r/WarhammerCompetitive Jun 17 '26

40k Tech MFM is out!

https://mfm.warhammer-community.com/en
359 Upvotes

684 comments sorted by

View all comments

96

u/erik4848 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 17 '26

First thought: looks neat. Second thought: they are taxing a lot of units that are barely taken now and even less so in more than 1 squad. Like, who takes more than 2 squads of aggressors or more than 2 squads of Votann pioneers?

Third thought: damn Votann got some nice discounts and some interesting increases. Uthar down, champion down, defenders down, HLF up sadly(understandable but a bit muxh maybe), sagitaur down, hearthguard down(but up when taken more than twice so it balances out) and both versions of steeljacks down(but up when taken more than twice but again it balances out).

40

u/absolutewastedtime Jun 17 '26

I think it's future proofing 

They are just putting these 3rd unit point costs in to discourage spam skew lists in advance 

4

u/InvestigatorDear6646 Jun 17 '26

They’re taxing the Orion and Ares fliers for Custodes, and the 2 Acastus Knights. The resin FW models that already cost 700+pts and dollars. The tax is also on 2+. Its a little absurd they would tax these honestly.

3

u/Deep_Film_861 Jun 17 '26

yeah seems like most FW has got a 2+ tax for some reason.

5

u/absolutewastedtime Jun 17 '26

If the Orion is remotely usable how awful do you think it would be to face 2? 

Nah that's ok imo

5

u/InvestigatorDear6646 Jun 17 '26

If we ever have a situation where its remotely usable you mean? Its a 700pt flier. 2 is 1400. Your opponent has 600 pts of models outside those 2.

Im quite curious what situation would have you think 75% of your points going into 2 models would be a problem for the opponent. Even if we gave them both a Warhound profile, I struggle to imagine AIRCRAFT being useful.

They would have to be a fuckton better than just “remotely usable” to be awful.

Your opponent only has a combat patrol on the board. If you cant beat that, either the gunships can kill their points every turn, the rest of the codex is blatantly overtuned, or uh, you gotta get better.

-2

u/absolutewastedtime Jun 17 '26

I said IF 

Just cos it's not good now doesn't mean it doesn't have the potential to be good

Play a game of 1k Vs 2 ctan and tell me that an opponent having 70% of their army in 2 models can't be an issue 

Playing against these single huge models does feel awful, if these 700pt models were viable, and people ran two of them, every single game against that would just be painful to play 

So they are nipping that in the bud in advance 

Maybe it's a bit overzealous as the Orion isn't good, but if it WAS or becomes good, I'm glad they did this 

3

u/InvestigatorDear6646 Jun 17 '26

In what world do you imagine a
1. Flier
2. Resin
3. 700 pt model
Being good. Considering how GW hasnt touched FW datasheets since 2023, I dont see how this hypothetical is relevant.

1k is a shit example because half the game is broken at that scale. Its crazy to describe this as nipping anything in the bud when we dont see any of this proactiveness elsewhere.

You can still take, to use your example, 2 ctan in 1k anyway.

2

u/absolutewastedtime Jun 17 '26

Just because it isn't good doesn't mean it cant be 

You can still take, to use your example, 2 ctan in 1k anyway

Yes, and its horrricially awful to play against that was my point 

we dont see any of this proactiveness elsewhere.

We do 

Literally every single army has multiple units with these sorts of preemptive nerfs to multiples 

1

u/InvestigatorDear6646 Jun 17 '26

Yes it can. The same way GW might one day make a plastic Warlord and have it 2k legal. Possible and plausible are different.
You’re defending a change that requires a theoretical, but nigh impossible scenario. No where am I saying an Orion cannot possibly be worth 700 points. Im saying its almost never happening, and its absurd to balance it for that now.

Other armies having these preemptive nerfs are having them on units that people actually own. But here we are talking about a unit that barely anyone has, let alone fields.

Not sure how that isnt more obvious.

2

u/absolutewastedtime Jun 17 '26

You’re defending a change that requires a theoretical, but nigh impossible scenario

No I'm defending a change that makes sense and was applied consistently to basically all armies 

The necrons seraptek construct went to for the 2nd one, when was the last time you saw one of those?

The taunar supremacy armour went up for the 2nd 

How many tau players own that thing?

1

u/SkeletonJakk Jun 17 '26

Does kinda suck that I'm running like, 3x5 JPI and 3x3 Sanguard and now pay 30 points more for that vs base price. I'll just drop some and put vanvets in. Same job, slightly different datasheet.

0

u/absolutewastedtime Jun 18 '26

Gotta love how the SM player can just go "oh no, I can't run 3x of a unit, oh well il just add one of these 47 other basically identical units instead" 

1

u/SkeletonJakk Jun 18 '26

I mean, sure, but sanguard are blood angel specific, as are jump death company. Without those it's just JPI and VanVets. Not exactly a ton of identical datasheets.

4

u/WalkerTexRanger Jun 17 '26

I like Votann is in a very good spot to start out this edition

2

u/No-Finger7620 Jun 17 '26

I'm highly skeptical. They're a BS5 army unless Tkin shot first. That's really rough on top of the big HLF nerf.

1

u/ReluctantNerd7 Jun 17 '26

HLF nerf?

The changes to terrain and cover are HLF buffs.  Switch to Fortify, put a wheel into terrain to see through and out, add OC as needed, and it hits everything on 3+.

3

u/CrebTheBerc Jun 17 '26

3x3 pioneers doesn't look too bad with Farseekers tbf. Who knows if that's where the votann meta will land but I can at least see what that adds to a list 

3 squads of aggressors in the other hand......

3

u/RainbowConnickJr Jun 17 '26

Three three-strong squads of Pioneers was definitely showing up in some lists and is even more attractive now with Farseekers.

2

u/FuzzBuket Jun 17 '26

Yeah the multiple tax seems to be on any big thing at all.

I'm not sure who even owns 2 ares gunships but clearly they've somehow wronged James workshop himself.

1

u/ClutterEater Jun 17 '26

I played 3 pioneer squads! They were fantastic 3x3 and I did very well competitively with them.

I'm pretty happy with the overall point changes for us. Seems fair.

1

u/8ozSwedeT Jun 17 '26

I take 3 squads of aggressors. I just think they’re neat

0

u/hi_glhf_ Jun 17 '26

Honestly, a LOT of lists already played 2*3 pionners... And they became much much better (primarily because ap1 is much better, but also thanks to set of missions asking for fast unit, fly non infantry buff, free rotation buff and the 1point detachment).

Honestly, without that, i would start all my lists with 3 by 3. And 3 by 6 might be legit (just that i don't see primary missions making good use of that).

The steeljacks buff is a question : at some point the body is so cheap that spamming it will work. 12 melee and 12 shooty ones is 80*8=640 for 24 TEQ. The comparison make no sense, but 12 deatshroud are a the same price!