Iron Hands nerf?

[tychobi]

So the consensus seems to be that Iron Hands are top tier and possibly overpowered(unproven). It is possible that a rules change by GW could result in nerfs. What do you think might be reasonable possible changes they might make? Are changes necessary? If no changes come is that a signal of power creep to come?

My personal opinion is that a small change is coming and will pull back on stacking defensive abilities in some way. It should be noted that my ability to predict GW rules changes is poor

[WarriorFish]

I don't think Internet consensus is much to go by generally, never mind for what GW does (or doesn't). Otherwise Eldar would have been beaten with the nerf stick years ago ;)

[Iron Father Ferrum]

The only thing that is giving the meta heartburn are Leviathan Dreadnoughts. The combination of stats, strats, relic, and repairs makes them the single most durable unit in the game.

 

If there are any nerfs, I forsee them targeting Leviathans. However, I also don't think it's necessary. Leviathans, even with CCWs, don't generally fare well when swarmed by infantry and can be wrapped up reasonably easily and thus neutralized. But people don't want to plan tactically these days.

[BluejayJunior]

Agreed. I've seen a lot of mathhammer, theory crafting about Leviathans and such, but I'm not sure what the effect on the game it has actually had yet. GW will definitely let things play out a little to see if it's a real problem for the game or just a lot of noise over nothing. If anything does come, it will likely have to do with stacking effects, especially damage dealing ones. 

[tychobi]

I don't think Internet consensus is much to go by generally, never mind for what GW does (or doesn't). Otherwise Eldar would have been beaten with the nerf stick years ago ;)

Yannari are have been nerfed time and time again and are now a sad shadow if their former selves. The response time on "broken" builds and units has never been swifter. I feel that your example works in favor of considering my questions.

[Warmachine90]

Edith: Nah, forget it ^^

[Lord_Caerolion]

We'll maybe see the Ironstone changed to affecting a single unit within 6", or something. Even ignoring Leviathans, the Ironstone is really being pushed in Iron Hands lists, from what I've seen.

[Rodrick]

after playing a few games,  i dont think IH are overpower, they are good, like top tier, like eldari, drukhari, imperial guard.

 

and some builds like triple repulsor exec  or leviathan are very powerful, but again, powerful , not game breaking, the meta will adjust.

[MajorNese]

Triple leviathan lists were already a thing long before supplements were even rumored.

Back in the day, those were just clustered around Girlyman, and it worked out just as well.

 

The only nerf I'd expect would be how Ironstone and Duty Eternal interact, as it makes dreads exponentially survivable against dedicated AT. Loads of exponential buffs ruined 7th edition, which is why GW (understandably) intends a linear effect of buffs these days.

 

On everything else, the meta will adjust. Fists are (if rumors turn out to be true) a hard counter for the Ironstone, doing the exact opposite but army wide, not just around a relic bearer, screwing over the typical mech-heavy IH lists more than the other way around.

Remember, an army is only the most powerful/"broken" when rules are first out, and other factions' are not yet. While Ironstone/Duty Eternal levis are certainly a hardcore combo, everything else is manageable.

[Galron]

I see Iron Stone getting changed to effect one vehicle. Iron Father being increased in points, and the strat that reduces damage by half being switched to once per game.

[MeltaRange]

The Ironstone is too powerful.  I could see it becoming "use at beginning of battle round, lasts for that battle round, one use only" type of thing.  That would make it still extremely good without being utterly ridiculous.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

I see Iron Stone getting changed to effect one vehicle. Iron Father being increased in points, and the strat that reduces damage by half being switched to once per game.

That's a terrible idea. It sounds good when you're talking about the Leviathan or even Contemptor, but what about boxnaughts? Then it becomes a useless strat.

[Kallas]

 

I see Iron Stone getting changed to effect one vehicle. Iron Father being increased in points, and the strat that reduces damage by half being switched to once per game.

That's a terrible idea. It sounds good when you're talking about the Leviathan or even Contemptor, but what about boxnaughts? Then it becomes a useless strat.

 

And changing Duty Eternal would needlessly punish every other Chapter.

[MajorNese]

Just prevent the two from stacking, and everything's golden.

 

Every single C:SM chapters has access to half-damage levis already, so that's not the issue. The Ironstone in itself is not an issue, since it's always equal (or worse) compared to Duty Eternal, and IF do the exact opposite army wide.

Just both stacking on a levi is creating an obvious hard combo...

[Iron Father Ferrum]

...that's easily sidestepped any number of ways. Double-stormcannon Levi's are anemic in melee, so wrap them up with infantry and they're out of the game. Play to objectives. It has a comparatively short range and no real mobility tricks so it's also not difficult to outmaneuver or hide from.

[Kallas]

Double-stormcannon Levi's are anemic in melee, so wrap them up with infantry and they're out of the game. Play to objectives. 

 

Well, that's very much in a vacuum. A Leviathan, Feirros and a Lieutenant costs about 500pts; there's still 1250/1500pts left in a list, which can quite happily accommodate screening infantry (and IH Intercessors are very solid).

 

It has a comparatively short range and no real mobility tricks so it's also not difficult to outmaneuver or hide from.

 

Some value to this point, but the Storm Cannon is 24" plus an 8" base move. That's not actually as slow as many would suggest, and while LoS can be an issue, a Leviathan stomping into the centre of the table isn't something that's easy to just ignore and dance around. More than likely, it's deleting a unit or two a turn on its own.

[MegaVolt87]

Eh, they recently removed whirlwind keyword from the scorpius for the sgt chronos synergy etc. Hopefully we just see FW dreads not working with some strats/ relics as the nerf over points increases etc. Also remember the OG FW units adjustment precedent- FW predators don't work with the kill shot stratagem. Anything else would be needlessly malicious, IH would catch a lot of flack for a universal levi dread points increase in the next CA. 

[Iron Father Ferrum]

That nerf had nothing to do with Chronos, it was made so you can't use the Suppression Fire stratagem on it. Shooting twice is fine, but three times is apparently too much.

[Morticon]

That nerf had nothing to do with Chronos, it was made so you can't use the Suppression Fire stratagem on it. Shooting twice is fine, but three times is apparently too much.

 

Irony for me is that I wouldnt play the Scorp without the Whirlwind keyword on account of its cost, but its utility with the strats would edge it to the "worthwhile" category for me. It's been sitting on my shelf since start of 8th and its horrid 215 point cost. 

[Aothaine]

But people don't want to plan tactically these days.

 

This is pretty much my opinion so far regarding most knee-jerk reactions to new content. Let it play out. IH are strong for sure. But they have weaknesses. It almost feels like GW is trying to prevent "All-comers" lists. Which is a good thing imho as it will really mix the meta up and make people want to buy different models in their range vs. the old method of "only only want to buy this unit".

[MegaVolt87]

 

But people don't want to plan tactically these days.

 

This is pretty much my opinion so far regarding most knee-jerk reactions to new content. Let it play out. IH are strong for sure. But they have weaknesses. It almost feels like GW is trying to prevent "All-comers" lists. Which is a good thing imho as it will really mix the meta up and make people want to buy different models in their range vs. the old method of "only only want to buy this unit".

 

 

Don't you mean trying to avoid best in slot choices/ auto include units? I always interpreted "all-comers" as not list tailoring, where you could take a balanced list and have a chance to win regardless of opponent. 

[Aothaine]

 

 

Don't you mean trying to avoid best in slot choices/ auto include units?

 

That is exactly what I meant. Sorry if I worded it poorly.

 

 

 

 

I always interpreted "all-comers" as not list tailoring, where you could take a balanced list and have a chance to win regardless of opponent. 

I suppose it depends. All-comers lists are very tailored. You want to have something to counter what ever any opponent can bring. I would say that all-comers lists are actually better than specialized lists in most instances. Usually in those lists you also choose only the best units that can cover multiple roles. They go hand-in-hand in my mind.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

TAAC lists attempt to cover every base; the result being of course that while they can do everything, they can't do any of it well, so skew lists tend to run over them. The problem with skew lists is that they're deliberately built to counter one or two popular strategies so if they don't run into them, they tend to struggle. If you run a bazillion lascannons because you're expecting Knights, an all-infantry skew is going to give a rough rogering.

[Aothaine]

Fair point. A TAAC list can still pull the win out by focusing on objectives and protecting the elements that counter the army they are facing with greater ease though.

[Happy-inquisitor]

The Iron Hands FAQ has been held back by GW for some reason and is a week overdue. I am concerned that they will react to the community response to IH with something of a knee-jerk nerf. I do think Iron Hands are very top tier right now but not for the reasons or with the units that are most commonly mentioned in the online community so a rapid nerf now would quite likely be targeting the wrong things anyway.

 

Despite being on the receiving end of IH in-game power i would much rather let it play out for a couple of months and see where/if a nerf needs to be applied than have GW respond to the internet hate directed their way.