|
Post by timcz on May 23, 2020 23:37:06 GMT
Really? FFS at least wait 12 hours before we completely over generalise about everything.
It could be they’re adding a global strat so that weapons like that do their max shots on 1CP. It may apply only when shooting 20+ models. Or you know what - it could be something completely different because we have absolutely zero effing idea currently.
|
|
|
Post by NidNoms on May 24, 2020 0:06:43 GMT
I think as 'nids players we have all showed hardiness in sticking with this faction for the past editions, the only way we can go is up and PA was a good start, combination of points drops and increases in CC strength can potentially lead to us taking a an alpha-strike route before being blown around but adversity can only invoke steadfastness and resilience, plus it will forever be fun to swarm the opponent with nids no matter the rules set against this. We live on , the hive mind will indefinitely adapt. Stay strong brothers ! yeah, after the 7th edition chrisis, we have seen the worst of getting screwed over
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on May 24, 2020 0:15:44 GMT
Its not like we have a whole lot of blast weapons ourselves, or that they also stated they are re-pointing everything due to their efficacy under the new rules or anything. But by all means do go on. Giga, think 1 step further, cmon ur better than that. If nids play marines who gains most from having blast weapons? The army that is less horde. Come on, which 1 is that? You've got 3 guesses to get this right Yes their points adjustments have always been so on point with the meta right? Like leaving the repulsor and intercessors as is? Or waiting i believe 2 CA to up the price on the Castellan remember that? Putting up the price of biovores so much theyre not even worth it most of the time and yet leaving the loyal 32 untouched and never ever touching mortar teams. But no, please, do go on. You literally know nothing more than was in that very bare bones article. Nothing. Save your tears for when you see actual rules and points costs. Or don't, whatever.
|
|
|
Post by Kyokii on May 24, 2020 0:33:57 GMT
Now now, gants. No need for everyone to shriek at the sky or one another about the upcoming nerfs. Being overly pessimistic will make anything- even a positive- look worse than it might be.
Doom and gloom isn't going to help, nor is blind optimism ignoring the past updates that have hammered nids from pretty good to, like, two builds. I'll be more realistic in stating that this update is not likely to suddenly make nids or even melee top dog, but I'm optimistic because gw wants to sell those melee primaris; that alone points toward melee being as if not more viable than it is right now. Be patient, temper expectations, and don't spill the salt. There just isn't enough information right now to draw major conclusions.
As an aside, I'm hoping for little tweaks. Expanding on what we know: tanks in melee can fire sponsors at the engaged enemy, but not the main gun- only able to use that on seperate, unengaged enemies. With cover I would like to see better bonuses Ala 5th edition where hard and soft cover had different modifiers. Gimme that +2 to save behind a wall for my carnifex that's 25% obscured. Or, at least, some simplified analog thst gw is likely going for.
|
|
|
Post by No One on May 24, 2020 1:44:17 GMT
This does legitimately make one of our main protection methods a lot weaker, depending on the type of vehicle and the number of shots (there are very few vehicles that have the ability to clear horde units shooting into combat, but the chip can be devastating as is), but what I didnt like was the Flamer change. Mind you, I think it's good for the Flamer, and should be as such (templates and blast markers were always meant to kill hordes, and it's just ironic that blast and flamers suddenly because single model DPS rather than horde clearers). I'm just not keen on the multitude of 2d3s, 3d6s, 4d6s, etc etc that some armies have when it comes to shooting infantry. Wanna bet the trigger is 11 or more models (because Imperium works in units of 5 or 10 infantry). Yeah, I think it's, on the whole, a decent change for the weapon roles. The problem is that nothing's been balanced around that idea, and points changes are not an effective balancer here. When you combine it with some extent of tank shooting into combat...role of horms is...? I think assuming it's a straight buff is...probably not the case. They basically just said it's changed (and that you can 'strike your enemies from all angles', but I don't see how that's different from current, especially since the 9" restriction is entirely Codex). I'm not expecting a nerf or anything, just maybe sideways and some tightening up of the rules that doesn't majorly effect balance, but makes it clearer that, say, disembarking isn't coming in from reserves... Honestly, if it changes so that fliers don't interact with the board outside of shooting/psychic, my GSC would be pretty happy. One of the worst rules that ever happened to tyranids was the true line of sight terrain rules. The day 5th edition dropped ever game I played since has been played on planet bowling ball. Oh sure, there's been terrain; but everything GW makes has more holes in it than a swiss cheese factory. Even large LoS blocking centerpieces are easy to play around. Heck, 8th edition cover rules were the worst. Any change to the terrain rules would be a huge benefit for nids. Yeah: ruins bottom floor blocks LoS is a pretty common houserule that makes a massive difference. It'd be nice to not have to clarify every game/TO whether that's happening or not. Expanding on what we know: tanks in melee can fire sponsors at the engaged enemy, but not the main gun- only able to use that on seperate, unengaged enemies. Except this is supposed to be 100% compatible with current Codex. Which, with a handful of sort-of exceptions (baneblades, russes, fire prisms etc), they don't have any differences defined between their guns. Except heavy/assault etc, but even 'sponsons' are often heavy, so...
|
|
|
Post by iniquity on May 24, 2020 2:04:55 GMT
I mean, can it actually get any worse?
|
|
|
Post by yolkyelk on May 24, 2020 2:17:03 GMT
From what I have seen I feel it would only make sense that hordes will be buffed in some way to justify big guns getting max hits. But then again I have not been in the hobby for too long and from what I hear from you guys GW does not sound very logical.
|
|
|
Post by No One on May 24, 2020 2:19:28 GMT
Yes. Very much yes: the rules so far and no other changes, we're a bit to a fair bit worse off. Will it? Hopefully not and there's other buffs in core rules and points tweaks across the boards balance things out. But don't hold your breath.
|
|
|
Post by draaen on May 24, 2020 4:19:54 GMT
As someone who is new to nids but has a couple other armies I'm excited to see the changes. Really want to see the full rules as the devil is always in the details. That and GW is often a little overzealous in selling the effectiveness of any strategy in previews!
Consolidating in and tagging a baneblade with 1 gaunt is a feel bad from the tank players perspective. If he was able to shoot that one gaunt and only that one gaunt, maybe at -1 or on 6's, seems reasonable tbh. I'm sure my opponents have not enjoyed having their tanks tri-pointed by my stealth suits and being stuck in combat with no chance of escape. Curious to see if the firing in combat rule applies to our big ranged bugs, but not getting my hopes up.
Also I am super excited for the primaris bikers for my white scars biker list.
|
|
|
Post by calbanite on May 24, 2020 5:02:58 GMT
We don't have a lot of blast weapons probably
Venom Cannons might turn into blast? D3 shot weapons get shots vs 5+ models and D6 get max shots against 10+ models possibly? Barbed Stranglers get sorta nasty IMO. A Tyrannocyte is pumping out 30 heavy bolter shots at BS4+ vs blobs.
The cynic in me is arguing about how they can't possibly make melee worse in 9th edition because they are releasing NEW MEHREEN MELEE BOIS so it would be totally not GW to make a new marine unit bad. At the same time I expect GW to poop on Xenos like they do in every cinematic.
|
|
|
Post by No One on May 24, 2020 5:12:05 GMT
The cynic in me is arguing about how they can't possibly make melee worse in 9th edition because they are releasing NEW MEHREEN MELEE BOIS so it would be totally not GW to make a new marine unit bad. At the same time I expect GW to poop on Xenos like they do in every cinematic. Melee for hordes plays different to melee for elite damage units. They could totally make melee good for small units that more want to kill stuff while being bad for large units that want to be obnoxious.
|
|
|
Post by yoritomo on May 24, 2020 5:49:29 GMT
They got a tank shooting a unit of grots touching it, i mean, really? Do they need to spell it out? Lets say, best case scenario they shoot as if firing overwatch. Its still considerably worse news for us than how it is today. Yes, they do need to spell it out for us. All you're doing is making assumptions, you have no idea what the final state of the rules are going to be. All we know is that tanks can fire when locked in combat. Do they shoot at the unit they are engaged with like pistols? Do they shoot at any legal target like a baneblade? We don't know. Have you ever thought that maybe the parity between vehicles and monstrous creatures continues? That would mean that our monstrous creatures would also be able to shoot while locked in combat. Not much wiggle room in understanding max shots from blasts vs hordes. If its 11, or 20 or units of 25 or more models, its still bad for us as our rules work best when u have a maxed unit. Codices will remain the same remember. That means synapse and malamthrope cover bubble congolining with less models is worse for us if we have less, especially if u go vs 'normal' units that dont have the blast weapon as now u have less models in each unit. Before I refute this, can I just point out that "y" and "o" are keys on your keyboard. Many of us go out of our way to type proper english so it can be easily readable. Is it too much to ask for the same? As far as shooting vs. hordes, we don't even know what a horde is yet. It could turn out that hordes are a new keyword that replaces the old swarm rules. We just don't know yet. This rule may not even affect us or could be easily played around. It's far too early to be panicking over undefined rules. But for the sake of argument, let's assume that every tyranid has the horde mechanic. On average it's an extra 3 shots per turn. Are we really that scared of 3 extra shots coming from a unit? Sure, there will be exceptions to this (the stormsurge is much better now), but you can't freak out just because a few units in the game get better. We're also leaving out that there may be some benefit for being a horde. If nothing else there's probably going to be a points adjustment to blast weapons or horde units to compensate for this new weakness. I'd be more than happy to take a few extra hits if they shaved a point off of all my gaunts. The changes in cover are not a boon for us, ots a boon for every army, including those armies with access to tanks that shoot in combat and models with blast weapons. Only their armies are less vulnerable to getting shot at then ours. All shades of Marine armies have access to ways of killing other tanks or other knights, or enemy hordes. So you dont NEED to get into CC with the tank to kill it or nullify it with marines for example, yet we are compelled to as we dont have anti tank or anti knight while at the same time their intercessors will gain the exact same benefits from cover as our gaunts. Leaving us on par with every other army from cover benefits, yet severely lacking in parity with other armies when suffering anti horde weaponry or the ability to nullify/kill tanks and such since we depend heavily on tagging them. Do you actually read what you write, because you are making my point for me. Shooting armies like cover, close combat armies NEED cover. Actually, one can make the argument that shooting armies prefer less terrain and cover. The fewer things between a unit with guns and their target the better. You say that shooting armies benefit from cover just as much as close combat armies, but you're wrong. Sure, they like standing in cover, but what they really want is open fields of fire and dead zones where the enemy has to cross without cover. A good player with a shooing list will gladly remove all terrain from the battlefield because the best defense against those new blast weapons you are so scared of are 1) LoS blocking terrain so you can't be shot at period, and 2) additional bonus from cover saves. Any improvement to the cover rules would be a great help to tyranid players across the board.
|
|
|
Post by Hive Bahamut on May 24, 2020 6:43:22 GMT
I love the Hive when new stuff comes upon the horizon. If it isn't piss poor, then it's (please do not swear). If it isn't point and click (which will be chastised later) then it is useless. Enigmatic, eccentric, home.
Tyranids always end up playing so different than everyone else, and up until this edition we didn't even share profiles or have a single Heavy gun. It will probably continue to be the same, with some sort of pasta tossed at the wall to stick type effect, but this is 40k, and we are NOT the heroes the player base needs, even if it the one we all deserve.
In my opinion there are at least a few things that need to be addressed:
1. True line of sight: No broad strokes, there needs to be some level of sanity applied here. From the very first game of 8th realizing that my Swarmlord was going to get annihilated because the radar of a Landraider could see the tip of his tail.. Was feel badsy. Bottom floor blocking line of sight is a stupid band aid fix that just adds to the problem. There needs to be some way to only shoot at vital componenets. That sweet ass conversion you did that has that trophy rack just cost you the game, or even a tournament.
2. Terrain and cover saves: Cover in 8th seems tailor made for MSU Astartes. No other army (apart from Sisters now, which tends to be larger squads) benefits so massively. Cover is essentially irrelevant if you were a horde unit.
3. Detachments, and how CP are obtained: There needs to be an overhaul to how the detachments work. They should have a similar framework, but scale more depending on the army. Have you seen a Custodes Brigade? Have you ever not seen a Militarum 1/2? Or how it is actually easier footwork to just spam Battalions like it is going out of style? Keep the Patrol as the Generic, remove Supreme Command idea altogether. Let us generate 1 or d3 a turn as long as Warlord is alive instead of nonsense fishing.
4. Universal Strats: How did Take Cover not make it to universal yet interrupt did in the shooting is king edition? There needs to be a handful of stock strats that are generally useful and not 52 per codex that uses at best 5. At first it seemed like a fun currency, but now it needs a retool.
5. Degrade: Whoever designed this I can applaud, whoever picked which stats degrade needs to be drug out and shot. How is a Long Range Tank losing M" and A, which are entirely irrelevant most of the time, and a close combat monster (most) loses WS/S/A? Derp.
6. Alternate Activations: Deployment and Assault phase started out great, but wait? How did it not make it to the movement/psyhcic/shooting phases? Shooting did NOT need that boost to already dominate 8th.
7. Hit and Wounds: I despise how rerolls were "removed" by doubling twin linked then just tossed right back in again with Chapter Master etc. Then reworded to nullify - to hit. What a waste of dice time. We get it, you shoot good.
8. Coherency: I actually like the idea of this being more of a Ld based idea to finally give it another purpose. Stuff like Gretchin and Gaunts are going to follow close together, as that is their strength (in numbers,) maybe like 1.5" or 2" whereas a Custodes or Necron and even things like walkers could easily be 3-4" and it wouldn't be ridiculous. Less cheesing of daisy chains and a more cinematic aesthetic.
9. Reserves and Deepstrike: Turns 2-5. I like the 9" idea so I don't know how to better that part though..
10: Fortifications: No detachment slot, just 0-1 for everyone. Free points with minor buff like AOS
11: Rework of psychic phase: Armies with psychic focus (GK, Nids, Sons, Daemons) can use multiple of the same spells per turn. Armies with support psykers (Imperium, Aeldari) can only use 1 of the powers each per turn. Same with Smite Scale, but multiple casts start and stay at WC6 instead. No super Smite. No double actions.
12: Warlords: No more of this multiple Warlords per army. 1 leader, 1 trait.
13: The inevitability that combat will be good again because Space Marines have swords again.
|
|
guy
Genestealer
Posts: 85
|
Post by guy on May 24, 2020 9:00:18 GMT
9th edition is necron vs imperium.
I bet, given the age of many units, and the lack of story focus for the last years, that tyranids will be the focus of 10th edition.
Inbetween, only the new codex will tell us whether tyranids will be competitive or remain at the bottom of the barrel.
I wouldnt expect much at 9th release with the old codex.
|
|
|
Post by niiai on May 24, 2020 9:42:52 GMT
I am actuamly in the camp that traditionaly a new edition made it very hard for nids. The reason for this is any army that is very different from the 'core rules' are most often shiftet around bybunforseen rule changes. Dark eldar, tyranids. In old fantasy tomb kings (who had their own magic phase) and dwarfs (whom where so imobile they could not walk.) The core of 40k is space marines.
As somebody pointed out the jobb og low damage melee units is to lock things in combat. If gargoyles and homragaunts can not lock down tanks that would be a problem for their role on the battlefield.
Anotherthing is that random number of attack wrapons deal full number of attacks vs hordes. What is a horde? More then 10 models in a unit? If so then a lott of ouer cheapest models will have problems. Charging into not d6 flamers, but 6 flamers is a lot. Frag grenades are 6 shots. Mortars are 3 shots. Rocket launchers might se an increase in play. Good luck having genestealers enjoy 4 frag misiles for 24 S4 shots.
Point adjustmeents need to be taken into acount for that either on blast weapons, or on unit cost. And cheap units where the bane of early 8th edition, so point per model can not go fown by much. (IG infantery being the prime example.)
If all armies get a lot of CP now, then one of nids advantages will go away. Cheap small detachments.
Perhaps 3 wound models like warriors and raveners become better? It is aomost like low model elite units like primaris are good.
New terain rules sound sweet though. In 8th edotion it is very hard to get cover saves.
And to end on a posetive note and not all doom and gloom I have enjoyed how 8th edotion panned out. To be able to leave a lot of FAQs behind will be good.
|
|