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.
2021/12/17 17:43:45
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Even with all the buffs to Melta for example, the amount of them required to take down a Dreadnaught hasn't really changed compared to 5th.
Yeah, right, why in 5th edition (IIRC) you had to do the following with a multi-melta to kill a dread, assuming melta range:
-hit on 3s
-rerolling pen on 5s (55% chance)
-destroy on 4+
Meaning you needed 6 multi-meltas to kill a dreadnought on average.
And now, you need
2 shots hit on 3s
wound on 3s
no save
4.5 damage
Which works out to...two multi-meltas.
with no rerolls, or bonuses.
Basically the same!!!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
vipoid wrote: I don't mind most of this but it is kinda depressing that Shuriken weapons are just outright better than Splinter weapons.
...Why.
I thought that was literally the distinction between them - splinter weapons are less effective, because theyre not trying to kill the target as efficiently and cleanly as possible, theyre trying to make it messy and painful.
In-game, the trade off being that drukhari kabalites have cheap open-topped transport options so they can fight from the safety of their transports while guardians have to either sprint around using the signature Eldar rules or ride in extremely pricy but defensively tough wave serpents.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/12/17 17:46:13
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2021/12/17 18:23:39
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
the_scotsman wrote: Let's review some of the increases in damage from the craftworld eldar rumors:
Dire Avengers: going to 3 shots S4 AP-1 24" range (50% increase +6" range increase)
wraithcannon: D3+3 damage 18" range (30% damage increase +6" range increase)
D-Scythe: D6 shots 12" range wound rolls of a 6 deal a MW (30% damage increase 4" range increase)
Shuriken Cannon: now 2 damage (100% damage increase vs W2+)
Howling Banshee: now 3A, D2 on the charge (150% damage increase vs W2+ on the charge)
Scatter laser: now 6 shots (50% damage increase)
Pulsar+Bright Lance: Now D3+3 (30% damage increase)
Fusion Gun: now D6+2 in melta range (30% damage increase)
Swooping Hawk: now 5 shots S4 autowound on a 6 to hit (60% damage increase vs preferred GEQ target)
So, they been doing this every faction, one at a time, but I know yall hate eldar, so maybe this will finally convince you there's a lethality problem in 40k. What are the best ways to salvage it? Old editions exist, obviously, and can easily be played, but is there a way to fix 9e and make the game not over in 2.5-3 turns?
In my eyes, ditching the stupid extra doctrine layer of army-wide rules and ditching or HEAVILY trimming down stratagems - ideally just to a few primarily defensive stratagems per faction - would be step 1. Step 2 would be a heavy rework of the cover system to bring back the option to have old, invuln-save style cover saves to combat the ABSURD creep in the armor piercing stat we've seen since index 8e. If we're not going to change the traits on any cover types, giving Defensible a trait where if you're targeted by a shooting attack you can Go to Ground for a 4++ invulnerable save, but a unit that used Go to Ground fights last in the fight phase. That, and opening up/universalizing Light Cover to all unit types and making claiming light cover the same as claiming Dense Cover might also help quite a bit.
In a realm of 2W Marines everything up there is appropriate. Y'all made the bed with "Marines should be 2W!" Now you get to lie in it.
Lascannons should also be 3+D3
Yes the game is too lethal, and everything should be toned back down. But in the paradigm we're in, everything listed is welcome.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/12/17 18:24:36
I thought that was literally the distinction between them - splinter weapons are less effective, because theyre not trying to kill the target as efficiently and cleanly as possible, theyre trying to make it messy and painful.
I mean, if Splinter weapons were less effective at killing targets but instead debilitated them in some way then that would be fine.
The issue is that Splinter weapons just suck because any fluff effect from poisoning targets, incapacitating targets, inflicting unimaginable agony to targets etc. isn't represented in any way by the game rules.
It's like saying "Army X's weapons aren't as effective as Army Y's weapons because they instead inflict lots of morale penalties" in a game that doesn't have a morale system.
In-game, the trade off being that drukhari kabalites have cheap open-topped transport options so they can fight from the safety of their transports while guardians have to either sprint around using the signature Eldar rules or ride in extremely pricy but defensively tough wave serpents.
Which winds up being pointless because firing worthless, garbage weapons from the safety of a transport doesn't change the fact that those weapons are worthless garbage.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
2021/12/17 19:22:19
Subject: Re:Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
vipoid wrote: I don't mind most of this but it is kinda depressing that Shuriken weapons are just outright better than Splinter weapons.
...Why.
I thought that was literally the distinction between them - splinter weapons are less effective, because theyre not trying to kill the target as efficiently and cleanly as possible, theyre trying to make it messy and painful.
In-game, the trade off being that drukhari kabalites have cheap open-topped transport options so they can fight from the safety of their transports while guardians have to either sprint around using the signature Eldar rules or ride in extremely pricy but defensively tough wave serpents.
And that is why you don't see kabals on the table, splinter is bad. Cool I am safe in a Venom... ok but the 4 Splinter weapons will deal almost zero damage.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/12/17 19:24:15
the_scotsman wrote: Let's review some of the increases in damage from the craftworld eldar rumors:
Dire Avengers: going to 3 shots S4 AP-1 24" range (50% increase +6" range increase)
wraithcannon: D3+3 damage 18" range (30% damage increase +6" range increase)
D-Scythe: D6 shots 12" range wound rolls of a 6 deal a MW (30% damage increase 4" range increase)
Shuriken Cannon: now 2 damage (100% damage increase vs W2+)
Howling Banshee: now 3A, D2 on the charge (150% damage increase vs W2+ on the charge)
Scatter laser: now 6 shots (50% damage increase)
Pulsar+Bright Lance: Now D3+3 (30% damage increase)
Fusion Gun: now D6+2 in melta range (30% damage increase)
Swooping Hawk: now 5 shots S4 autowound on a 6 to hit (60% damage increase vs preferred GEQ target)
So, they been doing this every faction, one at a time, but I know yall hate eldar, so maybe this will finally convince you there's a lethality problem in 40k. What are the best ways to salvage it? Old editions exist, obviously, and can easily be played, but is there a way to fix 9e and make the game not over in 2.5-3 turns?
In my eyes, ditching the stupid extra doctrine layer of army-wide rules and ditching or HEAVILY trimming down stratagems - ideally just to a few primarily defensive stratagems per faction - would be step 1. Step 2 would be a heavy rework of the cover system to bring back the option to have old, invuln-save style cover saves to combat the ABSURD creep in the armor piercing stat we've seen since index 8e. If we're not going to change the traits on any cover types, giving Defensible a trait where if you're targeted by a shooting attack you can Go to Ground for a 4++ invulnerable save, but a unit that used Go to Ground fights last in the fight phase. That, and opening up/universalizing Light Cover to all unit types and making claiming light cover the same as claiming Dense Cover might also help quite a bit.
In a realm of 2W Marines everything up there is appropriate. Y'all made the bed with "Marines should be 2W!" Now you get to lie in it.
Lascannons should also be 3+D3
Yes the game is too lethal, and everything should be toned back down. But in the paradigm we're in, everything listed is welcome.
in what bizarre, warped reality do you live that you think increasing a space marine in wounds from W1 to W2 warrants anti-tank weapons increasing in damage from D6 to D3+3?
If every tank in the game was going to increase in defensive capabilities - if, say, the VEHICLE and MONSTROUS CREATURE keyword conveyed a -1 damage effect - then 3+D3 and D6+2 meltas would make 100% perfect sense. And it would fit in to the paradigm of making elites/MEQs W2: that way you could have D2 anti-elite weaponry like heavy bolters, shuriken cannons, plasma etc, and it wouldnt work just as well versus vehicles, you'd have to bring dedicated AT weapons to hunt tanks.
Also, why is increasing the rate of fire of anti-GEQ models necessary then?
You're literally just positing a slippery slope fallacy here - "well we increased the durability of one unit type, so therefore, we have to increase the damage of everything! statlines are sacred! if you change one, you have to change all of them, duh!"
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2021/12/17 20:11:27
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
the_scotsman wrote: Let's review some of the increases in damage from the craftworld eldar rumors:
Dire Avengers: going to 3 shots S4 AP-1 24" range (50% increase +6" range increase)
wraithcannon: D3+3 damage 18" range (30% damage increase +6" range increase)
D-Scythe: D6 shots 12" range wound rolls of a 6 deal a MW (30% damage increase 4" range increase)
Shuriken Cannon: now 2 damage (100% damage increase vs W2+)
Howling Banshee: now 3A, D2 on the charge (150% damage increase vs W2+ on the charge)
Scatter laser: now 6 shots (50% damage increase)
Pulsar+Bright Lance: Now D3+3 (30% damage increase)
Fusion Gun: now D6+2 in melta range (30% damage increase)
Swooping Hawk: now 5 shots S4 autowound on a 6 to hit (60% damage increase vs preferred GEQ target)
So, they been doing this every faction, one at a time, but I know yall hate eldar, so maybe this will finally convince you there's a lethality problem in 40k. What are the best ways to salvage it? Old editions exist, obviously, and can easily be played, but is there a way to fix 9e and make the game not over in 2.5-3 turns?
In my eyes, ditching the stupid extra doctrine layer of army-wide rules and ditching or HEAVILY trimming down stratagems - ideally just to a few primarily defensive stratagems per faction - would be step 1. Step 2 would be a heavy rework of the cover system to bring back the option to have old, invuln-save style cover saves to combat the ABSURD creep in the armor piercing stat we've seen since index 8e. If we're not going to change the traits on any cover types, giving Defensible a trait where if you're targeted by a shooting attack you can Go to Ground for a 4++ invulnerable save, but a unit that used Go to Ground fights last in the fight phase. That, and opening up/universalizing Light Cover to all unit types and making claiming light cover the same as claiming Dense Cover might also help quite a bit.
In a realm of 2W Marines everything up there is appropriate. Y'all made the bed with "Marines should be 2W!" Now you get to lie in it.
Lascannons should also be 3+D3
Yes the game is too lethal, and everything should be toned back down. But in the paradigm we're in, everything listed is welcome.
in what bizarre, warped reality do you live that you think increasing a space marine in wounds from W1 to W2 warrants anti-tank weapons increasing in damage from D6 to D3+3?
If every tank in the game was going to increase in defensive capabilities - if, say, the VEHICLE and MONSTROUS CREATURE keyword conveyed a -1 damage effect - then 3+D3 and D6+2 meltas would make 100% perfect sense. And it would fit in to the paradigm of making elites/MEQs W2: that way you could have D2 anti-elite weaponry like heavy bolters, shuriken cannons, plasma etc, and it wouldnt work just as well versus vehicles, you'd have to bring dedicated AT weapons to hunt tanks.
Also, why is increasing the rate of fire of anti-GEQ models necessary then?
You're literally just positing a slippery slope fallacy here - "well we increased the durability of one unit type, so therefore, we have to increase the damage of everything! statlines are sacred! if you change one, you have to change all of them, duh!"
D6 to D3+3: When D6 is unreliable for anti-tank, why would a weapon that destroys thanks not kill a 2w marines in 1 hit? there is a chance with old rules it doesn't kill it, in every edition it always has, this is literally the 1st and only edition an AT weapon has a chance to not kill a Marine when the wound goes through. And doing only 1/12 of wounds to a 12 wound vehicle, that is not a good feeling when taking 20pts a SB's does the same thing but now is better vs everything else in the game.
The solution is to play a different game, an earlier edition, a houseruled edition e.g. Prohammer, or a houseruled current edition, e.g. larger tables or trading centimeters for inches, with lower points, without stratagems and gimmicks… I enjoyed 500pts on a 4x4 without cards and without cp and so on.
.
2021/12/17 21:37:35
Subject: Re:Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Daedalus81 wrote: Splinter Cannon went to D2, but changed in other ways as well and no one uses it.
People have complained and complained and complained about how Banshees can't even kill marines when they're supposed to kill elites and not hordes. And now that they'll get to kill marines -- it's a problem.
And absolutely none of this matters if the points are appropriate.
And as a final postscript (and I know I'm not the first to say it in this thread), but none of this matters period because these rumors are le jank. I usually like the rabblerousing Scotsman threads but this one is pretty suspect (and to be clear, you're exactly right about Banshees.)
Bloody Scots! They ruint Scotland!
2021/12/17 22:12:50
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Yeah, right, why in 5th edition (IIRC) you had to do the following with a multi-melta to kill a dread, assuming melta range:
-hit on 3s
-rerolling pen on 5s (55% chance)
-destroy on 4+
Meaning you needed 6 multi-meltas to kill a dreadnought on average.
And now, you need
2 shots hit on 3s
wound on 3s
no save
4.5 damage
Which works out to...two multi-meltas.
with no rerolls, or bonuses.
Basically the same!!!
It's pretty hard to get into half range, but melta was 2D6 pen in half range instead of reroll. Glances also matter, because they're only at -1 ( with the +1 offset ) so any 6s still kill. On top of that stripping and/or immobilizing can make a dreadnought pretty useless. Those factors put it much closer to 3 rather than 6.
At full range you have .333 pen and .167 glance for a 20% chance to kill it -- ignoring immobilize and weapon destroyed results. Two MM now at long range have 13.6% chance - so a fair bit less than the previous outcome ( down from 44% when they're in half range ).
I view the performance of MM in half range a great thing -- people want ranges and movement to matter...well...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/12/17 22:16:00
2021/12/17 22:17:16
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
the_scotsman wrote: Let's review some of the increases in damage from the craftworld eldar rumors:
Dire Avengers: going to 3 shots S4 AP-1 24" range (50% increase +6" range increase)
wraithcannon: D3+3 damage 18" range (30% damage increase +6" range increase)
D-Scythe: D6 shots 12" range wound rolls of a 6 deal a MW (30% damage increase 4" range increase)
Shuriken Cannon: now 2 damage (100% damage increase vs W2+)
Howling Banshee: now 3A, D2 on the charge (150% damage increase vs W2+ on the charge)
Scatter laser: now 6 shots (50% damage increase)
Pulsar+Bright Lance: Now D3+3 (30% damage increase)
Fusion Gun: now D6+2 in melta range (30% damage increase)
Swooping Hawk: now 5 shots S4 autowound on a 6 to hit (60% damage increase vs preferred GEQ target)
So, they been doing this every faction, one at a time, but I know yall hate eldar, so maybe this will finally convince you there's a lethality problem in 40k. What are the best ways to salvage it? Old editions exist, obviously, and can easily be played, but is there a way to fix 9e and make the game not over in 2.5-3 turns?
In my eyes, ditching the stupid extra doctrine layer of army-wide rules and ditching or HEAVILY trimming down stratagems - ideally just to a few primarily defensive stratagems per faction - would be step 1. Step 2 would be a heavy rework of the cover system to bring back the option to have old, invuln-save style cover saves to combat the ABSURD creep in the armor piercing stat we've seen since index 8e. If we're not going to change the traits on any cover types, giving Defensible a trait where if you're targeted by a shooting attack you can Go to Ground for a 4++ invulnerable save, but a unit that used Go to Ground fights last in the fight phase. That, and opening up/universalizing Light Cover to all unit types and making claiming light cover the same as claiming Dense Cover might also help quite a bit.
In a realm of 2W Marines everything up there is appropriate. Y'all made the bed with "Marines should be 2W!" Now you get to lie in it.
Lascannons should also be 3+D3
Yes the game is too lethal, and everything should be toned back down. But in the paradigm we're in, everything listed is welcome.
in what bizarre, warped reality do you live that you think increasing a space marine in wounds from W1 to W2 warrants anti-tank weapons increasing in damage from D6 to D3+3?
If every tank in the game was going to increase in defensive capabilities - if, say, the VEHICLE and MONSTROUS CREATURE keyword conveyed a -1 damage effect - then 3+D3 and D6+2 meltas would make 100% perfect sense. And it would fit in to the paradigm of making elites/MEQs W2: that way you could have D2 anti-elite weaponry like heavy bolters, shuriken cannons, plasma etc, and it wouldnt work just as well versus vehicles, you'd have to bring dedicated AT weapons to hunt tanks.
Also, why is increasing the rate of fire of anti-GEQ models necessary then?
You're literally just positing a slippery slope fallacy here - "well we increased the durability of one unit type, so therefore, we have to increase the damage of everything! statlines are sacred! if you change one, you have to change all of them, duh!"
1: As posted above, Marines don't auto-die to Lascannons anymore. Also the Multimelta is crazy good AT firepower right now. Other AT has been bumped to compensate.
2: You're arbitrarily categorizing a number of weapons as "anti-GEQ" while forgetting that Marines are actually the "default 40K profile" in practice because they're so popular. If you made Dire Avengers and Swooping Hawks strictly anti-GEQ units, they'd never be taken, because everybody knows they're gonna be fighting against Marines. Dire Avengers in particular should be reasonably competitive vs. Marines in firefights, as that's where they've typically been balanced towards.
3: If you want to further encourage specific weapons to engage tanks, bring back either the old AV system or the old to-Wound chart.
4: As for "slippery slope", it's either this or "feth YEAH SPEESH MAHREENS UBER ALLES!!!!!"
Codex creep sells models.
All other considerations secondary.
Game expendable.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
2021/12/17 22:45:22
Subject: Re:Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
The rumours may be right may be wrong - but most of it rings true for a 9th codex update. It feels a bit over the top as a package - but would anyone really be surprised if CWE gonna CWE?
I think lethality is a problem. I don't think its surprising that Eldar, Tau, perhaps even GSC, should get the Dark Eldar and Orks treatment (amongst others). But it is turning the game into the worse dynamics of ITC tournaments of yore - where you'd expect everything to die in 3 turns because everyone's running a glasshammer list.
But yeah. I think the train is set at this point. This is going to be 9th edition. I imagine 10th is going to be a quasi-5th style evolution. Maybe Transports will get 20+ wounds and cost 30 points or something. So everyone can hide inside metal bawkses for the opening 2 turns.
2021/12/17 23:15:37
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
the_scotsman wrote: Let's review some of the increases in damage from the craftworld eldar rumors:
Dire Avengers: going to 3 shots S4 AP-1 24" range (50% increase +6" range increase)
wraithcannon: D3+3 damage 18" range (30% damage increase +6" range increase)
D-Scythe: D6 shots 12" range wound rolls of a 6 deal a MW (30% damage increase 4" range increase)
Shuriken Cannon: now 2 damage (100% damage increase vs W2+)
Howling Banshee: now 3A, D2 on the charge (150% damage increase vs W2+ on the charge)
Scatter laser: now 6 shots (50% damage increase)
Pulsar+Bright Lance: Now D3+3 (30% damage increase)
Fusion Gun: now D6+2 in melta range (30% damage increase)
Swooping Hawk: now 5 shots S4 autowound on a 6 to hit (60% damage increase vs preferred GEQ target)
So, they been doing this every faction, one at a time, but I know yall hate eldar, so maybe this will finally convince you there's a lethality problem in 40k. What are the best ways to salvage it? Old editions exist, obviously, and can easily be played, but is there a way to fix 9e and make the game not over in 2.5-3 turns?
In my eyes, ditching the stupid extra doctrine layer of army-wide rules and ditching or HEAVILY trimming down stratagems - ideally just to a few primarily defensive stratagems per faction - would be step 1. Step 2 would be a heavy rework of the cover system to bring back the option to have old, invuln-save style cover saves to combat the ABSURD creep in the armor piercing stat we've seen since index 8e. If we're not going to change the traits on any cover types, giving Defensible a trait where if you're targeted by a shooting attack you can Go to Ground for a 4++ invulnerable save, but a unit that used Go to Ground fights last in the fight phase. That, and opening up/universalizing Light Cover to all unit types and making claiming light cover the same as claiming Dense Cover might also help quite a bit.
In a realm of 2W Marines everything up there is appropriate. Y'all made the bed with "Marines should be 2W!" Now you get to lie in it.
Lascannons should also be 3+D3
Yes the game is too lethal, and everything should be toned back down. But in the paradigm we're in, everything listed is welcome.
in what bizarre, warped reality do you live that you think increasing a space marine in wounds from W1 to W2 warrants anti-tank weapons increasing in damage from D6 to D3+3?
If every tank in the game was going to increase in defensive capabilities - if, say, the VEHICLE and MONSTROUS CREATURE keyword conveyed a -1 damage effect - then 3+D3 and D6+2 meltas would make 100% perfect sense. And it would fit in to the paradigm of making elites/MEQs W2: that way you could have D2 anti-elite weaponry like heavy bolters, shuriken cannons, plasma etc, and it wouldnt work just as well versus vehicles, you'd have to bring dedicated AT weapons to hunt tanks.
Also, why is increasing the rate of fire of anti-GEQ models necessary then?
You're literally just positing a slippery slope fallacy here - "well we increased the durability of one unit type, so therefore, we have to increase the damage of everything! statlines are sacred! if you change one, you have to change all of them, duh!"
1: As posted above, Marines don't auto-die to Lascannons anymore. Also the Multimelta is crazy good AT firepower right now. Other AT has been bumped to compensate.
2: You're arbitrarily categorizing a number of weapons as "anti-GEQ" while forgetting that Marines are actually the "default 40K profile" in practice because they're so popular. If you made Dire Avengers and Swooping Hawks strictly anti-GEQ units, they'd never be taken, because everybody knows they're gonna be fighting against Marines. Dire Avengers in particular should be reasonably competitive vs. Marines in firefights, as that's where they've typically been balanced towards.
3: If you want to further encourage specific weapons to engage tanks, bring back either the old AV system or the old to-Wound chart.
4: As for "slippery slope", it's either this or "feth YEAH SPEESH MAHREENS UBER ALLES!!!!!"
1. You claim other AT has been buffed but confirm lascannons don't kill a Marine 1/6 of the time anyway more? Also I don't think the design choice was "make it in line with meltas", on the contrary they were trying to make melta relevant.
2. You are forgetting the "standard profile" in the design teams world is a base human, you can't also just bring lists whacking expensive d2 weapons in everywhere to kill Marines because one day you will encounter that geq horde.
3. The old AV system was consistently pants for a few reasons, mostly due to the damage resolution. The old to wound chart I do like, I think double S/T is too high a break point with the scale of stats we have now.
4. That isn't and won't be a problem in 9th, the restrictions are too heavy and its hardly like Marines are dominating the game in terms of power level and haven’t since the start of 9th for that matter.
2021/12/18 01:14:04
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
1. Lascannons = staple AT weapons here. In this particular case though the reason Lascannons didnt get buffed along with the rest of them (Dark Lances etc.)is because GW probably wanted to push Meltas and because many Las mounts for Marunes come in quads, like the double Las-talon Primaris tank, Land Raiders and Devastator Squads.
2. It doesn't matter what the design teams think is the default profile when Marines are the most popular army, and everybody knows they'll be fighting marines.
3. :shrug:
4: Whether or not Marines are winning tourneys has little to do with it. The issue is efficacy of marine-opposing units on a unit to unit/model to model basis. Dire Avengers have traditionally been able to go toe-to-toe with Marines using roughly equivalent sized squads. A 24" Assault 3 AP -1 Catapult puts them back towards that realm again.
Dudeface wrote: 2. You are forgetting the "standard profile" in the design teams world is a base human, you can't also just bring lists whacking expensive d2 weapons in everywhere to kill Marines because one day you will encounter that geq horde.
The devs could tell us their baseline reference stat profile is a Knight and it wouldn't make an iota of difference. Players default to killing Marines because the MEQ profile is about half the armies in the game (outnumbering GEQ by raw faction count) and by far a majority of armies played.
Insectum7 wrote: 1. Lascannons = staple AT weapons here. In this particular case though the reason Lascannons didnt get buffed along with the rest of them (Dark Lances etc.)is because GW probably wanted to push Meltas and because many Las mounts for Marunes come in quads, like the double Las-talon Primaris tank, Land Raiders and Devastator Squads.
Yea, I get the sense that GW is saying the defacto marine AT is melta. The release of GK confirmed the future of the lascannon.
2021/12/18 03:30:59
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Sgt. Cortez wrote:The stats alone don't look outrageous. Problems usually arise from stratagems, traits and powers on top. CC is more killy imo, since it happens in both turns and ignores cover.
In round 1 in our games there's usually not much going in aside movement because you hardly see enemy units and the ones' you see are in cover and/ or can only be seen by few units.
I'd agree with that. The basic stats aren't that ridiculous, but start adding strategems, traits, psychic powers, character auras/targeted abilities, etc, and it starts to get ridiculous fast. Then consider that the fancy new terrain mechanics are a bit lacking, and we have problems. Seriously, somebody needs to get the designers a copy of the 4th edition terrain rules.
Insectum7 wrote:^Which gets awkward with CSMs, who don't have nearly the access to MMs that loyalists do.
Hellbrutes, Contemptors, Land Raider Achilles, and pintle mounts on a few LoWs. So all vehicles, and only one isn't fw. And people wonder why CSM players get cranky when they start talking about banning fw units. When it comes to a lot of things, it's all we've got.
2021/12/18 07:51:34
Subject: Re:Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Orlanth wrote: Codex creep sells models.
All other considerations secondary.
Game expendable.
Then why aren't all codexes creeped in equal measure?
Maybe because GW thought they had the same level of power creep when they released them. Or maybe because they want some factions (or even just specific units) to have more power creep than others.
And that is why you don't see kabals on the table, splinter is bad. Cool I am safe in a Venom... ok but the 4 Splinter weapons will deal almost zero damage.
I see kabals in venoms/raiders all the time. Even in the last goonhammer article about GT lists that placed high at events there were kabals in transports.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/12/18 09:00:21
2021/12/18 09:13:36
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Insectum7 wrote:^Which gets awkward with CSMs, who don't have nearly the access to MMs that loyalists do.
Hellbrutes, Contemptors, Land Raider Achilles, and pintle mounts on a few LoWs. So all vehicles, and only one isn't fw. And people wonder why CSM players get cranky when they start talking about banning fw units. When it comes to a lot of things, it's all we've got.
Meanwhile I can put them on Servitors, lol. 2 Multimeltas in a unit of four Servitors for 60 points total.
Orlanth wrote: Codex creep sells models.
All other considerations secondary.
Game expendable.
Then why aren't all codexes creeped in equal measure?
Maybe because GW thought they had the same level of power creep when they released them. Or maybe because they want some factions (or even just specific units) to have more power creep than others.
And that is why you don't see kabals on the table, splinter is bad. Cool I am safe in a Venom... ok but the 4 Splinter weapons will deal almost zero damage.
I see kabals in venoms/raiders all the time. Even in the last goonhammer article about GT lists that placed high at events there were kabals in transports.
Kabals are taken not for damage, but are force to take 1 unit for RSR, the Venom is most likely their to be cheap for secondaries, keep kabals live with a character like a Succubus. No one takes 5 kabals for their poison, they take for a Blaster time to time but never for poison, the poison weapons are ignored when thinking about them. Time to time you will see Venom spam with kabals, but that works bc of the 10 Blasters, they are just 4 extra wounds for 1 guy.
Saying you saw a kabal unit or 2 is like saying you see Lictors in most Nids lists therefore its a good unit.
Listen, i like Kabal, i own literally over 200 of them (granted 40 are old 3rd), i have 10 Raiders and 8 Venoms. I like MSU kabal with Incubi, Archons, and splash in Wyches/Hellions/Suc. If anyone wants them to be good its me. But when 600pts can't kill a Rhino (Including Trueborn and BH rr's) there is a problem.
DE is good right now bc of other units, Characters, cheap over kill units like Incubi, and tough units like Coven, combine with super fast movements. Kabals have none of that.
Lictors are in fact really good. We see them pretty often actually, and for a good reason.
Units don't need to be killy in order to be good or bad, they simply need a role. They don't need to be spammable in huge numbers as proof of being good either. Just being cheap sometimes is the quality a unity needs in order to be good. Especially if it's combined with a special rule such as infiltrator positioning, deep strike or simply high M stat. Lictors have both a infiltrator/deep strike ability and high M.
50 points for 4 splinter weapons and a blaster are really cheap. You don't need to kill rhinos with them, just sit on objectives, score secondaries, deny enemy objectives, or mess enemies movements with such units. Incubi and wyches you want them to assault stuff, kabals act like a back up. Of course there are better units at the moment, but to claim that kabalite warriors aren't played is wrong.
One of the best units in the ork codex is kommandos. Just standard boyz with better save (only in cover) and infiltrator rule which can be taken in 5 man squads. They have no punch at all, but they are cheap enough to perform very well. You don't need to kill anything with them, just use them for screening/positioning purposes, score objectives, harass enemy units. Even if they won't deal a single wound they'd be great.
2021/12/18 12:07:45
Subject: Re:Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Orlanth wrote: Codex creep sells models.
All other considerations secondary.
Game expendable.
Then why aren't all codexes creeped in equal measure?
Maybe because GW thought they had the same level of power creep when they released them. Or maybe because they want some factions (or even just specific units) to have more power creep than others.
And that is why you don't see kabals on the table, splinter is bad. Cool I am safe in a Venom... ok but the 4 Splinter weapons will deal almost zero damage.
I see kabals in venoms/raiders all the time. Even in the last goonhammer article about GT lists that placed high at events there were kabals in transports.
Kabals are taken not for damage, but are force to take 1 unit for RSR, the Venom is most likely their to be cheap for secondaries, keep kabals live with a character like a Succubus. No one takes 5 kabals for their poison, they take for a Blaster time to time but never for poison, the poison weapons are ignored when thinking about them. Time to time you will see Venom spam with kabals, but that works bc of the 10 Blasters, they are just 4 extra wounds for 1 guy.
Saying you saw a kabal unit or 2 is like saying you see Lictors in most Nids lists therefore its a good unit.
Listen, i like Kabal, i own literally over 200 of them (granted 40 are old 3rd), i have 10 Raiders and 8 Venoms. I like MSU kabal with Incubi, Archons, and splash in Wyches/Hellions/Suc. If anyone wants them to be good its me. But when 600pts can't kill a Rhino (Including Trueborn and BH rr's) there is a problem.
DE is good right now bc of other units, Characters, cheap over kill units like Incubi, and tough units like Coven, combine with super fast movements. Kabals have none of that.
1) Assuming you've put the blaster & blast pistol in your squad, how are you failing to kill a rhino with 600pts & average rolls?
2) How are you figuring that kabals full of MSU squads in Venoms don't have access to super fast movement? The things move 16". What more do you want?
2021/12/18 12:38:43
Subject: Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Orlanth wrote: Codex creep sells models. All other considerations secondary. Game expendable.
Then why aren't all codexes creeped in equal measure?
Maybe because GW thought they had the same level of power creep when they released them. Or maybe because they want some factions (or even just specific units) to have more power creep than others.
And that is why you don't see kabals on the table, splinter is bad. Cool I am safe in a Venom... ok but the 4 Splinter weapons will deal almost zero damage.
I see kabals in venoms/raiders all the time. Even in the last goonhammer article about GT lists that placed high at events there were kabals in transports.
Kabals are taken not for damage, but are force to take 1 unit for RSR, the Venom is most likely their to be cheap for secondaries, keep kabals live with a character like a Succubus. No one takes 5 kabals for their poison, they take for a Blaster time to time but never for poison, the poison weapons are ignored when thinking about them. Time to time you will see Venom spam with kabals, but that works bc of the 10 Blasters, they are just 4 extra wounds for 1 guy.
Saying you saw a kabal unit or 2 is like saying you see Lictors in most Nids lists therefore its a good unit.
Listen, i like Kabal, i own literally over 200 of them (granted 40 are old 3rd), i have 10 Raiders and 8 Venoms. I like MSU kabal with Incubi, Archons, and splash in Wyches/Hellions/Suc. If anyone wants them to be good its me. But when 600pts can't kill a Rhino (Including Trueborn and BH rr's) there is a problem.
DE is good right now bc of other units, Characters, cheap over kill units like Incubi, and tough units like Coven, combine with super fast movements. Kabals have none of that.
1) Assuming you've put the blaster & blast pistol in your squad, how are you failing to kill a rhino with 600pts & average rolls? 2) How are you figuring that kabals full of MSU squads in Venoms don't have access to super fast movement? The things move 16". What more do you want?
It takes 5 blasters in single units with BH for re-rolls to kill a Rhino. Thats 250pts of Kabals without their Transports... you are also kind of are force to take transport if you like it or not. 5 Blasters with BH re-roll a hit. Going to average to 1/2 on hits/wounds/damage: 4.5 Hits, 3 wounds, zero saves 3.5D, for 10.5D that is just enough to kill 1 if they didn't have an anything else protecting it, like -1 to hit from Tree's, or Sisters with an Invul, etc... If the unit is -1 to hit you need another Blaster to kill it, if they have an invul another 1 or 3 depending on 6+++/5+++. Vehicles with -1D are even worst.
Then you see the Ravager and it averages out to 8D........ for 130pts. Ravagers are good, IDK why DW -10pts to them.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/12/18 12:47:03
Then you see the Ravager and it averages out to 8D........ for 130pts. Ravagers are good, IDK why DW -10pts to them.
They certainly are a bit underpriced along with other drukhari units, and that's the reason why kabals may seem so bad in comparison, but their offensive potential is the reason why they are heavy support and therefore limited by rule of 3. Troops shouldn't compete with specialists in killyness, let alone with vehicles.
2021/12/18 13:47:42
Subject: Re:Heads up yall GW about to casually multiply the damage of another codex by 1.5
Orlanth wrote: Codex creep sells models.
All other considerations secondary.
Game expendable.
Then why aren't all codexes creeped in equal measure?
Maybe because GW thought they had the same level of power creep when they released them. Or maybe because they want some factions (or even just specific units) to have more power creep than others.
And that is why you don't see kabals on the table, splinter is bad. Cool I am safe in a Venom... ok but the 4 Splinter weapons will deal almost zero damage.
I see kabals in venoms/raiders all the time. Even in the last goonhammer article about GT lists that placed high at events there were kabals in transports.
Kabals are taken not for damage, but are force to take 1 unit for RSR, the Venom is most likely their to be cheap for secondaries, keep kabals live with a character like a Succubus. No one takes 5 kabals for their poison, they take for a Blaster time to time but never for poison, the poison weapons are ignored when thinking about them. Time to time you will see Venom spam with kabals, but that works bc of the 10 Blasters, they are just 4 extra wounds for 1 guy.
Saying you saw a kabal unit or 2 is like saying you see Lictors in most Nids lists therefore its a good unit.
Listen, i like Kabal, i own literally over 200 of them (granted 40 are old 3rd), i have 10 Raiders and 8 Venoms. I like MSU kabal with Incubi, Archons, and splash in Wyches/Hellions/Suc. If anyone wants them to be good its me. But when 600pts can't kill a Rhino (Including Trueborn and BH rr's) there is a problem.
DE is good right now bc of other units, Characters, cheap over kill units like Incubi, and tough units like Coven, combine with super fast movements. Kabals have none of that.
1) Assuming you've put the blaster & blast pistol in your squad, how are you failing to kill a rhino with 600pts & average rolls?
2) How are you figuring that kabals full of MSU squads in Venoms don't have access to super fast movement? The things move 16". What more do you want?
It takes 5 blasters in single units with BH for re-rolls to kill a Rhino. Thats 250pts of Kabals without their Transports... you are also kind of are force to take transport if you like it or not.
5 Blasters with BH re-roll a hit. Going to average to 1/2 on hits/wounds/damage: 4.5 Hits, 3 wounds, zero saves 3.5D, for 10.5D that is just enough to kill 1 if they didn't have an anything else protecting it, like -1 to hit from Tree's, or Sisters with an Invul, etc... If the unit is -1 to hit you need another Blaster to kill it, if they have an invul another 1 or 3 depending on 6+++/5+++. Vehicles with -1D are even worst.
Then you see the Ravager and it averages out to 8D........ for 130pts. Ravagers are good, IDK why DW -10pts to them.
That's shocking - a dedicated anti-tank platform is better vs tanks than MSU units toting someAT capability. Kinda like a hammer being better at pounding nails than a screwdriver is. Who'd have thought....
But if we're just rolling dice against a rhino in a vacuum & inserting whatever assumptions why aren't you rolling for the blast pistol, all the splitter weapons, and considering assault? That stuff adds up you know. And there's 5 or 6 units + their venoms in this rhino killing party....
That rhino dies in 1 turn.
15k+
Emperor's Spears 2500
Beastmen 10k
