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.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Anyone want to comment on how unwaveringly stupid and broken the Nids codex is now on release? 2 days after this "BALANCE" patch?

The only real broken thing I see about tyranids is their army of renown, which isn't included in their codex or even in some expansion. It's a White Dwarf thing.

Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

 Blackie wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Anyone want to comment on how unwaveringly stupid and broken the Nids codex is now on release? 2 days after this "BALANCE" patch?

The only real broken thing I see about tyranids is their army of renown, which isn't included in their codex or even in some expansion. It's a White Dwarf thing.

So? What difference does that make?
It's just one more GW source.

 Blackie wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
armor of contempt was an excellent idea.

It needs to be expanded to Custodes and Sisters of Silence. I'm a bit bitter that a 28 point Heavy Intercessor is just as hard to remove, arguably harder depending on faction, than a 50 point Custodes. I'm not saying Marines aren't elite and are too good, only that they are too close to Custodes now, who have far, far fewer toys and options.

They'd need a massive points hike then, though.

Armor of contempt was just a patch to help some low-mid tier factions being a bit more resilient, while custodes were already extremely resilient and top tier.

After a quick spike they fell back down to a 54% win percentage, and that's before they lost ObSec on a lot of units, Jetbikes got beat to death with a nerf bat, and strats got limited severely. With Custodes getting a nerf and a majority of other factions getting a buff I doubt they'll see a 50% win rate. My bet is more like 46%. Armor of Contempt would only bring them back up to average status.

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Anyone want to comment on how unwaveringly stupid and broken the Nids codex is now on release? 2 days after this "BALANCE" patch?

The only real broken thing I see about tyranids is their army of renown, which isn't included in their codex or even in some expansion. It's a White Dwarf thing.

So? What difference does that make?
It's just one more GW source.

My point is that it isn't the tyranid codex to be stupid and broken, but that expansion. Only that.

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

The problem is that the book and White Dwarf people are talking about are no longer available, making these things rather hard to use for people entering the hobby.

Dallas Open has already released a statement that the Leviathan and the Crusher supplements will not be allowed.

But this is the normal take for GW, essential parts of the rules are only available for a short time, so don't miss them

That tournaments do not allow them does not make them less valid, this just means we see the comeback of house rules o tournaments and that the game played is not the game "tested" by GW

 vipoid wrote:
I'm sure no one wants to hear this but I'm 99% sure the reason for all the extra AP and damage is because Marines were given an extra wound with zero thought for the wider impact.

But it's fine - I'm sure letting all Marines also ignore a point of AP will definitely, definitely not cause any further escalation in future codices and supplements.

I think this is right line of thinking - but wrong target.

Marines going to 2 wounds doesn't matter. They pay for it in their points. No one was winning tournaments by spamming tactical marines.

The issues I think are the rise of the 2+ save. Most "power armour armies" can essentially run a 2+/4++ save army (or at least have this defensive profile represent a chunk of their points).

Marines don't typically run a lot of basic T4 3+ 2 wound guys. When in late 8th and the Intercessor was the best troop unit in the game they did - but not so much now. They have the 1-3 obligated troops unit(s) and that's often it. You have been much more likely to see VV with storm shields, Blade Guard, in some cases even Terminators. Or dreadnoughts etc. And this is sort of true elsewhere. DG typically run a lot of Terminators. Thousand sons run a lot of Terminators. Custodes are a 2+/4++ faction. Even Sisters are getting in on the act with mass Sacresants (and Paragon Warsuits will eventually get cheap enough to be good). GK usually don't run Terminators (although clearly they can - and may want to look again with this new buff) - but they have tricks to help their "MEQ" bodies (and obviously, Dread Knights with a 2+ save).

And the problem with 2+ saves (which GW is potentially further adding to Tyranid monsters, and almost certainly will keep on Leman Russ etc when Guard get a new book) is they make AP- attacks borderline pointless. Gone are the days when you can shoot a bunch of terminators and expect some 1s. With some licence (since I can't remember exact points and am too lazy to try and find them) - back in ye olden days every 1 rolled cost you a 30-40 point model. Now its 1 wound on a 40-50 point model who has 3. You do no damage so they maintain position on the board - and then in their turn they kill you.

The problem I think is in the maths that 3+->2+ is either halving damage, or, going from 2+->3+ is doubling damage. Which is a massive swing in efficiency. Its a bit like how ork shooting has the problem that BS5+->6+ is double the nerf of 3+->4+.

As you like to say - shooting kabalites into 3+ save marines feels borderline pointless. Well into 2+ save its twice as pointless. 20 shots gets you maybe 1 wound.
So the obvious solution in DE 10th edition will be to give kabalites AP-1. And unless DE get dumpstered because of the crimes of 9th, I'd expect this to happen.

But really that will be sort of incidental to the game. DE have obviously been very successful - and partly at least that's because they can bring a bucket of AP to the table on units that aren't kabalites (who continue to just be blaster caddies). With blade artists anything with AP-1 in combat is throwing out a significant number of AP-2 wounds - never mind anything a bit more punchy.

I feel its a cycle:
Power Armour Player: "I'm bringing a lot of 2+ save stuff"
Opponents: "Okay I'm bringing a lot of AP-2, -3, -4 stuff because my AP- does nothing, and since GW know that they give it to me in my codex"
Power Armour Player: "Noooo... all my stuff dies fast now."
GW: "Okay ignore a point of AP on everything."
Power Armour Player: "haha, I love playing best looked after faction"
Opponents: "Okay... but now I'm *really* having to double down on bringing AP-2, -3, -4 etc, because AP- and AP-1 does nothing*
Power Armour Player: "wait a second..."

Nids look like they will be going straight to the top of the rankings.
It's a very strong codex with some insane mortal wound output, extremely good durability, shooting and melee on very aggressively pointed units.
I wonder how long it will be before gw need to do another emergency balance patch...

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

And? Just look at Saga of the Beast. That was valid for 7 months until the SM codex dropped and invalidated the Space Wolf half of it. What do you think makes Crusher the exception?

JakeSiren wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

And? Just look at Saga of the Beast. That was valid for 7 months until the SM codex dropped and invalidated the Space Wolf half of it. What do you think makes Crusher the exception?

Because Saga of the Beast was released in 8th, near the end of the edition, then GW released a new edition and a new codex. But the ork half was legit for an additional year in 9th, until also their codex dropped.

Crusher stampede was released during 9th edition with the upcoming codex in mind. This is no exception, it's something clear and intended.

In the case of SotB and the 9th SW codex GW explicitly said the the codex would have overwritten the expansion as it had some conflicts with 9th edition mechanics (lack of keywords, different keywords, different stats for shared stuff, etc...), but in the Crasher stampede case they didn't, they had no reason to do it.

I don't think its a bad thing for the competitive scene to go "no GW, don't be stupid" - but if GW didn't want these things to be valid, they'd say so.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
armor of contempt was an excellent idea.

It needs to be expanded to Custodes and Sisters of Silence. I'm a bit bitter that a 28 point Heavy Intercessor is just as hard to remove, arguably harder depending on faction, than a 50 point Custodes. I'm not saying Marines aren't elite and are too good, only that they are too close to Custodes now, who have far, far fewer toys and options.

They'd need a massive points hike then, though.

Armor of contempt was just a patch to help some low-mid tier factions being a bit more resilient, while custodes were already extremely resilient and top tier.

After a quick spike they fell back down to a 54% win percentage, and that's before they lost ObSec on a lot of units, Jetbikes got beat to death with a nerf bat, and strats got limited severely. With Custodes getting a nerf and a majority of other factions getting a buff I doubt they'll see a 50% win rate. My bet is more like 46%. Armor of Contempt would only bring them back up to average status.

Custodes win % fell because Tau and Clowns beat them, not because other factions started to beat them. Same with Tau win % trending down because of Clowns beating them.

 Eldarsif wrote:
Dallas Open has already released a statement that the Leviathan and the Crusher supplements will not be allowed.

Forgetting the Crusher thingy for a moment, will the Dallas Open be allowing other supplements (the Sisters one, the AdMech one, the Dark Eldar one, etc.)?

 kingheff wrote:
Nids look like they will be going straight to the top of the rankings.
It's a very strong codex with some insane mortal wound output, extremely good durability, shooting and melee on very aggressively pointed units.
I wonder how long it will be before gw need to do another emergency balance patch...

Historically Nids codexes have always looked good at release but never quite played out as well as people think they would, so we'll see.

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

And? Just look at Saga of the Beast. That was valid for 7 months until the SM codex dropped and invalidated the Space Wolf half of it. What do you think makes Crusher the exception?

Because Saga of the Beast was released in 8th, near the end of the edition, then GW released a new edition and a new codex. But the ork half was legit for an additional year in 9th, until also their codex dropped.

Crusher stampede was released during 9th edition with the upcoming codex in mind. This is no exception, it's something clear and intended.

In the case of SotB and the 9th SW codex GW explicitly said the the codex would have overwritten the expansion as it had some conflicts with 9th edition mechanics (lack of keywords, different keywords, different stats for shared stuff, etc...), but in the Crasher stampede case they didn't, they had no reason to do it.

I actually don't recall GW making that statement, so I will have to take your word on it. Having owned the SotB book, and subsequent Codex / Supplement, there wasn't any change that would have prevented the rules from SotB working as they did previously. So I find the concept of "conflicts" likely to be marketing talk (hey, here is a reason why the book you spent $$ on months ago is irrelevant, please don't be mad)

Regardless, historically, if the codex that a supplement is referring to is superseded, then that supplement (or that part of the supplement) is considered invalid unless explicitly expressed otherwise. Your "it was released just 5 months ago" is, by in large, irrelevant. Where would someone even consider drawing the line on how old rules must be before they can't be carried by "it was released just X months ago" anymore?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
Dallas Open has already released a statement that the Leviathan and the Crusher supplements will not be allowed.

Forgetting the Crusher thingy for a moment, will the Dallas Open be allowing other supplements (the Sisters one, the AdMech one, the Dark Eldar one, etc.)?

Don't know as they haven't released the final FAQ for the tournament.

I doubt they will disallow them even if they should. I have always been of the opinion that the campaign supplements are like pre-Alpha releases that have never been tested once, not even by the designers themselves. Fine for narrative/Crusade but not something that should be used in tournaments. That is, however, just my humble opinion.

I would also add that since Crusher Stampede was a White Dwarf update the new rules should invalidate them, much like we are already seeing with Tome Celestials in Age of Sigmar. Leviathan is technically the odd faction out and something that GW really needs to address if it is to be allowed or not.

JakeSiren wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

And? Just look at Saga of the Beast. That was valid for 7 months until the SM codex dropped and invalidated the Space Wolf half of it. What do you think makes Crusher the exception?

Because Saga of the Beast was released in 8th, near the end of the edition, then GW released a new edition and a new codex. But the ork half was legit for an additional year in 9th, until also their codex dropped.

Crusher stampede was released during 9th edition with the upcoming codex in mind. This is no exception, it's something clear and intended.

In the case of SotB and the 9th SW codex GW explicitly said the the codex would have overwritten the expansion as it had some conflicts with 9th edition mechanics (lack of keywords, different keywords, different stats for shared stuff, etc...), but in the Crasher stampede case they didn't, they had no reason to do it.

I actually don't recall GW making that statement, so I will have to take your word on it. Having owned the SotB book, and subsequent Codex / Supplement, there wasn't any change that would have prevented the rules from SotB working as they did previously. So I find the concept of "conflicts" likely to be marketing talk (hey, here is a reason why the book you spent $$ on months ago is irrelevant, please don't be mad)

Regardless, historically, if the codex that a supplement is referring to is superseded, then that supplement (or that part of the supplement) is considered invalid unless explicitly expressed otherwise. Your "it was released just 5 months ago" is, by in large, irrelevant. Where would someone even consider drawing the line on how old rules must be before they can't be carried by "it was released just X months ago" anymore?

You're right about the 5 months ago thing.

It's not the actual age of the rules that matters, but their context. That's what I meant.

In terms of the Crusher Stamped (and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm going off what I've seen others mention), but doesn't it have rules conflicts/issues with the new codex? If that's the case, then it would be another reason to consider it invalid until FAQ'd otherwise.

 Eldarsif wrote:
I doubt they will disallow them even if they should. I have always been of the opinion that the campaign supplements are like pre-Alpha releases that have never been tested once, not even by the designers themselves. Fine for narrative/Crusade but not something that should be used in tournaments. That is, however, just my humble opinion.

Why would they allow those other ones but single out the Leviathan supplement?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
I doubt they will disallow them even if they should. I have always been of the opinion that the campaign supplements are like pre-Alpha releases that have never been tested once, not even by the designers themselves. Fine for narrative/Crusade but not something that should be used in tournaments. That is, however, just my humble opinion.

Why would they allow those other ones but single out the Leviathan supplement?

in an attempt to stop the top 20 of their tournament being 90% Nids?

Tyel wrote:

I think this is right line of thinking - but wrong target.

Marines going to 2 wounds doesn't matter. They pay for it in their points. No one was winning tournaments by spamming tactical marines.

I would have to disagree here. Marines absolutely *didn't* pay for the extra wound in points. It made them twice as durable against most weapons, and the actual point increase they paid did not reflect that in the slightest.

You are correct that most tournament lists probably weren't spamming tactical marines (though I believe they have made heavy use of other 2-wound troops at times). However, this does not mean that the *rules* were not affected by the change to Marine statlines.

Remember, many of the books would have been written with no knowledge of what the tournament scene would look like after Marines dropped (to say nothing of the fact that GW plays a different game to the rest of the world).

Tyel wrote:

The issues I think are the rise of the 2+ save. Most "power armour armies" can essentially run a 2+/4++ save army (or at least have this defensive profile represent a chunk of their points).

Marines don't typically run a lot of basic T4 3+ 2 wound guys. When in late 8th and the Intercessor was the best troop unit in the game they did - but not so much now. They have the 1-3 obligated troops unit(s) and that's often it. You have been much more likely to see VV with storm shields, Blade Guard, in some cases even Terminators. Or dreadnoughts etc. And this is sort of true elsewhere. DG typically run a lot of Terminators. Thousand sons run a lot of Terminators. Custodes are a 2+/4++ faction. Even Sisters are getting in on the act with mass Sacresants (and Paragon Warsuits will eventually get cheap enough to be good). GK usually don't run Terminators (although clearly they can - and may want to look again with this new buff) - but they have tricks to help their "MEQ" bodies (and obviously, Dread Knights with a 2+ save).

And the problem with 2+ saves (which GW is potentially further adding to Tyranid monsters, and almost certainly will keep on Leman Russ etc when Guard get a new book) is they make AP- attacks borderline pointless. Gone are the days when you can shoot a bunch of terminators and expect some 1s. With some licence (since I can't remember exact points and am too lazy to try and find them) - back in ye olden days every 1 rolled cost you a 30-40 point model. Now its 1 wound on a 40-50 point model who has 3. You do no damage so they maintain position on the board - and then in their turn they kill you.

This is a very good point but part of it still goes back to the whole wound-inflation aspect I mentioned. I know referred to Marines getting a second wound, but it actually goes beyond that as other Marines units were also given extra wounds to maintain the difference in durability.

Terminators had 2 wounds back in 8th. Now, as you say, they have 3 wounds apiece. This makes them 50% more durable against basic weapons and twice as durable against D2 weapons like Plasmaguns. Unless I'm mistaken, their cost did not increase substantially when they got that extra wound.

As you say, basic weapons continue to fall further and further behind. We're already at the point where it takes about 300pts of Guardsmen rapid-firing to kill a single terminator.

Tyel wrote:

The problem I think is in the maths that 3+->2+ is either halving damage, or, going from 2+->3+ is doubling damage. Which is a massive swing in efficiency. Its a bit like how ork shooting has the problem that BS5+->6+ is double the nerf of 3+->4+.

I hadn't quite looked at it that way but that's a very good point.

Tyel wrote:

As you like to say - shooting kabalites into 3+ save marines feels borderline pointless. Well into 2+ save its twice as pointless. 20 shots gets you maybe 1 wound.
So the obvious solution in DE 10th edition will be to give kabalites AP-1. And unless DE get dumpstered because of the crimes of 9th, I'd expect this to happen.

Except that this doesn't actually work because AP-1 is AP0 vs Marines. So the only way for Kabalites to have an impact would be for their weapons to be AP-2.

Yes, this would be an absurd increase in power but it's what happens when you have absurd increases in durability.

Tyel wrote:

But really that will be sort of incidental to the game. DE have obviously been very successful - and partly at least that's because they can bring a bucket of AP to the table on units that aren't kabalites (who continue to just be blaster caddies). With blade artists anything with AP-1 in combat is throwing out a significant number of AP-2 wounds - never mind anything a bit more punchy.

What you mean is that it will be incidental to the tournament game. Because there do in fact exist people who would like to play lists that aren't just spamming Ravagers or whatever is worthwhile in the meta, whilst the troops that once formed the backbone of the army now gather dust on the shelves.

If anything, I think this is the danger of listening only to the tournament crowd, because an army is considered great if it has one really good build, even if it's a flavourless puddle of slurry and everything outside of that one good build is absolute gak. I think there are at least as many players who would rather be able to play what they like and not have it be utter trash because GW is desperately trying to cater to the bolter-porn crowd.

Tyel wrote:

I feel its a cycle:
Power Armour Player: "I'm bringing a lot of 2+ save stuff"
Opponents: "Okay I'm bringing a lot of AP-2, -3, -4 stuff because my AP- does nothing, and since GW know that they give it to me in my codex"
Power Armour Player: "Noooo... all my stuff dies fast now."
GW: "Okay ignore a point of AP on everything."
Power Armour Player: "haha, I love playing best looked after faction"
Opponents: "Okay... but now I'm *really* having to double down on bringing AP-2, -3, -4 etc, because AP- and AP-1 does nothing*
Power Armour Player: "wait a second..."

Pretty much.

JakeSiren wrote:
In terms of the Crusher Stamped (and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm going off what I've seen others mention), but doesn't it have rules conflicts/issues with the new codex? If that's the case, then it would be another reason to consider it invalid until FAQ'd otherwise.

No, Crusher Stampede works well with new codex as far as rules interactions are concerned.

The one with rule conflicts/issues is the Leviathan supplement, that one does need a FAQ.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
I doubt they will disallow them even if they should. I have always been of the opinion that the campaign supplements are like pre-Alpha releases that have never been tested once, not even by the designers themselves. Fine for narrative/Crusade but not something that should be used in tournaments. That is, however, just my humble opinion.

Why would they allow those other ones but single out the Leviathan supplement?

As I am not TO of Dallas Open I am unable to answer that. Maybe when they release the final FAQ there will be a clear answer from them why.

On an interesting note I saw this comment on r/warhammercompetitive. Now whether there is any validity to it I do not know.

kattahn wrote:Played in a GT today and the TO there(who is going to TO an upcoming major/supermajor) said the word they've had from GW so far is that crusher is legal but leviathan is not, but he also said he doesn't trust what they said because its hard to get an actual accurate answer from GW about things like this. What you get told depends more on which person you talk to that day than what the actual ruling is.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tyran wrote:

The one with rule conflicts/issues is the Leviathan supplement, that one does need a FAQ.

Interestingly enough that seems to rhyme with what Kattahn wrote on r/warhammercompetitive.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 kingheff wrote:
Nids look like they will be going straight to the top of the rankings.
It's a very strong codex with some insane mortal wound output, extremely good durability, shooting and melee on very aggressively pointed units.
I wonder how long it will be before gw need to do another emergency balance patch...

Historically Nids codexes have always looked good at release but never quite played out as well as people think they would, so we'll see.

I think it's up in the air to an extent of course, there's no doubt that they look incredible on paper but the rubber is yet to truly hit the road.
Harlies gun boats getting nerfed into the ground definitely helps but T'au are still very strong and if they pivot to heavier load outs because of the indirect nerfs and the armour of contempt changes it could be bad for nids. But anything that wants to compete in the midboard looks like it will struggle big time into nids.

 Eldarsif wrote:

It does feel like their reluctance to give out pure point updates for balancing stems from the idea that they want 2000 points to have X amount of marines and so on.

That's probably coming from the suits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Well they're apparently aiming for "no Boyz" in an Ork army so I think their thinking is somewhat off.

I doubt that's their intent.

Eh, I don't think Ork players having a positive play or army construction experience is too high up in their list of priorities.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:

I feel its a cycle:
Power Armour Player: "I'm bringing a lot of 2+ save stuff"
Opponents: "Okay I'm bringing a lot of AP-2, -3, -4 stuff because my AP- does nothing, and since GW know that they give it to me in my codex"
Power Armour Player: "Noooo... all my stuff dies fast now."
GW: "Okay ignore a point of AP on everything."
Power Armour Player: "haha, I love playing best looked after faction"
Opponents: "Okay... but now I'm *really* having to double down on bringing AP-2, -3, -4 etc, because AP- and AP-1 does nothing*
Power Armour Player: "wait a second..."

Yeah this is it. People bring weapons for the target they're most likely to see, and those players complain that it's unfair that when people build against them their armies fold.

I think the AOC rule is a good change in response to the massive increase in AP that has haunted 9th edition. I’m sure there will be some negative by products of units with equivalent armour but don’t get the rule because they are not marines/sisters.
For a while now, the weapons of choice have been high ROF AP -1 and -2 to drop power armour, and now that won’t be as reliable, meaning you will likely need to bring some actual anti armour weaponry to drop marines, for example the star cannon, which has been completely ignored so far due to shuricannon stats.
As for issues with recent change to shuricats, most Eldar players just wanted more range, not added lethality.

I haven’t done a thorough analysis of how this effects all weapons yet, but krak missiles look terrible now vs anything armoured with AOC (it wasn’t great before).
Vehicle durability increases will be an interesting result of this change, affecting everything from landspeeders, through dreads, up to even land raiders. The space marine tanks with 2+ saves may be worth looking at now that they will be getting even a 5+ save vs melta and dark/bright weapons.
I’m just hoping that the next few major tournaments show a more varied field in the top 10, although I’m thinking we are just going to see a plethora of nids instead as the new boogeymen.

Given the change with AoC, I hope people start focusing on higher AP weapons. My Daemons don't do too well with the number of shots flying around, and won't mind if people invest in higher AP at less shots.

I think it's difficult to make MEQ players happy to be honest.

In previous editions I had Marine players bemoan the 3+ saves of both my Necron Warriors and Sisters of Battle; who were shooting back at them with effectively identical weapons.

I also used to get complaints about the two Blasters in my eighteen model Dark Eldar Warrior squads. Those blasters were there because the other sixteen folks rapid-firing squad would be high-fiving each other if they lucked out and killed a single Marine.

Today, in my current group, the Marine and Sisters players complain about the standard Bolt Gun's lack of punch; but then want Powered Armour to be better.

Am I misinterpreting things or does it really come down to 'Xenos shouldn't be killing Marines'?

I understand MEQ armies carrying weapons that can punch through powered armour if that's the thing that gives them the most issue.

Well it is a problem, when you get an identical save, removed by identical heavy or special weapons, while your guys have the same bolters with same BS, but your models costs fewer points, because they don't have to pay for stuff you don't want them to use.

And yeah xenos and other armies are kill marines very easily with what is considered to be the basic weapons for some armies. And when at the same time marines don't have an option to always reach and win the melee engagment they are not happy about it. Who would be happy about spending the same money as someone else, and then getting farmed, because the DT decided to make other books more optimised.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:


I would have to disagree here. Marines absolutely *didn't* pay for the extra wound in points. It made them twice as durable against most weapons, and the actual point increase they paid did not reflect that in the slightest.

You are correct that most tournament lists probably weren't spamming tactical marines (though I believe they have made heavy use of other 2-wound troops at times). However, this does not mean that the *rules* were not affected by the change to Marine statlines.

Remember, many of the books would have been written with no knowledge of what the tournament scene would look like after Marines dropped (to say nothing of the fact that GW plays a different game to the rest of the world).

Marine players after their codex came out found out three things. Firs that their troops no longer kill stuff, so taking anything but the most minimal number of them makes no sense. The other armies beat them in shoting and melee even with 2W on each regular marine. And the last one that even if they spam attack bikes and venguard vets their lack of resiliance means that they are too slow to beat armies like Harlequins or Custodes. WS were the exeption out of all the marine books, because their whole chapter special rule was being based around being able to move faster then other marines. Which showed in armies like SW or BA, technically better in melee, with technically better utility , like making others strike last etc, be worse then then WS. After codex necron each new book was showing how low the damage on regular marines are, focusing them more and more in to blade guard and venguard veteran builds. And then as soon as we started getting books that could ignore storm shields or make them not work through how many shots their generated , like ad mecha did, suddenly even marines with rules that seemed mind blowing good had no impact on the meta. It took BT armies with their flat inv for regular dudes and GK , where the basic marine was an NDK, to make marines "good".