Good and Bad in Warhammer 10th Edition 

Indirect fire with Guard is probably one of the few things keeping guard in the game. They get blown off the board very quickly. In my opinion… though that could also be that I am not that great at the game, but that’s just me I guess.

The spot about paywalling the app, it literally is a shopping cart having that led to me seeking out a Soulgrinder and Helbrute just to try something different. Always such a tease when they do things like this. Also where’s the kill team app

Another positive is the slimming down of stratagems and enhancements. In 9th there was lots of choice but unfortunately most of them you never took because they weren't as good (especially as they all cost the same). Now they've cut down the fat and left you with the good stuff that you'll regularly use. Completely agree about the army builder. They should make it as easy as possible to get into and play the game - it's what encourages you to buy more models! Perhaps if you could just purchase the list builder for a few £'s/$'s a month/year it'd be okay. Lumping it together with Warhammer+ gives me the impression it isn't doing as well as they want it to.

I started playing in 3rd edition. Played a bunch of 3rd and 4th, a bit less up to 6th, and then almost nothing in 7th, 8th and 9th. I feel like a big reason that I didn't play, apart from not really having a scene at my FLGS, was that as time went on and we went through editions, I started disliking building lists more and more. It felt like even for a veteran like me, the barrier to entry was just getting higher and higher. It felt overwhelming to have 8 different detachments that you could mix and match, but maybe didn't want to for how they were made to interact with the amount of CP it would leave you with, and on top of that had strict rules on what type of units you could field in those, meaning I was constantly wrestling with the system in order to get something on the field that I liked the look and feel of. And not even mentioning, on top of that, the jungle of wargear options you had to carve your way through. Some armies had it worse than others in terms of wargear, I feel. When I looked at certain units of Thousand Sons during 8th and 9th, and the literal page of options you'd sometimes see there, my brain just shut down tbh xD "I don't want to deal with all this" was my prevailing thought 90% of the time I had a look at building a list. Is this current system perfect? Far from it. Way too many loadouts, from infantry all the way up to titanic units, are invalidated utterly because "Well, if it all costs the same, why not just build the biggest baddest shootiest thing I can make?" It does take away a lot of diversity in listbuilding. But the flipside to me is this: During a festival this summer, in downtime between bands, I found myself on the (then free) app (which I promptly replaced with a free alternative, shoutout New Recruit) building all kinds of armylists with whacky ideas and themes. Since 10th released, I have played 5 games of 40k, which is more than I played of 7th, 8th and 9th combined, and it is now a weekly scheduled Sunday afternoon for me again. Honestly, that weighs up to the intricacies we lost with this new system in the Indexes.

close combat armies are stuggling at the moment due to the meta being range and that range has changed to be quite strong so i hope september balences reduce certain points on units and help the game become more full (also i feel sorry for deathguard not tanky anymore)

FINALLY. Someone who is into leaders like I am. I picked up a few leaders just because they encourage the playstyle i love for some specific units. Never thought of even using a quarter of the character units until i seen something in their leader ability, mixed with how the unit they lead with their own abilities. I love the synergies some units have, even if theyre not great combat units, they help me enjoy the game a lot more

I am enjoying 10th. I agree that weapons like meltaguns need the "Anti Vehicle" key word. I still think 40k needs alternating activations like OPR and Necromunda. I think it would make the game more interactive.

I know it's trendy to hate GW/10th, but I really like it. Tactical secondaries and new terrain rules are a blast.

I think a good solution to the artillery question is to make it so they have to declare their target by placing down a marker where they want their guns to hit, if enemy models are within X distance of that marker *on the next turn*, only then do dice start to roll. This solves a lot of issues. Firstly gives some counter play as you can simply move away from where the shells will strike, though potentially at the cost of abandoning an objective, strategically significant location or a defendable position, leaving them vulnerable to other attacks, making it more interesting to the player on the receiving end. But also forcing the player using the artillery to think about how to best target their fire, turning the weapon more into a support unit for flushing targets out of cover, area denial tools or to destroy static targets. This also removes their ability to wipe out large portions of the enemy army on the first turn and opens up for having proper artillery duels.

Thanks for the video. I really liked the old indirect fire method of guessing the shot range and scattering the result.

I semi-agree with the Points changes into Power Level (PL). The problem is that they were rushed, plus the random decisions they made in regard to unit size and wargear causing major balance issues. 1) They were rushed because in most cases the best weapons are obvious, thus destroying build variety in the majority of units. They should've balanced weapons to make them all equally viable, where the best choice varies situationally, but instead the majority retain their pre-PL balance so most of the wargear is left ignored. I don't play AoS but as far as I understand they achieved this (correct me if I'm wrong). 2) The weird way Datasheets are allocated. We get half a dozen Leman Russes each with bespoke PL balance accounting for their main weapons (this is great for balance, even though it bloats datasheet count), but we also get many other units/models where a single Datasheet shares all their options, PL balance revolves around the strongest link so it's a waste to take any of the other options since you're grossly overpaying for them. You'll never see Eldar players taking a melee Wraithknight when they're costed for double Heavy Wraithcannons (plus the horrible abusive damage with fate dice) 3) Hard line on unit restrictions. As an Admech player it's beyond painful to both get a massive nerf to defensive/offensive stat on our troops while also giving them an important aura buff AND restricting them to only sizes of 10. This results in players wholy ignoring a major mechanic of 10th Ademch (Battleline aura) because it's ridiculous to pay 100+ pts for a useless unit just to get access to it. If we could take squads of 5 then there would be much more interaction with this mechanic, however being restricted to their current unit size makes it not viable.

I've only played 2 games of Combat Patrol so far, Space Marines and Necrons. I've enjoyed it so far. I haven't tried making any lists in 10th yet. What got me back into the game was the trailer for Indomitus. I bought some Sisters to go with the Space Marines and I didn't like how you couldn't play them in the same army. In AOS, if you play Cities of Sigmar, every 4th unit can be Stormcast Eternals so that's what I'd like to see, something like that where you are not penalized for doing soups. I want my Sisters to be backed up by some Black Templars.

Jay has brought up the "Parking Lot Guard" in enough of his videos that I specced out what that might look like at 1000pts: Lord Solar Leionus, Tank Commander (Executioner Plasma Cannon, Plasma Cannons sponsons), 3x Basilisk, 1x Leman Russ (Heavy Stubber, Lascannon, Plasma Cannon sponsons), 1 Exaction Squad That list looks terrifying ... at 1000 pts. I think the answer here is to push things up to 2000 pts then the amount of things that the Black Templar have on their side of the board aren't nearly as vulnerable (just due to the increase in bodies) to this kind of list. Just my 2 bits.

"Carve A Path" strategy in Malifaux where you're kicking your own objectives and kicking your opponents objectives right back at them. A lot of fun.

Maybe Jay should think about getting drop pods, deep strike and/ or fast moving units into his army to deal with his indirect-firing opponent. These units should get into those units' faces. I think that could sort that little problem out

If you want to play that game against parking lot guard, bring imperial knights. You can slot two big boys in at 1,000 point level. Towering keyword switches off obscuring so depending on your terrain all you need is partial LoS and you’re shooting is going through. If you have friends playing that way casually, you gotta give them something back :)

You could make indirect fire into "indirect fire X" where "X" is some restriction. If you did "indirect fire 5+" it could be that you ALWAYS hit on a 5+ when firing indirect. You could also put a range there, you could put an alternative number of attacks, etc. It would give them a lot more tuning ability on each indirect fire weapon.

I would say for indirect fire, GW could easily take a page from Battletech's rules. In Battletech Classic, your missile firing units can do indirect fire, but at the cost of additional to-hit penalties. You can do two things to mitigate: the first is have another unit spot for the firing unit, but the spotter unit cannot fire, otherwise that means penalties to shoot for both units. The other day is to have a special equipment called TAG, allowing the spotter to do the same thing and remove some of those penalties to make indirect very viable. The cost, however, is the unit with the TAG must roll a to-hit, and they only carry one or two weaker, short-range weapons and are fragile themselves. Both of these instances, the spotter MUST get up close to do spotting. This makes indirect a viable if risky strategy, as your opponent can easily target the spotter unit and blast it, thus forcing the firing unit to cost between getting in the line of fire for a better shot, or have really low chances of hitting anything.

Every morning with a new EoB vid is a good morning. As far as 10th goes, been playing a fair bit of it, really enjoy it for the most part. I agree with ya that it really sucks having melta weapons and thunder hammers being essentially worthless vs anything outside of mid-heavy infantry. The prevalence of tanks means that there's a lot more anti tank running around, which in turn makes it feel REALLY bad playing stuff like terminators/crisis suits

I couldn’t really figure out where to get started playing in 9th. I couldn’t find the info I needed and Army building seemed impossible to learn without outside help. Meanwhile for 10th I’ve got three combat patrols and I’ve taught my kids to play Warhammer. The new data cards and detachment stuff just made playing the game so much more streamlined so you can get to the fun.

There are armies out there that basically do not have anti-tank within their own indexes anymore, because what they were using in editions prior got left behind by vehicle toughness buffs. Sisters of Battle, for example. Also, the Fight phase is pretty anemic in 10th. Lots of melee units just don't perform like they used to, so the ones most worth taking are generally expendable and/or chaff like Arco-Flagellants as opposed to elites.

Many valid points! Having played since the 2nd edition I believe this is the best edition yet. Sure there are balance issues and some rules mistakes but we are early days yet of the edition and they will be addressed shortly I’m sure. I’m having tonnes of fun playing and with the app (that should be free!) , the index cards and the mission deck it flows so good! Jay, it sounds like you need to adapt your tactics or unit selection to get to those imperial guard. :-)

Been enjoying fielding older units noe that they receive unique abilities to suite their role. Finally dusted off my old Razorbacks and Predator Destructors since they can keep up with the joneses thanks to the new edition.

Honestly, they should just make the rules a rolling update and keep it digital. Then we don't need major revisions released every few years, they can just tweak, nerf, and buff whatever they need to as the data rolls out. If you want the printed books (i mean, i too like a hardcover in my book case) that is fine, but it will be out of date within a few months.

Paprika 😂 loved that!

yes. attached hq is the best!

Hey Jay, great video ❤

I played 10th edition couple of days ago, and it was really, really good time

"It doesn't matter what your squads are equipped with, it's all basically the same." - Man who loses every game he plays. :p

Prohibiting indirect fire to receive buffs would definitely help making it less overbearing. It could still be powerfull, but if it can't synergize with your army well, then it would likely not be interesting to spam it as a core of your playstyle. Another more thematic way to deal with it i like is to only allow indirect fire if another unit with a specific keyword has line of sight to the target, or maybe by using a strat or another type of limited resource. That way it doesn't shut of movement entirely, or when it does it's a limited thing you can't spam too much.

Given that, overall, Imperial Guard are one of the worst performers at tournament level, further nerfing indirect fire doesn't seem like the best solution for long-suffering Guard players. Tanks are back and big and tough, yes, yet ironically, they've been so overpriced in the Guard index that most of us are now considering running infantry + sentinel armies, with some indirect fire thrown in. If they try to dial back indirect fire, they at least have to compensate by making tanks less expensive (oh and the tank commander SUCKS).

I wonder if indirect fire could be balanced by changing it into a CP stratagem available to units with the keyword, like how smokescreen currently works.

I do like the idea of the index cards and how easy they would be to errata or modify for balance. And then it's just an announcement; "Hey, new cards out!" and everyone goes and downloads them. I mean, weren't we led to believe that would be the way at the beginning of 10th?

Loving the leaders, keywords on datasheets, detachments, and overall how list building is now. Though i would prefer to have a more granular point system, if you dont equip the best gun/melee you are leaving Value on the table. Or at least make the options worthwhile to take for the non BIS option.

I hate that some armies just flat out dont have indirect fire while others have entire squads and hella tanky tanks with indirect fire and enough range for the entire board. Dont forget about the heavy keyword with indirect fire, its not even fair or balanced

How about giving Indirect Fire a series of minium range bands; something like -1 to hit at 36"+, -2 to hit at 24"-36", -3 to hit at 12"-24" and no shooting below 12".

Indirect fire should require at least one unit in your army to have line of sight, like calling in a artillery strike on a target. The artillery doesn’t need to see the target, but someone does to call the shots in.

@10:20 There's a very easy way to balance it. Have some way of saying "you can only take 3 indirect fire platforms and also if you do take all 3 you can't some other stuff." You know, like the old detachment system.

For the points cost change related to wargear I kind of agree, but not fully. I agree that it was a pain in the ass to make lists when every option had a points cost and I like the idea of removing the points costs of wargear and just having the options balanced against each other. The problem is that that doesn't work for everything. The Leman Russ sponsons being one example, but what irritates me more is the hunter killer missile and the extra stubbier it can be equipped with! The choice is "Do you want to have extra weapons or do you want to not have it?". It's not super significant or anything, but you gain nothing by not taking it (including stuff unrelated to winning the game, like weird combo potentials or fun but weaker rules). You're just weaker with no more fun added so it's just dumb to not take it. The only reason to not take it is for wysiwyg, but it feels bad to have to be just straight up weaker to keep wysiwyg. The ideal solution in my mind is to just be more reserved with assigning points costs to wargear! Take the no wargear cost thing as far as possible and then give points costs only to the things that wouldn't work otherwise. Maybe not even to all the things that don't work without points cost! Cadian infantry squad sergeants can have a 3 strengths las pistol or a 4 strength bolt pistol. It's irritating and there isn't really any way to balance them against each other without serious changes or breaking immersion, but it's so insignificant that I think it's fine to just let it be broken and not bother putting a points cost on the bolter. (thou if you make it cost just 1 point it could be an option for filling out the last few points in a list)

Indirect fire can be fixed with the artillery template and the scatter dice, just saying.

Indirect fire should be changed so that the neg 1 to hit is baked into that weapons profile and they get +1 to hit if they can see the target unit. With modifier stacking being as it is you can only modify to +/- 1 after you consider all buffs/debuffs. So with current indirect fire you can use two abilities that give +1 to hit, one cancels out the neg 1 to hit from indirect and one buffs the hit to +1 to hit. If the modifiers were altered so that the neg 1 is in the ballistic skill and you get +1 with LOS then it eliminates buff stacking allowing indirect fire to hit so well. A unit that can hit without being hit back should always have a tax for that ability.

Played in a casual 8 player 3 round tourney yesterday at my local shop and had a blast. I managed to take 3rd with 2 wins when these were my first 3 2000 point games of 10th. Really fun time. Random Secondaries are great. Indirect is definitely an issue. Vehicles are crazy tanky, I was running 2 dreads and a Predator and I only lost one all day, and it got one shot by a Repulsor Executioner.

I’m not super competitive, and I miss the more granular points. Yes you could get around it with the multiple datasheets for a unit. But that does create some index/codex bloat. I also don’t think cover works as well as you think it does for close combat unit’s getting shot off before they get there. Otherwise? I think 10th is a lot of fun. I really like the bones of this edition.

I really love your enthusiasm. So many people are full of doom and gloom and your possibility is infectious

The stupid thing is I don't think having the core rolebook as a digital download has actually even effected their sales. Plenty of online store have the new core rulebook (the printed one) in their top sellers lists. People will pay for the fluff and having a physical rulebook, you dont need to force everyone to do it.

You should challenge Shawn to try something other than his parking lot 😂

I think a simple change would be to add an additional keyword. Penetrating Wounds ignore saves on a critical hit, but do not cause mortal wounds. And give most of the Anti + Devastating weapons Penetrating instead. Job done

I love your enthusiasm. It really is infectious. Also, can we politely ask your friend to tone down his lists a bit? It really sounds like he’s diving into the meta hard when he could also see that he’s going up against a more fluffy Templar list and just chill out a bit? 😅

Jay, about the tanks, I have a solution but you might not like it… the primaries land speeders . I took my Templar’s against a guard army and the land speeder thunderstrike almost knocked a leman russ off the board in 1 turn.

I like the idea for leaders, and it works great for space marines to "collect" them, but it's less so for factions what don't have 120+ datasheets. And some keyword stangeness is also baffling. Like attaching a single psyker to a giant brick of bodies now makes my entire squad vulnerable to anti-psyker stuff? Or Kastelans now become vulnerable to anti-character, anti-vehicle AND anti-troops if you dare to stick a datasmith to them? I just need some clarifications

Love the Vids

03:30 I have to vehemently disagree. That might be correct for boys and units like them, but other armies pay giant point taxes for potential war gear. Additionally, it results in only one option being the "correct" one for a given unit.

I'm also in on 10th. I hope that they decide to change at some point to free app so the only big barrier to new players is model cost. I also love the idea of quick turn around on army updates.

Why dont u do Battle Reports you have such a postive energy. I would love to watch you play!

I really hope the app stays free!! Thanks gents!! Fantastic as always!!!

I think that IDF for Guard should max hit on 3s. As a guard player myself I think that hitting on 3s, rerolling ones is plenty strong enough for indirect. An Earthshaker cannon hitting on 2s with reroll ones basically just doesnt miss. Thats a little overpowered.

I agree with you about the free app/rules/pdfs thing. I don't mind if they sell codices with a lot of lore and sexy pix and stuff, and a few rules mixed in, as long they keep releasing the actual rules parts for free. Heck, if they release ebook versions of the codices, I'll probably even buy a few. I just don't have much room for realbooks these days.

Ive been having fun still painting my 10th ed army.

Tell Sean to take a different list! If he's so good at the game, he'll still beat you without a fleet of tanks. But also, indirect should just have a modification of the max +/-1 rule. No indirect shot can be buffed past its base stat eg never hits on better than 4s

the tank talk is interesting to see considering over in horus heresy tanks are being blitzed off the table and lascannon squads reign supreme

wasnt the leaders attachable to units somethin the first dawn of war game pioneer? i thought that was something that could be done in tabletop aswell

10th has been great for 40k! I think you're right on pretty much every count balance-wise. Most of all, I agree that the full availability of rules has kicked off a mini golden age that I don't want to see the end of. Keep the indexes free! I will totally buy codexes for detachments, named characters, art, and lore, but all regular unit stat blocks should always be freely available.

Treat indirect like flyers? 1 unit per 1000 points? Like an Artillery keyword that is then limited. 'To hit' can be 3+ at best?

Saying that characters in 9th were just a tax where you either choose a beat stick or the cheapest to ignore really misses just how powerful and synergistic having strong buffing characters in your army was, and I hate to say it but kinda shows why you struggled to win games in 9th

I just haven't been having fun in 10th. The only other edition that really turned me off was 7th, and I've been playing since 3rd. When they said they were getting rid of power level because of terrible balance issues, they just meant the name - they got rid of the points system and made power level the default. List building was my favorite aspect of playing and its dead for me now. On the bright side, this gives me time for other games I didn't try while I was having so much fun with 9th. I did like it basically comes with a tempest of war deck from the start to make the missions feel a little more varied. I guess my Salamanders can melt a knight in one turn now, even though meltas aren't very good anti-tank anymore. I actually find massing small arms fire with boosts is the best way to kill vehicles, though Marines have some really strong buffs right now, and anti tank weapons aren't that great.

meanwhile squig buggies: murder everything within 36'', ignore every mechanic

I agree the app should be a gateway to the hobby but behind a paywall

As a Grey Knight player. I’m frustrated with armor atm. We have no way to really deal with armor unless we bring an allied knight. Our NDK are so expensive and so fragile they are not reliable. They took hammers away which was our AV. Just a bummer all around with armor.

I wish adding leaders to squads wasnt limited to 2 like i cant have a captain lieutenant and banner guy in the same squad so i end up with models i painted that have to live on the shelf

Funny jay posts vids almost as I am thinking of them, just yesterday I was like hmm 10th edition actually has some big issues and could be a bit badder than I thought, like it has its fun but.. and boom here he is almost thinking the same thing

I still say traditional devastator squads have found a new place in 10th edition :)

I love 10th edition. Minus playing against Knights or Eldar. Thankfully they are actually fairly rare in my local FLGS community.

Now I am a fan of all times of plastic kits from gundam to LEGO and now jay you have me a third form of plastic crack. And also a empty wallet. Is fun

GW just expects us to line up to be moneymilked and say please sir may i have some more

There is a downside to indirect fire, the rules say that if no model in the target unit is visible then it is -1 to hit and the unit gets benefit of cover

Cant wait for my game. Have not played in years . Only won 1 game and lost so many always had fun ! Always a blast its the Best Sci Fi grim dark the modles / minis are really awsome looking great quality. Only bad thing I can say is the price of course. You know its bad in life when drugs and harsh vices are cheaper then plastic models.

Idk if you can actually do the indirect fire thing.. you can only modify a hit roll +/- 1 and both the Heavy and the strat bonus are to that, not to the BS. You'd be rerolling 1s if there was a Scout Sentinel in range, mind.

A bit late to the comment party. Ive just returned to the game after 10+ years away. I agree with everything you say. I would also like to add that mortal wounds is, for me, a realy feels bad ability. As a sisters player... Oh, you hit me with that indirect tank? And it does 5 mortal wounds ? And I cant save with armour OR my invul save? So... 5 dead sacresants. Thats 65 points from one single shot, and I can do ZERO about it. I wouldnt mind it if they didnt bleed over to other minis. I get that they are great vs tanks and monsters. But when you just melt half a regular troop... feels bad

No idea why there is universal special rules but theres multiple units in the game that have a special rule but under a different name. Still seems very ‘special rule’ heavy which can get pretty mind numbing after a while.

I hate how some armies have fantastic centerpiece models that have great durability with high toughness + Invuls + FNPs and still move 12" plus fly and absolutely wreck in close combat with ap4 attacks. Most of my losses are where a daemon Primarch or grreater daemon just walks through 1000pts of my army while costing 300 to 325 pts. It's lame as hell to lose this way, and these models are criminally undercosted points wise. Specifically: Bloodthirsters, Morty, Angron, Magnus.

true fan squad

Let's be honest here, guard is strong only because of indirect. I'm ok with nerfing indirect, but I need something back

The one thing that battle scribe has going for it is how it’s organized and how it shows legends

App development can be VERY expensive. But it seems like a value add to their whole business...

The army that I play (tau empire) is not good in basically every game, I feel like most of the rules that I have are underpowered version of SM ones, and it feels bad when the army famous for is powerful shooting phase doesn't deal enough damage to tanks until turn 3 (when the game is already decided). But, even considering all of this I am having fun with this edition, and I know that most of the problems of my army will be solved in the future (especially with the codex). I think everyone should remember that this edition is only at the beginning, it didn't even receive an actual balance to points and rules yet, cause the ones that we have are quick fix to some mayor problems. Give this edition some time

Your excitement over attaching independent characters to squads shows you clearly didn't experience Death Stars in previous editions...

Suits are actually just 1 sheet. I feel the ppm and weapon has pros and cons just as free warfare does. I think it's just a matter of time still to see if it works well moving forward.

In my Leagues of votann armies, I only use indirect fire on my one time use missile on my land fortress

Crisis suits don't have more the one data sheet? Regardless one of the few times I think it's okay , there' supposed to be super flexible from a fluff perspective

Disagree with you on needing indirect fire. That is what artillery is, not letting people hide behind all the new cover options.

Some people love spending time building lists so I understand why some people are upset about the change

The counter for indirect is pretty easy: strategic reserves, reserves (with deep strike) and strategems that increase survivability of units. Speaking about SM… they have the flexibility to do exactly the things listed. Terminators, intercessor with go to ground and armour of contempt, an aphotecary and you are good to go. Unfortunately not everybody is good at the game, so people who aren’t good at it usually complain about balance, but the factions give all the tools to win games (with some minor issues for some factions). Keep training

I love list building because of the lack of troop tax. My carcharodons force is all terminators, a dreadnought and a couple of terminator hqs. Is it effective? No but it's fun, fluffy and it's what i want my army to be despite being completely legal in the rules.

I think I missed something from the rules. I tought you couldn't modify a to hit or to wound roll more than a -1 or a +1.

Kill Lord Solar and the scout sentinels and watch as the 3+ rerolling 1s of the basilisks transform into regular guard 4+. What buff does Shaun use to make them hit on 2s ? Orders don't stack and heavy and indirect fire cancel out so they should be hitting on 3s to my knowledge. The basilisks' firepower is only really efficient against regular marines because their 8 -2 2 profile, terminators, Gravis armor dudes and vehicles can shrug it off pretty good. I know that you like your sea of infantry for black templars but use a few units of elite infantry and vehicles like the gigachad redemptor dread that reduces damage of weapons targeting him by 1 and is toughness 10 so won't care about any amount of basilisk fire and can punch or plasma to death tough things, a few lascannons (gladiator lancer perhaps) for the very likely Leman Russ, sentinels or lord solar (obvious oath targets). Also guard infantry should be killed with bolters or chainswords for their number of attacks don't waste shots of anything else on them, infernus marines can seem like an answer but their range is so low that the basilisks will tear them apart before they get to them, maybe terminators, they will eat a whole squad a turn with their storm bolters and and power fists and are tough enough that they won't die to the basilisks too easily. So TL;DR: don't build your army to kill the guard squads, build it to kill what is actually threatening, so the basilisks the Russ and their support, use a bit more elite infantry or vehicles that can take punches and use a bit of volume fire on objectives you can contest and control that turn.

I wouldn't mind a cheap subscription for the app. But tying it to a media service that not everyone is bothered about isn't the greatest move.

Everybody is complaining about strong veichles, but nobody wants to take gravi-weapons, that have 2+ anti, because it's not strong against other units :) Everybody wants mega-multi-pulti-melta with 100500 / -10 / 100d6 damage ) I think specialisation is good, take the gravi - kill a tank!

Why not a case of Impact vs Armor like in Legion?

The only point changes I dislike is the inability tonbuy a single model vs the squad

Indirect fire from the guard parking lot sucks. I've lost half my army in one game from the turn one shooting phase from the guard player