Talk:The Angry Initiative

Introduction

• Start each of your posts with *

use : when stating a new line. This way * marks that it´s a new users post and we don´t have to get the mess where

we waste half the space because it´s the seventh reply in a reply chain.

If you use a name, which I would appreciate if you did, just post it at the end of your last line.

I will try to regularly minimize discussions to make it clear what is currently being discussed, if I have minimized your post before replying just remove the minimizing code. - AngryPirate

Tips and Suggestions

Just as a general suggestion

• Try not to make new units that cannot be easily converted from existent models. I found it that if' you're making a fandex, it's better to have it so the models for a fandex army could be used in a regular official codex games.

Psychic Powers

Option 1

Exalted Biomancy

0. Iron Arm.... Warp Charge 1

Iron Arm is a blessing that targets the Psyker. Whilst the power is in effect, the Psyker has +3 to his Strength and Toughness and he gains the Smash special rule.

1. Smite/Warp Speed.... Warp Charge 1/1

Smite is a witchfire power with the following profile:

	Range	S	AP	Type
Smite	18"	5	-	Assault 3D6

Warp Speed is a blessing that targets the Psyker. Whilst the power is in effect, the Psyker has +3 to his Initiative and Attacks and he gains the Fleet special rule.

2. Life Leech/Endurance.... Warp Charge 1/2 Life Leech is a witchfire power with the following profile:

	Range	S	AP	Type
Smite	18"	6	2	Assault 4, Leech Essence

Leech Essence: If Life Leech causes at least one unsaved Wound, the Psyker, or one friendly model within 6" of the Psyker, immediately regains a Wound lost earlier in the battle (up to their starting number of Wounds).

Endurance is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, all models in the target unit gain the Feel No Pain and Relentless special rules.

3. Enfeeble/Haemorraghe.... Warp Charge 1/2

Enfeeble is a malediction that targets a single enemy unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, the target unit suffers a -2 penalty to Strength and a -1 penalty to Toughness, and treats all terrain (even open ground) as difficult terrain.

Haemorraghe is a focussed witchfire power with a range of 18". The target must pass two separate Toughness tests or suffer a Wound with no armour or cover saves allowed for each test that was failed. If the target is removed as a casualty, randomly select another model (friend or foe) within 2" of him. That model must pass two separate Toughness tests or suffer a Wound with no armour or cover saves allowed for each test that was failed. If the target is removed as a casualty, continue the process of selecting another model and taking a two seperate Toughness test until a either a model survives or there are no more suitable targets within range.

Exalted Pyromancy

0. Fiery Form.... Warp Charge 1 Fiery Form is a blessing that targets the Psyker. Whilst the power is in effect, the Psyker gains a 4+ invulnerable save, increases his other invulnerable saving throws by +1 and his close combat attacks have the Soul Blaze special rule. Whilst the power is in effect, the Psyker re-rolls failed To Wound rolls inflicted by any further Pyromancy powers he manifests.

1. Fire Shield/Spontaneous Combustion.... Warp Charge 1/2 Fire Shield is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, the target unit has a 4+ cover save and all enemy units treat all terrain within 6" of the target as Dangerous Terrain (even open ground).

Spontaneous Combustion is a focussed witchfire power with a range of 18". The target model suffers a Strength 8 AP3 hit with the Soul Blaze special rule. If the model is slain by this hit in the Psychic phase, centre the small blast marker over the target before removing him as a casualty. All other models under the marker suffer a Strength 5 AP4 hit with the Ignores Cover and Soul Blaze special rules.

2. Flame Breath/Molten Beam.... Warp Charge 1/2 Flame Breath is a witchfire power with the following profile:

	Range	S	AP	Type
Flame Breath	Template	5	4	Assault 1, Torrent, Soul Blaze

Molten Beam is a beam power with the following profile:

	Range	S	AP	Type
Molten Beam	12"	8	1	Assault 1, Melta

3. Inferno/Sunburst.... Warp Charge 2/3 Inferno is a witchfire power with the following profile:

	Range	S	AP	Type
Inferno	30"	4	5	Assault 2, Ignores Cover, Large Blast, Soul Blaze

Sunburst is a nova power power with the following profile.

	Range	S	AP	Type
Sunburst	18"	4	5	Rapid Fire, Ignores Cover, Large Blast, Soul Blaze

Discussions

Wargear

Shotguns

• Does anybody have any ideas on how to improve the capabilities of the shotgun? What rules I propose are:

- Increasing the range to 18". Real-life Shotguns have more range than pistols. 

- BS2 Snap Shots & Overwatch. This gives the shotgun a more defensive/support nature. Also it displays the scatter nature of the shotgun.

- Being able to use shotguns as both Assault & Pistols. There are shotguns that can be shot with one hand. 

What are everyone's opinions? Are there more ideas that you can think of?

• I made shotguns and close combat weapons a package deal for SW and CSM feel free to do the same for any other army. This way it works essentially like making them pistols. I also thought about the other options but I don´t really think it is strictly necessary. - Angry Pirate

Missing

• You forgot to mention the status of angry Astra Militarum in the update. Also, is there a reason for why there won't be an angry adepta sororitas or do you just think the /tg/ codex is good enough as it is? Would the angry sororitas codex be: see the /tg/ codex?

• You could add that yourself. I don´t think the /tg/ codex is great, therefore I don´t want to link to it. Anything I link here is something I personally think is great or am committed to making great. SOB are monetarrily expensive beyond any realm of reason and their number of players is probably fairly limited. SOB would also need a large amount of editing to become a cool codex. Then there is the whole Grey Knight incident, making it impossible for me to take them seriously. - Angry Pirate

• Changed my mind, they are on the list, albeit last on the list.

OP/UP lists and/or units

Night Scythe Spam - Angry Necrons

A poster from another forum:

Cryptek

11 warriors - flyer 10 warriors - flyer 10 warriors - flyer 10 warriors - flyer 10 warriors - flyer 10 warriors - flyer

4 wraiths 4 wraiths 4 wraiths

Defence line - comm relay

1844

• You can do almost the same thing in the Calm necron codex with Immortals instead of warriors.

• The change is that Tesla now works on snap shots and are Assault 3 instead of 4, Wraiths also get a 2+ Cover Save because of Shrouded. I´m honestly not sold on the min squads of warriors but it wasn´t me who brought it up.

Immortals and Wraiths w. Transdimensional Beamers

Paraphrasing a post on another message board written in another language: There is no reason to take Necron Warriors over Necron Immortals. Immortals are better at hitting and are far more durable and can still inflict HP on vehicles on 6s whereas Warriors need a 6 followed by a 5+.

Wraiths w. transdimensional beamers and whip coils are OP.

• Yeah, though the angry Necron codex forces you to take two squads of warriors in most detatchments.
• Transdimentional beamers, yeah. Having multiple strenght D shots (even If the 6 result is taken out of the equation) is really strong. Wraithguards also have strenght D weapons however, their guns reach further but the move slower, wraiths have a much lower range but move quicker. So that is a compromise. Wraiths were also nerfed in the angry codex stats wise by losing a wound, making them much more vounerable. And whip coils, eh. 5th edition whip coils were really good, but the codex uses the 7th edition version, so it feels like a fair upgrade.

• Tested them out, didn´t cause a single wound with 6 T beamers, the weapon is a non-template version of the Wraithguards D-flamer. Also it´s AP 3. It´s in no way OP. - Angry Pirate

Test Games

• Could I set up a section for the angry codice Test Games played in my group? To report the battles and which units did what and so on.

• Yes that is what the Have you tried an angry codex section is for! Simply write (check editing for how it to write it out. - Angry Pirate

Codex: Space Marines Angry Spiritual Liege Edition

• In broad strokes, what could be fixed in the Vanilla Marine codex? All I can say for certain is that tactical marines are rarely taken except as a tax, and assault squads are rarely taken outside of the Skyhammer Annihilation Force.--Asorel (talk) 19:04, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

• Nerf grav-gun to salvo 1/2 and cannon to 2/3 , fast vehicle type Land Raiders, make termies T 5, captains WS 7-9 70 pts, chapter master WS 9 I 7-8, artificer armour 30 (40 for Master) pts and terminator armour 40 (50) pts. I think all formations, except the ones provided in the codex, should be banned while not participating in an apocalypse game, this will allow for reducing the cost of assault squads to 11/12 pts/model +2-4 for jump packs. Tacs at 13 pts per model. I don´t think I have disclosed this but my entire balancing system is built around 13 pt tacs with 6+ FNP (Iron Hands chapter tactics). Feel free to create the page. If you feel anything else needs to be added please do so. I am currently working on Daemons. -- Angry Pirate

• The only Spess Mehreen formation not in the codex is the Skyhammer. While powerful, it's markedly less so work with a grav-weaponry nerf, and still has its counters nonetheless. I'll get started on the codex later today.--Asorel (talk) 13:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Terminators

What is the reason behind terminators being Toughness 5? I am just curious why the buff to an already strong unit. Especially considering the plasma nerf. -Un'tan

Terminators are overcosted for what they provide, and, while powerful, don't have very many advantages over other high cost infantry in the Codex, such as biker command squads, Honor Guard, and Centurions. T5 helps alleviate this. Making plasma AP3 is not a change I can say I agree with. It might make sense if Imperial forces other than Astartes had access to grav-weapons, which fulfill the previous TEQ-hunting role of plasma quite neatly.--The Forgefather

At least from My experience I havent found terminators overpriced, a 2+ save is already very durable and powerfist wreck opposition In close combat. Now they might be slightly overcosted, even though in My opinion they aren't, however a Toughness of 5 makes them undercosted. If they really need to be adjusted why not just lower their points value a bit instead? Or at least with toughness 5 as they are now increase their cost a bit. on the subject of that, in the angry anarchist codex, terminators in a thousands sons detachment having a 2+ inv save is kinda ridiculous. -Un'tan

Terminators were really, really weak, at least compared to other options. Are they definitely fair and balanced now? I geuss they are probably a little overpowered now, they are definitely an issue which can overwhelm you if you don´t take any anti-terminator units to deal with them. Plasma was too good against too many things. Most Imperial armies, without access to grav, went for tons of plasma. The most important thing is the fluff of the Terminator suit though, which was designed to operate in plasma generators. The invul certainly isn´t what saves them from the plasma generator because that´s only covering their shoulder, so the only logical answer is the armour is too thick and heat resistant for plasma to damage it. Now you might argue weaponized plasma is different, but ultimately terminator armour was designed to work in a hot envoirment and plasma weaponry are heat based. I want to give all space marines the option of having grav, because why not? As far as the Thousand Sons detachment, I see your point, that wasn´t well thought out. I know Termies got a huge buff but you really ought to look at some army lists, because sadly terminators are lacking in all the lists I have reviewed. Toughness 5 matters very little when we are talking anti-terminator weapons and I think it´s only fair that Terminators can withstand a large amount of anti-personnel firepower.

I actually am going to take up the point that militarized plasma is different from that which would be used in plasma reactors. The imperiums militarized plasma weaponry was designed to be as powerful as possible, so much so that using it has a chance of it overheating. This isn't good or safe design, it is Military design, also design to old to be trifled with. Such unstable plasma would not be suited in a reactor where a large amount of it is created. Plasma can be kept to sustainable levels such as what the reactors would use. Plasma generators also cool down the plasma being made, this is still very high temperatures, but it is just what is heating up the surroundings. A terminator suit would not be litterally surrounded by plasma while working inside of a plasma generator, but it would still be hot enough for them to need those suits to be able to handle the heat just from the plasma being created. The conditions are not simmilar to getting actual plasma at even unsafer levels shot at oneself. Now, terminators might have been overpriced before, not from my personal experience but I do trust in that you have played more Games with them than I have, however with toughness 5 they are above that and in the range of overpriced.

What about just giving them an extra W or -1 S against weapons w/ S5 or lower?

Are you suggesting giving Terminators an extra wound instead of T 5? Is there some kind of problem with T 5?

• To clarify my previous long statement, Terminators being Toughness 5 is fine, but I think they are a bit underpriced at that toughness. A small point increase and they are fine. However I am against Plasma being ap 3, because the fluff reasons given do not make sense and taking away such an option for many armies is not a good Idea. -Un'tan

The reason why I wanted an extra W instead of T5 is balance. If Space Marine Termies get T5, so will the Chaos Terminators. To me, T6 Termies due to Mark of Nurgle is OP.

• Actually that is a good point. T6 terminators is small monsterous creature level. Hmm... But two wounds might actually be a stronger buff than T5. Haven't run the Numbers.

Also, there has been complains that having 1 AC, CML, or HF is not enough firepower. So, how about we have 2 out of every 5 Termies have a CML, AC, or HF?

2 W is far more powerful on Nurgle terminators. Nurgle Terminators are 45 pts/model and are armed with a power sword and bolter with Shred and Rending. SM can get T 5 Termie w. TH SS for 45 pts, I really don´t think there is a problem. Against high strength weaponry Nurgle termies gain little or no bonus from T 6 over T 5. I really don´t see a problem with them being small monstrous creatures, they are 9 feet tall and they weight at least 1 tonne probably more like 2-3 tonnes and that´s before talking about them being blessed by Nurgle.

I am not just taking Termies into consideration. The problem is that there will be someone out there that will field T6 Termies plus T6 Chaos Lord on a Bike due to Mark of Nurgle. Isn't the angry edition supposed to stop the cheese?

Cheese as in meaning imbalance? Yes. Cheese as in fair deathstars? No. That is not the intent. I don´t mind if my opponent brings a deathstar and spends a stupendous amount of points which might be spent better elsewhere. It´s basically impossible to stop people from creating deathstars, it´s just a matter of putting a number of characters into an elite unit. Terminators are a fairly slow unit, they do have Deepstrike but that is a dangerous affair, even more so with a character inside the unit and it makes their earliest possible turn of combat turn 3 and a 1/3 chance of turn 4 or later. All it really takes to take them down is high strength AP 1/2 weapons, which is fairly easy to obtain. If you are playing an official imperial army then you have access to AP 2 plasma wounding on 3+, angry imperium has access to melta which does pretty much the same, although at shorter range. Angry Necrons pay no heed to the difference between T 4 and T 6 termies since rending hits are what really matters anyways. Is there a specific loudout or tactic you would use or do you just think they are generally OP?

I just thought that T6 Termies & T6 Chaos Lord on bike was OP. Especially if they ally with Nurgle Daemons. But, you have made a very good point in regards to countering them.

Balance Guidelines

At several occurences you (Angry-Pirate) mentioned a excel Spreadsheet. Having only a SM squad+Rhino as balance comparision is rather rough... So if it has some more elaborate element would you mind to share it?--Cool3303 (talk) 20:52, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

• I can´t, because there isn´t anything beyond that. I can´t see how it would be possible to elaborate beyond that. But basically if you compare everything to the Angry SM codex it should be fine. - pirate

• Elaborating beyond that? Well let's speak in hypothetical upgrade terms:

Let's assume a GEQ is worth 4~3 points, that being a 3+ Statline with a "Bad" Weapon

You defined that a MEQ is worth 13 points,coming with 4+ Stats,a Decent weapon,Grenades and 3+Save

So if we compare this with other choices of SM and other codices

Assuming an Space Marines upgrade options aren't taxed with it's base cost we have

So if we for example look at Necrons tomb blade shieldvanes and Scout Marines we see +1 Armor is worth ~2pts

That means A Space Marine is worth 13 pts because 5pts(4+Statline)+4(3+Armor)+2(S5 Weapon)+2(Krak&Frag Grenades)+1(Fearless)

This is of course a Idealised calculation since AP3 Weapons are strangely sparse in the Regular Codices.

Necron Warriors: 5pts(4+Stats)+2pts(4+Armor)+4pts(S5gauss)+0,5pts(LD10) Reanimation is 1/3 Chance, so 9,5*1,3 ~12/13pts

Fire Warriors: :3pts (3+Stats)+2pts(4+Armor)+2(S5Weapon)=7pts

Hypothetically this could be broken down indefinitely

Individual Stats are self explanatory,being 1/6 or 1/12 Increases--Cool3303 (talk) 10:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

• Unit costs calcuations are all about multiplication, not addition. An additional wound on an Eldar is obviously worth less than it is on a Terminator.

All you can really do is figure out maximum and minimum point values of a unit and then you have to do playtesting to find out the exact point value a model is most balanced at.

The worth of a Necron Warrior for example can not be found out exactly by a simple calcuation of 13*endurance*dmg*mobility. The endurance of a Necron Warrior varies to a huge degree between different situations.

Situation A: A unit of 10 Necron Warriors take 6 S 6 AP 4 hits, 5 lay down. Then the rest of them are destroyed by 60 lasgun shots. It took roughly 250 pts worth of firepower to do that.

On the other hand if you do 60 bolter shots and fail to finish them off, you´ve spent 800 pts killing 60% of the squad.

• So what is the durability level of a Necron Warrior? Is it 130 pts/model killed or is it 25? Also what exactly is rending worth? On one hand it´s pretty much useless against Guard, it´s awesome against AV 10 vehicles and heavily armoured Infantry and MCs, but if they take cover then it´s effectiveness is once against close to that of a lasgun. So is it a lasgun or is it a melta gun?

It should also be noted that Warriors are armed with quark flayers not actual gauss weaponry.

I did at one point start developing such a system but it would be so extremely time consuming to make it any good, that my time is better spent elsewhere.

On top of all this you have combos which is what truly breaks any possability of using such a "simple" system. A glass cannon for example, will be far more effective in an army that can cast invisibility on it than it would otherwise be. - Pirate

Mathhammer-O-Matic

• Some time ago I constructed (several) scripting prototypes for working out the best guns in the IG arsenal - by taking every possible combination of Toughness + Save and running it against the Str & AP of the guns vs their points to get a point-per-kill value. Unfortunately it wasn't (and still isn't) usable by the general public, but if the value to the angry initiative is worthwhile, i'm happy to either do the work myself in an on-demand basis, or put it together on a VPS for others to do it so as to get a truly comprehensive kill value for everything, potentially in relation to everything else. If not, it'll go on the back burner as I still want a better arms dealer catalogue for IG.

On the subject; sample Mathhammer-O-Matic output for a full squad of angry tactical marines (3+sv,6+fnp) shooting & defending against an assault by another full squad of angry tacs, assuming 10 CC attacks and 10 bolters for the squad

name	pts	AMEq Kills	ppK
Angry Tac, no upgrades Shooting {Rapid Fire}	130	1.852	70
Angry Tac, no upgrades - CC + overwatch {Rapid Fire}	130	1.157	112
Angry Tac, no upgrades - CC + overwatch	130	0.926	140
Angry Tac, no upgrades Shooting	130	0.926	140
Angry Tac, no upgrades - CC + no overwatch	130	0.694	187

PSC Wintergreen (talk) 19:27, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

• There are six possible amounts of armour save, six possible amounts of invulnerable save, seventeen different amounts of Wound values and ten different Toughness values. That comes out to 6120 possible different values. Would you care to explain how and where you have simplified your system in such a way that it is usable? Even if you only take actual profiles you still have at least a hundred unique profiles.

What types of information can I get and how can I use it? What does your program do that a spreadsheet doesn't? If I wanted to know how much a Heavy Weapons Team Squad with mortars should cost vs a Wyvern how does your program perform better than my spreadsheet? Angry Pirate (talk) 20:24, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Edit: I forgot about 15-30 additional Wound values so maybe it's more like 100000-30000. - Pirate

• Easy! What i've done is define an attacker in the following format (as used in the system right now):

name	pts	bs	weapon 1	shots	wpn attributes	str	ap	weapon 2	shots	wpn attributes	str	ap	weapon 3 and so on	shots	wpn attributes	str	ap
IG Vets (lascannon)	80	4	lasgun	7	rapid_fire	3		laspistol	1		3		lascannonvs	1		9	2

Presently this is imported from a .csv ( the weapon str & AP don't have to specified every time as they're saved, but i've gone full pelt here for examples sake). As for the infinite combinations, the only thing that matters is toughness, save, inv and FNP - all of these can be stored in 4 cells under a name (eg 4,3,null,6 for angry marines) which I call defenders. From this defender table any number of additional attributes as applicable can be connected.

For each of these interesting defender entries, the system calculates an attackers weapon outcome (to hit, to wound from a lookup, AP, instant death cancelling FNP if applicable) as a cumulative percentage, then multiplies it by the number of shots. This value is summed with all the other weapons outcomes to create the 'AMEq Kill' value for a median percentage of unsaved wounds. There's already a capacity to automatically do this again with the modified shots for Rapid Fire weapons, and i'll eventually implement salvo weapons too. There's a longer list of examples on my profile page presently for stock IG.

The information produced at present includes points per kill for wounds and armour values. What it offers over a spreadsheet is indefinite expansion without affecting the table structure - for example there's infinite potential weapon attributes (forces instant death on 6+, grav amp, prefered enemy vs eldar), defender attributes ( e.g. subject to preferred enemy(eldar),Necron reanimation), combined weapon profiles (for units allowing a different weapon for each model, but granting a consistent view of their performance) etc.

What's only occurred to me now is that from that format and thanks to the way the data is structured, it would be a trivial issue to compare everything in codex A vs everything in codex B. To take a simple example, the balance of points spent vs points killed for non FW IG vs everything Skitarii.

In the case of HWT mortars vs Wyverns you tell me, have you implemented shred as a 'shred' checkbox or do you have to manually go in and calculate the shred effect? Does it reroll all or can you specify only reroll 6s? can you handle Tesla or Radstorm weapons extra hits? Does your Wyvern entry sum the damage output of its 3 guns against all interesting Toughness/Save/Inv/FNP/wtfever combinations automatically? What did you use as your blast hit/scatter calculation?

If you're serious about heavy duty cost/benefit balancing this would save hours, just at the data entry stage, never mind the presentation stage. I can say this from experience because I originally did it as a spreadsheet, which given the number of weapon calculation variations in the IG armory alone, is more trouble than it's worth.

Now I can appreciate this is a lot of information which is why i'm sounding it out to see what would *make* it more useful to the angry initiative and the broader 40k playerbase. PSC Wintergreen (talk) 21:22, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

• How do I use this information? Let's say unit A has a better kill/pt ratio against unit X than unit B, it doesn't really help me with anything as far as I see it. What about the other factors? Like buffing other units, range, mobility and durability? And you want to not only compare how good unit A and B are at killing X, but also X2, X3... X99, X100. I think it'll be information overload.

Finding out which units are best offensively might be vaguely useful, but I only think that's one brick in a larger puzzle and as I've stated earlier trying to learn everything about the intricacies of this one brick is going to take tens of hours, and even then you won't be any wiser balance wise since there are still three or four more bricks in the puzzle. I think the best idea is to eyeball the price first, then if I or someone thinks the price is fishy we can figure out the maximum and minimum viable price for the unit is and gradually close in on a balanced cost through playtesting and arguementation. Angry Pirate (talk) 08:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

• The single brick is exactly that, it's that specific brick which can be at least relied on instead of having to run the unit through all of the workings every time manually, and perhaps eventually model the other bricks in an automatic manner as well with a summarising combination system. Now if the eyeball&playtest method is what you want to do exclusively, fair enough - the alternate means and mechanism *exists* if/when it's needed, and since it's literally basic programming, it's hardly a major undertaking. I'll still be beavering away at it as a PoC for UI development and so forth should the situation change, and as for cost/benefit for unit Buffs, that's merely something I haven't factored into it yet, not something that's been ignored.PSC Wintergreen (talk) 08:56, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

8th

• ANGRY INITIATIVE FOR 8TH ED? Come on, I know 8th Ed is not perfect, nor is it entirely balanced. Where are the updated versions for these codices? Why hasn't anyone begun to workout how to fix 8th Ed?
• I'm glad you liked the codices I did but I don't think complete rewrites are something I'll do for 8th.

Writing a codex takes 10-50 hours. Then you have the math I did behind the scenes, at first I was calculating how successful units would be against certain other units (Incubi vs Terminators, vs Genestealers, vs Lychguard) so they win with an acceptable % of models left in their squad against things they should win against and take out as many enemy models as they should before perishing in fights they should lose. This takes quite a long time and eventually I just ended up eyeballing things because in the end you're going to have to playtest things a lot to get it truly balanced anyway. I spent at least a thousand hours just on the writing part (I think I did one rewrite per codex on average), then I also spent a couple hundred hours worth of playtesting and a couple hundred hours on math. It's basically a huge effort to rewrite tens of codices, who knew.

The most OP unit in 7th was the Wraith Knight, a LoW unit, this was horrible for the game. Now Titanic units are at least bad, they're often horrible, but horrible is better than OP for Titanic units.

The one problem I do have is that I think Chapter Tactics were a horrible idea because it makes you have to paint different units different colours or be objectively worse so I made the Warhammer 40,000 Stratagem Project for replacing each sub-faction's Chapter Tactic and Stratagem with two new Stratagems. I don't play with these rules though, when I have the option I just play without Chapter Tactics, when my opponent chooses a Chapter Tactic I'll take one as well.

If you play Imperial Knights or Orks there is the Angrier Initiative giving you Stratagems, Relics and Chapter Tactics.

If you don't think the current codicies are balanced (I agree) then I think you should go and make tier list threads on every 40k forum you can find. Put units and items into tiers of needs price increase of 20%, 15%, 10%, 5%, 0%, -5%, -10%, -15%, -20%. Asking for more than 20% price change is a bad idea, yo-yoing back and forth until you balance a unit is not a good idea. Do that for every army then GW will have an easy time finding out what units people have found are UP or OP and can adjust as such. Link to the threads on the 40k Facebook groups to get more people giving their input. Have the initial post be 0%, 0%, 0% and change it to be the average. I did a write-up of what changes I wanted in Necrons units before the codex came out and this doesn't take more than an hour or maybe a couple of hours at worst so this is something you can do if I don't decide to do it myself.

Making a comp system is pretty easy and implementing one for you and your friends is easy as well. Just make an excel document with the points for each unit and a multiplier of 0,80-1,2 in the next column and then when you are making your list you can choose whether to apply the comp or not. You can even make multiple comps and easily choose which one to apply when making your list. One possible comp might be one compiled by your gaming shop, another by you and one of your friend for gaming at home, another by a tournament organizer. All you have to do to find out whether a unit is good in a comp is whether the comp is harder on a unit than your own comp or easier than your own comp. If you think a unit is ,9 but another comp puts it at ,8 then the unit is better than you think it should be.

Here's what I just made for Necrons, it lacks FW but you should get the point: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qaU7X3cErRvvw8gtvvmBLbjhWp3ZusWd9DSiEe9epJI/edit?usp=sharing Angry Pirate (talk) 09:03, 1 May 2018 (UTC)