Recent Coven Nerf

sekac wrote:

Cerve wrote:

Damn, now I understand why good players don't visit this forum anymore

Since you're having such a hard time understanding what a meta is or how it affects the choices players make when designing lists, I have a thought experiment for you.


Since it is your stance that Artists of Flesh is broken nonsense that is in no way related to the meta, would you feel the same way if the meta was largely just spamming single damage attacks? Would AoF be absolutely broken if people were taking datasheets that made AoF utterly and completely useless? Would you still be saying it has to be nerfed? Probably not.


That's because the value of abilities like AoF are COMPLETELY DEPENDANT on the kinds of weapons people are bringing against you. Abilities like Black Heart's re-rolls or things like exploding 6s are not as meta dependant because they always have value. The value of which weapon to use those boosts on may fluctuate as the meta evolves, but the abilities themselves are always useful.


Artists of Flesh is not always useful. It's value is relative to the meta. That is objectively true whether or not you're capable of understanding or admitting it.

....and that's what is called META DEFINING! HELLOOOOO??

Yes of course if people play damage 1 AoF will sucks, but forcing all the other players to CHANGE their entire setting of lists IS what is called meta-defining lol

Ffs I can't belive I'm still answering, you have no clue about what is this game, what is the meta, what is broken and what is not dude!

And this is it, I'll not feed the troll anymore. End of this flame.

@sekak, @Cerve, I think you chaps might be inadvertently talking at cross-purposes.

Would you mind if I attempt a broad summation of what I believe the key point of disagreement here (and obviously please don't hesitate to correct me if you think I'm not properly representing your respective positions)?

If I'm reading correctly, the disagreement seems to have arisen either from a question of whether a unit should be nerfed based on its objective power or its performance in the current meta, or else which of those categories Artisans of the Flesh belongs to.

An example of the former would be DT Liquifier Guns (I think we can all agree these were objectively too strong?). These are units, weapons, abilities, and/or combinations of such that are simply too strong for their points. For obvious reasons, these are liable to not only be a part of the current meta but to be one of the key factors shaping it. However, a key aspect of such units(/weapons/abilities) is that they will remain strong even if the rest of the meta changes substantially.  

The latter are those units/weapons/abilities which are not inherently overpowered but have instead risen to prominence because of the current meta. For example, I think we can reasonably agree that Kabalite Warriors (and poison weapons in general) are, at the very least, pretty lacklustre by their own merits. However, if the meta suddenly became populated by a lot of lists of high-toughness, low-save models (e.g. Ork Boyz), then Kabalites, Venoms and Kabals like Poison Tongue might suddenly become mainstays of tournament lists. The key difference here is that these units/weapons/abilities are strong specifically because of the current meta and will likely fall back into obscurity as soon as it changes.

To return to the point at hand, the first possible point of disagreement may be a question of whether it is better to nerf units based on the former or the latter. The former may be considered to hurt only the most deserving units but can also be hard to reliably pin down (as units don't operate in a vacuum and many overly strong units/combinations are not as obvious as the DT Liquifier combo). The latter can more easily identify targets but risks hurting otherwise-mediocre units that are merely symptoms of the meta, rather than the units shaping it. In the above example, Kabalite Warriors are in the meta only because of the number of high-toughness, low-save models in the meta. However, if those units are spread over multiple, different armies then they may be less obvious than the Kabalites/Poison.

The second possible point of contention seems to be over whether AoF belongs to the former or the latter category (and thus whether the nerf to it is justified or whether it is being unfairly hammered even though it is merely a symptom of the current meta). On the one hand, it is dependant on D2 weapons featuring heavily in the meta, but on the other D2 weapons seem liable to remain at the very least a significant part of any meta.

Is this a reasonable summation of the argument, do you think?

Either way, perhaps it would help for each of you to clarify exactly where you stand and what you're arguing for(/against)? I think it might assist in bringing the discussion back into focus as I think at this point you are arguing past one another.

Alternatively, if you would prefer that I just sodded off and didn't get involved, that's always an option as well, and one I will oblige with if requested to.

Regarding the Liquifier nerf, I've said before that I'm 99% sure whoever is responsible for "balancing" Dark Eldar has never once played Dark Eldar. Thus, we are balanced purely from the perspective of people playing against us (hence, it is considered irrelevant if Dark Technomancers is made virtually unusable, so long as Space Marine players no longer need to worry about it).

I absolutely agree that there were other ways it could have been handled, rather than banning it outright from interacting with Liquifiers. At the very least, they could have made DT no long all-consuming (as the Liquifier was the mainstay weapon for Coven). However, as above, I believe the issue is that no one involved in the balancing process really cares about our faction enough to look at things from our perspective and try to balance around also keeping them usable.

Same reason why Raiders were repeatedly hammered, whilst the underperforming Venoms and their toothless Splinter Cannons (which used to have twice the shots as Shuriken Cannons to make up for their weaker profile but now have no advantage whatsoever) failed to receive any help.

And yeah, I agree our book is looking pretty slim in terms of options right now (and, as you say, it was hardly overloaded with them to begin with). I'm sure we're still strong but I just don't find it a lot of fun.

I find competitive the 90% of the Codex. I'm in line with all the nerfs, and I'm having a blast since it cames out.
New missions open up new ways of play, I'm testing with different Obsessions, and I never had so much fun oh changing plans and bringing up new lists. Thick City was stupid, utterly broken and extremely easy to play. Damn it was even easier than the previous Goodstuff.
Now that we are well priced (except for Wracks, but it's fine) you have to use your head again. Since this codex came out, a lot of new players with 0 skills just played this undercosted and broken Codex. Now that Custodes and Tau are out, a lot of these guys are changing faction again, and they will keep going forever. But this doesn't mean that our faction is bad and poor of choices. I can actually write 10 and more lists, all of them competitive for tournaments, some of them easier than others.
And yes, it is a "git gud" matter, because better you became, larger sight you get onto your codex in terms of competitiveness.

Damn I'm even considering Flayed Skull for the new Tau meta. Flayed Skull, the worse cabal obsession of the Codex.

Being undercosted at the release hurt the brain of DE players. Thick City just killed them completely. It was a joke of list, go and run, run and charge, and you will never die so don't worry on that. 0 tactics, 100% stupidity, just go and win. Which is an ok concept in causal games, but it shouldn't work on competitive enviroment.

If someone says that Thick City was "just ok, competitive but ok", it tells a lot about his deepness on a strategy level. Which is ok, it's always good when the game continue to show you that "there's more to learn", it is the best!
"Git Gud" is not an offense. It is an: "Hey, look, there's way more on this game than what you think. So go, learn and have fun, the fun isn't ended for you".

It's a good thing.

sekac wrote:

Oh look, Cerve is posting (yet again) about how much smarter he is at the game than anyone who disagrees with him. It's almost like he has nothing else of value to say. I think I'm done wasting my time on his self-gratification and complete lack of substantive arguments. Muting this clown.

Except that what I'm saying is what the entire competitive community is saying, I just agree with it. But ok whatever. Make it personal.
My last post was with no flame in it. But if you feel attacked.....well, you confirm my thought

sekac wrote:

Oh look, Cerve is posting (yet again) about how much smarter he is at the game than anyone who disagrees with him. It's almost like he has nothing else of value to say. I think I'm done wasting my time on his self-gratification and complete lack of substantive arguments. Muting this clown.

Dude, this is just childish spam, and was uncalled for. Please stop it and keep it pleasant for other readers. The fact that Cerve is more optimistic about all this is not a crime. (and that's coming from someone who's really not that positive)

sekac wrote:

Gelmir wrote:

sekac wrote:

Oh look, Cerve is posting (yet again) about how much smarter he is at the game than anyone who disagrees with him. It's almost like he has nothing else of value to say. I think I'm done wasting my time on his self-gratification and complete lack of substantive arguments. Muting this clown.

Dude, this is just childish spam, and was uncalled for. Please stop it and keep it pleasant for other readers. The fact that Cerve is more optimistic about all this is not a crime. (and that's coming from someone who's really not that positive)

Dude, there's a personal attack in 100% of his posts. Every single one of them is just a love letter to himself about how smart he is. I have no problem with him viewing things differently, but he never supports any of his arguments. Just "I'm right because I say so" or "I'm right because you don't know anything about the game". I asked him many times to knock it off with the personal attacks and he has demonstrated that is something he is absolutely unwilling to do.


So yeah, I'm blocking him. There's literally no reason not to.

A love letter to myself? More like a love letter to this Codex :-/

Yeah I know he can't read me. I'll end with this spam. Even if not really spam because I'm talking about the Codex itself and the erratas, but nvm.

Anyway, backing on topic: are you playing Coven again? Which obsession?

for my part, since i don't play competitively, i still play with almost the entire range of our Codex.
Seriously our codex, despite 4 nerfs in less than a year, is still rock solid when it comes to the fun factor in our list building.

I personally love the Coven customs: reroll charge / exploding 6 / +1S / ignore cover; in any combination.
I intend on trying Coven of Twelve.

again, i don't play competitive so i know my argument is not THAT important, but i still believe that the majority of players DON'T play in a competitive environment but more in a beer-&-pretzel setup.....maybe i'm wrong lol

Honestly I've been playing around with the idea of a zombie theme for my coven ... take 1 unit of 20 wracks and 1 haemie, the warlord trait twisted animator and using the custom coven combo of splinterblade for exploding 6's and obsessive collectors to just keep bringing wracks back for the massive blob of death

Cerve wrote:

Anyway, backing on topic: are you playing Coven again? Which obsession?

I like coven of twelve. The relic and stratagem are good for making the haemy a semi-competent character killer, instead of just a buff-bot. -1 AP is always nice too. And since you don't get any survivability from the obsession, that gives me an excuse to try grots in a raider (preferably Black Heart for dat t1 charge)

My next list experiment is Coven of 12 with Flayed Skull, for that whole Flaying theme.
Going to include a unit of 3 Talos with Chainflails, because -1AP built in might make them not bad.

Patayou wrote:

Cerve wrote:

Anyway, backing on topic: are you playing Coven again? Which obsession?

I like coven of twelve. The relic and stratagem are good for making the haemy a semi-competent character killer, instead of just a buff-bot. -1 AP is always nice too. And since you don't get any survivability from the obsession, that gives me an excuse to try grots in a raider (preferably Black Heart for dat t1 charge)

I'm in love with the Twelves, I can't wait to try them! I'm so much on this that I'm thinking to field chains on veichles just for striking in melee at ap-2

Cerve wrote:

I'm in love with the Twelves, I can't wait to try them! I'm so much on this that I'm thinking to field chains on veichles just for striking in melee at ap-2

I'm generally reluctant to take coven raiders (unless they're dark technomancers) because of the inability to use Lightning Fast Reactions on them.

What am I missing that people rarely talk about Dark Creed? More often than not, their +1 to hit will trigger and the Warlord Trait is just pure gold. The leadership debuffs are not the main go-to aspect, but they are nice as well.

I don't find an additional -1 AP very compelling on most Coven units.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

What am I missing that people rarely talk about Dark Creed? More often than not, their +1 to hit will trigger and the Warlord Trait is just pure gold. The leadership debuffs are not the main go-to aspect, but they are nice as well.

I don't find an additional -1 AP very compelling on most Coven units.

the +1HR is indeed really good, but don't forget that starting turn 3 you're already hitting in melee on 2+ army wide without any shenanigans.

Personally the +1AP will apply and make a change more often IMHO.

Note here that both are really good! now that i play more often against T'au and genestealer, the -1LD is really good!

The Strange Dark One wrote:

What am I missing that people rarely talk about Dark Creed? More often than not, their +1 to hit will trigger and the Warlord Trait is just pure gold. The leadership debuffs are not the main go-to aspect, but they are nice as well.

I don't find an additional -1 AP very compelling on most Coven units.

I do also like my wracks being able to perform actions (like retrieve nachmund data) while also being able to take potshots at enemy units with hexrifles/ossefactors. Granted, that's a relatively minor thing.

I do think that a large unit of wracks hitting at -2AP with metallotoxins will take apart a good number of vehicles.

And Grotesques/Talos hitting at -3AP seems pretty significant to me.

Yep I agree on Twelves. I'm amazed about how much those Wracks hits. 10 of them will reroll to wound with 1 CP only (Strife do that with 2CP), and ap-2 is the perfect way to force any armour save into invuln save. Expecially in this meta of Custodes (that they strike on Sr8, so no PoF/AoF), ap-2 force 2+ saves into 4+ saves, which is huge for an 85-115 points TROOP unit.
Dark Creed is fun, but on T3 you will hit on 2+ already, and with the nearly-mandatory Animus Vitae (if you rely on a lot of WS3+ units almost) you will strike on 2+ on T2.

Some quick napkin math on Twelve versus Splinterblades,

Each Twelves Wrack will score 0.22 AP-3 hits, and 0.44 AP-2 hits (0.28 and 0.55 on turn 3+).
Each Splinterblades Wrack will score about 0.28 AP-2 and 0.55 AP-1, (0.34 and 0.66 on turn 3+).

Average wounds against a 3+ (such as Tau Crisis Suits, most Craftworld stuff, and of course Marines) is 0.48 for Twelve and 0.455 for Splinterblades.
Against a Custodes 2+/4++, make that 0.33 and 0.32 for Twelve and Splinterblades, respectively.

So for Wracks, Twelve has a small edge but the two are sufficiently neck-and-neck that the real question is probably whether you prefer to be able to perform Actions and still take potshots with your guns, or if you prefer for those Grotesques or Taloi you're probably gonna be bringing to get to swing their meat around with a 1 CP Torturer's Craft. (Splinterblades is generally speaking better on the big boys than Twelve is right now, since whenever you're going up against Custodes the extra AP is just plain wasted anyway)

In my personal opinion, the guns on Wracks are more of a cute "oh yeah by the way" than anything to plan your army around, while a Torturer's Craft on a big dick unit of Grotesques can swing a midfield fight.

tldr: I think I slightly prefer Splinterblades + Master Torturers to Coven of Twelve for the current climate, but I wouldn't consider you insane for swinging the other direction.

Cerve wrote:

I find competitive the 90% of the Codex. I'm in line with all the nerfs, and I'm having a blast since it cames out.
[...]
I can actually write 10 and more lists, all of them competitive for tournaments, some of them easier than others.
[...]
Damn I'm even considering Flayed Skull for the new Tau meta. Flayed Skull, the worse cabal obsession of the Codex.

Does any of those lists make Venoms good? I've yet to play a 9th game (covid and personal reasons) and I reeeeaally want to make my Venoms good. I'm considering poison tongue as a kabal, coupled with some few Cult units and Incubbi (I got those toughest girls of the galaxy version! Super hot and cool!).

Kalmah wrote:

I personally love the Coven customs: reroll charge / exploding 6 / +1S / ignore cover; in any combination.
I intend on trying Coven of Twelve.

again, i don't play competitive so i know my argument is not THAT important, but i still believe that the majority of players DON'T play in a competitive environment but more in a beer-&-pretzel setup.....maybe i'm wrong lol

I don't have much coven, just two or three talos, an heamunculus and a big squad of grots.
They are still viable, right?
Or do I need wracks to get a patrol detachment?