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.

 vipoid wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Or just lose Relentless on Bikes.

Well, bikes are certainly in dire need of a few wallops with the nerf-bat.

Martel732 wrote:

It's such an obnoxious weapon; especially with hull points. It's been obnoxious since it was introduced.

Isn't it just a multilaser with an extra shot?

In any case, I'd say the problem is more with Hull Points, tbh. It was a badly thought-out rule that made it trivial to glance many vehicles to death, whilst rendering a lot of specialised anti-vehicle weapons virtually worthless.

It's a multilaser with an extra shot that is an option on every Eldar heavy weapon slot in the army. If guard could take units with six multilasers, I'd complain about that too. Platforms matter a lot, and Imperial heavy weapon platforms suck out loud for the most part.

Honestly, a lot of the bike rules could stand to be removed. I can maybe see Jetbikes jinking, but normal bikes? Really?

Also, +1 Toughness is dubious enough without also applying to ID.

Martel732 wrote:
It's a multilaser with an extra shot that is an option on every Eldar heavy weapon slot in the army. If guard could take units with six multilasers, I'd complain about that too. Platforms matter a lot, and Imperial heavy weapon platforms suck out loud for the most part.

Ah, so your problem is more with the availability of the weapon. That makes more sense.

Yeah, if Eldar had to deploy them the way the guard did, it would be fine. But some Eldar lists have 30 or more of the damn things. Really, GW?

Imagine if every space marine could take PGs. Not every squad, but every marine could take one.

You may not see 10 per squad, maybe 6-7 per squad, but it would change the game since marines could start killing a lot more with one turn of shooting. This would be worse if we are talking heavy weapons being able to fire on a relentless platform.

That is effectively what they did with wind riders.

 vipoid wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's a multilaser with an extra shot that is an option on every Eldar heavy weapon slot in the army. If guard could take units with six multilasers, I'd complain about that too. Platforms matter a lot, and Imperial heavy weapon platforms suck out loud for the most part.

Ah, so your problem is more with the availability of the weapon. That makes more sense.

Makes a ton of sense too. I certainly don't have any bikes capable of bringing an entire unit of 3-shot Heavy weapons. A Havoc squad can bring 4 heavy weapons at best and doesn't benefit from the toughness, speed, jinking, or relentless. Being able to spam Heavy weapons is strong on its own. Being able to do it on a Jetbike platform is just ludicrous when most players can't even do it with their heavy weapon foot-sloggers.

Forge the narrative - they continously bunnyhop.

Akiasura wrote:
Imagine if every space marine could take PGs. Not every squad, but every marine could take one.

You may not see 10 per squad, maybe 6-7 per squad, but it would change the game since marines could start killing a lot more with one turn of shooting. This would be worse if we are talking heavy weapons being able to fire on a relentless platform.

That is effectively what they did with wind riders.

And 36" range. That's really the worst part. And why the scatterlaser is so much better than the more expensive AC. Rending is a gak rule to trade for 12" of range.

Akiasura wrote:
Imagine if every space marine could take PGs. Not every squad, but every marine could take one.

You may not see 10 per squad, maybe 6-7 per squad, but it would change the game since marines could start killing a lot more with one turn of shooting. This would be worse if we are talking heavy weapons being able to fire on a relentless platform.

That is effectively what they did with wind riders.

We can sort of do that with Chosen. Five plasma guns plus a champion with a combi-plasma. Problem is it costs 193 pts minimum to do that for a squad of 6 Chosen. They also have Toughness 4 and no Jetbikes.

Again, I think it comes down to the platform.

Even with a shorter range, can you imagine Scatterbikes with rending guns?

 Arkaine wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Imagine if every space marine could take PGs. Not every squad, but every marine could take one.

You may not see 10 per squad, maybe 6-7 per squad, but it would change the game since marines could start killing a lot more with one turn of shooting. This would be worse if we are talking heavy weapons being able to fire on a relentless platform.

That is effectively what they did with wind riders.

We can sort of do that with Chosen. Five plasma guns plus a champion with a combi-plasma. Problem is it costs 193 pts minimum to do that for a squad of 6 Chosen. They also have Toughness 4 and no Jetbikes.

Plus scatterlasers are way better than plasma guns.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
Again, I think it comes down to the platform.

Even with a shorter range, can you imagine Scatterbikes with rending guns?

At least they'd be taking return fire from my 24" guns. To be honest, scatterlasers generate so many wounds that rending is actually worthless to them. I guess not against Riptides. In contrast, the Imperium can field so few assault cannons that rending is also worthless for them.

 vipoid wrote:
Again, I think it comes down to the platform.

Even with a shorter range, can you imagine Scatterbikes with rending guns?

I would to point out that Eldar can make that happen.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Again, I think it comes down to the platform.

Even with a shorter range, can you imagine Scatterbikes with rending guns?

I would to point out that Eldar can make that happen.

Misfortune?

 Arkaine wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Imagine if every space marine could take PGs. Not every squad, but every marine could take one.

You may not see 10 per squad, maybe 6-7 per squad, but it would change the game since marines could start killing a lot more with one turn of shooting. This would be worse if we are talking heavy weapons being able to fire on a relentless platform.

That is effectively what they did with wind riders.

We can sort of do that with Chosen. Five plasma guns plus a champion with a combi-plasma. Problem is it costs 193 pts minimum to do that for a squad of 6 Chosen. They also have Toughness 4 and no Jetbikes.

True, though chosen are a lot more expensive to do that with when compared to marines. If Pgs were a bit cheaper, like the bikes are...I'd actually start taking infantry in swarms again.
Chosen with a cheap pod and plasma guns would be really good, I'd certainly start taking them.

Agree that relentless and the 36" range 4 shot nature of the scat laser is what hurts the most.

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Again, I think it comes down to the platform.

Even with a shorter range, can you imagine Scatterbikes with rending guns?

I would to point out that Eldar can make that happen.

Misfortune?

Yup. On top of making the squad twin-linked.

The sick part is that you could build an Eldar list with zero scatterlasers that would still be quite good.

Martel732 wrote:
The sick part is that you could build an Eldar list with almost anything in the codex that would still be quite good.

Fixed that for you.

Like how much better the Wraith LORD is than pretty much any marine vehicle, but then the Wraith KNIGHT is so much better than that that I never so Wraithlords anymore.

Martel732 wrote:
Like how much better the Wraith LORD is than pretty much any marine vehicle, but then the Wraith KNIGHT is so much better than that that I never so Wraithlords anymore.

I remember back in 5th, comparing Wraithlords to Carnifex. The Wraithlord had 1 less wound and (IIRC) 1 less attack, but had better WS, BS, S, T, and I, on top of being a gun-platform.

And, as you say, that was before the WK arrived.

"I know, since it's a big Wraithlord, we'll make it like 2 Wraithlords strapped together. And then give it much better weapons. And then nerf Wraithlords. And then give the Wraithknight I5. And a 12" Jump move."

 vipoid wrote:

Bartali wrote:

Eternal War promotes static shooty castles, with small mobile units that hide until turn 5
Maelstrom promotes highly mobile lists

I've yet to see any evidence of this.

I see at least as much movement - if not more - in EW missions.

There's a bat rep on Youtube - look under Long War, IG vs BA. IG player sets up, BA player drop pods in. No movement and it is just literally each playing taking it in turns to roll buckets of dice (apologies if I missed anything, I skimmed through it).
Saw a lot of games like this in 6th, and I can see a lot of lists on here and elsewhere that are very similar, and aren't very dynamic outside of deployment.

I don't want to criticise Eternal War missions too much as it sounds as though a lot of people have fun playing them (and there's no such thing as wrong fun). I just prefer Maelstrom.

You think that if IG played maelstrom, they would play and set up differently? If an army wasn't give options for being "dynamic" it is codex, then it won't be.

Bartali wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Bartali wrote:

Eternal War promotes static shooty castles, with small mobile units that hide until turn 5
Maelstrom promotes highly mobile lists

I've yet to see any evidence of this.

I see at least as much movement - if not more - in EW missions.

There's a bat rep on Youtube - look under Long War, IG vs BA. IG player sets up, BA player drop pods in. No movement and it is just literally each playing taking it in turns to roll buckets of dice (apologies if I missed anything, I skimmed through it).
Saw a lot of games like this in 6th, and I can see a lot of lists on here and elsewhere that are very similar, and aren't very dynamic outside of deployment.

I don't want to criticise Eternal War missions too much as it sounds as though a lot of people have fun playing them (and there's no such thing as wrong fun). I just prefer Maelstrom.

I am surprised to hear that the BA did not move, usually they would assault right in after droppodding. However as a long time IG veteran I can honestly say that it is a rare sight to see us moving within a game. Our army is slow and squishy and our few mobile options vastly over priced. Even in a Maelstrom I will usually just sit back and blitz my opponent fro across the board as moving closer is kind of like running towards a honey badger butt naked and with your genitals smeared in pheromones. Your Guardsmen get shredded by enemy shooting then minced in close combat and your big expensive (read "overpriced") tanks either get flanked and blown up or are left stranded without support and get hit by DS troops and blown up.
The only times I ever move are to reposition my lines/guns and to respond to any major threats/run away from enemy troops.

Makumba wrote:
You think that if IG played maelstrom, they would play and set up differently? If an army wasn't give options for being "dynamic" it is codex, then it won't be.

All codexes are dynamic. It's only player bias that's static.

SJ

Removed by insaniak.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Bartali wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Bartali wrote:

Eternal War promotes static shooty castles, with small mobile units that hide until turn 5
Maelstrom promotes highly mobile lists

I've yet to see any evidence of this.

I see at least as much movement - if not more - in EW missions.

There's a bat rep on Youtube - look under Long War, IG vs BA. IG player sets up, BA player drop pods in. No movement and it is just literally each playing taking it in turns to roll buckets of dice (apologies if I missed anything, I skimmed through it).
Saw a lot of games like this in 6th, and I can see a lot of lists on here and elsewhere that are very similar, and aren't very dynamic outside of deployment.

I don't want to criticise Eternal War missions too much as it sounds as though a lot of people have fun playing them (and there's no such thing as wrong fun). I just prefer Maelstrom.

I am surprised to hear that the BA did not move, usually they would assault right in after droppodding. However as a long time IG veteran I can honestly say that it is a rare sight to see us moving within a game. Our army is slow and squishy and our few mobile options vastly over priced. Even in a Maelstrom I will usually just sit back and blitz my opponent fro across the board as moving closer is kind of like running towards a honey badger butt naked and with your genitals smeared in pheromones. Your Guardsmen get shredded by enemy shooting then minced in close combat and your big expensive (read "overpriced") tanks either get flanked and blown up or are left stranded without support and get hit by DS troops and blown up.
The only times I ever move are to reposition my lines/guns and to respond to any major threats/run away from enemy troops.

It's illegal to assault right after drop podding. You must mean the turn AFTER the BA army got shot to death.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Makumba wrote:
You think that if IG played maelstrom, they would play and set up differently? If an army wasn't give options for being "dynamic" it is codex, then it won't be.

All codexes are dynamic. It's only player bias that's static.

SJ

If an IG player tries to be dynamic his dudes get killed faster, then if they remain static with no garente that they will actualy reach the objective turn 1 and survive. They aren't cheaper then other units objective takers, they aren't resilient, they aren't faster or more killy. Sure can I load em up in chimeras and drive up turn one. It just means the game ends a turn or two faster. Which means less play time for me.

Makumba wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Makumba wrote:
You think that if IG played maelstrom, they would play and set up differently? If an army wasn't give options for being "dynamic" it is codex, then it won't be.

All codexes are dynamic. It's only player bias that's static.

SJ

If an IG player tries to be dynamic his dudes get killed faster, then if they remain static with no garente that they will actualy reach the objective turn 1 and survive. They aren't cheaper then other units objective takers, they aren't resilient, they aren't faster or more killy. Sure can I load em up in chimeras and drive up turn one. It just means the game ends a turn or two faster. Which means less play time for me.

Case in point.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Makumba wrote:
You think that if IG played maelstrom, they would play and set up differently? If an army wasn't give options for being "dynamic" it is codex, then it won't be.

All codexes are dynamic. It's only player bias that's static.

SJ

If an IG player tries to be dynamic his dudes get killed faster, then if they remain static with no garente that they will actualy reach the objective turn 1 and survive. They aren't cheaper then other units objective takers, they aren't resilient, they aren't faster or more killy. Sure can I load em up in chimeras and drive up turn one. It just means the game ends a turn or two faster. Which means less play time for me.

Case in point.

SJ

That's not a case in point unless you can point out good objective takers that he is choosing not to use...or use correctly.

You know I could be playing an IG list that is actual a counts as eldar or necron army, and then I wouldn't have the problems. So he may be right.

Makumba wrote:
You know I could be playing an IG list that is actual a counts as eldar or necron army, and then I wouldn't have the problems. So he may be right.

Or even a count-as SM army. Chimeras are Rhinos or Razorbacks, Leman Russ Can be Demolishers or Predators, Wyverns can be Whirlwinds, Ogryn/Bullgryn can be Terminators or Centurions, Rough Riders can be bikers etc.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Makumba wrote:
You think that if IG played maelstrom, they would play and set up differently? If an army wasn't give options for being "dynamic" it is codex, then it won't be.

All codexes are dynamic. It's only player bias that's static.

SJ

If an IG player tries to be dynamic his dudes get killed faster, then if they remain static with no garente that they will actualy reach the objective turn 1 and survive. They aren't cheaper then other units objective takers, they aren't resilient, they aren't faster or more killy. Sure can I load em up in chimeras and drive up turn one. It just means the game ends a turn or two faster. Which means less play time for me.

Case in point.

SJ

Could you respond to anything with something other than an off-the-cuff meaningless platitude that actually argues the point?

 vipoid wrote:

Makumba wrote:
You know I could be playing an IG list that is actual a counts as eldar or necron army, and then I wouldn't have the problems. So he may be right.

Or even a count-as SM army. Chimeras are Rhinos or Razorbacks, Leman Russ Can be Demolishers or Predators, Wyverns can be Whirlwinds, Ogryn/Bullgryn can be Terminators or Centurions, Rough Riders can be bikers etc.

Hrm....