Ranking Every Warhammer 40K Faction's ARTILLERY Units

[@auspextactics]

MAJOR CORRECTION PLEASE READ - Sorry looks like I really messed up the numbers on the Field Ordnance batteries. I wound up calculating them as if they had three batteries, not two (which explains why I had their numbers so high). Per 100pts they should be 4.4 against the cultists (2nd place to HWS), 2.3 against Intercessors (just 2nd to D-Cannons, though obliterators + purgation squads also beat them) and 0.9 against the vehicle target. Apologies for the error there, I know they come in twos, it was probably just because I'd done the numbers for the Heavy Weapon Squad just before!

[@jonathanko5471]

i'm both happy and sad you didnt cover the anvil siegeforce combo with the indirect options, oath + sustain critical 5's on desolation marines destroys like 12 cultists on average WITHOUT blast, destroys 4 marines with a single bast bonus, and destroys a little more than 5 scouts. Whirlwinds do very similar damage to these profiles, with noticeably less damage into cultists due to heavier reliance on quality over quantity. Anyways, I'm happy you didnt share my secret sauce, but sad it didnt make it into the video.

[@abortizzzz]

We forgive you

[@ChristianVonCarmian40kVtuber]

Exorcist is 10/10 because it is a battle organ. The other artillery units don't even come close to representing Church Warfare

[@vxicepickxv]

I may take this as a challenge.

[@lyra_sen3482]

Style wise got give to the sisters, a battle organ is cool as hell

[@lukel1111]

I was waiting to see this comment from you Christian!

[@hootie1883]

The Exorcist was one of the reasons I started a sisters army. I love that model. (I painted the piano keys on mine. :) )

[@kevlonk]

If only it wasnt so damn expensive..

[@hootie1883]

The funniest part of this whole video is the fact that Imperial Guard takes up a full third of the discussion among a couple dozen armies.

[@1812madjack]

And then there's the Orks who have one buggy, and it sucks.

[@quincykunz3481]

And currently they're barely usable. Which is better than most people's indirect, but still. It's tough because arty spam or plane spam is awful, but when that's a third of your model range? It stings that they are kept from being good, or even ok.

[@hootie1883]

@@quincykunz3481 No offense, but arty spam is not fun to play against at all. Getting hit on 2+s by arty with cover removed is terrible.

[@quincykunz3481]

@@hootie1883 Agree completely. That's what I meant when I called it awful, but I can tell I didn't word it clearly. It just sucks to have a massive chunk of a massive faction dedicated to a playstyle that is boring, toxic, and weak. There's gotta be a better way of balancing aircraft and indirect. Maybe make a core strat that removes penalties for firing indirectly for one unit, or maybe you buff their efficiency, but make it so a unit cannot fire indirectly two turns in a row, encouraging them to shoot directly more often. Aircraft... Don't belong in the game. They're super cool but they just don't make sense at 40k's scale. Forget melee, there is no realistic reason for them to ever even be shootable by most weapons. If I wanted to balance them, I'd throw realism out the window, let them jump off the board at the start of the movement phase and deepstrike back in at the end. They can leave engagement at no cost, but if they're ever below half while engaged or ever complete a charge-move they violently auto-explode.

[@stevenschnepp576]

@@quincykunz3481 CAS doesn't belong in the scale that includes the highest commanding officers of the military?

[@brodywood6274]

I know everyone wants you to sleep, but you are like a stone pillar holding my information on this game afloat. Thank you

[@bram8731]

Real. Every update is through auspex. Some rules I've learned through auspex. Most new model releases I've learned through auspex. Auspex the goat

[@AriousArchaic]

So true, the greatest sacrifice 🙌

[@Majere613]

The problem with Artillery is GW have surgically removed all the old rules that used to make them balanced. Back when they used Blast templates they always scattered, so you could only rely on the shells landing in the right general area, couldn't fire them near your own units (unless you didn't care) and were very unlikely to hit small skirmish units. They also removed minimum range on indirect, which for big guns like the Basilisk was quite a long way and meant they generally could only hit the mid-board with direct fire. That certainly could, and probably should, come back. The Exorcist is terrible. Over 200 points for a model that is fully capable of doing sod-all for an entire game, as I saw it do on multiple occasions before it even got nerfed. The profile looks scary, but between cover and AoC equivalents in the rare situation where it might do something game-changing it's quite easy to shut its damage down almost completely. I'd far prefer the thing to lose indirect altogether and just become the Sisters' main anti-tank unit like it used to be.

[@vxicepickxv]

The trick to using an exorcist is to give up on indirect fire after turn 2. Treat it like a direct fire tank after that. It actually works quite well when you treat it like a regular tank.

[@Majere613]

@vxicepickxv Oh, I largely agree. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the weapon especially if you team it up with an Immolator and a Castigator. The problem then though is the 70 or so point tax you're paying for indirect which probably didn't do anything much to begin with.

[@kylemartin7871]

Also IIRC they typically had minimum ranges as well (not all of them did though). So if you could close in on them your units were safe, which makes sense for weapons that shoot in arcs.

[@evangelosvasiliades1204]

Yep, absolutely this. The change away from blast markers in general made sense and was a good change, but the one who took it worse was absolutely indirect fire.

[@curioushybrid]

But then every unit-to-unit interaction wouldn't be the exact same attack sequence with slightly different numbers!

[@Krispy_Alfonce]

I'll stand by my crack theory that the desolations squad being broken at the start of 10th was less about GW not taking indirect fire seriously and more them just trying to inflate the sales of a bad selling kit.

[@frostedbutts4340]

Doubt it. Otherwise it wouldn't have taken them 5 freaking years to make Reivers playable lmao

[@vxicepickxv]

The problem is they gave those weapons to the wrong army. Those are ork weapons.

[@cica5978]

In theory Artillery should be balanced against units hiding by "awareness", like the Grey Knight Purgation Squad. It doesn't make sense for artillery to fire at something your army doesn't know is there. Movement takes place before shooting, so in theory you could set it up so that for artillery to fire, a unit in your army needs to be able to draw LOS (at either infinite or a set range) to that unit. The idea being that a spotter could run up, exposing themselves but seeing an enemy, then they "call in fire support" and the artillery can fire on the seen unit. This would also give over watch the opportunity to stop a spotting unit. Armies like the T'au or Guard (Gue'vesa?❤ ) could use Vox or Markerlights or dedicated spotters to give a bonus to artillery, and you could let Artillery fire on a terrain feature (a building for example) to hit units using it for cover, but with those units obviously having a large cover bonus (so artillery still has a use without spotters but is a lot weaker). I think a system like this would make artillery fun to play and play against since it would put a focus on positioning and counterplay.

[@Caranelen]

Problem with indirect fire for balance purposes is that it's simply not fun to play against artillery heavy lists. You just get hammered all game long by something which depending on screening and positioning, you might never get the chance to reach.

[@Michaelkayslay]

Yeah.. Isn't that the point.....

[@Caranelen]

@@Michaelkayslay Yes, but I'd argue that something which is just a massive frustration for the other player isn't quite the purpose of a game either. If I come out of a game annoyed at having played against a list I couldn't interact with, I won't want to play against another such list.

[@marauder340]

Honestly, artillery and aircraft should never have been made part of the game models-wise outside of epic or apoc games. The fact that ground troops can barely interact with them is the point and that makes sense from a purely wargaming perspective, but it IS understandable that it leads to negative play experience. The new Guard detachment rules on artillery make sense or the artillery rules of Bolt Action where it isn't always there but present a chance to have an impact instead of hard skewing the game.

[@mosselliadelt]

Heres the thing with at least guard artillery. Theyre fragile and cant move much. So the counter is deepstrikes and melee. Edit. Not the tanks but the infantry artillery

[@szymonrozanski6938]

Coping. Coping and seething! Dude, artillery exists for a reason. Not everyone has Dreadnoughts for infantry. You got to support your troops.

[@smatting2627]

Want to make indirect fire better? Bring back the pie plates and the scatter dice. (Keep the guessing part away from the game!).

[@reginlief1]

Two of my armies, Votann and Necrons, are missing this rule really. I feel like Votann should have an artillery emplacement. And just imagine a necron indirect fire that’s like shooting bolts of gauss fire into the air that homes in on enemies below, or a weapon that calls bolts of deathly living lightning down from the sky. Imotekh can do it why not anyone else!

[@Bobby3OOO]

The Necrons need a big harsh nerf. They’re absurd. It’s baffling. Who are they sleeping with? Who are they blackmailing?

[@TJ11692]

​@@Bobby3OOO The C'Tan

[@TheSkinBlog5270]

@@Bobby3OOO honestly lad there’s a few changes and it’ll balance quickly 😂 give the silent king the mounted keyword instead of vehicle keyword and add 20 points do doomsday arks and I’ll be surprised if we’re not in the 48-52% win rate mark. Although not counting me in this.. I’ve only won 2/14 games I’ve played with starshatter 😂 that’s with not bringing 3 DDA and the silent king though.

[@AllAboutParker]

Still holding onto my Whirlwinds.

[@smatting2627]

Chaos daemons also have the Nurgle Soul Grinder. Phlegm Bombardment. 36”, blast d6+1, S7, Ap -1, D2, lethal hits.

[@DaneInTheUS]

So excited to see the Necron artillery!

[@timfarrow1545]

The silent king and tesseract vaults i think

[@timfarrow1545]

Staff of falling stars was indirect.

[@kdhlkjhdlk]

FOBs come in pairs for 100 points, not threes.

[@auspextactics]

Urgh I'm dumb! I do know that really, I think I made the error because I'd just done the numbers on the three man heavy weapon squad... Apologies for the error, that is a pretty painful one as it affects the final standings. Will post a pinned correction comment above!

[@EmperorZanan]

​@auspextactics i just look forward to you comparing the new krieg artillery(and heavy weapons) in a few weeks when the codex drops.

[@tylerdenneson7320]

These are your best kinds of vids. Thanks again for all your content.

[@illiaboiko7354]

Field Ordnance comes in groups of 2, not 3

[@thedongermcgee5591]

The deathstrike deserves to be bumped up 2 points just because it is cool as heck!

[@retroafro1]

I think x3 whirlwinds, with oath of moment, targeting the enemies early pushes is a great way to start a battle for SM and could really force the oppositions tactics

[@Alexisking222]

No Mek Guns for Orks?

[@effindave6909]

Mek Guns don't have access to indirect do they?

[@memese8867]

Im surprised he didn’t mention the lobba

[@DrumBear78]

​@memese8867 same. TBH I forgot the buggy even had that option.

[@sanninjiraiya]

Ive loved the manticore ever since DoW2 came out. Such a great sounding unit and fun to use. I also consider the skyray artillery based on it's rules from ~5 editions ago

[@quandalesquigly]

You forgot the Hunter/Kill Rig for Orks, the Kill Rig is an easy 9/10.

[@dominicnowell6947]

I feel like if they made most indirect fire units require a spotter to shoot normally and otherwise only got on 6s and give the benefit of cover they could be easier to balance while still being useful

[@EwanCareyLive]

only on 6's would mean that in most games with some of them you wouldnt even expect to hit once. Imagine a unit, that you never expect to hit in any game. and that if you hit, you were slightly lucky. They alread provide benefit of cover The spotter is kind of interesting, but it just means adding in more rules. Which is something GW is avoiding. The less rules and fluff to the game, the better. And tbf overall, I entirely agree. Only on 6 without spotter would fix some issues like artillery shooting at your back line thats behind cover. but like, that is kinda artilleries only job? its supposed to chip off units of mele heavy elite armies that are sitting behind cover for mid board controll. Otherwise, shooting heavy armies, which are often T3, what choices do they have? walk up into center board and get whatever unit they put there wiped? They have to walk up to center if they got top of the turn, else they lose the game. So the artillery helps them to prevent the camping.

[@LysimedVenteel]

Hear me out here. But if you randomised indirect fire in some way, you could eliminate a lot of these balance problems. The obvious thing is blast templates and scatter dice - I know, I know, GW wants 40k to be more accessible and to have less complex kit - but you're bringing the miniatures, you may as well bring an extra special D6 and some orange plastic squares. That way, we can have a mechanic that: A) Makes blast weapons actually have a wide blast B) Means it's hard to hit specific units - better represents a barrage of some kind. On the other hand, I do like the idea of guessing where enemy units are. I don't know how to implement it though, without having tokens and taking the models off the board. The challenge is limiting a player who can walk around and see where the models are with the knowledge that the commander in a bunker could have - maybe faster-moving scouting units like sentinels could act as spotters and give you buffs to accuracy. Considering that, GW could remove the cover and -1 to hit, and make profiles more intimidating. Artillery would be less reliable, and harder to use, but you could build around it to get decent results.

[@YoshiSpendiff]

The Deathstrike and the new rolling barrage artillery detachment thing looks interesting - in theory you can slow a bunch of units to stop them getting out of the marker (or forcing them to advance)

[@CComrade]

Love my FOB's Bombasts are excellent for focusing down scoring units

[@Colin-e2w]

Do you think a Blast X style rule could help counter the balance-breaking artillery sniping useage? It'd mimic the way that scatter templates of old favoured targeting larger infantry units but made targeting small units or isolated HQ characters unreliable.

[@IlanMuskat]

Big update needed to the Astra Militarum section with today's codex info.

[@demon1103]

Gotta love that Guard make up 1/4th of the video XD

[@TheSkinBlog5270]

Guard are the new tau with the way they play 😂

[@wesleymiles8756]

The Orks definitely feel like they need a designated "tank" that's somewhere between the Speed Freek buggies and the Battlewagon.

[@thebashar]

Out of curiosity, who here would like to see the return of scatter dice? They added a little chaos to the game, with how they could fall back on your own troops, which I always thought added realism. And they slowed the game down a bit. But they were so much fun.

[@tellable9425]

It should be noted, Innes, one of the best players in the world is taking desolation marines to Nottingham. Definitely not a common pick but top level players are taking them atleast sometimes.

[@tinker1945]

I still like Desos to a degree. It just feels like the indirect is barely even part of their kit anymore, and now they're just primarily anti-tank which also has good chaff clear as well.

[@tellable9425]

@@tinker1945 so his explanation was as you said, the missiles can do decent work and he expects alot of guard, so clearing a unit of catachans blocking out a deepstrike or something was worth the admittedly high price.

[@tinker1945]

@@tellable9425 It's what I like them for. You just can't use them as an indirect unit anymore outside of "I'm not ready to risk them yet."

[@leovaeg]

also player skill can REALLY turn them around, since you have almost unlimited targetting options and that skyrockets the skill ceiling WAAAAY up

[@Paeper_Shredder]

Auspex uploads coincide conveniently with my nightly YT video. Nice.

[@curioushybrid]

If the problem with strong artillery is that it gets spammed, it seems like they could address that problem specifically rather than nerf artillery in general. For example, amend the Indirect Fire weapon ability to say that only one unit per turn can attack a target they can't see, like grenades! No point spamming it and artillery can be individually more interesting as a result. Also opens the door for stratagems/enhancements to allow an extra unit to fire, ignore the usual shooting penalties, etc.

[@acemanmkiii]

Perfect timing for a video to distract my self from wild fires

[@Paeper_Shredder]

Stay safe, cousin. Love from WA.

[@crazyyelir4127]

Necrons also have the Tesseract Vault that has an Indirect Fire Weapon as well.

[@christerprestberg3973]

There is so many creative and cool artillery in the game, I esp love the Night Spinner. Such a shame that they are a nightmare for balance.

[@adamcarey7712]

Never understood the indirect hate. It’s been around forever. I’ve had basilisks since 3rd edition. It also exists in real life and it’s extremely powerful. From the massed cannons of Napoleon, to the millions of shells being dropped in a single weekend in WW1, to the precision fast moving mobile artillery of today. Artillery is the king of the battlefield. They should explore some sort of spotting rule for calling in targets.

[@timfarrow1545]

Try catapults ballistas and treubuchets far older 😝

[@macroglossumstellatarum5932]

No love for the Barbgaunts and their boombox blasters... (First thing I thought of, as I'm so used to seeing the biovore as a mine dispenser that I forgot they can fire normally as well)

[@tfilipow7]

I do love my obliterators. I want more of them! And squads of 4 again.

[@wheekwarrior1406]

And for them to get a kit that isn't monopose.

[@tfilipow7]

@@wheekwarrior1406 YES!

[@joeblogs-y1m]

hammerfall bunker was the perfect excuse to reform sm indirect talk about opportunity lost

[@randomdude4505]

You forgot the airburst fragmentation projector. A weapon so bad in 10th that it should have scored a zero on your 1 to 10 scale.

[@zacharymorris6119]

The battlewagon had the lobba too.

[@zacharymorris6119]

For Orks.

[@anthonyfrost1123]

For the grey knights purgation squad, their incinerators would not be eligible to gain indirect fire, as the last sentence in the indirect fire rule states that torrent weapons can not be indirect fire weapons. That makes sense, I mean come on a torrent weapon is like a stream of harmful particles, I get that they are psykers and all but a stream of particles is only going to forward not up and around and over lol

[@lunettesfumees1312]

*Open a psychic portal gate in your back* "Nothing personnal"

[@Livid72Des]

Yeah I was surprised auspex forgot that ruling.

[@patrickbaillargeon7568]

Field ordnance batteries don't get 3x blast? Is there special rule ulcer requires an order and being stationary

[@kylemartin7871]

Just a daily reminder that Agents should have Orbital Bombardment and it is criminal that they don't.

[@ArkChanneltrue]

This is so strange, a faction totally focused on shooting like Tau, having only SMS... And no more artillery

[@yaboi69420]

I wish the Hammerfall bunker had indirect. It looks like everything else that does.

[@Louiscypher93]

Grey Knights mentioned!

[@Steampunkdz]

The skull cannon for chaos Daemons should be included

[@danjones3012]

Tesseract vault is more of an artillery piece with its indirect fire d6+3 st10 ap3 dmg3 blast+dev ctan power than the king

[@lazerbeamhawkins]

I came here to post the exact same thing! TV is definitely more of an artillery unit over TSK

[@udunaixx6444]

Regarding SM Whirlwind, now with the new OoM rule and Storm of Fire+adaptive strategy strats (maybe one of them for free from Roboute)in Gladius, this can hurt quite a lot some backfield enemy units on OBJ. Then, it needs to take the BS test.

[@bestnameever1850]

given that slow grinding attrition warfare is kinda necron's whole thing its a bit odd they have no artilery

[@christophertidwell2422]

Here at csm incorporated we belive in real fights look your enemy in the eye when your forgefiend rolls 5 6s to wound.

[@jbutfc]

Basilisks are so annoying. I was playing my full gravis IF against guard and the basilisks just cut my legs out from under me in regards to movement.

[@biscutboi]

I forgot about the desolation squad (evidently so did games workshop)

[@angelaraiel]

I know alot of people are gonna bring up templates but omg if they come back without a serious rework id stop playing. (For reference i used to play artillery guard). The sheer number of times i had to deal with parallax errors with scatter direction, the time it took for opponents to deploy at max coherency for every single unit, sniping wheb swapping to durect fire or with the BS reduction ti scatter range. Then barrage rules for multiple blasts too. Sure i couldnt guarantee a direct hit with the first template from the squad, but rolling hits on the second and third shots would let me make up for that plenty.

[@angelaraiel]

Inb4 there were things you could do to prevent parallax errors (eg roll dice near target) Yes, but the problem was people didn't consistently do them in the heat of the moment.

[@SpamRage]

So the purgation squad made the cut, but not the ironstorm misslepod from ik?

[@parko246]

Going to be absolutely criminal if the new box set artillery is just as useless as everything else.

[@Deoxsen]

Wouldn’t a Gunwagon have some artillery power if its got the big guns on top of

[@jeremiegartner464]

I wish gw would stagger the cost for multiple units on the ones people spam so I can take 1 instead of 3 or none.

[@AriousArchaic]

Rip plague burst crawlers, tough vehicle but thats about all it has for its points

[@FlourEater]

wait what... no Exocrine for Tyranids? the literall artillery cannon monster? Which is pretty much in 3 copies in every list?

[@banjoboy1223]

artillery is a good example of why warhammer, like commander in magic, requires a level of assumed good faith on all sides to be fun. No fun facing ultra optimized artillery if youre not built for it, same way a super lockdown/combo deck ruins the whole pod if no one is prepared for it

[@LordCrate-du8zm]

Ugh, tell me about it. I have a friend who has the most horrifically optimized Commander deck ever.

[@RushGamma]

~cries in space dwarf~

[@samuelelliot6156]

Squigbuggy for Orks? What about mek gunz?

[@Averlest162]

But Auspex what about the Votann arty we may only have 7 unique data sheets but one of them has a mortar XD

[@QisforQadim]

The indirect fire rules for 40k feel like a slapshod band-aid. Like to run indirect fire and have some element of fairness, more complex line of sight and communications rules would be needed. But GW is like 'fuggit, we need to keep the game ass simple.'

[@ishitrealbad3039]

isn't CSMs artillery the vindicator?

[@tbone11x]

I miss my sicaran arcus

[@Argumemnon]

No mention of big knight crappy indirect shooting.

[@keyanklupacs6333]

Shame a large chunk of players hang on the words of a handful of competitive youtubers spouting hyperbolic nonsense so loudly as to effect the actual balance these of units to wind up almost as bad as planes.

[@AK47_ASH]

votann player: whats this?

[@taffyadam6031]

No barbgaunts??

[@sasinator6918]

Artillery along with flyers and fortifications just feels weak. GW should make them all stronger.

[@Nook772]

Hard to keep the game fun and these units good too

[@sasinator6918]

@ yh true it is tricky but games workshop should be doing better with their game design. But having said that balance between lore/coolness vs game design is really toughZ

[@cleeiii357]

Blame those who complained that they were too good in the previous editions. Making GW overcorrect and made them weaker than balanced as a result.

[@Gwaeddwynn]

It's a similar problem to the world of warships debate (hear me out on this one)... Submarines and aircraft carriers have certainly shaped the world of real world naval warfare in a way that made classical battleships almost (or maybe not almost) obsolete... but their inclusion still brought a lot of balancing problems. Same goes for WH40k and the things you listed (except fortifications, they just don't have a good use and are overcosted). Artillery and flyers are the pieces of equipment that changed real world land warfare a lot because they are oppressive and devastating. There is a reason why we don't charge enemy lines swinging swords and axes. It's a fine balancing act to have units that have these rolls available to their respective armies without outright breaking the game, especially since their main selling point is that they don't adhere to really basic rules. It's a bit like a Thousand Sons army who also plainly doesnt adhere to a good amount of basic rules and pay for that privilege (similar to some extent for Genestealer Cults).

[@marauder340]

I would like it to go the way of indirect fire, artillery, or air support from Bolt Action and use the models as representative of the rule when resolving the effect/s. Or akin to the artillery rule of the new Guard siege detachment. Having them as a spammable unit is asking for trouble. Fortifications really could be more useful in limited quantities since they already call for quite a heavy points investment. Hammerfall Bunkers should have been lore accurate and could be deployed like Drop Pods but here we are. People shouldn't feel punished by having their unique fortifications and just curb the spam so that they can be made good without breaking the game.

[@vidarthorsby2052]

No imperial Knights?

[@memese8867]

No battlewagon lobba?

[@Trazynn]

So tired of GW sabotaging the Wyvern. It's such a beautiful model.

[@FireHazard007]

Skip day 7. Do you actually have an army? I want to see it.

[@brentherring9940]

Poor imperial knights not getting anything :(

[@KODarakor]

Average obliterator W

[@simonbas6]

The smart missiles are usable on tau vehicles because you take them so you can mark a target with FtGG from cover

[@zdron07]

Dwarf tears

[@Trinine9]

The night spinner is not even close to the exorcist and yet still cost the same points all cuz crybabies

[@stevenschnepp576]

The game really lost something when it gave up templates and scatter dice.

[@Gheydragon]

Dark Eldar Scourges Disliked That

[@GeneralMarbles]

You know, its fair to say indirects can have outsized impacts, and a game where lots of them are really good AT KILLING THINGS would be a boring game. Shooting is hard enough to balance as it is. Id be ok with just accepting they are hard to balance and letting GW point cost them into oblivion. If that wasnt ALSO there approach to Flyers. And Fortifications. And super heavies. And Recursion/hordes.... Dous GW like any of the models they make that arnt tanks or elite infantry? IMO a huge contributor to the mediocrity of 10th edition is how every unit is judged by how well it kills infantry or vehicles. There are no other (damage dealer) jobs because they rarely bother writing dataslates with answers to any of the above dataslates, because their brilliant BILLION dollar company idea is to just pretend every model THAT THEY SELL that isnt a tank/monster or infantry dousnt exist. Any see use +50 points immedietly. Its baffling how out of control the "points cost X unit class out of the game" approach has gotten. I have slight hope for the future of artillery for 11th as in the new Gaurd artillery regiment we see them actually trying something new with artillery. A new way to deliver on the fantasy of an artillery focused army without making the opposing player watch their key units evaporate behind cover. And its by making artillery debuff focused instead of damage focused. I also think another reasonable approach would be making indirect artillery damage heavily skewed toward hordebreaking, or giving it the ability to "splash" multile units if they are close together. This could give them specific jobs, deliver on the fantasy, and still prevent an artillery list from just sniping your key hero's/vehicles. Chaff are rarely something you desperetly NEED to enable your stragety. And honestly if they are good at killing the cheap action/points monkeys people like to use to hold points, GOOD. Actions monkeys are correct to take in most serious lists and you will always take the cheapest available option. I dont think it would be bad design to have people consider spending more points on their action monkeys IF artillery is a concern. Thats just better overall design.

[@hahaureadmyname]

rip world eaters

[@Michael-d9l6u]

I opened this video just to see what our options are. Exactly what I thought, nothing.

[@Paeper_Shredder]

What's a shooting phase?

[@giuseppeverdi4147]

Video like this make Guard shine as a parking lot army 😂, worst static gunline to play against 🤮🤮🤮

[@dominicl5862]

boom

[@charybdis1618033]

Poorhammer wants their gimmick back. This is far too informative and helpful, and involves far too little grade-school anger.

[@Damnedlegion40k]

Add a comment...😢

[@joshuaginn792]

#bringbacktemplates

[@matjov]

Auspex ignoring Legends units as usual, in spite of them being legal to play in non competitive games.

[@tinker1945]

Legends is fine. But if you're ranking units in a competitive sense, there's no point in including units that can't ever be played in a tournament.

[@matjov]

@tinker1945 but is this a specifically competitive 40K channel? Pretty sure the vast majority of players don't participate in tournaments and Legends are perfectly legal in matched play.

[@editor2766]

@@matjov Yes, it pretty much is.

[@matjov]

@@editor2766 even if it is, it's not a tournament specific channel. And as they're matched play legal, can't see the problem.

[@Mr.Anderson824]

no views in 24 seconds? Youve really fell off.

[@eugenebelford9087]

Summing up: While in lore even small fleets can exterminate entire planets and small squads can lay waste on thousands with bolter or shuriken drills, but on the tabletop a supposedly hallowed toothpick wielded by a maniac in melee outdoes thousands of years of engineering. 🤦‍♂ One of the reasons why I'm no longer interested to actually play the game. It ultimately all boils down to the stats of 6 rounds of melee dmg.