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.

Not Online!!! wrote:
remind me again, how does the mission structure look sofar?

Also the no counterplay argument still stands. FFS the old tide over pre vraks list for R&H did it better and that bought an offmap artillery strike which then you had to roll for like reserves and required to be dropped in on a point a model with vox could see and ate a whole heavy support slot. this is just ehhh, it's not even good.

Stuff like that is hard to balance. Usually it's effective if you stand under it, but no competent player will. If not that then it's so random that it's terribly spiky. So do you cost it like it will hit or do you cost it like it's just a disruption?

This has a regular cadence with a small measured outcome that you can still avoid if you choose to and doesn't come with a points cost to use.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
That rad bombardment rule sounds terrible.
Not because its weak or too strong, but because there's no counterplay.
As soon as the game starts the Ad Mech's opponent starts taking damage or gets shaken. By the wording, you don't even have a chance to move units out of way.
And then afterwords you start taking damage on a 3+. That's not going to feel good to play against.

the counterplay is :

Take the battleshock
Bring transports
Deepstrike stuff
Forward deploy
Bring units that don't mind losing a model every round
and most importantly : do the math as to what the average damage is going to be and realise that its negligible

Get nerfed or die doesn't sound like good counterplay.
Also, not everyone has transports or wants them.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Get nerfed or die doesn't sound like good counterplay.
Also, not everyone has transports or wants them.

you dont die tho, you MIGHT take D3 mortals...
and look at what the nerf means :

No OC
Bad fallback
No stratagems

so thats pretty irrelevant on turn1 (and if you realllly need one of these, just take the damage on the unit that needs it.

Also, not wanting to play a model is not a good excuse for GW to not create rules...

Rad bombardment is like Chaos Marines dying randomly all over the place - it's something which nobody would have guessed as an obvious faction trait, until suddenly it's clearly been there all along!

There isn't counter play to loads of abilities.

I initially thought it was a bit much, but as it stands you'll probably just accept no stratagems on turn 1. Annoying perhaps, but unlikely the end of the world. And if there's a specific unit you absolutely need to stratagem, well, taking some mortal wounds shouldn't be the end of things. A trickle of mortal wounds on some back-field units is relatively weak compared to some rules we've seen.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Rad bombardment is like Chaos Marines dying randomly all over the place - it's something which nobody would have guessed as an obvious faction trait, until suddenly it's clearly been there all along!

Rad Bombardment isnt a faction trait, its a BATTALION trait tho. Makes sense that one of the way you could play Admech is with them using rad (a thing they currently already heavily make use of) bombardment to force their opponents out of their defensive positions

Hoping we eventually get a Tyranid bio-bombardment detachment that is just spamming spore mines over all enemy units.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Rad bombardment is like Chaos Marines dying randomly all over the place - it's something which nobody would have guessed as an obvious faction trait, until suddenly it's clearly been there all along!

Rad Bombardment isnt a faction trait, its a BATTALION trait tho. Makes sense that one of the way you could play Admech is with them using rad (a thing they currently already heavily make use of) bombardment to force their opponents out of their defensive positions

Detachment trait.
Though I suspect that the primary attitude towards the distinction between faction traits and detachment traits is going to be indifference.

For now yes. Once we get codexes and more detachments that will likely change.

Voss wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Rad bombardment is like Chaos Marines dying randomly all over the place - it's something which nobody would have guessed as an obvious faction trait, until suddenly it's clearly been there all along!

Rad Bombardment isnt a faction trait, its a BATTALION trait tho. Makes sense that one of the way you could play Admech is with them using rad (a thing they currently already heavily make use of) bombardment to force their opponents out of their defensive positions

Detachment trait.
Though I suspect that the primary attitude towards the distinction between faction traits and detachment traits is going to be indifference.

right, i've been mixing up terms between AoS and 40k lol

 Tyran wrote:
For now yes. Once we get codexes and more detachments that will likely change.

I doubt it, unless there are a lot of other rules that make referencing them super important.
Otherwise, people are just going to treat 'the rules my army gets' on their two pages as the same thing- army rules.

It doesn't help that GW already uses 'faction trait' and 'army rule' interchangeably* and the articles are formatted as both army rules and detachment rules as a subset of 'faction rules' but the 'faction rules' title is hidden above a picture, so disassociated from the army/detachment rules to the audience.

*the rules picture calls them 'army rule,' but the datacard refers to the same thing under Abilities, formatted as 'faction: blah blah.'

Its a hot mess of meaningless 'well, aktually...' terminology, and you can't really blame people for using a sensible short hand.

Voss wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
For now yes. Once we get codexes and more detachments that will likely change.

I doubt it, unless there are a lot of other rules that make referencing them super important.
Otherwise, people are just going to treat 'the rules my army gets' on their two pages as the same thing- army rules.

It doesn't help that GW already uses 'faction trait' and 'army rule' interchangeably* and the articles are formatted as both army rules and detachment rules as a subset of 'faction rules' but the 'faction rules' title is hidden above a picture, so disassociated from the army/detachment rules to the audience.

*the rules picture calls them 'army rule,' but the datacard refers to the same thing under Abilities, formatted as 'faction: blah blah.'

Its a hot mess of meaningless 'well, aktually...' terminology, and you can't really blame people for using a sensible short hand.

The original comment i responded to was implying that now EVERY admech forces would be doing rad bombardment, which is not the case (well, once they get their codexes it wont be the case)

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
For now yes. Once we get codexes and more detachments that will likely change.

I doubt it, unless there are a lot of other rules that make referencing them super important.
Otherwise, people are just going to treat 'the rules my army gets' on their two pages as the same thing- army rules.

It doesn't help that GW already uses 'faction trait' and 'army rule' interchangeably* and the articles are formatted as both army rules and detachment rules as a subset of 'faction rules' but the 'faction rules' title is hidden above a picture, so disassociated from the army/detachment rules to the audience.

*the rules picture calls them 'army rule,' but the datacard refers to the same thing under Abilities, formatted as 'faction: blah blah.'

Its a hot mess of meaningless 'well, aktually...' terminology, and you can't really blame people for using a sensible short hand.

The original comment i responded to was implying that now EVERY admech forces would be doing rad bombardment, which is not the case (well, once they get their codexes it wont be the case)

Yep.

And then we wandered off on a related tangent.

I think people are going to treat detachments like space marine chapters. Just saying space marine army or ad mech army is meaningless. You need to know if they're playing Gladius or Rad Bombers- the faction ability will always (as far as we know) come along for the ride, so doesn't really need to be singled out.

Tyel wrote:
I initially thought it was a bit much, but as it stands you'll probably just accept no stratagems on turn 1. Annoying perhaps, but unlikely the end of the world. And if there's a specific unit you absolutely need to stratagem, well, taking some mortal wounds shouldn't be the end of things. A trickle of mortal wounds on some back-field units is relatively weak compared to some rules we've seen.

I doubt Guard are going to accept no Orders T1.

 Platuan4th wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I initially thought it was a bit much, but as it stands you'll probably just accept no stratagems on turn 1. Annoying perhaps, but unlikely the end of the world. And if there's a specific unit you absolutely need to stratagem, well, taking some mortal wounds shouldn't be the end of things. A trickle of mortal wounds on some back-field units is relatively weak compared to some rules we've seen.

I doubt Guard are going to accept no Orders T1.

so take the mortals on the units you wanna give orders to
or bring transports

Something I haven't seen anyone mention yet -- Vanguard lost Taser Goad, Arc Maul, Power Sword / Phosphor Blast Pistol and Radium Pistol.

Replaced with the "Alpha Combat Weapon" and Archeotech Pistol. The pistols weren't much to write home about, but the Arc Maul was definitely more of a distinct weapon -- though I doubt it ever got swung in anger much at all.

On one hand it didn't make sense for them to have all those options given they're not a melee unit, but I can see where people aren't going to like it.

 Tyran wrote:
For now yes. Once we get codexes and more detachments that will likely change.

Yeah there will be more powerful stuff to abuse :(

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
That rad bombardment rule sounds terrible.
Not because its weak or too strong, but because there's no counterplay.
As soon as the game starts the Ad Mech's opponent starts taking damage or gets shaken. By the wording, you don't even have a chance to move units out of way.
And then afterwords you start taking damage on a 3+. That's not going to feel good to play against.

the counterplay is :

Take the battleshock
Bring transports
Deepstrike stuff
Forward deploy
Bring units that don't mind losing a model every round
and most importantly : do the math as to what the average damage is going to be and realise that its negligible

Get nerfed or die doesn't sound like good counterplay.
Also, not everyone has transports or wants them.

You could also try 'be Sisters of Battle'. I would LOVE for you to give my whole army +1 to hit, thank you!

IMO admech is one of the hardest armys to paint and have it look good.

With the rules preview and the stats droping all around I would assume the points will go down.

So you will need to paint more models of what is one of the hardest armys to paint nicely. Seems like this will be an army that's hard for new players to get in on.

If the point don't drop than troops will not be taken. If the nerfs are all around like the troops got then the army will be cabbage.

Over all one of the worst previews so far IMO.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Something I haven't seen anyone mention yet -- Vanguard lost Taser Goad, Arc Maul, Power Sword / Phosphor Blast Pistol and Radium Pistol.

Replaced with the "Alpha Combat Weapon" and Archeotech Pistol. The pistols weren't much to write home about, but the Arc Maul was definitely more of a distinct weapon -- though I doubt it ever got swung in anger much at all.

On one hand it didn't make sense for them to have all those options given they're not a melee unit, but I can see where people aren't going to like it.

I personally like that these weapons were combined. Options like these work better in games like Kill Team, but in a large scale they just get lost in the noise.

 Eldarsif wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Something I haven't seen anyone mention yet -- Vanguard lost Taser Goad, Arc Maul, Power Sword / Phosphor Blast Pistol and Radium Pistol.

Replaced with the "Alpha Combat Weapon" and Archeotech Pistol. The pistols weren't much to write home about, but the Arc Maul was definitely more of a distinct weapon -- though I doubt it ever got swung in anger much at all.

On one hand it didn't make sense for them to have all those options given they're not a melee unit, but I can see where people aren't going to like it.

I personally like that these weapons were combined. Options like these work better in games like Kill Team, but in a large scale they just get lost in the noise.

I think more so today than in the past.

I know I keep looking at the Carnifex in Tyranids and think that back in the day the whole "toolbox" of weapon options it has are fantastic. However today there are so many more things that compete for a similar role. We've gone from armies that were quite small in model diversity into armies that have a big range of models to pick from. As a result I can see us losing some of the toolbox style of some models in armies because there just isn't a reason to have a 10 optoins on one model when there's 10 separate models for each of those roles also competing for the same role slot on the table.

There's a balance, AoS I feel has swung too far in making some weapon choices on troops (who only have 2 or 3 optoins) almost meaningless and I think that's a touch too far; esp as many AoS armies are pretty small anyway

Customisation makes collecting an army more fun, who cares if the weapon choices don't affect the outcome of games very much - playing is a pretty small part of the hobby

Boosykes wrote:
IMO admech is one of the hardest armys to paint and have it look good.

With the rules preview and the stats droping all around I would assume the points will go down.

So you will need to paint more models of what is one of the hardest armys to paint nicely. Seems like this will be an army that's hard for new players to get in on.

If the point don't drop than troops will not be taken. If the nerfs are all around like the troops got then the army will be cabbage.

Over all one of the worst previews so far IMO.

Maybe, but I don't think their points are going down much. For a long time they outperformed their cost and these nerfs should put them more in line. The original cost was 8 points and they're now 9 so I could see them back at 8 if guard stay at 6.5. Cadian Shock get sticky objectives, CP regen ( wargear ), and 2 specials. Vanguard get CP regen, OC modifier, and ignore cover ( wargear ). No idea on how they'll tackle Vanguard specials, but the ones they have are a bit better than Cadian stuff ( barring perhaps the GL ).

And it's more that AdMech is effin' expensive to collect.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Billicus wrote:
Customisation makes collecting an army more fun, who cares if the weapon choices don't affect the outcome of games very much - playing is a pretty small part of the hobby

This seems like a statement at odds with itself. If playing is a small part then people can model whatever they want and they don't have to worry about it affecting the game if they decide to play. They just model the coolest weapon for their tastes.

If only there was a system of universal/weapon special rules that they could use to differentiate weapons beyond just basic stats...

 Insularum wrote:
The 2nd part of the rad bombardment is the only bit that's really worrying. Most players will just decide between whether or not they care about being battleshocked or not and take the gamble on any units that need to use strats or their OC value on the first turn. Some of the initial damage taken is going to be offset by being more resilient to blast weapons anyway, losing one model from a 5 or 10 strong unit before the shooting phase will take an edge off a lot of units packing multiple blast weapons.

Well said, I didn't expect them to take a generic MW bombardment and make it tactically interesting. I think Rad Bombardment will be very effective against some armies, while rather middling against others. I'm also in favor of rules that force people out of building a castle in their DZ.

Have we seen confirmation Blast will operate the same in 10th?

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Have we seen confirmation Blast will operate the same in 10th?

It scales with unit size now, giving extra attacks for every 5 above 5 (if that makes sense) rather than flat non-scaling numbers.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Have we seen confirmation Blast will operate the same in 10th?

It scales with unit size now, giving extra attacks for every 5 above 5 (if that makes sense) rather than flat non-scaling numbers.

Where did you get the above 5 part from?

 Jidmah wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Have we seen confirmation Blast will operate the same in 10th?

It scales with unit size now, giving extra attacks for every 5 above 5 (if that makes sense) rather than flat non-scaling numbers.

Where did you get the above 5 part from?

People that played the demo at WHF told us.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Have we seen confirmation Blast will operate the same in 10th?

It scales with unit size now, giving extra attacks for every 5 above 5 (if that makes sense) rather than flat non-scaling numbers.

Ah I see, yes that makes sense, thank you.

Voss wrote:

RedNoak wrote:
errr am i the only one who is impressed by the arc rifle and rad carabines?

mortalwounding (d3) vehicles on hitrolls of 4+ for the rifle
and the rad will autowound infantry with 4+ to hit

seems pretty strong, guessing poison will work similiar?

That isn't how anti-X works. That functions on the wound roll, not the hit roll.
(see this article: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/04/just-how-tough-are-terminators-in-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/)

d3 or 2d3 mortals at half range against vehicles isn't terrible, but it depends on how many arc rifles a unit can take (1 or 2 at most is my guess, probably 1 per 10, since iirc that's whats in the box)

the carbine just wounds on a 4+ against all infantry, and has pretty much feth all utility otherwise. that's... fine with 3 attacks. But you gotta get those squishy fools within range in the first place.
Its nasty in mirror matches or against orks. It gets washed away pretty quickly with 4+ (sometimes 3+), 4+ and then 3+ armor saves)

AHH ok. Then I stand corrected, and thx for the link