Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 17:19:46


Post by: Sazzlefrats


I'm going to start off with... twice the cost to get -1 ap combat weapons on a slow unit, that isn't likely to see combat...

Its possible I missed something, but at their cost I don't see myself fielding them, unless I'm desperate for deepstriking.



* I did mean to say at 115ppm. I know that the Chaos Codex 2.0 was a typo (thanks for the correction).


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 17:20:58


Post by: Wayniac


Not at all. 65 was too cheap but 115 is way too much. should be like 90ish IMHO.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 17:29:56


Post by: Elbows


I'd definitely say no, but I also fully believe the units in that box were pre-CA18 etc. I think they'll all see a points drop later this year.

I'd say, despite amazing guns, they're probably 85-95 a model realistically.

Personally I don't care about the new models so I'll be fielding my old Oblits with old stats and points costs.

PS: Yes you did miss something, if you skipped the two additional shots, the bonus toughness, and the bonus wound...it's more than some close combat weapons.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 17:42:35


Post by: Argive


arent they the same cost but improves stat line ??


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 17:54:41


Post by: Vaktathi


They should really be more like 85/90pts at their current stats, not 115. They are really expensive for what they offer.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 17:56:55


Post by: Wayniac


 Argive wrote:
arent they the same cost but improves stat line ??


Yes and no. Shadowspear had them as unit size 1-3 at 115ppm. The CSM Codex 2.0 has what is likely a typo and lists them back at 65ppm with a unit size of 3. RAW, Codex 2.0 is the most recent publication so technically until it's FAQ'd yes, they are the same cost but improved stats and require 3 models in a unit.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 17:58:48


Post by: Elbows


Only a couple of internet-RAW blowhards will use that excuse. They're 115 points a model and 1-3 in a unit. The new CSM codex simply copy-pasted the old Obliterator entry, so ignore it.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:02:23


Post by: Wayniac


 Elbows wrote:
Only a couple of internet-RAW blowhards will use that excuse. They're 115 points a model and 1-3 in a unit. The new CSM codex simply copy-pasted the old Obliterator entry, so ignore it.


Yes, but by RAW GW says the latest publication takes precedence. So they are technically correct (the best kind of correct) and many stores, including my own, are ruling that the Codex takes precedence until FAQ'd for events. So, for example, there is a tournament next weekend. Unless it's FAQ'd beforehand, Obliterators are 65ppm with a unit size of 3 until otherwise stated, because that's RAW.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:06:56


Post by: Samuhell


 Elbows wrote:
Only a couple of internet-RAW blowhards will use that excuse. They're 115 points a model and 1-3 in a unit. The new CSM codex simply copy-pasted the old Obliterator entry, so ignore it.


Sorry to argue with you but the datasheet is the new one, the points at the back seem to be out but as it stands obliterators are 65 ppm and 3 in a unit


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:13:40


Post by: Argive


Yeah i would argue that some mini book you get with shadowspear is not going to take precedence over the actual codex that was published afterwards.

GW is at it again.... *Sigh*


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:17:05


Post by: BaconCatBug


 Samuhell wrote:
 Elbows wrote:
Only a couple of internet-RAW blowhards will use that excuse. They're 115 points a model and 1-3 in a unit. The new CSM codex simply copy-pasted the old Obliterator entry, so ignore it.


Sorry to argue with you but the datasheet is the new one, the points at the back seem to be out but as it stands obliterators are 65 ppm and 3 in a unit
"People who follow the rules are bad." Seems legit. I can only hope GW remember to actually fix this.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:20:03


Post by: Elbows


 Samuhell wrote:
 Elbows wrote:
Only a couple of internet-RAW blowhards will use that excuse. They're 115 points a model and 1-3 in a unit. The new CSM codex simply copy-pasted the old Obliterator entry, so ignore it.


Sorry to argue with you but the datasheet is the new one, the points at the back seem to be out but as it stands obliterators are 65 ppm and 3 in a unit


Sure, and people are welcome to hide behind that excuse as they always do with misprintings in books. It doesn't make them any less of a tool in my opinion.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:29:18


Post by: MinscS2


New Oblits are probably the most OP unit in the game at 65 ppm, but they're overpriced at 115 ppm.

They should probably be around 85-95 ppm with their new profile.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:29:34


Post by: Samuhell


 Elbows wrote:
 Samuhell wrote:
 Elbows wrote:
Only a couple of internet-RAW blowhards will use that excuse. They're 115 points a model and 1-3 in a unit. The new CSM codex simply copy-pasted the old Obliterator entry, so ignore it.


Sorry to argue with you but the datasheet is the new one, the points at the back seem to be out but as it stands obliterators are 65 ppm and 3 in a unit


Sure, and people are welcome to hide behind that excuse as they always do with misprintings in books. It doesn't make them any less of a tool in my opinion.


Wow, so as it stands mate you're going to throw insults for people playing RAW. I'd think about your approach to gaming. I'm using my book not some pamphlet from a box game I haven't bought. Your attitude stinks


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:32:48


Post by: MinscS2


Playing RAW when you know it's not RAI and will (or at the very least, should) get errata:ed would make you a TFG in my gaming-circle.

Of course, this being dakka, I expect the RAI-community to be in the minority.

In before "But how do you know that the new RAW-rules aren't RAI? "


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:35:04


Post by: BaconCatBug


 MinscS2 wrote:
Playing RAW when you know it's not RAI and will (or at the very least, should) get errata:ed would make you a TFG in my gaming-circle.

Of course, this being dakka, I expect the RAI-community to be in the minority.

In before "But how do you know that the new RAW-rules aren't RAI? "
But seriously, how do you know? Reductio ad absurdum is no longer applicable to 8th edition, so we have literally no way of knowing what GW is intending.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:36:16


Post by: Formosa


 Elbows wrote:
 Samuhell wrote:
 Elbows wrote:
Only a couple of internet-RAW blowhards will use that excuse. They're 115 points a model and 1-3 in a unit. The new CSM codex simply copy-pasted the old Obliterator entry, so ignore it.


Sorry to argue with you but the datasheet is the new one, the points at the back seem to be out but as it stands obliterators are 65 ppm and 3 in a unit


Sure, and people are welcome to hide behind that excuse as they always do with misprintings in books. It doesn't make them any less of a tool in my opinion.


Ignoring their very correct sticking to the most recent rules, think of it this way, if a new player buys that codex and plays them at 65pts each with the improved stats, how are you going to tell them that they are doing it wrong, there is no FAQ that supports you yet and its very likely that the FAQ will fix it, not everyone who plays them by what we call RAW is a tool.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:36:40


Post by: JNAProductions


I'd say that it's probably going to be FAQ'd, but HOPEFULLY to 85-95 points, and NOT 115.

Because at 115... They're not awful. But they're not very good either.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:37:53


Post by: Samuhell


 MinscS2 wrote:
Playing RAW when you know it's not RAI and will (or at the very least, should) get errata:ed would make you a TFG in my gaming-circle.

Of course, this being dakka, I expect the RAI-community to be in the minority.

In before "But how do you know that the new RAW-rules aren't RAI? "


Definitely they are going to be FAQ'd and I don't think their intent is the current pricing being correct however until we get further clarification on what exactly GW intend we have to use the most current rules. I don't personally agree with them nor do I agree with the Shadowspear prices (which appear too high IMHO)


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:42:57


Post by: JNAProductions


 Samuhell wrote:
 MinscS2 wrote:
Playing RAW when you know it's not RAI and will (or at the very least, should) get errata:ed would make you a TFG in my gaming-circle.

Of course, this being dakka, I expect the RAI-community to be in the minority.

In before "But how do you know that the new RAW-rules aren't RAI? "


Definitely they are going to be FAQ'd and I don't think their intent is the current pricing being correct however until we get further clarification on what exactly GW intend we have to use the most current rules. I don't personally agree with them nor do I agree with the Shadowspear prices (which appear too high IMHO)


And that's kinda the issue. While it's almost a given that RAI is not 65 PPM, is 115 the RAI either? One's too low, the other's too high.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:45:27


Post by: Samuhell


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Samuhell wrote:
 MinscS2 wrote:
Playing RAW when you know it's not RAI and will (or at the very least, should) get errata:ed would make you a TFG in my gaming-circle.

Of course, this being dakka, I expect the RAI-community to be in the minority.

In before "But how do you know that the new RAW-rules aren't RAI? "


Definitely they are going to be FAQ'd and I don't think their intent is the current pricing being correct however until we get further clarification on what exactly GW intend we have to use the most current rules. I don't personally agree with them nor do I agree with the Shadowspear prices (which appear too high IMHO)


And that's kinda the issue. While it's almost a given that RAI is not 65 PPM, is 115 the RAI either? One's too low, the other's too high.


I know, personally I haven't used oblits but the witch hunt attitude is putting me off playing with them to avoid the crap. it's a crying shame as the new models are awesome


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:54:46


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Samuhell wrote:
 MinscS2 wrote:
Playing RAW when you know it's not RAI and will (or at the very least, should) get errata:ed would make you a TFG in my gaming-circle.

Of course, this being dakka, I expect the RAI-community to be in the minority.

In before "But how do you know that the new RAW-rules aren't RAI? "


Definitely they are going to be FAQ'd and I don't think their intent is the current pricing being correct however until we get further clarification on what exactly GW intend we have to use the most current rules. I don't personally agree with them nor do I agree with the Shadowspear prices (which appear too high IMHO)


And that's kinda the issue. While it's almost a given that RAI is not 65 PPM, is 115 the RAI either? One's too low, the other's too high.

Cents say hi.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:55:45


Post by: JNAProductions


Yes, Cents aren't good. Your point?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:58:02


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


I did some comparative math regarding their cost efficiency back when the cost was first previewed.

The short answer is that you're getting a better unit for units of 1 or 3 Obliterators, but it's less efficient to run 2, which happens to be the number in the box.

Spoiler:

The formula weights the importance of the various factors [down to resistance to various categories of weapons], and then computes an average change in the values. 1 and 3 oblit are largely always over the line, 2 is always below the line, and the tail for fielding a ton of them is generally down unless you want the shooting more than the price.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 18:58:09


Post by: MinscS2


When unclear situations like this arise, and there are 2 potential ways to play a unit, my motto is "Play them with the way that is the least powerful" - Better to cheat yourself than your opponent.

It was the same when Necron Command Barges by RAW had a 3++ back in 5th (I think, might have been 6th) due to a piece of wargear. GW quite quickly errata:ed it to only work on the Necron Overlord when he was on foot, but for a short time, Barges with 3++ was a pretty common sight. I (and some others in my gaming-circle) refused to play them with a 3++. Evidently we played it right, but even if we hadn't, it would've only been to our own detriment, and not to that of our opponent.

Now if you want to play with Oblits but are put off by the uncertainty, play them as 115 ppm with a unit-size of 1-3.
At least for until the April-FAQ drops.

No one is gonna dislike you for paying 115 ppm, regardless if they end up costing 115 ppm or 65 ppm in the end, but people will (understandably imo) have issues with you paying 65 ppm if they end up going "back" to 115 ppm.

Afraid of a heated pre-game argument? Don't give your opponent a reason to argue.






Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:01:17


Post by: Gordon Shumway


I really don't know what the "final" price of oblits will be (I don't think it will be either 65 or 115). The codex is clearly a holdover/typo and the Shadowspear price is tenuous as many price points of their one off game systems seem to be aimed at internal balance of the box itself and get amended later. I would say 90-100 range is about right for them. Until they get their "final" price tag, I will be running with the Shadowpear price/numbers as that seems to be a bit more in line with the intent. I certainly won't let someone take a single model at 65 though, that's rules min/maxing at it worst picking and choosing rules in an unethical way.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:11:39


Post by: Brutallica


Currently they are at 65, and the argument with the "Everyone should know..." "its common knowledge that..." Is straight garbage. By same faulty logic you could say "everyone should know matched play is unbalanced and you really shouldnt be playing it, so play open play until the april FAQ is out."




Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:15:33


Post by: Wayniac


The problem with pointing out RAI, in this case, is that Shadowspear is not something everyone may have. The Codex is. If someone has Obliterators already, and bought the new Codex (let's say they came back to the game) and turns up for a game, what? You tell them they're cheating because a different boxed set that they didn't hear of (that is, as of this writing, temporarily out of stock) changed the points but the codex was reprinted with the old points?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:20:15


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
Yes, Cents aren't good. Your point?

Cents aren't actually good. They are good when buffed by a 400 point unit only. Utterly garbage without. A cent with 2 LC has about 1/2 of the firepower of an oblit - with less wounds - no invun - less mobility - no deepstrike. This is also after a points drop in the last CA. Lets also keep in mind 0 stratagem support ether. Oblitz are shooting twice at +1 to wound. The only playable way to use cents is with dakka build - which isn't exactly point and click win like oblitz. 1 shooting basically anything with a decent roll.

Lets get real. Can you honestly tell me you'd rather have a Dev cent with 2 LC and a missile launcher over an oblitz with the new point cost?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:22:08


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Yes, Cents aren't good. Your point?

Cents aren't actually good. They are good when buffed by a 400 point unit only. Utterly garbage without. A cent with 2 LC has about 1/2 of the firepower of an oblit - with less wounds - no invun - less mobility - no deepstrike. This is also after a points drop in the last CA. Lets also keep in mind 0 stratagem support ether. Oblitz are shooting twice at +1 to wound. The only playable way to use cents is with dakka build - which isn't exactly point and click win like oblitz. 1 shooting basically anything with a decent roll.

Lets get real. Can you honestly tell me you'd rather have a Dev cent with 2 LC and a missile launcher over an oblitz with the new point cost?


I... I literally said "Cents aren't good."

As in, are not good.

As in, bad.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:24:47


Post by: Xenomancers


My eyes played a trick on me - so we agree - cents aren't good. So - Cents say hi. My point is that Oblitz were OP before and they are fixing that by making them a higher % of your army. You still get about the same damage efficiency with them at the new points with stratagems. Which is an OP efficiency BTW.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:27:14


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
My eyes played a trick on me - so we agree - cents aren't good. So - Cents say hi. My point is that Oblitz were OP before and they are fixing that by making them a higher % of your army. You still get about the same damage efficiency with them at the new points with stratagems. Which is an OP efficiency BTW.


50% increase in Firepower at max squad size, but points went up by more than 75%. So no-they're not as efficient as before. More buffs have become available, but they all cost points.

They did get more resilient against some things (Lascannons by a good amount, small arms a good amount, OC Plasma a little) but are just as vulnerable to other things (Autocannons, for instance). And their melee is better, but that's negligible.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:34:59


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
My eyes played a trick on me - so we agree - cents aren't good. So - Cents say hi. My point is that Oblitz were OP before and they are fixing that by making them a higher % of your army. You still get about the same damage efficiency with them at the new points with stratagems. Which is an OP efficiency BTW.


50% increase in Firepower at max squad size, but points went up by more than 75%. So no-they're not as efficient as before. More buffs have become available, but they all cost points.

They did get more resilient against some things (Lascannons by a good amount, small arms a good amount, OC Plasma a little) but are just as vulnerable to other things (Autocannons, for instance). And their melee is better, but that's negligible.

You are still paying the same CP to increase that firepower though and autocannons are useless against units with 2+ saves. It is pretty dang easy to set up in cover with 24" range.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:50:58


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Short Answer: NO
Long Answer: AAAAW HELLL NAW

But Seriously, what do Oblits do that isn't done better by other units for less points? Oblits are great stat lines, but worthless at the cost.

Also, 6 completely random shots? CRAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPP


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wait, just checked. Is this right? HAVOCS SHOOT MORE REAPER DAKKA THEN A CHAOS TERMINATOR???? Bacon Cat Bug......explain!

Seriously, Havocs get 6 shots, Termies get 4. Facepalm.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 19:56:16


Post by: Gordon Shumway


Wayniac wrote:
The problem with pointing out RAI, in this case, is that Shadowspear is not something everyone may have. The Codex is. If someone has Obliterators already, and bought the new Codex (let's say they came back to the game) and turns up for a game, what? You tell them they're cheating because a different boxed set that they didn't hear of (that is, as of this writing, temporarily out of stock) changed the points but the codex was reprinted with the old points?


I'd be fine with it as long as they don't want to bring single model units. (Actually, I'd be fine with that too in regular play, as I'm pretty relaxed in my games, and I'd like to see how they do). It's not something I would let slide in a tourney setting. Official ruling on that. I wouldn't do it myself in relaxed games as that is not the price will be and I want to get a good sense of my list for the more competitive stuff.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 20:49:40


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
My eyes played a trick on me - so we agree - cents aren't good. So - Cents say hi. My point is that Oblitz were OP before and they are fixing that by making them a higher % of your army. You still get about the same damage efficiency with them at the new points with stratagems. Which is an OP efficiency BTW.


50% increase in Firepower at max squad size, but points went up by more than 75%. So no-they're not as efficient as before. More buffs have become available, but they all cost points.

They did get more resilient against some things (Lascannons by a good amount, small arms a good amount, OC Plasma a little) but are just as vulnerable to other things (Autocannons, for instance). And their melee is better, but that's negligible.

You forget the non-negligible toughness and wounds increase. It's a complicated measure though, because there's fewer total wounds but higher toughness.

Also, one unit is outputting the same firepower as two old units now, so you're paying less for equal firepower. A new unit costs 345 points, compared to 2 old units costing 390. Both output 36 shots, and your dice-fixing buffs will go further on the new unit so your obliterators perform better more consistently too.

Also, with the ability to field them singly, they're better throwaway suicide drop units, since a 115 point guy is cheap enough to easily sacrifice, and he's tough enough to draw antitank guns, or at least a very large amount of power.


If you're fielding 3 or 1, you're doing better than before, but if you're fielding 2 you're doing worse.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 21:00:26


Post by: JNAProductions


2 old units did 36 with Endless Cacophony.

What about those of us that DON'T run Slaanesh?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 21:01:48


Post by: Marmatag


Considered with the full range of buffs that Chaos is getting? Absolutely worth their points.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 21:02:12


Post by: Elbows


That's the question I get almost everytime I put Obliterators on the table "why aren't they Slaanesh?"


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 21:05:50


Post by: CREEEEEEEEED


Ok, first, cents are good. Perhaps not the best for the role they fill, but with a captain/chapter master, leiutenant and relic banner, (all essentials for a gunline anyway) they are good, maybe even throw in an apothecary. Not great, but good. Also oblits seem fairly worth the cost, especially with the buffs available from the new psychic discipline. Maybe a little overcosted, but not to the point of not taking.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 21:33:23


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


 JNAProductions wrote:
2 old units did 36 with Endless Cacophony.

What about those of us that DON'T run Slaanesh?


That's not my problem. A 3-man unit is pretty much the ideal target for Endless Cacophony. If you're not using Endless Cacophony on them because you have a better/more essential target for it that's understandable, and you can consider the newly-opened alternate use case of a single obliterator on a suicide mission. He's still solo strong enough to inconvenience a tank [or even outright kill it if you're lucky], needs to die right away, and takes heavy fire to dislodge.

But if you're making them Tzeentch or something, you probably also don't care about the 5% change in cost-efficiency, right?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/02 22:01:03


Post by: Slowroll


I think without taking buffs into account they are overcosted by 15-25 points. One Obliterator is only a little cheaper than, say, a Venomcrawler with a similar gun and 2/3 the shots but massively better survivability and melee.

Add buffs to the equation and it is still the best AT shooting unit Chaos has, to my knowledge. So I think they are still worth taking even if they are overcosted in an abstract sense.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 00:51:41


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 JNAProductions wrote:
2 old units did 36 with Endless Cacophony.

What about those of us that DON'T run Slaanesh?

Which is the problem with costing units like they always have a Strategem active. Why is the Strategem not priced like it'll be used on Obliterators instead?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 01:21:51


Post by: Formosa


 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
Ok, first, cents are good. Perhaps not the best for the role they fill, but with a captain/chapter master, leiutenant and relic banner, (all essentials for a gunline anyway) they are good, maybe even throw in an apothecary. Not great, but good. Also oblits seem fairly worth the cost, especially with the buffs available from the new psychic discipline. Maybe a little overcosted, but not to the point of not taking.


Normally I would not agree but seen as those things are pretty much a must take anyway I see your point, I'd like to try them out but damn those models are ugly as all hell, thinking of just getting the primaris ones and just slapping them on a bigger base as counts as, I don't use any other primaris so it should not be confusing.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 07:01:21


Post by: Aelyn


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I did some comparative math regarding their cost efficiency back when the cost was first previewed.

The short answer is that you're getting a better unit for units of 1 or 3 Obliterators, but it's less efficient to run 2, which happens to be the number in the box.

Spoiler:

The formula weights the importance of the various factors [down to resistance to various categories of weapons], and then computes an average change in the values. 1 and 3 oblit are largely always over the line, 2 is always below the line, and the tail for fielding a ton of them is generally down unless you want the shooting more than the price.
This is an... interesting assertion to make. Can you explain what you're doing here - what the actual formula is, any assumptions you've made etc - as I'm really not sure how you're justifying your statement.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 11:07:44


Post by: Jidmah


On sunday my opponent was running two units of three, old models of course, but new datasheet. He brought as sorcerer and an apostle to buffen them.

A unit of 3 now has 18 shots, where it had 12 before, so when shooting additional times, buffing to hit (prescience, warp sight plea, many stratagems) and/or buffing to wound (VotLW), you get more bang for your buck.
My opponent could provide two units of obliterators with +1 to hit at all times, with one shooting twice. So for 690 he had 54 shots hitting on 2+, dealing 26.667 damage to your average death guard model (3+ T5-7, FNP), so 0.03865 damage per point
Three units from the old datasheet would yield 36 shots hitting on 2+ and 12 hitting on 3+ dealing 22.519 for 585, which is 0.03849 damage per point.

So with those two buffs, my opponent was actually doing 0.3% more damage per point spent than he would have done before the change. So basically, they stayed the same, as you are not going to notice a 0.3% change when rolling d6.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 12:18:55


Post by: Karol


 Xenomancers wrote:


50% increase in Firepower at max squad size, but points went up by more than 75%. So no-they're not as efficient as before. More buffs have become available, but they all cost points.

They did get more resilient against some things (Lascannons by a good amount, small arms a good amount, OC Plasma a little) but are just as vulnerable to other things (Autocannons, for instance). And their melee is better, but that's negligible.

You are still paying the same CP to increase that firepower though and autocannons are useless against units with 2+ saves. It is pretty dang easy to set up in cover with 24" range.


But doesn't fewer points for the army over all means, fewer other targets, fewer points to buy chaff, so the chance of the oblits dieing before they make a big enough impact on the game gets higher? And it is not like the points hike is 5 pts per entire unit, it is substential, specially if one consideres the possibility of running 2 such units.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 13:18:54


Post by: Bharring


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
2 old units did 36 with Endless Cacophony.

What about those of us that DON'T run Slaanesh?

Which is the problem with costing units like they always have a Strategem active. Why is the Strategem not priced like it'll be used on Obliterators instead?


Because then it's miscosted for use on a CSM squad or whatever else you want to use it for.

There exists no static price points (A, B, C) such that
-A is the cost for a 3man Oblit squad
-B is the cost of 3 CSM
-C is the cost of Cacophony

Such that [A, B, A+B, A+C] are all fair.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 13:47:10


Post by: Excommunicatus


Sort of as if Strategems are a bad, gimmicky mechanic, eh?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 14:23:17


Post by: Spoletta


 Excommunicatus wrote:
Sort of as if Strategems are a bad, gimmicky mechanic, eh?


Considering that what Bharring said is applicable for 90% of the mechanics of this game, of AoS, of Warma/hordes, of Kill Team, of X-Wing... actually of almost all the games i know with somewhat complex rules, i don't undersand your comment.

Actually what Bharring said is "This game has non linear interacions", which is a definition at least as generic as "This game uses dices".


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 14:36:09


Post by: Bharring


What it means is that, without much more complicated rules, it can't be fair.

The saddest thing I've ever read was a proof that no non-trivial voting system can be fair. Incredibly sad, because it wasn't just an argument or some evidence - it was a formal proof with extremely defensible assumptions. There's better and worse voting systems. But there *is no* perfect voting system. Not because nobody's thought it up. Not because we haven't figured it out yet. It is demonstrable that it *can't* be figured out.

If that's the sad truth about balance in the voting system, what does that say about seeking balance in something so much more trivial? So much less important? With so many fewer eyes?

The game will never be balanced. It's a question of how much more or less balanced it will be, not a question of how to balance it perfectly.

So the next time you have the "perfect" answer, realize that you don't. Perhaps it is better. In most ways. But it won't be perfect.

What I said can be applied to most games. You can add complexity to "fix" it (make Cacophony cost an amount based on the unit size and value). But that's a hell of a lot of bloat. GW - and many players - would rather the rules as-is. Because the bloat-vs-balance tradeoff is too high.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 15:46:48


Post by: Spoletta


Bharring wrote:
What it means is that, without much more complicated rules, it can't be fair.

The saddest thing I've ever read was a proof that no non-trivial voting system can be fair. Incredibly sad, because it wasn't just an argument or some evidence - it was a formal proof with extremely defensible assumptions. There's better and worse voting systems. But there *is no* perfect voting system. Not because nobody's thought it up. Not because we haven't figured it out yet. It is demonstrable that it *can't* be figured out.

If that's the sad truth about balance in the voting system, what does that say about seeking balance in something so much more trivial? So much less important? With so many fewer eyes?

The game will never be balanced. It's a question of how much more or less balanced it will be, not a question of how to balance it perfectly.

So the next time you have the "perfect" answer, realize that you don't. Perhaps it is better. In most ways. But it won't be perfect.

What I said can be applied to most games. You can add complexity to "fix" it (make Cacophony cost an amount based on the unit size and value). But that's a hell of a lot of bloat. GW - and many players - would rather the rules as-is. Because the bloat-vs-balance tradeoff is too high.


We agree that it needs more complicated rules to be fair, but that is not something stricly related to stratagems. Psy powers work like that. Also chapter traits and almost any kind of buff.
If we want to go all the way, any shooting unit is also not defineable by a point value, because it has a range, and range has a non linear impact on the game.

We all know that points aren't perfect, but is a reasonable approach.


Defining stratagems as a "bad, gimmicky mechanic" because they can't be properly costed, means showing a deep ignorance of the game.
Note: This is also true for those whose mantra is "Any unit can be balanced at the right point cost", there is nothing wronger than that assumption.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 16:05:37


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Aelyn wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I did some comparative math regarding their cost efficiency back when the cost was first previewed.

The short answer is that you're getting a better unit for units of 1 or 3 Obliterators, but it's less efficient to run 2, which happens to be the number in the box.

Spoiler:

The formula weights the importance of the various factors [down to resistance to various categories of weapons], and then computes an average change in the values. 1 and 3 oblit are largely always over the line, 2 is always below the line, and the tail for fielding a ton of them is generally down unless you want the shooting more than the price.
This is an... interesting assertion to make. Can you explain what you're doing here - what the actual formula is, any assumptions you've made etc - as I'm really not sure how you're justifying your statement.


It's a series of weighted averages of percent changes in the various metrics based on the most-similar configuration enemy unit.
The overweights are noted at the top of the plot, but the weights inside the amalgamated "resilience, firepower, cqc, move, and cost" aren't shown. In this specific plot, Firepower is rated 2, resilience 1, and cost 3. Move and cqc are both rated 0 because there's no change to move, and the CQC improvement is irrelevant to the unit.

Each metric is calculated as a weighted average in the percent change of its subcomponents.

For firepower, only shot count is weighted; because the other values didn't change. I could introduce weights to allow me to implement the effects of CP re-rolls and new psychic buffs, but that would be complex once introducing the existence of buffed and un-buffed units, and while it's a safe bet that they will recieved Cacophony, it's not a safe bet on them receiving the entire potential buff suite.

Cost is simple, just backwards since cost decreases are good and increases are bad.

Resiliency has 3 components, save, toughness, and wound count. Save is weighted 0, since it's the same, toughness is valued more than wound count, but barely.
Toughness is considered like strength, and that's a weighted average of the odds of being wounded by hits of various strengths, weighted by their relevance. S4 and S3 are considered highly relevant, S5, S7, S9, and S10 are low relevance, S6 and S8 are considered moderate relevance.This is justified on the principle that antitank guns cost a lot more than anti-infantry guns, and the idea that the enemy will generally have more anti-infantry weapons than things to shoot them at but fewer antitank weapons than things they want to kill with them, so Obliterators dying to lascannons is less of a cause for concern since those aren't targeting your other high value models, or using their AP and range against entrenched havocs, or whatever.
Wound count is the total wound count in the unit. Wounds-to-degredation isn't accounted for, because it's more complicated, but could arguably be applied to Obliterators, since they have a fairly discontinuous degredation.


As for picking the most-similar unit to compare against at each level, I did this generally based on closest to having the same fire output, on the grounds that fire output is the primary driver in choosing to select a unit of obliterators to bring. It's notable that 1 does not assume the use of Endless Cacophony, on the grounds that the use case for a single solo suicide obliterator is different from the use case of a large squad. 2 newblitz are compared to 3 oldblitz, 3 newblitz are compared to 6 oldblitz, 4 newblitz are still compared to 6 oldblitz, and 5+ newblitz are compared to 9 oldblitz.

I can make a new, graph to account for the introduction of CP-re-rolls and re-rolls from the new psychic powers on gun stats, since that's pretty important to the primary use case of obliterators, and investing heavily in them also logically leads to being willing to invest in supporting them. In addition, I could try to account for the importance of their resistance to weapons of different damage class, since the change in wounds/guy is actually more important than just an overall decrease of wounds in the unit, because the one additional wound can absorb multiple points of damage from common multi-damage weapons used to eliminate obliterators. It's also notable that the relative importance of the various aspects of the unit vary by use case, so it's also worth taking it with a grain of salt there, since a single suicide newblit might care more about toughness and low cost than a big squad of obliterators which is much more interested in achieving destructive fire [and cost].

It's notable that varying the weights, or even the sub-weights can make the graph change a lot. However, for most "realistic" weightings [high importance of cost, medium-high importance of firepower, low importance of toughness], it looks like a buff at 1 and 3, but a nerf at most other values.


Interpreting the graph is also important, because it doesn't just say that 3 newblitz are going to be awesome. It says that 3 newblitz are more cost efficient than 6 oldblitz, their most-similar unit counterpart. Use case is important, and you might only really be interested in a weapons unit at the price point of 200 points, at which point you don't really care that they're more efficient at 3 than they used to be, because the 155 points you have to drop matter more to you than the overall improvement of that efficiency. And lists don't come down to buying units of maximum efficiency ["good unit soup" only wins games against "bad unit soup"], they come down to interactions between units, so variation in efficiency doesn't tell the whole story. In addition, it's percent change, and is in most cases is pretty low, like 5%, which you could easily write off as mostly irrelevant at the level of "use them if you liked them before"; and if you thought they weren't worth it before, a 5% improvement over bad is still bad.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 16:10:03


Post by: Malfurious


Are the points costs in shadowspear not geared specifically for all the models that come in the box? what I mean is isn't shadowspear it's own mini-game and the models in the box only interacting with each other?

I haven't read any of the literature that came with the box so I'm just throwing this out there.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 16:13:36


Post by: Xenomancers


 Jidmah wrote:
On sunday my opponent was running two units of three, old models of course, but new datasheet. He brought as sorcerer and an apostle to buffen them.

A unit of 3 now has 18 shots, where it had 12 before, so when shooting additional times, buffing to hit (prescience, warp sight plea, many stratagems) and/or buffing to wound (VotLW), you get more bang for your buck.
My opponent could provide two units of obliterators with +1 to hit at all times, with one shooting twice. So for 690 he had 54 shots hitting on 2+, dealing 26.667 damage to your average death guard model (3+ T5-7, FNP), so 0.03865 damage per point
Three units from the old datasheet would yield 36 shots hitting on 2+ and 12 hitting on 3+ dealing 22.519 for 585, which is 0.03849 damage per point.

So with those two buffs, my opponent was actually doing 0.3% more damage per point spent than he would have done before the change. So basically, they stayed the same, as you are not going to notice a 0.3% change when rolling d6.

It's not just that - being a random weapon that when it shoot twice retains the roll for the whole phase. A command reroll (one time use) has significantly more potential on 1 unit.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 16:39:34


Post by: Aelyn


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Aelyn wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I did some comparative math regarding their cost efficiency back when the cost was first previewed.

The short answer is that you're getting a better unit for units of 1 or 3 Obliterators, but it's less efficient to run 2, which happens to be the number in the box.

Spoiler:

The formula weights the importance of the various factors [down to resistance to various categories of weapons], and then computes an average change in the values. 1 and 3 oblit are largely always over the line, 2 is always below the line, and the tail for fielding a ton of them is generally down unless you want the shooting more than the price.
This is an... interesting assertion to make. Can you explain what you're doing here - what the actual formula is, any assumptions you've made etc - as I'm really not sure how you're justifying your statement.

Spoiler:

It's a series of weighted averages of percent changes in the various metrics based on the most-similar configuration enemy unit.
The overweights are noted at the top of the plot, but the weights inside the amalgamated "resilience, firepower, cqc, move, and cost" aren't shown. In this specific plot, Firepower is rated 2, resilience 1, and cost 3. Move and cqc are both rated 0 because there's no change to move, and the CQC improvement is irrelevant to the unit.

Each metric is calculated as a weighted average in the percent change of its subcomponents.

For firepower, only shot count is weighted; because the other values didn't change. I could introduce weights to allow me to implement the effects of CP re-rolls and new psychic buffs, but that would be complex once introducing the existence of buffed and un-buffed units, and while it's a safe bet that they will recieved Cacophony, it's not a safe bet on them receiving the entire potential buff suite.

Cost is simple, just backwards since cost decreases are good and increases are bad.

Resiliency has 3 components, save, toughness, and wound count. Save is weighted 0, since it's the same, toughness is valued more than wound count, but barely.
Toughness is considered like strength, and that's a weighted average of the odds of being wounded by hits of various strengths, weighted by their relevance. S4 and S3 are considered highly relevant, S5, S7, S9, and S10 are low relevance, S6 and S8 are considered moderate relevance.This is justified on the principle that antitank guns cost a lot more than anti-infantry guns, and the idea that the enemy will generally have more anti-infantry weapons than things to shoot them at but fewer antitank weapons than things they want to kill with them, so Obliterators dying to lascannons is less of a cause for concern since those aren't targeting your other high value models, or using their AP and range against entrenched havocs, or whatever.
Wound count is the total wound count in the unit. Wounds-to-degredation isn't accounted for, because it's more complicated, but could arguably be applied to Obliterators, since they have a fairly discontinuous degredation.


As for picking the most-similar unit to compare against at each level, I did this generally based on closest to having the same fire output, on the grounds that fire output is the primary driver in choosing to select a unit of obliterators to bring. It's notable that 1 does not assume the use of Endless Cacophony, on the grounds that the use case for a single solo suicide obliterator is different from the use case of a large squad. 2 newblitz are compared to 3 oldblitz, 3 newblitz are compared to 6 oldblitz, 4 newblitz are still compared to 6 oldblitz, and 5+ newblitz are compared to 9 oldblitz.

I can make a new, graph to account for the introduction of CP-re-rolls and re-rolls from the new psychic powers on gun stats, since that's pretty important to the primary use case of obliterators, and investing heavily in them also logically leads to being willing to invest in supporting them. In addition, I could try to account for the importance of their resistance to weapons of different damage class, since the change in wounds/guy is actually more important than just an overall decrease of wounds in the unit, because the one additional wound can absorb multiple points of damage from common multi-damage weapons used to eliminate obliterators. It's also notable that the relative importance of the various aspects of the unit vary by use case, so it's also worth taking it with a grain of salt there, since a single suicide newblit might care more about toughness and low cost than a big squad of obliterators which is much more interested in achieving destructive fire [and cost].

It's notable that varying the weights, or even the sub-weights can make the graph change a lot. However, for most "realistic" weightings [high importance of cost, medium-high importance of firepower, low importance of toughness], it looks like a buff at 1 and 3, but a nerf at most other values.

Interpreting the graph is also important, because it doesn't just say that 3 newblitz are going to be awesome. It says that 3 newblitz are more cost efficient than 6 oldblitz, their most-similar unit counterpart. Use case is important, and you might only really be interested in a weapons unit at the price point of 200 points, at which point you don't really care that they're more efficient at 3 than they used to be, because the 155 points you have to drop matter more to you than the overall improvement of that efficiency. And lists don't come down to buying units of maximum efficiency ["good unit soup" only wins games against "bad unit soup"], they come down to interactions between units, so variation in efficiency doesn't tell the whole story. In addition, it's percent change, and is in most cases is pretty low, like 5%, which you could easily write off as mostly irrelevant at the level of "use them if you liked them before"; and if you thought they weren't worth it before, a 5% improvement over bad is still bad.

That's... an awful lot of words that don't really answer my questions. You say that interpreting the graph is important, but you've not really given enough information for us to meaningfully interpret it. No offence intended, but this is something of a blackbox - you haven't explained how you actually derived the numbers, so how can I decide whether the output provided is meaningful?

It just felt odd to me that you claim 2 obliterators to be "less efficient" than 1 or 3, and the only thing I can see that could justify this is how you've chosen to compare 2 of the new to 3 of the old, but 3 of the new to 6 of the old. I'm pretty sure that's where the "2 is less efficient" idea is coming from - you're comparing to a pseudo-arbitrary number of the old ones, with an inconsistent conversion ratio.

EDIT: To clarify, I think this paragraph is the crux of the whole point:
As for picking the most-similar unit to compare against at each level, I did this generally based on closest to having the same fire output, on the grounds that fire output is the primary driver in choosing to select a unit of obliterators to bring. It's notable that 1 does not assume the use of Endless Cacophony, on the grounds that the use case for a single solo suicide obliterator is different from the use case of a large squad. 2 newblitz are compared to 3 oldblitz, 3 newblitz are compared to 6 oldblitz, 4 newblitz are still compared to 6 oldblitz, and 5+ newblitz are compared to 9 oldblitz

I don't see how you're justifying the underlined figures.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 16:45:58


Post by: Cynista


Since they need to be FAQ'd anyway, GW should take the opportunity to make them an even 100 points each. Because at 115 nobody will take them.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 17:11:02


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Aelyn wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Aelyn wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I did some comparative math regarding their cost efficiency back when the cost was first previewed.

The short answer is that you're getting a better unit for units of 1 or 3 Obliterators, but it's less efficient to run 2, which happens to be the number in the box.

Spoiler:

The formula weights the importance of the various factors [down to resistance to various categories of weapons], and then computes an average change in the values. 1 and 3 oblit are largely always over the line, 2 is always below the line, and the tail for fielding a ton of them is generally down unless you want the shooting more than the price.
This is an... interesting assertion to make. Can you explain what you're doing here - what the actual formula is, any assumptions you've made etc - as I'm really not sure how you're justifying your statement.

Spoiler:

It's a series of weighted averages of percent changes in the various metrics based on the most-similar configuration enemy unit.
The overweights are noted at the top of the plot, but the weights inside the amalgamated "resilience, firepower, cqc, move, and cost" aren't shown. In this specific plot, Firepower is rated 2, resilience 1, and cost 3. Move and cqc are both rated 0 because there's no change to move, and the CQC improvement is irrelevant to the unit.

Each metric is calculated as a weighted average in the percent change of its subcomponents.

For firepower, only shot count is weighted; because the other values didn't change. I could introduce weights to allow me to implement the effects of CP re-rolls and new psychic buffs, but that would be complex once introducing the existence of buffed and un-buffed units, and while it's a safe bet that they will recieved Cacophony, it's not a safe bet on them receiving the entire potential buff suite.

Cost is simple, just backwards since cost decreases are good and increases are bad.

Resiliency has 3 components, save, toughness, and wound count. Save is weighted 0, since it's the same, toughness is valued more than wound count, but barely.
Toughness is considered like strength, and that's a weighted average of the odds of being wounded by hits of various strengths, weighted by their relevance. S4 and S3 are considered highly relevant, S5, S7, S9, and S10 are low relevance, S6 and S8 are considered moderate relevance.This is justified on the principle that antitank guns cost a lot more than anti-infantry guns, and the idea that the enemy will generally have more anti-infantry weapons than things to shoot them at but fewer antitank weapons than things they want to kill with them, so Obliterators dying to lascannons is less of a cause for concern since those aren't targeting your other high value models, or using their AP and range against entrenched havocs, or whatever.
Wound count is the total wound count in the unit. Wounds-to-degredation isn't accounted for, because it's more complicated, but could arguably be applied to Obliterators, since they have a fairly discontinuous degredation.


As for picking the most-similar unit to compare against at each level, I did this generally based on closest to having the same fire output, on the grounds that fire output is the primary driver in choosing to select a unit of obliterators to bring. It's notable that 1 does not assume the use of Endless Cacophony, on the grounds that the use case for a single solo suicide obliterator is different from the use case of a large squad. 2 newblitz are compared to 3 oldblitz, 3 newblitz are compared to 6 oldblitz, 4 newblitz are still compared to 6 oldblitz, and 5+ newblitz are compared to 9 oldblitz.

I can make a new, graph to account for the introduction of CP-re-rolls and re-rolls from the new psychic powers on gun stats, since that's pretty important to the primary use case of obliterators, and investing heavily in them also logically leads to being willing to invest in supporting them. In addition, I could try to account for the importance of their resistance to weapons of different damage class, since the change in wounds/guy is actually more important than just an overall decrease of wounds in the unit, because the one additional wound can absorb multiple points of damage from common multi-damage weapons used to eliminate obliterators. It's also notable that the relative importance of the various aspects of the unit vary by use case, so it's also worth taking it with a grain of salt there, since a single suicide newblit might care more about toughness and low cost than a big squad of obliterators which is much more interested in achieving destructive fire [and cost].

It's notable that varying the weights, or even the sub-weights can make the graph change a lot. However, for most "realistic" weightings [high importance of cost, medium-high importance of firepower, low importance of toughness], it looks like a buff at 1 and 3, but a nerf at most other values.

Interpreting the graph is also important, because it doesn't just say that 3 newblitz are going to be awesome. It says that 3 newblitz are more cost efficient than 6 oldblitz, their most-similar unit counterpart. Use case is important, and you might only really be interested in a weapons unit at the price point of 200 points, at which point you don't really care that they're more efficient at 3 than they used to be, because the 155 points you have to drop matter more to you than the overall improvement of that efficiency. And lists don't come down to buying units of maximum efficiency ["good unit soup" only wins games against "bad unit soup"], they come down to interactions between units, so variation in efficiency doesn't tell the whole story. In addition, it's percent change, and is in most cases is pretty low, like 5%, which you could easily write off as mostly irrelevant at the level of "use them if you liked them before"; and if you thought they weren't worth it before, a 5% improvement over bad is still bad.

That's... an awful lot of words that don't really answer my questions. You say that interpreting the graph is important, but you've not really given enough information for us to meaningfully interpret it. No offence intended, but this is something of a blackbox - you haven't explained how you actually derived the numbers, so how can I decide whether the output provided is meaningful?

It just felt odd to me that you claim 2 obliterators to be "less efficient" than 1 or 3, and the only thing I can see that could justify this is how you've chosen to compare 2 of the new to 3 of the old, but 3 of the new to 6 of the old. I'm pretty sure that's where the "2 is less efficient" idea is coming from - you're comparing to a pseudo-arbitrary number of the old ones, with an inconsistent conversion ratio.

EDIT: To clarify, I think this paragraph is the crux of the whole point:
As for picking the most-similar unit to compare against at each level, I did this generally based on closest to having the same fire output, on the grounds that fire output is the primary driver in choosing to select a unit of obliterators to bring. It's notable that 1 does not assume the use of Endless Cacophony, on the grounds that the use case for a single solo suicide obliterator is different from the use case of a large squad. 2 newblitz are compared to 3 oldblitz, 3 newblitz are compared to 6 oldblitz, 4 newblitz are still compared to 6 oldblitz, and 5+ newblitz are compared to 9 oldblitz

I don't see how you're justifying the underlined figures.


I'm comparing it to the most-equivalent unit configuration. There's only a 45 point cost difference between 3 newblitz and 6 oldblitz and no difference in fire output. There's 6 less wounds. This is a roughly equivalent unit composition.

Comparing 2 newblitz to 3 oldblitz are also roughly comparable units, with a similar price point [35 points difference], same number of shots, and similar number of wounds.

Obliterators aren't continous, they're discrete. You cannot field 5 oldblitz [or at the ridiculous, a unit of 4.3 models]. It's also important to compare units in equivalent use-cases, because an efficieny comparison between a Grot and a Warlord Titan are essentially meaningless.

Thats how the comparison targets are chosen, buy choosing what I judged to be the most similar possible oldbliterator configuration. I could make a 3d plot to compare all the possible configurations, but all in all, and a fair number of them aren't very useful comparisons [IE: if you are going to run 1 newblit as a suicide drop, you wouldn't run 9 oldblitz as a antitank battery, so that's not a useful comparison].

Anyway, long story short, because the new, stronger unit stretches the value you get out of buffs onto them, there's a notable buff at the point of overflow, where you only have 1 unit of newbliterators, but need 2 units of oldbliterators to achieve the same effect. In short, the real buff was increased unit total power.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 17:18:29


Post by: Octopoid


Cynista wrote:
Since they need to be FAQ'd anyway, GW should take the opportunity to make them an even 100 points each. Because at 115 nobody will take them.


I will take three of them.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 17:24:38


Post by: Aelyn


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

I'm comparing it to the most-equivalent unit configuration. There's only a 45 point cost difference between 3 newblitz and 6 oldblitz and no difference in fire output. There's 6 less wounds. This is a roughly equivalent unit composition.

Comparing 2 newblitz to 3 oldblitz are also roughly comparable units, with a similar price point [35 points difference], same number of shots, and similar number of wounds.

Obliterators aren't continous, they're discrete. You cannot field 5 oldblitz [or at the ridiculous, a unit of 4.3 models]. It's also important to compare units in equivalent use-cases, because an efficieny comparison between a Grot and a Warlord Titan are essentially meaningless.

Thats how the comparison targets are chosen, buy choosing what I judged to be the most similar possible oldbliterator configuration.

Anyway, long story short, because the new, stronger unit stretches the value you get out of buffs onto them, there's a notable buff at the point of overflow, where you only have 1 unit of newbliterators, but need 2 units of oldbliterators to achieve the same effect. In short, the real buff was increased squad size.

Okay, but again, you didn't actually state the assumptions being used to get to your figures. I now realise that your graph was talking specifically about Slaaneshi Obliterators which get Endless Cacophony played on them - this was not mentioned in your first post, and only tangentially mentioned in the second post.

It also makes your graph useless to me, as I would run them in a Nurgle Epidemius force.

It's also worth mentioning that - since you're comparing one unit to two - you've tacitly ignored the additional flexibility gained by having two units, but have taken into account the reduced impacts of buffs. Again, this is not stated anywhere.

See how your message can be muddied if you don't make your assumptions explicit?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 17:49:25


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Aelyn wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

I'm comparing it to the most-equivalent unit configuration. There's only a 45 point cost difference between 3 newblitz and 6 oldblitz and no difference in fire output. There's 6 less wounds. This is a roughly equivalent unit composition.

Comparing 2 newblitz to 3 oldblitz are also roughly comparable units, with a similar price point [35 points difference], same number of shots, and similar number of wounds.

Obliterators aren't continous, they're discrete. You cannot field 5 oldblitz [or at the ridiculous, a unit of 4.3 models]. It's also important to compare units in equivalent use-cases, because an efficieny comparison between a Grot and a Warlord Titan are essentially meaningless.

Thats how the comparison targets are chosen, buy choosing what I judged to be the most similar possible oldbliterator configuration.

Anyway, long story short, because the new, stronger unit stretches the value you get out of buffs onto them, there's a notable buff at the point of overflow, where you only have 1 unit of newbliterators, but need 2 units of oldbliterators to achieve the same effect. In short, the real buff was increased squad size.

Okay, but again, you didn't actually state the assumptions being used to get to your figures. I now realise that your graph was talking specifically about Slaaneshi Obliterators which get Endless Cacophony played on them - this was not mentioned in your first post, and only tangentially mentioned in the second post.

It also makes your graph useless to me, as I would run them in a Nurgle Epidemius force.

It's also worth mentioning that - since you're comparing one unit to two - you've tacitly ignored the additional flexibility gained by having two units, but have taken into account the reduced impacts of buffs. Again, this is not stated anywhere.

See how your message can be muddied if you don't make your assumptions explicit?


A couple of counterpoints:
1: Why would I, or anyone who cares about a absolutely minuscule 5% change in efficiency, care about their effectiveness in uncommon [or at least non-optimal] cases. It's a fairly safe assumption that an arriving Obliterator battery will be receiving Endless Cacophony, because they're generally going to be both the most powerful unit available for it and the unit best positioned to take advantage of the stratagem.

2: The extension of buffs applies whether or not you're Slaanesh or Nurgle. Nurgle's stratagem is also more useful on the newblitz, because you're both bringing back more firepower from the ressurection function, and with 4 wounds per model there's a lot more room for a model be wounded but not dead and get a lot of benefit from the healing effect, so the point that the larger unit It's much harder to quantify mathematically, though.

3: It's A: impossible to quantify the additional tactical flexibility, B: the newbliterator changes allow greater strategic flexibility in the unit tasking during the planning stages, and C: the loss of tactical flexibility is, in this case, moderately marginal. The most notable case is one in which target 2 or 3 is zoned out from the other targets, so the extra firepower you brought in your unit becomes overkill [or directed at a target of opportunity] and you need another unit available to present threat to the other target. This is a moderately common case, and a fairly serious one if you're relying on that, but it's also possible to strategically pre-empt it, or to use tactics to overcome it.


I can make a new, more detailed plot if you want, because this one doesn't account for everything, but I at least percieve most of the un-accounted for things generally working in the favor of the newbliterators.

Also, I think I went over most of my assumptions in the long response. I even mention Cacophony, and that I felt it's a safe assumption that obliterators will receive Cacophony, but not a reasonable assumption that you're also going to be spend you CP re-rolls on their stat rolls, or that you're going to invest in a MoP to buff them psychically.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 19:19:26


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
2 old units did 36 with Endless Cacophony.

What about those of us that DON'T run Slaanesh?

Which is the problem with costing units like they always have a Strategem active. Why is the Strategem not priced like it'll be used on Obliterators instead?


Because then it's miscosted for use on a CSM squad or whatever else you want to use it for.

There exists no static price points (A, B, C) such that
-A is the cost for a 3man Oblit squad
-B is the cost of 3 CSM
-C is the cost of Cacophony

Such that [A, B, A+B, A+C] are all fair.

Except such Strategems, let's be honest here, aren't gonna be used on Chaos Marines. Nobody is gonna use the attacking twice Strategem for Chaos Marines for example, and it's already priced like it'll be used on...basically anything else.
Should Chaos Marines with Chainswords be priced like they can attack twice in a row?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 19:31:36


Post by: Bharring


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
2 old units did 36 with Endless Cacophony.

What about those of us that DON'T run Slaanesh?

Which is the problem with costing units like they always have a Strategem active. Why is the Strategem not priced like it'll be used on Obliterators instead?


Because then it's miscosted for use on a CSM squad or whatever else you want to use it for.

There exists no static price points (A, B, C) such that
-A is the cost for a 3man Oblit squad
-B is the cost of 3 CSM
-C is the cost of Cacophony

Such that [A, B, A+B, A+C] are all fair.

Except such Strategems, let's be honest here, aren't gonna be used on Chaos Marines. Nobody is gonna use the attacking twice Strategem for Chaos Marines for example, and it's already priced like it'll be used on...basically anything else.
Should Chaos Marines with Chainswords be priced like they can attack twice in a row?

So your proposed solution is to "streamline" the design space, such that only trivial options are left?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 21:00:01


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
2 old units did 36 with Endless Cacophony.

What about those of us that DON'T run Slaanesh?

Which is the problem with costing units like they always have a Strategem active. Why is the Strategem not priced like it'll be used on Obliterators instead?


Because then it's miscosted for use on a CSM squad or whatever else you want to use it for.

There exists no static price points (A, B, C) such that
-A is the cost for a 3man Oblit squad
-B is the cost of 3 CSM
-C is the cost of Cacophony

Such that [A, B, A+B, A+C] are all fair.

Except such Strategems, let's be honest here, aren't gonna be used on Chaos Marines. Nobody is gonna use the attacking twice Strategem for Chaos Marines for example, and it's already priced like it'll be used on...basically anything else.
Should Chaos Marines with Chainswords be priced like they can attack twice in a row?

So your proposed solution is to "streamline" the design space, such that only trivial options are left?

In many ways, the game could be more complicated, but it could be streamlined as well.

First and foremost, units NEED to be priced on their own merits, and not with buffers, as we can't assume the buffers exist at all times. When buffers exist, be it in auras and Strategems, they can then be priced depending on what they're buffing.
For example, it isn't like Chapter Master Special Characters are priced like they're buffing Tactical Marines all the time. Rather, they're priced like they're buffing Typhons or something. That's why, while I think it's really expensive, the Chapter Master Strategem is technically fair. However, why are we to assume all the Tactical Marines in your army are under these buffers? Should we price them like they naturally reroll 1's to hit or all to hit?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 21:53:48


Post by: Marmatag


It's really difficult to make that case though because many SM units were nerfed because of Guilliman, not because they stood on their own. Assault Cannons were nerfed for everyone - Grey Knights, Space Wolves, etc - because of their strength in a Guilliman gunline in early 8th edition.

This is also why balance is generally discussed around optimal scenarios, and when we discuss tournament placings we look at the top-tier of participants.

Balance is not a question of how poorly you can use a unit, but by how well it can perform if used properly.

Your jump pack, storm shield, meltagun captain pays the same price for his storm shield as my jump pack, storm shield, thunder hammer captain. One is a useless pile of crap, one is really good. Should the stormshields be differently costed because i have subpar options available to me?



Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 21:56:12


Post by: Bharring


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Spoiler:
Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
2 old units did 36 with Endless Cacophony.

What about those of us that DON'T run Slaanesh?

Which is the problem with costing units like they always have a Strategem active. Why is the Strategem not priced like it'll be used on Obliterators instead?


Because then it's miscosted for use on a CSM squad or whatever else you want to use it for.

There exists no static price points (A, B, C) such that
-A is the cost for a 3man Oblit squad
-B is the cost of 3 CSM
-C is the cost of Cacophony

Such that [A, B, A+B, A+C] are all fair.

Except such Strategems, let's be honest here, aren't gonna be used on Chaos Marines. Nobody is gonna use the attacking twice Strategem for Chaos Marines for example, and it's already priced like it'll be used on...basically anything else.
Should Chaos Marines with Chainswords be priced like they can attack twice in a row?

So your proposed solution is to "streamline" the design space, such that only trivial options are left?

In many ways, the game could be more complicated, but it could be streamlined as well.

First and foremost, units NEED to be priced on their own merits, and not with buffers, as we can't assume the buffers exist at all times. When buffers exist, be it in auras and Strategems, they can then be priced depending on what they're buffing.
For example, it isn't like Chapter Master Special Characters are priced like they're buffing Tactical Marines all the time. Rather, they're priced like they're buffing Typhons or something. That's why, while I think it's really expensive, the Chapter Master Strategem is technically fair. However, why are we to assume all the Tactical Marines in your army are under these buffers? Should we price them like they naturally reroll 1's to hit or all to hit?

Then you completely missed the point.

"First and foremost, units NEED to be priced on their own merits"
Set points values for units [A, B] such that they're fair. Let's assume that's viable.

"When buffers exist, be it in auras and Strategems, they can then be priced depending on what they're buffing."
So how do you now set the price of upgrade/buff/whatever [C], such that [A+C] and [B+C] are also fair?
Your argument is that you don't; you price it such that it's "fair" for the better of the two. Let's assume [A] is the stronger of the two. So, if [A+C] is comparable in points:value to [A] or [B] (or anything else out there), then [B+C] is, by your direction, overcosted.

So now we get to:
"Should we price them like they naturally reroll 1's to hit or all to hit?"
It doesn't matter. Per above, it is not possible to price them fairly under your stipulations.

Note that I'm not saying I can't figure out a way. I'm saying, based on the assumptions above, a way cannot exist.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/03 22:02:54


Post by: Aelyn


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

I can make a new, more detailed plot if you want, because this one doesn't account for everything, but I at least percieve most of the un-accounted for things generally working in the favor of the newbliterators.

Also, I think I went over most of my assumptions in the long response. I even mention Cacophony, and that I felt it's a safe assumption that obliterators will receive Cacophony, but not a reasonable assumption that you're also going to be spend you CP re-rolls on their stat rolls, or that you're going to invest in a MoP to buff them psychically.

Okay, again, you're completely missing my point.

I'm not saying that your assumptions are wrong, inappropriate, or invalid. (I'm also not saying they're right, appropriate, or valid - that's another question entirely.)

All I'm saying is that producing a graph with minimal explanation and saying:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The short answer is that you're getting a better unit for units of 1 or 3 Obliterators, but it's less efficient to run 2, which happens to be the number in the box.

can be highly misleading to anyone who doesn't know what your assumptions are. Without that information, your graph is worse than useless - it's actively misleading.

You still haven't explained how you actually get the numbers you've claimed, either, though I grant you've described (some of?) the principles that underpin the assumption - including your own, subjective, assessment of what is a reasonable comparison unit. It's not possible to assess how accurate they are or how applicable the graph is without understanding what it's saying, and that requires knowledge of the assumptions.

For example, by having just one buffed oldblit unit as the comparison point for the 2-man newblit unit but relying on two oldblit units, only one of which is buffed, as the baseline for the 3-man newblit unit, you're moving the efficiency of the baseline, which is artificially inflating the comparative efficiency of three newblits. That's not reflected on the graph, and that kind of misleading conclusion is exactly why I challenged the graph in the first place instead of taking it at face value.

Do you see what I'm trying to get at?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 00:49:24


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Aelyn wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

I can make a new, more detailed plot if you want, because this one doesn't account for everything, but I at least percieve most of the un-accounted for things generally working in the favor of the newbliterators.

Also, I think I went over most of my assumptions in the long response. I even mention Cacophony, and that I felt it's a safe assumption that obliterators will receive Cacophony, but not a reasonable assumption that you're also going to be spend you CP re-rolls on their stat rolls, or that you're going to invest in a MoP to buff them psychically.

Okay, again, you're completely missing my point.

I'm not saying that your assumptions are wrong, inappropriate, or invalid. (I'm also not saying they're right, appropriate, or valid - that's another question entirely.)

All I'm saying is that producing a graph with minimal explanation and saying:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The short answer is that you're getting a better unit for units of 1 or 3 Obliterators, but it's less efficient to run 2, which happens to be the number in the box.

can be highly misleading to anyone who doesn't know what your assumptions are. Without that information, your graph is worse than useless - it's actively misleading.

You still haven't explained how you actually get the numbers you've claimed, either, though I grant you've described (some of?) the principles that underpin the assumption - including your own, subjective, assessment of what is a reasonable comparison unit. It's not possible to assess how accurate they are or how applicable the graph is without understanding what it's saying, and that requires knowledge of the assumptions.

For example, by having just one buffed oldblit unit as the comparison point for the 2-man newblit unit but relying on two oldblit units, only one of which is buffed, as the baseline for the 3-man newblit unit, you're moving the efficiency of the baseline, which is artificially inflating the comparative efficiency of three newblits. That's not reflected on the graph, and that kind of misleading conclusion is exactly why I challenged the graph in the first place instead of taking it at face value.

Do you see what I'm trying to get at?


Actually, that's the point of it. You can't buff any units after the first, which is exactly why it's more efficient to field 3 newblitz versus 6 oldblitz. You can't keep fielding buffed obliterator units, you can only buff one, so the ability to consolidate 1.5 units into one winds up benefiting the unit in the form of improved buff efficiency. And it's not particularly useful to compare 3 newblitz to 3 oldblitz, because it's a fairly drastically different level of power and commitment from the unit. If you want to add power in the past, you would have needed to buy a whole another unit of obliterators, who wouldn't benefit from various buffs, while now you can add an extra man to get that whole extra units worth of firepower [and then some, and save a few points while you're at it]

I also think I've described the math enough to reconstruct it similarly. It's a weighted average of it's scores in defense, shooting, and cost [(2*shooting+1*defense+3*cost)/6]. Each subscore is a weighted average of the percent change of its various components [Newshots/Oldshots, or New Chance to be Wounded/Old Chance to be Wounded]. I described this process in detail in the first response post.


I acknowledge that I didn't describe the graph at first. I made it a long time ago, and didn't care a whole lot to go into gratuitous detail. The most important assumptions were listed at the top, that cost mattered a lot, shooting mattered less than the cost, and survivability was pretty far last [with melee and movement being entirely irrelevant]


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 04:58:17


Post by: Drudge Dreadnought


I compared the firepower of Havocs and Oblits in the tactica thread and found that it actually comes out about right with the Oblits at 115 pts.

Spoiler:
I'm running Oblits at the shadowspear price of 115pts, and their weapon with average rolls. So Str8, ap-2, D2.



The main comparison to make is Oblits vs Reaper Chain Cannons, as those are both 24" range. And funnily enough, we see that point for point, the reaper is more efficient against everything, but especially against horde infantry. This is mainly because of the cost difference. The Oblit is ~3x the cost of the Chain Cannon Havoc.

Autocannons are even cheaper. You get the whole squad of 4x autocannons and 1x champ for 5pts less than a single Oblit! And they also actually meet or beat the Obliterator in efficiency per point in almost every area, although which areas changes a bit with re-roll 1's to hit. With re-roll 1's to hit and wound, they are exactly the same vs the tanks.

The Lascannon is behind on infantry and slightly ahead on the tanks, with the difference increasing once the re-rolls are introduced.

So in pure offensive power, the havocs actually come in ahead for the most part. But of course, this comparison actually has more to it because of how different these units are. On the surface of it, we can notice that for the price of 3 Oblits, we can afford 10 Chain Cannon Havocs. But of course, those would be split into 3 squads, only one of which can benefit from VotLW or Shoot Twice. Oblits have the biggest benefit from strats because they let you concentrate the most shooting power into a single squad.

Also note that I used average, middle of the road rolls for the Oblits. If they rolled worse it would perform worse against some targets, but not necessarily vs all of them. If they had only str7 instead of 8, that wouldn't change anything vs the Guardsmen. And Ap-1 wouldn't change anything vs the Boyz. If they roll D1, they lose out on a lot vs tanks.

And how about Defense? The Oblits are 4 wounds per 115. Chain Cannon havocs are ~3.5, and autocannons are ~5. But the Obliterator has 2+ Armor, which effectively doubles its durability over the havoc vs AP0. And the Invul of 5++ doubles it vs AP-3 (plasma.) They are vulnerable to high Damage weapons, but between the armor and invul, they are still much more durable per point than the Havocs. And that's before you consider that they can get Daemon Keyword defensive buffs, and are easier to benefit with defensive buffs that target a single unit. And they have a nice melee weapon. And Deep Strike.

So overall, Oblits are the superior unit, even at the shadowspear price point. But a lot of that is due to strats and buffs that will be in short supply. So you should fill a full unit of Oblits, but you may want to consider Havocs instead of a second unit of Oblits. After all, you can get 3 squads of Autocannon havocs for the cost of 3 Oblits! And they have the 48" range going for them.


And if you compare Oblits and Combi-Plasma terminators, they come out at about equivalent at 115pts as well.
(Reposting from a B&C thread.)

Spoiler:
I've been thinking about the relationship between Obliterators and Comb-Plasma terminators. These two units are surprisingly comparable it turns out, but with some differences of course.

3 combi plasma+chainaxe terminators is 114pts, 1 oblit is 115. So same cost.

The combi-plasma overcharge profile is comparable to Fleshmetal guns, on average. Fleshmetal guns have the random element, but can perform better. Overcharged plasma always has ap-3, and guaranteed D2, so that's a slight edge. Oblits can benefit from the Devastation Battery and get re-roll wounds of 1's vs vehicles, so edge to them on that. And of course, overcharge plasma needs buffs/auras to make it safe to use. But both these units are high enough investment that they'll probably have it either way.

The oblit always has 6 shots, the terminators only get that in rapidfire range. But the terminators also get bolter shots. Bolter+regular plasma is better vs hordes than fleshmetal guns by a decent amount, which helps make up for the range.

The terminators have twice as many attacks. Compared to the chainaxe, the oblit has an extra strength and Dd3. The terminators can spend a few extra points to improve their weapons beyond what the oblits can get. Terminators solid win here.

They have the same saves, but the Terminators have 2 more wounds for the same price, and are less vulnerable to d3 and higher weapons. But you need to deal twice as many wounds to the oblits to reduce their firepower. The oblits have the daemon keyword and so can get some extra buff synergy, and T5. So that all about evens out. Oblits win if you have a MoP upping their invul save.

The terminators have 1" more move. Both deep strike.

3 oblits is equivalent to 9 terminators, but the terminators can go to 10, meaning you're packing a little bit more points into the squad to take advantage of buff and strats. But you need to worry about morale at that size.

So overall, these units seem to measure up to each other very fairly. They both share the role of being high cost, high firepower units that will get a lot out of buff stacking. The oblits do it better as mid field units taking advantage of their range. Their CC will mostly not get used except in self defense. The terminators have the edge as a pressure unit that's going to move into close range and force your opponent to deal with it.

If you run both, your opponent will have no idea what to shoot.


So I don't know if they'll stay 115pts, but that price seems to be internally consistent with their two most comparable units. So i won't be surprised if it doesn't change.
If we didn't have the strats we do, I think they'd need to go down to the 90-100 range. But currently they could cost 130 and would still be an autoinclude in most lists.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 05:50:00


Post by: stormcraft


Yea, 115 seems to much on the first glance as a standalone unit, but if you look at what you can do with em with a proper setup it still seems very much worth it.

Alpha Legion Slaneesh Oblits with a Reroll for the Damage Dice and VotLW firing twice with prescience and Lord Rerolls just brutal amount of firpower and will reliably delete 2 Targets in Range every shooting phase, and is a very good answer to knights and other hard targets.

So yea, even for 350+ Points i will still take them, at least the one squad.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 05:57:52


Post by: Not Online!!!


stormcraft wrote:
Yea, 115 seems to much on the first glance as a standalone unit, but if you look at what you can do with em with a proper setup it still seems very much worth it.

Alpha Legion Slaneesh Oblits with a Reroll for the Damage Dice and VotLW firing twice with prescience and Lord Rerolls just brutal amount of firpower and will reliably delete 2 Targets in Range every shooting phase, and is a very good answer to knights and other hard targets.

So yea, even for 350+ Points i will still take them, at least the one squad.


Again if propperly Set up.
All non Slaanesh obliterators are not as usefull as the Chart above, all non AL units are in the same boat, renegades Oblits don't even get VotLW.

I doubt it is healthy to balance around maximum efficient buff application for pts, instead gw should have taken a look at cacophony, etc.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 06:11:30


Post by: Karol


Maybe GW doesn't want people to play with non AL non slanesh oblits? It could be true.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 06:17:21


Post by: Drudge Dreadnought


Not Online!!! wrote:
stormcraft wrote:
Yea, 115 seems to much on the first glance as a standalone unit, but if you look at what you can do with em with a proper setup it still seems very much worth it.

Alpha Legion Slaneesh Oblits with a Reroll for the Damage Dice and VotLW firing twice with prescience and Lord Rerolls just brutal amount of firpower and will reliably delete 2 Targets in Range every shooting phase, and is a very good answer to knights and other hard targets.

So yea, even for 350+ Points i will still take them, at least the one squad.


Again if propperly Set up.
All non Slaanesh obliterators are not as usefull as the Chart above, all non AL units are in the same boat, renegades Oblits don't even get VotLW.

I doubt it is healthy to balance around maximum efficient buff application for pts, instead gw should have taken a look at cacophony, etc.


Yeah, it's an annoying situation. They kind of have to balance around the maximum efficient buff application at the moment though. If it's balanced without counting VotLW and Cacophony then when those are used, it'd be busted.

At this point I'm getting a bit tired of those strats forcing Chaos into monobuilds. Cacophony should be a 1CP strat restricted to Noise Marines. VotLW can stop existing as a strat, and come back as a trait or something that provides re-roll wounds of 1. Units that were busted with Cacophony can go down in points cost or something. In other words, take away the ability to turn 1 unit into a giant FU button, but make everything else slightly more powerful to compensate.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 06:27:06


Post by: stormcraft


Yea, that would require an actual redesign of the Codex, and GW just made it absolutely clear they have no desire to do so.
So we are stuck with the codex we have, and in that context the price is alright.
100 would be better imho, but i will still take them at 115


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 06:57:05


Post by: Aelyn


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Actually, that's the point of it. You can't buff any units after the first, which is exactly why it's more efficient to field 3 newblitz versus 6 oldblitz...

Okay, I think we're talking at cross purposes.

What I was trying to say (and I'm not sure if you realise it or not) is that your graph, especially combined with your original commentary, looks like it's saying something about the new Obliterators, but that the message is not representative of the actual efficiency of different builds. This is because you have a straight line for the baseline (i.e. comparative efficiency of the "equivalent" number of old Obliterators) despite the fact the the efficiency of old Obliterators is nonlinear. So the graph is functionally useless to anyone deciding whether to take Obliterators now or trying to figure out how to build them.

If the point you were trying to make all along was "two units (of oldblits) are less efficient than one, thanks to buffs", then the graph was an extremely oblique, not to mention misleading, way of saying it.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I also think I've described the math enough to reconstruct it similarly. It's a weighted average of it's scores in defense, shooting, and cost [(2*shooting+1*defense+3*cost)/6]. Each subscore is a weighted average of the percent change of its various components [Newshots/Oldshots, or New Chance to be Wounded/Old Chance to be Wounded]. I described this process in detail in the first response post.

But I know that you made assumptions regarding the Mark of Chaos, the use of Endless Cacophony, and the appropriate comparison point. I wouldn't have realised the point about one unit of Oldblits vs two and the use of Endless Cacophony if I hadn't raised the challenge about the graph and seen your comment about comparing 2:3 new : old but 3:6 new : old (which only makes sense thanks to Cacophony) and your throwaway line about not assuming Cacophony for a single Newblit. That was all vital context to interpreting the graph. (You also didn't explain how you calculated survivability except in high-level terms, but I grant you that's relatively insignificant)

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I acknowledge that I didn't describe the graph at first. I made it a long time ago, and didn't care a whole lot to go into gratuitous detail. The most important assumptions were listed at the top, that cost mattered a lot, shooting mattered less than the cost, and survivability was pretty far last [with melee and movement being entirely irrelevant]

I disagree both that those are the most important assumptions and with your comparative weightings, but yes, at least you did try to put some context around your post. Not nearly enough to evaluate your message with a critical eye and derive useful information, but some.

Either way, I think we understand each other now, and I see no point in discussing it further.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 07:32:26


Post by: An Actual Englishman


On paper just looking at their stats they're not a good unit for their cost. Some of you are downplaying or missing a few things here though and its leading people to believe they are way too expensive.

1. Their weapons are 24" so short range (this means their melee isn't negligible). They're designed to be used short range.
2. They can natively deep strike. This is massive, you can drop them wherever you like with the enemy in range of their guns (that are assault so suffer no negs to hit). Then charge another unit. This mitigates their 4" movement stat.
3. They have a 2+, 5++, T5 and 4W so they are durable.
4. Their fleshmetal guns aren't random. They always have a minimum of str 7 up to 9, their AP is between 1 and 3 which is kind of a wash against many targets you want to fire their weapons at and they're damage is D3 which is pretty standard for their weapon type too. Probably the biggest weakness of their weapon is the D3 damage.
5. Their melee profile is pretty decent and could definitely be used to finish something off.

Add access to stratagems that allow the unit to fire twice and we can see why their cost is such.

Personally I'd drop them in the midfield every game T2 and unload into a pesky vehicle. I don't think I'd use cacophony on them (there are probably better units for that) and I'd try to charge another unit to keep them alive/tie something up.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 07:48:26


Post by: Gir Spirit Bane


I like them at 115. They're an option without being THE option for Chaos Heavy Support. I'll run a couple of them as either distraction carnifexs for my rhinos or deepstriking trouble shooting.

Everyone crying they're worse now, the unit WAS good, STILL is good and whilst pricy the cost should stay above 100 minimum in my opinion.

Now GW go buff my DAMN vindicators and stop making my Iron Warriors friend cry.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 07:51:13


Post by: cole1114


For me, I just feel like a three-man squad of obliterators shouldn't be 48 points more expensive than a land raider. Something about that just doesn't feel right.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 08:16:11


Post by: Nithaniel


A lot of the points on both sides of this argument are completely valid. The points for what they now give are pretty close to balanced.

I just have a nagging feeling that they are a little bit worse now because at 195 points they were close to autoo include. With the new points level for 3 it feels like the points total has just tipped over into being too high to justify in the context of points availab;lity for the rest of the list.

I would hazard a guess and say most players given the choice would prefer to field the old datasheet


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 08:22:02


Post by: BoomWolf


I don't understand the logic of some people here.

Some people said they were too good at 65, but are too weak at 115 and should have been 85-90.

How...does that even compute?!?
They got a 50% increase in firepower, and got a lot harder to kill.
If they would cost 85-90 they would have been EVEN STRONGER than they were.

They need to cost 97 points to remain EXACTLY as cost-efficient, with two on the drop being exactly the same as old three.
anything below 100 would have been a straight buff, to a unit that you agree was too good...


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 14:39:42


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Aelyn wrote:

If the point you were trying to make all along was "two units (of oldblits) are less efficient than one, thanks to buffs", then the graph was an extremely oblique, not to mention misleading, way of saying it.


The point is that one unit of 3 new obliterators is more efficient than such a list used to be [you have 45 points extra to spend, if that was what you had], but one unit of 2 new obliterators is less [you have to cut 35 points to make room]. It's not useful to compare a single buffed unit of old obliterators to a single full buffed unit of new obliterators; they're at completely different levels of commitment. But its an option, and it's not a bad one now, it just may entail re-working your list somewhat to support the unit

The graph is comparative; it's plotting relative change in performance at various level of obliterator commitment. If you were running 2 units before, you're now running 1 of 3, and you've got yourself a better deal [though it's marginal, 6% is not enough to cheer over]. If you were running 1 old obliterator, it's less efficient [again, though, by a small value].

That said, the introduction of the ability to field 1 for 115 is a pretty decent option, combine with their individual survivability buffs, because someone has to kill it, and it's going to take at least some AT guns which will probably overkill it.


It seems to me that you're trying to define the change as a nerf. It's not strictly a nerf or a buff. It's a nerf if you're running 2, but a buff if you're running 1 or 3. That's really the point here.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Aelyn wrote:

I disagree both that those are the most important assumptions and with your comparative weightings, but yes, at least you did try to put some context around your post. Not nearly enough to evaluate your message with a critical eye and derive useful information, but some.

Either way, I think we understand each other now, and I see no point in discussing it further.


I'm curious, what do you think are the comparative weightings? Escalating cost's importance makes the degree of the buff more extreme [at 3-2-1 it's farily minor, but at 5-2-1 it's pretty observable].


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 16:03:27


Post by: Aelyn


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
It seems to me that you're trying to define the change as a nerf. It's not strictly a nerf or a buff. It's a nerf if you're running 2, but a buff if you're running 1 or 3. That's really the point here.

Then you are absolutely missing my point. I'm not trying to describe the change at all, I'm just challenging your graph and statements as I think they are highly misleading and not useful to people assessing the new rules.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Aelyn wrote:

I disagree both that those are the most important assumptions and with your comparative weightings, but yes, at least you did try to put some context around your post. Not nearly enough to evaluate your message with a critical eye and derive useful information, but some.

Either way, I think we understand each other now, and I see no point in discussing it further.


I'm curious, what do you think are the comparative weightings? Escalating cost's importance makes the degree of the buff more extreme [at 3-2-1 it's farily minor, but at 5-2-1 it's pretty observable].

It varies depending on list qnd unit role, but if you're talking specifically about the value of the change for suicide drop units, I think it goes damage = cost > survivability > melee > move = 0. Maybe a 5/5/3/1 ratio, I don't know.

But I think that looking at it in terms of comparative changes is not a useful perspective. I'd rather look at it in absolute terms - ideally I'd want a three-dimensional scatter diagram plotting offense v defence v cost, with points showing units of different sizes with different assumptions in place.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 16:22:12


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Aelyn wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
It seems to me that you're trying to define the change as a nerf. It's not strictly a nerf or a buff. It's a nerf if you're running 2, but a buff if you're running 1 or 3. That's really the point here.

Then you are absolutely missing my point. I'm not trying to describe the change at all, I'm just challenging your graph and statements as I think they are highly misleading and not useful to people assessing the new rules.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Aelyn wrote:

I disagree both that those are the most important assumptions and with your comparative weightings, but yes, at least you did try to put some context around your post. Not nearly enough to evaluate your message with a critical eye and derive useful information, but some.

Either way, I think we understand each other now, and I see no point in discussing it further.


I'm curious, what do you think are the comparative weightings? Escalating cost's importance makes the degree of the buff more extreme [at 3-2-1 it's farily minor, but at 5-2-1 it's pretty observable].

It varies depending on list qnd unit role, but if you're talking specifically about the value of the change for suicide drop units, I think it goes damage = cost > survivability > melee > move = 0. Maybe a 5/5/3/1 ratio, I don't know.

But I think that looking at it in terms of comparative changes is not a useful perspective. I'd rather look at it in absolute terms - ideally I'd want a three-dimensional scatter diagram plotting offense v defence v cost, with points showing units of different sizes with different assumptions in place.


The graph was made a while ago back when it was first debuted to observe whether it was a buff or a nerf, which is why it's comparative to oldblitz [and the answer is, it's both, though most users will be disappointed]. It's therefore strictly dependent upon whether you though oblitz were good or not.

That said, if you like suicide drops, I'd recommend breaking the unit up into singles, or just running one single. The changes are a major buff for that use case, I think.

I can make such a plot for you; however while it's easy to produce a numeric value for change in characteristics, it's slightly harder to directly quantify them with no relative point.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 17:23:26


Post by: Dudeface


 BoomWolf wrote:
I don't understand the logic of some people here.

Some people said they were too good at 65, but are too weak at 115 and should have been 85-90.

How...does that even compute?!?
They got a 50% increase in firepower, and got a lot harder to kill.
If they would cost 85-90 they would have been EVEN STRONGER than they were.

They need to cost 97 points to remain EXACTLY as cost-efficient, with two on the drop being exactly the same as old three.
anything below 100 would have been a straight buff, to a unit that you agree was too good...


You're only factoring the output of damage into this, they have 1.5 x the damage output but not 1.5 x the durability in a lot of circumstances. 65 gets you 3 t4 wounds, 115 get you 4 t5 wounds.

Actually napkin maths works out they are exactly twice as durable vs bolters, but if your opponents dropping bolter shots into them 1st and foremost then something's gone wrong.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 18:57:45


Post by: dominuschao


I think oblits are pretty balanced now. And honestly more appealing to me. Especially considering they can fight a bit better have T5 and have a higher damage output for a maxed unit and can function msu.

3 with scourged trait looks very hard to assault and since they're fairly resilent thats typically the answer to tough shooty stuff that comes down midgame and roaches what could threaten them at range..


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 20:40:57


Post by: Vaktathi


 BoomWolf wrote:
I don't understand the logic of some people here.

Some people said they were too good at 65, but are too weak at 115 and should have been 85-90.

How...does that even compute?!?
They got a 50% increase in firepower, and got a lot harder to kill.
If they would cost 85-90 they would have been EVEN STRONGER than they were.

They need to cost 97 points to remain EXACTLY as cost-efficient, with two on the drop being exactly the same as old three.
anything below 100 would have been a straight buff, to a unit that you agree was too good...
115pts is Dread/Tank pricing, and, unless you're going all in on building your force around maximizing the Oblits, other options will outperform them. From my perspective, as an IW player running without any MoS units, the new price doesn't quite fit.

A couple quadlas Predators cost about what three newblits will. They have about the same performance against T5/6/7 tanks and monsters, the Oblits are better against infantry, the Preds are better against T8+. Both units are going to be best utilized against tough things. The Predators are sporting 22 T7 3+ wounds though against the Oblits 12 T5 2+/5++ wounds. Broadly speaking, on average, each Predator is twice as resilient (depending on the weapon, sometimes more and sometimes less) as each Newblit, so our 2 Predators have the approximate staying power of 4 Newblits with otherwise similar firepower but only cost as much as 3.

So, against the targets you really want both to go after, the Predators are more resilient, have double the range, and are better against Knight/Russ T8. The Oblits basically just have DS (which isn't by any means useless, but isnt everything either). The Predators are only 15pts more than 3 Newblits, are gonna be there for the turn 1 alpha strike, and have a greater speed to make use of (if necessary) than the Oblits once the latter are on the board.

Hence, why I think Newblits are more appropriate at 90 than 115.



Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/04 20:48:41


Post by: Quasistellar


 cole1114 wrote:
For me, I just feel like a three-man squad of obliterators shouldn't be 48 points more expensive than a land raider. Something about that just doesn't feel right.


You're right. The land raider is still too expensive


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/05 00:19:58


Post by: MinscS2


@Vakathi - And then compare Oblits to Helbrutes and it gets even worse.
A Helbrute with a Plasmacannon and Missile Launcher is what, 96 pts? With a Twin-Las and Missile Launcher they're what, 116 pts? I'd pick that over an Obliterator every single day.

115 ppm Oblits is only somewhat fine if you're using playing around cacaphony and stacking buffs, but far from everyone plays them this way. I refuse MoS on my Scourged-Oblits and my World Eaters can't even take MoS (not that I would take it.)




Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 14:26:18


Post by: Lord Blackscale


Just ran the first round of an escalation league on Saturday. At 500 points one player brought a unit of three obliterators, at the 65 point cost, and in both games they played the other player was tabled in 2 turns. I think 65 is way too low, but 115 is too much. However, even as a chaos player myself, I would rather they be 115 than 65. But that is just based on my current experience.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 16:08:39


Post by: SHUPPET


Elbows wrote:
 Samuhell wrote:
 Elbows wrote:
Only a couple of internet-RAW blowhards will use that excuse. They're 115 points a model and 1-3 in a unit. The new CSM codex simply copy-pasted the old Obliterator entry, so ignore it.


Sorry to argue with you but the datasheet is the new one, the points at the back seem to be out but as it stands obliterators are 65 ppm and 3 in a unit


Sure, and people are welcome to hide behind that excuse as they always do with misprintings in books. It doesn't make them any less of a tool in my opinion.

How do you manage to always have the worst post in every thread you post in. This doesn't even seem like a typo to me, at the very least it's not definitive enough to call someone a tool for playing by the rules in their codex lol


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 17:58:49


Post by: BrianDavion


 Lord Blackscale wrote:
Just ran the first round of an escalation league on Saturday. At 500 points one player brought a unit of three obliterators, at the 65 point cost, and in both games they played the other player was tabled in 2 turns. I think 65 is way too low, but 115 is too much. However, even as a chaos player myself, I would rather they be 115 than 65. But that is just based on my current experience.


with any luck the FAQ'll find a nice comprimise cost of 80-90 points per for them


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 18:58:54


Post by: BoomWolf


The FAQ will clearly be 115.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 18:59:14


Post by: Octopoid


 BoomWolf wrote:
The FAQ will clearly be 115.


And if it's not?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 19:06:11


Post by: BoomWolf


Than I'll be outright shocked because it would be the most incompetent GW has been in a long, long while not to FAQ them to 115, as they clearly are intended to be.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 19:11:43


Post by: Galef


Agreed. If the next CSM FAQ doesn't correct the ppm of Oblits to 115, it will NOT be because they are supposed to be 65ppm, it will be because GW missed the boat ....AGAIN...on the points value.
Due to the release timing, it is abundantly clear Oblits are supposed to be 115ppm, but that was missed in the CSM Codex reprint/update.

Anyone arguing otherwise is mistaken, regardless of whether GW fixes their mistake or not.

Arguable the new Oblits are worth less than 115ppm, but given the two values we have been given 115 is the correct one.

-


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 20:39:42


Post by: Octopoid


 Galef wrote:
Agreed. If the next CSM FAQ doesn't correct the ppm of Oblits to 115, it will NOT be because they are supposed to be 65ppm, it will be because GW missed the boat ....AGAIN...on the points value.
Due to the release timing, it is abundantly clear Oblits are supposed to be 115ppm, but that was missed in the CSM Codex reprint/update.

Anyone arguing otherwise is mistaken, regardless of whether GW fixes their mistake or not.

Arguable the new Oblits are worth less than 115ppm, but given the two values we have been given 115 is the correct one.

-


Technically, this is not correct. It is how I have played it, to avoid alienating my opponent, but the "correct" points cost is the one in the most recent publication. Until and unless GW FAQs the points cost (which I suspect they will), 65 (and units of 3) is the "correct" way to field Oblits.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 21:02:17


Post by: Galef


Something can be technically correct and still be wrong. I think most of us acknowledge that 65ppm is a copy-paste left-over they forgot to change and that the intended ppm is 115.

I am glad most of us would play Oblits at 115ppm, but it is a bit disappointing to see so many players advocating for them at 65ppm on a technicality.
I know for some players it will be an honest mistake, but I truly hope those that are trying to "game the system" and spam 65ppm T5, 4W, 6 shot Oblits go out and buy tons of them just to have GW correct their error and make all those 9 Oblit lists much more costly, potentially forcing those players to drop several from their lists to sit on shelves until CA2019 drops them to 95-105ppm like they probably should be

-


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 21:22:09


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Galef wrote:
Something can be technically correct and still be wrong. I think most of us acknowledge that 65ppm is a copy-paste left-over they forgot to change and that the intended ppm is 115.

I am glad most of us would play Oblits at 115ppm, but it is a bit disappointing to see so many players advocating for them at 65ppm on a technicality.
I know for some players it will be an honest mistake, but I truly hope those that are trying to "game the system" and spam 65ppm T5, 4W, 6 shot Oblits go out and buy tons of them just to have GW correct their error and make all those 9 Oblit lists much more costly, potentially forcing those players to drop several from their lists to sit on shelves until CA2019 drops them to 95-105ppm like they probably should be

-


Logic dictates that's statement follow one rule,
A =\= non(A)

You stated A= Non(A)

Something can be technically correct and still be wrong


Pls dont do that, also so long we don't see the faq we really don't know what is meant and it is solely gw to blame for it.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 22:24:18


Post by: Lemondish


The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.

You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.

I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.

I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 22:27:36


Post by: Togusa


Lemondish wrote:
The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.

You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.

I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.

I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.


Except here is the problem.

Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 23:34:04


Post by: Lemondish


text removed,.

Reds8n



Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/08 23:43:05


Post by: Galas


Yeah I don't think 115ppm oblits are really that good (Ok , the full wombo combo is but thats another problem) but NUOblits at 65ppm are just... blergh.

I wouldn't tell anybody to not play them if he really wants but I would refuse a game with them. It will be completely unfair, theres just no point in playing a game with 9 NuOblits at 65ppm.

At least when you are playing something like non ultra competitive Dark Angels or pure adeptus custodes like myself.

But I just can't agree with people that believes NuOblits are fine at 65ppm.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 00:28:11


Post by: SHUPPET




Imagine thinking Obliterators were a good unit pre-nerf. They were doing nothing competitively, and thats even in an army that has a serious lack of AT. They needed a buff, desperately, and now that they got them, people who struggle with unit evaluation think they need a nerf.

Look at some of the stuff in this game. If you really think 200 pts for a 3 man T5 terminator unit, that deepstrikes turn 2, dies after, and needs to eat up every single buff you own to perform, is in anyway OP you're kidding yourself.

I think Hive Guard are a little overrated and I still wouldn't trade my Hive Guard out for Obliterators if you let me - and that's in Tyranids, an army that at least has a close combat presence to somewhat support a glass cannon unit that needs to DS within 24" of a target.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Deciding that this MUST BE a misprint and anyone playing by the rules is a power gamer, is also just absurd to me. Is there any proof at all that this is a misprint, or is this just poor balance evaluation on display?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 02:27:03


Post by: SHUPPET



I say so, top players say so, and the stats say so. Chaos has gotten multiple top 16 finishes at pretty much every GT since the release of the CSM dex. Unless it's happened super recently, not a single one of them had Obliterators. Don't even try to tell me it was due to a lack of representation either, one of the NOVA's there was literally 8 out of top 16 finishes were Chaos and not a single Obliterator present. And thats when Obliterators were at their prime, they could DS turn 1, so could Cultists, and warptime out of DS was a thing. What on earth makes you think they were a competitive unit, with no placings, after multiple nerfs to that lol at 65 pts?


Low level players will have it come in and blow up a landraider with no support units in position though and have their opinion shaped by that, so that's why the unit never seems to measure up to the narrative around it


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 03:02:56


Post by: Togusa




Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.

10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 03:37:44


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


 Togusa wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Lemondish wrote:
The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.

You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.

I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.

I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.


Except here is the problem.

Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.




This is me laughing in your face.


Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.

10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.


This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.

Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 03:38:56


Post by: SHUPPET


Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 07:06:26


Post by: Dudeface


 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 07:16:05


Post by: SHUPPET


Or maybe your unit evaluation is just bad.

If a unit hasn't cracked top tables at a GT once in 2 years, even though plenty of people tried to take it, chances are that unit isn't that great at all.

I'm not talking about where they currently sit at 65 points - I think that's a good points cost for them, and we may finally see them worthy of competitive play. I was talking about them pre-buff, to someone saying they were a great unit over the last two years - sorry, that's just wrong. I have a pretty well supported stance here, "nah they good" tells me you are playing at that level a little bit below competitive where they can compete more. Good players aren't losing to Obliterators.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 07:16:07


Post by: Not Online!!!


Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 07:51:40


Post by: WisdomLS


Just catching up, obliterators at either points value could be called many things but "Glass Cannon" isn't one of them - 12 wounds, T5, 2+/5++, easy to get into cover or hide out of LOS. This is not a glass cannon.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 08:06:54


Post by: Dudeface


Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 08:14:45


Post by: Not Online!!!


Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 09:37:59


Post by: SemperMortis


I don't even play Chaos, but yeah, RAW Those obliterators are 65pts a model. It is very clearly a Fethup on GW's part, because you know, apparently hiring an editor or actual play testers is just too demanding for a company GW's size.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 09:59:25


Post by: SHUPPET


SemperMortis wrote:
I don't even play Chaos, but yeah, RAW Those obliterators are 65pts a model. It is very clearly a Fethup on GW's part, because you know, apparently hiring an editor or actual play testers is just too demanding for a company GW's size.

What makes it clear that it's a mistake? Balance alone clearly isn't a consensus, is there anything else that makes it clearly a printing mistake? Asking again because last time I got no response.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 10:49:21


Post by: Eihnlazer


 SHUPPET wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
I don't even play Chaos, but yeah, RAW Those obliterators are 65pts a model. It is very clearly a Fethup on GW's part, because you know, apparently hiring an editor or actual play testers is just too demanding for a company GW's size.

What makes it clear that it's a mistake? Balance alone clearly isn't a consensus, is there anything else that makes it clearly a printing mistake? Asking again because last time I got no response.



Probably because there is literally no reason for them to drop them from 115pts per model to 65 pts per model a week later with no data stating they were underperforming, but there is reason to think that the codex was copy/pasted since the old cost was 65 and GW have consistently made typos and errors in their publications.

However lets ignore the consistant errors they have made in the past and believe they released the new updated datasheets and increased points on accident and felt it needed to go back to the old points just because.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 12:26:24


Post by: WisdomLS


 Eihnlazer wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
I don't even play Chaos, but yeah, RAW Those obliterators are 65pts a model. It is very clearly a Fethup on GW's part, because you know, apparently hiring an editor or actual play testers is just too demanding for a company GW's size.

What makes it clear that it's a mistake? Balance alone clearly isn't a consensus, is there anything else that makes it clearly a printing mistake? Asking again because last time I got no response.



Probably because there is literally no reason for them to drop them from 115pts per model to 65 pts per model a week later with no data stating they were underperforming, but there is reason to think that the codex was copy/pasted since the old cost was 65 and GW have consistently made typos and errors in their publications.

However lets ignore the consistant errors they have made in the past and believe they released the new updated datasheets and increased points on accident and felt it needed to go back to the old points just because.


The fact that it is a likely copy and paste error is further highlighted by the fact that they have been given a new dataslate where they can be taken in units of 1-3 and each model is PL6. Then in the points section they come in only units of 3 and PL roughly translates to 20 points per model meaning they should be somewhere between 110-130 being PL6.

I know PL=20pts isn't hard and fast especially since the points drops in Chapter approved but with the new CSM codex they actually went back and altered lots of units PL to bring them back in line making the Obliterators stand out even more as an obvious mistake.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 12:30:36


Post by: Galas


Is a mistake because the datasheed says the units are 1-3 but the point cost has 3 as the unit size, just like the old unit.

I dont know about top tables. In general deepstriking units then to suck in top tables because players know how to screen, thats why GSC arent as powerfull as many said.
But saying a unit sucks because it is not used in tournaments winning lists, I think is wrong, because tournament lists use the most busted units by definition. And I know. Complaining that bowser sucks instead of using fox is a scrub mentality but this is not a videogame, I payed as much for my miniatures and rules as the next guy, I think I deserve for them to be balanced and usable, each one with his own tactical uses.(And please refrain from the "you only want any random mix of units to be equally powerfull? Lololo")


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 14:04:52


Post by: lare2


How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 14:07:59


Post by: Not Online!!!


 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 14:29:52


Post by: SHUPPET


 Galas wrote:

But saying a unit sucks because it is not used in tournaments winning lists, I think is wrong, because tournament lists use the most busted units by definition.

Not saying it sucks, I'm saying it wasn't a competitive choice, ever, as some people have said.


 Galas wrote:
And I know. Complaining that bowser sucks instead of using fox is a scrub mentality but this is not a videogame, I payed as much for my miniatures and rules as the next guy, I think I deserve for them to be balanced and usable, each one with his own tactical uses.(And please refrain from the "you only want any random mix of units to be equally powerfull? Lololo")


I can dig it for sure, I don't think it's a scrub mentality, but I also don't think it impacts what I've said.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 14:52:39


Post by: Dudeface


Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 14:57:53


Post by: lare2


Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Awesome - much appreciated. So we'd be looking like some time this weekend... give or take.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 15:45:12


Post by: ikeulhu


Probably will come out the same time as the Big FAQ. They often hold off on Codex FAQ releases if another large FAQ is about to be released as well and just release them at the same time.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 17:01:56


Post by: Not Online!!!


 lare2 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Awesome - much appreciated. So we'd be looking like some time this weekend... give or take.


Don't quote me, the gal whilest nice was Q/A so oooo.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.


DP, f.e.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 17:07:27


Post by: Togusa


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Lemondish wrote:
The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.

You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.

I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.

I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.


Except here is the problem.

Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.




This is me laughing in your face.


Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.

10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.


This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.

Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.


This happened to me two days ago.

Math is great! Doing statistics is also great, but it really doesn't mean much on the table top, where dice do not behave properly due to imperfections, or rolling manipulation.

Of the 22 Storm of Fire shots fired at me, he hit with 20 of them (Ultramarines reroll strat) wounded with 12, and I lost 2 of three obliteratiors.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 19:04:51


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


 Togusa wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Lemondish wrote:
The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.

You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.

I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.

I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.


Except here is the problem.

Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.




This is me laughing in your face.


Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.

10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.


This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.

Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.


This happened to me two days ago.

Math is great! Doing statistics is also great, but it really doesn't mean much on the table top, where dice do not behave properly due to imperfections, or rolling manipulation.

Of the 22 Storm of Fire shots fired at me, he hit with 20 of them (Ultramarines reroll strat) wounded with 12, and I lost 2 of three obliteratiors.


One moment...

I just sampled 100000 such shooting attacks with MATLAB [because I'm lazy]. The average number of wounds dealt was a little under 2.5 wounds, the standard deviation was 1.3 wounds. Less than 0.04% of trials resulted in 8 or more wounds being dealt.

I believe your situation is most accurately referred to as "unlucky" and "edge case".


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 19:16:19


Post by: the_scotsman


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Lemondish wrote:
The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.

You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.

I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.

I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.


Except here is the problem.

Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.




This is me laughing in your face.


Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.

10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.


This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.

Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.


This happened to me two days ago.

Math is great! Doing statistics is also great, but it really doesn't mean much on the table top, where dice do not behave properly due to imperfections, or rolling manipulation.

Of the 22 Storm of Fire shots fired at me, he hit with 20 of them (Ultramarines reroll strat) wounded with 12, and I lost 2 of three obliteratiors.


One moment...

I just sampled 100000 such shooting attacks with MATLAB [because I'm lazy]. The average number of wounds dealt was a little under 2.5 wounds, the standard deviation was 1.3 wounds. Less than 0.04% of trials resulted in 8 or more wounds being dealt.

I believe your situation is what we refer to as "unlucky" and "edge case".


Nope, nopenopenope! if something unlikely happens to somebody, it is never because it is unlikely and unlikely things happen but very rarely, it is always because of Flaw In Uncontrollable Circumstance or Veiled Implication of Cheating. And, this is the important part, ALL those results should definitely be considered when deciding what is best for game balance.

Which is definitely why space marine double lascannon+missile launcher centurions should be nerfed. Sure, STATISTICALLY They're worse then dreadnoughts in every way, but I have this special set of three loaded dice that I've learned to trick-roll that always roll 6s that I always use when I make shooting attacks for my centurions.

Statistics are great and all, but balance decisions should be based on dice with imperfections and cheating.

Or at least, it should when I'm caught being disingenuous and probably exaggerating, anyway.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 19:29:55


Post by: Dudeface


Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Awesome - much appreciated. So we'd be looking like some time this weekend... give or take.


Don't quote me, the gal whilest nice was Q/A so oooo.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.


DP, f.e.


DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 19:31:25


Post by: JNAProductions


Daemon Prince was not meant as versing Oblits, it was just an example of a unit that can earn its points back.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 19:41:44


Post by: Not Online!!!


Spoiler:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Awesome - much appreciated. So we'd be looking like some time this weekend... give or take.


Don't quote me, the gal whilest nice was Q/A so oooo.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.


DP, f.e.


DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.


Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/09 20:18:55


Post by: Xenomancers


 SHUPPET wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
I don't even play Chaos, but yeah, RAW Those obliterators are 65pts a model. It is very clearly a Fethup on GW's part, because you know, apparently hiring an editor or actual play testers is just too demanding for a company GW's size.

What makes it clear that it's a mistake? Balance alone clearly isn't a consensus, is there anything else that makes it clearly a printing mistake? Asking again because last time I got no response.

Obliterators were clearly one of the stronger units in the game and already used in competitive lists. They are a staple in chaos soup lists. With this unit getting a lot better it makes no sense for it's cost not to go up. Then again this is GW - they make the strongest units stronger all the time without even realizing it. Sometimes they raise the cost of underperforming units. There is no telling what they want the cost to be. I'll just say - with them costing 115 they are still better than dev centurions who for 110 get 2 LC and a hurricane bolter with -1 wound 0 close combat ability no invun saves, no deep strike, and no assault weapons. They also can't shoot twice ether.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 01:48:20


Post by: SemperMortis


 SHUPPET wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
I don't even play Chaos, but yeah, RAW Those obliterators are 65pts a model. It is very clearly a Fethup on GW's part, because you know, apparently hiring an editor or actual play testers is just too demanding for a company GW's size.

What makes it clear that it's a mistake? Balance alone clearly isn't a consensus, is there anything else that makes it clearly a printing mistake? Asking again because last time I got no response.


Because they just had a new dataslate put out with a significantly higher cost. Add that to the fact that GW has been making more errors then ever when releasing codex's and its highly likely if not "Very clearly" a fethup. Granted, you can't take stupidity for granted, they very well might have just decided "meh feth it", i mean, look at the Stompa in the new ork codex.

Ork Players: The stompa is about 30-50% over priced and can never be played in anything approaching a competitive game unless we purposely want to lose.
GW STAFF: We have increased the fire power of its useless guns by 50%!
Ork Players: COOL! Did you dramatically reduce the price or give it another major enhancement.....like a FNP or Invuln save?
GW STAFF: We didn't reduce the price but we did give it a cool Invuln save and the ability to Deep strike!
Ork Players: COOL!!!!!!! How do we get that for the Stompa?
GW STAFF: By using this super cool detachment, it will cost you about 1700pts to field but you can then spend CP to deep strike and give the Stompa a relic invuln save!
Ork Players:.........................................


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 03:03:45


Post by: Togusa


the_scotsman wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Spoiler:
Lemondish wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Lemondish wrote:
The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.

You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.

I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.

I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.


Except here is the problem.

Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.




This is me laughing in your face.


Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.

10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.


This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.

Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.


This happened to me two days ago.

Math is great! Doing statistics is also great, but it really doesn't mean much on the table top, where dice do not behave properly due to imperfections, or rolling manipulation.

Of the 22 Storm of Fire shots fired at me, he hit with 20 of them (Ultramarines reroll strat) wounded with 12, and I lost 2 of three obliteratiors.


One moment...

I just sampled 100000 such shooting attacks with MATLAB [because I'm lazy]. The average number of wounds dealt was a little under 2.5 wounds, the standard deviation was 1.3 wounds. Less than 0.04% of trials resulted in 8 or more wounds being dealt.

I believe your situation is what we refer to as "unlucky" and "edge case".


Nope, nopenopenope! if something unlikely happens to somebody, it is never because it is unlikely and unlikely things happen but very rarely, it is always because of Flaw In Uncontrollable Circumstance or Veiled Implication of Cheating. And, this is the important part, ALL those results should definitely be considered when deciding what is best for game balance.

Which is definitely why space marine double lascannon+missile launcher centurions should be nerfed. Sure, STATISTICALLY They're worse then dreadnoughts in every way, but I have this special set of three loaded dice that I've learned to trick-roll that always roll 6s that I always use when I make shooting attacks for my centurions.

Statistics are great and all, but balance decisions should be based on dice with imperfections and cheating.

Or at least, it should when I'm caught being disingenuous and probably exaggerating, anyway.


Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak. But by all mean, go on insinuating I'm a liar.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 03:05:18


Post by: JNAProductions


 Togusa wrote:
Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.


Then how would you balance the game?

Because a one-in-a-million chance that happened to happen to you ain't a good balancing metric.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 04:23:46


Post by: MinscS2


 Togusa wrote:


Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.


Having played this game for many years now, I've realized that statistics actually mean a great deal - most of the time.

Sure, those 10 guardsmen with FRFSRF might kill a full squad of MEQ's. It's not impossible, but unlikely, and on occasion it will happen.
Far more likely however is that they do 2 wounds to said unit of MEQ's - which is about average.

Trying to balance a game around potential freak accidents is a bad idea. With so many dice rolls involved, weird stuff is bound to happen sometimes, but more often than not, trying to balance the game around "averages" and "statistics" is the best course of action.





Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 07:05:51


Post by: Dudeface


Not Online!!! wrote:
Spoiler:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Awesome - much appreciated. So we'd be looking like some time this weekend... give or take.


Don't quote me, the gal whilest nice was Q/A so oooo.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.


DP, f.e.


DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.


Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.


Edit: scrap my original post, it's not going to add value to someone who will openly make wild judgements on someone's character.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 07:38:59


Post by: Not Online!!!


Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Spoiler:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Awesome - much appreciated. So we'd be looking like some time this weekend... give or take.


Don't quote me, the gal whilest nice was Q/A so oooo.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.


DP, f.e.


DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.


Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.


Edit: scrap my original post, it's not going to add value to someone who will openly make wild judgements on someone's character.


Where excactly did i judge your charachter?

I stated you seem to have a chip on your shoulder nothing more nothing less and that you are not interested in a discussion.
Last i deducated do to you willingly missrepresenting the DP case above, and first due to the fact that you ignore the results Shuppet brought to the table.

Shuppet f.e. brought you the results, that Oblits never reach toptables in two years.
For a unit that is a Fire and forget unit with a Deepstrike the margine is extremely small inbetween not good and extremely good, due to the nature of it.

And here lies the problem, also just to make the accurate math, have you factored in the actual CP cost in pts for the unit?

The cheapest 5 CP you are going to get is 315 pts, (170 for when R&H would be allowed, but frankly nobody fields them in a competitive environment.)
So 315 / 5 = 63/pp per CP, if you go RC, then 315/8 = 39,375 pp/ CP.

You need 2 so even with RC you will end up with 78,75 pts on top of the unit just to factor in CP generation cost., if you also need to call in VoTWL that would be another 78,75 pts on top.
AND you will need to call it in relatively often due to the sorcerer that could and should babysitt them not beeing really mobile. And even if you manage that would be another 90pts on top for the unit to factor in.
AND SO ON.
Yeah obliterators are a great unit if supported propperly, problem is when you look at the cost of oppurtunity and what you need to fullfill with it to be bonkers you realise that you near knight level fast.
And here is the kicker, A dakka brute now costs less then a Oblit, is more reliable, get's a cheap shoot twice on a condition, has more range, etc.

So i am sorry to say but Shuppet is right on point when he stated that you seemed to miss the point.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 08:49:29


Post by: Jidmah


 MinscS2 wrote:
 Togusa wrote:


Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.


Having played this game for many years now, I've realized that statistics actually mean a great deal - most of the time.

Sure, those 10 guardsmen with FRFSRF might kill a full squad of MEQ's. It's not impossible, but unlikely, and on occasion it will happen.
Far more likely however is that they do 2 wounds to said unit of MEQ's - which is about average.

Trying to balance a game around potential freak accidents is a bad idea. With so many dice rolls involved, weird stuff is bound to happen sometimes, but more often than not, trying to balance the game around "averages" and "statistics" is the best course of action.


You're both kind of right and kind of wrong. The thing is, statistics are complicated, difficult to understand and often counter-intuitive. Averages are just a small part of statistics.

Most of the discussions here on dakka are basing their arguments on the expected average result of some offensive stat lines against some defensive stat lines. However, there is also a chance attached to actually archiving that average or a number close to that average, which is usually ignored. For example you would say, an overcharged plasma gun does 1.852 to a primaris marine, which means 0 dead marines on average, Togusa would then counter that from experience his plasma guns do usually kill a primaris marine or two.
Calculate the chance of 0. 1 or 2 shots damaging marines without knowing which formula to use is doable, but already a lot of work, doing the same work for Cawl’s Wrath takes hours let alone figuring out the chances of an entire Castellan worth of shooting killing 0-10 primaris marines.

Since these formulas need be know and understood and till take quite some time to solve some resort to programming to just toss a million dice at a problem and see what happens. While this is a viable approach, random numbers in computers aren't actually random, and few people are actually able to determine whether the implementation of "random" in their current tools is random enough for such an experiment. Last, but not least, many people fail to properly initialize and/or implement randomization in their code, so even a million dice that should be random enough could yield a different result than what actually should mathematically happen.

And then there is the issue of dice luck. Over in the ork thread there are people fighting over whether the SSAG is great or not, because some keep deleting knights with it, while others have yet to do more than 3 damage to a single target.
There is also a scientific paper on the web somewhere proving that one guy just sucks at dice rolling - his average roll across hundreds of thousands of dice was 2.8 while other people rolling the same dice just as many times had the average 3.5.

Last, but not least, points somehow try to put a price tag on a mix of damage output, resilience, speed and utility. Statistics can only cover the first two, so the only way to find a proper price tag is through iteration.

TL;DR: Averages are not a good tool to balance anything, but statistics done properly are. However, statistics aren't the only thing that matters, it's just one of multiple tools to find proper price tag.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 09:39:25


Post by: grouchoben


What we know:

The codex contains a printing error. The data slate is inconsistent with the price sheet: one says 1-3 models, the other says 3. So we know one of the two must be incorrect.

Which one is it? The data slate that has recently been fundamentally changed, in line with a new model release for the unit?

Or the points sheet that is identical to the old unit not only in price but models-per-unit?

To argue the former is not really reasonable: you're supposing, for some reason, that GW changed the model and the unit composition and the stats and the points, then decided 14 days later to immediately change the points back and the unit composition back, whilst keeping the new model and the new stats, but failed to properly update the codex to reflect this about-face.

As opposed to supposing that they just mistakenly copy-pasta'd from the old document. It's just Occam's Razor.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I will admit, though, that it's weird that GW haven't auto-FAQ'd this like they immediately did with the SW codex...


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 14:49:56


Post by: Dudeface


Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Spoiler:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Awesome - much appreciated. So we'd be looking like some time this weekend... give or take.


Don't quote me, the gal whilest nice was Q/A so oooo.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.


DP, f.e.


DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.


Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.


Edit: scrap my original post, it's not going to add value to someone who will openly make wild judgements on someone's character.


Where excactly did i judge your charachter?

I stated you seem to have a chip on your shoulder nothing more nothing less and that you are not interested in a discussion.
Last i deducated do to you willingly missrepresenting the DP case above, and first due to the fact that you ignore the results Shuppet brought to the table.

Shuppet f.e. brought you the results, that Oblits never reach toptables in two years.
For a unit that is a Fire and forget unit with a Deepstrike the margine is extremely small inbetween not good and extremely good, due to the nature of it.

And here lies the problem, also just to make the accurate math, have you factored in the actual CP cost in pts for the unit?

The cheapest 5 CP you are going to get is 315 pts, (170 for when R&H would be allowed, but frankly nobody fields them in a competitive environment.)
So 315 / 5 = 63/pp per CP, if you go RC, then 315/8 = 39,375 pp/ CP.

You need 2 so even with RC you will end up with 78,75 pts on top of the unit just to factor in CP generation cost., if you also need to call in VoTWL that would be another 78,75 pts on top.
AND you will need to call it in relatively often due to the sorcerer that could and should babysitt them not beeing really mobile. And even if you manage that would be another 90pts on top for the unit to factor in.
AND SO ON.
Yeah obliterators are a great unit if supported propperly, problem is when you look at the cost of oppurtunity and what you need to fullfill with it to be bonkers you realise that you near knight level fast.
And here is the kicker, A dakka brute now costs less then a Oblit, is more reliable, get's a cheap shoot twice on a condition, has more range, etc.

So i am sorry to say but Shuppet is right on point when he stated that you seemed to miss the point.


My apologies if i misunderstood the tone of your post in that case, it appeared you were essentially calling me a salty thick headed loser who can't learn from a mistake.

That's a much better discourse and yes when you factor in support costs their points do shoot up dramatically, it will cost more points to maximise output from them when in comparison to a prince which is fairly self sufficient outside of needing it's screen.

I find the helbrute to be a better comparison but there are enough differences in keywords and deployment to consider on their own merits. But this is a well structured and logical argument and will bow to that.

However I don't think whether a unit hits the top tables is fair definition of whether a unit itself is broken or not. Partly because we've not had chance to see the new oblits at their old cost in a competitive environment, partly because the units people do consider OP also have massive supporting cost elements.

That and ultimately 95%+ of the player base (myself included) have no aspirations of being a top table player, in which case the benchmark comes "is the unit efficient/capable enough for its points that it seems exceptional value", which I think new profile & old points is for us filthy casuals.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 14:59:20


Post by: Not Online!!!


Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Spoiler:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
How quickly does GW normally do codex FAQs? This inconsistency is pretty annoying.


2 weeks, i also asked for them if they would fully update with the faq to codex 2.0 which they said they would.


Awesome - much appreciated. So we'd be looking like some time this weekend... give or take.


Don't quote me, the gal whilest nice was Q/A so oooo.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Lmao.

I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.

There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.

Your reply is so weak.

You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .

Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?

You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"


That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.


Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.

So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?



My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.


So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.

Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,

Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.


So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.


DP, f.e.


DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.


Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.


Edit: scrap my original post, it's not going to add value to someone who will openly make wild judgements on someone's character.


Where excactly did i judge your charachter?

I stated you seem to have a chip on your shoulder nothing more nothing less and that you are not interested in a discussion.
Last i deducated do to you willingly missrepresenting the DP case above, and first due to the fact that you ignore the results Shuppet brought to the table.

Shuppet f.e. brought you the results, that Oblits never reach toptables in two years.
For a unit that is a Fire and forget unit with a Deepstrike the margine is extremely small inbetween not good and extremely good, due to the nature of it.

And here lies the problem, also just to make the accurate math, have you factored in the actual CP cost in pts for the unit?

The cheapest 5 CP you are going to get is 315 pts, (170 for when R&H would be allowed, but frankly nobody fields them in a competitive environment.)
So 315 / 5 = 63/pp per CP, if you go RC, then 315/8 = 39,375 pp/ CP.

You need 2 so even with RC you will end up with 78,75 pts on top of the unit just to factor in CP generation cost., if you also need to call in VoTWL that would be another 78,75 pts on top.
AND you will need to call it in relatively often due to the sorcerer that could and should babysitt them not beeing really mobile. And even if you manage that would be another 90pts on top for the unit to factor in.
AND SO ON.
Yeah obliterators are a great unit if supported propperly, problem is when you look at the cost of oppurtunity and what you need to fullfill with it to be bonkers you realise that you near knight level fast.
And here is the kicker, A dakka brute now costs less then a Oblit, is more reliable, get's a cheap shoot twice on a condition, has more range, etc.

So i am sorry to say but Shuppet is right on point when he stated that you seemed to miss the point.


My apologies if i misunderstood the tone of your post in that case, it appeared you were essentially calling me a salty thick headed loser who can't learn from a mistake.

That's a much better discourse and yes when you factor in support costs their points do shoot up dramatically, it will cost more points to maximise output from them when in comparison to a prince which is fairly self sufficient outside of needing it's screen.

I find the helbrute to be a better comparison but there are enough differences in keywords and deployment to consider on their own merits. But this is a well structured and logical argument and will bow to that.

However I don't think whether a unit hits the top tables is fair definition of whether a unit itself is broken or not. Partly because we've not had chance to see the new oblits at their old cost in a competitive environment, partly because the units people do consider OP also have massive supporting cost elements.

That and ultimately 95%+ of the player base (myself included) have no aspirations of being a top table player, in which case the benchmark comes "is the unit efficient/capable enough for its points that it seems exceptional value", which I think new profile & old points is for us filthy casuals.


No worries, i did call you salty but in this hobby if you are not having atleast some NaCl generated you must have patience like a Rock.


That said i say due to Oblits not hitting top table as a fire and forget unit, which needs to happen for a fire and forget unit to be considered good imo, the new old Shadowspear price of 115 ppm still overpriced.

Mind you i find the typo or not typo situation not better but on the opposite end and the fact that Gw did NOT ship an instant faq like with SW frankly a bit absurd. Because A: gw suddenly got a surge of lazyness or B: they have no idea for the new cost ppm.

Both i find not optimal for the consumers.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 15:51:15


Post by: Xenomancers


 grouchoben wrote:
What we know:

The codex contains a printing error. The data slate is inconsistent with the price sheet: one says 1-3 models, the other says 3. So we know one of the two must be incorrect.

Which one is it? The data slate that has recently been fundamentally changed, in line with a new model release for the unit?

Or the points sheet that is identical to the old unit not only in price but models-per-unit?

To argue the former is not really reasonable: you're supposing, for some reason, that GW changed the model and the unit composition and the stats and the points, then decided 14 days later to immediately change the points back and the unit composition back, whilst keeping the new model and the new stats, but failed to properly update the codex to reflect this about-face.

As opposed to supposing that they just mistakenly copy-pasta'd from the old document. It's just Occam's Razor.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I will admit, though, that it's weird that GW haven't auto-FAQ'd this like they immediately did with the SW codex...

THey have no reason to change it - it's not like they have a reputation to uphold. If this results in selling a bunch more shadowspear boxes it's genius. That is the only way to get the new obliterators currently. Plus if you end up with a ton of primaris marines and daemon engines out of the process - you might just decide to start a whole new space marine army and buy the lord discordant this weekend. It's so smart actually...it almost can't be an accident.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 17:58:53


Post by: grouchoben


So you're saying GW purposely printed an incorrect codex?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 18:44:02


Post by: BaconCatBug


 grouchoben wrote:
So you're saying GW purposely printed an incorrect codex?
GW are just incompetent.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 18:56:49


Post by: Xenomancers


 MinscS2 wrote:
 Togusa wrote:


Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.


Having played this game for many years now, I've realized that statistics actually mean a great deal - most of the time.

Sure, those 10 guardsmen with FRFSRF might kill a full squad of MEQ's. It's not impossible, but unlikely, and on occasion it will happen.
Far more likely however is that they do 2 wounds to said unit of MEQ's - which is about average.

Trying to balance a game around potential freak accidents is a bad idea. With so many dice rolls involved, weird stuff is bound to happen sometimes, but more often than not, trying to balance the game around "averages" and "statistics" is the best course of action.




Averages are important for sure. But 10 bolt guns can only do 20 wounds max for 130 points. Lasguns with FRFSRF can potentially kill 40 max for 40 points. The ability to do something needs to be taken into account even if it is a long shot. This game doesn't factor that in AT ALL.

Lots of dice has a lot of really great outlier outcomes. This is one of the main reasons why elite armies are not good.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 19:10:56


Post by: Karol


That is true, spread is important specially if you don't plan to play 2000 games vs each opponent to get those nice and round 3,5 dmg on a lascannon.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 19:29:55


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Xenomancers wrote:
 MinscS2 wrote:
 Togusa wrote:


Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.


Having played this game for many years now, I've realized that statistics actually mean a great deal - most of the time.

Sure, those 10 guardsmen with FRFSRF might kill a full squad of MEQ's. It's not impossible, but unlikely, and on occasion it will happen.
Far more likely however is that they do 2 wounds to said unit of MEQ's - which is about average.

Trying to balance a game around potential freak accidents is a bad idea. With so many dice rolls involved, weird stuff is bound to happen sometimes, but more often than not, trying to balance the game around "averages" and "statistics" is the best course of action.




Averages are important for sure. But 10 bolt guns can only do 20 wounds max for 130 points. Lasguns with FRFSRF can potentially kill 40 max for 40 points. The ability to do something needs to be taken into account even if it is a long shot. This game doesn't factor that in AT ALL.

Lots of dice has a lot of really great outlier outcomes. This is one of the main reasons why elite armies are not good.


39* shots though.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 19:36:36


Post by: Xenomancers


well 36 lasguns and 2 bolter shots for 41 points is what you really get. Beyond the point. Each shot is a potential kill. There needs to be an overall value for the chance a kill as baseline. A baseline cost just for having 1 wound. These are things that are needed to make elite infantry have some relevance.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 19:56:35


Post by: Vaktathi


While I agree that potential max damage is something that is important to recognize, I think in cases like 40 lasguns inflicting 40 wounds that the numeric baseline value for that potential would be so low that it would be irrelevantly small. I think the better place for that to have relevance is in balancing between weapons themselves when given options. A baseline cost for a wound is something that I agree should have value, but that's a hard thing to judge, and I think the granularity we have at the current scale is going to make that difficult, and it's something that definitely changes with the scale of the game you're playing at (hence why most games don't try to fit in all the stuff 40k does).

The more important aspect of volume I think is consistency, your results will more closely match the expected average and better avoid issues where a single bad roll will break something critical. Costing for that is difficult. A lot of "balance" mechanisms around this concept only operate on a meta scale and are basically a practice in controlled knee-capping (e.g. kill points pricing by actual points value killed or by discrete unit kill counts).



Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 20:01:19


Post by: Galef


I just had a thought: Maybe 65ppm IS the correct points....because the gun is supposed to be Assault D6, not Assault 6.
If they are D6 instead of straight 6, even at 65ppm Nublits are probably questionable for competition

-


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 20:24:58


Post by: Xenomancers


 Galef wrote:
I just had a thought: Maybe 65ppm IS the correct points....because the gun is supposed to be Assault D6, not Assault 6.
If they are D6 instead of straight 6, even at 65ppm Nublits are probably questionable for competition

-

The weapon basically has the same average profile as a tau ion cannon except it is flat 3 instead of d3. Except that weapon is a main battle tank and is D6 shots....Obviously the ion cannon is a better weapon still and is on a more durable profile with more range - but should the price difference really be much more than 2:1? 2 oblitz is clearly better than 1 ion cannon hammerheads.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 20:42:39


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


 Xenomancers wrote:
well 36 lasguns and 2 bolter shots for 41 points is what you really get. Beyond the point. Each shot is a potential kill. There needs to be an overall value for the chance a kill as baseline. A baseline cost just for having 1 wound. These are things that are needed to make elite infantry have some relevance.


You need to add 15 to that, half a company commander, if we're being semantic. That's 38 lasgun shots [or 36 lasgun shots and 2 frags] for 55 points.

A Leman Russ Tank Gun can do 36 wounds in one turn. Will it ever, no.

The maximum potential isn't really important. The distribution is though.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 20:51:04


Post by: Xenomancers


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
well 36 lasguns and 2 bolter shots for 41 points is what you really get. Beyond the point. Each shot is a potential kill. There needs to be an overall value for the chance a kill as baseline. A baseline cost just for having 1 wound. These are things that are needed to make elite infantry have some relevance.


You need to add 15 to that, half a company commander, if we're being semantic. That's 38 lasgun shots [or 36 lasgun shots and 2 frags] for 55 points.

A Leman Russ Tank Gun can do 36 wounds in one turn. Will it ever, no.

The maximum potential isn't really important. The distribution is though.

Your wrong...but whatever. Roll great with some bolters vs guard and you kill 40 points. Roll great with some lasguns and you kill 130 points of marines. That alone invalidates your argument. Literally - invalidates it. The amount I play and see unlikely things happen. These things have to be accounted for.

Lets also not forget. Bolters and lasguns are equal weapons against t5 and t 8 targets. Except the lasgun costs 3 times less per damage without even factoring in doubling it's shots from FRFSRF. The junk can't be defended in an honest way.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 21:49:33


Post by: Insectum7


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
well 36 lasguns and 2 bolter shots for 41 points is what you really get. Beyond the point. Each shot is a potential kill. There needs to be an overall value for the chance a kill as baseline. A baseline cost just for having 1 wound. These are things that are needed to make elite infantry have some relevance.


You need to add 15 to that, half a company commander, if we're being semantic. That's 38 lasgun shots [or 36 lasgun shots and 2 frags] for 55 points.

A Leman Russ Tank Gun can do 36 wounds in one turn. Will it ever, no.

The maximum potential isn't really important. The distribution is though.

Your wrong...but whatever. Roll great with some bolters vs guard and you kill 40 points. Roll great with some lasguns and you kill 130 points of marines. That alone invalidates your argument. Literally - invalidates it.


Roll great with some bolters and you can kill a Leman Russ tank, too. But the logic of that is sort of beside the point. The distribution does matter.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 21:59:33


Post by: Bharring


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
well 36 lasguns and 2 bolter shots for 41 points is what you really get. Beyond the point. Each shot is a potential kill. There needs to be an overall value for the chance a kill as baseline. A baseline cost just for having 1 wound. These are things that are needed to make elite infantry have some relevance.


You need to add 15 to that, half a company commander, if we're being semantic. That's 38 lasgun shots [or 36 lasgun shots and 2 frags] for 55 points.

A Leman Russ Tank Gun can do 36 wounds in one turn. Will it ever, no.

The maximum potential isn't really important. The distribution is though.

Your wrong...but whatever. Roll great with some bolters vs guard and you kill 40 points. Roll great with some lasguns and you kill 130 points of marines. That alone invalidates your argument. Literally - invalidates it. The amount I play and see unlikely things happen. These things have to be accounted for.

Lets also not forget. Bolters and lasguns are equal weapons against t5 and t 8 targets. Except the lasgun costs 3 times less per damage without even factoring in doubling it's shots from FRFSRF. The junk can't be defended in an honest way.


Roll great with a Dev squad, and you can delete a 3++ Castellan in one turn (I think they cap out at 48W in damage? Maybe more with Grav?)
Roll great with a Reaper squad, and you cap out at 40W in damage - less than that of the Dev squad.

By your argument, clearly, the Dev squad is better!

Or, put it this way:
-Roll great with a Guard squad, and 100 AP-2 wounds deletes 100 Guardsmen
-Roll great with a Marine squad and 100 AP-2 wounds kills nothing

Never will you roll that great - but that's the "maximum potential". But we all know that won't happen.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 22:02:44


Post by: Insectum7


Bharring wrote:

Roll great with a Dev squad, and you can delete a 3++ Castellan in one turn (I think they cap out at 48W in damage? Maybe more with Grav?)


60 with Grav and Cherub. Totally broken.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/10 22:31:35


Post by: SHUPPET


 BaconCatBug wrote:
 grouchoben wrote:
So you're saying GW purposely printed an incorrect codex?
GW are just incompetent.


It's not a mistake if it's printed deliberately, is his point.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 09:47:14


Post by: Karol


Well you can be deliberately incompetent. Happens daily. Today for example I wrestled bad in training and faked an injury I no longer have just to be first in cold bath.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 11:52:32


Post by: ThatMG


No, I do not think the new points value is valid. However I am likely in the minority in the fact that I don't think OLD 65 points is worth the new rules anyway. I personally think that GW over values specific things. Wounds and Toughness ratio is set to high for GW.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 12:08:47


Post by: Wayniac


It's very likely the 65ppm is a copy/paste error. But by GW's own admission the newest book takes precedence so until an FAQ they are 65ppm with the new profile. Yes, it's definitely in the "cheeseweasel" category to do that, but it's also the way the rules work per GW themselves. If they are so bone-headed as to never proofread anything (which we know they are) then that's on them, not on anyone who buys a codex and expects it to be correct.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 12:09:21


Post by: lare2


Does anyone know the email you can contact GW on for FAQs and whatnot? Impatient waiting to know what points these actually are.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 12:38:46


Post by: small_gods


Wayniac wrote:
It's very likely the 65ppm is a copy/paste error. But by GW's own admission the newest book takes precedence so until an FAQ they are 65ppm with the new profile. Yes, it's definitely in the "cheeseweasel" category to do that, but it's also the way the rules work per GW themselves. If they are so bone-headed as to never proofread anything (which we know they are) then that's on them, not on anyone who buys a codex and expects it to be correct.


Most TOs are not letting people take them at 65 points though as they know it's probably a typo. So you would only get to play them at 65 points in a casual game which is generally not a great look.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 13:24:41


Post by: The Salt Mine


I took a full unit to a local tourney last weekend. At 345 points they are to random to be good. Out of 3 games they generally only got 1 turn of shooting so 6 chances at shooting with double shooting strat. I rolled 3 damage once 2 damage twice and 1 damage 3 times out of the six times I shot. Keep in mind this was with gaze of fate rerolls as well. Granted that was some pretty bad luck to get the 1 damage that many times but at 345 points that unit is fething gak when it rolls 1 damage. At 345 points the damage should be d3+1 so always 2 minimum. While I am 100% sure the 65 points is a typo that is really what the unit is worth. The new melee profile has been 100% irrelevant in all of my games that tourney and all the practice games leading up to it. They just get shot off the board the next turn after they arrived from deepstrike.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 13:37:06


Post by: topaxygouroun i


Weird play: Take 3 of them, make them Nurgle, put them next to the Nurgle daemon tree. Without any other support whatsoever (no stratagems, spells, legion traits etc), they already have 0+ armor save. They save lascannons on a 3+. Just saying. we could deploy them on the field instead of deepstriking and create a no-go zone of 24" around them.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 14:16:43


Post by: lare2


Wayniac wrote:
 lare2 wrote:
Does anyone know the email you can contact GW on for FAQs and whatnot? Impatient waiting to know what points these actually are.


It's 40kfaq@gwplc.com but they don't reply to emails, the best you can hope for is them addressing it in the FAQ.



Cheers dude. Will give it a try nonetheless.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 14:29:48


Post by: Wayniac


 small_gods wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
It's very likely the 65ppm is a copy/paste error. But by GW's own admission the newest book takes precedence so until an FAQ they are 65ppm with the new profile. Yes, it's definitely in the "cheeseweasel" category to do that, but it's also the way the rules work per GW themselves. If they are so bone-headed as to never proofread anything (which we know they are) then that's on them, not on anyone who buys a codex and expects it to be correct.


Most TOs are not letting people take them at 65 points though as they know it's probably a typo. So you would only get to play them at 65 points in a casual game which is generally not a great look.
Huh, I've actually heard the opposite and most people ARE letting them be taken at 65 because of the "latest publication" rule.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 14:37:52


Post by: SHUPPET


 small_gods wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
It's very likely the 65ppm is a copy/paste error. But by GW's own admission the newest book takes precedence so until an FAQ they are 65ppm with the new profile. Yes, it's definitely in the "cheeseweasel" category to do that, but it's also the way the rules work per GW themselves. If they are so bone-headed as to never proofread anything (which we know they are) then that's on them, not on anyone who buys a codex and expects it to be correct.


Most TOs are not letting people take them at 65 points though as they know it's probably a typo. So you would only get to play them at 65 points in a casual game which is generally not a great look.


Errrr what? BCP would disagree with you on that, do you have a source for this, or are you just saying it how you "feel" it should be? That's not what most TO's are doing at all.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 14:57:55


Post by: Xenomancers


Everyone knows it's a misprint though. TO's should really not be letting them be played at 65 points. Really though - with nonsense like this out there why would anyone attend if everyone is just going to be spamming 50% off obliz?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:02:36


Post by: Wayniac


 Xenomancers wrote:
Everyone knows it's a misprint though. TO's should really not be letting them be played at 65 points. Really though - with nonsense like this out there why would anyone attend if everyone is just going to be spamming 50% off obliz?
But until the FAQ nobody can be 100% sure. It's likely a misprint but GW being GW it's hard to tell for sure.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:05:14


Post by: topaxygouroun i


 Xenomancers wrote:
Everyone knows it's a misprint though. TO's should really not be letting them be played at 65 points. Really though - with nonsense like this out there why would anyone attend if everyone is just going to be spamming 50% off obliz?


Why do people attend when everyone is just 50% castellan 50% ynnari?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:13:19


Post by: Galef


Wayniac wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Everyone knows it's a misprint though. TO's should really not be letting them be played at 65 points. Really though - with nonsense like this out there why would anyone attend if everyone is just going to be spamming 50% off obliz?
But until the FAQ nobody can be 100% sure. It's likely a misprint but GW being GW it's hard to tell for sure.
The problem is that this view is subjective. I, for example, am 100% sure that it is a misprint. And I am not alone. So I don't think it's fair to say "nobody" is 100% sure
But I can acknowledge that there are those out there with some doubt...for some reason...because we aren't GW

All the evidence and prior actions of GW leave me with no doubt this is a typo. There is no other logic behind it that fits.
But I don't play Oblits, or currently play in tourneys, so I have the luxury of discussing the obvious right answer with all my casual opponents who all agree 115ppm is correct.

My fear is that the next FAQ will miss this obvious oversight because, as you put it, "GW being GW" and everyone with "doubts" will feel vindicated that the points were meant to be 65ppm, when the majority of use can see the error.

-


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:19:27


Post by: BrookM


Final warning to all participants, as I am getting tired of seeing this thread light up my dashboard so often: RULE #1, to be polite to other users is not optional.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:21:43


Post by: SHUPPET


 Galef wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Everyone knows it's a misprint though. TO's should really not be letting them be played at 65 points. Really though - with nonsense like this out there why would anyone attend if everyone is just going to be spamming 50% off obliz?
But until the FAQ nobody can be 100% sure. It's likely a misprint but GW being GW it's hard to tell for sure.
The problem is that this view is subjective. I, for example, am 100% sure that it is a misprint. And I am not alone. So I don't think it's fair to say "nobody" is 100% sure
But I can acknowledge that there are those out there with some doubt...for some reason...because we aren't GW

All the evidence and prior actions of GW leave me with no doubt this is a typo. There is no other logic behind it that fits.
But I don't play Oblits, or currently play in tourneys, so I have the luxury of discussing the obvious right answer with all my casual opponents who all agree 115ppm is correct.

My fear is that the next FAQ will miss this obvious oversight because, as you put it, "GW being GW" and everyone with "doubts" will feel vindicated that the points were meant to be 65ppm, when the majority of use can see the error.

-


That's not what 100% sure means. You think you are fully sure. But you don't actually have any confirmation, and GW could just as easily rule it to be 65 pts going forward.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:32:35


Post by: Galef


That is certainly right. I cannot know for sure. And what's worse, even if GW DOES rule that 65ppm is correct, we STILL won't be sure it the current situation was a mistake and GW just rolled with it, rather than it being their true intention from the start.

But I truly believe the best HOUSE rule is to read between the lines and err on the side for caution and assume 115ppm is correct. It's a shame many TOs appear to be ruling this to allow a clearly OP points value to be used.

-


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:34:39


Post by: small_gods


 SHUPPET wrote:
 small_gods wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
It's very likely the 65ppm is a copy/paste error. But by GW's own admission the newest book takes precedence so until an FAQ they are 65ppm with the new profile. Yes, it's definitely in the "cheeseweasel" category to do that, but it's also the way the rules work per GW themselves. If they are so bone-headed as to never proofread anything (which we know they are) then that's on them, not on anyone who buys a codex and expects it to be correct.


Most TOs are not letting people take them at 65 points though as they know it's probably a typo. So you would only get to play them at 65 points in a casual game which is generally not a great look.


Errrr what? BCP would disagree with you on that, do you have a source for this, or are you just saying it how you "feel" it should be? That's not what most TO's are doing at all.


No I've been to two tournaments since CSM 2.0 and am going to a third this weekend. They all have oblits priced at 115 points. I asked myself and was told that I couldn't bring them at 65 so I brought a different list.

Not sure if that's different in other parts of the world but that seems to be the consensus in the UK.

Have you had different experiences?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:37:06


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Galef wrote:
That is certainly right. I cannot know for sure. And what's worse, even if GW DOES rule that 65ppm is correct, we STILL won't be sure it the current situation was a mistake and GW just rolled with it, rather than it being their true intention from the start.

But I truly believe the best HOUSE rule is to read between the lines and err on the side for caution and assume 115ppm is correct. It's a shame many TOs appear to be ruling this to allow a clearly OP points value to be used.

-


? clearly OP, what was that with subjective allready?

The unit never made toptables or top 16s.

Also the TO's in this case just hold themselves to GW's ruling that the newest rule iteration allways takes precedent.
Is it a bad situation, absolutely, point in case if they had a competent writing stuff that would've not slipped thorugh. but allas, GW stated they produce models mainly.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:38:22


Post by: SHUPPET


"Clearly OP" is pretty subjective. I think it's CLEARLY fine, and this forum is doing what it did for Kelermorph in recent memory, and a ton of other gak prior. Oblits will be fine at this point cost. Ruling against things that you think is OP is a very dangerous attitude.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:41:55


Post by: Nym


Warning, unpopular opinion : take away INFANTRY from the new Obliterators and replace it with MONSTER. They'll be fine at 65pts and the game will be far healthier.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 15:51:49


Post by: Galef


 SHUPPET wrote:
"Clearly OP" is pretty subjective. I think it's CLEARLY fine, and this forum is doing what it did for Kelermorph in recent memory, and a ton of other gak prior. Oblits will be fine at this point cost. Ruling against things that you think is OP is a very dangerous attitude.
Fair point, probably shouldn't have used the word "clearly". I agree that its subjective.
I was just observing all the discuss about people looking at the new statline at the old price and coming to the consensus that they are a "must-take" unit.
Historically, a unit that gets this kind of stat buff with no price increase and is fairly unanimously considered "good" ends up being "OP" pretty quite.
It's really difficult to not assume this will be the case with Nublits if left unchecked.

7E WraithKnight comes to mind. It went from a 240pt Heavy Support MC to a 325pt LoW GC. Even with the point jump, it was in every Eldar list.

-


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:00:55


Post by: SHUPPET


Again "fairly unanimously" is another way of saying "not unanimously". Amongst top players, it was "fairly unanimously" considered a bad unit.

It's okay for armies to have strong stuff. Pretty much every army needs anti-tank, CSM finally have a decent one, of course its going to be auto-take. Even for the role it's kinda limited, and still dies the next turn. Now it has the impact to justify it's points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Again, it's all opinions, but going off the most recent printing is the only way to do it. GW has had print times clash like this before.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:09:23


Post by: quickfuze


 grouchoben wrote:
What we know:

The codex contains a printing error. The data slate is inconsistent with the price sheet: one says 1-3 models, the other says 3. So we know one of the two must be incorrect.

Which one is it? The data slate that has recently been fundamentally changed, in line with a new model release for the unit?

Or the points sheet that is identical to the old unit not only in price but models-per-unit?

To argue the former is not really reasonable: you're supposing, for some reason, that GW changed the model and the unit composition and the stats and the points, then decided 14 days later to immediately change the points back and the unit composition back, whilst keeping the new model and the new stats, but failed to properly update the codex to reflect this about-face.

As opposed to supposing that they just mistakenly copy-pasta'd from the old document. It's just Occam's Razor.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I will admit, though, that it's weird that GW haven't auto-FAQ'd this like they immediately did with the SW codex...


Because they will get a bunch of sales on the kit while the points are low before the faq and then they will be shelved after.....not really hard to understand if you just factor in how shady GW really is


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:11:12


Post by: Galef


Wait? When the feth were Oblits considered a bad unit? Did I miss a meta change that nerfed them?
I know they weren't taken by "top-tourney" players, but I was under the impression that Slaanesh Oblits + shoot twice was still a powerful combo.

Just because something isn't "good-enough" for top tourneys, doesn't mean the unit isn't good. I mean just look at Craftworld Eldar. That book has TONS of "good" units that just do not make it to top tourney lists because they aren't Dark Reapers or Shining Spears in an Ynnari list.
If the standard of "good" is that it has to make it to tourney lists or don't bother, than yeah, Oblits must have been trash and even at 65ppm, Nublits might just make it to a list or 2.

But there is no way +1T, +1W, +2 shots isn't getting a points increase from GW on a unit that was at least "ok". Or at least, I cannot think of a similar example of such a thing every happening

-


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:14:42


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Galef wrote:
Wait? When the feth were Oblits considered a bad unit? Did I miss a meta change that nerfed them?
I know they weren't taken by "top-tourney" players, but I was under the impression that Slaanesh Oblits + shoot twice was still a powerful combo.

Just because something isn't "good-enough" for top tourneys, doesn't mean the unit isn't good. I mean just look at Craftworld Eldar. That book has TONS of "good" units that just do not make it to top tourney lists because they aren't Dark Reapers or Shining Spears in an Ynnari list.
If the standard of "good" is that it has to make it to tourney lists or don't bother, than yeah, Oblits must have been trash and even at 65ppm, Nublits might just make it to a list or 2.

But there is no way +1T, +1W, +2 shots isn't getting a points increase from GW on a unit that was at least "ok". Or at least, I cannot think of a similar example of such a thing every happening

-


Actually there is, remember the SW situation?
yeah the FAQ was delivered the same time with the book.
might very well be the case that they tried to test the water with shadowspear and realized that now nobody does take them anymore competitively so the price went on the chopping block.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:21:30


Post by: small_gods


 SHUPPET wrote:
"Clearly OP" is pretty subjective. I think it's CLEARLY fine, and this forum is doing what it did for Kelermorph in recent memory, and a ton of other gak prior. Oblits will be fine at this point cost. Ruling against things that you think is OP is a very dangerous attitude.


This isn't ruling against something that is OP though. It's ruling for common sense. Oblits got played in tournaments at their old points cost so were arguably competitive. To then give that unit 50% extra shooting, a wound, extra toughness and change then to be at least competent in mele and claim that it doesn't tip the balance too far is a strange assessment to make.

Don't get me wrong if I could get away with it I would take 9 to tournaments but if GW made a typo and gave gurdsmen 5 wounds each you would expect TOs to do something about it.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:24:42


Post by: JNAProductions


 small_gods wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
"Clearly OP" is pretty subjective. I think it's CLEARLY fine, and this forum is doing what it did for Kelermorph in recent memory, and a ton of other gak prior. Oblits will be fine at this point cost. Ruling against things that you think is OP is a very dangerous attitude.


This isn't ruling against something that is OP though. It's ruling for common sense. Oblits got played in tournaments at their old points cost so were arguably competitive. To then give that unit 50% extra shooting, a wound, extra toughness and change then to be at least competent in mele and claim that it doesn't tip the balance too far is a strange assessment to make.

Don't get me wrong if I could get away with it I would take 9 to tournaments but if GW made a typo and gave gurdsmen 5 wounds each you would expect TOs to do something about it.


What tournaments were they played at?

Genuinely curious, since Shuppet claims they weren't, you claim they were, and I don't follow tournaments enough to know who's right.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:25:47


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Not Online!!! wrote:
 Galef wrote:
Wait? When the feth were Oblits considered a bad unit? Did I miss a meta change that nerfed them?
I know they weren't taken by "top-tourney" players, but I was under the impression that Slaanesh Oblits + shoot twice was still a powerful combo.

Just because something isn't "good-enough" for top tourneys, doesn't mean the unit isn't good. I mean just look at Craftworld Eldar. That book has TONS of "good" units that just do not make it to top tourney lists because they aren't Dark Reapers or Shining Spears in an Ynnari list.
If the standard of "good" is that it has to make it to tourney lists or don't bother, than yeah, Oblits must have been trash and even at 65ppm, Nublits might just make it to a list or 2.

But there is no way +1T, +1W, +2 shots isn't getting a points increase from GW on a unit that was at least "ok". Or at least, I cannot think of a similar example of such a thing every happening

-


Actually there is, remember the SW situation?
yeah the FAQ was delivered the same time with the book.
might very well be the case that they tried to test the water with shadowspear and realized that now nobody does take them anymore competitively so the price went on the chopping block.


The SW change had been decided on months ago, because non-english versions went to print with the "right" warlord traits. So it wasn't immediate and reactionary, and isn't a quick turnaround on the FAQ.

In addition, the new Chaos book also went to print well before there could have been any feedback on Shadowspear, probably before shadowspear was even announced.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:46:19


Post by: Daedalus81


 quickfuze wrote:


Because they will get a bunch of sales on the kit while the points are low before the faq and then they will be shelved after.....not really hard to understand if you just factor in how shady GW really is


You mean the $180 "kit" that has alternate point values that were encountered BEFORE the codex was out?

What a dastardly plan! "Guys let's publish the wrong cost instead of just a low cost all around! That will definitely get more sales than just giving them a low cost!"


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:50:59


Post by: Xenomancers


 Galef wrote:
Wait? When the feth were Oblits considered a bad unit? Did I miss a meta change that nerfed them?
I know they weren't taken by "top-tourney" players, but I was under the impression that Slaanesh Oblits + shoot twice was still a powerful combo.

Just because something isn't "good-enough" for top tourneys, doesn't mean the unit isn't good. I mean just look at Craftworld Eldar. That book has TONS of "good" units that just do not make it to top tourney lists because they aren't Dark Reapers or Shining Spears in an Ynnari list.
If the standard of "good" is that it has to make it to tourney lists or don't bother, than yeah, Oblits must have been trash and even at 65ppm, Nublits might just make it to a list or 2.

But there is no way +1T, +1W, +2 shots isn't getting a points increase from GW on a unit that was at least "ok". Or at least, I cannot think of a similar example of such a thing every happening

-

Technically abaddon got a huge buff and didn't increase in points. However so did Calgar (not nearly as much) but it was just a free buff. On a character that costs over 200 points though - it can be argued they were overcosted to begin with (at least I think they were) the abaddon buff is insane though - his overall damage went up drastically with d3 to flat 3. Plus his aura....ignoring to hit modifiers...come on man. Anyways. No point in debating with people who refuse to acknowledge basic truths. Oblitz were a BIS option for chaos soup since forever. Even at 115 points they still will be. Many have demonstrated their points efficiency in a squad of 3 with the same buffs they were getting before - it is comparable - plus they are tougher - have more access to defensive buffs too.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:52:38


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 Galef wrote:
Wait? When the feth were Oblits considered a bad unit? Did I miss a meta change that nerfed them?
I know they weren't taken by "top-tourney" players, but I was under the impression that Slaanesh Oblits + shoot twice was still a powerful combo.

Just because something isn't "good-enough" for top tourneys, doesn't mean the unit isn't good. I mean just look at Craftworld Eldar. That book has TONS of "good" units that just do not make it to top tourney lists because they aren't Dark Reapers or Shining Spears in an Ynnari list.
If the standard of "good" is that it has to make it to tourney lists or don't bother, than yeah, Oblits must have been trash and even at 65ppm, Nublits might just make it to a list or 2.

But there is no way +1T, +1W, +2 shots isn't getting a points increase from GW on a unit that was at least "ok". Or at least, I cannot think of a similar example of such a thing every happening

-


Actually there is, remember the SW situation?
yeah the FAQ was delivered the same time with the book.
might very well be the case that they tried to test the water with shadowspear and realized that now nobody does take them anymore competitively so the price went on the chopping block.


The SW change had been decided on months ago, because non-english versions went to print with the "right" warlord traits. So it wasn't immediate and reactionary, and isn't a quick turnaround on the FAQ.

In addition, the new Chaos book also went to print well before there could have been any feedback on Shadowspear, probably before shadowspear was even announced.


Then why not instantly faq it?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 16:58:42


Post by: Xenomancers


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 quickfuze wrote:


Because they will get a bunch of sales on the kit while the points are low before the faq and then they will be shelved after.....not really hard to understand if you just factor in how shady GW really is


You mean the $180 "kit" that has alternate point values that were encountered BEFORE the codex was out?

What a dastardly plan! "Guys let's publish the wrong cost instead of just a low cost all around! That will definitely get more sales than just giving them a low cost!"

Uhhh - almost everyone I know has bought at least 1 shadowspear and I know many that have bought 2 and I bought 2 1/2. Most of these were purchased before chaos codex release. The oblitz being basically (just as effective but better in a lot of ways at 115) did not affect shadowspear sales...AT ALL. Now the longer they wait to clear up the obvious typo situation - you'll have more sales because of the OP pricing on oblitz after the initial rush to buy fades away. Plus with release of Lord Discoradent who buffs the venom crawlers you'll end up with. It will increase his sales too.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 17:06:22


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Not Online!!! wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

The SW change had been decided on months ago, because non-english versions went to print with the "right" warlord traits. So it wasn't immediate and reactionary, and isn't a quick turnaround on the FAQ.

In addition, the new Chaos book also went to print well before there could have been any feedback on Shadowspear, probably before shadowspear was even announced.


Then why not instantly faq it?


Because they're probably going to this weekend. These processes aren't instantaneous in the first place, and there's probably more than just this one error in the book. So far, they've have an FAQ 2-weeks after every book, which seems to consist of a combination of proofreading and responses to knee-jerk reactions.

And in the grand scheme of things, 2 weeks is basically near instantaneous for problem resolution anyway, and isn't really long enough to inconvenience anyone anyway.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 17:09:43


Post by: Daedalus81


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 quickfuze wrote:


Because they will get a bunch of sales on the kit while the points are low before the faq and then they will be shelved after.....not really hard to understand if you just factor in how shady GW really is


You mean the $180 "kit" that has alternate point values that were encountered BEFORE the codex was out?

What a dastardly plan! "Guys let's publish the wrong cost instead of just a low cost all around! That will definitely get more sales than just giving them a low cost!"

Uhhh - almost everyone I know has bought at least 1 shadowspear and I know many that have bought 2 and I bought 2 1/2. Most of these were purchased before chaos codex release. The oblitz being basically (just as effective but better in a lot of ways at 115) did not affect shadowspear sales...AT ALL. Now the longer they wait to clear up the obvious typo situation - you'll have more sales because of the OP pricing on oblitz after the initial rush to buy fades away. Plus with release of Lord Discoradent who buffs the venom crawlers you'll end up with. It will increase his sales too.


Cool story. So none of these people have any ability to look at that 115 and then go, "huh this is not the same points, maybe I should wait before buying more"? It's not like GW hasn't publicly stated several times that they release an FAQ two weeks after each codex.

These books were sent to print months ago, which is why the relic for fly over mortal wounds mentioned the fight phase.

It's not GW that is evil. It's that consumers are utterly stupid.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 17:10:46


Post by: SHUPPET


 Galef wrote:
Wait? When the feth were Oblits considered a bad unit? Did I miss a meta change that nerfed them?
I know they weren't taken by "top-tourney" players, but I was under the impression that Slaanesh Oblits + shoot twice was still a powerful combo.

Just because something isn't "good-enough" for top tourneys, doesn't mean the unit isn't good. I mean just look at Craftworld Eldar. That book has TONS of "good" units that just do not make it to top tourney lists because they aren't Dark Reapers or Shining Spears in an Ynnari list.
If the standard of "good" is that it has to make it to tourney lists or don't bother, than yeah, Oblits must have been trash and even at 65ppm, Nublits might just make it to a list or 2.


It was a "powerful combo" in that it was enough to allow Oblits to contest for a spot with Havocs, another not-so-great unit, and neither of them did particularly well anywhere. I don't mean bad as in "terrible garbage unit" or anything, but yeah, bad as in "competitively, this unit will hold you back from taking top tables". They needed a buff to be a good unit. They got one. Time will tell if it was too much, or if it was even intended, but as it stands I don't feel they are too broke at all.



 JNAProductions wrote:
 small_gods wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
"Clearly OP" is pretty subjective. I think it's CLEARLY fine, and this forum is doing what it did for Kelermorph in recent memory, and a ton of other gak prior. Oblits will be fine at this point cost. Ruling against things that you think is OP is a very dangerous attitude.


This isn't ruling against something that is OP though. It's ruling for common sense. Oblits got played in tournaments at their old points cost so were arguably competitive. To then give that unit 50% extra shooting, a wound, extra toughness and change then to be at least competent in mele and claim that it doesn't tip the balance too far is a strange assessment to make.

Don't get me wrong if I could get away with it I would take 9 to tournaments but if GW made a typo and gave gurdsmen 5 wounds each you would expect TOs to do something about it.


What tournaments were they played at?

Genuinely curious, since Shuppet claims they weren't, you claim they were, and I don't follow tournaments enough to know who's right.


I'm right. I went over their tournament success (or lack thereof) in depth in this thread a few months ago, and no events have changed that since. EVEN back when Oblits were at their utmost strongest competitively, not a single Oblit list could crack top 16 even at a GT where literally half of the top 16 was Chaos lists. They are simply not a competitive choice. They were one of the "trap" units in the CSM dex. beyond that, his logic simply doesn't make sense, and what he calls "common sense" is an good example of "what I sense being right" instead of what actually is. Everything including Giant Squigs gets played at tournaments. What's relevant is what does well at tournaments, and it's definitely not Obliterators.

People remember Obliterators for the times that they come down, then CSM player sinks a bunch of their best resources and other points into buffing them, and then they get to blow one thing up or put the hurt on a Knight, and it feels very explosive from the other side of the table. What they don't take into account is the resource investment, or all the times that they were neutered by random statline, or the fact that they were unable to do anything turn 1, or that they are basically a suicide unit that rarely has much impact beyond that - what sticks in the memory is that big turn that Oblits did go off, and the fact they had to kill or otherwise deal with this unit immediately, but not how easy it was to do so, or whether they'd have just been better off with a unit that does less damage but does it consistently, every turn, and without suiciding, or any sort of critical analysis. They are a great example of where the average players mindset is based often just based off "feel" and leads them to drastically misevaluating units.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 17:23:38


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

The SW change had been decided on months ago, because non-english versions went to print with the "right" warlord traits. So it wasn't immediate and reactionary, and isn't a quick turnaround on the FAQ.

In addition, the new Chaos book also went to print well before there could have been any feedback on Shadowspear, probably before shadowspear was even announced.


Then why not instantly faq it?


Because they're probably going to this weekend. These processes aren't instantaneous in the first place, and there's probably more than just this one error in the book. So far, they've have an FAQ 2-weeks after every book, which seems to consist of a combination of proofreading and responses to knee-jerk reactions.

And in the grand scheme of things, 2 weeks is basically near instantaneous for problem resolution anyway, and isn't really long enough to inconvenience anyone anyway.


Are you claiming an instant typo removal that is this mostlikely, takes a long time?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 17:32:42


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


Not Online!!! wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

The SW change had been decided on months ago, because non-english versions went to print with the "right" warlord traits. So it wasn't immediate and reactionary, and isn't a quick turnaround on the FAQ.

In addition, the new Chaos book also went to print well before there could have been any feedback on Shadowspear, probably before shadowspear was even announced.


Then why not instantly faq it?


Because they're probably going to this weekend. These processes aren't instantaneous in the first place, and there's probably more than just this one error in the book. So far, they've have an FAQ 2-weeks after every book, which seems to consist of a combination of proofreading and responses to knee-jerk reactions.

And in the grand scheme of things, 2 weeks is basically near instantaneous for problem resolution anyway, and isn't really long enough to inconvenience anyone anyway.


Are you claiming an instant typo removal that is this mostlikely, takes a long time?


2 weeks isn't really a long time. You've played what, 2 games in that time?

Publishing a document isn't instantaneous; and actually finding out about and confirming that there is a problem takes longer than you think, too. It probably takes about 3-5 days to actually have a document, and they also want to publish other fixes in the document.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 17:34:01


Post by: Xenomancers


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 quickfuze wrote:


Because they will get a bunch of sales on the kit while the points are low before the faq and then they will be shelved after.....not really hard to understand if you just factor in how shady GW really is


You mean the $180 "kit" that has alternate point values that were encountered BEFORE the codex was out?

What a dastardly plan! "Guys let's publish the wrong cost instead of just a low cost all around! That will definitely get more sales than just giving them a low cost!"

Uhhh - almost everyone I know has bought at least 1 shadowspear and I know many that have bought 2 and I bought 2 1/2. Most of these were purchased before chaos codex release. The oblitz being basically (just as effective but better in a lot of ways at 115) did not affect shadowspear sales...AT ALL. Now the longer they wait to clear up the obvious typo situation - you'll have more sales because of the OP pricing on oblitz after the initial rush to buy fades away. Plus with release of Lord Discoradent who buffs the venom crawlers you'll end up with. It will increase his sales too.


Cool story. So none of these people have any ability to look at that 115 and then go, "huh this is not the same points, maybe I should wait before buying more"? It's not like GW hasn't publicly stated several times that they release an FAQ two weeks after each codex.

These books were sent to print months ago, which is why the relic for fly over mortal wounds mentioned the fight phase.

It's not GW that is evil. It's that consumers are utterly stupid.
Why would they wait? 115 oblitz are everything the 65 point oblitz were (demonstrated ITT) - if you wanted oblitz the buff and points increase isn't stopping you. IF you want an OP unit - you are buying up shadow spears and for oblitz and venom crawlers (not OP but with lord discordant are going to be a top tier option) and even if it isn't top tier - it's just hype. People want stuff to play with it ASAP. GW sales are through the roof right now.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 17:50:52


Post by: Daedalus81


Yes - everything hinges on GW having a two week window for people to buy MORE of a $180 box. Fool proof plan.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 18:04:33


Post by: Karol


I can name at least one person who wanted to buy old oblits, just because the codex buffed them and kept them at 65pts.
If you aren't an avid forum goer it can happen to you, and it is not like the dudes working at the store are going to tell someone wanting to buy extra boxs to not do it, because maybe it gets FAQed soon.

It may not be the main source of income for GW, but it can be extra money. I bought an entire army that way.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 18:15:48


Post by: Xenomancers


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yes - everything hinges on GW having a two week window for people to buy MORE of a $180 box. Fool proof plan.

What do you mean everything hinges? We are literally talking about changing or not changing a 65 to a 115. I'm not saying it was intentional. I'm saying it was an accident but they probably knew about it the second it hit the press. They are just waiting to fix it because it will generate sales. They could have done a hotfix as with the space wolf codex but it literally can't hurt them to wait.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 18:21:52


Post by: BaconCatBug


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yes - everything hinges on GW having a two week window for people to buy MORE of a $180 box. Fool proof plan.

What do you mean everything hinges? We are literally talking about changing or not changing a 65 to a 115. I'm not saying it was intentional. I'm saying it was an accident but they probably knew about it the second it hit the press. They are just waiting to fix it because it will generate sales. They could have done a hotfix as with the space wolf codex but it literally can't hurt them to wait.
Except for the inevitable backlash when people get angry they pulled a Riot Games bait and switch, but I assume the beancounters have worked out that those sales outweigh the lost consumer confidence.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 18:34:46


Post by: Nightlord1987


I hope I'm wrong, but I think they are waiting on the Spring FAQ to release the CSM shadowspear info, which may not drop till the very end of April, if this month at all... Remember waiting for the last Big FAQ?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 18:36:27


Post by: Daedalus81


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yes - everything hinges on GW having a two week window for people to buy MORE of a $180 box. Fool proof plan.

What do you mean everything hinges? We are literally talking about changing or not changing a 65 to a 115. I'm not saying it was intentional. I'm saying it was an accident but they probably knew about it the second it hit the press. They are just waiting to fix it because it will generate sales. They could have done a hotfix as with the space wolf codex but it literally can't hurt them to wait.


Literally can't hurt everyone else to wait to weeks, either.

There isn't this large swath of Schrodinger's neck beard who is both simultaneously not aware of the 2 week FAQ window and who is also concerned about being competitive that's running out to buy more in total confidence.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I hope I'm wrong, but I think they are waiting on the Spring FAQ to release the CSM shadowspear info, which may not drop till the very end of April, if this month at all... Remember waiting for the last Big FAQ?


I remember it, because the bitching started on March 2nd. The last one waited for the tournament as well and came out April 16th. I'd bet on early next week.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 18:43:54


Post by: Eihnlazer


Shuppet is still claiming that oblits weren't used in top tournament lists when I know for a fact they where.

Though not techniqually a GT (it was 4 RTTs combined giving 12 games), the Louisiana state series of RTT's had the 2nd place winner using Abadon, cultists spam, and oblits for his army and he did quite well with them.

Granted things have changed a lot since then (that was first year of 8th edition afterall).


EDIT: math


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 19:07:59


Post by: Daedalus81


 Eihnlazer wrote:
Shuppet is still claiming that oblits weren't used in top tournament lists when I know for a fact they where.

Though not techniqually a GT (it was 4 RTTs combined giving 16 games), the Louisiana state series of RTT's had the 2nd place winner using Abadon, cultists spam, and oblits for his army and he did quite well with them.

Granted things have changed a lot since then (that was first year of 8th edition afterall).


A lot has changed since then. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with them at 65. 115 seems to be too much, too. Maybe more like 90.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 19:22:47


Post by: Galef


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Eihnlazer wrote:
Shuppet is still claiming that oblits weren't used in top tournament lists when I know for a fact they where.

Though not techniqually a GT (it was 4 RTTs combined giving 16 games), the Louisiana state series of RTT's had the 2nd place winner using Abadon, cultists spam, and oblits for his army and he did quite well with them.

Granted things have changed a lot since then (that was first year of 8th edition afterall).


A lot has changed since then. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with them at 65. 115 seems to be too much, too. Maybe more like 90.
Agreed. 90-100ppm seems the sweet spot for them. 65ppm is too low, and given the order of releases is VERY likely a typo, but 115ppm is too high and looks very much like GW being too cautious with a new "untested" unit.
It's a similar reason WKs were over 100pts too expensive at the start of 8E: GW didn't want them to be OP like they were in 7E and over nerfed them

GW has gotten much better at not overreacted with changes to units (which is great with the rate the changes come) but 115ppm seems like a return to old habits

-


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 20:15:26


Post by: Xenomancers


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yes - everything hinges on GW having a two week window for people to buy MORE of a $180 box. Fool proof plan.

What do you mean everything hinges? We are literally talking about changing or not changing a 65 to a 115. I'm not saying it was intentional. I'm saying it was an accident but they probably knew about it the second it hit the press. They are just waiting to fix it because it will generate sales. They could have done a hotfix as with the space wolf codex but it literally can't hurt them to wait.


Literally can't hurt everyone else to wait to weeks, either.

There isn't this large swath of Schrodinger's neck beard who is both simultaneously not aware of the 2 week FAQ window and who is also concerned about being competitive that's running out to buy more in total confidence.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I hope I'm wrong, but I think they are waiting on the Spring FAQ to release the CSM shadowspear info, which may not drop till the very end of April, if this month at all... Remember waiting for the last Big FAQ?


I remember it, because the bitching started on March 2nd. The last one waited for the tournament as well and came out April 16th. I'd bet on early next week.

It can hurt tournament results. These Oblitz at 65 points are freaking auto win LOL.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Galef wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Eihnlazer wrote:
Shuppet is still claiming that oblits weren't used in top tournament lists when I know for a fact they where.

Though not techniqually a GT (it was 4 RTTs combined giving 16 games), the Louisiana state series of RTT's had the 2nd place winner using Abadon, cultists spam, and oblits for his army and he did quite well with them.

Granted things have changed a lot since then (that was first year of 8th edition afterall).


A lot has changed since then. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with them at 65. 115 seems to be too much, too. Maybe more like 90.
Agreed. 90-100ppm seems the sweet spot for them. 65ppm is too low, and given the order of releases is VERY likely a typo, but 115ppm is too high and looks very much like GW being too cautious with a new "untested" unit.
It's a similar reason WKs were over 100pts too expensive at the start of 8E: GW didn't want them to be OP like they were in 7E and over nerfed them

GW has gotten much better at not overreacted with changes to units (which is great with the rate the changes come) but 115ppm seems like a return to old habits

-

While I agree 115 is too high for them as a base cost. I know this unit is going to be hitting on 2's rerolling 1's and wounding on 2's or 3's rerolling 1's and shooting twice. So being 15% overcosted is not a big deal. It shouldn't work that way but until stratagems balance/CP gen are fixed - it is literally the ONLY option.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 20:21:08


Post by: Not Online!!!


You realise that this is the exact reasoning behind overpriced sm and csm equipment right?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 22:26:00


Post by: Galas


The problem with NuOblits at 65ppm it that it makes so many units look absolutely stupid and terrible. I mean, they where terrible and bad before, but that just makes them look even worse. 26-32 (I don't remember) ppm terminators with combibolters and powerfist? 100+ point Dreadnoughts? If Oblits cost that with that firepower, statline, and combo potential, Dreadnoughts should cost something like 70-75ppm and Terminators something like 20 ppm.

I won't even mention Centurions because ... yeah.

And the problem is not about how those units probably deserve to be that point cost. Is about how are we reaching that point where those units that were supposed to be expensive but good, need to be so cheap, and have so powerfull statlines to compete.

But thats what will end up happening when you balance a game in a non-stop race to the top instead of a race to the middle. You keep making things better and better until you reach such extremes.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 22:42:45


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Literally can't hurt everyone else to wait to weeks, either.


This, seriously, it's been nearly two years, how are people not familiar with the pattern? I've bought a few things since the new codex dropped, MoP, some Greater Possessed, new Abaddon sculpt, mostly stuff that I was pretty certain would not be radically changing. NOTHING is certain until it's FAQ'd, it does not matter what was printed in your codex, if you buy before the FAQ you're buying a pretty model and hoping for the best.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 23:03:13


Post by: SHUPPET


 Eihnlazer wrote:
Shuppet is still claiming that oblits weren't used in top tournament lists when I know for a fact they where.

Though not techniqually a GT (it was 4 RTTs combined giving 12 games), the Louisiana state series of RTT's had the 2nd place winner using Abadon, cultists spam, and oblits for his army and he did quite well with them.

Granted things have changed a lot since then (that was first year of 8th edition afterall).


EDIT: math


My sides. 2nd place, at a RTT, back in 2017.


That's not a top tournament list. That's some RTT run that nobody has ever heard of and Google has literally no information on. That's just a "list". When people talk about what does well at tournaments, they mean what can perform at every tournament, including the stacked ones with a lot of players and a bunch of competition - not what can do well down in the slums, literally anything can. Without wanting to give out too much personal info about myself, I came first the other month with a list that literally had a Tervigon as my Warlord. My statements here literally qualified my claims as "GT's only" so this doesn't have any bearing on what I said.

Regardless, even if we did take this stat into account (which we still probably shouldn't), the Obliterators have been nerfed multiple ways since then and that was them at their prime, so if that's the sole placing you know of, it does more to support that Obliterators a month ago were indeed a pretty crappy unit.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 23:16:10


Post by: Eihnlazer


Im glad you didn't read my post completely before responding.

It was a series of RTT, 12 games in total, that's equivalent to two GT's worth of play. Obviously the same list wouldn't work nowadays, since alpha legion cultists cant start 9" away from their opponents deploy zone anymore. It worked pretty good at the start of 8th though.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/11 23:28:19


Post by: SHUPPET


 Eihnlazer wrote:
Im glad you didn't read my post completely before responding.

It was a series of RTT, 12 games in total, that's equivalent to two GT's worth of play. Obviously the same list wouldn't work nowadays, since alpha legion cultists cant start 9" away from their opponents deploy zone anymore. It worked pretty good at the start of 8th though.

I'm sorry, what part of my post gave you the impression that I didn't read this? Maybe it's you who should read post's in their entirety, I literally said it was a RUN of RTTs. It's still not a major GT and does not have the level of competition you would expect at an event.

And yes, as I said, Obliterators were a lot better back when you could deepstrike them turn 1 behind a screen of Alpha Legion cultists. The fact that the only placing you know for them even THEN, was 2nd at some event neither I nor Google have ever heard of before, just does more to support them not being a tournament performing unit in their more current state (aka significantly worse then that, in a much more powerful meta).


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/12 00:24:53


Post by: Eihnlazer


Well for one you typed in " 2nd place, at a RTT, back in 2017."

that usually signifies one.

Also, the competition was pretty stiff. Adam A won the overall and there were several other very good players involved.

To play consistently well againgst even 5 other good players is very hard over 12 games.

Anyway, I don't use chaos myself so I wont argue much further about the oblits. Since I don't have actual experience using them I cant be sure of how well they work. I just know that the few times ive had them againgst me they have always made their points back even if the rest of the chaos army hasn't done so well.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/12 01:44:06


Post by: Xenomancers


 Galas wrote:
The problem with NuOblits at 65ppm it that it makes so many units look absolutely stupid and terrible. I mean, they where terrible and bad before, but that just makes them look even worse. 26-32 (I don't remember) ppm terminators with combibolters and powerfist? 100+ point Dreadnoughts? If Oblits cost that with that firepower, statline, and combo potential, Dreadnoughts should cost something like 70-75ppm and Terminators something like 20 ppm.

I won't even mention Centurions because ... yeah.

And the problem is not about how those units probably deserve to be that point cost. Is about how are we reaching that point where those units that were supposed to be expensive but good, need to be so cheap, and have so powerfull statlines to compete.

But thats what will end up happening when you balance a game in a non-stop race to the top instead of a race to the middle. You keep making things better and better until you reach such extremes.

This guy deserves a medal.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/12 07:01:08


Post by: Karol


As logical as this maybe, if we went with this way of thought, then GW forgot to added 100-150pts on the castellan point spread sheet, and probably did a miss print of stats of cawls weapon of doom.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/15 17:43:14


Post by: Nightlord1987


I'm thinking the Nu Oblits are priced roughly as one man Autocannon Havoc units, which unfortunately leaves the 115 point price range as pretty close to accurate. I do agree that nearly doubling their points cost wasnt necessary, but i dont predict them to end up being that much cheaper than their Shadowspear price.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/15 18:14:05


Post by: Dysartes


Karol wrote:
As logical as this maybe, if we went with this way of thought, then GW forgot to added 100-150pts on the castellan point spread sheet, and probably did a miss print of stats of cawls weapon of doom.

This is... less than likely, given Codex: IK has an FAQ, and no "misprint" was cleared up. There was also no boxed set with a Castellan in it released a couple of weeks before the IK 'dex showing the Knight as having a different points cost to that which appeared in the book.

*sets strawman on fire*

I'm pretty damn sure this'll get cleared up when the FAQ for Codex CSM 2: Electric Boogaloo is released, so why stress about it?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/15 22:37:47


Post by: BoomWolf


Because I've got an event next week at the FAQ isn't out yet XD


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/15 22:42:34


Post by: Togusa


 BoomWolf wrote:
Because I've got an event next week at the FAQ isn't out yet XD


We're now 2 days past the nromal 2 week period, any reason for the delay?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/15 23:57:03


Post by: Daedalus81


 Togusa wrote:
 BoomWolf wrote:
Because I've got an event next week at the FAQ isn't out yet XD


We're now 2 days past the nromal 2 week period, any reason for the delay?


Likely delayed to pop out with big faq, so possibly another week.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 02:00:29


Post by: Dalymiddleboro


I see obliterators staying at 65 points


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 08:13:19


Post by: Pain4Pleasure


 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I see obliterators staying at 65 points

Wishful thinking that won’t happen


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 08:47:07


Post by: BrianDavion


 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I see obliterators staying at 65 points


Alright I'll bite.. why?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 08:50:59


Post by: Karol


BrianDavion wrote:
 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I see obliterators staying at 65 points


Alright I'll bite.. why?

Why did the castellan stay at the point costs it has? no body knows, GW decides, maybe by rolling dice or just by forgeting.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 08:57:24


Post by: BrianDavion


Karol wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I see obliterators staying at 65 points


Alright I'll bite.. why?

Why did the castellan stay at the point costs it has? no body knows, GW decides, maybe by rolling dice or just by forgeting.


the castellian was broken due to stratigems and relics as I understand it, a unit broken like that is a pain to properly points because "what about people who don't abuse that?"


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 09:08:08


Post by: Karol


Ok, then I will give an example people dont like me to give. Do you think a GK strike real should cost 20pts or more, when the DW shield vet with a SB and special ammo costs 20pts?
Or how about the basic IG cost?

I know it is easy to say GW did an error, they may even retract the point cost later on, but there is enough examples of GW doing crazy good or bad point costs, and not changing them with multiple CA and FAQ passing.



Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 11:34:41


Post by: Dysartes


Karol wrote:
Ok, then I will give an example people dont like me to give. Do you think a GK strike real should cost 20pts or more, when the DW shield vet with a SB and special ammo costs 20pts?
Or how about the basic IG cost?

Should the Strike be 20 points as is? Probably not, but I can see how GW got to that price point, given the cost of a basic Tactical marine. I can also see how the DW Vet ends up being 20 points, given the same starting point. The theory that their model may need adjustment is another matter entirely.

Karol wrote:
I know it is easy to say GW did an error, they may even retract the point cost later on, but there is enough examples of GW doing crazy good or bad point costs, and not changing them with multiple CA and FAQ passing.

There is a difference between the points costs you mention above - which may warrant adjustments for balance purposes - and the specific case of the Obliterators, where two different points costs (and unit sizes) for the same datasheet were released within, what, a fortnight of each other? I can't think of another example of this happening (this edition, at the very least) for units within the same book.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 12:50:51


Post by: Karol


There is a difference between the points costs you mention above - which may warrant adjustments for balance purposes - and the specific case of the Obliterators, where two different points costs (and unit sizes) for the same datasheet were released within, what, a fortnight of each other? I can't think of another example of this happening (this edition, at the very least) for units within the same book.

they had the option of a day 1 errata then. They didn't do it. If they didn't do it, then we have rules kicking in, and rules say that most recent rule is the right one. 65pts is the cost in the last chaos book to come out, so for now it is the official point cost. I don't understand what problem people have with this, and how this is different from same people telling others to wait for a FAQ or CA for a change, and that for now they have to suck it in and bear it.
Also rules don't care or mention how much time has to pass between two set of rules for both of them to be legal. If spear would come after the csm codex, the problem would not exist.

Should the Strike be 20 points as is? Probably not, but I can see how GW got to that price point, given the cost of a basic Tactical marine. I can also see how the DW Vet ends up being 20 points, given the same starting point. The theory that their model may need adjustment is another matter entirely.

So if feelings can't be the base of rules in w40k. Then we are left with the rule of law. And the rules say, last legal book decides. Last legal book says 65pts. Ergo 65pts it is. If GW decides to change it to 200pts per dude, they can do so, just like they can make it 65 or 20. It is their game, and their rule set. But till they change it, forcing people to play with them costing 100+pts is like forcing someone to pay the cost of unit or upgrade from an eariler book.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 13:53:54


Post by: grouchoben


Blits are going back up. Their sheet is one of many copy-pasta errors in the new codex. It's just wishful thinking to assume otherwise.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 13:57:25


Post by: Daedalus81


Karol wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I see obliterators staying at 65 points


Alright I'll bite.. why?

Why did the castellan stay at the point costs it has? no body knows, GW decides, maybe by rolling dice or just by forgeting.


Because it came too late in the cycle like DE and missed the boat for a proper review.

If you're not ok with that indicate 6 month points review on your community survey.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 14:06:44


Post by: A.T.


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Because it came too late in the cycle like DE and missed the boat for a proper review.
To be fair it's probably not far wrong on points if not for all the shenanigans making it stronger.

As for the oblits, it's a misprint - but i'd not begrudge someone playing their book as printed even if i'd personally take the common sense approach. Much as with the 6e sisters and their toughness 11 penitent engines...


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 14:08:59


Post by: Bharring


Or maybe it was printed correctly but the release window was bodged.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 14:29:39


Post by: A.T.


Bharring wrote:
Or maybe it was printed correctly but the release window was bodged.
My understanding (not having the book to hand) is that the datasheet is for a unit of 1-3 while the points entry is for a fixed unit of 3.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 15:21:17


Post by: SHUPPET


Bharring wrote:
Or maybe it was printed correctly but the release window was bodged.


Yeah, the timing argument has absolutely no legs, but there's something to do with the printing on the same datasheet conflicting with itself, suggestion a poor copy paste? I don't know, or care really.


It could go either way, nobody knows what GW will do. This might be the intended cost. It may not be. It may stay this way because they don't want to acknowledge such a massive error in a book advertised as the one resource you would need for the army. Maybe it will be changed in a week. Maybe it will remain unchanged because GW prefer it this way. Who knows, they are not a predictable company when it comes to balance, and talking about the release timing is absolutely mistaken when we've had models get released with one ruleset and get a new one like a week later in the past. This thread at the moment is just a silly back and forth of "No it won't!" "Yes it will!" "It definitely wasn't!" "It definitely was!", from a bunch of people who actually have no definites concerning anything. Thread may as well be locked


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 15:39:03


Post by: Xenomancers


A.T. wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Because it came too late in the cycle like DE and missed the boat for a proper review.
To be fair it's probably not far wrong on points if not for all the shenanigans making it stronger.

As for the oblits, it's a misprint - but i'd not begrudge someone playing their book as printed even if i'd personally take the common sense approach. Much as with the 6e sisters and their toughness 11 penitent engines...

All that is needed to know castellan costs to little it to compare to comparable things. It is better than most units that cost up to 1000 points without stratagems and relics.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 16:00:55


Post by: A.T.


 Xenomancers wrote:
All that is needed to know castellan costs to little it to compare to comparable things. It is better than most units that cost up to 1000 points without stratagems and relics.
Would you really rather have a relic/stratagem/trait-less castellan, or 1000pts of other good units?
I specify 'good' units as there are an abundance of bad 1000pt units it could be compared to.

Somewhat off topic though.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 20:03:48


Post by: Xenomancers


Part of the power of large models is their ability to be buffed by strats and abilities. It's not a fair comparison.

This is a fair comparison.

Castellan vs Astreraus tank (about 150 points more)
Less wounds - less firepower - less close combat ability.
Castellan wins

I challenge you - find me a single unit under 1000 points you'd prefer over a non warlord trait non relic castellan? Probably the only thing that comes close is a Fellblade at nearly 1000 points - it only costs about 80% more.

Better yet - At what point level would you take a Vaillant over a Castellan? Serious questions.

Clearly part of the problem is lost of units over 600 points aren't worth it BUT the Castellan is certainly too cheap for what it does at a base level. Minimum 700 I'd say - but anywhere between 700-750 is right. Lots of stuff like an Astrearus need to come down too.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 21:44:01


Post by: Bharring


A large part of that is most models over 500 points are terrible for their points. Very few of them measure up to their points worth of half-decent units.

Phantom, Reaver, Emperor, Vampyr, Hierodule, Stompa - it's almost all just plain bad, balance wise - even with stacking powers/stratagems.

As for units, most units top out under 500. The few that do go over that tend to be extreme examples (and also bad).


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/16 22:05:06


Post by: A.T.


 Xenomancers wrote:
I challenge you - find me a single unit under 1000 points you'd prefer over a non warlord trait non relic castellan?
A lot of things, though few single models (the Custodes flyer looks interesting...).

Base castellan ranged firepower is comparable to about a third of a volcano cannon, a rapid fire battlecannon, and a quad autocannon. For 100pts more than a dual-battlecannon questoris or 200 more than a shadowsword.


But it's a subject for a different thread.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/17 15:05:20


Post by: Xenomancers


At what point level would you take the valliant over the castellan?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/18 22:18:32


Post by: xeen


I have played three games so far ( I know not a large sample) but I think that the new Oblit's are worth the 115 points, if you take three of them. The extra 6 shots make a huge difference in their damage out put. It is a situation of the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. This is especially true of Slannesh/Black Leigion, using the strats to re-roll 1's to hit and shoot again


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/19 00:02:51


Post by: Daedalus81


 Xenomancers wrote:
At what point level would you take the valliant over the castellan?


It would never happen with the current relics. The Valiant risks melee with no invuln far more, which means either it takes the 2+ or 5++ relic, which is a huge loss over an upgrade like Cawl's.

Additionally, the relic for Conflag is more tame than Cawl's where the only bonus it gets is reroll to wound.

There isn't a point level that can sanely address that.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/19 00:23:30


Post by: mew28


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
At what point level would you take the valliant over the castellan?


It would never happen with the current relics. The Valiant risks melee with no invuln far more, which means either it takes the 2+ or 5++ relic, which is a huge loss over an upgrade like Cawl's.

Additionally, the relic for Conflag is more tame than Cawl's where the only bonus it gets is reroll to wound.

There isn't a point level that can sanely address that.

So your saying if the castellan was 5000 points and the valiant was still 500 you would be taking the castelian?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/19 01:00:04


Post by: Daedalus81


 mew28 wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
At what point level would you take the valliant over the castellan?


It would never happen with the current relics. The Valiant risks melee with no invuln far more, which means either it takes the 2+ or 5++ relic, which is a huge loss over an upgrade like Cawl's.

Additionally, the relic for Conflag is more tame than Cawl's where the only bonus it gets is reroll to wound.

There isn't a point level that can sanely address that.

So your saying if the castellan was 5000 points and the valiant was still 500 you would be taking the castelian?


I repeat -

There isn't a point level that can sanely address that.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/19 02:46:40


Post by: mew28


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 mew28 wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
At what point level would you take the valliant over the castellan?


It would never happen with the current relics. The Valiant risks melee with no invuln far more, which means either it takes the 2+ or 5++ relic, which is a huge loss over an upgrade like Cawl's.

Additionally, the relic for Conflag is more tame than Cawl's where the only bonus it gets is reroll to wound.

There isn't a point level that can sanely address that.

So your saying if the castellan was 5000 points and the valiant was still 500 you would be taking the castelian?


I repeat -

There isn't a point level that can sanely address that.

Their is some middle ground eg 600 500 or if that is still not enough 700 500 carry on until it is a real choice. Sure it might loo a bit odd having one cost 50% more but at the end of the day it is a fixable problem.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/25 08:32:22


Post by: 123ply


They are more overpriced than before, but they are also more worth it.

They are more worth it now because despite their points increase being much higher than what their buff would suggest, the Chaos codex is still crap so there isnt much to spend your points on anyway


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/25 09:15:10


Post by: Dysartes


 mew28 wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 mew28 wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
At what point level would you take the valliant over the castellan?


It would never happen with the current relics. The Valiant risks melee with no invuln far more, which means either it takes the 2+ or 5++ relic, which is a huge loss over an upgrade like Cawl's.

Additionally, the relic for Conflag is more tame than Cawl's where the only bonus it gets is reroll to wound.

There isn't a point level that can sanely address that.

So your saying if the castellan was 5000 points and the valiant was still 500 you would be taking the castelian?


I repeat -

There isn't a point level that can sanely address that.

Their is some middle ground eg 600 500 or if that is still not enough 700 500 carry on until it is a real choice. Sure it might loo a bit odd having one cost 50% more but at the end of the day it is a fixable problem.

Not necessarily - and especially if the value differential is based upon what combination of relics, House traits and Warlord traits are in play.

Which leads to the thought experiment - we have four Dominus-class Knights, two Castellans and two Valiants. One of each is allowed to be set up as a Warlord, one isn't, which whatever legal combination of relic/House/warlord trait. How do you price those four Knights so they are all sane choices to play them?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/25 09:18:50


Post by: Not Online!!!


Frankly alot of warlord trait and relic interactions get ouzt of hand preety fast now, and that is only the tip of the iceberg.

Smashcaptain is the same,
The new Chainsword CSM lords of BL with spitefull trait is the same.
Flawless host daemonprince spitefull trait.

Etc. these are all vastly overperforming contemporaries without traits.

And ona 600+ pts model this can get insane rather quickly.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/25 11:23:34


Post by: Dysartes


Indeed - I think we can all accept that the Castellan without the traits and relics is worth fewer points than the one with. The same is true for the Valiants, though the gap is probably smaller.

Whether a Valiant with traits and relics is worth more than a naked Castellan is an interesting question, and one I don't know the answer to.

Then the question shifts to how do you price the model - do you price it based on what it could have access to, or do you price it based on the naked version.

And if you price it based on what is has access to, do you allow the same unit to have a different price in different books - such as IK vs. RK, or IK vs. AdMech?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/25 11:42:08


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Dysartes wrote:
Indeed - I think we can all accept that the Castellan without the traits and relics is worth fewer points than the one with. The same is true for the Valiants, though the gap is probably smaller.

Whether a Valiant with traits and relics is worth more than a naked Castellan is an interesting question, and one I don't know the answer to.

Then the question shifts to how do you price the model - do you price it based on what it could have access to, or do you price it based on the naked version.

And if you price it based on what is has access to, do you allow the same unit to have a different price in different books - such as IK vs. RK, or IK vs. AdMech?


To me it seems gw can't make up it's mind on that.
F.e. Special and heavy weapons for Sm and csm seem to be priced around full rerolls all the time.
Oblits seem to always be Slaanesh, etc.

Other times units get away without such things ( pre tripple nerf cultists) and or get the nerfhammer double whammy ( conscripts and commisars)

The sad part is that units shared by multiple factions suffer exponentially ( normal eldar pay the price for ynnari).

Other times nothing happens.
The most eregious exemple though is the balance between the traits in themselves, you can't tell me f.e. That a WB CSM is the Same as an AL or RC one. Respectively should be the same price....


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/26 06:46:14


Post by: SHUPPET


Rather than having alternate points across Chapter Tactics, I think the answer is fixing the rules to be equally as good. And I think thats what they try to do.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/26 15:43:18


Post by: Togusa


Not Online!!! wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
Indeed - I think we can all accept that the Castellan without the traits and relics is worth fewer points than the one with. The same is true for the Valiants, though the gap is probably smaller.

Whether a Valiant with traits and relics is worth more than a naked Castellan is an interesting question, and one I don't know the answer to.

Then the question shifts to how do you price the model - do you price it based on what it could have access to, or do you price it based on the naked version.

And if you price it based on what is has access to, do you allow the same unit to have a different price in different books - such as IK vs. RK, or IK vs. AdMech?


To me it seems gw can't make up it's mind on that.
F.e. Special and heavy weapons for Sm and csm seem to be priced around full rerolls all the time.
Oblits seem to always be Slaanesh, etc.

Other times units get away without such things ( pre tripple nerf cultists) and or get the nerfhammer double whammy ( conscripts and commisars)

The sad part is that units shared by multiple factions suffer exponentially ( normal eldar pay the price for ynnari).

Other times nothing happens.
The most eregious exemple though is the balance between the traits in themselves, you can't tell me f.e. That a WB CSM is the Same as an AL or RC one. Respectively should be the same price....


Just a thought about Obliterators and Slaneesh.

I've recently learned that it's not the only way to play them. Yes, double shooting out of DS is powerful, but if you run them with Mark of Nurgle, you can regenerate them. When the trick works, it is very harrowing for your opponent.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/27 11:33:24


Post by: Karol


dead stuff doesnt regenerate. stuff that killed other stuff may not have to worry about being killed in the first place. Oblits nurgle or not are not tanky enough for w40k. If they were ++3inv with
re-rolls, then maybe giving them something else then MoS could be an option.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/27 22:24:22


Post by: Not Online!!!


Karol wrote:
dead stuff doesnt regenerate. stuff that killed other stuff may not have to worry about being killed in the first place. Oblits nurgle or not are not tanky enough for w40k. If they were ++3inv with
re-rolls, then maybe giving them something else then MoS could be an option.


Actually Chaos can bring back dead models.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/27 22:28:14


Post by: Karol


Can oblits come back when the units is dead? All I know is pox dudes recycle, which I think was 50% nerf with how one can no longer split a demon in to two smaller and get a poxy, out of one model.

I think of w40k like wrestling. Defence is all good and everyone has to know it, but if you break the other guys fingers then this is the event for him done. Even if you lose he will not be able to fight in next rounds against people from your school. It is better to have an opposing unit dead, and shoting twice is a good way to do it, then shoting one time and having a very small resiliance increase. Specially when the point costs for both types of oblits are identical. If slanesh ones were 115 and nurgle ones were 65, then we could take about the merits of 3 mos oblits double taping vs 5 mon oblits being more resilient.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/27 22:31:18


Post by: Formosa


Not Online!!! wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
Indeed - I think we can all accept that the Castellan without the traits and relics is worth fewer points than the one with. The same is true for the Valiants, though the gap is probably smaller.

Whether a Valiant with traits and relics is worth more than a naked Castellan is an interesting question, and one I don't know the answer to.

Then the question shifts to how do you price the model - do you price it based on what it could have access to, or do you price it based on the naked version.

And if you price it based on what is has access to, do you allow the same unit to have a different price in different books - such as IK vs. RK, or IK vs. AdMech?


To me it seems gw can't make up it's mind on that.
F.e. Special and heavy weapons for Sm and csm seem to be priced around full rerolls all the time.
Oblits seem to always be Slaanesh, etc.

Other times units get away without such things ( pre tripple nerf cultists) and or get the nerfhammer double whammy ( conscripts and commisars)

The sad part is that units shared by multiple factions suffer exponentially ( normal eldar pay the price for ynnari).

Other times nothing happens.
The most eregious exemple though is the balance between the traits in themselves, you can't tell me f.e. That a WB CSM is the Same as an AL or RC one. Respectively should be the same price....


Your right but not everyone has that mindset, I will happily say most choose their army based on looks, so that word bearers player uses the word bearers trait because that's the Amy they chose, it doesn't matter other traits are better because that person plays word bearers


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/27 22:33:28


Post by: Karol


What if being a legion or regiment or hive fleet cost points? WB trait would cost something like 50pts per army. While something like -1 to hit, could cost 100 or even 150pts.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/28 09:32:41


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Formosa wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
Indeed - I think we can all accept that the Castellan without the traits and relics is worth fewer points than the one with. The same is true for the Valiants, though the gap is probably smaller.

Whether a Valiant with traits and relics is worth more than a naked Castellan is an interesting question, and one I don't know the answer to.

Then the question shifts to how do you price the model - do you price it based on what it could have access to, or do you price it based on the naked version.

And if you price it based on what is has access to, do you allow the same unit to have a different price in different books - such as IK vs. RK, or IK vs. AdMech?


To me it seems gw can't make up it's mind on that.
F.e. Special and heavy weapons for Sm and csm seem to be priced around full rerolls all the time.
Oblits seem to always be Slaanesh, etc.

Other times units get away without such things ( pre tripple nerf cultists) and or get the nerfhammer double whammy ( conscripts and commisars)

The sad part is that units shared by multiple factions suffer exponentially ( normal eldar pay the price for ynnari).

Other times nothing happens.
The most eregious exemple though is the balance between the traits in themselves, you can't tell me f.e. That a WB CSM is the Same as an AL or RC one. Respectively should be the same price....


Your right but not everyone has that mindset, I will happily say most choose their army based on looks, so that word bearers player uses the word bearers trait because that's the Amy they chose, it doesn't matter other traits are better because that person plays word bearers


I play R&H, mostly, altough the recent Chaos stuff has me brought back to my marines. That said, i play what looks cool above f.e. ruleswise the strongest, but i also realise that there SHOULDN'T be such a discrepancy in effect just because of traits. I find that unhealthy. Basically i rather see that they would fill the gap between good and bad traits.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/28 11:49:15


Post by: MrDwhitey


Karol wrote:
Can oblits come back when the units is dead? All I know is pox dudes recycle, which I think was 50% nerf with how one can no longer split a demon in to two smaller and get a poxy, out of one model.

I think of w40k like wrestling. Defence is all good and everyone has to know it, but if you break the other guys fingers then this is the event for him done. Even if you lose he will not be able to fight in next rounds against people from your school. It is better to have an opposing unit dead, and shoting twice is a good way to do it, then shoting one time and having a very small resiliance increase. Specially when the point costs for both types of oblits are identical. If slanesh ones were 115 and nurgle ones were 65, then we could take about the merits of 3 mos oblits double taping vs 5 mon oblits being more resilient.


Absolutely amazing. Never stop.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/28 12:57:33


Post by: SHUPPET


wow that analogy. Smh.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 17:23:53


Post by: lare2


Did I miss it or did they not address the oblit pts issue? I can't see any reference to it...


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 17:29:35


Post by: Jacksmiles


It's there, not in magenta for some reason though. Bottom right of the first page.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 17:30:15


Post by: Kanluwen


Jacksmiles wrote:
It's there, not in magenta for some reason though. Bottom right of the first page.

Likely it's because they considered the CSM book a "new book" rather than just an updated one.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 17:30:59


Post by: Jacksmiles


 Kanluwen wrote:
Jacksmiles wrote:
It's there, not in magenta for some reason though. Bottom right of the first page.

Likely it's because they considered the CSM book a "new book" rather than just an updated one.


Maybe. There's a ton of magenta in the rest of the same document though.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 17:35:48


Post by: Galef


So it's confirmed 115ppm is the correct points, despite 65ppm being more "current", but we can finally say this was obviously a typo.
Or rather, anyone saying it WASN'T a typo can finally see the logic of those that were.

-



Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 17:36:37


Post by: Daedalus81


Jacksmiles wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Jacksmiles wrote:
It's there, not in magenta for some reason though. Bottom right of the first page.

Likely it's because they considered the CSM book a "new book" rather than just an updated one.


Maybe. There's a ton of magenta in the rest of the same document though.


Probably because it was ready 2 weeks ago and they made edits in between.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 17:42:23


Post by: Jacksmiles


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Jacksmiles wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Jacksmiles wrote:
It's there, not in magenta for some reason though. Bottom right of the first page.

Likely it's because they considered the CSM book a "new book" rather than just an updated one.


Maybe. There's a ton of magenta in the rest of the same document though.


Probably because it was ready 2 weeks ago and they made edits in between.


Not unlikely. Not sure it matters though, it should still be magenta because it's part of the newest iteration. It's just a color mistake that'll make it harder for a lot of people to see because they're skimming for color. Why doesn't really matter.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 17:52:58


Post by: Quasistellar


 Galef wrote:
So it's confirmed 115ppm is the correct points, despite 65ppm being more "current", but we can finally say this was obviously a typo.
Or rather, anyone saying it WASN'T a typo can finally see the logic of those that were.

-



Indeed. It was pretty obvious what happened. Still wish they had put out a band-aid faq sooner just for the points.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 19:21:14


Post by: Insectum7


 Galef wrote:
So it's confirmed 115ppm is the correct points, despite 65ppm being more "current", but we can finally say this was obviously a typo.
Or rather, anyone saying it WASN'T a typo can finally see the logic of those that were.

-



So much dakka wasted on that one, too.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 19:36:14


Post by: Irbis


Removed - BrookM


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 20:03:47


Post by: Tibs Ironblood


So glad this topic can die now lol.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 20:42:25


Post by: Daedalus81


 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
So glad this topic can die now lol.


We can keep it going for at least another 20 pages. Here...let me help.

Obliterators are very effective against 4 point IS.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 20:54:05


Post by: Insectum7


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
So glad this topic can die now lol.


We can keep it going for at least another 20 pages. Here...let me help.

Obliterators are very effective against 4 point IS.


Well right of the bat you're obviously incorrect, as the IS is minimum 10 models, making it 40 points.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 21:02:17


Post by: Bharring


When has being incorrect successfully invalidated an argument on DakkaDakka?


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/29 21:14:56


Post by: Insectum7


Bharring wrote:
When has being incorrect successfully invalidated an argument on DakkaDakka?


I'm not sure that it actually has in any meaningful way, however as a sloppy "debate tactic" it abounds. (hence the post, apologies if unclear.)


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 12:14:56


Post by: G00fySmiley


Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Now that it’s 115 points confirmed even though those of us smart enough to know, knew that was their cost, how many of you that were using 65 point ones feel bad for cheating?


none probably. heck I fully expect to have to look at handwritten lists forever now as people try to write in the lower points costs and point out its what is written and they claim to not know about the faq and/or that they don't use the online stuff an adhere to the book as some kind of purists. I really hope GW can clam down on needing these day 1 erattas and just proofread thier books properly.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 12:50:10


Post by: Lemondish


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Jacksmiles wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Jacksmiles wrote:
It's there, not in magenta for some reason though. Bottom right of the first page.

Likely it's because they considered the CSM book a "new book" rather than just an updated one.


Maybe. There's a ton of magenta in the rest of the same document though.


Probably because it was ready 2 weeks ago and they made edits in between.


Brand new FAQs are never magenta. That is done to indicate changes from a previous version. You won't see much in the first few pages because the first section of the document is for codex 2.0, as listed in the actual document itself. The first edition of the codex already had entries in the errata/FAQ and was included at the end, hence the magenta there.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 13:39:07


Post by: nurgle5


Daedalus81 wrote:
 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
So glad this topic can die now lol.


We can keep it going for at least another 20 pages. Here...let me help.

Obliterators are very effective against 4 point IS.


I'd actually be interested to see what people think about Obliterators in comparison to Blight Haulers now as choices for a big tough anti-tank unit, since (as now fully confirmed) the Blight Haulers only two points more per model.

Bharring wrote:When has being incorrect successfully invalidated an argument on DakkaDakka?


Maybe the name of this forum should be "40k General Arguments"


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 15:47:19


Post by: Togusa


Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Now that it’s 115 points confirmed even though those of us smart enough to know, knew that was their cost, how many of you that were using 65 point ones feel bad for cheating?


I have no remorse. They were perfectly fine at 65 points per model. Played last night with the new points, and this morning I wrote them all out of my list. 6 models for 700 points is over 1/3 of a 2K list, in an army with terrible troop options. Overcharged plasma makes short work of obliterators, which require you to either place or deepstrike within the range of the very gun that can kill them. T5 4W 5++ means nothing when you have to stick them out in the danger zone.

Havoks with autocannons and/or missile launchers will now be taking their place in my lists, at less than half the cost of 6 obliterators, double the models and the same toughness, less wound pool, same save in cover with sorcerer or dark apostle support providing an Invuln, but easier to hide with double the threat range and much more stable strength, damage and armor penetration. It's possible a single unit of three in DS with slanneesh mark is still a valid choice for a one trick pony, but I'm not sold.

Obliterators are not very good now. It's a sad day, but at least there is a viable replacement for them.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:04:17


Post by: Galef


Is it too early to cross our fingers for CA2019 to drop them to 90ish ppm?

...in December


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:13:17


Post by: Daedalus81


 nurgle5 wrote:

I'd actually be interested to see what people think about Obliterators in comparison to Blight Haulers now as choices for a big tough anti-tank unit, since (as now fully confirmed) the Blight Haulers only two points more per model.



Haulers are BS4. They can't deepstrike and they have 1 ML shot and 1 MM shot at 24" compared to 6 BC shots (effectively). They're certainly more durable, but they're also on the table and not terribly scary as it'd take them 2 to 3 turns to equal the fire output of one round for one obliterator.



Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:14:46


Post by: Xenomancers


 Togusa wrote:
Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Now that it’s 115 points confirmed even though those of us smart enough to know, knew that was their cost, how many of you that were using 65 point ones feel bad for cheating?


I have no remorse. They were perfectly fine at 65 points per model. Played last night with the new points, and this morning I wrote them all out of my list. 6 models for 700 points is over 1/3 of a 2K list, in an army with terrible troop options. Overcharged plasma makes short work of obliterators, which require you to either place or deepstrike within the range of the very gun that can kill them. T5 4W 5++ means nothing when you have to stick them out in the danger zone.

Havoks with autocannons and/or missile launchers will now be taking their place in my lists, at less than half the cost of 6 obliterators, double the models and the same toughness, less wound pool, same save in cover with sorcerer or dark apostle support providing an Invuln, but easier to hide with double the threat range and much more stable strength, damage and armor penetration. It's possible a single unit of three in DS with slanneesh mark is still a valid choice for a one trick pony, but I'm not sold.

Obliterators are not very good now. It's a sad day, but at least there is a viable replacement for them.

If you don't put every buff in the game on them they are worth 65. When they are auto 6 shots with shooting twice hitting on 2's RR 1's and wounding on 2's RR'1s they are worth their points. In fact they are stronger than they were before if you use them like that.

Overcharged plasma is worthless against -1 and -2 to hit buffs Literally will do more damage to themselves than they do to you. Just spam the -1 to hit man.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:16:20


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Now that it’s 115 points confirmed even though those of us smart enough to know, knew that was their cost, how many of you that were using 65 point ones feel bad for cheating?


I have no remorse. They were perfectly fine at 65 points per model. Played last night with the new points, and this morning I wrote them all out of my list. 6 models for 700 points is over 1/3 of a 2K list, in an army with terrible troop options. Overcharged plasma makes short work of obliterators, which require you to either place or deepstrike within the range of the very gun that can kill them. T5 4W 5++ means nothing when you have to stick them out in the danger zone.

Havoks with autocannons and/or missile launchers will now be taking their place in my lists, at less than half the cost of 6 obliterators, double the models and the same toughness, less wound pool, same save in cover with sorcerer or dark apostle support providing an Invuln, but easier to hide with double the threat range and much more stable strength, damage and armor penetration. It's possible a single unit of three in DS with slanneesh mark is still a valid choice for a one trick pony, but I'm not sold.

Obliterators are not very good now. It's a sad day, but at least there is a viable replacement for them.

If you don't put every buff in the game on them they are worth 65. When they are auto 6 shots with shooting twice hitting on 2's RR 1's and wounding on 2's RR'1s they are worth their points. In fact they are stronger than they were before if you use them like that.

Overcharged plasma is worthless against -1 and -2 to hit buffs Literally will do more damage to themselves than they do to you. Just spam the -1 to hit man.


Are you actually now trolling, because every imaginable buff get's rather bloody expensive for Chaos, not to mention that some of these buff givers are SLOWPOKES (MoP, DA).


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:18:13


Post by: Vaktathi


I think people are a whole lot more worried about being "right" on an anonymous internet message board than actually discussing the worth of Oblits

As is, I thought the old Oblits were thoroughly "meh", I think the new ones are "meh", and still think they need to be more like 90pts than 65 or 115.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:18:17


Post by: Nightlord1987


Yea, this sells me on the idea to just rebase my old Oblits on 50mm bases, instead of shelling out some buck on the new ones.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:23:53


Post by: Daedalus81


 Togusa wrote:


Havoks with autocannons and/or missile launchers will now be taking their place in my lists, at less than half the cost of 6 obliterators, double the models and the same toughness, less wound pool, same save in cover with sorcerer or dark apostle support providing an Invuln, but easier to hide with double the threat range and much more stable strength, damage and armor penetration. It's possible a single unit of three in DS with slanneesh mark is still a valid choice for a one trick pony, but I'm not sold.


AC havocs - 116
ML havocs - 156
Apostle - 110

So for more than the price of 3 obliterators you get 10 3+/5++ T5 wounds and 8 S7 AP2 D2 and 4 S8 AP2 DD6 shots.

Or for 37 points less -

8 T5 2+/5++ wounds, deepstrike, and 18 S8 AP2 D2 (roughly).

Havocs doubling their ML shots over two turns means 16 ML and 16 AC shots total - if they're all alive. Obliterators on turn 2 mean 36 shots, which is still more than the doubled havocs.

Caveat being rolling badly for the obliterator weapons. The apostle would also probably serve them better with a +1 to hit, which I think gives the edge to havocs,

At the end it comes down to whether or not you want to keep your firepower safe and if you want to do a funky daemon keyword build.

NOTE: this isn't a claim that they're good at 115 - just that they're not as bad as people make them out to be.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:24:11


Post by: Xenomancers


Not Online!!! wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Now that it’s 115 points confirmed even though those of us smart enough to know, knew that was their cost, how many of you that were using 65 point ones feel bad for cheating?


I have no remorse. They were perfectly fine at 65 points per model. Played last night with the new points, and this morning I wrote them all out of my list. 6 models for 700 points is over 1/3 of a 2K list, in an army with terrible troop options. Overcharged plasma makes short work of obliterators, which require you to either place or deepstrike within the range of the very gun that can kill them. T5 4W 5++ means nothing when you have to stick them out in the danger zone.

Havoks with autocannons and/or missile launchers will now be taking their place in my lists, at less than half the cost of 6 obliterators, double the models and the same toughness, less wound pool, same save in cover with sorcerer or dark apostle support providing an Invuln, but easier to hide with double the threat range and much more stable strength, damage and armor penetration. It's possible a single unit of three in DS with slanneesh mark is still a valid choice for a one trick pony, but I'm not sold.

Obliterators are not very good now. It's a sad day, but at least there is a viable replacement for them.

If you don't put every buff in the game on them they are worth 65. When they are auto 6 shots with shooting twice hitting on 2's RR 1's and wounding on 2's RR'1s they are worth their points. In fact they are stronger than they were before if you use them like that.

Overcharged plasma is worthless against -1 and -2 to hit buffs Literally will do more damage to themselves than they do to you. Just spam the -1 to hit man.


Are you actually now trolling, because every imaginable buff get's rather bloody expensive for Chaos, not to mention that some of these buff givers are SLOWPOKES (MoP, DA).

No - I am just smart and know this unit deletes 2 units a turn at minimum and is likely at least -1 to hit with 4++ save when you go to shoot back at them. Buffs aren't really expensive in the sense you are talking about ether. They are auto include. The only question is what units are you going to use them on. Oblitz are unquestionably the best because they get 18x2 quality shots. Nothing else in the army even comes close....except a squad of 10 terminators all with combi meltas which costs A LOT MORE and has LESS range.

Chaos is a death star buff army...understand this. Win games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Vaktathi wrote:
I think people are a whole lot more worried about being "right" on an anonymous internet message board than actually discussing the worth of Oblits

As is, I thought the old Oblits were thoroughly "meh", I think the new ones are "meh", and still think they need to be more like 90pts than 65 or 115.

Except they weren't MEH. THey were VERY OP.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:31:45


Post by: Togusa


 Galef wrote:
Is it too early to cross our fingers for CA2019 to drop them to 90ish ppm?

...in December


I'm actually okay with this. It forces CSM players to consider other options, rather than just spamming one unit three times because of its strengths and weight of dice. I feel as though I have more freedom to build my list now, without having to be "forced" to take max Oblits.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:33:34


Post by: Xenomancers


Choas has so many options.

It's best options work the same was as oblitz though. Stack multiple buffs on a unit and crush things.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:37:19


Post by: Togusa


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Now that it’s 115 points confirmed even though those of us smart enough to know, knew that was their cost, how many of you that were using 65 point ones feel bad for cheating?


I have no remorse. They were perfectly fine at 65 points per model. Played last night with the new points, and this morning I wrote them all out of my list. 6 models for 700 points is over 1/3 of a 2K list, in an army with terrible troop options. Overcharged plasma makes short work of obliterators, which require you to either place or deepstrike within the range of the very gun that can kill them. T5 4W 5++ means nothing when you have to stick them out in the danger zone.

Havoks with autocannons and/or missile launchers will now be taking their place in my lists, at less than half the cost of 6 obliterators, double the models and the same toughness, less wound pool, same save in cover with sorcerer or dark apostle support providing an Invuln, but easier to hide with double the threat range and much more stable strength, damage and armor penetration. It's possible a single unit of three in DS with slanneesh mark is still a valid choice for a one trick pony, but I'm not sold.

Obliterators are not very good now. It's a sad day, but at least there is a viable replacement for them.

If you don't put every buff in the game on them they are worth 65. When they are auto 6 shots with shooting twice hitting on 2's RR 1's and wounding on 2's RR'1s they are worth their points. In fact they are stronger than they were before if you use them like that.

Overcharged plasma is worthless against -1 and -2 to hit buffs Literally will do more damage to themselves than they do to you. Just spam the -1 to hit man.


I play black legion, and I have no access to -1 to hit that I am aware of. Even if I do, it's a bad mechanic and I will not use it. On any of my units.

That said, 85-90 points per model seems a lot more appropriate for their cost. You could even make the weapon cost between 7-10 points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Choas has so many options.

It's best options work the same was as oblitz though. Stack multiple buffs on a unit and crush things.


I was shocked to see how many options our terminators get when compared to loyalists. Wow.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:42:25


Post by: Vaktathi


 Xenomancers wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I think people are a whole lot more worried about being "right" on an anonymous internet message board than actually discussing the worth of Oblits

As is, I thought the old Oblits were thoroughly "meh", I think the new ones are "meh", and still think they need to be more like 90pts than 65 or 115.

Except they weren't MEH. THey were VERY OP.
Which ones? The old ones or the new iteration? I didn't really rate either particularly highly, especially if they weren't closely supported Slaaneshi ones. Playing Iron Warriors, MoS didn't really have a place in my lists.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 16:57:43


Post by: Xenomancers


If you are deliberately making a unit 50% weaker. Then yeah - it's going to be meh.

Know what is meh? A repulsor. That is Meh. Oblitz DS 1 shotting a repulsor almost automatically - thats not meh.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 17:28:47


Post by: Vaktathi


 Xenomancers wrote:
If you are deliberately making a unit 50% weaker. Then yeah - it's going to be meh.

Know what is meh? A repulsor. That is Meh. Oblitz DS 1 shotting a repulsor almost automatically - thats not meh.
I guess I'm not trying to cost them according to the maximum potential buff level and factoring the use of 2CP stratagems into their base cost. Even with EC, the Oldblits were not oneshotting a Repulsor by any means on average (they'd do 10-11 out of 16 wounds), so we have to factor in the cost of additional support (and ensuring it could be near enough the Oblits when they DS) as well for more buffs to make that happen. If we're talking a Character, 3 Oldblits, and 2 CP for a DS strike package to kill one 3+sv tank, that doesn't seem OP to me given the state of the game.

It also doesn't help that the Repulsor is basically a 1980's GI Joe toy with a gazillion absurdly named weapons that are just slightly different versions of existing alternatives and can't decide what it wants to actually be. The Repulsor is a fundamentally poorly thought out unit, not just a poorly costed one.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 17:32:17


Post by: Martel732


It IS a 1980s GI Joe toy!


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 18:20:29


Post by: RiTides


Temporarily locking this until one of us has a chance to deal with all the alerts this thread has generated...


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 19:27:28


Post by: BrookM


I did some cleaning up, warnings have been issued and to quote myself from a few pages ago..

Final warning to all participants, as I am getting tired of seeing this thread light up my dashboard so often: RULE #1, to be polite to other users is not optional.

Failure to comply will result in suspensions and a general lock of the thread.




Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 19:57:00


Post by: Not Online!!!


No - I am just smart and know this unit deletes 2 units a turn at minimum and is likely at least -1 to hit with 4++ save when you go to shoot back at them. Buffs aren't really expensive in the sense you are talking about ether. They are auto include. The only question is what units are you going to use them on. Oblitz are unquestionably the best because they get 18x2 quality shots. Nothing else in the army even comes close....except a squad of 10 terminators all with combi meltas which costs A LOT MORE and has LESS range.

Chaos is a death star buff army...understand this. Win games.


Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Ok, sure buddy:

3x oblit 345 pts.

CP battery most effective brand (RC 2x warpsmith 3x5 csm )365 pts. --> generates 8CP
Therefore 365 :8 = 45.625 per CP/pts.

we use 4 CP for VotWL and Cacaphony--> 182.5 pts used for CP generation.

MoP 90 pts.
Soooo

Total: 182.5 + 90 + 345 = 617.5 pts.

HOWEVER: the MoP can not be hidden as effective, also he is not particulary fast so to get the buffs you need to be in a rather small area for his PSY.
He can also be eliminated before hand, he also struggles to get close to an intended target because the oblit weapons are also just 24".

So you were saying again?



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also comparatively: A squad of 10 Combiplas Slaanesh terminators costs: 380 pts.
for firing 40 PG and 40 boltguns.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 20:08:47


Post by: Xenomancers


The math has already been demonstrated. At 115 the unit is even more effective than it used to be at 65 points. And it receives buffs better that target units.

The question is are they worth their points and the answer is when played correctly they are even better than they were before. So...Yes...Because they were already OP. \

That isn't even remotely close to the cost of a 10 man combi plas term squad.

Interesting I didn't know terms could take chainaxes. That is a pretty good unit too. Maybe even better than oblitz now. I'll concede that.


Are Obliterators worth their new points cost? @ 2019/04/30 20:10:21


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Xenomancers wrote:
The math has already been demonstrated. At 115 the unit is even more effective than it used to be at 65 points. And it receives buffs better that target units.

The question is are they worth their points and the answer is when played correctly they are even better than they were before. So...Yes...Because they were already OP.


SO SHOW me your math then.
Because i sure as hell haven't seen anything that disproves this and also shows how much you really know about the army.