Pure Deathwing - How are we doing?

[Hannibal]

That thing is called COMMAND points, so why not just base it on the HQs?

 

+2 per HQ charakter. Problem solved.

 

Battalion would give +4 to +6 points, the "smaller" detachments would give you at least +2 but offer more potent units. TROOPS can still be included into your force. Everything would be fine.

[Stormxlr]

That thing is called COMMAND points, so why not just base it on the HQs?

 

+2 per HQ charakter. Problem solved.

 

Battalion would give +4 to +6 points, the "smaller" detachments would give you at least +2 but offer more potent units. TROOPS can still be included into your force. Everything would be fine.

No, problem not solved. Infact problem made worse.

Now give it more than a second of thought and remember that some armies have access to really cheap HQs and some to only medium and expensive ones. Again this would benefit armies like Guard who can easily spam cheap HQs. Also tying CP generation to HQs promotes cheap HQ spam and disadvantages high point HQs.

 

Just give it a thought man. Terminator Captain a cheapest HQ choice for Deathwing costs 95 points while a company commander for IG costs 30 points. So according to you, IG would get 6 CP while Deathwing would get only 2 CP for the same cost of 90 points. Logic?

 

My solution while boring simply works without having to balance each armies CP generation. Give everyone same amount of CPs based on point level played. This evens the playing field. I would go even a step further and make a universal stratagem deck. That all factions can use and that's the only one allowed for competitive play. Sounds like balance to me.

Edited November 1, 2019 by Stormxlr

[Deadman Wade]

I'm not familiar with AM point values (cause I really dislike this army and don't want to look at them unless I have to lol), but this HQ spam problem could be solved by limiting the amount of detachments as well as giving expensive HQs more CPs. Commanders like captains could have more CPs while cheap "tax" HQs could have just one, and expensive characters like Azrael, Dante and Calgar could get extra.

Giving everyone the same amount of CPs could works if it's Kill-Team style - getting CPs every turn. Maybe it would be more balanced, but much more boring.

For example, in Warhammer Underworlds there are hundrerds of cards, but with bans, restrictions and with players finding the best combinations it all comes down to basically one deck with some small variations (2-3 cards based on factions), and the game became so dull and boring that's not worth playing anymore.

I believe that guys like Belial or other space marine captains should have more CPs than IG platoon commanders to represent their hundreds of years of command experience.

Edited November 1, 2019 by Deadman Wade

[Interrogator Stobz]

Somewhere in between is the key...

 

+2CP per 100 points of HQs. Then it is scaled and adjusted for game size and fraction.

[Fajita Fan]

But cheap HQs wouldn’t generate as many CP, like 1 each and a SM company commander would get like 3. If force orgs limited the number of HQs then you can’t spam cheap ones.

 

They wanted a mechanic that forced you to bulk out your battalion with lots of units (read:$$$) to get CP regardless of point level. They want you list building with MSU units so you buy more stuff.

[G8Keeper]

I'd get rid of CP's altogether and allow you to use 1 stratagem per turn, per HQ as long as you pass a dice roll based on your armies strategy rating (bringing that back would be a nice nostalgia moment). Current higher CP stratagems would need more HQ's to pool their stratagem allowance, maybe reducing all by 1 to compensate. All games would be limited to 3 detachments and we'd need to play around with the maximum number of HQ's in each type.  Or maybe not, guard armies for example would have a higher number of HQ's so more tries at a strat but it would be more likely to fail with a lower strategy rating.

 

Edit:

 

In fact I'd go further.  A flat 4+ on using stratagems unless your army is of mono codex type. Then you can use the strategy rating (all would be better than 4+)

Edited November 1, 2019 by G8Keeper

[Interrogator Stobz]

But cheap HQs wouldn’t generate as many CP, like 1 each and a SM company commander would get like 3. If force orgs limited the number of HQs then you can’t spam cheap ones.

 

They wanted a mechanic that forced you to bulk out your battalion with lots of units (read:$$$) to get CP regardless of point level. They want you list building with MSU units so you buy more stuff.

 

Not sure if this was a reply to me; but I'd say about my post that if someone wants to spam cheap HQs then that's up to them, my method recognizes that the more expensive HQs are better at command (CP generation) and the fighting that their extra points pay for.

It also recognizes that small elite units are actually easier to lead and are a far more flexible and strategic asset than the battalion/brigade of meatsack shenanigans that GW currently encourages with their system.

But I do prefer to play the game without CP and strats altogether, it just plays better (imho ofc).

[Interrogator Stobz]

+++Mod hat on; is this directly related to the topic of Deathwing? We need to be careful not to drift into general rules discussion which should be held elsewhere.++

[G8Keeper]

Roger that brother. Deathwing basically need an overhaul, I think we can all agree. We will 100% see Gravis in their ranks after the white dwarf article.

[Interrogator Stobz]

That saddens me.

[Berzul]

Improving the DW seems to be directly tied into getting the detachment system reworked a bit.

[Interrogator Stobz]

Agreed, bit it's all in the phasing to keep it in context here ;)

[Berzul]

Agreed, bit it's all in the phasing to keep it in context here ;)

True. My bad.

 

I'll be sure to keeo it in its proper context.

 

Sorry.

[Fajita Fan]

+++Mod hat on; is this directly related to the topic of Deathwing? We need to be careful not to drift into general rules discussion which should be held elsewhere.++

Well considering that one of the major reasons the Deathwing, a once proud army for several editions, are at a disadvantage is their lack of CP generation by being related to a mere Vanguard detachment. How CP are generated in the current rules and considerations of a better way so that specialized, fluffy forces we spent hundreds of dollars to build and paint might actually be worth playing in 8th edition seems a relevant discussion to me.

[Interrogator Stobz]

++Did I say don't discuss it Brother?

Just be careful that the discussion remains relevant to this specific topic. That is not open to debate.++

Edited November 2, 2019 by Interrogator Stobz

[Fajita Fan]

I wonder what motivated GW to remove DW terminators as troops but leave GK terminators alone. Both codices have power armor and GK termies were elites in the 3.5 edition book. Heck, GK halberds make their termies arguably better than DW powerfists.

 

Speaking of halberds has anyone gotten much use out of the DW company champion? I still have the weapon to model him but I couldn’t justify his points.

[Deadman Wade]

Well, all specialist detachments for C:SM, DA, BA and SW have been removed in favour of primaris-focused battalions, so that's understandable. Unfortunately, our battle company units are quite weak compared to C:SM, so we got hit pretty hard with that.

 

Back on topic, I was surprised how effective Deathwing is against standard ork competitive build (Shokk attack gun and lots of artillery and long-range shooting), and Terminator Master with relic storm bolter won me a few games by eliminating ork Meks. I feel that Deathwing severely lacks terminator lieutenant though, as sometimes it could be hard to clear multi-wound screens without to-wound rerolls.

Edited November 2, 2019 by Deadman Wade

[Berzul]

The DW champion is good in small point games. Mostly as an alternative to a 'smash captain'. His profile is good to wipe out squads of elites, so he works well as a counter to terminators and other TEQs.

 

I once managed to bottle up the main block of Black Templar of tacticals and scouts (i forget how their formation is called) of an oponent, and for two whole rounds, at a 1000 point game. This, with just the DW champion, leaving the rest of my army with room to maneuver around him and win the match.

 

All in all, though, I feel that the best champion is the RW one. Mobility counts for a LOT.

 

The DW have the best Ancient, but the best champion and apothecary are the RW ones.

 

On the subject of DW as troops, I really don't think we will ever get that again. GW gives off the impression of being regretful of the lore of the DW.

 

An army comprised only of terminators just goes against what they want the game to be, and at the same time it pushes sales away from the Marines range GW wants you to buy.

 

I expect the lore to shift in 8.5th or 9th edition towards a new DW. One that no longer works like the DW we know.

 

Its easier to change the lore to fit the game design, than to changw the game design to fit the lore, after all. Even if it can turn into a short sighted solution, sometimes.

Edited November 2, 2019 by Berzul

[Berzul]

Just as a side-story, I went to a low points tournament this weekend. Took one squad of stock-op terminators.

 

In my first match I managed to use them to kite a Redemptor Dread around the table for a bit, keeping my army safe.

 

In my last match they managed to clear out two big blobs of cultists, as well as tie up and break down a chaos rhino that was making a run for my gunline.

 

It felt good seeing the guys performing so well, even if the games were so small amd the role of the squad was so far removed from the front lines of the battle.

[G8Keeper]

Just as a side-story, I went to a low points tournament this weekend. Took one squad of stock-op terminators.

 

In my first match I managed to use them to kite a Redemptor Dread around the table for a bit, keeping my army safe.

 

In my last match they managed to clear out two big blobs of cultists, as well as tie up and break down a chaos rhino that was making a run for my gunline.

 

It felt good seeing the guys performing so well, even if the games were so small amd the role of the squad was so far removed from the front lines of the battle.

 

I still use DW whenever I can, it just feels right.  I ran a pretty big force in a 5k points game and deep struck them down to try and take on Mortarion + guards.  They died horribly but it's what they would have done :)

[Berzul]

My experience with the DW is that, they work as a one squad deal. Bare minimum in points.

 

A large force of deathwing becomes hard to deploy, costly, and often times useless. Meanwhile, one squad of 5 with stock options comes in as a not-that-costly team, that can deepstrike more easily, can even get ignored by your opponent overall, and can serve as a support squad. Clearing t-shirt wearing chaff that huddle up in small squads to camp objectives, or taking a point with line breaker or the ocassional far away objective marker, at the middle of the fight.

 

In essence, the DW are facing a severe identity crisis. With their mechanics not matching their lore, and their battlefield role not being clear at all.

 

Again, I insist, that the DW need to be rehauled and brought back to formula, in a sense. Either by changing up their rules (the hard way), or changing up their lore (the easy way).

 

But that also goes for all Terminators. Across all the codices. They need to be better, not just cheaper. Lowering the cost does not alone fix the unit.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Berzul

[G8Keeper]

My experience with the DW is that, they work as a one squad deal. Bare minimum in points.

 

A large force of deathwing becomes hard to deploy, costly, and often times useless. Meanwhile, one squad of 5 with stock options comes in as a not-that-costly team, that can deepstrike more easily, can even get ignored by your opponent overall, and can serve as a support squad. Clearing t-shirt wearing chaff that huddle up in small squads to camp objectives, or taking a point with line breaker or the ocassional far away objective marker, at the middle of the fight.

 

In essence, the DW are facing a severe identity crisis. With their mechanics not matching their lore, and their battlefield role not being clear at all.

 

Again, I insist, that the DW need to be rehauled and brought back to formula, in a sense. Either by changing up their rules (the hard way), or changing up their lore (the easy way).

 

But that also goes for all Terminators. Across all the codices. They need to be better, not just cheaper. Lowering the cost does not alone fix the unit.

 

I agree. I would argue that with shock assault and bolter discipline they have been one of the most improved units, it's just they were so far down in the power order it hasn't had the desired effect. Addressing getting into assault, move and fire heavy weapons at no penalty and their resilience would help immensely.

Edited November 4, 2019 by G8Keeper

[Berzul]

I agree.

 

To my estimation, every terminator should have the following rules to make them more viable.

 

1) Bolter Discipline as an always active effect

2) Shock Assault

3) Move and fire heavy weapons without penalty

4) Regular armor saves rolled with 2 dice and discarding the lowest

 

With that you would have a squad that, although slow, can move every turn without sacrificing firepower, that can deal good enough damage in melee if they ever get there, and that can actually survive storms of low AP fire while still being vulnerable enough against high strength and high armor penetration attacks. With regular saves (not invulnerable saves) on 2 dice, anything save for AP-4 attacks is something a terminator could survive with better odds than your average marine.

 

Then, as far as Deathwing go, you'd need to rework Inner Circle. For that, I'd look back to 7th.

 

What I always felt through 6th and 7th edition was that, while Grey Knights were the Anti-Demon marines, Dark Angels were the Anti-Heretic Astartes marines. With the Fallen just being the worst offenders, but with our abilities geared towards kicking around any chaos space marine army, as any chaos space marine army could indeed be hiding a Fallen in their ranks.

 

Now, morale tests are of no consequence to Terminator Squads, so that rule can either stay or go. Honestly, it makes little difference with how morale works now. And, with grim resolve giving us rerrolls with shooting, and as we have no lieutenants to give us rerrolls to wound, I'd take the rerroll to attack the Fallen bit of special rules and rework that. I'd take it back to a more general purpose ability. Making any squad of the Deathwing gain to hit and to wound rerrolls for 1s against any chaos marines, and rerroll all attack and wound rolls against Fallen.

 

That way the squad would:

 

1) Rerroll shooting, if standing still, against any enemy, same as any marine in the army

2) Rerroll 1s in attacking and wounding against chaos marines, even if they move

3) Rerroll all attacks and wounds against fallen

 

The ability becomes more powerful, as the scope of its applicability becomes more narrow.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Berzul

[Fajita Fan]

I like the emphasis on fighting CSM ^ I want to say that in 3rd edition if you took pure Deathwing your opponent got to use Cypher, anyone have a better memory than me?

 

I keep thinking about how Custodes became an official small, elite army with 2+ saves, jet bikes, and dreads. I am baffled that Sisters of Silence aren’t part of their codex as troops. Their Sworn Guardian rule lets them control an objective even when outnumbered, what if DW had a version of that so long as Belial is alive? That might cause players to focus on castling Belial but would also introduce a risk mechanic in how you play him.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Fajita Fan

[Berzul]

I had forgotten the Custodes.

 

How can it be that GW would go out of their way to make an army THAT elite-based, and still keep the DW in the sorry state that it is?

 

If I didn't know better, I'd say that was deliberate.

 

In any case, in order to make DW viable as a stand alone force, you'd have to sort these three points.

 

1. The lack of CPs and objective capping squads
2. The overall frailty of Terminators as a unit
3. The lack of ability to engage in combat