PDA

View Full Version : Do the point costs in the new Dark Angels codex make sense?



spispopd
24-05-2007, 14:52
The new Dark Angels codex changed the point costs for many options. Rumours indicate similar changes to the Blood Angels and Chaos lists, so it's likely that these new costs will apply to all forthcoming MEQ lists when they get updated. Although some of the changes made sense, others I don't really understand. I'll try to post as few point values as possible, so that I won't be breaking GW IP.

I guess that the reason Jervis made these changes was to achieve better balance. He probably wanted to make all choices useful, while removing no-brainers. While I can respect his goal (after all, that's what balance is about), I'm not sure that all of the changes helped to reach that goal at all. I'll go through some of the changes.

The changes to the HQ section make sense, and I can agree with them. The commander effectively pays for the Iron Halo in his point cost, while he gets a bp, ccw, grenades and fearless for free. I don't see anything especially wrong with him. The Chaplain got more expensive than he was in the SM codex, which also makes sense, as I always thought that he was underpriced. I can't really comment on the Librarian, since he has different powers than the SM counterpart, so the costs are harder to compare.

The point costs of the transports were lowered quite radically. Rhinos went down in price by 15 points and Razorbacks by 20 points, and both got 4 points of equipment for free. After the release of the 4th edition and its new transport rules, Rhinos and Razorbacks experienced a serious inflation in SM lists. In the 3rd editon the Rhino rush was a popular tactic, but 4th edition put an end to that. Some people still used transports, but they were now harder to use and therefore their use (and GW Rhino sales, I suppose) reduced dramatically. Instead of putting every squad in a transport, as was the case in the 3rd edition, people generally only bought them for command squads and other important squads, if even that. I do agree that their point cost should probably have been reduced, but not by that much. Personally I'd have settled for a 5 to 10 point discount. I fear that with the new costs transports are becoming almost no-brainers again. I don't play Dark Angels myself, and neither do my friends, but I see many mech DA lists on the Internet. If the rumours are true, other MEQs will also get those cheap Rhinos. The Razorback is also quite good as a fire support platform with twin heavy bolters and a pintle-mounted storm bolter (whose cost was halved, which made it a no brainer IMO). This may not scare MEQs, but is quite cost effective against Tau, Eldar, Orks, Tyranids or Guard.

The Dreadnought got 20 points more expensive. I don't think this is a good thing. Dreads weren't an overused unit anyway. I understand that the increase was because Jervis generally wanted to limit the number of assault cannons and make them more expensive. I agree that making the AC only one per unit and more expensive for Terminators and Speeders was definitely the right thing to do. However, the Dreadnought suffered unfairly, because not only the assault cannon Dread but all other weapon combinations got more expensive. The base cost is 20 points more expensive, and the lascannon upgrade is the same cost as before, so a lascannon Dread is now 20 points more expensive than before. Multi-melta Dreads are also more expensive than in the SM codex, and the plasma and twin autocannon options are also overpriced. The Dread is now hopelessly overpriced. The only effective combination seems to be assault cannon + venerable upgrade. Since the Assault cannon was a bit underpriced before, it suffered less from the overall increase than the other options. I seriously don't know what Jervis was thinking when he made these changes to the Dreadnought. What I would have done is that you should have bought the Dread naked, without a heavy weapon. However, you'd still have to buy a weapon. This is the way things were handled in the old 3rd edition SM codex. This way they could have made the assault cannon more expensive, but keep the other options at a decent cost.

Increasing the point costs of Predator sponsons made sense, as previously there was no real reason to not take sponsons. Still, I think that the cost of lascannon sponsons is now a bit too much. I think that 40-50 points would have been more appropriate. You have to remember that sponsons have limited fire arcs, and that since lascannons are not defensive weapons, you can't shoot the sponsons if you move the tank (assuming that you fire the turret weapon). Many people took heavy bolter sponsons with lascannon turrets even before (when the lascannon sponsons were dirt cheap), because they wanted versatility and mobility.

In the updated 3rd edition Chaos codex and the 4th edition SM codex Veteran Sergeants and Aspiring Champions got cheaper wargear and weapons than independent characters. I think that was a very good thing and made perfect sense. IC's had a better WS, BS, Initiative and more Attacks than Sergeants, so it was only fair and balanced that ICs paid more for powerful weapons. In the new DA codex Sergeants pay exactly the same amount of points for power weapons, power fists and plasma pistols as independent characters. I seriously don't understand why Jervis decided to go back to this old, clearly flawed system that was used in the first 3rd SM codex. On a second though, I might have a clue why he wanted to do this. Since the 4th edition power fists on squad leaders have became extremely popular, as they can no longer be targeted individually. Even though they strike last, they have a lot of ablative wounds in the form of squad members, so they still have a good chance to get those powerful armour ignoring S8 attacks in. Since the squad leader power fist is quite cheap for its abilities in the current SM and Chaos codices, it's become common practice to arm every Veteran Sergeant / Aspiring Champion with one. However, even if this was the reason, what Jervis has done with Dark Angels is not the right way to fix the problem. Obviously, they should have ONLY raised the cost of the power fist, but keep the other Sergeant options at the same cost as they were in codex SM (well, the ones that are left after all that "streamlining" anyway). Plasma pistols for Sergeants / Champions aren't extremely popular in SM and Chaos lists, so I didn't see any reason to increase their cost in codex DA. I actually don't think that it's worth it to arm a Sergeant with a plasma pistol in the new DA codex at all.

The cost of plasma pistols now the same for squad members as well. I think that they got too expensive. 10 points was a fair and balanced cost. It's insane that plasma pistols are more expensive than meltaguns! Even though the plasma pistol allows an extra attack in close combat when combined with a ccw, I still think that it should not cost more than a meltagun. A meltagun has the same range, but a better strenght, AP, bonus penetration against vehicles and it doensn't get hot.

Personally, I don't like the fact that everyone now gets grenades and pistols for free. It might have been okay if it was for DA only, but the rumours seem to indicate that Blood Angels and even Chaos is getting that equipment for free. It might be fair to assume that all forthcoming MEQ lists will follow this trend. I don't see it as horribly overpowered myself, but I just don't like it that EVERYBODY AND THEIR DOGS comes with this equipment. I mean, what's the point of even having a rule that allows models in cover to strike first in close combat if every model in the game has the ability to counter that with frag grenades? I understand that grenades weren't very popular before because of their point cost, although I did use frags (in my Chaos armies, I don't play DA) myself. What I would have suggested is that squads don't come with grenades automatically but instead have an upgrade called "combat equipment", which includes frag grenades, krak grenades and bolt pistols for +1 point per model (for the entire set). At that cost, the upgrade would have been quite attractive, but you still wouldn't have the problem of every squad in the game having grenades by standard.

The costs for Speeders and Attack bikes were also changed. Increasing the cost of the assault cannon was very good. However, I don't think that inceasing the base cost of Speeders by 15 points was necessary. It's also stupid that the multi-melta is a free upgrade from the heavy bolter for bikers and attack bikes. I think that the MM is clearly a more valuable weapon for a fast model like a Speeder or an Attack bike than the HB. The Multi-Melta's main drawback is its short range. That's why its cost was lowered in Devastator squads - that was a good thing to do. In the (relatively) immobile Devastator squads it makes sense to have the same cost for the MM and the HB (that is the case in the new DA codex and that is a good thing). However, in Speeder squadrons and Attack bikes the MM is worth a lot more points than a HB, because they can move 12" and still fire a heavy weapon. This makes it possible to counter the drawback of the MM (short range) quite effectively. Jervis has seemed to forget that the effectiveness of a weapon greatly depends on who is using it, and that should be reflected in their point cost. Personally I would have kept the Multi-melta upgrade for Speeders and Attack bikes the same cost as it was in codex SM. In the Dark Angels codex the multi-melta upgrade for Attack bikes and Speeders is almost a no-brainer - now wasn't the intention to take away no-brainer options, not add them? I haven't seen the BA list yet (only rumours), so I don't know what these weapons cost in it.

Assault Marines now have an option to remove their jump packs and trade them for a Rhino or a Drop Pod for free (the cost of jump packs is included in the base cost of the squad). This does not make sense. If you take a squad of 10 models, you'll pay additional points for the jump packs. If you take a Rhino, you lose those points. It would have been much more sensible to give Assault Marines the same base cost as Tactical Marines, and then give them the option to either buy a Rhino for X points per squad, Drop Pod for Y points per squad or jump packs at Z points per model.

Personally I didn't like the loss of armoury and more limited weapon options in codex DA. However, I have another thread for that, so I won't complain about it here. Still, there COULD have been something good about including all the options for characters in list entries. They could have considered the fact that some items are worth more for certain models than others, and make those items different cost depending on who's using them. For example, a power fist is certainly more valuable for an Assault Squad Sergeant than a Devastator Sergeant, because Devastators rarely want to be in close combat. They could have made power fists more expensive for Assault Sergeants and less expensive for Devastator Sergeants to reflect this. A Chaplain doesn't gain anything from the Terminator armour's 5+ invulnerable save, because he already comes with a 4+ invulnerable save built in. Therefore, it would make sense to charge less points for Terminator armour on Chaplains than on Librarians (who don't normally have an invulnerable). Unfortunately, Jervis hasn't taken advantage of this option. The upgrades cost the same regardless of who's using them.

Here's my conclusion. I think that Jervis is a designer who has some good and honourable intentions. He clearly wants to make the game more balanced, and in some ways he has succeeded (for example, by preventing las-plas min-maxing and reducing the number of assault cannons). However, I don't think that he is a very good games designer. I don't believe that he has a very good view on the effectiness of different things on the battlefield, and I don't think he has the ability to assign proper point costs for options. If I was to choose, I wouldn't let him write any codices by himself. He could be an advisor and present his opinions and views to other developers, but let somebody else assign the point costs and do the actual writing. What do you think?

Gammarah
24-05-2007, 15:06
For comparison, all the BA stuff is the same, except most infantry squads have a higher base cost because of Death Company, and Rhinos are five points more expensive. I semi-agree with you, JJ does have pretty good intentions, and I like most of his changes, but maybe he should have people advising him instead of the other way around.

Katastrophe
24-05-2007, 15:11
So, essentially what you are saying is that Jervis is the new Gav. That ultimately, the folks over at GW arent very good at numbers and their methods of assigning points costs and balancing lists shows very little understanding of what actually happens in games and when people make comparative unit decisions during list design.

You also seem to intuit that most of the changes favor the space marines event though they may not have gone about the changes in the smartest way (ie artificially lowering the cost of the SM transports to the point that they make fine mobile gun platforms (cheaper than the Eldar ones at that) that can also be mobile bunkers or terrain as well).

For the most part, all but the usual Fanboys would agree with your assessment.

LostTemplar
24-05-2007, 15:15
I disagree ona number of things but the basics are:

1. Tactical marines getting frag, BP and BG for free isnt' too much... they are the elite of the imperium, and are alreayd finely equipped. in fact nobody else gets these free grenades, though I do think everyone should have a Rifle + a hand gun. Lets face it, nowadays, thats the way, and it'll still be the same thing 40k years from now.

The rest, I'd rather wait and see for the final result of all this balancing, before commenting on particular points.

Captain Micha
24-05-2007, 15:17
For once someone put up something actually intelligent about codex da about the complaints.

The dreads I think got a pt cost jack because of the ac, and possibly because maybe games workshop feels now that they should have a point cost reflect its rarity. At least the dread is not worthless. also it's plas cannon is not overpriced... it does not suffer overheat and the dread can still go pretty much anywhere infantry can go. Making this unit a very valuable asset.

Also about the freebie with the assault squads, it is free. because by the time you pay for the transport you have negated the pt cost between a normal marine and an assault marine, if not more so depending on your squad size. So really the free transport option is worth the same points...

the weapon options really are not that limited, just on certain units really (the units that didn't make sense to get certain things... don't get them anymore.) because honestly a crozirus would be what a chappy takes to battle... and there is nothing wrong with a powerweapon anyway... so why complain about those lightning claws going away. This was done for sake of fluff.

Also a unified upgrade cost is a good idea, the chappy still benefits from the termie armor in the form of a heavy weapon, and a 2+ armor save.

I think that the da are actually very well written (better than smurf dex) and I look forward to seeing more codexes in the future from Jervis..

Kuato
24-05-2007, 15:27
The points changes you mentioned further limit the ability to min/max army lists by "making" you spend points on things that you would have streamlined out before. It's part of the overall balancing that JJ says is the new direction for 40k, and I agree with you that balancing the lists is an excellent move for the game as a whole.

Unfortunately, I think this balancing act will eventually fall flat for two reasons:

1. Removing many of the options in army lists, even the crappy ones, takes a degree of control out of the player's hands that makes them feel robbed. Many players like pouring over massive lists of options, trying to find exactly what they want. Even if you simplify the options to only include the things that people actually use, those 1-5% that used the other options for fluff/filler will have less fun because of the changes. And as we all know, 5% of players sounds like 95% on the internet...

2. Balancing isn't really balancing if you do it piecemeal. If GW continues to release rules as they do now, one codex at a time over the course of 3 years, the next edition will be ready before true balance is achieved (ie, all the codices have been updated). I understand that changing this system would require a massive shift in GW's overall business model, etc, etc, but geez...its no wonder people are flocking to other games like Hordes and Warmachine. Each new resource for those games updates every list, and adds new depth to the system.

Basically, I think JJ has a great idea but a terrible plan of execution. I feel like I need to make my obligatory plea for an online rules/codex database that is frequently patched and updated to maintain balance in real-time, but...I guess its just wishful thinking.

Bloodknight
24-05-2007, 15:35
Also remember that the extra armour upgrade which is sort of needed to make a Rhino really worthwhile tripled in cost. Effectively the Rhino got an 8 points break from 58 to 50 equipped.

Grand Master Raziel
24-05-2007, 17:00
For once someone put up something actually intelligent about codex da about the complaints.


I was making all of these points a month ago. What's changed?



The changes to the HQ section make sense, and I can agree with them. The commander effectively pays for the Iron Halo in his point cost, while he gets a bp, ccw, grenades and fearless for free. I don't see anything especially wrong with him. The Chaplain got more expensive than he was in the SM codex, which also makes sense, as I always thought that he was underpriced. I can't really comment on the Librarian, since he has different powers than the SM counterpart, so the costs are harder to compare.

What if you don't want that Iron Halo? Personally, I'm a big fan of using storm shields, combat shields, and terminator armor instead of the IH. With the shields, you get the protection where you need it for less than half the cost. Termie armor costs the same as the IH, but provides a bunch of other benefits for the price.



The point costs of the transports were lowered quite radically. Rhinos went down in price by 15 points and Razorbacks by 20 points, and both got 4 points of equipment for free. After the release of the 4th edition and its new transport rules, Rhinos and Razorbacks experienced a serious inflation in SM lists. In the 3rd editon the Rhino rush was a popular tactic, but 4th edition put an end to that. Some people still used transports, but they were now harder to use and therefore their use (and GW Rhino sales, I suppose) reduced dramatically. Instead of putting every squad in a transport, as was the case in the 3rd edition, people generally only bought them for command squads and other important squads, if even that. I do agree that their point cost should probably have been reduced, but not by that much. Personally I'd have settled for a 5 to 10 point discount. I fear that with the new costs transports are becoming almost no-brainers again. I don't play Dark Angels myself, and neither do my friends, but I see many mech DA lists on the Internet. If the rumours are true, other MEQs will also get those cheap Rhinos. The Razorback is also quite good as a fire support platform with twin heavy bolters and a pintle-mounted storm bolter (whose cost was halved, which made it a no brainer IMO). This may not scare MEQs, but is quite cost effective against Tau, Eldar, Orks, Tyranids or Guard.

Have you noticed that the base Razorback now makes a better gun platform than the base Land Speeder? The 'back is cheaper, a bit more sturdy, and it's heavy bolter is twin linked. It not being a scoring unit could be construed as a disadvantage, but it could be considered an advantage as well: if your opponent shoots at the 'backs, he's not shooting at your scoring units.

As far as the Rhino goes, JJ reduces the price of them by 15 points, but triples the cost of the Extra Armor upgrade, so with Extra Armor you're paying as much as a basic Rhino costs in the SM dex. However, the DA Rhino is still effectively 8 points cheaper, because with the SM dex you'd pay that many points for Extra Armor and Smoke Launchers. What I don't understand is why JJ didn't simply price the DA Rhino at 50pts, with Extra Armor and Smoke Launchers being included in the base price. At the current cost DA cost, I'd be tempted to take them for units I had no intention of moving around, simply to have cheap, expendable pieces of mobile terrain. I'm already somewhat notorious at my GW store for my Rhino screening tactics. If the price of basic Rhinos goes down by a third for everybody, then I'd have even more of them to work with.

Of course, the reason JJ felt the need to downprice Rhinos and Razorbacks is because the 4th edition rules boned transports. Okay, the developers went into 4th ed. with the expressed intention of ending Rhino Rush. That was handily accomplished with the rule that states that troops can't assault from a vehicle that moved that turn - dandy. Unfortunately, in addition to that, they heaped on harsher damage tables, forced disembarkation with Pinning Tests, and Entanglement. All that crap has SM players looking at safer alternatives to Rhinos, so they're using Drop Pods, Infiltrate (via the Traits system), or simply playing gunline armies that don't have to approach to do damage. So, GW (in classic GW fashion) rather than simply admitting to a mistake and retracting some of the rules that make transports such a risky proposition, is instead monkeying with the rules and prices of specific transports to entice players into using them again.



The Dreadnought got 20 points more expensive. I don't think this is a good thing. Dreads weren't an overused unit anyway. I understand that the increase was because Jervis generally wanted to limit the number of assault cannons and make them more expensive.

This is another situation where GW made a mistake, doesn't want to admit it, and tries to deal with it in an awkward sideways manner rather than simply addressing it head-on. The Rending Assault Cannon is widely considered overpowered. The logical approach would be to simply tone down the AC. Remove Rending, for instance. Doing this would not involve changing the core rules, and wouldn't even require any online rules adjustments. GW could simply start taking the Rending rule away from the AC in new SM publications and in new editions of existing ones. Eventually, everyone who plays SMs would be using a book with non-Rending ACs - pretty quickly too, if SM Redux is hitting the shelves in a year or so. That would be the sensible solution to this particular problem.

Instead of being sensible, JJ is taking the Nerf Bat to any unit that happens to be able to take the AC. The problem with that solution is that it indiscriminately harms the effectiveness of these units when the player uses them but opts not to use the AC. Case in point: Land Speeder squadrons. I enjoy using squadrons of 3 Tornados, but I prefer to use the multimelta-heavy flamer variant. I've never heard anyone complain that the heavy flamer was overpowered, and yet because a Speeder with a chin-mounted weapon is a "Tornado" regardless of what the chin-mounted weapon is, the heavy flamer Tornado squadron gets nerfed right along with the AC Tornado squadron.



I agree that making the AC only one per unit and more expensive for Terminators and Speeders was definitely the right thing to do. However, the Dreadnought suffered unfairly, because not only the assault cannon Dread but all other weapon combinations got more expensive. The base cost is 20 points more expensive, and the lascannon upgrade is the same cost as before, so a lascannon Dread is now 20 points more expensive than before. Multi-melta Dreads are also more expensive than in the SM codex, and the plasma and twin autocannon options are also overpriced. The Dread is now hopelessly overpriced. The only effective combination seems to be assault cannon + venerable upgrade. Since the Assault cannon was a bit underpriced before, it suffered less from the overall increase than the other options. I seriously don't know what Jervis was thinking when he made these changes to the Dreadnought. What I would have done is that you should have bought the Dread naked, without a heavy weapon. However, you'd still have to buy a weapon. This is the way things were handled in the old 3rd edition SM codex. This way they could have made the assault cannon more expensive, but keep the other options at a decent cost.

Of course, this would not be an issue if they simply fixed the damn Assault Cannon! Upcosting Dreadnoughts is a horrible idea, and is going to pretty much guarantee that the only Dreadnoughts you're likely to see on the table are bearing ACs...except maybe for Forge World variants. I've got a FW Siege Dreadnought. The price of that won't be going up anytime soon, so I guess it'll still be a viable option.



Increasing the point costs of Predator sponsons made sense, as previously there was no real reason to not take sponsons. Still, I think that the cost of lascannon sponsons is now a bit too much. I think that 40-50 points would have been more appropriate. You have to remember that sponsons have limited fire arcs, and that since lascannons are not defensive weapons, you can't shoot the sponsons if you move the tank (assuming that you fire the turret weapon). Many people took heavy bolter sponsons with lascannon turrets even before (when the lascannon sponsons were dirt cheap), because they wanted versatility and mobility.

I can only agree with you here. The Pred Annihilator with lascannon sponsons may have been a cheap way of sticking three lascannons in your army, but the downsides to doing so heavily outweighed the likely benefits. In order to use the thing, you have to stick it in the open and never move it. Between it's heavy firepower and weak armor, such a Pred would be a very high priority target for whatever shooting it's opponent can muster, so it's unlikely to survive the opponent's first shooting phase. The real "no brainer" Predator is the so-called "tactical" Pred - an Annihilator with heavy bolter sponsons. A Destructor with HB sponsons is a close second. Of course, vehicles in general are widely considered too fragile to be reliable (another failing of the 4th ed rules), so anyone using Preds at all is either a newb who doesn't know any better or someone who knows their drawbacks and is using them in spite of this knowledge.



In the updated 3rd edition Chaos codex and the 4th edition SM codex Veteran Sergeants and Aspiring Champions got cheaper wargear and weapons than independent characters. I think that was a very good thing and made perfect sense. IC's had a better WS, BS, Initiative and more Attacks than Sergeants, so it was only fair and balanced that ICs paid more for powerful weapons. In the new DA codex Sergeants pay exactly the same amount of points for power weapons, power fists and plasma pistols as independent characters. I seriously don't understand why Jervis decided to go back to this old, clearly flawed system that was used in the first 3rd SM codex. On a second though, I might have a clue why he wanted to do this. Since the 4th edition power fists on squad leaders have became extremely popular, as they can no longer be targeted individually. Even though they strike last, they have a lot of ablative wounds in the form of squad members, so they still have a good chance to get those powerful armour ignoring S8 attacks in. Since the squad leader power fist is quite cheap for its abilities in the current SM and Chaos codices, it's become common practice to arm every Veteran Sergeant / Aspiring Champion with one. However, even if this was the reason, what Jervis has done with Dark Angels is not the right way to fix the problem. Obviously, they should have ONLY raised the cost of the power fist, but keep the other Sergeant options at the same cost as they were in codex SM (well, the ones that are left after all that "streamlining" anyway). Plasma pistols for Sergeants / Champions aren't extremely popular in SM and Chaos lists, so I didn't see any reason to increase their cost in codex DA. I actually don't think that it's worth it to arm a Sergeant with a plasma pistol in the new DA codex at all.

I could see the power fist getting more expensive for Veteran Sergeants, but not the other equipment. The thing is, power fists could be 50 points a pop and SM players would still be taking them, not because we want to but because we have to. Granted, there are a lot of advantages to the hidden power fist, but there are also any number of threats in the game that SM units simply cannot deal with if they get assaulted by them unless they have a power fist in the squad. So, the power fist is not just a no-brainer option because it's advantageous, it's a no-brainer option because it's essential, unless GW is willing to either reduce the Toughness of all MCs by a point or to, or make them vulnerable to krak grenades/meltabombs. Tyranid, Eldar, Chaos, and even Necron players would howl about either of those options.



The cost of plasma pistols now the same for squad members as well. I think that they got too expensive. 10 points was a fair and balanced cost. It's insane that plasma pistols are more expensive than meltaguns! Even though the plasma pistol allows an extra attack in close combat when combined with a ccw, I still think that it should not cost more than a meltagun. A meltagun has the same range, but a better strenght, AP, bonus penetration against vehicles and it doensn't get hot.

What bothers me more about the assault squad is the removal of flamers as a squad option. Maybe that's something that won't carry over to BAs or SM Redux, but their absense from Assault Squads in Codex: Dark Angels has me concerned.



Personally, I don't like the fact that everyone now gets grenades and pistols for free. It might have been okay if it was for DA only, but the rumours seem to indicate that Blood Angels and even Chaos is getting that equipment for free. It might be fair to assume that all forthcoming MEQ lists will follow this trend. I don't see it as horribly overpowered myself, but I just don't like it that EVERYBODY AND THEIR DOGS comes with this equipment.

I'm with you on this one. There's a few things that bug me about it. First, it takes away some need to think about your army list. Having to pay 1 point per model for frags may not sound like much, but when you do that for 40+ figures, it adds up quick. So, it was an important consideration when making an army list, do I take the frags, or something else? Now it looks like you'll be able to take both. Non-SM players might not mind now, but in a few months they'll be saying, "Hey why do SMs get all that free stuff and my troops don't?"

Second, one of the big design considerations of 4th edition was that you'd have to make a choice between shooting or assaulting with most of your troops - they wouldn't be able to do both. Now, shooting and assaulting is rapidly becoming an option again, at least for SMs/CSMs. How long do you think it's going to be before people start complaining about that?

Third, the free krak grenades can be used on walkers, whereas Monstrous Creatures are completey uneffected by them. This makes walkers compare even more badly to MCs than they already do.



Assault Marines now have an option to remove their jump packs and trade them for a Rhino or a Drop Pod for free (the cost of jump packs is included in the base cost of the squad). This does not make sense. If you take a squad of 10 models, you'll pay additional points for the jump packs. If you take a Rhino, you lose those points. It would have been much more sensible to give Assault Marines the same base cost as Tactical Marines, and then give them the option to either buy a Rhino for X points per squad, Drop Pod for Y points per squad or jump packs at Z points per model.

I personally don't see why Assault Squads needed the Rhino option. It would have been popular in 3rd ed, but I didn't think many people have been clamoring for it recently. With Rhinos being as disadvantageous as they currently are, most players prefer to keep the jump packs.


Personally I didn't like the loss of armoury and more limited weapon options in codex DA. However, I have another thread for that, so I won't complain about it here. Still, there COULD have been something good about including all the options for characters in list entries. They could have considered the fact that some items are worth more for certain models than others, and make those items different cost depending on who's using them. For example, a power fist is certainly more valuable for an Assault Squad Sergeant than a Devastator Sergeant, because Devastators rarely want to be in close combat. They could have made power fists more expensive for Assault Sergeants and less expensive for Devastator Sergeants to reflect this. A Chaplain doesn't gain anything from the Terminator armour's 5+ invulnerable save, because he already comes with a 4+ invulnerable save built in. Therefore, it would make sense to charge less points for Terminator armour on Chaplains than on Librarians (who don't normally have an invulnerable). Unfortunately, Jervis hasn't taken advantage of this option. The upgrades cost the same regardless of who's using them.

The loss of the Armory is probably my single biggest problem with Codex: Dark Angels. It makes it harder to personalize your characters, and I really don't see why JJ felt the need, other than slavishly copying what Phil Kelly did with Codex: Eldar. Phil omitted the armory from Codex: Eldar, but the armory it had in the previous book was very small, and was entirely comprised of options for Farseers and Warlocks. Folding the armory into the entries for Farseers and Warlocks made sense for that book. The same cannot be said for SM books, because there are so many characters who have access to it. Furthermore, the idea that SM characters needed to have their options limited to keep them balanced is absurd. SM ICs don't scale up very well. If you spend more than 150 points on a SM IC, you're wasting points somewhere.


Here's my conclusion. I think that Jervis is a designer who has some good and honourable intentions. He clearly wants to make the game more balanced, and in some ways he has succeeded (for example, by preventing las-plas min-maxing and reducing the number of assault cannons). However, I don't think that he is a very good games designer. I don't believe that he has a very good view on the effectiness of different things on the battlefield, and I don't think he has the ability to assign proper point costs for options. If I was to choose, I wouldn't let him write any codices by himself. He could be an advisor and present his opinions and views to other developers, but let somebody else assign the point costs and do the actual writing. What do you think?

You're a lot kinder in your assessment than I am. I think JJ should be shifted over to LotR, so he won't do any more harm to a game system anyone cares about.

Katastrophe
24-05-2007, 17:07
The points changes you mentioned further limit the ability to min/max army lists by "making" you spend points on things that you would have streamlined out before. It's part of the overall balancing that JJ says is the new direction for 40k, and I agree with you that balancing the lists is an excellent move for the game as a whole.

Unfortunately, I think this balancing act will eventually fall flat for two reasons:

1. Removing many of the options in army lists, even the crappy ones, takes a degree of control out of the player's hands that makes them feel robbed. Many players like pouring over massive lists of options, trying to find exactly what they want. Even if you simplify the options to only include the things that people actually use, those 1-5% that used the other options for fluff/filler will have less fun because of the changes. And as we all know, 5% of players sounds like 95% on the internet...

2. Balancing isn't really balancing if you do it piecemeal. If GW continues to release rules as they do now, one codex at a time over the course of 3 years, the next edition will be ready before true balance is achieved (ie, all the codices have been updated). I understand that changing this system would require a massive shift in GW's overall business model, etc, etc, but geez...its no wonder people are flocking to other games like Hordes and Warmachine. Each new resource for those games updates every list, and adds new depth to the system.

Basically, I think JJ has a great idea but a terrible plan of execution. I feel like I need to make my obligatory plea for an online rules/codex database that is frequently patched and updated to maintain balance in real-time, but...I guess its just wishful thinking.


Too true. I hope that they finally get it through their heads that their method of producing books slowly isnt going to keep them competitive. Unfortunately, they seem to be oblivious to this point. They seem to be incapable of changing their business model in order to adjust to what other growing companies have been doing in order to become effective.

spispopd
24-05-2007, 17:28
1. Tactical marines getting frag, BP and BG for free isnt' too much... they are the elite of the imperium, and are alreayd finely equipped. in fact nobody else gets these free grenades, though I do think everyone should have a Rifle + a hand gun.

Like I explained, my main complain wasn't that Dark Angels get them. It's just that it looks like everybody in the forthcoming codices will have them too. According to the rumours, Blood Angels and Chaos are getting that equipment too. It would be safe to assume that all Marine chapters (including vanilla) will get that equipment when their books get updated. I seriously hope that they aren't giving free grenades to Guardsmen! Anyway, even if they don't, giving them to all MEQs is bad enough. After all, the vast majority of players play MEQs of some sort. I just don't like it because the "models in cover strike first" rule becomes completely irrelevant if everybody has grenades.


The dreads I think got a pt cost jack because of the ac, and possibly because maybe games workshop feels now that they should have a point cost reflect its rarity. At least the dread is not worthless. also it's plas cannon is not overpriced... it does not suffer overheat and the dread can still go pretty much anywhere infantry can go. Making this unit a very valuable asset.

I don't think that point cost should represent a unit's rarity. It should be based on the unit's effectiveness on the battlefield. I agree that the reason for the increase was probably the AC. But what I don't like is that Dreads with other weapon configurations got more expensive as well. It's pretty clear that the Assault Cannon is a better option than twin-linked autocannons or a multi-melta. It doesn't make sense to make the best option (well, next to the twin-linked lascannons) the default weapon. That why I'd like not to include any heavy weapons in the Dread's point cost but to add them separately with different costs which would depend on the weapon's effectiveness. The plasma cannon is okay, I think (even though it suffers from the 4th edition blast rules), but the assault cannon is still better, so the AC should be more expensive.


Also about the freebie with the assault squads, it is free. because by the time you pay for the transport you have negated the pt cost between a normal marine and an assault marine, if not more so depending on your squad size. So really the free transport option is worth the same points...

Maybe I didn't explain clearly enough. It's true that a Rhino for a Tactical squad costs the same as the difference between 5 Tactical Marines and and 5 Assault Marines. However, my complain was that when you add more Marines to the Assault squad, you'll still have to pay for their jump packs, even though they don't get them anymore because of the Rhino. Effectively you'll then pay points for nothing. I just don't understand why they had to do it this way. It would have been much more fair if you bought the models without jump packs (at the same cost as Tactical Marines), and then had the option of buying jump packs, a Rhino or a Drop Pod. Obviously, the Drop Pod would have been more expensive than the Rhino as usual, and you'd pay for jump packs on a model- per model basis, while the costs of vehicles wouldn't depend on the number of models in the unit.


Also a unified upgrade cost is a good idea, the chappy still benefits from the termie armor in the form of a heavy weapon, and a 2+ armor save.

But why is it a good idea? Wouldn't it be more fair if unit A paid more for item X than unit B, if the item is more powerful in the hands of unit A? Of course, the Chaplain still benefits from the armour, but the Librarian benefits more, so shouldn't he pay more? Or don't you think that gaining a 5+ invulnerable save is worth any points?



Also remember that the extra armour upgrade which is sort of needed to make a Rhino really worthwhile tripled in cost. Effectively the Rhino got an 8 points break from 58 to 50 equipped.

That's a fair point. Still, that's not the way I'd have done it. Besides, it doesn't fix the "Razorbacks as cheap gun platforms" problem, because they don't need extra armour to work. The massive point cost of extra armour also makes life even harder for poor old Dreadnoughts, who suffer from the "unified point costs" syndrome.

Katastrophe
24-05-2007, 17:49
the other thing about rhinos, ignoring the razorback issue, is that at 35 points they have 4 shots, can be used for mobile cover and as a bunker. That makes them well worth adding for every unit that can get them (except the assault marines), even if they aren't actually used as transports. for 140 points you get 16 bolter shots that is either difficult to kill or no worth throwing shots at.

samiens
24-05-2007, 18:30
OK, i'm about to get seriously hammered most likely for my opinion on this but I think ALL these changes are a good thing. JJ understands 40k and working within the business constraints he is balancing 40k (JJ suggested the model for the eldar book as far as I understand)

The new options reflect the fluff and stop people minmaxing- in general as an example, I see Dreadnaughts in every army I play and used well, they're severely overpowered before the recent changes.

Its true, these changes are leaving an elite of armiesbut these are being quickly dealt with-csm next and what price a quick sm redux- its badly needed.

Marines always used to have all the grenades- never made much diff and the point is that- a) its in the fluff, b) it means that marines can play like marines again rather than an uncharacteristic gunline.

The whole assault v shooty arguement lead to dull games-marines taking it away and leading to genuine tactical opportunities is a great thing- Eldar and DA show the future of 40k- where choice means how you play, not how you tech up your ultra character- the bane of 40k since 2nd ed that has finally been combatted in DA and Eldar.

As for nerfing-some things needed nerfing. I'm not a fanboy but sorting out a system takes time but its in the right manner. People complaining often dont like their power armies getting broken down- i still need to balance my da for new rules but its a much better proposition than power lists from 3rd ed- the end of the arms war hits hard but means in the end well all be ok.

samiens
24-05-2007, 18:31
Oh and seriously, statistically the assault cannon isn't that great at all- do the maths.

Captain Micha
24-05-2007, 18:49
to anyone that thinks its not a great weapon I suggest you play as other armies than space marines. with the exception of maybe eldar there are not too many non meq lists that stand up very well to ac fire.

what you undoubtedly meant to say was statisitically the ac is balanced against space marines. right?

it is a good thing because the libby gains just as much from it as a terminator does... it cost the same when it was wargear anyway *poke* so why should that change now?

Brother Alecium
24-05-2007, 18:51
My biggest comlplaint is people who complain about the Assault Cannon, and GW Nerfing it because of that. I have just as much of a chance of rolling a 1 as I do rolling a 6. It's a freaking crock of BS.

Why oh why does the most known Terminator army in the 40K universe get less heavy weapons then everyone else, and only be able to take 5 man squads? Who's bright idea was that? What sense if any does this idea make?

Captain Micha
24-05-2007, 18:53
yea whoopie.. so do I with any non ac weapon... they don't get a special perk for it.. so why should the ac.....

considering plasma blows up in your face on a one... and yet is supposedly a stronger weapon.....

FireN.Brimstone
24-05-2007, 18:55
Why oh why does the most known Terminator army in the 40K universe get less heavy weapons then everyone else, and only be able to take 5 man squads? Who's bright idea was that? What sense if any does this idea make?

I belive that would be second eddition and, if I'm not mistaken, space hulk...

Brother Alecium
24-05-2007, 19:00
I belive that would be second eddition and, if I'm not mistaken, space hulk...

Okay, and what edition are we playing in?

I am pretty sure that the DA's would have or could have adapted to include an additional 5 Terminators in a squad. And maybe just maybe the most feared Terminators in the 40K universe might think it a good idea to carry another Heavy weapon when going to battle. What was done to the Deathwing totaly overcooked my grits! :mad:

samiens
24-05-2007, 19:34
Ok, well I actually said what I meant and I play Dark Eldar primarily these days but I own most armies aside from IG in one form or another so I've dealt with it many times- it doesn't ignore cover, Isn't great against vehicles- worse than almost anything strength 8 or above, its short ranged and frankly id rather ppl wasted points on it than lasplas wargear.

But, I do think the 1 heavy weapon is well balanced and for the person complaining about 5 man terminator squads- thats how they're oganised, in the fluff the Deathwing rigidly fights as 20 squads of 5 men and have done forever. Plus mixed terminator squads are great and when the much needed redux of sm is done, we'll have the best terminators in the game (except maybe gk) like we're supposed too.

Anyway, I'll try and dig up the statistical breakdown of the ac I did a while ago.

Karhedron
24-05-2007, 19:48
The points change I have the most problem with is the Techmarine. A fully kitted out Techmarine in servo harness now costs 50% more than his equivelent in the vanilla SM codex. Now I can understand some units going up in price but the Techmarine was already a pretty expensive and pretty underpowered character. Add to that he appears to have lost some of his wargear like the Signum and I really cannot see why anyone would want to take him.

I used to buy one occasionally for my Devastators if I was taking plasma cannons but I never fought against one. So why the massive points hike?

Gutlord Grom
24-05-2007, 19:57
the weapon options really are not that limited, just on certain units really (the units that didn't make sense to get certain things... don't get them anymore.) because honestly a crozirus would be what a chappy takes to battle... and there is nothing wrong with a powerweapon anyway... so why complain about those lightning claws going away. This was done for sake of fluff.

Micha, a chappy could never take two lightning claws, ever. His crozius already takes up a spot.

So I think your a bit wrong.

ashc
24-05-2007, 20:26
In previous books the chaplain 'swapped out' his crozius; you could always take twin lightning claws.

The only thing I do not like with how it is priced in the new codex is the extra 20 points on Dreadnoughts; pretty ridiculous I say (even then I still take them, and I play deathwing.)

Ash

adreal
25-05-2007, 00:05
to the OP, you made mention of the fact that devs would normally not want ot be in combat, but with the combat squads rule, you can have a 5 man tac squad with your vet sarge running towards your enemy while your heavy weapons are shooting away. Seems the powerfist could do good there no?

Yeah that may not be the best method for your dev's (splitting them into two with two heavy weapons in each squad is better IMHO) but it's an option that had to be balanced, so powerfist costs the same as for everyone else

alex03
25-05-2007, 06:11
Here's MY List:

Bad:
Overpriced Dread
Mandatory Vet Sergents
Overpriced Lascannon Sponsons on Pred's
Loss of Terminator Honors for characters
Overpriced Land Speeders (by a small amount)
Overpriced Extra Armor
Overpriced Hunter Killer missile (still)
Not being able to master craft items for custom characters
Drop Pod points increased too much (it should be 40 pts IMO)
Assault squad can't be given meltabombs, flamers, and their plasma pistols points went up too much
Scout Squad as an elite choice

OK/Acceptable:
Combat Squads
Marines getting all the gear (bolt pistol, frag, krack)
AC cost going up
One HW in terminator squad
Points tweeks in Tac squad heavy weapons

Good:
Lower cost of Rhino's and Razorbacks
Lower cost of Stormbolter Upgrade for vehicles
Vet Squads are much better and worth taking
Lower cost of combi-weapons
Autocannon back for Dread
Autocannon pred cheaper


thats what I came up with off the top of my head.

cailus
25-05-2007, 06:37
People seem to have a very narrow view of balance.

In case you haven't noticed other codexes are having increases in points of heavy weapons and the removal of nasty no-brainer options.

True it will take time to replace all the Codexes.

But when the program finishes and all codexes are rewritten we should see a more balanced game with greater emphasis on troops and whole-of-army combined arms approach.

the_raptor
25-05-2007, 06:37
though I do think everyone should have a Rifle + a hand gun. Lets face it, nowadays, thats the way, and it'll still be the same thing 40k years from now.

Please provide evidence of any well known military doing this. Handguns are not general issue* in most militaries as far as I am aware, as that means less ammo for your rifle or replacing more generally useful equipment (soldiers will only carry so much equipment, give them too much and they will "forget" some of it). In the real world firing an assault rifle while you charge into an assault is just as easy/hard as firing a pistol (in fact a carbine with red dot sight is significantly better). Don't confuse game artefacts with real military tactics.

* Normally only issued to officers, MP's/guards, and other RE personnel.

fwacho
25-05-2007, 08:16
The attack bikes being only 50 points is acceptable ecasue you can only have severely limited number (as they are like heavy wepaons added on to bike squads)

The point value of speeders seems perfect as they seem to be preferable to attack bikes )let not forget you can kill one and they might still get full points for squad) There is also the multi-melta/ AC option not found in codex SM.

Teh rhinos are a very pleasent price break. i believe the price is perfect for mobile terrain. the extra armor no-brainer is gone as well.

The predetor destrictor might be a little too cheap.

Did you reallize that a full str assault squad get a very nice break on a drop pod as opposed to a tactical squad?

I actually use plasma pistols on almost all my V. srgs, thank you very much.

i do miss bionics as an option (Is used to put them on every body I could).

The librarian on a bike is probably gonna feel the right cost too me but way to cheap in my opponent's mind (esp MEQ's). On a good dice day this model will kick serious patootee.

i think teh dread should have been 10 points cheaper with the AC costing an extra 10. ( of couse with apocolypse rumors what they are the auto cannon upgrade might become very popular.)

I think the point costs are about right. I would like to see BP/ frag/krak remain a big 4 thing and stay out of the main dex (they have traits after all) Teh DA is really a very competative list

spispopd
25-05-2007, 11:28
I was making all of these points a month ago. What's changed?

I don't always read the forums actively, so I have missed your thread. Not trying to take the glory away from you or anything. :)



What if you don't want that Iron Halo? Personally, I'm a big fan of using storm shields, combat shields, and terminator armor instead of the IH. With the shields, you get the protection where you need it for less than half the cost. Termie armor costs the same as the IH, but provides a bunch of other benefits for the price.

I'm not a huge fan of the mandatory Iron Halo either, and I hope that it won't extend to all chapters. You can still use a Terminator armoured commander as Belial, but I feel pity for those who have modeled their power armoured commander with a shield. I hate invalidating models. However, in this thread I decided to focus on point costs, so I didn't complain about those things here. I have another thread about new GW rules invalidating models.

You and I seem to agree on almost everything, so I won't comment the rest of your post. It's good that there's someone who's with me on these things.



The new options reflect the fluff and stop people minmaxing- in general as an example, I see Dreadnaughts in every army I play and used well, they're severely overpowered before the recent changes.

Dreads overpowered? Are you serious? Do you mean just the assault cannon Dread, or Dreads in general? There are monstrous creatures and other things in the game that are way more nasty than Dreads for the same cost.


The whole assault v shooty arguement lead to dull games-marines taking it away and leading to genuine tactical opportunities is a great thing- Eldar and DA show the future of 40k- where choice means how you play, not how you tech up your ultra character- the bane of 40k since 2nd ed that has finally been combatted in DA and Eldar.

I don't know why you're comparing Eldar and DA on tactical terms. Eldar are an army of specialist, while DA (especially Tactical squads) are much more general purpose. You mentioned ultra characters. That's not the point of this thread, but I must say that herohammer hasn't gone anywhere - it's just that the custom made characters are being replaced by special characters. Eldrad Ulthran is now in half of all Eldar armies. The DA special characters are also quite popular, and according to the rumours Mephiston will be such a bad ass that every BA player will probably take him. Personally, I prefered the custom made characters. Seeing a named special character in every game feels really wrong.


As for nerfing-some things needed nerfing. I'm not a fanboy but sorting out a system takes time but its in the right manner. People complaining often dont like their power armies getting broken down-

Yes, some things needed nerfing. However, I think that many things that didn't need to be nerfed were still nerfed -for example, the cost of plasma pistols and power weapons for Sergeants and squad members. I agree that the cost of the power fist needed to go up, though. The point cost of the Dreadnought is also very unfair. Some things needed just a little bit of adjustment, but were adjusted a lot more than was needed, for example the Predator sponson costs.

As for complaining about the loss of power armies, that's not what I'm doing. In fact, I don't even play DA. If you read my opening post carefully, you'll see that I also objected to many of the "advantagious" changes such as the free grenades and super cheap Razorbacks and multi-melta bikes.


Oh and seriously, statistically the assault cannon isn't that great at all- do the maths.

I have done the math, and think that it is a great weapon. It's even better than the 3rd edition Eldar starcannon against most targets. I don't want to turn this thread into another assault cannon debate, so I won't say more about the subject.


it is a good thing because the libby gains just as much from it as a terminator does... it cost the same when it was wargear anyway *poke* so why should that change now?

To me, the great thing about the armoury was the amount of options available. I didn't like the loss of options in the new DA thing. Possibly one reason why Jervis wanted to reduce options was because all options are now given in list entries. If they had as many options as before, the entries would become quite long. Again, I don't think that taking away the options was a good thing, but it's not the main point about this thread; I have another thread for that.

Anyway, the armoury wasn't perfectly balanced (although it was good enough), as some items are a bit more useful in the hands of certain models than others. A good example is Terminaor armour for Chaplains, which should be cheaper for them than for others because they already come with an invulnerable save. In the 4th edition SM codex they had different costs for Sergeants and independent characters, which was a very good thing. By including all options in list entries, you could achieve even better balance, because you could have different point costs for each unit. The Chaplain gains less from Terminator armour than a Librarian, which means that the Chaplain should pay less points for the armour than a Librarian. I don't know why you're comparing Librarians to squad members. Obviously items will have different costs for squad members and characters. Generally characters should pay more than squad members.

I think that in the new DA codex the Terminator armour option for a Chaplain is a bit overpriced. You effectively lose an attack compared to a power armoured Chaplain, because you can't have two close combat weapons in Terminator armour and there are no more Terminator honours. You lose pretty much all other options (meltabombs, jump packs etc) when you take Terminator armour, you can't get in a Rhino or a Razorback and you can't sweeping advance. Gaining a 2+ armour save and deep strike is nice, but I still think that 25 points is a bit harsh for that when you also get all those disadvantages.


adrealto the OP, you made mention of the fact that devs would normally not want ot be in combat, but with the combat squads rule, you can have a 5 man tac squad with your vet sarge running towards your enemy while your heavy weapons are shooting away. Seems the powerfist could do good there no?

It could be good, but probably not the best way to spend points. Like you mentioned, splitting into two heavy weapon squads would be better. You also won't be having any assault weapons, which are one of the things that make Rhino-mounted tactical squads great. Still, that wasn't one of my major complaints, I really don't mind that much if Devastator Sergeants pay the same for power fists as Assault Sergeants.


People seem to have a very narrow view of balance.

In case you haven't noticed other codexes are having increases in points of heavy weapons and the removal of nasty no-brainer options.

If that's all that was happening, then maybe I wouldn't be complaining this much. But unfortunately some heavy weapon costs (like multi-meltas for attack bikes) are going DOWN without a sensible reason. In some cases, the updated codices have actually ADDED no-brainer options. On the other hand, some things that were definitely not overpowered (Dreads) are receiving costs increases. Some things deserved a small increase in cost, but have been totally overdone (like the Predator lascannon sponsons).


The attack bikes being only 50 points is acceptable ecasue you can only have severely limited number (as they are like heavy wepaons added on to bike squads)

Attack bikes work very differently from heavy weapon troopers in Tactical squads. In Tactical squads, the heavy weapon is forced to shoot at the same target as the bolters, which is often not the optimal choice. That's why Tactical squads pay less points for heavies than Devastators. Attack bikes, on the other hand, can be detached from the Biker squad and shoot at a different target.

I think that 50 points for a model with 2 Wounds, a 3+ save, T4(5), 2 Attacks, a general Marine statline, 12" movement, turbo boost, twin-linked bolters and a multi-melta which both can be fired even if the model moves, frag and krak grenades, teleport homer, fearlessness and Scouts USR is too cheap.


Did you reallize that a full str assault squad get a very nice break on a drop pod as opposed to a tactical squad?

Nope. A full Assault squad effectively pays 70 points for their jump packs - more than the cost of a Drop Pod.


I actually use plasma pistols on almost all my V. srgs, thank you very much.

You are in the minority, though. Most people don't want to give plasmas to their Veteran Sergeants at that cost.

Kargush
25-05-2007, 12:32
I'm with Raziel on this one. JJ made the worst Codecies in 3rd ed: the first C: DA, C: CSM, and C: SW(the latter of which has been lauded as a piece of cheese, and guess what Chapter JJ farvors himself...? The man is insane. The really funny thing is that the man is against what he calls no-brainers(terminator honors, purity seals, etc), and then removes them only to replace them with new no-brainers... He's also re-written some fluff to try and pass everything off as canon. Retcon, I call it... A pox on JJ's hide, he should have remained at Specialist Games...

Formarion
25-05-2007, 13:21
I tend not to believe the rumours that are being thrown around on forums such as these. If you look at the DA codex as what it is intended to be - a stand-alone codex for a highly secluded and unorthodox Marine army then the changes make sense. If we start to think that just because these changes were made in the DA list then they will automatically be made in every other codex then we get outcomes like this ^^. I mean the Black Templars had some funky changes from what I can remember, but no-one assumed those would be implimented into the next SM redux.

I am quite happy with the DA codex, the changes in it make sense to me and I highly doubt they will be implimented in the BA codx and even more certain they won't be in the Chaos codex. GW, from what I have seen so far, is trying to make the more defined Marine armies act as stand-alone lists, so differences will be even more noticeable than just special rules, they will probably be in the set-up of the armies themselves )combat squads or mixed numbers, price differences, mandatory equipment, etc).

Grand Master Raziel
25-05-2007, 13:49
True it will take time to replace all the Codexes.

But when the program finishes and all codexes are rewritten we should see a more balanced game with greater emphasis on troops and whole-of-army combined arms approach.

Do you really think the current trend is going to last for a complete cycle of dexes? Prior to The Attack of JJ, GW was trying to balance the dexes by uppowering the dexes that were weak (IG, Tau, Nids). That didn't last for a full cycle. Now, Overlord JJ has GW downpowering dexes, but how long will it be before JJ moves on, or a dex gets assigned to Haines-ish fanboy? The JJ-dexes will stil be weak, but players of those armies will have to grapple with monstrosities similar to the current Chaos dex, or perhaps just armies whose dexes were written with a "strengthen the armies" mentality.


Please provide evidence of any well known military doing this. Handguns are not general issue* in most militaries as far as I am aware, as that means less ammo for your rifle or replacing more generally useful equipment (soldiers will only carry so much equipment, give them too much and they will "forget" some of it). In the real world firing an assault rifle while you charge into an assault is just as easy/hard as firing a pistol (in fact a carbine with red dot sight is significantly better). Don't confuse game artefacts with real military tactics.


The pistol thing isn't to make SMs "more realistic", it's to give SMs back the shot before charging without altering the core 4th ed rules. The 3rd ed rules allowed troops with rapid fire weapons to fire a single shot before charging into combat. The 4th ed rules took that utility away. Giving pistols to troops with rapid fire weapons gives it back again, because they can fire the pistols before charging instead of their longarms. It pains me to admit it, but JJ did come up with clever idea with this one.


I don't always read the forums actively, so I have missed your thread. Not trying to take the glory away from you or anything. :)

That comment wasn't aimed at you, spispopd, it was aimed at Captain Micha, specifically his "Finally, intelligent criticism of Codex: Dark Angels!" comment.


I mean the Black Templars had some funky changes from what I can remember, but no-one assumed those would be implimented into the next SM redux.

I am quite happy with the DA codex, the changes in it make sense to me and I highly doubt they will be implimented in the BA codx and even more certain they won't be in the Chaos codex. GW, from what I have seen so far, is trying to make the more defined Marine armies act as stand-alone lists, so differences will be even more noticeable than just special rules, they will probably be in the set-up of the armies themselves )combat squads or mixed numbers, price differences, mandatory equipment, etc).

Black Templars aren't a "codex" chapter, which justifies their army list being significantly different from the others. DAs and BAs are largely codex chapters, so their army lists should be fairly similar, and thus the SM Redux list should strongly resemble the DA one. Chaos is a little harder to predict where GW might be going with that.

Varath- Lord Impaler
25-05-2007, 14:15
Hmmm Well if you look at the Codex and the changes that it is heralding it makes alot of sense.

1. 2+ armour really didnt seem all that impressive, mostly because of the large amount of heavy weapons and special weapons that could negate it. Now those weapons are being made more expensive to make heavier armour what it should be.
2. Vehicles, Move like a butterfly, die like a butterfly. Heavier vehicles were pointless, much too easy to destroy, now that more points are being spent on troops, heavy weapons arnt as proliferent. Vehicles such as the land raider might see the light of day.
3. Wounds? oh got plenty of them. Having a unit that can take 3 power weapons to the face before dying really is a tough cookie. The cutdown on 3 wound characters really puts this into perspective, also It shows how hardcore the 4 Wound Chapter masters are.

Its a good change, noone likes it yet, but its a good change. The Bar was raised too high, it needs to be brought back to earth level.

narlix
25-05-2007, 15:56
The points change I have the most problem with is the Techmarine. A fully kitted out Techmarine in servo harness now costs 50% more than his equivelent in the vanilla SM codex. Now I can understand some units going up in price but the Techmarine was already a pretty expensive and pretty underpowered character. Add to that he appears to have lost some of his wargear like the Signum and I really cannot see why anyone would want to take him.

I used to buy one occasionally for my Devastators if I was taking plasma cannons but I never fought against one. So why the massive points hike?

well in the DA he is only bout 10 points higher, its BA where he is 125 with out the harness i just boggle.

your paying for the fact he is not takeing up a slot on the FoC now. Which would be fair.... if he was still and IC , but he is not. Im really worried about what they are going to do in redux to them, I have two in my army, I know they are gonna lose the jump pack they can have, but if there not IC's im toast and they have to go, they are leading two of my assault squads.

Basicly tech marines for about 120 points have 5 attack ( with a power weapon) on the charge, 2 power fist attacks, 2+ normal save 4+ invun save, a flamer and plasma pistol on the turn they charge, and can take a jump pack or bike.

to some they are just a guy who fixes tanks, to other they are a combat monster, for about the same cost. just how ya use them.

gitburna
25-05-2007, 15:58
I'm with Raziel on this one. JJ made the worst Codecies in 3rd ed: the first C: DA, C: CSM, and C: SW(the latter of which has been lauded as a piece of cheese, and guess what Chapter JJ farvors himself...? The man is insane. The really funny thing is that the man is against what he calls no-brainers(terminator honors, purity seals, etc), and then removes them only to replace them with new no-brainers... He's also re-written some fluff to try and pass everything off as canon. Retcon, I call it... A pox on JJ's hide, he should have remained at Specialist Games...

3rd edition Space Wolves Cheesey ???! WTF
2nd edition perhaps but i think any assault army in the early days of 3rd edition had it made because of the Rhino/Transport rush

Removal of Terminator honours made sense. Practically every character took it. [just like nearly everyone had daemonic Strength for Chaos] What are the new No-brainers you're suggesting then?

And tell me about this fluff which has been "ReWritten"
Let me just remind you that *anything* published by Games Workshop is canon wether you like it or not {with the obvious exception of CS Goto}

Im quite intrigued :rolleyes:

Jervis is one of the best and longest serving designers GW have.

Ronin_eX
25-05-2007, 16:58
Poor JJ taking all this bloody flak for finally doing what needed to be done to balance the game. Sure they tried to balance it by increasing the power of "underpowered" lists but that leads to creep which only ends in imbalance again. By scaling the codecies back to basics you can more easily trouble shoot each list for imbalance. The method they are using now will have more longevity in the end which makes all the difference.

Say what you will about JJ's work during 3rd edition but I think basing one's opinion of someone off of the worst edition the game has ever seen will likely end in a skewed view. JJ has also written the rules to blood bowl as well as being one of the designers of the warhammer 40k 2nd edition armylists (thought by many, myself included, to be some of the best work ever done by GW). Some of the best stuff that has come out of GW has been his doing, sure he's made a few mistakes (3rd edition DA codex was horrid) but that shouldn't be what he is remembered for. I think that if GW sticks to JJ's plans we will see a much better product come out in the end. It may take time but I have hope for the future of the game.

And if they screw it all up and change their minds about the whole deal in a few years and decide to go back to the "power-creep" balancing method then there are plenty of other wargames to choose from and I'll be more than content giving them my attention. :p

samiens
25-05-2007, 17:13
Thankfully theres actually some support for JJ in a thread. Firstly, I personally don't know who decides on the final product but very few major companies are completely doiminated by one man. Secondly, he's using his experiences to create fluffy balanced armies hoorah!

Incidentally, character assassination on a broadcast medium (like this forum) Is potentially libel- you might want to be a little careful action can be taken against Warseer in any country where it can be accessed and I'd bet that could lead to some severe ramifications- dout anything would be done about it but laws exist for a reason. Plus its just plain rude- is a man insane because he makes what some people think is a mistake in a tabletop wargame, seriously? I don't know if you're a game designer but unless you work for GW I bet you're not as successful.

Seriously why don't you guys just play other games or be a little constructive? Those defending JJ- thanks for showing some common sense!

Karhedron
25-05-2007, 19:07
In case you haven't noticed other codexes are having increases in points of heavy weapons and the removal of nasty no-brainer options.
Indeed, just look at the Eldar codex. Starcannons had their rate of fire cut by 33% and the cost of Brightlances went through the roof. Part of the reason for this is that the studio realised that certain units like Terminators and Tanks weren't as tough as they should be. Cheap plasma and lascannons everywhere meant that anything without AV14 or a bunch of special rules tended to die in a real hurry.

Since they can't really go back and rework the mechanics of the game, they had to settle for increasing the costs of certain weapons. The IG codex gave the first hint of this but they bottled out a bit on the SM codex and didn't give many weapons much of a cost hike. Tyranids aren't really a shooty army and with Tau things like railguns are their signature weapons so couldn't get toned down too much. With Eldar and DA they finally bit the bullet and started making the cuts.

If you want to take down very hard units like Terminators and Tanks you now need to spend a lot more points on heavy weapons to do it. The alternative is to buy specialised units like Banshees or Fire Dragons which excel at one role but get badly mauled if used in the wrong way.

Cheap heavy weapons used to be like insurance. You could scatter a selection of them through your army without spending too many points. This made it easy to build an all-comers army whilst still loading out on more specialised and expensive units. Now there are some hard choices to be made.

As each codex gets revised, I think there will be some pain but the game as a whole will benefit. In a year or two's time it will be worth taking more Terminators and Tanks to tourneys because you know that armies will either have fewer weapons to deal with these tough targets or will be significantly smaller than they are now.

Whilst I don't agree with every change JJ has made, I agree with the direction he is going in. I think that the game will be better balanced in a couple of years time.

Toreador
25-05-2007, 21:25
And if you noticed, when you base everything off of 5's, you can't make things just cost +1pt per model. It makes much more sense when building armies.

Marines are suppose to be the basic end all be all of humanities warrior forces. By giving them frag and crack along with the bolter and bolt pistol you make them what they are suppose to be. Decently good at everything. Again, it makes more sense.

I am not sure if I agree with the price rise of the Dread, but it does seem like everyone fields them (with or without an AC) for some reason over tanks...

Taking anything in specific dexes for a few chapters as overall changes is dangerous. A lot of the options are limited for the reason they are a named chapter.

The price decrease in rhinos and razorbacks mean I will field them a lot more, and without extra armour. Not as mobile terrain, but what they were meant to do, make my army more maneuverable.

I like and approve of the way things are going. A sgt is a veteran, why not always give him the stats? If you notice this also helps balance out people taking a lot of 5 man squads. It is cheaper to add 5 guys to a squad than to buy another 5 man unit because of the vet sgt. If you notice, the cost of a 10 man tac squad with LC vs the cost of a 5 man with razorback and TL LC is about the same. One is more mobile, but dies quicker, one is more static, but more staying power.

It used to be with the DA dex and the SM dex I had no problem planning armies. Now I have a lot of problems making an army with the DA dex. There is so much competition between different options and units in the list that I spend hours playing with the list to come up with what I desire.

If you look at a lot of the list it just makes sense, there is some odd wizardry going on there.

I do agree that Plasma is almost too expensive, but it was also the thing that everyone ALWAYS takes. With cheaper rhinos and rapid fire, a marine squad can do some nasty things. It also makes those drop podding tricked out tac squads more expensive. Hidden fists have always been too cheap.

But you can't compare it to things designed the old way. We will have to wait until a few more codexes are out.

Deathwing_Matt
25-05-2007, 22:16
Despite its title, this may not just be a codex for a single chapter. It seems to also take on many of the problems of SM codex. For example, an assault cannon for a landspeeder is now 35pts to reflect its extra shot, the fact it is now rending and no longer jams. If anything, whilst adding DA stuff to it, it can work as a new Marine Codex, fixing many of Codex SM problems

Ranhothep
25-05-2007, 22:36
Retcon, I call it... A pox on JJ's hide, he should have remained at Specialist Games...

THIS is the truth. How can anyone honestly call a good designer a man who allowed Tzeentch Thousand Sons to take a Mark of Khorne in his Chaos Codex? :confused: this is just one example to tell it all.

Yes, the downgrading trend is a good approach. granted. Unfortunately the way he does it, is mostly..just VERY bad. the examples have been stated (dread, equal warger points costs for ICs and non-ICs etc etc)
OP is right on all accounts and presents them in a very well-written fashion.

Why, oh why has anyone allowed JJ to return from his specialist games exile? :cries: :cries:

Toreador
25-05-2007, 22:42
Probably because 40k is dying, and unless they can make a balanced game there will be no 40k. I welcome his return.

um.... what in the Chaos codex? Where did that come from?

I politely disagree.

Bloodknight
25-05-2007, 22:56
I donīt see whatīs wrong with equal wargear costs. If at all powerfists should be more expensive for sergeants than for ICs because they can use them better. :p

Gutlord Grom
25-05-2007, 23:23
Probably because 40k is dying, and unless they can make a balanced game there will be no 40k. I welcome his return.

um.... what in the Chaos codex? Where did that come from?

I politely disagree.


Since when was 40k dying? It seems quite popular.

Toreador
25-05-2007, 23:44
Profits are down across the board for GW, our retailer which was one of their larger B&M clients has 40k sales down over 2/3rds, other retailers are echoing the same. Quite a few shops you don't even see it played anymore, and tournaments have been dropping in attendance. It's still huge, but it is taking quite a hit. People are dropping to go play with other toys. Heck, just watch GW stock for a bit, and see where it is at,..

Gutlord Grom
25-05-2007, 23:49
Meh, games become less popular in areas over time, and then resurge in popularity. Happens a lot.

Toreador
25-05-2007, 23:57
Yep, been playing since 87, so I have seen it. But the condition of the company is not good at the moment, and with a little company called Phoenix Investments? buying up large portions of stock could be ripe for a buyout and split up.

There are big issues with the game, and a lot of people are dropping from it. Lack of rules support and balance being two. Why play Sisters or Orks if you can't win against SM or Eldar, which most others play. If everyone plays marines,.. it gets boring.

ProjectMayhem
26-05-2007, 01:28
I say wait for all the codices/armies/rules to fall into this new pricing before we judge if this makes sense.

Two reasons:

1) To see if equivalent units/options in all armies are costed in line with, for example, the options in the DA dex.

2) Just because a vanilla marine player sees that a DA dreadnaught is more expensive than his version and thinks it to be useless, doesn't mean that said dreadnaught is any less useful for the role it plays in a DA player's army.

shabbadoo
26-05-2007, 06:53
After looking at the changes made to Techmarines, 100 points, while higher than the entry in C: SM, is probably more appropriate points-wise. 100 points for a techmarine with servo harness gives you a 2+ save, 4 power weapon attacks, and 2 power fist attacks on the charge, plus a twin-linked plasma pistol and flamer for the Shooting Phase; and he can fix vehicles by himself on a roll of a 6 (with a re-roll!). That is a lot of flexibility to cram into 100 points of combat monster. Signum tech is nice and all, but it looks like it will be relegated across the board to a visual bit on the model (as will the Auspex) rather than something that affects the game. I imagine that many people will be screaming bloody murder when it gets dropped from C: SM.

I can see why the signum was dropped from the Techmarine, as it relegated him to the plasma cannon Devastator Squad “super ammo grot”, rather than taking on the role that Techmarines are supposed to have- support and vehicle maintenance. Techmarines are mostly about taking care of the technology, not insuring that the cross-eyed Devastator shoots "more better". I can live with that. It is tough to find the points to fit a Techmarine into a smaller list though.

I don’t have much of an issue with any point costs or nearly imposed heavy weapon restrictions in the Codex: Dark Angels. I understand and accept the reasons for it. It would have been nice to see the Apothecary be able to roam the battlefield like the Techmarine can, as it is very much what they are supposed to do.

AngryAngel
26-05-2007, 07:53
My biggest comlplaint is people who complain about the Assault Cannon, and GW Nerfing it because of that. I have just as much of a chance of rolling a 1 as I do rolling a 6. It's a freaking crock of BS.

Why oh why does the most known Terminator army in the 40K universe get less heavy weapons then everyone else, and only be able to take 5 man squads? Who's bright idea was that? What sense if any does this idea make?

Don't even bother bringing up the ac thing again. It'll just start a huge debate, and neither side will recant their views. Just agree its the most amazing thing since sliced bread and move on. You'll just tire yourself out for no real gain.

rintinglen
26-05-2007, 08:01
There are big issues with the game, and a lot of people are dropping from it. Lack of rules support and balance being two. Why play Sisters or Orks if you can't win against SM or Eldar, which most others play. If everyone plays marines,.. it gets boring.

Friend, I'll give you the Orks, they are so outdated they really can't be considered part of the 40k universe. However, Sisters played well can ruin a space marine army 7 out of 10 and can usually go evens with most eldar armies.
Be that as it may, Orks, Deamonhunters, Black Templar and Space Wolves are all prime examples of what is wrong with 40k: lack of balance. Un-fortunately, Jervis is going about with the Nerf stick about one codex too late. And that will certainly add to the decline and fall of the GW empire.

Going through and killing off SM is quite frankly insane. They are (or were) far and away the most popular models that GW makes. When little Johnny goes down to the local games store and buys his army box, it is Most likely Space Marines that he will choose. If he gets his butt handed to him when he plays, he won't buy any more, and he will go back to his PS2 and say to heck with the game. As it stands right now, Space Marines (if they follow the path of the DA) are going to be nothing but patsies for Mech Tau and Mech Eldar. They already have problems with those armies. Eldar have won or tied every tournament that I have seen since the new "balanced" codex came out. Further reducing the playability of their top dollar earner is just what GW needs to further drive down sales. You can count me amongst the number of those who would argue that ole Jervis is paving the proverbial path with his good intentions.

I think the DA codex reeks, I know that DA can't run with the big dogs as their codex is currently written (I have watched or played nine games involving DA since the new codex came out and they have won one, tied 2, and lost the rest) and I hate the new layout of the codex. Why the Army builder and the fluff sections couldn't have been combined is totally beyond me. The special rules are in the fluff section, but the points and the options are in the army builder. All in all, not the best design in my opinion.
OK, they want to limit access to the armory, fine. They want to eliminate the armory, I'm not really happy with that but I can hold my nose and accept it. But then when many changes are made to basic units, it is over the top. As the OP pointed out, many of the changes affect things that didn't need changing. Can any one tell me why assault marines lost Meltabombs? Or why every sergeant became a veteran? What ***** thought that only ten man squads can have heavy or special weapons? (Ok, that last question is rhetorical, I know it was Jervis Johnson). Why plasma is more expensive in the one army that should have more of it than any others? Why nerf terminators? The list goes on and on.

Kargush
26-05-2007, 08:30
3rd edition Space Wolves Cheesey ???! WTF
2nd edition perhaps but i think any assault army in the early days of 3rd edition had it made because of the Rhino/Transport rush.
*snip*
And tell me about this fluff which has been "ReWritten"
Let me just remind you that *anything* published by Games Workshop is canon wether you like it or not {with the obvious exception of CS Goto}

Im quite intrigued :rolleyes:

Jervis is one of the best and longest serving designers GW have.

No-brainers? Besides stuff like Interrogator-Chaplains to get Sacred Standards(confers Fearless), 10-man Tactical Squads(to get the heavy weapon), few(or no) transports(to avoid Escalation trouble), twin lightening claws and combi-weapon on Masters(get the extra attack and get some shooting too), etc... Want me to continue? Or can you find the rest on your own?

Also, the removal of an armoury makes some of the options more or less moriboud...

SW cheesey? Well, besides ablative wolves for characters, a Chaplain that also is an Apothecary, extra characters, wolf pelts and tooth necklaces, Belt of Russ and Iron Halo(by RAW, that can be done, since the Belt didn't remove the option of the Iron Halo), very good assault troops as Troops, split shooting with Long Fangs, Terminator sergeants in squads... Need I continue...?

JJ isn't the best. He is the best at Specialist Games, but his view of 40K should have died with 2nd ed...

Ronin_eX
26-05-2007, 08:33
Friend, I'll give you the Orks, they are so outdated they really can't be considered part of the 40k universe. However, Sisters played well can ruin a space marine army 7 out of 10 and can usually go evens with most eldar armies.
Be that as it may, Orks, Deamonhunters, Black Templar and Space Wolves are all prime examples of what is wrong with 40k: lack of balance. Un-fortunately, Jervis is going about with the Nerf stick about one codex too late. And that will certainly add to the decline and fall of the GW empire.

Going through and killing off SM is quite frankly insane. They are (or were) far and away the most popular models that GW makes. When little Johnny goes down to the local games store and buys his army box, it is Most likely Space Marines that he will choose. If he gets his butt handed to him when he plays, he won't buy any more, and he will go back to his PS2 and say to heck with the game. As it stands right now, Space Marines (if they follow the path of the DA) are going to be nothing but patsies for Mech Tau and Mech Eldar. They already have problems with those armies. Eldar have won or tied every tournament that I have seen since the new "balanced" codex came out. Further reducing the playability of their top dollar earner is just what GW needs to further drive down sales. You can count me amongst the number of those who would argue that ole Jervis is paving the proverbial path with his good intentions.

I think the DA codex reeks, I know that DA can't run with the big dogs as their codex is currently written (I have watched or played nine games involving DA since the new codex came out and they have won one, tied 2, and lost the rest) and I hate the new layout of the codex. Why the Army builder and the fluff sections couldn't have been combined is totally beyond me. The special rules are in the fluff section, but the points and the options are in the army builder. All in all, not the best design in my opinion.
OK, they want to limit access to the armory, fine. They want to eliminate the armory, I'm not really happy with that but I can hold my nose and accept it. But then when many changes are made to basic units, it is over the top. As the OP pointed out, many of the changes affect things that didn't need changing. Can any one tell me why assault marines lost Meltabombs? Or why every sergeant became a veteran? What ***** thought that only ten man squads can have heavy or special weapons? (Ok, that last question is rhetorical, I know it was Jervis Johnson). Why plasma is more expensive in the one army that should have more of it than any others? Why nerf terminators? The list goes on and on.

About the only thing I agree with in this post is that the current game is unbalanced. I can't help but think of the phrase "better late than never". It would have been great if this had all started at the beginning of 4th edition but hindsight is 20/20 and they are at least trying to fix what they broke now. Whining about how it was your favourite army that was balanced first is simply sour grapes.

As for sales of marines going down, great! Maybe people will start seeing that other races are just as viable after the rebalance and we'll finally see a more equal distribution of armies. I for one think that less people playing marines could only be a good thing for the hobby.

The newly balanced lists are just fine and your "evidence" based on personal experience is just a personal opinion, not fact. I have played 13 games under the new DA codex, I've won 10, lost 1, and tied twice. I hardly see how any one person's W/L/T ration proves that a codex is good or bad as many factors come in to it, not least of which is an individuals point of view. I'm glad you at least tried it but it hardly sounds like you gave it a fair shake as it sounds like you made up your mind before the thing even hit the printers.

The other changes don't all have a very good basis. Assault Marines aren't anti-tank weapons that's the devastator's job, thus melta-bombs are limited to the sergeant. Vet sergeants makes sense to me as the DA have a large backlog of non-DW veterans and many of those end up serving as sergeants for basic squads. Other than that they are a very useful upgrade for the leadership boost and the close combat ability they can provide. For the point increase on plasma weapons, that is because they are worth X points. Something's cost is not a reflection of availability but a reflection of effectiveness. Besides DA are not the "plasma" army, that is a myth started in the 3rd edition and it has no actual grounding in DA background. In the end we will see changes made to all the codecies and the resulting balance will hopefully make the game much more fun and playable as a result.

Stella Cadente
26-05-2007, 08:33
Probably because 40k is dying, and unless they can make a balanced game there will be no 40k. I welcome his return.

um.... what in the Chaos codex? Where did that come from?

I politely disagree.

I agree, its popularity around these parts has started to obviously decrease, heck even Lord of the rings has become more popular recently, and the BA update made all the BA players cry, which I laughed so hard at.

to the original question
"Do the point costs in the new Dark Angels codex make sense?"

yes, now stop whining and play the damn game, if you don't like it, TOUGH, its not gonna change for a SMALL minority of people, there are more people that like the new rules than those that don't.

of course you could just not play 40k anymore and play a decent game

Marius Xerxes
26-05-2007, 09:55
The whole assault v shooty arguement lead to dull games-marines taking it away and leading to genuine tactical opportunities is a great thing- Eldar and DA show the future of 40k- where choice means how you play, not how you tech up your ultra character- the bane of 40k since 2nd ed that has finally been combatted in DA and Eldar.


I dont see how the character issue has been combatted. Eack book provides Special Characters that are devestating. Karanduras (ignore miss spellings please) in Eldar packs 8 STR 8 Power Fist Attacks on his own, Infiltrates, Fleets, 2+ save and is immune to Instant Death.

Azrael has 5 or 6 STR 6 Power Weapon Attacks on his own.

Mephiston in the new BA sports anything from 6 to 9 STR 5 Power Weapon attacks, up to STR 6 if used in combination with other characters along with INT 7, has the equilivent to a jet pack, and if one wound gets through, can kill you instantly.

What they took away in your own character building they clearly provided in the Special Character Arena. Those numbers bring back ideas of 2nd Ed "Hero Hammer".

Gutlord Grom
26-05-2007, 16:39
yes, now stop whining and play the damn game, if you don't like it, TOUGH, its not gonna change for a SMALL minority of people, there are more people that like the new rules than those that don't.


You know just because you feel that your opinion is better than ours, and that we should shut up is great. Bravo! I admire your self confidence and you should continue with that in real life.

However, our opinion is just as valid as yours. This is a discussion forum. Not "Shut up because Stella Cadente says so".

So please, unless you can come up with an arguement besides "Shut up!", you should follow your own advice.

Master Jeridian
26-05-2007, 23:17
I say wait for all the codices/armies/rules to fall into this new pricing before we judge if this makes sense.

Two reasons:

1) To see if equivalent units/options in all armies are costed in line with, for example, the options in the DA dex.

This is a pet favourite of mine- you can't judge the DA Codex based on Codex SM's, and other older books...
Sorry, buddy, but I can and do compare DA to said books because I can and do play against armies from said books all the time. This idea that 'all will be okay' when Jervis pulls a miracle out and creates balance in 40k is rubbish- it will take years to do this, and with Mech Tau and Eldar at the end of the list, and already proving to be the big two (once BA and Chaos are gone) who's gonna stick around?


2) Just because a vanilla marine player sees that a DA dreadnaught is more expensive than his version and thinks it to be useless, doesn't mean that said dreadnaught is any less useful for the role it plays in a DA player's army.

Taken in isolation, perhaps. But combined with the fact nearly everything (every useful thing at least) has recieved big price hikes- that 'vanilla marine player' can cram in a lot more stuff, hence his army is more powerful. That Dreadnought may fulfill the same purpose but it is taking up more pts, making the DA army smaller and less capable.

ProjectMayhem
27-05-2007, 01:03
This is a pet favourite of mine- you can't judge the DA Codex based on Codex SM's, and other older books...
Sorry, buddy, but I can and do compare DA to said books because I can and do play against armies from said books all the time. This idea that 'all will be okay' when Jervis pulls a miracle out and creates balance in 40k is rubbish- it will take years to do this, and with Mech Tau and Eldar at the end of the list, and already proving to be the big two (once BA and Chaos are gone) who's gonna stick around?

I know you love nothing more than to throw your hat into the tired old love/hate debates, but try actually reading my post in it's context before you rush to your usual conclusions. :rolleyes:

I said let's see how this pans out in future codices and potential reduxs before we declare DA (or 40k for that matter) dead in the water. I didn't say "all will be okay" in anything. If only DA, BA, and Chaos are receiving this treatment and no other codex, then, as you pointed out, we have a problem. Since DA is the first to get this "overhaul", we can't make an accurate assessment because the format, philosophy, and theory differs greatly from the previous five codices, which could be all eligible for a redux including the BGB. This had nothing to do if whether people love, hate, or don't care about this rules direction. It's about whether GW is going to go through with said standards a few years down the line, and then, we react to how they accomplish it. THAT is what I suggested.


Taken in isolation, perhaps. But combined with the fact nearly everything (every useful thing at least) has recieved big price hikes- that 'vanilla marine player' can cram in a lot more stuff, hence his army is more powerful. That Dreadnought may fulfill the same purpose but it is taking up more pts, making the DA army smaller and less capable.

Everything? Ok, using your logic, try doing a price comparison between similar units equipped with similar options with DA and SM. While SM gets cheaper dreads, Pred As, drop pods, and assault cannons...DA players are getting better value on several optimal builds in Tac/Dev marines, named characters, pred D's, company masters, Rhinos, Razorbacks, Command Squads, and Veterans for example. It's give and take. Is this the correct way to go? I don't know. I reserve judgement until I see how this standard is implemented across the board.

fazzgd
27-05-2007, 01:47
no problem.
Dark Angels codex point costs -> New Space Marines codex point costs
All die together.:D

and Different Army point costs edit.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
27-05-2007, 10:15
Removal of Terminator honours made sense. Practically every character took it. [just like nearly everyone had daemonic Strength for Chaos] What are the new No-brainers you're suggesting then?

Jervis is one of the best and longest serving designers GW have.

1.Strength will be replaced with daemonic weapon(+1str power weapon+d6attacks,with serious drawback).Chaos character doesn't buff your squads so they deserve to be more killy.

2.Jervis do many mistakes,take a closer look - he want force people to take 10 man squad right - he failed, he nerfed every troop choice in C: da and C: ba and elite choices are really crowded and "WORTH IT" - most competentive armies will be WITHOUT tactical squads ore with one to fill the slots.Jervis want to take away non brainers-he raise points - and more often unnecessary(plasma pistol should cost 10 points across the board,extra armour too,as well power weapon,lighting claws are still slightly overpriced,dread is horribly overpriced, speeder is overpriced,tactical squad cost is overpriced,techmarine as well,attack bike is slightly too cheap,terminator armour for chaplain is overpriced,rhino and razor are too cheap,predator as well).

Good idea poor implementation



yes, now stop whining and play the damn game, if you don't like it, TOUGH, its not gonna change for a SMALL minority of people, there are more people that like the new rules than those that don't.

Not as small minority - ok.I'm from Poland and i've often meet best tournament players.POWERGAMERS.Do you know why power fists are used that often - because no other weapon can deal with every threat like power fist do and be as effective when fighting MEQ.Some stathammer:

Charging Sarge(WS4 S4 I4 A4) vs Marine Squad
Power Fist 1.66 dead marine 55 pts
Lighting Claw 1.5 dead marine 60 pts
Power weapon 1 dead marine 45 pts
Rending weapon 0.85 dead marine not avilable

Charging Sarge(WS4 S4 I4 A4) vs Hive Tyrant,Daemon Prince
Power Fist 1.66 wound 55 pts
Lighting Claw 0.61 wound 60 pts
Power weapon 0.33 wound marine 45 pts
Rending weapon 0.70 wound not avilable

not to mention that only power fist can open vehicles.

who with common sense will take anything other than fist? Also why harlequins rending kiss cost 4 points when clearly it is better than power weapon !!!

Master Jeridian
27-05-2007, 11:25
Everything? Ok, using your logic, try doing a price comparison between similar units equipped with similar options with DA and SM. While SM gets cheaper dreads, Pred As, drop pods, and assault cannons...DA players are getting better value on several optimal builds in Tac/Dev marines, named characters, pred D's, company masters, Rhinos, Razorbacks, Command Squads, and Veterans for example. It's give and take. Is this the correct way to go? I don't know. I reserve judgement until I see how this standard is implemented across the board.

Shame then that Drop Pods, Assault Cannons and Predator Annihilators are the competitive things. Don't forget more flexible wargear, Librarians with decent psychic powers, cheaper power fist, plasma, etc.

DA bonuses?
Better value 'optimal builds' on Tacticals/Devs- since when has being straighjacketed into 5/10 models 'optimal build'? And how exactly is paying more for plasmaguns and lascannons, and heavy bolters- conducive to optimal?

Named characters- :o

Predator Destructors- true they are cheaper, still don't pack the MEq punch needing in a MEq heavy game.

Company Masters- how are they better? That you are forced to take an Iron Halo and it is hidden in the price. They pay just as much as SM Masters- they just have a small fraction of the wargear and no access to Termie Honours.

Rhinos/Razorbacks- GW screwed with the transport rules so badly that only Skimmer Transports are still widely used. Even at the DA prices they are a risky and unreliable proposition. Far safer (yet boring) to sit as a gunline, Deep Strike/Pod or Infiltrate- since GW at the same time made Infiltrate and Deep Strike happen in nearly every game- making transports somewhat redundant.

Command Squads- straightjacketed at 5xman so easily killed, not a retinue so even with them and a transport the Commander must start on the board alone in Escalation- perhaps reading the rulebook before writing Codex's may help Jervis?

Veterans- what? The ability to bling out and watch them die just like normal Marines. Or glory in the fact they can have variable squad size which makes them stand out in DA....like every SM squad can do?

So from here it looks like a lot of take and very little give.


I said let's see how this pans out in future codices and potential reduxs before we declare DA (or 40k for that matter) dead in the water.

I'll say it again- I'm playing 40k now against armies that are far superior, am I supposed to not play until they are all brought to DA level? Or am I to stop a game before turn 1...to see how this pans out in future.
Because people will judge it now, not sit there for 10years. And new people to the game will see DA have their ass handed to them game after game, so why would they collect them? Great fluff only takes a person so far, people can be good sports- but losing most of your games.

To the original question: Some pts cost do make sense, some don't.

Making a Dreadnought more expensive rather than it's Assault Cannon is insane- Dread's just weren't that impressive before. They where easy prey for your Eldar and Tau (who will be big contendors once MEq armies are nerfed) on the first turns, before they get stuck into killing you.

Power fists, plasma, lascannons- maybe. My opponents had no trouble fighting my army before. TBH, considering the tourney environment is tailored to fight Marines with considerations of other armies a distant second- I always walked in with everyone's army designed to defeat mine. This perhaps 'offset' the percieved 'cheapness' of Marine options and units.

Regardless- fudging with pts costs in a Sub-Codex and making them all more expensive, whilst leaving the Vanilla Codex more powerful- just creates this massive void between the two books. Watching a game between DA and SM is obscene.

"Oh you see that Termie squad with 1 Ass, it cost more than you Termie squad with 2 Ass."
"Don't worry, I get krak grenades to compensate.":rolleyes:

If they where going to do this, it should have started with Codex SM- followed rapidly by DA and BA (in WD if necessary). So that everyone is equally screwed.

spispopd
27-05-2007, 12:26
I tend not to believe the rumours that are being thrown around on forums such as these. If you look at the DA codex as what it is intended to be - a stand-alone codex for a highly secluded and unorthodox Marine army then the changes make sense. If we start to think that just because these changes were made in the DA list then they will automatically be made in every other codex then we get outcomes like this ^^. I mean the Black Templars had some funky changes from what I can remember, but no-one assumed those would be implimented into the next SM redux.

I am quite happy with the DA codex, the changes in it make sense to me and I highly doubt they will be implimented in the BA codx and even more certain they won't be in the Chaos codex. GW, from what I have seen so far, is trying to make the more defined Marine armies act as stand-alone lists, so differences will be even more noticeable than just special rules, they will probably be in the set-up of the armies themselves )combat squads or mixed numbers, price differences, mandatory equipment, etc).

In the past, Warseer rumours have been very reliable, so I have quite a bit of trust in the rumours concerning the new BA and Chaos codices. It has been stated that the BA options and point costs are very much like in the DA codex. The biggest differences between them are special characters, Death Company, Ravenwing and Deathwing. That, and BA gets more jump packs. I'm not saying that this (the similarity between BA and DA) is a bad thing, as they are both pretty much codex chapters. It has also been said that Chaos Rhinos are the same cost as DA Rhinos and that their Aspiring Champions have very limited choices, just like DA Veteran Sergeants. It makes sense to believe that most of the new DA and BA codex changes will carry on to the Marine codex redux, if JJ is writing it. Like Grand Master Raziel mentioned, Black Templars will have more differences, since they aren't a codex chapter, but I believe that the new costs for vehicles and character wargear will apply to them, too. Besides, the Black Templars codex was released before the DA codex and wasn't (IIRC) written by Jervis.



Hmmm Well if you look at the Codex and the changes that it is heralding it makes alot of sense.

1. 2+ armour really didnt seem all that impressive, mostly because of the large amount of heavy weapons and special weapons that could negate it. Now those weapons are being made more expensive to make heavier armour what it should be.
2. Vehicles, Move like a butterfly, die like a butterfly. Heavier vehicles were pointless, much too easy to destroy, now that more points are being spent on troops, heavy weapons arnt as proliferent. Vehicles such as the land raider might see the light of day.

Well, I have to agree that a 2+ save is not all that impressive compared to a 3+ save. There are more AP2 weapons than AP3 weapons in the game, which is a problem. Power weapons and fists don't care whether your save is 3+ or 2+. 3+ is pretty much the optimal save to have, and 2+ is not that great an upgrade to it. This could be solved by having modifiers instead of the AP system, but it looks like they won't be coming back. Personally, I would have prefered making all plasma weapons AP3 instead of charging an insane amount of points for them. I guess that AP2 makes sense fluffwise, though.

I don't think that the DA codex makes life much easier for vehicles. Lascannons are more expensive, but instead they get insanely cheap multi-melta bikes.



Poor JJ taking all this bloody flak for finally doing what needed to be done to balance the game. Sure they tried to balance it by increasing the power of "underpowered" lists but that leads to creep which only ends in imbalance again. By scaling the codecies back to basics you can more easily trouble shoot each list for imbalance. The method they are using now will have more longevity in the end which makes all the difference.

I'm not against toning down overpowered armies/units/options or increasing the costs of underpriced things. I agree that it's generally a better method than "codex creep". I do like some of the changes that JJ made. However, some of the things were totally unnecessary and don't help to achieve the goal of balance at all. These include increasing the point cost of the Dread, reducing the amount of weapon options for characters and overpriced plasma pistols for squad members and Sergeants. Some no-brainer options were removed, but some others were added, while some units and options were made so expensive that they're not really even worth using anymore.



Seriously why don't you guys just play other games or be a little constructive?

I'm not sure if this was directed to me or not. As for me, I want to play 40k. I have invested a lot of time and money on my models, and I like the world and backround of 40k. Just because I don't like JJ's new rules doesn't mean that I completely hate the game. I haven't started to play other wargames, because painting models takes a lot of time. I don't always have lots of time available, and I'm quite a slow painter anyway. As for constructiveness, I believe I have offered quite a few alternatives to the made changes.



And if you noticed, when you base everything off of 5's, you can't make things just cost +1pt per model. It makes much more sense when building armies.

I believe you were refering to my "combat equipment" suggestion, which involved having the currently free upgrades (bolt pistols, frag and krak grenades) as a package at +1 point per model. First of all, I don't know why you'd have to base everything on 5's. This wasn't the case in the Eldar codex, altough the DA codex seems to do this. Anyway, even if you have some kind of an obsession to base everything on 5's, you wouldn't have big problems with my combat equipment suggestion. Since DA squads are bought either as 5 or 10 models strong, the upgrade costs would be multiples of 5 anyway. The exception is bikers and characters, but perhaps they could have the equipment for free if it's absolutely necessary that every point cost is a multiple of 5.


I like and approve of the way things are going. A sgt is a veteran, why not always give him the stats? If you notice this also helps balance out people taking a lot of 5 man squads.

A Sergeant is not necessarily a veteran. I think that the fact that you can only include a heavy weapon with 10 models is enough to encourage taking big squads. The mandatory Veteran Sergeant isn't a big issue for me, but I'm not a huge fan of the idea either. I'm not sure if the Chaos codex will have mandatory Aspiring Champions, but I hope that it won't. I'm also not sure if this particular change will extend to the vanilla SM codex.



Yes, the downgrading trend is a good approach. granted. Unfortunately the way he does it, is mostly..just VERY bad.

It's good that some people understood my point. :)



I donīt see whatīs wrong with equal wargear costs. If at all powerfists should be more expensive for sergeants than for ICs because they can use them better.

I didn't object to _power fists_ becoming more expensive on Sergeants. That change was necessary. It is true that power fists are very effective on Veteran Sergeants. What you suggested (more expensive power fists for Sergeants than for IC's) might actually be a good idea. I have been thinking about that myself. What I don't like is that the OTHER wargear became more expensive on Sergeants, too. 10 point plasma pistols and power weapons made perfect sense and was much more fair than the current cost. Power weapons and plasma pistols should definitely be less expensive for Sergeants than they are for IC's.



I say wait for all the codices/armies/rules to fall into this new pricing before we judge if this makes sense.

Two reasons:

1) To see if equivalent units/options in all armies are costed in line with, for example, the options in the DA dex.

2) Just because a vanilla marine player sees that a DA dreadnaught is more expensive than his version and thinks it to be useless, doesn't mean that said dreadnaught is any less useful for the role it plays in a DA player's army.

1) We'll see about that in the future, but according to the rumours, the BA and Chaos lists will have similar costs as Dark Angels. If that's true, then it's fair to assume that it will apply to Codex SM redux, too.

2) If the Dread is overpriced, then it's overpriced. I don't think that there's anything that the Dread excels at that can't be done by another unit. Okay, nobody else in a SM list gets S10 close combat attacks, but how often do you need those? Ranged weapons or a power fist on a Sergeant usually does the same job.



The other changes don't all have a very good basis. Assault Marines aren't anti-tank weapons that's the devastator's job, thus melta-bombs are limited to the sergeant. Vet sergeants makes sense to me as the DA have a large backlog of non-DW veterans and many of those end up serving as sergeants for basic squads. Other than that they are a very useful upgrade for the leadership boost and the close combat ability they can provide. For the point increase on plasma weapons, that is because they are worth X points. Something's cost is not a reflection of availability but a reflection of effectiveness.

So you admit that they don't all have a very good basis? I don't think that there was anything wrong with having the options for meltabombs on an Assault squad. Marines are not as extremely specialized as Eldar Aspect Warriors. For example, Devastators are not solely anti-tank. They have options for anti-infantry weapons, too. By the same logic, it would be perfectly acceptable to give Assault Marines an option against vehicles, ie meltabombs.

I definitely agree that a cost should be a reflection of effectiveness, not availability. Still, the plasma point costs don't make sense even from a balance/effectiveness viewpoint. The cost of the plasma gun went up by 5 points, which may or may not have been a good thing. I personally think that it should probably have stayed at the price that it is in the SM codex, although I don't particularly mind the increase. However, the cost of the plasma cannon went down at the same time, which isn't logical. Or maybe they understood that small blasts aren't that great in the 4th edition. Anyway, in the new DA dex plasma pistols, plasma guns and plasma cannons all cost the same number of points for squad members. Are they all worth the same? I'm particularly irritated by the cost of plasma pistols. I don't think that many players will want to arm their Veteran Sergeants with one at the cost in codex DA. There's always the chance of losing a valuable model to overheat, too. Squad members now pay more for plasma pistols than they do for meltaguns. Is someone seriously saying that the plasma _pistol_ is better than a meltagun?



to the original question
"Do the point costs in the new Dark Angels codex make sense?"

yes, now stop whining and play the damn game, if you don't like it, TOUGH, its not gonna change for a SMALL minority of people, there are more people that like the new rules than those that don't.


You know just because you feel that your opinion is better than ours, and that we should shut up is great. Bravo! I admire your self confidence and you should continue with that in real life.

However, our opinion is just as valid as yours. This is a discussion forum. Not "Shut up because Stella Cadente says so".

I've got to agree with Gutlord Grom. Stella Candente's comment was totally uncalled for. Just before I don't like everything that has been done in codex Dark Angels and offer well-writter criticism (often with suggestions on how things could have been done better) does not make me a whiner. Besides, how do you know it's just a small minority that doesn't like the rules? Have you asked for every DA player's opinion? More importantly, did you ask whether they like ALL of the changes, or just some of them?

Personally, I do like _some_ of the changes to the Dark Angels codex. These include the following.
-Assault cannons limited to one per squad/squadron for Terminators and Speeders.
-Increased point cost for assault cannons.
-Increased cost of the Chaplain (he was a bit underpriced in the SM codex).
-Combat squads (I'm not sure if all Marine chapters should have this, though, but for DA it's okay).
-Only 10 man squads can take a heavy weapon.
-The way Deathwing and Ravenwing work together.
-Increased cost of POWER FISTS for Veteran Sergeants (I do like that, but not the increased cost of other items for Veteran Sergeants).

However, there also many things that I don't like, and that's why I created this thread. The things I don't like include the following:
-Increased cost for Dreadnoughts (only the cost of Assault Cannon should have been increased, and it should not have been included in the base cost).
-Increased base cost for Speeders (it could have been increased by a little bit, but not that much).
-More expensive plasma pistols and power weapons for Sergeants and more expensive plasma pistols for squad members.
-Increasing the cost of Predator lascannons sponsons by that much (a small increase would have been in order, but what was done was way too much).
-Decreasing the cost of transports by that much (a small decrease would have been in order, but what was done was too much).
-Pinte-mounted storm bolter is now a no-brainer.
-Free multi-melta upgrade for Attack Bikes and Land Speeders.
-Free grenades and pistols for everybody.
-Limited wargear and weapon options for Veteran Sergeants and characters. This makes many models illegal.

The problems in the SM codex were quite well documented. The good things that I mentionded adress these problems quite well. The bad things just add additional problems. So basically JJ has fixed some problems (the most obvious ones that anyone writing the codex would have fixed), but added many problems of his own. I believe that some other designer could have fixed the problems in codex SM without adding all those additional problems. On the other hand, the combat squads rule and RW/DW combined arms tactics were really fresh ideas by Jervis - not everybody would have done that.

So basically I don't think that Jervis is devil incarnate or anything like that. He has done some good things in the past (although he has also done some bad things in the past, too) and there is _something_ good in the Dark Angels codex. I even do have some respect for the guy. Trying to make a balanced game is a very good goal. Still, I don't think that JJ is a very good designer - for 40k at least. He has a hard time evaluating the effectiveness of different things on the battlefield and his point costs often reflect the abilities of models/options quite poorly.

Ian Argent
27-05-2007, 16:01
How many of you nay-sayers have played with the new codex and a designed-from-scratch army (not necessarily new models, just new army list)?

I've been playing it since shortly after I got my hands on the codex, and I'm amazed by it. The store I go to is pretty much a test environment for tourney armies (not a slam on the players there, they're great guys, but I wanted to describe the competitive environment). Everyone there considers the DA to be at the tourney power level.

I'm not undefeated (unlike the other DA player there) but my opponents (IMHO) have had to work for their wins, and I've found that the DA are a bit more forgiving than before (oddly enough).

I believe the points costs are rather closer to the "correct" points values.

Long-range anti-armour has gone up and armour unit costs have gone down - hasn't a big complaint about tanks been that they're too fragile?

Assault Cannons are up in price and down in availability - good. They were too cheap and too available for their effectiveness before. And chaning the rules for them would not have been an option - there's been enough hand-waving freakoutery about this codex already; can you imagine the HWFO if DA got less-effective AC than anyone else? Remember, too, that the BT are probably NOT going to get a redux, so they couldn't just say "Oh, wait for the C: SM Redux," since the old AC would still be available to the BT...

Increase in points cost for non-independent-character wargear. About time for most of it, because of the "hidden" powerfist effect. Basically, everything that is not a plasma pistol is MORE effective in the hands of a non-independent character because the rest of the squad screens him. "Hidden" powerfists are arguably much more effective than non-hidden powerfists. Plasma pistols are a bit of a wash since non-IC are typically 1-wound characters. OTOH, I doubletap the plasma pistols on my sergeants almost all the time (range permitting) and I've lost 1 man to pistol overheat. between 3+ save and apothecaries in command squads, I don't fear overheat. IMHO, plasma pistols on multi-wound characters are a bit too cheap, rather than sergeant/assault squad PP being too expensive. In a different army, one that has a worse armour save, my opinion would change. But it's about right for marines.

Gutlord Grom
27-05-2007, 18:11
Hey, Ian whats with that last line in your sig?

Grand Master Raziel
27-05-2007, 19:01
Long-range anti-armour has gone up and armour unit costs have gone down - hasn't a big complaint about tanks been that they're too fragile?

They're still too fragile. That hasn't been addressed. The only way to really address it is to fundamentally change the vehicle rules. The only difference is that some vehicles have gotten cheaper. Monkeying with the prices constitutes a refusal to acknowledge the problem, and if the problem of vehicle-fragility does get properly addressed in 5th ed, then all of a sudden the supercheap vehicles are going to be overcosted.


Assault Cannons are up in price and down in availability - good.

No, bad. Again, the actual problem was not directly addressed. Again, JJ's ass-backwards method of addressing the problem causes more problems by punishing players that like units that can have ACs but don't have to, such as Dreadnoughts and Tornados. As the OP suggested, maybe JJ's intentions were good, but his execution stinks like rotten fish.


They were too cheap and too available for their effectiveness before. And chaning the rules for them would not have been an option - there's been enough hand-waving freakoutery about this codex already; can you imagine the HWFO if DA got less-effective AC than anyone else? Remember, too, that the BT are probably NOT going to get a redux, so they couldn't just say "Oh, wait for the C: SM Redux," since the old AC would still be available to the BT...

I doubt it would raise an iota more controversy than there already is. Codex: Dark Angels is a huge collection of kicks in the nuts to DA and DA-successor players, and yet it seems to have an avid following. One more kick in the nuts would probably just have its fans chanting, "Thank you JJ, may I have another?"

At any rate, if GW weren't so adverse to using its website to circulate rules addendums and clarifications, the problem you're postulation would be a non-issue. Even given GW's poor record in this matter, the situation would eventually self-correct. Players of AC-spam armies might be inclined to gravitate to BTs because their dex isn't going to change for a while, but that's going to be true anyway, unless they decide to go with BAs instead, with Baal Preds providing a moderately cheap AC platform in the Heavy Support slot (cheaper than LRCs, anyway). The 6-man lasplas squad army isn't going to entirely go away until GW gets around to a BT-redux, so if they're serious about stopping that style of army, they'll have to redo BTs sooner rather than later.


Increase in points cost for non-independent-character wargear. About time for most of it, because of the "hidden" powerfist effect. Basically, everything that is not a plasma pistol is MORE effective in the hands of a non-independent character because the rest of the squad screens him. "Hidden" powerfists are arguably much more effective than non-hidden powerfists. Plasma pistols are a bit of a wash since non-IC are typically 1-wound characters. OTOH, I doubletap the plasma pistols on my sergeants almost all the time (range permitting) and I've lost 1 man to pistol overheat. between 3+ save and apothecaries in command squads, I don't fear overheat. IMHO, plasma pistols on multi-wound characters are a bit too cheap, rather than sergeant/assault squad PP being too expensive. In a different army, one that has a worse armour save, my opinion would change. But it's about right for marines.

********. I've got upwards of 7000 points worth of Space Marines, and in all of that army, I've only got one character with a plasma pistol, and since he's a sergeant he gets it for a discount. The plasma pistol is one of those points-sink items that smart SM players avoid taking for their ICs, and that doesn't even take into account the risk that the thing might kill its bearer. The only reason I've got even one sergeant with a plasma pistol (besides the points-break) is that I typically use that sergeant in a Command Squad with an Apothecary, so if it does overheat, and he fails his armor save, I can save him with the Apothecary. Unfortunately, if SM-Redux follows the DA mold too closely, I won't be using that particular sergeant very much, because Command Squads will get shrunk down to a max of 5 men, which is too small to be anything but a liability, so I won't be able to field my Apothecary to protect him. So, if anything, plasma pistols are currently overcosted.

Sypher21
27-05-2007, 20:31
I'm really disappointed with the Combat Squad idea. Why *must* I choose between 5 men or 10 men? What if I just don't have those extra 15 points to man a full 10 man squad, instead of a 9 man squad? So I must remove 4 guys, for no good reason?

IMO, this JJ guy is thinking backwards.

MysteryGilgamesh
27-05-2007, 21:03
I'm really disappointed with the Combat Squad idea. Why *must* I choose between 5 men or 10 men? What if I just don't have those extra 15 points to man a full 10 man squad, instead of a 9 man squad? So I must remove 4 guys, for no good reason?

IMO, this JJ guy is thinking backwards.

I'm pissed by it because all of a sudden, Marines have NO choice between mechanically being punished (5 man) or being forced to overspend on troops. Either way, Marines get screwed.

lord_blackfang
27-05-2007, 21:16
Codex: Dark Angels is a huge collection of kicks in the nuts to DA and DA-successor players, and yet it seems to have an avid following.

Maybe this avid following is proof that the Codex is, in fact, not a collection of kicks in the nuts?

Nah, the ~10% of naysayers can't all be wrong :angel:

FashaTheDog
27-05-2007, 21:44
After reading that bit about an online codex database with all sorts of realtime updates mentioned on the first page I got to thinking just how cool would a GW "electronic" codex be (henceforth e-Codex)? I know this idea has to have been floating around for eons now but not being glued to the forums, this is what I thought of here and am curious how folks would react to it. Something akin to a large blackberry built to be fairly durable with a constantly updated database for all of the codicies. They could market it along the lines of you buy the main unit and get a free codex of your choice. You then pay a one time fee for each additional codex and then your e-Codex downloads and saves the codecies you bought in memory and whenever an update is posted, the e-Codex downloads and saves the update automatically when you turn it on. A USB port later allows for users to print their codicies so they can have a paper version handy for those of us who feel that they need a handy reference or do not like carrying expensive electronics around for whatever reason. Yes, this e-Codex idea would be expensive but with the amount of money people dump into this game and the problems with GW's current system, I know I would jump at this. Now this idea was cooked up in however long it took to read the first page of posts and type this but I think there could be something to it.

Master Jeridian
27-05-2007, 22:19
I wouldn't buy it.

Can't really sit down, relax and read a computer screen- it hurts the eyes after a while.

Plus:

"Can I see the rule?"
"No sorry, my batteries dead."

Ian Argent
27-05-2007, 23:19
Hey, Ian whats with that last line in your sig?

Prediction I made a while back. IMHO, Combat squads are going to end up being the "nastiest" thing in the book. I realize there's some disagreement about that :)

Master Jeridian
27-05-2007, 23:32
I'm guessing in the same way that the Ork Choppa is the beardiest thing in that Codex, i.e. everything else is even more pathetically weak.

Ian Argent
27-05-2007, 23:35
Hey - I'm doing better under the new codex than I did under the old. I found my proof on the table.

Master Jeridian
27-05-2007, 23:50
Each to his own, though you must have been playing very badly with Codex SM's before- ;)

Ian Argent
27-05-2007, 23:58
Then there's my buddy with the undefeated DA army. All I can say is the store I go to considers DA to be a strong army.

I'll admit that I'm not the best player - but C: DA fits me a good bit better than the previous version did.

Ronin_eX
28-05-2007, 01:19
Each to his own, though you must have been playing very badly with Codex SM's before- ;)

I found the same results as Mr. Argent did. Maybe it is because we didn't min-max our lists when we played using the old rules or maybe the new list is just more our style. All I know is that the new DA list allows me more tactical options than I had with the old SM list. In the end I have only two losses and one tie out of the thriteen games I've played. Maybe the new style of marines just aren't some people's style, it's either adapt or find the army that actually suits you now. DA suit me just fine under the new rules and I'm doing just fine with it.

adreal
28-05-2007, 06:54
Personally, I do like _some_ of the changes to the Dark Angels codex. These include the following.
-Assault cannons limited to one per squad/squadron for Terminators and Speeders.
-Increased point cost for assault cannons.
-Increased cost of the Chaplain (he was a bit underpriced in the SM codex).
-Combat squads (I'm not sure if all Marine chapters should have this, though, but for DA it's okay).
-Only 10 man squads can take a heavy weapon.
-The way Deathwing and Ravenwing work together.
-Increased cost of POWER FISTS for Veteran Sergeants (I do like that, but not the increased cost of other items for Veteran Sergeants).

However, there also many things that I don't like, and that's why I created this thread. The things I don't like include the following:
-Increased cost for Dreadnoughts (only the cost of Assault Cannon should have been increased, and it should not have been included in the base cost).
-Increased base cost for Speeders (it could have been increased by a little bit, but not that much).
-More expensive plasma pistols and power weapons for Sergeants and more expensive plasma pistols for squad members.
-Increasing the cost of Predator lascannons sponsons by that much (a small increase would have been in order, but what was done was way too much).
-Decreasing the cost of transports by that much (a small decrease would have been in order, but what was done was too much).
-Pinte-mounted storm bolter is now a no-brainer.
-Free multi-melta upgrade for Attack Bikes and Land Speeders.
-Free grenades and pistols for everybody.
-Limited wargear and weapon options for Veteran Sergeants and characters. This makes many models illegal.

just wanted to touch on your list here, well mainly the negatives

the increased price of dreads, are the other weapon options cheaper or the same price as in codex space marines? (really asking I don't know)

the 15 extra points (is it that much) could be the fact that it has a heavy bolter already on it (again I don't know what the space marines codex has so:rolleyes: )


I think the points cost for sargents wrere raised to combat the hidden effect, instead of singlleing out powerfists and making power swords become 'the next thing' they raised all the points, to remove no brainers. What squad can get plasma pistols but assault marines?

how much were lass cannon sponsons in C: SM, and IIRC the base cost of the pread was reduced so i think it works out in the end

I actually agree with the price drop in rhino's, I mean I'm not paying $50 AUS for a 35pt tank, I'll pay $5 more and get the option to make it a razorback.

Actually I've never taken one, but I feel extra armour is the no brainer

I agree that a multi melta shouldn't be priced the same as a heavy bolter on the swifter vechiles, this is a blunder that I'm not looking forward to being fixed

I don't see why having grendades and pistols is so wrong. Now my non fisted tac squads have a chance to down a vechile and don't have to worry about cover, plus the pistol shot before combat is nice:)

I can see the annoyance of the limits of wargear, but for a newer player, building a character isn't daunting anymore. Hell I cringe at the wargear section of the chaos codex every time I look at it, so much potential to cheat without knowing it, and I've been playing GW games since 1997, imagine a 13 year old just getting into the game

rintinglen
28-05-2007, 07:36
I found the same results as Mr. Argent did. Maybe it is because we didn't min-max our lists when we played using the old rules or maybe the new list is just more our style. All I know is that the new DA list allows me more tactical options than I had with the old SM list. In the end I have only two losses and one tie out of the thriteen games I've played. Maybe the new style of marines just aren't some people's style, it's either adapt or find the army that actually suits you now. DA suit me just fine under the new rules and I'm doing just fine with it.

Um, ok. I've not seen you play, and I don't know your competition.
But in my observation, out of 11 games, the DA have won 2, tied once, and lost eight. The Deathwing in particular is aptly named, it dies!!! I beat one DA player pretty handily with my SOB army, and using a lame list based on what models I had at hand, tied with another player who is actually a better player than I. In particular, the lack of Veteran abilities just hoses the DA.

I watched A Deathwing army get slaughtered by a Khorne army in 1500 pts. It was just plain ugly. The Khorne Termies had furious charge, and the plus one initiative and strength meant that by the time that the DA got a turn, they were all dead. In my case, They were seriously out numbered by my sisters AND my Primus Novemberus DIY Marines. The SOB used their faith to ruin two squads, and their Exorcist Missiles pretty much did for the rest, (including Sammael, who went down to three missiles and 28 bolter shots.) My Marines played to a tie, but if I had had the rest of my army to choose from, I'd have whipped him like a rented dog sled team. As was, despite not having any powerfists to deal with his increadibly lucky Veteran Dreadnought, I easily played to a tie.

I keep reading how well the new codex is playing out, but that is not what I've seen.

On an aside, I have 4 of the 2005 space marine veteran sergeants, (the one with a power fist and storm bolter). I love that model and use it despite the loss of an attack in cc, BUT IF I PLAYED DA I'D BE SCREWED.

and I do think Jughead Honson is, if not the Devil, then at least he is in league with him.

samiens
28-05-2007, 08:15
wow, jughead honson: that's the most intelligent remark I've heard in ages its completely made me rethink the whole topic. As for being in league with Satan- how does that work exactly- Satan is the great tempter who lures followers with sweet temptation to gain himself power over God's realms- the original fallen angel is hardly the best similie for a man balancing a tabletop game. Do we have to resort to libel (pretty pathetic libel at that) to discuss controversial issues- no wonder GW doesn't take forums like this seriously- it sounds like its full of petulant little children with nothing to offer. Seriously grow up! Life's hard in a creative industry- if you're going to resort to insults at least make them pithy clever ones.

As for the DA win/loss ratios I can actually relate on bith sides- when I started with the new codex I got hammered and that lead me to a Dark Eldar sabbatical but now I've returned I went completely back to basics and took the new codex as what it is, something completely new. This lead to a revelation, DA are not designed to fight like a codex sm army or 3rd edition DA! (They are rather like 2nd ed DA with the emphasis on troops- a good thing if you ask me) The new DA are more dynamic, more mobile and used correctly harder hitting than the old gunline. Deathwing armies used right (which is NOT easy trust me) are the bane of pretty much every other army- I went back to mixed DA as I found it too easy and whilst I'm a decent player I'm not some kind of gaming God. The thing is codex sm plays like a gun line or for those more inventive players- a mad rush army very much in the one trick pony line that 3rd ed produced. DA on the other hand are a middleway tactical army and used well have better options and can crush both. I don't think DA are a simple or starter army but that's good- it means an ultimately rewarding challenge for the multitude of veteran players who love them so.

Note- the sergeant model you mention is not a DARK ANGEL marine so why should it fit into said category. Plus if codex sm goes the same way you could still include it as a veteran.

As for cursing games developers here's a thought- they stop working no more game (it would be illegal to do it yourself- you don't have the required property rights) If that's what you want and I can only assume that plenty of people do want that- then why spend time on a forum moaning about it? Seriously if you hate it that much do you not have anything better to do? Attacking personalities is unconstructive and has little or nothing to do with the topic and you could use your time so much more wisely. (so could I admittedly but when tempers get flared people need to stand up if only to say discuss it like real people not petty five year olds- meaning no offence to the many non-petty 5 year olds out there.)

Ronin_eX
28-05-2007, 09:18
Um, ok. I've not seen you play, and I don't know your competition.
But in my observation, out of 11 games, the DA have won 2, tied once, and lost eight. The Deathwing in particular is aptly named, it dies!!! I beat one DA player pretty handily with my SOB army, and using a lame list based on what models I had at hand, tied with another player who is actually a better player than I. In particular, the lack of Veteran abilities just hoses the DA.

I watched A Deathwing army get slaughtered by a Khorne army in 1500 pts. It was just plain ugly. The Khorne Termies had furious charge, and the plus one initiative and strength meant that by the time that the DA got a turn, they were all dead. In my case, They were seriously out numbered by my sisters AND my Primus Novemberus DIY Marines. The SOB used their faith to ruin two squads, and their Exorcist Missiles pretty much did for the rest, (including Sammael, who went down to three missiles and 28 bolter shots.) My Marines played to a tie, but if I had had the rest of my army to choose from, I'd have whipped him like a rented dog sled team. As was, despite not having any powerfists to deal with his increadibly lucky Veteran Dreadnought, I easily played to a tie.

I keep reading how well the new codex is playing out, but that is not what I've seen.

On an aside, I have 4 of the 2005 space marine veteran sergeants, (the one with a power fist and storm bolter). I love that model and use it despite the loss of an attack in cc, BUT IF I PLAYED DA I'D BE SCREWED.

and I do think Jughead Honson is, if not the Devil, then at least he is in league with him.

You know what they say about different strokes? The simple matter is that the player I lost to time and time again before this codex came out hasn't beaten me in a straight match six games in a row and I've wiped him off the field in the last three. That's evidence enough for me.

So you've seen DW do poorly? Deathwing have never been an easy army to play and they tend to be a win big or lose big army. In addition they are far from the only type of army the DA can field. Have you tried playing some games against mixed arms forces (that contain RW, DW and Battle Company units)? Judging a list based on one way of playing it is hardly evidence as to how lacking it is. Is the Chaos codex underpowered crap just because a Thousand Sons army sucks? No, in fact the Chaos codex is overpowered in many ways. Just the same, a pure Deathwing force (something that is now a player enforced theme instead of an actual structured armylist) is hard to play but when you play DA as a mixed force all of their strengths come to the fore. So don't go thinking the DA codex sucks because players are having trouble winning with the limitations they've imposed on themselves.

I play a fully mixed force and I've met with great success using the list. My personal play experience is all I need as evidence and it seems that you've only seen a very limited slice of what the DA can do (Deathwing armies). But you have your opinion based on your experiences and I have mine and no amount of "evidence" will cause either of us to change our minds on the subject. So in the end I'll just go on having fun with my DA and you can go on playing against them until your opponents learn the ins and outs of the list and you start to find that you need to re-evaluate how to play against the DA.


As for the DA win/loss ratios I can actually relate on bith sides- when I started with the new codex I got hammered and that lead me to a Dark Eldar sabbatical but now I've returned I went completely back to basics and took the new codex as what it is, something completely new. This lead to a revelation, DA are not designed to fight like a codex sm army or 3rd edition DA! (They are rather like 2nd ed DA with the emphasis on troops- a good thing if you ask me) The new DA are more dynamic, more mobile and used correctly harder hitting than the old gunline. Deathwing armies used right (which is NOT easy trust me) are the bane of pretty much every other army- I went back to mixed DA as I found it too easy and whilst I'm a decent player I'm not some kind of gaming God. The thing is codex sm plays like a gun line or for those more inventive players- a mad rush army very much in the one trick pony line that 3rd ed produced. DA on the other hand are a middleway tactical army and used well have better options and can crush both. I don't think DA are a simple or starter army but that's good- it means an ultimately rewarding challenge for the multitude of veteran players who love them so.

This man speaks the gospel truth (praise the Emperor!). The DA require you to "think different" (hope Steve Jobs isn't going to send his lawyers after me for that). They are a mobile strikeforce that is able to bring loads of firepower to bear on small portions of the enemy. Any player that tries to use them like they always have since the 3rd edition will likely die quite a bit. Those that treat the DA like they worked in 2nd edition (i.e. the Adeptus Astartes premier mixed arms Chapter) will find lots of success. Some one on B&C said it best when they said "throw out your old armylists and start from scratch" because you need to start coming up with new tactics to use the "new school" marine armies effectively.

samiens
28-05-2007, 09:46
And hey presto, the Lord JJ did take the world (of 40k) and shook from it the liberal amounts of cheese that had built up and some people were mighty pissed as they would no longer be able to play in a coma... how dare he make them think- that's what internet forums were for...

infinity101
28-05-2007, 10:48
However, there also many things that I don't like, and that's why I created this thread. The things I don't like include the following:
-Increased cost for Dreadnoughts (only the cost of Assault Cannon should have been increased, and it should not have been included in the base cost).
-Increased base cost for Speeders (it could have been increased by a little bit, but not that much).
-More expensive plasma pistols and power weapons for Sergeants and more expensive plasma pistols for squad members.
-Increasing the cost of Predator lascannons sponsons by that much (a small increase would have been in order, but what was done was way too much).
-Decreasing the cost of transports by that much (a small decrease would have been in order, but what was done was too much).
-Pinte-mounted storm bolter is now a no-brainer.
-Free multi-melta upgrade for Attack Bikes and Land Speeders.
-Free grenades and pistols for everybody.
-Limited wargear and weapon options for Veteran Sergeants and characters. This makes many models illegal.


to comment on this, i agree with the following negative remarks

the dread issue _could have_ easily be fixed by lowering the cost of other weapons while increasing its base price with the ass cannon included. but as it is, no dreads for me....as i dread to put them on the table :)

while powerfists maybe should have been increased in pts, the power weapon and plas pist, should have stayed the same cost. as it is, if i have to pay over the top for something, i might as well buy something that has some kick (PF)

that uber cheap rhinos whith uber cheap storm bolters are almost no brainers, but not as transports. for 40 pts you are buying mobile wreck terrain piece that has 4 SB shots while it lives, and it takes away a part of the fire from important stuff

about the las sponsons. i never take them as if you want to use them you must be stationary. and a predator hasnt got enough armor to live being stationary. and in addition, 2 heavy bolters almost perform as well as 2 lascannons vs MEQs
so instead an option i never took, i have a more expensive option i will never take.....couldn't care less

"free" multi melta is i think a balancing factor for the loss of heavy firepower from troops.
a squad of assault bikes would have been good, but they thought about that and preemptively forbidden it.
but still, to take a single multi melta bike you have to pay 170 pts minimum. is that a good way to get a single heavy weapon?




Personally, I do like _some_ of the changes to the Dark Angels codex. These include the following.
-Assault cannons limited to one per squad/squadron for Terminators and Speeders.
-Increased point cost for assault cannons.
-Increased cost of the Chaplain (he was a bit underpriced in the SM codex).
-Combat squads (I'm not sure if all Marine chapters should have this, though, but for DA it's okay).
-Only 10 man squads can take a heavy weapon.
-The way Deathwing and Ravenwing work together.
-Increased cost of POWER FISTS for Veteran Sergeants (I do like that, but not the increased cost of other items for Veteran Sergeants).


ass cannon limit is OK on termies and speeders. IMO it was never that powerful on the speeders so it doesnt harm me (paper sledgehammer). and i do agree that 4 ass cannons deep striking on the first turn would be too much

chaplain was a no brainer, because it worked.
now he cant have lightning claws and join the assault squad with a cheap powerfist anymore, so it doesnt work as well as before.
why increase its cost further? it feels like the balance pendulum swinging too far back.

if something works....quick ....hit it twice just in case :rolleyes:
(and this happened to many items in the DA codex)

combat squads might be OK

deathwing and ravenwing work together as charm only because the scouts with teleport homers got shafted.

about the 10 men getting the heavy weapon.
this has been discussed probably too many times but nevertheless i have to say what i think

this was implemented IMO just to bring in line 6 men las plas combo

in other words. it was implemented to bring back balance

i applaud that

BUT

IMO that balance is now even further away than ever
why do i think so

1) DA, while being a major chapter, and having many players, are certainly not more numerous than vanilla SMs.
so changing DA does not influence global balance significantly

2) the game prior to this was somewhat balanced with 2 "lascannons" per (around) 200 pts in mind

ie a carnifex around 200 pts (i think) with 5 wounds and save 2+ (and possible regen) is balanced vs 2 squads with lascannons when he has to walk for 3 turns to reach them (he will also kill them with its own shooting, and will kill them all when cc begins)
but now, you can only have a single DA lascannon per (around) 200 pts, and that is clearly not enough to harm it significantly in 3 turns walking

thus the carni is either too cheap or too powerful in this situation as it was meant to be balanced vs 2 lascannons ...this is a loss of balance IMO

another example is an eldar falcon. i think it is also around 200 pts
it would have been faced with around 2 squads shooting it with heavy weapons and _maybe_ bringing it down due to the holofield and other nifty items
nowdays it has only to fear a single DA heavy per 200 pts
again a loss of balance

i could go and list all other units that are _now_ considered powerful even when faced with a 2 heavy weapons (lascannons) per 200 pts
all those units/combos/whatever were designed to be "ballanced" with that odds ratio in mind
a severe loss of balance IMO, and to fix that new artificial imbalance it will take many, many, many, many ........... many years with the current speed of codex release

the balance pendulum swung too far and on the _average_ codex to begin with, while it spared the known powerful ones creating a greater imbalance than was present before
now because of that, instead of minor corrections to other codeci, all of them require a massive rebalancing and effort

IMO better balance could have been accomplished by

1) first redoing codex chaos (bring down in power several _known_ types of cheese, and _buff_ several weak choices/lists to remove no brainers, and make everything useful but not over the top)

2) then redoing codex SM as it indirectly affects all other SMs that link to it (thus balancing many armies simultaneously) and by redoing i mean, remove 6 men las plas combo in one way and not several simultaneous ways as in DA,fix 2 ACs per termies, fix 9 AC speeder of doom list (if there was one in the first place), remove LClaws from flying chappies, and similar known no brainer options or balance breakers

3) then continue to make _minor_ alterations (as larger ones would not be needed) to other codeci, _eventually_ reaching SM divergent main chapters (DA, BA, SW, BT).

even though i am a DA player, i would be willing to wait (for my own codex) for the game as a whole to be balanced, and while waiting, it would be fun to play other armies instead of MEQs as they would be redone sooner and made more interesting to players.
now i do have a new codex nerf angels, but i still have to wait but in an unbalanced situation, and still be playing only vs MEQs that were left unharmed by the new "balance"

Master Jeridian
28-05-2007, 11:26
I found the same results as Mr. Argent did. Maybe it is because we didn't min-max our lists when we played using the old rules or maybe the new list is just more our style.

This old chestnut never gets old, agree with me or be labeled a power gamer- be careful, it's mighty high on that pedestal.

Ian Argent
28-05-2007, 16:52
This old chestnut never gets old, agree with me or be labeled a power gamer- be careful, it's mighty high on that pedestal.

I'm going to turn that around and note that the other DA player in my store is a power gamer. I don't mean that in a negative way; he's a lot of fun to play against, but he builds powerful armies. And his DA army is quite powerful as well. It's got a great theme (and he's intentionally restricted himself to do it) - it's based on the 7th company, so it's all "tactical" marines at 1750 pts. So it's not like the codex can't be used to build a powerful army (which seems to be a common complaint).

The important thing I've been finding about the new DA is that you need to seriously build around your troops selection. Take more than minimum troops (2x5). Tacticals aren't the best at anything they do, but they're good enough to do the job against anything but specialist troops until your specialists get there. On the other hand, you do need the specialists.

This is turning into yet another arguement between the same people on both sides, rehashing the same topics. As to the topic on hand, I'll reiterate: given what we have now in 40K4, the point costs make sense. At this point, rules can't be changed, but points costs can. At the same time, there is a limit to the inferences that can be drawn from C: DA with respect to the hypothetical C: SM Redux.

I fully expect the points costs to follow C: DA in a Redux, but the unit entries are probably going to be a bit more flexible. Soemthing like this:

Space Marine Special Rules:
ATSKNF

Fixed Squad Sizes + Combat Squads
OR
Variable size squads + no combat squads

Optionally: Pick one veteran skill - this will be your army's "signature". Prices will depend on the squad it is applied to and be noted in the unit's particular stats

HQ:
Chapter Master - Azrael's stats, artificer armour, bolt pistol, bolter or CCW, frag, krak

Pistol may be upgraded to plasma


Bolter/CCW upgraded to PW, PF, LC, 2xLC, TH


Storm Bolter or Combi-weapon may be added


Iron Halo, Storm Shield, or combat shield may be added


Adamantine mantle may be added


One master-crafted item - each item above has 2 costs with the second being the master-crafted cost

[/LIST]

Master of the librarians - Ezekial's stats, artificer armour, bolt pistol, force sword, frag, krak
Wargear options as for chapter master, less the iron halo and mantle.

Master of the chaplains - As Interrogator Chaplain, plus option for one master-crafted weapon

Librarian and chaplain, as respective entries in C: DA

Company Master - as company master in C: DA, plus terminator armour (one per army) to represent the master of the 1st co. Possibly including one master-crafted item

Command Squad - as C: DA, with the requirement that they get and pay for your army ability

Elites:
Dreads, techmarines, veterans as C: DA - vets may get and pay for your army's ability
Terminators as C: DA except for split into assault terminator and shooty terminator, and they must get and pay for veteran ability

Troops:
Tactical squads per C: DA
Scouts per C: DA (including manstopper rounds)

Fast Attack:*
Bike Squads
Scout Bike Squads
Attack Bike squads
Landspeeder squads
Assault Squads

Heavy Support:
See C: DA heavy support section


* I don't know how to structure the bike squads; for one I haven't seen the new C: BA yet so I can't comment on how a codex bike unit is supposed to be laid out, or whether they get separate attack bike squads.

Maelx
28-05-2007, 18:23
Has anyone ELSE noticed how the new codicies seem to follow one rule:

By making things more appealing that weren't before - people are inclined to buy new models and try different tactics with a new codex.

Has anyone else considered the options aren't cheaper because JJ is a bad game designer - but rather to increase sales?

Lord Malek The Red Knight
28-05-2007, 18:34
By making things more appealing that weren't before - people are inclined to buy new models and try different tactics with a new codex.

Has anyone else considered the options aren't cheaper because JJ is a bad game designer - but rather to increase sales?
i did get that feeling after reading C:Eldar, but come to think of it now, im undecided. couldnt it just be that the reason i dont have many of the models that were improved is because the fact that they used to need improving put me off them in the past?

~ Tim

Ronin_eX
28-05-2007, 19:24
So you admit that they don't all have a very good basis?

Whoops, that's what I get for typing late at night. The don't shouldn't have been a don't. I agree with the other changes actually. Now everyone may carry on. :p


This old chestnut never gets old, agree with me or be labeled a power gamer- be careful, it's mighty high on that pedestal.

But apparently we weren't "playing the list very well", which means that there must in fact be a right way to play it. I always used 10-man squads and 5-man terminators squads regardless of whether or not they were the most efficient combination. Maybe this hampered my play style under the old codex and now that my play style is supported by it I'm doing better. I never accused other players of min-maxing, I just said I didn't and maybe that was why I didn't do as well with the list before the new codex. So don't go finding an insult where I didn't put one, I'm reffering to myself not others.

Xarian
28-05-2007, 19:25
I think increasing Dread point costs across the board was unnecessary.

With the exception of the Tyranids and the original SM codex, it seems like the designers are (overall) making anti-tank weaponry harder to come by. Take the Eldar codex for instance - sure, Bright Lances got increased in price, but also look at Wraithguard. Their effectiveness against infantry/MCs nearly doubled (due to the changes in the Wraithcannon) but their effectiveness against vehicles actually decreased (along with the D-Cannon). If this trend continues, the Necrons will probably be in for unpleasant surprises.

Karhedron
28-05-2007, 19:35
With the exception of the Tyranids and the original SM codex, it seems like the designers are (overall) making anti-tank weaponry harder to come by.
Agreed, I think this is intended to counter the relative fragility of vehicles. While vehicles are more mobile than infantry, they suffer horendously in that one lucky shot can kill them. It is very hard to kill infantry completely in the same way (OK if you leave them bunch up in LOS of ordnance it can be done but in that case you probably deserve to lose your troops ;)).

If you look at the tactics threads, most players agree that fielding just a couple of vehicles is a waste of time. The current rules favour either going for a foot-sloggin force or a fully mechanised force in the hope that your opponent cannot bring enough anti-tank weapons to bear.

By increasing the cost of most the really effective AT guns (lascannons, brightlances etc), vehicles in general become more likely survive, especially AV13+ which are immune to <S7 weapons which tend to get a high rate of fire.

Personally I am not convinced this is the best way to make tanks more survivable. They should not have changed the rules for hull-down from 3rd to 4th edition and should not have added the rule about AP1 always penetrating. Vehicles were generally perceived as fragile even in 3rd edition and the changes actually made the situation worse. While increasing the cost of AT weapons will help to some extent, there is the inevitable time-lag while some codices (SMs etc) still get access to cheap AT weapons while others do not.

Maelx
28-05-2007, 20:04
i did get that feeling after reading C:Eldar, but come to think of it now, im undecided. couldnt it just be that the reason i dont have many of the models that were improved is because the fact that they used to need improving put me off them in the past?

~ Tim

Well, you've also proved my point inadvertently. If what you purchase is based around what you think is good and suddenly all these old "useless options" are now the best thing available, looks like people will be spending more money on their Army.

Since 40k superiority is 60%+ list building, by changing the balance of power it forces a change in the balance of your list. To stay competitive you have to add new things - and spend money.

Then again, perhaps I'm just shouting conspiracy theory and am just being paranoid :P GW does have a tendency to do a swinging pendulum approach in many regards Nerfed to Awesome - generally not quite in the middle.

Just look at the changes in the chaos codicies. The old one? Horribly complicated. The new one? Almost too simple.

Ian Argent
28-05-2007, 20:29
Well, you've also proved my point inadvertently. If what you purchase is based around what you think is good and suddenly all these old "useless options" are now the best thing available, looks like people will be spending more money on their Army.

Since 40k superiority is 60%+ list building, by changing the balance of power it forces a change in the balance of your list. To stay competitive you have to add new things - and spend money.


I'm going to have to disagree with this, at least in respect to the new Edlar and DA codices - list-building is an integral part of the game to be sure, but with the new codices at least, there are many more viable options.

Ronin_eX
29-05-2007, 03:55
While making all options good helps with selling models it also promotes varied and balanced armies. So I say if they're doing either of these it can only be good for the game. :D

shabbadoo
29-05-2007, 04:15
Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, Jervis Johson's attorney would certainly want you to believe that his client wrote accurate "point values" in Codex: Dark Angels. And they make a good case. Hell, I almost felt pity myself! But, ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca(points at illustration). Chewbacca is a Wookie from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major game company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, then the point values in Codex: Dark Angels do not make sense! The defense rests.


I just had to throw the infamous “Chewbacca Defense” in here, as it is what I thought of when I first read the title of this thread. :D

samiens
29-05-2007, 04:28
that's genuinely the best anti-jj arguement yet...

Ronin_eX
29-05-2007, 04:29
*head explodes!*

I always fall for the famn chewbacca defense! *shakes fist at shabbadoo*

Grand Master Raziel
29-05-2007, 21:48
By increasing the cost of most the really effective AT guns (lascannons, brightlances etc), vehicles in general become more likely survive, especially AV13+ which are immune to <S7 weapons which tend to get a high rate of fire.

Unfortunately, it doesn't really address the problem, as one lucky shot can still kill any vehicle in the game.



Personally I am not convinced this is the best way to make tanks more survivable. They should not have changed the rules for hull-down from 3rd to 4th edition and should not have added the rule about AP1 always penetrating. Vehicles were generally perceived as fragile even in 3rd edition and the changes actually made the situation worse. While increasing the cost of AT weapons will help to some extent, there is the inevitable time-lag while some codices (SMs etc) still get access to cheap AT weapons while others do not.

Well, I don't think the melta change did that much damage, as it seems to me that not to many people make much use of meltaguns at this point, although that my change in the near future. Changing the Hull Down rule to the Concealed rule definately doesn't help, though, and neither does the damage result carryover if you happen to score a result that's already happened - a second Immobilized result, for instance. Plus, forced disembarkations with pinning tests and the Entangled rule really make transports a crapshoot in general.


Since 40k superiority is 60%+ list building, by changing the balance of power it forces a change in the balance of your list. To stay competitive you have to add new things - and spend money.


Well...it's not like this is Magic: The Gathering. Individual figures can often be plugged into squads whereever you happen to need them. A SM figure with a bolter can be a member of a Tac, Dev, Vet, or Command squad. Of course, depending on what SM Redux does to the Vet squad, I might buy myself another box set and give them a slightly different paint job from the rest of my guys to differentiate them. I want to see what options the Vet squad gets first, so I know how to model them.

Zerosoul
29-05-2007, 23:21
Well, you've also proved my point inadvertently. If what you purchase is based around what you think is good and suddenly all these old "useless options" are now the best thing available, looks like people will be spending more money on their Army.

Okay. Granted. So codex changes are often driven by financial considerations. This can be given, because as a business intended to earn money, all decisions at GW ultimately come down to making money. So?



Just look at the changes in the chaos codicies. The old one? Horribly complicated. The new one? Almost too simple.

Oh, wow - you've got a copy of the new Codex? Awesome! How's the new fluff? What changes did they make to Terminators?

As to the main issue: The Dark Angel codex is just fine. Good, even. Just not in the way that it used to be. You're forced to rely on basic troops, which is a change in most 40k armies, where troops are often looked at as liabilities(Tau, I'm looking at you). In fact, squealing aside, the new codices have all been more or less balanced. I think the DA codex is by far the most balanced codex GW has put out this entire edition. It's a tremendous disservice to say that anyone who thinks the changes are good is a fanboy. Most of the changes were absolutely needed. If it inconveniences you? Too bad.

Now, they're not all perfect. In the new codex Blood Angel tac squads are incredibly overpriced - by at least 15%, all told, and frankly they shouldn't be more than ten points more expensive than DA tac squads. Why they didn't just include Death Company as a squad you can buy rather than include them in all other squads so you're punished even if you don't take DC is beyond me. I understand that this isn't likely to change even with the "official" release of the squads. Too bad. It's just a change that people need to adapt to.

Hellfury
30-05-2007, 02:32
Here is one thing I havent seen mentioned yet.

Termies. yes touched on but missed.

Termies et one less weapon, but yet the assault cannon goes up n price.

So now we have a squad that is more expensive than a normal termie squad with two.

This is not makig sense.

I can live with one fewer heavy weapon, but the termies are now overcosted for having only one heavy.A termie squad with oe assault cannon shold cost no more than 200-215 point max, yet it is way past that.

If they are going to keep termies at the same cost, but increase the price of assault cannons, they should either allow the unrestricted use of another assault cannon, or allow the restricted use of a second heavy weapon that is not a duplicate.

In other words, 1 assault cannon and one other heavy weapon is fair for the points we are paying now for termies.

By disallowing the second heavy weapon, it is now nearly mandatory that assault cannons be used to even start to attempt to make termies worth their points. Thus, forcing players into "no brainers". Surely this Plan of Jervis' is missing the trees for the woods.

This is one of the glaring examples for me, that Jervis Intentions are good, but he missed the mark. The road to hell lies paved with good intentions...

Ronin_eX
30-05-2007, 03:49
So he's going to hell because you think he priced a weapon in a game incorrectly. Poor guy. :p

I don't mind it really, people seem to latch on to the assault cannon as some kind of sticking point. Terminators can carry more than assault cannons, just look at the heavy flamer, it's amazing for its price now while the CML looks pretty good at only 2/3rds the cost of an assault cannon. I play with the new terminators all the time and I haven't noticed a huge fall in their viability in my list since the DA codex changed over.

Hellfury
30-05-2007, 04:09
So he's going to hell because you think he priced a weapon in a game incorrectly. Poor guy. :p


Well thats one way to interpret what I said. Its certainly a very creative assumption. I think its quite disrespectful to take someones words out of context, just so you can appear "witty" by attempting to disavow a valid opinion.

First of all, I am not saying the weapon is priced wrong. If you might have possibly read the whole post, you would have seen I was refering to the cost of the model.

Yeah you can take heavy flamers and such. Now do you think a squad of 5 termies that can take one heavy flamer is over priced? Why take a squad with a single heavy flamer when I can be much more effective by taking a squad of tacs with a single flamer? Far cheaper and less expensive to build.

The point of this is, termies are not costed correctly. Simple as that. It doesnt matter what weapon you take, as you can only take one of them now.

Most people who loved CML's with their deathwing are now taking assault cannons because they are only allowed one weapon in the squad. They now feel since they pay so much for termies that they have to get the most out of them that they can by taking...you guessed it, an assault cannon.
Thats called shoe horning.
Jervis is trying to fix the problem, but he is missing the point. He wants to make "No brainers" abolished, yet is basically forcing players to take assault cannons to compensate for the high initial cost of the termies, which is based on taking two weapons in the first place.

shabbadoo
30-05-2007, 04:14
And the CML fits quite nicely on that close combat termintor who can still have those nice close combat weapons.

By the way, the Chewbacca Defense post was not against JJ in any way; quite the opposite. You will note that the whole point of the thing is that the Chewbacca Defense is total BS, and I don't mean Ballistic Skill ;), and just serves to bolster JJ's perspective rather than repudiate it. I happen to agree with the new perspective, so reserve a seat in the 7th circle of Hell for me too. :D

AngryAngel
30-05-2007, 06:05
So he's going to hell because you think he priced a weapon in a game incorrectly. Poor guy. :p

I don't mind it really, people seem to latch on to the assault cannon as some kind of sticking point. Terminators can carry more than assault cannons, just look at the heavy flamer, it's amazing for its price now while the CML looks pretty good at only 2/3rds the cost of an assault cannon. I play with the new terminators all the time and I haven't noticed a huge fall in their viability in my list since the DA codex changed over.

Yeah a heavy flamer can be pretty usefull..if you can get your slow ass termies into flamer range, which isn't always too easy. Or if you can beat out greater speed, as against a nid list or eldar. Lotta luck there.

The CML, if it was better might be worth something..though I can't see wasting your choice normally with this when everyone and their grandmother can already take a missle launcher for a good price. This does leave an assault cannon as the usual choice for termies for a heavy weap. Ok range, good number of shots, and usefull.

A cml looked better back when ya could have more models per squad as well, more sb fire going out. Not if ya intend to shoot effectively ya need every beat ya can ring out of the termies, which means an assault cannon.

So yeah the increased cost for the base termies, as well as the cost increase of the assault cannon, and the cut down to one heavy weapon. Altogether, doesn't make much sense. Some of those things by themselves, not bad all together, a bit too much.

Joah_from_Alberta
30-05-2007, 06:39
If Jervis is one of the best designers GW has, then you might as well be throwing money out the window. I do not know how this man became a game designer. It must very well be the same universal principle that places our politicians into office when cab drivers have better sense.

I have read alot of what you people have to say. And it's good to see such a cohesive intellect. Unfortunately, from what I can tell, GW in our changing world economy is never going to survive. And people like JJ are only there to insult our collective beauty by attempting to cheapen the intergrity of our community with dumbeddown rules and tacked on afterthoughts of his earlier days of glory with GW. When will people, ever, learn that it's better to die on your feet than to live on your knees. Shame on GW for not producing an orc codex!!!! Once you fail to provide to one part of your sphere for too long, your orbit begins to wobble, and soon, fail completely for lack of integrity. This is the nature of our existence. And people like JJ should realise that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Hellebore
30-05-2007, 06:42
Heavy flamers are great for deep striking terminator units.

I use a long fang pack in my Wulfen army with 2 meltaguns and 2 flamers teleported by a rune priest with a combi flamer. Laying out those 3 flamer templates certainly makes the unit nasty.

A deep striking termie unit will be in range pretty soon if you teleport into the opponent's side. I once wiped out an entire unit of storm troopers like that with my Salamanders...:cool:

Hellebore

Hellfury
30-05-2007, 07:01
Heavy flamers are great for deep striking terminator units.

I use a long fang pack in my Wulfen army with 2 meltaguns and 2 flamers teleported by a rune priest with a combi flamer. Laying out those 3 flamer templates certainly makes the unit nasty.

A deep striking termie unit will be in range pretty soon if you teleport into the opponent's side. I once wiped out an entire unit of storm troopers like that with my Salamanders...:cool:

Hellebore


Yeah, they are great....when you have more than one...as in your examples.

lord_blackfang
30-05-2007, 07:54
The point of this is, termies are not costed correctly.

*Pssst...*
DA Termies also have three special rules included in their points cost (DW Assault, Fearless, and Mixed weaponry)
And BA Termies come with a complimentary Death Company guy.

So it's not like you're paying more for nothing.

Hellfury
30-05-2007, 08:36
*Pssst...*
DA Termies also have three special rules included in their points cost (DW Assault, Fearless, and Mixed weaponry)
And BA Termies come with a complimentary Death Company guy.

So it's not like you're paying more for nothing.

Deathwing assault...pretty meh, but I have seen people defend it with their dying breath as I waffle stomp their army, so I can see why its so good. You know, being able to have your termies get slaughtered even quicker than reserves allow. Combined arms indeed.

Fearless, this is simply a drawback. ATSKNf is clearly superior, but with fearless, deathwing now dies even quicker in assault.

Mixed weaponry... this is the only thing that I can see be a valid argument for increase of points. I dont like assault termies, but many think theyre effective. So there may be some cause for increase there.

Considering the two things I consider major drawbacks as to the one thing that MIGHT be a minor boon, personally I find that they are still considerably overcosted.

As for BA's the price they pay is fair. They actually get something of use for their loss of heavy weapon.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
30-05-2007, 09:59
indeed fearless is on par with atsknf and deathwing assault is not as great - when we mix it with already expensive models ... well they are not cost effective again(and only half of them gets sth from deathwing assault)

Varath- Lord Impaler
30-05-2007, 10:09
Fearless, this is simply a drawback. ATSKNf is clearly superior, but with fearless, deathwing now dies even quicker in assault.

I would like to say that if you actually lose a combat with your termies due to losing more terminators than your opponents your unit will probably die anyway.

I prefer fearless. Taking more armour saves doesnt really bother me.

I like deathwing assault, nice to have. Using a squad of ravenwing and a squad or 2 of deathwing you can very easily surround your opponent turn 1.

Kargush
30-05-2007, 10:17
How many of you nay-sayers have played with the new codex and a designed-from-scratch army (not necessarily new models, just new army list)?

I have. So I have some basis for my opinions. One of the most missed parts happens to be veteran skills. Go figure.


\I doubt it would raise an iota more controversy than there already is. Codex: Dark Angels is a huge collection of kicks in the nuts to DA and DA-successor players, and yet it seems to have an avid following. One more kick in the nuts would probably just have its fans chanting, "Thank you JJ, may I have another?"

We're all masochists! Didn't you realise that in 3rd ed when we played with a truly nerfed Codex? The first one, also written by JJ?


If Jervis is one of the best designers GW has, then you might as well be throwing money out the window. I do not know how this man became a game designer. It must very well be the same universal principle that places our politicians into office when cab drivers have better sense.

JJ isn't a good designer. He has one work of merit, and that's Epic Armageddon(a surprisingly simple game), and that's it. Everything else he has his name in or has done alone since 3rd ed is just ********. The man is insane. Just look at his 3rd ed works... And now he makes Codecies that reminds one of 2nd ed whilst also dumbing it down so a slightly retarded baby could play the game.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
30-05-2007, 10:25
if he will price items correctly he will be good designer - but he isn't

(list of incorrect prices:
-power weapon on sarges
-plasma pistol across the board
-extra armour
-rhinos and razorback
-terminators
-land speeders
-chaplain terminator armour
-dreadnoughts
and probably some i cant remember)

also he forces us to play special characters ...

Stella Cadente
30-05-2007, 11:34
if he will price items correctly he will be good designer - but he isn't

(list of incorrect prices:
-power weapon on sarges
-plasma pistol across the board
-extra armour
-rhinos and razorback
-terminators
-land speeders
-chaplain terminator armour
-dreadnoughts
and probably some i cant remember)

also he forces us to play special characters ...

how are they priced incorrectly??, stop thinking this is a Space marine codex, IT IS NOT, if marines do get there REDUX you realize all this will happen

glowing in the dark
30-05-2007, 12:14
Probably because 40k is dying,


No it's no. It's no.1 selling wargame in the world. There was a thread and a link somewhere on warseer, but i can't find it.

Toreador
30-05-2007, 15:50
Points costing is all relative, and it entirely depends on what armies you play against whether or not you "think" it is costed correctly.

I like DW assault. It can be a liability, it can be an extreme benefit if you place correctly. Last game I had an Eldar assault coming right up the center. RW dropped the DW in the building right in front of them first turn and in combination stopped the advance cold. In every situation I have used them I have gained benefit, if only to change my opponents plan. Combined with the RW just the threat causes a lot of fire to come my bikes way. Fire that would be aimed at other, more vital units. And always remember kids. You don't have to always bring them in first turn if you don't want to.

I will take Fearless over ATSKNF any day. I don't want the chance of being pushed out of the position I am in, especially if it is a good defensive position. It is rare I am outnumbered by a huge amount, and when I am, it isn't usually the outnumbering wounds that kill me. I don't make it that far.

Ronin_eX
30-05-2007, 16:24
Exactly, players who use DWA all the time are simply making a tactical blunder. It's not meant to be used at every possible chance which is why many seem to think it sucks. People seem to think special rules should ALWAYS make you better. Personally I prefer things that take a modicum of thought before their use. DWA can be used in many different ways besides dropping directly in front of the enemy. DWA is a great example of a rule which expands on options rather than defining how something should be used. My terminators have DWA but that doesn't mean I'm always going to use, but it is an option that I can always use if I need it.

As for fearless it has a few notable upsides that ATSKNF doesn't have. An opponent can't "babysit" me off the table (being too close to rally). I can't be pinned. Neutralizing terminators for a turn is a huge blow to the unit as it cuts out a large amount of firepower from your army. I will never give up a position to the enemy without a bloody fight, they need to kill every last terminator before they can move on. This makes them ideal for capturing a position because even if they go down the squad that took them down likely wont be a scoring unit after the smoke settles. Not to mention that I don't need to take an "all on your own" check with that last terminator which means he wont end up running away from that unit I wanted him to charge/shoot. Reliability is why I prefer fearless on my terminators (and bikes for that matter).

samiens
30-05-2007, 17:35
OK, why can't we discuss this without actively insulting Games Designers? Its pathetic and goes a long way to suggest why noone takes these forums very seriously, any point that might have been raised is drowned in a sea of sadly deficient quips.

Anyway, yes the points costs make sense but planty of people don't like them and its more challenging to make a winning army from all accounts. We'd like more options but the problem is that to do so with sensible DA-style balance would mean a codex would take forever to release (even longer than orks!)

I'm starting to think that this thread has reached the end of its usefulness, those who like it will make minor concessions and those who don't will never accept the way its going and will probably have to stop playing the game as GW has decided what to do with their intellectual property. Anyway, I think the real issue should be Codex chaos space marines and Codex space marines - all that's wrong with 40k in 2 easy books (because games are complicated and difficult to play- armies that the aforementioned baby could win with!)

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
30-05-2007, 18:16
how are they priced incorrectly??, stop thinking this is a Space marine codex, IT IS NOT, if marines do get there REDUX you realize all this will happen


it indeed will happend - but - didn't you realize that i dont base it on SM codex ???

i base it on MY OWN game experience and math and by experience of many good players

in C: SM prices are also imbalanced or if you like it more - not as effective to become vialable.

Consider Lighting Claws - it is better than Power Fist - it is not. Yet it cost 30 points. Did you ever considered taking it at this cost ?? Probably not. Why?? It is too high to be effective excliuding very rare situation.

Same problem is with Power Sword. When you want to spend points on any weapon You choose Fist if you want to be competentive even if this squad is anti-infantry(want to kill infantry).

But fluff says that weapon designed to deal with troops is Power axe,power sword etc and lighting claws as well. it is not represented on tabletop thus he failed miserably. All options should be vialable, now only one isAL of balaced codex.so please stop posting such BS(not balistic skill :P)

I can explain other.

I'm from power gamer country, and often speak with best tournament players from Poland.

Toreador
30-05-2007, 18:57
And thus why things are limited and or raised in price. Plasma is very effective, power fists an almost must have. They are very powerful in the places we can take them, thus the price hike. They make any space marine squad instantly good at CC. They insta kill most characters.

Other balance is by placing options with specific characters/units.

samiens
30-05-2007, 19:01
um...what are we talking about, an IC with a power weapon/LCs is much more effective than a power fist as it clears the kill zone before it strikes. Same goes for squads- terminators holding cover with lcs are so much more effecive than power fists defensively- thats why i use 2 pairs and I'm a great tournament player- the points costs deal with the various situations available so I utterly disagree with you. Plus most clever players stop power fists striking period- clever casualty removal renders them almost totally ineffective.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
30-05-2007, 19:04
um...what are we talking about, an IC with a power weapon/LCs is much more effective than a power fist as it clears the kill zone before it strikes. Same goes for squads- terminators holding cover with lcs are so much more effecive than power fists defensively- thats why i use 2 pairs and I'm a great tournament player- the points costs deal with the various situations available so I utterly disagree with you. Plus most clever players stop power fists striking period- clever casualty removal renders them almost totally ineffective.

Did you note that subject is "which weapon Sarge choose" ??? Reconsider it :)

LC is effective on IC as well as power weapon(LC's are better of course)

Is sarge with power weapon as effective as IC - it is not. it is far less dangerous indeed.

Also cleaver players not always have chance to prevent power fist from striking - it is rather rare.

On "plasma pistol" subject - is 15 pts right price for such risky equipment(kill or inflict wound on already expensive bearer) - it depends but in most cases not.

kokujin_atsuhara
30-05-2007, 19:13
I only want to add something about insulting the game designers:
All the people that seays something is overpriced, and the game designer is bad...
Design a better game.
I'm doing it

See you!

samiens
30-05-2007, 19:13
fair enough, its not that obvious that ur only talking bout sergeants. Even so, I wouldn't say that the powerfist is the only choice- it depends what you want your squad to do- the power weapon is an xcellent troop killer used properly and against some srmies- say orks- can sve a squad in a way a power fist won't. Lightning claws are the weapon of choice against Carnifexes, just don't throw in a loan squad. Plus its really easy to stop Pfs striking, really easy.

Oh and the guy designi ng his own game, I've done that too but have no wayto get it out there, but its so much more fun than moaning!

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
30-05-2007, 19:33
fair enough, its not that obvious that ur only talking bout sergeants. Even so, I wouldn't say that the powerfist is the only choice- it depends what you want your squad to do- the power weapon is an xcellent troop killer used properly and against some srmies- say orks- can sve a squad in a way a power fist won't. Lightning claws are the weapon of choice against Carnifexes, just don't throw in a loan squad. Plus its really easy to stop Pfs striking, really easy.

Oh and the guy designi ng his own game, I've done that too but have no wayto get it out there, but its so much more fun than moaning!

fair enough - my post was quoted and the thing about sarges was missed.

agnaist troops power fist is better choice than power weapon which is shamefull(take every single model from base contact is ... well ... problematic if The Squad fist is attached to is not so killy :) even if it is it is hard(but not impossible - just use the tactics )

agnaist orks it is small defference between striking with bare hand and striking with power weapon(6+ save???). how often you fight orks??

Massed lighting claws are good agnaist carni - but ... well ... how many squad aside terminators can have many lighting claws - not many. which are mobile enough - veteran assault squad - shrike's wing ??

AngryAngel
30-05-2007, 19:51
So if you believe something to be wrong..you should just sit back and take it ? No..we, the nay sayers have answerd and continue to voice our opinion on what we see as messed up with the changes. I'm not going to drop my army because things about it suck a whole lot. I'm going to push on, but I'll be damned if someone trys to tell me I can't be pissed about it..and I can't say I think it sucks.

However in all fairness..I doubt a half retarded baby could play 40k.....how could it reach the table..let alone be able to handle the models without dropping or breaking them ?..thats just silly.

lord_blackfang
30-05-2007, 20:53
So if you believe something to be wrong..you should just sit back and take it ? No..we, the nay sayers have answerd and continue to voice our opinion on what we see as messed up with the changes. I'm not going to drop my army because things about it suck a whole lot. I'm going to push on, but I'll be damned if someone trys to tell me I can't be pissed about it..and I can't say I think it sucks.


For 6-7 years we've had to deal with daily moaning from disgruntled Eldar players. I'm not looking forward to another 6 years of whining Space Marine players.

At least the Eldar complaints were somewhat valid.

Hellfury
31-05-2007, 00:35
For 6-7 years we've had to deal with daily moaning from disgruntled Eldar players. I'm not looking forward to another 6 years of whining Space Marine players.

At least the Eldar complaints were somewhat valid.

Looking at it that way, youre right. Compared to eldar, DA players dont have a whole lot to complain about.

Off topic sort of:

Odd how I embrace the eldar changes, yet didnt play eldar until the newest dex, but hate the DA changes, and used to play deathwing. :confused:
Yet both share similar qualities. Hell, I even feel the WD BA codex isnt half bad, in fact I kinda like it.

Yet somehow I cannot stomach the DA book.

Perhaps I took the changes to my deathwing too personally. I really did covet that army...

Ian Argent
31-05-2007, 01:04
Hey - I'm one of the biggest supporters of the new C: DA in this board :) and I'll concede that "pure" deathwing got rather aggressively "balanced" and less competitive; mainly due to the lack of the second heavy weapon in a 5-man squad (which IMHO was justified) and the increase in cost of Dreads (neutral on that - the AC cost was probably too low, but ...)

Oh, and in a pure DW army Belial's relative lack of customizeability vs a standard company master is a downcheck as well.

Hurts the pure DW, but I can't really argue with the changes when looked at from the combined-arms part of the chapter.

Ronin_eX
31-05-2007, 05:30
Yeah, the DA army really went from being an army with two sublists to one cohesive list. Ravenwing and Deathwing are both themes now and like many themes they tend to be less powerful because the player imposes limitations on themselves. I've always loved the Deathwing but GW has gone back to the 2nd edition's focus on the DA as a mixed arms force. I'm glad it is still possible to play pure forces but a downside to making the list powerful when taken as a whole means that not using the whole list makes the resulting limited armies less powerful.

I guess many players found this to be a much bigger paradigm shift than either the Eldar or the Blood Angels. Both of thos armies were simply balanced as their role has been much unchanged since 2nd edition (Eldar is the army of specialists while BA are an assault army). DA, however, have gone through many changes over every edition. 2nd edition we were a mixed force with a lot of mobile firepower. 3rd edition saw us become the foil of the Blood Angels when we became "the shooty marines with three kinds of army". Now we've come full circle and become something of an army of shock troops. I feel that this new identity feels better than being the shooty marines (compared to the three assault oriented marine forces) despite some loss in power of the pure forces we were able to take in 3rd edition.

Changes as great as the ones DA faced can be hard to swallow, especially if you haven't been around for a few of them. I guess the reason I was so quick to like the codex. I actually hated it a few months before it was released but I had a change of heart when I saw that it was actually going back to the old 2nd edition style I loved years ago. I'm just glad that we now seem to have a defined role amongst other marine chapters now that isn't as one sided as "shooty" or "assaulty".

lord_blackfang
31-05-2007, 07:29
Odd how I embrace the eldar changes, yet didnt play eldar until the newest dex, but hate the DA changes, and used to play deathwing. :confused:

...

Perhaps I took the changes to my deathwing too personally. I really did covet that army...

I think that's a major part of it. It's hard to accept change in things you're used to. I've never played DA before, so I can look at the codex without preconceptions. And I enjoy it so much I'm building two seperate armies with it.

Then there's GW's "pendulum effect," their inability to get things just right. It might have swung a little bit too far again, but is much closer to "just right" than ever before, IMO.

infinity101
31-05-2007, 09:52
Then there's GW's "pendulum effect," their inability to get things just right. It might have swung a little bit too far again, but is much closer to "just right" than ever before, IMO.

it _will_ be closer to the "just right" after all other get their pendulum effect
right now it is on the "too far" side

but i fear that the GW will notice their mistake (that they went too far) in the middle of the redoing all other codeci
and will try to not make that mistake for others
thus other codeci will be even nearer to the "just right" while ours, (even while being close) will still be just a little "too far" down

sorry for the crappy graphs that follow
----- are levels of perceived "power"
....... are spacers and the distances shown might not be actual distances

OLD DA--------
......................
BALANCE-------- (the pendulum effect swung too far, as agreed even partially by many)
......................
NEW DA---------

it there were an equal pendulum effect for other codeci
OLD CHAOS--------
.........................
.........................
BALANCE----------
.........................
NEW CHAOS-------
(CSM is just taken as an example of a currently stronger than average, i know that not all CSM lists are strong)

result
BALANCE----------
..........................
DA = CSM---------
we are balanced vs each other and close to the "just right" balance

but if they spot their mistake and lessen the pendulum effect for further codeci (which is more likely)

OLD CHAOS--------
.........................
.........................
BALANCE----------
NEW CHAOS------- (new chaos closer to the "just right" in one go)

result
BALANCE----------
NEW CHAOS------- (closer)
NEW DA----------- (close, but a bit "too far")

is equivalent to the old lineup.....meaning equally unbalanced as was prior to the new DA
OLD CHAOS-------
OLD DA-----------
BALANCE----------

and we are stuck again in an uphill battle for the next 10 or so years

it would be better for all if they just stick to small changes, and approach the "just right" in small, easily fixed if wrong steps, than whacking someone with a nerf bat several times, just in case

gitburna
31-05-2007, 10:20
No-brainers? Besides stuff like Interrogator-Chaplains to get Sacred Standards(confers Fearless),

Is that the same Fearless that players a few posts back were saying is "Universally inferior to ATSKNF" ??

Big Deal,so a high-level chaplain makes a squad fearless.


10-man Tactical Squads(to get the heavy weapon), few(or no) transports(to avoid Escalation trouble), twin lightening claws and combi-weapon on Masters(get the extra attack and get some shooting too), etc... Want me to continue? Or can you find the rest on your own?

How are any of these No brainer options ???
The 10 man squad "no brainer" in particular makes me laugh


SW cheesey? Well, besides ablative wolves for characters, a Chaplain that also is an Apothecary, extra characters, wolf pelts and tooth necklaces, Belt of Russ and Iron Halo(by RAW, that can be done, since the Belt didn't remove the option of the Iron Halo), very good assault troops as Troops, split shooting with Long Fangs, Terminator sergeants in squads... Need I continue...?
All of which might have been well and good in the 3rd edition transport rush....

gitburna
31-05-2007, 10:47
1.Strength will be replaced with daemonic weapon(+1str power weapon+d6attacks,with serious drawback).Chaos character doesn't buff your squads so they deserve to be more killy.

Yes, and how many of those daemon weapons will there be in the average list ? I very much doubt that every aspiring champion will have one.


2.Jervis do many mistakes,take a closer look - he want force people to take 10 man squad right - he failed

How ?


, he nerfed every troop choice in C: da and C: ba and elite choices are really crowded and "WORTH IT" - most competentive armies will be WITHOUT tactical squads ore with one to fill the slots.
Frankly I doubt it.


Jervis want to take away non brainers-he raise points - and more often unnecessary(plasma pistol should cost 10 points across the board

Is this the same plasma pistol which can destroy any vehicle up to armour value 13 instakill t3 characters and shoot down expensive terminators quite reliably? Frankly i think its quite fairly priced.

extra armour too,as well power weapon,lighting claws are still slightly overpriced,dread is horribly overpriced, speeder is overpriced,tactical squad cost is overpriced,techmarine as well,attack bike is slightly too cheap,terminator armour for chaplain is overpriced,rhino and razor are too cheap,predator as well).

Extra armour overpriced ? I suppose you thought that the previous "no brainer" cost was fair then ?
Powerweapon is not overpriced. Lightning claws certainly arent. Dreadnought goes up in price a bit, I'd hardly say its overpriced. They are particularly worth their cost in cityfights. How do you figure that the Landspeeder is overpriced ? Its expensive if you stick on assault cannons but thats the whole point. Techmarine doesnt even take up a slot so i dont see what your problem there is. Attack bike too cheap but landspeeder too expensive ? WTF

Terminator armour for chaplain overpriced ? Well when you can start getting fearless,reroll to hit terminators as a retinue then your argument holds less weight. Rhinos and razorbacks too cheap? What, the same "Metal coffins, cant survive without smoke launchers and extra armour" rhinos and razorbacks that people have been decrying the past 3 years? Predator might be cheap but thats one without lascannons,so combined with the costs to field lascannons or missile launchers elsewhere in the list,its a fair trade-off.

{snipped the boring powergamer with 'fist commentary} Dark angels sergeants can hardly get access to lightning claws now, and come with krak grenades so your arguments null in any case. Also your "codex space marine" sergeant gets a discount [for some reason] on his powerfist, despite having the same strength and a greater number of ablative wounds than for a character.

shabbadoo
31-05-2007, 11:08
I wouldn'tcall the long Fangs much of a boon compared to DA devstartator squads. For 57 points more DA get a 10-man squad and can of course split into combat squads to effectivley split their fire. Plus they have no squad leader that must remain alive to split their fire and that ablative shield of 3 marines per combat squad is not bad either. DA win this contest hands down, and that all takes into account the "outrageous" point costs for the heavy weapons that the DA Devastators pay. By the way, I used a 2x LC, 2x ML load-out for comparison purposes.

Anybody else care to site some comparisons that favor the DA? Let the cheesefest begin!!! :D

Griffin
31-05-2007, 13:30
I'd like to see a common tournament list, and then a Dark Angel list for comparison to see "How badley DA got Shafted". I imagine that the bonuses DA get more than makes up for one or two adjustments in costs. Anybody care to take a whack at it ? I don't play SM or I'd do a comparison myself.

gitburna
31-05-2007, 13:47
i'd say that true grit/CCW versus bolter/boltpistol is about even when you take into account both attack and defence, and a variety of opponents.

Dark angels get a higher basic level of ability against armoured targets by dint of every model having krak grenades. The powerfist upgrades for Spacewolves can then give them the edge, but thats more points still. They also have the ability to become a shooty unit with the heavy weapon/split squads in order to take more objectives.

Dark angels characters might not be CC Powerhouses like the more close quarters chapters, but the DA are probably more rounded overall, having good shooting and anti-light vehicle abilities. Dark angel captains also get rites of battle helping out the rest of the army.

Dark Angels get a much better fast attack and heavy support section.
I'd say the Dark Angels are better for the tactical player whereas the spacewolves work better for an in your face more aggressive style. Which is exactly as it should be.

Grand Master Raziel
31-05-2007, 13:54
Yeah, the DA army really went from being an army with two sublists to one cohesive list. Ravenwing and Deathwing are both themes now and like many themes they tend to be less powerful because the player imposes limitations on themselves. I've always loved the Deathwing but GW has gone back to the 2nd edition's focus on the DA as a mixed arms force. I'm glad it is still possible to play pure forces but a downside to making the list powerful when taken as a whole means that not using the whole list makes the resulting limited armies less powerful.

The thing about the combined-arms approach that you're lauding, if I'm interpreting what you're implying correctly (that it relies on a combo of DW, RW, and battle company DAs), is that it relies on units that, while fun, are not necessarily cost effective or reliable. I've always regarded Bikes and Terminators as "luxury units" - stuff I put in my lists for fun once I'm satisfied I have enough less flashy but more reliable things to fill the roles I want to fill. In a 2000 point game, it's fairly easy to have enough points to include a Bike squad and a Termie squad after including enough meat-and-potatoes units to rely on in any given situation, but in a 1500 point list it's damn hard. I might do either Bikes or Terminators, but I wouldn't do both, as the expense takes too much away from the rest of your army. I have a hard time imagining that this is not even more true of DA armies, where nearly everything involved is more expensive.



Then there's GW's "pendulum effect," their inability to get things just right. It might have swung a little bit too far again, but is much closer to "just right" than ever before, IMO.

That'll largely depend on what they do with Chaos, and from the rumors I'm hearing it doesn't sound like Chaos is actually losing much. The extreme lists like the IWAoD might go away, but it sounds like Chaos is gaining a hell of a lot more in the process than DAs did. With all the equipment they sound like they'll be getting, if basic Chaos troopers don't cost near 20 points a model, then they're going to be horrendously undercosted.


it would be better for all if they just stick to small changes, and approach the "just right" in small, easily fixed if wrong steps, than whacking someone with a nerf bat several times, just in case

Quoted For Truth.

@Gitburna: Regarding your sig, the way Gerald Butler delivered that line, you're sig should read:


Madness? This! Is! Spar! Ta! ;)

Kargush
01-06-2007, 12:22
How are any of these No brainer options ???
The 10 man squad "no brainer" in particular makes me laugh


So you're saying that for an army that is often fielded as a shooty army, taking 10-man Tactical Squads to get a heavy weapon isn't a no-brainer? Laudes to you for keeping your opinion in spite of counter-arguments.

gitburna
01-06-2007, 14:54
So you're saying that for an army that is often fielded as a shooty army, taking 10-man Tactical Squads to get a heavy weapon isn't a no-brainer? Laudes to you for keeping your opinion in spite of counter-arguments.

Yes thats precisely what im saying. A no-brainer option is exactly that, and frankly i'd rather use mine when deciding wether or not to equip tactical squads with heavy weapons. Sticking a heavy in either means the whole unit remains stationary or i have to split the squad, neither of which is something i necessarily want to do.

Since when were the dark angels a "shooty" army anyway? I always figured on them as being a codex force with a slight favour for fast attack vehicles [including bikes] as opposed to the blood angels who are codex with a slight favour for fast assaults.

roachvan
01-06-2007, 14:55
I can see how bad the nerf was.
In our last league a veteran DA player was slaughtered to a man by a new nid player.
The DA player had great dice rolls and great tactics the nid player had ok dice rolls and no tactics.

If this doesn't say they went to far then maybe I should give up warhammer for tiddly winks.

dean
01-06-2007, 15:06
I can see how bad the nerf was.
In our last league a veteran DA player was slaughtered to a man by a new nid player.
The DA player had great dice rolls and great tactics the nid player had ok dice rolls and no tactics.

If this doesn't say they went to far then maybe I should give up warhammer for tiddly winks.

Define "good" tactics. Did he rush into CC or did he fall back from dedicated CC units so he could shoot them more? Did he move his assaulty troops forward enough to make a "speed bump" so his shooty units couldnt be consolodated into?

"Good" tactics for almost all other armies don't necessarily work against 'nids. There is at least one thread in 40k Gen addressing DA vs Nidzilla lists. I however would include ALL SM lists in that discussion because we are only talking about one 6xLas/Plas squad in 1850 points. You give up 12/24 S4 shots for 1 S9, 1/2 S8 and 2/4 S4 and a powerfist. (assuming 3 full sized squads vs 4 6xLas/plas)



Codex: Dark Angels - burn your old army lists, delete your saved armies; it's a new codex, start from the basics. Check your preconceptions at the door.

Certain units got slightly nerfed. Certain units got slightly buffed. The army as a whole got a decent boost. Adapt and Overcome.


Emphasis mine.

Joah_from_Alberta
01-06-2007, 15:59
Look fellows, my intention is not to demean the designer, yet it should be noted that he is not a genius. His lack of calculated approach leads to an apparent lack of insight. And yeah, look forward to 10 years of pinball-- bling, bling. Man, I wish Hasbro would buy out GW, at least they have teams of designers, rather than one hot wig. Whatever, someone should dig up Napoleons' rules for playing with toy soldiers, maybe then we'd have better army lists.

BrainFireBob
01-06-2007, 17:13
Funny, considering that he's the member of the studio who's insisting that they HAVE a calculated approach- for the first time ever.

Democratus
01-06-2007, 17:19
Man, I wish Hasbro would buy out GW, at least they have teams of designers, rather than one hot wig.

Yeah. Because Hasbro buying out Avalon Hill did wonders for Squad Leader and Panzer Leader. :rolleyes:

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
01-06-2007, 17:51
Yes, and how many of those daemon weapons will there be in the average list ? I very much doubt that every aspiring champion will have one.

0-2;) No AC will have one - they will have Power Fist

How ?

No one with sane mind will take one - look people in the past take more tactical squads - who now take more than compulsory 2 - only because he must ?

Frankly I doubt it.

We will see most point efficient armies ... no one will be based on tactical squad - they are burden now

Is this the same plasma pistol which can destroy any vehicle up to armour value 13 instakill t3 characters and shoot down expensive terminators quite reliably? Frankly i think its quite fairly priced.

... and fry bearer? yes. how many multi wound characters can be instant killed by PP - who? Inquisitor lord:p ?

Extra armour overpriced ? I suppose you thought that the previous "no brainer" cost was fair then ?
Powerweapon is not overpriced. Lightning claws certainly arent. Dreadnought goes up in price a bit, I'd hardly say its overpriced. They are particularly worth their cost in cityfights. How do you figure that the Landspeeder is overpriced ? Its expensive if you stick on assault cannons but thats the whole point. Techmarine doesnt even take up a slot so i dont see what your problem there is. Attack bike too cheap but landspeeder too expensive ? WTF

Extra Armour isn't option - due to vehicle rules without one you lost too much.

Terminator armour for chaplain overpriced ? Well when you can start getting fearless,reroll to hit terminators as a retinue then your argument holds less weight. Rhinos and razorbacks too cheap? What, the same "Metal coffins, cant survive without smoke launchers and extra armour" rhinos and razorbacks that people have been decrying the past 3 years? Predator might be cheap but thats one without lascannons,so combined with the costs to field lascannons or missile launchers elsewhere in the list,its a fair trade-off.

Hold as much weight as before - it is overpriced and not worth it. Now they are "living pieces of terrain for 35 pts. and razors are best way to get lasscannon

{snipped the boring powergamer with 'fist commentary} Dark angels sergeants can hardly get access to lightning claws now, and come with krak grenades so your arguments null in any case. Also your "codex space marine" sergeant gets a discount [for some reason] on his powerfist, despite having the same strength and a greater number of ablative wounds than for a character.

I never defended old fist price dude. read carefully. My words are from PG perspective - which is important.I defended old power sword price - several years of playtesting discovered that 10 points for SM Sarge IS good price.

PF is invaluable to deal with MC and many other things