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.
...Yeah, how crazy is that? Imagine if other official events started doing something similar. You'd have to play Magic with actual Magic cards. What a world that would be.....
40k 9th Edition and it's limited weapn options is a travesty, especial when you look on the HH leaks and the "classic" 7th Edition loadout for all those Army options...
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2022/03/31 09:09:12
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: It's not passive to specifically go out of your way to go into a thread about something and announce just how much you don't care to everyone and how indifferent you are, and how much it doesn't affect you.
What you describe here is literally threadcrapping, which well-moderated forums don't permit. People can decide for themselves whether this forum qualifies there.
I will say, though, that the obvious solution to GW's current idiotic no-model-no-rules-no-options nonsense is for the community to go back to treating GW's 'rules' as guidelines and be willing to modify them to suit their particular play-group's needs, rather than treating them as holy writ.
"Hey, my Chaos Lord has a combi-flamer because I built him back when that was a legal option. Do you want me to play him WYSIWYG or closest now-legal option?"
"WYSIWYG is easier to deal with. You've used the old points value from back when it was legal? OK, let's get on with the game!"
That's pretty much how it would go in my group. If you've got an awesome-looking conversion in your army, we will find a way to make it 'legal', no matter what GW (or the international tourney circuit ) says.
A little bit of righteous anger now and then is good, actually. Don't trust a person who never gets angry.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: It's not passive to specifically go out of your way to go into a thread about something and announce just how much you don't care to everyone and how indifferent you are, and how much it doesn't affect you.
What you describe here is literally threadcrapping, which well-moderated forums don't permit. People can decide for themselves whether this forum qualifies there.
I will say, though, that the obvious solution to GW's current idiotic no-model-no-rules-no-options nonsense is for the community to go back to treating GW's 'rules' as guidelines and be willing to modify them to suit their particular play-group's needs, rather than treating them as holy writ.
"Hey, my Chaos Lord has a combi-flamer because I built him back when that was a legal option. Do you want me to play him WYSIWYG or closest now-legal option?"
"WYSIWYG is easier to deal with. You've used the old points value from back when it was legal? OK, let's get on with the game!"
That's pretty much how it would go in my group. If you've got an awesome-looking conversion in your army, we will find a way to make it 'legal', no matter what GW (or the international tourney circuit ) says.
Careful, it's almost like you're promoting free thought there. But do agree, and as mentioned before, if the 1-2 combi weapons people just lost access to make that much of annimpact on how the army plays, I'd be amazed.
The Red Hobbit wrote: It could be they balanced the CSM codex against the early 9e codex (specifically Marines) because they planned on it releasing earlier but that plan was delayed due to some behind the scenes reason.
They could have started working on it 2 weeks ago and they would be balancing it against the Space Marine codex. Anyone expecting the Chaos Space Marine codex to be stronger than the Space Marine codex is going to be sorely disappointed. It happened once before and it will never happen again. The best CSM can hope for is that they're in the starter box so their codex can release at the around the same time as SM at the beginning of the edition rather than at the end after an edition's worth of powercreep. Otherwise, better luck next edition.
The Red Hobbit wrote: It could be they balanced the CSM codex against the early 9e codex (specifically Marines) because they planned on it releasing earlier but that plan was delayed due to some behind the scenes reason.
Yeah but according to rumours the book seems to be in playtesting now?
Eh no. If it was playtesting now it would be late 2022/early 2023 release. We know it's coming soon.
There wouldn't be time for physical products to come if it was playtesting now...
Leadtimes. Leadtimes. Leadtimes. These things are done well ahead.
He has to be, nobody could be that bloody dense in real life, right? Social justice warriors are one thing, but prattling on in some sort of justice crusade over toy soldiers is really taking the cake. What exactly are "the consequences of not calling out GW on its actions" that I am disregarding? As if my discontented bleating on an obscure internet forum that GWs own design staff have disparaged in the past for being an example of the worst excesses of the fanbase will change anything in a book that has already gone to print. Like, oh no - GW is going to publish yet another gakky substandard low quality rules publication, the world is ending - not like that isn't usually the case to begin with, not like there aren't a dozen other miniatures games out there that I can and do invest into/play regularly.
The part that really gets me is that apparently being relieved that bolt pistols are an option (when the rumor posted just a couple pages prior was that it was plasma pistols only) and that I haven't had yet another set of miniatures completely invalidated and gak-canned by GW somehow translates to "indifference" or, as Wha-mu has been repeatedly vomiting all over his keyboard, "feth yours, I got mine". Its not like I wasn't complaining about how my exalted champions have been rendered entirely useless by these changes just a dozen or two pages ago or anything. Its not like I don't own literal armies worth of miniatures that are literally unplayable because they don't have valid rules anymore or anything.
Dudeface wrote: Removing options is never good but not caring or being upset about it isn't the same as defending their removal.
"Don't care. Got mine." is a hair's breadth away from defending the removal.
Indifference is defending, full stop
That's not how language works. Indifference is passive, and defending is active.
Go away, troll.
It's not passive to specifically go out of your way to go into a thread about something and announce just how much you don't care to everyone and how indifferent you are, and how much it doesn't affect you.
Explain to me, in exact detail, how I "specifically went out of my way to come into this thread" when I have been an active participant in this thread and in this discussion, posting regularly dozens of times, since the very beginning of this thread. Seriously, I'll wait. I have been posting in this thread *literally* since page 1 - my first post in this thread was *before* yours - by a full page. I've made over 30 posts in this thread by my count, I would imagine I am one of the most frequent posters here - so uhh, how am I going out of my way again?
While you're at it, I'd love for you to show me where I indicated that I don't care, because all I said was that I am "content", i.e. relieved, that I can still use my lord minis - and thats really not the same thing.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2022/03/31 12:20:23
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: It's not passive to specifically go out of your way to go into a thread about something and announce just how much you don't care to everyone and how indifferent you are, and how much it doesn't affect you.
What you describe here is literally threadcrapping, which well-moderated forums don't permit. People can decide for themselves whether this forum qualifies there.
I will say, though, that the obvious solution to GW's current idiotic no-model-no-rules-no-options nonsense is for the community to go back to treating GW's 'rules' as guidelines and be willing to modify them to suit their particular play-group's needs, rather than treating them as holy writ.
"Hey, my Chaos Lord has a combi-flamer because I built him back when that was a legal option. Do you want me to play him WYSIWYG or closest now-legal option?"
"WYSIWYG is easier to deal with. You've used the old points value from back when it was legal? OK, let's get on with the game!"
That's pretty much how it would go in my group. If you've got an awesome-looking conversion in your army, we will find a way to make it 'legal', no matter what GW (or the international tourney circuit ) says.
Careful, it's almost like you're promoting free thought there. But do agree, and as mentioned before, if the 1-2 combi weapons people just lost access to make that much of annimpact on how the army plays, I'd be amazed.
No, the loss of combi-weapons for our characters won't have much of an impact on how our armies play, but the loss of jump packs absolutely will. Especially for Legions that are focused on jump infantry.
AL dump this morning
AL strats
-the sabotage strat is now auto explode
-fall back and shoot
-12" deepstrike denial
-shoot a unit that deepstrikes nearby
-forward operatives, pregame move
-conceal is replaced with untargetable beyond 12"
ALWLT -sniper warlord trait
-redeploy for up to 3.units
-a cultist buff
-i am alpharius is still there
No news on the other warlord traits
And for relics
-one turn for battle ennemy strats cost +1cp on a 4+ (still there)
- power sword with dd3 and causes -1 to hit (GONE)
-bolt weapons wounds on +2(except vehicules and titanic), ignores cover (still there)
-the combi bolter relic must be gone since no way foe HQ to get combis (GONE, no surprises there)
-+2 armor, and transhuman
- armor with 3d6 movemebt that can "ghostwalk" through units (still there)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Prayers
-basic prayer still reroll all hits in melee
-+1 to wound in melee
- -1to hit (REPLACED) Now it is 1-3 hits always fail, no rerolls allowed
- 6" aura when doing leadership test roll 2d6 discard the highest & fail action & fight last
-+1 to hit (gone)
-5++ buble is gone you said (gone)
-priest het +2a(was +3) and ap2 (was ap4) on weapon
And for god specifics
-+d3 wounds (gone)
-advance and charge (still there)
-S+2 (gone)
-T+2 (gone)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/03/31 14:00:35
Rydria wrote: Not having to pay for mark of slaanesh, as emperor’s children is super nice.
Indeed. With Noise Marines being "GOOD" and Excruciating Frequencies going to MW, along with Honor the Prince remaining in some fashion we'll be doing alright for Chaos at least.
I can't wait to see the rules for Noise Marines i wonder if they kept music of the apocalypse, or have been changed.
Honor the prince remaining the same, is amazing for us makes the theoretical Terminator squad with 3 power fist. 1 chain fist, duel accursed weapon per 5 a great bomb, or if you want to go cheaper a squad of Warptalons
I imagine music of the apocalypses stays but gets cleaned up to not be able to attack within 1". EC have had some sort of fight/shoot on death since "Traitor Legions" so hopefully it stays as its fluffy. A EC Terminators assault from deep strike is be nuts: all those fists hitting on a 2+, and generating +2 hits on 6's turn 3. It only gets worse if Excess of Violence is still a thing. The only real concern is our Warlord Traits and Relics. Sure a lot of them are barely an upgrade; but things like: Intoxicating Elixir, Remnant of the Maraviglia, Raiment Repulsive, and Loathsome Grace would be painful to lose.
-the combi bolter relic must be gone since no way foe HQ to get combis (GONE, no surprises there)
Er, what's the use of a sniper warlord if there's nothing for him to fire but a pistol?
Bharring wrote: At worst, you'll spend all your time and money on a hobby you don't enjoy, hate everything you're doing, and drive no value out of what should be the best times of your life.
Stuff like that is allowed, but god forbid i want an combi-bolter lord.
thanks gw, really nice
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
I would prefer large number of units not be made invalid and models removed from the game as part of what seems to be a sort of 'sterilising process'.
The biggest indicator someone is a loser is them complaining about 3d printers or piracy.
Memnoch wrote: This codex is starting to sound like more of a mess with every release of rumours and leaks.
Replace "codex" with "edition" and you have 40k in a nutshell right now
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
I want GW to just increase how many points a Guardsman spends to get a flamer instead of going full Kharn on unit options.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/03/31 16:06:22
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
I would prefer large number of units not be made invalid and models removed from the game as part of what seems to be a sort of 'sterilising process'.
That's the nature of the beast. I understand your feelings, they're likely the feelings of most of the community. But as I said, the solution isn't simple. Balancing 2000+ data sheets over 6-10 different games, many with dozens of options of their own is going to be next to impossible for GW, as they are already not that great at game balance to begin with. With all the screaming for game balance to be a priority, they're making the best choice they have, which is to reduce the complexity and scope of the game, an easy way to do that is remove options.
For all the complaining I've been seeing about the loss of the Jump pack Chaos lord, I can honestly tell you that having been a part of the hobby for nearly 8 years, and having played in four different US states during that time, I've never seen a jump pack lord on the table that wasn't a Blood Angel. People obviously have them and use them, but they're not that popular and that is something that I am sure GW market research has shown. Axing weaker or limited things is the easiest solution to them.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
I would prefer large number of units not be made invalid and models removed from the game as part of what seems to be a sort of 'sterilising process'.
Large number of units? Mutilators? They're the only ones removed from the game, some options are being removed for foot lords. Not sure I'd agree it's sterilisation of the army. They removal of cult troops I can see as a problem but I sort of understand that might be the first step to truly separating out the god specific legions, they don't want overlapping unit entries where possible.
Memnoch wrote: This codex is starting to sound like more of a mess with every release of rumours and leaks.
Replace "codex" with "edition" and you have 40k in a nutshell right now
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
I want GW to just increase how many points a Guardsman spends to get a flamer instead of going full Kharn on unit options.
I can't help you there as I don't understand the math of competitive wargaming. If they can do that and it will actually matter, then go for it. But I suspect given all the complaints about points over the last 2-3 years, that just isn't a viable solution. Look at the mess 40K points are in now because of all the push back. Points are everywhere and it's really hard to tell if a book is current or not anymore due to that.
Standard spells
-warptime still there but no charge
-+1 to hit
-no invul on 1 ennemy unit
- 1 model get s+2 & +1a
-3d6 each 4+ = 1mw
-if d6 is bigger then T, then d3 MW and units within 6" take 1mw on a 4+
clockworkchris9 wrote: Standard spells
-warptime still there but no charge
-+1 to hit
-no invul on 1 ennemy unit
- 1 model get s+2 & +1a
-3d6 each 4+ = 1mw
-if d6 is bigger then T, then d3 MW and units within 6" take 1mw on a 4+
Big nerf on Gift ( and warptime ). Better have a low ass casting cost.
thanks 
