New FAQ - WTF ?!

[PrinceCharming]

think we should get instability aswell, would be sooo sweet

 

[Tawg]

think we should get instability aswell, would be sooo sweet

You mean the Ld test to check for breakage?

You know, I was actually really happy when the VCs lost the instability that daemon's have, I liked that you could "Count" your loses, and know exactly where the fight was going, but the possibility of a unit of 20 zombies suffering 10 wounds, falling down, and the opponent running through sounds harsh.. I mean, are we suppose to just throw even bigger units at them then? I guess that's not too big of an issue, they are rather cheep.

I still like the current crumble rules for the VC though. It's just unfortunate they are a little wobbly on their intentions with what happens following crumble(/instability).

 

[Yorga]

I see they dropped the ball and did not add Ethereal to the "1 wound per unit" ruling like they should have. STUPID STUPID GW!!! :mad2:

@ Johnny:

Warrior priest and arch lectors no longer add to channeling attempts. But on the other side of that sword they cannot be affected by hellheart either.

 

[PrinceCharming]

what you mean yorga, ehtereals 1 pe runit?

 

[Johnny-Crass]

Ummm yorga they still channel per their rules. The wizard thing was just a stupid question

 

[Vipoid]

I think fear needs to be looked at as well. Too many things cause fear/terror IMO and this fear-negates-fear-thing seems to be double-dipping into ItP's design space. Take Ogres for example: they cause fear because they're big. Sure, an empire troop should be afraid of one crashing into them and stomping. The fear undead causes is fundamentally different - undeath should inspire fear in Ogres as well. Just because you're fat doesn't mean you shouldn't be worried about undeath!

That last line is definitely siggable.

Anyway, I know what you mean about fear. Our troops are still paying for it, but it's basically worthless in the 8th edition ruleset. There are just too many barriers to overcome, for it to do anything - ironically, Fear is probably one of the least-feared rules in the game.

I mean, firstly, you've got the ItP units/armies - Undead, daemons. Then, you have units/armies like ogres, which case fear themselves. Then you've got anything which has/can buy Frenzy (this giving it ItP.
And, you've also got things like Cold Blooded, which make failing fear even less likely.

And, even if your army isn't affected by one of the above, most units will still be testing on Ld9/10 - probably with a BSB reroll. So, for Ld9, that's less than a 3% chance of success. Terrifying.

Finally, if by some miracle you get fear off, the effect isn't even that amazing. If it reduced WS and I to 1 (or gave them ASL), then that might be a little better, but WS rarely makes enough difference, outside of a few, specific units (and at least one of those involves ogres).

I think the problem (aside from Fear's effect being rather pathetic) is that there are too many ways to make Ld test near-impossible to fail.

I would like to see some sort of use for our core units beyond "crap to tie stuff up where not even a character can offset it's CR". A bus of skeletons should be able to do *something* other than suck and die.

I guess I just want undead to be more versatile beyond "character delivery with a few monsters". Honestly, the more the new books come out, I think we're one of the more limited armies in terms of army-mechanics and ways to make us win. TKs especially have this... those poor bastards!

Again, I know where you're coming from. I love our strong, blendy characters - they're the reason I started VCs. But, it would be nice to have some other options. I mean, we have a few ways to make our core survivable - we can raise them, we can give them regenerate. However, it would be nice if we had something to give them some offensive punch, without relying on Mindrazor.

Enemies always take a fear check (no matter if they have fear or terror) when they are outnumberd by models with the undead special rule?

That's an interesting idea, but it doesn't address the core issue - Ld tests aren't scary when you have a 97-99% chance of passing, and the penalty for losing is reduced WS for a turn.

I really dislike Steadfast tbh, that rule depreciated a lot of units that depended on breaking the opponents (Like smaller knight units, god why do I need to out number them?!); But I am of the mindset that GW doesn't exactly have a think-tank behind their official rules creation. I am often left asking why, or how, they think certain things are a good idea..

I can understand why they introduced it. However, there are 2 issues at the moment:

1) This gave a massive boost to both regular units, and units with demonic instability... but no bonus whatsoever to units that are simply unstable. Sadly, they failed to redress the balance elsewhere.

2) It's too hard to break. I don't understand why disruption doesn't negate steadfast.

I still like the current crumble rules for the VC though. It's just unfortunate they are a little wobbly on their intentions with what happens following crumble(/instability).

Well, it seems like Vampires/Vampiric units should have *some* protection against crumbling. Maybe they take one fewer wound per crumble, or are allowed ward/regenerate saves against the wounds. Basically, it seems like a Vampire Lord shouldn't crumble just as easily as a zombie.

 

[Yorga]

Ummm yorga they still channel per their rules. The wizard thing was just a stupid question

They can channel though they are not wizards? That's dumb!

 

[akiro27]

2) It's too hard to break. I don't understand why disruption doesn't negate steadfast.

^^ This! A thousand times this! When learning the 8th ed rules I was constantly mixing up disruption vs steadfast and how they worked. Not intuitive at all.

-aki

 

[The Sun King]

Not only is it counter-intuitive that you cannot disrupt steadfast it also makes for broken units like Slaves.

 

[NoisyAssassin]

I would have loved to see something like "An Unstable unit which loses combat, but is Steadfast, suffers half the normal number of wounds". It would give Steadfast meaning for undead without being horribly broken.

And I agree 100% that Disruption should negate Steadfast. I played it that way for the first 5 or so games of 8th until someone in my group managed to realize that it didn't work that way. Another way to deal with Deathstars and makes the movement phase more import. Two concepts I can get behind!

 

[Yorga]

Not only is it counter-intuitive that you cannot disrupt steadfast it also makes for broken units like Slaves.

You know what? I'm getting tired about hearing how broken Slaves are. The Skaven have very little left in this new meta of armies that can help them compete.

I'm more upset about the slaves losing the no overrun rule than my zombies losing it. I have not played my Skaven since WoC came out. Then DoC and those ridicules Khorne cannons put the nail in the coffin.

I was developing a skaven army designed around using 20 rat slave units to delay the enemy long enough to get some shots off. Now that is all out the freaking window thanks to GW and their stupid pendulum FAQs. :mad2:

What do Skaven have now?

Aboms? Yeah right...what with Dwarf and Demon flaming cannons and now High Elves that have a hit and run flaming flyer.

Dread 13th? Sure if you are lucky enough to find an opponent that is not ramming MC down your throat.

Twin Towers? Sure if you are lucky enough to find an opponent who isn't using shadow or life magic. Or ...Iron Blasters, stanks, cannons (Dwarf or Empire), Hellcannons, Trebs, Khorne Cannons....you get the picture.

All the skaven are left with is some tricks that blow up in their face 30% of the time. :tongue:

Wake up people! Skaven are now mid-tier no doubt about it.

 

[The Sun King]

I'm sorry to say NoisyAssassin but that would be horribly broken - would arguebly make Zombies the best unit in the game.

 

[Johnny-Crass]

Doomwheels are still bent though!

 

[Seneschal]

The change to Spirit Leech is something I am not a fan of. I see plenty of benefits for particular armies but a nerfing for others (that I happen to play, bleh).
I am interested in seeing if BoD and Doom and Darkness will affect it now although I doubt it.

 

[The Sun King]

@ Yorga: I don't know if you play uncomped or what but there is a reason our resident Skaven player wins every single tournament(though I hope to take him out in our current league where I beat him 14-6). What meta are you talking aobut? Because uncomped there is no doubt that Skaven is still one of the best armies out there. Skaven Slaves kill Greater Daemones when they blow up for christ sake... Most things in the Skaven book is so underpriced that hurts for a none skaven player to read it. The standard Skaven army list scores MINUS in the swedish comp(I'm thinking about 2 Warplightning canons, alot of Skaven Slaves, HPA, Doomwheel, Screaming Bell Grey Seer, 4 Engineers(doom rocket, brass orb) type of lists).

 

[Minsc]

Wake up people! Skaven are now mid-tier no doubt about it.

I'm not gonna derail this thread any further, but I'm just gonna give you a quick..."yeah "



As for the new FAQ, from a VC-PoV there was no big surprise. GW doing a 180 on the whole "unstable-poof-overrun"-deal was unexpected, but not a big deal really, since this is how it's been for as long as I can remember, so now it's buisness as usual.

 

[vampiricshaman]

with this ruling does that mean Skellies are back to being our best core?

 

[Count Lasombra]

I agree with Yorga.

 

[Yorga]

@ Yorga: I don't know if you play uncomped or what but there is a reason our resident Skaven player wins every single tournament(though I hope to take him out in our current league where I beat him 14-6). What meta are you talking aobut? Because uncomped there is no doubt that Skaven is still one of the best armies out there. Skaven Slaves kill Greater Daemones when they blow up for christ sake... Most things in the Skaven book is so underpriced that hurts for a none skaven player to read it. The standard Skaven army list scores MINUS in the swedish comp(I'm thinking about 2 Warplightning canons, alot of Skaven Slaves, HPA, Doomwheel, Screaming Bell Grey Seer, 4 Engineers(doom rocket, brass orb) type of lists).

I guess I just get unlucky and get matched up against all the cannon bearing armies like Dwarves, Empire, OK etc. My towers last until about turn 2. :grave: Part of that is my fault for not using the Stormbanner. But I figure that would increase life span until turn 3 so..yeah. Then I am left with a bunch of clanrats or even plague monks trying to bring down armor 1+ stuff or T4 stuff with only strength 3 attacks. Doesn't work so well....

I had intended to take a lot of WFT and Plaguewind mortars and delay my opponent with 20 man slave units that would pop and not allow an overrun. But GW just shot that plan in the foot.

BTW, when I play with my WoC, I'm in your artillery grill by turn 2.

 

[Adam_Barrow]

I've tried going Weapon Team heavy, Yorga. It tends to perform subpar in my experience. Those rats can't be used reliably in any stretch of the word, even allowing for Skaven unreliability. I bring a single Warpfire Thrower and one Mortar nowadays. I've consolidated my Clannies into two units of 40, shields, 5 wide, parked right in front of the Seer's bunker for Ld 10+ bsb rerolls. It doesn't shift easily.

Sorry to derail the topic there.

 

[Nagashizzar]

The Death Greedy Fist is no more!

"Change the last sentence to “In addition, an enemy Wizard loses a Wizard level and a randomly selected spell each time they are hit in close combat by an Ogre wearing the Greedy Fist.”

Is it me or this change should be in magenta?

 

[Johnny-Crass]

No that is old

 

[Nagashizzar]

No that is old

God... When this was corrected? All that pain for nothing...

 

[Count Matthewzilla]

Warpflame is not flaming...

Sad Panda

 

[Bullhax]

No that is old

God... When this was corrected? All that pain for nothing...

Hmm dec. or january So not THAT long ago