Get Ready For Chapter Approved

[Havok13]

 

 

Im all for the updates to improve balance, however it seems little things get overlooked. One thing that is annoying me (doesnt take much) the price for chainfists. No one will take these now due to their price staying the same, especially when thunder hammers and power fists have decreased.

They dropped them to 14pts for Chaos. Not sure if they did for others.

That would make sense, hopefully it will be the same for SM.

[Ficinus]

For superheavies like the Fellblade and Glaive, there is always 7th ed/Horus Heresy 1st ed (once it's released). They are appropriately costed there, and it is their natural habitat.

 

(I didn't want to quote the dozen or so posts about FW LoW points, it seemed excessive)

[Brother Christopher]

This refers only to Codex: Space Marines, which I have experience with.

 

These leaked point adjustments just make me think that I have no idea about making a Codex interesting and am seriously lacking any clue how to make it (internally) balanced. I have no first-hand experience of any other book, so I can't tell how SM fare against other armies and whether their point costs are justified. However, looking at GW's adjustment it seems that they boosted Primaris (which probably is a good thing, but something that doesn't affect me), handicapped the only obvious (i.e. good efficiency for the point) picks in the Codex and called it a day. It becomes more and more apparent and sad that GW still does not seem to be mature or experienced enough to create an interesting and relatively balanced system (or they don't want to).

 

It is profoundly sad that so many interesting options in the Codex, which might add variety and fun to the system, requires special effort on the player's part to find weird, out-of-the-box justification to use them, since neither the rules, nor the ascribed points warrant taking them. It seems to me that GW insists on forcing people to pay an Old Edition Fun Unit Tax when, among other things, they want to field such things as Stormtalons, Centurions (especially Devastator Centurions), Land Speeders, Drop Pods, Assault Squads or even BT Neophytes and now Land Raiders Crusaders. This practice renders a large part of the Codex useless. I can just imagine that the same goes for other Codexes. And this, something that affect even the smallest games, is my largest gripe with this update, and not Super Heavy units used for special occasions.

[Ciler]

 

 

Im all for the updates to improve balance, however it seems little things get overlooked. One thing that is annoying me (doesnt take much) the price for chainfists. No one will take these now due to their price staying the same, especially when thunder hammers and power fists have decreased.

They dropped them to 14pts for Chaos. Not sure if they did for others.

That would make sense, hopefully it will be the same for SM.

 

The leaks indicate this NOT to be the case.

[Havok13]

 

 

 

 

Im all for the updates to improve balance, however it seems little things get overlooked. One thing that is annoying me (doesnt take much) the price for chainfists. No one will take these now due to their price staying the same, especially when thunder hammers and power fists have decreased.

They dropped them to 14pts for Chaos. Not sure if they did for others.

That would make sense, hopefully it will be the same for SM.

The leaks indicate this NOT to be the case.

I'm hoping for it to come into effect for the SW codex next year.

[Major_Gilbear]

I... find the CA changes to be really weird and "7E", and I don't really understand why much of the stuff that's been changed received the attention it did; for example, I wasn't even vaguely aware that Guard meltaguns were so apparently undercosted.

 

With the Index, Codex, FAQ, CA (plus any FW equivalents), this multi-book mess is now too unnecessarily hard to navigate for the purposes of just building an army and playing a game. I also actually question if better balance has even been achieved in the end.

 

To me, whilst using rough points to ensure that there isn't massive disparity between two armies (i.e., they should usually be within 5-10% of each other at most for a "fair" game), I think Power Levels plus Wheaton's Law will be applying to my games with friends.

[Ficinus]

I'm surprised that Chaos Space Marine chainfists were overcosted but Space Marine chainfists were ideally costed. I haven't done extensive playtesting so I'll take GW's word for it.

[THUNDERFISTS]

SM Terminators all went down to 26pts too while CSM Termies stay at 31pts. Very weird how essentially the same unit over two armies would vary by 25pts overall. Maybe they're taking into account marks and stratagems?

[Ficinus]

SM Terminators all went down to 26pts too while CSM Termies stay at 31pts. Very weird how essentially the same unit over two armies would vary by 25pts overall. Maybe they're taking into account marks and stratagems?

I don't think Cataphractii terminators went down for Space Marines, but I can understand why. It's weird that Chaos terminators stayed at the higher points cost... it seems almost random.

[Shockmaster]

I... find the CA changes to be really weird and "7E", and I don't really understand why much of the stuff that's been changed received the attention it did; for example, I wasn't even vaguely aware that Guard meltaguns were so apparently undercosted.

 

With the Index, Codex, FAQ, CA (plus any FW equivalents), this multi-book mess is now too unnecessarily hard to navigate for the purposes of just building an army and playing a game. I also actually question if better balance has even been achieved in the end.

 

To me, whilst using rough points to ensure that there isn't massive disparity between two armies (i.e., they should usually be within 5-10% of each other at most for a "fair" game), I think Power Levels plus Wheaton's Law will be applying to my games with friends.

 

I am surprised GW are not trying to sell us their own army building app similar to Battlescribe to help make the army building process easier.

[Ishagu]

Chaos Termies are way better because of their options. Don't compare them with the loyalist variants

[Damo1701]

Unless the points changes are released FAQ-style, it really won't affect me.

 

Not buying the book. The Edition is 6 months old. A bit early for its first "Annual Update."

 

That being said, as I never spammed anything, or took part in tournaments, why should my lists be neutered, because Tournament Players cannot avoid spamming the FotM?

 

I will make it clear to any opponents after release date that I did not purchase CA, and therefore am working from the most recent army specific publications. Either they'll agree, or we'll use Power levels. Makes no real difference to me.

 

I'm done with the "In-App purchase" mentality behind 8th edition. Especially when everybody suffers because of the choice of the Tournament Circuit/WAAC players.

[kombatwombat]

SM Terminators all went down to 26pts too while CSM Termies stay at 31pts. Very weird how essentially the same unit over two armies would vary by 25pts overall. Maybe they're taking into account marks and stratagems?

That might be partly my fault.

 

I’ve been harping on the GW Facebook page about Assault Terminators being 31 points while normal Terminators are 26 points since the first leaks of the Index. As in, I’ve posted probably half a dozen times, plus commented on lots of articles about it.

 

I didn’t think they’d drop the cost of Tartaros while they were at it, though.

[Interrogator-Chaplain Ezra]

I just saw something on the leaks. Deathwatch getting Primaris units. I know some people who are going to be very happy about that.

[Plasmablasts]

 

 

I... find the CA changes to be really weird and "7E", and I don't really understand why much of the stuff that's been changed received the attention it did; for example, I wasn't even vaguely aware that Guard meltaguns were so apparently undercosted.

 

With the Index, Codex, FAQ, CA (plus any FW equivalents), this multi-book mess is now too unnecessarily hard to navigate for the purposes of just building an army and playing a game. I also actually question if better balance has even been achieved in the end.

 

To me, whilst using rough points to ensure that there isn't massive disparity between two armies (i.e., they should usually be within 5-10% of each other at most for a "fair" game), I think Power Levels plus Wheaton's Law will be applying to my games with friends.

I am surprised GW are not trying to sell us their own army building app similar to Battlescribe to help make the army building process easier.

Given their AoS Warscroll builder, I’d be surprised if they’re not working on one.

[Gentlemanloser]

I just saw something on the leaks. Deathwatch getting Primaris units. I know some people who are going to be very happy about that.

Deathwatch already had (mostly) all the Primaris units.

 

They were part of the 2 page pdf that gave Primaris to everyone.

 

Bar the GK of course...

Edited November 26, 2017 by Gentlemanloser

[Interrogator-Chaplain Ezra]

 

I just saw something on the leaks. Deathwatch getting Primaris units. I know some people who are going to be very happy about that.

Deathwatch already had (mostly) all the Primaris units.

 

They were part of the 2 page pdf that gave Primaris to everyone.

 

Bar the GK of course...

 

Yes, but this is the remaining stuff, Agressors, Inceptors, what have you. Those weren't available in the index, and are now being put it by way of the CA book.

[Boyadventurer]

I just saw something on the leaks. Deathwatch getting Primaris units. I know some people who are going to be very happy about that.

 

Haha, don't walk in to the DW forum expecting smiles. All we got were the base SM changes (and didn't even get the whole primaris run -- no ancients or lieutenants for one thing), and not only did they not bother to look at any of our own units (a plain bolter vet is now more expensive than an intercessor), they didn't even give the copy/paste a look over to realize we can't even take librarians with jump packs.

 

DW have just gotten such weird treatment. They release some fantastic kits, that seemed to have sold very well considering how hard they were to find after launch and that they were one of the 4 highest selling armies last year, but then drop a weird codex with things that don't make sense, not let us take a lot of basic character options just because you can't easily put a DW shoulder pad on it, and now we're the only army that has to pay (3ppm!) for our basic army special rule (even if we can't use it!)

 

It's just so weird to treat a pretty new army, that sold very well, like that.

[General Strike]

I just feel like they suffer from the lack of a unified vision. If they had a small group in charge of just that, the unified vision of 40k, the game, stories, and models, and they enforced that vision between sculptors, game design, rules, lore writers, and the social media team then I think things would run more smoothly. The 8th edition change over has been too much for me, and I've shelved my army plans until the codices are out. I'll probably finish up my Custodes and get around to painting Guilliman, but I just don't know what the company is doing at this point. Even just coming out and saying WHY they chose to do things the way they did would do a lot.

 

Edit: My own frustration may be spilling over into my comments here, so take my vinegar for what it is.

Edited November 26, 2017 by HCMistborn

[Indefragable]

I just feel like they suffer from the lack of a unified vision. If they had a small group in charge of just that, the unified vision of 40k, the game, stories, and models, and they enforced that vision between sculptors, game design, rules, lore writers, and the social media team then I think things would run more smoothly. The 8th edition change over has been too much for me, and I've shelved my army plans until the codices are out. I'll probably finish up my Custodes and get around to painting Guilliman, but I just don't know what the company is doing at this point. Even just coming out and saying WHY they chose to do things the way they did would do a lot.

 

Edit: My own frustration may be spilling over into my comments here, so take my vinegar for what it is.

I’ve been it before I’m variosu places, but I would love to know when GW considers 8th Ed “launched.” As in when is the “product” of 8th complete and 8.1 (expansions, supplements, dessert and coffee, etc...) begins. Edited November 26, 2017 by Indefragable

[Cryptix]

 

 

I... find the CA changes to be really weird and "7E", and I don't really understand why much of the stuff that's been changed received the attention it did; for example, I wasn't even vaguely aware that Guard meltaguns were so apparently undercosted.

 

With the Index, Codex, FAQ, CA (plus any FW equivalents), this multi-book mess is now too unnecessarily hard to navigate for the purposes of just building an army and playing a game. I also actually question if better balance has even been achieved in the end.

 

To me, whilst using rough points to ensure that there isn't massive disparity between two armies (i.e., they should usually be within 5-10% of each other at most for a "fair" game), I think Power Levels plus Wheaton's Law will be applying to my games with friends.

I am surprised GW are not trying to sell us their own army building app similar to Battlescribe to help make the army building process easier.

They are tho, Valrak mentioned its be out a little after Christmas.

[Slave to Darkness]

I haven't done extensive playtesting so I'll take GW's word for it.

Tbh I doubt GW has done extensive playtesting either. :lol:

[Shockmaster]

 

 

I... find the CA changes to be really weird and "7E", and I don't really understand why much of the stuff that's been changed received the attention it did; for example, I wasn't even vaguely aware that Guard meltaguns were so apparently undercosted.

 

With the Index, Codex, FAQ, CA (plus any FW equivalents), this multi-book mess is now too unnecessarily hard to navigate for the purposes of just building an army and playing a game. I also actually question if better balance has even been achieved in the end.

 

To me, whilst using rough points to ensure that there isn't massive disparity between two armies (i.e., they should usually be within 5-10% of each other at most for a "fair" game), I think Power Levels plus Wheaton's Law will be applying to my games with friends.

I am surprised GW are not trying to sell us their own army building app similar to Battlescribe to help make the army building process easier.

They are tho, Valrak mentioned its be out a little after Christmas.

 

 

Okay, I had missed that, it will be interesting to see what GW do, as assuming it is not free it will be hard to compete with what the likes of Battlescribe already offer.

[Panzer]

 

I... find the CA changes to be really weird and "7E", and I don't really understand why much of the stuff that's been changed received the attention it did; for example, I wasn't even vaguely aware that Guard meltaguns were so apparently undercosted.

 

With the Index, Codex, FAQ, CA (plus any FW equivalents), this multi-book mess is now too unnecessarily hard to navigate for the purposes of just building an army and playing a game. I also actually question if better balance has even been achieved in the end. :ermm:

 

To me, whilst using rough points to ensure that there isn't massive disparity between two armies (i.e., they should usually be within 5-10% of each other at most for a "fair" game), I think Power Levels plus Wheaton's Law will be applying to my games with friends.

 

 

I am surprised GW are not trying to sell us their own army building app similar to Battlescribe to help make the army building process easier.

  

 

 

I... find the CA changes to be really weird and "7E", and I don't really understand why much of the stuff that's been changed received the attention it did; for example, I wasn't even vaguely aware that Guard meltaguns were so apparently undercosted.With the Index, Codex, FAQ, CA (plus any FW equivalents), this multi-book mess is now too unnecessarily hard to navigate for the purposes of just building an army and playing a game. I also actually question if better balance has even been achieved in the end. :ermm:

To me, whilst using rough points to ensure that there isn't massive disparity between two armies (i.e., they should usually be within 5-10% of each other at most for a "fair" game), I think Power Levels plus Wheaton's Law will be applying to my games with friends.

I am surprised GW are not trying to sell us their own army building app similar to Battlescribe to help make the army building process easier.

Given their AoS Warscroll builder, I’d be surprised if they’re not working on one.

That app already got announced way before 8th got released. It's in develpment currently.

[Hopper21]

Unless the points changes are released FAQ-style, it really won't affect me.

 

Not buying the book. The Edition is 6 months old. A bit early for its first "Annual Update."

 

That being said, as I never spammed anything, or took part in tournaments, why should my lists be neutered, because Tournament Players cannot avoid spamming the FotM?

 

I will make it clear to any opponents after release date that I did not purchase CA, and therefore am working from the most recent army specific publications. Either they'll agree, or we'll use Power levels. Makes no real difference to me.

 

I'm done with the "In-App purchase" mentality behind 8th edition. Especially when everybody suffers because of the choice of the Tournament Circuit/WAAC players.

Im a tournament player not a very good one too. I dont really feel responsible for your "suffering"