What could Chapter Approved do?

[Tyriks]

I don't mind the turn 2 deep strike as much as others but I agree it was too much. I think they should drop the turn 3 limit if they're keeping this.

 

The stated problem it was trying to fix was deep striking and then shooting, removing some unit from the table with little to no defense in a lot of situations. I think a better fix would be what someone proposed when the beta came out; apply a shooting penalty after deep strike. Making shooting after DS as reliable as charging after DS would make a lot of sense and remove the need for the limitation. Charging out of DS is already not reliable for most armies so I don't mind it, but shooting out of deep strike can be brutal.

[Lemondish]

Official news? No, unfortunately not.

All that I "know" is that we'll be getting SoB beta rules and I've heard from multiple sides now that the CA will have something really good for Marines, GK included.

What I hope for is more Stratagems, Relics, Warlord Traits for each faction, reworked terrain rules and a playable version of the deep strike beta rule. My group has nothing against using beta rules but we quickly decided to ignore that one in its current form because it doesn't solve any problems (aside maybe from Terminator/Obliterator bombs) and just makes things harder for melee armies.

 

Instantly interested...tell me more

[Panzer]

 

Official news? No, unfortunately not.

All that I "know" is that we'll be getting SoB beta rules and I've heard from multiple sides now that the CA will have something really good for Marines, GK included.

What I hope for is more Stratagems, Relics, Warlord Traits for each faction, reworked terrain rules and a playable version of the deep strike beta rule. My group has nothing against using beta rules but we quickly decided to ignore that one in its current form because it doesn't solve any problems (aside maybe from Terminator/Obliterator bombs) and just makes things harder for melee armies.

 

 

Instantly interested...tell me more

I'd love to but unfortunately I don't know more. ^^

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Never mind about CA, what about the September/Autumn/Fall(?) Update any news on that?

[Marshlands]

I'd like to see the whole game slowed down, not by nerfing turn 1, but by focusing objectives on late game and allowing MORE units in reserve/ any unit in reserve with a walk on ability (perhaps also a generic strategem to outflank).

 

I think then you'd want to keep key stuff back, rather than alpha strike, until your opponent drops their key units (So you can counter, kill, and claim the late game points). Would also be faster to play/ turns would take a more equal time to play.

[Lemondish]

I'd like to see the whole game slowed down, not by nerfing turn 1, but by focusing objectives on late game and allowing MORE units in reserve/ any unit in reserve with a walk on ability (perhaps also a generic strategem to outflank).

 

I think then you'd want to keep key stuff back, rather than alpha strike, until your opponent drops their key units (So you can counter, kill, and claim the late game points). Would also be faster to play/ turns would take a more equal time to play.

 

You know, I think there's a real solution there to kind of differentiate things. The turn 3 limitation on deep strike probably needs to go, and I think there'd be a lot of beneficial effects if the deep strike options moved away from 'set up anywhere' and more towards the outflank concept of setting up on a table edge. 

[Bat33.1]

I'd like to see some restriction on faction soup and CP farming - Knights are strong anyway but once you add an Imperial Guard CP farm for minimal points they go right to the top in comp play. Likewise Eldar with all the options they have for cross faction list building it makes mono codex armies virtually redundant in a strong competitive meta.

 

I'd also prefer an allies system similar to A0S where you have a points limit for allies, I think it's 400 currently for 2k games and I'd like to see CP only used on the faction that generated them - so if it's Guard you use them on Guard not Imperial or some other keyword. 

 

As others have already said the rules bloat is getting silly again, no idea currently how many books could be required for a mixed list but it must be getting close to the 9 books that our local top tier tournament player was carrying for his Eldar list at the tail end of 7th. 

[Ishagu]

We have to be careful about how much we want Imperial soup to be nerfed.

 

Too much and it's the Eldar show once again

[Panzer]

I hope Orks will rule the tournaments next. 

[Triszin]

stares in 5 Space Wolf Drop Pods

I call it the cage.

you drop em around knights to prevent them from moving for a turn

[MARK0SIAN]

We have to be careful about how much we want Imperial soup to be nerfed.

 

Too much and it's the Eldar show once again

You are right but It’s already the Eldar show. The only reason Imperial soup is the most complained about thing is because more people play Imperium in some variety.

 

If the same number of people who played Imperium played Eldar the amount of complaints would’ve seen them nerfed in a way that made the commissar nerf seem like a buff.

 

This is what I fear we will get this time. So many complaints about imperial stuff that they’ll hit it with a sledgehammer and leave a lot of the other balance issues untouched.

[Cpt_Reaper]

If I may, there are a few things I'd like to see happen. I fully accept such changes would rather tick off some players but I think they'd be for the best,

 

• Allies are restricted in Matched Play. Something like Allies can only be 25% of your total army (I wonder where i got that idea).
• A change to detachments to make anything other than a Battalion more viable. Perhaps restrict the number of Battalions and Brigades per X points?
• Increase CPs granted by Vanguard, Outrider and Spearhead detachments to 3
• Change CP regen abilities so that you can only ever regen 1 point at a time. Like the Dark Angels Warlord Trait, if you spend 3 you can regen 1 on a 5+
• Mortal Wounds cannot be ignored by Disgustingly Resilient and other FNP rules. However it can now be ignored by invuln saves.
• A natural 6 to hit always hits. A natural 1 always misses. Regardless of modifiers.

[CaptainMarsh]

Wouldn't that make Invulnerables- which can get as high as 3+, often get to 4+, have a ton of 5+- much stronger?

Mind you I'd be happy...as a Custode player.

[Cpt_Reaper]

That's a fair point. Maybe Mortal Wounds cause Invulns to max out at 5+?

[Interrogator-Chaplain Ezra]

 

• Mortal Wounds cannot be ignored by Disgustingly Resilient and other FNP rules. However it can now be ignored by invuln saves.

Over my bolter-blasted, Nurgle-blessed corpus.

[Cpt_Reaper]

How would you suggest one counters FNP heavy armies then? Because Death Guard and Death Company forces who just shrug off everything, even Mortal Wounds, are something that needs to addressed.

[Panzer]

Why do you think FnP heavy armies need a counter in the first place? Last time I checked Death Guard aren't exactly a top tier army on Eldar level and the 6+++ on Deathcompany is a joke.
Just do it like with any other durable target ... throw dice at it until it dies. You even have the advantage that FnP models are more vulnerable to multi-damage weapons than models with just a regular good save since it takes only one failed FnP roll to kill a W1 model.

 

In fact, FnP abilities are the counter to Mortal wounds here. 

[Cpt_Reaper]

I think they are in need of a counter because at the moment their only counter is "throw more dice".

 

An army doesn't need to be top tier to be a problem. I've had just as difficult time against FNP rich armies as I have against Eldar or Tau.

[Panzer]

Well ultimately the "throw more dice at it" is the answer to everything. Even with your changes. The question is just how easy it is for those dice.

Also depending on your list and the skill difference between you and your opponent anything can be a problem, really. I don't see Nurgle armies being a problem AT ALL and complaining about units with a 6+++ is really a bit ridiculous considering how unlikely it is to save any model, especially once multi-damage weapons come into play.

[Cpt_Reaper]

It's not just Nurgle armies I want to look at. The whole triad of invuln, mortal wounds and fnp needs reworking, in my opinion.

 

Mortal counters FNP, is countered by invuln.

FNP should counter multi-damage wounds. One roll stops it all of it because you are ignoring a single Wound with multiple Damage.

[Morticon]

We’re all anxious

 

I know Robbin Cruddace was a table judge at Nova. I also know he got a bit of an education on RAW vs RAI. I know they made judgements on the fly that had to be explained to the group as a whole so everyone was on the same page. ( I saw this on the feed and post game interviews with players).

Prot- can you tell me a bit more about this? I'm quite curious- especially the RAW vs RAI "education" ! Thanks!

[Panzer]

It's not just Nurgle armies I want to look at. The whole triad of invuln, mortal wounds and fnp needs reworking, in my opinion.

 

Mortal counters FNP, is countered by invuln.

FNP should counter multi-damage wounds. One roll stops it all of it because you are ignoring a single Wound with multiple Damage.

 

But Mortal wounds counter Invul/Armor and is getting countered by FnP. FnP gets countered by multi-damage weapons.

You kinda got the whole thing backwards lol

[Morticon]

 

The line of sight rules are fine. The terrain rules is what sucks.

I’m not so sure, you shouldn’t be able to draw line of sight on banner poles, helmet plumes, trailing cloaks etc. Should be body to body like it used to be.

 

 

 

Wait- is this a thing?!

[Morticon]

 

 

Even the OP is essentially "there is no news or rumour, please fill in the gap".

 

The OP was asking the community if there was any other word, considering the OP doesn't have 40k news attached intravenously.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

 

 

 

The line of sight rules are fine. The terrain rules is what sucks.

I’m not so sure, you shouldn’t be able to draw line of sight on banner poles, helmet plumes, trailing cloaks etc. Should be body to body like it used to be.

 

Wait- is this a thing?!

Yep. LOS is from any part of the firing model to any part of the target model. So, if you can draw a bead from the tip of a sword to the corner of a vehicle, they can shoot eachother.