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.

SemperMortis wrote:

I love the fact that anytime Orkz have anything remotely competitive its labeled broken or absurdly powerful. A Squigbuggy ON ITS OWN, as in no other buffs was getting 2D6 shots at BS4 and 1D6 shots at BS5 with the smaller gun getting 18' range compared to the 36 of the bigger one. The big gun AVERAGED 7 shots, 3.5 hits, 2.3 wounds and 1.5 dead Marines. The little gun at half the range averaged 3.5 shots, 1.16 hits, 0.77 wounds and 0.51 dead Marines. All told this thing AVERAGED 2 dead Marines a turn. Now, lets compare it to the ridiculous Voidweaver that you said was just as bad as the squigbuggy. Voidweaver, without buffs averaged 1.3 dead Marines with just its secondary guns, add in the Prismatic cannon and it became 2.4 dead Marines with ease, the biggest difference being the Squigbuggy couldn't hurt vehicles very well, the Voidweaver could switch to a secondary weapons type and plunk S12 -4AP 2D3 dmg shots into vehicles.

Both those were 90pts btw.

I think GW is legitimately worried about people losing to orks and getting the impression that Astartes are not the best faction.

Hecaton wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

I love the fact that anytime Orkz have anything remotely competitive its labeled broken or absurdly powerful. A Squigbuggy ON ITS OWN, as in no other buffs was getting 2D6 shots at BS4 and 1D6 shots at BS5 with the smaller gun getting 18' range compared to the 36 of the bigger one. The big gun AVERAGED 7 shots, 3.5 hits, 2.3 wounds and 1.5 dead Marines. The little gun at half the range averaged 3.5 shots, 1.16 hits, 0.77 wounds and 0.51 dead Marines. All told this thing AVERAGED 2 dead Marines a turn. Now, lets compare it to the ridiculous Voidweaver that you said was just as bad as the squigbuggy. Voidweaver, without buffs averaged 1.3 dead Marines with just its secondary guns, add in the Prismatic cannon and it became 2.4 dead Marines with ease, the biggest difference being the Squigbuggy couldn't hurt vehicles very well, the Voidweaver could switch to a secondary weapons type and plunk S12 -4AP 2D3 dmg shots into vehicles.

Both those were 90pts btw.

I think GW is legitimately worried about people losing to orks and getting the impression that Astartes are not the best faction.

If that were AT ALL the case, they'd not be the first codex each new edition and getting consequently powercrept to oblivion.

Space Marines were the last codex in 8th and powercrept everyone else into oblivion. I don't think you have actually dispelled Hecaton's hypothesis.

SemperMortis wrote:

Yeah...that isn't true. Marines DOMINATED early 9th no matter how much you want to rewrite history. July 2020 9th came out, between then and the start of 2021 Marines of all flavors racked up 19 top placings at Big events, Aeldari (Eldar, DEldar, Ynnari and Harlquins) combined racked up...wait for it....19. Yeah Harlies were damn good but they weren't head and shoulders better than Marines who were the dominant release faction. Mind you, when DE and Ad Mech came out both were thoroughly dethroned

Link your source. I don't remember the name of the old tournament data site (it was seemingly abandoned at one point) and the Goonhammer site's layout is dogshit and I don't want to go through the effort of learning how to look for old tournament data in a comprehensive way.

 vict0988 wrote:
Space Marines were the last codex in 8th and powercrept everyone else into oblivion. I don't think you have actually dispelled Hecaton's hypothesis.

Exactly.

 vict0988 wrote:
Space Marines were the last codex in 8th and powercrept everyone else into oblivion. I don't think you have actually dispelled Hecaton's hypothesis.

As the person creating the hypothesis, the onus is on Hecaton to provide sufficient evidence to prove both aspects of it. And SM 2.0 wasn't the last 'dex in 8th - that was the SoB.

Having said that, EviscerationPlague is factually inaccurate with their "every edition" claim - though I'd argue that using 8th to try to refute it is abusing a black swan, given it is the only edition to date with two distinct versions of Codex: Space Marines being launched within it (and I doubt people would try to claim that the first one hadn't suffered due to power creep in other books as 8th progressed).

Anyway, let's look at EC's claim, using this page on Wikipedia as a source.

1st Ed - No such thing as a Codex.
2nd Ed - First Codex was Codex: Space Wolves, which might qualify, but the generic SM Codex at the time, Codex: Ultramarines, was no earlier than 4th, given it was released in 1995.
3rd Ed - Codex: Space Marines was the first released Codex this edition
4th Ed - Codex: Space Marines was the first released Codex this edition
5th Ed - Codex: Space Marines was the first released Codex this edition
6th Ed - Codex: Space Marines wasn't the first released Codex this edition (Chaos SM got that honour). While Dark Angels were second, generic Codex: Space Marines was back in sixth spot out of thirteen released this edition.
7th Ed - Codex: Space Marines wasn't the first released Codex this edition (Orks got that honour). Blood Angels, Grey Knights and Space Wolves were all released before generic Codex: Space Marines, which was back in thirteenth spot out of eighteen released this edition - possibly fourteenth, depending on when in June 2015 it and the Dark Angels book were released.
8th Ed - v1 was definitely the first 'dex released in 8th.
9th Ed - Codex: Space Marines was either first or second in 9th, with both it and Necrons marked as being released in the same month. Don't really feel like trying to go back through two years of WHC posts to nail the specifics of that bit down, thank ye very much.

We've got four, maybe five, editions out of eight where Codex: Space Marines was definitely the first released in an edition, with three where it clearly wasn't. Enough to back up a "most" claim, but definitely not enough to back up an "every" claim. Heck, if Necrons released on an earlier weekend in Oct 2020, we end up on a 50/50 split, and even "most" goes out of the window (though you could still evidence a claim that it was the book that was most commonly released first, as no other faction comes anywhere near four).

I'm not touching the power creep part of EC's claim, merely the "released first every edition" part.

Hecaton wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

I love the fact that anytime Orkz have anything remotely competitive its labeled broken or absurdly powerful. A Squigbuggy ON ITS OWN, as in no other buffs was getting 2D6 shots at BS4 and 1D6 shots at BS5 with the smaller gun getting 18' range compared to the 36 of the bigger one. The big gun AVERAGED 7 shots, 3.5 hits, 2.3 wounds and 1.5 dead Marines. The little gun at half the range averaged 3.5 shots, 1.16 hits, 0.77 wounds and 0.51 dead Marines. All told this thing AVERAGED 2 dead Marines a turn. Now, lets compare it to the ridiculous Voidweaver that you said was just as bad as the squigbuggy. Voidweaver, without buffs averaged 1.3 dead Marines with just its secondary guns, add in the Prismatic cannon and it became 2.4 dead Marines with ease, the biggest difference being the Squigbuggy couldn't hurt vehicles very well, the Voidweaver could switch to a secondary weapons type and plunk S12 -4AP 2D3 dmg shots into vehicles.

Both those were 90pts btw.

I think GW is legitimately worried about people losing to orks and getting the impression that Astartes are not the best faction.

There is an unconfirmed rumor that GW is legitimately worried about properly balancing orks, as ork players have a high tendency to be focused on just that faction and thus are more experienced with their army than the average marine and eldar player. Allegedly, they are afraid that when they give orks a codex a 50% W/L baseline codex, the ork veterans with thousands of games under their belt will be walking all over their respective communities.

I'm not sure how much truth there is to this rumor, but it makes a lot of sense actually. No matter how bad the ork army is, there are always a few ork veterans placing first or second with completely bonkers list, and even in my group I have heard people voice complaints about how they will never be able to play any of their ~10 armies as well as me who has been playing nothing but orks for almost a decade.
And of course, every ork player knows how people will completely lose their gak and demand nerfs as soon orks look even vaguely competitive.

Of course, this is no excuse for not giving a gak about writing a coherent codex without mistakes. Tune it in any way you like, but put effort into it.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

Yeah...that isn't true. Marines DOMINATED early 9th no matter how much you want to rewrite history. July 2020 9th came out, between then and the start of 2021 Marines of all flavors racked up 19 top placings at Big events, Aeldari (Eldar, DEldar, Ynnari and Harlquins) combined racked up...wait for it....19. Yeah Harlies were damn good but they weren't head and shoulders better than Marines who were the dominant release faction. Mind you, when DE and Ad Mech came out both were thoroughly dethroned

Link your source. I don't remember the name of the old tournament data site (it was seemingly abandoned at one point) and the Goonhammer site's layout is dogshit and I don't want to go through the effort of learning how to look for old tournament data in a comprehensive way.

You dont remember DA getting major nerfs? ATV spam with Apoths was stupidly insane. No one had the fire power back then to kill a full unit so you just rezed and healed them to full. With 9 on them on the table, 2 Apoths on Bikes, that was enough alone to win against some armies, and you still had 800pts left over.

Marines, and by marines we have to mean WS and for a split second salamanders, were never better then harlequins. custodes had higher win rates too, orks pre codex had similar win rates to the better marines. And the state was a thing up until DE came out, and suddenly doing drive by attacks with liquifires and undercosted units was better, then doing the same with harlequins.

DA with their "crazy" inner circle rules and combined detachments, which were suppose to kill the game, never even reached 65% win rates. I don't think they even held 60% for a time comperable to DEs or Harlis.

There is an unconfirmed rumor that GW is legitimately worried about properly balancing orks, as ork players have a high tendency to be focused on just that faction and thus are more experienced with their army than the average marine and eldar player. Allegedly, they are afraid that when they give orks a codex a 50% W/L baseline codex, the ork veterans with thousands of games under their belt will be walking all over their respective communities

.



It is not even a question of player expiriance. It is problem of what GW thinks they can give to orks or any other horde army. They do seem to understand that horde armies, maybe more money to them, but they make it very unfun for everyone else to play against. Including mirrors. And history wise, when orks had good lists or good stuff, it seems to be a spam of nob bikers, tons of heavy weapons, artilery, buggies. Making the stompa "OP" would be less problematic to the game, then lets say suddenly big shootas or rokkits becoming a valid corner stone of an army. Because a stompa will get focused fired, a horde of 260 orks with heavy weapons won, unless GW designes an army to precisly do that , but then the weight of fire generated often kills everything else too, starting with marines and ending with vehicles. But on the flip side GW has no problem to do necron style updates, where an army plays soliter, so who knows. Orks, to me, fall in to the same cathegory as marines, as far as design goes. GW assumes that they will sell more or less no matter what they do to the rules. They can start low, then go high or vice versa. There is no need for them to stay good for a long time. Still better then being IG where GW just seems to not care at all, what ever the rules are good or bad, or if they should be updated and how long one has to wait for such an update.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

Yeah...that isn't true. Marines DOMINATED early 9th no matter how much you want to rewrite history. July 2020 9th came out, between then and the start of 2021 Marines of all flavors racked up 19 top placings at Big events, Aeldari (Eldar, DEldar, Ynnari and Harlquins) combined racked up...wait for it....19. Yeah Harlies were damn good but they weren't head and shoulders better than Marines who were the dominant release faction. Mind you, when DE and Ad Mech came out both were thoroughly dethroned

Link your source. I don't remember the name of the old tournament data site (it was seemingly abandoned at one point) and the Goonhammer site's layout is dogshit and I don't want to go through the effort of learning how to look for old tournament data in a comprehensive way.

Source is blood of kittens https://bloodofkittens.com/9th-edition-top-army-list-compendium/

Karol wrote:
Marines, and by marines we have to mean WS and for a split second salamanders, were never better then harlequins. custodes had higher win rates too, orks pre codex had similar win rates to the better marines. And the state was a thing up until DE came out, and suddenly doing drive by attacks with liquifires and undercosted units was better, then doing the same with harlequins.

DA with their "crazy" inner circle rules and combined detachments, which were suppose to kill the game, never even reached 65% win rates. I don't think they even held 60% for a time comperable to DEs or Harlis.

yeah...that also isn't true. Specifically

orks pre codex had similar win rates to the better marines.

. In 9th, the same year that Marines had 19 Top placings orkz had....7. Even during their "OMG they are broken!" phase (2021), orkz had only about 10 more wins than Marines. Drukhari had more than 2x as many as Orkz and Ad Mech had 11 more wins than Orkz.
But of those 3 factions with better tournament placings, which got beaten to death with the nerf hammer? Orkz.

 vict0988 wrote:
Space Marines were the last codex in 8th and powercrept everyone else into oblivion. I don't think you have actually dispelled Hecaton's hypothesis.

You mean the 2.0 codex that lasted half a year until the new one for 9th came out? LOL okay

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:
Space Marines were the last codex in 8th and powercrept everyone else into oblivion. I don't think you have actually dispelled Hecaton's hypothesis.

You mean the 2.0 codex that lasted half a year until the new one for 9th came out? LOL okay

Yeah, poor SM, only getting to be head and shoulders better than everyone else for the first 6 months of 8th and the last 6 months of 8th....and the first 6months of 9th....

 Backspacehacker wrote:
*Laughs in being right*
I remember when i was told i was insane and was complete wrong in the stat bloat getting worse and worse.

Calling it now, we are going to see super wounds that cant be saved at all, they will be like mortal wounds but even more powerful.

Hey look! i was, as i always am, 100% right again.

Behold, super mortal wounds that cant be saved against and bleed over, even more powerful super wounds! We have come full circle in 40k, BACK to wound bleed over. this is amazing to watch, its like a train wreck in slow motion.

You can use your armor against them.
Hell, Bullgryns can get a 3+ against it.

Edit: Less snark, but wounds spilling over is not new. It's not common, but not new.

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can use your armor against them.
Hell, Bullgryns can get a 3+ against it.

Edit: Less snark, but wounds spilling over is not new. It's not common, but not new.

Oh of course it was not new, but its something that GW went outta their way to talk about how it was removed, even going so far to say "Your guys dont die of sympanthy wounds." Yet here we are again.

My snark aside, i was right, the creep IS getting worse and worse, because every interation we just get more deadly and more insane weapons. We went from AP -2 being all over the place, then multi wounds, then notable to wound on anything other hten a 4+, then we got ignore invuln wounds, then we got unmodifiable saves from daemons, now we have weapons that bleed into the squad.

Its blatently obvious at this point that those writing the rules for 40k have no idea what they are doing, or are being willful participants in making blatently broken weapons to push model sales to the point of they cant even hide it.
The stat creep is a run away train, that is not going to stop until someone blows the tracks and we try again.

I will continue to be snarking to a degree though because eveyrone kept telling me oh im wrong im crazy thats never going to happen, and yet the only thing between me being wrong and right is about a 2 month window.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can use your armor against them.
Hell, Bullgryns can get a 3+ against it.

Edit: Less snark, but wounds spilling over is not new. It's not common, but not new.

Oh of course it was not new, but its something that GW went outta their way to talk about how it was removed, even going so far to say "Your guys dont die of sympanthy wounds." Yet here we are again.

My snark aside, i was right, the creep IS getting worse and worse, because every interation we just get more deadly and more insane weapons. We went from AP -2 being all over the place, then multi wounds, then notable to wound on anything other hten a 4+, then we got ignore invuln wounds, then we got unmodifiable saves from daemons, now we have weapons that bleed into the squad.

Its blatently obvious at this point that those writing the rules for 40k have no idea what they are doing, or are being willful participants in making blatently broken weapons to push model sales to the point of they cant even hide it.
The stat creep is a run away train, that is not going to stop until someone blows the tracks and we try again.

I will continue to be snarking to a degree though because eveyrone kept telling me oh im wrong im crazy thats never going to happen, and yet the only thing between me being wrong and right is about a 2 month window.

Wait. When did we *not* have spillover damage? Mortal Wounds have been spilling over since 8th. This is just a slightly less powerful version of that, isn't it?

 Wyldhunt wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can use your armor against them.
Hell, Bullgryns can get a 3+ against it.

Edit: Less snark, but wounds spilling over is not new. It's not common, but not new.

Oh of course it was not new, but its something that GW went outta their way to talk about how it was removed, even going so far to say "Your guys dont die of sympanthy wounds." Yet here we are again.

My snark aside, i was right, the creep IS getting worse and worse, because every interation we just get more deadly and more insane weapons. We went from AP -2 being all over the place, then multi wounds, then notable to wound on anything other hten a 4+, then we got ignore invuln wounds, then we got unmodifiable saves from daemons, now we have weapons that bleed into the squad.

Its blatently obvious at this point that those writing the rules for 40k have no idea what they are doing, or are being willful participants in making blatently broken weapons to push model sales to the point of they cant even hide it.
The stat creep is a run away train, that is not going to stop until someone blows the tracks and we try again.

I will continue to be snarking to a degree though because eveyrone kept telling me oh im wrong im crazy thats never going to happen, and yet the only thing between me being wrong and right is about a 2 month window.

Wait. When did we *not* have spillover damage? Mortal Wounds have been spilling over since 8th. This is just a slightly less powerful version of that, isn't it?

Spill over wounds from weapons stopped in 8th, mortal wounds were allocated 1 at a time so they spilled over, but only from things like powers which there are not many powers out there able to do a lot of mortal wounds.
Spill over from weapons is something just now coming back into play with this, and its unsalable, its that fact that now we are seeing this on regular war gear thats a big deal, and this is just one of their weapons that a normal dude is running around with, i cant wait to see their vehicles.

What about Flail weapons?
Like the sarge’s weapon in Deathwing Knights.

 JNAProductions wrote:
What about Flail weapons?
Like the sarge’s weapon in Deathwing Knights.

That would be a melee weapon, melee has never been one of the major problem children of 40k, espeically in 8th and 9th. Strapping this to a weapon at range is exactly what i was talking about
Plus the flail does not ignore invulns like this one, you have here, pretty much a melta sniper that ignores invulns and spills over. This is what i was saying we were gonna see happen and its happening again.

Like we can play the cherry picking game all we want, but we have seen now that GW is introducing this kinda power on a base tropp now, vs Deathwing which are an elite.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
What about Flail weapons?
Like the sarge’s weapon in Deathwing Knights.

That would be a melee weapon, melee has never been one of the major problem children of 40k, espeically in 8th and 9th. Strapping this to a weapon at range is exactly what i was talking about
Plus the flail does not ignore invulns like this one, you have here, pretty much a melta sniper that ignores invulns and spills over. This is what i was saying we were gonna see happen and its happening again.

Like we can play the cherry picking game all we want, but we have seen now that GW is introducing this kinda power on a base tropp now, vs Deathwing which are an elite.

They're not introducing NEW mechanics, though. They're just increasing power.
The two are not the same.

For what it's worth, yeah, that's pretty blatant power creep, I agree. But it's not NEW creep-it's just old things turned up in power.

If we want to say technically its not a new thing, yes its not new.

However reasonably you cant equate the two.
One is a melee weapon that spills over wounds swinging at S4 + Weapons Strength.

The other is a S9 AP-4 D3+3 24" range spilling over, and ignores any invuln saves.

Its not equitable it would be like saying yes both a tomato and a water melon are a fruit, but we all know damn well a tomato does not go in a fruit salad, we all know damn well, this weapon is not the same to compare to a flail.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
*Laughs in being right*
I remember when i was told i was insane and was complete wrong in the stat bloat getting worse and worse.

Calling it now, we are going to see super wounds that cant be saved at all, they will be like mortal wounds but even more powerful.

Hey look! i was, as i always am, 100% right again.

Behold, super mortal wounds that cant be saved against and bleed over, even more powerful super wounds! We have come full circle in 40k, BACK to wound bleed over. this is amazing to watch, its like a train wreck in slow motion.

*Brags about being always right*
*Posts proof of himself being wrong*
*Repeats inaccurate claim just to underscore the point*

Pure gold.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
If we want to say technically its not a new thing, yes its not new.

However reasonably you cant equate the two.
One is a melee weapon that spills over wounds swinging at S4 + Weapons Strength.

The other is a S9 AP-4 D3+3 24" range spilling over, and ignores any invuln saves.

Its not equitable it would be like saying yes both a tomato and a water melon are a fruit, but we all know damn well a tomato does not go in a fruit salad, we all know damn well, this weapon is not the same to compare to a flail.

Yeah. The Flail can reliably body 6-8 GEQ on its own (4 attacks, hitting on 2+ with potential RR1s, wounding the same, no save and 2 dead GEQ per failed save) while this will usually only kill one. It kills a little more than half as many if it gets a 6 to-wound.

Again, I'm not disagreeing that this is power creep... But it's not revolutionary.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
If we want to say technically its not a new thing, yes its not new.

However reasonably you cant equate the two.
One is a melee weapon that spills over wounds swinging at S4 + Weapons Strength.

The other is a S9 AP-4 D3+3 24" range spilling over, and ignores any invuln saves.

Its not equitable it would be like saying yes both a tomato and a water melon are a fruit, but we all know damn well a tomato does not go in a fruit salad, we all know damn well, this weapon is not the same to compare to a flail.

Yeah. The Flail can reliably body 6-8 GEQ on its own (4 attacks, hitting on 2+ with potential RR1s, wounding the same, no save and 2 dead GEQ per failed save) while this will usually only kill one. It kills a little more than half as many if it gets a 6 to-wound.

Again, I'm not disagreeing that this is power creep... But it's not revolutionary.

Don't they have some ability that makes the wounds auto-6?

Yeah, the Judgement tokens.

That’s new, for what it’s worth.

That is vomit worthy and a reinforcement to me of why I ran away screaming from this point of the game. How depraved do you need to be as a designer that you feel this fine? I'm going to laugh my ass off at the sheer lethality a lasgun or it's mary sue upgrade in the 4month codex.

 Gibblets wrote:
That is vomit worthy and a reinforcement to me of why I ran away screaming from this point of the game. How depraved do you need to be as a designer that you feel this fine? I'm going to laugh my ass off at the sheer lethality a lasgun or it's mary sue upgrade in the 4month codex.

Not gonna lie, I'm going to take a break from the game again. GW needs to stop hiring their "rules" writers for attitude.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Yeah, the Judgement tokens.

Weren't the Judgement Tokens auto-wound on n+ to hit, where n depends on how many tokens are on the target?

I didn't see anything about the auto-wounds also counting as an automatic 6 to wound.

It's there in the rules; proccing Judgement Tokens automatically wounds and those count as rolling a 6 for whatever extra purposes. I'd post a screenshot of the rule but of course I don't have the full Codex in a convenient PDF on my phone.

I mentioned this previously but it is extremely easy to stack Judgement Tokens along with subfaction bonuses to make that trigger very reliable. The best combination I have seen is:
- Thurian subfaction treats 2 Tokens as 3
- Thurian also includes a special character who can place a Token on 2 units per turn, and use a strat to turn one of those into 2 (3 with the subfaction bonus).
- Said character can also auto-6 one hit roll per turn for a friendly model.
- Thurians can reroll one Hit roll per turn, including deliberately rerolling a successful hit in the hope of triggering Judgement.

This all builds up to use the characters auto-6 to guarantee one Magna-Rail roll per turn, and then have a second on a 75% chance for the cost of 1CP.
I'd also like to take this opportunity to highlight how absolutely bonkers-good the Forgemaster is when he rocks his Relic Sniper and his personal Judgement strat.

 Dysartes wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Yeah, the Judgement tokens.

Weren't the Judgement Tokens auto-wound on n+ to hit, where n depends on how many tokens are on the target?

I didn't see anything about the auto-wounds also counting as an automatic 6 to wound.

Its part of the Judgment rule, the hit that works with Judgement counts as a 6 to wound.