Because you already have to roll to hit the unit. So any attempt to make it harder to hit should manipulate the chance of hitting. It shouldn't be an arbitrary additional save on top of your roll to hit. The roll to hit is an abstraction that accounts for it already.
Theres also a lot of units that don't get jink saves even though they're lore wise probably faster. Best case would be dark elder. The reason theres such an extreme disparity between DE in the lore and tabletop is because whilst they are that squishy and don't wear much armour they are supposed to be hyper fast, dodge bullets and you simply can't hit them. But the mechanics of 40k mean that you're as likely to hit a Warlord Titan as a Dark Eldar Wych. This is much faster than a biker can swerve a bike out of the way. So what is the justification for bikes getting an additional save? Assault marines are fast but don't; the list is exhaustive.
The same goes with planes. I already can only hit the plane on a 6. Surely that has already accounted for all the aerial maneuvers which that aircraft could make. Why should the plane get an additional save on top of its existing protection?
So I think they should change how BS works so that instead of something like a jink save some units modify the hit chance. So a plane means you have minus 2 BS when you shoot at it for example. They should also apply this with more forethought. A Dark Eldar bike or raider needs an extra layer of protection. Eldar, Tau and Space Marines do not so they should have lower modifiers or even none at all.
As for the hitting a flying aircraft at extreme altitudes (which is what Zooming is supposed to represent), can you imagine trying to hit a plane travelling at Mach 1 with a rifle or machinegun? THAT'S why you need a 6 to hit.
The Jink save in that instance is the pilot actively trying to avoid incoming fire, which naturally makes it even more difficult.
Bikes are similar, though easier to hit due to slower speed. The Jink represents the biker actively trying to avoid getting shot, as opposed to the To Hit roll representing the shooter pulling off a shot.
I mean I think when one rule has such a powerful impact on the game and entire armies are built around the use of that rule you've got a major problem.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Retrogamer0001 wrote: As for the hitting a flying aircraft at extreme altitudes (which is what Zooming is supposed to represent), can you imagine trying to hit a plane travelling at Mach 1 with a rifle or machinegun? THAT'S why you need a 6 to hit.
The Jink save in that instance is the pilot actively trying to avoid incoming fire, which naturally makes it even more difficult.
Bikes are similar, though easier to hit due to slower speed. The Jink represents the biker actively trying to avoid getting shot, as opposed to the To Hit roll representing the shooter pulling off a shot.
Yes, but if I am a Space Marine I am more likely to hit said aircraft. So my BS should be taken into account and it being an aircraft should be a modifier to my BS.
Then why don't other fast things like assault marines, crisis suits or dark elder get similar saves to represent them evading targets? Shouldn't every unit in the game be trying to avoid targets by this logic? Doesn't it make a lot more sense to simply use modifiers or a table for hitting opponents like with weapon skill instead of having two separate roles? If rolling to hit, as you say, only considers the aimers accuracy, then what, those Wyches are just standing stock still and making no effort to dodge?
You can't argue that its okay to use a set BS for hitting some units and then that a handful are so fast they get an additional save.
I am pretty sure the pilot will always be doing his very best to avoid being shot. This implies the marine biker wasn't doing anything to avoid being hit beforehand.
But even then, the rule has been heavily abused and has not resulted in a positive change.
I oppose BS modifiers in a D6 system. It penalizes low model count elite armies far too much.
After attempting to hack together a 40k-Mordheim conversion using BS modifiers I've decided to oppose BS modifiers in the larger game because they'd make everything take quite a lot longer. They may make difficult-but-not-impossible shots a thing and make cover less pointless for good Arm/Invul models, but they also require an extra mental checklist/table lookup and more on-the-fly math that sort of works when you're running ten models but would be awful if you were running sixty. (WHFB and Mordehim got away with it because their shooting is more secondary, and gun-less models aren't a waste of time and space there.)
(For the record they don't really penalize low-model-count armies if they're equally applied, given that a BS4 model with a -1 to-hit mod is just as much of an improvement over a BS3 model with a -1 to-hit mod as if neither one had the penalty. It does penalize dedicated-shooting armies simply because enemies tend to get closer before you can kill them, but that's not necessarily a bad thing (I think we can all agree that dying in your deployment zone with no chance to do anything because the other guy brought a lot more guns than you did is frustrating and unfun).)
The problem with Jink is how easily it stacks and improves, without significant penalties to most enemies. Nurgle DPs get 2+ cover at all times, effectively for free. 3+ cover is also ultra reliable.
If Jink was just a 5+ base again, it'd be fine. Or don't let it stack with anything except explicitly jink-related buffs.
I oppose BS modifiers in a D6 system. It penalizes low model count elite armies far too much.
How?
If you are an elite army you will have higher ballistic skill? So you're more likely to hit than Bob Guardsman who will have the same negative modifier for hitting something. Instead of saying you need 6 to hit this or this unit has an extra saving throw you could account for stuff like being a better shot instead of ignoring it or being inconsistent like the current system.
I oppose BS modifiers in a D6 system. It penalizes low model count elite armies far too much.
After attempting to hack together a 40k-Mordheim conversion using BS modifiers I've decided to oppose BS modifiers in the larger game because they'd make everything take quite a lot longer. They may make difficult-but-not-impossible shots a thing and make cover less pointless for good Arm/Invul models, but they also require an extra mental checklist/table lookup and more on-the-fly math that sort of works when you're running ten models but would be awful if you were running sixty. (WHFB and Mordehim got away with it because their shooting is more secondary, and gun-less models aren't a waste of time and space there.)
(For the record they don't really penalize low-model-count armies if they're equally applied, given that a BS4 model with a -1 to-hit mod is just as much of an improvement over a BS3 model with a -1 to-hit mod as if neither one had the penalty. It does penalize dedicated-shooting armies simply because enemies tend to get closer before you can kill them, but that's not necessarily a bad thing (I think we can all agree that dying in your deployment zone with no chance to do anything because the other guy brought a lot more guns than you did is frustrating and unfun).)
Surely it wouldn't be that complicated?
I mean they use them in AoS which is a really barebones system and it works fine enough as it is. Unlike the WS chart you only have one set statistic in BS to modify. That way you have a single dice roll for hitting the target instead of two like we have now with multiple modifiers being applied.
Stormonu wrote: Blame Tau markerlight shenanigans for the proliferation of Jink. It's become as bad as giving every unit Feel No Pain for ...reasons.
The reason for both is that GW has simultaneously ramped up firepower and made cover near meaningless, hence the need for more passive defenses. Bikes used to be 36 pts without Jink and they were fine for the cost at the time because they could avoid most of the enemy army through mobility and good use of terrain. Now positioning is meaningless, everyone can shoot anything all the time and so models need more saves.
Waaaghpower wrote: The problem with Jink is how easily it stacks and improves, without significant penalties to most enemies. Nurgle DPs get 2+ cover at all times, effectively for free. 3+ cover is also ultra reliable.
If Jink was just a 5+ base again, it'd be fine. Or don't let it stack with anything except explicitly jink-related buffs.
The problem with cutting it is that unless you're a Daemon Prince it's pretty crucial to your survival. Deleting or trimming it may nerf Daemon Princes but it'll make Dark Eldar even more unplayable, drop Dark Angels' only competitive advantage over the other Marine books, make vehicle Flyers even more skew ('do you have the right tool for dealing with this? If yes, this is tissue paper not worth a fraction of its points. If no, this is god-tier OP and makes Wraithknights look sensible.' [/hyperbole]), and drop most skimmers from middling-to-good straight down into an overpriced mess.
(A Wave Serpent is in no way worth 2x a Chimera without Jink.)
I oppose BS modifiers in a D6 system. It penalizes low model count elite armies far too much.
After attempting to hack together a 40k-Mordheim conversion using BS modifiers I've decided to oppose BS modifiers in the larger game because they'd make everything take quite a lot longer. They may make difficult-but-not-impossible shots a thing and make cover less pointless for good Arm/Invul models, but they also require an extra mental checklist/table lookup and more on-the-fly math that sort of works when you're running ten models but would be awful if you were running sixty. (WHFB and Mordehim got away with it because their shooting is more secondary, and gun-less models aren't a waste of time and space there.)
(For the record they don't really penalize low-model-count armies if they're equally applied, given that a BS4 model with a -1 to-hit mod is just as much of an improvement over a BS3 model with a -1 to-hit mod as if neither one had the penalty. It does penalize dedicated-shooting armies simply because enemies tend to get closer before you can kill them, but that's not necessarily a bad thing (I think we can all agree that dying in your deployment zone with no chance to do anything because the other guy brought a lot more guns than you did is frustrating and unfun).)
Until the mods become -2 or -3 and then it swings back to the high model count armies. That's what happened in 2nd ed. Hormagaunts could give a -2 to hit at will, which was OP for the cost of the model.
I oppose BS modifiers in a D6 system. It penalizes low model count elite armies far too much.
After attempting to hack together a 40k-Mordheim conversion using BS modifiers I've decided to oppose BS modifiers in the larger game because they'd make everything take quite a lot longer. They may make difficult-but-not-impossible shots a thing and make cover less pointless for good Arm/Invul models, but they also require an extra mental checklist/table lookup and more on-the-fly math that sort of works when you're running ten models but would be awful if you were running sixty. (WHFB and Mordehim got away with it because their shooting is more secondary, and gun-less models aren't a waste of time and space there.)
(For the record they don't really penalize low-model-count armies if they're equally applied, given that a BS4 model with a -1 to-hit mod is just as much of an improvement over a BS3 model with a -1 to-hit mod as if neither one had the penalty. It does penalize dedicated-shooting armies simply because enemies tend to get closer before you can kill them, but that's not necessarily a bad thing (I think we can all agree that dying in your deployment zone with no chance to do anything because the other guy brought a lot more guns than you did is frustrating and unfun).)
Surely it wouldn't be that complicated?
I mean they use them in AoS which is a really barebones system and it works fine enough as it is. Unlike the WS chart you only have one set statistic in BS to modify. That way you have a single dice roll for hitting the target instead of two like we have now with multiple modifiers being applied.
AoS is a similarly melee-focused system and it's got one to-hit modifier (cover), plus however many more are buried across the whole mess of warscrolls that I don't have the patience to go find. 40k has to replicate several tiers of cover at the very least; I will grant that my Mordheim system's modifiers won't carry over entirely (cover, range, multiple-shots, moving and shooting...), but if you want to take Jink, snapshots, and cover and stick them into a modifier system you're going to have a lot more modifiers than AoS has to deal with.
I oppose BS modifiers in a D6 system. It penalizes low model count elite armies far too much.
After attempting to hack together a 40k-Mordheim conversion using BS modifiers I've decided to oppose BS modifiers in the larger game because they'd make everything take quite a lot longer. They may make difficult-but-not-impossible shots a thing and make cover less pointless for good Arm/Invul models, but they also require an extra mental checklist/table lookup and more on-the-fly math that sort of works when you're running ten models but would be awful if you were running sixty. (WHFB and Mordehim got away with it because their shooting is more secondary, and gun-less models aren't a waste of time and space there.)
(For the record they don't really penalize low-model-count armies if they're equally applied, given that a BS4 model with a -1 to-hit mod is just as much of an improvement over a BS3 model with a -1 to-hit mod as if neither one had the penalty. It does penalize dedicated-shooting armies simply because enemies tend to get closer before you can kill them, but that's not necessarily a bad thing (I think we can all agree that dying in your deployment zone with no chance to do anything because the other guy brought a lot more guns than you did is frustrating and unfun).)
Until the mods become -2 or -3 and then it swings back to the high model count armies.
Depends on whether worse than a 6 to hit is 6-and-4+/etc or just 'impossible'. (I do know part of the reason it works in Mordheim/my Mordheim conversion is that BS stats aren't stuck in the 2-4 range except for very special circumstances, a modifier system would have to rethink how BS stats are distributed pretty fundamentally.)
Jink is fine, what needs to happen is it needs a seperation from a cover save.
Imo I think jink rule should only benefit from stealth, shrouded, and invisibility.
BUT, a jink save can not be taken against the following weapon types
Torrent, blast, template, barrage, and a model with precision shot.
It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever ever that a bike or anything can some how dodge and explosion. Really if anything needs a template of some sort it should not be dodgeable this is coming from someone who runs a ravenwing Death Star.
Totalwar1402 wrote: The same goes with planes. I already can only hit the plane on a 6. Surely that has already accounted for all the aerial maneuvers which that aircraft could make. Why should the plane get an additional save on top of its existing protection?
Because the 6 to hit (which should be a 7 to hit, re-rolling all successes, if we want to be realistic) is representing the near-impossibility of hitting aircraft, even aircraft that aren't trying to evade, with anything but a specialized anti-aircraft weapon. The jink save represents the pilot breaking off their attack (thus firing only snap shots, and usually leaving the battlefield) to actually try to evade incoming fire.
Backspacehacker wrote: Jink is fine, what needs to happen is it needs a seperation from a cover save.
Imo I think jink rule should only benefit from stealth, shrouded, and invisibility.
BUT, a jink save can not be taken against the following weapon types
Torrent, blast, template, barrage, and a model with precision shot.
It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever ever that a bike or anything can some how dodge and explosion. Really if anything needs a template of some sort it should not be dodgeable this is coming from someone who runs a ravenwing Death Star.
Templates and torrent already ignore cover, so jinking doesn't help there. Many blast weapons and Barrage weapons also ignore cover (like Wyverns), so again jinking is no help. I've had my Ravenwing Command Squad get erased by a squad of Wraithguard joined by an Archon with Webway Portal. Nothing at all they could do about it, they just died.
I'm also pretty sure Jink doesn't stack with any other cover saves besides Stealth and Shrouded. Jink provides a cover save of its own, and Stealth/Shrouded provide a modifier to that cover save. Some people complain about Ravenwing because of their ability to reroll that save, but there are ways to get around it. Plus, jinking comes with a penalty (snap shots the following turn) so it's not like it's free, unlike things like FnP on many units, or Necron Reanimation Protocols, which have little to no downside.
In short, I don't think Jinking is a problem, at least not compared to other things in the game. It might need to go on a long list of rules that need some tweaks, but overall it's fine. Who knows how it will work in 8th edition.
With all the ignores cover out there, jink is almost useless anyway.
Jink should be enhanced, not reduced. It should be a completely different kind of save, which will prevent it from stacking with cover, which is just plain stupid. If you're bouncing around in cover instead of keeping your head down, your save would be worse, not better.
So jink should give a flat 5++ and not be stackable with any other buffs, except by dark eldar who could have various means to get it to 3++. EZPZ fix.
JimOnMars wrote: With all the ignores cover out there, jink is almost useless anyway.
Jink should be enhanced, not reduced. It should be a completely different kind of save, which will prevent it from stacking with cover, which is just plain stupid. If you're bouncing around in cover instead of keeping your head down, your save would be worse, not better.
So jink should give a flat 5++ and not be stackable with any other buffs, except by dark eldar who could have various means to get it to 3++. EZPZ fix.
Yeah the stacking is horrible.
Outside of Tau not every army has access to ignore cover. This creates a divide between the have and have not armies.
It should be an alternate save though. Not an additional saving throw like feel no pain on top of your armor.
Totalwar1402 wrote: The same goes with planes. I already can only hit the plane on a 6. Surely that has already accounted for all the aerial maneuvers which that aircraft could make. Why should the plane get an additional save on top of its existing protection?
Because the 6 to hit (which should be a 7 to hit, re-rolling all successes, if we want to be realistic) is representing the near-impossibility of hitting aircraft, even aircraft that aren't trying to evade, with anything but a specialized anti-aircraft weapon. The jink save represents the pilot breaking off their attack (thus firing only snap shots, and usually leaving the battlefield) to actually try to evade incoming fire.
Because dedicated AA platforms are extremely expensive point sinks and with jink its still very difficult to take down aircraft. Plus not every army has easy access to such weapons and other planes are too unreliable for this purpose.
I play quite a bit of Heresy and the aircraft mechanics really screw up list construction. If I don't spend my precious heavy support slot on that Deredeo or flakk missiles I am going get wrecked. This assumes he just brings one plane. Not 3 or 4. I mean I tried running an infantry based close combat Emperors Children army and I just got mulched by the planes. I kept having to find ways of ramming things into my army to counter them that don't derail my armies theme.
Plus, your opponent isn't an idiot, hes going to try to knock out your Deredeo first turn and then give his planes free reign over the battlefield.
I find it very difficult, even at the standard 3-4k we role with to physically have enough AT and AA without diluting my armies intended theme.
Bit of math
Deredeo 4 BS5 TL Str8 cannons with armourbane
Hits 3.888888889 Hull Point 3.348765432 Failed Jink Saves 1.674382716
Meaning it needs three turns to put down a Storm Eagle. This assumes it gets three turns to shoot a storm eagle. In that same time theres a lot of things that can easily kill a Deredeo.
Backspacehacker wrote: Jink is fine, what needs to happen is it needs a seperation from a cover save.
Imo I think jink rule should only benefit from stealth, shrouded, and invisibility.
BUT, a jink save can not be taken against the following weapon types
Torrent, blast, template, barrage, and a model with precision shot.
It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever ever that a bike or anything can some how dodge and explosion. Really if anything needs a template of some sort it should not be dodgeable this is coming from someone who runs a ravenwing Death Star.
Templates and torrent already ignore cover, so jinking doesn't help there. Many blast weapons and Barrage weapons also ignore cover (like Wyverns), so again jinking is no help. I've had my Ravenwing Command Squad get erased by a squad of Wraithguard joined by an Archon with Webway Portal. Nothing at all they could do about it, they just died.
I'm also pretty sure Jink doesn't stack with any other cover saves besides Stealth and Shrouded. Jink provides a cover save of its own, and Stealth/Shrouded provide a modifier to that cover save. Some people complain about Ravenwing because of their ability to reroll that save, but there are ways to get around it. Plus, jinking comes with a penalty (snap shots the following turn) so it's not like it's free, unlike things like FnP on many units, or Necron Reanimation Protocols, which have little to no downside.
In short, I don't think Jinking is a problem, at least not compared to other things in the game. It might need to go on a long list of rules that need some tweaks, but overall it's fine. Who knows how it will work in 8th edition.
Yes but most flamer type weapons are useless because that marine biker has the toughness and armour to tank it. The issue is that it renders the high str low ap weapons meant to kill these elite units useless.
Backspacehacker wrote: This is why i said they should not be able to jink out of an explosion, most, hell ALL armies have access to some explosions.
The stacking is fine, they just need to change so all blasts cant be jinked.
Yeah but when you can stack it to a 2 plus re-rollable save something has went very wrong.
To be fair, the issue is that you can declare Jink if you're going to be touched by the template at all.
If Blast weapons could start targeting points on the board instead of units, it would go a long way towards mitigating the issue of the 2+ rerollable against Blasts. You can't Jink if something scatters onto you.
Backspacehacker wrote: This is why i said they should not be able to jink out of an explosion, most, hell ALL armies have access to some explosions.
The stacking is fine, they just need to change so all blasts cant be jinked.
Yeah but when you can stack it to a 2 plus re-rollable save something has went very wrong.
But also you need to understand that 2+ rerollable comes at a really high cost to field and make useful.
You wanna know how to quickly make a bike army and or ravenwing army weep? If you are MEQ, 3 vindicators, or run the sternguard formation with the special issue bolters that ignore cover, and then rip.
Backspacehacker wrote: This is why i said they should not be able to jink out of an explosion, most, hell ALL armies have access to some explosions.
The stacking is fine, they just need to change so all blasts cant be jinked.
Yeah but when you can stack it to a 2 plus re-rollable save something has went very wrong.
But also you need to understand that 2+ rerollable comes at a really high cost to field and make useful.
You wanna know how to quickly make a bike army and or ravenwing army weep? If you are MEQ, 3 vindicators, or run the sternguard formation with the special issue bolters that ignore cover, and then rip.
I run Tyranids and Dark Eldar...
TBH my main experience of jink relates to masses of skimmer tanks and fliers. Nobody at my local club has an all bike army especially since they mostly play Heresy and Jetbikes are crazy expensive.
Backspacehacker wrote: This is why i said they should not be able to jink out of an explosion, most, hell ALL armies have access to some explosions.
The stacking is fine, they just need to change so all blasts cant be jinked.
Yeah but when you can stack it to a 2 plus re-rollable save something has went very wrong.
But also you need to understand that 2+ rerollable comes at a really high cost to field and make useful.
You wanna know how to quickly make a bike army and or ravenwing army weep? If you are MEQ, 3 vindicators, or run the sternguard formation with the special issue bolters that ignore cover, and then rip.
I run Tyranids and Dark Eldar...
TBH my main experience of jink relates to masses of skimmer tanks and fliers. Nobody at my local club has an all bike army especially since they mostly play Heresy and Jetbikes are crazy expensive.
Well, if thats the case Flayers already have a swath of issues so, its not really apt to compare jink of a flyer vs a unit on the ground. But also, you are playing two very week armies at the moment with the only viable way to run nids competitively is the flying circus. Same with dark eldar who have a crap ton of jink as well. Again, any ignores cover and you are screwed.
Martel732 wrote: I think 7 th ed jink is fine. Rules that encourage decisions are good.
Exalted for truth. 6th-ed Jink was a serious problem because it handed bikes and skimmers a consequence-free 4+/3+ cover save, 7th-ed snapfire-after-jinking fixed the problem quite neatly.
Backspacehacker wrote: This is why i said they should not be able to jink out of an explosion, most, hell ALL armies have access to some explosions.
The stacking is fine, they just need to change so all blasts cant be jinked.
Yeah but when you can stack it to a 2 plus re-rollable save something has went very wrong.
But also you need to understand that 2+ rerollable comes at a really high cost to field and make useful.
You wanna know how to quickly make a bike army and or ravenwing army weep? If you are MEQ, 3 vindicators, or run the sternguard formation with the special issue bolters that ignore cover, and then rip.
I run Tyranids and Dark Eldar...
TBH my main experience of jink relates to masses of skimmer tanks and fliers. Nobody at my local club has an all bike army especially since they mostly play Heresy and Jetbikes are crazy expensive.
Well, if thats the case Flayers already have a swath of issues so, its not really apt to compare jink of a flyer vs a unit on the ground. But also, you are playing two very week armies at the moment with the only viable way to run nids competitively is the flying circus. Same with dark eldar who have a crap ton of jink as well. Again, any ignores cover and you are screwed.
Because if Dark Eldar didn't have jink then you could quite easily destroy the entire army in one turn, even in a casual game. Basically the army suffers because the mechanics of 40k don't accommodate for "these guys are so sneaky and fast you can't hit them" so its as easy to hit a Wych as it is a Warlord Titan.
Backspacehacker wrote: This is why i said they should not be able to jink out of an explosion, most, hell ALL armies have access to some explosions.
The stacking is fine, they just need to change so all blasts cant be jinked.
Yeah but when you can stack it to a 2 plus re-rollable save something has went very wrong.
But also you need to understand that 2+ rerollable comes at a really high cost to field and make useful.
You wanna know how to quickly make a bike army and or ravenwing army weep? If you are MEQ, 3 vindicators, or run the sternguard formation with the special issue bolters that ignore cover, and then rip.
I run Tyranids and Dark Eldar...
TBH my main experience of jink relates to masses of skimmer tanks and fliers. Nobody at my local club has an all bike army especially since they mostly play Heresy and Jetbikes are crazy expensive.
Well, if thats the case Flayers already have a swath of issues so, its not really apt to compare jink of a flyer vs a unit on the ground. But also, you are playing two very week armies at the moment with the only viable way to run nids competitively is the flying circus. Same with dark eldar who have a crap ton of jink as well. Again, any ignores cover and you are screwed.
Because if Dark Eldar didn't have jink then you could quite easily destroy the entire army in one turn, even in a casual game. Basically the army suffers because the mechanics of 40k don't accommodate for "these guys are so sneaky and fast you can't hit them" so its as easy to hit a Wych as it is a Warlord Titan.
Exactly which is why we need the jink rule...wait im confused are you arguing for or agianst jink as is?
Martel732 wrote: I think 7 th ed jink is fine. Rules that encourage decisions are good.
Exalted for truth. 6th-ed Jink was a serious problem because it handed bikes and skimmers a consequence-free 4+/3+ cover save, 7th-ed snapfire-after-jinking fixed the problem quite neatly.
Ehhhh...
If the weapons on Skimmers, Bikes, and Jetbikes were more often Ordnance or Blast I would agree. As it stands, many of them are just hitting on 6s instead of their normal BS but have alternate ways of beefing things up via Psykers or the weapons being Twin-Linked.
Realistically, Jink should be something that must be declared during your Movement phase and require you to move a certain distance, not in reaction to being shot.
Martel732 wrote: I think 7 th ed jink is fine. Rules that encourage decisions are good.
Exalted for truth. 6th-ed Jink was a serious problem because it handed bikes and skimmers a consequence-free 4+/3+ cover save, 7th-ed snapfire-after-jinking fixed the problem quite neatly.
Ehhhh...
If the weapons on Skimmers, Bikes, and Jetbikes were more often Ordnance or Blast I would agree. As it stands, many of them are just hitting on 6s instead of their normal BS but have alternate ways of beefing things up via Psykers or the weapons being Twin-Linked.
Realistically, Jink should be something that must be declared during your Movement phase and require you to move a certain distance, not in reaction to being shot.
Rerollable 6+ means you're hitting slightly worse than a BS2 model would. Chopping a BS4 model back down to effective BS1 or 2 is a pretty serious trade-off, even if they aren't shut down entirely by being blasts.
(Off the top of my head the only way to buff a snapshot's to-hit on a Jink-capable model is to give it a reroll, unless you're Tau and have Markerlights. Or are a 30k Fire Raptor and are using a generous reading of PotMS that lets you bypass jinking with it.)
That's the thing. It was assumed to apply only to the number of weapons a vehicle could shoot after moving, but then the latest FAQ dropped and said it applied specifically to psychic effects that would force the vehicle to snapshot, so it may apply to any or all snapshots. It may, for instance, grant Skyfire or let you shoot at Invisible units, it may not.
Martel732 wrote: I think 7 th ed jink is fine. Rules that encourage decisions are good.
Exalted for truth. 6th-ed Jink was a serious problem because it handed bikes and skimmers a consequence-free 4+/3+ cover save, 7th-ed snapfire-after-jinking fixed the problem quite neatly.
Ehhhh...
If the weapons on Skimmers, Bikes, and Jetbikes were more often Ordnance or Blast I would agree. As it stands, many of them are just hitting on 6s instead of their normal BS but have alternate ways of beefing things up via Psykers or the weapons being Twin-Linked.
Realistically, Jink should be something that must be declared during your Movement phase and require you to move a certain distance, not in reaction to being shot.
Rerollable 6+ means you're hitting slightly worse than a BS2 model would. Chopping a BS4 model back down to effective BS1 or 2 is a pretty serious trade-off, even if they aren't shut down entirely by being blasts.
A BS4 model firing at BS1 or 2, effectively, with a 4+ Cover Save is better than a model firing at BS3 with no way to claim a Cover Save aside from being 25% obscured or paying for Camo Netting.
You're still waaaaaaaaay too generously gifted with Jinking.
I think DE should have some other defence unique to them. Jink isn't a problem because DE units and vehicles are terrible at taking damage. But marine bikers and storm eagles aren't.
Martel732 wrote: I think 7 th ed jink is fine. Rules that encourage decisions are good.
Exalted for truth. 6th-ed Jink was a serious problem because it handed bikes and skimmers a consequence-free 4+/3+ cover save, 7th-ed snapfire-after-jinking fixed the problem quite neatly.
How exactly did it do that? I can't think of many units that did that that aren't a worse problem now.
Totalwar1402 wrote: I think DE should have some other defence unique to them. Jink isn't a problem because DE units and vehicles are terrible at taking damage. But marine bikers and storm eagles aren't.
They do cover saves, if you want to user DE effectively you need to load them up in transports that have the good jink and then run around the field mad max style. Thanks to FAQ, if a vehicle jinks, the models inside dont count as jinking and can fire out at full BS (Dont ask). Again, you cant bring the storm eagle into the equation, one its forge world so its going to be stronger then normal, and two its a flyer, they already are a bitch to hit if you dont have skyfire. Marine bike are always strong because of T5, but they are still only a one wound model. Which still as DE im not sure why you care about a models str considering almost all your weapons are poison of some sort.
Martel732 wrote: I think 7 th ed jink is fine. Rules that encourage decisions are good.
Exalted for truth. 6th-ed Jink was a serious problem because it handed bikes and skimmers a consequence-free 4+/3+ cover save, 7th-ed snapfire-after-jinking fixed the problem quite neatly.
How exactly did it do that? I can't think of many units that did that that aren't a worse problem now.
Well Black knights wound have been a hell of a lot more scary, twin linked rapid fire plasma on a 3+, and a base 3+ rerollable easily boosted to a 2+ rerollable yes please.
I think that jinking should be dependent on how far the unit moves - it's a little silly that a trukk that moves 24" gets no cover save at all, but a tau skimmer gets a 3+ for standing still.
And honestly, declaring a jink in your movement phase would make a fair amount of sense, though I'm not sure if that would be too much of a nerf.
Kap'n Krump wrote:I think that jinking should be dependent on how far the unit moves - it's a little silly that a trukk that moves 24" gets no cover save at all, but a tau skimmer gets a 3+ for standing still.
And honestly, declaring a jink in your movement phase would make a fair amount of sense, though I'm not sure if that would be too much of a nerf.
This is why I liked Jink more in 6th. You got a save based on moving not a weird you are both jinking and not jinking until the opponent finishes shooting. I'd rather improve that system.
Backspacehacker wrote:
pm713 wrote: As opposed to now which is pretty much the same. It seems silly to nerf a load of units for one to be balanced.
BUT also remember, what came out in 6th, flyers, what would jink then fire its really powerful weapons with no draw back, flyers.
Do flyers really have weapons that good? Most seem pretty pricy for what they get.
Kap'n Krump wrote:I think that jinking should be dependent on how far the unit moves - it's a little silly that a trukk that moves 24" gets no cover save at all, but a tau skimmer gets a 3+ for standing still.
And honestly, declaring a jink in your movement phase would make a fair amount of sense, though I'm not sure if that would be too much of a nerf.
This is why I liked Jink more in 6th. You got a save based on moving not a weird you are both jinking and not jinking until the opponent finishes shooting. I'd rather improve that system.
Backspacehacker wrote:
pm713 wrote: As opposed to now which is pretty much the same. It seems silly to nerf a load of units for one to be balanced.
BUT also remember, what came out in 6th, flyers, what would jink then fire its really powerful weapons with no draw back, flyers.
Do flyers really have weapons that good? Most seem pretty pricy for what they get.
The only Flyer I can think of that's overarmed for its price is the Hemlock, which is also 185pts for a 2-HP 10-10-10 and has blast weapons so it can't fire after jinking. It's the sort of vehicle that has to come on, make its points back immediately, and then either explodes or spends the rest of the game running and hiding.
Totalwar1402 wrote: I think DE should have some other defence unique to them. Jink isn't a problem because DE units and vehicles are terrible at taking damage. But marine bikers and storm eagles aren't.
They do cover saves, if you want to user DE effectively you need to load them up in transports that have the good jink and then run around the field mad max style. Thanks to FAQ, if a vehicle jinks, the models inside dont count as jinking and can fire out at full BS (Dont ask). Again, you cant bring the storm eagle into the equation, one its forge world so its going to be stronger then normal, and two its a flyer, they already are a bitch to hit if you dont have skyfire. Marine bike are always strong because of T5, but they are still only a one wound model. Which still as DE im not sure why you care about a models str considering almost all your weapons are poison of some sort.
Martel732 wrote: I think 7 th ed jink is fine. Rules that encourage decisions are good.
Exalted for truth. 6th-ed Jink was a serious problem because it handed bikes and skimmers a consequence-free 4+/3+ cover save, 7th-ed snapfire-after-jinking fixed the problem quite neatly.
How exactly did it do that? I can't think of many units that did that that aren't a worse problem now.
Well Black knights wound have been a hell of a lot more scary, twin linked rapid fire plasma on a 3+, and a base 3+ rerollable easily boosted to a 2+ rerollable yes please.
Yes but why is the Dark Eldar a justification for more heavily armored and hard hitting armies getting the same or often better levels of protection from jink?
I have done what you suggested and done the detachment that can give you a 2+ jink on turn one with all the goodies; with a 3 plus normally. The enormous difference is that apart from the venom & ravager, none of the Dark Eldar vehicles are dedicated gun platforms; they are assault transports. They're built to zip across the board and for your guys to leap out and charge; not exchange fire with a tank line. So its a lot harder for them to do what the Eldar do and just stand off and shoot. DE are supposed to charge into melee and its here that the whole army falls apart; since their infantry gets no bonus to survive shooting or over watch. Plus they all hit like wet noodles.
Well strength matters because (shock) Dark Eldar are a CC army. It states this repeatedly in both the fluff, blurbs and suggested force organization for them. Of the three basic army types only the Kabalite one is arguably a more shooting oriented army and that's only because you can put your tactical marine equivalents on assault transports and fire out of them. So can Orks, that doesn't mean Orks are intended as a shooty army. There isn't, for example, a DE equivalent of Reapers or those teleport guys.
Kap'n Krump wrote:I think that jinking should be dependent on how far the unit moves - it's a little silly that a trukk that moves 24" gets no cover save at all, but a tau skimmer gets a 3+ for standing still.
And honestly, declaring a jink in your movement phase would make a fair amount of sense, though I'm not sure if that would be too much of a nerf.
This is why I liked Jink more in 6th. You got a save based on moving not a weird you are both jinking and not jinking until the opponent finishes shooting. I'd rather improve that system.
Backspacehacker wrote:
pm713 wrote: As opposed to now which is pretty much the same. It seems silly to nerf a load of units for one to be balanced.
BUT also remember, what came out in 6th, flyers, what would jink then fire its really powerful weapons with no draw back, flyers.
Do flyers really have weapons that good? Most seem pretty pricy for what they get.
The only Flyer I can think of that's overarmed for its price is the Hemlock, which is also 185pts for a 2-HP 10-10-10 and has blast weapons so it can't fire after jinking. It's the sort of vehicle that has to come on, make its points back immediately, and then either explodes or spends the rest of the game running and hiding.
Space Wolf, Dark Angel, Dark Eldar and Ork flyers all seem pretty bad. Eldar ones don't seem great when there aren't flyers to counter or it's the bad Hemlock.
Here's the viscous cycle I encounter with fliers:
I take Fliers because they have Skyfire, but aren't locked into using their weapons to shoot fliers. Their guns cost more than what they would on a ground tank, but provide extra utility in that they can shoot at other flying enemies without penalties.
Because the amount of damage it gives off is less than that of my ground targets, my opponents can safely ignore much of what my fliers can give out in terms of firepower. So, they don't focus on it, and don't take a lot of AA - which includes not taking many fliers.
In response to their lack of fliers, I don't need many fliers either - After all, I take them for AA. So, I drop the fliers I bring. So do they.
Now, we're playing 40k without fliers.
FMCs are still decent, of course, but many of them (in my experience) just stay on the ground because it's easier to get into assault. (If they're playing a Bloodthirster or a close-combat DP, they don't want him flying.)
Martel732 wrote: But it's still out there, and might become law in 8th.
Doubtful. The backlash was huge and immediate, nobody liked the supplement, and the newer books are being very clear that it's entirely optional. GW can be dumb, but they're not *that* dumb.
Backspacehacker wrote: Jink is fine, what needs to happen is it needs a seperation from a cover save.
Imo I think jink rule should only benefit from stealth, shrouded, and invisibility.
BUT, a jink save can not be taken against the following weapon types
Torrent, blast, template, barrage, and a model with precision shot.
It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever ever that a bike or anything can some how dodge and explosion. Really if anything needs a template of some sort it should not be dodgeable this is coming from someone who runs a ravenwing Death Star.
I'm all for this with the exception of Precision Shot, I'm kind of torn on that one. I associate Precision Shots with sniper rifles and hitting fast moving targets with a scope is high, high difficulty. On the other hand I see the roll of six as the sniper tearing the scope off and eyeballing the shot because they're Just. That. Good.
As it stands right now jink is the only thing that makes my RW playable. 120 points for a 3 model squad. Without that rerollable 3+ I lose 120 points to a single battle cannon or a round of shooting from devs or countless other things. On top of that, only snap firing with my plasma talons kills a bike far more often than I'd like, so I have to thoroughly consider if I want to fire or not after I jink. Taking away my ability to safely shoot cripples the squad enough that they're really not that scary, especially when you'll likely have cover from the shots I fire back.
Not sure if jink saves should go. Skimmers should have them.
But a 4+ cover save is not a good thing. It should at most be a 5+ save similar to the regular 5+ cover save if a unit is shot.
Not sure if jink saves should go. Skimmers should have them.
But a 4+ cover save is not a good thing. It should at most be a 5+ save similar to the regular 5+ cover save if a unit is shot.
Been there in 6th, and as a DE player, the 5+ jink was a rough time. There have been some significant changes to the treatment of skimmers over the 4 editions I have played. I would argue that the weight of the skimmer/flier should have a bearing on its ability to use evasive manoeuvres through the jink rule.
If the sum of its AV is less than 33, keep the 4+. 5+ for 33 or over.
DE specifically, because I am biased yes, but also based on the fluff about their attack style, should be immune to Jink penalties. They have virtually no T/L weaponry in the army.
im talking 6th ed flyers when the necron airforce was the most power army in the game, and the vendetta was deadly as hell and made up the bulk of most armies.
Backspacehacker wrote: im talking 6th ed flyers when the necron airforce was the most power army in the game, and the vendetta was deadly as hell and made up the bulk of most armies.
That wasn't due to jink. Vendettas were 130-pt-odd models with a transport capacity of 10 that could also land in an edition where scoring only mattered last turn and lazcannons needed 5+ to explode.
Backspacehacker wrote: im talking 6th ed flyers when the necron airforce was the most power army in the game, and the vendetta was deadly as hell and made up the bulk of most armies.
That wasn't due to jink. Vendettas were 130-pt-odd models with a transport capacity of 10 that could also land in an edition where scoring only mattered last turn and lazcannons needed 5+ to explode.
Don't forget AA was limited for ALL armies, and therefore it was a little harder to deal with Croissant Spam when they then rimmed a bunch of stuff down your throat in the form of Wraiths and Destroyer Lords and CCB (I miss the sweep attacks so much) and then some Deathmarks.
It's a tough one, Jink can be annoying and a little overpowered at times, but there many things that rely on it and, in my opinion, it does make sense. There's been some good proposals put forward but personally I disagree with all the ones I've read, either because they don't really make as much sense as others claim, or because it wouldn't improve it.
Declaring Jink in your movement phase is a decent enough idea but, really, it doesn't make sense. If you declare Jink on a given unit in your movement phase, there's a good chance your opponent will just not shoot at it, especially if you have similar units that haven't declared Jink, and then why would a biker or a skimmer pilot have adopted evasive manoeuvers if there was no incoming fire?
The proposals that Jink should be based on how fast you move or that flyers shouldn't get Jink falls through on the logic that Jink is the pilot actively trying to avoid incoming fire. It would be easy enough for a good marksman to judge where to fire if a vehicle is moving fast, but at a constant speed, but much harder if said vehicle is trying to avoid fire by zigzagging erratically. Stuff like fast moving Trukks, as someone mentioned, shouldn't be getting a save simply for moving far, a Jink represents a much more agile class of vehicle avoiding fire. As an aside though, I think they should definitely bring back making vehicles that have moved a certain distance harder to hit in combat. For flyers, the logic is the same. They're already hard to hit as it is, being high above the battlefield, they should get an extra save for evasive manoeuvers, making them even more difficult to hit. Besides, I find that most flyers are pretty much disabled once they elect to Jink. If I force one to, I can count it as dealt with in the following turn. Sure, flyers can leave combat airspace, but then we're probably talking only two, maybe three, rounds of full-BS shooting a game, which I think is fair.
The only suggestion I like, which I think someone mentioned (I only skimmed the post - pun intended) was to make Jink worse on higher AV vehicles, which does make sense as they would be heavier and therefore less agile. Perhaps a less messier fix would to reduce standard Jink to a 5+ but to say that Fast Skimmers, Jetbikes and (maybe Bikes too) get a 4+. This would reduce the power of Jink on certain things that could do with a nerf, such as deathstars surrounding the use of Jinking bikes as a save mechanic, but keep things that really need that Jink, such as the DE vehicles that have mentioned, equally as survivable while making a lot of sense. In my opinion, at least.
Still think DE should get better jink saves than anyone else, no matter how they work. I see those guys in my mind jinking like mofos as they tear up the field.
JimOnMars wrote: Still think DE should get better jink saves than anyone else, no matter how they work. I see those guys in my mind jinking like mofos as they tear up the field.
Certainly DE should be better than Eldar.
Now please don't take this the wrong way, but understand, this sounds REALLY, petty.
But I do agree in some aspect but if you really wanna get more outta dark eldar you need to load up their party barge and jink it all the time with recent FAQ models inside a vehicle don't count as jinking if the transport jinks, so, open top fire away!
Why would fluffy rules be petty? I don't think it petty that Thousand Suns have a lot of psychic dice. Nor is it petty that Necrons are durable, nor Deathwatch are versatile nor genestealers stealthy. Why would it be petty that Dark Eldar are good at jinking?
JimOnMars wrote: Still think DE should get better jink saves than anyone else, no matter how they work. I see those guys in my mind jinking like mofos as they tear up the field.
Certainly DE should be better than Eldar.
Now please don't take this the wrong way, but understand, this sounds REALLY, petty.
But I do agree in some aspect but if you really wanna get more outta dark eldar you need to load up their party barge and jink it all the time with recent FAQ models inside a vehicle don't count as jinking if the transport jinks, so, open top fire away!
There is good fluffy reason for it though. Eldar have better reflexes than Space Marines and Dark Eldar being melee preference have better reflexes again, it doesn't get represented by a higher initiative in melee but I think that a better jink save would be fair.
The only suggestion I like, which I think someone mentioned (I only skimmed the post - pun intended) was to make Jink worse on higher AV vehicles, which does make sense as they would be heavier and therefore less agile. Perhaps a less messier fix would to reduce standard Jink to a 5+ but to say that Fast Skimmers, Jetbikes and (maybe Bikes too) get a 4+. This would reduce the power of Jink on certain things that could do with a nerf, such as deathstars surrounding the use of Jinking bikes as a save mechanic, but keep things that really need that Jink, such as the DE vehicles that have mentioned, equally as survivable while making a lot of sense. In my opinion, at least.
So, if skimmers, jetbikes and bikes get to jink...who doesn't? Is there anyone else jinking?
JimOnMars wrote: Why would fluffy rules be petty? I don't think it petty that Thousand Suns have a lot of psychic dice. Nor is it petty that Necrons are durable, nor Deathwatch are versatile nor genestealers stealthy. Why would it be petty that Dark Eldar are good at jinking?
Not sure I get where you're coming from.
I understand its a fluffy thing, but the way it comes off is, your saying my army should be the best army at this because fluff, when i use the same argument for space marines it sounds the same.
Lore wise the bolter is a mini RPG that does not detonate until it is inside a target, so because of that, lore wise they should be S5 AP 3 and marines should have at least T5 or W2 because in lore they can loose and entire limb or get a hole blown through them and keep fighting.
It just does not hold actual water. That said, I would not be against Dark Eldar having skilled rider or the ability to buy the upgrade to one of their vehicles that can jink.
1) There is nothing wrong with jink, just take Ignore cover
2) Only things that are stupidly strong are things thats GW knew had jink and they gave it more rules to make it better, this isnt jink being to strong its inbalance
3) Just melee, yes 40k is more of a shooting game, but you can still melee.....
4) To many things need jink to even be playable
5) Its to fluffy of a good rule to remove, we dont have enough good fluffy rules
6) Fix the power between the armies and rules then if its to strong we can talk...
Amishprn86 wrote: 1) There is nothing wrong with jink, just take Ignore cover
This isn't a solution that should even be touted about.
Jink shouldn't force units that rely on Cover Saves to be crap, which ends up happening by virtue of people taking a lot of Ignores Cover stuff just to counteract Jinking units.
Jink should be its own save,separate from a Cover Save, and AA weapons should get the ability to negate or reduce a Jink Save if they land a hit. End of story.
2) Only things that are stupidly strong are things thats GW knew had jink and they gave it more rules to make it better, this isnt jink being to strong its inbalance
Reaver Jetbikes.
Flyers.
3) Just melee, yes 40k is more of a shooting game, but you can still melee.....
Try getting into melee with Guardian Jetbikes.
4) To many things need jink to even be playable
You could remove Jink from Guardian Jetbikes and they'd still be playable.
5) Its to fluffy of a good rule to remove, we dont have enough good fluffy rules
6) Fix the power between the armies and rules then if its to strong we can talk...
This is just the kind of "L2P" attitude that is not conducive to quality discussion.
Jink could just be declared when they're targeted, as it is now, but an initiative test (or a flat 4+) that's done before they roll to shoot. If they pass the unit shooting at them suffers -1 to hit (I guess -2 for skilled rider/pilot but I'm not so sure on pushing it too much).
Don't want it to be too complex though so I'm not sure of this idea.
The only suggestion I like, which I think someone mentioned (I only skimmed the post - pun intended) was to make Jink worse on higher AV vehicles, which does make sense as they would be heavier and therefore less agile. Perhaps a less messier fix would to reduce standard Jink to a 5+ but to say that Fast Skimmers, Jetbikes and (maybe Bikes too) get a 4+. This would reduce the power of Jink on certain things that could do with a nerf, such as deathstars surrounding the use of Jinking bikes as a save mechanic, but keep things that really need that Jink, such as the DE vehicles that have mentioned, equally as survivable while making a lot of sense. In my opinion, at least.
So, if skimmers, jetbikes and bikes get to jink...who doesn't? Is there anyone else jinking?
What's your point here? I think one of us doesn't quite understand the other...
All the unit types you've listed jink anyway in the current rules so if you're complaining about the prevalence of jink that's nothing to do with my suggestions (not that I'd suggest removing it from anything either though). But I'm guessing you knew that already.
Note that I said Fast Skimmers get the 4+ Jink. So regular Skimmers like a Tau Hammerhead would only get a 5+, whereas stuff like Dark Eldar Raiders would get an improved 4+ to represent the fact that they're lighter and more agile. Is that what's causing confusion? I also said Bikes were a maybe. While they're certainly not as agile as Jetbikes and light skimmers like Raiders, they're probably a lot more agile than a Hammerhead, so they're kind of borderline. I'd probably put them in the less agile category of 5+, if it were up to me, but I imagine there are those who'd disagree.
Does that clear things up? If it doesn't I'm afraid I'm not sure what you're getting at
Amishprn86 wrote: 1) There is nothing wrong with jink, just take Ignore cover
This isn't a solution that should even be touted about.
Jink shouldn't force units that rely on Cover Saves to be crap, which ends up happening by virtue of people taking a lot of Ignores Cover stuff just to counteract Jinking units.
Jink should be its own save,separate from a Cover Save, and AA weapons should get the ability to negate or reduce a Jink Save if they land a hit. End of story.
2) Only things that are stupidly strong are things thats GW knew had jink and they gave it more rules to make it better, this isnt jink being to strong its inbalance
Reaver Jetbikes. Flyers.
3) Just melee, yes 40k is more of a shooting game, but you can still melee.....
Try getting into melee with Guardian Jetbikes.
4) To many things need jink to even be playable
You could remove Jink from Guardian Jetbikes and they'd still be playable.
5) Its to fluffy of a good rule to remove, we dont have enough good fluffy rules 6) Fix the power between the armies and rules then if its to strong we can talk...
This is just the kind of "L2P" attitude that is not conducive to quality discussion.
Reaver Jetbikes are not good without Jink, they are 5+ armor with 0 invul unlike Eldar bikes with 3+ armor or Harle bikes with 4+/4++/5++ Fliers are worthless if they jink, Look at Orc and DE fliers, without jink they wouldnt last 1 turn on the table. Jink improved the game IMO Eldar Jetbikes are just to good in general, they dont need a special weapon on each model, they arnt good b.c oh Jink, they are good b.c many other reasons. Yes it is a L2P discussion IMO. ever sense Jink came out and got better it never made a game 1 sided in all my 300+ 7th ed games (I play DE, Eldar, Harlequins and Corsairs) so I know all about jinking. Jink in most cases made the game more fun and even. I even play my friend that brings 3 Storm Ravens (he likes the model) he jinks with them many times, I dont get made, Im glad at least I forced 750pts to be 1/4 as effective as it was with a few shots and just ignore them getting objectives.
My input into this discussion is Jink is fine the way it is, b.c you dont agree with it doesnt mean you can ignore what I have to say and say "its not conductive" no it is, there is always 2 sides to the coin. :p
I find this topic rather ridiculous for Dark Eldar players. I mean we're made out of tissue paper. I realize some armies that get it probably don't need it but what are you proposing to replace it with?
Also kanluwen if you have issue with reaver jetbikes then i'm sorry but learn to play. They have 5+ armor and toughness 4. If they didn't have jink and skilled rider almost nobody would run them and yeah to my knowledge you have multiple blast weapons in guard that ignore cover anyway. This is also considering you have to be careful with this melee unit because if it fails to reach base contact it can't use it's cluster caltrops for 'hammer of wrath' (which doesn't allow a separate pile-in which is super stupid and they don't have fleet on dark eldar jetbikes which is also stupid) which you will cry at if you fail because the rest of their melee is pretty garbage. Also if your reavers get charged in all likelihood they will do next to no damage and die en masse. Even after rolling an extra +1 toughness on their combat drugs (which is a 1/6 for a whopping toughness 5) they still got destroyed by ork boyz after killing their targets.
The other thing you might use reavers for is their heat lances which would be ok if you could jump shoot jump effectively with it (heat lances with 18" and 9" range for tank hunting is somewhat tough) and you can only take one special weapon per 3 unlike the eldar ones which can take a special weapon on every bike. It's not super easy though as you'd need cover and the short range means you'd either have to be out of line of sight or in cover. Of course skilled rider doesn't boost your cover save in terrain but just jinks. It does however prevent DT which would absolutely murder reaver jetbikes otherwise.
Btw you want to know what's really BS? Tau smart missile systems. Oh hey it's nice that you have cover saves and aren't in line of sight. Too bad we still hit you anyway and avoid everything you can do (cover, armor, lack of line of sight) and wound your bikes on 2's. There's a lot of cheese in tau and they counter dark eldar hardcore but smart missile systems are pretty high up on the list.
Besides dark eldar deserve some good toys. It's fair that reavers are decent. Without jink reavers would be so much worse that they might rate only a bit better than hellions. I mean we don't even have grenades on most of our combat units or armor even. So much for the famed dark eldar initiative when charging into cover. If reavers got ruined here handling units in cover would be even harder than it already is. Haemonculus covens would pretty much be the only possible thing dark eldar players could play even more so than it already is.
Amishprn86 wrote:
Reaver Jetbikes are not good without Jink, they are 5+ armor with 0 invul unlike Eldar bikes with 3+ armor or Harle bikes with 4+/4++/5++
Fliers are worthless if they jink, Look at Orc and DE fliers, without jink they wouldnt last 1 turn on the table.
What was your statement?
2) Only things that are stupidly strong are things thats GW knew had jink and they gave it more rules to make it better, this isnt jink being to strong its inbalance
Jink improved the game IMO
Jink, by itself, isn't what's wrong here. More on that in a second.
Eldar Jetbikes are just to good in general, they dont need a special weapon on each model, they arnt good b.c oh Jink, they are good b.c many other reasons.
Yes it is a L2P discussion IMO. ever sense Jink came out and got better it never made a game 1 sided in all my 300+ 7th ed games (I play DE, Eldar, Harlequins and Corsairs) so I know all about jinking. Jink in most cases made the game more fun and even. I even play my friend that brings 3 Storm Ravens (he likes the model) he jinks with them many times, I dont get made, Im glad at least I forced 750pts to be 1/4 as effective as it was with a few shots and just ignore them getting objectives.
My input into this discussion is Jink is fine the way it is, b.c you dont agree with it doesnt mean you can ignore what I have to say and say "its not conductive" no it is, there is always 2 sides to the coin. :p
Jink is awful the way it is.
If Jink existed, by itself, and did not allow for rerollable saves or Psyker abilities didn't exist granting units that had Jink Shrouded or make them so they could only ever be hit by Snap Shots(many of the 'counters' to bikes are Blast or Template weapons, which cannot be snap fired, and the kinds of weapons that counter FMCs but not Flyers are high S but low ROF...unless you're Grav, which is a whole different bucket of bananas).
Jink is the key issue in regards to 7th edition though. It never should have been made a Cover Save. It should have been made its own save, and weapons that they wanted to counteract such a thing should have been given "Ignores Jink".
PS:
I can completely ignore what you have to say and write it off as "not conducive" to the discussion as when your only input was to say "take Ignores Cover stuff", and then blatantly ignore the point I made about how the proliferation of Ignores Cover as a means of screwing with Jinking armies has been a negative impact on units that traditionally rely solely on Cover Saves to get things done(SM Scouts, Ratlings, Eldar Rangers, Tyranids...)...it makes it seem like you are only here to argue on behalf of your pet army, not actually engage in discussion.
flamingkillamajig wrote:I find this topic rather ridiculous for Dark Eldar players. I mean we're made out of tissue paper. I realize some armies that get it probably don't need it but what are you proposing to replace it with?
Also kanluwen if you have issue with reaver jetbikes then i'm sorry but learn to play.
I would suggest that you learn to read before making inane comments like this.
The example of Reaver Jetbikes was posted alongside of Flyers as a counter to this ridiculous statement:
2) Only things that are stupidly strong are things thats GW knew had jink and they gave it more rules to make it better, this isnt jink being to strong its inbalance
Amishprn86 wrote: 1) There is nothing wrong with jink, just take Ignore cover
My entire army has 2 weapons with Ignores Cover, Burnas and Skorchas. That is it. Neither is good, both are highly over priced and both are hard to get and short ranged template weapons.
2) Only things that are stupidly strong are things thats GW knew had jink and they gave it more rules to make it better, this isnt jink being to strong its inbalance
I agree with this a bit. Ork Bikers have Jink and are not considered OP. Good? yes, OP? No.
Eldar Jetbikes have Jink and a dozen other rules and easy access to psychic powers which make those rules even better.
Or my favorite, the Eldar Skimmers that have easy access to improved Jink.
3) Just melee, yes 40k is more of a shooting game, but you can still melee.....
Melee in 7th has been reduced to Super units and Death Stars, Everyone else is struggling hugely to get into CC, let alone win once they get there. Nobody is afraid of Blood Angels Assault Marines or a Mob of 10 ork boyz anymore because they die before they get into CC and if they do survive to get there they are so depleted that they can do very little and even less after Overwatch.
4) To many things need jink to even be playable
I agree, to an extent. Ork Biker Boyz need Jink, but if they didn't have it they could lose a few points off their price (6) and it would be fine. Skimmers? to an extent but again a price decrease would fix that as well.
5) Its to fluffy of a good rule to remove, we dont have enough good fluffy rules
To an extent, 2+ and 3+ rerollable Jink saves is a bit fething stupid. "Ohh I got nailed by that lascannon even though i shifted to my left, better shift to my right! much better" To put this another way, this should be HARD TO GET, not almost army wide and easily attainable. Eldar have easy access to rerollable saves and improving Jink saves by psychic shenanigans. Dark Angels have the easiest and most reliable way of doing this. Orks? Orks need Zhadsnark, a Warboss on bike and DLS as well as Nightfghting or First turn TurboCharge to get that all important 2+ rerollable jink save.
6) Fix the power between the armies and rules then if its to strong we can talk...
I dont like to be that guy but to be that guy. ITs your own fault if you dont bring more ignore cover weapons to a fight you know is going to have jink, i mean, cmon man, you are kinda asking for it.
I hate to pull this line but, with all the posts in here complaining about jink, it honestly boils down to, Get Good, or Learn how to play.
Im not saying full blown list tailor, but at least think about what you bring.
Backspacehacker wrote: I dont like to be that guy but to be that guy. ITs your own fault if you dont bring more ignore cover weapons to a fight you know is going to have jink, i mean, cmon man, you are kinda asking for it.
I hate to pull this line but, with all the posts in here complaining about jink, it honestly boils down to, Get Good, or Learn how to play.
Im not saying full blown list tailor, but at least think about what you bring.
And to those players who have armies that don't have access to ignores cover weapons like Orks and such? Or are you suggesting I should bring 2-3 Mobs of Burna Boyz and a Burna Bommer whenever I play against Dark Angels?
This is a useless post to help players with because their are armies that don't have easy access to Ignores Cover weapons like SM, Tau and a few others have. Also, if your going to a Tournament you can't list tailor.
So Get good and L2P are yet again terrible advice.
Get in melee? Yeah melee is weak, and yes i agree orks are gimped, but you cant say you dont have anything because you do, its called melee.
And again, orks are in a really bad place, so of course you are going to get stopped, but thats not because of jink thats because of all the bullgak thats available for marines.
IF anything you just sound like a pissed off person because you codex is crap right now, which hey man, im sorry blame GW for not updating it, its not jinks fault.
Backspacehacker wrote: Get in melee? Yeah melee is weak, and yes i agree orks are gimped, but you cant say you dont have anything because you do, its called melee.
And again, orks are in a really bad place, so of course you are going to get stopped, but thats not because of jink thats because of all the bullgak thats available for marines.
IF anything you just sound like a pissed off person because you codex is crap right now, which hey man, im sorry blame GW for not updating it, its not jinks fault.
If you read up, I am actually OK with Jink, I just think certain armies have abused it, like your own army, Dark Angels.
Easy access to 2+ and 3+ Rerollable Jink saves is just stupid. I wouldn't have a problem with Jink when playing Dark Angels if it was still just a 4+ Save without a reroll.
To put that into perspective, my Army can have a single model with a 3+ Rerollable cover save or a 2+ if he turbo boosts or its nightfighting, but to do so I have to field a FWIC (Zhadsnark) Buy a warboss and put him on a bike and give him DLS, that costs roughly 260pts, and it is only for that 1 model.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, to get into CC against bike armies is rather hard and only possible if your opponent is a bit of a moron, or he wants his bikes in CC.
Backspacehacker wrote: I dont like to be that guy but to be that guy. ITs your own fault if you dont bring more ignore cover weapons to a fight you know is going to have jink, i mean, cmon man, you are kinda asking for it.
I hate to pull this line but, with all the posts in here complaining about jink, it honestly boils down to, Get Good, or Learn how to play.
Im not saying full blown list tailor, but at least think about what you bring.
And to those players who have armies that don't have access to ignores cover weapons like Orks and such? Or are you suggesting I should bring 2-3 Mobs of Burna Boyz and a Burna Bommer whenever I play against Dark Angels?
This is a useless post to help players with because their are armies that don't have easy access to Ignores Cover weapons like SM, Tau and a few others have. Also, if your going to a Tournament you can't list tailor.
So Get good and L2P are yet again terrible advice.
The funniest part is that all SM don't even have easy access to Ignores Cover. Raven Guard detachments using their flavor rules require you to bring the Pinion and a bunch of Scouts(the Sergeants are what grant Ignores Cover) to grant Ignores Cover to units within a certain distance.
Backspacehacker wrote:Get in melee? Yeah melee is weak, and yes i agree orks are gimped, but you cant say you dont have anything because you do, its called melee.
I love how "melee" has become the answer to anything people don't want changed.
And again, orks are in a really bad place, so of course you are going to get stopped, but thats not because of jink thats because of all the bullgak thats available for marines.
IF anything you just sound like a pissed off person because you codex is crap right now, which hey man, im sorry blame GW for not updating it, its not jinks fault.
If anything, you sound like a person who relies on the crutch that is Jink and don't want any changes made that would impact it.
Personally? I think Jink needs the following things to be done to make it less easily abused:
A) Cover Save aspect removed from it. No more stackables. If you want to Jink, you get your 4+ and that's it barring any kind of unique special rule that improves your Jink.
B) Weapons with Skyfire and/or Interceptor need to be changed to match the Imperial Armour Hydra Flak Tank rules.
Auto-Targeting System wrote:The Hydra's twin-linked autocannon ignore any Cover Saves or Cover Save bonuses provided by the Supersonic and Jink special rules, and prevent it from moving Flat Out.
By doing this, you've created a solution that directly impacts Jink without screwing with armies that rely upon Cover Saves to survive.
Backspacehacker wrote: I dont like to be that guy but to be that guy. ITs your own fault if you dont bring more ignore cover weapons to a fight you know is going to have jink, i mean, cmon man, you are kinda asking for it.
I hate to pull this line but, with all the posts in here complaining about jink, it honestly boils down to, Get Good, or Learn how to play.
Im not saying full blown list tailor, but at least think about what you bring.
And to those players who have armies that don't have access to ignores cover weapons like Orks and such? Or are you suggesting I should bring 2-3 Mobs of Burna Boyz and a Burna Bommer whenever I play against Dark Angels?
This is a useless post to help players with because their are armies that don't have easy access to Ignores Cover weapons like SM, Tau and a few others have. Also, if your going to a Tournament you can't list tailor.
So Get good and L2P are yet again terrible advice.
The funniest part is that all SM don't even have easy access to Ignores Cover. Raven Guard detachments using their flavor rules require you to bring the Pinion and a bunch of Scouts(the Sergeants are what grant Ignores Cover) to grant Ignores Cover to units within a certain distance.
Backspacehacker wrote:Get in melee? Yeah melee is weak, and yes i agree orks are gimped, but you cant say you dont have anything because you do, its called melee.
I love how "melee" has become the answer to anything people don't want changed.
And again, orks are in a really bad place, so of course you are going to get stopped, but thats not because of jink thats because of all the bullgak thats available for marines.
IF anything you just sound like a pissed off person because you codex is crap right now, which hey man, im sorry blame GW for not updating it, its not jinks fault.
If anything, you sound like a person who relies on the crutch that is Jink and don't want any changes made that would impact it.
Personally? I think Jink needs the following things to be done to make it less easily abused:
A) Cover Save aspect removed from it. No more stackables. If you want to Jink, you get your 4+ and that's it barring any kind of unique special rule that improves your Jink.
B) Weapons with Skyfire and/or Interceptor need to be changed to match the Imperial Armour Hydra Flak Tank rules.
Auto-Targeting System wrote:The Hydra's twin-linked autocannon ignore any Cover Saves or Cover Save bonuses provided by the Supersonic and Jink special rules, and prevent it from moving Flat Out.
By doing this, you've created a solution that directly impacts Jink without screwing with armies that rely upon Cover Saves to survive.
Yep, as to the part where you say Space Marines don't have easy access to ignores cover, I was referencing FW as well. Since SMs can take those ridiculous Sicarian Battle Tanks and the NON-FW Thunderfire Cannons which have a S5 AP6 Heavy 4 blast Ignores Cover mode which can effectively mutilate things that rely on Cover.
Can only snap fire after Only effected by stealth, shrouded, skilled rider. Precision shots over ride jink Blasts can not be jinked Jink can never exceed 3+
this is all in the context of bikes, as for flyers thats a whole other can of worms.
Which for refrence i do have a bike army, but the only reason its there is because i need it to run my actual army, the deathwing. So it turned into a ravenwing deathwing combo i play for fluff not WAAC.
But the fact still remains, orcs are in a crappy place so its not a vary good comparison to use them as the "This army sucks against x" since well, they kinda suck against everything.
which they have access to burna boyz so you can say we dont have ignore covers because you do.
also you cant count FW because the second a FW model/rules hit the table all bets are off because they are their own flavor of cheddar cheese.
Yep, as to the part where you say Space Marines don't have easy access to ignores cover, I was referencing FW as well. Since SMs can take those ridiculous Sicarian Battle Tanks and the NON-FW Thunderfire Cannons which have a S5 AP6 Heavy 4 blast Ignores Cover mode which can effectively mutilate things that rely on Cover.
To be fair, those things are going to require you to ally in a CAD in order to take them if playing certain SMs.
Raven Guard, again, can't take any of that stuff as part of their special detachment. They can't even take a Librarian or a Conclave.
Can only snap fire after
Only effected by stealth, shrouded, skilled rider.
Precision shots over ride jink
Blasts can not be jinked
Jink can never exceed 3+
this is all in the context of bikes, as for flyers thats a whole other can of worms.
Which for refrence i do have a bike army, but the only reason its there is because i need it to run my actual army, the deathwing. So it turned into a ravenwing deathwing combo i play for fluff not WAAC.
But the fact still remains, orcs are in a crappy place so its not a vary good comparison to use them as the "This army sucks against x" since well, they kinda suck against everything.
which they have access to burna boyz so you can say we dont have ignore covers because you do.
also you cant count FW because the second a FW model/rules hit the table all bets are off because they are their own flavor of cheddar cheese.
I mentioned Burna Boyz if you read up, but they really don't count because THEY WILL NEVER GET CLOSE ENOUGH. A Burna Boy can move 6 and his template can shoot..what? 6 inches? A DA Biker can move 12 and shoot 24, so there is literally no situation in which I can catch you unless you WANT to be caught. And even if you mess up and I do catch you, you still have a 3+ armor save against it so that 1 turn won't do a whole lot before those over priced burnas are killed.
And even if you take out FW, Most SM chapters have access to Thunderfire cannons which are cheap and pretty damn effective across the board.
Yep, as to the part where you say Space Marines don't have easy access to ignores cover, I was referencing FW as well. Since SMs can take those ridiculous Sicarian Battle Tanks and the NON-FW Thunderfire Cannons which have a S5 AP6 Heavy 4 blast Ignores Cover mode which can effectively mutilate things that rely on Cover.
To be fair, those things are going to require you to ally in a CAD in order to take them if playing certain SMs.
Raven Guard, again, can't take any of that stuff as part of their special detachment. They can't even take a Librarian or a Conclave.
True, but it isn't exactly hard to get that in tournaments or in casual play.
Can only snap fire after
Only effected by stealth, shrouded, skilled rider.
Precision shots over ride jink
Blasts can not be jinked
Jink can never exceed 3+
None of the above.
Stealth and Shrouded are Cover Saves. Jink shouldn't be a Cover Save. It should literally be called a "Jink Save" and be its own thing, mitigated by things that would mitigate Jink Saves and not Ignores Cover.
Can only snap fire after
Only effected by stealth, shrouded, skilled rider.
Precision shots over ride jink
Blasts can not be jinked
Jink can never exceed 3+
None of the above.
Stealth and Shrouded are Cover Saves. Jink shouldn't be a Cover Save. It should literally be called a "Jink Save" and be its own thing, mitigated by things that would mitigate Jink Saves and not Ignores Cover.
But at the same time, woundnt it be harder to hit something thats jinking if its harder to see?
Also, there is a thing called cover for burna boys, they also have transports. You should also be thankful you went up against ravenwing bikers, not black knights, black knights only have 18 inches.
Again, your complaining about a power unit for being a power unit, its the same with warp spiders, and knights, they are a cheese unit that do cheesy things. Its not the mechanic, its the abusive unit thats running it.
Wanna know how to beat an army like that? Numbers, the weakness of a bike army is its limit to wounds, you throw enough models and shots at it, they will eventually roll a 1.
But at the same time, woundnt it be harder to hit something thats jinking if its harder to see?
Also, there is a thing called cover for burna boys, they also have transports. You should also be thankful you went up against ravenwing bikers, not black knights, black knights only have 18 inches.
Again, your complaining about a power unit for being a power unit, its the same with warp spiders, and knights, they are a cheese unit that do cheesy things. Its not the mechanic, its the abusive unit thats running it.
Wanna know how to beat an army like that? Numbers, the weakness of a bike army is its limit to wounds, you throw enough models and shots at it, they will eventually roll a 1.
Let me explain this to you barney Style then if I am putting Burnas in cover they are now slower then that 6in move and will never reach you, so they are effectively out of the game. If I put them in a Trukk, they are now the perfect target for your Plasma weapons and other AP1-2 weapons. Why? Because 10 Burnas in a Trukk with a ram = 195pts If you fire 3 Plasma Guns at rapid fire range (easy to get with a bike) you have 6 shots, 4 hits, 2 pens and a better then 50% chance to have it explode. When that Trukk explodes it will KILL about half the boyz inside, they will take a leadership and Pinning check they will fail one of them and they are either running away or pinned and useless.
And no, I am not complaining about a power unit, Power units have their place. In the context of Jink, I am complaining about how EASY it is to give your bikes a 2+ or 3+ rerollable cover save. And as to your comment about putting out dakka? Orks don't have dakka anymore.
Put orks in cover next to an objective, you just made it so those bikes will never get near you or that objective, you now have a secured objective.
You throw more bodies at them, i have seen it work.
Also you are implying they have not jinked before shooting, so in actuality assuming perfectly average statistics.
3 guns, 6 shots, twin linked. 1 will hit, rerolling the other 5, less then 1 hits but lets assume 1 anyway so 2 hits out of the 6, then you need to roll for pen, then for damage.
Also not taking gets hot into account, also assuming they dont take a nade launcher.
If you have not opened fire on a set of bikes running toward you to try and get them to jink so they snap fire, again, that's not he bikes fault.
Dont get me wrong, the Ravenwing bike start is a power/cheese unit thats not being argued. But again, thats not because of jink, thats because of the bullgak that is the darkshroud giving them all stealth for the 2+.
Backspacehacker wrote: Put orks in cover next to an objective, you just made it so those bikes will never get near you or that objective, you now have a secured objective.
You throw more bodies at them, i have seen it work.
Also you are implying they have not jinked before shooting, so in actuality assuming perfectly average statistics.
3 guns, 6 shots, twin linked. 1 will hit, rerolling the other 5, less then 1 hits but lets assume 1 anyway so 2 hits out of the 6, then you need to roll for pen, then for damage.
Also not taking gets hot into account, also assuming they dont take a nade launcher.
If you have not opened fire on a set of bikes running toward you to try and get them to jink so they snap fire, again, that's not he bikes fault.
Dont get me wrong, the Ravenwing bike start is a power/cheese unit thats not being argued. But again, thats not because of jink, thats because of the bullgak that is the darkshroud giving them all stealth for the 2+.
That is what I have been trying to point out this entire time! LMAO
Backspacehacker wrote: Put orks in cover next to an objective, you just made it so those bikes will never get near you or that objective, you now have a secured objective.
You throw more bodies at them, i have seen it work.
Also you are implying they have not jinked before shooting, so in actuality assuming perfectly average statistics.
3 guns, 6 shots, twin linked. 1 will hit, rerolling the other 5, less then 1 hits but lets assume 1 anyway so 2 hits out of the 6, then you need to roll for pen, then for damage.
Also not taking gets hot into account, also assuming they dont take a nade launcher.
If you have not opened fire on a set of bikes running toward you to try and get them to jink so they snap fire, again, that's not he bikes fault.
Dont get me wrong, the Ravenwing bike start is a power/cheese unit thats not being argued. But again, thats not because of jink, thats because of the bullgak that is the darkshroud giving them all stealth for the 2+.
That is what I have been trying to point out this entire time! LMAO
GLORIOUS DAYS FOR UNDERSTANDINGS!!!
No i feel you on the darkshroud i feel dirty as hell when i use it.
But i dont think its so much and issue with jink, stealth, or shrouded effecting jink, its the ease of availability that makes it OP. Its the same thing with scatter lasers and bikes. Alone neither is over powered, but what makes them over powered is the platform they can be run on, bikes, and how cheap they are.
For what the darkshoud can do for how cheap it is, thats over powered and cheesy. Double, maybe even tripple its price, now we are getting to be more reasonable.
Can only snap fire after
Only effected by stealth, shrouded, skilled rider.
Precision shots over ride jink
Blasts can not be jinked
Jink can never exceed 3+
None of the above.
Stealth and Shrouded are Cover Saves. Jink shouldn't be a Cover Save. It should literally be called a "Jink Save" and be its own thing, mitigated by things that would mitigate Jink Saves and not Ignores Cover.
But at the same time, woundnt it be harder to hit something thats jinking if its harder to see?
What part of "Jink shouldn't be a Cover Save" are you missing?
Stealth and Shrouded would be fine on Bikers or Jetbikes IF they no longer had Jink adding into it.
Can only snap fire after Only effected by stealth, shrouded, skilled rider. Precision shots over ride jink Blasts can not be jinked Jink can never exceed 3+
None of the above.
Stealth and Shrouded are Cover Saves. Jink shouldn't be a Cover Save. It should literally be called a "Jink Save" and be its own thing, mitigated by things that would mitigate Jink Saves and not Ignores Cover.
But at the same time, woundnt it be harder to hit something thats jinking if its harder to see?
What part of "Jink shouldn't be a Cover Save" are you missing?
Stealth and Shrouded would be fine on Bikers or Jetbikes IF they no longer had Jink adding into it.
So then if we say its not longer a cover say, Then i can take m 3+ rerollable would be usable against flamers now, i mean im ok with that sure. Since its not a cover, all the ignore cover saves can no longer apply so its just a 3++ against anything.
Which is fine with me since the bike deathstar relies on a librarian to cast invisibility so its a snap shot either way.
Can only snap fire after
Only effected by stealth, shrouded, skilled rider.
Precision shots over ride jink
Blasts can not be jinked
Jink can never exceed 3+
None of the above.
Stealth and Shrouded are Cover Saves. Jink shouldn't be a Cover Save. It should literally be called a "Jink Save" and be its own thing, mitigated by things that would mitigate Jink Saves and not Ignores Cover.
But at the same time, woundnt it be harder to hit something thats jinking if its harder to see?
What part of "Jink shouldn't be a Cover Save" are you missing?
Stealth and Shrouded would be fine on Bikers or Jetbikes IF they no longer had Jink adding into it.
So then if we say its not longer a cover say, Then i can take m 3+ rerollable would be usable against flamers now, i mean im ok with that sure. Since its not a cover, all the ignore cover saves can no longer apply so its just a 3++ against anything.
And under my proposal, they instead get shredded by anything with Interceptor(if a ground target) or Skyfire(if a Jetbike/Skimmer/Flyer).
Which is fine with me since the bike deathstar relies on a librarian to cast invisibility so its a snap shot either way.
Which is easily fixed by making it so that a Librarian casting Invisibility doesn't affect the whole unit anymore, instead affecting models within a 3" radius.
Why does Bikes and Jetbikes need to be so easy to hit? Maybe thats GW's intention is to make them a hard target for shooting?
Really it comes down to Eldar, DA and some SM bike shenanigans that go crazy over jink.
Honestly SM/DA want to be within charging range, so Flamers/Melee is easy to get in on them. If they dont have hit and run just tie them up. DA and SM must take their Non re-roll or 2+ cover b.c flamers and melee ignore that. SO now they are just Marine Bikes. Just watch out for the overwatch.
You can even shriek them down.....
PS: if you army is lacking (BA, Orcs, DE etc...) then take allies, that was the point of the Ally chart, they dont need to be BB to fill a hole.
So now it comes down to Eldar. so basically some of you are mad about eldar? Is this what this topic boils down to?
Amishprn86 wrote: Why does Bikes and Jetbikes need to be so easy to hit? Maybe thats GW's intention is to make them a hard target for shooting?
Really it comes down to Eldar, DA and some SM bike shenanigans that go crazy over jink.
Really it comes down to the fact that Jink, no matter who is using it, is a wildly abusive skill. The only difference between Dark Eldar and Orks Jinking versus Eldar Jetbikes or DA and White Scars is the fact that DE and Ork units aren't that great to begin with.
Honestly SM/DA want to be within charging range, so Flamers/Melee is easy to get in on them. If they dont have hit and run just tie them up. DA and SM must take their Non re-roll or 2+ cover b.c flamers and melee ignore that. SO now they are just Marine Bikes. Just watch out for the overwatch.
"They can't take their rerollable 2+ Cover Saves, they're just 3+ Armor Saves."
Oh well...in that case, that's super okay then.
You can even shriek them down.....
And you can shoot them to death with 158 Guardsmen firing Lasguns with everyone being issued First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire(316 shots at over half range, 474 shots at half range or lower) as part of an Emperor's Shield Infantry Company in a Cadian Detachment.
(PS--158 Guardsmen firing that many means you have taken no Special or Heavy Weapons, if you were able to take Sergeants and Officers with Lasguns still you would be looking at 175 models firing Lasguns at once)
That doesn't mean what you suggested is a reliable tactic, or even a good one for that matter.
PS: if you army is lacking (BA, Orcs, DE etc...) then take allies, that was the point of the Ally chart, they dont need to be BB to fill a hole.
Allies != "Ways to fill a hole in your army". Just because that's what they have essentially been boiled to down by the playerbase does not mean that was the intention.
So now it comes down to Eldar. so basically some of you are mad about eldar? Is this what this topic boils down to?
This topic boils down to the fact that Jink, as a Cover Save, is a wildly exploitable tool that only serves to highlight the difference between top tier books that have access to Jinkable units and lower tier books that have no effective counters to Jink when those same top tier books have wildly easy access to Psykers and abilities that make it so that the normal counters to Jinking(Good example here is the Wyvern) cannot be used since Snap Shot disallows for Blast weapons to even hit those targets.
Turning Jink into its own save that cannot be stacked with things like Stealth or Shrouded, while altering weapons that at the moment are lackluster(Interceptor and Skyfire) to counter one form of Jinking unit or the other(Interceptor v ground based Jinking units, Skyfire v air based Jinking units) kills two birds with one stone.
I like the Bolt Action method: you have "to hit" and "to wound" that is it (no armor).
Then you apply modifiers to the above with how hard it is to hit or how hard to hurt.
I agree "jink" is a direct impact on being able to hit the target.
+1 to hit or something like that (Marine hits on 4+ rather than 3+).
The more rolls you need to make, the less likely it amounts to anything.
I tend to enjoy models getting remove more than the mountain of dice rolling to get there.
Sounds good on paper but in reality not a good idea.
If you are an ork, your hitting on 5s if we say jinking is a -1 to hit you need a six, what about skilled rider? A -2, now orks can never hit.
The jink save does not need to be removed. Like I said, make it so you can't jink a blast and it's good, all armies have access to blast weapons all armies have a way to deal with it.
The notion that it's some super broken op cheese of all cheese is just silly, poison ignore cover your screwed. Ignore any cover they are screwed, melee they are screwed. The problems all stem from them getting stacked buffs from other various units and powers, you address those issues the jink problem will solve itself.
The main offenders are eldar and DA. Double or even triple the cost of the dark shroud and you can address the dark angels one. Eldar I can't speak for how to address it becuase I don't actually play an eldar army myself so I don't know their ins and outs but I big issue with their bikes is not so much jink as it is scatter lasers but that's another thread.
As to orks having a hard time, that's not a jink issue, that's a GW has not given them any love and they are massively under powered, the army as a whole is broken not jink.
Yeah +1/-1 to hit modifiers don't work so great in a D6 based system. Decent for the odd unique special rule, but nothing so universal as Jink.
I'm actually really liking the suggestions that Jink is separate save. It's a simple, elegant solution that makes a lot of sense both in terms of game mechanics and fairness and in terms of the background/reality.
I mean, in 40k you have several things that can make it harder for you to get killed by a shot, represented by in-game rules. You have the armour you're wearing (armour save), any weird psychic force fields (invul saves), the fact that you're hard to see because of cover or because it's dark or whatever (cover saves, stealth/shrouded). In 40k, the game mechanics dictate that you select one of these things to help you avoid incoming fire. I see no reason why "adopting evasive manoeuvres" (jink save) cannot be added to this list. And, by this logic, you can't say that "oh dodging around in the dark makes you even harder to hit, therefore Jink should stack with Stealth" because then by that logic you should be able to take an armour, invul and cover save just because you're in power armour, wearing an iron halo and are stood behind a tree. The game mechanics dictate you only choose one of those things.
Amishprn86 wrote: Why does Bikes and Jetbikes need to be so easy to hit? Maybe thats GW's intention is to make them a hard target for shooting?
Really it comes down to Eldar, DA and some SM bike shenanigans that go crazy over jink.
Really it comes down to the fact that Jink, no matter who is using it, is a wildly abusive skill. The only difference between Dark Eldar and Orks Jinking versus Eldar Jetbikes or DA and White Scars is the fact that DE and Ork units aren't that great to begin with.
Honestly SM/DA want to be within charging range, so Flamers/Melee is easy to get in on them. If they dont have hit and run just tie them up. DA and SM must take their Non re-roll or 2+ cover b.c flamers and melee ignore that. SO now they are just Marine Bikes. Just watch out for the overwatch.
"They can't take their rerollable 2+ Cover Saves, they're just 3+ Armor Saves."
Oh well...in that case, that's super okay then.
You can even shriek them down.....
And you can shoot them to death with 158 Guardsmen firing Lasguns with everyone being issued First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire(316 shots at over half range, 474 shots at half range or lower) as part of an Emperor's Shield Infantry Company in a Cadian Detachment.
(PS--158 Guardsmen firing that many means you have taken no Special or Heavy Weapons, if you were able to take Sergeants and Officers with Lasguns still you would be looking at 175 models firing Lasguns at once)
That doesn't mean what you suggested is a reliable tactic, or even a good one for that matter.
PS: if you army is lacking (BA, Orcs, DE etc...) then take allies, that was the point of the Ally chart, they dont need to be BB to fill a hole.
Allies != "Ways to fill a hole in your army". Just because that's what they have essentially been boiled to down by the playerbase does not mean that was the intention.
So now it comes down to Eldar. so basically some of you are mad about eldar? Is this what this topic boils down to?
This topic boils down to the fact that Jink, as a Cover Save, is a wildly exploitable tool that only serves to highlight the difference between top tier books that have access to Jinkable units and lower tier books that have no effective counters to Jink when those same top tier books have wildly easy access to Psykers and abilities that make it so that the normal counters to Jinking(Good example here is the Wyvern) cannot be used since Snap Shot disallows for Blast weapons to even hit those targets.
Turning Jink into its own save that cannot be stacked with things like Stealth or Shrouded, while altering weapons that at the moment are lackluster(Interceptor and Skyfire) to counter one form of Jinking unit or the other(Interceptor v ground based Jinking units, Skyfire v air based Jinking units) kills two birds with one stone.
k, I played DE and Nids for all of 6th and so far all the way up in 7th till 5 months ago I just started Harlequins and Corsairs.
As a Nids and DE player (no eldar allies, pure DE) going against, BA (3 Stormravens) DA, SM, Tau, Necrons blah blah all net lists mind you.
I dont see anything wrong with jink, there are answers to it, if you dont want to fill a couple spots in your army for that answer then thats your fault.
There are also a few powers that go around Jink.
Now. Would I be appose to a change? No, but not b.c it is OPAF, but honestly sense day 1 I wished it was a 4+ "invul" and not a cover save. But I dont want this for "OMG its op" reason, but because nothing will stop it and to be more fluffy to show you wasnt hit, instead terrain took the bullet for you...
k, I played DE and Nids for all of 6th and so far all the way up in 7th till 5 months ago I just started Harlequins and Corsairs.
Okay, and?
As a Nids and DE player (no eldar allies, pure DE) going against, BA (3 Stormravens) DA, SM, Tau, Necrons blah blah all net lists mind you.
Once again:
And?
I dont see anything wrong with jink, there are answers to it, if you dont want to fill a couple spots in your army for that answer then thats your fault.
That's not the point that was made. You attempted to say that Allies can negate Jink. Great. You're not "filling a couple spots in your army" as an answer for Jink, you're having to bring in a second army entirely to negate Jink.
There are also a few powers that go around Jink.
Which is great, until someone shuts down your Psyker phase by killing your Psykers.
Now. Would I be appose to a change? No, but not b.c it is OPAF, but honestly sense day 1 I wished it was a 4+ "invul" and not a cover save. But I dont want this for "OMG its op" reason, but because nothing will stop it and to be more fluffy to show you wasnt hit, instead terrain took the bullet for you...
Take a few moments to actually spell things out. It isn't hard to type out "because".
In any regards, no. Jink should not be an Invulnerable Save either. It being rolled into any other save is dumb and anyone advocating for it to be rolled within another save category needs to seriously rethink their reasonings.
I'm sure it's never occurred to you that Harlequin(and Eldar in general) have access to Sanctic Daemonology and the ability to cast "Sanctuary"(+1 to Invulnerable Saves and Daemons within 12" of the Psyker treat all terrain as Dangerous Terrain).
You want to keep Jink in, fine. But it should NEVER be modifiable by any non-Expert Rider skill. All the talk yourself and others have made about Template weapons and other nonsense is just "L2P" tripe.
Backspacehacker wrote: I have already said what I think needs to happen but agreed with the above.
Jink should be capped at 3+
Dark shroud should cost more
Should not be able to jink: ignore cover, template, blast, or precision shot.
Even just letting them get hit by blast needs them a lot.
I would agree with this, except for ignores cover. A Tau laser pointer isn't really going to do squat if you don't know where the vehicle will be when the bullet gets there.
Jink is the perfect thing to become "ignores ignores-cover."
I would personally love a real AV14 over our crappy AV12 Skimmers with Jink.
Jink is so useless most of the time, it's supposed to compensate the lack of armor, but then it's 100% useless when in cover, doesn't work when immobilized, steals most of your firepower when you use it, etc.
As a Jink user, I wish it were separate from cover, so that my supposed durability boost was really exactly that.
I also wish it worked when immobilized, just like AV14 does.
And definitely, whatever the defensive mechanism is supposed to be, it shouldn't be a choice between defensive and offensive modes, because that's not a defensive mechanism, that's a special ability which should probably be reserved to units that are supposed to have a defensive vs offensive mode.
Going back to one of the points in the original post - ie, you have the same chance of hitting a Titan as you do to hit a Dark Eldar bike. This is a really good point. It should be way more difficult to hit the DE bike.
One way to do it is how Flames of War does it. In FOW, the To Hit roll depends on the target's experience level - not the firing unit's. E.g. to hit a target that's rated Trained is 3+, to hit a Veteran is 4+ etc. The rationale is that the more experienced a warrior is, the better he is at using cover or not exposing himself to enemy fire, and thus the more difficult it is to hit him.
The To Hit roll is modified by range and cover, as well as whether the target moved or fired in the previous turn or not. So to hit a Trained target at more than half-range is 4+. If that same target is in cover, then it's 5+. If that target was stationery or did not shoot and gone to ground last turn, then it's 6+ etc - forgive me if I got some of this wrong, been awhile since my FOW models saw action, but that's the general idea.
It works pretty well, but it's a totally different mechanic from 40k
I run dark eldars and orks and i have to say without jinking (especially the DE) these armies don't stand a chance... maybe orks can work if spamming vehicles but bikes are among our best units and still we're an average (if not weak) army. What is not balanced are some invulns extremely high but dirty cheap, superheavies and models with T7/8 that cost less than 500 points, formations that allow a lot of free transports for armies that shouldn't be hordes, psychic phases with 30+ dice and shooting phase with 100+ shots with bs3/4/5. Also the D weapons should be banned, or become an option only in games at 2500 points or higher. The jink special rule has also a lot of sense as it should be very difficult to hit some very fast units unless you target them with some wall of fire o some special weapons, that's why the ignores cover special rule also is acceptable, but shouldn't be abused.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
spunkybass wrote: Going back to one of the points in the original post - ie, you have the same chance of hitting a Titan as you do to hit a Dark Eldar bike. This is a really good point. It should be way more difficult to hit the DE bike.
I agree and i think that superheavies and gargantuan monstrous creatures should be hit at 2+ regardless of the BS of the shooter, as they're so huge that even a cave man that found a futuristic weapon can't miss them. Or it can be consider the distance from the shooting unit and the big target, if under some range (like melta guns for example) everyone can hit them at 2+.
The one that makes me laugh is "To wound" rolls. You roll to hit, then you have to roll to wound, then your opponent rolls an armour save...
Except, from an objective point of view that makes no sense whatsoever. Wounding rolls should be done away with as they're simply arbitrary and completely redundant. You roll to hit and pass. Great, now your opponent rolls their armour save. Pass? Great, not wounded/dead, armour stopped it. Failed? They're dead/wounded accordingly.
All wounding rolls do is add yet another roll to lessen the attacker's odds of a successful attack. Having played Cold War Commander and rolled for hits only, getting rid of wound rolls would be absolutely the way to go and would shave so much time off of games from getting rid of otherwise unnecessary stat checking and rolling.
Amishprn86 wrote: Why does Bikes and Jetbikes need to be so easy to hit? Maybe thats GW's intention is to make them a hard target for shooting?
Really it comes down to Eldar, DA and some SM bike shenanigans that go crazy over jink.
Honestly SM/DA want to be within charging range, so Flamers/Melee is easy to get in on them. If they dont have hit and run just tie them up. DA and SM must take their Non re-roll or 2+ cover b.c flamers and melee ignore that. SO now they are just Marine Bikes. Just watch out for the overwatch.
You can even shriek them down.....
PS: if you army is lacking (BA, Orcs, DE etc...) then take allies, that was the point of the Ally chart, they dont need to be BB to fill a hole.
So now it comes down to Eldar. so basically some of you are mad about eldar? Is this what this topic boils down to?
I have yet to come across a DA/SM player who wants to get his bikes close to my flamers/melee....ever. They usually just shoot around the field and kill the most vulnerable aspects of my force and then kill the infantry as they go.
And your suggestion for BA, Ork (Not fething Orc), and DE is garbage. An army shouldn't have to take another army to fill in a hole.
All wounding rolls do is add yet another roll to lessen the attacker's odds of a successful attack. Having played Cold War Commander and rolled for hits only, getting rid of wound rolls would be absolutely the way to go and would shave so much time off of games from getting rid of otherwise unnecessary stat checking and rolling.
This isn't real life. There are plenty of things that can take a blast from a frag grenade and fight on perfectly well, armour or no.
The only way to remove the wound roll would be to instead give everything an appropriate amount of wounds, but the granularity required would be insane and at that point you may as well play RPGs.
Removing it would be kicking the Dark Eladr while they are down.
Having jink be affected by unit type would be better (IMO)
Have a 5+ base.
+1 If a Fast vehicle/Zooming Flyer/Swooping monstrous creature/ Eldar jetbike (Note that I also believe that craftworld jetbikes should be knocked down to a 4+ armour save)
-1 For Tank unit type and 4+ HP vehicles
Honestly Reaver Jetbikes should be Armor 4, the DE book is 1 less armor save across the board to be more fluffy.
Even tho we pay the same points......... But but but we have fleet and Night vision no way is that better than Batlefocus or ANYTHING ELSE all Eldar ken get, even Tau or SM etc....
Jink is fine. The problem is not enough keeps units alive. It's always auto delete. Anything that makes anything else survivable vs eldar and tau guns I'm all for.
Amishprn86 wrote: Honestly Reaver Jetbikes should be Armor 4, the DE book is 1 less armor save across the board to be more fluffy.
Even tho we pay the same points......... But but but we have fleet and Night vision no way is that better than Batlefocus or ANYTHING ELSE all Eldar ken get, even Tau or SM etc....
Except we don't. Our bikes don't, our hammer of wrath bikes absolutely must make it base to base in combat or they'll lose the combat and pray you don't roll super low on cluster caltrops (like double 1's) and our covens units don't have fleet. We don't have strength 10 much less str D weapons. Eldar have them up the butthole and that's not even considering their gargantuans.
I like how taking away jink saves doesn't do much for a lot of OP armies but it would absolutely cripple reavers and that's one of the few non-coven units worth taking.
Nobody in their right mind would remove jink saves without replacing them with another resilience mechanism.
That applies to everything that currently has jink.
Amishprn86 wrote: Honestly Reaver Jetbikes should be Armor 4, the DE book is 1 less armor save across the board to be more fluffy.
Even tho we pay the same points......... But but but we have fleet and Night vision no way is that better than Batlefocus or ANYTHING ELSE all Eldar ken get, even Tau or SM etc....
Except we don't. Our bikes don't, our hammer of wrath bikes absolutely must make it base to base in combat or they'll lose the combat and pray you don't roll super low on cluster caltrops (like double 1's) and our covens units don't have fleet. We don't have strength 10 much less str D weapons. Eldar have them up the butthole and that's not even considering their gargantuans.
I like how taking away jink saves doesn't do much for a lot of OP armies but it would absolutely cripple reavers and that's one of the few non-coven units worth taking.
The entire point is that DE bikes are 16ppm, eldar are 17ppm
LITERALLY 1ppm difference and DE bikes are 5+ vs 3+, weaker rules/guns/options/upgrade/formations etc...
but... but... DE ones have skill rider.....
The Shadow wrote:Yeah +1/-1 to hit modifiers don't work so great in a D6 based system. Decent for the odd unique special rule, but nothing so universal as Jink.
I'm actually really liking the suggestions that Jink is separate save. It's a simple, elegant solution that makes a lot of sense both in terms of game mechanics and fairness and in terms of the background/reality.
I mean, in 40k you have several things that can make it harder for you to get killed by a shot, represented by in-game rules. You have the armour you're wearing (armour save), any weird psychic force fields (invul saves), the fact that you're hard to see because of cover or because it's dark or whatever (cover saves, stealth/shrouded). In 40k, the game mechanics dictate that you select one of these things to help you avoid incoming fire. I see no reason why "adopting evasive manoeuvres" (jink save) cannot be added to this list. And, by this logic, you can't say that "oh dodging around in the dark makes you even harder to hit, therefore Jink should stack with Stealth" because then by that logic you should be able to take an armour, invul and cover save just because you're in power armour, wearing an iron halo and are stood behind a tree. The game mechanics dictate you only choose one of those things.
Eh, are you sure about that? Because I've played severalD6 based games whose entire mechanic for shooting boiled down to "+/- X to your to-hit roll". For the sake of example (and because I remember the rules the best) Brikwars had a really nifty system where the roll was modified by everything from range to how fast both parties were going to the size of the target to how much of the target was visible and a couple other more minor tweaks. And in spite of how complex those rules were, it still went faster than it does in 40k's system of "an elite marine has exactly the same chances of scoring a hit on a house-sized tank sitting 2 yards away as he does a lone guardsman at the very edge of bolter range".
EDIT: I'm not saying 40k should move to such a system (the only reason brikwars got away with having infantry weapons almost auto-hit against anything bigger than a light vehicle was because the mechanics meant that infantry scale anti-tank weapons basically didn't exist), just that it can be done without breaking or over-complicating the system.
40K used to have a system just like that...and while people bemoan the "huge difficulty" of adjusting your D6 roll to hit, it made far more logical sense than the subsequent introduction of cover saves and jink saves.
Initially you suffered a penalty to hit an enemy model if it was in cover, and/or moving fast. Conversely, vehicles suffered a penalty for firing if they moved over X" (i.e. they're going so fast it's tough for them to engage targets).
Somehow people thought this was just far too demanding and difficult so we went around our ass to get to our elbow and ended up oddly re-instituting the idea of cover saves and jink saves and then difficulty shooting IF you jinked and all this other silly crap.
In a progression of a turn it made more logical sense to use the old method.
I am more likely to hit said aircraft. So my 
if I am putting Burnas in cover they are now slower then that 6in move and will never reach you, so they are effectively out of the game. If I put them in a Trukk, they are now the perfect target for your Plasma weapons and other AP1-2 weapons. Why? Because 10 Burnas in a Trukk with a ram = 195pts If you fire 3 Plasma Guns at rapid fire range (easy to get with a bike) you have 6 shots, 4 hits, 2 pens and a better then 50% chance to have it explode. When that Trukk explodes it will KILL about half the boyz inside, they will take a leadership and Pinning check they will fail one of them and they are either running away or pinned and useless.
