Sception Posted December 30, 2013 Share Posted December 30, 2013 I really think that's inaccurate. What, GW doesn't want people buying the possessed models they made? And this kit was released with the 4e book, and possessed were even worse then. Are you honestly suggesting that GW Financial leaned on the rules writers to make a brand new kit terrible? The financial guys have no say on what the rules for individual units are. They may have a say in what existing units get new models, or what new units get made in the first place, but they have no say in what the actual rules are. This is readily evident - sometimes old units that nobody's going to buy more of are terrible, but sometimes they're great. Plagues are the best cult unit, what, three editions in a row, now? Bikes, an ancient unit with no new models are way better than the brand new raptors & warp talons. Sometimes expensive new models are amazing in the game, but sometimes they're lackluster (Fiends, Raptors), or outright terrible (possessed in 4e, apostles now). Sometimes units suck. Sometimes they're great. Ocassionally you see deliberate attempts to nerf units that have been perceived as overpowered or overused, or buff units that are underpowered or underused, but those attempts aren't always successful, or sometimes they're too successful, or sometimes they don't bother to try to do that at all. There is no rhyme or reason to GW's rule design, and even if there was a method to it, they don't do the play testing necessary to actually pull off whatever it is they think they're trying to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forté Posted December 30, 2013 Author Share Posted December 30, 2013 GW have realized that people still buy the Possessed kit to kitbash so who cares if the rules suck. Now, oblits...minis are substandard, done by a trainee and currently in the worst material ever but are almost auto include. Helturkey...ok model but far from the best. Fantastic rules. Pretty much auto include. Maybe I've just spent too much time in retail to be cynical about this sort of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sception Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Again, new models, old models, lousy models, great models, it doesn't matter. None of it has any correlation to how good the rules for those units are. Conspiracy theories are nice, but a simple plot of rules-quality vs. any given trait that might make GW care or not care about selling more of a particular kit shows that there's just no interaction there. You've come up with an assumption, that GW's financial department drives their rule writing, and are backtracking explanations to fit your assumption. The truth is so much simpler, and so much worse. GW's rules are so slip shod and random because GW does not give a flip about their rules. We already know this - it's evident from the rules themselves, it's blatant from the known lack of play testing, they've even literally said as much. It's a thing we already know. And it more than accounts for some units being way too good and some just lousy, as well as for the complete lack of any rhyme or reason with regards to which is which. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 I don't know when PK writes rules for his eldar they seem to work rather well . new stuff is good or even realy good , stuff that was used less is much better . good stuff that was good , is still good . With chaos they maybe doing random stuff , but when SR , vendettas or necron/DE came out there were realy few realy bad type of units . Although it is a bummer for those "demon" DE scouts , realy nice models to paint . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disciple of Fulgrim Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 I have to agree with forte and malisteen on this one. Given most of what I've read about the current, overall state of 6th Edition 40K, I think it's now pretty self-evident that GW considers their (at times ill-conceived, reportedly poorly tested and always expensive) RAW to simply be: 1. a highly useful catalyst for miniatures sales and 2. a nice additional source of revenue. Sure there are some exceptions but generally speaking, whether 40K's current RAW are well suited for competitive play is something GW also seems to no longer "give a flip about" (presuming they ever did, which has also been debated here on B&C.) The fact that knowledgable CSM players (correctly IMO) consider Possessed worthless for competitive/tournament play is simply meaningless to 1. Casual players who like their fluff and/or how they look and 2. Modellers (such as me) who want their bitz for kitbashing - presumably resulting in enough sales to keep Possessed part of GW's CSM line. (Though it might be interesting to find out how many Possessed are sold as part of the CSM starter bundle, and how many are sold individually.) Would better rules for the Possessed result in more of them being sold? Sure - but apparently not in quantities that matter to GW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forté Posted December 31, 2013 Author Share Posted December 31, 2013 The thing with Competitive play though is the rules are there. If you look at other competitive systems though you will find that they usually have rules put in place to balance things specifically for Competition. Examples that spring to mind are Infinity for tabletop stuff and Call of Duty for console gaming. Both have alterations to what can be used in the competitive arena but outside its down to the players to decide what is fair game. A completely fair and balanced system would be impossible with so many variables. One of the biggest being the players themselves. But, values being a bit more realistic would be nice. Wishful thinking. But nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trevoroftzeentch Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 They can work. There are several better things to use. In 1 game I had success running 8 possessed w/ MoS and Icon of excess in a landraider with abaddon attached. Giving abaddon FnP. Without a land raider I don't see myself ever using them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Ok let say you would have taken NM with a syren asp champion and same icon or zerkers +abadon/LR in both cases would possessed give something better/different then those two other units[as in plus we more or less covered what possessed are bad at]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slayer le Boucher Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Well the only thing i can see is that they have a base S5 abd a ++ save, but without any wargear or options to make actual use of thoses... If at least they had Rending, that still could be interessting, not super effectif, but interessting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rune Priest Ridcully Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Tbf, I think give them rending and an extra wound with their current abilities and price, they would be decent, heck you could jazz up the marks to have additional benefits for them.Khorne: AP2, Hated (All) Slameesh:+1d6 charge range, move through cover. Nurgle: Slow and purpseful, poisoned (5+)Tzeentch: Brotherhood of sorcerers (Level 2), warpflame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 problem is with 2w , they would make melee oblits un needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rune Priest Ridcully Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 problem is with 2w , they would make melee oblits un needed. Because they are oh so used as it is, being the first thing every chaos player adds after his compulsory brandlord, plaguemarines or/and cultists, hell turkey and shooty obliterators.. I've thought about using possessed in a small 5 man unit kept behind or with your other units and used as a counter attack unit for when they close, but terminantors give them a good run in combat and have shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeychunks Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Rather than mucking around with Rending, I think the simplest fix would be to grant them Unit Type: Beasts. Flesh Hounds are excellent proof that a relatively durable model (T4/3+/5++ is still 'durable') still make for excellent assault units even under 6th rules. Of course it's not a perfect comparison since Hounds are far cheaper, but I think a WS5, Beast-movement Possessed would make for an excellent foundation when remaking the unit. It also gives them a distinct niche among the brutally effective Berzerkers, versatile Mutilators and weight-of-dice Chaos Marines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forté Posted January 1, 2014 Author Share Posted January 1, 2014 Only thing with that is they'll move them to the Fast section which already has the turkey, spawn, raptors and bikes. But I do see what you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeychunks Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Not necessarily. The Daemons Elite section includes a Beast unit and 2 Cavalry units so it's hardly unprecedented. I think it would work. More differentiation between our assault units, an obvious specialisation that the Loyalists cannot recreate, and super cool to boot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crucial Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Those couple of wings backpacks wouldnt look so outa place in the unit aswell if they moved as beasts! Maybe someone from GW is taking notes on this right now!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slayer le Boucher Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 They are subjects to wild mutations, be it wings or legs, they move has beast. look at the beast units with the handler in the DE codex, for sake of simplicity while the model is on a skyboard, he count has a beast to be on par with the rest of the units models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 problem is with 2w , they would make melee oblits un needed. Because they are oh so used as it is, being the first thing every chaos player adds after his compulsory brandlord, plaguemarines or/and cultists, hell turkey and shooty obliterators.. I've thought about using possessed in a small 5 man unit kept behind or with your other units and used as a counter attack unit for when they close, but terminantors give them a good run in combat and have shooting. doesn't matter , they wouldn't make 2 new types of model ranges and make one totaly dominate over the other out of two different boxs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.