So how do we fix this broken unit? I know the next Eldar codex will nerf them, but that's still a couple years away and until then, what is the right "sportsman" thing to do? Not buy holofield upgrades? Not fire the shield?
I don't think increasing the cost is appropriate because it's a dedicated transport and needs to be fieldable as one. If you increase the cost, all you are doing is pushing it further towards use as a main battle tank.
The obvious problem area is the Serpent Shield as a combination of power, range and Ignore Cover to make a truly tank-ruining sniper. I have no real issue with the Shield when it is used defensively and would consider it to be accurate. After all, the fluff says that it is only fired as a last resort and so I'd expect it to be a fantastic defensive unit.
My own recommendation would be to absolutely gut the range on the shield, down to 6-12". This could well come in with a price break for all the harm it would do to the vehicle but it needs to be encouraged to move and actually transport units, not dart about on the backline and send waves of power 60" downwind with surgical accuracy.
I think you could even go for a 2-in-1 fix here by allowing it to count as an Assault Vehicle on the turn that the Shield is fired, so Banshees suddenly have a place in the world again.
Bharring wrote: Its our *only* DT, and our only other transport is an HS that only fits 6, costs 165+ kitted, and dies like a Dreadnought.
A dreadnought with a 4+ cover save and one that can move 12" and still fire both primaries at BS4.
Personally I think going back to the 5th edition serpent shield would be best - all weapons over S8 are counted as S8 while firing at the front or sides of the wave serpent.
The Wave Serpent shield is insanely strong and point-efficient, on both defensive and offensive profiles. I understand Phil Kelly wanted to reintroduce old rules of the tank, way back in Epic 40k , 2nd edition. But they were overpowered, and now we have the same issue. Here are some ideas :
* To conform the weapon profile with a directed wave phenomenon, and ignoring cover, it should not be multi-shot, rather template. Torrent fits well, 12+8" range would help bringing it under control. This range matches with those of the rest of weaponry. Then STR:7 AP- could be kept as is.
* I feel the save against penetrating damage could be reduced from 2+ to 3+.
* Get rid of scatter laser making other weapons rerollable. It's just a lazy copy of Tau markerlights, slows the game, awkward : resolve first, while all weapons count as firing simultaneously ( ?!? ). This auto-take option, grants an almost 100% guaranteed twin-linking of other weapons, is bad game design. Why rolling the dice when it's all but sure you will get twin-linking anyway ? It adds insult to injury.
Taking at least 2 out of these 3 ideas, I will be OK with Wave Serpent being its current price.
Average performance is slightly worse compared with current not using a scatter laser; significantly worse when compared with using a scatter laser where you would expect all hits from the D6+1 to hit.
Just wondering how many people here actually play Eldar, when you roll a double 1 on to hits on the save the shield has limited usefulness... but I guess that is my fault for playing deathwing in a past life
A reduction in range might be in order, maybe 18-24 and the idea of being able to turn the tank into an assault vehicle is awesome. That would then fit with the reduced range as you would have to get up close an personal to be able to make the charge when you disembark.
As an elder player it pains me to say but perhaps losing/reducing cover saves (not jink) when the shield is still up. From a fluff point of view imagine the shield is a glowing aura of energy, so making the tank more visible, maybe even negating night fighting against anything shooting at it.
What I think gets lost is that it IS the only Eldar DT. Rhinos and chimeras might lack the punch but they are a fraction of the cost...
Ban them. I'm that sick of them at this point. Eldar can get them back in 7th. They can go without transports till then and see how the rest of us live.
No other faction pays as much for t3 infantry as Eldar. No other faction, fluffwise, is as mobile or has nearly as good transports. Add to it very little in the way of deep striking, and its really hard to do footdar. We need a decent transport.
The idea to drop their range drastically works best in my opinion. Then its a short burst to help the unit its transporting and the pinning rule could theoretically be handy, or to provide a last ditch 'get away!' fire.
I'm still waiting on a way to make pinning worthwhile too, now that I think of it.
Make it a one time use only effect. If you deploy the shield in the game you can't deploy it again. That would fix it, and if you do you sacrifice your shooting phase on your following turn.
and make the serpent take up an elite slot as opposed to a dedicated transport slot.
Lucarikx wrote: Change the range of the Serpent Shield to 12". Leave the points the same. Its a good model w/o the shield, but the 60" makes it OTT.
Lucarikx
I agree entirely. 12" means it's still devastating up close, but it isn't packing as much firepower as a TLAC dreadnought while having a good 24" on the old boy.
Even 24" would be fine, although 12" would be idea - it would ensure that it would hurt a lot, but you'd be using it at a cost - your defences would be down, and if your enemy is packing a meltagun you're toast.
Bharring wrote: No other faction pays as much for t3 infantry as Eldar. No other faction, fluffwise, is as mobile or has nearly as good transports. Add to it very little in the way of deep striking, and its really hard to do footdar. We need a decent transport.
Cry me a river,elf boy. No one else gets a main battle tank as a TRANSPORT.
Bharring wrote: No other faction pays as much for t3 infantry as Eldar. No other faction, fluffwise, is as mobile or has nearly as good transports. Add to it very little in the way of deep striking, and its really hard to do footdar. We need a decent transport.
No other faction has access to 9 point BS4 rending shooting.
No other faction has access to t6 troops who can hide in a vehicle.
No other faction has access to S10 T8.
No other faction has access to a tank that's meant to be a survivable transport but can rip your face off at a moments notice.
No other faction has access to no less than 6 eternal warriors
No other faction has access to 100 point ML3 psykers
No other faction has access to a tank with a weapon that can fulfil any given role at any given time.
No other army has access to 17 point troop jet bikes
Wave Serpents don't need a nerf, they have a few tricks up their sleeves (Like all eldar should) but they are not to broken.
Yes they either can be very killy or very defensive but can't both at the same time. If had them for the price of a rhino sure get rid of the shooting shield but when they normally cost 4 times more then a rhino heck yeah want them to be as good as they are.
Where they are broken is when mixed with a psyker for reroll cover saves. But everything is broken with reroll saves
Bassline wrote: Wave Serpents don't need a nerf, they have a few tricks up their sleeves (Like all eldar should) but they are not to broken.
Yes they either can be very killy or very defensive but can't both at the same time. If had them for the price of a rhino sure get rid of the shooting shield but when they normally cost 4 times more then a rhino heck yeah want them to be as good as they are.
Where they are broken is when mixed with a psyker for reroll cover saves. But everything is broken with reroll saves
They are very broken.
They're very killy. Nobody needs to be able to reduce pens to glances when you can only take 3 glances. They do cost on average 4 times the price of a rhino. Sure, but they have two more weapons and three weapons that far outstrip a rhino's single storm bolter.
You do realise the Serpent shield *just* ignores cover, right? The rule which I think you're referring to - perfect timing *just* lets the psyker's unit ignore cover. IT doesn't cast on a tank and there's nothing about re-rolling saves. Please, if you're going to rush to the defence of a toy in your arsenal, know the rules you're defending.
Finally, a Dreadnought pays 20 points shy of a wave serpent for the same output (bar the scatter laser) and is the same chassis, but is 6" slower and doesn't get the cover save bonus a wave serpent does. Did I mention how a dreadnought isn't a dedicated transport and you can take, at most, 6 of the things if you take a master of the forge tax? All Eldar have t do is take 6 54 point troop choices. Oh no, I got to take MSU ON TOP of my stomp-face 6 armoured units.
Kain wrote: Turn the serpent shield into an ordinary template.
Not a torrent.
Just a template.
D6+1 templates, right?
We're still keeping the thing broken here!
It should be a torrent, but can place the template 60" away and then it moves another 2D6" and hits every model it passes over. If it hits a vehicle, the vehicle takes 2D6 S7 hits, and MCs are struck down automatically.
To represent the knockback, enemies hit automatically break, even if they are fearless though get to regroup afterwards. Because it is a blowback and not a real break test, ATSKNF cannot be used either.
Also, as it's a crushing attack, instead of having a strength, units must pass an initiative test or die (no saves of any kind allowed).
To balance this out, the price is increased by 5 points.
Kain wrote: Turn the serpent shield into an ordinary template.
Not a torrent.
Just a template.
D6+1 templates, right?
We're still keeping the thing broken here!
The template hits at S: Feth you.
S: Feth you is the one strength level higher than D, as you grab your hard cover Eldar codex and bludgeon your enemy into unconsciousness and claim victory.
You may then steal your opponent's models and whatever is in his or her wallet.
I'd say make it one use only and bring its range down to that of a Scatter Laser (36?) that way it isn't increasing the tank's max range kill-zone and if that isn't enough bring its downgrade from a 2+ to a 3+ or even a 4+.
Seriously, a lot of the problem is to do with the scatter laser making it TL so if you get a good lot of hits (rolling a 4+ for number basically) you can expect all of them to hit.
Hence my suggestion: Auto hits, but it's reduced to D3+1, so at best it gets as many hits as a slightly below average result with the scatter laser, while it still being a really good option and do good damage, and making the Scatter Laser no longer a 'no brainer'.
Bassline wrote: Wave Serpents don't need a nerf, they have a few tricks up their sleeves (Like all eldar should) but they are not to broken.
Yes they either can be very killy or very defensive but can't both at the same time. If had them for the price of a rhino sure get rid of the shooting shield but when they normally cost 4 times more then a rhino heck yeah want them to be as good as they are.
Where they are broken is when mixed with a psyker for reroll cover saves. But everything is broken with reroll saves
Unfortunately you seem to be very confused about the actual rules and hence likely don't understand just how broken Cheese Serpents are.
for one (major thing) It already ignores cover.................
To fix it needs a huge price increase or the shield being one shot (and loss of the defensive element) and/or very short range (you know to actually fit the fluff and make it not just broken)
Also it would be better if there was a way of making it an assault vehicle (which also maybe makes Banshees usable) and likely make Falcons a DT as well........
If it were a moving template like Purple Sun in Fantasy, it would be even more overpowered. Also, GW represent that kind of attack with random dice anyway, for some reason.
Daba wrote: If it were a moving template like Purple Sun in Fantasy, it would be even more overpowered. Also, GW represent that kind of attack with random dice anyway, for some reason.
No I mean, just a simple hell-hound Torrent or Doom-scythe line.
Daba wrote: If it were a moving template like Purple Sun in Fantasy, it would be even more overpowered. Also, GW represent that kind of attack with random dice anyway, for some reason.
No I mean, just a simple hell-hound Torrent or Doom-scythe line.
Nothing particularly fancy.
If it was a S7AP- Torrent flamer, or hell, throw AP4 on there, it would be a reasonable weapon.
I think they already had a torrent flamer in the form of the shadow weaver, though didn't they?
Just bring some anti tank. But I'm not sure if it's the right to do... Maybe bring some anti horde? Yeah that sounds like an appropriate solution.
Is my LGS the only one that doesn't complain about it and just devises a plan to beat it and actually manages to do it?
There are still many players that I yet have to defeat. I got even defeated by a Ravenwing player once while having 4x Wave Serpents.
Sir Arun wrote: So how do we fix this broken unit? I know the next Eldar codex will nerf them, but that's still a couple years away and until then, what is the right "sportsman" thing to do? Not buy holofield upgrades? Not fire the shield?
The best solution for fixing your serpents is simply not to fire the shield. That makes them merely good rather than super-overpowered and doesn't require you to change any rules or re-write any army lists. You can suggest it to your opponents as a 'house rule' or 'gentleman's agreement' without needing to get everyone to agree to it before they write their lists.
macexor wrote: Just bring some anti tank. But I'm not sure if it's the right to do... Maybe bring some anti horde? Yeah that sounds like an appropriate solution.
Is my LGS the only one that doesn't complain about it and just devises a plan to beat it and actually manages to do it?
There are still many players that I yet have to defeat. I got even defeated by a Ravenwing player once while having 4x Wave Serpents.
Suggest a way for orks to destroy one.
It's not so much having to destroy the tank, that's not the issue here. The issue is that this is a *transport* that can deal with most *anything*.
I think a Wave Serpent isn't the only thing that this 6 (?) year old codex struggles against. It would be actually easier to name things it doesn't struggle against.
I'm not trying to insult any Ork players here but saying that the WS is the single reason why it cannot fight on an even ground against Eldar doesn't seem right.
And I'm sure that I can easily create a list without a WS that ork players would still have a harsh time with.
On the other hand newer codices (or whatever the plural form is) can fight against it. Some have an easier fight, some a tougher one but it's not an unbeatable thing.
There is also such a thing as allies. While Eldar are using them to strengthen their army, why can't Ork do the same thing?
Either drown him with bodies (6x 30 boyz klaw in each and allied IG blobs 50 man each with some melta bombs) or bring some other nasty units such as Night Scythes.
Eldar also struggle against high AV. Bring as many Battlewagons as possible and get into his face. The only thing you have to watch out for is WK. Just throw at him a 20-30 man fearless boyz squad and laugh at him as he tries to kill them.
Although it's true that Eldar have lots of options when it comes to high str weapons (fire dragons, crimson hunter, fire prism, falcon, biright lance war walkers, bright lance anywhere actually, wraithknight, wraithlord, wraithguard, hell even swooping hawks) Eldar tend to heavily rely on their Wave Serpents as their AT and just use WK as a "Land Raider buster" when need comes. Hardly anyone spams all those hight str shots.
And that's what other people can use against those who heavily spam Wave Serpents.
Unless one plays Iyanden but we're talking about spamming Wave Serpents, aren't we?
You mean the army with more heavy tank killing options than the emperor himself right?
He was talking about orks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
macexor wrote: Although it's true that Eldar have lots of options when it comes to high str weapons (fire dragons, crimson hunter, fire prism, falcon, biright lance war walkers, bright lance anywhere actually, wraithknight, wraithlord, wraithguard, hell even swooping hawks) Eldar tend to heavily rely on their Wave Serpents as their AT and just use WK as a "Land Raider buster" when need comes. Hardly anyone spams all those hight str shots.
And that's what other people can use against those who heavily spam Wave Serpents.
Unless one plays Iyanden but we're talking about spamming Wave Serpents, aren't we?
Question mate, when you say your meta is full of people who find ways to deal with the serpent, do you mean that your players cater lists? Because that's a really unique practice and is completely inadequate as an argument.
anyone can bring a land raider knowing their opponent's running serpent spam, but while a LR would excel there, the LR will usually fall flat on its face against just about anything else. How does one build a competitive, non RPS list that deals with wave serpents while still being balanced against MCs and flyers?
Orks have more problems against Land Raiders. They have S7 and 8 shooting in enough numbers to kill WS, but they have a lack of things that crack armour 13 and 14 easily, especially at range.
ionusx wrote: I think the wave serpent should be dataslated. Then sell the dataslate for 25 bucks a pop. That will fix it, nobody likes dataslates.
And then it's price needs to get jacked up to about 150pts
macexor wrote: Just bring some anti tank. But I'm not sure if it's the right to do... Maybe bring some anti horde? Yeah that sounds like an appropriate solution.
Is my LGS the only one that doesn't complain about it and just devises a plan to beat it and actually manages to do it?
There are still many players that I yet have to defeat. I got even defeated by a Ravenwing player once while having 4x Wave Serpents.
Suggest a way for orks to destroy one.
Err... orks are one of the best armies for dealing with wave serpents. A mob of lootas in a battlewagon can chew through their hull points and the WS can't do much to the battlewagon with it's usual set-up. Even if it gets side shots with it's S 6&7 weapons, it's only going to take off a few hull points, which are easily repaired by the mekboys in the loota mob.
I suppose you mean tailor? Haven't heard that term yet.
No they don't. I'm (surprisingly) the only player that plays this type of list. All the rest either play Tau, Grav-bike spam, Necron, Daemons, Jetseers etc. Probably now some IG will appear.
Probably the reason I don't annihilate all my opponents is my lack of experience. Could be. I've never had a feeling (while playing against those better players) that I had the upper hand right from the beginning and had them on the ropes. Somehow everyone always has some kind of a counter to my Serpent spam. Another funny thing is that only recently I've started playing there and yet most of the players were already used to my list.
I also had some games where I had a great first and second turn but got outplayed by a better opponent who just played the mission and won.
When it comes to the ways in which I get destroyed by a brute force than it works more or less that way:
Daemons: Screamers/Khorne dogs/FMC get in my face and then wreck me in CC while their troops get objectives. Funny thing is that in all my games against Daemons (4 i think so minimum 20 turns) no one has ever failed a single Grimore test. Tau: outshoot me although their troops aren't that good. I have to play a rather passive game especially if I get the second turn.
Grav spam: although I have a limited experience with it, it just wrecks me if he gets the first turn
Necrons: just look at JY2's batreps. He has no problems with Eldar
Jetseerstar: the one guy that runs it is just a better player than me. I'm gonna challenge him next time when he will hopefully take his DE.
But when it comes to those older codices like Orks, BA, SW or even GK i don't have such problems. In some cases I even feel bad for them. It seems that no matter what they do, they are gonna get beaten eventually. Or is it because all the better players choose to play "better" armies and leave the "worse" armies mostly to the ones who don't care about winning that much?
All in all i think that against newer codices Eldar aren't (not talking about Jetseer Council here because it is not my cup of tea) thatOP as some claim them to be. Most (if not all among newer codices) armies have answers to their threats and that alone should be enough to stop them.
macexor wrote: Just bring some anti tank. But I'm not sure if it's the right to do... Maybe bring some anti horde? Yeah that sounds like an appropriate solution.
Is my LGS the only one that doesn't complain about it and just devises a plan to beat it and actually manages to do it?
There are still many players that I yet have to defeat. I got even defeated by a Ravenwing player once while having 4x Wave Serpents.
Suggest a way for orks to destroy one.
Err... orks are one of the best armies for dealing with wave serpents. A mob of lootas in a battlewagon can chew through their hull points and the WS can't do much to the battlewagon with it's usual set-up. Even if it gets side shots with it's S 6&7 weapons, it's only going to take off a few hull points, which are easily repaired by the mekboys in the loota mob.
10 lootas is an average of 20 shots at BS2, which is an average of 7 hits and an average of 2.33 hull points. So your, what, 400 point box of blokieblokes just killed 100 points.
Bear in mind that points to killing ratios aren't really something that make sense without taking into account range/delivery/risk and how good their defences are. Also, not any unit will on average kill it's own points in a turn, and those are generally super specialist or close combat troops.
How many points of rocket boys or zzap guns kill a land raider a turn?
Without the transport the inside (Dire Avengers) is rather useless and can be easily crushed by boyz against whom rending shots aren't effective at all.
So it's at least 200 points. If it wasn't for those Lootas you wouldn't kill the inside.
And now if killing in 1 turn half your cost, especially by a unit that is quite durable, is nothing for you, than I don't know what you actually expect them to do.
I don't expect guided Scatter Walkers to kill 210 points in 1 turn and they are a glass cannon.
Other interesting thing is that 13 Lootas and a Battlewagon with some Big Shootas (weapon-destroyed-proof vehicle) is not even 300 points.
Bear in mind that points to killing ratios aren't really something that make sense without taking into account range/delivery/risk and how good their defences are. Also, not any unit will on average kill it's own points in a turn, and those are generally super specialist or close combat troops.
How many points of rocket boys or zzap guns kill a land raider a turn?
No, he only knocked out about two thirds of a serpent. That is why I said 100.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
macexor wrote: Without the transport the inside (Dire Avengers) is rather useless and can be easily crushed by boyz against whom rending shots aren't effective at all.
So it's at least 200 points. If it wasn't for those Lootas you wouldn't kill the inside.
And now if killing in 1 turn half your cost, especially by a unit that is quite durable, is nothing for you, than I don't know what you actually expect them to do.
I don't expect guided Scatter Walkers to kill 210 points in 1 turn and they are a glass cannon.
Other interesting thing is that 13 Lootas and a Battlewagon with some Big Shootas (weapon-destroyed-proof vehicle) is not even 300 points.
Why would you take scatter lasers on something you plan to guide exactly? Isn't the whole point of scatter lasers that you don't need guide because of them? Seems a bit wasteful. 3 War Walkers with 6 bright lances (far surpassed by hornets, sure, but let's pretend they don't exist) with guide should bring any tank low.
That's what I mentioned earlier. My meta is heavy on infantry (be it Broadsides, bikes, Tyranids, FMC, Khorne Dogs, anything and all usually with some kind of a cover save) or lighter vehicles (Venoms, Night Scythes, I don't mention WS cause I'm the only one running them) and I don't need those Bright Lances that much (only against Barges TBH). The only high str shots I have is WK and so far that seems enough. I might change my list depending on future IG lists but so far that's enough.
That's why I take Scatter Lasers. And because I take double Scatter Lasers their shots aren't TL. That's why I need to guide them. And Scatter Lasers are probably better against targets such as Night Scythes. Not mentioning infantry.
Make the Serpent Shield a one use item where if you shoot it once it's gone for the rest of the game. For the points cost of the Wave Serpent this would be a fair nerf.
macexor wrote: That's what I mentioned earlier. My meta is heavy on infantry (be it Broadsides, bikes, Tyranids, FMC, Khorne Dogs, anything and all usually with some kind of a cover save) or lighter vehicles (Venoms, Night Scythes, I don't mention WS cause I'm the only one running them) and I don't need those Bright Lances that much (only against Barges TBH). The only high str shots I have is WK and so far that seems enough. I might change my list depending on future IG lists but so far that's enough.
That's why I take Scatter Lasers. And because I take double Scatter Lasers their shots aren't TL. That's why I need to guide them. And Scatter Lasers are probably better against targets such as Night Scythes. Not mentioning infantry.
You should average a glance and a pen against night scythes, with 24 twin-linked scatter laser shots. 12 Pulse lasers should average a glance and a pen, but the pen should be more meaningful.
I really don't see the mightiness of the Wave Serpent.
It doesn't have firing ports like the Chimera does but instead it has the nifty shield to throw to make up for it, but they die just fine.
They are an IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle, somewhere between an APC and a Tank.)
HIt them with some reasonable anti-tank fire and watch the DA team that survives run for cover.
my thought on the shield would be to drop range to 24", make it a simple large blast template that moves from the WS to a point 24" away. Any unit that is partially covered by the path of this blast takes D6 S6 AP- , ignores cover hits.
If firing the shield, no other weapon can fire that turn (it takes up to much of the vehicle's power to use it) and once fired, the shield is gone for good.
Also, take away the option for holofield. The shield should interefere with how a holofield works.
Automatically Appended Next Post: or, just abstract the whole thing entirely. keep the defensive posture as normal, drop holofield option.
The shield gives the "assault vehicle" ability to the Wave Serpent (fluff...a burst from the shield hits and disorients enemy troops, allowing the occupants to disembark and conduct an assault under relative safety)
Making it one use only retains its strong Alpha, which I think needs to be nerfed. The thing shouldn't be artillery, and most of the range nerfs (or template, or torrent) handle that well.
I am glad to see a clear consensus agrees that its shooting needs a nerf. Clearly.
Wakshaani wrote: I'm down for the one-shot-per-game rule, personally, along with "Once fired, the defensive portion is gone as well."
Just like that, thing's fixed.
^This.
I think there should be a basic guideline for 40k Proposed Rules like this: "keep it simple".
No new rules, no new numbers, no additional stuff. Just the same rule, yet fixed by changing 6 words.
Page 67 Eldar Codex. Serpent Shield entry. Change last sentence (If this option is used, the Serpent Shield is inactive until the start of its following turn) for "If this option is used, the Serpent Shield is inactive for the rest of the game."
Bharring wrote: Making it one use only retains its strong Alpha, which I think needs to be nerfed. The thing shouldn't be artillery, and most of the range nerfs (or template, or torrent) handle that well.
You are right about being a too strong Alpha attack, but the elegance and simplicity of the solution is too much to discard.
I am glad to see a clear consensus agrees that its shooting needs a nerf. Clearly.
Me too!
Another proof that most people actually know which units are breaking the game and how to fix them.
if it's meant to be a last resort, just make it improve the vehicles 'explode' result if the eldar player wants to. at the last minute the shield collapses, throwing everyone around to their feet.
but I agree that a 6" to 12" range would be perfectly balanced, bar the fact that it'll then make the serpents ignore pens on a 2+, all the time.
one thing that annoys me is that you can't use the shield the turn after you shoot, but there's no rule saying you can't shoot it the turn after you use it. making the eldar player decide in the first turn whether he wants to risk his tank exploding or fire the shield next turn would really make it a bit less "I'm eldar so I do what I want, so there".
All of the problems with the shield would be instantly solved if you returned the shield to just being a shield, and nothing else. If you want to give wave serpents more weapons, then give them more weapons.
Wave serpents have a TON of stuff going for them, what from being fast, being able to shoot extra guns on the move, being able to ignore terrain, being able to pass over impassable terrain, free cover saves, etc. They're already easily the best transport in the game, despite their low armor.
Honestly, they don't even really need a shield, but I understand that it's there for fluff reasons. Even if it was something as small as +1 to jink and gave the serpent adamantium will, or giving it blessed hull, or little things like that would likely be enough. The way it is now is absurd.
Ailaros wrote: I agree with the general consensus of the vote.
All of the problems with the shield would be instantly solved if you returned the shield to just being a shield, and nothing else. If you want to give wave serpents more weapons, then give them more weapons.
Wave serpents have a TON of stuff going for them, what from being fast, being able to shoot extra guns on the move, being able to ignore terrain, being able to pass over impassable terrain, free cover saves, etc. They're already easily the best transport in the game, despite their low armor.
Honestly, they don't even really need a shield, but I understand that it's there for fluff reasons. Even if it was something as small as +1 to jink and gave the serpent adamantium will, or giving it blessed hull, or little things like that would likely be enough. The way it is now is absurd.
They are not low armour - they are Av 12 front and sides even without the shield comparted to most transports and most importantly virtually gaurentee their passangers are immune to stunned etc results which can be devestating to "normal" transports......
Whilst its unfair for the Eldar ot only have the one broken D.transport - its also unfair to everyone else to have to play against them in numbers.............
The simplest/most elegant solution isn't adding a few words to make it one-use, its treating the 0 in its range as a typo...
It is unfair, Morden, to either the Eldar player who doesn't get a DT, or the other player who gets shot off the table. That is why many of us wish the thing were nerfed, as it would be more fair to both parties.
Oh, and while there are several reasonable complaints about the Dex, I really dont think "too much 2+ armor" is one of them.
Bharring wrote: No other faction pays as much for t3 infantry as Eldar. No other faction, fluffwise, is as mobile or has nearly as good transports. Add to it very little in the way of deep striking, and its really hard to do footdar. We need a decent transport.
No other faction has access to 9 point BS4 rending shooting.
No other faction has access to t6 troops who can hide in a vehicle.
No other faction has access to S10 T8.
No other faction has access to a tank that's meant to be a survivable transport but can rip your face off at a moments notice.
No other faction has access to no less than 6 eternal warriors
No other faction has access to 100 point ML3 psykers
No other faction has access to a tank with a weapon that can fulfil any given role at any given time.
No other army has access to 17 point troop jet bikes
Lose the "woe is me" attitude.
The 9point model has a 12" range, t3, and is APed by Bolt guns. Good but not game breaking.
Mark of Nurgle bikers are t6, have Jink, move 12", and several other things. The troops you're talking about are near Termite prices, and the transport they can use is the Serpent.
Wraithknight (our s10 t8) is a little OP. Our other MCs aren't that scary.
Our only 2+ armor are HQs in the Abby price range, but with only 3 wounds, and nowhere near the killyness. A simple Shield Eternal Captain outperforms here. The Phoenix Lords are fun, but not that strong.
Our Far seers are good, but they are t3 models that our armies are based around. If the Far seer is in place to do its job, then it is vulnerable. Good but hardly broken. Our Librarian equivalents aren't even LD 10 (spirit seer or warlock). And compare the warlock to a Primaries Psyker from the new IG... The Far seer is good, but as the cornerstone of our faction, it should be.
This whole discussion is about fixing our do-anything Serpents
Jet bikes are a problem. I haven't used them, but they are really cheap for troops with that much mobility.
Don't mistake my attitude for thinking Eldar are in trouble. I've been saying for a long time that Serpents and Jet Councils need nerfs, and the Wraithknight might also need one. However, I want to make sure we don't destroy them in the process.
(The Serpent is the only one I know quite well. My only Wraith is a Lord I'm looking to field, and I have no Jet bikes, as I don't think I'd enjoy them)
I think we're mostly on the same page, but its difficult to be objective when Eldar OPness keeps bashing people's heads in.
Bharring wrote: The simplest/most elegant solution isn't adding a few words to make it one-use, its treating the 0 in its range as a typo...
It is unfair, Morden, to either the Eldar player who doesn't get a DT, or the other player who gets shot off the table. That is why many of us wish the thing were nerfed, as it would be more fair to both parties.
Oh, and while there are several reasonable complaints about the Dex, I really dont think "too much 2+ armor" is one of them..
That was my whole point - the present incranration is bad for both Eldar players - in that its way too OP but their only DT choice and to those who have to face the things.
I never mentioned 2+ armour - I was replying to the statement that the Wave Serpent has low armour - when its actually very well protected for a APC with front AND side armour of 12.
6" is quite short but seems reasonable - although a template might well work as well......
The 2+ comment was in reference to someone mentioning we have 6 models with 2+ armor and EW.
AV12 is mid-range armor. Against AV12, most armies can pop it at mid/short range reliably, but not necessarily at long range. Seems right. AV13 would be too much, and AV11 too little
(Rhinos are av11, but 35pts for t4 3+ infantry - 3 rhinos per Serpent, by cost)
Remember that Necron transports are AV13 skimmers, until their first pen, and aren't generally considered broken.
Bharring wrote: The 2+ comment was in reference to someone mentioning we have 6 models with 2+ armor and EW.
AV12 is mid-range armor. Against AV12, most armies can pop it at mid/short range reliably, but not necessarily at long range. Seems right. AV13 would be too much, and AV11 too little
(Rhinos are av11, but 35pts for t4 3+ infantry - 3 rhinos per Serpent, by cost)
Remember that Necron transports are AV13 skimmers, until their first pen, and aren't generally considered broken.
AV 12 is good for a APC - especially one which also has fast, jink and a force shield, good armament and that normally ignores crew shaken and stunned results - all unlike Rhinos or Immolators - which are closer - having heavy weapons. Crew stunned / staggered can be hugely determinetal to pasengers as it stays in place even if they are thrown out - wrecked is a much better result for most trasported figures. Playing my Sisters I tened ot have at least one unit per game rendered useless and killed due to shaken or stunned results. my Dark Eldar are the same....
I've had a few different ideas to fix the Serpent Shield, many of which are mirrored by others. Personally I wouldn't take the "1 shot only" or "only a shield" rule changes without a point reduction in the Wave Serpent.
1) Reduce range to 24"
2) Change hits to D3+1
3) At the beginning of your movement phase, if the Serpent Shield was fired last turn, roll a die. On a 4+, the Shield repowers itself and may be used again. Otherwise, the shield is still recharging and cannot be used either for its defensive or shooting purposes.
There is so much butthurt in this thread you would think that Serpent spam was filling top 8s everywhere and not just dominating people in casual games.
Lets get real, the serpent is attractive as a tank because there isn't much else in the book to compete with it. Not to mention that top eldar lists are not even spamming them, they are running seer or beast stars. It fails as a transport because there isn't anything worth putting into the dam things because it doesn't have the assault rule. The only other option that can put out as much dakka is a full squad of scatter walkers.
So the main argument is that its too powerful of a shooting platform, but it averages 8 shots a turn for over 150 points. It does have those fun 11 shot turns, but just as many 6 shot turns.
There are many units that are putting out just as much firepower or more on just as mobile or defensive bodies.
Its only Av12 3 hull points so it dies as easily as any other tank, but it does have that 4+ cover. Really though if you don't have your armor parked in cover already you're doing it wrong. The main advantage is the serpent can move around and get better angles where other armor cannot.
Its str 6 and 7 so its wounding most things on 2+ but everyone gets their armor save so the ignores cover is really only affecting fliers and even then you're not dropping a flier with a single serpent. The high strength and high rate of fire is just something that every army is getting though so you may as well get used to it.
I'm sure I could think of more but I think most people are just dead set on blaming the serpent for all of their problems.
There is so much butthurt in this thread you would think that Serpent spam was filling top 8s everywhere and not just dominating people in casual games.
Lets get real, the serpent is attractive as a tank because there isn't much else in the book to compete with it. Not to mention that top eldar lists are not even spamming them, they are running seer or beast stars. It fails as a transport because there isn't anything worth putting into the dam things because it doesn't have the assault rule. The only other option that can put out as much dakka is a full squad of scatter walkers.
So the main argument is that its too powerful of a shooting platform, but it averages 8 shots a turn for over 150 points. It does have those fun 11 shot turns, but just as many 6 shot turns.
There are many units that are putting out just as much firepower or more on just as mobile or defensive bodies.
Its only Av12 3 hull points so it dies as easily as any other tank, but it does have that 4+ cover. Really though if you don't have your armor parked in cover already you're doing it wrong. The main advantage is the serpent can move around and get better angles where other armor cannot.
Its str 6 and 7 so its wounding most things on 2+ but everyone gets their armor save so the ignores cover is really only affecting fliers and even then you're not dropping a flier with a single serpent. The high strength and high rate of fire is just something that every army is getting though so you may as well get used to it.
I'm sure I could think of more but I think most people are just dead set on blaming the serpent for all of their problems.
There is so much butthurt in this thread you would think that Serpent spam was filling top 8s everywhere and not just dominating people in casual games.
Lets get real, the serpent is attractive as a tank because there isn't much else in the book to compete with it. Not to mention that top eldar lists are not even spamming them, they are running seer or beast stars. It fails as a transport because there isn't anything worth putting into the dam things because it doesn't have the assault rule. The only other option that can put out as much dakka is a full squad of scatter walkers.
So the main argument is that its too powerful of a shooting platform, but it averages 8 shots a turn for over 150 points. It does have those fun 11 shot turns, but just as many 6 shot turns.
There are many units that are putting out just as much firepower or more on just as mobile or defensive bodies.
Its only Av12 3 hull points so it dies as easily as any other tank, but it does have that 4+ cover. Really though if you don't have your armor parked in cover already you're doing it wrong. The main advantage is the serpent can move around and get better angles where other armor cannot.
Its str 6 and 7 so its wounding most things on 2+ but everyone gets their armor save so the ignores cover is really only affecting fliers and even then you're not dropping a flier with a single serpent. The high strength and high rate of fire is just something that every army is getting though so you may as well get used to it.
I'm sure I could think of more but I think most people are just dead set on blaming the serpent for all of their problems.
Right on target Sir, have an Exalt.
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............
Goldphish wrote: There is so much butthurt in this thread you would think that Serpent spam was filling top 8s everywhere and not just dominating people in casual games.
Lets get real, the serpent is attractive as a tank because there isn't much else in the book to compete with it. Not to mention that top eldar lists are not even spamming them, they are running seer or beast stars. It fails as a transport because there isn't anything worth putting into the dam things because it doesn't have the assault rule. The only other option that can put out as much dakka is a full squad of scatter walkers.
So the main argument is that its too powerful of a shooting platform, but it averages 8 shots a turn for over 150 points. It does have those fun 11 shot turns, but just as many 6 shot turns.
There are many units that are putting out just as much firepower or more on just as mobile or defensive bodies.
Its only Av12 3 hull points so it dies as easily as any other tank, but it does have that 4+ cover. Really though if you don't have your armor parked in cover already you're doing it wrong. The main advantage is the serpent can move around and get better angles where other armor cannot.
Its str 6 and 7 so its wounding most things on 2+ but everyone gets their armor save so the ignores cover is really only affecting fliers and even then you're not dropping a flier with a single serpent. The high strength and high rate of fire is just something that every army is getting though so you may as well get used to it.
I'm sure I could think of more but I think most people are just dead set on blaming the serpent for all of their problems.
Yup, and that's why I want it banned. Use your feet, elf boy!
No real reason with the current meta to change the Wave Serpent. Once you hit the other more important 'broken' combos in the game, proper anti-tank can weed their way into the game more and nullify the effectiveness of multiple Serpent lists.
Also, I'm curious to see how the new IG (yes, I said IG...deal with it) Codex does at bringing down multiple Serpents with their proliferation of anti-tank ability.
I have to disagree, the Wave Serpent (along with Tau) is largely responsible for the shift to deathstars due to the ammount of damage they can put out. While not uncounterable fixing them would be part of fixing the game as a whole. If they were a heavy choice it would make spamming them really a non-thing and players would need to sacrifice other choices to take them.
I think that points should stay the same and it should have the same defensive bonuses. I also think it should be able to take holo fields.
I think what needs to change is the weapon part of the shield. 60" is crazy, and I say that as an Eldar player. I think the maximum it should be is 24" and maybe not ignores cover. If people complain that the nerd is too heavy, maybe add in a rule where targets are repelled D6" or something? Not sure.
Breng77 wrote: I have to disagree, the Wave Serpent (along with Tau) is largely responsible for the shift to deathstars due to the ammount of damage they can put out. While not uncounterable fixing them would be part of fixing the game as a whole. If they were a heavy choice it would make spamming them really a non-thing and players would need to sacrifice other choices to take them.
I believe the Daemon deathstar was played pretty heavily evne before the Eldar Codex hit....so not sure I can agree with you on that one.
Screamerstar was largely not played at all until after Tau came out, and even moreso after eldar. The use of Screamerstar was a response to essentially anything else getting blown off the table in short order.
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............
Yup, and that's why I want it banned. Use your feet, elf boy!
Great argument!
Here is an easy fix. Swap it for the Falcon. i.e. make it a Heavy Choice and the Falcon a dedicated transport.
Then you would have people complaining about the falcon as well, with a scatter it has 6 shots a turn as well, but its just a little less accurate.
I think what needs to change is the weapon part of the shield. 60" is crazy, and I say that as an Eldar player. I think the maximum it should be is 24" and maybe not ignores cover. If people complain that the nerd is too heavy, maybe add in a rule where targets are repelled D6" or something? Not sure.
60" range means nothing to a weapon that you will never use outside of 36". Why people keep saying that all these eldar players are blasting them off the table at 60" I have no idea. At 36" a serpent is within range of every AT weapon in the game. At 24" the serpent might be easier to take out but then you would just see more people taking chin mounted shuri cannons. So now the transport is avg 11 shots a turn. That'll fix the complaining!
Edit: I forgot to add that while I do have an eldar army my main army is dark angels.
Then you would have people complaining about the falcon as well, with a scatter it has 6 shots a turn as well, but its just a little less accurate.
Well lets look at this assertion
1.) Costs 10 points more
2.) Scatter laser would no be twin linked, so it would not be an auto twinlink for all guns, even moreso against flyers.
3.) Scatter laser costs 5 points more so now you are at 15 points more expensive.
4.) Max range 48" on a 2 shot gun
5.) Does not ignore cover
6.) Wave Serpent averages 8.5 shots so 2 more shots, but can also shoot more than that (and less but 6 is the minimum.)
It would not be complained about nearly as much, and would actually get used (if it is so good why do people never take it and instead take serpents as transports in spam lists)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also I see people taking the chin mounted cannons already so....yeah
Mr Morden wrote: Rubbish - I have played games against Cheese Serpents where they were destroying my trasnports as they tried to clsoe at more than 36" range.
36" is not in range of my Multi-Meltas, my Melta guns or pretty much everyhting that cna hurt Serpents in my Sororitas list.
I have a substantial Eldar army myself but I would not use multiple Wave Serpents
You're kidding right? You only bring AT with a max of 24" range and pile them into rhinos which have been considered trash since 6th started and complain about serpents...
Pretty sure any army with long range weapons would be destroying your rhinos. Which is just about everyone? oh and serpents avg 4 shots outside of 36" and with no rerolls they are only going to do 1 or 2 glances if they are lucky. So yes if the eldar player devoted 300+ points of his army I hope he destroyed your 35pnt transport.
There needs to be a discussion about serpents in competitive formats and casual formats. I'll agree that if someone brings 5-6 serpents against what I would think is a casual list like yours it may be a bit boring for you as a sister player but that's what you get when you bring a casual list against someone that is taking a more competitive approach. In a competitive setting 5-6 serpents are okayish but eldar wouldn't be tabling people. Their opponents, you know, have answers for an Av12 tank.
Serpent shooting gets twin linked heavy weapon plus d6+1 s7 range 60 ignore cover pinning
Falcon gets 2 s8ap2 range 48 shots
Serpent shoots much better.
Serpent can transport 12
Falcon can transport 6
Serpent is a much better transport (Guardians and Wraithnouns can't even use a Falcon).
Top of turn 1, when neither can Jink, the Serpent can degrade Pens to Glances. Falcon has no defense the Serpent doesn't have.
Serpent is much more survivable.
Identical movement.
Clearly there is a balance problem.
The Falcon feels right, if a bit overcosted. But moving it to DT really only pushes tank armies, not mechanized armies. Besides the thing feels like a HS choice.
The Falcon should be the tank hunter, and the Serpent should be the close-support tank/transport, but currently the Serpent is simply better.
Then you would have people complaining about the falcon as well, with a scatter it has 6 shots a turn as well, but its just a little less accurate.
Well lets look at this assertion
1.) Costs 10 points more
2.) Scatter laser would no be twin linked, so it would not be an auto twinlink for all guns, even moreso against flyers.
3.) Scatter laser costs 5 points more so now you are at 15 points more expensive.
4.) Max range 48" on a 2 shot gun
5.) Does not ignore cover
6.) Wave Serpent averages 8.5 shots so 2 more shots, but can also shoot more than that (and less but 6 is the minimum.)
It would not be complained about nearly as much, and would actually get used (if it is so good why do people never take it and instead take serpents as transports in spam lists)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also I see people taking the chin mounted cannons already so....yeah
The question was if the serpent and falcon switched places. If they were switched I think people would more than likely run 3 serpents in heavy since it is better than most of the competition is that slot. If they would take as many falcons as they could I don't know, but I don't see why not. Honestly you might not see the serpent taken if they switched just because of the redundancy. The falcon doesn't get taken now because as you and I both said it is slightly worse than the serpent against the majority of targets and it's in a competitive heavy slot. Serpents and falcons are pretty much the same tank, but one is worse. What would you take?
It was either somewhere on this forum or another someone did the mathhammer for both of these tanks, and they are actually surprisingly similar with the serpent pulling ahead slightly in most situations.
Breng77 wrote: So again then you are capped at 3 serpents, and cannot take any Wraithknights, or support platforms, or Dark Reapers etc.
Which is why I don't think people would take them if the falcon and serpent switched. They fulfill similar roles and the heavy slot is so competitive.
To the poster above, your points are off. Falcon with chin mounted cannon is 160 but I don't really see any point in bringing it so its really 150. Wave serpent without cannon is 135. 15 point difference isn't that bad when you consider one has to buy, at minimum, a 65 point troop.
The issue is that if you are bringing 6, then you are looking at 90 points difference.
SO if people take no or less serpents then it is more balanced. The falcon simply put is not near as scarey. (consider that a scatter laser only TL 2 shots vs up to 7).
Falcon is not super scare for infantry, because they can take cover etc.
It is similar or worse against light armor.
Etc.
I also don't see how it feels Heavy support, when it is similar to an eldar razorback.
Breng77 wrote: The issue is that if you are bringing 6, then you are looking at 90 points difference.
SO if people take no or less serpents then it is more balanced. The falcon simply put is not near as scarey. (consider that a scatter laser only TL 2 shots vs up to 7).
Falcon is not super scare for infantry, because they can take cover etc.
It is similar or worse against light armor.
Etc.
I also don't see how it feels Heavy support, when it is similar to an eldar razorback.
90 points is a lot, but you're not factoring in troops. One is required to take them and one is not. I am sure that had some effect in their pricing.
The dakka is really the loss, as you said in most cases the falcon is firing less, on avg 2 less shots a turn. S8 AP2 though is nice which leads to the next point...
Against light armor the serpent is better, but against higher AV the falcon wins.
The cover debate is pointless in this comparison. For troops against the falcon you need cover to avoid the AP2, but against the serpent everyone get theirs sv so taking away their cover is useless the majority of the time.
Personally I would love it if they made it similar to a razorback. Having another option for transport with a better anti tank gun would be nice without losing a heavy slot.
Mr Morden wrote:
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............
Whenever I read one of his posts about this topic, and it is his favorite, I am reminded of that quote about how one should not wrestle pigs in mud. You will both get dirty but the pig likes it.
Just bring some good anti tank units and blow some Wave Serpents up and I believe you wont see them as so "broken" afterwards.
Breng77 wrote: The issue is that if you are bringing 6, then you are looking at 90 points difference.
SO if people take no or less serpents then it is more balanced. The falcon simply put is not near as scarey. (consider that a scatter laser only TL 2 shots vs up to 7).
Falcon is not super scare for infantry, because they can take cover etc.
It is similar or worse against light armor.
Etc.
I also don't see how it feels Heavy support, when it is similar to an eldar razorback.
90 points is a lot, but you're not factoring in troops. One is required to take them and one is not. I am sure that had some effect in their pricing.
The dakka is really the loss, as you said in most cases the falcon is firing less, on avg 2 less shots a turn. S8 AP2 though is nice which leads to the next point...
Against light armor the serpent is better, but against higher AV the falcon wins.
The cover debate is pointless in this comparison. For troops against the falcon you need cover to avoid the AP2, but against the serpent everyone get theirs sv so taking away their cover is useless the majority of the time.
Personally I would love it if they made it similar to a razorback. Having another option for transport with a better anti tank gun would be nice without losing a heavy slot.
The cover is not at all pointless. If I have a 5+ save or worse cover is frequently better (often much better) than my save. As going to ground gets me a 3+ cover save instead of my 5+ or worse armor. (Even matters for 4+ save infantry if you go to ground)
Cover save matters for fliers that evade to get cover, now get nothing (note the twin linking makes the serpent much better vs fliers)
Cover save matters against skimmers with jink saves (or bike units with bad armor)
Cover save matters if I have stealth or shrouded
Cover save matters if my vehicle pops smoke.
Cover save matters vs an aegis.
Many units use cover as a significant part of their durability. The serpent ignores this..
In fact the cover save only really does not matter much if:
The target has a 3+ save or better
The target is not in cover of any kind.
The target cannot go to ground and has 5+ armor or better.
The selection of units that the falcon is better against is quite limited.
1) Wow, I apparently have been putting 2 holofields on each of my Falcons. Oops. Glad to know it's 15 points cheaper than I thought.
2) You really shouldn't have to explain how mean "ignores cover" is to an Eldar player. We should all feel our victims pain (Curse you Tau and Hellturkey!)
3) Nobody puts a Brightlance on a Serpent, because there isn't really a need, but a TL Brightlance Serpent is better against AV14 than a Brightlance Falcon, for fewer points. Which is crazy. Falcon still has AV13 covered though.
Mr Morden wrote:
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............
Just bring some good anti tank units and blow some Wave Serpents up and I believe you wont see them as so "broken" afterwards.
Some armies just don't have massed s7 shots with ignore cover. You've just stated: "Come om, stop playing orks, csm, adepta sororita, dark eldar and such - go get some tau, eldar or a gravstar".
The issue is that 4+ cover in the open, 3+ behind a ruin and 2+ behind fortifications on a vehicle that also is capable of ignoring pens or firing an ammount of s7 ignore cover shots that can get twin-linked and is simultaniously a transport and can jump across the whole map and get 3+ cover in the open...costs how much?!!
And it's extremely hard to catch a serpent in mellee.
To tell you the truth, i manage to win eldar from time to time just cause there are lots of eldar generals that allready got used to pushing win-buttons and don't give a heck about tacticks no more. It's fun but something like that happened to eldar fluffwise. They were super-advanced and could do anything. Got carried away and BAM! They got screwed to the point of exticntion. Probably this BAM will be a new codex a few years later. By that time common eldar players will completely forget about the existence of tactics with their serpentspams and seerstars. I forsee a titanic bugurt the moment they'll get brought in a line again. Heed my word!
Breng77 wrote: The cover is not at all pointless.
Cover save matters
I have already admitted that related to vehicles the ignores cover is good, but against troops a AP- weapon that ignores cover is hardly over powered. Yes a few units that depend on cover will have to use their Sv, but compare it to a weapon that is AP2-3 and ignores cover and you would have something to complain about. Not to mention that the scatter is AP6 without ignores cover. Serpents just make people roll lots of dice, but 1000 points worth of shooting should make you roll some dice.
The last couple posters asking for a one time use realize the price would have to come down to reflect the loss of fire power? Hell if it was one time use I would assume eldar would become become an ally force. You can get pretty much everything you want out of their codex with an ally matrix if you didn't have viable troop options. That or you would be forced to play aegis gun lines relying on warp spiders and war walkers/wraith knights to do the heavy lifting.
Orks
Daemons
Cultists
Chaos spawn
Ig Dark eldar
Kroot
Etc.
Don't really care much whether something is ignores cover or ap 2-3 ignores cover (which not much really is stock). Daemons especially don't care. Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.
Like I said if the serpent were not a dedicated transport it would be fine, but when it is a better tank than basically any heavy support tank I. The game and it is a DT that is a problem.
Breng77 wrote: Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.
Do you realize how silly this sounds? If more than half my army cannot kill 200-300 points of anything in a single shooting phase I'd rewrite my list. Most games of 40k are decided by the end of the 3rd turn if not the 2nd. Competitive play revolves around death stars that can point and click to remove units and turn 5 objective grabbers. Honestly I'd be more worried about the death stars that cost half the amount of 6 serpents and do more damage and remain almost unkillable.
and all the units you listed are 5-10 ppm. Do you really care if you fail some 4-5-6+ saves and lose them?
Don't really care much whether something is ignores cover or ap 2-3 ignores cover (which not much really is stock). Daemons especially don't care. Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.
Mr Morden wrote:
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............
Whenever I read one of his posts about this topic, and it is his favorite, I am reminded of that quote about how one should not wrestle pigs in mud. You will both get dirty but the pig likes it.
Just bring some good anti tank units and blow some Wave Serpents up and I believe you wont see them as so "broken" afterwards.
Wave Serpents in their current incarnation are more resistant to Lascannons than Land Raiders if they're not shooting their shields. A Land Raider is 250+ points for a transport, so by the Eldar standard it ought to be cheaper, because it's so unfair that a transport is expensive, right?
If they're not shooting the shields, there's no problem.
Land Raiders are much more resilient against S8 and especially S7 shooting, which has always killed Serpents more effective against them.
Lascannon are only a side to the argument, and any weapon that relies on penetrating hits and single hits is bound to be worse against something that downgrades a pen to a glance.
While I would think the Land Raider is worse overall and overpriced, this is not an honest comparison as you could say that the Land Raider is worth infinitely more than an AV12 vehicle as it's immune to S7 gunnery, which is common and most complained about this edition.
A Las cannon (s9) is only moderately more deadly to an LR than a Serpent with its shield up. But anything less and the LR is a brick.
Assuming front/side armor
S9 hits:
Serpents are penned half as often.
Serpents are glanced 3.5 times as often
S8:
LRs can't be penned, Serpent can
Serpents are glanced almost 3 times as often
S7:
LRs immune, Serpents can be penned or glanced
S6:
LRs immune, Serpents can be glanced
Anything in melee (or rear armor):
LRs: S8 can glance, s9 can pen
Serpents: S4 can glance, s5 can pen
Also, since the LR has 4hp, and the Serpent has 3hp and an abnormal glance:pen ratio, the LR cares more about pens than a Serpent, but a Serpent cares more about glances.
Basically, the argument here is like claiming a Warlock should cost as much as a Tyranofex because they both die to a hit from Shard of Anaris.
Mr Morden wrote:
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............
Whenever I read one of his posts about this topic, and it is his favorite, I am reminded of that quote about how one should not wrestle pigs in mud. You will both get dirty but the pig likes it.
Just bring some good anti tank units and blow some Wave Serpents up and I believe you wont see them as so "broken" afterwards.
Or you will find them overpowred like most people posting on this topic apart from a few hardcore defenders - some of whom happen to be Eldar players (as I am) - as you will know from reading all the varied posts about the Wave Serpent here - it is a problem - ignoring it does not mean it does not exist.....
Denying there is a problem isn't as bad as the cleanse-it-with-fire options (such as outright banning them), but it's still not a good thing. Hyperbole in either direction makes forming a consensus even harder.
(Edit - sorry, Morden, what I wrote didn't match what I meant)
I didn't - LIke the majority of posters I said reduce the sheer OP power of the shield gun -0 which is one of the major porblems - if that means reducing the cost fair enough.
I also said it compounded the problem that the Serpent s the only DT that the Eldar have and it would better to have more choice and an Assault vehicle that enabled Banshees to be playable.
Breng77 wrote: Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.
Do you realize how silly this sounds? If more than half my army cannot kill 200-300 points of anything in a single shooting phase I'd rewrite my list. Most games of 40k are decided by the end of the 3rd turn if not the 2nd. Competitive play revolves around death stars that can point and click to remove units and turn 5 objective grabbers. Honestly I'd be more worried about the death stars that cost half the amount of 6 serpents and do more damage and remain almost unkillable.
and all the units you listed are 5-10 ppm. Do you really care if you fail some 4-5-6+ saves and lose them?
Which deathstars are those? 6 Serpents cost 900 points fully upgraded.
Screamerstar to function well is 920 points and does far less damage on average
Seer Council is about 800 points
Beast Star is Probably around 500-600 points
Centurian Star is Probably around 800 points
Ovesastar is 800+
So hardly half the cost. Most of these engage one unit per turn unless they charge....
as for caring about 5-10 points per model, yes I care if those are my troops, I want to be able to make use of ways to keep them alive, like cover. Or you know 30+ PPM spawn, or 52 point Beasts of Nurgle, or 43 point Plague drones, or Say Belakor for 350 points. More or less any unit that relies on Shrouding. Or DE jetbikes that cost what 22 points per model or so. 25 point screamers without the Grimoir on them, Flesh hounds, Seekers, Nob Bikers, Lootas,.....the list goes on. There are plenty of units which at least in part rely on cover for their durablility, having a base transport that easily denies it at range is bad IMO.
The thing people fail to realize is that sure it does not sound crazy that you do 300+ points of damage per turn with your shooting against stuff, until you take into account armies that take 2 turns or so to get to you, now those armies are down 600 points before any damage is dealt. At which point playing down 600 points becomes difficult.
Now you can say "well you should have long range anti-tank in your army....so for Daemons that would be what exactly? Oh nothing...ok just so we are clear on that.
Or you know the serpents target the long range anti tank first....and then don't worry about it...
Don't really care much whether something is ignores cover or ap 2-3 ignores cover (which not much really is stock). Daemons especially don't care. Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.
Good thing it can't.
Really against models with a 5+ save, 6 serpents average 28 wounds. SO against say flesh hounds tha tis 455 points.
I heard a rumor about 7th edition coming up that the rule 'Acrobatics' will be changed to allow the unit to assault out of a transport.
This would be so nice for the Banshees and wouldn't need to have them create an assault transport for the Eldar.
Taking the easy way out as it were.
Wave Serpents in their current incarnation are more resistant to Lascannons than Land Raiders if they're not shooting their shields. A Land Raider is 250+ points for a transport, so by the Eldar standard it ought to be cheaper, because it's so unfair that a transport is expensive, right?
Yeah serpents are tougher than land raiders and shoot better to! Why do people keep saying this? If they are blowing you off the table with their shields they are not ignoring pens.
Or you will find them overpowred like most people posting on this topic apart from a few hardcore defenders - some of whom happen to be Eldar players (as I am) - as you will know from reading all the varied posts about the Wave Serpent here - it is a problem - ignoring it does not mean it does not exist.....
Serpents are not really a problem. In competitive formats spamming just 5-6 serpents just doesn't do that well. It is more than likely your list building that is not taking heavy armor into considerations.
Which deathstars are those? 6 Serpents cost 900 points fully upgraded.
The cheapest you can get 6 serpents with upgrades is 1200.
Screamerstar to function well is 920 points and does far less damage on average
Seer Council is about 800 points
Beast Star is Probably around 500-600 points
Centurian Star is Probably around 800 points
Ovesastar is 800+
So hardly half the cost. Most of these engage one unit per turn unless they charge....
Most of those units are nearly impossible to kill outside of extremely competitive formats. Serpent spam can falter against most tac lists.
as for caring about 5-10 points per model, yes I care if those are my troops, I want to be able to make use of ways to keep them alive, like cover. Or you know 30+ PPM spawn, or 52 point Beasts of Nurgle, or 43 point Plague drones, or Say Belakor for 350 points. More or less any unit that relies on Shrouding. Or DE jetbikes that cost what 22 points per model or so. 25 point screamers without the Grimoir on them, Flesh hounds, Seekers, Nob Bikers, Lootas,.....the list goes on. There are plenty of units which at least in part rely on cover for their durablility, having a base transport that easily denies it at range is bad IMO.
Except all of those units have another save. Sorry you don't always get your cover save, but that seems to be a rule that's getting passed out to every army.
The thing people fail to realize is that sure it does not sound crazy that you do 300+ points of damage per turn with your shooting against stuff, until you take into account armies that take 2 turns or so to get to you, now those armies are down 600 points before any damage is dealt. At which point playing down 600 points becomes difficult.
Yeah about that. seems people realized at the start of 6th that running a full assault army doesn't work. If you're talking about a short range army with no mobility then...
Now you can say "well you should have long range anti-tank in your army....so for Daemons that would be what exactly? Oh nothing...ok just so we are clear on that.
Or you know the serpents target the long range anti tank first....and then don't worry about it...
Yeah you probably shouldn't let your limited AT die first turn or just bring more of it.
Really against models with a 5+ save, 6 serpents average 28 wounds. SO against say flesh hounds tha tis 455 points.
Against flesh hounds that's at max 320 points, but I don't see too many people running full squads of 20. Even if they did that's only 14 models lost from an entire shooting phases. I'd call that a win if I only lost 224 points from 1200 points of shooting.
You keep saying 1200 points of shooting but that is not the case. Adding the contents of the transport to the cost is not really fair to say since they are troops, do score, and can kill things in addition to the serpents. That is like me costing those Death Stars at 200 or 300 more points to account for troops that must be taken to run the army in the first place. Many armies cannot take lots of effective long range anti tank.
Breng77 wrote: You keep saying 1200 points of shooting but that is not the case. Adding the contents of the transport to the cost is not really fair to say since they are troops, do score, and can kill things in addition to the serpents. That is like me costing those Death Stars at 200 or 300 more points to account for troops that must be taken to run the army in the first place. Many armies cannot take lots of effective long range anti tank.
Regardless if they can do something, the majority of the time they never get out of the serpent until turn 5 to grab objectives, or maybe they are hiding on a backfield objective. DA are just a tax that just so happens to get out and shoot something once in a while, or dies to a stiff breeze.
The fact is you don't get 6 serpents on the battlefield without spending 1200 points. Its important to recognize that because it shows just how much of a list is devoted to just serpents. If I am playing a 1500 point game, 1200 + a mantleseer is nearly the entire list. If you say 900 some mouthbreather will just go on about how broken eldar are that they can take 6 serpents at 1500 and still have 600 left to bring over-powered wraithknights and gak.
While true the shooting is only coming from 900 points of the army, other units than dire avengers can take them so it is possible to have units that are embarked actually do something. So saying that it is 1200 points of shooting is disingenuous. Much the same as saying screamer star costs 1100 points because I need to bring 2 troops to play the army.
For instance I could take a spirit seer as my lone hq, and field a wraith guard squad in one of this six serpents, or a fire dragon squad, or dark reapers, etc. In fact a serpent list at 1500 points will have more flexibility than most Death Stars because dropping say one serpent does not impact it as much as dropping parts of the star will.
Daba wrote: Has a serpent spam list actually won any majors? Compared with Deathstar lists?
No idea - don't play tournaments for the most part - Equally valid - how causal games have won in the first turn or two by Wave Serpent spam?
Comparing broken unit A with Broken Unit B and saying one is less broken than the other does not make it less broken.................
Dire Avengers
Regardless if they can do something, the majority of the time they never get out of the serpent until turn 5 to grab objectives, or maybe they are hiding on a backfield objective
So like win the game maybe? And this is different to most other people's Troops choices how? The difference is each squad they can come with a fast, powerful, well protected gunship..............
Really cant believe how people could think the Serpent is all fine... must be the eldarland-tauland-Syndrome...
*irony on*
no, the codex and the serpent is all fine... youre just a poor general, youre list is poor or whatever else if you cant beat eldar. It isnt that hard. Dont blame the codex... Its just that every smart general tends to like eldar and therefore some people think its the codex... And you know, just the smartest Generals can make it to the last rounds of a tournament. See the logic?
*irony off*
Do you also think the hellturkey is fine?
Really?
As I said before. Make the shield one shot only with removal of its defnsive effect after the shot and the rest can stay as it is.
Daba wrote: Has a serpent spam list actually won any majors? Compared with Deathstar lists?
No idea - don't play tournaments for the most part - Equally valid - how causal games have won in the first turn or two by Wave Serpent spam?
Well, you can measure tournaments from people who are there and record or recall what happened.
With casual games, I could say 'none' and there's literally no way of tracking one way or another.
Without this data, you can't really say whether it's OP or not, it's just based on feeling (note my feeling is that it is overturned, too good). With tournament data, we DO see Helldrakes being taken, and is usually the only (non token) presence CSM have allied to Daemons. We have some evidence there. I similarly expect Wave Serpents to occupy a similar role and make often appearances.
Looking at the stats, most people know the unit is broken: 112 dakkanauts already proposed a way to fix it. And the vast majority focused on the Shield.
I am missing a "no need to fix it at all" option for those who say it is not broken. Perhaps even a full "Is it broken?" poll, with multiple options such as Serpents, Riptides, Heldrakes, Wraithknights and all the "stars".
Daba wrote: Has a serpent spam list actually won any majors? Compared with Deathstar lists?
No idea - don't play tournaments for the most part - Equally valid - how causal games have won in the first turn or two by Wave Serpent spam?
Well, you can measure tournaments from people who are there and record or recall what happened.
With casual games, I could say 'none' and there's literally no way of tracking one way or another.
Without this data, you can't really say whether it's OP or not, it's just based on feeling (note my feeling is that it is overturned, too good). With tournament data, we DO see Helldrakes being taken, and is usually the only (non token) presence CSM have allied to Daemons. We have some evidence there. I similarly expect Wave Serpents to occupy a similar role and make often appearances.
I'll let tournament players answer if it shows up lots or a little - the difficulty with this particular vehicle is that the Eldar don't get another DT so for their mandatory Troops choice - unless you go for loads of Jetbikes then its pretty much a no brainer I think? So it should be in tournament lists I should think?
Are not a lot of Eldar lists based around this? 4x 5 Dire Avengers in Wave Serpent with scatter lasers, Shuriken-cannon and holo fields
It's not broken, just too good/above the curve. Broken implies something else, and thigs can be broken without even being too good (eg ATSKNF) because they 'break' normal game interaction, or make it a non game (D-weapons), neither of which the Wave Serpent does; if it did it would be over Deathstars in tournament choice.
Mr Morden wrote: Maybe but "broken" means to me "its too good" for the game...
They are distinct as broken can be used for something that is too bad, as well as separately having game breaking bugs/interactions, or makes the game degenerate. The Wave Serpent is none of those things so cannot be described as broken.
Broken as in "not working properly". ATSKNF, Look out Sir!, Mandrakes and Serpents are all, imo, broken. And for different reasons.
A rule that ignores a vast part of the game´s mechanics and applies to nearly half the armies, a rule that goes silly really fast and breaks the narrative and the suspension of unbelief, a unit so bad it gives the other player an unfair advantage, and a unit so good it gives you an unfair advantage.
Breng77 wrote:So comparing them to other super OP things makes them not OP? Both serpents and Deathstars are bad for the game and both need fixing.
Daba wrote:Has a serpent spam list actually won any majors? Compared with Deathstar lists?
This was my point, deathstars win competitive formats where people are playing to win. Serpent spam doesn't. It's obviously not on the same level.
Breng77 wrote:For instance I could take a spirit seer as my lone hq, and field a wraith guard squad in one of this six serpents, or a fire dragon squad, or dark reapers, etc. In fact a serpent list at 1500 points will have more flexibility than most Death Stars because dropping say one serpent does not impact it as much as dropping parts of the star will.
It's funny that is what most competitive lists do, but then they are not running 5-6 serpents anymore. ie they start dropping serpents to take units that are competitive and offer options that a list full of serpents doesn't.
Mr Morden wrote: how causal games have won in the first turn or two by Wave Serpent spam?
I can understand this because I have done it to people before. Neither one of us enjoyed the game, but they wanted to play. The vast majority of these games though the opponent has zero tactics in mind, they have a random assortment of models, varying degrees of rule knowledge usually none, and just play terrible. This is where a lot of the hate for competitive units comes from I think. No one forgets getting tabled and they will always try to find and excuse. It had to be the other army it was over powered.
So like win the game maybe? And this is different to most other people's Troops choices how? The difference is each squad they can come with a fast, powerful, well protected gunship..............
You can't blame a player for taking their best troop choices.
MasterOfGaunts wrote:Really cant believe how people could think the Serpent is all fine... must be the eldarland-tauland-Syndrome...
no, the codex and the serpent is all fine... youre just a poor general, youre list is poor or whatever else if you cant beat eldar. It isnt that hard. Dont blame the codex... Its just that every smart general tends to like eldar and therefore some people think its the codex... And you know, just the smartest Generals can make it to the last rounds of a tournament. See the logic?
Do you also think the hellturkey is fine?
It is almost as if the latest codex tends to do well. Aside from the abomination that is DA every new codex has had its fun in 6th. CSM had to wait for the hellturkey faq, but before that it was a terrible unit that no one would touch. Nids might be the next DA, but people are still building lists. So I'd wait and see. Do we all get to cry when your codex gets updated? Just wait a month or two when IG lists start pounding out the top 8s.
da001 wrote:Looking at the stats, most people know the unit is broken: 112 dakkanauts already proposed a way to fix it. And the vast majority focused on the Shield.
Most people are generally not competitive or even semi competitive in their list building. Playing against a semi competitive list like serpent spam with your fluff list generally doesn't end well. It usually leads to a lot of resentment to make up for the players own faults.
Are not a lot of Eldar lists based around this? 4x 5 Dire Avengers in Wave Serpent with scatter lasers, Shuriken-cannon and holo fields
Nope, drop the shuri cannons as its a waste of points, and you only need 1-3 for competitive lists. You can't fit in a deathstar if you take 6.
da001 wrote:Broken as in "not working properly". ATSKNF, Look out Sir!, Mandrakes and Serpents are all, imo, broken. And for different reasons.
A rule that ignores a vast part of the game´s mechanics and applies to nearly half the armies, a rule that goes silly really fast and breaks the narrative and the suspension of unbelief, a unit so bad it gives the other player an unfair advantage, and a unit so good it gives you an unfair advantage.
All of them should be fixed one way or another.
Hey we agree on something! but probably not the way you would think. There are many USR's in this game that need to be nerfed. ATSKNF, Ignores Cover, Sv re-rolls to name a couple. These rules generally promote strategies that are not fun for either player. When you can outright ignore basic rules of the game and deny your opponent their armies special touch you're not promoting a fun gaming environment. A great example, White scares are a great army now, space marines are actually seeing top 8s again. Then you factor in that silly =I= book and you realize every player can screw white scars over for less than 50 points. What a great way to play! Or the general annoyance of people everywhere tau and their markerlights/buffmander. What other army can in general remove so many USRs from an opposing army or give so many to their own? It's just bad rules design.
Now the serpent shield does have ignores cover which I agree is silly. Anything with the possibility of firing 7 S7 shots doesn't need ignores cover. Glancing other vehicles to death is too easy, but for the most part no one takes vehicles with less than Av12 anymore except fliers so it's not that game breaking. It is a problem though since it hamstrings game design in the future. Everytime GW writes in one of these USR's that ignores rules they are promoting the type of play that casual players don't like.
I don't think the serpent is over powered, I think its a very competitive choice for eldar. Every army has competitive choices though. The fact is most players are casual and don't enjoy playing or building competitive lists. If you're about to play an eldar player and he pulls out 6 serpents. Let him know you want a friendly game. Its the same if you come across any of the deathstars, you don't have to play against these people or they can play a more casual friendly list.
da001 wrote:Looking at the stats, most people know the unit is broken: 112 dakkanauts already proposed a way to fix it. And the vast majority focused on the Shield.
Most people are generally not competitive or even semi competitive in their list building. Playing against a semi competitive list like serpent spam with your fluff list generally doesn't end well. It usually leads to a lot of resentment to make up for the players own faults.
I see two words in your sentence that draw my attention:
1) Resentment created by something (a game) intended to be fun.
2) Searching for the "fault" in either fluffy or competitive players to explain the "resent".
I enjoy competitions but I do not think 40k is made for that, so I do not go to 40k tournaments. I play "for fun" like in "fun for both players, no matter who wins". I particularly enjoy tight games and using fluffy lists. I will like to play against an Eldar player without the absolute lack of balance between my fluffy list and a competitive list. Either the other player does not take Serpents, Wraithknights, Seerstars and the like or I am forced to play "competitive" choices instead of those I enjoy (like heldrake spam or screamerstar or centurion star or whatever boring, lame, copy-pasted "star" from the Internet). Either way, one of the two players must use a list he doesn´t like. And buy models he doesn´t like. And even play a game in a way he doesn´t like. I assure you I see no point in wasting my small amount of spare time in a game that generates resentment in me, no matter whose fault it is.
I don´t think this is fair, and thus I advocate for house ruling ("fixing") clearly broken units. Heldrakes, Screamerstars... and Serpents. As you said, the Serpent Alpha Strike is not fun. And I don´t think it is the other player´s "fault" for fielding an army no longer "competitive". This resentment is caused by a problem in the game itself, a problem that can be easily fixed. A problem the creators acknowledged and left to the players to solve.
This way both players can take whatever list they want, and still enjoy a tight, interesting battle, instead of the game reduced to Star Unit A Vs Star Unit B, which I (as many other players) find boring to no end.
da001 wrote:Broken as in "not working properly". ATSKNF, Look out Sir!, Mandrakes and Serpents are all, imo, broken. And for different reasons.
A rule that ignores a vast part of the game´s mechanics and applies to nearly half the armies, a rule that goes silly really fast and breaks the narrative and the suspension of unbelief, a unit so bad it gives the other player an unfair advantage, and a unit so good it gives you an unfair advantage.
All of them should be fixed one way or another.
Hey we agree on something! but probably not the way you would think. There are many USR's in this game that need to be nerfed. ATSKNF, Ignores Cover, Sv re-rolls to name a couple. These rules generally promote strategies that are not fun for either player. When you can outright ignore basic rules of the game and deny your opponent their armies special touch you're not promoting a fun gaming environment. A great example, White scares are a great army now, space marines are actually seeing top 8s again. Then you factor in that silly =I= book and you realize every player can screw white scars over for less than 50 points. What a great way to play! Or the general annoyance of people everywhere tau and their markerlights/buffmander. What other army can in general remove so many USRs from an opposing army or give so many to their own? It's just bad rules design.
Now the serpent shield does have ignores cover which I agree is silly. Anything with the possibility of firing 7 S7 shots doesn't need ignores cover. Glancing other vehicles to death is too easy, but (...)
I don´t think we agree on something, we agree on everything
You are just not using the word "overpowered", you are using expressions such as "highly competitive" and "best choice" for the Serpent. You are deliberately trying to avoid the word "overpowered" using synonyms.
for the most part no one takes vehicles with less than Av12 anymore except fliers so it's not that game breaking. It is a problem though since it hamstrings game design in the future. Everytime GW writes in one of these USR's that ignores rules they are promoting the type of play that casual players don't like.
Well said!
And why does "nobody" uses AV12 vehicles? Because stuff like the Serpent. By fixing the Serpent (and the rest of broken units), all of a sudden lots and lots of new units and lists are suddenly playable again, perhaps not at tournament levels, but enough for casual games even against a competitive player using the best possible list.
It is all a matter of how much overpowered are "good lists" against "bad lists". I think the gap is too big right now.
I don't think the serpent is over powered, I think its a very competitive choice for eldar. Every army has competitive choices though. The fact is most players are casual and don't enjoy playing or building competitive lists. If you're about to play an eldar player and he pulls out 6 serpents. Let him know you want a friendly game. Its the same if you come across any of the deathstars, you don't have to play against these people or they can play a more casual friendly list.
But I don´t want that. I want to play against your Serpents, no matter how many of them, with a normal list, and still be able to give you a good fight.
I don´t want you to be forced to choose between not being able to play with a casual player without causing resentment and not fielding the Serpents you bought and paint. And I don´t want me to be forced to choose between getting heldrakes/screamerstar and being unable to play against a competitive player.
I think the best solution I've seen here is to swap the take-all-comers gunship with megashields with the humble little transport sat in the heavy support slot.
it's as if when they were holding interviews for who will do what...;
writers - "okay, so who's going to be the dedicated anti-tank of the army?"
Fire Dragons: "well we've got melt-"
Wave Serpent: "I'll deal with the tanks!!!!"
Fire Dragons: "bu-"
Writers: "excellent! now, who will be the hard to kill behemoth of the army?"
Wraithknight: "well, I happen to be toughness eigh-"
Waveserpent: "I'll downgrade all penetrating hits to glancing hits, and then ignore them on a 4+ anyway!!!!"
Wraithknight: "but I-"
Writers: "Brilliant! now, who will be the fast moving shooting unit of the army?"
Warp Spiders: "We can move at an incrdib-"
Wave Serpent: "I WILL MOVE AS FAST AS POSSIBLE AND STILL SHOOT AND GET A COVER SAVE TOO!"
Warp Spiders: "But we're th-"
Writers: "okay waveserpent, you can do that too. so who's going to be the dedicated transport of the army?"
Falcon: "well I'm a reasonably balanced uni-"
Waveserpent: "I have the largest troop capacity and more guns than you!! I'll carry the troops!!"
Falcon: "I think that's a little unf-"
Writers: "okay Waveserpent, you get that too. now, who will be the guy to get linebreaker? It can't be you waveser-"
Waveserpent: "I will dump a unit that has done nothing but ride around all game in the opponents deployment zone, contest their objective and take linebreaker!!!!!"
honestly, I'm surprised the waveserpent isn't a flier with hover mode.
Mr Morden wrote: Maybe but "broken" means to me "its too good" for the game...
They are distinct as broken can be used for something that is too bad, as well as separately having game breaking bugs/interactions, or makes the game degenerate. The Wave Serpent is none of those things so cannot be described as broken.
I call it broken for reasons I have already said you call it something else - nothing changes the fact that its too good -hence broken.
Even by your defination Wave Serpent spam often makes the game less fun - hence degnerates the game..........
da001 worte "Lots of great stuuff" and exalted in repsonse to the Goldphish - which seemed to be mostly you must play a competative list or you are playing wrong..........Oh and playing with the hardest units makes you a better player?
da001 wrote:I see two words in your sentence that draw my attention:
1) Resentment created by something (a game) intended to be fun.
2) Searching for the "fault" in either fluffy or competitive players to explain the "resent".
I should of clarified my statement better. Player A brings a non competitive list against Player B who is using a semi or even a very competitive list. Neither side will have fun in this engagement more than likely. Player A will more than likely get boarded and what else can he say except the other army was obviously over powered! We should nerf it all! or he could re-evaluate what happened and what he can do next time to make sure both players have a good time.
I enjoy competitions but I do not think 40k is made for that, so I do not go to 40k tournaments. I play "for fun" like in "fun for both players, no matter who wins". I particularly enjoy tight games and using fluffy lists. I will like to play against an Eldar player without the absolute lack of balance between my fluffy list and a competitive list. Either the other player does not take Serpents, Wraithknights, Seerstars and the like or I am forced to play "competitive" choices instead of those I enjoy (like heldrake spam or screamerstar or centurion star or whatever boring, lame, copy-pasted "star" from the Internet). Either way, one of the two players must use a list he doesn´t like. And buy models he doesn´t like. And even play a game in a way he doesn´t like. I assure you I see no point in wasting my small amount of spare time in a game that generates resentment in me, no matter whose fault it is.
This is the exact attitude I am talking about with a casual player. You want to play non competitive lists in a game that has competitive formats. You can't expect every unit in the game to be equal or balanced and players will always find the best units / unit combinations. It's a two player game and at some point you have to ask the other person what they think is fun. They might like playing semi competitive games where as you might want to play non competitive games. Lowering the standard for everyone just because you don't find competitive formats any fun seems wrong.
I don´t think this is fair, and thus I advocate for house ruling ("fixing") clearly broken units. Heldrakes, Screamerstars... and Serpents. As you said, the Serpent Alpha Strike is not fun. And I don´t think it is the other player´s "fault" for fielding an army no longer "competitive". This resentment is caused by a problem in the game itself, a problem that can be easily fixed. A problem the creators acknowledged and left to the players to solve.
This way both players can take whatever list they want, and still enjoy a tight, interesting battle, instead of the game reduced to Star Unit A Vs Star Unit B, which I (as many other players) find boring to no end.
This solution only works if everyone in your meta agrees to it, but what happens when you have that one guy or new players want to join in? Their idea of fun might not mesh with yours.What they think is fair might be different.
You are just not using the word "overpowered", you are using expressions such as "highly competitive" and "best choice" for the Serpent. You are deliberately trying to avoid the word "overpowered" using synonyms.
You got me here! Good job, but really it's because very few units in this game are really overpowered. It's usually a combination of units that make something over powered.
And why does "nobody" uses AV12 vehicles? Because stuff like the Serpent. By fixing the Serpent (and the rest of broken units), all of a sudden lots and lots of new units and lists are suddenly playable again, perhaps not at tournament levels, but enough for casual games even against a competitive player using the best possible list.
Because guns exist in this game and the hull point system is dumb. A tank with decent armor and save happens to be good, who would of guessed. How many other vehicles have decent armor and a save? oh fliers.
It is all a matter of how much overpowered are "good lists" against "bad lists". I think the gap is too big right now.
There will always be a gap, unless you take the power level into the dirt non competitive lists just won't win often against competitive lists. It's just kinda how it works.
But I don´t want that. I want to play against your Serpents, no matter how many of them, with a normal list, and still be able to give you a good fight.
Then bring a competitive list. I play Dark Angels, I don't even have a competitive list. I still understand that it isn't my opponents fault that his <insert netlist> rolled me. Making every codex as terrible as mine though would just make for really boring games.
I don´t want you to be forced to choose between not being able to play with a casual player without causing resentment and not fielding the Serpents you bought and paint. And I don´t want me to be forced to choose between getting heldrakes/screamerstar and being unable to play against a competitive player.
Then don't play the game? Find people that want to play the game the same as you or don't get angry when you get tabled.
which seemed to be mostly you must play a competative list or you are playing wrong..........Oh and playing with the hardest units makes you a better player?
I never said anything of the kind good sir. I said that playing non competitive lists against a competitive list and then complaining about losing is wrong.
Playing with the hardest units, I assume you mean strongest, doesn't mean anything. What about the guy who picked up <whatever> and decided he was going to build an army just because of that unit. If it happens to be the riptide, or hellturkey, or serpent, or whatever can you really fault him? Some of the strongest units are also some of the coolest.
Then bring a competitive list. I play Dark Angels, I don't even have a competitive list. I still understand that it isn't my opponents fault that his <insert netlist> rolled me. Making every codex as terrible as mine though would just make for really boring games.
Making every Codex (and Codex Unit) viable would make for better games than the present situation where some units (and Codexs) are better - why defend this as you seem to be doing - it only promotes the usage of certain units. Why should the DA codex be bad and others ok and some really good - I can't understand why anyone would want or defend this situation?
Yes by all means the game style should be discussed with the players involved - but again if no one is having fun because one list is default poor and the other default good - that's a problem with the units and the codex not just the players?
The problem is currently that everyone seems to agree that certain units are too good for the points (broken, cheese, whatever you want to call it) but any attempt to bring them into line with other units is seen an attack on "competitive" players who need these OP units? Otherwise apart form the discussion about how and which units to change - why else do a few people defend them and scream nerf - rather than balance?
You can't expect every unit in the game to be equal or balanced and players will always find the best units / unit combinations.
Thats right, but why dont fix Units that has been identified as too strong for their costs relative to the other ones? In this special case, the serpent.
Mr Morden wrote:Making every Codex (and Codex Unit) viable would make for better games than the present situation where some units (and Codexs) are better - why defend this as you seem to be doing - it only promotes the usage of certain units.
I would love it if GW could write better, but I am not GW. I just play within the confines of their game.
Why should the DA codex be bad and others ok and some really good - I can't understand why anyone would want or defend this situation?
I never said that I'd like for some units to be better or worse. I'd love for every unit to be as good as the serpent, but overall the eldar codex has just as many glaring problems as any other codex. Eldar just have a few units that are really good in the current meta.
Yes by all means the game style should be discussed with the players involved - but again if no one is having fun because one list is default poor and the other default good - that's a problem with the units and the codex not just the players?
If I run an Eldar list of all guardians. Should I be competitive? That is really what you're arguing for.
The problem is currently that everyone seems to agree that certain units are too good for the points (broken, cheese, whatever you want to call it) but any attempt to bring them into line with other units is seen an attack on "competitive" players who need these OP units? Otherwise apart form the discussion about how and which units to change - why else do a few people defend them and scream nerf - rather than balance?
Because lets say that you make enough noise and GW decides to nerf wave serpents. Then eldar players will switch to mass warp spiders or whatever and then it will be that unit that's overpowered. Any kind of nerf needs to be justified. It has to have an impact on the overall game.
Why don't we see posts about how a unit that most armies can take, and is a battle brother, happens to give almost every worth while USR to any unit it is combined with?
Why hasn't anyone just said, take away the serpents ignores cover and leave it at that. Now its just a platform that avg 8 shots a turn and you get all your saves against it.
MasterOfGaunts wrote: Thats right, but why dont fix Units that has been identified as too strong for their costs relative to the other ones? In this special case, the serpent.
There will always be units that are stronger than their points costs. I would love it if GW made all units this way, but they don't. Sooner or later people figure it out whats units work better and that's the unit that gets played everywhere and gets splashed on the internet.
Games were made to be fun and competitive otherwise we wouldn't keep score. I think it's fun to play against strong lists because it makes you think about your list building. You have to try and find unit combinations that work better. Sure we could all just play our favorite units and have a beer and pretzel game and it would be fun for a while. but some people like to play competitively. Sooner or later I am going try and make my army better, and I am preparing for you to do the same. This type of mentality leads to netlisting because there will always be an optimal list.
da001 wrote:I see two words in your sentence that draw my attention:
1) Resentment created by something (a game) intended to be fun.
2) Searching for the "fault" in either fluffy or competitive players to explain the "resent".
I should of clarified my statement better. Player A brings a non competitive list against Player B who is using a semi or even a very competitive list. Neither side will have fun in this engagement more than likely. Player A will more than likely get boarded and what else can he say except the other army was obviously over powered! We should nerf it all! or he could re-evaluate what happened and what he can do next time to make sure both players have a good time.
I can think of two perfectly viable solutions after the re-evaluation:
Option 1: The casual player (who is partly responsible for the "fun" factor in the game) may buy a set of rather expensive competitive units and create a competitive combo, even if he dislikes the models or the background of the units. He may then waste a lot of time painting models he doesn´t like and, if the meta doesn´t change, then finally be able to play a list he doesn´t like. This involve months of work and lots of money for this player.
Option 2: The competitive player (who is also partly responsible for the "fun" factor in the game) may openly admit that the unit X is overpowered, and accept a minor change during a game against an obvious fluffy list. For example, if you want to use lots of Serpents against a normal list, the change "once shot the Shield is lost" is enough. It doesn´t turn the Serpent into a bad unit, at all. This takes five seconds and nobody is forced to waste money or time in something he does not like.
Resentment appears when, while trying to reach a compromise, it is obvious that a person thinks the other part should spend money and time to get into his "superior" solution, when there is no need. It costs you nothing to fix the Serpents.
I enjoy competitions but I do not think 40k is made for that, so I do not go to 40k tournaments. I play "for fun" like in "fun for both players, no matter who wins". I particularly enjoy tight games and using fluffy lists. I will like to play against an Eldar player without the absolute lack of balance between my fluffy list and a competitive list. Either the other player does not take Serpents, Wraithknights, Seerstars and the like or I am forced to play "competitive" choices instead of those I enjoy (like heldrake spam or screamerstar or centurion star or whatever boring, lame, copy-pasted "star" from the Internet). Either way, one of the two players must use a list he doesn´t like. And buy models he doesn´t like. And even play a game in a way he doesn´t like. I assure you I see no point in wasting my small amount of spare time in a game that generates resentment in me, no matter whose fault it is.
This is the exact attitude I am talking about with a casual player. You want to play non competitive lists in a game that has competitive formats.
It hasn´t. GW has made a lot of efforts to make clear the game is not intended for competitive purposes.
You can't expect every unit in the game to be equal or balanced and players will always find the best units / unit combinations.
I am not expecting that. There is but a handful of broken units.
It is all about the size of the gap between "bad lists" and "good lists". There will always be a gap. It just happens that it is too big right now.
It's a two player game and at some point you have to ask the other person what they think is fun. They might like playing semi competitive games where as you might want to play non competitive games.
I enjoy competitive games, as long as both players have a chance of winning.
If the game is one sided, it is not fair competition. I don´t enjoy unfair competitions. It doesn´t matter if I win or I lost, I just do not enjoy it. My defeats are useless because I learn nothing and my victories are hollow because I feel like cheating. That´s the reason I usually put " " in "competitive" players. Competition is worthless without balance.
Lowering the standard for everyone just because you don't find competitive formats any fun seems wrong.
It is not just "me": the majority of the players are casual, not competitive. You said so recently, and polls are quite clear in this regard. The guy with the 4 Heldrakes that insists they are not overpowered is seen as TFG, because he can potentially turn a game into a drama.
And it is not "lowering the standard". It is raising the standard: fixing the game making it fair for both players. That´s what real competition is about: see who is a better player in a fair match.
I don´t think this is fair, and thus I advocate for house ruling ("fixing") clearly broken units. Heldrakes, Screamerstars... and Serpents. As you said, the Serpent Alpha Strike is not fun. And I don´t think it is the other player´s "fault" for fielding an army no longer "competitive". This resentment is caused by a problem in the game itself, a problem that can be easily fixed. A problem the creators acknowledged and left to the players to solve.
This way both players can take whatever list they want, and still enjoy a tight, interesting battle, instead of the game reduced to Star Unit A Vs Star Unit B, which I (as many other players) find boring to no end.
This solution only works if everyone in your meta agrees to it, but what happens when you have that one guy or new players want to join in? Their idea of fun might not mesh with yours.What they think is fair might be different.
You are right. That´s the difficult part: you declare heldrakes overpowered, fix them in a group, and eventually meet someone who just bought 4 heldrakes. And claims they are not overpowered, just strong.
Time and patience are good tools. And a lot of talking and negotiation.
What I find completely unfair is that the rest of the players (the majority) should buy and paint a lot of new stuff they don´t like just to play with the 4-heldrakes guy, or accept that they are somehow "worse players" because they cannot defeat his list.
You are just not using the word "overpowered", you are using expressions such as "highly competitive" and "best choice" for the Serpent. You are deliberately trying to avoid the word "overpowered" using synonyms.
You got me here! Good job, but really it's because very few units in this game are really overpowered. It's usually a combination of units that make something over powered.
I think we all know some units that are "too good", either alone or when working with others.
(...)
It is all a matter of how much overpowered are "good lists" against "bad lists". I think the gap is too big right now.
There will always be a gap, unless you take the power level into the dirt non competitive lists just won't win often against competitive lists. It's just kinda how it works.
The size of the gap is what matters. It is not fixing every unit, just a handful of them.
But I don´t want that. I want to play against your Serpents, no matter how many of them, with a normal list, and still be able to give you a good fight.
Then bring a competitive list.
Look at the bolded part. You are asking me to buy and paint units I don´t like in order to play. I am not asking you to pay more money or do anything, I am asking you to forfeit an advantage based on fairness
I play Dark Angels, I don't even have a competitive list. I still understand that it isn't my opponents fault that his <insert netlist> rolled me. Making every codex as terrible as mine though would just make for really boring games.
The Dark Angels codex is not terrible. It is quite good. It has lots of options and fun. Games are boring only if one-sided.
The only reason you think otherwise is because you are only thinking on a handful of completely broken lists. If Serpents, Screamerstars and the rest are fixed, you will suddenly be able to play Dark Angels the way you want. Tournaments see only, how many, ten different lists? Fifteen? By fixing what is broken, we all win.
I don´t want you to be forced to choose between not being able to play with a casual player without causing resentment and not fielding the Serpents you bought and paint. And I don´t want me to be forced to choose between getting heldrakes/screamerstar and being unable to play against a competitive player.
Then don't play the game? Find people that want to play the game the same as you or don't get angry when you get tabled.
Not playing the game because a handful of players like one-sided games? Nonsense. The other solutions are ok though.
which seemed to be mostly you must play a competative list or you are playing wrong..........Oh and playing with the hardest units makes you a better player?
I never said anything of the kind good sir.
Neither did I said the first part. You got my quotes mixed with another person, Mr Morden. It is quite confussing if you start "da001 said" and then put Mr Morden´s words.
I said that playing non competitive lists against a competitive list and then complaining about losing is wrong.
Sure. But then again many competitive players claim that "X is not overpowered" just to get players to play with. And then not-competitive players feel cheated.
It is something you just (sort of) admitted doing a couple of posts before (the "you got me there!" part), and it is common. In the four heldrake example aforementioned, the heldrake player will tipically get no games from many players, except when he finds a newb who can be tricked into a game by claiming that Heldrakes are not that overpowered. Cue arguments, resentment and senseless drama. People complain because they feel cheated.
Playing with the hardest units, I assume you mean strongest, doesn't mean anything. What about the guy who picked up <whatever> and decided he was going to build an army just because of that unit. If it happens to be the riptide, or hellturkey, or serpent, or whatever can you really fault him? Some of the strongest units are also some of the coolest.
To begin with, that´s rare. Most players spamming the few broken units do it because winning, even when it is achieved using unfair advantages, means a lot to them. But I do know some! And you know what? They are the first in proposing a way to field the units they like without causing a drama. I know a Heldrake guy that uses the rule: "a flyer can use a template weapon only when hovering", and only uses a 180º arc from the mouth. And I saw an Elysian fluffy player (lots of veterans in chimeras, stormtroopers and vendettas) to nerf the Vendettas in different ways back in 5th.
Imagine you go to a place and meet one stranger. You look at his list and there are two options: either he is using a competitive list or he is not. What stops you for accepting a nerf in the Serpents when playing with the second list? What´s the point of winning with an obviously superior list?
Competition is only worthy when you prove your skill against the other player´s on an equal footing. Winning means nothing otherwise.
Just for fun, I decided to play around with the "Bring more anti-tank weapons" statement that was mentioned earlier with the assumption that the opponent was playing Space Marines.
Wave Serpents have 3 HP, 12/12/10, 4+ cover if they move (and are in the open) and can downgrade pens to glances on a 2+ (if I'm incorrect, someone please let me know). With the assumption that the entire Space Marine army can shoot at one and the Wave Serpent does not fire the shield, you'd need the following (on average) amounts of the traditional SM anti-tank weapons to glance out a Wave Serpent in 1 turn:
18 Missile Launchers (this would be the equivalent of 3 Dev Squads and 6 Tactical Squads).
Spoiler:
18 shots, 12 hits (18 * 2/3), 6 glances * (Glances on 4, Pens on 5 or 6, significant chance to convert all to glances, so 12 * 1/2), 3 hull points (6 * 1/2 due to Holofields).
*I went ahead and assumed that the 1/3 of hits, the 4 glances, would be about .68 pens, which after holofields would be .34....a slim chance here.
14 Lascannons (still 6 Tacticals, but only 2 Dev squads).
Spoiler:
14 shots, 9 hits (14 *.67), 6 glances (Glances on 3, Pens on 4, 5, 6. Significant chance to convert all to glances so 9 * 2/3), 3 hull points (6 * 1/2 due to Holofields).
*Again, out of the 6 damage rolls, you're only looking at 1/2 of those being pens, which against the shield goes down to .51, and holofields reduce to .26)
Now, obviously this would a perfectly average roll, which gives the opportunity for different results (the Marine Player could hit with everything while the Eldar player could flub his holofields), but in general, in order for anti-tank weapons to really work on a wave serpent, you'd need a staggering amount of them, or pray that you can tease out the Serpent Shield shots and hope you have enough weapons left over after he's done.
I can math out other weapons if people want, but it turns out that depending on the venue, Grav weapons seem to be the best solution. I say "depending on the venue" because they can kill a Serpent in two immobilize results (or bikes can immobilize with 1, and then assault and krak/meltabomb it) if your venue ruled that grav weapons ignore vehicle cover saves.
Mr Morden wrote:Making every Codex (and Codex Unit) viable would make for better games than the present situation where some units (and Codexs) are better - why defend this as you seem to be doing - it only promotes the usage of certain units.
I would love it if GW could write better, but I am not GW. I just play within the confines of their game.
Why should the DA codex be bad and others ok and some really good - I can't understand why anyone would want or defend this situation?
I never said that I'd like for some units to be better or worse. I'd love for every unit to be as good as the serpent, but overall the eldar codex has just as many glaring problems as any other codex. Eldar just have a few units that are really good in the current meta.
Yes by all means the game style should be discussed with the players involved - but again if no one is having fun because one list is default poor and the other default good - that's a problem with the units and the codex not just the players?
If I run an Eldar list of all guardians. Should I be competitive? That is really what you're arguing for.
The problem is currently that everyone seems to agree that certain units are too good for the points (broken, cheese, whatever you want to call it) but any attempt to bring them into line with other units is seen an attack on "competitive" players who need these OP units? Otherwise apart form the discussion about how and which units to change - why else do a few people defend them and scream nerf - rather than balance?
Because lets say that you make enough noise and GW decides to nerf wave serpents. Then eldar players will switch to mass warp spiders or whatever and then it will be that unit that's overpowered. Any kind of nerf needs to be justified. It has to have an impact on the overall game.
Why don't we see posts about how a unit that most armies can take, and is a battle brother, happens to give almost every worth while USR to any unit it is combined with?
Why hasn't anyone just said, take away the serpents ignores cover and leave it at that. Now its just a platform that avg 8 shots a turn and you get all your saves against it.
MasterOfGaunts wrote: Thats right, but why dont fix Units that has been identified as too strong for their costs relative to the other ones? In this special case, the serpent.
There will always be units that are stronger than their points costs. I would love it if GW made all units this way, but they don't. Sooner or later people figure it out whats units work better and that's the unit that gets played everywhere and gets splashed on the internet.
Games were made to be fun and competitive otherwise we wouldn't keep score. I think it's fun to play against strong lists because it makes you think about your list building. You have to try and find unit combinations that work better. Sure we could all just play our favorite units and have a beer and pretzel game and it would be fun for a while. but some people like to play competitively. Sooner or later I am going try and make my army better, and I am preparing for you to do the same. This type of mentality leads to netlisting because there will always be an optimal list.
Again whats with the negativity - oh we can't and shouldnot chnage anything cos it means nothing and soemthing else will just take its place.......? Thats just nonsense - if you fix the really broken things - then the universe gets better and games get closer....and likely more fun.
If you you are stuck with nothing will ever change (and we shouldn;t bother) and eventyually everyone will just play the cheese untis and be unhappy.........
I see now nobody can shed some light on this matter
Goldphish wrote: (...)
Because lets say that you make enough noise and GW decides to nerf wave serpents.
You are assuming that
1: GW listens to their customers and cares about the general quality of their game, carefully analizing the valuable feedback the Internet provides.
2: They only hear some things and ignore others. If they nerfed all the units everyone is asking them to nerf then lots of new lists will be usable, and the game will be vastly improved.
Then eldar players will switch to mass warp spiders or whatever and then it will be that unit that's overpowered.
Doesn´t matter. The gap will get shorter, and the game will be better.
Any kind of nerf needs to be justified. It has to have an impact on the overall game.
Yeah, we agree on that.
A nerf is justified if a unit or collection of units is so powerful it is damaging the game as a whole.
(...)
Games were made to be fun and competitive otherwise we wouldn't keep score. I think it's fun to play against strong lists because it makes you think about your list building. You have to try and find unit combinations that work better.
List building is a form of competition, which means that it is only meaningful in a balanced game.
There is no skill implied in doing a Serpent spam list. It is obvious from day one that the unit is broken. That´s not thinking or making good decisions in list building. If the game were balanced, finding the combination of units that will give you an edge (instead of a major advantage) against another player would be really noteworthy.
(...)This type of mentality leads to netlisting because there will always be an optimal list.
I disagree.
First: If the game is balanced enough there would be so much variety that any list, no matter how good, will suffer against some lists and be quite strong against another. And since casual players (the majority) will take units thinking on personal preference, there will be no way to unify the lists.
Second: It would be an improvement. If the game gets more variety and fairness, that´s good enough. Not solving a glaring problem because "if we do so another, smaller problem may appear" sounds odd.
That is still *far* fewer Lascannons or Missile Launchers than can take out a Land Raider.
How does it compare to Ghost Arcs, Predators, or Hammerheads?
Besides, massed s7 is what you want if you're going to shoot a Serpent to death. And with it's shield up, it doesn't have much in the way of dakka. And it melts to rear armor or melee. Honestly, Marines should be looking to drop it with Krak grenades.
That is still *far* fewer Lascannons or Missile Launchers than can take out a Land Raider.
How does it compare to Ghost Arcs, Predators, or Hammerheads?
Besides, massed s7 is what you want if you're going to shoot a Serpent to death. And with it's shield up, it doesn't have much in the way of dakka. And it melts to rear armor or melee. Honestly, Marines should be looking to drop it with Krak grenades.
Land raiders are also almost twice the price, bring less overall firepower, and are much slower, as well as vulnerability to Melta. I'll happily work out the others later tonight when I'm on my desktop.
And I agree, I was mainly pointing out "bring more anti-tank" against wave serpents isn't that great of an idea.
The massed str 7 marines can bring are the stalker and riflemen dreads (there are also skyhammer stormtalons, but they are a special case for being the most likely to be able to get rear shots with their turret), and TL BS4 autocannons need a total of 20 shots to glance down a serpent. In other words, you'd need a combination of 5 stalkers or rifleman dreads to glance one down. I should point out that the following turn all those dreads are likely gone thanks to AV 12 vs 4-5 serpent shields
As far as krak grenades go, the only two units marines have that are likely to get a charge on a serpent normally are assault marines and bikes, and bikes I addressed in my prior post.
EDIT: Did you mean Ghost Ark or Annihilation Barge? The Ghost Ark is in kinda funny company there.
LRs are 260 points max. Serpents, kitted, are 145. Not what I'd call double, but a notable difference
If the Sheild is being shot, the Serpent is nowhere near as survivable as a LR.
If the Sheild is being used defensively, we're comparing:
4xs6ap6r36 TL + 3xs6ap5(psuedorending)r24 TL (likely)
vs
Standard + MM:
2xs9ap2r48 TL + 3xs5ap4r36 TL + 1xs8ap1r24 Melta + POTMS: The Serpent has 1 more shot, but much worse AP and Range all around.
Crusader + MM:
4xs6ap4r24 TL Rending + 6xs4ap5 TL Rapid Fire + 1xs8ap1r24 Melta + POTMS: Lots more shots than the Serpent (11/17 to 7), with the Serpent having higher S on average, but much lower than the MM. Half the Serpent's shooting does outrange this variant, though.
LRR:
4xs6ap4r24 TL Rending + 2x*Flamestorm Cannons* + 1xs8ap1r24 Melta + POTMS: This is a short range tank, but OMFGWTFBBQ is it good at that. Serpent can't even compare.
I suppose it could be argued that some LR builds aren't better than Serpent shooting in all cases, but each LR build is *much* better at shooting what it's made for.
Dakka isn't what LRs are for, though. An LR also has:
-Straight-out immunity to anything s7 and below
-can ONLY be penned by s9+, or with special rules
-4HP means that even when it can be glanced, the glances are a lot less scary
-*Assault Vehicle* (and the Crusader has Frag Assault Launchers). Do not underestimate this!
-Rear armor isn't AV10 (FYI, Serpent Shield cannot reduce pens to rear armor)
A standard Tac squad can eat a Serpent if it gets into melee. While doing so can be hard, threatening to do so can be quite powerful (a threat in being is very useful on the tabletop).
Also, as for the Stalker:
75pts for 4xs7 TL shots:
Each shot:
HIts: 2/3 + 1/3(2/3) = 8/9
Base Glance: on 5 = 1/6
Base Pen: 6+ = 1/6
All Glances (incl Sheild): 1/6 + 1/6(5/6) = 7/36
All Pens: 1/36
So it's not likely to pen, but 7/36 chance to glance per hit. About 1 out of every 4 shots hurts the Serpent (Glance or Pen)
In relation, the Serpent gets (assuming 1+ SL hits):
7 shots s6
Hits: 8/9
Glances: on 6 = 1/6
Pens: 7+ = 0
So a Serpent glances 8 out of 56 shots. That's about .14 glances per shot, far below that of the Stalker.
Long story short, the Stalker eats the Serpent mode-for-model assuming both are within 24" of eachother (with the Stalker eating the Serpent obscenely harder between 24-48).
Add to it that the Stalker is 75 points to the kitted cost of a Serpent of 145.
While a single stalker may not be able to blow up a Serpent in one round, it is a very strong counter for it. For much closer to half the points of a Serpent than a Serpent is to half the points of a LR.
Another reasonable way to take it out is podded marines.
A 5-man +combi(plas) + plas + pod is about as much as a Serpent, and can smoke it's tailpipe easily (4xs7, 1xs6, 4xs4, all on AV10, no Serpent Shield). Even if it can't for some reason (ass to the wall), you could drop them nearby. That way, if the Serpent moves 6 or 12 inches, it should be an easy charge (if you placed correctly), and if it flat-outed, you've already wasted a turn of the Serpent (if it's spam, it'd be multiple). It's only reasonable way to handle that is to shoot them off the table, which means a lot of dakka not shooting at your other threats. If 1 survives, its a threat. If 2 or 3 survive, its a dead Serpent.
The Serpent is OP, but it's not unkillable. Implying that it's near as survivable as a LR is absurd. And clearly wrong, even when you look at weapons the Serpent is strongest against (low-shot-count high-Strength). And without the Shield shooting, it's dakka is manageable.
(For the Necron vehicles, many of theirs can be AV13 skimmers, including one of their DTs)
Bharring wrote: LRs are 260 points max. Serpents, kitted, are 145. Not what I'd call double, but a notable difference
If the Sheild is being shot, the Serpent is nowhere near as survivable as a LR.
If the Sheild is being used defensively, we're comparing:
4xs6ap6r36 TL + 3xs6ap5(psuedorending)r24 TL (likely)
vs
Standard + MM:
2xs9ap2r48 TL + 3xs5ap4r36 TL + 1xs8ap1r24 Melta + POTMS: The Serpent has 1 more shot, but much worse AP and Range all around.
Crusader + MM:
4xs6ap4r24 TL Rending + 6xs4ap5 TL Rapid Fire + 1xs8ap1r24 Melta + POTMS: Lots more shots than the Serpent (11/17 to 7), with the Serpent having higher S on average, but much lower than the MM. Half the Serpent's shooting does outrange this variant, though.
LRR:
4xs6ap4r24 TL Rending + 2x*Flamestorm Cannons* + 1xs8ap1r24 Melta + POTMS: This is a short range tank, but OMFGWTFBBQ is it good at that. Serpent can't even compare.
I suppose it could be argued that some LR builds aren't better than Serpent shooting in all cases, but each LR build is *much* better at shooting what it's made for.
Dakka isn't what LRs are for, though. An LR also has:
-Straight-out immunity to anything s7 and below
-can ONLY be penned by s9+, or with special rules
-4HP means that even when it can be glanced, the glances are a lot less scary
-*Assault Vehicle* (and the Crusader has Frag Assault Launchers). Do not underestimate this!
-Rear armor isn't AV10 (FYI, Serpent Shield cannot reduce pens to rear armor)
A standard Tac squad can eat a Serpent if it gets into melee. While doing so can be hard, threatening to do so can be quite powerful (a threat in being is very useful on the tabletop).
Also, as for the Stalker:
75pts for 4xs7 TL shots:
Each shot:
HIts: 2/3 + 1/3(2/3) = 8/9
Base Glance: on 5 = 1/6
Base Pen: 6+ = 1/6
All Glances (incl Sheild): 1/6 + 1/6(5/6) = 7/36
All Pens: 1/36
So it's not likely to pen, but 7/36 chance to glance per hit. About 1 out of every 4 shots hurts the Serpent (Glance or Pen)
In relation, the Serpent gets (assuming 1+ SL hits):
7 shots s6
Hits: 8/9
Glances: on 6 = 1/6
Pens: 7+ = 0
So a Serpent glances 8 out of 56 shots. That's about .14 glances per shot, far below that of the Stalker.
Long story short, the Stalker eats the Serpent mode-for-model assuming both are within 24" of eachother (with the Stalker eating the Serpent obscenely harder between 24-48).
Add to it that the Stalker is 75 points to the kitted cost of a Serpent of 145.
While a single stalker may not be able to blow up a Serpent in one round, it is a very strong counter for it. For much closer to half the points of a Serpent than a Serpent is to half the points of a LR.
Another reasonable way to take it out is podded marines.
A 5-man +combi(plas) + plas + pod is about as much as a Serpent, and can smoke it's tailpipe easily (4xs7, 1xs6, 4xs4, all on AV10, no Serpent Shield). Even if it can't for some reason (ass to the wall), you could drop them nearby. That way, if the Serpent moves 6 or 12 inches, it should be an easy charge (if you placed correctly), and if it flat-outed, you've already wasted a turn of the Serpent (if it's spam, it'd be multiple). It's only reasonable way to handle that is to shoot them off the table, which means a lot of dakka not shooting at your other threats. If 1 survives, its a threat. If 2 or 3 survive, its a dead Serpent.
The Serpent is OP, but it's not unkillable. Implying that it's near as survivable as a LR is absurd. And clearly wrong, even when you look at weapons the Serpent is strongest against (low-shot-count high-Strength). And without the Shield shooting, it's dakka is manageable.
(For the Necron vehicles, many of theirs can be AV13 skimmers, including one of their DTs)
There is a little problem in your argumentation. You didnt add the jink save to your math:
Assuming you didnt use the turbo-boost, to fire at full bf, but with holofields installed, its just about 1 hit of 8 from the stalker that does something to the serpent. With 4 shots you need 5-6 turns in average to glance out a Serpent with 1/72 Chance for a pen. Really effective... Besides this the Stalker is a valuable HS Slot, while the Serpent is just a DT. So its definetely not a strong Counter for the serpent.
Another thing is, that it makes no sense to compare their ability to take out each other, cause normally you shoot at things with realistic kill-chances. If the Serpent cant kill the Stalker, there is a lot of other stuff that can handle it in the eldar codex. Rock, paper, scissor...
And depending on your opponent, WS are less or more survivable than a LR. Yes, LR are immune to S7, but they dont have a jink and Pens really hurt them, cause most weapons that are capable to pen them have AP2 or AP1. It really hurts to loose a 260 point tank, loose a weapon on it, get it immobelized or just see it doing nothing for a whole turn. And speaking of Pens, it isnt really that hard to get a pen on a LR.
- Eldar/DE ---> Lance Weapons, fast moving Meltas
- Marines ---> Podded Meltas
- Tau ---> Melta-Crisis, Hammerhead
There is also a lot of stuff that can glance them to death so quick, you dont even know it was on the table: Mass Gauss-Weapons, Scarabs, Haywirewyches. Sure they can glance a WS too, but its mobility makes it much harder and do never underestimate the worth of the jink save!
The only drawback of the Serpent is that it has to choose between offense and defense. However its one of the most flexible Units in the game and to good for its costs. Its not unkillable as you said, but you need the right tools to get rid of it and there are not that much in most codices.
Concerning the Necron barges: They loose, their AV13 after the first pen (and as i said, pens arent that hard to archive), are open topped (so they explode really fast), have no holofield option and they arent fast, meaning they cant move more than 6" if they want to fire at full bs. They also cant get away from possible threads as fast as a WS can. Firepower... hm... depends on the enemy and Situation. In 12" 30 shots of gauss can really ruin ones day, but you have to get there alive... Think you cant compare their firepower cause their Targets arent the same.
ionusx wrote: Make it a one time use only effect. If you deploy the shield in the game you can't deploy it again. That would fix it, and if you do you sacrifice your shooting phase on your following turn.
and make the serpent take up an elite slot as opposed to a dedicated transport slot.
So then where is our dedicated transport if it takes up an elite slot?
ionusx wrote: Make it a one time use only effect. If you deploy the shield in the game you can't deploy it again. That would fix it, and if you do you sacrifice your shooting phase on your following turn.
and make the serpent take up an elite slot as opposed to a dedicated transport slot.
So then where is our dedicated transport if it takes up an elite slot?
What would be your suggestion to replace our current problem unit?
A balanced Serpent - perhaps one shot and/or 6" range/template shield gun
Falcon (or Falcon variant)
Another vehicle akin to the Venom or the Raider - especially for the currently ruined units like Banshees
Land Raiders that are not in motion to deliver a payload are an expensive bunker, therefore there is always the possibility that the LR will be out of cover if they are being used aggresively.
Redeemers and Crusaders usually always have to move towards the enemy to get any value from their shooting and payload, therefore they will have to spend time outside of cover.
Skimmers that are moving always have cover because of jink.
Bharring wrote: Do players never use cover for their tanks? A Stalker should have 5+s at least, and LRs often should too.
Yep, and then somebody moves his fast moving AT to an angle where the LR or Stalker looses its cover, while the only way to get around a jink is a weapon with "ignore cover".
And as "nobody" mentioned, it isnt that easy to make effective use of a tank if you want to keep up its cover save. The Serpent dont have to worry about cover, only Thing it have to do is to move less than an Inch to the side.
Serpentshield + Holofield + Jink + AV12 = Extreme Surviveability, there is no way to denie that.
The defensive part of the shield is just as bad as the shooting part in my opinion. It just invalidates heavy AT weapons like Vanquisher cannons completely, and from a fluff/common sense perspective that completely kills the mood. Combine with how it ignores half of all AT fire full stop.
I won't run the maths but it probably takes somewhere in the region of 10 Vanquisher Russes firing simultaneously to kill one Wave Serpent.
The Serpent Shield should be at BEST, a 5+ ignore pen/12'' S7 AP- weapon, but absolutely not with ignores cover. Keep the 4+ jink for all I care, it'd still be a great vehicle relative to the things that are actually balanced. The sheer level of stupidity of its current rules strains my brain.
Mr.Omega wrote: The defensive part of the shield is just as bad as the shooting part in my opinion. It just invalidates heavy AT weapons like Vanquisher cannons completely, and from a fluff/common sense perspective that completely kills the mood. Combine with how it ignores half of all AT fire full stop.
I won't run the maths but it probably takes somewhere in the region of 10 Vanquisher Russes firing simultaneously to kill one Wave Serpent.
The Serpent Shield should be at BEST, a 5+ ignore pen/12'' S7 AP- weapon, but absolutely not with ignores cover. Keep the 4+ jink for all I care, it'd still be a great vehicle relative to the things that are actually balanced. The sheer level of stupidity of its current rules strains my brain.
Keep in mind that in the world of Hull Points, a Serpent Shield's protection ability can only help it twice. The third time it's out of Hull Points anyways so it doesn't matter.
A Vanquisher is going to have a difficult time killing a Wave Serpent regardless of the Serpent Shield. I'm going off the old Imperial Guard codex... so I don't know if they changed it.
Vanquisher BS 3: 50% hit
Wave Serpent Jink (with holo fields): 25% hit
Armor Penetration roll for a Penetrating Hit (since we're talking about the bonus from the Serpent Shield we don't need to worry about Glances, since the Serpent Shield only protects against Penetrators: 8%
Odds to destroy the Wave Serpent with a 5 or 6 on the Damage Chart (since the Vanquisher is AP2): 2.5%
So yes, 2.5% of the time, the Serpent Shield will prevent you from destroying the Wave Serpent in one hit. That's really not much of a difference. You have better odds just trying to Hull Point it to death anyways.
Mr.Omega wrote: The defensive part of the shield is just as bad as the shooting part in my opinion. It just invalidates heavy AT weapons like Vanquisher cannons completely, and from a fluff/common sense perspective that completely kills the mood. Combine with how it ignores half of all AT fire full stop.
I won't run the maths but it probably takes somewhere in the region of 10 Vanquisher Russes firing simultaneously to kill one Wave Serpent.
The Serpent Shield should be at BEST, a 5+ ignore pen/12'' S7 AP- weapon, but absolutely not with ignores cover. Keep the 4+ jink for all I care, it'd still be a great vehicle relative to the things that are actually balanced. The sheer level of stupidity of its current rules strains my brain.
Keep in mind that in the world of Hull Points, a Serpent Shield's protection ability can only help it twice. The third time it's out of Hull Points anyways so it doesn't matter.
A Vanquisher is going to have a difficult time killing a Wave Serpent regardless of the Serpent Shield. I'm going off the old Imperial Guard codex... so I don't know if they changed it.
Vanquisher BS 3: 50% hit
Wave Serpent Jink (with holo fields): 25% hit
Armor Penetration roll for a Penetrating Hit (since we're talking about the bonus from the Serpent Shield we don't need to worry about Glances, since the Serpent Shield only protects against Penetrators: 8%
Odds to destroy the Wave Serpent with a 5 or 6 on the Damage Chart (since the Vanquisher is AP2): 2.5%
So yes, 2.5% of the time, the Serpent Shield will prevent you from destroying the Wave Serpent in one hit. That's really not much of a difference. You have better odds just trying to Hull Point it to death anyways.
Unless I'm going crazy that's a load of gibberish even going by what you said beforehand there, since the odds of destroying the Wave Serpent overall listed there are 2.5% , not the percentage factoring effect the Serpent Shield has on the result with one shot by your maths.
Well, actually that's wrong, because the actual chance is 1.157%. Without that 2+ to penetrate factor, it becomes 8.333%. Or, to put it bluntly, you would be 6 times more likely to kill the Wave Serpent in one shot without the 2+ to ignore penetrating hits.
Spoiler:
Battlescribe mathhammer factors:
Greater than or equal to 4
Greater than or equal to 5 (2D6)
Less than 4
Less than 2
Greater than or equal to 5
End result: 0.012 pass (1.157%)
Well, actually that's wrong, because the actual chance is 1.157%. Without that 2+ to penetrate factor, it becomes 8.333%. Or, to put it bluntly, you would be 6 times more likely to kill the Wave Serpent in one shot without the 2+ to ignore penetrating hits.
Even if my math was lazy and not 100% accurate while drinking my coffee this morning, you still pretty much demonstrated my point. Sure, you can say it's SIX TIMES more likely without the Sepent Shield, but it'd be more accurate to say it's 7% more likely... which is still pretty small. So it's still safe to say the Serpent Shield only comes into effect less than 10% of the time you fire at a Wave Serpent with your tank of choice in this example. Meaning that my original point stands... against a Wave Serpent a Vanquisher has a really low chance of doing anything, even without considering the Serpent Shield. You're better off trying to Hull Point it.
The important things is pretty much everyone agrees with this - we just need to find some agreement on fixing it (and ideally the other broken units).............
The important things is pretty much everyone agrees with this - we just need to find some agreement on fixing it (and ideally the other broken units).............
Personally I find the defensive aspect fine. I can't begrudge a transport that can protect its cargo across the table.
My pet suggestion is this: The range on the Serpent Shield goes down to somewhere in the 6-12" range, however it gains the rule Guided Strike.
Guided Strike: Units that were aboard this transport and disembarked this turn may assault a unit/model targeted by this weapon as though the vehicle has the Assault Vehicle rule.
It nerfs the range aspect of the shield, and gives the Eldar player something back to allow their assault units a chance to get into melee without having to stand out in the open for a turn first.
The important things is pretty much everyone agrees with this - we just need to find some agreement on fixing it (and ideally the other broken units).............
Personally I find the defensive aspect fine. I can't begrudge a transport that can protect its cargo across the table.
My pet suggestion is this: The range on the Serpent Shield goes down to somewhere in the 6-12" range, however it gains the rule Guided Strike.
Guided Strike: Units that were aboard this transport and disembarked this turn may assault a unit/model targeted by this weapon as though the vehicle has the Assault Vehicle rule.
It nerfs the range aspect of the shield, and gives the Eldar player something back to allow their assault units a chance to get into melee without having to stand out in the open for a turn first.
We shouldn't have relatively invulnerable transports that require your opponent to put 2-3/4 of his AT firepower towards just to stand an average chance of killing one, period. Not even for its points cost.
Just as with the Riptide, there's very little satisfaction in chipping away at something that's obscenely hard to kill yet not even of a massive cost.
We shouldn't have relatively invulnerable transports that require your opponent to put 2-3/4 of his AT firepower towards just to stand an average chance of killing one, period. Not even for its points cost.
Just as with the Riptide, there's very little satisfaction in chipping away at something that's obscenely hard to kill yet not even of a massive cost.
You'll have to forgive me, I picked up Eldar in 6th Edition with their new codex. Playing against them in 5th our only Eldar player used Footdar. But from what I remember, weren't Holofields even MORE disgusting in the previous edition than in 5th? I don't think Eldar vehicles being insanely difficult to kill is anything new in the 40k universe. That's how they've always been. Can someone with more background info provide details? Then on top of holofields, Eldar had Spirit Stones (they still do just nobody takes them anymore because of Hull Points) which let them ignore Shaken and Stunned results. So in 5th Edition, even when you did hit an Eldar tank, chances were you did nothing at all, not even a Hull Point.
We shouldn't have relatively invulnerable transports that require your opponent to put 2-3/4 of his AT firepower towards just to stand an average chance of killing one, period. Not even for its points cost.
Just as with the Riptide, there's very little satisfaction in chipping away at something that's obscenely hard to kill yet not even of a massive cost.
You'll have to forgive me, I picked up Eldar in 6th Edition with their new codex. Playing against them in 5th our only Eldar player used Footdar. But from what I remember, weren't Holofields even MORE disgusting in the previous edition than in 5th? I don't think Eldar vehicles being insanely difficult to kill is anything new in the 40k universe. That's how they've always been.
Land Raider
Hell Turkey
Storm Raven
Ironclad Dread
Ven Dread
Valkrye
Dreadknight
Riptide
Tervigon
Swarmy
Almost anything Nurgle
Any Greater Demon
Monolit
All of them are more resilient than a Serpent at range, and much less vulnerable to being charged.
Predators and Necron skimmers are in the same boat as the Serpent for survivability.
Jink is really good, but it's no better than a terrain save, so should only be situationally better. Holofields make it better, but a 4+ isn't that much better than a 5+.
Land Raider - Nearly double as expensive as the WS, big target, half as mobile and no jink. Easier to Pen with the right weapons. Only a DT for Termies
Hell Turkey - Another Unit that is too good for its costs
Storm Raven - 40-50% more expensive and its main protection is being a flyer. Doesnt start on the table and if its shot down everything inside is screwed.
Ironclad Dread - while being nearly as expensive as a full equuipped WS AV13 is the best Thing about it
Riptide - another broken unit
Tervigon - are you kidding? All you need is some AP3 with S6+ or a weapon with rending
All of them are more resilient than a Serpent at range, and much less vulnerable to being charged.
Predators and Necron skimmers are in the same boat as the Serpent for survivability. - that may be rigth, if there were only glancing hits. if it Comes to pens... Most Necron Skimmers are open topped. Predators have no jink and arent as mobile. Mobility is also some Kind of defense
Jink is really good, but it's no better than a terrain save, so should only be situationally better. Holofields make it better, but a 4+ isn't that much better than a 5+.
- Jink is much better than a terrain save... No dangerous Terrain test to get cover, no need to move a longer way just to get some cover...
Bharring wrote: Land Raider
Hell Turkey
Storm Raven
Ironclad Dread
Ven Dread
Valkrye
Dreadknight
Riptide
Tervigon
Swarmy
Almost anything Nurgle
Any Greater Demon
Monolit
All of them are more resilient than a Serpent at range, and much less vulnerable to being charged.
Predators and Necron skimmers are in the same boat as the Serpent for survivability.
Jink is really good, but it's no better than a terrain save, so should only be situationally better. Holofields make it better, but a 4+ isn't that much better than a 5+.
All of the MCs (and the Nurgle stuff) listed are vulnerable to poisoned weapons (see also: Dark Eldar). In addition, the only ones that can actually choose to avoid combat normally are the Riptide and Dreadknight. Everything else is going to want to get stuck in as soon as possible or is slow enough to be caught because they are moving 6" a turn while whatever is chasing them is moving 6" plus run until they are in charge range (and that's if they are just infantry!).
As for the land vehicles (Land Raider and Monolith), the only ranged weapons that they are less vulnerable to are Str 6-7 non-Melta weapons. Compare landing a drop pod with 5 sternguard equipped with combi-meltas on their side arc to the Wave Serpent, and I'll bet that both the Monolith and Land Raider will evaporate while the Wave Serpent zips off to avoid the charge next turn.
On the charge they may be more resilient, however that's balanced by the fact that they can actually be caught. They'll ignore the krak grenades sure, but if somebody is charging them he's got meltabombs, haywire grenades, or Smash to make sure they can do the job.
As for the Dreadnoughts listed that's laughable, The Ironclad has a little more armor in the front arc, however they are still slow enough to be caught by a determined assaulter, and have the same AV 12 on the sides (and front for the venerable) without the ability to force glances or the guaranteed cover.
Predators are far from as resilient as the Serpent. For one thing they don't downgrade Penetrating hits to Glancing. For another, their side armor is paper thin AV 11, and getting a side shot on them is incredibly easy unless terrain is in your favor. As for Necron Skimmers, the only one that really sees play is the Annihilation Barge, and that thing is a steal at the pricepoint it's at.
The aircraft listed all have to put themselves at risk of being intercepted by Str 7 weapons (Tau eat them all for lunch, there's a reason Hellturkeys are a splash choice and not a main choice these days), in addition all of the flyers are spending less time on the board (therefore opening themselves up to not doing as much), or are spending time circling and therefore giving back arc shots. Obviously they are completely immune to being charged unless they hover so you have a point on them being more immune to being charged.
Going from a 5+ save to a 4+ is pretty major, it's approximately a 27% swing in save effectiveness (33% - 50%)
The important things is pretty much everyone agrees with this - we just need to find some agreement on fixing it (and ideally the other broken units).............
Daba wrote: You know you can get terrain saves without having to go 'into' it?
I know, but they can be negated by mobile Units who can get a free field of view on the target, while a jink is almost alwasy "on".
we just need to find some agreement on fixing it
Sadly this will never happen, cause there is always someone who disagrees. We need to find some ideas that could work and somebody who says "This is it!". The latter one should be GWs job.
Way 1: One shot only, remove the defense completely after the shot.
Way 2: Range scaled down to 12" and no ignore cover
Way 3: Firing the Serpent Shield Needs every amount of energy and the full concentration of the Pilot. Therefore it cant fire any other weapon in the same turn (so no more twin-linking on the shield)
People are still complaining about both the survivability and the dakka that serpents posses. While it is possible for a serpent to use both in a game, doing so generally lessens their threat to the opponent.
I don't feel like quoting at the moment, but you really need to stop comparing units without taking consideration of its full price. A serpent is minimum 200 points to field.
Serpents do not get to just ignore pens all together, they still take the hull point! So they die just like any vehicle that gets lit up. If they are ignoring pens instead of firing that means they are not killing you for at least 20% of the game unless they are going second, and they only get to do it twice before they die anyway. The defensive qualities of the serpent are over rated. At what point in 6th did we go back to caring about pens?
My solution to the serpent is simple. No one apparently noticed it earlier. Remove the Ignores Cover from the shield's weapon profile. It makes little sense for it to be there and it would balance out the vehicle without over nerfing it. At that point you have a AV12 4/5+ vehicle that can move 12" and fire 2 weapons at full bs, which is ~8 shots a turn. A little high for a transport but you're also paying 200 points for it at minimum and comparing that to the other guns around it isn't that bad. ie misslesides, twin linked tesla, splintercannons, half the ig guns, etc Every army has their cost effective options for blowing people up, or at least the new books do.
You'll see about as much consensus on this thread on how to fix the Wave Serpent as you will in your average "Wish List" thread for a new codex or rules edition.
Personally, for me if the Serpent Shield was changed to 1-shot or 12" I'd feel at least a 15 point reduction in the cost of the Wave Serpent would be appropriate. I'm not a fan of either of these options personally, but other people seem to love them. I don't like 1-shot weapons in 40k period, and putting a 12" range on the Serpent Shield is almost the same thing as taking it away entirely. It'll get used about as often as Tank Shocking.
My preferred fix options would be:
1) Range reduced to 36". I think this is a perfectly reasonable fix. It means the Wave Serpent can't fire the Serpent Shield with impunity while out of weapons range of all the opponent's army.
2) Shield must roll each turn after it is fired to recharge. Shield only becomes available next turn on a 4+. Defensive bonuses are still lost as long as the shield is down. I could also see this as being simplified to an "every other turn" use.
3) Wave Serpent comes with the defensive Serpent Shield stock. The ability to fire the Serpent Shield comes as a 20 point upgrade. 20 points is almost expensive as a D-Cannon, so I believe this point cost would be more than balancing.
MasterOfGaunts wrote: Way 1: One shot only, remove the defense completely after the shot.
Way 2: Range scaled down to 12" and no ignore cover
Way 3: Firing the Serpent Shield Needs every amount of energy and the full concentration of the Pilot. Therefore it cant fire any other weapon in the same turn (so no more twin-linking on the shield)
I have to respond to this because its so absurd. The solutions you people keep dreaming up are funny. At this point why don't you just remove the dam weapon. No commander in his right mind is going to drive up into assault range to use an ineffective weapon. Its like you think that if you come up with something that allows it to fire its not over nerfing it, but then your solution would be like removing it just the same since you will no longer have to deal with it.
If I can't have a decent fire base in my troop slots Ill just take min squads of bikes and keep them in reserve forever. So much fun.
Murrdox wrote: You'll see about as much consensus on this thread on how to fix the Wave Serpent as you will in your average "Wish List" thread for a new codex or rules edition.
Personally, for me if the Serpent Shield was changed to 1-shot or 12" I'd feel at least a 15 point reduction in the cost of the Wave Serpent would be appropriate. I'm not a fan of either of these options personally, but other people seem to love them. I don't like 1-shot weapons in 40k period, and putting a 12" range on the Serpent Shield is almost the same thing as taking it away entirely. It'll get used about as often as Tank Shocking.
My preferred fix options would be:
1) Range reduced to 36". I think this is a perfectly reasonable fix. It means the Wave Serpent can't fire the Serpent Shield with impunity while out of weapons range of all the opponent's army.
2) Shield must roll each turn after it is fired to recharge. Shield only becomes available next turn on a 4+. Defensive bonuses are still lost as long as the shield is down. I could also see this as being simplified to an "every other turn" use.
3) Wave Serpent comes with the defensive Serpent Shield stock. The ability to fire the Serpent Shield comes as a 20 point upgrade. 20 points is almost expensive as a D-Cannon, so I believe this point cost would be more than balancing.
Just my 2-cents.
Some nice ideas here. I like the recharging system. But what about making it stacking like reserves in 5 ed?
If the shield is fired, it becomes inactive. At the beginning of the controlling player's next shooting phase roll a dice and see if it gets recharged. On a roll of 5+ it gets recharged. Add +1 if the serpend hadn't moved in the movement phase. Add another +1 for every failed recharge attempt since the last use (firing). The roll of 1 is always a failure.
So it's not 1-use, it has the exact same damage output, range and stuff but it has a chance of not recharging. Which is increased if you move for a 'free' jink save. The longer it's in play the more chances of recharging you have. Also, you'd not know if it's gona work or not untill the shooting phase so now it's not a no-brainer option and you have to think about your actions and placing and take the risks like everyone else does.
It's still very strong and capable of alpha-striking but more dangerous in the long-run perspective cause u're not guaranteed to have it next turn.
Daba wrote: Change the number of hits it [serpent shield on shooting mode] causes down to D3+1.
Thats virtually no change and IMO certianly nowhere near enough
it is enough for now. Although powerful, the overall transport is a very expensive unit as far as dedicated goes. If you go much further you have to consider a hefty price reduction. It is a subtle fix but it honestly does the job. Lower average hits means the 60 inch range suddenly isn't soloing units any more at outside their range. The lower but still firepower is useful but your thinking about trading of the shield now and it's not so useful against soft targets with low save which was one target that the ignore cover was super effective against and combines very well with the scatter laser.
The fact that it is not a build that sweeps tournaments heavily implies it needs only a subtle change.
Goldphish wrote: People are still complaining about both the survivability and the dakka that serpents posses. While it is possible for a serpent to use both in a game, doing so generally lessens their threat to the opponent.
I don't feel like quoting at the moment, but you really need to stop comparing units without taking consideration of its full price. A serpent is minimum 200 points to field.
Serpents do not get to just ignore pens all together, they still take the hull point! So they die just like any vehicle that gets lit up. If they are ignoring pens instead of firing that means they are not killing you for at least 20% of the game unless they are going second, and they only get to do it twice before they die anyway. The defensive qualities of the serpent are over rated. At what point in 6th did we go back to caring about pens?
My solution to the serpent is simple. No one apparently noticed it earlier. Remove the Ignores Cover from the shield's weapon profile. It makes little sense for it to be there and it would balance out the vehicle without over nerfing it. At that point you have a AV12 4/5+ vehicle that can move 12" and fire 2 weapons at full bs, which is ~8 shots a turn. A little high for a transport but you're also paying 200 points for it at minimum and comparing that to the other guns around it isn't that bad. ie misslesides, twin linked tesla, splintercannons, half the ig guns, etc Every army has their cost effective options for blowing people up, or at least the new books do.
Rubbish its 135pts with TL Scatter Laser and Holofields.
The importantace of ignoring the pens is that the pens (if they don't kill you) damage the effectiveness of your vehicle AND the Troops inside - its why Monsterous Creatures are so good (and why Riptides should not be MC)
Oh so its ok if you have the new books but screw everyone else?
The debate right now seems to be on whether needing the Shields shooting is sufficient. I believe so, but others are arguing otherwise.
On the subject of the Malta Drop, on top of first within 6", (2/3 * 32/36) of shots hurt the Serpent (most downgraded pens to glances). That's more than 3/5, meaning usually a dead Serpent.
Bottom on 1, if he brought his nonsheild guns to bear, you're penning rear armor on 3s, and those can't be downgraded. If, instead, he's hiding, you'll do 2 HP, leaving it almost dead.
Melts Dropping a LR or other AV14 is unlikely to HP them out (needs 4 of 5 to HP). For pens, it (2/3 * 21/36), which is under half. Then, each one has a 1/2 chance to blow it up.
So bringing the one thing that torches AV14 easily but the Serpent is strongest against is moderately better at killing the intended target than the non intended target.
Run these numbers again at 6"+, and the Serpent loses a HP or two, while the LR is fine.
Get access to rear armor, and its laughable.
Replace the Melts with Plasma, and the Serpent is doomed whereas the LR is invulnerable.
Replace with a Tac squad, and they have a chance on Serpent side armor, and would destroy a Serpent's tailpipe, but can't touch a LR on any facing.
The Serpent is designed to survive heavy antitank being shot at it from a gun line. As with anything Eldar, if you fight it's strengths, you'll loose. Its like complaining that Banshees are OP because they beat Tacs in melee. Once you start trying to face it on different terms (shoot the banshees, hide in cover, or flank the Serpent, or force it into hiding), they won't seem so OP.
A gun line with just some high-s shots is what it does well against. Pods for either rear armor or putting a threat on the table, or moving stuff up the table may be required. The only gun lines that might do well are massed mid-S (6/7), ones with far too much survivability (or too many models), or Tau. But you're playing to their strength that way.
Long story short, stop trying to use a hammer to drive a screw.
Indeed - this is just defending the indefensible - happens everytime anyone suggests trying to balance any of the well known broken/OP/Cheese (whatever description you choose) units a few people think the world is ending and scream nerf....and nothing ever gets done.
@ Bharring - so what armies do you have that are successful against Wave Serpent spam - cos at the moment its lot of handwavium and oh its easy to beet them if your not a rubbish player.
What armies have faced wave serpent spam since the theoretical nerf to its shooting was implemented? Its shooting really needs a nerf. I have never disputed that.
Bharring wrote: What armies have faced wave serpent spam since the theoretical nerf to its shooting was implemented? Its shooting really needs a nerf. I have never disputed that.
Well some people are still saying that it should not receive any nerf or just drop it down to D3+1 shots..........
Morden -
Seems insufficient to me, but reducing the Shield portion to a 5+ seems like too much.
I'm still a fan of the 6/12" range option, although the torrent/template (1, not d6+1) idea is interesting.
Part of how it breaks the game is in having an absurdly strong and long range first turn. Armies shouldn't be wiping each other out first turn.
Eldar are master specialists, and the Serpent should be mid range support and stupidly survivable.
I feel the need to reiterate that it's hard to be objective while people are beating your face in with Serpents. Which is the only time most people see the Serpent. I have a problem being objective about the Helldrake.
Bharring wrote: The debate right now seems to be on whether needing the Shields shooting is sufficient. I believe so, but others are arguing otherwise.
On the subject of the Malta Drop, on top of first within 6", (2/3 * 32/36) of shots hurt the Serpent (most downgraded pens to glances). That's more than 3/5, meaning usually a dead Serpent.
Bottom on 1, if he brought his nonsheild guns to bear, you're penning rear armor on 3s, and those can't be downgraded. If, instead, he's hiding, you'll do 2 HP, leaving it almost dead.
Melts Dropping a LR or other AV14 is unlikely to HP them out (needs 4 of 5 to HP). For pens, it (2/3 * 21/36), which is under half. Then, each one has a 1/2 chance to blow it up.
So bringing the one thing that torches AV14 easily but the Serpent is strongest against is moderately better at killing the intended target than the non intended target.
Run these numbers again at 6"+, and the Serpent loses a HP or two, while the LR is fine.
Get access to rear armor, and its laughable.
Replace the Melts with Plasma, and the Serpent is doomed whereas the LR is invulnerable.
Replace with a Tac squad, and they have a chance on Serpent side armor, and would destroy a Serpent's tailpipe, but can't touch a LR on any facing.
The Serpent is designed to survive heavy antitank being shot at it from a gun line. As with anything Eldar, if you fight it's strengths, you'll loose. Its like complaining that Banshees are OP because they beat Tacs in melee. Once you start trying to face it on different terms (shoot the banshees, hide in cover, or flank the Serpent, or force it into hiding), they won't seem so OP.
A gun line with just some high-s shots is what it does well against. Pods for either rear armor or putting a threat on the table, or moving stuff up the table may be required. The only gun lines that might do well are massed mid-S (6/7), ones with far too much survivability (or too many models), or Tau. But you're playing to their strength that way.
Long story short, stop trying to use a hammer to drive a screw.
I do find it amusing how you assume the Serpent is sitting still, or leaving enough room at the back of the serpent for drop pods to land and disgorge troops into the rear arc, and moving into range where tactical squads charging it are a serious concern.
But, as I stated earlier, I'm fine with the survivability of the Wave Serpent, my beef was with the statement "just bring more heavy weapons." Some armies cannot bring the amount of heavy weapons in a gunline and expect to have them all have LoS. As explained, a moving serpent would need the equivalent of 5 stalkers shooting at the same target to bring down a serpent in one turn. No SM army (outside of the FW siege vanguard list) can do that without dipping into dreadnoughts (which can die frighteningly fast when the serpents decide to go on the offensive). I've also explained that the best weapon for taking down serpents in a Marine list appears to be Grav weapons, as they don't care about penetrating hits, and (depending on interpretation) don't care about jink saves.
My main issue is the shooting. A 60" S7 gun with multiple shots that ignores cover and is usually twin-linked is entirely too good.
Mr Morden wrote:Rubbish its 135pts with TL Scatter Laser and Holofields.
The importantace of ignoring the pens is that the pens (if they don't kill you) damage the effectiveness of your vehicle AND the Troops inside - its why Monsterous Creatures are so good (and why Riptides should not be MC)
Oh so its ok if you have the new books but screw everyone else?
I didn't say anything about screwing people without a new book, just that people with a new book can do the same thing and generally do. They spam their most effective units.
Bharring wrote:I'm still a fan of the 6/12" range option, although the torrent/template (1, not d6+1) idea is interesting.
Again a solution that effectively removes the weapon portion of the shield.
Part of how it breaks the game is in having an absurdly strong and long range first turn. Armies shouldn't be wiping each other out first turn.
Apparently it isn't breaking the game because you don't see it at tournaments.
nobody wrote:My main issue is the shooting. A 60" S7 gun with multiple shots that ignores cover and is usually twin-linked is entirely too good.
I do find it amusing people keep saying it's twin linked at 60". At 37'-60" you're looking at 2-3 S7 hits with ignores cover on avg, oh nos.
Take away the ignores cover and its laughable.
nobody wrote:My main issue is the shooting. A 60" S7 gun with multiple shots that ignores cover and is usually twin-linked is entirely too good.
I do find it amusing people keep saying it's twin linked at 60". At 37'-60" you're looking at 2-3 S7 hits with ignores cover on avg, oh nos.
Take away the ignores cover and its laughable.
I'm well aware that the Scatter Laser is required to make it twin-linked, I was rushing to post and I should have mentioned that. As for the range, on a standard board 60" may as well read "full board" since on a standard 4x6 board the only way the full 60" really becomes noticeable is in short table edge deployment.
The ignores cover is a portion of the problem, but the 60" range (which again, basically means full board) should be brought down in any reasonable modification.
Bharring wrote: What armies have faced wave serpent spam since the theoretical nerf to its shooting was implemented? Its shooting really needs a nerf. I have never disputed that.
Well some people are still saying that it should not receive any nerf or just drop it down to D3+1 shots..........
Because dropping it down to D3+1 is actually a decent sized nerf? Which is like a 40% decrease in firepower for that weapon? No one thought that doing that also affects it's range performance as it's suddenly doing half the damage at 60"?
Don't underestimate how much of a change that actually is.
koooaei wrote: You know what's annoying me in that d6+1? This +1 part. Even more than d6 Don't know why. Maybe because my lootas shoot d3 and not d2+1 or something
The worst thing about Lootas is it's D3 x guys in the unit, so you a roll of a 1 is really bad for them. If it were D3 each, they would at least average out a bit more nicely.
koooaei wrote: You know what's annoying me in that d6+1? This +1 part. Even more than d6 Don't know why. Maybe because my lootas shoot d3 and not d2+1 or something
The worst thing about Lootas is it's D3 x guys in the unit, so you a roll of a 1 is really bad for them. If it were D3 each, they would at least average out a bit more nicely.
The first 5 or 6 games I played with my Lootas I played them this way. It made rolling the Lootas' to-hit rolls take a lot longer (roll 10 dice, count up the number of attacks on each one, add those up, count out that many dice, and then roll AGAIN to actually shoot). But it was really awesome and my Lootas were devastating, and pretty reliable most of the time to get a good number of shots off.
Most people who are content with things are usually don't go onto the internet to crusade for everything being just fine. That in mind, I'm always skeptical of bad reports I read online. Reading so many complaints here, I'm inclined to agree that something has to be done (drawing on arguments I read earlier) to reduce the gap between competitive play and casual play. However, I'm inclined towards a gentle change (perhaps out of Eldar bias), as many of the Competitive Players I've read here seem to think that little or no change is needed. I also think a gentle touch would do best to satisfy everybody involved.
I understand that we can't change GW, but I agree with previous posters on the subject of House Rules. But that's an internal gaming-group matter (or sometimes just between the two playing a match), though I do think that the internet can give us good ideas for these House Rules. I've seen many great answers here.
Back to the fixes. Of the arguments on fixing the Wave Serpent Shield, most of what (I can remember) I've read up until now seems to be divided into two categories: Fix the Defense or Fix the Offence. I'll start with Offence.
Daba wrote: Change the number of hits it [serpent shield on shooting mode] causes down to D3+1.
I like this idea, though I think we should also strip away the Ignore Cover. In terms of 40k-Meta, Ignore Cover never felt right with me in an edition that scaled back cover saves but made it easier to get those cover saves. I'll have to run the numbers on those as well. To the point, because I liked this idea, I decided to do a little bit of amateur math. As I don't engage in a lot of Mathammer, I take no offense if anybody wants to laugh at my n00bish flailing.
Spoiler:
Assuming 6 Wave Serpents as looking at individual Wave Serpents doesn't have the same impact. It's also very important to note, all of these are under the (often impossible) assumption that EVERY Wave Serpent were to somehow focus their fire on the same unit (or same Toughness or Armor Value), at the same distance. In most Practical Applications, the Wave Serpents will be splitting their fire, with some firing more shots than others due to range. I've also tried to pick Average or Median values where-ever possible. This is not an example of the extremes either can produce. I feel it is interesting to note that (in theory) the unmodified results shown here are beyond the possibilities of an Extreme High Roll of the d3+1 based army. To save time I haven't factored in any Shuriken weaponry and only focused on the Serpents. I have also assumed Laser Lock in all instances where applicable. Saves or Vehicle Damage Results also have not been factored in, this is just a look at Average Damage Potential Per Turn. This is by no means a promise or guarantee. Tzeentch is a fickle jerk. I'll do saves and the Ignore Cover results later.
Extreme Range: (37"-60") (Assuming Average Value)6 *(d6+1) =27 SS 26 *(BS4) = 18 S7 AP- Hits
vs T3-T5: 18 * 2+ = 15 Wounds vs T6: 18 * 3+ = 12 Wounds
vs AV11: 18 * (Penetrats on 5+)= 6.667 (Glances on 4+) = 3.333 (Glancing + Penetrating) = 10 Hull Points vs AV12: 18 * (Penetrates on 6+) = 3 (Glances on 5+) = 3 (Glancing + Penetrating) 6 Hull Points vs AV13: 18 * (Glances on 6+) = 3 Hull Points vs AV14: (No point in doing this...)
(Assuming Average Value)6 * (d6+1) =27 SS 27*(2/3)= 18 +(TL 9 Misses *BS4 =6) = 24 S7 AP- Hits
Total: 45.333 (~45) S6 or Better Hits
vs T3-T4: 45.333 (~45) * 2+ = 37.778 (~38) Wounds vs T5: 24SS * ( +(Wounds on 2+) =20 +21.333SL * (Wounds on 3+) = 14.222 = 34.222 (~34) Wounds vs T6: 24SS * (Wounds on 3+) =16 +21.333SL * (Wounds on 4+) = 10.667 = 26.667 (~27) Wounds
vs AV11: 24SS * (Penetrats on 5+)= 8 (Glances on 4+) = 4 (Glancing + Penetrating) = 12 Hull Points 21.333SL * (Glances on 5+)= 2.667 (Penetrates on a 6+) = 3.556 (Glancing + Penetrating) = 7.111 (~7) More Hull Points (~19 Hull Points Total) vs AV12: 24SS * (Penetrats on 6+)= 4 (Glances on 5+) = 4 (Glancing + Penetrating) = 8 Hull Points 21.333SL * (Glances on 6+)= 3.556 = ~4 More Hull Points (~16 Hull Points Total) vs AV13: 24SS * (Glances on 6+) = 4 Hull Points
Extreme Range: (37"-60") (Assuming Median Value)6 *(d3+1) =18 SS 18 *(BS4) =12 S7 AP- Hits
vs T3-T5: 12 * 2+ = 10 Wounds vs T6: 12 * 3+ = 8 Wounds
vs AV11: 12 * (Penetrats on 5+)= 4 (Glances on 4+) = 2 (Glancing + Penetrating) = 6 Hull Points vs AV12: 12 * (Penetrates on 6+) = 2 (Glances on 5+) = 2 (Glancing + Penetrating) 4 Hull Points vs AV13: 12 * (Glances on 6+) = 2 Hull Points
Medium Range: (25"-36") SL: Remains unchanged, see above
(Assuming Average Value)6 *(d3+1) =18 SS 18 *(BS4) =12 +TL (6 Misses *BS4 =4) = 16 S7 AP- Hits
Total: 37.333 (~45) S6 or Better Hits
vs T3-T4: 37.333 * (Wounds on 2+) = 31.111 (~31) Wounds vs T5: 16SS * (Wounds on 2+) =13.333 +21.333SL * (Wounds on 3+) = 14.222 = 24.556 (~25) Wounds vs T6: 16SS * (Wounds on 3+) =10.667 +21.333SL * (Wounds on 4+) = 10.667 = 21.333 (~21) Wounds
vs AV11: 16SS * (Penetrats on 5+)= 5.333(Glances on 4+) = 2.667 (Glancing + Penetrating) = 8 Hull Points (~7) More Hull Points from SL (~15 Hull Points Total) vs AV12: 16SS * (Penetrats on 6+)= 2.667 (Glances on 5+) = 2.667 (Glancing + Penetrating) = 5.333 (~5) Hull Points (~4) More Hull Points from SL (~9 Hull Points Total) vs AV13: 16SS * (Glances on 6+) = 2.667 (~3) Hull Points
I don't know if that's enough of a change to make a difference. However as mentioned above, the outliers would be removed, and probably make the unit 'feel more balanced.'
On the subject of fixing the defense, as I don't have all of the required codecies, I'd like to request for someone to do the math on comparing various options for killing the Wave Serpent if it's Shield's Save were instead 3+. Or 4+. I'd would ask for both with and without jink+holo fields, but I don't want to take to much of your time.
How would the results compare to 2+? If there isn't a change, then is problem inherent in the Wave Serpent is in the Jink save? At least that's the next question I'd like to consider, because from what (I can remember) I've read, the argument involving the Jink Save seems to be that in combination with it's offensive strike.
Maybe bring some anti horde? Yeah that sounds like an appropriate solution. 
Wave Serpents.
I've never had a feeling (while playing against those better players) that I had the upper hand right from the beginning and had them on the ropes. Somehow everyone always has some kind of a counter to my Serpent spam. Another funny thing is that only recently I've started playing there and yet most of the players were already used to my list.
Besides this the Stalker is a valuable 
