Black Heart Spearhead

Some of these suggestions are ludicrous. I would not take haywire blasters ever if they were 12 points.

Agents of Vect is potent, but 3 CPs. If anything, I see it become more prevalent in other armies rather than being pruned back.

While some of our stuff is definitely punching above its cost (grots take an inordinate amount of firepower to kill and put out a lot of damage given how much they cost, for example), all this clamoring for getting nerfed is very strange when you should be asking them to make the weaker armies better (and as TA said, your opponents to suck less).

withershadow wrote:

Some of these suggestions are ludicrous. I would not take haywire blasters ever if they were 12 points.

 

Haywire are ludicrous right now, at 8 points... but rarely I find myself agree with the community, guess I'm playing a different game :-/

Saldiven wrote:

Cerve wrote:

Even blocking a reroll (or better, a chance to go in melee before you) can change the game...

Don't think me wrong: I love Agents for fluffy wise. But competitive is a must-take, and for friendly game it brokes the game. The thing that even Eldar are taking a BH spearhead (and I mean, 99% of the lists) it's a critical thing in my opinion.

Not around here....

Sorry, I forgot the "at the next GT London", my fault

dumpeal wrote:

We can only negate 1 stratagem per turn.

Wrong. We can negate 1 stratagem per phase.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Agents of Vect only works if you have CP dominance. In low CP lists you're better off using them on other things. Once again, the meta is lazy and takes the obvious solution. Give the codex 3-6 months and people will figure it out and build lists around it.

Or nerf it right away because bad players think it's broken and OP.

Says the one who consider Razorwing Flocks good

"bad players", so I guess all the Eldar players at the incoming London GT...

Why people can't just be humble?

Problem with dissies and grots possibly being too good and needing a Nerf, is they might be too good in the same way dark reapers were good.
In that they're good against basically all targets, and the counter strategy might (might!) Require lists to shift to only deal with these two units.

In MTG they called this distorting the meta. You didn't make decisions to be the best general power, or deal with a type of problem, but you needed to have a direct and different answer to this one unit thing or you lost.

In that case you needed to buff every other thing in the game... Or just Nerf those two things.

This might not be the case. It's too early to say. But if those units are just so good there is no reason not to Max them, and there is nothing that makes them bad that isn't only good against them. Then they'll need a Nerf.

Cerve wrote:

TeenageAngst wrote:

Agents of Vect only works if you have CP dominance. In low CP lists you're better off using them on other things. Once again, the meta is lazy and takes the obvious solution. Give the codex 3-6 months and people will figure it out and build lists around it.

Or nerf it right away because bad players think it's broken and OP.

Says the one who consider Razorwing Flocks good

"bad players", so I guess all the Eldar players at the incoming London GT...

Why people can't just be humble?

Because Europe plays 40k with a truffle hunting pig and seashells for dice. They don't play the way we play in the states.

hexxenwyrd wrote:

Problem with dissies and grots possibly being too good and needing a Nerf, is they might be too good in the same way dark reapers were good.
In that they're good against basically all targets, and the counter strategy might (might!) Require lists to shift to only deal with these two units.

In MTG they called this distorting the meta. You didn't make decisions to be the best general power, or deal with a type of problem, but you needed to have a direct and different answer to this one unit thing or you lost.

In that case you needed to buff every other thing in the game... Or just Nerf those two things.

This might not be the case. It's too early to say. But if those units are just so good there is no reason not to Max them, and there is nothing that makes them bad that isn't only good against them. Then they'll need a Nerf.

Those are the two things that I would be okay with going up in cost.

But people here and elsewhere have so far called for the nerfing of: kabalites, wyches, reavers, raiders, venoms, ravagers, razorwing fighters, Lhameaens and even hellions. Basically everything people use, and some things they don't.

Perversely, most of this is coming from presumably the players themselves, just like all this angst about Trueborn and Index options when no other army blinks an eye at utilizing index gear. I suspect it's either hipsters who want to go back to the days of DE being the "super hard mode super rare snowflake" army, or a bunch of players who faced them for the first time ever and lost.

Oh no, Dark Eldar are a strong army for the first time... ever pretty much! Put them back in the trash where they belong!

Cerve wrote:

withershadow wrote:

Some of these suggestions are ludicrous. I would not take haywire blasters ever if they were 12 points.

 

Haywire are ludicrous right now, at 8 points... but rarely I find myself agree with the community, guess I'm playing a different game :-/

No they are finally playable.

Agents of Vect features so prominently in the London GT lists not because it's overpowered, but because the previous dominant forces in the tournament circuit (like BA and mixed Chaos), depend entirely on a specific stratagem to assert their dominance. Just like no one was worried about flying Hive Tyrants, until they became the go-to counter to the previous Dark Reaper meta.

Cerve wrote:

dumpeal wrote:

We can only negate 1 stratagem per turn.

Wrong. We can negate 1 stratagem per phase.

Yeah. But still. A LOT of thing happens in a phase. If you bet the victory on the outcome of a single stratagem, you were on a very bad position to begin with. Especially if you KNOW I have Agent of Vect.

And please remember.... By itself, Agent of Vect does nothing. It only prevent you to use your OP stratagems.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Cerve wrote:

TeenageAngst wrote:

Agents of Vect only works if you have CP dominance. In low CP lists you're better off using them on other things. Once again, the meta is lazy and takes the obvious solution. Give the codex 3-6 months and people will figure it out and build lists around it.

Or nerf it right away because bad players think it's broken and OP.

Says the one who consider Razorwing Flocks good

"bad players", so I guess all the Eldar players at the incoming London GT...

Why people can't just be humble?

Because Europe plays 40k with a truffle hunting pig and seashells for dice. They don't play the way we play in the states.

Even more so!

merse24 wrote:

AoV isn't something that I spam every game, but in most gamea, there is a critical point that your opponent uses a strategem that he really needs to get off, that's when I use it.  
That single strat has won me games, or at a minimum sealed the game.  

If there is a strategem that an opponent uses that if you stop it is game changing..... Is probably a strategem that is in itself game changing. IMO, there are a lot of good, game changing strategems out there. OUR game changing strategem just happens to be stopping other people's game changing strategem

Aschen wrote:

merse24 wrote:

AoV isn't something that I spam every game, but in most gamea, there is a critical point that your opponent uses a strategem that he really needs to get off, that's when I use it.  
That single strat has won me games, or at a minimum sealed the game.  

If there is a strategem that an opponent uses that if you stop it is game changing..... Is probably a strategem that is in itself game changing.  IMO, there are a lot of good, game changing strategems out there.  OUR game changing strategem just happens to be stopping other people's game changing strategem

Very good point

There are plenty of stratagems that by themselves aren't game changing, but in the right situation can alter the course of a game. There's been strats I've let slide against me early in the game because it wasn't going to result in me losing the game, but later in the game, in a different situation, that same strat was critical to the outcome.

withershadow wrote:

Agents of Vect features so prominently in the London GT lists not because it's overpowered, but because the previous dominant forces in the tournament circuit (like BA and mixed Chaos), depend entirely on a specific stratagem to assert their dominance.  Just like no one was worried about flying Hive Tyrants, until they became the go-to counter to the previous Dark Reaper meta.  

I agree with this. People are really quick to jump on the sudden new hotness, claim it is too powerful and needing tuning without really looking why it's become a problem in the first place.

It's the same way how in 7e Strength D was the bees knees, but not just because it was strong (while being quite terrible against low T vehicles like DE boats), but because there were so many superbuff deathstars in play with rerollable invulnerables and invisibility. In such cases you really hoped for that roll of 6 on damage table to simply remove those overly annoying models with no saves. Needing to resort to such means to be able to play really turned me off 7e, thus the changes of 8e and mortal wounds mechanics for just such models.

No, I disagree on that. It's not a meta-call, BA were never these big champions to need to take down. Neither Cacophony or Traitors Tide. AoV is great in 90% of games, and even if you're blocking a single reroll it can make results. A lot of people got it, a lot of them is playing it.
We will see if GW will nerfed it or not. In my opinion, in a competitive view, this Codex has some broken stuffs, and AoV is one of them. Nice fluffy lore but terrible game design mechanic. It's just annoying, cut down some armies (which is always bad for a game) and terrible usefull against the others.
We will se, I'll stop arguing now.



For some costs, for me Shardnet is ludicrous at 5 points were Gauntlet and Flals are 4. Shardnet is stunning, i tried it a lot of times and if played well, those 5 Wyches are capable to being virtually immortal, "silencing" completely any infantry shooting unit. There's no challange, 5vs4 points is silly. They can litterally push them at 8 if they're kind, or 10 if they're wise.

Haywire blasters....I love them. They're like our smite spam against veichles, bypassing thougness, saves, quantum shields, wave serpents, anything. 2-3x5 Scourges and you're fine. You can manage other veichles by charges, there's no need to put in some blasters/lances (which they are good tho). Just for their output against veichles, 8 points is nothing. Add the versatility against of D3 hits St4 ap-1 in a poisoned army and you have (nearly) the perfect weapon. It's not a DL Ravager that you will throw away against a fully infantry army, it's ADAPTABLE which is why them are so good.
Yeah Shredders are good but you, but with Ravagers and all the poison stuff the Codex is filled of antiinfantry guns.
Blasters are nice, but nearly useless against Necrons, suffering a bit against Eldar, not so good against elite units ecc..Definitely not adaptable.
Haywire are between both, silghtly worse than the first and decisely better than the lasts. 8 Points seems to me a bit low. 10 will be good.

Anyway I'm off topic.

AoV is really good, but the main reason why it is so good is because people often rely to heavily on getting a certain stratagem of. The issue is that people often still take 1 unit and boost it with a few stratagems to make that unit game winning, against nids that often means a melee units (say 20 genestealers) that by stratagems etc move 18-20 inch so they can do turn 1 charges. Till us people could only stop it by sacrificing a unit to eat that charge. Now people actually have to think about such units. Before the only question was how do I make this unit as strong as possible, against us it means building an army around 1 stratagem won't work anymore. So yes it makes a lot of point and click armies a lot less usefull. Then again those were before rarely the best games I played, so I do not mind at all if people have to adapt and make more all rounded list not reliyng purely on 1 unit/ stratagem gimmick.

Haywire is OP? Stop being ridiculous. It is marginally better against a lot of vehicles than a blaster per point and has little utility if a vehicle isn't the target, yes it can shoot d3 shots at something, but that just makes it equivalent to a bolt rifle with shorter range. Doubly so when you look at the damage a blaster does against other targets.

When you go quoting 8 points for such and such you aren't including the base cost of the unit. Which in this case is 3/5ths of the cost. So it isn't an 8 point gun it is a 20 point model and your comparing it to a 29 point model. This brings the difference between the two down a lot and really makes them comparable

I think if HWB go up too much, they are going to be completely forgotten about again. It is really nice against vehicles, doing mortal wounds and all...but any other target and its inferior.....

against guard, its boltgun status like Splata said...

Against marines, you're basically paying 20 points for a model that shoots like a 6pt model

Against t5+, you are basically paying 20pts for a model that shoots WORSE than a 6pt model

Haywire performance does not justify costing any more than it does. I would never ever take it at 12 points, and probably would balk at 10. I think Cerve is a double agent here to sabotage us, he probably plays Tau.

Ahahh no, I'm just a DE player who is sick to win I hope that it's because my opponents here needs to study this new Codex and get countermeasures, because I'm finding them.....well...kinda boring

Cerve wrote:

Ahahh no, I'm just a DE player who is sick to win I hope that it's because my opponents here needs to study this new Codex and get countermeasures, because I'm finding them.....well...kinda boring

Well, at least you got the eldar mindset down. Now you can start doing trick shots and wacky lists.

Siticus the Ancient wrote:

Cerve wrote:

Ahahh no, I'm just a DE player who is sick to win I hope that it's because my opponents here needs to study this new Codex and get countermeasures, because I'm finding them.....well...kinda boring

Well, at least you got the eldar mindset down. Now you can start doing trick shots and wacky lists.

I'm already doing and still winning! I'm letting down the Kabal (except for 3 Ravagers usually) and playing around Conven+Cult but...I don't know, I'm going foward. I'm playing like an Ork player.

I'm feeling like I'm playing like +30% of the models I should, in 2000 points. We can deploy too many stuffs. Maybe Haywire is good? Ok, so bump up Scourges. 4 Deepstriking Haywire blasters can't costs 92 points, it's embarassing. And I don't care about math, the thing is they CAN do too many mortal wounds. They have to limit this. For their costs, you can't have the potential of 12+ mortal wounds on a veichle. You're bypassing flyer rules, quantum rules, serpent rules, inv rules, toughtness rules...and most of it, you still wound veichles at 5+ with ap -1. You add the mortal wounds.
You can say "ok, but they cost because you're spending points only for anti tank", so if they sucks against infantry, i can be ok...but they are, actually, an ap-1 range 18" bolters...for 92 points. They are always, always usefull.

Grotesques are embarassing. A lot of people still buying Raiders for them, but they don't really need it. 7"+D6 first turn, in the second you're in game. I played 3 Talos+3-3-4 Grotesques and you can't literrally kill them off. First turn, you must choose if you wanna shoot your antitank fire on Taloi, or on 3 Ravagers. And try to kill Grotesques, do the math.
Add 3 Venoms w/5 Wyches each and you're done. Shardnets are ludicrous good, and the thing is you're never going to shoot down those Wyches, because I get you too many threats.

etc etc..I'm playing too many models at 2000 points tho

Cerve wrote:

I'm playing too many models at 2000 points tho

I agree with this and it's why I'm expecting us to be getting some points increases in the future. The cost decreases in the Codex were very welcome on the whole but some were unnecessary and others went too far.