Kharn and Tal editionPrevious heresy>>98244169>HH 3.0 - Complete gofile - All Books:https://gofile.io/d/cnJk0N>Titanicus Compendiumshttps://gofile.io/d/qdYzem>New Edition, to a great wailing and gnashing of teeth:https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/setting/warhammer-the-horus-heresy/>Official FAQ/Errata/Downloads:https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/downloads/warhammer-the-horus-heresy/>Thread FAQ (very old, remembers Age of Terra)https://pastebin.com/iUqNrrA8https://pastebin.com/8riDmnhS>30k TACTICA & TIPShttps://pastebin.com/Tm2P4QLphttps://1d6chan.miraheze.org/wiki/Age_of_Darkness-Warhammer_30k/3.0_Tactics/General_Tactics『Adeptus Titanicus and Legions Imperialis』>Official FAQ/Errata/Downloadshttps://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/downloads/legions-imperialis/>List of Titan Legions with Badges and Colourshttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17Jccq0V--SwJifLVLwbisYnQeqLlS2pMSiPbGXp1Brs/htmlview>More listshttps://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/List_of_Titan_Legions>What size magnets do I need?5x1mm>Tacticshttps://1d6chan.miraheze.org/wiki/Adeptus_Titanicus/Tactics>Legions Imperialis Army Builderhttps://legionbuilder.app/>Thread Question: Do you play the game?
Titanicus was played today. A nice 1750 NOVA practice match, tied score. Got a rare turn 1 melee, the cerastus lancers did very well again.Had a followup game of 11th edition and I don't want to make a battle report anymore.
>>98257316Yes. Just played a 3v3 game today. Death Guard, Emperor's Children, and Mechanicum vs Imperial Fists, Iron Hands, and Solar Aux.Was meant to be a narrative game with the traitors up on points and the Loyalists just had to escape. Ended up a pretty crushing victory for the Traitors.
>>98257488>primaris >40k dg slop>coomershit
>>98257575Post your models, fagboi.
>>98257488Holy sloppa
>>98257316I got some questions.Who is the best true scale stl maker so I can find and download and share his stuff?Or is it better to find a maker who matches the nu-heresy scale instead?Was a marine legion civil war inevitable even without chaos influence?Has any tutorial come out to making those model pictures of the black books or at least blank templates of them so I can download them?
>>98257705>Was a marine legion civil war inevitable even without chaos influence?Maybe not civil war, but a few legions were definitely up for elimination, either through attrition or direct action. World Eaters and Thousand Sons likely had no place in the Imperium as the Emperor intended, barring Magnus acting as a battery for the golden throne.
I'm bedridden due to a neck injury, all I have is my puter and some delicious watermelon.In regards to tanks, are they viable to 3D print since they're so extremely overpriced?
>>98257705>true scaleAsk me how I know you unironically seethe about being 5'10" irl.
>>98257316>Do you play the game?Not as much as I would like. In other news: Xiphon built. Now I just need to fill in some gaps because I built half of it while lazy and tired in the middle of the night.
>>98257705>Was a marine legion civil war inevitable even without chaos influence?Horus sent the White Scars to Chondax and the Alpha Legion to keep them there four years before he was wounded on DavinI think even in Betrayal there are mentions of supply chains being diverted to Legions that Horus favored long before Davinas far as the other Legions go, Magnus probably wouldn't have rebelled and even allowed the Space Wolves to land on Prospero unopposed, only allowing his Legion to defend their territory on the ground; the Night Lords destroyed Nostramo and basically disappeared twenty years prior to the burning of Prospero; the Word Bearers were long since corrupted even then
>>98257989I like the scale of the nuheresy beakies. I think they are truescale done right which is why I asked.>ask me how I knowYou don’t know.I’m a 5’8” midget irl. Gotta up your game in deciphering a man’s height from his posts.
>>98258013Looks like you did some good cleanup work on that model or got a good resin recast. What specific tools did you use to clean up and assemble that model?
>>98258090A knife. Superglue. Clippers.
>>98258013That should be the more glaring gaps (at least the ones you see from the top) filled in.
Post your models
>>98257705>Was a marine legion civil war inevitable even without chaos influence?Yes. Chaos provided the initial impetus via lorgar/davin, but most of the traitor legions joined up without "chaos influence" and in some cases (khan) chaos influence was what kept them from joining. It wouldnt have been "the horus heresy", but a good many of the legions would have gone rogue even without any outside involvement (like the world eaters, where its a wonder angron lasted as long as he did).
Capped this yesterday, it helps that there are some minds working as a counterbalance to the flanderization of the Legions. Afaik there was no longer that absolutely did not use a particular kind of unit, but rather had a strong disdain for them: WS weren't too keen on Dreadnoughts, and neither were the DG on jump pack infantry.
>>98258139>and neither were the DG on jump pack infantry.The DG doctrine was literally "every marine can be a tactical, assault marine, or devastator as needed".
>>98258153Yes, and?
>>98258253Therefore they clearly did not have an aversion to jump infantry.
>>98258261"During the Horus Heresy, the Death Guard viewed jump packs with disdain, seeing them as a tactical liability. Under Mortarion’s doctrine, the Legion prioritized relentless, foot-slogging attrition warfare over rapid aerial assaults. They believed disciplined, inexorable infantry advances were far superior to the flighty, disorganized nature of jump-reliant units.""Mortarion heavily distrusted airborne or fast-moving mechanized warfare. He viewed the Death Guard as the ultimate grinders of war, built to soak up punishment and slowly march through artillery, chemical warfare, and attrition. Because the Legion prided itself on being tough, resolute, and immovable, relying on jet packs or bikes fundamentally clashed with their cultural identity.""Unlike legions that relied heavily on deep strikes or hit-and-run tactics (like the Blood Angels or Raven Guard), the Death Guard practically discarded specialized jump-pack and fast-assault units. Instead of fielding traditional Assault or Tactical Squads, every marine was heavily standardized. They generally carried a bolter, a bolt pistol, and a close-combat weapon, adapting to whatever the battlefield required on foot.""The only Death Guard units known to use jump packs during the Heresy were specialized Destroyer Squads. These units, which were widely shunned within the Legion for using radioactive and chemical weaponry, occasionally utilized jump packs to close distances rapidly to deploy rad-missiles or clear out heavily fortified areas. However, these were highly specific, controversial exceptions rather than the norm."
Seems like TOW is getting a lot of new shit tomorrow. And what do we get?
>>98258432Rumor is new abby model & SoH terminators
>>98258432>TOW is getting a lot of new shit tomorrowMore Cathay no one asked for aside from tourney fags?
>>98257975HH tanks are probably the thing that kickstarted hobby 3d printing
What are my options for getting combi meltas if I don't have a 3D printer
>>98257989I'm 190cm and built like a rugby player, I want truescale models because it's a self-insert power fantasy. Only literal manlets are offended by properly sized models because they make you feel inferior. Which you are.
>>98258552To wait for GW to release the combi weapon pack>inb4 it's the seekers upgrade pack and you get like 2 combis of each and 5 seeker bolters
>>98258552use pcbway or some other service to print them for you?
Have these already been posted?
>>98258651
>>98258657
>>98258651>>98258657>>98258659Nice! Do you have the Auxillia Raiders at all?
>>98258659>>98258674I should have everything, sorry I got interrupted
>>98258705
>>98258707
>>98258707>Storm maulOh damn thats cooler than I thought
>>98258707>>98258711oh yeah they 100% want you to use subjugator parts as they come with power mauls too
>>98258314What is the source for this? Why would the DG shun their destroyers for using chem/rad weapons when that was a legion-wide specialty? It even says in their black book entry that use of such weapons did not bother or dishonor the DG at all.
>>98258707>can't have shotgun and shield, only maul and shieldat least the shotguns are S5 I suppose
>>98258756>>98258722I need to see if I still have left over arbites sprues, want to see how those shotgun arms and the maul/shield look on them
>>98258651So I was right. Breacher vets just got shotguns and volkites as options. Neat.>>98258657Exactly what I expected. Shame the heavy chainsword/power weapon options will be too expensive, but im glad the unit isnt retinue locked any more.
>>98258707Very cool unit. Not sure theyre very good. but cool.
>>98258659Cool I guess.
>>98258651shotgun upgrade kit when?
>>98258651"I heard theyre losing ranged options"
>>98258651So, they are mostly the same. The new shit are the shotguns and the sergeant thunder hammer, and they are a little more expensive 235 vs 215 in the legacies.
>>98258314So this means I cant really paint up my Xiphon or my 2 lightnings for my DG/IW/WEs? Damn it....
>>98259016Of course you can. Every Legion used every single (non-specific) unit. And if there's a niche to be filled, well, that's what the Exemplary Battles units were for. Just a bit of fun and a bit of fluff to flesh out the setting, I greatly enjoy the simple creativity at play there.
>>98257581NTA but he has a point
>>98258314>Death Guard shunning Destroyers>Death Guard shunning the use of chemical weapons and rad munitionsThis is retarded and wrong lmao
>>98258651>exactly the same but can now have combi weapons and shotguns >>98258657>can now fully run my blackshields as pride is our armor again without a praetor >on top of all the cool ZM shit Alright GW you got me I'll buy your damn DLC.
>>98258859ATP anyone dooming about 3.0 should be met with a roundhouse kick snapping their little fagaloon necks. Have yet to meet anyone hating on the current ed that have actually played the game or at the very least have played it not spamming their faggy fury of the first/rhino rush lists
>>98259101>>exactly the same but can now have combi weapons and shotgunsAlso volkite. Also they got a bit more expensive, which is frankly fine imo. Its not a killer for what the unit does and it helps despoiler vets stand out as the "footslogging melee vets" option
>>98259159Vet breachers could take volkite as of legacies.
>>98259104Your argument is so reductive. At best 3.0 is a sidegrade. Which leads one to possibly conclude as to why make it in the first place as opposed to tweaking the older editions and tighten things up. 3.0 does some good things and it does a lot of things that leave one questioning the thought process. A good portion of people agree that flavor was watered down and I stand by it. That means something. No is going to argue that some shit was busted, see my earlier suggestion. But you don’t get to dismiss naysayers en masse on WAACFAG shit from earlier editions. It’s disingenuous.
>>98259166>Which leads one to possibly conclude as to why make it in the first place as opposed to tweaking the older editions and tighten things upBecause the "tweaks" that were required would end up as a functionally new edition. Which they did. You cant take 2.0, slap on "damage characteristics" and then expect things to be fixed. Nor would it even be 2,0 once you have went through updating all the weapons. And 3e changed a lot more than just "damage characteristics".
>>98258651For me, it’s 4x alchem flamer breachers
>>98259177I humbly disagree. Deep strike needed changed, vehicles needed to be less paper tigers (arguably move to 5th vehicular damage chart (also maybe slightly tweak that) neither here nor there), clamp down on reaction abuse, adjust points for weapons, adjust some weapon profiles perhaps, adjust units, make dreads less oppressive, bring up some RoW, bring down some RoW, and then FAQ from there. I argue it didn’t need damage increases or super challenges or changing leadership to 3-4 stats. These seem like a lot but just require a little attention with not much deviation from its places of origins. 3.0 was a massive shift to something entirely new, way out in left field and people recognized it instantly. I once again argue they didn’t need to.
>>98259177Yup. At the very least you would need a complete rewrite of all the non legion libers and heavy rewrites on the legion ones. 2.0 was a fucking mess, they’d be insane to just do a faq like what people say they want
>>98258552buy a printer, or buy prints
>>98259231Okay that’s fair and I agree. But instead of sticking to the skeleton of the rules they went off the mark. The work required would still be considered a “new” 2.5 edition I’ll yield that ground but the “spirit of it is still that of 1.0-2.0. 3.0 is in spirit to itself. It’s entirely on new ground and I once again will state for those in the back that yes any reasonable person can say that 3.0 does some good things but that’s not what people wanted and were largely ignored. That’s where the disconnect existed or still exists.
>>98258552Etsy. You can find all kinds of combi weapons and other shit on there. That’s where I get my power scythes.
Bashed up a Castellax Infernus. Anyone got a decent source on the OOP Malinax transfer sheet or other sources of Xana II transfers, that include Xanita techna-glyphs?
>>98259218>deep strike needed changed>vehicles>reactions needed change>weapons needed changed>every non-legion book needed changed>legion balanced needed changed>dreadnoughts and units needed changedSee what I mean? All the "little tweaks" add up to "this is a new edition">it didn’t need damage increases or super challenges or changing leadership to 3-4 stats.But it did need damage to be added (not increased, the killyness is about the same). Because thats how you fix units and dreadnoughts. >3-4 mental statsAre a way you fix the other factions. Theyre what allows for varied statuses and therefore weapons that are useful beyond raw killing power (and factions which are good because theyre resistant to them).
>>98259104nta but these units are literally>please buy kit A and kit B to make this unitIt's quite lazy
>>98257488what's your army?
>>98258651NO FUCK MY VET BREACHERS ARE ILLEGAL NOW
>>98258314Source?
>>98259433His ass
>>98258657its so fake and gay you cant have combat shield and pistol, happy they finally got shields tho
>>98259396I’ll use ToW as precedence here. They got a meaty FAQ and are due to get another. However they are printing this in a new updated book set to release some time this year with all the changes until 2.0 in the future. They could have done this for 2.0 and not released this 3.0 set of rules for another 2 years. I think in most players hearts this is what they wanted. Not the book selling part but you get the idea.On your point of the variable leadership stats, it was never a point of contention between players with just one leadership value unless I misremembered something. It worked just as intended. Adding status to units is cool but I don’t think it needed to be split.
>>98259428How? They didn't lose anything
>BUY NECROMUNDAWhat did they mean by this?
>>98259379Cool
>>98259464>They got a meaty FAQ and are due to get another.None of which did what you are suggesting. You do not understand the sheer scope of the changes made if you think TOW is an example of "they did that". To put it into HH terms, the TOW changes are (asides from the changes to released missions) basically just "dreadnoughts can no longer return fire, you can only include 0-1 walkers per 1000pts". Oh, and "FNP is now done after damage is assigned rather than blocking damage". Thats it. There are individual pts adjustements, there are minor tweaks here and there. We are not talking about wholesale overhauls of systems. >it was never a point of contention between players with just one leadership valueYou missed what was written. LD "worked fine", but the new system introduced more levers of balance. Which in turn is what allowed factions to be balanced better.
Have anyone ported Veteran Breacher rules for 1.0 or 2.0?
>>98259508Basically: TOW and its post 1.5 FaQ/changes arent 2.0 to 3e, or even 2.0 to some hypothetical 2.0 that addressed all of the issues but didnt go as far as 3e. Its 3e to "3e but the default missions now have you score at the start of turn as opposed to the end of the turn, making rhino rush scoring much weaker. Also they buffed vanguard a bit and vehicles get -1 to hit when at 25% HP or less, we also increased seekers to 19ppm"
>>98259509That sounds a bit trivial doesent it? Just take the veteran statline for those editions (so 1w or 2w depending) and then give them their special weapons options and youre done. Porting them to 2e is literally just taking their unit page, removing "vanguard" and then giving them BS5 and relentless or whatever it was vets had that edition.
>>98259546Yeah fair I was just wondering point cost wise mostly
>>98259410Wtf are you actually trying to say with this. That’s literally every heresy unit without a single dedicated kit. The only way this wouldn’t be the case is if they shove a unit in there that’s something like hss with bimbly gimbly guns. Even militia is all just “buy x kit from this other wargame”
>>98259559Vets are the same-ish cost in 2e arent they? So probably keep that more or less the same. Tactical/despoiler vets are both 18ppm, breacher vets are 20 (now 22) ppm. So you can basically just have them as "a bit more expensive than normal veterans" if theyre not.
>>98259508Infantry got massive buffs, ridden monsters took a nerf, and magic took a hit. Big changes but overstepped boundaries. Monstrous infantry still suck. Some armies models are too expensive. Point wise which hurts some armies. I think the idea of an updated rulebook is great and the items I mentioned regarding HH arguably aren’t massive overhauls. Maybe my comparison to ToW was slightly unfair in that models function differently. But I still stick to the main premise of 2.0 was half baked and not thought through and needed a facelift. Whether you want to call it 2.5 or 3.0 doesn’t matter in so much that what 3.0 IS, is an entirely different game. That’s not what the public was ready for. It doesn’t help the book reads like shit.Weren’t chapter approved books just that? Changes and FAQs with some supplementary material on the side. Why isn’t that practical? I understand needing more material fucking sucks.Also let’s please us the word balance lightly here lest we fall to darkness. Look at what 40k is now. It’s a fucking board game in the name of “balance” now. Why do you think editions 3rd-5th are so loved by older players? Weren’t perfect but those games felt like a wargame. This goes without saying that the rules and codexes weren’t perfect. I say we look to the past for guidance and be careful with the future when writing new editions.
>>98259575Yes I think they should pay for their breacher shields so that makes sense.
>>98258478>SoH and Fist edition>endless SoH and Fist releases>IW and Sally edition>more SoH releasesThey’ll release anything except an IW character huh?
>>98259569There's quite the difference between>Here's an army you're gonna have to kitbash/convertand>Here's a new unit that you should make with two kits we just releasedIf you can't grasp that difference, there's nothing much to say.
>>98259711You now remember the custom dantioch model that was mistaken for a leak.
>>98259713NTA, but you’re trying to create some weird distinction between kitbashing and using two kits to make a unit, which is just kitbashing.
>>98259585Nta but dude people bring up balance for heresy because they give a damn. “Balance” in 2.0 was a crock of shit where most armies were nonfunctional and the functional lists had to be built around spamming or dealing with the same 5 units everyone ran. 1.0 had issues as well but atleast its not a game of paper armor outside of one super rapist that’s one of the few units that can survive first contact while also being the best unit at everything else in the game
>>98259711>two cool legions in 2e>they get stuff>two shit legions in 3e>ignoredSeems right. They should have just gone full retard and done WB vs UM for 3e
I wish I could use napalm robot is Cohort Vagus>>98259711Huh? you just got a plastic upgrade sprue and warsmith (in 40k)
>>98259503No, anon, he’s hot. Hot Castellax looking for Cybertheurgists in your area.
>>98259719That's... Not what was said. At all.If I create a new unit, the "Galagoogoo Cadre", which let's say use conversion beamers, you'll have to kitbash/convert it because there isn't a model for it.Now let's say I release 2 new kits, the mk4 recon and the despoilers. Then I make a new journal, which has a new unit that's made from taking mk4 recon bodies and the pistol hands of the despoilers. Call it them Blackshield Pistoleros.Again, if you and the other anon can't understand the difference between the two, then there's nothing else to say.
>>98259744I’m just gonna do it desu
>>98259585>Infantry got massive buffs,Yes, One unit type got a buff in the form of some small rules changes (and the missions, which encourage static defensive play on objective pts, which infantry is good at)>ridden monsters got nerfsYup, they got some tweaks which lessen their power through minor adjustments here and there. >and magic took a hitA little bit, sure. But thats the thing, these are ultimately low scope things. These are tweaks rather than overhauls. This is "dreadnoughts have BS4" rather than some sort of systemic change which fundamentally alters how things work. The biggest overhaul to balance has - once again - been the missions, monsters being capped at 3+ armor does not actually matter very much.
>>98259713Pass the crack over here man. Maybe you’d have a point if it was some specific unit with unique wargear but we’re talking about a kit having a fucking shield man. It’s kitbashing. Even if we’re talking about the saturnine command squad which is the only actual example of what you’re talking about it’s still a unit people would have kitbashed(yes kitbashed) and would have wanted to run
>>98259751>", which let's say use conversion beamers, you'll have to kitbash/convert it because there isn't a model for it.Which they would tell you to do by buying a unit with conversion beamers and using that. >. Then I make a new journal, which has a new unit that's made from taking mk4 recon bodies and the pistol hands of the despoilers. Call it them Blackshield Pistoleros.Okay? Thats the same thing. In both cases you just take a unit without an official model and present a possible way of building it.
>>98259779>saturnine command squadSaturnine squad + praetor>whirlwind variantScorpius + missile tarentula>Augur Command and Control SquadRapier + Mk6 tacticalsIt's a pattern
>>98259751What's the difference here? The little textbox that they include that offers newer players a suggestion of how they could do this kitbash? All it does is encourage people to try kitbashing a little, which is unironically cool and good? This is a much cooler way of doing things than just removing all options not in the kit, and this is actually helpful to newer players.
>>98259806Augur Command Squad is just the rapier crew with no rapier
>>98259789>>98259822>Again, if you and the other anon can't understand the difference between the two, then there's nothing else to say.Last reply.
>>98259778My argument is the things that I listed need to be fixed are small tweaks. The foundation upon which they sit is still there. HOWEVER, the melee hit system should go back to 3+ and 4+ except at double WS. That fixes so much and that table would be considered a complete change I think. I think the 3.0 challenge system sucks and isn’t for me. I think it should just be the old combat from 4th edition 40k.
Yall need to stop engaging with the schizo troll
Would the Mechanicum Battle Group and Mechanicum Combat Group be a playable HH force? With an additional Tech Priest Dominus from my 40k Admech as HQ.
Random question but what Liber are the rules for the Augur Command Squad in? I must be overlooking them somewhere.
>>98259825>My argument is the things that I listed need to be fixed are small tweaks.Then you dont understand the things you listed and what "fixing them" means. Because no, they arent. >>98259825>HOWEVER, the melee hit system should go back to 3+ and 4+ except at double WSNo. It shouldnt.Thats a system made for a game with massive stat disparity, where you have WS2 dudes and WS9 dudes running around (i.e warhammer fantasy) and not a game about people with 99% identical statlines fighting each other.
>>98259903Sloptica Dropsite 1
>>98259903Isstvan IIRC
>>98259911>>98259913Thanks, dudes
>>98259903Istvaan Dropsite part 1
>>98257012>3e mechanicum is even more obtuse in terms of listbuilding God fucking dammit.
>>98259927>I CANNOT TAKE THIS ANYMORe
>>98259906I disagree. Points changes is small. Adjusting legion Rite of Wars is small etc. If you are talking a cumulative amount of changes then sure I see what you’re saying. Individually it’s not large. 1.0 had that WS system and I haven’t heard anyone once complain about it. I have however heard people complain about the newer WS system.
>>98259939The old force org was great. wtf were they thinking?
>>98259976NTA but I've always complained about the old WS chart. It was a useless addition to the game, pretending to be complicated when it boiled down to>You hit on a 4+ in close combat, unless your WS is higher and then you hit on a 3+Didn't even need the fucking chart, it was an absolute joke. It was like it didn't even know dice have 6 sides.The new WS chart adds much more variety to hit rolls in close combat. Some retards are mad about it purely because they can no longer one-shot a praetor with their power fist tactical sergeant costing five times less points as easily.
>>98259976>I disagreeFixing dreadnoughts is not "a simple tweak"Fixing vehicles is not "a simple tweak"Fixing RoWs and factions is not "a simple tweak"Fixing weapons is not "a simple tweak"Fixing every non-marine book is not "a simple tweak". Fixing reactions is not "a simple tweak"Fixing deep strike is not "a simple tweak" (although it would probably be the easiest to fix). Individually every single one of these changes will likely require systemic overhauls (or simply "lots and lots and lots of changes"). You can try pulling some random bandaid, but actually meaningfully addressing these problems takes a lot of writing and fucking with the rules. These arent small issues caused by a pts value being a bit too low or whatever, theyre compounding problems which are often interlinked (you cant meaningfuly change vehicle durability without changing weapons and their associated issues or failures)>I havent heard anyone complain about the old systemBecause they were used to it, because fewer people played that system, and because there was nothing to compare it to. The HH ws chart is better for HH, because it is a chart that makes WS an actually relevant combat stat, and making small differences matter is very important in HH. Its more mechanically involved and allows for more interactivity via various mechanics.
>>98259980The game had outgrown the old FOC a long time ago. It worked great in old 40k where armies were closer to skirmish size, and you only needed four or five squads of infantry and two tanks to play the game. But the FOC was way too limited for the size of armies in HH, and required tons of extra rules, exceptions and other crutches to still function. It just seems more simple to you because you've been used to it for so long.
>>98259980The old FOC isnt great for games at the scale of HH, and with rosters (and armies) being as large as they are you ended up with really weird slot congestion. Which is why so many ROW were just about essentially ignoring it (and why rules like vehicle squadrons and dreadnought talons had to be introduced). Its simple, its nice, everyone and their mother is used to it. Its also not actually super good.
>>98260008That’s fair on where you stand as it’s a matter of taste here and I respect your opinion. I like it for those exact reasons where sometimes a lowly mug can make a name for itself. The game was swingy but that’s what made for cool moments. It felt like you never knew what could happen. But I won’t tell you you’re wrong for not liking it.On that note I also think that units should get 1+ attack for charging, extra weapon, no extra attack for disembarking and assailing from a non assault vehicle etc. Maybe this is where we could meet in the middle. Keep the new WS chart and give the old bonuses back. That way against elite units you literally have to drown them in dice. And still gonna have to spike 5s. Would that seem better? Actually makes melee dangerous.
>>98259980yeah they went full retard
>>98258651if only they would FAQ alexis pollux so it can deep strike with warders or vet breachers, aside regular breachers.
>>98260023>>98260041If you think the new one is better you're coping.
>>98257844I was thinking about the TS some days ago and I think Emps might have intended for them to become proto-grey knights considering how psychic powers get bonuses against daemons in a lot of editions/specialist games.
>>98260045>a lowly mug can make a name for itselfBut that's the thing. They still can, you just need to roll a 5+ instead of a 4+ now. Personally heavily dislike the old bonus attacks a lot. Every fucking game, each fucking round of combat, I almost always had to remind opponents of all the various bonus attacks, and rules that changed or prevented them. Because the rules for them weren't listed clearly at all, and most people are half illiterate to begin with. Attack modifiers listed in weapon profiles is a huge improvement in that regard.
>>98260045>no extra attack for disembarking and assailing from a non assault vehicle etc.Well, with the current system (the only one where you can do that) you dont get any bonuses for charging out of transports since its disordered. So no WE trait or whatever.>extra weaponIm split on that one. On the one hand its a fun rule and allows for interesting builds, on the other hand it histrically encouraged dumb cancer like thunder hammer + paragon blade, and leads to annoying situations regarding how many weapons units are allowed to be given "by design". Itd be fun to get "dual power swords" or whatever as their own option though, + attacks over the normal weapon but you trade your pistol for it (like with twin claws). >+1 for chargingYea, getting rid of that one is a bit strange. I get that its a bit "artificial", but it encouraged proactive play and gave aggressive units that extra little bit against more defensive units. Itd help even despoilers and assault squad out with tacticals.
>>98260023Couldn’t you just add extra slots to the old force org? People are starting to find that the new one isn’t cutting it. Not to mention how objectives are played. You literally have an issue where armies start to look the same. It’s all samey.
>>98260084>You literally have an issue where armies start to look the sameBecause they all take tactical marines?
>>98260060The new one IS better. It offers more freedom and flexibility while giving characters more of a role to play, encouraging the low level heroes who are the best sort of character for the ruleset in terms of "fun interactions".
>>98260080Melee isn’t what it can be this section and it’s mostly standing and shooting. They shouldn’t have removed incentives to get into combat. Assault squads suck dick. One of the reasons is lack of attacks.
>>98260080>They still can, you just need to roll a 5+ instead of a 4+ now. a sergeant physically cannot kill a praetor in one round
>>98260080It’s honestly not that hard and a reason why WYSIWYG is easy for identification purposes.
>>98260045>. I like it for those exact reasons where sometimes a lowly mug can make a name for itself.But thats the thing, you dont feel that "lowly mug" distinction when eveyrthing is so homogenized. The gap between Ws4 and Ws5 feels big because it matters, because theyre harder to hit and hit you easily. Whereas from a "player" perspective when you hit everything on 4s who gives a shit?
>>98260095>Assault squads suck dick.Only if you're bad at the game, any squad with a jump pack is fucking broken, shooting armies are doomed when they can just leapfrog from terrain into your deployment zone turn 2.
>>98260081Easy fix, no extra attacks for additional cc weapon with hammers, paragon blade, etc. Bring it all back.
>>98260088Line is just retarded and it should never have changed for objective scoring. There should be incentives to bring basic tacticals but line 2 is so fucking forced.
>>98260096>a sergeant physically cannot kill a praetor in one roundThey can actually. Even a 1A sgt is technically capable of killing a saturnine praetor. Have a power fist/thunder hammer, pick finishing blow (or the blood angel +damage one), win the roll-off and go first. Hit twice, wound twice, two saves failed. Six damage. Although to fight a challenge you need the master sgt perk anyways, which means you have 2 attacks base anyways. Its unlikely and youre better off buying a lottery ticket, but its possible.
>>98260094The thing is you want to field a diverse army? You have to pay the fucking character tax and it’s fucking gay.
>>98260124>There should be incentives to bring basic tacticalsAnd now there are and youre bitching about it. >but line 2 is so fucking forced.How exactly? Theyre marginally better than line(1)
>>98260126Yea and then you have to use a prime advantage. Do you forget not every sergeant can duel? The prime system is also fucking gay. I sometimes feel some 3.0 players are like beaten dogs. Not that you guys are but I find it hard to defend 3.0 in its entirety.
>>98260084>Couldn’t you just add extra slots to the old force org?That is what the current system is. It's just that instead of compulsory HQ and such, you now take HQ to add more of the slots that you need through detachments. I've been playing a lot of games locally and at events, and after the initial adjustment period I have not heard anybody that actually plays the game still complain about the new system.>ObjectivesThere's a lot of dynamics that go into objectives and board control once people venture beyond the units found in the AOD box and learn the importance of positioning. >Armies look the sameThat is purely because people are lazy, don't want to think themselves, and as a result just copy the most well know netlist. There is no way to fix this. The current edition actually has the most build variety the game has ever seen, the difference is that different types of armies can require a different strategy in game. Which most warhammer players can't wrap their heads around, most people still live in the older editions where games were decided at the listbuilding stage. Funnily enough, there has been a huge surge in new players locally with the new edition, who have little to no experience with older editions. And not a single one of their armies looks the same (beyond the inherent similarities you get because this is the space marines vs space marines game) yet the game win rates haven't been skewed one way or another at all.
>>98260129I need officers.... in my army?!If you want to go full schizo and have 20 different detachments you need lots of characters, which is good. It means you arent encouraged to simply take the best specialist for every job but to sometimes take "subpar" units because theyre in the slots you have. Rather than pay the 100pts for a dude to open up an armor slot for a vindicator or a support slot for HSS you might take some land speeders because you have fast attack slots left. It rewards specialization without forcing it, and enables varied and flexible list building without making it the optimal and only way to play.
>>98260099>It’s honestly not that hardFor you, yes. But for a lot of people it actually was. I understand it is hard to imagine people being different than yourself when you're autistic.
>>98260124If you have trouble killing tactical squads or keeping them away from objective markes, you're just bad at the game. Sorry. There are so many ways and tools to completely invalidate them. If you'd be complaining about something like lernaean terminators with their built in Line 1 you might have had a point.
>>98260132There was absolute nothing wrong with the old objective scoring system. Why fix something if it wasn’t broke. This is where the cynical guy in me comes out. This whole thing feels so unplaytested. Peoples biggest gripe with 1.0 was fucking parking lots, broken legion rules that needed to be tuned, mech, couple other things I have mentioned. Otherwise it was great. Then we jump to now and have a massive fracturing of the playerbase because GW fucked it all for almost no good reasons.
>>98260141>Do you forget not every sergeant can duel?Then they aren't attacking a praetor, so it doesn't matter whether they can kill it in one round or not. Now does it? >the prime systemThe system is good, even if it could use expanding in the future with more options. It's a simple way to "flavour" your army, and there's a solid reason to take most of the available primes. It's also conveniently "not mandatory", to the point where you feel compelled to prime-max.
>the person actively pushing 3.0 at my LGS came out as a troon
I feel more and more everyday that 3.0 is massively Astro-turfed by 3.0 shills. I guarantee most of these guys haven’t played the earlier editions. They are newfag 40k tourists. That’s my guess.
>>98260112People have such a hard time understanding the value of mobility. Tried explaining it to a local player, but he only saw the insane potential of even the humble assault squad when I measured out examples in front of him on a board.
>>98260164The old system if he was within 2” or base to base contact he could always take a shot at the praetor. Now that isn’t guaranteed. Dishonest stance.
>>98260141I actually really like the prime system as a way to customize or differentiate some units or models for flavor.
>>98260163>Otherwise it was great"other than the way the game actually played, it was fantastic!">There was absolute nothing wrong with the old objective scoring systemIt encouraged boring defensive play and not doing anything with your line units because they were the only ones that could score and you needed them for the end of the game. It also created situations where "only the last turn matters" and everything preceeding may as well not have been there. It also made any "alternative scoring" wildly OP. The new system is possibly a bit too fast, but the fact that it encourages responsible and aggressive games where players have to constantly wrestle with each other for pts is good. >GW fucked it all for almost no good reasons.Essentially every change in 3e is very clearly an attempt to deal with the major issues of prior editions. Those attempts are - for the most part - successful. Its wildly different in many ways because thats what happens when you fix a lot of things at once.
>>98260181Cope. Been playing since 3rd edition 40k, played all through 1.0 and 2.0, and 3.0 has been the most fun I've had in a looong time. You're entitled to having your own opinion, now fucking deal with the fact other people can have a different one.
>>98260189No one’s debating the movement. It’s the actually lethality that they have. They should have 4 attacks on the charge instead of the what 2 attacks?
>>98260189It's been this way since they allowed you to use your jump packs in both movement and assault phase in second, but people just still don't get it because 3 editions have trained them that the only way to deal with the op shooting unit with obvious weaknesses is their own op shooting unit with obvious weaknesses. Blind leading the blind man.
>>98260192Not in 2e they couldnt.
>>98260163>Sit in a corner blasting>Dash towards objectives in the last turnJust be honest and say that you enjoyed it more. Saying there was nothing wrong with it just factually wrong.
>>98260201>They should have 4 attacks on the charge instead of the what 2 attacks?3 attacks if you go by older editions, followed by 2 in every subsequent round.And I agree, the lethality of despoilers and assault marines is a bit too low, the speed is nice but with the power weapons they need to actually kill things they end up significantly more expensive than their ranged counterparts despite being much more difficult and situational due to being melee.
>>98260200No one is complaining about the existence of differing opinions. I don’t have substantive evidence to back this but HH is now dead in more areas where it was played than alive now. The player base is clearly not in agreement more so now than any point in history as far as HH is concerned. I’m glad you guys like 3.0 but I don’t think you are a massive majority. The truth is probably skewed more towards a very mixed reception. Not good.
>>98260201Even a 10 man assault squad has more than enough attacks to send any MEQ not equipped for combat running. And with krak grenades they'll wreck any vehicles with a rear AV below 12 in one turn, and likely cripple rear AV 12 vehicles.Assault squads have the right amount of damage for their role: fast harrasment unit. Sure, they can't hold their own against elite melee unit, but that isn't what they're suppose to do to begin with.
the old scoring systems weren't well balanced but they also weren't designed to be gamified originally, the crowd was more open to narrative missions: assassinate the VIP, assault this convoy, pass around the servo skulltoday, most of the community is obsessed with GW(tm) official rules and absolutely refuse to play with any sort of homebrew
>>98260207I was referring to 4th. Thank you for this though.
>>98260229Assault squad and despoilers should be more lethal. Period. The don’t have that weight of attacks.
>>98260225Old editions had a more universal opinion because everybody agreed about the stuff that was broken as fuck lmao. Your anecdotal experience is no real indication of the actual size of the HH playerbase as a whole, and neither is mine. Nobody but GW with sales numbers can make any credible statements about it really. But there are still events being organised for it, by GW themselves no less, so HH most certainly isn't dead or dying.
>>98260129>bodies of troops need commanders>this is le badMaybe 40k is more your speed
>>98260230That’s what I’m trying to get across. Thank you for putting it into words. GW should not be the end all be all when it comes to rules and currently the rules are very sterile. Gamified. GW didn’t say this so I guess I need to play the way I’m told! Older rules are wargame rules. The more we go forward the less of a wargame it becomes.
>>98260230>most of the community is obsessed with GW(tm) official rules and absolutely refuse to play with any sort of homebrewThatss interesting, because there are several popular homebrew rules (and especially mission) packs, and basically no event runs "generic" GW missions.GW has always intended its rules and missions to be "launching off points" for homebrew content. This has also never been the norm in actual play. People did not create cool and exciting narrative scenarios for their day-to-day games on average.
>>98260255No one argued against that. At what point do you feel you have enough HQ but still want to take that one thing but need to take ANOTHER HQ. The old force org was only bad in a situation where you ran out of slots. I don’t think people want to take a single mini hq just to add 1 tank? That’s ridiculous.
>>98260200*a wrong one.
>>98260278>I don’t think people want to take a single mini hq just to add 1 tank?Which you dont need to do, unless you have already filled out all the slots your previous HQs have gotten you. One centurion unlocks 8 armor slots.
>>98260251>Nobody but GW with sales numbers can make any credible statements about it reallyLmao. Old GW prided itself on not doing customer research, so they dont know either.
>>98260224>much more difficult and situational due to being melee.No they aren't. Getting charges turn 1 or 2 is so fucking easy this edition. What is difficult a out jumping out from behind LOS blocking terrain, then locking something in combat with no chance of reactions or volley fire with that 5" set up move assault squads have? Despoilers are similar, but the disordered charge out of a rhino does make it ever so slightly more risky if your opponent has the luxury of wasting reaction points against despoilers, you have made some real big mistakes somewhere
>>98260293I take three detachments including the primary. I have enough points to add a tank. But I now have to take another HQ. I don’t want 4 HQ but I don’t have a choice. Do you understand?
>>98260257>>98260230Thats a very nice takedown of the kids nowadays. But do you have anything to back it up? Or are modern players just less narrative based on the general vibes?
>>98260297SALES NUMBERS you blind fuck. GW is a publicly traded company, if they didn't track sales numbers they wouldn't have existed any more by now. Not to mention that modern GW actually does do market research.
>>98260309>I have enough points to add a tank. But I now have to take another HQ.So in other words "I used up all of the detachments I had access to but want to splash more stuff in, I now need to unlock more detachments, how could this happen to me!"Use a prime slot for logistical benefit then.
>>98260309>What is Logistical Benefit
>>98260319Modern GW? Absolutely. But Modern GW doesent have a time machine to accurately know "how things were back in the day". The GW of back in the day didnt know if shit was broken or popular or whatever else, they scoffed at the idea of finding out what players on average thought.
>>98260274>especially missionthe only popular one I've seen is made by an unironic competitive fancy tryhard who wanted to use fixed terrain setups
>>98260306>Getting charges turn 1 or 2 is so fucking easy this editionIt is. Shooting 24" is easier.
>>98260313I do agree with anon that the old missions were so bad they heavily incentivised people to create their own mission objectives. But from my experience most people are more than open to try something new if you're socially well adjusted and just have a conversation about it with them.
>>98260309Lmao nogames
>>98260325What if I wanted to use the prime for something else? It’s not limitless as opposed to a wider force org chart from 1st and 2nd. Honestly if the chart was bigger and you compared it to the current monstrosity, people would go for the former. That’s my guess.
>>98260334So is the argument that people dont do and accept homebrew missions (something that even the "competetive tryhards" apparently do. Or is it just "well the homebrew stuff people widely share isnt personalized narratives!">>98260353>What if I wanted to use the prime for something else?Then you have to make that trade off. Thats how choices work. Spending points or slots or detachments or primes all comes at the expense of not being able to do something else, thats the point.
>>98260329How the fuck is "how things back then" and old GW's methods related to a conversation about the current size of the HH playerbase, as in right now, today? Why even bring that up, are you stuck in the past that much?
>>98260337>Shooting 24" is easierIt literally isn't retard, that's the whole fucking point of the terrain rules. In most games I've played it turns into melee units skirmishing in the terrain to claim objectives (tacticals got eviscerated turn 2) while vehicles are driving around trying to get LOS on what's outside of cover, usually either vehicles or artillery
>>98260334>fixed terrain setupsOh so you're a 40k tourist who got lost. Come back when you have some actual experience with HH.
>>98260357the argument is neitherit's that the wider community is filled with people who only care about "balance" to the detriment of all else
>>98260337Not with the better LOS blocking rules it ain't. Unless you play on planet bowling ball, but that is a problem in every single edition.
>>98260357What trade offs did you have to make in the old force orgs other than slot restriction when maxed out, which in theory for game sizes should have been increased? What trade offs? That’s where the freedom to make any army list you want really kicks in. Just don’t be a massive dick about running a skew list all the time.
Still can't believe we went from people always complaining about not having enough HQ slots for all their characters, to people whining about having to bring any characters to begin with.
>>98260384Almost like what people really want is to complain
>>98260388So true. It's often been joked about that complaining is the real hobby of tabletop wargamers.
>>98260384>>98260388Almost like you can't satisfy everyone and it's different people complaining because the game no longer caters to the way you want to play. Which is a good thing. If you liked how things were before, find other like minded people and keep playing that. And if you can't, well I guess that tells you no one agrees with you.
>>98260170Well, anon, tell us, dont keep us waiting, is she well hung or what?
>>98260384They didn’t need a whole new army creation method to make that work though. It’s always about trying to reinvent something that arguably worked. They just needed to expand on the original rules.
>>98260170>About to get free sloppy toppy in the LGS bathroom on a regular basisDamn, anon is so lucky
>>98260449>anon is this down badGrim. Dark, even.
>>98260023and not it is better? under 2.0 you could easy make a functional all dreadnought, all jetbikes or all tank army. Right now you have to buy a "thousand" expensive centurions to pull that off. And on top of that the lists you end up are often shit. Pride of the Legion was a fun to play, even if it wasn't the most optimal way to play. Now a whole terminator army, outright sucks. You have to spam line, and the same units as everyone, because your list will not work, and not just a bit, at all. On top of that GW decided to quad or quinta nerf dreadnoughts to a point, where the best one suddenly is the Castaferrum and not because it is good good. It is just the cheapest. Heck even if someone had a hate boner for conemptors, why nerf Doredeos and Leviathans too. And to make it even more fun they release a "bigger Batman" dreadnought, and it is bad. That is just mind blowing, especialy as they put the thing in the starter box.
>>98260414yeah, but hey they do it in w40k too. 9th just needed a few tweeks, some extra units and new model lines for some factions. It was fun to play most of the time. And then 10th came out and it was a shit show, that not only limited some armies options, but somehow made the most fun way to play the army in the edition the index set of rules.
>>98260500>The 40k tourist exposing themselves for what they areEvery fucking time. No wonder /hhg/ was much more quite around the release of 11th, all the clueless trolls were shitposting in their dedicated containment thread, meaning we didn't have to deal with them here.
>>98260537Son, I am a 2ed w40k tourist. You want me to talk how they did the same in 3.5 ed?
>>98260170troons gonna troon
>>98260540A bit more effort and it could have been a marine with sunglasses and the book title The Age of Dankness
>>98260181Probably.
The new method of Force Org was a cynical revision to make you buy more minis, it was never intended to "work"
>>98260486>>98260486>All jetbikesHad characters in them. Still possible. Can win, but need a completely different game plan.>All dreadnoughtsMandatory forge lord and mortificator, still included characters. Dreadnoughts can control objectives, so plays pretty conventional too.>All tanksWith the proteus command spartan, you now can do the same in current edition. Unconventional gameplay, but lots tanks blocking the way to objective markers can be pretty difficult to play against. >All terminators army sucks...What? This is the most nogames thing I've read in the whole threat. With some armies, like AL with their lernaean, all terminators borders on being oppressive.>You have to spam lineCustodes don't even have Line, yet I've seen them win HH events several times. So factually incorrect. >More whiningSorry, but it just sounds like you have little to no experience actually playing games. >Dreadnoughts badAlso wrong. To people who have been playing, dreadnoughts have proven to be a solid addition, proportionate to their point cost. Durable, solid damage, pretty much guaranteed to win any combat due to how combat resolution works. And with objectives now forcing people to leave their deployment zone, the leviathan's 6" movement is barely an issue any more. >Saturnine dreadnought is badSeriously, you need to stop trolling. Last events I went to had one is almost any list, the infantry-clearing double inversion beamer or heavy plasma bombard can do is almost unrivalled. Fucking nogames.
>>98260540>quit heresy and sold SoH when 3.0 launched to focus on TOW>mark IV releases Saturday and there's rumours of plastic justaerin comingDon't know what it is but the timing for everything heresy has always been fucked, there has literally never been a good time to play it.
I'm not understanding what makes the Kratos overpowered.AV14 is strong as fuck this edition, but the firepower seems very easy to ignore.How are people usually kitting them out.
>>98260605The kratos is over-hyped. If you don't use lots of land raiders or spartans Or just hide them behind terrain and have them deliver their cargo turn 1 you can just ignore it all game with pretty much zero consequences.
>>98260587Sounds like a you problem. I'll help you out though: GW has stated they are not going to do legion specific units in plastic until all the current legion agnostic units are done, so that plastic JUSTaerin rumour is false.
>>98260617>The kratos is over-hyped.
>the kratos is b-b-based....
erm ackshually, the kratos can't be based because that would modelling for advantageyou have to assemble it baselessly
>>98260681Did you know that Tanks on Bases is a hotly debated issue within GW? They mentioned that in a sidebar in White Dwarf sometime this year.
>>98260686>here's your $20 fuckoff big black oval to make your superheavy legal for 4.0 bro
>>98260698Can you tell me that you don't believe this is something GW would do?
>>98260729it might well be something 40gayers face sooner or later
>>98260698>Heres your poorly done but still somewhat OKish 3d printed pack of them for $20 bro, you can only buy them in packs of 30-100 though.
>>9826073840goys deserve it
>>98260581This all could have basically been done with the previous editions.
>>98260751>Implying Heresoys don't deserve it
>>98260761Return to your containment thread, buddy.
>>98260774>Further implying /hhg/ isn't my containment threadHomie you don't know me, I live here and just stir shit all day
11th must have flopped hard, when we already have 40k tourists returning so soon to shit up our thread about HH. Already miss the quiet we had.
>>98260780It's okay anon, we could already tell you're a nogames nomodels loser.
>>98260409>98260486>it's the large-cocked wife for us>it's the large-cocked wife for us>gonna make you take that thing>while you're bleeding from your ring
>>98260605Nothing, its just good. >very easy to ignoreNot for big Av14 vehicles.
>>98260815>>98260617So does everyone take the melta blast gun on it, is that what makes it powerful?
>>98260867its stable, so it can move and shoot without penalty, meaning D2 lascannons etcof course you can just fuck it with a glance or shock
>>98260581Implying this person has even tried 3.0. I’m so sick of people saying shit that was only minimally true since the start of the ed. Yeah sure man line is so oppressive when it gets deleted off the table after a single turn. Vanguard units sure are useless just ignore my ashen circle deleting all the tacs on the board
>>98260867or choombattlecannon's good for ordnance shots at knights, particularly melee knights you don't ideally want to be in melta range of
>>98260780I guess everyone needs a hobby
>>98260867Thats the most common variant, yes. >what makes it so powerfulRealistic chance to oneshot basically any vehicle in the game. Doesent care about moving because its stable. Can return fire with a decurion locus. Very tank with Av14 10HP. Its not some sort of giga oppressive meta breaker, but its dangerous unit good at dealing with Av14 boxes in a safe way, and since its so durable a list without proper anti tank (note: some lascannons is not "proper anti tank") is going to find it hard to deal with.Also good at killing walkers and automata I guess.
>>98260956>Also good at killing walkers and automata I guess.Their invulnerable save can fuck it over it hard though. >Oops I rolled a 5+ on my sub 200 points unit haha, guess your 400 points tank does nothing this turn haha
>>98260977>Their invulnerable save can fuck it over it hard though.Can. On average wont. Thats just how saves work vs low volume shot models.
>>98260686All vehicles should have been on square bases from the start. Then you would've never had Eldar waacfags ruin armor facing for literally everyone.
>>98261024Eldar ruining everything has nothing to do with armour facing and everything to do with Eldar and their players.
>>98261024Sorry anon but there is no fixing Eldar waacfags.
Fuck Mars reeeeee
>>98260486>expensiveAnon plain centurions give you 2 detachment slots and a base optae cost 50 points the is not that expensive to get an extra detachment.If the new FOC has a problem is that some detachments kind of suck and the primary detachment might need an extra prime slot. That and every journal should come with new detachment and prime benefits, the Spartan Prometheus ones being only for specific types of missions was a crime.
>>98261085https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnkjYb--wD8
>>98261136https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkXAmx33pj0
>>98261122You are allowed to use the spartan prometeus and prime traits from Tallarn in any game though? It's only the HQ tanks detachments that's restricted.
A year in what do we think of disintegrators and dreadnoughts? Do they need a slight touch to make them a little better? I think dreads should be able to upgrade to venerable for x points to raise WS or BS one point. Disintegrators and any overload weapon just needs to go back to gets hot and just make a save with the armour unmitigated. But increase the cost for disintegrators a tad to compensate? Plasma could arguably be knocked down a point or two maybe?
>>98261262I think both are fine. But theyre on the lower end of fine (for the most part - plasma dreads) to where you COULD buff them and it would be fine.For dreads I would simply give leviathans WS5 and the deredeo BS5. For Disintegrators? A point of strength on all guns. >Disintegrators and any overload weapon just needs to go back to gets hotNah, overload is fine.
>>98261262Disintegrators are broken>t. only lost 3 veterans to Overload in 10 gamesDreadnoughts are in a good spot. Their damage and resilience is appropriate for their current point cost.
>>98261191Weren't the prime advantages locked into the detachment? also, even if you could there is no normal detachment with tank prime slots.
>>98261262>VenerableYou mean veteran dread? Marines have barely been around for a couple of centuries and most of the dread patterns way less.
