110864
Post by: Otto von Bludd
As evidenced by various tournament Guard lists, these two units are currently the backbone of a competitive Guard army. Since it seems likely that both these units will be nerfed / adjusted in the future I would like to hear about the performance of Guard armies that do not include them. That is, how are Guard players who are choosing to run Infantry Squads over the aforementioned units, or running detachments without any Troops, doing? Is anyone doing this regularly? Are multiple Infantry Squads, perhaps in Chimeras, able to hold the line like a blob of Conscripts or are they not cheap enough / numerous enough per squad to do it?
83742
Post by: gungo
Hmm since those are the two main troop slots. Not very well however guards still have taurox primes, vendetta/vulture, basilisk carriage platforms, manticore, medusa platforms, tarrantula lasers and you can get by with melta/plasma infantry.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
I personally prefer Infantry Squads over conscripts. I think the humble infantry squad is highly under-rated.
The main reason why I dropped conscripts was not because they were underperforming, but because they were making my games take too long! You can't win a game you don't finish, after all.
Scions are indispensable right now in my army. They allow me to drop in to exploit weak spots and snatch up objectives that have been cleared by artillery. Mechanized and Airborne infantry can fulfill this role, but transports are extremely expensive. Airborne drops are, quite frankly, the most cost-efficient way of taking the fight to the enemy.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
I've won plenty of games with no conscripts and Scions haven't been required. Our infantry is plenty strong on their own. I don't even have a manticore or multiple Basilisks.
53939
Post by: vipoid
Same. I don't know if they're necessarily better, but I think they're more interesting and (since I don't take artillery) I find their special and heavy weapons very useful.
CplPunishment wrote:
Scions are indispensable right now in my army. They allow me to drop in to exploit weak spots and snatch up objectives that have been cleared by artillery. Mechanized and Airborne infantry can fulfill this role, but transports are extremely expensive. Airborne drops are, quite frankly, the most cost-efficient way of taking the fight to the enemy.
Yeah, as someone who uses infantry- IG, I find Scions invaluable for quickly reaching the enemy's back lines.
7730
Post by: broxus
I think conscripts will get a nerf. I doubt the scions will get a nerf since they already had one. Their problem was just the command squad spam that is no longer feasible. The troop choices are fine.
Honestly I havent used conscripts and I have been struggling in many games since normal infantry squads are so fragile. Bolters shred them (as they are designed). Once the bubble wrapping is gone, my tanks are really challenged since they can't shoot after leaving combat.
53939
Post by: vipoid
Plasmaguns might go up in points for Scions (perhaps to about 9-10), which would be reasonable.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
I've done without scions but then I most use rough rider's to cover there role. The second a codex comes out you will probably see that more of a preference because rough riders are regiment where as scion wold stop you getting regiment bonuaes.
I haven't found conscripts to be that great a performer and prefer infantry squads as well.
Note conscripts are great if your opponent spammed anti tank and or spends 3/4 quarters of the game shooting the conscripts rather than the damage output in your list but that's your opponents stupidy. People keep telling me the units that are designed to deal with conscripts are bad so they don't take them so struggle to deal with conscripts
Personally plasma guns need to be 1-2 pts more melta needs +1dam across all codexs and commissar could probably do with a 5pt increase and lord commissar 10pt.
If you add 1pt to.conscripts they become unplayable because for an identical pts cost I can take infantry squads that are better if you nerf their shooting it makes little difference. You could make them T2 but that would be a break with tradition and again prob ably make them unplayable
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thinking about it though having a rule that conscripts cannot be taken in detachments that contain scions might work. That way your not weakening either choice justo the combination
110864
Post by: Otto von Bludd
How many Infantry Squads are you all running? I've been running 6 to fill out a Brigade but I'm not sure if it is enough, or if I just need to screen them better (perhaps with Scout Sentinels to get outside of my deployment) because usually none of them survive the game. That is their job of course because currently THEY are the screen, but I think it will become problematic when we get objective secured and all my troops are dead. I would like to mech them all up in Chimeras but that is a huge amount of points.
105913
Post by: MinscS2
Haven't used Conscripts in 8th, and if I use Scions it's a 10man unit with Hotshot Lasguns.
I have yet to lose a game with my IG in 8th. Granted, I don't play in a WAAC-environment but still.
Edit: I run plenty of infantry squads though, usually 6.
112239
Post by: SilverAlien
Perfectly fine. Infantry squads are still one of the better troops in the game (which says a lot about guards overall balance that they get ignored).
IG is generally undercosted across the board compared to most armies. With the exception of the leman Russ variants, and s few other things.
53939
Post by: vipoid
 Otto von Bludd wrote:How many Infantry Squads are you all running? I've been running 6 to fill out a Brigade but I'm not sure if it is enough, or if I just need to screen them better (perhaps with Scout Sentinels to get outside of my deployment) because usually none of them survive the game. That is their job of course because currently THEY are the screen, but I think it will become problematic when we get objective secured and all my troops are dead. I would like to mech them all up in Chimeras but that is a huge amount of points.
Currently I run about 3 per 500pts - 2 with lascannons and plasmaguns and 1 with a Flamer as a screening squad.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Otto von Bludd wrote:How many Infantry Squads are you all running? I've been running 6 to fill out a Brigade but I'm not sure if it is enough, or if I just need to screen them better (perhaps with Scout Sentinels to get outside of my deployment) because usually none of them survive the game. That is their job of course because currently THEY are the screen, but I think it will become problematic when we get objective secured and all my troops are dead. I would like to mech them all up in Chimeras but that is a huge amount of points.
6 infantry squads to fill up a brigade. I am contemplating running 9 barebones squads (since their special/heavy weapons suffer from bs4+ and 1st turn charges galore). Add to this a trio of scions and we can put troops wherever the big guns clear the space.
Sentinels are great for scouting ahead and denying the enemy prime drop zones for T1 charges. Save points and take the multilaser. This helps fill out a brigade's FA attack requirements for 135pts total. Remember that they are purely strategic in nature. That way their low firepower cannot disappoint you.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
5 infantry with 1 conscript unit to bubble-wrap them from 1st turn charge.
Each infantry squad has heavy bolter+ plasma gun+bolt gun.
29120
Post by: NH Gunsmith
I won't be using any Conscripts or Scions in my army. I am playing my first game with the Guard once Saturday, will let you know how it goes.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
 NH Gunsmith wrote:I won't be using any Conscripts or Scions in my army. I am playing my first game with the Guard once Saturday, will let you know how it goes.
You will definitely need a lot of infantry squads then! They aren't too bad, actually.
110864
Post by: Otto von Bludd
One benefit of the IS is that you can generally get away without using Commissars. The Squad usually dies outright (what usually happens) or the Sarge's LD7 is enough to see them through.
81025
Post by: koooaei
You can make a taurox + basilisk/manticore spam list and it'll work cause those are pretty powerful too. You don't even need any troops - though, it'd be better to at least have some bodies to bauble wrap and ward against charges.
Remember that you can take transports for any unit - not necesserily troops. So, your basilisks can have tauroxes as dedicated transports.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
You don't need a commissar but yarrick doesn't hurt
112857
Post by: basedgigi
Another thing to consider if you are worried about morale is inquisitors, for 55 points you get a psyker and a bubble of ld9, which should be enough for infantry squads.
98911
Post by: Klowny
HWT spam is cancerto fight against. I'm talking 10-12 squads. Not fun, but effective
113188
Post by: pismakron
They do very well. Imperial Guard is very strong across the board with the exception of most Leman Russ variants. But plasma scions are still crazy good.
19370
Post by: daedalus
I do pretty good without conscripts, but I do bring scions. My winning combination so far seems to be 4 x 10 infantry with plasma pistol, plasmagun, and power sword. I'll also bring somewhere around 3 HWS to camp out in a Stormlord. I usually put about 20 or so Scions in on top of that, and then pad the rest out with support characters and basilisks.
I'm W/L 1/2 for the edition, which doesn't look good, but the first game was me getting used to the new edition against people who'd already had a few games under their belts, the second game was me tabling GK, and then the third game was when an Eldar player played conceal wrong. After we found out it wasn't supposed to include vehicles, he thought I would have had the game.
I don't honestly think conscripts need a nerf, but I suspect they will, though for want of all the first turn assault players not being able to let their gimmick work without getting shot at by tanks for a while. I totally think Scions are too good though. Or plasma is too good. Or both. To be honest, I'd probably take them still if plasma was 10-15 points. I guess we'll see how it goes though.
44614
Post by: necron99
broxus wrote:I think conscripts will get a nerf. I doubt the scions will get a nerf since they already had one. Their problem was just the command squad spam that is no longer feasible. The troop choices are fine.
Honestly I havent used conscripts and I have been struggling in many games since normal infantry squads are so fragile. Bolters shred them (as they are designed). Once the bubble wrapping is gone, my tanks are really challenged since they can't shoot after leaving combat.
Why isn't command squad spam feasible?
53939
Post by: vipoid
Because you now need to take a 40pt Tempestor Prime for each Scion Command Squad you want to take.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
2 reasons firstly they FAQ'd it so that you can only include 1 per officer which is kind of a large tax.
Secondly while a vanilla command squad or one with sniper rifles is viable and cost effective but its not gonna be hugely impactfull.
So to make it really work you add in plasma guns etc etc... which make it powerful. However with no squishy bodies to soak up those wounds it dies to anything that can see it making it a prime target.
This means either you need to stick it in something with firepoints which ups the cost till its no longer cheap and a lot of the time say with a bastion you might be better off with a veteran squad. Although the five plasma command squad baneblade is awesome for comedy value if you want an army of one unit.
or
Use it to deepstrike suicide as in tempestus scions. Which is very effective but the officer tax on a suicide unit means its no longer cost effective.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Plasma scions aren't too good. They are too cheap.
53939
Post by: vipoid
I think if plasma goes up by a few points they'll be fine.
44614
Post by: necron99
 vipoid wrote:
Because you now need to take a 40pt Tempestor Prime for each Scion Command Squad you want to take.
Ah, ok, yeah that's a pain. What I've been doing is dropping two scion command squads within order range of 1 prime. Usually I can do that because 1 command squad isn't enough to take care of the target or there are multiple targets clumped up. If that happens then I'm left with two tiny models that I can deepstrike out of sight in their deployment zone so i can get line breaker.
19370
Post by: daedalus
How do you define good then?
113340
Post by: ChargerIIC
The Guard squad actually is a better choice than conscripts in many lists. for 80ish (instead of 60) points you can get 2 chainswords, 18 lasguns and a better WS and BS.
Scions have a good place in their ability to deploy form reserves. The lower model count makes them pretty damn popular and I can't blame people when their stats aren't too far off from Tac Marines.
2 Caidan Squads with a Company Commander and a Commissar is a great start to your troop choices. Don't bother with the Lord Commisar
11860
Post by: Martel732
There is no meaningful difference. Undercosted is undercosted.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
There is a difference.
"Too good" implies their rules are broken and need to be nerfed.
"Too cheap" implies that their rules are fine, but their price should increase.
Scions themselves are probably where they need to be price-wise. Plasma is not.
11860
Post by: Martel732
CplPunishment wrote:
There is a difference.
"Too good" implies their rules are broken and need to be nerfed.
"Too cheap" implies that their rules are fine, but their price should increase.
Scions themselves are probably where they need to be price-wise. Plasma is not.
There's not a functional difference, imo. Only a difference in your preferred approach. We could just as easily change their rules and leave their points. Currently, their rules ARE broken because of their price point. You can't extricate the two from each other. A unit is only broken with respect to its point cost.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Considering every single troop option they have is cheap - and good - just like everything in the entire index - I'd say they are fine without the conscripts.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
A 10 man infantry sqaud unit with an autocannon and a plasma gun is 62 points...and realistically you don't even need the plasma gun- also for 62 points you can have 5 scions with 2 plasma guns and 2 hot shot lasguns.
Or for Crying out loud you can have 10 Scions with hotshot lasguns and hit them with FRFSRF and spit out 40 - ap-2 shots? for 120 points when you add the company commander. This army is so gaking busted.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Martel732 wrote:There's not a functional difference, imo. Only a difference in your preferred approach. We could just as easily change their rules and leave their points. Currently, their rules ARE broken because of their price point. You can't extricate the two from each other. A unit is only broken with respect to its point cost.
I gotta agree with Martel here. Point cost is an essential factor in determining if a unit is good. Are ogryn good when they're 3 points per model? Absolutely! Are they good now. Ehhhh......
Xenomancers wrote:Considering every single troop option they have is cheap - and good - just like everything in the entire index - I'd say they are fine without the conscripts.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or for Crying out loud you can have 10 Scions with hotshot lasguns and hit them with FRFSRF and spit out 40 - ap-2 shots? for 120 points when you add the company commander. This army is so gaking busted.
It's more like 18 if you're talking about right out of deep strike. One has a laspistol and the lasguns have 18" range, so you're not rapid firing out of deep strike. So, that's 1-3 dead marines.
At the same distance, scouts get 1-3 dead marines. They cost about the same.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Scouts are really good this edition. Unfortunately, I understand they might be a little boring.
108848
Post by: Blackie
You still can spam scions command squads. 4 dudes with plasma and a prime are still way undercosted for what they do and with multiple units you can also dispose of another CP cuz you can bring a vanguard detachment full of scions. I'd take 3 of them everytime if I was an AM power player.
Unless GW removes their ability to deepstrike or scions plasmas become 13 points each like any other imperial plasma gun they will be overpowered for the entire edition.
113355
Post by: Zuri Prime
Personally I use my Plasma Scions as a distraction while my HSVG command squad(s) put in the actual work. I rarely deploy my Scions I'm close proximity so I keep my Tempestor Prime (usually my warlord) back to prevent him from being an easy KP.
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
 Xenomancers wrote:Considering every single troop option they have is cheap - and good - just like everything in the entire index - I'd say they are fine without the conscripts.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or for Crying out loud you can have 10 Scions with hotshot lasguns and hit them with FRFSRF and spit out 40 - ap-2 shots? for 120 points when you add the company commander. This army is so gaking busted.
First, 10 Scions + Tempestor Prime is 140 points. They can't take orders from Company Commanders. Second, I like how you forgot that half range of 18" is 9", not 12" and the sergeant cant take a lasgun. It's 18 S3 AP-2 shots for a whopping 2.7 dead MEQ after a deep strike. If by some miracle, the Marine player didn't wipe 10 T3/4+ sv models afterward, then yes your 'totally broken' mathhammer scenario of 37 AP-2 shots could occur, killing a further 5.3 MEQ. Those numbers go down even further if the squad being targeted was in cover.
Guard critics would be taken a lot more seriously if they weren't parading around fantasy scenarios with blatantly false numbers and fake rules as evidence of brokenness.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Oh yeah, I forgot the Prime's cost in there. So the scouts actually do the same damage cheaper, but scouts are really good this edition. Pity that marine players find them so boring.
Anyway, I still stick with that Scions are possibly too good, but it's for want of too cheap of plasma that makes them that way. As kludgy as it is to make their plasma more expensive but leave infantry plasma alone, I think 10 points per PG would be fair for them.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Martel732 wrote:CplPunishment wrote:
There is a difference.
"Too good" implies their rules are broken and need to be nerfed.
"Too cheap" implies that their rules are fine, but their price should increase.
Scions themselves are probably where they need to be price-wise. Plasma is not.
There's not a functional difference, imo. Only a difference in your preferred approach. We could just as easily change their rules and leave their points. Currently, their rules ARE broken because of their price point. You can't extricate the two from each other. A unit is only broken with respect to its point cost.
Yes there is a functional difference. If you were to, let's say, remove their airborne drop ability (which would make many non- AM players VERY HAPPY), you would change how they function on the battlefield. Currently the Astra Militarum has no other units with a similar ability, giving them excellent synergy at a steal of a price. Take it away and they suddenly aren't much different from Veterans with Carapace.
What it boils down to is this: if you remove some of their attractive abilities, people will drop them like a hot potato. If you leave the rules alone but increase the prices a little (at least on plasmaguns), people will be upset *but will still take them*. Why? Because they will still do the same job they did before.
Simply put there is a very large, very literal functional difference between an expensive high-utility unit, and a cheap neutered one.
Yes it's true that a unit is only broken with respect to its points cost, but you also have to factor in how said unit functions with the rest of the faction it was made for. Sacrificing abilities to make yet another gunline infantry/mechanized assault squad is a redundancy the guard simply doesn't need.
11860
Post by: Martel732
That's a next-level consideration. Not a unit-level one. It still stands that each broken unit can be fixed by a) increasing points or b) taking away abilities. You are still expressing an opinion as to which would be a better fix. They are too good because they are too cheap. Period. I play marines. My book is filled with crap I don't need at this point. Take a number.
29660
Post by: argonak
Veterans cost 6 points per man. The difference between Veterans and Scions is 1 point of save (carapace armor), and deep strike.
So you're already paying an extra 3 points per man to upgrade to scions. Their company commander version is also lame, as he has to give up a weapon option to be able to give two commands for the same price as a normal CC, and he doesn't even get an invuln save.
A Space Marine is 13 points base. He comes with a free boltgun, free bolt pistol. He has 3+ armor, T4, BS and WS 3+, an extra point of ld, chapter tactics, and ATSKNF, and he has a 24" rapid fire 1 s4 weapon.
A Scion with his HSLG (which costs 1 point) is 10 points. So you have a 3 point difference between a tactical space marine and a scion.
In my opinion, there isn't room to increase the cost of a scion without increasing the cost of a space marine. And if you take away their deep strike, then guard loses the only deep strike unit they have.
37016
Post by: More Dakka
For objective based games normal barebones infantry squads in Chimeras supported by Commanders and Commissars do rather well at taking the field. They need to be supported by HellHounds and Artillery and you need dangerous close support like LR tanks with 3x HF, or dual MM and LC getting up there to take pressure off them.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Except your forgetting the lore of unintended consequences by raising the cost of guard plasma guns to weaken scions you also effect the other units that can take them
Non scion command squads that can't deepstrike are they broken?
What about veteran squads?
How about infantry with its one plasma?
What about rough riders?
Special weapon squads?
So your effecting a lot more than just the scions you want to weaken I don't recall non scion command squads and special weapons teams being broken not saying you can't increase the pts but it's not the simple fix. When GW nerfed storm ravens they hit a lot of underused units as well.
Getting rid of deepstrike would cripple scion's and make them unplayable as a catachan player who doesn't use them I think that's a bad move GW need to stop destroying units to the point of unplayability or people will get board of making new armies every 4 weeks.
Here's a few other options
1) Give enough time for the meta to come up with answers many lists have too many anti-tank guns and not enough anti-infantry a hang over from 7th when they wern't needed. Time might allow people to come up with answers that do exist in your codexs.
2) Raise the cost of scions higher cost and suddenly their not so hot and it doesnt effect other units.
3) Lower hot shots to AP1 this would weaken scions as troops but not effect the command squads but command squads alone require the tax.
4) make players choose between scions and conscripts. Your either a regiment of raw recruits with some hardened guardsman or your an elite deepstrikeing top of the line force your not both. Breaking the synergy with conscripts makes it harder for scion players to hold their objectives as a lot of the fuss is about the combination one good unit is not as strong.
5) Give more rewards for playing other regiments catachan's and cadians not a fix for scions itself but it would help increase diversity so all guard lists didn't look the same and if there was more variety there might be less fuss.
6) Sort the other weapons out. - Melta is underpowered across all codex's increase its damage and make it a more viable alternative. Also make some of the anti-personal weapons more effective vs large units.
7) Upgrade the weaker performing factions as their codexs come out. Power is also comparative if other faction get stronger guard won't seem so strong. Also if marines keep losing maybe their infantry need a 1pt reduction to balance them. Also see if the new chapter tactics etc. make a difference.
7) Finnally just leave it as it is not all codexs have to be equal just ask nids players what 7th was like. Guard are top tear now this means other factions have to drop. Unfortunate if it's yours unlucky but that's not a problem try another faction if you want to be a top tournament player.
29408
Post by: Melissia
Actually they were saying raising plasmaguns for scions only.
Such a ruling has precedence in this edition already, in fact; after all, thunder hammers cost more for characters than for non-characters.
53939
Post by: vipoid
U02dah4 wrote:Except your forgetting the lore of unintended consequences by raising the cost of guard plasma guns to weaken scions you also effect the other units that can take them
Just have separate prices for Scions.
108384
Post by: kurhanik
 argonak wrote:Veterans cost 6 points per man. The difference between Veterans and Scions is 1 point of save (carapace armor), and deep strike.
So you're already paying an extra 3 points per man to upgrade to scions. Their company commander version is also lame, as he has to give up a weapon option to be able to give two commands for the same price as a normal CC, and he doesn't even get an invuln save.
A Space Marine is 13 points base. He comes with a free boltgun, free bolt pistol. He has 3+ armor, T4, BS and WS 3+, an extra point of ld, chapter tactics, and ATSKNF, and he has a 24" rapid fire 1 s4 weapon.
A Scion with his HSLG (which costs 1 point) is 10 points. So you have a 3 point difference between a tactical space marine and a scion.
In my opinion, there isn't room to increase the cost of a scion without increasing the cost of a space marine. And if you take away their deep strike, then guard loses the only deep strike unit they have.
Just spit balling here, but would a possible solution to Scions be to up them by 1 point, and make HSLG free? That way the base model is still 10 points, but they no longer get their 1 point discount on special weapons. Combine this with bumping plasma to 10 points and they become still useful but not as much of an auto take as before.
110864
Post by: Otto von Bludd
 More Dakka wrote:For objective based games normal barebones infantry squads in Chimeras supported by Commanders and Commissars do rather well at taking the field. They need to be supported by HellHounds and Artillery and you need dangerous close support like LR tanks with 3x HF, or dual MM and LC getting up there to take pressure off them.
I ran a list like this but didn't include enough artillery / tank support and found out that my Inf Squads in Chimeras, while great for taking objectives and very resilient, just didn't have enough firepower to deal with tough threats. I figured that because Chimeras are quite pricey but great up close (with dual HF) the best way to run a mech infantry list would be with, like you said, Hellhounds and artillery. I would leave the LRBTs out though because they are so pricey compared to Arty or HHs and the Chimeras already suck up a lot of points.
Edit: As for Scions, I think just reducing the number of special weapons to 2 max in 5 and 10 man squads (with 4 still in Command Squads) would fix them. Yes you could just spam 5 man squads, but you would need more Commanders to hand out orders thus decreasing order and point efficiency. Since the real issue with Scions is the overcharged-plasmas spam with re-rolls, issue, this would probably be a good fix that wouldn't ruin them.
19370
Post by: daedalus
 Melissia wrote:Actually they were saying raising plasmaguns for scions only.
Such a ruling has precedence in this edition already, in fact; after all, thunder hammers cost more for characters than for non-characters.
GK Terminators pay quite a bit more for their special weapons too (in spite of the fact that they don't get anything out of it).
29660
Post by: argonak
vipoid wrote:U02dah4 wrote:Except your forgetting the lore of unintended consequences by raising the cost of guard plasma guns to weaken scions you also effect the other units that can take them
Just have separate prices for Scions.
Shall we raise prices for guard command squads and veterans as well then? They're BS 3+ too. They can double tap rerolling 1s too. The only thing they can't do is deep strike.
I think the complaints would drop if we just eliminated command squads. People use them as a suicide plasma unit, because they can deep strike in rapid fire range. If your "suicide" unit is minimum 150 points versus 64, I think the complaints would drop.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Seems like this thread is going off topic with people crying/trying to nerf Scions. Not sure why I visit these forums anymore ...
29408
Post by: Melissia
 Colonel Cross wrote:Seems like this thread is going off topic with people crying/trying to nerf Scions. Not sure why I visit these forums anymore ...
If you think that's bad, just look at any single thread where conscripts get mentioned. Mod handed out warning after warning and people still derailed threads over it. Regardless, with no conscripts or scions, IG relies solely on guard squads for its troops. And they're probably fairly priced, so you can bring a reasonable amount of them and still have other units in your army. They have superior offensive fire to conscripts (150% firepower per lasgun shot for 133% of the points), plus the ability to take a special weapon. Flamers to penalize charging, plasmaguns to hit MEQ, or a heavy weapon to sit back and hope for a lucky shot, while denying deep strike. Individual guard squads go down faster than a fully loaded conscript squad... but well, it should really, given that you're paying 150 points vs 40 points. 4 guard squads at 160 is very much superior to the conscript squad as an all around unit. At the same time... they're still just guardsmen. The main problem with them is kill points. At the same time, guard really doesn't even have a reason to bother competing in kill points to begin with, it's not a very fair game mechanic.
110864
Post by: Otto von Bludd
Melissia wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:Seems like this thread is going off topic with people crying/trying to nerf Scions. Not sure why I visit these forums anymore ...
If you think that's bad, just look at any single thread where conscripts get mentioned. Mod handed out warning after warning and people still derailed threads over it.
Regardless, with no conscripts or scions, IG relies solely on conscript squads for its troops.
And they're probably fairly priced, so you can bring a reasonable amount of them and still have other units in your army. They have superior offensive fire to conscripts (150% firepower per lasgun shot for 133% of the points), plus the ability to take a special weapon. Flamers to penalize charging, plasmaguns to hit MEQ, or a heavy weapon to sit back and hope for a lucky shot, while denying deep strike. Individual guard squads go down faster than a fully loaded conscript squad... but well, it should really, given that you're paying 150 points vs 40 points. 4 guard squads at 160 is very much superior to the conscript squad as an all around unit.
At the same time... they're still just guardsmen. The main problem with them is kill points. At the same time, guard really doesn't even have a reason to bother competing in kill points to begin with, it's not a very fair game mechanic.
Kill points is indeed a huge issue when running Infantry Squads. My last two games where we randomized the mission ended up being kill point games and I knew my only hope was to table the opponent.
29408
Post by: Melissia
That should read "relied solely on guard squads". Man that's a sad slip of the tongue.
29660
Post by: argonak
Melissia wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:Seems like this thread is going off topic with people crying/trying to nerf Scions. Not sure why I visit these forums anymore ...
If you think that's bad, just look at any single thread where conscripts get mentioned. Mod handed out warning after warning and people still derailed threads over it.
Regardless, with no conscripts or scions, IG relies solely on guard squads for its troops.
And they're probably fairly priced, so you can bring a reasonable amount of them and still have other units in your army. They have superior offensive fire to conscripts (150% firepower per lasgun shot for 133% of the points), plus the ability to take a special weapon. Flamers to penalize charging, plasmaguns to hit MEQ, or a heavy weapon to sit back and hope for a lucky shot, while denying deep strike. Individual guard squads go down faster than a fully loaded conscript squad... but well, it should really, given that you're paying 150 points vs 40 points. 4 guard squads at 160 is very much superior to the conscript squad as an all around unit.
At the same time... they're still just guardsmen. The main problem with them is kill points. At the same time, guard really doesn't even have a reason to bother competing in kill points to begin with, it's not a very fair game mechanic.
What are your thoughts on Veterans? I'd like them more if they had carapace armor back as an option, 2 points for BS3+ doesn't really seem worth it, although the expanded weapon options are nice. I see zero appeal in shotguns over lasguns.
Maybe run them with 3 plasma guns and a lascannon? Keep them behind normal guardsman (or the other troop unit that shall not be mentioned) and try and get some work from their BS3+?
29408
Post by: Melissia
argonak wrote:Maybe run them with 3 plasma guns and a lascannon? Keep them behind normal guardsman (or the other troop unit that shall not be mentioned) and try and get some work from their BS3+?
I mean, the only use I really see for veterans is to do flamer+shotgun assault. And even then the problem is getting them there...
19370
Post by: daedalus
argonak wrote:
What are your thoughts on Veterans? I'd like them more if they had carapace armor back as an option, 2 points for BS3+ doesn't really seem worth it, although the expanded weapon options are nice. I see zero appeal in shotguns over lasguns.
Scions kind of became the new carapace veterans. Close to 10 points, troop choice, 4+ armor, BS 3+. Lots of special weapons, and we'll toss in nice lasguns, because we're going to roll them together with stormtroopers.
They're going to have to do something real special with vets to distinguish them from scions at this point, and I don't honestly know what that would be.
Maybe run them with 3 plasma guns and a lascannon? Keep them behind normal guardsman (or the other troop unit that shall not be mentioned) and try and get some work from their BS3+?
Running them behind anything doesn't get you anything except a range bubble. You're better off driving that chimera up and hoping that it survives long enough for them to get to use those special weapons, once.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
argonak wrote: Melissia wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:Seems like this thread is going off topic with people crying/trying to nerf Scions. Not sure why I visit these forums anymore ...
If you think that's bad, just look at any single thread where conscripts get mentioned. Mod handed out warning after warning and people still derailed threads over it.
Regardless, with no conscripts or scions, IG relies solely on guard squads for its troops.
And they're probably fairly priced, so you can bring a reasonable amount of them and still have other units in your army. They have superior offensive fire to conscripts (150% firepower per lasgun shot for 133% of the points), plus the ability to take a special weapon. Flamers to penalize charging, plasmaguns to hit MEQ, or a heavy weapon to sit back and hope for a lucky shot, while denying deep strike. Individual guard squads go down faster than a fully loaded conscript squad... but well, it should really, given that you're paying 150 points vs 40 points. 4 guard squads at 160 is very much superior to the conscript squad as an all around unit.
At the same time... they're still just guardsmen. The main problem with them is kill points. At the same time, guard really doesn't even have a reason to bother competing in kill points to begin with, it's not a very fair game mechanic.
What are your thoughts on Veterans? I'd like them more if they had carapace armor back as an option, 2 points for BS3+ doesn't really seem worth it, although the expanded weapon options are nice. I see zero appeal in shotguns over lasguns.
Maybe run them with 3 plasma guns and a lascannon? Keep them behind normal guardsman (or the other troop unit that shall not be mentioned) and try and get some work from their BS3+?
I know you're not asking me, but they will probably gain carapace as an option in the Codex.
I run two squads of Lascannon/plasma vets with Harker buffing hit rolls and a Company Commander buffing wound rolls. It's lethal, especially when overheating. Only issue is that they are still guardsmen and dedicated firepower will take them out. Don't rely on them alone.
I can see shotguns being good with three meltaguns and a plasma pistol, loaded in a Valk/Chimera with an officer and maybe another character. Jump out and use the "take aim!" order. You can only do 1 order per unit per turn, and you don't want to waste FRFSRF on your melta vets anyhow. Meltaguns and Shotguns both want to be within 6" for maximum power, so they work well together.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
I like vets but they need fortifications and it's a shame they are so overcosted
113722
Post by: sossen
Melissia wrote:If you think that's bad, just look at any single thread where conscripts get mentioned. Mod handed out warning after warning and people still derailed threads over it.
I haven't received any warnings. Have you?
Melissia wrote:At the same time... they're still just guardsmen. The main problem with them is kill points. At the same time, guard really doesn't even have a reason to bother competing in kill points to begin with, it's not a very fair game mechanic.
Just don't play regular kill points scenarios if you want a competitive game. The design is inherently unfair.
108848
Post by: Blackie
argonak wrote:Veterans cost 6 points per man. The difference between Veterans and Scions is 1 point of save (carapace armor), and deep strike.
So you're already paying an extra 3 points per man to upgrade to scions. Their company commander version is also lame, as he has to give up a weapon option to be able to give two commands for the same price as a normal CC, and he doesn't even get an invuln save.
A Space Marine is 13 points base. He comes with a free boltgun, free bolt pistol. He has 3+ armor, T4, BS and WS 3+, an extra point of ld, chapter tactics, and ATSKNF, and he has a 24" rapid fire 1 s4 weapon.
A Scion with his HSLG (which costs 1 point) is 10 points. So you have a 3 point difference between a tactical space marine and a scion.
In my opinion, there isn't room to increase the cost of a scion without increasing the cost of a space marine. And if you take away their deep strike, then guard loses the only deep strike unit they have.
You can't compare vets to scions. A scions command squad with 4 plasmas and a prime is around 100 points, vets must be 10 men squads and without a vehicle they're useless. Which means they are extremely expensive compared to scions and can be targeted before they start doing their job unlike scions that appear wherever they want at the moment they want. Vets are not even remotely as effective as scions command squads.
Tactical squads also suck. Their best quality is the possibility of bringing a razorback with twin assault cannon as their dedicated transport, and the heavy/special weapons they can take which make them way more expensive, 25+ points per model and only a few of them can replace bolters while all the guys in scions command squads can take a plasma gun.
But you're right, scions points cost is ok. Their plasma gun's price should be increased, because scions without plasmas are not overpowered and are ok for 10 points.
53939
Post by: vipoid
argonak wrote:
Shall we raise prices for guard command squads and veterans as well then?
No. BS3+ isn't the kicker - it's being able to deploy where needed, within rapid-fire range.
Veterans and normal Command Squads aren't an issue at the moment. If anything, they're probably a bit underpowered.
argonak wrote:
I think the complaints would drop if we just eliminated command squads.
But why is that necessary? Wraithknights, Imperial Knights, Scatterbikes etc. were all OP i 7th, should GW have just removed those from their respective books?
argonak wrote: People use them as a suicide plasma unit, because they can deep strike in rapid fire range. If your "suicide" unit is minimum 150 points versus 64, I think the complaints would drop.
So what you're really saying is 'Imperial Guard shouldn't be allowed any nice things'.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
 Blackie wrote: argonak wrote:Veterans cost 6 points per man. The difference between Veterans and Scions is 1 point of save (carapace armor), and deep strike.
So you're already paying an extra 3 points per man to upgrade to scions. Their company commander version is also lame, as he has to give up a weapon option to be able to give two commands for the same price as a normal CC, and he doesn't even get an invuln save.
A Space Marine is 13 points base. He comes with a free boltgun, free bolt pistol. He has 3+ armor, T4, BS and WS 3+, an extra point of ld, chapter tactics, and ATSKNF, and he has a 24" rapid fire 1 s4 weapon.
A Scion with his HSLG (which costs 1 point) is 10 points. So you have a 3 point difference between a tactical space marine and a scion.
In my opinion, there isn't room to increase the cost of a scion without increasing the cost of a space marine. And if you take away their deep strike, then guard loses the only deep strike unit they have.
You can't compare vets to scions. A scions command squad with 4 plasmas and a prime is around 100 points, vets must be 10 men squads and without a vehicle they're useless. Which means they are extremely expensive compared to scions and can be targeted before they start doing their job unlike scions that appear wherever they want at the moment they want. Vets are not even remotely as effective as scions command squads.
Tactical squads also suck. Their best quality is the possibility of bringing a razorback with twin assault cannon as their dedicated transport, and the heavy/special weapons they can take which make them way more expensive, 25+ points per model and only a few of them can replace bolters while all the guys in scions command squads can take a plasma gun.
But you're right, scions points cost is ok. Their plasma gun's price should be increased, because scions without plasmas are not overpowered and are ok for 10 points.
Tac squads got a direct upgrade from last edition and are pretty strong. Comparing them to scions is a bad comparison because they functurn differently. Are scions better possibly are tac squads bad no.
Tac squads compared to scions
Better armour so tankier 16%
Better toughness so tankier again against most anti infantry shooting 16%
Better strength so 16% more effective in most CC
Has an Obsec equivalent so much better at holding objectives till chapter approved at least
No HQ tax so more cost effective
Can take a lascannon so huge range.
Boltgun are an excellent anti conscript gun for their price
Having only 1 Lascannon means that 4 13 pt models die before the 38pt model giving it a lot of cost effective protection.
Thank's to chapter tactics (salamanders) you may reroll one to hit and to wound role for that squad making that lascannon one of the most effective lascannons in the game for its points.
Less of a priority target so it can make it a points back over a couple of rounds of shooting
Scions
Mobility thanks to deepstrike
Better damage output in one round of shooting
HQ tax
Less tough
Has to make its points back across one round of shooting because it won't be alive next turn.
Weak if your opponent has no multiwound models to make full use of the plasmas 2nd damage
One is a defensive unit not designed to suicide one is an offensive suicide unit it is not a fair comparison
113722
Post by: sossen
U02dah4 wrote:Better armour so tankier 16%
Better toughness so tankier again against most anti infantry shooting 16%
They are more survivable vs most anti-infantry shooting but per pt that difference is smaller. Not insignificant, but not as good as it seems.
They are better in melee, but again it's a smaller difference per pt.
U02dah4 wrote:Has an Obsec equivalent so much better at holding objectives till chapter approved at least
That rule is basically already out, it will be used in ITC. Regular scions are one of only a few troop choices that will be able to deepstrike onto an objective, seems pretty good.
Kind of, but it's not like the tempestor prime is useless. He typically gets to buff a command squad and a regular squad when they drop. That's basically an additional plasma scion in terms of additional hits and also prevents almost all hit rolls of 1.
U02dah4 wrote:Boltgun are an excellent anti conscript gun for their price
Not really better than the hotshot lasgun, the bolter has a range advantage but the lasgun gets more kills per hit, especially per pt.
U02dah4 wrote:Can take a lascannon so huge range.
Having only 1 Lascannon means that 4 13 pt models die before the 38pt model giving it a lot of cost effective protection.
Thank's to chapter tactics (salamanders) you may reroll one to hit and to wound role for that squad making that lascannon one of the most effective lascannons in the game for its points.
If you want a unit from SM which is just going to camp an objective in your deployment zone this isn't too bad.
U02dah4 wrote:Less of a priority target so it can make it a points back over a couple of rounds of shooting.
I don't know if this can be counted as a plus. It just means that they do little damage compared to their durability, and on top of that they do little damage compared to their cost. If their durability was amazing I could get behind them as objective-campers or bubblewrap but they simply aren't tough enough per pt.
Meanwhile the scions are doing god's work by blowing gak up all across the board, it's rare to face an opponent with no efficient plasma targets. They easily make their points back in one turn by shooting at predators, stormravens, terminators etc.
85299
Post by: Spoletta
Scions at 10 points are fine.
The easy fix is to increase the cost of plasma guns for them, the tyranid codex is full of those exceptions.
AM pays less for special weapons due to bs4+ and low durability. In general, it stand to reason that they get less use out of special weapons compared to SM, so it is good design that they pay less for weapons.
In the case of scions, this hypotesis is not true, they get a lot out of special weapons, so they should pay the SM costs, or close to it.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
As I said scion have to make it back in 1 turn or they die because their glass cannons. High damage output low toughness targets are priorities and your enemy will shoot them to bits.
The strongest lists I've seen not featureing a primarch be it guard or orks have been almost entirely infantry not everything's a marine or a tau commander and if plasma spam is a common sight I'd expect more of it because it effectively halves the impact of scions
My point was that there are a lot of reasons that tacs arn't bad. Each of those reasons may only be a small bit but collectively they add up. However the role is different.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Sossen, if you're so sad about tac Marines being what they are, then start playing a different army. Sorry your main troops choice can't just look at a Target and will it off the board.
Tac Marines have been nearly identical since I started playing in 3rd edition. Why are so many Marine players crying about them now? I think they had the same stats and were 15 pts back then and they're 13 now. Their lackluster performance should be no surprise. And didn't the codex drop see points reductions practically across the board? Are we really trying to cry about increasing Scion plasma guns by 3pts each? I'm fine with that, but people are still going to be butt hurt!
Back on topic, which by the way is NOT "Scions are broken, how do we fix them?" It's how do we fare without them.
The answer is we do fine but it's more boring. I use Scions because they are the most mobile unit we have, I love my old Stormtrooper models and Kasrkin, and they are cool. So I'm going to use them anyway. Same reason I use my big ugly metal Ogryn and original rough riders.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Tacs have been gak forever. This is the best they have ever been and they're still gak. Hell one of the features of 5th ed ba was zero tacs.
114239
Post by: rhinoceraids
I use elysians. Same idea only 5 points per model.
Need the mobility. Without elite drop troops guard would have a very tough time grabbing objectives.
I remember playing 7th and just never moving all game....thrilling.
If you don't want to use conscripts try using bullgryns. Bring 6. Bring a priest for +1 attacks. A astropath for +1 save. Maybe yarrick beside them to re-roll 1's. Ultra competitive? Nah. Fun? I think so! Make a pretty scary screen unit and you don't need to roll 200 dice.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Colonel Cross wrote:
Back on topic, which by the way is NOT "Scions are broken, how do we fix them?" It's how do we fare without them.
The answer is we do fine but it's more boring. I use Scions because they are the most mobile unit we have, I love my old Stormtrooper models and Kasrkin, and they are cool. So I'm going to use them anyway. Same reason I use my big ugly metal Ogryn and original rough riders.
Yup. Remove Scions and conscripts and it's back to the days of "okay, I set up my static gunline across from you. I shoot at you until you don't have any other mobile units, which is when I win, unless you make it to assault first, which is when I lose. If you have long range shooting and can blow up my artillery enough that I can't shoot you off the table (>50% odds) then we tie. Hooray!" That was common enough in 5th that it was the reason why I started playing power blobs and using stormtroopers back then.
You can mix that up a little with infantry squads with power weapons, but without the combined squads rule, power blobs still aren't the deceptively unscary surprise that they used to be.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Marines have it hard they have to pay for transports now and that big reduction and adjustment for them. Marines have been the golden boys for a while and their not now unless you include a primarch
But on topic Rough riders still give you plenty of mobility and their <regiment> when we get regiment bonuses
11860
Post by: Martel732
IG can use Valkyries for mobility still. They work well enough.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote:Marines have it hard they have to pay for transports now and that big reduction and adjustment for them. Marines have been the golden boys for a while and their not now unless you include a primarch
I'm BA, chief. There's no adjustment for me at all. The marines weren't the golden boys. Their formations and superfriends were. Marines themselves are crappy as ever.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
My First Army was BA so I feel for you at the moment BA feels like a lemartes death company imperium sideboard. But we haven't had a codex yet. However BA being underpowered compared to SM because of a lack of formations and special rules is nothing new.
11860
Post by: Martel732
The codex won't fix anything. I'm calling it now.
So your admission of them being "underpowered" underscores my point. The base marine is fundamentally not useful because 40K punishes generalists.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Work well enough for what? I can't talk you guys into trying Rhinos. What do you think a transport that costs what two Rhinos do for half the carry capacity and 14 wounds is going to do for gaining ground, particularly for a horde army?
110187
Post by: U02dah4
No BA in general not tacs why take a marine with no special rules when a SM player can take an almost identical marine in a different paint scheme with a chapter tactic, relic, better warlord traits, more strategems and a primarch.
11860
Post by: Martel732
 daedalus wrote:
Work well enough for what? I can't talk you guys into trying Rhinos. What do you think a transport that costs what two Rhinos do for half the carry capacity and 14 wounds is going to do for gaining ground, particularly for a horde army?
I use Rhinos. What the hell are you talking about?
19370
Post by: daedalus
Martel732 wrote:The codex won't fix anything. I'm calling it now.
So your admission of them being "underpowered" underscores my point. The base marine is fundamentally not useful because 40K punishes generalists.
To be fair, this edition punishes elite units pretty hard too. Look at terminators / GK.
11860
Post by: Martel732
U02dah4 wrote:No BA in general not tacs why take a marine with no special rules when a SM player can take an almost identical marine in a different paint scheme with a chapter tactic, relic, better warlord traits, more strategems and a primarch.
Why take a marine period in 40K? The answer used to be to get a free transport or be life support for superfriends. What's the answer now? There is none. The chapter tactics don't fix the fundamental conceptual problems of generalists. Automatically Appended Next Post: daedalus wrote:Martel732 wrote:The codex won't fix anything. I'm calling it now.
So your admission of them being "underpowered" underscores my point. The base marine is fundamentally not useful because 40K punishes generalists.
To be fair, this edition punishes elite units pretty hard too. Look at terminators / GK.
Terminators have also always been gak. The GK also required a Warddex to be effective. Generalists = crap.
19370
Post by: daedalus
I was referring to the 40+ pages of disagreement on the use of rhinos (amongst other things) in the myriad other conscript threads.
It might not have been you specifically, but the overwhelming takeaway from that experience was that no one must use them.
11860
Post by: Martel732
I use them, because sometimes Im actually hauling 2 X 5 marines. They are very effective protection, but do NOTHING to solve marines' throw weight problem. You are also paying 50% the cost of a conscript blob just to transport your ineffective marines to shooting range of the conscripts.
Rhinos are very effective vs Nids and Orks, and even other marines, but don't provide a real boost vs IG. Too much effort to deal with 25% of their list.
I've already tried many BA combos vs hordes, and it's just a world of gak. Especially hordes that shoot.
113722
Post by: sossen
Colonel Cross wrote:Sossen, if you're so sad about tac Marines being what they are, then start playing a different army.
I'm simply explaining the facts, there's no judgment in what I'm saying. It's a game with rules, tac marines have rules that limit their usefulness in a competitive setting. That doesn't mean that I don't like the models or avoid them when playing casual games.
11860
Post by: Martel732
sossen wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:Sossen, if you're so sad about tac Marines being what they are, then start playing a different army.
I'm simply explaining the facts, there's no judgment in what I'm saying. It's a game with rules, tac marines have rules that prohibit their usefulness in a competitive setting. That doesn't mean that I don't like the models or avoid them when playing casual games.
Pretty much this.
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
Why not switch the cost of meltas and plasma? suddenly melta becomes more reasonable and plasma has a bit of a tax on it (because why take melta when plasma does that job better for less points?)
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Martel732 wrote:sossen wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:Sossen, if you're so sad about tac Marines being what they are, then start playing a different army.
I'm simply explaining the facts, there's no judgment in what I'm saying. It's a game with rules, tac marines have rules that prohibit their usefulness in a competitive setting. That doesn't mean that I don't like the models or avoid them when playing casual games.
Pretty much this.
Well my point being folks who play other armies come into imperial guard threads and derail them with complaints of their own units and comparing apples to oranges. I'm just getting tired of it.
29660
Post by: argonak
Blackie wrote: argonak wrote:Veterans cost 6 points per man. The difference between Veterans and Scions is 1 point of save (carapace armor), and deep strike.
So you're already paying an extra 3 points per man to upgrade to scions. Their company commander version is also lame, as he has to give up a weapon option to be able to give two commands for the same price as a normal CC, and he doesn't even get an invuln save.
A Space Marine is 13 points base. He comes with a free boltgun, free bolt pistol. He has 3+ armor, T4, BS and WS 3+, an extra point of ld, chapter tactics, and ATSKNF, and he has a 24" rapid fire 1 s4 weapon.
A Scion with his HSLG (which costs 1 point) is 10 points. So you have a 3 point difference between a tactical space marine and a scion.
In my opinion, there isn't room to increase the cost of a scion without increasing the cost of a space marine. And if you take away their deep strike, then guard loses the only deep strike unit they have.
You can't compare vets to scions. A scions command squad with 4 plasmas and a prime is around 100 points, vets must be 10 men squads and without a vehicle they're useless. Which means they are extremely expensive compared to scions and can be targeted before they start doing their job unlike scions that appear wherever they want at the moment they want. Vets are not even remotely as effective as scions command squads.
Tactical squads also suck. Their best quality is the possibility of bringing a razorback with twin assault cannon as their dedicated transport, and the heavy/special weapons they can take which make them way more expensive, 25+ points per model and only a few of them can replace bolters while all the guys in scions command squads can take a plasma gun.
But you're right, scions points cost is ok. Their plasma gun's price should be increased, because scions without plasmas are not overpowered and are ok for 10 points.
Veterans have command squads with the nearly same weapon options (excluding HSLGs and HSVGs and gaining shotguns). They're a perfectly adequate comparison. Of course they're not as effective, they cost 3 points less.
The Scions are paying 3 points +1 to their save and deep strike. 3 Points gets marines a jump pack with deep strike, fly, and 10" movement. Excuse me if I don't think scions are overcosted.
Tactical squads suck? Compared to what? They're better than scions in a ton of ways, and only for a few more points.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Well said.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Personally, I think the humble infantry squad is overlooked and under-appreciated. I run them all day every day.
You can run them barebones for 40 points
Better BS than conscripts
Can have Special/heavy weapons
Sarge can have a power weapon
They fit in transports
Give you more tactical flexibility than conscripts
As a bonus, they make it easy to fill out Brigades and Battalions for cheap.
I'm not trying to imply that they are better than conscripts, but when you are playing a friendly game they will get you through. I don't want to spend forever moving 50-man blobs anyhow. Only in a super-competitive game will I consider that.
29408
Post by: Melissia
CplPunishment wrote:Personally, I think the humble infantry squad is overlooked and under-appreciated.
Oh, I think they're definitely more useful than conscripts. Conscripts basically excel at exactly one thing, but the infantry squad can do that plenty adequately enough and can also do more than that.
No, I wasn't one of the ones dragging threads off topic; but I did see numerous posts by mods, or edits by mods, showing redtext saying in various ways "stop dragging the thread off topic".
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Melissia wrote:CplPunishment wrote:Personally, I think the humble infantry squad is overlooked and under-appreciated.
Oh, I think they're definitely more useful than conscripts. Conscripts basically excel at exactly one thing, but the infantry squad can do that plenty adequately enough and can also do more than that.
I've stopped using conscripts entirely and I'm doing just fine. You can cram a lot of infantry squads into a list, and they are great for denying deepstrikers from getting into your back lines. They also help you get insane amounts of Command Points. Guard can easily do 1brigade and 2battalions in 2000pts, all battle-forged for a whopping 18 CP total,
I haven't stopped using scions, but I am contemplating alternatives. Everything I can think of is so much more expensive because it relies on transports for mobility. And there is only one TROOPS unit that can fit in transports and isn't scions (discounting Conscripts in a Superheavy!). They are definitely hard to live without.
29660
Post by: argonak
CplPunishment wrote:Personally, I think the humble infantry squad is overlooked and under-appreciated. I run them all day every day.
You can run them barebones for 40 points
Better BS than conscripts
Can have Special/heavy weapons
Sarge can have a power weapon
They fit in transports
Give you more tactical flexibility than conscripts
As a bonus, they make it easy to fill out Brigades and Battalions for cheap.
I'm not trying to imply that they are better than conscripts, but when you are playing a friendly game they will get you through. I don't want to spend forever moving 50-man blobs anyhow. Only in a super-competitive game will I consider that.
I agree, I only run infantry squads in my guard so far and they do just fine. I just need to buy some more boxes so I can retire my Bolt Action proxies. I am thinking about running a couple squads of veterans in my future games though, to try and make use of that extra BS without paying full scion price. Automatically Appended Next Post: CplPunishment wrote: Melissia wrote:CplPunishment wrote:Personally, I think the humble infantry squad is overlooked and under-appreciated.
Oh, I think they're definitely more useful than conscripts. Conscripts basically excel at exactly one thing, but the infantry squad can do that plenty adequately enough and can also do more than that.
I've stopped using conscripts entirely and I'm doing just fine. You can cram a lot of infantry squads into a list, and they are great for denying deepstrikers from getting into your back lines. They also help you get insane amounts of Command Points. Guard can easily do 1brigade and 2battalions in 2000pts, all battle-forged for a whopping 18 CP total,
I haven't stopped using scions, but I am contemplating alternatives. Everything I can think of is so much more expensive because it relies on transports for mobility. And there is only one TROOPS unit that can fit in transports and isn't scions (discounting Conscripts in a Superheavy!). They are definitely hard to live without.
I really want to give special weapon rough riders a try in my next game. I think they'll be a good mobile plasma platform.
113722
Post by: sossen
Colonel Cross wrote:Martel732 wrote:sossen wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:Sossen, if you're so sad about tac Marines being what they are, then start playing a different army.
I'm simply explaining the facts, there's no judgment in what I'm saying. It's a game with rules, tac marines have rules that prohibit their usefulness in a competitive setting. That doesn't mean that I don't like the models or avoid them when playing casual games.
Pretty much this.
Well my point being folks who play other armies come into imperial guard threads and derail them with complaints of their own units and comparing apples to oranges. I'm just getting tired of it.
Go back to the original post, which was claiming that increasing the cost of scions would mandate an increase in the cost of space marines for consistency's sake. My point is that this is not the case because scions are much better per pt.
29408
Post by: Melissia
I think the point being made was that, take away deep strike and special weapons spam, and Scions on their own aren't better point per point than tacticals. The problem is they get plasmaguns too cheaply and they can deep strike for free.
They're not really overpowered on their own, but as a vehicle for cheap overcharged plasmaguns that can be dropped almost anywhere on the map. Because plasma is probably too powerful this edition, and deep striking allows them to suicide plasma overcharge.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
The point being made was take away deep strike and tacticals are significantly better than scions. I also think your perception of how cost effective scions are does depend on your army. They are superb against elite armies but against infantry hoard they struggle to make their points back because they don't get it back in one turn.
81025
Post by: koooaei
Blackie wrote:
Tactical squads also suck. Their best quality is the possibility of bringing a razorback with twin assault cannon as their dedicated transport
If i get it right, dedicated transports are no longer limited to certain units. You can bring a razorback as a dedicated transport to your stormraven.
29408
Post by: Melissia
Also, tacticals don't suck. Supported by one or two HQs, three tactical squads can erase a freaking 50-man conscript squad protected by a commissar in one turn-- a feat very few things can manage for the same price. Certainly very few troops can manage that at any rate.
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
CplPunishment wrote:Personally, I think the humble infantry squad is overlooked and under-appreciated. I run them all day every day.
You can run them barebones for 40 points
Better BS than conscripts
Can have Special/heavy weapons
Sarge can have a power weapon
They fit in transports
Give you more tactical flexibility than conscripts
As a bonus, they make it easy to fill out Brigades and Battalions for cheap.
I'm not trying to imply that they are better than conscripts, but when you are playing a friendly game they will get you through. I don't want to spend forever moving 50-man blobs anyhow. Only in a super-competitive game will I consider that.
I agree that infantry squads are useful and i currently run them as my second line. But sarge taking a power sword is not much of a selling point. Two str 3 attacks on ws4+ is not a platform worth 4 times the cost of a boltgun so you can maybe use it once before dying horribly to whatever charged you or the super pissed off friends of the one guy you killed on the charge.
110512
Post by: Firefox1
All that whining about increasing the costs for scion plasma when everyone already noticed it´s about their deep strike ability. 
Remove that DS ability, reduce the costs per scion by 2 points and then give the squad the option to choose a DS gear for around 30 points.
That would adress the problem directly. But of course all DS units have to be reviewed.
53939
Post by: vipoid
Firefox1 wrote:Remove that DS ability, reduce the costs per scion by 2 points and then give the squad the option to choose a DS gear for around 30 points.
It would be nice if the proposed "fixes" for Scions weren't designed to either make them unplayable or else remove their only meaningful advantage.
113722
Post by: sossen
Melissia wrote:Also, tacticals don't suck. Supported by one or two HQs, three tactical squads can erase a freaking 50-man conscript squad protected by a commissar in one turn-- a feat very few things can manage for the same price. Certainly very few troops can manage that at any rate.
There are lots of units that can do that at the same price point - if they are allowed to gear themselves optimally for the task, are all placed within flamer range and then shoot+charge, all while assuming that they get to that range unharmed.
29408
Post by: Melissia
Also, 30 points-- six points per model? Ridiculous! It should be 2ppm at most, which is 10 points for a squad of five. 3ppm is what marines pay for non-character jump packs. 2ppm is what reivers pay for grav-chutes. Automatically Appended Next Post: sossen wrote:if they are allowed to gear themselves optimally for the task, are all placed within flamer range and then shoot+charge, all while assuming that they get to that range unharmed.
Your rants about conscripts always gave conscripts every advantage. I'm not obligated to participate in your defeatist fantasies and assume the same.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
It's the new GW way if your list wins a tournament people will keep whineing rather than try to build to counter it until GW nerf it to oblivion. Acolytes too strong goodbye stormravens too strong goodbye and now people expect hoards to go the same way. However there are anti infantry tools not being used in many lists and this problem is meta counterable.
It seems like at least by this thread Jury is split on scions power. The interesting things i's that the meta counter to scion lists is to take less vehicles and more tac squads and asside from whining that they are not hyper competitive no one has actually made a case that they are bad. Just stated it while making a comparison with one of the best troop choices in the army that specialises in troops.
Weapon diversity is an issue but would it not make more sense to strengthen meltas and grenade launchers to make them equality competative rather than kill plasmas
108848
Post by: Blackie
Stormravens are exactly the same unit with the same price that they had at the start of the edition. The "flyers only" list has been nerfed, but it was clearly a mistake, playing with 5 stormravens is not even 40k. But if it's ok for a lot of people to play with and against 4 imperial knights I guess a list with only stormravens doesn't look wrong either.
You can still play with 1-3 of those nasty things in a quite effective list. Stormravens are still overpowered.
110512
Post by: Firefox1
vipoid wrote:Firefox1 wrote:Remove that DS ability, reduce the costs per scion by 2 points and then give the squad the option to choose a DS gear for around 30 points.
It would be nice if the proposed "fixes" for Scions weren't designed to either make them unplayable or else remove their only meaningful advantage.
Without DS they would be as playable as Veterans and if they opt to take the DS capability at least they pay decent points for that.
So sorry i don´t understand what you mean, please explain.
53939
Post by: vipoid
Firefox1 wrote:Without DS they would be as playable as Veterans and if they opt to take the DS capability at least they pay decent points for that.
So sorry i don´t understand what you mean, please explain.
The points you are demanding they pay to deep strike are absurd. Tactical Marines pay just 3pts for Jump Packs (which give the not only deep strike but also double movement), yet you would have Scions pay twice that (more for Command Squads) just for the deep strike ability.
With your proposal, you might as well just remove Scions from the codex. It's clearly what you want and it's what your changes amount to.
110512
Post by: Firefox1
I wasn´t fixed on that number, just throw one into the room, sorry for being not clear on that. And voted also to review every unit with that ability.
But it is simply wrong to cry for increased plasma costs when it all depends on DS.
And while i´m fine with less, i´m sure some here will cry for more.
What amount would you propose?
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Firefox1 wrote: vipoid wrote:Firefox1 wrote:Remove that DS ability, reduce the costs per scion by 2 points and then give the squad the option to choose a DS gear for around 30 points.
It would be nice if the proposed "fixes" for Scions weren't designed to either make them unplayable or else remove their only meaningful advantage.
Without DS they would be as playable as Veterans and if they opt to take the DS capability at least they pay decent points for that.
So sorry i don´t understand what you mean, please explain.
On what planet would they be as playable as veterans.
Veteran squad 3 plasmas and boltgun 82pts same as Scions in that scenario so veterans double their wounds and exchange 3 hot shots for 6 lasguns and an extra plasma and regiment bonuses (plus additional options such as an HWT and heavy flamer in exhange for not having deep strike).
Meanwhile Scion squad 2 plasmas at -2 pts 52pts. Would be terrible as while they can damage output they would be dead before they ever got in range. They often struggle to make pt's back with prime targeting
Finnally rough riders with duel Plasmas comes in at 60pts so what would you be gaining for an extra 22.
Also I don't see all that many veterans.
Tell you what why don't we fix the guard codex by adding a 0 on the end of all pts cost and balance space marines by making them 5pts per modal because because your aim seems to be to destroy the unit rather than balance Automatically Appended Next Post: Firefox1 wrote:I wasn´t fixed on that number, just throw one into the room, sorry for being not clear on that. And voted also to review every unit with that ability.
But it is simply wrong to cry for increased plasma costs when it all depends on DS.
And while i´m fine with less, i´m sure some here will cry for more.
What amount would you propose?
0 seems a more appropropiate number for balance between armies. A 1pt per scion increase would weaken them to average
The denial of conscripts to scion players and an upgrade of melta/ grade launchers would be a better fix
85299
Post by: Spoletta
No, i would honestly like to have the special weapons costs for scions increased to space marines levels or close to it. After all they get the same mileage out of those special weapons that SM get, why would they pay less for them?
53939
Post by: vipoid
Spoletta wrote:No, i would honestly like to have the special weapons costs for scions increased to space marines levels or close to it. After all they get the same mileage out of those special weapons that SM get, why would they pay less for them?
Because they're significantly less durable? It's an important point because Scions rarely get to fire their weapons more than once.
To be clear, I do think they should pay more for plasma (probably around 10pts), I just don't think they should pay full marine prices.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Even if you have the same BS you don't get the same mileage if your squishier because you are more likely to be dead before you get a second shot so space marines tend to get more mileage from thete guns and that's before you take salamanders or giulliman as optons. Scion to get better positioning but they already pay a premium for that.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
U02dah4 wrote:Even if you have the same BS you don't get the same mileage if your squishier because you are more likely to be dead before you get a second shot so space marines tend to get more mileage from thete guns and that's before you take salamanders or giulliman as optons. Scion to get better positioning but they already pay a premium for that.
A suicide squad is a suicide squad. How long do you honestly expect 5 man marine command squad to last anyways?
107114
Post by: Covenant
“A 1pt per scion increase would weaken them to average.“
Wait, isn't this be the plan? to only have average units so you can play everything? 
110187
Post by: U02dah4
On its own not long as most armies can concentrate fire but if taken in groups it will take 33% to 50% more shooting to take them down depending on chapter with greater mobility after its landed to reposition should it wish to relocate to another target in sub sequent turns.
16% more survival due to +1SV
16% more survival vs S3,S4, S6,S7 (I'm assuming S8+ weapons will target a vehicle and I can't remember the last time I was shot by an S1 or S2 weapon)
16% more survival if Iron hands chapter tactic
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Covenant wrote:“A 1pt per scion increase would weaken them to average.“
Wait, isn't this be the plan? to only have average units so you can play everything?
That's a terrible plan and not going to happen because units power is effected by terrain, the size of the battlefield and what their shooting at. Scions are strong in the meta but pretty weak vs infantry builds.
Simple test try a 1k game of
Cpt
Apothecary
3 salamanders lascanon tacs
6 lascannon devastator squads with a single Las cannon and cherub
All Sgt but one with storm bolters
Or a wall of kroot with ethereal hq and kroothound/vespid in support with 1 shaper.
Or a pure guard infantry list
Then see how well the scion list does
It also seems only focused on weakening stronger units not fixing weak ones I mean where is the complaint from marine players that they are not being devestated by the awesome power of the deathstrike missile which let's face it has the tiny drawback that 50% of games it won't fire
110512
Post by: Firefox1
U02dah4 wrote:
On what planet would they be as playable as veterans.
Veteran squad 3 plasmas and boltgun 82pts same as Scions in that scenario so veterans double their wounds and exchange 3 hot shots for 6 lasguns and an extra plasma and regiment bonuses (plus additional options such as an HWT and heavy flamer in exhange for not having deep strike).
As long as the Prime is required they would be a bad choice, yes. If not the SCS without DS would costs 56 pts, so points wise it would be 6 Scions with 6 plasma to 10 vets with 3 plasma.
On foot neither unit would get to their goal.
U02dah4 wrote:
Meanwhile Scion squad 2 plasmas at -2 pts 52pts. Would be terrible as while they can damage output they would be dead before they ever got in range. They often struggle to make pt's back with prime targeting
That´s always the problem of Scions and 10 T3 models with 5+ also don´t do better.
U02dah4 wrote:
Finnally rough riders with duel Plasmas comes in at 60pts so what would you be gaining for an extra 22.
What 22? SCS still would cost 56 pts, 4 with 4 plasma.
Agreed.
U02dah4 wrote:
Tell you what why don't we fix the guard codex by adding a 0 on the end of all pts cost and balance space marines by making them 5pts per modal because because your aim seems to be to destroy the unit rather than balance
You missed what i wanted to say.
I wanted to say that the problem some see is not the costs of the plasma but the ability to deep strike. With my post i wanted to hear what they would change. I just can´t hear their plasma whining anymore.
I am fine with them as they are, especially after the Prime tax and see no need to change anything about them.
Cheap deep stiking is part of the 8th. Furthermore most armies have cheap screening units so can neuter their effect.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote:
0 seems a more appropropiate number for balance between armies. A 1pt per scion increase would weaken them to average
Good to hear.
U02dah4 wrote:The denial of conscripts to scion players and an upgrade of melta/ grade launchers would be a better fix
I am quite sure no codex will ever have a rule that says if you pick unit x you can´t pick unit y.
What upgrades to the melta/grenade launcher would that be?
Spoletta wrote:No, i would honestly like to have the special weapons costs for scions increased to space marines levels or close to it. After all they get the same mileage out of those special weapons that SM get, why would they pay less for them?
And if 4 scions with melta drop at your land raider, you want to increase the costs of meltas?
It has been said a couple of times, scion are one shot weapons and nowhere near the durability of any space marine.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Firefox1 wrote:U02dah4 wrote:
On what planet would they be as playable as veterans.
Veteran squad 3 plasmas and boltgun 82pts same as Scions in that scenario so veterans double their wounds and exchange 3 hot shots for 6 lasguns and an extra plasma and regiment bonuses (plus additional options such as an HWT and heavy flamer in exhange for not having deep strike).
As long as the Prime is required they would be a bad choice, yes. If not the SCS without DS would costs 56 pts, so points wise it would be 6 Scions with 6 plasma to 10 vets with 3 plasma.
On foot neither unit would get to their goal.
U02dah4 wrote:
Meanwhile Scion squad 2 plasmas at -2 pts 52pts. Would be terrible as while they can damage output they would be dead before they ever got in range. They often struggle to make pt's back with prime targeting
That´s always the problem of Scions and 10 T3 models with 5+ also don´t do better.
U02dah4 wrote:
Finnally rough riders with duel Plasmas comes in at 60pts so what would you be gaining for an extra 22.
What 22? SCS still would cost 56 pts, 4 with 4 plasma.
Agreed.
U02dah4 wrote:
Tell you what why don't we fix the guard codex by adding a 0 on the end of all pts cost and balance space marines by making them 5pts per modal because because your aim seems to be to destroy the unit rather than balance
You missed what i wanted to say.
I wanted to say that the problem some see is not the costs of the plasma but the ability to deep strike. With my post i wanted to hear what they would change. I just can´t hear their plasma whining anymore.
I am fine with them as they are, especially after the Prime tax and see no need to change anything about them.
Cheap deep stiking is part of the 8th. Furthermore most armies have cheap screening units so can neuter their effect.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote:
0 seems a more appropropiate number for balance between armies. A 1pt per scion increase would weaken them to average
Good to hear.
U02dah4 wrote:The denial of conscripts to scion players and an upgrade of melta/ grade launchers would be a better fix
I am quite sure no codex will ever have a rule that says if you pick unit x you can´t pick unit y.
What upgrades to the melta/grenade launcher would that be?
Spoletta wrote:No, i would honestly like to have the special weapons costs for scions increased to space marines levels or close to it. After all they get the same mileage out of those special weapons that SM get, why would they pay less for them?
And if 4 scions with melta drop at your land raider, you want to increase the costs of meltas?
It has been said a couple of times, scion are one shot weapons.
You have different numbers because I compared scion squads not scion command squads because the previous had not talked about command squads so 22 is a normal scion squad compared to a rough rider squad.
Also pretty much every codex has the rule if you pick unit X you can't pick unit Y or else TauDar. Also there are examples of certain chapters having access to certain units models that other chapters don't.
In fact the lost librarius rule in codex SM says that adeptus astartes psykers cannot be drawn from the black temples faction so precedent so just reword the rule to conscripts and tempests scions
Melta doesn't do enough damage to justify it's cost and range in any codex so it needs a Damage buff.
It would be great for grenade launcher to have attacks proportionate to the size of the squad your shooting to give it a neiche
85299
Post by: Spoletta
Firefox1 wrote:
Spoletta wrote:No, i would honestly like to have the special weapons costs for scions increased to space marines levels or close to it. After all they get the same mileage out of those special weapons that SM get, why would they pay less for them?
And if 4 scions with melta drop at your land raider, you want to increase the costs of meltas?
It has been said a couple of times, scion are one shot weapons and nowhere near the durability of any space marine.
In fact i said to increase the cost of special weapons, not the cost of plasma. Scions paying AM costs for weapons is simply not right.
110512
Post by: Firefox1
U02dah4 wrote: Also pretty much every codex has the rule if you pick unit X you can't pick unit Y or else TauDar
TauDar sound like previous edition. In pure armies i don´t see that "problem", can you give an example?
U02dah4 wrote:
It would be great for grenade launcher to have attacks proportionate to the size of the squad your shooting to give it a neiche
A problem with previous template-weapons, something i wrote in another Guard topic.
And i don´t seem to be the only one, someone at Bols wrote also about that.
www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/08/ 40k-explosive-weapons-we-have-a-problem.html
Btw. is there also a thread about tau commanders with 4 plasma rifles, which can do quite the same as SCS+Prime, or is it just Guard-hate, just asking?
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
RogueApiary wrote:CplPunishment wrote:Personally, I think the humble infantry squad is overlooked and under-appreciated. I run them all day every day.
You can run them barebones for 40 points
Better BS than conscripts
Can have Special/heavy weapons
Sarge can have a power weapon
They fit in transports
Give you more tactical flexibility than conscripts
As a bonus, they make it easy to fill out Brigades and Battalions for cheap.
I'm not trying to imply that they are better than conscripts, but when you are playing a friendly game they will get you through. I don't want to spend forever moving 50-man blobs anyhow. Only in a super-competitive game will I consider that.
I agree that infantry squads are useful and i currently run them as my second line. But sarge taking a power sword is not much of a selling point. Two str 3 attacks on ws4+ is not a platform worth 4 times the cost of a boltgun so you can maybe use it once before dying horribly to whatever charged you or the super pissed off friends of the one guy you killed on the charge.
I said power weapon, not power sword.
With a nearby Straken & priest, attacks you will get 4 attacks each fight phase plus 3 in the shooting phase with "fix bayonets". If you are smart about it, any power weapon can pay dividends. 4 points won't break the bank anyhow.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Firefox1 wrote:U02dah4 wrote: Also pretty much every codex has the rule if you pick unit X you can't pick unit Y or else TauDar
TauDar sound like previous edition. In pure armies i don´t see that "problem", can you give an example?
U02dah4 wrote:
It would be great for grenade launcher to have attacks proportionate to the size of the squad your shooting to give it a neiche
A problem with previous template-weapons, something i wrote in another Guard topic.
And i don´t seem to be the only one, someone at Bols wrote also about that.
www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/08/ 40k-explosive-weapons-we-have-a-problem.html
Btw. is there also a thread about tau commanders with 4 plasma rifles, which can do quite the same as SCS+Prime, or is it just Guard-hate, just asking?
Codex SM lost librarius rule adeptus astartes psyckers may not be drawn from the black templars chapter
Templates were the best answer to hoards half reason people struggle with conscripts is there areally almost no equivalents
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Instead of a futile comparison of scions vs tac marines, can we discuss something pertinent to the guard. Like whether we can be competitive without scions or with a neutered version of them?
11860
Post by: Martel732
IG can be competitive with scions removed completely, if necessary. I'm not advocating this, but just as a demonstration of the robust nature of the list.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Martel732 wrote:IG can be competitive with scions removed completely, if necessary. I'm not advocating this, but just as a demonstration of the robust nature of the list.
Okay, how exactly?
11860
Post by: Martel732
By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
I suppose you could put those points into beefing up your gunline with artillery, AA and meatshields, but has this been done in practice?
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Yes but at a competitive level why would you run a list that's almost as good when you could the list that is good
I've had good results using rough riders in place of scion they are almost as efficient
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
U02dah4 wrote:Yes but at a competitive level why would you run a list that's almost as good when you could the list that is good
I've had good results using rough riders in place of scion they are almost as efficient
I think roughriders are a surprisingly good countercharge unit, but they can't get into the backlines as easily as storm troopers. A smart opponent will pick off roughriders if they aren't hidden well. On top of that, they aren't troops. They are decent, but don't fill the void of scions.
11860
Post by: Martel732
CplPunishment wrote:Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
I suppose you could put those points into beefing up your gunline with artillery, AA and meatshields, but has this been done in practice?
Someone in my play group refuses to use scions as a matter of honor and he's still undefeated. Of course, he's rocking 200 conscripts usually. There is no where to deep strike and you can't physically move to 2/3 of the objectives after turn 2. With the new determination of going first, he can sometimes keep lastalons on repulsors from being able to shoot his artillery. It's awesome and sad at the same time.
I don't think this is really a case of the IG being some horrible death machine. I haven't extensively analyzed them vs say DE or Nids. But they can pimp slap marines around no problem without scions. The question is whether marines are any kind of yardstick? They weren't in 5th. And this game looks a lot like 5th. Marines were victims in 5th. Only the snowflake marines were worth a damn in 5th. Which, yes, BA were part of that squad. I'm feeling less and less ashamed about 5th every day at this point.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
It's also a question of whether the current competitive marine lists are optimised for the meta and losing or are marines getting slapped about because most players are investing to many pts in AV and high AP weaponry that they needed in 7th while deriding the anti infantry units as bad because they were in 7th despite now needing them.
I look at a lot of lists and go it's great for hunting other marines but how do you kill a hoard?
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Martel732 wrote:CplPunishment wrote:Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
I suppose you could put those points into beefing up your gunline with artillery, AA and meatshields, but has this been done in practice?
Someone in my play group refuses to use scions as a matter of honor and he's still undefeated. Of course, he's rocking 200 conscripts usually. There is no where to deep strike and you can't physically move to 2/3 of the objectives after turn 2. With the new determination of going first, he can sometimes keep lastalons on repulsors from being able to shoot his artillery. It's awesome and sad at the same time.
I don't think this is really a case of the IG being some horrible death machine. I haven't extensively analyzed them vs say DE or Nids. But they can pimp slap marines around no problem without scions. The question is whether marines are any kind of yardstick? They weren't in 5th. And this game looks a lot like 5th. Marines were victims in 5th. Only the snowflake marines were worth a damn in 5th. Which, yes, BA were part of that squad. I'm feeling less and less ashamed about 5th every day at this point.
The cruel irony is that sounds like the best answer to scion spam yet...
113722
Post by: sossen
CplPunishment wrote:Martel732 wrote:CplPunishment wrote:Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
I suppose you could put those points into beefing up your gunline with artillery, AA and meatshields, but has this been done in practice?
Someone in my play group refuses to use scions as a matter of honor and he's still undefeated. Of course, he's rocking 200 conscripts usually. There is no where to deep strike and you can't physically move to 2/3 of the objectives after turn 2. With the new determination of going first, he can sometimes keep lastalons on repulsors from being able to shoot his artillery. It's awesome and sad at the same time.
I don't think this is really a case of the IG being some horrible death machine. I haven't extensively analyzed them vs say DE or Nids. But they can pimp slap marines around no problem without scions. The question is whether marines are any kind of yardstick? They weren't in 5th. And this game looks a lot like 5th. Marines were victims in 5th. Only the snowflake marines were worth a damn in 5th. Which, yes, BA were part of that squad. I'm feeling less and less ashamed about 5th every day at this point.
The cruel irony is that sounds like the best answer to scion spam yet...
The BAO winner mentioned this in the FLG podcast, mass bubblewrap is good against scions/commanders etc and conscripts+brimstones are the best options.
110512
Post by: Firefox1
U02dah4 wrote:
Codex SM lost librarius rule adeptus astartes psyckers may not be drawn from the black templars chapter
A ok. I thought about a ruling that is directly connected to a unit (e. g. something like taking hellblasters prevents you from picking devastators)
U02dah4 wrote:Templates were the best answer to hoards half reason people struggle with conscripts is there areally almost no equivalents
In my gaming group templates caused the players to took long time setting their model as far spread as possible. It was just time consuming. So i like the loss of them.
But those weapons need now one of those proposed solutions.
Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
Feel free to carry on with your explanation.
My try would be using standard inf squads around a commissar and company commander. Defensive it is a lot worse as you would loose 1 model in each squad. Offensive BS 4+ will compensate to a certain point as only 2 units benefitting from the orders.
But to be honest the possibilty to increase the inf squad size to 20 will be needed to make them halve of an alternative to conscripts.
113340
Post by: ChargerIIC
Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
So far you've advocated the Standard Guard Squad, The Scions and Conscripts as miscosted. You've literally banned all of our troop choices.
At this point you might just want to admit you want AM banned.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.
Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke. Automatically Appended Next Post:  ChargerIIC wrote:Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
So far you've advocated the Standard Guard Squad, The Scions and Conscripts as miscosted. You've literally banned all of our troop choices.
At this point you might just want to admit you want AM banned.
They all deserve point increases - or all other troop choices in the game need point reductions.
Conscripts should be 4 points and have and not be able to receive orders. Gardsmen should be 6 points (like ork boys). Vets should be 8 (like guardians). Scions I think their cost is correct (they'd still be good at 11) for the base unit BUT all gards weapons need to cost the same as other imperium units. Except for the melle weapons - the reduction of those weapons is justified due to their decreased strength and attack characteristics.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Firefox1 wrote:U02dah4 wrote:
Codex SM lost librarius rule adeptus astartes psyckers may not be drawn from the black templars chapter
A ok. I thought about a ruling that is directly connected to a unit (e. g. something like taking hellblasters prevents you from picking devastators)
U02dah4 wrote:Templates were the best answer to hoards half reason people struggle with conscripts is there areally almost no equivalents
In my gaming group templates caused the players to took long time setting their model as far spread as possible. It was just time consuming. So i like the loss of them.
But those weapons need now one of those proposed solutions.
Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
Feel free to carry on with your explanation.
My try would be using standard inf squads around a commissar and company commander. Defensive it is a lot worse as you would loose 1 model in each squad. Offensive BS 4+ will compensate to a certain point as only 2 units benefitting from the orders.
But to be honest the possibilty to increase the inf squad size to 20 will be needed to make them halve of an alternative to conscripts.
I agree that templates made things time consuming but they did keep hoards in check and there is a compromise it's having attacks proportionate to the number of models in the squad your targetting
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
Xenomancers wrote:Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.
Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.
You realize cost is partly determined within the context of other options within the army and not just a direct comparison of units between armies right? Guard infantry are cheap because we don't have Magnus, or Guilliman, or crazy Eldar fliers. You make troops in the guard on par with Eldar troops pointswise, then you need to massively buff our characters and vehicles.
Edit: Wow, you're seriously proposing making basic guardsmen 6 points? You just want guard to be garbage tier again and aren't even trying at this point.
19370
Post by: daedalus
I remember when this thread had less whining.
11860
Post by: Martel732
U02dah4 wrote:It's also a question of whether the current competitive marine lists are optimised for the meta and losing or are marines getting slapped about because most players are investing to many pts in AV and high AP weaponry that they needed in 7th while deriding the anti infantry units as bad because they were in 7th despite now needing them.
I look at a lot of lists and go it's great for hunting other marines but how do you kill a hoard?
If you don't load up on heavy weapons like lascannons, nidzilla and mechdar run you over even worse.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChargerIIC wrote:Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
So far you've advocated the Standard Guard Squad, The Scions and Conscripts as miscosted. You've literally banned all of our troop choices.
At this point you might just want to admit you want AM banned.
Did I ever mention banning? Did I ever mention banning scatbikes or WK? Or 6th ed wave serpents? Or 5th ed GK?
"Feel free to carry on with your explanation. "
I already did. The guy with 200 conscripts + artillery + lascannons. I can't give you the exact specifics, because I don't play guard. I'd argue that all T3 5+ infantry with range weapons are undercosted in 8th, though. There's not much mathematical room down there, though.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Holy feth. What is going on in this thread now?
This is a case of either children being on this forum or people who lack intelligence. One cannot compare basic troops choices across armies. Each army has a fleshed out style and everything interacts differently. This is getting absurd.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Xenomancers wrote:Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.
Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChargerIIC wrote:Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
So far you've advocated the Standard Guard Squad, The Scions and Conscripts as miscosted. You've literally banned all of our troop choices.
At this point you might just want to admit you want AM banned.
They all deserve point increases - or all other troop choices in the game need point reductions.
Conscripts should be 4 points and have and not be able to receive orders. Gardsmen should be 6 points (like ork boys). Vets should be 8 (like guardians). Scions I think their cost is correct (they'd still be good at 11) for the base unit BUT all gards weapons need to cost the same as other imperium units. Except for the melle weapons - the reduction of those weapons is justified due to their decreased strength and attack characteristics.
I agree and I disagree
Points wise guardsman are fine adapt you have the tools to fight them
SM look to your tac squads you forgot them in 7th I know
Orks quit your complaining green tide is one of the best now and perfect for slaughtering guardsmen.
Tau commander spam is great vs marines but pure kroot is the way to go against the guard yes I know they don't shoot.
Inquisition OK GW hate you so you die
When it comes to guard
Other than the deathstrike missile which needs a massive boost and leamon russes/valkyrie that need a smaller boost they are an army that's generally consistent it's the one list that is great. Sure their troops are strong but what is guard if not about the troops. Other armies make up for it in other areas.
When you look at other armies that not always true sanguinery guard need a boost all space marine infantry could do with a 1pt reduction tau need to be reminded that you don't have to shoot like storm troopers. Skittarii need scout and to ignore mandatory HQ's.
More often than not it should be about looking at what isn't played and making it better and looking at the tools you have and don't use don't punish what works because something will always replace it
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
RogueApiary wrote: Xenomancers wrote:Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.
Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.
You realize cost is partly determined within the context of other options within the army and not just a direct comparison of units between armies right? Guard infantry are cheap because we don't have Magnus, or Guilliman, or crazy Eldar fliers. You make troops in the guard on par with Eldar troops pointswise, then you need to massively buff our characters and vehicles.
Edit: Wow, you're seriously proposing making basic guardsmen 6 points? You just want guard to be garbage tier again and aren't even trying at this point.
I'm making direct comparisons to existing rules. How can you say I'm not trying? Gaurd are clearly over performing and it's easy to realize why - they are too cheap. Gaurd have access to buttloads of lords of war too. A Baneblade weilding a volcano cannon could easily 1 shot magnus. They can take an Imperial knight. They can take Celestine in their army - or guiliman. You can't honestly be saying guard infantry are so cheap because they don't have access to good stuff?
11860
Post by: Martel732
Colonel Cross wrote:Holy feth. What is going on in this thread now?
This is a case of either children being on this forum or people who lack intelligence. One cannot compare basic troops choices across armies. Each army has a fleshed out style and everything interacts differently. This is getting absurd.
I'm not doing that. T3 and 5+ armor are mathematically better than they were in 7th. That's just empirically true. So is Str 3 shooting, btw. The tourney results are also showing this to be empirically true.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Martel732 wrote:U02dah4 wrote:It's also a question of whether the current competitive marine lists are optimised for the meta and losing or are marines getting slapped about because most players are investing to many pts in AV and high AP weaponry that they needed in 7th while deriding the anti infantry units as bad because they were in 7th despite now needing them.
I look at a lot of lists and go it's great for hunting other marines but how do you kill a hoard?
If you don't load up on heavy weapons like lascannons, nidzilla and mechdar run you over even worse.
Well then the problem isn't guard it's nidzilla and mechdar forcing you to only pick weapons to counter them Automatically Appended Next Post: Martel732 wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:Holy feth. What is going on in this thread now?
This is a case of either children being on this forum or people who lack intelligence. One cannot compare basic troops choices across armies. Each army has a fleshed out style and everything interacts differently. This is getting absurd.
I'm not doing that. T3 and 5+ armor are mathematically better than they were in 7th. That's just empirically true. So is Str 3 shooting, btw. The tourney results are also showing this to be empirically true.
Strength 4 shooting is also better
11860
Post by: Martel732
But can't be taken in the same numbers. And is not really the main point. Str 3 shooting isn't really the problem. It's the icing on the cake. It's the point investment to remove T3 5+ bodies in a REASONABLE amount of time.
"SM look to your tac squads you forgot them in 7th I know "
This is the best they have ever been, and they are still gak. Always have been gak, always will be gak. The generalist curse in 40K.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
U02dah4 wrote: Xenomancers wrote:Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.
Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChargerIIC wrote:Martel732 wrote:By leveraging the other miscosted units in their list, of course.
So far you've advocated the Standard Guard Squad, The Scions and Conscripts as miscosted. You've literally banned all of our troop choices.
At this point you might just want to admit you want AM banned.
They all deserve point increases - or all other troop choices in the game need point reductions.
Conscripts should be 4 points and have and not be able to receive orders. Gardsmen should be 6 points (like ork boys). Vets should be 8 (like guardians). Scions I think their cost is correct (they'd still be good at 11) for the base unit BUT all gards weapons need to cost the same as other imperium units. Except for the melle weapons - the reduction of those weapons is justified due to their decreased strength and attack characteristics.
I agree and I disagree
Points wise guardsman are fine adapt you have the tools to fight them
SM look to your tac squads you forgot them in 7th I know
Orks quit your complaining green tide is one of the best now and perfect for slaughtering guardsmen.
Tau commander spam is great vs marines but pure kroot is the way to go against the guard yes I know they don't shoot.
Inquisition OK GW hate you so you die
When it comes to guard
Other than the deathstrike missile which needs a massive boost and leamon russes/valkyrie that need a smaller boost they are an army that's generally consistent it's the one list that is great. Sure their troops are strong but what is guard if not about the troops. Other armies make up for it in other areas.
When you look at other armies that not always true sanguinery guard need a boost all space marine infantry could do with a 1pt reduction tau need to be reminded that you don't have to shoot like storm troopers. Skittarii need scout and to ignore mandatory HQ's.
More often than not it should be about looking at what isn't played and making it better and looking at the tools you have and don't use don't punish what works because something will always replace it
OMG - again with the tacs - they are garbage. Why? They can only take 1 heavy per 5 and cost about the same as a fully loaded vet unit with autocannons and plasma. It's readily apparent that the vet unit is better than tac marines. I'm fine with them being better than tac marines (I would never put a tac marine in a list ever - they are total donkey gak).
11860
Post by: Martel732
A standard tac marine with no buffs kills 1.78 pts of conscripts within rapid fire range. A conscript with no buff kills 0.96 pts of marines. Those two numbers would have to be very different for tac marines to be a viable solution. Note: which unit has access to better buffs?
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Where the feth are you getting these numbers?
11860
Post by: Martel732
Tac marine: 2*.6666*.66666.*.666666*3 = 1.78
Conscript: 2*.33333*.33333*.333333*13 = 0.97
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Colonel Cross wrote:Holy feth. What is going on in this thread now?
This is a case of either children being on this forum or people who lack intelligence. One cannot compare basic troops choices across armies. Each army has a fleshed out style and everything interacts differently. This is getting absurd.
Yeah - that's not actually how it works. Also - it's totally possible for armies to have different fighting styles (like long/mid/short/ cc/glass cannon/low damage tank) and still be balanced against each other. It's rather simple when we can simulate a game quickly using mathematics. Right now with the majority of gard units balance is laughable.
Also - what fighting style exactly do the guard have that warrants their troops being too cheap for their abilities? The fact that they are almost always on the defensive - which is practically always an advantage to begin with? (can make better use of cover - and play reactionary)??? How bad of shape are gaurd HQ, HS, FA, and ELITE, options in that they need to have over powered troops?
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
I still disagree with you that troops choices can be compared across armies This isn't some MOBA where the game developers make or lose money on the balance of the game. The sheer number of units, armies, and combinations ensure that you're not in your house, with calculators and Excel spreadsheets running the numbers on what is balanced or not. Get a grip. Just admit you're as biased against the guard as I am for them.
Well I'd say that we're shoe horned into taking artillery as our HS as our MBT is hot garbage. Our AA is pretty bad. I don't even really like the Wyvern anymore since my army doesn't really need more anti troop capability. It's really difficult to fight vehicle heavy or durable infantry lists.
Our HQs are for buffs, not going to do much offensively.
Our FA options are quite balanced but if we didn't want BDEs then you'd rarely see much. I don't own a Hellhound but the fact it's main weapon is randomized makes it extremely unappealing to me personally. I love rough riders but they tend to come in on an empty part of the board to chase an OBJ and stay out of LoS.
Our elites, while offering many options, are quite unpalatable. I wanted Ratlings to be useful but they're not. Initially in 8th I had trouble narrowing down my elites but now it's basically 2 commissars with boltguns and an Astropath.
My army is mostly infantry squads. I think they're right where they should be. I need tons of them to do anything!
11860
Post by: Martel732
Some aspects of a troop choice can be compared across armies, others can not. But the above math is not acceptable if people are trying to pimp tac marines as some kind of counter to guardsmen/conscripts. Yeah, marines get a few special weapons, but a flamer kills a whopping 4.67 pts of conscripts when it fires. The same flamer kills 8.42 pts of marines. Marines just run out of assets too quickly.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Martel732 wrote:Tac marine: 2*.6666*.66666.*.666666*3 = 1.78
Conscript: 2*.33333*.33333*.333333*13 = 0.97
Your math is wrong.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
I'm not doing the maths but in actuality there is no way 1 conscript in rapid fire range is going to kill 1 marine. I have to throw handfuls of dice to hurt anything with a lasgun! Hitting on 5s then wounding on 5s is not going to net you .97 wounds per dude! That's crazy.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
By my math it takes 10 SM bolters to kill 6 conscripts and 50 FRFSRF conscript lasguns to kill 7 marines. All this assuming 12", no cover.
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
Xenomancers wrote:RogueApiary wrote: Xenomancers wrote:Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.
Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.
You realize cost is partly determined within the context of other options within the army and not just a direct comparison of units between armies right? Guard infantry are cheap because we don't have Magnus, or Guilliman, or crazy Eldar fliers. You make troops in the guard on par with Eldar troops pointswise, then you need to massively buff our characters and vehicles.
Edit: Wow, you're seriously proposing making basic guardsmen 6 points? You just want guard to be garbage tier again and aren't even trying at this point.
I'm making direct comparisons to existing rules. How can you say I'm not trying? Gaurd are clearly over performing and it's easy to realize why - they are too cheap. Gaurd have access to buttloads of lords of war too. A Baneblade weilding a volcano cannon could easily 1 shot magnus. They can take an Imperial knight. They can take Celestine in their army - or guiliman. You can't honestly be saying guard infantry are so cheap because they don't have access to good stuff?
You're joking, right? You mean a 36% chance of doing a whopping average of 7 (of his EIGHTEEN) wounds to magnus is now the definition of 'easily one shot'? With such an inflated view of Guard capabilities no wonder you can't shut up about how op guard are.
3.5 (avg shot number on 1D6) * .5 (yay Guard Ballistic skill) *.84 (finally, but no reroll because somehow Magnus isn't titanic despite being almost as large as a Knight) *.21 (3++ rerollings 1's is so much fun to shoot at) = .3 so I can expect to do 2d6 damage once every 3 rounds. SO GOOD. Oh and since Chaos almost certainly got the first turn, those numbers probably are even worse because they very likely knocked it down a wound profile.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
You multiplied by the points cost of the target unit. That is not needed to determine how many die.
11860
Post by: Martel732
I said 0.97 points of marines.
113722
Post by: sossen
You're reading it wrong, it's an efficiency comparison.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Ah my bad I thought it was wounds caused!
110512
Post by: Firefox1
You are joking? Or not?
In case of not, there is no way that a guardsman is as much worth as an ork. Not even in shooting they can compete against orks with shootas. Veterans loose also in shooting without adding special and heavy weapons. And with increasing numbers it gets even worse, mob rule and green tide.
Ork boyz are way closer to 8 points than the humble guardsman to 5.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
RogueApiary wrote: Xenomancers wrote:RogueApiary wrote: Xenomancers wrote:Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.
Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.
You realize cost is partly determined within the context of other options within the army and not just a direct comparison of units between armies right? Guard infantry are cheap because we don't have Magnus, or Guilliman, or crazy Eldar fliers. You make troops in the guard on par with Eldar troops pointswise, then you need to massively buff our characters and vehicles.
Edit: Wow, you're seriously proposing making basic guardsmen 6 points? You just want guard to be garbage tier again and aren't even trying at this point.
I'm making direct comparisons to existing rules. How can you say I'm not trying? Gaurd are clearly over performing and it's easy to realize why - they are too cheap. Gaurd have access to buttloads of lords of war too. A Baneblade weilding a volcano cannon could easily 1 shot magnus. They can take an Imperial knight. They can take Celestine in their army - or guiliman. You can't honestly be saying guard infantry are so cheap because they don't have access to good stuff?
You're joking, right? You mean a 36% chance of doing a whopping average of 7 (of his EIGHTEEN) wounds to magnus is now the definition of 'easily one shot'? With such an inflated view of Guard capabilities no wonder you can't shut up about how op guard are.
3.5 (avg shot number on 1D6) * .5 (yay Guard Ballistic skill) *.84 (finally, but no reroll because somehow Magnus isn't titanic despite being almost as large as a Knight) *.21 (3++ rerollings 1's is so much fun to shoot at) = .3 so I can expect to do 2d6 damage once every 3 rounds. SO GOOD. Oh and since Chaos almost certainly got the first turn, those numbers probably are even worse because they very likely knocked it down a wound profile.
magnus has a 4++ save not 3++. This changes the math a great deal.
1124
Post by: Captain Brown
Back to the original question. I have won several games without either and lost two games while fielding Conscripts and a small Scion unit in the first one of those loses. The only really poor performer has been the Leman Russ. :(
Lots of regular infantry squads with Heavy Weapons included seem to cause problems for most opponents. The Heavy Weapons target vehicles and monstrous creatures while the PBIs fire on their opposite number. Even without Conscripts most opponents are over saturated with targets unless they are flamer heavy.
My two cents,
CB
11860
Post by: Martel732
Leman russ is tough, but not super killy. It's very cheap t8.
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
Xenomancers wrote:RogueApiary wrote: Xenomancers wrote:RogueApiary wrote: Xenomancers wrote:Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.
Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.
You realize cost is partly determined within the context of other options within the army and not just a direct comparison of units between armies right? Guard infantry are cheap because we don't have Magnus, or Guilliman, or crazy Eldar fliers. You make troops in the guard on par with Eldar troops pointswise, then you need to massively buff our characters and vehicles.
Edit: Wow, you're seriously proposing making basic guardsmen 6 points? You just want guard to be garbage tier again and aren't even trying at this point.
I'm making direct comparisons to existing rules. How can you say I'm not trying? Gaurd are clearly over performing and it's easy to realize why - they are too cheap. Gaurd have access to buttloads of lords of war too. A Baneblade weilding a volcano cannon could easily 1 shot magnus. They can take an Imperial knight. They can take Celestine in their army - or guiliman. You can't honestly be saying guard infantry are so cheap because they don't have access to good stuff?
You're joking, right? You mean a 36% chance of doing a whopping average of 7 (of his EIGHTEEN) wounds to magnus is now the definition of 'easily one shot'? With such an inflated view of Guard capabilities no wonder you can't shut up about how op guard are.
3.5 (avg shot number on 1D6) * .5 (yay Guard Ballistic skill) *.84 (finally, but no reroll because somehow Magnus isn't titanic despite being almost as large as a Knight) *.21 (3++ rerollings 1's is so much fun to shoot at) = .3 so I can expect to do 2d6 damage once every 3 rounds. SO GOOD. Oh and since Chaos almost certainly got the first turn, those numbers probably are even worse because they very likely knocked it down a wound profile.
magnus has a 4++ save not 3++. This changes the math a great deal.
Weaver of Fates gives +1 to invuln saves. Also, even with no invuln save, a volcano cannon will average 1.47 wounds before damage. It would still take two turns of unmolested shooting to kill Magnus on average without any save at all. Which is still a far cry from your original claim of 'easily one shot'. But please, do keep making stuff up.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Firefox1 wrote:
You are joking? Or not?
In case of not, there is no way that a guardsman is as much worth as an ork. Not even in shooting they can compete against orks with shootas. Veterans loose also in shooting without adding special and heavy weapons. And with increasing numbers it gets even worse, mob rule and green tide.
Ork boyz are way closer to 8 points than the humble guardsman to 5.
They have 6+ saves dude...your dudes have 5+ saves - they are also in cover because there is 0 reason for them not to be - so they are rolling 4+ saves. The vets win. Oh yeah - they do have 3 plasma guns and an auto-cannon too...because thats what you give them. Ork boys are fish-food running across the field getting blasted.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
So now we're just in the subject of melee focused armies vs shooty ones?
And it's very difficult to get entire units in cover this edition. Especially since most LoS blocking terrain doesn't usually provide actual cover for models. Mostly hills and such these days. So my units are rarely in cover.
And Martel, now I don't even have to read your posts because every one is just going to say how awesome X imperial guard unit is haha. The Russ is a waste of points, it's not very cheap. I don't take units because they are tough. I tried to like a combined arms force at the beginning of 8th. Truly. I took Chimeras, Valkyries, LRs. I found it best to just not take any vehicles at all given the amount of AT which abounds in my local meta. Now they have no targets for their AT and I find it very amusing.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Colonel Cross wrote:So now we're just in the subject of melee focused armies vs shooty ones?
And it's very difficult to get entire units in cover this edition. Especially since most LoS blocking terrain doesn't usually provide actual cover for models. Mostly hills and such these days. So my units are rarely in cover.
And Martel, now I don't even have to read your posts because every one is just going to say how awesome X imperial guard unit is haha. The Russ is a waste of points. I don't take units because they are tough. I tried to like a combined arms force at the beginning of 8th. Truly. I took Chimeras, Valkyries, LRs. I found it best to just not take any vehicles at all given the amount of AT which abounds in my local meta. Now they have no targets for their AT and I find it very amusing.
I didn't say it was awesome. I said it was cheap T8. That's not good enough by itself. Quit reading in and finding things I'm not saying. Just like you jumped my math without even taking time to understand what I was saying. I'm sure there are many crappy IG units. People just don't use them. Surprise, surprise. Those units should be better, I assume.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Conscript 2*0.33333333*0.3333333*0.333333333=0.074 dead tacs or 0.062 dead iron hands so ignoring buffs 100 conscripts kill 7.4 tacs at 300 pts
Tacs 2*0.666666*0.666666666*0.666666666=0.593 dead conscripts better maths
11860
Post by: Martel732
I don't care about number of models. I care about points taken off the table. Your math is not better.
29408
Post by: Melissia
CplPunishment wrote:By my math it takes 10 SM bolters to kill 6 conscripts and 50 FRFSRF conscript lasguns to kill 7 marines. All this assuming 12", no cover.
Something like that.
100 shots hitting at 5+: 33.333 hits, wounding on 5+: 11.111 wounds, saving on 3+: 3.704 unsaved wounds. Double this with FRFSRF, and it becomes just over seven marines.
Give the marines a basic cover save:
100 shots hitting at 5+: 33.333 hits, wounding on 5+: 11.111 wounds, saving on 2+: 1.852 unsaved wounds. Double this with FRFSRF, and it becomes just over three marines.
10 SM bolters, unassisted by HQ buffs
20 shots, hitting at 3+: 13.333 hits, wounding on 3+: 8.889 wounds, saving on 5+: 5.929 unsaved wounds.
So yes, your math is definitely better than Martel's, which isn't really a surprise given his history of bad math and flawed assumptions. Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nah, it's just an extension of the generic whines about conscripts and how they wish a single five-man tactical squad could eliminate them in one turn consistently every time.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
It should be noted that to get your 7 marines your investing 300 pts of conscripts and at least a company commander at 30+ depending on armament and I'm assuming a commissar at amother 30+ which is almost triple your SM investment pts wise. (Considering if you count storm bolter they come in 6''s at 67pts.)
11860
Post by: Martel732
I never said anything about 7 marines. In fact, that's why I did the analysis the way I did.
" how they wish a single five-man tactical squad could eliminate them in one turn consistently every time."
I don't think anyone is saying that. Stop misrepresenting people.
" his history of bad math and flawed assumptions."
Another person who didn't bother to read what I wrote.
113722
Post by: sossen
Here are the normalized figures, assuming the 2x50 conscripts + company commander + commissar setup vs regular tac marines:
Tac marine shooting at conscripts within rapid fire range, pts removed per pt used to fire: 0,164
Conscripts shooting at space marines with FRFSRF without rapid fire range, pts removed per pt used to fire: 0,267
This is simply showing the pts damage inflicted by each party upon the other with regular shooting. Not wounds.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
And that doesn't even figure in the morale phase, which will net an average of 3-4 more, which means a total of 9-10 dead conscripts.
To operate more efficiently, a 50 man conscript squad (150pts) needs at minimum a barebones platoon commander (20pts) and a Commissar (31pts) for a total of 201pts. This means the average 6 dead conscripts will require 1 execution per turn to keep them in line.
3 5-man tactical squads, with each Sergeant bearing a stormbolter runs at 201 pts.
So now instead of 20 bolter shots at 12", a more likely and equitable (points-wise) matchup would result in 36 bolter rounds (assuming the SM player goes first!) 36*.66666*.66666*.66666=10.7 dead conscripts (+1 casualty in the morale phase). That's close to 12 dead conscripts, leaving the opponent with 38 to shoot back with.
38 * 4 due to FRFSRF= 152 shots*.3333*.3333*.3333= 5.6 Dead Marines. An entire combat squad. That's painful.
The retaliation will result in 24 shots *.6666*.6666*.6666= 7.1 (8 after an execution) leaving us with 30 conscripts. 120 lasgun shots*.3333*.3333*.3333= 4.4 dead marines. Rounding down, that leaves a Sergeant standing. Marines retaliate with 16 bolter rounds *.6666*.6666*.6666= 4.7 leaving 25 conscripts (and a morale check they statistically will *barely* fail BLAM 24). Good thing for those conscripts that they can handily take out 3.6 marines. Now we are down to the 2 sergeants, and I think I can stop here.
If Conscripts go first, they will easily wipe out an entire combat squad if they focus their fire. We can infer from the result of the SM go first scenario how this one will turn out... conscripts win.
MAJOR CAVEAT: This scenario involves two forces that magically appear within rapid fire range. It is more likely that they will shoot at each other once or twice from over 12" range. This favors the marines, as it is more likely that all of them can get within 24" of one conscript than all conscripts getting within 24" of one marine. Also, it will be easier for MSUs to make use of cover--another advantage to the Marine player. This is another layer of math that I simply don't want to do, but if the Marine player goes first, this matchup *might* be a close fight.
If I am being an honest IG player though, the favor is clearly on the side of the conscripts, and it would take smart use of flanking and cover for the marines to have a chance to win.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Also, marines are likely to have more gear than this. It's actually a super complex problem. I freely admit that if I could tailor for horde lists, it would help a LOT. Alas, I can't really do that.
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
CplPunishment wrote:And that doesn't even figure in the morale phase, which will net an average of 3-4 more, which means a total of 9-10 marines.
To operate more efficiently, a 50 man conscript squad (150pts) needs at minimum a barebones platoon commander (20pts) and a Commissar (31pts) for a total of 201pts. This means the average 6 dead conscripts will require 1 execution per turn to keep them in line.
3 5-man tactical squads, with each Sergeant bearing a stormbolter runs at 201 pts.
So now instead of 20 bolter shots at 12", a more likely and equitable (points-wise) matchup would result in 36 bolter rounds (assuming the SM player goes first!) 36*.66666*.66666*.66666=10.7 dead conscripts (+1 casualty in the morale phase). That's close to 12 dead conscripts, leaving the opponent with 38 to shoot back with.
38 * 4 due to FRFSRF= 152 shots*.3333*.3333*.3333= 5.6 Dead Marines. An entire combat squad. That's painful.
The retaliation will result in 24 shots *.6666*.6666*.6666= 7.1 (8 after an execution) leaving us with 30 conscripts. 120 lasgun shots*.3333*.3333*.3333= 4.4 dead marines. Rounding down, that leaves a Sergeant standing. Marines retaliate with 16 bolter rounds *.6666*.6666*.6666= 4.7 leaving 25 conscripts (and a morale check they statistically will *barely* fail BLAM 24). Good thing for those conscripts that they can handily take out 3.6 marines. Now we are down to the 2 sergeants, and I think I can stop here.
If Conscripts go first, they will easily wipe out an entire combat squad if they focus their fire. We can infer from the result of the SM go first scenario how this one will turn out... conscripts win.
MAJOR CAVEAT: This scenario involves two forces that magically appear within rapid fire range. It is more likely that they will shoot at each other once or twice from over 12" range. This favors the marines, as it is more likely that all of them can get within 24" of one conscript than all conscripts getting within 24" of one marine. Also, it will be easier for MSUs to make use of cover--another advantage to the Marine player. This is another layer of math that I simply don't want to do, but if the Marine player goes first, this matchup *might* be a close fight.
If I am being an honest IG player though, the favor is clearly on the side of the conscripts, and it would take smart use of flanking and cover for the marines to have a chance to win.
I think the real problem here is that EVERYONE is comparing the troops choices in a vacuum and not accounting for all the extras in each codex. Guard troops are their bread and butter and the majority of the army builds off of how their troops perform (lots of them with crummy firepower to be precise), whereas Marines have tons of goodies to compensate and deal with very specific circumstances, (i.e. Vanguard, Sterngaurd, Aggressors, devastators, etc) and a stable of powerful aircraft and support characters to maximize their "middling" troop choices to their fullest potential as well as to deal powerful alpha strikes.
As far as I am concerned guard win and lose on their troop choices, something that few if any codex has had to deal with for a very very long time. Pre-6th troops were considered a "Tax," ....unless you played guard. Firewarriors are not what make Tau what they are, its the suits, Guardians do not define Eldar, its their psykers and Aspects, and CSM do not win games for chaos, its their HQs. Once we wrap our heads around where the center of the army is you can then figure out how it should be balanced.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Most marine goodies actually aren't good. Especially since their stats are based off the terrible tac marine.
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
Martel732 wrote:Also, marines are likely to have more gear than this. It's actually a super complex problem. I freely admit that if I could tailor for horde lists, it would help a LOT. Alas, I can't really do that.
Properly equipped aggressors and reivers can make short work of guardsman, pretty much if you can tie them up they are going to be toast, even assault marines with jump packs will do the job and as a bonus your unit can't be shot at by the guards heavier firepower. If they are falling back the next turn that means that the unit is going to be NOT doing anything that turn or they will have to waste an order to get them shooting again.
11860
Post by: Martel732
I don't know about rievers, but aggressors are thoroughly unimpressive. I guess I like reivers better, because they have better options for getting to the battle. Aggressors seem like points you are just throwing away without a Repulsor.
Typically, the damage from conscripts is just icing on the cake. Most guard players i know will happily just march the survivors out of combat just a bit so the rest of the list can light up your assault elements. 100 bodies plus support is consuming around 400 pts. That's another 1600 pts to wail on your assault elements. Even with no scions, that's a lot of dakka.
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
Martel732 wrote:I don't know about rievers, but aggressors are thoroughly unimpressive.
Typically, the damage from conscripts is just icing on the cake. Most guard players i know will happily just march the survivors out of combat just a bit so the rest of the list can light up your assault elements. 100 bodies plus support is consuming around 400 pts. That's another 1600 pts to wail on your assault elements. Even with no scions, that's a lot of dakka.
Now consider that all that IS NOT shooting at the rest of your army so you can dig in on objectives or find a position to exploit guards' many weakness (assaulting tanks makes them utterly worthless, killing officers/commissars, and outrunning your opponent since his speed is permanently set at molasses)
29660
Post by: argonak
Martel732 wrote:Most marine goodies actually aren't good. Especially since their stats are based off the terrible tac marine.
Why is the tactical marine terrible?
Str 4, tough 4, ws 3+, bs 3+, 3+ save. Reroll LD tests intrinsically. Extreme versatility of special and heavy weapon choices. 24" S4 rapid fire weapon, AND a s4 pistol, AND grenades of both types.
That's your idea of terrible? What is your idea of good? If you don't want an all around unit, then play some other army, don't try and tell me marines suck when they have some of the best troop stats in the game.
And do we have to derail ANOTHER thread into conscript mathhammer arguments that no one uses with any consistency just to try and argue their nonsensical points?
Give it a rest people. Either GW is going to nerf them or they won't. You arguing about it won't do didly. And its pretty clear no one is going to change their minds at this point.
29408
Post by: Melissia
And there's the crux of hte problem. People want to play marines, but they don't want to play like marines need to play to win.
You need to use every advantage your statline gives you. Not just half of it.
94810
Post by: deltaKshatriya
Marines are pretty good imo. It's just most people don't play to their strengths. That's why they lose in my experience. A lot changed in this edition, and Space Marines don't have the play styles of last edition. IMO people just need to adapt a bit to the change.
11860
Post by: Martel732
argonak wrote:Martel732 wrote:Most marine goodies actually aren't good. Especially since their stats are based off the terrible tac marine.
Why is the tactical marine terrible?
Str 4, tough 4, ws 3+, bs 3+, 3+ save. Reroll LD tests intrinsically. Extreme versatility of special and heavy weapon choices. 24" S4 rapid fire weapon, AND a s4 pistol, AND grenades of both types.
That's your idea of terrible? What is your idea of good? If you don't want an all around unit, then play some other army, don't try and tell me marines suck when they have some of the best troop stats in the game.
And do we have to derail ANOTHER thread into conscript mathhammer arguments that no one uses with any consistency just to try and argue their nonsensical points?
Give it a rest people. Either GW is going to nerf them or they won't. You arguing about it won't do didly. And its pretty clear no one is going to change their minds at this point.
I agree the hammer is coming or it isn't. Made a new thread to address this. Bottom line: ig are top tier without scions and still easily defeat marines consistently because of lack of overall efficacy on the part of the marines. Automatically Appended Next Post:  deltaKshatriya wrote:Marines are pretty good imo. It's just most people don't play to their strengths. That's why they lose in my experience. A lot changed in this edition, and Space Marines don't have the play styles of last edition. IMO people just need to adapt a bit to the change.
My counter view is that marines have no strengths which is their big problem. See the new thread for more.
108848
Post by: Blackie
SM (ultramarines at least) are still in the top 5 armies, if not top 3 or better. They win tournaments even without the 5+ stormravens lists.
113722
Post by: sossen
Blackie wrote:SM (ultramarines at least) are still in the top 5 armies, if not top 3 or better. They win tournaments even without the 5+ stormravens lists.
Do you have any links to lists that won after the FAQ? Would like to see what they run.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Martel when you say marines have no strengths it's because you view it all as black and white with everything being broken or useless.
Endurance? Accuracy? Pts per £ invested in your army. A host of relics stratagem and special rules to tailor your army and obsec troops. Yes this may change as more codexs/chapter approved arrives but for now that's a lot.
Marines don't have a lot of in your face awesomeness that super spam unit but they also don't have the vulnerabiliy of other factions and can be built with more diversity and still function
11860
Post by: Martel732
U02dah4 wrote:Martel when you say marines have no strengths it's because you view it all as black and white with everything being broken or useless.
Endurance? Accuracy? Pts per £ invested in your army. A host of relics stratagem and special rules to tailor your army and obsec troops. Yes this may change as more codexs/chapter approved arrives but for now that's a lot.
Marines don't have a lot of in your face awesomeness that super spam unit but they also don't have the vulnerabiliy of other factions and can be built with more diversity and still function
No, I don't view things that way, thank you very much. Marines are actually more vulnerable than guardsmen on a per point basis to most weapons. I'm saying marines have no strengths because of math. Mathematically they just don't. They pay for advantages that are too difficult to leverage too much of the time.
29408
Post by: Melissia
As amusing as it is to watch Martel being driven in to a corner, let's stay on topic.
113722
Post by: sossen
Melissia wrote:As amusing as it is to watch Martel being driven in to a corner, let's stay on topic.
These suppression techniques of yours aren't working. He is making an important point about points efficiency, ignoring the facts won't make them go away.
29408
Post by: Melissia
[delete]
11860
Post by: Martel732
Corner? WTF is she talking about?
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Unit A is, per point, more vulnerable than Unit B? This is an example of how statistics are not trustworthy as they can be shaped to support any argument one wishes.
There are simply too many variables to take that seriously.
113722
Post by: sossen
Colonel Cross wrote:Unit A is, per point, more vulnerable than Unit B? This is an example of how statistics are not trustworthy as they can be shaped to support any argument one wishes.
There are simply too many variables to take that seriously.
There are many variables but definitely a finite number. It's not really statistics either, you could just call it probability calculations assuming that your dice are true d6s. That doesn't mean that it isn't a complex problem but it's not beyond analysis. It's not untrustworthy as long as you understand what is being compared and put it into context on a tabletop. Cover, range, highrolls etc can all be taken into account. It's not for no reason that tactical marines are seen as squishy, they need cover to be competitive and even then they are weak per pt vs weapons with AP.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Colonel Cross wrote:Unit A is, per point, more vulnerable than Unit B? This is an example of how statistics are not trustworthy as they can be shaped to support any argument one wishes.
There are simply too many variables to take that seriously.
No, they just don't support your beliefs, and so that makes them "untrustworthy". Also, since we are buying units with "points", what metric other than durability/pt is more meaningful in a durability discussion? I even showed this explicitly up above with the flamer. A flamer kills 4.67 POINTS of conscripts, and kills 7.58 POINTS of marines. So which list are you getting further ahead against by firing a flamer? The IG loses more models, but the marines lose more points. But we bought our lists with points, not models. Now start adding these special weapons that everyone assumes tac marines have and the marines are losing even more points. That's why I think tacs stink.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
I just take everything with a grain of salt.
And I haven't touched my ultramarines this edition, but yeah, I'm betting they suck. But I knew that months ago when the AP rules came out. I knew armies with good armor saves were going to pay and armies like my guard were going to get a save for the first time since I started playing.
From my point of view, they seem costed appropriately. When looking at the comparison holistically. Looking at Scions, guardsmen, scouts, and tacticals. The main culprit in the lack of balance here, if comparing these troops at all is even wise to do, is the core rules! I get armor saves when I didn't use to and common weapons I have access to such as heavy bolters and autocannons now reduce 3+ saves when they didn't before. However, it's easier to get tacticals in cover and they certainly benefit more from it.
I'm not going into Marine threads and detailing them. I'm kind of over this conversation at this point. Mostly because it's pointless. GW will do what they do and in the meantime I am having fun playing my buddy's space pups (his damn Wulfen are insane by the way) and Tau.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Conscript spam and GEQ hordes in general are powerful for two reasons:
1 AP5 became AP0
2 Template and Large Blast weapons could get you more potential hits than the current randumb mechanic. This renders most anti-horde weapons from 7th useless or sub-par.
This is the simple truth about guard right now. Guardsmen in the open are no longer bolter fodder, but a guardsman is still the bolter's optimal target. SM players need to come to terms with the fact that Flamers and bolters aren't enough. You need to bring dedicated anti-horde for bolters to mop up after. How you do this is a question for another thread. This thread is about how the guard fares without scions and conscripts.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Colonel Cross wrote:I just take everything with a grain of salt.
And I haven't touched my ultramarines this edition, but yeah, I'm betting they suck. But I knew that months ago when the AP rules came out. I knew armies with good armor saves were going to pay and armies like my guard were going to get a save for the first time since I started playing.
From my point of view, they seem costed appropriately. When looking at the comparison holistically. Looking at Scions, guardsmen, scouts, and tacticals. The main culprit in the lack of balance here, if comparing these troops at all is even wise to do, is the core rules! I get armor saves when I didn't use to and common weapons I have access to such as heavy bolters and autocannons now reduce 3+ saves when they didn't before. However, it's easier to get tacticals in cover and they certainly benefit more from it.
I'm not going into Marine threads and detailing them. I'm kind of over this conversation at this point. Mostly because it's pointless. GW will do what they do and in the meantime I am having fun playing my buddy's space pups (his damn Wulfen are insane by the way) and Tau.
Can't disagree with the last line. I also feared the return of AP, but I was wrong in the incarnation of my fear. My marines don't feel super fragile like 2nd, but rather, T3 5+ is so hard to get off the board on a per point basis. I mean yes, even though i can do the math and compute how fragile marines really are, they still don't feel as fragile as hordes are durable. Automatically Appended Next Post: CplPunishment wrote:Conscript spam and GEQ hordes in general are powerful for two reasons:
1 AP5 became AP0
2 Template and Large Blast weapons could get you more potential hits than the current randumb mechanic. This renders most anti-horde weapons from 7th useless or sub-par.
This is the simple truth about guard right now. Guardsmen in the open are no longer bolter fodder, but a guardsman is still the bolter's optimal target. SM players need to come to terms with the fact that Flamers and bolters aren't enough. You need to bring dedicated anti-horde for bolters to mop up after. How you do this is a question for another thread. This thread is about how the guard fares without scions and conscripts.
You forgot hordes having access to psychology ignoring mechanics. But yes, you are basically correct.
OMG. I completely didn't notice the "conscripts" part of the thread. No scions OR conscripts? There's still artillery and the Vulture and a couple other FW doodads and the basic IG squad itself. Can IG leverage IG squads to be surrogate conscripts? I've never seen anyone try, because they are ALL on the conscript train. That's a super legit question. If the IG player allows DS drop gaps, things change a lot, because then marines can access the artillery.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Martel's problem is thinking in black white terms conflating strengths with efficiency and efficiency with being able to leverage that efficiency.
Most units have strengths and weakness's. Marines have high BS high armour and are relatively strong and tough compared to other armies. If you stick tacs in cover they have a 2+ armour save compared to the 5+ guard as it tends to be difficult to get 50 conscripts all in cover, they also get a host of special rules. They are also generally not that bad at anything. Weaknesses you pay a premium for them and they are often not a specialist tool. The key thing is this is about the unit itself.
By comparing those strengths and weaknesses to its pts value we can approximate how efficient that unit is.
Conscripts Many weaknesses no real strengths at all but pts wise very efficent.
Marines typically many strengths few real weaknesses but pts inefficient.
Leverage is complex it is your ability to bring those strengths and efficiency to bare - Leverage is often dependent on several things. Firstly player skill hypothetically Martel may not be able leverage marines as a low skill player by standing them in the open so they have a direct shoot out with conscripts that doesn't mean someone else can't. Leverage them by utilising their objective holding for example. Leverage is also effected by other units commissars enable conscripts to be better leveraged the conscript itself doesn't get a better statline because commissars exist and if taken with out them has the same strength and weaknesses it always had. Skitarii vanguard are strong and relatively efficient but difficult to leverage because they have no transports or scout/deepstrike ability. The game board plays a role if you have more line of sight blocking terrain mobility and indirect fire become more valuable. You can't stick marines in terrain if there is none. Finnally meta is vital if everyone runs tanks AV weapons have beter opportunitys to be leveraged if you only play against guard infantry that Las cannon isn't going to help but it is just as good a tool at doing what it does.
So to break something simple down say the plasma gun in overcharge
Strengths 2 shots, high strength, high AP 2 damage and option to fire in a safer mode weakness chance it kills you and a pts premium.
Efficiency well that depends on the BS of the model firing the gun for guard infantry it is 16% less efficient a choice than for a tac squad. However if is cheaper for the guard so it is overall more efficient in their hands.
Leverage ignoring skill if my opponent takes nothing but infantry squads within a void shield generator it's very difficult to leverage the strengths of the plasma because the AP doesn't matter the damage doesn't matter and even if you kill infantry your not making the points back however if my opponent is taking stormravens and primaris marines happy days. If I've given my plasma to a scion I can position it where I want barring unusual amounts of bubblewrap if I put my plasma on a tac squad I can't.
The strengths and weakness of the plasma gun don't change, it's efficiency varies by army and your ability to levarage it can potentially vary considerably.
Tacs are strong they are inefficient but the can be good if they are leveraged correctly.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Most opponents know how to make that leveraging process impossible. Tac marines are ancient. They are one of the first things that players learn how to deal with. I haven't lost to a non-gladius tac-based list since 4th ed. The math is THAT stacked against them. And I know tacs.
"Marines typically many strengths few real weaknesses but pts inefficient"
This means on a per point basis, they don't have strengths. If you overpay for something, it's not longer a strength. It's a liability.
The rules of the game punish generalists, and always have.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Again your back to the black and whites " makes leverage impossible" and yet others are telling you they can levarage them.
You are saying you've not lost to a tac based list since 4th well very few lists are pure tac based but I've certainly won games using them and you cant judge tacs in 8th by tacs in 7th or older edditions the rules have changed so there performance against you in the past is null and void.
The math is clearly not that stacked against them (not saying it's in their favor however) but you showed us your maths earlier in which the conscript on average killed a marine so I shall take your maths with a pinch of salt. Needless other people are telling you its not so black and white.
Their strengths don't go away because there pts are inefficient. Units are still good at what they do they are still bad at what there bad at. I may feel that decked out IK are inefficient this does effect my decision's on whether I want to run them. I can still acknowledge they have strengths and how to use them to best effect if I ran one.
Your comming to that conclusion because again your back to binary good/bad. Units like tacs are not perfect but there not bad either their is room in the middle
No the rules of the game don't inherently punish generalists you have to factor in efficiency and leverage what is a conscript if not a generalist it's generally bad at all things however few people are going to tell you it's a weak choice.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Martel732 wrote:
OMG. I completely didn't notice the "conscripts" part of the thread. No scions OR conscripts? There's still artillery and the Vulture and a couple other FW doodads and the basic IG squad itself. Can IG leverage IG squads to be surrogate conscripts? I've never seen anyone try, because they are ALL on the conscript train. That's a super legit question. If the IG player allows DS drop gaps, things change a lot, because then marines can access the artillery.
I've played 2 games recently without conscripts. One of which also didn't use Scions.
First game was against Blood Angels. I think they were Sanguinary Guard? Idk the dude didn't seem to know his rules very well and wanted to play PL so also changed his weapons after the first turn, I think?
Regardless, he deep struck right in front of me and got a charge off. From that point on he proceeded to fly over units and charge whatever he wanted. I eventually won but it was a slow grind as 2+ saves with 2 wounds with all his HQs and apothecary and banner dudes were tough to bring down with my neutered list. If those Sanguinary Guard dudes get an invuln then I'll never kill them.
My most recent game was a tank heavy list with only 3 infantry squads against Space Wolves. His list stomped me. A knight, Wulfen, flyer with hell Frost Cannon, too many heavy bolters, and 2 Las Cannon, predator, laserback, venerable deadnought with that 3+ invuln and then Bjorn behind him. He just marched up the field and there was nothing I could do. I think in his charge with Bjorn against a Russ he did 26 damage. Lol. My infantry screens crumbled to morale immediately and so only held him up for 1 turn. I think all I killed was a predator and a Wulfen. Leman Russes are terrible but at least fun.
The hard thing with the guard is that we have so many options to build a list, it's hard to say if Scions or conscripts are required. With conscripts protecting those tanks the game would have been different. Scions wouldn't have really helped there much since most units had an invuln and are super tough.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Martel732 wrote:
OMG. I completely didn't notice the "conscripts" part of the thread. No scions OR conscripts? There's still artillery and the Vulture and a couple other FW doodads and the basic IG squad itself. Can IG leverage IG squads to be surrogate conscripts? I've never seen anyone try, because they are ALL on the conscript train. That's a super legit question. If the IG player allows DS drop gaps, things change a lot, because then marines can access the artillery.
Before I gave up, I spent a few pages of one of the other threads trying to convince people that it was possible. I speculate the tournament list that everyone was talking about weeks ago would have had to give up a single tank for the point difference, and I'm pretty doubtful that it would have made that list any less powerful.
Personally, I've screened against GK with infantry before. It's slightly more expensive, but still pretty functional at the end of the day, though you do have to change up your tactics a bit since Magic Tail theory doesn't really apply anymore.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Colonel Cross wrote:Martel732 wrote:
OMG. I completely didn't notice the "conscripts" part of the thread. No scions OR conscripts? There's still artillery and the Vulture and a couple other FW doodads and the basic IG squad itself. Can IG leverage IG squads to be surrogate conscripts? I've never seen anyone try, because they are ALL on the conscript train. That's a super legit question. If the IG player allows DS drop gaps, things change a lot, because then marines can access the artillery.
I've played 2 games recently without conscripts. One of which also didn't use Scions.
First game was against Blood Angels. I think they were Sanguinary Guard? Idk the dude didn't seem to know his rules very well and wanted to play PL so also changed his weapons after the first turn, I think?
Regardless, he deep struck right in front of me and got a charge off. From that point on he proceeded to fly over units and charge whatever he wanted. I eventually won but it was a slow grind as 2+ saves with 2 wounds with all his HQs and apothecary and banner dudes were tough to bring down with my neutered list. If those Sanguinary Guard dudes get an invuln then I'll never kill them.
My most recent game was a tank heavy list with only 3 infantry squads against Space Wolves. His list stomped me. A knight, Wulfen, flyer with hell Frost Cannon, too many heavy bolters, and 2 Las Cannon, predator, laserback, venerable deadnought with that 3+ invuln and then Bjorn behind him. He just marched up the field and there was nothing I could do. I think in his charge with Bjorn against a Russ he did 26 damage. Lol. My infantry screens crumbled to morale immediately and so only held him up for 1 turn. I think all I killed was a predator and a Wulfen. Leman Russes are terrible but at least fun.
The hard thing with the guard is that we have so many options to build a list, it's hard to say if Scions or conscripts are required. With conscripts protecting those tanks the game would have been different. Scions wouldn't have really helped there much since most units had an invuln and are super tough.
It's sad but Russes don't pull their weight anymore. I love those tanks. The basilisk is cheaper, more reliable and ignores LOS.
I think guard need 6-9 infantry squads minimum to be competitive without conscripts. Buying them barebones helps mitigate their higher cost. They do have their own advantages as well.
As for rolling without scions, our option is either mechanized/airborne infantry (expensive bullet magnets) or area denial aka MORE BIG GUNS! I'm leaning towards the latter.
11860
Post by: Martel732
What about vultures? Anyone using those? I've been told they're busted.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Martel732 wrote:What about vultures? Anyone using those? I've been told they're busted.
Simply put, the average player won't have one. FW is pricey.
11860
Post by: Martel732
I don't know. I face FW on a regular basis. I played against two FW WKs consistently for 20 months in 7th.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
I can only speak for my local meta, of course.
11860
Post by: Martel732
U02dah4 wrote:Again your back to the black and whites " makes leverage impossible" and yet others are telling you they can levarage them.
You are saying you've not lost to a tac based list since 4th well very few lists are pure tac based but I've certainly won games using them and you cant judge tacs in 8th by tacs in 7th or older edditions the rules have changed so there performance against you in the past is null and void.
The math is clearly not that stacked against them (not saying it's in their favor however) but you showed us your maths earlier in which the conscript on average killed a marine so I shall take your maths with a pinch of salt. Needless other people are telling you its not so black and white.
Their strengths don't go away because there pts are inefficient. Units are still good at what they do they are still bad at what there bad at. I may feel that decked out IK are inefficient this does effect my decision's on whether I want to run them. I can still acknowledge they have strengths and how to use them to best effect if I ran one.
Your comming to that conclusion because again your back to binary good/bad. Units like tacs are not perfect but there not bad either their is room in the middle
No the rules of the game don't inherently punish generalists you have to factor in efficiency and leverage what is a conscript if not a generalist it's generally bad at all things however few people are going to tell you it's a weak choice.
It is completely binary in this way: the question I'm asking is whether something is worth putting in a list or not. There are only two outcomes: in the list or not in the list. So it kind of does boil down to a binary decision.
" but you showed us your maths earlier in which the conscript on average killed a marine so I shall take your maths with a pinch of salt"
No, I didn't. Go look again.
"Ah my bad I thought it was wounds caused!"
This guy gets it. Try harder.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tournies were full of the inferno lance WKs, too. I think it's a mistake to leave FW out of the discussion. That's why I asked about Vultures. Automatically Appended Next Post: daedalus wrote:Martel732 wrote:
OMG. I completely didn't notice the "conscripts" part of the thread. No scions OR conscripts? There's still artillery and the Vulture and a couple other FW doodads and the basic IG squad itself. Can IG leverage IG squads to be surrogate conscripts? I've never seen anyone try, because they are ALL on the conscript train. That's a super legit question. If the IG player allows DS drop gaps, things change a lot, because then marines can access the artillery.
Before I gave up, I spent a few pages of one of the other threads trying to convince people that it was possible. I speculate the tournament list that everyone was talking about weeks ago would have had to give up a single tank for the point difference, and I'm pretty doubtful that it would have made that list any less powerful.
Personally, I've screened against GK with infantry before. It's slightly more expensive, but still pretty functional at the end of the day, though you do have to change up your tactics a bit since Magic Tail theory doesn't really apply anymore.
Pro: no need to buy commissars, better firepower/pt
Cons: Vulnerable to psychology, order efficiency is poor, can't cover as much physical space, less durability/pt
19370
Post by: daedalus
Martel732 wrote:What about vultures? Anyone using those? I've been told they're busted.
I haven't played with one, because I don't have one laying around, but looking at the index, it's basically two punisher autocannons mounted on a BS 3+ flyer for (unless I missed adding wargear) <200 points. It seems significantly undercosted, particularly when you compare it to the Vendetta and to a lesser extent the Avenger.
I don't think it's a big deal personally, because a lot of people flip out about FW options, which is a shame overall, because a lot of the stuff is terribly ineffective, if still really really cool. But I guess all it takes is a few bad apples to spoil the broth, or something like that.
Hell, I think I've seen maybe two vultures in person in my life, but I suspect maybe that's going to change nowadays. Or at least until FW puts out a new imperial book kneejerking it back into line.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Yeah, given the Vendetta, I'd add at least another 50-100 points to its cost, particularly since it gets BS 3+ against non-flying things.
11860
Post by: Martel732
I'm not flipping out, I'm just offering it as a way to prop up IG in the absence of conscripts/scions. And reporting what other knowledgable players with more spare time have told me.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
No it isn't binary
Yes the unit is awesome you should always take it
You can build a list round it.
The unit is good and fills a niche but it's not a requirement
It's a valid inclusion but not everyone runs it.
It's OK
It works in some lists if built correctly
It's inefficient but its the only option we have
Its inefficient but can work
Its terrible and never worth taking.
11860
Post by: Martel732
That's the list before list building. At some point, you have to make a binary choice. That's my point.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Martel732 wrote:What about vultures? Anyone using those? I've been told they're busted.
I just bought the Gatling cannons and magnetized a Valkyrie to be anything. The Vultures problem is that I don't really need 40 S5 shots. I need AT that can actually hit.
The Vulture and bare bones Valkyrie are both 160. I run my Valks with Lascannon and Heavy Bolters so it's 188. I think
you pay a lot for the ability to transport in this edition.
Vendetta is 230.
Vendetta is pretty awful. I be even tried it in hover mode next to Yarrick but at that point, it's fragile and very expensive for BS4+ it actually ended up winning me the game because my opponent neutered it and then just ignored it but I loaded a troop squad in it and dumping them off on an OBJ.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Dunecrawlers with neutron lazers are always good
the commissar if I run a pure vehicle list should I take it because comissars are good and it's black and white no it does nothing however commisars are great in an infantry list
Sanguinary guard is always bad because death company do the same job better
Tac squads are a valid inclusion that can perform well but I would not expect everyone to run it they also vary in effectiveness by chapter
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
daedalus wrote:Martel732 wrote:What about vultures? Anyone using those? I've been told they're busted.
I haven't played with one, because I don't have one laying around, but looking at the index, it's basically two punisher autocannons mounted on a BS 3+ flyer for (unless I missed adding wargear) <200 points. It seems significantly undercosted, particularly when you compare it to the Vendetta and to a lesser extent the Avenger.
I don't think it's a big deal personally, because a lot of people flip out about FW options, which is a shame overall, because a lot of the stuff is terribly ineffective, if still really really cool. But I guess all it takes is a few bad apples to spoil the broth, or something like that.
Hell, I think I've seen maybe two vultures in person in my life, but I suspect maybe that's going to change nowadays. Or at least until FW puts out a new imperial book kneejerking it back into line.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yeah, given the Vendetta, I'd add at least another 50-100 points to its cost, particularly since it gets BS 3+ against non-flying things.
It's hitting on 4's unless you enter hover mode since the guns are heavy, but you're going to need to move it to get into 24" range so you won't be able to use hover mode until turn 2, at which point you'll be in range of the entire enemy gunline. 20 str 5 shots hit, about 14 wound, roughly 10 guardsmen die or around 4-5 marines.
Fought one the other day and wasn't too impressed. It wiped a 30 man conscript mob after two turns of shooting and then promptly exploded to hydra flak fire and some vet lascannons. Might be hilarious parking it next to Harker in hover mode though. I can see a pair of them putting in some work, but I'd rather have an equivalent number of Tauroxes, especially when you factor in the monetary cost.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
daedalus wrote:Martel732 wrote:What about vultures? Anyone using those? I've been told they're busted.
I haven't played with one, because I don't have one laying around, but looking at the index, it's basically two punisher autocannons mounted on a BS 3+ flyer for (unless I missed adding wargear) <200 points. It seems significantly undercosted, particularly when you compare it to the Vendetta and to a lesser extent the Avenger.
I don't think it's a big deal personally, because a lot of people flip out about FW options, which is a shame overall, because a lot of the stuff is terribly ineffective, if still really really cool. But I guess all it takes is a few bad apples to spoil the broth, or something like that.
Hell, I think I've seen maybe two vultures in person in my life, but I suspect maybe that's going to change nowadays. Or at least until FW puts out a new imperial book kneejerking it back into line.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yeah, given the Vendetta, I'd add at least another 50-100 points to its cost, particularly since it gets BS 3+ against non-flying things.
I think maybe it could be 200pts. Maybe. But not 260! It doesn't have PotMS. If it moves it's still hitting on 4s and has no transport capacity. At 260 I'm just going to ally space Marine Flyers!
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Vultures sound good based on hearsay. I totally depends on how much disposable income you have. Naturally a tournament player will spare no expense to have the best army possible. Which brings up an interesting point about the BAO:
Did anyone else notice the top 2 placers used a lot of FW stuff (couldn't see the 3rd place list). Is this a coincidence, or does FW give us an edge in tournament play?
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
What else were they using besides Earthshaker Platforms?
I think 108 points for the Basilisk vs 80 points for the platform seem pretty similar given the 4 less wounds, 1 less armor save, no heavy bolter, and can't move.
I'm guessing it's just a case of min-maxing and the sheer number of conscripts protecting the big guns.
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
CplPunishment wrote:Vultures sound good based on hearsay. I totally depends on how much disposable income you have. Naturally a tournament player will spare no expense to have the best army possible. Which brings up an interesting point about the BAO:
Did anyone else notice the top 2 placers used a lot of FW stuff (couldn't see the 3rd place list). Is this a coincidence, or does FW give us an edge in tournament play?
FW takes index choices like basilisks and hydras and makes them cheaper in the form of platforms. It's not like you need to move them anyway so why not cut the 28-33 point premium you're paying for the chassis + HB to fit in more stuff? You dont even need to pay fw prices for them either since they dont make the platforms any more and theyre easy enough to make a decent scratch build of as long as you have the plastic kit already.
Edit: didn't realize you lose 4 wounds and a point of armor but gain a point of toughness going from bassie to platform. The platforms also don't degrade, which is a nice feature. At 7 wounds its still going to take two lascannon wounds to reliably kill it as opposed to 3 on a normal basilisk.
110864
Post by: Otto von Bludd
Colonel Cross wrote:Martel732 wrote:What about vultures? Anyone using those? I've been told they're busted.
I just bought the Gatling cannons and magnetized a Valkyrie to be anything. The Vultures problem is that I don't really need 40 S5 shots. I need AT that can actually hit.
The Vulture and bare bones Valkyrie are both 160. I run my Valks with Lascannon and Heavy Bolters so it's 188. I think
you pay a lot for the ability to transport in this edition.
Vendetta is 230.
Vendetta is pretty awful. I be even tried it in hover mode next to Yarrick but at that point, it's fragile and very expensive for BS4+ it actually ended up winning me the game because my opponent neutered it and then just ignored it but I loaded a troop squad in it and dumping them off on an OBJ.
I would agree the Vulture is pretty mediocre, even the punisher cannon variant. Mine sits on the shelf because I can't think of a list where I need 40 STR 5 AP - shots that hit on 4s or 5s for 200+ points and will probably die turn 1. I just don't need that for anything when I have 100s of lasgun shots and tons of Heavy Bolters already. Not to mention it dies absurdly fast because it can never break enemy LoS and it's perceived as a huge threat because it WAS a huge threat in 7th. However it lost its re-rolls, 3+ to hit while moving, its Vector Dancer AND its survive-ability (the old flyer rules) which are the reasons it was so good before. The Vendetta is even worse because it sits there in the open with every possible enemy gun able to see it with 6 las-cannons and a squad of men on board with T7. Do you know where alllll the enemy AT is going on turn 1? To make it worse, even if it survives it hits on 5s at full HP. The Vulture is slightly better because it can at least hit on 4s while moving, and I think it actually has a place with an AT load out because at least it can drop into hover and hit on 3s (BS3+ AT is very rare and coveted for gaurd).
Which brings me to your statement "I need AT that can actually hit. ". This is Guard's biggest weakness in my opinion. Our AT is terribly unreliable and when Knight Crusaders are cutting huge swathes of your list apart every turn, unreliable AT just doesn't cut it! What have you been using for reliable AT?
11860
Post by: Martel732
If you opponents are using flames/stormbolters/hurricane bolters for anti-horde, you can keep HWT out of range the whole game with conscripts. Without conscripts, I'm not too sure.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Haha I have no reliable AT! I just have redundant AT. Lascannon in my troop squads, maybe a heavy weapons squad, and a Basilisk. At least I can keep the Basilisk out of LoS.
Scions aren't really the answer to vehicles either. Sigh although I've had some success with meltas.
It's bad. My main opponent is space wolves and he has so much high T stuff and things with invulns. I just have to lock him in combat and maneuver for time and space. It's fun but kind of lame when your army can't really hurt that type of army. If it weren't for mass bodies I'd never stand a chance.
I think my goal is to build a AM-Ad Mech army. Use the Admech for their dune crawlers and maybe some robots. Then just mass infantry guard.
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
Otto von Bludd wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:Martel732 wrote:What about vultures? Anyone using those? I've been told they're busted.
I just bought the Gatling cannons and magnetized a Valkyrie to be anything. The Vultures problem is that I don't really need 40 S5 shots. I need AT that can actually hit.
The Vulture and bare bones Valkyrie are both 160. I run my Valks with Lascannon and Heavy Bolters so it's 188. I think
you pay a lot for the ability to transport in this edition.
Vendetta is 230.
Vendetta is pretty awful. I be even tried it in hover mode next to Yarrick but at that point, it's fragile and very expensive for BS4+ it actually ended up winning me the game because my opponent neutered it and then just ignored it but I loaded a troop squad in it and dumping them off on an OBJ.
Which brings me to your statement "I need AT that can actually hit. ". This is Guard's biggest weakness in my opinion. Our AT is terribly unreliable and when Knight Crusaders are cutting huge swathes of your list apart every turn, unreliable AT just doesn't cut it! What have you been using for reliable AT?
Still on a roll with these 4 man company command squad lascannon teams. A lot of opponents seem really reluctant to shoot them because it's 'just four guys'. Especially when I'm running 100 other infantry models towards objectives and have tanks/arty for them to deal with. I'm finally going to see how they do in a tournament environment tomorrow.
Edit: Also, hitting fliers on 4's with lascannons feels so good.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Yeah that might be our best option. And we need to use our plethora of units to confuse our opponents and hopefully they make the wrong Target priority list.
In a tournament it's too late once they learn what they should have targeted because you only play them once. Like that Russ that looked scary but didn't do anything all game.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Colonel Cross wrote:What else were they using besides Earthshaker Platforms?
I think 108 points for the Basilisk vs 80 points for the platform seem pretty similar given the 4 less wounds, 1 less armor save, no heavy bolter, and can't move.
I'm guessing it's just a case of min-maxing and the sheer number of conscripts protecting the big guns.
I couldn't see the 3rd list, but one was using artillery platforms, the other used elysians.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
I could see Elysians being very tough to beat.
I've tried the quad mortars and heavy mortars. They sucked for their points but were fun and looked cool. The quad launcher is MORE than an Earthshaker and the heavy mortar is almost the same cost. They are nowhere near as viable! It's disappointing.
108848
Post by: Blackie
sossen wrote: Blackie wrote:SM (ultramarines at least) are still in the top 5 armies, if not top 3 or better. They win tournaments even without the 5+ stormravens lists.
Do you have any links to lists that won after the FAQ? Would like to see what they run.
http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2017/08/10/top-itc-tournament-lists-july-2017/
The following 3 lists were SM without stormravens:
http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Thomas-Hegstrom-Oakey-3rd-Overall-Boise-Cup-GT-2017.pdf
http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Colin-McDade-2nd-Overall-Warzone-Houston-2017.pdf
http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Cyle-Thompson-2nd-Overall-Slaughterhouse-2017.pdf
All based around guilliman re-rolls. 2nd and 3rd places, which are huge results in this kind of tournaments, with lots of power players, and ending 1st, 2nd or 3rd is just a matter of luck or player's skills, because lists in top positions have basically the same efficiency. I bet in other non official tournaments SM are still winning a lot.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
So out of all the ITC results compiled on that site, 6 are ultramarines, 1 are blood angels, and 1 are regular space Marines. To 4 Astra Militarum. Although that may decrease in the future as the flyer spam is not as viable anymore.
Those lists make me sick to look at. So gross. If someone asked me to play a game with them and I saw 6 twin assault Cannon razorbacks, 6 Taurox Primes, or nothing but artillery and conscripts I'd be like, "nah, you win."
91290
Post by: Kap'n Krump
You know, come to think of it, it is more than a little odd that scions just get to deep strike for free, whereas space marines have to pay ~100 for a drop pod.
11860
Post by: Martel732
That's every ig player i play lol.
19370
Post by: daedalus
 Kap'n Krump wrote:You know, come to think of it, it is more than a little odd that scions just get to deep strike for free, whereas space marines have to pay ~100 for a drop pod.
You're confusing a single, specific unit in an army that has deep strike built in with a transport that gives 10 infantry of your choosing the ability to deep strike. Also, they've had it in some form or another at least 3 editions now, so it should quickly be leaving "odd" I'd think.
A better comparison would be Assault Marines, which get it with jump packs (at 16 ppm) unless you take the jump packs off of them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or any of the, what, 3 types of terminators, who also have it built in?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or Scouts. Really, not technically the same thing, but it's sort of the poor man's infiltration, which doesn't really exist much anymore either.
Edited for accuracy.
11860
Post by: Martel732
All marine units are super inefficient compared to scions as an additonal slap in the face.
19370
Post by: daedalus
And, I mean, Inceptors and Vanguard too, but they're basically just different types of assault marines.
29408
Post by: Melissia
Actually, Reivers pay 2ppm for deep strike.
Assault marines pay 3ppm for deep strike + fly.
19370
Post by: daedalus
You're right. Reivers do pay for it. I wish they'd stop labeling equipment as special rules.
And I'm going to argue that Assault Marines don't pay for deep strike. I'm going to make the argument that they get a 3 point refund if they don't have it. That's semantics, but it's MY semantics.
29408
Post by: Melissia
I mean I get why you say this, but I'm just wanting to keep from having newer players be confused. In the current setup, assault marines are 13 ppm, and can optionally pay 3ppm for jump packs.
19370
Post by: daedalus
That's legitimate. I have corrected my wrongitudes.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
How does this thread always end up being about marines?
11860
Post by: Martel732
Tac marines get brought up as a counter to conscripts.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
Besides the answer to the original queston is pretty much agreed by everyone that if you nerf conscripts guard players take infantry and don't bat an eyelid and half the players don't run scion and those that do will take them until you make them unplayable
113340
Post by: ChargerIIC
Dakka's Law: All threads will eventually feature a reference to Tactical Marines' Stat Line
29660
Post by: argonak
Kap'n Krump wrote:You know, come to think of it, it is more than a little odd that scions just get to deep strike for free, whereas space marines have to pay ~100 for a drop pod.
Scions are 3 ppm more than veterans. They get +1 to their Save and deep strike for that.
29120
Post by: NH Gunsmith
What I am interested in, is trying out some Gryphonne Patten Chimeras. I used six of them last edition to great effect. Really want to try some Plasma/Melta vets in them and see how they do this edition. Although I will miss doing Plasma drive-bys with them since the FW ones last edition still allowed guys to shoot out of the top.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
I've used them a few times. But my enemy turned out to be Tau and Space Wolves. So didn't even get to use their special ability!
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
I haven't used Chimeras yet. Once you add up the weapons, they get pretty expensive. If GW made our transports more reasonably priced and scion weapons a more fairly priced, you would start seeing more lists with Mechanized and Airborne elements.
Another simple fix is to bring back tactical reserves. I would drop scions from my list in a heartbeat if I could hold a couple Valkyries full of Catachans in reserve!
Right now our choices are:
1. Turtle on our objectives and drop scions on their objectives after softening the enemy up.
2. Turtle HARD on our objectives and OBLITERATE the enemy off of their objectives.
This all boils down to the sheer inefficiency of using mechanized infantry to move up the field compared to scions.
Transports are expensive.
Transports force you to be deployed on the table, therefore making you targetable.
Transports move relatively fast, but their movements are somewhat predictable.
Scions are a steal for their price.
Scions deploy off the table, so can't be targeted before they arrive where they are needed.
Scions are more unpredictable. They can land wherever there is room. They force opponents (most of whom want to get in our face) to re-think advancing everything up the board too quickly.
The only advantage transports currently provide is that they are the most reliable way to deliver flamers within their 8" range.
110864
Post by: Otto von Bludd
 CplPunishment wrote:I haven't used Chimeras yet. Once you add up the weapons, they get pretty expensive. If GW made our transports more reasonably priced and scion weapons a more fairly priced, you would start seeing more lists with Mechanized and Airborne elements.
Another simple fix is to bring back tactical reserves. I would drop scions from my list in a heartbeat if I could hold a couple Valkyries full of Catachans in reserve!
Right now our choices are:
1. Turtle on our objectives and drop scions on their objectives after softening the enemy up.
2. Turtle HARD on our objectives and OBLITERATE the enemy off of their objectives.
This all boils down to the sheer inefficiency of using mechanized infantry to move up the field compared to scions.
Transports are expensive.
Transports force you to be deployed on the table, therefore making you targetable.
Transports move relatively fast, but their movements are somewhat predictable.
Scions are a steal for their price.
Scions deploy off the table, so can't be targeted before they arrive where they are needed.
Scions are more unpredictable. They can land wherever there is room. They force opponents (most of whom want to get in our face) to re-think advancing everything up the board too quickly.
The only advantage transports currently provide is that they are the most reliable way to deliver flamers within their 8" range.
Something does seem wrong when it takes 600 points of transports to move 240 points worth of men. Those kind of costs basically ruin any kind of mechanized infantry list, which leaves us, like you say, turtling in our deployment and dropping scions everywhere.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Otto von Bludd wrote: CplPunishment wrote:I haven't used Chimeras yet. Once you add up the weapons, they get pretty expensive. If GW made our transports more reasonably priced and scion weapons a more fairly priced, you would start seeing more lists with Mechanized and Airborne elements.
Another simple fix is to bring back tactical reserves. I would drop scions from my list in a heartbeat if I could hold a couple Valkyries full of Catachans in reserve!
Right now our choices are:
1. Turtle on our objectives and drop scions on their objectives after softening the enemy up.
2. Turtle HARD on our objectives and OBLITERATE the enemy off of their objectives.
This all boils down to the sheer inefficiency of using mechanized infantry to move up the field compared to scions.
Transports are expensive.
Transports force you to be deployed on the table, therefore making you targetable.
Transports move relatively fast, but their movements are somewhat predictable.
Scions are a steal for their price.
Scions deploy off the table, so can't be targeted before they arrive where they are needed.
Scions are more unpredictable. They can land wherever there is room. They force opponents (most of whom want to get in our face) to re-think advancing everything up the board too quickly.
The only advantage transports currently provide is that they are the most reliable way to deliver flamers within their 8" range.
Something does seem wrong when it takes 600 points of transports to move 240 points worth of men. Those kind of costs basically ruin any kind of mechanized infantry list, which leaves us, like you say, turtling in our deployment and dropping scions everywhere.
Exactly. I don't know what they were thinking when they priced transports. From what I understand, this isn't a problem exclusive to the Guard either. Hopefully codices will lower their cost.
29120
Post by: NH Gunsmith
Well, here to report on how my Guard did without any Scions or Conscripts. Played 1,500 points against Daemons, it was a smashing success for the Tallarn 325th Recon Company.
It didn't help I stole the initiative, killed 4 of his 7 dudes on Juggernauts, crippled his Soul Grinder, and that was it. I deployed pretty far back since I had 21 deployments and wasn't expected to Seize the Initiative. But, I always spend a Command Point to go for it... because why not? Getting in some early shots with an Imperial army is generally a plus.
His Turn 1 he advanced almost everything and killed a single Guardsmen with the Soul Grinder and managed to Smite a dude or two.
Turn 2 deleted the last of the Juggernauts, clearing out the middle of the board and started hitting his other dudes on the left to try and make the charges I receive on his turn just a little less terrible.
By the end of my Turn 4, all he had left was just a crippled Soul Grinder. He called the game since there was no way he would be able to stop my guys advancing to his objective, and the Soul Grinder had 3-4 wounds left.
MVP of the game, Yarrick. Every unit within 6" of him overcharged every Plasma shot. I lost a single dude to my own Plasma all game. It was glorious. It didn't help that I rolled a large amount of 6's on Overwatch, gunning down 3 Fiends with just Guardsmen on his Turn 3. Guard orders are great! This was my first game with them since the last 3 models needed for my 2,000 (and my 1,500) showed up yesterday. I hate to say it, I don't see myself playing my Blood Angels any time soon.
The Leman Russ Executioners didn't do to terribly much, but I deployed them first. My opponent was scared of them for some reason and deployed a lot of his stuff to my left to try and stay out of line of sight. But, Yarrick sitting in between 3 Heavy Weapon Squads with Missile Launchers and 3 Infantry Squads with Plasma and Missile Launcher was so good, and very order efficient, besides "Get back in the fight!" the only order I used on my entire left flank was "Bring it down!".
Yarrick is surprisingly good in combat too, a heroic intervention into a Fiends squad ended up with him cutting down 2 of them and forced him to go after a Company Commander and a Missile Squad to try and reduce incoming fire next turn, leaving Yarrick free from harm and he just walked out of combat my following turn. Without Conscripts, I almost don't see a need for the Commissars though, Yarrick was the Warlord and took the +1 Leadership trait, and Coteaz is Ld10, and allows Imperium units to use his as well.
6
29408
Post by: Melissia
ChargerIIC wrote:Dakka's Law: All threads will eventually feature a reference to Tactical Marines' Stat Line
Yeeeeep. CplPunishment wrote:Exactly. I don't know what they were thinking when they priced transports. From what I understand, this isn't a problem exclusive to the Guard either. Hopefully codices will lower their cost.
I think they priced the Rhino according to its durability to ranged anti-tank--and for how durable it is, it's pretty fairly priced-- then priced every other Imperial transport based on its comparison to the rhino somehow. Which doesn't work very well for Guard...
29661
Post by: stratigo
One of those is pure SM, and that one was before people glommed on to how good conscripts are.
29660
Post by: argonak
Melissia wrote: ChargerIIC wrote:Dakka's Law: All threads will eventually feature a reference to Tactical Marines' Stat Line
Yeeeeep.
CplPunishment wrote:Exactly. I don't know what they were thinking when they priced transports. From what I understand, this isn't a problem exclusive to the Guard either. Hopefully codices will lower their cost.
I think they priced the Rhino according to its durability to ranged anti-tank--and for how durable it is, it's pretty fairly priced-- then priced every other Imperial transport based on its comparison to the rhino somehow.
Which doesn't work very well for Guard...
Yeah, IG has the same problem the Orks do. The utility offered by the mobility of an 100 point vehicle feels lessened when you're transporting a 40 point unit. Its hard to get your bang for that buck.
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
argonak wrote: Kap'n Krump wrote:You know, come to think of it, it is more than a little odd that scions just get to deep strike for free, whereas space marines have to pay ~100 for a drop pod.
Scions are 3 ppm more than veterans. They get +1 to their Save and deep strike for that.
They also will not get access to <Regiment> rules and have more limited access to orders from a source that is lacking a 5++ for more points. That will be part of the balancing factor for Scions if they aren't getting to play with the cool regiment rules, which hopefully will benefit classic play styles i.e. Steel Legion = Transports, Catachan = Cover/Ambush, Cadians = Leadership/Shooting (aka the Ultramarines of Guard), Vostroyans = mastercrafted weapons (ala Salamanders?). We have seen a little bit of this in the FW book with DKoK getting their Cult of Sacrifice rule to ignore Morale from shooting (which is HUGE) and Elysian getting to deep strike.
29660
Post by: argonak
 generalchaos34 wrote: argonak wrote: Kap'n Krump wrote:You know, come to think of it, it is more than a little odd that scions just get to deep strike for free, whereas space marines have to pay ~100 for a drop pod.
Scions are 3 ppm more than veterans. They get +1 to their Save and deep strike for that.
They also will not get access to <Regiment> rules and have more limited access to orders from a source that is lacking a 5++ for more points. That will be part of the balancing factor for Scions if they aren't getting to play with the cool regiment rules, which hopefully will benefit classic play styles i.e. Steel Legion = Transports, Catachan = Cover/Ambush, Cadians = Leadership/Shooting (aka the Ultramarines of Guard), Vostroyans = mastercrafted weapons (ala Salamanders?). We have seen a little bit of this in the FW book with DKoK getting their Cult of Sacrifice rule to ignore Morale from shooting (which is HUGE) and Elysian getting to deep strike.
I will be extremely annoyed if they implement regiment tactics in that fashion. It will also cripple:
Ogryns.
Ratlings.
Valkyries.
Priests.
Engineerseers.
Commissars.
Pyskers.
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
argonak wrote: generalchaos34 wrote: argonak wrote: Kap'n Krump wrote:You know, come to think of it, it is more than a little odd that scions just get to deep strike for free, whereas space marines have to pay ~100 for a drop pod.
Scions are 3 ppm more than veterans. They get +1 to their Save and deep strike for that.
They also will not get access to <Regiment> rules and have more limited access to orders from a source that is lacking a 5++ for more points. That will be part of the balancing factor for Scions if they aren't getting to play with the cool regiment rules, which hopefully will benefit classic play styles i.e. Steel Legion = Transports, Catachan = Cover/Ambush, Cadians = Leadership/Shooting (aka the Ultramarines of Guard), Vostroyans = mastercrafted weapons (ala Salamanders?). We have seen a little bit of this in the FW book with DKoK getting their Cult of Sacrifice rule to ignore Morale from shooting (which is HUGE) and Elysian getting to deep strike.
I will be extremely annoyed if they implement regiment tactics in that fashion. It will also cripple:
Ogryns.
Ratlings.
Valkyries.
Priests.
Engineerseers.
Commissars.
Pyskers.
I kinda see this as how it will go, all those units are auxiliary of some kind and aren't permanently attached to a particular regiment, esp enginseers, priests and psykers. It may be an interesting balancing factor, esp if they give those options some sort of points reduction if taking them makes you lose Regiment. Also I hope like Black Templar the Catachans aren't allowed to get Commissars =P
110187
Post by: U02dah4
But catach an do get assigned them in the fluff. They occasionally end up dead but they get assigned them
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
U02dah4 wrote:But catach an do get assigned them in the fluff. They occasionally end up dead but they get assigned them
Oh they do get assigned, I have a feeling that outside of a storied few like Colonel Greiss most Commissars will make it out of their first deployment, its hard to intimidate a guy whose whole family was eaten by carniverous plants. That must be how the Commissariat gets rid of their screw ups =P
I would love GW forever if they had a rule just disallowing them altogether or if on deployment on a 6+ your commissar has a chance to get fragged (of course this would mean that the catachan regiment rule would be morale based to compensate, or just really really good) actually, a rule that makes Catachan incapable of taking conscripts would make more sense since a catachan soldier has seen more horrors than the most grizzeled vet see their entire career by their 10th birthday.
79269
Post by: Cptskillet
Sorry if this was talked about here in the thread, did a general skimming and didn't see it, but what are people's opinions on the catachan characters? I converted up Straken and Harker for my catachan guard and Straken seems to be a great support and good support should the squad's hes by get charged, he hits really hard! and Harker I'm contemplating to have him just sit by heavy weapon teams and just pewpewpew.
29660
Post by: argonak
 Cptskillet wrote:Sorry if this was talked about here in the thread, did a general skimming and didn't see it, but what are people's opinions on the catachan characters? I converted up Straken and Harker for my catachan guard and Straken seems to be a great support and good support should the squad's hes by get charged, he hits really hard! and Harker I'm contemplating to have him just sit by heavy weapon teams and just pewpewpew.
Harker is awesome. Strakken is good but you should focus on CC if you're going to bring him, which frankly isn't a guardsman's strength. Straken should always bring a priest or two to keep himself company and give another attack to those around him.
Unfortunately even if you're giving guardsmen 3 attacks, they're still guardsmen and they hit at 4+ with s3 and no ap. Which isn't going to frighten anyone.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Exactly. At that point, with orders, their lasguns are superior. Only reason to take a priest is to keep him close to Bullgryn. And Straken doesn't even help them with extra attacks. He's a pretty solid character on his own though.
29660
Post by: argonak
Colonel Cross wrote:Exactly. At that point, with orders, their lasguns are superior. Only reason to take a priest is to keep him close to Bullgryn. And Straken doesn't even help them with extra attacks. He's a pretty solid character on his own though.
I wonder if we'll see anything extra combat oriented for catachans? Maybe their big knives will count as chainswords or something. The problem I have with Fix Bayonets, is that it requires you to have already been charged, and still be alive. Most of the time when my guard get charged, they get dead. And if anything is alive, its falling back so everyone else can shoot at the combat unit.
Fix Bayonets should give a bonus in the combat phase, not the shooting phase. Maybe let any unit who gets that order fight twice in the fight phase. Right now its just always inferior to shooting. And the only unit who might want it, Ogryns, can't get it.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Yeah and that is why I've not used that order even once yet.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
Cptskillet wrote:Sorry if this was talked about here in the thread, did a general skimming and didn't see it, but what are people's opinions on the catachan characters? I converted up Straken and Harker for my catachan guard and Straken seems to be a great support and good support should the squad's hes by get charged, he hits really hard! and Harker I'm contemplating to have him just sit by heavy weapon teams and just pewpewpew.
Harker is great. Keep in mind that he buffs ANY unit that you give the CATACHAN regimental keyword, This includes infantry, vehicles and HIMSELF. Also, Baneblades. Another pro-tip: re-roll 1s and plasma were made for each other. Long story short, he will do wonderful things for anything nearby with big guns,
Straken is nice too. Keep in mind that his +1 attack in the fight phase buff applies to him as well. A nearby priest is a solid investment ( OT, priests get free bolt pistols currently) because it will give him yet another attack. That's 6 S6 melee attacks at 2D each, hitting on 2+. Don't forget that he rerolls failed wounds when fighting MONSTERS. In my opinion he is great to have hanging behind the frontlines for heroic interventions.
His ONLY downside is that his melee attacks are only AP -1, which means even successful wounds can be easily ignored. This is mitigated by the fact that he can potentially dish out 17 attacks in a single game turn. He does 6 in each player's fight phase (assuming he is in combat near a priest) and can order himself to "fix bayonets" at the start of the shooting phase for 5 more attacks (assuming a priest, and keeping in mind that his own +1 attack buff is only applicable in the fight phase). He can then shoot his plasma pistol in close quarters during the shooting phase. Overcharge at your own risk (In other words, is losing Straken worth it???).
Keep in mind that some people debate whether or not officers can issue orders to themselves. RAW clearly says they can do this, but there are still quite a few out there who insist you can't.
111961
Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine
Good enough.
Infantry squads can hold the line adequately enough. Conscripts are just better.
56367
Post by: Inquisitor Jex
With the firepower we can muster, not a real problem.
I mean hey, we can have a 3d6 4/0/0 27 pts mortar squad that shoots at 48 and doesn't need to see the target to do so. Dump an officer near-by for re-rolls and it'll work well, still hitting on 4+, but wounding most infantry on 3/4s rather than the usual Guard's 4/5. Basiliks' are the same but bigger and better, but no orders. Heavy bolters are Highway robbery as well for what they are, and add an officer and it's crazy good, stll can hurt most vehicules on 5s.
Sentinels are something that I use as well, light vehicules sure, but it doesn't go lamer he it goes weaker. Scouts with heavy flamers and chainsaws did served me well and seems to draw attention as well, keeping fire away from my infantry squads. Worse case they are mobile, tougher heavy weapons platform.
I used Ratling a few times, but the FAQ sorta removed the scawny nature of them, so they lost some colour a bit. Still forces my opponenet to watch his characters. SWS with snipers are cheap and effective at that too.
At any rate, The Guard's strength and survival lies in what it was before; it's leaders and support units (commissars and the like), adding a Command Squad with a Flag and having a Vox-network just make it just tougher.
110512
Post by: Firefox1
argonak wrote: generalchaos34 wrote: argonak wrote: Kap'n Krump wrote:You know, come to think of it, it is more than a little odd that scions just get to deep strike for free, whereas space marines have to pay ~100 for a drop pod.
Scions are 3 ppm more than veterans. They get +1 to their Save and deep strike for that.
They also will not get access to <Regiment> rules and have more limited access to orders from a source that is lacking a 5++ for more points. That will be part of the balancing factor for Scions if they aren't getting to play with the cool regiment rules, which hopefully will benefit classic play styles i.e. Steel Legion = Transports, Catachan = Cover/Ambush, Cadians = Leadership/Shooting (aka the Ultramarines of Guard), Vostroyans = mastercrafted weapons (ala Salamanders?). We have seen a little bit of this in the FW book with DKoK getting their Cult of Sacrifice rule to ignore Morale from shooting (which is HUGE) and Elysian getting to deep strike.
I will be extremely annoyed if they implement regiment tactics in that fashion. It will also cripple:
Ogryns.
Ratlings.
Valkyries.
Priests.
Engineerseers.
Commissars.
Psykers.
Regardless of any buffs or nerfs.
Do we really need that much differentiation as the index 2 shows? I mean except for the enginseers and the priests what else army would use those units other than Astra Militarum?
And if some units should be excluded of orders then a 1 sentence rule on their sheet would be an easy solution. "The unit cannot receive any orders."
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
Previous page had a bunch of vulture/vendetta/Valkyrie talk.
boyz.. BOYZ... Friggin' THUNDERBOLT.
8 shots of S7 AP-1 2D
2 shots of S9 AP-3 D6
4 shots of S8 AP-2 D6
All on a BS 3+ , 15W 3+ hard to hit platform.
Just ordered one from forgeworld.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Yeah but it's always hitting on 4s since it has to move every turn.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
So the probability is that 4 autocannons, 1 lascannon and 2 krak missiles hit each turn. That will put a respectable amount of wounds on most targets. I would get one if I had the cash!
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
CplPunishment wrote:
So the probability is that 4 autocannons, 1 lascannon and 2 krak missiles hit each turn. That will put a respectable amount of wounds on most targets. I would get one if I had the cash!
As a long time Vendetta owner I am 100% getting one of these models! you can load it up with tons of missiles and really bring on the pain. Stock its around 200 points and with all the hellstrike missiles you're looking at a near 300 price tag but its a helluva lot of shots (8 autcannon shots, 2 lascannon, and 4 better than Krak missiles) on a tough platform that can self repair each turn. Unfortunately it can't hover to take advantage of the BS 3 but I think that was a way to ensure its hitting on regular guard stats, much like the Vulture has a bonus against ground targets.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
I totally would love one of it wasn't outrageously expensive, don't get me wrong. We need all the AT help we can get and this is an excellent platform.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
generalchaos34 wrote: CplPunishment wrote:
So the probability is that 4 autocannons, 1 lascannon and 2 krak missiles hit each turn. That will put a respectable amount of wounds on most targets. I would get one if I had the cash!
As a long time Vendetta owner I am 100% getting one of these models! you can load it up with tons of missiles and really bring on the pain. Stock its around 200 points and with all the hellstrike missiles you're looking at a near 300 price tag but its a helluva lot of shots (8 autcannon shots, 2 lascannon, and 4 better than Krak missiles) on a tough platform that can self repair each turn. Unfortunately it can't hover to take advantage of the BS 3 but I think that was a way to ensure its hitting on regular guard stats, much like the Vulture has a bonus against ground targets.
I just thought of a nasty no-conscript, no-scion list:
Battalion: +3 CP
x3 Company Commanders, Bolter, Chainsword 93
x5 Infantry Squads 200
Battallion: +3CP
x2 Company Commanders, Bolter, Chainsword 62
x5 Infantry squads 200
Flyer Wing: +1CP
1445 points worth of Thunderbolts! Should come out to about 5 assuming they are between 200-300 pts as you said. I don't have the FW book for exact pricing.
Battleforged: +3CP
Total CP: 10
Total points: Approx 2000
Think this could take on Storm Raven spam?
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
A loaded thunderbolt is 270 points. A loaded vendetta is 230 points.
Always hitting on 4s? So it's as accurate as a hovering vendetta, but isn't a sitting duck.
So firepower-wise the question is would you rather hit with 3 lascannon shots or 1 lascannon, 4 autocannons, and 2 hellstrike missiles. I'd love to see the wound math on both the vendetta and the thunderbolt.
113355
Post by: Zuri Prime
I'd take the Vendetta any day all day, and only the Thunderbolt for if I expect to shoot anything other than vehicles and elites seriously. I've seen good things from this little bird, from torching half a Helldrake to blapping a Magnus twice in overwatch with LCs. Good stuff.
There is an argument to be made with a twin LC and two Hellstrike missile Vulture as well. It's even cheaper than a Vendetta although you do lose out on some dice rolls.
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
So I just did some math.
Average thunderbolt damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 4.66
Vs Russ = 6.26
Vs predator/rhino = 7.9
Also average 3.14 unsaved wounds vs marines
Average vendetta (stationary) damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 4.65
Vs Russ = 5.85
Vs predator/rhino = 5.85
Also average 2.07 unsaved wounds vs marines
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
ThePorcupine wrote:So I just did some math.
Average thunderbolt damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 4.66
Vs Russ = 6.26
Vs predator/rhino = 7.9
Also average 3.14 unsaved wounds vs marines
Average vendetta (stationary) damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 4.65
Vs Russ = 5.85
Vs predator/rhino = 5.85
Also average 2.07 unsaved wounds vs marines
That's math for a 270 point thunderbolt, right?
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
Right.
5526
Post by: CplPunishment
ThePorcupine wrote:A loaded thunderbolt is 270 points. A loaded vendetta is 230 points.
Always hitting on 4s? So it's as accurate as a hovering vendetta, but isn't a sitting duck.
So firepower-wise the question is would you rather hit with 3 lascannon shots or 1 lascannon, 4 autocannons, and 2 hellstrike missiles. I'd love to see the wound math on both the vendetta and the thunderbolt.
That means my theoretical list has an extra 95 points to play with... That's more than enough for Special/Heavy weapons, or whatever "seasoning" you can buy for that price. Remove bolters from Commanders and you've got a full 100 points to play with.
That's 100 Guardsmen.
5 Company Commanders (10 orders)
5 "Flying tanks"
and whatever you want to buy for 100pts.
If only I had the cash for forgeworld...
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
Some more fun math.
After figuring out how well vendettas and thunderbolts do against armor on average I wanted to compare them to some other typical anti-armor. First up are the 3 russ loadouts that one could classify as "anti-armor." Multimeltas are the only legitimate anti-armor sponson choice, and even outperform plasma cannons against all 3 vehicle types (assuming within 24 inches of course). Also keep in mind multimeltas and demolishers are very short ranged so it's likely enemy vehicles will simply stay out of range, or the russ will have to move to get all weapons in range, and thus the moving profile is the more likely one.
Average Pask 259pts (everything in range) + battlecannon + lascannon + 2 multimeltas damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 5.17 stationary (4.45 moving)
Vs russ = 6.45 (5.58 moving)
Vs predator/rhino = 8.08 (7.01 moving)
Average Pask 277pts (everything in range) + demolisher + lascannon + 2 multimeltas damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 5.99 stationary (5.59 moving)
Vs russ = 7.76 (6.89 moving)
Vs predator/rhino = 8.74 (7.67 moving)
Average Pask 262pts (everything in range) + vanquisher + lascannon + 2 multimeltas damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 4.94 stationary (4.22 moving)
Vs russ = 6.05 (5.18 moving)
Vs predator/rhino = 7.55 (6.48 moving)
Next manticores; the "anti-armor" artillery. And seeing as how manticores are roughly half the price relative to the other anti-armor choices I'm looking at, I think a more useful comparison would be 2 manticores to get a feeling of a similar points-worth of all options.
Average manticore 133pts damage per turn vs vehicles. Assuming heavy bolter is out of range (hide, dummy). And assuming you're not moving (stay put, dummy).
Vs landraider = 2.33 stationary (2 manticores = 4.66)
Vs russ = 3.11 stationary (2 manticores = 6.22)
Vs predator/rhino = 3.11 stationary (2 manticores = 6.22)
Now for something silly. The dreaded 4-man special weapon scion command squad. Assuming deepstriking next to a vehicle in rapid-fire range. Also assuming no re-rolling orders since I'm not sure how to factor that in. So just picture the damage a smidge more if there's orders.
Average scion rapid plasma gun x4 damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 3.56
Vs russ = 4.44
Vs predator/rhino = 5.92
Average scion melta gun x4 damage per turn vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 3.89 (4.95 within 9 inches)
Vs russ = 4.66 (5.95 within 9 inches)
Vs predator/rhino = 6.21 (7.93 within 9 inches)
Average damage of 10 man scion squad given FRFSRF vs vehicles.
Vs landraider = 1 (about 2 damage within 9 inches)
Vs russ = 1.33 (about 2.66 damage within 9 inches)
Vs predator/rhino = 1.33 (about 2.66 damage within 9 inches)
79269
Post by: Cptskillet
So to keep conversation going what kind of regiment rules do you all think they will give us guardsmen? Maybe some synergy with hqs?
61686
Post by: generalchaos34
Cptskillet wrote:So to keep conversation going what kind of regiment rules do you all think they will give us guardsmen? Maybe some synergy with hqs?
Id like to see some playstyle/famous regiment specific ones. i.e. Steel Legion = bonus to chimeras/tauroxs or riding in them, Cadia= accurate lasguns or generic bonus for balanced army (ala Ultramarines) Valhallan= Hordes, Mordian Iron Guard = bonus to leadership or morale rerolls Catachan= -1 to hit (its popular these days) Vostroyan= mastercrafted rerolls a single 1 Tallarn= certain unit types gain outflank.
but I would also like RESTRICTIONS. Like the only unimpeded regiments would be Cadians, and others would maybe be Steel legion must have dedicated transports, Catachans cannot have conscripts, valhallans MUST have conscripts, vostroyans have to buy certain upgrades (like if they brough back carapace armor).
79269
Post by: Cptskillet
My brother and I were discussing this earlier and he said the same thing about catachans getting -1 to hit ala raven guard since jungle fighters(also my current army, I am undefeated with my rambos!) Maybe a buff to flamers and melee since in fluff they tend to love it.
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
I think that's actually a really bad idea for guard.
I mean, it's flavorful and I WISH it was doable like marine chapters, but there's a big difference between guard and marines. A marine player can buy a crapload of generic marines, paint them green, and say "I have a salamanders army and get to use salamanders rules" and everyone will look at his army and agree.
Every guard army has its own individual models (which are 90% of the time really expensive and hard to find, mind you). You can't simply paint your cadians a particular color and claim to be valhallans or krieg. Nobody's gonna let you get away with that gak. 99% of what you can find in stores are cadians. 99% of guard players have just cadians. Cadians is all they'll be able to play. Even if new models come out for other regiments, you'll need to buy 100+ infantry of that regiment. You cannot realistically say "sorry, guard players. spend $300 before you can play with these rules lol."
112663
Post by: RogueApiary
ThePorcupine wrote:I think that's actually a really bad idea for guard.
I mean, it's flavorful and I WISH it was doable like marine chapters, but there's a big difference between guard and marines. A marine player can buy a crapload of generic marines, paint them green, and say "I have a salamanders army and get to use salamanders rules" and everyone will look at his army and agree.
Every guard army has its own individual models (which are 90% of the time really expensive and hard to find, mind you). You can't simply paint your cadians a particular color and claim to be valhallans or krieg. Nobody's gonna let you get away with that gak. 99% of what you can find in stores are cadians. 99% of guard players have just cadians. Cadians is all they'll be able to play. Even if new models come out for other regiments, you'll need to buy 100+ infantry of that regiment. You cannot realistically say "sorry, guard players. spend $300 before you can play with these rules lol."
I don't see why you couldn't give Cadian models the Catachan or other regiment keywords. It's a big galaxy. Cadian pattern armor is pretty widespread in fluff anyway. Unless there's a Valhallan rule for cold weather fighting, what's to say you don't have a regiment that uses Valhallan tactics (waves of conscripts and some dude who is close to but not quite unlike chenkov) but is issued the very common Cadian pattern armor?
I mean right now I run my Cadian models under the Catachan keyword with Sergeant "Barker". Tossed on a Cadian helmet and shoulder pad on Harker and now he's good to go.
66502
Post by: Ir0njack
ThePorcupine wrote:I think that's actually a really bad idea for guard.
I mean, it's flavorful and I WISH it was doable like marine chapters, but there's a big difference between guard and marines. A marine player can buy a crapload of generic marines, paint them green, and say "I have a salamanders army and get to use salamanders rules" and everyone will look at his army and agree.
Every guard army has its own individual models (which are 90% of the time really expensive and hard to find, mind you). You can't simply paint your cadians a particular color and claim to be valhallans or krieg. Nobody's gonna let you get away with that gak. 99% of what you can find in stores are cadians. 99% of guard players have just cadians. Cadians is all they'll be able to play. Even if new models come out for other regiments, you'll need to buy 100+ infantry of that regiment. You cannot realistically say "sorry, guard players. spend $300 before you can play with these rules lol."
I gotta disagree, alot of guard players get really creative and just make up their own regiments. If you paint your guys in a winter scheme who's to say they arn't iceworlders like valhallans, or in tans from a desert world like tallarn. The question you should be asking yourself is if someone's gonna be a jackbooted gatekeeper and say you don't have the right models for the regimental rule you want to use, are they really someone you want to play with? Me, I have a fully converted knightworld regiment, men at arm guardsmen, shielded heavy weapon teams, giant bulky medieval looking power armored guys for Ogryn, Heraldry flying "demi knights" instead of sentinels, courts seers instead of primaris psykers, etc, etc. I'm pretty sure there arn't going to be any rules for knightworlders and I can promise you that if I want to use a regimental rule and someone says "sorry, guard players. spend $300 before you can play with these rules lol." I'll tell them to goosestep somewhere else. Not having regimental doctrines while every other faction get a their own version just because guard don't have a standardized uniform is ridiculous.
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
RogueApiary wrote:I don't see why you couldn't give Cadian models the Catachan or other regiment keywords.
Because there are existing models for those things. It's like, who's to say I can't use wolf guard terminators as some chaos terminators instead. Maybe they got corrupted. Yeah maybe you'll meet people nice enough to let you do that, but I'd feel like a dick. Which is also why I don't run Harker. I know damn well those aren't catachans. I've seen catachans.
<edit> I'd feel I'm trying to game the system.
29660
Post by: argonak
ThePorcupine wrote:RogueApiary wrote:I don't see why you couldn't give Cadian models the Catachan or other regiment keywords.
Because there are existing models for those things. It's like, who's to say I can't use wolf guard terminators as some chaos terminators instead. Maybe they got corrupted. Yeah maybe you'll meet people nice enough to let you do that, but I'd feel like a dick. Which is also why I don't run Harker. I know damn well those aren't catachans. I've seen catachans.
<edit> I'd feel I'm trying to game the system.
You are welcome to be as uptight as you want to be with your toys, but don't expect the rest of us to care. Some guys in flames Of War are the same, and get all stressed about whether their infantry are wearing the right uniform for the right year they're representing...
If that's your thing, go ahead! You be you. But most people don't care.
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
To clarify, I would of course play vs someone using non -standard miniatures/etc. What I meant was I would feel like a dick constantly asking everyone I play with if it's ok that I'm using x models to count as y. I don't want to burden people, I don't want some to think I'm power gaming, and I want my regiment to feel legitimate for my own good.
All I'm saying is I can buy a "start collecting space marines", paint them green, call them salamanders, and they would look 100% authentic and nobody would bat an eye because that's exactly what salamanders look like. Guard players are under a LOT more scrutiny, and that makes me sad.
79269
Post by: Cptskillet
True enough, I got a literal army of barechested muscle men for my army, I'd be hard pressed to say "ya their mordians" lol but this also makes me wonder if regiments like the tanith might get rules? Or even maybe tank regiments from the fluff, now that'd be cool
111162
Post by: Suzuteo
Cptskillet wrote:True enough, I got a literal army of barechested muscle men for my army, I'd be hard pressed to say "ya their mordians" lol but this also makes me wonder if regiments like the tanith might get rules? Or even maybe tank regiments from the fluff, now that'd be cool
Why would they? There's only one regiment...
61532
Post by: ThePorcupine
One of anything never stopped GW before. All named characters as examples.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
The distinction should be is it clear
my army i's catachan is clear.
My cadian models are conscripts everything else is catachan it's clear
This melta is a plasma but this one isn't. this vendettas a storm raven and wolf guard terminators are assault terminators is not clear
Also if you paint you buy your start collecting set paint it green call it salamandrrs and them demy me my regiment I'm going to point out that your shoulder pad iconography is wrong and insist you use the chapter reflecting your shoulder pads. Even if that means your two + different chapters.
29120
Post by: NH Gunsmith
Shoot, if we get any regimental tactics I don't expect more than just Cadian and Catachan.. I have just come to the conclusion that my Tallarn will most likely end up being run as Catachan.
|
|
