I find it funny that gw has free wargear and then there is the new knight christmas box where you get a knight with the missile launcher/autocannon counted in the points cost but it just aint in the box
They could have dropped the extra sprue in if they'd wanted. So what if it's old stock, have a production run on the extra sprue. They just want to sell the box and another knight.
@@yhormthemidget That knight stopped being sold over 2 years ago. The last box (before this one not sure if it was a battleforce or christmas one) was made out of the same minis yet had the new kit
the problem is that at the start of 10th they just used the more costy profile, instead of striking a balance. they also tried to give each weapon cost and benefits within their own profile, the problem here is that some profiles are more efficient vs certain targets and you end up chosing them. another piece of the puzzle is the rules changes: devastating wounds weapons were very hot with oath of moment rerolling wounds. now they are niece uses.
Not only that, but they gave certain units very specific rules that only benefitted one profile. For example, Chaos Legionaries were given "Veterans of the Long War" as an ability, which allowed them to reroll melee wounds of 1 when in engagement range, or all melee wounds if by an objective. So why would they take their expensive special and heavy weapons when they would prefer their chainswords? This is especially damning, as the swords could be exchanged _for free_ in past editions, while the shooting weapons cost extra points, which are now rolled into their profile. And to make things worse, if they lower the points to counter this, it now makes their melee too cheap, which is what happened at the beginning of the edition with Chosen. In short, there was a reason all of the previous editions had separate upgrades and points values. It wasn't just for the fluff or RPG elements - it is a defined balance and gameplay metric.
If they cost the unit based on the best weapon, then it's overcosted. If they don't, it's broken and undercoated. Not having loadouts makes sense if the game was made for it. But warhammer simple isn't, warhammer has always had weapon choices. If there is only one choice that is better than the rest, or if you make each weapon the same with slight differences, then you have no real choices. 10th feels like they wanted every unit to be one, same profile. Yet, they kept the weapon options from last edition. You can't have your cake and eat it too when it comes to weapon profiles. Some are just better than others, or have niche roles that make them worst to take in most games.
@@silverblack110 I think you hit the nail on the head. GW just want Warhammer to be made up of single, monopose, mono-profile units. Chess, but with much more expensive pieces. I don't know why exactly, but the cynicism in me leads me to believe that it's to either sell the game to the lowest common denominator, or it's to sell each unit multiple times over. Or both. Think: Intercessors, vs. Assault Intercessors. But now with a different kit for Assault Intercessors with power weapons, and then another, separate, kit with Thunder Hammers. Or another one for Intercessors with just flamers. They're effectively upgrade sprues, but you can't buy those sprues on their own. Each one has just one profile in the codex, and they rotate which ones are effective with every balance update. And no, they don't sell individual models in blister packs like they used to.
@DeathInTheSnow "you will buy rebuy your army every 2 years and will be happy with this" I don't disagree on some fundamental level, that having a few units that specialize in something good. Gravis units generally are fine imo. But regular intercessors... They should be folded into a different box later. If they could do a Tactical squad box but with intercessors, I think people would be happy. But the amount of "speciality" or "mono purpose" kits just keeps accumulating. Soon enough, they will need to purge the space Marines again just to release something new each year. It's worrying to think about... I think the real solution is just to play an edition you and your buddies like (2nd, 9th, etc). And not worry about buying into the new edition just for the same, slightly nicer models
@@DeathInTheSnow even funnier, index crisis suits had an ability to auto-advance 6" but none of their weapons had the Assault keyword, so surprise surprise they were always lead by the commander who gave them assault...
As a new player this edition i was glad they weren't there. But now that ive got the hang of things i understand why people have been asking for them back
i was learning how to play during 9th, then when 10th came i was happy they were gone because they made the game so complex, but at the same time, once you got the hang of using an army builder app, it made the process so easy.. now i miss points so bad
It was a lot of fun in list building in my opinion. Balancing, relics warlord traits, wargear a powers. 9th edition had problems but some parts were fun
@cristhianmlr 2 main reasons, 1 being that im frequently 5 points short or over 2000, and being able to change a weapon to get that number even would be nice. 2 is that there are a lot of units that get balanced based on one weapon loadout, and the others become useless for their cost. When a unit gets a points hike because their plasma guns are too good, it would be nice if I could maybe still run their bolt guns for cheaper
ngl I don't dislike power levels, when properly balanced they could make a gamemode like combat patrol which is a lot more simple, and a more complex competitive mode for tournaments with weapon points values
An admittedly insignificant problem with the free wargear I've experienced in playing against my friend's Death Guard is that their shooting phase invariably takes a long time as each unit of Plague Marines has about six different weapons to fire
Absolutely. Upgrades are upgrades for a reason. It’s odd that lascannons and heavy bolsters cost the same for devastators since lascannons historically have been about 10-15 points more because they’re just better overall.
The kits simply aren't designed for wargear to all be free is the thing. They're never going to be able to make a chainsword equal value to a thunder hammer or a shardcarbine equal to a dark lance etc. With the rules as they are there are so many options that have just been made completely pointless. I know GW wants to make balancing the game easier for themselves but this ain't the way. I'm hoping some kind of middle ground can be found but I feel like this is probably so much less work for the rules designers that they're just going to double down on it.
I think there's a middle ground people are overlooking. I don't think a Chainsword needs to be considered of "equal value" to a Thunder Hammer, likewise Flamers Vs Plasma guns, or Heavy Bolters vs Lascannons. They have different target-profiles, so the relative cost of the weapon isn't relevant to players' decision-making. If I want to hunt tanks I'm taking the Lascannon every time, and if they cost different amounts then I'll find the points for it. I really think there are loadouts that you just will never see on a given unit. Nobody will ever run, or ever has I suspect, four Heavy Bolters in a Devastator squad; there's just too much good anti-infantry firepower spread across the rest of the army to skew the unit in that direction. The other weapons, like Multi-Meltas, work arguably better than Lascannons, but only if you have a Transport, or Deep Strike, or a certain Detachment rule, etc, and all of those things have a price tag attached already. I think the answer is to do away with baseline special rules for every unit, since they often incentivise certain builds anyway, and to expand the system of Enhancements, and add tiered points costs which unlock better wargear, as a way to further customise units but without needing to split up Datasheets.
Yes. Bring back the player decision of cost-effective loadouts vs fully armed loadouts, give people a choice to choose rather than be forced to stuff a load of useless weapons on say a battlewagon or vanquisher leman russ. People have no reason to be scared of adding numbers up, that's what calculators and battlescribe is for.
As someone who joined in 10th ed you going through the history of this issue and how prior editions did it was very helpful for understanding the nuance of the situation. Having only known 10th ed my biggest complaint is that generic characters that I can build stories around and avoid the constraints of pre-existing lore that surround named characters just don't feel like I can customized to make them competitive with the named characters. While I'll never chase the meta, it does feel kinda bad when some named characters feel necessary or vital to a list.
As a fellow newcomer but who has somewhat followed the game for a while, I feel like free wargear isn’t so much the problem as the removal of additional levels of army/character customization like Relics or Faction Armories.
Not every unit needs wargear points, but in situations where a large percentage of a units power is based off of wargear, then you should have to pay points, like a captain with chainsword should be cheaper than a power fist, but a Sergeant probably doesn't need to pay points for a better weapon, since it's 1 model in a full squad
I really liked list building in 9th, it was as 15-20% of my whole hobby enjoyment and I was gutted when it left. However I'm used to it now and it does simplify building your models as you just take best loadout. I genuinely don't mind either way now but I would love to see points per model come back for in between min max squad sizes I think that would add more choice back to list building without screwing up the simplified new points costs overmuch.
I do admit that the thing that brought me back to Warhammer was the new simple way to build armies (in tts for example) and it is also what brought me to buy Necrons to build a 1000p list, but it is true that now that i'm at the very least a little more comfortable with list building that the use of wargear points and flexible building would bring a lot more enjoyment (AND not having your freshly painted models be obsolete because now some weapon combinations are illegal)
Amen this, this right here is the reason why I’d say keep it free. From how many times they want to change a rule and be so wishywashy about the next rule set that having everything just be free is the best way to do it because one second it’s take 10 plague marines with and the fixings to a hand full with all the same load out, and I don’t have 8 melta plague marines
10th edition datasheets with 9th edition points, faction rules (and subfaction rules), and 10th edition core abilites and stratagems (because i’d rather not flip through four pages of stratagems just to find out if i can magically muscle button my way through an enemy unit for a command point) would be an amazing version of the game.
@@samhunter1205 Sure but is it really worth it to spend an extra 30 points on a unit of termigants to take all the pretty meh extra guns? Like I said for the health of the game the answer is probably yes but from just wanting dumb fun then no.
Like I said in the comments of the poll. I hate this edition dictated by tournament bros. This is not what Warhammer was made for. Go play Call of Duty or some other shit.
To balance against other weapon options yes, but I see why having them free is appealing as you can just model your unit as you enjoy. I'd like them back, personally. Even if they keep the box-restriction they have currently.
I'd prefer they go all the way I want to take all meltas and all flamers. In a single squad to specialize againist a single profile. Thats why they called them "special weapons"
modeling your unit as you enjoy is less punishing with costs though without costs if "how you enjoy" isnt the objectivly most powerful loadout you get punished hard
They forced us into Power Level. No more, no less. The removal of points per model was more to ensure that folks were building "from the box" rather than using 3D printing or EBay to source the extra hits needed to give an entire Blightlord Terminators squad Combi-Plasma, or having 3x Cyclic Ion Blasters on Tau Battlesuits. You build what you buy. Power Weapons do not have stat differences, but why take a Power Sword when you take a Power Fist? There's no reason not to. Same cost, better statline, and if you run a Gravis Captain with the Relic Fist, you get an extra attack (which is cool). This is great, to some degree, for newer players. Less analysis paralysis, and rule of cool means a Power Axe is what you want, but now your model is less effective. No more! However, it also changed loadouts and obliterated Combi-Weapons as a differentiated wargear choice. A Combi-Flamer is not the same as a Combi-Melta in form or function - yet it's the same. My hope is that 10th was the "reset" and we start seeing diversification return in 11th. I also think that adding +1 model to a unit, or +1 objectively better weapon (Power Fist again) could be an additional lever to pull for GW. It's less crunchy, but means that a player must make some fun/interesting choices. But I'll trade all the above for the Custom Chapteres/Septs/etc again. Bring back those rules - where we can have Index Astartes articles again and fun Successor Chapters again.
Hear, hear. The loss of flavor for chapters, etc. was brutal to endure... and combining all the combi-weapons into a single profile never made any sense to me. Really hope we see more flavor for subfactions return with 11th, if not sooner.
I want to see it come back. At the end of the day, free wargear has absolutely invalidated Bolt pistols, and it sucks that they're relegated to nothingness
its invalidated literally hundreds of weapons because there are strictly better options i can name maybe 3 units across the entire 40k roster that DONT have a clear best option, and clear worse options
This motherfucker has such a short attention span he thinks creating a discussion and weighing the pros and cons for TWENTY SIX MINUTES is a waste of time. Do you just eat your bread straight out the bag cuz you can’t wait for it to be toasted? Sorry, it’s stupid of me to ask a question like that, you probably didn’t even take the time to read it.
Yeah, I assembled my tanks with cheaper weapons like flamers and heavy bolters and now I'm forced to either tear them away and replace with lascannons or count-as half of my army. Oh wait, I can always buy another 8 tanks, right GW?
YOU CAN STILL BUILD THE LIST YOU WANT, HOW ARE YOU THIS DELIBERATELY DENSE!!! THERE IS LITERALLY NOTHING STOPPING YOU FROM TAKING THE WARGEAR YOU WANT!!! you literally cant make an argument for wargear costing points when they currently cost ZERO POINTS and dont limit how you can build your unit. points values have been assigned accordingly, thats why crisis suits in the index costs way more than crisis suits in the codex, as they are completely different and balanced accordingly. people like you just dont get it, for whatever fucking reason. wargear costing points just adds more arbitrary variables to a game that already has a LOT of variables. you simply dont need it and it doesnt add to the game, period. GW isnt going to change 10th edition to be more complicated, as the whole goal of 10th was to not be overbloated with rules and variables like 9th edition. pay attention, or stop sharing ignorant opinions. why should we be taxed for taking the wargear we like? we currently dont have to pay for it. you're literally asking for points to be split up again like 9th edition, because you think its fun? why the hell should i pay different costs for Leman Russ sponson weapons? thats fucking stupid and adds nothing to the game. having to settle for lesser wargear because I dont have enough points is also stupid. clearly you dont understand game design or what GW has accomplished with 10th. nobody wants a 63 pack of cards for stratagems, orders, and psyker powers again. bloat is not good for warhammer. go play mordheim or something if you want to fidget with a bunch of numbers like a rpg.
PER MODEL COST PLEASE This would allow me to go "ahh I think this squad could use an extra guy, or maybe this AT squad needs an extra melta". As it stands, I have to go buy another 5 models to include one more gun because GW has arbitrarily shot themselves in the foot. Not to mention, there's no reason to not take a better close combat weapon if it's free... so why aren't the units auto-equipped with it?
YES! I remember when they first did this and suddenly every guard vehicle list just got like 14 HK missiles added to their lists for free. It felt so stupid
Guard player here I bought HK tokens because of 10th lol. I was using an index card it was hard to track. Chimeras, sentinels, Russes, basilisks, manticores, etc. I’d end up with like ten+ HKs
Bring them back and make em stay! 1. Not all gear is equal 2. No gear ugrade versus all gear is free in an average 2k army is easily 500 points 3. see 2. ==> you can no longer balance the game proper For those folk that go: Oh, now I have to do math... Sure you do, you cheater, just for once bring a points-LEGAL army to the game! It takes little efford, either an add to calculate it for you or... the oldschool pen and paper + calculater(if needed), that is, if you youngsters can stil write...
yes, and force organizations also need to return. Its kinda awkward when I go up against a tyranid army with no guants or a necron army with no warriors.
I agree, though force organization charts are really a work around of bad balance. Sufficient rules and incentivizing of infantry would lead to armies that look more fluffy naturally
thats fucking stupid. if you want rule bloat and mandatory troops requirements, go play 9th edition. why the fuck do you want to fuck things up? the whole goal of 10th was to remove bloat, streamline the game and speed up the pace of play. all 3 goals they have accomplished, and you want to go back? grow up. go play a different edition if thats what you want, theres literally nothing stopping you outside of the fact that practically nobody wants to play 9th for exactly the bloat and arbitrary numbers that you apparently miss. if people really wanted those things, honestly, then there would be people playing 9th edition all the time, or any other edition than 10th. thats just not the case though, people play 10th edition. 10th is highly regarded as one of the best iterations to date, and theyre not going to bring back points for wargear, as it goes directly against their whole goal for 10th. the only people that want points back are those who are arrogant in their ignorance.
Ya, they need to have a selection for a point cost. To keep complication down, they need to group weapons. For example, the Wraithlord: brightlances are current cost. Starcannon, Shuriken cannon, scatter laser, and missile launcher are all -20 pts.(even if you have one brightlance, pay full price, can mix and match at 125). Just an example and could maybe have a “cheap” option with scatter lasers at 115. Would really help improve different variety and not being able to get a cool unit in because your 10 pts short.
It's can be somewhat annoying when units like the Crisis suits had a million options, but i think it was healthier for the game and it made it easier to use up remaining points on lists especially with the damn points constantly changing.
It wasn’t healthier. We had the exact same discussions, just about why this or that weapon was a bad choice. Half the equipment was never used and some setups were just clearly the best. So good in fact that we named them. The current system is not perfect,but a lot better. Removing useless choices is a good thing. Dark Eldar witches had like 7 weapons, basically all the same. Combining them was a good idea. And crisis suits actually had strikes rules, the ridiculous suits of 9th were broken, so that didn’t really help either.
its literally the same wargear options you already have, but with points differences that needlessly complicate list building. as it stands, you can take whatever weapons and gear you like without penalty. with gear and weapons costing points, the cost of the unit would go up accordingly. this needless complication also makes balance more difficult and time consuming. as it stands, GW has done a good job of balancing the game. most factions are doing pretty well and all factions are at least playable. the same couldnt be said for a number of previous editions, including 9th. the whole point of 10th was to streamline the game, let you take the units you want without worrying about how many of what with which gear, and its been great. people have been crying about the loss of wargear points since day one, which is stupid because they could take whatever wargear they like from day one. these complainers have no idea what theyre asking for, nor why. theyre just a bunch of self entitled, ignorant children masquerading as adult gamers.
@@TheMarcosvolta not really. Originally back in 3rd etc you had seperate lists of special weapons, heavy weapons, sergeant weapons etc plus things like relics, faction special items you could all pick to tailor your unit. It was way more interesting and really wasn't complicated at all. For example Unit A is armed with boltguns but can select 1 special and 1 heavy weapon from the lists, the sergeant can pick 1 weapon from the sergeanrs list to replace his basic bolt pistol or chainsword each weapon has its own cost but its really basic maths. It added so much flavour and tactical fun. I hate how now its just units of identical guys that really can only do one specific job on the table, incoherent reasoning as to why one sergeant gets a power sword but the others don't, no variety in your own or opponents units, the table tops gone from true flexibility and surprising results to basically a rock paper scissors match up. The options "included" are far far fewer. Some units do get to take a special weapon but it's limited to just either a melta or a flamer. Why. It sucks.
@@TheMarcosvolta not really. Originally you had seperate special weapons, heavy weapons, sergeant weapons, special item lists. A unit, for example a tactical squad, would then get it's basic bolter and be allowed to choose one special and one heavy weapon. The sergeant could also replace either his bolt pistol or his chainsword for a weapon off the sergeants list. These lists were far more expansive than the options you get "included" nowadays. Very few units will give you actual options but even then its between 2 special weapons, instead of the 8 or so you could pick from before. Each weapon would have its own cost. But that's just really simple maths. It allowed for so much more variety and flavour not to mention tactical tailoring of units. You could get some really surprising results, it also meant units could generally be built to deal with a variety of jobs. Now it's all single units identically equipped. Making it a very rock paper scissors feel a lot of the time on table top. Not to mention dumbing it down and having all your units look identical and boring. As for balance it really wasnt too bad. Balance is shot these days despite what any stats might claim. A codex used to be worth buying. It's pointless now because they're obsolete before they've finished printing. There a rules hotfix every two weeks nowadays to try and sort the horrific balance issues of certain units. 3rd was very stable by comparison. Basically it was no more complicated, no harder to balance and gave real variety and flavour to your units while also adding a fun tactical addition to the game letting you play about with and tailor your units. Creating far more interesting games than having ten identical one trick ponies get hard countered immediately.
As a new player that dipped my toes into 8th I like that they have trimmed all that stuff down honestly. I don't want to spend exorbitant amounts of time list building, for me that's not where the fun is. It would be cool to have options for enhancements for normal squads though, like the adrenal glands or toxin sacs. Might be fun.
They should just consolidate all weapons into the same option then like with combi-weapons, so power sword, chainsword, powerfist, etc all have the same value, and if you are in favour of no points for wargear then you don't get to complain about this. Also shit like vexilas need to be done away with and have their benefits baked into the unit so I'm not obligated to have a cloned flagpole in every fucking squad of wardens.
My only issue is I have been playing all troops no loots for decades. So now that everything is free I have thousands of points of models that are under equipped.
I thought i was gonna miss both the various costs of wargear and custom unit sizes at first, but honestly now i don't mind that it's gone. I know one of the main arguments for bringing it back is "player choice" but honestly that was rarely actually the case before with wargear before. In my experience, in the case of most units the winning concept was "as cheap as possible". In most cases you actually didn't use the special weapons for most units. And if there was a very clear optimal way to play a unit, why would you choose any other way if you're making a competetive list? Take a standard unit of Battle sisters. In 9th, before novitiates, it was your only troop option so you usually played with a few squads. But as they were chaff units, you would never give them any sort of wargear as it was just wasted points. In 10th however, it is absolutley viable to play them with either MM/Meltagun or HF/flamer. So i actually have more options now in that regard.
No "we" didn't collectively hated it... Some morons with IQ lower than that of a bonobo were nota ble to use it correctly, but people with a functional brain loved it
Very true, disappointingly in the previews for the new edition they had the gall to spin it as doing what we wanted them to, claiming they removed power level because it was unpopular and kept points. Just because they're called "points" doesn't change that the system is fundamentally still power level but with a but with a tad more granularity
to what end? self imposed limitations? you can do that without GW. nothing is stopping you from taking the wargear you want, but you would prefer there to be limitations for everyone? that sounds fucking stupid, because it is. if you dont want an abortion, dont get an abortion. dont try to tell other people how to do things just because you think everyone should ignorantly live life your way. theres a reason we're playing 10th edition and not 9th edition now, and players unanimously prefer 10th. anybody who thinks points for wargear is a good thing doesnt understand shit about game design nor balance. its like trying to explain quantum physics to someone who chose to drop out of high school. its just selfish kids asking for things they dont understand but think they want anyways. meanwhile 40k is more popular than ever with more players than ever, and thats in part due to trimming the fat from 9th edition. the bloat towards the end was absolutely ridiculous. now games are faster and a lot more concise. if you want fiddle with a whole bunch of numbers, go play a rpg, dont mindlessly beg for more bloat after they just removed a ton of it. all youre doing is showing off the limitation of your perception and your lack of caring.
I play AoS more than 40k so I’m used to it but it annoys me no end as I loved building a custom Chapter master or a tooled up blender vampire lord in oldhammer.
I don't want to return to the buck-naked-troops editions, so I agree with the better wargear getting points but otherwise leaving things as is. We already have to have our arms twisted to bring battleline at all, I'd rather they be equipped than just...being cheap for cheap's sake.
so you dont understand game design? cool story bro. returning to rules bloat is flat out stupid and unnecessary. you got 20 points left? take an enhancement or learn how to build a better list. theres literally no excuse except you being childish and demanding things change to fit you instead of the other way around.
@@TheMarcosvolta If +(X) points being written on a datasheet for certain weapon options for the sake of balance is too much rules bloat for you then you should probably go and play a game that's seemingly on a more fitting intellectual level for yourself, like flipping a coin and predicting if it'll land heads or tails.
As a DG player I've gotten both pros and cons from the new system - not having to pay to play my units with their best equipment means I can have a bit of an easier time making lists, and if I want to run a more or less melee/special weapon focused ball of Plague Marines I can without having to pull out a calculator. But it also meant that early 10th when we couldn't field units of 7 was genuinely upsetting for multiple reasons. Personally, I'd like to see more split-datasheets like what they've done with Death Company, Leman Russes, and Tau Battlesuits. A Battleline squad of Plague Marines that are all-bolters or maybe bolters and a special weapon or two with a cheaper cost versus a... idk, maybe call them something like Wretched Refuse squad that's all special weapons and is more expensive. That'd be fine I think. We could use more datasheets in general tbh, even if our lack of options is something I *like* about the faction. I also think points should be on a per-model basis, with minimum and maximum sizes for squads. Give people a *bit* more granularity on how to split things up without going full-tilt back to wargear.
If it's not going to affect their primary purpose, like a guard sergeant with a power weapon instead of a chainsword, then the options don't need points. However if one/multiple weapon profile/s is/are pushing the cost of the unit up, those should absolutely come with a points cost. Using the Guard as an example; The cost of Cadian Shock Troops could be wargear agnostic since a meltagun and plasma gun or flamer and grenade launcher aren't going to affect the units role or even combat ability all that much, but I don't thing anyone would too miffed if each Leman Russ was 5 points more expensive than now, but 15-20pts cheaper if they don't have their sponsons. Another would be Chaos Legionaries having a special rule for melee combat, so I don't think people would get mad if a squad with bolters was 5-10pts cheaper than one with swords. Basically having how it is, but with outliers that make other loadout worthless having an increased points cost.
This is also what I thought, at least for Guard (I don't play any other armies yet xD) Sponsons should have cost for bring them vs not. But general infantry upgrades should be free, like the sergeant loadouts. Maybe add 5 points to melta/plasma on Troopers and keep the flamer/grenade launcher free? At least in my experience melta/plasma tend to be more effective.
I have played 3 games total during 10th edition, and 3 games total during my life span . 10th has made it somewhat easy to understand as I learn bit by bit
10th edition is the first edition where you have consistency in what a model actually does. Wargear is 'fun' but it is hell on comprehension. Now we just get to build fun squads with different weapons, no more cost optimization to agonize over.
As much as I want wargear costs back, I do appreciate not having it in tournament settings. I feel less pressured for my models to be WYSIWYG because whatever is on the model is whatever special gear I want. I feel like there's more pressure to have your models put together "correctly" when there's a tangible cost attached to them
When I started collecting Blood Angels in 5th Ed a ton of wargear upgrades were uneconomic from a points POV, so I built a lot of barebones units. My old stuff is now less competitive, unless I decide to snap off a bunch of chainswords and bolt pistols from my sergeants and death company.
Yes! The worst thing they did among the many, was to remove wargear options from characters and squads, and force players to have to take full spqauds for an arbitrary points cost.
I was a little late to the poll, but I'll share again I wouldn't mind adding a small points cost to a unit to take better weapons, such as 5 points to give a tactical marine a special weapon, 10 for a heavy weapon, and 5 more for a plasma pistol, power fist and/or thunder hammer on the sergeant (in this example, a fully kitted out squad with PP & PF would be +20 points, not +25). Similar upcharge if a special or heavy weapon is so far above it's peers it should have an added tax as a nerf.
A lot of things can be free, just let the Intercessors have their grenade launcher it barely does anything. Some things need a point cost, like Devastator-type Squads heavy weapons or tank main guns. Biggest villain of 10th listbuilding is locked squad sizes and the listbuilding tetris it causes.
any time you have to choose between 2 options, those options should have costs if its just "your guy can also take this as well" that being free is fine
It's easier than this Why have different combinations of Models with different gear each (not looking anyone, Primaris...) when you can have a Main Unit with all the combinations inside? Technically you didn't changed anything. Saved confusing names and simplify the game. Datacards are nice but honestly it's intended for casual players with limited collection (not a bad thing)
For the most part, I find that I don't mind this zero-cost much. I think the biggest thing I might be interested in would be for some units that have the potential to take a lot of special weapons and equipment to have one cost for the base unit with no wargear changes, and then another cost for the unit with any and all wargear as you want. My personal example would be basic Sktarii Rangers or Vanguard. Right now there is no reason not to take a seargent melee weapon, a plasma gun, an arc rifle, a transuranic arquebus, and either an omnispex or broad-spectrum data-tether on every unit. This has made basic AdMech infantry pay a decent tax for all this free stuff. However, if there was an option to just ignore ALL of that stuff and take the base unit instead at a lower cost, I think I might do that in some cases either to get more bodies on the table, or to fill in a shortfall in points. Other than that, dealing with this change hasn't actually been as big a deal as I feared it would.
When I tried to get into warhammer in 8th edition I got overwhelmed by trying to build army with individual points for weapons and all the extras I completely dropped warhammer, when I got back into it and found out that all the weapon points were gone and I can build MY army how I like and not have to think about whats best for each individual squad and focus more on it as a overall thing, I was super happy, if they were to jump back now it would really screw me over with my army.
Problem is it didn't have to be all or nothing. Having EVERY weapon option on a model be the same cost makes it hard to design differences between them, besides the obvious of anti-infantry vs anti-vehicle. You end up with a single "best" option. The more correct answer would have been to have points on some things as upgrades, and others baked in to base points as the default option. As an example take Space Marine Devastators. They have 6 different heavy weapons that all had to be equal in power. The better way would be to leave Heavy Bolters/Flamers free as default options, make Plasma/Grav Cannons a 5 point upgrade and a bit stronger, and Melta Guns and Lascannons a 10 point upgrade so they can be really strong. This gives both players and rule makers more flexibility. Notice I still kept everything in 5 point increments, that's fine because it makes list building and balance simpler. If an upgrade isn't worth 5 points make it free, if it becomes a problem bump it up 5 points later, easy. (I'm also fine with limited squad sizes as they are now, but certain units like tac marines NEED a 5 man option, razorback doesn't count) Simpler, without being OVER simplified.
I agree with this method, but it could be better. Weaker or less effecient profiles should be buffed to incentivise their use in different contexts. Example: The Palatine can have a Bolt Pistol or a Plasma pistol. Even with wargear points there is never a good reason to not give her the plasma. To compensate the pistol could have Rapid Fire or possibly Sustained Hits; Devastating Wounds of you want to be spicy. The Palatine already grants Lethal Hits to the squad so having an extra shot would be a decent balance to the auto-include plasma. Sacresants have similarly thought out wargear. Their maces deal more damage and have Lethal Hits, but with a Palatine you already get that. Instead you take the halberds which get Sustained Hits and and extra AP in exchange for less damage per attack. Point costing wargear doesn't actually prevent or inhibit the ability to take the best options every time. All it does is extend the amount of time you spend constructing an army. Making all of a units weapons useful is the best way to incentivise not taking the absolute best thing every time or minimizing wargear to build a horde.
Just bring back points-costing alongside Warlord Traits and proper Relics, the game seems tailored towards competitive/tournament play, so those guys aren't gonna care about it being simplified. Power Levels should also make a return, if GW are that concerned about keeping things simple/streamlined.
I remember the days of +1 point for frag grenades, +5 points for heavy bolter, +15 for power fist, +15 for lascannon. Let me build the unit they way looks cool, and make the guns and weapons as close to balanced as possible. Heavy bolter with a bunch of shots is good vs horde, and lascannon vs vehicle. Powerfist with less hits than power sword and give chain sword sustain. Keep it simple and let me play what looks cool all for same price.
Not to mention that other wargear options are simply disallowed by the cost-benefit announcement. The Lightning Claws on Assault Terminators are not because of efficiency toward targets, because Lightning Claws are VERY efficient at killing things when you get to re-roll all hits AND wounds because of them. But why would you ever take Lightning Claws when going with a Storm Shield gives you a whole EXTRA WOUND?
It took a little longer to fine-tune a list, but it wasn't difficult at all. Not to mention the points cost per model, so you could always squeeze an extra model here or there to use up all of your points budget.
way WAY easier then without costs 10th has been better balanced between armies (for the msot part, end of 9th was better then any point of 10th, but most of 9th was worse) but thats more of a change in design ideas, in 9th there was a LOT of codex creep which made every new army coming out just obscenely strong compared to the field, had nothing to do with wargear, entirely to do with design intent, 10th largely solved that design intent and kept (for the most part, there are outliers) codicies on par with each other internally however, between units within a coded, and between weapons on those units, 10th is literally the worst balance has EVER been, and its almost purely to do with the removal of wargear costs the removal of wargear costs has made the "meta option" SOOOOOO much stronger comapred to the off meta options if you want to take a gun "cos its cool" and not cos its meta, 10th is literally the worst the game has EVER been for that, and is a HUGE driving force for why armies like SM have incredibly low tournament winrates, because the "offmeta" picks are so much worse, and punished so much harder, then they ever were in the past
No. I don't want to agonise over whether a squad leader needs a Power Sword or not. I want them to have it because it's cool. I don't want to have to choose the boring Bolter and Chainsword option because it's most points efficient in a shooting focused squad.
then take them because its cool, thats what i did the entireity of 9th rather then be forced to take them because you are paying for them anyway unless you are playing ultra high level competition competative games, the fact power swords on your int sargent is "suboptimal" really REALLY didnt matter your issue is feeling "punished" for taking cool options, but built in wargear (its not free, its built in, your always paying for the strongest option) is FAAAAAR more punishing if you DONT want to take the most powerful option what if you like autocannons, and want to take them not lascannons, well...without wargear costs you dont just "feel" like your punished, you are ACTIVLY punished because you are forced to pay for the better stronger option you didnt even take
I play since third edition and can say, that I liked 10. Edition with a big margin the most. I like to simply click army list together instead of being forced to tweek lists into oblivian. I like the better balance between melee and ranged armies. Everything feels so much lighter, easier and better. With horror I remember the painful psychicic phases from past editions and the armour penetration rules or vehicle armor rules or the stupid mortal wounds spam. For me it clear: Leave Wargear options points free as they are to keep the game nice and easy.
Can we also get back a list of psychic abilities for our factions that have Psykers? it seems extremely over simplified that looking for a certain psychic attack or ability only tied to one specific model when we used to have at least a list of 4 to 6 to pick from. Even Necrons when they refresh roll out last edition, the introduced a Crpyptek Arkana system that you could spend points basically to add an ability to a Cryptek such as dealing 1d3 mortal wounds once every shooting phase for 25 points, which was locked specifically into the psychomancer. It seems a shame that they introduced the system for only one addition and then the whole concept was scrapped and now we have this system where certain characters can only join certain units and if you’re not playing space marines, you’re more likely to have heroes that having more restricted list of units that they can join. Also, what is up with the universal characteristics for Combi weapon no matter which one is an equipped they all deal the same damage and have the same weapon abilities. It’s another oversimplification that feels unnecessary and adds more bland playability to 10th. Also certain factions having access to eight detachments while you are faction has access to three or five with no apparent reasoning behind it feels like why does X faction get more choice than Y faction?
I like to have all special stuff with all of my units. It makes it more casual to both build the minis and make the lists on the go. I can understand why it bothers people competitively but otherwise we casuals do benefit from not having to worry about wargear.
10:30 While you showed the Ballistus Dreadnought I can't help but wonder if, had the wargear/weapons cost points, if we would have had weapon OPTIONS instead of being stuck with just Lascannons+Missiles .... (I miss my dual-Autocannons dread ...)
I like the limiting of war gear amounts to unit sizes where there is only 1 to 2 plasma guns per 10 guardsmen as it keeps box sizes down, cheaper, and I think makes war gear options more interesting. Though I would like to see specialty weapons have points costs on the unit datasheet. So most weapons remain free such as your basic small tank guns and unit firearms, but things like plasma guns for a unit of guardsmen or the big cannons would have different costed variants. This would also probably help with reducing the cost of the game's entry, as someone can make some hoard factions a bit more elite and up the points. Not to mention this fixes the problem of some guns being actually useless like when I can get a bolt pistol vs a las pistol, I'm always picking the bolt cause it is better.
Ideally, Each squad would get so many points in free wargear that would be enough to insure the unit would have some upgrades without it being enough to 'you may as well just take all the best stuff because why wouldn't you?", But that would be a noteworthy amount of extra complexity and book-keeping, which 10th has swung hard away from. Im sure Its also drastically easier to balance even if it means screwing over certain weapon combos. Though, if your going to pay for the best load-out then at the very least you should be aloud to 'swap out' before deployment to the weapons most appropriate for the deployment. Lascannons are very much worth more than a flamer against any regular list... but if the guard player your matched into is running 300 Kriegers and 0 armor, then suddenly the flamer starts to look like the better deal.
T'au crisis suits are a perfect example of why this didn't work, before the codex dropped you always just wanted to take the best weapons on them, which turned out was the CIB because it was more effective into most targets than any of the specialised weapons. The only way they can make this work is that they do what they did with the codex tau to other armies, group similar weapons together into different units, then the trade-off between them is more reasonable and also allows them to point weapon groups effectively rather than penalising bad weapons by grouping them with good options.
TBH I’d prefer flexible squad sizes return rather than paying for wargear, because not being able to fit a squad + leader into a transport bothers me more than costed wargear. Also, it’s been nearly 2 years since wargear became free and the squad points costs have been balanced accordingly, so to suddenly go back to costed wargear could mess up the squad costs and ruin the balance. A lot of wargear was over-priced in 9e because they were rounded up to 5 or 10 points, when a lot of wargear should’ve been 2-3 or 6-8 points. For example, for SM Assault Intercessors, equipping the Sergeant with a Power Fist used to cost 5 points and a Thunder Hammer cost 10 points! Considering the A-Int squad is 75 points (in 10e), which equates to 15 points per model, it’s ridiculous that a Thunder Hammer is 2/3rds the cost of an Intercessor. Most of all, free wargear allows us to assemble our models with the weapons we want, rather than magnetizing arms or buying extra models to match the model’s weapon to its wargear on our army lists.
I would argue that yes, wargear costs SHOULD come back. While I appreciate having a unit that can be customized, either remove the options altogther, saving for the "optimal" loadout, and adjust points cost to reflect BiS, OR add wargear costs to units and make players choose between kitted units, or more bodies.
On one hand, I don't want to do the extra math. On the other hand, without wargear points costs you pretty much have to take the optimal loadouts for each squad or it's a waste of points, which diminishes the versatility of units to the detriment of the game.
I've been wanting a "basic" vs "upgraded" cost since I started playing 10th. As-is they might as well just get rid of options and say that, for example, every Astra Militarum sergeant comes with a plasma pistol and power fist. It's crazy from a lore standpoint for 10% of the entire army to have those, but it would be dumb to take anything else. If it was a basic cost for laspistol and chainsword, and for +10 you could give the sergeant anything you want, that would be a huge improvement. Lore-wise a squad normally has one special and one heavy weapon, so no charge for those.
Split each unit into 'bare' and 'premium'. Bare has no extra wargear and is cheap. Premium has any wargear you want (like it is in 10th). That's the sweet spot between depth and streamline.
Honestly I wouldn’t mind a “Basic” vs “Advanced” approach ala early D&D. Basic has things like free gear/is more accessible to new players like GW is focused on rn, then have an Advanced rule set with more crunch for people who have a handle on the game.
This is such a dumb idea. The whole point is different special weapons need different points costs as some are more powerful than others. Bare units don't need to come back
I don't think wargear costs would be necessary, but GW would have to put in the elbow grease to make it work. Make weapons meaningful tradeoffs. Give some units stripped down version, where you can't take all the fun stuff, but you are cheaper. The space marines look okay, because they were refreshed with this idea in mind, while every other faction is seemingly designed around points.
A couple issues with weapon loadout point costs that occur to me, thinking more on it, are a bit of a Scylla and Charybdis. First, right now, GW already struggles with the workload of updating points on the simplified MFM, and updating to account for how good given wargear choices are, not only in a vacuum, but in the present metagame, seems well beyond them, so they would struggle to make it balanced, which we're starting to expect, since they're doing better on that in 10th than they did in 9th. Then, if they do manage it, it'll likely involve lots of small, granular changes each MFM, which makes things difficult for people trying to put together lists with smaller collections, or just not being as able to stay up to date.
In regards to base vs upgraded units, Corsair Voidreavers and Voidscarred show that Games Workshop should be open to this solution. Definitely would welcome having more options, especially ones that help encourage flavour for the army, tailoring it to be more elite or common, for instance. 10th removing points per model and war gear pricing rather hurt my enthusiasm for the edition.
There's no pro, it's a detriment to the game. The "pro" is that it's more accessible at a steep cost to list construction. It's not *just* the fact that it makes "non-optimal" weapon choices too unattractive, it's that it has informed the primaris line and that's why we get forty intercessor variants with the same bodies. That's a really unhealthy direction for things to take. The other negative is that they half-measured instead of making a radical choice. If they want the game to be casual, then make it casual. That means no more points, going back to detachments and having just a number of units you can pick. You just make unit size equivalents, so 5 intercessors are the standards and instead you can pick 8 assault intercessors or 4 infiltrators. For an elite slot you can have 3 aggressors, 4 terminators or 5 bladeguard. For a heavy choice you can have 1 tank, or have a big tank like a repulsor/land raider take up two slots. Note that I'm not actually equating these things, I'm using them as examples. Yes, I understand the box sets of 3/5/10 won't make sense anymore then, but honestly who gives a... The point is that GW should've gone casual if they wanted to go casual and make a better game out of it and then keep a separate competitive 'grown up' game with the old points and only 1 big point adjustment per year with errata or FAQs to address outright broken things. This half-measure we have now, which is power level 2.0 is just bad.
I don’t think they need to go all the way back for wargear points (although I wouldn’t mind). Locked squad sizes HAS to go however. I think some things could remain free. Tactical squads for example could have two special weapons free, and then +5 points to swap in any of the heavy weapons. Something like that.
Yes but also no. I said this in the poll but, wargear should not have a cost just for the sake of having a cost. Lots of stuff doesnt apprechiably improve a unit, or is so circumstantial as to not truly matter. A powerfist on an intersessor sergeant? Sure I'll pay 5 points. A power sword? Not a chance. It also doesnt make sense in many cases where a squad might show up without it's extra weapons, tactical marines and battle sisters with no special weapons simly doesnt make sense. I am fully aware that players can be "fluffy" in their choices, but I think these kinds of things should be factored into units from the get-go. For example, a battle sister squad should get most of the wargear for free, with some extra costs involved in the best options, a free heavy bolter factored into the unit price with the option to pay for multi melta, free weapons on the squad leader. Yes, on a scale of "what would it cost at costco" a Flamer is more expensive than a Bolter, I just think that that's a very bad mode of thought for game balance.
Upgrade "tiers", max 3 including vanilla, would enough. This can vary from weapons, more weapons, ability/psychic upgrades etc, and limit to unit sizes where appropriate. For example, +20 to take special weapons on Devastators, +40 for heavy, or have mid tier for weak weapons like flamer and heavy bolter, high tier for plasma and lascannons.
I didn't start playing until 10th but I wouldn't mind if some wargear had point costs. Like space marine sargents pistol options, always take a plasma is the standard, so make a heavy bolt pistol a little cheaper, like 5 points vs 10 for the plasma. This would require reevaluating the points system game wide and cause some point "inflation". That way the math works and old people can say "back in my day i could get 5 intercessors for 80 points now 80 points will only get me enhancement"
The only reason 9th was playable IMO with custom wargear was because of Battlescribe. I honestly don't think I would have kept up with or cared about balanced weapons without it.
As a fairly new player I have a lot of second hand units and I am grateful that I don't have to bother about the loadout too much. I don't want to buy all the other bits seperatly. I like the idea of squeezing every single point into a list but having to roll 4 or 5 different weapon profiles for one unit would take me forever 😅
thats actually more an issue with built in wargear then with costs dude your paying for those 4-5 different weapon options regardless if you take them or not, their price is built into the unit if you like your simplier units, you actually PREFER wargear costs, cos then your not paying for the guns you didnt want to take
I think I want the effect of Wargear attached to characters/lieutenants, rather than the whole squad. It's a fixed set of options, denoted by that one model rather than expecting WYSIWYG for the whole unit.
I would be fine with some units paying more for certain units. Like elite units get it free and low cost units have to pay. Like scions vs just a unit of guard. Or simply have a base cost tax. Like if you take basic weapons it's x points. But for only 5 or 10 pts more it unlocks the special wargear? Have it be a flat cost(minimal) for the whole squad vs for each weapon.
The only way free wargear can be a positive is if they manage to make equally viable each and every wargear option on a model. Consolidating options feels bad, as an Admech player, and bringing back wargear costs *cannot* be that difficult. Alternative bandaid solution is always just to split datasheets.
I would actually take it a step further and have different points for divergent chapters for example dark angels using outriders, obviously should be more effective by either giving them the 5++ save or giving them some portion of their old data sheets from ninth edition when they had extra attacks with their chains swords when they charged. In my opinion, this is what’s holding back workshop from making changes that would universally affect every single chapter and it also we deuces the design space when purchasing a divergence chapters supplement
