BA & The Big FAQ 2!

[Quixus]

As far as how I feel about the change to fly it just goes back to needing a well rounded army.

What is a well rounded army? An army that has melee, ranged and psyker elements? Or an army that can deal with all sorts of armies? At least one of the first elements is unnecessary to create an army of the second type.

[Panzer]

I will say army wide -1 to hit on an entire Eldar Army is really too strong. As of now Ork's cant even shoot some of them. I suspect we will see some tweaking/changes.

 

As far as how I feel about the change to fly it just goes back to needing a well rounded army.

 

Not sure what you mean with well rounded army either. Nothing about FLY was preventing that. All the change does is to nerf melee units with FLY ... which are basically all our melee units. In fact this promotes a less well rounded army because melee was already struggling as is.

And yes army-wide -1 to-hit is too strong and should go, that's out of question. I just don't see it happening in the CA. Also Orks get the ability to automatically hit on 6s with their Codex.

[brother_b]

I don't think I agree. When tournament player make aware of a big problem within the core rules then it should get changed. However GW often changes core rules when it's actually an army specific problem that needs to get fixed and THAT is the wrong approach.

Really what core mechanic was so broken that we needed to see such sweeping changes? First turn plasma drop troops? Not CC troops that's for sure.

 

Is my 4th Onager over powered but 9 Leman russes or 9 demon princes are not?

 

That's the result we got from tournament fixes.

[The Unseen]

This FAQ was mostly a garbage fire. Only 2 good things they actually did was nerf CP regen, but still nothing stopping ridiculous CP batteries from allies, and at least they made the "no dropping in opponents face turn 1" thing apply to everyone, since the "sneaky" ways of getting close are now free moves. But GW drops yet more nerfs onto melee armies, and continues to somehow find ways to buff screening units/hordes at the same time. Ohh no, a marine captain did a thing, can't have that. Only shooting units can kill stuff hiding behind a thin wall of guardsmen, silly flying superman. /S

 

Why even bother trying to play a melee unit that isn't a giant stompy robot when it's clear GW will make sure it never stays viable, unless its a horde unit.

[PaladinStormlord]

With these rules changes, I feel gun lines continue to get stronger, while assault armies are being weakened. I love my DC, and now no longer being able to leap over a unit on the charge to encircle them hurts! Before I could at least hope that my DC could get two turns of use if I positioned them correctly, preventing the enemy from falling out of combat and the long guns clearing them away. Now they are a guaranteed one and done unit, and I can't even get them to their prime target with the screens. The change to CP farm is much needed, and probably should of been push further. I felt the change in CP cost to one of our best stragems was completely fair. I can't think of a RANGED BA unit that out shines that same unit in a different legion.

[Panzer]

 

I don't think I agree. When tournament player make aware of a big problem within the core rules then it should get changed. However GW often changes core rules when it's actually an army specific problem that needs to get fixed and THAT is the wrong approach.

Really what core mechanic was so broken that we needed to see such sweeping changes? First turn plasma drop troops? Not CC troops that's for sure.

 

Is my 4th Onager over powered but 9 Leman russes or 9 demon princes are not?

 

That's the result we got from tournament fixes.

 

 

You are misunderstanding me. I didn't say these changes are good. I just disagreed with you saying changing core rules based on tournament experiences is wrong in general. You even quoted the relevant part to these rules but let me quote myself again:

 

However GW often changes core rules when it's actually an army specific problem that needs to get fixed and THAT is the wrong approach.

[brother_b]

No i understood you panzer I just disagree.

 

Maybe disagree is not the right word as we are both in agreement that sweeping changes based on tournaments are wrong.

 

You point to the specific army problems, I'm not even comfortable changing specific armies based merely on tournament feedback.

 

What kind of feedback is appropriate? I think tournament, club players, regular feedback received through an online form, anything like that. The meta-data from all players should be considered.

 

And maybe they are receiving feedback from all sources. I do find it a little improbable as armies like close combat oriented have been hit harder than the already powerful shooting armies.

[Panzer]

No i understood you panzer I just disagree.

 

Maybe disagree is not the right word as we are both in agreement that sweeping changes based on tournaments are wrong.

 

You point to the specific army problems, I'm not even comfortable changing specific armies based merely on tournament feedback.

 

What kind of feedback is appropriate? I think tournament, club players, regular feedback received through an online form, anything like that. The meta-data from all players should be considered.

 

And maybe they are receiving feedback from all sources. I do find it a little improbable as armies like close combat oriented have been hit harder than the already powerful shooting armies.

 

Feedback from non-tournament sources gets considered as well. That's what they have the email account for. I don't know about you but there are plenty people who mail them regularly, especially after each FAQ/Errata release.

[Dont-Be-Haten]

Before you could focus strictly on melee centric armies with the ability to jump over chafe.

 

Well rounded is more like an all comers list. Lists that can play to the entirety of the board etc.

[brother_b]

I will say army wide -1 to hit on an entire Eldar Army is really too strong. As of now Ork's cant even shoot some of them. I suspect we will see some tweaking/changes.

 

As far as how I feel about the change to fly it just goes back to needing a well rounded army.

Orks are getting dakka dakka ability which looks pretty strong. It will counter the ability to stack negatives.

 

They should have considered limiting the amongtbif - modifiers while designing the codexes codicies? Originally. Either that or 6 always hits. Oh well.

[Diagramdude]

Wanted to raise two points.

 

1. On its face FAQ2 nerfed BA pretty hard. However on reflection deep strike and infiltrate have been nerfed so hard that BA now reign supreme in turn one assault power. UWOF and Forlorn Fury can deliver two reliable hard hitting punches turn 1. Not that many other armies can do that. Plus opponents are less likely to run scouts or other deep strike denial now that deep strike is confined to turn 2 and later. So there will be less zoning defence against a BA turn 1 assault.

 

2. In the tournament meta a lot of players were running a BA battalion along with Guard. Usually two slam caps and 15 scouts. Pre FAQ2 it was mandatory to take the CP miner guard warlord. Now that CP farm has been nerfed so hard, I have had success running one of the BA smash captains as warlord. This means I can choose between artisan of war and gift of foresight game by game, and for a total of 3 CP i get two death visions. Angels wing and hammer of baal. It used to be 5CP for two death visions and angels wing + Veritas Vitae. The 4D hammer is so brutal against so many things and now that the Grand Strategist warlord is obsolete the BA warlords may see much more play.

[Morticon]

can someone paste the wording of the new jump pack/fly rules- i seem to have missed it.  

If we can no longer charge over intervening models/terrain, we've been heavily, heavily neutered. 

[Dont-Be-Haten]

can someone paste the wording of the new jump pack/fly rules- i seem to have missed it.  

 

If we can no longer charge over intervening models/terrain, we've been heavily, heavily neutered. 

By your request my liege.

 

ERRATA Page 177 – Moving Change the second paragraph to read: ‘If the datasheet for a model says it can Fly, then during the Movement phase it can move across models and terrain as if they were not there.’

 

It's very unfortunate.

[Morticon]

Why?! Why on earth would they do that?! :/

[Morticon]

Follow up question- who do we write to for feedback? 

Anyone have an email? Thanks. 

[Panzer]

Follow up question- who do we write to for feedback? 

 

Anyone have an email? Thanks. 

 

40kFAQ@gwplc.com

[Arkhanist]

Losing the ability to move over blocking units in the charge phase (and much harder to tri-lock) sucks really hard though. Now we know how they decided to restrain Slamguinius, just nerf all flying assault units.

 

Morticon: GW created a specific inbox just for feedback on rules that they theoretically factor in when writing the FAQ changes: 40kfaq@gwplc.com

 

edit: hah, ninja'd.

[lash144]

Wanted to raise two points.

 

1. On its face FAQ2 nerfed BA pretty hard. However on reflection deep strike and infiltrate have been nerfed so hard that BA now reign supreme in turn one assault power. UWOF and Forlorn Fury can deliver two reliable hard hitting punches turn 1. Not that many other armies can do that. Plus opponents are less likely to run scouts or other deep strike denial now that deep strike is confined to turn 2 and later. So there will be less zoning defence against a BA turn 1 assault.

 

2. In the tournament meta a lot of players were running a BA battalion along with Guard. Usually two slam caps and 15 scouts. Pre FAQ2 it was mandatory to take the CP miner guard warlord. [...]

1. Problem is the nerf to how fly only really works in the movement phase now. You can't jump over screens anymore... That's means: While we still can charge T1 (for some 2-6 CP) we can't hop over their screens anymore. So we would be investing many points for charging their GEQ screen...

 

2. Totally agreed. D4 dmg is just brutal against big units, especially if you consider things like a good roll on Red Rampage and the ability to swing twice for 3CP.

[Charlo]

FLY as a rule has been treated so heavily handed, it doesn't make sense narratively, let alone crunch-ily.

 

My only thought is that GW saw the whole Tri-locking thing and figured it was an unintended trick that was maybe a bit too complex? A "gotcha" moment that the opponent can't do anything about?

 

I don't agree but it's the kind of thinking they sometimes have on these matters.

 

 

Wanted to raise two points.

1. On its face FAQ2 nerfed BA pretty hard. However on reflection deep strike and infiltrate have been nerfed so hard that BA now reign supreme in turn one assault power. UWOF and Forlorn Fury can deliver two reliable hard hitting punches turn 1. Not that many other armies can do that. Plus opponents are less likely to run scouts or other deep strike denial now that deep strike is confined to turn 2 and later. So there will be less zoning defence against a BA turn 1 assault.

2. In the tournament meta a lot of players were running a BA battalion along with Guard. Usually two slam caps and 15 scouts. Pre FAQ2 it was mandatory to take the CP miner guard warlord. Now that CP farm has been nerfed so hard, I have had success running one of the BA smash captains as warlord. This means I can choose between artisan of war and gift of foresight game by game, and for a total of 3 CP i get two death visions. Angels wing and hammer of baal. It used to be 5CP for two death visions and angels wing + Veritas Vitae. The 4D hammer is so brutal against so many things and now that the Grand Strategist warlord is obsolete the BA warlords may see much more play.

 

Some excellent points, and very "meta". Maybe some line-breaker BA will be in a good position?

 

My only worry is that Chaff wasn't taken purely to screen, it's taken because its cheap, effective, can hold objectives, gives board control etc while there may well be a small reduction, where chaff is so effective in 8th ed I don't think we'll see a huge meta-shift away from it.

 

Oh, especially with THE LADZ on the horizon.

[Panzer]

The problem with Forlorn Fury after these changes is that if you use it they won't be in your deployment zone anymore so the Prepared Positions Stratagem won't give them free Cover. That means while they're also prime target due being fast and choppy, everything else is also more tanky so it makes even more sense to focus on them first.

So it's really only an option if we go first, otherwise it's basically the same as throwing the Death Company away.

[lash144]

So did anyone have had some success after the FAQ? If yes what did you run?

[keeblerartillery]

I did yes - I had two games last weekend and won both. Granted, they weren't against the most competitive lists (death guard and tau/SM combo) but I didn't find anything to be game breaking. Frankly, I used some old advice of Morts and didn't try and T1 charge but rather held back (except for a cpt slam charge on Mortarian). I used multi-charges to my advantage, a solid firebase to backup my sang guard and vanvets, and scout bikes and inceptors to clear chaff.

[Dont-Be-Haten]

The problem with Forlorn Fury after these changes is that if you use it they won't be in your deployment zone anymore so the Prepared Positions Stratagem won't give them free Cover. That means while they're also prime target due being fast and choppy, everything else is also more tanky so it makes even more sense to focus on them first.

So it's really only an option if we go first, otherwise it's basically the same as throwing the Death Company away.

You just advance them into cover so they have a 2+ save if you don't go first/opponent seizes. It's basically a free 13-18" movement that ignores vertical distance and can hop over units.

[Panzer]

 

The problem with Forlorn Fury after these changes is that if you use it they won't be in your deployment zone anymore so the Prepared Positions Stratagem won't give them free Cover. That means while they're also prime target due being fast and choppy, everything else is also more tanky so it makes even more sense to focus on them first.

So it's really only an option if we go first, otherwise it's basically the same as throwing the Death Company away.

You just advance them into cover so they have a 2+ save if you don't go first/opponent seizes. It's basically a free 13-18" movement that ignores vertical distance and can hop over units.

 

If possible, yes.

[lash144]

I did yes - I had two games last weekend and won both. Granted, they weren't against the most competitive lists (death guard and tau/SM combo) but I didn't find anything to be game breaking. Frankly, I used some old advice of Morts and didn't try and T1 charge but rather held back (except for a cpt slam charge on Mortarian). I used multi-charges to my advantage, a solid firebase to backup my sang guard and vanvets, and scout bikes and inceptors to clear chaff.

Glad to here this!

Who is this Morts you are talking about and where can I find his advice? (Still quite new to BA)