77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
Discuss.
Right I'm off.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Started due to not wanting to clutter and ruin yet another good thread:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/620893.page
81025
Post by: koooaei
They're underpowered. In Morgoth we trust.
80586
Post by: Zewrath
Exalted for great truth! 
88026
Post by: casvalremdeikun
There was a thread earlier this month on this exact subject, but I think it got closed.
Summation of my opinion of the Wave Serpent: It has the Transport ability of the Rhino, Combat capability of the Predator, and Survivability of the Land Raider. In short: OP.
89756
Post by: Verviedi
So how are Wave Serpents OP, again? i lost three of them in my last game against Tau due to 2 railgun Hammerheads.
55577
Post by: ImAGeek
Better this thread gets closed than countless others because a certain person persists on derailing multiple threads saying WS are underpowered...
Wave Serpents are ridiculous.
Verviedi wrote:So how are Wave Serpents OP, again? i lost three of them in my last game against Tau due to 2 railgun Hammerheads.
Just because they died in a game to a vehicle specifically aimed at taking out tanks and vehicles doesn't mean they're not OP...
53939
Post by: vipoid
Verviedi wrote:So how are Wave Serpents OP, again? i lost three of them in my last game against Tau due to 2 railgun Hammerheads.
Remember, kids, the plural of 'anecdote' is 'fact'.
88026
Post by: casvalremdeikun
Verviedi wrote:So how are Wave Serpents OP, again? i lost three of them in my last game against Tau due to 2 railgun Hammerheads.
Did I say they were invincible or OP? Because OP doesn't mean they can't be dealt with. They are OP because all of their traits are shoved into one Objective-Secured, undercosted package.
80586
Post by: Zewrath
Btw, the other thread mentioned something about krak grenades killing Wave Serpents.. How the actual feth is that even possible with a competent plastic toy general controlling the Wave Serpents?
88026
Post by: casvalremdeikun
 Zewrath wrote:Btw, the other thread mentioned something about krak grenades killing Wave Serpents.. How the actual feth is that even possible with a competent plastic toy general controlling the Wave Serpents?
Can someone explain the mechanics of this to me?
Side note: When I quote you, the work feth actually shows up as feth, not feth. You know what I mean.
88684
Post by: Zsolt
WS really need a way to deal with AV14. Like put Lance on serpent shield or something. Also d6+1 is too random, just make it 7.
80586
Post by: Zewrath
 casvalremdeikun wrote: Zewrath wrote:Btw, the other thread mentioned something about krak grenades killing Wave Serpents.. How the actual feth is that even possible with a competent plastic toy general controlling the Wave Serpents?
Can someone explain the mechanics of this to me?
Side note: When I quote you, the work feth actually shows up as feth, not feth. You know what I mean.
45948
Post by: Murenius
<Generic untenable claim about Wave Serpents being non OP>
34243
Post by: Blacksails
<Generic one time anecdote about a wave serpent being destroyed, put forward as evidence to it not being OP>
81025
Post by: koooaei
 Blacksails wrote:
<Generic one time anecdote about a wave serpent being destroyed, put forward as evidence to it not being OP>
<Generic justification of wave serpents being totally fine because wailing banshees>
85539
Post by: TychoTerziev
Wave Serpents are ok. I don't know why people whine about them. I hard-counter them with Pyrovore spam.
35310
Post by: the_scotsman
 TychoTerziev wrote: Wave Serpents are ok. I don't know why people whine about them. I hard-counter them with Pyrovore spam.
I mean, I use Flayed ones or vespids usually but it's pretty much the same deal, everyone just needs to adapt to the new meta.
75775
Post by: Rismonite
 koooaei wrote: Blacksails wrote:
<Generic one time anecdote about a wave serpent being destroyed, put forward as evidence to it not being OP>
<Generic justification of wave serpents being totally fine because wailing banshees>
<generic comment about orkz and math highly unrelated to anything involving a wave serpent>
86074
Post by: Quickjager
Wave Serpents need to be given assault, it would make them useful and give Howling Banshees a delivery method.
58139
Post by: SilverDevilfish
 Rismonite wrote: koooaei wrote: Blacksails wrote:
<Generic one time anecdote about a wave serpent being destroyed, put forward as evidence to it not being OP>
<Generic justification of wave serpents being totally fine because wailing banshees>
<generic comment about orkz and math highly unrelated to anything involving a wave serpent>
<generic comment that the only reason the wave serpent is seen as so powerful is because only terrible WAAC players use them and no one who's a good person actually spams them, thus bad balance is "totally fine guiz">
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
the_scotsman wrote: TychoTerziev wrote: Wave Serpents are ok. I don't know why people whine about them. I hard-counter them with Pyrovore spam.
I mean, I use Flayed ones or vespids usually but it's pretty much the same deal, everyone just needs to adapt to the new meta.
It's an assault-edition, running around in fast skimmer tanks is a death trap to my Space Marine Scouts!
Zewrath wrote:Btw, the other thread mentioned something about krak grenades killing Wave Serpents.. How the actual feth is that even possible with a competent plastic toy general controlling the Wave Serpents?
I know, I was thinking that as well. 
The only reasonable situation I can see that in is with Assault Marines, but I believe the OP said it was Tactical Marines.
Krak grenades: OP.
46128
Post by: Happyjew
Wave Serpents should be a Fast Attack choice. As a squadron of 1-3. That way they can float around with their vulnerable backs to each other and form a spinning circle of death.
In addition to being a DT.
71534
Post by: Bharring
Wave Serpents should be MCs. For fluff reasons.
They're clearly the second coming of the Old Ones.
It can be difficult to tell what posts in here are serious, and which aren't.
Serpent is OP, but it does have some weaknesses. Not enough to be fair, but don't ignore them.
Krak grenades at range might ding them. They add just a little more oomph to a podded combatsquadded plasma tac squad (plasma > melts when popping serpents). Also, each marine is a threat-in-being thanks to having those kraks, so they can do some area denial. Granted, between the serpent's range and firepower, this won't change the game but will help. Marine bikers though, if not obliterated, would be able to run down a Serpent. Eventually. Bottom line, it can help, but alone will get trounced by Serpents as they currently are.
As for transport of a rhino/output of a Predator/survivability of a Land Raider, that's a bit off. Its closer to the survivability of a Predator than a Land Raider. And costs as much as a rhino + predator. So either better firepower or better survivability than rhino + predator for about the same price tag. A Lascannon is much more deadly to a Serpent than a Land Raider. An autocannon is much more deadly to a Serpent than Predator, and cant hurt a Land Raider. Sure, Melta in half range or high-s Armorbane on front armor is going to be scarier to the thing designed to soak fire than the thing designed to not get hit, but that shouldn't be a surprise. But what about a blastmaster or Tyranid shooting? Or melee? Or s6/7? Most of the time though, a Serpent is much more vulnerable than a Land Raider, probably about the same class as a Predator.
If it weren't for the Serpent Shield's OP shooting, it'd probably be fair.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
I've played Eldar a lot so trust me, I know - Wave Serpents are not OP. They are just one of 40ks excellent units, but there are plenty of excellent units so they are no OP. Sure, they might be better than every single model available to every single army in 40k except for maybe 1, and can be taken in triple the number of most standard units, but hey, at the end of the day, what does overpowered really mean? Its not about winning games it's just that they are really easy to stomp noobs with like most posters on Dakka, high level wave serpent play takes a lot of skill and decision making or Eldar is almost guaranteed to lose, LOL jimsolo your credibility just got revoked you all have goldfish memories talk to me when you realise how 40k works on a competitive level, dude your codex just sucks, wow you think Dark Eldar need a buff to Haywire now LOL keep whining, I have a bunch of stats backing up my claim that Eldar isn't OP with only a 60% overall win rate in 6th ed tournaments which only makes them the highest by like 5%, just because you haven't learnt how to beat serpents does not make them OP, shuppet I'm not responding in this thread again until you learn how to discuss competitive 40k, have you ever even been to a tournament?
45948
Post by: Murenius
<Generic comment totally missing the irony of the other posts elaborating over many lines how WS are not OP>
edit: Oops, several guys were quicker and already posted this 
25751
Post by: gmaleron
Honestly the only thing about Wave Serpents that needs to be changed is the shield IMO. Either it does its shenanigans of turning a Penetrating hit into a Glance OR allows a shooting attack, not have the ability to do both.
38888
Post by: Skinnereal
Larger capacity, but only a single rear ramp, and no fire points, Combat capability of the Predator,
Similar, and Survivability of the Land Raider.
AV10 on the rear? Jink doesn't help there. AV14 is immune to anything* below S8, but S6 has a chance against AV12.
So, of those 3 points:
Different,
Similar,
Similar at shooting, but worse in cc.
But, it's easy to spam WC, for a hefty price.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
Its clearly not OP.
Just really, really excellent.
Totally different things because they're totally different words.
Totes.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
Did you know that points costs are irrelevant, and unless you have both the durability of a land raider and the firepower of a leman Russ you are definitely not unbalanced?
Wtf is with all these abstract ass multiple comparisons, look at it for what it is and at the price it costs, if I see one more post comparing the durability to a raider at the same time as comparing the firepower to something completely different and some third comparison elsewhere all designed to explain how this unit isn't OP.., it's ridiculous lol.
How many people out here actually think this model is balanced? What is this, Shadow Dakka?
Can OP add a 2 answer poll at top lol
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
Done.
74682
Post by: MWHistorian
Definitely OP.
46128
Post by: Happyjew
I voted Overcosted because it looked lonely being one of the two with no votes. And I couldn't bring myself to say it was balanced.
It's not fair that SM get nice cheap 35 point transports and w Eldar have to pay 130+ points.
Ah silliness.
60997
Post by: zephoid
Idk why GW thought serpents needed more firepower. It would have been fine with just the shield as an incredibly durable transport.
I would keep the points cost, give it assault transport, but if you embark or disembark, you lose the shield. Reduce the shield to a 3+ to downgrade pen to glance also. That way it does exactly what its supposed to: transport. It would be one of the best transports in the game, but only a transport.
28444
Post by: DarknessEternal
I've yet to see a Marine punch a Land Raider to death, or seen one killed by a Str 7 guns.
I see that happen to a Wave Serpent literally every time one is fielded.
81025
Post by: koooaei
There's some important information about wave serpents you guyz should know.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/618107.page
21971
Post by: Mozzyfuzzy
When my local meta was a thing, I only saw one wave serpent, it blew itself up trying to ram a rhino or something (the details are fuzzy), anyway with this conclusive proof of the lack of OP, I have beaten all your arguments.
On a side note RIP local meta 2009-2014.
46128
Post by: Happyjew
This one time I fielded 12 Wave Serpents, and even though they wiped out most of my opponents army, they couldn't hurt his Land Raider. Obviously they are not OP, and the shield should be Range 120", Strength 10 AP1, Assault 6D6, Armourbane, Lance, Ignores Cover.
Wait, we are trying to balance the Serpent, right?
35310
Post by: the_scotsman
 DarknessEternal wrote:
I've yet to see a Marine punch a Land Raider to death, or seen one killed by a Str 7 guns.
I see that happen to a Wave Serpent literally every time one is fielded.
A marine with a 14% chance of killing one on the charge if he can get into cc (I'm assuming you mean powerfist)
And a strength 7 weapon with a 5% chance of killing one (assuming plasma gun into read armor double tapping)
Kills them every game. Literally. Every game. Anecdotal evidence is the best.
30490
Post by: Mr Morden
Massively OP
Unless you are only interested in winning - in which case they are massively underpowered and overcosted.
35310
Post by: the_scotsman
The next time I face off against nine wave serpents, I'll just remember the counter strategy: I'll use my SM sergeant with a powerfist to kill them.
Done and done.
4139
Post by: wuestenfux
Serpents are unbalanced.
In a doubles tournament, we (Eldar and DE) battled a dual CSM army.
One of the my Serpents killed a grounded DP in one volley, 11 hits with tl scatterlaser, shuricannon, and shield. Too many wounds, gone.
I've shelved my Eldar army for other days to come and enjoy playing Necrons.
46128
Post by: Happyjew
wuestenfux - you missed understood. You only killed the DP because it was grounded. Had it been flying around still you wouldn't' have been able to touch it.
4139
Post by: wuestenfux
 Happyjew wrote:wuestenfux - you missed understood. You only killed the DP because it was grounded. Had it been flying around still you wouldn't' have been able to touch it.
Well, all weapons of the Serpent were twin-linked.
CSM lost horribly.
30490
Post by: Mr Morden
TychoTerziev wrote: Wave Serpents are ok. I don't know why people whine about them. I hard-counter them with Pyrovore spam.
I go back to my Wave Serpents are the hard-counter to fun.....
90435
Post by: Slayer-Fan123
Happyjew wrote:I voted Overcosted because it looked lonely being one of the two with no votes. And I couldn't bring myself to say it was balanced.
It's not fair that SM get nice cheap 35 point transports and w Eldar have to pay 130+ points.
Ah silliness.
I would use a Wave Serpent over any Drop Pod or Rhino if I had the option to buy them for my Space Marines.
35241
Post by: HawaiiMatt
Swap the shields shooting to S4 AP- torrent (much more wave like IMO).
Swap the defense to 3+ or 4+ to turn pen to glance.
Give it assault ramps, because putting assault troops in it makes your army worse.
-Matt
71534
Post by: Bharring
And many Eldar units would take a Rhino or Pod over a Serpent given the option.
A rear armor powerfist or plasma pen may only have a 1/6 chance to remove an unhurt Serpent, but a Serpent wound has a 0 chance of removing a Tac squad.
Stop fishing for Explodes on a 3hp vehicle with AP2+. Especially in 7th, you're going to hull it out instead.
Also, any rear pen is going to either immobilize it (letting you trash it next round), or drop its shooting ability.
That, and you usually use more than one PG shot, and always have at least two PF attacks (that do damage on a 2+.
Then, there is the rest of the squad. A naked 6-man tac squad will drop a serpent on average, if it gets to charge.
Serpent is OP, but it does have limits.
53939
Post by: vipoid
Bharring wrote:And many Eldar units would take a Rhino or Pod over a Serpent given the option.
Maybe a drop pod. I highly doubt Eldar players would take a Rhino, unless they're taking it in an attempt to be fairer on their opponents.
Bharring wrote:A rear armor powerfist or plasma pen may only have a 1/6 chance to remove an unhurt Serpent, but a Serpent wound has a 0 chance of removing a Tac squad.
Eh?
Bharring wrote:
Stop fishing for Explodes on a 3hp vehicle with AP2+. Especially in 7th, you're going to hull it out instead.
Well, you usually have to.
Are we saying that the WS isn't overpowered because it can actually be killed? O_o
Bharring wrote:
Also, any rear pen is going to either immobilize it (letting you trash it next round), or drop its shooting ability.
Or, you know, be converted to a glance on a 2+.
And, even if its not firing its shield, it can still put out something like 7 S6 shots at BS4 - 4 of which are automatically TL, and the other 3 will usually be TL as well.
How do you cope with such negligible firepower? 
Bharring wrote:
Then, there is the rest of the squad. A naked 6-man tac squad will drop a serpent on average, if it gets to charge.
Where are these tactical squads charging from? I mean, the WS can move 12" each turn and still put out a ton of firepower - how are normal marines with no jump packs or bikes getting into combat with it?
Yes, but those limits do not even come close to reflecting either its cost, or its DT status.
46128
Post by: Happyjew
 vipoid wrote:Bharring wrote:
Also, any rear pen is going to either immobilize it (letting you trash it next round), or drop its shooting ability.
Or, you know, be converted to a glance on a 2+.
If your opponent is trying to convert a pen on Rear Armour to a Glance, you need to smack them with the rules for the Serpent Shield.
71534
Post by: Bharring
I dunno - having something cheap like a Rhino to get infantry places would be useful. Not as outright powerful as a Serpent, but with ranges of 12-18 inches, saving over 100 points per squad for a relatively weak and fragile jaunt 18" up board first turn could be a good trade. Not great but not useless. I definitely agree the Serpent is better generraly though.
My point with the one pen/wound is basically a response to the claim that a single pen from an ap2 weapon is useless. An Assault Centurion isn't broken just because a single PG or PF wound doesnt kill it. Hullpoints really do matter on a Serpent.
A rear armor pen can only be downgraded if you're cheating. Regardless of whether the Shield was shot. Rear pens aren't easy to line up, but the Serpent has no special protection to those.
As for the shooting, if you penned, they're probably snapshotting next round. So BS1.
7xS6 TL is good, but 2x Assault Cannon razorbacks are a little cheaper for 8xs6 TL actual Rending. Shorter range, much better AP, and an additional shot. If it weren't for the Serpent Shield's shooting, it seems right.
Getting the Marines into position is hard. My point is that, if you can, you can kill it. This gives Marines some denial utility.
I agree the Serpent is OP, but not to the degree you seem to believe.
53939
Post by: vipoid
Happyjew wrote:
If your opponent is trying to convert a pen on Rear Armour to a Glance, you need to smack them with the rules for the Serpent Shield.
Good point, my mistake.
Oddly enough, the rear armour of a Wave Serpent rarely come up in our games.
Bharring wrote:
As for the shooting, if you penned, they're probably snapshotting next round. So BS1.
But, even with BS1, you have 4 TL S6 shots, and if even one of those hits then its other weapons are TL as well. That does take the edge of snapshotting somewhat.
And, of course, you have the difficulty in penetrating it in the first place. You're either dealing with the Serpent Shield and/or Jink, or you're trying to catch a fast skimmer in melee.
Bharring wrote:
7xS6 TL is good, but 2x Assault Cannon razorbacks are a little cheaper for 8xs6 TL actual Rending. Shorter range, much better AP, and an additional shot. If it weren't for the Serpent Shield's shooting, it seems right.
How are the razorbacks cheaper? 2 Razorbacks with assault cannons is 150pts. A WS with Scatter Lasers and Shuriken Cannon is 130pts.
Bharring wrote:
Getting the Marines into position is hard. My point is that, if you can, you can kill it. This gives Marines some denial utility.
But that holds true for just about any transport - many of which do not have the defences or manoeuvrability of a WS.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
So beautiful. The poll is almost like a middle finger to serps... (turn it on its side)
46128
Post by: Happyjew
Poly Ranger wrote:So beautiful. The poll is almost like a middle finger to serps... (turn it on its side)
You sir, have just blown my mind...
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
It's tzeentch at work. He's tired of losing his DPs and LoC to spams of the beggers!
28444
Post by: DarknessEternal
the_scotsman wrote:
A marine with a 14% chance of killing one on the charge if he can get into cc (I'm assuming you mean powerfist)
And a strength 7 weapon with a 5% chance of killing one (assuming plasma gun into read armor double tapping)
Marines come in squads of 10 and carry krak grenades.
Strength 7 weapons come in many varieties, up to and including rending, twin-linked, ignores jink, and 6 shots on a fast vehicle.
If you're having trouble killing Wave Serpents, you aren't trying very hard to kill them.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
Every vote helped create this beautiful piece of art.
71534
Post by: Bharring
I figured standard now was +holo +ghostwalk. And i don't field a lot of Razorbacks (My squaddies do my shooting, and normally the in-company kind, in my Marine lists).
So about the same cost for more dakka on on two platforms that are each individually less durable than the one platform. Perhaps I'm looking at it wrong, but that looks about right to me? But then, I don't see a lot of people taking Razorbacks, and when they do, they don't seem to be taking ACs.
All this assumes the Serpent Shield is handled somehow. Serpent is broken as is, of course.
80561
Post by: ThatSwellFella
 SHUPPET wrote:I've played Eldar a lot so trust me, I know - Wave Serpents are not OP. They are just one of 40ks excellent units, but there are plenty of excellent units so they are no OP. Sure, they might be better than every single model available to every single army in 40k except for maybe 1, and can be taken in triple the number of most standard units, but hey, at the end of the day, what does overpowered really mean? Its not about winning games it's just that they are really easy to stomp noobs with like most posters on Dakka, high level wave serpent play takes a lot of skill and decision making or Eldar is almost guaranteed to lose, LOL jimsolo your credibility just got revoked you all have goldfish memories talk to me when you realise how 40k works on a competitive level, dude your codex just sucks, wow you think Dark Eldar need a buff to Haywire now LOL keep whining, I have a bunch of stats backing up my claim that Eldar isn't OP with only a 60% overall win rate in 6th ed tournaments which only makes them the highest by like 5%, just because you haven't learnt how to beat serpents does not make them OP, shuppet I'm not responding in this thread again until you learn how to discuss competitive 40k, have you ever even been to a tournament?
i know how to beat them: use ignores cover weapons, like legion of the dammed, bring a knife to a gunfight and deep strike something into it's rear. And yet every single game, i or any of my buddies play vs eldar, no one can bring those theories to fruition since eldar player (usually) isn't mentally handicapped person to allow that to happen
76717
Post by: CrownAxe
Happyjew wrote:wuestenfux - you missed understood. You only killed the DP because it was grounded. Had it been flying around still you wouldn't' have been able to touch it.
And if the DP was flying it wouldn't be doing anything because it has no shooting attacks and can't assault on the turn it changes flight modes.
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
the_scotsman wrote:The next time I face off against nine wave serpents, I'll just remember the counter strategy: I'll use my SM sergeant with a powerfist to kill them.
Done and done.
Exalted.
DarknessEternal wrote:the_scotsman wrote:
A marine with a 14% chance of killing one on the charge if he can get into cc (I'm assuming you mean powerfist)
And a strength 7 weapon with a 5% chance of killing one (assuming plasma gun into read armor double tapping)
Marines come in squads of 10 and carry krak grenades.
Strength 7 weapons come in many varieties, up to and including rending, twin-linked, ignores jink, and 6 shots on a fast vehicle.
If you're having trouble killing Wave Serpents, you aren't trying very hard to kill them.
No, I'm having trouble even reaching them with my 10 (and rapidly dwindling) krak grenades.
28444
Post by: DarknessEternal
Try reading the rest of your codex then.
76717
Post by: CrownAxe
The WS is a Fast Skimmer, if it doesn't want to get assaulted it doesn't have to try very hard
81025
Post by: koooaei
the_scotsman wrote:The next time I face off against nine wave serpents, I'll just remember the counter strategy: I'll use my SM sergeant with a powerfist to kill them.
Done and done.
That's quite easy since power fists have 60' range.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
Bharring wrote:Then, there is the rest of the squad. A naked 6-man tac squad will drop a serpent on average, if it gets to charge.
Really? 6 attacks. 4/6 hits, so 4 hits. 50% results so we'll go with 2 pens. How is that "dropping" a serpent on average? Or did you forget that grenades can only ever get one attack in CC? edit: And that's assuming they actually get to charge. Dear god how bad do you have to be to have a vehicle that ignores terrain and moves 12+"/turn and let it get assaulted?
71534
Post by: Bharring
Because I suck at math.
2/3 hit
1/2 hurt
------
1/3 HP/marine
9 Marines in 1 round with no special weapons.
Although with a pen or two from 6 marines, it's not likely to do too much.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Even if just firing snapshots, if equipped with a scatterlaser, between that and the shield (to simplify things we'll ignore any shuriken weapons), it's still on average landing nearly as many shots on target (at higher average Strength) as a fully functional Chimera with two Heavy 3 guns.
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
The real problem is did anyone think that over all the years of the previous codex releases, were they in any way needing a power-boost? I could care less how overpowered they are at the moment, I just want some of what the developers at GW are smoking.
18690
Post by: Jimsolo
On the fence. The main reason for the accusations of broken-ness only works in one mode at a time, and by and large they're still pretty frail. I'm just fine with them. That being said, I've never seen them spammed like crazy, so that could change my opinion.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
ThatSwellFella wrote: SHUPPET wrote:I've played Eldar a lot so trust me, I know - Wave Serpents are not OP. They are just one of 40ks excellent units, but there are plenty of excellent units so they are no OP. Sure, they might be better than every single model available to every single army in 40k except for maybe 1, and can be taken in triple the number of most standard units, but hey, at the end of the day, what does overpowered really mean? Its not about winning games it's just that they are really easy to stomp noobs with like most posters on Dakka, high level wave serpent play takes a lot of skill and decision making or Eldar is almost guaranteed to lose, LOL jimsolo your credibility just got revoked you all have goldfish memories talk to me when you realise how 40k works on a competitive level, dude your codex just sucks, wow you think Dark Eldar need a buff to Haywire now LOL keep whining, I have a bunch of stats backing up my claim that Eldar isn't OP with only a 60% overall win rate in 6th ed tournaments which only makes them the highest by like 5%, just because you haven't learnt how to beat serpents does not make them OP, shuppet I'm not responding in this thread again until you learn how to discuss competitive 40k, have you ever even been to a tournament?
i know how to beat them: use ignores cover weapons, like legion of the dammed, bring a knife to a gunfight and deep strike something into it's rear. And yet every single game, i or any of my buddies play vs eldar, no one can bring those theories to fruition since eldar player (usually) isn't mentally handicapped person to allow that to happen
Yeah my post is satire and basically just me repeating a string of difference statements ive seen morgoth make recently
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
 AegisGrimm wrote:The real problem is did anyone think that over all the years of the previous codex releases, were they in any way needing a power-boost? I could care less how overpowered they are at the moment, I just want some of what the developers at GW are smoking.
I think, in many ways, they constantly operate two editions behind. In 4E, when the last book was released, the Falcon was the unkillable-invinci-skimmer of doom (requiring an average of ~81 BS4 Lascannon shots to bring down). Well, the core rules largely fixed that by itself. The problem with the Wave Serpent before was just that it was a bit expensive in 5E (not really in 4E). when they redid Eldar in 6E, instead of just cutting its cost down, they decided to resurrect some rule from Epic ages ago (when it wasn't a transport) and give it the mega-range-ignores-cover shield cannon thingy.
53939
Post by: vipoid
Possibly something of an aside, but it seems like Skimmers in general have too many advantages over Tracked vehicles.
There's the speed/mobility aspect, obviously, but it seems reasonable to expect them to have to sacrifice something in exchange. However, I really struggle to think of any advantages that Tracked transports have over skimmers:
- Firepower? Well, the WS alone basically blows this one right out of the water. But, even leaving that one out, many other Skimmers can still put out a good deal of firepower. The Necron Ghost Ark has 10 Gauss Flayers, Venoms can put out 12 poison shots at long range.
- Transport Capacity? Nope. Both the WS and the Devilfish have 12 capacity (which is actually more than most tracked transports), while others are equal to Rhinos in capacity.
- Durability? Personally, this is where I'd expect tracked transports to excel. I mean, surely being slower and grounded means you can invest more in armour, right? Nope. In fact, skimmers tend to be considerably more durable than their land-based counterparts. Compare the Devilfish or WS to a Rhino or Chimera. It has better front armour than the former and better side armour than the latter. And, the WS is more heavily armoured still. Necron Skimmers, meanwhile, have a wopping AV13 on their front and sides. And, even if that shield is taken down, they still have the same front and side armour as a Rhino or Razorback, but better rear armour. I think the only skimmers that actually seem fragile are DE ones. In any case, on top of frequently having more armour, Skimmers also have the ability to jink - giving them a 4+ (at least) cover save, even in the open. Yes, it means sacrificing firepower, but it's entirely optional and remains a survival ability that Tracked transports simply don't have.
I don't know, I guess I'd just expect skimmers to lose out in at least one of these areas. Am I looking at this wrong?
76717
Post by: CrownAxe
vipoid wrote:I don't know, I guess I'd just expect skimmers to lose out in at least one of these areas. Am I looking at this wrong?
The drawback is suppose to be that it costs more points. Such as if a rhino costs x points, a rhino that is also a skimmer would cost x+y points.
The problem with the wave serpents isn't that they are excellent at everything you want in a vehicle (that being durability, damage output, and mobility). Its that they are excellent at everything and are undercosted for it. As an example if the wave serpent costs 500 pts it would be terrible, where as if you picked an awful unit like pyrovores or warp talons and made them worth 1 point they would be broken. In the end it all comes down to point costs.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Indeed Skimmers do have marked advantages over tracked vehicles.
GW seems obssessed with ensuring Skimmers are markedly superior to tracked tanks. 5th was the only exception where they were largely balanced (at least in the core rules).
Skimmers have routinely been far more durable than their apparently sturdier ground bound counterparts.
Another point to add to Vipoid's is that the only cover mechanism tracked tanks and walkers have for cover (aside from intervening terrain/models) is Smoke Launchers. These are single use, prevent *all* firing (including embarked passengers), cannot be used if you move flat out, and are only a 5+ cover save. Not all tanks and walkers come with this either, some have to buy it.
Skimmers can choose to Jink whenever they are shot at for a 4+ cover save (and almost ubiquitously have access to wargear that can enhance that to a 3+) without regards to moving flat out, can do so even if immobilized, and without any effect whatsoever on embarked passengers.
It's not even transports you have to look at, compare most tracked gun-tanks to skimmer equivalents and it becomes instantly apparent that the skimmer equivalent is typically superior for these reasons, even when they cost roughly the same and have similar armor.
EDIT: also, Skimmers get bonus Flat Out movement if they're Fast, tracked ones do not. Fast also tends to be very rare amongst Tracked tanks while more Skimmers are Fast than not.
62560
Post by: Makumba
Fun fact about the cost of a WS is that if you take the same points buy a rhino and a predator, you get less fire power , slower movment and no where near the vunerability a WS has.
35310
Post by: the_scotsman
vipoid wrote:Possibly something of an aside, but it seems like Skimmers in general have too many advantages over Tracked vehicles.
There's the speed/mobility aspect, obviously, but it seems reasonable to expect them to have to sacrifice something in exchange. However, I really struggle to think of any advantages that Tracked transports have over skimmers:
- Firepower? Well, the WS alone basically blows this one right out of the water. But, even leaving that one out, many other Skimmers can still put out a good deal of firepower. The Necron Ghost Ark has 10 Gauss Flayers, Venoms can put out 12 poison shots at long range.
- Transport Capacity? Nope. Both the WS and the Devilfish have 12 capacity (which is actually more than most tracked transports), while others are equal to Rhinos in capacity.
- Durability? Personally, this is where I'd expect tracked transports to excel. I mean, surely being slower and grounded means you can invest more in armour, right? Nope. In fact, skimmers tend to be considerably more durable than their land-based counterparts. Compare the Devilfish or WS to a Rhino or Chimera. It has better front armour than the former and better side armour than the latter. And, the WS is more heavily armoured still. Necron Skimmers, meanwhile, have a wopping AV13 on their front and sides. And, even if that shield is taken down, they still have the same front and side armour as a Rhino or Razorback, but better rear armour. I think the only skimmers that actually seem fragile are DE ones. In any case, on top of frequently having more armour, Skimmers also have the ability to jink - giving them a 4+ (at least) cover save, even in the open. Yes, it means sacrificing firepower, but it's entirely optional and remains a survival ability that Tracked transports simply don't have.
I don't know, I guess I'd just expect skimmers to lose out in at least one of these areas. Am I looking at this wrong?
....yes. In that I get THREE rhinos for a ghost ark, and almost four for a WS. (Not saying ws isn't stupid here, btw.)
A better comparison would be something like Raider vs Chimera. Equal points cost. Chimera has 12 front armor and is closed-topped, and I find on average Multilaser+ HB will fare better than Lance.
So, durability+firepower in that instance.
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
 CrownAxe wrote:
The WS is a Fast Skimmer, if it doesn't want to get assaulted it doesn't have to try very hard
And my reply was specifically ignoring all other units in the Codex because you claimed that any player worth their salt should be able to assault a Wave Serpent with Tactical Marines and then destroy it with krak grenades. That was all that I was referring to.
74682
Post by: MWHistorian
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that maybe relying on tac squads with krak grenades might not be the most...efficient means of dealing with WS's.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
 MWHistorian wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb and say that maybe relying on tac squads with krak grenades might not be the most...efficient means of dealing with WS's.
Lol. Phrased perfectly.
80586
Post by: Zewrath
vipoid wrote:Possibly something of an aside, but it seems like Skimmers in general have too many advantages over Tracked vehicles.
There's the speed/mobility aspect, obviously, but it seems reasonable to expect them to have to sacrifice something in exchange. However, I really struggle to think of any advantages that Tracked transports have over skimmers:
- Firepower? Well, the WS alone basically blows this one right out of the water. But, even leaving that one out, many other Skimmers can still put out a good deal of firepower. The Necron Ghost Ark has 10 Gauss Flayers, Venoms can put out 12 poison shots at long range.
- Transport Capacity? Nope. Both the WS and the Devilfish have 12 capacity (which is actually more than most tracked transports), while others are equal to Rhinos in capacity.
- Durability? Personally, this is where I'd expect tracked transports to excel. I mean, surely being slower and grounded means you can invest more in armour, right? Nope. In fact, skimmers tend to be considerably more durable than their land-based counterparts. Compare the Devilfish or WS to a Rhino or Chimera. It has better front armour than the former and better side armour than the latter. And, the WS is more heavily armoured still. Necron Skimmers, meanwhile, have a wopping AV13 on their front and sides. And, even if that shield is taken down, they still have the same front and side armour as a Rhino or Razorback, but better rear armour. I think the only skimmers that actually seem fragile are DE ones. In any case, on top of frequently having more armour, Skimmers also have the ability to jink - giving them a 4+ (at least) cover save, even in the open. Yes, it means sacrificing firepower, but it's entirely optional and remains a survival ability that Tracked transports simply don't have.
I don't know, I guess I'd just expect skimmers to lose out in at least one of these areas. Am I looking at this wrong?
Bravo, Vipoid. Thank you for making an excellent post on every single that annoys me about skimmers. Have all my exalts.
86874
Post by: morgoth
 Vaktathi wrote:Indeed Skimmers do have marked advantages over tracked vehicles.
GW seems obssessed with ensuring Skimmers are markedly superior to tracked tanks. 5th was the only exception where they were largely balanced (at least in the core rules).
Skimmers have routinely been far more durable than their apparently sturdier ground bound counterparts.
Another point to add to Vipoid's is that the only cover mechanism tracked tanks and walkers have for cover (aside from intervening terrain/models) is Smoke Launchers. These are single use, prevent *all* firing (including embarked passengers), cannot be used if you move flat out, and are only a 5+ cover save. Not all tanks and walkers come with this either, some have to buy it.
Skimmers can choose to Jink whenever they are shot at for a 4+ cover save (and almost ubiquitously have access to wargear that can enhance that to a 3+) without regards to moving flat out, can do so even if immobilized, and without any effect whatsoever on embarked passengers.
It's not even transports you have to look at, compare most tracked gun-tanks to skimmer equivalents and it becomes instantly apparent that the skimmer equivalent is typically superior for these reasons, even when they cost roughly the same and have similar armor.
EDIT: also, Skimmers get bonus Flat Out movement if they're Fast, tracked ones do not. Fast also tends to be very rare amongst Tracked tanks while more Skimmers are Fast than not.
Tracked tanks are generally played very statically and will benefit either from friendly troop / hull cover (5+) or ruin cover (4+).
In the same price range as a Wave Serpent, you get a Leman Russ that doesn't care about S7 and less and S5 and less in assault.
In the same price range as a Wave Serpent + Dire Avengers, you get a Land Raider that doesn't care about S7 and less in shooting or assault, has 4 HP and can shoot at two different targets.
All in all, for equivalent cover and price points, tracked tanks tend to be just as resilient as Skimmers, with skimmers having a harder time finding cover and a very costly Jink (66% of damage output for the next turn).
Moreover, their resilience is not just based on cover saves, which means they don't fall apart when ignores cover weaponry is used.
Of course, that doesn't prevent the Wave Serpent from being a top-tier unit, but it's important to not mistake the Jink ability for "durability" or "free cover save" because it's neither. It's a very expensive cover save, and adds absolutely no durability against assault or ignores cover.
78655
Post by: melkorthetonedeaf
I just don't understand the serpent shield.
53939
Post by: vipoid
morgoth wrote:
Tracked tanks are generally played very statically and will benefit either from friendly troop / hull cover (5+) or ruin cover (4+).
You can do the same with skimmers. The difference is that they also have access to a jink save in the open, or against an enemy who has circumvented whatever they were using for cover.
morgoth wrote:
In the same price range as a Wave Serpent, you get a Leman Russ that doesn't care about S7 and less and S5 and less in assault.
A few points:
- A Leman Russ is not a transport - it is a dedicated tank.
- A Leman Russ is a HS choice, whilst the WS is a dedicated transport.
- A Leman Russ might not care about S7, but it has to worry about penetrating hits a hell of a lot more than a WS does.
- A Leman Russ *does* have to worry about S5 in assault, because that's still enough to penetrate most of them. Furthermore, it has to worry about assault in general more than a WS does, because it does not have the speed or mobility to easily keep away from assault units.
morgoth wrote:
In the same price range as a Wave Serpent + Dire Avengers, you get a Land Raider that doesn't care about S7 and less in shooting or assault, has 4 HP and can shoot at two different targets.
Not sure about them being in the same price range. Even with some weapon upgrades, you can get a WS + Dire Avengers for less than 200pts - while Land Raiders cost 240+ before upgrades. And, that's before we've even bought anything for the Land Raider to transport. It seems more reasonable to say that you can get 2 WSs (minus crew) for about the same price as a Land Raider (again, minus crew).
In which case, those WSs have 50% more hull points, can shoot 2 different targets with a lot of firepower and can capture 2 objectives (probably with Objective Secured).
morgoth wrote:
All in all, for equivalent cover and price points, tracked tanks tend to be just as resilient as Skimmers, with skimmers having a harder time finding cover and a very costly Jink (66% of damage output for the next turn).
Not really, no.
morgoth wrote:
Moreover, their resilience is not just based on cover saves, which means they don't fall apart when ignores cover weaponry is used.
Well, quite, Pity skimmers get nothing to protect them from ignores-cover weapons. If only they had extra mobility, or some kind of shield that downgrades penetrating hits into glances.
Also, yes, some weapons ignore cover - but, other weapons ignore AV and not cover/jink(Gauss, Haywire, Grav etc.).
morgoth wrote:
Of course, that doesn't prevent the Wave Serpent from being a top-tier unit, but it's important to not mistake the Jink ability for "durability" or "free cover save" because it's neither. It's a very expensive cover save, and adds absolutely no durability against assault or ignores cover.
Sorry, but Jink is a free cover save and does add durability. You can argue that you have to sacrifice shooting, but if your Wave Serpent would otherwise be blown to bits, then it would have even less shooting. I'm sure many people would prefer their Leman Russ or Land Raider to be firing at reduced capacity next turn, then to be a smoking crater next turn. 
The thing with Jink is that you have it if and when you need it. If the opponent isn't shooting your vehicle, don't jink. If he's shooting you but not with any particularly threatening weapons, don't jink. If you can just get cover elsewhere - e.g. by positioning your skimmer partially behind some ruins or something, don't jink. If your only chance at winning the game lies with firing everything you've got in your next turn, don't jink. However, if your transport's survival is more important than its offence, you have the option to jink. Perhaps it's sitting on a valuable objective? Perhaps you need it to deliver an important cargo somewhere? Whatever the reason, you have the option to give it an automatic 4+ cover save even in the open.
20671
Post by: Bartali
As discussed in the thread, the Wave Serpents biggest weakness (as with any vehicle) is assault.
It'll be interesting to see what impact Thunderwolves (especially Company of the Great Wolf lists) have on Wave Serpents, who are fast and vapourise most vehicles in one turn of assault.
Also be interesting to see if a new BA codex changes things up too. Mass (cheaper) jumpers with Meltaguns, Krak Grenades and Meltbombs
61618
Post by: Desubot
Bartali wrote:As discussed in the thread, the Wave Serpents biggest weakness (as with any vehicle) is assault. It'll be interesting to see what impact Thunderwolves (especially Company of the Great Wolf lists) have on Wave Serpents, who are fast and vapourise most vehicles in one turn of assault. Also be interesting to see if a new BA codex changes things up too. Mass (cheaper) jumpers with Meltaguns, Krak Grenades and Meltbombs
To bad not everyone is team Jacob or Edward. The only real way to get rid of a wave serpent is to assault it or HP it with ignore cover. not alot has the later. The thing is just too good for the price. there is no putting it any different.
86874
Post by: morgoth
vipoid wrote:morgoth wrote:
Tracked tanks are generally played very statically and will benefit either from friendly troop / hull cover (5+) or ruin cover (4+).
You can do the same with skimmers. The difference is that they also have access to a jink save in the open, or against an enemy who has circumvented whatever they were using for cover.
No you can't, Skimmers tend to be a lot higher and cannot hide 25% behind infantry.
vipoid wrote:
morgoth wrote:
In the same price range as a Wave Serpent, you get a Leman Russ that doesn't care about S7 and less and S5 and less in assault.
A few points:
- A Leman Russ is not a transport - it is a dedicated tank.
- A Leman Russ is a HS choice, whilst the WS is a dedicated transport.
- A Leman Russ might not care about S7, but it has to worry about penetrating hits a hell of a lot more than a WS does.
- A Leman Russ *does* have to worry about S5 in assault, because that's still enough to penetrate most of them. Furthermore, it has to worry about assault in general more than a WS does, because it does not have the speed or mobility to easily keep away from assault units.
Yes because Eldar going second and still having their shields up on T1 changes is a hell of a lot more protection. No matter the fact that it's AV12 and will take penetrating hits from a lot more weapons.
vipoid wrote:
morgoth wrote:
In the same price range as a Wave Serpent + Dire Avengers, you get a Land Raider that doesn't care about S7 and less in shooting or assault, has 4 HP and can shoot at two different targets.
Not sure about them being in the same price range. Even with some weapon upgrades, you can get a WS + Dire Avengers for less than 200pts - while Land Raiders cost 240+ before upgrades. And, that's before we've even bought anything for the Land Raider to transport. It seems more reasonable to say that you can get 2 WSs (minus crew) for about the same price as a Land Raider (again, minus crew).
In which case, those WSs have 50% more hull points, can shoot 2 different targets with a lot of firepower and can capture 2 objectives (probably with Objective Secured).
I thought you were talking about durability ? Oh right, you moved the goalposts again.
vipoid wrote:
morgoth wrote:
All in all, for equivalent cover and price points, tracked tanks tend to be just as resilient as Skimmers, with skimmers having a harder time finding cover and a very costly Jink (66% of damage output for the next turn).
Not really, no.
morgoth wrote:
Moreover, their resilience is not just based on cover saves, which means they don't fall apart when ignores cover weaponry is used.
Well, quite, Pity skimmers get nothing to protect them from ignores-cover weapons. If only they had extra mobility, or some kind of shield that downgrades penetrating hits into glances.
Shrödinger's Wave Serpent much ?
Good thing that WS is alone on an infinite table with quantum terrain.
vipoid wrote:
Also, yes, some weapons ignore cover - but, other weapons ignore AV and not cover/jink(Gauss, Haywire, Grav etc.).
morgoth wrote:
Of course, that doesn't prevent the Wave Serpent from being a top-tier unit, but it's important to not mistake the Jink ability for "durability" or "free cover save" because it's neither. It's a very expensive cover save, and adds absolutely no durability against assault or ignores cover.
Sorry, but Jink is a free cover save and does add durability. You can argue that you have to sacrifice shooting, but if your Wave Serpent would otherwise be blown to bits, then it would have even less shooting. I'm sure many people would prefer their Leman Russ or Land Raider to be firing at reduced capacity next turn, then to be a smoking crater next turn.
And what happens every time it wouldn't have been blown to bits ? Oh right. That's what I thought.
Said LR can only be penned 16% of the time by a lascan, instead of 50% of the time for a WS. Even with the Jink save, the WS is penned exactly as many times as the Land Raider. If the LR has cover, the WS does a lot worse. but it's more resilient because vipoid said so.
vipoid wrote:
The thing with Jink is that you have it if and when you need it. If the opponent isn't shooting your vehicle, don't jink. If he's shooting you but not with any particularly threatening weapons, don't jink. If you can just get cover elsewhere - e.g. by positioning your skimmer partially behind some ruins or something, don't jink. If your only chance at winning the game lies with firing everything you've got in your next turn, don't jink. However, if your transport's survival is more important than its offence, you have the option to jink. Perhaps it's sitting on a valuable objective? Perhaps you need it to deliver an important cargo somewhere? Whatever the reason, you have the option to give it an automatic 4+ cover save even in the open.
Go try a Wave Serpent for yourself, you have no idea how it works and what Jink really is.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
morgoth wrote: vipoid wrote:morgoth wrote:
Tracked tanks are generally played very statically and will benefit either from friendly troop / hull cover (5+) or ruin cover (4+).
You can do the same with skimmers. The difference is that they also have access to a jink save in the open, or against an enemy who has circumvented whatever they were using for cover.
No you can't, Skimmers tend to be a lot higher and cannot hide 25% behind infantry.
a) Intervening units don't need 25% cover
b) This is factually incorrect - the low skimmer base (what many people use because of balancing act issues) leaves the Serpent low enough that Dire Avengers can provide 25% cover. Automatically Appended Next Post: morgoth wrote: vipoid wrote:morgoth wrote:In the same price range as a Wave Serpent + Dire Avengers, you get a Land Raider that doesn't care about S7 and less in shooting or assault, has 4 HP and can shoot at two different targets.
Not sure about them being in the same price range. Even with some weapon upgrades, you can get a WS + Dire Avengers for less than 200pts - while Land Raiders cost 240+ before upgrades. And, that's before we've even bought anything for the Land Raider to transport. It seems more reasonable to say that you can get 2 WSs (minus crew) for about the same price as a Land Raider (again, minus crew).
In which case, those WSs have 50% more hull points, can shoot 2 different targets with a lot of firepower and can capture 2 objectives (probably with Objective Secured).
I thought you were talking about durability ? Oh right, you moved the goalposts again.
I underlined where you brought up shooting. The only additional thing he brought up was capturing 2 objectives. Everything else was directly answering your point - no goalpost shifting here.
Go try a Wave Serpent for yourself, you have no idea how it works and what Jink really is.
I have. You're simply wrong.
53939
Post by: vipoid
morgoth wrote:
No you can't, Skimmers tend to be a lot higher and cannot hide 25% behind infantry. Depends how tall the infantry are. Not to mention, you can still hide them behind MCs or terrain.
Yes because Eldar going second and still having their shields up on T1 changes is a hell of a lot more protection. No matter the fact that it's AV12 and will take penetrating hits from a lot more weapons. I'm really not sure what you're saying here. Yes, more things can penetrate AV12, but you have a shield that downgrades those to glancing hits on a 2+, and can also jink for a 4+ cover save.
I thought you were talking about durability ? Oh right, you moved the goalposts again. I merely addressed the comparison you brought up - including your point about shooting two different targets. So, if the goalposts are in the wrong position, it's because you moved them there yourself.
Shrödinger's Wave Serpent much ? Maybe I'm misunderstanding your terminology, but I thought "Shrödinger's Wave Serpent" referred to the assumption that a Wave Serpent will have every upgrade. However, neither the Shield, nor Jink (or mobility, for that matter), is an upgrade - WSs have them automatically. So, I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
Good thing that WS is alone on an infinite table with quantum terrain. Good thing I'm a pineapple and frequently decorate my table with watermelons. Oh, I'm sorry, I thought we were exchanging pointless statements.
And what happens every time it wouldn't have been blown to bits ? Oh right. That's what I thought. So, if you're not worried about your WS exploding, then don't jink. It's not like you're forced to.
Said LR can only be penned 16% of the time by a lascan, instead of 50% of the time for a WS. Even with the Jink save, the WS is penned exactly as many times as the Land Raider. If the LR has cover, the WS does a lot worse. but it's more resilient because vipoid said so. Yep, because Lascannons are the only anti-vehicle weapons in existance. No one will ever use a Lance, Melta, Guass, Haywire or other weapon against you. As long as you can survive a Lascannon, you're good to go. 
My responses in Red.
71534
Post by: Bharring
"Schroedinger's Waveserpent" is generally the concept that a serpent cannot fire its sheild and then downgrade a pen with it. One or the other.
86874
Post by: morgoth
Either way, the fact remains that the only argument that stands is that the WS can be spammed using a regular CAD.
Face your problems, ask for unbound and stop whining about a unit that may not even be in the top 10 most broken 40K units.
Or start calling every other unit around that power level OP, and make as many threads about it as you do with the Wave Serpent, for consistency's sake.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
By shrodingers wave serpent, he means to say that wave serpents are not overpowered because they cannot use their shields in both modes and cannot jink and shoot at normal bs all at once. Therefore that catagorically means they can't be overpowered, as they could only possibly be OP if they could do all of it at once.
It's his favourite catch phrase and ironically enough doesn't actually parallel with the theory behind shrodingers cat anyway.
30490
Post by: Mr Morden
morgoth wrote:Either way, the fact remains that the only argument that stands is that the WS can be spammed using a regular CAD.
Face your problems, ask for unbound and stop whining about a unit that may not even be in the top 10 most broken 40K units.
Or start calling every other unit around that power level OP, and make as many threads about it as you do with the Wave Serpent, for consistency's sake.
Look at the poll numbers and realise your error 
and then stop whining that you just want to use the most op in order to win.
I Killed a Wave Serpent last night with a Sister and a Melta gun - it was glorious - then the Dire Avengers from inside wiped her out and her unit................but she had done the Emperor's work that day
86874
Post by: morgoth
It's better to know the rules before posting about them.
Please re-read the BRB about vehicles and cover, you'll find it interesting.
74682
Post by: MWHistorian
morgoth wrote:Either way, the fact remains that the only argument that stands is that the WS can be spammed using a regular CAD.
Face your problems, ask for unbound and stop whining about a unit that may not even be in the top 10 most broken 40K units.
Or start calling every other unit around that power level OP, and make as many threads about it as you do with the Wave Serpent, for consistency's sake.
Being spamable is only a part of the problem. The thing has many, many strengths with no real weakness. (Unless those pesky teleporting tac squads flinging krak grenades ruin your day.) It's worth more than its points, thus it's OP. By what degree is it OP is what's debatable. I'd say, relatively, in the higher end.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
Of the people so far that have made a decision and not sat on the fence 82.2% (that's over 4 in 5) have said the waveserpent is OP. Just thought I'd point that out.
61618
Post by: Desubot
morgoth wrote:Face your problems, ask for unbound and stop whining about a unit that may not even be in the top 10 most broken 40K units.
Im fairly sure the poll says you are wrong.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
morgoth wrote:Either way, the fact remains that the only argument that stands is that the WS can be spammed using a regular CAD.
Face your problems, ask for unbound and stop whining about a unit that may not even be in the top 10 most broken 40K units.
Or start calling every other unit around that power level OP, and make as many threads about it as you do with the Wave Serpent, for consistency's sake.
Please, list your top 10 then.
And no, the rest of the arguments stand, especially considering your failed rebuttal. Automatically Appended Next Post: morgoth wrote:
It's better to know the rules before posting about them.
Please re-read the BRB about vehicles and cover, you'll find it interesting.
Sorry - my mistake from playing primarily Nids. Got any response to, I dunno, any of the other points I made?
53939
Post by: vipoid
morgoth wrote:Either way, the fact remains that the only argument that stands is that the WS can be spammed using a regular CAD.
That's not a fact, that's just your opinion.
morgoth wrote:
Face your problems, ask for unbound and stop whining about a unit that may not even be in the top 10 most broken 40K units.
So, the Wave Serpent isn't broken... it just requires opponents to use Unbound armies on order to beat it.
Yeah, that seems perfectly reasonable.
Also, could you please enlighten us with your list of the top 10 most broken units in 40k?
Also also, why don't you start some threads about the units you consider broken, and see if others share your view? Unless, of course, you're afraid of rebuttal.
74682
Post by: MWHistorian
If Morgoth was posting in jest, I'd consider him a comic genius at this point.
71534
Post by: Bharring
The height of a skimmer does matter some. In a tourny game, I put my highest-dakka skimmer behind the highest cover on the board half they gave us. Top of t1, the opponent moves something into the center, and pops the skimmer with no terrain cover (6th ed, so no jink). Not a huge drawback, but it does matter some.
I think Morgoth was trying to point out that being able to use the Serpent Shield and Jink at the top of 1 helps, but only in half of the games, and then only on the first turn.
The point about jink/don't jink with regards to its costs (reduced dakka) is mostly about jink not being a straight 4+/3+ save. If its always done, it is substantial loss of dakka. If its not always done, its not quite as effective as a 4+/3+. So always assuming a 4+/3+ while also assuming 3+ hits every round is a little disingenuous.
As for LR vs WS, I see your Haywire, Guass, and Melts, and I raise you:
-Plasma Anything
-Krak Missile Launchers
-Autocannons
-Icharus Lascannon (thanks to skyfire)
-Assault Cannons
-Rail Rifles
-Blast masters
-Tyranid s7/8 shooting
-Vector Strike
-Krak Grenades
-Tau Missiles
-Krak Grenades
-Pulse Lasers
-Scatter Lasers
-Shuriken Cannons
-Malta over half range
-Anything rear armor
-Anything melee
And anything else between a Scatter Laser and a Lascannon.
I don't know what you face, but I see s6-9 far more often than in-melta-range Malta weapons and such.
The Serpent is OP right now, but comparing its toughness to a landraider is quite a bit off.
Sure, tools designed to work through any armor are more deadly to tanks that pile on armor than those designed to avoid getting hit. But that is how it should be. Those tanks are there to shrug off the s9 and under weaponry. And I see those a lot more often.
As for tracked vs skimmer, I think they mostly pay points for it. Skimmer is just, generally, the better tech once perfected, if you can afford it. The IoM can do some skimmers, but not well. So you have an 80pt base Devilfish. Or an about-equal-cost tri-las Pred vs BL Falcon, where the Pred can sit farther away, do more damage, and take more head on, than the skimmer falcon, that wins in maneuverability.
If you removed/nerfed the Serpent's shooting, its shooting survivability would be about right for what they cost.
(Side note - someone suggested 24"/Gets Hot for firing the Serpent Shield. What do ya'll think of that?)
Edit - oops, a whole page went by while in typed this
62560
Post by: Makumba
Or an about-equal-cost tri-las Pred vs BL Falcon, where the Pred can sit farther away, do more damage, and take more head on, than the skimmer falcon, that wins in maneuverability.
Nice thing your compering two models no one uses. Trilas are overcosted and I never seen anyone want to take a falcon.
Specialy as you can take a WS, not waste a heavy support slot, have better fire power then a pred. And it will be scoring.
The WS is more resilient then a Lemman Russ or a LR not just, because it has better rules or because it is a fast skimmer, but because there will be max 2 of the AV tanks in most lists and there are 5-6 serpents in an eldar list. Any good army will run 1-2 good anti tank units or at least try to run units that will do anti tank ok, this means those 1-2 Russes or LR, can be destroyed faster and leave the IG or marine player with a bigger points hole in their list them someone losing a WS. Aside for nids or necron how many armies can counter 5-6 WS and be good enough against all other popular type of builds?
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
morgoth wrote:
Tracked tanks are generally played very statically and will benefit either from friendly troop / hull cover (5+) or ruin cover (4+).
Sometimes, but not at all always, and the same will go for Skimmer gun tanks quite often. Stuff like transports or things like Hellhounds which have to close range, often won't have that option however. That's all very dependent on terrain, deployment, firing lanes, etc. That's all *far* less reliable than just being able to choose to jink, usually only works from one direction (so if something Fast boost over, or something Deep Strikes into the side, won't matter), and usually that save will be less than what a Skimmer will usually get (5+ terrain is more common, while camo nets are of much less value, where they're even available, while holofields are very common upgrades).
In the same price range as a Wave Serpent, you get a Leman Russ that doesn't care about S7 and less and S5 and less in assault.
Most Russ tanks are rear AV10, only three are rear AV11. While they don't care about S7 from the front, they also have *very* little mobility, most variants lack the 60" striking range (especially anything on them that would ignore cover). In the same price range, we also have stuff like Hellhounds, Predators, Taurox Primes (depending on upgrades), Battlewagons (with *very* narrow frontal armor arcs), walkers like Dreads or armored sentinel squadrons, etc that are all much easier to engage.
In the same price range as a Wave Serpent + Dire Avengers, you get a Land Raider that doesn't care about S7 and less in shooting or assault, has 4 HP and can shoot at two different targets.
And now you're comparing two units to one, nobody takes naked Land Raiders, they're far too expensive to take just as gun tanks, once you account for that the Land Raiders plus cargo are usually ~500 points. Additionally against many, if not most, of the things that can easily destroy a Land Raider (e.g. meltaguns, railguns, demolisher cannons, lance weapons, etc), the Wave Serpent can exercise its Jink save and have a higher chance (way higher if equipped with the very common Holofield upgrade) of negating the HP loss or avoiding an Explosion than the Land Raider can and safely deliver its transported cargo to where it needs to be.
All in all, for equivalent cover and price points, tracked tanks tend to be just as resilient as Skimmers
If you're comparing Wave Serpents to Leman Russ tanks stuck hiding behind terrain the whole game in the backfield, or comparing them with large embarked squad to a naked Land Raider, sure. They're certainly lacking the extreme mobility at that point. Consider that two Chimeras cost about what a kitted Wave Serpent usually costs (with similar armor, role, and weapon strength), nobody would consider those two really equal in firepower or resiliency to a Wave Serpent.
Compare with skimmers having a harder time finding cover
Some might if you mounted them on the really tall skimmer base stem maybe? I've got a Hammerhead and Leman Russ tank right here next to me, and the Hammerhead is maybe a third of an inch taller on its skimmer base? Either could claim the cover save behind an Aegis line.
and a very costly Jink (66% of damage output for the next turn).
The alternative for the tracked tank often being no damage output for the rest of the game however
Even when jinking, damage output is often still significant, as I pointed out above, a jinking Scatterlaser Wave Serpent is landing as much firepower as a Chimera is when fully functional and stationary (or if you start including Necrons with Tesla it's even more amusing). Meanwhile those tracked tanks don't even have the option of Jinking, while the Skimmers can still do so even if immobilized.
Moreover, their resilience is not just based on cover saves, which means they don't fall apart when ignores cover weaponry is used.
The overwhelmingly vast majority of which aren't strong enough to hurt them, or only have a very small chance of doing so, the primary exception being getting Markerlighted, Wave Serpent shield cannons, or having IG infantry very close getting orders from an officer, two of those three being from Skimmer armies.
Of course, that doesn't prevent the Wave Serpent from being a top-tier unit, but it's important to not mistake the Jink ability for "durability" or "free cover save" because it's neither. It's a very expensive cover save, and adds absolutely no durability against assault or ignores cover.
Of course it doesn't do anything against assault, all tanks are absurdly easy to kill in assaults, but the Wave Serpent, along with other Fast Skimmers, can avoid that better than any tracked tank. Again, cover save ignoring weapons typically are either not strong enough to hurt something like a Wave Serpent, or only have a very small chance.
71534
Post by: Bharring
Yeah, Makumba, AV spam is something I dislike in any flavor. Serpent Spam certainly does add something nasty to it. But Knight walls exist too. Ugh.
I think one for one, a Russ would be more survivable than a Serpent, but Serpent Spam is uglier than Russ spam.
I had a game in 6th vs IG/DA/Inq, where he sat two Russes in front of the 4+ field, and used Probes to deny any infiltrations. He complained about how broken the one av12 4+ vehicle was, while he had 2 av14 4+s sitting around. As for dakka, a pair Battle Cannons on AV14s with heavy flamers and artillery does a number on Footdar.
As for tri-las vs Falcons, I'd almost never take a tri-las over a 4xLC Dev squad (but then I plan UM defendants). I do, however, field Falcons far more than Serpents. They are on the light side of effectiveness, but they are a ton of fun.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually, most ignores-cover shooting (tau rail/plasma/missile, Nid s7/8 shooting, CSM Blast masters, and Eldar 'Sheilds) that I see are all *really* scary to a Serpent. Most aren't scary to a Russ or LR though.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
 Mr Morden wrote:
I Killed a Wave Serpent last night with a Sister and a Melta gun - it was glorious
Sisters are OP.
80637
Post by: krodarklorr
 gmaleron wrote:Honestly the only thing about Wave Serpents that needs to be changed is the shield IMO. Either it does its shenanigans of turning a Penetrating hit into a Glance OR allows a shooting attack, not have the ability to do both.
I'm fine with it doing both, just limit the range, take away Ignores Cover, make it not effected by Laser Lock (Since it can't be destroyed on it's own), something. Anything, really. Just do anything to it to fix it. Also, Laser Lock. Change it, naoh.
46128
Post by: Happyjew
 krodarklorr wrote: gmaleron wrote:Honestly the only thing about Wave Serpents that needs to be changed is the shield IMO. Either it does its shenanigans of turning a Penetrating hit into a Glance OR allows a shooting attack, not have the ability to do both.
I'm fine with it doing both, just limit the range, take away Ignores Cover, make it not effected by Laser Lock (Since it can't be destroyed on it's own), something. Anything, really. Just do anything to it to fix it. Also, Laser Lock. Change it, naoh.
Well, either it is a weapon, in which case it can be affected by Laser Lock and be destroyed; or it is not a weapon and cannot be destroyed nor benefit from Laser Lock.
For some reason, the non-Eldar players in my group have decided it is a weapon that cannot be destroyed.
80637
Post by: krodarklorr
Happyjew wrote: krodarklorr wrote: gmaleron wrote:Honestly the only thing about Wave Serpents that needs to be changed is the shield IMO. Either it does its shenanigans of turning a Penetrating hit into a Glance OR allows a shooting attack, not have the ability to do both.
I'm fine with it doing both, just limit the range, take away Ignores Cover, make it not effected by Laser Lock (Since it can't be destroyed on it's own), something. Anything, really. Just do anything to it to fix it. Also, Laser Lock. Change it, naoh.
Well, either it is a weapon, in which case it can be affected by Laser Lock and be destroyed; or it is not a weapon and cannot be destroyed nor benefit from Laser Lock.
For some reason, the non-Eldar players in my group have decided it is a weapon that cannot be destroyed.
I thought it specifically said it can't be destroyed apart from the vehicle?
53939
Post by: vipoid
Honestly, the shield just seems like something a dedicated transport just shouldn't have in the first place.
I mean, even without it, it has solid armour (plus Jink), and can easily put out 7 TL S6 shots.
80637
Post by: krodarklorr
vipoid wrote:Honestly, the shield just seems like something a dedicated transport just shouldn't have in the first place.
I mean, even without it, it has solid armour (plus Jink), and can easily put out 7 TL S6 shots.
This. Me and numerous other people have said just put the Serpent shield on the Falcon and call it a day.
46128
Post by: Happyjew
krodarklorr wrote: Happyjew wrote: krodarklorr wrote: gmaleron wrote:Honestly the only thing about Wave Serpents that needs to be changed is the shield IMO. Either it does its shenanigans of turning a Penetrating hit into a Glance OR allows a shooting attack, not have the ability to do both.
I'm fine with it doing both, just limit the range, take away Ignores Cover, make it not effected by Laser Lock (Since it can't be destroyed on it's own), something. Anything, really. Just do anything to it to fix it. Also, Laser Lock. Change it, naoh.
Well, either it is a weapon, in which case it can be affected by Laser Lock and be destroyed; or it is not a weapon and cannot be destroyed nor benefit from Laser Lock.
For some reason, the non-Eldar players in my group have decided it is a weapon that cannot be destroyed.
I thought it specifically said it can't be destroyed apart from the vehicle?
Nope. It is a piece of wargear that can function as a weapon. Which is more or less called out in the Weapon Destroyed rule "including vehicle upgrades that function as weapons". The real problem is what happens when destroyed? Does it lose both offensive and defensive capabilities, or does it just lose the ability to shoot?
I still stand by my thoughts on how the "shooting" should work - If "fired" the Serpent cannot shoot any other weapons. All units within 6" take a Pinning test.
This prevents the Laser Lock shenanigans, and makes it fit more with the fluff - a wave of energy that blasts the enemy from their feet.
80637
Post by: krodarklorr
Happyjew wrote:
Nope. It is a piece of wargear that can function as a weapon. Which is more or less called out in the Weapon Destroyed rule "including vehicle upgrades that function as weapons". The real problem is what happens when destroyed? Does it lose both offensive and defensive capabilities, or does it just lose the ability to shoot?
I still stand by my thoughts on how the "shooting" should work - If "fired" the Serpent cannot shoot any other weapons. All units within 6" take a Pinning test.
This prevents the Laser Lock shenanigans, and makes it fit more with the fluff - a wave of energy that blasts the enemy from their feet.
I'm okay with that. Definitely sounds good to me.
71534
Post by: Bharring
You're still paying 150-ish points per Serpent.
Clearly broken with the shield as-is.
But without the shield entirely?
Serpent is harder to kill than a Rhino, but not four times harder to kill. AV12s don't fold like paper, but I usually don't have trouble killing a couple of them. The cost would have to come down if it lost the shield entirely.
Explodes a CSM Rhino - CSM - 1/2 wounded, 1/3 of those fail armor save = 1/6 die, one LD test (pinning)
Explodes a Serpent - DAs - 2/3 wounded, 1/2 of those fail saves = 1/3 die, two LD tests (pinning and shock). Each man cost as much as a CSM.
Explodes a Serpent - Guardians - 2/3 wounded, 2/3of those fail saves = over half die, two LD tests
Without some pen protection, the only troops that'd be feasible for Eldar are backfield campers, Jetbikes, and Wraiths. Take out DTs entirely, and you're down to backfield camping and Jetbikes. For an army with mostly range 12-18 weapons, that is painful.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Given how much more likely killing a vehicle through HP's is than exploding it (especially medium vehicles), even on penetrations, it shouldn't be a huge concern, and it's not like other armies that don't sport 3+ armor have pen protection like DE, IG and Tau (and while some of their infantry are cheaper, even specialist units like Scions and Trueborn have to deal with it).
That said, a "shield" of some sort is part of its longstanding fluff. Previously this treated anything higher than S8 as S8. With the decreased importance of penetrations (particularly in 7th, especially relative to 5th edition), the value of the shield as a defensive mechanism is much less than what it used to be (and why currently it's used so often purely offensively). If they dumped the cannon part and turned the shield into an "always on" 5+ invul save, that would remove 33% of all hits against it, while allowing it to operating without having to rely on Jink as much, allowing it a bit more freedom of operation, without making it quite as absurd as it is now and without making the Jink mechanic superfluous if it feels heavily endangered, in addition to keeping some more survivability versus ignores-cover weapons. Thus, for 130pts, you could sport a TL Scatterlaser, a shuricannon, (so up to seven S6 TL'd shots, still not terrible firepower by any means) with a 5+ invul and a Jink option to gain a 4+ cover (or 145pts for a 3+ cover).
53939
Post by: vipoid
Well, surely it depends what upgrades you buy?
I mean, you can get a reasonable build for 130.
Bharring wrote:
Serpent is harder to kill than a Rhino, but not four times harder to kill. AV12s don't fold like paper, but I usually don't have trouble killing a couple of them. The cost would have to come down if it lost the shield entirely.
But then, Rhinos can't put out 7 TL S6 Shots at long range.
It seems like a Chimera would be a better comparison (with 2 costing the same as a single WS).
2 Chimeras average 3 S6 hits and 3 S5 hits on their target (if they remain stationary to fire)
If the Chimeras move 6", then they average 3 S6 hits, and 1 S5 hit.
If they move 12", then they average 1 S6 hit and 1 S5 hit.
The WS can move 12", and averages ~6 S6 hits.
If it jinks, it averages ~2 S6 hits.
The Chimeras have FA12 SA10 RA10, and 6 hull points between them.
The WS has FA12 SA12 RA10 with 3 HPs, but has the option to jink.
The Chimeras do have twice the capacity between them.
I don't know, it doesn't seem to come off too unreasonably. It has fewer HPs, though more side armour. And, it can move 12" and still put out more firepower than 2 stationary Chimeras. Or, it can jink (which will, on average, double its life-expectancy), but put out reduced firepower as a result (though, still more than the 2 Chimeras if they move 12").
At the very least, I really don't think it would require a major point drop. Though, ideally, it's the sort of thing you'd use plat testing to fine-tune.
Bharring wrote:
Explodes a CSM Rhino - CSM - 1/2 wounded, 1/3 of those fail armor save = 1/6 die, one LD test (pinning)
Explodes a Serpent - DAs - 2/3 wounded, 1/2 of those fail saves = 1/3 die, two LD tests (pinning and shock). Each man cost as much as a CSM.
Explodes a Serpent - Guardians - 2/3 wounded, 2/3of those fail saves = over half die, two LD tests
Without some pen protection, the only troops that'd be feasible for Eldar are backfield campers, Jetbikes, and Wraiths. Take out DTs entirely, and you're down to backfield camping and Jetbikes. For an army with mostly range 12-18 weapons, that is painful.
All I can say to this is 'how do you think DE feel?' I mean, their troops also have 5+ saves - but their transports are AV10 open topped. Serpents are already considerably more durable by virtue of being AV12 and closed-top. I don't see why they need even more protection on top of that.
Hell, the aforementioned Chimera is generally used to transport Guardsmen - who are no more durable than Guardians. Should Chimeras get shields too?
71534
Post by: Bharring
Yeah, the pen reduction isn't nearly as necessary as it was in 6th.
That said, IG and Tau are both long-range armies. DE are a mix of long range and melee. It's a lot easier to not get blown up when you don't need the transport to get close.
Eldar are odd in that their vehicles usually have decent ranges, but most of their infantry options have critically-short range. 12" and 18" isn't uncommon. They have speed and a flying-brick of a DT to compensate, but currently that DT is far too much of a gunboat to be fair.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, don't Chimeras have Firepoints?
And DE have open topped, and typically 24" range. DE pay a lot when their boats blow up, but their boats cost less than half a Serpent, and DE is generally a glass-cannon army.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
(And how is the Serpent's 24" on it's cannon long-range?)
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
Bharring wrote:You're still paying 150-ish points per Serpent.
Clearly broken with the shield as-is.
But without the shield entirely?
Serpent is harder to kill than a Rhino, but not four times harder to kill. AV12s don't fold like paper, but I usually don't have trouble killing a couple of them. The cost would have to come down if it lost the shield entirely.
Explodes a CSM Rhino - CSM - 1/2 wounded, 1/3 of those fail armor save = 1/6 die, one LD test (pinning)
Explodes a Serpent - DAs - 2/3 wounded, 1/2 of those fail saves = 1/3 die, two LD tests (pinning and shock). Each man cost as much as a CSM.
Explodes a Serpent - Guardians - 2/3 wounded, 2/3of those fail saves = over half die, two LD tests
Without some pen protection, the only troops that'd be feasible for Eldar are backfield campers, Jetbikes, and Wraiths. Take out DTs entirely, and you're down to backfield camping and Jetbikes. For an army with mostly range 12-18 weapons, that is painful.
I think most people would be fine with a points drop if the Serpent lost the shield or if its effect was sufficiently nerfed.
80404
Post by: Red Marine
Imagine a scenario if you please.
Your a new 40k player, and your a hack. You want to win above all other concerns. So you decide to research the internet for a newb autowin button. What does the internet say? Serpent spam! So you buy five SWs with min DAs.
You proceed to the lfgs and game until you drop. And lose relentlessly. How do you think that skilless hack of a newb would respond?
My guess would be, in this hypothetical situation, that the newb in question would argue ceaselessly that WSs were under powered. Just a thought mind you, a hypothetical. A bit of " mathhammer" if you will.
55577
Post by: ImAGeek
 Red Marine wrote:Imagine a scenario if you please.
Your a new 40k player, and your a hack. You want to win above all other concerns. So you decide to research the internet for a newb autowin button. What does the internet say? Serpent spam! So you buy five SWs with min DAs.
You proceed to the lfgs and game until you drop. And lose relentlessly. How do you think that skilless hack of a newb would respond?
My guess would be, in this hypothetical situation, that the newb in question would argue ceaselessly that WSs were under powered. Just a thought mind you, a hypothetical. A bit of " mathhammer" if you will.
...it all makes sense now.
71534
Post by: Bharring
It'd probably take losing the shield outright to justify any price drop.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Red Marine wrote:Imagine a scenario if you please.
Your a new 40k player, and your a hack. You want to win above all other concerns. So you decide to research the internet for a newb autowin button. What does the internet say? Serpent spam! So you buy five SWs with min DAs.
You proceed to the lfgs and game until you drop. And lose relentlessly. How do you think that skilless hack of a newb would respond?
My guess would be, in this hypothetical situation, that the newb in question would argue ceaselessly that WSs were under powered. Just a thought mind you, a hypothetical. A bit of " mathhammer" if you will.
If we're speculating about the same thing that I think we're speculating about, I'm afraid I Ninjad you by about three weeks and at least as many threads!
74137
Post by: Pyeatt
Balanced 8% [ 16 ]
Unbalanced (undercosted) 76% [ 151 ]
Unbalanced (overcosted) 8% [ 16 ]
"This is a really uncomfy fence" 8% [ 16 ]
Total Votes : 199
So what I'm seeing is either Morgorth voting 32 times, or 31 people who looooove cheese Eldar.. and Morgorth.
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
 Pyeatt wrote:Balanced 8% [ 16 ]
Unbalanced (undercosted) 76% [ 151 ]
Unbalanced (overcosted) 8% [ 16 ]
"This is a really uncomfy fence" 8% [ 16 ]
Total Votes : 199
So what I'm seeing is either Morgorth voting 32 times, or 31 people who looooove cheese Eldar.. and Morgorth.
I think it's partly due to the nature of the poll though to be fair. I voted Unbalanced (undercosted) of course, but I don't think the Wave Serpent is undercosted at all... I think it's too good to even be an option in the game. No vehicle should have such great mobility, survivability and firepower in a single package and especially when you can spam it. Making it super-expensive does little to make it less OP, it just means that spamming it is less attractive. So from my perspective the proper option should be "Unbalanced (needs complete retooling to make it fair)".
Tone down serpent shield significantly and then we can talk about points drops. Hell, at this point we could ditch the offensive mode entirely and it would be much less cheesy (although maybe not worth a point drop yet). Automatically Appended Next Post: Pyeatt wrote:Balanced 8% [ 16 ]
Unbalanced (undercosted) 76% [ 151 ]
Unbalanced (overcosted) 8% [ 16 ]
"This is a really uncomfy fence" 8% [ 16 ]
Total Votes : 199
So what I'm seeing is either Morgorth voting 32 times, or 31 people who looooove cheese Eldar.. and Morgorth.
One guy said he voted overcosted for the lulz earlier.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
I thought this was all satire so I voted "overcosted" lol
Regardless, 183 people voted against morgoths opinion and only 16 people voted with him. This means his "undeniably facts" are not facts at all. I'm not even sure if he understands what the term undeniable means, because if 92% of people disagree with your opinion, theres probably at least a contesting point there rather than just saying "this is impossible to deny" because it would mean admitting to yourself things that would hurt your ego.
74137
Post by: Pyeatt
SHUPPET wrote:I thought this was all satire so I voted "overcosted" lol
Regardless, 183 people voted against morgoths opinion and only 16 people voted with him. This means his "undeniably facts" are not facts at all. I'm not even sure if he understands what the term undeniable means, because if 92% of people disagree with your opinion, theres probably at least a contesting point there rather than just saying "this is impossible to deny" because it would mean admitting to yourself things that would hurt your ego.
He's like a Republican fighting global warming research, lol. Automatically Appended Next Post: Mr Morden wrote:
I Killed a Wave Serpent last night with a Sister and a Melta gun - it was glorious - then the Dire Avengers from inside wiped her out and her unit................but she had done the Emperor's work that day
I will marry that sister one day. Automatically Appended Next Post: MWHistorian wrote:If Morgoth was posting in jest, I'd consider him a comic genius at this point.
He's kind of like the Ann Coulter of this site " Genocides cool. Women shouldn't vote. I dislike Jews" - Ann Coulter, most likely.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
I think a lot of those undercosted votes are probably joke votes. There are 2 out of 16 that have admitted as much so far...
86874
Post by: morgoth
vipoid wrote:Also, could you please enlighten us with your list of the top 10 most broken units in 40k?
Also also, why don't you start some threads about the units you consider broken, and see if others share your view? Unless, of course, you're afraid of rebuttal.
1. No thanks, that list would be very long to compile. Half the special characters of the IoM are in the top 10 most broken units in 40K, you have annihilation barges, undercosted Night Scythes, psy henchmen for their undercosted and CAD+allies spammable warp charges, etc.
2. Because it's not about sharing my view.
10% of players play Eldar and most people who even post are always focused on how they've been wronged.
Therefore they will always side against the Eldar (or the Tau, or some other minority Xenos) because that is always a majority vote with the IoM players behind.
The votes on the poll are worthless because of that, they've been cast by people who would like everyone but their army to be nerfed.
Notice how the poll has zero notion of nuance either.
It could be "slightly undercosted", "top-tier", "god-tier".
But no, you've successfully hidden all those votes under the opinion you want to hear.
The fact of the matter is that only slightly undercosted and up units make it into tournament lists, for any army really, so you've just confirmed that indeed, the WS is a good choice. a good unit even. I'll even say it's very good.
That doesn't make it broken, OP, or anything close to the bs you Eldar haters come up with.
53939
Post by: vipoid
What? Writing down 10 units?
morgoth wrote:
2. Because it's not about sharing my view.
10% of players play Eldar and most people who even post are always focused on how they've been wronged.
Therefore they will always side against the Eldar (or the Tau, or some other minority Xenos) because that is always a majority vote with the IoM players behind.
The votes on the poll are worthless because of that, they've been cast by people who would like everyone but their army to be nerfed.
So then, why isn't every Eldar unit as hated as the Wave Serpent?
Probably because it's an utterly meaningless term.
morgoth wrote:
It could be "slightly undercosted", "top-tier", "god-tier".
But no, you've successfully hidden all those votes under the opinion you want to hear.
I take it the possibility that you're simply wrong, and that the wave serpent is very undercosted, never entered your mind?
86874
Post by: morgoth
vipoid wrote:I take it the possibility that you're simply wrong, and that the wave serpent is very undercosted, never entered your mind?
It entered my mind several times, just as every possibility in every discussion.
However, I don't believe that you (and the WSOP crowd) have considered that the Wave Serpent is merely riding on the meta and far less undercosted than the worst offenders.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
It doesn't matter, 84% of people who made a decision voted that it is overcosted. It doesn't matter whether they think it is slightly overcosted (which wouldn't be unbalanced), top tier or god tier. They believe it is overcosted. Full stop.
You have successfully hidden the truth from yourself of what people have voted by ignoring once again what others are saying. In huge volume. Your own voice seems to be the only opinion you want to hear.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
92% of commenters on this poll disagreed with morgoth, not including the satire votes to underpowered
you lost dude
86819
Post by: nedTCM
This post always comes up like every few weeks. And there is always one or two people that make the underpowered claim. Everyone else agrees the the WS is at least slightly OP and/or undercosted. It essentially just becomes an argument with those few people who make ridiculous claims and repeatedly stating they are right. This topic really doesn't need to be made over and over again.
55577
Post by: ImAGeek
morgoth wrote: vipoid wrote:Also, could you please enlighten us with your list of the top 10 most broken units in 40k?.
1. No thanks, that list would be very long to compile. Half the special characters of the IoM are in the top 10 most broken units in 40K, you have annihilation barges, undercosted Night Scythes, psy henchmen for their undercosted and CAD+allies spammable warp charges, etc.
You really don't help yourself do you... At least back up your claims. A list of 10 things isn't gonna take long to put down is it. Half the special characters in the IoM are more then ten so how can they make the top ten? No wonder there's no room for the WS on your list...
Also, I see you mentioned some Necron units there, a 'Minority Xenos' army. Why don't we see many complaints about those units (not since 6th for NIght Sythes at least). Hmm...maybe because WS are worse?
nedTCM wrote:This post always comes up like every few weeks. And there is always one or two people that make the underpowered claim. Everyone else agrees the the WS is at least slightly OP and/or undercosted. It essentially just becomes an argument with those few people who make ridiculous claims and repeatedly stating they are right. This topic really doesn't need to be made over and over again.
As said in the first post, this was made to stop other perfectly good threads being derailed with the arguments about Wave Serpents.
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
nedTCM wrote:This post always comes up like every few weeks. And there is always one or two people that make the underpowered claim. Everyone else agrees the the WS is at least slightly OP and/or undercosted. It essentially just becomes an argument with those few people who make ridiculous claims and repeatedly stating they are right. This topic really doesn't need to be made over and over again.
The only reason it was created was because that same person derailed another thread, necessitating a new "discussion" to get that thread back on track.
In response to Morgoth, IoM battle brother shenanigans ARE broken IMHO. That doesn't make the Wave Serpent any less OP though, there are lots of major fixes that 40k needs. Annihilation Barges and Night Scythes are pretty bad as well, but not on the same degree as the WS (again, IMHO).
53939
Post by: vipoid
Honestly, I don't think Battle Brothers should even exist.
It just creates too many problems and broken combos in a ruleset that already suffers from abysmal balance.
84790
Post by: zerosignal
Clearly the WS is undercosted. Possibly, broken (my understanding of this term is that you basically HAVE to take this unit to be competitive, or else have some very strong counter to it - it warps the metagame).
Here's a good fix, IMHO - just three words:
One Use Only
and why, why, why 60" range... I really have no idea what geedubs developers are smoking (look at the new nid models for example... just, what? You needed to give a faction a boost and you did so by releasing weak units? whut?)
86874
Post by: morgoth
 ImAGeek wrote:morgoth wrote: vipoid wrote:Also, could you please enlighten us with your list of the top 10 most broken units in 40k?.
1. No thanks, that list would be very long to compile. Half the special characters of the IoM are in the top 10 most broken units in 40K, you have annihilation barges, undercosted Night Scythes, psy henchmen for their undercosted and CAD+allies spammable warp charges, etc.
You really don't help yourself do you... At least back up your claims. A list of 10 things isn't gonna take long to put down is it. Half the special characters in the IoM are more then ten so how can they make the top ten? No wonder there's no room for the WS on your list...
That claim doesn't need any backup, every good player knows of at least 10 units in 40K that are a lot more undercosted than the WS.
The problem with listing them is the sheer number of units making the undercosted list and then the sorting by most/least undercosted in order to come up with a top 10 that will not end up with another long and boring discussion.
ImAGeek wrote:
Also, I see you mentioned some Necron units there, a 'Minority Xenos' army. Why don't we see many complaints about those units (not since 6th for NIght Sythes at least). Hmm...maybe because WS are worse?
Because Necrons did not dominate late 6th and early 7th, not because they lack undercosted units, but because the army as a whole ends up weaker.
ImAGeek wrote:
nedTCM wrote:This post always comes up like every few weeks. And there is always one or two people that make the underpowered claim. Everyone else agrees the the WS is at least slightly OP and/or undercosted. It essentially just becomes an argument with those few people who make ridiculous claims and repeatedly stating they are right. This topic really doesn't need to be made over and over again.
As said in the first post, this was made to stop other perfectly good threads being derailed with the arguments about Wave Serpents.
Which always start with people pretending the WS are OP when it's simply another very good unit in the 40K universe.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
morgoth wrote: vipoid wrote:Also, could you please enlighten us with your list of the top 10 most broken units in 40k?
Also also, why don't you start some threads about the units you consider broken, and see if others share your view? Unless, of course, you're afraid of rebuttal.
1. No thanks, that list would be very long to compile. Half the special characters of the IoM are in the top 10 most broken units in 40K, you have annihilation barges, undercosted Night Scythes, psy henchmen for their undercosted and CAD+allies spammable warp charges, etc.
2. Because it's not about sharing my view.
You "named 40% of the list, so why not just finish it out? I'm really interested to see what IoM characters are broken.
10% of players play Eldar and most people who even post are always focused on how they've been wronged.
Therefore they will always side against the Eldar (or the Tau, or some other minority Xenos) because that is always a majority vote with the IoM players behind.
Only 10%? Are you sure?
The votes on the poll are worthless because of that, they've been cast by people who would like everyone but their army to be nerfed.
Assuming bias without evidence is foolish at best.
Notice how the poll has zero notion of nuance either.
It could be "slightly undercosted", "top-tier", "god-tier".
But no, you've successfully hidden all those votes under the opinion you want to hear.
When the goal was to discover if people thought it was under costed (everyone else's opinion) or over costed (your opinion) nothing was hidden.
The fact of the matter is that only slightly undercosted and up units make it into tournament lists, for any army really, so you've just confirmed that indeed, the WS is a good choice. a good unit even. I'll even say it's very good.
That doesn't make it broken, OP, or anything close to the bs you Eldar haters come up with.
Wait, under costed doesn't mean over powered? Under costed means that its power level is higher than it should be. Isn't that the very definition of overpowered?
74682
Post by: MWHistorian
This shouldn't be a conversation. The WS is OP and its so obviously OP that it's silly.
The meta has to shift around it (even Morgoth admitted that one) and it makes the game un fun.
The question really is: How OP is the WS?
86874
Post by: morgoth
zerosignal wrote:Clearly the WS is undercosted. Possibly, broken (my understanding of this term is that you basically HAVE to take this unit to be competitive, or else have some very strong counter to it - it warps the metagame).
Here's a good fix, IMHO - just three words:
One Use Only
and why, why, why 60" range... I really have no idea what geedubs developers are smoking (look at the new nid models for example... just, what? You needed to give a faction a boost and you did so by releasing weak units? whut?)
When it does use its 60" range, it's not undercosted anymore because without the twin-link from the scatter laser it cannot hit flyers, and still has AP nothing. 195+ points to send 4.5 S7 AP nothing shots downrange is just very bad for any army (except nids, they get no range).
The nid codex is a bad joke and a prime example of "you basically HAVE to take this unit to be competitive" with flyrants.
The reason the Eldar are always fielding Wave Serpents is that there is no way to make a competitive army without them, not because the WS is all kinds of OP, but because anything else is really bad compared to other armies. Automatically Appended Next Post: rigeld2 wrote:Wait, under costed doesn't mean over powered? Under costed means that its power level is higher than it should be. Isn't that the very definition of overpowered?
No.
Under costed means that unit falls in the right half of the bell curve and does perform better than average per point.
If that was the meaning of overpowered, then half the units in the game would be listed as OP.
55577
Post by: ImAGeek
morgoth wrote:
When it does use its 60" range, it's not undercosted anymore because without the twin-link from the scatter laser it cannot hit flyers, and still has AP nothing. 195+ points to send 4.5 S7 AP nothing shots downrange is just very bad for any army (except nids, they get no range).
Except it is still undercosted because it's not like using it at 60" prohibits you from using it with the twin linked bonus at other points in the game...it can still do all the things that make it undercosted.
21971
Post by: Mozzyfuzzy
morgoth wrote:
When it does use its 60" range, it's not undercosted anymore because without the twin-link from the scatter laser it cannot hit flyers, and still has AP nothing. 195+ points to send 4.5 S7 AP nothing shots downrange is just very bad for any army (except nids, they get no range).
Strange here I was playing Csm and Dark angels, with the only way for me to get 4 s7 shots is to take predators, but they don't come with skimmer, fast vehicle or a transport option, and I'm limited to 3 of them due to heavy support, I'd take the wave serpent over it's equal value in points of predators any day.
But wait, the wave serpent doesn't have access to lascannons, so the two aren't comparable.
86874
Post by: morgoth
 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:morgoth wrote:
When it does use its 60" range, it's not undercosted anymore because without the twin-link from the scatter laser it cannot hit flyers, and still has AP nothing. 195+ points to send 4.5 S7 AP nothing shots downrange is just very bad for any army (except nids, they get no range).
Strange here I was playing Csm and Dark angels, with the only way for me to get 4 s7 shots is to take predators, but they don't come with skimmer, fast vehicle or a transport option, and I'm limited to 3 of them due to heavy support, I'd take the wave serpent over it's equal value in points of predators any day.
But wait, the wave serpent doesn't have access to lascannons, so the two aren't comparable.
But they get AP, and rending, and if they were transports would be able to transport somtehing else than crap.
Either way S6-7 AP gak is an Eldar hallmark, it wouldn't make sense to try to compete in that precise band, would it ?
For cheaper, you do get a higher armor hull with 3 Lascan shots, I don't think it's any worse than 4.5 S7 AP- shots.
But then, that Predator isn't a competitive choice, and is probably as undercosted as the 60" backfield serpent shield WS.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
morgoth wrote:rigeld2 wrote:Wait, under costed doesn't mean over powered? Under costed means that its power level is higher than it should be. Isn't that the very definition of overpowered?
No.
Under costed means that unit falls in the right half of the bell curve and does perform better than average per point.
If that was the meaning of overpowered, then half the units in the game would be listed as OP.
There isn't a bell curve of power. So what's your definition of overpowered?
There's "balanced" - units that perform equal to their point costs.
"Over costed/underpowered" - units that perform worse than their point costs indicate.
"Under costed/overpowered" - units that perform better than their point costs indicate.
53939
Post by: vipoid
Yes, it does. And you need to provide it.
morgoth wrote:The problem with listing them is the sheer number of units making the undercosted list and then the sorting by most/least undercosted in order to come up with a top 10 that will not end up with another long and boring discussion.
Tell you what, forget the order. Just name 10 units more OP than the wave serpent.
rigeld2 wrote:
Wait, under costed doesn't mean over powered? Under costed means that its power level is higher than it should be. Isn't that the very definition of overpowered?
The terms are indeed largely interchangeable.
I think the only real difference is that the price is the *only* problem with an undercosted unit. Whereas some Overpowered may be so because of effects that just plain shouldn't exist (and are virtually impossible to price fairly). For example, Invisibility is an effect that just shouldn't exist at all within the game - it's just too overpowering to put a reasonable price on.
86874
Post by: morgoth
rigeld2 wrote:morgoth wrote:rigeld2 wrote:Wait, under costed doesn't mean over powered? Under costed means that its power level is higher than it should be. Isn't that the very definition of overpowered?
No.
Under costed means that unit falls in the right half of the bell curve and does perform better than average per point.
If that was the meaning of overpowered, then half the units in the game would be listed as OP.
There isn't a bell curve of power. So what's your definition of overpowered?
There's "balanced" - units that perform equal to their point costs.
"Over costed/underpowered" - units that perform worse than their point costs indicate.
"Under costed/overpowered" - units that perform better than their point costs indicate.
Then why aren't you screaming overpowered for every other unit that is under costed ? why that fixation on the WS ? why even reserve that term for it ? Automatically Appended Next Post: vipoid wrote:
Tell you what, forget the order. Just name 10 units more OP than the wave serpent.
Do you mean more undercosted ? or some other term that doesn't seem to have a clear definition ?
55577
Post by: ImAGeek
morgoth wrote: vipoid wrote:
Tell you what, forget the order. Just name 10 units more OP than the wave serpent.
Do you mean more undercosted ? or some other term that doesn't seem to have a clear definition ?
That's an argument you're having with someone else but good effort to wriggle out of his question.
21971
Post by: Mozzyfuzzy
morgoth wrote:
But they get AP, and rending, and if they were transports would be able to transport somtehing else than crap. When did autocannons have rending? and when was transporting meq's in rhinos any good? Oh when it came to adding more guns in 5th because razorbacks.
Either way S6-7 AP gak is an Eldar hallmark, it wouldn't make sense to try to compete in that precise band, would it ? I thought sending S6/7 down range was a waste of time why would it be the hallmark of an army if it was so bad?
For cheaper, you do get a higher armor hull with 3 Lascan shots, I don't think it's any worse than 4.5 S7 AP- shots. But it has to be stationary to fire all it's guns (loses mobility) or if it moves it fires less, the wave serpent can move 6" and fire all it's guns, or move 12" and fire less. While still transporting stuff
But then, that Predator isn't a competitive choice, and is probably as undercosted as the 60" backfield serpent shield WS. Or maybe because the tri las pred, can generally perform one roll well (antitank/ monstrous creature) and the other role poorly (anti infantry, moving and shooting, transport)
34243
Post by: Blacksails
Ah good, the thread has now turned into a semantics debate about the definitions of over powered and under costed in a vague attempt to dodge the real issue.
Being that the wave serpent is clearly significantly stronger than it has any right to be for its point cost.
Which, I mean, really, overpowered/undercosted doesn't matter. Its too strong.
But its a classic tactic of people who won't just admit a certain unit is too strong for the game.
Further, Morgoth, I can't think of 10 units better than the wave serpent. Maybe you should actually argue a point and list these 10 units.
I'll wait.
53939
Post by: vipoid
morgoth wrote:
Do you mean more undercosted ? or some other term that doesn't seem to have a clear definition ?
*shrugs*
Pick one.
I really don't care if you choose to list 10 units more underpriced than the WS, or 10 units more OP than the WS. As I said, the terms are largely interchangeable.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
morgoth wrote:Then why aren't you screaming overpowered for every other unit that is under costed ? why that fixation on the WS ? why even reserve that term for it ?
Because there aren't threads claiming that Anni Barges are fine and balanced and everything is okay.
(Hint - because no one I know thinks they're balanced) I'm here showing you the error of your claims, and that's it.
And I'm not "reserving" any term for it. I'm just pointing out how ludicrous your assertions are.
Do you mean more undercosted ? or some other term that doesn't seem to have a clear definition ?
Since the terms are interchangeable...
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
In previous threads people have demonstrated mathmatically the point for shot ratio of the serp is higher than other equivalents.
In this thread and previous threads people have shown how the serpent can be used to fill multiple tactical roles for cheaper than the dedicated units for that role.
There have been unit by unit comparisons to show the WS is OP.
There have been tournament results posted which have demonstrated its power.
Now there has also been a poll which has resoundingly shown that the vast majority believe it unbalanced and undercosted.
...
What more evidence do you need?
Mathmatics, statistics, comparisons, opinion polls and demonstrations of battlefield scenarios are not enough evidence for you. Does the flying spaghetti monster need to come down and declare it himself before you accept it?
71534
Post by: Bharring
While I did select 'undercosted', I think it is more accurate to say it is both OP *and* overcosted.
It is op. Look t other posts for that at the moment.
But I don't think the problem is that it simply costs too little. Sure, if you bumped the cost, you could theoretically balance it as a gunboat. But it would still be a nasty gunboat.
It should be more of a troop transport/fire support model. Meaning it gets its guys to where they need to get, and carries weaponry to support.
There are two problems with that.
First, it is an OP gunboat. Most of the time, it's firepower is far more important than anything you'll have inside. So you're fielding gunboat with extras, not a transport with some guns.
Second issue is price for delivery. At 115 stock/145-ish kitted, it is too expensive if your goal is to shift a bunch of units up-field. Quite often, the tank is more expensive than the unit. Furthermore, having neither fire points nor assault makes it a little unwieldy, although its speed helps a lot. Basically, one round to move 12", and then disembark the next (moving 6" or less with the only AP being on the AV10 rear, you can wind up disembarking further away from your target than the front of your hull started), and potentially assault on the turn after that. So if you want to get your short-range or melee guys into positon, you're often either putting a 145pt transport into charge range, or you're covering the distance on foot. Not as much a problem with most other DTs because they're cheaper, and/or the units have longer range.
If we don't want to use a Serpent, we can:
-Footslog (t3 4+/5+ with 18"/12" guns? Not for those costs)
-Falcon it up for more points, a HS slot per unit, and can't handle more than 6 models (lots of fun for a specialist or skirmish unit, terrible for pushing)
-Jetbikes (I'd rather my troops be actual infantry)
-Footslogging Wraiths (Decently survivable per model, but too few models, and 12" range or less without battle focus)
-Unbound with no troops
-Dark Eldar allies for a WWP and some cheap transports (and other troop options).
So we have options, but none of them sound like the setup for a good game.
If it weren't for the 'Shield shooting, the Serpent would have one main weapon and one defensive weapon. Seems about right. --
-Could cheap out at cannon/catapault for a little anti infantry close range fire
-Could go SL/SC for a good anti-infantry setup
-Could go BL or EML with the shuriCat for a heavy weapon to support the infantry
But with the 'Shield, SL/SC is just far too awesome.
So, as far as providing a DT for Eldar, I see the Serpent as both OP and overcosted, and would love to see them both fixed.
All that said, Eldar have an amazing 'Dex right now, so we'd be OK with the Serpent taking a nerf. I do hope that if they nerf it though, they nerf its gunboat ability, not its f-u-gunline durability. I like that the Eldar dex has both good shooting and durability, but what really sells their character is when they have to pick between the two each round. The Serpent gets both simultaniously (to varying degrees). It is basically the hard counter to fun.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, as for nuance, the attitude of these boards has become increasingly nuanced since Serpent Spam arrived. In this thread alone, there is plenty. Its no longer the every-thing-about-it-is-stupid refrain it used to be. The reason you're probably not seeing it is because the community seems to be settling around the point that a hard nerf to its shooting -possibly slightly short of fully removing it - would bring it in line. A lot of recent posts have been quite rational and nuanced.
(Simplest fix would be 6" range.
A more complex one I'm toying with is 6" heavy 1 s7 torrent/pinning/Gets Hot.
One Use Only would do nothing to mitigate the alpha gunboat ability, although it would be a stiff nerf the rest of the game. Not a fan of that direction.
)
86874
Post by: morgoth
For a list of ten units more undercosted than the Wave Serpent in the standard BRB rules (i.e. not maelstrom only or tournament-specific missions) with no dataslates or ForgeWorld, at 1850 points:
Coteaz,
Psy Henchmen,
Pask,
Creed,
Da Finkin' Kap Ork HQ,
Conscripts,
Priests,
Annihilation Barge,
Drop Pods,
Azrael
There are still at least another dozen before the WS turn comes up.
No matter how hard you whine, the truth remains that the WS's strongest points are partial immunity to CAD limitations and the prevalence of Maelstrom-type missions.
The unit itself is far from the top 10 list of most undercosted units.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
We've had 6 pages of evidence why the serp is undercosted, could you please maybe put a single sentence as to why each of those units is more undercosted than the serp?
Maybe if you want to put a bit more effort in you could also use mathematics, tournament results, opinion polls or conparisons to prove your point... if only we'd done that for the serp.
Or you can keep 'whining' about how unfair it is that people keep saying the serp is OP, that people just don't understand you, and the whole world is aginst you. "Its not fair, its not fair, its not fair!" Christ - the half term holiday is over soon and I've got to go back and deal with that adolescent attitude day in day out. I'm just going to enjoy my last two days of holiday. Im out.
Btw (last note) I'm not usually so critical of people... but the insulting attitude you use with everybody who doesn't agree with you in every thread is just rude and unnecessary.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
I am not OP! I'm just big boned.
76833
Post by: AutarchRion
Well... I have actually never had too much of an issue with these. I run an assault heavy list, so as long as I can catch them with DPs, Screamers or something similar, I can pop them pretty easy. I will say that if the opponent is a douche wagon and takes 5 or 6, they can be a bit overwhelming. lol
But isn't this always how 40k has worked? There are always some units that are powerful and very difficult to deal with. The goal is to find ways to beat them. For me, deepstrike, quick assault units, forcing them to jink.... they are beatable, but I agree... they are powerful.
53939
Post by: vipoid
morgoth wrote:For a list of ten units more undercosted than the Wave Serpent in the standard BRB rules (i.e. not maelstrom only or tournament-specific missions) with no dataslates or ForgeWorld, at 1850 points:
Coteaz,
Psy Henchmen, Are these still possible? This is an honest question, since I haven't seen the new inquisition book. I agree that they were silly in the last GK book though.
Pask, Assuming a Punisher, he requires a minimum investment of 335pts - that's with the cheapest possible Russ and before you add and sponsons or other upgrades to him or his wingman. I really struggle to see how he's as underpriced as the WS.
Creed, Um... why? He's a decent Force Multiplier, but he more than doubles the price of a CCS and is still just as fragile as the standard Company Commander.
Da Finkin' Kap Ork HQ, Eh? Is an extra warlord trait really that overpowered? Sorry, but no way is that more underpriced than the WS.
Conscripts, You really think these are more undercosted than a WS? Again, why?
Priests, Maybe slightly, but nowhere near the degree of the WS.
Annihilation Barge, No objections here.
Drop Pods, Again, I'd disagree that these are more undercosted than the WS, but I certainly agree that they're undercosted.
Azrael Why?
Thanks for providing the list, but is there any chance you could give your reasoning behind some of these? I mean, I can at least understand Annihilation Barges and Drop Pods, but several of the others really have me confused. e.g. Most threads I've seen seemed to agree that Creed is actually overpriced. So, it would be useful to hear why you believe the opposite to be true.
There are still at least another dozen before the WS turn comes up.
No matter how hard you whine, the truth remains that the WS's strongest points are partial immunity to CAD limitations and the prevalence of Maelstrom-type missions. Again, that's just one problem - it's not the only one.
The unit itself is far from the top 10 list of most undercosted units. I think many others will still disagree with you on that one.
74682
Post by: MWHistorian
The WS isn't just in the top 10, it's in the top 3 OP units.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
Oh dear, conscripts and Creed being more overpowered than wave serpents?
Yeah, there's no point arguing about the power level of wave serpents when the same person feels Creed is too strong. Morgoth must have thought Creed was super bonkers broken with the 5th ed book, because he took a pretty serious hit from the nerf bat in this edition.
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
Bharring wrote:While I did select 'undercosted', I think it is more accurate to say it is both OP *and* overcosted.
It is op. Look t other posts for that at the moment.
But I don't think the problem is that it simply costs too little. Sure, if you bumped the cost, you could theoretically balance it as a gunboat. But it would still be a nasty gunboat.
It should be more of a troop transport/fire support model. Meaning it gets its guys to where they need to get, and carries weaponry to support.
There are two problems with that.
First, it is an OP gunboat. Most of the time, it's firepower is far more important than anything you'll have inside. So you're fielding gunboat with extras, not a transport with some guns.
Second issue is price for delivery. At 115 stock/145-ish kitted, it is too expensive if your goal is to shift a bunch of units up-field. Quite often, the tank is more expensive than the unit. Furthermore, having neither fire points nor assault makes it a little unwieldy, although its speed helps a lot. Basically, one round to move 12", and then disembark the next (moving 6" or less with the only AP being on the AV10 rear, you can wind up disembarking further away from your target than the front of your hull started), and potentially assault on the turn after that. So if you want to get your short-range or melee guys into positon, you're often either putting a 145pt transport into charge range, or you're covering the distance on foot. Not as much a problem with most other DTs because they're cheaper, and/or the units have longer range.
If we don't want to use a Serpent, we can:
-Footslog (t3 4+/5+ with 18"/12" guns? Not for those costs)
-Falcon it up for more points, a HS slot per unit, and can't handle more than 6 models (lots of fun for a specialist or skirmish unit, terrible for pushing)
-Jetbikes (I'd rather my troops be actual infantry)
-Footslogging Wraiths (Decently survivable per model, but too few models, and 12" range or less without battle focus)
-Unbound with no troops
-Dark Eldar allies for a WWP and some cheap transports (and other troop options).
So we have options, but none of them sound like the setup for a good game.
If it weren't for the 'Shield shooting, the Serpent would have one main weapon and one defensive weapon. Seems about right. --
-Could cheap out at cannon/catapault for a little anti infantry close range fire
-Could go SL/ SC for a good anti-infantry setup
-Could go BL or EML with the shuriCat for a heavy weapon to support the infantry
But with the 'Shield, SL/ SC is just far too awesome.
So, as far as providing a DT for Eldar, I see the Serpent as both OP and overcosted, and would love to see them both fixed.
All that said, Eldar have an amazing 'Dex right now, so we'd be OK with the Serpent taking a nerf. I do hope that if they nerf it though, they nerf its gunboat ability, not its f-u-gunline durability. I like that the Eldar dex has both good shooting and durability, but what really sells their character is when they have to pick between the two each round. The Serpent gets both simultaniously (to varying degrees). It is basically the hard counter to fun.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, as for nuance, the attitude of these boards has become increasingly nuanced since Serpent Spam arrived. In this thread alone, there is plenty. Its no longer the every-thing-about-it-is-stupid refrain it used to be. The reason you're probably not seeing it is because the community seems to be settling around the point that a hard nerf to its shooting -possibly slightly short of fully removing it - would bring it in line. A lot of recent posts have been quite rational and nuanced.
(Simplest fix would be 6" range.
A more complex one I'm toying with is 6" heavy 1 s7 torrent/pinning/Gets Hot.
One Use Only would do nothing to mitigate the alpha gunboat ability, although it would be a stiff nerf the rest of the game. Not a fan of that direction.
)
This. I said this more or less a page or 2 ago, but I think you explained it much better.
|
|
