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 mean, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the intention is to remove Armor of Contempt as a faction-wide ability and instead put it on specific things.

Scouts having AoC is stupid. Phobos having AoC is stupid.

Why? Because they're not lore-wise heavily armored enough for your liking? You'd rather restrict AoC to only the models that benefit absolutely the most from it? Realistically no scout/phobos AoC wouldn't have much of an impact on the game. I havent seen scouts in a serious list since they were moved from Troops to Elites. I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've seen scouts even in casual lists. Scout armor of contempt is a bit of a non-issue.

Phobos sees play a bit more, but usually only as some advanced/ scoring or utility units. Getting rid of phobos troops is usually not a problem either.

So you could do what you suggest... it just wont make much of a difference.

apogats wrote:
Why? Because they're not lore-wise heavily armored enough for your liking?

Because Phobos is literally described as sacrificing some protection for increased mobility, dexterity, and the ability to move more quietly?
And Scouts are wearing Carapace Armor, not Power Armour.

You'd rather restrict AoC to only the models that benefit absolutely the most from it?

I'd rather see AoC moved in the same direction as we're seeing in the Guard book:
It's tied to specific rules, rather than being a catch-all for every AM vehicle.

Realistically no scout/phobos AoC wouldn't have much of an impact on the game. I havent seen scouts in a serious list since they were moved from Troops to Elites. I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've seen scouts even in casual lists. Scout armor of contempt is a bit of a non-issue.

So is a rumoured removal of Armour of Contempt then...since we're just running off speculation and anecdotes.

Phobos sees play a bit more, but usually only as some advanced/ scoring or utility units. Getting rid of phobos troops is usually not a problem either.

So you could do what you suggest... it just wont make much of a difference.

By this same logic, so will removing Armour of Contempt.

Seeing as how there's a new Codex on the way at some point.

You complain about Void Armor on League stuff, but say nothing about Armored Tracks on Guard vehicles or the Armored Cockpit on the Armored Sentinel vs the Scout Sentinel not having the rule...despite it literally being the same thing!

For all we know, AoC goes but things working off the "basic" Intercessor(Hellblaster, Assault, Veteran, and Vanilla Intercessors plus the Outriders) and the "basic" Power Armor(Sternguard, Vanguard, Assault, Devastator, Tacticals, and Bikers) get AoC baked in going forward while Gravis(Aggressors, Heavy Intercessors, Eradicators, and Inceptors) plus Terminators and Centurions get an "improved" AoC.

Well, I cant comment on what a new codex will or won't bring. I don't think that was the point of the thread.

But removing AoC in its entirety makes a huge difference for power armored units, gravis units, and vehicles.

If you somehow got to seeing my post as "removing AoC will make no difference." I think you missed the point completely.

 Kanluwen wrote:

apogats wrote:
Why? Because they're not lore-wise heavily armored enough for your liking?

Because Phobos is literally described as sacrificing some protection for increased mobility, dexterity, and the ability to move more quietly?

So you'd remove AoC because of unspecified 'benefits' that are not reflected in rules in any way, shape, or form? Bravo, A++ logic here

This is doubly stupid considering the vitals (covered by thigh/chest/shoulder armor, helmet, and pads) are armored just as well as any other SM, and Phobos, thanks to garbage rule writing, are among the weakest and least used SM units. Nerfing bad stuff for absolutely no logic/fluff/model reason, peak Phil Kelly moment...

More support to the rumours:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/zwbqdz/rumours_from_the_death_or_glory_live_stream/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

Leggy wrote:
More support to the rumours:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/zwbqdz/rumours_from_the_death_or_glory_live_stream/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

Thanks ! What does "points rise to EC" even mean ? It's a sub faction it doesn't have a point cost in the first place.

It means that somehow Emporer's Children is percieved as being broken in a too powerful manner and therefore they have to have a point increase to balance them compared to other units.

Having just played a game of EC (me) vs Death Guard I can say that it is absolute bunk. DG get free weapon upgrades, +1T and, Damage Reduction 1 all for 21 ppm. My EC get to pay extra for sonic blasters (+5) and recieve no stat bonus or special rule other than what is attaced to the weapon.

I can't see any reason to penalize EC players except to make them play vanilla CSM so that GW doesn't need to make a new codex for them.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

DeadliestIdiot wrote:

I still don't understand why they ditched USRs...

Because GW wanted to make the 8th edition rules as short ('accessible') as possible; following the AoS model.

My opinion is that they wanted to make 40K and WFB the same game by unifying the rulesets. The plan 7 years or more ago was probably to end the old world, create a new "anything goes" realm, and then end the WH40K universe and put the models out with the same rules. You want to play WH40K but the only guy who showed up has Sigmar models? No worries! They also probably figured that they would do the fan base a solid and release the basic rules for free, meaning everyone with any models would be able to play against anyone else with models, as long as both sides had the rules for their army.

That one guy who set his army on fire and posted it to YouTube saved all of us WH40K players, in my opinion. We owe him a debt of gratitude, and so does GW. Because instead they discovered they can put out a new ruleset every 3 years and people buy it. They can publish a completely broken app and ask for $5 a month for it, and people will pay it. They can put out a $40 book every 6 months and sell it out every time.

I think they're moving more towards the unified ruleset with 10th edition, though. Every rumor leans in that direction. "Even more simplified unit stats" is the big clue. I almost think they're trying to make 9th edition a terrible experience for the majority of the playerbase on purpose, to get everyone to really lean into the new edition. That would require a lot of planning and thought on their part, but if I can think it up, they can too.

Sure, put Warriors up by a further 10. That won't exacerbate the problem with all their upgrades having no points costs at all...

If a surgeon was as bad at surgery as GW is at writing rules, they wouldn't be allowed to practice.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Sure, put Warriors up by a further 10. That won't exacerbate the problem with all their upgrades having no points costs at all...

If a surgeon was as bad at surgery as GW is at writing rules, they wouldn't be allowed to practice.

If an assistant manager was as bad at their job as GW is at writing rules, they wouldn't be able to practice.

Leggy wrote:
More support to the rumours:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/zwbqdz/rumours_from_the_death_or_glory_live_stream/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

I would take that with a whole salt mine. Reducing Harlies to a 5++ would kill them as a competitive faction. Points increases I could believe, as that would simply force them to bring less stuff, which might help balance them. AoC disappearing I could believe since it was always kind of a bandaid fix, but that will seriously impact not just Marines but Sisters as well (Paragons are back to being paperweights). Some of those increases for Nids would be a little steep as well, but to be honest that book is so stacked that players of that faction could just pivot to other stuff and still wreck face.

 ZergSmasher wrote:

Leggy wrote:
More support to the rumours:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/zwbqdz/rumours_from_the_death_or_glory_live_stream/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

I would take that with a whole salt mine. Reducing Harlies to a 5++ would kill them as a competitive faction. Points increases I could believe, as that would simply force them to bring less stuff, which might help balance them. AoC disappearing I could believe since it was always kind of a bandaid fix, but that will seriously impact not just Marines but Sisters as well (Paragons are back to being paperweights). Some of those increases for Nids would be a little steep as well, but to be honest that book is so stacked that players of that faction could just pivot to other stuff and still wreck face.

Got to remember though gw goal is to get players by new models(preferably whole armies) by making current good bad and bad good.

Harlequins would be fine with a 5++.

 dadx6 wrote:


That one guy who set his army on fire and posted it to YouTube saved all of us WH40K players, in my opinion. We owe him a debt of gratitude, and so does GW. Because instead they discovered they can put out a new ruleset every 3 years and people buy it. They can publish a completely broken app and ask for $5 a month for it, and people will pay it. They can put out a $40 book every 6 months and sell it out every time.

Now that's just deceptive and libelous.

The books cost $55.

All the meanwhile, if AOC gets removed, new darlings Votaan prove Marines have nothing to offer. Two models with W1 4+ with Void Armor is a lot better than a W2 3+. And they have twice the offense LOL

 dadx6 wrote:

That one guy who set his army on fire and posted it to YouTube saved all of us WH40K players, in my opinion. We owe him a debt of gratitude, and so does GW. Because instead they discovered they can put out a new ruleset every 3 years and people buy it. They can publish a completely broken app and ask for $5 a month for it, and people will pay it. They can put out a $40 book every 6 months and sell it out every time.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Sure, put Warriors up by a further 10. That won't exacerbate the problem with all their upgrades having no points costs at all...

If a surgeon was as bad at surgery as GW is at writing rules, they wouldn't be allowed to practice.

If an assistant manager was as bad at their job as GW is at writing rules, they wouldn't be able to practice.

You've never worked in big retail, have you?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
It means that somehow Emporer's Children is percieved as being broken in a too powerful manner and therefore they have to have a point increase to balance them compared to other units.

Having just played a game of EC (me) vs Death Guard I can say that it is absolute bunk. DG get free weapon upgrades, +1T and, Damage Reduction 1 all for 21 ppm. My EC get to pay extra for sonic blasters (+5) and recieve no stat bonus or special rule other than what is attaced to the weapon.

I can't see any reason to penalize EC players except to make them play vanilla CSM so that GW doesn't need to make a new codex for them.

I knew this would happen. While their good at the moment theres been a lot of complaints about Emperors Children tournament performance. Ignoring the fact that virtually all the tournament list were taking Abaddon and/or had lots of dense cover. Meanwhile the EC player that don't want to use a the Black Legion character; or lots of terrain smacked too. Just, be glad we're just getting a points increase rather than rules changes. it'll be easier for GW's to undo after once again overcorrecting for a precieved problem. I doubt they'll increase the cost of Sonic Blasters though as no one even takes them at there current cost. Expect the Blastmaster to go up in cost though at least 5-10 pts.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
It means that somehow Emporer's Children is percieved as being broken in a too powerful manner and therefore they have to have a point increase to balance them compared to other units.

Having just played a game of EC (me) vs Death Guard I can say that it is absolute bunk. DG get free weapon upgrades, +1T and, Damage Reduction 1 all for 21 ppm. My EC get to pay extra for sonic blasters (+5) and recieve no stat bonus or special rule other than what is attaced to the weapon.

I can't see any reason to penalize EC players except to make them play vanilla CSM so that GW doesn't need to make a new codex for them.

I mean, Emperor's Children did win the LGT, biggest tournament of 2022 given LVO was still in Covid-Blues.

They won more GTs in the Nephilim season then Harlequins. They sit at a 56-60% win rate most weeks. They are definitely up there with Tyranids and Harlequins as a "problem faction".

Were those wins on the backs of Noise Marine units, specifically?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Were those wins on the backs of Noise Marine units, specifically?

They were certainly a big part of it. Most lists had 5-6 units shooting their 3 "Thunderhammer-Equivalent-but-better-AP"-shots at 48" range (damage 4 if closer) without penalties. It hyper-efficient, extremely decentralised shooting that you always must overcomit against to completely kill, or they just pull casualties out of LoS and bring back the "Thunderhammer-gun"

No other heavy support unit like .. Devastators? Dark Reapers? Havocs? Lootaz? Broadsides? Sororitas Retributers even? whathaveyou has even 50% of that efficiency per points (never mind the range, etc..), and Noise Marines are also ObSec, <Core>, non-rule-of-3 and relatively nasty for a fire support in close combat.




The Blastmaster guy shooting without any buffs or re-rolls at 24" into a Rhino-Equivelent averages about 5.3 damage (36 points for that model currently,).

A single sororitas Retributor girl with a Multimelta without any buffs or re-rolls at 24" into a Rhino-Equivalent averages about 2.3 damage (32 points for that model currently, which is also going up per rumours).

Blastmaster Noisemarine is the equivalent of about 73.15 points of Sisters-Multi-Melta-Girls in raw mathhammer shooting output. Never mind him having better toughness, ObSec, more fexibility at range, an alternate shooting-profile, ability to resurrect without CP spending, better close-combat. Etc..

Sunny Side Up wrote:
The Blastmaster guy shooting without any buffs or re-rolls at 24" into a Rhino-Equivelent averages about 5.3 damage (36 points for that model currently,).

A single sororitas Retributor girl with a Multimelta without any buffs or re-rolls at 24" into a Rhino-Equivalent averages about 2.3 damage (32 points for that model currently, which is also going up per rumours).

Let me check your math. You get 3 shots at WS 3. That means 2 hits. You wound on 3+ so 1.32 wounds. The Rhino saves on a base 3+ adjusted by Aoc and AP meaning save on a 5+ leaves .87 total hits x3 for Damage = 2.6 damage to the Rhino. That looks like a much smaller number than the one you gave. Just saying...

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
The Blastmaster guy shooting without any buffs or re-rolls at 24" into a Rhino-Equivelent averages about 5.3 damage (36 points for that model currently,).

A single sororitas Retributor girl with a Multimelta without any buffs or re-rolls at 24" into a Rhino-Equivalent averages about 2.3 damage (32 points for that model currently, which is also going up per rumours).

Let me check your math. You get 3 shots at WS 3. That means 2 hits. You wound on 3+ so 1.32 wounds. The Rhino saves on a base 3+ adjusted by Aoc and AP meaning save on a 5+ leaves .87 total hits x3 for Damage = 2.6 damage to the Rhino. That looks like a much smaller number than the one you gave. Just saying...

Within 24'' it's D4 due to Sonic Weapons special rule, that would lead to a total damage of 3.47.

Fair enough but to be precise the distance specified in the quote is 24" not less than 24".

Also for completeness' sake a unit of retributors with 4 Multi Meltas cost 140 pts.

For an EC player to have 2 Blastmasters would require the expenditure of 240 points since you would need 2 units of Noise Marines.

So, let's take this to a logical conclusion. 240 points of Noise Marines firing at a Rhino at less than half range does 8 points of damage to the Rhino. The retributors do 10 points to a Rhino without being within half distance. Within 12" the damage goes to 16 for the sisters.

You tell me which is the more efficient result. Spending 30 points per point of damage or 14 points per point of damage.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Fair enough but to be precise the distance specified in the quote is 24" not less than 24".

Also for completeness' sake a unit of retributors with 4 Multi Meltas cost 140 pts.

For an EC player to have 2 Blastmasters would require the expenditure of 240 points since you would need 2 units of Noise Marines.

So, let's take this to a logical conclusion. 240 points of Noise Marines firing at a Rhino at less than half range does 8 points of damage to the Rhino. The retributors do 10 points to a Rhino without being within half distance. Within 12" the damage goes to 16 for the sisters.

You tell me which is the more efficient result. Spending 30 points per point of damage or 14 points per point of damage.

You forgetting rest of units? Can't compare just 1 model from unit and base calc from that.

Why are we comparing troups with a single heavy weapon and dedicated anti-tank units ?

Not only they aren't costed the same they don't have the same role at all.

I will say, having Armour of Contempt on my marines is great, but playing against power armour sucks, as all my -1ap attacks are meaningless. I would much prefer there be no AoC.

tneva82 wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Fair enough but to be precise the distance specified in the quote is 24" not less than 24".

Also for completeness' sake a unit of retributors with 4 Multi Meltas cost 140 pts.

For an EC player to have 2 Blastmasters would require the expenditure of 240 points since you would need 2 units of Noise Marines.

So, let's take this to a logical conclusion. 240 points of Noise Marines firing at a Rhino at less than half range does 8 points of damage to the Rhino. The retributors do 10 points to a Rhino without being within half distance. Within 12" the damage goes to 16 for the sisters.

You tell me which is the more efficient result. Spending 30 points per point of damage or 14 points per point of damage.

You forgetting rest of units? Can't compare just 1 model from unit and base calc from that.

I did factor in all 8 bolt guns into my numbers. So it compares 2 Noise Marine Units (1 Blastmaster and 4 boltguns each) with 1 unit of Retributors (4 Multi-meltas and 1 boltgun).

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Fair enough but to be precise the distance specified in the quote is 24" not less than 24".

Also for completeness' sake a unit of retributors with 4 Multi Meltas cost 140 pts.

For an EC player to have 2 Blastmasters would require the expenditure of 240 points since you would need 2 units of Noise Marines.

So, let's take this to a logical conclusion. 240 points of Noise Marines firing at a Rhino at less than half range does 8 points of damage to the Rhino. The retributors do 10 points to a Rhino without being within half distance. Within 12" the damage goes to 16 for the sisters.

You tell me which is the more efficient result. Spending 30 points per point of damage or 14 points per point of damage.

You forgetting rest of units? Can't compare just 1 model from unit and base calc from that.

I did factor in all 8 bolt guns into my numbers. So it compares 2 Noise Marine Units (1 Blastmaster and 4 boltguns each) with 1 unit of Retributors (4 Multi-meltas and 1 boltgun).

You can't just ignore their defensive stats, either. Noise Marines are T4 with 2 wounds, while Retributors are T3 with 1 wound. Guess which squad is easier to remove? Also, the Blastmaster is going to have ablative wounds, while the Retributors (after the sergeant) are going to lose damage output rather quickly.

If you want to Mathammer things out, fine, but you need to consider the whole picture.

I don't know Sisters well enough to argue about staying power but I do know that 4 Multi-meltas are going to do a whole lot more damage than the 2 Blastmasters. I suppose you could add 80 points more to the sisters by putting them in a Rhino. That would put them about at the same level point-wise.