CA leaks

[Dusldorf]

https://imgur.com/gallery/d8Ae4TN

[Frowbakk]

Heavy Flamers dropped from 17 to 14, Combi-Meltas from 17 to 15, Combi-Flamer from 9 to 8, Character Storm Shields 10 points,non-characters 2 points...

Nice.

[Ish]

Blood of Kittens is reporting that one of the universal rule changes in Chapter Approved is “-1 to hit “Chapter Tactics” type rules across all codexes is now +1 cover.”

And I’ve got 2,000 Points of Imperial Fists and their “enemy units do not receive cover benefits to their saves” chapter trait on pre-order. I am fully capable of the laughter.

[WestRider]

Holy %@#$. Tyranid Primes went down to almost half their previous cost. They're probably actually worth taking now! Lots of other very welcome drops there and in the Chaos Dexes as well, lots of stuff dropping 10-20%, and a significant number at 25%-ish.

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, Ish said:

Blood of Kittens is reporting that one of the universal rule changes in Chapter Approved is “-1 to hit “Chapter Tactics” type rules across all codexes is now +1 cover.”

And I’ve got 2,000 Points of Imperial Fists and their “enemy units do not receive cover benefits to their saves” chapter trait on pre-order. I am fully capable of the laughter.

That would be a welcome change. And don't forget, your marines do have counterparts with the same trait: the Iron Warriors.

[Ish]

Yeah, that always struck me as an odd design decision. I’ve always seen the two legions as siege masters, but with the Imperial Fists putting the emphasis on defensive tactics and the Iron Warriors on the offensive: Dorn builds up, Perturabo tears down.

I’d have made it so that the Imperial Fists got an enhanced bonus from cover and had harder Fortifications; But given the Iron Warriors a bonus against targets in cover and extra oomph against Fortifications... So they’d both do better against most enemies, but they’d cancel each other out in a head to head match up.

Oh well, it is what it is... 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ish said:

Yeah, that always struck me as an odd design decision. I’ve always seen the two legions as siege masters, but with the Imperial Fists putting the emphasis on defensive tactics and the Iron Warriors on the offensive: Dorn builds up, Perturabo tears down.

I’d have made it so that the Imperial Fists got an enhanced bonus from cover and had harder Fortifications; But given the Iron Warriors a bonus against targets in cover and extra oomph against Fortifications... So they’d both do better against most enemies, but they’d cancel each other out in a head to head match up.

Oh well, it is what it is... 

Well, I was running Iron Warriors for a bit and army wide cover denial is a mixed bag. On the one hand, denying cover is very useful. On the other hand, it means that the opponent has little obligation to hide in cover, which makes their movements a bit less predictible and can be inconvient at times. 

The other bit is that the Iron Warriors (and probably the fists) only deny the save modifier from cover. This means they still get penalized to hit against units that are harder to hit while in cover, like Eldar Rangers. Other effects which function in cover, still affect the units, as you only modify their cover save. 

And then of course, the effect has very limited value against opponents that don't plan on using cover, either due to incredibly shoddy saves or because they have superior invulnerable saves. Horde Orks, for example, benefit very little from cover (6+ becomes a 5+..) so often don't care if you deny it. 

The last weak point bugs me. Since cover denial means effectively increased AP vs opponents in cover, weapons with superior AP effectively already deny cover and are therefore found more unaffected by the cover denial. Meltaguns, in particular, are a very classic Iron Warrior weapon option and were found entirely redundant with the cover denial, as -4 AP doesn't really need cover denial. So I found that for Iron Warriors, weapons that deal -2 ap and worse are ideal, while -3 ap or better seemed excessive.

[Ish]

Well, since I’m looking at building an All-Primaris force (unless I decide to strip and repaint my Deathwing) I’m going to have a lot of S4 AP -1 small arms that just slightly out range the 24” small arms of most factions. 

Primaris Marines are a “shooty” force that doesn’t have the raw numbers to compete with a dedicated gunline army, like Guard or Tau. The Imperial Fists chapter tactic should actually encourage them to get out from their ruins and trench lines and come towards me. In theory, I should be able to use LOS and movement blocking terrain to channel the enemy’s superior numbers into kill zones and tunnels where I can bring my guns to bear on just a small part of their force. In theory.

I’m not going to pretend like I’ve got some sort of tourney smashing master plan in the works. I just like how the models look and enjoy rolling fistfuls of dice.

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, Ish said:

Well, since I’m looking at building an All-Primaris force (unless I decide to strip and repaint my Deathwing) I’m going to have a lot of S4 AP -1 small arms that just slightly out range the 24” small arms of most factions. 

Primaris Marines are a “shooty” force that doesn’t have the raw numbers to compete with a dedicated gunline army, like Guard or Tau. The Imperial Fists chapter tactic should actually encourage them to get out from their ruins and trench lines and come towards me. In theory, I should be able to use LOS and movement blocking terrain to channel the enemy’s superior numbers into kill zones and tunnels where I can bring my guns to bear on just a small part of their force. In theory.

I’m not going to pretend like I’ve got some sort of tourney smashing master plan in the works. I just like how the models look and enjoy rolling fistfuls of dice.

And imperial fists are heavy bolter focused, too, which definitely works with this one. Oh, don't forget that the re-rolling wounds vs buildings applies in both the shooting and the melee phase - won't come up much, but useful all the same. 

 

[Guest]

Anyway, CA leaks.

I'm noting my Bloodthirsters got reduced by almost 100pts each. Can now field 8 in a 2k list (while still adhereing to the rule of 3 thanks to them having 3 different unit entries).

[Guest]

Ouch, the Railgun on the Hammerhead went down by 28pts, but the supremacy railgun on the gunrig fortification stayed at 50pts. So Gunrig remains 120pts with bs 5+, while hammerhead (with railgun and burst cannons) has dropped to 126pts with BS 3+...

GW seems to be sabotaging their fortifications this edition. Very annoying.

I do wonder if the issue is that GW only updates models that do good or bad in tournaments, so models that don't show up in tournaments don't get updates...?

[Ish]

24 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

I'm noting my Bloodthirsters got reduced by almost 100pts each. Can now field 8 in a 2k list (while still adhereing to the rule of 3 thanks to them having 3 different unit entries).

Eight is the sacred number of Khorne, so this would actually be a fluffy list to field... Probably too limited to win a tourney, probably too cheesy to make your regular “pick up game” list, but it would be fun to see that many Greater Dæmons on the table at once.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Ish said:

Eight is the sacred number of Khorne, so this would actually be a fluffy list to field... Probably too limited to win a tourney, probably too cheesy to make your regular “pick up game” list, but it would be fun to see that many Greater Dæmons on the table at once.

You could just as easily run a list of 7 and just say one became blood for the blood god before the battle started.

But it is neat that we can now field 8. I do wonder if GW considered this when adjusting points.

[PumpkinHead]

I have been out of the game pretty much since OFCC. Getting in some games soon, thankfully. 1 quick question, does CA 2018 replace the old CA?  Will I only need my rule book, CA 2018, and codex to get the points and rules needed to play?

Thanks.

[Ish]

Just now, PumpkinHead said:

I have been out of the game pretty much since OFCC. Getting in some games soon, thankfully. 1 quick question, does CA 2018 replace the old CA?  Will I only need my rule book, CA 2018, and codex to get the points and rules needed to play?

Thanks.

That’s what GW says and it’s how the equivalent Generals’ Handbooks for AoS have worked.

[Sgt. Rock]

I've heard rumors of a new Space Marines codex/index; is there any indication floating around the warp that one of those is coming soon? I want to start playing with my dudemanz, but I can't bring myself to drop the scratch on the book only to have it invalidated in a month or two. I'd much rather wait and get the new book, if it's going to be coming soon.

[Ish]

There are always rumors of new codices for the Space Marines. But, frankly, I highly doubt we will see one within the next year or two, the current one only came out in July 2017. 

We will probably see more “codex supplement” type books that add options onto the basic codex, but I highly doubt we’ll see it get replaced outright.

For what it’s worth, as I type this, I’m walking into Guardian Games to buy a massive pile of Imperial Fists. So if the current codex gets replaced, I’ll be just as “SOL” as you. 😁

[WestRider]

9 hours ago, PumpkinHead said:

I have been out of the game pretty much since OFCC. Getting in some games soon, thankfully. 1 quick question, does CA 2018 replace the old CA?  Will I only need my rule book, CA 2018, and codex to get the points and rules needed to play?

Thanks.

Looking at the leaked points changes, a bunch of them are exactly the same as what they were changed to in CA 2017, so it looks like any changes from there that haven't been changed yet again are included here as well.

[Ish]

8 minutes ago, WestRider said:

Looking at the leaked points changes, a bunch of them are exactly the same as what they were changed to in CA 2017, so it looks like any changes from there that haven't been changed yet again are included here as well.

I do kinda wish they'd put an asterisk next to the changed points or something...

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, WestRider said:

Looking at the leaked points changes, a bunch of them are exactly the same as what they were changed to in CA 2017, so it looks like any changes from there that haven't been changed yet again are included here as well.

It would be pretty annoying to have to reference both CA books in order build a list. Glad they combined them.

[happycamper]

You guys heard of BattleScribe right? Lol

[Ish]

47 minutes ago, happycamper said:

You guys heard of BattleScribe right? 

It’s a very useful tool, but it’s not uncommon for there to be errors (or just plain missing) information in its fan-built databases. 

[InfestedKerrigan]

8 hours ago, Ish said:

It’s a very useful tool, but it’s not uncommon for there to be errors (or just plain missing) information in its fan-built databases. 

Well now, they wouldn't want to upstage and outclass GW, would they?

[Guest]

Oh, CA mentions a unit for TAU refered to as "The Eight," any idea what unit they are talking about? 

[InfestedKerrigan]

20 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

Oh, CA mentions a unit for TAU refered to as "The Eight," any idea what unit they are talking about? 

Really?