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.

I am asking this because the thread about Wraith Knights made me laugh a bit. People are perfectly fine with a 300pt model having 2 D weapons, Stomp, 3+ armor save, 5+ FNP and can benefit from cover, on top of having JUMP.

So with all of that said, what do you fellow dakka heads think a Stompa should cost in a world where a WK is 295pts?

The Stompa is reasonably costed. WK's are not reasonably costed. WK's should be ~400pts, not sub 300, they are nowhere near sane at their current price.

There's nothing wrong with the Stompa. There is something very wrong with the Wraithknight.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The Stompa is reasonably costed. WK's are not reasonably costed. WK's should be ~400pts, not sub 300, they are nowhere near sane at their current price.

There's nothing wrong with the Stompa. There is something very wrong with the Wraithknight.

So in your opinion a Stompa is perfectly priced and the Eldar WK is just under priced. The current public opinion on the WK is that it needs a 100pt price bump, bringing it to around 400pts. If you think that is appropriate pricing for the WK (Not saying you do) would you then say that the Stompa is roughly twice as good as a WK? 400 vs 770pts?

 Vaktathi wrote:
The Stompa is reasonably costed. WK's are not reasonably costed. WK's should be ~400pts, not sub 300, they are nowhere near sane at their current price.

There's nothing wrong with the Stompa. There is something very wrong with the Wraithknight.

This. The Stompa is about right IMO.

The problem is the Wraithknight; it went from being a bit too durable to being just as durable with 2x D weapon shots plus Stomp on the same high Toughness mobile platform with a long range. Its basically double the cost of a Wraith Lord with a weapon but is much more than double the value, not helped by the fact that the Monstrous Creature rules are not at all fit for purpose on larger models (Wraith Lords are fine as they only have three Wounds).


You should really compare the Stompa more to the Imperial Knights; while they can be cheesy if you take a lot of them, they're about the right price individually. Actually some of their options could do with being cheaper, like the carapace weapons.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
The Stompa is reasonably costed. WK's are not reasonably costed. WK's should be ~400pts, not sub 300, they are nowhere near sane at their current price.

There's nothing wrong with the Stompa. There is something very wrong with the Wraithknight.

So in your opinion a Stompa is perfectly priced and the Eldar WK is just under priced. The current public opinion on the WK is that it needs a 100pt price bump, bringing it to around 400pts. If you think that is appropriate pricing for the WK (Not saying you do) would you then say that the Stompa is roughly twice as good as a WK? 400 vs 770pts?

12HP, large transport capacity, and lots of weaponry, etc,

770 sounds largely fair, equal to ~4-5 or so battle tanks, but faster and with the ability to assault (and carry lots of dudes).Not a match for two WK's in a straight up slugfest probably, but also brings utility that WK's do not.

I think 770 is probably about right for the stompa platform - about twice the durability of a knight, about twice the points.

My biggest problem with the stompa is that you're paying 770 for one decent gun, another gun that runs out of ammo generally by turn 2, and has only one more D attack than a knight at I1.

So, you're paying a lot of points for damage output that is honestly not much greater than a knight.

Or, to put it another way, two knights (or WKs) are going to do a lot more damage than one stompa.

I personally was hoping for some kustom stompa builders in the new ork codex, or at least some kind of options for one, but no go.

It is a multitool that isn't even mediocre at one job. We could easily knock 100 points off and it would still be mediocre for the price.

Under 300, thing is too underpowered!

In all seriousness, the Stompa is about 100 points over costed. But that's because IA:8 lets you build a Kustom Stompa with (I think) more attacks, same weapon loadout for 100 points less, lol.

It's OK is but not worth 770. I wouldn't lower it anymore then 100 pts. I'd be so happy if this "utilitarian" was made into an assault transport that I'd keep it the same price. That single change would be enough for me so that at least it'll do one of its jobs right. Right now under current rules with current equipment it's overpriced. An author needs to write a new ork novel of a great Waaaaagh! that needs to be stopped as the Space Marises rush on to meet the green horde consisting of a few dozen orks and a couple vehicles. A huge majority of the codex costs more then the equivalents of other armies and the other armies don't get the backfire tables or are superior for less points. In addition to a codex writer that seems to have forgotten Ork BS.

In current meta, around 550 is the max i'd pay for it.

People are delusional if you think 700 is anywhere near "fair". 600 is what it should be, as it loses to a single knight 50 precent of the time in meelee, never mind the rest of the opponents army. The no assault transport capacity always breaks down to how many guys can I fit in here to repair it, making it even more expensive. Or grots to poop out for obsec.

And the wraithknight needs to be 500 base.

 Frozocrone wrote:
Under 300, thing is too underpowered!

In all seriousness, the Stompa is about 100 points over costed. But that's because IA:8 lets you build a Kustom Stompa with (I think) more attacks, same weapon loadout for 100 points less, lol.

IA: 8 is old.

Like really old. It's also worth noting that they said quite often that it was a misprint.

as the voting continues it is becoming more and more interesting. I hope to hear a few more opinions on this.

SemperMortis wrote:
as the voting continues it is becoming more and more interesting. I hope to hear a few more opinions on this.

I'm of the opinion that the points cost for the Stompa needs to stay right where it is, or else, take a points bump.

Do you know how many lascannon shots it takes to take that thing down?

Traditio wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
as the voting continues it is becoming more and more interesting. I hope to hear a few more opinions on this.

I'm of the opinion that the points cost for the Stompa needs to stay right where it is, or else, take a points bump.

Do you know how many lascannon shots it takes to take that thing down?

*rolls eyes*

I'm sure by your metric of playing an army, the fact that tactical marines can't kill it in one go makes it OP.

Anyways, on topic, It should be roughly 550-575 points, at least with its base loadout. For it to be truly resilient you need to combo in KFF or units with Meks inside which inflate its points even higher and the damage output is mainly through CC, which being I1 means he rarely gets into combat without suffering a fair bit of damage even against power fist units. If they had access to the all the weapons from the kustom stompa it would convince me to keep the 600sh price tag.

Traditio wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
as the voting continues it is becoming more and more interesting. I hope to hear a few more opinions on this.

I'm of the opinion that the points cost for the Stompa needs to stay right where it is, or else, take a points bump.

Do you know how many lascannon shots it takes to take that thing down?

Your doing it wrong hit it with Melta and boom you have a 800ish point crater.

On top of that, it really doesn't put out enough dakka to justify its points. People point out the "utility" of the damned thing by saying it has a big troop capacity...but that is literally just for putting mekz and a Big Mek with an KFF or MFF. Otherwise the "utility" is non-existent.

SemperMortis wrote:

Traditio wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
as the voting continues it is becoming more and more interesting. I hope to hear a few more opinions on this.

I'm of the opinion that the points cost for the Stompa needs to stay right where it is, or else, take a points bump.

Do you know how many lascannon shots it takes to take that thing down?

Your doing it wrong hit it with Melta and boom you have a 800ish point crater.

On top of that, it really doesn't put out enough dakka to justify its points. People point out the "utility" of the damned thing by saying it has a big troop capacity...but that is literally just for putting mekz and a Big Mek with an KFF or MFF. Otherwise the "utility" is non-existent.

It has a ridiculous number of hull points. That's why it's so expensive.

Bring that down to 6 hullpoints, and I'd happily agree that it should be less expensive in terms of points value.

Traditio wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
as the voting continues it is becoming more and more interesting. I hope to hear a few more opinions on this.

I'm of the opinion that the points cost for the Stompa needs to stay right where it is, or else, take a points bump.

Do you know how many lascannon shots it takes to take that thing down?

Do you know how mediocre lascannons are for killing vehicles?

CrownAxe wrote:Do you know how mediocre lascannons are for killing vehicles?

Quoting the warhammer 40k wiki:

"The powerful Lascannon is a formidable Laser Weapon whose energetic shot of coherent light is capable of penetrating most armoured vehicles. It is the favorite anti-tank weapon of the Imperial Guard and is also commonly used by the Space Marines"

Traditio wrote:

CrownAxe wrote:Do you know how mediocre lascannons are for killing vehicles?

Quoting the warhammer 40k wiki:

"The powerful Lascannon is a formidable Laser Weapon whose energetic shot of coherent light is capable of penetrating most armoured vehicles. It is the favorite anti-tank weapon of the Imperial Guard and is also commonly used by the Space Marines"

So you're using fluff reasons rather than the actual stats and play-tested effectiveness of the weapon profile? Wrong approach. Also, I have to agree with CrownAxe - they can be pretty awful.

Traditio wrote:

CrownAxe wrote:Do you know how mediocre lascannons are for killing vehicles?

Quoting the warhammer 40k wiki:

"The powerful Lascannon is a formidable Laser Weapon whose energetic shot of coherent light is capable of penetrating most armoured vehicles. It is the favorite anti-tank weapon of the Imperial Guard and is also commonly used by the Space Marines"

Why are you quoting fluff from a wiki site? What does fluff have to do with good a lascannon actually is?

IllumiNini wrote:So you're using fluff reasons rather than the actual stats and play-tested effectiveness of the weapon profile? Wrong approach. Also, I have to agree with CrownAxe - they can be pretty awful.

The consensus is: "Grav is the only weapon that you should be taking ever; all other forms of shooting are worthless."

That's not an indication that missile launchers are bad.

That's not an indication that lascannons are bad.

That's an indication that the game is imbalanced.

Lascannons are supposed to be AT weapons. If they aren't doing their job, something has gone awry.

Traditio wrote:

IllumiNini wrote:So you're using fluff reasons rather than the actual stats and play-tested effectiveness of the weapon profile? Wrong approach. Also, I have to agree with CrownAxe - they can be pretty awful.

The consensus is: "Grav is the only weapon that you should be taking ever; all other forms of shooting are worthless."

That's not an indication that missile launchers are bad.

That's not an indication that lascannons are bad.

That's an indication that the game is imbalanced.

Lascannons are supposed to be AT weapons. If they aren't doing their job, something has gone awry.

Yeah GW is bad a making balanced rules

Even if you ignore Grav, Missle Launchers and Lascannons aren't very good.

Traditio wrote:

IllumiNini wrote:So you're using fluff reasons rather than the actual stats and play-tested effectiveness of the weapon profile? Wrong approach. Also, I have to agree with CrownAxe - they can be pretty awful.

The consensus is: "Grav is the only weapon that you should be taking ever; all other forms of shooting are worthless."

That's not an indication that missile launchers are bad.

That's not an indication that lascannons are bad.

That's an indication that the game is imbalanced.

Lascannons are supposed to be AT weapons. If they aren't doing their job, something has gone awry.

Well that's a balance issue, then; and it's no excuse to use fluff as a basis to say that Stompaz need an increase in points.

CrownAxe wrote:]Yeah GW is bad a making balanced rules

Even if you ignore Grav, Missle Launchers and Lascannons aren't very good.

Ignoring grav, what anti-tank heavy weapons do you propose?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IllumiNini wrote:Well that's a balance issue, then; and it's no excuse to use fluff as a basis to say that Stompaz need an increase in points.

Of course it is. The things that lascannons are supposed to kill should have a points cost determined by how many lascannon shots it takes to kill them. That means that Stompas must increase in points costs.

Grav and lascannons should not be equally good at killing tanks. Grav needs serious nerfs.

Autocannons and Meltas.

Also, no, things shouldn't be costed "by how many lascannons it takes to kill them". That's a stupid idea

 CrownAxe wrote:
Autocannons and Meltas

Autocannon over a lascannon? S7, AP 4, Heavy 2?

Why would you do that?

Besides, that's not even an option for devastator squads.

And meltas are so situational. For SMs, it basically only works with drop pods.

Sitting a heavy weapons squad in cover and sniping tanks from a distance should be a perfectly viable play style.

Traditio wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
Autocannons and Meltas

Autocannon over a lascannon? S7, AP 4, Heavy 2?

Why would you do that?

Because removing two HPs is better then trying to get a lucky explode with one. Autocannons are also cheaper by half the points of a lascannon generally

Sitting a heavy weapons squad in cover and sniping tanks from a distance should be a perfectly viable play style.

Why?

Traditio wrote:

IllumiNini wrote:Well that's a balance issue, then; and it's no excuse to use fluff as a basis to say that Stompaz need an increase in points.

Of course it is. The things that lascannons are supposed to kill should have a points cost determined by how many lascannon shots it takes to kill them. That means that Stompas must increase in points costs.

How did you come to the conclusion that this is how to calculate the points for a unit? And even if I take your word that it's an appropriate way to look at calculating points (which it definitely is not), then how exactly do you define what Lascannons are designed to kill?

Stompaz, along with a number of other things in the Orks Codex like Morkas and Gorkas, do not need a points increase IMHO, and they especially don't need a points increases simply because your fundamentally flawed logic demands it.

Also CrownAxe has hit the nail on the head again. Melta Weapons and Auto Cannons are good anti-tank weapons. I would also argue that Assault Cannons are at least half-decent because S6 Rending.

 IllumiNini wrote:

Traditio wrote:

IllumiNini wrote:Well that's a balance issue, then; and it's no excuse to use fluff as a basis to say that Stompaz need an increase in points.

Of course it is. The things that lascannons are supposed to kill should have a points cost determined by how many lascannon shots it takes to kill them. That means that Stompas must increase in points costs.

How did you come to the conclusion that this is how to calculate the points for a unit? And even if I take your word that it's an appropriate way to look at calculating points (which it definitely is not), then how exactly do you define what Lascannons are designed to kill?

Stompaz, along with a number of other things in the Orks Codex like Morkas and Gorkas, do not need a points increase IMHO, and they especially don't need a points increases simply because your fundamentally flawed logic demands it.

Also CrownAxe has hit the nail on the head again. Melta Weapons and Auto Cannons are good anti-tank weapons. I would also argue that Assault Cannons are at least half-decent because S6 Rending.

Anyways, the stompa needs a price reduction of 300-400 points at least to be decent, with the amount of D going around, its not hard to take it out and 700+ is stupid insane for one.

Be polite, please. --Janthkin