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.

 Wyldhunt wrote:
+ People like the maelstrom-esque missions. (Is drunken commander syndrome not a thing?)

Still exists, but significantly mitigated by the fact that if you dislike the RNG you can opt out of the mechanic entirely and use fixed objectives.

tneva82 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

3) Wombo-combos. The game didn't feel much like maneuver was key. My Hydras killed his plane thanks to Ursula Creed letting them overwatch twice, and my plane died thanks to Fate Dice. There wasn't much to be done except bring the planes outside of 24" of everything that might want to shoot them, which is sort of silly because then they do nothing, anyways, and can be zapped in the opponent's turn before doing anything either way AND you haven't consumed an enemy CP. Additionally, the corsairs were very powerful because they combined all kinds of odd weapons with Lethal Hits and a Farseer providing Fate Dice buffs (the auto-6) in a very visibly pre-planned way that didn't have much tactical brilliance to execute.

Fyi overwatch is once per turn. Ursula let to do again in same phase. Doesn't overwrite once per turn

Unit,

When you say your Hydras used overwatch twice, were all three firing overwatch at the same time?

Playable and okay. The missions are doing most of the heavy lifting in that respect.

A lot of the actual moment to moment gameplay has a multitude of tedious things going on with it and despite the supposed fewer rules, you get interrupted more and the flow of the game just isn't there.

It's also paradoxically too durable and too lethal at the same time. If you're one of the top factions that can abuse poorly thought out core mechanics then a brick of Terminators with AoC disappears as if it was never there. If you're mid-tier or lower then there's literally no point in ever rolling dice vs that; you are doing 0 damage to it.

As for the factions I play: CSM and Necrons either retained a lot of flavour, or had more added to them, and feel like they're better internally balanced than before. Aeldari and Drukhari are the complete opposite; they're giant messes with tons of missteps and bad design choices, a complete gutting of flavour and extreme drops in lethality on undeserving units and extreme boosts in lethality for units that in 9th were already good. Worse yet many of these problems probably won't ever really be fixed; Drukhari just fundamentally have a lot of bad melee datasheets and those will not be changed.

 Bosskelot wrote:
Playable and okay. The missions are doing most of the heavy lifting in that respect.

A lot of the actual moment to moment gameplay has a multitude of tedious things going on with it and despite the supposed fewer rules, you get interrupted more and the flow of the game just isn't there.

It's also paradoxically too durable and too lethal at the same time. If you're one of the top factions that can abuse poorly thought out core mechanics then a brick of Terminators with AoC disappears as if it was never there. If you're mid-tier or lower then there's literally no point in ever rolling dice vs that; you are doing 0 damage to it.

As for the factions I play: CSM and Necrons either retained a lot of flavour, or had more added to them, and feel like they're better internally balanced than before. Aeldari and Drukhari are the complete opposite; they're giant messes with tons of missteps and bad design choices, a complete gutting of flavour and extreme drops in lethality on undeserving units and extreme boosts in lethality for units that in 9th were already good. Worse yet many of these problems probably won't ever really be fixed; Drukhari just fundamentally have a lot of bad melee datasheets and those will not be changed.

Can you refer to a good writeup on the problems with the thematic Drukhari and Aeldari rules?

I really dislike 10th so far

- Why do some many indirect fire units effectively ignore the indirect fire penalties with Heavy countering the -1 to hit and have ignore cover. Some factions have abilities that even straight up turn off cover if they can hit the unit.

- Overwatch at 24" in the movement phase and with auto-hitting units makes fragile melee units borderline unusable, especially because you can overwatch at the end of a charge move. You know what isn't fun, having every significant part of my army being -2 to move, advance and charge because I had the audacity to move in my own movement phase and got overwatched by a tonne of barbgaunts.

- Fight first has the same issue, fragile melee units are borderline unusable in this edition against some armies.

- Army building, fixed squad sizes and free wargear aren't fun either. Sure, most of the time people were only taking groups of 5 or 10 or whatever the new limits are anyway. Not for my Sisters army though, why can I only have squads of 10 dominions. I don't want to bring 10 dominions when only 4 can have special weapons historically regardless of their squad size. The one squad I'd like to bring more than 5 of for ablative wounds: Retributors, are only available in a squad of 5 rather than the 10 they used to be. Why?! Devastators, which are nearly identical units can be brought in 5 or 10, and are also cheaper despite having more wounds, higher toughness, more wargear options and an armorium cherub. Also just screw me I guess because I wanted to build my tank with a closed hatch and no storm bolter, because I'm paying for it anyway now, not to mention a retributor squad with multi meltas is not worth the same as a squad with heavy bolters.

- The wild haves and have nots of the indexes: why do some factions have abundant access to ranged devastating wounds, fights first, reduce ap by 1, free strats, indirect fire etc and others don't. Have fun playing Votann against Guard with mass artillery, you're just being shot the whole game, too slow and short ranged to shoot them back if you can even get line of site on them.

- Wildly inconsistent reduced lethality, some factions got lethality reduced, not Space marines, eldar or imperial knights though and about knights...

- Towering as a rule. Knights are just playing an entirely different game to the rest of us. A faction with quite strong shooting, re-rolling 1s to hit and wound AND a 6+ or 5+ FNP on at minimum T10 bodies. Yeah why not also have them ignore obscuring. I've also played against them with LOS blocking terrain like solid walls, barely helped. Especially playing a faction that has almost no weapons higher than S10 AP-2.

- Lone Operative on shooting units. You have a vindicare assassin just out in the open? Cool, can't do a damn thing about it. Either spend the whole game hiding small characters or they're very likely getting killed

- Devastating wounds on weapons that do a lot of damage when I have 1w infantry. That's not any less lethal than 9th was.

Ultimately it just hasn't been fun. Playing Orks but then having my 1 round waaagh get effectively -6" movement on my key charging units because 100 points of barbgaunts exist isn't fun. Having a Knight with a conflagration cannon teleport into my backline and then knowing, any of my Sisters infantry units move, they're dead, isn't fun. Getting shot and being able to do nothing in return, isn't fun, especially when it's good shooting or has utility effects. Not all of these things can be fixed with points. I loved list building in 9th, it had a lot of nuance to it. 10th have been bland and boring for me.

AdmittedlyLame wrote:
- Why do some many indirect fire units effectively ignore the indirect fire penalties with Heavy countering the -1 to hit and have ignore cover. Some factions have abilities that even straight up turn off cover if they can hit the unit.

Heavy doesn't ignore the indirect penalty. A stationary Basilisk firing at a visible target hits at BS 3+, when firing at a target that isn't visible it hits on a 4+.

especially because you can overwatch at the end of a charge move.

Just remember that if you do the charging unit is already in engagement range. Vehicles will be at -1 to hit and infantry models can only fire pistols. So the trick of charging from behind LOS blocking terrain still works in most cases.

- Lone Operative on shooting units. You have a vindicare assassin just out in the open? Cool, can't do a damn thing about it. Either spend the whole game hiding small characters or they're very likely getting killed

Why can't you do anything about it? Lone Operative gives immunity to shooting outside 12", it doesn't negate it entirely. Get within 12" and you can shoot it normally (or charge it).

23 games played. 19 lost, 1 technical draw as my opponent had to leave eariler, and 2 victories. Although of the wins one vs a dude who has not played w40k and his DG since 8th and a mirror vs a new player.

Army feels odd. Teleporting and tricks related to its give it huge mobility, but it has absolutly no damage. And I don't use NDKs, so it is a real problem. On top of that the costing of a lot of things, seems to have been done by a different person then the one who wrote/tested the rules. A Brother Captin is GK Lt, as Grand Masters are company Cpts. Yet someone forgot to give him the join as second rule. This creates a situation where there is physicaly not enough points to take enough termintor units to fit all characters in, and without lone operative they just die too fast on their own. Plus without being able to buff units and no offensive powers of their own, there isn't much of a reason to take them to begin with. Comparing to some other armies, it feels as if there wasn't much work put down to shape the rules to make a working army out of the units GK can take. A the vehicles are are just marine copy paste.

But as AoS is in a slump around here, the summer is going to be a w40k one this year.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

AdmittedlyLame wrote:
- Why do some many indirect fire units effectively ignore the indirect fire penalties with Heavy countering the -1 to hit and have ignore cover. Some factions have abilities that even straight up turn off cover if they can hit the unit.

Heavy doesn't ignore the indirect penalty. A stationary Basilisk firing at a visible target hits at BS 3+, when firing at a target that isn't visible it hits on a 4+.

Relative to 9th: when indirect shooting became a problem in 9th so much that GW created a new rule to nerf it, it was hitting just like it is now. Last edition, indirect fire was hitting on 5s and wasn't an issue.

especially because you can overwatch at the end of a charge move.

Just remember that if you do the charging unit is already in engagement range. Vehicles will be at -1 to hit and infantry models can only fire pistols. So the trick of charging from behind LOS blocking terrain still works in most cases.

In most cases, but any skilled player knows to put the flamer or fight first capable units at the front.

- Lone Operative on shooting units. You have a vindicare assassin just out in the open? Cool, can't do a damn thing about it. Either spend the whole game hiding small characters or they're very likely getting killed

Why can't you do anything about it? Lone Operative gives immunity to shooting outside 12", it doesn't negate it entirely. Get within 12" and you can shoot it normally (or charge it).

How? My opponent has an entire army surrounding the thing and it has 36" or 48" range. It's not easy to get within 12 of something like that against any capable opponent. Especially on some deployments

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:


Heavy doesn't ignore the indirect penalty. A stationary Basilisk firing at a visible target hits at BS 3+, when firing at a target that isn't visible it hits on a 4+.

I think you are have just hit the nail. Indirectly, the basilisk should be hitting natively on a 5+. If it's visible it should be 4+. Indirectly with buffs, say a scout sentinel, it should be maxed at 4+, no higher.

 Smirrors wrote:
I think you are have just hit the nail. Indirectly, the basilisk should be hitting natively on a 5+. If it's visible it should be 4+. Indirectly with buffs, say a scout sentinel, it should be maxed at 4+, no higher.

"Remove artillery from the artillery faction" is not a viable solution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AdmittedlyLame wrote:
How? My opponent has an entire army surrounding the thing and it has 36" or 48" range. It's not easy to get within 12 of something like that against any capable opponent. Especially on some deployments

If your opponent is camping in a back corner with their whole army to protect a sniper and not moving out to threaten the mid-table objectives you just put stuff on the middle objectives and take an easy win even if the sniper kills a character or two. And TBH it probably won't even kill much if you have enough terrain since staying back that far makes it hard to get line of sight to priority targets.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

"Remove artillery from the artillery faction" is not a viable solution.

Who said anything about removing artillery? Its about making rules that fit the game in a balanced and enjoyable way.

The basilisk should be max indirect fire at 4+ (and therefore priced accordingly). Units like Desolation Marines, should take penalty for using their indirect weapons.

 Smirrors wrote:
Who said anything about removing artillery? Its about making rules that fit the game in a balanced and enjoyable way.

The basilisk should be max indirect fire at 4+ (and therefore priced accordingly). Units like Desolation Marines, should take penalty for using their indirect weapons.

We tried that. Guard sucked at a 30% win rate and Basilisks were only seen when they didn't get the -1 to hit. And then the 9th edition book put the penalty back and artillery went right back on the shelf. Hitting on 4s and 5s is not reliable enough.

And Basilisks do take a penalty (unless you give them Sentinel support). They take the same -1 to hit as any unit, they just have good starting accuracy.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:
Who said anything about removing artillery? Its about making rules that fit the game in a balanced and enjoyable way.

The basilisk should be max indirect fire at 4+ (and therefore priced accordingly). Units like Desolation Marines, should take penalty for using their indirect weapons.

We tried that. Guard sucked at a 30% win rate and Basilisks were only seen when they didn't get the -1 to hit. And then the 9th edition book put the penalty back and artillery went right back on the shelf. Hitting on 4s and 5s is not reliable enough.

And Basilisks do take a penalty (unless you give them Sentinel support). They take the same -1 to hit as any unit, they just have good starting accuracy.

Hitting on 4s is their thing. If they are concerned with -1 to hit, make a special rule so their rounds can't be modified. And then make them cheap again.

Rules to make Guard tanks should definitely be improved, otherwise more competitively priced.

Give us strong Bullgryn units.

If GSC can have strong bike units, Guard should be able to do the same or similar with our calvary.

Artillery isnt the only way Guard should be viable.

 Smirrors wrote:
Hitting on 4s is their thing

Hitting on 4s base, with ways to buff that to 3s or better. Not hitting on 5s and needing buffs to get to 4s. Been there, done that, Basilisks sucked and never saw play.

And no, making Basilisks so cheap they get to the total firepower of the current rules for the same point cost by putting more models on the table is not a real solution.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

3) Wombo-combos. The game didn't feel much like maneuver was key. My Hydras killed his plane thanks to Ursula Creed letting them overwatch twice, and my plane died thanks to Fate Dice. There wasn't much to be done except bring the planes outside of 24" of everything that might want to shoot them, which is sort of silly because then they do nothing, anyways, and can be zapped in the opponent's turn before doing anything either way AND you haven't consumed an enemy CP. Additionally, the corsairs were very powerful because they combined all kinds of odd weapons with Lethal Hits and a Farseer providing Fate Dice buffs (the auto-6) in a very visibly pre-planned way that didn't have much tactical brilliance to execute.

Fyi overwatch is once per turn. Ursula let to do again in same phase. Doesn't overwrite once per turn

The Eldar player pointed out that she uses the same wording as Asurmen, except Asurmen calls out the Overwatch stratagem as the only one he can do twice per phase, unlike Ursula who can do any.

His logic was if Asurmen's wording works on Overwatch (as it must since it names it specifically), then Ursula's wording works on Overwatch too (as well as others).

Where in ursula it says it overrides once per turn?

Unless he can show exact word he's cheating.

Phase ain't turn.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:
Hitting on 4s is their thing

Hitting on 4s base, with ways to buff that to 3s or better. Not hitting on 5s and needing buffs to get to 4s. Been there, done that, Basilisks sucked and never saw play.

And no, making Basilisks so cheap they get to the total firepower of the current rules for the same point cost by putting more models on the table is not a real solution.

Basilisks have utility as a tool to slow down infantry. As you highlighted, it can stand still and if enemy is visible, its shooting on 3s. This is the same as a Vanquisher battle tank.

No one likes artillery spam and guard players shouldn't either. At the end of the day its just a difference of opinion of how you like to play and see a faction play.

 Smirrors wrote:
I think you are have just hit the nail. Indirectly, the basilisk should be hitting natively on a 5+. If it's visible it should be 4+. Indirectly with buffs, say a scout sentinel, it should be maxed at 4+, no higher.

If the Basilisk, and its ilk, hit on 5+ most of the time, no one would take them.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:
I think you are have just hit the nail. Indirectly, the basilisk should be hitting natively on a 5+. If it's visible it should be 4+. Indirectly with buffs, say a scout sentinel, it should be maxed at 4+, no higher.

If the Basilisk, and its ilk, hit on 5+ most of the time, no one would take them.

The same way nobody ever took Lootas, Dakka Jets, Shoota Boys or Conscripts? /sarcasm

 vict0988 wrote:
The same way nobody ever took Lootas, Dakka Jets, Shoota Boys or Conscripts? /sarcasm

Basilisks cost as much as Shoota Boyz, do they? Orks have alternative units with lots of BS4+ and BS3+, do they?

If you're going to pick examples, please pick good ones. Choosing most of your examples from an army that damn-near uniformly hits on 5+ isn't a great start to an argument.

Guard players, on the other hand, but their big guns, would have other options that are considerably more reliable than 5+ hitting Basilisks/Manticores. That's what I was getting at. Figured that'd be obvious.

 vict0988 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:
I think you are have just hit the nail. Indirectly, the basilisk should be hitting natively on a 5+. If it's visible it should be 4+. Indirectly with buffs, say a scout sentinel, it should be maxed at 4+, no higher.

If the Basilisk, and its ilk, hit on 5+ most of the time, no one would take them.

The same way nobody ever took Lootas, Dakka Jets, Shoota Boys or Conscripts? /sarcasm

I think we can all agree that nobody in the history of W40K has taken Conscripts for their ability to lay down withering firepower. Given that is the point of the Basilisk, you are comparing Apples to Rocks.

I still wish 4+ was considered "OK" or "normal" instead of inefficient shelf worthy trash.

I think 4+ is perfectly fine for an indirect piece of artillery.

Not so great for a Carnifex swinging his claws.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think 4+ is perfectly fine for an indirect piece of artillery.

Not so great for a Carnifex swinging his claws.

Why? They're renown for being tough, strong, unsubtle battering rams, not for being expert skilled melee fighters.

Dudeface wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think 4+ is perfectly fine for an indirect piece of artillery.

Not so great for a Carnifex swinging his claws.

Why? They're renown for being tough, strong, unsubtle battering rams, not for being expert skilled melee fighters.

I mean, not really? Or at least, I'd say their drawbacks shouldn't be represented by a low WS. And arguably, they're not really that strong (i.e. high strength) in melee in 10th either.

Dudeface wrote:
Why? They're renown for being tough, strong, unsubtle battering rams, not for being expert skilled melee fighters.

Because a Carnifex should be better at swinging its claws than a Guardsman is at swinging his rifle.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think 4+ is perfectly fine for an indirect piece of artillery.

Not so great for a Carnifex swinging his claws.

Why? They're renown for being tough, strong, unsubtle battering rams, not for being expert skilled melee fighters.

I mean, not really? Or at least, I'd say their drawbacks shouldn't be represented by a low WS. And arguably, they're not really that strong (i.e. high strength) in melee in 10th either.

They used to be base WS3 and BS2 iirc back in 3rd/4th, which for newer players is as accurate/useful in melee as a base human and as accurate at range as an ork. So yes, they're not historically finesse combatants, this push for over the top efficiency is what lead to the lethality issue. Maybe stuff shouldn't be hitting as often and/or as hard all the time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Why? They're renown for being tough, strong, unsubtle battering rams, not for being expert skilled melee fighters.

Because a Carnifex should be better at swinging its claws than a Guardsman is at swinging his rifle.

History of the game says otherwise.

I've played a few games now and I'm having fun.
I was disappointed with the way options have been squished for some armies but I've learned to live with it.
Playing CSM is fun which is a sentence I haven't said in a long time. The difference between actual Astartes and Cultists as Battleline is well done IMO and the Legionaries can definitely pack a punch. Sorcerers remain cool as ever and I'm considering picking up a new army based on my original custom warband. Dark Pacts aren't as bad as I first thought.
Deathwatch are definitely interesting but I had to rework a fair whack of my Killteams.
T'au shooting continues to terrify and Necron Reanimation Protocols are the bane of my existence.
But it's all fun and that's really what matters.

Dudeface wrote:
History of the game says otherwise.

And for a time Defilers were as skilled in melee as Guardsmen. That was stupid too.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
History of the game says otherwise.

And for a time Defilers were as skilled in melee as Guardsmen. That was stupid too.

Again, disagree, but to each their own. I just don't like the attitude that 50% of a d6 is worthless to the majority.

I didn't say it was.

I think that giant monsters that specialise in punching things should perhaps be more skilled than the basic line infantry of the Imperium.