PDA

View Full Version : New Chaos FAQ: Hellbrute Point reduction



Azulthar
20-10-2012, 00:19
Sorry if this was already posted.

The new Chaos FAQ (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2710181a_Chaos_Space_Marines_v1.0a.pdf), in addition to being very quickly released, also did something that I've rarely (ever?) seen in a FAQ: it reduces the point cost of a unit. The Hellbrute is now 100 points, instead of a 105.

Any reason why they did this? It's too soon for a balance pass, and GW never concerns itself with balance passes t̶h̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶F̶A̶Q̶s̶ anyway.

GrandDukeJerot
20-10-2012, 00:21
I'm hoping its a new step in GW policy where they "patch" their books periodically to keep them balanced.

Kevlar
20-10-2012, 00:21
Sorry if this was already posted.

The new Chaos FAQ (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2710181a_Chaos_Space_Marines_v1.0a.pdf), in addition to being very quickly released, also did something that I've rarely (ever?) seen in a FAQ: it reduces the point cost of a unit. The Hellbrute is now 100 points, instead of a 105.

Any reason why they did this? It's too soon for a balance pass, and GW never concerns itself with balance passes t̶h̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶F̶A̶Q̶s̶ anyway.

No idea, but five points isn't going to make it competitive.

RanaldLoec
20-10-2012, 00:24
Glad to see Typhus can take more than 10 zombies.

Bubble Ghost
20-10-2012, 00:28
It was probably just a production error, i.e. it was always supposed to have been 100 but the wrong figure was printed for whatever reason. That said, I still don't quite understand why they'd bother to correct it in an FAQ.

MajorWesJanson
20-10-2012, 00:41
I suspect the 105 number was due to simply taking the SM dreadnought statline/entry to start, then changing it to make it chaos.
If they want to make it more competitive, the next errata will add the line: The Helbrute may select options from the chaos vehicle armory at the point costs stated.

The_Klobb_Maniac
20-10-2012, 00:42
lmao, did they seriously fix the termies weapons thing*? That surprises the living balls out of me.

*I can't check at the moment as I don't own the codex. I can't remember which that option is.

@MJ
yeah, it's a drag that it can't have vehicle options.

vladmech
20-10-2012, 00:53
If I remember correctly, this is the first time since 6th edition Warhammer Fantasy with the Dark Elves FAQ that they actually changed the point cost on something, right?

(Side note, that was awesome as they spaced it properly to just print out and glue in your codex over the old entries.)

vladmech
20-10-2012, 00:55
lmao, did they seriously fix the termies weapons thing*? That surprises the living balls out of me.

*I can't check at the moment as I don't own the codex. I can't remember which that option is.

@MJ
yeah, it's a drag that it can't have vehicle options.

Yeah it's replacing the 'choose one of the three options below' to being able to mix and match your weapons as you see fit.

Wyrmwood
20-10-2012, 01:12
I expected the Axe of Blind Fury and terminator weapon options to be FAQ'd, though not this quickly. Strange that the Helbrute has been reduced in cost a little. Too soon to tell what effect that will have.

solkan
20-10-2012, 01:41
The account in other forums is that the 100 point cost was the value published in the other language versions, and thus the change has nothing to do with balance. In other words, even point costs can have typos.

Daedalus81
20-10-2012, 02:57
I'm hoping its a new step in GW policy where they "patch" their books periodically to keep them balanced.

They have been doing this in fantasy for a while already...

BaloOrk
20-10-2012, 04:18
Nice quickfix, keep it up whoever is responsible

GrandDukeJerot
20-10-2012, 05:22
They have been doing this in fantasy for a while already...

Well I havent played fantasy in any serious capacity since high school.

EvilFuzzyDoom
20-10-2012, 05:46
That is great, all of it. I'm glad I don't have to pull apart all my old termies with powerfists & combimeltas!

Clarkson
20-10-2012, 05:51
is this also the record for shortest FAQ?

MajorWesJanson
20-10-2012, 05:54
is this also the record for shortest FAQ?


Technically, yes, with a grand total of 0 FAQs on it.
It's an errata published in the FAQ format.

Clarkson
20-10-2012, 06:12
Technically, yes, with a grand total of 0 FAQs on it.
It's an errata published in the FAQ format.

shortest errata?

Hashulaman
20-10-2012, 06:54
I don't remember an Errata/FAQ coming out only 2 weeks after game launch either. Then again I haven't kept up on FAQ's. I never imagined it would be so fast.

Clarkson
20-10-2012, 06:58
I don't remember an Errata/FAQ coming out only 2 weeks after game launch either. Then again I haven't kept up on FAQ's. I never imagined it would be so fast.

I meant the fact it had 4 things on it that could have easily have waited until a full on faq in january or late december.

the zombies is obvious. the axe was unintended.. the hellbrute was 5points off and the termie one wasnt a deal breaker

Swordsman
20-10-2012, 06:59
I was hoping for eternal warrior on Princes. :/

ehlijen
20-10-2012, 07:02
I meant the fact it had 4 things on it that could have easily have waited until a full on faq in january or late december.

the zombies is obvious. the axe was unintended.. the hellbrute was 5points off and the termie one wasnt a deal breaker

I disagree on the termie one. Letting people know as soon as possible that they don't need to snap the arms of their termies to remain tournament legal was an important thing to get right.

Scammel
20-10-2012, 09:25
I was hoping for eternal warrior on Princes. :/

The the fact that this wasn't considered an immediate and obvious fix makes me wonder if this'll happen at all, but they could quite easily change their minds between this and the next update.

Vaktathi
20-10-2012, 09:32
Very interesting indeed, I can't recall the last time they changed a cost for something, aside from the big SM wargear update to make it so we didn't have 3 different stormshield rules and the like. In fact, I don't think they ever have. Now, there's still issues with the Helbrute, such as it's wonky upgrade costs and complete lack of standard wargear and having to pay for weapons that other dreadnoughts get free and the like (in addition to the fact that it has a lifespan of about 20 seconds on a 6E field thanks to Hull Points), but a step in the right direction and frees up 15 very desperately needed points in my walker-horde list :)


I really like where it's going. A bit sparse, but relatively quick and addressing some major issues. Kudos to GW for a good job so far here. Now if only they'd done it right the first time and spent 20 minutes doing some basic proofreading :P

EDIT: apparently the Helbrute cost change was actually because it was supposed to be 100pts and the printer narfed it, as non-english print editions show it as 100pts.

ljal
20-10-2012, 12:19
Whatever the reason: GW appears to wake up in modern update-frequent world :) New blood in GW maybe? This way or another: Good job.
BTW I remember really quite quick fix on Tyranids in 5 ed (?) cause first version made people hate new rules.
TO GW: more faqs on many conundrum issues!!!
EG: Does Helldrake vector strike nullify Jink on flyers or not?

Grocklock
20-10-2012, 12:39
This speedy turn around could be due to the fact people are emailing in their Questions to GW. So as more people ask them questions the more FAQs will come out.

logan054
20-10-2012, 12:50
I was hoping for eternal warrior on Princes. :/

I imagine they lost it because daemons will as well.

nosebiter
20-10-2012, 13:14
Extremely embarrasinh that the book even needs to be erataed this much 2 weeks after its release

Dark Primus
20-10-2012, 13:33
And a Daemon Prince of Khorne now can take Axe of Blind Fury?! AWESOME! :D I can imagine a lot of potential Khorne armies lead by a DP of Khorne will have that weapon now.

Must check the number of attacks it can bring to bear on the foe here.
DP number of attacks 5 + rage = 2 attacks + D6 attacks = 13 attacks :p = nerd orgasm
Plus
Daemon of Khorne - Furious Charge = 1 strength when attacking.
Axe of Blind Fury = +2 strength ap 2, Blinded, Daemon weapon.

Minus 1 on Weapon Skill and Ballistic skill
Conclusion DP charges with I8, WS8, Strength 9 up to maximum 13 attacks :D *second nerdgasm*

Still worth taking a DP.

BasetheRuin
20-10-2012, 13:38
Hurrah!

http://i1169.photobucket.com/albums/r509/bcderue/BlackLegionTermie12_zpsfe051c5e.jpg

On behalf of the United Terminator Front we thank you for letting us keep our arms GW.

Good job!

jay court
20-10-2012, 13:57
Can't see the the point of reducing the Helbrute by 5 points.

A.T.
20-10-2012, 14:13
Can't see the the point of reducing the Helbrute by 5 points.Correcting a misprint so that it's not priced differently in different languages.

Cthell
20-10-2012, 15:21
I imagine they lost it because daemons will as well.

Why don't I think that, if that happens (which I agree seems likely), they won't remove the "Demonbane" rule from Nemesis force weapons?

Dangersaurus
20-10-2012, 17:22
shortest errata?

IIRC, the shortest FAQ/errata was the original Planetstrike FAQ (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m640095a_FAQ_Planetstrike_Oct2009.pdf) with two answers. The word-count might be higher than the CSM FAQ though.

Valorel
20-10-2012, 18:12
Extremely embarrasinh that the book even needs to be erataed this much 2 weeks after its release

"This much"? 8 erratas, half of which are more clarifications than modifications?

Voss
20-10-2012, 18:53
I meant the fact it had 4 things on it that could have easily have waited until a full on faq in january or late december.
No reason to encourage them to be lazy. See problem, fix problem is a good work ethic, and to the benefit of everyone involved.

duffybear1988
20-10-2012, 18:58
I don't know whether to be happy or dismayed...

On the one hand they have released an FAQ/errata really quickly, on the other hand things like getting points costs and weapons options incorrect is laughable for the 'leading miniatures company in the world'.

This is doubly worrying because the books have gone up in price, and nobody wants to introduce a friend to the game and then tell them to buy a brand spankingly new codex, and then to hit up the website for an FAQ because the company couldn't do their jobs properly to begin with.

Swordsman
20-10-2012, 19:09
I imagine they lost it because daemons will as well.

If that's true, they better start stripping eternal warrior off anyone who isn't the absolute top-tier HQ of their codex. Because as it stands, an Imperial Guard hero (Yarrick), is more resilient than a Daemon-Prince..

This game makes less sense - from a fluff standpoint - by the moment.

Lord Inquisitor
20-10-2012, 19:24
My guess is that these are issues that came up before release or soon after and we'll see a full FAQ at a later date.

Poseidal
20-10-2012, 19:27
Eternal Warrior was originally something for the Eldar Phoenix Lords to represent the undying nature of them — and they paid dearly for that in points and not having an invulnerable save (apart from Asurmen, who was absurdly expensive for what he did).

Then it got handed out to more models with invulnerable, and given to HQ special characters with no explanation whatsoever.

logan054
20-10-2012, 19:36
Why don't I think that, if that happens (which I agree seems likely), they won't remove the "Demonbane" rule from Nemesis force weapons?

They might well do, I think its obvious they only reason they had it was because of daemons having ET, even if they don't, how often do you fail those leadership 10 tests?


If that's true, they better start stripping eternal warrior off anyone who isn't the absolute top-tier HQ of their codex. Because as it stands, an Imperial Guard hero (Yarrick), is more resilient than a Daemon-Prince..

This game makes less sense - from a fluff standpoint - by the moment.

ET is really overused, so I do hope they strip it back to a very select few.

Swordsman
20-10-2012, 19:45
Eternal Warrior was originally something for the Eldar Phoenix Lords to represent the undying nature of them and they paid dearly for that in points and not having an invulnerable save (apart from Asurmen, who was absurdly expensive for what he did).

Then it got handed out to more models with invulnerable, and given to HQ special characters with no explanation whatsoever.

Well, Daemon-Princes already have the absurd price going for them; and I'm pretty sure they're a lot more undying than an Eldar. ;)

Poseidal
20-10-2012, 19:52
Well, Daemon-Princes already have the absurd price going for them; and I'm pretty sure they're a lot more undying than an Eldar. ;)

Phoenix Lords in a way are Daemon-Princes anyway.

The problem was Force Weapons should never have been an Instant Death weapon, which was put in during 3rd edition which makes zero sense since the enemy they're meant to be effective against (daemons) were immune to it (in 2nd, they ignored the daemonic aura save). Now mastery levels are back, along with Warp Charges (force cards I guess) they had the opportunity to undo some of the mess 3rd edition made but they didn't.

ehlijen
21-10-2012, 01:28
Phoenix Lords in a way are Daemon-Princes anyway.

The problem was Force Weapons should never have been an Instant Death weapon, which was put in during 3rd edition which makes zero sense since the enemy they're meant to be effective against (daemons) were immune to it (in 2nd, they ignored the daemonic aura save). Now mastery levels are back, along with Warp Charges (force cards I guess) they had the opportunity to undo some of the mess 3rd edition made but they didn't.

That's not quite how it was. In 3rd ed force weapons caused super instant death that was not negated by the usual (and rare) ID protection (which always specified it was against doublt T only). Deamons had no protection from it.
In the 3.5 chaos dex, princes and lords could be made immune to the double T one only and a khorne one could get a 2+ save against FW wounds, but no deamon was immnune to ID yet.

Then GKs got the first force weapons that were greater than S4 (up till now, most MCs didn't fear FWs because they came on S4 or 3 models).

It wasn't until the actual deamons codex at the end of 4th that deamons got blanket eternal warrior. And frankly, they shouldn't have. Forceweapons should have just stayed at S4 (5 with FC) max and in small numbers.

Right now, not everyone plays GKs or BA, but everyone gets smacked with useless ID tools because those two armies can't have it too easy. If someone brings a primaris psyker, they pay points for that S3 FW. It should get to do stuff once in a while. If someone brings a railgun, it should get to ID T5 stuff, that's why it costs what it costs.

logan054
21-10-2012, 01:54
Phoenix Lords in a way are Daemon-Princes anyway.

The problem was Force Weapons should never have been an Instant Death weapon, which was put in during 3rd edition which makes zero sense since the enemy they're meant to be effective against (daemons) were immune to it (in 2nd, they ignored the daemonic aura save). Now mastery levels are back, along with Warp Charges (force cards I guess) they had the opportunity to undo some of the mess 3rd edition made but they didn't.

lol, don't be silly, why change silly things when you can add even more silly things!

destroyerlord
21-10-2012, 09:03
Wow that was super quick. It is a strange errata though, 5 points won't make or break a unit.

damiengore
21-10-2012, 17:13
the reason they dropped the hellbrute 5 pts is because it doesn't come with a storm bolter or combi bolter like its imperial counterpart, that upgrade is 5pts!

Kevlar
21-10-2012, 19:40
the reason they dropped the hellbrute 5 pts is because it doesn't come with a storm bolter or combi bolter like its imperial counterpart, that upgrade is 5pts!

Or it was just a misprint since all the other language editions had it at 100.

Minsc
21-10-2012, 19:44
Or it was just a misprint since all the other language editions had it at 100.

It's probably both actually.
The other language-editions have it at 100 pts because it doesn't have a combi-bolter.
The english version was a missprint on the pointcost.

Lord Inquisitor
21-10-2012, 19:44
Yeah, it appears to just be a simple misprint, nothing to do with game balance at all.

Cheeslord
21-10-2012, 23:55
If that's true, they better start stripping eternal warrior off anyone who isn't the absolute top-tier HQ of their codex. Because as it stands, an Imperial Guard hero (Yarrick), is more resilient than a Daemon-Prince..

This game makes less sense - from a fluff standpoint - by the moment.

Well, anyone who isn't Space Marines is probably not worthy of Eternal Warrior. With the Grey knight codex sitting like the proverbial elephant in the room however, anything without eternal warrior that relies on multi-wound models cannot be balanced. I am a bit worried the next Daemon codex will "Nid" them up...


If someone brings a railgun, it should get to ID T5 stuff, that's why it costs what it costs.

In the massively outdated and generally considered underpowered tau codex, a railgun (actually a broadside with twin-linked railgun) costs less than a single T5 Daemon prince that it will 1-shot...



Mark.

ehlijen
22-10-2012, 04:32
Tau railguns are supposed to make up for the fact that they don't get powerfists, so I see no problem with a deamon prince actually having to fear Tau guns as much as a land raider does.

The game shouldn't be balanced against grey knights with too much EW anymore than against DE with too much poison resistance or against Necrons with too much glancing protection on vehicles.

Do GKs have too many forceweapons? Yes they do. But that doesn't mean that giving them slightly more than other races is a bad idea (just not this many more). After all, there are plenty of choices in the chaos codex that don't give one care about FWs over power weapons, so chaos isn't impotent against them.

Baaltor
22-10-2012, 04:47
I meant the fact it had 4 things on it that could have easily have waited until a full on faq in january or late december.

the zombies is obvious. the axe was unintended.. the hellbrute was 5points off and the termie one wasnt a deal breaker

Stop complaining about quick and effective service.

MajorWesJanson
22-10-2012, 05:26
Well, anyone who isn't Space Marines is probably not worthy of Eternal Warrior. With the Grey knight codex sitting like the proverbial elephant in the room however, anything without eternal warrior that relies on multi-wound models cannot be balanced. I am a bit worried the next Daemon codex will "Nid" them up...



In the massively outdated and generally considered underpowered tau codex, a railgun (actually a broadside with twin-linked railgun) costs less than a single T5 Daemon prince that it will 1-shot...



Mark.

True, but you get into CC with Tau, and they are toast. They are a glass cannon army. their skimmers get great saves from range, but get in close and they fold pretty fast too.

loveless
22-10-2012, 05:30
So...how long before these edits gets rolled into the next printing of the Chaos Marine Codex? I haven't picked it up yet, and I'd just as soon wait...or is GW not that helpful?

I assume the iBook version will be updated soon.

Murphey
22-10-2012, 05:31
...so I see no problem with a deamon prince actually having to fear Tau guns as much as a land raider does.


I would actually disagree with this. Monstrous creatures, ideally at least, have a different cost benefit setup than vehicles. Vehicles are, by and large, immune to small arms fire. Monstrous creatures are not. (Show me one monstrous creature immune to str 7 weapons) Conversely, once you overcome that strength threashold on vehicles, they have a good chance of simply dying outright. Monstrous creatures' dynamic is that they're vulnerable to massed small arm fire, but tend to be able to weather the big hits quite effectively. (Lords of Change can shrug off railguns like a champ)

Considering the fact that a Demon Prince often costs more than a land raider, is less resilient to damage than a land raider, can be killed my high strength weapons like a land raider; we're coming up with a very poor cost/benefit analysis.

Personally, I'd be a lot happier with them being true toughness 6, as it would immensely increase their suvivability. Yes, we probably shouldn't be trying to balance the whole game against the Grey Knights. But 40k is, by it's very nature, a competative game. GKs are absolutely unhinged in the current meta, and GW doesn't seem to be Errata-ing them down to a balanced level, so we're left with half the codices in the game being unable to compete in any true sense (which isn't fun for anyone, really.)

So, my take on it is this: If you want to kill a Land Raider with the Tau, you use a railgun. If you want to kill a monstrous creature, you should be using plasma or mass firewarrior support. That's the way the dynamic had worked out for years, and I thought it worked out pretty well.

As an aside, what all other MCs can be IDed by Str 10 weapons? Off the top of my head we have:
Harpies
Demon Princes

And is that it? I think that even further outlines the issues with the Demon Princes.

ehlijen
22-10-2012, 07:05
They're not all that vulnerable to small arms fire. More so than vehicles, yes, but in return they get more wounds and saves, uusually and are never prevented from being useful the followng turn through damage results.

Deamon princes might be T5, but they can also hit a lot harder in combat than most other MCs can, with access to deamon weapons. They are a bit more glass cannon now than they used to be, but they're still as lethal, if not more so.

Vaktathi
22-10-2012, 08:26
They're not all that vulnerable to small arms fire. More so than vehicles, yes, but in return they get more wounds and saves, uusually and are never prevented from being useful the followng turn through damage results.

Deamon princes might be T5, but they can also hit a lot harder in combat than most other MCs can, with access to deamon weapons. They are a bit more glass cannon now than they used to be, but they're still as lethal, if not more so.
They don't really hit much harder than most, the big thing is they're hit *back* less. Overall, the DP is really expensive for what he does, he's got a big and scary statline but pays a premium for stats that largely only mean something against expensive IC's while otherwise not meaning a thing against most opponents.

The Daemon Prince went up 35pts a ~32% increase in cost, to gain +2WS (means getting hit back by *specifically* WS4 opponents is harder, but any other weapon skill below 8 sees no change) +3I (kinda nice...but not really necessary) and +1A while losing a 3+sv (that can be purchased back for 20pts), Eternal Warrior, and 1pt of Ld (making them less capable psykers than 60pt Sorcs).

The vast majority of MC's are going to outperform a DP on a point for point basis, many still on a 1:1 basis like Trygons and Canoptek Spyders and the Eldar Avatar.

It's not like DP's were broken before, it's just that the other options were so poor the DP was really the only useable (competitively) choice for most. The changes make it considerably worse after all is said and done (in terms of value for points spent) for little good reason.

Spare Change
22-10-2012, 09:31
It's especially bad if you try to make it a psyker. The cost just explodes, and becomes completely unjustifiable.

The only build I can see even being somewhat decent is a Khorne Prince, with AoBF, wings and armor. You get a pretty killy monstrous-creature for 250ish. Even then, it's not a competitive choice. Princes just aren't worth it right now..

Mauler
22-10-2012, 10:50
Considering the fact that a Demon Prince often costs more than a land raider, is less resilient to damage than a land raider, can be killed my high strength weapons like a land raider; we're coming up with a very poor cost/benefit analysis.

I'm not sure why people do this. Murph, your reasoning behind most of the post seems pretty solid but for this comparison. Both are very capable units, but they're both about as different in every way as could be. If your Land Raider could lead your army or your Daemon Prince have Terminators cling to it's limbs as it flies about to drop them off I'd get it, but I'm not sure what the point is? This isn't a criticism, I'm just trying to work it out. One is a top-level daemon melee killing machine, the other is the top-level transport ranged-PEW support for Terminators. HALP

Wyrmnax
22-10-2012, 12:08
It did not change the price of the Hellbrute, just fixed a typo.

On every book that wasnt in english language it was 100 points already.

narrativium
22-10-2012, 13:11
If it's a question asked frequently enough, and the answer's obvious, it doesn't take long to make an FAQ document. Best sorted soonest.