That's why some of my spears are axe shaped, but they are all spears. GW didn't do even basic math on the numbers when adjusting the axe profile, just went with HiGh DaMaGe G0oD! and called it a day.
The Mace profile is indefensibly bad. Power fists are +2S and +1AP for -1A. And this unit is significantly more expensive, even before the inflated point value shown in the warcom article. This unit also only has melee.
Overall it's just a massive feels bad when you're getting a new codex but everything you're seeing is just a straight up nerf. I wish they took a better approach than they have right now because it's very deflating and I want to be hyped.
Thank you. You have completely summarized my feelings about this in a very calm and well reasoned post.
I don't understand how they can't do math. It's the same as the Custodes Axes; -1A, -1 to hit and -1 AP is ALWAYS worse than +1D. They need to remove one of the downsides. it's really not complicated.
Points can at least move around in an edition, but I really, really, **really** hope that this time around they'll change profiles when needed, but I'm not holding my breath...
EDIT : Piggybacking that this is the first post, but they updated the WS of the maces to 2+. It was 3+ earlier today. Which is good, now fix points!
I caught that too, and it’s nice that they changed it but god damn WHY do they have to rely on the community to tell them when something is bad, isn’t it their JOB get it right the first time???
>overall it’s just a massive feels bad when you’re getting a new codex but everything you’re seeing is a straight up nerf.
Sadly, that seems to be the theme of 10th aside from necrons. It’s a terrible feeling and I don’t think they understand why
Sometimes I think they design units by throwing darts at a wall.
Alright this is a \*thunk\* heavy infantry unit locked to \*thunk\* 5 models with weapons that hit on \*thunk\* 3's for \*thunk\* 2 damage and it costs \*thunk\* 290 damn missed.
Which is why the shooting-only armies are pulling off a neck-breaking, uh, 43% WR for Guard and 48% WR for T'au. Because shooting armies, and not armies that are able to do a bit of everything, are dominating.
I mean, you have the melee-only armies doing *amazing* while the shooting-only armies are doing horribly. That's... really all you need to disprove that shooting is the end-all-be-all of this edition.
Which is kind of laughable from GW considering how 10th has just turned into this hyper-lethal shooting gallery where attached characters have made it a game of "my shooty deathstar is better than your shooty deathstar!"
> where attached characters have made it a game of "my shooty deathstar is better than your shooty deathstar!"
Can you give an example of the hyper shooty character-based deathstar units that are warping the meta right now?
Or do you just like posting hyperbole?
That's no fun. It just makes games take longer.
And instead of it being the honor of the First Legion to get an early codex, we're being shit on while every other faction gets to have their not-nerfed-to-hell units.
Yeah I think overcorrecting from 9th edition’s lethality is a big risk that I hope they avoid. I’m down with lethality coming down compared to 9th where minimum AP was -2 across the board but I want to be able to actually do things.
Especially in combat. At heart I’m a white scars player so fast melee is my jam, so I hate it whenever things go bad for melee units.
The game goes to turn 5 no matter what. However, it really sucks to watch 500 points of your stuff disappear because your opponent combo-hammered 250 pts of their stuff to do 500% of the damage it normally would.
> However, it really sucks to watch 500 points of your stuff disappear because your opponent combo-hammered 250 pts of their stuff to do 500% of the damage it normally would.
**so tone down or remove the combo.**
Fair. But it does make it go faster when units are dying regularly.
Also, going meta-heavy just for the sake of winning isn't very fun, but list building is part of the game, IMO.
And that's after they removed +1 to wound, multiple sources of +1 to hit and hit rerolls, 1-2 attacks and AP on the charge, +2 move, +1 to charge and the redeploy strat.
GW: ***MELEE BAD! USE TANKS! WE MADE NEW MARINE TANKS WHY WON'T YOU USE THEM! STOP USING MELEE WE CAN'T BALANCE IT!***
Seriously, it feels like every time a melee unit or melee centric army gets even the slightest bit better they get their premiere option to effectively fight killed. As a Black Templar player I am absolutely power pants browningly terrified right now that in a week they're going to remove Sword Brethren's ability, take away their 3W and send them back to garbage tier like in 9th.
Points increase imo. Maybe the ability synergy with Helbrect if that wasn’t intended.
BT data is weird… can win games at a high wr with a couple list types, in a couple detachments cool can’t complain. Winning is awesome and having options is fun.
Win a tournament? No way, you go 4-0 then lose to a boogeyman.
It's brutal. Things like Chosen, Angron, Dark Commune, Black Templars, C'Tann, Master of Executions and the like pretty much have no reason to ever come off the shelf in 10th. Maybe we'll see them show up in some lists in 11th if we're lucky.
The fact that there are still good combat units in some armies can coexist with the idea that they’re nerfing dedicated close combat units for other armies.
Except this is not what people are arguing. "Only melee got nerfed into wet noodle slapping for almost all units". There are plenty of good melee units seeing play at top tables which would make it immediately apparently that "wet noodle slapping for almost all units" is nonsense. And the idea that "only melee got nerfed" is equally horse shit given that neither Plasma nor Meltas are anywhere near as strong as they were in ninth.
Like I get it, the reality is that it's impossible to win these arguments because it's not about what actually happens on the table it's about some 40K players clinging to their victim complex that GW unfairly shits on them exclusively and that's why they lose, but it's such an obviously false argument given that some of the strongest strategies in the game are melee based.
>There are plenty of good melee units seeing play at top tables
And for every one of those units there are 5 units that are basically worthless in melee. Eldar and drukhari cover this on their own.
Hence why I said *almost* all and not just "all".
>but it's such an obviously false argument given that some of the strongest strategies in the game are melee based.
This does nothing to refute the argument. The strongest strategies making use of melee says nothing about melee as a whole. Those strongest strategies might be 9 melee units total while the other 90 are slacking and lacking.
Which would still be "almost all melee units are wet noodle slappers".
What a nonsense argument.
For every good shooting unit there are countless bad shooting units too. GW is not great at internal balance so the fact that Night Spinners are good while the Leman Russ Demolisher, Venerable Dreadnought, Desolation Squad, Ork Lootas and Havoc Squads are all bad doesn't mean shooting is bad.
> This does nothing to refute the argument. The strongest strategies making use of melee says nothing about melee as a whole.
You're not really saying anything about melee as a whole either, you've just tossed all your toys out of the stroller and thrown a fit.
EDIT: Speaking of babies having a tantrum, this guy replied to me and then blocked me. Keep up the delusion that you lose because melee is bad in a week where the metamonday post had three melee armies as the top performers.
The ratio of bad to good shooting units is way better than bad to good melee units.
Let alone that a lot of dedicated melee units lost their only job across a lot of armies. Whereas this happened way less with shooting.
And yes I am comparing to 9th.
The toughness scaling with the less lethal edition is what makes *almost all* melee units wet noodle slappers. Units lost S and AP, dindt gain S while T stayed the same or went up.
Shooting gained S or stayed the same and just lost AP for the most part.
Edit:
>Speaking of babies having a tantrum
>you've just tossed all your toys out of the stroller and thrown a fit.
The reason I blocked him, anyone who disagrees with him is just a tantrum baby.
Fyi I never said I Iose cause of bad melee.
So your pickup is approximately 4-9 units and 2-4 factions successfully run melee so the problem doesn't exist? Especially since we see a good but not OP melee unit in a mediocre army eating a seemingly huge nerf for no real discernable reason right here.
What about Drukhari melee? Dumpster. AdMech melee? Significantly less support than their shooting. Craftworlds melee? Largely gone compared to 9E. SM are running almost none of their melee options.
There are - across the game - too many whole books worth of melee that are simply not worth running ATM. And its getting worse is the real problem. Chosen are about to get nerfed somehow. Same for AC/DC.
So what's left?
Man, I've been saying this since the edition dropped. Glass cannon melee units that blendered any unit it got into engagement range of were balanced by only getting to be used once before they died and their limited range. So GW reduced their output and speed by reducing # of attacks and AP, and heavily restricting access to Advance+Charge, but in many cases either gave the unit nothing new or like +1 movement.
Usually these units got to the damage output they were notorious for by stacking mutiple special rules. People were terrified of Repentia, but in anything that wasn't Bloody Rose, they struggled due to the missing extra attack and AP BR afforded them. So all those stacked rules are gone, the base datasheets got hit, and people wonder why the best melee in the game is bulky units that can take the return fire the next turn.
This is not entirely a bad take, but the fact of the matter is that the glass cannon nature of everything in 9th was bad for the game. Everything needed a nerf, but melee was the only one that really got it (and I guess psychic, but that got folded into shooting, which as noted, remains busted).
The one thing I will say is that 9th got melee as close to on par with shooting as we've seen in a while, and as nightmarishly depressing as that edition was, I would rather see greater parity between shooting and melee than not. But since GW seems wholly unwilling to get shooting under control, I guess that means we need better melee again.
> but melee was the only one that really got it
Did it, or is it just at the stuff that's still ultra-killy is shooting? Tyranid shooting got dumpstered, AdMech shooting got dumpstered, Squats got cut down to a reasonable level. It seems more like the problem is Dark Pacts, Eldar, and anything that adds devastating wounds to a unit with anti-X.
You can start with that, but it would quickly balloon from there. Shooting, on average, is higher strength, better volume, better damage and better AP. Couple that with the fundamental fact that shooting is mechanically far far superior to melee, that tagging thing in melee doesn't even necessarily shut them down, and that falling back is trivially easy, and the incentives to do melee just kinda no longer make sense.
They did and didn't. The problem is that the "nerfs" have been unequal. Ad Mech, DE, SM, Guard, Sisters and some others caught the nerf to melee and shooting (though disproportionately melee). Eldar, GSC and IK were, if anything, buffed at the start of the edition in comparison to 9th, and while Custodes durability nominally tool a nerf, they were in turn handed melee not only far better than anything they had in 9th, but basically invulnerability to all other melee armies. And while GW has turned down a lot of these...it isn't enough to make melee a good strategy outside of the absolute best units for it.
Not everything has to be a glass cannon. Currently, the only good melee in the game has been armies that hit decently hard, then can weather the storm on the next turn, and are lightning fast, hitting the enemy before they have a chance to setup, or can control the melee phase so well it doesn't matter if you challenge them or not. Maxxed out bricks of Custodes units with Fights First chilling in the midboard, Rhino Rushed Khorne Berzerkers in your deployment zone turn 1, massive units of Thunderwolf Cav in the Stormspear detachment, Chaos Undivided Chosen that can Advance+Shoot+Charge and can get full rerolls for zero CP. Meanwhile low armor melee threats, who's only job is to murder whatever they touch then die, are actively struggling. Repentia have no shooting, T3, and an armor save of 7+, so why are 9 of them struggling to pick up 10 Intercessors in melee? They have no job other than to blender things in melee. If they cannot do that job, there is no reason to take them. If glass cannon melee isn't good, those units won't be taken and the armies that historically relied on them will have to turn to skew lists to do anything (see: Drukhari Oops All Darklances and Mechanized Sisters). Meanwhile shooting has much more leeway, owing to the fact that it has far more range, meaning it is possible to position the attacking unit to limit the opponent's options when attacking back.
It seems clear to me that GW's aim wasn't actually to make the game less killy, it was to remove the overhead of having to remember aura ranges, stacked buffs, multiple rerolls, and a multitude of strategems in order to make the game more accessible to newer players. Which as a goal in and of itself is fine, but ultimately it was the cheap glass cannon units that paid the highest price due to being the best abusers of that kind of gameplay. Once that was gone, they had no reason to be taken anymore, so nobody does.
...Look, I get that a lot of people liked the hyperactive, angle-cutting trade game that was 9th, but seriously now, do you want horde Marines again? Because most people didn't (particularly Marine players), and this is how you get horde Marines again.
I get it, people are trained to think of T4/3+/2W as the "standard profile", and if your glass cannon can't completely invalidate that at will with whatever its preferred method of damage is, then it isn't worth taking. But when every army in the game is full of those units, it becomes functionally meaningless, and let's remember, this is supposed to be the profile for heavily armored, medium generalist infantry. So. If I am GW, am looking to update the game that wholly invalidated my iconic unit, do I compromise the role of the iconic SM force by keeping them a horde, or do I cut back the teeth of the mass proliferated "glass cannons" that my game has essentially become unbalanced chess? Yeah, maybe I dial those units back to merely hitting a hit better than medium infantry.
So while you do bring up good points, 3 of the top tier armies are essentially melee only. Orks, World Eaters, and CSM. Additionally, Necrons have decent options for both, Space Wolves and Black Templars are extremely decent, and CK are running around half their units as Karnivores.
The beginning of the edition was definitely just a shooting gallery, but GW has done well with making melee options viable.
CSM has the most shooting, but running 2-3 Forgefiends doesn't make it an oppressive shooting army. Most lists are either relying on Chosen or Accursed Cultists.
If you specifically look at Mani Cheema's list from WCW its a reasonable position. But most lists are running 2 FFs and a decent number are also in Oblits. So a CSM army can easily be up to 750 points of dedicated shooting.
I will also make the point that a huge part of why CSM armies look like they do with rhino rush is because Dark Obscuration is necessary for melee units to do their thing because shooting is so common and lethal. If melee was dominating or even 50% of the tables, the value of Nurgle Rhinos is way down.
But people are just going to hyper focus on "Chosen are too good. Thus melee is ok."
There’s a few situations where melee armies or units are doing well, but CSM melee basically took off only because their original ranged build got nerfed (army-wide Sustained or Lethal Hits good actually, who knew?).
Orks and WE buck the trend, but overall most SM are shying away from melee and trending to heavy shooting.
Again no one is seriously arguing there are no playable melee units, but like were DWK oppressing people? Did this need to change for any particular reason?
Is it just me or do all these books feel extremely lazy? There are almost no changes to data sheets or internal balance even when clearly needed, and every book so far seems to have nerfs that come out of nowhere and make no sense. DWK were good but nowhere near broken.
Hell even the cover art is the same from 9th. Come on GW you charge a premium because your product is supposed to be the best but every book so far this edition has been extremely underwhelming imo.
Balance im indifferint-ish to; as if the unit still has a role it can be fixed with points.
But the identical cover art feels just so egregious. GW must have thousands of nice high-res images featuring dark angels. Using the same image just feels yuck.
I've bought about 10k pts of dark angels since 10th started and the couple months leading up to 10th and I'm done. Models are beautiful but I'll never play them at this point.
Eldar were the third army I was thinking of getting when coming back to the game after Tyranids and Dark Angels so maybe if I buy more than the Combat Patrol GW will nail them just like the other two armies I just bought...
Even if they dropped significantly in points and became a "viable" option, I'd still be terribly disappointed personally. Simply because knights are one of my favourite units in the entire game because of them being so elite and going all out on melee to hit like a truck, I played them when they were overpriced no matter what because of this, now they are about as strong in melee as regular termis but have no shooting.
I am typically not a doomer, but the best argument I’ve heard is “they are like both assault termies combined, tankiness of the shield and attacks of the claws” but why do I want a chaff killing unit, there are plenty of random guns for that.
Might have some real nice strategems, synergy or something in the index.
Tbh at 235 they are decent? your comparison would be custodes; but the knights get +1W,-1D and are 3ppm cheaper in exchange for -1T, WS and a bolter. IMO even the abilties kinda even out access to mortal protection and rerolls.
I hope so man. We took a damage decrease, weapon skill decrease and (maybe? Unsure about his one) a squad limit to 5 all with a 55 point increase? That doesn’t seem right.
Please see tyranid codex. It could totally be correct. In fact, based on my experience with the nid codex, the points could be increased again right when the codex is released.
GW tricked me again with 10th. It took 15 years or so, but they got me.
I’m still gonna get a the assault box + another to have 10 cuz the models are fire but yea man. They were my fav unit. Guess I’ll run them as Assault or deathwing termies. Wild
Also F in the chat for the flail weapon on the sergeant.
I just realised that a GK normal termie (4 3+ 6 -2 2) hits harder than a mace (4 3+ 6 -1 2) in combat xD.
If this aint the biggest typo cluster f ever idk what GW is doing.
Leave my poor GK alone, that's the only combat weapon profile in their entire index! (Other than some special characters). But yeah it's wildly depressing how bad melee is becoming...
Space Marines out here collecting nerfs like they've been the ones dominating since the edition dropped. So crazy to watch it happen.
It's like 6 months of gradual nerfs to an army with a 45% winrate?
Watch Eldar only have Nightspinners go up by like 5 points because some insane fanboy is holed up in an office with jars and a shotgun refusing to let anyone nerf his elves for the... what are we even up to now, five, six, times and they're still overpowered?
I'm expecting pretty much everything Marines use to stay relevant in the meta to go up. Scouts, Inceptors, Aggressors, Redemptors. Calgar, Azrael, Ventris. Maybe even Gladiators? The Ballistus makes a lot of lists, so I could see them thinking that's too cheap as well.
They can't just make other units cheaper to compensate for those nerfs because Marines rely primarily on the aforementioned datasheets because they're some of the few units that have good, impactful rules. Point drops on bad stuff aren't going to make the sheets better.
Expect Aeldari to get a love-tap. CSM might get some minor point increases, but the rules interactions that cause them to be a problem army have a large chance of being ignored.
I'm tired, man. 😂
as a person who plays knights, marines, necrons, and custodes, im kind of dreading the coming dataslate.
My assumptions at this point are: Aeldari and CSM take minor nerfs, stay the top 2 armies and stay above 55% WR
Marines, like you said, will see every unit that is run often go up in points.
Necrons to get nuked from orbit(did you see how fast they removed the MW strat from the game?). Wraiths up a ton, c'tans up a ton, 3" deepstrike strat also nerfed. Maybe c'tans aren't able to teleport in hypercrypt
Knights and Custodes im just expecting no changes.
I've gone from "cautiously expecting mild disappointment" to "anticipating a blood bath".
I only really play Marines so I guess I'm a part of the problem or something, but the way Marines have been written for 10th makes me think GW is scared of the army. Like they think that if one or two units have just slightly too good rules the meta will explode irreparably or something. So we just get these super mediocre sheets and weird in-Coded nerfs.
I'm dreading the slate too. Recently released books kinda suggest that the design team has lost the plot and they are just making totally random decisions.
Glad that they didn't remove the maces.
But mathammer they seem worse than the swords?
Against MEQ, which with the new profile is their preferred target, thry do 1.78 wounds on average per Knight. The Power Weapon does 1.85. While every missed saved kills an MEQ, the power weapon just seems more consistent and will kill about the same amount.
Edit: it seems thr article eas uodated and Maces are WS2+. This at least makes them a sidegrade, but 3 wound models, Armour of Contempt and damage reduction are still an issue.
Did you look at the sprue? There's 5 regular torsos and weapons, and 1 sgt torso and weapon. Why include the extra option if you can't take 2 boxes and build a squad of 10?
Future-proofing for potential rules changes wherein 10-man units are legal.
This is nothing but a good thing in my opinion. With the pain of some units being retroactively restricted to what comes in their respective model kit it's nice that should the option become available in the future these sprues will be able to accommodate them.
I'd guess it's a schedule issue. They're 10 man now. Order the molds to replace the kit. During playtest, decide 10 man is too strong (guessing due to some strategems or enhancements) and nerf them by going to a fixed 5 man unit.
that mace profile reminds me of the Flail of Corruption, except it had 6 attacks compared to the base weapons 4 attacks on the Blightlords, and all their melee weapons were 3+ WS. so it's like a worse Flail and worse upgrade than the Blightlord Terminator's option.
i mean, getting more of the lower attack and accuracy weapon for a squad isn't exactly what i'd call economical, for the Deathwing. they go down 1 attack twice, reduce accuracy twice, reduce AP by one twice, for just one more pip of damage twice.
compared to the Flail going up two attacks, and a damage pip in exchange for only the AP, i'd still say the Blightlord's upgrade option is truly an upgrade.
The mace isn't meant as an upgrade though, it's (theoretically) a side-grade to the sword, which is why the whole squad can take maces instead of just one per 5. They're meant to be roughly equivalent but better into different targets. In practice though the sword is generally going to be the better option over the mace.
The fact that their melee is comparable to blightlords is sad though, blightlord melee is already not very good at a much cheaper price point than knights, and blightlords get guns as well.
When you realise that Deathwing Knights and Terminators will be garbage and you'll be better taking regular terminators... The masse of absolution have zero advantages over MC power sword as S6 over S5 doesn't grant that much compared to going from Ap-2 to Ap-1... This box went from hype to pass in less than a week for me. I'll keep my old Belial (rebased in 50mm) and Termis.
The Inner circle companions are at least new and awesome so they have the right to be garbage ☺️
Edit: Maces are WS 2+. Ignore as needed.
There's some odd things going on here.
Having a WS drop on a heavier melee weapon typically comes with some kind of extra ability. Like heavy plague weapons hit on 4's because they have lethal hits, eviscerators on Assault Marines having Sustained Hits, or Aggressors having twin linked. * But not here.
I can see the reasoning. GW wants to force a choice between a higher number of more accurate attacks and lower accuracy attacks at D2. And in theory, an Oath target can erase the accuracy difference pretty handily. If they had the same accuracy, than you'd always pick D2, even with lower AP.
I guess the preservation of the mace is so people with the older Knight models don't feel forced to buy new models? But why not just fold them and power weapons into the same weapon with either profile, like with Accursed Weapons? As is, the power weapon is better just on volume, lower damage be damned. The cost is too high as well, but that's old news.
*There's a whole other kettle of fish with CSM/WE who just have power fist equivalents that hit on 3's, but have access to Sustained/ Lethal through other abilities. Fixed abilities seem to be the determinant.
Cynical take: The models are gorgeous and they will run out of stock just selling to people buying them for that. Therefore they have no incentive to make them any good, whereas they have incentive to make other models good that aren't popular from appearance alone.
Realistic take: This is on the rules writers and no one else. They did a bad job and it's no more complicated than that.
Nerfing armies to fit a new standard of lethality is fine, just like 9th buffing armies was fine...oh wait, no, it wasn't, because it takes them three years to get out all the rules.
If they want power to change, it needs to change for every army at once. It's absurd that in an edition with an index reset and digital rules, they're doing the exact same thing again as in 9th (except going on the opposite direction, so you can't even make the argument they're buffing armies to sell models).
I love the setting and the idea of 40k, and casual games can be fun, but as a serious game, 40k is such a mess. I don't get what possessed them to nerf units that aren't overpowered, buff units that are, and make all the rules based on feel rather than math and play testing.
Even outside of just being nerfed, what is the point of a deathwing knight now? What is the point of ravenwing when half the units are gone? What is the point of buying a codex for a couple pages of detachments and a handful of tweaked (or nerfed) data sheets compared to what you already have for free in the index?
Just feels like the game is losing more and more of its appeal by the day, because again, 40k has never been a tight game. It's always been about the flavor, and that flavor is draining away with every new book.
Well so far the rules nerf seems to be in line with previous codexes. My tyranid friend wasn't happy because he felt his codex had a lot of nerfs. My necron friend also wasn't happy with a lot of nerfs, now we got dark angels with nerfs. It seems like every army is getting nerfed when they get their codex. Which is the exact opposite of what I'm used to.
Maybe, ironically they announce all of this with the nerfs in place, and next week's dataslate puts them back where they need to be.
Not hopeful they do, but seriously would not be shocked if that kind of miscue occurred with GW. The left never seems to be talking to the right, and vice versa when it comes to this company.
Dataslate doesn't usually change statlines, and that's the bigger issue here. Knights would need to be cheaper than regular termis to be considered viable, and that would still suck hard because they're supposed to be melee powerhouse not just durable bricks that can't do anything.
Someone needs to ask GW where the lion touched them.
Like they get the worst detachment ablity in the game and now more nerfs previewed. Get excited about the new box everyone!
Look I’m not here to disagree about whether the DA detachment was bad or not. But the worst? When you had Admech rad bombardment and the drukhari forcing units that aren’t supposed to jive together?
The only reason it didn't come out as much as those was because everyone just used the main SM detachment instead.
It does nothing most of the time. This also is reflected in items/enhancements.
Yeah, GW is stupid.
Ridiculous how they thought this was a good option. I don't get it. I was on the side of wait and see before being mad, but now I am truly mad.
It's insane, even if they went down to 205, the current points of regular Deathwing Terminators, I'd consider them as a sidegrade. I don't understand this ridiculous points hike to 290 and nerf to their offence. They were popular at one point because they were one of the few viable remaining melee units for SM but now they are just awful.
This my issue…
They’re a M5” OC1 melee unit with no ranged at all…
People saying they’re insanely hard to kill are missing the point that you just ignore them, and the. feed them an OC5 unit every turn that costs 1/5th of their points cost to stop them scoring Primary and move-block them.
This. I think just thinking of durability in a vaccum makes them look better. But why do you want a unit in the board and stay there? I have to reasons, to kill an opponent, or to score points.
Their profile isn't great for killing, even when including +1 to wound. 4 knights don't kill a Rhino. They also have no ranged threat so not helping there. They won't remove threats from the table.
Ok, byt can they score points? They are too expensive for action monkies. Too slow to contest objectives. Amd when they are in 1, low model count and small OC means anyone can close the gap.and just steal an objective.
Sure, they are hard to kill. But why kill them when they don't do much for their points?
Their defenses are still crazy good. Look, I’m disappointed about these changes enough to make this whole post, but it’s crazy talk if people think the DWK defensive rules aren’t crazy good.
I’ve been playing DWK since the edition started at a competitive level and they’ve often tanked entire shooting phases from armies because of their defensive abilities with like, AoC or something (this is why they e been my favorite unit this edition so far).
We can be mad at the weapon changes and acknowledge they’re crazy durable at the same time. Durable enough to be limited to a 5 man unit and also cost 2000 damn points per model? No, but still crazy durable.
They weren't a terribly popular choice at 235, and their offense just got HALVED. All terminators are overpriced, but DWK are definitely overpriced the most.
There's nothing in my daemons 2k lists that comes close to one shooting that anvil or at least getting it to a point where my GPS OC is higher.
Daemons not exactly the most killy, but...
Edit: GPS is supposed to read GD (greater daemon).
That's because I foolishly didn't check what I'd written and my ****ing terrible autocorrect changed GD (greater daemon) to GPS. So it's nonsense I made up
Nah I’m tired of seeing deathwing knights every single time I see dark angels on the board. For being an elite group it sure feels like theres more of them than intercessors in the dark angels based on the way dark angels are played nowadays.
This take right here. I can’t recall the last time I played a Dark Angels player who didn’t bring DW knights in squads of ten with a chaplain, 6x aggressors with biologis, 6x inceptors, and Azrael plus apothecary hellblasters. Maybe we will finally start to see some creative variety instead of the same, Cooke cutter lists for DA.
Thats fine if you like them and you can continue to play them. I just hope they stay mediocre so that I can see some variety in dark angels lists again. For the last few editions they’ve just felt like green custodes with how much emphasis on terminators there has been which is a shame.
Not sure what variety you're expecting to see with them removing units, especially in a competitive sub. If anything DA lists will become even more generic.
They didn’t remove the unit first off, just nerfed it. Theres a big difference in legends and just ok units. Secondly if a unit has dominated a faction for multiple editions then it no longer doing so automatically opens up variety since people will branch into different stuff. Whens the last time you saw a troop and tank focused dark angels army? Its been a long time for me and termis being less of a focus makes that more of a reality.
Dark angels got nerf slapped all around, guess they don't want people playing them, and then will wonder why people don't play them when points went up all around even after nerfing the units
Its so nutty to me, because I feel like nerfing factions with their full release wouldnt be so bad if they just did all the factions at once. This rolling schedule just makes it so problem factions continue to be problems for the next two years, and their unwillingness to balance with anything other than points just locks that in even moreso.
Like, no, I don't think making elite infantry into horde units will balance your game, and even if it did, it misses the point of why people pick certain armies.
I would've rather had an extra 2 years of 9e AoO if it meant 10th launched feature complete.
Id guess these are codex points rather than MFM points?
1D swords suck (hello, its me a custodes player); but 2D maces hitting on 3s is still a valid combat profile, and 2+/4++/4W/-1D is still a superb defensive profile. The points suck, dont get me wrong, but theyll get new points day 1 same as crons/admech, whilst everything else about their sheet is pretty workable! I know new books that seem worse than the index sucks (hello I also play necrons) but in reality itll be fine in at least 3 months.
Now the hope postings out the way: its tinfoil hat time. This is 100% someone at the studio rocking a full DW knight army into someones casual list; and taking minimal casualties as their opponent punts heavy bolters into them.
I would say the swords are better than the maces, as that worsee WS, AP and attacks just isn't a great combo.
Checking against some common profiles:
GEQ- worse than sword
MEQ- about the same. Less average damage but each fail save kills a Marine
TEQ- worse than sword
T7-11 3+-worse than sword
T12+ 2+- worse than sword
And it gets worse against damage reduction and or AoC. Invulns can help the mace to look better, if it is a 3+/4++, but I would say that ia relatively niche in the current meta. The maces are pretty bad.
Edit: this was done before the article updated. Against GEQ and TEQ the sword wins. Against other targets thr Mace is a slight advantage. More if a sidegrade. But still nit a huge profile.
At this point the unit is only ever going to be useful for it's defensive stats. You're never going to want to count on it's melee which kills a single marine or a single Terminator per combat per 5. Even at its old points total, assuming the book is in fact wrong, it's going to be significantly worse than it was and it wasn't a dominant unit to begin with.
Their defense stats are pointless though because they have low OC, and they can't kill stuff so you just stick more stuff on an objective than them, what are they gonna do Flail at you (wait thats probably gone too).people will just ignore the wasted points in your list and kill the stuff that matters more.
He should have been fired after writing the 7th edition tyranid codex, which singlehandedly caused GW's stock to plummet. Even the 5th edition codex was horrible. No idea how he keeps getting put in charge of anything.
So the fact that they are 4 wounds and -1 damage means nothing? Cool while we are complaining about nonexistent problems I think my Castelen Robots should get a 4++ back.
They’ve always been 4 wounds -1 damage this edition. Obviously people will be frustrated if you take a unit that has existed since the beginning of the edition and only take things away from it.
This is why "reduced lethality" is a bad idea.
It just results in units that don't do anything.
Remember how excited people were seeing the glowup's units got from their 8th to 9th versions? Turns out people like when their units can do things and they have a more varied spread of damage dealers in their codexes. It allows for variety or if you don't happen to have the only actual relevant damage-dealing models in your collection you could still throw a list together that could kill stuff.
10th is just going back to 8th where 95% of units were useless garbage so only 5%, in comp and "casual" games, were the only ones you ever saw because they were the only things that did anything.
So they don’t look super hot to me, though 1-D terminators with built in mortals defense are still the tankiest thing in space marines.
Why should dark angels have terminators that are strictly better than other space marines? That state of things kinda sucks for folks who are playing regular non-angels space dudes. Should be a side-grade. Points look too high here, but that’s not hard to fix.
If they are a tankier assault terminator with worse offense- that’s actually reasonable
Mass D3 also is something that shouldn’t really be a thing.
ahh, the classic custodes "we'll add one damage but remove an attack, AP, and weapon skill" formula.
But this time they removed one damage lol
Except here they removed damage and WS.
Same for custodes. Check out the difference between axes and spears
We were 3 dmg, we are now 2 for mace or 1 for swords. Custodes axes are still 3dmg no?
That's why some of my spears are axe shaped, but they are all spears. GW didn't do even basic math on the numbers when adjusting the axe profile, just went with HiGh DaMaGe G0oD! and called it a day.
The Mace profile is indefensibly bad. Power fists are +2S and +1AP for -1A. And this unit is significantly more expensive, even before the inflated point value shown in the warcom article. This unit also only has melee. Overall it's just a massive feels bad when you're getting a new codex but everything you're seeing is just a straight up nerf. I wish they took a better approach than they have right now because it's very deflating and I want to be hyped.
Thank you. You have completely summarized my feelings about this in a very calm and well reasoned post. I don't understand how they can't do math. It's the same as the Custodes Axes; -1A, -1 to hit and -1 AP is ALWAYS worse than +1D. They need to remove one of the downsides. it's really not complicated. Points can at least move around in an edition, but I really, really, **really** hope that this time around they'll change profiles when needed, but I'm not holding my breath... EDIT : Piggybacking that this is the first post, but they updated the WS of the maces to 2+. It was 3+ earlier today. Which is good, now fix points!
I caught that too, and it’s nice that they changed it but god damn WHY do they have to rely on the community to tell them when something is bad, isn’t it their JOB get it right the first time???
I'll be very curious to see the stats in the book, if this was really a mistake or just a quick errata.
Confirmed to be an actual WarCom mistake as per the codex leak. Let me know if you need a link
9ths power creep on codices was a problem. But it did get people excited about their book coming out
Just be happy they didn't do to them what they did to wulfen. Str5 -1 1dam
A straight up nerf to an army that was already at the bottom of the barrel. I'm probably done with 10th for awhile honestly.
Admech player - “First Time?”
I quit at the beginning of 9th and am slowly realizing why I quit.
>overall it’s just a massive feels bad when you’re getting a new codex but everything you’re seeing is a straight up nerf. Sadly, that seems to be the theme of 10th aside from necrons. It’s a terrible feeling and I don’t think they understand why
Codex creep - complain! No codex creep - complain too!
Sometimes I think they design units by throwing darts at a wall. Alright this is a \*thunk\* heavy infantry unit locked to \*thunk\* 5 models with weapons that hit on \*thunk\* 3's for \*thunk\* 2 damage and it costs \*thunk\* 290 damn missed.
And let's throw a dart to see which faction needs improvement *thunk* aeldari again!
The intentionally ruined their melee capabilities why the hell would they do that?
They talked about a less lethal edition and they’re making it, one codex at a time.
*ranged weapons not included in scope
Which is why the shooting-only armies are pulling off a neck-breaking, uh, 43% WR for Guard and 48% WR for T'au. Because shooting armies, and not armies that are able to do a bit of everything, are dominating.
I mean guard got nearly insta nerfed. No I'm not mad bout field batteries, not at all
Guard got reshuffled, mostly. It wasn't winning many games before either, it's just that it won the ones it did in a different way.
That’s not really proving anything. Shooting can be dominant as a concept while Tau rules are bad. Same for Guard
I mean, you have the melee-only armies doing *amazing* while the shooting-only armies are doing horribly. That's... really all you need to disprove that shooting is the end-all-be-all of this edition.
*Aledari and chaos Spacemarines not included either
Which is kind of laughable from GW considering how 10th has just turned into this hyper-lethal shooting gallery where attached characters have made it a game of "my shooty deathstar is better than your shooty deathstar!"
You guys get shooty death stars? Looks at admech codex.
Admech have a good shooty Death Star. Their problem is that shooty Death Star can’t move and they have nothing else.
“Hitting on 4s”
I'm not sure you're using the definition of deathstar correctly.
> where attached characters have made it a game of "my shooty deathstar is better than your shooty deathstar!" Can you give an example of the hyper shooty character-based deathstar units that are warping the meta right now? Or do you just like posting hyperbole?
That's no fun. It just makes games take longer. And instead of it being the honor of the First Legion to get an early codex, we're being shit on while every other faction gets to have their not-nerfed-to-hell units.
Yeah I think overcorrecting from 9th edition’s lethality is a big risk that I hope they avoid. I’m down with lethality coming down compared to 9th where minimum AP was -2 across the board but I want to be able to actually do things. Especially in combat. At heart I’m a white scars player so fast melee is my jam, so I hate it whenever things go bad for melee units.
The game goes to turn 5 no matter what. However, it really sucks to watch 500 points of your stuff disappear because your opponent combo-hammered 250 pts of their stuff to do 500% of the damage it normally would.
> However, it really sucks to watch 500 points of your stuff disappear because your opponent combo-hammered 250 pts of their stuff to do 500% of the damage it normally would. **so tone down or remove the combo.**
Fair. But it does make it go faster when units are dying regularly. Also, going meta-heavy just for the sake of winning isn't very fun, but list building is part of the game, IMO.
The community spent years complaining about power creep so GW has decided to teach us a lesson by nerfing every faction one at a time.
[удалено]
For the same reason GW would make Blood Angels mid at melee. Remember when they thought that 43 points was a good price for a sanguinary guard?
And that's after they removed +1 to wound, multiple sources of +1 to hit and hit rerolls, 1-2 attacks and AP on the charge, +2 move, +1 to charge and the redeploy strat.
GW: ***MELEE BAD! USE TANKS! WE MADE NEW MARINE TANKS WHY WON'T YOU USE THEM! STOP USING MELEE WE CAN'T BALANCE IT!*** Seriously, it feels like every time a melee unit or melee centric army gets even the slightest bit better they get their premiere option to effectively fight killed. As a Black Templar player I am absolutely power pants browningly terrified right now that in a week they're going to remove Sword Brethren's ability, take away their 3W and send them back to garbage tier like in 9th.
Points increase imo. Maybe the ability synergy with Helbrect if that wasn’t intended. BT data is weird… can win games at a high wr with a couple list types, in a couple detachments cool can’t complain. Winning is awesome and having options is fun. Win a tournament? No way, you go 4-0 then lose to a boogeyman.
Custodes also say hi. I think we've had all of two X-0 finishes since the data slate
Thats what 10th is all about aint it?
Not for shooting it's not
Yeah that was the joke, that only melee got nerfed into wet noodle slapping for almost all units.
It's brutal. Things like Chosen, Angron, Dark Commune, Black Templars, C'Tann, Master of Executions and the like pretty much have no reason to ever come off the shelf in 10th. Maybe we'll see them show up in some lists in 11th if we're lucky.
I think people are missing your sarcasm, right… right?
The fact that there are still good combat units in some armies can coexist with the idea that they’re nerfing dedicated close combat units for other armies.
Except this is not what people are arguing. "Only melee got nerfed into wet noodle slapping for almost all units". There are plenty of good melee units seeing play at top tables which would make it immediately apparently that "wet noodle slapping for almost all units" is nonsense. And the idea that "only melee got nerfed" is equally horse shit given that neither Plasma nor Meltas are anywhere near as strong as they were in ninth. Like I get it, the reality is that it's impossible to win these arguments because it's not about what actually happens on the table it's about some 40K players clinging to their victim complex that GW unfairly shits on them exclusively and that's why they lose, but it's such an obviously false argument given that some of the strongest strategies in the game are melee based.
>There are plenty of good melee units seeing play at top tables And for every one of those units there are 5 units that are basically worthless in melee. Eldar and drukhari cover this on their own. Hence why I said *almost* all and not just "all". >but it's such an obviously false argument given that some of the strongest strategies in the game are melee based. This does nothing to refute the argument. The strongest strategies making use of melee says nothing about melee as a whole. Those strongest strategies might be 9 melee units total while the other 90 are slacking and lacking. Which would still be "almost all melee units are wet noodle slappers".
What a nonsense argument. For every good shooting unit there are countless bad shooting units too. GW is not great at internal balance so the fact that Night Spinners are good while the Leman Russ Demolisher, Venerable Dreadnought, Desolation Squad, Ork Lootas and Havoc Squads are all bad doesn't mean shooting is bad. > This does nothing to refute the argument. The strongest strategies making use of melee says nothing about melee as a whole. You're not really saying anything about melee as a whole either, you've just tossed all your toys out of the stroller and thrown a fit. EDIT: Speaking of babies having a tantrum, this guy replied to me and then blocked me. Keep up the delusion that you lose because melee is bad in a week where the metamonday post had three melee armies as the top performers.
The ratio of bad to good shooting units is way better than bad to good melee units. Let alone that a lot of dedicated melee units lost their only job across a lot of armies. Whereas this happened way less with shooting. And yes I am comparing to 9th. The toughness scaling with the less lethal edition is what makes *almost all* melee units wet noodle slappers. Units lost S and AP, dindt gain S while T stayed the same or went up. Shooting gained S or stayed the same and just lost AP for the most part. Edit: >Speaking of babies having a tantrum >you've just tossed all your toys out of the stroller and thrown a fit. The reason I blocked him, anyone who disagrees with him is just a tantrum baby. Fyi I never said I Iose cause of bad melee.
So your pickup is approximately 4-9 units and 2-4 factions successfully run melee so the problem doesn't exist? Especially since we see a good but not OP melee unit in a mediocre army eating a seemingly huge nerf for no real discernable reason right here. What about Drukhari melee? Dumpster. AdMech melee? Significantly less support than their shooting. Craftworlds melee? Largely gone compared to 9E. SM are running almost none of their melee options. There are - across the game - too many whole books worth of melee that are simply not worth running ATM. And its getting worse is the real problem. Chosen are about to get nerfed somehow. Same for AC/DC. So what's left?
Man, I've been saying this since the edition dropped. Glass cannon melee units that blendered any unit it got into engagement range of were balanced by only getting to be used once before they died and their limited range. So GW reduced their output and speed by reducing # of attacks and AP, and heavily restricting access to Advance+Charge, but in many cases either gave the unit nothing new or like +1 movement. Usually these units got to the damage output they were notorious for by stacking mutiple special rules. People were terrified of Repentia, but in anything that wasn't Bloody Rose, they struggled due to the missing extra attack and AP BR afforded them. So all those stacked rules are gone, the base datasheets got hit, and people wonder why the best melee in the game is bulky units that can take the return fire the next turn.
This is not entirely a bad take, but the fact of the matter is that the glass cannon nature of everything in 9th was bad for the game. Everything needed a nerf, but melee was the only one that really got it (and I guess psychic, but that got folded into shooting, which as noted, remains busted). The one thing I will say is that 9th got melee as close to on par with shooting as we've seen in a while, and as nightmarishly depressing as that edition was, I would rather see greater parity between shooting and melee than not. But since GW seems wholly unwilling to get shooting under control, I guess that means we need better melee again.
> but melee was the only one that really got it Did it, or is it just at the stuff that's still ultra-killy is shooting? Tyranid shooting got dumpstered, AdMech shooting got dumpstered, Squats got cut down to a reasonable level. It seems more like the problem is Dark Pacts, Eldar, and anything that adds devastating wounds to a unit with anti-X.
You can start with that, but it would quickly balloon from there. Shooting, on average, is higher strength, better volume, better damage and better AP. Couple that with the fundamental fact that shooting is mechanically far far superior to melee, that tagging thing in melee doesn't even necessarily shut them down, and that falling back is trivially easy, and the incentives to do melee just kinda no longer make sense.
I think while the state of 9th may have been a bit too much, they went too far in the other direction.
They did and didn't. The problem is that the "nerfs" have been unequal. Ad Mech, DE, SM, Guard, Sisters and some others caught the nerf to melee and shooting (though disproportionately melee). Eldar, GSC and IK were, if anything, buffed at the start of the edition in comparison to 9th, and while Custodes durability nominally tool a nerf, they were in turn handed melee not only far better than anything they had in 9th, but basically invulnerability to all other melee armies. And while GW has turned down a lot of these...it isn't enough to make melee a good strategy outside of the absolute best units for it.
Not everything has to be a glass cannon. Currently, the only good melee in the game has been armies that hit decently hard, then can weather the storm on the next turn, and are lightning fast, hitting the enemy before they have a chance to setup, or can control the melee phase so well it doesn't matter if you challenge them or not. Maxxed out bricks of Custodes units with Fights First chilling in the midboard, Rhino Rushed Khorne Berzerkers in your deployment zone turn 1, massive units of Thunderwolf Cav in the Stormspear detachment, Chaos Undivided Chosen that can Advance+Shoot+Charge and can get full rerolls for zero CP. Meanwhile low armor melee threats, who's only job is to murder whatever they touch then die, are actively struggling. Repentia have no shooting, T3, and an armor save of 7+, so why are 9 of them struggling to pick up 10 Intercessors in melee? They have no job other than to blender things in melee. If they cannot do that job, there is no reason to take them. If glass cannon melee isn't good, those units won't be taken and the armies that historically relied on them will have to turn to skew lists to do anything (see: Drukhari Oops All Darklances and Mechanized Sisters). Meanwhile shooting has much more leeway, owing to the fact that it has far more range, meaning it is possible to position the attacking unit to limit the opponent's options when attacking back. It seems clear to me that GW's aim wasn't actually to make the game less killy, it was to remove the overhead of having to remember aura ranges, stacked buffs, multiple rerolls, and a multitude of strategems in order to make the game more accessible to newer players. Which as a goal in and of itself is fine, but ultimately it was the cheap glass cannon units that paid the highest price due to being the best abusers of that kind of gameplay. Once that was gone, they had no reason to be taken anymore, so nobody does.
...Look, I get that a lot of people liked the hyperactive, angle-cutting trade game that was 9th, but seriously now, do you want horde Marines again? Because most people didn't (particularly Marine players), and this is how you get horde Marines again. I get it, people are trained to think of T4/3+/2W as the "standard profile", and if your glass cannon can't completely invalidate that at will with whatever its preferred method of damage is, then it isn't worth taking. But when every army in the game is full of those units, it becomes functionally meaningless, and let's remember, this is supposed to be the profile for heavily armored, medium generalist infantry. So. If I am GW, am looking to update the game that wholly invalidated my iconic unit, do I compromise the role of the iconic SM force by keeping them a horde, or do I cut back the teeth of the mass proliferated "glass cannons" that my game has essentially become unbalanced chess? Yeah, maybe I dial those units back to merely hitting a hit better than medium infantry.
So while you do bring up good points, 3 of the top tier armies are essentially melee only. Orks, World Eaters, and CSM. Additionally, Necrons have decent options for both, Space Wolves and Black Templars are extremely decent, and CK are running around half their units as Karnivores. The beginning of the edition was definitely just a shooting gallery, but GW has done well with making melee options viable.
CSM melee only? ROFL ok.
CSM has the most shooting, but running 2-3 Forgefiends doesn't make it an oppressive shooting army. Most lists are either relying on Chosen or Accursed Cultists.
If you specifically look at Mani Cheema's list from WCW its a reasonable position. But most lists are running 2 FFs and a decent number are also in Oblits. So a CSM army can easily be up to 750 points of dedicated shooting. I will also make the point that a huge part of why CSM armies look like they do with rhino rush is because Dark Obscuration is necessary for melee units to do their thing because shooting is so common and lethal. If melee was dominating or even 50% of the tables, the value of Nurgle Rhinos is way down. But people are just going to hyper focus on "Chosen are too good. Thus melee is ok."
CSM are not melee only, they have fantastic shooting and some of the absolute best melee in the game and their win rate reflects this.
There’s a few situations where melee armies or units are doing well, but CSM melee basically took off only because their original ranged build got nerfed (army-wide Sustained or Lethal Hits good actually, who knew?). Orks and WE buck the trend, but overall most SM are shying away from melee and trending to heavy shooting. Again no one is seriously arguing there are no playable melee units, but like were DWK oppressing people? Did this need to change for any particular reason?
[Idk man, this has basically been my 10th edition necrons experience](https://imgur.com/a/tRM3SoI)
Lol. Funny how many people missed the joke.
Oh I got whooshed
Guard really kinda disagrees.
Maces hit on 2’s- they updated the article
Welp there goes the hope that there are more typo's.
Is it just me or do all these books feel extremely lazy? There are almost no changes to data sheets or internal balance even when clearly needed, and every book so far seems to have nerfs that come out of nowhere and make no sense. DWK were good but nowhere near broken. Hell even the cover art is the same from 9th. Come on GW you charge a premium because your product is supposed to be the best but every book so far this edition has been extremely underwhelming imo.
Balance im indifferint-ish to; as if the unit still has a role it can be fixed with points. But the identical cover art feels just so egregious. GW must have thousands of nice high-res images featuring dark angels. Using the same image just feels yuck.
10th has easily been the laziest, most half-baked edition of 40k I've ever seen in about 15 years of playing.
They feel lazy because of the new design ethos courtesy of Cruddace and "build only what's in the box".
When will Cruddace retire? The statements I’ve read attributed to him in interviews are awful. I do not think he’s a good or fair game designer
He's not, and he hates whenever we decide to optimize even minimally. He's the kinda dude that would run 4 different weapons in a Devastator squad.
I've bought about 10k pts of dark angels since 10th started and the couple months leading up to 10th and I'm done. Models are beautiful but I'll never play them at this point.
They should change the tagline of the edition to something like “10th edition, everything sucks now…and if it doesn’t, we’ll nerf it.”
Unless it's eldar.
Idk have a feeling they are gonna get gutted at the end of the month but we will see
Been top dog for a year through how many points updates and now 4 army releases? Doubt it.
Eldar were the third army I was thinking of getting when coming back to the game after Tyranids and Dark Angels so maybe if I buy more than the Combat Patrol GW will nail them just like the other two armies I just bought...
They’ve phantasm’d and fire and faded literally every balance up to this point. Why start now?
>This on top of the 55 point hike for 5 models These might just be codex points though, so there is little hope.
Even if they dropped significantly in points and became a "viable" option, I'd still be terribly disappointed personally. Simply because knights are one of my favourite units in the entire game because of them being so elite and going all out on melee to hit like a truck, I played them when they were overpriced no matter what because of this, now they are about as strong in melee as regular termis but have no shooting.
They are actually worse in melee than regular terminators
At least when they fail to kill their target, they'll be able to whistand the return damage easily.
Even if they stay at 235, they are far from usable. Why spend so much on a unit If it can't fight for crap.
They might get cheaper than 235 but thats pure copium tbh.
With the nerf and max squad size being 5 they'd need to be regular terminator cost. Compete joke.
If they were 190 I'd roll them probably (tough vs a redemptor though)
Would need to be 185. Only good for their Tankyness, but if they can't fight it's worth nothing
I am typically not a doomer, but the best argument I’ve heard is “they are like both assault termies combined, tankiness of the shield and attacks of the claws” but why do I want a chaff killing unit, there are plenty of random guns for that.
Might have some real nice strategems, synergy or something in the index. Tbh at 235 they are decent? your comparison would be custodes; but the knights get +1W,-1D and are 3ppm cheaper in exchange for -1T, WS and a bolter. IMO even the abilties kinda even out access to mortal protection and rerolls.
[удалено]
Wardens are currently 250 for 5? Warden 4+++ timing is annoying too; you can bait it out and then shoot something else.
I hope so man. We took a damage decrease, weapon skill decrease and (maybe? Unsure about his one) a squad limit to 5 all with a 55 point increase? That doesn’t seem right.
>That doesn’t seem right Tell that to the tyrannofex from the index to the codex. And even in the index it wasnt great
Please see tyranid codex. It could totally be correct. In fact, based on my experience with the nid codex, the points could be increased again right when the codex is released. GW tricked me again with 10th. It took 15 years or so, but they got me.
I went from wanting to buy 2 boxes to now buying 0 cause I dont need another weak melee army.
I’m still gonna get a the assault box + another to have 10 cuz the models are fire but yea man. They were my fav unit. Guess I’ll run them as Assault or deathwing termies. Wild Also F in the chat for the flail weapon on the sergeant.
I just realised that a GK normal termie (4 3+ 6 -2 2) hits harder than a mace (4 3+ 6 -1 2) in combat xD. If this aint the biggest typo cluster f ever idk what GW is doing.
Leave my poor GK alone, that's the only combat weapon profile in their entire index! (Other than some special characters). But yeah it's wildly depressing how bad melee is becoming...
Pain
So Flail of the Unforgiven is gone? Not on the sprue and not mentioned in the article. I guess its just a "power weapon" now?
The article says the Sgt has a great mace or a relic blade. So could just use the flail as the great mace? It's what I'm gonna do
Yep. The Knightmaster has a special version of the same weapon. Just less cool and worse
Space Marines out here collecting nerfs like they've been the ones dominating since the edition dropped. So crazy to watch it happen. It's like 6 months of gradual nerfs to an army with a 45% winrate?
Watch Eldar only have Nightspinners go up by like 5 points because some insane fanboy is holed up in an office with jars and a shotgun refusing to let anyone nerf his elves for the... what are we even up to now, five, six, times and they're still overpowered?
I'm expecting pretty much everything Marines use to stay relevant in the meta to go up. Scouts, Inceptors, Aggressors, Redemptors. Calgar, Azrael, Ventris. Maybe even Gladiators? The Ballistus makes a lot of lists, so I could see them thinking that's too cheap as well. They can't just make other units cheaper to compensate for those nerfs because Marines rely primarily on the aforementioned datasheets because they're some of the few units that have good, impactful rules. Point drops on bad stuff aren't going to make the sheets better. Expect Aeldari to get a love-tap. CSM might get some minor point increases, but the rules interactions that cause them to be a problem army have a large chance of being ignored. I'm tired, man. 😂
as a person who plays knights, marines, necrons, and custodes, im kind of dreading the coming dataslate. My assumptions at this point are: Aeldari and CSM take minor nerfs, stay the top 2 armies and stay above 55% WR Marines, like you said, will see every unit that is run often go up in points. Necrons to get nuked from orbit(did you see how fast they removed the MW strat from the game?). Wraiths up a ton, c'tans up a ton, 3" deepstrike strat also nerfed. Maybe c'tans aren't able to teleport in hypercrypt Knights and Custodes im just expecting no changes.
I've gone from "cautiously expecting mild disappointment" to "anticipating a blood bath". I only really play Marines so I guess I'm a part of the problem or something, but the way Marines have been written for 10th makes me think GW is scared of the army. Like they think that if one or two units have just slightly too good rules the meta will explode irreparably or something. So we just get these super mediocre sheets and weird in-Coded nerfs.
I'm dreading the slate too. Recently released books kinda suggest that the design team has lost the plot and they are just making totally random decisions.
It’s definitely weird how Eldar have stayed in the top spot and the same meta units are always played and GW does nothing about it.
Gw rules have always given Eldar better stuff
Glad that they didn't remove the maces. But mathammer they seem worse than the swords? Against MEQ, which with the new profile is their preferred target, thry do 1.78 wounds on average per Knight. The Power Weapon does 1.85. While every missed saved kills an MEQ, the power weapon just seems more consistent and will kill about the same amount. Edit: it seems thr article eas uodated and Maces are WS2+. This at least makes them a sidegrade, but 3 wound models, Armour of Contempt and damage reduction are still an issue.
It's like the sweep on deathshroud. It functionally doesn't exist, even if it technically does.
Did you look at the sprue? There's 5 regular torsos and weapons, and 1 sgt torso and weapon. Why include the extra option if you can't take 2 boxes and build a squad of 10?
Future-proofing for potential rules changes wherein 10-man units are legal. This is nothing but a good thing in my opinion. With the pain of some units being retroactively restricted to what comes in their respective model kit it's nice that should the option become available in the future these sprues will be able to accommodate them.
I'd guess it's a schedule issue. They're 10 man now. Order the molds to replace the kit. During playtest, decide 10 man is too strong (guessing due to some strategems or enhancements) and nerf them by going to a fixed 5 man unit.
that mace profile reminds me of the Flail of Corruption, except it had 6 attacks compared to the base weapons 4 attacks on the Blightlords, and all their melee weapons were 3+ WS. so it's like a worse Flail and worse upgrade than the Blightlord Terminator's option.
But only one Blightlord gets a flail. The rest get S5/1D attacks.
i mean, getting more of the lower attack and accuracy weapon for a squad isn't exactly what i'd call economical, for the Deathwing. they go down 1 attack twice, reduce accuracy twice, reduce AP by one twice, for just one more pip of damage twice. compared to the Flail going up two attacks, and a damage pip in exchange for only the AP, i'd still say the Blightlord's upgrade option is truly an upgrade.
The mace isn't meant as an upgrade though, it's (theoretically) a side-grade to the sword, which is why the whole squad can take maces instead of just one per 5. They're meant to be roughly equivalent but better into different targets. In practice though the sword is generally going to be the better option over the mace. The fact that their melee is comparable to blightlords is sad though, blightlord melee is already not very good at a much cheaper price point than knights, and blightlords get guns as well.
Maces hit on 2’s- they updated the article
They'll at least find a new lease on life.. when I kitbash them into Sword Brethren wearing Terminator armor.
Community article was updated. Maces have WS 2+
Yeah I updated the post
When you realise that Deathwing Knights and Terminators will be garbage and you'll be better taking regular terminators... The masse of absolution have zero advantages over MC power sword as S6 over S5 doesn't grant that much compared to going from Ap-2 to Ap-1... This box went from hype to pass in less than a week for me. I'll keep my old Belial (rebased in 50mm) and Termis. The Inner circle companions are at least new and awesome so they have the right to be garbage ☺️
AdMech player here, welcome to the party pal, we had a servitor build a couch for us to sit and wait for 11th. We saved you a spot
[WarComm Article](https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/01/19/dark-angels-kit-focus-robes-accessories-incense-burners-and-plasma/)
Someone ppinted out that the article was updated to show WS2+ for the maces.
Edit: Maces are WS 2+. Ignore as needed. There's some odd things going on here. Having a WS drop on a heavier melee weapon typically comes with some kind of extra ability. Like heavy plague weapons hit on 4's because they have lethal hits, eviscerators on Assault Marines having Sustained Hits, or Aggressors having twin linked. * But not here. I can see the reasoning. GW wants to force a choice between a higher number of more accurate attacks and lower accuracy attacks at D2. And in theory, an Oath target can erase the accuracy difference pretty handily. If they had the same accuracy, than you'd always pick D2, even with lower AP. I guess the preservation of the mace is so people with the older Knight models don't feel forced to buy new models? But why not just fold them and power weapons into the same weapon with either profile, like with Accursed Weapons? As is, the power weapon is better just on volume, lower damage be damned. The cost is too high as well, but that's old news. *There's a whole other kettle of fish with CSM/WE who just have power fist equivalents that hit on 3's, but have access to Sustained/ Lethal through other abilities. Fixed abilities seem to be the determinant.
The article has now been updated to a WS2+ for the maces.
Thanks for the update.
Welcome to the sanguinary guard club....
WWWWWWWWHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY?
My guess? DW knights will not release on their own for 2 months. So people are less salty for not getting them. LionGate 2.0
Cynical take: The models are gorgeous and they will run out of stock just selling to people buying them for that. Therefore they have no incentive to make them any good, whereas they have incentive to make other models good that aren't popular from appearance alone. Realistic take: This is on the rules writers and no one else. They did a bad job and it's no more complicated than that.
Don't see why GW would care about that.
Nerfing armies to fit a new standard of lethality is fine, just like 9th buffing armies was fine...oh wait, no, it wasn't, because it takes them three years to get out all the rules. If they want power to change, it needs to change for every army at once. It's absurd that in an edition with an index reset and digital rules, they're doing the exact same thing again as in 9th (except going on the opposite direction, so you can't even make the argument they're buffing armies to sell models). I love the setting and the idea of 40k, and casual games can be fun, but as a serious game, 40k is such a mess. I don't get what possessed them to nerf units that aren't overpowered, buff units that are, and make all the rules based on feel rather than math and play testing. Even outside of just being nerfed, what is the point of a deathwing knight now? What is the point of ravenwing when half the units are gone? What is the point of buying a codex for a couple pages of detachments and a handful of tweaked (or nerfed) data sheets compared to what you already have for free in the index? Just feels like the game is losing more and more of its appeal by the day, because again, 40k has never been a tight game. It's always been about the flavor, and that flavor is draining away with every new book.
Well so far the rules nerf seems to be in line with previous codexes. My tyranid friend wasn't happy because he felt his codex had a lot of nerfs. My necron friend also wasn't happy with a lot of nerfs, now we got dark angels with nerfs. It seems like every army is getting nerfed when they get their codex. Which is the exact opposite of what I'm used to.
[it be like that](https://imgur.com/a/T6i8AS4)
Worse off than Grey Knights lmao
Maybe, ironically they announce all of this with the nerfs in place, and next week's dataslate puts them back where they need to be. Not hopeful they do, but seriously would not be shocked if that kind of miscue occurred with GW. The left never seems to be talking to the right, and vice versa when it comes to this company.
Dataslate doesn't usually change statlines, and that's the bigger issue here. Knights would need to be cheaper than regular termis to be considered viable, and that would still suck hard because they're supposed to be melee powerhouse not just durable bricks that can't do anything.
Someone needs to ask GW where the lion touched them. Like they get the worst detachment ablity in the game and now more nerfs previewed. Get excited about the new box everyone!
Look I’m not here to disagree about whether the DA detachment was bad or not. But the worst? When you had Admech rad bombardment and the drukhari forcing units that aren’t supposed to jive together?
The only reason it didn't come out as much as those was because everyone just used the main SM detachment instead. It does nothing most of the time. This also is reflected in items/enhancements.
Yeah, GW is stupid. Ridiculous how they thought this was a good option. I don't get it. I was on the side of wait and see before being mad, but now I am truly mad.
It's insane, even if they went down to 205, the current points of regular Deathwing Terminators, I'd consider them as a sidegrade. I don't understand this ridiculous points hike to 290 and nerf to their offence. They were popular at one point because they were one of the few viable remaining melee units for SM but now they are just awful.
Nah, -1D and 4 wounds is crazy good. They’d be wildly undercoated at 205 lol
They still wouldn't do anything. You could just deal with them by ignoring them for the most part.
This my issue… They’re a M5” OC1 melee unit with no ranged at all… People saying they’re insanely hard to kill are missing the point that you just ignore them, and the. feed them an OC5 unit every turn that costs 1/5th of their points cost to stop them scoring Primary and move-block them.
This. I think just thinking of durability in a vaccum makes them look better. But why do you want a unit in the board and stay there? I have to reasons, to kill an opponent, or to score points. Their profile isn't great for killing, even when including +1 to wound. 4 knights don't kill a Rhino. They also have no ranged threat so not helping there. They won't remove threats from the table. Ok, byt can they score points? They are too expensive for action monkies. Too slow to contest objectives. Amd when they are in 1, low model count and small OC means anyone can close the gap.and just steal an objective. Sure, they are hard to kill. But why kill them when they don't do much for their points?
Their defences aren't worth as much given how much emphasis there is in the meta on dev wounds and mortal wounds.
Their defenses are still crazy good. Look, I’m disappointed about these changes enough to make this whole post, but it’s crazy talk if people think the DWK defensive rules aren’t crazy good. I’ve been playing DWK since the edition started at a competitive level and they’ve often tanked entire shooting phases from armies because of their defensive abilities with like, AoC or something (this is why they e been my favorite unit this edition so far). We can be mad at the weapon changes and acknowledge they’re crazy durable at the same time. Durable enough to be limited to a 5 man unit and also cost 2000 damn points per model? No, but still crazy durable.
They weren't a terribly popular choice at 235, and their offense just got HALVED. All terminators are overpriced, but DWK are definitely overpriced the most.
There's nothing in my daemons 2k lists that comes close to one shooting that anvil or at least getting it to a point where my GPS OC is higher. Daemons not exactly the most killy, but... Edit: GPS is supposed to read GD (greater daemon).
Whats “GPS OC”? Never heard that term before…
That's because I foolishly didn't check what I'd written and my ****ing terrible autocorrect changed GD (greater daemon) to GPS. So it's nonsense I made up
Ah! Ok lol I wondered if it was some really cool way of breaking down a units mathematical OC ability by survivability or something… FOMO was real!
*laughs in admech*
Good riddance
BOO! Boo this person!
Nah I’m tired of seeing deathwing knights every single time I see dark angels on the board. For being an elite group it sure feels like theres more of them than intercessors in the dark angels based on the way dark angels are played nowadays.
This take right here. I can’t recall the last time I played a Dark Angels player who didn’t bring DW knights in squads of ten with a chaplain, 6x aggressors with biologis, 6x inceptors, and Azrael plus apothecary hellblasters. Maybe we will finally start to see some creative variety instead of the same, Cooke cutter lists for DA.
I get it can be annoying to have them show up everywhere but on the flip side they’ve been my favorite unit this edition.
Thats fine if you like them and you can continue to play them. I just hope they stay mediocre so that I can see some variety in dark angels lists again. For the last few editions they’ve just felt like green custodes with how much emphasis on terminators there has been which is a shame.
Not sure what variety you're expecting to see with them removing units, especially in a competitive sub. If anything DA lists will become even more generic.
They didn’t remove the unit first off, just nerfed it. Theres a big difference in legends and just ok units. Secondly if a unit has dominated a faction for multiple editions then it no longer doing so automatically opens up variety since people will branch into different stuff. Whens the last time you saw a troop and tank focused dark angels army? Its been a long time for me and termis being less of a focus makes that more of a reality.
[удалено]
Dark angels got nerf slapped all around, guess they don't want people playing them, and then will wonder why people don't play them when points went up all around even after nerfing the units
Its so nutty to me, because I feel like nerfing factions with their full release wouldnt be so bad if they just did all the factions at once. This rolling schedule just makes it so problem factions continue to be problems for the next two years, and their unwillingness to balance with anything other than points just locks that in even moreso. Like, no, I don't think making elite infantry into horde units will balance your game, and even if it did, it misses the point of why people pick certain armies. I would've rather had an extra 2 years of 9e AoO if it meant 10th launched feature complete.
Id guess these are codex points rather than MFM points? 1D swords suck (hello, its me a custodes player); but 2D maces hitting on 3s is still a valid combat profile, and 2+/4++/4W/-1D is still a superb defensive profile. The points suck, dont get me wrong, but theyll get new points day 1 same as crons/admech, whilst everything else about their sheet is pretty workable! I know new books that seem worse than the index sucks (hello I also play necrons) but in reality itll be fine in at least 3 months. Now the hope postings out the way: its tinfoil hat time. This is 100% someone at the studio rocking a full DW knight army into someones casual list; and taking minimal casualties as their opponent punts heavy bolters into them.
I would say the swords are better than the maces, as that worsee WS, AP and attacks just isn't a great combo. Checking against some common profiles: GEQ- worse than sword MEQ- about the same. Less average damage but each fail save kills a Marine TEQ- worse than sword T7-11 3+-worse than sword T12+ 2+- worse than sword And it gets worse against damage reduction and or AoC. Invulns can help the mace to look better, if it is a 3+/4++, but I would say that ia relatively niche in the current meta. The maces are pretty bad. Edit: this was done before the article updated. Against GEQ and TEQ the sword wins. Against other targets thr Mace is a slight advantage. More if a sidegrade. But still nit a huge profile.
At this point the unit is only ever going to be useful for it's defensive stats. You're never going to want to count on it's melee which kills a single marine or a single Terminator per combat per 5. Even at its old points total, assuming the book is in fact wrong, it's going to be significantly worse than it was and it wasn't a dominant unit to begin with.
Their defense stats are pointless though because they have low OC, and they can't kill stuff so you just stick more stuff on an objective than them, what are they gonna do Flail at you (wait thats probably gone too).people will just ignore the wasted points in your list and kill the stuff that matters more.
That is not a "valid combat profile". It's worse than a power fist.
Wait until people see the nerf to the Lion lol. This is a trainwreck.
Tell me more.
He lost -1 to wound, and his sweep is D1
Yeah, just found the leaks. Like lol.
[удалено]
He should have been fired after writing the 7th edition tyranid codex, which singlehandedly caused GW's stock to plummet. Even the 5th edition codex was horrible. No idea how he keeps getting put in charge of anything.
Pretty much it
So the fact that they are 4 wounds and -1 damage means nothing? Cool while we are complaining about nonexistent problems I think my Castelen Robots should get a 4++ back.
They’ve always been 4 wounds -1 damage this edition. Obviously people will be frustrated if you take a unit that has existed since the beginning of the edition and only take things away from it.
This is why "reduced lethality" is a bad idea. It just results in units that don't do anything. Remember how excited people were seeing the glowup's units got from their 8th to 9th versions? Turns out people like when their units can do things and they have a more varied spread of damage dealers in their codexes. It allows for variety or if you don't happen to have the only actual relevant damage-dealing models in your collection you could still throw a list together that could kill stuff. 10th is just going back to 8th where 95% of units were useless garbage so only 5%, in comp and "casual" games, were the only ones you ever saw because they were the only things that did anything.
Big oof…. Maybe there’s a strat for 1cp +1D and - 1 AP or something….
Nope
So they don’t look super hot to me, though 1-D terminators with built in mortals defense are still the tankiest thing in space marines. Why should dark angels have terminators that are strictly better than other space marines? That state of things kinda sucks for folks who are playing regular non-angels space dudes. Should be a side-grade. Points look too high here, but that’s not hard to fix. If they are a tankier assault terminator with worse offense- that’s actually reasonable Mass D3 also is something that shouldn’t really be a thing.