PDA

View Full Version : Did GW's DoC Flamer nerf go too far?



Pages : [1] 2

Lord Dan
25-07-2012, 15:17
There's some talk over on the DoC rumor thread about the new statline for flamers, and whether or not GW has gone too far with them. We now know that Flamers:

Have -1 S on their profile.
Are susceptible to all negative shooting modifiers (multiple shots, long range, move-and-fire, etc.)

Additionally, they are getting a 5 point price increase over the last book, though they are also moving to special. Based on all of this, please take a moment to answer the poll, above.

Bob Arctor
25-07-2012, 15:29
I don't remember seeing them getting S3 shooting as well, in which case I think the definitely went way overboard. If that turns out to be incorrect, then I would downgrade this to just being a little overboard.

If they had still allowed Flamers to ignore the multi-shot penalty then I would probably be saying its just right.

imo, they should have gone a different direction and kept their fighting potential the same but reducing the range of their shooting to at least 12" so they have to get up close and personal to cause any damage. Maybe force them to take the multi-shot penalty, but make them exempt from the moving and shooting penalty instead. It would make Flamers a bit more like they were originally. At the moment its just too easy against some opponents to stand 17.5" away (with little risk of being charged by a large block of infantry or other superior foe) and move back when threatened.

Lord Dan
25-07-2012, 15:33
Oops, you're right! I changed the opening post.

Aéquitas
25-07-2012, 15:35
Oops, you're right! I changed the opening post.

You didn't its still there.

Lord Dan
25-07-2012, 15:38
Haha, I deleted the wrong "-1 S" comment. Fixed it.

Artinam
25-07-2012, 15:40
I think that with these nerves they can still be a very decent unit. No longer the 'must use' unit which annoyed me so (these things were rockhard to the point of unfairness). I do think the point increase with these nerves, wasn't really needed. You did forget the mention they got a tiny 'buff' they are a special choice now, so less competing stuff and you can potentially get more of them.

Still, they work at this point cost and my Pegasus Knights finally stand a chance in beating them in close combat...

Aéquitas
25-07-2012, 15:49
Anyways about the flamers I think all changes were fine except the penalty for multiple shots. That penalty alone has such a huge impact on the damagepotential of the flamers it pretty much halves the wounds they are able to throw out.
The change has effect on normal shooting but also on stand and shoot so you get punished twice.

Daemons have enough other choices to make their lists competative so all in all it won't cripple the Daemons, however I think 90% of the Daemons players will now stop using flamers.

theunwantedbeing
25-07-2012, 15:50
Seems 100% fair to me.
(okay, 90% fair, but going too far is better than not going far enough)

If this stops all daemon players from using them I say job well done GW.....except for the bit where they released new flamer models, that was a bit silly.
I am a little sick of seeing two units of 6 flamers in a "pure" Slaanesh/Nurgle/Khorne army.

The bearded one
25-07-2012, 16:03
No, I think its fair. Now you can't have your cake and eat it too, you have to make choices. You can move and fire a bazillion shots at long range, but be less accurate for it, or you can stand still, or get closer, for more accuracy. The +5pt cost wasn't really necessary though. They did get this funky warpflame rule or something, didn't they? Rolling a dice and on a 1 granting regeneration, or on a 6 inflicting additional wounds, on an enemy, IIRC?

T10
25-07-2012, 16:13
GW has totally killed Damenons of Chaos with this nerf. The only one who will use 3x15 Flamers in 2014 wil be sweaty sycophantic Matt Ward fanboys with "WE REMEMBER" tee shirts.

Sexiest_hero
25-07-2012, 16:15
ah, they were so OP it only fair they spend some time in the "fair" column. It's still great shooting for a non shooty army, it's just not completely broken anymore

The bearded one
25-07-2012, 16:38
I went for a googlesearch to look up older flamer models, and when I had typed in "flamers of Tzeentch", the very first searchterm suggestion was "flamers of Tzeentch overpowered" xD

Urgat
25-07-2012, 16:41
GW has totally killed Damenons of Chaos with this nerf.
Can't tell if it's sarcasm or not...

EDMM
25-07-2012, 16:43
For all the conspiracy theorists, GW released fancy, shiny new models, and made them significantly less attractive in game terms.

Remember this for next time.

Urgat
25-07-2012, 16:47
What, are you going to claim they didn't write the rules of the Beatmen rares so they'd sell more? Preposterous!

Nocculum
25-07-2012, 16:49
The changes to skirmishers in 8th edition is why they were 'toned down', and rightly so. They still remain a strong unit within the Daemons of Chaos army book, and still retain their usefulness.

tmarichards
25-07-2012, 16:50
It's too early to tell just how much of an effect they'll have in games (they're less good now but you can take many more of them), but on first glance I think it's pretty decent. They may well end up getting pushed out by merit of not being 100% optimal any more, a greater daemon suddenly jumps right back up to being awesome because Daemons now have their own war machines to kill other people's cannons. Once you put in a 600pt Lord, 600pts of core + heralds and the new rare toys there may not be enough points left over to take a decent number of them, especially if these new chariots are pretty good...

The bearded one
25-07-2012, 17:07
What, are you going to claim they didn't write the rules of the Beatmen rares so they'd sell more? Preposterous!

However in contrast to the beastmen rares, they didn't alter and specifically nerf one of the new models that they were releasing, at the very same time.

Urgat
25-07-2012, 17:20
However in contrast to the beastmen rares, they didn't alter and specifically nerf one of the new models that they were releasing, at the very same time.

It only furthers my point, no? :p I was just underlying the fact that we didn't need to wait for the flamers to know it didn't work that way.

Graxy
25-07-2012, 17:50
I think the -1S is pretty fair. A unit that is supposed to be threatening from a range shouldn't really be able to defend itself as well as it currently can against most things that realistically should be thrown at them (the normal for charging small skirmishers would be some sort of cheap cav unit, most of which are currently being wounded on 2s).

I agree with the unit suffering from all modifiers apart from multi shotting. The norm for anything that shoots a random amount of shots is that there is no penalty for multi shots, and I don't think that past problems that people have had with the unit should change that. Also, I'm not sure how this would work if the unit were to roll a single shot. I'd assume that the multi shot modifier would not apply, but this would lead me to the assumption that like other weapons that have the special rule of "multiple shots (fixed number)", they can opt to shot a single shot even when they can shoot more as to avoid the modifier. We'll have to wait to see how this works though.

With both of these changes, I think that the 5pt increase is a bit over the top, but I dodn't really feel like I'm informed enough to give an overall verdict on whether it is too much of a nerf or not.

jdebelly
25-07-2012, 18:41
How can they get a -1 to shooting and moving when they're skirmishers... they are still skirmishers, right?

AngelofSorrow
25-07-2012, 18:54
Yes they are. Skirmishers are affected by move and shoot penalties.


Ready for eternal war!

Bodysnatcher
25-07-2012, 19:01
Shame it kicks my mono-tzeentch in the teeth. Still, I'll need to see the full details before i make a decision either way.

ewar
25-07-2012, 19:42
My only gripe is that it's about 4 years too late...

I voted a little too far, but didn't factor in that you can take many more of them now with the shift to special, so I would (if such things were possible) change my vote to fair. Now please, please for the love of all the Dark Powers, double the cost of the Masque...

The bearded one
25-07-2012, 19:50
How can they get a -1 to shooting and moving when they're skirmishers... they are still skirmishers, right?


Yes they are. Skirmishers are affected by move and shoot penalties.

The bonus skirmishers have to shooting, is that they can march and fire, but like angelofsorrow says movement penalties still aply to them.

Artinam
25-07-2012, 19:57
Why the cries of anguish? I mean come on, the unit was obviously to powerful. They could kill pretty much anything, move and fire D3 shots per model. This wasn't a unit you could throw a warmachine hunter into and expect to stand a chance against it.

The bearded one
25-07-2012, 20:00
Shame it kicks my mono-tzeentch in the teeth.

Flamers got a little bit worse, but screamers got waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy better


They could kill pretty much anything, move and fire D3 shots per model.

D6 shots, not D3. Yes, you read that right. This was a unit that could quite often throw 20+ str4 shots your way.

Maoriboy007
25-07-2012, 20:01
Do demons still have thier old break system, if so then no Flamers are fine with the changes, especially as special.
They did the same thing to Ghouls as well, depowered them solidly and still put the price up, swordsmen and most of the TK army were fairly mild got depowered and had a price rise, flamers were at least on the higher end of the scale.

And demons are getting war machines now? Perfect.

The bearded one
25-07-2012, 20:02
Shame it kicks my mono-tzeentch in the teeth.

Flamers got a little bit worse, but screamers got waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy better


They could kill pretty much anything, move and fire D3 shots per model.

D6 shots, not D3. Yes, you read that right. This was a unit that could quite often throw 20+ str4 shots your way.

Bodysnatcher
25-07-2012, 20:19
Just glad I have a lot of screamers too...

Daedalus81
25-07-2012, 20:57
The nerfs bring them back to being inline with everything else. The extra 5 points is for warpflame.

Nubl0
25-07-2012, 21:07
I think it might have been a little too much. Yes they were very powerful for a bs based shooting unit, but I didn't find them broken. More like every other bs based shooting unit is rather lackluster these days. In 7th they were scary as people had much smaller units, not so in 8th.

Bodysnatcher
25-07-2012, 21:15
I always thought the high S was to make up for the inability to flee as compared to other similar units.

The bearded one
25-07-2012, 21:27
I always thought the high S was to make up for the inability to flee as compared to other similar units.

I thought that was what the 2 wounds, T4, 5+ wardsave and 2 initiative 4 attacks were for..

Confessor_Atol
25-07-2012, 21:31
This kick in the pants couldn't have happened to a more deserving group of eather-creatures. While it's harsh, I don't think it's out of line. Put me down for "fair".

Jericho
25-07-2012, 21:35
It's way too late, but they sure did kick a lot of ass stats-wise for a shooting unit. Maybe a bit less of an auto-include now.

10021201012% agree on the Masque btw. Way too cheap considering what a Ld-bomb army can do to many armies out there.

Flying_Flaming_Moose
25-07-2012, 21:45
I'd say fair, the unit was disgusting under the old rules - and i'm speaking from a tzeentch nut head. I would like to have a game with daemons when i don't have to shake my head at the stupidity of the flamer choice - either using them or playing against them.

Wesser
25-07-2012, 21:53
It's in line with the trend

Empire Shooting got butchered too. GW is slowly phasing Ballistic skill out of the game

Phazael
25-07-2012, 21:55
The current ones compare pretty unfavorably to Lead Beltchers, who are hardly ever taken. The only role they served in my army was as a flank support and minor shooting thread. That won't change much, but seriously the 2+ flaming ward saves and new emphasis on large units pretty much dealt with them already. Guess I will run more solo fiends in their place....

Gaargod
25-07-2012, 22:04
Flamers were always my definition of underpriced and overpowered.

Underpriced is obvious. This mostly applies to their shooting - throwing out 18" D6 S4 (flaming) shots in and of itself isn't a problem. The problem is that its on a 35pts model with good manoeuvrability - that's just underpriced, and they should have been closer to 50pts than 30pts.

Overpowered is their combat ability. They're clearly meant as a close/medium range support squad which isn't designed for combat - compare skink skirmishers, for example. Yet Flamers are ridiculously hardcore compared at S5 T4 A2 I4 (slightly let down by Ws2). Most combat warmachine/support hunters are just going to utterly fail against them.

Dominatrix
25-07-2012, 22:39
Flamers were always my definition of underpriced and overpowered.
Overpowered is their combat ability. They're clearly meant as a close/medium range support squad which isn't designed for combat - compare skink skirmishers, for example. Yet Flamers are ridiculously hardcore compared at S5 T4 A2 I4 (slightly let down by Ws2). Most combat warmachine/support hunters are just going to utterly fail against them.

You are comparing skinks to flamers? Seriously? And based on that they are "ridiculously hardcore and overpowered"? :confused: How about comparing them to leadbelchers, who belong to an 8th edition book? Looks like this thread was the excuse a lot of people have been waiting for to start their "nerf daemons" hysteria. How about letting go of 7th edition and join the rest of us in 8th? Like the earlier poster who said flamers could kill pretty much anything and didn't even get the number of shots right.. Anyway I'll refer you to your signature: "in other news, water is wet, sky is blue, and warhammer is unbalanced. we now return you to your regularly scheduled internet bitchfest."

O&G'sRule
25-07-2012, 23:03
Wheres the new stat line? when did that happen? Or is this just a rumour?

Dominatrix
25-07-2012, 23:13
It will be on the leaflet included with the new WD issue. The nerfs first. Basically flamers go up 5 points, lose a point of strength in close combat and get penalty for multi shot. They also get a new shooting rule that might do d3 wounds no amor save to the unit they are shooting, but there is an equal chance it might give your target regeneration!! (imagine shooting a horde unit and giving it regeneration..) The positive is that they move to special from rare.

Anyway it seems GW really wants us to buy the new screamers and soul grinder. So I predict you won't get to see many flamers from now on in army lists, their position been taken by these two units. On the plus side people on this forum hate flamers so much, they might even call your list soft if they see no flamers!! :D

Urgat
25-07-2012, 23:18
I think it's Lord Dan who said in that other thread, do demon players actually try and make us feel sorry for a flamer nerf? :p
They're not very murderous against big units anymore, I read. They are, in fact, it's just that it's less obvious in a big unit than a small one, but they kill as many in 8th as they did in 7th. Obviously they're meant to target small units, monsters with regen, warmachines, etc etc. Pre-nerf, they were too cheap for what they did. That some meta favoring larger units made them less efficient against these units is irrelevant, it's not the unit which is faulty, it's the other army which is trying to limit its own weaknesses. Just like any other units, flamers shouldn't be ever efficient, against everything, all the time. They ought to have weaknesses. Before, they did not. They owned at range, they owned at melee. They destroyed everything they targeted, and then destroyed everything that dared charge them too. And shrugged off incoming missiles, of course.
So yeah, they don't own big units. They'd still utterly murder smaller units and so on, and they're way too efficient at that for their point cost. So the nerf was expected by a majority of players, and fairly so. With their new rules, they can still do that, and they cost the right price for it. That they're not good at destroying big units is fine, because it's not their role.

Anyway, remember that leaflet is jut a temporary fix, they're probably going to change again with the new book, so...

fubukii
25-07-2012, 23:45
I think that lead blechers were better then prenerf flamers, now they take the cake now. A little to over nerfed and probably wont be seen much now if ever.

5 pts
-1str
multiple shots?

Leacblechers dont suffer multiple shots.... or long range. Seems fair? ALot of leftover 7th edition doc hate left it seems.

Urgat
25-07-2012, 23:54
Leadbelchers also have a very big footprint and much less maneuvrability and LoS than skirmishing 25mm bases. It's not just all about the number of shots. The flamers, you can basically just move them at one point and shoot. The leadbelchers, getting them at a place where they can actually shoot at something, is a whole different kind of deal. Besides they do suffer penalty for long range, it's moving they don't. They can't stand and shoot either. It'd be nice to remember the negatives too when you compare stuff. Not saing LB aren't good mind, just disagreeing they're better than flamers.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 03:50
I think that lead blechers were better then prenerf flamers, now they take the cake now. A little to over nerfed and probably wont be seen much now if ever.

5 pts
-1str
multiple shots?

Leacblechers dont suffer multiple shots.... or long range. Seems fair? ALot of leftover 7th edition doc hate left it seems.

Alot of anti daemon sentiment is left. Apparently people dont know how to play against them still, therefore they continue to complain. I really hope GW doesnt completely destroy flamers. I only take a unit of 6, however if they completely nerf them to oblivion I am kinda unsure what they will do to the rest of the book. I guess we will wait for saturday. And yes I believe their nerf on flamers was pretty dramatic. I am fine with the point increment and the -1 S to profile, but the suffer all modifiers makes them seem like a point sink.

decker_cky
26-07-2012, 04:03
Are they still 3-6? If you can take bigger units, I might be inspired to take a daemon army with 30 flamers. :)

vinny t
26-07-2012, 04:07
This nerf is pretty irritating. Personally I never found Flamers too overpowering in 8th edition. They were about on par with fiends, too cheap and too good at what they did, but overall they don't have that much of an impact on the game. I would much rather bloodletters get toned down, as they tend to make or break games much more than support units like flamers do.

When I use my daemons I tend to run one unit of 3 Flamers because they are a nice support unit. Now that they have gotten significantly more expensive and not nearly as good, I don't know if I will keep taking them. For the price of 3 Flamers I could instead take 2 fiends, which fulfill essentially the same purpose.

I voted slightly overboard.

Bring_Back_Chaos_Dwarfs?
26-07-2012, 04:23
Though flamers still fire D6 shots per model, correct? Or did it get reduced to D3 shots per?

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 04:32
D6 which means its still randomed so they could roll terrible have have a bad turn of shooting.

On average a unit of 6 will generate 21 shots.
-1 far range (18 inches)
-1 multi shots
-1 (prob move and shoot)

So i just math hammer it. With 21 shots and suffering all of these penalties a flamer squad of 240 points will be able to kill 2.3 T3 models (without enemy saves)
Lets say you dont move. With 21 shots suffering 2 -1 penalties a flamer squad of 240 points will be able to kill 4.5 T3 models(without enemy saves)

Thanks gw for ending flamers.

Lord Dan
26-07-2012, 04:37
Actually it's an average of 18 shots, unless there is some special rule I'm overlooking.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 04:44
Why 18 ???? the average on 2 dice is 7.

7 * 3 = 21

Lord Dan
26-07-2012, 04:56
Ah, I see what you did. The average roll on a D6 is a 3 (and incidentally, in this case, you're rolling 6 dice for a perfect average) which multiplied by six dice is 18 shots. You shouldn't group the rolls in pairs, as each roll is an independent event, and grouping dice can do wonky things to your numbers. For example while the average on 2 dice is 7, which multiplied by 3 is 21, the average on 3 dice is 9, which multiplied by two brings us back to 18. :p

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 05:04
Actually the average roll of a D6 is 3.5. I group it like this 1,2,3 and 4,5,6 Therefore the median of this is 3.5............... 3.5 * 6 = 21. I am confident your math is wrong :O

The average roll of 3 D6 = 3.5 * 3.... = 10.5 shots

AlphariusOmegon20
26-07-2012, 05:28
They owned at range, they owned at melee.

Wait, what? :confused:

Owned at Melee? We can't be talking about the same unit, considering that Flamers are WS2. They hit everything in CC on a 5+, which means they rarely hit anything. Even a couple of hits was cause for celebration, regardless if they even wounded what they hit. I've played against daemons in both 7th and 8th and I've always been more scared of their shooting than I ever have been about their CC capabilities. Flamers are pretty much a one trick pony.

No, I'll say the big elephant that is in the room, This nerf was way uncalled for. They weren't that great before the nerf and are even more useless now.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 05:39
Well Flamers will hit WS 3/4 on 4's. People complain that Flamers destroy in CC because Flamers can fend off most units that are designed to counter them. See I am completely fine with GW nerfing their CC ability, thus making them weak to CC which downsides how effective they are (they are not that effective for me though). I always believe everything in the game should have a counter, and Close Combat should be the counter to Shooty units. However once GW adjusts their shooting, CC ability, and then Skyrockets their price. Thats the moment when I think this may be the start of the "Death of Daemons".

Rumors though say that Flamers may get another type of shooting I have heard 1 shot at same S, but causes D3 wounds. This is not confirmed though

Koyo
26-07-2012, 05:55
I must say I am enjoying the over reactions from this thread. I'd hardly call 5 pt a sky rocket. They will still do fine against the odd fast cav that can catch up to them. The shooting penalty can be overcome by getting closer or...god forbid...not moving. Anyway, if I remember the rumor correctly, now if they roll a 6 to wound its d3 wounds with no armor saves (their normal shooting). Anyone feel free to correct me if my memory is a little off.

Lord Dan
26-07-2012, 06:03
Actually the average roll of a D6 is 3.5. I group it like this 1,2,3 and 4,5,6 Therefore the median of this is 3.5............... 3.5 * 6 = 21. I am confident your math is wrong :O

The average roll of 3 D6 = 3.5 * 3.... = 10.5 shots

I'm too tired to work this one through. I suspect is has something to do with the fact that 3.5 is impossible to roll on a single dice, though I'll figure it out in the morning.

If you have a potential of 36 shots then you will, on average, roll up 18 shots.

Koyo
26-07-2012, 06:08
I suppose I'll help poor Dan out. Since them shooting 0 shots is not possible, then they have a potential of 6-36 shots, the middle being 21, not 18.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 06:24
Over reactions, or just my opinion? Depends I generally tend to overreact and I shouldnt however It doesnt look good for daemons. We wont know their actualy shooting Info for awhile, however rolling a 6 to wound and it causing D3 wounds is a poor attempt to raise them 5 points. Seeing that many models that Flamers shoot at are 1 wound models it wont matter.

Evil Hypnotist
26-07-2012, 07:01
I could deal with the 5 point hike and the -1 Str in combat (they are hard as nails in cc atm) but losing the multiple shot modifer immunity is a massive blow, still if they wanted to stop them being 'must-haves' they have done a bloody good job!

Koyo
26-07-2012, 07:14
Over reactions, or just my opinion? Depends I generally tend to overreact and I shouldnt however It doesnt look good for daemons. We wont know their actualy shooting Info for awhile, however rolling a 6 to wound and it causing D3 wounds is a poor attempt to raise them 5 points. Seeing that many models that Flamers shoot at are 1 wound models it wont matter.

My comment wasn't completely targeted at you mate (apologies if you took it for anything other then a light hearted comment). I'm a DoC mono-tzeentch player, and I can tell you that I'm tickled pink by the update. My list no longer writes itself!!! And actually, you brought up a good point: single wound models may not be the best target for Flammers anymore.

bernh
26-07-2012, 08:01
Ah, I see what you did. The average roll on a D6 is a 3 (and incidentally, in this case, you're rolling 6 dice for a perfect average) which multiplied by six dice is 18 shots.

I will apply you logic and I am saying that average roll on a D6 is a 4, and you have a 'perfect average' 24 shots. Discuss.


Flamers are WS2. They hit everything in CC on a 5+

No, they hit almost everything in CC on a 4+. Only units with WS5+ are hit on 5+.

Dark Reaper
26-07-2012, 08:14
I'm too tired to work this one through. I suspect is has something to do with the fact that 3.5 is impossible to roll on a single dice, though I'll figure it out in the morning.

If you have a potential of 36 shots then you will, on average, roll up 18 shots.

Sorry if I am coming off as a little harsh here, but this is something you clearly do not understand. If you roll one dice, the results you can get are 1,2,3,4,5,6. If you add all these numbers together, you get 21. If you then divide 21 by 6, you get 3,5 which is the average dice roll on 1d6.

I have to agree with whoever did the math for shooting against t3 units. I think it is a bit harsh that flamers now are only 2/3 as effective on short range while moving and only 1/2 as effective on long range while moving. I voted they got a little overboard as I fail to see how a unit of 6 will ever get its point cost back against anything.

sulla
26-07-2012, 08:51
Seems 100% fair to me.
(okay, 90% fair, but going too far is better than not going far enough)

If this stops all daemon players from using them I say job well done GW.....except for the bit where they released new flamer models, that was a bit silly.
I am a little sick of seeing two units of 6 flamers in a "pure" Slaanesh/Nurgle/Khorne army.I would have thought a better way of discouraging non-Tzeench armies using flamers would be to offer better rare choices for those armies... I mean; beasts of nurgle and blood crushers...

That said, the changes sound pretty fair to my mind. The to hit nerf is probably the most sensible of the lot. Now they need to get much clloser and preferably stand still to shoot, rather than dancing outside safe charge ranges. I think I'll still field mine. Hard to say though. Now plastic plaguebearers are available, I might squeeze a unit of them in to justify my great unclean one.

Snake1311
26-07-2012, 08:51
I have to agree with whoever did the math for shooting against t3 units. I think it is a bit harsh that flamers now are only 2/3 as effective on short range while moving and only 1/2 as effective on long range while moving. I voted they got a little overboard as I fail to see how a unit of 6 will ever get its point cost back against anything.

Ranged units aren't meant to be getting their points back.

Also, flamers are a ranged unit in an army that doesn't normally have that capacity. Hence costed at a premium.

About time they nerfed them really

Dominatrix
26-07-2012, 09:16
And actually, you brought up a good point: single wound models may not be the best target for Flammers anymore.

Then they will probably watch the rest of this edition from the bench, because multi wound models are not the best target for them either. Let's assume they are shooting at a hydra. The unit of 6 flamers move and shoot.. they will average 21 shots give or take.. hitting on 6s means 4 may hit , wounding on 5s means you MAY get 1. Well that was 240 pts well spent now, wasn't it?. :p The more I think about it the more I am certain that screamers will replace them completely and the soulgrinder might pick up the role of ranged unit. On a sidenote, a pity beasts of nurgle didn't get any new models, because in that case they might get a couple of rules making them worth using.

Glemigobles
26-07-2012, 10:47
The nerfs bring them back to being inline with everything else. The extra 5 points is for warpflame.

The extra 5 points is for flamers being special - you can have more of them.
And c'mon - they are still very good.

theunwantedbeing
26-07-2012, 11:01
I would have thought a better way of discouraging non-Tzeench armies using flamers would be to offer better rare choices for those armies... I mean; beasts of nurgle and blood crushers...
It would have been if Flamers weren't filth.

You don't balance things by making everything into filth to go alongside the one thing that is already filth.
You tone down the filth.

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 11:42
Plus, screamers became better.

Urgat
26-07-2012, 12:19
Wait, what? :confused:

Owned at Melee? We can't be talking about the same unit, considering that Flamers are WS2. They hit everything in CC on a 5+

Right... I've been playing an army with WS2 pretty much across the board for over 15 years, and you tell me that straight to the face? Opponent needs to be WS5 to be hit on 5+. That leaves the vast majority of things in Warhammer to be hit on the average 4+.


And actually, you brought up a good point: single wound models may not be the best target for Flammers anymore.

Regenerating monsters? Flamers, I suppose, do flaming attacks? Plenty of nasty regen monsters around for them to have fun with.


hitting on 6s

There we go. In the new rules, flamers hit on 6. Honestly, how do the other armies, which have BS3 if they're not elves, do? So you got -1 for multishot. That brings you down to the same BS as everybody with the assurance that you're going to get at least the same number of shots per mini, on average three times the number, and if lucky 6 times the numbers. Let's see, does a flamer costs 3 times a thunderer? I mean with the two attacks, the ward, the two wounds, the toughness and an average of 3 shots (3.5? :p), it's clearly worth 3 thunderers. Not gonna mention they can move and shoot, they got M6, skirmishers, etc, which would more than counterbalance the shorter range (I'm being very generous there, I'm not even considering the tremendous difference it gives them in terms of just staying alive). Oh, it costs just 2 points less than 3 thunderer. After cost increase. Quizz: especially in a demon army, what would you have, a flamer, or three thunderers?
They're now special, the upper unit limit has most likely been removed; for the same points, you can make a unit of them on average equivalent to any shooting unit in any other army, and it's still got it's boatload of special rules. Flamers remain great.

Pedneault
26-07-2012, 12:50
There we go. In the new rules, flamers hit on 6. Honestly, how do the other armies, which have BS3 if they're not elves, do? So you got -1 for multishot. That brings you down to the same BS as everybody with the assurance that you're going to get at least the same number of shots per mini, on average three times the number, and if lucky 6 times the numbers. Let's see, does a flamer costs 3 times a thunderer? I mean with the two attacks, the ward, the two wounds, the toughness and an average of 3 shots (3.5? :p), it's clearly worth 3 thunderers. Not gonna mention they can move and shoot, they got M6, skirmishers, etc, which would more than counterbalance the shorter range (I'm being very generous there). Oh, it costs just 2 points less than 3 thunderer. After cost increase. Quizz: especially in a demon army, what would you have, a flamer, or three thunderers?
They're now special, the upper unit limit has most likely been removed; for the same points, you can make a unit of them on average equivalent to any shooting unit in any other army, and it's still got it's boatload of special rules. Flamers remain great.

3 thunderers are less random, and have 1 more wound.

Bye Bye flamers, welcome screamers.

Artinam
26-07-2012, 12:56
Flamers can move and fire though, are at -1 to hit with shooting and can even march and shoot whereas thunderers can't and I dare say that a single Flamer can kill of 3 thunderers in closecombat and is better then 3 thunderers vs better things. They are further immune to psychology, and steadfast in a forest, have flaming attacks in shooting (making that whole negative bit of giving regeneration the enemy target completely pointless). They also cause fear and have magical attacks. And the last one, their save isn't modified by high strenght unlike Thunderers.

Actually had to add things to my post seeing what they all have.

And yes as a Flamer 'hater', I made a mistake in the nr of shots. It wasn't D3 as I thought but D6, my honest apologies. /end sarcasm.


They are still a very decent choice and provide some needed shooting to the Daemon army. And everyone happily ignores their buff, the warpflame rule thing making them better against multiwound models and them being special choice.

Urgat
26-07-2012, 12:58
3 thunderers are less random, and have 1 more wound.
They still got the same number of shots on average, and the 5+ ward save pretty much equals a third wound.


Bye Bye flamers, welcome screamers.
I don't see why, even with their new stat, the screamers are really nothing to write home about. They're certainly good at what they do now, and they're fairly priced, but they're not filth at all, so I don't get what warrants that comment.

Pedneault
26-07-2012, 13:09
Since flamers won't be reliable enough to kill or weaken big monsters with regen.

Screamers will be able to take on the same job as the flamers and by beeing flying will be easier to manipulate.
About the same stats, same points, screamers 3 atks = 3 average shots for flamers, that will be hitting on better than a 6+
Bonus : they might even get some hits hopping over units on their way.

theunwantedbeing
26-07-2012, 13:32
3 thunderers are less random, and have 1 more wound.

Bye Bye flamers, welcome screamers.

Well that settles it then, flamers are the worst unit ever now they suffer an extra -1 to hit and aren't strength 5 anymore.

Pedneault
26-07-2012, 13:50
And everyone happily ignores their buff, the warpflame rule thing making them better against multiwound models and them being special choice.

Roll a D6 for every wounds not saved. On a 6 you do D3 more wounds to the units, on a 1 you give them 6+ regen for the rest of the game.

Jind_Singh
26-07-2012, 14:34
I like the sounds of the new look flamers - if anything ALL armies need more of these kinds of units - they have a useful function in the game, they still have Str 4 shooting which is nice, and they have a funky rule that will add some zest to the game - and they won't be crowding out the rare choices.

Now for their so called nerfs - being str 5 was always stupid - a stupid oversight - and glad it's been corrected!
Multiple shoots modifier - again a decent one - having just come back from a weekend tournament I saw what six of those buggers were doing - they were deadly! Sure we can all sit down and use standard deviations, etc, to work out average hits, etc - but dice is dice - and far too often they roll an insane number of hits in one round of shooting - and they cause a world of hurt! Then all of a sudden that no modifier for multiple shots becomes HUGE!

I can still a valid use for them with the army book - and I hope they keep revising books like this, it's fantastic!

Lord Dan
26-07-2012, 15:15
I suppose I'll help poor Dan out. Since them shooting 0 shots is not possible, then they have a potential of 6-36 shots, the middle being 21, not 18.

There it is, thanks Koyo.

Midnight math is no fun!

vinny t
26-07-2012, 15:24
"On a 1 the unit gets 6+ Regen" That has to be one of the dumbest things GW has ever thought of. I want to see the rules justification for flaming shooting giving a unit Regeneration. Not to mention the fact that it is super good for the target unit. Units like Grave Guard, Dwarf Warriors, Swordsmasters, White Lions, will maybe have 2 models die to Flamers shooting and in return might get a Regeneration save. All this for the discount price of 240 points!

Honestly this just reeks of the new 40k release, nerfing commonly used units and making new units really good.

Flamers are now a shooting unit that is pretty awful at shooting, a combat unit that is pretty poor in combat, and their mobility is wasted if you want any chance of shooting with them. For 240 points there are much better units you could buy.

This isn't 7th edition anymore. Flamers were slightly undercosted and maybe a tad owerpowered but they were primarily a support unit. I never saw a game that was decided by Flamers. All they did was prevent chaff from getting in the Bloodletters' way. Now all they can hope to do is try to knock off a wound here or there.

Also I'm pissed because I just bought some more Flamers and now I learn that they suck. :rolleyes:

Soundwave
26-07-2012, 15:34
It is going to be ok,now you will have to buy a soul grinder for some decent shooting....................

shelfunit.
26-07-2012, 15:42
"On a 1 the unit gets 6+ Regen" That has to be one of the dumbest things GW has ever thought of. I want to see the rules justification for flaming shooting giving a unit Regeneration. Not to mention the fact that it is super good for the target unit. Units like Grave Guard, Dwarf Warriors, Swordsmasters, White Lions, will maybe have 2 models die to Flamers shooting and in return might get a Regeneration save. All this for the discount price of 240 points!

Welcome to theworld of Tzeench - the changer of ways.


Honestly this just reeks of balancing commonly used overpowered units.

Fixed that for you.


Flamers are now a shooting unit that is pretty awful at shooting, a combat unit that is pretty poor in combat, and their mobility is wasted if you want any chance of shooting with them. For 240 points there are much better units you could buy.

Rubbish. They are a shooting unit that is now on par with most other shooting units, still better in combat than mst shooting units. Of course there are better units you can buy, this is still Daemons after all.


This isn't 7th edition anymore. Flamers were slightly undercosted and maybe a tad owerpowered but they were primarily a support unit. I never saw a game that was decided by Flamers. All they did was prevent chaff from getting in the Bloodletters' way. Now all they can hope to do is try to knock off a wound here or there.

They were a vastly over powered unit that could destroy whole units before they were halfway across the battlefield. Now they fill their harrying rol perfectly.


Also I'm pissed because I just bought some more Flamers and now I learn that they suck. :rolleyes:

Welcome to the world of balanced armies at last.

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 16:13
Flamers are now a shooting unit that is pretty awful at shooting, a combat unit that is pretty poor in combat,

that's odd isn't it? Flamers combat unit that is pretty poor in combat? But flamers are not a combat unit. They're a shooting unit that is vastly more powerful in combat than most other shooting units. Even at -1 str, 2 str4 attacks at I4 is no laughing matter for a shooting unit. Especially if they are doing their support'ey job, any enemy fast cav and warmachine hunters and such will probably engage them somewhere to the sides, and be a fair distance away from their general and BSB too, so a better chance of failing their fear test.

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 16:21
It is an interesting one. Release a new plastic kit of a heavily popular part of the army... And release rules that will necessarily make them less popular.

I voted "a little far" I think all of the changes are fair and justified but as usual GW finds three ways to fix something and implements them all. Essentially -1 BS really cuts their shooting capacity down to very reasonable levels. The -1 S seems reasonable also, but by this point the points increase feels like a kick in the teeth. I used to take flamers in max-cheese lists and I don't think I'll take them ever now. Then again if I ran a pure Tzeentch list they'd still be viable, if not brilliant anymore, so they're probably closer to balanced than they were before... Just a bit too far on the nerf side I think.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 17:33
Can someone please explain to me where they are finding the new rules for the Daemons of Chaos?

With that said, I dont think competitive players will take Flamers anymore. I limited myself to 1 unit of 6. This 1 unit wont be in my army no longer because of how terrible they have become. I did the mathhammer a few pages back, and I dont understand why people think killing 2 T3 models (without them taking saves) with a unit of 6 flamers is "fair"

Even with their "Chance to do D3 wounds" I believe this make the game more luck and less strategy.

Andy p
26-07-2012, 17:35
Im still wondering why they needed two separate sets for the same thing? Because they only just made flamers into finecast...and now they release another set as well?

Incidentally are the new ones plastic, I cant remember. I do remember that they are a bit...sharp edged with their flame design.

Belkoft
26-07-2012, 17:38
OK I had to register just to say this.

Flamers were overpowered in 7th, but in 8th they were only a good unit, taking a few models each turn from shooting. now, 6 flamers will be doing roughly 2 wounds on t4 models per round, against t6 doing 1 wound per round... good game... especially for 240 points.

They went from a good unit that most armies considered taking, for the main reason they were versatile, now, they cant shoot, and opponents wont be put off charging them with chaff because they arent any good in combat, ok they are not a combat unit, but neither are they more than 6 models, so they don't have staying power. once they get charged it's over for them, where as say a unit of archers could flee, or managed to hold and then get support from an additional unit.

At the end of the day there is no reason to take flamers, making them special only makes it possible to take more of a bad unit.

The people that are saying this was a fair nerf must have a very skewed view on reality, because GW did this for a reason. As I said before, most daemon players have flamers, making them useless means those daemon players will have to buy something new. And just to be on the safe side they have made a unit that has never seen competitive play probably the best unit in the army, and at a similar cost.

It's obvious this was done on purpose as that is their business model, those who say this is a justified nerf... well I honestly don't know what to say to you, you must live in your own little world to think that flamers are now balanced.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 17:45
I like the comment above

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 17:50
I know you do, halfblood, I know you do. Personally I like Lord dan's comment from the rumour thread better ;)


They went from a good unit that most armies considered taking, for the main reason they were versatile, now, they cant shoot, and opponents wont be put off charging them with chaff because they arent any good in combat, ok they are not a combat unit, but neither are they more than 6 models, so they don't have staying power. once they get charged it's over for them, where as say a unit of archers could flee, or managed to hold and then get support from an additional unit.

The difference between str5 to str4 is not one of "niiiice" to "absolute, pure unadultered grabage". Unless your flamers are regularly charged by knights and tough infantry, with 2 str4 attacks each they're still going to be a menace for any other chaff or warmachine hunting unit. You're grossly underestimating what a 2-wound T4, 5+ wardsave 2 I4 str4 attack model can do in combat. For a unit that is supposed to be a shooting, supporting unit, those stats are godlike.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 17:53
You seem to forget that they are Ws2

Dominatrix
26-07-2012, 17:54
I did some calculations a while back to show what kind of (laughable) damage 6 flamers can do to a hydra (a model that costs roughly the same). "People" are not interested in calculations and facts. It is much more fun to offer some anecdotal evidence of how a flamer unit decimated a thousand models rolling nothing but sixes and thus deserves the nerfs. Or how they are oh so much better than other shooting units, nevermind the fact they cost twice as much. I think it is residual anguish from last edition and people finding it difficult to change their minds no matter the facts. Noone will argue that flamers needed a nerf, but as always GW decided to overcompensate and people jumped on the chance to express their ********.

GodlessM
26-07-2012, 17:55
Why am I not surprised? A week ago they were OP. Now they take a slight hit and people are saying GW went overboard? Make up yer mind people for crying out loud.

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 17:56
Can someone please explain to me where they are finding the new rules for the Daemons of Chaos?
The rules will be in a leaflet packaged with the upcomming White Dwarf, some people have it early it seems.


With that said, I dont think competitive players will take Flamers anymore. I limited myself to 1 unit of 6. This 1 unit wont be in my army no longer because of how terrible they have become. I did the mathhammer a few pages back, and I dont understand why people think killing 2 T3 models (without them taking saves) with a unit of 6 flamers is "fair"

Well, let's have a look at the new Flamers and compare them to Leadbelchers.

Flamers have: BS4
Leadbelchers have: BS3
Verdict - equal, since the Leadbelchers don't suffer multiple shots.

Shooting range, strength
Flamers have S4, flaming, 18" range BUT can march and shoot
Leadbelchers have S4 AP
Verdict - pretty equal, flamers have an equivalent long range and slightly better effective "short range" (21" vs ogre's 18") but have to move physically closer to benefit from it.

Combat stats:
Leadbelchers are +1WS, +1W, +1A, get ranks/steadfast and the advantages of MI (stomp, 3 supporting attacks).
Flamers are +2I and have a daemonic save and the advantages of skirmishers (free reform, stubborn in woods).
Verdict: Leadbelchers win hands down I think.

Points:
Leadbelchers cost about 15% more.
Verdict: Leadbelchers really don't cost that much more for 50% more wounds and attacks.

Are there any viable uses for Flamers?

Well, they can still shoot chaff. If you can start within 21" of a chaff unit, you can get within short range of them. Still -1 for moving and -1 for multiple shots, but taking a unit of 3 they should still achieve enough wounds to take out a sabretusk, a unit of 6 should take out most chaff units up to a pumba. While a unit of 6 won't be able to take more than about a wound off a Hydra, if the Soulgrinder gives us a cannon (or maybe two!), that should be enough to strip regen and then smack them in the face with a cannonball.

I don't think either of these roles makes them a "must have" but certainly they still have some value. I do agree that the nerf went too far. -1S and +5 points was pretty fair ... but the multiple shot penalty really hurts them.

Then again, it seems like GW is dead set to kill ballistic skill shooting. With the rather inexplicable raising of the points of missile troops in the Empire list when they were pretty overpriced in the old book, BS shooting seems to have a premium set upon it. Why, no idea, but it does seem to be consistent. Leadbelchers are one of the best now and even then I rarely see Leadbelchers in OK lists. I take them from time to time and they're merely "okay".

Lord Dan
26-07-2012, 18:00
I've seen the "2 wounds against a T4 opponent" thing thrown around a bit, and wanted to clarify something:

With -1 to hit: 21 shots, 10.5 hits, 5.25 wounds.
With -2 to hit: 21 shots, 7 hits, 3.5 wounds.
With -3 to hit: 21 shots, 3.5 hits, 1.75 wounds.

Obviously subtract wounds based on armor saves, though in my opinion if you're firing on high armor opponents you're doing it wrong. You can see here that it isn't until you need 6's to hit (presumably from multiple shots, moving, and long range) that you only do two wounds. Obviously against T3 opponents things improve somewhat:

-1 to hit: 21 shots, 10.5 hits, 7 wounds.
-2 to hit: 21 shots, 7 hits, 4.66 wounds.
-3 to hit: 21 shots, 3.5 hits, 2.33 wounds.

The trick here is to keep your negative modifiers low, which means that you can't run around firing hail mary shots at units in buildings. Interestingly the main complaint about flamers seems to be that they can't obliterate whole units anymore, and that you now must choose softer targets to take down instead. It seems, to me, that these changes have moved flamers to the role in which they were intended, which is a harassing support unit in an army of CC monsters.

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 18:08
The people that are saying this was a fair nerf must have a very skewed view on reality, because GW did this for a reason. As I said before, most daemon players have flamers, making them useless means those daemon players will have to buy something new. And just to be on the safe side they have made a unit that has never seen competitive play probably the best unit in the army, and at a similar cost.
But... they are just releasing a plastic kit. These rules accompany the plastic kit. It makes plenty of sense to make a crap unit people don't have (screamers) and make them plastic with improved rules to ensure people take them! Totally get that. If they released Plaguebearers and buffed Plaguebearers but nerfed the Bloodletter rules, I could see that (everyone has Bloodletters - need to get them to buy Plaguebearers now!).

But to spend a large amount of money making a plastic kit of models people are in demand for because of good rules and release a nerf to those models... and GW are doing it because they're money grabbing gits? :eyebrows:

The first time practically in living memory that GW releases new rules for a unit generally considered overpowered even though it might actually hurt sales of the new plastic kit... I think they deserve kudos, even if the knife of balance cut too deep.


Why am I not surprised? A week ago they were OP. Now they take a slight hit and people are saying GW went overboard? Make up yer mind people for crying out loud.
Godless, what are you talking about? It is perfectly possible for a unit to be overpowered, nerfed strongly and then become underpowered or vice versa. It happens all the time in codex updates. Starcannon - all over the place, over-nerfed and then never seen again. Assault cannons, storm shields, too bad, improved too much and all over the place. Happens in WFB too. Example: well, pretty much all of Ogres, even their core is considered a bit good relative to all the other 8th books despite all that they got from the old book was a points break of about 5 points.

AmaroK
26-07-2012, 18:16
The demon players crying for the nerf are making look bad to all demon players, really. Even with the nerf, you have a unit that cause fear (and considering flamers should be an anti-chaff unit operating out of the leadership bubbles, this isnīt pointless), inmune to psychology and unbreakable (under the unstability rules, but unbreakable), with a built in +5 ward save, able to march & shoot (comparing them to thunderers and leadbelchers in this regard is not even getting close), able to generate a massive load of str 4 shoots and use it even in a stand & shoot reaction, and now, if you get a 6 wounding, you make d3 wounds (hello high toughness monsters with almost no save like spynxes).

And the drawbacks are that you have modifiers for multiple shoots and moving in a BS 4 unit (oh noes, flamers will have to think about their positioning instead of crossing the board like headless chicken killing everything); If you get a 1 to wound the unit gets a regen, and if the unit already had regen, it improves it 1 point (4+ regen becomes 3+ regen). But if flamers attack are still flaming attacks, why would you want regen anyways, its negated :P And finally, they have str 4 instead of 5 in close combat (omg, a shooting unit with just strenght 4, what an offense!)

All in all, complaining about how flamers are after the nerf is just wanting them to be overpowered. As they are now they are ok (and surely way more than ok), and as they should have been: a supporting shooting unit in an army with almost no ranged attacks, able to clean up chaff and now big monsters (Im afraid with a lucky volley this could be proven too much, but I have to see it in action) and to operate on its own, but by no means able to clean up big rank & file units like nothing in 1-2 turns.

Emrico
26-07-2012, 18:20
Im still wondering why they needed two separate sets for the same thing? Because they only just made flamers into finecast...and now they release another set as well?

Incidentally are the new ones plastic, I cant remember. I do remember that they are a bit...sharp edged with their flame design.

Flamers have been in Finecast for a year. They were one of the first Daemon models to go to Finecast.

Jim

Belkoft
26-07-2012, 18:27
The difference between str5 to str4 is not one of "niiiice" to "absolute, pure unadultered grabage". Unless your flamers are regularly charged by knights and tough infantry, with 2 str4 attacks each they're still going to be a menace for any other chaff or warmachine hunting unit. You're grossly underestimating what a 2-wound T4, 5+ wardsave 2 I4 str4 attack model can do in combat. For a unit that is supposed to be a shooting, supporting unit, those stats are godlike.

The thing besides the WS2 you're forgetting is that they aren't a combat unit, they are given that stat line because of the points they cost. if they get charged, and lose combat, in all likelihood they will probably pop due to instability, the strength 5 was there to make people think twice about charging them. I agree strength 4 is nothing to be sniffed at, but a lot more units will be willing to charge them... which has an additional detrimental effect, people wont want to bunker their HoTz in a unit that can get charged and easily lose combat, it now makes taking a horror bunker more cost effective. Which is saying something because of how poor they are in 8th.


I've seen the "2 wounds against a T4 opponent" thing thrown around a bit, and wanted to clarify something:

With -1 to hit: 21 shots, 10.5 hits, 5.25 wounds.
With -2 to hit: 21 shots, 7 hits, 3.5 wounds.
With -3 to hit: 21 shots, 3.5 hits, 1.75 wounds.

Obviously subtract wounds based on armor saves, though in my opinion if you're firing on high armor opponents you're doing it wrong. You can see here that it isn't until you need 6's to hit (presumably from multiple shots, moving, and long range) that you only do two wounds. Obviously against T3 opponents things improve somewhat:

-1 to hit: 21 shots, 10.5 hits, 7 wounds.
-2 to hit: 21 shots, 7 hits, 4.66 wounds.
-3 to hit: 21 shots, 3.5 hits, 2.33 wounds.

Yeah that's the calculations I got myself, but these results are pretty accurate, as you will always have -1 from multiple shots, the majority of the time they will need to move due to the range issues flamers have, and because they are a shooting unit, you dont in all honesty want to be within 9" of the enemy... meaning you will be rolling 6's to hit... just pray the're isn't any skirmishers... likewise with stand and shoot, you don't get the - move and shoot, but you get the - for getting charged. so 6's the majority of the time, ok, so once or twice you will be able to hit on 5's... thats still not worth 240 points.


The trick here is to keep your negative modifiers low, which means that you can't run around firing hail mary shots at units in buildings. Interestingly the main complaint about flamers seems to be that they can't obliterate whole units anymore, and that you now must choose softer targets to take down instead. It seems, to me, that these changes have moved flamers to the role in which they were intended, which is a harassing support unit in an army of CC monsters.

They have never been able to obliterate whole units, well... maybe small units if you're facing an MSU army or in 7th when units were smaller (this again comes back to residual hatred that daemons got in 7th, because they were the new kids on the block) But the comment you made came off as flippant, that they can just do one round of shooting and kill a horde... its just not possible. They could kill chaff reliably. Now, its barely possible to do that... you will have to take many more flamers, at a higher cost, to do the same thing that they did before... which was support.

Pedneault
26-07-2012, 18:27
Why would I spend 240 points on chaff hunters ?

Tyranno1
26-07-2012, 18:29
You seem to forget that they are Ws2

Nobody forgot this. Its just that all the units that could possibly fight flamers early on into the game that I can think of will have ws4 at the very most, so flamers will still be hitting on a 4, 3 if the unit fails its fear test.

And being hit on 3s is no big loss when they are that durable for shooty unit.

AmaroK
26-07-2012, 18:30
Why would I spend 240 points on chaff hunters ?

Because controlling the enemy chaff is the key to win. Oh, I forgot, people spend 240 points to obliterate units, nvm And you donīt have to buy all 6 flamers, do you? :P

decker_cky
26-07-2012, 18:31
Why would I spend 240 points on chaff hunters ?

They're still fast and decent in combat. I think that they did do 1 nerf too many. The -1 S was obvious, and either making them worse at shooting or increasing their price made sense. I'm still confident that they're very useable.

They're definitely a nice target for harmonic convergence now.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 18:32
The demon players crying for the nerf are making look bad to all demon players, really. Even with the nerf, you have a unit that cause fear (and considering flamers should be an anti-chaff unit operating out of the leadership bubbles, this isnīt pointless), inmune to psychology and unbreakable (under the unstability rules, but unbreakable), with a built in +5 ward save, able to march & shoot (comparing them to thunderers and leadbelchers in this regard is not even getting close), able to generate a massive load of str 4 shoots and use it even in a stand & shoot reaction, and now, if you get a 6 wounding, you make d3 wounds (hello high toughness monsters with almost no save like spynxes).

And the drawbacks are that you have modifiers for multiple shoots and moving in a BS 4 unit (oh noes, flamers will have to think about their positioning instead of crossing the board like headless chicken killing everything); If you get a 1 to wound the unit gets a regen, and if the unit already had regen, it improves it 1 point (4+ regen becomes 3+ regen). But if flamers attack are still flaming attacks, why would you want regen anyways, its negated :P And finally, they have str 4 instead of 5 in close combat (omg, a shooting unit with just strenght 4, what an offense!)

All in all, complaining about how flamers are after the nerf is just wanting them to be overpowered. As they are now they are ok (and surely way more than ok), and as they should have been: a supporting shooting unit in an army with almost no ranged attacks, able to clean up chaff and now big monsters (Im afraid with a lucky volley this could be proven too much, but I have to see it in action) and to operate on its own, but by no means able to clean up big rank & file units like nothing in 1-2 turns.


They are terrible facts are fact.

They are daemons therefore they get all the bonuses of being a daemon this is obviously factored into their cost. 40 points for a Flamers is pretty poor.


Lets say against T5

-1 Modifier 21 Shots 3.48 wounds (Without saves)
-2 Modifier 21 Shots 2.334 Wounds (Without saves)
-3 Modifier 21 Shots 1.14 wounds (without saves)

Then you look at this, they now cost 240 points, then you look most of the time you will be either suffering from long range, or having to move and shoot. Therefore the magic number is -2 modifier. If the creature has a
5+ save damage output drops to 1.9 (This includes -1 reduction to armor)
4+ save damage output drops to 1.5 (This includes -1 reduction to armor)

Private_SeeD
26-07-2012, 18:32
I voted for 'Is just right' on a few occasions I've seen units of flamers totally obliterate whole units and like a previous post mentioned you'd see lists that were pure nurgle/khorne/slannesh list but still had flamers tag'in along for the ride. I don't think they've been nerfed too harshly, they've jst been balanced out

AmaroK
26-07-2012, 18:53
Lets say against T5???

Their natural target now is either low toughtness chaff units (light cavalry, redirectors of any kind, throaway units etc) that are in no way T5, but mostly T3 and some T4. Choosing to make mathhammer against T5 is choosing an unfavourable target to prove they suck. But leadbelchers, thunderers and most of the str 4 shooting troop would get similar results. The other new role, hunting T6+ big monster is not considered in your maths, and scoring "just" 2 sixes to wound on a volley against that kind of monsters can kill or cripple them severely. I donīt know what the odds are, but the psychological aspect plays a big role in the game.

As I said before, you donīt have to take the full 6 load unit now, they are in the special slot. You can take 3 smaller units, being able to cover more areas across the boardand not having to move to shoot. But this require some thinking on positioning the flamers, how could this be....

Flamers should have been a support shooting unit in an army with barely any shooting but big strenghts in other areas (CC, magic, immunity to psychology & fear...) But demon players got used to have the best (or one of the best) shooting units point per point. Now that they got in line with other shooting units, and eventhough they keep most of their other strenghts, the flamers are useless crap...

Lord Dan
26-07-2012, 18:56
I donīt know what the odds are, but the psychological aspect plays a big role in the game.

-1 to hit: 21 shots, 10.5 hits, 1.75 wounds.
-2 to hit: 21 shots, 7 hits, 1.16 wounds.
-3 to hit: 21 shots, 3.5 hits, .58 wounds.

Matt.Wood88
26-07-2012, 19:01
Has anyone yet realised that they are skirmishers so can move and shoot without penalty?
Just my two cents.
I will still take them in my daemon army, because I love the new models and always loved what they represent :)
Cheers
Matt

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 19:04
Skirmishers can march and shoot... But the -1 penalty does indeed apply.

sulla
26-07-2012, 19:05
It would have been if Flamers weren't filth.

You don't balance things by making everything into filth to go alongside the one thing that is already filth.
You tone down the filth....hence the second paragraph of my post...

shelfunit.
26-07-2012, 19:08
Has anyone yet realised that they are skirmishers so can move and shoot without penalty?
Just my two cents.
I will still take them in my daemon army, because I love the new models and always loved what they represent :)
Cheers
Matt

Sorry, can't find that rule in the book.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 19:08
I am pretty sure Flamers are "not in line" with other shooting units. Leadbelchers for Example.

Like someone said earliar GW hit models that Daemon players used the most like Flamers, and they probably hit Bloodletters( I have not seen the new stat/cost for them yet) too. This was to cause a shift to other Daemonic units and will ultimately generate more revenue for GW. I am a fan of Khorne and Tzeentch so I hope Screamers/ Bloodcrushers are more valuable I have always want to run a few of them.

AmaroK
26-07-2012, 19:11
-1 to hit: 21 shots, 10.5 hits, 1.75 wounds.
-2 to hit: 21 shots, 7 hits, 1.16 wounds.
-3 to hit: 21 shots, 3.5 hits, .58 wounds.

If you are saying those are the chances to get a 6 to wound after those modifiers to hit, Iīll take them gladly, considering you get d3 wounds with them :)


I am pretty sure Flamers are "not in line" with other shooting units. Leadbelchers for Example.

Like someone said earliar GW hit models that Daemon players used the most like Flamers, and they probably hit Bloodletters( I have not seen the new stat/cost for them yet) too. This was to cause a shift to other Daemonic units and will ultimately generate more revenue for GW. I am a fan of Khorne and Tzeentch so I hope Screamers/ Bloodcrushers are more valuable I have always want to run a few of them.

Leadbelchers canīt march and shoot; canīt stand and shoot; canīt reform when moving; arenīt immune to panic (in fact they are just L7); they donīt have a ward save; they are easier to be hit by enemy shooting. And they cost more or less points. Why are the flamers so much worse than leadbelchers?

Belkoft
26-07-2012, 19:13
But... they are just releasing a plastic kit. These rules accompany the plastic kit. It makes plenty of sense to make a crap unit people don't have (screamers) and make them plastic with improved rules to ensure people take them! Totally get that. If they released Plaguebearers and buffed Plaguebearers but nerfed the Bloodletter rules, I could see that (everyone has Bloodletters - need to get them to buy Plaguebearers now!).

But to spend a large amount of money making a plastic kit of models people are in demand for because of good rules and release a nerf to those models... and GW are doing it because they're money grabbing gits? :eyebrows:

The first time practically in living memory that GW releases new rules for a unit generally considered overpowered even though it might actually hurt sales of the new plastic kit... I think they deserve kudos, even if the knife of balance cut too deep.

The difference is, have you seen the new models, to me they look inferior to the finecast models. They aren't as bad as cannon hands, but with the firecracker look they have going on it doesn't strike fear into the enemy.

Nerfing the unit should be enough to put off people buying more flamers, but it seems GW really didn't want people buying more flamers... which will come back when we get our 9th (yes that far ahead) flamers will magically become better... when people have sold all their flamers and then have to buy new models. It's a long term business model but its practical.


The demon players crying for the nerf are making look bad to all demon players, really. Even with the nerf, you have a unit that cause fear (and considering flamers should be an anti-chaff unit operating out of the leadership bubbles, this isnīt pointless), inmune to psychology and unbreakable (under the unstability rules, but unbreakable), with a built in +5 ward save, able to march & shoot (comparing them to thunderers and leadbelchers in this regard is not even getting close), able to generate a massive load of str 4 shoots and use it even in a stand & shoot reaction, and now, if you get a 6 wounding, you make d3 wounds (hello high toughness monsters with almost no save like spynxes).

Please look at the math before commenting that we are all crying over nothing. d3 wounds? no... 1 wound my friend, if your lucky. With sentences like "able to generate massive load of str 4 shots." you sound like the kind of person that stands at the table and gasps when i roll so many dice... has it even occurred to you that the shots will barely do anything because of the nerfs?


And the drawbacks are that you have modifiers for multiple shoots and moving in a BS 4 unit (oh noes, flamers will have to think about their positioning instead of crossing the board like headless chicken killing everything); If you get a 1 to wound the unit gets a regen, and if the unit already had regen, it improves it 1 point (4+ regen becomes 3+ regen). But if flamers attack are still flaming attacks, why would you want regen anyways, its negated :P And finally, they have str 4 instead of 5 in close combat (omg, a shooting unit with just strenght 4, what an offense!)

Right, Daemons are a close combat army... of course we are going to walk across the field, we can't gun line it up, and wait for them to come to us, we have to move to them, so as you put it, we have to cross the board like headless chickens... as for killing everything? have you played daemons in 8th? they can kill chaff... thats what they are their for though... supporting the big units.

as for the regeneration issue you addressed, right, flamers shoot trolls, trolls charged/get charged by bloodletters, that's a 3+ regeneration save... 4+ is bad enough... yes if we keep hitting them with flaming then its not an issue, but what happens when you can't?


All in all, complaining about how flamers are after the nerf is just wanting them to be overpowered. As they are now they are ok (and surely way more than ok), and as they should have been: a supporting shooting unit in an army with almost no ranged attacks, able to clean up chaff and now big monsters (Im afraid with a lucky volley this could be proven too much, but I have to see it in action) and to operate on its own, but by no means able to clean up big rank & file units like nothing in 1-2 turns.

They are not OK, I agree they we're slightly too good, the points increase and the -1str would of been enough... even increasing the points by 10 would of been justified. But the making it so the shooting unit in the army is so bad that there is no point in taking them...

Also, if you have seen someone kill big monsters and kill big rank and file units like nothing in 1-2 turns using nothing but flamers. Check their dice. they simply shouldn't be able to do this on average unless for those two turns the big monster did nothing but stand there, and the opponent do nothing in terms of magic. Or the daemon player rolled all sixes for number of shots, then all 6's for hits... which is a worst/best case scenario depending on your point of view. I've never seen that happen, I've got lucky and had 5's and a couple 6's, but then fluffed my hits. I've had plenty of times when I've rolled under 10 shots...

People always seem to focus on what is the maximum they can do. which in all honesty is a lot, 36 shots from 6 models is ridiculously good, but lets be truthful... that very very very rarely happens, you may of been unfortunate and been on the receiving end of one of these godly dice throws, and feel that flamers are too good and over powered... but it was just dice, that's all it was. we suffer from it in return, small units which can be more easily destroyed that bigger units. I'm not forgetting the 5++ save or the t4, but i do remember that they are WS2, anything decent gets in combat with them, they will pop. but that's the same for all shooting units...

At the end of the day, they were slightly better than the average shooting unit, because of the skirmisher rule and flaming attacks. now they are among the worst shooting. We're not crying because there was a nerf, we're crying because it went too far. A lot of the daemon players would of been happy if they had been fairly balanced. But you can't honestly sit there spout regurgitated nonsense that you've heard from someone else and expect the daemon players to think, "oh hang on, Amarok is right. Flamers needed nerfing into unplayability, while their at it, why not nerf the rest of the book." why would daemons be happy at losing one of their favorite and most versatile units?

Phazael
26-07-2012, 19:19
Personally, I would have just changed them to three shots and S4 in close combat and called it a day. That would have made them good, but predictable. GW went way overboard, but I doubt it will alter sales because anyone playing Daemons owned a dozen long ago.

Lord Dan
26-07-2012, 19:22
My vote would have been for S3 in combat, no stand and shoot. Same point cost.

Andy p
26-07-2012, 19:24
Flamers have been in Finecast for a year. They were one of the first Daemon models to go to Finecast.

Jim

Doesnt time fly by? Theory of relativity and all that...

But in my defence my army has sets which are +12 years old now, so 1 year isn't an immense amount of time to me. Still doesn't answer my question on the need for two sets of one unit though.

Belkoft
26-07-2012, 19:33
Lets say against T5???

Their natural target now is either low toughtness chaff units (light cavalry, redirectors of any kind, throaway units etc) that are in no way T5, but mostly T3 and some T4. Choosing to make mathhammer against T5 is choosing an unfavourable target to prove they suck. But leadbelchers, thunderers and most of the str 4 shooting troop would get similar results. The other new role, hunting T6+ big monster is not considered in your maths, and scoring "just" 2 sixes to wound on a volley against that kind of monsters can kill or cripple them severely. I donīt know what the odds are, but the psychological aspect plays a big role in the game.

You chose the t5 by giving and example of a sphinx, also lower toughness targets have already been calculated, 1.75 wounds for toughness 4, and 2.33 for toughness 3. still not great is it?


As I said before, you donīt have to take the full 6 load unit now, they are in the special slot. You can take 3 smaller units, being able to cover more areas across the boardand not having to move to shoot. But this require some thinking on positioning the flamers, how could this be....

I'm starting to think you don't play with terrain on you're board... you nearly always have to move. as for taking more? are you mad? why would you take more of a unit that is completely ineffectual now, and costs more?


Flamers should have been a support shooting unit in an army with barely any shooting but big strenghts in other areas (CC, magic, immunity to psychology & fear...) But demon players got used to have the best (or one of the best) shooting units point per point. Now that they got in line with other shooting units, and eventhough they keep most of their other strenghts, the flamers are useless crap...

most of their other strengths... i assume you are talking about the immune to psychology and 5++ save and fear? that all daemons get, i could get 20 horrors for that much. which makes a better bunker for hotz, or 20 bloodletters, which makes a better killy unit, or 4 fiends, which would make better chaff hunters. face it, with the changes to flamers, they are pretty much good for nothing.


If you are saying those are the chances to get a 6 to wound after those modifiers to hit, Iīll take them gladly, considering you get d3 wounds with them :)


you get a chance of doing d3 wounds... if you get lucky... if you get unlucky you give them regenerate

Urgat
26-07-2012, 19:34
"Raises hand"
I've changed my mind. Flamers, with their new rules, are now uterlly crappy. Please don't take them anymore. Please fill your special with the terrifying new screamers, they're going to destroy everything with their sub-par monstrous infantry profile.
Thank you for your attention, that is all.

HalfBlood
26-07-2012, 19:38
Personally, I would have just changed them to three shots and S4 in close combat and called it a day. That would have made them good, but predictable. GW went way overboard, but I doubt it will alter sales because anyone playing Daemons owned a dozen long ago.

I was with you on this. 3 Shots a model S4 base and end it there.

It would be awesome if you could explain the new screamer profile for us :O

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 19:46
"Raises hand"
I've changed my mind. Flamers, with their new rules, are now uterlly crappy. Please don't take them anymore. Please fill your special with the terrifying new screamers, they're going to destroy everything with their sub-par monstrous infantry profile.
Thank you for your attention, that is all.

Ha no fear... Flamers are pretty much dead to me since Soulgrinders came to fantasy-land. I can get a mobile cannon powerhouse? Yes please. If they'd left flamers rare with no change in rules they'd still have some serious competition.

Emrico
26-07-2012, 19:52
Doesnt time fly by? Theory of relativity and all that...

But in my defence my army has sets which are +12 years old now, so 1 year isn't an immense amount of time to me. Still doesn't answer my question on the need for two sets of one unit though.

The Finecast Flamers are now discontinued so only the plastics will be available in the future.

Jim

AmaroK
26-07-2012, 20:11
Please look at the math before commenting that we are all crying over nothing. d3 wounds? no... 1 wound my friend, if your lucky. With sentences like "able to generate massive load of str 4 shots." you sound like the kind of person that stands at the table and gasps when i roll so many dice... has it even occurred to you that the shots will barely do anything because of the nerfs?

First of all, the rules say that if you get a 6 to wound against large targets, you get d3 wounds. So yes, its d3 wounds. Secondly, I own demon of chaos, and I know what they can do. They generate massive shooting, you want it or not. Shoots will do well if you position your flamers and use the rest of your army so you dont have to move them so much. Yes, you need to synergize your army. Yes, you canīt walk around killing units in 1 turn. But you donīt have to hit with plenty of modifiers always. Its about player skill now, not overpowered rules.


Right, Daemons are a close combat army... of course we are going to walk across the field, we can't gun line it up, and wait for them to come to us, we have to move to them, so as you put it, we have to cross the board like headless chickens... as for killing everything? have you played daemons in 8th? they can kill chaff... thats what they are their for though... supporting the big units.

as for the regeneration issue you addressed, right, flamers shoot trolls, trolls charged/get charged by bloodletters, that's a 3+ regeneration save... 4+ is bad enough... yes if we keep hitting them with flaming then its not an issue, but what happens when you can't?

The headless chicken comment was about the flamers unit, not about the whole army. And if you get charged by trolls, you are a shooting unit, you shouldnīt be able to win easily vs a strong cc unit.


They are not OK, I agree they we're slightly too good, the points increase and the -1str would of been enough... even increasing the points by 10 would of been justified. But the making it so the shooting unit in the army is so bad that there is no point in taking them...

Slighty good?? Slightly?? Then why everyone was taking all the flamers they could in their armies?


At the end of the day, they were slightly better than the average shooting unit, because of the skirmisher rule and flaming attacks. now they are among the worst shooting. We're not crying because there was a nerf, we're crying because it went too far. A lot of the daemon players would of been happy if they had been fairly balanced. But you can't honestly sit there spout regurgitated nonsense that you've heard from someone else and expect the daemon players to think, "oh hang on, Amarok is right. Flamers needed nerfing into unplayability, while their at it, why not nerf the rest of the book." why would daemons be happy at losing one of their favorite and most versatile units?

No, flamers werenīt slightly better than the average shooting unit, they were WAY better than most of the shooting units, and not only because of the skirmisher rule and flaming attacks, but because they: cause fear, inmune to panic, unbreakable under daemonic unstability, 5+ ward save, were insane in CC (2 wounds, str 5, T4) for a shooting unit, movement 6 (along with being skirmisher and a pretty long range for their shoots) and able to generate a load of shots. What you mentioned was just the cherry on top. I have demons myself and I barely fielded them because I felt they were way beyond the top, and so did my rivals. And about flamers being one of the favourite units of demons, it must have been after the (overpowered) 7th edition army book, because under Hordes of Chaos almost nobody took them (they were just support teams of horrors) and nobody ever claimed those were their favourites. Uber rules create fan favourites, it seems :P

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 20:14
Lets say against T5

-1 Modifier 21 Shots 3.48 wounds (Without saves)
-2 Modifier 21 Shots 2.334 Wounds (Without saves)
-3 Modifier 21 Shots 1.14 wounds (without saves)

Then you look at this, they now cost 240 points, then you look most of the time you will be either suffering from long range, or having to move and shoot. Therefore the magic number is -2 modifier. If the creature has a
5+ save damage output drops to 1.9 (This includes -1 reduction to armor)
4+ save damage output drops to 1.5 (This includes -1 reduction to armor)

Through the years of mathhammering I have realised something; whenever you do mathhammer, odds for anything that seems easy at first glance, become awkwardly low. Even an attack that needs a 2+ to hit and then a 2+ to wound, which sounds really easy to do, is only a 25/36 chance to succeed.

With that in mind, let's make a comparison to flamers.

Let's take that T5 example, using 6 flamers, opposite 24 dark elf crossbowmen. In a case when both move&fire at long range, both will need 6's hit, and the crossbows need 6's to wound, the flamers 5's;
flamers average 21 shots, hit 3.5 and wound 1.16
crossbows have 48 shots, hit 8 and wound 1.33

Seems pretty similar for the points to me.

AmaroK
26-07-2012, 20:28
You chose the t5 by giving and example of a sphinx, also lower toughness targets have already been calculated, 1.75 wounds for toughness 4, and 2.33 for toughness 3. still not great is it?


Actually, sphinx has T8, and it I took it as an example because anything but a cannon wounds it on 6īs and... oh, the flamers on 6īs make also d3 wounds instead of 1! Same goes for str 3-4 against T6 monsters. Worthless, I guess.

About the wounds against T4 and T3, make the calculations of other str3-4 shooting units and tell me if they do much better. I donīt think so, at least in most of the cases. (Edit: ty, The bearded one, you ninjaīed me :D)



I'm starting to think you don't play with terrain on you're board... you nearly always have to move. as for taking more? are you mad? why would you take more of a unit that is completely ineffectual now, and costs more?



More the opposite, I play with plenty of terrain. That made me think more where do I position my units to shoot or get shooted. And most of the ranged unit canīt move and shoot so happily. Using throwaway units, redirectors and synergizing with the rest of my army to get an extra free shooting round is what works for me (and for my rivals). Also, big monsters (which are a main target of flamers now) rarely have any cover, so in this regard, terrain isnīt that important.



most of their other strengths... i assume you are talking about the immune to psychology and 5++ save and fear? that all daemons get, i could get 20 horrors for that much. which makes a better bunker for hotz, or 20 bloodletters, which makes a better killy unit, or 4 fiends, which would make better chaff hunters. face it, with the changes to flamers, they are pretty much good for nothing.

Sure, all the demons get that, but most of the people also agree that a built in 5+ ward save, a unique break system and cause fear army wide were not payed enough in the 7th edition army book (which almost everyone agreed that was the most overpowered book in that edition by far), not factoring demon gifts, heralds, special characters etc I donīt fear 20 horrors nor 20 bloodletters more than 6 flamers, thats for sure. But as Urgat said, donīt field flamers :D


you get a chance of doing d3 wounds... if you get lucky... if you get unlucky you give them regenerate

If your shooting are flaming, the regeneration is negated. Its not like they get a wardsave or make them unbreakable after all.

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 20:31
It should also be noted that in 8th Ed books none of the BS shooting seems worthwhile, really the only exceptions seem to be poisoned (khalida, maneaters, goblins with banner). As I mentioned earlier empire shooting got stamped on hard and the flamers still don't seem that bad in comparison with handgunners.

Which isn't to say handgunners are good, or that flamers aren't now pretty rubbish. Slightly more useful than handgunners but definitely not a unit I'll bother with.

If they do D3 wounds on a 6 that's pretty good against monsters - but is it on the "to would" roll (which would be awesome) or on a seperate dice roll? One roll per wound or just one roll?

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 20:42
I believe it is 1 roll on a unit on which you inflicted wounds.

Urgat
26-07-2012, 20:42
Ha no fear... Flamers are pretty much dead to me since Soulgrinders came to fantasy-land. I can get a mobile cannon powerhouse?

You don't even know the rule for that canon :/ Besides as usual people will conclude that a ranged weapon on a melee monster is just a waste of point, whether you opt for melee or shooting.

Pedneault
26-07-2012, 20:44
Suposed to be unsaved wound, you roll a dice, on a 6 +d3 wounds, on a 1 6+ regeneration.

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 20:51
You don't even know the rule for that canon :/ Besides as usual people will conclude that a ranged weapon on a melee monster is just a waste of point, whether you opt for melee or shooting.

I don't but a cannon of any flavor is worth it's weight in gold to daemons. And I'm pretty sure hellcannon and ironblasters aren't considered a waste of points.

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 21:00
I don't but a cannon of any flavor is worth it's weight in gold to daemons. And I'm pretty sure hellcannon and ironblasters aren't considered a waste of points.

the dwarf flamecannon is, though. The soulgrinder does not necessarily have actual cannon-rules, we don't know yet what the upgrades might be, except that they are all 3 about 50pts and the soulgrinder can fire while moving.

Belkoft
26-07-2012, 21:01
First of all, the rules say that if you get a 6 to wound against large targets, you get d3 wounds. So yes, its d3 wounds. Secondly, I own demon of chaos, and I know what they can do. They generate massive shooting, you want it or not. Shoots will do well if you position your flamers and use the rest of your army so you dont have to move them so much. Yes, you need to synergize your army. Yes, you canīt walk around killing units in 1 turn. But you donīt have to hit with plenty of modifiers always. Its about player skill now, not overpowered rules.

sorry, i misunderstood you, i thought you was concentrating on the numbers of actually getting hits through, and not talking about warpfire. as it stands... you could do d3 wounds... but really, even if this was a constant buff, they still wouldnt be as good as they were.

I think people throw around overpowered, they were better than decent, but in no game was decided on flamers alone.


The headless chicken comment was about the flamers unit, not about the whole army. And if you get charged by trolls, you are a shooting unit, you shouldnīt be able to win easily vs a strong cc unit.

right so you don't move your flamers at all? you just keep them stationary the whole game? if so you're the first person to do so... you should want to be moving them up with your bloodletters to offer support in the flanks in cc, if your only using the flamers for shooting, you're doing it wrong, especially when they add so much more. and now with the nerfs, they can either choose to be left behind, and hope to get some shots off if an enemy unit is visable/within range... and thats still rolling on 5's... or they can do naff all damage in shooting and move to support the combat units


Slighty good?? Slightly?? Then why everyone was taking all the flamers they could in their armies?

Because they we're the only shooting in our army? had we had soulgrinder when we had decent flamers, it would of been a tough call which to take. we took them to deal with chaff, much the same way knights and other shooting units deal with them. you make it sound as though it was an auto win if we took flamers... they we're versatile, don't get me wrong, they we're good... but they weren't overpowered.


No, flamers werenīt slightly better than the average shooting unit, they were WAY better than most of the shooting units, and not only because of the skirmisher rule and flaming attacks, but because they: cause fear, inmune to panic, unbreakable under daemonic unstability, 5+ ward save, were insane in CC (2 wounds, str 5, T4) for a shooting unit, movement 6 (along with being skirmisher and a pretty long range for their shoots) and able to generate a load of shots. What you mentioned was just the cherry on top. I have demons myself and I barely fielded them because I felt they were way beyond the top, and so did my rivals. And about flamers being one of the favourite units of demons, it must have been after the (overpowered) 7th edition army book, because under Hordes of Chaos almost nobody took them (they were just support teams of horrors) and nobody ever claimed those were their favourites. Uber rules create fan favourites, it seems :P

I wish we had a unit that was bs1, that was a daemon... because according to you they would be overpowered as well... because they are a daemon. could you tell me, which units shooting units you considered worse than flamers, and which you consider worse shooting units now giving the nerfs?

I listed what made them a good shooting unit, you listed what made them a good unit in every aspect... and will you please shut up about generate loads of dice... they can also generate 6 dice... you never seem to want to mention that? i could get 26 handgunners for the points of 6 flamers... 26 shots, which on average is better than what flamers can produce... can range across the board so there's no need to move, have armour piercing, more wounds, can flee if gets charged. and people say handgunners are overpriced in 8th... yet on paper they are better.

I was obviously not on about hoards of chaos, i was talking about the unit we have just lost being a favourite, because they could shoot, if they replaced flamers with daemonic archers, I would take them, as they would be more reliable with shots, and do all the things you claim that makes flamers overpowered... and its not because they would be overpowered, its because they add something to the army that's needed.

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 21:08
i could get 26 handgunners for the points of 6 flamers... 26 shots, which on average is better than what flamers can produce... can range across the board so there's no need to move, have armour piercing, more wounds, can flee if gets charged. and people say handgunners are overpriced in 8th... yet on paper they are better.

They're easier to hit, wound and kill though, and even if some fast cav or an eagle gets into combat, they stand virtually no chance at all, while a unit of flamers will joyfully clobber that eagle or fast cav into the dirt. Handgunners are better when it comes to firing, but man.. do they sacrifice it in survivability

Belkoft
26-07-2012, 21:20
oh sorry, i didnt realise i couldn't flee with handgunners? and their is 26 of them... so 26 wounds rather than 12...

Lord Dan
26-07-2012, 21:21
i could get 26 handgunners for the points of 6 flamers... 26 shots, which on average is better than what flamers can produce... can range across the board so there's no need to move, have armour piercing, more wounds, can flee if gets charged. and people say handgunners are overpriced in 8th... yet on paper they are better.

Nah. 26 handgunners against a T4 opponent runs something like this:

4's to hit: 26 shots, 13 hits, 6.5 wounds.
5's to hit: 26 shots, 8.6 hits, 4.3 wounds.

If you recall Flamers get:

4's to hit: 21 shots, 10.5 hits, 5.25 wounds.
5's to hit: 21 shots, 7 hits, 3.5 wounds.

Now granted, Handgunners get armor piercing over the flamers, which makes them better against higher armor saves, and 6" of extra range. By contrast, the flamers have flaming attacks, can move and still fire, won't ever run, are decent in combat, have a higher toughness, skirmish, and come with a ward save.

theunwantedbeing
26-07-2012, 21:25
oh sorry, i didnt realise i couldn't flee with handgunners? and their is 26 of them... so 26 wounds rather than 12...

26 wounds at toughness 3 with no save.
St3 bows take 52 hits to kill all those handgunners compared to 54 to kill those 6 flamers, that is of course ignoring the fact that flamers are an extra -1 to hit due to skirmishing.
St4 shots take 38 hits to kill the handgunners and 35 hits to kill the flamers, pretty similar.
St5 shots take 31 hits to kill the handgunners and 26 hits to kill the flamers, this is where the flamers much lower wound count really starts to cause problems for them.

So checkmate mr.flamers-weren't-broken

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 21:26
oh sorry, i didnt realise i couldn't flee with handgunners? and their is 26 of them... so 26 wounds rather than 12...

Granted, they have the option to escape, but you can't always do so safely, and especially in an empire army there is a good chance you'r close enough to the table edge to drop off, but I think I prefer easily beating my assailant to death (and also S&S'ing) over running away and being out of the game for another turn.

Furthermore while there may be 26 wounds instead of 12, those 26 wounds have t3 and no save, instead of t4 and a 5+ wardsave.

Urgat
26-07-2012, 21:27
I don't but a cannon of any flavor is worth it's weight in gold to daemons. And I'm pretty sure hellcannon and ironblasters aren't considered a waste of points.

Yeah? I heard it's a weak grapeshot thing. I can't wait for people to wake up and smell the roses :p

The bearded one
26-07-2012, 21:33
Yeah? I heard it's a weak grapeshot thing. I can't wait for people to wake up and smell the roses :p

We do know the soulgrinder has 3 possible upgrades, but we have no idea what they are yet. That Danish guy ought to make another vid and carefully zoom in on all the rules :D

Dominatrix
26-07-2012, 21:35
Yeah? I heard it's a weak grapeshot thing. I can't wait for people to wake up and smell the roses :p

I read it is a grapeshot thing, with the option to upgrade it to a stonethrower or a cannon. That sounds intriguing especially if you consider the only other viable rare choice is fiends of slaanesh.

Urgat
26-07-2012, 21:47
Yeah, we also know any of those upgrades are about 50 pts, and since a SG price is already half-way between a giant and an arachnarok... I wonder how much pts people are prepared to pay for a glorified warmachine. And with 4 attacks, it's not even that impressive in combat to start with, especially with the enormous frontage it's gonna have. This "canon" really just sounds like a concession to the fact the model has one on the arm and so it had to have something to reflect it in the rules, but I highly doubt it's the purpose of the unit at all. You know, it's kind of like the spiderweb catapult of the arachnarok. I'd love it if it was a regular warmachine, but attached to an arach, it's useless.

Dominatrix
26-07-2012, 22:51
I see what you mean. But other than its shooting options I fail to see other uses for it. As you said its close combat stats are nothing to write home about. I am hoping the stonethrower upgrade is like the ability Kugath has, so it should be decent. Besides they have to make fantasy players buy the thing, so its rules should be good!! Or maybe the release of this leaflet in WD will have the same relation with the next Daemon armybook as the WoC WD list had with the last WoC armybook. A sign of things to come, but with a lot of things being different between the two.

Belkoft
26-07-2012, 22:58
Nah. 26 handgunners against a T4 opponent runs something like this:

4's to hit: 26 shots, 13 hits, 6.5 wounds.
5's to hit: 26 shots, 8.6 hits, 4.3 wounds.

If you recall Flamers get:

4's to hit: 21 shots, 10.5 hits, 5.25 wounds.
5's to hit: 21 shots, 7 hits, 3.5 wounds.

soo... handgunners are better at shooting. which was my point


Now granted, Handgunners get armor piercing over the flamers, which makes them better against higher armor saves, and 6" of extra range. By contrast, the flamers have flaming attacks, can move and still fire, won't ever run, are decent in combat, have a higher toughness, skirmish, and come with a ward save.

yes good call, flaming attacks/armour piercing... a special rule each to cancel themselves out
can move and fire this right here, is one of the reasons flamers we're better than average. but still, with the range from the handgunners there is much less need to move. the only real reason for them to be moving is to flee if something big and gribbly comes along that can destroy the unit in one go...
wont run away you're calling this a good thing? the last thing i want is my shooty unit tied up with a unit for a few turns. because while they are decent in combat, they are better at shooting
decent in combat they are often underestimated, but they are only a support unit, saying that, the handgunners stand a chance in combat, simply because of their numbers, oh they will likely get trounced, but lets say 6 flamers vs 26 handgunners while we're at it. (bit more favourable to flamers seeing as their major weekness is WS2) flamers charge in (again, lets favour flamers), 12 attacks, 6 hits, 5 wounds (pre nerf) 10 attacks, 6.66 hits, 1.11 wounds, 0.67 save hand gunners maybe cause 1 wounds, hand gunners have 4 ranks flamers charged. handgunners lose by 1... steadfast, handgunners can now get help the next turn. Hell lets do it the other way, say I didnt get a chance to reform the handgunners, still 5 wounds from flamers, hand gunners 18 attacks, 12 hits, 4 wounds. 1.33 saved handgunners 3 wounds and 2 ranks, flamers charge and 5 wounds, drawn combat.... hand gunners lose by 1, steadfast, get helped out next turn. so no, flamers aren't that decent in combat compared to other units... the stat line just suggests they are. which is a reason complain about them.
have a higher toughness this only helps mitigate the fact you can only have 6 in a unit.
skirmish has its bad sides as well... no rank bonus for example, can't deny steadfast is another. and with them having skirmish as a rule it gives you the option to move and shoot, but they kind of have too because of the range, which means another -1 penalty for shooting
Come with a ward save. yep nothing i can say will detract from that... this is the other thing that makes them better than average troops. not overpowered, but still better than average, its not like they are tzeentch creatures and should get a 4++ save instead... oh wait. the writers probably thought that was overpowered, so they didn't include it for a reason? the only thing that's worth mentioning is that yes 6 flamers have 6 5++ ward saves, but hand gunners have 26 wounds. it kind of balances out.

Things handgunners get, State troops, Rank bonus, Steadfast, Banner, Musician... if these had been included in the scenarios, things would of worked out even worse for the daemons, losing combat, and then possibly losing wounds to instability.


26 wounds at toughness 3 with no save.
St3 bows take 52 hits to kill all those handgunners compared to 54 to kill those 6 flamers, that is of course ignoring the fact that flamers are an extra -1 to hit due to skirmishing.
St4 shots take 38 hits to kill the handgunners and 35 hits to kill the flamers, pretty similar.
St5 shots take 31 hits to kill the handgunners and 26 hits to kill the flamers, this is where the flamers much lower wound count really starts to cause problems for them.

So checkmate mr.flamers-weren't-broken

Nice try but we're playing checkers
You've literally just proven that flamers were easier to kill with moderate to high powered weapons. you should of really included the -1 to hit... mind you you would need a strength 3 unit to do that. so hand gunners wont work. if you care to do the math i'd recommend high elf archers as they are known as notoriously under powered.

Yes hand gunners are easier to kill with low powered weapons, but are you really going to spend 52 shots shooting one unit of handgunners? that's you're entire shooting phase focused on a support unit.

This is all rather arbitrary as shooting unit don't stand around ready to get picked off.

But I think we've reached at point we're the "Flamers are overpowered" are now giving me facts and maths to prove their point, that directly states the opposite is true

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 23:06
the dwarf flamecannon is, though. The soulgrinder does not necessarily have actual cannon-rules, we don't know yet what the upgrades might be, except that they are all 3 about 50pts and the soulgrinder can fire while moving.The dwarf flame cannon is not a combat monster, nor move and fire nor actually a cannon. Unless the cannon upgrade has some major downside that isn't apparent, a move and fire cannon is always very valuable. Combat abilities and being the toughest monster bar the destroyer is the icing on the cake.


Yeah? I heard it's a weak grapeshot thing. I can't wait for people to wake up and smell the roses :p
Well we'll see wont we? I heard the grapeshot thing is upgradable to a true cannon just as in 40k (which is roughly similar to a battlecannon). Still, either I'm going to be smelling roses or warpflame in the morning. My prediction is if it is a true cannon then we'll see a defiler in every competitive list (and no flamers) by about 2 months from now.

Urgat
26-07-2012, 23:11
You're willing to pay 300pts out of your rare section just for a canon. Seriously?

Andy p
26-07-2012, 23:16
The Finecast Flamers are now discontinued so only the plastics will be available in the future.

Jim

Yeah but what was the reasoning behind this? "Oh they've had one whole year...yeah they've had their time in the sun ok let's bring on some more....KAAACHING"

Of course I dont have access to any stats, but one of the main reasons behind the finecast cost increase over their metal counterparts was allegedly to do with the cost of the molds....but of course id need proof of this, but if this is true then why create a new mold for one year...then scrap it?

If this is not true then withdrawn....however it still seems like an odd thing to do. Most of the stuff they did in this mini-expansion/update to daemons is interesting and fairly understandable...this just....isnt.

And lastly...these new ones are ugly. That's just personal preference, but I really prefer the last ones.

I suppose cost wise it is probably better they are plastic though....that is one plus.

Lord Inquisitor
26-07-2012, 23:16
You're willing to pay 300pts out of your rare section just for a canon. Seriously?

Yes. Probably two!

It's crazy good for daemons. With 600+ points tied up in my lord with my level 4 and general and heaviest hitter all bundled together in one big target, paying 300 for a secondary cannonbait with a cannon to take out enemy cannons on it is a terrific choice.

Urgat
26-07-2012, 23:23
Yeah but what was the reasoning behind this? "Oh they've had one whole year...yeah they've had their time in the sun ok let's bring on some more....KAAACHING"

Of course I dont have access to any stats, but one of the main reasons behind the finecast cost increase over their metal counterparts was allegedly to do with the cost of the molds....but of course id need proof of this, but if this is true then why create a new mold for one year...then scrap it?

If this is not true then withdrawn....however it still seems like an odd thing to do. Most of the stuff they did in this mini-expansion/update to daemons is interesting and fairly understandable...this just....isnt.

You didn't quite get it. The reason behind finecast has always been to replace metals when stocks had run out until a plastic kit has become available. Increased price of finecast has nothing to do with the mold, the entire reasoning behind using finecast was that it could use the same molds.

Lord Inquisitor: 1200pts tied in three models... well, I don't know what to say. To each his own. I'll just consider myself lucky I don't have to face that kind of party- her, I mean army.

AmaroK
26-07-2012, 23:27
If I remember correctly from my brief overview on the booklet, theres no way you can get a cannon fire in the soulgrinder. Normal one with no upgrades is a grapeshot type. If you buy an upgrade is a catapult fire. Another one is a bolt thrower type. Both are 50 points. Theres a third upgrade for a melee str10 attack causing 1d6 wounds, around 10 points. My first impression is that it could go too expensive too fast, going over 300 points easily. On the other hand its T7, so hard to wound.

About the flamers, when you wound a unit (no matter how many wounds) you make single roll. If you get a 6 you make d3 wounds with no armor save, with a 1 the target gains a 6+ regen. If it had regen, it improves it by 1.

Bring_Back_Chaos_Dwarfs?
26-07-2012, 23:42
People always seem to focus on what is the maximum they can do. which in all honesty is a lot, 36 shots from 6 models is ridiculously good, but lets be truthful... that very very very rarely happens -Belkoft

Yeah man EXTREMELY rare. That would be a freaking yahtzee. I know a bar that has a running game of it every night - you pay a dollar to play (you only get one try a night) and it gets put in a bucket, if you get a yahtzee then you win (most?) of the bucket. It's happened once in the past 6 years.

edit; it's a dive bar so the crowds are real small. soooooo not as rare as that example makes it seem. but still, like Belkoft stated, really rare!

ah, whoops, also, a yhatzee is all sixes on FIVE dice, not six, and your chances of getting it according to

http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=56;t=002583;p=0

is about .08%!

theunwantedbeing
27-07-2012, 00:45
You've literally just proven that flamers were easier to kill with moderate to high powered weapons.
I think you'll find I didn't.


you should of really included the -1 to hit...
Shall I include that flamers are likely to be sat in some sort of cover as well?
You need 156 shots to kill those handgunners with bs3 st3 shooting, but it's a whopping 324 to kill the flamers (they're not in cover...just long range).


mind you you would need a strength 3 unit to do that. so hand gunners wont work. if you care to do the math i'd recommend high elf archers as they are known as notoriously under powered.
Math for what regarding high elf archers exactly?


Yes hand gunners are easier to kill with low powered weapons, but are you really going to spend 52 shots shooting one unit of handgunners? that's you're entire shooting phase focused on a support unit.
No you just throw a fireball their way and they run off to remove the handgunners, you have to kill all the flamers.


This is all rather arbitrary as shooting unit don't stand around ready to get picked off.
Shooty units tend to not move at all.
This is why Flamers are so good, they do move...upto 12" at a time meaning they are very hard to pick off.

Lord Dan
27-07-2012, 00:48
soo... handgunners are better at shooting. which was my point
If you consider an extra 1.25 wounds "better" despite all the other advantages I mentioned, then yes.


yes good call, flaming attacks/armour piercing... a special rule each to cancel themselves out
Sure, why not.


can move and fire this right here, is one of the reasons flamers we're better than average. but still, with the range from the handgunners there is much less need to move. the only real reason for them to be moving is to flee if something big and gribbly comes along that can destroy the unit in one go...
Right but here's the difference: if the flamers need to move to shoot something, they can. Handgunners can't. As an Empire player I can tell you then number of games in which my handgunners got to sit still and lob shots at my opponent as he simply walked at me were few and far between. The tactical flexibility of the flamers is worth a lot more than you're giving them credit for.


wont run away you're calling this a good thing? the last thing i want is my shooty unit tied up with a unit for a few turns. because while they are decent in combat, they are better at shooting
Yeah I do. If you're the tactical genius you implied by miraculously placing your handgunners in a spot from which they can, apparently, shoot down 240 points in a single game, then you're likely smart enough not to place your Flamers in front of a unit of chosen knights of khorne. The fact is if you're hunting the right targets, fast cav, enemy shooting units, chaff, etc., it shouldn't matter if they charge you.


decent in combat they are often underestimated, but they are only a support unit, saying that, the handgunners stand a chance in combat, simply because of their numbers, oh they will likely get trounced, but lets say 6 flamers vs 26 handgunners while we're at it. (bit more favourable to flamers seeing as their major weekness is WS2) flamers charge in (again, lets favour flamers), 12 attacks, 6 hits, 5 wounds (pre nerf) 10 attacks, 6.66 hits, 1.11 wounds, 0.67 save hand gunners maybe cause 1 wounds, hand gunners have 4 ranks flamers charged. handgunners lose by 1... steadfast, handgunners can now get help the next turn. Hell lets do it the other way, say I didnt get a chance to reform the handgunners, still 5 wounds from flamers, hand gunners 18 attacks, 12 hits, 4 wounds. 1.33 saved handgunners 3 wounds and 2 ranks, flamers charge and 5 wounds, drawn combat.... hand gunners lose by 1, steadfast, get helped out next turn. so no, flamers aren't that decent in combat compared to other units... the stat line just suggests they are. which is a reason complain about them.
If you have your handgunners in 5x5 formation for those ranks then you spent a turn not shooting to reform. Also, mathematically, the Flamers win combat for the first 2 or 3 rounds. More importantly, what idiot is going to charge a skirmishing unit head-on into a fully ranked unit with steadfast? I wouldn't even do that with a skirmishing unit designed for combat, let alone a shooting support unit.

Against the targets you'll be hunting anyway- fast cav, small shooting units, war machines, etc.- 12 S4 attacks provides a nice deterrent, and a reliable backup if shooting isn't going your way.


have a higher toughness this only helps mitigate the fact you can only have 6 in a unit.
You don't need more than 6 in a unit. You've already complained about the price of a 6-model unit, can you imagine trying to win back points on a 400 point support unit? Forget about it.


skirmish has its bad sides as well... no rank bonus for example, can't deny steadfast is another. and with them having skirmish as a rule it gives you the option to move and shoot, but they kind of have too because of the range, which means another -1 penalty for shooting
Yeah, again, I'm not charging ranked units with Flamers. The only units I would charge are those that can be beaten in a single round, like fast cav, and in those cases not breaking ranks really doesn't matter. I would say that the benefits of being able to march and shoot, as well as getting -1 to hit from enemy ranged attacks far outweigh to "drawback" of not breaking ranks, which couldn't have happened with a 6-model unit anyway.


Come with a ward save. yep nothing i can say will detract from that... this is the other thing that makes them better than average troops. not overpowered, but still better than average, its not like they are tzeentch creatures and should get a 4++ save instead... oh wait. the writers probably thought that was overpowered, so they didn't include it for a reason? the only thing that's worth mentioning is that yes 6 flamers have 6 5++ ward saves, but hand gunners have 26 wounds. it kind of balances out.
I'm pretty sure the Bearded One proved above that, mathematically, a 5++ save on 6 models works out the being, effectively, 27 wounds.


Things handgunners get, State troops, Rank bonus, Steadfast, Banner, Musician... if these had been included in the scenarios, things would of worked out even worse for the daemons, losing combat, and then possibly losing wounds to instability.
Except you pay for those bonuses, and I'm not getting into combat with you. Ever. Instead, how about the handgunners and flamers do what they do best?

Assume stationary and close range for both. Would you care for the first volley, handgunners?

H: 26 shots, 8.6 hits, 4.3 wounds, 2.8 wounds after saves. 5 flamers remain (with 9.2 wounds).
F: 17.5 shots, 8.75 hits, 5.8 wounds. 21.1 handgunners remain.

H: 21.1 shots, 7.05 hits, 3.5 wounds, 2.3 wounds after saves. 4 flamers remain (with 6.9 wounds).
F: 14 shots, 7 hits, 4.6 wounds. 16.5 handgunners remain.

H: 16.5 shots, 5.5 hits, 2.7 wounds, 1.8 wounds after saves. 3 flamers remain (with 5.1 wounds).
F: 10.5 shots, 5.25 hits, 3.5 wounds. 13 handgunners remain.

H: 13 shots, 4.3 hits, 2.1 wounds, 1.4 wounds after saves. 2 flamers remain (with 3.7 wounds).
F: 7 shots, 3.5 hit, 2.3 wounds. 10.6 handgunners remain.

H: 10.6 shots, 3.5 hit, 1.7 wounds, 1.1 wounds after saves. 2 flamers remain (with 2.6 wounds).
F: 7 shots, 3.5 hit, 2.3 wounds. 8.3 handgunners remain.

H: 8.3 shots, 2.7 hits, 1.38 wounds, .8 wounds after saves. 1 flamer remains (with 1.8 wounds).
F: 3.5 shots, 1.2 hit, .8 wounds. 7.5 handgunners remain.

Game ends.

So I'd call that evenly matched, wouldn't you?

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 01:11
Of course they Went overboard (!) because they want us to use SoulGrinders for shooting now, and they want us to bulk up on shiny new Screamers in the Special Section so [of course] they Went overboard there as well.
That's all the needs to be said for these 8 pages of thread really..

Will Daemons (the army) be weaker for it? Nope.
Is it the best way of going about rules-design? Nope. Probably the 'worst' actually (at least for us gamers) but they've done it Before and they'll do it again. ;)

The bearded one
27-07-2012, 01:21
it's just so awkward they chose this moment to release plastic flamers.

"We nerfed flamers, now buy more flamers!"

:wtf:

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 01:31
Well they did make them a Special Choice, hoping that since you can take more of them some people will want to on occassion.
Also, in 40k they get better from what I understand, so obviously Screamers are more geared toward Fantasy now.

I just can't fathom why we're having a discussion like this thread.. It's just obvious they've made them bad on purpose,
just like Ghouls were made bad on purpose - You're not supposed to rely on them anymore!
just like the mortar was craze-nerfed - you're supposed to rely on large detachments (more models) and shiny new wizard mobiles now..
just like Mournfangs (and ogres in general) - were purposefully discounted in cost.

The danger with this strategy is that when it crashes we get things like 7th Ed Dark Elves, Vampires and Daemons.. And that's just no kind of fun.

This swap between Screamers and Flamers doesn't effect the fact that Daemons are perfectly balanced army that people love to harp about because GW pushed them in Fantasy toward the end of THE PREVIOUS EDITION.

Lord Inquisitor
27-07-2012, 02:30
Of course they Went overboard (!) because they want us to use SoulGrinders for shooting now, and they want us to bulk up on shiny new Screamers in the Special Section so [of course] they Went overboard there as well.
That's all the needs to be said for these 8 pages of thread really..
This again?

If they had neutered bloodletters this might make sense. But to nuke a unit that they're releasing plastic models for makes no sense from a business perspective. Why would they push us away from a new plastic kit they just spent a large amount of money developing?

The nerf to flamers is designed to improve balance, nothing more nothing less. For once, no other motive makes sense. Whether they succeeded or the typical GW pendulum is at work is another matter.

vinny t
27-07-2012, 02:49
"On a 1 the unit gets 6+ Regen" That has to be one of the dumbest things GW has ever thought of. I want to see the rules justification for flaming shooting giving a unit Regeneration. Not to mention the fact that it is super good for the target unit. Units like Grave Guard, Dwarf Warriors, Swordsmasters, White Lions, will maybe have 2 models die to Flamers shooting and in return might get a Regeneration save. All this for the discount price of 240 points!
Welcome to theworld of Tzeench - the changer of ways.

Fair point fluff-wise, but the rule still sucks. Giving a dedicated close combat unit a regeneration save for the cost of a couple of models is stupid. I don't like the idea of having to risk helping my opponent every time I shoot at a unit. There's a reason I don't play Orcs and Goblins ;)



Honestly this just reeks of balancing commonly used overpowered units.
Fixed that for you.
No thanks, I'm pretty sure I said what I meant to say.

Flamers' impact on the game is often negligible. I never once saw a game that was determined by Flamers. They're a nice support unit, but didn't do much heavy lifting.


Flamers are now a shooting unit that is pretty awful at shooting, a combat unit that is pretty poor in combat, and their mobility is wasted if you want any chance of shooting with them. For 240 points there are much better units you could buy.
Rubbish. They are a shooting unit that is now on par with most other shooting units, still better in combat than mst shooting units. Of course there are better units you can buy, this is still Daemons after all.

People who are still bitter about daemons from 7th edition need to move on. There's a reason why not many people take BS shooting, BS units are drastically overcosted. Now Flamers are too. They might be on the same level as other BS units, but it's still a crappy level.


This isn't 7th edition anymore. Flamers were slightly undercosted and maybe a tad owerpowered but they were primarily a support unit. I never saw a game that was decided by Flamers. All they did was prevent chaff from getting in the Bloodletters' way. Now all they can hope to do is try to knock off a wound here or there.
They were a vastly over powered unit that could destroy whole units before they were halfway across the battlefield. Now they fill their harrying rol perfectly.

21 shots, 6s to hit = 3.36 hits
3.36 hits, 3s to wound = 2.2176 wounds
2.2176 wounds, 6s for armor = 1.863 wounds

I want my 240 point unit to kill more than maybe 1 or 2 light cavalry a turn.


Also I'm pissed because I just bought some more Flamers and now I learn that they suck.
Welcome to the world of balanced armies at last.
In what insane world is a unit of 3 Flamers unbalanced?

If the only changes were -1S and +5 points I would have been happy that a slightly undercosted unit was corrected. But neutralizing their shooting ability and introducing a potentially very harmful random element was unnecessary.

Maoriboy007
27-07-2012, 02:55
You're willing to pay 300pts out of your rare section just for a canon. Seriously?A cannon thats also a monster? As a VC player, yes please! I know ironblasters and Hellcannons are cheaper, but the're really underpriced.
And anyone who thinks Flamers were merely "Ok" before are kidding themselves, even my opponants have asheepish "sorry mate" look on thier face when they roll dice for these guys.
Did they do overboard with the depowering? Maybe a little, but certainly not by much and really not as much as the treatment less deserving units have received.

Lord Inquisitor
27-07-2012, 03:08
From what AmaroK said earlier it sounds like a bolt thrower upgrade not a cannon, which is a bit less exciting.

Lord Dan
27-07-2012, 03:26
That's a big freaking bolt shooting out of that cannon...

Urgat
27-07-2012, 03:54
Her... you seen the soul grinder's "canon" recently? :p
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23892524@N00/4097276107/
The "canon" is the three tubes on that right arm. If anything that's a small bolt (well, three small bolts) those could shoot. You only needed watch the model to know you wouldn't get an ironblaster.

As for DaemonReign's assumption. Which one is it that GW wanted to sell when they released the three beastman rares?

Lord Dan
27-07-2012, 04:29
What happened to the big chest cannon thing?

Urgat
27-07-2012, 04:54
It happened that the Chaos space marine's defiler is not the demon's soul grinder, I assume :p

Lord Dan
27-07-2012, 06:56
Eh, one crawly-walky demon machine thing is the same as another.

Zeroth
27-07-2012, 07:37
As for the Soul Grinders weapon not looking like a cannon, remember that the strongest shot it has in 40k is S10 AP1 and it is from it's mouth

Von Wibble
27-07-2012, 09:24
I voted slightly overboard.

I think the move to special is actually a disadvantage. Yes, you can have more, but if you're mono-Tzeentch this means less screamers (who by all accounts may be worth taking) and no rare options. Less choice for the army overall. If you aren't mono-Tzeentch then I think it evens out - more Bloodcrushers or whatever but less Flesh Hounds for example. But aren't Flesh Hounds way better for the points anyway? Oc it should be a sign that Tzeentch is to recieve a new rare choice when an 8th edition Daemon book does surface, and if the Soul Grinder is amazing then it means no competition on that front.

The S nerf and multishot were fine. But I think that would have been enough on its own. Points increase on top simply wasn't necessary.

For those arguning that Flamers are fairly priced compared to handgunners, quite right, they are. But the problem is that BS shooters are for some reason overpriced (yet nonBS war machines are if anything too good) - it would be better to start bucking the trend by pricnig the Flamers as they were and going from there.

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 09:50
For those arguning that Flamers are fairly priced compared to handgunners, quite right, they are.

They would be if Flamers was ever a Core Choice, yes. ;)

This whole debate is too infected by which army they belong to. Flamers are just as 'meh' now as those Beastmen Rares are, and Screamers are just as good as Mournfangs.

They did the same to Ghouls - would have been enough to remove Ghoulkin OR increase their cost slightly.. Doing both was a kick in the nads.
Same thing with the Mortar..

And yes there'll Always be exceptions. The entire TK book seems to have been done with none of this strategizing, for example. Probably because some archyopes of players don't add stuff to their armies based on how good the units are..
Ong-players, Dwarf-players, people like this are more prone to collect those armies "no matter what" in my experience.

Andy p
27-07-2012, 10:34
You didn't quite get it. The reason behind finecast has always been to replace metals when stocks had run out until a plastic kit has become available. Increased price of finecast has nothing to do with the mold, the entire reasoning behind using finecast was that it could use the same molds.

Lord Inquisitor: 1200pts tied in three models... well, I don't know what to say. To each his own. I'll just consider myself lucky I don't have to face that kind of party- her, I mean army.

Yeah I did wonder if that was a bit of erroneous hearsay, so as usual it was just greed.

Urgat
27-07-2012, 12:45
Yeah I did wonder if that was a bit of erroneous hearsay, so as usual it was just greed.

Well, it's a company, not the Red Cross...

As for the Soul Grinders weapon not looking like a cannon, remember that the strongest shot it has in 40k is S10 AP1 and it is from it's mouth

Well that sure as hell won't fire canon balls or spearchukka bolts either :p


Ong-players, Dwarf-players, people like this are more prone to collect those armies "no matter what" in my experience.
And yet, the arachnarok isn't exactly a no-brainer, while the mangler was released how much later? You know, maybe you could at least consider the possibility that the massive quantity of "exceptions" means you're just mistaken and GW doesn't tie rules to sale prospects. They took their sweet time releasing the HPA, really.

Baluc
27-07-2012, 12:58
"On a 1 the unit gets 6+ Regen" That has to be one of the dumbest things GW has ever thought of. I want to see the rules justification for flaming shooting giving a unit Regeneration. Not to mention the fact that it is super good for the target unit. Units like Grave Guard, Dwarf Warriors, Swordsmasters, White Lions, will maybe have 2 models die to Flamers shooting and in return might get a Regeneration save. All this for the discount price of 240 points!

Honestly this just reeks of the new 40k release, nerfing commonly used units and making new units really good.

Flamers are now a shooting unit that is pretty awful at shooting, a combat unit that is pretty poor in combat, and their mobility is wasted if you want any chance of shooting with them. For 240 points there are much better units you could buy.

This isn't 7th edition anymore. Flamers were slightly undercosted and maybe a tad owerpowered but they were primarily a support unit. I never saw a game that was decided by Flamers. All they did was prevent chaff from getting in the Bloodletters' way. Now all they can hope to do is try to knock off a wound here or there.

Also I'm pissed because I just bought some more Flamers and now I learn that they suck. :rolleyes:

You realize of course that Flamers have flaming shooting attacks... and that by suffering a wound from said flaming attacks regen is nulified. Allowing you too continue shooting like the regen was not there...

Anyway, flamers are now IMO not a catch-all unit. Before you took 12 flamers, and proceeded to remove your enemies support units. You shot the fighty guys and fought the shooty guys.

Now you have to think before you win. Hey that hydra over there looks like its going to kill my bloodletters...
Move 12"
Short range is 9"

That's a 21" threat range for short range fire or 30" range for long range!
Second there is no median role for a singe d6, so one flamer would have any number of shots.
6D6 on the other hand will consistently provide 21 shots, which is superior to most shooting units in the game.

Equal points of HE archers gets you 21 S3 shots, with no free reforms, no steadfast in forests, or ITP, or S4 close combat attacks or The best Break mechanic in the game.

Equal points of Leadbelchers gets you 17.5 shots, that hit on the same value, with stomp +1 attack, but with Ld7, armour piercing instead of flaming, normal break tests.

Not that any of the matters since, flamers excel at something neither of those units do, hunting regen monsters, chariots, and single multi-wound models.

The bearded one
27-07-2012, 13:01
They took their sweet time releasing the HPA, really.

And thunderwolves and tervigons. I have never seen more scratchbuilt versions of a unit than of those 2.

Belkoft
27-07-2012, 13:50
So I'd call that evenly matched, wouldn't you?

that basically sums it up for me, they are pretty evenly matched, to a unit that's over coasted as far as empire played are concenered, handgunners are by far not the best shooting out there, and they matched up fine.

as for the combat scenarios, we're going round in swings and roundabouts. it's personal preference, each have their own bonus's and negatives.

But at the end of the day, in 8th edition, flamers weren't overpowered, they were a useful flexible unit which is what made them good.

Snake1311
27-07-2012, 17:03
But at the end of the day, in 8th edition, flamers weren't overpowered, they were a useful flexible unit which is what made them good.

THe more people say that, the more I believe it

Oh wait, no.

But its a great tool to identify posters who have no idea what they are talking about :)

I'm personally torn between "just right" and "a little overboard". I will reserve judgement until I see them in play

Lord Dan
27-07-2012, 17:23
in 8th edition, flamers weren't overpowered, they were a useful flexible unit which is what made them good.

GW and a majority of the gaming community disagreed, which is likely why the developers felt the need to get heavy-handed with the nerfing.

Soundwave
27-07-2012, 17:32
To be prude from a business point of view G.W have only detracted the flamers to make the other "newer kits" and older (soulgrider) "kits" more buy me now options...

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 18:04
But at the end of the day, in 8th edition, flamers weren't overpowered, they were a useful flexible unit which is what made them good.

Quite right. They just happened to be Daemons. Don't pay attention to the arrogant loudmouth pretend-to-know-it-all (no, Lord Dan, not you) - Soundwave sums it up pretty well:

Flamers - Nerfed intentionally hard in Fantasy in order to 'promote' SoulGrinders and Screamers. To compensate Flamers were buffed for 40k from an already good performance. GW hope to sell Flamers and round bases and Soulgrinders on Square bases.

And maybe it's for the best, actually (given the decision to add the SoulGrinder to Fantasy which I would never have made personally) - but that doesn't cure the sour after-taste lingering for those of us who prefers rules with 'integrity'.

Drasanil
27-07-2012, 18:39
Quite right. They just happened to be Daemons.

Oh indeed, woe is the daemons player for he hath but known persecution at the hands of GW's cruel regime! That the fickle game designers took what was widely acknowledged by all as a perfectly fair and entirely reasonable unit and rendered it so low as to be 'nigh on worthless' is certainly the most appalling and egregious of violations in recent memory:shifty:

I love this thread, a perfect showcase of how some DoC players have gotten so used to having their cake and eating it too, that a more or less reasonable re-balance to bring one of their more abusive units back in line will produces pages of hand-wringing.

Even the regen/D3 wounds thing from warp-flame is more of a buff than a debuff if you play largely Tzeentch armies, but you wouldn't think so looking at this thread, most of your units have flaming attacks IIRC, meaning you essentially get a chance at extra wounds risk free. The only armies this really 'hurts' are those that had a tendency to min-max or those that played 'pure' mono-god armies that somehow managed to always have a few flamers in toe.

Lord Dan
27-07-2012, 18:43
Don't pay attention to the arrogant loudmouth pretend-to-know-it-all (no, Lord Dan, not you)
Well, that was mean. We're so not friends anymore.


Flamers - Nerfed intentionally hard in Fantasy in order to 'promote' SoulGrinders and Screamers. To compensate Flamers were buffed for 40k from an already good performance. GW hope to sell Flamers and round bases and Soulgrinders on Square bases.
Why wouldn't they want to sell Flamers for both systems? The assumption some people keep making is that sales of Flamers kits somehow detracts from sales of Soulgrinder kits, which isn't really the case when they perform totally different roles and take up different army composition slots.


but that doesn't cure the sour after-taste lingering for those of us who prefers rules with 'integrity'.
Ugh, spare me. Your username is appropriate given the army's dominance throughout 7th edition and it's continued strength even into this edition. Check out any of those "I WANT A WAAC ARMY WHAT DO ICHOOSE@!" threads- the common consensus is that Daemons are still top dog.

Being weaker than they were in 7th definitely doesn't make them weak, and the idea that GW is somehow going to sell more soulgrinder kits because they made flamers weaker is a stretch. In fact if that was their only motivation they should have given both soulgrinders and flamers a 2++ and S10 shooting, which would have sent sales of both through the roof.

shelfunit.
27-07-2012, 18:52
In fact if that was their only motivation they should have given both soulgrinders and flamers a 2++ and S10 shooting, which would have sent sales of both through the roof.

Which would only really have been a marginal improvement :p

Dark Reaper
27-07-2012, 18:55
THe more people say that, the more I believe it

Oh wait, no.

But its a great tool to identify posters who have no idea what they are talking about :)

I'm personally torn between "just right" and "a little overboard". I will reserve judgement until I see them in play

Yeah, I think you might be right. I think they might have gone a little over board, but still, they way they were where way too good.

Urgat
27-07-2012, 19:11
"Peers at poll" For myself, I'll now let the colored little bars speak, and let the vocal minority do its thing :p
"walks away rather pleased with the way Warhammer is heading"

HalfBlood
27-07-2012, 19:34
However this is a forum, where majority of the people on warseer are still sour over Daemons in 7th. Majority of players dont mind flamers, its the few that cry about them that we hear about.

HalfBlood
27-07-2012, 19:47
Well, that was mean. We're so not friends anymore.


Why wouldn't they want to sell Flamers for both systems? The assumption some people keep making is that sales of Flamers kits somehow detracts from sales of Soulgrinder kits, which isn't really the case when they perform totally different roles and take up different army composition slots.


Ugh, spare me. Your username is appropriate given the army's dominance throughout 7th edition and it's continued strength even into this edition. Check out any of those "I WANT A WAAC ARMY WHAT DO ICHOOSE@!" threads- the common consensus is that Daemons are still top dog.

Being weaker than they were in 7th definitely doesn't make them weak, and the idea that GW is somehow going to sell more soulgrinder kits because they made flamers weaker is a stretch. In fact if that was their only motivation they should have given both soulgrinders and flamers a 2++ and S10 shooting, which would have sent sales of both through the roof.

Daemons are alot weaker then what you are portraying. Where would you rank them in regaurds to the other armies?

I think another issue that we are seeing. Is this is GW's first attempt to weaken(Down to the 8th edition books) a solid book. Obviously once Lizardmen, DE,WoC, and Skaven fall down threads will pop up just like this.

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 20:19
Lord Dan. I didn't mean you. I wasn't sarcastic when I wrote that I didn't mean you. I did however mean the guy who's dragging around old quotes of mine in his sig.

I didn't mean to say Flamers were weak in 8th Edition. I honestly Think they were fine. Random as hell, which means sometimes poor and sometimes awesome - but on average pretty much all right as a Rare Choice.

Now, as a Special Choice they certainly needed some toning down. Increased cost is fine, reduced Strength is all right too - but somewhere between that D6-chart and adding penalty for Multiple Shots GW certainly came down on them too Heavy handed.
In Fantasy. Because in Fantasy they want to convince Daemon-players to get SoulGrinders and Screamers (which have thus been made really good now).
And they hope to sell more Flamers in 40k.

So yeah I didn't mean you. Ok? Thus I'll disregard the name-calling and general silliness of the rest of your post - as if I did mean you all that jazz would have been perfectly called for.

Lord Inquisitor
27-07-2012, 20:29
To be prude from a business point of view G.W have only detracted the flamers to make the other "newer kits" and older (soulgrider) "kits" more buy me now options...

I just can't make this make sense.

Sure, they want us to buy soul grinders and screamers. But why nerf flamers, which also are a new release? Remember GW has just sunk a whole lot of cash into making plastic flamers. The soul grinder by comparison is an old model and presumably had a good return already, particularly since most of it is from the popular defiler sprue.

If they nerfed fiends to make us buy flamers or screamers you might have a point! But there's no way producing a new sprue and then pushing customers away from it makes sense!

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 20:32
Every Fantasy player pretty much have Flamers already. Even as a Special choice there's a limit to how many of those Plastic models they will sell to Fantasy players. So they made them proper bad prompting the purchase of Soulgrinders, and making Screamers looking even better.
While, in 40k, they were made better [Flamers, that is] so there they'll sell more of them.
Doesn't that make sense?

Lord Dan
27-07-2012, 20:55
Lord Dan. I didn't mean you. I wasn't sarcastic when I wrote that I didn't mean you. I did however mean the guy who's dragging around old quotes of mine in his sig.

I didn't mean to say Flamers were weak in 8th Edition. I honestly Think they were fine. Random as hell, which means sometimes poor and sometimes awesome - but on average pretty much all right as a Rare Choice.

Now, as a Special Choice they certainly needed some toning down. Increased cost is fine, reduced Strength is all right too - but somewhere between that D6-chart and adding penalty for Multiple Shots GW certainly came down on them too Heavy handed.
In Fantasy. Because in Fantasy they want to convince Daemon-players to get SoulGrinders and Screamers (which have thus been made really good now).
And they hope to sell more Flamers in 40k.

So yeah I didn't mean you. Ok? Thus I'll disregard the name-calling and general silliness of the rest of your post - as if I did mean you all that jazz would have been perfectly called for.

Sorry for over-reacting- despite my sarcastic demeanor I was actually kind of hurt. Again, I apologize for the tone.

Lord Inquisitor
27-07-2012, 21:17
Her... you seen the soul grinder's "canon" recently? :p
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23892524@N00/4097276107/
The "canon" is the three tubes on that right arm. If anything that's a small bolt (well, three small bolts) those could shoot. You only needed watch the model to know you wouldn't get an ironblaster.

As for DaemonReign's assumption. Which one is it that GW wanted to sell when they released the three beastman rares?

That little arm cannon thing is different. It's called the harvester cannon and that's the grapeshot thing. Then you have the flame cannon, claw, stone thrower and bolt throwers are upgrades.

HalfBlood
27-07-2012, 21:56
How exactly has there core changed in the WD update?

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 22:05
Sorry for over-reacting- despite my sarcastic demeanor I was actually kind of hurt. Again, I apologize for the tone.

And I apologize for catching you in the crossfire as it was really Another poster that set my allergies in full Blossom.

You and I - I'm sure - can have a civil disagreement in a respectfull manner.

The post I made was unnecessary. It's just.. well.. us poor Daemon-lovers get a lot of crap thrown at us and somehow we're just supposed to sit quiet when certain people are simply smug and more or less explicitly rude to us.
Which is not something I am accusing you of.

Let's just put this behind us. :) I shall try to not blurt out such negative remarks in the future, despite certain people deserving it in buckets, because - yes - innocent (respectable) by-standers may get caught by accident.

You have my unreserved apologies.

Urgat
27-07-2012, 22:16
That little arm cannon thing is different. It's called the harvester cannon and that's the grapeshot thing. Then you have the flame cannon, claw, stone thrower and bolt throwers are upgrades.

I know, I was only talking about the model, in regard to what Lord Dan was saying, which in retrospect was understandable as he was mistaking the defiler with the soul grinder. The Defiler does have a big canon modeled on. There is no alternative to the three-tubes thing on the SG sprues.

The bearded one
27-07-2012, 22:33
How exactly has there core changed in the WD update?

it hasn't, not even for the plaguebearers ;)


It's just.. well.. us poor Daemon-lovers get a lot of crap thrown at us and somehow we're just supposed to sit quiet when certain people are simply smug and more or less explicitly rude to us.

I have an alibi, my dice warp and revolt in the presence of daemonkind to the point of absurdity. The fact daemons are the army of choice for the local min-maxing tournament scene does not help either :p Just ignore anything I might say :D

HalfBlood
27-07-2012, 22:37
wow Thats pretty disappointing. I was pretty sure they were going to nerf Bloodletters and increase effectiveness of plaguebearers since they get a new model

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 22:42
I'm relieved personally. If all their gonna do is swap they might as well leave them alone.
And personally I'd say Plaguebearers are fine (it's Bloodletters that needs to go up a Point and the other two that needs a minor buff).
Oh man I just wish they show restraint with Daemons when they are redone.. both up and down so to speak. The devil is in the details.

HalfBlood
27-07-2012, 22:58
I agree with you. But people complain way to much about bloodletters.

DaemonReign
27-07-2012, 23:23
@ TheBeardedOne: You know what.. Your complaining I can actually take. And you demonstrate with your own humourous post exactly why. And as a gamer that picked this army for aesthethic reasons I really Think it's a shame that there are players using the obvious 'loopholes' in the list to min-max and give their opponant bad experiences. That is not what this game is supposed to be about. And - of course - if I had my way Daemons wouldn't even have those loopholes to begin with - but if the alternative is to bash them across the board in the spirit of childish vengeance then they're better left alone.

@ Halfblood: Min-maxing has a lot to do with this. The fact that it's stuff like the Despair Icon and MoS that is broken gets clouded by the fact that it's two Hordes of Bloodletters Rolling all over your forces - at least that's what I suspect because Bloodletters by themselves don't deserve all that flak.

Lordsaradain
27-07-2012, 23:25
Was this nerf in an errata or is it just a rumour?

Urgat
27-07-2012, 23:33
There's a booklet coming with the next white dwarf that changes the rules for the flamers and the screamers, and adds three slaanesh chariot things and the Soul Grinder (half of it is 40K but well I didn't pay attention to what happened on that side). You ought to go check the news and rumors forum, there's a whole topic about it. And it's news, not rumors, there's a video of it all on youtube.

Lordsaradain
27-07-2012, 23:37
Link to the video?

Lord Dan
27-07-2012, 23:51
And I apologize for catching you in the crossfire as it was really Another poster that set my allergies in full Blossom.

You and I - I'm sure - can have a civil disagreement in a respectfull manner.

You're a true gentleman, and indeed we can.

Let me ask you: would you have changed anything about the Daemon list, were you in charge of this update? More specifically, what would you have done differently with Flamers?

DaemonReign
28-07-2012, 00:28
would you have changed anything about the Daemon list, were you in charge of this update? More specifically, what would you have done differently with Flamers?

*ugh*
Well first of all I wouldn't have added the SoulGrinder to Fantasy. As many Daemon-players I was hoping for some Rare Slot monsters, but something new and to be perfectly honest anything except the SoulGrinder (which was actually a fear I had that's now manifested as fact). So given that premise I wouldn't have created the need to move Flamers to the Special Section.
As a Special Choice, however, I would either have reduced their firing range to 12" or simply increased their cost to 45-50pts. (and I would have playtested that... unlike some I imagine..)
Reducing their Range would have been an interesting alternative even as a Rare Choice, as that would change a lot of the more cheesy ways you've been able to use them up until now.
That would just be my prefence, where-as some of the things in the GW-patch arn't all that bad either - it's more a case of sticking too many things in there:
If they had stopped at reducing their Strength to 4 and upping their cost to 40 I would have said: 'Fine'. When you add that D6-chart and (more importantly) -1ToHit for Multiple Shots it's basically GW telling me 'Oh silly Fantasy-player, go buy some SoulGrinders or start playing 40k (where you'll buy some Soulgrinders).

While we're at it, Screamers I Think would have been fine with 2W and 2A (Everything else unchanged) - and so the GW-patch is also screaming 'Buy our new plastic cast that for all intents and purposes look exactly like the previous metal ones!

But yeah the bottom line is I wouldn't have gone for the SoulGrinder. Hate to be a whiner about that - but having spent two years dreaming up an experimental DoC Book I was hoping for cooler and more fitting things, like:
The Phantasm of Slaanesh: This guy comes on a Chariot-base, lower body of a serpent and upper body of a Daemonette/Fiend-like Slaanesh Daemon (Rare Choice Monster like my two next examples)
The Behemoth of Khorne: A Juggernaut grown by Khorne's rage to gargantuan proportions, which can be upgraded with the Skullshrine of Khorne (that screws with all magic naturally!)
The Eye of Tzeentch: A Beholder-like remote-eye for the Wizard of Wizard's himself, through which Tzeentch casters can re-direct their magic..

But I digress. With regards to Flamers it's clear they couldn't just leave them 'as was' if moving them to Special, it's just the reasons for doing it and the extent to which they did it that I disagree with.
Because they haven't nerfed daemons at all (for good or worse) they have just swapped already poor internal balance around a Little bit - for the sake of real-World profit rather than for the sake of benefitting The Game.
All in my opinion, of course. :)

Urgat
28-07-2012, 00:34
'Buy our new plastic cast that for all intents and purposes look exactly like the previous metal ones![/I]


Nah, you're being unfair. Go to the website, they've just been added (the whole lot of new minis), and those new screamers are really good, the blurry pic we've seen didn't show the details at all, and if the things are generally the same, the details make a world of a difference. Same goes for the flamers, actually.

The bearded one
28-07-2012, 01:12
Nah, you're being unfair. Go to the website, they've just been added (the whole lot of new minis), and those new screamers are really good, the blurry pic we've seen didn't show the details at all, and if the things are generally the same, the details make a world of a difference. Same goes for the flamers, actually.

I just checked the video they had on the 'what's new today' blog, and a lot of it definately looks better. The chariots look a bit less messy, the screamers pretty cool, lots of fins and eyes and stuff, and I am pleasantly surprised with the plaguebearers and nurglings. The plaguebearers in particular now look significantly better than I thought they did before, and now I finally got to see that rumoured "fly" head, which looks awesome.

Plaguebearers always were my favourite of the daemon foottroops ;) Who knows, I might build up a nurgle force some day, in the future. Not currently though, Ive gotten myself way over my head with a boxload of new beastmen already, even though I'm mildly contemplating to make nurgle beastmen instead, but I got 30 of those beastmen already assembled by the previous owner, so I think I'll drop that thought.

Urgat
28-07-2012, 01:33
They're all up for preorder with 360° view and stuff you know, no need for silly videos ;)

The bearded one
28-07-2012, 01:44
They're all up for preorder with 360° view and stuff you know, no need for silly videos ;)

I know all of it in all it's shapes and forms is up, and I have looked at the pictures in the advance order section, but the video shows some nifty closeups (and some 360 degree views that are a bit smoother and easier on the eye).

Athlan na Dyr
28-07-2012, 02:11
So wait, the Soulgrinder's best shot is a bolt thrower :wtf:
In 40k, it has a railgun-equivalent (S10 and AP1 which is the best a gun can be for square basers)
This seems to be reinforcing the notion that medieval cannons are more powerful and accurate then heavy laser cannons :shifty:

Now, before I get to the Flamers, a disclaimer: I hate things that can fight and shoot with a passion and a fury (this applies to Hellcannon, ironblasters and Flamers).
That said, the penalty of (what is effectively) -1 BS + a lowering of Strength and a price rise does seem a little much. To be honest a little more of an increase to the price and a drop in combat ability to the old flamers would have served reasonably well, not that I've thought about it extensively. Put me down as a slight overnerf/roughly balanced.

Lord Inquisitor
28-07-2012, 04:58
It does have the stone thrower (which is still pretty deadly to monsters and artillery) and the flame cannon which is potentially pretty nasty in WFB as it comes with a good move. If you can flank an infantry unit you can dance around them flaming them.

sulla
28-07-2012, 05:23
It does have the stone thrower (which is still pretty deadly to monsters and artillery) and the flame cannon which is potentially pretty nasty in WFB as it comes with a good move. If you can flank an infantry unit you can dance around them flaming them.A flame cannon on a model that can march 16" is hellishly useful. Moreso than a stone thrower, I suspect. That will function much like a Cygor in that it's too expensive to waste it's time meandering forward hoping for a one-in-three hit from a stone thrower.

But marching up the flank and enflinading an entire army with a s5 flame template... that will be worth it. Knock 20 guys out of a unit and they won't be steadfast for very long.

Dark Reaper
28-07-2012, 07:39
You cannot march and fire with it.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Tapatalk 2

Sh4d0w
28-07-2012, 10:00
Take the flamers down to strength 4, down to strength 3 even but do not mess with their ranged capabilities, no daemon player will honestly say that they need or warrant strength 5 but why are they giving them a penalty to multi-shot?? IMHO from my experiences shades cause alot of damage than flamers do so why do they feel the need to lower their ranged capabilities? Also to Athlan na Dyr I totally agree with you that things should not be able to fight and shoot well, leaves them with no real weakness.

In short take the strength down, increase price to 40 but DO NOT MESS WITH RANGED CAPABILTIES

DaemonReign
28-07-2012, 10:13
leaves them with no real weakness.

Well to be fair they were a Rare choice, and the still never come in bigger units than 6. ;)

I agree Shades are better than Flamers were - Dark Elves in general have been better than Daemons for a long while.

And yes, reduced Strength is fine, increased cost is fine (I'm ambivalent but if it satisfied disgruntled opponants then fine!) - but the Multiple Shot Penalty is hitting below the belt, and that D6-chart is a very good example of (simply) bad rules-design. You'll forget to roll that D6, and then you'll forget to implement the result - it's just not necessary.

Sh4d0w
28-07-2012, 10:20
Also at the risk of being molested most of you people that are claiming flamers were "all powerful" are just sour grapes. You claim that people that play daemons "have their cake and eat it too" and have done for too long but when you think about it, most of you are supporting this nerf because it does not affect you and makes daemons weaker in general...so yeah >.<

brother_maynard
28-07-2012, 10:46
you're right sh4d0w, i've played 80+ games with my daemons in the past year, and my flamers averaged 3-4 wounds on T4 foes a round in shooting (and thats BEFORE saves). thats enough to reliably kill a great eagle or force a panic test on a unit of fast cav. with the multiple shot penalty, they can't even reliably take down an eagle in one round of shooting, let alone threaten a support unit of similar cost like a hellpit or mortis engine.

it was that ability to basically guarantee the death of an eagle/sabretusk/mangler in one round that kept them in the list, since they can't even do that anymore, its just 240 pts of dead weight. they're going to be dropped for screamers in my competitive lists, and the sweet, sweet irony is that people will STILL think "this guy's list is soft, he's got screamers instead of flamers." :D

HurrDurr
28-07-2012, 18:48
Third part here, never played as or against daemons.

I've read at least up to page 10 and a few things seem apparent. Flamers were overpowered, flamers are now underpowered. I voted slightly overboard, nerfing one strength off of a flamer isn't the same as one strength on a sauras, or a state troop, it seemed kind of random for them to have great melee stats but want to stay mobile and engaged from a range. I don't see anything wrong with them having good ranged power and also being able to provide significant damage on a charge with their stats assuming it was reflected in the cost, they can only do one or the other per turn. WS2 is really not as bad as people make it out to be, not T4 I4 S5 W2 bad anyways. The biggest problem I see is regardless of what they are costed at if they don't meet a certain level of power people won't take them, it would be nice of someone would list out the previous stats compared side by side the new ones to make things clearer.

I don't understand what flamers and handgunners have to do with anything, once again all I have to say is if you don't look at the whole picture, then you don't have the whole story. (correct me if I'm wrong) From what I understand daemons are a relatively low model count army, so one redirect hits a larger chunk of their battle line, that's also messing with more points in a single redirect. Smaller body count armies already take up less space on a table so it's easier to maneuver around the table anyways. I don't even know if anything I'm saying actually holds much influence on the army but I think asking more questions and considering everything else around the Flamers(think strength 5 trebuchet that only gets 1-2 turns to fire because it belongs to an army of knights that charge too soon, just an example) is more constructive than "world of warcraft" style duels between flamers that don't skirmish into the flanks of a perfectly positioning handgunner unit. Looks like this thread has been mostly whining and counter whining.

Lord Inquisitor
28-07-2012, 18:55
A flame cannon on a model that can march 16" is hellishly useful. Moreso than a stone thrower, I suspect. That will function much like a Cygor in that it's too expensive to waste it's time meandering forward hoping for a one-in-three hit from a stone thrower.

But marching up the flank and enflinading an entire army with a s5 flame template... that will be worth it. Knock 20 guys out of a unit and they won't be steadfast for very long.

It's worth pointing out that unlike hydra, grinders can't march and flame. On the other hand they get an extra random distance, although this does make it possible to misfire, overshoot or undershoot, even if a total miss is unlikely.

In games so far I've found the flame cannon is potentially devastating but it isn't useful turn 1 unless your opponent throws his units forward quickly and the grinder is vulnerable to being charged. But if you allow the grinder to break through your lines or flank you, the damage potential is horrific and it is fast enough even without marching it can follow units around and flame them continuously. I was able to do this effectively in one game and if I wasn't shooting chaos warriors with 2+/3++ it might have been rather good!

theunwantedbeing
28-07-2012, 18:57
It's worth pointing out that unlike hydra, grinders can't march and flame.

And it can fire more than once a game.
Whereas the hydra cannot.

Obviously this is 100% irrelevant in most games as they only ever last 2 turns but for that miniscule percentage of games that do play the full 6 turns, it matters.

DaemonReign
28-07-2012, 23:53
Flamers were overpowered, flamers are now underpowered.

I found your post refreshing and pretty much an adult reasoning around this issue. I Think most 'comparative' studies made in this thread are Bullocks too and I very much agree that Flamers (as a Special Choice) needed some toning down (increased cost and lowered Strength would have been quite all right - multiple shots penalty sent them into the sewer - and yes I submit it was very intentional too).

The part you wrote which I quoted should be nuanced thus: Flamers were overpowered in 7th Ed, spot on in 8th Ed, and with this WD-patch they are purposefully underpowered to help sell SoulGrinders and Screamers to Fantasy players.

This, of course, is not based on the contents of this thread, let alone the general 'consensus' anywhere, but rather by extensive experience in using Flamers and knowing for a fact that they're good but not that good. And some sources are more reliable than others - BrotherMaynard just stated he's played over 80 games this year alone and his emphasis is roughly similar to mine. But of course that's conveniently ignored for the benefit of 'consensus' and 'majority' or what-ever you want to call it.

GW knows they wouldn't sell tons of plastic Flamers to Fantasy players regardless of what they did to them - hell I got about 40 models myself (I might get more if they were made a Core Choice haha) - and as long as Flamers were a decent choice that would keep a lot of people from feeling drawn to SoulGrinders and Screamers.

The net result is plus-minus zero for the Army. Daemons are still among "the top ten armies" of the game. I doubt that will ever change actually.

sulla
29-07-2012, 02:14
You cannot march and fire with it.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Tapatalk 2True, but they can march and then fire. That means 5 turns of the sort of devestation my hydra dishes out once per game.... It's worth the cost IMO.

HurrDurr
29-07-2012, 08:44
@DaemonReign

Just as a disclaimer, I voted slightly overboard because personally that's what it looked like from everything I read. I don't really know and could change my mind if I knew the army better. Main point I'm trying to make is that regardless of the fact that I know basically nothing about Daemons, I know the questions that should be getting asked and answered and I'm not seeing any here. I tried to give examples like redirects effecting an army of fewer larger blocks, not necessarily because I think it's true but just to stimulate more wholesome debates because I don't know enough to have a real say in it.

Urgat
29-07-2012, 09:12
True, but they can march and then fire. That means 5 turns of the sort of devestation my hydra dishes out once per game.... It's worth the cost IMO.

Nobody will let you shoot that 5 times. Regardless of it's toughness, it IS kinda weak in close combat against any decently big unit. Since it has to either shoot or move, either it'll have to evade being charged (and therefore won't shoot, you don't do that with basic movement), either it shoots only once and gets charged. Well, of course, your opponent won't be able to do much about it if he runs only a big horde... in fact, it might be very good for the metagame of WFB, if I think about it.

Dark Reaper
29-07-2012, 11:11
True, but they can march and then fire. That means 5 turns of the sort of devestation my hydra dishes out once per game.... It's worth the cost IMO.

Good point. In fact I can't remember last time my hydra did a s5 breath attack either as opponents usually manages to pick off a few wounds before it comes too close, knowing full well what a s5 breath does.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Tapatalk 2

DaemonReign
29-07-2012, 13:41
@ HurrDurr - Daemons actually have quite a bit of units that work well as re-directors. The Changes to Flamers probably won't effect this so much. Moving Fiends to Special and setting their min-unit size to 3+, for example, would have a greater impact.

Dark Reaper - Yeah well the Hydra is Another really good unit that's excessively described as 'broken' over-and-over again as if stating it with repetition makes it any more true. I've played against Dark Elves a lot and there are much worse things in that last aside of the War Hydra - because [yes] knock ~2 wounds of it and you've pretty much 'defanged' it.

Urgat
29-07-2012, 14:38
People complain about dual hydras, Daemonreign. And they're cheap enough so that dual hydras can be used in smaller games (you can have two in a 1500pts game).

sulla
29-07-2012, 19:03
Nobody will let you shoot that 5 times. Regardless of it's toughness, it IS kinda weak in close combat against any decently big unit. Since it has to either shoot or move, either it'll have to evade being charged (and therefore won't shoot, you don't do that with basic movement), either it shoots only once and gets charged. Well, of course, your opponent won't be able to do much about it if he runs only a big horde... in fact, it might be very good for the metagame of WFB, if I think about it.In combat, the main thing about it is it won't give up masses of CR. So it can happily combo in combat with your average bloodletter horde or greater daemon. Stomps make it about zero CR vs the static res of the unit and the daemons should win most combats, especially if the soulgrinder manages to knock a few ranks off first.

I don't mean to imply it's an autoinclude unit, but it's fairly priced for what it can do with the flame cannon and claw and a better option than any of the specials or rares if you wanted an extra combat unit that wasn't a bloodletter horde. Other units like screamers are more versatile but the soulgrinder is not bad for it's cost.

snottlebocket
29-07-2012, 19:07
Shame they didn't increase their weapon skill as well. Originally flamers were m9, ws4, str5, i5, 2a units with a very short ranged shooting attack. They were amazing at using their speed to zoom around flanks. Shoot at units you didn't want to charge like archers before charging into combat. They packed quite a punch.

Right now they're halfway combat unit, halfway shooting unit and no longer great at either.

Maoriboy007
29-07-2012, 21:06
Some people seem to be giving the impression that Flamers were significantly depowered in 8th edition, but having played against them I don't see it. They still pump out brutal amounts of damage that will likely wipe out any small elite unit and even put dents in infantry blocks. Its probably more that hordes absorb the punishment and remain functional, but they still get to suffer the casualties flamers cause.
As far as I can tell flamers are no more worse of than any other shooting unit, other than having to pay a premium for the admittedly awesome demonic rules, being able to field as many shots as other units with fewer models, and skirmishing with some CC ability thrown in.
As far as it just being sour grapes goes, undead got way more flak , and they weren't a patch on demons, and Demons are by no means a weak army in 8th, they certainly came away less scarred from the edition changes. I fully expect the rest of the army to be just as nasty if screamers are any indication, so complaining about flamers is a bit much.
In all honestly I think they did worse to more Tomb Kings units , from that point of view Demon players can cry me a river....

fubukii
29-07-2012, 21:36
unit of 6 flamers, 240 poins 12 wounds, on avg 21 shots MS pen means, if standing still the following....

10 hits
on the move 7 hits
long range stationary 7 hits
Long range on the move 3.36 hits.
240 pts for on avg 6.6 wounds to a toughness 3 unit. No one sees that as terrible?

Pre nerf
long range no move 21 shots, 10 hits
move short range the same
No move no long range (wtf how did you let this happen) 14 hits. 9 wounds vs t3

Post nerf is way Underpowered, pre nerf is good but not the OMG IT WIPES ENTIRE units like people claim.

Fact leadblechers are better pre and post nerf but no one complains about them. Better in cc, more wounds, and now MUCH better shooting, impact hits and with new general and bsb rules in this edition never flee (unless raped in combat in which the flamers would poof) anyway. Also have the option to flee as a reaction. LEts nerf lead blechers to.

The bearded one
29-07-2012, 23:07
Post nerf is way Underpowered, pre nerf is good but not the OMG IT WIPES ENTIRE units like people claim.

I dunno, 6-9 wounds in one go, and when standing still at short nearly 10, that's a pretty damn substantial part of most units. Few ballistic skill shooting does something like that. The impact of those numbers might be more apparent when you are on the battlefield, and have to remove a third or a quarter of your unit after one shooting phase. 9 kills is generally what about 1 round of my skink and chameleon skirmishers can achieve, but that's 50 models.


Fact leadblechers are better pre and post nerf but no one complains about them. Better in cc, more wounds, and now MUCH better shooting, impact hits and with new general and bsb rules in this edition never flee (unless raped in combat in which the flamers would poof) anyway. Also have the option to flee as a reaction. LEts nerf lead blechers to.

Leadbelchers are also good, but on the other hand, leadbelchers have to charge to receive the benefit of their impact hits, something a shooting unit doesn't want to do, with both leadbelchers and flamers their combat stats by themselves are a deterrent for charging them at all, but impact hits are unlikely to come into play with 'belchers. Leadbelcher wound and attack stats are better, and they have a stomp, though they don't have a wardsave or daemonic instability, are slower initiativewise and do not have the advantage of being skirmisher (advantageous for a shooting unit), and are of course slightly more expensive. As a point of concilliation however, I and I think most others do think the 5pt increase was a bit too much above the other nerfs. So adjusting for that an ogre leadbelcher seems pretty fair compared to a flamer when pricing the flamer at their old price of 35pts. The leadbelcher is not really overpowered now, the flamer is simply a bit too expensive in this comparison.

More importantly however, psychology still is a very important thing for leadbelchers. Leadbelchers are definately not a priority for a player to have within the general-bsb bubbles. They are a support unit on the sidelines, while the irongut and mournfang units are kept into those bubbels. In most games against ogres I have played thus far, they are not very near to the general, and with a poor leadership of 7 they are highly susceptible to panic (particularly because they tend to be in small units). A point that strikes me odd with a leadbelcher<->flamer comparison, is daemonic instability compared to regular breaktesting. If you beat the ogres by a single point, they test on ld6. If you do the same to flamers, they also do the same, but don't break but lose several wounds instead, and will need to roll very high to poof entirely. Unless you got heavily clobbered the odds are quite high at least 1 wound of a flamer will remain, I've seen it plenty of times (possibly every time I assaulted flamers :p I remember at least two times when a horde of 35 dwarf warriors with great weapons got stopped in their tracks, because the last few wounds on the flamers wouldn't budge).

Then again, my daemongames are silly. I'm convinced amongst onlookers there's a hooded Tzeentchfollower jedi-controlling the dice. :D

HalfBlood
29-07-2012, 23:09
Oh trust me we had long discussions about the flamer nerfs. Just dont take them and take the shiny new Screamers or Soulgrinder, or Chariots.

DaemonReign
29-07-2012, 23:15
240 pts for on avg 6.6 wounds to a toughness 3 unit. No one sees that as terrible?

Oh it's terrible all right. :)

EDIT
*lol* Halfblood yeah it's just painstakingly obvious what's happened here.. It's nothing but a sales-trick and there's little more to be said about it really.

HalfBlood
29-07-2012, 23:20
For sales yes, and thats what GW is all about. Atleast Flamers got better in 40k...

DaemonReign
29-07-2012, 23:26
... Because that's where they expect to sell some more of them. Yes.

The bearded one
29-07-2012, 23:29
Seems a rather arbitrary pick of unit to nerf in that case, especially when you're releasing a plastic kit for them and nerf it for half your daemon customerbase, instead of switching up plaguebearers and bloodletters. I imagine plaguebearersales to have been quite low before now. That way they wouldn't have had to nerf the model they were releasing in plastic and would've nerfed an old one that had payed itself off already. You're going to need more plaguebearers too, anyway. I think it'd make more sense from a bussines standpoint, as the new plastic flamers are still going to need to pay off for themselves and they just nerfed them for half of the daemonusers. Existing daemonplayers already have the models, sure, but new ones don't, and GW is focussing more on new 'short-time' customers anyway, rather than veterans.

I think it is GW using this leaflet to do the standard stuff of changing units they're bringing new models out for (a practice generally seen during new armybooks, but now during this leaflet), such as seen with the screamers so that they'd actually sell any at all, but incidentaly also nerf a unit considered to be a bit too powerful (and naturally coming down heavyhanded. Case in point; mortars and ghouls).

Lord Inquisitor
29-07-2012, 23:47
The other thing to remember is leadbelchers aren't even all that. They're okay and you can make them work but they're far from the most competitive unit in the book. Perhaps that is partially to do with the context of the book (I'd take 'em if they were core) and certainly if they were available to Empire that might be another story but they certainly aren't overly cheap.

fubukii
29-07-2012, 23:57
Oh it's terrible all right. :)

EDIT
*lol* Halfblood yeah it's just painstakingly obvious what's happened here.. It's nothing but a sales-trick and there's little more to be said about it really.

Terrible enough to not be included in my tournament lists. Just take a soul grinder instead, sucks since i have 18 painted flamers. I can name plenty of shooting options that are leagues better.

Flamers dropped and soulgrinder added.

DaemonReign
30-07-2012, 00:39
Seems a rather arbitrary pick of unit to nerf in that case

Any self-respecting Fantasy player already have 18 Flamers.
They'll sell more in 40k, and by making them damn near useless they create a suitable 'void' for the SG and new-and-improved Screamers to fill (in Fantasy).

In part, also, the heavy-handedness is probably 'our own fault'. I've always said/thought that GW listenning to whining is the biggest danger this hobby faces. Ghouls and Mortars were subjected to this as well, so it's not something that singles out Daemons as some poor lonely victim.

Bottom line: I think it's a shame that rules evidently can't be written with integrity toward The Game. 8th Ed is such an awesome Edition. It's really a shame they can't just shut the world and their quarterly reports out from Rules Design.

Not gonna use the SoulGrinder, nor the rules-patch.. Sad but true.

Doommasters
30-07-2012, 01:17
Terrible enough to not be included in my tournament lists. Just take a soul grinder instead, sucks since i have 18 painted flamers. I can name plenty of shooting options that are leagues better.

Flamers dropped and soulgrinder added.

Played a friends DoC over the weekend to test out the new rules, just leave the flammers at home they really are that bad. Just when GW were getting some credit for the quality of 8th edition rules balance they go and do this. Lets hope they correct it when the DoC get an offical army book becuase right now the best place for Flammers is on Ebay.

The bearded one
30-07-2012, 01:50
Any self-respecting Fantasy player already have 18 Flamers.

Don't most also have a billion bloodletters, but virtually 0 plaguebearers?


Played a friends DoC over the weekend to test out the new rules, just leave the flammers at home they really are that bad.

Leadbelchers at long range are equally good at shooting as flamers that are either at short range, or standing still (eg. 5+ to hit). Last time I faced those leadbelchers, they killed 6 minotaurs. Luckily those minotaurs were only my doombull's escort service anyway, but those poor cows, they will never be able to play the violin again. :(

Lord Inquisitor
30-07-2012, 02:00
The only part in this that possibly makes sense is the significant buff in 40K. Then I could accept that GW are trying to sell the new plastics to the 40K daemon players maybe they might be trying to push players towards other entries.

But still it doesn't make that much sense. No, not every daemon player has twelve, I have three and they're based on daemonette models. If you want to sell more plastics, why not nerf fiends? Why not nerf bloodletters and buff plaguebearers?

I'm going to ascribe incompetence rather than malice here. GW have a long history of over-nerfing anything that's too good. Or turning anything rubbish into too good. Typically they'll come up with one or two "fixes" to the rules and a points change and then implement them all. Assault cannons were rubbish in 3rd. They could have given them rending, they could have given them an extra shot, they could have made them cheaper. They did all three and you saw them all over the place. Starcannon were everywhere, then they nerfed them and put up the points now you don't see them ever. Storm shields, etc. 8th ed WFB has been rather free of this sort of thing with more attention to balance but examples exist throughout the editions.

DaemonReign
30-07-2012, 02:06
Pb's will sell themselves just by being 10-in-a-box and not metal.
Screamers and Flamers were updated with new rules in part because they were released together, and in the case of Flamers also because the Rare section would otherwise become crowded with the addition of the SoulGrinder.
Patching units that are not being redone would amount to making a new Army book.
I know you got a bone to pick with BL's TBO, and I agree they should go up a point in cost, but there are many more units in the DoC book that would need some fixing too.

No, this release was all about paving the way for maximized revenue in the short term for the new units being released, as well as making sure the SoulGrinder becomes a common thing in fantasy (and fast).

I don't care too much what power level Daemons have in general. In the rules I play by myself they are pretty nerfed and I've lost 75% of all games so far - but rules made with one eye on a balance sheet just stinks as far as I am concerned. Key word I like to use is simply: Integrity!

So yeah lots of nice models. Which is great. But the rules-patch is a ****.
EDIT
Hey Lord Inq.. Maybe you're right and GW games development are just phoneys through-and-through.. If the sales-trick explanation doesn't hold that's the only alternative left. :(

The bearded one
30-07-2012, 02:14
Nerfing bloodletters for president!


Pb's will sell themselves just by being 10-in-a-box and not metal.

But that makes me wonder why plaguebearers received nothing to make them more appealing, while screamers got buffed through the roof. neither was very popular, both received plastic kits. Nurglings could actually be added here also, as they share another similarity with screamers, being a special choice too, and coming with 3 models/bases in a box as well. Yet screamers go the buff, while their nurgley counterparts remained untouched (quite rightly so maybe. They're nurgle after all, you shouldn't touch that!). I'm gonna stick to LI's theory on this one. A bit of fumbling for new models (I'm guessing screamersales were simply so abysmal before they didn't want to let this plastic kit be a waste) and characteristically overreacted 'fixing'.

Lord Dan
30-07-2012, 02:29
But that makes me wonder why plaguebearers received nothing to make them more appealing, while screamers got buffed through the roof. neither was very popular, both received plastic kits.

"Alright gentlemen, how are the rules updates coming for those new plastic kits?"
"Good, good. We're running behind with the updates on the nurgle stuff."
"Okay. How behind?"
"I mean, the WD goes out next week. We'll probably need to work overtime to g-"
"NO! Er, I mean, no. No overtime. That's unacceptable."
"Well, either that or we go without updates for the nurgle stuff."
"That'll have to do."
"Although, here. With what we have it only takes up just over a page."
"No, no that won't do. Let's put in a Soulgrinder an-"
"You mean the tank?"
"That's the one. Add that in with some fantasy-esque rules, and then nerf something through the floor so we don't seem biased."
"Flamers? They seem strong."
"Good. How much room does that take up?"
"2 pages now, sir."
"Excellent. Double space that bad boy and order in some pizza."

Doommasters
30-07-2012, 03:14
"Alright gentlemen, how are the rules updates coming for those new plastic kits?"
"Good, good. We're running behind with the updates on the nurgle stuff."
"Okay. How behind?"
"I mean, the WD goes out next week. We'll probably need to work overtime to g-"
"NO! Er, I mean, no. No overtime. That's unacceptable."
"Well, either that or we go without updates for the nurgle stuff."
"That'll have to do."
"Although, here. With what we have it only takes up just over a page."
"No, no that won't do. Let's put in a Soulgrinder an-"
"You mean the tank?"
"That's the one. Add that in with some fantasy-esque rules, and then nerf something through the floor so we don't seem biased."
"Flamers? They seem strong."
"Good. How much room does that take up?"
"2 pages now, sir."
"Excellent. Double space that bad boy and order in some pizza."

Well at least they get a chance at redemption come the 8th DoC army book right......the question is will they admit their mistake? As much hate as most players have for DoC most playres can see the clear disregard for balance is this 'patch'.

fubukii
30-07-2012, 03:18
I really like the new plague bearers and i think they are a solid single unit with the reroll wound banner, only init based spells cause them trouble. Its a shame i own 40 of the old metal ones.

DaemonReign
30-07-2012, 03:45
Nerfing bloodletters for president! But that makes me wonder why plaguebearers received nothing to make them more appealing, while screamers got buffed through the roof.

Regardless of what 'people think', and as fubukii already said, Plaguebearers are actually the one Core unit we have right now that's arguably worth ~12pts. So it would have been rather terrible, in my opinion, if they had been buffed. Daemonettes are about as overcosted as BL's are undercosted, and Horrors need a whole new Magic Lore before their value can even be assessed so that's a whole quagmire of little edits.

Screamers look almost like LordInq described the process - they could have given them like half of those changes and called it a day and it would have been 'just right'. And with Flamers they went way, way, overboard with the multiple-shot penalty while that new D6-chart looks mostly like someone's private pet-baby that didn't get killed in time.

EDIT
And frankly I don't understand how you can even doubt the obvious sales-tactics behind these changes..
- Is it even a question whether or not Flamers were moved to Special in order to make room for the SoulGrinder?
- Is it even a question whether or not Screamers were heavily buffed in order to sell?
- Once in the Special section, wouldn't Flamers have hurt the sales of Screamers if the remained anything resembling 'useable'?
- Meanwhile, Flamers are slightly improved in 40k.

So what you guys are saying is basically that this clockwork-interaction between the units being released/patched-for-fantasy is just something that happened by happenstance, and that it's really all 'blind luck' which in reality stems from a team of monkeys armed with crayons sitting around reading whine-mails.. (?)
Not saying you're wrong, but.. I'd like to believe there's at least some coherent thought behind this (even if it's the wrong kind of thoughts - i.e. business-related rather than game-related)

GrandmasterWang
30-07-2012, 07:31
Hmm, I think its telling that the most vocal complainers to the flamer change describe them as a "solid to good" choice in 8th.

I personally think they were ridiculously op as do most I play with. Very hard to get rid of with ridiculous shooting. I still think they would (current) win a lot of math hammer shootouts. (prove me wrong fellas). Maybe a slight overnerf but this is much better than they were. Now people actually have to use them well to get great results.

Remember as well that technically daemons should pay a premium for shooting. Very glad flamers have been balanced. 18 of the old broken blighters was a nightmare to face and I remember fielding 18 a couple of times myself (shudder)

I have the update in front of me. Are the new flamers more balanced than the old ones.... Yes!!! Does the soul grinder replace flamers... No! It fulfills a completely different role. Fun fact~ a fully upgraded grinder is 10 pts less than a destroyer.

Warp gaze ( bolt thrower) upgrade is 55. I do like the ini test claw upgrade. Tomb kings, dwarfs and ogres beware.

Good job games workshop.

Dark Reaper
30-07-2012, 08:05
Honestly, with the amount of misprints in the leaflet, I wouldn't be overly surprised if someone simply forgot about a rule where flamers shouldn't get penalty for multiple shots. If things turns out to bad, you could always just insist that they have bs5 seeing as that is what is printed at the start of the leaflet. They also have the option to upgrade one flamer to a pyrocaster with bs4. The chariot profiles are also pretty weird in places.

Zeroth
30-07-2012, 09:13
Did it go too far? Maybe not, but it went "far enough", they won't make it into my lists far as often as they used to. They were actually performing so-so in my games, but that might be more of a meta thing.

fubukii
30-07-2012, 09:22
If flamers are So op how does your group look at salamanders and leadblechers... :)?

Flamers were solid to good pre nerf, and average to bad with the nerf. The new magic lores implemented plenty of easy ways to deal with them, in addition to making block units more manueverable.

GrandmasterWang
30-07-2012, 09:37
Leadbelchers are fine, salamanders are op.

The thing is, with -1 to shoot at them, flamers are hard to shoot to death. Now they are much less dangerous in combat which is a great thing.

I would like to see a poll as to which is more balanced, old or new