So since the new CSM look so tasty and I first cut my teeth in 40k with Black Legion, I am returning to my warmaster! I'd like to start this with saying I have no intention of actually fielding any cultists at all, purely CSM or Daemons for me but my Alpha Legion buddy is very annoyed at the new Codex where Cultists will lose their trait AND still retain their 5ppm price tag. He looks over at Imperial Guard and wonders how on earth Guardsmen could be 4ppm.
What is everyone elses thought on this? Personally I'm cool with it ONLY if Guardsmen get a price hike, hell if cultists are 5ppm no trait I could see IG at 6ppm and maybe my beloved gaunts going up to 5 PPM.
Or make CSM useful and give all CSM chainsword for free in addition to bolter and pistol... (or make them chosen, but I like having the options in elites choice that aren't cult troops)
You will see guardsmen remaining at 4ppm because reasons. You can put your cultists where I'm going to put mine, just at that place where the sun don't shine.
- DA gives them a 5++ in a bubble before anyone shoots.
- They can get +1A for outnumbering as Black Legion
- Reroll failed charges when in Cult of the Damned
There are potentially quite a few tools now that can make cultists pretty solid.
- DA gives them a 5++ in a bubble before anyone shoots.
- They can get +1A for outnumbering as Black Legion
- Reroll failed charges when in Cult of the Damned
There are potentially quite a few tools now that can make cultists pretty solid.
So they aren't worth 5 points because you have to pour so many resources into them in the first place. Got it.
Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
Send in the Next Wave? Which is also 2CP and not limited to once a game?
It isn't like Valhalla is a bad army either.
- DA gives them a 5++ in a bubble before anyone shoots.
- They can get +1A for outnumbering as Black Legion
- Reroll failed charges when in Cult of the Damned
There are potentially quite a few tools now that can make cultists pretty solid.
I'm trying to see how are cultists justified at 5 ppm when tzaangors are 7ppm:
- 5++ save without having to bother with a DA - They get +1 attack without having to do anything
- Reroll failed charges with a mutalith around
-have a better WS, Str, toughness and +2 leadership.
-They get to keep VotlW.
-They get a +1 to advance and charge upgrade.
That's all before adding character support whatsoever. 7ppm vs 5ppm.
If the cultist is justified at 5 ppm, then a guardsman should 100% be 6ppm, which would make the tzaangor a 9ppm and keep the astartes marines justified at 13ppm??? I don't really see how would that make sense unless we were making practically everything non troop +25% more points.
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
This along with a few other comments show that due to how GW has designed the game makes balance even harder than before. Between Strats, Auras from characters or other buffs and chapter traits, costing a unit is nightmare even if GW was making a good faith effort to balance every unit. Putting aside comparisons to guardsmen how effective a cultist unit is swings wildly based on the above.
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
The ego behind this statement... I can't even. Tell me how armies with cultists in them fare these days compared to armies with guardsmen in them.
The more significant concern is squad size is now limited to 30. The downsides to this are manifest. Tide of Traitors just became 25% less effective and squads just became significantly easier to wipe out. Drowning your opponent in low-strength attacks just became more of a stretch.
Part of how I justified the cost of Cultists was the chance large squads can be returned to full health. This cap (and the nice models coming out of Shadowspear) makes the case for using Renegades and Heretics going forward.
Bach wrote: They want us to play more marines and less cultists. And instead of make marines better, they made cultists worse.
It sucks but I am too busy being distracted by all of the new CSM releases to get upset.
Increasingly i think this is basically it. The army name is Chaos Space Marines, and GW wants Space Marines to be the primary units. Now, why they wont adjust the CSM units themselves is beyond me, but they really seem to want the focus on CSMs and not Cultists.
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
Send in the Next Wave? Which is also 2CP and not limited to once a game?
It isn't like Valhalla is a bad army either.
Was nerfed within days of IG codex release. You have to allocate reinforcement points prior to the game begins. The units are not free. So essentially you pay CP to bring in reserves that would be free otherwise. Might be in the running for the worst stratagem in all of 8th edition.
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
The ego behind this statement... I can't even. Tell me how armies with cultists in them fare these days compared to armies with guardsmen in them.
Yup, that's what I thought.
If you detect bitterness in my post its simply because GW wasted no time in nerfing send in the next wave. It was literally nerfed within days of the codex coming out as it was deemed OP. Meanwhile tide of traitors has been available basically this entire edition & was only recently nerfed in the last 6 months to be limited to once per game. Even in its nerfed state it is an incredible stratagem. Its free units. The only armies that I'm aware of have access to such stratagems are chaos & orks. Orks makes sense but chaos? So the army that is literally known for drowning their foes in bodies (IG) cannot have such a stratagem but chaos can? From a lore perspective it makes no sense. Guard are in a good place competitively. I'm not asking for buffs. I'm simply pointing out the irony of removing an ability that should be present in one army & giving it to another where it shouldn't.
- DA gives them a 5++ in a bubble before anyone shoots.
- They can get +1A for outnumbering as Black Legion
- Reroll failed charges when in Cult of the Damned
There are potentially quite a few tools now that can make cultists pretty solid.
So they aren't worth 5 points because you have to pour so many resources into them in the first place. Got it.
- DA gives them a 5++ in a bubble before anyone shoots.
- They can get +1A for outnumbering as Black Legion
- Reroll failed charges when in Cult of the Damned
There are potentially quite a few tools now that can make cultists pretty solid.
I'm trying to see how are cultists justified at 5 ppm when tzaangors are 7ppm:
- 5++ save without having to bother with a DA - They get +1 attack without having to do anything
- Reroll failed charges with a mutalith around
-have a better WS, Str, toughness and +2 leadership.
-They get to keep VotlW.
-They get a +1 to advance and charge upgrade.
That's all before adding character support whatsoever. 7ppm vs 5ppm.
If the cultist is justified at 5 ppm, then a guardsman should 100% be 6ppm, which would make the tzaangor a 9ppm and keep the astartes marines justified at 13ppm??? I don't really see how would that make sense unless we were making practically everything non troop +25% more points.
As a thousand sons player, I've noticed this. Because I have tzangors, I have absolutely zero interest in cultists apart from maybe a min point squad to squat on objectives. But I think a single chaos spawn would be cheaper, tougher, faster, and easier to hide.
I'm trying to see how are cultists justified at 5 ppm when tzaangors are 7ppm:
- 5++ save without having to bother with a DA - They get +1 attack without having to do anything
- Reroll failed charges with a mutalith around
-have a better WS, Str, toughness and +2 leadership.
-They get to keep VotlW.
-They get a +1 to advance and charge upgrade.
That's all before adding character support whatsoever. 7ppm vs 5ppm.
If the cultist is justified at 5 ppm, then a guardsman should 100% be 6ppm, which would make the tzaangor a 9ppm and keep the astartes marines justified at 13ppm??? I don't really see how would that make sense unless we were making practically everything non troop +25% more points.
That's if you want to spring for a TS detachment, which carries it's own point sinks. If you want to make 5 point cultists worthwhile there appear to be avenues to do so. I can't tell you everything, because I don't have the books yet, but the picture is not as bleak as some are making it out to be.
As a thousand sons player, I've noticed this. Because I have tzangors, I have absolutely zero interest in cultists apart from maybe a min point squad to squat on objectives. But I think a single chaos spawn would be cheaper, tougher, faster, and easier to hide.
I never run cultists as TS these days. That doesn't mean cultists shouldn't necessarily be 5 points.
Bach wrote: They want us to play more marines and less cultists. And instead of make marines better, they made cultists worse.
It sucks but I am too busy being distracted by all of the new CSM releases to get upset.
Increasingly i think this is basically it. The army name is Chaos Space Marines, and GW wants Space Marines to be the primary units. Now, why they wont adjust the CSM units themselves is beyond me, but they really seem to want the focus on CSMs and not Cultists.
87 points for a unit that puts out 8 S5 AP-1 D1 shots and 10 S4 Ap- D1 shots is pretty decent IMO. Even if you didn't get 8CP for a battalion of them, and you do, I'd say those are a fairly worthwhile unit.
Now that Havocs are T5 and can be set up out of LOS thanks to move and shoot heavy, and a combi-plasma terminator costs 38, I think competitive chaos lists will be using a lot more power armor now.
Red Corsair battalion with 2x cheap HQs (maybe the new Robin Hood Men In Tights executioner guy, with advance and charge he might be decent), 3 87-point csm squads, and an alpha legion battalion with 3 more CSM squads, a dark apostle, a lord, some havocs with lascannons and 1 ML, and a squad of deep striking terminators with combiplasma and MoS sounds fairly effective.
If you set up a squad of havocs in cover a catachan basilisk with reroll 1s to hit does less than 1 unsaved wound on average. They're pretty solid little heavy weapons platforms with the T5, since that grants a die shift against most weapons you would use against them at range (basilisks, disintegrators, overcharged plasma, etc)
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
Send in the Next Wave? Which is also 2CP and not limited to once a game?
It isn't like Valhalla is a bad army either.
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
Send in the Next Wave? Which is also 2CP and not limited to once a game?
It isn't like Valhalla is a bad army either.
Tide of traitors is once per game
For all we know that restriction could get removed.
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
Send in the Next Wave? Which is also 2CP and not limited to once a game?
It isn't like Valhalla is a bad army either.
Was nerfed within days of IG codex release. You have to allocate reinforcement points prior to the game begins. The units are not free. So essentially you pay CP to bring in reserves that would be free otherwise. Might be in the running for the worst stratagem in all of 8th edition.
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
The ego behind this statement... I can't even. Tell me how armies with cultists in them fare these days compared to armies with guardsmen in them.
Yup, that's what I thought.
If you detect bitterness in my post its simply because GW wasted no time in nerfing send in the next wave. It was literally nerfed within days of the codex coming out as it was deemed OP. Meanwhile tide of traitors has been available basically this entire edition & was only recently nerfed in the last 6 months to be limited to once per game. Even in its nerfed state it is an incredible stratagem. Its free units. The only armies that I'm aware of have access to such stratagems are chaos & orks. Orks makes sense but chaos? So the army that is literally known for drowning their foes in bodies (IG) cannot have such a stratagem but chaos can? From a lore perspective it makes no sense. Guard are in a good place competitively. I'm not asking for buffs. I'm simply pointing out the irony of removing an ability that should be present in one army & giving it to another where it shouldn't.
Cultists are now capped at 30 models, so that makes tide of traitors even worse than before. More than just 25% worse, since killing 30 cultists outright -cultists that don't have -1 to be hit any more- is many times easier than trying to kill 40 alpha legion ones.
Also, Tyranids can summon free units with sporocysts, harpies and biovores. And the worst stratagem in the game is easily the sporefield of tyranids. Also costs reinforcement points only it doesn't bring back anything useful.
It's hard to feel bad for 5 pt models. 5 pt models shouldnt get special traits or have good buff options to begin with. Being cheap shouldnt be all upside.
Martel732 wrote: It's hard to feel bad for 5 pt models. 5 pt models shouldnt get special traits or have good buff options to begin with. Being cheap shouldnt be all upside.
Martel732 wrote: It's hard to feel bad for 5 pt models. 5 pt models shouldnt get special traits or have good buff options to begin with. Being cheap shouldnt be all upside.
What about 4ppm models that are strictly better?
They should be 6 ppm or lose regiments and orders. Guardsmen should have no traits and no buffs at their price point.
Martel732 wrote: It's hard to feel bad for 5 pt models. 5 pt models shouldnt get special traits or have good buff options to begin with. Being cheap shouldnt be all upside.
What about 4ppm models that are strictly better?
They should be 6 ppm or lose regiments and orders. Guardsmen should have no traits and no buffs at their price point.
So until they do, I'd say we're fine feeling bad for 5ppm cultists.
Martel732 wrote: It's hard to feel bad for 5 pt models. 5 pt models shouldnt get special traits or have good buff options to begin with. Being cheap shouldnt be all upside.
What about 4ppm models that are strictly better?
A bad argument when many people have advocated for Guardsman to be 5 pts for ages now. The problem isn't the people complaining, its GW keeping Guard at 4 points.
Comparing units X, Y and Z from different codexes and different points in an edition shows just how arbitrary GW's pricing of units is.
Commissar Benny wrote: Doesn't Chaos have access to tide of traitors/aka free models still? Its one of the best stratagems in the game. Guard doesn't have access to that. What more do you want?
Send in the Next Wave? Which is also 2CP and not limited to once a game?
It isn't like Valhalla is a bad army either.
Martel732 wrote: It's hard to feel bad for 5 pt models. 5 pt models shouldnt get special traits or have good buff options to begin with. Being cheap shouldnt be all upside.
What about 4ppm models that are strictly better?
A bad argument when many people have advocated for Guardsman to be 5 pts for ages now. The problem isn't the people complaining, its GW keeping Guard at 4 points.
Comparing units X, Y and Z from different codexes and different points in an edition shows just how arbitrary GW's pricing of units is.
BaconCatBug wrote: Infantry Squads need to be bumped up to 6ppm, or 5ppm and commanders up to 40ppm.
Veterans probably need to go back up to 6ppm as well. They're absurd at 5ppm, the only saving grace being their lack of obsec. Commanders should probably be 40ppm, Guardsmen at 5ppm and Veterans at 6ppm.
But, as mentioned, this argument will get no traction with Guard players who would rather reboot the entire edition rather than pay extra for these units.
I don't enjoy using cultists anyway (I have some modeled up). I'm glad they got nerfed, but the reality is they simply should be flip-flopped with Guard as has been mentioned numerous times.
Put them to 4 points, put Guard to 5...and if you want to extra-hammer cultists, remove their ability to take Veterans of the Long War etc. (basically GW "fixed" the wrong issue with Cultists).
Most CSM units are balanced around the maximum *potential* that a unit can have without realizing that in most games only 1 unit in your entire army will ever have a chance of reaching that maximum potential via strats and psychic and 5 different buffing characters.
"Of course cultists should be 5pts, everyone will give them prayer buffs, abaddon babysitting, VOTLW and 3 different psychic powers right?"
"Of course Daemon engines are WS4+, if you daemonforge them, prescience them, warptime them, diabolical strength them they might actually kill 10 guardsmen in one combat"
And apply the above statements to most units in the book
Continuity wrote: Most CSM units are balanced around the maximum *potential* that a unit can have without realizing that in most games only 1 unit in your entire army will ever have a chance of reaching that maximum potential via strats and psychic and 5 different buffing characters.
"Of course cultists should be 5pts, everyone will give them prayer buffs, abaddon babysitting, VOTLW and 3 different psychic powers right?"
"Of course Daemon engines are WS4+, if you daemonforge them, prescience them, warptime them, diabolical strength them they might actually kill 10 guardsmen in one combat"
And apply the above statements to most units in the book
That seems to be how GW balances things. They include the potential stratagems and buffs that you can use as part of the underlying balance.
Continuity wrote: Most CSM units are balanced around the maximum *potential* that a unit can have without realizing that in most games only 1 unit in your entire army will ever have a chance of reaching that maximum potential via strats and psychic and 5 different buffing characters.
"Of course cultists should be 5pts, everyone will give them prayer buffs, abaddon babysitting, VOTLW and 3 different psychic powers right?"
"Of course Daemon engines are WS4+, if you daemonforge them, prescience them, warptime them, diabolical strength them they might actually kill 10 guardsmen in one combat"
And apply the above statements to most units in the book
That seems to be how GW balances things. They include the potential stratagems and buffs that you can use as part of the underlying balance.
Exactly. Units should not be priced about buffers and Strategems. Buffers and Strategems need to be priced around units.
Which is an insane way to balance anything and a reason I'm starting to think that Strats and everyone getting faction traits (something I liked at the start of the edition) are starting to become as big of a cancer as formations were last edition. Combine that with all kinds of auras being handed out like candy and properly costing a unit seems nearly impossible to me.
okay... interesting argument forming and I think the solution is clearer than people think.
with the amount and time of effort GW have put into the miniatures for the blackstone fortress game; continued soon with the release of the commissar and ogryn, I could potentially see a traitor guard mini-dex, or revamped rengades and heretics book on the horizon.
you get a 7 man squad of guardsmen with varied equipment for 35pts.... not saying it good; but its not too shabby either.
If GW changed the keywords on traitor guardsmen but maintained the 2 per army limitation (which I hate with a vengeance) -you'd end up with chaos players running 2x7 guardsmen as troops alongside the new hotness Csm as their 3 minimum troops for a battalion, at least in smaller games that aren't tournaments...
if there is a renegade guard book on the horizon, and a new release for chaos space marines out now... could we be looking at an incentive to strip away cultists into another sub-faction?
BaconCatBug wrote: Infantry Squads need to be bumped up to 6ppm, or 5ppm and commanders up to 40ppm.
Veterans probably need to go back up to 6ppm as well. They're absurd at 5ppm, the only saving grace being their lack of obsec. Commanders should probably be 40ppm, Guardsmen at 5ppm and Veterans at 6ppm.
But, as mentioned, this argument will get no traction with Guard players who would rather reboot the entire edition rather than pay extra for these units.
Yes but if you use Remule logic. The 5 point veterans can't possible be undercosted because guard players don't use them. It can't be because 4 points infantry are just better. LOL.
GamerGuy wrote: okay... interesting argument forming and I think the solution is clearer than people think.
with the amount and time of effort GW have put into the miniatures for the blackstone fortress game; continued soon with the release of the commissar and ogryn, I could potentially see a traitor guard mini-dex, or revamped rengades and heretics book on the horizon.
you get a 7 man squad of guardsmen with varied equipment for 35pts.... not saying it good; but its not too shabby either.
If GW changed the keywords on traitor guardsmen but maintained the 2 per army limitation (which I hate with a vengeance) -you'd end up with chaos players running 2x7 guardsmen as troops alongside the new hotness Csm as their 3 minimum troops for a battalion, at least in smaller games that aren't tournaments...
if there is a renegade guard book on the horizon, and a new release for chaos space marines out now... could we be looking at an incentive to strip away cultists into another sub-faction?
GamerGuy
Vigilus lists "Hereticus Militarum" in the participating forces during the battles. It's all but a given in the near future.
"Of course Daemon engines are WS4+, if you daemonforge them, prescience them, warptime them, diabolical strength them they might actually kill 10 guardsmen in one combat"
"waaah, I shot my lascannon at a guardsman squad and it only killed ONE how ridiculously broken terribad is that???"
My defiler is S16/S12 with D6/3 damage on its weapons.
I HOPE it underperforms against infantry-tier chaff models. Because if it didn't, imagine what that fething thing would do to a tank!
They are still a horde unit that can be buffed and made immune to moral. They can still shoot twice and still can ride of traitors. They now have a formation and new Apostle buffs. I think cultists will be fine and still the go to choice.
If the issue is people using Cultists as a cheap troop choice...
why not fix that by making them no longer a troop choice in CSM, maybe an Elite or Fast Attack choice? something else so they can stay cheap but become "as well as" not "instead of"?
leopard wrote: If the issue is people using Cultists as a cheap troop choice...
why not fix that by making them no longer a troop choice in CSM, maybe an Elite or Fast Attack choice? something else so they can stay cheap but become "as well as" not "instead of"?
Or just a Troop choice that doesn't take up a slot? They retain ObSec (or whatever it is called) but you still have to take other Troop choices to fill out detachments.
Tyranid infantry would really like to talk about being overcosted.
A hormagaunt is 5 points and doesn't even have a gun. 2 str 3 attacking in CC with a 6+ save. They have a special pile in move you never get to use because they are dead. THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE A GUN.
Xenomancers wrote: Tyranid infantry would really like to talk about being overcosted.
A hormagaunt is 5 points and doesn't even have a gun. 2 str 3 attacking in CC with a 6+ save. They have a special pile in move you never get to use because they are dead. THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE A GUN.
On the flip side, they are normally immune to morale, which probably accounts for that cost. (See : poxwalkers)
At the moment I have to agree with the sentiment that Guardsmen are under costed. With <Regiment> and Orders they should be at least 6 points per model.
It's all crap. We can talk about what 'should' be priced at what point level, but the bottom line is that if you change a cost at this low of a level, it makes everything else more expensive in the game, which means smaller armies, which means less sales.
GW is trying to push cultists out of the view of Chaos Marine players so they'll buy the new Chaos Marines. The Red Corsairs tactic is all you need as proof. "Oh, competitive players want a CP battery... so we'll make it so they can do that with Chaos Marines! All set!" Boom, done, cultists now have less of a role to play.
To be honest, I'm fine with that. The only way to buy cultists through GW is in that 5-man box that has 3 ranged weapons and 2 melee, and nobody wants the ranged weapons. It's a crap box. They've needed their own multi-part box since 6th edition, but why am I fine with that? I hate cultists. I hate that they were added to the Chaos Marine army. The more they're nerfed, the better, to me.
I want my Chaos Marine army to have MARINES. The problem I see is less a problem with cultists and more a problem with 1 wound, 1 attack power armor models.
oni wrote: At the moment I have to agree with the sentiment that Guardsmen are under costed. With <Regiment> and Orders they should be at least 6 points per model.
People whined and moaned about Conscripts to the point of getting them bumped up to 4ppm. 5ppm Cultists is on their heads.
oni wrote: At the moment I have to agree with the sentiment that Guardsmen are under costed. With <Regiment> and Orders they should be at least 6 points per model.
The cost of Voice Of Command should be tied up in the officer(s), but I agree that <Regiment> shouldn't be free.
10 guardsmen is unarguably better than 10 cultists; better weapon options, armour, unit traits and leadership for a point less. But then I guess if all you wanted was a 'disloyal 32' you've still got R&H mutants, who can field a battalion (fractionally) cheaper than the astra militarum.
There is a detectable value to bigger squads - which is why conscripts cost the same per man as full guardsmen despite being worse, since you get more bang for your buck throwing stratagems or support characters at a 30-man unit.
I guess the question is, is a 30-man cultist (WS/BS 4+, SV 6+, no traits, flamer/stubber options) unit better enough than a 30-man conscript unit (WS/BS 5+, SV 5+, <Regiment>, grenades) to warrant costing more?
I agree about the traitor guard stuff, by the way. Traitor Guard, Beastmen, Negavoltists and Rogue Psykers are nice units (I love the little touch of the 'one guy with krak grenades' as an elegant 'special weapon') and it's really annoying that they're "you may only take one/two of these units". The chaos ogryn and commissar look really good, and throwing in cultists and making a new lost and the damned codex would be awesome.
inirlan wrote: Cultists without legion traits and 5ppm? I think R&H looks slightly better now. Barely.
did you really play cultists for legion traits (in particular black legion)? you took them cause they are an horde rerolling anything to hit and immune to morale, who care of bl traits? maybe alpha legion but for the rest no one cared of legion traits.
oni wrote: At the moment I have to agree with the sentiment that Guardsmen are under costed. With <Regiment> and Orders they should be at least 6 points per model.
The cost of Voice Of Command should be tied up in the officer(s), but I agree that <Regiment> shouldn't be free.
So how many points per model should Marines be paying for a -1 to be hit?
And "the cost of Voice of Command" IS tied up in the Officers. We're talking about 5W with a 5+/5++ save and a Laspistol for 30ppm on the HQs.
You want higher priced Officers? I want actual wargear that frigging matters. I want to buy Artillery Strikes, I want to buy Sniper Rifles, I want to buy a fricking Baneblade for 'em.
10 guardsmen is unarguably better than 10 cultists; better weapon options, armour, unit traits and leadership for a point less. But then I guess if all you wanted was a 'disloyal 32' you've still got R&H mutants, who can field a battalion (fractionally) cheaper than the astra militarum.
And what unit traits are those again?
Yeah, we get "better weapon options". We also are static for the amount of those weapons--2 models become a HWT, 1 can take a Special. I have to burn Command Points to get squad sizes higher than 10.
There is a detectable value to bigger squads - which is why conscripts cost the same per man as full guardsmen despite being worse, since you get more bang for your buck throwing stratagems or support characters at a 30-man unit.
Not even remotely true. The price bump was because of Conscript blobs that got made "fearless" by Commissars. Both of those are absolutely 100% nerfed now.
I guess the question is, is a 30-man cultist (WS/BS 4+, SV 6+, no traits, flamer/stubber options) unit better enough than a 30-man conscript unit (WS/BS 5+, SV 5+, <Regiment>, grenades) to warrant costing more?
Conscripts never should have been given a 5+ save or the <Regiment> trait. This keeps getting brought up by the whiners but I think you would be hardpressed to find Guard players who will not agree that the Conscript profile as it stands is okay.
And BTW: Conscripts, at 4ppm, are also the only unit that can't receive Orders with no dice roll necessary. "Raw Recruits" means you need to roll a 4+ to have an Order successfully issued--if you fail, it doesn't work.
They literally just made it more complicated to do than removing the <Regiment> tag. They could have fixed one of the big boogeymen issues of early 8th("FRFSRF Conscripts wiped out my army! OMG OP!") with that one simple thing of removing the <Regiment> bit or replacing it with "Auxilia"(no Orders to Auxilia units).
BaconCatBug wrote: Infantry Squads need to be bumped up to 6ppm, or 5ppm and commanders up to 40ppm.
Veterans probably need to go back up to 6ppm as well. They're absurd at 5ppm, the only saving grace being their lack of obsec. Commanders should probably be 40ppm, Guardsmen at 5ppm and Veterans at 6ppm.
But, as mentioned, this argument will get no traction with Guard players who would rather reboot the entire edition rather than pay extra for these units.
Then how do you price Militarum Tempestus? Considering they use all the same mechanics in pure detachments, but no one is whining about them.
inirlan wrote: Cultists without legion traits and 5ppm? I think R&H looks slightly better now. Barely.
did you really play cultists for legion traits (in particular black legion)? you took them cause they are an horde rerolling anything to hit and immune to morale, who care of bl traits? maybe alpha legion but for the rest no one cared of legion traits.
Indeed, if morale immunity would be wanted on blobs, r&h can provide it with 50 strong squads.
The key problem was the aura of abbadon + stratagem + traits.
If it were not then you would see a lot more R&H fielded.
Xenomancers wrote: Tyranid infantry would really like to talk about being overcosted.
A hormagaunt is 5 points and doesn't even have a gun. 2 str 3 attacking in CC with a 6+ save. They have a special pile in move you never get to use because they are dead. THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE A GUN.
On the flip side, they are normally immune to morale, which probably accounts for that cost. (See : poxwalkers)
Poxwalkers have that built into their cost though is the difference.
I think that "most" guard players have little problem with guardsmen going up 1 point to 5 points. But going higher than that is where you will get the big arguments.
Tygre wrote: I think that "most" guard players have little problem with guardsmen going up 1 point to 5 points. But going higher than that is where you will get the big arguments.
No, even going 1 point higher is too much.
Infantry Squads cannot and should not be changed unless it is accompanied by a boost to Carapace Armor instead of Flak.
Tygre wrote: I think that "most" guard players have little problem with guardsmen going up 1 point to 5 points. But going higher than that is where you will get the big arguments.
No, even going 1 point higher is too much.
Infantry Squads cannot and should not be changed unless it is accompanied by a boost to Carapace Armor instead of Flak.
Yet you flew off the handle when I suggested half a point via making the Sergeant an extra 5 points for ease of bookkeeping.
Tygre wrote: I think that "most" guard players have little problem with guardsmen going up 1 point to 5 points. But going higher than that is where you will get the big arguments.
No, even going 1 point higher is too much.
Infantry Squads cannot and should not be changed unless it is accompanied by a boost to Carapace Armor instead of Flak.
techsoldaten wrote:
Part of how I justified the cost of Cultists was the chance large squads can be returned to full health. This cap (and the nice models coming out of Shadowspear) makes the case for using Renegades and Heretics going forward.
If you're upset at Cultist rules, you're going to be appalled when you get hold of Index: Forces of the Astra Militarum.
5 point cultists would be fine if guardsmen were 5 points. And I'm sure anyone factoring in the buffs you can give cultists, I could go back through their post history and find them saying you can't judge the efficacy of guardsmen with the assumption they have orders.
So how many points per model should Marines be paying for a -1 to be hit?
And "the cost of Voice of Command" IS tied up in the Officers. We're talking about 5W with a 5+/5++ save and a Laspistol for 30ppm on the HQs.
You want higher priced Officers? I want actual wargear that frigging matters. I want to buy Artillery Strikes, I want to buy Sniper Rifles, I want to buy a fricking Baneblade for 'em.
And what unit traits are those again?
Yeah, we get "better weapon options". We also are static for the amount of those weapons--2 models become a HWT, 1 can take a Special. I have to burn Command Points to get squad sizes higher than 10.
Not even remotely true. The price bump was because of Conscript blobs that got made "fearless" by Commissars. Both of those are absolutely 100% nerfed now.
.
How much <chapter> or <legion> should cost is fair question, because it shouldn't be free either. However, it's fair to say that up at the astartes/nobz end of the spectrum, 1 point per model up or down is far less of a big deal, as is saying 1 point per model is nominally assigned to a trait.
Nor am I suggesting guard shouldn't get <regiment> (the trait I was talking about) or that they need to go up in cost.
I was agreeing that the value of orders is tied up in the officer, not in the guard infantry's cost - and if support characters are included, more chaos characters have reroll auras than you can shake a pointy stick at (something guard are shy on aside from unit-by-unit orders, catachan-only Harker and Yarrick). But similarly, their value is in the price of those units and, like orders, also not relevant.
Conscripts were increased in price for a swathe of reasons - commissars and orders and for that matter priests. Big units are a far bigger deal with Fix Bayonets, for example.
As noted, with combined squads eating command points, they're the only way to field 20-30 man units by default. Making them the same price means that the percieved value of being able to get a 30 man squad versus a 10 man squad (to GW) is equivalent to dropping from WS/BS4+ to WS/BS5+. Raw Recruits just makes the number of people you issue orders to per order balance out; 10 in an infantry squad, ~15 (on average) with conscripts.
Meanwhile - back at the point....... The point is that Cultists - with a 30 man squad size - need to be compared principally to Conscripts, not Guardsmen. Guard infantry squads aren't really that relevant. Yes, they're more expensive than Conscripts but they're pretty much better at everything else - higher WS, BS, the options of flamers, stubbers, and blades/pistols, and an in-built squad leader with a marginally less awful Ld.
The only thing they really miss out on relative to the conscripts is Sv5+ (which does matter in large numbers against bolters and blades) and <regiment>. So the question is, are they better enough than conscripts to justify an extra point per model?
BrianDavion wrote: 5 point cultists are just proof GW intends to give us a Hereticus Millitarium codex soon
Fingers crossed
ignoring the pricing of cultists there's some good evidance for it, the existance of models in the first place being one of them. GW's also been on a tear ressurecting old concepts etc, and frankly traitor guard are a pretty damn popular one. another big evidance is that the vigilus ablaze book referances "Hereticus millitarium" maybe it's just me but I think GW would just list units as cultists etc and not give them a specific name and examples of unit names if they weren't planning on going somewhere with it
Well, if they do they will hopefully incorporate some of the old R&H models. I'm happy, but at the same time angry if I end up with stuff I spent a lot on that I can't use.
BrianDavion wrote: 5 point cultists are just proof GW intends to give us a Hereticus Millitarium codex soon
Fingers crossed
ignoring the pricing of cultists there's some good evidance for it, the existance of models in the first place being one of them. GW's also been on a tear ressurecting old concepts etc, and frankly traitor guard are a pretty damn popular one. another big evidance is that the vigilus ablaze book referances "Hereticus millitarium" maybe it's just me but I think GW would just list units as cultists etc and not give them a specific name and examples of unit names if they weren't planning on going somewhere with it
One can hope, considering there are 14 regiments in total on Vigilus, depending on regiments size that are between 140000- 1'400'000 traitors.
Tbf it seems like most of the armies with a less than military professional/racial competency in soldiering troops/race in its codex are getting them relegated to the support roles they are. Just means the cultists are like grots now, at least you get strategems other than we die now lol haha. Yeah guardsmen need fixing but at least chaos are getting time in the sun again.
Karfang wrote: Tbf it seems like most of the armies with a less than military professional/racial competency in soldiering troops/race in its codex are getting them relegated to the support roles they are. Just means the cultists are like grots now, at least you get strategems other than we die now lol haha. Yeah guardsmen need fixing but at least chaos are getting time in the sun again.
Guardsmen at 5 points but Conscripts don't get regimental doctrines would be a good way to make arguments for taking either unit...
Sunny Side Up wrote: I don't think there should be a model in the game below 5 pts.
A toughness 1 model with a single wound and no shooting or melee is still worth that for the table space it takes up in screening, etc..
If it's a troop choice and can be used to fill a battalion, it should probably be 6 or 7 points minimum.
So you really tbunk a gretchin with str and t 2, ws5+ bs4+ and a str3 pistol needs to be 6 or 7 points just for battalion tax when even a sneeze kills them? Come on man yeah some stuff needs points tweaking but thats just dumb
Xenomancers wrote: Tyranid infantry would really like to talk about being overcosted.
A hormagaunt is 5 points and doesn't even have a gun. 2 str 3 attacking in CC with a 6+ save. They have a special pile in move you never get to use because they are dead. THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE A GUN.
On the flip side, they are normally immune to morale, which probably accounts for that cost. (See : poxwalkers)
They are only immune to morale while in synapse. And the same thought was probably made when they priced the synapse creatures too "This guy makes everything around him immune to morale! Let's price him a little higher". It should be one of the two, not both.
Tygre wrote: I think that "most" guard players have little problem with guardsmen going up 1 point to 5 points. But going higher than that is where you will get the big arguments.
No, even going 1 point higher is too much.
Infantry Squads cannot and should not be changed unless it is accompanied by a boost to Carapace Armor instead of Flak.
Yet you flew off the handle when I suggested half a point via making the Sergeant an extra 5 points for ease of bookkeeping.
What does a Sergeant bring to a squad to make them worth "an extra 5 points"?
A Laspistol and 1 LD. That's not "an extra 5 points". That's not even an extra point.
When 8th edition started guardsman were really good for the points already. You compared them to cultists, ork boys, conscripts and a few other units they were a no brainer to take and probably undercosted at the time. Now ork boyz went up, conscripts went up and cultists went up.. but the guarsmen are still the same and somehow Veterans went down. should really be conscripts- 4ppm, guardsman- 5ppm, veterans- 6ppm in my opinion. You will still at that point see guardsman around bubble wrapping things but you might also see other things like mechanicum bubblewrap as they would be more comparable in points to performance.
G00fySmiley wrote: When 8th edition started guardsman were really good for the points already. You compared them to cultists, ork boys, conscripts and a few other units they were a no brainer to take and probably undercosted at the time. Now ork boyz went up, conscripts went up and cultists went up.. but the guarsmen are still the same and somehow Veterans went down. should really be conscripts- 4ppm, guardsman- 5ppm, veterans- 6ppm in my opinion. You will still at that point see guardsman around bubble wrapping things but you might also see other things like mechanicum bubblewrap as they would be more comparable in points to performance.
Do you see anyone using veterans? They are way too expensive for what they do and how little survivability they have, especially paying bs 3+ prices for a Meltaguns instead of bs 4+. Especially when the difference between those are equal to a whole nother guardsman
G00fySmiley wrote: When 8th edition started guardsman were really good for the points already. You compared them to cultists, ork boys, conscripts and a few other units they were a no brainer to take and probably undercosted at the time. Now ork boyz went up, conscripts went up and cultists went up.. but the guarsmen are still the same and somehow Veterans went down. should really be conscripts- 4ppm, guardsman- 5ppm, veterans- 6ppm in my opinion. You will still at that point see guardsman around bubble wrapping things but you might also see other things like mechanicum bubblewrap as they would be more comparable in points to performance.
Do you see anyone using veterans? They are way too expensive for what they do and how little survivability they have, especially paying bs 3+ prices for a Meltaguns instead of bs 4+. Especially when the difference between those are equal to a whole nother guardsman
a guardsman is imo worth close to 6 points already so getting +1 BSdef pushes them up to that level yes.
as for people using veterans not often, but I have seen the 2 meltas and a plasma pistol in a chimera rush up and do the emperor's work. I run a squad of this in my own imperial guard lists and they almost always get their points back.
DominayTrix wrote: 5ppm cultists are now officially worse than kroot. Even the tau have better melee chaff now.
This is just exceedingly false, because carnivores have none of the force multipliers that cultists do. But I'm glad you brought them up, because kroot, like cultists, also have no trait.
Tygre wrote: I think that "most" guard players have little problem with guardsmen going up 1 point to 5 points. But going higher than that is where you will get the big arguments.
No, even going 1 point higher is too much.
Infantry Squads cannot and should not be changed unless it is accompanied by a boost to Carapace Armor instead of Flak.
Yet you flew off the handle when I suggested half a point via making the Sergeant an extra 5 points for ease of bookkeeping.
What does a Sergeant bring to a squad to make them worth "an extra 5 points"?
A Laspistol and 1 LD. That's not "an extra 5 points". That's not even an extra point.
Well it's better than making them all 4.5 points.
Also see you flew off the handle again! Amazing how far the Imperial Guard apologists will go!
DominayTrix wrote: 5ppm cultists are now officially worse than kroot. Even the tau have better melee chaff now.
This is just exceedingly false, because carnivores have none of the force multipliers that cultists do. But I'm glad you brought them up, because kroot, like cultists, also have no trait.
a guardsman is imo worth close to 6 points already
I know this isn't your point, but I wanted to use this to play some devil's advocate...
The people who think IS should be 6 points - can you give 3 bullet points as to why that is the case?
So why should a unit be priced on what MIGHT be around? Also Kroot can get access to support via the Dalyth Warlord trait. Should they be priced more because of it?
Xenomancers wrote: Tyranid infantry would really like to talk about being overcosted.
A hormagaunt is 5 points and doesn't even have a gun. 2 str 3 attacking in CC with a 6+ save. They have a special pile in move you never get to use because they are dead. THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE A GUN.
On the flip side, they are normally immune to morale, which probably accounts for that cost. (See : poxwalkers)
I mean....most armies have a completely ignore morale mechanic. Be it squad size or a special character that always gets used. It is not justification for costing a point more than you should.
Sir Heckington wrote: IS are 6 points, is it a 1 point upgrade to fire warriors? Where do Vets fit in there?
Maybe orders need to be nerfed.
I actually tend to fall into the category of make Guardsmen 5ppm, Veterans 6ppm, and tack 10 points onto any unit that can issue orders.
No.
If anything most Officers are already too expensive given the crap options they have access to and the lack of any meaningful role other than "Shout at Things". You want a higher priced Officer? You start them off with some actual wargear to justify it. Carapace Armor, Power Swords, whatever. There's a reason why they are able to be taken so cheap and it's because there is 0 reason for anyone to put anything else on them past what little is mandatory at the moment.
Ditch Conscripts' <Regiment> and Raw Recruits(it no longer becomes needed since they can't receive Orders) or rework Raw Recruits into a Synapse styled thing(if no Officers or Commissars in range--LD penalties abound!), drop their saves to a 6+ and in general make them more in line with what a "Conscript" should be--drop to 3ppm.
Drop Cultists' access to special weapons, drop to 3ppm.
Voila! Fixed. Because Veterans at 6ppm is, quite frankly, going to be even more of a death knell for that unit.
Sir Heckington wrote: IS are 6 points, is it a 1 point upgrade to fire warriors? Where do Vets fit in there?
Maybe orders need to be nerfed.
I actually tend to fall into the category of make Guardsmen 5ppm, Veterans 6ppm, and tack 10 points onto any unit that can issue orders.
No.
If anything most Officers are already too expensive given the crap options they have access to and the lack of any meaningful role other than "Shout at Things". You want a higher priced Officer? You start them off with some actual wargear to justify it. Carapace Armor, Power Swords, whatever. There's a reason why they are able to be taken so cheap and it's because there is 0 reason for anyone to put anything else on them past what little is mandatory at the moment.
I don't get this logic, because nobody was putting any wargear on them anyway.
Also they should be cheaper because they can't buy stuff? So logically stuff should be more expensive if it has more options?
Logic like that is why Devastators used to pay 40 points for a Lascannon. That was stupid.
DominayTrix wrote: 5ppm cultists are now officially worse than kroot. Even the tau have better melee chaff now.
This is just exceedingly false, because carnivores have none of the force multipliers that cultists do. But I'm glad you brought them up, because kroot, like cultists, also have no trait.
a guardsman is imo worth close to 6 points already
I know this isn't your point, but I wanted to use this to play some devil's advocate...
The people who think IS should be 6 points - can you give 3 bullet points as to why that is the case?
Kroot have access to multiple force multipliers. They allow Tau units to FTGG, have 2 different units that can buff leadership, reroll wound rolls of 1, and finally they use the markerlight table. This is before you look at things like better guns, better WS, scout move, higher strength ranged and melee attacks, their ranged weapon IS their melee weapon unlike cultists who have to choose, regular Tau units can FTGG for them, and higher base move speed. With the exception of FTGG, all of these buffs aren't limited to one unit per turn like VOLW, prescience, endless cacophany etc are.
Daedalus81 wrote: The people who think IS should be 6 points - can you give 3 bullet points as to why that is the case?
Orders, armor, weaponry, leadership.
Gave you four.
Orders is a big one. IS are effectively 5.5 points with a commander. That's your 6 point IS right there. The commander does almost nothing otherwise and is going to be very vulnerable if assassins take hold. They could still probably use a 1 point bump, but I'm ok waiting for recent changes to shake out.
Sir Heckington wrote: IS are 6 points, is it a 1 point upgrade to fire warriors? Where do Vets fit in there?
Maybe orders need to be nerfed.
I actually tend to fall into the category of make Guardsmen 5ppm, Veterans 6ppm, and tack 10 points onto any unit that can issue orders.
No.
If anything most Officers are already too expensive given the crap options they have access to and the lack of any meaningful role other than "Shout at Things". You want a higher priced Officer? You start them off with some actual wargear to justify it. Carapace Armor, Power Swords, whatever. There's a reason why they are able to be taken so cheap and it's because there is 0 reason for anyone to put anything else on them past what little is mandatory at the moment.
Ditch Conscripts' <Regiment> and Raw Recruits(it no longer becomes needed since they can't receive Orders) or rework Raw Recruits into a Synapse styled thing(if no Officers or Commissars in range--LD penalties abound!), drop their saves to a 6+ and in general make them more in line with what a "Conscript" should be--drop to 3ppm.
Drop Cultists' access to special weapons, drop to 3ppm.
Voila! Fixed. Because Veterans at 6ppm is, quite frankly, going to be even more of a death knell for that unit.
Reminder that Grots are 3ppm.
Your modified Conscrpits and Cultists are still far better than Grots.
4ppm would be fair.
Storm Guardians are 6ppm. Pistol/Chainsword Guardsmen with +1 Mv/WS/BS.
Guardian Defenders are 8ppm. Boltgun-equivelant weapon, BattleFocus, +1 Mv/WS/BS Guardsmen - paying twice the points for more mobility and basic-Tac-Marine firepower.
Kroot have access to multiple force multipliers. They allow Tau units to FTGG, have 2 different units that can buff leadership, reroll wound rolls of 1, and finally they use the markerlight table. This is before you look at things like better guns, better WS, scout move, higher strength ranged and melee attacks, their ranged weapon IS their melee weapon unlike cultists who have to choose, regular Tau units can FTGG for them, and higher base move speed. With the exception of FTGG, all of these buffs aren't limited to one unit per turn like VOLW, prescience, endless cacophany etc are.
Kroot can go to 20. They have 1 S4 attack in melee.
Cultists go to 30. They can have either 1 or 2 S3 attacks. +1A for outnumbering.
Both are T3. Cultists can have a 5++ in a bubble now with essentially no chance of failure.
Both are LD6. Cultists can be made morale immune in more than one way now.
Cultists can get reroll charges. Multiple methods of +1 to hit. +1 to wound in melee.
Kroot get markerlights. Cultists just get to flat reroll hits.
Sir Heckington wrote: IS are 6 points, is it a 1 point upgrade to fire warriors? Where do Vets fit in there?
Maybe orders need to be nerfed.
I actually tend to fall into the category of make Guardsmen 5ppm, Veterans 6ppm, and tack 10 points onto any unit that can issue orders.
No.
If anything most Officers are already too expensive given the crap options they have access to and the lack of any meaningful role other than "Shout at Things". You want a higher priced Officer? You start them off with some actual wargear to justify it. Carapace Armor, Power Swords, whatever. There's a reason why they are able to be taken so cheap and it's because there is 0 reason for anyone to put anything else on them past what little is mandatory at the moment.
Ditch Conscripts' <Regiment> and Raw Recruits(it no longer becomes needed since they can't receive Orders) or rework Raw Recruits into a Synapse styled thing(if no Officers or Commissars in range--LD penalties abound!), drop their saves to a 6+ and in general make them more in line with what a "Conscript" should be--drop to 3ppm.
Drop Cultists' access to special weapons, drop to 3ppm.
Voila! Fixed. Because Veterans at 6ppm is, quite frankly, going to be even more of a death knell for that unit.
Cultists have no access to special weapons though, they have access to flamers or stubbers, nothing else.
Daedalus81 wrote: Kroot can go to 20. They have 1 S4 attack in melee.
Cultists go to 30. They can have either 1 or 2 S3 attacks. +1A for outnumbering.
I believe that is tied to the specialist detachment, it's certainly not automatic.
Daedalus81 wrote: Both are T3. Cultists can have a 5++ in a bubble now with essentially no chance of failure.
If I devote a Dark Apostle to babysitting them, and I choose that prayer, like say, instead of the +1 to wound prayer, or the -1 to hit prayer. The Dark Apostle has become Schrodinger's buff. Or if I devote a detachment to a Noc Crown and they never move.
Daedalus81 wrote: Both are LD6. Cultists can be made morale immune in more than one way now.
If I devote Abaddon to babysitting or make them Iron Warriors and devote my Iron Warriors Chaos Lord to babysitting them.
Daedalus81 wrote: Cultists can get reroll charges. Multiple methods of +1 to hit. +1 to wound in melee.
They have 1 way to get +1 to wound, in melee, with babysitter, they don't get Veterans.
Daedalus81 wrote: Kroot get markerlights. Cultists just get to flat reroll hits.
Again, if I tie up Abaddon on babysitting duty, otherwise it's re-roll 1s and I'm still tying up a Chaos Lord to babysit Cultists.
I mean pretty much everything listed above is throwing good points at a bad unit to make it...mediocre?
I can't answer all your questions until I see the books, but when you get to multiply everything you do by 30 it makes it more significant.
Removing 60 to 90 models with a 5++ that are morale immune is not terribly easy. Given enough dedication to supporting them they'll swamp your lines before you can kill them all. And when they're there so is Abaddon and he's definitely not worse now given that he'll hit and wound knights on 2s if you want.
If you truly want to run cultists are hard as possible then you'd run them as the fluff sort of envisions. Multiple DAs tossing out buffs. Beat stick characters swirling in the middle ready to thunder hammer the hard stuff.
Daedalus81 wrote: Kroot can go to 20. They have 1 S4 attack in melee. Cultists go to 30. They can have either 1 or 2 S3 attacks. +1A for outnumbering.
I believe that is tied to the specialist detachment, it's certainly not automatic.
Daedalus81 wrote: Both are T3. Cultists can have a 5++ in a bubble now with essentially no chance of failure.
If I devote a Dark Apostle to babysitting them, and I choose that prayer, like say, instead of the +1 to wound prayer, or the -1 to hit prayer. The Dark Apostle has become Schrodinger's buff. Or if I devote a detachment to a Noc Crown and they never move.
Daedalus81 wrote: Both are LD6. Cultists can be made morale immune in more than one way now.
If I devote Abaddon to babysitting or make them Iron Warriors and devote my Iron Warriors Chaos Lord to babysitting them.
Daedalus81 wrote: Cultists can get reroll charges. Multiple methods of +1 to hit. +1 to wound in melee.
They have 1 way to get +1 to wound, in melee, with babysitter, they don't get Veterans.
Daedalus81 wrote: Kroot get markerlights. Cultists just get to flat reroll hits.
Again, if I tie up Abaddon on babysitting duty, otherwise it's re-roll 1s and I'm still tying up a Chaos Lord to babysit Cultists.
I mean pretty much everything listed above is throwing good points at a bad unit to make it...mediocre?
TBH ever since the Index Chaos had the tendency to include the Stratagem cost moreso then other armies, same with synergy. "Oh but Oblierators are so good with Slaanesh their increased cost does nothing against them" meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike.
Rinse and repeat for the rest of the book. CSM units don't stand alone and you feel it. It's kinda like all competitive marines lists requiring Gulliman.
I think a lot of issues come with lack of granularity of particular units when points are this low.
Difference between 20 and 21 are negligible, but between 4 and 5 is potentially colossal.
I do honestly believe guardsmen for 4 ppm ARE much greater than their point costs justifies. Hell they shoot quite well, are tremendously durable for the cost and some of the regiment bonuses are a little crazy in my opinion. I hate charging catachan IS with my hormagaunts, why on earth is a unit cheaper hitting harder with better armour?
I'm fine with either 6 pt guardsmen with captains staying same price, or 5 pt guardsmen with anyone who can order going slightly up in price as well. In an ideal world I would double the points cost of EVERYTHING and allow for true granular scale where you could much more accurately dictate a units point to power much better.
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: I think a lot of issues come with lack of granularity of particular units when points are this low.
Difference between 20 and 21 are negligible, but between 4 and 5 is potentially colossal.
I do honestly believe guardsmen for 4 ppm ARE much greater than their point costs justifies. Hell they shoot quite well, are tremendously durable for the cost and some of the regiment bonuses are a little crazy in my opinion. I hate charging catachan IS with my hormagaunts, why on earth is a unit cheaper hitting harder with better armour?
I'm fine with either 6 pt guardsmen with captains staying same price, or 5 pt guardsmen with anyone who can order going slightly up in price as well. In an ideal world I would double the points cost of EVERYTHING and allow for true granular scale where you could much more accurately dictate a units point to power much better.
Seconded, it is much easier to balance Grots>Conscripts>Cultists>IG>Veterans, etc when they would be more expensive.
Cultists got nerfed. With a 6+ save only but a decent shooting attack they are worth 5 points. They never should have gotten VOtLW and VOtLW needs to get a nerf to only affect your next attack action anyways getting 2-3 rounds of shooting out of it is blatantly broken for 1 CP. That or it can cost 3 CP like the Tau +1 to wound stratagem. With this infantry are probably worth 6 points. Man...how much of the games issues would be fixed if common sense was put into pointing units.
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: I think a lot of issues come with lack of granularity of particular units when points are this low.
Difference between 20 and 21 are negligible, but between 4 and 5 is potentially colossal.
I do honestly believe guardsmen for 4 ppm ARE much greater than their point costs justifies. Hell they shoot quite well, are tremendously durable for the cost and some of the regiment bonuses are a little crazy in my opinion. I hate charging catachan IS with my hormagaunts, why on earth is a unit cheaper hitting harder with better armour?
I'm fine with either 6 pt guardsmen with captains staying same price, or 5 pt guardsmen with anyone who can order going slightly up in price as well. In an ideal world I would double the points cost of EVERYTHING and allow for true granular scale where you could much more accurately dictate a units point to power much better.
TBH ever since the Index Chaos had the tendency to include the Stratagem cost moreso then other armies, same with synergy.
"Oh but Oblierators are so good with Slaanesh their increased cost does nothing against them" meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike.
Rinse and repeat for the rest of the book. CSM units don't stand alone and you feel it. It's kinda like all competitive marines lists requiring Gulliman.
That's everything.
You don't take a Valiant - you take a Castellan with Cawl's Wrath.
You need commanders with your IS.
Doom is required for haywire to really do work.
You're not running grotesques or talos without a haemonculus.
etc
etc
etc
Bharring wrote: Storm Guardians are 6ppm. Pistol/Chainsword Guardsmen with +1 Mv/WS/BS.
Guardian Defenders are 8ppm. Boltgun-equivelant weapon, BattleFocus, +1 Mv/WS/BS Guardsmen - paying twice the points for more mobility and basic-Tac-Marine firepower.
But you CAN use buffs!
That's literally the argument some people would use. Defenders are only worth a damn in ONE particular scenario (bombs basically) and don't even get me started on why Storm Guardians are bad and in fact shouldn't even exist.
Xenomancers wrote: Cultists got nerfed. With a 6+ save only but a decent shooting attack they are worth 5 points. They never should have gotten VOtLW and VOtLW needs to get a nerf to only affect your next attack action anyways getting 2-3 rounds of shooting out of it is blatantly broken for 1 CP. That or it can cost 3 CP like the Tau +1 to wound stratagem. With this infantry are probably worth 6 points. Man...how much of the games issues would be fixed if common sense was put into pointing units.
How about we chop off a leg from each Chaos Marine while we're at it?
TBH ever since the Index Chaos had the tendency to include the Stratagem cost moreso then other armies, same with synergy.
"Oh but Oblierators are so good with Slaanesh their increased cost does nothing against them" meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike.
Rinse and repeat for the rest of the book. CSM units don't stand alone and you feel it. It's kinda like all competitive marines lists requiring Gulliman.
That's everything.
You don't take a Valiant - you take a Castellan with Cawl's Wrath.
You need commanders with your IS.
Doom is required for haywire to really do work.
You're not running grotesques or talos without a haemonculus.
etc
etc
etc
Infantry squads already function without the Commanders though. That's the difference.
Then the key is how cheap Commanders are.
"meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike."
Man don't even talk about a mark like it's something meaningful. It is a arbitrary rule that gives bonuses for no negative. Unlike a chapter trait which can not be mixed within detachments. Solution...take all of your obliterators as Slaanesh....
Xenomancers wrote: Cultists got nerfed. With a 6+ save only but a decent shooting attack they are worth 5 points. They never should have gotten VOtLW and VOtLW needs to get a nerf to only affect your next attack action anyways getting 2-3 rounds of shooting out of it is blatantly broken for 1 CP. That or it can cost 3 CP like the Tau +1 to wound stratagem. With this infantry are probably worth 6 points. Man...how much of the games issues would be fixed if common sense was put into pointing units.
How about we chop off a leg from each Chaos Marine while we're at it?
Do you think it's fair that a stratagem get used 3 times while only paying for it once?
Xenomancers wrote: "meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike."
Man don't even talk about a mark like it's something meaningful. It is a arbitrary rule that gives bonuses for no negative. Unlike a chapter trait which can not be mixed within detachments. Solution...take all of your obliterators as Slaanesh....
Solution to your marine army, TAKE GULLIMAN and never complain about it , Deal?
Xenomancers wrote: "meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike."
Man don't even talk about a mark like it's something meaningful. It is a arbitrary rule that gives bonuses for no negative. Unlike a chapter trait which can not be mixed within detachments. Solution...take all of your obliterators as Slaanesh....
Ask ANY Chaos player. Literally anyone. Ask them if they prefer Marks as they are now, or Marks as they were (Tzeentch:+1 invul, Nurgle: +1 toughness etc). Don't speak about Marks of Chaos as they are "bonuses" when they used to actually provide useful abilities every single edition before GW decided to just make them into a cool tatoo on the models. Especially when the chaos daemons kept their abilities of their marks just fine.
Xenomancers wrote: Cultists got nerfed. With a 6+ save only but a decent shooting attack they are worth 5 points. They never should have gotten VOtLW and VOtLW needs to get a nerf to only affect your next attack action anyways getting 2-3 rounds of shooting out of it is blatantly broken for 1 CP. That or it can cost 3 CP like the Tau +1 to wound stratagem. With this infantry are probably worth 6 points. Man...how much of the games issues would be fixed if common sense was put into pointing units.
How about we chop off a leg from each Chaos Marine while we're at it?
Do you think it's fair that a stratagem get used 3 times while only paying for it once?
Do you think it's fair that guardsmen are 4ppm and cultists are 5ppm?
Xenomancers wrote: "meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike."
Man don't even talk about a mark like it's something meaningful. It is a arbitrary rule that gives bonuses for no negative. Unlike a chapter trait which can not be mixed within detachments. Solution...take all of your obliterators as Slaanesh....
Take all your Marines as Ultramarines and bring Roboute every time!
One would figure you'd be more sympathetic, but I guess I was wrong.
Reminder that Grots are 3ppm.
Your modified Conscrpits and Cultists are still far better than Grots.
4ppm would be fair.
Grots are a weird one in that it's blatantly obvious that the unit has the effectiveness of the Grot Shield stratagem baked into their points.
I've wondered for awhile if it was intended to be an ability rather than a stratagem.
Grots super small stature is part of their point cost -- it is easier to hide them out of sight then any other unit (except maybe brimstone's?) So for backfield objective grabbers they are amazing against anything that isn't a mortar, and at 30pts a squad, are still cheap enough that you can take 3 squads below a 100 pts.
Reminder that Grots are 3ppm.
Your modified Conscrpits and Cultists are still far better than Grots.
4ppm would be fair.
Grots are a weird one in that it's blatantly obvious that the unit has the effectiveness of the Grot Shield stratagem baked into their points.
I've wondered for awhile if it was intended to be an ability rather than a stratagem.
Grots super small stature is part of their point cost -- it is easier to hide them out of sight then any other unit (except maybe brimstone's?) So for backfield objective grabbers they are amazing against anything that isn't a mortar, and at 30pts a squad, are still cheap enough that you can take 3 squads below a 100 pts.
It's a bit sad actually, due to a Combination of grotz beeing small and remaining 3ppm whilest ork boyz went up they are now the core for Ork CP.
Not Online!!! wrote: Cultists have no access to special weapons though, they have access to flamers or stubbers, nothing else.
Erm - flamers are definitely a special weapon, and I'm guessing Kan would be referring to heavy stubbers as well.
Are they also somehow: Grenade launchers, Meltas, PG's, Sniperrifles,?
No?
Then no.
Just because the range isn't as extensive, doesn't mean that there are no special weapons available to Cultists at present, no matter how hard you would like to push that narrative.
Not Online!!! wrote: Cultists have no access to special weapons though, they have access to flamers or stubbers, nothing else.
Erm - flamers are definitely a special weapon, and I'm guessing Kan would be referring to heavy stubbers as well.
Are they also somehow: Grenade launchers, Meltas, PG's, Sniperrifles,?
No?
Then no.
Just because the range isn't as extensive, doesn't mean that there are no special weapons available to Cultists at present, no matter how hard you would like to push that narrative.
To drop access from Special weapons, you first need access to special weapons and not select few.
That is my point.
I am not pushing a narrative, i am stating a fact.
Sir Heckington wrote: IS are 6 points, is it a 1 point upgrade to fire warriors? Where do Vets fit in there?
Maybe orders need to be nerfed.
I actually tend to fall into the category of make Guardsmen 5ppm, Veterans 6ppm, and tack 10 points onto any unit that can issue orders.
So Tempestor Primes are worth 50 points in your head?
I doubt anyone gives any thought for the Scions in such discussions. ALso their whole stick of suicide dropping makes them annoying. So double win?
I don't think so.
It doesn’t really matter whether or not most people think about them or not. They are there and need to be considered when people say things like “nerf orders” or “add 10 points to units that can give orders.”
People don’t consider the consequences of these things. That’s why I’m glad GW didn’t listen to everything any random on the internet says regarding balancing.
Someone says nerf orders. Are orders a problem on Scions or Conscripts?
Do Tempestor Primes need to be 55 points per model to issue two orders, considering they also pay 5 points for a second order while giving up a pistol?
Xenomancers wrote: "meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike."
Man don't even talk about a mark like it's something meaningful. It is a arbitrary rule that gives bonuses for no negative. Unlike a chapter trait which can not be mixed within detachments. Solution...take all of your obliterators as Slaanesh....
Ask ANY Chaos player. Literally anyone. Ask them if they prefer Marks as they are now, or Marks as they were (Tzeentch:+1 invul, Nurgle: +1 toughness etc). Don't speak about Marks of Chaos as they are "bonuses" when they used to actually provide useful abilities every single edition before GW decided to just make them into a cool tatoo on the models. Especially when the chaos daemons kept their abilities of their marks just fine.
Xenomancers wrote: Cultists got nerfed. With a 6+ save only but a decent shooting attack they are worth 5 points. They never should have gotten VOtLW and VOtLW needs to get a nerf to only affect your next attack action anyways getting 2-3 rounds of shooting out of it is blatantly broken for 1 CP. That or it can cost 3 CP like the Tau +1 to wound stratagem. With this infantry are probably worth 6 points. Man...how much of the games issues would be fixed if common sense was put into pointing units.
How about we chop off a leg from each Chaos Marine while we're at it?
Do you think it's fair that a stratagem get used 3 times while only paying for it once?
Do you think it's fair that guardsmen are 4ppm and cultists are 5ppm?
I literally just said infantry should be 6 points if a cultist is 5.
Marks used to cost points too - so you were paying for the stat. It also just made chaos units marines plus one. Which is also unfair. Currently marks are just stratagem permissions - which unfortunately is one of the most powerful things in the game right now. Slaanesh Oblitz literally do 2x the damage as regular oblitz...they pay nothing for that right - there is no cost associated except the command points.
Sir Heckington wrote: IS are 6 points, is it a 1 point upgrade to fire warriors? Where do Vets fit in there?
Maybe orders need to be nerfed.
I actually tend to fall into the category of make Guardsmen 5ppm, Veterans 6ppm, and tack 10 points onto any unit that can issue orders.
So Tempestor Primes are worth 50 points in your head?
I doubt anyone gives any thought for the Scions in such discussions. ALso their whole stick of suicide dropping makes them annoying. So double win?
I don't think so.
It doesn’t really matter whether or not most people think about them or not. They are there and need to be considered when people say things like “nerf orders” or “add 10 points to units that can give orders.”
People don’t consider the consequences of these things. That’s why I’m glad GW didn’t listen to everything any random on the internet says regarding balancing.
Someone says nerf orders. Are orders a problem on Scions or Conscripts?
Do Tempestor Primes need to be 55 points per model to issue two orders, considering they also pay 5 points for a second order while giving up a pistol?
Don't blame me, i know they exist.
Also conscripts only half the time understand what their leader is telling them, like lobotomized little cattle.
Sir Heckington wrote: IS are 6 points, is it a 1 point upgrade to fire warriors? Where do Vets fit in there?
Maybe orders need to be nerfed.
I actually tend to fall into the category of make Guardsmen 5ppm, Veterans 6ppm, and tack 10 points onto any unit that can issue orders.
So Tempestor Primes are worth 50 points in your head?
I doubt anyone gives any thought for the Scions in such discussions. ALso their whole stick of suicide dropping makes them annoying. So double win?
I don't think so.
It doesn’t really matter whether or not most people think about them or not. They are there and need to be considered when people say things like “nerf orders” or “add 10 points to units that can give orders.”
People don’t consider the consequences of these things. That’s why I’m glad GW didn’t listen to everything any random on the internet says regarding balancing.
Someone says nerf orders. Are orders a problem on Scions or Conscripts?
Do Tempestor Primes need to be 55 points per model to issue two orders, considering they also pay 5 points for a second order while giving up a pistol?
It doesn't really matter whether or not most people think about other marks of chaos. Other marks are there and they need to be considered when people say things like "slaanesh oblits can shoot twice" or "slaanesh havoks".
Apple Peel wrote: It doesn’t really matter whether or not most people think about them or not. They are there and need to be considered when people say things like “nerf orders” or “add 10 points to units that can give orders.”
I don't see a problem, they can order Guardsmen around just like any other commander. Just because you'll generally group them up with Scions doesn't change that. You want to make it so they can only issue orders to Scions, sure, keep it at 40 points.
Apple Peel wrote: Do Tempestor Primes need to be 55 points per model to issue two orders, considering they also pay 5 points for a second order while giving up a pistol?
Clearly you have a strong grasp of the math involved. Also, I assume this is not the same pistol that you all seem to describe as 'useless'?
This entitlement that AM players have about Orders being free is absurd.
Actually, they're pretty damn good still, as my company commander got demoted to a platoon commander to make room for command russ. Orders are just icing. So are the lasguns, to be honest. Guardsmen are worth 4 ppm with no guns. I'd take them.
Apple Peel wrote: It doesn’t really matter whether or not most people think about them or not. They are there and need to be considered when people say things like “nerf orders” or “add 10 points to units that can give orders.”
I don't see a problem, they can order Guardsmen around just like any other commander. Just because you'll generally group them up with Scions doesn't change that. You want to make it so they can only issue orders to Scions, sure, keep it at 40 points.
Apple Peel wrote: Do Tempestor Primes need to be 55 points per model to issue two orders, considering they also pay 5 points for a second order while giving up a pistol?
Clearly you have a strong grasp of the math involved. Also, I assume this is not the same pistol that you all seem to describe as 'useless'?
This entitlement that AM players have about Orders being free is absurd.
Tempestor Prime can’t issue orders to guardsmen, only Scions. It’s <Regiment> infantry. Militarum Tempestus replaces <regiment>.
Apple Peel wrote: It doesn’t really matter whether or not most people think about them or not. They are there and need to be considered when people say things like “nerf orders” or “add 10 points to units that can give orders.”
I don't see a problem, they can order Guardsmen around just like any other commander. Just because you'll generally group them up with Scions doesn't change that. You want to make it so they can only issue orders to Scions, sure, keep it at 40 points.
Do you even know how the Orders mechanic works?
Voice of Command, Codex Astra Militarum pg 85 wrote:This unit may issue one order per turn to the soldiers under their command at the start of their Shooting phase. Orders may only be issued to INFANTRY units within 6" of this unit that have the same <Regiment> keyword as this unit.
Tempestor Primes can already only issue Orders to Scions. This was part of the whole nonsense surrounding the GSC and their Brood Brothers rules at the outset, as it meant that the <Regiment> tag(or if you didn't have it, Auxilia/Militarum Tempestus) got replaced with Brood Brothers allowing for Tempestors to do things there that they normally can't. It also meant that Ogryns and Ratlings could receive Orders, which they aren't supposed to.
Apple Peel wrote: Do Tempestor Primes need to be 55 points per model to issue two orders, considering they also pay 5 points for a second order while giving up a pistol?
Clearly you have a strong grasp of the math involved. Also, I assume this is not the same pistol that you all seem to describe as 'useless'?
This entitlement that AM players have about Orders being free is absurd.
Nobody has suggested that Orders are "free". It's widely considered that is mostly why Platoon Commanders to Company Commanders is a 10 pt jump, despite the same equipment and basically the same statline(+1LD, +1W on the Company Commander vs Platoon).
Not Online!!! wrote: Cultists have no access to special weapons though, they have access to flamers or stubbers, nothing else.
Erm - flamers are definitely a special weapon, and I'm guessing Kan would be referring to heavy stubbers as well.
Are they also somehow: Grenade launchers, Meltas, PG's, Sniperrifles,?
No?
Then no.
Just because the range isn't as extensive, doesn't mean that there are no special weapons available to Cultists at present, no matter how hard you would like to push that narrative.
To drop access from Special weapons, you first need access to special weapons and not select few.
That is my point.
I am not pushing a narrative, i am stating a fact.
Access to any special weapons is, shockingly enough, access to special weapons - even if you only have a very, very limited subset of options generally referred to as special weapons.
Alternatively, we could say that Space Marine Tactical Squads have no access to special weapons, as they don't get grenade launchers...
I do always forget that IS could take a Sniper Rifle if they wanted to - not entirely sure when I'd want to consider it, though.
Wow, you guys sure do like to start fights about IG commanders vs. X units.
To the original point, I am completely ok with the change to Cultists. That being said, they should get a completely special Word Bearers buff if your whole army is Word Bearers.
Fanatical Devotion/Chant - All infantry units in this army get +1 to their Leadership, and +1 to their save rolls while receiving overwatch attacks.
Xenomancers wrote: "meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike."
Man don't even talk about a mark like it's something meaningful. It is a arbitrary rule that gives bonuses for no negative. Unlike a chapter trait which can not be mixed within detachments. Solution...take all of your obliterators as Slaanesh....
Take all your Marines as Ultramarines and bring Roboute every time!
One would figure you'd be more sympathetic, but I guess I was wrong.
It's a vanilla marine problem. Can't really mix because reroll auras don't cross over. Chaos gets around it by it's stratagems being linked to marks and not legion traits (some are but most aren't) It's part of the reason CSM isn't as bad as SM.
Xenomancers wrote: "meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike."
Man don't even talk about a mark like it's something meaningful. It is a arbitrary rule that gives bonuses for no negative. Unlike a chapter trait which can not be mixed within detachments. Solution...take all of your obliterators as Slaanesh....
Take all your Marines as Ultramarines and bring Roboute every time!
One would figure you'd be more sympathetic, but I guess I was wrong.
It's a vanilla marine problem. Can't really mix because reroll auras don't cross over. Chaos gets around it by it's stratagems being linked to marks and not legion traits (some are but most aren't) It's part of the reason CSM isn't as bad as SM.
It's a CSM problem. Can't really mix because Thousand Sons psykers can't cast spells on other marines. Weaver of fates, Glamour of tzeentch, boon of mutation and temporal manipulation don't cross over. Marines can get around it by simply buffing other astartes with no problem.
Everyone can play this game y'know.
Any CSM Legion except World Eaters that is in the Chaos Space Marine Codex can take Slaanesh Obliterators without invalidating models or paintjobs. It's essentially just saying "I want this special rule on this unit" without it having a bearing on your Legion Trait (again, sans World Eaters).
Taking Guilliman requires both playing Ultramarines (for it to be any point) and a purchase of a suitable model. It's not even remotely the same.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Any CSM Legion except World Eaters that is in the Chaos Space Marine Codex can take Slaanesh Obliterators without invalidating models or paintjobs. It's essentially just saying "I want this special rule on this unit" without it having a bearing on your Legion Trait (again, sans World Eaters).
Taking Guilliman requires both playing Ultramarines (for it to be any point) and a purchase of a suitable model. It's not even remotely the same.
Sadly I play with a fair number of people that won't say their, say, Iron Warriors Obliterators are Marked by Slaanesh, even if it would give them access to a great stratagem. Marks are annoying for a force that is supposed to only be marked Chaos Undivided or no mark at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: "meanwhile every other non Slaanesh Obliterator has to deal with the pricehike."
Man don't even talk about a mark like it's something meaningful. It is a arbitrary rule that gives bonuses for no negative. Unlike a chapter trait which can not be mixed within detachments. Solution...take all of your obliterators as Slaanesh....
See my above post, that has stopped people I know from using the Marks, to their detriment, because of how anti-fluff it is.
Thousand sons are literally a different codex from CSM. You are talking about something entirely different. Plus that is also not true. That majority of chaos spells specify daemon or heretic astartes keywords. Only a few specify thousand sons. This is also a no issue because tzangors are also a great option and happen to have heretic astartes AND thousand sons keywords.
"Thousand sons are literally a different codex from CSM."
Now. That wasn't true.
"You are talking about something entirely different."
Oh, what an age of the game, where taking one of the four Cult Troops in a CSM book is taking something entirely different - unlike two of the four.
I think you mean that was true. Complaining about TS and CSM not jiving is like complaining that BA and SM don't jive. Totally different codex. TS still jives pretty well though really. Ahriman and DP both have access to CSM powers and they affect most units in both codex.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Any CSM Legion except World Eaters that is in the Chaos Space Marine Codex can take Slaanesh Obliterators without invalidating models or paintjobs. It's essentially just saying "I want this special rule on this unit" without it having a bearing on your Legion Trait (again, sans World Eaters).
Taking Guilliman requires both playing Ultramarines (for it to be any point) and a purchase of a suitable model. It's not even remotely the same.
Sadly I play with a fair number of people that won't say their, say, Iron Warriors Obliterators are Marked by Slaanesh, even if it would give them access to a great stratagem. Marks are annoying for a force that is supposed to only be marked Chaos Undivided or no mark at all.
This is the boat I'm in. I like to make my armies as competitive as possible...within their established fluff.
For me, Iron Warriors are largely an undedicated army, with extremist elements who dedicate themselves to Khorne but are otherwise seen as crazy/lost/expendable by their brethren. That's how they've been presented in detail for most of their history, and that's how I build my Iron Warriors armies.
Hamfisting a Mark of Slaanesh on a unit that ostensibly is already its own unique chaos cult in an army that otherwise doesn't dedicate itself to Slaanesh (and if anything tends towards a rival god) simply for a Stratagem is, to me, a TFG move that undercuts the fluff basis that makes anyone interested in playing the game in the first place.
While the rules allow for that, it feels like cheating in spirit in a manner that other codex books take more steps to actively combat.
Vaktathi wrote: For me, Iron Warriors are largely an undedicated army, with extremist elements who dedicate themselves to Khorne but are otherwise seen as crazy/lost/expendable by their brethren. That's how they've been presented in detail for most of their history, and that's how I build my Iron Warriors armies.
We used to have a Mark for that, it wasn't amazing, but it was solid. But hey, you work with what you got, apparently IW have softened up on the whole casual dedication thing, because frankly, the other option is pretty crappy.
topaxygouroun i wrote: Ask ANY Chaos player. Literally anyone. Ask them if they prefer Marks as they are now, or Marks as they were (Tzeentch:+1 invul, Nurgle: +1 toughness etc). Don't speak about Marks of Chaos as they are "bonuses" when they used to actually provide useful abilities every single edition before GW decided to just make them into a cool tatoo on the models. Especially when the chaos daemons kept their abilities of their marks just fine.
Chaos player here, I'd rather not go back to the days when you were a moron for taking anything other than Nurgle on units that could pick their mark. At least now there's some argument for the other marks, and it's really just your biggest dakka unit that really should be a specific mark.
topaxygouroun i wrote: Ask ANY Chaos player. Literally anyone. Ask them if they prefer Marks as they are now, or Marks as they were (Tzeentch:+1 invul, Nurgle: +1 toughness etc). Don't speak about Marks of Chaos as they are "bonuses" when they used to actually provide useful abilities every single edition before GW decided to just make them into a cool tatoo on the models. Especially when the chaos daemons kept their abilities of their marks just fine.
Chaos player here, I'd rather not go back to the days when you were a moron for taking anything other than Nurgle on units that could pick their mark. At least now there's some argument for the other marks, and it's really just your biggest dakka unit that really should be a specific mark.
Don't lie, there is none beyond Slaanesh and cacophony.
Atleast for the damage part.
Everything else just requires even more hoops to go through.
Also last edition Slaanesh and icon were the hotness par ecelence not nurgle.
ph34r wrote: Slaanesh daemon wings with Sonic terminators used slaanesh. Nurgle was great on many things too but there were restrictions.
I don't know about tzeentch and khorne. Pretty sure bloodletter summoning -wing armies were existant.
I used mark of chaos undivided or no mark at all. RIP
Yep. And I still use no mark, because I play an undivided army of Iron Warriors and it doesn't make sense for that, of course it means I'm punished rules wise for it.
ph34r wrote: Slaanesh daemon wings with Sonic terminators used slaanesh. Nurgle was great on many things too but there were restrictions.
I don't know about tzeentch and khorne. Pretty sure bloodletter summoning -wing armies were existant.
I used mark of chaos undivided or no mark at all. RIP
Yep. And I still use no mark, because I play an undivided army of Iron Warriors and it doesn't make sense for that, of course it means I'm punished rules wise for it.
I use noise marines to represent a unit of "demi" oblits, ones on the way to the big bois but the virus has not taken over yet, but like you I wont use any other mark because Iron warriors hate that stuff.
I think a great example of how marks can differ in a unit, or even within a squad, is the Night Lords omnibus. There's one guy that's clearly marked by Khorne, Uzas, though the rest of his squad spurns him. Doesn't stop him from screaming 'blood for the blood god' when he charges in to slaughter the foe.
Chaos Space Marines can be recently turned renegades. They can be legionnaires that have fought for 10k years. They can be a mix of legions, each squad unique (havocs from Iron Warriors, raptors from Night Lords, noise marines from Emperor's Children), or they can be mono-god, whether they follow a legion or not (Death Guard vs. the Purge).
More than any other faction, Chaos Space Marines leaves room for you to build your army how you see it. If you want to go 100% fluff-bunny Iron Warriors, with no marks and no daemons, you go for it. Your list is just as valid, fluff wise, as the competitive player that brings a 3 squads of 3 Slaanesh Obliterators along with a Chaos Knight Castellan and little else except blobs of Cultists. Chaos Warbands can look like that.
Sadly, the rules don't reflect the fluff, but there's hardly a faction out there now that doesn't have some grievous distance between fluff and rules. If you want your army to be more effective, you're going to have to make some hard choices. That's just the reality of playing Warhammer 40k. That said, I've seen super fluffy World Eaters or Night Lords lists do just fine in just about every kind of play bar tournament. Learning your army, using the tools you have, and having a bit of luck go a lot further than having an extra bonus that you waited 5 years for GW to give you.
I've been playing Chaos Space Marines for 12 years. I've been vocal on this forum and plenty of other places about how it feels like GW keeps slapping us in the face. That doesn't stop me from loving the models and this faction for the variety and openness that you get out of it that no other faction offers.
Its funny watching everyone get salty over 4ppm guardsmen. Many guard players would be happy to see cultists go back to 4ppm, especially after all the nerfs.
But only salty csm players would ask for everything else to be brought up to their crappy level.
The topic here is Chaos Cultists, can we please stick to it.
The topic in this case will always compare to comparable units that perform ( overperform?) so you putting down your foot here is due to the nature of this thread about as usefull as a bath in manure.
Smirrors wrote: Its funny watching everyone get salty over 4ppm guardsmen. Many guard players would be happy to see cultists go back to 4ppm, especially after all the nerfs.
But only salty csm players would ask for everything else to be brought up to their crappy level.
Well no, cultists are in their correct location at 5 ppm. They were too cheap at 4 points. Guardsmen are also too cheap at 4 points, is the thing.
The topic here is Chaos Cultists, can we please stick to it.
The topic in this case will always compare to comparable units that perform ( overperform?) so you putting down your foot here is due to the nature of this thread about as usefull as a bath in manure.
So the posts I deleted where people were swearing at each other, discussing their lunch and talking about some TV show are on topic?
Cross discussion of other units is of course warranted, off topic spam and insults are not.
To be honest, why not make IS, Cultists, and gaunts 6PPM. Weight of dice is a real problem and increasing cost across the board would help.
Slight knock on effect are MeQ's don't look so poor in comparison. (Yes I would hate my termagants being 6 pts at first, but really anything with a gun and is cheap needs to be around that level, keep hormagants are 5 since the likelihood of them even getting in CC is a crapshoot)
The joys of this again, and I wasn't even responding last time. The issue with guard troops costing is simply the two trouble areas for this whole edition, command points and allies. Both can be broke as a joke, together are amazing broke. Guard infantry, in their own book, are fine. Used as command point batteries less so. I knew it would be an issue way back at the beginning it's now on an inevitable course where everything must be nerfed over and over because some game aspects, as the ones mentioned previous make balance a sick joke.
I'd also point out the other ways to use guard forces were nerfed pretty fast, like scions, remember when they were amazing ? I do. That couldn't be allowed to stand ! Conscripts ? Commissars ? All must fall. I think there are some players who will only be happy when Guard are terrible bad, seemingly like through 6th-7th.
Is it annoying to have guard batteries all over ? Yes, yes it is but I more over blame ally abuse and command point farming for all of that. Now I'm sorry some armies feel hard done over, yeah I felt that before. I have a few power armor forces so I hear it. However wanting to drag others down because cultists were nerfed does feel a bit sad. I didn't honestly feel cultists needed the point hike in the first place, removing their access to some strats and traits would have been enough but in standard GW fashion, why nerf a little when you can nerf a lot and leave other issues to fester forever.
Guard have been nerfed a bunch already. From scions, to conscripts, commissars. To be honest I'm just waiting for more nerfing coming down the road as it just feels like it's the thing to do. I really other armies would be brought up, than just bringing others down all the time. I can as well say from most of these changes my games have been more the casual competitive type so haven't had any issues, my guard win and lose just fine. I don't though CP farm for ally knights with smash captains etc. I'm one of the few that usually runs list pure just because it feels right and from when I started playing that was the norm. I can say list pure, guardsmen are fine, but I see the problem I don't wish them nerfed though. The game has issues but all the nerfing won't bring up those which currently languish. Just my opinion of course, at least without touching the real problem areas that will see more and more issues arise from. However these mechanics are too baked into this edition I feel for them to change that much at this point.
As always dreams of balance are smashed apart with the reality of GWs inability to hold steady direction.
Guard aren't even fine in their own book. Guard need more nerfs, or they wouldn't be in so many tournament lists. If said mechanics are REALLY baked in, shouldn't guardsmen pay more for being able to exploit those mechanics?
Martel732 wrote: Guard aren't even fine in their own book. Guard need more nerfs, or they wouldn't be in so many tournament lists. If said mechanics are REALLY baked in, shouldn't guardsmen pay more for being able to exploit those mechanics?
If the issue is soup, then nerf the fething soup. Don't punish "pure" IG-players because other armies exploit the CP-system in their name.
Martel732 wrote: Guard aren't even fine in their own book. Guard need more nerfs, or they wouldn't be in so many tournament lists. If said mechanics are REALLY baked in, shouldn't guardsmen pay more for being able to exploit those mechanics?
If the issue is soup, then nerf the fething soup. Don't punish "pure" IG-players because other armies exploit the CP-system in their name.
topaxygouroun i wrote: Ask ANY Chaos player. Literally anyone. Ask them if they prefer Marks as they are now, or Marks as they were (Tzeentch:+1 invul, Nurgle: +1 toughness etc). Don't speak about Marks of Chaos as they are "bonuses" when they used to actually provide useful abilities every single edition before GW decided to just make them into a cool tatoo on the models. Especially when the chaos daemons kept their abilities of their marks just fine.
Chaos player here, I'd rather not go back to the days when you were a moron for taking anything other than Nurgle on units that could pick their mark. At least now there's some argument for the other marks, and it's really just your biggest dakka unit that really should be a specific mark.
Just because Old Nurgle used to be better than the other marks, does not mean it's nice that Marks of chaos are now nothing more than glorified tattoos. the old Marked lists were flavorful and thematic. What are they now? What are we now, Mal?
Hey, this might be already mentioned here, but does the new apostle prayers affect cultists? If I remember correctly, there was one prayer that buffs wounding +1, similar to the veterans stratagem..
I don't know. Maybe in ITC Soup is the hotness but in ETC Tournament teams (Where one team can't repeat factions so one Imperial Soup automatically fills 3 factions from being used) Guard stills destroys nearly everything else. I know people has allready forgot how good baneblades are because Castellan is just must better.
But catachan hordes with Straken and Hellhounds are still very hot (Lol I made a joke), and theres many armies that can't do anything agaisnt a Imperial Guard artillery army.
And yeah I know, nothing of that appears in LVO or Adepticon so everything is crap and only Ynnari and 32+Castellan is actually powerfull (Glorius american meta that is better than european one because their tournament pack> our tournament pack ). Just like in 7th Tau were fine because they didn't won tournaments, because it was all Demon spam and Eldar.
Martel732 wrote: Guard aren't even fine in their own book. Guard need more nerfs, or they wouldn't be in so many tournament lists. If said mechanics are REALLY baked in, shouldn't guardsmen pay more for being able to exploit those mechanics?
If the issue is soup, then nerf the fething soup. Don't punish "pure" IG-players because other armies exploit the CP-system in their name.
But punish other chaos players because some people stick slaanesh mark on their oblits, or like to abuse alpha legion cultist bombs?
Because of tide of traitors, the cultists in my thousand sons codex (completely different codex according to GW) also went up to 5 ppm. Plot twist though: Thousand Sons do not have access to tide of traitors. Or alpha legion traits or anything else for that matter. Why did my codex have to go through the cultist nerf just because someone else exploits them? This is exactly the same reasoning as to why guardsmen need to go up in points.
Martel732 wrote: Guard aren't even fine in their own book. Guard need more nerfs, or they wouldn't be in so many tournament lists. If said mechanics are REALLY baked in, shouldn't guardsmen pay more for being able to exploit those mechanics?
If the issue is soup, then nerf the fething soup. Don't punish "pure" IG-players because other armies exploit the CP-system in their name.
Soup is not the issue per se. Guardsmen being a no brainer pick in every conceivable scenario is. Soup just gives more lists access to the broken guardsmen, it does not break them itself. The soup lists don't function the same with 6 ppm guardsmen.
Spreelock wrote: Hey, this might be already mentioned here, but does the new apostle prayers affect cultists? If I remember correctly, there was one prayer that buffs wounding +1, similar to the veterans stratagem..
Yes they do. Apostles are like the shepherd for cultists.
Galas wrote: I don't know. Maybe in ITC Soup is the hotness but in ETC Tournament teams (Where one team can't repeat factions so one Imperial Soup automatically fills 3 factions from being used) Guard stills destroys nearly everything else. I know people has allready forgot how good baneblades are because Castellan is just must better.
But catachan hordes with Straken and Hellhounds are still very hot (Lol I made a joke), and theres many armies that can't do anything agaisnt a Imperial Guard artillery army.
And yeah I know, nothing of that appears in LVO or Adepticon so everything is crap and only Ynnari and 32+Castellan is actually powerfull (Glorius american meta that is better than european one because their tournament pack> our tournament pack ). Just like in 7th Tau were fine because they didn't won tournaments, because it was all Demon spam and Eldar.
didn't both LVO and the last GW sponsored big tournament have a flyer wing Eldar list in like top 2-4? so some stuff seems to be good no matter what kind of scenario or setting is being played
Martel732 wrote: Guard aren't even fine in their own book. Guard need more nerfs, or they wouldn't be in so many tournament lists. If said mechanics are REALLY baked in, shouldn't guardsmen pay more for being able to exploit those mechanics?
If the issue is soup, then nerf the fething soup. Don't punish "pure" IG-players because other armies exploit the CP-system in their name.
But punish other chaos players because some people stick slaanesh mark on their oblits, or like to abuse alpha legion cultist bombs?
Don't put words in my mouth please, you'll be pressed to find a single post from me where I welcome general nerfs to cultists due to alpha legion or oblits due to MoS+Cacaphony.
As for cultists I do think that 5 ppm is too much, but I also think that they never should've had legion traits to begin with, just as conscripts shouldn't be able to receive orders at all, nor have regimental traits. (They're conscripts after all, not trained soldiers.)
Base guardsmen shouldnt have traits at 4 ppm. Or orders. 4 point models should basically be super bare bones. That's the implied contract of paying very few points. You get very few benefits/abilities.
oh look another thread about how guardsmen are under costing and help the poor chaos even though they're receiving huge amount of buffs and models in love from GW, how they don't ever get anything good.
sometimes I honestly wonder if any of these people have ever played against pure Guard lists or just a loyal 32. Trust me play against a pure guard and you won't be whining about their infantry, they are nothing game breaking. It's like when people complain about basilisks. I think on average they're removing one to two marines a turn and typically never make their points in entire game.
They are game breaking. Mono IG is soul crushing, they just come up short in ITC. Trying playing GW's godawful missions vs mono IG. It's not about making points back. It's about swarming objectives with infinite cheap obj sec that can't be removed in a reasonable period of time.
Baneblade hulls are more overgunned than IKs, they just can't survived 40+ lascannon shots. But guardsment still make them immune to assault and short range weapons.
Des702 wrote: oh look another thread about how guardsmen are under costing and help the poor chaos even though they're receiving huge amount of buffs and models in love from GW, how they don't ever get anything good.
sometimes I honestly wonder if any of these people have ever played against pure Guard lists or just a loyal 32. Trust me play against a pure guard and you won't be whining about their infantry, they are nothing game breaking. It's like when people complain about basilisks. I think on average they're removing one to two marines a turn and typically never make their points in entire game.
Loyal 32 is something guard players hide behind to justify their undercosted units.
As much as I hate it Martel does have a point IG codex is full of choices that just take the mick out of other codex's.
Trying to remove 30 wounds of 5+ or 4+ save for 120 points isn't something that many codex's can achieve.
The direct comparison between IS and Cultists was bad when they went to 5ppm now it's rediculous 4ppm IS +1Ld +1Sv for a point less and can still have regiment traits?
This unfortunately looks like GW is just nerfing cultists off the table.
mono guard is hella strong. I have had my battlewagon list be wiped by mono guard without being able to make a single charge. turn 1 cracks half my battle wagons and most everything inside. turn 2 the wagons that get to move get blown up and contents ravaged. turn 3 cleanup on aisle orks I am close to tabled and am just left with a handful of backfield models like lootas who now have the gretchin whittle down enough that they get blown away too. I think mono guard are the strongest single codex, the only competition it has for the title is mono dark eldar.
You see we got so much in common, Imperial Guard players defend the points cost of Imperial Guard stuff and Chaos players constantly whine as they receive the second most love in the game.
But I'll concede the point that maybe they could go cheaper. I don't typically follow tournaments nor play super competitive games so maybe in my games they are underwhelming because we're kind of playing for fun, where is in tournament and hardcore games they're insufferable.
IG codex has ruined countless non-competitive games in my experience
Really? all my closest games have been playing my Guard the ones where I stomped the other person typically are with Admech or Nids.
So for argument's sake if Imperial Guard went up to 5 points per guy and the commanders went up an additional five points would that make you guys Happy? Cuz honestly stop seeing this same argument I would totally go for that. It would only really hurt the spam.
Edit: so in your opinion who should I be shooting with the basilisk? a tank oh wow that's like a whole 4 wounds a turn... the funny thing is it's indirect fire probably won't matter than anyways since tanks are so hard to hide.
IG codex has ruined countless non-competitive games in my experience
Really? all my closest games have been playing my Guard the ones where I stomped the other person typically are with Admech or Nids.
So for argument's sake if Imperial Guard went up to 5 points per guy and the commanders went up an additional five points would that make you guys Happy? Cuz honestly stop seeing this same argument I would totally go for that. It would only really hurt the spam.
Would have to be playtested. I don't think 5 is a good number anymore, after the cultist treatment. But it's where it would probably start. Commanders probably need more than 5 pt hike. Their utility is stupid. Everyone is conditioned to seeing IG get effective stuff for next to no points. Freaking storm guardians are 6 ppm. That's probably where guardsmen should be. I mean at 4 pts, they should get no traits and no orders. That's what GW is telling us with cultists.
Part of the problem is guard look stupidly cheap next to some units. But the lack of points granularity makes it so if you make them six then they're so close to other units that are way more effective than them.
Lets focus on the good - 5 point cultists without VOTL is a step in the right direction. Realistically though - Choas has received a massive buff. It is utterly massive.
Cursed Earth
+1 to hit prayers
shoot twice with havocs or a big ass unit of noice marines? and oblitz in the same turn. I mean...guys...it's getting ridiculous. Not to mention the Abadon buff....I mean...I get that it is abaddon but should he really be out damaging a primarch for 0 points increase? OFC the answer is no but...whatever.
IG codex has ruined countless non-competitive games in my experience
Really? all my closest games have been playing my Guard the ones where I stomped the other person typically are with Admech or Nids.
So for argument's sake if Imperial Guard went up to 5 points per guy and the commanders went up an additional five points would that make you guys Happy? Cuz honestly stop seeing this same argument I would totally go for that. It would only really hurt the spam.
Would have to be playtested. I don't think 5 is a good number anymore, after the cultist treatment. But it's where it would probably start. Commanders probably need more than 5 pt hike. Their utility is stupid. Everyone is conditioned to seeing IG get effective stuff for next to no points. Freaking storm guardians are 6 ppm. That's probably where guardsmen should be. I mean at 4 pts, they should get no traits and no orders. That's what GW is telling us with cultists.
Storm Guardians shouldn't exist in the first place. Bad concept, bad execution, pointless unit that has never been done well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: Lets focus on the good - 5 point cultists without VOTL is a step in the right direction. Realistically though - Choas has received a massive buff. It is utterly massive.
Cursed Earth
+1 to hit prayers
shoot twice with havocs or a big ass unit of noice marines? and oblitz in the same turn. I mean...guys...it's getting ridiculous. Not to mention the Abadon buff....I mean...I get that it is abaddon but should he really be out damaging a primarch for 0 points increase? OFC the answer is no but...whatever.
Out-damaging a Primarch seems to be a stretch. Maybe against smaller targets...
Des702 wrote: Part of the problem is guard look stupidly cheap next to some units. But the lack of points granularity makes it so if you make them six then they're so close to other units that are way more effective than them.
Which units? Storm guardians? Maybe kabalites. But if we make kabs 8 pts....
You would basically have to change the point cost of every other troop in the game other than space Marines to fix that. Not just guardians but dark calibites, Admech rangers, vanguard, termagaunts... 6 is too much without a huge overhaul of the game.
Bobthehero wrote: So if Guardsmen are 6ppm, would Kriegsmen go up to 7ppm? Firewarrior price, really?
I'd put firewarriors back at 8. And yes, traits and orders and such should cost. God forbid ig have slightly below average troops and amazing tanks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Des702 wrote: You would basically have to change the point cost of every other troop in the game other than space Marines to fix that. Not just guardians but dark calibites, Admech rangers, vanguard, termagaunts... 6 is too much without a huge overhaul of the game.
Nevertheless thats what the cultist change is saying. Cultists and guardsmen cant be the same price.
Bobthehero wrote: So if Guardsmen are 6ppm, would Kriegsmen go up to 7ppm? Firewarrior price, really?
I'd put firewarriors back at 8. And yes, traits and orders and such should cost. God forbid ig have slightly below average troops and amazing tanks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Des702 wrote: You would basically have to change the point cost of every other troop in the game other than space Marines to fix that. Not just guardians but dark calibites, Admech rangers, vanguard, termagaunts... 6 is too much without a huge overhaul of the game.
Nevertheless thats what the cultist change is saying. Cultists and guardsmen cant be the same price.
Adorable, then you realise that auras do outperform in castle builds and then you must price in auras off abbadon and Guilliman and then you get 15 ppm tacs, because ultramarines.
Bobthehero wrote: So if Guardsmen are 6ppm, would Kriegsmen go up to 7ppm? Firewarrior price, really?
Firewarriors are clearly the next most undercosted unit after infantry. They need to go up. Plus a Kriegsmen is not an official codex yet. Lets focus on the real stuff. Infantry 6/ Vets 7/ khabs+ firewarriors to 8.
Bobthehero wrote: So if Guardsmen are 6ppm, would Kriegsmen go up to 7ppm? Firewarrior price, really?
Firewarriors are clearly the next most undercosted unit after infantry. They need to go up. Plus a Kriegsmen is not an official codex yet. Lets focus on the real stuff. Infantry 6/ Vets 7/ khabs+ firewarriors to 8.
FW is as official as your marines, you realize that right?
Bobthehero wrote: So if Guardsmen are 6ppm, would Kriegsmen go up to 7ppm? Firewarrior price, really?
Firewarriors are clearly the next most undercosted unit after infantry. They need to go up. Plus a Kriegsmen is not an official codex yet. Lets focus on the real stuff. Infantry 6/ Vets 7/ khabs+ firewarriors to 8.
FW is as official as your marines, you realize that right?
What I think he means is that, since they're still not out of their Index stage, we should focus on the armies that aren't dealing with that issue.
I could be mistaken but I think that's what they meant.
Bobthehero wrote: So if Guardsmen are 6ppm, would Kriegsmen go up to 7ppm? Firewarrior price, really?
Firewarriors are clearly the next most undercosted unit after infantry. They need to go up. Plus a Kriegsmen is not an official codex yet. Lets focus on the real stuff. Infantry 6/ Vets 7/ khabs+ firewarriors to 8.
FW is as official as your marines, you realize that right?
What I think he means is that, since they're still not out of their Index stage, we should focus on the armies that aren't dealing with that issue.
I could be mistaken but I think that's what they meant.
No it's Martel, for him fw is p2w, everything not marines op out of principle.
Bobthehero wrote: My Guardsmen don't, no acess to Straken or STR 4, either
Effectively ignoring morale outside of assault seems pretty good for a gunline, unless I'm completely misunderstanding how Cult of Sacrifice works. Your commanders are cheaper also.
I play both CSMs and Guard, have for most editions of this game's existence.
Cultists got a raw deal. The constant hyperbole with basic putz Guardsmen is...more than a wee bit silly however.
No, despite being easy to say on an anonymous web forum, nobody is actually going to run naked guardsmen without guns or orders or doctrines and think they're just fine. Guardsmen are not 6 or 7pt models and the last time they were in that range IG were basically the worst army in the game. They'll probably go to 5pts at some point, and I'm not gonna cry myself to sleep over it, but some of the apoplectic assertions here really aren't helping. We're definitely not at 7E scatterbike "we toss out 40 shots a turn that wound almost all infantry on 2's and can glance almost any vehicle to death from across the board with the best mobility in the game and hide behind terrain after shooting with a jet move and sport a Space Marine save and Jink" broken.
Yeah, there's stuff in the IG codex that needs addressing. Tank Commanders are absurdly undercosted, Shadowswords are overgunned, the Catachan doctrine bonuses are both overcapable and not entirely appropriate for the faction, while half the book never sees the table and many units are basically nonfunctional (e.g. Vanquisher, Deathstrike). Ultimately however, little of that is particularly relevant to Cultists.
Yeah Cultists compare poorly with Guardsmen in a straight up comparison. I also don't think Cultists should cost as much as they do. At the same time, the putz Guardsmen is the centerpiece Troops unit of the IG army, Cultists are not and have never been intended to be, just as Conscripts are not and were not intended to be for IG, Chaos Space Marines are supposed to be the centerpiece troop unit of the CSM army. I think this was GW's thinking with the changes, as opposed to directly attempting to balance Cultists against similar units from other armies. The bigger picture issue however is that basic Marine paradigm that the CSM book is built around doesn't function as it once did, and that has caused issues for all MEQ armies. This isn't the fault of IG, or any other one army, the basic game mechanics have changed in a way that GW hasn't bothered to account for and in many ways GW has simply allowed game bloat to overtake what once made Marines unique (e.g. Custodes and Knights redefining elite and durable multirole armies). Most other factions haven't developed the same issues in the same way.
All things considered, as a CSM player, Cultists are near the bottom of my concerns for the army. There are bigger issues that are much more relevant to the army as a whole, and a lot more units in need of greater assistance than Cultists. I'd much rather have my Chaos Marines doing their actual job rather than stew over Cultists not being as quite good as Guardsmen.
The points granularity once we start talking 4/5pt models is also an issue, one thag may make perfectly balancing such units difficult no matter what, and GW doesn't like changing their points scale or dealing with half points or anything else to accommodate that, while firepower has also grown to the point that quite often what's being thrown about doesnt care if you're a Terminator or a Grot, if you're not a Superheavy or Custodian you're dead either way, making comparisons between very broad spectrums of units hard to judge. Trying to balance between Cultists and Guardsmen yields a lot more room to account for differences than trying to balance Cultists, Guardsmen, Marines, Custodes, and Knights together.
The game has developed a scale issue over the last few editions and has done little to address it.
Their commanders are more expensive (+7 pts for company, +3 pts for platoon), they just have their platoon commander equivalent as an HQ instead of elites. My point is if you crank up the price for normal Guardsmen there will be a point where Kriegers won't be worth the extra pts they cost.
Bobthehero wrote: So if Guardsmen are 6ppm, would Kriegsmen go up to 7ppm? Firewarrior price, really?
Firewarriors are clearly the next most undercosted unit after infantry. They need to go up. Plus a Kriegsmen is not an official codex yet. Lets focus on the real stuff. Infantry 6/ Vets 7/ khabs+ firewarriors to 8.
FW is as official as your marines, you realize that right?
What I think he means is that, since they're still not out of their Index stage, we should focus on the armies that aren't dealing with that issue.
I could be mistaken but I think that's what they meant.
Bobthehero wrote: Why is your side faction more important than mine?
It's not. But most of it is patently unusable. Your stuff might not be elite anymore. See the difference? Your current models win during the setup phase and i have no input or hope of victory. The situations are very different.
Also just make krieg guys 6 pts like everyone else would be. There you are special again, but the situation is still improved.
I get penalized for everything because marines. No sympathy. No mercy. Something has to give with ig.
we have all played with substandard units through the sheer love of playing with those units. Many of us playing with those units over many many editions. But having that attitude is not conducive to an environment that would Foster some type of solution. And honestly it only hurts your position from a "take me serious" view.
Personally I think five points with a bit of a point increase to the platoon commanders and regular commanders would really go a step in the right direction but you can't go higher because then they are way too close to units that are much much better than them like the simple Ranger which is still itself not considered very good.
You think orders and regimental bonuses make regular Imperial Guard better than cultist could you imagine only one point difference between 4 + armor, 3 + to hit, canticles and a 6+ invun with a better gun with 4 strength and longer range and has a chance to get - 1 ap.
I get penalized for everything because marines. No sympathy. No mercy. Something has to give with ig.
we have all played with substandard units through the sheer love of playing with those units. Many of us playing with those units over many many editions. But having that attitude is not conducive to an environment that would Foster some type of solution. And honestly it only hurts your position from a "take me serious" view.
Personally I think five points with a bit of a point increase to the platoon commanders and regular commanders would really go a step in the right direction but you can't go higher because then they are way too close to units that are much much better than them like the simple Ranger which is still itself not considered very good.
You think orders and regimental bonuses make regular Imperial Guard better than cultist could you imagine only one point difference between 4 + armor, 3 + to hit, canticles and a 6+ invun with a better gun with 4 strength and longer range and has a chance to get - 1 ap.
I don't care if you take me seriously, because I don't think GW is going to do any of this.
Something is obviously better than nothing. But why do we keep giving the guardsmen the benefit of the doubt? It can't be 6 because it's too close to a ranger? Well, it can't be 5 because of grots and cultists. So yeah, maybe make it closer the ranger and make it far less of a powerhouse unit. Maybe even a bit.. subpar.
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: To be honest, why not make IS, Cultists, and gaunts 6PPM. Weight of dice is a real problem and increasing cost across the board would help.
Slight knock on effect are MeQ's don't look so poor in comparison. (Yes I would hate my termagants being 6 pts at first, but really anything with a gun and is cheap needs to be around that level, keep hormagants are 5 since the likelihood of them even getting in CC is a crapshoot)
Except weight of fire isn't actually a problem
At currently, if there's a full squad of marines (130pts) vs 3 squads of IS (120 pts), at 24"
The Guardsman squads, assuming they're all in range and no los blocking, will on average, kill 1.5 marines or 19.5 points (or since you can't do half a wound, 13 or 26 pts)
(27 lasgun shots, BS 4+, S 3 vs T 4, SV 3+ (27*1/2*1/3*1/3))
The Space marines, using Bolter Discipline and assuming they're also all in range/no LOS blocking, get 5.3R kills on average for (20 or 24 pts), followed by losing more to morale. Moarle is hard to math, but on average (all possible outcomes divided by number of outcomes) it's 1.6R for a total of 7 dead guarsmen on average (28 pts)
(18 bolt rounds, BS 3+, S 4 vs T 3, S 5+, Ld 7 (18*2/3*2/3*4/6+(0+0+1+2+3+4)/6)
Space marines do slight better on average for 10 points more, but not exactly exactly impressive all around. And yes, the guardsman do way better at 12", but with the introduction of Bolter Discipline space marines don't need to be at half range to get max damage
At 6 points, the guardsmen kill 1 marine on average, and marines kill the same amount (so 13 pts on average vs 42 points). The guardsmen can't even break even at 12", and then the space marines move forward, shoot their bolters, and then assault to finish off what's left.
How does this relate to cultist being 5 pts? Simple answer is that they shouldn't be. I can understand the logic that GW wants Chaos Space Marines to focus on the marines, but if they want cultist to take a more of a support role they should have at least gotten something to make them more support-y rather than a flat nerf, basing the price of a unit on what buffs they get is dumb because this it become required to use that buff to make it useful and you end up with canned synergy (or at worse, skornergy).
I think part of the reason Cultus pay more is because they're not the default troop of the army. Looking at units in a vacuum doesn't always give you the reason why they cost so much like Imperial Guard have better orders and regimental bonuses. The cultist have way better strategies and auras. Guard doesn't get auras they have to do individual commands. Honestly I think the two are close enough fit they should probably be priced the same.are guard squads better possibly but not enough to justify being an additional point more.
Also if we change Rangers then we have to change Vanguard then we have to change all the Guardians then we have to change tau and we have to change dark eldar that may have to change a bunch of the tyranid troops like the hormagaunts and termagaunts. Seriously if you love space Marine so much then why don't you push for space Marines to be changed instead.
Des702 wrote: I think part of the reason Cultus pay more is because they're not the default troop of the army. Looking at units in a vacuum doesn't always give you the reason why they cost so much like Imperial Guard have better orders and regimental bonuses. The cultist have way better strategies and auras. Guard doesn't get auras they have to do individual commands. Honestly I think the two are close enough fit they should probably be priced the same.are guard squads better possibly but not enough to justify being an additional point more.
Also if we change Rangers then we have to change Vanguard then we have to change all the Guardians then we have to change tau and we have to change dark eldar that may have to change a bunch of the tyranid troops like the hormagaunts and termagaunts. Seriously if you love space Marine so much then why don't you push for space Marines to be changed instead.
The issue is IS have been and without serious nerfing remain worth atleast 5ppm .
Cultists probably were worth 5ppm but they got moved to 5 and then are apparently loosing traits the -1 to hit and if it's the keyword aswell there will be other interactions that are effected.
Marines are over priced have been from the very start but making cultist 5 even 6 ppm just changes choas from having a chance using cultists to lossing harder with cultists or the still overcosted marines.
The issue is GW is seeing a problem choas armies only use cultist and rather than taking the time to ask why, they just went swinging the nerf bat wildly. 13 point marines arn't good, regardless of what cultists cost, it just at what points for cultists do 13 point marine's become the least worst option
Martel732 wrote: You go try to kill those things with ba. I dare you.
Hitting 98%, wounding 83% and killing for any failed save with a smash captain with 7 attacks? He'll kill his points back easily. And it's not like you have to send him in by himself against a unit 3 times his cost.
Bobthehero wrote: My Guardsmen don't, no acess to Straken or STR 4, either
Effectively ignoring morale outside of assault seems pretty good for a gunline, unless I'm completely misunderstanding how Cult of Sacrifice works. Your commanders are cheaper also.
Really not seeing the Krieg distinction here.
Krieg infantry are odd, and I think provide a good glimpse as to what exactly the problem is with regular Infantry.
Cult of Sacrifice, effectively their doctrine, means Kriegers ignore morale outside of assault. They also get krak grenades and WS3+, but they don't get FRFSRF or Take Aim, and cost 5ppm. So they lose two of the most useful orders and pay an extra point per model, and so in spite of their collection of minor bonuses and fairly useful doctrine they don't see all that much play.
So, if you raised the cost of the regular Infantry Squad to 5ppm, nerfed FRFSRF and MMM (say, FRFSRF gives you +1 shot, and MMM just lets you take an auto-6 to Advance), tweaked the doctrines (eg Catachan should be WS3+, not S4), and most importantly nerfed CP batteries in some fashion, then I think you'd see a lot fewer Infantry Squads on the tabletop. Taking them to 6+ points seems an overreaction that doesn't really address the specific factors, while excessively punishing the players with the less-performant regiments.
Martel732 wrote: You go try to kill those things with ba. I dare you.
Hitting 98%, wounding 83% and killing for any failed save with a smash captain with 7 attacks? He'll kill his points back easily. And it's not like you have to send him in by himself against a unit 3 times his cost.
That math is incorrect. Try non-smash vs bullgryns. Good luck.
Has anyone ever looked at the math if Catachans had the Avalanche of Muscle rule that Bullgryns have instead of strength 4? That sounds way more thematic.
On the issue of Krieg units, it should be noted that GW/FW have largely gone out of their way to make them distinctly subpar for the entire history of the model line going back to 4E where IG were about as bottom barrel as they come. They've always had higher costs than basic codex infantry, and had fewer options and upgrades, largely just for WS4 which has always been almost entirely cosmetic.
GW/FW has always seen to it that *the* archetypal attritional guard army is the least capable of executing that particular playstyle
I stopped trying to use the actual DKoK rules for my DKoK army a loooooong time ago. Given that the main studio is apparently responsible for FW rules now and the fact that they've done largely nothing with them for most stuff since the Index books, coupled with the shrinking DKoK model line, leads me to believe that the Krieg line is essentially on the slowroad to Squatsville.
Martel732 wrote: I don't know anything about them. I know nothing about Krieg. Never seen them, actually.
They're a really natty army, actually. very fun to play - and frankly they are a 'full codex' army - there are no DEATH KORPS relics, warlord traits or stratagems, but the generic ASTRA MILITARUM ones work fine, and the army even has it's own unique special character in the form of Marshall "That Was A Lascannon, Was It?" Karis Venner, who's a sort of combination of a lord commissar and a bargain-basement Creed.
They have a lot of drawbacks compared to 'proper' militarum - no heavy weapons in infantry squads, no Take Aim! order, no conscripts (well....nothing stops you declaring conscripts to be DEATH KORPS but Cult of Sacrifice isn't a regimental doctrine so 'normal' units don't get it), quite a few stratagems don't work because the 'equivalent' unit has a different keyword name. Their unique units are very cool, though, and Death Riders hit like a freaking brick.
Krieg infantry are odd, and I think provide a good glimpse as to what exactly the problem is with regular Infantry.
Cult of Sacrifice, effectively their doctrine, means Kriegers ignore morale outside of assault. They also get krak grenades and WS3+, but they don't get FRFSRF or Take Aim, and cost 5ppm. So they lose two of the most useful orders and pay an extra point per model, and so in spite of their collection of minor bonuses and fairly useful doctrine they don't see all that much play.
Just as an observation - they don't get Front Rank Fire! Second Rank Fire! (lasguns become rapid fire 2) but they do get Without Mercy (lasguns become pistol 2). That gives them the exact same performance at 12"-24", and whilst they don't get the 2"-12" zone of 4-shot death, they can double tap in combat which is a nasty shock if you're not expecting it.
Use Laurels of Command to combine Without Mercy! and Fix Bayonets! and you can be in a very bad place if you're stuck in an extended assault with a Krieg infantry line.
Honestly, their biggest problem is sheer (financial) cost. There's a bundle deal for a krieg 'platoon' that optimistically will let you put about 400 points on the table.....for the painful sum of £295.
Add in the fact that the grenadier squad is out of production and putting a 1750 point 'throne of skulls' size army together is a 'spare kidney' job.
Des702 wrote: I think part of the reason Cultus pay more is because they're not the default troop of the army. Looking at units in a vacuum doesn't always give you the reason why they cost so much like Imperial Guard have better orders and regimental bonuses. The cultist have way better strategies and auras. Guard doesn't get auras they have to do individual commands. Honestly I think the two are close enough fit they should probably be priced the same.are guard squads better possibly but not enough to justify being an additional point more.
Also if we change Rangers then we have to change Vanguard then we have to change all the Guardians then we have to change tau and we have to change dark eldar that may have to change a bunch of the tyranid troops like the hormagaunts and termagaunts. Seriously if you love space Marine so much then why don't you push for space Marines to be changed instead.
Was something like that ever specified by members of the design team? About the core units of an army being a bit or more then a bit overcosted, so people use them?
As marines changes go, I know the question wasn't directed at me, but I don't think GW wants to update old marines. Be their loyalist or chaos. They seem to be fine with the rules they have now. If they ever wanted to fix them, they would have done it a long time ago. Grunt marines are bad for more then some time. No idea how they were in 7th though.
Is 5pts guardsmen really "screwing them over"? If so then what they've done to cultists must have violated at least a quarter of the Geneva Convention by now
Continuity wrote: Is 5pts guardsmen really "screwing them over"? If so then what they've done to cultists must have violated at least a quarter of the Geneva Convention by now
vipoid wrote: I'd still like to see what happens to IG usage if CP sharing is removed.
But I guess we're not allowed to do that because that wouldn't screw over people playing mono-IG.
Try fighting a competitive mono-codex IG army with any other mono-codex than Craftworld Eldar and tell me how it goes. Even Dark Eldar can't wistand them unless the IG player is bad, really bad. Is even worse if you end up with a deployment with short borders. A short range army like Eldar just can't do anything agaisnt the long range firepower of IG. And when they reach shooting distance they have to pell the IG hordes.
Is very sad to play marines , have 2 rhinos, 3 predators, and 25 marines, and thats basically your army, and then face a IG list with 10-12 heavy vehicles and 60-80 bodies on the ground. And every single model of those barring the basic infantry squad will shot much more and much better than all of your units.
Statistics at the competitive level put guard at a 50% win rate.
Everything is being mathhammered at the guardsmen level when codex needs to be looked at a whole
To bring it back on Cultists, at release they were a little too strong but the nerfs came with a price rise. Now they have been nerfed again they really should go back to 4ppm.
Guardsmen going to 5ppm should happen with 9th Edition so that everything gets repriced accordingly. I expect 9th to be the ultimately edition once all the 8e shenanigans get sorted out.
You can ignore because you say so? Where am I wrong? Tell me.
"Everything is being mathhammered at the guardsmen leve"
That's the part that Castellan lists and Baneblade lists abuse.
"Statistics at the competitive level put guard at a 50% win rate. "
Thats' because castellans disintegrate mono IG. But are still hiding behind IG. The same thing would work with baneblades if castellans with Raven strat didn't exist.
GW's gonna GW, so what I say ultimately doesn't matter at all, but it's really delusional to dismiss someone out of hand with no counteranalysis.
Most armies can have a good competitive game against guard.
Most armies can clear out 60 guardsmen comfortably unless the guard player just hides them.
Most armies can clear 80-90 guardsmen if they are even semi able to handle horde spec armies.
Most armies should be able to go first against guard if its a roll off.
Most armies wont lose too much to FRFSRF The Knight armies people hate also keep guard armies in check, otherwise you would see much more tank heavy lists.
Most armies will gain full secondary points against guard in ITC
1) Conceded because of soup and #7. But this doesn't directly address guardsmen, because many of the soups beating IG have guardsmen themselves.
2) Timetable? The whole point of guard is that everything you shoot at 4 point models is basically doing nothing. They are wasting your time and shots on models they have no investment in. It's not debatable that most lists can kill 60 guardsmen. The issue is what they have left themselves after they do this. Every shot against a guardsmen puts the IG player further and further ahead in the match.
3) Not sure I agree with this. Just the number of to hit and to wound rolls is becoming prohibitive at this point.
4) Okay. And now they have the cover strat. Not sure how much that helps.
5) Completely disagree. I've seen lots of expensive T5 units just get worn out by FRFSRF. So no, many lists lose a lot of points to FRFSRF. Some don't, but a lot do.
6) Agreed, but only b/c of the Raven Castellan. If not for the Raven castellan, the shadowsword would be substituted.
7) Agreed, and this enables point one. The fact that ITC puts any downside at all on cheap models is why I like it. Even still, guardsmen are a dominant force in ITC. There is no cheaper way to generate CP, take up space, turn off deep strike and turn off assault lists.
vipoid wrote: I'd still like to see what happens to IG usage if CP sharing is removed.
But I guess we're not allowed to do that because that wouldn't screw over people playing mono-IG.
Try fighting a competitive mono-codex IG army with any other mono-codex than Craftworld Eldar and tell me how it goes. Even Dark Eldar can't wistand them unless the IG player is bad, really bad.
To be fair, in the specific case of Dark Eldar, IG have always been a terrible matchup in every edition, even when IG were otherwise largely terrible.
Even back in 4E, my ostensibly broken Iron Warriors never beat Dark Eldar, their massed AP2, CC invul saves, and "always wounds on 4+" was really powerful against MEQ's for a S3 T3 army. However, those strengths didn't mean much against my otherwise abysmally terribad mechanized stormtrooper company
Is very sad to play marines , have 2 rhinos, 3 predators, and 25 marines, and thats basically your army, and then face a IG list with 10-12 heavy vehicles and 60-80 bodies on the ground. And every single model of those barring the basic infantry squad will shot much more and much better than all of your units.
Is the issue with the Guard or the Space Marines? If the Guard disappeared from the game, are the Space Marines still bad against Eldar, Knights, Dark Eldar, Tau, Custodes, etc?
I mean, compare it to a Custodes list, at say 1500pts, they're getting maybe 18-25 models, so almost as many infantry as the SM list, minus the tanks, but two of those are transports, and the difference between each Custodian is dramatically more than the difference between a Space Marine and a Guardsman, they're probably a stronger force than the Space Marines as well. Guardsmen and Custodians aren't too badly balanced against each other largely speaking, the outlier is the Space Marine in the middle.
vipoid wrote: I'd still like to see what happens to IG usage if CP sharing is removed.
But I guess we're not allowed to do that because that wouldn't screw over people playing mono-IG.
Try fighting a competitive mono-codex IG army with any other mono-codex than Craftworld Eldar and tell me how it goes. Even Dark Eldar can't wistand them unless the IG player is bad, really bad.
To be fair, in the specific case of Dark Eldar, IG have always been a terrible matchup in every edition, even when IG were otherwise largely terrible.
Even back in 4E, my ostensibly broken Iron Warriors never beat Dark Eldar, their massed AP2, CC invul saves, and "always wounds on 4+" was really powerful against MEQ's for a S3 T3 army. However, those strengths didn't mean much against my otherwise abysmally terribad mechanized stormtrooper company
Is very sad to play marines , have 2 rhinos, 3 predators, and 25 marines, and thats basically your army, and then face a IG list with 10-12 heavy vehicles and 60-80 bodies on the ground. And every single model of those barring the basic infantry squad will shot much more and much better than all of your units.
Is the issue with the Guard or the Space Marines? If the Guard disappeared from the game, are the Space Marines still bad against Eldar, Knights, Dark Eldar, Tau, Custodes, etc?
I mean, compare it to a Custodes list, at say 1500pts, they're getting maybe 18-25 models, so almost as many infantry as the SM list, minus the tanks, but two of those are transports, and the difference between each Custodian is dramatically more than the difference between a Space Marine and a Guardsman, they're probably a stronger force than the Space Marines as well. Guardsmen and Custodians aren't too badly balanced against each other largely speaking, the outlier is the Space Marine in the middle.
I play mono custodes and let me tell you unless you spam basic guardians you'll end up with 12-15 models and maybe 1-2 dreadnoughts/tanks. And Custodes agaisnt Imperial Guard are terrible because they are an elite army that kills elite armies.
I know that the matchup of imperial guard vs marines is more a fault of marines being that weak than of imperial guard being too powerfull, because I also see the difference when I play Tau and it looks like I have points to bring everything I want compared with my marines.
Martel732 wrote: 1) Conceded because of soup and #7. But this doesn't directly address guardsmen, because many of the soups beating IG have guardsmen themselves.
2) Timetable? The whole point of guard is that everything you shoot at 4 point models is basically doing nothing. They are wasting your time and shots on models they have no investment in. It's not debatable that most lists can kill 60 guardsmen. The issue is what they have left themselves after they do this. Every shot against a guardsmen puts the IG player further and further ahead in the match.
3) Not sure I agree with this. Just the number of to hit and to wound rolls is becoming prohibitive at this point.
4) Okay. And now they have the cover strat. Not sure how much that helps.
5) Completely disagree. I've seen lots of expensive T5 units just get worn out by FRFSRF. So no, many lists lose a lot of points to FRFSRF. Some don't, but a lot do.
6) Agreed, but only b/c of the Raven Castellan. If not for the Raven castellan, the shadowsword would be substituted.
7) Agreed, and this enables point one. The fact that ITC puts any downside at all on cheap models is why I like it. Even still, guardsmen are a dominant force in ITC. There is no cheaper way to generate CP, take up space, turn off deep strike and turn off assault lists.
1) I think you are really too focused on Soup guard vs Soup guard being only the way Soup guard wins. On what basis are you saying that only guard beat guard? The point is you dont necessarily need to address guardsmen when overall the stats say guard wins 50%. Its a healthy win rate. Guard lists with Castellans have a disproportionate win rate which is what SHOULD be addressed.
2) Timetable: Over the course of a 6 turn game. A good opponent and most lists will leave the guard player with a handful of guardsmen by the end.
3) Honestly If your list cannot clear out 80-90 guardsmen, then its going to really struggle against the orks/nids/plague bearer lists that are out there.
4) It helps a lot and guard have the CP to pay for it. No denying it.
5) FRFSRF can certainly help strip wounds off things, but I dont think its disproportionate to the cost of the guardsmen and commander that is firing. Just do the maths and you will see for yourself. 1 Commander (2 orders) and 3 Infantry squads (2 with FRFSRF) =150pts vs 3 Custodians will likely kill off 1 custodian (50ish points)
6) A shadowsword will not break the meta
7) Well yeah thats the role of the guardsmen in the Guard list. Killing is a bonus. The guardsmen is what gives away most of the points (kill more, butchers, reaper etc) but allows the guard player to still be in the running in ITC.
EDIT: I should clarify that as stats stand, the IG win rate is overall 58% and we know for the many of that includes a Castellan which is known to add up to 10% to guards wins.
Reading trough this thread I feel like I'm doing something massively wrong when I play IG.
Most of, if not all of my regular guardsmen are usually dead by the end of the game, even against Thousand Sons.
(Who I'm currently on a loosing-streak against, but that has more to do with my opponent using loaded dice...at least it feels that way.)
I also feel that non-guard players are massively overvaluing lasguns.
I mean sure, on occasion the humble lasgun can blast a Knight of the table, but most of the time, it's just a bunch of dice being rolled for seemingly very little effect.
10 Guardsmen without FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 9 shots, 4,5 hits, 1,5 wounds, 0,5 wounds after saves.
0-12" 19 shots, 9,5 hits, 3,16 wounds, 1,05 woundsafter saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen killed a single MEQ. on average.
10 guardsmen with FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 18 shots, 9 hits, 3 wounds, 1 wound after saves.
0-12": 37 shots, 18,5 hits, 6,16 wounds, 2,05 wounds after saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen and 35 points of Officer kills 2 MEQ's on average.
Yes, the firepower of Infantry Squads is gamebreaking indeed.
And I agree with those above who state that if you bring a list that can't deal with 60-80 guardsmen, then you brought a very peculiar (read: bad/un-optimized) list.
If 60-80 T3 5+ guardsmen is giving you trouble, I would like to see you deal with a swarm of Orks or Nids.
MinscS2 wrote: Reading trough this thread I feel like I'm doing something massively wrong when I play IG.
Most of, if not all of my regular guardsmen are usually dead by the end of the game, even against Thousand Sons.
(Who I'm currently on a loosing-streak against, but that has more to do with my opponent using loaded dice...at least it feels that way.)
I also feel that non-guard players are massively overvaluing lasguns.
I mean sure, on occasion the humble lasgun can blast a Knight of the table, but most of the time, it's just a bunch of dice being rolled for seemingly very little effect.
10 Guardsmen without FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 9 shots, 4,5 hits, 1,5 wounds, 0,5 wounds after saves.
0-12" 19 shots, 9,5 hits, 3,16 wounds, 1,05 woundsafter saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen killed a single MEQ. on average.
10 guardsmen with FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 18 shots, 9 hits, 3 wounds, 1 wound after saves.
0-12": 37 shots, 18,5 hits, 6,16 wounds, 2,05 wounds after saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen and 35 points of Officer kills 2 MEQ's on average.
Yes, the firepower of Infantry Squads is gamebreaking indeed.
And I agree with those above who state that if you bring a list that can't deal with 60-80 guardsmen, then you brought a very peculiar (read: bad/un-optimized) list.
If 60-80 T3 5+ guardsmen is giving you trouble, I would like to see you deal with a swarm of Orks or Nids.
The issue with guardsmen is not surviving all game, but rather forcing the enemy to waste expensive guns and models to clear out those guardsmen over two or three so they can reach the enemy tanks/knights shelling your army unhindered.
Guardsmen are cheap and can take a lot more damage before dying than most comparable units while still providing a non-trivial amount of shooting (killing two MEQ for 75 points is GOOD for a troops unit), while you have access to powerful weapons with high range which also very hard to kill in form of leman russes, baneblades and knights. Unlike other armies, IG does not need to maneuver or move in range in order to maximize their shooting, so you are unlikely to expose something you do not want to expose. For your opponent, it means if you can't get through the guardsmen before the tanks and knights have obliterated all key targets, the game is lost.
That's kind of how guard should operate, it's just that guardsmen are bit too efficient at holding the line.
Continuity wrote: Is 5pts guardsmen really "screwing them over"? If so then what they've done to cultists must have violated at least a quarter of the Geneva Convention by now
Would it screw over Infantry Squads? Probably not. I mean, maybe a bit but it's not like guard have many other options when it comes to troops.
However, what people seem to forget is that IG has infantry beyond Infantry Squads. And if you bump up Infantry Squads, then the other infantry will all have to go up in price as well.
And so by increasing the cost of Infantry Squads (which are taken too much), you're also inadvertently increasing the cost of units that are already barely ever taken (Special Weapon Squads, Veterans, Command Squads etc.).
Galas wrote: Yeah I don't have a problem with the guardsmen's firepower. The problem I have is with the 3 manticores, 3 Tank Commanders, 3 catachan basilisks...
So shouldn't the focus be on nerfing those things instead?
Continuity wrote: Is 5pts guardsmen really "screwing them over"? If so then what they've done to cultists must have violated at least a quarter of the Geneva Convention by now
Would it screw over Infantry Squads? Probably not. I mean, maybe a bit but it's not like guard have many other options when it comes to troops.
However, what people seem to forget is that IG has infantry beyond Infantry Squads. And if you bump up Infantry Squads, then the other infantry will all have to go up in price as well.
And so by increasing the cost of Infantry Squads (which are taken too much), you're also inadvertently increasing the cost of units that are already barely ever taken (Special Weapon Squads, Veterans, Command Squads etc.).
Galas wrote: Yeah I don't have a problem with the guardsmen's firepower. The problem I have is with the 3 manticores, 3 Tank Commanders, 3 catachan basilisks...
So shouldn't the focus be on nerfing those things instead?
Spreelock wrote: Hey, this might be already mentioned here, but does the new apostle prayers affect cultists? If I remember correctly, there was one prayer that buffs wounding +1, similar to the veterans stratagem..
Yes they do. Apostles are like the shepherd for cultists.
Cultists lose their legion trait, and apostle prayers affect friendly legion units. How do they affect them? Or is it they have the trait and simply receive no benefit?
Edit: I really don't know and haven't seen the datasheet. Please let me know if I can stop painting 40 EC cultists.
MinscS2 wrote: Reading trough this thread I feel like I'm doing something massively wrong when I play IG.
Most of, if not all of my regular guardsmen are usually dead by the end of the game, even against Thousand Sons.
(Who I'm currently on a loosing-streak against, but that has more to do with my opponent using loaded dice...at least it feels that way.)
I also feel that non-guard players are massively overvaluing lasguns.
I mean sure, on occasion the humble lasgun can blast a Knight of the table, but most of the time, it's just a bunch of dice being rolled for seemingly very little effect.
10 Guardsmen without FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 9 shots, 4,5 hits, 1,5 wounds, 0,5 wounds after saves.
0-12" 19 shots, 9,5 hits, 3,16 wounds, 1,05 woundsafter saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen killed a single MEQ. on average.
10 guardsmen with FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 18 shots, 9 hits, 3 wounds, 1 wound after saves.
0-12": 37 shots, 18,5 hits, 6,16 wounds, 2,05 wounds after saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen and 35 points of Officer kills 2 MEQ's on average.
Yes, the firepower of Infantry Squads is gamebreaking indeed.
And I agree with those above who state that if you bring a list that can't deal with 60-80 guardsmen, then you brought a very peculiar (read: bad/un-optimized) list.
If 60-80 T3 5+ guardsmen is giving you trouble, I would like to see you deal with a swarm of Orks or Nids.
The issue with guardsmen is not surviving all game, but rather forcing the enemy to waste expensive guns and models to clear out those guardsmen over two or three so they can reach the enemy tanks/knights shelling your army unhindered.
Guardsmen are cheap and can take a lot more damage before dying than most comparable units while still providing a non-trivial amount of shooting (killing two MEQ for 75 points is GOOD for a troops unit), while you have access to powerful weapons with high range which also very hard to kill in form of leman russes, baneblades and knights. Unlike other armies, IG does not need to maneuver or move in range in order to maximize their shooting, so you are unlikely to expose something you do not want to expose. For your opponent, it means if you can't get through the guardsmen before the tanks and knights have obliterated all key targets, the game is lost.
That's kind of how guard should operate, it's just that guardsmen are bit too efficient at holding the line.
Okay, then try and fight Orks. If you can't deal with 60+ guarden, how are you going to deal with 90+ Orks, where they kill almost anything they touch in CC thanks to Skarboys, Ghaz and Exploding 6s?
Spreelock wrote: Hey, this might be already mentioned here, but does the new apostle prayers affect cultists? If I remember correctly, there was one prayer that buffs wounding +1, similar to the veterans stratagem..
Yes they do. Apostles are like the shepherd for cultists.
Cultists lose their legion trait, and apostle prayers affect friendly legion units. How do they affect them? Or is it they have the trait and simply receive no benefit?
Edit: I really don't know and haven't seen the datasheet. Please let me know if I can stop painting 40 EC cultists.
Cultists are still <LEGION>, they just don't get the legion trait which is a different specific thing. It basically just means that Alpha Legion cultists aren't -1 to hit, stuff like that.
Galas wrote: Yeah I don't have a problem with the guardsmen's firepower. The problem I have is with the 3 manticores, 3 Tank Commanders, 3 catachan basilisks...
So shouldn't the focus be on nerfing those things instead?
Well, some of them yes, but that was my point. The problem is the combination of having the best chaff in the game with the best long range firepower of the game. And the best LOS ignoring forepower of the game.
I think a lot of people in here are missing the point.
Lasguns are just icing on the cake. Guardsmen would be worth 4 points with no gun at all.
They are the ultimate time buying/stalling unit. It's not about "dealing with" 90 guardsmen. It's about surviving all the crap behind them you can't physically get to.
Orks are 7 ppm, and their defenses are not significantly better. So you are removing an Ork army almost twice a fast as a guard army.
Nid hordes are more comparable, as hive guard are terrifying, but Nids don't really have a baneblade equivalent. And termigants are FAR less capable than guardsmen.
And no, we shouldn't focus on the units that the guardsmen are protecting necessarily. Guard tanks might be much more balanced if they could actually be accessed in melee. But they are not, since there is always a huge wall that can stall for a long, long time. Even <fly> units can't get around them really anymore. Clever placement just shuts it down.
If there was a way to shoot before movement, this wouldn't be so bad. But guardsmen are quite literally killing the enemy army in the movement phase without firing a shot. Or rather, setting them up to be killed by the undercosted artillery and command russes.
Orks are actually FAR easier to deal with than guard, since melee is such a gak show in 8th. They are coming to me, can't get all the orks fighting anymore, etc. Now the 45 lootas behind grot shields is horrific, but that's a VERY IG-esque set up. Murderous ranged units that can't be touched because of cheap chaff. See a theme?
Galas wrote: Yeah I don't have a problem with the guardsmen's firepower. The problem I have is with the 3 manticores, 3 Tank Commanders, 3 catachan basilisks...
So shouldn't the focus be on nerfing those things instead?
Well, some of them yes, but that was my point. The problem is the combination of having the best chaff in the game with the best long range firepower of the game. And the best LOS ignoring forepower of the game.
MinscS2 wrote: Reading trough this thread I feel like I'm doing something massively wrong when I play IG.
Most of, if not all of my regular guardsmen are usually dead by the end of the game, even against Thousand Sons.
(Who I'm currently on a loosing-streak against, but that has more to do with my opponent using loaded dice...at least it feels that way.)
I also feel that non-guard players are massively overvaluing lasguns.
I mean sure, on occasion the humble lasgun can blast a Knight of the table, but most of the time, it's just a bunch of dice being rolled for seemingly very little effect.
10 Guardsmen without FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 9 shots, 4,5 hits, 1,5 wounds, 0,5 wounds after saves.
0-12" 19 shots, 9,5 hits, 3,16 wounds, 1,05 woundsafter saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen killed a single MEQ. on average.
10 guardsmen with FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 18 shots, 9 hits, 3 wounds, 1 wound after saves.
0-12": 37 shots, 18,5 hits, 6,16 wounds, 2,05 wounds after saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen and 35 points of Officer kills 2 MEQ's on average.
Yes, the firepower of Infantry Squads is gamebreaking indeed.
And I agree with those above who state that if you bring a list that can't deal with 60-80 guardsmen, then you brought a very peculiar (read: bad/un-optimized) list.
If 60-80 T3 5+ guardsmen is giving you trouble, I would like to see you deal with a swarm of Orks or Nids.
The issue with guardsmen is not surviving all game, but rather forcing the enemy to waste expensive guns and models to clear out those guardsmen over two or three so they can reach the enemy tanks/knights shelling your army unhindered.
Guardsmen are cheap and can take a lot more damage before dying than most comparable units while still providing a non-trivial amount of shooting (killing two MEQ for 75 points is GOOD for a troops unit), while you have access to powerful weapons with high range which also very hard to kill in form of leman russes, baneblades and knights. Unlike other armies, IG does not need to maneuver or move in range in order to maximize their shooting, so you are unlikely to expose something you do not want to expose. For your opponent, it means if you can't get through the guardsmen before the tanks and knights have obliterated all key targets, the game is lost.
That's kind of how guard should operate, it's just that guardsmen are bit too efficient at holding the line.
Okay, then try and fight Orks. If you can't deal with 60+ guarden, how are you going to deal with 90+ Orks, where they kill almost anything they touch in CC thanks to Skarboys, Ghaz and Exploding 6s?
Ironically 30 ork boys are 210 points and only rock a 6+, 5+ in cover
That is much easier to wade through than 30 Guardsmen for 120 that rick a 5+, 4+ in cover.
To remove the same points you would have to wade through 50+ Guardsmen
I do have to agree here, I was happy enough with discussing other stuff as a point of comparison but the last few pages seem to be far more discussion of Guard and their variations. We really don't need yet another guard thread masquerading as a cultists one.
Pleasestop wrote: Okay, then try and fight Orks. If you can't deal with 60+ guarden, how are you going to deal with 90+ Orks, where they kill almost anything they touch in CC thanks to Skarboys, Ghaz and Exploding 6s?
First of all... that's what you are taking as an example? None of that is anywhere near competitive. Skarboyz are less survivable than imperial guardsmen, cost 7 points per model and a CP per unit, Ghaz is a overcosted by a lot and the goff kulture is nothing but overkill. In addition, if I can kill 60 guardsmen (240 points) with heavy bolter shots, those same heavy bolters will kill 74 skarboyz (518 points and 3 CP). And that's not even considering that those skarboyz can't chose to be in cover. Second - Kill almost anything they touch? I just drive a PBC into a mob each and they are stuck in combat unable to charge for the rest of the game, neutering almost half of a 2000 point army.
The more important part - there is not a single ork unit that even remotely compares to a castellan, LRBT, bane blades, shadow swords, basilisks, manticores in shooting. Ork shooting is easily killed, short ranged and cannot ignore LoS and mostly has less strengt, AP and damage than their imperial counterparts: Lots of units will not be in range or sight of their preferred targets turn 1. In addition, the goff will have less shooting in general, because they spent 835 on Thrakka and his skarboyz, as opposed to the 310 points spent on the loyal 32.
MinscS2 wrote: Reading trough this thread I feel like I'm doing something massively wrong when I play IG.
Most of, if not all of my regular guardsmen are usually dead by the end of the game, even against Thousand Sons.
(Who I'm currently on a loosing-streak against, but that has more to do with my opponent using loaded dice...at least it feels that way.)
I also feel that non-guard players are massively overvaluing lasguns.
I mean sure, on occasion the humble lasgun can blast a Knight of the table, but most of the time, it's just a bunch of dice being rolled for seemingly very little effect.
10 Guardsmen without FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 9 shots, 4,5 hits, 1,5 wounds, 0,5 wounds after saves.
0-12" 19 shots, 9,5 hits, 3,16 wounds, 1,05 woundsafter saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen killed a single MEQ. on average.
10 guardsmen with FRFSRF against a MEQ:
12-24": 18 shots, 9 hits, 3 wounds, 1 wound after saves.
0-12": 37 shots, 18,5 hits, 6,16 wounds, 2,05 wounds after saves.
At optimal range, 40 points of guardsmen and 35 points of Officer kills 2 MEQ's on average.
Yes, the firepower of Infantry Squads is gamebreaking indeed.
And I agree with those above who state that if you bring a list that can't deal with 60-80 guardsmen, then you brought a very peculiar (read: bad/un-optimized) list.
If 60-80 T3 5+ guardsmen is giving you trouble, I would like to see you deal with a swarm of Orks or Nids.
The issue with guardsmen is not surviving all game, but rather forcing the enemy to waste expensive guns and models to clear out those guardsmen over two or three so they can reach the enemy tanks/knights shelling your army unhindered.
Guardsmen are cheap and can take a lot more damage before dying than most comparable units while still providing a non-trivial amount of shooting (killing two MEQ for 75 points is GOOD for a troops unit), while you have access to powerful weapons with high range which also very hard to kill in form of leman russes, baneblades and knights. Unlike other armies, IG does not need to maneuver or move in range in order to maximize their shooting, so you are unlikely to expose something you do not want to expose. For your opponent, it means if you can't get through the guardsmen before the tanks and knights have obliterated all key targets, the game is lost.
That's kind of how guard should operate, it's just that guardsmen are bit too efficient at holding the line.
Okay, then try and fight Orks. If you can't deal with 60+ guarden, how are you going to deal with 90+ Orks, where they kill almost anything they touch in CC thanks to Skarboys, Ghaz and Exploding 6s?
pretty simple for guard or most armies to deal with those orks. The issue is the guardsmen are a way to cheap screen with a mediocre offinsive capability. so those orks are the threat and cannot break through more than 1 rank of 3 bubblewrapped ranks in front of tanks. If there are guardsmen left in a squad they fall back without penalty and set up as a screen again, and might even get to fire on the orks that charged them. meanwhile those 30 man squads of boys are hemoraging orks and due to a low leadership once youdrop em below 10 they are probably runing away.
Skarboys is not great and costs CP Ghaz is overcosted by around 30% for what he does compared to imperium optins... btu that is just how orks work according to GW
as for the cultists part here... I do think they are a 5 point model as well.
Here's the thing. 90% of this forum is dedicated to group counseling people venting about math. Seriously. Less than 1 post about positive changes or happiness in the game this forum is dedicated to.
The General Forums is the Youtube comments section of Dakka Dakka.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Here's the thing. 90% of this forum is dedicated to group counseling people venting about math. Seriously. Less than 1 post about positive changes or happiness in the game this forum is dedicated to.
The General Forums is the Youtube comments section of Dakka Dakka.
Good point.
In general, I am very happy with the upcoming Chaos changes, I see a lot of dusty units that might be fun to play, even if not completely competitive. There you go, at least the post is partial positive.
Chaos players are generally salty because almost every single rules update in the game up until about 6 months ago, delivered some kind of nerf to the army. This is not hyperbole, this is documented fact, please feel free to take a look, hell, we'd get nerfed when completely unrelated codices would drop, it was absurd.
For april fools, the mods could implement something that replaces all variants of "guardsmen" with random troops from other armies and watch the world burn.
Jidmah wrote: For april fools, the mods could implement something that replaces all variants of "guardsmen" with random troops from other armies and watch the world burn.
The mods replacing 'guardsmen' with 'Grey Knight Strike Squads' would make my day.
Jidmah wrote: For april fools, the mods could implement something that replaces all variants of "guardsmen" with random troops from other armies and watch the world burn.
The mods replacing 'guardsmen' with 'Grey Knight Strike Squads' would make my day.
Pleasestop wrote: Okay, then try and fight Orks. If you can't deal with 60+ guarden, how are you going to deal with 90+ Orks, where they kill almost anything they touch in CC thanks to Skarboys, Ghaz and Exploding 6s?
First of all... that's what you are taking as an example?
None of that is anywhere near competitive. Skarboyz are less survivable than imperial guardsmen, cost 7 points per model and a CP per unit, Ghaz is a overcosted by a lot and the goff kulture is nothing but overkill. In addition, if I can kill 60 guardsmen (240 points) with heavy bolter shots, those same heavy bolters will kill 74 skarboyz (518 points and 3 CP). And that's not even considering that those skarboyz can't chose to be in cover.
Second - Kill almost anything they touch? I just drive a PBC into a mob each and they are stuck in combat unable to charge for the rest of the game, neutering almost half of a 2000 point army.
The more important part - there is not a single ork unit that even remotely compares to a castellan, LRBT, bane blades, shadow swords, basilisks, manticores in shooting. Ork shooting is easily killed, short ranged and cannot ignore LoS and mostly has less strengt, AP and damage than their imperial counterparts: Lots of units will not be in range or sight of their preferred targets turn 1. In addition, the goff will have less shooting in general, because they spent 835 on Thrakka and his skarboyz, as opposed to the 310 points spent on the loyal 32.
Not to be an imperial apologist but it is simply untrue that ork weapons have less AP/Strength/ and damager than imperial counter parts. Most of their big guns have AP-4 and high damage. The only thing making them worse is they don't hit as good...Unless they are freebootas...in which case they are just better. In general - orks are pretty dang good.
What do orks lack? They don't have undercosted infantry.
Not to derail the thread or anything but I keep seeing this mention of 10 Imperial Guard tanks in fictional Games were somehow they all have line of sight and can all be covered by this other fictional wall of 60 bodies that all seemed to get cover despite you having none and somehow you're not bringing enough of anything else to be able to do any damage to them.
Also I never understood the hate of basilisks. I mean I know they get the rerolls of number of shots so even if you always got six shots you only ever hit three times dealing usually around two wounds that can be multiplied to 4 on average after damage. If you're shooting at hiding infantry typically you're only killing two. And if you're shooting a tank it probably couldn't hide anyways bus negating its ignore line of sight.
Des702 wrote: Not to derail the thread or anything but I keep seeing this mention of 10 Imperial Guard tanks in fictional Games were somehow they all have line of sight and can all be covered by this other fictional wall of 60 bodies that all seemed to get cover despite you having none and somehow you're not bringing enough of anything else to be able to do any damage to them.
Also I never understood the hate of basilisks. I mean I know they get the rerolls of number of shots so even if you always got six shots you only ever hit three times dealing usually around two wounds that can be multiplied to 4 on average after damage. If you're shooting at hiding infantry typically you're only killing two. And if you're shooting a tank it probably couldn't hide anyways bus negating its ignore line of sight.
Your missing the prblem of ignoring LoS it means you can park your basilisks in a corner behind some terrain and your opponents ability to effect them is almost negligible.
Now if Cultists had some of that shenanigans to screen they might be worth 5ppm
Pleasestop wrote: Okay, then try and fight Orks. If you can't deal with 60+ guarden, how are you going to deal with 90+ Orks, where they kill almost anything they touch in CC thanks to Skarboys, Ghaz and Exploding 6s?
First of all... that's what you are taking as an example?
None of that is anywhere near competitive. Skarboyz are less survivable than imperial guardsmen, cost 7 points per model and a CP per unit, Ghaz is a overcosted by a lot and the goff kulture is nothing but overkill. In addition, if I can kill 60 guardsmen (240 points) with heavy bolter shots, those same heavy bolters will kill 74 skarboyz (518 points and 3 CP). And that's not even considering that those skarboyz can't chose to be in cover.
Second - Kill almost anything they touch? I just drive a PBC into a mob each and they are stuck in combat unable to charge for the rest of the game, neutering almost half of a 2000 point army.
The more important part - there is not a single ork unit that even remotely compares to a castellan, LRBT, bane blades, shadow swords, basilisks, manticores in shooting. Ork shooting is easily killed, short ranged and cannot ignore LoS and mostly has less strengt, AP and damage than their imperial counterparts: Lots of units will not be in range or sight of their preferred targets turn 1. In addition, the goff will have less shooting in general, because they spent 835 on Thrakka and his skarboyz, as opposed to the 310 points spent on the loyal 32.
Not to be an imperial apologist but it is simply untrue that ork weapons have less AP/Strength/ and damager than imperial counter parts. Most of their big guns have AP-4 and high damage. The only thing making them worse is they don't hit as good...Unless they are freebootas...in which case they are just better. In general - orks are pretty dang good.
What do orks lack? They don't have undercosted infantry.
You also forgot that most of their AP-4 High Damage guns are pretty overcosted or on bad platforms.
Your missing the prblem of ignoring LoS it means you can park your basilisks in a corner behind some terrain and your opponents ability to effect them is almost negligible.
Now if Cultists had some of that shenanigans to screen they might be worth 5ppm
This was always something they could do and no one cared before...
Honestly losing one to two guys a turn to a unit that's desperately trying to make its points back it's not particularly scary in my eyes. besides that Gun shield is fairly tall so there's not a lot of terrain to hide behind you can usually hide one maybe two Max on a board. I mean whirlwinds can do this and they wound at pretty much the same rate with a little less AP. But no one seems to care about them. Since the edition change I'd say my basilisks do less without templates...
As for fixing IS points and cultist I would say they are not significant different enough to warrant different points and should both be 5 points. The points granularity doesn't allow for it.
Pleasestop wrote: Okay, then try and fight Orks. If you can't deal with 60+ guarden, how are you going to deal with 90+ Orks, where they kill almost anything they touch in CC thanks to Skarboys, Ghaz and Exploding 6s?
First of all... that's what you are taking as an example?
None of that is anywhere near competitive. Skarboyz are less survivable than imperial guardsmen, cost 7 points per model and a CP per unit, Ghaz is a overcosted by a lot and the goff kulture is nothing but overkill. In addition, if I can kill 60 guardsmen (240 points) with heavy bolter shots, those same heavy bolters will kill 74 skarboyz (518 points and 3 CP). And that's not even considering that those skarboyz can't chose to be in cover.
Second - Kill almost anything they touch? I just drive a PBC into a mob each and they are stuck in combat unable to charge for the rest of the game, neutering almost half of a 2000 point army.
The more important part - there is not a single ork unit that even remotely compares to a castellan, LRBT, bane blades, shadow swords, basilisks, manticores in shooting. Ork shooting is easily killed, short ranged and cannot ignore LoS and mostly has less strengt, AP and damage than their imperial counterparts: Lots of units will not be in range or sight of their preferred targets turn 1. In addition, the goff will have less shooting in general, because they spent 835 on Thrakka and his skarboyz, as opposed to the 310 points spent on the loyal 32.
Not to be an imperial apologist but it is simply untrue that ork weapons have less AP/Strength/ and damager than imperial counter parts. Most of their big guns have AP-4 and high damage. The only thing making them worse is they don't hit as good...Unless they are freebootas...in which case they are just better. In general - orks are pretty dang good.
What do orks lack? They don't have undercosted infantry.
You also forgot that most of their AP-4 High Damage guns are pretty overcosted or on bad platforms.
its also ignoring that most of that stronger shooting are made of tissue paper (but not costed as if they were) and if freebootas in order to get the +1 to hit they have to be within 24 inches of a unit that destroyed a unit. and it is just that phase. So to properly use you have to overkill something (not easy with BS5+ and random shot weapons) and then you get that .16% better hit chance. usually you are better off with badmoons for rerolls of 1 or deathskulls for one reroll to hit and one reroll to wound per unit. as for being "pretty dang good" that must be why they did so well at LVO and have been placing so high in tournaments... oh wait...
Des702 wrote: Not to derail the thread or anything but I keep seeing this mention of 10 Imperial Guard tanks in fictional Games were somehow they all have line of sight and can all be covered by this other fictional wall of 60 bodies that all seemed to get cover despite you having none and somehow you're not bringing enough of anything else to be able to do any damage to them.
Also I never understood the hate of basilisks. I mean I know they get the rerolls of number of shots so even if you always got six shots you only ever hit three times dealing usually around two wounds that can be multiplied to 4 on average after damage. If you're shooting at hiding infantry typically you're only killing two. And if you're shooting a tank it probably couldn't hide anyways bus negating its ignore line of sight.
Your missing the prblem of ignoring LoS it means you can park your basilisks in a corner behind some terrain and your opponents ability to effect them is almost negligible.
Now if Cultists had some of that shenanigans to screen they might be worth 5ppm
Honestly guard, cultists, all of it should be more like 9-10 ppm. Their numbers are to large, it doesn’t reflect fluff really well. When I can have more guardian defenders than guardsman or cultists it’ll be fluffy
Des702 wrote: Not to derail the thread or anything but I keep seeing this mention of 10 Imperial Guard tanks in fictional Games were somehow they all have line of sight and can all be covered by this other fictional wall of 60 bodies that all seemed to get cover despite you having none and somehow you're not bringing enough of anything else to be able to do any damage to them.
Also I never understood the hate of basilisks. I mean I know they get the rerolls of number of shots so even if you always got six shots you only ever hit three times dealing usually around two wounds that can be multiplied to 4 on average after damage. If you're shooting at hiding infantry typically you're only killing two. And if you're shooting a tank it probably couldn't hide anyways bus negating its ignore line of sight.
Your missing the prblem of ignoring LoS it means you can park your basilisks in a corner behind some terrain and your opponents ability to effect them is almost negligible.
Now if Cultists had some of that shenanigans to screen they might be worth 5ppm
Honestly guard, cultists, all of it should be more like 9-10 ppm. Their numbers are to large, it doesn’t reflect fluff really well. When I can have more guardian defenders than guardsman or cultists it’ll be fluffy
Des702 wrote: Not to derail the thread or anything but I keep seeing this mention of 10 Imperial Guard tanks in fictional Games were somehow they all have line of sight and can all be covered by this other fictional wall of 60 bodies that all seemed to get cover despite you having none and somehow you're not bringing enough of anything else to be able to do any damage to them.
Also I never understood the hate of basilisks. I mean I know they get the rerolls of number of shots so even if you always got six shots you only ever hit three times dealing usually around two wounds that can be multiplied to 4 on average after damage. If you're shooting at hiding infantry typically you're only killing two. And if you're shooting a tank it probably couldn't hide anyways bus negating its ignore line of sight.
Your missing the prblem of ignoring LoS it means you can park your basilisks in a corner behind some terrain and your opponents ability to effect them is almost negligible.
Now if Cultists had some of that shenanigans to screen they might be worth 5ppm
Honestly guard, cultists, all of it should be more like 9-10 ppm. Their numbers are to large, it doesn’t reflect fluff really well. When I can have more guardian defenders than guardsman or cultists it’ll be fluffy
If a guardsmen is 9 ppm, what is a Scion?
You really did not understand that statement as sarcasm?
Des702 wrote: Not to derail the thread or anything but I keep seeing this mention of 10 Imperial Guard tanks in fictional Games were somehow they all have line of sight and can all be covered by this other fictional wall of 60 bodies that all seemed to get cover despite you having none and somehow you're not bringing enough of anything else to be able to do any damage to them.
Also I never understood the hate of basilisks. I mean I know they get the rerolls of number of shots so even if you always got six shots you only ever hit three times dealing usually around two wounds that can be multiplied to 4 on average after damage. If you're shooting at hiding infantry typically you're only killing two. And if you're shooting a tank it probably couldn't hide anyways bus negating its ignore line of sight.
Your missing the prblem of ignoring LoS it means you can park your basilisks in a corner behind some terrain and your opponents ability to effect them is almost negligible.
Now if Cultists had some of that shenanigans to screen they might be worth 5ppm
Honestly guard, cultists, all of it should be more like 9-10 ppm. Their numbers are to large, it doesn’t reflect fluff really well. When I can have more guardian defenders than guardsman or cultists it’ll be fluffy
If a guardsmen is 9 ppm, what is a Scion?
You really did not understand that statement as sarcasm?
Bobthehero wrote:Yeah Apple, you dropped your sarcasm-o-meter or something
Don’t you guys remember? There have been a few people over time talking about increasing point limits for armies for better granularity, as well as bringing all point costs up. I thought this was one of those.
Des702 wrote: Not to derail the thread or anything but I keep seeing this mention of 10 Imperial Guard tanks in fictional Games were somehow they all have line of sight and can all be covered by this other fictional wall of 60 bodies that all seemed to get cover despite you having none and somehow you're not bringing enough of anything else to be able to do any damage to them.
Also I never understood the hate of basilisks. I mean I know they get the rerolls of number of shots so even if you always got six shots you only ever hit three times dealing usually around two wounds that can be multiplied to 4 on average after damage. If you're shooting at hiding infantry typically you're only killing two. And if you're shooting a tank it probably couldn't hide anyways bus negating its ignore line of sight.
Your missing the prblem of ignoring LoS it means you can park your basilisks in a corner behind some terrain and your opponents ability to effect them is almost negligible.
Now if Cultists had some of that shenanigans to screen they might be worth 5ppm
Honestly guard, cultists, all of it should be more like 9-10 ppm. Their numbers are to large, it doesn’t reflect fluff really well. When I can have more guardian defenders than guardsman or cultists it’ll be fluffy
If a guardsmen is 9 ppm, what is a Scion?
You really did not understand that statement as sarcasm?
Bobthehero wrote:Yeah Apple, you dropped your sarcasm-o-meter or something
Don’t you guys remember? There have been a few people over time talking about increasing point limits for armies for better granularity, as well as bringing all point costs up. I thought this was one of those.
Yes, however this one posted and I paraphrase, "there are to much IG or cultists on the board and too little guardians, due to fluff we should increase the points on IG and Cultists therefore"
Fluff = guardian= eldar = desperate last ditch defenders of a dying species.
IG)/cultists = human = waaaaaaay to many around to care about.
Des702 wrote: Not to derail the thread or anything but I keep seeing this mention of 10 Imperial Guard tanks in fictional Games were somehow they all have line of sight and can all be covered by this other fictional wall of 60 bodies that all seemed to get cover despite you having none and somehow you're not bringing enough of anything else to be able to do any damage to them.
Also I never understood the hate of basilisks. I mean I know they get the rerolls of number of shots so even if you always got six shots you only ever hit three times dealing usually around two wounds that can be multiplied to 4 on average after damage. If you're shooting at hiding infantry typically you're only killing two. And if you're shooting a tank it probably couldn't hide anyways bus negating its ignore line of sight.
Your missing the prblem of ignoring LoS it means you can park your basilisks in a corner behind some terrain and your opponents ability to effect them is almost negligible.
Now if Cultists had some of that shenanigans to screen they might be worth 5ppm
Honestly guard, cultists, all of it should be more like 9-10 ppm. Their numbers are to large, it doesn’t reflect fluff really well. When I can have more guardian defenders than guardsman or cultists it’ll be fluffy
If a guardsmen is 9 ppm, what is a Scion?
You really did not understand that statement as sarcasm?
Bobthehero wrote:Yeah Apple, you dropped your sarcasm-o-meter or something
Don’t you guys remember? There have been a few people over time talking about increasing point limits for armies for better granularity, as well as bringing all point costs up. I thought this was one of those.
Yes, however this one posted and I paraphrase, "there are to much IG or cultists on the board and too little guardians, due to fluff we should increase the points on IG and Cultists therefore"
Fluff = guardian= eldar = desperate last ditch defenders of a dying species.
IG)/cultists = human = waaaaaaay to many around to care about.
Acts like I care about the knife-ears and their social roles.
). Just like in 7th Tau were fine because they didn't won tournaments, because it was all Demon spam and Eldar.
