Are the Astra Militarum really overpowered?

[BitsHammer]

I haven't looked at a Fire Prism's rules in a while so I can't comment on it, but with how cheap Guard tanks are and how many shots they can throw ever turn right now there is a definite problem with how they operate. A tank that basically never needs to, or wants to move, gets extra shots for moving? What.

 

And my point wasn't that we should take an "eye for an eye" approach to design, but rather the methodology employed in updating armies should be the same.

[Schlitzaf]

A Leman Russ Shooting Twice actually kills the same amount of models as an equivalent pointed vanilla Marine Predator. Just as an aside

[BitsHammer]

A Leman Russ Shooting Twice actually kills the same amount of models as an equivalent pointed vanilla Marine Predator. Just as an aside

By itself, sure. But it's NEVER by itself. Add in rerolls from being Cadian, or the other bonuses in the army and suddenly it's killing above any Marine Predator.

[Schlitzaf]

 

A Leman Russ Shooting Twice actually kills the same amount of models as an equivalent pointed vanilla Marine Predator. Just as an aside

 

By itself, sure. But it's NEVER by itself. Add in rerolls from being Cadian, or the other bonuses in the army and suddenly it's killing above any Marine Predator.

Rerolls from Captain/Liutanent? Are we back to theory hammeriny army v army what if’s?

[BitsHammer]

 

 

A Leman Russ Shooting Twice actually kills the same amount of models as an equivalent pointed vanilla Marine Predator. Just as an aside

By itself, sure. But it's NEVER by itself. Add in rerolls from being Cadian, or the other bonuses in the army and suddenly it's killing above any Marine Predator.

Rerolls from Captain/Liutanent? Are we back to theory hammeriny army v army what if’s?

 

Cadians reroll 1s to hit if they don't move. Don't even need an HQ for Orders.

 

If we start bringing in other stuff once we add in Orders then they can re-roll the number of shots they need. And then there is the Relic of Cadia that lets you seriously screw over Chaos armies...

[The Unseen]

BA overcharged engines was a core mechanic, daemons deep striking was a core mechanic, and Dark Angels have had a deep strike buff for termies for a long time.

 

Most other factions didn't have a single core mechanic to rely on, they had to make do with whatever special rules they had, if any, to differentiate them from similar armies.

Now those special rules they had are strategems, but guard got to keep their rules almost entirely, plus new stratagems as well.

 

It isn't "an eye for an eye", it's keeping rules and the way their implemented consistent across factions.

If everyone else has to pay CP, in some cases very large amounts, to gain access to rules that allow them to break the normal game mechanics, but one faction doesn't, that's going to lead to imbalance.

 

And of course if it's too good for leman russes, it's probably also too good on fire prisms.

But eldar don't have dirt cheap, effecient infantry screens to protect said fire prism, just to note.

[Mileposter]

I haven't looked at a Fire Prism's rules in a while so I can't comment on it, but with how cheap Guard tanks are and how many shots they can throw ever turn right now there is a definite problem with how they operate. A tank that basically never needs to, or wants to move, gets extra shots for moving? What.

Fire Prisms have the exact same rule (under a different name) about firing twice if they don't move half of their total movement. However, unlike a Russ, Fire Prisms also have a Stratagem that allows them to reroll all failed hits and wounds - even outside line of sight or weapon range - so long as two Fire Prisms are shooting the same target. A Fire Prism costs roughly the same as a Russ with sponsons.

[BitsHammer]

I'm just going to point out that Eldar can't spam CP like Guard can for that, but yes, it probably shouldn't have that rule either. That sort of rule is one I'd expect to see on a superheavy.

The fact we've taken the rules from a super heavy tank and given it to regular tanks for free is frankly silly.

[Colonel Cross]

And Fire Prisms have better BS AND can fall back from CC and still fire. Honestly, they're quite even, but I'd rather take a platform with a Stratagem that allows full rerolls and can fall back and fire.

 

And before the codex, nobody took Russes. They were so bad I moved to an all infantry force. But the codex may have gone too far, some may say. So then we're back full circle to: "how do we fix blast weapons?"

[BitsHammer]

I'm definitely not saying Russes shouldn't be good, but giving them a rule to fire twice was not the way in my opinion.

[Mileposter]

And before the codex, nobody took Russes. They were so bad I moved to an all infantry force. But the codex may have gone too far, some may say. So then we're back full circle to: "how do we fix blast weapons?"

I feel I've presented the best solution thus far - but I admit I've fallen down on my own rule and I haven't written up a thing from the games I've tested it in. I'll have that in tomorrow, probably.

[Melete]

I'm definitely not saying Russes shouldn't be good, but giving them a rule to fire twice was not the way in my opinion.

Lemans aren't even the best tanks Guard can take, though. They're good, but if you take a look at competitive guard lists, they aren't spamming Lemans. The most common tanks would be Basilisks and Manticores.

[BitsHammer]

 

I'm definitely not saying Russes shouldn't be good, but giving them a rule to fire twice was not the way in my opinion.

Lemans aren't even the best tanks Guard can take, though. They're good, but if you take a look at competitive guard lists, they aren't spamming Lemans. The most common tanks would be Basilisks and Manticores.

 

Bassies were pretty pants in the past and were never taken over Manticores so I am glad to see them hitting the table again, but I do feel this game needs some rebalancing all over the place.

 

Being able to shoot at targets you can't see should have a -1 to hit (you used to have full scatter with no reduction, this would match that at least a little).

 

Tanks shouldn't get bonuses for not moving unless they have to pay for them (CP, buying HQs for orders).

 

A gunline army shouldn't get a baked in reroll for not moving (Cadia).

 

I admit I could probably point out other problems (how anti-Chaos a number of things are are but we lack anti-Xenos options, which should have been equally as important since Guard regularly fight Xenos as often, if not more than, they do Chaos), but I'm not sitting in front of the book and honestly I already feel like just this post will likely cause some people to become a bit upset with me.

[Colonel Cross]

I only own 1 Basilisk and rocked it pre codex. I thought it was lackluster. Most people felt they (or the Earthshaker platforms) were too good. Then the codex improved their AP for some reason. But the codex buffed the Russes so much I've been able to 1 shot Repulsors from a battle Cannon tank commander (I play Catachan). So I stopped bringing Artillery, maybe I'm not the best to comment on it.

Are people really seeing Basilisks or manticores performing so well they should be nerfed with a to hit modifier? With the increasing likelihood of -1 or -2 to hit, Artillery could quickly become pointless.

[BitsHammer]

It used to be that when you had tanks that shot things out of LoS they suffered a penalty for it. I'd like this to be a universal thing honestly, not just on artillery.

[Beams]

I only own 1 Basilisk and rocked it pre codex. I thought it was lackluster. Most people felt they (or the Earthshaker platforms) were too good. Then the codex improved their AP for some reason. But the codex buffed the Russes so much I've been able to 1 shot Repulsors from a battle Cannon tank commander (I play Catachan). So I stopped bringing Artillery, maybe I'm not the best to comment on it.

Are people really seeing Basilisks or manticores performing so well they should be nerfed with a to hit modifier? With the increasing likelihood of -1 or -2 to hit, Artillery could quickly become pointless.

This is a huge issue.

 

I recently played against someone who had -1 to hit on all units, and a -2 on a select few outside of twelve. My sisters, which are relient on BS 3+ now shot at bs 5". Guard would be hitting on 6's, and Orks wouldn't be able to hit at all. Add in a -1 to hit for indirect fire and guard artillery wouldn't be able to hit anything in that army.

 

Or more likely, against Raven guard, altiaoc, the admech with -1 and all tyranids with that gland or near venomthropes, guard artillery would be hitting on 6s, rendering them pointless. If there wasn't an abundance of -1 to hit rules, it would be fine, but allowing stackable -1's would defeat the purpose of artillery

[BitsHammer]

I'd argue that they could balance that with a strategem not unlike some old rules: "Fire on my Target". Spend 1 CP to nominate a unit that is visible to a unit with a vox. Basalisk and Medusa units gain +1 to hit against that target.

It builds in a work around for the 4 armies that can bring a penalty to hit at a distance, but doesn't just give it away for free.

[Colonel Cross]

Well, we do have Aerial Spotter, which for 2 CPs allows re-roll of all failed hit rolls for the unit this phase.  It only works for Basilisks and Wyverns though, for some strange reason it doesn't work on Manticores or any other artillery.  

[Feral_80]

AM artillery (as all AM long-range fire) is *already* pointless, de facto.

 

The current proliferation and abuse of -1 hit modifiers, especially with certain codexes, has profoundly affected the game balance and is easily the worst idea GW had this edition. Its immediate result is that traditional builds for BS 4+ armies like Guard are pretty much screwed against some opponents. Which forces any balanced Guard list to focus on short-range, mobile fire only.

 

This is the current state of the game, like it or not. I, for one, like a dynamic game that discourages static play, but certainly I do not like at all to see that traditional Guard (and other similar) armies and collections are nearly unplayable in any competitive (which does *not* mean tournament, just a sane, challenging match) environment. This -1 thing has already gone wild, and I'm afraid it will only get worse.

 

And, most of the psychotic criticisms I've read in the past pages just make no sense, of course, but that's another story 

[Finkmilkana]

Yeah, -1 to hit on whole armies is bad for balance.

It means that currently gunline guard is bad against them, but too good against armies without -1 to hit. It means you cannot nerf guard without making them completely underpowered against certain lists, while on the other hand guard as it currently is is very strong against other lists like classic space marine lists.

This results in marine complaining gunline guard is too strong while gunline guard players lately often feel they are already too weak when playing -1 to hit armies. Marines with their good BS with rerolls on the other hand do not feel the effect of -1 to hit as strongly and don’t complain as much about the armies guard struggles against. It’s Rock Paper Scissors of the worst kind and I actually don’t see how it can be balance without someone feeling they are being treated unfairly.

[Melete]

AM artillery (as all AM long-range fire) is *already* pointless, de facto.

 

The current proliferation and abuse of -1 hit modifiers, especially with certain codexes, has profoundly affected the game balance and is easily the worst idea GW had this edition. Its immediate result is that traditional builds for BS 4+ armies like Guard are pretty much screwed against some opponents. Which forces any balanced Guard list to focus on short-range, mobile fire only.

 

This is the current state of the game, like it or not. I, for one, like a dynamic game that discourages static play, but certainly I do not like at all to see that traditional Guard (and other similar) armies and collections are nearly unplayable in any competitive (which does *not* mean tournament, just a sane, challenging match) environment. This -1 thing has already gone wild, and I'm afraid it will only get worse.

 

And, most of the psychotic criticisms I've read in the past pages just make no sense, of course, but that's another story 

Whoa. Alaitoc/Ynarri lists are indeed quite strong. Kronos and Alpha Legion are solid. And I don't like the proliferation of -1 mechanics at all.

 

But I wouldn't go so far as to say Guard lists are unplayable! Guard are a solid top tier faction, perhaps a bit weaker than Eldar right now but still very much in competition. I think we'll see some Guard flavored lists - perhaps a mostly "pure" AM list, perhaps with Celestine, or perhaps with Hive Tyrant spam - perform quite well at the LVO. 

[Claws and Effect]

At least the Raven Guard and Alpha Legion -1 Is only on some units. Namely infantry, dreads, and bikes. Perfectly thematic for a stealthy chapter. Hard to hit things you can't see, and it's hard to hide a tank.

 

Alaitoc getting it on everything is a bit much.

 

I would rather have seen Raven Guard at least get some kind of bonus for jump pack units, but that's a different topic altogether.

[Claws and Effect]

Honestly, if Orders required a roll again I'd consider the matter resolved.

 

A lot of factions lost baked in special rules and had them turned into Strategems. Guard not only kept theirs, but had it improved by making Orders autopass where they used to require a roll.

 

If they went back to needing a roll and an autopass strategem was introduced, my issue with Infantry squads would go away.

 

The double firing tanks should be looked at too. Either make it cost something or let them do it and not fire next turn.

 

Aggressors can fire twice if they don't move, but that's mitigated by the fact that they usually only get to do it once before they get pasted. No one wants to eat 84 bolter shots more than once.

[Firepower]

I can't help but feel that, while IG do have a few advantages that should be reigned in, a great deal of the problem is that Marines really just aren't all that great.  I think someone mentioned before that fielding a 'fluffy' Marine army and fielding a 'fluffy' IG army produce two wildly different results.  I'd have to say this is accurate.  Marines have to build very specifically to land in the higher tier zone, and a great deal of those units I simply have no interest in using because they don't feel right for my Templars (and Guilliman can go hang).  

 

Unless I were to take very specific units and use very specific strategies, I pretty much can't deal out enough wounds to deal with an effective horde.  Armies like IG can bring not only hordes but back them up with ruthless tanks.  I love my LRC, but it costs so much and can be locked so easily in a loop that I'm better off buying a bunch of Aggressors or something like that for the anti-infantry dakka.  I love my stabby Crusaders, but I'd be vastly better off doing like other SM armies and using minimal scout squads (which I will never use) to help fill out formations for more CP.  

 

I dunno, I think I'm just kinda rambling at this point.  The general jist is that despite having one of the widest ranges of models to take, to keep up with the meta we're left with a handful of remotely effective choices, whereas I and many other SM players have built armies for what feels right, rather than what plays well...or something.  I dunno, I've lost track of where I was going :P

 

tl;dr IG aren't OP, Marines are UP

[totgeboren]

Heh, during previous editions when discussion on the save mechanism came up, there were always lots of people who argued that cover and such should give a minus to hit. I always argued against, since it basically impossible to balance when some armies hit on 5+ (so -1 reduces their firepower by half) and some hit on 3+ (so -1 reduces their firepower bu 25%). Somehow getting a -2 or more essentially breaks the game.

 

Added resilience from being hard to hit needs to be resolved by T boost or Save boosts (and this applies to all those -1 to hit abilites the lots of armies have too!).

 

So, give indirect fire a special rule: "Take Cover!: If a unit is hit by indirect fire and the attacking unit does not have LOS to them, they gain a +2 save bonus if they are in cover, and a +1 save bonus if the are in the open". Or something like that. they could get to ignore wounds suffered on a 5+ like FnP.