Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
To kill a Stompa, a single D hit would need two 6s in a row, which is very very unlikely.

I don't know anything about the Khorne thing because everyone agrees it's bad, but touche, I suppose.

The heirophant is also a contender for worst titan-sized model in the game and still needs a 4+ after a 6 to die in one hit.

I still cringe at the idea that these models are allowed in sub 2k games.

Who ever wrote 7th thought apoc should be the standard template for the games, and its just, ugh.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
To kill a Stompa, a single D hit would need two 6s in a row, which is very very unlikely.

I don't know anything about the Khorne thing because everyone agrees it's bad, but touche, I suppose.

The heirophant is also a contender for worst titan-sized model in the game and still needs a 4+ after a 6 to die in one hit.

Well, your original statement was:

I can't think of anything costing over 1000 points that will go down in a single D hit.

We were answering that statement. Not exhaustively either, just with what came to mind.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
To kill a Stompa, a single D hit would need two 6s in a row, which is very very unlikely.

I don't know anything about the Khorne thing because everyone agrees it's bad, but touche, I suppose.

The heirophant is also a contender for worst titan-sized model in the game and still needs a 4+ after a 6 to die in one hit.

I still cringe at the idea that these models are allowed in sub 2k games.

Who ever wrote 7th thought apoc should be the standard template for the games, and its just, ugh.

I mean, I sort of see where you're coming from, but none of the models costing more than 500 points are really worth bringing in a small game. Maaaaybe Magnus could be used in 1850, but aside from him, I don't think there's any real choice that's top-tier in a 2k game. (Knights come in under 500 points for pretty much every build I can think of, maybe some Renegade knights push that a little, but not much.)

Backspacehacker wrote:Honestly remove D form non apoc games.

D was never designed to be seen in game lower then like 4k, where if you lost a squad it was no big deal but in 1850 the fact we have D weapons is just silly.

Str D can be removed when the Super-Heavies are removed.

But I think that is half the point, right?

 Charistoph wrote:

Backspacehacker wrote:Honestly remove D form non apoc games.

D was never designed to be seen in game lower then like 4k, where if you lost a squad it was no big deal but in 1850 the fact we have D weapons is just silly.

Str D can be removed when the Super-Heavies are removed.

But I think that is half the point, right?

I'm actually ok with that imo a very quick way to fix many problems

-remove D from sub 2k games
-remove GMC and Suoer heavies from sub 2k games
-no single unit can consist of 25% of the total armies value not counting transports: IE terminator at 235 are fine in a 1k game even if they take a transport

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
To kill a Stompa, a single D hit would need two 6s in a row, which is very very unlikely.

I don't know anything about the Khorne thing because everyone agrees it's bad, but touche, I suppose.

The heirophant is also a contender for worst titan-sized model in the game and still needs a 4+ after a 6 to die in one hit.

All it needs is to face a couple grav cents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
All in all, d-weapons are not so bad in a regular game, surprisingly. They do marginally more unsaved (unsavable) wounds to regular guyz and noone's taking landraiders anywayz - not cause of d but cause of grav and haywire and bushes that have 1/6 chance to immobilize it.

What i do think is need to be chanced - and by "changed" i mean "reworked significantly" is psy powers. Oh, the mages and wizards of 40k, you are plentiful and annoying as heck. Invisibility, re-roll saves, 1-st turn charges across the map, flying ruins - all this stuff has affected the game way more and in way worse ways than d-weapons.

People in my area have started taking knights simply because of stomps. Their only hope vs magic deathstars. And the game devolves to: if you roll a tactical 5 on the invisivility table, you're golden - now the opponent can only hope for tactical 6-s on the stomp table. Not that it's impossible to play around but...it IS playing around! All your cool and lovingly painted forces are forced to roll around the untouchables, score and wait when they tactically fail at rolling enough dice at invis/save re-rolls. Oh, and too bad if you're bringing something that's not quick enough to roll around - now all you can do is hope for a severe tactical fail (not roll enough dice or roll too many 6-s and than roll bad on perils) on the opponent's part turn 1.

As band-aid patches these are sort of tangential to the issues they're addressing. In detail:

1: Capping Invulnerable saves at 3+ doesn't do much to most of the Daemon builds that take advantage of invul-stacking shenanigans (since they're Daemons of Tzeentch and 3++/reroll 1s is still really hard to do anything to), and the only other thing you're catching this way is a really weird Imperial hammernator/Sanctuary melee deathstar. A better solution might be to make more effects interact with Invulnerable saves; i.e. make Banishment apply to any Invulnerable save rather than just those granted by the Daemon rule and take away the Perils-on-any-doubles effect from Sanctic Daemonology.

2: Invisibility definitely needs to go to set-to-WS/BS1, but it's just the most egregious example of the all-or-nothing nature of psychic powers. If you go all-in on massed psykers you can do a lot with them, if you don't you can't do anything when they come get you. Cap psychic dice spent on a single power, give all psykers a denial bubble as per Psychic Hoods, give the Necrons, Tau, and Dark Eldar some way to interact with the psychic phase (Pariahs, Kroot Shamans, weird anti-psyker tech, that sort of thing), and hard-ban (or rewrite) the Librarius formation and you'll catch out a lot of other abuse alongside the Invisibility nerf.

3: D-weapons exist in the game because of GW's swallow-the-spider-to-catch-the-fly approach to game balance. They're here because there are GMCs/superheavies, if those got capped at one per full 1,500 (so none from 0-1,499, one from 1,500-2,999, etc.) and the bigger ones (full-size Titans, the flyers) got banned in non-Apocalypse games you could almost revert them to 4e (automatic Wound/Penetrating Hit causing Instant Death) without issue. And make the non-superheavy distortion guns high Strength/fleshbane instead of D-strength.

1) I remember 5e Fatecrusher. A 1-9 chance for a wound to be unsaved is an order of magnitude better than a 1-in-36 chance. That, and it caps certain random combos that one could roll up; from a Thousand Sons Daemon Prince rolling on Ectomancy and getting a blessing that becom8es a 3++ (or a 2++ rerollable), to an Impossible Robe Lord of Change with either Cursed Earth or the Tzeentchian Warlord Trait that adds +1 to Invulnerables.
2) Invisibility is still the big one.
3) Fleshbane would be good. But superheavies are still crazy. What about Wraithknights too?

 MagicJuggler wrote:
1) I remember 5e Fatecrusher. A 1-9 chance for a wound to be unsaved is an order of magnitude better than a 1-in-36 chance. That, and it caps certain random combos that one could roll up; from a Thousand Sons Daemon Prince rolling on Ectomancy and getting a blessing that becom8es a 3++ (or a 2++ rerollable), to an Impossible Robe Lord of Change with either Cursed Earth or the Tzeentchian Warlord Trait that adds +1 to Invulnerables.
2) Invisibility is still the big one.
3) Fleshbane would be good. But superheavies are still crazy. What about Wraithknights too?

axe them too. As i said the guy who wrote 40k had a real hard on for Apoc and thought it should be the standard template.

I have said it in other threads, but if you quickly want to fix some of the many issues that plague 40k do the following

-Remove GMC and super heavies from sub 2k games
-Remove D weapons from sub 2k games, if they are D they become S10 AP2
-Change Phyker phase
-Tax formations
-Remove ally matrix
-No single unit in your army may make up 25% of the armies total excluding transport costs, this helps cut back on death stars
-Remove the grav amp, i think inharently grav is fine, but the amp is bullgak, alternative, remove grav all together along with gets hot for plasma to make it viable as an exchange.
-Implement the AoS MC rules, to get weaker as they take wounds, or give vehicles an armor save of some sort.

Removing these addresses the OP formations, the deathstar armies like bikes, and removed the over powered walkers from the game like knights. Also addresses the glaring OP that is grav, and makes vehicles and mech based units not laughable compared to MC.

I disagree on removing the ally matrix. There is a very good reason why it is in, and it is good for both players AND GW.

The best thing for the Ally Matrix is just return it to closer to 6th Edition and have Battle Brothers be Friendly Units you cannot join, Embark, be Embarked on, or cast Blessings on. Simple.

 Charistoph wrote:
I disagree on removing the ally matrix. There is a very good reason why it is in, and it is good for both players AND GW.

The best thing for the Ally Matrix is just return it to closer to 6th Edition and have Battle Brothers be Friendly Units you cannot join, Embark, be Embarked on, or cast Blessings on. Simple.

I would have to politely disagree there.

IMO The ally matrix is one of the leading causes to what broke balance in 40k. Because it opened the door to the super friends combos. What you suggested i think would help, but it would have the same effect as just removing it. Whats the point of taking my none space marine army and then running a conclave that cant cast on them?

Now in Apoc, sure, anything goes there, in standard sub 2k games, i would say no, or, under the stipulation that your ally can only be taken in a CAD, and value no more then half the total army's value.

I think this though is going to be resolved in 8th ed. I have a very sneaking suspicion we are going to get grand alliances soon. IoM, Eldar, Chaos, then Orks, Tau, and Nids on their own.

I think there's a tension in 40k between the people that do like apoc style games and the people that don't.

I see all this "no whatnots and doodads in sub-2k games" and I'm like "well, if that happens, I guess it's time to sell my army and get into a hobby that I'll enjoy."

And then I hear from people who are like "I can't enjoy the hobby with superheavies and d-weapons" and I'm like "well, one of us has to go.... T.T"

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think there's a tension in 40k between the people that do like apoc style games and the people that don't.

I see all this "no whatnots and doodads in sub-2k games" and I'm like "well, if that happens, I guess it's time to sell my army and get into a hobby that I'll enjoy."

And then I hear from people who are like "I can't enjoy the hobby with superheavies and d-weapons" and I'm like "well, one of us has to go.... T.T"

I would agree with this normally BUT, before 7th there was a clear and hard line that defined a apoc game, and a standard game, and both had their own rules and toys to bring to the table, and that was fine, because both games were really good, and offered different types of games.

What they did though was meld the two together which is not good. In Apoc there was no big deal about D or super heavies, because you were playing such large games if you lost a whole squad to one shot, NBD, in a 1850 normal game, thats a pretty big deal. Then the only way to actually counter the list, is to list tailor to deal with that.

So then on that i would say look at it from my perspective, we had a game that had a clear set of rules that separated the big toys from the smaller toys and each group could play in their respective setting. Those barriers got removed and now the big boy toys with D and such are walking in on people who had operated in CAD land for the longest time and are getting crushed by SHW with nothing to counter it other then bringing a SHW of their own.

There is a time and a place for everything, but muddling it all together is not the time nor the place. Its like when they put flyers in and no AA for the longest time, anyone remember the necron air force lol.

I disagree with removing allies simply because I disagree with removing options, period. Also, I run Word Bearers with Daemon support and do not want to go through another period of CSM where my only Daemon choices are "lesser Daemon" and "greater Daemon."

Patch offenders rather than removing them outright.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
I disagree with removing allies simply because I disagree with removing options, period. Also, I run Word Bearers with Daemon support and do not want to go through another period of CSM where my only Daemon choices are "lesser Daemon" and "greater Daemon."

Patch offenders rather than removing them outright.

True, im a fan of fluff which is why i think whats going to happen is we are going to see grand orders pop up where all chaos are in the same boat.

But i want more restrictions of allies, like i had suggested, you can only take allies as a cad or something.

Keep allies. Remove battle brothers.

Allies of convenience don't cause problems as far as I'm aware. It's only when you start stacking characters from different codexes into units that things get bad.

yeah pretty much

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think there's a tension in 40k between the people that do like apoc style games and the people that don't.

I see all this "no whatnots and doodads in sub-2k games" and I'm like "well, if that happens, I guess it's time to sell my army and get into a hobby that I'll enjoy."

And then I hear from people who are like "I can't enjoy the hobby with superheavies and d-weapons" and I'm like "well, one of us has to go.... T.T"

I would agree with this normally BUT, before 7th there was a clear and hard line that defined a apoc game, and a standard game, and both had their own rules and toys to bring to the table, and that was fine, because both games were really good, and offered different types of games.

What they did though was meld the two together which is not good. In Apoc there was no big deal about D or super heavies, because you were playing such large games if you lost a whole squad to one shot, NBD, in a 1850 normal game, thats a pretty big deal. Then the only way to actually counter the list, is to list tailor to deal with that.

So then on that i would say look at it from my perspective, we had a game that had a clear set of rules that separated the big toys from the smaller toys and each group could play in their respective setting. Those barriers got removed and now the big boy toys with D and such are walking in on people who had operated in CAD land for the longest time and are getting crushed by SHW with nothing to counter it other then bringing a SHW of their own.

There is a time and a place for everything, but muddling it all together is not the time nor the place. Its like when they put flyers in and no AA for the longest time, anyone remember the necron air force lol.

My play groups have always allowed superheavies since their release in Citadel Journal 11 in second edition in standard games, so no, there's not a clear hard line that defined an Apoc game. There were for people that banned options that were available, but that's no different than banning options that are available now.

In 3rd Edition, for example, you could take a Warhound Titan for 3 HS and 1 HQ slot, and a Baneblade as a 0-1 Heavy Support. So no, it's not always been some sort of clear, hard line unless you were banning (or unaware of) a variety of options.

Backspacehacker wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
I disagree on removing the ally matrix. There is a very good reason why it is in, and it is good for both players AND GW.

The best thing for the Ally Matrix is just return it to closer to 6th Edition and have Battle Brothers be Friendly Units you cannot join, Embark, be Embarked on, or cast Blessings on. Simple.

I would have to politely disagree there.

IMO The ally matrix is one of the leading causes to what broke balance in 40k. Because it opened the door to the super friends combos. What you suggested i think would help, but it would have the same effect as just removing it. Whats the point of taking my none space marine army and then running a conclave that cant cast on them?

I just took out the Super Friend Combos, and you say that isn't enough?

And it wouldn't have the same effect as removing it. Some people like to have different bits of different armies because they like those units/models for themselves.

As for the Conclave, that is more an issue with how the whole Imperium of Man, and Space Marines in particular, operate over all. Of course, that separation can easily indicate how disunified the Imperium of Man actually is. Similarly, the distrust between Chaos Marines and Daemon. The only real issue, fluff-wise, is Genestealer Cults and Tyranids, but the Draft FAQ has already demonstrated how GW feels about them.

Arson Fire wrote:Keep allies. Remove battle brothers.

Allies of convenience don't cause problems as far as I'm aware. It's only when you start stacking characters from different codexes into units that things get bad.

There are some significant differences between Battle Brothers and Allies of Convenience, even leaving out those super friend combos BSH was talking about. A model cannot get within 1" of an enemy model unless it is trying to be in close combat with it, while a friendly model is required for engaging in combat, and that includes Battle Brothers.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
1) I remember 5e Fatecrusher. A 1-9 chance for a wound to be unsaved is an order of magnitude better than a 1-in-36 chance. That, and it caps certain random combos that one could roll up; from a Thousand Sons Daemon Prince rolling on Ectomancy and getting a blessing that becom8es a 3++ (or a 2++ rerollable), to an Impossible Robe Lord of Change with either Cursed Earth or the Tzeentchian Warlord Trait that adds +1 to Invulnerables.
2) Invisibility is still the big one.
3) Fleshbane would be good. But superheavies are still crazy. What about Wraithknights too?

Invisibility is important, but it isn't the start and the end of the problem. The rest of the psychic phase needs to be dealt with along with it.

What about Wraithknights? They'd be subject to the one-per-full-1,500 limit same as the rest, and you'd kill them with grav-weapons, Gauss, D-strength psychic powers, etc. the way you kill them without superheavies in your list today. It's not like Shadowswords are the only counter to Wraithknights.

There actually aren't any cost effective counters to WK.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Honestly remove D form non apoc games.

D was never designed to be seen in game lower then like 4k, where if you lost a squad it was no big deal but in 1850 the fact we have D weapons is just silly.

StrD was never so problematic before the 7ed Eldar came out. Before that, even though StrD had long been incorporated in normal 40k games, it was too rare to make great impact. As far as I can remember, only IK can reliably spam the D with the cost of around 350pts per model and it is only at most 4 attacks in cc. The other viable one is a huge fortification that cost 525pts!! All other sources will already been Apoc games level pts cost that would not be feasible to use in normal 40k games. Or, are very unreliable one ML3 GK psychic powers (hard to generate, and need 8 dices to ensure it goes off).

7th ed. Craftworld Eldar changed everything. This codex can spam the D with very cheap units, like a 295pts jump GMC that can take either shooty D or the chopy D. Wraithguards who fire 5 StrD at the cost of 160pts only. Not to say they also have D multiple barrage from the D cannon and Warp hunters and other forge world stuff.

This meta actually triggered a chain reaction: Man… how do my mainstay / army core survivve these many D?? There are only 3 choices, either not let them hit you (invisibility), when get hit, my inv save can reliably save my a*s (2++ rerollable), or let them don't know what to shoot at (exreme MSU, like Gladius Space Marine).



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Then things deteriorated further when these reaction triggers further reactions. How to handle the new deathstars? MORE D D D D, and now that is what Daemons and Magnus CSM are likely going to. Or BRING MORE DAKKA, which is what Tau are doing after their 7th dropped, it also handles MSU quite well.

With these changes, anyone who don't have the StrD, who cannot access invisibility or 2++ rerollable, don't have extreme MSU and are not a GMC or FMC are LEFT TO DIE WORTHLESSLY. Inculding classic MCs that was "OP" a couple years ago. Whenever anyone claim MC is OP, that'd better mean FMCs, nowadays the MCs who don't have wings are fragile as paper against the crazy firepowers...

They're still OP compared to vehicles. And for any list w/o the crazy firepower.

Martel732 wrote:
They're still OP compared to vehicles. And for any list w/o the crazy firepower.

............................

You may try compare a Carnifex to a Wave Serpernt with Holo Field.

Martel732 wrote:
They're still OP compared to vehicles. And for any list w/o the crazy firepower.

This, it comes down to, at what point are you building a list to deal with something, or are you list tailoring.

Tell me how fun is a game going to be for you if i bring 2 aquilla strong points and your army is getting hit with 2 apocalyptic mega blasts a turn, or 4 D larges blasts a turn. Its not very fun is it, its like going up against wraith knights, no one has fun in those games.

Many people come from a time when D was not in your standard games, nor were super heavies. That was an Apoc Scale thing. Then GW ham fisted them into 7th to push more models and its freaking awful to even fight them unless you bring one of your own which is not something simple like bringing the right war gear or swap this unit for that. Its a huge chunk of your army.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're still OP compared to vehicles. And for any list w/o the crazy firepower.

This, it comes down to, at what point are you building a list to deal with something, or are you list tailoring.

Tell me how fun is a game going to be for you if i bring 2 aquilla strong points and your army is getting hit with 2 apocalyptic mega blasts a turn, or 4 D larges blasts a turn. Its not very fun is it, its like going up against wraith knights, no one has fun in those games.

Many people come from a time when D was not in your standard games, nor were super heavies. That was an Apoc Scale thing. Then GW ham fisted them into 7th to push more models and its freaking awful to even fight them unless you bring one of your own which is not something simple like bringing the right war gear or swap this unit for that. Its a huge chunk of your army.

Really, D weapons wouldn't be nearly so bad if they still had the 5th edition rules. Back then, it was an automatic Penetrating hit, or an automatic Wound with Instant Death, and no Armor or Cover saves allowed. That was it. D weapons were great for taking down titans and AV14, since they mostly had really long range or lots of hits in melee, Armorbane didn't really exist yet, and even S10 could only seriously hurt enemies like Monoliths 1/3rd of the time. It was also great for Monstrous Creatures, since Instant Death just bypassed Toughness, but it allowed for big special characters and really tough enemies to tank damage better. (Keep in mind that Gargantuan Creatures just took d3 wounds against Instant Death, so it still made it good at killing titans, too.)

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're still OP compared to vehicles. And for any list w/o the crazy firepower.

This, it comes down to, at what point are you building a list to deal with something, or are you list tailoring.

Tell me how fun is a game going to be for you if i bring 2 aquilla strong points and your army is getting hit with 2 apocalyptic mega blasts a turn, or 4 D larges blasts a turn. Its not very fun is it, its like going up against wraith knights, no one has fun in those games.

Many people come from a time when D was not in your standard games, nor were super heavies. That was an Apoc Scale thing. Then GW ham fisted them into 7th to push more models and its freaking awful to even fight them unless you bring one of your own which is not something simple like bringing the right war gear or swap this unit for that. Its a huge chunk of your army.

Really, D weapons wouldn't be nearly so bad if they still had the 5th edition rules. Back then, it was an automatic Penetrating hit, or an automatic Wound with Instant Death, and no Armor or Cover saves allowed. That was it. D weapons were great for taking down titans and AV14, since they mostly had really long range or lots of hits in melee, Armorbane didn't really exist yet, and even S10 could only seriously hurt enemies like Monoliths 1/3rd of the time. It was also great for Monstrous Creatures, since Instant Death just bypassed Toughness, but it allowed for big special characters and really tough enemies to tank damage better. (Keep in mind that Gargantuan Creatures just took d3 wounds against Instant Death, so it still made it good at killing titans, too.)

Yes but that was also when seeing a land raider on the field was a big deal, because in 5th, even killing a rhino was a pain in the ass, and still D was not on the board.

Neophyte2012 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're still OP compared to vehicles. And for any list w/o the crazy firepower.

............................

You may try compare a Carnifex to a Wave Serpernt with Holo Field.

I'd rather have the Carnifex because:

It can defend itself in close combat.
It doesn't get stuck on shrubs.
It doesn't snap fire if something penetrates its armour.
It can't explode if something penetrates its armour.
It can't be kept from moving ever if something penetrates its armour.
It can't lose a weapon if something penetrates its armour.
It doesn't care about facings for its toughness.
It doesn't care about fire arcs for its weapons.

Need I go on?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Neophyte2012 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They're still OP compared to vehicles. And for any list w/o the crazy firepower.

............................

You may try compare a Carnifex to a Wave Serpernt with Holo Field.

I'd rather have the Carnifex because:

It can defend itself in close combat.
It doesn't get stuck on shrubs.
It doesn't snap fire if something penetrates its armour.
It can't explode if something penetrates its armour.
It can't be kept from moving ever if something penetrates its armour.
It can't lose a weapon if something penetrates its armour.
It doesn't care about facings for its toughness.
It doesn't care about fire arcs for its weapons.

Need I go on?

1. That is true, I admit.
2. Yes, but Wave Serpent is skimmer, just fly 12 inch over that shrub, do not stop on it. A classic MC like Carnifex can only move 6 inch a turn......... How can it compare mobility to Wave Serpent........
3 - 6. For normal vehicle, yes it is big problem, BUT Wave Serpent is The OP vehicle in the game, the shield downgrade any penetration to glance, and how often would you see one without 5++ holo field?
7. Yes, but Wave Serpent has a side of AV12 which are same as front, and have a relatively small rear arc compare to IK, Leman Russ, Dreadnoughts etc., and anytime a smart guy who turned the AV10 rear facing of Wave Serpent to you, usually it is the time that he unload the Wraith Guard from the skimmer to StrD you.
8. Yes. But unlike Imperial Tanks who load up lots of sponsor for expensive points cost, which rendered useless by the firing arc limitation. The wave serpent just need to care its turrent mounted weapon on top, which just need 5pts to be upgraded to awesome equipment. Firing Arc should not be a problem....

I'd rate a wave serpent as far more useful than a carnifex.
You don't see carnifexes in competitive lists.
Can't say the same for wave serpents (they're less common than they used to be, as scatterbike and warp spider spam has taken over most lists, but they still show up).

Most MCs are indeed tougher than most vehicles.
Most vehicles are much faster than most MCs.
Vehicles tend to have much more firepower for cheaper than the traditional MCs. Eldar/Tau break that unwritten rule and get silly guns, but their pseudo walker MCs are indeed broken. No argument there.

The flyrant has better guns than any BA unit.