Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2163

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#19 » Nov 25 2017 03:21

SinisterSamurai wrote:Lastly: Understrength units can only be taken in Auxiliary Detachments.

We've known this already but it does raise an interesting question. Is it worth spending 1 CP for a Monat XV8?

SinisterSamurai wrote:Even more, because of the exploitable wording, a model could advance, and then fire a heavy weapon without any penalty. Your heavy BS is better after advancing than after simply moving. Wish I could put it on a broadside, but I guess Longstrike will do.

Our only HQs with heavy weapons are Longstrike, Darkstrider, and the Fireblade I think. While the heavy weapon perk is interesting, I feel like it will be more valuable to gain the bonus on advancing assault weapons.

SinisterSamurai wrote:It doesn't say immediately after, but I think it's implied.

Fair enough. This is the one stratagem I can see myself using every turn. Basically, it adds +2 Markerlights... so, for a squad of 5 Pathfinders firing, once the first two have fired you should have one hit, use the stratagem and now you have three. The next 3 firing should bring you to 4-5 Markerlights, if you end up with 4 just use a backup Markerlight like a Fireblade or something. In addition, this stratagem makes it much easier to get 3 Markerlight hits on something if you need to launch Seeker or Destroyer Missiles.

User avatar
SinisterSamurai
Kor'La
Kor'La
Posts: 416

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#20 » Nov 25 2017 03:37

Arka0415 wrote:Our only HQs with heavy weapons are Longstrike, Darkstrider, and the Fireblade I think. While the heavy weapon perk is interesting, I feel like it will be more valuable to gain the bonus on advancing assault weapons.

Warlord selection isn't limited to HQs, just characters. Consider (and then dismiss) the lowly Firesight Marskman for a Warlord. Or the Shaper. Also, consider Forge World, which for example has a Smart Missile commander.

And, just to be clear, the bonus doesn't only apply to assault (removing the -1) and heavy, but all weapons. Normally, advancing would prevent Rapid Fire weapons from being used, but now you can use your Advance move to close into double-tap range.
Last edited by SinisterSamurai on Nov 25 2017 03:48, edited 2 times in total.

Wedrujacy
Shas'Saal
Posts: 61

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#21 » Nov 25 2017 03:43

Just checked Japan GW and they have CA 2017 for around 34 EUR O_o

stayhandsome
Shas'Saal
Posts: 32

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#22 » Nov 25 2017 03:58

Wedrujacy wrote:Just checked Japan GW and they have CA 2017 for around 34 EUR O_o


How much are you expecting it to be?

In Japan almost everything is ~20% more expensive than western prices

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 807

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#23 » Nov 25 2017 04:00

Hmm. Most of the missing factions from the points changes either just got a codex (Eldar) or are about to get one (Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Chaos). Then there are Tau and Necrons; nothing definitive but at the very least highly suggestive of the release schedule after Chaos.

Fixed points would have been nice but if I have to wait a couple of months then a few of my models will just be for display for a couple more months. I tried my Riptide out again this week for chuckles[1] and a points change alone can't fix the IA Riptide.

The Titan points adjustments are clearly a game design decision to give us Apocalypse games and to price that class of models out of Matched Play games. It looks like the big toys are back to being designed for big games - or narrative/open games of course. My decision on which Tigershark to buy just got easier.

The updated rumour on Puretide Engram Neurochip is very encouraging. Even against a full set of relics that one would be a strong choice if the CP gain on 6+ works on both players' stratagem use. If we only have one for a few months it is nice to have a decently strong one. The new stratagem is still excellent - it was a no-brainer that we would get one or more markerlight stratagems and that one looks very good for the 1CP cost. As I said elsewhere it really helps me offset the double-penalty effect of opposing -1 BS abilities with markerlight dependent army builds.

[1] It earned some table-time by winning Machines and Monsters category for me in Armies on Parade.

User avatar
Haechi
Shas'Saal
Posts: 147

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#24 » Nov 25 2017 04:01

What a disappointment.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2163

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#25 » Nov 25 2017 04:17

Haechi wrote:What a disappointment.

Hey, it's not as bad as you think. One of the Warlord Traits is decent, the Relic is great, and the Markerlight stratagem is even better. In addition we got FW Hammerheads at the correct price, no competitive units got nerfed, ITC rules are in for rolling for first turn, and hopefully we'll have a codex within the next 2-3 months!

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 807

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#26 » Nov 25 2017 04:21

Arka0415 wrote:
SinisterSamurai wrote:Lastly: Understrength units can only be taken in Auxiliary Detachments.

We've known this already but it does raise an interesting question. Is it worth spending 1 CP for a Monat XV8?

1CP to take a Monat Stealth Suit as a Drone Controller caddy with bonus Homing Beacon option? Surrounded by drones it is still not going to die. Worth considering.

Having this in CA does legitimise this option for players, it is a legal use of the rules with a stated cost.

I think taking the drone part of a unit without the "main" part of that unit would be strictly rules-legal but far too cheesy for my personal dairy-tolerance.

Arka0415 wrote:
SinisterSamurai wrote:It doesn't say immediately after, but I think it's implied.

Fair enough. This is the one stratagem I can see myself using every turn. Basically, it adds +2 Markerlights... so, for a squad of 5 Pathfinders firing, once the first two have fired you should have one hit, use the stratagem and now you have three. The next 3 firing should bring you to 4-5 Markerlights, if you end up with 4 just use a backup Markerlight like a Fireblade or something. In addition, this stratagem makes it much easier to get 3 Markerlight hits on something if you need to launch Seeker or Destroyer Missiles.


Agreed. The lack of "immediately" in the wording really frees us up to finish firing the rest of the markerlights in the unit before we decide to apply the stratagem. Otherwise you could get a certain type of opponent claiming that because you rolled another markerlight after the one that hit you missed the chance to use the stratagem "immediately".

User avatar
Haechi
Shas'Saal
Posts: 147

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#27 » Nov 25 2017 04:24

Arka0415 wrote:
Haechi wrote:What a disappointment.

Hey, it's not as bad as you think. One of the Warlord Traits is decent, the Relic is great, and the Markerlight stratagem is even better. In addition we got FW Hammerheads at the correct price, no competitive units got nerfed, ITC rules are in for rolling for first turn, and hopefully we'll have a codex within the next 2-3 months!


Really? I couldn't care less about those. What we need is unit cost reduction, not barely remarkable traits...

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2163

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#28 » Nov 25 2017 04:30

Haechi wrote:Really? I couldn't care less about those. What we need is unit cost reduction, not barely remarkable traits...

It looks like no faction is getting major cost reductions or major competitiveness changes, with the exception of some major alterations for Forgeworld units. Wait for the codex for that, I guess.

User avatar
Haechi
Shas'Saal
Posts: 147

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#29 » Nov 25 2017 04:33

Arka0415 wrote:
Haechi wrote:Really? I couldn't care less about those. What we need is unit cost reduction, not barely remarkable traits...

It looks like no faction is getting major cost reductions or major competitiveness changes, with the exception of some major alterations for Forgeworld units. Wait for the codex for that, I guess.


True, but since they advertised it as "bringing indexes on par with codexes" and "lots of points changes", one can only be disappointed with the result.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2163

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#30 » Nov 25 2017 04:35

Haechi wrote:True, but since they advertised it as "bringing indexes on par with codexes" and "lots of points changes", one can only be disappointed with the result.

I feel like we, as a community, hyped it too much by ourselves. What else could it have been, besides lame stopgap changes? No matter how many FAQs, erratas, or Chapter Approved books they put out, Index armies won't hold a candle to Codex armies.

User avatar
Haechi
Shas'Saal
Posts: 147

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#31 » Nov 25 2017 04:50

They could have with Sept traits, points overhaul, and more strategems.

User avatar
Emberkahn
Shas'Saal
Posts: 114

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#32 » Nov 25 2017 06:23

As a minor note; i am actually quite supportive of the Tau'nar change. It makes us worse, but thanks to shield drones that thing was straight up terrifying in normal games; In fact I have never so much as lost a wound on one. As sad as it is to see us get hit by a nerf bat when our current available options are so limited, I feel that this was just.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2163

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#33 » Nov 25 2017 06:27

Emberkahn wrote:As a minor note; i am actually quite supportive of the Tau'nar change. It makes us worse, but thanks to shield drones that thing was straight up terrifying in normal games; In fact I have never so much as lost a wound on one. As sad as it is to see us get hit by a nerf bat when our current available options are so limited, I feel that this was just.

Seems like the change was mainly to limit it to Apocalypse games, which are getting all-new rules too. I feel like I can never quite get behind major nerfs, but this one I can understand.

pilky
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 258

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#34 » Nov 25 2017 07:21

Somewhat disappointed at the lack of points changes (even most of the FW ones are from an FAQ months ago), though given we're not the only one to be shafted in that way, and the extent of changes elsewhere, I'm inclined to believe the theory that Tau and Necros may be next after Daemons and Angels. Especially as the one points change I was certain we'd get would be to up gun drones by a few points.

Either way, the stuff we do get is pretty damn awesome so I'm content enough for now. D3 extra markerlights is way more useful than a reroll

Sonnenkoenig
Shas
Posts: 12

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#35 » Nov 25 2017 07:23

What a disappointment indeed!! Concerning matched play and the promise of a massive points adjustment, literally NOTHING has happened! The points alteration of FW units is completely uninteresting. The stratagem (a single one!!!) and the traits + the relic WITHOUT changing anything else are but a bad joke! Hoping for a decent codex, though...

User avatar
Maxwell
Shas'Saal
Posts: 82

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#36 » Nov 25 2017 08:48

I don’t own a Ta’unar, but (presuming this is true) in what world is this acceptable for the consumer? They’re invalidating a $300+ investment for everyone who purchased one. I would be so ticked if I spent the money and hours on end assembling and painting it for this to happen. It’s the functional equivalent of removing it from the index.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Impulse and 3 guests