Ice_can wrote: Someone did the maths in the news and roumers thread with vulkan 1 6 man unit can 1 shot an Acastus class Knight which is 850 points
*sigh* With Vulkan 6 heavy melta eradicators do 24 wounds outside of 12, 33 within 12, average to a T9 2+ Fellblade. Good grief. If they don't errata the super doctrines Salamanders will have the equivalent to a Falchion in an infantry unit outside of 12, and something better inside of 12.
Ice_can wrote: Someone did the maths in the news and roumers thread with vulkan 1 6 man unit can 1 shot an Acastus class Knight which is 850 points
*sigh* With Vulkan 6 heavy melta eradicators do 24 wounds outside of 12, 33 within 12, average to a T9 2+ Fellblade. Good grief. If they don't errata the super doctrines Salamanders will have the equivalent to a Falchion in an infantry unit outside of 12, and something better inside of 12.
Yeah at this point they need banned, day 1 FAQ'd or LoW need some seriously massive buffs.
Ice_can wrote: Someone did the maths in the news and roumers thread with vulkan 1 6 man unit can 1 shot an Acastus class Knight which is 850 points
*sigh* With Vulkan 6 heavy melta eradicators do 24 wounds outside of 12, 33 within 12, average to a T9 2+ Fellblade. Good grief. If they don't errata the super doctrines Salamanders will have the equivalent to a Falchion in an infantry unit outside of 12, and something better inside of 12.
Yeah at this point they need banned, day 1 FAQ'd or LoW need some seriously massive buffs.
LOWs? Hell, every vehicle. If they can do that to one of the toughest units in the game, nothing's safe. +1 to wound needs to die.
Tyel wrote: FWIW - overkill is a thing.
But that's why you probably won't take the full 6. Three units of 4 is probably enough in most scenarios.
The mere threat of these guys, coupled with the fact that the buffs are beneficially against infantry as well as vehicles means that we are about to enter into yet another Horde edition, but SM players are going to do just fine with that because yay they still have aggressors which unbuffed nuke 20 boyz a turn.
Tyel wrote: FWIW - overkill is a thing.
But that's why you probably won't take the full 6. Three units of 4 is probably enough in most scenarios.
Right, if you have something really tough to kill (like a Fellblade or Achilles), just fire two squads at it, otherwise 4 man squads should melt normal vehicles.
Yeah Aggressors can "only" kill 2/3rd's of their points in Orks every single turn without any buffs or auras, while still having a solid defensive statline and having powerfists too. And now their flamers get increased range too.
Daedalus81 wrote: Eradicators can still double tap if they did NOT advance.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Aggressors LOST double tap.
So agressors finally got nerfed but eradicators are still broken, suppose that's about a score draw for balance, hopefully GW don't take another year or so to fix eradicators.
Eradicators don't bug me as much as salamander Eradicators.
Giving them 6 models and CS will be nuts if they don't strip out some doctrines.
CS?
If I'm piecing together the correct leaks and they are true we now have eradicators at same old points more damage, is that actually an easier to use shoot twice as they do NOT have to shoot 1 unit with all 6 of them?
Plus they now pack MultiMeltas.
I really want GW to include some of whatever their deaigners are smoking in the next WD as it's got to be crazy.
Combat squadding. Take 6 and split em for more sally rerolls and less overkill.
Daedalus81 wrote: Eradicators can still double tap if they did NOT advance.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Aggressors LOST double tap.
So agressors finally got nerfed but eradicators are still broken, suppose that's about a score draw for balance, hopefully GW don't take another year or so to fix eradicators.
Eradicators don't bug me as much as salamander Eradicators.
Giving them 6 models and CS will be nuts if they don't strip out some doctrines.
CS?
If I'm piecing together the correct leaks and they are true we now have eradicators at same old points more damage, is that actually an easier to use shoot twice as they do NOT have to shoot 1 unit with all 6 of them?
Plus they now pack MultiMeltas.
I really want GW to include some of whatever their deaigners are smoking in the next WD as it's got to be crazy.
Combat squadding. Take 6 and split em for more sally rerolls and less overkill.
And more efficient use of detachment slots. Want two 3 man squads? Take one six man squad and split it, you still have two hs slots remaining. Or take two six man squads, split into four, one hs slot for that leviathan, new dakka floaty-not-a-predator, etc. Kills the whole "Three squads is all my hs choices!" argument doesn't it?
So are you getting the same feeling from what we've seen so far as me Daed? I.E.: loyalists toned down for the most part, but eradicators = "Holy scatbikes all over again 2020 Batman!"?
So are you getting the same feeling from what we've seen so far as me Daed? I.E.: loyalists toned down for the most part, but eradicators = "Holy scatbikes all over again 2020 Batman!"?
Edit: double post.
So you're saying we should have waited for the codex?
I very much dislike the squad sizes. I don't know that GW has any other levers to pull to reign them in other than changing super docs.
Have we seen those leaked?
They have a bit less mobility which is helpful. That Aggressors got slapped hives me some hope they still have some other tweak, but the window is getting small.
So are you getting the same feeling from what we've seen so far as me Daed? I.E.: loyalists toned down for the most part, but eradicators = "Holy scatbikes all over again 2020 Batman!"?
Edit: double post.
So you're saying we should have waited for the codex?
I very much dislike the squad sizes. I don't know that GW has any other levers to pull to reign them in other than changing super docs.
Have we seen those leaked?
They have a bit less mobility which is helpful. That Aggressors got slapped hives me some hope they still have some other tweak, but the window is getting small.
My issue is that the waiting never stops. Y'know, that whole "arms race" you're always talking about.
Super doctrines are a supplement thing, so I doubt we'll know if they change until those get erratad to match the rules in the new codex. So probably not until release day, at the earliest. But a change for Salamanders would seem to be needed. But eradicators will be an issue even without the Salamanders super doctrine. Two six man squads, split up or not, could kill a knight a turn if they're Ultramarines with the heavy meltas. Even if they aren't, with the -1 to hit from moving they'll average 16 wounds on a T8 3+ target for each six (doesn't matter if it's one squad of six or two of three). That's all without buffs btw. So that's a 365 PPM Repulsive Executioner slagged per turn by 240 points of models.
I'll always love how marine apologist respond with "But your unit is actually crap" when somebody mentions a actually competitive unit of their codex and how inferior it is to a space marine unit, even after this one has been nerfed.
Space Marine units exist in a perpetual state of being "fine" (That translates to absolutely OP) and "unusable crap" (That range goes from good to actually kinda bad)
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: The straight D3 was why you were taking the Thunder Hammer anyway. They could've made it AP-1 and it would still be taken over a Power Fist.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: The straight D3 was why you were taking the Thunder Hammer anyway. They could've made it AP-1 and it would still be taken over a Power Fist.
Go on.
Uh not much to go on about. The straight reliability of the Thunder Hammer while not being stuck to just Terminators made them incredibly popular for your Smash Characters. The AP didn't really matter since most worthy targets will have an Invul of some kind.
Ergo if the Thunder Hammer isn't still absurdly expensive it will still be taken over a Power Fist. Power Fists are straight D2 I think now though which helps but not much.
My issue is that the waiting never stops. Y'know, that whole "arms race" you're always talking about.
480 for 12
"The waiting never stops"
It didn't for GK for quite a long time. So for 1 in 25 there was a lot of waiting.
Everything else happened along the schedule GW defined. Whether or not it changed things the way you or I wanted or expected is irrelevant. What did happen was continual updates that attempted to tackle root issues. We knew the design after a few books.
I don't buy a car without knowing the price, right?
Why would I spend my time bitching about Aggressors (and setting up disingenuous comparisons by using max shots - not you)?
And low and behold the anticipated nerf was real. Waiting was appropriate, was it not?
Arms race is less of a concern. We have PA as a stop gap and were not looking at index to codex levels of variance in play style (but certainly in potential unit updates). The new gear is points based so if the points are reasonable it may be a wash.
So, yes, ill wait and see if there's more info on eradicators. If they're bs then they're bs. If the 2 week FAQ doesn't turn them around *if* they're bsthen riot.
+1A per claw is a decent little buff, wonder if when we get a CSMfaq to change all the weapons they remember to apply that to my Claws of the Black Hunt relic.
Although (assuming no points changes) does +1A and +1W make a warp talon worth 27points? Still don't think so, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Vanican wrote: +1A per claw is a decent little buff, wonder if when we get a CSMfaq to change all the weapons they remember to apply that to my Claws of the Black Hunt relic.
Although (assuming no points changes) does +1A and +1W make a warp talon worth 27points? Still don't think so, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
If assault intercessors stay 27 then it is +1 ap, 5++, reroll wounds and deepstrike/fly for 10. Feels steep.
Is that in reference to my efficiency remark on eradicators vs a Repulsor Executioner? That was 6 eradicators. Double firing, assuming they moved to get the shot so are - 1 to hit: 12×.5=6 hits, S8 vs T8 wounding on 4s 6×.5=3 wounds, AP-4 blows right through the armour so no save Dd6+2 averages 5.5 damage per wound gets you 16 wounds, or a dead Repulsor Executioner. That's from 6 eradicators: 240 points.
"The waiting never stops"
It didn't for GK for quite a long time. So for 1 in 25 there was a lot of waiting.
Everything else happened along the schedule GW defined. Whether or not it changed things the way you or I wanted or expected is irrelevant. What did happen was continual updates that attempted to tackle root issues. We knew the design after a few books.
I don't buy a car without knowing the price, right?
Why would I spend my time bitching about Aggressors (and setting up disingenuous comparisons by using max shots - not you)?
And low and behold the anticipated nerf was real. Waiting was appropriate, was it not?
Arms race is less of a concern. We have PA as a stop gap and were not looking at index to codex levels of variance in play style (but certainly in potential unit updates). The new gear is points based so if the points are reasonable it may be a wash.
So, yes, ill wait and see if there's more info on eradicators. If they're bs then they're bs. If the 2 week FAQ doesn't turn them around *if* they're bsthen riot.
Oh, I'm not rioting. We've all seen this before. Like I said "scatbikes 2020". I just find it odd they did such a good job on the rest of the codex but missed the mark on eradicators. But if they change the Salamanders super doctrine, no worries, they'll still bounce off of my Fellblade and Achilles, assuming I'm stupid enough to let a full squad get within 24. I like a lot of these changes and they've got me excited for the new csm codex and the Imperial Armour Compendium. I hope I'm not disappointed.
BTW did you notice +1A per LC?
No, I didn't. See, something to get excited about. Warp talons with 4 attacks on the charge. They'll shred loyalists. Assuming they kept shred. They still reroll wounds right? And Reaper ACs are AP-2 now. I'm sure that will apply to normal ACs as well. Maybe butcher cannons? Yeah, can't wait to see the Compendium.
Vanican wrote: +1A per claw is a decent little buff, wonder if when we get a CSMfaq to change all the weapons they remember to apply that to my Claws of the Black Hunt relic.
Although (assuming no points changes) does +1A and +1W make a warp talon worth 27points? Still don't think so, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
If assault intercessors stay 27 then it is +1 ap, 5++, reroll wounds and deepstrike/fly for 10. Feels steep.
Not for Night Lords if we keep Prey On The Weak and Raptor Strike.
Edit: Oh yeah. Chainfists are flat 3 damage against vehicles. Now that's how they're supposed to work. Almost like having Armourbane back again. Here's hoping dreadnought chainfists/claws get a similar boost (build sheet for the ironclad had them at D2d3, so, flat 6 against vehicles? My Contemptor would love that).
Is that in reference to my efficiency remark on eradicators vs a Repulsor Executioner? That was 6 eradicators. Double firing, assuming they moved to get the shot so are - 1 to hit: 12×.5=6 hits, S8 vs T8 wounding on 4s 6×.5=3 wounds, AP-4 blows right through the armour so no save Dd6+2 averages 5.5 damage per wound gets you 16 wounds, or a dead Repulsor Executioner. That's from 6 eradicators: 240 points.
"The waiting never stops"
It didn't for GK for quite a long time. So for 1 in 25 there was a lot of waiting.
Everything else happened along the schedule GW defined. Whether or not it changed things the way you or I wanted or expected is irrelevant. What did happen was continual updates that attempted to tackle root issues. We knew the design after a few books.
I don't buy a car without knowing the price, right?
Why would I spend my time bitching about Aggressors (and setting up disingenuous comparisons by using max shots - not you)?
And low and behold the anticipated nerf was real. Waiting was appropriate, was it not?
Arms race is less of a concern. We have PA as a stop gap and were not looking at index to codex levels of variance in play style (but certainly in potential unit updates). The new gear is points based so if the points are reasonable it may be a wash.
So, yes, ill wait and see if there's more info on eradicators. If they're bs then they're bs. If the 2 week FAQ doesn't turn them around *if* they're bsthen riot.
Oh, I'm not rioting. We've all seen this before. Like I said "scatbikes 2020". I just find it odd they did such a good job on the rest of the codex but missed the mark on eradicators. But if they change the Salamanders super doctrine, no worries, they'll still bounce off of my Fellblade and Achilles, assuming I'm stupid enough to let a full squad get within 24. I like a lot of these changes and they've got me excited for the new csm codex and the Imperial Armour Compendium. I hope I'm not disappointed.
BTW did you notice +1A per LC?
No, I didn't. See, something to get excited about. Warp talons with 4 attacks on the charge. They'll shred loyalists. Assuming they kept shred. They still reroll wounds right? And Reaper ACs are AP-2 now. I'm sure that will apply to normal ACs as well. Maybe butcher cannons? Yeah, can't wait to see the Compendium.
Vanican wrote: +1A per claw is a decent little buff, wonder if when we get a CSMfaq to change all the weapons they remember to apply that to my Claws of the Black Hunt relic.
Although (assuming no points changes) does +1A and +1W make a warp talon worth 27points? Still don't think so, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
If assault intercessors stay 27 then it is +1 ap, 5++, reroll wounds and deepstrike/fly for 10. Feels steep.
Not for Night Lords if we keep Prey On The Weak and Raptor Strike.
regarding nightlords, apparently reivers are getting a rule that removes obsec from nearby units' I'd not be at all suprised if that ended up as part of the night lords chapter tactics when C:CSM came out
Galas wrote: I'll always love how marine apologist respond with "But your unit is actually crap" when somebody mentions a actually competitive unit of their codex and how inferior it is to a space marine unit, even after this one has been nerfed.
Space Marine units exist in a perpetual state of being "fine" (That translates to absolutely OP) and "unusable crap" (That range goes from good to actually kinda bad)
I have a marine army. But I'll say it now. The average Space Marine vocal player is an absolute cancer on competitive discussion.
Is that in reference to my efficiency remark on eradicators vs a Repulsor Executioner? That was 6 eradicators. Double firing, assuming they moved to get the shot so are - 1 to hit: 12×.5=6 hits, S8 vs T8 wounding on 4s 6×.5=3 wounds, AP-4 blows right through the armour so no save Dd6+2 averages 5.5 damage per wound gets you 16 wounds, or a dead Repulsor Executioner. That's from 6 eradicators: 240 points.
"The waiting never stops"
It didn't for GK for quite a long time. So for 1 in 25 there was a lot of waiting.
Everything else happened along the schedule GW defined. Whether or not it changed things the way you or I wanted or expected is irrelevant. What did happen was continual updates that attempted to tackle root issues. We knew the design after a few books.
I don't buy a car without knowing the price, right?
Why would I spend my time bitching about Aggressors (and setting up disingenuous comparisons by using max shots - not you)?
And low and behold the anticipated nerf was real. Waiting was appropriate, was it not?
Arms race is less of a concern. We have PA as a stop gap and were not looking at index to codex levels of variance in play style (but certainly in potential unit updates). The new gear is points based so if the points are reasonable it may be a wash.
So, yes, ill wait and see if there's more info on eradicators. If they're bs then they're bs. If the 2 week FAQ doesn't turn them around *if* they're bsthen riot.
Oh, I'm not rioting. We've all seen this before. Like I said "scatbikes 2020". I just find it odd they did such a good job on the rest of the codex but missed the mark on eradicators. But if they change the Salamanders super doctrine, no worries, they'll still bounce off of my Fellblade and Achilles, assuming I'm stupid enough to let a full squad get within 24. I like a lot of these changes and they've got me excited for the new csm codex and the Imperial Armour Compendium. I hope I'm not disappointed.
BTW did you notice +1A per LC?
No, I didn't. See, something to get excited about. Warp talons with 4 attacks on the charge. They'll shred loyalists. Assuming they kept shred. They still reroll wounds right? And Reaper ACs are AP-2 now. I'm sure that will apply to normal ACs as well. Maybe butcher cannons? Yeah, can't wait to see the Compendium.
Vanican wrote: +1A per claw is a decent little buff, wonder if when we get a CSMfaq to change all the weapons they remember to apply that to my Claws of the Black Hunt relic.
Although (assuming no points changes) does +1A and +1W make a warp talon worth 27points? Still don't think so, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
If assault intercessors stay 27 then it is +1 ap, 5++, reroll wounds and deepstrike/fly for 10. Feels steep.
Not for Night Lords if we keep Prey On The Weak and Raptor Strike.
regarding nightlords, apparently reivers are getting a rule that removes obsec from nearby units' I'd not be at all suprised if that ended up as part of the night lords chapter tactics when C:CSM came out
Oh, I'm not rioting. We've all seen this before. Like I said "scatbikes 2020". I just find it odd they did such a good job on the rest of the codex but missed the mark on eradicators.
That's what shocks me too.
All of the codex changes are truly nice, both for the SM and for the rest of the game.
Then you read eradicators...
Are we going to see the SM being turned into a mid/high tier faction that is propelled into OP due to an unbalanced datasheet?
Oh, I'm not rioting. We've all seen this before. Like I said "scatbikes 2020". I just find it odd they did such a good job on the rest of the codex but missed the mark on eradicators.
That's what shocks me too.
All of the codex changes are truly nice, both for the SM and for the rest of the game.
Then you read eradicators...
Are we going to see the SM being turned into a mid/high tier faction that is propelled into OP due to an unbalanced datasheet?
Galas wrote: I'll always love how marine apologist respond with "But your unit is actually crap" when somebody mentions a actually competitive unit of their codex and how inferior it is to a space marine unit, even after this one has been nerfed.
Space Marine units exist in a perpetual state of being "fine" (That translates to absolutely OP) and "unusable crap" (That range goes from good to actually kinda bad)
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
no, try again
Galas wrote: I'll always love how marine apologist respond with "But your unit is actually crap" when somebody mentions a actually competitive unit of their codex and how inferior it is to a space marine unit, even after this one has been nerfed.
Well now that the codex has been leaked, the rules look fine. Erdictors got the 6 man unit with option to combat squads and a Multi Melta in every 3 dudes, which is nice, because some people were worried that they would be caped at 3 men. Now they are a lot more slot efficient.
Veteran intercessors for assault marines are a thing, so maybe those people who wanted to play a melee horde are going to find a slot for them. Hand flamers and melee weapons for all sgts not just assault intercessors ones are nice too.
Bummer about the aggresors nerf to all people that stocked up on them, but who knows, maybe they are still worth it. Am not a good player enough to judge the changes in points and rules.
Sad that heavy intercessors sgts do not have the melee upgrade options. a 2/2/2 auto boltgun, heavy auto boltgun, vet assault intercessors army looked cool on paper.
Karol wrote: Well now that the codex has been leaked, the rules look fine. Erdictors got the 6 man unit with option to combat squads and a Multi Melta in every 3 dudes, which is nice, because some people were worried that they would be caped at 3 men. Now they are a lot more slot efficient.
And that right there is either Trolling or prime example of the issue.
Only real hope at this point is a the 2 week eratta.
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
no, try again
dude, the unit people are complaining about eradicators to are fire dragons. no one uses them because in 8th edition Melta has been GARBAGE
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
no, try again
dude, the unit people are complaining about eradicators to are fire dragons. no one uses them because in 8th edition Melta has been GARBAGE
You do know that I don't play marines right? And that my dudes don't have access to erdictors, and probably never will.
And I think that over 40+ pages we established that non marine players hate them, while marine players generaly like to have an efficient anti tank options.
The worries about them were about the squad size, so I , although this is a speculation, assuming that marine players like the fact that the unit is 6 man strong, unlike eliminators, and by virtue of that more slot efficient.
From what perspective do you want me to write my posts from, oppressed xeno player?
Or to add how Abhore the Witch is unfair to my army? It seems like I can't get anything right. I write about GK, my army, it is bad because I write only about them. I try to write about armies and units from the army perspective, I am suddenly trolling. I make my first joke, I get a warning.
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
no, try again
dude, the unit people are complaining about eradicators to are fire dragons. no one uses them because in 8th edition Melta has been GARBAGE
Mr Morden wrote: Do you think Eradicators are fair and balanced?
He is not arguing wether Eradicators are balanced or not. He said that the comparison isn't useful because people take the new, super efficient unit and compare it to something nobody took in a competitive environment.
Mr Morden wrote: Do you think Eradicators are fair and balanced?
He is not arguing wether Eradicators are balanced or not. He said that the comparison isn't useful because people take the new, super efficient unit and compare it to something nobody took in a competitive environment.
Your question here is misrepresenting his point.
What has the SpAcE mARinE pLayER StaMp Of ApPrOvaL to compare against then?
If the exact same unit, with the same weapons and that fulfils a similar goal is an invalid comparison. What is?
Mr Morden wrote: Do you think Eradicators are fair and balanced?
He is not arguing wether Eradicators are balanced or not. He said that the comparison isn't useful because people take the new, super efficient unit and compare it to something nobody took in a competitive environment.
Your question here is misrepresenting his point.
What has the SpAcE mARinE pLayER StaMp Of ApPrOvaL to compare against then?
If the exact same unit, with the same weapons and that fulfils a similar goal is an invalid comparison. What is?
Unfortunately the sisters compare actually quite nice to the eradicators.
Eradicators look quite underpowered compared to the sisters, at least damage/point wise.
GW screwed up a lot of AT units with their new hotness for melta, not just eradicators.
Deal with it, you will not see anything with more than 3 wounds in 9th edition.
Karol wrote: You do know that I don't play marines right? And that my dudes don't have access to erdictors, and probably never will.
And I think that over 40+ pages we established that non marine players hate them, while marine players generaly like to have an efficient anti tank options.
The worries about them were about the squad size, so I , although this is a speculation, assuming that marine players like the fact that the unit is 6 man strong, unlike eliminators, and by virtue of that more slot efficient.
From what perspective do you want me to write my posts from, oppressed xeno player?
Or to add how Abhore the Witch is unfair to my army? It seems like I can't get anything right. I write about GK, my army, it is bad because I write only about them. I try to write about armies and units from the army perspective, I am suddenly trolling. I make my first joke, I get a warning.
Grey Knights are Marines - its in the keywords and everything. Look at my Sig Mate - I play MARINES but not a exclusively anything player. I just don't like unbalnced units - I said the same (repeatedly) about Eldar Cheese Serpents in previous editions.
Eradicators look quite underpowered compared to the sisters, at least damage/point wise.
Multimeltas look powerful now, it may be that they need a points bump. Oh but guess which weapon the Eradicators get as a free swap for every 3 of them. ??
Then there is the durability and combat prowess comparision of the two units.
Mr Morden wrote: Do you think Eradicators are fair and balanced?
He is not arguing wether Eradicators are balanced or not. He said that the comparison isn't useful because people take the new, super efficient unit and compare it to something nobody took in a competitive environment.
Your question here is misrepresenting his point.
Its a simple question is it not? Why is it wrong to ask?
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
no, try again
dude, the unit people are complaining about eradicators to are fire dragons. no one uses them because in 8th edition Melta has been GARBAGE
Dishonest argumentation is dishonest, Chosen with melta, aswell as obliterators were also compared. The later IS comptetitve.
P: 4 of this here thread even:
Not Online!!! wrote: The very fact that 3 of them cost 15 pts more then a singular obliterator , should maybee give pause for thought.
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
no, try again
dude, the unit people are complaining about eradicators to are fire dragons. no one uses them because in 8th edition Melta has been GARBAGE
They were also compaired yo twin fusion veteran crisis suits with 2 fusion blasters which were used at the end of 8th but marine players won't respond yo that comparison as they are 60ppm and still worse than eradicators.
The Aggressor changes don’t bother me much because I rarely ever got to double tap with my Flamers, and those still won’t be penalized for running and shooting. Plus now I get an extra four inches of range which is super nice.
Eradicators should probably be dropped to an 18” range. Make them have to put a bit of work into getting into range.
Still waiting to see a Reiver sheet to see exactly what their changes are.
Mr Morden wrote: Do you think Eradicators are fair and balanced?
He is not arguing wether Eradicators are balanced or not. He said that the comparison isn't useful because people take the new, super efficient unit and compare it to something nobody took in a competitive environment.
Your question here is misrepresenting his point.
What has the SpAcE mARinE pLayER StaMp Of ApPrOvaL to compare against then?
If the exact same unit, with the same weapons and that fulfils a similar goal is an invalid comparison. What is?
To start with, it's obvious GW agrees that basic melta weapons needed work, and 9th edition is going to see GW re-examining some weapons to make them be a bit better performing. As such comparing them to stuff in codex CWE or Orks etc has the flaw of "yeah their weapons are better because GW is boosting that class of weapons" we'd be best off to find a melta unit outside codex space marines to compare them too.
One whose armed with Imperial Melta weapons and thus we know how their weapons will perform, and thus can make a more honest comparison by looking at them beside marines with updated guns.
Sister of Battle retributors would be about perfect. take a look at them, assume the updated multi melta profile.. how do they compare?
Karol wrote: Well now that the codex has been leaked, the rules look fine. Erdictors got the 6 man unit with option to combat squads and a Multi Melta in every 3 dudes, which is nice, because some people were worried that they would be caped at 3 men. Now they are a lot more slot efficient.
Karol wrote: The worries about them were about the squad size, so I , although this is a speculation, assuming that marine players like the fact that the unit is 6 man strong, unlike eliminators, and by virtue of that more slot efficient.
is this.... you can't be.... wait wha.... how the... hell
WHAT discussion have you been reading where the concern about ERADICATORS was that they weren't slot efficient enough and needed to be buffed in that regards? Or that they needed to be buffed with new weapons?
This is too extreme levels of absurd to even be annoying, just..... just... what?
Beyond eradicators, which somehow managed to dive straight off the deep end in the codex, the rest seems fine however. Bladeguard are still a touch cheap but that's easily fixed.
Not Online!!! wrote: No brian, you don't get that favour, the comparisons were allready made to good units.
You wanting to argue further dishonestly is a squarly YOU issue.
no dude, I'm pointing out that ALL Melta weapons are being buffed, and therefore, you must examine eradicators in that light. I gave you a perfectly acceptable point of comparison. a fairly recent unit from another codex. that we know will get it's weapon changed in X a way.
Mr Morden wrote: Do you think Eradicators are fair and balanced?
He is not arguing wether Eradicators are balanced or not. He said that the comparison isn't useful because people take the new, super efficient unit and compare it to something nobody took in a competitive environment.
Your question here is misrepresenting his point.
What has the SpAcE mARinE pLayER StaMp Of ApPrOvaL to compare against then?
If the exact same unit, with the same weapons and that fulfils a similar goal is an invalid comparison. What is?
To start with, it's obvious GW agrees that basic melta weapons needed work, and 9th edition is going to see GW re-examining some weapons to make them be a bit better performing. As such comparing them to stuff in codex CWE or Orks etc has the flaw of "yeah their weapons are better because GW is boosting that class of weapons" we'd be best off to find a melta unit outside codex space marines to compare them too.
One whose armed with Imperial Melta weapons and thus we know how their weapons will perform, and thus can make a more honest comparison by looking at them beside marines with updated guns.
Sister of Battle retributors would be about perfect. take a look at them, assume the updated multi melta profile.. how do they compare?
Like a tissue box being 5 t3 3+sv to 9T5 3+Sv wounds.
But that asside no buffs they do 9.3 wounds to a Russ for 140 points.
Eradicators 2 heavy plus MM do 9 if they move and shoot 12 if they don't for 120 points
Still undercosted and MFM 2020 is proven to be a complete take if it was supposed to have balanced points.
Vehicals need about 1/3 reduction in price Xeno players are being overcharged rediculously. But please continue with how this makes eradicators not the prime example of GW having failed to balance a unit.
Not Online!!! wrote: No brian, you don't get that favour, the comparisons were allready made to good units.
You wanting to argue further dishonestly is a squarly YOU issue.
no dude, I'm pointing out that ALL Melta weapons are being buffed, and therefore, you must examine eradicators in that light. I gave you a perfectly acceptable point of comparison. a fairly recent unit from another codex. that we know will get it's weapon changed in X a way.
Stop arguing dishonestly by claiming "OnLy BaD UniTs WeRe UseD!!!!!!"""
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
no, try again
dude, the unit people are complaining about eradicators to are fire dragons. no one uses them because in 8th edition Melta has been GARBAGE
Dishonest argumentation is dishonest, Chosen with melta, aswell as obliterators were also compared. The later IS comptetitve.
P: 4 of this here thread even:
Not Online!!! wrote: The very fact that 3 of them cost 15 pts more then a singular obliterator , should maybee give pause for thought.
Mr Morden wrote: Do you think Eradicators are fair and balanced?
He is not arguing wether Eradicators are balanced or not. He said that the comparison isn't useful because people take the new, super efficient unit and compare it to something nobody took in a competitive environment.
Your question here is misrepresenting his point.
What has the SpAcE mARinE pLayER StaMp Of ApPrOvaL to compare against then?
If the exact same unit, with the same weapons and that fulfils a similar goal is an invalid comparison. What is?
To start with, it's obvious GW agrees that basic melta weapons needed work, and 9th edition is going to see GW re-examining some weapons to make them be a bit better performing. As such comparing them to stuff in codex CWE or Orks etc has the flaw of "yeah their weapons are better because GW is boosting that class of weapons" we'd be best off to find a melta unit outside codex space marines to compare them too.
One whose armed with Imperial Melta weapons and thus we know how their weapons will perform, and thus can make a more honest comparison by looking at them beside marines with updated guns.
Sister of Battle retributors would be about perfect. take a look at them, assume the updated multi melta profile.. how do they compare?
Like a tissue box being 5 t3 3+sv to 9T5 3+Sv wounds.
But that asside no buffs they do 9.3 wounds to a Russ for 140 points.
Eradicators 2 heavy plus MM do 9 if they move and shoot 12 if they don't for 120 points
Still undercosted and MFM 2020 is proven to be a complete take if it was supposed to have balanced points.
Vehicals need about 1/3 reduction in price Xeno players are being overcharged rediculously. But please continue with how this makes eradicators not the prime example of GW having failed to balance a unit.
Better yet, find me 2 more examples of units from the leaks they failed to balance.
Dudeface wrote: Beyond eradicators, which somehow managed to dive straight off the deep end in the codex, the rest seems fine however. Bladeguard are still a touch cheap but that's easily fixed.
Unfortunately the sisters compare actually quite nice to the eradicators.
Eradicators look quite underpowered compared to the sisters, at least damage/point wise.
GW screwed up a lot of AT units with their new hotness for melta, not just eradicators.
Deal with it, you will not see anything with more than 3 wounds in 9th edition.
Not at all. Those sisters retributors are T3 1W 3+ dudes that cost 32ppm. Eradicators look 10 times better, because they aren't glass cannon while their damage output is certainly not inferior.
Sisters melta retributors were and they may be finally good while their army is not going to dominate the meta because of it. Eradicators were overpowered before and they're even more overpowered now. Their army was dominating the meta before, and I'm referring to any possible levels of gaming from ultra casual to ultra competitive, (tournament data from Australia aren't real info), and will continue to do it.
And I wouldn't be so sure about what we're going to see or not. When 9th was released many players considered armies with cheaper infantry models dead, with only the more elite oriented ones to perform well, and they ended up wrong. Now we may assume that this edition will still be the elite oriented one or some return of the hordes but let's wait 1-2 months and we'll all predict completely different metas.
Dudeface wrote: Beyond eradicators, which somehow managed to dive straight off the deep end in the codex, the rest seems fine however. Bladeguard are still a touch cheap but that's easily fixed.
but will they be?
this was the time to fix it
Their transport got nerfed and they don't get full rerolls any more, there's plenty of reasons they maybe want to wait and see what the community do. It's not like they do a pass of all points every year.
Vehicals need about 1/3 reduction in price Xeno players are being overcharged rediculously. But please continue with how this makes eradicators not the prime example of GW having failed to balance a unit.
I prefer giving them more wounds. Reducing the model count to 10-15% was a good move for GW, I don't want to come back to huge armies in standard games only because lethality is too high.
Vehicals need about 1/3 reduction in price Xeno players are being overcharged rediculously. But please continue with how this makes eradicators not the prime example of GW having failed to balance a unit.
I prefer giving them more wounds. Reducing the model count to 10-15% was a good move for GW, I don't want to come back to huge armies in standard games only because lethality is too high.
Agreed, it also helps differentiate between anti infantry and anti armour, makes d2 weapons etc less appealing to spam against vehicles if they have more wound but gives more scope to increase anti tank damage (as they have) which is wasted on infantry.
Vehicals need about 1/3 reduction in price Xeno players are being overcharged rediculously. But please continue with how this makes eradicators not the prime example of GW having failed to balance a unit.
I prefer giving them more wounds. Reducing the model count to 10-15% was a good move for GW, I don't want to come back to huge armies in standard games only because lethality is too high.
How many more wounds do you give a warhound titian, Acresstus class Knights Falchion and Fellblades,
A Riptide, Russ all need like 20 something wounds to not give out 100%+ returns in a single volly from eridicators.
Knights are now 50 wounds, Titains at the 80+ range?
I'm not opposed to the idea but man looks like anyone without a codex is going to be unplayable in the new Eradicators meta.
Vehicals need about 1/3 reduction in price Xeno players are being overcharged rediculously. But please continue with how this makes eradicators not the prime example of GW having failed to balance a unit.
I prefer giving them more wounds. Reducing the model count to 10-15% was a good move for GW, I don't want to come back to huge armies in standard games only because lethality is too high.
How many more wounds do you give a warhound titian, Acresstus class Knights Falchion and Fellblades,
A Riptide, Russ all need like 20 something wounds to not give out 100%+ returns in a single volly from eridicators.
Knights are now 50 wounds, Titains at the 80+ range?
I'm not opposed to the idea but man looks like anyone without a codex is going to be unplayable in the new Eradicators meta.
Just ask your opponent not to bring 18 eradicators, or don't bring anything they're good at killing. Not ideal but if you're that worried it's the best way.
Vehicals need about 1/3 reduction in price Xeno players are being overcharged rediculously. But please continue with how this makes eradicators not the prime example of GW having failed to balance a unit.
I prefer giving them more wounds. Reducing the model count to 10-15% was a good move for GW, I don't want to come back to huge armies in standard games only because lethality is too high.
How many more wounds do you give a warhound titian, Acresstus class Knights Falchion and Fellblades,
A Riptide, Russ all need like 20 something wounds to not give out 100%+ returns in a single volly from eridicators.
Knights are now 50 wounds, Titains at the 80+ range?
I'm not opposed to the idea but man looks like anyone without a codex is going to be unplayable in the new Eradicators meta.
Just ask your opponent not to bring 18 eradicators, or don't bring anything they're good at killing. Not ideal but if you're that worried it's the best way.
18 haha good one, 6 of them can one round a knight with what sounds like will be the new standard marine buffs.
The sad thing is even if I leave the big units at home they can achieve a 100%+ return against crisis suits FFS.
I'm not opposed to the idea but man looks like anyone without a codex is going to be unplayable in the new Eradicators meta.
It's nothing different than early 8th when SM had their codex and pretty much anyone else still had the index. Guilliman's Ultramarines, even without 6+ razorbacks, were basically impossible to defeat with my Orks, Drukhari or SW unless the SM player toned down his list by a large margin. And I had 10k of orks, 7k of SW and 5k of Drukhari back then, so it wasn't like I didn't have options.
I guess it won't be different now, SM players can either avoid bringing tournament level lists to casual games or play against themselves. Nothing new here.
Unfortunately the sisters compare actually quite nice to the eradicators.
Eradicators look quite underpowered compared to the sisters, at least damage/point wise.
GW screwed up a lot of AT units with their new hotness for melta, not just eradicators.
Deal with it, you will not see anything with more than 3 wounds in 9th edition.
Not at all. Those sisters retributors are T3 1W 3+ dudes that cost 32ppm. Eradicators look 10 times better, because they aren't glass cannon while their damage output is certainly not inferior.
Sisters melta retributors were and they may be finally good while their army is not going to dominate the meta because of it. Eradicators were overpowered before and they're even more overpowered now. Their army was dominating the meta before, and I'm referring to any possible levels of gaming from ultra casual to ultra competitive, (tournament data from Australia aren't real info), and will continue to do it.
And I wouldn't be so sure about what we're going to see or not. When 9th was released many players considered armies with cheaper infantry models dead, with only the more elite oriented ones to perform well, and they ended up wrong. Now we may assume that this edition will still be the elite oriented one or some return of the hordes but let's wait 1-2 months and we'll all predict completely different metas.
Yes, and that's why I said that compared well damage/point wise, so you telling me that they don't compare well in thoughness, doesn't exactly count as a counter argument
Yes, and that's why I said that compared well damage/point wise, so you telling me that they don't compare well in thoughness, doesn't exactly count as a counter argument
Comparisons make sense only considering the units as a whole Better if also taking into account the actual impact they have on their armies and the meta. Damage/point wise means nothing without comparing toughness as those sisters will fire one turn and then evaporate, while those SM will likely fire multiple times and they're also easier to spam, I don't think many sororitas armies will bring more than a unit of retributors.
I can deal with a single glasscannon unit that can kill a land raider in one turn, I probably can't if I have to face three, which aren't even glasscannon, on top on a top tier army.
Overall Eradicators are way better than Multimelta retributors.
Yes, and that's why I said that compared well damage/point wise, so you telling me that they don't compare well in thoughness, doesn't exactly count as a counter argument
Excpet they don't eradicators are Flat out better
Heck I layed out the maths for you, but as usual it was ignored as it showed your point to be untrue.
Retributors cost 15 points per wound to a Russ
Eradicators cost 13 points per wound or 10 points per wound done thats not even remotely comparable.
Yes, and that's why I said that compared well damage/point wise, so you telling me that they don't compare well in thoughness, doesn't exactly count as a counter argument
Excpet they don't eradicators are Flat out better
Heck I layed out the maths for you, but as usual it was ignored as it showed your point to be untrue.
Retributors cost 15 points per wound to a Russ
Eradicators cost 13 points per wound or 10 points per wound done thats not even remotely comparable.
And they can both be buffed to be more efficent.
Include the armorium cherubs, for that first round you're getting 14 wounds out even after moving (i.e. from further away or from safely disembarking) with no buffs, which is categorically better than the heavy eradicators with multimelta standing still.
They're both good units, both have quirks in different ways and on the face of it eradicators are slightly better but retributors are more flexible imo.
Yes, and that's why I said that compared well damage/point wise, so you telling me that they don't compare well in thoughness, doesn't exactly count as a counter argument
Excpet they don't eradicators are Flat out better
Heck I layed out the maths for you, but as usual it was ignored as it showed your point to be untrue.
Retributors cost 15 points per wound to a Russ
Eradicators cost 13 points per wound or 10 points per wound done thats not even remotely comparable.
And they can both be buffed to be more efficent.
Include the armorium cherubs, for that first round you're getting 14 wounds out even after moving (i.e. from further away or from safely disembarking) with no buffs, which is categorically better than the heavy eradicators with multimelta standing still.
They're both good units, both have quirks in different ways and on the face of it eradicators are slightly better but retributors are more flexible imo.
Dont drag our retributers into this, unlike the special snowflake marines we dont have 500 different AT options to choose from, we have melta weapons and the exorcist, end of list.
Include the armorium cherubs, for that first round you're getting 14 wounds out even after moving (i.e. from further away or from safely disembarking) with no buffs, which is categorically better than the heavy eradicators with multimelta standing still.
They're both good units, both have quirks in different ways and on the face of it eradicators are slightly better but retributors are more flexible imo.
Atleast you haven't gone radio silence when confronted with numbers so I'll try and be as civil avout this as I can.
So your saying make them more expensive with one use only buffs and they get better, than eradicators but nothing like the durability.
Also this isnt using things like Salamanders and other strategum buffs to make the eradicators more efficent that they get every turn for 0 points for adding a facrion keyword.
WHAT discussion have you been reading where the concern about ERADICATORS was that they weren't slot efficient enough and needed to be buffed in that regards? Or that they needed to be buffed with new weapons?
This is too extreme levels of absurd to even be annoying, just..... just... what?
Among people that play space marines on other forums and at the new store I go to. More or less everyone was worried if sm will have enough slots, and , which ended up to be true, if scouts stop being a cheap troop option. With everything else going up in points, starting with characters and relics and ending with troops, transports and weapon options, no is going to be able to run that mythical 18 erdictor list. And we play 2250pts here, people here claim they play 2000pts and less, so this is even less of a problem.
Include the armorium cherubs, for that first round you're getting 14 wounds out even after moving (i.e. from further away or from safely disembarking) with no buffs, which is categorically better than the heavy eradicators with multimelta standing still.
They're both good units, both have quirks in different ways and on the face of it eradicators are slightly better but retributors are more flexible imo.
Atleast you haven't gone radio silence when confronted with numbers so I'll try and be as civil avout this as I can.
So your saying make them more expensive with one use only buffs and they get better, than eradicators but nothing like the durability.
Also this isnt using things like Salamanders and other strategum buffs to make the eradicators more efficent that they get every turn for 0 points for adding a facrion keyword.
You're also ignoring miracle dice, orders, strats etc for both sides, the fact retributors get cheaper easier to access transports, can split fire and are more mobile as well.
Yes eradicators will do notably more damage if you park them up on a spot and just stand still firing at 1 target every turn. But there is more to the game than just mathematical damage output. Are eradicators too good and too cheap, absolutely. Are the only unit in the game with those sorts of numbers, not at all.
Yes, and that's why I said that compared well damage/point wise, so you telling me that they don't compare well in thoughness, doesn't exactly count as a counter argument
Comparisons make sense only considering the units as a whole Better if also taking into account the actual impact they have on their armies and the meta. Damage/point wise means nothing without comparing toughness as those sisters will fire one turn and then evaporate, while those SM will likely fire multiple times and they're also easier to spam, I don't think many sororitas armies will bring more than a unit of retributors.
I can deal with a single glasscannon unit that can kill a land raider in one turn, I probably can't if I have to face three, which aren't even glasscannon, on top on a top tier army.
Overall Eradicators are way better than Multimelta retributors.
Correct, but you have to learn how to answer.
If you answer to a statement which says "Damage wise x is better than y", you don't answer "Not at all! y is more durable than y!" like you did, because that automatically makes you wrong. You answer "Ok, but if you consider the durability of those units, then y is better than x" and the discussion can go on. Easy isn't it?
Include the armorium cherubs, for that first round you're getting 14 wounds out even after moving (i.e. from further away or from safely disembarking) with no buffs, which is categorically better than the heavy eradicators with multimelta standing still.
They're both good units, both have quirks in different ways and on the face of it eradicators are slightly better but retributors are more flexible imo.
Atleast you haven't gone radio silence when confronted with numbers so I'll try and be as civil avout this as I can.
So your saying make them more expensive with one use only buffs and they get better, than eradicators but nothing like the durability.
Also this isnt using things like Salamanders and other strategum buffs to make the eradicators more efficent that they get every turn for 0 points for adding a facrion keyword.
I missed your answer, but yes I was considering the cherubs in it.
Include the armorium cherubs, for that first round you're getting 14 wounds out even after moving (i.e. from further away or from safely disembarking) with no buffs, which is categorically better than the heavy eradicators with multimelta standing still.
They're both good units, both have quirks in different ways and on the face of it eradicators are slightly better but retributors are more flexible imo.
Atleast you haven't gone radio silence when confronted with numbers so I'll try and be as civil avout this as I can.
So your saying make them more expensive with one use only buffs and they get better, than eradicators but nothing like the durability.
Also this isnt using things like Salamanders and other strategum buffs to make the eradicators more efficent that they get every turn for 0 points for adding a facrion keyword.
You're also ignoring miracle dice, orders, strats etc for both sides, the fact retributors get cheaper easier to access transports, can split fire and are more mobile as well.
Yes eradicators will do notably more damage if you park them up on a spot and just stand still firing at 1 target every turn. But there is more to the game than just mathematical damage output. Are eradicators too good and too cheap, absolutely. Are the only unit in the game with those sorts of numbers, not at all.
Yeah The numbers where done to respond to retributors do more damage than eradicators which they don't base.
I'm not familiar enough with sisters of battle to know all the buffs they can stack but if you do I'd be interested in the numbers as compairing them to units in multiple armies I own they look rediculous.
Dudeface wrote: Beyond eradicators, which somehow managed to dive straight off the deep end in the codex, the rest seems fine however. Bladeguard are still a touch cheap but that's easily fixed.
but will they be?
this was the time to fix it
Their transport got nerfed and they don't get full rerolls any more, there's plenty of reasons they maybe want to wait and see what the community do. It's not like they do a pass of all points every year.
bladeguard are still core, so they get all the rerolls they used to.
Yes, and that's why I said that compared well damage/point wise, so you telling me that they don't compare well in thoughness, doesn't exactly count as a counter argument
Excpet they don't eradicators are Flat out better
Heck I layed out the maths for you, but as usual it was ignored as it showed your point to be untrue.
Retributors cost 15 points per wound to a Russ
Eradicators cost 13 points per wound or 10 points per wound done thats not even remotely comparable.
And they can both be buffed to be more efficent.
Include the armorium cherubs, for that first round you're getting 14 wounds out even after moving (i.e. from further away or from safely disembarking) with no buffs, which is categorically better than the heavy eradicators with multimelta standing still.
They're both good units, both have quirks in different ways and on the face of it eradicators are slightly better but retributors are more flexible imo.
Dont drag our retributers into this, unlike the special snowflake marines we dont have 500 different AT options to choose from, we have melta weapons and the exorcist, end of list.
retributors have been brought up as they're a non marine melta unit that we know will be boosted by these weapons changes and thus is a solid point of comparison.
Include the armorium cherubs, for that first round you're getting 14 wounds out even after moving (i.e. from further away or from safely disembarking) with no buffs, which is categorically better than the heavy eradicators with multimelta standing still.
They're both good units, both have quirks in different ways and on the face of it eradicators are slightly better but retributors are more flexible imo.
Atleast you haven't gone radio silence when confronted with numbers so I'll try and be as civil avout this as I can.
So your saying make them more expensive with one use only buffs and they get better, than eradicators but nothing like the durability.
Also this isnt using things like Salamanders and other strategum buffs to make the eradicators more efficent that they get every turn for 0 points for adding a facrion keyword.
You're also ignoring miracle dice, orders, strats etc for both sides, the fact retributors get cheaper easier to access transports, can split fire and are more mobile as well.
Yes eradicators will do notably more damage if you park them up on a spot and just stand still firing at 1 target every turn. But there is more to the game than just mathematical damage output. Are eradicators too good and too cheap, absolutely. Are the only unit in the game with those sorts of numbers, not at all.
Yeah The numbers where done to respond to retributors do more damage than eradicators which they don't base.
I'm not familiar enough with sisters of battle to know all the buffs they can stack but if you do I'd be interested in the numbers as compairing them to units in multiple armies I own they look rediculous.
ok, so with mircle dice each time you gain one, you roll a D6 and bank it, and you can then put that dice aside and use it to replace a certain roll. obviously it's VEEEEERY popular for people to save their 5s and 6s for melta damage.
Holy gak. This guy. This fething guy. He loses the re-roll abilty he had before, but picks up the old Selfless Healer Warlord trait that lets him heal two models instead of one. Now hold on, you might be saying, what if I wanted to take Father of the Future for that 6+ ignore wounds? Well, you’re in luck, because that’s now baked into the Apothecary’s datasheet (though notably, it now has no bonus effect for Iron Hands, who instead have to live with the same 6+ as everyone else gets. Boo hoo). So for +15 pts, you’re essentially getting both of the Faith & Fury Warlord Traits with the option of a new-and-improved Selfless Healer, which makes him heal a flat 3 wounds instead of d3 on both of his targets, and also lets them use the new Combat Revival stratagem for free, letting them revive a dead model at full wounds without having to spend your precious CP. You can also give him the Acquittal relic bolt pistol, which has a decent profile at strength 5, AP-3, damage 2. It only gets better when you point it at an INFANTRY model, though, since it always wounds on a 2+ and goes up to an impressive damage 4.
regarding nightlords, apparently reivers are getting a rule that removes obsec from nearby units' I'd not be at all suprised if that ended up as part of the night lords chapter tactics when C:CSM came out
Don't get my hopes up. That would be wicked.
oh boy , that would be so dope and actually make sense.
Dudeface wrote: Beyond eradicators, which somehow managed to dive straight off the deep end in the codex, the rest seems fine however. Bladeguard are still a touch cheap but that's easily fixed.
but will they be?
this was the time to fix it
Their transport got nerfed and they don't get full rerolls any more, there's plenty of reasons they maybe want to wait and see what the community do. It's not like they do a pass of all points every year.
bladeguard are still core, so they get all the rerolls they used to.
I thought chapter master was only full reroll hits for characters now? Or was that a typo?
Dudeface wrote: Beyond eradicators, which somehow managed to dive straight off the deep end in the codex, the rest seems fine however. Bladeguard are still a touch cheap but that's easily fixed.
but will they be?
this was the time to fix it
Their transport got nerfed and they don't get full rerolls any more, there's plenty of reasons they maybe want to wait and see what the community do. It's not like they do a pass of all points every year.
bladeguard are still core, so they get all the rerolls they used to.
I thought chapter master was only full reroll hits for characters now? Or was that a typo?
I'm fairly sure the CM selects one unit of core or a character to get Rerolls for a turn. Which can be bladguard, and likely would be on the turn they are pushing an objective
Hey, I don’t think it’s gotten mentioned yet here, but the heavy rifles and Multimelta on them isn’t free. They’re 40 base, +5 for the heavy rifle, +10 for the Multimelta.
AduroT wrote: Hey, I don’t think it’s gotten mentioned yet here, but the heavy rifles and Multimelta on them isn’t free. They’re 40 base, +5 for the heavy rifle, +10 for the Multimelta.
Well that's like 5% less busted but they're still way undercosted.
AduroT wrote: Hey, I don’t think it’s gotten mentioned yet here, but the heavy rifles and Multimelta on them isn’t free. They’re 40 base, +5 for the heavy rifle, +10 for the Multimelta.
Why would I spend my time bitching about Aggressors (and setting up disingenuous comparisons by using max shots - not you)?
And low and behold the anticipated nerf was real. Waiting was appropriate, was it not?
Yep, what a hell of a nerf it was to! Instead of killing an entire mob each turn with 4 they can only kill 2/3rds of a mob with 6. So now it takes them 1.5 turns to earn back their points shooting at boyz instead of 1 turn. Again, you poor guys, how will you ever make do with such weak units.
That's what shocks me too.
All of the codex changes are truly nice, both for the SM and for the rest of the game.
Then you read eradicators...
Are we going to see the SM being turned into a mid/high tier faction that is propelled into OP due to an unbalanced datasheet?
Again, Truly nice is relative. The basic intercessor squad is better at ranged combat then Ork shoota boys of similar point value and the intercessor squad is as good if not BETTER than the average choppa Ork mob of similar point value. And that is before you add in any buffs at all.
Aggressors obliterate 2/3rds of a mob a turn and that isn't even getting into anything else the codex has. Eradicators are just the cherry on top.
in fairness when people say "but your unit is crap" what they're saying is "no one ever uses this unit if they're remotely compeitive, and we've been saying they need to be buffed for ages"
So compare Ork boyz to intercessors, compare tankbustas to Eradicators, compare shoota boyz or any anti-infantry ork unit to Aggressors. How does that work out? SM's even before their new codex leaks were better across the board. And ork boyz and tankbustas were being used in competitive lists.
Karol wrote: Well now that the codex has been leaked, the rules look fine. Erdictors got the 6 man unit with option to combat squads and a Multi Melta in every 3 dudes, which is nice, because some people were worried that they would be caped at 3 men. Now they are a lot more slot efficient.
enter the player saying the rules look fine even though there is literally no unit in the game remotely close to as good as this is right now.
Karol wrote: Veteran intercessors for assault marines are a thing, so maybe those people who wanted to play a melee horde are going to find a slot for them. Hand flamers and melee weapons for all sgts not just assault intercessors ones are nice too.
Nothing like having basic infantry being as efficient as assault oriented armies infantry.
Karol wrote: Bummer about the aggresors nerf to all people that stocked up on them, but who knows, maybe they are still worth it. Am not a good player enough to judge the changes in points and rules.
Sorry SM players, your easy button now requires you to push it....twice. 1 Aggressor = 40pts, kills between 3-4 boyz a turn or 24-32pts no buffs required.
Dudeface wrote: Beyond eradicators, which somehow managed to dive straight off the deep end in the codex, the rest seems fine however. Bladeguard are still a touch cheap but that's easily fixed.
Haven't seen all the leaks yet, but somehow its hilarious you guys all think Aggressors are ok now. 12 shots per model against their chosen target, without buffs killing 3-4 models a turn.
Not Online!!! wrote: No brian, you don't get that favour, the comparisons were allready made to good units.
You wanting to argue further dishonestly is a squarly YOU issue.
no dude, I'm pointing out that ALL Melta weapons are being buffed, and therefore, you must examine eradicators in that light. I gave you a perfectly acceptable point of comparison. a fairly recent unit from another codex. that we know will get it's weapon changed in X a way.
The comparison isn't to Melta weapons, the comparison is to Anti-tank weapons. And again, the best anti-tank unit in my army is arguably the Tankbusta which can't do a fraction of what eradicators can now do.
Dudeface wrote: Beyond eradicators, which somehow managed to dive straight off the deep end in the codex, the rest seems fine however. Bladeguard are still a touch cheap but that's easily fixed.
but will they be?
this was the time to fix it
Their transport got nerfed and they don't get full rerolls any more, there's plenty of reasons they maybe want to wait and see what the community do. It's not like they do a pass of all points every year.
The math isn't hard, 3 eradicators with heavies and 1 multi-melta are getting 8 shots a turn if they don't move, thats 5-6 hits on average. They are wounding T5-7 vehicles 3-4 times on average, with -4 they are bypassing almost everyones normal saves and if they don't have a invuln they are on average doing enough to pop most of those vehicles.
Just ask your opponent not to bring 18 eradicators, or don't bring anything they're good at killing. Not ideal but if you're that worried it's the best way.
I'm sure Tournament organizers will hop right on that.
WHAT discussion have you been reading where the concern about ERADICATORS was that they weren't slot efficient enough and needed to be buffed in that regards? Or that they needed to be buffed with new weapons?
This is too extreme levels of absurd to even be annoying, just..... just... what?
Among people that play space marines on other forums and at the new store I go to. More or less everyone was worried if sm will have enough slots, and , which ended up to be true, if scouts stop being a cheap troop option. With everything else going up in points, starting with characters and relics and ending with troops, transports and weapon options, no is going to be able to run that mythical 18 erdictor list. And we play 2250pts here, people here claim they play 2000pts and less, so this is even less of a problem.
Eradicators were considered the strongest unit in the entire game, and the #1 unit in need of a nerf, by almost the entirety of the competitive community including every single reasonable SM player I've seen (yes, they are rarity on this particular website I'm aware). But to react to them getting buffs by saying "phew, seems there was nothing to worry about, this was the ideal outcome" just displays that you are so far fething disconnected from the competitive scene that you should not be spouting out anywhere near the amount of declarations on the state of faction balance as you do.
Daedalus81 wrote: Chief Apothecary and Eradicators. No reroll hits (don't need them, really), but the ability to make them stick around seems quite strong.
Doctrines are as is. Even without Salamanders this will be stupid strong.
Holy gak. This guy. This fething guy. He loses the re-roll abilty he had before, but picks up the old Selfless Healer Warlord trait that lets him heal two models instead of one. Now hold on, you might be saying, what if I wanted to take Father of the Future for that 6+ ignore wounds? Well, you’re in luck, because that’s now baked into the Apothecary’s datasheet (though notably, it now has no bonus effect for Iron Hands, who instead have to live with the same 6+ as everyone else gets. Boo hoo). So for +15 pts, you’re essentially getting both of the Faith & Fury Warlord Traits with the option of a new-and-improved Selfless Healer, which makes him heal a flat 3 wounds instead of d3 on both of his targets, and also lets them use the new Combat Revival stratagem for free, letting them revive a dead model at full wounds without having to spend your precious CP. You can also give him the Acquittal relic bolt pistol, which has a decent profile at strength 5, AP-3, damage 2. It only gets better when you point it at an INFANTRY model, though, since it always wounds on a 2+ and goes up to an impressive damage 4.
Why waste it on a 3-wound Eradicator when you can bring back an 8-wound ATV?
Daedalus81 wrote: Chief Apothecary and Eradicators. No reroll hits (don't need them, really), but the ability to make them stick around seems quite strong.
Doctrines are as is. Even without Salamanders this will be stupid strong.
Holy gak. This guy. This fething guy. He loses the re-roll abilty he had before, but picks up the old Selfless Healer Warlord trait that lets him heal two models instead of one. Now hold on, you might be saying, what if I wanted to take Father of the Future for that 6+ ignore wounds? Well, you’re in luck, because that’s now baked into the Apothecary’s datasheet (though notably, it now has no bonus effect for Iron Hands, who instead have to live with the same 6+ as everyone else gets. Boo hoo). So for +15 pts, you’re essentially getting both of the Faith & Fury Warlord Traits with the option of a new-and-improved Selfless Healer, which makes him heal a flat 3 wounds instead of d3 on both of his targets, and also lets them use the new Combat Revival stratagem for free, letting them revive a dead model at full wounds without having to spend your precious CP. You can also give him the Acquittal relic bolt pistol, which has a decent profile at strength 5, AP-3, damage 2. It only gets better when you point it at an INFANTRY model, though, since it always wounds on a 2+ and goes up to an impressive damage 4.
Why waste it on a 3-wound Eradicator when you can bring back an 8-wound ATV?
Because that's more meme than real.
ATV are not really good in terms of firepower. You can get much better than a single multimelta for 85 points. They are also not CORE.
If you take those carts, you do that for the mobility, surely not for a castle.
This means that said apot must be a bike one, which is something that only DA have.
This also means that many times you will have your apot going around with those 3 guys without a lot of other stuff within 3", and since ATV are not vehicles, as soon as one goes down you have lost LoS.
Eradicators instead are used either in the castle, or in reserve. If they are in reserve they are hardly going to be ressed, but if they are in the castle, then the apot has easy access to them.
Eradicators were considered the strongest unit in the entire game, and the #1 unit in need of a nerf, by almost the entirety of the competitive community including every single reasonable SM player I've seen (yes, they are rarity on this particular website I'm aware). But to react to them getting buffs by saying "phew, seems there was nothing to worry about, this was the ideal outcome" just displays that you are so far fething disconnected from the competitive scene that you should not be spouting out anywhere near the amount of declarations on the state of faction balance as you do.
I have never in my life, and I go to a sports school, met anyone person who though that just being good is enough. Just because something is good, doesn't mean it can't be even better. And something about erdictors did get better, the squad size, being core etc and people were worried that GW may make them worse, as they did change stuff to be worse after a short time. No one was happy that their recast leviathans suddenly became worse, if they played IH.
Eradicators were considered the strongest unit in the entire game, and the #1 unit in need of a nerf, by almost the entirety of the competitive community including every single reasonable SM player I've seen (yes, they are rarity on this particular website I'm aware). But to react to them getting buffs by saying "phew, seems there was nothing to worry about, this was the ideal outcome" just displays that you are so far fething disconnected from the competitive scene that you should not be spouting out anywhere near the amount of declarations on the state of faction balance as you do.
I have never in my life, and I go to a sports school, met anyone person who though that just being good is enough. Just because something is good, doesn't mean it can't be even better. And something about erdictors did get better, the squad size, being core etc and people were worried that GW may make them worse, as they did change stuff to be worse after a short time. No one was happy that their recast leviathans suddenly became worse, if they played IH.
Ho
Lee
gak
Am I the only one reading this? Seriously someone pinch me, this cannot be real life lmao. Someone weigh in here and tell me they are seeing this same absurdity right now?
Well, surely when Indomitus was released the Codex was already in print. I'm surprised there are changes to Indomitus units at all, probably they realized the strange wording only the Judicar by themselve. Eradicators will be changed in the first FAQ probably if they really are as strong as people say. So have fun with them for the next few weeks while many people haven't even gotten their Indomitus Set or don't care for Marines anyway
Eradicators were considered the strongest unit in the entire game, and the #1 unit in need of a nerf, by almost the entirety of the competitive community including every single reasonable SM player I've seen (yes, they are rarity on this particular website I'm aware). But to react to them getting buffs by saying "phew, seems there was nothing to worry about, this was the ideal outcome" just displays that you are so far fething disconnected from the competitive scene that you should not be spouting out anywhere near the amount of declarations on the state of faction balance as you do.
I have never in my life, and I go to a sports school, met anyone person who though that just being good is enough. Just because something is good, doesn't mean it can't be even better. And something about erdictors did get better, the squad size, being core etc and people were worried that GW may make them worse, as they did change stuff to be worse after a short time. No one was happy that their recast leviathans suddenly became worse, if they played IH.
Ho
Lee
gak
Am I the only one reading this? Seriously someone pinch me, this cannot be real life lmao. Someone weigh in here and tell me they are seeing this same absurdity right now?
No, it's a pretty accurate description of a true WAAC.
It's also a mindset, furthered by social institutions respectively.
It doesn't help that Karols introduction was in a shop that was basically only such people.
Frankly it's also less a Karol problem, he himself admited he was in therapy.
Truth is it isn't an uncommon opinion to have, and considering how GW balances stuff seemingly more via pendulum swings but with adding force in the other direction after every high point it isn't even unfounded.
Eradicators were considered the strongest unit in the entire game, and the #1 unit in need of a nerf, by almost the entirety of the competitive community including every single reasonable SM player I've seen (yes, they are rarity on this particular website I'm aware). But to react to them getting buffs by saying "phew, seems there was nothing to worry about, this was the ideal outcome" just displays that you are so far fething disconnected from the competitive scene that you should not be spouting out anywhere near the amount of declarations on the state of faction balance as you do.
I have never in my life, and I go to a sports school, met anyone person who though that just being good is enough. Just because something is good, doesn't mean it can't be even better. And something about erdictors did get better, the squad size, being core etc and people were worried that GW may make them worse, as they did change stuff to be worse after a short time. No one was happy that their recast leviathans suddenly became worse, if they played IH.
Ho
Lee
gak
Am I the only one reading this? Seriously someone pinch me, this cannot be real life lmao. Someone weigh in here and tell me they are seeing this same absurdity right now?
No, it's a pretty accurate description of a true WAAC.
It's also a mindset, furthered by social institutions respectively. It doesn't help that Karols introduction was in a shop that was basically only such people. Frankly it's also less a Karol problem, he himself admited he was in therapy. Truth is it isn't an uncommon opinion to have, and considering how GW balances stuff seemingly more via pendulum swings but with adding force in the other direction after every high point it isn't even unfounded.
Wait, I'm having trouble here. It sounds like you're interpreting Karol's stance here as more or less "I know this was a totally busted unit, and it just got more busted. But truth be told I am happy about this anyway because feth balance, my army is stronger, ez wins, gg noobs". And I agree, this is indeed a common stance for terrible players who struggle to win otherwise, and even with a massive power imbalance in their favor will still face significant strategic challenge.
But, the impression that I'm getting here from reading Karol's explanation is that he's saying "Eradicators were okay before, but they've been improved upon by being buffed, and this is good game design overall" for.... I dunno, no real reason has been given that I can discern other than another ham-fisted analogy / thinly veiled excuse to mention again that he went to a sports school. Oh and that this is a "popular opinion" online.... which just a cursory glance at like, any comment on any page in this entire thread would probably tell you is absolutely not the case. That's a right disconnect from where the 40k community stands on Eradicators right now lol
Eradicators were considered the strongest unit in the entire game, and the #1 unit in need of a nerf, by almost the entirety of the competitive community including every single reasonable SM player I've seen (yes, they are rarity on this particular website I'm aware). But to react to them getting buffs by saying "phew, seems there was nothing to worry about, this was the ideal outcome" just displays that you are so far fething disconnected from the competitive scene that you should not be spouting out anywhere near the amount of declarations on the state of faction balance as you do.
I have never in my life, and I go to a sports school, met anyone person who though that just being good is enough. Just because something is good, doesn't mean it can't be even better. And something about erdictors did get better, the squad size, being core etc and people were worried that GW may make them worse, as they did change stuff to be worse after a short time. No one was happy that their recast leviathans suddenly became worse, if they played IH.
Ho
Lee
gak
Am I the only one reading this? Seriously someone pinch me, this cannot be real life lmao. Someone weigh in here and tell me they are seeing this same absurdity right now?
No, it's a pretty accurate description of a true WAAC.
It's also a mindset, furthered by social institutions respectively.
It doesn't help that Karols introduction was in a shop that was basically only such people.
Frankly it's also less a Karol problem, he himself admited he was in therapy.
Truth is it isn't an uncommon opinion to have, and considering how GW balances stuff seemingly more via pendulum swings but with adding force in the other direction after every high point it isn't even unfounded.
Wait, I'm having trouble here. It sounds like you're interpreting his stance is more or less "I know this was a totally busted unit, and it just got more busted. But I am happy about this anyway because I'm feth balance, my army is stronger, ez wins, gg noobs". And I agree, this is indeed a common stance for terrible players who struggle to win otherwise, and even with a massive power imbalance in their favor will still face significant strategic challenge.
I think, i interpret him more along the line off as stating a fact about such people, and conotating it with gw general rather, triggerhappy balance approach which seems to exist without a middleground..
But the impression that I'm getting here from reading Karol's explanation is that he's saying "Eradicators were okay before, but they've been improved upon by being buffed, and this is good game design overall" for.... I dunno, no real reason has been given that I can discern other than another ham-fisted analogy / thinly veiled excuse to mention again that he went to a sports school.
Karol doesn't play marines though and Karol didn't mention his opinion upon the game design aswell. I do think his comparison is more along the line of an advocati diaboli in this instance.
Then if it’s not honesty from him, and it’s him parroting biased honesty from others, then all I have to say is.... who the hell is he listening to? What’s the point in weighing in on this thread like “well, good job GW it seems you improved the game by buffing Eradicators and people are happy with this”, like what the hell? Just... if you’re gonna make a statement in this thread about what people are saying, please; first read what people in here are actually saying, jfc. Because I didn’t see a single post in this entire thread saying Eradicators needed buffs or that they should have been buffed, let alone this being the general reception as his obliviousness would imply
Nitro Zeus wrote: Then if it’s not honesty from him, and it’s him parroting biased honesty from others, then all I have to say is.... who the hell is he listening to? What’s the point in weighing in on this thread like “well, good job GW it seems you improved the game by buffing Eradicators and people are happy with this”, like what the hell? Just... if you’re gonna make a statement in this thread about what people are saying, please; first read what people in here are actually saying, jfc. Because I didn’t see a single post in this entire thread saying Eradicators needed buffs or that they should have been buffed, let alone this being the general reception as his obliviousness would imply
Considering he is talking about the perception of his LOCALS, i seriously think you missed the mark.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Then if it’s not honesty from him, and it’s him parroting biased honesty from others, then all I have to say is.... who the hell is he listening to? What’s the point in weighing in on this thread like “well, good job GW it seems you improved the game by buffing Eradicators and people are happy with this”, like what the hell? Just... if you’re gonna make a statement in this thread about what people are saying, please; first read what people in here are actually saying, jfc. Because I didn’t see a single post in this entire thread saying Eradicators needed buffs or that they should have been buffed, let alone this being the general reception as his obliviousness would imply
They're saying the people he plays with love it when good units get buffed and nobody likes their models being nerfed.
Its taken, what 5-6 outraged condescending paragraphs from you and still not acknowledged that simple single sentence which was Karols point.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Then if it’s not honesty from him, and it’s him parroting biased honesty from others, then all I have to say is.... who the hell is he listening to? What’s the point in weighing in on this thread like “well, good job GW it seems you improved the game by buffing Eradicators and people are happy with this”, like what the hell? Just... if you’re gonna make a statement in this thread about what people are saying, please; first read what people in here are actually saying, jfc. Because I didn’t see a single post in this entire thread saying Eradicators needed buffs or that they should have been buffed, let alone this being the general reception as his obliviousness would imply
Considering he is talking about the perception of his LOCALS, i seriously think you missed the mark.
Here's the posts he made.
Spoiler:
Karol wrote: Well now that the codex has been leaked, the rules look fine. Erdictors got the 6 man unit with option to combat squads and a Multi Melta in every 3 dudes, which is nice, because some people were worried that they would be caped at 3 men. Now they are a lot more slot efficient.
Veteran intercessors for assault marines are a thing, so maybe those people who wanted to play a melee horde are going to find a slot for them. Hand flamers and melee weapons for all sgts not just assault intercessors ones are nice too.
Bummer about the aggresors nerf to all people that stocked up on them, but who knows, maybe they are still worth it. Am not a good player enough to judge the changes in points and rules.
Sad that heavy intercessors sgts do not have the melee upgrade options. a 2/2/2 auto boltgun, heavy auto boltgun, vet assault intercessors army looked cool on paper.
Karol wrote: You do know that I don't play marines right? And that my dudes don't have access to erdictors, and probably never will.
And I think that over 40+ pages we established that non marine players hate them, while marine players generaly like to have an efficient anti tank options.
The worries about them were about the squad size, so I , although this is a speculation, assuming that marine players like the fact that the unit is 6 man strong, unlike eliminators, and by virtue of that more slot efficient.
From what perspective do you want me to write my posts from, oppressed xeno player? Or to add how Abhore the Witch is unfair to my army? It seems like I can't get anything right. I write about GK, my army, it is bad because I write only about them. I try to write about armies and units from the army perspective, I am suddenly trolling. I make my first joke, I get a warning.
Nothing about locals, quite clearly stating that the rules look fine to he himself, and that to marine players overall the Eradicators buffs seems like a good thing. This entire thread is a testament to that not being the case, even Marine players were saying they will be nerfed, everyone needs to chill until we see the rules, blah blah blah. Not what happened.
AFTER I asked who he's listening to, he goes on to mention it being Marine players online, and of course his toxic local. Excluding Karol's invented local meta that he simply uses as an anecdote to serve whatever stance he chooses at the time, I ask again - WHERE is he reading and listening to acting like the general reception is that Eradicators needed buffs? That's NOT what 40k players, not even Marine players, have been saying lol
Nitro Zeus wrote: Then if it’s not honesty from him, and it’s him parroting biased honesty from others, then all I have to say is.... who the hell is he listening to? What’s the point in weighing in on this thread like “well, good job GW it seems you improved the game by buffing Eradicators and people are happy with this”, like what the hell? Just... if you’re gonna make a statement in this thread about what people are saying, please; first read what people in here are actually saying, jfc. Because I didn’t see a single post in this entire thread saying Eradicators needed buffs or that they should have been buffed, let alone this being the general reception as his obliviousness would imply
They're saying the people he plays with love it when good units get buffed and nobody likes their models being nerfed.
Its taken, what 5-6 outraged condescending paragraphs from you and still not acknowledged that simple single sentence which was Karols point.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Then if it’s not honesty from him, and it’s him parroting biased honesty from others, then all I have to say is.... who the hell is he listening to? What’s the point in weighing in on this thread like “well, good job GW it seems you improved the game by buffing Eradicators and people are happy with this”, like what the hell? Just... if you’re gonna make a statement in this thread about what people are saying, please; first read what people in here are actually saying, jfc. Because I didn’t see a single post in this entire thread saying Eradicators needed buffs or that they should have been buffed, let alone this being the general reception as his obliviousness would imply
Considering he is talking about the perception of his LOCALS, i seriously think you missed the mark.
Here's the posts he made.
Spoiler:
Karol wrote: Well now that the codex has been leaked, the rules look fine. Erdictors got the 6 man unit with option to combat squads and a Multi Melta in every 3 dudes, which is nice, because some people were worried that they would be caped at 3 men. Now they are a lot more slot efficient.
Veteran intercessors for assault marines are a thing, so maybe those people who wanted to play a melee horde are going to find a slot for them. Hand flamers and melee weapons for all sgts not just assault intercessors ones are nice too.
Bummer about the aggresors nerf to all people that stocked up on them, but who knows, maybe they are still worth it. Am not a good player enough to judge the changes in points and rules.
Sad that heavy intercessors sgts do not have the melee upgrade options. a 2/2/2 auto boltgun, heavy auto boltgun, vet assault intercessors army looked cool on paper.
Karol wrote: You do know that I don't play marines right? And that my dudes don't have access to erdictors, and probably never will.
And I think that over 40+ pages we established that non marine players hate them, while marine players generaly like to have an efficient anti tank options.
The worries about them were about the squad size, so I , although this is a speculation, assuming that marine players like the fact that the unit is 6 man strong, unlike eliminators, and by virtue of that more slot efficient.
From what perspective do you want me to write my posts from, oppressed xeno player?
Or to add how Abhore the Witch is unfair to my army? It seems like I can't get anything right. I write about GK, my army, it is bad because I write only about them. I try to write about armies and units from the army perspective, I am suddenly trolling. I make my first joke, I get a warning.
Nothing about locals, quite clearly stating that the rules look fine to he himself, and that to marine players overall the Eradicators buffs seems like a good thing. This entire thread is a testament to that not being the case, even Marine players were saying they will be nerfed, everyone needs to chill until we see the rules, blah blah blah. Not what happened.
AFTER I asked who he's listening to, he goes on to mention it being Marine players online, and of course his toxic local. Excluding Karol's invented local meta that he simply uses as an anecdote to serve whatever stance he chooses at the time, I ask again - WHERE is he reading and listening to acting like the general reception is that Eradicators needed buffs? That's NOT what 40k players, not even Marine players, have been saying lol
Nitro Zeus wrote: Then if it’s not honesty from him, and it’s him parroting biased honesty from others, then all I have to say is.... who the hell is he listening to? What’s the point in weighing in on this thread like “well, good job GW it seems you improved the game by buffing Eradicators and people are happy with this”, like what the hell? Just... if you’re gonna make a statement in this thread about what people are saying, please; first read what people in here are actually saying, jfc. Because I didn’t see a single post in this entire thread saying Eradicators needed buffs or that they should have been buffed, let alone this being the general reception as his obliviousness would imply
They're saying the people he plays with love it when good units get buffed and nobody likes their models being nerfed.
Its taken, what 5-6 outraged condescending paragraphs from you and still not acknowledged that simple single sentence which was Karols point.
Read the above, and try to keep up.
Get off your high horse, anyone whose had a Karol conversation in the past knows about their experiences with the game to date and knows they're basing it ofc their local meta.
How bout you get off your freaking high horse, there was absolutely no indication of that at all until AFTER I asked and even then, he literally specified that it’s also coming from people online - so I had to ask, who exactly is saying Eradicators needed buffs, lol. So what the hell are you even trying to argue here?
Karol wrote: Well now that the codex has been leaked, the rules look fine. Erdictors got the 6 man unit with option to combat squads and a Multi Melta in every 3 dudes, which is nice, because some people were worried that they would be caped at 3 men. Now they are a lot more slot efficient.
Veteran intercessors for assault marines are a thing, so maybe those people who wanted to play a melee horde are going to find a slot for them. Hand flamers and melee weapons for all sgts not just assault intercessors ones are nice too.
Bummer about the aggresors nerf to all people that stocked up on them, but who knows, maybe they are still worth it. Am not a good player enough to judge the changes in points and rules.
Sad that heavy intercessors sgts do not have the melee upgrade options. a 2/2/2 auto boltgun, heavy auto boltgun, vet assault intercessors army looked cool on paper.
Karol wrote: You do know that I don't play marines right? And that my dudes don't have access to erdictors, and probably never will.
And I think that over 40+ pages we established that non marine players hate them, while marine players generaly like to have an efficient anti tank options.
The worries about them were about the squad size, so I , although this is a speculation, assuming that marine players like the fact that the unit is 6 man strong, unlike eliminators, and by virtue of that more slot efficient.
From what perspective do you want me to write my posts from, oppressed xeno player?
Or to add how Abhore the Witch is unfair to my army? It seems like I can't get anything right. I write about GK, my army, it is bad because I write only about them. I try to write about armies and units from the army perspective, I am suddenly trolling. I make my first joke, I get a warning.
Nothing about locals, quite clearly stating that the rules look fine to he himself, and that to marine players overall the Eradicators buffs seems like a good thing. This entire thread is a testament to that not being the case, even Marine players were saying they will be nerfed, everyone needs to chill until we see the rules, blah blah blah. Not what happened.
AFTER I asked who he's listening to, he goes on to mention it being Marine players online, and of course his toxic local. Excluding Karol's invented local meta that he simply uses as an anecdote to serve whatever stance he chooses at the time, I ask again - WHERE is he reading and listening to acting like the general reception is that Eradicators needed buffs? That's NOT what 40k players, not even Marine players, have been saying lol
I marked the points where he is clearly talking about others in his local meta and THEIR worries.
BTW whenever Karol mentions his “local” it’s entirely safe to ignore that completely, as he’s been caught out tripping over his lies before with mutually exclusive statements based a year apart that he forgot about. He simply invents an anecdote from his local to support his stance in every single thread, which is why he ALWAYS has one that conveniently lines up with whatever he’s saying. I’m sure we’ve all noticed this, but conveniently Karol has been on the SM downplay side of this argument right, so this time we are supposed to put any stake in what his definitively garbage “local meta” / anecdotal fantasy has decided?
Nitro Zeus wrote: BTW whenever Karol mentions his “local” it’s entirely safe to ignore that completely, as he’s been caught out tripping over his lies before with mutually exclusive statements based a year apart that he forgot about. He simply invents an anecdote from his local to support his stance in every single thread, which is why he ALWAYS has one that conveniently lines up with whatever he’s saying.
Oh really? I never knew! That totally never clicked to me all the other times you've mentioned it in every other thread on this site. Did anyone else know Karol went to a sports school? Or that he does wrestling? And that he's from Poland? And that all of these things make a flawless analogy and comparison for everything 40k?
I agree, Karol plays in a very special environment and also seems to live in a very special environment of which I had never thought it was even possible in Poland.
People think the US meta is cut throat and competitive. But from what I understand the polish meta takes that to 11. For pretty much every system.
Why waste it on a 3-wound Eradicator when you can bring back an 8-wound ATV?
I'm relatively confident that will get FAQ'd. People went nuts about it being a vehicle and a bike so it just feels like they put a keyword in and forgot to remove one.
Ultimately it is two heals and a revive and you can't re-target units, so...probably not so busted at first thought considering the trade-offs.
So ive been not paying attention for the last 20 pages on all these threads.
Can i just take a punt:
Marines (and specificaly eradicators) didint really get a nerf and the usual suspects have performed spectacular feats of mental gymnastics from "lets wait and see" to " well taking 3 of these units seems pretty waac so I WILL NEVER DO THST THEREFORE THERE IS NO PROBLEM" and the classic "marines have only been top army for 6 months and remember eldar from x editions ago? They clearly deserve to be strong.."
Sounds about right?
Did I win a cookie?
I love you all dakkanauts. Taking a week off and coming back to see the mayhem was a good shout
AduroT wrote: Don your tinfoil hats! Do you think they’ll nerf these guys in the first FAQ, and will that happen before or after their kit comes out?
Never, evil gw is evil, they hate competitive play and all these sponsored events are shilling you imba kits because its marines 24/7, 365 and ever kit they could make invalidates every other faction. Stupid NPCs.
My games are literally unplayable because of eradicators, they're in every game I play and they kill 15 tanks a turn.
Am I doing it right now?
In all seriousness a decent solution would be to give the same damage profile to the assault variant, knock 6" range off it and remove fires twice. Single shots count for a lot but aren't super easy to do.
I think we'll see Dreadnoughts no longer being core in about a month's time. I've been seeing what people have been theory crafting, and it's pretty hilarious.
Eradicators were considered the strongest unit in the entire game, and the #1 unit in need of a nerf, by almost the entirety of the competitive community including every single reasonable SM player I've seen (yes, they are rarity on this particular website I'm aware). But to react to them getting buffs by saying "phew, seems there was nothing to worry about, this was the ideal outcome" just displays that you are so far fething disconnected from the competitive scene that you should not be spouting out anywhere near the amount of declarations on the state of faction balance as you do.
I have never in my life, and I go to a sports school, met anyone person who though that just being good is enough. Just because something is good, doesn't mean it can't be even better. And something about erdictors did get better, the squad size, being core etc and people were worried that GW may make them worse, as they did change stuff to be worse after a short time. No one was happy that their recast leviathans suddenly became worse, if they played IH.
I think there was a heysoos guy in the middle east a while ago that would argue that being good was actually the most important thing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Argive wrote: So ive been not paying attention for the last 20 pages on all these threads.
Can i just take a punt:
Marines (and specificaly eradicators) didint really get a nerf and the usual suspects have performed spectacular feats of mental gymnastics from "lets wait and see" to " well taking 3 of these units seems pretty waac so I WILL NEVER DO THST THEREFORE THERE IS NO PROBLEM" and the classic "marines have only been top army for 6 months and remember eldar from x editions ago? They clearly deserve to be strong.."
Sounds about right?
Did I win a cookie?
I love you all dakkanauts. Taking a week off and coming back to see the mayhem was a good shout
Marines did get toned down, just very gently. Mostly their power just moved out of easy stuff (aggressors) into more difficult to use units (terminators, bladeguard), the Eradicators being the obvious exception
Darsath wrote: I think we'll see Dreadnoughts no longer being core in about a month's time. I've been seeing what people have been theory crafting, and it's pretty hilarious.
I don't. They'll adjust other bits of the theorycraft first (if anything at all). Core seems rigidly based on what they see as the fluff of the army, and they aren't going to change that based on what the 'EvilBad Against-the-Spirit-of-the-Game Players' are doing.
Darsath wrote: I think we'll see Dreadnoughts no longer being core in about a month's time. I've been seeing what people have been theory crafting, and it's pretty hilarious.
Any reason to believe the Dread lists won't lose to hordes/Harlequins like the current set of marine lists that went to hard into anti-space marines are doing?
Darsath wrote: I think we'll see Dreadnoughts no longer being core in about a month's time. I've been seeing what people have been theory crafting, and it's pretty hilarious.
Any reason to believe the Dread lists won't lose to hordes/Harlequins like the current set of marine lists that went to hard into anti-space marines are doing?
The new Redemptor is the reason why. 180 points, lots of damage 1 shots, good range, 13 wounds. There's more silly things people are theory crafting, but it's the tip of the iceberg.
Argive wrote: So ive been not paying attention for the last 20 pages on all these threads.
Can i just take a punt:
Marines (and specificaly eradicators) didint really get a nerf and the usual suspects have performed spectacular feats of mental gymnastics from "lets wait and see" to " well taking 3 of these units seems pretty waac so I WILL NEVER DO THST THEREFORE THERE IS NO PROBLEM" and the classic "marines have only been top army for 6 months and remember eldar from x editions ago? They clearly deserve to be strong.."
Sounds about right?
Did I win a cookie?
I love you all dakkanauts. Taking a week off and coming back to see the mayhem was a good shout
Marines did get toned down, just very gently. Mostly their power just moved out of easy stuff (aggressors) into more difficult to use units (terminators, bladeguard), the Eradicators being the obvious exception
I have yet to see them getting toned down to non-ridiculous levels. Aggressors still make back more than their points in 2 turns, Eradicators are broken OP, everything else seems literally better than every other factions comparable units, not to mention the buffs they are likely to receive in the form of strats we haven't seen yet.
So either SMs get a major nerf in the 2 week FAQ/errata or every other codex needs MASSIVE attention to bring it up to comparable levels to play on remotely equal footing.
So if Aggressors are going to stay at 12 shots a turn vs horde, than my ork boyz at 8ppm are likely going to need 2 wounds in order to have a chance of playing against them, basically every vehicle in the game is going to need a hefty buff to wounds in order to survive against Eradicators. etc etc.
Argive wrote: So ive been not paying attention for the last 20 pages on all these threads.
Can i just take a punt:
Marines (and specificaly eradicators) didint really get a nerf and the usual suspects have performed spectacular feats of mental gymnastics from "lets wait and see" to " well taking 3 of these units seems pretty waac so I WILL NEVER DO THST THEREFORE THERE IS NO PROBLEM" and the classic "marines have only been top army for 6 months and remember eldar from x editions ago? They clearly deserve to be strong.."
Sounds about right?
Did I win a cookie?
I love you all dakkanauts. Taking a week off and coming back to see the mayhem was a good shout
Well, some of the nerfs that I could find easily --
Spoiler:
-scouts are elites
-aggressors can't advance without penalty
-aggressors can't double tap
-centurions nerfed to ground
-grav devastators lost their re-roll strat.
-vehicles aren’t core outside of dreadnoughts, so not a lot of re-rolls for vehicles.
-thunderfire cannons lost strength on their gun to be 4 (but they like cents weren’t seeing much competitive play anyway)
-primaris vehicles lost fly and now need to spend CP to get -2 to charge.
-impulsors are 5++
-master artisan trait only grants 1 type of re-roll
-eradicators now can’t advance and double shoot. (but got buffs, too)
-no more fight twice (even if you die) except for assault intercessors
-no more 3++
-no full CM rerolls (unknown on Tiggy, Bobby, etc) and smash captains crippled
-dreadnoughts don't get bolter discipline
-no double shoot for executioners
-eliminators lost +1 to hit and wound
-eliminators lost fall back after overwatch
-eliminators lost ignore Line of Sight
-litanies can't affect non-core non-character units
-psychic powers can't affect non-core non-character units
-ATSKNF got a significant nerf
-Contemptor is BS/WS3 and W9
-Skilled Riders is now -1 to hit instead of 3++/4++
-pop smoke is not an ability
-Inceptors lost crushing charge
So Eradicators slightly better. BGV's transport got nerfed. And they can maybe resurrect an ATV. All while marines are still capable of losing regularly.
Not much changes for Salamanders that we know of yet other than standard full rerolls.
We still have to find out what happens to the named characters and their abilities first though.
“All the while Marines are still capable of losing regularly”. Mate Castellan in its Prime lost regularly. Ynnari lost regularly. 5th Ed GK lost regularly. The fact that you keep leaning on this deceptive language tells us all you know that Marines are OP. OP doesn’t mean losing isn’t a regular occurrence, this is just a sorry fallback.
Eliminators didn’t really lose the +1 to hit, they actually got the baked into their base stats with BS 2+ now, without the serge needing to give up his shots.
While the rifle lost the scoot after overwatch, it now has scoot after every shooting phase.
The biggest nerf to them is the mortal wound shot is on an unmodified 6 now.
lol at listing Dreadnoughts as being nerfed because they lost Bolter discipline. Yeah forget about everything they gained right, they are NERFED because they lost one rule that barely even makes a difference for their usual loadouts.
I will say, normally, we'll be finding out soon enough how well the codexes will be performing. Of course, with real world issues right now, that might not be as easy as it sounds for us to get a decent data set to start making judgement on.
I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
How much do other armies pay for that statline, those guns and those abilities (if they even have access to them)? How many of those armies also have access to re-rolls which don't cost CP or aren't once per game abilities?
There's your answer.
Alternatively, read the thread to see all of the countless comparisons showing how much Eradicators outperform literally every single other anti-tank unit in the game, while often costing less.
Ice_can wrote: Seriously those defending Marines as Balanced need to watch the Tabletob Titans Review of the codex.
Spoiler:
They state the codex has NOT BEEN NERFED it just aide shifted into you will now want different units.
To be fair to this, they also said that before they knew that all the Repulsor style tanks had lost fly, and a few other things.
That being said, marines still look to be on the strong side, but I think there has been enough toned down that they hopefully won't be opressive anymore. I also think they hit the nail on the head when the mentioned that it's also a really easy army to play, which is a huge factor.
Eradicators should get day 1 FAQd with higher points though.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
Nothing at all. Its just a conspiracy because everyone hates marines..
Ice_can wrote: Seriously those defending Marines as Balanced need to watch the Tabletob Titans Review of the codex.
Spoiler:
They state the codex has NOT BEEN NERFED it just aide shifted into you will now want different units.
To be fair to this, they also said that before they knew that all the Repulsor style tanks had lost fly, and a few other things.
That being said, marines still look to be on the strong side, but I think there has been enough toned down that they hopefully won't be opressive anymore. I also think they hit the nail on the head when the mentioned that it's also a really easy army to play, which is a huge factor.
Eradicators should get day 1 FAQd with higher points though.
How much does loosing fly really matter when its no longer god level keyword?
And the fly nerf hits other factions & units much harder then repulsor/impulsor so its not really a marine specific nerf.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
Nothing at all. Its just a conspiracy because everyone hates marines..
Ice_can wrote: Seriously those defending Marines as Balanced need to watch the Tabletob Titans Review of the codex.
Spoiler:
They state the codex has NOT BEEN NERFED it just aide shifted into you will now want different units.
To be fair to this, they also said that before they knew that all the Repulsor style tanks had lost fly, and a few other things.
That being said, marines still look to be on the strong side, but I think there has been enough toned down that they hopefully won't be opressive anymore. I also think they hit the nail on the head when the mentioned that it's also a really easy army to play, which is a huge factor.
Eradicators should get day 1 FAQd with higher points though.
How much does loosing fly really matter when its no longer god level keyword?
And the fly nerf hits other factions & units much harder then repulsor/impulsor so its not really a marine specific nerf.
Fly makes a huge difference even after the nerfs with all the terrain on battlefields and the size of those tanks. It's the difference between staying completely out of LoS, and then being able to move and shoot fully, or being able to be shot out in the open because you cannot maneuver as well.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
Nothing at all. Its just a conspiracy because everyone hates marines..
Ice_can wrote: Seriously those defending Marines as Balanced need to watch the Tabletob Titans Review of the codex.
They state the codex has NOT BEEN NERFED it just aide shifted into you will now want different units.
To be fair to this, they also said that before they knew that all the Repulsor style tanks had lost fly, and a few other things.
That being said, marines still look to be on the strong side, but I think there has been enough toned down that they hopefully won't be opressive anymore. I also think they hit the nail on the head when the mentioned that it's also a really easy army to play, which is a huge factor.
Eradicators should get day 1 FAQd with higher points though.
How much does loosing fly really matter when its no longer god level keyword?
And the fly nerf hits other factions & units much harder then repulsor/impulsor so its not really a marine specific nerf.
Fly makes a huge difference even after the nerfs with all the terrain on battlefields and the size of those tanks. It's the difference between staying completely out of LoS, and then being able to move and shoot fully, or being able to be shot out in the open because you cannot maneuver as well.
Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner! It means primaris tanks have to play by the same terrain rules as real tanks. It's an even bigger nerf to Impulsors that can no longer just pass straight over terrain in order to get their payload where they want it. I dig it.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
Nothing at all. Its just a conspiracy because everyone hates marines..
Ice_can wrote: Seriously those defending Marines as Balanced need to watch the Tabletob Titans Review of the codex.
Spoiler:
They state the codex has NOT BEEN NERFED it just aide shifted into you will now want different units.
To be fair to this, they also said that before they knew that all the Repulsor style tanks had lost fly, and a few other things.
That being said, marines still look to be on the strong side, but I think there has been enough toned down that they hopefully won't be opressive anymore. I also think they hit the nail on the head when the mentioned that it's also a really easy army to play, which is a huge factor.
Eradicators should get day 1 FAQd with higher points though.
How much does loosing fly really matter when its no longer god level keyword? And the fly nerf hits other factions & units much harder then repulsor/impulsor so its not really a marine specific nerf.
Fly makes a huge difference even after the nerfs with all the terrain on battlefields and the size of those tanks. It's the difference between staying completely out of LoS, and then being able to move and shoot fully, or being able to be shot out in the open because you cannot maneuver as well.
Fair point. But in my mind nobody ever took repulsors for their manoeuvrability... trying to hide them never been easy even with fly. Their high toughness wounds and guns is still their shtick.
Did impulsor also loose fly ? I think that would be a much bigger nerf.
I think its only fair due to ad-mech tanks getting shafted
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
Nothing at all. Its just a conspiracy because everyone hates marines..
Ice_can wrote: Seriously those defending Marines as Balanced need to watch the Tabletob Titans Review of the codex.
They state the codex has NOT BEEN NERFED it just aide shifted into you will now want different units.
To be fair to this, they also said that before they knew that all the Repulsor style tanks had lost fly, and a few other things.
That being said, marines still look to be on the strong side, but I think there has been enough toned down that they hopefully won't be opressive anymore. I also think they hit the nail on the head when the mentioned that it's also a really easy army to play, which is a huge factor.
Eradicators should get day 1 FAQd with higher points though.
How much does loosing fly really matter when its no longer god level keyword?
And the fly nerf hits other factions & units much harder then repulsor/impulsor so its not really a marine specific nerf.
Fly makes a huge difference even after the nerfs with all the terrain on battlefields and the size of those tanks. It's the difference between staying completely out of LoS, and then being able to move and shoot fully, or being able to be shot out in the open because you cannot maneuver as well.
Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner! It means primaris tanks have to play by the same terrain rules as real tanks. It's an even bigger nerf to Impulsors that can no longer just pass straight over terrain in order to get their payload where they want it. I dig it.
Feels like skimmers are going to have a nieche again.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
How much do other armies pay for that statline, those guns and those abilities (if they even have access to them)? How many of those armies also have access to re-rolls which don't cost CP or aren't once per game abilities?
There's your answer.
Alternatively, read the thread to see all of the countless comparisons showing how much Eradicators outperform literally every single other anti-tank unit in the game, while often costing less.
CSM pay 25 PPM for T4 1W 3+ dude with a single shot 12" Melta. (Champ has a Combi-Melta, not just a normal one, though.)
How much does loosing fly really matter when its no longer god level keyword?
And the fly nerf hits other factions & units much harder then repulsor/impulsor so its not really a marine specific nerf.
Well it depends on how you play I suppose but over here that thing having FLY made it incredibly frustrating to fight against. We play with quite a bit of high terrain/buildings and that thing parking itself on top of them being nonchargeable or being able to deliver it payload guaranteed T2 at the latest when all other transports/tanks had to take the long way around for LoS/transporting made it so much better than other tanks/transports. While I agree overall game balance should be more important than fluff, in this case the things being able to park themselves on top of buildings being unfluffy also bothered me.
Nitro Zeus wrote: lol at listing Dreadnoughts as being nerfed because they lost Bolter discipline. Yeah forget about everything they gained right, they are NERFED because they lost one rule that barely even makes a difference for their usual loadouts.
Deceptive was right. Wow.
I said I was going to list nerfs. That was a nerf. If I said I was going to call everything out then I would be being deceptive, but you're just a goon looking to pick a fight so push off, yea?
How much does loosing fly really matter when its no longer god level keyword?
And the fly nerf hits other factions & units much harder then repulsor/impulsor so its not really a marine specific nerf.
Well it depends on how you play I suppose but over here that thing having FLY made it incredibly frustrating to fight against. We play with quite a bit of high terrain/buildings and that thing parking itself on top of them being nonchargeable or being able to deliver it payload guaranteed T2 at the latest when all other transports/tanks had to take the long way around for LoS/transporting made it so much better than other tanks/transports. While I agree overall game balance should be more important than fluff, in this case the things being able to park themselves on top of buildings being unfluffy also bothered me.
I am guilty of parking my wave serpent on a ruin pinnacle a foot above the battle field
How much does loosing fly really matter when its no longer god level keyword? And the fly nerf hits other factions & units much harder then repulsor/impulsor so its not really a marine specific nerf.
Well it depends on how you play I suppose but over here that thing having FLY made it incredibly frustrating to fight against. We play with quite a bit of high terrain/buildings and that thing parking itself on top of them being nonchargeable or being able to deliver it payload guaranteed T2 at the latest when all other transports/tanks had to take the long way around for LoS/transporting made it so much better than other tanks/transports. While I agree overall game balance should be more important than fluff, in this case the things being able to park themselves on top of buildings being unfluffy also bothered me.
I am guilty of parking my wave serpent on a ruin pinnacle a foot above the battle field
Oh make no mistake if my tanks could do it I'd do the same, we play to win over here (in fact I'm known for tokyo drifting my tanks for advantage). I'm just saying a hovertank being able to scale buildings like that makes no sense fluffwise and I'm glad they lost the ability to do so .
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
You rarely split fire melta weapons so you can easily consider them as being 2 shots.
Find me an equivalent unit that have the damage output, at similar ranges while being as durable and prove to us all how they are not broken.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
You rarely split fire melta weapons so you can easily consider them as being 2 shots.
Find me an equivalent unit that have the damage output, at similar ranges while being as durable and prove to us all how they are not broken.
Old marine attack bike with a multi melta?
Honestly if you guys are still getting pissed about eradicators you are going to hate the new melta rules in general. Any unit with multi meltas will be putting out similar damage to the new eradicators. Even if you nerf eradicators any other melta option in SM will just replace them.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
You rarely split fire melta weapons so you can easily consider them as being 2 shots.
Find me an equivalent unit that have the damage output, at similar ranges while being as durable and prove to us all how they are not broken.
Old marine attack bike with a multi melta?
Honestly if you guys are still getting pissed about eradicators you are going to hate the new melta rules in general. Any unit with multi meltas will be putting out similar damage to the new eradicators. Even if you nerf eradicators any other melta option in SM will just replace them.
You realise that eradicators get a multiMelta for +10 points aka 50 and gets 4 shoots with it so cheaper than your example for twice the shots.
Also can marine player's try looking outside of their top codex in the game of units for something if they are going to claim eradicators are needed/okay.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
An Ork Deff Kopta would be the closest thing I can think of as far as durability wise and weapon wise, the best unit we have for anti-tank would be hte tankbustas but they are the definition of glass cannon.
Eradicator is T5, 3W 3+ save and comes standard with what amounts to a 2 shot melta gun that does D6+2 damage per wound at half range, so min 3, likely 5+.
The Deff Kopta is T5 4W but 4+ save and comes with an upgrade to 2 S8 -2 AP 3dmg rokkitz but they hit on 5s instead of 3s. And it costs 10pts more.
The equivalent to 1 eradicator would be 2 Tankbustas at 34pts. T4 1W 6+ save armed with a single shot Rokkit at 24' range S8 -2AP 3dmg, however they get to reroll misses against vehicles, but they also hit on 5s, so full rerolls equates to basically BS4.
At max range the Tankbustas have a 1.2 chance to hit a T7 or less vehicle, 0.8 chance to wound and .53 chance to go through a 3+ save to do 3 dmg. So they average about 1.5dmg a turn.
The Eradicator has a 1.2 chance to hit a T7 or less vehicle, .8 chance to wound and it will go through all but a 2+ or invuln so .8 chance to do D6dmg which averages out to 2.8 dmg a turn, if he is within half range it becomes 4.8
In return, the Marine at T5 3W 3+ save takes 27 bolter hits to die on average, the Tankbustas need 4-5 bolter hits. So the Marine is roughly 5x more durable to small arms fire.
So why are they broken? Well, they do more damage than basically every other dedicated anti-tank unit in the game point for point and are incredibly durable for their cost. Throw in the upgrades to heavy and multi-melta and its even worse.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
You rarely split fire melta weapons so you can easily consider them as being 2 shots.
Find me an equivalent unit that have the damage output, at similar ranges while being as durable and prove to us all how they are not broken.
Old marine attack bike with a multi melta?
Honestly if you guys are still getting pissed about eradicators you are going to hate the new melta rules in general. Any unit with multi meltas will be putting out similar damage to the new eradicators. Even if you nerf eradicators any other melta option in SM will just replace them.
Attack bike is actually slightly more durable with 4 W at T5 and 3+. However, the old Multi-melta was 1 shot at S8, so its literally got HALF the damage output as an Eradicator and it costs 55pts with the upgrade, so its 15pts more expensive. I believe in 9th, because GW is ridiculous, it actually dropped to 50pts but meh.
Also, I do love when SM players are asked to find a unit as broken as this and they immediately respond with another SM unit
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Samuhell wrote:I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
Breton wrote:That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
There are precious few units in the game that can throw out 1 melta shot per 20pts invested, out to a range of 24", on a platform with T5/W3/3+ for 40ppm.
If Eradicators aren't absolutely fantastic in your mind, I want to see an example of what is, and show us how it compares in terms of damage-per-cost while having comparable range and durability. Seriously, what would you consider better?
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
yes, nothing to see here folks, just a T5 3 wound marine with what amounts to a 2 shot melta gun at 24' range for 40pts, no biggie. Care to compare that to a similar unit like we've been doing for awhile now? How do they stack up against each other? Yeah, that is what I thought.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
If you can't find a way to deepstrike them you obviously never read the 9th edition rules, aka you are willfully obtuse. Which is what I expect out of you at this point, but even without it they are way to good for their point cost.
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Maybe try reading the ninth edition rulebook before making posts on the game state my man.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
If you can't find a way to deepstrike them you obviously never read the 9th edition rules, aka you are willfully obtuse. Which is what I expect out of you at this point, but even without it they are way to good for their point cost.
Its a BRB Strat? I've been looking in the codex and Supplements. I looked in the BRB too but only found one that allowed what basically amounted to Outflank not Deepstrike so I went back to codex, supplements, campaign books, etc. Which one is it? Whats the name of the strat? Which page? I miss the EBooks where you could use a search function.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Yes, but it's what everyone is talking about when they talk about putting eradicators into reserves. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure Breton knows it. These things seem designed to come in from a board edge turn 2 or 3 and melt stuff. That's why I think it's silly to consider auras when talking about them. They practically have "Operate behind enemy lines without support" written on them.
If you can't find a way to deepstrike them you obviously never read the 9th edition rules, aka you are willfully obtuse. Which is what I expect out of you at this point, but even without it they are way to good for their point cost.
Its a BRB Strat? I've been looking in the codex and Supplements. I looked in the BRB too but only found one that allowed what basically amounted to Outflank not Deepstrike so I went back to codex, supplements, campaign books, etc. Which one is it? Whats the name of the strat? Which page? I miss the EBooks where you could use a search function.
It's actually essentially outflank, it's called strategic reserves, it's in the BRB.
And you knew this is what he meant, and you are clearly being purposely obtuse to make some kind of point. Badly.
Eradicators range means that in 90% of situations, the outflank is equally as effective as deepstrike. It has a few downsides, but they're outweighed by the fact that Eradicators can use it to appear anywhere along a table edge and delete an enemy unit.
It's marginally easier to screen your tanks from units coming from reserves, but if you have enough of a horde of screens to fully protect your vehicles from all sides, then you can also protect them from deepstrikers, so the difference is moot. Plus if you're running that many hordes, the eradicators probably don't have many decent targets anyway.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Yes, but it's what everyone is talking about when they talk about putting eradicators into reserves. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure Breton knows it. These things seem designed to come in from a board edge turn 2 or 3 and melt stuff. That's why I think it's silly to consider auras when talking about them. They practically have "Operate behind enemy lines without support" written on them.
No, I was actually looking for Deep Strike. I was thinking deep strike onto the Center Mosh Pit when I was told they could Deep Strike for 1CP.
Edit to Add: One of the things I didn't like about them was they were slow. Outflanking onto the short board edge and then foot slogging 15 turns to get back to the middle doesn't make them sound any better. Pairing them with Guilliman for his advance bonus is better than that.
I'm just annoyed with them now because, to sound like a broken record, Aggressors lost their shoot twice (and didn't even keep the ability to not lose accuracy with advance + shoot) yet Eradicators kept it for...reasons. Either both units should have it or neither should have it. The inconsistency from GW is infuriating at times.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Yes, but it's what everyone is talking about when they talk about putting eradicators into reserves. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure Breton knows it. These things seem designed to come in from a board edge turn 2 or 3 and melt stuff. That's why I think it's silly to consider auras when talking about them. They practically have "Operate behind enemy lines without support" written on them.
No, I was actually looking for Deep Strike. I was thinking deep strike onto the Center Mosh Pit when I was told they could Deep Strike for 1CP.
Edit to Add: One of the things I didn't like about them was they were slow. Outflanking onto the short board edge and then foot slogging 15 turns to get back to the middle doesn't make them sound any better. Pairing them with Guilliman for his advance bonus is better than that.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Yes, but it's what everyone is talking about when they talk about putting eradicators into reserves. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure Breton knows it. These things seem designed to come in from a board edge turn 2 or 3 and melt stuff. That's why I think it's silly to consider auras when talking about them. They practically have "Operate behind enemy lines without support" written on them.
No, I was actually looking for Deep Strike. I was thinking deep strike onto the Center Mosh Pit when I was told they could Deep Strike for 1CP.
Edit to Add: One of the things I didn't like about them was they were slow. Outflanking onto the short board edge and then foot slogging 15 turns to get back to the middle doesn't make them sound any better. Pairing them with Guilliman for his advance bonus is better than that.
Why do you need to walk into the center of the board?
6" deployed from the edge, 24" range. your already reaching 30" on a 60" board.
Why are you fixated on needing to be in the center of the board?
What Eradictors need to do is be able to get range to their target, which is very likely going to happen.
Nitro Zeus wrote: lol at listing Dreadnoughts as being nerfed because they lost Bolter discipline. Yeah forget about everything they gained right, they are NERFED because they lost one rule that barely even makes a difference for their usual loadouts.
Deceptive was right. Wow.
I said I was going to list nerfs. That was a nerf. If I said I was going to call everything out then I would be being deceptive, but you're just a goon looking to pick a fight so push off, yea?
The conversation was whether the changes actually nerfed Space Marines, or whether they were just changed, and what was ACTUALLY made worse. You came in with an example of a nerf that was in fact, exactly what he said - a unit that had something changed yet wasnt weaker at all. Why would someone not point this out? It's incredibly relevant to the dishonest point you attempted to make.
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. If you feel I'm disagreeing with you at a higher rate than anyone else, perhaps you should take a look at the quality of the posts you've been making mate.
Any time you want to take a rest, you feel free. You are pretty tiring.
As mentioned at the time anything foot slogging was "slow".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ordana wrote: Why do you need to walk into the center of the board?
6" deployed from the edge, 24" range. your already reaching 30" on a 60" board.
But not at optimal ranges. Deep Strike to the center lets you dodge incoming fire before you Deep Strike 9" away inside of the 12" Multi-Melta Range. You probably want to take it up with the guy who originally said you could deep strike them. As I mentioned then and still prefer now, faster melta that can redeploy to other areas is my preference.
Why are you fixated on needing to be in the center of the board?
What Eradictors need to do is be able to get range to their target, which is very likely going to happen.
You probably want to take it up with the guy who originally said you could deep strike them.
Why do you think "getting to the center of the board" isn't a litmus test instead of a literal obsession? As I mentioned then and still prefer now, faster melta that can redeploy to other areas is my preference. A melta speeder can hit both sides of the board much easier than infantry. What makes you think going from edge to center is an obsession and not a litmus test? A unit that can quickly move from Edge to Center can usually also hit both back corners where tanks, artillery and so on like to hide.
Nitro Zeus wrote: The conversation was whether the changes actually nerfed Space Marines, or whether they were just changed, and what was ACTUALLY made worse. You came in with an example of a nerf that was in fact, exactly what he said - a unit that had something changed yet wasnt weaker at all. Why would someone not point this out? It's incredibly relevant to the dishonest point you attempted to make.
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. If you feel I'm disagreeing with you at a higher rate than anyone else, perhaps you should take a look at the quality of the posts you've been making mate.
Daedalus81 replied to a post that claimed that nothing changed for the overall power level with an possible incomplete list of changes that impact the efficiency of units / wargear in a negative way without giving an opinion wether all changes made to a unit / wargear made it stronger overall despite the nerf.
You are picking a fight and have a gak discussion culture. Instead of joining into accusing them of being deceptive, you could just have pointed out that Dreads did get buffs and probably became better overall.
Nitro Zeus wrote: The conversation was whether the changes actually nerfed Space Marines, or whether they were just changed, and what was ACTUALLY made worse. You came in with an example of a nerf that was in fact, exactly what he said - a unit that had something changed yet wasnt weaker at all. Why would someone not point this out? It's incredibly relevant to the dishonest point you attempted to make.
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. If you feel I'm disagreeing with you at a higher rate than anyone else, perhaps you should take a look at the quality of the posts you've been making mate.
Daedalus81 replied to a post that claimed that nothing changed for the overall power level with an possible incomplete list of changes that impact the efficiency of units / wargear in a negative way without giving an opinion wether all changes made to a unit / wargear made it stronger overall despite the nerf.
You are picking a fight and have a gak discussion culture. Instead of joining into accusing them of being deceptive, you could just have pointed out that Dreads did get buffs and probably became better overall.
There's only so many times we give a person the benefit of the doubt before we start to realise that the arguments being put forth are deliberately sculpted to paint an inaccurate picture. He admitted as much in his response. So no I'm not picking a fight. I'm calling it exactly what it was - a deceptive argument. Dreadnoughts losing Bolter Discipline doesn't mean that Dreadnoughts were nerfed. They are definitely a better choice than before, and stronger than alternative equivalents from many other armies so I don't see this as a nerf.
a_typical_hero wrote: I don't think they can, as reviews are out there and nobody mentioned it as of yet. Somebody would have said something if that were the case.
Truthfully, I would have expected someone to mention it either way.
It's pretty important if GW eliminated or continued transport Tetris.
There's only so many times we give a person the benefit of the doubt before we start to realise that the arguments being put forth are deliberately sculpted to paint an inaccurate picture. He admitted as much in his response. So no I'm not picking a fight. I'm calling it exactly what it was - a deceptive argument. Dreadnoughts losing Bolter Discipline doesn't mean that Dreadnoughts were nerfed. They are definitely a better choice than before, and stronger than alternative equivalents from many other armies so I don't see this as a nerf.
You are so positively ridiculous that I can't even. I didn't say "Dreadnoughts were worse". I listed nerfs. A list. As in these things are nerfs. feth.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Then. How. Is. It. An. Example. Of. Space. Marines. Being. Weaker?
Jesus Christ how slow do we have to go for you.
Back up, let's slow it down for you. A unit receiving a nerf, doesn't mean it's weaker by default, it may receive other buffs.
Objectively speaking, Daedalus gave you a list of nerfs as clearly stated.
At no point did they or anyone else say conclusively those were evidence for a unit or the army being weaker. They are categorically nerfs.
Let's give a made up example. Ork warboss gets -1 BS next ork codex. That is a nerf. Same time the unit gets +99 to all other stats. The unit is better overall, but still received a nerf.
So when someone guesses Marines overall didn’t get a nerf, and marine players are just pretending things got nerfed when they are just fine. And you respond to this by listing a unit getting one negative change and ignoring the positive changes for it that leave it in a better place before, and you use this response as an example of a nerf in direct response to his post, how is this not proving EXACTLY what he’s saying?
It was absolutely a deceptive example, there’s no two ways about it, and if you guys weren’t so deeply biased here there’s no way you wouldn’t say the exact same thing about someone else doing the same thing.
The sad part is that it’s completely unnecessary, Marines did overall get nerfs, and there was absolutely zero need to mention Dreadnoughts to make the exact point he was trying to make.
You either defend codex Astartes as having bern nerfed to unplayable trash and having been unfairly downgraded from a B teir to a D tier codex.
Or you got smashed for a year with marine cheese, and the codex when from being A tier to A tier.
Turthfully it probably has been changed up enough that if the marine player ties they can take a weaker list, which was almost impossible before.
However in the real world where people are not deliberately sabotaging their own codex at list building
They went from A+ to A tier. The problem is a lot of factions are stuck with 8th edition codex's anf as a result are solidly lodged in B tier at best with a few being C and D with Tau and GSC being deciededly F tier and just fundamentally flawed with the changes to mission design.
Going from 1st to still 1st and saying woe is me is bound to generate a hostile response as it highlights a significant lack of awareness.
Yeah very true post Ice Can. Tho I think GSC are above F, I’ve seen some scary lists, but not everyone has the collection to pull it off. My GSC is a small detachment so I can’t unfortunately. I do think they are probably the #1 slept on faction right now, but only because people view them so low.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Yeah very true post Ice Can. Tho I think GSC are above F, I’ve seen some scary lists, but not everyone has the collection to pull it off. My GSC is a small detachment so I can’t unfortunately. I do think they are probably the #1 slept on faction right now, but only because people view them so low.
I'm going on goonhammer analysis as I think most of the best "GSC lists" are more some form of soup with either nids or guard.
I think your probably right and could go top tier if someone works out how to bypass the designed for 8th multi detachments of multiple subfactions nature of their codex, and also how to avoid being zones off the table with your main gimic.
But given most competitive players have 2+ factions it's easier to just pick a higher tier codex and skip the 6 months of loosing to unlock the secret 1000IQ list.
Nitro Zeus wrote: So when someone guesses Marines overall didn’t get a nerf, and marine players are just pretending things got nerfed when they are just fine. And you respond to this by listing a unit getting one negative change and ignoring the positive changes for it that leave it in a better place before, and you use this response as an example of a nerf in direct response to his post, how is this not proving EXACTLY what he’s saying?
It was absolutely a deceptive example, there’s no two ways about it, and if you guys weren’t so deeply biased here there’s no way you wouldn’t say the exact same thing about someone else doing the same thing.
The sad part is that it’s completely unnecessary, Marines did overall get nerfs, and there was absolutely zero need to mention Dreadnoughts to make the exact point he was trying to make.
And yet you overcorrected and decided to focus on a single item within that list ignoring the rather major nerfs like Skilled Riders to prove your made up bs point you relentless hypocrite.
Nitro Zeus wrote: So when someone guesses Marines overall didn’t get a nerf, and marine players are just pretending things got nerfed when they are just fine. And you respond to this by listing a unit getting one negative change and ignoring the positive changes for it that leave it in a better place before, and you use this response as an example of a nerf in direct response to his post, how is this not proving EXACTLY what he’s saying?
It was absolutely a deceptive example, there’s no two ways about it, and if you guys weren’t so deeply biased here there’s no way you wouldn’t say the exact same thing about someone else doing the same thing.
The sad part is that it’s completely unnecessary, Marines did overall get nerfs, and there was absolutely zero need to mention Dreadnoughts to make the exact point he was trying to make.
And yet you overcorrected and decided to focus on a single item within that list ignoring the rather major nerfs like Skilled Riders to prove your made up bs point you relentless hypocrite.
What made up bs point? My only point was that at least one inclusion on your list was deceptively added. Please, tell me what other “made up bs point” makes me a “relentless hypocrite” here? I know you struggle with comprehension, I know you struggle HARD with it, but go ahead - answer the question, and quote where I made whatever point you are calling made up bs, or how I’m a hypocrite.
Deceptively added. Right. I made a list. I made no judgements on the items that list. It's you who has a stick up your ass and can't handle when someone doesn't tow the line so you come in like a giant donkey-cave. You don't discuss. You just pretend to be high and mighty and force gak down people's throats.
Daedalus81 wrote: Deceptively added. Right. I made a list. I made no judgements on the items that list. It's you who has a stick up your ass and can't handle when someone doesn't tow the line so you come in like a giant donkey-cave. You don't discuss. You just pretend to be high and mighty and force gak down people's throats.
Couldn’t answer the question or provide a quote? Color me surprised! Not like I literally predicted that outcome before you responded haha. You don’t have a point, just a bunch of personal attacks like I said, and that post confirms it.
You seem way too worked up. Go take a breather, detach yourself from your personal collection, come back when you can at least attempt to formulate an argument that isn’t inherently dishonest or just a string of personal attacks. It’s just a game pal.
Daedalus81 wrote: Deceptively added. Right. I made a list. I made no judgements on the items that list. It's you who has a stick up your ass and can't handle when someone doesn't tow the line so you come in like a giant donkey-cave. You don't discuss. You just pretend to be high and mighty and force gak down people's throats.
Couldn’t answer the question or provide a quote? Color me surprised! Not like I literally predicted that outcome before you responded haha. You don’t have a point, just a bunch of personal attacks like I said, and that post confirms it.
You seem way too worked up. Go take a breather, detach yourself from your personal collection, come back when you can at least attempt to formulate an argument that isn’t inherently dishonest or just a string of personal attacks. It’s just a game pal.
Weird, you're in the right when you string personal attacks against Karol however.
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
we must wait and see, doesn't matter that they now once more stand head and shoulders above the rest because they lost 1 CM in height...
Especially compared to the other dexes...that are as of yet once again not simultaniously updated..
Daedalus81 wrote: Deceptively added. Right. I made a list. I made no judgements on the items that list. It's you who has a stick up your ass and can't handle when someone doesn't tow the line so you come in like a giant donkey-cave. You don't discuss. You just pretend to be high and mighty and force gak down people's throats.
Couldn’t answer the question or provide a quote? Color me surprised! Not like I literally predicted that outcome before you responded haha. You don’t have a point, just a bunch of personal attacks like I said, and that post confirms it.
You seem way too worked up. Go take a breather, detach yourself from your personal collection, come back when you can at least attempt to formulate an argument that isn’t inherently dishonest or just a string of personal attacks. It’s just a game pal.
Weird, you're in the right when you string personal attacks against Karol however.
I didn’t string any personal attacks against Karol. I put forward that we don’t need to be comparing every single thing 40k related to polish boarding school in every single thread, as it’s a ridiculous analogy at the best of times. A sentiment many many people have echoed. In fact I think it’s me echoing others in this case. Of course however you’re so beyond impartiality here that you will literally defend anyone or anything defending Marines, to the point that you took the side of the guy literally saying “Eradicators should have been buffed because in polish sports school, being good is never enough you can always be better”. Weird that you think anyone would ever take you guys seriously after that.
I didn’t string any personal attacks against Karol. I put forward that we don’t need to be comparing every single thing 40k related to polish boarding school in every single thread, as it’s a ridiculous analogy at the best of times. A sentiment many many people have echoed. In fact I think it’s me echoing others in this case. Of course however you’re so beyond impartiality here that you will literally defend anyone or anything defending Marines, to the point that you took the side of the guy literally saying “Eradicators should have been buffed because in polish sports school, being good is never enough you can always be better”. Weird that you think anyone would ever take you guys seriously after that.
And when you string insults against Xeno? You're 100% a hypocrite.
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
What answer would make you happy? People aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions here. Either you think everything is fething terrible or you're a white knight. There's no room for discussion in between.
It literally doesn't matter what answer I give, because people don't fething bother to read a post unless it starts with "MARINES ARE SUPER DUPER STRONG".
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
What answer would make you happy? People aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions here. Either you think everything is fething terrible or you're a white knight. There's no room for discussion in between.
It literally doesn't matter what answer I give, because people don't fething bother to read a post unless it starts with "MARINES ARE SUPER DUPER STRONG".
Just answer. If you want to add nuance, that's great! I'd like the overall opinion, and not nitty gritty on each unit, but caveats, exceptions, etc. in your answer are fine. I'd like to know, though.
This thread has generated a huge load of reports. Given the choice between me going through all of them and deleting them one by one and issuing warnings, or stuff being cut out and stopping here, I think we'd all much prefer the latter here, thanks!
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
What answer would make you happy? People aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions here. Either you think everything is fething terrible or you're a white knight. There's no room for discussion in between.
It literally doesn't matter what answer I give, because people don't fething bother to read a post unless it starts with "MARINES ARE SUPER DUPER STRONG".
Just answer. If you want to add nuance, that's great! I'd like the overall opinion, and not nitty gritty on each unit, but caveats, exceptions, etc. in your answer are fine. I'd like to know, though.
Appreciate it's not directed at me, but as a layman I feel that the marine codex is still going to be at the top, there are only really 2 problem units in eradicators and bladeguard, the latter less so.
On the other hand I think the powerless overall is less astronomical compared to the last version and is something that should be possible to play against with fewer "eurgh" moments caused by lopsided rules stacking, I.e. fight twice smash captains who then fight again on death etc.
I also personally feel eradocators need a rules change, points won't cut it atm.
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
What answer would make you happy? People aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions here. Either you think everything is fething terrible or you're a white knight. There's no room for discussion in between.
It literally doesn't matter what answer I give, because people don't fething bother to read a post unless it starts with "MARINES ARE SUPER DUPER STRONG".
hmmph fair enough.
i still doubt the overall somewhat minor nerfs (except aggressors and by god that piece of gak unit deserved the shafting) were a bit too lenient, otoh the core issue remains that the groundwork SM groundwork is still head and shoulders above the rest of the 8th dex users for the forseable future, including also factions that got severly impaired due to their design cue GSC and Tau. Frankly, we would probably have a lot less issues, if we actually knew the groundwork for all factions , aka would have all dexes in an updated state, but as is, eradicators are just the new agrressor except +1 in most cases and i think the ammount of salt in regards of that is justifyable as is questioning the remaining existence of doctrines and super doctrines.
However eradicators as an dedicated AT unit, managing to surpress basically the use of any vehicle without an decent invul IS a massive issue, because not every faction has a handy dual armory like chaos full of invul having cheapish vehicles, and for some factions like guard, such vehicles are signature units.
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
What answer would make you happy? People aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions here. Either you think everything is fething terrible or you're a white knight. There's no room for discussion in between.
It literally doesn't matter what answer I give, because people don't fething bother to read a post unless it starts with "MARINES ARE SUPER DUPER STRONG".
Just answer. If you want to add nuance, that's great! I'd like the overall opinion, and not nitty gritty on each unit, but caveats, exceptions, etc. in your answer are fine. I'd like to know, though.
Appreciate it's not directed at me, but as a layman I feel that the marine codex is still going to be at the top, there are only really 2 problem units in eradicators and bladeguard, the latter less so.
On the other hand I think the powerless overall is less astronomical compared to the last version and is something that should be possible to play against with fewer "eurgh" moments caused by lopsided rules stacking, I.e. fight twice smash captains who then fight again on death etc.
I also personally feel eradocators need a rules change, points won't cut it atm.
Points would do it, but it would have to be a big hit. They need to be 60 PPM minimum with their current rules. That would make a six man squad 360 points, a unit that can kill a 360 point tank in a single round of shooting should at least be as expensive as the tank. But if we're doing rules, I'd say losing double tap would do it, but maybe be too much.
The problem is gw always makes things worse by adding more rules. When I first saw the stats for the heavy meltas I thought "Holy crap!", then I realized that since they were heavy weapons they would always be hitting on 4s if they moved. Then I saw the strategem that makes any infantry unit that moved count as standing still.
You can mess about with Eradicators as part of a mixed DW unit as well
Spoiler:
INDOMITOR KILL TEAMComprising warriors wearing the heavier Gravis variant of Mk X, Indomitor Kill Teams are mobile bastions capable of unleashing the firepower of a squadron of battle tanks� Before them, hordes of xenos and monstrous beasts alike are torn apart�An Indomitor Kill Team contains: 1 Heavy Intercessor Sergeant; 4 Heavy Intercessors (see Codex: Space Marines – Heavy Intercessor Squad). You can add any 5 of the following models to this unit:• 1 Heavy Intercessor (see Codex: Space Marines – Heavy Intercessor Squad)• 1 Aggressor (see Codex: Space Marines – Aggressor Squad)• 1 Inceptor (see Codex: Space MarinesInceptor Squad)• 1 Eradicator (see Codex: Space Marines – Eradicator Squad)
Only Eradicators in this unit can shoot twice when this unit uses the Total Obliteration ability.
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
we must wait and see, doesn't matter that they now once more stand head and shoulders above the rest because they lost 1 CM in height...
Especially compared to the other dexes...that are as of yet once again not simultaniously updated..
Be a lot of fun like 8th was for factions like Orkz and GSC who get to wait over a year for a codex to bring them up to par with the Marines. Especially for those factions who then wait a year only to find their codex isn't as good and then SMv9.2 comes out and blows them up to obscene amounts of power again.
Mr Morden wrote: You can mess about with Eradicators as part of a mixed DW unit as well
Spoiler:
INDOMITOR KILL TEAMComprising warriors wearing the heavier Gravis variant of Mk X, Indomitor Kill Teams are mobile bastions capable of unleashing the firepower of a squadron of battle tanks� Before them, hordes of xenos and monstrous beasts alike are torn apart�An Indomitor Kill Team contains: 1 Heavy Intercessor Sergeant; 4 Heavy Intercessors (see Codex: Space Marines – Heavy Intercessor Squad). You can add any 5 of the following models to this unit:• 1 Heavy Intercessor (see Codex: Space Marines – Heavy Intercessor Squad)• 1 Aggressor (see Codex: Space Marines – Aggressor Squad)• 1 Inceptor (see Codex: Space MarinesInceptor Squad)• 1 Eradicator (see Codex: Space Marines – Eradicator Squad)
Only Eradicators in this unit can shoot twice when this unit uses the Total Obliteration ability.
Weird, I kind of like it but I don't understand why you would? The rest of them in there is cool though.
Mr Morden wrote: You can mess about with Eradicators as part of a mixed DW unit as well
Spoiler:
INDOMITOR KILL TEAMComprising warriors wearing the heavier Gravis variant of Mk X, Indomitor Kill Teams are mobile bastions capable of unleashing the firepower of a squadron of battle tanks� Before them, hordes of xenos and monstrous beasts alike are torn apart�An Indomitor Kill Team contains: 1 Heavy Intercessor Sergeant; 4 Heavy Intercessors (see Codex: Space Marines – Heavy Intercessor Squad). You can add any 5 of the following models to this unit:• 1 Heavy Intercessor (see Codex: Space Marines – Heavy Intercessor Squad)• 1 Aggressor (see Codex: Space Marines – Aggressor Squad)• 1 Inceptor (see Codex: Space MarinesInceptor Squad)• 1 Eradicator (see Codex: Space Marines – Eradicator Squad)
Only Eradicators in this unit can shoot twice when this unit uses the Total Obliteration ability.
Weird, I kind of like it but I don't understand why you would? The rest of them in there is cool though.
The unit gets the following keywords -Infantry, Core, Primaris, Mk X Gravis, Kill Team, Indomito - might matter for strats? Not sure
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
What answer would make you happy? People aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions here. Either you think everything is fething terrible or you're a white knight. There's no room for discussion in between.
It literally doesn't matter what answer I give, because people don't fething bother to read a post unless it starts with "MARINES ARE SUPER DUPER STRONG".
Just answer. If you want to add nuance, that's great! I'd like the overall opinion, and not nitty gritty on each unit, but caveats, exceptions, etc. in your answer are fine. I'd like to know, though.
I'll answer with a question. What would you think of the book if Eradicators weren't in it?
What do you think the power level of Marines are, relative to other Codecs? Just an overall opinion.
What answer would make you happy? People aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions here. Either you think everything is fething terrible or you're a white knight. There's no room for discussion in between.
It literally doesn't matter what answer I give, because people don't fething bother to read a post unless it starts with "MARINES ARE SUPER DUPER STRONG".
Just answer. If you want to add nuance, that's great! I'd like the overall opinion, and not nitty gritty on each unit, but caveats, exceptions, etc. in your answer are fine. I'd like to know, though.
I'll answer with a question. What would you think of the book if Eradicators weren't in it?
It'd still be too strong, relative to the other Codecs.
I mean, you've got people saying "Aggressors aren't worth it anymore," when they get 7-12 shots (with Blast, so flat 12 against hordes) in the shooting phase and still have a bunch of Powerfist attacks in melee, while being a very durable unit. And the thing is, relative to some of the other Space Marine options, they might even be right!
There are some truly bonkers units like Eradicators, but most Space Marine units are, while not so nuts, aggressively costed for all they can do.
I mean, you've got people saying "Aggressors aren't worth it anymore," when they get 7-12 shots (with Blast, so flat 12 against hordes) in the shooting phase and still have a bunch of Powerfist attacks in melee, while being a very durable unit. And the thing is, relative to some of the other Space Marine options, they might even be right!
There are some truly bonkers units like Eradicators, but most Space Marine units are, while not so nuts, aggressively costed for all they can do.
And I'd agree with you, but my too strong is, "can I beat them and not feel screwed over?". If I can answer yes to that then I think the book is headed in a good direction.
With the FAQs out already it looks like the named CMs got nerfed. There is nothing else much of note on the Salamander end so Eradicators will still be silly for a while.
3 Aggressors get 36 shots against horde for 24 hits and 12 wounds. Against boyz thats 10 dead Boyz. 135pts kills 80. That is pretty damn good, if its in tactical turn its 96.
In CC Those 3 aggressors get 13 attacks on the charge at S8 AP-3 Flat 2 dmg. hitting on 4s.
3 Meganobz get 12 shots, for 4 hits and 2 wounds against Ork boyz for 1.68ish dead boyz.
In CC those 3 meganobz get 9 attacks at S10 -3AP D3 dmg hitting on 4s. if you want to get rid of their shooting entirely and give them a a pair of Saws each they go up to 12 attacks.
So the Space Marines go to anti-horde unit is as good as my Ork Elite melee unit.
One thing that is also noteworthy with Eradicators (just to put it up for discussion): with the ability to take a Multimelta for only +10 points a 3 man squad has, even after taking 8 wounds (2 losses, last dude at 1 wound), still 50% firepower. A 6 man squad remains at 50% after taking 14 wounds (4 losses, one guy at 1 wound). That's also pretty impressive for a 130-140 points unit (factoring in the MM).
I just note it adressing the mention that the doubleshooting ability etc. is not that bad, since doubletapping is mostly overkill. I see instead that with the buffs to Melters and the MM they can perform pretty well even when outside of Melterrange, without rerolls and/or when they already took losses.
That last dude of an almost deleted squad still shoots 4 times, hits 2.66, wounds a Chimera/Wyvern/Basilisk/Manticore 1.77 times, making an average of 9.77 damage in Meltarange. Almost enough to still shoot back the points of his whole unit. If he gets some sort of rerolls or is just a bit lucky, its sufficient to kill a Basilisk (125 points minimum).
Also as I mentioned in the Guard tactics: IG has the problem of not only providing a lot of optimal targets for them in the form of Vehicles without Invulnarability save (and lots of them also T6-T7), but even if we go full Infantry, Eradicators are pretty good at killing of our big boys: 3 Eradicators with MM without any rerolls, chapter etc. kill 2.96 slabshield Bullgryn inside of meltarange and 2.18 outside. So even pure footsloggers provide enough targets for them to shoot back their points in 1.5-2 shooting phases.
Also two of our best tank options (Punisher and Demolisher), only have 24'' range, which was fine when Meltas had few shots and had to get close, but those are now in trouble.
Pyroalchi wrote: One thing that is also noteworthy with Eradicators (just to put it up for discussion): with the ability to take a Multimelta for only +10 points a 3 man squad has, even after taking 8 wounds (2 losses, last dude at 1 wound), still 50% firepower. A 6 man squad remains at 50% after taking 14 wounds (4 losses, one guy at 1 wound). That's also pretty impressive for a 130-140 points unit (factoring in the MM).
I just note it adressing the mention that the doubleshooting ability etc. is not that bad, since doubletapping is mostly overkill. I see instead that with the buffs to Melters and the MM they can perform pretty well even when outside of Melterrange, without rerolls and/or when they already took losses.
That last dude of an almost deleted squad still shoots 4 times, hits 2.66, wounds a Chimera/Wyvern/Basilisk/Manticore 1.77 times, making an average of 9.77 damage in Meltarange. Almost enough to still shoot back the points of his whole unit. If he gets some sort of rerolls or is just a bit lucky, its sufficient to kill a Basilisk (125 points minimum).
Also as I mentioned in the Guard tactics: IG has the problem of not only providing a lot of optimal targets for them in the form of Vehicles without Invulnarability save (and lots of them also T6-T7), but even if we go full Infantry, Eradicators are pretty good at killing of our big boys: 3 Eradicators with MM without any rerolls, chapter etc. kill 2.96 slabshield Bullgryn inside of meltarange and 2.18 outside. So even pure footsloggers provide enough targets for them to shoot back their points in 1.5-2 shooting phases.
Also two of our best tank options (Punisher and Demolisher), only have 24'' range, which was fine when Meltas had few shots and had to get close, but those are now in trouble.
Whats the best longer-range solution for guard? I'm not overly familiar with them off top of my head. Are basilisk still any use here or are they not enough damage per wound?
I just mentioned the Basilisk since a lot of players have one, you can put in a Chimera, Manticore, Hydra, Tauros instead, they are all as vulnerable.
@LR: the Battlecannon is also very good. It's just that regarding damage output Punisher and Demolishers were the best, but are now really in danger since 24" is suddenly close enough, at least for Eradicators
Mr Morden wrote: You can mess about with Eradicators as part of a mixed DW unit as well
Spoiler:
INDOMITOR KILL TEAMComprising warriors wearing the heavier Gravis variant of Mk X, Indomitor Kill Teams are mobile bastions capable of unleashing the firepower of a squadron of battle tanks� Before them, hordes of xenos and monstrous beasts alike are torn apart�An Indomitor Kill Team contains: 1 Heavy Intercessor Sergeant; 4 Heavy Intercessors (see Codex: Space Marines – Heavy Intercessor Squad). You can add any 5 of the following models to this unit:• 1 Heavy Intercessor (see Codex: Space Marines – Heavy Intercessor Squad)• 1 Aggressor (see Codex: Space Marines – Aggressor Squad)• 1 Inceptor (see Codex: Space MarinesInceptor Squad)• 1 Eradicator (see Codex: Space Marines – Eradicator Squad)
Only Eradicators in this unit can shoot twice when this unit uses the Total Obliteration ability.
Weird, I kind of like it but I don't understand why you would? The rest of them in there is cool though.
Ablative wounds for Eradicators, I guess. Also means they're troops, so they get Obsec.
Unfortunately GW have completely killed off Deathwatch as a faction now, so the new killteams don't really do enough to make them viable. I doubt you'll be seeing Deathwatch in any tournaments for 9th edition.
SemperMortis wrote: 3 Aggressors get 36 shots against horde for 24 hits and 12 wounds. Against boyz thats 10 dead Boyz. 135pts kills 80. That is pretty damn good, if its in tactical turn its 96.
In CC Those 3 aggressors get 13 attacks on the charge at S8 AP-3 Flat 2 dmg. hitting on 4s.
3 Meganobz get 12 shots, for 4 hits and 2 wounds against Ork boyz for 1.68ish dead boyz.
In CC those 3 meganobz get 9 attacks at S10 -3AP D3 dmg hitting on 4s. if you want to get rid of their shooting entirely and give them a a pair of Saws each they go up to 12 attacks.
So the Space Marines go to anti-horde unit is as good as my Ork Elite melee unit.
bAlaNcEd
No. They do not get 36 shots. That is the maximum. They would kill 8 or 64 points.
You also mentioned the MANZ melee, but you didn't do the math.
12 * .5 * .833 = 5 wounds through armor -- equates to two Aggressors and 1 with a single wound left. 2.66 Aggressors is 120 points.
Those Aggressors likewise do -- 13 * .5 * .666 * .666 = 2.9 wounds through armor. At D2 that is a 1.66 MANZ or 66 points.
Niiru wrote: Unfortunately GW have completely killed off Deathwatch as a faction now, so the new killteams don't really do enough to make them viable. I doubt you'll be seeing Deathwatch in any tournaments for 9th edition.
What do you mean? I thought Deathwatch gets access to most (all?) of the Space Marine Codex now plus they will retain their special stuff. Isn't that making them more viable?
Niiru wrote: Unfortunately GW have completely killed off Deathwatch as a faction now, so the new killteams don't really do enough to make them viable. I doubt you'll be seeing Deathwatch in any tournaments for 9th edition.
What do you mean? I thought Deathwatch gets access to most (all?) of the Space Marine Codex now plus they will retain their special stuff. Isn't that making them more viable?
They have lost access to SIA almost entirely (only standard bolters and combi weapons have access to it), and it got nerfed anyway.
Terminators, primaris, and bikers have zero access to SIA in any way, shape or form.
Frag Cannons completely nerfed into the ground. Effectively legended.
(Probably fixed in supplement) Deathwatch are the only army to completely lose all their relics, stratagems and warlord traits.
So they DO gain access to the marine codex. But they lost ALL of their special stuff, other than kill teams. Which are... ok, but nowhere near enough to make up for what you would otherwise gain by being (for example) dark angels deathwing (1+/4++/6+++ 3W only getting wounded on 4+ even against S12 weaponry).
The loss of relics and stratagems will likely be fixed in the supplement, but the SIA change alone, along with the weak legion trait and loss of their unique weapon options, means you're always better off taking any other chapter.
Yeah, deathwatch looks pretty bad. Though the example you chose is probably the strongest thing in the new book aside from eradicators, so it's a little misleading. I kinda doubt that deathwing terminators with built-in transhuman are really going to be a thing long-term.
Daedalus81 wrote: No. They do not get 36 shots. That is the maximum. They would kill 8 or 64 points.
The bit you quoted literally says against hordes.
So yeah, against hordes they get a flat 36 shots.
And even when they don't, and get just those 8 kills, 50% return on a non-specialist unit (ie one that has a pretty durable defensive statline and powerfists) is pretty darned good.
Daedalus81 wrote: You also mentioned the MANZ melee, but you didn't do the math.
12 * .5 * .833 = 5 wounds through armor -- equates to two Aggressors and 1 with a single wound left. 2.66 Aggressors is 120 points.
Those Aggressors likewise do -- 13 * .5 * .666 * .666 = 2.9 wounds through armor. At D2 that is a 1.66 MANZ or 66 points.
136 kills 120
135 kills 66
ORKS OP
Aggressors are wounding on 2s, as Meganobz are T4. Comparing the profiles, the Aggressors are getting an extra attack, the Meganobz get a 5+ save, and otherwise the rolls they need are identical. Both hit on 4s, both wound on 2s, both do 2 damage against a 3 wound profile.
So, on average the Meganobz are actually only doing 46% better in the first round of combat, in exchange for having no shooting whatsoever, and having a 4" move on a unit that is completely useless outside of melee. And that's before getting into doctrines, chapter tactics, and buff abilities, which generally favor the Marines in this matchup.
Still seems to me like the Aggressors are plenty useful. I'd jump for joy to have that profile on my Tyrant Guard.
No. They do not get 36 shots. That is the maximum. They would kill 8 or 64 points.
You also mentioned the MANZ melee, but you didn't do the math.
12 * .5 * .833 = 5 wounds through armor -- equates to two Aggressors and 1 with a single wound left. 2.66 Aggressors is 120 points. Those Aggressors likewise do -- 13 * .5 * .666 * .666 = 2.9 wounds through armor. At D2 that is a 1.66 MANZ or 66 points.
136 kills 120 135 kills 66
ORKS OP
I can see why people call you disingenuous. All damage was shown against Ork boyz, but for some reason you decided to swap them over to attacking each other because? it made your example better?
As far as shooting. Since, as explained, we are shooting ork boyz, they have to be in mobz of at least 10 and usually are seen in 30, the general consensus is that they would be shooting at Hordes So yeah,12 shots is the norm in that situation, if you want to be pedantic and play the "well maybe they are a minimum size mob" they go down to 9.5 shots per model on average Even at that average its still 9.5 shots, 6 hits 3 wounds and 2.5 dead Ork boyz Or 20pts Which is 44.4% return on investment against a minimum sized mob of boyz.
3 Manz get 12 attacks (Dual saw) they hit 6 times and wound 5 times against boyz thats 5 dead boyz or 40pts 3 Aggressors get 13 attacks, they hit 6.5 times and wound 5.41 times, against boyz tahts 5-6 dead boyz or 40-48pts.
Against all vehicles except T8 and all infantry T4 and below Aggressors are better on the charge thanks to the +1 attack, Against T5 and T8-10 Meganobz have the advantage thanks to S10 vs S8 for the aggressors.
So the unit is capable of killing significantly better at range than Meganobz armed with Saws, and in CC they kill more T1-4 and T6-7 than an equal value of meganobz. I would argue that while Primaris at T5 are more common than they were last edition, they are still in the minority when compared to T2-4 infantry units and as far as vehicles, you will see a lot more T6-7 than you will T8.
*SIDE NOTE: your math was wrong. 3 aggressors get 13 attacks, for 6.5 hits, against Meganobz that is 5.41 wounds against a 5+ save = 3.6 unsaved wounds for likely 2 dead Meganobz. So weaker than Meganobz return (Thanks to S10) but definitely not 2.9 unsaved wound
I apologize - I completely blew it by forgetting that Fragstorms are blast now.
I think Aggressors are awesome. People would be nuts not to use them. I'm not arguing that they're bad. I'm saying there are features to each army and unit and singling out pieces doesn't really tell us all that much.
MANZ have access to deepstrike and reroll charges where Aggressors do not. I'm not saying this makes them perfectly balanced. Orks have their tools and Marines have theirs.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
You rarely split fire melta weapons so you can easily consider them as being 2 shots.
Find me an equivalent unit that have the damage output, at similar ranges while being as durable and prove to us all how they are not broken.
Mate look I'm not going to look for a unit, I'm not a space marine player (never have been) and I'm not defending them I'm just asking for info as no one thus far has shown me how these are so game-breaking, I personally have scion command squads with plasma that relish units like this as you simply delete them.
I get they're undercosted I agree but the way people are talking these things are going to come along bend you over and use no lube and then do the same to your mother and all I'm seeing is an undercosted melta unit personally, I'm not seeing how they break the meta.
Also and I think this is a big point people aren't thinking about, this is a new edition the only 2 codices that have been made for this edition is space marine and necron everything else is old tech and whilst this sounds bad but how are they going to sell new books if your old 8th edition is perfectly suitable and ultimately completely equal, for us to see if this unit is out of whack we can only compare to other 9th ed books and we don't have enough info for that
I can see why people call you disingenuous. All damage was shown against Ork boyz, but for some reason you decided to swap them over to attacking each other because? it made your example better?
Because you don't shoot lascannons at infantry. Contriving that MANZ are worse by forcing MANZ to be the same role as Aggressors creates a scenario where you can force imbalance.
I can see why people call you disingenuous. All damage was shown against Ork boyz, but for some reason you decided to swap them over to attacking each other because? it made your example better?
Because you don't shoot lascannons at infantry. Contriving that MANZ are worse by forcing MANZ to be the same role as Aggressors creates a scenario where you can force imbalance.
Comparing elite infantry which come standard with Assault guns and Powerfists to Elite infantry which come standard with Assault guns and power klaws?
No the point was to show that Aggressors are almost or as good in CC as Meganobz, whose whole shtick is CC. At 45pts they are still amazing and as Catbarf mentioned, I would take them in a second in my lists, at a minimum they have more than twice as much dakka against all targets as my Meganobz, and they hit on 3s compared to my 5s; and in CC they are almost as good against some targets, and are better against more.
Also Meganobz can not deep strike unless you use a stratagem on them.
I can see why people call you disingenuous. All damage was shown against Ork boyz, but for some reason you decided to swap them over to attacking each other because? it made your example better?
Because you don't shoot lascannons at infantry. Contriving that MANZ are worse by forcing MANZ to be the same role as Aggressors creates a scenario where you can force imbalance.
At 45pts they are still amazing and as Catbarf mentioned, I would take them in a second in my lists, at a minimum they have more than twice as much dakka against all targets as my Meganobz, and they hit on 3s compared to my 5s; and in CC they are almost as good against some targets, and are better against more.
Also Meganobz can not deep strike unless you use a stratagem on them.
Sure, I agree for the most part. I think people who say Aggressors are garbage now are nuts. MANZ teleporting is an 'out of bounds' scenario, which is why I dislike mathhammer as a means to judge viability.
I have now changed my mind on eradicators. Mostly because I play Deathwatch, which have been completely gutted and had all their unique abilities squatted.
However they -can- now take a completely legal 30 eradicators in 2000 points.
BrianDavion wrote: It's worth noting that GW's got a bit of time to correct that before heavy intercessors come out
I mean sure. But... what are they going to do, remove the only thing they've actually given to Deathwatch?
They've literally removed every other unique trait and weapon they had before. All they have left is the kill teams. If they remove the only killteam that's halfway viable, they might as well just legend the entire chapter and be done with it.
I really want to see a tournament pic of Eradicator armies lined up across from each other like a 17th century battle, with melta half range being the equivalent of attaching bayonets.
Speaking of which, how do Eradicators stack up against each other? First unit to fire wins?
BrianDavion wrote: It's worth noting that GW's got a bit of time to correct that before heavy intercessors come out
I mean sure. But... what are they going to do, remove the only thing they've actually given to Deathwatch?
They've literally removed every other unique trait and weapon they had before. All they have left is the kill teams. If they remove the only killteam that's halfway viable, they might as well just legend the entire chapter and be done with it.
BrianDavion wrote: It's worth noting that GW's got a bit of time to correct that before heavy intercessors come out
I mean sure. But... what are they going to do, remove the only thing they've actually given to Deathwatch?
They've literally removed every other unique trait and weapon they had before. All they have left is the kill teams. If they remove the only killteam that's halfway viable, they might as well just legend the entire chapter and be done with it.
a good nerf for eradicators would be to clarify that
"one target" means a SINGLE target, not a unit. which would drasticly reduce firepower against infantry squads.
BrianDavion wrote: It's worth noting that GW's got a bit of time to correct that before heavy intercessors come out
I mean sure. But... what are they going to do, remove the only thing they've actually given to Deathwatch?
They've literally removed every other unique trait and weapon they had before. All they have left is the kill teams. If they remove the only killteam that's halfway viable, they might as well just legend the entire chapter and be done with it.
a good nerf for eradicators would be to clarify that
"one target" means a SINGLE target, not a unit. which would drasticly reduce firepower against infantry squads.
Once they've sold enough Eradicators, and Marine players have won enough free games on their backs to feel like they're the chosen ones, sure.
BrianDavion wrote: It's worth noting that GW's got a bit of time to correct that before heavy intercessors come out
I mean sure. But... what are they going to do, remove the only thing they've actually given to Deathwatch?
They've literally removed every other unique trait and weapon they had before. All they have left is the kill teams. If they remove the only killteam that's halfway viable, they might as well just legend the entire chapter and be done with it.
a good nerf for eradicators would be to clarify that
"one target" means a SINGLE target, not a unit. which would drasticly reduce firepower against infantry squads.
That's a useless nerf that does absolutely nothing to impact it's intended role which it is currently way overperforming at, to the point of completely warping the meta.
Niiru wrote: However they -can- now take a completely legal 30 eradicators in 2000 points.
Come again?
Watch Master
Captain
10 Indomitor Team (5x heavy intercessor, 5x eradicator)
10 Indomitor Team
10 Indomitor Team
5 Eradicators
5 Eradicators
5 Eradicators
Apothecary
Apothecary
...is the current meme list. 15 of those eradicators have obsec, for what little that might be worth.
Yea...so GW better have a big ol' points increase for Eradicators soon. That gak won't fly.
I mean.. it only matters if someone takes Deathwatch to a tournament. Which currently isn't going to happen. Even this meme list, which is the best DW can now do, is horrifically weak.
It's disappointing that this has to be clarified, but that's obviously a meme list even in any chapter as he said, not intended to be a good list lol. Eradicators are massively overtuned but you don't dedicate almost your entire army to a single role just because you do it well. And then you're also playing Deathwatch instead of a good chapter. There's real problems with Eradicators but a 30 strong Deathwatch force of them isn't one of them. In fact its kinda cute lol they are here to exterminate
Daedalus81 wrote: Oh I see - they stripped out SIA so none of that for HI.
I assume HI in this context is Heavy Intercessors?
Personally I wasn't expecting that anyway, as heavy bolters never had SIA.
But twin-bolters on bikes used to get it, as did storm bolters for terminators. But they don't any more. Basically there's no guns left that get it, except the bog-standard bolter profile (which is mostly useless even with SIA).
Primaris Intercessor rifles used to get it as well, but the don't anymore, so no primaris units get SIA at all. Losing it on storm bolters would have been ....vaguely acceptable, if primaris had kept it at least.
As it is, SIA is dead. It will basically never come up again in any serious game, in its current state.
Points would do it, but it would have to be a big hit. They need to be 60 PPM minimum with their current rules. That would make a six man squad 360 points, a unit that can kill a 360 point tank in a single round of shooting should at least be as expensive as the tank. But if we're doing rules, I'd say losing double tap would do it, but maybe be too much.
The problem is gw always makes things worse by adding more rules. When I first saw the stats for the heavy meltas I thought "Holy crap!", then I realized that since they were heavy weapons they would always be hitting on 4s if they moved. Then I saw the strategem that makes any infantry unit that moved count as standing still.
At 60 points they’re almost the same as a MM speeder with three times the movement, ignoring Heavy, and T5 6W 3+.
Without knowing exactly which strat you’re talking about, the one I THINK you’re talking about they can’t advance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SemperMortis wrote: 3 Aggressors get 36 shots against horde for 24 hits and 12 wounds. Against boyz thats 10 dead Boyz. 135pts kills 80. That is pretty damn good, if its in tactical turn its 96.
In CC Those 3 aggressors get 13 attacks on the charge at S8 AP-3 Flat 2 dmg. hitting on 4s.
3 Meganobz get 12 shots, for 4 hits and 2 wounds against Ork boyz for 1.68ish dead boyz.
In CC those 3 meganobz get 9 attacks at S10 -3AP D3 dmg hitting on 4s. if you want to get rid of their shooting entirely and give them a a pair of Saws each they go up to 12 attacks.
So the Space Marines go to anti-horde unit is as good as my Ork Elite melee unit.
bAlaNcEd
The problem there isn’t the Aggressors, the problem is your Orks and melee in general. They screwed melee over, and are still trying to figure out how to fix it.
Niiru wrote: However they -can- now take a completely legal 30 eradicators in 2000 points.
Come again?
Watch Master
Captain
10 Indomitor Team (5x heavy intercessor, 5x eradicator)
10 Indomitor Team
10 Indomitor Team
5 Eradicators
5 Eradicators
5 Eradicators
Apothecary
Apothecary
...is the current meme list. 15 of those eradicators have obsec, for what little that might be worth.
Yea...so GW better have a big ol' points increase for Eradicators soon. That gak won't fly.
i gotta ask, did you expect, something better out of GW?
Because the fact that GW feths up such rules makes such units even more of an issue then they were allready...
And "that gak will fly" until GW deems it necessary to release a CA
i gotta ask, did you expect, something better out of GW?
Because the fact that GW feths up such rules makes such units even more of an issue then they were allready...
And "that gak will fly" until GW deems it necessary to release a CA
I don't know if they fethed it up. Some people seem to think it's a meme list. With so few bodies and no SIA it isn't flexible and it's also slow. DA terminators seem scary, too, but then its 43/47 ppm for a 5 man. A couple of those plus support gets to half the army pretty fast.
I know that these are individually strong things, but that's not the whole picture. Once I spend more time digesting Necrons I might feel differently.
It will be interesting if mass DW eradicators is better than mass DW aggressors - which was an obvious meme list, and yet either no one ran it, or it didn't work. I guess you might want some dedicated anti-tank rather than just hundreds of S4 AP- shots.
Tyel wrote: It will be interesting if mass DW eradicators is better than mass DW aggressors - which was an obvious meme list, and yet either no one ran it, or it didn't work. I guess you might want some dedicated anti-tank rather than just hundreds of S4 AP- shots.
i gotta ask, did you expect, something better out of GW?
Because the fact that GW feths up such rules makes such units even more of an issue then they were allready...
And "that gak will fly" until GW deems it necessary to release a CA
I don't know if they fethed it up. Some people seem to think it's a meme list. With so few bodies and no SIA it isn't flexible and it's also slow. DA terminators seem scary, too, but then its 43/47 ppm for a 5 man. A couple of those plus support gets to half the army pretty fast.
I know that these are individually strong things, but that's not the whole picture. Once I spend more time digesting Necrons I might feel differently.
the point is not the power of the list, it's an obvious skew, an oppressive skew even, but anything that is even just bringing regular TAC ammount of bodies can deal with it.
The issue is the oppresiveness amalgated out of the DW rules and the eradicator.
In essence, that list might lose most of it's match ups but against factions that rely upon vehicles as a core part of their factions identity it will not be a fun matchup. Even if the list is UP.
Tyel wrote: It will be interesting if mass DW eradicators is better than mass DW aggressors - which was an obvious meme list, and yet either no one ran it, or it didn't work. I guess you might want some dedicated anti-tank rather than just hundreds of S4 AP- shots.
Probably didn't work. "mass" slow 45ish point models missing ObSec, isn't very massive. Aggresors were incredibly good at their one trick, but the really only had the one.
Points would do it, but it would have to be a big hit. They need to be 60 PPM minimum with their current rules. That would make a six man squad 360 points, a unit that can kill a 360 point tank in a single round of shooting should at least be as expensive as the tank. But if we're doing rules, I'd say losing double tap would do it, but maybe be too much.
The problem is gw always makes things worse by adding more rules. When I first saw the stats for the heavy meltas I thought "Holy crap!", then I realized that since they were heavy weapons they would always be hitting on 4s if they moved. Then I saw the strategem that makes any infantry unit that moved count as standing still.
At 60 points they’re almost the same as a MM speeder with three times the movement, ignoring Heavy, and T5 6W 3+.
Good point, you've finally convinced me, multi-melta land speeders are far superior to eradicators. And they need a massive points hike. Now.
Without knowing exactly which strat you’re talking about, the one I THINK you’re talking about they can’t advance.
Yes, that's the one. Sorry, forget the name right now. But what does that have to do with anything? They're heavy weapons, they can't fire if they advance anyway. The point is it allows the eradicators to reposition in order for a better shot at their chosen target without suffering the -1 to hit from moving with heavy weapons. The idea that if they did that they would be less effective due to hitting on 4s instead of 3s made the heavy meltas seem a little less ridiculous to me. That strategem kills that balancing mechanism.
Yes, that's the one. Sorry, forget the name right now. But what does that have to do with anything? They're heavy weapons, they can't fire if they advance anyway. The point is it allows the eradicators to reposition in order for a better shot at their chosen target without suffering the -1 to hit from moving with heavy weapons. The idea that if they did that they would be less effective due to hitting on 4s instead of 3s made the heavy meltas seem a little less ridiculous to me. That strategem kills that balancing mechanism.
If you're planning on moving and shooting, I think you'd stick with the basic (assault) melta rifle not the heavy.
Marines probably have enough good stratagems that you want to be using that you won't design a list that has to 'waste' CP on making heavy Eradicators count as stationary when your most likely going to outflank them onto the board.
The Heavy versions might do more but do you need more? Seemed to me like Eradicators were already doing enough.
Ordana wrote: Marines probably have enough good stratagems that you want to be using that you won't design a list that has to 'waste' CP on making heavy Eradicators count as stationary when your most likely going to outflank them onto the board.
The Heavy versions might do more but do you need more? Seemed to me like Eradicators were already doing enough.
In my head, I was already using them with Guilliman (if/when I was using them), not outflanking. Stick some Aggressors out front, some Eradicators in the back/on the flank, Grandpappy Smurf (rerolls + +1" to charge and advance) and Tiggy in the middle(-1 to hit, and/or Tactical doctrine this turn. each for one unit) , now that Aggressors don't have to avoid Advancing to preserve the double tap, its an even easier decision. Of course, now I have to figure out what kind of shenanigans I can use to get them (Aggressors and Grandpappy) to charge and/or Heroically Intervene after an advance/before my next turn (if possible). I'm wondering if it would be mean to add a Chief Apothecary. If they fix Apothecaries being able to heal MONSTERs like Guilliman, I'll stop wondering. If I really want to go overboard, tack on a couple Victrix Guard so he can't even be sniped or otherwise targetted by shooting. But probably not, that's already pricey enough.
I wish we had an apothecary like the marine one, being able to resurect a whole paladin or an attack bike is a big thing. Am not even sure if an apothecary isn't better in some cases, then a regular Lt run as a counter unit.
Karol wrote: I wish we had an apothecary like the marine one, being able to resurect a whole paladin or an attack bike is a big thing. Am not even sure if an apothecary isn't better in some cases, then a regular Lt run as a counter unit.
What's a paladin? I don't recognize that from any of the Marine Codexes. Resurrecting an Attack Bike is an iffy thing, he's got to be near the unit to do it, and I think - now/eventually/next week/whatever you want to call it - only the Chief Apothecary can do it. And the Indexes for the other chapters make even that doubtful - Brother Corbulo still only heals D3, and can't resurrect - the Deathwing and Ravenwing Apothecaries only heal D3 not the Flat 3 or whatever we've been told. Of course as yet more wonkiness the -Wing Apothecaries also give the 6+ FNP so maybe they did a little bit of both on the Indexes until the Supplement comes out.
Also what is a "counter unit" in the manner you're using it?
Breton wrote: What's a paladin? I don't recognize that from any of the Marine Codexes. Resurrecting an Attack Bike is an iffy thing, he's got to be near the unit to do it, and I think - now/eventually/next week/whatever you want to call it - only the Chief Apothecary can do it.
ehhm no? any apothecary can do it. its a 1CP strat used at the END of the movement phase. So you can zip back with an ATV and revive a 85 points, 8 Wound model.
Karol wrote: I wish we had an apothecary like the marine one, being able to resurect a whole paladin or an attack bike is a big thing. Am not even sure if an apothecary isn't better in some cases, then a regular Lt run as a counter unit.
What's a paladin? I don't recognize that from any of the Marine Codexes. Resurrecting an Attack Bike is an iffy thing, he's got to be near the unit to do it, and I think - now/eventually/next week/whatever you want to call it - only the Chief Apothecary can do it. And the Indexes for the other chapters make even that doubtful - Brother Corbulo still only heals D3, and can't resurrect - the Deathwing and Ravenwing Apothecaries only heal D3 not the Flat 3 or whatever we've been told. Of course as yet more wonkiness the -Wing Apothecaries also give the 6+ FNP so maybe they did a little bit of both on the Indexes until the Supplement comes out.
Also what is a "counter unit" in the manner you're using it?
then a regular Lt run as a counter unit.
Appocothory is 6+FNP aura plus heal d3 wounds on a wounded model and can use 1CP strategum to bring back a model at full wounds.
Or as anyone with any sence will do upgrade him for 25 points
Cheif has 6+FNP aura plus heal upto 3 wounds on any wounded model, cannuse the sttategum for bringing back a model at full wounds for 0CP.
AKA someone at GW decied that being allowed to use a 1CP strategum for free 4 times and changing D3 to flat 3 was only worth 25 points.
Breton wrote: What's a paladin? I don't recognize that from any of the Marine Codexes. Resurrecting an Attack Bike is an iffy thing, he's got to be near the unit to do it, and I think - now/eventually/next week/whatever you want to call it - only the Chief Apothecary can do it.
ehhm no? any apothecary can do it. its a 1CP strat used at the END of the movement phase. So you can zip back with an ATV and revive a 85 points, 8 Wound model.
That's right, I forgot they made it a strat, I don't have the book, or the leaked stuff yet, just the FAQ's and Index'es put out by GW. How does the Apothecary zip back with an ATV?
a good nerf for eradicators would be to clarify that
"one target" means a SINGLE target, not a unit. which would drasticly reduce firepower against infantry squads.
yes, because the biggest issue with Eradicators was how effective they were against infantry squads, not the fact that 9 of them with some upgrades or 12 with no upgrades but in melta range was 1 shotting a fething Stompa. Not saying a stompa is remotely good but 40 T8 wounds and costs about 1k points and 360pts of Eradicators 1 shot it with some weapons upgrades, no buffs, no chapter bonuses or reroll auras. (if 5 for heavy and 10 for MM is correct the 9 Eradicators would cost 420pts, killing almost 1k a turn in Stompas) 3 Eradicators, NO weapons upgrades were doing enough to 1 shot an Ork Buggy each turn, not even in 1/2 melta range.
3 eradicators can 1 shot a deff dread,
6 eradicators with just heavy upgrades can 1 shot a Gorkanaut, or 6 without upgrades but in melta range.
SemperMortis wrote: 3 Aggressors get 36 shots against horde for 24 hits and 12 wounds. Against boyz thats 10 dead Boyz. 135pts kills 80. That is pretty damn good, if its in tactical turn its 96.
In CC Those 3 aggressors get 13 attacks on the charge at S8 AP-3 Flat 2 dmg. hitting on 4s.
3 Meganobz get 12 shots, for 4 hits and 2 wounds against Ork boyz for 1.68ish dead boyz.
In CC those 3 meganobz get 9 attacks at S10 -3AP D3 dmg hitting on 4s. if you want to get rid of their shooting entirely and give them a a pair of Saws each they go up to 12 attacks.
So the Space Marines go to anti-horde unit is as good as my Ork Elite melee unit.
bAlaNcEd
The problem there isn’t the Aggressors, the problem is your Orks and melee in general. They screwed melee over, and are still trying to figure out how to fix it.
The problem there is that GW has increased the deadliness of ranged combat dramatically while nerfing how damaging CC is while at the same time not increasing the durability of CC units, especially my ork units. How hard is it really to get rid of a Meganob, T4 3W 2+ save? Only way to give them an invuln is to pay for an HQ to escort them and it only works with ranged weapons.
Aggressors are just a wonderful example of how badly GW has screwed up. Here is an incredibly points efficient shooting unit, capable of slaying hordes, but we are also going to make them incredibly deadly in CC vs tough units/vehicles and durable as holy hell because we can't have SM players not winning.
What weakness do aggressors have? The only one I can think of is mobility, but at the same time, those meganobz are even slower.
What weakness do aggressors have? The only one I can think of is mobility, but at the same time, those meganobz are even slower.
No easy transport, limited access to invuln/FNP, and limited deepstrike options.
The supplements that favor Aggressors of a type (UM,SL) don't have infiltrate (WS,RG). The supplements handing out 5++ or 5+++ usually prefer other units. Salamanders have a 6+++ available, but realistically you're not putting all you're Aggressors in that bubble.
MANZ otherwise can get a 5++ (ranged), 6+++, easy access to a transport, deepstrike, swipe from a transport, the best version of reroll charges, still (at present) have fight twice, access to run & charge, and D3 killsaws (which when previously discussed makes 3 of them kill just about 4 aggressors).
Now I'm not excluding transhuman and other stuff available to Aggressors for the purpose of deceit. You asked about Aggressor weaknesses and I put them up against MANZ strengths. We agree that Aggressors are good. We don't agree that MANZ are bad by comparison.
MANZIMHO aren't really comparable to agressors anyway, they're more an Ork terminator then an Ork Agressor (and yes IMHO they should be given a third wound when the new Ork 'dex comes out)
And it should also be noted that the 18" range and the desire to stay immobile is the main weakness of Aggressors. Not sure if it's enough to counteract their efficiency but yeah.
Now, if orks got an aggressor equivalent i'd be pretty happy. Like a lovechild between flashgitz and meganobs. Or just flashgitz in mega armour. Wait why isn't that a thing already? They'd probably just call it snazz armour with megagunz.
Now, if orks got an aggressor equivalent i'd be pretty happy. Like a lovechild between flashgitz and meganobs. Or just flashgitz in mega armour. Wait why isn't that a thing already? They'd probably just call it snazz armour with megagunz.
Oh wow that's awesome.
Actually my friend used to run that in 2nd ed. A bunch of Nobz in Mega Armor with Lascannons.
Weirdly enough, I've been looking at eradicators and devastators, and... I'm actually not sure what you could do with eradicators that wouldn't make them irrelevant.
For less points per gun, you can have a unit of 4x multi-meltas. This gives you more shots, that can be split-fired, along with a signum and a cherub for bonus shots and 2+ to hit on a model.
The only advantage that eradicators have over that is T5 (the extra wounds are countered by devs being cheaper), and their rifle being assault vs heavy.
So the erads are a bit harder to kill, and are a bit more mobile (extra 6" without taking a hit penalty), which is good obviously but... I'm not sure how you'd 'fix' them.
If you dropped their double-fire ability, they'd be useless. They'd be half as good as devs, but for more points.
Someone said to raise their points to 60, but they're already more expensive than devs for less firepower. Maybe upping to 45 per model is viable...
Niiru wrote: Weirdly enough, I've been looking at eradicators and devastators, and... I'm actually not sure what you could do with eradicators that wouldn't make them irrelevant.
For less points per gun, you can have a unit of 4x multi-meltas. This gives you more shots, that can be split-fired, along with a signum and a cherub for bonus shots and 2+ to hit on a model.
The only advantage that eradicators have over that is T5 (the extra wounds are countered by devs being cheaper), and their rifle being assault vs heavy.
So the erads are a bit harder to kill, and are a bit more mobile (extra 6" without taking a hit penalty), which is good obviously but... I'm not sure how you'd 'fix' them.
If you dropped their double-fire ability, they'd be useless. They'd be half as good as devs, but for more points.
Someone said to raise their points to 60, but they're already more expensive than devs for less firepower. Maybe upping to 45 per model is viable...
(Sorry to drag this topic back onto... topic)
So.... in other words vs other Marine heavy weapons team options... they might be... balanced?
Niiru wrote: Weirdly enough, I've been looking at eradicators and devastators, and... I'm actually not sure what you could do with eradicators that wouldn't make them irrelevant.
For less points per gun, you can have a unit of 4x multi-meltas. This gives you more shots, that can be split-fired, along with a signum and a cherub for bonus shots and 2+ to hit on a model.
The only advantage that eradicators have over that is T5 (the extra wounds are countered by devs being cheaper), and their rifle being assault vs heavy.
So the erads are a bit harder to kill, and are a bit more mobile (extra 6" without taking a hit penalty), which is good obviously but... I'm not sure how you'd 'fix' them.
If you dropped their double-fire ability, they'd be useless. They'd be half as good as devs, but for more points.
Someone said to raise their points to 60, but they're already more expensive than devs for less firepower. Maybe upping to 45 per model is viable...
(Sorry to drag this topic back onto... topic)
So.... in other words vs other Marine heavy weapons team options... they might be... balanced?
Maybe? I certainly don't see how they can be nerfed without also nerfing other heavy weapon options.
I suspect the end result is going to simply be that other armies have to suck, until they get their updates, and hope that GW stay on track to actually give them decent updates.
(I have been trying to build up a Deathwatch army, so I have very little faith in the GW shitshow considering how badly they completely squatted deathwatch yesterday, but still.)
Tyel wrote: It will be interesting if mass DW eradicators is better than mass DW aggressors - which was an obvious meme list, and yet either no one ran it, or it didn't work. I guess you might want some dedicated anti-tank rather than just hundreds of S4 AP- shots.
Probably didn't work. "mass" slow 45ish point models missing ObSec, isn't very massive. Aggresors were incredibly good at their one trick, but the really only had the one.
Niiru wrote: Weirdly enough, I've been looking at eradicators and devastators, and... I'm actually not sure what you could do with eradicators that wouldn't make them irrelevant.
For less points per gun, you can have a unit of 4x multi-meltas. This gives you more shots, that can be split-fired, along with a signum and a cherub for bonus shots and 2+ to hit on a model.
The only advantage that eradicators have over that is T5 (the extra wounds are countered by devs being cheaper), and their rifle being assault vs heavy.
So the erads are a bit harder to kill, and are a bit more mobile (extra 6" without taking a hit penalty), which is good obviously but... I'm not sure how you'd 'fix' them.
If you dropped their double-fire ability, they'd be useless. They'd be half as good as devs, but for more points.
Someone said to raise their points to 60, but they're already more expensive than devs for less firepower. Maybe upping to 45 per model is viable...
(Sorry to drag this topic back onto... topic)
So.... in other words vs other Marine heavy weapons team options... they might be... balanced?
Maybe? I certainly don't see how they can be nerfed without also nerfing other heavy weapon options.
I suspect the end result is going to simply be that other armies have to suck, until they get their updates, and hope that GW stay on track to actually give them decent updates.
(I have been trying to build up a Deathwatch army, so I have very little faith in the GW shitshow considering how badly they completely squatted deathwatch yesterday, but still.)
The secret is that devastators are actually, themselves, OP. And have been for about a year. GW just keeps switching the most OP way to play with them depending on their guns, so everyone using the drop grav devs kinda got boned now that melta devs are the new hotness, and there's not as much a reason to make the transition when eradicators are just better. Supress eradicators and melta devs would dominate almost as much though, yes.
Niiru wrote: Weirdly enough, I've been looking at eradicators and devastators, and... I'm actually not sure what you could do with eradicators that wouldn't make them irrelevant.
For less points per gun, you can have a unit of 4x multi-meltas. This gives you more shots, that can be split-fired, along with a signum and a cherub for bonus shots and 2+ to hit on a model.
The only advantage that eradicators have over that is T5 (the extra wounds are countered by devs being cheaper), and their rifle being assault vs heavy.
So the erads are a bit harder to kill, and are a bit more mobile (extra 6" without taking a hit penalty), which is good obviously but... I'm not sure how you'd 'fix' them.
If you dropped their double-fire ability, they'd be useless. They'd be half as good as devs, but for more points.
Someone said to raise their points to 60, but they're already more expensive than devs for less firepower. Maybe upping to 45 per model is viable...
(Sorry to drag this topic back onto... topic)
So.... in other words vs other Marine heavy weapons team options... they might be... balanced?
Maybe? I certainly don't see how they can be nerfed without also nerfing other heavy weapon options.
I suspect the end result is going to simply be that other armies have to suck, until they get their updates, and hope that GW stay on track to actually give them decent updates.
(I have been trying to build up a Deathwatch army, so I have very little faith in the GW shitshow considering how badly they completely squatted deathwatch yesterday, but still.)
how did they squat deathwatch? I know they lost SIA but that's hardly squatting them
Niiru wrote: Weirdly enough, I've been looking at eradicators and devastators, and... I'm actually not sure what you could do with eradicators that wouldn't make them irrelevant.
For less points per gun, you can have a unit of 4x multi-meltas. This gives you more shots, that can be split-fired, along with a signum and a cherub for bonus shots and 2+ to hit on a model.
The only advantage that eradicators have over that is T5 (the extra wounds are countered by devs being cheaper), and their rifle being assault vs heavy.
So the erads are a bit harder to kill, and are a bit more mobile (extra 6" without taking a hit penalty), which is good obviously but... I'm not sure how you'd 'fix' them.
If you dropped their double-fire ability, they'd be useless. They'd be half as good as devs, but for more points.
Someone said to raise their points to 60, but they're already more expensive than devs for less firepower. Maybe upping to 45 per model is viable...
(Sorry to drag this topic back onto... topic)
So.... in other words vs other Marine heavy weapons team options... they might be... balanced?
Maybe? I certainly don't see how they can be nerfed without also nerfing other heavy weapon options.
I suspect the end result is going to simply be that other armies have to suck, until they get their updates, and hope that GW stay on track to actually give them decent updates.
(I have been trying to build up a Deathwatch army, so I have very little faith in the GW shitshow considering how badly they completely squatted deathwatch yesterday, but still.)
how did they squat deathwatch? I know they lost SIA but that's hardly squatting them
Without a major overhaul, deathwatch are just a cheap gimmick of giving obsec to weird units like outriders. They have nothing else.
Frag cannons are nerfed hard and still 15pts. Shotguns are actually better... But require giving up your melee weapon. Vets kill team can't even take a black shield anymore.
You're better off fielding your marines as any other army. There's no benefit to deathwatch unless you like the fluff, and everything that's fluffy has been removed or made unplayably bad.
BrianDavion wrote: ...how did they squat deathwatch? I know they lost SIA but that's hardly squatting them
As of right now Deathwatch are approximately comparable to playing Space Marines with no Chapter Tactics. You can buy a 20pt 2W Deathwatch Veteran who can have a 30"/AP-1 boltgun, or you could buy a 20pt Intercessor that has almost the same statline/weapon. You could use Mission Tactics to reroll 1s to wound against things of a specific battlefield role, or you could get Lieutenants that work on everything. You could reroll 1s to hit against Xenos books, or you could just sit by your Captains and reroll 1s to hit against everything.
They're not 100% pointless compared to other Chapters right now (SIA has non-Kraken options, ObSec Storm Shields are nice, and Mission Tactics does work on non-Core units table-wide), but they're pretty close.
BrianDavion wrote: MANZIMHO aren't really comparable to agressors anyway, they're more an Ork terminator then an Ork Agressor (and yes IMHO they should be given a third wound when the new Ork 'dex comes out)
They're already 3W. Nobz and all their equivalents were 2W since ages so the megarmour gave them a 3rd wound in 8th, like the terminator armour gave marines a 2nd wound. Now they should be 4 or 5 W. Or get T5. TWC are 4W and they've always had the same number of wounds of meganobz.
Daedalus81 wrote: The supplements handing out 5++ or 5+++ usually prefer other units.
Do keep in mind that Psychic Fortress is now a 6" 5++ invuln save. So all marines have access to the 5++ if they bring a libby along. Your point still stands though
Daedalus81 wrote: The supplements handing out 5++ or 5+++ usually prefer other units.
Do keep in mind that Psychic Fortress is now a 6" 5++ invuln save. So all marines have access to the 5++ if they bring a libby along. Your point still stands though
This is what annoys me most right now. GW considers that 5++ is a thing anybody should or could have and not have to pay practically any premiums for it... except for the armies that were initially designed to have an invuln save as their main trait (daemons, thousand sons etc), for which the invuln was baked into the cost of the models and still carries over until now.
There used to be a time where the only time you could find an invuln save outside HQ was rubric marines or daemons. It was their thing, and why they cost as much as they did. Especially rubrics, which had a 4++ save and an ap3 gun under the old rules (and paying points for it as they should), which ended up these days with a 5++ save and an ap-2 weapon, both of which literally everybody now can have without having to pay any premiums at all.
Side note: the very fact that most units kinda need to have an invuln save to even be around these days says a lot about the balance of offense vs defense in this game.
Niiru wrote: Weirdly enough, I've been looking at eradicators and devastators, and... I'm actually not sure what you could do with eradicators that wouldn't make them irrelevant.
For less points per gun, you can have a unit of 4x multi-meltas. This gives you more shots, that can be split-fired, along with a signum and a cherub for bonus shots and 2+ to hit on a model.
The only advantage that eradicators have over that is T5 (the extra wounds are countered by devs being cheaper), and their rifle being assault vs heavy.
So the erads are a bit harder to kill, and are a bit more mobile (extra 6" without taking a hit penalty), which is good obviously but... I'm not sure how you'd 'fix' them.
If you dropped their double-fire ability, they'd be useless. They'd be half as good as devs, but for more points.
Someone said to raise their points to 60, but they're already more expensive than devs for less firepower. Maybe upping to 45 per model is viable...
(Sorry to drag this topic back onto... topic)
So.... in other words vs other Marine heavy weapons team options... they might be... balanced?
Maybe? I certainly don't see how they can be nerfed without also nerfing other heavy weapon options.
I suspect the end result is going to simply be that other armies have to suck, until they get their updates, and hope that GW stay on track to actually give them decent updates.
(I have been trying to build up a Deathwatch army, so I have very little faith in the GW shitshow considering how badly they completely squatted deathwatch yesterday, but still.)
how did they squat deathwatch? I know they lost SIA but that's hardly squatting them
One assumes by scheduling their supplement for imminent release, just like the two special chapters that lost stuff and didn't get a big bump to tide them over..? Such *appalling* treatment.
If you find the truth antagonising, maybe you should take a look at where your biases lay on this topic. He needn't stop anything. I get that you guys want a one sided echo chamber in here, but you're not gonna get that, especially when what you're saying is just so outlandishly blinkered.
Daedalus81 wrote: The supplements handing out 5++ or 5+++ usually prefer other units.
Do keep in mind that Psychic Fortress is now a 6" 5++ invuln save. So all marines have access to the 5++ if they bring a libby along. Your point still stands though
This is what annoys me most right now. GW considers that 5++ is a thing anybody should or could have and not have to pay practically any premiums for it... except for the armies that were initially designed to have an invuln save as their main trait (daemons, thousand sons etc), for which the invuln was baked into the cost of the models and still carries over until now.
There used to be a time where the only time you could find an invuln save outside HQ was rubric marines or daemons. It was their thing, and why they cost as much as they did. Especially rubrics, which had a 4++ save and an ap3 gun under the old rules (and paying points for it as they should), which ended up these days with a 5++ save and an ap-2 weapon, both of which literally everybody now can have without having to pay any premiums at all.
Side note: the very fact that most units kinda need to have an invuln save to even be around these days says a lot about the balance of offense vs defense in this game.
I think a huge culprit for what lead to this was Marines having cheap and easy access to 3++ in the form of the storm shield. No invulnerable save should be better than a 4++ without some serious drawbacks (such as only being able to be used in close combat, losing the save after a fail etc.)
it's literally ALL he does. check his post history, it's 10 pages of NOTHING but whining about Marines. I can't even figure out what Faction Ice plays because he doesn't talk about anything but how aweful marines are
Niiru wrote: Weirdly enough, I've been looking at eradicators and devastators, and... I'm actually not sure what you could do with eradicators that wouldn't make them irrelevant.
For less points per gun, you can have a unit of 4x multi-meltas. This gives you more shots, that can be split-fired, along with a signum and a cherub for bonus shots and 2+ to hit on a model.
The only advantage that eradicators have over that is T5 (the extra wounds are countered by devs being cheaper), and their rifle being assault vs heavy.
So the erads are a bit harder to kill, and are a bit more mobile (extra 6" without taking a hit penalty), which is good obviously but... I'm not sure how you'd 'fix' them.
If you dropped their double-fire ability, they'd be useless. They'd be half as good as devs, but for more points.
Someone said to raise their points to 60, but they're already more expensive than devs for less firepower. Maybe upping to 45 per model is viable...
(Sorry to drag this topic back onto... topic)
So.... in other words vs other Marine heavy weapons team options... they might be... balanced?
Maybe? I certainly don't see how they can be nerfed without also nerfing other heavy weapon options.
I suspect the end result is going to simply be that other armies have to suck, until they get their updates, and hope that GW stay on track to actually give them decent updates.
(I have been trying to build up a Deathwatch army, so I have very little faith in the GW shitshow considering how badly they completely squatted deathwatch yesterday, but still.)
The problem with buffing devastators to almost be as good as the broken Eradicators is that the game just gets more broken.
The last thing 40k needed was to become more lethal. Pretty much every change to game mechanics since the release of 8th has been to try to reduce alpha strike lethality.
And after a year of Marines being broken I don't think many Xenos players are happy to hear "wait another year and hope GW fixes you. And if they don't, guess you have another chance in 3-4 years?"
the weapons buffs are being applied to 3 areas. 1st are Meltaguns whom simply have proven not very effective at their task. no one was using melta in 8th edition, so clearly GW needed to revisit the rules for Melta. makes sense to me. the 2nd is heavy bolters. they weren't being used much when alternatives where avaliable because, yet again, they weren't all that great. with the expansion of marines to 2 wounds, the heavy bolter was changed to have a place as a "heavy infantry killer" lastly are power weapons, ultimately a lot of power weapons just wheren't working quite right, GW is hoping to get em tuned up.
Flamers where also given more range because the only people who used flamers where those able to extend their range.
we also saw astartes chainswords buffed because a lot of marine melee infantry units use chainswords but they where underperforming due to a lack of AP. the chainsword rules are an attempt to make units like assault marines etc actually usable
About the Invulnerable Save, you entire Dark Angel army now can have a 4+/5+ without almost even building for it.
Also, 3++ isn't a thing anymore for Storm Shield. Unless some armies forget their update, the new Index for marine subfactions list the Storm Shield as the Bladeguard (4++, +1 to Armor Save).
So, there are no more 3++ in the Marine roster in form of Storm Shield.
But GW can't expect that all Marine weapons are used the same as they have a huuuuge amount of them.
If we get to the point that we have to buff the most basic melee weapons because they are not seeing play we are going to have problems:
- We Xenos get the same treatment and the game becomes a bloodbath. Incubi getting the +1S on their power weapons or Wyches getting AP on their knives, if I have to talk about something I know.
- We Xenos remain the same and then it's just even worse, as we can't compete anymore.
Wait and see, I guess. At least I like what they've done with the Necron Codex, Xenos have faith.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
Really - some of this makes sense. Some damage profiles have been shown to be bad through 8th. The problem if GW never seems to think of things holistically. Ignore Xenos and just look at Imperium.
Imo flamers should have always been 12" range. They should probably - imo again - have auto-overwatch too. You might need to tweak their points, but that's the niche of this gun, and it doesn't tread on other toes.
Unfortunately this doesn't apply to other weapons.
Okay, the HB should be 2 damage. Well what was 2 damage before? The Autocannon. Now the difference between these weapons is incredibly blurred. The Autocannon arguably might still have a niche due to being better versus T6 - if T6 was a common sort of stat. But it isn't really. And the Autocannon is theoretically the same versus T7, and worse versus literally everything else. So... yeah.
So.. should we expect the autocannon to be buffed to say 3 damage? Or is it just obsolete this edition? Presumably though you couldn't just make the HB have more shots - because then its becoming an assault cannon, the new CSM weapon, or whatever the super duper Primaris lots of shots is called.
Similar with melta. I think the +2 damage in half range over rerolling the dice is a good change. But clearly this wasn't good enough, multi-meltas needed 2 shots. Which is crazy. Because it makes them ludicrously better than lascannons - or lastype equivalent weapons. People can try and make something out of the longer range - but when the board is smaller, more and more units can move and fire without penalty (and the penalty is capped in any case) - I feel this is quite weak. An MM in 12" is now almost as good as 4 lascannons versus a standard 3+ same target. This is faintly bonkers - and the only way to bring parity is to give lascannons 2 shots. Or up their damage to 3D3 damage like the new Necron destroyer.
So yes, maybe we'll get wyches with 8 attacks, and dark lances will fire twice etc - or by the time DE show up, GW will have realised this was a silly system, and nerf everything.
I think meltas needed the extra buff and a really good one. Meltas are now fair, not busted. Some units carrying meltas are overpowered, but that's because they are extremely undercosted. Meltas overall are now where they should have always been.
Flamers are ok at 12 but I could understand their previous 8'' range, it was design to avoid deepstrike and clear the screeners, which was a silly and overpowered combo that I was glad it was gone. 12'' are ok if only platiforms with flamers can't deepstrike; same logic with melta: their platforms shouldn't deepstrike. Some melta are overpowered because they can get in melta range in turn 1. Denying them to outflank/deepstrike would also buff and give more purpose to transports, which are in a bad state at the moment, especially for SM. Heavy flamers at 5 points and +50% range are extremely good now.
Power weapons and chainswords were ok IMHO, and I can justify their upgrade only if all their equivalents from other codexes also get an upgrade. Do I finally get AP-1 choppas?
About the autocannon issue I think weapons with S less than 6 (or even 7) should have their damage reduced against vehicles/monsters by 1. Heavy bolters should be good against infantries but not an anti tank tool and with D2 they compete with rockets and autocannons in hurting vehicles which is silly. On the other hand increasing damage and/or AP to any other weapon is just as bad as lethality is already too high, especially for the shooting phase.
Yes, that's the one. Sorry, forget the name right now. But what does that have to do with anything? They're heavy weapons, they can't fire if they advance anyway. The point is it allows the eradicators to reposition in order for a better shot at their chosen target without suffering the -1 to hit from moving with heavy weapons. The idea that if they did that they would be less effective due to hitting on 4s instead of 3s made the heavy meltas seem a little less ridiculous to me. That strategem kills that balancing mechanism.
If you're planning on moving and shooting, I think you'd stick with the basic (assault) melta rifle not the heavy.
You always have to plan on moving and shooting. Do you expect your opponent to simply move whatever target you want to hit right in front of your eradicators? You have to expect to need to maneuver the unit into position to take the shot. You're going to have to do that eventually, and the strategem removes the penalty for doing so. It looks like it was designed just for eradicaters with the heavy meltas, or devastators with multi-meltas.
Cybtroll wrote: About the Invulnerable Save, you entire Dark Angel army now can have a 4+/5+ without almost even building for it.
Also, 3++ isn't a thing anymore for Storm Shield. Unless some armies forget their update, the new Index for marine subfactions list the Storm Shield as the Bladeguard (4++, +1 to Armor Save).
So, there are no more 3++ in the Marine roster in form of Storm Shield.
The Victrix Guard still are, and specifically called out as so in the FAQ(Ultima Storm Shields are apparently not Storm Shields), but one two model situational bodyguard unit is the exception not the rule.
And after a year of Marines being broken I don't think many Xenos players are happy to hear "wait another year and hope GW fixes you. And if they don't, guess you have another chance in 3-4 years?"
Well first of all since Feb most stores were closed, and opened a bit durning summer, and it looks like they are going to be closing back up again with the rise in people sick. So the year of OP marines isn't that comperable to eldar or castellans being powerful when people actualy got to play. And the second thing is people do get to wait years for GW to fix their codex. I was told it is the normal thing and how GW operates. 2 years to wait for an update that kind of a fixs your army doesn't sound strange to me. I played only in 8th and had to wait longer, and from what people told me If I started in 7th it could easier have been 3-4 years too.
Okay, the HB should be 2 damage. Well what was 2 damage before?
The HB should have gone to 4 shots and D2. The Grav Cannon is 4 shots, -3 and D1/D2. The HB will almost never be taken over Grav if both are an option.
The Autocannon has been in bad shape most of its life and does need some work. Autocannon with performance relatively similar to Grav or plasma should be the goal as most armies taking one can’t take Grav or heavy Plasma
You always have to plan on moving and shooting. Do you expect your opponent to simply move whatever target you want to hit right in front of your eradicators? You have to expect to need to maneuver the unit into position to take the shot. You're going to have to do that eventually, and the strategem removes the penalty for doing so. It looks like it was designed just for eradicaters with the heavy meltas, or devastators with multi-meltas.
Always planning on moving and shooting is my point - Thus the regular ones you can advance and shoot. I’m still probably doing ATVs, old bikes (and attack bikes) or most likely speeders. But when/if I do Eradicators, I’m doing them with the assault Melta rifle so they can advance and shoot with a bigger threat bubble.
And after a year of Marines being broken I don't think many Xenos players are happy to hear "wait another year and hope GW fixes you. And if they don't, guess you have another chance in 3-4 years?"
Well first of all since Feb most stores were closed, and opened a bit durning summer, and it looks like they are going to be closing back up again with the rise in people sick. So the year of OP marines isn't that comperable to eldar or castellans being powerful when people actualy got to play. And the second thing is people do get to wait years for GW to fix their codex. I was told it is the normal thing and how GW operates. 2 years to wait for an update that kind of a fixs your army doesn't sound strange to me. I played only in 8th and had to wait longer, and from what people told me If I started in 7th it could easier have been 3-4 years too.
Yes, gaps were often longer in the past. And it was complained about a lot.
And after a year of Marines being broken I don't think many Xenos players are happy to hear "wait another year and hope GW fixes you. And if they don't, guess you have another chance in 3-4 years?"
Well first of all since Feb most stores were closed, and opened a bit durning summer, and it looks like they are going to be closing back up again with the rise in people sick. So the year of OP marines isn't that comperable to eldar or castellans being powerful when people actualy got to play. And the second thing is people do get to wait years for GW to fix their codex. I was told it is the normal thing and how GW operates. 2 years to wait for an update that kind of a fixs your army doesn't sound strange to me. I played only in 8th and had to wait longer, and from what people told me If I started in 7th it could easier have been 3-4 years too.
People have been playing through the covid situation tho. Either playing with family members or on tabletop simulator. The game didnt completely stop because stores were closed. We still had to deal with marines 2.0. And marines got better winrate AND playrate than Ynnari or Castellans got.
Sure, its how GW operates because they don't want to release all codexes at once, it doesnt mean we're not allowed to complain about it.
Oh, and just so your hatred of Eldar doesn't misunderstand what i mean, i say this with my Chaos in mind. And armies like genestealer cults and imperial guard that are pretty dated.
VladimirHerzog wrote: And armies like genestealer cults and imperial guard that are pretty dated.
There are a number of armies that probably shouldn’t be armies but instead sub factions. GSC started as a Nid subfaction and probably should have stayed there. Custodes probably should have been finagled like Agents of The Imperium. Imperial/Chaos Knights too.
The HB should have gone to 4 shots and D2. The Grav Cannon is 4 shots, -3 and D1/D2. The HB will almost never be taken over Grav if both are an option.
I cannot say if that would make sense for SM, but for other codices 4 shot, D2 heavy bolters would be kind of strange. As you already implied, it would make the Autocannon (for IG for example) even more pointless and also I personally think, buffing HB by 100% was more than enough. Keep in mind that outside of Codex SM there are some armies that can take a lot of HBs (IG for example) and I personally don't think we need even more damage but more durability in the game (but that is my personal opinion of course)
Tyel wrote: Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
Really - some of this makes sense. Some damage profiles have been shown to be bad through 8th. The problem if GW never seems to think of things holistically. Ignore Xenos and just look at Imperium.
Imo flamers should have always been 12" range. They should probably - imo again - have auto-overwatch too. You might need to tweak their points, but that's the niche of this gun, and it doesn't tread on other toes.
Unfortunately this doesn't apply to other weapons.
Okay, the HB should be 2 damage. Well what was 2 damage before? The Autocannon. Now the difference between these weapons is incredibly blurred. The Autocannon arguably might still have a niche due to being better versus T6 - if T6 was a common sort of stat. But it isn't really. And the Autocannon is theoretically the same versus T7, and worse versus literally everything else. So... yeah.
So.. should we expect the autocannon to be buffed to say 3 damage? Or is it just obsolete this edition? Presumably though you couldn't just make the HB have more shots - because then its becoming an assault cannon, the new CSM weapon, or whatever the super duper Primaris lots of shots is called.
Similar with melta. I think the +2 damage in half range over rerolling the dice is a good change. But clearly this wasn't good enough, multi-meltas needed 2 shots. Which is crazy. Because it makes them ludicrously better than lascannons - or lastype equivalent weapons. People can try and make something out of the longer range - but when the board is smaller, more and more units can move and fire without penalty (and the penalty is capped in any case) - I feel this is quite weak. An MM in 12" is now almost as good as 4 lascannons versus a standard 3+ same target. This is faintly bonkers - and the only way to bring parity is to give lascannons 2 shots. Or up their damage to 3D3 damage like the new Necron destroyer.
So yes, maybe we'll get wyches with 8 attacks, and dark lances will fire twice etc - or by the time DE show up, GW will have realised this was a silly system, and nerf everything.
Call me crazy, but I almost think weapons should have, and stay with me on this: SPECIFIC uses.
1. Flamers should be auto-wounding anything in cover - because flamer throwers were designed to take out entrenched infantry or infantry in buildings.
2. Auto cannons or anything S7+ should be (ANTI-TANK) That would mean +1/2 damage for anything their toughness or above. So a S7 Autocannon will do 3 damage to a T6 vehicle. A S8 Lehman Russ will for +2 damage to a T6 or a +1 to a T7. Lascannons S9 should do D6+3 to anything T6+.
Grenade weapons should follow flamers and do auto-wounds to units in cover. If you are in a building and a grenade drops in at your feet, you are getting wounded.
VladimirHerzog wrote: And armies like genestealer cults and imperial guard that are pretty dated.
There are a number of armies that probably shouldn’t be armies but instead sub factions. GSC started as a Nid subfaction and probably should have stayed there. Custodes probably should have been finagled like Agents of The Imperium. Imperial/Chaos Knights too.
Why? They have enough model support to be their own standalone army with their own playstyle.
GSC is one of the more unique armies there is in the game right now. The concept is solid, theyre just lacking good rules.
Custodes are being phased out by marines but theyre still the "ultra-elite, low model count" army.
IMO all armies that are playable right now are justifiable.
@Fezzik. yeah, it really feels like weapons should have some sort of keyword that would make them more efficient against their preferred target (lore-wise).
However, unless i'm mistaken, isnt the autocannon an anti heavy-infantry weapon in the fluff?
Imagine how much simple the "melta/plasma/flamer" errata wouldve been if they were keywords instead of abilities. Instead of waiting for their own codex to come out, fusion/heat lances/plaguespitters couldve been changed in one swoop by just stating "All melta weapons now have D6+2 damage if they are within half range", "all flamers have 12" range now", etc.
The HB should have gone to 4 shots and D2. The Grav Cannon is 4 shots, -3 and D1/D2. The HB will almost never be taken over Grav if both are an option.
I cannot say if that would make sense for SM, but for other codices 4 shot, D2 heavy bolters would be kind of strange. As you already implied, it would make the Autocannon (for IG for example) even more pointless and also I personally think, buffing HB by 100% was more than enough. Keep in mind that outside of Codex SM there are some armies that can take a lot of HBs (IG for example) and I personally don't think we need even more damage but more durability in the game (but that is my personal opinion of course)
.
The Grav Gun is rapid fire 1, to Heavy 4.
The Heavy Bolter is Rapid Fire 1 to Heavy 3
And that extra shot plus extra pen makes the Grav still better enough than the HB to usually be mathematically superior point for point. Better to give guard a better HB and then retune Autocannon into a hole they’re missing... Grav or heavy plasma.
VladimirHerzog wrote: @Fezzik. yeah, it really feels like weapons should have some sort of keyword that would make them more efficient against their preferred target (lore-wise).
However, unless i'm mistaken, isnt the autocannon an anti heavy-infantry weapon in the fluff?
Imagine how much simple the "melta/plasma/flamer" errata wouldve been if they were keywords instead of abilities. Instead of waiting for their own codex to come out, fusion/heat lances/plaguespitters couldve been changed in one swoop by just stating "All melta weapons now have D6+2 damage if they are within half range", "all flamers have 12" range now", etc.
Indeed I think you are correct on that, however, the Autocannon has morphed into an anti-light vehicle killer since 7th. High Penetration, high strength, good shooting, and good damage. I remember building the Auto-cannon weapon teams for my cadian lists because they were better anti-tank than Lascannons 1 shot at S9, that had swingy damage. I'd end up earning way more points with the Cannons then anything else really.
It wasn't until 8th rolled around where T8 became almost stock standard on everything not infantry, and the Autocannon lost it's ability to do anything well. It pops heavy infantry well enough, but with the new HB changes, or the way Plasma became the golden child, who gives a toss about S7 AP2 D2 shooting anymore.
If I had my wish, I'd make autocannons the stock profile for sniper weapons. Heavy 1 48" S7 AP2 D2. Then you'd have to respect sniper units. Boy howdy, my Tanith scouts kitbash from 2016 would finally come off the shelf.
Autocannons are in a weird spot. I think they need more AP and less str.
They should be str 6 ap -3 flat 3 damage (the old index starcannon profile) - maybe with a reroll wounds vs vehicals with a t6 or less. IDK the right cost for such a weapon. Maybe 25 points?
Xenomancers wrote: Autocannons are in a weird spot. I think they need more AP and less str.
They should be str 6 ap -3 flat 3 damage (the old index starcannon profile) - maybe with a reroll wounds vs vehicals with a t6 or less. IDK the right cost for such a weapon. Maybe 25 points?
People have been playing through the covid situation tho. Either playing with family members or on tabletop simulator. The game didnt completely stop because stores were closed. We still had to deal with marines 2.0. And marines got better winrate AND playrate than Ynnari or Castellans got.
Sure, its how GW operates because they don't want to release all codexes at once, it doesnt mean we're not allowed to complain about it.
Oh, and just so your hatred of Eldar doesn't misunderstand what i mean, i say this with my Chaos in mind. And armies like genestealer cults and imperial guard that are pretty dated.
I do forget about the store thing. Still not everyone is going to go visit someone they aren't family with, in places it was down right illegal. And it looks like it is going to be illegal once the emergancy state gets called out again durning autum winter. And I am not saying tha knights or GSC are doing great, but they are with books ment for 8th ed. what do people expect that their 8th ed books are going to work well in 9th, heck my dudes weren't working in 8th with an 8th book. So I both don't get the suprise why armies with 9th ed rules are better and I don't really understand what people wanted from GW.
Did people think that GW would have done some other army at the start of the edition then marines? didn't they make marines the first codex in all editions they ever had. I would love to get a book too, specialy with my terminators not getting the buff I thought they would get in the FAQ, but I do understand that GW is going to go through all the marines first, and the AoS backlog, and then they are probably going to do something like a chaos sub faction or maybe eldar, if they really worked hard for the last 2 years on their redesign.
Plus I don't hate the eldar, they are an imaginary faction. Would be like hating a dog or rain. It would be stupid, now I can hate the designers of the rules or people that that play the army. That is natural, but my supposed hatred of them or castellans, doesn't the change the fact GW works the way it does. And I find strange that most people had the deal with it mind set , when their armies were good in 8th ed and called it the "best edition w40k ever had", and now when their armies are bad, they can't accept waiting 2-3 years to get them fixed. I mean it confuses me, because either it is a double standard for some factions. And maybe I even get it, considering the sales and all. Or people are just interested in their own fun, but then it means that all the stuff about playing the narrative, my old store being toxic, the whole WAAC tournament stuff was lie. And people actualy do care for their factions being better then those of others. They just don't say, it when the ones they have are the betters ones. And I wouldn't even be suprised if both things were true at the same time. I took 2 years to realise that when people say space marines, they don't GK, they just count all the other marines. Or when people from the west say how someone days is, they don't want to hear the litany of bad things that happened to you and your family lately, which is a customery thing to tell here.
So again. I don't play marines. Having OP marines doesn't make my faction better in anyway, in fact we just got nerfs because of marines. But I hell a lot confused considering all the talk I remember from 8th. If people play for fun, and didn't care about winning in 8th with their taus and eldar, why would they care about winning now. All of this just makes me fell more stupid. And I probably I am, in general this is how it ends for me, If I don't get something.
People have been playing through the covid situation tho. Either playing with family members or on tabletop simulator. The game didnt completely stop because stores were closed. We still had to deal with marines 2.0. And marines got better winrate AND playrate than Ynnari or Castellans got.
Sure, its how GW operates because they don't want to release all codexes at once, it doesnt mean we're not allowed to complain about it.
Oh, and just so your hatred of Eldar doesn't misunderstand what i mean, i say this with my Chaos in mind. And armies like genestealer cults and imperial guard that are pretty dated.
I do forget about the store thing. Still not everyone is going to go visit someone they aren't family with, in places it was down right illegal. And it looks like it is going to be illegal once the emergancy state gets called out again durning autum winter. And I am not saying tha knights or GSC are doing great, but they are with books ment for 8th ed. what do people expect that their 8th ed books are going to work well in 9th, heck my dudes weren't working in 8th with an 8th book. So I both don't get the suprise why armies with 9th ed rules are better and I don't really understand what people wanted from GW.
Did people think that GW would have done some other army at the start of the edition then marines? didn't they make marines the first codex in all editions they ever had. I would love to get a book too, specialy with my terminators not getting the buff I thought they would get in the FAQ, but I do understand that GW is going to go through all the marines first, and the AoS backlog, and then they are probably going to do something like a chaos sub faction or maybe eldar, if they really worked hard for the last 2 years on their redesign.
Plus I don't hate the eldar, they are an imaginary faction. Would be like hating a dog or rain. It would be stupid, now I can hate the designers of the rules or people that that play the army. That is natural, but my supposed hatred of them or castellans, doesn't the change the fact GW works the way it does. And I find strange that most people had the deal with it mind set , when their armies were good in 8th ed and called it the "best edition w40k ever had", and now when their armies are bad, they can't accept waiting 2-3 years to get them fixed. I mean it confuses me, because either it is a double standard for some factions. And maybe I even get it, considering the sales and all. Or people are just interested in their own fun, but then it means that all the stuff about playing the narrative, my old store being toxic, the whole WAAC tournament stuff was lie. And people actualy do care for their factions being better then those of others. They just don't say, it when the ones they have are the betters ones. And I wouldn't even be suprised if both things were true at the same time. I took 2 years to realise that when people say space marines, they don't GK, they just count all the other marines. Or when people from the west say how someone days is, they don't want to hear the litany of bad things that happened to you and your family lately, which is a customery thing to tell here.
So again. I don't play marines. Having OP marines doesn't make my faction better in anyway, in fact we just got nerfs because of marines. But I hell a lot confused considering all the talk I remember from 8th. If people play for fun, and didn't care about winning in 8th with their taus and eldar, why would they care about winning now. All of this just makes me fell more stupid. And I probably I am, in general this is how it ends for me, If I don't get something.
I've been playing mostly with my significant other and online during the crisis, i had a couple games with friends before wave 2 started. I know im not the only one in that situation.
I play my armies with a 100% "fun" approach to them. I bring the models i like and that fit with how my army operates. I played an eldar wraith host, thousand sons, tzeentch demons and night lords since before psychic awakening came out. The thing that annoys me is that if i know i'm against marines, i HAVE to bring models that don't really interest me just because i need some way to deal with them. Spamming starcannons isnt fun, playing wombo combo with havocs/obliterators isnt fun. Thats what i think most people are complaining about when they say marines are too much. I truly don't want my factions to be better than others, i stopped playing admech because of that. Effectively winning the game on turn one because of the alpha strike isnt what im playing the game for.
As for people calling 8th "the best edition ever" i don't know about that. It clearly was the best in a "approachable by new players" aspect but the game lost a lot of its fun aspect and depth. You might say you don't hate eldar and that might very well be true but the amount of times your comments are something similar to "but eldar players don't complain when their army is OP" makes it seem like you do.
And yeah. When people say "marines" they dont mean GK, they mean the chapters that have access to doctrines.
People have been playing through the covid situation tho. Either playing with family members or on tabletop simulator. The game didnt completely stop because stores were closed. We still had to deal with marines 2.0. And marines got better winrate AND playrate than Ynnari or Castellans got.
Sure, its how GW operates because they don't want to release all codexes at once, it doesnt mean we're not allowed to complain about it.
Oh, and just so your hatred of Eldar doesn't misunderstand what i mean, i say this with my Chaos in mind. And armies like genestealer cults and imperial guard that are pretty dated.
I do forget about the store thing. Still not everyone is going to go visit someone they aren't family with, in places it was down right illegal. And it looks like it is going to be illegal once the emergancy state gets called out again durning autum winter. And I am not saying tha knights or GSC are doing great, but they are with books ment for 8th ed. what do people expect that their 8th ed books are going to work well in 9th, heck my dudes weren't working in 8th with an 8th book. So I both don't get the suprise why armies with 9th ed rules are better and I don't really understand what people wanted from GW.
Did people think that GW would have done some other army at the start of the edition then marines? didn't they make marines the first codex in all editions they ever had. I would love to get a book too, specialy with my terminators not getting the buff I thought they would get in the FAQ, but I do understand that GW is going to go through all the marines first, and the AoS backlog, and then they are probably going to do something like a chaos sub faction or maybe eldar, if they really worked hard for the last 2 years on their redesign.
Plus I don't hate the eldar, they are an imaginary faction. Would be like hating a dog or rain. It would be stupid, now I can hate the designers of the rules or people that that play the army. That is natural, but my supposed hatred of them or castellans, doesn't the change the fact GW works the way it does. And I find strange that most people had the deal with it mind set , when their armies were good in 8th ed and called it the "best edition w40k ever had", and now when their armies are bad, they can't accept waiting 2-3 years to get them fixed. I mean it confuses me, because either it is a double standard for some factions. And maybe I even get it, considering the sales and all. Or people are just interested in their own fun, but then it means that all the stuff about playing the narrative, my old store being toxic, the whole WAAC tournament stuff was lie. And people actualy do care for their factions being better then those of others. They just don't say, it when the ones they have are the betters ones. And I wouldn't even be suprised if both things were true at the same time. I took 2 years to realise that when people say space marines, they don't GK, they just count all the other marines. Or when people from the west say how someone days is, they don't want to hear the litany of bad things that happened to you and your family lately, which is a customery thing to tell here.
So again. I don't play marines. Having OP marines doesn't make my faction better in anyway, in fact we just got nerfs because of marines. But I hell a lot confused considering all the talk I remember from 8th. If people play for fun, and didn't care about winning in 8th with their taus and eldar, why would they care about winning now. All of this just makes me fell more stupid. And I probably I am, in general this is how it ends for me, If I don't get something.
Karol almost everyone agreed GK were bad for a lot of 8th the issue is players can't do much about it except complain to GW.
The reason people are arguing over spacemarines is because some people are saying oh they have been made weeker and that's not fair, while a lot of other factions fundamentally dont work in 9th due to the sweeping changes GW has made.
Had GW genuinely toned down the damage output of Spacemarines there would be less salt.
If Marines 2.0 hadn't been as broken there would be less salt.
If they had given somewhat reasonable points costs to non marine units in the MFM2020 there would be less salt.
If they hadn't clearly decided to ensure the earliest opportunity for anyone of the other major factions to get a power boost was febuary (more likely march) of next year there would be less salt.
*Salt means people being upset/ pissed off at decisions that feel very unfair.
double post.
I just find it odd they did such a good job on the rest of the codex but missed the mark on eradicators. But if they change the Salamanders super doctrine, no worries, they'll still bounce off of my Fellblade and Achilles, assuming I'm stupid enough to let a full squad get within 24. I like a lot of these changes and they've got me excited for the new 
You always have to plan on moving and shooting. Do you expect your opponent to simply move whatever target you want to hit right in front of your eradicators? You have to expect to need to maneuver the unit into position to take the shot. You're going to have to do that eventually, and the strategem removes the penalty for doing so. It looks like it was designed just for eradicaters with the heavy meltas, or devastators with multi-meltas.
