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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Right, restrictions. We don't know what restrictions are placed on the rules writers. Sure, we know they have to write the rules for the models after they see them, but what other restrictions are they under? Take the CSM rules in Faith and Fury for example: everyone wanted new Legion traits, but that wasn't what the writers were supposed to do. They were supposed to give the remaining 6 Legions what Black Legion got in Vigilus: new stratagems, warlord traits, and relics. Stop. They may have REALLY wanted to write new Legion traits, but that wasn't what their bosses wanted them to do. If they had done that, then those new Legion traits would probably have been tossed and they would have gotten chewed out for not following orders. There's more going on than just what the writers want to do.

This presume a level of micromanagement that isn't needed to explain it. I would think it was more "We need this book released this quarter. Get it done." and no one has the time to sit down and revamp the fundamental aspects of CSM beyond what they were already tasked to do. Couple that with no unifying strategy and you get a haphazard result. 9th shows a little more strategy in the past, but they're still inconsistent about applying it as the edition progresses, which shows they're learning as they go.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

The "9th edition powercreep" is actually seen only on one specific category of models, the heavy melee ones, which started with BGV. GW wasn't happy with the performance of those in 8th so they are buffing the category. It would be very very nice if they could just fix the other heavy melee models with points until they get their dex...
In your ballistari example though, there was just one comment which said "yeah, 9th vs 8th", but actually it followed with a discussion about the differences between a ballistari and a war walker which did show that there isn't really that much of a difference between the two... yeah, the ballistari is a bit better in the end, but it is also considered a broken good 9th edition model, not exactly par of the course for the edition.
So no, I don't see this general power creep.

Ballistari are not melee. Nor are Raiders or Dark Tech. Eradicators are perceived as some to be OP. On the opposite of that Outriders are heavy melee, but are rarely seen.

What you are referencing are units that perform well under a mission design that allows melee to actually be useful and little to do with the models themselves outside how well that can achieve objectives.

Spoletta wrote:

The "9th edition powercreep" is actually seen only on one specific category of models, the heavy melee ones, which started with BGV.
So no, I don't see this general power creep.

Stop stop, you're making me hyped for Aberrants again

 Insectum7 wrote:
You're overcomplicating it. My premise is that someone sees a preview unit with nice new model and percieved buffs. And they get excited about said units and buy a bunch. And the units aren't necessarily bad either, there just happen to be additional revelations once a codex comes out or the meta has settled. The same person will discover that although the unit they purchased is reasonable, there's now some other unit that it absolutely meta-changing or whatever and this person will be encouraged to get that/those units in addition to (or even in replacement of) all the other purchases (and possibly over-purchases) they've already acquired.

It could happen totally organically, mind you. But it could also be planned out by GW to an extent. There is a lot of churn by design, and some of that is long term. But some could also be pretty short term.

The TS example is easy to shrug off since it doesn't have to be happening all the time in order for it to happen some of the time, because sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. In both directions, too.

It is overcomplicated, because it isn't a real dynamic. If it isn't a dynamic that applies to you then it likely doesn't apply to others as well.

The meta certainly didn't settle in the two months between release and balance patches. In fact even before the Admech patch we saw DG gain significant traction in spite of Admech and yet nothing has happened to their army since the start of the edition.

GW doesn't even need to push units. Simply by introducing armies with diverse mechanics you alter what set of tools might be best to bring -

I want S6/7 D2 to deal with raiders, but then I don't want that much, because of -1D.
I want S8 to tackle the occasional knights and big vehicles, but not too much to take away from units that will hold objectives.
I want lots of S5 D1 Blast to deal with Necrons and Orks, but not so much that DG or blast ignoring Admech overwhelm.

And just by the process of designing a list I discover other units to fill those roles in a measure appropriate to the present meta.

But you want to know the worst unit pusher? The community.

How many people went and bought as many Outriders they could just because everyone was freaking out about 19 attacks? How many people grabbed 18 Eradicators, because everyone declared how incredible it was to have such efficient damage only to never put them on the table when people figured out that missions matter and mobility with melta matters and ABs were better. Whoops.

GW didn't secretly make Centurions a sleeper hit in 8th. That was a confluence of mission design ( out of GW control ), traits, and magic boxes ( out of GW control ).

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Right, restrictions. We don't know what restrictions are placed on the rules writers. Sure, we know they have to write the rules for the models after they see them, but what other restrictions are they under? Take the CSM rules in Faith and Fury for example: everyone wanted new Legion traits, but that wasn't what the writers were supposed to do. They were supposed to give the remaining 6 Legions what Black Legion got in Vigilus: new stratagems, warlord traits, and relics. Stop. They may have REALLY wanted to write new Legion traits, but that wasn't what their bosses wanted them to do. If they had done that, then those new Legion traits would probably have been tossed and they would have gotten chewed out for not following orders. There's more going on than just what the writers want to do.

This presume a level of micromanagement that isn't needed to explain it. I would think it was more "We need this book released this quarter. Get it done." and no one has the time to sit down and revamp the fundamental aspects of CSM beyond what they were already tasked to do. Couple that with no unifying strategy and you get a haphazard result. 9th shows a little more strategy in the past, but they're still inconsistent about applying it as the edition progresses, which shows they're learning as they go.

So, you think it was just a coincidence that they did the exact same thing for the remaining 6 Legions as they did for Black Legion in Vigilus, and nothing else? Also isn't an order to get (X) done by (Y) date a restriction? I'm not saying this is a conspiracy from gw corporate to "keep CSM down", I'm saying that the rules writers have specific tasks that they're supposed to do, and that's what they do.

Yea, but I don't think it has any upper management lever pulling.

The general strategy would be something like "All the codexes are out and we have a ton of models as well as a new edition coming up. Let's do a transitory slate of books to incorporate the new models."

Then the next level down decides what each book will focus on and in what measure.

Are we discussing the internal dynamics at GW in an effort to find where to place the blame/praise?

I am enjoying the discussion, just trying to figure out what sparked it, which I think was the assertion that "the design is bad because of GW paying it's designers crap" iirc

 Daedalus81 wrote:

It is overcomplicated, because it isn't a real dynamic. (source?) If it isn't a dynamic that applies to you then it likely doesn't apply to others as well.

Why am I representative of every other player in the hobby?

I've SEEN people impulse buy a bunch of stuff on hype. I've seen people revert their army choices (but not their purchases) a month down the line. I never claimed that this was the only way GW sells models, but it's definitely a tool in their arsenal should they choose to use it, and I bet they do from time to time.

There seem to buy good armies in one go, just because the army is good and they can afford it.

Rules are maybe not the only factor that makes people buy models, but I haven't seen many ugly models with bad rules selling well. Ugly as sin models that sell well does happen. So clearly one thing has to be more important then the other things. Cost, popularity, not wanting to play an identical army is a factor too. But I doubt there are many people are now thinking about making a scout army.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

It is overcomplicated, because it isn't a real dynamic. (source?) If it isn't a dynamic that applies to you then it likely doesn't apply to others as well.

Why am I representative of every other player in the hobby?

I've SEEN people impulse buy a bunch of stuff on hype. I've seen people revert their army choices (but not their purchases) a month down the line. I never claimed that this was the only way GW sells models, but it's definitely a tool in their arsenal should they choose to use it, and I bet they do from time to time.

Because most people who care about the strength of their army will care about what they're buying. People who buy on impulse won't really be paying attention. And then there's so many people who buy models just to paint or play only narrative. None of this has any bearing on them. It really doesn't matter how GW markets things so long as they do.

There's so many avenues to access information before purchases now, too. Goonhammer write ups, literal page turner videos, points... Everything. It has never been easier for people to make informed decisions about what they're going to get before release day. All of this works against this presumed strategy. gak, I might even decide to back out of the box if the datasheet for the new guy isn't particularly useful. I probably won't, because 'ooh shiny'.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

It is overcomplicated, because it isn't a real dynamic. (source?) If it isn't a dynamic that applies to you then it likely doesn't apply to others as well.

Why am I representative of every other player in the hobby?

I've SEEN people impulse buy a bunch of stuff on hype. I've seen people revert their army choices (but not their purchases) a month down the line. I never claimed that this was the only way GW sells models, but it's definitely a tool in their arsenal should they choose to use it, and I bet they do from time to time.

Because most people who care about the strength of their army will care about what they're buying. People who buy on impulse won't really be paying attention. And then there's so many people who buy models just to paint or play only narrative. None of this has any bearing on them. It really doesn't matter how GW markets things so long as they do.

There's so many avenues to access information before purchases now, too. Goonhammer write ups, literal page turner videos, points... Everything. It has never been easier for people to make informed decisions about what they're going to get before release day. All of this works against this presumed strategy. gak, I might even decide to back out of the box if the datasheet for the new guy isn't particularly useful. I probably won't, because 'ooh shiny'.

It is a tool GW has in it's toolkit, and players do not so neatly fit into monolithic groups. "Impulse-competitive" purchases will happen too. "X looks like it will be good, I'll buy a bunch of them." totally happens. . . like of course it happens.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Are we discussing the internal dynamics at GW in an effort to find where to place the blame/praise?

I am enjoying the discussion, just trying to figure out what sparked it, which I think was the assertion that "the design is bad because of GW paying it's designers crap" iirc

Er, sorry. I said that I (as in me, personally) didn't like lambasting the rules writers because of their low pay, and it snowballed from there. I generally prefer to punch up, not down.

To reiterate what I originally said besides the pay comment: I think it's ok for 9th and 8th edition codexes to coexist as long as gw gets the points right, which they often don't. Which leads to issues like 40 PPM Bloodcrushers seeming bad when compared to 25 PPM Squig Boys, or 80 PPM Warwalkers seeming bad when compared to 75 PPM Laser Chickens. Gw seems to focus on whatever their currently releasing, and allowing units in older codexes to languish in comparison in the points updates.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Just addressing the "imaginary conversation" part...

Ask a fan of 9e "why are my CSM so terrible?" and I guarantee you'll get to "wait for your 9e Codex and then you can play again!" within a few sentences.

on one hand, OK, definitely fair.

on the other hand, let's take a quick look-see at a quick comparison between one of those 'OP new units designed to sell' vs 'outdated unit that you have to wait for your dex to be playable.'

Ork Beastboss on Squigosaur: Mv10", T7, W9, 4+/5++. 3A at S7 Ap-3 D3, wounds on a 6 cause 3mw instead of normal damage. 6A at S6 AP-2 D2. Gives a +1 to hit aura for Beast Snaggas within 6". 170pts. Woah pretty nasty right what will gw pull next?

Khorne Daemon Prince with Wings: Mv12" with fly, T6 W8 3+/5++, 1A at S8 Ap-2 D2, 7A at S8 Ap-2 D3, drops to -2A and -1S if not charged/charging. Gives a RR1s to hit aura to all units including itself within 6". 185pts.

Minus...I think one attack on the charge, the khorne daemon prince has done that much and had that statline since the 8th ed indexes.

How much of this new shiny holy **** OPOPOP stuff is actually that, and how much of it is just a reaction to a new unit that does a new thing that people aren't yet used to?

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

It is overcomplicated, because it isn't a real dynamic. (source?) If it isn't a dynamic that applies to you then it likely doesn't apply to others as well.

Why am I representative of every other player in the hobby?

I've SEEN people impulse buy a bunch of stuff on hype. I've seen people revert their army choices (but not their purchases) a month down the line. I never claimed that this was the only way GW sells models, but it's definitely a tool in their arsenal should they choose to use it, and I bet they do from time to time.

Because most people who care about the strength of their army will care about what they're buying. People who buy on impulse won't really be paying attention. And then there's so many people who buy models just to paint or play only narrative. None of this has any bearing on them. It really doesn't matter how GW markets things so long as they do.

There's so many avenues to access information before purchases now, too. Goonhammer write ups, literal page turner videos, points... Everything. It has never been easier for people to make informed decisions about what they're going to get before release day. All of this works against this presumed strategy. gak, I might even decide to back out of the box if the datasheet for the new guy isn't particularly useful. I probably won't, because 'ooh shiny'.

It is a tool GW has in it's toolkit, and players do not so neatly fit into monolithic groups. "Impulse-competitive" purchases will happen too. "X looks like it will be good, I'll buy a bunch of them." totally happens. . . like of course it happens.

Sure, but whether they wield it or even need to wield it is really severely undermined by many factors.

I never impulse buy unless something catches my eye at the FLGS.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

It is overcomplicated, because it isn't a real dynamic. (source?) If it isn't a dynamic that applies to you then it likely doesn't apply to others as well.

Why am I representative of every other player in the hobby?

I've SEEN people impulse buy a bunch of stuff on hype. I've seen people revert their army choices (but not their purchases) a month down the line. I never claimed that this was the only way GW sells models, but it's definitely a tool in their arsenal should they choose to use it, and I bet they do from time to time.

Because most people who care about the strength of their army will care about what they're buying. People who buy on impulse won't really be paying attention. And then there's so many people who buy models just to paint or play only narrative. None of this has any bearing on them. It really doesn't matter how GW markets things so long as they do.

There's so many avenues to access information before purchases now, too. Goonhammer write ups, literal page turner videos, points... Everything. It has never been easier for people to make informed decisions about what they're going to get before release day. All of this works against this presumed strategy. gak, I might even decide to back out of the box if the datasheet for the new guy isn't particularly useful. I probably won't, because 'ooh shiny'.

It is a tool GW has in it's toolkit, and players do not so neatly fit into monolithic groups. "Impulse-competitive" purchases will happen too. "X looks like it will be good, I'll buy a bunch of them." totally happens. . . like of course it happens.

Sure, but whether they wield it or even need to wield it is really severely undermined by many factors.

hehe. How many salespeople have you worked with? Lot's of them aren't motivated by sheer need.

Nobody buys reigned-in rules. If they aren't "better" than the old ones, there's no incentive to buy into replacements.

GW learned this by about the 3rd to 4th codex back in 8th, which was why we rapidly began moving away from balancing the rules to "better, stronger, faster" codexes, and why I gave up on the game.

 Stormonu wrote:
Nobody buys reigned-in rules. If they aren't "better" than the old ones, there's no incentive to buy into replacements.

GW learned this by about the 3rd to 4th codex back in 8th, which was why we rapidly began moving away from balancing the rules to "better, stronger, faster" codexes, and why I gave up on the game.

The incentive is being able to play, as you can't really find a game if you pretend the newer codex never came out.
With your mates you can agree to anything, even playing in older editions, but good luck trying to get a game at the local store with obsolete rules. Let alone tournaments.

 the_scotsman wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Just addressing the "imaginary conversation" part...

Ask a fan of 9e "why are my CSM so terrible?" and I guarantee you'll get to "wait for your 9e Codex and then you can play again!" within a few sentences.

on one hand, OK, definitely fair.

on the other hand, let's take a quick look-see at a quick comparison between one of those 'OP new units designed to sell' vs 'outdated unit that you have to wait for your dex to be playable.'

Ork Beastboss on Squigosaur: Mv10", T7, W9, 4+/5++. 3A at S7 Ap-3 D3, wounds on a 6 cause 3mw instead of normal damage. 6A at S6 AP-2 D2. Gives a +1 to hit aura for Beast Snaggas within 6". 170pts. Woah pretty nasty right what will gw pull next?

Khorne Daemon Prince with Wings: Mv12" with fly, T6 W8 3+/5++, 1A at S8 Ap-2 D2, 7A at S8 Ap-2 D3, drops to -2A and -1S if not charged/charging. Gives a RR1s to hit aura to all units including itself within 6". 185pts.

Minus...I think one attack on the charge, the khorne daemon prince has done that much and had that statline since the 8th ed indexes.

How much of this new shiny holy **** OPOPOP stuff is actually that, and how much of it is just a reaction to a new unit that does a new thing that people aren't yet used to?

You're missing out -1 damage and some supremely strong Relics and WLT's in that comparison, not to mention stratagems including fight on death, transhuman, +1 to wound and of course clan kulturs too. Oh and, uh, the Beastboss on Squigosaur is 145 POINTS

A better comparison would be to the CCB which looks like a joke next to the Squigosaurs.

And the CCB technically has a 9th ed rule set.

Karol wrote:
And the CCB technically has a 9th ed rule set.

Nothing technical about it either, except for the fact that Necrons have been crept on so hard. But hey, apparently the CCB was soooooo spoooookyyyyyyyy it caught a points increase in CA21 so what do I know

 Bosskelot wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Just addressing the "imaginary conversation" part...

Ask a fan of 9e "why are my CSM so terrible?" and I guarantee you'll get to "wait for your 9e Codex and then you can play again!" within a few sentences.

on one hand, OK, definitely fair.

on the other hand, let's take a quick look-see at a quick comparison between one of those 'OP new units designed to sell' vs 'outdated unit that you have to wait for your dex to be playable.'

Ork Beastboss on Squigosaur: Mv10", T7, W9, 4+/5++. 3A at S7 Ap-3 D3, wounds on a 6 cause 3mw instead of normal damage. 6A at S6 AP-2 D2. Gives a +1 to hit aura for Beast Snaggas within 6". 170pts. Woah pretty nasty right what will gw pull next?

Khorne Daemon Prince with Wings: Mv12" with fly, T6 W8 3+/5++, 1A at S8 Ap-2 D2, 7A at S8 Ap-2 D3, drops to -2A and -1S if not charged/charging. Gives a RR1s to hit aura to all units including itself within 6". 185pts.

Minus...I think one attack on the charge, the khorne daemon prince has done that much and had that statline since the 8th ed indexes.

How much of this new shiny holy **** OPOPOP stuff is actually that, and how much of it is just a reaction to a new unit that does a new thing that people aren't yet used to?

You're missing out -1 damage and some supremely strong Relics and WLT's in that comparison, not to mention stratagems including fight on death, transhuman, +1 to wound and of course clan kulturs too. Oh and, uh, the Beastboss on Squigosaur is 145 POINTS

A better comparison would be to the CCB which looks like a joke next to the Squigosaurs.

fair, I mixed up a couple of rules between squigboss and the named dude. but it's pretty funny that you bring up various 'extras' that the beastboss has access to, like...one relic to increase it's combat stats and a few warlord traits, when a daemon prince literally gets to

-pick one of four gods it belongs to to increase its stats in various ways
-choose from a whole fuckton of various relics and traits including 6 from each legion
-gets psychic powers 3/4 of the time including 'just move again! Why not!'
-has stratagems like "1cp to just add +1 to wound" as opposed to the not one single offensive stratagem that orks have access to

I purposefully compared Khorne to beastboss because it meant that we didn't have to get bogged down in the specifics of the extra rules and instead we could just note that, casually, the daemon prince can deal double the damage on average rolls if it gets into a vehicle profile model (9.9 vs 4.7) in addition to having a much more widely useful aura ability and more movement and FLY, while being out of one of the oldest books currently legal for play if not the oldest (tbh dont remember if csm were the second or third codex out in 8th).

There's a similar strawmanning going on with the Squigriders vs Bloodcrushers comparison. It's pretty clear that bloodcrushers are a little bit below the power curve and speculation is that squigriders are going to be pretty good, and most deffo wil not have the exact same pitfalls that bloodcrushers run into no sirree bob. But people like to forget that bloodcrushers are, objectively, a better unit all round in terms of stats, so it's a question of how much more theyre actually worth compared to squigriders, not "ZOMG Y THEY NOT THE SAME???"

like, they've got 1 more wound, 1 better invuln, similar damage output (worse vs meq better vs 1w and high-T targets) and oh btw they also have a stratagem to deal d3mw for each model in the bloodcrusher unit to a unit they're charging then declare a bonus charge, for 2cp and a 1cp 3d6" charge strat.

What a 6-man squighog boyz unit doesn't do that a 6-man bloodcrusher unit does do is 5d3 mw in the charge phase when it completes a successful charge and then if those 10 mortal wounds somehow manage to kill the target unit it gets to charge a second time.

Maybe they're a timmy unit. Actually, they're definitely a Timmy unit, but you have to at least consider some of the capabilities they have in the comparison, you cant just yell "STATS SIMILAR POINTS DIFFERENT THIS MEAN POWER CREEP???"

 the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

 Bosskelot wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Just addressing the "imaginary conversation" part...

Ask a fan of 9e "why are my CSM so terrible?" and I guarantee you'll get to "wait for your 9e Codex and then you can play again!" within a few sentences.

on one hand, OK, definitely fair.

on the other hand, let's take a quick look-see at a quick comparison between one of those 'OP new units designed to sell' vs 'outdated unit that you have to wait for your dex to be playable.'

Ork Beastboss on Squigosaur: Mv10", T7, W9, 4+/5++. 3A at S7 Ap-3 D3, wounds on a 6 cause 3mw instead of normal damage. 6A at S6 AP-2 D2. Gives a +1 to hit aura for Beast Snaggas within 6". 170pts. Woah pretty nasty right what will gw pull next?

Khorne Daemon Prince with Wings: Mv12" with fly, T6 W8 3+/5++, 1A at S8 Ap-2 D2, 7A at S8 Ap-2 D3, drops to -2A and -1S if not charged/charging. Gives a RR1s to hit aura to all units including itself within 6". 185pts.

Minus...I think one attack on the charge, the khorne daemon prince has done that much and had that statline since the 8th ed indexes.

How much of this new shiny holy **** OPOPOP stuff is actually that, and how much of it is just a reaction to a new unit that does a new thing that people aren't yet used to?

You're missing out -1 damage and some supremely strong Relics and WLT's in that comparison, not to mention stratagems including fight on death, transhuman, +1 to wound and of course clan kulturs too. Oh and, uh, the Beastboss on Squigosaur is 145 POINTS

A better comparison would be to the CCB which looks like a joke next to the Squigosaurs.

fair, I mixed up a couple of rules between squigboss and the named dude. but it's pretty funny that you bring up various 'extras' that the beastboss has access to, like...one relic to increase it's combat stats and a few warlord traits, when a daemon prince literally gets to

-pick one of four gods it belongs to to increase its stats in various ways
-choose from a whole fuckton of various relics and traits including 6 from each legion
-gets psychic powers 3/4 of the time including 'just move again! Why not!'
-has stratagems like "1cp to just add +1 to wound" as opposed to the not one single offensive stratagem that orks have access to

I purposefully compared Khorne to beastboss because it meant that we didn't have to get bogged down in the specifics of the extra rules and instead we could just note that, casually, the daemon prince can deal double the damage on average rolls if it gets into a vehicle profile model (9.9 vs 4.7) in addition to having a much more widely useful aura ability and more movement and FLY, while being out of one of the oldest books currently legal for play if not the oldest (tbh dont remember if csm were the second or third codex out in 8th).

There's a similar strawmanning going on with the Squigriders vs Bloodcrushers comparison. It's pretty clear that bloodcrushers are a little bit below the power curve and speculation is that squigriders are going to be pretty good, and most deffo wil not have the exact same pitfalls that bloodcrushers run into no sirree bob. But people like to forget that bloodcrushers are, objectively, a better unit all round in terms of stats, so it's a question of how much more theyre actually worth compared to squigriders, not "ZOMG Y THEY NOT THE SAME???"

like, they've got 1 more wound, 1 better invuln, similar damage output (worse vs meq better vs 1w and high-T targets) and oh btw they also have a stratagem to deal d3mw for each model in the bloodcrusher unit to a unit they're charging then declare a bonus charge, for 2cp and a 1cp 3d6" charge strat.

What a 6-man squighog boyz unit doesn't do that a 6-man bloodcrusher unit does do is 5d3 mw in the charge phase when it completes a successful charge and then if those 10 mortal wounds somehow manage to kill the target unit it gets to charge a second time.

Maybe they're a timmy unit. Actually, they're definitely a Timmy unit, but you have to at least consider some of the capabilities they have in the comparison, you cant just yell "STATS SIMILAR POINTS DIFFERENT THIS MEAN POWER CREEP???"

I agree that the Beastboss on Squigosaur isn't OP, but you'd make your point better if you didn't compare it to a unit that costs 50 PPM more than it (Khorne Daemon Prince with wings and Hellforged Sword is 195 PPM, not 185). CSM don't have any 145 PPM characters, so maybe a Maulerfiend (140 PPM) or a Contemptor with a Chainclaw (145 PPM +1CP). But if you do the Contemptor you should probably give the Beastboss a WT or Relic to make up for the 1CP tax. Comparing a 145 PPM unit to a 195 PPM unit just muddies the waters. Probably shouldn't include stratagems into the comparison either. And how did you get the Daemon Prince up to S8? I'm assuming that the +2A on the charge instead of just +1A is because you made it a World Eater? It's early so maybe I'm missing something.

Edit: And yes, once the Grey Knights codex releases in a couple of weeks CSM will officially be the oldest codex in the game, with no new one in sight.

 Bosskelot wrote:

You're missing out -1 damage and some supremely strong Relics and WLT's in that comparison, not to mention stratagems including fight on death, transhuman, +1 to wound and of course clan kulturs too. Oh and, uh, the Beastboss on Squigosaur is 145 POINTS

A better comparison would be to the CCB which looks like a joke next to the Squigosaurs.

Crons are not straight melee powerhouse like Orks. CCB is still formidable with quantaum shielding. CCB also has a Gauss Cannon which actually does things unlike that Thump Gun, flies, moves faster, grants +1 to hit in ranged and melee, and heals. My Szarekhan CCB will also have 5+++ vs MW, reroll a wound roll, -1D, and Voltaic Staff.

The overall effect of those two models are going to be pretty similar unless you carelessly feed the squig.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

 Bosskelot wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Just addressing the "imaginary conversation" part...

Ask a fan of 9e "why are my CSM so terrible?" and I guarantee you'll get to "wait for your 9e Codex and then you can play again!" within a few sentences.

on one hand, OK, definitely fair.

on the other hand, let's take a quick look-see at a quick comparison between one of those 'OP new units designed to sell' vs 'outdated unit that you have to wait for your dex to be playable.'

Ork Beastboss on Squigosaur: Mv10", T7, W9, 4+/5++. 3A at S7 Ap-3 D3, wounds on a 6 cause 3mw instead of normal damage. 6A at S6 AP-2 D2. Gives a +1 to hit aura for Beast Snaggas within 6". 170pts. Woah pretty nasty right what will gw pull next?

Khorne Daemon Prince with Wings: Mv12" with fly, T6 W8 3+/5++, 1A at S8 Ap-2 D2, 7A at S8 Ap-2 D3, drops to -2A and -1S if not charged/charging. Gives a RR1s to hit aura to all units including itself within 6". 185pts.

Minus...I think one attack on the charge, the khorne daemon prince has done that much and had that statline since the 8th ed indexes.

How much of this new shiny holy **** OPOPOP stuff is actually that, and how much of it is just a reaction to a new unit that does a new thing that people aren't yet used to?

You're missing out -1 damage and some supremely strong Relics and WLT's in that comparison, not to mention stratagems including fight on death, transhuman, +1 to wound and of course clan kulturs too. Oh and, uh, the Beastboss on Squigosaur is 145 POINTS

A better comparison would be to the CCB which looks like a joke next to the Squigosaurs.

fair, I mixed up a couple of rules between squigboss and the named dude. but it's pretty funny that you bring up various 'extras' that the beastboss has access to, like...one relic to increase it's combat stats and a few warlord traits, when a daemon prince literally gets to

-pick one of four gods it belongs to to increase its stats in various ways
-choose from a whole fuckton of various relics and traits including 6 from each legion
-gets psychic powers 3/4 of the time including 'just move again! Why not!'
-has stratagems like "1cp to just add +1 to wound" as opposed to the not one single offensive stratagem that orks have access to

I purposefully compared Khorne to beastboss because it meant that we didn't have to get bogged down in the specifics of the extra rules and instead we could just note that, casually, the daemon prince can deal double the damage on average rolls if it gets into a vehicle profile model (9.9 vs 4.7) in addition to having a much more widely useful aura ability and more movement and FLY, while being out of one of the oldest books currently legal for play if not the oldest (tbh dont remember if csm were the second or third codex out in 8th).

There's a similar strawmanning going on with the Squigriders vs Bloodcrushers comparison. It's pretty clear that bloodcrushers are a little bit below the power curve and speculation is that squigriders are going to be pretty good, and most deffo wil not have the exact same pitfalls that bloodcrushers run into no sirree bob. But people like to forget that bloodcrushers are, objectively, a better unit all round in terms of stats, so it's a question of how much more theyre actually worth compared to squigriders, not "ZOMG Y THEY NOT THE SAME???"

like, they've got 1 more wound, 1 better invuln, similar damage output (worse vs meq better vs 1w and high-T targets) and oh btw they also have a stratagem to deal d3mw for each model in the bloodcrusher unit to a unit they're charging then declare a bonus charge, for 2cp and a 1cp 3d6" charge strat.

What a 6-man squighog boyz unit doesn't do that a 6-man bloodcrusher unit does do is 5d3 mw in the charge phase when it completes a successful charge and then if those 10 mortal wounds somehow manage to kill the target unit it gets to charge a second time.

Maybe they're a timmy unit. Actually, they're definitely a Timmy unit, but you have to at least consider some of the capabilities they have in the comparison, you cant just yell "STATS SIMILAR POINTS DIFFERENT THIS MEAN POWER CREEP???"

I agree that the Beastboss on Squigosaur isn't OP, but you'd make your point better if you didn't compare it to a unit that costs 50 PPM more than it (Khorne Daemon Prince with wings and Hellforged Sword is 195 PPM, not 185). CSM don't have any 145 PPM characters, so maybe a Maulerfiend (140 PPM) or a Contemptor with a Chainclaw (145 PPM +1CP). But if you do the Contemptor you should probably give the Beastboss a WT or Relic to make up for the 1CP tax. Comparing a 145 PPM unit to a 195 PPM unit just muddies the waters. Probably shouldn't include stratagems into the comparison either. And how did you get the Daemon Prince up to S8? I'm assuming that the +2A on the charge instead of just +1A is because you made it a World Eater? It's early so maybe I'm missing something.

Edit: And yes, once the Grey Knights codex releases in a couple of weeks CSM will officially be the oldest codex in the game, with no new one in sight.

I think they're mixing Chaos Daemons Prince with CSM Prince.

Khorne Daemon Princes get +1 Strength and Attack on the charge.
Khornate CSM Princes do not.

So the most obvious issue here is that none of you really seem to understand what powercreep is.

Half of this discussion has devolved into "A unit came out that's better than another unit ZOMG POWERCREEPINZ!!! Which is both wrong and stupid.

Powercreep is when something is so powerful relative to what already exists that it shifts the entire powercurve upward. In CCGs this can occur with a single card relatively easily, Unstable Shredder from Hearthstone is a good example of that.

In 40k it's rarer and requires a truly OP unit. The Castellan in it's glory days was this, same with flying hive tyrants and even post melta buff retributors. But not every unit that's better than a unit that existed before it represents powercreep. The unit in question has to be good enough to warp AT LEAST the entire army around it and be by themselves, a serious meta consideration.

An example is the squigosaur. As good as it is, it doesn't really change anything. It doesn't require special consideration to deal with and the only real affect it has on it's own army is that you now take a squigosaur. It's not powercreep, it's just a good unit.

As far as actual powercreep goes, only Admech and Drukhari have actually represented creep. The other books are mostly in line with each other and are generally right around where the powercurve was at the end of 8th. It just seems like creep because more of those factions are ON that curve than below it.

ERJAK wrote:
So the most obvious issue here is that none of you really seem to understand what powercreep is.

Half of this discussion has devolved into "A unit came out that's better than another unit ZOMG POWERCREEPINZ!!! Which is both wrong and stupid.

Powercreep is when something is so powerful relative to what already exists that it shifts the entire powercurve upward. In CCGs this can occur with a single card relatively easily, Unstable Shredder from Hearthstone is a good example of that.

In 40k it's rarer and requires a truly OP unit. The Castellan in it's glory days was this, same with flying hive tyrants and even post melta buff retributors. But not every unit that's better than a unit that existed before it represents powercreep. The unit in question has to be good enough to warp AT LEAST the entire army around it and be by themselves, a serious meta consideration.

An example is the squigosaur. As good as it is, it doesn't really change anything. It doesn't require special consideration to deal with and the only real affect it has on it's own army is that you now take a squigosaur. It's not powercreep, it's just a good unit.

As far as actual powercreep goes, only Admech and Drukhari have actually represented creep. The other books are mostly in line with each other and are generally right around where the powercurve was at the end of 8th. It just seems like creep because more of those factions are ON that curve than below it.

^this.

I would say that the biggest instances of actual power creep in 8th/9th have been:

1) Castellan/ knight strats and relics in general, possibly also Custodes (represented serious creep in the average value you got out of a CP) - this was somewhat countered by nerfing offending strats/units and in the general reduction in the number of CPs you got throughout the game.

2) SM 2.0, army-wide special rule creep with doctrines plus the seven layer bean dip of pain. SM 3.0 was largely a nerf from this point.

3) Codex Drukhari and Codex Admech which were kind of combo-creep? you saw some serious multiplicative gak going down with both dexes. ATM my personal prediction is admech is probably getting closer to reasonable, and drukhari is giong to pop back up and need more nerfs (like 10-15pts on raiders tbh) to get back down to the average.

But it's only really 'power creep' if GW then turned around and made EVERY codex post-drukhari/admech to be on that level, and just left the rest in the dust.

A unit like, for example, Bloodcrushers, which has since the index never really been used, hasnt ever really shown any indication of being anywhere near the value of your average, bog-standard power level unit. it compares disfavorably with a lot of stuff that's 'decent, but never going to turn up in a tourney list' like a regular dreadnought, or a basic ork boyz squad.

I would encourage anyone who regularly plays tts to try out a little experiment that I've played recently with a friend of mine: Grab a list from an earlier point in the competitive game, say, a castellan soup list from mid-8th, and play it vs a current meta 9th ed list with both using the rules as they existed at the time. So the castellan soup list gets the 20CP plus infinite regeneration battery with House Raven pre-nerf and the drukhari list or whatever plays 9th ed as now.

I'll give you a spoiler: Earlier competitive lists wreck current competitive lists' shop, in general, Malefic Lord unrestricted smitespam, culexus assassin 'whoops my whole army is hit on a 6' etc... its all quite a bit crazier.

So if power creep isn't a thing, why aren't we allowed to compare the strength of 9th edition to 8th edition books when we are talking about balance?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So if power creep isn't a thing, why aren't we allowed to compare the strength of 9th edition to 8th edition books when we are talking about balance?

And more importantly, why can't gw do that when they're adjusting the points?

 the_scotsman wrote:
7A at S8 Ap-2 D3

How? Are you assuming that they are World Eaters? Without factoring in the Beastboss on Squigosaur's clan traits? And as covered, the Khornate DP in Legions doesn't get +1 strength from charging.

Also, my guy, a Khornate Daemon Prince with a hellforged sword and a malefic talon with wings is 195 points.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I think having codexes from both 9th and 8th coexisting is fine, as long as the points accurately take the relative power differences of the units in them into account. Which they often don't. But that can also be said for units that have already received their updates. Which seems to point to gw just needing to pay more attention when writing CA. But I'm not keen on lambasting the rules writers now that we know how they're (under)paid.

Seriously, why? The tabletop games industry has never paid well. That wasn't a revelation. Older gamers have been telling baby gamers that they don't really want to work for <gaming company> since the early days of TSR.

Partly because of the nepotism in the industry (if you aren't someone's buddy, you largely wont get hired) and because the pay is absolute rubbish (go work the desk at a bank instead).