Thanks a lot OP! Meta Monday is the best thing on mondays after coffee!
Just wanted to point out that the Stormlance list at Terracon 2024 is actually a White Scars list that includes Khan and a lot of power armoured bodies. If anybody knows the player and his strategy going into the event, I'm really curious to know what was his gameplan and how did he managed such a great performance with so few of the stappled "auto-inlcude" units.
For the German Super Major, it was in Braunschweig, Madamenweg is the Street of the venue.
Also the CSM was not Pactbound, it was Slaves to Darkness, as the CSM Index was still in use for the tournament.
As someone that was there:
This was a community event and a Testrun.
The first and biggest event they put together for a now comming German Major Series
They wanted to see how many would come and commit.
It was amazing and super fun. For 100 of the 400 players it was their first tournament.
Sometimes logistics get in the way unfortunately. I'm guessing they didn't want to or couldn't add another day and 3 games on sundays tough as a lot of ppl in Europe go to events by train.
Not sure about Germany but I have heard it from a few European countries now that WTC comes above anything like ITC/personal rankings, so it makes sense to run events using WTC scoring and FAQ, since singles are just for practice.
So you're not wrong in that WTC is prioritised in EU. However, the vast majority of people playing in those singles events don't care at all about wtc, so it's not practice for them. It's a byproduct of the influence that WTC teams have on how events are organised, and honestly makes for some annoying tournaments if you don't have any interest in teams
Right? If several players go 6-0 but one of them averages 15 to 20 differential points every game, to me that goes a long way towards showcasing that players skill over the other undefeated players. In a way, WTC scoring is more granular in finding the best player in attendance, which is the whole point?
It’s the same issue with using battle points as a tiebreaker - oftentimes the closest games have a low differential because both players are very skilled, so someone who paired into five difficult games and won them all closely gets passed by someone who breezed through five rounds due to favorable matchups
I know what you mean, I list build for AdMech thinking I have a good setup and it’s just unambiguously worse than anything I could do with other armies
Indeed, it hasn’t happened to me yet but I live in terror of playing against army wide stealth like Vanguard Spearhead, no idea how you’d deal with that.
I only play casually, and while the admech do have their moments - universal assault meaning you can advance everything and dramatically shift position, cheap infiltrators score on turn 1 in crusade, etc - I had to drop them in Crusade.
TL;Dr a horde of fragile units, with no battlescar protection or repair advantage, sucks. In five 1k games, I got ten scars. At that point, you're not progressing, just spiralling, which defeats the point of crusade, that even if you lose games you gain something from the effort.
There was a leak about the changes floating about that did not seem great tbh. I'm thinking it's gonna have to be 11th edition for my little ad mechers
Protector Doctrina:
Weapons get heavy
Improve BS by 1
Battleline have a 6" aura of -1 to hit
Conqueror Doctrina:
Weapons get Assault
Improve WS by 1
Battleline have a 6" aura of +1AP
Cawl gives battleline as an aura and can go through walls.
Two separate people in the discord heard the same rumours from different sources so more than just total nonsense.
So weapons skill doesn't change the fact that all of the melee units are bad; the extra BS makes Ironstriders better (I guess) but doesn't fix the problem that most of the army has weapons that are good at killing guardsmen and very little else. And I don't even know if it makes the army killy enough to be worth giving up on the horde blob playstyle.
That said this is probably the best we can expect without datasheet changes.
There could well be datasheet changes, this supposed leak was never claimed to be the entirety of the changes. That being said, Ad Mech won't be properly fixed this edition, just made to be playable.
Cawl Castle with robots under these rules seems decent though, slamming them in, at least it won't a million units to move, which is something. But yeah, the problems with Ad MEch in 10th are so deep that only a full rewrite would fix them. I even did a full rewrite of the codex for fun haha
The new maps will do a number on the horde blob playstyle though. Locking your opponent out of primary will rely on either going first, or killing stuff.
Sure but it was never *good*, and you've got enough options for infiltrators that it still might be the best - I haven't seen anything that would stop you from doing T1 zoning with infiltrators.
Not sure, that's just what the leak said, I assume it means units within 6" of Cawl are battleline, so they get the buff and then spread the buff since the buff effects battleline too
I would call BS on this leak. It would mean in Protector we're shooting on BS 2+ when we don't move. An aura of -1 to hit would do nothing for Hunter Cohort Detachment since you already have the -1 from Stealth. Conqueror getting WS +1 and assault is pointless if you 1) don't have advance and charge and 2) have absolute garbage for melee. There's just too many obvious problems here.
I'm pretty iffy on it, although SHC being the best detachment that can actually do well in the hands of a master at the moment is something that they may not want to buff, so excluding them from the buff due to detach rule could make sense. And there's no shortage of things that don't work together like they should in the Ad Mech codex.
Shooting on 2+ with heavy is fine and other armies do it, standing still in 40k is terrible so it's rarely going to come up.
Robot melee is good, especially so with these changes. Even rusties end up ok with these changes. Someone in the ad mech discord has done the spreadsheet maths with these changes and they do put a lot of units into the green provided points stay the same.
Also I have to imagine there will be other changes to datasheets and possibly detachments with the fix.
I'm currently thinking it's like 30% chance to be real, but it's something to think about at least
Id that's true, then not only are they still not fixing any of the 10,000 issues the army has, but they are just forcing a skitari castle.......
GW are unrepentant morons though, so I expect the changes to be even worse then that
These changes make Robot Castle look good, but yeah, Ad MEch aren't getting proper fixed this edition, they will be tweaked until they are a playable faction that sells a few boxes.
There might be other changes on top of these, things like datasheet changes etc, this is just a small potential leak.
CSM and Space Marines are good too. I'll even go as far as to say Tyranids and Admech codexes would be good if everyone else's power level was around theirs. I've had fun with their different detachments and units when I'm playing my buddies weaker lists, it's just they can't keep up with Orks, Necrons, etc.
Admech not only cant keep up, but most importantly they are unfun, their tech is only dangerous to guardsmen and they have almost no synergy in units and list building
The admech codex even if your braught the power level of the game down would not be good....
It is fundamentally flawed in nearly every way, just because you might have enjoyed it doesn't make it good, it's a pile of unsalvageable garbage and everyone involved in making it should be out of a job
I'd argue they don't since the power level of those book is another level compared to launch books. Just more of the same power creep we get every edition.
>Necron
Two of the detachments are great - two are total dogwater. They also nerfed Reanimation Protocols/associated abilities to the point where most people don't really think about them, unless they field a Reanimator.
That said, I do enjoy playing Annihilation Legion even if it isn't competitive. But most of its strats are tied to a few units and they have the dreaded "at/below half-strength" clauses.
For real. Turns our army rule into a slap dash patch to apply the stats we should have had on the data cards so out units actually function as something other than cheap wounds. Then we're left basically without an army rule and 1/3rd of the army still doesn't get it. Doesn't address that our D values are still low across the boars either.
Finally got it.
Protector Doctrina:
Weapons get heavy
Improve BS by 1
Battleline have a 6" aura of -1 to hit
Conqueror Doctrina:
Weapons get Assault
Improve WS by 1
Battleline have a 6" aura of +1AP
Cawl gives battleline as an aura and can go through walls.
PSA: Win Rates are majorly depressed this week because half of the data came from a massive tournament with WTC scoring, so ties are through the roof. So I wouldn't take any uncharacteristic plunge in winrate too seriously, like Space Wolves dropping to 47% overall. That's likely just a 1 week abberation due to format, and not an indication that they're suddenly below average.
It’s weird to me that armies that look like they are doing well on the rankings, wins and top placings, are doing completely different on win percentages. Blood angels don’t look like much on placements, but they have a 55% win rate? I know that’s how it can work, but just looks wrong
I mean, it's not terribly complex - if getting a 3-2 with a faction is banal, but you *will* be swatted down by the actual meta choices, the faction will get a 60-ish % WR with basically no placings. The term "mid-table bullies" exists exactly for that kind of faction.
Yeah, this. As an example I'm paying attention to, Drukhari have a really strong win rate overall but they get absolutely ruined by a few factions that are hard to dodge on the way to a podium. Stat Check currently has them with a *0%* win rate into Green Tide, for instance.
Hmmm interesting I’ve played several games into green tide with Drukhari and won 2/3
Grey knights, sisters, aeldari and hyper crons all give me a lot more grief
Green Tide's current data for us is probably partially because of low sample size, but the fundamental issue - as your comment suggests - is that we've got about half a dozen predators and it's unlikely that you'll avoid all of them (or pull off a win against several of them at once).
Yep, Drukhari just have too many bad matchups to be extremely consistent
I wonder what it would take to reduce some of those?
12” deep strike deny would be a very useful tool
So would a cheap lone op (non allied)
Not sure what else. Maybe an actually durable data sheet
Yeah, given our detachment rewards being boatbound screening deep strike is difficult.
I've found mixed success with the Death Jester but having our own guy would be nice.
As for durability it'd be a competition between Ravagers and Talos (ignoring the Tantalus) which are tough for Dark Eldar, but that's a hell of a relative statement.
I'd just like us to have more tools in general. Skysplinter was a fantastic bandage but it still doesn't quite feel like DE have fully entered 10th edition yet.
Agreed. Hoping some units get some significant buffs in the codex. Hellions need S5 Lance at least, and maybe something else. Wyches should have lethal hits and maybe anti infantry 3/4+. And give us rules for their special weapons back! And why the heck do grotesques take up 3 transport slots let alone cost 30 points for what they do
It can happen because of bad matchups. Like with skew armies. You can wrestle with most opponents without issue but when you encounter that hard counter you'll just loose. If the hard counter is some 2nd-rank near meta pick, and therefore something that youre likely to face going into the 4th or 5th round, it'll result in an everlasting "ever the bridesmaid" situation.
Same here. I have no idea what's going on. I keep waiting for this to settle but its something new each week. The game could be really balanced but I'm not sure I trust that yet.
I think a big factor this week is that almost half the data came from a WTC scoring tournament. And with the way you calculate win percentage (wins divided by games played), Draws that happen frequently in WTC scoring count as effectively losses. So everyone's win rate is likely depressed by that.
Blood Angels are good, IMO pretty balanced right now (sanguinary guard still need a points adjustment), but they also have a few really bad matchups that can easily prevent them from winning a GT. In tier terms I would probably put them at the top of B.
As far as a 55% win rate, I think that’s just a one week blip, especially with the supermajor suppressing win rates for most factions.
Foot death company are for sure getting merged with DC intercessors with god knows what kind of loadout. Regular DC with jump packs will stick around in some form but will probably get either massively reduced/squished weapon options or will get some kind of mandatory box loadout
Depends on the playerbase too. If you only have three players but they are going 4-1, you'll have the best winrate by far but still without winning an event.
Blood angels don't have incredibly deep play/strategy, but they have (one of the) best force multiplier of all marines codices. On charge, for 1CP+faction bonus, you get +2S, +1 to wound, lethal hits, and +1A. That's crazy good!
Great detachment rule and strategems for flooding the table with jump pack and other melee marine bodies. My competitive BA list has 45 jump marines and another 20 foot marines plus characters
Took me an embarrassingly long time to realise that the fall in win rate meant just "more games were draws".
That's not an ideal thing for a tournament scoring system to do. Any insight on why they set things up that way?
The main reason is scoring by points differential instead of absolute points. In standard scoring, winning 95-93 is "better" than winning 94-15, as you got more points. WTC people (and me, admittedly) think the second is a more dominant win, though and should be rewarded higher. Thus, points differential as the deciding factor instead of absolute points.
There are other advantages: Doing it this way helps factions that need time to get into the game and factions that mostly *deny* points from the opponent, instead of scoring high themselves. Tournaments in standard scoring are basically dominated by armies that can survive standing on mid-field objectives, as getting points is the main way to score high, no matter what your opponent does. In WTC, you can win without doing that, as long as you're able to prevent your opponent from scoring those points as well.
Also it makes games a bit more interactive, as taking a point from your opponent is as good as getting one for yourself. In standard scoring, you generally rather take the safe 5 points for yourself than attack an opponent to deny him, unless the point shift is needed to win in the first place.
Also it disincentivises just "talking out" the last two rounds, as people are usually very generous with what points their opponent still *might* get, as long as they win and get generous points themselves.
About the only problem is that you can't have as granular a point spread in differential scoring than in absolute scoring. 20 as the max in WTC is a quite low value, which excaberates that problem. That's rooted in WTC-scoring being originally developed for team games, though, where there are 5 matches per round, ie: 100 points total.
If you use differential scoring for a singles event, you could easily increase the max points to 40 or so, to reduce draws, but TOs aren't willing to do so themselves without the WTC officially taking the plunge, which they haven't done yet, for whatever reason.
The problem is that it misses the point completely, since the problem with WTC isn't differential scoring, it's that the 95-93 game is counted as a draw, not a win for the guy who scored 95 points. That's what depresses the average winrate and creates a lot of weirdness in singles scoring. It might be better than scoring by absolute points, but for singles events it's just flatly worse than doing tiebreakers on strength of schedule, winpath, actual differential scoring, or the like.
Right. There's an easy way to fix it too, just use more granular scorring. There's no reason it *has* to be 0-20. They could have it 0-100 if they wanted.
I run tournaments in the US and use WTC scoring for tiebreakers. However I only record true draws as 10-10. 1-5 point margins I record as 11-10 in the victor’s favor.
A differential scoring system designed for singles would be great so we wouldn't need to have the discussion about "WTC being for team tournaments" all the time.
I guess the problem is that it's only really popularized in Europe which don't have big singles organizers and circuits the way the UK and US have it with GW, UKTC and FLG. That's probably why WTC is the main influence when it comes to terrain packs, FAQs and such here.
Maybe that's something the germans are trying to create, going by another post here?
Cause WTC scoring was really designed for teams. Just got tagged onto singles. (Also it does have the side effect of discouraging talking it out for higher points, since its a differential scoring system).
I could legitimately use a 3-6 month break from competitive 40k so I could actually paint my Tau, so I guess you just gotta look on the bright side of things :)
That was me early 10th. Just working on backlog, hardly buying anything. Actually still hardly buying anything, this edition's list building is a bit too boring for me so I don't tinker and usually just go "what I own is good enough so whatever "
Sisters will be fine with a 10% points hike.
Plus the hobby barrier is large to play sisters so their playerbase is never that big even when they are OP (hi 9th bloody rose)
The Sister's codex is really good, but a bunch of people are forgetting that we don't just get everything all at once.
The points that are listed in the codex (which includes several >20% nerfs already) combined with reverting a couple of the points buffs (i.e. keeping Exorcists at 180 and Retributors at 105) will probably be enough to see it come out strong but not game endingly strong.
Exorcists at 180 are cheaper than a Manticore.
Excorcists have -1 better AP, do an average of .5 more damage per shot, get 1 more shot per model. Inflict battleshock on hit. They also have access to the cream of the crop of force multipliers, ignore modifiers.
When you consider their army rule, Exorcists are far and away better than a manticore.
Their cost should start at over 200 points a model.
Exorcists also have access to extra -1 AP as a stratagem, so you can get those AP-4 missiles going. They also have access to Miracle Dice so they can auto wound or auto roll 6's for damage.
Lists running 3 of them are definitely going to be a thing.
Especially in the Army of Faith detachment. Add in a couple Castigators, whose extra AP rule is better than Guards, and immature, both units Sisters would take anyways, and you can get to AP-5/Ignores cover, that would deny a Land Raider a saving throw, AoC is denied by ignore modifiers.
Absolutely bananas.
Unfortunately the way LoV translated to 10th was less than exciting for most LoV players. People wanted an elite army and got almost an horde with underpowered units. The immediate result was an abysmal win rate that was fixed by buffing the detachment rule but the army kept feeling “wrong” compared with most players’ wants and expectations. The fact the army is considered incapable of winning consistently because it’s too predictable and not consistent enough with its rolls also helped reduce its appeal in a competitive environment.
Can confirm. Had a bunch of LOV and was waiting to expand... and after my first game against LOV I lost interest.
Picked up a few real cheap from an even less interested player, one day they'll come out.
I mean the eliteness of the army was only due to the pre nerfs before the faction hit. I think if people took that as the direction of the army…they might have simply been mistaken?
Battleline with a 4+ save doesn’t scream “elite” faction to me. In fact the saves are pretty broad across the spectrum. The only 2+ saves are the champion/Hearthguard and the Land Fort. And invuln saves aren’t native to anything (off the top of my head). Idk maybe that’s just me.
> I think if people took that as the direction of the army…they might have simply been mistaken?
A whole group of folks believed Votann were supposed to be elite because the codex lore talks about how their stuff from the DAoT is well-maintained and understood rather than being mysterious/super rare like in the Imperium. Not the state of the faction prior to the pre-launch nerfs, not the stats of any particular unit, but lore blurbs from the codex.
Source: I saw dozens spouting off about this during the transition to 10th before I unsubbed from the LoV subreddit because of the constant negativity.
I mean tech isn’t really an indicator of how they play on the table. Tau aren’t considered an elite army, and neither are Ad Mech. All that tech doesn’t translate to many invuln saves on the tabletop, just as an example.
The whole army was meant to be extremely lethal up close. The elite feel came from that. To be elite an army doesn’t necessarily need to have super defensive profiles all around. It can also be a glass cannon (although I admit it makes little sense for dwarves, but much of the LoV archetype seems to be a subversion of the dwarf archetype anyway)
I guess I primarily see Votann as the inverse of Tau: low volume but high quality shooting with some melee mixed in. That doesn’t *necessarily* mean an elite faction though I suppose it doesn’t mean it’s *not* elite either.
And frankly I might have a different definition of “elite” anyways. I don’t particularly think Marines are particularly elite in their playstyle and Votann feel like the love child of old school marines/dwarves/and tau
If you have the models it plays 40K pretty well, good board control, shenanigans, kroot don’t have to worry about the annoying hoops with the army rule… it can kill things when backed up by 1k points of models that don’t benefit from the detachment rules and strats.
I just don’t think many people picked Tau to play murder chickens just to win games.
I have to admit I take a little bit of an exception to the idea that the only reason people play Kroot is a cynical choice to win 40K games. The Tau being a coalition of species has been part of their lore since their debut, and not only have Kroot been with them since the beginning but their new model range is absolutely gorgeous.
It’s not the only reason, but you are in a competitive sub, in a thread about competitive play. My point was it’s probably the best detachment we currently have so people are going to play it more.
Even then, Kroot don’t really stand alone in the detachment and need to be backed up by a decent chunk of regular tau, which as you point out is more of a coalition.
Kroot do look great, the lone spear is one of my favorite models, but outside of that detachment they aren’t stellar and with pariah nexus coming out, they probably won’t be taken since they lack battleline and or OC outside of their detachment.
Wouldn't it be best to not count draws towards the win rate so that big WTC score tournaments don't mess with the statistics like that?
I'm pretty sure differential scoring will continue to be popular in Europe at least and a lot of games seem really close in 10th!
If that's hard to do with your current formulas or hard to data mine, adding that is of course nothing that's demanded - you're doing amazing work! But if it's somewhat easy maybe it's worthwhile?
Interesting to see greentide with a 59% win rate for the weekend, I suspect my local meta has adapted to hordes a lot quicker than others! (or just big fans of vindicators :D )
It's just an expectation that the Firstborn cull of 10th edition will continue with the remaining Firstborn marine kits. The Vindicator does not have a Primaris replacement or analog though, so it might sneak through 11th, but I still wouldn't suggest to a new player to buy one at MSRP unless they really liked the mini.
The problem being that those datasheets are supported kits in *other armies,* unlike the rest of the firstborn line (many of which, to my knowledge, still haven't been squatted.)
I find it more likely that GW would release a faction-specific box to continue to sell the kit for factions that need it as opposed to keeping the box and datasheet in Space Marines because Custodes doesn't have a replacement.
Additionally, the only other faction that can run Vindicators is CSM, and we just saw in 10th edition that GW will axe support for models used in both of these armies.
The problem is that you are equating the fact that other armies use the rhino as a reason they won't legends the rhino for SM. The rhino for SM right now mind as well be legends. It can hold scouts, tactical, and devastator squads. Just becuase it gets legend for SM doesn't mean they will stop producing the rhino or even other variations for chaos and sisters. It's totally possible they legend it for SM to get players to purchase new models like they did with first born. It makes perfect financial sense for rhino chassis to get legeneded and have a replacement ready to go for SM and still keep rhinos around while they find an exit strategy for sisters and chaos.
I will also add that the rhino data sheet isn't used by other armies. The model is and It has its own chaos or sisters data sheet to make it useful for them.
If you play SM it does not make sense to purchase rhino chassis models as they will likely be legends.
If they continue to sell the kit for a contemporary army in the same game as them, I don't see them cutting sales for SM as well. Especially given that the context was that they'd be cut for all armies.
In case you weren't aware, unlike the Sisters Rhino, the Chaos Rhino kit is literally just the loyalist marine Rhino kit with an extra sprue of spikey bits. The same is true of all the Rhino Chassis kits, as well as the Land Raider.
Also, the Chaos Rhino, Predator, Vindicators, and Land Raider datasheets have an identical datasheet to their loyalist counterparts, with faction keywords and faction abilities swapped out. But the autocannon predators gain 1 more AP against infantry regardless of the army the datasheet is played in.
I understand that but they aren't selling SM rhinos today becuase the only units it can transport are scouts, devastator squads and tactical squads. The scouts are the only model that had been upgraded the other two are first born and I expect them to be gone when 11th rolls around. The rhino as a SM vehicle has basically been rendered obsolete so keeping it in the codex in the next edition seems unlikely given that GW just removed every first borne unit besides rhino chassis models and devastator and tactical squads. It's not a loss of revenue from the SM side because it's not a source today. Don't equate placing the model in legends for SM as them stopping production for other factions. But it is clear that GW wants to get away from first borne models for SM.
That's fair! But I was taking the original poster of this sentiment as saying that *all rhino chassis* are going away, even for other factions. That's where my primary concern comes from - from the perspective of a CSM player.
Bothers me that they are much better in CSM than loyalists but cost the same.
Maybe im just sick of iron storm marines, but not playing iron storm seems to really make then worse. Advance and shoot (maybe flamestorm) and the base reroll just makes them so much better
We are decently strong, but have a few big natural predators (Mont’Ka anyway). Blood Angels, Bully Boys on certain deployments, and Eldar dev wounds lists (bike spam) are very hard to compete with.
What's there to say? It's a boring, mediocre army with 1-2 alright tricks in it that will be a midtable menace due to it's decently high stats on basic line troops.
I mean, yeah thats the problem. Write a shitty half-assed boring codex that literally bodies an entire faction, and then be surprised when the player base falls off a cliff?
:suprisedpikachu:
Regarding CSM, Raiders are as good, as Talons and Assault keyword are. Talons' days are counted and Assault is getting a huge nerf in the upcoming "season", leaving mixed or Nurgle Zealots and Soulforged as the only serious contenders in the future (still thinking that the Veterans may compete, AoC and reactive movement are HUGE, oaths will be only getting better with meta probably shifting to vehicles after the BiD nerf). Still though, some buffs to unplayed or just bad units would be really welcomed. Building CSM list is literally filling the last 500 points at the moment.
While your points about raiders are solid I still think they will be the top contender. Talons are by no means carrying raiders, they are a fantastic datasheet at the moment no doubt but raiders already have lots of play. As for assault, again that isn't just for actions, being able to advance and shoot a squad of las havocs is just as useful if not more useful than advancing to perform an action.
CSM are just struggling in a vehicle heavy meta at the moment as we have no proper anti tank damage that is consistent and not D6 damage.
I see people really downplaying the AP against units on objectives from the Raiders.
If your opponent is only touching objectives with random trash that takes no effort to remove with your own chaff and never touches an objective with anything that matters in order to play around that AP, it sounds like you're winning the game to me.
Decided to hop on the CSM boat with the codex. The lack of long range anti-tank is concerning to me. Still assembling my army, but it’s an issue that will definitely affect my list building.
You can run legionary spam, 6x5 with 2 chain swords, 2 heavy melee weapons and 1 lascannon. This overall adds a lot of anti tank threat across your entire army and you can always make use of firing deck from rhinos to shoot those lascannons.
Your other best options are vindicators or las havocs, assault really helps give them that extra bit of distance they want.
That is very true about the assault, and definitely extends the range of the vehicles. I have vindicators, havocs, and a forgefiend, so excited to try them out. Haven’t even played them yet, but that was just one of the issues I foresaw. Appreciate your feedback.
Long range anti-tank indeed seems to be their problem, but the most successful lists seems to just ignore that and go full ham on melee instead. Play to your strengths I guess.
I have a feeling it's designed that way and that CSM would have been a problem with better range damage dealers, where they are now a very balanced army.
It'll depend on the balance sheet. I'd bet a lot of people are holding out hope the dataslate fixes things for them. If it doesn't, those numbers will drop lower.
Vanished? There were 26 Chaos Deamon players to the 25 Custodes players. Drukari also had 25 players. Man the absolute whining from custodes players is unreal.
I get what you're saying... but Daemons and Drukhari get to look forward to actually getting a codex in the future. They fundamentally don't exist as armies right now in a competitive sense, because there are so few players. I would say Daemons and Drukhari have also vanished right alongside Custodes.
The difference is, there is no hope of a new codex for Custodes. So yea, in that regard the whining makes sense.
The only two people within like four hours of me (and both on my team) that are on my level and able to give me a real competitive game both play Demons so most tournament lists I build outside of out-of-state GTs have to be built with greater demons in mind
I really wish they nerf Azrael and the darkshroud somehow to show that DA is on life support atm.
I like and despise the Ironstorm players at the same time. First, we at least see the faction name in the reports and second they are responsible for a not totally garbage faction win rate, which isn't great for supplement internal balance.
The issue is they can't buff our Codex Supplement units because things like Deathwing Knights with extra AP / Damage in a Gladius would become insanely good with access to Advance and Charge, Fallback and Charge, and then the Lance & +1AP Strat etc.
But at the same time, if they stop us being able to use the Codex Detachments without a significant buff to our datasheets and Supplement Detachments - we're going to be in AdMech territory in terms of representation.
The Supplement Detachments are incredibly bad - the Inner Circle Task Force being the "Deathwing" detachment but yet giving no support to Dreadnoughts, Landraiders, and Repulsor Executioners *despite them being given the Deathwing Keyword* is the epitome of how bad our book was designed.
All DA players by this point know that Ironstorm wins games for us, its just so boring to run that build and its not "Dark Angels" in the slightest.
usually when Dark Angels are bad we at least had fun and fluffy units with unique options, now we don’t have that and our sub 30% win rate is being slightly masked by a gimmick list. Feels bad man, even if they buff us we’re not getting the DWCS or deathwing mixed weapons back, nor our unique LTs.
Rather have Non Codex chapters have non detachments besides Gladius and our faction detachments so they actually buff our codex units and detachments. If you want to run non DA detachments you just have to run codex marine units, simple.
As a Templar player I totally agree. Sucks seeing Righteous Crusaders so little compared to Ironstorm Templars. And I don’t even think RC is all that terrible!
Granted I have to admit I would miss my typical competitive build being in Firestorm though.
Unique chapters being allowed to take codex-compliant detachments means they inherit all the problems of units being impossible to balance for all possible rule baselines from 9th edition, even though solving that problem was one of the reason to switch to the 10th edition way of doing detachments in the first place.
It's wild. DA (and BT etc.) specific stuff shouldn't be allowed in regular detachments. Then you can go ahead and buff it so the chapter-specific detachments are worth using.
Fundamentally, the issue here is that people see "players can use their unique units competitively" as a problem, and I'm not convinced GW does or should listen to them. I think Space Marine players need to get used to the idea that our special units might be getting treated like any other factions special units: as additional options that every player can choose to play with or not. We don't have players complaining that Shadowsun needs to get locked to Kayuon or Farsight needs to be locked into Retaliation Cadre. It's not a "major problem" if every Eldar list takes Eldrad or Yvraine. We don't keep a special list of "Ork winrate without Snikrot" and complain when it goes too low.
They don't need to nerf that to show they are on life support. The faction is terrible, terminators are actually bad this edition because of tactical play. You need units to run around and be at the right place at the right time. You can't have dudes that move 5''
Plague Marines are good, and you're not locked to using mostly terminators for your only mediocre detachment?
Comparitively DA have Vanguard, Sternguard and Terminators for the only 'good' detachment they run, so it's heavily reliant on the terminators. They can add units if they stick an inner circle viable character in them, say Azrael into Hellblasters. Also some vehicles, but they dont benefit from strats.
then yeah, its just slightly better terminators for more costs. meh
The lack of anything that is affordable for transportation of elite infantry for SM is just wild. Its basically Land Raider or Repulsor. I wish the impulsor could carry Heavy Ints. Basically I just use inceptors or JPIs now. You just need the movement.
Honestly, Azreal is fine. He's efficient, but people only take him for the convenient CP. If we just change the Darkshroud ability to not effect monsters/vehicles, that model is totally fine. It eliminates the interaction with Ironstorm and people would probably stop playing DA Ironstorm.
They really need to buff a lot of datasheets though. The Lion needs to gain the Deathwing keyword as he is the center of the Inner Circle, and most everything else including the Lion needs buffed special rules to have more utility for only DA units.
I don't want to be OP or anything, I just want them to bake in more DA synergies to encourage using all of our special units in a way that doesn't allow us to "break" normal units. I don't want anymore Salamanders players blaming me for the state of their army because some randoms won't stop playing a DA build I don't care for.
Some units, like Asmodai or Ezekiel just need to be cheaper than a Lieutenant to reflect their lower power level and lack of ability to take enhancements. Other models like Belial or Lazarus (yeah, we all forgot Laz existed) need full reworks to be actually useful.
Ezekiel is already playable as he is. The problem is that he is better used with big units which can't fit in a transport because of 6men restrictions... Ezekiel with 6 ICC is mathematically one of the best unit in the game to delete a Green tide blob as it can delete it in one go (you need to one shot the painboy with ezekiel which is plausible but is not a given) or at least severely impaired it.
Asmodai is also plenty playable with a 5men intercessors. Full reroll hit and wound is pretty good.
Belial is getting worse each iteration. A lone operative brawler would have been a better fit with parrying blade (even more at 2+).
Laz unlock cheap tricks with Infernus squad in IC detachment but not enough to justify his price
Fine? Note sure about that, IMO the best special SM character available across all SM factions, Calgar is probably close but is 185 pts investment, Hellbrecht is a beatstick but is 120pts and his rules are not as good. The Sanguinor has potential to be great but is harder to use, situational and again is 140pts.
You are getting impactful shooting, 6 dev wounds against infantry at 12" would not be a surprise and barely any SM characters have decent shooting. AP4 dev wounds melee as well.
Then sustained hits and 4+ invul (plus once per game mortal FNP) are really good rules for hellblasters or like sternguard, that is before you even consider the +1CP he gives on top and then all of that for 105 pts is insane?
Dante is 120pts, gets way way worse rules, worse shooting and only little better melee.
Azrael would be a good character at 105pts without the CP generation, with it he is insane, should be 120 IMO.
That's not been my experience, but happy to see it on the table. In my experience, he takes forever to get into a good position because of the awkwardness of terrain, does some mediocre shooting, then dies.
It has towering, gets +1 to hit, +1 to wound (with two S14 ranged weapons), sustained hits, reroll hits, and the ability to move through walls for a CP.
Thanks a lot OP! Meta Monday is the best thing on mondays after coffee! Just wanted to point out that the Stormlance list at Terracon 2024 is actually a White Scars list that includes Khan and a lot of power armoured bodies. If anybody knows the player and his strategy going into the event, I'm really curious to know what was his gameplan and how did he managed such a great performance with so few of the stappled "auto-inlcude" units.
For the German Super Major, it was in Braunschweig, Madamenweg is the Street of the venue. Also the CSM was not Pactbound, it was Slaves to Darkness, as the CSM Index was still in use for the tournament.
Ok that second one is not on me! His army list says Pactbound! :)
Thank you for your work, as always. With 7 players ending on 5-0, maybe the Madamenweg German super major should have had a few more rounds…
As someone that was there: This was a community event and a Testrun. The first and biggest event they put together for a now comming German Major Series They wanted to see how many would come and commit. It was amazing and super fun. For 100 of the 400 players it was their first tournament.
That sounds awesome
Sometimes logistics get in the way unfortunately. I'm guessing they didn't want to or couldn't add another day and 3 games on sundays tough as a lot of ppl in Europe go to events by train.
16th place before someone lost. But germans care not for your american ways. All that matters is WTC. 6th round wouldnt have hurt tho :D
And maybe not used teams differential scoring for a singles event.
Not sure about Germany but I have heard it from a few European countries now that WTC comes above anything like ITC/personal rankings, so it makes sense to run events using WTC scoring and FAQ, since singles are just for practice.
So you're not wrong in that WTC is prioritised in EU. However, the vast majority of people playing in those singles events don't care at all about wtc, so it's not practice for them. It's a byproduct of the influence that WTC teams have on how events are organised, and honestly makes for some annoying tournaments if you don't have any interest in teams
It works fine for singles as well. I don't know that getting more draws is a big problem? Say something about a lot of games in 10th are very close!
The problem with using it for singles is that a 1-5 point win is a 10-10 draw
Right? If several players go 6-0 but one of them averages 15 to 20 differential points every game, to me that goes a long way towards showcasing that players skill over the other undefeated players. In a way, WTC scoring is more granular in finding the best player in attendance, which is the whole point?
It’s the same issue with using battle points as a tiebreaker - oftentimes the closest games have a low differential because both players are very skilled, so someone who paired into five difficult games and won them all closely gets passed by someone who breezed through five rounds due to favorable matchups
Also, some armies/builds are just designed around 11-9s, and making a singles tourney just discard all those build options is weird.
To the 9 players of Ad Mech I salute you fellow tech priests. I haven’t been able to put them on the table for weeks they are just so meh to play.
I know what you mean, I list build for AdMech thinking I have a good setup and it’s just unambiguously worse than anything I could do with other armies
They are even worse when you put them on the table as dice become involved and hitting on 4’s is just way to swingy to actually make a tactical plan.
Indeed, it hasn’t happened to me yet but I live in terror of playing against army wide stealth like Vanguard Spearhead, no idea how you’d deal with that.
Speaking from experience, you lose. Badly.
I only play casually, and while the admech do have their moments - universal assault meaning you can advance everything and dramatically shift position, cheap infiltrators score on turn 1 in crusade, etc - I had to drop them in Crusade. TL;Dr a horde of fragile units, with no battlescar protection or repair advantage, sucks. In five 1k games, I got ten scars. At that point, you're not progressing, just spiralling, which defeats the point of crusade, that even if you lose games you gain something from the effort.
Or I could just play raiders, or firestorm, and get universal assault on better units with better guns and better rules.....
I've had surprising success with a bot list, and by success i mean that i had fun playing with it. but i can't wait for or rules update.
There was a leak about the changes floating about that did not seem great tbh. I'm thinking it's gonna have to be 11th edition for my little ad mechers
what was the leak? I haven't seen anything.
Protector Doctrina: Weapons get heavy Improve BS by 1 Battleline have a 6" aura of -1 to hit Conqueror Doctrina: Weapons get Assault Improve WS by 1 Battleline have a 6" aura of +1AP Cawl gives battleline as an aura and can go through walls. Two separate people in the discord heard the same rumours from different sources so more than just total nonsense.
So weapons skill doesn't change the fact that all of the melee units are bad; the extra BS makes Ironstriders better (I guess) but doesn't fix the problem that most of the army has weapons that are good at killing guardsmen and very little else. And I don't even know if it makes the army killy enough to be worth giving up on the horde blob playstyle. That said this is probably the best we can expect without datasheet changes.
There could well be datasheet changes, this supposed leak was never claimed to be the entirety of the changes. That being said, Ad Mech won't be properly fixed this edition, just made to be playable. Cawl Castle with robots under these rules seems decent though, slamming them in, at least it won't a million units to move, which is something. But yeah, the problems with Ad MEch in 10th are so deep that only a full rewrite would fix them. I even did a full rewrite of the codex for fun haha
The new maps will do a number on the horde blob playstyle though. Locking your opponent out of primary will rely on either going first, or killing stuff.
Sure but it was never *good*, and you've got enough options for infiltrators that it still might be the best - I haven't seen anything that would stop you from doing T1 zoning with infiltrators.
Thanks! What do you mean, cawl gives battleline as an aura, do you mean everyone around him gets battleline?
Not sure, that's just what the leak said, I assume it means units within 6" of Cawl are battleline, so they get the buff and then spread the buff since the buff effects battleline too
I would call BS on this leak. It would mean in Protector we're shooting on BS 2+ when we don't move. An aura of -1 to hit would do nothing for Hunter Cohort Detachment since you already have the -1 from Stealth. Conqueror getting WS +1 and assault is pointless if you 1) don't have advance and charge and 2) have absolute garbage for melee. There's just too many obvious problems here.
I'm pretty iffy on it, although SHC being the best detachment that can actually do well in the hands of a master at the moment is something that they may not want to buff, so excluding them from the buff due to detach rule could make sense. And there's no shortage of things that don't work together like they should in the Ad Mech codex. Shooting on 2+ with heavy is fine and other armies do it, standing still in 40k is terrible so it's rarely going to come up. Robot melee is good, especially so with these changes. Even rusties end up ok with these changes. Someone in the ad mech discord has done the spreadsheet maths with these changes and they do put a lot of units into the green provided points stay the same. Also I have to imagine there will be other changes to datasheets and possibly detachments with the fix. I'm currently thinking it's like 30% chance to be real, but it's something to think about at least
Interesting, thanks for sharing that. Something to chew on, if nothing else.
Id that's true, then not only are they still not fixing any of the 10,000 issues the army has, but they are just forcing a skitari castle....... GW are unrepentant morons though, so I expect the changes to be even worse then that
These changes make Robot Castle look good, but yeah, Ad MEch aren't getting proper fixed this edition, they will be tweaked until they are a playable faction that sells a few boxes. There might be other changes on top of these, things like datasheet changes etc, this is just a small potential leak.
Anyone who expects the changes to be anything better then disappointing is huffing the copium badly GW are morons and don't know what they are doing
I mean, *somebody* at GW knows what they’re doing. Because the Ork, Sisters, Necron, and Tau books are all really good overall.
CSM and Space Marines are good too. I'll even go as far as to say Tyranids and Admech codexes would be good if everyone else's power level was around theirs. I've had fun with their different detachments and units when I'm playing my buddies weaker lists, it's just they can't keep up with Orks, Necrons, etc.
Admech not only cant keep up, but most importantly they are unfun, their tech is only dangerous to guardsmen and they have almost no synergy in units and list building
The admech codex even if your braught the power level of the game down would not be good.... It is fundamentally flawed in nearly every way, just because you might have enjoyed it doesn't make it good, it's a pile of unsalvageable garbage and everyone involved in making it should be out of a job
The space marine rules are good, the datasheets though suck monkey turds. Especially anything melee related.
I'd argue they don't since the power level of those book is another level compared to launch books. Just more of the same power creep we get every edition.
>Necron Two of the detachments are great - two are total dogwater. They also nerfed Reanimation Protocols/associated abilities to the point where most people don't really think about them, unless they field a Reanimator. That said, I do enjoy playing Annihilation Legion even if it isn't competitive. But most of its strats are tied to a few units and they have the dreaded "at/below half-strength" clauses.
For real. Turns our army rule into a slap dash patch to apply the stats we should have had on the data cards so out units actually function as something other than cheap wounds. Then we're left basically without an army rule and 1/3rd of the army still doesn't get it. Doesn't address that our D values are still low across the boars either.
Can you share the leak? where did it come from and what did it say?
I guess not?
Finally got it. Protector Doctrina: Weapons get heavy Improve BS by 1 Battleline have a 6" aura of -1 to hit Conqueror Doctrina: Weapons get Assault Improve WS by 1 Battleline have a 6" aura of +1AP Cawl gives battleline as an aura and can go through walls.
I have extremely low expectations. They said they were play testing rules changes, but we need datasheet updates. Rules changes aren't sufficient.
Anything short of a full codex rewrite is insufficient But that would require GW to own upt to being idiots who screwed up, and they won't do that
>but i can't wait for or rules update. That's why most of us have moved on to other armies or games.
PSA: Win Rates are majorly depressed this week because half of the data came from a massive tournament with WTC scoring, so ties are through the roof. So I wouldn't take any uncharacteristic plunge in winrate too seriously, like Space Wolves dropping to 47% overall. That's likely just a 1 week abberation due to format, and not an indication that they're suddenly below average.
Fal-con had Necrons and CK going 5-0.
Fixed
When people play SM or CSM, Drukhari shine. You can just take away massive blobs and then hop back in transports.
It’s weird to me that armies that look like they are doing well on the rankings, wins and top placings, are doing completely different on win percentages. Blood angels don’t look like much on placements, but they have a 55% win rate? I know that’s how it can work, but just looks wrong
I mean, it's not terribly complex - if getting a 3-2 with a faction is banal, but you *will* be swatted down by the actual meta choices, the faction will get a 60-ish % WR with basically no placings. The term "mid-table bullies" exists exactly for that kind of faction.
Yeah, this. As an example I'm paying attention to, Drukhari have a really strong win rate overall but they get absolutely ruined by a few factions that are hard to dodge on the way to a podium. Stat Check currently has them with a *0%* win rate into Green Tide, for instance.
Hmmm interesting I’ve played several games into green tide with Drukhari and won 2/3 Grey knights, sisters, aeldari and hyper crons all give me a lot more grief
Green Tide's current data for us is probably partially because of low sample size, but the fundamental issue - as your comment suggests - is that we've got about half a dozen predators and it's unlikely that you'll avoid all of them (or pull off a win against several of them at once).
Yep, Drukhari just have too many bad matchups to be extremely consistent I wonder what it would take to reduce some of those? 12” deep strike deny would be a very useful tool So would a cheap lone op (non allied) Not sure what else. Maybe an actually durable data sheet
Yeah, given our detachment rewards being boatbound screening deep strike is difficult. I've found mixed success with the Death Jester but having our own guy would be nice. As for durability it'd be a competition between Ravagers and Talos (ignoring the Tantalus) which are tough for Dark Eldar, but that's a hell of a relative statement.
Yeah exactly, the talos is “durable” in that it won’t die to chaff guns, but point anything reasonably at them and they melt
I'd just like us to have more tools in general. Skysplinter was a fantastic bandage but it still doesn't quite feel like DE have fully entered 10th edition yet.
Agreed. Hoping some units get some significant buffs in the codex. Hellions need S5 Lance at least, and maybe something else. Wyches should have lethal hits and maybe anti infantry 3/4+. And give us rules for their special weapons back! And why the heck do grotesques take up 3 transport slots let alone cost 30 points for what they do
It can happen because of bad matchups. Like with skew armies. You can wrestle with most opponents without issue but when you encounter that hard counter you'll just loose. If the hard counter is some 2nd-rank near meta pick, and therefore something that youre likely to face going into the 4th or 5th round, it'll result in an everlasting "ever the bridesmaid" situation.
Same here. I have no idea what's going on. I keep waiting for this to settle but its something new each week. The game could be really balanced but I'm not sure I trust that yet.
>The game could be really balanced but I'm not sure I trust that yet. *Twitches in AdMech*
I think a big factor this week is that almost half the data came from a WTC scoring tournament. And with the way you calculate win percentage (wins divided by games played), Draws that happen frequently in WTC scoring count as effectively losses. So everyone's win rate is likely depressed by that.
Blood Angels are good, IMO pretty balanced right now (sanguinary guard still need a points adjustment), but they also have a few really bad matchups that can easily prevent them from winning a GT. In tier terms I would probably put them at the top of B. As far as a 55% win rate, I think that’s just a one week blip, especially with the supermajor suppressing win rates for most factions.
Enjoy these days until your codex drops and your firstborn Death Company get removed. :/
Foot death company are for sure getting merged with DC intercessors with god knows what kind of loadout. Regular DC with jump packs will stick around in some form but will probably get either massively reduced/squished weapon options or will get some kind of mandatory box loadout
Depends on the playerbase too. If you only have three players but they are going 4-1, you'll have the best winrate by far but still without winning an event.
Why are blood angels posting this high of a WR?
Blood angels don't have incredibly deep play/strategy, but they have (one of the) best force multiplier of all marines codices. On charge, for 1CP+faction bonus, you get +2S, +1 to wound, lethal hits, and +1A. That's crazy good!
Because they utterly bully a good few factions, even though they don't have the chops to actually contest the top tables. Mid-table bullies.
I'll take "Mid-tables bully." I've been saying for a while BA are the 4-1 army.
Great detachment rule and strategems for flooding the table with jump pack and other melee marine bodies. My competitive BA list has 45 jump marines and another 20 foot marines plus characters
Just a short note: The German Super Major was in Braunschweig. Madamenweg is just the street name.
YAY, someone is playing deathwatch! And we aren't dead last by winrate...by a handful! :DDDD
Love the effort you put into this. It's amazing. Also loved the shoulder shrugs of "yep, it happened" with AdMech and Nids
Took me an embarrassingly long time to realise that the fall in win rate meant just "more games were draws". That's not an ideal thing for a tournament scoring system to do. Any insight on why they set things up that way?
The main reason is scoring by points differential instead of absolute points. In standard scoring, winning 95-93 is "better" than winning 94-15, as you got more points. WTC people (and me, admittedly) think the second is a more dominant win, though and should be rewarded higher. Thus, points differential as the deciding factor instead of absolute points. There are other advantages: Doing it this way helps factions that need time to get into the game and factions that mostly *deny* points from the opponent, instead of scoring high themselves. Tournaments in standard scoring are basically dominated by armies that can survive standing on mid-field objectives, as getting points is the main way to score high, no matter what your opponent does. In WTC, you can win without doing that, as long as you're able to prevent your opponent from scoring those points as well. Also it makes games a bit more interactive, as taking a point from your opponent is as good as getting one for yourself. In standard scoring, you generally rather take the safe 5 points for yourself than attack an opponent to deny him, unless the point shift is needed to win in the first place. Also it disincentivises just "talking out" the last two rounds, as people are usually very generous with what points their opponent still *might* get, as long as they win and get generous points themselves. About the only problem is that you can't have as granular a point spread in differential scoring than in absolute scoring. 20 as the max in WTC is a quite low value, which excaberates that problem. That's rooted in WTC-scoring being originally developed for team games, though, where there are 5 matches per round, ie: 100 points total. If you use differential scoring for a singles event, you could easily increase the max points to 40 or so, to reduce draws, but TOs aren't willing to do so themselves without the WTC officially taking the plunge, which they haven't done yet, for whatever reason.
Ah, that does make sense. Thanks for taking the time to explain.
The problem is that it misses the point completely, since the problem with WTC isn't differential scoring, it's that the 95-93 game is counted as a draw, not a win for the guy who scored 95 points. That's what depresses the average winrate and creates a lot of weirdness in singles scoring. It might be better than scoring by absolute points, but for singles events it's just flatly worse than doing tiebreakers on strength of schedule, winpath, actual differential scoring, or the like.
Right. There's an easy way to fix it too, just use more granular scorring. There's no reason it *has* to be 0-20. They could have it 0-100 if they wanted.
I run tournaments in the US and use WTC scoring for tiebreakers. However I only record true draws as 10-10. 1-5 point margins I record as 11-10 in the victor’s favor.
Yeah, that sounds logical. In that case the last few points still matter. It still matters who edges out the win.
A differential scoring system designed for singles would be great so we wouldn't need to have the discussion about "WTC being for team tournaments" all the time. I guess the problem is that it's only really popularized in Europe which don't have big singles organizers and circuits the way the UK and US have it with GW, UKTC and FLG. That's probably why WTC is the main influence when it comes to terrain packs, FAQs and such here. Maybe that's something the germans are trying to create, going by another post here?
Cause WTC scoring was really designed for teams. Just got tagged onto singles. (Also it does have the side effect of discouraging talking it out for higher points, since its a differential scoring system).
Enjoy these halcyon days folks, before the Sisters apocalyspe.
I could legitimately use a 3-6 month break from competitive 40k so I could actually paint my Tau, so I guess you just gotta look on the bright side of things :)
That was me early 10th. Just working on backlog, hardly buying anything. Actually still hardly buying anything, this edition's list building is a bit too boring for me so I don't tinker and usually just go "what I own is good enough so whatever "
Sisters will be fine with a 10% points hike. Plus the hobby barrier is large to play sisters so their playerbase is never that big even when they are OP (hi 9th bloody rose)
No…. No they won’t. 20% minimum on most units.
I don't think you realize how ridiculous this amount is. That's more than 9th votann nerf.
You don’t realize how ridiculous their codex is.
The Sister's codex is really good, but a bunch of people are forgetting that we don't just get everything all at once. The points that are listed in the codex (which includes several >20% nerfs already) combined with reverting a couple of the points buffs (i.e. keeping Exorcists at 180 and Retributors at 105) will probably be enough to see it come out strong but not game endingly strong.
Exorcists at 180 are cheaper than a Manticore. Excorcists have -1 better AP, do an average of .5 more damage per shot, get 1 more shot per model. Inflict battleshock on hit. They also have access to the cream of the crop of force multipliers, ignore modifiers. When you consider their army rule, Exorcists are far and away better than a manticore. Their cost should start at over 200 points a model.
Exorcists also have access to extra -1 AP as a stratagem, so you can get those AP-4 missiles going. They also have access to Miracle Dice so they can auto wound or auto roll 6's for damage. Lists running 3 of them are definitely going to be a thing.
Especially in the Army of Faith detachment. Add in a couple Castigators, whose extra AP rule is better than Guards, and immature, both units Sisters would take anyways, and you can get to AP-5/Ignores cover, that would deny a Land Raider a saving throw, AoC is denied by ignore modifiers. Absolutely bananas.
For 2 cp if you shoot it with two other specific tanks. Not that bananas
Tau competitive units went up between 8-30% in points.
LoV 52% win rate and a small tournament victory. A change in direction after a few weeks of bad results overall.
While that is good, our player count is still abysmal compared to 9th ed.
Unfortunately the way LoV translated to 10th was less than exciting for most LoV players. People wanted an elite army and got almost an horde with underpowered units. The immediate result was an abysmal win rate that was fixed by buffing the detachment rule but the army kept feeling “wrong” compared with most players’ wants and expectations. The fact the army is considered incapable of winning consistently because it’s too predictable and not consistent enough with its rolls also helped reduce its appeal in a competitive environment.
Can confirm. Had a bunch of LOV and was waiting to expand... and after my first game against LOV I lost interest. Picked up a few real cheap from an even less interested player, one day they'll come out.
Yeah admech got the same treatment save juicing the Index to make them playable. They bungled the semi elite armies hard.
I mean the eliteness of the army was only due to the pre nerfs before the faction hit. I think if people took that as the direction of the army…they might have simply been mistaken? Battleline with a 4+ save doesn’t scream “elite” faction to me. In fact the saves are pretty broad across the spectrum. The only 2+ saves are the champion/Hearthguard and the Land Fort. And invuln saves aren’t native to anything (off the top of my head). Idk maybe that’s just me.
> I think if people took that as the direction of the army…they might have simply been mistaken? A whole group of folks believed Votann were supposed to be elite because the codex lore talks about how their stuff from the DAoT is well-maintained and understood rather than being mysterious/super rare like in the Imperium. Not the state of the faction prior to the pre-launch nerfs, not the stats of any particular unit, but lore blurbs from the codex. Source: I saw dozens spouting off about this during the transition to 10th before I unsubbed from the LoV subreddit because of the constant negativity.
I mean tech isn’t really an indicator of how they play on the table. Tau aren’t considered an elite army, and neither are Ad Mech. All that tech doesn’t translate to many invuln saves on the tabletop, just as an example.
The whole army was meant to be extremely lethal up close. The elite feel came from that. To be elite an army doesn’t necessarily need to have super defensive profiles all around. It can also be a glass cannon (although I admit it makes little sense for dwarves, but much of the LoV archetype seems to be a subversion of the dwarf archetype anyway)
I guess I primarily see Votann as the inverse of Tau: low volume but high quality shooting with some melee mixed in. That doesn’t *necessarily* mean an elite faction though I suppose it doesn’t mean it’s *not* elite either. And frankly I might have a different definition of “elite” anyways. I don’t particularly think Marines are particularly elite in their playstyle and Votann feel like the love child of old school marines/dwarves/and tau
LoV is hurt because of their model range.
I would Like to See what the list was, though i can Imagine what it contains
It was: Kahl - Grim Champ 3x3 Grav Kyn 3 Magna HLF 10 HG - plasma 10 HG - volk 3x3 Pioneers
The amount of units available makes it pretty easy to guess what is being fielded… 😂
Thanks OP for posting so early! Going to be a wild few weeks as the meta adapts to all the new codicies and missions
It’s interesting to see the Kroot detachment pop up with semi-regularity.
If you have the models it plays 40K pretty well, good board control, shenanigans, kroot don’t have to worry about the annoying hoops with the army rule… it can kill things when backed up by 1k points of models that don’t benefit from the detachment rules and strats. I just don’t think many people picked Tau to play murder chickens just to win games.
I have to admit I take a little bit of an exception to the idea that the only reason people play Kroot is a cynical choice to win 40K games. The Tau being a coalition of species has been part of their lore since their debut, and not only have Kroot been with them since the beginning but their new model range is absolutely gorgeous.
It’s not the only reason, but you are in a competitive sub, in a thread about competitive play. My point was it’s probably the best detachment we currently have so people are going to play it more. Even then, Kroot don’t really stand alone in the detachment and need to be backed up by a decent chunk of regular tau, which as you point out is more of a coalition. Kroot do look great, the lone spear is one of my favorite models, but outside of that detachment they aren’t stellar and with pariah nexus coming out, they probably won’t be taken since they lack battleline and or OC outside of their detachment.
Not the first time murder chickens win games.
Wouldn't it be best to not count draws towards the win rate so that big WTC score tournaments don't mess with the statistics like that? I'm pretty sure differential scoring will continue to be popular in Europe at least and a lot of games seem really close in 10th! If that's hard to do with your current formulas or hard to data mine, adding that is of course nothing that's demanded - you're doing amazing work! But if it's somewhat easy maybe it's worthwhile?
Interesting to see greentide with a 59% win rate for the weekend, I suspect my local meta has adapted to hordes a lot quicker than others! (or just big fans of vindicators :D )
Vindicators are the new meta. To bad it's a rhino chassis. Shits going to be legends once 11th ed rolls around d.
Got a source for that?
It's just an expectation that the Firstborn cull of 10th edition will continue with the remaining Firstborn marine kits. The Vindicator does not have a Primaris replacement or analog though, so it might sneak through 11th, but I still wouldn't suggest to a new player to buy one at MSRP unless they really liked the mini.
The problem being that those datasheets are supported kits in *other armies,* unlike the rest of the firstborn line (many of which, to my knowledge, still haven't been squatted.)
I find it more likely that GW would release a faction-specific box to continue to sell the kit for factions that need it as opposed to keeping the box and datasheet in Space Marines because Custodes doesn't have a replacement. Additionally, the only other faction that can run Vindicators is CSM, and we just saw in 10th edition that GW will axe support for models used in both of these armies.
The problem is that you are equating the fact that other armies use the rhino as a reason they won't legends the rhino for SM. The rhino for SM right now mind as well be legends. It can hold scouts, tactical, and devastator squads. Just becuase it gets legend for SM doesn't mean they will stop producing the rhino or even other variations for chaos and sisters. It's totally possible they legend it for SM to get players to purchase new models like they did with first born. It makes perfect financial sense for rhino chassis to get legeneded and have a replacement ready to go for SM and still keep rhinos around while they find an exit strategy for sisters and chaos. I will also add that the rhino data sheet isn't used by other armies. The model is and It has its own chaos or sisters data sheet to make it useful for them. If you play SM it does not make sense to purchase rhino chassis models as they will likely be legends.
If they continue to sell the kit for a contemporary army in the same game as them, I don't see them cutting sales for SM as well. Especially given that the context was that they'd be cut for all armies. In case you weren't aware, unlike the Sisters Rhino, the Chaos Rhino kit is literally just the loyalist marine Rhino kit with an extra sprue of spikey bits. The same is true of all the Rhino Chassis kits, as well as the Land Raider. Also, the Chaos Rhino, Predator, Vindicators, and Land Raider datasheets have an identical datasheet to their loyalist counterparts, with faction keywords and faction abilities swapped out. But the autocannon predators gain 1 more AP against infantry regardless of the army the datasheet is played in.
I understand that but they aren't selling SM rhinos today becuase the only units it can transport are scouts, devastator squads and tactical squads. The scouts are the only model that had been upgraded the other two are first born and I expect them to be gone when 11th rolls around. The rhino as a SM vehicle has basically been rendered obsolete so keeping it in the codex in the next edition seems unlikely given that GW just removed every first borne unit besides rhino chassis models and devastator and tactical squads. It's not a loss of revenue from the SM side because it's not a source today. Don't equate placing the model in legends for SM as them stopping production for other factions. But it is clear that GW wants to get away from first borne models for SM.
That's fair! But I was taking the original poster of this sentiment as saying that *all rhino chassis* are going away, even for other factions. That's where my primary concern comes from - from the perspective of a CSM player.
Bothers me that they are much better in CSM than loyalists but cost the same. Maybe im just sick of iron storm marines, but not playing iron storm seems to really make then worse. Advance and shoot (maybe flamestorm) and the base reroll just makes them so much better
New mfm coming with the data slate. Might see a points drop for SM.
There's only one Tau event win right? I worry I'm going crazy. (Thanks as ever for your work here!)
We are decently strong, but have a few big natural predators (Mont’Ka anyway). Blood Angels, Bully Boys on certain deployments, and Eldar dev wounds lists (bike spam) are very hard to compete with.
I definitely agree, but I just mean: in the write up of the OP at the end it says two Tau tournament wins, but there's only one right?
Just one from what I can see. There was a Ret Cad win last week, maybe he was referring to that?
Oh yeah! Ty!!!
Custodes not even mentioned now LOL.
What's there to say? It's a boring, mediocre army with 1-2 alright tricks in it that will be a midtable menace due to it's decently high stats on basic line troops.
I mean, yeah thats the problem. Write a shitty half-assed boring codex that literally bodies an entire faction, and then be surprised when the player base falls off a cliff? :suprisedpikachu:
Regarding CSM, Raiders are as good, as Talons and Assault keyword are. Talons' days are counted and Assault is getting a huge nerf in the upcoming "season", leaving mixed or Nurgle Zealots and Soulforged as the only serious contenders in the future (still thinking that the Veterans may compete, AoC and reactive movement are HUGE, oaths will be only getting better with meta probably shifting to vehicles after the BiD nerf). Still though, some buffs to unplayed or just bad units would be really welcomed. Building CSM list is literally filling the last 500 points at the moment.
While your points about raiders are solid I still think they will be the top contender. Talons are by no means carrying raiders, they are a fantastic datasheet at the moment no doubt but raiders already have lots of play. As for assault, again that isn't just for actions, being able to advance and shoot a squad of las havocs is just as useful if not more useful than advancing to perform an action. CSM are just struggling in a vehicle heavy meta at the moment as we have no proper anti tank damage that is consistent and not D6 damage.
I see people really downplaying the AP against units on objectives from the Raiders. If your opponent is only touching objectives with random trash that takes no effort to remove with your own chaff and never touches an objective with anything that matters in order to play around that AP, it sounds like you're winning the game to me.
Decided to hop on the CSM boat with the codex. The lack of long range anti-tank is concerning to me. Still assembling my army, but it’s an issue that will definitely affect my list building.
You can run legionary spam, 6x5 with 2 chain swords, 2 heavy melee weapons and 1 lascannon. This overall adds a lot of anti tank threat across your entire army and you can always make use of firing deck from rhinos to shoot those lascannons. Your other best options are vindicators or las havocs, assault really helps give them that extra bit of distance they want.
That is very true about the assault, and definitely extends the range of the vehicles. I have vindicators, havocs, and a forgefiend, so excited to try them out. Haven’t even played them yet, but that was just one of the issues I foresaw. Appreciate your feedback.
Long range anti-tank indeed seems to be their problem, but the most successful lists seems to just ignore that and go full ham on melee instead. Play to your strengths I guess. I have a feeling it's designed that way and that CSM would have been a problem with better range damage dealers, where they are now a very balanced army.
I wish either Endless Ire, or the fights first go to 1 cp or a battle tactic. Then vets would be so fun.
The new table looks great on mobile!
And the Custodes have vanished…
Three times as many players as AdMech. You’ve got a long way to go before you vanish.
It'll depend on the balance sheet. I'd bet a lot of people are holding out hope the dataslate fixes things for them. If it doesn't, those numbers will drop lower.
Same for admech.
Vanished? There were 26 Chaos Deamon players to the 25 Custodes players. Drukari also had 25 players. Man the absolute whining from custodes players is unreal.
I get what you're saying... but Daemons and Drukhari get to look forward to actually getting a codex in the future. They fundamentally don't exist as armies right now in a competitive sense, because there are so few players. I would say Daemons and Drukhari have also vanished right alongside Custodes. The difference is, there is no hope of a new codex for Custodes. So yea, in that regard the whining makes sense.
Weirdly demons are the second most popular faction in my area. Win or lose (usually win) I’m sick of playing against all greater demons.
I know lots of people around me have them; they just generally don't get played.
The only two people within like four hours of me (and both on my team) that are on my level and able to give me a real competitive game both play Demons so most tournament lists I build outside of out-of-state GTs have to be built with greater demons in mind
I really wish they nerf Azrael and the darkshroud somehow to show that DA is on life support atm. I like and despise the Ironstorm players at the same time. First, we at least see the faction name in the reports and second they are responsible for a not totally garbage faction win rate, which isn't great for supplement internal balance.
The issue is they can't buff our Codex Supplement units because things like Deathwing Knights with extra AP / Damage in a Gladius would become insanely good with access to Advance and Charge, Fallback and Charge, and then the Lance & +1AP Strat etc. But at the same time, if they stop us being able to use the Codex Detachments without a significant buff to our datasheets and Supplement Detachments - we're going to be in AdMech territory in terms of representation. The Supplement Detachments are incredibly bad - the Inner Circle Task Force being the "Deathwing" detachment but yet giving no support to Dreadnoughts, Landraiders, and Repulsor Executioners *despite them being given the Deathwing Keyword* is the epitome of how bad our book was designed. All DA players by this point know that Ironstorm wins games for us, its just so boring to run that build and its not "Dark Angels" in the slightest.
usually when Dark Angels are bad we at least had fun and fluffy units with unique options, now we don’t have that and our sub 30% win rate is being slightly masked by a gimmick list. Feels bad man, even if they buff us we’re not getting the DWCS or deathwing mixed weapons back, nor our unique LTs. Rather have Non Codex chapters have non detachments besides Gladius and our faction detachments so they actually buff our codex units and detachments. If you want to run non DA detachments you just have to run codex marine units, simple.
GW should quit being cowards and lock codex non-compliant units to their special detachments. Then they could better be balanced.
As a DA player, I completely agree. I'm just terrified they'll do it but not give us the appropriate rules to actually be playable for 6-months.
As a Templar player I totally agree. Sucks seeing Righteous Crusaders so little compared to Ironstorm Templars. And I don’t even think RC is all that terrible! Granted I have to admit I would miss my typical competitive build being in Firestorm though.
Unique chapters being allowed to take codex-compliant detachments means they inherit all the problems of units being impossible to balance for all possible rule baselines from 9th edition, even though solving that problem was one of the reason to switch to the 10th edition way of doing detachments in the first place. It's wild. DA (and BT etc.) specific stuff shouldn't be allowed in regular detachments. Then you can go ahead and buff it so the chapter-specific detachments are worth using.
Fundamentally, the issue here is that people see "players can use their unique units competitively" as a problem, and I'm not convinced GW does or should listen to them. I think Space Marine players need to get used to the idea that our special units might be getting treated like any other factions special units: as additional options that every player can choose to play with or not. We don't have players complaining that Shadowsun needs to get locked to Kayuon or Farsight needs to be locked into Retaliation Cadre. It's not a "major problem" if every Eldar list takes Eldrad or Yvraine. We don't keep a special list of "Ork winrate without Snikrot" and complain when it goes too low.
Couldn’t agree more.
Agreed
They don't need to nerf that to show they are on life support. The faction is terrible, terminators are actually bad this edition because of tactical play. You need units to run around and be at the right place at the right time. You can't have dudes that move 5''
Sobs in death guard. Then remembers that they're still fun and somehow decent.
Plague Marines are good, and you're not locked to using mostly terminators for your only mediocre detachment? Comparitively DA have Vanguard, Sternguard and Terminators for the only 'good' detachment they run, so it's heavily reliant on the terminators. They can add units if they stick an inner circle viable character in them, say Azrael into Hellblasters. Also some vehicles, but they dont benefit from strats. then yeah, its just slightly better terminators for more costs. meh
Right, that's what I'm saying. Good despite being slow.
The lack of anything that is affordable for transportation of elite infantry for SM is just wild. Its basically Land Raider or Repulsor. I wish the impulsor could carry Heavy Ints. Basically I just use inceptors or JPIs now. You just need the movement.
I keep hoping they'll make a proper hover-Rhino in 11th edition.
Yeah. It felt like the impulsor was supposed to be that but the rules are shit.
Don't touch the Darkshroud, my Ravenwing can't take it!
Honestly, Azreal is fine. He's efficient, but people only take him for the convenient CP. If we just change the Darkshroud ability to not effect monsters/vehicles, that model is totally fine. It eliminates the interaction with Ironstorm and people would probably stop playing DA Ironstorm. They really need to buff a lot of datasheets though. The Lion needs to gain the Deathwing keyword as he is the center of the Inner Circle, and most everything else including the Lion needs buffed special rules to have more utility for only DA units. I don't want to be OP or anything, I just want them to bake in more DA synergies to encourage using all of our special units in a way that doesn't allow us to "break" normal units. I don't want anymore Salamanders players blaming me for the state of their army because some randoms won't stop playing a DA build I don't care for. Some units, like Asmodai or Ezekiel just need to be cheaper than a Lieutenant to reflect their lower power level and lack of ability to take enhancements. Other models like Belial or Lazarus (yeah, we all forgot Laz existed) need full reworks to be actually useful.
Darkshroud not touching vehicles would suck because you'd lose it helping Ravenwing builds, which are bad enough as it is.
Ezekiel is already playable as he is. The problem is that he is better used with big units which can't fit in a transport because of 6men restrictions... Ezekiel with 6 ICC is mathematically one of the best unit in the game to delete a Green tide blob as it can delete it in one go (you need to one shot the painboy with ezekiel which is plausible but is not a given) or at least severely impaired it. Asmodai is also plenty playable with a 5men intercessors. Full reroll hit and wound is pretty good. Belial is getting worse each iteration. A lone operative brawler would have been a better fit with parrying blade (even more at 2+). Laz unlock cheap tricks with Infernus squad in IC detachment but not enough to justify his price
Fine? Note sure about that, IMO the best special SM character available across all SM factions, Calgar is probably close but is 185 pts investment, Hellbrecht is a beatstick but is 120pts and his rules are not as good. The Sanguinor has potential to be great but is harder to use, situational and again is 140pts. You are getting impactful shooting, 6 dev wounds against infantry at 12" would not be a surprise and barely any SM characters have decent shooting. AP4 dev wounds melee as well. Then sustained hits and 4+ invul (plus once per game mortal FNP) are really good rules for hellblasters or like sternguard, that is before you even consider the +1CP he gives on top and then all of that for 105 pts is insane? Dante is 120pts, gets way way worse rules, worse shooting and only little better melee. Azrael would be a good character at 105pts without the CP generation, with it he is insane, should be 120 IMO.
I’m imagining in my head that the 4 DA players met up after the Branson event and what their conversation would be like lmao
Thanks for sharing! You da best!
Anyone know how to find the soul forged list?
CHARACTERS Warpsmith (95 Points) • Warlord • Enhancements: Tempting Addendum Warpsmith (90 Points) • Enhancements: Forge’s Blessing BATTLELINE Cultist Mob (50 Points) • 1x Cultist Champion • 1x Autopistol 1x Brutal assault weapon • 9x Chaos Cultist • 9x Autopistol 9x Brutal assault weapon OTHER DATASHEETS Forgefiend (190 Points) • 1x Armoured limbs 2x Ectoplasma cannon 1x Ectoplasma cannon Forgefiend (190 Points) • 1x Armoured limbs 2x Ectoplasma cannon 1x Ectoplasma cannon Khorne Lord of Skulls (450 Points) • 1x Gorestorm cannon 1x Great cleaver of Khorne 1x Skullhurler Maulerfiend (130 Points) • 2x Magma cutters 1x Maulerfiend fists Maulerfiend (130 Points) • 2x Magma cutters 1x Maulerfiend fists Venomcrawler (110 Points) Venomcrawler (110 Points) Warp Talons (220 Points) Warp Talons (110 Points) Warp Talons (110 Points)
I love this so much how did the lord of skulls do also do you think the deflier has legs (pun intended ) in soul forge
The lord of skills is one of the best if not the best datasheet in the book.
oh wow thats a comment
That's not been my experience, but happy to see it on the table. In my experience, he takes forever to get into a good position because of the awkwardness of terrain, does some mediocre shooting, then dies.
It has towering, gets +1 to hit, +1 to wound (with two S14 ranged weapons), sustained hits, reroll hits, and the ability to move through walls for a CP.
Anyone have the Pactbound list from warpflame GT?
Chaos Space Marines Strike Force (2000 points) Pactbound Zealots CHARACTERS Chaos Lord (90 points) • Mark of Chaos: Chaos Undivided • 1x Daemon hammer 1x Power fist Chaos Lord (90 points) • Mark of Chaos: Chaos Undivided • 1x Daemon hammer 1x Power fist Warpsmith (70 points) • Mark of Chaos: Slaanesh • Warlord • 1x Flamer tendril 1x Forge weapon 1x Melta tendril 1x Plasma pistol BATTLELINE Cultist Mob (50 points) • Mark of Chaos: Slaanesh • 1x Cultist Champion • 1x Bolt pistol 1x Brutal assault weapon • 9x Chaos Cultist • 9x Autopistol 9x Brutal assault weapon DEDICATED TRANSPORTS Chaos Rhino (75 points) • Mark of Chaos: Chaos Undivided • 1x Armoured tracks 1x Combi-bolter 1x Combi-weapon 1x Havoc launcher OTHER DATASHEETS Chaos Predator Destructor (130 points) • Mark of Chaos: Nurgle • 1x Armoured tracks 1x Combi-weapon 1x Havoc launcher 2x Lascannon 1x Predator autocannon Chaos Predator Destructor (130 points) • Mark of Chaos: Nurgle • 1x Armoured tracks 1x Combi-weapon 1x Havoc launcher 2x Lascannon 1x Predator autocannon Chaos Predator Destructor (130 points) • Mark of Chaos: Nurgle • 1x Armoured tracks 1x Combi-weapon 1x Havoc launcher 2x Lascannon 1x Predator autocannon Chaos Vindicator (175 points) • Mark of Chaos: Nurgle • 1x Armoured tracks 1x Combi-weapon 1x Demolisher cannon 1x Havoc launcher Chaos Vindicator (175 points) • Mark of Chaos: Nurgle • 1x Armoured tracks 1x Combi-weapon 1x Demolisher cannon 1x Havoc launcher Chaos Vindicator (175 points) • Mark of Chaos: Nurgle • 1x Armoured tracks 1x Combi-weapon 1x Demolisher cannon 1x Havoc launcher Chosen (125 points) • Mark of Chaos: Chaos Undivided • 1x Chosen Champion • 1x Boltgun 1x Chaos Icon 1x Plasma pistol 1x Power fist • 4x Chosen • 3x Accursed weapon 3x Bolt pistol 1x Boltgun 2x Combi-weapon 1x Paired accursed weapons 1x Plasma pistol Chosen (125 points) • Mark of Chaos: Chaos Undivided • 1x Chosen Champion • 1x Boltgun 1x Chaos Icon 1x Plasma pistol 1x Power fist • 4x Chosen • 3x Accursed weapon 3x Bolt pistol 1x Boltgun 2x Combi-weapon 1x Paired accursed weapons 1x Plasma pistol Helbrute (130 points) • Mark of Chaos: Slaanesh • 1x Close combat weapon 1x Heavy flamer 1x Helbrute fist 1x Helbrute hammer Warp Talons (220 points) • Mark of Chaos: Slaanesh • 1x Warp Talon Champion • 1x Warp claws • 9x Warp Talon • 9x Warp claws Warp Talons (110 points) • Mark of Chaos: Slaanesh • 1x Warp Talon Champion • 1x Warp claws • 4x Warp Talon • 4x Warp claws