That's my point. I've got a guy in my group who does it very successfully but MoO doesn't want to hear it. I'm open to any and all BA idea, but there's just not enough variety in that codex.
Selym wrote: Does he do it successfully only against BA? Because if that's true, then there's not point listening to anything else you have to say.
No, no. He's at least 50/50 vs mid tier lists. DA in particular get brutalized, because he's had ignore cover on every infantry squad before between psykers and orders. And of course, the wyverns ignore cover. He beats Gladius pretty frequently, too. Pop transport -> bombard with wyverns. Over and over.
Exactly. And they cost 70 points. It's like a Librarian with a statline that's worse in every possible way, wargear that's worse in every possible way, a smaller selection of psychic tables, a lower Ld and in an army with nothing that will be any help in keeping it alive.
Selym wrote: Does he do it successfully only against BA? Because if that's true, then there's not point listening to anything else you have to say.
No, no. He's at least 50/50 vs mid tier lists. DA in particular get brutalized, because he's had ignore cover on every infantry squad before between psykers and orders. And of course, the wyverns ignore cover. He beats Gladius pretty frequently, too. Pop transport -> bombard with wyverns. Over and over.
Aye, but how is he acheiving that?
Primaris Psykers are an utter joke. They cost nearly as much as a Librarian but have none of the utility or survivability and all those powers such as twinlinked and 4+ Invun have to be rolled for first and then cast. They also require running Bolb Guard who are only effective if you get the 4+ invun for them and cast it. Dont get it or fail to cast and you are left with 50 ineffective and soon to be very dead bodies.
Selym wrote: Exactly. And they cost 70 points. It's like a Librarian with a statline that's worse in every possible way, wargear that's worse in every possible way, a smaller selection of psychic tables, a lower Ld and in an army with nothing that will be any help in keeping it alive.
Selym wrote: Does he do it successfully only against BA? Because if that's true, then there's not point listening to anything else you have to say.
No, no. He's at least 50/50 vs mid tier lists. DA in particular get brutalized, because he's had ignore cover on every infantry squad before between psykers and orders. And of course, the wyverns ignore cover. He beats Gladius pretty frequently, too. Pop transport -> bombard with wyverns. Over and over.
Aye, but how is he acheiving that?
Primaris Psykers are an utter joke. They cost nearly as much as a Librarian but have none of the utility or survivability and all those powers such as twinlinked and 4+ Invun have to be rolled for first and then cast. They also require running Bolb Guard who are only effective if you get the 4+ invun for them and cast it. Dont get it or fail to cast and you are left with 50 ineffective and soon to be very dead bodies.
You bring enough psykers that you get a 90+% chance of getting two of them with 4++. It's just like with BA: I don't use lists with less than four librarians anymore.
Selym wrote: Exactly. And they cost 70 points. It's like a Librarian with a statline that's worse in every possible way, wargear that's worse in every possible way, a smaller selection of psychic tables, a lower Ld and in an army with nothing that will be any help in keeping it alive.
My point was more that taking 2 of something isn't exactly "spamming" them.
Selym wrote: Does he do it successfully only against BA? Because if that's true, then there's not point listening to anything else you have to say.
No, no. He's at least 50/50 vs mid tier lists. DA in particular get brutalized, because he's had ignore cover on every infantry squad before between psykers and orders. And of course, the wyverns ignore cover. He beats Gladius pretty frequently, too. Pop transport -> bombard with wyverns. Over and over.
Aye, but how is he acheiving that?
Primaris Psykers are an utter joke. They cost nearly as much as a Librarian but have none of the utility or survivability and all those powers such as twinlinked and 4+ Invun have to be rolled for first and then cast. They also require running Bolb Guard who are only effective if you get the 4+ invun for them and cast it. Dont get it or fail to cast and you are left with 50 ineffective and soon to be very dead bodies.
You bring enough psykers that you get a 90+% chance of getting two of them with 4++. It's just like with BA: I don't use lists with less than four librarians anymore.
But you can only bring two of them because they are a HQ choice. And if you do so then you have two models and still have to take the risk of there being a 33.3'% chance (assuming you upgraded both to L2) that you wont get the 4+invun.
For IG, it can be double CAD with 4X primaris or triple CAD with 6X primaris guys. Plenty of places to hide.
Leave useless Russes at home, you get points for a lot of good stuff.
Unless the FAQ has changed the rules, Primaris Psykers don't use up HQ slots...
Each IG detachment can simply take 0-3 of them.
Same deal with Priests & Engineseers (0-3 per detachment)
Commissars are slightly different, in that while they also do not 'use up' any HQ slots, they are instead limited to 0-1 per Company/Platoon Command Squads in the army.
Martel732 wrote:How do you think I'm bringing 4 libbies in one list?
Libby conclave?
Martel732 wrote:Ding ding ding ding ding.
For IG, it can be double CAD with 4X primaris or triple CAD with 6X primaris guys. Plenty of places to hide.
Leave useless Russes at home, you get points for a lot of good stuff.
It could be but then it is 280 points (or 420) on 4 (or 6) very squishy models. I have tried them before but they just seem..... Lacklustre when compared to other psykers or even other units in the codex. Dont get me wrong, they are okayish, but I prefer to ally with Inquisition and Marines for my psykers these days. Inquisitors in particular make really good psychic units as they can also be really tough and can hit hard.
Russes are still the biggest heavy hitters we have in the codex and Exterminators make really good transport poppers (I dont know who it was who was calling the Punisher and the Demolisher "good" but they really are not). If the enemy Infantry are not in transports then Wyverns are okay, however very few people run foot Infantry that much these days and Wyverns are not hard to pop, especially as my club lacks LOS blocking terrain. Wyverns are also stupidly vulnerable to DS and outflanking units.
The thing that really loses me matches though is the sheer lack of manoeuvrability and staying power. Pushing objectives beyond your deployment zone is really hard and holding them is laughable.
For IG, it can be double CAD with 4X primaris or triple CAD with 6X primaris guys. Plenty of places to hide.
Leave useless Russes at home, you get points for a lot of good stuff.
Unless the FAQ has changed the rules, Primaris Psykers don't use up HQ slots...
Each IG detachment can simply take 0-3 of them.
Same deal with Priests & Engineseers (0-3 per detachment)
Commissars are slightly different, in that while they also do not 'use up' any HQ slots, they are instead limited to 0-1 per Company/Platoon Command Squads in the army.
Ah.
I think my Codex is out of date then, as the last time I made an IG list, Primaris Psykers were a proper HQ choice.
For IG, it can be double CAD with 4X primaris or triple CAD with 6X primaris guys. Plenty of places to hide.
Leave useless Russes at home, you get points for a lot of good stuff.
Unless the FAQ has changed the rules, Primaris Psykers don't use up HQ slots...
Each IG detachment can simply take 0-3 of them.
Same deal with Priests & Engineseers (0-3 per detachment)
Commissars are slightly different, in that while they also do not 'use up' any HQ slots, they are instead limited to 0-1 per Company/Platoon Command Squads in the army.
Ah.
I think my Codex is out of date then, as the last time I made an IG list, Primaris Psykers were a proper HQ choice.
Is your codex called Imperial guard? If it is then it is the old one. I couldnt tell you by the Primaris Psyker entry though - I took one look at the profile when it was released, laughed bitterly and promptly forgot it existed.
master of ordinance wrote: It could be but then it is 280 points (or 420) on 4 (or 6) very squishy models. I have tried them before but they just seem..... Lacklustre when compared to other psykers or even other units in the codex. Dont get me wrong, they are okayish, but I prefer to ally with Inquisition and Marines for my psykers these days. Inquisitors in particular make really good psychic units as they can also be really tough and can hit hard.
Russes are still the biggest heavy hitters we have in the codex and Exterminators make really good transport poppers (I dont know who it was who was calling the Punisher and the Demolisher "good" but they really are not). If the enemy Infantry are not in transports then Wyverns are okay, however very few people run foot Infantry that much these days and Wyverns are not hard to pop, especially as my club lacks LOS blocking terrain. Wyverns are also stupidly vulnerable to DS and outflanking units.
The thing that really loses me matches though is the sheer lack of manoeuvrability and staying power. Pushing objectives beyond your deployment zone is really hard and holding them is laughable.
It's not like you're spending those extra points on nothing, you do actually get the Troops you're spending those points on.
So instead of taking, say, 4 or 6 Veteran Squads in one CAD, you take 2 Veteran Squads in each of your two or three CADs.
Or if you take Platoons, then you can just make each of them small instead of maxing them out.
For IG, it can be double CAD with 4X primaris or triple CAD with 6X primaris guys. Plenty of places to hide.
Leave useless Russes at home, you get points for a lot of good stuff.
Unless the FAQ has changed the rules, Primaris Psykers don't use up HQ slots...
Each IG detachment can simply take 0-3 of them.
Same deal with Priests & Engineseers (0-3 per detachment)
Commissars are slightly different, in that while they also do not 'use up' any HQ slots, they are instead limited to 0-1 per Company/Platoon Command Squads in the army.
Ah.
I think my Codex is out of date then, as the last time I made an IG list, Primaris Psykers were a proper HQ choice.
Is your codex called Imperial guard? If it is then it is the old one. I couldnt tell you by the Primaris Psyker entry though - I took one look at the profile when it was released, laughed bitterly and promptly forgot it existed.
I don't know, it's been in a box for over a year along with almost all of my models.
Front cover. If it says Astra Militarium then its the current one.
I prefer to run my armies as 'Veteran Platoons' - IE CCS with 4 to 6 Veteran sections plus supporting units. However if I am going to expand I will need ore troops and well, without a job I cannot afford £20+ for ten bods.
I prefer to run my armies as 'Veteran Platoons' - IE CCS with 4 to 6 Veteran sections plus supporting units. However if I am going to expand I will need ore troops and well, without a job I cannot afford £20+ for ten bods.
Finding out what it says on the front cover would require being able to see the front cover.
Selym wrote: Exactly. And they cost 70 points. It's like a Librarian with a statline that's worse in every possible way, wargear that's worse in every possible way, a smaller selection of psychic tables, a lower Ld and in an army with nothing that will be any help in keeping it alive.
My point was more that taking 2 of something isn't exactly "spamming" them.
So was mine. I was being sarcastic, in relation to my misinformed earlier post about their choices of powers.
The one thing that keeps getting pushed around her that should be considered is the viability of bringing a crap-ton of guardsmen is not only impractical in terms of money and time for most guard players but also if the dice are not in your favour those mass bodies get annihilated without doing anything at all.
@Martel you keep stating using more LOS terrain to help blob guard, but have you tried to hide 60+ models on a 6x4 board with a ton of terrain, HAH
SwampRats45MK wrote: The one thing that keeps getting pushed around her that should be considered is the viability of bringing a crap-ton of guardsmen is not only impractical in terms of money and time for most guard players but also if the dice are not in your favour those mass bodies get annihilated without doing anything at all.
@Martel you keep stating using more LOS terrain to help blob guard, but have you tried to hide 60+ models on a 6x4 board with a ton of terrain, HAH
I've seen IG infantry hiding behind Defence Lines in their own deployment zone. They still died in droves.
SwampRats45MK wrote: The one thing that keeps getting pushed around her that should be considered is the viability of bringing a crap-ton of guardsmen is not only impractical in terms of money and time for most guard players but also if the dice are not in your favour those mass bodies get annihilated without doing anything at all.
@Martel you keep stating using more LOS terrain to help blob guard, but have you tried to hide 60+ models on a 6x4 board with a ton of terrain, HAH
I've seen IG infantry hiding behind Defence Lines in their own deployment zone. They still died in droves.
Again, was did the IG opponent have the opportunity to list tailor? Scatterlasers, for example, are actually less efficient vs guardsmen than marines. Many, many lists deck themselves out to kill marines, not geqs.
Selym wrote: Exactly. And they cost 70 points. It's like a Librarian with a statline that's worse in every possible way, wargear that's worse in every possible way, a smaller selection of psychic tables, a lower Ld and in an army with nothing that will be any help in keeping it alive.
Selym wrote: Does he do it successfully only against BA? Because if that's true, then there's not point listening to anything else you have to say.
No, no. He's at least 50/50 vs mid tier lists. DA in particular get brutalized, because he's had ignore cover on every infantry squad before between psykers and orders. And of course, the wyverns ignore cover. He beats Gladius pretty frequently, too. Pop transport -> bombard with wyverns. Over and over.
Aye, but how is he acheiving that?
Primaris Psykers are an utter joke. They cost nearly as much as a Librarian but have none of the utility or survivability and all those powers such as twinlinked and 4+ Invun have to be rolled for first and then cast. They also require running Bolb Guard who are only effective if you get the 4+ invun for them and cast it. Dont get it or fail to cast and you are left with 50 ineffective and soon to be very dead bodies.
You bring enough psykers that you get a 90+% chance of getting two of them with 4++. It's just like with BA: I don't use lists with less than four librarians anymore.
See above, sorry I interpreted that as "Bring more LOS terrain". Still the point is bringing a metric tonne or heck an imperial ton of regular guardsmen is not defacto better than any marine variant in any game I've played and bringing that sort of army in a tournament setting causes turns to be so monotonous and long that no-one wants to play you. That's why I'd have to agree on some levels that overall Astra Militarum is a bad army.
But overall the one I voted for was Chaos Space Marines, they are supposed to be the main villain no, hardly seems like it on the tabletop sometimes
SwampRats45MK wrote: The one thing that keeps getting pushed around her that should be considered is the viability of bringing a crap-ton of guardsmen is not only impractical in terms of money and time for most guard players but also if the dice are not in your favour those mass bodies get annihilated without doing anything at all.
@Martel you keep stating using more LOS terrain to help blob guard, but have you tried to hide 60+ models on a 6x4 board with a ton of terrain, HAH
I've seen IG infantry hiding behind Defence Lines in their own deployment zone. They still died in droves.
Again, was did the IG opponent have the opportunity to list tailor? Scatterlasers, for example, are actually less efficient vs guardsmen than marines. Many, many lists deck themselves out to kill marines, not geqs.
They were playing against my Sisters of Battle, and the fact that I'd be playing Sisters of Battle was known.
Ultimately though, it was her first game using Imperial Guard. And I guess there is the fact that I was the one who wrote the IG list, so it's entirely possible I subconsciously wrote it in a way that would ensure my victory.
My experience, playing both IG and BA [until I wisened up and switched to Red Vanilla Marines] was that I could potentially win any game with BA, but I could not potentially win any game with IG, as the strongest builds in IG require you to mostly sit still and then have a few objective snagging units to leave your DZ.
My objective snagging units were invariably targeted for destruction, so were wiped out, leaving me to only be able to effectively score points in my DZ. If there were 0-1 objectives in my DZ, I could predict a loss in every one of those games.
I was more successful in playing BA, than I was playing IG, and I've been playing Guard since the Eye of Terror campaign. Loved me those plastic Cadians. I'm not saying that I won much with BA, but I did win on occasion, while I lost every game with IG [in 7th].
greatbigtree wrote: My experience, playing both IG and BA [until I wisened up and switched to Red Vanilla Marines] was that I could potentially win any game with BA, but I could not potentially win any game with IG, as the strongest builds in IG require you to mostly sit still and then have a few objective snagging units to leave your DZ.
My objective snagging units were invariably targeted for destruction, so were wiped out, leaving me to only be able to effectively score points in my DZ. If there were 0-1 objectives in my DZ, I could predict a loss in every one of those games.
I was more successful in playing BA, than I was playing IG, and I've been playing Guard since the Eye of Terror campaign. Loved me those plastic Cadians. I'm not saying that I won much with BA, but I did win on occasion, while I lost every game with IG [in 7th].
This, totally this. Wish I could type better, I've played guard since 3rd edition and only won a lot in the intern period of 4th-5th when I changed to full mechanized. My fiancee's BA done quite fine against most lists she's faced, she even walloped an Eldar Scat bike list whereas I faced the same opponent with cover hidden blobs and just lost completely with decent causalities but mainly due to mobility issues.
Martel732 wrote: The four to six divination psykers we just discussed in the thread.
Given that they're not guaranteed to get that particular ability (I think), I seriously doubt they're going to be able to cover even half of their army with that spell.
Selym wrote: You clearly need to improve your listbuilding - Wyverns are the only HS you should use.
Well I should clarify I have done better since I sold my Catachans are started using some of the formations from the Cadian Codex Supplement, but frankly I don't think its been my list building, just my unannturally bad luck with dice. Average game I play I roll a lot of 1's, heck my Pathfinder group gave me the nickname "Critical Failure" due to my propensity to roll ones on d20's. I think I'm going to go back to just reading thoughts here as this is off what the OP was asking I believe
I still think the worst army is by far Chaos Space Marines, so my gripes on my Guard and my fiancees BA is moot
Selym wrote: You clearly need to improve your listbuilding - Wyverns are the only HS you should use.
Well I should clarify I have done better since I sold my Catachans are started using some of the formations from the Cadian Codex Supplement, but frankly I don't think its been my list building, just my unannturally bad luck with dice. Average game I play I roll a lot of 1's, heck my Pathfinder group gave me the nickname "Critical Failure" due to my propensity to roll ones on d20's. I think I'm going to go back to just reading thoughts here as this is off what the OP was asking I believe
I still think the worst army is by far Chaos Space Marines, so my gripes on my Guard and my fiancees BA is moot
I feel ya on the rolls, buddy. IG is oddly unforgiving of bad rolls. I have gone entire games without hitting anything with battlecannons on my russes :/
Martel732 wrote: The four to six divination psykers we just discussed in the thread.
Given that they're not guaranteed to get that particular ability (I think), I seriously doubt they're going to be able to cover even half of their army with that spell.
Does it play out differently in reality?
Four LV1 Psykers rolling on the same table means a little over half your games you get it. Add more Psykers and Mastery Levels for taste.
Why is anyone shocked that giving large numbers of models 4++ saves, rerolls to hit, full BS overwatch and ignore cover a decent list? It's not world beating, it's mid-tier. Which means it usually wins vs trash and usually loses to Eldar. Why is this so controversial?
Martel732 wrote: The four to six divination psykers we just discussed in the thread.
Given that they're not guaranteed to get that particular ability (I think), I seriously doubt they're going to be able to cover even half of their army with that spell.
Does it play out differently in reality?
Four LV1 Psykers rolling on the same table means a little over half your games you get it. Add more Psykers and Mastery Levels for taste.
I guess I'm not very familiar with psykers as my main army doesn't actually have any psykers whatsoever.
If one or two of your psykers end up with the desired spell, how does that let you apply it to lots of units simultaneously?
SwampRats45MK wrote: The one thing that keeps getting pushed around her that should be considered is the viability of bringing a crap-ton of guardsmen is not only impractical in terms of money and time for most guard players but also if the dice are not in your favour those mass bodies get annihilated without doing anything at all.
@Martel you keep stating using more LOS terrain to help blob guard, but have you tried to hide 60+ models on a 6x4 board with a ton of terrain, HAH
If the dice gods don't like you march their asses up field and tie down a bike squad or grav cents for the rest of the game. Or take objectives with them. Or March them over to some wyverns to use as wrap. Just because a unit of guardsmen doesn't perform the way you expect it to doesn't make the game hopeless. If the whole army can't hit... well the dice gods are fickle. We've all been back alley, no-lubed by them before. Welcome to 40k.
MoO
....well I tried. Psykers are good. The fact that you play to statline instead of abilities means that you'll most likely keep on getting poor results. Let me sum up the situation in a little metaphor:
Me: "if you are going to take tanks, take a cheap unit of demolishers or dakka punishers"
You: "punishers and demolishers suck, executioners are where it's at" ( paraphrasing)
Now here's the rub.
Demolishers and punishers are to be used for anti (heavy) infantry which they excel at. When they hit it hurts like hell (unless necron decurion). They get even better with psykers (which you also refuse to use). When they dont work they serve as an excellent fire/assault magnet. Hell, I've seen dakka punishers used as AA, but that's another story.
Executioners kill themselves all the time and are stupidly expensive when kitted out.
Good luck man. I tried. At least 3 or 4 times. I'll do my best not to talk gak, but it's very difficult not to when you blame the games problems on one army, while you yourself refuse to gak or get off the pot.
Martel732 wrote: Why is anyone shocked that giving large numbers of models 4++ saves, rerolls to hit, full BS overwatch and ignore cover a decent list? It's not world beating, it's mid-tier. Which means it usually wins vs trash and usually loses to Eldar. Why is this so controversial?
Because you are forced to rely on four very expensive, very squishy and very finicky models that have a chance not to roll the power you need.
@Selym: The Pieplates are not the worst ones. The worst ones are the Typhons and the triple invisible Vindicators which drop 7" and 10" dinner plates respectively, and give no gaks about cover. Wyverns are good IF you are facing foot infantry. As soon as the enemy brings transports/vehicles they are useless, so you need at least one transport popping unit and HWS with Autocannons are not it. You will need at least one Exterminator squadron. Wyverns are also very squishy and thus need to be placed behind LOS blocking cover which is great until your club lacks it. You also hit the nail on the head with the objective capturing bit. Moving a Guard army is a joke and getting close to most armies (Tau being exempt) is suicide. You lack the mobility to take objectives and those few units with the mobility will vanish very quickly once your opponent sees them.
As for those telling me not to let my opponent tailor their list, it is rather hard not too. My club operates mainly on a arrange and bring system and pick up games are relatively infrequent. Everyone knows that I play Guard. I may bring Marines or Inquisition as allies but I lack the stuff to make either main armies and even if I had the stuff, I play Guard. My opponents know this and know that I have limited funds and thus limited choices and so the can build accordingly.
Martel732 wrote: Why is anyone shocked that giving large numbers of models 4++ saves, rerolls to hit, full BS overwatch and ignore cover a decent list? It's not world beating, it's mid-tier. Which means it usually wins vs trash and usually loses to Eldar. Why is this so controversial?
Because you are forced to rely on four very expensive, very squishy and very finicky models that have a chance not to roll the power you need.
@Selym: The Pieplates are not the worst ones. The worst ones are the Typhons and the triple invisible Vindicators which drop 7" and 10" dinner plates respectively, and give no gaks about cover. Wyverns are good IF you are facing foot infantry. As soon as the enemy brings transports/vehicles they are useless, so you need at least one transport popping unit and HWS with Autocannons are not it. You will need at least one Exterminator squadron. Wyverns are also very squishy and thus need to be placed behind LOS blocking cover which is great until your club lacks it.
You also hit the nail on the head with the objective capturing bit. Moving a Guard army is a joke and getting close to most armies (Tau being exempt) is suicide. You lack the mobility to take objectives and those few units with the mobility will vanish very quickly once your opponent sees them.
As for those telling me not to let my opponent tailor their list, it is rather hard not too. My club operates mainly on a arrange and bring system and pick up games are relatively infrequent. Everyone knows that I play Guard. I may bring Marines or Inquisition as allies but I lack the stuff to make either main armies and even if I had the stuff, I play Guard. My opponents know this and know that I have limited funds and thus limited choices and so the can build accordingly.
Uhh, Exterminators are basically more-expensive autocannons on a Leman Russ chassis...
SwampRats45MK wrote: The one thing that keeps getting pushed around her that should be considered is the viability of bringing a crap-ton of guardsmen is not only impractical in terms of money and time for most guard players but also if the dice are not in your favour those mass bodies get annihilated without doing anything at all.
@Martel you keep stating using more LOS terrain to help blob guard, but have you tried to hide 60+ models on a 6x4 board with a ton of terrain, HAH
If the dice gods don't like you march their asses up field and tie down a bike squad or grav cents for the rest of the game. Or take objectives with them. Or March them over to some wyverns to use as wrap. Just because a unit of guardsmen doesn't perform the way you expect it to doesn't make the game hopeless. If the whole army can't hit... well the dice gods are fickle. We've all been back alley, no-lubed by them before. Welcome to 40k.
March up too.... How the hell are we supposed to get close? If you try to move closer with Guard your army literally evaporates.
MoO
....well I tried. Psykers are good. The fact that you play to statline instead of abilities means that you'll most likely keep on getting poor results. Let me sum.up the situation in a little metaphor:
Me: "if you are going to take tanks, take a cheap unit of demolishers or dakka punishers"
You: "punishers and demolishers such, executioners are where it's at" ( paraphrasing)
Now here's the rub.
Demolishers and punishers are to be used for anti (heavy) infantry which they excel at. When they hit it hurts like hell (unless necron decurion). They get even better with psykers (which you also refuse to use). When they dont work they serve as an excellent fire/assault magnet. Hell, I've seen dakka punishers used as AA, but that's another story.
Executioners kill themselves all the time and are stupidly expensive when kitted out.
Good luck man. I tried. At least 3 or 4 times. I'll do my best not to talk gak, but it's very difficult not to when you blame the games problems one one army, while you yourself refuse to gak or get off the pot.
Good day sir.
Ack, I meant Exterminators! They make great anti transport/light/medium armour/infantry platforms.
The Punisher is only good with Pask, so it is best to leave it at home and the Demolisher is really expensive. I find that the Thunderer is a far better choice as it is both faster and cheaper whilst the only downside is the loss of the Heavy Bolter, which you never use anyway.
Now, here is y rub with you. 1, you call Punishers good. Paskless Punishers are terrible and should never be considered, then tell me my tank choices are terrible. The second (2,) is that I do use Psykers but I dont use guard psykers. If I bring a psyker then it is either an Inquisitor or a Librarian in an allied detachment as these are both superior to the IG stock psyker.
Martel732 wrote: Why is anyone shocked that giving large numbers of models 4++ saves, rerolls to hit, full BS overwatch and ignore cover a decent list? It's not world beating, it's mid-tier. Which means it usually wins vs trash and usually loses to Eldar. Why is this so controversial?
Because you are forced to rely on four very expensive, very squishy and very finicky models that have a chance not to roll the power you need.
@Selym: The Pieplates are not the worst ones. The worst ones are the Typhons and the triple invisible Vindicators which drop 7" and 10" dinner plates respectively, and give no gaks about cover. Wyverns are good IF you are facing foot infantry. As soon as the enemy brings transports/vehicles they are useless, so you need at least one transport popping unit and HWS with Autocannons are not it. You will need at least one Exterminator squadron. Wyverns are also very squishy and thus need to be placed behind LOS blocking cover which is great until your club lacks it.
You also hit the nail on the head with the objective capturing bit. Moving a Guard army is a joke and getting close to most armies (Tau being exempt) is suicide. You lack the mobility to take objectives and those few units with the mobility will vanish very quickly once your opponent sees them.
As for those telling me not to let my opponent tailor their list, it is rather hard not too. My club operates mainly on a arrange and bring system and pick up games are relatively infrequent. Everyone knows that I play Guard. I may bring Marines or Inquisition as allies but I lack the stuff to make either main armies and even if I had the stuff, I play Guard. My opponents know this and know that I have limited funds and thus limited choices and so the can build accordingly.
Uhh, Exterminators are basically more-expensive autocannons on a Leman Russ chassis...
That are twin linked and can actually take hits and have double the rate of fire. On the surface they look mediocre, but when used have proven (to me at least) deadly.
If the dice gods don't like you march their asses up field and tie down a bike squad or grav cents for the rest of the game. Or take objectives with them. Or March them over to some wyverns to use as wrap. Just because a unit of guardsmen doesn't perform the way you expect it to doesn't make the game hopeless. If the whole army can't hit... well the dice gods are fickle. We've all been back alley, no-lubed by them before. Welcome to 40k..
Thanks for welcoming to 40k, as if I haven't been playing since 3rd edition as I had mentioned earlier. Regardless theory of moving massive units up the field works but not always in practice due to terrain set up, speed of opposing force etc. Regardless my scions have become my main army and I have had much more success.
This back and forth of IG being more blargh than BA and BA being more blargh than IG is kind of cyclical. As I stated before, it is my safe guess that if we had to pick one army that is terrible its Chaos. But most of the armies mentioned here definitely need help and those armies that are the worst culprits of the pain train and complaints need some balancing for fairness.
master of ordinance wrote: That are twin linked and can actually take hits and have double the rate of fire. On the surface they look mediocre, but when used have proven (to me at least) deadly.
...while also costing around twice as many points as an Imperial Guard Heavy Weapons Squad that puts out more shots per turn.
An Exterminator is absolutely more durable, but is it really worth all those extra points while sacrificing raw firepower?
Martel732 wrote: The four to six divination psykers we just discussed in the thread.
Given that they're not guaranteed to get that particular ability (I think), I seriously doubt they're going to be able to cover even half of their army with that spell.
Does it play out differently in reality?
Four LV1 Psykers rolling on the same table means a little over half your games you get it. Add more Psykers and Mastery Levels for taste.
I guess I'm not very familiar with psykers as my main army doesn't actually have any psykers whatsoever.
If one or two of your psykers end up with the desired spell, how does that let you apply it to lots of units simultaneously?
You apply the buffs to huge units. That's the trick.
If the dice gods don't like you march their asses up field and tie down a bike squad or grav cents for the rest of the game. Or take objectives with them. Or March them over to some wyverns to use as wrap. Just because a unit of guardsmen doesn't perform the way you expect it to doesn't make the game hopeless. If the whole army can't hit... well the dice gods are fickle. We've all been back alley, no-lubed by them before. Welcome to 40k..
Thanks for welcoming to 40k, as if I haven't been playing since 3rd edition as I had mentioned earlier. Regardless theory of moving massive units up the field works but not always in practice due to terrain set up, speed of opposing force etc. Regardless my scions have become my main army and I have had much more success.
This back and forth of IG being more blargh than BA and BA being more blargh than IG is kind of cyclical. As I stated before, it is my safe guess that if we had to pick one army that is terrible its Chaos. But most of the armies mentioned here definitely need help and those armies that are the worst culprits of the pain train and complaints need some balancing for fairness.
CSM and BA have many of the exact same problems. Plague marines are better than anything that BA have in a lot of situations. However, the lack of grav is an issue for CSM. I think maybe the cyclopean cabal puts CSM ever so slightly above BA at this point.
"Because you are forced to rely on four very expensive, very squishy and very finicky models that have a chance not to roll the power you need."
Last time I checked, LoS is pretty damn good. I get it, you don't like the idea. But it's a hell of a lot better than rely on Russ hulls. And Primaris psykers aren't expensive. Russes are. Where are your army lists for these BA armies that you claim are whooping you? Earlier you thought BA could take librarian conclave. That doesn't give me confidence that you know anything about BA.
SwampRats45MK wrote: The one thing that keeps getting pushed around her that should be considered is the viability of bringing a crap-ton of guardsmen is not only impractical in terms of money and time for most guard players but also if the dice are not in your favour those mass bodies get annihilated without doing anything at all.
@Martel you keep stating using more LOS terrain to help blob guard, but have you tried to hide 60+ models on a 6x4 board with a ton of terrain, HAH
If the dice gods don't like you march their asses up field and tie down a bike squad or grav cents for the rest of the game. Or take objectives with them. Or March them over to some wyverns to use as wrap. Just because a unit of guardsmen doesn't perform the way you expect it to doesn't make the game hopeless. If the whole army can't hit... well the dice gods are fickle. We've all been back alley, no-lubed by them before. Welcome to 40k.
March up too.... How the hell are we supposed to get close? If you try to move closer with Guard your army literally evaporates.
MoO
....well I tried. Psykers are good. The fact that you play to statline instead of abilities means that you'll most likely keep on getting poor results. Let me sum.up the situation in a little metaphor:
Me: "if you are going to take tanks, take a cheap unit of demolishers or dakka punishers"
You: "punishers and demolishers such, executioners are where it's at" ( paraphrasing)
Now here's the rub.
Demolishers and punishers are to be used for anti (heavy) infantry which they excel at. When they hit it hurts like hell (unless necron decurion). They get even better with psykers (which you also refuse to use). When they dont work they serve as an excellent fire/assault magnet. Hell, I've seen dakka punishers used as AA, but that's another story.
Executioners kill themselves all the time and are stupidly expensive when kitted out.
Good luck man. I tried. At least 3 or 4 times. I'll do my best not to talk gak, but it's very difficult not to when you blame the games problems one one army, while you yourself refuse to gak or get off the pot.
Good day sir.
Ack, I meant Exterminators! They make great anti transport/light/medium armour/infantry platforms.
The Punisher is only good with Pask, so it is best to leave it at home and the Demolisher is really expensive. I find that the Thunderer is a far better choice as it is both faster and cheaper whilst the only downside is the loss of the Heavy Bolter, which you never use anyway.
Now, here is y rub with you. 1, you call Punishers good. Paskless Punishers are terrible and should never be considered, then tell me my tank choices are terrible. The second (2,) is that I do use Psykers but I dont use guard psykers. If I bring a psyker then it is either an Inquisitor or a Librarian in an allied detachment as these are both superior to the IG stock psyker.
Martel732 wrote: Why is anyone shocked that giving large numbers of models 4++ saves, rerolls to hit, full BS overwatch and ignore cover a decent list? It's not world beating, it's mid-tier. Which means it usually wins vs trash and usually loses to Eldar. Why is this so controversial?
Because you are forced to rely on four very expensive, very squishy and very finicky models that have a chance not to roll the power you need.
@Selym: The Pieplates are not the worst ones. The worst ones are the Typhons and the triple invisible Vindicators which drop 7" and 10" dinner plates respectively, and give no gaks about cover. Wyverns are good IF you are facing foot infantry. As soon as the enemy brings transports/vehicles they are useless, so you need at least one transport popping unit and HWS with Autocannons are not it. You will need at least one Exterminator squadron. Wyverns are also very squishy and thus need to be placed behind LOS blocking cover which is great until your club lacks it.
You also hit the nail on the head with the objective capturing bit. Moving a Guard army is a joke and getting close to most armies (Tau being exempt) is suicide. You lack the mobility to take objectives and those few units with the mobility will vanish very quickly once your opponent sees them.
As for those telling me not to let my opponent tailor their list, it is rather hard not too. My club operates mainly on a arrange and bring system and pick up games are relatively infrequent. Everyone knows that I play Guard. I may bring Marines or Inquisition as allies but I lack the stuff to make either main armies and even if I had the stuff, I play Guard. My opponents know this and know that I have limited funds and thus limited choices and so the can build accordingly.
Uhh, Exterminators are basically more-expensive autocannons on a Leman Russ chassis...
That are twin linked and can actually take hits and have double the rate of fire. On the surface they look mediocre, but when used have proven (to me at least) deadly.
Fair enough. At least exterminators are cheap. If you just take the turret and a hull LC. I guess we're going to agree to disagree on the others, but that exterminator has such a low damage output (at BS 3) IMO the points would almost certainly be better spent elsewhere. That's my point. Take tanks that perform. Even at BS 3, 35 Str 5 shots are going to yield results. Especially with Prescience which every Primaris psyker will have. The demolishers are hit or miss ( again Prescience helps ). If they hit, a 10/2 ordinance large blast is going to do work against everyone but necrons. Of they are a miss, then they are eating fire that's not going into your transports taking objectives.
Yes moving a platoon up field you will take casualties. That's why you use cover saves. That's why you bring 3 or 4 Primaris psykers instead of a Libby because at least one will almost definitely get the 4++ power. That's why you put a commissar in the platoon. The scary SM stuff needs to be relatively close to put the hurt on you. A stubborn platoon, even after taking a dozen or so casualties is still a decent tarpit for a few turns. Especially with buffs. Getting into double tap range and then letting off a salvo of FRFSRF, is usually a good idea. Again, especially with buffs like Rending shots or Prescience. Es6if they can sit on an objective as well.
Martel732 wrote: The four to six divination psykers we just discussed in the thread.
Given that they're not guaranteed to get that particular ability (I think), I seriously doubt they're going to be able to cover even half of their army with that spell.
Does it play out differently in reality?
Four LV1 Psykers rolling on the same table means a little over half your games you get it. Add more Psykers and Mastery Levels for taste.
I guess I'm not very familiar with psykers as my main army doesn't actually have any psykers whatsoever.
If one or two of your psykers end up with the desired spell, how does that let you apply it to lots of units simultaneously?
You apply the buffs to huge units. That's the trick.
Okay, but you're still taking a minimum of around as many infantry squads (even blobbed up) as you have psykers, and most of your psykers probably aren't going to have the spell you want.
I'd have two blobs, and put the appropriate psykers in each one. The mech vets don't need the buffs. Air cav doesn't need them. Sentinels outflanking don't need them. Wyverns don't need them. I think the guy uses 6 X LV 2 primaris to virtually guarantee the powers and dice to cast them. That's at 2K , though.
Outflanking Sentinels? they last a turn at best before they are destroyed by Bolter fire. AV 10/10/10 open topped HP 2 does not last.
Aircav is a good idea and a fun looking one, but one that is vastly out of my budget right now.
The who 'Two Blobs' thing still relies upon getting the right power, and relying on a 1 in 6 chance of getting a power (or even 4 in 6 if you take two upgraded Primaris Psykers) is just not a viable option. Sure, you might get lucky and get the powers you need, but other times you get screwed and end up with two blobs of puny, weak, infantry with no method of buffing them.
It works. Almost every divination power is awesome for the IG.
It takes 9 BS 4 bolter shots to inflict a single HP against a sentinel. And they can't shake you. Using multilasers, you can fire from far outside their range or in the range where a 10 man tac squad will inflict about a single HP. It takes a 140 pt marine unit 6 turns to destroy it. And you can chose how far to approach from. It works.
CSM and BA have many of the exact same problems. Plague marines are better than anything that BA have in a lot of situations. However, the lack of grav is an issue for CSM. I think maybe the cyclopean cabal puts CSM ever so slightly above BA at this point.
"Because you are forced to rely on four very expensive, very squishy and very finicky models that have a chance not to roll the power you need."
Last time I checked, LoS is pretty damn good. I get it, you don't like the idea. But it's a hell of a lot better than rely on Russ hulls. And Primaris psykers aren't expensive. Russes are. Where are your army lists for these BA armies that you claim are whooping you? Earlier you thought BA could take librarian conclave. That doesn't give me confidence that you know anything about BA.
No Martel, Plaguemarines are most definitely NOT better than everything the BA can put on the table...
To field PM's as Obsec, you require a MoN Lord tax. (and the only viable Nurgle Lord build is on a bike w/Power fist + Lightning claw + Sigil, for a minimum of 165pts)
Each Plaguemarine squad is going to run typically 140-150pts + Rhino 'tax' to actually get them anywhere. Also remember that the unit champion is bound by the game's single worst special rule - Champion of Chaos.
On the other hand, BA's (especially post FAQ), can now get cheap Sniper Scouts for a paltry 60pts/squad!
BA Dreads alone are better than MSU Plaguemarines, especially since like all Loyalist Marines, BA's have the game's best idiot-proof delivery system in Drop Pods. (Fragiosos are 'uber tasty now post FAQ 'fix'!)
Death Co. are likewise, a far, far superior unit to Plaguemarines, as are MSU'd Grav Bikers (who will demolish pretty much everything short of Cultists in the CSM codex).
Sang Priests are a solid HQ option, as are Chaplains.
Granted, BA Librarians are *really* hurting due to the lack of Conclave shenanigans, BUT, they did still get a solid boost through access to the new Loyalist Marine psychic powers. Conversely, that "amazing" Cyclopia Cabal, requires the addition of the Black Legion codex, (and paying the added 'Black Legion Tax'), and power-wise, are easily the game's worst psykers as they are left with only Biomancy or Telepathy as viable options, since all the Chaos lores are laughably weak.
And also don't forget, that despite being an army that is supposed to be all about shock assaults, appearing seemingly from nowhere unexpectedly using warp portals/magic, drop assaults, etc..., Chaos Marines have 0 Deep Strike mitigation abilities save for a single 25pts relic, that the bearer has to first kill an enemy model in cc in order to 'activate'!!
Oh, and we're also the only army in the game bar Sisters who have 0 innate Infiltrate, beyond praying for a 1/6 shot at a damn Warlord Trait. (or else being shoe-horned into taking an expensive named character!)
And despite being stuck with the worst variant, our Land Raider doesn't even function at a basic level, since Jervis decided we didn't need PotMS/Infernal Device anymore.
Meanwhile, our army of mostly close combat specialists have no delivery method beyond Rhino assaults, because apparently Chaos hasn't yet gotten the memo about it no longer being 3rd/4th edition anymore!
Head-to-head, no FW shenanigans or allies, BA's will demolish CSM's 9/10 times.
Chaos Marines are just too inept, and have no ability to mitigate alpha strikes, beyond hiding in metawl bwakes. BA's on the other hand while not stellar by any means, can simply throw everything into Pods and/or Jump Pack the ever-living gak out of the poor Chaos Marines.
Dread spam with those Fragiosos + a couple Death Co. variants, (including that one from Shield of Baal which is a Troops choice!), is actually a really, really mean list to take vs. any 'codex only' CSM army.
Plague marines are much better than DC in most situations.
Drop pods are highly overrated for BA. It turns off our chapter tactic and we have no formations that really take advantage of them. In fact, I think drop pods are highly overrated in general. They force early commitments and most marine units don't have very good firepower. Especially BA units. It's a good way to throw away a lot of points.
Fragnoughts are better, but they still suffer from being vehicles.
As I said, BA and CSM are in a very similar boat, but plague marines and the cyclopean cabal tilt it in the CSM favor.
Plaguemarines are in no way better than Death Co...
Their damage output is entirely tied up with their special weapons, and the best they can hope for in assaults is to tarpit something for a couple rounds, since they have inferior assault stats. (lol! Initiative 3!)
Add to it that the Champion is easy to deal with thanks to the serious knee capping that Champion of Chaos really is.
Death Co. on the other hand are a pretty formidable assault unit, who can actively make it there thanks to innate FNP, plus can take a couple Power fists for dealing with nasty threats.
Sure Invis would put them on a level close to Thundercav, but, against the other dumpster fire books, they're a huge PITA to deal with.
But then, the fact that you claim Drop Pods are overrated is telling... Pods are one of the single biggest assets Marines have, and is what gives them the game's best alpha strike abilities.
Most people readily agree that they're vastly under priced for what they bring, and should easily cost 45-55pts a pop. They are frankly all but idiot-proof, and shoving the majority of a Marine army into them is not only super annoying for the 1st turn fustigation opponents will suffer, but Drop Pods are also frankly ridiculous at outright controlling the entire table for the Marine player.
Seriously, why do you think there were at least 4 hate-threads per day after the Marine FAQ that could be RAW'd into turning them into 12"+ area-denial shenanigans?!
Again, it's true that no Skyhammer/DevCents/Libby Conclave means that BA Drop Pod assaults aren't the same level of auto-fustigation that Vanillas have access to, but massed Fragiosos + a couple min Tac squads w/Melta + Combi-melta and/or MSU Assault Squads w/2x Melta + Combi-melta is a Kobiashimaru scenario for the base CSM codex.
Martel732 wrote: It works. Almost every divination power is awesome for the IG.
It takes 9 BS 4 bolter shots to inflict a single HP against a sentinel. And they can't shake you. Using multilasers, you can fire from far outside their range or in the range where a 10 man tac squad will inflict about a single HP. It takes a 140 pt marine unit 6 turns to destroy it. And you can chose how far to approach from. It works.
On an average table a lot of Bolters and heavier weapons are going to be in range of your Sentinels as soon as they come on whilst those Sentinels (9 shots) will miss half of their shots (4.5 hits) and fail to wound with a sixth of them (3.75 wounds) and the Marines will save 1/3 of all wounds inflicted (2.5 wounds saved) for an average of half a dead marine for a full squadrons worth of shooting.
In the meantime your average Marine unit puts out 20 shots at close range and if it chooses to assault inflicts 1 S6 attack and 18 (19 if Sarge is attacking too) S4 attacks, both resulting in a dead Sentinel per unit (or 1.5 if they assault). And that is not factoring in heavy weapons like Autocannons and Heavy Bolters.
Martel732 wrote: I'd have two blobs, and put the appropriate psykers in each one. The mech vets don't need the buffs. Air cav doesn't need them. Sentinels outflanking don't need them. Wyverns don't need them. I think the guy uses 6 X LV 2 primaris to virtually guarantee the powers and dice to cast them. That's at 2K , though.
Ahhh, okies.
I was thinking about needing a minimum of 4-6 Troops choices for 2-3 CADs. Didn't know mechanized Veterans wouldn't be receiving them.
Martel732 wrote: It works. Almost every divination power is awesome for the IG.
It takes 9 BS 4 bolter shots to inflict a single HP against a sentinel. And they can't shake you. Using multilasers, you can fire from far outside their range or in the range where a 10 man tac squad will inflict about a single HP. It takes a 140 pt marine unit 6 turns to destroy it. And you can chose how far to approach from. It works.
On an average table a lot of Bolters and heavier weapons are going to be in range of your Sentinels as soon as they come on whilst those Sentinels (9 shots) will miss half of their shots (4.5 hits) and fail to wound with a sixth of them (3.75 wounds) and the Marines will save 1/3 of all wounds inflicted (2.5 wounds saved) for an average of half a dead marine for a full squadrons worth of shooting.
In the meantime your average Marine unit puts out 20 shots at close range and if it chooses to assault inflicts 1 S6 attack and 18 (19 if Sarge is attacking too) S4 attacks, both resulting in a dead Sentinel per unit (or 1.5 if they assault). And that is not factoring in heavy weapons like Autocannons and Heavy Bolters.
So shoot Rhinos with them. Or predator hulls in the side. Plus, not all opponents are marines.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Experiment 626 wrote: Plaguemarines are in no way better than Death Co...
Their damage output is entirely tied up with their special weapons, and the best they can hope for in assaults is to tarpit something for a couple rounds, since they have inferior assault stats. (lol! Initiative 3!)
Add to it that the Champion is easy to deal with thanks to the serious knee capping that Champion of Chaos really is.
Death Co. on the other hand are a pretty formidable assault unit, who can actively make it there thanks to innate FNP, plus can take a couple Power fists for dealing with nasty threats.
Sure Invis would put them on a level close to Thundercav, but, against the other dumpster fire books, they're a huge PITA to deal with.
But then, the fact that you claim Drop Pods are overrated is telling... Pods are one of the single biggest assets Marines have, and is what gives them the game's best alpha strike abilities.
Most people readily agree that they're vastly under priced for what they bring, and should easily cost 45-55pts a pop. They are frankly all but idiot-proof, and shoving the majority of a Marine army into them is not only super annoying for the 1st turn fustigation opponents will suffer, but Drop Pods are also frankly ridiculous at outright controlling the entire table for the Marine player.
Seriously, why do you think there were at least 4 hate-threads per day after the Marine FAQ that could be RAW'd into turning them into 12"+ area-denial shenanigans?!
Again, it's true that no Skyhammer/DevCents/Libby Conclave means that BA Drop Pod assaults aren't the same level of auto-fustigation that Vanillas have access to, but massed Fragiosos + a couple min Tac squads w/Melta + Combi-melta and/or MSU Assault Squads w/2x Melta + Combi-melta is a Kobiashimaru scenario for the base CSM codex.
Alpha strike is over rated. When it goes wrong, you have no back up plan at all. I'd rather face a pod list than a straight up Gladius. Although the reverse is probably true for IG. But for pod lists, mechanization kills the alpha strike and then kills them. Bubblewrap is also extremely unfortunate for them. Drop pods would be a lot more horrifying if we played with secret lists. But you can see them coming, so just adjust accordingly and punish them.
People were having to defend SW grey hunter drop back in 5th. Now that assault is even worse, and armies have 7th ed toys, BA dropping in your face should be more amusing than anything else. Skyhammer is a different beast, but if you can neuter the grav cannon drop, skyhammer dies too. The assault marines are NOT scary.
DC are actually pretty garbage in 7th. FNP on T4 is pretty fragile in the scheme of things. They can't turbo boost, or jink, either so they are pretty easy to deal with. A simple spoiling attack ruins their scheme completely. Or you can just shoot them to death pretty easily with a shooting list.
Martel732 wrote: It works. Almost every divination power is awesome for the IG.
It takes 9 BS 4 bolter shots to inflict a single HP against a sentinel. And they can't shake you. Using multilasers, you can fire from far outside their range or in the range where a 10 man tac squad will inflict about a single HP. It takes a 140 pt marine unit 6 turns to destroy it. And you can chose how far to approach from. It works.
On an average table a lot of Bolters and heavier weapons are going to be in range of your Sentinels as soon as they come on whilst those Sentinels (9 shots) will miss half of their shots (4.5 hits) and fail to wound with a sixth of them (3.75 wounds) and the Marines will save 1/3 of all wounds inflicted (2.5 wounds saved) for an average of half a dead marine for a full squadrons worth of shooting.
In the meantime your average Marine unit puts out 20 shots at close range and if it chooses to assault inflicts 1 S6 attack and 18 (19 if Sarge is attacking too) S4 attacks, both resulting in a dead Sentinel per unit (or 1.5 if they assault). And that is not factoring in heavy weapons like Autocannons and Heavy Bolters.
So shoot Rhinos with them. Or predator hulls in the side. Plus, not all opponents are marines.
No, but most of them either are or have equivalent firepower.
Martel732 wrote: It works. Almost every divination power is awesome for the IG.
It takes 9 BS 4 bolter shots to inflict a single HP against a sentinel. And they can't shake you. Using multilasers, you can fire from far outside their range or in the range where a 10 man tac squad will inflict about a single HP. It takes a 140 pt marine unit 6 turns to destroy it. And you can chose how far to approach from. It works.
On an average table a lot of Bolters and heavier weapons are going to be in range of your Sentinels as soon as they come on whilst those Sentinels (9 shots) will miss half of their shots (4.5 hits) and fail to wound with a sixth of them (3.75 wounds) and the Marines will save 1/3 of all wounds inflicted (2.5 wounds saved) for an average of half a dead marine for a full squadrons worth of shooting.
In the meantime your average Marine unit puts out 20 shots at close range and if it chooses to assault inflicts 1 S6 attack and 18 (19 if Sarge is attacking too) S4 attacks, both resulting in a dead Sentinel per unit (or 1.5 if they assault). And that is not factoring in heavy weapons like Autocannons and Heavy Bolters.
MoO I know this isn't a tactics thread but one of the guys I recently played at a tournament runs Guard, he actually has a pretty good number of guard answers to higher tier armies that you might be interested in.
In an 1850 point match he runs a lot of cheap chaff, a good number of Chimera, two Russ Tanks decked out for different types of firepower, a few other smaller, cheaper tanks and statics for variety of firepower.
*Deep Strike tactics - He starts his stuff outside their transports and spreads the chaff units to make it impossible to get anything bigger than a Space Marine Land Speeder within 15' of his tanks on the first turn, you'd be lucky to drop a pod inside his deployment zone, and that's on a six terrain piece 8x4 table. Everything advancing is forced to go through ranks of MSU which will usually die or break in the first round of combat, leaving the 'victorious' unit sitting in a kill-zone.
*Deathstars - If he gets first turn he opens fire on the deathstar with as much as possible before it even gets to start piling the buffs, if not he uses the MSU to force the deathstar to move the way he wants it to, fires on it every step of the way with small fire while killing everything else off with the heavy blasts, has a pretty good rate of 'accidentally' scattering those large blasts on the deathstar as well, his team tells me they've never seen a deathstar get to his tanks within five turns and they've only seen two get to him at all. One was too crippled to win and the other would have ripped him a new one but the game ended after the sixth turn.
*Eldar - Pretty much the same strategy as the deathstars but rather than hiding the transports at the back he brings them forwards and uses them as fortifications, catches a lot of players by surprise when they spend their first turn trying to shoot around the transports at the MSU which apparently don't have cover only to have the transports respond by tank-shocking through their ranks. Eldar have great leadership so he rarely kills anything with the shocks but it gets squads of his boys deep into Eldar territory and when he bails chaff out and they open fire on everything it usually forces the jet-bikes to waste a turn or two going back and cleaning them up.
Tau can be a hard counter to Guard as neither of them really likes taking the initiative but they're also the only army that has no real answer to being tank-shocked and suck at close combat almost as bad as Guard do so he sends chaff carrying Chimera through their ranks, if the dice roll his way he can actually deny a Tau army their marker lights by turn two by locking them down in melee.
His belief is most Guard players play their guard too much like Marines and spend too much time trying to keep them alive.
Martel732 wrote: It works. Almost every divination power is awesome for the IG.
It takes 9 BS 4 bolter shots to inflict a single HP against a sentinel. And they can't shake you. Using multilasers, you can fire from far outside their range or in the range where a 10 man tac squad will inflict about a single HP. It takes a 140 pt marine unit 6 turns to destroy it. And you can chose how far to approach from. It works.
On an average table a lot of Bolters and heavier weapons are going to be in range of your Sentinels as soon as they come on whilst those Sentinels (9 shots) will miss half of their shots (4.5 hits) and fail to wound with a sixth of them (3.75 wounds) and the Marines will save 1/3 of all wounds inflicted (2.5 wounds saved) for an average of half a dead marine for a full squadrons worth of shooting.
In the meantime your average Marine unit puts out 20 shots at close range and if it chooses to assault inflicts 1 S6 attack and 18 (19 if Sarge is attacking too) S4 attacks, both resulting in a dead Sentinel per unit (or 1.5 if they assault). And that is not factoring in heavy weapons like Autocannons and Heavy Bolters.
MoO I know this isn't a tactics thread but one of the guys I recently played at a tournament runs Guard, he actually has a pretty good number of guard answers to higher tier armies that you might be interested in.
In an 1850 point match he runs a lot of cheap chaff, a good number of Chimera, two Russ Tanks decked out for different types of firepower, a few other smaller, cheaper tanks and statics for variety of firepower.
*Deep Strike tactics - He starts his stuff outside their transports and spreads the chaff units to make it impossible to get anything bigger than a Space Marine Land Speeder within 15' of his tanks on the first turn, you'd be lucky to drop a pod inside his deployment zone, and that's on a six terrain piece 8x4 table. Everything advancing is forced to go through ranks of MSU which will usually die or break in the first round of combat, leaving the 'victorious' unit sitting in a kill-zone.
*Deathstars - If he gets first turn he opens fire on the deathstar with as much as possible before it even gets to start piling the buffs, if not he uses the MSU to force the deathstar to move the way he wants it to, fires on it every step of the way with small fire while killing everything else off with the heavy blasts, has a pretty good rate of 'accidentally' scattering those large blasts on the deathstar as well, his team tells me they've never seen a deathstar get to his tanks within five turns and they've only seen two get to him at all. One was too crippled to win and the other would have ripped him a new one but the game ended after the sixth turn.
*Eldar - Pretty much the same strategy as the deathstars but rather than hiding the transports at the back he brings them forwards and uses them as fortifications, catches a lot of players by surprise when they spend their first turn trying to shoot around the transports at the MSU which apparently don't have cover only to have the transports respond by tank-shocking through their ranks. Eldar have great leadership so he rarely kills anything with the shocks but it gets squads of his boys deep into Eldar territory and when he bails chaff out and they open fire on everything it usually forces the jet-bikes to waste a turn or two going back and cleaning them up.
Tau can be a hard counter to Guard as neither of them really likes taking the initiative but they're also the only army that has no real answer to being tank-shocked and suck at close combat almost as bad as Guard do so he sends chaff carrying Chimera through their ranks, if the dice roll his way he can actually deny a Tau army their marker lights by turn two by locking them down in melee.
His belief is most Guard players play their guard too much like Marines and spend too much time trying to keep them alive.
I'd be genuinely interested to see his list. Also, how is anyone dying from tank shock?
greatbigtree wrote: My experience, playing both IG and BA [until I wisened up and switched to Red Vanilla Marines] was that I could potentially win any game with BA, but I could not potentially win any game with IG, as the strongest builds in IG require you to mostly sit still and then have a few objective snagging units to leave your DZ.
My objective snagging units were invariably targeted for destruction, so were wiped out, leaving me to only be able to effectively score points in my DZ. If there were 0-1 objectives in my DZ, I could predict a loss in every one of those games.
I was more successful in playing BA, than I was playing IG, and I've been playing Guard since the Eye of Terror campaign. Loved me those plastic Cadians. I'm not saying that I won much with BA, but I did win on occasion, while I lost every game with IG [in 7th].
You said it perfectly. Those talking about buffing blobs with divination and so on, yes, this does indeed work very well. Throw a Xenos inquisitor with Rad/Psychotroke grenades and divination in a blob with a priest and you have one really good melee unit...and you will still lose because that unit is static for all intents and purposes. It's a unit that relies entirely on your opponent engaging it first for it to work. If they don't charge you, your unit does nothing because it will never reach anyone to do it. You will be whittled down by small arms fire or templated and once that blob is gone, you are basically finished because you just lost a Baneblade worth of points. People say Baneblades are sub par because of how many eggs are in one basket. A kitted out blob (the only kind worth anything) is exactly the same with one crucial difference, it is, unlike a Baneblade, a unit that is nearly entirely reactive. Once your TWC toting friend has charged that blob once and had his TWC literally kill themselves in the ensuing melee without killing a single guardsman (yes this has happened), he will never ever make that mistake again.
By the way, you will still lose the game in such a scenario because you are totally unable to pursue distant objectives or move around the board as the situation requires. Why? Because none of your mobile units are self sufficient, they all require extensive support from others to function, which means more points spent then your enemy has to spend in order to do the exact same thing. How will you move around the board, chimera vets? Chimera and Vet alike are erased by common bolters, or swept by 1-2 tac marines in melee. How exactly are you going to remove that backfield dev squad, even SCOUT squad, from their objective when they will crush you in melee and slaughter you when shooting? Will you use outflanking sentinels? Same thing AND they aren't ob sec. Deep striking Scions? Dead the turn after arrival.
master of ordinance wrote: That are twin linked and can actually take hits and have double the rate of fire. On the surface they look mediocre, but when used have proven (to me at least) deadly.
...while also costing around twice as many points as an Imperial Guard Heavy Weapons Squad that puts out more shots per turn.
An Exterminator is absolutely more durable, but is it really worth all those extra points while sacrificing raw firepower?
The answer is no, not when you're trying to take out vehicles. And the thing may as well not exist when facing foot spam.
I love my exterminators, but they are just so useless. And the durability of them never particularly impressed me. Usually gone by T2.
Martel732 wrote: It works. Almost every divination power is awesome for the IG.
It takes 9 BS 4 bolter shots to inflict a single HP against a sentinel. And they can't shake you. Using multilasers, you can fire from far outside their range or in the range where a 10 man tac squad will inflict about a single HP. It takes a 140 pt marine unit 6 turns to destroy it. And you can chose how far to approach from. It works.
On an average table a lot of Bolters and heavier weapons are going to be in range of your Sentinels as soon as they come on whilst those Sentinels (9 shots) will miss half of their shots (4.5 hits) and fail to wound with a sixth of them (3.75 wounds) and the Marines will save 1/3 of all wounds inflicted (2.5 wounds saved) for an average of half a dead marine for a full squadrons worth of shooting.
In the meantime your average Marine unit puts out 20 shots at close range and if it chooses to assault inflicts 1 S6 attack and 18 (19 if Sarge is attacking too) S4 attacks, both resulting in a dead Sentinel per unit (or 1.5 if they assault). And that is not factoring in heavy weapons like Autocannons and Heavy Bolters.
MoO I know this isn't a tactics thread but one of the guys I recently played at a tournament runs Guard, he actually has a pretty good number of guard answers to higher tier armies that you might be interested in.
In an 1850 point match he runs a lot of cheap chaff, a good number of Chimera, two Russ Tanks decked out for different types of firepower, a few other smaller, cheaper tanks and statics for variety of firepower.
*Deep Strike tactics - He starts his stuff outside their transports and spreads the chaff units to make it impossible to get anything bigger than a Space Marine Land Speeder within 15' of his tanks on the first turn, you'd be lucky to drop a pod inside his deployment zone, and that's on a six terrain piece 8x4 table. Everything advancing is forced to go through ranks of MSU which will usually die or break in the first round of combat, leaving the 'victorious' unit sitting in a kill-zone.
*Deathstars - If he gets first turn he opens fire on the deathstar with as much as possible before it even gets to start piling the buffs, if not he uses the MSU to force the deathstar to move the way he wants it to, fires on it every step of the way with small fire while killing everything else off with the heavy blasts, has a pretty good rate of 'accidentally' scattering those large blasts on the deathstar as well, his team tells me they've never seen a deathstar get to his tanks within five turns and they've only seen two get to him at all. One was too crippled to win and the other would have ripped him a new one but the game ended after the sixth turn.
*Eldar - Pretty much the same strategy as the deathstars but rather than hiding the transports at the back he brings them forwards and uses them as fortifications, catches a lot of players by surprise when they spend their first turn trying to shoot around the transports at the MSU which apparently don't have cover only to have the transports respond by tank-shocking through their ranks. Eldar have great leadership so he rarely kills anything with the shocks but it gets squads of his boys deep into Eldar territory and when he bails chaff out and they open fire on everything it usually forces the jet-bikes to waste a turn or two going back and cleaning them up.
Tau can be a hard counter to Guard as neither of them really likes taking the initiative but they're also the only army that has no real answer to being tank-shocked and suck at close combat almost as bad as Guard do so he sends chaff carrying Chimera through their ranks, if the dice roll his way he can actually deny a Tau army their marker lights by turn two by locking them down in melee.
His belief is most Guard players play their guard too much like Marines and spend too much time trying to keep them alive.
I'd be genuinely interested to see his list. Also, how is anyone dying from tank shock?
I'll see if I still have a copy with my tournament stuff. As for dying to tank shock, by failing a leadership test and not being able to legally fall back far enough to get out of the tank's path, actually succeeding in killing stuff with the tank shock isn't part of the plan so much as rolling to wound from inside the opponent's ranks, it's just a bonus if it happens.
It appears that 17 pages into this topic most of the posters are arguing for their own faction. Of more interest are those opinions from players already playing powerful armies and what they consider to be the ones needing the most help.
After playing as BT for a bit, my view is that guard either need VASTLY more offensive rolling (or a way to increase shot strength), or they need to somehow skip a step in to-hit, to-wound, roll-saves.
Huron black heart wrote: It appears that 17 pages into this topic most of the posters are arguing for their own faction. Of more interest are those opinions from players already playing powerful armies and what they consider to be the ones needing the most help.
*shrug* I don't think my army is weak. In fact, my girlfriend's ex-army was among the weakest (CSM), and my side army is rather weak (Nids).
Huron black heart wrote: It appears that 17 pages into this topic most of the posters are arguing for their own faction. Of more interest are those opinions from players already playing powerful armies and what they consider to be the ones needing the most help.
That's to be expected though as people love to believe they win through skill, which is why you often get Space Marine players claiming not to be top tier, or to be bottom of top tier when they're actually either joint first or a close second in power now
Huron black heart wrote: It appears that 17 pages into this topic most of the posters are arguing for their own faction. Of more interest are those opinions from players already playing powerful armies and what they consider to be the ones needing the most help.
I hope you're not talking about me because I recall arguing that my favorite army - Sisters of Battle - actually have some decent options and aren't the worst.
Huron black heart wrote: It appears that 17 pages into this topic most of the posters are arguing for their own faction. Of more interest are those opinions from players already playing powerful armies and what they consider to be the ones needing the most help.
That's to be expected though as people love to believe they win through skill, which is why you often get Space Marine players claiming not to be top tier, or to be bottom of top tier when they're actually either joint first or a close second in power now
I generally tend to believe I lose through a failure in my own skill and that my victories come from having a unit meet a favorable matchup for once out of random chance (or occasionally a misinterpretation of the rules in an unclear situation not covered by the rules).
This comes from examining my actions on the tabletop and coming to the only reasonable conclusion - that I am just plain terrible at playing the game well.
You said it perfectly. Those talking about buffing blobs with divination and so on, yes, this does indeed work very well. Throw a Xenos inquisitor with Rad/Psychotroke grenades and divination in a blob with a priest and you have one really good melee unit...and you will still lose because that unit is static for all intents and purposes. It's a unit that relies entirely on your opponent engaging it first for it to work. If they don't charge you, your unit does nothing because it will never reach anyone to do it. You will be whittled down by small arms fire or templated and once that blob is gone, you are basically finished because you just lost a Baneblade worth of points. People say Baneblades are sub par because of how many eggs are in one basket. A kitted out blob (the only kind worth anything) is exactly the same with one crucial difference, it is, unlike a Baneblade, a unit that is nearly entirely reactive. Once your TWC toting friend has charged that blob once and had his TWC literally kill themselves in the ensuing melee without killing a single guardsman (yes this has happened), he will never ever make that mistake again.
By the way, you will still lose the game in such a scenario because you are totally unable to pursue distant objectives or move around the board as the situation requires. Why? Because none of your mobile units are self sufficient, they all require extensive support from others to function, which means more points spent then your enemy has to spend in order to do the exact same thing. How will you move around the board, chimera vets? Chimera and Vet alike are erased by common bolters, or swept by 1-2 tac marines in melee. How exactly are you going to remove that backfield dev squad, even SCOUT squad, from their objective when they will crush you in melee and slaughter you when shooting? Will you use outflanking sentinels? Same thing AND they aren't ob sec. Deep striking Scions? Dead the turn after arrival.
I cannot exalt this enough.
@Selym: I have some pretty good results with my Exterminators when I use them.They usually provide a tough target for my opponents AT firepower and the two tank squadron can pop a transport each turn or hurt a unit. I tend to give them camo gear and a pintle mount to increase the survivability and damage output. Nothing is better than a heavy tank sat in a ruin with a camo net for a 3+ cover save (or behind an Aegis for a 2+).
"Nothing is better than a heavy tank sat in a ruin with a camo net for a 3+ cover save (or behind an Aegis for a 2+)."
Okay. Keep losing. And by your battle reports, it seems a lot of things are better. The firepower on Russ hulls is rather embarrassing for their points cost and they have no external method of gaining ignores cover. As long as you keep coughing up for ignorable Russes whose armor is ignored by D weapons, you are at a huge disadvantage.
Huron black heart wrote: It appears that 17 pages into this topic most of the posters are arguing for their own faction. Of more interest are those opinions from players already playing powerful armies and what they consider to be the ones needing the most help.
I hope you're not talking about me because I recall arguing that my favorite army - Sisters of Battle - actually have some decent options and aren't the worst.
Huron black heart wrote: It appears that 17 pages into this topic most of the posters are arguing for their own faction. Of more interest are those opinions from players already playing powerful armies and what they consider to be the ones needing the most help.
That's to be expected though as people love to believe they win through skill, which is why you often get Space Marine players claiming not to be top tier, or to be bottom of top tier when they're actually either joint first or a close second in power now
I generally tend to believe I lose through a failure in my own skill and that my victories come from having a unit meet a favorable matchup for once out of random chance (or occasionally a misinterpretation of the rules in an unclear situation not covered by the rules).
This comes from examining my actions on the tabletop and coming to the only reasonable conclusion - that I am just plain terrible at playing the game well.
I wasn't actually referring to anybody specific nor trying to sound high and mighty (apologies if I did) I also voted for my own faction (CSM) but was trying to say that our views are skewed naturally towards the army we know the best (our own) and those people picking an opposing force aren't seeing it through rose tinted glasses (or should that be the opposite of rose tinted?)
The bottom three for me would be CSM, Orks and Guards. Nids seem to beat me quite easily but then I'm also not a very good player.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Sorry, but Tyranids can't be the worst just because they have Fly rants and Mawlocs.
Is the codex poorly written? Absolutely. However it has tools to deal with anything outside maybe Wraithknights. Mawlocs are seriously good.
The codex doesn't have tools to deal with Wraithknights. They could when it wasn't a GC.
Mawlocs are good, but from my personal experience, they have a lot of possibility for error. The only way to guarantee things is by using Lictors, and even then that can be hit or miss.
The codex as a whole, outside those two units, is garbage. That's like saying CSM are good because of Oblits and Heldrakes.
Martel732 wrote: "Nothing is better than a heavy tank sat in a ruin with a camo net for a 3+ cover save (or behind an Aegis for a 2+)."
Okay. Keep losing. And by your battle reports, it seems a lot of things are better. The firepower on Russ hulls is rather embarrassing for their points cost and they have no external method of gaining ignores cover. As long as you keep coughing up for ignorable Russes whose armor is ignored by D weapons, you are at a huge disadvantage.
You still have not coughed up any BA ideas.
Well, when I encounter D-weapons regularly Martel, I will let you know. It is the one upside to playing against Marines, they have no integral D-weapons.
In the meantime come up with a replacement for the Russ that has survivability and the capacity to deal with transports and infantry.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and a BA idea Martel? Codex Space Marines with Furiso's counting as Ironclads, Librarian Dreads as Venerable's, The gold dudes as honour guard and the Black ones with the red cross (name slips my mind) as Vanguard.
Go from there.
Martel732 wrote: "Nothing is better than a heavy tank sat in a ruin with a camo net for a 3+ cover save (or behind an Aegis for a 2+)."
Okay. Keep losing. And by your battle reports, it seems a lot of things are better. The firepower on Russ hulls is rather embarrassing for their points cost and they have no external method of gaining ignores cover. As long as you keep coughing up for ignorable Russes whose armor is ignored by D weapons, you are at a huge disadvantage.
You still have not coughed up any BA ideas.
Well, when I encounter D-weapons regularly Martel, I will let you know. It is the one upside to playing against Marines, they have no integral D-weapons.
In the meantime come up with a replacement for the Russ that has survivability and the capacity to deal with transports and infantry.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and a BA idea Martel? Codex Space Marines with Furiso's counting as Ironclads, Librarian Dreads as Venerable's, The gold dudes as honour guard and the Black ones with the red cross (name slips my mind) as Vanguard.
Go from there.
He's right - it's objectively better than anything you've been fielding.
That's not a BA list. If you have to swap out my codex for a list, you've already conceded the debate. And managed to work in your bitterness over C:SM. Well done.
Russes aren't survivable and their firepower is mediocre. They are slightly better land raiders. Obviously the Russ isn't getting it done or you wouldn't be complaining about losing to the worst lists in the game.
Martel732 wrote: That's not a BA list. If you have to swap out my codex for a list, you've already conceded the debate. And managed to work in your bitterness over C:SM. Well done.
Russes aren't survivable and their firepower is mediocre. They are slightly better land raiders.
How so? I just made a suggestion that will allow you to continue to play your BA, but do so at a completely higher level. Russ's are survivable, IF you use them right. Big if there, but the 3+ cover save is a nightmare to my opponents. As others have said, it is the lack of ability to catch objectives that really lose a Guard player so many games. The real problem with the Russ is the cost vs damage output, but as the Guard codex lacks anything better in the Russ's role, you have to keep using it.
Martel732 wrote: That's not a BA list. If you have to swap out my codex for a list, you've already conceded the debate. And managed to work in your bitterness over C:SM. Well done.
Russes aren't survivable and their firepower is mediocre. They are slightly better land raiders.
How so? I just made a suggestion that will allow you to continue to play your BA, but do so at a completely higher level.
Russ's are survivable, IF you use them right. Big if there, but the 3+ cover save is a nightmare to my opponents. As others have said, it is the lack of ability to catch objectives that really lose a Guard player so many games. The real problem with the Russ is the cost vs damage output, but as the Guard codex lacks anything better in the Russ's role, you have to keep using it.
How so? I don't own half the models to make a vanilla list work. It's not just changing to vanilla that magically makes everything better. All the units that make vanilla great BA don't get at all, so I don't own the models. You're conceding that you have no ideas with the actual BA codex and are just trying to be a smart ass about it.
I'm done with the Russ thing. Keep using them, and keep losing. You need points for air cav and outflankers. Taking objectives is your admitted problem. Air cav and outflankers do that for you. Russes don't. I've tried every viable unit in the BA codex. You haven't done the same with IG. I've seen DA players almost flip the table out of frustation from the 6 psyker build. It doesn't matter if you don't like it. I'm playing one of the worst lists in the game and I don't particularly fear Russes. That should tell you something.
master of ordinance wrote: How so? I just made a suggestion that will allow you to continue to play your BA
No, you told him to go play Codex: Space Marines.
I guess I can just tell you to quit complaining and go proxy as Renegades and Heretics then?
I mean, yeah, sure, why not?
Its really the logical thing.
As a guard player as well, I fully intend to use the 30k militia rules to run beefed up grenadier squads and rapier platforms. I think it'd be valid advice for someone to tell me to play a different army list/codex that is basically the same thing and/or already WYSIWYG with my current models.
Which is why I'm totally for merging all the marine books so we don't get nonsense where Red Emo Marines are somehow worse off when you could just decide to play them as Red non-Emo marines in a different book and already be 100% WYSIWYG with significantly better rules.
As for the worst codex, hard to say. I'm more of a fan of just more generic tiers, in which I'd find the likes of Guard and BA and the not-really-codices-but-GW-calls-them-that-anyways codices.
Martel732 wrote: Problem is that there's a lot of units present in competitive vanilla lists that BA players just don't own.
So... Gravturions? Seriously, what other marine unit is exclusive to the vanilla book that is competitive? For a gladius you already have razorbacks and generic marines, as well as librarians for conclaves, and bikers for bike stuff.
I'm done with the Russ thing. Keep using them, and keep losing. You need points for air cav and outflankers. Taking objectives is your admitted problem. Air cav and outflankers do that for you. Russes don't. I've tried every viable unit in the BA codex. You haven't done the same with IG. I've seen DA players almost flip the table out of frustation from the 6 psyker build. It doesn't matter if you don't like it. I'm playing one of the worst lists in the game and I don't particularly fear Russes. That should tell you something.
Your ignorance of the abilities of Vets in Valks is showing, as is your suggestion to use outflankers... which are Scout Sentinels.
3x Plasma Vets, in a Valk, runs almost 250 points, with no appreciable survivability. The Valk is useless as an anti-air platform, and absolutely pathetic in its damage output. So you're paying 250 points to put a 105 point unit on the table on or about turn 3... by which point objectives are claimed and you're going to try to, what, not die when 3 marines assault you because they're right next to you?
Scout Sentinels? AV 10, Open topped, and 2 HP? Not for the price. I admit they're mobile, but they can't survive. They're 1.5 times the cost of a Jetbike, no ability to move quickly after arrival, and have a crappier gun. They're not even that much more survivable, if you work in the JB's save.
Your suggestions are laughable.
And seriously, I made the jump from BA to Vanilla with no problem at all. Death Company = Honour Guard or Vanguard Vets or whatever else you want that's choppy. After that, you can pick up a handful of models to "up the competitive". Or don't. To be honest, I can play a better assault army with BA models using Ultramarine tactics, without any SM exclusive models.
Doesn't make BA better, but it does make your models more competitive.
Again, the solutions to IG mobility would require you to spend your entire points on fast, mobile units so that they aren't picked off leaving you stuck in your DZ. At that point, you might as well play BA and go charging forth. You're going to do more damage [trust me] because IG's damage output goes to gak once you start moving. BA's might get their asses handed to them, but they still win more games than IG do. Their playstyle is more conducive to achieving the win conditions of 7th edition than IG's effective playstyle.
Any points spent on IG "mobility" are better spent in Allies. I started allying in BA to my IG in order to get some mobility. And then I kept allying in more BA, because I kept doing better. And then I started playing all BA... and then I switched to SM because they're straight-up better. That's the problem with Guard right now. You're better off spending your points on allies.
I'm done with the Russ thing. Keep using them, and keep losing. You need points for air cav and outflankers. Taking objectives is your admitted problem. Air cav and outflankers do that for you. Russes don't. I've tried every viable unit in the BA codex. You haven't done the same with IG. I've seen DA players almost flip the table out of frustation from the 6 psyker build. It doesn't matter if you don't like it. I'm playing one of the worst lists in the game and I don't particularly fear Russes. That should tell you something.
Your ignorance of the abilities of Vets in Valks is showing, as is your suggestion to use outflankers... which are Scout Sentinels.
3x Plasma Vets, in a Valk, runs almost 250 points, with no appreciable survivability. The Valk is useless as an anti-air platform, and absolutely pathetic in its damage output. So you're paying 250 points to put a 105 point unit on the table on or about turn 3... by which point objectives are claimed and you're going to try to, what, not die when 3 marines assault you because they're right next to you?
Scout Sentinels? AV 10, Open topped, and 2 HP? Not for the price. I admit they're mobile, but they can't survive. They're 1.5 times the cost of a Jetbike, no ability to move quickly after arrival, and have a crappier gun. They're not even that much more survivable, if you work in the JB's save.
Your suggestions are laughable.
And seriously, I made the jump from BA to Vanilla with no problem at all. Death Company = Honour Guard or Vanguard Vets or whatever else you want that's choppy. After that, you can pick up a handful of models to "up the competitive". Or don't. To be honest, I can play a better assault army with BA models using Ultramarine tactics, without any SM exclusive models.
Doesn't make BA better, but it does make your models more competitive.
Again, the solutions to IG mobility would require you to spend your entire points on fast, mobile units so that they aren't picked off leaving you stuck in your DZ. At that point, you might as well play BA and go charging forth. You're going to do more damage [trust me] because IG's damage output goes to gak once you start moving. BA's might get their asses handed to them, but they still win more games than IG do. Their playstyle is more conducive to achieving the win conditions of 7th edition than IG's effective playstyle.
Any points spent on IG "mobility" are better spent in Allies. I started allying in BA to my IG in order to get some mobility. And then I kept allying in more BA, because I kept doing better. And then I started playing all BA... and then I switched to SM because they're straight-up better. That's the problem with Guard right now. You're better off spending your points on allies.
I'm guessing you are in the pro-Russ camp, then?
I maintain my suggestions work fine against mid-tier and lower lists. Since that's all I'm claiming IG can compete against. Against Tau/Eldar/Superfriends/Necrons, they're really boned just like all the have-not codices.
"I can play a better assault army with BA models using Ultramarine tactics, without any SM exclusive models."
Only because of telepathy.
"Doesn't make BA better, but it does make your models more competitive."
Another vote for "change codex".
" They're 1.5 times the cost of a Jetbike, no ability to move quickly after arrival, and have a crappier gun."
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Sorry, but Tyranids can't be the worst just because they have Fly rants and Mawlocs.
Is the codex poorly written? Absolutely. However it has tools to deal with anything outside maybe Wraithknights. Mawlocs are seriously good.
The codex doesn't have tools to deal with Wraithknights. They could when it wasn't a GC.
Mawlocs are good, but from my personal experience, they have a lot of possibility for error. The only way to guarantee things is by using Lictors, and even then that can be hit or miss.
The codex as a whole, outside those two units, is garbage. That's like saying CSM are good because of Oblits and Heldrakes.
I don't even think Obliterators are good anymore.
One unit does not a good codex make. But maybe three does?
Martel732 wrote: That's not a BA list. If you have to swap out my codex for a list, you've already conceded the debate. And managed to work in your bitterness over C:SM. Well done.
Russes aren't survivable and their firepower is mediocre. They are slightly better land raiders. Obviously the Russ isn't getting it done or you wouldn't be complaining about losing to the worst lists in the game.
You aren't wrong but there is literally no alternative in the codex for semi mobile, semi durable ground based firepower. ALL your infantry are t3 and you have no access to relentless other than rolling on the mediocre Cadian warlord trait table and hoping for the best. Spending 70 points for a single t3, BS3, non relentless lascannon shot which makes the other 8 weapons in the squad useless (even in a blob) is madness. Russes are very good in a shootout if there are no D weapons flying around, can move up to 6" and fire everything, can be kitted out for any role they need to fill, do not need to spend points on morale buffs, can tank shock, can ram, and so on. Though mediocre in the grand scheme of things, they are the best platforms we have for heavy weapons in the codex. Overpriced? Some variants perhaps, but a minimum platoon with no upgrades and 2 lascannons costs 170 points, with all of the drawbacks I listed above. A LR Vanquisher with a lascannon and 2 multimeltas costs 5 points less. The Russ is the best heavy weapons platform the Guard have.
Martel732 wrote: That's not a BA list. If you have to swap out my codex for a list, you've already conceded the debate. And managed to work in your bitterness over C:SM. Well done.
Russes aren't survivable and their firepower is mediocre. They are slightly better land raiders. Obviously the Russ isn't getting it done or you wouldn't be complaining about losing to the worst lists in the game.
You aren't wrong but there is literally no alternative in the codex for semi mobile, semi durable ground based firepower. ALL your infantry are t3 and you have no access to relentless other than rolling on the mediocre Cadian warlord trait table and hoping for the best. Spending 70 points for a single t3, BS3, non relentless lascannon shot which makes the other 8 weapons in the squad useless (even in a blob) is madness. Russes are very good in a shootout if there are no D weapons flying around, can move up to 6" and fire everything, can be kitted out for any role they need to fill, do not need to spend points on morale buffs, can tank shock, can ram, and so on. Though mediocre in the grand scheme of things, they are the best platforms we have for heavy weapons in the codex. Overpriced? Some variants perhaps, but a minimum platoon with no upgrades and 2 lascannons costs 170 points, with all of the drawbacks I listed above. A LR Vanquisher with a lascannon and 2 multimeltas costs 5 points less. The Russ is the best heavy weapons platform the Guard have.
I think what I'm usually seeing is one div-buffed blob with 5 X autocannons and one with 5X lascannons. They are always ending up twin-linked and ignore cover between orders and psyker powers. These weapons can crack any non-LR transport and then the wyverns murder everything that had to emergency disembark. This is frighteningly effective a systematically scrubbing a gladius off the table.
T3 just isn't the liability it used to be with all the mass S6/7 flying around. S6 AP 4/5 kills approx the same point cost of marines and guardsmen. If the guardsmen get cover, it swings in their favor wildly. It's even worse if the S6/7 is AP 3. You can moan about bolters, but most non-Gladius lists minimize this terrible weapon. And it is terrible because of the numbers in which it is fielded and the cost per model of the wielders.
" A LR Vanquisher with a lascannon and 2 multimeltas costs 5 points less"
But can't receive some divination buffs and can't be given the good orders.
" no D weapons flying around,"
Half my games have D-weapons. The Wraithcannons, the Stormsurge or reaper chainswords.
Martel, you can't have it both ways.
You can't sit back and claim that "IG are fine vs. the other bottom rung books", and then turn around and claim that BA's are the single worst book of all time because YOU only play against list tailored/top tier BS.
Vs. the other 'have-not' books, BA's (post FAQ boost) are now easily the best off of the lower tier along side Tyranids & superfriends IG.
Now, discounting allies entirely, (ie: "parent codex only" lists), you could probably rank the main books about;
God Tier (ie: super easy mode)
- Eldar
Top Tier (ie: can still win top spot in Tournaments)
- Vanilla Marines
Upper-mid Tier (ie: very difficult to outright win a Tournament, but typically will always play kingmaker/spoiler)
- Tau
- Chaos Daemons
- Decurion Necrons
- Thundercav + Murderpack Space Wolves
- Ravenwing shenanigan Necrons
- Khornekin
Middle Tier
- Flyrant spam Tyranids
- general Loyalist Marine lists (Vanillas/SW/DA/probably DW)
- Grey Knights
- Covens/Venom spam DE - Mechanicus
- Ork "Tournament level" list
- Dread/Drop Pod spam BA's
- IG 'Cadicurion'/Vet spam/Psyker blobs
BA aren't good even against middle tier codices. That aren't even good vs CSM, despite your protests. They are about the same. CSM and BA both lack model count and shooting efficacy. (The more I play with grav guns, the more I despise them) And to a certain extent, lack assault efficacy for models that survive shooting.
Drop pod BA's are actually weaker than a generic BA list, because it completely wastes their inherent speed. Drop pods are not a panacea against 5th ed veterans. I go as far to say that non-skyhammer drop pod marines are actually a poor list. They drop in, shoot once, and then die miserably. Marines are too expensive to suicide in a piece-mealed fashion.
The FAQ "boost" for BA is a red herring to fool players like yourself. Don't kid yourself; that fragnought is still going to be hull pointed out like chump against remotely competent opponent, rendering the attack boost moot. BA scouts are still largely useless because we don't get land speeder storms.
kronk wrote: Arguing about what codex is the lowest tier is as silly as which IPA Beer is the worst. They're all bitter, they all suck.
I for one happen to like India Pale Ales, Alexander Keiths is good and many cottage industry breweries make good ones too
But yeah I mean somewhat contributed to this earlier, I did also state that it had become somewhat cyclical. Overall there is quite a few codices that need reworking and one of the worst is Chaos Space Marines, followed by a lot of the others mentioned.
i can agree that CSM need a rework over BA just due to chronology. That will make the BA officially the worst, I think. Even worse than Orks. At least Orks are a bit counter meta.
Martel732 wrote: i can agree that CSM need a rework over BA just due to chronology. That will make the BA officially the worst, I think. Even worse than Orks. At least Orks are a bit counter meta.
Experiment 626 wrote: Martel, you can't have it both ways.
You can't sit back and claim that "IG are fine vs. the other bottom rung books", and then turn around and claim that BA's are the single worst book of all time because YOU only play against list tailored/top tier BS.
Vs. the other 'have-not' books, BA's (post FAQ boost) are now easily the best off of the lower tier along side Tyranids & superfriends IG.
Now, discounting allies entirely, (ie: "parent codex only" lists), you could probably rank the main books about;
God Tier (ie: super easy mode)
- Eldar
Top Tier (ie: can still win top spot in Tournaments)
- Vanilla Marines
Upper-mid Tier (ie: very difficult to outright win a Tournament, but typically will always play kingmaker/spoiler)
- Tau
- Chaos Daemons
- Decurion Necrons
- Thundercav + Murderpack Space Wolves
- Ravenwing shenanigan Necrons
- Khornekin
Middle Tier
- Flyrant spam Tyranids
- general Loyalist Marine lists (Vanillas/SW/DA/probably DW)
- Grey Knights
- Covens/Venom spam DE - Mechanicus
- Ork "Tournament level" list
- Dread/Drop Pod spam BA's
- IG 'Cadicurion'/Vet spam/Psyker blobs
Experiment 626 wrote: Martel, you can't have it both ways.
You can't sit back and claim that "IG are fine vs. the other bottom rung books", and then turn around and claim that BA's are the single worst book of all time because YOU only play against list tailored/top tier BS.
Vs. the other 'have-not' books, BA's (post FAQ boost) are now easily the best off of the lower tier along side Tyranids & superfriends IG.
Now, discounting allies entirely, (ie: "parent codex only" lists), you could probably rank the main books about;
God Tier (ie: super easy mode)
- Eldar
Top Tier (ie: can still win top spot in Tournaments)
- Vanilla Marines
Upper-mid Tier (ie: very difficult to outright win a Tournament, but typically will always play kingmaker/spoiler)
- Tau
- Chaos Daemons
- Decurion Necrons
- Thundercav + Murderpack Space Wolves
- Ravenwing shenanigan Necrons
- Khornekin
Middle Tier
- Flyrant spam Tyranids
- general Loyalist Marine lists (Vanillas/SW/DA/probably DW)
- Grey Knights
- Covens/Venom spam DE - Mechanicus
- Ork "Tournament level" list
- Dread/Drop Pod spam BA's
- IG 'Cadicurion'/Vet spam/Psyker blobs
If you're using certain builds to up the tiering, DE w/Covens can make some middle-upper middle tier lists with CTC and supporting units
Also, which book is "Mechanicus?" If it's only the tripple-book formation, then honestly I'd push it up at least to upper-middle, and if it's all the three books individually, then I think calling them all the same power ranking is a bit of a broad brush... Not complaining about my book (which is mono-Skitarii, since it has been questioned a few times.) Just seeing some inconsistencies in how things are grouped. Skitarii has to take help from the other two to get a ranking (which I think is fully fair,) but BA having to take anything from SM is met with such screaming of bloody murder that you could replace your Grav guns with Martel's voice and achieve the same power.
And it matters a lot that the mechanicus codices are not strictly superior to each. Ie, there's a reason to run one of them and ally in the others. There's no reason at all to ever touch BA, either as an ally or as a main force.
And it matters a lot that the mechanicus codices are not strictly superior to each. Ie, there's a reason to run one of them and ally in the others. There's no reason at all to ever touch BA, either as an ally or as a main force.
By that reasoning there's no reason to play anything that isn't Eldar... ah forget it, why do I even bother. I'm gonna go have fun with the game instead of... whatever the hell this is.
And it matters a lot that the mechanicus codices are not strictly superior to each. Ie, there's a reason to run one of them and ally in the others. There's no reason at all to ever touch BA, either as an ally or as a main force.
By that reasoning there's no reason to play anything that isn't Eldar... ah forget it, why do I even bother. I'm gonna go have fun with the game instead of... whatever the hell this is.
Not precisely. Other codices don't get magically better by changing a name and a paint job. BA are codex compliant, and yet strictly inferior to all other codex compliant chapters. There's nothing BA have that vanilla marines don't also have, but only better. Tau have supersuits, Tyranids have big bugs, etc. So those are reasons to choose them over Eldar. There is no reason to ever touch the BA codex with the current vanilla codex.
kronk wrote: Arguing about what codex is the lowest tier is as silly as which IPA Beer is the worst. They're all bitter, they all suck.
I for one happen to like India Pale Ales, Alexander Keiths is good and many cottage industry breweries make good ones too
Keiths? Really? Man, I moved from next door where you are out to Keiths home and I can't stand the stuff. Give me a proper lager or a real ale any day.
On topic, I think Orks are really suffering something fierce. I hardly even hear anyone talk about them anymore. Pretty sad given how awesome they are in the fluff.
I can't believe this was essentially arguing about 2nd worst. Everyone seems to give CSM the nod as worst, and then argues about IG or BA.
Personally, I'd say it's probably
CSM -> Orks -> IG -> BA in terms of worst. IG and BA are hard to separate. Against the top tier codexes, I think BA do better. Against the mid to bottom tier, IG do better. Mainly this is because the top tier codexes just laugh at tanks to the point you might as well not have them, but, for example, Orks and Nids are still concerned about them being there.
I don't think it is enough. Cyclopean cabal is funny against armies with big LoW (such as supremacy suits) but in most cases there are just not going to be units big and strong enough to warrant it.
Ashiraya wrote: I don't think it is enough. Cyclopean cabal is funny against armies with big LoW (such as supremacy suits) but in most cases there are just not going to be units big and strong enough to warrant it.
Exactly. Oh! I shot you with your own tactical squad! HORROR!
The sorcerers themselves are also very easy to kill - they can't even get a 2+ unless they gimp themselves with overpriced TDA.
I can see it being funny to grab a couple of wyverns and blowing up the IG's own guardsman blob with them, but it is honestly pretty niche and overall it an inefficient power. Better than what CSM already have, to be sure, but a situational gimmick is not alone taking them anywhere in the power scale.
Ashiraya wrote: Exactly. Oh! I shot you with your own tactical squad! HORROR!
The sorcerers themselves are also very easy to kill - they can't even get a 2+ unless they gimp themselves with overpriced TDA.
I can see it being funny to grab a couple of wyverns and blowing up the IG's own guardsman blob with them, but it is honestly pretty niche and overall it an inefficient power. Better than what CSM already have, to be sure, but a situational gimmick is not alone taking them anywhere in the power scale.
I think you're understating it's value a bit. Saw it used to great affect on taking over a Stormsurge multiple times at ATC.
Again, the big scary things are ideal targets, but those are rarely readily available, nor do you always have a suitable target for whatever you get control of.
If you meet an army of Wraithknights and Scatterbikes, neither enemy unit is particularly susceptible to fire from the other.
Martel732 wrote: "the top tier codexes just laugh at tanks to the point you might as well not have them"
Unless, of course, they were free tanks and all obj sec.
Sure, but that's how bad tanks are. They are so bad that, unless they are free, you are most likely better off leaving them at home. Rhinos aren't horrible since their so cheap, but the troops they tend to carry aren't really worth it for most armies.
Again, this is only against competitive lists. Eldar, Marines, Tau, Necrons tend to be able to strip HP very effectively, and IG suffer against those armies compared to BA or other low tier dexes.
However, armies like DE and Orks can't really strip HPs off quick enough to make the IG tanks useless. This allows IG to punch harder against the lower tier armies, so it makes an interesting place for them. They are strong against low tier codexes, feeling like they belong in upper mid against those armies, but against high tier armies, they feel awful and like they should belong in low tier. I think this is what is creating these problems and discussions here.
That, and some people seem to have different ideas of what is good based on their meta. RIP Mutilator thread
Some people seem to think Cyclopean Cabal gives them a leg up on the other bottom feeders now. I don't know myself; your thoughts?
I haven't tried it out yet, though looking at it, it actually seems like it's better against the stronger armies.
Against Guard, I can't think of a unit I'd want to cast this on. This is true in DE, Orks, BA, and tbh, most of the weaker dexes. The ideal targets seem to be GMC and MC, and the weaker dexes don't have any of these...or at least any that are strong.
Against Nids I can see it being useful. Nid MCs have shortish range and can cause some wounds.
Against Tau, it seems really good. This is most likely the best army in the game to use this power against. They lack a deathstar to keep you away as well, although they can delete the casters if they have to.
Against Marines, it feels hit or miss. I can see some lists having this hurt them greatly, and other lists not caring. I think against lists that care, you'll find your casters quickly deleted however. Pop in, Grav shots until death. It's hard to protect them and have them contribute, as CSM really need to move forward to be effective.
Against Eldar, it feels mostly like a miss. Bikes shooting another bike squad is good, but it feels hard to get in range to me.
Against Necrons I see it being useless or close to useless.
Against Wolves it feels useless.
Against Daemons...I can't tell. Mediocre?
All in all, its good but not great. If invisibility isn't nerfed in your group, it's a lot stronger but still struggles against many of the top dexes who have melee deathstars, which CSM lack. You'll drag the melee out but won't win, or will fail to pin down the enemy death star. It doesn't change why CSM are bad though...they don't hit hard enough on any front. Their guns are weak or overcosted, and their melee units are pretty bad compared to many other armies. Tough wise they are average to good, and this certainly raises that with biomancy and telepathy, but damage wise it doesn't do enough.
There needs to be a formation that grants all marines +1 attack, +1 Strength, and fleet for Khorne or something. That would help CSM since at least they'd be brutal in melee. As it stands, some armies have deathstars that can walk across a CSM army by itself.
Akiasura wrote: I can't believe this was essentially arguing about 2nd worst. Everyone seems to give CSM the nod as worst, and then argues about IG or BA.
I honestly think Chaos Marine players just turned up in larger numbers to take this poll than Ork players.
CSM they have power armor, BS4, FMCs, and competent Psykers, that Orks would kill for.
Akiasura wrote: I can't believe this was essentially arguing about 2nd worst. Everyone seems to give CSM the nod as worst, and then argues about IG or BA.
I honestly think Chaos Marine players just turned up in larger numbers to take this poll than Ork players.
CSM they have power armor, BS4, FMCs, and competent Psykers, that Orks would kill for.
And they lose the game if hit with a few ion accelerators. Power armor is as much a curse as a boon at this point.
Akiasura wrote: I can't believe this was essentially arguing about 2nd worst. Everyone seems to give CSM the nod as worst, and then argues about IG or BA.
I honestly think Chaos Marine players just turned up in larger numbers to take this poll than Ork players.
CSM they have power armor, BS4, FMCs, and competent Psykers, that Orks would kill for.
I'm not going to claim that Orks are in a better position. I will say that Power armor is as much a weakness as it is a strength with grav and str D on the table, but this only effects the stronger dexes not the weaker ones.
Our FMCs outside of special characters are pretty garbage. They might not be the worst in the game, but I'm sure its close. Not enough damage at range, very expensive, and not that tough compared to others. Keep in mind that the Flyrant is good because it pumps out decent ranged damage, the DP can't really claim the same.
CSM does have good psykers. Can't deny that.
In return, Orks get a much better LoW. Their standard troop is superior to anything I can field as a CSM player. Their bikers are better than what I can field. Their formations are better than anything I can field. They are tougher against most guns than I am as well, point for point.
Orks have some weaknesses. I think their biggest is the randomness of their guns, low shots per model, and lack of twin linked. Really, FnP and TL should be the core of the Ork Codex. It represents how tough they are and how much they love their dakka, while helping them as a dex. If shootas were Assault 3 TL, and Choppas +1 Str, I think they'd have a much stronger core.
Flash gitz should be AP 2-4 randomly only (1-2 =Ap 2, 3-4 =Ap 3, etc etc). Give them an extra bullet and twin linked.
Tbh, I'd give all the Ork guns +1 shot and TL. They'd become a horde of bullets army, but nothing is very accurate. Charging them becomes dangerous due to the sheer wave of firepower they put out, but they still need luck to win. Keep their points roughly the same, or drop their points and remove the TL.
Anyway that's off topic.
EDIT, did the math, with TL they become about as accurate as guardsmen. Let them re-roll ones and get +1 shot.
And it matters a lot that the mechanicus codices are not strictly superior to each. Ie, there's a reason to run one of them and ally in the others. There's no reason at all to ever touch BA, either as an ally or as a main force.
By that reasoning there's no reason to play anything that isn't Eldar... ah forget it, why do I even bother. I'm gonna go have fun with the game instead of... whatever the hell this is.
Maybe people playing with points expensive models want to do more with them than just pull them off the table 78% of the game. Because short of fast AV/ MSU spam that's exactly the way BA play. Got tabled for the first time ever when some asshat brought Ad Mech war convocation to a casual game. I imagine playing BA in a competitive meta feels a lot like that and it's lame as gak.
Experiment 626, you have no clue how situational frag nought are. A few weeks ago I say one absolutely delete a chaos sorcerers retinue of chosen. Last night I played my nids vs BS with 2 fragnoughts. The first one landed properly, killed a warrior and 7 gaunts and was immediately tarpitted for the rest of the game. The other rolled a 11" scatter for the pods and was dropped in one round of shooting by an Exocrine and another unit of warriors with deathspitters. Didn't do anything but look scary.
master of ordinance wrote: To be fair, almost anything in the game dies to Ion Accelerators. Tau need toning down, heavily.
Orks and your guardsmen give up far fewer points when hit, though.
True, however they give up more points against strength 5 Ap 5 weapons, and strength 7 Ap 4 weapons, so it kind of balances out. You could claim, with these units in cover, that it may not be the case but this is Tau we are talking about.
master of ordinance wrote: To be fair, almost anything in the game dies to Ion Accelerators. Tau need toning down, heavily.
Orks and your guardsmen give up far fewer points when hit, though.
True, however they give up more points against strength 5 Ap 5 weapons, and strength 7 Ap 4 weapons, so it kind of balances out. You could claim, with these units in cover, that it may not be the case but this is Tau we are talking about.
Akiasura wrote: I can't believe this was essentially arguing about 2nd worst. Everyone seems to give CSM the nod as worst, and then argues about IG or BA.
I honestly think Chaos Marine players just turned up in larger numbers to take this poll than Ork players.
CSM they have power armor, BS4, FMCs, and competent Psykers, that Orks would kill for.
Ditto. It seems like CSM players don't realize just how bad other books have it. They have an old book, which I'm sure they're tired of playing, but it can still be made to work. They have no idea what foul things an Ork player would do to get access to an ML 3 weird boy with HALF the discipline CSM sorcs do. They have no idea the foul things a BA player would do to have a playable shooting OR CC list. Or even.a formation with moving 3 up cover saves for our dreads(as bad as they are). As it is now, if they aren't maelstrom missions, BA are best left in a display case.
Akiasura wrote: I can't believe this was essentially arguing about 2nd worst. Everyone seems to give CSM the nod as worst, and then argues about IG or BA.
I honestly think Chaos Marine players just turned up in larger numbers to take this poll than Ork players.
CSM they have power armor, BS4, FMCs, and competent Psykers, that Orks would kill for.
Ditto. It seems like CSM players don't realize just how bad other books have it.
I actually own Orks and CSM, so I'm aware of how bad Orks have it. In another thread, I was suggesting that Orks are a terrible dark horse choice since they can't contribute in a competitive game to any meaningful level. However, that doesn't mean that Orks have it worse than CSM. BA certainly don't, I think they are better than Orks or CSM.
They have an old book, which I'm sure they're tired of playing, but it can still be made to work.
I would love to see a list that works that isn't "Run daemons with some CSM to technically win this argument" because that is what happens everytime someone suggests CSM can work.
Remember, we have had a huge thread where people thought mutilators were good. Mutilators! That's how bad the CSM dex is.
They have no idea what foul things an Ork player would do to get access to an ML 3 weird boy with HALF the discipline CSM sorcs do.
This is the one strength we have over the other bad dexes. Our psykers are pretty good. Not SM or Eldar good, but certainly the top of the weaker armies. It is, however, our only strength.
They have no idea the foul things a BA player would do to have a playable shooting OR CC list.
As a CSM player, I would do foul things for a viable shooting or CC list. We currently don't have any such list.
Keep in mind, in an era where people are running grav, D weapons, Tau pie plats, and Scatbikes, CSM are still running plasma guns. We don't even have pods, and struggle with removing armor, of all things.
Our CC options are also terrible. Possessed are garbage tier, our landraider is the worst option available, we lack a way to deliver Khorne troops. What CC list for chaos is playable? We certainly aren't building a deathstar with our options.
The only good options in the CSM list are the following;
Sorcerors (Not really shooty or CC, buffy and usually makes units tougher with some direct damage available).
Cultists (Cheap objective holder).
Plague Marines (Tough, not offensively powerful at all, extremely slow).
Nurgle Bikers (Tough, not offensively powerful at all).
Heldrake (It's something? Much weaker than before, and it was the only thing propping up the dex for a while).
And...that's it. All the other options are terrible for various reasons. We certainly can't run a playable shooty or CC list, unless by playable you mean "can put models on the table", in which case everyone qualifies.
Or even.a formation with moving 3 up cover saves for our dreads(as bad as they are). As it is now, if they aren't maelstrom missions, BA are best left in a display case.
Dreads for CSM are a laughing stock, I'd never run them. Any of the competitive armies can remove a few models with HP, and CSM lacks the ability to spam meaningful HP for a decent cost to toughness/firepower ratio. Few armies can, to be fair (IG can't, its why they are so terrible right now).
I can't tell you the last time I ran CSM against a remotely competitive army and didn't get tabled. Even against Orks and other lower tier armies, it feels like an uphill battle. IG can run tanks against us effectively since we can't pop armor at range without spamming horrible options like lascannons. Without divination, those are awful for the points.
Ashiraya wrote: Akia, looks like you copypasted the Nurgle biker comment by mistake. They are bad but at least not slow!
Whoops, meant to remove the slow. They are similar to the plague marines in that they are not bad at tanking hits (It's hard to imagine a better unit for the points against Scat bikes that doesn't involve a formation) but are still extremely weak in their offense. It takes them too long to kill a MC or GMC.
CSM feels like gak because people naturally compare it the Adeptus Astartes.
The common complaints of CSM almost always reflect how much better that the Astartes have it.
No ATSKNF No Drop Pods
No Grav
No Free Vehicles
No whatever new thing Adeptus Astartes got in their recent codex, but CSM don't have, even though they used to be Adeptus Astartes.
You can pretty much copy and paste every CSM complaint, and replace CSM with Ork as well
ANYTHING orks do even competently is mostly done by taking large numbers of something to accomplsh it.
Orks take a mob of 10 guys in a vehicle so that 1 of them can survive long enough to use a powerfist, and that's considered a typical strategy.
The CSM book also has some other issues aside from just not getting the Loyalist toys. Fundamentally the army is still built to function like a 5E or even a 4E army in many respects. Its AT weapons still are largely based around trying to get penetrating hits rather than stripping HP's. Its big new gribblies were made vehicles rather than MC's. Its infantry still generally are built around close combat and a reliance on consolidating into new combats or being able to pile out of a Rhino directly into CC. The army's Psychic capabilities are relatively mild outside of bolt-on's like Belakor or allies. There's also issues with theme and function, such as the weird split GW introduced between Cult and Dedicated units (e.g. the difference between a unit of basic CSM's with a Mark of Nurgle vs Plague Marines) and questions of why Cult units don't exist outside of Tac-equivalents.
They feel like Gak largely because they are Gak, even not comparing them to Loyalist marines. They're an army left behind two or even three editions in the past in terms of functionality.
I've not played 40K for some time now and I've deliberately not read the thread because I'm going to hazard a bet that my Chaos Space Marines are still at the bottom.
Now I'm going to go back and see what others have said who are more current and see if I;m right
adamsouza wrote: CSM feels like gak because people naturally compare it the Adeptus Astartes.
The common complaints of CSM almost always reflect how much better that the Astartes have it.
I didn't mention SM once during my going over why the CSM army is bad. The CSM army is bad because they can't kill anything and, for the most part, are extremely slow. They also suffer against AV spam since they lack ways to destroy tanks in number.
No ATSKNF No Drop Pods
No Grav
No Free Vehicles
No whatever new thing Adeptus Astartes got in their recent codex, but CSM don't have, even though they used to be Adeptus Astartes.
Some of these are strange, from a fluff perspective (Why no Legion Tactics, Drop pods, or Grav weapons? If anything, Chaos should have more grav weapons, or daemon weapons).
But these aren't the weaknesses I listed for the most part. I've never seen a CSM player argue for free tanks, for example.
You can pretty much copy and paste every CSM complaint, and replace CSM with Ork as well
Not true. Orks have a solid LoW can do armor spam to an extent. Certain armies have issues dealing with the amount of wounds on the table, although many of the top tier armies don't. Orks also have the green tide which is semi-viable, Chaos has nothing that doesn't involve allying in a stronger dex and spamming psykers.
ANYTHING orks do even competently is mostly done by taking large numbers of something to accomplsh it.
Yes.
This is a theme of horde armies. Skaven in fantasy took a large amount of troops to accomplish anything, yet were quite strong during their entire career.
It doesn't make the list weak by itself.
Orks take a mob of 10 guys in a vehicle so that 1 of them can survive long enough to use a powerfist, and that's considered a typical strategy.
CSM take 10 guys in a vehicle to pop off two plasma shots and die. At least the orks are cheaper and can get stuck in against a lot of units. Our basic troop doesn't even get taken, you plop cultists down and try to hide the shame.
Try orks against CSM if you want. You'll find that Orks beat CSM in melee and equal them at ranged. If Orks decide to spam transports/BW/LoW, there isn't much the CSM player can do to stop it. Meanwhile, the CSM has little in response except spam psykers and hope for the best . We don't deal enough wounds to counter Orks, we don't have effective AV weapons on good platforms to counter transports, and we don't have the melee ability to punch through the hordes on a point to point level.
CSM are awful, and have been for most of their inception. 3.5 was the last time they were good, 4 had one build that was rage inducing. They remain awful to this day. Their parallels to the marine dex highlights this, but its not the only reason.
Just look at 1k sons (arguably the worst unit in the game), Mutilators, Fiends, Landraider, Zerkers, the cost of many of the marks, no divination (makes no sense), cost of oblits, possessed...it's crazy how high it is.
master of ordinance wrote: To be fair, almost anything in the game dies to Ion Accelerators. Tau need toning down, heavily.
Orks and your guardsmen give up far fewer points when hit, though.
True, however they give up more points against strength 5 Ap 5 weapons, and strength 7 Ap 4 weapons, so it kind of balances out. You could claim, with these units in cover, that it may not be the case but this is Tau we are talking about.
With more unit in cover, at least you strain their marker lights more. As for S4 AP 5 weapons, bolters are trash and are minimized in most non-gladius lists.
"Try orks against CSM if you want. You'll find that Orks beat CSM in melee and equal them at ranged. If Orks decide to spam transports/BW/LoW, there isn't much the CSM player can do to stop it. Meanwhile, the CSM has little in response except spam psykers and hope for the best . We don't deal enough wounds to counter Orks, we don't have effective AV weapons on good platforms to counter transports, and we don't have the melee ability to punch through the hordes on a point to point level. "
This is why Orks are better than BA as well. At least, head to head. Against the field, I still think the Orks ability to soak wounds is more valuable than whatever it is people think BA can actually do.
How can Orks be the sconed worst army. Clearly they've never seen a fully mechanize green tide assault you in turn 2. (PS. This is the fan boy inside of me talking.)
Not true. Orks have a solid LoW can do armor spam to an extent. Certain armies have issues dealing with the amount of wounds on the table, although many of the top tier armies don't. Orks also have the green tide which is semi-viable, Chaos has nothing that doesn't involve allying in a stronger dex and spamming psykers.
1: What solid LoW? Ghaz? he sucks balls and is only worth his points when you invest 1100pts to give him a 2++. Or are you talking about a Stompa? Which I believe is something like 200-250pts over priced for what little it does. Its a super heavy and is absurdly expensive (770pts).
2: Orks have terrible armor. The only vehicle we have that has armor that can be spammed is the BW which is 110pts naked. When you give it dakka its closer to 165pts and is only effective at Range 24 or less. It is an AV 14/12/10 Open topped vehicle that loses its benefit of good front armor because it completely lacks range. We have trukkz? but they have almost zero dakka and tend to explode frequently, we have 4 different flyers, all of them are trash though So what vehicle spam are you talking about? Yeah CSM has a problem with anti-tank but so do Orks. our most effective anti-tank is Lootas, expensive, no armor, fragile and ohh yeah D3 shots so you don't even know if your going to have enough dakka to do anything.
3: Green tide is a gimmick list which is easily beatable using almost any list. If you attack it from two sides the tide spends the rest of the game consolidating into two separate combats and the only scary part about it is the nob with Pks in it. a NEKKID Green tide costs around 650pts, that has ZERO Pks in it. An Equipped Green tide costs around 1k-1.2k Not much wiggle room left over for other options that can do stuff.
Not true. Orks have a solid LoW can do armor spam to an extent. Certain armies have issues dealing with the amount of wounds on the table, although many of the top tier armies don't. Orks also have the green tide which is semi-viable, Chaos has nothing that doesn't involve allying in a stronger dex and spamming psykers.
1: What solid LoW? Ghaz? he sucks balls and is only worth his points when you invest 1100pts to give him a 2++. Or are you talking about a Stompa? Which I believe is something like 200-250pts over priced for what little it does. Its a super heavy and is absurdly expensive (770pts).
Specifically, the custom stompa. I should have made it clear.
It's way above anything the CSM get. Show me a CSM choice that's better than the Custom Stompa.
When you give it dakka its closer to 165pts and is only effective at Range 24 or less. It is an AV 14/12/10 Open topped vehicle that loses its benefit of good front armor because it completely lacks range.
You need to compare this to the CSM, which you fail to do, instead of making vacuum statements.
Compare the BW to the Landraider. Naked, I can fit two of them for the cost of one Raider. If you buy the bells and whistles and troops for both, it's pretty close to 2 BW to 1 Landraider. It's a much better delivery system being cheaper, and can fire more guns from the troops. It's significantly better than what CSM have and, best of all, can be spammed since it's cheapish if it's naked with a solid front AV. You can make a wall of armor that can be podded, but is difficult to flank.
It still falls flat against the top codexes of course, but it's still better than anything the CSM have access to. Unless you are suggesting land raiders are better than BW?
We have trukkz? but they have almost zero dakka and tend to explode frequently, we have 4 different flyers, all of them are trash though So what vehicle spam are you talking about?
The spam is BW, Dreads, Flyers, and trukks. It's doable for orks to put a lot of HP on the table that is meaningful and must be dealt with, while CSM can't say the same. No one is afraid of rhinos, just like trukks, but no one is afraid of 2 PGs in the rhino either. It's too little damage for a nearly 200 point package. A trukk with boys has a PC wielding Nob in there that can charge, tying a squad up, and deliver a decent amount of high strength attacks. Many squads in this game are god awful at CC and more expensive than a small squad of orks.
Orks big problem with Trukk units is they fail against the competitive armies that have split fire, MSU, or have CC units that laugh at Orks. CSM also fail against those units for the same reasons. But, at least Trukks can threaten an IG line, or BA line. A CSM squad, at best, pops out and double taps plasma and eats a charge or rapid fire. It's much less effective.
Again, no HP spam list will work well against the top tier dexes. But you'll find a lot of the lower tier dexes that still use lascannon equivalents struggle to get through all that meat. Orks have the option to use that strategy, CSM don't. They don't have any unit outside of DP that says "DEAL WITH ME", and DP are very fragile for the points.
Yeah CSM has a problem with anti-tank but so do Orks. our most effective anti-tank is Lootas, expensive, no armor, fragile and ohh yeah D3 shots so you don't even know if your going to have enough dakka to do anything.
Lootas are, again, much better than Havoks. They are much better than oblits against most opponents as well.
Orks have, arguably, about the same anti-tank as CSM do. You guys use claws mostly, on bikes or other fast things (I see lootas targetting MCs more often tbh, or popping transports), and we use meltas on various platforms. Both of these aren't very effective, since you can't expect to target back line tanks until turn 3. The melta's aren't that...great I would say, compared to the claws, but its close.
But lootas are better long range firepower than anything we get. Please, point to the unit CSM get that are better.
3: Green tide is a gimmick list which is easily beatable using almost any list. If you attack it from two sides the tide spends the rest of the game consolidating into two separate combats and the only scary part about it is the nob with Pks in it. a NEKKID Green tide costs around 650pts, that has ZERO Pks in it. An Equipped Green tide costs around 1k-1.2k Not much wiggle room left over for other options that can do stuff.
And what do CSM have that's better? A CSM list will struggle against the Tide, it doesn't have enough offensive firepower to get through all that meat.
Quite frankly, throughout the entire discussion, you failed to address the main point. No one is arguing that orks are bad You are arguing that they are worse than CSM. Which you have failed to do, in every point you bring up.
Please point out how the CSM have better AV spam, Anti-tank, Formations, something equivalent to the custom stompa, better melee, better shooting, absorbing shots, speed, etc etc. Because, from someone who owns both, it seems they are either equal or CSM are worse off in every category.
Specifically, the custom stompa. I should have made it clear.
It's way above anything the CSM get. Show me a CSM choice that's better than the Custom Stompa.
This is forgeworld, not Codex Orks. Its also not that good, it is more of a surprise option at best.
Not true. Trukks are very cheap and can be counted as spam, much in the same way that Rhinos can be. Your dreads are better than ours as well.
So because we can spam a cheap transport, just like SM and CSM players we are better then CSM? Trukkz are AV10 and die to bolter fire, and have a 1/6 chance to explode to non AP1-2 weapons. Against AP1 its a 50/50 chance to explode, and with Orks, when a vehicle explodes it usually kills half the unit inside.
Our dreads are better?
Deff Dread is 80 points and a Hellbrute is 100. Hellbrute has a Multi Melta compared to the Deff Dreads 2 big shootas. Hellbrute has BS4 to the Deff Dreadz BS2, Hellbrute is S6 to Deff Dreadz S5 (not as important except when weapons are destroyed), Hellbrute has better initiative and 1 more attack in CC then the Deff Dread. So you get all that for 20pts. I would say they are about the same, garbage.
Unless your comparing Hellbrutes to Killa Kanz, 50pt walkers with leadership issues.
The spam is BW, Dreads, Flyers, and trukks. It's doable for orks to put a lot of HP on the table that is meaningful and must be dealt with, while CSM can't say the same. No one is afraid of rhinos, just like trukks, but no one is afraid of 2 PGs in the rhino either. It's too little damage for a nearly 200 point package. A trukk with boys has a PC wielding Nob in there that can charge, tying a squad up, and deliver a decent amount of high strength attacks. Many squads in this game are god awful at CC and more expensive than a small squad of orks.
BWs are expensive OT Transports that lack guns for 110pts. Yes they are roughly 1/2 the cost of a landraider, but the raider is more survivable and comes standard with 2 TL lascannons and a TL heavy bolter, not great but still not bad. When a BW transport is upgraded it usually costs around 165pts (20pts for rokkitz/Big Shootas, 30pts for killkannon and 5 for Ram) Even with all that dakka it is still not nearly as good as the Land Raider, so again I would say its close enough to a draw not to matter.
Dreads? ALL Ork walkers are trash, Killa Kanz, Deff Dreadz, Mork/Gork and Stompa, utter trash.
Flyers? Expensive AV10/10/10 flyers which all lack Dakka. The best of the lot is generally considered to be the Dakkajet which puts out piss poor dakka compared to a lot of other options. Especially when you factor in that this takes up a FA slot that is needed for good units like Biker boyz.
Trukkz are just 35pt death traps half the time.
A Trukk with boyz has a PK nob in it, true, but a Rhino with CSM in it has a Sergeant with a PF as well, he might not have as many attacks but its the same principle, furthermore hes wearing 3+ armor against my T-Shirt. So again, I would say its about the same.
Lootas are, again, much better than Havoks. They are much better than oblits against most opponents as well.
Orks have, arguably, about the same anti-tank as CSM do. You guys use claws mostly, on bikes or other fast things (I see lootas targetting MCs more often tbh, or popping transports), and we use meltas on various platforms. Both of these aren't very effective, since you can't expect to target back line tanks until turn 3. The melta's aren't that...great I would say, compared to the claws, but its close.
But lootas are better long range firepower than anything we get. Please, point to the unit CSM get that are better.
A loota is a 14pt model with a S7 AP4 48range D3 heavy weapon. A Havoc is a 28pt model with a Range 48 S8 AP3 missile launcher. That Havoc has 3+ armor and most importantly LD9. Those lootas have a 6+ save and LD7.
In other words when someone looks in the general direction of my lootas they die, test for LD and then run off the table. Your Havocs might be a lot more expensive but at least they have the chance of sustaining casualties and sticking in the fight.
Oblits? basically centurions without the good stuff. I won't argue this one nearly as much except to say that getting to choose a random weapon every turn would be beneficial frequently. On the other hand they are WAY to expensive.
Lootas biggest problem is that with D3 shots they tend to suck and with LD7 they run away a lot. On average your rolling 2 shots, with 10 lootas thats 20 shots and 6-7 hits. At S7 thats not bad, but compared to a lot of other units that isn't that great.
And what do CSM have that's better? A CSM list will struggle against the Tide, it doesn't have enough offensive firepower to get through all that meat.
I literally told you how to beat a green tide with almost any list. tactical marines can do it with 2 squads. Attack from different sides of the tide and the ork player spends the next 2-3 turns consolidating into CC. Yeah, you won't kill the tide but you just tied up the majority of my forces for 2-3 turns without costing yourself to much.
Quite frankly, throughout the entire discussion, you failed to address the main point. No one is arguing that orks are bad
You are arguing that they are worse than CSM. Which you have failed to do, in every point you bring up.
I am sorry you feel that way, I have pointed out how I think Orks are worse off then CSM but if not please look up, they are about the same but I think that CSM has better options overall.
Please point out how the CSM have better AV spam, Anti-tank, Formations, something equivalent to the custom stompa, better melee, better shooting, absorbing shots, speed, etc etc. Because, from someone who owns both, it seems they are either equal or CSM are worse off in every category.
Rhino's are about the same as trukkz, Preds make BWs looks silly in terms of dakka, in terms of Anti-Tank, you have melta weapons something I really don't have, my most reliable way of killing AV13-14 is with Power Klaws.
Formations? none of the Ork Formations are worth a damn, The supplement has some gimmicks but they are all gimpy at best. Our Decurion costs around 1,100pts minimum to make a usable deathstar.
In regards to equivalent to a Custom Stompa? Well when you equip it with guns and shields it costs about as much as a regular Stompa ( a bit less) and your in the same territory as a Warhound titan so.....there you go, take a Chaos Warhound titan. not to hard
Better Melee? Well pretty much any unit you have that has an invul save or At initiative AP2 something we lack almost completely except FW.
Better at Dakka? Depends on what your comparing, overall I would say CSM have a lot better dakka then Orks.
Absorbing Dakka? Orks don't absorb dakka, they die in droves, so they absorb it in the sense that they lose a ton of models.
Like I said they are WICKED Close, but I would say Orks are worse by a little bit.
Sorry, but Trukks dying to Bolters is a very gross exaggeration. It takes 27 BS4 shots minimum to HP out a Trukk. Anything above the Bolter is inflicting almost the same damage to a Rhino anyway.
Specifically, the custom stompa. I should have made it clear.
It's way above anything the CSM get. Show me a CSM choice that's better than the Custom Stompa.
This is forgeworld, not Codex Orks. Its also not that good, it is more of a surprise option at best.
Please point out the Chaos option that is superior. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you can't.
The custom stompa isn't great against top tier opponents who pop HP like it's nothing, but it's certainly better than anything Chaos has.
Not true. Trukks are very cheap and can be counted as spam, much in the same way that Rhinos can be. Your dreads are better than ours as well.
So because we can spam a cheap transport, just like SM and CSM players we are better then CSM? Trukkz are AV10 and die to bolter fire, and have a 1/6 chance to explode to non AP1-2 weapons. Against AP1 its a 50/50 chance to explode, and with Orks, when a vehicle explodes it usually kills half the unit inside.
Yes spamming cheap transports make you better at AV spam. I know, crazy concept that spamming something makes you better at spamming it. And trukk are superior to rhinos due to their delivery system and payload.
Trukkz take over a squad rapid firing to destroy it. If they are within rapid fire range, you can unload the boyz and clean up anyway. Trukkz also carry a superior payload to the terrible Rhino w/2PG. Notice that SM players don't take rhinos unless they are free, they'd rather pod or not take the unit at all.
You still didn't mention how the Rhino is superior.
Deff Dread is 80 points and a Hellbrute is 100. Hellbrute has a Multi Melta compared to the Deff Dreads 2 big shootas. Hellbrute has BS4 to the Deff Dreadz BS2, Hellbrute is S6 to Deff Dreadz S5 (not as important except when weapons are destroyed), Hellbrute has better initiative and 1 more attack in CC then the Deff Dread. So you get all that for 20pts. I would say they are about the same, garbage.
You neglected the best part of your dreads and the worst of ours to make your point.
Ork dreads get access to the KFF, which make them tough to destroy (Basically adds 1 extra HP to every dread).
Chaos dreads get the crazed special rule which makes them very unreliable.
So if they equal before, this pushes it towards the orks I would say.
Unless your comparing Hellbrutes to Killa Kanz, 50pt walkers with leadership issues.
If you wanted to spam, I'd lead towards more killa kanz since it's easy to get a lot of them with some trukk and BW back up. 50pt walkers are dirt cheap, that's about the cost of a wulfen with equipment. Throw the KFF in there and it takes some firepower to bring them down. Killa kanz also get superior range options. Honestly, the Kanz are better than the dreads, I'm surprised you're hinting otherwise.
Obviously grav or D weapons destroy them, but we are talking about weaker dexes.
So yeah, they would be the same in your original analysis, but you forget your biggest strength and our biggest weakness. Have to give this to the orks.
The spam is BW, Dreads, Flyers, and trukks. It's doable for orks to put a lot of HP on the table that is meaningful and must be dealt with, while CSM can't say the same. No one is afraid of rhinos, just like trukks, but no one is afraid of 2 PGs in the rhino either. It's too little damage for a nearly 200 point package. A trukk with boys has a PC wielding Nob in there that can charge, tying a squad up, and deliver a decent amount of high strength attacks. Many squads in this game are god awful at CC and more expensive than a small squad of orks.
BWs are expensive OT Transports that lack guns for 110pts. Yes they are roughly 1/2 the cost of a landraider, but the raider is more survivable and comes standard with 2 TL lascannons and a TL heavy bolter, not great but still not bad.
Hold on there. Are you claiming 2 TL lascannons for ~250 points is not bad? That's a massive exaggeration. A landraider has been terrible for a decade now, and we both know it. Not only that, but CSM get the worst landraider option. At least BW see some play.
When a BW transport is upgraded it usually costs around 165pts (20pts for rokkitz/Big Shootas, 30pts for killkannon and 5 for Ram) Even with all that dakka it is still not nearly as good as the Land Raider, so again I would say its close enough to a draw not to matter.
It pumps out more firepower than the landraider if you include the troops firing, all while costing nearly half the price. Orks have cheaper payloads as well compared to CSM for the most part. And they get access to the KFF, so it's actually tougher from the front.
If you think the BW is the same as the worst transport in the game, I'm not sure what to tell you. The LR is hot garbage for chaos. It can be safely ignored until it delivers its payload, and chaos doesn't have many scary payloads outside of zerkers with a leader.
Dreads? ALL Ork walkers are trash, Killa Kanz, Deff Dreadz, Mork/Gork and Stompa, utter trash.
Still better than the brute. Remember, this is about comparisons, not blanket statements where you ignore certain synergies that exist in your army because it helps your argument.
Flyers? Expensive AV10/10/10 flyers which all lack Dakka. The best of the lot is generally considered to be the Dakkajet which puts out piss poor dakka compared to a lot of other options. Especially when you factor in that this takes up a FA slot that is needed for good units like Biker boyz.
What are you talking about? The bombers have amazing dakka. The dakka jet can put out 9-12 Str 6 shots. The bomber has a Str 7 Ap 2 armorbane large blast that can target invisible troops. If anything the biggest problem with the flyers is they take up a FA slot and don't help out orks against armor. They are weaker than the heldrake, true, but better against flyers. The bomber is nasty.
A Trukk with boyz has a PK nob in it, true, but a Rhino with CSM in it has a Sergeant with a PF as well, he might not have as many attacks but its the same principle, furthermore hes wearing 3+ armor against my T-Shirt. So again, I would say its about the same.
Sure, if you want to ignore things like say....Point costs? The chaos marine squad is going to cost a lot more than the orks if it's taking 2 PG, Rhino, and leader with fist compared to a bunch of sluggas bringing one PK.
So roughly the same but Orks get a discount. Seems that orks are better.
Lootas are, again, much better than Havoks. They are much better than oblits against most opponents as well.
Orks have, arguably, about the same anti-tank as CSM do. You guys use claws mostly, on bikes or other fast things (I see lootas targetting MCs more often tbh, or popping transports), and we use meltas on various platforms. Both of these aren't very effective, since you can't expect to target back line tanks until turn 3. The melta's aren't that...great I would say, compared to the claws, but its close.
But lootas are better long range firepower than anything we get. Please, point to the unit CSM get that are better.
A loota is a 14pt model with a S7 AP4 48range D3 heavy weapon. A Havoc is a 28pt model with a Range 48 S8 AP3 missile launcher. That Havoc has 3+ armor and most importantly LD9. Those lootas have a 6+ save and LD7.
So, for the same cost of a havoc, a loota gets 2d3 S 7 shots? So for one Str 8 Ap 3 shot, you get on average 4 Str 7 shots?
Plus, lootas tend to pick a spot in cover and hide in the back. Weapons with that kind of range, outside of scat lasers, tend to ignore armor anyway, and we are both relying on cover saves.
Lootas are better than Havoks. If they were costed the same, I'd give it slightly to Havoks but it would be close. They aren't of course.
In other words when someone looks in the general direction of my lootas they die, test for LD and then run off the table. Your Havocs might be a lot more expensive but at least they have the chance of sustaining casualties and sticking in the fight.
A lot more expensive? It's double the points for less shots. It takes 4 Havoks to pop most Av 11 transports, sometimes 5. It takes 3-4 lootas to do the same, and you've spent a fraction of the points!
Oblits? basically centurions without the good stuff. I won't argue this one nearly as much except to say that getting to choose a random weapon every turn would be beneficial frequently. On the other hand they are WAY to expensive.
Lootas biggest problem is that with D3 shots they tend to suck and with LD7 they run away a lot. On average your rolling 2 shots, with 10 lootas thats 20 shots and 6-7 hits. At S7 thats not bad, but compared to a lot of other units that isn't that great.
We aren't comparing to a lot of units, we are comparing to CSM.
So for 140 points, you get 20 shots at and 6-7 hits. Good odds to pop a transport.
For 140 points of havoks, I get 5 shots and 3 hits. Most likely won't pop a transport.
Yeah, obviously havoks are better what was I thinking?
And what do CSM have that's better? A CSM list will struggle against the Tide, it doesn't have enough offensive firepower to get through all that meat.
I literally told you how to beat a green tide with almost any list. tactical marines can do it with 2 squads. Attack from different sides of the tide and the ork player spends the next 2-3 turns consolidating into CC. Yeah, you won't kill the tide but you just tied up the majority of my forces for 2-3 turns without costing yourself to much.
Quite frankly, throughout the entire discussion, you failed to address the main point. No one is arguing that orks are bad
You are arguing that they are worse than CSM. Which you have failed to do, in every point you bring up.
I am sorry you feel that way, I have pointed out how I think Orks are worse off then CSM but if not please look up, they are about the same but I think that CSM has better options overall.
You rant that Orks are terrible, but its extremely rare for you to say "This is worse than the CSM option in the same role" in your previous post. You aren't comparing units side by side, just mentioning what Orks get like I'm unaware.
Please point out how the CSM have better AV spam, Anti-tank, Formations, something equivalent to the custom stompa, better melee, better shooting, absorbing shots, speed, etc etc. Because, from someone who owns both, it seems they are either equal or CSM are worse off in every category.
Rhino's are about the same as trukkz,
No. Trukkz are weaker to bolters, although it still takes a 3 squads at max range to down one, but being able to deliver something to CC is something any CSM commander would kill for. It's our biggest complaint as a dex. Trukkz are much better.
Please point out how a rhino + squad is equal to a trukk mob. In toughness, sure, but 40k is all about killing.
Fair. Preds are one of our better options, but the BW isn't about dakka. We can compare 3-4 Killa Kanz to the Pred, since it's the closest in role. The Pred is arguably equal in toughness between a KFF and all the extra HP, and the pred is better against armored targets (though it'll take 2 rounds to pop a 35 point rhino so...). The Killa kanz meanwhile are dropping 6-8 blast templates a turn and destroying infantry. Its hard to say who's better.
in terms of Anti-Tank, you have melta weapons something I really don't have, my most reliable way of killing AV13-14 is with Power Klaws.
Melta weapons get one shot and have to be delivered, and we lack delivery methods. They are much better in eldar (Serpents and Dragons) and SM (Drop pods). With us, they don't do anything until turn 3 or 4, and that's more than half the game. It's why you never see meltas in a CSM force outside of termiecide.
PKs have a similar problem, but at least strike rear armor and a single squad has a good chance to pop a transport. Not so for 3 meltas...one is going to miss.
Formations? none of the Ork Formations are worth a damn, The supplement has some gimmicks but they are all gimpy at best. Our Decurion costs around 1,100pts minimum to make a usable deathstar.
Same with Chaos, and I have seen the tide used to good effect.
In regards to equivalent to a Custom Stompa? Well when you equip it with guns and shields it costs about as much as a regular Stompa ( a bit less) and your in the same territory as a Warhound titan so.....there you go, take a Chaos Warhound titan. not to hard
It costs quite a bit less than a regular stompa. You could build a custom stompa to be a regular stompa (though why?) and it'll come out less. It's not in the same territory as a Warhound titan either.
I'm going to ask that you include synergies (the KFF is amazing), point costs (Saying Rhino squad=Trukk mob but neglecting points), and be a little more detailed than "This is crap". It IS crap, both of the dexes are crap. It's a matter of which is worse.
Better at Dakka? Depends on what your comparing, overall I would say CSM have a lot better dakka then Orks.
Huh, that's weird. When we compared our shootiest units (Lootas vs Havoks, Killa Kanz versus Preds/Brutes, Flyers) it certainly seemed that Orks were pumped out a much much higher volume of fire in every single category. Like...literally every category.
How strange.
Absorbing Dakka? Orks don't absorb dakka, they die in droves, so they absorb it in the sense that they lose a ton of models.
Yes, they are a horde army. That's why we bring in points to the conversation.
So for roughly double the points, orks are relying on a 5+ cover (either from the KFF or an actual cover save) while marines are relying on a 3+ save or a similar cover save.
This means against weapons that don't ignore 3+ armor, Orks and Marines lose points at the same rate (twice as many saves for twice as many points).
Against weapons that ignore cover, but not armor, Orks lose points at a much faster rate.
Against weapons that ignore both, Orks lose points at a much slower rate.
Against weapons that ignore armor, Orks lose points at a much slower rate.
I would say the vast majority of weapons, outside of marker lights, fall in the 1st and 4th category, where orks are either tied or advantaged. Obviously if an ork squad is outside of cover, they are easy pickings, but there isn't a reason for orks to be outside of the KFF or cover if they are on foot. Much like guard, they benefit quite a bit from cover in all situations, so there is never a good reason to step outside of it, unless you'll reach CC. And Orks can be very dangerous in CC if a deathstar isn't involved.
A MEQ just isn't that tough in this meta. A bolter will do 4/18 wounds to an ork in cover. So it takes 2 marines in rapid fire range to down 1 ork. 28 points to kill 1 6-7 point model. Outside of cover its a lot worse, 2/6, so every 3 shots downs an ork (though that's still 42 points at range and 21 points up close...). To compare, a MEQ is 2/18, so it takes twice as many shots compared to cover, or 3x as many if the orks don't have cover (the only time marines are tougher).
But what about PGs, Str D, and Grav?
20/54 inside cover, 10/18 outside cover. A PG if the marines are outside cover, will kill 1 Marine or 1 ork per rapid fire. Inside cover, it's more like 2 PGs will down 1.8 orks or Marines. What would you rather lose?
Aki its hard to debate you on these points, not because your right, but because you make up scenarios in each situation that makes the orks seem stronger and the Chaos units seem weaker.
Fair. Preds are one of our better options, but the BW isn't about dakka. We can compare 3-4 Killa Kanz to the Pred, since it's the closest in role. The Pred is arguably equal in toughness between a KFF and all the extra HP, and the pred is better against armored targets (though it'll take 2 rounds to pop a 35 point rhino so...). The Killa kanz meanwhile are dropping 6-8 blast templates a turn and destroying infantry. Its hard to say who's better.
So 3-4 Killa Kanz at 150-200pts (165-220 with Grotzookas) with an 85pt HQ choice (naked) are arguably as tough as a 140pt (lascannon sponsons and TL lascannon Gun) Predator.
But of course those Killa Kanz are dropping those 6-8 blast templates a turn, destroying infantry, leaving out the fact that those 6-8 blasts are S6 AP5, Range 18 and are small blast templates not large. So those 3-4 killa kanz, escorted by a Big Mek with a KFF have to WALK up the field 6inches in movement and maybe 6 in shooting phase and get to within 18inches of their target. All the while that predator your saying is just as good/tough as those killa Kanz is shooting 2 regular and 1 TL S9 AP2 shots at whatever its targeting.
Or conversely you could just equip your Preds with the bare minimum, add a havoc launcher and vehicle spam. For 37pts more then a Killa Kan you can shoot 2 S7 shots at 48 inches and a S5 small blast at 48 inches. In other words your putting out dakka 2-3 turns before my Kanz are even in range.
So again, I would love to debate you but every time I have tried you keep putting out specific situations or scenarios that favor orks over Chaos.
SemperMortis wrote: Aki its hard to debate you on these points, not because your right, but because you make up scenarios in each situation that makes the orks seem stronger and the Chaos units seem weaker.
I'm not making up scenarios, I'm literally comparing units for their intended purpose. I'm even including, in the toughness discussion, every type of firepower their likely to come across. I hardly see how that's made up.
It's certainly a step above "This is trash, this is trash, this is trash" For the lootas and raider, there isn't even a scenario. I just compared the firepower and looked at how much damage they cause. Unless you think popping transports is a made up scenario?
Unless you're implying that cover saves are weird. I'm not sure what to say to that, my stationary troops always deploy in cover. Even in my havoks. Too many long range guns ignore armor.
Fair. Preds are one of our better options, but the BW isn't about dakka. We can compare 3-4 Killa Kanz to the Pred, since it's the closest in role. The Pred is arguably equal in toughness between a KFF and all the extra HP, and the pred is better against armored targets (though it'll take 2 rounds to pop a 35 point rhino so...). The Killa kanz meanwhile are dropping 6-8 blast templates a turn and destroying infantry. Its hard to say who's better.
So 3-4 Killa Kanz at 150-200pts (165-220 with Grotzookas) with an 85pt HQ choice (naked) are arguably as tough as a 140pt (lascannon sponsons and TL lascannon Gun) Predator.
You could make an argument for not including the HQ, though the KFF effects the entire army in a bubble, and it seems to be an auto include for most orks since not having saves is their biggest weakness.
But yes, 3 Killa Kanz are arguably as tough as the predator. They have double the HP and a save, but a weaker front armor and start to lose firepower faster. If shot from the rear, from say a drop pod, the predator dies much quicker.
Obviously its army dependent. Against Eldar, the predator is tougher since scat bikes can't target the front. Against SM, the Kanz are tougher, since a drop pod would rather take out one 150 target then 1 50 point target, but they are likely to cause 3-4 HP either way (not inclduing the save) to rear armor.
But of course those Killa Kanz are dropping those 6-8 blast templates a turn, destroying infantry, leaving out the fact that those 6-8 blasts are S6 AP5, Range 18 and are small blast templates not large.
Sure, they are small blasts. Neither army, as far as I'm aware, has access to a large blast weapon that has decent range (maybe the defiler, but its incredibly overcosted).
Given the Orks awful BS, I'm happy with blast templates. Getting 1-2 hits per template is more hits than I usually get with an ork weapon. It's still 6-12 Str 6 hits.
Do you think The kanz cause less damage then the predator with the TL Lascannon and 2 side LCs that you brought up? Against tanks, sure.
However, a predator will rarely knock a rhino out in one turn. One shot will miss, one '1' will be rolled, a cover save...it's not likely to cause 3 HP with only 3 shots. Taking two turns to destroy a 35 point model is awful when you're that expensive.
Against any infantry, it'll kill 2 guys. Maybe less dependent on cover, but it roughly rounds to two. Against MCs it varies on their saves (Invul, Fnp, Cover), so 1-2.
So, against most targets, the Predator causes 1-2 wounds, dependent on cover. I'm sorry if you feel this is "impossible" rather than based on averages.
The Killa kanz cause between 6-12 hits with their blast templates. Against vehicles, the Predator wins. Not that the predator is any good at it, but its a victory for the predator.
Against Troops, MEQ suffer 5/18 wounds per hit. So, 30/18 on the low end, 60/18 on the high end.
Against Eldar or 4+ save troops, 5/12 wounds per hit, so 30/12 or 60/12.
Against MEQ, or 5+ save troops (so cover basically), 10/18 wounds per hit, so 60/18 t o120/18 on the high end.
So against troops, it's equal to the predator on the low end, and much better on the high end.
So those 3-4 killa kanz, escorted by a Big Mek with a KFF have to WALK up the field 6inches in movement and maybe 6 in shooting phase and get to within 18inches of their target. All the while that predator your saying is just as good/tough as those killa Kanz is shooting 2 regular and 1 TL S9 AP2 shots at whatever its targeting.
I don't really consider this a weakness for orks, their whole army wants to walk up the field and the KFF is an auto include.
3 lascannon shots, so ~50 points per cannon, isn't very good. I wouldn't pay for 40 points per cannon. Havoks are considered very over priced and their ratios are much better than the pred.
Or conversely you could just equip your Preds with the bare minimum, add a havoc launcher and vehicle spam. For 37pts more then a Killa Kan you can shoot 2 S7 shots at 48 inches and a S5 small blast at 48 inches. In other words your putting out dakka 2-3 turns before my Kanz are even in range.
Hmm, thats a decent amount of dakka. It does eat up all your heavies, and I'd rather take havoks who are still better for the points. I'd have to say that, with that set up, they are most likely equal in terms of firepower.
But let's not forget why I was originally suggesting the Kanz. AV spam. The orks can put Killa Kanz, Trukks, and BW under a KFF all loaded with melee troops and push it foward. It's a wall of HP in your face that demands your attention, unless you're a top tier dex with a strong melee unit, or it'll eat you alive. Now, strong armies don't care because bikes/necrons/SM/Tau have enough firepower or melee units to laugh this off, but the weaker dexes can't pump out that much HP damage.
The predator that you mentioned, for example, is likely causing 1 HP per turn. 1. In an army that has over 15 easy. Even if I took 3 units of those predators, I couldn't crack all that armor. De are in a similar tough spot, as are nids. IG are better off, but still struggle. Sisters will struggle with that many targets as well, since they really want to see 3 HP targets in the av 12 area. If I took 3 LC preds, I'm causing 1-2 AV per turn. I'm still not cracking all that armor, especially the BW, and I'm not flanking or hitting the rear. The orks will reach my front line in decent numbers, and I've invested 25% of my army in lascannon preds against orks!
Chaos can't AV spam. Our Rhinos don't carry scary payloads because they can't charge, we don't get razor backs, and our predator doesn't want to be in your face. The best we have is 3 vindicators and a lot of rhinos. But once you eliminate the 3 vindicators, we are pretty much dead in the water, with most armies being able to outshoot us. If we had trukks, we'd be a lot better off.
So again, I would love to debate you but every time I have tried you keep putting out specific situations or scenarios that favor orks over Chaos.
I suppose math has an Ork bias I really don't know what you're talking about, I literally compare the every type of firepower or target you are likely to see. I don't mix up that much, no wulfen for example, because I'd be here all day. But comparing to transports, tanks, MEQ and GEQ is standard for these discussions.
You could make an argument for not including the HQ, though the KFF effects the entire army in a bubble, and it seems to be an auto include for most orks since not having saves is their biggest weakness.
But yes, 3 Killa Kanz are arguably as tough as the predator. They have double the HP and a save, but a weaker front armor and start to lose firepower faster. If shot from the rear, from say a drop pod, the predator dies much quicker.
Obviously its army dependent. Against Eldar, the predator is tougher since scat bikes can't target the front. Against SM, the Kanz are tougher, since a drop pod would rather take out one 150 target then 1 50 point target, but they are likely to cause 3-4 HP either way (not inclduing the save) to rear armor.
I don't really consider this a weakness for orks, their whole army wants to walk up the field and the KFF is an auto include.
3 lascannon shots, so ~50 points per cannon, isn't very good. I wouldn't pay for 40 points per cannon. Havoks are considered very over priced and their ratios are much better than the pred.
Do you understand how a KFF functions? This is an honest question because from the way your talking about it I don't think you do. a KFF is a 5++ bubble, it is 6 inches in any direction from the model carrying it, if you put the model in a vehicle to give it some semblance of protection you limit the KFF to just THAT vehicle. So for a KFF to provide a bubble for the entire army you would need at least 3 of them, for them to keep up with the vehicle spam your talking about you would need to put the Big Mek on a bike, and to keep the Big Mek alive you would need to provide him with an escort, probably a biker squad since they can keep up with him. So for 3 Big Mekz to have KFFs on bikes with a minimum squad of Ork Warbikers as an escort (no nob no pk) would cost 164pts PER Mek or for all 3 of them 492pts.
But let's not forget why I was originally suggesting the Kanz. AV spam. The orks can put Killa Kanz, Trukks, and BW under a KFF all loaded with melee troops and push it foward. It's a wall of HP in your face that demands your attention, unless you're a top tier dex with a strong melee unit, or it'll eat you alive. Now, strong armies don't care because bikes/necrons/SM/Tau have enough firepower or melee units to laugh this off, but the weaker dexes can't pump out that much HP damage.
So 1 Unit of Kanz (6 strong) with Grotzookas since you like them is 330pts
3 Units of Trukkz filled with Boyz with a Nob/PK = 426pts
3 Big Mekz on bikes with KFFs with a small squad to escort = 492pts
2 BWs filled with boyz with a nob/pk and armed with 4 big shootaz/Rokkitz and a Cannon = 624
So thats 12 HPs from the Kanz, 9 HPs from the Trukkz and 8 HPs from the Battle Wagonz. All for the measly price of 1872pts. Even if you reduce the boyz by a couple to reduce that to 1850pts your left with a VERY useless force.
For starters those Kanz are slowing down the entire army because they move so slow, the Bikers are useless because they don't have a PK in them, and your using them solely for that KFF for your vehicles and ohh yeah your vehicles? 5 open topped transports, against those expensive Las Preds we were talking about? 2 hits = 2 pens against trukkz, with a 1/3rd chance to save it with that 5++ KFF save, so probably not going to happen, those pens are +2 on the chart because of Open topped and AP2 meaning that you have a 50/50 chance to immobilize or destroy a trukk EACH turn.
realistically the only good threat in that list is the Battlewagonz because if you can manage to survive one round of shooting and rush the SOB forward you can usually get a turn 2 assault.
Chaos can't AV spam. Our Rhinos don't carry scary payloads because they can't charge, we don't get razor backs, and our predator doesn't want to be in your face. The best we have is 3 vindicators and a lot of rhinos. But once you eliminate the 3 vindicators, we are pretty much dead in the water, with most armies being able to outshoot us. If we had trukks, we'd be a lot better off.
Orks can.
Well for 1870ish points I can make the following list that has 10 Havoc launcher armed Rhinos for a total of 10 S5 small blasts at Range 48, and 19 Missile Launchers.
Sorcerer
3x Havocs with rhino and missile launchers
3x Chosen with rhino and 1 missile launcher
4x CSMs with Rhino and 1 missile launcher.
So for the same points as the ork player your taking a grand total of 30 HPs to the ork players 29, ALL of your good weapons are Range 48 so your probably going to be in range from the start of the game, where as the Ork player is going to be out of range of his grotzookas for almost the entire game. Yeah those Rhino's aren't going to stand up to any heavy weapons but at 47pts they are cheaper then my Kanz and have better weapons. Ohh and did I mention that against those 80 boyz that the ork player is fielding with their scary 6+ armor you have 40 CSMs 15 Chosen and 15 Havocs, or in other words 70 Power armor models.
So explain to me again how you as a CSM player can't spam anything? I am not saying this list is good against those top tier codex's but I am pointing out that you can spam 3+ models with HP spam almost as well as I can spam 6+ models and HP spam.
Don't worry, we'll get a 7E codex about a month before 8E drops. The new book will have doubled the random tables for double the fluffliness, and we will have another dinobot, based off the dinobot kits we already have!
Update the model line you say? Why? You can just spam plasmaguns and win easily already. If you want other stuff, just buy a box of Space Marines already, jeez.
Selym wrote: I like the number of people that have voted Tau and Eldar.
Shirley, you jest?
Why only mention the first and fourth most powerful armies? I can't believe people are convinced Space Marines could possibly be the weakest! Nor Dark Angels, Space Wolves etc.
I must admit still being rather puzzled by Codex power tiers. I mean, I play Space Marines and Necrons and I repeatedly lose to Chaos Space Marines. It seems to me that player skill and luck play a big factor.
It's anecdotal but I have a hard time reconciling what I read online with actual games I witness. It's not even me, I've seen this same Chaos player beat a Necron Decurion just last week at my gaming store.
Please don't. Rule #1 is a thing even if you do not like a playerbase.
Think of the ULTRAMARINES!
How can we play fluffily if they keep getting borked by lasguns?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gree wrote: I must admit still being rather puzzled by Codex power tiers. I mean, I play Space Marines and Necrons and I repeatedly lose to Chaos Space Marines. It seems to me that player skill and luck play a big factor.
It's anecdotal but I have a hard time reconciling what I read online with actual games I witness. It's not even me, I've seen this same Chaos player beat a Necron Decurion just last week at my gaming store.
Please don't. Rule #1 is a thing even if you do not like a playerbase.
Think of the ULTRAMARINES!
How can we play fluffily if they keep getting borked by lasguns?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gree wrote: I must admit still being rather puzzled by Codex power tiers. I mean, I play Space Marines and Necrons and I repeatedly lose to Chaos Space Marines. It seems to me that player skill and luck play a big factor.
It's anecdotal but I have a hard time reconciling what I read online with actual games I witness. It's not even me, I've seen this same Chaos player beat a Necron Decurion just last week at my gaming store.
What did the necrons use, and what did Chaos use?
Dude, it's a game. Show a little tact and decency.
Wanting a better written Space Marine codex isn't a bad thing. Tactical Marines are still garbage without you buying 6 more Rhinos and even then the build for them is Centurion Star.
Selym wrote: What did the necrons use, and what did Chaos use?
IIRC the Necron player had a Decurion with some Canoptek Wraiths and some Monoliths. I was playing another game at the time, but that's what I remember, especially the part where he was complaining about losing an entire unit of Canoptek Wraiths to shooting. I fought the Chaos player earlier with my Necrons and I think he was still using the same list of:
Terminator Sorcerer
Chaos Lord with Daemonheart on Bike
2 Termicide Units
Noise Marines
Havocs with Missile Launchers
2 units of Raptors
1 unit of Cultists
1 Heldrake
Martel732 wrote: Necrons should roll that list easily. Sometimes things go wrong.
That's true. At least for me though, I have a pretty consistent loss record against his Chaos Marines. I've tried everything from Gravstars to Librarius Conclaves and I just can't seem to beat his Chaos Marines. I've played a ton of games with him and I've only ever won twice against him. I'm not sure if he's really that good a player or is it something with me.
Selym wrote: How dare armies like IG get both cheap units AND really powerful ap3 spam?
And how DARE they bring more than two tanks, in fact they should be limited to one tank and no more than one Special Weapon per every four sections! And Lasguns are OP - they need to be S2 with a 12" range!
Selym wrote: What did the necrons use, and what did Chaos use?
IIRC the Necron player had a Decurion with some Canoptek Wraiths and some Monoliths. I was playing another game at the time, but that's what I remember, especially the part where he was complaining about losing an entire unit of Canoptek Wraiths to shooting. I fought the Chaos player earlier with my Necrons and I think he was still using the same list of:
Terminator Sorcerer
Chaos Lord with Daemonheart on Bike
2 Termicide Units
Noise Marines
Havocs with Missile Launchers
2 units of Raptors
1 unit of Cultists
1 Heldrake
Honestly that list is super bad. I'm not sure what it could possibly be on your end.
How can we play fluffily if they keep getting borked by lasguns?
master of ordinance wrote: And how DARE they bring more than two tanks, in fact they should be limited to one tank and no more than one Special Weapon per every four sections! And Lasguns are OP - they need to be S2 with a 12" range!
If you are not going to post anything meaningful, don't post.
Vaktathi wrote: The sum total of shooting in that CSM list should struggle to destroy a unit of Decurion Harvest Wraiths over the course of an entire game .
And yet it happened according to the Necron player.
In fact when I played him earlier I lost my entire unit of 5 Canoptek Wraiths to him in a single shooting phase. (Though I was not playing a Decurion) Enfeeble weakened them to T4 and a mass of shots from the Noise Marines, Raptors and the Oblits finished them off.
How can we play fluffily if they keep getting borked by lasguns?
master of ordinance wrote: And how DARE they bring more than two tanks, in fact they should be limited to one tank and no more than one Special Weapon per every four sections! And Lasguns are OP - they need to be S2 with a 12" range!
If you are not going to post anything meaningful, don't post.
We are just commenting on the general views from the playerbase of a certain army.
Gree wrote: I must admit still being rather puzzled by Codex power tiers. I mean, I play Space Marines and Necrons and I repeatedly lose to Chaos Space Marines. It seems to me that player skill and luck play a big factor.
It's anecdotal but I have a hard time reconciling what I read online with actual games I witness. It's not even me, I've seen this same Chaos player beat a Necron Decurion just last week at my gaming store.
They do. I mean I tabled IG/Death watch with my BA (first time playing them in like 7 or 8 months) last night. The player I was facing was arguably more skilled than I, with a better list than I. Dont get me wrong, i played it pretty well. However if you're playing against the cards and dice in addition to your opponent there's only so much one can do.
I don't know why some posters think just because their TFG runs a certain list all players are like that. It's kind of sad really because they've essentially had their beloved hobby turned into a reason to rip on people they've never even met.
How can we play fluffily if they keep getting borked by lasguns?
master of ordinance wrote: And how DARE they bring more than two tanks, in fact they should be limited to one tank and no more than one Special Weapon per every four sections! And Lasguns are OP - they need to be S2 with a 12" range!
If you are not going to post anything meaningful, don't post.
We are just commenting on the general views from the playerbase of a certain army.
You're missing the point. Respectful posts are respectful posts. A blanketed opinion based on a couple of buffoons at your LGS is neither informed nor respectful.
For example I don't rag on all IG players. Just the ones that wave their ignorance around like a flag.
I don't know why some posters think just because their TFG runs a certain list all players are like that. It's kind of sad really because they've essentially had their beloved hobby turned into a reason to rip on people they've never even met.
posting gak here is about the only fun you can get put of 40k these days, unless you can find someone who will try alternate rules.
However if you're playing against the cards and dice in addition to your opponent there's only so much one can do.
Something like that happened to me in another recent game with my Necrons.
My Lychguard with Overlord had just tanked the entire firepower of an Imperial Guard army, including 50 lasguns with Prescience, a Manticore, 3 Democharges, an Imperial Knight, and a multitude of heavy weapons with only 3 dead. The rest of the unit was prepared to charge into the massive Guard blob and essentially win me the game. They then failed their leadership test on LD 10. I re-rolled with my Warlord Trait and failed again. The Lychguard ran away and where shot to pieces in the Guard player's next turn.
I don't know why some posters think just because their TFG runs a certain list all players are like that. It's kind of sad really because they've essentially had their beloved hobby turned into a reason to rip on people they've never even met.
posting gak here is about the only fun you can get put of 40k these days, unless you can find someone who will try alternate rules.
No offense man, but that doesn't even remotely sound like a community problem. Plus, that's why places like 4chans table section and spikey bits forums are a thing.
I don't know why some posters think just because their TFG runs a certain list all players are like that. It's kind of sad really because they've essentially had their beloved hobby turned into a reason to rip on people they've never even met.
posting gak here is about the only fun you can get put of 40k these days, unless you can find someone who will try alternate rules.
No offense man, but that doesn't even remotely sound like a community problem. Plus, that's why places like 4chans table section and spikey bits forums are a thing.
Come back when you have been on the receiving end of a super friends WAAC mega formation combo power list.
Vaktathi wrote: The sum total of shooting in that CSM list should struggle to destroy a unit of Decurion Harvest Wraiths over the course of an entire game .
And yet it happened according to the Necron player.
In fact when I played him earlier I lost my entire unit of 5 Canoptek Wraiths to him in a single shooting phase. (Though I was not playing a Decurion) Enfeeble weakened them to T4 and a mass of shots from the Noise Marines, Raptors and the Oblits finished them off.
On average, assuming no Decurion bonus and Enfeeble having gone off, that'll require an average of 135 BS4 S4 shots to kill 5 Wraiths. That's probably the upper limit of the entire army's killing power at that point, if it's even able to.match that, so that's still quite a feat.
With Decurion bonus and no Enfeeble it's double that, 270 BS4 S4 shots.
I don't know why some posters think just because their TFG runs a certain list all players are like that. It's kind of sad really because they've essentially had their beloved hobby turned into a reason to rip on people they've never even met.
posting gak here is about the only fun you can get put of 40k these days, unless you can find someone who will try alternate rules.
No offense man, but that doesn't even remotely sound like a community problem. Plus, that's why places like 4chans table section and spikey bits forums are a thing.
Come back when you have been on the receiving end of a super friends WAAC mega formation combo power list.
Been there plenty of times. I don't have an axe to grind against Tau, Crons and AdMech players even of I absolutely think those armies are stupidly frustrating to play against when done WAAC.
I don't know why some posters think just because their TFG runs a certain list all players are like that. It's kind of sad really because they've essentially had their beloved hobby turned into a reason to rip on people they've never even met.
posting gak here is about the only fun you can get put of 40k these days, unless you can find someone who will try alternate rules.
No offense man, but that doesn't even remotely sound like a community problem. Plus, that's why places like 4chans table section and spikey bits forums are a thing.
Come back when you have been on the receiving end of a super friends WAAC mega formation combo power list.
Vaktathi wrote: On average, assuming no Decurion bonus and Enfeeble having gone off, that'll require an average of 135 BS4 S4 shots to kill 5 Wraiths. That's probably the upper limit of the entire army's killing power at that point, if it's even able to.match that, so that's still quite a feat.
With Decurion bonus and no Enfeeble it's double that, 270 BS4 S4 shots.
*shrugs* well that's more or less what happened. It's moments like that where I don't put any stock in Mathammer.
Although I must apologize as I remembered it was a shooting phase and an assault phase after that. 3 Wraiths got killed by shooting and another wound inflicted on one of the remaining Wraiths and the Oblits and the Raptors with the Chaos Lord charged them. The Raptors killed them before the Oblits could swing. Looking back that was pretty much the moment I lost the game, as he rushed towards my Warriors and Immortals while avoiding my Lychstar. He won by a fairly large margin in Objectives with First Blood and Linebreaker.
I don't know why some posters think just because their TFG runs a certain list all players are like that. It's kind of sad really because they've essentially had their beloved hobby turned into a reason to rip on people they've never even met.
posting gak here is about the only fun you can get put of 40k these days, unless you can find someone who will try alternate rules.
No offense man, but that doesn't even remotely sound like a community problem. Plus, that's why places like 4chans table section and spikey bits forums are a thing.
Come back when you have been on the receiving end of a super friends WAAC mega formation combo power list.
I have played IG artilleryspam back when I still was innocent enough to believe that the 20 man CSMVotlW lists GW encourages you to play were viable, as well as melee Chosen and the like.
I got tabled and he took no real losses.
Do you feel that makes me justified to insult you?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Selym wrote: posting gak here is about the only fun you can get put of 40k these days
'Posting gak' is also against the forum rules. Go to 4chan or something if you just want to vent.
Vaktathi wrote: The sum total of shooting in that CSM list should struggle to destroy a unit of Decurion Harvest Wraiths over the course of an entire game .
And yet it happened according to the Necron player.
In fact when I played him earlier I lost my entire unit of 5 Canoptek Wraiths to him in a single shooting phase. (Though I was not playing a Decurion) Enfeeble weakened them to T4 and a mass of shots from the Noise Marines, Raptors and the Oblits finished them off.
On average, assuming no Decurion bonus and Enfeeble having gone off, that'll require an average of 135 BS4 S4 shots to kill 5 Wraiths. That's probably the upper limit of the entire army's killing power at that point, if it's even able to.match that, so that's still quite a feat.
With Decurion bonus and no Enfeeble it's double that, 270 BS4 S4 shots.
I knew CSM was in a bad place, but that's just stunning.
*shrugs* well that's more or less what happened. It's moments like that where I don't put any stock in Mathammer.
Mathammer works out the statistical odds of something happening. It's incredibly unlikely to roll 20 D6's and come up with nothing but sixes, but ask around enough, and someone here has probably done it at least once due to the sheer number of dice we roll. But the fact that such results are possible does not mean you can rely on them being a thing - especially when the exact opposite result is just as likely.
In terms of game balance, if something's odds of occurring are less than 1/1000, you can count it as impossible.
Selym wrote: Mathammer works out the statistical odds of something happening. It's incredibly unlikely to roll 20 D6's and come up with nothing but sixes, but ask around enough, and someone here has probably done it at least once due to the sheer number of dice we roll. But the fact that such results are possible does not mean you can rely on them being a thing - especially when the exact opposite result is just as likely.
In terms of game balance, if something's odds of occurring are less than 1/1000, you can count it as impossible.
Of course I recognize my story is anecdotal and how that relates. That being said I still have no stock in Mathhammer, given my own experiences as a 40k player. I put more stock in player skill and luck than anything else.
I mean, according to everyone here, I should have curbstomped my Chaos opponent. Yet the exact opposite happened. I'm just trying to wrap my head around it.
We are just commenting on the general views from the playerbase of a certain army.
You do understand you're making a bad name for yourself in the process, right? And by logical extension of what you're doing, a bad name for Guard players as your comments will inevitably be associated with the army you play and mention often.
There are annoying players for every faction. Best not to paint them all with the broadest brush in your arsenal.
We are just commenting on the general views from the playerbase of a certain army.
You do understand you're making a bad name for yourself in the process, right? And by logical extension of what you're doing, a bad name for Guard players as your comments will inevitably be associated with the army you play and mention often.
There are annoying players for every faction. Best not to paint them all with the broadest brush in your arsenal.
And yet I have yet to personally meet anyone who primarily uses C:SM that wasn't a dick about it.
Selym wrote: Mathammer works out the statistical odds of something happening. It's incredibly unlikely to roll 20 D6's and come up with nothing but sixes, but ask around enough, and someone here has probably done it at least once due to the sheer number of dice we roll. But the fact that such results are possible does not mean you can rely on them being a thing - especially when the exact opposite result is just as likely.
In terms of game balance, if something's odds of occurring are less than 1/1000, you can count it as impossible.
Of course I recognize my story is anecdotal and how that relates. That being said I still have no stock in Mathhammer, given my own experiences as a 40k player. I put more stock in player skill and luck than anything else.
I mean, according to everyone here, I should have curbstomped my Chaos opponent. Yet the exact opposite happened. I'm just trying to wrap my head around it.
Mathhammer is absolutely correct, but there are statistical anomalies. The Wraith thing is quite a doozy, though.
Vaktathi wrote: On average, assuming no Decurion bonus and Enfeeble having gone off, that'll require an average of 135 BS4 S4 shots to kill 5 Wraiths. That's probably the upper limit of the entire army's killing power at that point, if it's even able to.match that, so that's still quite a feat.
With Decurion bonus and no Enfeeble it's double that, 270 BS4 S4 shots.
*shrugs* well that's more or less what happened. It's moments like that where I don't put any stock in Mathammer.
Mathhammer will give you an average, the most likely outcome from which to form a baseline to make decisions from, it wont ever predict exactly what *will* happen. It's possible for 5 basic Guardsmen to slay those 5 Wraiths in a single round of shooting, but the math tells you that you that you shouldn't expect that outcome.
Taking advantagr of the odds the mathammer gives you is what makes players good, its what informs decisionmaking, consciously or not.
Although I must apologize as I remembered it was a shooting phase and an assault phase after that. 3 Wraiths got killed by shooting and another wound inflicted on one of the remaining Wraiths and the Oblits and the Raptors with the Chaos Lord charged them. The Raptors killed them before the Oblits could swing. Looking back that was pretty much the moment I lost the game, as he rushed towards my Warriors and Immortals while avoiding my Lychstar. He won by a fairly large margin in Objectives with First Blood and Linebreaker.
that sounds much more plausible and I probably should have gathered that but even then thats a majority of the army being focused onto a single, non-optimized unit, and such killing power concentration onto such a small portion of an opponents army often has major drawbacks.
Vaktathi wrote: The sum total of shooting in that CSM list should struggle to destroy a unit of Decurion Harvest Wraiths over the course of an entire game .
And yet it happened according to the Necron player.
In fact when I played him earlier I lost my entire unit of 5 Canoptek Wraiths to him in a single shooting phase. (Though I was not playing a Decurion) Enfeeble weakened them to T4 and a mass of shots from the Noise Marines, Raptors and the Oblits finished them off.
On average, assuming no Decurion bonus and Enfeeble having gone off, that'll require an average of 135 BS4 S4 shots to kill 5 Wraiths. That's probably the upper limit of the entire army's killing power at that point, if it's even able to.match that, so that's still quite a feat.
With Decurion bonus and no Enfeeble it's double that, 270 BS4 S4 shots.
I knew CSM was in a bad place, but that's just stunning.
You just can't win a game like that.
I think this is a case of whoever wrote the Necron book was just a complete idiot when they *buffed* wraiths and introduced the new RP mechanic and Decurion more than CSM's being awful, however true the latter may be.
The Necron codex was the big shark jumping moment of 7E in my eyes. The power ramp up with that book was absurd.
Selym wrote: And yet I have yet to personally meet anyone who primarily uses C:SM that wasn't a dick about it.
I've met plenty who were perfectly normal, excellent opponents. While your personal experiences may paint C:SM as being dicks, posting on the internet and claiming all C:SM players are dicks does no good for anyone, especially peoples' opinions of you.
Vaktathi wrote: [Mathhammer will give you an average, the most likely outcome from which to form a baseline to make decisions from, it wont ever predict exactly what *will* happen. It's possible for 5 basic Guardsmen to slay those 5 Wraiths in a single round of shooting, but the math tells you that you that you shouldn't expect that outcome.
Taking advantagr of the odds the mathammer gives you is what makes players good, its what informs decisionmaking, consciously or not.
If people wish to rely on that, that's fine. I personally have no interest in it all.
that sounds much more plausible and I probably should have gathered that but even then thats a majority of the army being focused onto a single, non-optimized unit, and such killing power concentration onto such a small portion of an opponents army often has major drawbacks.
It's been three days since I played the game and my memory is a bit hazy.
The Wraiths where significantly ahead of the rest of my army with no support. That was a mistake in retrospect. Behind them a ways I had a unit of Immortals and Warriors behind an Aegis Line. On the other side of the board, I had a warrior blob and a Triarch Stalker that got blown up before it could do anything. He really could afford to kill the Wraiths because I could not deploy the rest of the army quickly enough to form an effective counter-attack.
Vaktathi wrote: [Mathhammer will give you an average, the most likely outcome from which to form a baseline to make decisions from, it wont ever predict exactly what *will* happen. It's possible for 5 basic Guardsmen to slay those 5 Wraiths in a single round of shooting, but the math tells you that you that you shouldn't expect that outcome.
Taking advantagr of the odds the mathammer gives you is what makes players good, its what informs decisionmaking, consciously or not.
If people wish to rely on that, that's fine. I personally have no interest in it all.
Well, you do it whether you realize it or not. For instance, you dump the battlecannon on the Tac Marines instead of the Terminators because it offers the greatest possible expected outcome. It's possible to kill that Terminator squad with the Battlecannon, but their 2+ save means it's unlikely, and you may be lucky to kill one, whereas with the Tac squad a total unit wipe is far more likely and a solid hit will generate 5 or 6 kills as a matter of course (which, combined, have a much greater value than the single Terminator you might otherwise expect to kill), hence you don't shoot the Terminators and send the ordnance at the Tac marines. Whether you consciously work out the math manually or not, you're always relying on the general principles. Likewise I know I probably don't need to dump all twenty meltagun shots from drop podding Sternguard into that Rhino to kill it barring a one in a billion unlucky dice rolls streak, one combat squad will probably do the trick, two if it's sporting a 4+ cover save, and I can position the other units to engage different targets for an overall more effective round of shooting.
Nobody is sitting there running the numbers and calculating out exactly how many casualties they're going to inflict with each salvo from every unit each and every turn, but those numbers will inform you as to what sort of resources will be required to accomplish a given task in the majority of instances.
It's been three days since I played the game and my memory is a bit hazy.
The Wraiths where significantly ahead of the rest of my army with no support. That was a mistake in retrospect. Behind them a ways I had a unit of Immortals and Warriors behind an Aegis Line. On the other side of the board, I had a warrior blob and a Triarch Stalker that got blown up before it could do anything. He really could afford to kill the Wraiths because I could not deploy the rest of the army quickly enough to form an effective counter-attack.
If one player makes a major error and it's seized upon by the other skillfully, of course things can be turned around. I can beat Mike Tyson in a fistfight if I catch him passed out drunk, however much he may pound me to mush in a fair fight.
However assuming equally skilled players with nobody making a major error that's capitalized upon (generally what most people are assuming in discussions like this), the CSM's are going to be at a massive disadvantage almost without exception.
I suppose I should repeat myself in this case. If people wish to rely on it, then that's fine. I personally have no interest in Mathhammer.
That is really all I have to say on the subject.
Vaktathi wrote: If one player makes a major error and it's seized upon by the other skillfully, of course things can be turned around. I can beat Mike Tyson in a fistfight if I catch him passed out drunk, however much he may pound me to mush in a fair fight.
However assuming equally skilled players with nobody making a major error that's capitalized upon (generally what most people are assuming in discussions like this), the CSM's are going to be at a massive disadvantage almost without exception.
If it was just that once time, I'd be fine with dismissing it as an outlier. Certainly I'm relatively inexperienced with playing Necrons. But I've played this guy multiple times with a firmly slanted win-loss ratio in his favor. This is despite me playing the ''power armies'' like Space Marines and him playing armies like Chaos and Tyranids that people deride. (He plays Chaos, Tyranids, Orks and Necrons, with Chaos being his most favorite). Yet according to the internet, I shouldn't be losing a often as I do with those armies.
I mean, I would certainly like to think that I'm a decent enough player, since I've played since 3rd edition. He started much more recently, so I don't consider our matches unfair at all. I'm not some top-grade tournament player, but I don't think I'm a complete loser either. My win/loss ratio is pretty good against everyone else in my gaming store. Nor do I think I generally make major errors often. Really, one could say quite the opposite as I've tried all the ''top-tier'' builds that the internet recommends. So no, I really don't think that's the case.
We are just commenting on the general views from the playerbase of a certain army.
You do understand you're making a bad name for yourself in the process, right? And by logical extension of what you're doing, a bad name for Guard players as your comments will inevitably be associated with the army you play and mention often.
There are annoying players for every faction. Best not to paint them all with the broadest brush in your arsenal.
And yet I have yet to personally meet anyone who primarily uses C:SM that wasn't a dick about it.
My older brother is not a dick, thank you very ing much.
What grinds my gears as a CSM player. Is all the sources I have to have if I want maintain a competitive army. I use the Chaos Demon Codex with the Curse of the Wulfen supplement, Khorne Daemonkin, the Black Legion supplement, Helcult Formation, and sometimes the Crimson Slaughter supplement. Of course not all at once but I am still searching for a fluffy competitive army list. I want a single codex to maintain a competitive army. Two is fine but with so many varied sources I mine as well be writing an essay than playing 40k. Now with new FAQ's I will soon be editing my sources to maintain current rules. Truthfully this has discouraged me from investing in GW. If rumors are true about new CSM (I have chasing that rabbit for several years now) a new kharne and maybe primarch models will do little for me or for most CSM armies since our codex hasn't drastically improved for almost 4 years. If GW makes a new codex I will consider investing again.
We are just commenting on the general views from the playerbase of a certain army.
You do understand you're making a bad name for yourself in the process, right? And by logical extension of what you're doing, a bad name for Guard players as your comments will inevitably be associated with the army you play and mention often.
There are annoying players for every faction. Best not to paint them all with the broadest brush in your arsenal.
And yet I have yet to personally meet anyone who primarily uses C:SM that wasn't a dick about it.
My older brother is not a dick, thank you very ing much.
Well according to every major tournament result they are that bad off. Add in the fact that the only trick they have is "Spam" they really aren't doing well.
I understand your local meta might have some talented Ork players who have some good lists who win regularly, but based on competitive play and non-competitive play that we have seen, orks aren't doing well.
Exactly, your experiences are anecdotal. There are far, far more of them in the world than those you have met, so stop sassing them all for it.
Uh-huh.
The same logic gives you no logical reason to defend them.
You are making sweeping accusations on a large population without more than anecdotes as evidence, and anecdotes can equally be provided to show the contrary (see my brother). The burden of proof is not on me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Exactly, your experiences are anecdotal. There are far, far more of them in the world than those you have met, so stop sassing them all for it.
Uh-huh.
The same logic gives you no logical reason to defend them.
You are making sweeping accusations on a large population without more than anecdotes as evidence, and anecdotes can equally be provided to show the contrary (see my brother). The burden of proof is not on me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Never said I was logical, but for the large number of people who have met such people on this site, the lines are amusing.
It is stil illogical to assume persons are nice by default. Equally as illogical as assuming they are not nice by default.
Exactly, your experiences are anecdotal. There are far, far more of them in the world than those you have met, so stop sassing them all for it.
Uh-huh.
The same logic gives you no logical reason to defend them.
You are making sweeping accusations on a large population without more than anecdotes as evidence, and anecdotes can equally be provided to show the contrary (see my brother). The burden of proof is not on me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Never said I was logical, but for the large number of people who have met such people on this site, the lines are amusing.
It is stil illogical to assume persons are nice by default. Equally as illogical as assuming they are not nice by default.
To be fair, I've found the same that Space Marine players tend to be the most TFG and annoying; always power gaming and getting on everyone elses' nerves
No, they are just the most numerous, and it is much easier to remember annoying players than the normal players.
Painting with broad brushes, meeting one person and judging all the others from that, and so on, is the reason things like racism even exists. It is not a good thing.
Ashiraya wrote: No, they are just the most numerous, and it is much easier to remember annoying players than the normal players.
Painting with broad brushes, meeting one person and judging all the others from that, and so on, is the reason things like racism even exists. It is not a good thing.
And they always happen to be the most elitist as well. GW is best, other games havnt got the same tactical depth, your a bad player because you play Guard, you should play another army, hahaha, such a weak player, etc....
Ashiraya wrote: No, they are just the most numerous, and it is much easier to remember annoying players than the normal players.
Painting with broad brushes, meeting one person and judging all the others from that, and so on, is the reason things like racism even exists. It is not a good thing.
And they always happen to be the most elitist as well. GW is best, other games havnt got the same tactical depth, your a bad player because you play Guard, you should play another army, hahaha, such a weak player, etc....
Don't worry, you only lose because you are a bad player. It has nothing to do with C:SM being better than C:AM in every way.
"And they always happen to be the most elitist as well."
I'd say Eldar players are by far the most elitist in my experience, but that's a sample of a few hundred players at best. Just stop. Unless every marine player is going superfriends or gladius, they aren't even that good of list. Not even in my play group is every marine player superfriend or gladius. Most of them own a gladius, but often get bored of playing it.
Martel732 wrote: "And they always happen to be the most elitist as well."
I'd say Eldar players are by far the most elitist in my experience,
thankfully there is only one Eldar player in my club, although he has openly stated that the only way to beat him is to have a hell of a lot of long range firepower and then pray that you get the first turn.
Selym wrote: Don't worry, you only lose because you are a bad player. It has nothing to do with C:SM being better than C:AM in every way.
Sarcasm isn't really the lowest form of humour.
That is because it isn't humorous at all.
Clearly you didn't grow up in Britain.
Fawlty Towers is funny.
'I am being oppressed by Marine players! Woe is me!' is not.
Unless you are deliberately doing this as satire (like that Holy Grail scene), in which case the problem is that you are beating a horse that is so long dead there is little but earth left.
Yes, there's a poll, I suggest you check it out and use it as a basis for discussions rather than trying to establish which faction has the greatest number of dick players.
I mean, I try never to mini-mod, but you two are taking the piss.
Azreal13 wrote: Jesus Christ! Just act like adults the pair of you and get on with the fething topic.
So do we actually have a conclusion on which is the weakest codex, or are we going nowhere?
Unfortunately, we need to start this thread over. With Traitors Hate just coming out, the CSM codex can't be far behind. Hopefully they move up a whole bunch of tiers.
Azreal13 wrote: Yes, there's a poll, I suggest you check it out and use it as a basis for discussions rather than trying to establish which faction has the greatest number of dick players.
I mean, I try never to mini-mod, but you two are taking the piss.
Selym wrote: I like the number of people that have voted Tau and Eldar.
Shirley, you jest?
Already aware of the poll. There are, however, clearly a bunch of people who disagree.
If looking at the poll is all we need here, then why post at all?
Azreal13 wrote: Jesus Christ! Just act like adults the pair of you and get on with the fething topic.
So do we actually have a conclusion on which is the weakest codex, or are we going nowhere?
Unfortunately, we need to start this thread over. With Traitors Hate just coming out, the CSM codex can't be far behind. Hopefully they move up a whole bunch of tiers.
If TH is a supplement, we are not getting a codex.
Azreal13 wrote: Yes, there's a poll, I suggest you check it out and use it as a basis for discussions rather than trying to establish which faction has the greatest number of dick players.
I mean, I try never to mini-mod, but you two are taking the piss.
Selym wrote: I like the number of people that have voted Tau and Eldar.
Shirley, you jest?
Already aware of the poll. There are, however, clearly a bunch of people who disagree.
If looking at the poll is all we need here, then why post at all?
Are you not familiar with what "a basis for discussion" might mean in this context?
Don't worry guys, gals and whatever else people like to identify as nowadays, I, our saviour, SGTPozy shall return us to real discussion!
So, as we can all see, CSM *apparently* are the weakest but I for one disagree... Clearly Space Wolves are as only four people voted them, so they're so bad people haven't even considered voting for them as they're such a lost cause! All other voters are just whining about their own faction, myself included.
SGTPozy wrote: Don't worry guys, gals and whatever else people like to identify as nowadays, I, our saviour, SGTPozy shall return us to real discussion!
So, as we can all see, CSM *apparently* are the weakest but I for one disagree... Clearly Space Wolves are as only four people voted them, so they're so bad people haven't even considered voting for them as they're such a lost cause! All other voters are just whining about their own faction, myself included.
Anyone disagree?
Oh yeah, SW lack anything even remotely competitive. Worst codex by a mile
Traitors Hate will be out in September with 7E love for Chaos Space Marines. If they get the same love Chaos Daemons did with the Incursion stuff, they'll be better off than they are now.
adamsouza wrote: Traitors Hate will be out in September with 7E love for Chaos Space Marines. If they get the same love Chaos Daemons did with the Incursion stuff, they'll be better off than they are now.
Everyone thought that might be the case with the updates to the CSM Supplements.. Yeah that didn't exactly end well.
But maybe with GW's new policies and overall changes CSM won't be left in the gutter at least.
Space Wolf players wouldn't realise it if their army did suck, as long as they make melee they're cheering. Having an army that can make first turn charges is their idea of heaven.
I'm still wondering how anybody could believe that the weakest army is anything other than Tyranids, let alone an army with armour saves.
adamsouza wrote: Traitors Hate will be out in September with 7E love for Chaos Space Marines. If they get the same love Chaos Daemons did with the Incursion stuff, they'll be better off than they are now.
Everyone thought that might be the case with the updates to the CSM Supplements.. Yeah that didn't exactly end well.
Tbf, the poll is about what you think the weakest codex is. You can't really infer anything about the strongest one. Everything got at least one vote, so clearly not everyone was equally right.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: They have what is literally the best hard counter to Scatter bikes and Warp Spiders with Mawlocs.
Yeah that depends on your idea of the usefulness of a mawloc.... A 4W T6 appearing in the middle of an army is not going to last long in the following shooting phase unless you place them near low quality/tarpit units.... You're basically paying 140 points for one, potentially two S6 AP2 pie plates.... and a distractionfex the next turn.
Orks are a pretty bad codex people don't realize how much fw makes them competitve with gunwagons, zhardsnark, and buzzgrob bigmek. Even the sole competitve codex varient in the greentide isn't as good as it use to be.
However dark eldar were bad before and got absolutely crushed in the latest faq.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: They have what is literally the best hard counter to Scatter bikes and Warp Spiders with Mawlocs.
Yeah that depends on your idea of the usefulness of a mawloc.... A 4W T6 appearing in the middle of an army is not going to last long in the following shooting phase unless you place them near low quality/tarpit units.... You're basically paying 140 points for one, potentially two S6 AP2 pie plates.... and a distractionfex the next turn.
Oh they won't be durable to either of them. You have to alpha strike with them and hope the Flyrants can clean up.
They're still an excellent hard counter to them. They just do super terrible against Tau and Necrons and Marines.
Just like any other pie plate, you know it's coming so space your guys.
Properly spaced, a mawloc is going to get maybe 3 bikes. Then it needs to not scatter. Because no one is going to leave their bikes next to a lictor.
That's if there isn't a ruin somewhere on the table the bikes can sit on top of. Mawlocs can't hit anything above the ground floor of a ruin.
Against other infantry, they are neutered by transports. S6 blasts aren't so great against vehicle side armour. Particularly with the 1/6 chance of dying to the following mishap.
They aren't as terrible as most of the tyranid codex, but are not in the same league as scatterbikes.
The only reason I rate Orks as worse then Tyranids is that we have nothing nearly as good as a Flyrant. And Orks and nids both rely on model spam and neither is a very useful tactic in our current edition.
So if we do see an updated CSM book this year, do you think it will just be more of a bridge between the 6th and 8th or will they just make it a straight up 7th update?
I would hate to think it is just a 7th update this late in the game.
Vash108 wrote: So if we do see an updated CSM book this year, do you think it will just be more of a bridge between the 6th and 8th or will they just make it a straight up 7th update?
I would hate to think it is just a 7th update this late in the game.
SemperMortis wrote: The only reason I rate Orks as worse then Tyranids is that we have nothing nearly as good as a Flyrant. And Orks and nids both rely on model spam and neither is a very useful tactic in our current edition.
One model won't make the army, especially since Flyrants are more or less 2 or 3 wound MCs (they tend to fall from the sky pretty often.
I'm not saying Orks are better than bugs, because IMO Bugs are better at shooting but in my experience if bugs make it to assault, unless it's against fish people or guardsmen they don't hit hard enough or stay around long enough. Hitting everything on 4 and wounding most on 4 or higher isn't really great for longevity or CC success. You know gak is upside-down when bugs are run as shooting armies.
Orks on the other hand do work in CC. They have the bodies/means to get there and then drown you in wounds.
Vash108 wrote: So if we do see an updated CSM book this year, do you think it will just be more of a bridge between the 6th and 8th or will they just make it a straight up 7th update?
I would hate to think it is just a 7th update this late in the game.
Wouldn't be the first time it's happened.
Don't be so pessimistic! Surely GW see's the plight of the Chaos Space Marine players and will give them a wonderful 8th edition codex!
SemperMortis wrote: The only reason I rate Orks as worse then Tyranids is that we have nothing nearly as good as a Flyrant. And Orks and nids both rely on model spam and neither is a very useful tactic in our current edition.
One model won't make the army, especially since Flyrants are more or less 2 or 3 wound MCs (they tend to fall from the sky pretty often.
I'm not saying Orks are better than bugs, because IMO Bugs are better at shooting but in my experience if bugs make it to assault, unless it's against fish people or guardsmen they don't hit hard enough or stay around long enough. Hitting everything on 4 and wounding most on 4 or higher isn't really great for longevity or CC success. You know gak is upside-down when bugs are run as shooting armies.
Orks on the other hand do work in CC. They have the bodies/means to get there and then drown you in wounds.
Yeah it's the weird thing that Nids just can't really hack it in combat anymore. And even then they're more of a close-medium range shooty army. It's the main reason I find the Mawloc incredibly lack lustre, it just can't really hack it in combat. Many of their decent CC choices (for their cost) such as warriors and shrikes simply get shot to pieces and insta death'd incredibly easily.
SemperMortis wrote: The only reason I rate Orks as worse then Tyranids is that we have nothing nearly as good as a Flyrant. And Orks and nids both rely on model spam and neither is a very useful tactic in our current edition.
One model won't make the army, especially since Flyrants are more or less 2 or 3 wound MCs (they tend to fall from the sky pretty often.
I'm not saying Orks are better than bugs, because IMO Bugs are better at shooting but in my experience if bugs make it to assault, unless it's against fish people or guardsmen they don't hit hard enough or stay around long enough. Hitting everything on 4 and wounding most on 4 or higher isn't really great for longevity or CC success. You know gak is upside-down when bugs are run as shooting armies.
Orks on the other hand do work in CC. They have the bodies/means to get there and then drown you in wounds.
Yeah it's the weird thing that Nids just can't really hack it in combat anymore. And even then they're more of a close-medium range shooty army. It's the main reason I find the Mawloc incredibly lack lustre, it just can't really hack it in combat. Many of their decent CC choices (for their cost) such as warriors and shrikes simply get shot to pieces and insta death'd incredibly easily.
When I played Nids a few weeks back they used some sort of formation to infiltrate some Genestealer models up very close and lock me down in Assault before I could do anything. I got off no shooting at all by the time the Flyant swooped in and massacred the rest.
SemperMortis wrote: The only reason I rate Orks as worse then Tyranids is that we have nothing nearly as good as a Flyrant. And Orks and nids both rely on model spam and neither is a very useful tactic in our current edition.
One model won't make the army, especially since Flyrants are more or less 2 or 3 wound MCs (they tend to fall from the sky pretty often.
I'm not saying Orks are better than bugs, because IMO Bugs are better at shooting but in my experience if bugs make it to assault, unless it's against fish people or guardsmen they don't hit hard enough or stay around long enough. Hitting everything on 4 and wounding most on 4 or higher isn't really great for longevity or CC success. You know gak is upside-down when bugs are run as shooting armies.
Orks on the other hand do work in CC. They have the bodies/means to get there and then drown you in wounds.
Yeah it's the weird thing that Nids just can't really hack it in combat anymore. And even then they're more of a close-medium range shooty army. It's the main reason I find the Mawloc incredibly lack lustre, it just can't really hack it in combat. Many of their decent CC choices (for their cost) such as warriors and shrikes simply get shot to pieces and insta death'd incredibly easily.
When I played Nids a few weeks back they used some sort of formation to infiltrate some Genestealer models up very close and lock me down in Assault before I could do anything. I got off no shooting at all by the time the Flyant swooped in and massacred the rest.
How would that work? Seeing by that logic the flyrant wouldn't be able to shoot at anything either
SemperMortis wrote: The only reason I rate Orks as worse then Tyranids is that we have nothing nearly as good as a Flyrant. And Orks and nids both rely on model spam and neither is a very useful tactic in our current edition.
One model won't make the army, especially since Flyrants are more or less 2 or 3 wound MCs (they tend to fall from the sky pretty often.
I'm not saying Orks are better than bugs, because IMO Bugs are better at shooting but in my experience if bugs make it to assault, unless it's against fish people or guardsmen they don't hit hard enough or stay around long enough. Hitting everything on 4 and wounding most on 4 or higher isn't really great for longevity or CC success. You know gak is upside-down when bugs are run as shooting armies.
Orks on the other hand do work in CC. They have the bodies/means to get there and then drown you in wounds.
Yeah it's the weird thing that Nids just can't really hack it in combat anymore. And even then they're more of a close-medium range shooty army. It's the main reason I find the Mawloc incredibly lack lustre, it just can't really hack it in combat. Many of their decent CC choices (for their cost) such as warriors and shrikes simply get shot to pieces and insta death'd incredibly easily.
When I played Nids a few weeks back they used some sort of formation to infiltrate some Genestealer models up very close and lock me down in Assault before I could do anything. I got off no shooting at all by the time the Flyant swooped in and massacred the rest.
How would that work? Seeing by that logic the flyrant wouldn't be able to shoot at anything either
The Flyrant did't shoot at anything. He just charged into close combat the turn he was able to and I couldn't do anything because the Genestealers where locked in combat with my main shooty units. The Flyrant proceeded to slaughter my Centurions.
Well unless there is a formation I'm missing, you can't assault the turn you infiltrate. So you should have had at least a turn to dakka down some of the stealers.
Dantes_Baals wrote: Well unless there is a formation I'm missing, you can't assault the turn you infiltrate. So you should have had at least a turn to dakka down some of the stealers.
He was using the Ghosar Broodkin Formation to Turn One assault with the Genestealers.
Dantes_Baals wrote: Well unless there is a formation I'm missing, you can't assault the turn you infiltrate. So you should have had at least a turn to dakka down some of the stealers.
He was using the Ghosar Broodkin Formation to Turn One assault with the Genestealers.
Lennac wrote: Just started collecting... picked Chaos Space Marines (lore and aesthetics).
Then I look at the results of this poll.
Welcome to the club. :(
Any word on an update to the Codex or any changes for the army in the near future? Honestly, it's not a huge deal for me because I'm just starting out and assembling/painting my army - also learning the rules, so I haven't even played yet. But still, just curious about the future of this army that I have committed my time (and money) to.
We are getting some minor things, like a new Kharn and a campaign book.
Otherwise, there is no concrete evidence of any major changes. The Imperial Guard also got a campaign book and it did not make any remarkable impact either.
Lennac wrote: Just started collecting... picked Chaos Space Marines (lore and aesthetics).
Then I look at the results of this poll.
Welcome to the club. :(
TFW you've collected chaos for the last 18 or so years so you got to watch the backslide of an army you've worked on for years...
It's not all Doom and Gloom though.. You can use IA: 13 supplied by FW which gives CSM a major facelift (compared with its current codex), but you need to make sure your area is comfortable with FW first
The Flyrant did't shoot at anything. He just charged into close combat the turn he was able to and I couldn't do anything because the Genestealers where locked in combat with my main shooty units. The Flyrant proceeded to slaughter my Centurions.
If you're loosing to an army with genestealers and a CC flyrant.... yeah, not really an army problem is it? There's a reason I presumed he had a dakka flyrant.
Gree wrote: He was using the Ghosar Broodkin Formation to Turn One assault with the Genestealers.
Well that answers it... they're not part of the Tyranid codex, they're genestealer cult, which are allies of convenience... so the brood can use it, but not your normal codex variant genestealers.
If you're loosing to an army with genestealers and a CC flyrant.... yeah, not really an army problem is it? There's a reason I presumed he had a dakka flyrant.
I was more responding to the idea that Tyranids are bad at CC. My own experiences sharply differ from what people on the internet say. I've had Tyranid Monstrous Creatures rip apart my squads on more than one occasion.
Nor do I consider there to be a problem with myself.
Well that answers it... they're not part of the Tyranid codex, they're genestealer cult, which are allies of convenience... so the brood can use it, but not your normal codex variant genestealers.
Lennac wrote: Just started collecting... picked Chaos Space Marines (lore and aesthetics).
Then I look at the results of this poll.
Welcome to the club. :(
TFW you've collected chaos for the last 18 or so years so you got to watch the backslide of an army you've worked on for years...
It's not all Doom and Gloom though.. You can use IA: 13 supplied by FW which gives CSM a major facelift (compared with its current codex), but you need to make sure your area is comfortable with FW first
I wouldnt call it a major face lift, its a rather small one. It just gives you some good stuff that ultimately gets dragged down by the garbage.
Martel732 wrote: But it matters for how formations interact. Genestealers from C: Tyranids can't benefit from that formation.
Again, same difference as far as I'm concerned. It's all bugs to me.
But that makes the situations not comparable, because I wouldn't let this person bend the rules in this way. You agreed to make the Tyranids more powerful than they actually are.
If you're loosing to an army with genestealers and a CC flyrant.... yeah, not really an army problem is it? There's a reason I presumed he had a dakka flyrant.
I was more responding to the idea that Tyranids are bad at CC. My own experiences sharply differ from what people on the internet say. I've had Tyranid Monstrous Creatures rip apart my squads on more than one occasion.
Nor do I consider there to be a problem with myself.
Well that answers it... they're not part of the Tyranid codex, they're genestealer cult, which are allies of convenience... so the brood can use it, but not your normal codex variant genestealers.
Same difference as far as I'm concerned.
Fottslogging MC's, especially nid's CC footslogging MC's are pretty weak in the current meta, if you're struggling against them you can't really complain.
Martel732 wrote: But it matters for how formations interact. Genestealers from C: Tyranids can't benefit from that formation.
Again, same difference as far as I'm concerned. It's all bugs to me.
Are you being fething serious or trying to troll people here?
'well chaos space marines aren't weak because normal space marines do fine'
'but they're different codexes'
*Shrugs* 'They're all Astartes to me'
Don't worry, Dakka is 1/3rd trolls, 1/3rd people who don't know what they're on about, 1/3rd aged vets who don't like anything anymore, and 3/3rds not gonna agree on anything.
But that makes the situations not comparable, because I wouldn't let this person bend the rules in this way. You agreed to make the Tyranids more powerful than they actually are.
How was he bending the rules? It was only the forces from the Deathwatch Overkill that did that infiltration. What's the issue here? Did you think I meant that Genestealers from Codex Tyranids where using those rules?
Fottslogging MC's, especially nid's CC footslogging MC's are pretty weak in the current meta, if you're struggling against them you can't really complain.
I'm not complaining. I'm just commenting on my personal experiences. I find what people say on the internet to rarely match up in reality when I play games.
And what I actually have a problem with is the CC Flyrant who is the primary threat in tearing apart my formations. Footslogging MC's are a secondary threat compared to him.
Are you being fething serious or trying to troll people here?
'well chaos space marines aren't weak because normal space marines do fine'
'but they're different codexes'
*Shrugs* 'They're all Astartes to me'
.
I know more about Astartes than I do Xenos, hence my answer. To me it's just a bunch of new bugs across the table, even if ruleswise they're just allies. No trolling. I'm quite serious.
I'm not certain what the issue is here. Unless people plan to drive over to my gaming store and play in my local meta, what exactly is the problem?
Lennac wrote: Just started collecting... picked Chaos Space Marines (lore and aesthetics).
Then I look at the results of this poll.
Welcome to the club. :(
TFW you've collected chaos for the last 18 or so years so you got to watch the backslide of an army you've worked on for years...
It's not all Doom and Gloom though.. You can use IA: 13 supplied by FW which gives CSM a major facelift (compared with its current codex), but you need to make sure your area is comfortable with FW first
I wouldnt call it a major face lift, its a rather small one. It just gives you some good stuff that ultimately gets dragged down by the garbage.
Must be a difference in areas, as I've found CSM to really push up the ladder with FW in my area .
How can Orks be the sconed worst army. Clearly they've never seen a fully mechanize green tide assault you in turn 2. (
ing much.
