Jump to content

FAQ2/ouch


Nemisor

Recommended Posts

To be fair, the ‘drop Agressors 9” from your opponent and double-tap without them being able to do anything’ tactic was always going to get nerfed, wasn’t it?

 

Agressors are no longer the obvious choice for my money, here. Hellblasters, maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SO ... instead ... the one Chapter ... that had the one unit ... using one the stratagem, that was vaguely competitive in the Codex ... not UM, gets nerfed is remotely okay? I get it but Jesus, besides being lower mid tier to begin with, let's just crap on Vanilla/DIY MArines one more time. 

 

Its :censored: , anyone dissing on Primaris can shove it.  :smile.:

 

 

That said. I look forward to finding a way to make the new Chapter "stratagem" work with the new Universal stratagem. Going to have see how unit synergy works. I was lookinf forward to converting 20 Reivers into Scouts. Now I'm not sure ... yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was strong but given the lackluster of the rest of the codex builds it kinda evened out

 

My hyper competitive VVs got a double nerf between losing SftS and not being able to charge over screens too...

 

All we can do is provide constructive feedback to these decision

 

If they're gonna nerf SftS I'd rather it be a SW style outflank than just a 6" move... at least its useful and still fluffy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had very good result going second with my guard parking lot using the new universal stratagem.  I think this stratagem will be even better for raven guard.  -1 to hit and a 2+ save is pretty filthy.  This should make raven guard pretty solid for objective holding and point scoring.  Marines(t4, 3+) still mostly suck due to being overcosted though... so I dont imagine any marine lists will make a dent in the competitive meta.    

 

The real pain in the FAQ is for close combat armies and especially deepstriking close combat armies.  Raven Guard got off easy compared to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t like the “feel”. I’d prefer a rule that operated similar to Eldar striking from the webways but in our case “shadows”. I might change my mind later but it like I said doesn’t feel right for RG SftS.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also saw rumors that the -1 hit traits maybe killed off in favour of the "counts as in cover" type rules. Of course, just rumors and I'd rate them as needing lotsa salt.

Annoying RG is being played off as some sort of gunline and the elements of ambushes, decapitation strikes and fade away, and jumppack preference aren't played up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is the nerf to FLY because the rule book FAQ specifies the MOVEMENT phase?

 

I also was a bit peeved at the change to our stratagem. Mostly because I loved being able to use it to insert my units into places that they wouldn't normally be able to get too. I thought it was fitting because it showed their tactical ambush planning.

 

Overall I don't like the changes and I feel like we got hit when other, larger issues were not fully addressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new version still happens after the Seize roll, right?

If so, it's not that bad. You still move a unit a full 9", not their normal movement rate. You can stI'll control the board early with the threat of a double tap from Aggressors or what have you.

I'd been using the old SftS on Assault Centurions and Assault Marines, and my Jump Captain. Jump units can still cover a ton of ground by the end of the first movement phase (21").

Adapt and overcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my group has switched to narrative play.....so yeah does not really effect me too much. When and if we switch back to match....Ill have my Crimson Fists Primaris force 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more of a narrative player but I don't have a lot of time to play, and I don't have a solid group to consistently play with, and the meta is 2k competitive lists... sigh.

 

How does narrative work for your group? Do you just cherry pick the rules that you want to play with and ignore the FAQs that you don't think make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

most of the faq rules are for matched play. the only rule we are keeping is the DS in turn one in enemy depolyment zone. Special abilities like stfs dont apply 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You strike from shadows when you deploy the unit. You dont move the unit until game begins. So yes, there is something stopping your from sfts multiple times to one unit.

 

 

Is there anything in the new wording that would stop you moving the same unit multiple times with sfts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I think a lot of people are misreading is that sfts was nerfed because of the Chaos Codex version not the Loyalist version. The problem was that people were using it to drop cultist bombs into the enemy lines. 

 

I don't think it is much of an issue for RG at all to be honest. We used sfts for very few units and the best of those being the aggressors. It is a shame, but the extra movement at the beginning can be almost as powerful. We still have access to deep strike with our VVs, but my army which is all primaris is going to have to change things up a bit now. Even with that I'm not too upset. Space Marines are not really an army for competitive play. If you're going to play competitive then you need to soup it up or move to Eldar/Dark Eldar. I'm more of a fan of cinematic battles and narrative play so I don't mind the changes so much at all.

 

Also, keep your heads up men/women. I hear good things are coming for us this December.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I think a lot of people are misreading is that sfts was nerfed because of the Chaos Codex version not the Loyalist version. The problem was that people were using it to drop cultist bombs into the enemy lines. 

 

I don't think it is much of an issue for RG at all to be honest. We used sfts for very few units and the best of those being the aggressors. It is a shame, but the extra movement at the beginning can be almost as powerful. We still have access to deep strike with our VVs, but my army which is all primaris is going to have to change things up a bit now. Even with that I'm not too upset. Space Marines are not really an army for competitive play. If you're going to play competitive then you need to soup it up or move to Eldar/Dark Eldar. I'm more of a fan of cinematic battles and narrative play so I don't mind the changes so much at all.

 

Also, keep your heads up men/women. I hear good things are coming for us this December.

 

What exactly did you hear?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've written about the FLY nerf in relation to marines. 

If anyone is interested, this was what I sent to the faq email.  I strongly urge people to write in with similar feedback.  The more they hear the more they will listen. 
 

Dear GW Team, 
 
First off, thanks so much for the efforts undertaken to streamline and clarify so much. 
 
As a long time 40k player (21 years) and avid tournament organiser and player, I feel I need to offer some feedback on one aspect of the rules changed in the recent FAQ
 
While this may seem like a minor change/clarification, the effects are actually incredibly large. 
 
ERRATA Page 177 – Moving Change the second paragraph to read: ‘If the datasheet for a model says it can Fly, then during the Movement phase it can move across models and terrain as if they were not there.’
 
Currently, the game of 8th has shifted exceptionally heavily towards a shooting
 meta - arguably more than ever before.  Counter charge elements still exist to some degree, but the only armies that can viably and consistently engage in close combat are those with exceptionally cheap base costs or massively high damage output (Genestealers, Orks, Khorne Zerkers for example). 
 
However, for armies such as Blood Angels, or even regular marines with assault/jump pack marines the additional movement benefits allowed a host of tactical options which would benefit them ever so slightly and at least give them some inclusion viability into lists. 
 
(A regular 10man assault marine squad with no special weapons, for example will only do 2 unsaved wounds on the charge to a fellow marine equivalent squad). 
 
The real strength of these units lie in their ability to engage quickly and circumvent movement restrictions that would hamper them getting into combat.  One restriction for example would be putting a line of cheap cannon fodder in front of something more valuable. With the FLY keyword, you could hop on over and engage with the stuff behind. 
 
Further to this, their next arguably biggest strength would be the fact they can lock units in combat with some handy tactical placements - made easier by the fact that they could hop over models to do it.
 
None of this is viable now. 
 
In a meta where its so, so easy to simply waltz out of combat and blast the fighty units into oblivion where the rest of your army protected by lines of cheap flak....
 
This change is really, really hurts gamers who are looking for alternatives in design and build and who are not only wanting to go "shooty".  
 
Please reconsider the reasons for making this change, and consider that allowing for FLY movement in all phases allows for a MUCH wider variety of builds, therefore a wider variety of armies, game play, styles and sales.  
 
Kindest regards, 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I think a lot of people are misreading is that sfts was nerfed because of the Chaos Codex version not the Loyalist version. The problem was that people were using it to drop cultist bombs into the enemy lines. 

 

I don't think it is much of an issue for RG at all to be honest. We used sfts for very few units and the best of those being the aggressors. It is a shame, but the extra movement at the beginning can be almost as powerful. We still have access to deep strike with our VVs, but my army which is all primaris is going to have to change things up a bit now. Even with that I'm not too upset. Space Marines are not really an army for competitive play. If you're going to play competitive then you need to soup it up or move to Eldar/Dark Eldar. I'm more of a fan of cinematic battles and narrative play so I don't mind the changes so much at all.

 

Also, keep your heads up men/women. I hear good things are coming for us this December.

 

Hope is the first step to disappointment or so the quote goes.

I'm going to stay a bit cynical just in case the buff turns out to be for Guilliman and his blob or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point drops across the board is what I keep seeing. Maybe that fixes things, maybe not but it will help.

 

Half price weapons for vanguard vets would be neat.

 

 

 

 

Something I think a lot of people are misreading is that sfts was nerfed because of the Chaos Codex version not the Loyalist version. The problem was that people were using it to drop cultist bombs into the enemy lines.

 

I don't think it is much of an issue for RG at all to be honest. We used sfts for very few units and the best of those being the aggressors. It is a shame, but the extra movement at the beginning can be almost as powerful. We still have access to deep strike with our VVs, but my army which is all primaris is going to have to change things up a bit now. Even with that I'm not too upset. Space Marines are not really an army for competitive play. If you're going to play competitive then you need to soup it up or move to Eldar/Dark Eldar. I'm more of a fan of cinematic battles and narrative play so I don't mind the changes so much at all.

 

Also, keep your heads up men/women. I hear good things are coming for us this December.

Hope is the first step to disappointment or so the quote goes.

I'm going to stay a bit cynical just in case the buff turns out to be for Guilliman and his blob or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point drops is the main thing that I'm hearing. But I trust this new GW. They don't want their flagship army to be in the gutters for too long. Plus they are balancing rules that are used in different ways over multiple armies. It is a hard task to please everyone. The best thing we can do is submit structured and professional feedback. They are listening. They are making changes. The game will improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my mind (and what do I know?), it would have made more sense to have the Raven Guard Stratagem be usable once per game and have a sliding cost like the Relics:

 

1CP = 1 unit

3 CP = 3 units

 

 

Keeps the spirit of it alive while also having some balanced drawbacks.

 

<shrug> what do I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't like that at all.

 

To my mind (and what do I know?), it would have made more sense to have the Raven Guard Stratagem be usable once per game and have a sliding cost like the Relics:

 

1CP = 1 unit

3 CP = 3 units

 

 

Keeps the spirit of it alive while also having some balanced drawbacks.

 

<shrug> what do I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't like that at all.

 

To my mind (and what do I know?), it would have made more sense to have the Raven Guard Stratagem be usable once per game and have a sliding cost like the Relics:

 

1CP = 1 unit

3 CP = 3 units

 

 

Keeps the spirit of it alive while also having some balanced drawbacks.

 

<shrug> what do I know.

 

 

What about it don't you like? That it's not the original form (1CP per unit, unlimited use) or something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.