Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm probably misremembering this, but wasn't there an edition of 40k where units transported in an Open-Topped vehicle could take damage from certain shooting attacks? I doubt GW would be willing to drastically patch a BRB rule like that, but if the power imbalance comes from the transportees...
(edit: I would expect that the BRB rule be patched rather than just Dark Eldar transports out of an overabundance of fairness - it might be gross for units that weren't all that broken to have to abide by it, but I just don't think it would be right to hit just Dark Eldar with that nerf and it'd be better to future proof it against upcoming codices that might end up having similar issues with their transports)

 Amishprn86 wrote:
When I play 2-3 Patrols I have to take 2 Wych ones b.c I want to have Hellions, Reavers, and Beasts, that means no matter what my next patrol is heavily limited or I have to add in Kabal into a Wych or Coven detachment and that Kabal units doesn't get any Obsessions so I either take my Archon and Court with obsessions or I take my Coven with Obsessions, its a hard option for me. So having +2CP feels more like a DE sneaking compensation strategy that Vect would do.

No, that's complete gak. You realise that if Chaos Daemons want to take a couple of Khorne units in a Nurgle Detachment they don't get +2 CP and they lose their chapter tactic on both the Nurgle AND the Khorne units in the Detachment right?

You're playing a completely busted army, just god damn acknowledge that you like it being busted instead of that gak about it feeling good to get free dessert because you ate your brocolli while every other army in the game is eating rock bread, making an army should not be a picnic, you should have to make hard decisions. Aeldari soup being good is nice, but they haven't put up the same numbers of GT top 4s have they?

Also its DT that makes Raiders feel strong, outside of DT the Raider does the same thing they always have been for 23yrs, rush up, shoot once, and unload murdering melee units.

Except Raiders used to be 3,5 damage on average instead of 5 and T5 instead of T6.

 waefre_1 wrote:
I'm probably misremembering this, but wasn't there an edition of 40k where units transported in an Open-Topped vehicle could take damage from certain shooting attacks?

Flamers gave D3 (or maybe D6 hits) to the guys inside the transport.

We still have the court as a potential problem as it featured quite heavily.

I also don't think they intended the extra transport capacity to let grots in over characters.

Rule of unintended consequences.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 waefre_1 wrote:
I'm probably misremembering this, but wasn't there an edition of 40k where units transported in an Open-Topped vehicle could take damage from certain shooting attacks? I doubt GW would be willing to drastically patch a BRB rule like that, but if the power imbalance comes from the transportees...

That was when shooting at units in bunkers, iirc.

 waefre_1 wrote:
I'm probably misremembering this, but wasn't there an edition of 40k where units transported in an Open-Topped vehicle could take damage from certain shooting attacks? I doubt GW would be willing to drastically patch a BRB rule like that, but if the power imbalance comes from the transportees...
(edit: I would expect that the BRB rule be patched rather than just Dark Eldar transports out of an overabundance of fairness - it might be gross for units that weren't all that broken to have to abide by it, but I just don't think it would be right to hit just Dark Eldar with that nerf and it'd be better to future proof it against upcoming codices that might end up having similar issues with their transports)

I believe you are right yes. But I think it was specifically when using flamer template weapons, and it was one of the early times when you got D6 or D3 hits on a unit inside the OT transport. Probably around 5 or 6th edition if i'm remembering correctly.

It was template weapons, though quite honestly it should've applied to Blast Weapons as well (just an opinion, since Open Topped vehicles were the best ones and had no drawbacks).

What we need is Open Topped Ghost Arks again and firing points back. There's no point in getting the transports that are expensive when it takes away firepower from an army to begin with. Not that Guard have many units they would want to transport but at least Chimeras get SOME Lasgun shots from embarked models.

Open-topped Vehicles also modified the vehicle damage roll, so they could be destroyed in a single shot more easily or lose more functionality.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Open-topped Vehicles also modified the vehicle damage roll, so they could be destroyed in a single shot more easily or lose more functionality.

Which really wasn't a downside because you were looking to glance vehicles to death for the most part.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Open-topped Vehicles also modified the vehicle damage roll, so they could be destroyed in a single shot more easily or lose more functionality.

Which really wasn't a downside because you were looking to glance vehicles to death for the most part.

In 6th and 7th, sure.
Not in 5th or earlier though, unless you were killing it through imobilised and wqeapon destroyed results (which Open-topped helped you get AND also let you have a chance of getting a Wrecked result).

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Open-topped Vehicles also modified the vehicle damage roll, so they could be destroyed in a single shot more easily or lose more functionality.

Which really wasn't a downside because you were looking to glance vehicles to death for the most part.

In 6th and 7th, sure.
Not in 5th or earlier though.

Absolutely though, especially as one that started the game in 3rd/4th with Necrons. Immobile vehicles were pretty useless.

Yeah, this is a great idea. To get at specifically dark tech flamer builds, we should nerf trukk boyz and genestealer cults too! Itd be great if we could nerf the actual problem, but at least it wouldnt impact any space marine armies.

 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, this is a great idea. To get at specifically dark tech flamer builds, we should nerf trukk boyz and genestealer cults too! Itd be great if we could nerf the actual problem, but at least it wouldnt impact any space marine armies.

I heard flamers in open-topped transports were OP, when are we nerfing Burna Boys

 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, this is a great idea. To get at specifically dark tech flamer builds, we should nerf trukk boyz and genestealer cults too! Itd be great if we could nerf the actual problem, but at least it wouldnt impact any space marine armies.

it is what GW always have done. 5 tyrants and spammed cmds are a problem, lets put in rule of 3 for everyone. Ultramarines getting too much out of their re-rolls with Gullimans, the fix to it is to rise the point costs of all vehicles, even for armies that don't get re-rolls.

The main drawback to Open-Topped used to be +1 on the vehicle damage table. All open topped transports save one (battlewagon) are T5 or T6, all closed-topped transports are T7 or T8. Putting a roof on a battlewagon removes Open Topped and adds +1 Toughness.

Seems to me like in the edition they removed universal special rules, they worked in the drawback to open topped in a manner that avoids universal special rules.

This is like arguing that space marines no longer have their power armor represented because it doesnt say "Power Armor" anywhere on their datasheet.

just for curiosity, is this thread longer or shorter than the "Nerf IHs" thread we started back in late 8th, or the Nerf Castellan thread? It feels like this one is not going away any time soon, and I remember the knights one was about 20-30 pages.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
just for curiosity, is this thread longer or shorter than the "Nerf IHs" thread we started back in late 8th, or the Nerf Castellan thread? It feels like this one is not going away any time soon, and I remember the knights one was about 20-30 pages.

nobody gets mad when a xenos army is op they just hate on space marines shushhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Um, people got seriously pissed when Eldar Bikes were broken as all hell right? Also, not sure If I mistook your point, but Knights aren't Astartes.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
just for curiosity, is this thread longer or shorter than the "Nerf IHs" thread we started back in late 8th, or the Nerf Castellan thread? It feels like this one is not going away any time soon, and I remember the knights one was about 20-30 pages.

Tomorrow of the goons at Goonhammer is writing an article on suggested rulechanges (or point changes) for drukhari. We will have that to discuss in this thread

Perhaps we can thus get it to 35 pages, preferably without adding discussions about old edition rules and other offtopic (though interesting for veteran players like me) content ?

Oh please, this entire thread is 35 pages of "You're not playing fair!" vs. "NAH UHN!

But sure, we can engage in the fantasy that this thread has value beyond arguing with a brick wall.

Flamers hitting guys inside open top was a rule in 6th and it ruined open top vehicles, they became 100% unplayable. After playing DE in 6th with that rule I'll never play anyone again with flamers if that rule comes back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 addnid wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
just for curiosity, is this thread longer or shorter than the "Nerf IHs" thread we started back in late 8th, or the Nerf Castellan thread? It feels like this one is not going away any time soon, and I remember the knights one was about 20-30 pages.

Tomorrow of the goons at Goonhammer is writing an article on suggested rulechanges (or point changes) for drukhari. We will have that to discuss in this thread

Perhaps we can thus get it to 35 pages, preferably without adding discussions about old edition rules and other offtopic (though interesting for veteran players like me) content ?

Its easy, remove DT, fix Comp edge, +1CP to fly-fy, and raise courts +2pts each model.

Other things don't need to change for now.

admittedly +15pts to raider, +5pts to dark lance, -5pts to disintegrator would be a quick-fix points nerf that would probably balance out pretty much all variants of competitive lists. not necessarily TOTALLY fair to the raider, but if you're going to do a knee-jerk nerf it's a better idea than trying to make a snap judgement on which exact units need point hikes and how perfectly to do that to prevent whackamole syndrome.

Removing Blade Artists and +2CP from patrols would be in my first round of nerfs, just like removing Bolter Discipline and the whole 'go ahead, take Successor Chapters without giving anything up in exchange!' would have been in my first round of nerfs for space marines. stupid, extraneous special rules that make the army less fun to play as and against, aren't really necessary, and are super difficult to track in terms of how much power they are adding to the army, BEFORE you go and kneecap random units points or abilities.

But GW gonna GW and they love leaving the seven-layer dip of nonsensical special rules while making the core units' stats worse and worse and worse.

My round one nerf list would be:

-remove +2cp
-remove Blade Artists
-rework compedge to not interact with razorflails (just change to 'attack rolls' from 'attacks)
-remove or basically remove dark tech (make only +1 to wound, make MWs trigger off wound rolls of 1, and make it no longer All-Consuming would be my nerf)

Watch competitive lists for another month, if Drukhari are still above 55% after, add in Raider point nerf (+20pts to DL raider +10pts to Dissie raider) to shave ~100pts off of competitive builds.

 the_scotsman wrote:
admittedly +15pts to raider, +5pts to dark lance, -5pts to disintegrator would be a quick-fix points nerf that would probably balance out pretty much all variants of competitive lists. not necessarily TOTALLY fair to the raider, but if you're going to do a knee-jerk nerf it's a better idea than trying to make a snap judgement on which exact units need point hikes and how perfectly to do that to prevent whackamole syndrome.

Removing Blade Artists and +2CP from patrols would be in my first round of nerfs, just like removing Bolter Discipline and the whole 'go ahead, take Successor Chapters without giving anything up in exchange!' would have been in my first round of nerfs for space marines. stupid, extraneous special rules that make the army less fun to play as and against, aren't really necessary, and are super difficult to track in terms of how much power they are adding to the army, BEFORE you go and kneecap random units points or abilities.

But GW gonna GW and they love leaving the seven-layer dip of nonsensical special rules while making the core units' stats worse and worse and worse.

My round one nerf list would be:

-remove +2cp
-remove Blade Artists
-rework compedge to not interact with razorflails (just change to 'attack rolls' from 'attacks)
-remove or basically remove dark tech (make only +1 to wound, make MWs trigger off wound rolls of 1, and make it no longer All-Consuming would be my nerf)

Watch competitive lists for another month, if Drukhari are still above 55% after, add in Raider point nerf (+20pts to DL raider +10pts to Dissie raider) to shave ~100pts off of competitive builds.

Yeah, this is where I am, though I'd also add some nerf to the Archon Court (maybe specifically nuking them from eligibility for WWSWF). I think the Raider needs to go up, sorry Amish. But otherwise I wouldn't go crazy with the nerfs at this stage.

 the_scotsman wrote:
admittedly +15pts to raider, +5pts to dark lance, -5pts to disintegrator would be a quick-fix points nerf that would probably balance out pretty much all variants of competitive lists. not necessarily TOTALLY fair to the raider, but if you're going to do a knee-jerk nerf it's a better idea than trying to make a snap judgement on which exact units need point hikes and how perfectly to do that to prevent whackamole syndrome.

Removing Blade Artists and +2CP from patrols would be in my first round of nerfs, just like removing Bolter Discipline and the whole 'go ahead, take Successor Chapters without giving anything up in exchange!' would have been in my first round of nerfs for space marines. stupid, extraneous special rules that make the army less fun to play as and against, aren't really necessary, and are super difficult to track in terms of how much power they are adding to the army, BEFORE you go and kneecap random units points or abilities.

But GW gonna GW and they love leaving the seven-layer dip of nonsensical special rules while making the core units' stats worse and worse and worse.

My round one nerf list would be:

-remove +2cp
-remove Blade Artists
-rework compedge to not interact with razorflails (just change to 'attack rolls' from 'attacks)
-remove or basically remove dark tech (make only +1 to wound, make MWs trigger off wound rolls of 1, and make it no longer All-Consuming would be my nerf)

Watch competitive lists for another month, if Drukhari are still above 55% after, add in Raider point nerf (+20pts to DL raider +10pts to Dissie raider) to shave ~100pts off of competitive builds.

WTF why remove Blade Artists? Its on the datasheets and its extremely minor, thats basically rewriting all the datasheets and a stupid knee jerk with no taught at all. Why should Marines get -1AP in shooting and melee for full turns on full weapons when we get it 1/6 the time only in melee, how silly.

PS, old DE still took 3 patrols and gain +D3 CP from the Haemonculus, so that has not change, its funny how everyone hate it now when its been like that for a very long time.

Karol wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, this is a great idea. To get at specifically dark tech flamer builds, we should nerf trukk boyz and genestealer cults too! Itd be great if we could nerf the actual problem, but at least it wouldnt impact any space marine armies.

it is what GW always have done. 5 tyrants and spammed cmds are a problem, lets put in rule of 3 for everyone. Ultramarines getting too much out of their re-rolls with Gullimans, the fix to it is to rise the point costs of all vehicles, even for armies that don't get re-rolls.

You're oversimplifying.

In any case I played GK last night.

I would up losing 10 wounds from 3 psilencer wounds. It's impressive to get whalloped by 6 shot guns doing 2 to 4 damage.

They seem potentially well equipped to punch DE.

Blade Artists is going nowhere, GW currently has a hard-on for such army wide rules.

I've seen many calls for it's removal, and they seem to hinge not on it's amazing effectiveness (cos it ain't powerful) but that it doesn't tickle some people's g-spot as 'thematic'

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, this is a great idea. To get at specifically dark tech flamer builds, we should nerf trukk boyz and genestealer cults too! Itd be great if we could nerf the actual problem, but at least it wouldnt impact any space marine armies.

it is what GW always have done. 5 tyrants and spammed cmds are a problem, lets put in rule of 3 for everyone. Ultramarines getting too much out of their re-rolls with Gullimans, the fix to it is to rise the point costs of all vehicles, even for armies that don't get re-rolls.

You're oversimplifying.

In any case I played GK last night.

I would up losing 10 wounds from 3 psilencer wounds. It's impressive to get whalloped by 6 shot guns doing 2 to 4 damage.

They seem potentially well equipped to punch DE.

So what more did the GK do (in terms of putting up a fight) ? I was also thinking that their psy power astral aim was great to deal with hidden raiders, but aside from that I don't know.
What was the final score ? What did he have left (in terms of units alive) at the end of the game ?

 harlokin wrote:
Blade Artists is going nowhere, GW currently has a hard-on for such army wide rules.

I've seen many calls for it's removal, and they seem to hinge not on it's amazing effectiveness (cos it ain't powerful) but that it doesn't tickle some people's g-spot as 'thematic'

The typical argument used against blade artist is that it does too little for too much time wasted.

Spoletta wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
Blade Artists is going nowhere, GW currently has a hard-on for such army wide rules.

I've seen many calls for it's removal, and they seem to hinge not on it's amazing effectiveness (cos it ain't powerful) but that it doesn't tickle some people's g-spot as 'thematic'

The typical argument used against blade artist is that it does too little for too much time wasted.

You're right, that too.

63 to 70

He had WWSWF on 2 GMDKs and a 10 man that he kept move and shoot or safe with astral.

He blocked me from midboard scramblers and scored his with dynamic insertion. Made good use of gate to pressure.

If not for my screw ups I should have won with 90 points, but he was also restrained with two large squads so hard to say how it might have changed.

I should note lots of warding staves and 3++ saves and -1 to wound.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Open-topped Vehicles also modified the vehicle damage roll, so they could be destroyed in a single shot more easily or lose more functionality.

Which really wasn't a downside because you were looking to glance vehicles to death for the most part.

It was a downside.
Barrage and template weapons were the bane of opened top. It was a long time ago but I played GK against DE quite often. I can remember my tempest flamers on the dreadknights being a source of major fear as not only did they do a lot of damage to the vehicle they also fried some dudes inside. open topped only being a positive is a massive joke. It is a new problem from 8th and 9th. It has always had a negative.

Blade Artists feels like a rule which would have been cool circa 3rd edition to indicate that DE were the choppy/spiky Eldar faction - but I sort of feel fluffwise that ship has sailed and mechanically having to fish out the 6s to wound is kind of annoying.

Moreover it offers no tactical value. If you were hitting someone to potentially get those 6s to wound, you were always going to hit them anyway. I mean you could argue this is true of Combat Doctrines - but the super doctrine does sort of encourage build variation by chapter. Necrons may end up often following a script - but you can deviate if you want to.