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.

They also don’t have what mission types they open up. I would have expected both the DP cost and those to be on the detachments.

But if it’s something they want to be able to easily modify, makes sense to have it in the same document as the points.

Not really Apropros anything? But if I retire when I intend to? We’ll be on 17th Edition, and about a year to go to 18th. Provided the 3 year cycle remains.

How come only some factions have an 11th faction pack?
Surely everyone needs updated with stuff like the new flyer/hover rules?

 kirotheavenger wrote:
How come only some factions have an 11th faction pack?
Surely everyone needs updated with stuff like the new flyer/hover rules?

They're staggering the downloads over this week. Everyone will have a pack within the next 100 hours.

Marines - Monday
Xenos - Tuesday
Chaos - Wednesday
Other Imperium - Thursday

 Asmodai wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
How come only some factions have an 11th faction pack?
Surely everyone needs updated with stuff like the new flyer/hover rules?

They're staggering the downloads over this week. Everyone will have a pack within the next 100 hours.

Marines - Monday
Xenos - Tuesday
Chaos - Wednesday
Other Imperium - Thursday

ah, thanks
I guess they need to slow-roll the hype train. Fortunately I only have to wait till later today for mine then

Also helps prevent the servers from catching on fire. Spread the load of the downloads over the week. Things are probably already a little stressed with people spamming refresh looking for new tidbits of news.

 Asmodai wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
How come only some factions have an 11th faction pack?
Surely everyone needs updated with stuff like the new flyer/hover rules?

They're staggering the downloads over this week. Everyone will have a pack within the next 100 hours.

Marines - Monday
Xenos - Tuesday
Chaos - Wednesday
Other Imperium - Thursday

To add to this, current rumours circulating from in the know TO folks is that Friday will see the tournament companion guide released.

Then some time next week we get the new MFM which implements a unit surcharge for spamming too many of the same datasheet. For example your first Defiler may cost 250pts but the 2nd/3rd ones taken cost 260pts each. The trigger point for this varies by datasheet and isn't necessarily on all units.

Because I like paper, I pre-ordered the Core Rules. Going to wait on the cards, since I am still building my Custodes... and probably won't be playing anything outside of Combat Patrol for a bit. (Unless you think that's stupid, and I should buy them now?)

 xttz wrote:
Then some time next week we get the new MFM which implements a unit surcharge for spamming too many of the same datasheet. For example your first Defiler may cost 250pts but the 2nd/3rd ones taken cost 260pts each. The trigger point for this varies by datasheet and isn't necessarily on all units.

As said on Reddit before the thread got deleted, I'm going to be suspect on this one.

There's a danger GW might try it for a bit because it would allow them to have their cake and eat it too. Defilers completely breaking your competitive scene and obviously need a nerf? But you still want every chaos player out there to be strongly incentivized to buy at least one? Fine, make the first one clearly under costed, but have the third one massively over costed. If the next two are 260 that's a nothing. But if it went 250/300/350 there's a pretty clear incentive to not run the 3rd.

But this is quite ugly design. Its going to make balancing a lot harder, since you've now got to navigate/account for these obvious and deliberate errors.
Its also so... transparently greedy that there may be some fan backlash even beyond the usual.

To be fair I do like the idea that people who buy one of the fun shiny new kit aren't as 'punished' by the actions of others who spam the max in every list.

If that fan backlash is coming from the small minority who scooped up all the defiler stock to win as many events as possible before the inevitable nerf, I won't have a lot of sympathy.

Tyel wrote:

 xttz wrote:
Then some time next week we get the new MFM which implements a unit surcharge for spamming too many of the same datasheet. For example your first Defiler may cost 250pts but the 2nd/3rd ones taken cost 260pts each. The trigger point for this varies by datasheet and isn't necessarily on all units.

As said on Reddit before the thread got deleted, I'm going to be suspect on this one.

There's a danger GW might try it for a bit because it would allow them to have their cake and eat it too. Defilers completely breaking your competitive scene and obviously need a nerf? But you still want every chaos player out there to be strongly incentivized to buy at least one? Fine, make the first one clearly under costed, but have the third one massively over costed. If the next two are 260 that's a nothing. But if it went 250/300/350 there's a pretty clear incentive to not run the 3rd.

But this is quite ugly design. Its going to make balancing a lot harder, since you've now got to navigate/account for these obvious and deliberate errors.
Its also so... transparently greedy that there may be some fan backlash even beyond the usual.

I think such tinfoil hattery is just silly tbh.
The new hotness is trash at least as often as it's hot on the tabletop too

Whereas having scaling unit costs encourages variety and makes hitting a "sweetspot" of seeing a unit without it being spammed much easier to find

Varying costs for multiples of the same unit seems a reasonable balance tool. Sometimes a unit is only a problem when its spammed.

One more tool in the toolbox. I mostly run Highlander lists anyway since I don't like painting the same thing over and over, so pretty much straight bonus for me.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I think such tinfoil hattery is just silly tbh.
The new hotness is trash at least as often as it's hot on the tabletop too

Whereas having scaling unit costs encourages variety and makes hitting a "sweetspot" of seeing a unit without it being spammed much easier to find

I agree GW get it wrong the other way as well. I think Mutilators for example would be priced to move at 150-160 points, but are decidedly average to bad at 200.
I'd tend to agree that GW has been historically quite indifferent to which grey plastic they shift. So arguments to the effect that they write rules to sell this specific plastic are questionable.

The alternative interpretation is that they think 1 Defiler is fine at 250 points, its just that 3 are breaking the game at 750 points.
I'm not sure I can buy that. You compound the imbalance by taking 3, but the first defiler is clearly under costed too.

Ultimately I like White Dwarf soft-Highlander armies which don't just spam 3 of the most undercosted datasheets in the codex.
But I'd be wary of trying to get them this way. You aren't increasing list variety if every faction who can is immediately chucking 250 points at a Defiler, because it should probably be something like 280-300.
GW has I think moved to balancing across faction performance and army composition. Now they have to move back to considering the relative power/points for the 1st of a unit, wanting a slightly worse ratio for the 2nd and 3rd.
The result seems likely to be more auto-takes and never-takes. Okay if the never-take is always the spam choice that may not impact me very much, but it seems like a bit of a design flaw.
And do you apply this more generally? You can bring 4 C'Tan with different datasheets. Is this fine (imo: no) or should the Necron player pay something of a premium for each additional one? Do we have carve outs like this across all the factions?

I guess nothing stops GW just giving it a go. But I think it will be messy.

Are you only balancing for winrate, or are there more considerations?

Do we think any unit is just as valid to spend (at 50% winrate) as any other, therefore 3 Defilers is just as fine as a Defiler, a Predator, and a Terminator Squad (or whatever)?

Personally I think greater unit variety is to be encouraged.
Although I like to see things in pairs, it just looks more balanced. So costs of units increasing after 2 would give players a bit of a poke to discourage them from spamming, which I would be a good thing, even if it wasn't actually a balance related push.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Do we think any unit is just as valid to spend (at 50% winrate) as any other, therefore 3 Defilers is just as fine as a Defiler, a Predator, and a Terminator Squad (or whatever)?

Well I don't really see why you'd want it to be "invalid".
If we wanted to go down this road why not just have a "rule of two" rather than making the third unit a trap choice?

Tyel wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Do we think any unit is just as valid to spend (at 50% winrate) as any other, therefore 3 Defilers is just as fine as a Defiler, a Predator, and a Terminator Squad (or whatever)?

Well I don't really see why you'd want it to be "invalid".
If we wanted to go down this road why not just have a "rule of two" rather than making the third unit a trap choice?

I don't think being marginally less efficient is in anything like the same ballpark as being a trap choice
But leaving the option open for people that really love Defilers is better than cutting it off entirely

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I don't think being marginally less efficient is in anything like the same ballpark as being a trap choice
But leaving the option open for people that really love Defilers is better than cutting it off entirely

I feel this is why having hypothetical debates about principles is rather difficult.

I mean if GW changed Defilers to 250/260/260 - or 250/250/260 if you think people shouldn't be impacted for taking 2 - then I feel safe in saying it would have minimal to zero effect on the current meta. Triple defilers can keep stomping along with a 65%~ win rate.
If on the other hand Defilers were 250/300/350, then taking that third one clearly hurts and is probably moving towards being a trap. This is however the sort of points hike I think you might need to bring triple defiler lists under control (because I think they should be 280-300 right now).

But lets say triple Defilers were at a 50% win rate and the points were changed from 250 each to 250/260/260. Well... I suspect again that 20 points across a list is a fairly marginal difference, and there's likely no impact on the win rates. So maybe its fine. You are very marginally disincentivised from running 3 but it doesn't really impact your chances of winning a game. But since it doesn't really matter, why are we doing this?

There's an obvious middle ground between +10 points being too small and +50 points being too much. +30 points as a starter perhaps?

Also, the 9th Tau codex already had something like this with Crisis suit guns.
Your first plasma rifle cost 10pts, then 15pts for the second, and 20pts for the third.
So Defilers could cost something like 250/270/290 for the first, second, and third.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenos faction packs are up now

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/downloads/warhammer-40000/

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Also, the 9th Tau codex already had something like this with Crisis suit guns.
Your first plasma rifle cost 10pts, then 15pts for the second, and 20pts for the third.
So Defilers could cost something like 250/270/290 for the first, second, and third.

They did. Without getting into the weeds I can't remember whether it was good though. Seem to remember it being a bit like I described - i.e. the third weapon was very inefficient, so something of a trap. Bad if you were hard WYSIWYG and had built your guys that way.

I guess my point is "what should a Defiler cost in old money". If its a genuinely 250 point unit, then paying 290 is quite a tax. On its own probably not enough to kill a list - but certainly if you ran 3 Defilers and 3 of something else it would add up. If however it should be a 270 unit, you are making up 20 points on the first at 250. Which on its own probably doesn't break things - but if you can do that on 8~ units in a highlander list and effectively be up 160~ points, that probably will be much better.

Anyway force dispositions are up on the Warhammer Community article, so going to pour through them.

Not expressing a valid in-game opinion, as I’d need to actually be playing for that you know. But….

It feels like an attempt to reflect Tank Squaring. I’m happy to assume most know what that is, but will offer a brief all the same.

Tank Squaring refers to two tanks being the strategic equivalent of four. You’ve double your firepower, and your enemy has double the targets to take out or avoid. Combined? It’s the impact of having four in the field. Kinda. Basically two tanks is more than twice than effective than just the one.

Whether they’re getting it right I’ll let more informed* minds discuss.

*gosh, that’s a low bar!

Xenos up.

The changes to flyer rules (hug the edge, go back into reserves) is not doing any favors to the Hemlock Wraithfighter’s short range aura/guns.

Wartrakk apparently doesn't attach to bikes after all. Maybe when the Codex comes around. No restriction keywords seem to have been added to detachments so that new Wagon detachment works fine with Blitz Brigade. Feels very.... undesigned which I guess happens when they keep Codex compatibility.

 Nevelon wrote:
Xenos up.

The changes to flyer rules (hug the edge, go back into reserves) is not doing any favors to the Hemlock Wraithfighter’s short range aura/guns.

At least we have a good idea how the various bombers work. I would have gone with pick a target anywhere on the table myself, but I can make "within 24i" work.
And it's easy enough to apply to the various Legends units that also use bombs.

It all feels a little..... messy. They say that T'au have had changes to how the army rule works, but I'm damned if I can see anything different.

ccs wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Xenos up.

The changes to flyer rules (hug the edge, go back into reserves) is not doing any favors to the Hemlock Wraithfighter’s short range aura/guns.

At least we have a good idea how the various bombers work. I would have gone with pick a target anywhere on the table myself, but I can make "within 24i" work.
And it's easy enough to apply to the various Legends units that also use bombs.

Does this mean as long as I stay abput 30" from a table edge I'm immune to bomb attacks?

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Xenos up.

The changes to flyer rules (hug the edge, go back into reserves) is not doing any favors to the Hemlock Wraithfighter’s short range aura/guns.

At least we have a good idea how the various bombers work. I would have gone with pick a target anywhere on the table myself, but I can make "within 24i" work.
And it's easy enough to apply to the various Legends units that also use bombs.

Does this mean as long as I stay abput 30" from a table edge I'm immune to bomb attacks?

Or not visible to the bomber at the end of the fight phase.

Blitza-Bommer, Boom Bomb ability
Change to:
'At the end of your opponent’s Fight phase, select one visible enemy
unit (excluding Lone Operative units) within 24" of this unit, and roll
one D6 for that unit: On a 4+, that unit suffers D6 mortal wounds

Other bombers might differ, not going to check them all.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Xenos up.

The changes to flyer rules (hug the edge, go back into reserves) is not doing any favors to the Hemlock Wraithfighter’s short range aura/guns.

At least we have a good idea how the various bombers work. I would have gone with pick a target anywhere on the table myself, but I can make "within 24i" work.
And it's easy enough to apply to the various Legends units that also use bombs.

Does this mean as long as I stay abput 30" from a table edge I'm immune to bomb attacks?

Yes, so far.
Unless you're facing a Drukari Voidraven (it's bomb targets 1 visible, non-lone op, enemy model withing 24" & then hits every enemy unit within d6" of that model.)
I haven't seen anything with a further reaching bomb effect than 24"/Voidraven so far.

For practicality reasons, I'm not a huge fan of forcing all the tall, top-heavy models with lots of pointy bits sticking out to be placed at the very edges of the table.

 Asmodai wrote:
For practicality reasons, I'm not a huge fan of forcing all the tall, top-heavy models with lots of pointy bits sticking out to be placed at the very edges of the table.

It’s not a good compromise from a physical model POV.

I can almost hear the rules team talking about how to fix flyers.

How do we stop flyers from body-blocking other units? Glue them to the edge of the table.
That will break transports! Just remove the flyer tag from them, back to being fast skimmers.
What if they knock them off the edge of the table? Sell them replacements! More sales!

I expect a lot of 'wobbly model syndrome' "let's just move it 6 inches in-board for now and move it back when needed"