So I've played 5 games now with my guard, with average success. Learning what's worth the points and what isn't. Is it just me, or is a wyvern hands down the best anti infantry in the game? Against tau, it killed 300 points of models. Against marines 200 points.
The thing is average enough to not warrant anything dedicated going after it, no one will commit melta to it when there are russes and chimeras full of vets. It just chills in ruins and nukes everything.
Dare I say best valued unit in the game for anti-infantry? Great against tau/elder, decent against marines, awesome against any horde whatsoever.
It is one of the few gems in the Imperial Guard codex, infinitely better than any of the trap units that are the elite section of the army list.
They brutalize anything in the open, and even make hard armored troops sit up and take notice by sheer volume of hits and wounds on average.
I've run them with good success in the past (Proxy my old griffon mortar tanks for them on occasion) and am impressed to be sure. They do work, and do it well for a VERY reasonable cost. Nigh worthless versus armored targets or high toughness (T:8+), but Emperor help anything in the open that's T:5 or lower, because Stormshard mortars don't give a feth, and are going to make whatever unit is beneath their templates regret their life choices.
I would argue that they're one of the best units in the codex, and certainly one of the best artillery platforms in 40k for dealing with infantry, point for point.
I agree, one of the strongest units in the game - they solve a lot of problems. Ignoring cover, twin linked and shred on 4 templates that can strike anywhere within 48 inches with no line of sight is just crazily good. 65pts for a chimera chassis isn't terrible either. I find individual wyverns rarely motivate the enemy to shoot at them as they are so cheap.
I'd say guard as a codex are great at dealing with enemy infantry but fall down against enemy armour / MCs due to anti-armour units being overpriced...
With my daemons (3 FMC + summoning), it's always a tough choice between sacrificing my daemon factory to ignore them or focusing on them right off the bat.
I know a guy who runs 3 units of 2. I only have my big daemons after turn one and summoning becomes pointless, but then the FMC's just go on a happy murderous rampage. Which is why he's buying some Vendettas.
I have one that I hide behind around a basilisk, this confuses the enemy to no end. When I first came across them it was when a mate smashed me using two allied with sisters. That really was devastating.
They're possibly the best unit in the IG codex. While they're incredibly useful, they not a totally OP unit people will complain about and are actually quite easy to knock out. They're great at forcing enemy units out of cover.
Fielding 3 Space Marine Whirlwinds in the Suppression Force formation goes one better by adding Pinning on top of Shred to those templates and having the option to trade Ignores Cover for S5 AP4. Of course, I learned the hard way about tank formations vs. haywire armies like AdMech as my opponent burned 2.5 of my 3 tanks in a single shooting phase. But despite having no actual Wyverns I have a ton of second-hand affection for them thanks to the Suppression Force.
Wyverns are amazing, I both love and hate them. That being said, I always go for them. It might be a waste, but I feel it's better to kill them early, as they're too much of a pain not to.
Baldeagle91 wrote: They're possibly the best unit in the IG codex. While they're incredibly useful, they not a totally OP unit people will complain about and are actually quite easy to knock out. They're great Ywat forcing enemy units out of cover.
Yes, they are. 48 inch range, ignores cover, shred heavy 2 blast should not be on a 65 point tank.
If anything, the fact that the OP consistently kills 3-5 times the points cost of a wyvern should in and of itself be apparent evidence that it's OP.
Ditto for whirlwinds and thunderfire cannons.
GW, imho, sorely underestimates the points value of ranged barrage weapons.
Baldeagle91 wrote: They're possibly the best unit in the IG codex. While they're incredibly useful, they not a totally OP unit people will complain about and are actually quite easy to knock out. They're great Ywat forcing enemy units out of cover.
Yes, they are. 48 inch range, ignores cover, shred heavy 2 blast should not be on a 65 point tank.
If anything, the fact that the OP consistently kills 3-5 times the points cost of a wyvern should in and of itself be apparent evidence that it's OP.
Ditto for whirlwinds and thunderfire cannons.
GW, imho, sorely underestimates the points value of ranged barrage weapons.
They're also a weapon on a extremely fragile platform, vulnerable to other barrage weapons (such as basilisks), only reliable vs light infantry and you can have games where they don't do particularly much damage. Despite the fact IG use them, some players even spam them, and they don't really help that much suggests more than anything it's not particularly OP.
I've never really seen them decide a game, they more chip away at peoples troops.
Baldeagle91 wrote: They're possibly the best unit in the IG codex. While they're incredibly useful, they not a totally OP unit people will complain about and are actually quite easy to knock out. They're great Ywat forcing enemy units out of cover.
Yes, they are. 48 inch range, ignores cover, shred heavy 2 blast should not be on a 65 point tank.
If anything, the fact that the OP consistently kills 3-5 times the points cost of a wyvern should in and of itself be apparent evidence that it's OP.
Ditto for whirlwinds and thunderfire cannons.
GW, imho, sorely underestimates the points value of ranged barrage weapons.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Are you saying Whirlwinds are mildly undercosted?
At the current cost, 1 - 5 man tactical squad with bolters is slightly more expensive than a whirlwind or a wyvern.
Somehow, that doesn't seem right.
A 5 man tactical squad with bolters does not have the same infantry killing capacity as a whirlwind or a wyvern.
Wyvern's are also incredible fragile, and are a fair bit harder to hide than a 5 man Tactical squad. This is not a fair comparison imo. The Wyvern is one of the only good things the Guard has right now, and it is far from OP
One of the few times I ever lost my Pathfinders was from a Wyvern. I managed to win that game through objectives though.
It's a great unit. I tried to tell my friend to bring more of them to make it more interesting but he was convinced they sucked and never put 2+2 together and figure out they were decent at taking down markerlights. He also would rarely go for my markerlights and usually shoot my Firewarriors or suits with everything. He would always usually aim his one wyvern them at Crisis Suits and Riptides. Which drove me nuts. He concluded the Wyvern is a useless unit... my jaw dropped when he said this.
I tried to help him I really did but when I say he is without a doubt one of the worst 40k players I've ever seen you can be assured of that.
Can you see now why I haven't lost a game in two years? *sigh* I haven't had a real game in two years.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: And 100+ Gretchin have less killing potential than an Imperial Knight. Your comparison is stupid and you know it.
Tactical marines with bolters and wyverns are both effective at killing the same kinds of units. The comparison is perfectly apt.
But if you want to talk about vehicles, a rhino costs 35 points. Are you going to tell me that a wyvern is slightly less effective than 2 rhinos?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
War Kitten wrote:Wyvern's are also incredible fragile
That's a "12" on front AV, no?
Besides, they don't need to be not-fragile. That's a "48" in the stat-line of the gun. Also, "barrage."
and are a fair bit harder to hide than a 5 man Tactical squad
Lol no.
Again, "barrage."
Again, let's put this in perspective. 1 wyvern = slightly more than 2 devastator marines with missile launchers.
That seem right to you?
That's also side and rear armor of "10". You can shoot it to death with bolters from the side and rear. Throw your Marines in metal boxes and you can just drive right next to the Wyvern and shoot it to death. And have you heard of these things called drop pods? They're great for getting up close and personal with Wyverns. If AV12 is that insurmountable of an obstacle to you then I'm sorry, but you have bigger issues than my Wyverns
They are about 80 points under costed, and in my experience always deadly. And you are crazy if you think people would not commit melta /anti tank to getting rid of them. They are priority number one when I fight guard.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: And 100+ Gretchin have less killing potential than an Imperial Knight. Your comparison is stupid and you know it.
Tactical marines with bolters and wyverns are both effective at killing the same kinds of units. The comparison is perfectly apt.
But if you want to talk about vehicles, a rhino costs 35 points. Are you going to tell me that a wyvern is slightly less effective than 2 rhinos?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
War Kitten wrote:Wyvern's are also incredible fragile
That's a "12" on front AV, no?
Besides, they don't need to be not-fragile. That's a "48" in the stat-line of the gun. Also, "barrage."
and are a fair bit harder to hide than a 5 man Tactical squad
Lol no.
Again, "barrage."
Again, let's put this in perspective. 1 wyvern = slightly more than 2 devastator marines with missile launchers.
That seem right to you?
That's also side and rear armor of "10". You can shoot it to death with bolters from the side and rear. Throw your Marines in metal boxes and you can just drive right next to the Wyvern and shoot it to death. And have you heard of these things called drop pods? They're great for getting up close and personal with Wyverns. If AV12 is that insurmountable of an obstacle to you then I'm sorry, but you have bigger issues than my Wyverns
+1 Plus it's open topped.
Best case scenario each Wyvern is popping off 12 S4 AP6 hits each turn, but on an extremely fragile platform that has a high chance to miss. By comparison you have space marines who are much more multi-purpose, shoot off 10 BS4 S4 AP5 shots (so say 7 hits), WS4 and S4 in CC and free transports. Wow Wyverns are so OP compared to 5 marines....
Orock wrote: They are about 80 points under costed, and in my experience always deadly. And you are crazy if you think people would not commit melta /anti tank to getting rid of them. They are priority number one when I fight guard.
145 points for a wyvern? Yeah you're having a laugh....
War Kitten wrote:That's also side and rear armor of "10".
Again: "barrage." You can literally park it behind a wall or a building, bubble wrap your army around it and just lol at your opponent for 7 turns.
You can't take the wyvern in isolation from the rest of the AM army.
You can shoot it to death with bolters from the side and rear. Throw your Marines in metal boxes and you can just drive right next to the Wyvern and shoot it to death. And have you heard of these things called drop pods? They're great for getting up close and personal with Wyverns.
I don't use drop pods.
I do, however, use mehtal bawkses.
I'm dubious about the chances of actually getting to rear or side AV armor on the wyvern. Again, chances are, you'll have the rest of your army in the way of my getting there. If my mehtal bawkses don't get leeman russed or lascannoned to death before I can get to your wyvern, I would be amazed.
The most consistently effective ways I can think of to deal with that are: 1. drop pod melta, and why would I waste that on a 65 point model, even if I used drop pods? and 2. an orbital strike that is probably going to miss.
If AV12 is that insurmountable of an obstacle to you then I'm sorry, but you have bigger issues than my Wyverns
It's not just AV 12. It's AV 12 that fires barrage weapons, is going to be sitting at the edge of the map with a bunch of other stuff in the way, and likely won't be in line of sight. Ever.
There's no way that it should be a 65 point model. 100 points easily. Same for the whirlwind (though the whirlwind should, admittedly, be more expensive than the wyvern).
Ultimately, the wyvern isn't OP. That's not my point. I just don't think that it should be a 65 point model.
The Wyvern is one of the few good things the Guard codex has. I'll admit it's probably a tad too cheap for what it does, but I don't want to see it's cost jacked up significantly. It is still almost painfully fragile, and most of the time it only has a 4+ cover save at best (unless you splurge for camo-netting, which adds to its' cost). So even a few Krak missiles lobbed at it can easily knock it out of commission.
Peregrine wrote:Because apparently it's a 65 point model that is going to table your army if you don't?
Eh, it's not that good. I'm not particularly afraid of two S4, AP 6 small blasts.
I just think it's undercosted for what it does. A forteriori for the whirlwind (which, it seems to me, has better firepower than the wyvern).
To put this in context, a razorback with heavy bolter costs 55 points. Is a wyvern only 10 points better? A whirlwind?
Considering that most of the time most SM players seem to be taking a Gladius that Razorback costs you nothing. Is a Wyvern then 65 points better than that free Razorback?
Traditio wrote: Eh, it's not that good. I'm not particularly afraid of two S4, AP 6 small blasts.
Then why are you putting so much effort into arguing that it's overpowered? If it's not even scary enough to be worth spending a unit to kill then it can't be all that much of a balance issue.
War Kitten wrote:Considering that most of the time most SM players seem to be taking a Gladius that Razorback costs you nothing. Is a Wyvern then 65 points better than that free Razorback?
Traditio wrote: Eh, it's not that good. I'm not particularly afraid of two S4, AP 6 small blasts.
Then why are you putting so much effort into arguing that it's overpowered? If it's not even scary enough to be worth spending a unit to kill then it can't be all that much of a balance issue.
I will admit that the wyvern, when it comes to "a list of things that GW needs to fix," is nowhere near the top.
It's definitely on the list. But not really priority number 1.
War Kitten wrote:Considering that most of the time most SM players seem to be taking a Gladius that Razorback costs you nothing. Is a Wyvern then 65 points better than that free Razorback?
I run mine with 6 free rhinos. No razorbacks.
That has no bearing on the discussion. Most SM players take the free Razorbacks, so are you really going to argue that the Wyvern is 65 points better than the Razorback?
37 points for the hull (AV 12 + AV 10 + AV 10 + 3 HP), then +4 points each for the two STR 4 mortars, then subtract 6 points for AP 6, then +30 points for the hull-mounted heavy bolter. Total: 65 points.
37 points for the hull (AV 12 + AV 10 + AV 10 + 3 HP), then +4 points each for the two STR 4 mortars, then subtract 6 points for AP 6, then +30 points for the hull-mounted heavy bolter. Total: 65 points.
A heavy bolter is 10 points.
The closest equivalent to a single one of the mortars is essentially 2 frag missiles (10 points each).
War Kitten wrote:That squad of Devs is probably more durable than my AV 12/10/10 box.
No, they aren't.
Your AV 12/10/10 box can hide completely out of line of sight the whole game. It doesn't need to see.
I think you're overestimating the effectiveness of barrage. The scatter die ensures that a lot of shots are going to miss, so the twin-linked is what makes the mortar decent.
War Kitten wrote:I think you're overestimating the effectiveness of barrage. The scatter die ensures that a lot of shots are going to miss, so the twin-linked is what makes the mortar decent.
That too. Firing a twin-linked barrage weapon is, for all intents and purposes, BS 4 shooting. Blasts are essentially BS 2; twin-linking that raises it to BS 4.
War Kitten wrote:I think you're overestimating the effectiveness of barrage. The scatter die ensures that a lot of shots are going to miss, so the twin-linked is what makes the mortar decent.
That too. Firing a twin-linked barrage weapon is, for all intents and purposes, BS 4 shooting. Blasts are essentially BS 2; twin-linking that raises it to BS 4.
Martel732 wrote:Math fail. BS 3 for twinlinked blast.
There is a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit on a 6 sided scatter die. Twin-link means that you may reroll a miss, which, again, has a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit.
Martel732 wrote:Math fail. BS 3 for twinlinked blast.
There is a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit on a 6 sided scatter die. Twin-link means that you may reroll a miss, which, again, has a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit.
1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3 = BS 4
Umm, nope. Maybe this is why you have problems understanding how good something is.
You multiply chances for failure and then subtract from unity. So 1 - (.66666)(.6666) = .556
Martel732 wrote:Math fail. BS 3 for twinlinked blast.
There is a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit on a 6 sided scatter die. Twin-link means that you may reroll a miss, which, again, has a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit.
1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3 = BS 4
Umm, nope. Maybe this is why you have problems understanding how good something is.
You multiply chances for failure and then subtract from unity. So 1 - (.66666)(.6666) = .556
War Kitten wrote:That squad of Devs is probably more durable than my AV 12/10/10 box.
No, they aren't.
Your AV 12/10/10 box can hide completely out of line of sight the whole game. It doesn't need to see.
Oh yeah? Well those devs can sit up on an upper floor of a ruin and not be charged by bikes while the tank cannot. Thus they can completely hide from melee in or out of LoS if they wanted to.
Actually looking it up it looks like they even removed the bit about bikes not being able to climb up floors anyway. Probably doesn't help I've somehow not seen normal bikes since 5th.
Martel732 wrote: Can't bikes drive up the ruin by rolling enough charge distance?
They can, but they'll have to roll higher thanks to difficult terrain, and they'll take Dangerous Terrain tests in the process. It's risky for them to do so.
Martel732 wrote: Can't bikes drive up the ruin by rolling enough charge distance?
They can, but they'll have to roll higher thanks to difficult terrain, and they'll take Dangerous Terrain tests in the process. It's risky for them to do so.
I guess. White scars ignore all that thanks to move through cover. I'll take my chances in general to assault a weapon team. Actually, I'm not sure bikes are ever slowed by terrain. I'd have to double check that.
Traditio wrote: (that said, I rarely play against IG, and don't really want to,either)
So what exactly do you want to play against? You hate Tau and Eldar (and think Tau and Eldar players are WAACTFGs), you don't like Necrons because they're too durable, and you probably don't like Tyranids because they have too many MCs. And now you don't like IG, for some bizarre reason. So what is left? The only armies I've seen you say anything favorable about are orks (because you can beat them easily) and your own tactical marine spam.
Traditio wrote: Your AV 12/10/10 box can hide completely out of line of sight the whole game. It doesn't need to see.
And then flyers, drop pods, etc, gain LOS on it and AV 10 becomes a fatal problem. Don't forget that a single "shaken" result keeps you from shooting at all.
That's not how it works at all. In case you missed the point of my absurd example points you can't just add up the prices of individual components and get the final price of the unit. And you certainly can't do it the way you're trying to do it. Just to point out the most obviously wrong point cost in your total you're counting the full price of the Rhino for a unit that doesn't get the Rhino's storm bolter or transport capacity. The Rhino hull alone can not possibly be 35 points.
twin linked lets you reroll the scatter plus you have 2 chances to roll an amount equal to 5 or less to land a decent hit to start from. It's pretty good chances - thats why wyverns are so boss. I run whirlwinds with the supression force and get similar results with the large blast. Also can go str 5 and do some serious damage to light vehicle squads with ordnance. The only reason these units are not spammed beyond belief is because invisibility exists. It only takes an oppoent one time to realize infantry can not survive with massive shred pie plates raining on them from 48 inches. my opponents usually go for them first now.
Thinking it over, I definitely don't see them as undercosted as much as just ignored. In every game I've used it the thing went the whole game untouched, not because it was hidden in some remote corner; it was because no one felt the need to go after it. If you ignore a unit that will shoot you every turn for the whole game instead of going after it then it's your fault it killed so much stuff, ignoring any unit that's shooting stuff every turn is going to end with a lot of dead stuff.
It wasn't for lack of opportunities, either. Any sort of DS, a majority of fast attack choices, artillery of your own, charging a transport or vehicle of your own up to it... it crumples like paper if you breath on it.
Oh, you think I'm going to keep it protected from CC and melta? Well now the pricing points go out the door. If I'm going bare minimum protection it's 50 points for a squad of 10 guardsmen. These guys are so far back on the table they'll be lucky to shoot twice a game, and will be out of order range, if you don't go after my wyvern. Even then, it's 10 guardsmen. If you can't kill 10 guardsmen then the wyvern is the least of your worries.
And if you're going to compare it to something go off the chimera chassis (which so help me, if you think a chimera is underpriced). 65 points for a chimera which has the same armor and a hull mounted HB. What you're swapping out for the mortar is the ability to transport a vet squad with 2 fire points (who can be a lot more killy than the wyvern if they're ignored), has a multilaser turret, and can fire at two additional targets using the side lasgun arrays. Multilaser and lasguns? Meh, pretty nice. The fact that it's the only way to get melta and plasma up the field safely though, that's what balances it out.
I'd agree that around 75-80pts would be a fairer costing for them - they wouldn't be considered one of the stronger units in the game if they weren't great value for their points.
Incidentally, I also think the basilisk is over-costed along with most other guard anti-armour options. It'd be more of a decision in the artillery section if wyverns were 80pts, basilisks 100pts and manticores 150pts
The discussions about if units are over or under costed can be solved with ease if you look at tournament builds. When something is spammed there its likely undercosted and if it is never taken at all (outside TAX units) it is most likely overcosted. Its not that hard really.
Ah, Wyverns...Those daemons you call Wyverns just wreak face with their ungodly amount of shreding, twinlinked, 48" ignores cover murder blasts . They are one of the best units in the game period and when you run 5 in a 1500 point can make even the nastiest codexes sweat. Of course, it stands to reason that Guard really need these murder machines to stay in the game nut yeah...they're powerful.
Xathrodox86 wrote: How good would be a trio of Wyverns against a Marine army, based around bikes and AS? Assuming that the IG would get first turn?
It would be effective against foot-slogging marines. If I saw a trio of wyverns on your side of the table, I'd probably just concede before turn 1 even starts. I may or may not mutter "cheesemonger" under my breath after so doing.
Against bikes? Space marine bikes have a toughness of 5 and generally come in squads of 3.
So...there's that. True, you would prevent their jinks from being effective. But they still have 3+ armor.
Xathrodox86 wrote: How good would be a trio of Wyverns against a Marine army, based around bikes and AS? Assuming that the IG would get first turn?
It would be effective against foot-slogging marines. If I saw a trio of wyverns on your side of the table, I'd probably just concede before turn 1 even starts. I may or may not mutter "cheesemonger" under my breath after so doing.
Against bikes? Space marine bikes have a toughness of 5 and generally come in squads of 3.
So...there's that. True, you would prevent their jinks from being effective. But they still have 3+ armor.
Cheesemonger? Against guard?
Wyverns are very strong little toys but cheesy and conceding T1 is a little much considering they have a plethora of weaknesses, small shredding barrage blasts are great but compare them to Riptides or storm surges supported by markerlights or Warp hunters throwing oput D3+1 barrage blasts with D strength. Comparing them to say Skyhammer Grav devs or Grav Cents or bikers armed with special weapons or Scatterbikes or Nightspinners or Thunderfire cannons or Thudd guns etc. In terms of anti infantry fire power they are good but they are certainly not the best in comparison to the heavier hitters from the other books...
Xathrodox86 wrote: How good would be a trio of Wyverns against a Marine army, based around bikes and AS? Assuming that the IG would get first turn?
It would be effective against foot-slogging marines. If I saw a trio of wyverns on your side of the table, I'd probably just concede before turn 1 even starts. I may or may not mutter "cheesemonger" under my breath after so doing.
Against bikes? Space marine bikes have a toughness of 5 and generally come in squads of 3.
So...there's that. True, you would prevent their jinks from being effective. But they still have 3+ armor.
I know that this would be a very unsportsmanship thing to do, and I'd never use it. However I just wanted to know what people do think about the merit of such formation? After all, it's still only a single squadron...
Xathrodox86 wrote: How good would be a trio of Wyverns against a Marine army, based around bikes and AS? Assuming that the IG would get first turn?
It would be effective against foot-slogging marines. If I saw a trio of wyverns on your side of the table, I'd probably just concede before turn 1 even starts. I may or may not mutter "cheesemonger" under my breath after so doing.
Against bikes? Space marine bikes have a toughness of 5 and generally come in squads of 3.
So...there's that. True, you would prevent their jinks from being effective. But they still have 3+ armor.
Cheesemonger? Against guard?
Wyverns are very strong little toys but cheesy and conceding T1 is a little much considering they have a plethora of weaknesses, small shredding barrage blasts are great but compare them to Riptides or storm surges supported by markerlights or Warp hunters throwing oput D3+1 barrage blasts with D strength. Comparing them to say Skyhammer Grav devs or Grav Cents or bikers armed with special weapons or Scatterbikes or Nightspinners or Thunderfire cannons or Thudd guns etc. In terms of anti infantry fire power they are good but they are certainly not the best in comparison to the heavier hitters from the other books...
To paraphrase Traditio from other threads its shennanigans if you take anything that is more points effective than a SM tactical squad with little more than a ML Flamer and maybe a PF wielding sarg.
He wants to fight the battle of Normandy in space, but without landing ships to get his troops on shore, air cover and tactical bombing runs, sappers, mine clearing vehicles, recon units and will only fight normandy in space providing the enemy doesn't use Panthers, Tigers or 'shreks against him.
If you smile or laugh when you select a unit, you are abusing the codex/rules.
Since he only runs a basic SM list and will not sanction weapons or units to make his armies remotely TAC any opponent fielding Wyverns should be made to feel bad about themselves.
Xathrodox86 wrote: How good would be a trio of Wyverns against a Marine army, based around bikes and AS? Assuming that the IG would get first turn?
It would be effective against foot-slogging marines. If I saw a trio of wyverns on your side of the table, I'd probably just concede before turn 1 even starts. I may or may not mutter "cheesemonger" under my breath after so doing.
Against bikes? Space marine bikes have a toughness of 5 and generally come in squads of 3.
So...there's that. True, you would prevent their jinks from being effective. But they still have 3+ armor.
Cheesemonger? Against guard?
Wyverns are very strong little toys but cheesy and conceding T1 is a little much considering they have a plethora of weaknesses, small shredding barrage blasts are great but compare them to Riptides or storm surges supported by markerlights or Warp hunters throwing oput D3+1 barrage blasts with D strength. Comparing them to say Skyhammer Grav devs or Grav Cents or bikers armed with special weapons or Scatterbikes or Nightspinners or Thunderfire cannons or Thudd guns etc. In terms of anti infantry fire power they are good but they are certainly not the best in comparison to the heavier hitters from the other books...
To paraphrase Traditio from other threads its shennanigans if you take anything that is more points effective than a SM tactical squad with little more than a ML Flamer and maybe a PF wielding sarg.
He wants to fight the battle of Normandy in space, but without landing ships to get his troops on shore, air cover and tactical bombing runs, sappers, mine clearing vehicles, recon units and will only fight normandy in space providing the enemy doesn't use Panthers, Tigers or 'shreks against him.
If you smile or laugh when you select a unit, you are abusing the codex/rules.
Since he only runs a basic SM list and will not sanction weapons or units to make his armies remotely TAC any opponent fielding Wyverns should be made to feel bad about themselves.
I'd say you shouldn't make ridiculous stuff up but he's actually said most of that stuff.
Xathrodox86 wrote: How good would be a trio of Wyverns against a Marine army, based around bikes and AS? Assuming that the IG would get first turn?
It would be effective against foot-slogging marines. If I saw a trio of wyverns on your side of the table, I'd probably just concede before turn 1 even starts. I may or may not mutter "cheesemonger" under my breath after so doing.
Against bikes? Space marine bikes have a toughness of 5 and generally come in squads of 3.
So...there's that. True, you would prevent their jinks from being effective. But they still have 3+ armor.
Cheesemonger? Against guard?
Wyverns are very strong little toys but cheesy and conceding T1 is a little much considering they have a plethora of weaknesses, small shredding barrage blasts are great but compare them to Riptides or storm surges supported by markerlights or Warp hunters throwing oput D3+1 barrage blasts with D strength. Comparing them to say Skyhammer Grav devs or Grav Cents or bikers armed with special weapons or Scatterbikes or Nightspinners or Thunderfire cannons or Thudd guns etc. In terms of anti infantry fire power they are good but they are certainly not the best in comparison to the heavier hitters from the other books...
To paraphrase Traditio from other threads its shennanigans if you take anything that is more points effective than a SM tactical squad with little more than a ML Flamer and maybe a PF wielding sarg.
He wants to fight the battle of Normandy in space, but without landing ships to get his troops on shore, air cover and tactical bombing runs, sappers, mine clearing vehicles, recon units and will only fight normandy in space providing the enemy doesn't use Panthers, Tigers or 'shreks against him.
If you smile or laugh when you select a unit, you are abusing the codex/rules.
Since he only runs a basic SM list and will not sanction weapons or units to make his armies remotely TAC any opponent fielding Wyverns should be made to feel bad about themselves.
I'd say you shouldn't make ridiculous stuff up but he's actually said most of that stuff.
I agree with him that their are issues with the game. Regarding this specific thread I don't think Wyverns are one them.
Tbh vs hordes of course the Wyvern is going to do well.... it's an anti-horde vehicle. It's going to cause nightmares for Orks, Nights, Renegades and even other Guard.
But if you want to compare it to footslogging marines? Who even does footslogging marines these days? Especially seeing you can get free Rhinos/Razorbacks/DropPods.
37 points for the hull (AV 12 + AV 10 + AV 10 + 3 HP), then +4 points each for the two STR 4 mortars, then subtract 6 points for AP 6, then +30 points for the hull-mounted heavy bolter. Total: 65 points.
Well using the salamander as a template.
35 points for the AV 12/10/10 open topped hull, +5 points for the Mortars X4 (seeing each stormshard puts out two shots), then +10 for the heavy bolter. Same result at 65points but there's a reason I used the salamander. And even with this points I don't know anyone who thinks base mortars, or hell even the majority of guard Heavy Weapons are costed correctly.
It's an AV 12/10/10 HP3 vehicle, with an autocannon and heavy bolter, that can scout, is Amphibious and is Fast..... These things are pretty awesome at flanking capable of causing all kinds of havoc for 55 point. Are they overpowered? Hardly, but they're good at what they do, even better imo than scout sentinels.
You're basically trading Scout and all that manoeuvrability, for Barrage, Shred and Twinlinked.
How good would be a trio of Wyverns against a Marine army, based around bikes and AS? Assuming that the IG would get first turn?
I had this situation at a tournament recently and my three wyverns did pretty well. My opponent had a competitive mix of IH chapter masters and re-roll 2+ jinking ravenwing, mainly built round a super-unit in a ravenwing command squad. in 2 turns wyverns sniped out all of the regular ravenwing bikers in the command squad, leaving just two unkillable chapter masters and a biker chaplain. This meant they had a lot less hitting power in terms of dice volume, so they spent the rest of the game killing guardsmen tied up in CC.
Bikes aren't wyverns primary prey, but each is likely to kill around one bike per turn, depending on spacing of the unit
It would be effective against foot-slogging marines. If I saw a trio of wyverns on your side of the table, I'd probably just concede before turn 1 even starts. I may or may not mutter "cheesemonger" under my breath after so doing.
Against bikes? Space marine bikes have a toughness of 5 and generally come in squads of 3.
So...there's that. True, you would prevent their jinks from being effective. But they still have 3+ armor.
Relevant portion underlined for emphasis.
Please remove your avatar or change it to something different at your earliest convenience.
I don't want someone as whiny as you associated with the South or the Confederate Battle Standard.
Thank you.
On Topic:
The Wyvern is a well designed tank, in that it does it's job (infantry killing) very well, while not being infallible or death star broken. It can't kill tanks or armor and most monstrous creatures are going to shrug off it's blasts with relative impunity.
Running a squadron of 3 of them is an excellent heavy support choice and will do good solid work vs. anything T:5 and lower.
Why are you trying to foot slog an army in a meta where non-necron decurion infantry is crap? Or fielding an army of infantry against a unit that's good at killing infantry?
The marines aren't even the ones that have it the worse. You think marines got it bad against wyverns? Try footslogging orks. Or Guard. Or Nids. Your marines have 3+ armor saves and T4 at least.
As an ork player, I absolutely hate wyverns, but not for the reason you think.
Yes, they are very good at shredding infantry, especially for their points cost. Yes they are rather cheap for what they do. But what really makes me dislike them, is time.
For those of you who have fought against someone who is using a wyvern, you know what I'm talking about. They shoot, him and haw about wither to twin link it, then sometimes re-roll. They count up models. They roll for the 11 other shots. Re-roll some of them. Count up more models. Then, 10 minutes later, they actually roll to wound. You think you're out of the woods, but then you realize they still have another squadron left to shoot.
Back when my FLGS ran eternal war tourneys, the issue was that when you have to take out 20 minutes to just shoot and account for the wounds (and who gets sniped out or not!) for only two squadrons, then it became more effective as a stalling tactic, taking so long to shoot and resolve that my orks rarely got into close combat, or if they did, only got in it for a turn, and barely make much of an impact before the game ended and points were tallied. And, naturally, imperial guard did better when we ended before I could swarm his position.
Thankfully, now that we're running maelstrom missions, so stalling hurts both sides. I don't mind so much if we were playing a fun, and untimed mission, but in tournament settings, it's something I really hate to see. Again, it's not so much because they're very good for their points value (which they are!), but it's because they take so long to shoot.
Palleus wrote: As an ork player, I absolutely hate wyverns, but not for the reason you think.
Yes, they are very good at shredding infantry, especially for their points cost. Yes they are rather cheap for what they do. But what really makes me dislike them, is time.
For those of you who have fought against someone who is using a wyvern, you know what I'm talking about. They shoot, him and haw about wither to twin link it, then sometimes re-roll. They count up models. They roll for the 11 other shots. Re-roll some of them. Count up more models. Then, 10 minutes later, they actually roll to wound. You think you're out of the woods, but then you realize they still have another squadron left to shoot.
Back when my FLGS ran eternal war tourneys, the issue was that when you have to take out 20 minutes to just shoot and account for the wounds (and who gets sniped out or not!) for only two squadrons, then it became more effective as a stalling tactic, taking so long to shoot and resolve that my orks rarely got into close combat, or if they did, only got in it for a turn, and barely make much of an impact before the game ended and points were tallied. And, naturally, imperial guard did better when we ended before I could swarm his position.
Thankfully, now that we're running maelstrom missions, so stalling hurts both sides. I don't mind so much if we were playing a fun, and untimed mission, but in tournament settings, it's something I really hate to see. Again, it's not so much because they're very good for their points value (which they are!), but it's because they take so long to shoot.
Have to agree. It can be pretty deadly, but it's the time to shoot that is the most frustrating.
Wow, Tradito has once again impressed me with his intolerance of anything else being as good as or even close too his precious blue boys.
The Wyvern, from what I have heard, is good, but I have yet to use one as I lack the funds to run around and purchase three of GW's very expensive tank kits. However give the comments here (and the fact I will be peeing a certain blue boy off) I might just have to invest in some.
You don't even own a Wyvern? Please quit complaining about guard until you start using their good units. I own all BA and have tried many varied combinations in 7th.
Martel732 wrote: You don't even own a Wyvern? Please quit complaining about guard until you start using their good units. I own all BA and have tried many varied combinations in 7th.
I cannot afford them. Right now I am unemployed and there are so few jobs going around here that I can get too (cant drive or afford to learn too) it is laughable. In the past half a year I have fired off more applications than I care to count and till nothing has happened.
If I could afford a Wyvern or three then I would buy them but I cannot.
Automatically Appended Next Post: More to the point Martel, the Guard codex should have more than one viable choice available to its players. This is just further proof that the Guard are in dire need of an update.
Welcome to GW. At minimum, it's pay to keep your list updated. I've had to kitbash 20 vanguards with storm shields and model in 10 combi-melta sternguards for STARTERS. None of my painted predators get use. None of my razorbacks. None of my power fist sergeants. The list goes on.
The Wyvern is far from the only usable thing in the codex. It's just one of the most efficient, and so you see them very frequently.
Sounds like you are still using Russ hulls because that's what you have. Unfortunately, 7th ed has decided that high AV is crap, and the ordinance rule makes many russes even more crap.
Why is there even any hate for the one thing in The AM codex worth a feth? It fits perfectly into the niche it is provided as infantry killers hell with all the Nerfs to the vehicle rules in this codex let the underdogs have one nice toy. I remember fighting leaf blower lists and the hated 100 metal boxs in a row. The wyvern is quite kind by comparison no?
ThirstySpaceMan wrote: Why is there even any hate for the one thing in The AM codex worth a feth? It fits perfectly into the niche it is provided as infantry killers hell with all the Nerfs to the vehicle rules in this codex let the underdogs have one nice toy. I remember fighting leaf blower lists and the hated 100 metal boxs in a row. The wyvern is quite kind by comparison no?
The wyvern is fine. The IG needs an AT and an anti-MC counterpart as well. Because Russes are forever junked with ordinance, haywire, and D in the game. Not to mention lists that hand out free combi-meltas like mine. Oh, and grav cannons junk Russes, too.
master of ordinance wrote: Wow, Tradito has once again impressed me with his intolerance of anything else being as good as or even close too his precious blue boys.
The Wyvern, from what I have heard, is good, but I have yet to use one as I lack the funds to run around and purchase three of GW's very expensive tank kits. However give the comments here (and the fact I will be peeing a certain blue boy off) I might just have to invest in some.
The Wyvern will absolutely SHRED any infantry that is T5 or below. Each blast may only be S4 and AP6, but with each one getting to re-roll to hit and to wound, and ignoring cover? The Wyvern kills just through sheer weight of wounds.
Baldeagle91 wrote: They're possibly the best unit in the IG codex. While they're incredibly useful, they not a totally OP unit people will complain about and are actually quite easy to knock out. They're great Ywat forcing enemy units out of cover.
Yes, they are. 48 inch range, ignores cover, shred heavy 2 blast should not be on a 65 point tank.
If anything, the fact that the OP consistently kills 3-5 times the points cost of a wyvern should in and of itself be apparent evidence that it's OP.
Ditto for whirlwinds and thunderfire cannons.
GW, imho, sorely underestimates the points value of ranged barrage weapons.
I definitely agree wyvern and TFCs could use a price bump, but I've gotta say whirlwinds are fine as is. Wyvern are S4 ap6 4 small blasts. They may be say, 15 points undercosted, but not OP by a long shot
Baldeagle91 wrote: They're possibly the best unit in the IG codex. While they're incredibly useful, they not a totally OP unit people will complain about and are actually quite easy to knock out. They're great Ywat forcing enemy units out of cover.
Yes, they are. 48 inch range, ignores cover, shred heavy 2 blast should not be on a 65 point tank.
If anything, the fact that the OP consistently kills 3-5 times the points cost of a wyvern should in and of itself be apparent evidence that it's OP.
Ditto for whirlwinds and thunderfire cannons.
GW, imho, sorely underestimates the points value of ranged barrage weapons.
I definitely agree wyvern and TFCs could use a price bump, but I've gotta say whirlwinds are fine as is. Wyvern are S4 ap6 4 small blasts. They may be say, 15 points undercosted, but not OP by a long shot
Agreed. I can see points for Wyverns and TFC (mostly due to the multiple shots) but Whirlwinds? Against a properly spaced out opponent, that single Large Blast will not kill that much. Whirlwinds are absolutely fine as is.
Baldeagle91 wrote: They're possibly the best unit in the IG codex. While they're incredibly useful, they not a totally OP unit people will complain about and are actually quite easy to knock out. They're great Ywat forcing enemy units out of cover.
Yes, they are. 48 inch range, ignores cover, shred heavy 2 blast should not be on a 65 point tank.
If anything, the fact that the OP consistently kills 3-5 times the points cost of a wyvern should in and of itself be apparent evidence that it's OP.
Ditto for whirlwinds and thunderfire cannons.
GW, imho, sorely underestimates the points value of ranged barrage weapons.
I definitely agree wyvern and TFCs could use a price bump, but I've gotta say whirlwinds are fine as is. Wyvern are S4 ap6 4 small blasts. They may be say, 15 points undercosted, but not OP by a long shot
Agreed. I can see points for Wyverns and TFC (mostly due to the multiple shots) but Whirlwinds? Against a properly spaced out opponent, that single Large Blast will not kill that much. Whirlwinds are absolutely fine as is.
Don't whirlwinds had a formation where three of them basically makes them better wyverns?
Baldeagle91 wrote: They're possibly the best unit in the IG codex. While they're incredibly useful, they not a totally OP unit people will complain about and are actually quite easy to knock out. They're great Ywat forcing enemy units out of cover.
Yes, they are. 48 inch range, ignores cover, shred heavy 2 blast should not be on a 65 point tank.
If anything, the fact that the OP consistently kills 3-5 times the points cost of a wyvern should in and of itself be apparent evidence that it's OP.
Ditto for whirlwinds and thunderfire cannons.
GW, imho, sorely underestimates the points value of ranged barrage weapons.
I definitely agree wyvern and TFCs could use a price bump, but I've gotta say whirlwinds are fine as is. Wyvern are S4 ap6 4 small blasts. They may be say, 15 points undercosted, but not OP by a long shot
Agreed. I can see points for Wyverns and TFC (mostly due to the multiple shots) but Whirlwinds? Against a properly spaced out opponent, that single Large Blast will not kill that much. Whirlwinds are absolutely fine as is.
Don't whirlwinds had a formation where three of them basically makes them better wyverns?
Yes and no. They get pinning and Shred with better strength and ap, but no ignores cover.
I'm with the crowd who thinks the Wyvern is criminally undercosted. In my group, it's the reason infantry can't be played in the open, because it just butchers them.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I'm with the crowd who thinks the Wyvern is criminally undercosted. In my group, it's the reason infantry can't be played in the open, because it just butchers them.
Why just in the open?
Surely it would actually force your troops into the open seeing at least then they'd be doing something productive?
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: I'm with the crowd who thinks the Wyvern is criminally undercosted. In my group, it's the reason infantry can't be played in the open, because it just butchers them.
Why just in the open?
Surely it would actually force your troops into the open seeing at least then they'd be doing something productive?
Uhh, good point. The Wyvern has Ignore Cover, doesn't it? Being in-cover versus outside-cover makes no difference then.
Surely it would actually force your troops into the open seeing at least then they'd be doing something productive?
What I mean by that is not in a vehicle of some sort, since cover is meaningless against a Wyvern.
: (
That's a good point. Hordes of infantry slaughtering each other by the thousands (or dozens in the case of the tabletop game) is gosh-darned amazing, but that can't happen if the enemy infantry stay in their metal boxes.
Look at it this way: it's very close in stats (if you swap BS4 for BS3 twin-linked and S5 for S4 shred) to the infamous 30k Quad-gun, which legion players tend to use as the poster-child for power-gaming in 30k.
It doesn't have the 'alternate antitank ammo' option (essentially tank hunter krak missiles), but it's a touch cheaper and ignores cover is a pretty fair swap.
Look at it this way: it's very close in stats (if you swap BS4 for BS3 twin-linked and S5 for S4 shred) to the infamous 30k Quad-gun, which legion players tend to use as the poster-child for power-gaming in 30k.
It doesn't have the 'alternate antitank ammo' option (essentially tank hunter krak missiles), but it's a touch cheaper and ignores cover is a pretty fair swap.
Is the Wyvern fun to play against, or does facing one across the table detract from the fun?
Is the Wyvern fun to play against, or does facing one across the table detract from the fun?
My only problem with them is the mechanics of working out the hits, which does slow down gameplay.
They have a job, they do it well. They might be slightly underpriced, but close enough to what they should be I file them under “efficient” not “broken”
But they are fragile, and can’t do much against vehicles. I’ve not found them un-fun when seen across the table. A threat to my troops? Yup. But that’s the game.
--
I don’t see how people can complain about the whirlwind. It basically shoots a large blast version of a flamer or heavy bolter. Neither of which is particularly feared. Sure, if you have 3 in a squad, you get pinning and shred, but then you are talking about ~200 points invested in paper tanks
TFCs have a lot of similarities to the wyvern, and are probably a bit undercoated as well. Not a fragile though, which is a major advantage.
Is the Wyvern fun to play against, or does facing one across the table detract from the fun?
My only problem with them is the mechanics of working out the hits, which does slow down gameplay.
They have a job, they do it well. They might be slightly underpriced, but close enough to what they should be I file them under “efficient” not “broken”
But they are fragile, and can’t do much against vehicles. I’ve not found them un-fun when seen across the table. A threat to my troops? Yup. But that’s the game.
--
I don’t see how people can complain about the whirlwind. It basically shoots a large blast version of a flamer or heavy bolter. Neither of which is particularly feared. Sure, if you have 3 in a squad, you get pinning and shred, but then you are talking about ~200 points invested in paper tanks
TFCs have a lot of similarities to the wyvern, and are probably a bit undercoated as well. Not a fragile though, which is a major advantage.
Good. : D
I've been considering redoing my army composition to be an Unbound army with the bulk of points being in IG (mostly infantry), a couple squads of Sororitas, and a single squad of vanilla Space Marines. I also have to figure out how to represent the army's leader, as he's a non-Space Marine who wears power armor but isn't a Sister of Battle. I'm thinking a generic Inquisitor with appropriate gear for the model is the only real option, but then I'd have to buy the Inquisition Codex and it was such a pain to print out my Sororitas one (legally purchased from Black Library's official site. I don't have a tablet. The many, many pictures used up multiple cartridges of ink on my first attempt) I was thinking of getting a Wyvern since I've been having trouble dealing with infantry mobs, but if it was going to just be annoying to play against I'd find something else.
Since I play with a very agreeable opponent, we'll probably figure out a mutually-acceptable way of dealing with multiple barrage blasts that's not such a pain to figure out who gets hit. I'm thinking at the moment maybe just letting the owner of the target unit pick which models under the templates get removed.
However I just wanted to know what people do think about the merit of such formation? After all, it's still only a single squadron... 
