Wounds lost per 20 regular bolter shots: 1.47 vs 1.09
Wounds lost per 20 regular bolter shots in cover: .71 vs 1.09
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds: 33%/100%/100% vs 44%/88%/100%
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds in cover: 0%/33%/66% vs 44%/88%/100%
Deployment options: anywhere 9" away from enemies vs regular deployment.
MEQ killed in single round of shooting 12"/18"/24": 3.92/3.92/0 vs 1.96/0.87/0.87
Melee wounds per turn vs MEQ: .76 vs 1.29
Melee wounds taken vs 10 MEQ: .718 vs 1.09 (.545?)
Power level: 8 vs 8
Strait up fight: Rubrics lose after 2 rounds of fighting doing 1-2 wounds. Even if they don't deep strike.
So basically if you can manage to find cover Inceptors are somewhere between 1.5 and 1.75 times better then Rubrics, but are the same power level...right.
Edit:
Plz do not try to add "context" anything you add to one side you would have to add to the other to equal it out. Making it a fruitless effort.
Keep in mind that adding more Rubricae would not decrease the problem it would increse the problem. Inceptors have a clear advantage add more units multiplies the gap it does NOT shrink it.
Formerly Wu wrote: Are you comparing two fully kitted-out squads? Because that's what power level assumes.
Unless you want the rubrics using warpflamers which.... won't really help....
Previously I assumed the psychic power would even things out. However, seeing a peril happens 1/18 times and, if it occurs, will wipe out at minimum half the rubircs squad, including psyker.... that's not really something you want to spam.
Weirdly, the rubrics are much better in melee, with the pistols and single force weapon. But the primaris can likely disengage easily due to fly, assuming it's similar to the tau rule.
Formerly Wu wrote: Are you comparing two fully kitted-out squads? Because that's what power level assumes.
I am comparing both data sheets all you could do is add warp flamers to the Rubrics. Simple fact is the interceptors have about a 25% chance of wipong the Rubrics out in 1 turn.
I am comparing both data sheets all you could do is add warp flamers to the Rubrics. Simple fact is the interceptors have about a 25% chance of wipong the Rubrics out in 1 turn.
Derp, missed the fact that soulreaper cannons are only for units of 10. And again, we don't know the effect of the Icon.
Unless you want the rubrics using warpflamers which.... won't really help....
It's not clear if the calculations in the OP include a soulreaper cannon, and we don't know what effect an Icon of Flame has.
A squad of 5 rubrics do not get a soulreaper cannon, a squad of 10 do, but then that's 14 power, not equivalent to the 8 an interceptor squad costs. We could compare the 14 power rubrics to two squads of 8 power, but that's 16. And if the 14 vs 16 is somehow much better than 8v8, that really again just shows power isn't even a rough measure and most players could eyeball it better than using power.
Though, worth mentioning.... unless you want the rubrics to charge the interceptors... 14 power rubrics are a better match to 16 points of interceptors than 8 power rubrics vs 8 power interceptors.
So yeah, narrative looks like it'll be unbalanced enough to be dead on arrival.
Wounds lost per 20 bolter shots in cover: .71 vs 1.09
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds: 33%/100%/100% vs 44%/88%/100%
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds in cover: 0%/33%/66% vs 44%/88%/100%
Deployment options: anywhere 9" away from enemies vs regular deployment.
MEQ killed in single round of shooting 12"/18"/24": 3.92/3.92/0 vs 1.96/0.87/0.87
Melee wounds per turn vs MEQ: .76 vs 1.29
Melee wounds taken vs 10 MEQ: .718 vs 1.09 (.545?)
Power level: 8 vs 8
Strait up fight: Rubrics lose after 2 rounds of fighting doing 1-2 wounds. Even if they don't deep strike.
So basically if you can manage to find cover Inceptors are somewhere between 1.5 and 1.75 times better then Rubrics, but are the same power level...right.
are you accounting for rubrics having 2+ armor saves vs those assault bolters?
McGibs wrote: Yeah, that's how you compare things...
In a big giant vacuum.
Should we list out the fact the interceptors are more flexible, have better mobility, can deploy where needed, and are generally going to have a much easier time being where they need to be and doing their job?
McGibs wrote: Yeah, that's how you compare things...
In a big giant vacuum.
What would you like to add? Cover makes things much worse for the Rubrics. Any sort of support you give the Rubrics Marines are going to have something similar available. So comparing them in a vaccum makes no difference.
Wounds lost per 20 bolter shots in cover: .71 vs 1.09
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds: 33%/100%/100% vs 44%/88%/100%
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds in cover: 0%/33%/66% vs 44%/88%/100%
Deployment options: anywhere 9" away from enemies vs regular deployment.
MEQ killed in single round of shooting 12"/18"/24": 3.92/3.92/0 vs 1.96/0.87/0.87
Melee wounds per turn vs MEQ: .76 vs 1.29
Melee wounds taken vs 10 MEQ: .718 vs 1.09 (.545?)
Power level: 8 vs 8
Strait up fight: Rubrics lose after 2 rounds of fighting doing 1-2 wounds. Even if they don't deep strike.
So basically if you can manage to find cover Inceptors are somewhere between 1.5 and 1.75 times better then Rubrics, but are the same power level...right.
are you accounting for rubrics having 2+ armor saves vs those assault bolters?
Like, are they just all alone fighting each other on an empty table? Who's going first? The Rubriks are troops for TSons, so are there 4 more squads backing them up in a gunline? Are they in a Rhino like they should be? What about how they synergize with other tson characters?
Comparing units like this has so little value when there's so many other factors going on in any given game.
McGibs wrote: Yeah, that's how you compare things...
In a big giant vacuum.
What would you like to add? Cover makes things much worse for the Rubrics. Any sort of support you give the Rubrics Marines are going to have something similar available. So comparing them in a vaccum makes no difference.
Wounds lost per 20 bolter shots in cover: .71 vs 1.09
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds: 33%/100%/100% vs 44%/88%/100%
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds in cover: 0%/33%/66% vs 44%/88%/100%
Deployment options: anywhere 9" away from enemies vs regular deployment.
MEQ killed in single round of shooting 12"/18"/24": 3.92/3.92/0 vs 1.96/0.87/0.87
Melee wounds per turn vs MEQ: .76 vs 1.29
Melee wounds taken vs 10 MEQ: .718 vs 1.09 (.545?)
Power level: 8 vs 8
Strait up fight: Rubrics lose after 2 rounds of fighting doing 1-2 wounds. Even if they don't deep strike.
So basically if you can manage to find cover Inceptors are somewhere between 1.5 and 1.75 times better then Rubrics, but are the same power level...right.
are you accounting for rubrics having 2+ armor saves vs those assault bolters?
Assualt Bolters are AP -1 they get 3 + save
ok, next question, did you factor in the icon of flame, if so you have info I don't please share. did you factor in Death to the false emperor? (which Naftkia reports as being an additional attack whenever you roll a 6 in melee)
McGibs wrote: Like, are they just all alone fighting each other on an empty table? Who's going first? The Rubriks are troops for TSons, so are there 4 more squads backing them up in a gunline? Are they in a Rhino like they should be? What about how they synergize with other tson characters?
Comparing units like this has so little value when there's so many other factors going on in any given game.
In order:
Factors like going first can benefit either, has nothing to do with the units. The fact they won't fight in a vacuum is again, irrelevant, what we are seeing is if the rubrics can hold their own, or if they are over costed. If the rubric has a gunline, the interceptors have additional squads (and given they have the mobility to dictate when combat starts, this doesn't help rubrics at all, as an entire unit may get shot down before doing anything).
The rhino is not an upgrade, and costs additional power. So unless the rhino is unbalanced power wise, irrelevant.
Similarly, unless the tsons have much better synergy than the primaris marines, and we have no reason to think this is the case, the character question is irrelevant.
Everything you said wasn't considered for extremely obvious reasons, except that you pointed out rubrics can be taken as troops. That will give a small advantage in CP to a tsons army. But that's really it. And it still means rubrics aren't particularly useful outside a tsons army.
Those are supposed to be regular bolters not assualt bolters edited for clarification.
Ah whoops my bad then!
Though given the Warpflame I wonder if the intention is that the power is meant for what they are able to beat better rather then something that counters them.
McGibs wrote: Like, are they just all alone fighting each other on an empty table? Who's going first? The Rubriks are troops for TSons, so are there 4 more squads backing them up in a gunline? Are they in a Rhino like they should be? What about how they synergize with other tson characters?
Comparing units like this has so little value when there's so many other factors going on in any given game.
Any context you add to one side you can add to another. Context is irrlevent here.
thekingofkings wrote: If I am reading it right, power level is not 100% equivalent kind of thing, more just in general.
At 14 power, a 10 strong squad of rubrics is much better of against 2 units of 8 power interceptors (for 16 power total) than a 5 man 8 power rubric squad is against 8 power worth of interceptors.
It isn't that they aren't 100% on the mark, it is that they aren't even vaguely close to lining up correctly.
To be fair, the problem is kinda obvious if you look. The Aspiring Sorcerer has a force weapon, which is driving the power up, despite the rubrics both not being particularly good in close combat as well as the rubrics not being able to easily get into combat due to a low move speed. The sorcerer also has a psychic power which drives the price up... but using it gives you a 1/18 chance of destroying most of your unit. And you aren't even likely to hurt other units, again given rubrics slow plodding nature.
These problems will likely carry over into points as well.
thekingofkings wrote: If I am reading it right, power level is not 100% equivalent kind of thing, more just in general.
At 14 power, a 10 strong squad of rubrics is much better of against 2 units of 8 power interceptors (for 16 power total) than a 5 man 8 power rubric squad is against 8 power worth of interceptors.
It isn't that they aren't 100% on the mark, it is that they aren't even vaguely close to lining up correctly.
To be fair, the problem is kinda obvious if you look. The Aspiring Sorcerer has a force weapon, which is driving the power up, despite the rubrics both not being particularly good in close combat as well as the rubrics not being able to easily get into combat due to a low move speed. The sorcerer also has a psychic power which drives the price up... but using it gives you a 1/18 chance of destroying most of your unit. And you aren't even likely to hurt other units, again given rubrics slow plodding nature.
These problems will likely carry over into points as well.
Yes the disparity is alarming but its unique so far. Comparing Tac Marines to Rubrics you get a 9 vs 8 in favor of tac Marines which would end up winning just barely which with 1 power point difference you would expect. But tac marines aginst inceptors pssssshhh dont even waste your times you would lose the entire squad in a single round due to morale.
ross-128 wrote: Well if you play with points Inceptors will allegedly be 53pts/model: 39 for the base model and 14 for the two mini-HBs they come with.
So a squad of three of them will weigh in at 159 points.
Oh wow the value system for casual games that doesn't even bother to account for the difference in weapon loadouts doesn't give you an exact and equal representation of a unit's power?
thekingofkings wrote: If I am reading it right, power level is not 100% equivalent kind of thing, more just in general.
At 14 power, a 10 strong squad of rubrics is much better of against 2 units of 8 power interceptors (for 16 power total) than a 5 man 8 power rubric squad is against 8 power worth of interceptors.
It isn't that they aren't 100% on the mark, it is that they aren't even vaguely close to lining up correctly.
To be fair, the problem is kinda obvious if you look. The Aspiring Sorcerer has a force weapon, which is driving the power up, despite the rubrics both not being particularly good in close combat as well as the rubrics not being able to easily get into combat due to a low move speed. The sorcerer also has a psychic power which drives the price up... but using it gives you a 1/18 chance of destroying most of your unit. And you aren't even likely to hurt other units, again given rubrics slow plodding nature.
These problems will likely carry over into points as well.
Yes the disparity is alarming but its unique so far. Comparing Tac Marines to Rubrics you get a 9 vs 8 in favor of tac Marines which would end up winning just barely which with 1 power point difference you would expect. But tac marines aginst inceptors pssssshhh dont even waste your times you would lose the entire squad in a single round due to morale.
But, shouldn't this be exactly opposite? Shouldn't the warp-power infused demonically enhanced Rubrics best a standard 10,000 year old geneseed vanilla tacmarine squad?
Given the (old) cost, and the notion of them being empty suits of unfeeling death, shouldn't the rubrics be something like mini terminators?
ross-128 wrote: Well if you play with points Inceptors will allegedly be 53pts/model: 39 for the base model and 14 for the two mini-HBs they come with.
So a squad of three of them will weigh in at 159 points.
ross-128 wrote: Well if you play with points Inceptors will allegedly be 53pts/model: 39 for the base model and 14 for the two mini-HBs they come with.
So a squad of three of them will weigh in at 159 points.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Now how do the interceptors take heavy weapons fire from strength 6-7 weapons (you know, crowd control weapons that are on most units currently)
How good is their invulnerable save?
How much more durable against strength 3 massed small arms fire?
A disintegrator would wipe out the interceptors wholesale, as will most other high Ap weapons.
You placed all of you stock on comparisons that ignore some of the most important abilities of the thousand suns.
A thousand suns warrior will always have at least a 5+ save, you can't say the same for the primaris marines in this comparison.
Tell you what we will play a game called i can deep strike on turn 1 unload my whole squad on your unit and charge you in the same turn preventing you from ever getting a single round of shooting, and getting first strike in CC which will probably wipe your squad out.
How else could he deride a game that hasn't been released yet, to bemoan how Chaos got shafted [past-future tense?] without fully knowing how the rules work? He's got numbers, and no-one can apply real-game scenarios to it because he already said so! It's a perfectly Traditional [capital T] way of doing things.
You need the full rules, and an understanding of the scope of things. For all we know, the banner causes a hit equal to the models movement stat when they charge Rubrics...
How else could he deride a game that hasn't been released yet, to bemoan how Chaos got shafted [past-future tense?] without fully knowing how the rules work? He's got numbers, and no-one can apply real-game scenarios to it because he already said so! It's a perfectly Traditional [capital T] way of doing things.
You need the full rules, and an understanding of the scope of things. For all we know, the banner causes a hit equal to the models movement stat when they charge Rubrics...
Numbers dont lie. If you have an argument that refutes the numbers by all means share it. "Hes ignorant" isnt an argument i am taking what i know and applying it. Im sure chapter tactics wont give them a reroll on those bolters either.
How else could he deride a game that hasn't been released yet, to bemoan how Chaos got shafted [past-future tense?] without fully knowing how the rules work? He's got numbers, and no-one can apply real-game scenarios to it because he already said so! It's a perfectly Traditional [capital T] way of doing things.
You need the full rules, and an understanding of the scope of things. For all we know, the banner causes a hit equal to the models movement stat when they charge Rubrics...
Numner dont lie. If you have an argument that refutes the numbers by all means share it. "Hes ignorant" isnt an argument i am taking what i know and applying it. Im sure chapter tactics wont give them a reroll on those bolters either.
numbers don't lie if you ignore parts of the equiation. we have no idea what chapter tactics will be, no idea what Legion tactics will be, no idea what the icon of flame will do, no idea what death to the false emperor will do.
in short you're trying to insist that 1+1+1+X = 3.
97% of people know that you can make up a statistic on the spot, and make it sound true when taken out of context. Numbers can be misleading, I can do it whenever I feel like it. Take a look at the graphs in advertisements.
And you are, by the definition of the word, ignorant of the total picture. We all are. What you've taken and run with is meaningless. It's like saying all the sand on the ocean floor is green, because I've seen green sand before so the bottom of the ocean must have green sand too. It's meaningless until you see the whole picture.
He's Ignorant, as you put it, is an entirely valid argument in this case. I can objectively prove you don't fully understand / know the rules and mechanics of the game, by asking you if you're a developer for GW? Assuming you're not, and assuming you haven't seen the complete rules, nor do you know what all those rules mean, and you don't have experience playing the forthcoming game... then you don't have any degree of demonstrable expertise, regarding the overall balance of the game.
So... yeah... you're just dumping on something you don't know about. Talking gak for the sake of an emotional high, but it doesn't mean anything in the long term.
How else could he deride a game that hasn't been released yet, to bemoan how Chaos got shafted [past-future tense?] without fully knowing how the rules work? He's got numbers, and no-one can apply real-game scenarios to it because he already said so! It's a perfectly Traditional [capital T] way of doing things.
You need the full rules, and an understanding of the scope of things. For all we know, the banner causes a hit equal to the models movement stat when they charge Rubrics...
Numner dont lie. If you have an argument that refutes the numbers by all means share it. "Hes ignorant" isnt an argument i am taking what i know and applying it. Im sure chapter tactics wont give them a reroll on those bolters either.
numbers don't lie if you ignore parts of the equiation. we have no idea what chapter tactics will be, no idea what Legion tactics will be, no idea what the icon of flame will do, no idea what death to the false emperor will do.
in short you're trying to insist that 1+1+1+X = 3.
Im not ignoring parts of the equation. Im saying that as it looks right now and given all other things equal, which is what GW said they were striving for, A squad of these guys will rip through just about everything theu are put up against.
How else could he deride a game that hasn't been released yet, to bemoan how Chaos got shafted [past-future tense?] without fully knowing how the rules work? He's got numbers, and no-one can apply real-game scenarios to it because he already said so! It's a perfectly Traditional [capital T] way of doing things.
You need the full rules, and an understanding of the scope of things. For all we know, the banner causes a hit equal to the models movement stat when they charge Rubrics...
Numner dont lie. If you have an argument that refutes the numbers by all means share it. "Hes ignorant" isnt an argument i am taking what i know and applying it. Im sure chapter tactics wont give them a reroll on those bolters either.
numbers don't lie if you ignore parts of the equiation. we have no idea what chapter tactics will be, no idea what Legion tactics will be, no idea what the icon of flame will do, no idea what death to the false emperor will do.
in short you're trying to insist that 1+1+1+X = 3.
Im not ignoring parts of the equation. Im saying that as it looks right now and given all other things equal, which is what GW said they were striving for, A squad of these guys will rip through just about everything theu are put up against.
and will proably be pointed approperatly, no I don't expect PL to be a very reliable indicator of well.. anything. I don't think anyone really does. It'll be handy with gathering a quick non serious game with a friend or something, but.. as a real balancing tool? I suspect it'll be horriable
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Now how do the interceptors take heavy weapons fire from strength 6-7 weapons (you know, crowd control weapons that are on most units currently)
How good is their invulnerable save?
How much more durable against strength 3 massed small arms fire?
A disintegrator would wipe out the interceptors wholesale, as will most other high Ap weapons.
You placed all of you stock on comparisons that ignore some of the most important abilities of the thousand suns.
A thousand suns warrior will always have at least a 5+ save, you can't say the same for the primaris marines in this comparison.
Tell you what we will play a game called i can deep strike on turn 1 unload my whole squad on your unit and charge you in the same turn preventing you from ever getting a single round of shooting, and getting first strike in CC which will probably wipe your squad out.
That's fantastic! Now about those multiple d6 automatic hits for trying that nonsense. You may kill a couple of the thousand suns, but you are still going to take 10 automatic hits on average (assuming only 3 models left) so you could still lose 1/3 of your unit on the way in. And that's if you make a 9" charge. Yes you can use command points, so can I. That's an even brake there.
Go ahead, counter the complete invalidation of you argument by doing what you said others were not, by stacking the tactical odds in your favor. However, you response does nothing to negate the fact that the rubric marines have different and balanced counters to other lists that the interceptors do not. They are different units with different roles, defeated with different options in the armies across the game.
They may be at a disadvantage squad v squad, but they will obviously affect the game in general in a very similar fashion. The rubrics will move forward holding ground and threatening heavy infantry and light vehicles while the interceptors will be a rapid insertion unit dedicated to destroying an infantry unit by weight of fire and probably being wiped out the following turn.
Im not ignoring parts of the equation. Im saying that as it looks right now and given all other things equal, which is what GW said they were striving for, A squad of these guys will rip through just about everything theu are put up against.
Every power level 8 unit isn't going to be balanced against every other power level 8 unit in the entire game.
The idea is that a power level 150 army will be somewhere in the same ballpark as another power level 150 army. Not even considering that the power levels are not "striving for all other things equal". It's a rough estimation of army potential. If you're going to try to grok pure numbers, at least wait until the points come out.
greatbigtree wrote: 97% of people know that you can make up a statistic on the spot, and make it sound true when taken out of context. Numbers can be misleading, I can do it whenever I feel like it. Take a look at the graphs in advertisements.
And you are, by the definition of the word, ignorant of the total picture. We all are. What you've taken and run with is meaningless. It's like saying all the sand on the ocean floor is green, because I've seen green sand before so the bottom of the ocean must have green sand too. It's meaningless until you see the whole picture.
He's Ignorant, as you put it, is an entirely valid argument in this case. I can objectively prove you don't fully understand / know the rules and mechanics of the game, by asking you if you're a developer for GW? Assuming you're not, and assuming you haven't seen the complete rules, nor do you know what all those rules mean, and you don't have experience playing the forthcoming game... then you don't have any degree of demonstrable expertise, regarding the overall balance of the game.
So... yeah... you're just dumping on something you don't know about. Talking gak for the sake of an emotional high, but it doesn't mean anything in the long term.
A direct comparison of two things is not "making up" statistics.
You apparently dont understand the difference of total ignorance and specific ignorance. We know enough. We know that by adding 0 power points to Rubric Marines you would have to double thier move and give them better deployment options at the very least. Which in my humble opnion is an absurdity that sholudn't be considered. They have also given us a metric by which to measure which is what I did. I compared directly two units THE GAME DEVS say are about equal. And did a pretty good job of showing how they are far from it.
Im not ignoring parts of the equation. Im saying that as it looks right now and given all other things equal, which is what GW said they were striving for, A squad of these guys will rip through just about everything theu are put up against.
Every power level 8 unit isn't going to be balanced against every other power level 8 unit in the entire game.
The idea is that a power level 150 army will be somewhere in the same ballpark as another power level 150 army. Not even considering that the power levels are not "striving for all other things equal". It's a rough estimation of army potential. If you're going to try to grok pure numbers, at least wait until the points come out.
That seems pretty illogical
If Unit A is clearly superior to Unit B, and you're allowed the exact same amount of each.
Then Army of Unit A will pretty much continue to be superior to Army of Unit B.
At the very least, when the difference between these 2 are so massive they could have made Interceptors be Power 9 or Rubric be Power 7.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Now how do the interceptors take heavy weapons fire from strength 6-7 weapons (you know, crowd control weapons that are on most units currently)
How good is their invulnerable save?
How much more durable against strength 3 massed small arms fire?
A disintegrator would wipe out the interceptors wholesale, as will most other high Ap weapons.
You placed all of you stock on comparisons that ignore some of the most important abilities of the thousand suns.
A thousand suns warrior will always have at least a 5+ save, you can't say the same for the primaris marines in this comparison.
Tell you what we will play a game called i can deep strike on turn 1 unload my whole squad on your unit and charge you in the same turn preventing you from ever getting a single round of shooting, and getting first strike in CC which will probably wipe your squad out.
That's fantastic! Now about those multiple d6 automatic hits for trying that nonsense. You may kill a couple of the thousand suns, but you are still going to take 10 automatic hits on average (assuming only 3 models left) so you could still lose 1/3 of your unit on the way in. And that's if you make a 9" charge. Yes you can use command points, so can I. That's an even brake there.
Go ahead, counter the complete invalidation of you argument by doing what you said others were not, by stacking the tactical odds in your favor. However, you response does nothing to negate the fact that the rubric marines have different and balanced counters to other lists that the interceptors do not. They are different units with different roles, defeated with different options in the armies across the game.
They may be at a disadvantage squad v squad, but they will obviously affect the game in general in a very similar fashion. The rubrics will move forward holding ground and threatening heavy infantry and light vehicles while the interceptors will be a rapid insertion unit dedicated to destroying an infantry unit by weight of fire and probably being wiped out the following turn.
Heres your problem if you bring flamers your range is 9" im not going to charge you ill sit at 13-18" and shoot you down while you grit your teeth and die, you still lose and payed more GJ.
Its not about stacking the odds in my favor is about real time reactions. People always bring up examples where the enemy is apparently the dumbest opponent ever to win fights. Even if you bring bolters i could still deep strike in 18 inces away unload kill 2-3 you move up take maybe 1 guy and thats streching it on 2 bolter shots and physic power I shoot again and charge your dead at the end of round two.
I would also like to point out that you keep changing the loadout while i am stcking to the same stock stuff in the data sheet.
Im not ignoring parts of the equation. Im saying that as it looks right now and given all other things equal, which is what GW said they were striving for, A squad of these guys will rip through just about everything theu are put up against.
Every power level 8 unit isn't going to be balanced against every other power level 8 unit in the entire game.
The idea is that a power level 150 army will be somewhere in the same ballpark as another power level 150 army. Not even considering that the power levels are not "striving for all other things equal". It's a rough estimation of army potential. If you're going to try to grok pure numbers, at least wait until the points come out.
Assuming your right how are they predicting the exact units people will bring? If every army has a low mid and high and one person brings all low and anotherbrings all high there is no balace there. They can't try to predict the EXACT units people will pick.
Again, you are having a direct fight between these two units, where the rubric marines never get to use their invulnerable saves and any time someone points out the weapon options available to rubrics you dismiss their statement out of hand as if they were only ever going to be fighting interceptors.
The rubrics trade speed for better Ap and durability against high Ap weapons that the interceptors do not have. They have different targets and roles.
You're being unfair in your comparison in a futile attempt to prove you are right. Your comparison is flawed and should not be taken seriously as an example of imbalance.
This is an apples to oranges comparison to some degree.
But IMO the anxiety is warranted.
Nothing so far indicates that GW will be handling things like this with much nuance.
Still, it seems that a squad of Rubrics should wreck a similarly configured squad of tactical marines by definition, otherwise chaos is just not all that scary and the points increase is simply not worth it.
It may be the case that chaos players will be left better off collecting chaos mahweens and calling them traitors but using the loyalist mahween rules to do so.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Again, you are having a direct fight between these two units, where the rubric marines never get to use their invulnerable saves and any time someone points out the weapon options available to rubrics you dismiss their statement out of hand as if they were only ever going to be fighting interceptors.
The rubrics trade speed for better Ap and durability against high Ap weapons that the interceptors do not have. They have different targets and roles.
You're being unfair in your comparison in a futile attempt to prove you are right. Your comparison is flawed and should not be taken seriously as an example of imbalance.
AP is a gradual improvement now. Having a 1 AP advantage is less significant now than it was before.
AP 3 vs an Av3 unit used to mean 66% more shots would go thru, while the Assault Bolter in the past would be AP4, which meant it did absolutely nothing against Av3.
66% vs 0% difference
In 8e it's 33% vs 16% difference.
The 1 STR Advantage the Assault Bolter has basically makes it a wash.
After that we just need to consider the fact that Assault Heavy Bolters have 3 shots.
Major error: only calculating average 50/50 and not variance to 41/59. For my point by point analysis I am going to make the same error simply becaus the math gets too convoluted otherwise (I don't feel like doing it for an hour or more, if someone does pls do). Power level 8 assumes stronger then 7, weaker than 9. leading the a potential 16% percent difference within it. You have not calculated the squad leaders.
only trough for shooting. In a vaccuum meaningless difference.
Shots at 12"/18"/24": 18/18/0 vs 9/4/4
hte incepros have more shots at shorter range. In a vaccuum this is better. In practrice the range is a not unimportant factor
Wounds: 6 vs 5
With multiwound weapons being a thing the 2*3 becomes worse. the TS have 5*1. Any shots with multiple damage even ,if it is random, will play much more havoc on the inceptors than the TS even with teir AS becoming one worse.
Mortal wounds per game: 3 vs 4
For the inceptors this is true if they get 7.2 charges . Vs 3.5 smite powers on the TS aspiring sorcerer. UTTERLY USELESS comparison on your end. Heavily in favor of the TS and a major factor vs everything. Not even accounting for the higher chance of the smites vs the charge. This is by very far the worst mistake in your maths
Wounds lost per 20 regular bolter shots: 1.47 vs 1.09
correct
Wounds lost per 20 regular bolter shots in cover: .71 vs 1.09
cover is not a vaccuum. This goes againts the basice of your math. Useless and wrong
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds: 33%/100%/100% vs 44%/88%/100%
True but way too much averaging out to be a usefull statistic. Calcualted at 9 inch range.
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds in cover: 0%/33%/66% vs 44%/88%/100%
see above.
]Deployment options: anywhere 9" away from enemies vs regular deployment.
True accounted for in shooting but the vaccuum requirement ignore far to many factors here
MEQ killed in single round of shooting 12"/18"/24": 3.92/3.92/0 vs 1.96/0.87/0.87
No clue how you calcuated this but its 1/1/0 for inceptors and 0.5/0.22/0.22. Inceptors are still beter but this was way of the mark and even with my corrections still wrong since it does not account for icon of flame.
Melee wounds per turn vs MEQ: .76 vs 1.29
I get 1.1 for the TS, same for the inceptors
Melee wounds taken vs 10 MEQ: .718 vs 1.09 (.545?)
I get 1.48 for the inceptors and 0.55 for the TS. This is assumiong the MEQ have 2 attacks
Power level: 8 vs 8
Strait up fight: Rubrics lose after 2 rounds of fighting doing 1-2 wounds. Even if they don't deep strike.
[color=orange]Completely wrong in a straight up melee fight assuming no charge bonusses and both strike at the same time (not never going to happen but the activation system makes vaccuum mathhammer impossible) the TS win over the course over +/-- 6 rounds of close combat. dealing 247% more wounds to the inceptors. Note this not taking the reduction of power via caualtie sin acount wich would change it even more in favor of the Ts since the sorcerer deals most of the damage with his force weapon the rubrics marines are basicly ablative wounds. [/color]
So basically if you can manage to find cover Inceptors are somewhere between 1.5 and 1.75 times better then Rubrics, but are the same power level...right.
Edit:
Plz do not try to add "context" anything you add to one side you would have to add to the other to equal it out. Making it a fruitless effort.
Keep in mind that adding more Rubricae would not decrease the problem it would increse the problem. Inceptors have a clear advantage add more units multiplies the gap it does NOT shrink it. It does decrease the problem since it unlocks the reaper autocannon and they become cheaper
I think you have seriouly underestimated your aspiring sorcerer and His abilities, both smite and force weapons even in a vacuum. Especially the mortal wounds error is pretty much unforgivable. 3-4 psychic power manifested in a game happens, SEVEN charges by and large do not.Most games aren't even seven turns.
TLDR: you have screwed up your maths massively in favor of your argument
The fun part here is, that even assuming his calculations were spot-on, and the inceptors did easily beat rubrics at the same power level, it still ignores two important factors:
1-power level is a really rough estimate, same power level=/=same point cost.
2-not all units are equal versus all units. bad matchups and good matchups exist. and inceptors are probably some of the worst matchup possible for rubrics. they are just not made to fight that king of enemy, they are made to butcher line infantry.
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote: Tell you what we will play a game called i can deep strike on turn 1 unload my whole squad on your unit and charge you in the same turn preventing you from ever getting a single round of shooting, and getting first strike in CC which will probably wipe your squad out.
A few points here, the deep strike has to be further away than 9", so you are going to need to roll a 9 on 2D6 to get to charge, as you only need to come within 1" of the unit to fight them. However if you land and unload all that firepower I can remove a model that is closest to your unit, thus increasing the distance you need to charge. Plus When you do charge I can Overwatch, which should do some damage, I may be hitting on 6's, but with Inferno Bolters it is still going to hurt. In combat the Inceptors aren't that great, 2 attacks each. The Thosand Sons have a Sorcerer with a Force Sword and an Inferno Pistol, he'll help reduce the Inceptors.
If the Inceptors use their fly keyword to hit and run, this does allow the Thosand Sons a round of shooting and Overwatch.
One other point is that 40k is mission and objective based, we have seen that objectives are now claimed by players who have the most models near an objective. The Inceptors being a 3 model unit aren't going to be good at claiming or contesting objectives, where as Thousand Sons are better.
The Inceptors are good, but aren't meant to be used as a unit you throw down the enemies throat. They are a unit that is used to jump on weakened units and deliver the killing blow. Sending them in against a full unit of Marines is a bad idea, they lack the numbers to survive a protracted conflict.
Earth127 wrote: Actually it's 10 on 2D6 since you have to be more then 9 inch away not 9 inch.
Also pls do charge the TS unit, the force weapon on the aspiring sorcerer makes short work of them.
Only need to get within 1" now to be in a combat, so needs a 9, which is not likely. And allows the Thousand Sons to Overwatch, and them in their turn to get closer, shoot the unit, and also engage it in combat where their numbers will work in their favour.
Im not ignoring parts of the equation. Im saying that as it looks right now and given all other things equal, which is what GW said they were striving for, A squad of these guys will rip through just about everything theu are put up against.
Every power level 8 unit isn't going to be balanced against every other power level 8 unit in the entire game.
The idea is that a power level 150 army will be somewhere in the same ballpark as another power level 150 army. Not even considering that the power levels are not "striving for all other things equal". It's a rough estimation of army potential. If you're going to try to grok pure numbers, at least wait until the points come out.
That seems pretty illogical
If Unit A is clearly superior to Unit B, and you're allowed the exact same amount of each.
Then Army of Unit A will pretty much continue to be superior to Army of Unit B.
At the very least, when the difference between these 2 are so massive they could have made Interceptors be Power 9 or Rubric be Power 7.
You assume people are going to bring armies ENTIRELY of Rubrics and Inceptors??
Wounds lost per 20 regular bolter shots: 1.47 vs 1.09
Wounds lost per 20 regular bolter shots in cover: .71 vs 1.09
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds: 33%/100%/100% vs 44%/88%/100%
Fire power lost at 2/4/6 rounds in cover: 0%/33%/66% vs 44%/88%/100%
Deployment options: anywhere 9" away from enemies vs regular deployment.
MEQ killed in single round of shooting 12"/18"/24": 3.92/3.92/0 vs 1.96/0.87/0.87
Melee wounds per turn vs MEQ: .76 vs 1.29
Melee wounds taken vs 10 MEQ: .718 vs 1.09 (.545?)
Power level: 8 vs 8
Strait up fight: Rubrics lose after 2 rounds of fighting doing 1-2 wounds. Even if they don't deep strike.
So basically if you can manage to find cover Inceptors are somewhere between 1.5 and 1.75 times better then Rubrics, but are the same power level...right.
Edit:
Plz do not try to add "context" anything you add to one side you would have to add to the other to equal it out. Making it a fruitless effort.
Keep in mind that adding more Rubricae would not decrease the problem it would increse the problem. Inceptors have a clear advantage add more units multiplies the gap it does NOT shrink it.
Yawn. Chaos players complaining about nothing again, is it tuesday already?
A direct comparison of two things is not "making up" statistics.
You apparently dont understand the difference of total ignorance and specific ignorance. We know enough. We know that by adding 0 power points to Rubric Marines you would have to double thier move and give them better deployment options at the very least. Which in my humble opnion is an absurdity that sholudn't be considered. They have also given us a metric by which to measure which is what I did. I compared directly two units THE GAME DEVS say are about equal. And did a pretty good job of showing how they are far from it.
Lulz... you are specifically ignorant about most of the premise you present. You are creating a specific scenario in which your numbers... which I'm going to have to double check now... favour a bias you had before you even began. You have 10 pieces of a 100 piece puzzle and believe yourself capable of predicting the remaining 90 pieces. Congratulations! What's tomorrows lottery numbers? You only need 7/45 pieces to get that one right.
There's no metric given here, as that would indicate sufficient information given to make a clear decisions. You're speculating based on incomplete information. Period. There's no other endgame. And you're upset that in the specific scenario that you envision, that no one else is allowed to alter, that the worst-case scenario is that Rubrics bite it to the other models.
How agrievating that I'll need to crunch those numbers today.
So... you are comparing a unit with an obvious counter-unit and bemoaning the fact that a counter-unit wins? What did you expect with 18 Heavy Bolter shot? That the normal infantry albeit with a better save and higher AP will just shake this kind of firepower off and wipe the squad next turn?
Kandela wrote: So... you are comparing a unit with an obvious counter-unit and bemoaning the fact that a counter-unit wins? What did you expect with 18 Heavy Bolter shot? That the normal infantry albeit with a better save and higher AP will just shake this kind of firepower off and wipe the squad next turn?
"Obvious counter unit"
You see, that's what is interesting. Both units are made to do the same thing, more or less: kill infantry, particularly heavier infantry. They have both offensive and defensive bonuses geared towards dealing with them. One is just notably better, due to having a significantly higher firepower. Rubric only draw even against guard equivalent or weaker, as the str 5 guns and toughness 5 don't come into play there. Even then, it's drawing even, not coming out ahead.
Also, why do people assume chapter tactics/marks will change things such that rubrics are better off? Are we suggesting that chapter tactics will be weaker than the chaos equivalent, and that interceptors won't have the benefit of having a wider array of options to chose from (given rubrics are locked in by nature).
We have the core rules and both units sheets. That's 90% of the information. Assuming that the remaining 10% will be roughly equivalent for each isn't a huge jump in logic, particularly given the remaining 10% are the army wide bonuses.
Kandela wrote: So... you are comparing a unit with an obvious counter-unit and bemoaning the fact that a counter-unit wins? What did you expect with 18 Heavy Bolter shot? That the normal infantry albeit with a better save and higher AP will just shake this kind of firepower off and wipe the squad next turn?
"Obvious counter unit"
You see, that's what is interesting. Both units are made to do the same thing, more or less: kill infantry, particularly heavier infantry. They have both offensive and defensive bonuses geared towards dealing with them. One is just notably better, due to having a significantly higher firepower. Rubric only draw even against guard equivalent or weaker, as the str 5 guns and toughness 5 don't come into play there. Even then, it's drawing even, not coming out ahead.
Also, why do people assume chapter tactics/marks will change things such that rubrics are better off? Are we suggesting that chapter tactics will be weaker than the chaos equivalent, and that interceptors won't have the benefit of having a wider array of options to chose from (given rubrics are locked in by nature).
We have the core rules and both units sheets. That's 90% of the information. Assuming that the remaining 10% will be roughly equivalent for each isn't a huge jump in logic, particularly given the remaining 10% are the army wide bonuses.
Wrong. We don't have full rules for the CSM, OR Marines. We don't know what unit synergies will unfold. We have no clue what Chaptor (or Legion) tactics will involve. We don't know the full rules on all the add'l scenario rules available in the BRB. We don't have access to any of the other available TS/Chaos psy-powers. We don't know what a TS Sorc HQ will do for the Rubrics. We still have far less than 90% of the info. What we do have is most of the basic rules. I.E. the rules that are available free and simply allows for folks to set up a basic game with little flair and no add'l special rules.
I understand that claiming units/models/rules are DOA before said things become fully available is a Dakka tradition, but using a system that the dev's themselves claim is used to roughly equate models/squads and saying that one is clearly better than the other simply because they have an equal power level is stretching this well past the breaking point. And the OP putting this out there, then basically saying "You can't take anything else into consideration" is the equivalent of my 5yo, after getting told to go to his room for having a bad attitude, yelling "I'm going to my room and you can't talk to me anymore!", then slamming the door.
Power Levels were never intended to create absolute balance between two units. It is a rough approximation of the value of the unit, not a direct comparison between units to see which one is 'better'.
Kandela wrote: So... you are comparing a unit with an obvious counter-unit and bemoaning the fact that a counter-unit wins? What did you expect with 18 Heavy Bolter shot? That the normal infantry albeit with a better save and higher AP will just shake this kind of firepower off and wipe the squad next turn?
Worst case scenario for rubrics, the inteceptors drop shy of 9 inch, shoot and assault. Rounding down for 50%, so 0,444444 wounds is still no wound on average, but 0,500001 is a wound.
They fire all non pistols, so 6 shots a piece for 18 shots.
They kill 3, then charge doing nothing due the rubrics having a 2+ save in melee since their all is dust rules only cares about damage, not damage vs shooting. (as far as we know and apparently we know enough to make a final decision)
And their charge does nothing as 3 models isn't enough to trigger moral wounds.
The rubrics kill none on overwatch and neither can they kill anybody in melee.
Interceptors back out of combat on their turn and shoot the remaining rubrics down due to fly.
6 wounds remaining.
Worst case for interceptors, the rubrics are somehow within 8 inch due to a command ability or feth if I know, doesn't matter due to this being the worst case scenario. Maybe the interceptors just whiffed hard after deepstriking.
Either way it wouldn't cost more and from what we know this could totally be a thing so let's make it a certainty too because we know enough.
All warpflamers, auto hits, so 12 hits (and a bolt pistol), killing one and putting a wound on another. Loose one guy to overwatch.
But we also have the psyker putting out 1 mortal wound, killing another, so there is one guy after charging.
In melee, the sorcerer and the 3 remaining guys cause a 1 wound all together. If the sorcerer caused the wound, the last remaining guy dies.
Either unit walks back out of CC and the interceptor dies to the sorcerer since falling back prevents shooting, not psychic powers.
If the interceptor walks out he gets to kill one more rubric, but that isn't enough to kill the sorcerer who can walk back out on his turn or simply manifest if the interceptor already fell back and deal the last wound.
Rubrics win.
4 wounds remaining.
Yay, the power system works and is a great measure for relative strength.
*/sarcasm*
All I'm saying is, we don't know jack. All in all they seem indeed ROUGHLY equal from what we know, so the power points in this case seem fine for now.
We don't know all the rules, we don't know how army synergy matter, we don't know points, which are going to be a much better standard to go by, we don't know how faction specific bonuses and command points shake things up and we don't know how much rubrics being troops affects this match up.
There is also no guarantee at all that the interceptors will actually make the charge. Luck is also always a factor. Blessing of tzeentch might still be there in some form and could very well mean that the rubrics are even tougher than we think.
That could give them a real chance of not taking a single wound from shooting and the bolter backlash would then kill a guy and smite puts another wound on there, pretty much neutering the inteceptors.
We also don't know if you can manifest in combat, which would cause another wound in the case of the interceptor best case, making it 5-4 wounds. Not that the example is worth much, but yea.
So yea, again, we don't have enough to go on.
99% of a car is still a pile of junk if the battery is that last percentage.
Vryce wrote: Wrong. We don't have full rules for the CSM, OR Marines. We don't know what unit synergies will unfold. We have no clue what Chaptor (or Legion) tactics will involve. We don't know the full rules on all the add'l scenario rules available in the BRB. We don't have access to any of the other available TS/Chaos psy-powers. We don't know what a TS Sorc HQ will do for the Rubrics. We still have far less than 90% of the info. What we do have is most of the basic rules. I.E. the rules that are available free and simply allows for folks to set up a basic game with little flair and no add'l special rules.
I understand that claiming units/models/rules are DOA before said things become fully available is a Dakka tradition, but using a system that the dev's themselves claim is used to roughly equate models/squads and saying that one is clearly better than the other simply because they have an equal power level is stretching this well past the breaking point. And the OP putting this out there, then basically saying "You can't take anything else into consideration" is the equivalent of my 5yo, after getting told to go to his room for having a bad attitude, yelling "I'm going to my room and you can't talk to me anymore!", then slamming the door.
Power Levels were never intended to create absolute balance between two units. It is a rough approximation of the value of the unit, not a direct comparison between units to see which one is 'better'.
Find a unit that has the same power level that does to Inceptors what Inceptors do to Rubric Marines.
McGibs wrote: Like, are they just all alone fighting each other on an empty table? Who's going first? The Rubriks are troops for TSons, so are there 4 more squads backing them up in a gunline? Are they in a Rhino like they should be? What about how they synergize with other tson characters?
Comparing units like this has so little value when there's so many other factors going on in any given game.
Any context you add to one side you can add to another. Context is irrlevent here.
Not reallv. Heard phrase whole is bigger than sum of it's parts?
Worst case scenario for rubrics, the inteceptors drop shy of 9 inch, shoot and assault. Rounding down for 50%, so 0,444444 wounds is still no wound on average, but 0,500001 is a wound.
They fire all non pistols, so 6 shots a piece for 18 shots.
They kill 3, then charge doing nothing due the rubrics having a 2+ save in melee since their all is dust rules only cares about damage, not damage vs shooting. (as far as we know and apparently we know enough to make a final decision)
And their charge does nothing as 3 models isn't enough to trigger moral wounds.
The rubrics kill none on overwatch and neither can they kill anybody in melee.
Interceptors back out of combat on their turn and shoot the remaining rubrics down due to fly.
6 wounds remaining.
Worst case for interceptors, the rubrics are somehow within 8 inch due to a command ability or feth if I know, doesn't matter due to this being the worst case scenario. Maybe the interceptors just whiffed hard after deepstriking.
Either way it wouldn't cost more and from what we know this could totally be a thing so let's make it a certainty too because we know enough.
All warpflamers, auto hits, so 12 hits (and a bolt pistol), killing one and putting a wound on another. Loose one guy to overwatch.
But we also have the psyker putting out 1 mortal wound, killing another, so there is one guy after charging.
In melee, the sorcerer and the 3 remaining guys cause a 1 wound all together. If the sorcerer caused the wound, the last remaining guy dies.
Either unit walks back out of CC and the interceptor dies to the sorcerer since falling back prevents shooting, not psychic powers.
If the interceptor walks out he gets to kill one more rubric, but that isn't enough to kill the sorcerer who can walk back out on his turn or simply manifest if the interceptor already fell back and deal the last wound.
Rubrics win.
4 wounds remaining.
Yay, the power system works and is a great measure for relative strength.
*/sarcasm*
All I'm saying is, we don't know jack. All in all they seem indeed ROUGHLY equal from what we know, so the power points in this case seem fine for now.
We don't know all the rules, we don't know how army synergy matter, we don't know points, which are going to be a much better standard to go by, we don't know how faction specific bonuses and command points shake things up and we don't know how much rubrics being troops affects this match up.
There is also no guarantee at all that the interceptors will actually make the charge. Luck is also always a factor. Blessing of tzeentch might still be there in some form and could very well mean that the rubrics are even tougher than we think.
That could give them a real chance of not taking a single wound from shooting and the bolter backlash would then kill a guy and smite puts another wound on there, pretty much neutering the inteceptors.
We also don't know if you can manifest in combat, which would cause another wound in the case of the interceptor best case, making it 5-4 wounds. Not that the example is worth much, but yea.
So yea, again, we don't have enough to go on.
99% of a car is still a pile of junk if the battery is that last percentage.
Except the probelm is if you have a unit of Rubrics with all warpflamers a decent player isn't going to DS 9" away they are going to DS 18" away and stay out of your range. This is the problem, for the Rubrics win you have to have a Marine player that is absolutely abysmal. You can't say Oh well they all have flamers if they charge me, because if you have all flamers NO ONE is going to charge that unit. You have to look at it from a temporally logically perspective. What will the enemy know BEFORE the game begins, how would he act in that case. But, I will say this if TS can some how swap weapons during the charge phase sure Inceptors lose.
McGibs wrote: Like, are they just all alone fighting each other on an empty table? Who's going first? The Rubriks are troops for TSons, so are there 4 more squads backing them up in a gunline? Are they in a Rhino like they should be? What about how they synergize with other tson characters?
Comparing units like this has so little value when there's so many other factors going on in any given game.
Any context you add to one side you can add to another. Context is irrlevent here.
Not reallv. Heard phrase whole is bigger than sum of it's parts?
Unit vs unit comparisons are worthless.
Tell why not really. Dont just assert that I am wrong because you said so. If we assume that they will both have access to the same abilities for about the same price you end up with the same result.
A direct comparison of two things is not "making up" statistics.
You apparently dont understand the difference of total ignorance and specific ignorance. We know enough. We know that by adding 0 power points to Rubric Marines you would have to double thier move and give them better deployment options at the very least. Which in my humble opnion is an absurdity that sholudn't be considered. They have also given us a metric by which to measure which is what I did. I compared directly two units THE GAME DEVS say are about equal. And did a pretty good job of showing how they are far from it.
Lulz... you are specifically ignorant about most of the premise you present. You are creating a specific scenario in which your numbers... which I'm going to have to double check now... favour a bias you had before you even began. You have 10 pieces of a 100 piece puzzle and believe yourself capable of predicting the remaining 90 pieces. Congratulations! What's tomorrows lottery numbers? You only need 7/45 pieces to get that one right.
There's no metric given here, as that would indicate sufficient information given to make a clear decisions. You're speculating based on incomplete information. Period. There's no other endgame. And you're upset that in the specific scenario that you envision, that no one else is allowed to alter, that the worst-case scenario is that Rubrics bite it to the other models.
How agrievating that I'll need to crunch those numbers today.
Tell me what the following word is "comparis_n" oh look that is SPECIFIC ignorance we CAN extrapolate information from what Devs have told us and by comparing current rules with new rules. Like AP in general goes like this. AP 4/3/2/ transfers to AP-1/-2/-3.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BoomWolf wrote: The fun part here is, that even assuming his calculations were spot-on, and the inceptors did easily beat rubrics at the same power level, it still ignores two important factors:
1-power level is a really rough estimate, same power level=/=same point cost.
2-not all units are equal versus all units. bad matchups and good matchups exist. and inceptors are probably some of the worst matchup possible for rubrics. they are just not made to fight that king of enemy, they are made to butcher line infantry.
You completely missed my point it seems. Besides, I said it's the worst case scenario for interceptors, how you get there is irrelevant as far as math is concerned.
With all that we do know, there is still EVERYTHING that can change with what we don't know. And even if mathwise, the rubrics lose completely to interceptors in terms of doing damage, that is STILL not a measure of how valuable one unit is compared to another. Rubrics could still be more valuable at taking objectives just as an example, while still having decent firepower. Or by virtue of being troops, allow you to gain more CP than interceptors or they could be better in a million other ways. Other ways that could even mean that the rubrics are no less deadly/durable.
You're putting too much stock into the information we have and power levels in particular.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Here's another example. Assuming power levels are maxed units, then rubrics could be much cheaper in points. The interceprs don't have any options to be cheaper, rubrics do. Their bolters are already decent, but with the points difference you could maybe get some tzangors/cultists to shield the rubrics. Combined with terrain, the intecerptors might not even be able to get a shot at rubrics, while the rubrics can shoot at them due the longer range while the interceptors then get charged by cultists.
The interceptors need line of sight to the rubrics and need to stay 9 inch away from BOTH units. That example could be worthless or it could be viable, we just don't know.
Roknar wrote: You completely missed my point it seems. Besides, I said it's the worst case scenario for interceptors, how you get there is irrelevant as far as math is concerned.
With all that we do know, there is still EVERYTHING that can change with what we don't know. And even if mathwise, the rubrics lose completely to interceptors in terms of doing damage, that is STILL not a measure of how valuable one unit is compared to another. Rubrics could still be more valuable at taking objectives just as an example, while still having decent firepower. Or by virtue of being troops, allow you to gain more CP than interceptors or they could be better in a million other ways. Other ways that could even mean that the rubrics are no less deadly/durable.
You're putting too much stock into the information we have and power levels in particular.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Here's another example. Assuming power levels are maxed units, then rubrics could be much cheaper in points. The interceprs don't have any options to be cheaper, rubrics do. Their bolters are already decent, but with the points difference you could maybe get some tzangors/cultists to shield the rubrics. Combined with terrain, the intecerptors might not even be able to get a shot at rubrics, while the rubrics can shoot at them due the longer range while the interceptors then get charged by cultists.
The interceptors need line of sight to the rubrics and need to stay 9 inch away from BOTH units. That example could be worthless or it could be viable, we just don't know.
Oh I do get your point but what I'm saying is why is the worst case scenario for rubrics a competent Inceptor player and a worse case for an Inceptor is an incompetent Inceptor player. What would happen if you had an incompetent Rubric player that kept trying to chase down these guys with flamers.
Except we know that PL is not maxxed out units. To add 5 Rubricae you have to add 6 PL to the unit.
Find a unit that has the same power level that does to Inceptors what Inceptors do to Rubric Marines.
Would you kindly tell me how? How are we going to find a unit that has same power level if the rules for Inceptors and Rubric all come from LEAKS and we know next to nothing about power level for pretty much anything?
I meant with maxed in the sense of maxed unit options. So potentially the cost of warp flamers and other force weapons and warpflame pistols. It's most likely not going to contribute much, but the fact of the matter is that we don't know, which was my main point.
The rubrics being within 8 inch in the interceptors worst case scenario is completely independent of player ability. What is the worst case for interceptors? Being within a full force rubric marine unit with warp flamers. The math doesn't account for how likely that specific case is to actually manifest.
My main point however was that the math doesn't account for a whole slew of things. And why does it have to be an incompent interceptor player for this to occur? There could be a command ability that let's you deepstrike rubrics for example. There is currently a warlord trait that allows this. It could VERY much be possible without any control on the opponents side. And being a CP means it would be free and furthermore, with the rubrics being troops might make it so that it's actually easier to acquire CP with rubrics than it is with a marine player wanting to use inteceptors. That could be one factor that in favour of rubrics too.
The math makes no assumptions on how you got into that worst case, only that it's a potential situation. And when we take the worst case for either unit, the two end up fairly close in performance. The rubrics are only slightly weaker but possibly cheaper in actual points.
This all being a vacuum as well makes the math pretty pointless.
In a real game a TSons player migth now want to take the odd pure flamer unit as a defense for all the T1 madness. And maybe there is a cost difference that allows the purchase of a rhino to get them close pretty fast.
So your so called competent player might have to burn a unit off an objective and the interceptors are the only unit that can do it, and the turn after the TSons player brings in the flamer rubrics.
Comparing two units in a vacuum is already loaded with issues and doing so without even knowing all the rules makes it no better than playing the lottery.
Roknar wrote: You completely missed my point it seems. Besides, I said it's the worst case scenario for interceptors, how you get there is irrelevant as far as math is concerned.
With all that we do know, there is still EVERYTHING that can change with what we don't know. And even if mathwise, the rubrics lose completely to interceptors in terms of doing damage, that is STILL not a measure of how valuable one unit is compared to another. Rubrics could still be more valuable at taking objectives just as an example, while still having decent firepower. Or by virtue of being troops, allow you to gain more CP than interceptors or they could be better in a million other ways. Other ways that could even mean that the rubrics are no less deadly/durable.
You're putting too much stock into the information we have and power levels in particular.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Here's another example. Assuming power levels are maxed units, then rubrics could be much cheaper in points. The interceprs don't have any options to be cheaper, rubrics do. Their bolters are already decent, but with the points difference you could maybe get some tzangors/cultists to shield the rubrics. Combined with terrain, the intecerptors might not even be able to get a shot at rubrics, while the rubrics can shoot at them due the longer range while the interceptors then get charged by cultists.
The interceptors need line of sight to the rubrics and need to stay 9 inch away from BOTH units. That example could be worthless or it could be viable, we just don't know.
Oh I do get your point but what I'm saying is why is the worst case scenario for rubrics a competent Inceptor player and a worse case for an Inceptor is an incompetent Inceptor player. What would happen if you had an incompetent Rubric player that kept trying to chase down these guys with flamers.
Except we know that PL is not maxxed out units. To add 5 Rubricae you have to add 6 PL to the unit.
Are you still going on about this? Dude you can math hammer, theory hammer, etc until the heatdeath of the universe but you won't actually know which unit is better until you play them within the greater context of the armies they're a part of.
All you're doing is spinning your wheels angrily and making yourself upset for no reason.
Dark Elder have Disintegrators which deal 2 damage flat, so get some Warriors with those. Done. And then those Warriors obviously aren't a great counter to Rubric Marines.
Oh look. Counters exist for different units. Imagine that, huh?
We also don't know how crowded some slots might be. With old marines and nu marines both sharing the adeptus astartes keyword you effectively end up having two factions worth of options per slot. Given how many slots the new detachments appear to have that might be a non issue but yea, still comes back to not knowing enough to make definitive judgments.
It's just a little bit silly to compare Fast Attack with Troops...
Troops are meant to be a swiss army knife and you compare it to a machete and complain that it won't cut wood the same.
Iceptors are in my opinion meant to have an absolutely devastating alpha strike in order to force trade between units (maybe some pesky devastator unit that dig in some terrain and pop-ed your precious tank, maybe some troops that are sitting backfield guarding some objective) and most probably draw huge amount of fire from your opponent as he make sure that won't happen again. They can come on turn 2 or 3. Sometimes only those 2-3 turn matter as your opponent tables you...
Roknar wrote: I meant with maxed in the sense of maxed unit options. So potentially the cost of warp flamers and other force weapons and warpflame pistols. It's most likely not going to contribute much, but the fact of the matter is that we don't know, which was my main point.
That's fine but then you should consider how a person would play if you had all flamers.
Roknar wrote: The rubrics being within 8 inch in the interceptors worst case scenario is completely independent of player ability. What is the worst case for interceptors? Being within a full force rubric marine unit with warp flamers. The math doesn't account for how likely that specific case is to actually manifest.
It is not independent of player ability. One unit has a 10" move and can deploy after the other restricted by 9" away from enemy units. 100% of the time Inceptors will be able to out maneuver Rubrics. 100% of the time they will be in a better position after deployment, as long as you assume both players are competent. ANY change you make to anything the Rubrics can do you have to allow a change for the Inceptors as well, and because Rubrics are playing catch up they are going
Roknar wrote: My main point however was that the math doesn't account for a whole slew of things. And why does it have to be an incompent interceptor player for this to occur? There could be a command ability that let's you deepstrike rubrics for example. There is currently a warlord trait that allows this. It could VERY much be possible without any control on the opponents side. And being a CP means it would be free and furthermore, with the rubrics being troops might make it so that it's actually easier to acquire CP with rubrics than it is with a marine player wanting to use inteceptors. That could be one factor that in favour of rubrics too.
Except its not free is it. It costs CP and anything you give to one your going to give to another so now I give a some sort of bonus to the Inceptors. This is what I mean when I say adding context doesent matter its an equation and these two units are supposed to be around equal so if you add something to one side you have to add it to the other, which is going to be a push, Rubrics are going to be paying catch up the entire time.
Roknar wrote: The math makes no assumptions on how you got into that worst case, only that it's a potential situation. And when we take the worst case for either unit, the two end up fairly close in performance. The rubrics are only slightly weaker but possibly cheaper in actual points.
This all being a vacuum as well makes the math pretty pointless.
In a real game a TSons player migth now want to take the odd pure flamer unit as a defense for all the T1 madness. And maybe there is a cost difference that allows the purchase of a rhino to get them close pretty fast.
So your so called competent player might have to burn a unit off an objective and the interceptors are the only unit that can do it, and the turn after the TSons player brings in the flamer rubrics.
Comparing two units in a vacuum is already loaded with issues and doing so without even knowing all the rules makes it no better than playing the lottery.
No the math doesn't. YOU have to you have to assume a player would think the best thing to do is to charge a unit full of flamers, which I find unreasonable. Now if you want to say that units are all total unknowns at the start of the game sure except that is not how I play and as far as I can tell its not how most people play. The cost difference should be around 15% which allows 25 points for a Rhino, again unreasonable, and I'm not going to address the rest since you made an assumption without checking how likely it could happen. Comparing two units in a vacuum is only a problem for people that don't understand that if things are balanced then you can add all the context you want, but in the end all it will do is push the end result farther down the road with the same gap as you started with.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Dark Elder have Disintegrators which deal 2 damage flat, so get some Warriors with those. Done. And then those Warriors obviously aren't a great counter to Rubric Marines.
Oh look. Counters exist for different units. Imagine that, huh?
Whats the range how many shots what the toughness of the models, if its what I think your referring too this isn't going to end well for the Rubrics.
Roknar wrote:We also don't know how crowded some slots might be. With old marines and nu marines both sharing the adeptus astartes keyword you effectively end up having two factions worth of options per slot. Given how many slots the new detachments appear to have that might be a non issue but yea, still comes back to not knowing enough to make definitive judgments.
Now your getting into the "just pick the units the devs want you to pick".
Kandela wrote:It's just a little bit silly to compare Fast Attack with Troops...
Troops are meant to be a swiss army knife and you compare it to a machete and complain that it won't cut wood the same.
Iceptors are in my opinion meant to have an absolutely devastating alpha strike in order to force trade between units (maybe some pesky devastator unit that dig in some terrain and pop-ed your precious tank, maybe some troops that are sitting backfield guarding some objective) and most probably draw huge amount of fire from your opponent as he make sure that won't happen again. They can come on turn 2 or 3. Sometimes only those 2-3 turn matter as your opponent tables you...
Here is what you just said. Its just silly to compare two units that should be around the same power level.
Rubric marines are a fine match for interceptors, between mortal wounds, a soul reaper cannon, better range, and better AP, they are a great answer for the absurd amount of shots the interceptors have.
Aspiring sorc
4 x rubric marines
+ soulreaper cannon
Aspiring sorc
2/3 chance of one mortal wound a round = .66 wound
1/6 chance of doing an additional mortal wound = .16 Wound
2/3 * 1/3 * 2/3 = .15 wounds unsaved wounds a round
who wins depends on who goes first,
If interceptors go first:
First round the interceptors knock down 3 rubrics
Rubrics respond with 2 wounds killing one interceptor
Second round Interceptors get 1.8 wounds thru finishing the fight
If rubrics go first:
First round rubrics get 2.5 wounds thru
Interceptors get 1.8 wounds in return, rounded up to two rubrics dead
Next round rubrics get 2.2 wounds thru killing another interceptor
Interceptor gets 1 and then the rubrics finish him off.
that seems pretty balanced, and that's before we even know what death to the false emperor does, if it's hatred style reroll ones that could be a check mark in the rubrics favor.
How did this get to three pages without anyone going over the OPs math?
How did it get to 3 pages? It's an idiotic comparison based on incomplete information. We don't know what all their special rules do yet. We don't know what force multipliers will exist for them. We haven't seen a single army in a index yet let alone 2 to compare them. We don't know if we are comparing a FA to a Troop/elite. We have no idea what we are actually looking at.
Soul Reaper cannons can't be used until it's a 10 man unit. So a more comparative point is that with two Interceptor Squads. At that point it evens out.
Just because someone is named Thousand-Son-Sorcerer doesn't mean they know what's going on with Rubric Marines. They actually look good to me, and I'm hardcore along with my regular group.
Grimgold wrote: Rubric marines are a fine match for interceptors, between mortal wounds, a soul reaper cannon, better range, and better AP, they are a great answer for the absurd amount of shots the interceptors have.
Aspiring sorc
4 x rubric marines
+ soulreaper cannon
Aspiring sorc
2/3 chance of one mortal wound a round = .66 wound
1/6 chance of doing an additional mortal wound = .16 Wound
2/3 * 1/3 * 2/3 = .15 wounds unsaved wounds a round
who wins depends on who goes first,
If interceptors go first:
First round the interceptors knock down 3 rubrics
Rubrics respond with 2 wounds killing one interceptor
Second round Interceptors get 1.8 wounds thru finishing the fight
If rubrics go first:
First round rubrics get 2.5 wounds thru
Interceptors get 1.8 wounds in return, rounded up to two rubrics dead
Next round rubrics get 2.2 wounds thru killing another interceptor
Interceptor gets 1 and then the rubrics finish him off.
that seems pretty balanced, and that's before we even know what death to the false emperor does, if it's hatred style reroll ones that could be a check mark in the rubrics favor.
How did this get to three pages without anyone going over the OPs math?
Because they did you cant have a soul reaper cannon in a 5 man squad. You have a 1/6 chance of doing no wounds with Smite which means the average is .66 mortal wounds per turn. Lastly even if all your math is right Inceptors are all but guaranteed to get the first go every game since they can DS when and where you want them.
Lance845 wrote: How did it get to 3 pages? It's an idiotic comparison based on incomplete information. We don't know what all their special rules do yet. We don't know what force multipliers will exist for them. We haven't seen a single army in an index yet let alone 2 to compare them. We don't know if we are comparing an FA to a Troop/elite. We have no idea what we are actually looking at.
What an incredible waste of time.
You're telling me, I think most of these complaint threads are just knee-jerking not too similar to their favorite toys being replaced. It is not complete argument otherwise.
For all, we know the new Thousand Sons are less powerful or more powerful. We don't know anything yet, it's far too early to call anything. We have incomplete information for us to reliably argue anything other than the looks of the models (but even then there is an argument that we still can't even about that!)
I thought about making a thread asking people's thoughts whether these Primarius Marines will replace regular space marines, but again I thought critically and said: "No we don't have enough information and would cause unnecessary friction."
Find a unit that has the same power level that does to Inceptors what Inceptors do to Rubric Marines.
Would you kindly tell me how? How are we going to find a unit that has same power level if the rules for Inceptors and Rubric all come from LEAKS and we know next to nothing about power level for pretty much anything?
We could look at units we do have that are similar. Like plague marines, 7 power for a unit of 5.
Well, at range plague marines are better against inceptors than rubrics, assuming two blight launchers and one plasma gun. They are actually better against every target, even inside rapid fire/pistol range. Even against single wound infantry plague marines outperform rubrics. I don't want to type the math out for every single encounter, but against single wound normal marines, rubrics average out 2 wounds shooting in rapid fire range (assuming the sorc kept his pistol) while plague marines manage 2.4ish.
Plague marines are also tougher against interceptors as well as everything else. So point plague marines.
Rubrics again have the rather odd distinction of.... doing better in melee. Again. Less so this time, as the plague marines get there single power fist to balance the force weapon, but more because the pistol shots when locked in cc beat the plague knives. Well, they also have the advantage of a sorc who wipes the unit 1/18 times he casts a spell. Which isn't really that great.
And again, this is a comparison to a unit cheaper than the rubrics. And the rubrics still come out looking not great/downright bad.
At this point, a tsons army has to have a way to mitigate perils for this unit to work. Otherwise that sorcerer is dead weight.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Soul Reaper cannons can't be used until it's a 10 man unit. So a more comparative point is that with two Interceptor Squads. At that point it evens out.
Just because someone is named Thousand-Son-Sorcerer doesn't mean they know what's going on with Rubric Marines. They actually look good to me, and I'm hardcore along with my regular group.
Okay lets compare 10 Rubrics to 1 unit of 6 Inceptors
Deployment comes you put your squad on the table, I DS 18" away unload 36 shots into the unit. you lose 4-5 guys, you move up 5" your range is 13" you get 7 shots 4 at S 5 AP -3 resulting in 1.089 wounds then 4 bolter shots cause .431 wounds. Smite causes another .66 wounds. total of 2 wounds 1 guy lost. I move forward 10" shoot 30 more rounds take another 4 guys leaving 1-2 guys in the unit 3" charge .825 wounds lets assume you kill 1 guy with overwatch you still lose the unit and I am left with 66% of my unit.
MAYBE just MAYBE I do know what im talking about and there is a problem. Had that even crossed your mind?
Lance845 wrote: How did it get to 3 pages? It's an idiotic comparison based on incomplete information. We don't know what all their special rules do yet. We don't know what force multipliers will exist for them. We haven't seen a single army in an index yet let alone 2 to compare them. We don't know if we are comparing an FA to a Troop/elite. We have no idea what we are actually looking at.
What an incredible waste of time.
You're telling me, I think most of these complaint threads are just knee-jerking not too similar to their favorite toys being replaced. It is not complete argument otherwise.
For all, we know the new Thousand Sons are less powerful or more powerful. We don't know anything yet, it's far too early to call anything. We have incomplete information for us to reliably argue anything other than the looks of the models (but even then there is an argument that we still can't even about that!)
I thought about making a thread asking people's thoughts whether these Primarius Marines will replace regular space marines, but again I thought critically and said: "No we don't have enough information and would cause unnecessary friction."
OMG your right we know nothing. I mean I'm assuming their T, weapon S, Wounds, Movement, Deployment Options, Unit Options, What they need to wound, Armor saves, what the rules are for weapons...or
Talamare wrote: I think that people are approaching this slightly wrong
Don't compare Rubric killing Interceptors and vice/versa
Instead, let's see how they fare against a few standards.
vs T4, Av3+ MEQ vs T3, Av5+ GEQ vs T5, Av4+ Transport
vs T7, Av3+ Dreadnaught
vs T8, Av3+ Tank
I've already done that the reason why I'm comparing the two is because its a faster way to get an Idea of what will happen when these individual units will do when they go up against units like that. Inceptors preform better in ever catagory except in T10+ where rubric marines preform 50% better problem is 50% of .10 is laughable.
Roknar wrote: I meant with maxed in the sense of maxed unit options. So potentially the cost of warp flamers and other force weapons and warpflame pistols. It's most likely not going to contribute much, but the fact of the matter is that we don't know, which was my main point.
That's fine but then you should consider how a person would play if you had all flamers.
Roknar wrote: The rubrics being within 8 inch in the interceptors worst case scenario is completely independent of player ability. What is the worst case for interceptors? Being within a full force rubric marine unit with warp flamers. The math doesn't account for how likely that specific case is to actually manifest.
It is not independent of player ability. One unit has a 10" move and can deploy after the other restricted by 9" away from enemy units. 100% of the time Inceptors will be able to out maneuver Rubrics. 100% of the time they will be in a better position after deployment, as long as you assume both players are competent. ANY change you make to anything the Rubrics can do you have to allow a change for the Inceptors as well, and because Rubrics are playing catch up they are going
Roknar wrote: My main point however was that the math doesn't account for a whole slew of things. And why does it have to be an incompent interceptor player for this to occur? There could be a command ability that let's you deepstrike rubrics for example. There is currently a warlord trait that allows this. It could VERY much be possible without any control on the opponents side. And being a CP means it would be free and furthermore, with the rubrics being troops might make it so that it's actually easier to acquire CP with rubrics than it is with a marine player wanting to use inteceptors. That could be one factor that in favour of rubrics too.
Except its not free is it. It costs CP and anything you give to one your going to give to another so now I give a some sort of bonus to the Inceptors. This is what I mean when I say adding context doesent matter its an equation and these two units are supposed to be around equal so if you add something to one side you have to add it to the other, which is going to be a push, Rubrics are going to be paying catch up the entire time.
Roknar wrote: The math makes no assumptions on how you got into that worst case, only that it's a potential situation. And when we take the worst case for either unit, the two end up fairly close in performance. The rubrics are only slightly weaker but possibly cheaper in actual points.
This all being a vacuum as well makes the math pretty pointless.
In a real game a TSons player migth now want to take the odd pure flamer unit as a defense for all the T1 madness. And maybe there is a cost difference that allows the purchase of a rhino to get them close pretty fast.
So your so called competent player might have to burn a unit off an objective and the interceptors are the only unit that can do it, and the turn after the TSons player brings in the flamer rubrics.
Comparing two units in a vacuum is already loaded with issues and doing so without even knowing all the rules makes it no better than playing the lottery.
No the math doesn't. YOU have to you have to assume a player would think the best thing to do is to charge a unit full of flamers, which I find unreasonable. Now if you want to say that units are all total unknowns at the start of the game sure except that is not how I play and as far as I can tell its not how most people play. The cost difference should be around 15% which allows 25 points for a Rhino, again unreasonable, and I'm not going to address the rest since you made an assumption without checking how likely it could happen. Comparing two units in a vacuum is only a problem for people that don't understand that if things are balanced then you can add all the context you want, but in the end all it will do is push the end result farther down the road with the same gap as you started with.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Dark Elder have Disintegrators which deal 2 damage flat, so get some Warriors with those. Done. And then those Warriors obviously aren't a great counter to Rubric Marines.
Oh look. Counters exist for different units. Imagine that, huh?
Whats the range how many shots what the toughness of the models, if its what I think your referring too this isn't going to end well for the Rubrics.
Roknar wrote:We also don't know how crowded some slots might be. With old marines and nu marines both sharing the adeptus astartes keyword you effectively end up having two factions worth of options per slot. Given how many slots the new detachments appear to have that might be a non issue but yea, still comes back to not knowing enough to make definitive judgments.
Now your getting into the "just pick the units the devs want you to pick".
Kandela wrote:It's just a little bit silly to compare Fast Attack with Troops...
Troops are meant to be a swiss army knife and you compare it to a machete and complain that it won't cut wood the same.
Iceptors are in my opinion meant to have an absolutely devastating alpha strike in order to force trade between units (maybe some pesky devastator unit that dig in some terrain and pop-ed your precious tank, maybe some troops that are sitting backfield guarding some objective) and most probably draw huge amount of fire from your opponent as he make sure that won't happen again. They can come on turn 2 or 3. Sometimes only those 2-3 turn matter as your opponent tables you...
Here is what you just said. Its just silly to compare two units that should be around the same power level.
Sigh, you're twisting my words and taking them out of context.
I'm saying that a judgement made not knowing 100% if the facts is the the same as knowing 0%.
You keep saying that adding context doesn't matter since both get it, but that's not true.
Take the humble rhino for example. space marines and csm get it, but you don't know about formations.
Let's just assume for the purpose of discussion that being able to add a havoc launcher is a big deal and so SM rhino << CSM rhino
Space marines then get a formation which makes them free, which is huge, but so what..then csm can get some thing too...except they never did.
So now free rhino >>>>>>>not free rhino.
And don't go picking that apart. Rhinos being free is 1, ONE special rule, and yet it makes a HUUUGE difference.
So despite knowing just about everything, you're world is suddenly turned upside down.
But even then things get complicated, because in order to take that you need a specific list etc, etc.
Point being (and my ONLY point), you simply cannot go ahead and make a decisive judgment about any unit in the game right now.
We don't have all the facts, all you can do at this point is be concerned and wait.
I've already done that the reason why I'm comparing the two is because its a faster way to get an Idea of what will happen when these individual units will do when they go up against units like that. Inceptors preform better in ever catagory except in T10+ where rubric marines preform 50% better problem is 50% of .10 is laughable.
Aye, and I'm actually on your side on this matter.
The 1AP advantage is basically a wash to the 1STR advantage.
They we just need to consider the vast weight of fire advantage that Interceptors have.
as for a unit with roughly the same predicted power level that should be a fairly hard counter to inceptor squads, I'll toss one out.
we know that a Inceptor squad costs 159 points for a squad of 3, with 2 assault bolters each. assuming the points stay approximatly the same, a Predator tank could be upgraded to a full las pred for that much. and that would SHRED the inceptor squad.
and ohh look! it's a unit 1k sons have!
or the demolisher tank. maybe a properly kitted out dreadnought? ohh I bet the helldrake'd fry it pretty easily. CSMs have plenty of tools at 150ish points to handle this.
Where does anyone get the concept that two units that have similar points cost will do equally well against each other? Points levels always, always, always are a relative gauge of strength vs a broad variety of targets.
Compare Rubrics against 20 different targets of the same power level. Obviously we cannot just yet, but should not draw conclusions based on one or two available comparisons.
Talamare wrote: I think that people are approaching this slightly wrong
Don't compare Rubric killing Interceptors and vice/versa
Instead, let's see how they fare against a few standards.
vs T4, Av3+ MEQ vs T3, Av5+ GEQ vs T5, Av4+ Transport
vs T7, Av3+ Dreadnaught
vs T8, Av3+ Tank
Alright, lets do this
First are inceptors, then rubrics in RF/Pistol range (sorc has bolt pistol, isn't using smite), then plague marines with 2 blight 1 plasma, also in rapid fire range.
4 vs 2 vs 2.37
6.666 vs 4 vs 4.52
4 vs 1.666 vs 4.3 (blight launcher starts getting multiple wounds per hit).
2 vs 1.333 vs 2.04
2 vs .666 vs 1.70
I forgot the blight launcher rerolls to wounds rolls of 1, so the plague marine is a little lower than it should be. Including that it should be:
4 vs 2 vs 2.67
6.666 vs 4 vs 5.07
4 vs 1.666 vs 5.04
2 vs 1.333 vs 2.34
2 vs .666 vs 2
Left both up just in case I messed up my recalculation. So again, rubrics just don't put out much damage, even compared to the lower cost plague marines they need to cast smite every turn just to stay competitive, and again I'll stress the 1/18 chance of killing half your rubrics off. Plague marines are also a troop option, meaning this isn't a slot issue, and plague marines can take damage better than rubrics, so the cost isn't durability.
Roknar wrote: Sigh, you're twisting my words and taking them out of context.
I'm saying that a judgement made not knowing 100% if the facts is the the same as knowing 0%.
How did I take your words out of context? You said that the Warlord trait and CP are free. I said they don't cost points, but they do cost slots (paraphrased). So now your going to add something to one unit that makes them better I get to do the same except its not going to be the same thing ,its going to be the thing that improves their power level the most.
Roknar wrote: You keep saying that adding context doesn't matter since both get it, but that's not true.
Take the humble rhino for example. space marines and csm get it, but you don't know about formations.
Let's just assume for the purpose of discussion that being able to add a havoc launcher is a big deal and so SM rhino << CSM rhino
I keep saying that adding context docent matter because the Devs said they intended to give every army similar support options. Which I take to mean the same power level, not the same exact thing. It doesn't matter though because in either situation Rubrics are playing catch-up
Roknar wrote: Space marines then get a formation which makes them free, which is huge, but so what..then csm can get some thing too...except they never did.
So now free rhino >>>>>>>not free rhino.
Okay?
Roknar wrote: And don't go picking that apart. Rhinos being free is 1, ONE special rule, and yet it makes a HUUUGE difference.
So despite knowing just about everything, you're world is suddenly turned upside down.
But even then things get complicated, because in order to take that you need a specific list etc, etc.
Its not one special rule though its at least 2. You HAVE to bring certain units and those units get the option for a free Rhino. So the devs determine the EXACT units you bring and give you extra stuff to make up for the power loss else where. Which isn't what your arguing.
Roknar wrote: Point being (and my ONLY point), you simply cannot go ahead and make a decisive judgment about any unit in the game right now.
We don't have all the facts, all you can do at this point is be concerned and wait.
Okay tell you what I'll give you EVERYTHING. how will the balance occur after this point?
Your undoubtedly going to say well other units/formations will make up for the gap, because its the only thing you have left.
Here is your problem. How will the devs predict the exact units/formations people will take? They can't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
John Prins wrote: Where does anyone get the concept that two units that have similar points cost will do equally well against each other? Points levels always, always, always are a relative gauge of strength vs a broad variety of targets.
Compare Rubrics against 20 different targets of the same power level. Obviously we cannot just yet, but should not draw conclusions based on one or two available comparisons.
My point isn't that Rubrics Lose its the margin by which they lose.
as for a unit with roughly the same predicted power level that should be a fairly hard counter to inceptor squads, I'll toss one out.
we know that a Inceptor squad costs 159 points for a squad of 3, with 2 assault bolters each. assuming the points stay approximatly the same, a Predator tank could be upgraded to a full las pred for that much. and that would SHRED the inceptor squad.
and ohh look! it's a unit 1k sons have!
or the demolisher tank. maybe a properly kitted out dreadnought? ohh I bet the helldrake'd fry it pretty easily. CSMs have plenty of tools at 150ish points to handle this.
What if I was an airborne infantryman and don't like tanks? What if I don't use tanks...at all. Why should I be forced to take certain units to have a viable army? How am I the one building the Army if the Devs basically create a system that harshly punishes me for not sticking to a army build they have decided is best?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Soul Reaper cannons can't be used until it's a 10 man unit. So a more comparative point is that with two Interceptor Squads. At that point it evens out.
Just because someone is named Thousand-Son-Sorcerer doesn't mean they know what's going on with Rubric Marines. They actually look good to me, and I'm hardcore along with my regular group.
Okay lets compare 10 Rubrics to 1 unit of 6 Inceptors
Deployment comes you put your squad on the table, I DS 18" away unload 36 shots into the unit. you lose 4-5 guys, you move up 5" your range is 13" you get 7 shots 4 at S 5 AP -3 resulting in 1.089 wounds then 4 bolter shots cause .431 wounds. Smite causes another .66 wounds. total of 2 wounds 1 guy lost. I move forward 10" shoot 30 more rounds take another 4 guys leaving 1-2 guys in the unit 3" charge .825 wounds lets assume you kill 1 guy with overwatch you still lose the unit and I am left with 66% of my unit.
MAYBE just MAYBE I do know what im talking about and there is a problem. Had that even crossed your mind?
No it hasnt, because you don't. When deployment comes, what happens if the Rubrics are in a Rhino? Why are Inceptors getting the first turn in this scenario?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Soul Reaper cannons can't be used until it's a 10 man unit. So a more comparative point is that with two Interceptor Squads. At that point it evens out.
Just because someone is named Thousand-Son-Sorcerer doesn't mean they know what's going on with Rubric Marines. They actually look good to me, and I'm hardcore along with my regular group.
Okay lets compare 10 Rubrics to 1 unit of 6 Inceptors
Deployment comes you put your squad on the table, I DS 18" away unload 36 shots into the unit. you lose 4-5 guys, you move up 5" your range is 13" you get 7 shots 4 at S 5 AP -3 resulting in 1.089 wounds then 4 bolter shots cause .431 wounds. Smite causes another .66 wounds. total of 2 wounds 1 guy lost. I move forward 10" shoot 30 more rounds take another 4 guys leaving 1-2 guys in the unit 3" charge .825 wounds lets assume you kill 1 guy with overwatch you still lose the unit and I am left with 66% of my unit.
MAYBE just MAYBE I do know what im talking about and there is a problem. Had that even crossed your mind?
No it hasnt, because you don't. When deployment comes, what happens if the Rubrics are in a Rhino? Why are Inceptors getting the first turn in this scenario?
Inceptors get first turn because they will never not get first turn.
Formerly Wu wrote: Are you comparing two fully kitted-out squads? Because that's what power level assumes.
Official response from the design teAm is that it's essentially an avg of fully loaded and no options.
That said, comparing two units when we don't know all there rules (like what the standard does) is silly. We don,t kow enough to make fair, objective statements about the strengths or weaknesses of any unit over another yet.
Inceptors get first turn because they will never not get first turn.
Yeah, you're probably right. There will never be any sort of reserve manipulation or interceptor mechanics. Definitely not any kind of mission stratagems that play into things, because that's not the sort of mission types power-level narrative games are based around at all.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Soul Reaper cannons can't be used until it's a 10 man unit. So a more comparative point is that with two Interceptor Squads. At that point it evens out.
Just because someone is named Thousand-Son-Sorcerer doesn't mean they know what's going on with Rubric Marines. They actually look good to me, and I'm hardcore along with my regular group.
Okay lets compare 10 Rubrics to 1 unit of 6 Inceptors
Deployment comes you put your squad on the table, I DS 18" away unload 36 shots into the unit. you lose 4-5 guys, you move up 5" your range is 13" you get 7 shots 4 at S 5 AP -3 resulting in 1.089 wounds then 4 bolter shots cause .431 wounds. Smite causes another .66 wounds. total of 2 wounds 1 guy lost. I move forward 10" shoot 30 more rounds take another 4 guys leaving 1-2 guys in the unit 3" charge .825 wounds lets assume you kill 1 guy with overwatch you still lose the unit and I am left with 66% of my unit.
MAYBE just MAYBE I do know what im talking about and there is a problem. Had that even crossed your mind?
No it hasnt, because you don't. When deployment comes, what happens if the Rubrics are in a Rhino? Why are Inceptors getting the first turn in this scenario?
Inceptors get first turn because they will never not get first turn.
Fine, then I decide that Rubric Marines will always start in a Rhino and you got to kill it to get to them.
ClockworkZion wrote: That said, comparing two units when we don't know all there rules (like what the standard does) is silly. We don,t know enough to make fair, objective statements about the strengths or weaknesses of any unit over another yet.
Inceptors are faster. That is objective, and true.
Inceptors are better at range. That is objective, and true.
Inceptors have better deployment options. That is objective, and true.
We don't know what chapter tactics does either, or ATSKNF. On what basis would you ascribe them making those two weaker then their Chaos counterparts?
Most likely T7, somewhere from 7-10 wounds, 3+ armour save.
So, Inceptors, with their 18 shots, 12 hits, 4 wounds, 2 go through. Likely not enough to do any real damage.
And then the Rubrics do what? Sit scared in their Rhino, and do paltry damage to the Inceptors, or get out, get the first volley, and then get crumped?
The problem as i see it can basically be boiled down to:
1 - thousand sons are tzeentch faction
2 - adeptus restartes are the new hotness
If you look at traditional gw behaviour (and not buy into the hype that things are different now), the problems seems fairly well established. We have the data cards for most of the information of the two units, the idea that comparisons can't be made yet are the same arguments i see every edition when something looks bad and the fans say you have to wait and see. No, sometimes things look bad because they're bad. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its probably a duck.
So, Inceptors, with their 18 shots, 12 hits, 4 wounds, 2 go through. Likely not enough to do any real damage.
And then the Rubrics do what? Sit scared in their Rhino, and do paltry damage to the Inceptors, or get out, get the first volley, and then get crumped?
If they are all armed with warpflamers, they can easily kill the Inceptors with shooting followed by assault.
ClockworkZion wrote: That said, comparing two units when we don't know all there rules (like what the standard does) is silly. We don,t know enough to make fair, objective statements about the strengths or weaknesses of any unit over another yet.
Inceptors are faster. That is objective, and true.
Inceptors are better at range. That is objective, and true.
Inceptors have better deployment options. That is objective, and true.
We don't know what chapter tactics does either, or ATSKNF. On what basis would you ascribe them making those two weaker then their Chaos counterparts?
Guess it is inceptors, despite what a waste that is. Second Rubricae will be getting a 2+ save against anyone that chooses to drop interceptors in, that is objective and true. (Cover+rubric abilities)
Inceptors will get AT BEST a 4+ save against rubrics, that is objective and true.
An entire unit of inrceptors will get crumped by just the aspiring sorceror in CQC that is objective and true (2+ save against interceptors)
Inceptors can't shoot once in CQC, Rubrics CAN and with very good pistols, this is objective and true.
Increasing squad size to the next higher point will benefit rubricae VASTLY more than it will inceptors. This is objective and true.
Dropping in inceptors give them a 5/18 chance to make their initial charge which if they fail means they get wiped off the board by the rubricae next turn as they stand useless with their wangs in their hands, this is objective and true.
It's almost like different units have different strengths and weaknesses...
ClockworkZion wrote: That said, comparing two units when we don't know all there rules (like what the standard does) is silly. We don,t know enough to make fair, objective statements about the strengths or weaknesses of any unit over another yet.
Inceptors are faster. That is objective, and true.
Inceptors are better at range. That is objective, and true.
Inceptors have better deployment options. That is objective, and true.
We don't know what chapter tactics does either, or ATSKNF. On what basis would you ascribe them making those two weaker then their Chaos counterparts?
What do all of the subfaction keywords do? The banner? The Legion and Chapter tactics?
Based on statlines alone, yes, it looks like the new kids might be better, but with a whole slew of rules left unknown we can,t fairly and objectively weigh anything. It's like trying to compare two different ducks you're seen a rough sketch of, but don,t know how much they weigh, what color they are, ect.
Yes we know generally what we have, but we lack specific details to make those generalities matter.
What if I was an airborne infantryman and don't like tanks? What if I don't use tanks...at all. Why should I be forced to take certain units to have a viable army? How am I the one building the Army if the Devs basically create a system that harshly punishes me for not sticking to a army build they have decided is best?
the predator isn't the ONLY answer, it's just obviously a "very good answer" and I'm sorry but GW is not obligated to make every unique in the codex equally good at everything just because you might not want to use the options they give you. The Predator's been a staple of all Space Marine armies since what 2nd? 3rd edition? it's why I choose it, if you play space Marines of ANY type, chances are pretty good you've got something that could handle em.
what some other stuff? alright let's see..
Helldrakes, forge fiends, Land Raiders (seriously a chaos Land Raider would shred these suckers), Obliterators might do alright depending on their stats. Chaos Terminators with Combi Plasmas,
andc yeah all these units I'm naming are HEAVY units, thats what you use to take out a unit like this. Inceptors are a small unit with high toughness and multiple wounds. you don't use your generic anti infantry guns to pop them, you sue your heavy weapons. for example, we saw Plague Marines can have 2 or 3 plasma guns a squad in 8th, plasma guns are gonna be what you use to drop units like inceptors.
So, Inceptors, with their 18 shots, 12 hits, 4 wounds, 2 go through. Likely not enough to do any real damage.
And then the Rubrics do what? Sit scared in their Rhino, and do paltry damage to the Inceptors, or get out, get the first volley, and then get crumped?
If they are all armed with warpflamers, they can easily kill the Inceptors with shooting followed by assault.
Inceptors drop in 18" away (no scatter).
Rubrics disembark 3" from their Rhino, move up 6", and end 9" away. Warpflamers help how?
Yeah? Did you take into account the fact that a inceptor unit cannot be expanded? That 3 models is as big as tbe unit gets? Or how about that since this thread has started the core rules have leaked and there is no longer contesting an objective. The unit with the most models within 3 inches of an objective has ownership.
Right. You didn't. Because we didnt know. And we still dont know everything. Until we have some real context for how it will actually work on the table you are trying to come to a absolute conclusion based on partial information.
Did the melee results take into account that apparently (according to rumor) when Rubrics roll 6s to hit in melee they get an extra attack (that doesn't make extra attacks)?
Busy with something else, so only reading atm, but warpfalmers allow them to advance and still flame. So 3 + 5 (not 6) + 3 on average so that's 11 plus the 8 inch range is enough to hit them and you only need to reach one.
Formerly Wu wrote: Are you comparing two fully kitted-out squads? Because that's what power level assumes.
Official response from the design teAm is that it's essentially an avg of fully loaded and no options.
That said, comparing two units when we don't know all there rules (like what the standard does) is silly. We don,t kow enough to make fair, objective statements about the strengths or weaknesses of any unit over another yet.
We absolutely do know enough to make fair and objective statements.
We didn't guess any of the numbers, we used the hard data that has already been presented.
SilverAlien proved that they are strictly better against all targets. As well as we know they have better toughness and better mobility.
So, Inceptors, with their 18 shots, 12 hits, 4 wounds, 2 go through. Likely not enough to do any real damage.
And then the Rubrics do what? Sit scared in their Rhino, and do paltry damage to the Inceptors, or get out, get the first volley, and then get crumped?
If they are all armed with warpflamers, they can easily kill the Inceptors with shooting followed by assault.
Inceptors drop in 18" away (no scatter).
Rubrics disembark 3" from their Rhino, move up 6", and end 9" away. Warpflamers help how?
Advancing and shooting thanks to assault weapons rules.!
Huh. Okay, so 3" disembark, 5" move, meaning they need a 2+ advance to hit the Inceptors, with 5d6 (17.5) S4 Rend-2 hits, or 4 wounds.
So even in the best case scenario (they have a rhino (putting their PL above the Inceptors), the Inceptors choose to go after them, they don't flub the advance roll) they don't manage to wipe out the Inceptors with shooting.
Formerly Wu wrote: Are you comparing two fully kitted-out squads? Because that's what power level assumes.
Official response from the design teAm is that it's essentially an avg of fully loaded and no options.
That said, comparing two units when we don't know all there rules (like what the standard does) is silly. We don,t kow enough to make fair, objective statements about the strengths or weaknesses of any unit over another yet.
We absolutely do know enough to make fair and objective statements.
We didn't guess any of the numbers, we used the hard data that has already been presented.
SilverAlien proved that they are strictly better against all targets. As well as we know they have better toughness and better mobility.
Really? So... What bonuses do Thousand Sons get from their LT?
What about from being Tzeentch?
What bonuses or penalties do the Inceptors get from their CT?
What does the Thousand Sons banner do?
Are we accounting that 1 in 6 attacks by CSM in melee get an extra attack?
Why aren't we looking at how many wounds from shooting the Inceptors will take at 19-24"? You know, the range they can't shoot but be shot for situations where they don't start inside their range band (perhaps they landed and wiped out some cultists and are now focusing on the Rubrics)?
Why assume they make the charge when averages mean they need to roll a 9+ to make the charge and even with a reroll are less likely to make it on turn one instead of being Overwatched, then shot again the next turn and counter-charged?
I don't see the objectivity of having all information present and accounted for, not fairness by accounting for situations that would hurt the Inceptors. Everything in this thread is geared towards supporting the assumption that in a straight fit the Inceptors will ALWAYS have and advantage despite the fact that it's impossible for that to actually be true.
Lance845 wrote: You cannot advance and charge. Genestealers are the only unit we know is an exception to that rule.
Gotcha. So even with Warpflamers and everything going right (admittedly, "everything" in this case is rolling a 2+ on a d6, so it's not HARD, but still) and assuming Inceptors have no cover, they still only take two down.
Edit: For those who are saying "We don't know what the Icon Of Flame/Legion Rules/Chapter Tactics" do, please, post reasonable guesses as to what they do that will actually make a significant difference.
In theory, Legion rules could be "This model hits and wounds on a 2+, rerolling, against Primaris Marines, and increases their AP value by 2 points". But that's not gonna happen. So what do you think they'll be, to make such a huge difference?
Because right now, we have most of their stats. Not all-but most.
Lance845 wrote: Yeah? Did you take into account the fact that a inceptor unit cannot be expanded? That 3 models is as big as tbe unit gets? Or how about that since this thread has started the core rules have leaked and there is no longer contesting an objective. The unit with the most models within 3 inches of an objective has ownership.
Right. You didn't. Because we didnt know. And we still dont know everything. Until we have some real context for how it will actually work on the table you are trying to come to a absolute conclusion based on partial information.
I.e. a total waste of time.
The fact that the comparison is based around power and not points already was a red flag that it was a waste of time.
Assault weapons like flamers can run and shoot at minus 1 to hit. Flamers hit automatically.
3"+5"+3.5"+8"= 19.5" threat range on average for an all flamer unit on a disembark.
Average roll for hits would be 3.5 so for Rubrics (warpflame
pistol out of range) alone that's 14 hits.
14 wounds that wound on 5s means 4.6666666666667 wounds get through. Of those the Inceptors save on a 5+ (3+ degraded by -2) means that of those they save 1.5 wounds which means that 2.5 wounds go through on average.
This is of course not taking in anything other than pure statlines into consideration so who knows if the banner could push up the number of wounds the target unit takes, or if a Chapter Tactic could make the Inceptors harder to hit or able to shrug off wounds.
Edit: 4.67-1.5 is 3.17. So basically 3 wounds go through on avg, not 2.5.
JNAProductions wrote: Huh. Okay, so 3" disembark, 5" move, meaning they need a 2+ advance to hit the Inceptors, with 5d6 (17.5) S4 Rend-2 hits, or 4 wounds.
So even in the best case scenario (they have a rhino (putting their PL above the Inceptors), the Inceptors choose to go after them, they don't flub the advance roll) they don't manage to wipe out the Inceptors with shooting.
So, Inceptors, with their 18 shots, 12 hits, 4 wounds, 2 go through. Likely not enough to do any real damage.
And then the Rubrics do what? Sit scared in their Rhino, and do paltry damage to the Inceptors, or get out, get the first volley, and then get crumped?
If they are all armed with warpflamers, they can easily kill the Inceptors with shooting followed by assault.
Inceptors drop in 18" away (no scatter).
Rubrics disembark 3" from their Rhino, move up 6", and end 9" away. Warpflamers help how?
JNAProductions wrote: I believe you can do everything normally after disembarking, so yes.
Disembarked models may act as normal after disembarking. Granted they say "move" in the example list of things you can do, but I assume they mean "advance" and not "move as normal" as that would be effectivley an 8" move out of the transport...
Basically if both players are playing well it's a close goddam fight that comes down to either what else is going on in the battle, dice, equipment choices or how on fire the aspiring sorcerer is.
Seriously, in a vacuum chamber 'I stand 17" away in cover you stand 17" away in cover' fight, how fire the aspiring sorcerer is is the single biggest determining factor since he can kill the entire squad of inceptors in 2 psychic phases despite their defenses if he rolls extremely well, whereas the entire inceptor squad needs 4ish turns to kill the rubrics if they're full strength for all 4.
If close combat happens the rubrics are at a MASSIVE advantage, even with less attacks swinging secons AND wounding on 5s for the regular guys.
JNAProductions wrote: I know. But I got a few things wrong-Rubrics move 5", and they can advance and shoot.
So they need a 2+ on their advance to shoot. THAT BEING SAID-that'll kill MAYBE TWO Inceptors, and likely less.
On average the four Inferno flamers kill one and wound another. Not enough to fail Battleshock as the highest the Marines would roll would be a 7 (d6+1 casualty).
That said, it does shownthat flamers actually might be more dangerous that people currently expect since Rubrics should run less than half the cost per model of an Inceptor in points.
ClockworkZion wrote: Really? So... What bonuses do Thousand Sons get from their LT?
What about from being Tzeentch?
What bonuses or penalties do the Inceptors get from their CT?
What does the Thousand Sons banner do?
Are we accounting that 1 in 6 attacks by CSM in melee get an extra attack?
Why aren't we looking at how many wounds from shooting the Inceptors will take at 19-24"? You know, the range they can't shoot but be shot for situations where they don't start inside their range band (perhaps they landed and wiped out some cultists and are now focusing on the Rubrics)?
Why assume they make the charge when averages mean they need to roll a 9+ to make the charge and even with a reroll are less likely to make it on turn one instead of being Overwatched, then shot again the next turn and counter-charged?
I don't see the objectivity of having all information present and accounted for, not fairness by accounting for situations that would hurt the Inceptors. Everything in this thread is geared towards supporting the assumption that in a straight fit the Inceptors will ALWAYS have and advantage despite the fact that it's impossible for that to actually be true.
So many irrelevant demands. Unless you're expecting that they will double the effectiveness of their shooting, which is just delusional.
SilverAlien proved that Interceptors are anywhere around 150% to 250% the shooting capability of Rubrics. They also better in melee too.
ClockworkZion wrote: Really? So... What bonuses do Thousand Sons get from their LT?
What about from being Tzeentch?
What bonuses or penalties do the Inceptors get from their CT?
What does the Thousand Sons banner do?
Are we accounting that 1 in 6 attacks by CSM in melee get an extra attack?
Why aren't we looking at how many wounds from shooting the Inceptors will take at 19-24"? You know, the range they can't shoot but be shot for situations where they don't start inside their range band (perhaps they landed and wiped out some cultists and are now focusing on the Rubrics)?
Why assume they make the charge when averages mean they need to roll a 9+ to make the charge and even with a reroll are less likely to make it on turn one instead of being Overwatched, then shot again the next turn and counter-charged?
I don't see the objectivity of having all information present and accounted for, not fairness by accounting for situations that would hurt the Inceptors. Everything in this thread is geared towards supporting the assumption that in a straight fit the Inceptors will ALWAYS have and advantage despite the fact that it's impossible for that to actually be true.
So many irrelevant demands. Unless you're expecting that they will double the effectiveness of their shooting, which is just delusional.
SilverAlien proved that Interceptors are anywhere around 150% to 250% the shooting capability of Rubrics. They also better in melee too.
Current banner can potentially deal more wounds. We could see the same for the new one.
Tzeentch rules might give the rerolling 1s on saves like on Tzeentch Daemons.
Hardly irrelevant when the rules in question have potential to impact the durability and offensive power of the unit.
And people seem to have found Rubrics BETTER in melee, not worse.
Also, those Inceptors still have to make a charge that statistically they aren't likely to make to even get stuck in turn one and attack first...
Tyran wrote: The fact that the comparison is based around power and not points already was a red flag that it was a waste of time.
This. I didn't even bother posting after reading the OP because any player who uses the power ratings as a reference for game balance obviously has no idea how the game works and isn't worth the time.
T3, 5+, 0-12"
4 Wounds from Rubrics
6.67 Wounds from Inceptors
T3, 5+, 12-18"
1.78 Wounds from Rubrics
6.67 Wounds from inceptors
T3, 5+, 18-24"
1.78 Wounds from Rubrics
0 Wounds from Inceptors
Inceptors do more than 50% more damage in rapid fire range, and more than triple past that.
T4, 3+, 0-12"
2 Wounds from Rubrics
4 Wounds from Inceptors
T4, 3+, 12-18"
.89 Wounds from Rubrics
4 Wounds from Inceptors
T4, 3+, 18-24"
.89 Wounds from Rubrics
0 Wounds from Inceptors
Inceptors do double damage in rapid fire, and over quadruple outside it.
T7, 3+, 0-12"
1.33 Wounds from Rubrics
2 Wounds from Inceptors
T7, 3+, 12-18"
.59 Wounds from Rubrics
2 Wounds from Inceptors
T7, 3+, 18-24"
.59 Wounds from Rubrics
0 Wounds from Inceptors
Not quite twice as good at rapid fire range, but nearly four times as good past it.
T8, 3+, 0-12"
.67 Wounds from Rubrics
2 Wounds from Inceptors
T8, 3+, 12-18"
.30 Wounds from Rubrics
2 Wounds from Inceptors
T8, 3+, 18-24"
.30 Wounds from Rubrics
0 Wounds from Inceptors
Inceptors are, once again, three times as good at rapid fire range, nearly SEVEN TIMES as good outside that...
Rubrics ARE better in the 18-24" range, but with Inceptors greater movement, that's AT BEST a wash.
Edit: Again, the Icon of Flame is going to have to literally double their effectiveness for it to make them compare. And it's vulnerable to being sniped out, potentially, if Snipers get a rule like that.
What about flamers vs Interceptors in short range? We all know Interceptors will rock them over 8" but since 16.5" threat range of Rubrics with Inferno Flamers is a thing (5" move + 3.5" avg advance + 8" flamer) means they can at least be a useful threat with 3.5 autohits from 4 models...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also the only thing we,ve heard about snipers was them being able to ignore the "can't target charcters" set of targetting rules. We don't know if they can allocate hits and wounds.
Then 12 shots, 8 hits, 5.33 wounds, 1.78 past the saves. But the Inceptors can simply move away, and while they might sacrifice a little shooting power, they can perpetually kite the Rubrics with the two remaining Inceptors.
Edit: So what do you THINK it'll do? Because again-it will have to literally at least DOUBLE their effectiveness to bring them on par with Inceptor SHOOTING. That's not even touching mobility.
I meant comparing the flamers vs the Interceptor shooting against a range of targets in short range, like you did with the bolter.
And 10" move isn't enough to kite a 16.5" avg threat radius of a flamer unit. So Inteceptors advancing to increase the distance and decreasing their BS to kite?
18" away to start. Rubrics move up 8.5"... Meaning they can't even touch them unless the Inceptors mess up.
Let's assume 10". Rubrics move up 8.5", leaving them 1.5" away.
Inceptors kill the closest model, adding an extra 1"-2.5". Then move 13.5"-putting them 16" away, or outside the MINIMUM threat range.
The issue is, Inceptors aren't going to BE that close in the first place, barring outside circumstances. Which is all fine and dandy, there are other parts to the army, but that applies equally to both sides.
JNAProductions wrote: 18" away to start. Rubrics move up 8.5"... Meaning they can't even touch them unless the Inceptors mess up.
Let's assume 10". Rubrics move up 8.5", leaving them 1.5" away.
Inceptors kill the closest model, adding an extra 1"-2.5". Then move 13.5"-putting them 16" away, or outside the MINIMUM threat range.
The issue is, Inceptors aren't going to BE that close in the first place, barring outside circumstances. Which is all fine and dandy, there are other parts to the army, but that applies equally to both sides.
You said close enough to lose a model to the flamers. That means you were within 8" to start. That means the other two can,t move far enoug away to kite anything.
Now if you,re kiting from the start that,s different, but is not in context with the original scenario where you were close enough to lose a guy in the first place.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also why would Inceptors kill the closest model? Defender allocates wounds. He can pull from back.
Tyran wrote: The fact that the comparison is based around power and not points already was a red flag that it was a waste of time.
This. I didn't even bother posting after reading the OP because any player who uses the power ratings as a reference for game balance obviously has no idea how the game works and isn't worth the time.
he only further confirmed he's looking for something to complain about when I noted the Lascannon predator would proably have a similer points cost and be more then capable of effortlessly killing the inceptors, and he started some ran t about how "what if I don't wanna take any tanks cause I'm an air cav and besides, how is needing to take a unit to deal with something giving me freedom is list building?"" or some such rubbish.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Just going to point out we have 0 clue as to what the Icon of Flame does.
For all we know it could case To Hit rolls of a 6 to cause Mortal Wounds or something like that.
Or does more wounds. Or gives Inferno Weapons +1S. Or does d6 additional wounds to a unit for each unsaved wound they had this turn. Or...
It can do a lot of things, and yet I've been told that a wargear option that could change the way the numbers crunch is irrelevant,
Seems silly to me...
None of what you mentioned would put the rubrics even on par with inceptors, barring the ability to multiply the number of wounds the unit deals by d6 which is so absurd I refuse to entertain it.
If it turned every wound by an inferno weapon into a mortal wound, it'd almost be good enough to give rubrics equal firepower in rapid fire range. Not quite as good, but almost. +1 str wouldn't be enough either, +2 might shift the balance in a couple matchups but again not that much.
Now, the one rule I continue to mention could potentially change this is something that lets the sorcerer cast smite without worrying about destroying his own unit. That brings them up into a more level playing field with inceptors and generally above plague marines. So cross your fingers tsons can mitigate perils.
Tyran wrote: The fact that the comparison is based around power and not points already was a red flag that it was a waste of time.
This. I didn't even bother posting after reading the OP because any player who uses the power ratings as a reference for game balance obviously has no idea how the game works and isn't worth the time.
Considering my comparison showed them being outshot by both lower and the same power units, I'd say it likely indicates something. It may indicate power isn't just a vague measure but a generally useless one, or that rubrics are over priced, or that their is a rule that makes the sorcerer more than dead weight/a melee deterrent.
We can actually learn quite a bit if people would stop and think.
Guess it is inceptors, despite what a waste that is. Second Rubricae will be getting a 2+ save against anyone that chooses to drop interceptors in, that is objective and true. (Cover+rubric abilities)
Sure and outside of 12" Inceptors do 3x the damage to Rubric marines.
ERJAK wrote: Inceptors will get AT BEST a 4+ save against rubrics, that is objective and true.
See above
ERJAK wrote: An entire unit of inrceptors will get crumped by just the aspiring sorceror in CQC that is objective and true (2+ save against interceptors)
No he would probably die in the first round. They would kill him with a mortal wound on the charge or strike first and weight of fire him to death.
ERJAK wrote: Inceptors can't shoot once in CQC, Rubrics CAN and with very good pistols, this is objective and true.
Rubrics dont have pistols only the sorcerer.
ERJAK wrote: Increasing squad size to the next higher point will benefit rubricae VASTLY more than it will inceptors. This is objective and true.
No it dosent ive already gone over this it only makes the TS more vulnerable to loseing guys to morale. You would lose 5 guys to shooting and 1 to the charge on average. Plus another 1 to CC 7 means a 3 leaves you with one guy.
ERJAK wrote: Dropping in inceptors give them a 5/18 chance to make their initial charge which if they fail means they get wiped off the board by the rubricae next turn as they stand useless with their wangs in their hands, this is objective and true.
How are they going to get wiped out? What? You going to shoot them? Oh noes .4 wounds lost. You lose 2-3 if your in the open or 1-2 if your not when they DS if you charge them your probably going to lose 1 to overwatch. So your losing 2-4 before you get into combat. And if you fail the charge your dead.
Then 12 shots, 8 hits, 5.33 wounds, 1.78 past the saves. But the Inceptors can simply move away, and while they might sacrifice a little shooting power, they can perpetually kite the Rubrics with the two remaining Inceptors.
Edit: So what do you THINK it'll do? Because again-it will have to literally at least DOUBLE their effectiveness to bring them on par with Inceptor SHOOTING. That's not even touching mobility.
Ignoring the fact that rubrics will likely grind out inceptors in an attrition shooting war due to their defenses being better suited to inceptor damage than inceptor defenses are to rubric damage and that rubrics are much better in melee.
I think taking the Sorceror out of the equation in terms of damage output is unfair to the Rubrics. Part of the reason they're likely rated as high as they are is their access to psychic powers. Smite alone is a handy and fairly reliable way to dish out mortal wounds (just don't roll double sixes and kill your unit).
Who knows what other powers they may have access to.
Guess it is inceptors, despite what a waste that is. Second Rubricae will be getting a 2+ save against anyone that chooses to drop interceptors in, that is objective and true. (Cover+rubric abilities)
Sure and outside of 12" Inceptors do 3x the damage to Rubric marines.
ERJAK wrote: Inceptors will get AT BEST a 4+ save against rubrics, that is objective and true.
See above
ERJAK wrote: An entire unit of inrceptors will get crumped by just the aspiring sorceror in CQC that is objective and true (2+ save against interceptors)
No he would probably die in the first round. They would kill him with a mortal wound on the charge or strike first and weight of fire him to death.
ERJAK wrote: Inceptors can't shoot once in CQC, Rubrics CAN and with very good pistols, this is objective and true.
Rubrics dont have pistols only the sorcerer.
ERJAK wrote: Increasing squad size to the next higher point will benefit rubricae VASTLY more than it will inceptors. This is objective and true.
No it dosent ive already gone over this it only makes the TS more vulnerable to loseing guys to morale. You would lose 5 guys to shooting and 1 to the charge on average. Plus another 1 to CC 7 means a 3 leaves you with one guy.
ERJAK wrote: Dropping in inceptors give them a 5/18 chance to make their initial charge which if they fail means they get wiped off the board by the rubricae next turn as they stand useless with their wangs in their hands, this is objective and true.
How are they going to get wiped out? What? You going to shoot them? Oh noes .4 wounds lost. You lose 2-3 if your in the open or 1-2 if your not when they DS if you charge them your probably going to lose 1 to overwatch. So your losing 2-4 before you get into combat. And if you fail the charge your dead.
Fine, if you want to cherry pick best case scenarios the inceptors land kill 1 guy the rubrics kill 2 between 3 mortal wounds in the psychic phase and 1 bolter wound. The last guy fails to do anything and the sorc pips him with 2 more mortal wounds.
JNAProductions wrote: I believe you can do everything normally after disembarking, so yes.
Disembarked models may act as normal after disembarking. Granted they say "move" in the example list of things you can do, but I assume they mean "advance" and not "move as normal" as that would be effectivley an 8" move out of the transport...
Does doubling your movemet on average seem reasonable? It doesnt to me im willing to bet that disembarking will disallow advancing in the same turn.
ClockworkZion wrote: I think taking the Sorceror out of the equation in terms of damage output is unfair to the Rubrics. Part of the reason they're likely rated as high as they are is their access to psychic powers. Smite alone is a handy and fairly reliable way to dish out mortal wounds (just don't roll double sixes and kill your unit).
Who knows what other powers they may have access to.
Given that the data sheet is said to tell you, rubrics have access to lesser smite, and that's it.
As for why it isn't being included, while it brings damage closer inline (not actually equal but closer) you lose half your rubrics+sorcerer on a double 1 or 6. 1/18 chance to basically kill off your own unit. Which equates to an average of .166 mortal wounds inflicted on your own squad, vs .888 average mortal wounds on the enemy. That's a net gain, but a really risky one.
So if that's a big part of the power, tsons must have more reliable psykers than the default.
ERJAK wrote: Fine, if you want to cherry pick best case scenarios the inceptors land kill 1 guy the rubrics kill 2 between 3 mortal wounds in the psychic phase and 1 bolter wound. The last guy fails to do anything and the sorc pips him with 2 more mortal wounds.
LMAO 3 mortal wounds. LMAO and that has a 16% chance of happening. Its not worst case senario, im taking the averages how the dice would roll on average. LOL so bad.
JNAProductions wrote: I believe you can do everything normally after disembarking, so yes.
Disembarked models may act as normal after disembarking. Granted they say "move" in the example list of things you can do, but I assume they mean "advance" and not "move as normal" as that would be effectivley an 8" move out of the transport...
Does doubling your movemet on average seem reasonable? It doesnt to me im willing to bet that disembarking will disallow advancing in the same turn.
What do you think they do? +1 ld and some gak bonus like always.
ClockworkZion wrote: Are we accounting that 1 in 6 attacks by CSM in melee get an extra attack
Thats a chainsword thing not a CSM thing Rubrics don't have chainswords.
ClockworkZion wrote: Why aren't we looking at how many wounds from shooting the Inceptors will take at 19-24"? You know, the range they can't shoot but be shot for situations where they don't start inside their range band (perhaps they landed and wiped out some cultists and are now focusing on the Rubrics)?
Because its .4 wounds and would only be 1 turn it literally makes no difference
ClockworkZion wrote: Why assume they make the charge when averages mean they need to roll a 9+ to make the charge and even with a reroll are less likely to make it on turn one instead of being Overwatched, then shot again the next turn and counter-charged?
Because they have jet packs which is almost guarnteed to give them some bonus for charging.
ClockworkZion wrote: I don't see the objectivity of having all information present and accounted for, not fairness by accounting for situations that would hurt the Inceptors. Everything in this thread is geared towards supporting the assumption that in a straight fit the Inceptors will ALWAYS have and advantage despite the fact that it's impossible for that to actually be true.
Think harder. Look harder...
Oh and its not an assumption when Inceptors can DS on turn 1 and guarnteed get the first round of firing. Every fething game.
Random but... where are people getting the free 3" move when disembarking from? I can't find reference to it in the leaked rules or any of the articles. Unless people are extrapolating from the deepstriking rules.
Because I'd like to see if it does indicate this is a "free" move, more than likely I'd expect it to count against the unit's movement for the turn.
Edit: was looking on the movement page, didn't see the transport sidebar. That's interesting to say the least.
Considering my comparison showed them being outshot by both lower and the same power units, I'd say it likely indicates something. It may indicate power isn't just a vague measure but a generally useless one, or that rubrics are over priced, or that their is a rule that makes the sorcerer more than dead weight/a melee deterrent.
We can actually learn quite a bit if people would stop and think.
The only function of power is to be able to quickly make a game without worrying about making a list. The simple fact that it doesn't considers weapons or upgrades should tell you how useless it is for actual balance.
And your comparison doesn't consider the fact that Rubrics are actually tougher targets against most weapons.
Tyran wrote: The only function of power is to be able to quickly make a game without worrying about making a list. The simple fact that it doesn't considers weapons or upgrades should tell you how useless it is for actual balance.
Power is considering that fact that all upgrades are taken for the power point listed.
Okay, let's assume an 8" max (at the end of the movement phase).
Kills one and a half Inceptors, Inceptor player picks the nearest to die to get an extra 1".
They're now 9" away. They move their 10", putting them 19" away-outside the average threat range, and JUST BARELY inside the maximum threat range. (Unless the Inceptors weren't bunched together, or their base is bigger than 1", in which case they're OUTSIDE the MAXIMUM threat range.)
ERJAK wrote: Basically if both players are playing well it's a close goddam fight that comes down to either what else is going on in the battle, dice, equipment choices or how on fire the aspiring sorcerer is.
Seriously, in a vacuum chamber 'I stand 17" away in cover you stand 17" away in cover' fight, how fire the aspiring sorcerer is is the single biggest determining factor since he can kill the entire squad of inceptors in 2 psychic phases despite their defenses if he rolls extremely well, whereas the entire inceptor squad needs 4ish turns to kill the rubrics if they're full strength for all 4.
If close combat happens the rubrics are at a MASSIVE advantage, even with less attacks swinging secons AND wounding on 5s for the regular guys.
They are at a slight advantage in melee. Not "MASSIVE". Do the math 1.15 wounds for rubrics .71 wounds for Inceptors if you include the charge damage it becomes 1.21.
Considering my comparison showed them being outshot by both lower and the same power units, I'd say it likely indicates something. It may indicate power isn't just a vague measure but a generally useless one, or that rubrics are over priced, or that their is a rule that makes the sorcerer more than dead weight/a melee deterrent.
We can actually learn quite a bit if people would stop and think.
The only function of power is to be able to quickly make a game without worrying about making a list. The simple fact that it doesn't considers weapons or upgrades should tell you how useless it is for actual balance.
And your comparison doesn't consider the fact that Rubrics are actually tougher targets against most weapons.
Tougher than plague marines? No they are not. If I must I'll be glad to go through and show that, there is not a single weapon in the game rubrics are tougher against. Hypothetically, assuming the rubrics can get a 4+ invulnerable vs 1 damage weapons with high AP, a str 10+ ap-4 damage 1 weapon would be marginally better vs plague marines (save on a 5+ vs 4+, all else equal) but that's literally it. But that's literally the only time it'd be the case, and no such weapon currently exists. In all other cases plague marines are as tough or tougher, again despite having a lower power.
Tyran wrote: The only function of power is to be able to quickly make a game without worrying about making a list. The simple fact that it doesn't considers weapons or upgrades should tell you how useless it is for actual balance.
Power is considering that fact that all upgrades are taken for the power point listed.
Power doesn't really considers that, because you cannot assume that the units being used will have all the upgrades or weapons. And there are units whose entire role is dependent on upgrades and weapons.
For example Tyranid termagants, there is literally a difference of 3 times the firepower between a devilgant and the standard version, and they are going to have the same power cost.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SilverAlien wrote: Tougher than plague marines? No they are not. If I must I'll be glad to go through and show that, there is not a single weapon in the game rubrics are tougher against.
Lasguns in open terrain is one, although I was actually thinking about Rubrics vs Inceptors.
SilverAlien wrote: Tougher than plague marines? No they are not. If I must I'll be glad to go through and show that, there is not a single weapon in the game rubrics are tougher against.
Lasguns in open terrain is one, although I was actually thinking about Rubrics vs Inceptors.
You realize a 3+ save and a 5+ FNP beats a 2+ save, correct?
Inceptors are a different story, but my point is that the rubrics toughness doesn't mitigate their poor firepower, as plague marines are cheaper, have roughly as much firepower (including the rubric's sorc), and are quite a bit tougher than either.
Inceptors actually have the same rough durability vs lasgun fire in the open. Rubrics get a 2+ save, but inceptors have more wounds overall, and have 2w each so they can take a wound without losing firepower. Plasma and other high AP single damage weapons favor rubrics, but str 4/5 or 8/9 swing advantage to inceptors. So durability is mostly a wash.
Shadelkan wrote: I gotta say, this is the dumbest thread I've ever read on dakkadakka, yet reminds me why I hardly come here.
No one here knows what's entirely in this new edition, and yet you talk like it's already completely released. Hilarious.
Yes we only have the unit and weapon profiles, core rules, and rules for all listed abilities. No way we could possibly compare them.
All we are missing is the icon of flame and potential army wide bonuses for taking certain factions, which we assume are roughly equivalent if they even still exist. We aren't really going out on that much of a limb.
JNA reference values
T3, 5+, 0-12"
4 Wounds from Rubrics
6.67 Wounds from Inceptors
T4, 3+, 0-12"
2 Wounds from Rubrics
4 Wounds from Inceptors
T7, 3+, 0-12"
1.33 Wounds from Rubrics
2 Wounds from Inceptors
T8, 3+, 0-12"
.67 Wounds from Rubrics
2 Wounds from Inceptors
Except your never going to be in range. If you bring a bunch of units filled with flamers people are going to sit back pop your transports first turn and then shoot you down as you slog forward at 9" a turn. Its not a viable strategy in the slightest.
SilverAlien wrote: Tougher than plague marines? No they are not. If I must I'll be glad to go through and show that, there is not a single weapon in the game rubrics are tougher against.
Lasguns in open terrain is one, although I was actually thinking about Rubrics vs Inceptors.
You realize a 3+ save and a 5+ FNP beats a 2+ save, correct?
Inceptors are a different story, but my point is that the rubrics toughness doesn't mitigate their poor firepower, as plague marines are cheaper, have roughly as much firepower (including the rubric's sorc), and are quite a bit tougher than either.
Inceptors actually have the same rough durability vs lasgun fire in the open. Rubrics get a 2+ save, but inceptors have more wounds overall, and have 2w each so they can take a wound without losing firepower. Plasma and other high AP single damage weapons favor rubrics, but str 4/5 or 8/9 swing advantage to inceptors. So durability is mostly a wash.
No it doesn't, you need a 4+ FNP to equal a 2+ save.
As for Inceptors, you also have to consider multi-damage weapons.
SilverAlien wrote:If it turned every wound by an inferno weapon into a mortal wound, it'd almost be good enough to give rubrics equal firepower in rapid fire range. Not quite as good, but almost. +1 str wouldn't be enough either, +2 might shift the balance in a couple matchups but again not that much.
An entire unit shooting nothing but mortal wounds with AP-2 and all this gets of you is a "meh"? Are you out of your mind?
Back on topic.
Somebody asked for example of icons and stuff (Jnp?)
Rubriccs already have one up on the inceptors with the icon. The inceptors have nothign equivalent.
Then Atsknf is most likely going to remain some kind of protetction for battleshocks or leadership modification like the butcher cannon array.
VotLW was partly offensive. Potent, but directed vs marines. we're comparing against a marine unit so that won't be a problem either way.
So death to the false emperor could still be offensive. Could be hatred, could be preferred enemy, ie working with shooting as well.
That would be better not in terms of power but in that every unit can use it compared to the previous melee only.
...Or the rumoured more attacks on 6's. (are those exploding?)
Then the icon of flame used to do more damage. It still might, but likely not like it used to given how many people complained how bad it was.
So all bets are off on this one. It could give bolters a conflagerate kind of effect, it could cause mortal wounds on a 6.
It could also be a protection. Iirc it was described as being hard to look at in the lore and so could cause enemy units to gain -1 to hit rubrics.
We know that kind of effect is a thing from orcs and it would be fluffy. Or it could replace blessing of tzeentch and improve their armour or invuln sav, who knows.
With just preferred enemy TSons put three wounds into the inceptors at 18 inch. The next turn inceptors kill maybe one rubric.
The inceptors won't want to assault Rubrics as they are utterly worthless in CC vs rubrics with their now 5 attacks vs the rubrics 2+ save and the sorcerer can kill an inceptor a turn, more if you can smite into melee. And their hammer of wrath ain't gonna do gak.
The turn after TSons finish them off and even should one guy stays alive he can't do much of anything.
That's not even counting whatever the icon would do.
Again though, the whole comparison is flawed.
There's not only those two units on the board and killing is most certainly not the only way they are valuable.
And let's not pretend like you can just deepstrike next to any unit you want, bubblewrapping is easier than ever.
X----9"-----R----9"-----/-----9"----C----9"-----X
With R being a rubric and C being cultists, you can leave a whopping 18 inch between those two units and your opponent will NOT be able to deepstrike in between.
That's a straight line and only cultists on one side, but you get the idea. Deepstriking close will not be as easy as people think it is
Shadelkan wrote: I gotta say, this is the dumbest thread I've ever read on dakkadakka, yet reminds me why I hardly come here.
No one here knows what's entirely in this new edition, and yet you talk like it's already completely released. Hilarious.
Not knowing everything isnt what its about there is very little in the dark now and there is a huge gap between these units. Unless you think the icon will double thier damage, which is unreasonable to say the least. Notice in the data sheet there is no Mark of Tzeentch. They just have a 5+ invul save which only comes into effect vs AP -3 which is going to be rare.
SilverAlien wrote: Tougher than plague marines? No they are not. If I must I'll be glad to go through and show that, there is not a single weapon in the game rubrics are tougher against.
Lasguns in open terrain is one, although I was actually thinking about Rubrics vs Inceptors.
You realize a 3+ save and a 5+ FNP beats a 2+ save, correct?
Inceptors are a different story, but my point is that the rubrics toughness doesn't mitigate their poor firepower, as plague marines are cheaper, have roughly as much firepower (including the rubric's sorc), and are quite a bit tougher than either.
Inceptors actually have the same rough durability vs lasgun fire in the open. Rubrics get a 2+ save, but inceptors have more wounds overall, and have 2w each so they can take a wound without losing firepower. Plasma and other high AP single damage weapons favor rubrics, but str 4/5 or 8/9 swing advantage to inceptors. So durability is mostly a wash.
No it doesn't, you need a 4+ FNP to equal a 2+ save.
As for Inceptors, you also have to consider multi-damage weapons.
Oh wow my bad, I don't know why I had it backwards in my head like that. Major screw up on my part. Should've checked the numbers to be safe.
Multi damage weapons also bypass the tsons saves, so I was giving them a small advantage there. Still, not convinced either is more durable overall, just situationally more durable.
SilverAlien wrote:If it turned every wound by an inferno weapon into a mortal wound, it'd almost be good enough to give rubrics equal firepower in rapid fire range. Not quite as good, but almost. +1 str wouldn't be enough either, +2 might shift the balance in a couple matchups but again not that much.
An entire unit shooting nothing but mortal wounds with AP-2 and all this gets of you is a "meh"? Are you out of your mind?
Back on topic.
Somebody asked for example of icons and stuff (Jnp?)
Rubriccs already have one up on the inceptors with the icon. The inceptors have nothign equivalent.
Then Atsknf is most likely going to remain some kind of protetction for battleshocks or leadership modification like the butcher cannon array.
VotLW was partly offensive. Potent, but directed vs marines. we're comparing against a marine unit so that won't be a problem either way.
So death to the false emperor could still be offensive. Could be hatred, could be preferred enemy, ie working with shooting as well.
That would be better not in terms of power but in that every unit can use it compared to the previous melee only.
...Or the rumoured more attacks on 6's. (are those exploding?)
Then the icon of flame used to do more damage. It still might, but likely not like it used to given how many people complained how bad it was.
So all bets are off on this one. It could give bolters a conflagerate kind of effect, it could cause mortal wounds on a 6.
It could also be a protection. Iirc it was described as being hard to look at in the lore and so could cause enemy units to gain -1 to hit rubrics.
We know that kind of effect is a thing from orcs and it would be fluffy. Or it could replace blessing of tzeentch and improve their armour or invuln sav, who knows.
With just preferred enemy TSons put three wounds into the inceptors at 18 inch. The next turn inceptors kill maybe one rubric.
The inceptors won't want to assault Rubrics as they are utterly worthless in CC vs rubrics with their now 5 attacks vs the rubrics 2+ save and the sorcerer can kill an inceptor a turn, more if you can smite into melee. And their hammer of wrath ain't gonna do gak.
The turn after TSons finish them off and even should one guy stays alive he can't do much of anything.
That's not even counting whatever the icon would do.
Again though, the whole comparison is flawed.
There's not only those two units on the board and killing is most certainly not the only way they are valuable.
And let's not pretend like you can just deepstrike next to any unit you want, bubblewrapping is easier than ever.
X----9"-----R----9"-----/-----9"----C----9"-----X
With R being a rubric and C being cultists, you can leave a whopping 18 inch between those two units and your opponent will NOT be able to deepstrike in between.
That's a straight line and only cultists on one side, but you get the idea. Deepstriking close will not be as easy as people think it is
Show your math there is no way Inceptors are losing 3 wounds with rerolling 1s at 18" they only get 4 shots. At most its 1.2 including smite.
SilverAlien wrote:If it turned every wound by an inferno weapon into a mortal wound, it'd almost be good enough to give rubrics equal firepower in rapid fire range. Not quite as good, but almost. +1 str wouldn't be enough either, +2 might shift the balance in a couple matchups but again not that much.
An entire unit shooting nothing but mortal wounds with AP-2 and all this gets of you is a "meh"? Are you out of your mind?
Note the wording: every wound into a mortal wound. A mortal wounds only advantage is ignoring saves. In every scenario I ran the numbers for, the rubrics still can't match the firepower of the inceptors.
So if the rubrics totally ignores all armor saves, they still struggle. That's how awful their firepower is comparatively. I don't think you realize just how pitiful the rubrics firepower is by comparison. They are really really sad.
My god, reading back at the posts made in the time I wrote that makes me regret spending so much time on it. This thread could just as well be a traditio thread, except for chaos.
SilverAlien wrote:If it turned every wound by an inferno weapon into a mortal wound, it'd almost be good enough to give rubrics equal firepower in rapid fire range. Not quite as good, but almost. +1 str wouldn't be enough either, +2 might shift the balance in a couple matchups but again not that much.
An entire unit shooting nothing but mortal wounds with AP-2 and all this gets of you is a "meh"? Are you out of your mind?
Note the wording: every wound into a mortal wound. A mortal wounds only advantage is ignoring saves. In every scenario I ran the numbers for, the rubrics still can't match the firepower of the inceptors.
So if the rubrics totally ignores all armor saves, they still struggle. That's how awful their firepower is comparatively. I don't think you realize just how pitiful the rubrics firepower is by comparison. They are really really sad.
Yes as best I can tell 3.2 of the 8 power points comes from the Sorcerer.
Roknar wrote: My god, reading back at the posts made in the time I wrote that makes me regret spending so much time on it. This thread could just as well be a traditio thread, except for chaos.
So... you can't actually show any reason mathematically the rubrics aren't hot garbage, we've all basically accepted the icon isn't going to magically double their firepower, so the next step is insulting people by comparing them to someone who hasn't even been in this thread. Who quite a few of you seem to take remarkable joy in constantly harassing regardless. Honestly, if that constitutes a good usage of your time it is literally impossible for anything you do to be considered a waste by comparison.
Oh wow my bad, I don't know why I had it backwards in my head like that. Major screw up on my part. Should've checked the numbers to be safe.
Multi damage weapons also bypass the tsons saves, so I was giving them a small advantage there. Still, not convinced either is more durable overall, just situationally more durable.
The extra damage is far more punishing on the Inceptors, as they pay premium for that extra wound and they have so little models.
Oh wow my bad, I don't know why I had it backwards in my head like that. Major screw up on my part. Should've checked the numbers to be safe.
Multi damage weapons also bypass the tsons saves, so I was giving them a small advantage there. Still, not convinced either is more durable overall, just situationally more durable.
The extra damage is far more punishing on the Inceptors, as they pay premium for that extra wound and they have so little models.
Fair enough, I think it depends on weapon. A d3 weapon for example will always negate the rubric's save, but will still deal 1 w to the inceptor 33% of the time. I'd say only the d6 or flat 2/3 damage weapons are dramatically more punishing for inceptors.
Is anyone taking into account the scorcerer using his psychic power in melee?
Nothing in the leaked rules prevents a psyker from attempting to manifest powers based on enemy proximity. So remember that if he survives a single round of combat that he will be blasting that unit again.
Lance845 wrote: Is anyone taking into account the scorcerer using his psychic power in melee?
Nothing in the leaked rules prevents a psyker from attempting to manifest powers based on enemy proximity. So remember that if he survives a single round of combat that he will be blasting that unit again.
Its only a wound a turn on average and risks wiping out almost the entire squad.
Tyran wrote: The only function of power is to be able to quickly make a game without worrying about making a list. The simple fact that it doesn't considers weapons or upgrades should tell you how useless it is for actual balance.
Power is considering that fact that all upgrades are taken for the power point listed.
Power doesn't really considers that, because you cannot assume that the units being used will have all the upgrades or weapons. And there are units whose entire role is dependent on upgrades and weapons.
Better question, why would the Power Rank NOT be made without all those upgrades that unit size allows for?
Tyran wrote:For example Tyranid termagants, there is literally a difference of 3 times the firepower between a devilgant and the standard version, and they are going to have the same power cost.
Sure they do, NOW. But in a month or so, will they be so different in the new datasheets? We've seen that Power Weapons are more balanced out between Str bonus and AP then they have ever been. Aside from GW's normal ability to shoot itself in the mouth through its foot when it comes to balance, what tells you to assume that there will be such an actual power difference between the different GunGants?
Also things like chaos daemons will allow you to summon them by way of keywords and if you're not in matched play you don't pay points ts for the side board.
How many spells can the inceptors counter in a round?
Last edition mark of tzeench gave a +1 to invulnerable saves, if that stayed the same then rubric marines would NEVER have less than a 4+ save. Meaning they will always have better saves against missiles, lascannons, melta guns, plasma guns, and all the other high strength good ap shooting that exists in the game.
A tri-las predator destroys inceptors outright, but would be a horrible idea to throw at rubric marines since every damage above 1 is wasted and they'll have a 4++ in the open.
As for the banner, the rubrics are automitons, held together by sorcery. Similar units in AOS can take banners that return fallen members to life.
Counter an extra d3 models returning for free every turn.
You have no clue what their wargear does, and I've seen what thematic and perfectly viable options are available to draw from as game mechanics.
As has been stated many times this thread, the whining is unnecessary and we don't have enough information to actually back up your claim of imbalance.
Power level is with upgrades included, confirmed in the first live Q&A.
Inceptors are not better than TS on paper. Plz read my first post on page 2. Multiwounds isn't wasted on TS in partcular due to their +1 AS on 1 damage weapons.
Bare in mind this kind of vacuum model says current TS are good so take with a grain of salt.
Powerlevel is also been confirmed as an average for the unit as well. Not looking good for this whole power level thing when there's like 3 different answers on it.
Q: Hey, Warhammer 40,000 I have a question about Power Levels. The Q&A that was released early on said that power levels are based on the unit with no upgrades, but there was a comment on this page that said they were based on the unit having all the upgrades they can take.
So which is it? I only ask because I'm watching people nerd fight on the internet over this issue and just want to give the argument the Emperor's Mercy. Thanks!
A: Hey [REDACTED] - a great question. We had a word with Simon from the rules team about this and he said:
"The Power Level represents an average somewhere in between the basic unit with the most basic loadout and the most tooled up unit of doom with all the upgrades. Basically, it's a mid-range average."
Except your never going to be in range. If you bring a bunch of units filled with flamers people are going to sit back pop your transports first turn and then shoot you down as you slog forward at 9" a turn. Its not a viable strategy in the slightest.
Which is why I ignored that aspect. I just wanted to know it's raw potential. It's absolutely there.
That's honestly probably why Rubrics are costed so highly, because of the raw damage the Flamers are capable of doing.
Altho, don't fill me with bull either. Vehicles are tankier than ever, and if you go first it's a none issue for you to rush up the board.
Not to mention you should create so many high priority targets for your opponent that they might feel that a small squad of Rubrics are not a primary concern.
So yea, claiming "never" is empty and irrelevant.
I still stand that either Rubrics should have costed 1 point less, or that Interceptors should have costed like 2 more.
Except your never going to be in range. If you bring a bunch of units filled with flamers people are going to sit back pop your transports first turn and then shoot you down as you slog forward at 9" a turn. Its not a viable strategy in the slightest.
Which is why I ignored that aspect. I just wanted to know it's raw potential. It's absolutely there.
That's honestly probably why Rubrics are costed so highly, because of the raw damage the Flamers are capable of doing.
Altho, don't fill me with bull either. Vehicles are tankier than ever, and if you go first it's a none issue for you to rush up the board.
Not to mention you should create so many high priority targets for your opponent that they might feel that a small squad of Rubrics are not a primary concern.
So yea, claiming "never" is empty and irrelevant.
I still stand that either Rubrics should have costed 1 point less, or that Interceptors should have costed like 2 more.
Yeah, I love the idea that he KNOWS people will just be popping transports all over the place first turn. Because yeah... we have seen enough weapon and vehicle profiles to know anything about how possible that would be.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Also things like chaos daemons will allow you to summon them by way of keywords and if you're not in matched play you don't pay points ts for the side board.
Chaos daemons are not CSM and that has no bearing on the disscussion being had.
Point taken. Dosent make much of a difference though.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Last edition mark of tzeench gave a +1 to invulnerable saves, if that stayed the same then rubric marines would NEVER have less than a 4+ save. Meaning they will always have better saves against missiles, lascannons, melta guns, plasma guns, and all the other high strength good ap shooting that exists in the game.
As far as I can tell MoT and probably marks in general are not a thing. The 5++ comes from favored of Tzeentch which would be the mark maybe but your not going to get
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: A tri-las predator destroys inceptors outright, but would be a horrible idea to throw at rubric marines since every damage above 1 is wasted and they'll have a 4++ in the open.
Thats amazing that have a 4++ with no evidence that they would have it and some evidence to the contrary.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: As for the banner, the rubrics are automitons, held together by sorcery. Similar units in AOS can take banners that return fallen members to life.
What units? Could it be undead units that are extreamly squishy? You are being dishonest. Stop it.
Asserting that some thing might be the case doesn't make a point espically aome thing that is ridiculous. I can do the same thing watch this. Chapter Tactics gives all marines a 2+ rerollable FnP
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: You have no clue what their wargear does, and I've seen what thematic and perfectly viable options are available to draw from as game mechanics.
We are missing the Icon. Thats it there is no reason to beleive that marks are still around you would see it as part of thier equipment on the data sheet if it was. Even if we dont know what 1 item is we can reasonably say its not going to near double Rubric offensive abilities.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: As has been stated many times this thread, the whining is unnecessary and we don't have enough information to actually back up your claim of imbalance.
Except your never going to be in range. If you bring a bunch of units filled with flamers people are going to sit back pop your transports first turn and then shoot you down as you slog forward at 9" a turn. Its not a viable strategy in the slightest.
Which is why I ignored that aspect. I just wanted to know it's raw potential. It's absolutely there.
That's honestly probably why Rubrics are costed so highly, because of the raw damage the Flamers are capable of doing.
Altho, don't fill me with bull either. Vehicles are tankier than ever, and if you go first it's a none issue for you to rush up the board.
Not to mention you should create so many high priority targets for your opponent that they might feel that a small squad of Rubrics are not a primary concern.
So yea, claiming "never" is empty and irrelevant.
I still stand that either Rubrics should have costed 1 point less, or that Interceptors should have costed like 2 more.
Yeah, I love the idea that he KNOWS people will just be popping transports all over the place first turn. Because yeah... we have seen enough weapon and vehicle profiles to know anything about how possible that would be.
Your right im sure rhinos are going to be super durable.
Except your never going to be in range. If you bring a bunch of units filled with flamers people are going to sit back pop your transports first turn and then shoot you down as you slog forward at 9" a turn. Its not a viable strategy in the slightest.
Which is why I ignored that aspect. I just wanted to know it's raw potential. It's absolutely there.
That's honestly probably why Rubrics are costed so highly, because of the raw damage the Flamers are capable of doing.
Altho, don't fill me with bull either. Vehicles are tankier than ever, and if you go first it's a none issue for you to rush up the board.
Not to mention you should create so many high priority targets for your opponent that they might feel that a small squad of Rubrics are not a primary concern.
So yea, claiming "never" is empty and irrelevant.
I still stand that either Rubrics should have costed 1 point less, or that Interceptors should have costed like 2 more.
Killing a rhino first turn to make it so a unit of rubrics that spend pretty much the rest of the game trying to do something useful is worth it.
The axioms presented by the side claiming Inceptors are always better than Ksons are pretty questionable. Would it be desirable to have a points-based game in which 8 points of X, isolated from all other features of the game, should be equivalent, or even close to 8 points of Y, when the game's only played at 50+ points?
So yeah, Inceptors MIGHT be better at killing Ksons at all ranges (though I'll note the OP's team hasn't really responded to Earth127's maths) than the opposite - and that's assuming that the maths presented in support of this assertion is correct, and that none of the information we don't have is going to change it. Because of course ALL special rules and exceptions are always going to be equivalent, right? It's not like, for example, games with variable elements and factions ever have a faction that benefits more from buffs while another faction is composed of non-interactive specialists.
But whatever - in the interests of being charitable, let's say we accept the proposition on face value that ATSKNF and DTTFE have statistically equal effects, AND that those statistical effects apply equivalently across all possible tabletop permutations.
That still tells us what, exactly? That one should probably not try to engage Inceptors with Ksons, and that one should probably try to engage Ksons with Interceptors. Cool! That's a handy piece of in-game information. I guess in these games where I bring my eight five-man units of Ksons and the other guy brings his eight three-man units of Inceptors he's probably going to win. Because, after all, the game is only ever going to be about killing the other guy's models, and there are only ever going to be two model types, and myself and the other guy are strictly equal in our ability to make effective decisions in list building and then in using our models on the table.
All of that is to say that "all else being equal" is an overwhelmingly useless hypothetical to employ here, but it's also nonsense, since all else isn't equal - there are specific (and unspoken) assertions about the nature of the game baked into the plea that we take it as given that all else is equal. If the OP wants a world in which every single point is and ought to be equally comparable to every other single point without any room for judgement, decision making, scenario goal, opponent's force selection, or any other such thing - all that is being neatly (but fecklessly) packed into the word "context", I have the following game, and it's a great solo game! Opponents are just that messy context we don't want to consider after all.
One player rolls a casino-balanced die. One a 4+, the player wins.
Holy Terra... This thread. It literally is the parody of the gak-flinging contest that was supposed to happen when rules are released - both sides are so deep into their own asses that they can't hear anything outside of their echo-chamber
Longstrider wrote: The axioms presented by the side claiming Inceptors are always better than Ksons are pretty questionable. Would it be desirable to have a points-based game in which 8 points of X, isolated from all other features of the game, should be equivalent, or even close to 8 points of Y, when the game's only played at 50+ points?
How are they questionable? Would it be describable that a metric used to balance be accurate? Yes, that was a pretty stupid question.
Longstrider wrote: So yeah, Inceptors MIGHT be better at killing Ksons at all ranges (though I'll note the OP's team hasn't really responded to Earth127's maths) than the opposite - and that's assuming that the maths presented in support of this assertion is correct, and that none of the information we don't have is going to change it. Because of course ALL special rules and exceptions are always going to be equivalent, right? It's not like, for example, games with variable elements and factions ever have a faction that benefits more from buffs while another faction is composed of non-interactive specialists.
They are better at killing just about everything except T10+ not at all ranges TS are better in the 19-24 bracket although you wouldn't be able to tell since they almost never kill anything. Because Earth127's math is fething abysmal he got 1 MEQ killed by a unit shooting 18 S 5 AP -1 shots as best I can tell he made up numbers cause he thinks I did the same or has no idea what he is doing.
Longstrider wrote: That still tells us what, exactly? That one should probably not try to engage Inceptors with Ksons, and that one should probably try to engage Ksons with Interceptors. Cool! That's a handy piece of in-game information. I guess in these games where I bring my eight five-man units of Ksons and the other guy brings his eight three-man units of Inceptors he's probably going to win. Because, after all, the game is only ever going to be about killing the other guy's models, and there are only ever going to be two model types, and myself and the other guy are strictly equal in our ability to make effective decisions in list building and then in using our models on the table.
That Inceptors have 2x the shooting and speed, have better deployment options, for the same or near the same price. No one is saying all Rubrics and all Inceptors.
Longstrider wrote: All of that is to say that "all else being equal" is an overwhelmingly useless hypothetical to employ here, but it's also nonsense, since all else isn't equal - there are specific (and unspoken) assertions about the nature of the game baked into the plea that we take it as given that all else is equal. If the OP wants a world in which every single point is and ought to be equally comparable to every other single point without any room for judgement, decision making, scenario goal, opponent's force selection, or any other such thing - all that is being neatly (but fecklessly) packed into the word "context", I have the following game, and it's a great solo game! Opponents are just that messy context we don't want to consider after all.
Player decisions (judgement and decision making) would be based on skill and knowledge of the player which is supposed to be the determining factor. Scenario goal can be swapped between armies so you can't point to that as a balance tool. Opponent's force is supposed to be balanced via metrics (PL and points). Anything other then skill and knowledge should be minimized. The fact that income plays a role in how well your army will preform is by far one of the most annoying part of the balance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kandela wrote: Holy Terra... This thread. It literally is the parody of the gak-flinging contest that was supposed to happen when rules are released - both sides are so deep into their own asses that they can't hear anything outside of their echo-chamber
They are better at killing just about everything except T10+ not at all ranges TS are better in the 19-24 bracket although you wouldn't be able to tell since they almost never kill anything. Because Earth127's math is fething abysmal he got 1 MEQ killed by a unit shooting 18 S 5 AP -1 shots as best I can tell he made up numbers cause he thinks I did the same or has no idea what he is doing.
So even vs TEQ it's more than 1. Interceptors just have better guns, but it's pretty obvious that they do.
Rubric Marines are literally Marines with Faux-Plasma Rifles.
Interceptors have not 1, but 2 Effective Heavy Weapons each. The comparison honestly feels like 3 Crisis Suit vs 5 Fire Warriors.
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote: Killing a rhino first turn to make it so a unit of rubrics that spend pretty much the rest of the game trying to do something useful is worth it.
Pointlessly debatable as there are far, FAR too many variables to consider. Worst part is the argument is pointless since I never cared about how practical it was, just the raw potential of the flamers it carries. Concede.
Yaknow, this whole argument here is totally moot even before you THINK about the fact that we don't know for sure what DttFE does, or what icon of flame does, or the fact rubrics can deny spells and inceptors cant, or that we got faction-spesific spells we KNOW exist, and could make the asp sorcerer that much more potent.
You know why?
Because power level is a really, REALLY vague estimate of power, and nothing to be taken seriously in any competitive level, or in any way indicate point costs.
Lets run a shot analysis of units of give power levels and known costs-shall we? (I'm taking some of it directly off a post I made in another forum)
The inceptors cost 53 each, so a team is 159.
Divide by 8, you got 19.875 points per power level.
The intercessors are 24 points each, so 120 a team-and power level 6. so they are 20 points per power level. pretty close.
Other known factor, the hellblasters, 40 each power level 12. so we hit 16.666 point per power level.
That's...a bit off. like, 15% off.
It seems like 1 power level=roughly 16-20 points? seems about right?
The captain though, power level 7 and costs 148, so that's 21.143 points per power level.
So, a PL is worth somewhere between 16.666 and 21.143?
So...power level and points so not translate all that easily. we got a huge divergance in PL to point ratio, and we were just looking at a handful of units from one very specific line.
we got 4.46 points-per-power-level difference between our highest and our lowest example-and these might not be the biggest edge cases, because once more we only saw Numarines, and only some of them to boot.
Its a VERY rough outline, one that should never be used to compare units if you know your stuff. 4.46 difference between current edge cases, rounding down to 4 means the rubric squad might cost 127 while half- equipped, and still be within power level logic.
So, 127 points might be the same 8 PL as 159 points, despite 148 points being lower 7 PL, and 120 being 6 PL.
Get what I'm going at?
The power level is wonky. its really rough, and it only scales properly in saying the ARMIES are roughly the same scale, and useless for individual units.
And to top it off-we have yet to actually seen mission rules.
If "only troops score" returns, that would skyrocker the estimated PL of every troop unit, and unlike inceptors, rubrics are troops.
n0t_u wrote: Powerlevel is also been confirmed as an average for the unit as well. Not looking good for this whole power level thing when there's like 3 different answers on it.
Q: Hey, Warhammer 40,000 I have a question about Power Levels. The Q&A that was released early on said that power levels are based on the unit with no upgrades, but there was a comment on this page that said they were based on the unit having all the upgrades they can take.
So which is it? I only ask because I'm watching people nerd fight on the internet over this issue and just want to give the argument the Emperor's Mercy. Thanks!
A: Hey [REDACTED] - a great question. We had a word with Simon from the rules team about this and he said:
"The Power Level represents an average somewhere in between the basic unit with the most basic loadout and the most tooled up unit of doom with all the upgrades. Basically, it's a mid-range average."
Call me biased since I was the one who bothered them about it to get this answer, but I'm betting on this version of where they got the points from than the other two.
On a different note there was some confusion a ways back on why Rubrics would protentiall get extra attacks: it,s not a "chainsword thing" but rather the rumored effects of "Death to the False Emperor", which, if rumor is true, gives CSM an extra attack on a to-hit roll of a 6.
According to Warhammer Fest players ATSKNF rerolls Battleshock tests.
Yeah, I'd say the only thing this thread really proves is that power levels aren't as balanced as points. But we already knew that.
I highly doubt that Rubrics are going to be 53 points per model, even if they are paying for a psyker.
Of course, I'd also bet that their sorc can learn spells other than Smite. He is a psyker after all. If you told me with a straight face that a Primaris Psyker should only cost 5-6 points because he has the same statline as a Guardsman, I'd have to excuse myself from the room so I can stop laughing.
ross-128 wrote: Yeah, I'd say the only thing this thread really proves is that power levels aren't as balanced as points. But we already knew that.
I highly doubt that Rubrics are going to be 53 points per model, even if they are paying for a psyker.
Of course, I'd also bet that their sorc can learn spells other than Smite. He is a psyker after all. If you told me with a straight face that a Primaris Psyker should only cost 5-6 points because he has the same statline as a Guardsman, I'd have to excuse myself from the room so I can stop laughing.
And yet that is exactly what The OP and a number of others are trying to say.
Also I would no discount smite: an 18" range mortal wound with a 5/6 chance of working hurts.
And then there is the multiwounds of the froce weapon that makes the TS win the combat. see my math on page 2.
Also my math is correct except for Shooting vs MEQ:
inceptors deal 4 wounds in range as talamere calculated.
TS have 2,5 in rapid fire range (9*(2/3)*(1/2)*(5/6)).
Note I share the criticism that all calcualtions are averages only and don't take distribution into account but I don't know enough chance math to caculate those.
Kandela wrote: Holy Terra... This thread. It literally is the parody of the gak-flinging contest that was supposed to happen when rules are released - both sides are so deep into their own asses that they can't hear anything outside of their echo-chamber
It's hard to stay polite and objective when OP is basically operating on the following premises as far as I'm concerned.
Power levels are equal to points and allow a making an definitive judgement on balance.
Balance/value of a unit is determined entirely by the ability to kill the opposing unit. Unit roles, ability to lock down objectives, etc are not a thing.
Inceptors and rubrics are the only units to exist, there is no conceivable reason for either to ever engage another unit.
Not knowing all the facts has no bearing on the value of a unit. Neither core rules, detachment rules or wargear/unit special rules have a snowballs chance in hell to skew the balance in one units' favour,
because GW said the game will be perfectly balanced and there is no reason to believe that might not be case or that GW has a proven track record of that absolutely not being the case.
There is also no way for rubrics to EVER engage inceptors on their terms, since Inceptors will ALWAYS deepstrike next to rubrics and make their charge and they will NEVER whiff. There is absolutely nothing the rubric player can do about it.
So yea under those premises the rubrics are indeed worthless.
No way they could get an advantage by being troops or having more bodies and loosing less combat efficiency per model loss or simply being better at something that is not based on killing prowess.
No way that there will be a detachment/special rule that makes them amazeballs and no such buff for inceptors. That's never happened right?
No way that they might end up a lot cheaper than inceptors because power level don't translate 1:1 into points. It's not like some of our currrent banners cost more as much as a rhino or those that those warpflamers almost afford you one.
We also have no idea how they point things, a master crafted sword now costs FOUR times as much as a power sword, who's to say that banner won't cost an arm and a leg but will be amazing? And that power sword is three time cheaper than it is now, we simply have no idea on points.
They could easily end up with 50+ points worth of options rolled into that power level for all we know, but apparently we know for certain that rubrics will not improve drastically when we get all the rules.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Also things like chaos daemons will allow you to summon them by way of keywords and if you're not in matched play you don't pay points ts for the side board.
How many spells can the inceptors counter in a round?
Last edition mark of tzeench gave a +1 to invulnerable saves, if that stayed the same then rubric marines would NEVER have less than a 4+ save. Meaning they will always have better saves against missiles, lascannons, melta guns, plasma guns, and all the other high strength good ap shooting that exists in the game.
A tri-las predator destroys inceptors outright, but would be a horrible idea to throw at rubric marines since every damage above 1 is wasted and they'll have a 4++ in the open.
As for the banner, the rubrics are automitons, held together by sorcery. Similar units in AOS can take banners that return fallen members to life.
Counter an extra d3 models returning for free every turn.
You have no clue what their wargear does, and I've seen what thematic and perfectly viable options are available to draw from as game mechanics.
As has been stated many times this thread, the whining is unnecessary and we don't have enough information to actually back up your claim of imbalance.
Good day, ladies and gentlemen.
Every indication is that Mark of Tzeentch no longer does that, meaning Rubrics have a mere 5++. Not bad, but not as good as a 4++.
Banners in AoS return units if you roll a 1 on Battleshock, not automatically. HUGE difference.
We actually do know what the majority of their wargear does-it's pretty much just the banner that's still a mystery.
We have somewhere around 85% of the info on these guys-not enough to be perfectly accurate, but MORE than enough to start drawing comparisons.
And again-the few things we don't know would have to double or triple Rubric's efficiency to bring them on par with Inceptors.
Tri-Las Predator math, by the way.
4 shots.
2.67 hits.
1.78 wounds on Inceptors.
1.48 wounds past the saves.
One or two dead Inceptors, most likely.
4 shots.
2.67 hits.
2.22 wounds on Rubrics
1.48 past the saves.
One or two dead Rubrics, most likely.
So yeah, it's slightly better against the Inceptors, granted. And if it's T7, Rubrics are better suited to killing it (although the sheer NUMBER of shots Inceptors get might outweigh that).
If it's T8, though, Inceptors will have a much easier time killing it.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Also things like chaos daemons will allow you to summon them by way of keywords and if you're not in matched play you don't pay points ts for the side board.
Chaos daemons are not CSM and that has no bearing on the disscussion being had.
With the keyword system they're possibly reunited again.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yoyoyo wrote: So, how do the Exalted Sorcerers, Scarab Occult, unique psychic powers, and Legion rules stack up?
Oh wait. You have no idea.
They stack up as "worse than the Interceptors", duh.
40k Facebook page said Khorne Daemonkin works under the new system by sharing the Chaos and Knorne rules to unit inside of a single FOC.
Tzeentch Daemons would likewise unit with TSons under Tzeentch and Chaos.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Smite plus Rubric shooting should actually drop 2 Inteceptors a turn. All three if you get lucky on your rolls for Smite since Mortal Wounds overflow.
ClockworkZion wrote: 40k Facebook page said Khorne Daemonkin works under the new system by sharing the Chaos and Knorne rules to unit inside of a single FOC.
Tzeentch Daemons would likewise unit with TSons under Tzeentch and Chaos.
I'm curious what kind of effect that has on our daemonic units. That was a pretty significant change from normal csm.
ClockworkZion wrote: 40k Facebook page said Khorne Daemonkin works under the new system by sharing the Chaos and Knorne rules to unit inside of a single FOC.
Tzeentch Daemons would likewise unit with TSons under Tzeentch and Chaos.
I'm curious what kind of effect that has on our daemonic units. That was a pretty significant change from normal csm.
They can share Tzeentch and Chaos themed rules, but not the Ones specific to Traitor Astartes and Daemons with each other.
ClockworkZion wrote: 40k Facebook page said Khorne Daemonkin works under the new system by sharing the Chaos and Knorne rules to unit inside of a single FOC.
Tzeentch Daemons would likewise unit with TSons under Tzeentch and Chaos.
I'm curious what kind of effect that has on our daemonic units. That was a pretty significant change from normal csm.
They can share Tzeentch and Chaos themed rules, but not the Ones specific to Traitor Astartes and Daemons with each other.
I was referring to dameons of khorne possessed and warp talons. That change just made so much sense, even having both the mark and daemon of khorne since a possessed is effectively two entities in one.
Hopefully we'll keep that,except now also with other gods.
As far the storm troopers, I believe you can mix them but you only get faction benefits if have one or the other. That is you would get all imperial abilities but neither inquisition nor scions benefits.
Having an all scions detachment would give you imperial AND scion abilities, but you don't loose command points for mixing.
I'd say the biggest unknown is that we don't know what 8e psychic powers will do.
What if Warp Speed lets the TSons squad get 3 extra attacks per model and always strike first in combat? Suddenly they've turned into a CC powerhouse, especially with 3 extra attacks on that force sword.
What if Endurance gives them all a 4+FNP? That would be pretty strong when stacked with their invulnerable save.
And then there's all the stuff in Divination. Re-rolls to hit from Prescience, overwatch at full ballistic skill from Foreboding, re-rolling saves with Precognition, and Rending with Misfortune.
Invisibility is probably either going to be gone or not nearly as strong considering all the problems it caused in 7e, but Shrouding might still grant a cover bonus.
Now sure, the Sorcerer is a level 1 psyker (probably anyway), so he can only pick one of those (unless bonus Primaris Powers are still a thing). But he gets to pick at the start of any game, so he can pick based on what the opponent has. That makes any psyker a huge wildcard.
n0t_u wrote: They stack up as "worse than the Interceptors", duh.
Aside from the ongoing debate, that's not how you balance a faction. Asymmetry is acceptable.
Maybe you can use a Sorcerer HQ to kill Inceptors, and use the Rubric troops to tackle the HQ. In this case it's just whining about rock beating scissors, when you aren't considering paper.
Games need to be balanced holistically. It really doesn't matter if Inceptors outshoot footslogging Rubrics. There's a lot of other factors to consider.
Kandela wrote: Holy Terra... This thread. It literally is the parody of the gak-flinging contest that was supposed to happen when rules are released - both sides are so deep into their own asses that they can't hear anything outside of their echo-chamber
By which you mean consistently citing the actual math showing the rubric's fire power isn't on par with the power 8 interceptors, and is barely on par with power 7 plague marines? Pointing out the gap is large enough a single icon is unlikely to bridge the gap unless it literally doubles the wounds inflicted in most situations?
What point has been brought up besides the constant icon+chapter tactics, which is incredibly unlikely to bridge the gap.
I've even gone so far as to point out a combination (tsons can ignore/mitigate perils so smite spam, plus icon doing something, buts them only a bit behind inceptors overall) that might explain them being in the same bracket, even if the gap between the low end of power 8 and the upper end is fairly extreme.
Kandela wrote: Holy Terra... This thread. It literally is the parody of the gak-flinging contest that was supposed to happen when rules are released - both sides are so deep into their own asses that they can't hear anything outside of their echo-chamber
It's hard to stay polite and objective when OP is basically operating on the following premises as far as I'm concerned.
Power levels are equal to points and allow a making an definitive judgement on balance.
Balance/value of a unit is determined entirely by the ability to kill the opposing unit. Unit roles, ability to lock down objectives, etc are not a thing.
Inceptors and rubrics are the only units to exist, there is no conceivable reason for either to ever engage another unit.
Not knowing all the facts has no bearing on the value of a unit. Neither core rules, detachment rules or wargear/unit special rules have a snowballs chance in hell to skew the balance in one units' favour,
because GW said the game will be perfectly balanced and there is no reason to believe that might not be case or that GW has a proven track record of that absolutely not being the case.
There is also no way for rubrics to EVER engage inceptors on their terms, since Inceptors will ALWAYS deepstrike next to rubrics and make their charge and they will NEVER whiff. There is absolutely nothing the rubric player can do about it
Points and power levels should be linked, meaning a huge gap in effectiveness for equivalent power levels is not promising.
I've done a breakdown showing that rubrics are worse at killing everything than inceptors. Yes, ability to kill enemy models is kinda a big deal in this game. We've also seen the core rules, so if troops get obj secured or some equivalent it was not worth mentioning in there.
Again, I've compared both units to others. Even in rapid fire range, inceptors are always the better choice for killing anything.
We have the core rules, the vast majority of the war gear, and all the unit special rules. We lack only the icon and the potential detachment rules.
Yes, a unit with half the move speed and no extra deployment options will generally not be engaging a unit with over twice the mobility and the ability to deep strike, on terms favorable to the former. This goes on to illustrate how rubrics in generally aren't as useful. Mobility was extremely important last edition, I fail to see why it wouldn't be now.
n0t_u wrote: They stack up as "worse than the Interceptors", duh.
Aside from the ongoing debate, that's not how you balance a faction. Asymmetry is acceptable.
Maybe you can use a Sorcerer HQ to kill Inceptors, and use the Rubric troops to tackle the HQ. In this case it's just whining about rock beating scissors, when you aren't considering paper.
Games need to be balanced holistically. It really doesn't matter if Inceptors outshoot footslogging Rubrics. There's a lot of other factors to consider.
Rubrics don't actually tackle anything better though. That's the point. Inceptors consistently out damage them against every single type of target.
Tyran wrote: The only function of power is to be able to quickly make a game without worrying about making a list. The simple fact that it doesn't considers weapons or upgrades should tell you how useless it is for actual balance.
Power is considering that fact that all upgrades are taken for the power point listed.
Power doesn't really considers that, because you cannot assume that the units being used will have all the upgrades or weapons. And there are units whose entire role is dependent on upgrades and weapons.
Better question, why would the Power Rank NOT be made without all those upgrades that unit size allows for?
Power is designed as a guide so players can play a game with almost no prep time, and I don't know you but my models don't go around with all the possible weapons and upgrades, and I imagine it is the same for most players. This means that most players are not going to play with all the possible weapons and upgrades for the simple reason they don't have the models built that way. Power is the ultimate expression of GW's "beer and pretzels" and it isn't mean to be balanced, because you only need a glance to know that people can break the system by fielding all the upgrades and weapons, but who wants to play with that people?
Tyran wrote:For example Tyranid termagants, there is literally a difference of 3 times the firepower between a devilgant and the standard version, and they are going to have the same power cost.
Sure they do, NOW. But in a month or so, will they be so different in the new datasheets? We've seen that Power Weapons are more balanced out between Str bonus and AP then they have ever been. Aside from GW's normal ability to shoot itself in the mouth through its foot when it comes to balance, what tells you to assume that there will be such an actual power difference between the different GunGants?
Honestly I doubt it, in part because I don't see them giving them bonus AP to gaunts, and there is also the issue of biomorphs.
Kandela wrote: Holy Terra... This thread. It literally is the parody of the gak-flinging contest that was supposed to happen when rules are released - both sides are so deep into their own asses that they can't hear anything outside of their echo-chamber
I'm with you on this one. I'm lucky to live so far away from the people involved here.
SilverAlien wrote: Rubrics don't actually tackle anything better though. That's the point. Inceptors consistently out damage them against every single type of target.
Maybe they don't need to. They'll get their juice from synergy with the HQs, or custom strategems (which they'll produce more of than troops).
This discussion is missing synergy and tactics, those are kind of relevant in a TT wargame. It's not always just about math.
Don't say that, you'll summon the wrath of the monofocused math nerds who think they have it all figured out without having realized that they haven't taken every single variable in to consideration.
Again-Inceptors are anywhere from 150% to 667% more effective (call it only twice as effective, in most cases).
What synergy is going to OUTRIGHT DOUBLE the effectiveness of Rubric Marines? They could reroll all hits and all wounds, and that just MIGHT bring them on par.
Just throwing it out there but what if power levels are scored withing the context of their respective roles. Such as rubrics being power level 8 troops, whereas interceptors are power level 8 fast attack and shouldn't be compared directly against eachother as their roles in the battlefield are completely different and thus judged with different parameters. Just a theory but figure it's worth asking about.
JNAProductions wrote: Again-Inceptors are anywhere from 150% to 667% more effective (call it only twice as effective, in most cases).
What synergy is going to OUTRIGHT DOUBLE the effectiveness of Rubric Marines? They could reroll all hits and all wounds, and that just MIGHT bring them on par.
Or force the enemy to reroll hits or wounds. Or reroll armor saves. Or gain two saves. Or gain the ability to shoot longer range. And so on and so forth. We don't know. You're taking two units in a vacuum, that honestly I don't even feel are intended to be equivalent units to begin with.
JNAProductions wrote: Again-Inceptors are anywhere from 150% to 667% more effective (call it only twice as effective, in most cases).
What synergy is going to OUTRIGHT DOUBLE the effectiveness of Rubric Marines? They could reroll all hits and all wounds, and that just MIGHT bring them on par.
Did you miss the part where they have a Psyker?
Another thing to keep in mind is expanding the squad is 6PL, not 8, so it's obvious they're paying a 2PL premium for that Psyker up front. Considering a Primaris Psyker costs 50 points all by himself and has no other redeeming features, that sounds pretty reasonable. Psykers ain't cheap.
And while having basically two heavy bolters on each model is a pretty stupid level of firepower, they're still only getting 6 wounds per squad with no ability to expand.
Now, that said, the power level is likely still off because as mentioned, Inceptors seem to have been rated on a scale of roughly 20pts/PL, while the Rubrics are most likely around 15pts/PL (to be honest, I'm expecting a Rubric to cost around 14pts/model compared to 53/model for the Inceptors). But that's a problem with the Power Levels, not the Rubrics. Just play with points, and it'll be fine.
Well, so far it seems that "power level" resembles the points costs of 7th edition and prior - meaning they are hardly more than an estimation of what a unit can do. Sometimes they are way off, like half the Chaos, Ork and Eldar Codizes in 7th edition. And obviously GW chose the same answer as in 7th: free upgrades. Power levels don't count any upgrades, just like all formations were free before. You couldn't compare a unit of Crimson slaughter CSM with Mark of Nurgle with Death Guard CSM - they did cost exactly the same, however, the former wouldn't have any chance against the latter.
However, the new edition seems to bring us tested, balanced points costs additionally instead of the rubbish we had before.
We haven't seen those yet. Also, we don't know enough about synergy and the TS codex to estimate if the power levels turn out reasonable in the end. If you still find power levels unbalanced - play with points instead.
Roknar wrote: It's hard to stay polite and objective when OP is basically operating on the following premises as far as I'm concerned.
No its hard to be polite when you don't have a leg to stand on so you just make ridiculous claims and straw-man every argument.
Roknar wrote: Power levels are equal to points and allow a making an definitive judgement on balance.
Strawman. I have not once said power level is the same as points. Unless your going to argue that the gap, and there is a gap, between these two units with can be made up by 15-20 points. Stop being dishonest.
Roknar wrote: Balance/value of a unit is determined entirely by the ability to kill the opposing unit. Unit roles, ability to lock down objectives, etc are not a thing.
Yes that why I keep referencing their similarity in toughness, Massively better movement by Inceptors, and deployment options. The first allows them to stay on an OBJ and the second allows them to move to that obj. the last one lets them be in the best possible position to execute the previous two.
Roknar wrote: Inceptors and rubrics are the only units to exist, there is no conceivable reason for either to ever engage another unit.
Again never said that. Please keep putting words in my mouth. And the fact that the math shows that Rubrics are going to preform worse against every type of unit you ignore that.
Roknar wrote: Not knowing all the facts has no bearing on the value of a unit. Neither core rules, detachment rules or wargear/unit special rules have a snowballs chance in hell to skew the balance in one units' favour, because GW said the game will be perfectly balanced and there is no reason to believe that might not be case or that GW has a proven track record of that absolutely not being the case.
Not knowing all the facts CAN have an affect but how much of an affect? There are two question marks for BOTH units, and if we assume that those two things are equal
Roknar wrote: There is also no way for rubrics to EVER engage inceptors on their terms, since Inceptors will ALWAYS deepstrike next to rubrics and make their charge and they will NEVER whiff. There is absolutely nothing the rubric player can do about it.
Whiff what? The charge. Do honestly believe that units with jump packs will not have some sort of boost to their charge?
Roknar wrote: No way they could get an advantage by being troops or having more bodies and loosing less combat efficiency per model loss or simply being better at something that is not based on killing prowess.
They wont because Obj secure goes by models so being troops means nothing.
Roknar wrote: No way that there will be a detachment/special rule that makes them amaze balls and no such buff for Inceptors. That's never happened right?
So like when SM got free Rhinos and Chaos got...Chaos got...oh that's right nothing. It has happened for Space Marines
Roknar wrote: No way that they might end up a lot cheaper than inceptors because power level don't translate 1:1 into points. It's not like some of our current banners cost as much as a rhino or those that those warpflamers almost afford you one.
Sigh this is so childish. How do you think they came up with the power level? Maybe took the points cost and then just divided it? That's how an intelligent person would do it because its super easy and still somewhat accurate even then the base cost of Rubrics would be 150 compared to 159 for
Roknar wrote: We also have no idea how they point things, a master crafted sword now costs FOUR times as much as a power sword, who's to say that banner won't cost an arm and a leg but will be amazing? And that power sword is three time cheaper than it is now, we simply have no idea on points.
Power Level is a generic metric its not very exact. But, two units should be about the same if they have the same power level. NO ONE IS SAYING THEY SHOULD BE THE EXACT SAME. Not knowing the points is irrelevant, devs do and they used Points to determine Power Level. Which means these two units are going to be about the same point cost. Your argument is that Rubrics are going to cost around 160 points with upgrades okay fine. except to be around the same your going to have to add 80 to 100 points in upgrades to get that. which means the base cost of rubrics would be around 60-80 points...Does that seem at all reasonable.
Roknar wrote: They could easily end up with 50+ points worth of options rolled into that power level for all we know, but apparently we know for certain that rubrics will not improve drastically when we get all the rules.
If you are making a list, use points. If you want a quick game with and you don't have a list at hand (because different size in armies for example), use power.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Well, so far it seems that "power level" resembles the points costs of 7th edition and prior - meaning they are hardly more than an estimation of what a unit can do. Sometimes they are way off, like half the Chaos, Ork and Eldar Codizes in 7th edition. And obviously GW chose the same answer as in 7th: free upgrades. Power levels don't count any upgrades, just like all formations were free before. You couldn't compare a unit of Crimson slaughter CSM with Mark of Nurgle with Death Guard CSM - they did cost exactly the same, however, the former wouldn't have any chance against the latter.
However, the new edition seems to bring us tested, balanced points costs additionally instead of the rubbish we had before.
We haven't seen those yet. Also, we don't know enough about synergy and the TS codex to estimate if the power levels turn out reasonable in the end. If you still find power levels unbalanced - play with points instead.
No Power Level is the Devs taking the point cost of the units with "half upgrades" and then dividing by 20.
JNAProductions wrote: Again-Inceptors are anywhere from 150% to 667% more effective (call it only twice as effective, in most cases).
What synergy is going to OUTRIGHT DOUBLE the effectiveness of Rubric Marines? They could reroll all hits and all wounds, and that just MIGHT bring them on par.
Did you miss the part where they have a Psyker?
Another thing to keep in mind is expanding the squad is 6PL, not 8, so it's obvious they're paying a 2PL premium for that Psyker up front. Considering a Primaris Psyker costs 50 points all by himself and has no other redeeming features, that sounds pretty reasonable. Psykers ain't cheap.
And while having basically two heavy bolters on each model is a pretty stupid level of firepower, they're still only getting 6 wounds per squad with no ability to expand.
Now, that said, the power level is likely still off because as mentioned, Inceptors seem to have been rated on a scale of roughly 20pts/PL, while the Rubrics are most likely around 15pts/PL (to be honest, I'm expecting a Rubric to cost around 14pts/model compared to 53/model for the Inceptors). But that's a problem with the Power Levels, not the Rubrics. Just play with points, and it'll be fine.
So you think the base cost of Rubrics will be 100 points...LMAO okay.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ecdain wrote: Just throwing it out there but what if power levels are scored withing the context of their respective roles. Such as rubrics being power level 8 troops, whereas interceptors are power level 8 fast attack and shouldn't be compared directly against eachother as their roles in the battlefield are completely different and thus judged with different parameters. Just a theory but figure it's worth asking about.
Why would you create a complexly different system to judge the power of a unit when you have a system and can take that system add up the points from that system and then just divide by a number?
SilverAlien wrote: Rubrics don't actually tackle anything better though. That's the point. Inceptors consistently out damage them against every single type of target.
Maybe they don't need to. They'll get their juice from synergy with the HQs, or custom strategems (which they'll produce more of than troops).
This discussion is missing synergy and tactics, those are kind of relevant in a TT wargame. It's not always just about math.
The results of your tactics are a derivative of the math. If you have the best tactics in the world but are going against M1A1 and all you have are shovels to hit it with your going to lose.
You have called me out on the one bit of math that was wrong. I accidently messed 2 fractures up. But are ignoring the other bits that are wrong in yours.
The main problems are: All mistakes are stacked in favor of your argument rather than both ways. You forget to take the aspiring sorcerer into account and he is the main part of the functionatlity. Read ross' last posts about how ridiculous that is. ( Tough I can understand in 7E the sorcerer is utterly useless because of the Tzeentch discipline wich SUCKS)
JNAProductions wrote: Again-Inceptors are anywhere from 150% to 667% more effective (call it only twice as effective, in most cases).
What synergy is going to OUTRIGHT DOUBLE the effectiveness of Rubric Marines? They could reroll all hits and all wounds, and that just MIGHT bring them on par.
Or force the enemy to reroll hits or wounds. Or reroll armor saves. Or gain two saves. Or gain the ability to shoot longer range. And so on and so forth. We don't know. You're taking two units in a vacuum, that honestly I don't even feel are intended to be equivalent units to begin with.
No one is saying they should be perfectly equal. The only group technically saying that here are the Devs (both units are power level 8) I understand their are counter units and that their going to be more powerful at the same power level. But look at the gap between these two units. Its huge Inceptors preform better every where except in CC. Inceptors can wipe the entire Rubric Squad off the map in a single turn. In 7th right now if you want to do that you need double the points usually, less if its a counter unit. There is something wrong here either the Rubrics are way over priced or Inceptors are under priced.
Now looking at PL we have something good with the rules leak. We know Inceptors are a single 3 man unit that has two weapons and we know they are going to cost around 160 points. which means PL is probably Points/20. Its super easy to do and they don't have to come up with a system. Lets assume the PL gap is as big as possible. 7.5 for Rubrics, and 8.4 for Inceptors, rounded up and down respectively. even then you end up with only an 18 point difference. So if you keep the prices reasonable, add a Rhino 40 points, add an Icon which is going to almost double ranged capabilities which is unreasonable in general but keeping something like that to only 40 points, the base cost of Rubrics would be around 60-80 points, which is wholly unreasonable.
It doesn't matter which way you slice this apple its rotten through and through.
ClockworkZion wrote: 40k Facebook page said Khorne Daemonkin works under the new system by sharing the Chaos and Knorne rules to unit inside of a single FOC.
Tzeentch Daemons would likewise unit with TSons under Tzeentch and Chaos.
I'm curious what kind of effect that has on our daemonic units. That was a pretty significant change from normal csm.
They can share Tzeentch and Chaos themed rules, but not the Ones specific to Traitor Astartes and Daemons with each other.
I was referring to dameons of khorne possessed and warp talons. That change just made so much sense, even having both the mark and daemon of khorne since a possessed is effectively two entities in one.
Hopefully we'll keep that,except now also with other gods.
As far the storm troopers, I believe you can mix them but you only get faction benefits if have one or the other. That is you would get all imperial abilities but neither inquisition nor scions benefits.
Having an all scions detachment would give you imperial AND scion abilities, but you don't loose command points for mixing.
Marks in AoS give the god specific keyword and any rules that go with it.
The prevention of mixing rules at high levels is to prevent things like the Barkstar. That said I'm sure Inquisitors will have a rule to mitigae it since they represent the Emperor himself to most forces of the Imperium.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I think people are confused about Power. It's been said by the Devs that the rating is an averae between the unit taking every single option and no options. This means that for units with no options they'll be sitting closer to where they normally would while units like Thousand Sons are actually paying for an uograde they can't take yet (the gun that unlocks at 10 models).
It's less the strict strength of the unit and more an average cost of the unit. Using it to determine if something is OP or not isn't going to work because the cost of the best wargear the unit can take may not even be something they can taken in the smallest size unit you can field.
This makes units more expensive to field, but cheaper to buy extra bodies for.
Things like Pyskers will also make units more expensive to start with, but not be charged again as you add more to the unit.
Basically the entire premise of using power to determine balance in a vacuum is an idea that fails from the inception due to the nature of how they determine power levels.
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote: Now looking at PL we have something good with the rules leak. We know Inceptors are a single 3 man unit that has two weapons and we know they are going to cost around 160 points. which means PL is probably Points/20. Its super easy to do and they don't have to come up with a system. Lets assume the PL gap is as big as possible. 7.5 for Rubrics, and 8.4 for Inceptors, rounded up and down respectively. even then you end up with only an 18 point difference. So if you keep the prices reasonable, add a Rhino 40 points, add an Icon which is going to almost double ranged capabilities which is unreasonable in general but keeping something like that to only 40 points, the base cost of Rubrics would be around 60-80 points, which is wholly unreasonable.
Here you go.
As far as I can tell the same thing that happened in the last edition is happening in this one. The Sorcerer is gak and costs a feth ton. He's the most expensive part of the unit and is best in melee, rest of the unit costs about what he does by himself but do almost no damage in CC. Its a 150 point unit that is capable of 75 points worth of shooting and 75 points worth of CC. Its a unit that is good at neither shooting nor CC but has the cost of a unit that should be very good at one or the other or good at both.
I think you're overreacting without seeing the entire game or the matched points. Power levels seem very coarse. Personally, I fear the 1K sons more at this point because of their save mods.
First, the whole concept of tactical effectiveness has been formally defined for at least 2500 years. Hit the enemy where they are weak, avoid them where they are strong.
If Rubrics win in CC, focus on that. If they can hide from DS in a Transport, focus on that. If they can get psychic support or standoff range to swing the shooting phase in their favor, focus on that. If they can counter-reserve or piecemeal whatever SM leaves on the table, focus on that. If they win more objectives as troops, or give you superior strategems by filling troops slots in your FOC, focus on that. And attack multiwound units with weapons than punish a multiwound statline.
You are already 100% locked into footslogging them with zero protection against a DS unit, while shooting them with weapons that don't deal more than 1W.
Show me that this is the best tactical application for Rubrics, and I'll concede you have a point.
Martel732 wrote: I think you're overreacting without seeing the entire game or the matched points. Power levels seem very coarse. Personally, I fear the 1K sons more at this point because of their save mods.
Now looking at PL we have something good with the rules leak. We know Inceptors are a single 3 man unit that has two weapons and we know they are going to cost around 160 points. which means PL is probably Points/20. Its super easy to do and they don't have to come up with a system. Lets assume the PL gap is as big as possible. 7.5 for Rubrics, and 8.4 for Inceptors, rounded up and down respectively. even then you end up with only an 18 point difference. So if you keep the prices reasonable, add a Rhino 40 points, add an Icon which is going to almost double ranged capabilities which is unreasonable in general but keeping something like that to only 40 points, the base cost of Rubrics would be around 60-80 points, which is wholly unreasonable.
They are going to be losing Fearless, so they're definitely going to be cheaper than the 23/model that they cost in the 6e codex because Fearless ain't free. Space Marines have also had a point shaved off them just because, so I'd expect that discount to carry over to everything that is based on the Space Marine statline.
They do still have their AP -2 guns and bonus to saves against small arms though, so those might push them up a couple points, maybe 18-20 total on the high end. Death to the False Emperor is probably just a new name for Veterans of the Long War, so no change there.
This doesn't mean the starting squad is going to be under 100 points of course. Remember: you're paying for a Psyker up front, and Psykers ain't cheap! The Psyker by himself can easily add 40-50 points just by being a Psyker. I mean seriously, are you expecting to get a Psyker for free?
That's why it's so useful that they can expand their squad so much though. Because rubrics are so much cheaper than the Sorcerer, it's far cheaper to expand the squad to get more wounds and guns than it is to buy a second squad (though of course, a second squad does get you a second Psyker).
Yoyoyo wrote: First, the whole concept of tactical effectiveness has been formally defined for at least 2500 years. Hit the enemy where they are weak, avoid them where they are strong.
It has and that's not how its defined. Use your resources where they are most effective. Strength and weakness are irrelevant. Effectiveness
Yoyoyo wrote: If Rubrics win in CC, focus on that. If they can hide from DS in a Transport, focus on that. If they can get psychic support or standoff range to swing the shooting phase in their favor, focus on that. If they can counter-reserve or piecemeal whatever SM leaves on the table, focus on that. If they win more objectives as troops, or give you superior strategems by filling troops slots in your FOC, focus on that. And attack multiwound units with weapons than punish a multiwound statline.
Rubrics do not win in CC unless you have a full Str unit and you get to charge. If you manage to do that with a unit that has half the movement speed, you should join the military and go to OCS.
Yoyoyo wrote: You are already 100% locked into footslogging them with zero protection against a DS unit, while shooting them with weapons that don't deal more than 1W.
Yes because there is no Rhino upgrade option on the data sheet. Which means they are not counting that into the "half cost".
Yoyoyo wrote: Show me that this is the best tactical application for Rubrics, and I'll concede you have a point.
Show me that deploying Inceptors the way I said would be unlikely or even difficult in any way. The simple fact is Rubrics have to be put on the board first, Inceptors don't, which means no matter what if Inceptors want to unload on your Rubrics they are going to, and the only way to prevent that is to being 2 20 man units of cultists to bubble wrap them, which still wouldn't help because they DS in Shoot Rubrics Charge cultists, on thier turn they fall back Shoot rubrics, repeat till their dead.
Martel732 wrote: I think you're overreacting without seeing the entire game or the matched points. Power levels seem very coarse. Personally, I fear the 1K sons more at this point because of their save mods.
Now looking at PL we have something good with the rules leak. We know Inceptors are a single 3 man unit that has two weapons and we know they are going to cost around 160 points. which means PL is probably Points/20. Its super easy to do and they don't have to come up with a system. Lets assume the PL gap is as big as possible. 7.5 for Rubrics, and 8.4 for Inceptors, rounded up and down respectively. even then you end up with only an 18 point difference. So if you keep the prices reasonable, add a Rhino 40 points, add an Icon which is going to almost double ranged capabilities which is unreasonable in general but keeping something like that to only 40 points, the base cost of Rubrics would be around 60-80 points, which is wholly unreasonable.
Have you somehow missed the post about PL/points ratio I did JUST LAST PAGE?
From merely 4 units that we know both PL and point cost of, we got a wide range of 16.666 to 21.143
4 units. and the edge cases are 25% apart.
And that's for units with FIXED LOADOUTS
Power level means NOTHING about the actual point value of units. at all.
Its supposed to give a rough estimate that once you pile WHOLE ARMIES around it, it sorta makes sense that the two armies are at the same ballpark
Because inceptors are effectively crisis suits, like any FSE player would know-the individual suit is rather OP for the cost/effect ratio, but as you pile them they become a burden on the army as a whole because you got too little manpower to hold ground, or to control the board.
Inceptors share the exact same issue. the more you field them, the quicker you run out of points with very actual board presence. you can alpha things, you can defiantly nuke targets of choice-but you lack staying power. you get easily blown off the table by a few bad rolls, or some well-positioned shooters you just can't reach.
The new deepstrike-without-error is a double edged sword. I honestly am not sure its better than old scatter for the user
If I place a circle of 17" inch around my defended target-you can't deepstrike, at all. while before it would have been a really safe drop. heck, I used to pull 5-inch gap drops all the time (it seems that the more balls I had, the more luck I had with scattering, its the "safe" drops that got horribly messed, while the balsy ones went perfectly)
So, I can easily force you to land as far as 30" away from the thing I'm trying to defend (counting three sets on 9" and the model size of the defenders), heck its yet another advantage of bigger model count-you can lock out more of the table from deepstrikes.
Back to the original point, the PL is vague, very much so.
Its not reflective of points, it has huge divergence even counting just within the starter set's primaris.
The Rubrics are 5 for 6 PL and 2 more to upgrade a rubric to a sorcerer, so the sorcerer alone counts for 3.2 PL of the unit. this calculated that the sorcerer can deny spells (inceptors got no equivalent skill)
Rubric PL calculates the following unknown factors: DttFE (we got a rumor, nothing solid), icon of flame (theoretically could be insane), faction spells (again, theoretically insane), etc.
Your entire analysis, and panic induced by it, is based on partial information, and a completely bs premises that PL equal points.
ross-128 wrote: They are going to be losing Fearless, so they're definitely going to be cheaper than the 23/model that they cost in the 6e codex because Fearless ain't free. Space Marines have also had a point shaved off them just because, so I'd expect that discount to carry over to everything that is based on the Space Marine statline.
They do still have their AP -2 guns and bonus to saves against small arms though, so those might push them up a couple points, maybe 18-20 total on the high end. Death to the False Emperor is probably just a new name for Veterans of the Long War, so no change there.
This doesn't mean the starting squad is going to be under 100 points of course. Remember: you're paying for a Psyker up front, and Psykers ain't cheap! The Psyker by himself can easily add 40-50 points just by being a Psyker. I mean seriously, are you expecting to get a Psyker for free?
That's why it's so useful that they can expand their squad so much though. Because rubrics are so much cheaper than the Sorcerer, it's far cheaper to expand the squad to get more wounds and guns than it is to buy a second squad (though of course, a second squad does get you a second Psyker).
Except to keep the prices reasonable your going to have to the base cost below 100 to keep the cost of the upgrades reasonable.
Tactics were related strictly to math in 7th, with everything being rewritten in 8th we'll need to wait and see if that holds true going forward.
That said, Inceptors might get a power bump once their full kit comes out with weapon options. Right now they're Power 8 because they have no options and just one loadout, but with new options they could see a power bump due to how power is worked out by the design team.
Man and still going. Why? You're 8 pages in and you've convinced nobody of anything. You're a half step shy of literally banging your head against the wall.
Oh btw according to anecdotes from warhammerfest Deathguard kick the gak out of numarines atm. Gonna do a thread for them too?
ross-128 wrote: They are going to be losing Fearless, so they're definitely going to be cheaper than the 23/model that they cost in the 6e codex because Fearless ain't free. Space Marines have also had a point shaved off them just because, so I'd expect that discount to carry over to everything that is based on the Space Marine statline.
They do still have their AP -2 guns and bonus to saves against small arms though, so those might push them up a couple points, maybe 18-20 total on the high end. Death to the False Emperor is probably just a new name for Veterans of the Long War, so no change there.
This doesn't mean the starting squad is going to be under 100 points of course. Remember: you're paying for a Psyker up front, and Psykers ain't cheap! The Psyker by himself can easily add 40-50 points just by being a Psyker. I mean seriously, are you expecting to get a Psyker for free?
That's why it's so useful that they can expand their squad so much though. Because rubrics are so much cheaper than the Sorcerer, it's far cheaper to expand the squad to get more wounds and guns than it is to buy a second squad (though of course, a second squad does get you a second Psyker).
Except to keep the prices reasonable your going to have to the base cost below 100 to keep the cost of the upgrades reasonable.
What part of "you get a Psyker" are you not understanding?
another thing to consider is that rubrics could be built in a way that'd make em nasty objective holders. they may not be that great at killing inceptors, but I imagine a full squad with warpflamers would be annoying to dislodge. and proably shred CC units.
ross-128 wrote: They are going to be losing Fearless, so they're definitely going to be cheaper than the 23/model that they cost in the 6e codex because Fearless ain't free. Space Marines have also had a point shaved off them just because, so I'd expect that discount to carry over to everything that is based on the Space Marine statline.
They do still have their AP -2 guns and bonus to saves against small arms though, so those might push them up a couple points, maybe 18-20 total on the high end. Death to the False Emperor is probably just a new name for Veterans of the Long War, so no change there.
This doesn't mean the starting squad is going to be under 100 points of course. Remember: you're paying for a Psyker up front, and Psykers ain't cheap! The Psyker by himself can easily add 40-50 points just by being a Psyker. I mean seriously, are you expecting to get a Psyker for free?
That's why it's so useful that they can expand their squad so much though. Because rubrics are so much cheaper than the Sorcerer, it's far cheaper to expand the squad to get more wounds and guns than it is to buy a second squad (though of course, a second squad does get you a second Psyker).
Except to keep the prices reasonable your going to have to the base cost below 100 to keep the cost of the upgrades reasonable.
What part of "you get a Psyker" are you not understanding?
the guy belives power levels should be purely equal, and that there should be no room for roles, individual unit strengths etc.
This thread is silly. Here's something to consider. Rubrics get to shoot the inceptors first because inceptors can't deepstrike, because if we're going to be silly enough to do this single unit comparison half your single unit army must be placed on the board. Seriously though different units have different strengths just because two have an equal power level doesn't mean that they should have an equal chance of killing each other. That logic should be easy to set as terrible. Lascannon pres and autocannon pres have the same power level since they're the same tank but I'm pretty sure one is heavily favored in that figbt.
Martel732 wrote: Tac marines got cheaper because they were and are gak. They are super gak in 8th.
I dunno. They got the indirect buff in that their Heavy weapons can fire on the move now. It's definitely something you can't ignore, and a Melta/Multi/Combi Squad from a Pod doesn't sound as bad.
Martel732 wrote: Tac marines got cheaper because they were and are gak. They are super gak in 8th.
I dunno. They got the indirect buff in that their Heavy weapons can fire on the move now. It's definitely something you can't ignore, and a Melta/Multi/Combi Squad from a Pod doesn't sound as bad.
Watch me ignore it. They're still terrible. Them and their BS 3 heavy weapons lol. We're coming out of an edition with fast heavy weapons squads as troops. Slightly better tac squads are still victims.
Martel732 wrote: Tac marines got cheaper because they were and are gak. They are super gak in 8th.
I dunno. They got the indirect buff in that their Heavy weapons can fire on the move now. It's definitely something you can't ignore, and a Melta/Multi/Combi Squad from a Pod doesn't sound as bad.
Not only that, but there seem to be no charging restrictions for shooting rapid fire or heavy weapons either. So you can short range bolter someone while also using a HB to thin a unit and then charge what's left to kill it off.
Sounds like some people here need to play Imperial Guard. That'll teach them some lessons about assessing a unit based on comparing single models and ignoring how they interact with the rest of the list.
Martel732 wrote: Tac marines got cheaper because they were and are gak. They are super gak in 8th.
I dunno. They got the indirect buff in that their Heavy weapons can fire on the move now. It's definitely something you can't ignore, and a Melta/Multi/Combi Squad from a Pod doesn't sound as bad.
Not only that, but there seem to be no charging restrictions for shooting rapid fire or heavy weapons either. So you can short range bolter someone while also using a HB to thin a unit and then charge what's left to kill it off.
You know, like they do in the lore.
Let me know how that works out for you. Protip: it won't. The lore clearly means nothing in the tabletop game.
Martel732 wrote: Tac marines got cheaper because they were and are gak. They are super gak in 8th.
I dunno. They got the indirect buff in that their Heavy weapons can fire on the move now. It's definitely something you can't ignore, and a Melta/Multi/Combi Squad from a Pod doesn't sound as bad.
Watch me ignore it. They're still terrible. Them and their BS 3 heavy weapons lol. We're coming out of an edition with fast heavy weapons squads as troops. Slightly better tac squads are still victims.
they're better then they where, every thing we've seen about 8th suggests Marines are going to be buffed
Martel732 wrote: I think you're overreacting without seeing the entire game or the matched points. Power levels seem very coarse. Personally, I fear the 1K sons more at this point because of their save mods.
Now looking at PL we have something good with the rules leak. We know Inceptors are a single 3 man unit that has two weapons and we know they are going to cost around 160 points. which means PL is probably Points/20. Its super easy to do and they don't have to come up with a system. Lets assume the PL gap is as big as possible. 7.5 for Rubrics, and 8.4 for Inceptors, rounded up and down respectively. even then you end up with only an 18 point difference. So if you keep the prices reasonable, add a Rhino 40 points, add an Icon which is going to almost double ranged capabilities which is unreasonable in general but keeping something like that to only 40 points, the base cost of Rubrics would be around 60-80 points, which is wholly unreasonable.
Have you somehow missed the post about PL/points ratio I did JUST LAST PAGE?
From merely 4 units that we know both PL and point cost of, we got a wide range of 16.666 to 21.143
4 units. and the edge cases are 25% apart.
And that's for units with FIXED LOADOUTS
Power level means NOTHING about the actual point value of units. at all.
Its supposed to give a rough estimate that once you pile WHOLE ARMIES around it, it sorta makes sense that the two armies are at the same ballpark
Because inceptors are effectively crisis suits, like any FSE player would know-the individual suit is rather OP for the cost/effect ratio, but as you pile them they become a burden on the army as a whole because you got too little manpower to hold ground, or to control the board.
Inceptors share the exact same issue. the more you field them, the quicker you run out of points with very actual board presence. you can alpha things, you can defiantly nuke targets of choice-but you lack staying power. you get easily blown off the table by a few bad rolls, or some well-positioned shooters you just can't reach.
The new deepstrike-without-error is a double edged sword. I honestly am not sure its better than old scatter for the user
If I place a circle of 17" inch around my defended target-you can't deepstrike, at all. while before it would have been a really safe drop. heck, I used to pull 5-inch gap drops all the time (it seems that the more balls I had, the more luck I had with scattering, its the "safe" drops that got horribly messed, while the balsy ones went perfectly)
So, I can easily force you to land as far as 30" away from the thing I'm trying to defend (counting three sets on 9" and the model size of the defenders), heck its yet another advantage of bigger model count-you can lock out more of the table from deepstrikes.
Back to the original point, the PL is vague, very much so.
Its not reflective of points, it has huge divergence even counting just within the starter set's primaris.
The Rubrics are 5 for 6 PL and 2 more to upgrade a rubric to a sorcerer, so the sorcerer alone counts for 3.2 PL of the unit. this calculated that the sorcerer can deny spells (inceptors got no equivalent skill)
Rubric PL calculates the following unknown factors: DttFE (we got a rumor, nothing solid), icon of flame (theoretically could be insane), faction spells (again, theoretically insane), etc.
Your entire analysis, and panic induced by it, is based on partial information, and a completely bs premises that PL equal points.
The PL is vague because we don't know the exact number to go off of. Oh wait we have 1 unit that we can go off of, I-N-C-E-P-O-T-R-S. Because we know their points cost AND we know they have no options other then what they have. We know the PL is based on the points cost of "half upgrades" So the PL is going to be Points/20, or around that I took the most extreme case 7.5 PL for Rubrics 8.4 for Inceptors. which leaves only a 19 point gap. Even at 22 points its only a 20 point gap. Aspiring Sorcerers get 1 spell Pseudo Smite that's it. So the Spells aren't doing it. Rhino will cost between 30 and 50 points probably, 40 on average. So the Icon of Flame would have to near double the effect of their ranged capabilities, 30-40 points, 35 on average, 75 points total on average, 75-160 = 85 would be the base cost of a Unit of Rubric Marines Stock, 10 points more then Tac Marines.
I agree with that point, Tactics is basically how your troops move around the battlefield and how you incorporate every advantage to your advantage. That being said, Math plays its role.
If my units are vastly mathematically superior to yours, your tactics NEEDS to be vastly superior than mine for you to stand a chance.
Martel732 wrote: I think you're overreacting without seeing the entire game or the matched points. Power levels seem very coarse. Personally, I fear the 1K sons more at this point because of their save mods.
Now looking at PL we have something good with the rules leak. We know Inceptors are a single 3 man unit that has two weapons and we know they are going to cost around 160 points. which means PL is probably Points/20. Its super easy to do and they don't have to come up with a system. Lets assume the PL gap is as big as possible. 7.5 for Rubrics, and 8.4 for Inceptors, rounded up and down respectively. even then you end up with only an 18 point difference. So if you keep the prices reasonable, add a Rhino 40 points, add an Icon which is going to almost double ranged capabilities which is unreasonable in general but keeping something like that to only 40 points, the base cost of Rubrics would be around 60-80 points, which is wholly unreasonable.
Have you somehow missed the post about PL/points ratio I did JUST LAST PAGE?
From merely 4 units that we know both PL and point cost of, we got a wide range of 16.666 to 21.143
4 units. and the edge cases are 25% apart.
And that's for units with FIXED LOADOUTS
Power level means NOTHING about the actual point value of units. at all.
Its supposed to give a rough estimate that once you pile WHOLE ARMIES around it, it sorta makes sense that the two armies are at the same ballpark
Because inceptors are effectively crisis suits, like any FSE player would know-the individual suit is rather OP for the cost/effect ratio, but as you pile them they become a burden on the army as a whole because you got too little manpower to hold ground, or to control the board.
Inceptors share the exact same issue. the more you field them, the quicker you run out of points with very actual board presence. you can alpha things, you can defiantly nuke targets of choice-but you lack staying power. you get easily blown off the table by a few bad rolls, or some well-positioned shooters you just can't reach.
The new deepstrike-without-error is a double edged sword. I honestly am not sure its better than old scatter for the user
If I place a circle of 17" inch around my defended target-you can't deepstrike, at all. while before it would have been a really safe drop. heck, I used to pull 5-inch gap drops all the time (it seems that the more balls I had, the more luck I had with scattering, its the "safe" drops that got horribly messed, while the balsy ones went perfectly)
So, I can easily force you to land as far as 30" away from the thing I'm trying to defend (counting three sets on 9" and the model size of the defenders), heck its yet another advantage of bigger model count-you can lock out more of the table from deepstrikes.
Back to the original point, the PL is vague, very much so.
Its not reflective of points, it has huge divergence even counting just within the starter set's primaris.
The Rubrics are 5 for 6 PL and 2 more to upgrade a rubric to a sorcerer, so the sorcerer alone counts for 3.2 PL of the unit. this calculated that the sorcerer can deny spells (inceptors got no equivalent skill)
Rubric PL calculates the following unknown factors: DttFE (we got a rumor, nothing solid), icon of flame (theoretically could be insane), faction spells (again, theoretically insane), etc.
Your entire analysis, and panic induced by it, is based on partial information, and a completely bs premises that PL equal points.
The PL is vague because we don't know the exact number to go off of. Oh wait we have 1 unit that we can go off of, I-N-C-E-P-O-T-R-S. Because we know their points cost AND we know they have no options other then what they have. We know the PL is based on the points cost of "half upgrades" So the PL is going to be Points/20, or around that I took the most extreme case 7.5 PL for Rubrics 8.4 for Inceptors. which leaves only a 19 point gap. Even at 22 points its only a 20 point gap. Aspiring Sorcerers get 1 spell Pseudo Smite that's it. So the Spells aren't doing it. Rhino will cost between 30 and 50 points probably, 40 on average. So the Icon of Flame would have to near double the effect of their ranged capabilities, 30-40 points, 35 on average, 75 points total on average, 75-160 = 85 would be the base cost of a Unit of Rubric Marines Stock, 10 points more then Tac Marines.
Martel732 wrote: Tac marines got cheaper because they were and are gak. They are super gak in 8th.
I dunno. They got the indirect buff in that their Heavy weapons can fire on the move now. It's definitely something you can't ignore, and a Melta/Multi/Combi Squad from a Pod doesn't sound as bad.
Not only that, but there seem to be no charging restrictions for shooting rapid fire or heavy weapons either. So you can short range bolter someone while also using a HB to thin a unit and then charge what's left to kill it off.
You know, like they do in the lore.
Let me know how that works out for you. Protip: it won't. The lore clearly means nothing in the tabletop game.
Hop out of their Rhino, shoot a target unit (say..Gaunts), charge the Rhino in to to take the Overwatch, then charge the Tacts in to stomp some bugs.
Sounds viable to me as a tactic.
But you know, since the math doesn't say that the Marines automatically win the game because they do this it's super bad.
I agree with that point, Tactics is basically how your troops move around the battlefield and how you incorporate every advantage to your advantage. That being said, Math plays its role.
If my units are vastly mathematically superior to yours, your tactics NEEDS to be vastly superior than mine for you to stand a chance.
Indeed, they both have a role. I beat a Decurion Necron list in 7th with Sisters despite having three models left in my entire army (he basically only lost three models in his entire army) because I had Objective Secure troops on 2 objectives to his 1.
Tactics can make weak units and armies win over numerically superior ones. Even in 40k.
I agree with that point, Tactics is basically how your troops move around the battlefield and how you incorporate every advantage to your advantage. That being said, Math plays its role.
If my units are vastly mathematically superior to yours, your tactics NEEDS to be vastly superior than mine for you to stand a chance.
Indeed, they both have a role. I beat a Decurion Necron list in 7th with Sisters despite having three models left in my entire army (he basically only lost three models in his entire army) because I had Objective Secure troops on 2 objectives to his 1.
Tactics can make weak units and armies win over numerically superior ones. Even in 40k.
Sometimes. How many times out of 100 do you think you could do that the Decurion? 5? 10? That's what matters, not the fact that it is possible.
Martel732 wrote: The actual ability of tac marines to fight in CC has always been terrible on a per pt basis. This doesn't look like its changing.
Most units took a hit in CC due to losing chargine bonuses and CCW/BP bonus attacks. We,ll see how that plays out with the full game in a couple of weeks..
I agree with that point, Tactics is basically how your troops move around the battlefield and how you incorporate every advantage to your advantage. That being said, Math plays its role.
If my units are vastly mathematically superior to yours, your tactics NEEDS to be vastly superior than mine for you to stand a chance.
Indeed, they both have a role. I beat a Decurion Necron list in 7th with Sisters despite having three models left in my entire army (he basically only lost three models in his entire army) because I had Objective Secure troops on 2 objectives to his 1.
Tactics can make weak units and armies win over numerically superior ones. Even in 40k.
Sometimes. How many times out of 100 do you think you could do that the Decurion? 5? 10? That's what matters, not the fact that it is possible.
Considering I was failing wounding rolls constantly the game should have been closer.
Point is that I covered my weaknesses through tactics and leveraged my only real strength (Obj Sec) to win despite basically losing my entire army. This is something all players try to do. Relying solely on numerical advantage isn't enough to consistently win games.
You're fooling yourself if you think that tac marines will be effective in CC.
"Relying solely on numerical advantage isn't enough to consistently win games."
Depends on how many scatterbikes you've got, I guess. Because killing everything by turn 3 is a good way to win. Oh, and they're all obj sec.
The Decurion is no longer even in my top 10 7th ed lists for the exact reason you gave. I've even tabled Decurions before. Because maximum face-punching.
Martel732 wrote: You're fooling yourself if you think that tac marines will be effective in CC.
Effective but not dominant is my expectation. Tacts are swiss army knives, not dedicated murder machines.
Blunt swiss army knives without any of the extra tools, maybe.
You argue from a skewed perspective of what "effective" actually means. They,re not Firewarriors. You can use em in cose commbat to finish off weakend units. They just won't win you games if you rely on assault alone.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Well, there's no decurion in 8th either, but that was brought up.
As an example of using tactics to beat math, not as an example of how 8th plays.
Martel732 wrote: Oh really? Boltguns have no AP at all. That doesn't seem like a buff.
there are three ways to buff a unit in 40k (or any table top game really) the first is just to increase the stats, the third is to decrease the points cost, the third way is to change how the base rules interact with those stats to produce a better army.
it seems 8th edition is gonna give Marines the third way, Tac Squads may now, split their fire against multiple targets (this means a varfity of things pop up, for example, a tac squad could bolter down some infantry near an enemy tank, while the meltagun and multimelta in the squad burn down the tank) they can fire their heavy weapons on the move (hitting on a 4 or better isn't exactly that bad. and it IS an improvement) there are a number of little things like that that'll be improvements.
Martel732 wrote: Oh really? Boltguns have no AP at all. That doesn't seem like a buff.
there are three ways to buff a unit in 40k (or any table top game really) the first is just to increase the stats, the third is to decrease the points cost, the third way is to change how the base rules interact with those stats to produce a better army.
it seems 8th edition is gonna give Marines the third way, Tac Squads may now, split their fire against multiple targets (this means a varfity of things pop up, for example, a tac squad could bolter down some infantry near an enemy tank, while the meltagun and multimelta in the squad burn down the tank) they can fire their heavy weapons on the move (hitting on a 4 or better isn't exactly that bad. and it IS an improvement) there are a number of little things like that that'll be improvements.
I didn't say they wouldn't be better. But they are so terrible atm that I don't think these buffs are going to change how they end up playing in the table at all. They get a single heavy weapon. I can spam heavies on other platforms. And -2 AP weapons are going to render regular marines as utter chaff. That's my prediction atm.
The bottom line is that the bolter schlub doesn't bring enough value to the table to justify the tac squad. Even with combi, special , heavy, their firepower is still awful and their CC is abysmal. 13 pts is still too much, just like 14 was, and 16, and 22, and 30.
Martel732 wrote: And I'm using scatterbikes as an example when tactics can't beat math. Because the math is too overwhelming.
I've been using tac marines since 2nd ed, except when I didn't have to in 5th. They've always been crap. Pure crap.
Tbf grav cannon tacs with scout in free rhinos were preeeetttyy good. But that's like 80points of free/op extras?
Also, judging by this thread DG must be super Tau'nar levels of busted. Since numarines are clearly a scheme by GW to take chaos players happiness away, it seems weird that DG were winning most of the time.
The Numarines aren't that impressive. It's easy to imagine much more cost effective units. The problem is that they started with the base marine, who was completely ineffective in 7th without very powerful gimmicks.
I do have faith that nothing will be Tau'nar busted in 8th, but that is a VERY low bar.
Not gonna lie, it was fun reading how the arguments didn't change over time factoring in other things we know.
Wonder who does better against lascannons and heavy multi wound attacks.
If I had to guess I think a rhino would cost 2 power so can someone compare 6 interceptors to the durability and damage output of a 10 man unit of rubrics with a rhino. Most likely still having two fire points so they can fire two weapons out the top
Well, let's say we try applying the same logic to something more familiar: Guardsmen and Tacticals.
A squad of Guardsmen and a squad of Tacs will probably end up being the same power level, because Guardsmen have about half the cost per model but get double the models in a basic squad. Over all, the difference between their base costs is not large enough to make the power level change (because it's less than 20 points).
So we'll run with some fairly poor assumptions and do a shootout between them at 24".
Tac 1: 4 shots, 2/3 hit, 2/3 wound, 1/3 save, 1.18 wounds on average.
Guardsmen: 9 shots, 1/2 hit, 1/3 wound, 2/3 save, 0.5 wounds on average
Oh no, those poor Guardsmen less than half the damage output despite having twice as many models, how horrible! And this is after getting a save they wouldn't have gotten before! Clearly Guardsmen are absolutely worthless.
But I'm sure we all know why that's not true. Guardsmen have quite a lot of tricks up their sleeve that such a simple look doesn't even come close to accounting for, particularly when looked at as part of a full list.
Martel732 wrote: I think you're overreacting without seeing the entire game or the matched points. Power levels seem very coarse. Personally, I fear the 1K sons more at this point because of their save mods.
Now looking at PL we have something good with the rules leak. We know Inceptors are a single 3 man unit that has two weapons and we know they are going to cost around 160 points. which means PL is probably Points/20. Its super easy to do and they don't have to come up with a system. Lets assume the PL gap is as big as possible. 7.5 for Rubrics, and 8.4 for Inceptors, rounded up and down respectively. even then you end up with only an 18 point difference. So if you keep the prices reasonable, add a Rhino 40 points, add an Icon which is going to almost double ranged capabilities which is unreasonable in general but keeping something like that to only 40 points, the base cost of Rubrics would be around 60-80 points, which is wholly unreasonable.
Have you somehow missed the post about PL/points ratio I did JUST LAST PAGE?
From merely 4 units that we know both PL and point cost of, we got a wide range of 16.666 to 21.143
4 units. and the edge cases are 25% apart.
And that's for units with FIXED LOADOUTS
Power level means NOTHING about the actual point value of units. at all.
Its supposed to give a rough estimate that once you pile WHOLE ARMIES around it, it sorta makes sense that the two armies are at the same ballpark
Because inceptors are effectively crisis suits, like any FSE player would know-the individual suit is rather OP for the cost/effect ratio, but as you pile them they become a burden on the army as a whole because you got too little manpower to hold ground, or to control the board.
Inceptors share the exact same issue. the more you field them, the quicker you run out of points with very actual board presence. you can alpha things, you can defiantly nuke targets of choice-but you lack staying power. you get easily blown off the table by a few bad rolls, or some well-positioned shooters you just can't reach.
The new deepstrike-without-error is a double edged sword. I honestly am not sure its better than old scatter for the user
If I place a circle of 17" inch around my defended target-you can't deepstrike, at all. while before it would have been a really safe drop. heck, I used to pull 5-inch gap drops all the time (it seems that the more balls I had, the more luck I had with scattering, its the "safe" drops that got horribly messed, while the balsy ones went perfectly)
So, I can easily force you to land as far as 30" away from the thing I'm trying to defend (counting three sets on 9" and the model size of the defenders), heck its yet another advantage of bigger model count-you can lock out more of the table from deepstrikes.
Back to the original point, the PL is vague, very much so.
Its not reflective of points, it has huge divergence even counting just within the starter set's primaris.
The Rubrics are 5 for 6 PL and 2 more to upgrade a rubric to a sorcerer, so the sorcerer alone counts for 3.2 PL of the unit. this calculated that the sorcerer can deny spells (inceptors got no equivalent skill)
Rubric PL calculates the following unknown factors: DttFE (we got a rumor, nothing solid), icon of flame (theoretically could be insane), faction spells (again, theoretically insane), etc.
Your entire analysis, and panic induced by it, is based on partial information, and a completely bs premises that PL equal points.
The PL is vague because we don't know the exact number to go off of. Oh wait we have 1 unit that we can go off of, I-N-C-E-P-O-T-R-S. Because we know their points cost AND we know they have no options other then what they have. We know the PL is based on the points cost of "half upgrades" So the PL is going to be Points/20, or around that I took the most extreme case 7.5 PL for Rubrics 8.4 for Inceptors. which leaves only a 19 point gap. Even at 22 points its only a 20 point gap. Aspiring Sorcerers get 1 spell Pseudo Smite that's it. So the Spells aren't doing it. Rhino will cost between 30 and 50 points probably, 40 on average. So the Icon of Flame would have to near double the effect of their ranged capabilities, 30-40 points, 35 on average, 75 points total on average, 75-160 = 85 would be the base cost of a Unit of Rubric Marines Stock, 10 points more then Tac Marines.
We also have the full rules, power level and point costs of the intercessors, the primaris captain and the hellblasters-who I've based the calculations at.
Somehow you managed to ignore the fact that I said "4 units" and claim there is one without even looking at my original power that details the 4 known units.
Your entire post has no root in reality, as it ignores multiple know factors-as in 3 entire unit's worth of known PL and point costs, of the three, the intercessors sorta fits the PL=20 points mold, the other two very much does not and display the same 25% value disparity I have noted.
Honestly, how on earth you qoute-reply to me while your reply obviously did not include reading what I wrote and asking yourself where I am getting my numbers (that you seem unfamiliar with) is beyond me.
Darkagl1 wrote: This thread is silly. Here's something to consider. Rubrics get to shoot the inceptors first because inceptors can't deepstrike, because if we're going to be silly enough to do this single unit comparison half your single unit army must be placed on the board. Seriously though different units have different strengths just because two have an equal power level doesn't mean that they should have an equal chance of killing each other. That logic should be easy to set as terrible. Lascannon pres and autocannon pres have the same power level since they're the same tank but I'm pretty sure one is heavily favored in that fight.
You realize that Inceptors have a 10" move and will be able to maneuver so that they get first shot right? After 2 rounds of shooting the Rubrics have lost 2.5 wounds if the Inceptors charge they lose another .5 plus .7 for attacks puts them at 3.7 high enough to call it 4 leaving just the Aspiring Sorcerer which will do 1.4 wounds in combat finishing off 1 and putting 1 wound on another. Inceptors Fall Back and fire 12 rounds into the Sorc killing him.
Martel732 wrote: I think you're overreacting without seeing the entire game or the matched points. Power levels seem very coarse. Personally, I fear the 1K sons more at this point because of their save mods.
Now looking at PL we have something good with the rules leak. We know Inceptors are a single 3 man unit that has two weapons and we know they are going to cost around 160 points. which means PL is probably Points/20. Its super easy to do and they don't have to come up with a system. Lets assume the PL gap is as big as possible. 7.5 for Rubrics, and 8.4 for Inceptors, rounded up and down respectively. even then you end up with only an 18 point difference. So if you keep the prices reasonable, add a Rhino 40 points, add an Icon which is going to almost double ranged capabilities which is unreasonable in general but keeping something like that to only 40 points, the base cost of Rubrics would be around 60-80 points, which is wholly unreasonable.
Have you somehow missed the post about PL/points ratio I did JUST LAST PAGE?
From merely 4 units that we know both PL and point cost of, we got a wide range of 16.666 to 21.143
4 units. and the edge cases are 25% apart.
And that's for units with FIXED LOADOUTS
Power level means NOTHING about the actual point value of units. at all.
Its supposed to give a rough estimate that once you pile WHOLE ARMIES around it, it sorta makes sense that the two armies are at the same ballpark
Because inceptors are effectively crisis suits, like any FSE player would know-the individual suit is rather OP for the cost/effect ratio, but as you pile them they become a burden on the army as a whole because you got too little manpower to hold ground, or to control the board.
Inceptors share the exact same issue. the more you field them, the quicker you run out of points with very actual board presence. you can alpha things, you can defiantly nuke targets of choice-but you lack staying power. you get easily blown off the table by a few bad rolls, or some well-positioned shooters you just can't reach.
The new deepstrike-without-error is a double edged sword. I honestly am not sure its better than old scatter for the user
If I place a circle of 17" inch around my defended target-you can't deepstrike, at all. while before it would have been a really safe drop. heck, I used to pull 5-inch gap drops all the time (it seems that the more balls I had, the more luck I had with scattering, its the "safe" drops that got horribly messed, while the balsy ones went perfectly)
So, I can easily force you to land as far as 30" away from the thing I'm trying to defend (counting three sets on 9" and the model size of the defenders), heck its yet another advantage of bigger model count-you can lock out more of the table from deepstrikes.
Back to the original point, the PL is vague, very much so.
Its not reflective of points, it has huge divergence even counting just within the starter set's primaris.
The Rubrics are 5 for 6 PL and 2 more to upgrade a rubric to a sorcerer, so the sorcerer alone counts for 3.2 PL of the unit. this calculated that the sorcerer can deny spells (inceptors got no equivalent skill)
Rubric PL calculates the following unknown factors: DttFE (we got a rumor, nothing solid), icon of flame (theoretically could be insane), faction spells (again, theoretically insane), etc.
Your entire analysis, and panic induced by it, is based on partial information, and a completely bs premises that PL equal points.
The PL is vague because we don't know the exact number to go off of. Oh wait we have 1 unit that we can go off of, I-N-C-E-P-O-T-R-S. Because we know their points cost AND we know they have no options other then what they have. We know the PL is based on the points cost of "half upgrades" So the PL is going to be Points/20, or around that I took the most extreme case 7.5 PL for Rubrics 8.4 for Inceptors. which leaves only a 19 point gap. Even at 22 points its only a 20 point gap. Aspiring Sorcerers get 1 spell Pseudo Smite that's it. So the Spells aren't doing it. Rhino will cost between 30 and 50 points probably, 40 on average. So the Icon of Flame would have to near double the effect of their ranged capabilities, 30-40 points, 35 on average, 75 points total on average, 75-160 = 85 would be the base cost of a Unit of Rubric Marines Stock, 10 points more then Tac Marines.
We also have the full rules, power level and point costs of the intercessors, the primaris captain and the hellblasters-who I've based the calculations at.
Somehow you managed to ignore the fact that I said "4 units" and claim there is one without even looking at my original power that details the 4 known units.
Your entire post has no root in reality, as it ignores multiple know factors-as in 3 entire unit's worth of known PL and point costs, of the three, the intercessors sorta fits the PL=20 points mold, the other two very much does not and display the same 25% value disparity I have noted.
Honestly, how on earth you qoute-reply to me while your reply obviously did not include reading what I wrote and asking yourself where I am getting my numbers (that you seem unfamiliar with) is beyond me.
What are the point costs for the all the upgrades for those other three units?
BoomWolf wrote: Yaknow, this whole argument here is totally moot even before you THINK about the fact that we don't know for sure what DttFE does, or what icon of flame does, or the fact rubrics can deny spells and inceptors cant, or that we got faction-spesific spells we KNOW exist, and could make the asp sorcerer that much more potent.
You know why?
Because power level is a really, REALLY vague estimate of power, and nothing to be taken seriously in any competitive level, or in any way indicate point costs.
Lets run a shot analysis of units of give power levels and known costs-shall we? (I'm taking some of it directly off a post I made in another forum)
The inceptors cost 53 each, so a team is 159.
Divide by 8, you got 19.875 points per power level.
The intercessors are 24 points each, so 120 a team-and power level 6. so they are 20 points per power level. pretty close.
Other known factor, the hellblasters, 40 each power level 12. so we hit 16.666 point per power level.
That's...a bit off. like, 15% off.
It seems like 1 power level=roughly 16-20 points? seems about right?
The captain though, power level 7 and costs 148, so that's 21.143 points per power level.
So, a PL is worth somewhere between 16.666 and 21.143?
So...power level and points so not translate all that easily. we got a huge divergance in PL to point ratio, and we were just looking at a handful of units from one very specific line.
we got 4.46 points-per-power-level difference between our highest and our lowest example-and these might not be the biggest edge cases, because once more we only saw Numarines, and only some of them to boot.
Its a VERY rough outline, one that should never be used to compare units if you know your stuff. 4.46 difference between current edge cases, rounding down to 4 means the rubric squad might cost 127 while half- equipped, and still be within power level logic.
So, 127 points might be the same 8 PL as 159 points, despite 148 points being lower 7 PL, and 120 being 6 PL.
Get what I'm going at?
The power level is wonky. its really rough, and it only scales properly in saying the ARMIES are roughly the same scale, and useless for individual units.
And to top it off-we have yet to actually seen mission rules.
If "only troops score" returns, that would skyrocker the estimated PL of every troop unit, and unlike inceptors, rubrics are troops.
Do I really need to quote MYSELF?
Is looking a single page back (as instructed) that hard?
All the known primaris units so far have a fixed loadout-no options to consider.
Hell, the point costs and the dataslates of these units came from the same source at the same time as the inceptors did. if that's not deliberate ignorance, I don't know what is.
Darkagl1 wrote: This thread is silly. Here's something to consider. Rubrics get to shoot the inceptors first because inceptors can't deepstrike, because if we're going to be silly enough to do this single unit comparison half your single unit army must be placed on the board. Seriously though different units have different strengths just because two have an equal power level doesn't mean that they should have an equal chance of killing each other. That logic should be easy to set as terrible. Lascannon pres and autocannon pres have the same power level since they're the same tank but I'm pretty sure one is heavily favored in that fight.
You realize that Inceptors have a 10" move and will be able to maneuver so that they get first shot right? After 2 rounds of shooting the Rubrics have lost 2.5 wounds if the Inceptors charge they lose another .5 plus .7 for attacks puts them at 3.7 high enough to call it 4 leaving just the Aspiring Sorcerer which will do 1.4 wounds in combat finishing off 1 and putting 1 wound on another. Inceptors Fall Back and fire 12 rounds into the Sorc killing him.
Actually, with only 18" range vs 24", 10" movement might not be enough to do that. The Inceptor's threat range (move+shoot) with that is 28". If they're more than 28" away, they can't cover enough ground in one turn to shoot them before the end of that turn.
The TSons' threat range is... 29". 24" of weapon range plus 5" of movement. Because the TSons' threat range is larger, they have a window where they can get themselves into a position to get the first shot. Where as any move the Inceptors take that put them within striking range of the TSons will also put them in range for a counter-attack. If the Inceptors find themselves having to stop anywhere in between 29" and 18", an 11" window (note that's 1" further than their move), the TSons will get the first shot.
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote: You realize that Inceptors have a 10" move and will be able to maneuver so that they get first shot right? After 2 rounds of shooting the Rubrics *blah blah blah*
So, you're planning to leave your pricey Rubrics and Aspiring Sorcerer exposed to every army with greater mobility or an alpha strike option?
What outcome were you hoping for exactly? You want to be outplayed and outmanoeuvred by the SM player, but still win?
Yoyoyo wrote: So, you're planning to leave your pricey Rubrics and Aspiring Sorcerer exposed to every army with greater mobility or an alpha strike option?
What outcome were you hoping for exactly? You want to be outplayed and outmaneuvered by the SM player, but still win?
Why do you think Fast Attack exists?
Now were adding units?
How do you out maneuver a unit that isn't on the board? And can be placed anywhere on the board? You can't you will always get outmaneuvered.
What are Rubrics better at then Inceptors? That is my question to you, and against some thing that is fairly common. Not well if your getting shot at with Rend -4 S6 weapons that do multiple damage, unless there are GOBS of that.
Darkagl1 wrote: This thread is silly. Here's something to consider. Rubrics get to shoot the inceptors first because inceptors can't deepstrike, because if we're going to be silly enough to do this single unit comparison half your single unit army must be placed on the board. Seriously though different units have different strengths just because two have an equal power level doesn't mean that they should have an equal chance of killing each other. That logic should be easy to set as terrible. Lascannon pres and autocannon pres have the same power level since they're the same tank but I'm pretty sure one is heavily favored in that fight.
You realize that Inceptors have a 10" move and will be able to maneuver so that they get first shot right? After 2 rounds of shooting the Rubrics have lost 2.5 wounds if the Inceptors charge they lose another .5 plus .7 for attacks puts them at 3.7 high enough to call it 4 leaving just the Aspiring Sorcerer which will do 1.4 wounds in combat finishing off 1 and putting 1 wound on another. Inceptors Fall Back and fire 12 rounds into the Sorc killing him.
Actually, with only 18" range vs 24", 10" movement might not be enough to do that. The Inceptor's threat range (move+shoot) with that is 28". If they're more than 28" away, they can't cover enough ground in one turn to shoot them before the end of that turn.
The TSons' threat range is... 29". 24" of weapon range plus 5" of movement. Because the TSons' threat range is larger, they have a window where they can get themselves into a position to get the first shot. Where as any move the Inceptors take that put them within striking range of the TSons will also put them in range for a counter-attack. If the Inceptors find themselves having to stop anywhere in between 29" and 18", an 11" window (note that's 1" further than their move), the TSons will get the first shot.
Filling your mandatory troops slot, meching up in a Rhino, leveraging mission special rules, bashing multiwound targets with force weapons, denying offensive psychic powers, taking Invul saves, etc.
Alpha strike isn't new either. The goal is minimize vulnerability, then crush the relatively expensive alpha striker. Of course you'll fail hard if you leave a pseudo-elite like Rubrics badly exposed, That's just bad play in any edition.
So against -3 rend weapons. Which im sure will be all over the battle field.
Yoyoyo wrote: Alpha strike isn't new either. The goal is minimize vulnerability, then crush the relatively expensive alpha striker. Of course you'll fail hard if you leave a pseudo-elite like Rubrics badly exposed, That's just bad play in any edition.
How are you going to minimize vulerability if your using Rubrics as Troops? They are going to be the most prevalent unit on the board for your army, there the ones that are supposed to mitigate the risk.
Darkagl1 wrote: This thread is silly. Here's something to consider. Rubrics get to shoot the inceptors first because inceptors can't deepstrike, because if we're going to be silly enough to do this single unit comparison half your single unit army must be placed on the board. Seriously though different units have different strengths just because two have an equal power level doesn't mean that they should have an equal chance of killing each other. That logic should be easy to set as terrible. Lascannon pres and autocannon pres have the same power level since they're the same tank but I'm pretty sure one is heavily favored in that fight.
You realize that Inceptors have a 10" move and will be able to maneuver so that they get first shot right? After 2 rounds of shooting the Rubrics have lost 2.5 wounds if the Inceptors charge they lose another .5 plus .7 for attacks puts them at 3.7 high enough to call it 4 leaving just the Aspiring Sorcerer which will do 1.4 wounds in combat finishing off 1 and putting 1 wound on another. Inceptors Fall Back and fire 12 rounds into the Sorc killing him.
Actually, with only 18" range vs 24", 10" movement might not be enough to do that. The Inceptor's threat range (move+shoot) with that is 28". If they're more than 28" away, they can't cover enough ground in one turn to shoot them before the end of that turn.
The TSons' threat range is... 29". 24" of weapon range plus 5" of movement. Because the TSons' threat range is larger, they have a window where they can get themselves into a position to get the first shot. Where as any move the Inceptors take that put them within striking range of the TSons will also put them in range for a counter-attack. If the Inceptors find themselves having to stop anywhere in between 29" and 18", an 11" window (note that's 1" further than their move), the TSons will get the first shot.
Hmm math seems to check out.
Yeah no it doesn't, LOS is a thing, think then speak.
So the extra threat range doesn't matter because reasons gotcha.
Yeah no it doesn't, LOS is a thing, think then speak.
So the extra threat range doesn't matter because reasons gotcha.
Yes because LOS isn't a thing that anyone has ever used to prevent being shot at while moving forward.
Do me favor Type blood angles battle report into you tube and spend 9 hours watching the results and count the number of times the BA player uses terrain to prevent their unit from being shot at. I'm sure it will be in the hundreds. Your right though I'M being unreasonable.
It would matter if they had the same or near the same MS and both had FLY
Yeah no it doesn't, LOS is a thing, think then speak.
So the extra threat range doesn't matter because reasons gotcha.
Yes because LOS isn't a thing that anyone has ever used to prevent being shot at while moving forward.
Do me favor Type blood angles battle report into you tube and spend 9 hours watching the results and count the number of times the BA player uses terrain to prevent their unit from being shot at. I'm sure it will be in the hundreds. Your right though I'M being unreasonable.
It would matter if they had the same or near the same MS and both had FLY
I think the point he's trying to make is that apparently outside conditions don't matter unless it's convenient for you.
It definitely seems to me that you need to spend some time playing Imperial Guard so you can learn to rely less on raw stats and single models. Maybe by the end of it you might even learn to play.
Yeah no it doesn't, LOS is a thing, think then speak.
So the extra threat range doesn't matter because reasons gotcha.
Yes because LOS isn't a thing that anyone has ever used to prevent being shot at while moving forward.
Do me favor Type blood angles battle report into you tube and spend 9 hours watching the results and count the number of times the BA player uses terrain to prevent their unit from being shot at. I'm sure it will be in the hundreds. Your right though I'M being unreasonable.
It would matter if they had the same or near the same MS and both had FLY
I think the point he's trying to make is that apparently outside conditions don't matter unless it's convenient for you.
It definitely seems to me that you need to spend some time playing Imperial Guard so you can learn to rely less on raw stats and single models. Maybe by the end of it you might even learn to play.
No I'm trying to keep it simple, they are the ones that try to say things like no LOS allowed no cover allowed, Inceptors cant DS, and have to mindlessly jump forward without ever taking advantage of anything because the controlling player is incompetent. If anything THEY are the ones trying to manipulate things in thier favor. They keep saying i am comparing the two units in a vacuum when they keep trying to compare them in a vacuum.
Yeah no it doesn't, LOS is a thing, think then speak.
So the extra threat range doesn't matter because reasons gotcha.
Yes because LOS isn't a thing that anyone has ever used to prevent being shot at while moving forward.
Do me favor Type blood angles battle report into you tube and spend 9 hours watching the results and count the number of times the BA player uses terrain to prevent their unit from being shot at. I'm sure it will be in the hundreds. Your right though I'M being unreasonable.
It would matter if they had the same or near the same MS and both had FLY
Oh I see you seem to be laboring under a misapprehension that only the inceptors can use terrain.
Yeah no it doesn't, LOS is a thing, think then speak.
So the extra threat range doesn't matter because reasons gotcha.
Yes because LOS isn't a thing that anyone has ever used to prevent being shot at while moving forward.
Do me favor Type blood angles battle report into you tube and spend 9 hours watching the results and count the number of times the BA player uses terrain to prevent their unit from being shot at. I'm sure it will be in the hundreds. Your right though I'M being unreasonable.
It would matter if they had the same or near the same MS and both had FLY
I think the point he's trying to make is that apparently outside conditions don't matter unless it's convenient for you.
It definitely seems to me that you need to spend some time playing Imperial Guard so you can learn to rely less on raw stats and single models. Maybe by the end of it you might even learn to play.
Yeah no it doesn't, LOS is a thing, think then speak.
So the extra threat range doesn't matter because reasons gotcha.
Yes because LOS isn't a thing that anyone has ever used to prevent being shot at while moving forward.
Do me favor Type blood angles battle report into you tube and spend 9 hours watching the results and count the number of times the BA player uses terrain to prevent their unit from being shot at. I'm sure it will be in the hundreds. Your right though I'M being unreasonable.
It would matter if they had the same or near the same MS and both had FLY
I think the point he's trying to make is that apparently outside conditions don't matter unless it's convenient for you.
It definitely seems to me that you need to spend some time playing Imperial Guard so you can learn to rely less on raw stats and single models. Maybe by the end of it you might even learn to play.
No I'm trying to keep it simple, they are the ones that try to say things like no LOS allowed no cover allowed, Inceptors cant DS, and have to mindlessly jump forward without ever taking advantage of anything because the controlling player is a slow. If anything THEY are the ones trying to manipulate. They keep saying i am comparing the two units in a vacuum when they keep trying to compare them in a vacuum.
Ok let's try to keep this simple. Purely taking two units and comparing them on the basis of power level (or points for that matter) and having them fight it out is a pointless exercise. It's even more pointless when you're trying to compare them in a vacuum (which you're trying to do) and you cheat the game rules (allowing deepstrike in 1v1 when in order to deepstrike you must have half your units on board rounded up). When that was pointed out to you, which means rubrics shoot first because of larger range you responded with no, because inceptors have greater movement. When it was pointed out that rubrics still have larger threat range, you responded with no because LOS. When it was pointed out that both sides can use LOS, you responded with some other special qualification. You're the one who is trying to insist on some sort of silly comparison in the first place, and every time anyone points out how silly it is or how you math bad you respond with more special conditions to attempt to justify what is a pointless comparison to make in the first place. At this point the only conclusion I can draw is you have some sort of victim complex associated with playing chaos and a world in which rubrics aren't completely outclassed by inceptors is somehow scary to you.
Alrighty so this is how many wounds it takes to kill a thousand sons marine versus a primaris marine
Damage one weapon
no rend - 6 wounds to 6 wounds
Rend 1 - 3 wounds to 4 wounds
Rend 2 - 2 wounds to 3 wounds
Rend 3 - 2 wounds to 2.4 wounds
Rend 4+ - 2 wounds to 2 wounds
Damage one weapon is same at no rend, and better for primaris until -4 when it evens out to the same again.
Multi damage weapon
No rend - 3 wounds to 4.5 wounds for d3, 3.51 for d6 Rend 1 - 2 wounds to 3 wounds for d3 2.34, for d6 Rend 2 - 2 wounds to 2.25 wounds for 1.755, for d6 Rend 3 - 2 wounds to 1.8 wounds for 1.404, for d6 Rend 4+ - 2 wounds to 1.5 wounds for d3, 1.17 for d6 So against multi wound No rend to rend -2 Primaris are more survivable. For rend -3 and above d3 primaris are less survivable that thousand sons. For d6 wounds primaris are worse off at rend -2
So we can clearly see when thousand sons are more durable than primaris
Now for comparing the likelihood of wounding a T4 to T5 here is how likely a single hit from a weapon is likely to wound.
Str 3 - .33 to .33
Str 4 - .5 wounds to 1/3
Str 5 - .66 wounds to .5
Str 6 - .66 wounds to .66
Str 7 - .66 to .66
Str 8 - .83 to .66
Str 9 - .83 to .66
Str 10 - .83 to .83
Now lets look at comparing a hit from a Str 5 weapon to a Str 4 against thousand sons and inceptors
Toughness 3 - .66 to .66
Toughness 4 - .5 to .66
Toughness 5 - .33 to .5
Toughness 6 - .33 to .33
Toughness 7 - .33 to .33
Toughness 8 - .16 to .33
Toughness 9 - .16 to .33
Toughness 10 - .16 to .16
Taking this with the above we can multiply out how a combination of weapon stats would work to kill something.
A single heavy bolter hit .4256 wounds and .25 wounds
A single Inferno boltgun hit will do .5 wounds, and .11 wounds
So in this situation we are comparing basically two unit types where it is super heavily weighted for the inceptors but terrible for the thousand sons.
No wonder they seem poorly balanced against each other.
Backing up a bit, is the complaint about tacts really that they don,t specialize enough to be super awesome at anything? The most generalist of all generalist troop choices.
Are people forgetting what tacts are actually supposed to be? They do a little of everything at a reasonaly competent level and that's it. They'll never wow you, but the can always have the ability to contribute something pretty much no matter the situation.
And with Power being the way it is as long as they can still combat squad you basically get two units for the cost of one full sized one rather than paying more for two seperate units.
But, you know, complete trash.
Back to the main topic, the problem with this entire topic is that it's basically approaching the entire system wrong:
1. Power is basically the cost of a unit plus half of it's biggest upgrades divided by 20. It has nothing to do with how strong or weak the unit is, just the cost. Said cost also assumes you,re buying upgrades that you may not run and may not even contribute to the combat strength of the unit (banners for example).
2. Two units of identical costs in points where never expected to be exactly the same in durability, ranged damage, resilience, speed or melee. It's apples to oranges inside of the same codex and a complete apples to pine trees comparison between different armies. You only get close when you take two units from the same book who share similiar jobs and compare them (HBDevs vs Inceptors would be an example) and weigh pros and cons appropiately for what you want them to do.
3. The topic fails to address new information as it comes out properly (Death to the False Emperor generating extra attacks when you roll a 6 to hit for example), nor does it properly admit that it's comparing unlike items based solely on how much they cost in a less than perfect match play setup. You know, the game mode that's supposed to be actually balanced?
That said, for a more accurate comparison 5 Rubrics cost 6 power, which is 120 points, or 24 ppm when armed with Inferno Bolters (which are rolled into their power, much like how Inceptors have their weapons rolled into their Power).
An Inceptor costs 39 ppm and another 14ppm for both of their guns for a total of 43ppm.
So one Inceptor is nearly twice the cost of a single Rubric.
Just had a thought...Tacticals could be 13ppm without any wargear. Cheaper base, but cost some points to equip (with free options, like how Primaris have free bolt pistols).
On one hand to claim that since all the information isn't available, little can be discerned from what is known just simply is not true. Much can be gleaned from the released information on a straight up comparison of inceptors and rubric marines. On the other hand, it is also very true that not all the information is known, so without context it is premature to base any final analysis on what has been leaked so far. Luckily all should be revealed in the very near future.
What is more telling perhaps is IF there is a large discrepancy in the relative strength of certain units, how quickly or well will the new GW address that imbalance? Everyone is allowed to make their share of mistakes, and ol' GW made plenty. The problem in the past was that they neither rarely cared nor bothered with a suitable solution. How will they address the unavoidable issues that do arise?
In the meantime, I'd say give them the benefit of the doubt. If they screw up, THEN bust out the pitchforks and torches!
ERJAK wrote: At this point just play a better army then.
Why play a better army? How do we know Rubrics are over priced? How do we know Inceptors are underpriced?
Well we know Inceptors in points work out to around near double that of a basic Rubric. Assuming that means the additional 40 points in the initial 160 points a Rubric Squad should cost at base (8*20) is likely split between the cost of the Sorceror and half the cost of all the upgrades the unit can potentially take, even if the unit isn't using them or can't take them (the gun upgrade for example).
Basically to do a proper comparison on how these two units could Celebrity Death Match it up we'd need to work out an equivlant amount of points for both units from match play list rather than comparing a unit that's paying for upgrades it can't even use and a unit with no upgrades.
The issue isn't so much that Inceptors will beat Rubrics in a shoot out. In fact, assuming Rubrics start in rapid fire range, they win. (With few survivors, but hey.)
The issue is Inceptors are VASTLY superior at taking out pretty much anything else. MEQs, TEQs, GEQs, Dreadnoughts, Russes...
I need to correct a math error from earlier: Inceotors are 54 points with guns. That means they are more than double the cost of a Rubric with an Inferno Bolter.
Big difference looking at it like points where we get 6 Rubrics vs 3 Inceptors versus power were we,re looking at 6 Rubrics+Sorc+1/2 cost full wargear loadout
Vs 3 Inceptors.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean when your one dude cost as much as two of my dudes, it,s a bit more reasonable for them to be basically twice as good.
amanita wrote: On one hand to claim that since all the information isn't available, little can be discerned from what is known just simply is not true. Much can be gleaned from the released information on a straight up comparison of inceptors and rubric marines. On the other hand, it is also very true that not all the information is known, so without context it is premature to base any final analysis on what has been leaked so far. Luckily all should be revealed in the very near future.
What is more telling perhaps is IF there is a large discrepancy in the relative strength of certain units, how quickly or well will the new GW address that imbalance? Everyone is allowed to make their share of mistakes, and ol' GW made plenty. The problem in the past was that they neither rarely cared nor bothered with a suitable solution. How will they address the unavoidable issues that do arise?
In the meantime, I'd say give them the benefit of the doubt. If they screw up, THEN bust out the pitchforks and torches!
Could not agree more I just want this information ahead of time so when we can do a proper comparasion it will happen quickly. But you have to admit there is a striking gap between these units that needs to be filled and give that the lack of information is slight at this point its not looking like the gap will be closed in any noticible way.
amanita wrote: On one hand to claim that since all the information isn't available, little can be discerned from what is known just simply is not true. Much can be gleaned from the released information on a straight up comparison of inceptors and rubric marines. On the other hand, it is also very true that not all the information is known, so without context it is premature to base any final analysis on what has been leaked so far. Luckily all should be revealed in the very near future.
What is more telling perhaps is IF there is a large discrepancy in the relative strength of certain units, how quickly or well will the new GW address that imbalance? Everyone is allowed to make their share of mistakes, and ol' GW made plenty. The problem in the past was that they neither rarely cared nor bothered with a suitable solution. How will they address the unavoidable issues that do arise?
In the meantime, I'd say give them the benefit of the doubt. If they screw up, THEN bust out the pitchforks and torches!
Could not agree more I just want this information ahead of time so when we can do a proper comparasion it will happen quickly. But you have to admit there is a striking gap between these units that needs to be filled and give that the lack of information is slight at this point its not looking like the gap will be closed in any noticible way.
The gap exists because units pay more upfront for potential upgrades and less for additinonal kodels. When comparing a MSU squad that has upgrades with a unit that can't take options there will be a disparity.
If you want to compare use points, or wait for Inceptors to get a real release and their datasheet to chane to reflect new options.
ClockworkZion wrote: I mean when your one dude cost as much as two of my dudes, it,s a bit more reasonable for them to be basically twice as good.
Except that ONE SQUAD of Inceptors is twice as good as ONE SQUAD of Rubrics. Not model per model.
Go back and read the offical response from GW on how power is calculated and then look at the options available to each unit. Consider also that the Rubrics have to pay easilly 20 points extra for a having a psyker as well.
Power is NOT a means to measure combat potential, it's a rough ranking of COST based on the unit plus half the total points of all the upgrades it COULD take. Rubrics have more options, thus pay more base than Inceptors.
Using power to compare a unit that is paying more for options it can't use at base size (Soulreaper Cannon), and aren't getting benifts from (banner) and it basically throws any sort of equality of the two units out the window.
ClockworkZion wrote: I need to correct a math error from earlier: Inceotors are 54 points with guns. That means they are more than double the cost of a Rubric with an Inferno Bolter.
Big difference looking at it like points where we get 6 Rubrics vs 3 Inceptors versus power were we,re looking at 6 Rubrics+Sorc+1/2 cost full wargear loadout
Vs 3 Inceptors.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean when your one dude cost as much as two of my dudes, it,s a bit more reasonable for them to be basically twice as good.
Yeah thats fine now find the upgrade that puts the Rubrics even close to on par with Inceptors. Rhinos cant be included since they arent an upgrade. Your options are flamers, icon, and DttFE. Flamers are NOT good in any way. Right now flamers cost 4 ppm which is 8 to 10 points DttFE is going to be marginial as far as i can tell which means the icon is going cost 30 points at a least and double thier ranged capabilities and slightly increase thier durability.
JNAProductions wrote: Tell me, what exactly do you THINK the banner will do? Because it'd have to outright double the power of Rubrics to make them on par.
And if that's really how power level works... It's crap. Plain and simple.
I don,t know and that wasn't the point. The point was that the 8 power assumes you have it and makes you pay for it. Just like it makes you pay for the Soulreaper you can't use at start.
There are costs bundled into that power that make the scales unbalanced in terms of options. A unit with no options is going to have a lower power because it has not additional costs to factor in.
