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

I'm all for it, there have been too many nuisance transports across multiple editions that weren't used to transport.

It also stops them being used to block out deep strike and charges etc.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I'm all for it, there have been too many nuisance transports across multiple editions that weren't used to transport.

It also stops them being used to block out deep strike and charges etc.

Hell, you can still use them for that. You just have to have their passengers hop out turn one and they can go do whatever they want.

 Laughing Man wrote:
Not honestly gonna complain. Folks taking Land Speeder Storms for units that can't use them has been exceedingly dumb.

'We broke the previously perfectly functional dedicated transport rules. To fix this, we must break them more!'

 Laughing Man wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I'm all for it, there have been too many nuisance transports across multiple editions that weren't used to transport.

It also stops them being used to block out deep strike and charges etc.

Hell, you can still use them for that. You just have to have their passengers hop out turn one and they can go do whatever they want.

Which is fine, but stops it being used as a deployment tactic, and then if your opponent is the essentially redeploying the first turn rather than going forward, then it's all good.

Voss wrote:


---
Weirdest change:

No Empty Dedicated Transports: When you deploy your army, each Dedicated Transport must have at least one unit embarked in it – if it doesn’t, then it’s destroyed. No more empty Wave Serpents or Land Speeder Storms (the main culprits in the past).

Way to prove you've no concept of reserves, battlefield tactics or basic safety, GW.
Everybody waits for the battle kickoff whistle in the APC, not dispersed in terrain. That's just...

Doesn't this basically kill Ghost Arks? Normally you get an Ark and 20 warriors and use it as a supporting unit.
Can't do that anymore, it seems. Because feth necrons I guess.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Us3Less wrote:
I'm not sure what the problem is here, but I never liked that you could take a transport but then not actually transport the unit you bought it for... it only made things like venom/raider spam even better and personally it just felt wrong. I haven't encountered a situation yet where separating transport and 'cargo' made sense, so I'm all for this change.

It's a blanket rule that screws over more esoteric dedicated transports like Ghost Arks.
Before you could just get 20 warriors and a ghost ark and you're fine, you can use it as intended.
Now you have to get 30 warriors to use it as how it's meant to be used, as a support vehicle for warriors.

There might be other awkward interactions with other units. At least Night Scythes aren't dedicated transports.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Laughing Man wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I'm all for it, there have been too many nuisance transports across multiple editions that weren't used to transport.

It also stops them being used to block out deep strike and charges etc.

Hell, you can still use them for that. You just have to have their passengers hop out turn one and they can go do whatever they want.

Assuming they get first turn and the transports don't get blown up that is.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Us3Less wrote:
I'm not sure what the problem is here, but I never liked that you could take a transport but then not actually transport the unit you bought it for... it only made things like venom/raider spam even better and personally it just felt wrong. I haven't encountered a situation yet where separating transport and 'cargo' made sense, so I'm all for this change.

It's a blanket rule that screws over more esoteric dedicated transports like Ghost Arks.
Before you could just get 20 warriors and a ghost ark and you're fine, you can use it as intended.
Now you have to get 30 warriors to use it as how it's meant to be used, as a support vehicle for warriors.

There might be other awkward interactions with other units. At least Night Scythes aren't dedicated transports.

If I understand you correctly, you don't like the rule because it prevents you from taking a transport for a unit that doesn't fit in the transport (i.e. a unit of 20 warriors in a Ghost Ark that has a transport capacity less than 20)? Because to me, it only makes sense that you shouldn't be able to.

 Jidmah wrote:
Uhm, semper, you might want to check your "nobody was using this" statements against actual data...

Should we be pedantic or do you want to just admit you know I was being hyperbolic to make the point it was an unneeded nerf to a unit which was seeing play but was by no stretch of the imagination oppressive or OP or even an Auto-include.

In 2021 there were 54 GTs where ork lists placed in the top 4, 46 of those with the new Codex. Of the 46 only 17 had a Beastboss on Squigosaur in them. None ironically had the named character who went up 30pts as well. So yes it was taken, but not in an insane amount nor was it an auto-include. Hence my use of hyperbole, sorry if you didn't pick that up.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Uhm, semper, you might want to check your "nobody was using this" statements against actual data...

It's Semper - reality need not apply.

Nor, by the look of things, do basic mathematics skills - 110 to 95 is a 15 point drop, not a 25 point drop.

My apologies for a typo. Thanks for pointing it out.

 Grimskul wrote:

It'd be better if grots got more functional rules, but at least it's a start. I don't even know if they're worth 3ppm at their current ruleset, but 4ppm won't be enough to make them "competitive". Likewise with Boyz being at 8. I see them needing to be around 6-7 points with the AoC changes and general lack of synergy in the current codex.

They aren't worth 3ppm except as action monkeys and back field objective holders. The lack of armor and additional rules to make them bad (-1 attrition tests, not obsec) just means that is all they are good for.

chaos0xomega wrote:

A 1 pt reduction in grots is still a 20% reduction in cost. They may still be underpowered/overcosted, but they are dramatically less underpowered/overcosted than they were previously which brings them a bit closer to usable. It might not be as much progress as we wanted, but its still substantial improvement.

Most competitive lists weren't taking any of them, the few that had them were generally taking 1 MSU squad, so on average this saves a list 10pts. And i'll point out that GW hit them with a 66% Price hike in this edition so giving them a 20pt price cut isn't breaking news or game changing. Grots weren't running away with 9th edition prior to the new codex the whole point of making Ork troops more expensive was to stop hordes.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Uhm, semper, you might want to check your "nobody was using this" statements against actual data...

Should we be pedantic or do you want to just admit you know I was being hyperbolic to make the point it was an unneeded nerf to a unit which was seeing play but was by no stretch of the imagination oppressive or OP or even an Auto-include.

In 2021 there were 54 GTs where ork lists placed in the top 4, 46 of those with the new Codex. Of the 46 only 17 had a Beastboss on Squigosaur in them. None ironically had the named character who went up 30pts as well. So yes it was taken, but not in an insane amount nor was it an auto-include. Hence my use of hyperbole, sorry if you didn't pick that up.

Sorry, if one third of the top tournament lists are running a model "no one uses those" isn't hyperbole, it's ignorant and wrong.

Even if it was hyperbole, it's completely misplaced here and makes you look like a fool.

That said, both the kill rig and the beastboss were staples for the goff archetype which was doing very well at tournaments before its unwarranted nerf. The other lists were not running that archetype, but exploiting freeboota planes and squig buggy spam.

TL;DR: If you post dumb gak, be prepared to be called out for it. Your post was dumb gak and going "loL i wAs beEinG iROnic, yOu jUSt diDN't gET iT" while rolling your eyes like a teenage girl doesn't change that.

Us3Less wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Us3Less wrote:
I'm not sure what the problem is here, but I never liked that you could take a transport but then not actually transport the unit you bought it for... it only made things like venom/raider spam even better and personally it just felt wrong. I haven't encountered a situation yet where separating transport and 'cargo' made sense, so I'm all for this change.

It's a blanket rule that screws over more esoteric dedicated transports like Ghost Arks.
Before you could just get 20 warriors and a ghost ark and you're fine, you can use it as intended.
Now you have to get 30 warriors to use it as how it's meant to be used, as a support vehicle for warriors.

There might be other awkward interactions with other units. At least Night Scythes aren't dedicated transports.

If I understand you correctly, you don't like the rule because it prevents you from taking a transport for a unit that doesn't fit in the transport (i.e. a unit of 20 warriors in a Ghost Ark that has a transport capacity less than 20)? Because to me, it only makes sense that you shouldn't be able to.

You don't know what the Ghost Ark is for then.
Ghost Arks aren't rhinos. They aren't primarily for transport, they're for healing your warrior blobs. It's why you can only repair warriors and why you can repair warriors outside of Ghost Arks.
It's why there's a repair rule that only heals an embarked unit up to the transport cap; you would embark a heavily damaged squad into the ark, heal it up to 10 and return it to the field to be repaired by the Ark's aura and other means.

The GA is an ambulance, it is not an IFV or APC. Making a rule that forces you to embark a healthy squad into a GA undermines its purpose and indirectly nerfs it, as you have to pay for additional squad of warriors to take a vehicle to support your warrior blobs. It was already an expensive (yet effective) combo before the change, now I'm not sure if it's viable.

 Jidmah wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Uhm, semper, you might want to check your "nobody was using this" statements against actual data...

Should we be pedantic or do you want to just admit you know I was being hyperbolic to make the point it was an unneeded nerf to a unit which was seeing play but was by no stretch of the imagination oppressive or OP or even an Auto-include.

In 2021 there were 54 GTs where ork lists placed in the top 4, 46 of those with the new Codex. Of the 46 only 17 had a Beastboss on Squigosaur in them. None ironically had the named character who went up 30pts as well. So yes it was taken, but not in an insane amount nor was it an auto-include. Hence my use of hyperbole, sorry if you didn't pick that up.

Sorry, if one third of the top tournament lists are running a model "no one uses those" isn't hyperbole, it's ignorant and wrong.

Even if it was hyperbole, it's completely misplaced here and makes you look like a fool.

That said, both the kill rig and the beastboss were staples for the goff archetype which was doing very well at tournaments before its unwarranted nerf. The other lists were not running that archetype, but exploiting freeboota planes and squig buggy spam.

TL;DR: If you post dumb gak, be prepared to be called out for it. Your post was dumb gak and going "loL i wAs beEinG iROnic, yOu jUSt diDN't gET iT" while rolling your eyes like a teenage girl doesn't change that.

Lets compare that to the top character other factions are taking that didn't get nerfed...like Trajann. How many top Custards lists featured Trajann? like 80-90% I'm guessing because I don't feel like looking but I can only imagine its the vast majority of them

But hey if you feel like being rude, that's on you bud I hope you have a wonderful day.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Us3Less wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Us3Less wrote:
I'm not sure what the problem is here, but I never liked that you could take a transport but then not actually transport the unit you bought it for... it only made things like venom/raider spam even better and personally it just felt wrong. I haven't encountered a situation yet where separating transport and 'cargo' made sense, so I'm all for this change.

It's a blanket rule that screws over more esoteric dedicated transports like Ghost Arks.
Before you could just get 20 warriors and a ghost ark and you're fine, you can use it as intended.
Now you have to get 30 warriors to use it as how it's meant to be used, as a support vehicle for warriors.

There might be other awkward interactions with other units. At least Night Scythes aren't dedicated transports.

If I understand you correctly, you don't like the rule because it prevents you from taking a transport for a unit that doesn't fit in the transport (i.e. a unit of 20 warriors in a Ghost Ark that has a transport capacity less than 20)? Because to me, it only makes sense that you shouldn't be able to.

You don't know what the Ghost Ark is for then.
Ghost Arks aren't rhinos. They aren't primarily for transport, they're for healing your warrior blobs. It's why you can only repair warriors and why you can repair warriors outside of Ghost Arks.
It's why there's a repair rule that only heals an embarked unit up to the transport cap; you would embark a heavily damaged squad into the ark, heal it up to 10 and return it to the field to be repaired by the Ark's aura and other means.

The GA is an ambulance, it is not an IFV or APC. Making a rule that forces you to embark a healthy squad into a GA undermines its purpose and indirectly nerfs it, as you have to pay for additional squad of warriors to take a vehicle to support your warrior blobs. It was already an expensive (yet effective) combo before the change, now I'm not sure if it's viable.

That sounds more like a quirk of the rule rather than intended. It embarks a 20 man squad that has been reduced to below 10, heals it up to 10 then let's it out to heal up even more in it's aura?

Also, and crucially it doesn't stop you from doing that tactic, it just means you have a squad of 10 for the ghost ark that starts in it, and then the squad of 10 embarks later in the game.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Us3Less wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Us3Less wrote:
I'm not sure what the problem is here, but I never liked that you could take a transport but then not actually transport the unit you bought it for... it only made things like venom/raider spam even better and personally it just felt wrong. I haven't encountered a situation yet where separating transport and 'cargo' made sense, so I'm all for this change.

It's a blanket rule that screws over more esoteric dedicated transports like Ghost Arks.
Before you could just get 20 warriors and a ghost ark and you're fine, you can use it as intended.
Now you have to get 30 warriors to use it as how it's meant to be used, as a support vehicle for warriors.

There might be other awkward interactions with other units. At least Night Scythes aren't dedicated transports.

If I understand you correctly, you don't like the rule because it prevents you from taking a transport for a unit that doesn't fit in the transport (i.e. a unit of 20 warriors in a Ghost Ark that has a transport capacity less than 20)? Because to me, it only makes sense that you shouldn't be able to.

You don't know what the Ghost Ark is for then.
Ghost Arks aren't rhinos. They aren't primarily for transport, they're for healing your warrior blobs. It's why you can only repair warriors and why you can repair warriors outside of Ghost Arks.
It's why there's a repair rule that only heals an embarked unit up to the transport cap; you would embark a heavily damaged squad into the ark, heal it up to 10 and return it to the field to be repaired by the Ark's aura and other means.

The GA is an ambulance, it is not an IFV or APC. Making a rule that forces you to embark a healthy squad into a GA undermines its purpose and indirectly nerfs it, as you have to pay for additional squad of warriors to take a vehicle to support your warrior blobs. It was already an expensive (yet effective) combo before the change, now I'm not sure if it's viable.

That sounds more like a quirk of the rule rather than intended. It embarks a 20 man squad that has been reduced to below 10, heals it up to 10 then let's it out to heal up even more in it's aura?

Also, and crucially it doesn't stop you from doing that tactic, it just means you have a squad of 10 for the ghost ark that starts in it, and then the squad of 10 embarks later in the game.

Well yeah, because giving effective immunity to a 10+ warrior blob would be a bit too much. Think about it, if it could heal an embarked squad up to 20 it would be really annoying to play against. You bring down a warrior squad to single model, it retreats back inside the ark and comes back out at full strength. You bring it down to a single model again, it does the same thing again.
10 warriors are a lot easier to kill than 20 warriors, especially if there's already a bunch of RP buffs at play.

It doesn't stop the tactic, but as I said, it makes it more expensive. It adds a good 130 point to the list if you want to keep your silver tide. Might as well just drop the Ark and add more warriors.

Edit : Actually, I was mistaken, I was thinking of the 8th ed codex. As of 9th ed, the Ghost Ark cannot repair models embarked within it, as the clause stating that it could no longer exists. It only repairs units outside of it. So you can't even use that tactic.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Us3Less wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Us3Less wrote:
I'm not sure what the problem is here, but I never liked that you could take a transport but then not actually transport the unit you bought it for... it only made things like venom/raider spam even better and personally it just felt wrong. I haven't encountered a situation yet where separating transport and 'cargo' made sense, so I'm all for this change.

It's a blanket rule that screws over more esoteric dedicated transports like Ghost Arks.
Before you could just get 20 warriors and a ghost ark and you're fine, you can use it as intended.
Now you have to get 30 warriors to use it as how it's meant to be used, as a support vehicle for warriors.

There might be other awkward interactions with other units. At least Night Scythes aren't dedicated transports.

If I understand you correctly, you don't like the rule because it prevents you from taking a transport for a unit that doesn't fit in the transport (i.e. a unit of 20 warriors in a Ghost Ark that has a transport capacity less than 20)? Because to me, it only makes sense that you shouldn't be able to.

You don't know what the Ghost Ark is for then.
Ghost Arks aren't rhinos. They aren't primarily for transport, they're for healing your warrior blobs. It's why you can only repair warriors and why you can repair warriors outside of Ghost Arks.
It's why there's a repair rule that only heals an embarked unit up to the transport cap; you would embark a heavily damaged squad into the ark, heal it up to 10 and return it to the field to be repaired by the Ark's aura and other means.

The GA is an ambulance, it is not an IFV or APC. Making a rule that forces you to embark a healthy squad into a GA undermines its purpose and indirectly nerfs it, as you have to pay for additional squad of warriors to take a vehicle to support your warrior blobs. It was already an expensive (yet effective) combo before the change, now I'm not sure if it's viable.

Yeah, you're describing an abuse of the rules, not 'what was intended'. Props to GW for fixing it.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

Yeah, you're describing an abuse of the rules, not 'what was intended'. Props to GW for fixing it.

They already "fixed it" in 9th though by simply removing the ability to repair models in the ark (faulty memory ftw). It was also an ability it had since it's inception and wasn't that cheesy. If you think that was abuse of the rules, you haven't seen Sonic the Genestealer, rerollable 2+ invuls or Fish of Fury.
Unless you mean the repair aura around the vehicle is an abuse of the rules. Explain how killing a unit's primary purpose and gimmick is a good thing.

No, that's literally what the ghost ark was intended for. Since it original release that's been it's purpose. This is an arbitrary fix that's damaged the ghost arks utility.

The ghost ark is a repair centre but is in necron novels being used as a straight up transport as well iirc.

I understand it appears wonky because it has supplemental rules for units near it, but it's primary purpose is/was a transport, changing it to a different slot might solve that more eloquently though, but I dare say it would see even less use then if it robs a slot.

Ultimately yes, if you want a ghost ark, take a unit of 10 warriors and your blob of 20, at least then once the 20 gets below 10 you can hotswap as needed or keep reaper models in the ark while the flayer guys move up etc.

Dudeface wrote:
The ghost ark is a repair centre but is in necron novels being used as a straight up transport as well iirc.

I understand it appears wonky because it has supplemental rules for units near it, but it's primary purpose is/was a transport, changing it to a different slot might solve that more eloquently though, but I dare say it would see even less use then if it robs a slot.

Ultimately yes, if you want a ghost ark, take a unit of 10 warriors and your blob of 20, at least then once the 20 gets below 10 you can hotswap as needed or keep reaper models in the ark while the flayer guys move up etc.

I'm pretty sure Ghost Arks do not have the Open Topped rule, so therefore reapers can't shoot out of it. It used to be open topped, but it lost that rule since 8th ed. As of 9th ed it lost the clause allowing for repairs in the ark. So keeping reapers in the ark effectively wastes them.
So you can't use it to repair units in the ark, you can't use it to do drive bys and now you have to pay an additional warrior tax. Might as well drop the ark, take 10 more warriors with the points you gained from the drop and deploy two 20 model strong units of warriors.

Gives the Reanimator a use at least, I suppose. Spending 80 points for healer beats spending 145+130 points.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
The ghost ark is a repair centre but is in necron novels being used as a straight up transport as well iirc.

I understand it appears wonky because it has supplemental rules for units near it, but it's primary purpose is/was a transport, changing it to a different slot might solve that more eloquently though, but I dare say it would see even less use then if it robs a slot.

Ultimately yes, if you want a ghost ark, take a unit of 10 warriors and your blob of 20, at least then once the 20 gets below 10 you can hotswap as needed or keep reaper models in the ark while the flayer guys move up etc.

I'm pretty sure Ghost Arks do not have the Open Topped rule, so therefore reapers can't shoot out of it. It used to be open topped, but it lost that rule since 8th ed. As of 9th ed it lost the clause allowing for repairs in the ark. So keeping reapers in the ark effectively wastes them.
So you can't use it to repair units in the ark, you can't use it to do drive bys and now you have to pay an additional warrior tax. Might as well drop the ark, take 10 more warriors with the points you gained from the drop and deploy two 20 model strong units of warriors.

Gives the Reanimator a use at least, I suppose. Spending 80 points for healer beats spending 145+130 points.

You still don't want the Reanimator. It's still major trash.

Ghost Ark can carry characters still, right? Throw the Cryptek on it at the beginning of the game I guess?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
The ghost ark is a repair centre but is in necron novels being used as a straight up transport as well iirc.

I understand it appears wonky because it has supplemental rules for units near it, but it's primary purpose is/was a transport, changing it to a different slot might solve that more eloquently though, but I dare say it would see even less use then if it robs a slot.

Ultimately yes, if you want a ghost ark, take a unit of 10 warriors and your blob of 20, at least then once the 20 gets below 10 you can hotswap as needed or keep reaper models in the ark while the flayer guys move up etc.

I'm pretty sure Ghost Arks do not have the Open Topped rule, so therefore reapers can't shoot out of it. It used to be open topped, but it lost that rule since 8th ed. As of 9th ed it lost the clause allowing for repairs in the ark. So keeping reapers in the ark effectively wastes them.
So you can't use it to repair units in the ark, you can't use it to do drive bys and now you have to pay an additional warrior tax. Might as well drop the ark, take 10 more warriors with the points you gained from the drop and deploy two 20 model strong units of warriors.

Gives the Reanimator a use at least, I suppose. Spending 80 points for healer beats spending 145+130 points.

You still don't want the Reanimator. It's still major trash.

Ghost Ark can carry characters still, right? Throw the Cryptek on it at the beginning of the game I guess?

I guess that's a viable work around. A lord or warden might be better as a "sacrifice" though because you'd want teks to support your forces with their buffs.
A bit clunky, but then again, so is this inelegant rule.

Dudeface wrote:
The ghost ark is a repair centre but is in necron novels being used as a straight up transport as well iirc.

I understand it appears wonky because it has supplemental rules for units near it, but it's primary purpose is/was a transport, changing it to a different slot might solve that more eloquently though, but I dare say it would see even less use then if it robs a slot.

Ultimately yes, if you want a ghost ark, take a unit of 10 warriors and your blob of 20, at least then once the 20 gets below 10 you can hotswap as needed or keep reaper models in the ark while the flayer guys move up etc.

Not correct. Codex says the ghost ark is a repair barge that repairs warriors on the battlefield and can be pressed into service as a conventional transport if needed. Its primary purpose since arriving in the game was to repair units. Transport has always been just something it can do if needed.

The "fix" to the game is stupid with regards to transports. They are already accounted for with the points or power level system. If they wanted to prevent spamming empty transports they could have just given them a maximum amount like they had in other editions. But needing to be in a transport or it implodes is dumb and people shouldn't spend so much energy trying to defend dumb ideas.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
The ghost ark is a repair centre but is in necron novels being used as a straight up transport as well iirc.

I understand it appears wonky because it has supplemental rules for units near it, but it's primary purpose is/was a transport, changing it to a different slot might solve that more eloquently though, but I dare say it would see even less use then if it robs a slot.

Ultimately yes, if you want a ghost ark, take a unit of 10 warriors and your blob of 20, at least then once the 20 gets below 10 you can hotswap as needed or keep reaper models in the ark while the flayer guys move up etc.

Not correct. Codex says the ghost ark is a repair barge that repairs warriors on the battlefield and can be pressed into service as a conventional transport if needed. Its primary purpose since arriving in the game was to repair units. Transport has always been just something it can do if needed.

The "fix" to the game is stupid with regards to transports. They are already accounted for with the points or power level system. If they wanted to prevent spamming empty transports they could have just given them a maximum amount like they had in other editions. But needing to be in a transport or it implodes is dumb and people shouldn't spend so much energy trying to defend dumb ideas.

It's nothing to do with fluff or points etc. It's almost 100% just to do with the stalling deployment via having more drops and loading up the transport t1. Re: ghost ark I said in my post they should just move It's slot.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
Weirdest change:

No Empty Dedicated Transports: When you deploy your army, each Dedicated Transport must have at least one unit embarked in it – if it doesn’t, then it’s destroyed. No more empty Wave Serpents or Land Speeder Storms (the main culprits in the past).

Way to prove you've no concept of reserves, battlefield tactics or basic safety, GW.
Everybody waits for the battle kickoff whistle in the APC, not dispersed in terrain. That's just...

Nope. Just no.

The double-tap of CP reduction and no free WT/Relic was bad enough, but this is flat out insane.

They really haven't a clue what they're doing.

Really? Flat out insane?

Were non-competitive types just running around with oodles of empty transports? A unit that this forum spits on unless it's part of Eldar, Harlies, DE, or Nids?

Thr ghost ark was never considered in this change. Just a casualty of the dart and dart board method of game design.
Empty wave serpents might be a issue some where. They could adjust the wave serpent, adjust transport allotments, make it more desirable to fill the transport or make transports implode T1 if empty. The dart landed on implosion and now empty wave serpents are fixed.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Voss wrote:
Weirdest change:

No Empty Dedicated Transports: When you deploy your army, each Dedicated Transport must have at least one unit embarked in it – if it doesn’t, then it’s destroyed. No more empty Wave Serpents or Land Speeder Storms (the main culprits in the past).

Way to prove you've no concept of reserves, battlefield tactics or basic safety, GW.
Everybody waits for the battle kickoff whistle in the APC, not dispersed in terrain. That's just...

Nope. Just no.

The double-tap of CP reduction and no free WT/Relic was bad enough, but this is flat out insane.

They really haven't a clue what they're doing.

Really? Flat out insane?

Were non-competitive types just running around with oodles of empty transports? A unit that this forum spits on unless it's part of Eldar, Harlies, DE, or Nids?

Uh, were competitive doing it?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

You don't know what the Ghost Ark is for then.
Ghost Arks aren't rhinos. They aren't primarily for transport, they're for healing your warrior blobs. It's why you can only repair warriors and why you can repair warriors outside of Ghost Arks.
It's why there's a repair rule that only heals an embarked unit up to the transport cap; you would embark a heavily damaged squad into the ark, heal it up to 10 and return it to the field to be repaired by the Ark's aura and other means.

The GA is an ambulance, it is not an IFV or APC. Making a rule that forces you to embark a healthy squad into a GA undermines its purpose and indirectly nerfs it, as you have to pay for additional squad of warriors to take a vehicle to support your warrior blobs. It was already an expensive (yet effective) combo before the change, now I'm not sure if it's viable.

No. That's what YOU think they should work like.

A 10 man in a super durable transport that flies makes for a really great objective capper that can heal it's own fairly durable infantry.

You are mixing taking a 20 man to do damage against a 10 man to play the mission.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Thr ghost ark was never considered in this change. Just a casualty of the dart and dart board method of game design.
Empty wave serpents might be a issue some where. They could adjust the wave serpent, adjust transport allotments, make it more desirable to fill the transport or make transports implode T1 if empty. The dart landed on implosion and now empty wave serpents are fixed.

I know they do this every time and more often than not it hits orks - but is it really that much to ask to just flip through all codices, find every single datasheet affected by such a sweeping change and think for one minute whether a change like that causes problems?

It always feels like the check space marines, eldar and guard and if none of the three break in half, the change is good to go for all other armies as well.

 Jidmah wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Thr ghost ark was never considered in this change. Just a casualty of the dart and dart board method of game design.
Empty wave serpents might be a issue some where. They could adjust the wave serpent, adjust transport allotments, make it more desirable to fill the transport or make transports implode T1 if empty. The dart landed on implosion and now empty wave serpents are fixed.

I know they do this every time and more often than not it hits orks - but is it really that much to ask to just flip through all codices, find every single datasheet affected by such a sweeping change and think for one minute whether a change like that causes problems?

It always feels like the check space marines, eldar and guard and if none of the three break in half, the change is good to go for all other armies as well.

If they looked through all the codexes before making a rule they run the chance of feeling embarrassed with their inability to write a coherent edition of rules.

It really feels like a lot of you are missing the 'Dedicated' part of 'Dedicated Transport'.

If you weren't taking the transport for the purpose of putting something inside it, then you were just abusing the rules and not following the intent.

I'm not sorry if GW hurt your feeling by making you use transports as, y'know, transports.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
It really feels like a lot of you are missing the 'Dedicated' part of 'Dedicated Transport'.

If you weren't taking the transport for the purpose of putting something inside it, then you were just abusing the rules and not following the intent.

I'm not sorry if GW hurt your feeling by making you use transports as, y'know, transports.

This sums it up best, if you're using something outside of being a dedicated transport it probably doesn't belong in that slot.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

You don't know what the Ghost Ark is for then.
Ghost Arks aren't rhinos. They aren't primarily for transport, they're for healing your warrior blobs. It's why you can only repair warriors and why you can repair warriors outside of Ghost Arks.
It's why there's a repair rule that only heals an embarked unit up to the transport cap; you would embark a heavily damaged squad into the ark, heal it up to 10 and return it to the field to be repaired by the Ark's aura and other means.

The GA is an ambulance, it is not an IFV or APC. Making a rule that forces you to embark a healthy squad into a GA undermines its purpose and indirectly nerfs it, as you have to pay for additional squad of warriors to take a vehicle to support your warrior blobs. It was already an expensive (yet effective) combo before the change, now I'm not sure if it's viable.

No. That's what YOU think they should work like.

A 10 man in a super durable transport that flies makes for a really great objective capper that can heal it's own fairly durable infantry.

You are mixing taking a 20 man to do damage against a 10 man to play the mission.

White knight to save the day, and one that doesn't play Necrons to boot!

You ever bothered to actually play Necrons or read the codex, or do you think defending these asinine changes will make GW favor your own army at some point?