More Dakka! detachment had too much dakka and has been changed by GW

[Dr_Ruminahui]

As a surprise to pretty much nobody, the More Dakka! detachment released recently turned out to be too powerful and has been hit by a number of power reductions - see the Warhammer Community article here.

 

The biggest change (at least per the article itself) appears that it swapped universal Sustained Hits 2 in the shooting phase and Assault when in the Waagh for universal Assault and Sustained Hits 1 only during the Waugh.  Personally, while the detachment was definitely too powerful, the changes seem to be missing the point of the detachment and an over reaction as well.

Edited Wednesday at 08:20 PM by Dr_Ruminahui

[01RTB01]

I've no love for overpowered but they've really taken the baseball bat to the detachment.

 

Modding the strats and dropping to sustained 1 was fine. As it is, way too harsh.

 

Usual overreaction and it totally undermines what the detachment is supposed to be.

Edited Wednesday at 08:33 PM by 01RTB01

[HeadlessCross]

1 minute ago, 01RTB01 said:

I've no love for overpowered but they've really taken the baseball bat to the detachment.

 

Modding the strats and dropping to sustained 1 was fine. As it is, way too harsh.

 

Usual overreaction and it totally undermines what the detachment is supposed to be.

What exactly was an overreaction? Even a basic Sustained 1 as an army rule would've been stupid in relation to Ork shooting. 

[Orange Knight]

I think they've gone too far with the nerfs as the spirit and intent behind the detachment has been lost.

 

There must have been some middle ground they could have taken. 

49 minutes ago, HeadlessCross said:

What exactly was an overreaction? Even a basic Sustained 1 as an army rule would've been stupid in relation to Ork shooting. 

 

Maybe allow the rule as it was during a Waaagh

[01RTB01]

1 hour ago, HeadlessCross said:

What exactly was an overreaction? Even a basic Sustained 1 as an army rule would've been stupid in relation to Ork shooting. 

 

Thank you for your constructive criticism as per usual.

 

Sustained only being during the waaagh is quite poor. Sustained one would be fine. Considering through warhorde all melee gets sustained one all the time and they're much better at melee than shooting, I honestly don't see why they've restricted it to just during the waaagh. As such, I see it as an overreaction.

 

Feel free to disagree, you usually do.

[DemonGSides]

20 minutes ago, 01RTB01 said:

Sustained only being during the waaagh is quite poor. Sustained one would be fine. Considering through warhorde all melee gets sustained one all the time and they're much better at melee than shooting, I honestly don't see why they've restricted it to just during the waaagh. As such, I see it as an overreaction.

 

 

Sustained 2 is nutty in of itself and giving it to the vast majority of a faction was REALLY good. I think the best way to quick gut check if something is supremely overpowered is to ask "Would literally any army be salivating at having this rule?" and I can't think of a single army that wouldn't want that as a rule.  This is going to matter more towards what I point out at the end with regards to limiting the choices Ork players have.

 

Assault as an added rule is actually pretty powerful and not something to be cross about; I wish it was on Hammer of the Emperor for example.

 

Sustained 2 on Waaagh probably wasn't broken, but would be on certain units who already have a high volume of shots; the Tankbusta's that brought about this change being the main culprit, and capable of killing pretty much anything by sheer weight of fire, something that I'm pretty sure I've heard a lot of people say is an un-fun addition with the change to how to hit/to wound has changed over the years. 

 

I hadn't played against the runt-jail version of the list, but by all accounts it was massively un-fun to play against, so I think those nerfs are also fine and thematically warranted.

 

Consider this came with 0 points increases, and very little strategem nerfs, and makes the choices for the detatchment more meaningful (You were pretty much, almost always, slamming "Get stuck in ladz" on repeat every single turn), I think this is going to be a solid nerf overall and allow multiple Ork detatchments to exist, as opposed to "Why would you ever play anything other than More Dakka if you have more than 2 infantry or walker units?"

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 10:07 PM by DemonGSides

[HeadlessCross]

1 minute ago, 01RTB01 said:

 

Thank you for your constructive criticism as per usual.

 

Sustained only being during the waaagh is quite poor. Sustained one would be fine. Considering through warhorde all melee gets sustained one all the time and they're much better at melee than shooting, I honestly don't see why they've restricted it to just during the waaagh. As such, I see it as an overreaction.

 

Feel free to disagree, you usually do.

Melee is a lot harder to get offensive output for vs shooting, this is not a new concept. This is why melee buffs are less frowned upon as buffs or army rules vs shooting. 

 

Orks are priced to move for their shooting units as though they will be BS5+, and it's super effective shooting despite not gaining many shooting buffs as an army. What Sustained 1 does is essentially treat them as +1 to hit, but with a greater damage ceiling. This should be obviously too strong on their infantry shooting, which has an absurd quantity to it for the price. 

37 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

Maybe allow the rule as it was during a Waaagh

Which would basically be +2 to their hit roll but with a greater damage ceiling. Absolutely bad idea. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

They should have just cut it to sustained 1, and left it at that.

[01RTB01]

11 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Sustained 2 is nutty in of itself and giving it to the vast majority of a faction was REALLY good. I think the best way to quick gut check if something is supremely overpowered is to ask "Would literally any army be salivating at having this rule?" and I can't think of a single army that wouldn't want that as a rule.  This is going to matter more towards what I point out at the end with regards to limiting the choices Ork players have.

 

Assault as an added rule is actually pretty powerful and not something to be cross about; I wish it was on Hammer of the Emperor for example.

 

Sustained 2 on Waaagh probably wasn't broken, but would be on certain units who already have a high volume of shots; the Tankbusta's that brought about this change being the main culprit, and capable of killing pretty much anything by sheer weight of fire, something that I'm pretty sure I've heard a lot of people say is an un-fun addition with the change to how to hit/to wound has changed over the years. 

 

I hadn't played against the runt-jail version of the list, but by all accounts it was massively un-fun to play against, so I think those nerfs are also fine and thematically warranted.

 

Consider this came with 0 points increases, and very little strategem nerfs, and makes the choices for the detatchment more meaningful (You were pretty much, almost always, slamming "Get stuck in ladz" on repeat every single turn), I think this is going to be a solid nerf overall and allow multiple Ork detatchments to exist, as opposed to "Why would you ever play anything other than More Dakka if you have more than 2 infantry or walker units?"

 

 

I don't disagree on sustained 2. That was too much. Sustained one would have been fine considering most ork shooting is hitting on 5s/6s. Most other armies are hitting on 3s/4s by comparison.

 

Get stuck in ladz definitely needed the CP increase and removal from grots.

 

I also agree there needs to be competition between the detachments. However, kult of speed has been awful from the start and continues to be. 

[DemonGSides]

1 hour ago, 01RTB01 said:

However, kult of speed has been awful from the start and continues to be. 

 

Sure but that's a whole different problem.

Assault as normal (Get into range of the fight quicker), then pop waagh to go crazy and pull the trigger harder is more thematic as well, with regards to the ordering of the rules.  Overall makes more sense, at least to me.

[Cenobite Terminator]

This is typical for the design team, they pretty much always overreact when handing out the nerfhammer. It wouldn’t surprise me if they have someone dedicated in the design team that does this sort of thing.

[HeadlessCross]

3 hours ago, Cenobite Terminator said:

This is typical for the design team, they pretty much always overreact when handing out the nerfhammer. It wouldn’t surprise me if they have someone dedicated in the design team that does this sort of thing.

Except it wasn't an overreaction, it was one of the few times multiple nerfs were necessary. Don't forget that no unit cost went up either, which is MAJOR for still keeping units viable here and other detachments. 

[HeadlessCross]

4 hours ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Sure but that's a whole different problem.

Assault as normal (Get into range of the fight quicker), then pop waagh to go crazy and pull the trigger harder is more thematic as well, with regards to the ordering of the rules.  Overall makes more sense, at least to me.

Exactly, Kult of Speed has several other issues that have nothing to do with how ridiculously strong this detachment was. 

[Orange Knight]

Could have done it so it only affected Shootas, and it gave them sustained hits 1.

 

That would have been thematic, and still a compelling enough rule.

[prava]

11 hours ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Sustained 2 is nutty in of itself and giving it to the vast majority of a faction was REALLY good. I think the best way to quick gut check if something is supremely overpowered is to ask "Would literally any army be salivating at having this rule?" and I can't think of a single army that wouldn't want that as a rule.  This is going to matter more towards what I point out at the end with regards to limiting the choices Ork players have.

 

Assault as an added rule is actually pretty powerful and not something to be cross about; I wish it was on Hammer of the Emperor for example.

 

Sustained 2 on Waaagh probably wasn't broken, but would be on certain units who already have a high volume of shots; the Tankbusta's that brought about this change being the main culprit, and capable of killing pretty much anything by sheer weight of fire, something that I'm pretty sure I've heard a lot of people say is an un-fun addition with the change to how to hit/to wound has changed over the years. 

 

I hadn't played against the runt-jail version of the list, but by all accounts it was massively un-fun to play against, so I think those nerfs are also fine and thematically warranted.

 

Consider this came with 0 points increases, and very little strategem nerfs, and makes the choices for the detatchment more meaningful (You were pretty much, almost always, slamming "Get stuck in ladz" on repeat every single turn), I think this is going to be a solid nerf overall and allow multiple Ork detatchments to exist, as opposed to "Why would you ever play anything other than More Dakka if you have more than 2 infantry or walker units?"

 

 

 

Sustained 2 on Orks is much more valuable than in any other army. By a mile.

[irlLordy]

I believe they previously said that they were doing more modelling on expected damage output and resilience for units and rules to avoid this type of overpowered stuff feom being released in the future. In that case, I wonder what happened here, were the models wrong or do they only do it for detachment?

 

Similarly what was the environment they were testing in before release? A lot of broken stuff got released at the end of 9th because they were playtested against prenerfed versions of really strong codexes. I wonder if this a sign of internally ramping up the power levels? (although to be fair, I dont think the other detachments released were that overpowered)

[crimsondave]

2 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

Could have done it so it only affected Shootas, and it gave them sustained hits 1.

 

That would have been thematic, and still a compelling enough rule.

It’s all about the math hammer.  Theme is out the window.

[phandaal]

39 minutes ago, irlLordy said:

I believe they previously said that they were doing more modelling on expected damage output and resilience for units and rules to avoid this type of overpowered stuff feom being released in the future. In that case, I wonder what happened here, were the models wrong or do they only do it for detachment?

 

Similarly what was the environment they were testing in before release? A lot of broken stuff got released at the end of 9th because they were playtested against prenerfed versions of really strong codexes. I wonder if this a sign of internally ramping up the power levels? (although to be fair, I dont think the other detachments released were that overpowered)

 

Pretty sure there is no baseline points value for anything in 40k. i.e., a basic one wound, single melee attack model with 6" move and a 6+ everything, and each additional benefit (another attack, more wounds, a gun etc) adds value to that model. Each drawback (slower move, 7+ save etc) gives a discount. Then you build the points based on that.

 

With a system like that, the rules team would calculate the value of multiplying a unit's firepower and compare to other detachments' value to make sure it is in line. There are more layers with things like strategems, but that is still doable with comparisons and averages.

 

That is probably not happening, because unit points values go up or down based on the balance team's judgement of what is used too much, not enough, whatever. And certainly not doable when most gear has no intrinsic points value anymore.

 

Under the existing model, it is not possible for them to accurately gauge power without brute force playing it against as many things as possible. Especially difficult now when they gave their outside testers the boot due to leaks. That does lead to the question of why some things that should never pass even a basic smell test make it live, but that is a different topic.

[Rain]

1 hour ago, phandaal said:

Under the existing model, it is not possible for them to accurately gauge power without brute force playing it against as many things as possible. Especially difficult now when they gave their outside testers the boot due to leaks. That does lead to the question of why some things that should never pass even a basic smell test make it live, but that is a different topic.

That’s the real head scratcher. Sustained 2 on a BS 5+ unit doubled their expected output of hits. It’s an absolutely nutty buff to just give out for free by choosing a detachment, and it really shouldn’t require playtesting to see that.

[HeadlessCross]

6 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

Could have done it so it only affected Shootas, and it gave them sustained hits 1.

 

That would have been thematic, and still a compelling enough rule.

I don't understand what you mean. You mean that the army rule being just Sustained 1 to Shootas would be a compelling army rule?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

6 hours ago, prava said:

 

Sustained 2 on Orks is much more valuable than in any other army. By a mile.

It’s more helpful, but less powerful.

 

if you’re hitting on 4+ you’re naturally getting more hits and every 6 at that point just makes your shooting better.

 

It would be flat out a better boost to any army with better shooting 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Yes, its good for any army that shoots (so, most armies).  It is not equally good for all armies.

 

Most importantly, its a bigger boost for low BS, as it gives the greater improvement to their shooting.  So, with BS 5+, half your hits trigger it.  So, for example, on a statistically average 6 dice, you are going from 2 hits to 4 hits - a 100% increase in your effective firepower.  On the other end of the spectrum, with BS 2+, on a statistically average 6 dice, you are going from 5 hits to 7 - a 40% increase in effective firepower.  Which is still good, but not as impactful.

 

Its also better for armies with rerolls - especially "reroll all hits" - which is what makes it so potent on lootas.  For them, with BS 5+, on a statistically average 6 dice, you go from 3.33 hits after rerolls to 6 hits (though only if you don't reroll the 5 that hit but didn't crit - if you do, you drop to 5.5 hits).  Outside of lootas, though, orks don't have much in the way of rerolls, so this isn't a huge factor for them.

 

It is then better if you can apply it to a weapon that matters - I don't think anyone thought the imbalance of More Dakka came from applying it to things like sluggas and shootas.  Rather, it came from things like tank busta rockets and (to a lesser extent) lootas, who have a decent combination of shots, strength and damage.

 

So, I think it is more than fair to say Sustained 2 is particularly potent for orks, especially given that the units that use it best are generally very competitive even without it.

Edited Thursday at 04:02 PM by Dr_Ruminahui

[HeadlessCross]

1 hour ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

It’s more helpful, but less powerful.

 

if you’re hitting on 4+ you’re naturally getting more hits and every 6 at that point just makes your shooting better.

 

It would be flat out a better boost to any army with better shooting 

It isn't less powerful. Each number for Sustained is basically a +1 to hit but with a grander damage ceiling. 

 

Just to help visualize it, imagine a weapon has 6 shots, but the user has BS6+. The average is 1 shot landed. Add Sustained 1, and it's now an average of 2 shots landed (or the equivalent of BS5+). Now you look at Sustained 2, and that's 3 shots landed average, or BS4+.

 

Now put those qualities on a unit that's already priced to be shooting at BS5+ but was already very effective at it to begin with. 

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

It’s more helpful, but less powerful.

 

if you’re hitting on 4+ you’re naturally getting more hits and every 6 at that point just makes your shooting better.

 

It would be flat out a better boost to any army with better shooting 

Sustained generates the same number of extra hits regardless of WS/BS, but the worse the WS/BS, the greater the proportional benefit, relative to not having Sustained at that WS/BS. So, if anything, it is “better” for units with a poor base skill. Unless by “better shooting” you mean higher Str/AP/dmg weapons in which case—sure, I guess.

 

Otherwise, I’m really not sure what you mean by it being “less powerful.” It generates the same purely cardinal number of additional hits, irrespective of the baseline hit value.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

23 hours ago, 01RTB01 said:

I've no love for overpowered but they've really taken the baseball bat to the detachment.

 

Modding the strats and dropping to sustained 1 was fine. As it is, way too harsh.

 

Usual overreaction and it totally undermines what the detachment is supposed to be.

Nobody can claim that he didn´t see this coming from a mile away.