So, I'll begin by saying I'm broadly happy that they buffed marines. I have zero interest in playing imperium (outside of sisters) but the fellows were genuinely struggling.
However, I am really not fond of the drop pod exception. There are a lot of factions who should have that kind of ability and when they said "hey, we should be able to DS turn 1" GW said no one, period dot, was going to be able to do that. It really feels pretty bad for drop pods to now break that rule completely and overtly.
Again, not a knock on drop pods (which were not good and heck might still not be great) or that marines, broadly, didn't need help. But this really feels like a jerk move given the very consistent story of "no turn 1 deepstrike".
Agreed, Drop Pods needed this to be even remotely viable. Now if GW can give this exception to the Webway Gate and it might see use too, other than just as a pretty terrain piece
So, I'll begin by saying I'm broadly happy that they buffed marines. I have zero interest in playing imperium (outside of sisters) but the fellows were genuinely struggling.
However, I am really not fond of the drop pod exception. There are a lot of factions who should have that kind of ability and when they said "hey, we should be able to DS turn 1" GW said no one, period dot, was going to be able to do that. It really feels pretty bad for drop pods to now break that rule completely and overtly.
Again, not a knock on drop pods (which were not good and heck might still not be great) or that marines, broadly, didn't need help. But this really feels like a jerk move given the very consistent story of "no turn 1 deepstrike".
Perhaps GW thought "You know, we'd kinda like people to buy this $40+ model we make. What can we do about that? Hmmm.... Let's make it more useful."
No turn one DS should never have been a thing to start with.
BrianDavion wrote: did other factions have to spend an additional 80 points to basicly add deep strike to a unit?
Yeah, kind of. To deepstrike two of my craftworlder units, I need 3 CP. A batallion requires 3 troops and gives me 5 CP. So 60% of the troop tax goes towards deepstriking. Instead of getting a semi-durable vehicle with a huge footprint, I get avengers or storm guardians or rangers. Which are all okay-to-good in their own right. Assuming I use triple rangers for my troops, I spend 180 points for the 5CP. 60% of 180 is 108.
So basically, I'm spending 108 points to deepstrike 2 units instead of 65 points (the current cost of drop pods; not 80) to deepstrike 10 models. And I get 15 rangers out of the deal instead of a toughness 6 hunk of metal with a huge footprint.
Rangers are great, but that doesn't seem like a jarringly imbalanced set of choices to me.
The new drop pod marines throw a bone to oldschool marines who, generally speaking, kind of needed something. I'm not sure I love this particular approach to making oldmarines or drop pods desirable, but it's an interesting attempt.
People are making too big a deal about this IMO. They still aren't going to be much good unless the points went down that im not aware of. SM still don't have much of anything worth spending 65 points to deepstrike, turn one or not.
So...uh...yeah? Tyranid Tyranocytes are very similar and can't do this. Nids certainly aren't rocking any tournaments sans perhaps as a bit of a support for GSC, much like marines. A lot of space marine stuff can deep strike on its own.
Like, the entire GSC army was based fundamentally around turn 1 deep strikes. That was 100% their central theme. GW said no one is going to do it regardless of cost, so we will do other things for you guys. Turning around and then giving drop pods of all things the ability to break what they said was an unbreakable rule is bad form.
Again, this isn't to say that drop pods were/are good. I said upfront I believe in and am happy for SM to get buffs. I am even happy for drop pods to get buffs (either in points costs or by other means). But this was supposed to be an unbreakable rule (they said as much) and now they've broken it. I think that is bad form.
As for $40 or whatever; look, a lot of people have gakky units. Ask everyone who thought wraithknights were slick cool models how much they are getting used. The cycle happens; I would like for drop pods to be solid things to use. But I don't think breaking a rule that applies to everyone else like this (when, again, they said it wouldn't get broken) is the good route to that.
Like, the entire GSC army was based fundamentally around turn 1 deep strikes. That was 100% their central theme. GW said no is going to do it regardless of cost, so we will do other things for you guys. Turning around and then giving drop pods of all things the ability to break what they said was an unbreakable rule is bad form.
Again, this isn't to say that drop pods were/are good. I said upfront I believe in and am happy for SM to get buffs. I am even happy for drop pods to get buffs (either in points costs or by other means). But this was supposed to be an unbreakable rule (they said as much) and now they've broken it. I think that is bad form.
Agreed. I'm not really against the changes to drop pods, but I do have a little marine envy at not having other similarly undesirable units buffed in a similar fashion. Maybe tyrannocites and webway gates will get similar buffs in a chapter approved or something.
This is fine. Drop pods being immobile is such a huge penalty in 8th edition that you're honestly spending points to make your opponent's army better. Seriously - being able to assault the drop pod, which doesn't really fight back, and so avoid lethal shooting is phenomenal.
But let's remember point #2 - Space Marine bolters really only start to get good on turn 2 when they can initiate the Tactical Doctrine now. If super-deadly bolters become a thing (which is possible with veterans), you'll likely have Space Marines choosing to wait until turn 2 to bring these pods in anyways.
It's largely irrelevant, between a ton of new infiltrators, rules benefiting units that come in a turn two and drop pods still being overpriced, you'll likely never see them outside of some cheesy go second strat.
BrianDavion wrote: did other factions have to spend an additional 80 points to basicly add deep strike to a unit?
Yeah, kind of. To deepstrike two of my craftworlder units, I need 3 CP. A batallion requires 3 troops and gives me 5 CP. So 60% of the troop tax goes towards deepstriking. Instead of getting a semi-durable vehicle with a huge footprint, I get avengers or storm guardians or rangers. Which are all okay-to-good in their own right. Assuming I use triple rangers for my troops, I spend 180 points for the 5CP. 60% of 180 is 108.
So basically, I'm spending 108 points to deepstrike 2 units instead of 65 points (the current cost of drop pods; not 80) to deepstrike 10 models. And I get 15 rangers out of the deal instead of a toughness 6 hunk of metal with a huge footprint.
Rangers are great, but that doesn't seem like a jarringly imbalanced set of choices to me.
The new drop pod marines throw a bone to oldschool marines who, generally speaking, kind of needed something. I'm not sure I love this particular approach to making oldmarines or drop pods desirable, but it's an interesting attempt.
You also get several more CP's, you get to deepstrike TWO units, not one for the cost you're comparing to deepstriking ONE unit And you get all those troop units. AND you get units of rangers. You're comparing the price of your total package - the troops, the CP's that matter but not the extra ones, and your units that will Deepstrike to the "upgrade" cost of only the drop pod that doesn't have much Dakka, can't move - and thus transport again, can't re-embark - and thus protect a unit, and can be virtually ignored once it's been used. To be honest the Drop Pod should have had enough weaponry to make it painful to ignore. Once it's deployed it's a giant immobile storm bolter that isn't worth shooting at. The weapons that can hurt it will get more bang for their buck shooting at virtually ANYTHING else.
You also get several more CP's, you get to deepstrike TWO units, not one for the cost you're comparing to deepstriking ONE unit And you get all those troop units. AND you get units of rangers. You're comparing the price of your total package - the troops, the CP's that matter but not the extra ones, and your units that will Deepstrike to the "upgrade" cost of only the drop pod that doesn't have much Dakka, can't move - and thus transport again, can't re-embark - and thus protect a unit, and can be virtually ignored once it's been used. To be honest the Drop Pod should have had enough weaponry to make it painful to ignore. Once it's deployed it's a giant immobile storm bolter that isn't worth shooting at. The weapons that can hurt it will get more bang for their buck shooting at virtually ANYTHING else.
Not sure I followed all of that. A couple of points though:
* A single droppod transports up to 10 models. So technically that 65 point cost transports up to 10 units, but more realistically it probably transports two 5-man squads or 1 squad and 1+ characters.
* I'm probably not deepstriking my troops (unless they're a ~200 point guardian blob at which point the effective points cost of deepstriking goes up more. So the price of the units being deepstruck is no more included in that 108 price tag than the cost of drop podding units are included in the cost of the drop pod itself.
* Admittedly, the troop tax of a batallion to pay for a stratagem is a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison. For a cleaner comparison look at the tyrannocite. Basically a drop pod, but also worse in many ways.
I'm not taking the stand that drop pods are secretly amazing or anything. I'm just saying, in response to BrianDavion's post, that other factions do in fact have to spend finite resources to deepstrike their units. And pointing out that the cost to do so is probably vaguely on par with the cost paid to drop pod units.
'Nids do it with tyrannocytes using points. Other factions generally use command points. A few things let you use special abilities. So depending on how many points you feel a command point or deepstriking special ability (think the Deceiver) functionally costs, that's how much other armies pay to deepstrike.
To play droppod's advocate for just a moment though...
* You point out that people don't usually want to shoot at them with heavy weapons. That actually makes them slightly better objective holders as a result.
* GW ruled that the doors are part of the model meaning a drop pod is actually a pretty large movement blocker.
* I feel like one of the biggest problems with drop pods is just what you put inside it. Marines don't have a ton of units that A.) don't already deepstrike, B.) are really scary specifically when they deepstrike, and C.) can fit into a drop pod. If I could stick, say, fire dragons inside of a drop pod for 65 points instead of using CP to do it, I'd strongly consider that option.
Conversly the drop pods size often also works against it if your trying to deploy it especially if your opening those doors.
The other thing is those CP arn't spent untill deployment, so you know the terrain and opponents list before committing to spending those CP, drop pods are points spent a list building.
That added flexibility is a cost that way too many player's undervalue constantly.
Not sure I followed all of that. A couple of points though:
* A single droppod transports up to 10 models. So technically that 65 point cost transports up to 10 units, but more realistically it probably transports two 5-man squads or 1 squad and 1+ characters.
You're with me so far. The Drop Pod is basically one unit - and you said the Stratagem allowed you to deep strike two. That means you'd have to either halve your cost, or double the SM cost.
* I'm probably not deepstriking my troops (unless they're a ~200 point guardian blob at which point the effective points cost of deepstriking goes up more. So the price of the units being deepstruck is no more included in that 108 price tag than the cost of drop podding units are included in the cost of the drop pod itself.
It is when you're trying to include the price you paid for those troops to generate the CP to fuel the stratagem. You're not including the cost SM have to pay to be battle forged and generate CP.
* Admittedly, the troop tax of a batallion to pay for a stratagem is a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison. For a cleaner comparison look at the tyrannocite. Basically a drop pod, but also worse in many ways.
I'm not taking the stand that drop pods are secretly amazing or anything. I'm just saying, in response to BrianDavion's post, that other factions do in fact have to spend finite resources to deepstrike their units. And pointing out that the cost to do so is probably vaguely on par with the cost paid to drop pod units.
'Nids do it with tyrannocytes using points. Other factions generally use command points. A few things let you use special abilities. So depending on how many points you feel a command point or deepstriking special ability (think the Deceiver) functionally costs, that's how much other armies pay to deepstrike.
Its especially apples to oranges when you divide that cost only on the CP, and not the other benefits. You didn't determine which fraction of your troop costs were paying for the CP Generation compared to which fraction of the troop costs was paid for a bunch of screens, shots, wounds, and etc, then determine which fraction of that fraction was your CP Generation used on the stratagem. Its not like you have to sacrifice X% of your troop models to power the stratagem, you still have them, they're still performing a function.
To play droppod's advocate for just a moment though...
* You point out that people don't usually want to shoot at them with heavy weapons. That actually makes them slightly better objective holders as a result.
No it doesnt. They're not objective secured, and they're model count 1. When you're ready to score the point, you charge it with two throw away models that also aren't objective secured (or even one that is), and you win. Until then, you can usually just ignore the shooting it does.
* GW ruled that the doors are part of the model meaning a drop pod is actually a pretty large movement blocker.
Not if you're charging it when you're done not caring about it. This, (mostly) not the points, or the turn 1 deep strike was the problem with a Drop Pod. All the comedic relief of "I'll shoot them with my Rhino" and none of the (continuing) movement around the covering terrain.
* I feel like one of the biggest problems with drop pods is just what you put inside it. Marines don't have a ton of units that A.) don't already deepstrike, B.) are really scary specifically when they deepstrike, and C.) can fit into a drop pod. If I could stick, say, fire dragons inside of a drop pod for 65 points instead of using CP to do it, I'd strongly consider that option.
I feel like one of the biggest problems is people keep treating it like a fire and forget Use Once object and they're OK with it. Swap that Storm Bolter for a twin linked assault cannon, or a tas-talon or something still "Bolter" ranged but with enough punch, or enough volume of fire to matter and things become different.
If I drop that pod on you on turn 1 - Storm Bolter gets 2 shots the first turn, and 4 per turn after (Rapid Fire 2 and the thing is literally immobile after the turn it drops) that's 22 shots for the entire game. 100% (-2 to save with Tactical Doctrine vs a 5+ GEQ Save) of 9.87558 wounds from 67% of 14.74 hits (67% of 22 shots) means the drop pod is statistically incapable of removing a 10 man guard squad sitting 4 inches away on an objective in a 6 turn game. And you didn't pay 150% of a Guard Squad's points to deepstrike 400% of a Guard Squad's points to kill a Guard Squad, so the unit that was in the Pod probably has other plans.
Statistically speaking, there is no reason to move the 10 man guard squad away from a Drop Pod that dropped on the same objective they're securing - At the end of the game, there will be a drop pod, and one badly mauled guardsman bleeding out but still alive on top of the objective. And the Guardsman gets to score the point(s). Give the Immobile Drop Pod a serious 24inch'ish threat weapon so it functions as a Dawn of War turret after the drop, and it starts looking viable. And Assault Marine gets deep strike AND 12" move for what, 2 points ? - a 10 man squad for 20? If I'm going to pay another 40+ for what's left over after the deep strike, it should at least make you think about doing something about it.
Just wanting to point out that deployed pods, ie with doors down, are basically a secured objective if they land directly on top of the objective. With the doors down no other unit can get within 3" of the objective. Not so useful for objectives in your opponents back field, but good for those no man's land objectives at the start.
AndrewC wrote: Just wanting to point out that deployed pods, ie with doors down, are basically a secured objective if they land directly on top of the objective. With the doors down no other unit can get within 3" of the objective. Not so useful for objectives in your opponents back field, but good for those no man's land objectives at the start.
Cheers
Andrew
Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors. If i have more models than one there i control that objective. A model on a 25mm base can get within 3" of the objective, when it moves between drop pod doors, and stays 1.1" away from them.
AndrewC wrote: Just wanting to point out that deployed pods, ie with doors down, are basically a secured objective if they land directly on top of the objective. With the doors down no other unit can get within 3" of the objective. Not so useful for objectives in your opponents back field, but good for those no man's land objectives at the start.
Cheers
Andrew
Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors. If i have more models than one there i control that objective.
And you can choose to attack with your fists instead of your normal melee weapon with minimum models in range to fight ensuring combat lasts as long as possible, meaning your unit can't be shot at while it holds the objective!
And you can choose to attack with your fists instead of your normal melee weapon with minimum models in range to fight ensuring combat lasts as long as possible, meaning your unit can't be shot at while it holds the objective!
Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors. If i have more models than one there i control that objective. A model on a 25mm base can get within 3" of the objective, when it moves between drop pod doors, and stays 1.1" away from them.
I respectfully disagree with that statement. The rules (barring a faq of which I am unaware or missed) Objective control has no interaction with combat and relies purely on model count within 3" of the centre of it. Charging the pod and reaching the doors do nothing to take control of that objective. I also disagree with your assertion that a 25mm base can get within 3" of the centre of an objective while remaining 1" away from the drop pod. Taking the base on its own, the radius from the centre is app 1 3/4", to the edge. There is no way you can get within the 3" without being within 1" of the model.
The reason why GSC can’t Deepstrike turn 1 is due to their rules, and how they can get easy charges with units that can wipe nearly any unit 8n a game in 1 round of combat. It’s because they can essentially win turn 1 with it. Marines whilst having some interesting and potent combos for this will not be a true ruin the game alpha strike.
Also, marines have been able to do drop pod assault for years, GSC are still new. Marines are the ICONIC force in the game for doing this and I’m glad they are back to be able to do so... they need the help.
Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors. If i have more models than one there i control that objective. A model on a 25mm base can get within 3" of the objective, when it moves between drop pod doors, and stays 1.1" away from them.
I respectfully disagree with that statement. The rules (barring a faq of which I am unaware or missed) Objective control has no interaction with combat and relies purely on model count within 3" of the centre of it. Charging the pod and reaching the doors do nothing to take control of that objective. I also disagree with your assertion that a 25mm base can get within 3" of the centre of an objective while remaining 1" away from the drop pod. Taking the base on its own, the radius from the centre is app 1 3/4", to the edge. There is no way you can get within the 3" without being within 1" of the model.
Charging allows you to get within 1" of the door, and thus within 1" of the center, and absolutely within 3" of the objective.
The part about close combat just meant that as long as they were clanging S4 combat knives off of T6 Drop Pod walls, other units can't shoot them because of the locked in close combat problem - not that it had any bearing on which group gets to control the objective.
Charging allows you to get within 1" of the door, and thus within 1" of the center, and absolutely within 3" of the objective.
The part about close combat just meant that as long as they were clanging S4 combat knives off of T6 Drop Pod walls, other units can't shoot them because of the locked in close combat problem - not that it had any bearing on which group gets to control the objective.
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with. Does the DP still come with POTMS? I thought I heard somewhere that all POTMS can choose to explode rather than roll?
Charging allows you to get within 1" of the door, and thus within 1" of the center, and absolutely within 3" of the objective.
The part about close combat just meant that as long as they were clanging S4 combat knives off of T6 Drop Pod walls, other units can't shoot them because of the locked in close combat problem - not that it had any bearing on which group gets to control the objective.
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with. Does the DP still come with POTMS? I thought I heard somewhere that all POTMS can choose to explode rather than roll?
It was the first thing he wrote. You even quoted it.
Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors.
I've never heard of anyone suggesting POTMS allows vehicles to commit suicide. No, the Drop Pod does not have POTMS, and I'm not sure if it ever did.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm also not even sure this is new, or if we just noticed it. I looked in my ebook and it has a Drop Pod Assault Rule that says at "the end of ANY of your movement phases..." {Emphasis mine) I would assume Turn 1 gives you a movement phase that would count as ANY of them
Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.
Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols.
I suggest you read the rules. You cant shoot with pistols at enemy units which are within 1" of friendly models. Only the models which are 1" within enemy units can shoot with pistols. And they have to shoot the closest enemy model, which doesnt have to be from the enemy unit they are within 1". What unit is closest is determined on a model to model basis.
Models cannot target enemy units that
are within 1" of friendly models – the risk
of hitting your own troops is too great.
A model can fire a Pistol even if there are
enemy units within 1" of its own unit, but
it must target the closest enemy unit. In
such circumstances, the model can shoot
its Pistol even if other friendly units are
within 1" of the same enemy unit.
Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.
Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?
I think that's close but not quite - and depends on how literal you are with the rules. Technically - a model with a pistol can fire it's pistol, but only ever at the closest unit and can still shoot if other friendly models within 1" of their target enemy unit. It's implied this is in addition to normal shooting and/or when the firing model/unit is within that 1" zone, but this isn't specified. Close Combat isn't required either, though it would be a rare case where models are within 1" of each other and not in close combat.
Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.
Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?
I think that's close but not quite - and depends on how literal you are with the rules. Technically - a model with a pistol can fire it's pistol, but only ever at the closest unit and can still shoot if other friendly models within 1" of their target enemy unit. It's implied this is in addition to normal shooting and/or when the firing model/unit is within that 1" zone, but this isn't specified. Close Combat isn't required either, though it would be a rare case where models are within 1" of each other and not in close combat.
Yeah, unless I'm being really dense here, I can't really see any circumstances where you're going to be able to target a unit with pistols unless you're already in CC with that unit.
Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.
Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?
I think that's close but not quite - and depends on how literal you are with the rules. Technically - a model with a pistol can fire it's pistol, but only ever at the closest unit and can still shoot if other friendly models within 1" of their target enemy unit. It's implied this is in addition to normal shooting and/or when the firing model/unit is within that 1" zone, but this isn't specified. Close Combat isn't required either, though it would be a rare case where models are within 1" of each other and not in close combat.
Yeah, unless I'm being really dense here, I can't really see any circumstances where you're going to be able to target a unit with pistols unless you're already in CC with that unit.
The closest unit could still be several inches away, it’s fairly common to shoot the unit before you charge it. Not here of course, you don’t care if you kill the drop pod, and get defended if you don’t unless the other player comes over to counter charge you.
Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.
Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?
I think that's close but not quite - and depends on how literal you are with the rules. Technically - a model with a pistol can fire it's pistol, but only ever at the closest unit and can still shoot if other friendly models within 1" of their target enemy unit. It's implied this is in addition to normal shooting and/or when the firing model/unit is within that 1" zone, but this isn't specified. Close Combat isn't required either, though it would be a rare case where models are within 1" of each other and not in close combat.
Yeah, unless I'm being really dense here, I can't really see any circumstances where you're going to be able to target a unit with pistols unless you're already in CC with that unit.
The closest unit could still be several inches away, it’s fairly common to shoot the unit before you charge it. Not here of course, you don’t care if you kill the drop pod, and get defended if you don’t unless the other player comes over to counter charge you.
'A model can fire a Pistol even if there are enemy units within 1" of its own unit, but it must target the closest enemy unit. In such circumstances, the model can shoot its Pistol even if other friendly units are within 1" of the same enemy unit.'
As per 'in such circumstances' the latter part of this rule only applies if the conditions of the first part (shooting when there are enemy units within 1"). So no shooting into combat involving enemy units unless you're also in that combat, surely?
Yeah, unless I'm being really dense here, I can't really see any circumstances where you're going to be able to target a unit with pistols unless you're already in CC with that unit.
Tell me, the three CSM with chainswords and bolt pistols, closer to the ratlings than the BA, who do they have to shoot, when firing their pistols ? Do they have to shoot the BA, who are within 1" of their unit ?
You can still charge them or pile into them and be safe from shooting.
Riptides will pile into Drop Pods and be safe.
Knights will kill the stuff coming out of drop pods, pile in and be safe.
Ravagers will charge into Drop Pods and be safe.
Genestealers and GSC Cult stuff will gently touch a drop pod with the last model out of 20+ and be safe.
Plaguebearer blobs will just touch a Drop Pod and be safe.
If you bring Drop Pods, you're basically giving your opponent some free Slaanesh Mirrors/Fiends/Wyches to safe themselves into close combat without needing to wrap models.
The closest unit could still be several inches away, it’s fairly common to shoot the unit before you charge it. Not here of course, you don’t care if you kill the drop pod, and get defended if you don’t unless the other player comes over to counter charge you.
'A model can fire a Pistol even if there are enemy units within 1" of its own unit, but it must target the closest enemy unit. In such circumstances, the model can shoot its Pistol even if other friendly units are within 1" of the same enemy unit.'
As per 'in such circumstances' the latter part of this rule only applies if the conditions of the first part (shooting when there are enemy units within 1"). So no shooting into combat involving enemy units unless you're also in that combat, surely?
I see, you don’t see how a unit can shoot an enemy unit in CC, unless they were already in CC with it. There’s probably and edge case where it can happen when the rules break down after crashing into each other.
The closest unit could still be several inches away, it’s fairly common to shoot the unit before you charge it. Not here of course, you don’t care if you kill the drop pod, and get defended if you don’t unless the other player comes over to counter charge you.
'A model can fire a Pistol even if there are enemy units within 1" of its own unit, but it must target the closest enemy unit. In such circumstances, the model can shoot its Pistol even if other friendly units are within 1" of the same enemy unit.'
As per 'in such circumstances' the latter part of this rule only applies if the conditions of the first part (shooting when there are enemy units within 1"). So no shooting into combat involving enemy units unless you're also in that combat, surely?
I see, you don’t see how a unit can shoot an enemy unit in CC, unless they were already in CC with it. There’s probably and edge case where it can happen when the rules break down after crashing into each other.
Right, firstly if I attribute something to someone else I apologise.
Right pistols. As long as I target the closest unit I can fire a pistol at a unit even if it is within 1" of a friendly model. Whether that is RaI, I leave it open, however RaW its rather open to abuse but I can shoot models as long as they are the closest target. (P5) your example, does not allow them to target the unit of BA and so must target the ratlings.
Breton, the original post that I replied to only stated that charging the doors would challenge control of the objective, there was no mention of piling into the centre of the model. Also in one of the other review threads, I seem to recall someone saying that SM got a new stratagem where rather than rolling for an explosion a model with POTMS could decide to auto explode.
Multiple factions already can turn 1 Ds. I'm actually a big fan of units being able to; in fact I'm a fan of units doing basically anything....as long as they pay the required point cost that more or less fair.
This fixes my issue with DMC and da jump imo, where the drop pod acts as a tax for a unit rather then a limited but free spell/relic. This way if it's to busted the resolution is simple, up the cost of pods in chapter approved until there fair.
It's an obvious rules favoritism, but also pretty innocent one. Pods can still probably harm marine player more than the enemy. Unless GW would start making 10 men Primaris pods, it's harmless.
Just compare it to other infiltration or move enhancing options - marines don't actually need pods to do turn 1 charges or shoot what they want I think.
They do... you have to pay the points to take the characters to do thos ethings and or CP for relics... Nobody gets a free ride my friend. And none of those things are the same as true DS where the units are protected in case you don't go first..
You really under estimate how much of board control advantage it gives you to DS a big ass footprint model plus payload T1 don't you?
Argive wrote: They do... you have to pay the points to take the characters to do thos ethings and or CP for relics... Nobody gets a free ride my friend.
And none of those things are the same as true DS where the units are protected in case you don't go first..
You really under estimate how much of board control advantage it gives you to DS a big ass footprint model plus payload T1 don't you?
No because it could be done before 1-2 editions ago, and all the complaints were the non-Marine units using them.
At most there is gonna be complaints about Grav Devastators. That's really it.
Argive wrote: They do... you have to pay the points to take the characters to do thos ethings and or CP for relics... Nobody gets a free ride my friend.
And none of those things are the same as true DS where the units are protected in case you don't go first..
You really under estimate how much of board control advantage it gives you to DS a big ass footprint model plus payload T1 don't you?
No because it could be done before 1-2 editions ago, and all the complaints were the non-Marine units using them.
At most there is gonna be complaints about Grav Devastators. That's really it.
For now.
Then the new Primaris Drop pod arrives, say, the 'Inductinator', and you can suddenly drop in more.
Argive wrote: They do... you have to pay the points to take the characters to do thos ethings and or CP for relics... Nobody gets a free ride my friend.
And none of those things are the same as true DS where the units are protected in case you don't go first..
You really under estimate how much of board control advantage it gives you to DS a big ass footprint model plus payload T1 don't you?
No because it could be done before 1-2 editions ago, and all the complaints were the non-Marine units using them.
At most there is gonna be complaints about Grav Devastators. That's really it.
For now.
Then the new Primaris Drop pod arrives, say, the 'Inductinator', and you can suddenly drop in more.
which proably won't occur before the next codex so... *shrugs*
Argive wrote: They do... you have to pay the points to take the characters to do thos ethings and or CP for relics... Nobody gets a free ride my friend.
And none of those things are the same as true DS where the units are protected in case you don't go first..
You really under estimate how much of board control advantage it gives you to DS a big ass footprint model plus payload T1 don't you?
No because it could be done before 1-2 editions ago, and all the complaints were the non-Marine units using them.
At most there is gonna be complaints about Grav Devastators. That's really it.
Ok so we went to "but what about 2 edition ago"...
I never played 2 editions ago. I play now. And I'm only interested in this edition and I'm calling what I'm seeing bud. And what I'm seeing is strict mechanic breaking rule available to only one faction.
No single thing is breaking the game, all of those things together though??
Forgive me for not buying the "it doesn't matter because marines suck anyway".
Argive wrote: They do... you have to pay the points to take the characters to do thos ethings and or CP for relics... Nobody gets a free ride my friend.
And none of those things are the same as true DS where the units are protected in case you don't go first..
You really under estimate how much of board control advantage it gives you to DS a big ass footprint model plus payload T1 don't you?
No because it could be done before 1-2 editions ago, and all the complaints were the non-Marine units using them.
At most there is gonna be complaints about Grav Devastators. That's really it.
Ok so we went to "but what about 2 edition ago"...
I never played 2 editions ago. I play now. And I'm only interested in this edition and I'm calling what I'm seeing bud. And what I'm seeing is strict mechanic breaking rule available to only one faction.
No single thing is breaking the game, all of those things together though??
Forgive me for not buying the "it doesn't matter because marines suck anyway".
I would advise you to withhold judgement until we see how it all works together. I've played 40K long eneugh to know that first glance of a codex via spoilers may not tell the full story. every codex via the previews looks awesome. remember a lotta the guys who get a codex early and publish reviews are VENDORS. they have a vested intreast in upselling the product
Then the new Primaris Drop pod arrives, say, the 'Inductinator', and you can suddenly drop in more.
which proably won't occur before the next codex so... *shrugs*
They might release it as a White-Dwarf datasheet, or as a free PDF online so anyone of the SM armies can use it. You never know, we live in a magical time of not knowing what's to come next.
or they might release a ork unit thats horriably broken, or a necron unit, or an eldar unit, or a guard unit or a... you get the idea. worrying about what they could randomly put out is a waste of time
Breton, the original post that I replied to only stated that charging the doors would challenge control of the objective,
Charging the doors probably would. The doors aren't that long. You're probably within 3" if you're in the triangle between the doors and not in base contact yet.
Grav Cannons came down in price too, from what I've heard. But they're still S5, and -3 for D3 (average2) at best. vs S7/8 -3 D1/D2 for plasma. I think I'd rather wound on 3's and 4's than get two more shots, 1 and a third more hits.
Breton, the original post that I replied to only stated that charging the doors would challenge control of the objective,
Charging the doors probably would. The doors aren't that long. You're probably within 3" if you're in the triangle between the doors and not in base contact yet.
Grav Cannons came down in price too, from what I've heard. But they're still S5, and -3 for D3 (average2) at best. vs S7/8 -3 D1/D2 for plasma. I think I'd rather wound on 3's and 4's than get two more shots, 1 and a third more hits.
Theres a strat that lets you re-roll wounds and damage rolls for grav cannons... so.....
Theres a strat that lets you re-roll wounds and damage rolls for grav cannons... so.....
That's rerolling 5's turning into the equivalent of rolling 4's to wound, and you're not going to average much more than 2 damage. If you reroll a 2, you're as likely to get a 1 as a 3 so rerolling 1's to get a 2 or a 3 2/3 of the time will add some, but not much. 10 Combi-plas may still come out on top over 4 Grav Cannon. 9 or 8 Combi Plas with a Cap and/or Lt may come out on top but not by much. I think they're both pretty close. Part of it is I'm hesitant to drop a Dev Squad on your side of the board. I want them behind my lines. If it's just one Grav Cannon in a Vet or Tac Squad, maybe but then it's still more about whats with them than the Grav Amp. And it's unlikely to have enough heavy's to benefit from Dev Doctrine. I still think I'd be more inclined to do RapidFire or Assault weapons in a SG/Vet/etc squad and use the trait/stratagem to make them Tactical Doctrine on Turn 1 if possible/necessary.
As a BA player I can already charge turn 1 with 3 units capable of killing a knight in a single turn, especially with the new shock assault rule so I see no need for drop pods at all.
Librarian Dread can move 6 + 12 physic move. Then have 3+2d6 charge with reroll to charge. Thats 21 inch +2d6 with reroll. Can have up to 10 attacks that hit and wound on 2+ with ap4 and flat 3 damage and can fight again if it dies.
Can use 2 stratagems to DS a JP unit t1 and have a 3d6 charge. Vanguard vets or Sanguinary Guard works well with this or a smash captain.
Can also have a 12+d6 move before the first turn on a smash captain or DC unit and then move 12 + 2d6 charge turn 1 for 24 +3d6 movement.
Can quite reliable t1 charge with about 150pts(lib dread or mephiston) + 350pts(full dc unit) +350pts (SG unit) for 850pts of models that wreck anything in melee and that without a single pod. Still BA is quite bad despite this and just shows that marine t1 charges is not a problem at all.
If we could have guard levels of artillery and somehow clear their screens/ds deny before end of t1 movementbit would be a different scenario. But unless you face pure knights any list can easily deny the value of the drop pod. Its not like the old pods you could ds anywhere as long as the model could fit. Having to be 9 inches away is already defeating most of the advantage.
Or a name suggesting it us the ultimate power in the 40k universe.
"Investor"
" a class of space marines which have the role of securing funding and equipment for the order.
Their mark XI combat power suit allows them to dazzle their opponent and gain favourable trade rights.
Additionally all of them are equipped with a wanrant of trade of gulliman, giving them even more power then a regular rogue trader warrant. "
Then the new Primaris Drop pod arrives, say, the 'Inductinator', and you can suddenly drop in more.
which proably won't occur before the next codex so... *shrugs*
They might release it as a White-Dwarf datasheet, or as a free PDF online so anyone of the SM armies can use it. You never know, we live in a magical time of not knowing what's to come next.
Right. Instead of hyping the Primaris Drop Pod - or just letting Primaris ride in the current drop pod - in the codex they just finished writing last week, they're going to release a new model all on it's lonesome?
I have skimmed the release notes, and they seem, to me at least, to be attempting to throw the OldBois some love with this, not that it will help. From what I read, it can't take Primaris, or Terminators, or anything other than standard troops.
This cuts out Centurions, or anything that would be useful for DSing turn 1 really. Great, you have a squad of vets and maybe an LT. Not gonna lie, that's 80pts for 1/2 units that get within 9" of the enemy, or their back field, that will be dead by turn 2 and likely won't earn their points back.
I may be wrong, but I don't see these flying off the shelves and onto tables. Primaris is king now, and these are attempts to put lipstick on a corpse.
I think GW's plan at the start of 8th was to replace marines with primaris but they have adapted to the market not being complient and just doing as it was told.
They are embracing the idea of having mixed marines apparently the fluff section of the new codex even talks about making mixed chapters due to the utility of old marines.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have skimmed the release notes, and they seem, to me at least, to be attempting to throw the OldBois some love with this, not that it will help. From what I read, it can't take Primaris, or Terminators, or anything other than standard troops.
This cuts out Centurions, or anything that would be useful for DSing turn 1 really. Great, you have a squad of vets and maybe an LT. Not gonna lie, that's 80pts for 1/2 units that get within 9" of the enemy, or their back field, that will be dead by turn 2 and likely won't earn their points back.
I may be wrong, but I don't see these flying off the shelves and onto tables. Primaris is king now, and these are attempts to put lipstick on a corpse.
Drop Pod swarms will, thankfully, not be making a return. Bell of Lost Souls posted the full rule today - it ignores the entire Tactical Restraint rule. That means not only can you come down turn 1, but you also don't need to come down by turn 3. Again, none of this makes Drop Pods crazy broken or anything, but it is a tool in the toolbelt. Taking a single Drop Pod in a list with a squad inside will be good because of what it helps you achieve, and not in how they kill stuff.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have skimmed the release notes, and they seem, to me at least, to be attempting to throw the OldBois some love with this, not that it will help. From what I read, it can't take Primaris, or Terminators, or anything other than standard troops.
This cuts out Centurions, or anything that would be useful for DSing turn 1 really. Great, you have a squad of vets and maybe an LT. Not gonna lie, that's 80pts for 1/2 units that get within 9" of the enemy, or their back field, that will be dead by turn 2 and likely won't earn their points back.
I may be wrong, but I don't see these flying off the shelves and onto tables. Primaris is king now, and these are attempts to put lipstick on a corpse.
Potentially* - - - UM ability to move and fire Heavy Weapons without penalty, +Dev squads with (now cheaper) Grav Cannons, plus Amp Strat for reroll wounds and damage with Grav weapons, plus Devastator Doctrine for -4 AP.
Optionally - plus Chapter Master (reduced CP cost) with improved re-roll ability.
.888 x .555 x 2.5 x 20 = 24.6 (rough numbers, cherub but no Signum bonus) 24ish wounds against Leman Russ targets from just one Devastator squad.
So whats to stop someone from bringing a gigantic amount of drop pods with nobody inside, and making a wall across the opponents board to stop them from moving up on turn one if you go first? This was a friend of mine's fear, and apparently spending 500+ points for basically no firepower isnt enough to sway them otherwise that this will break the meta.
What are some other flaws with this tactic besides that, which stops this from being broken?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have skimmed the release notes, and they seem, to me at least, to be attempting to throw the OldBois some love with this, not that it will help. From what I read, it can't take Primaris, or Terminators, or anything other than standard troops.
This cuts out Centurions, or anything that would be useful for DSing turn 1 really. Great, you have a squad of vets and maybe an LT. Not gonna lie, that's 80pts for 1/2 units that get within 9" of the enemy, or their back field, that will be dead by turn 2 and likely won't earn their points back.
I may be wrong, but I don't see these flying off the shelves and onto tables. Primaris is king now, and these are attempts to put lipstick on a corpse.
Potentially* - - - UM ability to move and fire Heavy Weapons without penalty, +Dev squads with (now cheaper) Grav Cannons, plus Amp Strat for reroll wounds and damage with Grav weapons, plus Devastator Doctrine for -4 AP.
Which requires Tac Doctrine to be up. Which requires Turn 2, unless there's a stratagem I'm not familiar with.
(And I'd love it if UM had a stratagem that interacted with Doctrines - something like "Gain the benefit of any one doctrine for this turn, regardless of what turn/doctrine you're on".)
*wait until book/s
Ohgodpleasedothis
As for the OP, I'm super glad Pods can arrive T1 again. I wish it were only half, but I'd prefer all over none. That said, I haven't read the book. We'll see.
That, and Primaris - at least some of them, like Intercessors - really should be allowed to Pod in.
Between a Tac points cut, Pods T1, and effectively A2 across the board, it sounds like GW has done a lot to make RealMarines less bad in a lot of ways. I doubt they're top tier now, but they're certainly not as garbage. We'll see how much they changed when the book hits the meta.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have skimmed the release notes, and they seem, to me at least, to be attempting to throw the OldBois some love with this, not that it will help. From what I read, it can't take Primaris, or Terminators, or anything other than standard troops.
This cuts out Centurions, or anything that would be useful for DSing turn 1 really. Great, you have a squad of vets and maybe an LT. Not gonna lie, that's 80pts for 1/2 units that get within 9" of the enemy, or their back field, that will be dead by turn 2 and likely won't earn their points back.
I may be wrong, but I don't see these flying off the shelves and onto tables. Primaris is king now, and these are attempts to put lipstick on a corpse.
Potentially* - - - UM ability to move and fire Heavy Weapons without penalty, +Dev squads with (now cheaper) Grav Cannons, plus Amp Strat for reroll wounds and damage with Grav weapons, plus Devastator Doctrine for -4 AP.
Which requires Tac Doctrine to be up. Which requires Turn 2, unless there's a stratagem I'm not familiar with.
(And I'd love it if UM had a stratagem that interacted with Doctrines - something like "Gain the benefit of any one doctrine for this turn, regardless of what turn/doctrine you're on".)
*wait until book/s
Ohgodpleasedothis
As for the OP, I'm super glad Pods can arrive T1 again. I wish it were only half, but I'd prefer all over none. That said, I haven't read the book. We'll see.
That, and Primaris - at least some of them, like Intercessors - really should be allowed to Pod in.
Between a Tac points cut, Pods T1, and effectively A2 across the board, it sounds like GW has done a lot to make RealMarines less bad in a lot of ways. I doubt they're top tier now, but they're certainly not as garbage. We'll see how much they changed when the book hits the meta.
Yeah I getcha, Even with the -1 for moving, if the Cherub is still there you're getting pretty close to the same result. Even closer if the new rerolls mechanic pans out. But yeah, wait and see.
There already looks like there's a Strat that works with Doctrines in the base book, from the writeup.
vaklor4 wrote: So whats to stop someone from bringing a gigantic amount of drop pods with nobody inside, and making a wall across the opponents board to stop them from moving up on turn one if you go first? This was a friend of mine's fear, and apparently spending 500+ points for basically no firepower isnt enough to sway them otherwise that this will break the meta.
What are some other flaws with this tactic besides that, which stops this from being broken?
It's not a bug, it's a feature!
Hey, this is a suggestion I've already made to a friend who has a few pods and has only used them twice this edition. With Turn 1 DS, if he goes first, he can indeed use these to create a LoS blocking wall. I think it's very clever, but I don't know if it's good. It's 5pts shy of 200 to do this, and they can be charged and give your opponent almost as much protection as they give to you. So, again, I really don't think that's a broken thing to do. It's a tool in the toolbox. If your friends are worried, remind them that your opponent can't see through the line of drop pods either - line of sight cuts both ways. They may also want to invest in units with some kind of Scouting feature if this becomes an issue (which I wouldn't worry about until it actually does become an issue, since it probably won't). Anything that takes up space before turn 1 will vastly reduce the effectiveness of such a wall.
vaklor4 wrote: So whats to stop someone from bringing a gigantic amount of drop pods with nobody inside, and making a wall across the opponents board to stop them from moving up on turn one if you go first? This was a friend of mine's fear, and apparently spending 500+ points for basically no firepower isnt enough to sway them otherwise that this will break the meta.
What are some other flaws with this tactic besides that, which stops this from being broken?
my orks would love this. charge the drop pods, keep power claws out of range before the consolidate next turn move. blow up the drop pod during the opponent turn with a power claw, consolidate towards the closest unit and then continue moving forward. its like a speed boost and protection from my opponents shooting for a turn.
^I've definitely used pods before to block movement. Imo that's the most egregious thing you can do with them, as the doors have been ruled (iirc) as movement blockers. So if there's some Nids you want to halt for a turn, you can do that. Unfortunately/fortunately, they can charge the pods and "hide", although you can still shoot units beyond them.
It's the sort of thing which isn't game breaking, but is occasionally useful.
Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore. This is like coming out and buffing Ratlings to make them S5 rifles.
Speaking of which, did all sniper rifles go to S5, or just marine sniper rifles? Because my command squads might want to go sniper.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore.
This is a buff for a model that a lot of people own, for an army that even more people own and still enjoy. Plus, that model has probably already had it's costs met, any more Pod sales are probably just gravy for GW.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore.
This is a buff for a model that a lot of people own, for an army that even more people own and still enjoy. Plus, that model has probably already had it's costs met, any more Pod sales are probably just gravy for GW.
I refuse to spend a dime on models that WILL be squatted sooner than later. Let me know when my primaris can ride in them, otherwise, pass.
Yeah, Primaris will get a super Pod and it will cost like $120. You're welcome to it
No Primaris won't get a drop pod they'll get a deep striking bunker! I'm totally calling this it'll be a bunker that you don't have get out of unless it's destroyed but you can shoot out of it's windows
Theres a strat that lets you re-roll wounds and damage rolls for grav cannons... so.....
That's rerolling 5's turning into the equivalent of rolling 4's to wound, and you're not going to average much more than 2 damage. If you reroll a 2, you're as likely to get a 1 as a 3 so rerolling 1's to get a 2 or a 3 2/3 of the time will add some, but not much. 10 Combi-plas may still come out on top over 4 Grav Cannon. 9 or 8 Combi Plas with a Cap and/or Lt may come out on top but not by much. I think they're both pretty close. Part of it is I'm hesitant to drop a Dev Squad on your side of the board. I want them behind my lines. If it's just one Grav Cannon in a Vet or Tac Squad, maybe but then it's still more about whats with them than the Grav Amp. And it's unlikely to have enough heavy's to benefit from Dev Doctrine. I still think I'd be more inclined to do RapidFire or Assault weapons in a SG/Vet/etc squad and use the trait/stratagem to make them Tactical Doctrine on Turn 1 if possible/necessary.
If SG are 13 that's 25 points or 250 for the squad.
5 Devs w/ GC, Cherub, & Combiplas will be 151.
I refuse to spend a dime on models that WILL be squatted sooner than later. Let me know when my primaris can ride in them, otherwise, pass.
Yeah, Primaris will get a super Pod and it will cost like $120. You're welcome to it
No Primaris won't get a drop pod they'll get a deep striking bunker! I'm totally calling this it'll be a bunker that you don't have get out of unless it's destroyed but you can shoot out of it's windows
Now you're talking! And it'll be covered in little missile barrage pods and heavy stubbers!
I refuse to spend a dime on models that WILL be squatted sooner than later. Let me know when my primaris can ride in them, otherwise, pass.
Yeah, Primaris will get a super Pod and it will cost like $120. You're welcome to it
No Primaris won't get a drop pod they'll get a deep striking bunker! I'm totally calling this it'll be a bunker that you don't have get out of unless it's destroyed but you can shoot out of it's windows
Now you're talking! And it'll be covered in little missile barrage pods and heavy stubbers!
I feel like fragstorm grenade launchers would be more fitting, and then it'll have a rule so passengers can fire overwatch for extra cheese haha
Argive wrote: They do... you have to pay the points to take the characters to do thos ethings and or CP for relics... Nobody gets a free ride my friend.
And none of those things are the same as true DS where the units are protected in case you don't go first..
You really under estimate how much of board control advantage it gives you to DS a big ass footprint model plus payload T1 don't you?
1: Not really; most chaos lists these days bring a TSDP even when there not using the crystal. On top of that with how detachments work you have HQ, thats not tax.
2: A relic/ paying cp for something is an entirely different mechanic then paying points. If your pure TS the only two worthwhile relic is the helm(which doesnt count because its job is giving you cp not taxing it) ad the DMC. The relic slot (which you get a free one also) is relatively uncontested (as an opportunity cost) where as points are always a opportunity cost mechanic. On top of that even if you where to do a bizaro cp- point cost conversion a relic would be significantly less then 63(drop pod?) points. It always ruins certain units, tzaangors get outcompeted by deamon troops but they stay strong purely because of the DMC. If the DMC went away GW could actually buff tzaangors in some way and it would be fine; as it stands there a unit that cant be tampered with. By putting the cost of the unit (for what it does) in the unit and not outside forces (relics, psychic powers) it lets you balance the unit as a unit. This is why eldar are super strong even though they have only received nerfs really; there inherent power comes from strong stratagems and guide/doom/jinx etc and not there datasheets (which without before mentioned things are actually quite bad)
3: errrrr no I don't underestimate how powerful it is? I have no idea where you got that idea from. In fact its the contrary why i like its existence. I like doing powerful things on the tabletop and I want everyone to have access to powerful things.Games where every mechanic you utilize feels lukewarm are A) harder to get a diverse enough healthy meta and B) feel bland to play imo.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore. This is like coming out and buffing Ratlings to make them S5 rifles.
Fezzik... a lot of people own a LOT of drop pods. Maybe you haven't been around long enough, but just last edition, Drop Pod spam was a big deal, and every Marine player I knew owned at least 3 of them, with some people owning, like, 8 of them. Believe me, they're out there. You just haven't seen them used, but many people own these. A better comparison would be to say this is like learning that a newly released TV has a bonus for using its RCA connectors. Everyone has them, but almost no one uses them, and at the moment it's still questionable as to whether or not this change is enough to get people on board with using them.
My only gripe with the return of pods is the return of the doors up vs doors down. When no one took them it didn’t really matter.
IMO, GW should have ruled doors up/down your choice for appearance and drawing Los thru the pod, but doors don’t block movement. Variable base size is weird and it’s silly that no one can step on a ramp that’s designed to be stepped on.
Edit: ...okay, I think I see the reason, they probably don’t want a case where opponents can set models on your drop pod model without your permission. But game rulewise it’s still nuts.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore. This is like coming out and buffing Ratlings to make them S5 rifles.
Fezzik... a lot of people own a LOT of drop pods. Maybe you haven't been around long enough, but just last edition, Drop Pod spam was a big deal, and every Marine player I knew owned at least 3 of them, with some people owning, like, 8 of them. Believe me, they're out there. You just haven't seen them used, but many people own these. A better comparison would be to say this is like learning that a newly released TV has a bonus for using its RCA connectors. Everyone has them, but almost no one uses them, and at the moment it's still questionable as to whether or not this change is enough to get people on board with using them.
I'm willing to admit I'm wrong. But does anyone really expect to break out 3, because that's the rule now, and start turn 1 DSing, I'm guessing Dev squads, into the opponents back field?
Then again, I have zero idea what GW plans with the remaining new releases for codices, there might be a new faction bonus to 2 year old strategies from last edition. But I doubt it. GW seems laser focused on the new toys.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore. This is like coming out and buffing Ratlings to make them S5 rifles.
Fezzik... a lot of people own a LOT of drop pods. Maybe you haven't been around long enough, but just last edition, Drop Pod spam was a big deal, and every Marine player I knew owned at least 3 of them, with some people owning, like, 8 of them. Believe me, they're out there. You just haven't seen them used, but many people own these. A better comparison would be to say this is like learning that a newly released TV has a bonus for using its RCA connectors. Everyone has them, but almost no one uses them, and at the moment it's still questionable as to whether or not this change is enough to get people on board with using them.
I'm willing to admit I'm wrong. But does anyone really expect to break out 3, because that's the rule now, and start turn 1 DSing, I'm guessing Dev squads, into the opponents back field?
Then again, I have zero idea what GW plans with the remaining new releases for codices, there might be a new faction bonus to 2 year old strategies from last edition. But I doubt it. GW seems laser focused on the new toys.
Rule of 3 doesn't apply to dedicated transports, so there's no max Drop Pods (except they can't exceed the number of other units in the same detachment of course - but you presumably want something for them to transport so that shouldn't be an issue).
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore.
I've owned & used Drop Pods since 2e.
1st it was the Armorcast ones. Then I added 1 of each when Forge World made them (regular, Deathwind - missle & assault cannon, dreadnaught). I added several more when GW introduced the plastic kit.
Over the years I added a few more dreadnought pods.
Last year I completely replaced every Armorcast one in my collection.
And in the next few months? I'm going to add enough FW dreadnought pods so that each of my dreads has their own dedicated ride.
I have a lot of drop pods....
So just because YOU don't use the things, or see them being used, doesn't mean those rules improvements won't be appreciated.
I refuse to spend a dime on models that WILL be squatted sooner than later. Let me know when my primaris can ride in them, otherwise, pass.
Yeah, Primaris will get a super Pod and it will cost like $120. You're welcome to it
No Primaris won't get a drop pod they'll get a deep striking bunker! I'm totally calling this it'll be a bunker that you don't have get out of unless it's destroyed but you can shoot out of it's windows
Now you're talking! And it'll be covered in little missile barrage pods and heavy stubbers!
I feel like fragstorm grenade launchers would be more fitting, and then it'll have a rule so passengers can fire overwatch for extra cheese haha
I'm willing to admit I'm wrong. But does anyone really expect to break out 3, because that's the rule now, and start turn 1 DSing, I'm guessing Dev squads, into the opponents back field?
I refuse to spend a dime on models that WILL be squatted sooner than later. Let me know when my primaris can ride in them, otherwise, pass.
Yeah, Primaris will get a super Pod and it will cost like $120. You're welcome to it
No Primaris won't get a drop pod they'll get a deep striking bunker! I'm totally calling this it'll be a bunker that you don't have get out of unless it's destroyed but you can shoot out of it's windows
Now you're talking! And it'll be covered in little missile barrage pods and heavy stubbers!
I feel like fragstorm grenade launchers would be more fitting, and then it'll have a rule so passengers can fire overwatch for extra cheese haha
This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Drop Pods deep striking turn 1 were part of the rules day 1.
All I know.. is i'd love an option to put a 10 man Viorla breacher team into a drop pod to drop then onto the other side turn 1, disembark them w/n 5" and double tap them at the closest unit for only 65 extra points. Maybe not tournament grade, but would be fun/totally worth it at FLG fridays, and would be mostly unexpected.
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Drop Pods deep striking turn 1 were part of the rules day 1.
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Sadly this is likely the best build. Give it the rocket or the AA stubber.
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Venoms are open topped, right? That makes it better right there. And -1 to hit built in. Seriously? Drukhari are still gonna stomp marines after this codex.
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Drop Pods deep striking turn 1 were part of the rules day 1.
You know what i mean, from when DSing turn 2 started
Daedalus81 wrote:
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
6 of that setup is half your army before weapons.
They are 80pts base before weapons, 6 will not be 1/2 your army, more like 700pts of your 2k., yeah i know thats close to 1/2 but its still 300pts difference. Im guessing 20pts for weapons. Also remember Tacs are going down, and so are some of the wargear.
You're really trying to say 11 Wounds at T7 with a 4++ (shooting and cc) are comparable to 6 wounds at T5 and a 5++ vs. shooting only?
Not even considering the assault vehicle rule, the -2 to charge, etc.., etc...
-1 is still a great defense. Plasma still kills itself, regular chapter masters can't reroll it. And given that the transport turns off its expensive cargo, I'd say it is comparable. Space marines not contributing is a big deal.
Martel732 wrote: Venoms are open topped, right? That makes it better right there. And -1 to hit built in. Seriously? Drukhari are still gonna stomp marines after this codex.
While very true, its still 75pts vs 95-100pts for double the survivability, +2 toughness, +5 wounds, and still able to get Invul that is 4+ vs 5+, -1 to hit isnt all that, there are so many plus to hits and re-rolls, heck even the new Impolsor can get a weapon with +1 to hit against fly.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore. This is like coming out and buffing Ratlings to make them S5 rifles.
Speaking of which, did all sniper rifles go to S5, or just marine sniper rifles? Because my command squads might want to go sniper.
No one owns a drop pod and stores don't carry them? This is probably takes the cake in claims I've heard on dakka. Almost every marine player owns at least one, every game store I've ever been to including GW in NYC and Philie have them on the shelves and this codex gave a lot of love to the classic marine line. I'm more convinced than ever it'll be a long while till they go away.
I have to say, after having to fight certain posters for days about " Drop pods are the worthless junk !! you'll never win with them and basic troop marines !! "
These marine codex changes please me greatly, it looks like maybe drop pods may have some merit, especially if you can go first, being able to drop in turn 1 once more will feel good at the least being the only exception to that.
I don't think this makes drop pods bad or even makes a bad change. Some select units having turn 1 deep strike won't destroy the game, the thing that destroyed the turn 1 reserves was the fact there were no limitations, and some armies that lived for the hot drop were too cheap for what they did.
It was overall a mess but some units using the turn 1 hot drop should be fine. I doubt even with this Drop pods will slam over the top scene, but it does make using them and old marines have a bit more bite.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore. This is like coming out and buffing Ratlings to make them S5 rifles.
.
Where do you come up with this stuff?
First it's Impulsors will be close to 200pts, you guys are deluding yourself. And now this.
I own a drop pod and my local GW has at least 4 on the shelf last time I looked (might be gone now though)
dakka absolutes are always golden entertainment! Don't know who takes the cake right now, you or Xenomancers.
I refuse to spend a dime on models that WILL be squatted sooner than later. Let me know when my primaris can ride in them, otherwise, pass.
Yeah, Primaris will get a super Pod and it will cost like $120. You're welcome to it
No Primaris won't get a drop pod they'll get a deep striking bunker! I'm totally calling this it'll be a bunker that you don't have get out of unless it's destroyed but you can shoot out of it's windows
Now you're talking! And it'll be covered in little missile barrage pods and heavy stubbers!
I feel like fragstorm grenade launchers would be more fitting, and then it'll have a rule so passengers can fire overwatch for extra cheese haha
.... depending on the cost I'd take one... seriously a deployable bunker could be pretty awesome
I scimmed all so idk if addressed (If so let me have it).
What happens if I want to take say (not looking at points, say around 2k) say 4 HQs 6 TROOPS 2 HEAVY SUPPORTS in 8 Drop Pods (so 2x battalions) entire army is in Drop pod assault. So if Enemy gets first turn will be like back ages ago and nothing on the field? or is it first Battle round turn all have to drop?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have skimmed the release notes, and they seem, to me at least, to be attempting to throw the OldBois some love with this, not that it will help. From what I read, it can't take Primaris, or Terminators, or anything other than standard troops.
This cuts out Centurions, or anything that would be useful for DSing turn 1 really. Great, you have a squad of vets and maybe an LT. Not gonna lie, that's 80pts for 1/2 units that get within 9" of the enemy, or their back field, that will be dead by turn 2 and likely won't earn their points back.
I may be wrong, but I don't see these flying off the shelves and onto tables. Primaris is king now, and these are attempts to put lipstick on a corpse.
Well every time they revise the break down more Primaris/1.0 barriers as well. I've heard the Intercessor Sarge can have a Thunderhammer hammer now. I have a strong suspicion they're going to let Primaris in a Drop Pod sooner rather than later.
I'll even add that I would be unlikely to Pod on Turn 1 - definitely not in the backfield. Someone else came up with the idea of Pod'ing Turn 1 into your own side of the board for an estimated 20 inch DS denial and that wasn't a bad idea after you do the Square Inch Math - and they should get credit, not I. A couple empty Pods landing on your own side of the board - Or landing on your own side of the board with the unit slated to camp that objective wouldn't suck too much for the points and would force your opponent to spend turns deleted the drop pods delaying their Deep Strike, or to Deep Strike into the kill box you chose for them. On turn 1, Dev Doctrine is active, and while I think it's possible to give one unit Tactical Doctrine it's Warlord Trait or CP costly, so you're spending valuable CP, or all but handing Slay The Warlord to your opponent.
I'd still Pod on turn 2 after I've moved from Dev to Tactical Doctrine.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
vaklor4 wrote: So whats to stop someone from bringing a gigantic amount of drop pods with nobody inside, and making a wall across the opponents board to stop them from moving up on turn one if you go first? This was a friend of mine's fear, and apparently spending 500+ points for basically no firepower isnt enough to sway them otherwise that this will break the meta.
What are some other flaws with this tactic besides that, which stops this from being broken?
Simply - charge the drop pods. Now you can't be shot until you get rid of them - and they can't counter charge because they can't go through their own model if the models were close enough to prevent you from going through, unless you deep strike on their side - which has all the advantages of the alpha strike problem - you pick when and where, and that's always going to be in your VP favor if you know what you're doing.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have skimmed the release notes, and they seem, to me at least, to be attempting to throw the OldBois some love with this, not that it will help. From what I read, it can't take Primaris, or Terminators, or anything other than standard troops.
This cuts out Centurions, or anything that would be useful for DSing turn 1 really. Great, you have a squad of vets and maybe an LT. Not gonna lie, that's 80pts for 1/2 units that get within 9" of the enemy, or their back field, that will be dead by turn 2 and likely won't earn their points back.
I may be wrong, but I don't see these flying off the shelves and onto tables. Primaris is king now, and these are attempts to put lipstick on a corpse.
Potentially* - - - UM ability to move and fire Heavy Weapons without penalty, +Dev squads with (now cheaper) Grav Cannons, plus Amp Strat for reroll wounds and damage with Grav weapons, plus Devastator Doctrine for -4 AP.
Which requires Tac Doctrine to be up. Which requires Turn 2, unless there's a stratagem I'm not familiar with.
I can't remember if it's a Warlord Trait or a Stratagem but they can give one unit the Tactical Doctrine when they're not in the Tactical Doctrine. How it interacts with Scions is unknown - You'd have to look at the wording and how strict people are going to be with it. And if it's a Trait that requires the warlord to be nearby, you just deep struck your Warlord with a suicide squad?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore. This is like coming out and buffing Ratlings to make them S5 rifles.
Speaking of which, did all sniper rifles go to S5, or just marine sniper rifles? Because my command squads might want to go sniper.
I own four of them. Unfortunately only three are built. I've been meaning to get the fourth finished so it can go in the pre-cut hole in my transport case before I lose a piece, but other stuff has had higher priority on my bench.
If all you want is pods to cover your own side of the table, why not just use trantulas? They’re half the cost and allow you to shoot at enemies hugging them.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Not to be a meta purist, but it seems pointless to include buffs to a model no one owns and isn't sold in most stores anymore. This is like coming out and buffing Ratlings to make them S5 rifles.
Fezzik... a lot of people own a LOT of drop pods. Maybe you haven't been around long enough, but just last edition, Drop Pod spam was a big deal, and every Marine player I knew owned at least 3 of them, with some people owning, like, 8 of them. Believe me, they're out there. You just haven't seen them used, but many people own these. A better comparison would be to say this is like learning that a newly released TV has a bonus for using its RCA connectors. Everyone has them, but almost no one uses them, and at the moment it's still questionable as to whether or not this change is enough to get people on board with using them.
I'm willing to admit I'm wrong. But does anyone really expect to break out 3, because that's the rule now, and start turn 1 DSing, I'm guessing Dev squads, into the opponents back field?
Then again, I have zero idea what GW plans with the remaining new releases for codices, there might be a new faction bonus to 2 year old strategies from last edition. But I doubt it. GW seems laser focused on the new toys.
I did the Area math for a 4x6 and 4x8 board. Two drop pods dropping on your side will drastically limit how much of your side of the table is open for THEIR Deep Strike. You force them into the choice between delaying their deep strike while they eliminate your Drop Pod or Deep Striking into the only available space you left them - which should be the place they can least likely damage you from, and will eat the most damage in - or force them to Deep Strike in the corner where they'll still have to walk a month of Sunday's to get into the game.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bort wrote: If all you want is pods to cover your own side of the table, why not just use trantulas? They’re half the cost and allow you to shoot at enemies hugging them.
A) Forgeworld
B) Don't already own them like my 4 drop pods from several editions of boxed sets and such.
C) It was someone else's idea, I'm just running with the theory. Its possible Tarantulas do it better if they have a roughly 20 inch no DS circle on them like the Pod Bay Doors create.
To be fair, only if they rolled for it. Drop Pod Assault/DeathWing Assault and maybe a couple others skipped the roll. Half came in on Turn 1. That's why so many people own 3 Drop Pods. Half gave you two pods on turn 1.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AngryAngel80 wrote: I have to say, after having to fight certain posters for days about " Drop pods are the worthless junk !! you'll never win with them and basic troop marines !! "
These marine codex changes please me greatly, it looks like maybe drop pods may have some merit, especially if you can go first, being able to drop in turn 1 once more will feel good at the least being the only exception to that.
I've argued both sides of Drop Pods, because they make a great Devil's Advocate Exhibit 1.
They're not good. They're not horrible. They're Slightly Worse Than Rhino bad. They need more offensive firepower so they can't just be ignored. Instead of a Storm Bolter give them a Twin Linked 24" range Land Raider/Predator Sponson/Turrets (so Lastalon instead of Lascannon) hanging from the ceiling - they start putting out 2 Anti Tank or 10+ Anti Infantry shots a turn, and the opponent is going to start caring if that thing lives or dies on your schedule not theirs.
Turn 1 DS is unlikely to become a thing. The disconnect between Turn 1 Dev Doctrine and Deep Striking Tactical Doctrine units - or Deepstriking Devastators onto the other side of the board without support when you can DS Tactical Doctrine Units on Turn 2 with Tactical Doctrine will have most folks waiting for Turn 2 out of preference -either rules or psycholgical.
.... depending on the cost I'd take one... seriously a deployable bunker could be pretty awesome
Its not far off fluff either, there are stories about pre-fab fortifications, bunkers, and even bases/chapter Monasteries dropped from Orbit - in theory the Marines don't ride the fortification down because unlike pods, Jump Packs, and Grav Chutes its designed to hit full speed with enough impact to bury several levels down for a foundation, but we already have gravitic technology, so maybe they have a G free zone to hide in during the descent.
But you're still stuck with a fortification and the units are off the table. Maybe it will be an immobile (Drop Pod) vehicle with doors/ramps you can raise/lower (or Pretend to rather than opening the can of worms that is changing the dimensions of your model) (Open Topped) that allows them to stay on the board and shoot out of it.
Fencing your opponent in with Stupid little Droppods might actually work.
I do hope not though for obvious reasons
Fencing them in always worked. This just may work easier and better because it's cheap with an annoying but not dangerous unit with a gigantic footprint per point. 130-200 points for "You Deepstrike where I want, or you deepstrike not at all" is the theme behind all sorts of screening forces. Its one of the main reasons Knights soup Guard. They don't NEED the Loyal 32 for CP - 3+ Titanic Knights will generate enough CP to have a game - its just a gravy train freebie.
Glad to see Pods making a potential comeback.
Really iconic and definitely fit the theme and idea of Marines to a tee.
Might finally get to use the 4 I bought at the very end of 7th ed.....
Ratius wrote: Glad to see Pods making a potential comeback.
Really iconic and definitely fit the theme and idea of Marines to a tee.
Might finally get to use the 4 I bought at the very end of 7th ed.....
Oh right now it's all theory. And it's going to be tough giving up 2W Primaris (say 175% as effective as a 1W old Marine) for a Pod. Pods won't make a REAL comeback until they finally give up, give in, and give them to Primaris. Every change they make the blur the lines a little more. Eventually they're going to give Pods to Primaris. Its just a matter of time. Pods even more than Land Raiders are too iconic.
Nazrak wrote: Anything to be said for Multi-Melta Devs in a pod? I've never been much of a fan of Grav.
I've run two drop pods containing two squads of Devs with 4 multi meltas, a basic tac squad, four vets with storm bolters and chainswords (all serjeants get the same except the Devs who just get the bolters) and vulkan H'estan.
Vulkan gives doom and guide to all the meltas and everyone else gives wounds and covering fire. 8 multi meltas rerolling everything is pretty tasty. It's not a cheap thing to deploy but it is effective.
Nazrak wrote: Anything to be said for Multi-Melta Devs in a pod? I've never been much of a fan of Grav.
I've run two drop pods containing two squads of Devs with 4 multi meltas, a basic tac squad, four vets with storm bolters and chainswords (all serjeants get the same except the Devs who just get the bolters) and vulkan H'estan.
Vulkan gives doom and guide to all the meltas and everyone else gives wounds and covering fire. 8 multi meltas rerolling everything is pretty tasty. It's not a cheap thing to deploy but it is effective.
This is the dream I live for, dropping in my Salamanders and blasting away with fire and fury. A shame our flamers are only 8"... Maybe we'll get some love in our supplement and something may increase the range of flamer weapons (stratagem?).
Nazrak wrote: Anything to be said for Multi-Melta Devs in a pod? I've never been much of a fan of Grav.
I've run two drop pods containing two squads of Devs with 4 multi meltas, a basic tac squad, four vets with storm bolters and chainswords (all serjeants get the same except the Devs who just get the bolters) and vulkan H'estan.
Vulkan gives doom and guide to all the meltas and everyone else gives wounds and covering fire. 8 multi meltas rerolling everything is pretty tasty. It's not a cheap thing to deploy but it is effective.
Honestly as long as Multi-Meltas are Heavy 1 they'll never be good to use compared to Grav Cannons.
Nazrak wrote: Anything to be said for Multi-Melta Devs in a pod? I've never been much of a fan of Grav.
I've run two drop pods containing two squads of Devs with 4 multi meltas, a basic tac squad, four vets with storm bolters and chainswords (all serjeants get the same except the Devs who just get the bolters) and vulkan H'estan.
Vulkan gives doom and guide to all the meltas and everyone else gives wounds and covering fire. 8 multi meltas rerolling everything is pretty tasty. It's not a cheap thing to deploy but it is effective.
Honestly as long as Multi-Meltas are Heavy 1 they'll never be good to use compared to Grav Cannons.
I'm old enough to remember when they used to get a template (unless I'm so old that my memory's failing?), so yeah, this is always a bit disappointing to me. Probably my all-time favourite – from a "coolness" perspective – 40K weapon, but they're just a bit underwhelming.
They were a 4" diameter blast, which was quite good. ( S8 -4 AP 2D12 Damage ) Blasts could also hit every vehicle location they touched, too. Multimeltas were the most expensive weapon in the SM Heavy Weapons list, at 65 points (compared to a Missile Launchers 45).
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well the Salamanders rules are bad anyway so who cares? Run them as something else and get a better bonus.
You have impossibly high standards if you think free re-rolls on every unit and turning -1 AP into 0 AP is bad. Their supplement isn't even out anyways.
Nazrak wrote: Anything to be said for Multi-Melta Devs in a pod? I've never been much of a fan of Grav.
I've run two drop pods containing two squads of Devs with 4 multi meltas, a basic tac squad, four vets with storm bolters and chainswords (all serjeants get the same except the Devs who just get the bolters) and vulkan H'estan.
Vulkan gives doom and guide to all the meltas and everyone else gives wounds and covering fire. 8 multi meltas rerolling everything is pretty tasty. It's not a cheap thing to deploy but it is effective.
This is the dream I live for, dropping in my Salamanders and blasting away with fire and fury. A shame our flamers are only 8"... Maybe we'll get some love in our supplement and something may increase the range of flamer weapons (stratagem?).
The fact that this isnt already a thing is stupid. How in the hell does an Infernus CANNON only have 8" range? All I can say is that there better be buffs to flame, melta & hammers for the Sons of Nocturne.
Orodhen wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well the Salamanders rules are bad anyway so who cares? Run them as something else and get a better bonus.
You have impossibly high standards if you think free re-rolls on every unit and turning -1 AP into 0 AP is bad. Their supplement isn't even out anyways.
Why would I use a different armys rule, I play Salamanders? My dudes are green armoured, coal black skinned with red eyes, drake icons, geometric shapes and armed with a ton of flamers & melta. o you're right they should totesmcgotes be Ultras or better yet you should pick my army for me since anyone who plays Salamanders is obviously incompetent .
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well the Salamanders rules are bad anyway so who cares? Run them as something else and get a better bonus.
You have impossibly high standards if you think free re-rolls on every unit and turning -1 AP into 0 AP is bad. Their supplement isn't even out anyways.
The free rerolls didn't make them good in the first place. Gaining a durability rule worse than Iron Hands and Raven Guard helps them how?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
This guy gets it. You don't need to defend bad rules.
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
Because you don't get special characters or direct access to chapter relics. If you can build a list without those things then by all means go successor.
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
Because you don't get special characters or direct access to chapter relics. If you can build a list without those things then by all means go successor.
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Sadly this is likely the best build. Give it the rocket or the AA stubber.
So, I'm not 100% sure but I'm about 90% sure that you can't take the invul and an extra cannon at the same time, which means the impulsors will be pretty useless as weapon platforms in a world where people are outfitting lists to deal with knights.
They're actually pretty amazing as transports but thinking you're going to successfull razorbackrush in a world where even bottom tier armies like Grey Knights and Sisters can reliably kill 3-4 non-invul rhino chassis is a bit optimistic.
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
Because you don't get special characters or direct access to chapter relics. If you can build a list without those things then by all means go successor.
See: "using the Ultramarines rules". Get rid of the absurd idea that how you paint your models or what stories you tell about them has anything to do with their rules.
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
Because you don't get special characters or direct access to chapter relics. If you can build a list without those things then by all means go successor.
See: "using the Ultramarines rules". Get rid of the absurd idea that how you paint your models or what stories you tell about them has anything to do with their rules.
Exactly, and that's the main benefit of actually painting them as "Your dudez".
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Sadly this is likely the best build. Give it the rocket or the AA stubber.
So, I'm not 100% sure but I'm about 90% sure that you can't take the invul and an extra cannon at the same time, which means the impulsors will be pretty useless as weapon platforms in a world where people are outfitting lists to deal with knights.
They're actually pretty amazing as transports but thinking you're going to successfull razorbackrush in a world where even bottom tier armies like Grey Knights and Sisters can reliably kill 3-4 non-invul rhino chassis is a bit optimistic.
Shoot my 100 point impulsor instead of my 150 point redemptor - be my guest. As Ironhands you get a 6+ FNP and half your degrading profile. I don't think a 4++ is going to help you much when most your other units don't have one. Trading guns for invuns doesn't really make sense. Espcially when it's your best gun too. I could see the 4++ for a unit of hellblasters...maybe.
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
Because you don't get special characters or direct access to chapter relics. If you can build a list without those things then by all means go successor.
See: "using the Ultramarines rules". Get rid of the absurd idea that how you paint your models or what stories you tell about them has anything to do with their rules.
Exactly, and that's the main benefit of actually painting them as "Your dudez".
Certainly. Don't think for a second I wont be playing my Ultras as Ironhands if those rules work better for me. The rules have almost nothing to do with the fluff anyways. It upsets me that I can't use the characters for my army and stuff but...way she goes.
I do mostly agree with that. An Impulsor loaded with Hellblasters or had Aggressors been legal, yeah I’d be all over the 4++ option. One loaded with 5 Intercessors? Don’t really need it. Unless my strategy relied on them all getting up the board together, sure shoot one of the sacrificial boxes instead of a better unit.
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
One; you suggested it so I'm not sure that you are the best person to decide what Iwant to do and Two, ummmmmmm hell no. Why in the hell would I want to run my army that I've had for quite a few years, killed literally thousands of Orks & Tyranids and have painted lovingly. I should just ditch all that for a new entirely different type of army? What a jacked up way to play. O wait, I forgot who I was referring to. You should be last person anyone listens to about their own army. If I wanted to play ultras I would have, or scars, or wolves. There is absolutely zero about the other legions, chapters etc that remotely interest me.
If I want to play a different type of army, I have my Metalica & Flawless Host currently. Soon Sororitas will join.
bort wrote: ... sure shoot one of the sacrificial boxes instead of a better unit.
I almost feel like this is a strength in of itself. 100pt box that seems scary because of it's cargo. If even a few units divert shooting at it, that helps the rest of your force endure the first turn
bort wrote: ... sure shoot one of the sacrificial boxes instead of a better unit.
I almost feel like this is a strength in of itself. 100pt box that seems scary because of it's cargo. If even a few units divert shooting at it, that helps the rest of your force endure the first turn
Amishprn86 wrote: This is 100% fine and should have been a part of the rules day 1, i'm more mad about the Implosor than the drop pods, that thing is so freaking cheap, its only like 10pts more than a Venom.....
If i was a marine i would just spam Impolsors and 5mans, i'd have 5-6 of them easily.
Sadly this is likely the best build. Give it the rocket or the AA stubber.
So, I'm not 100% sure but I'm about 90% sure that you can't take the invul and an extra cannon at the same time, which means the impulsors will be pretty useless as weapon platforms in a world where people are outfitting lists to deal with knights.
They're actually pretty amazing as transports but thinking you're going to successfull razorbackrush in a world where even bottom tier armies like Grey Knights and Sisters can reliably kill 3-4 non-invul rhino chassis is a bit optimistic.
Shoot my 100 point impulsor instead of my 150 point redemptor - be my guest. As Ironhands you get a 6+ FNP and half your degrading profile. I don't think a 4++ is going to help you much when most your other units don't have one. Trading guns for invuns doesn't really make sense. Espcially when it's your best gun too. I could see the 4++ for a unit of hellblasters...maybe.
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
Because you don't get special characters or direct access to chapter relics. If you can build a list without those things then by all means go successor.
See: "using the Ultramarines rules". Get rid of the absurd idea that how you paint your models or what stories you tell about them has anything to do with their rules.
Exactly, and that's the main benefit of actually painting them as "Your dudez".
Certainly. Don't think for a second I wont be playing my Ultras as Ironhands if those rules work better for me. The rules have almost nothing to do with the fluff anyways. It upsets me that I can't use the characters for my army and stuff but...way she goes.
Maybe if you park your 4++ tank (or two) on key objectives people will have to shoot at them, rather than shoot something they want to shoot at...? No? ok...
bort wrote: ... sure shoot one of the sacrificial boxes instead of a better unit.
I almost feel like this is a strength in of itself. 100pt box that seems scary because of it's cargo. If even a few units divert shooting at it, that helps the rest of your force endure the first turn
-
yup
Nonsense if it cant one shot a knight and then also have 100 special rules and cost 100 points its useless.
bort wrote: ... sure shoot one of the sacrificial boxes instead of a better unit.
I almost feel like this is a strength in of itself. 100pt box that seems scary because of it's cargo. If even a few units divert shooting at it, that helps the rest of your force endure the first turn
-
Absolutely. I want them to shoot it. It is there to get shot at. It's cheap. Provides some protection to a unit I don't want to get shot at. I'll give it a missle so you can't ignore it or it can punish you a bit. I am not sure what weapon to arm it with though. Missle is okay at 17 points. Not sure the cost of the AA aray - but it is another decent option if its cost is similar. On thing that is worth noting is this puppy has a 14" move and a d6 explosion. D6 mortal explosions win games. I don't want this buddy running around with full HP. I want it in front of their characters charging into CC units trying to detonate itself late game.
bort wrote: ... sure shoot one of the sacrificial boxes instead of a better unit.
I almost feel like this is a strength in of itself. 100pt box that seems scary because of it's cargo. If even a few units divert shooting at it, that helps the rest of your force endure the first turn
-
Absolutely. I want them to shoot it. It is there to get shot at. It's cheap. Provides some protection to a unit I don't want to get shot at. I'll give it a missle so you can't ignore it or it can punish you a bit. I am not sure what weapon to arm it with though. Missle is okay at 17 points. Not sure the cost of the AA aray - but it is another decent option if its cost is similar. On thing that is worth noting is this puppy has a 14" move and a d6 explosion. D6 mortal explosions win games. I don't want this buddy running around with full HP. I want it in front of their characters charging into CC units trying to detonate itself late game.
I believe there is a strat to auto explode(not sure if its from ranged weapon or CC too)
Throwing these boats at enemies cuddled up near their HQs could be fun especialy as it has fly.
bort wrote: ... sure shoot one of the sacrificial boxes instead of a better unit.
I almost feel like this is a strength in of itself. 100pt box that seems scary because of it's cargo. If even a few units divert shooting at it, that helps the rest of your force endure the first turn
-
Absolutely. I want them to shoot it. It is there to get shot at. It's cheap. Provides some protection to a unit I don't want to get shot at. I'll give it a missle so you can't ignore it or it can punish you a bit. I am not sure what weapon to arm it with though. Missle is okay at 17 points. Not sure the cost of the AA aray - but it is another decent option if its cost is similar. On thing that is worth noting is this puppy has a 14" move and a d6 explosion. D6 mortal explosions win games. I don't want this buddy running around with full HP. I want it in front of their characters charging into CC units trying to detonate itself late game.
I believe there is a strat to auto explode(not sure if its from ranged weapon or CC too)
Throwing these boats at enemies cuddled up near their HQs could be fun especialy as it has fly.
Wow if that is true it is going to be amazing. Redemptors also have d6 explosions. That is a lot of potential for mortal mayhem.
bort wrote: ... sure shoot one of the sacrificial boxes instead of a better unit.
I almost feel like this is a strength in of itself. 100pt box that seems scary because of it's cargo. If even a few units divert shooting at it, that helps the rest of your force endure the first turn
-
Absolutely. I want them to shoot it. It is there to get shot at. It's cheap. Provides some protection to a unit I don't want to get shot at. I'll give it a missle so you can't ignore it or it can punish you a bit. I am not sure what weapon to arm it with though. Missle is okay at 17 points. Not sure the cost of the AA aray - but it is another decent option if its cost is similar. On thing that is worth noting is this puppy has a 14" move and a d6 explosion. D6 mortal explosions win games. I don't want this buddy running around with full HP. I want it in front of their characters charging into CC units trying to detonate itself late game.
I believe there is a strat to auto explode(not sure if its from ranged weapon or CC too)
Throwing these boats at enemies cuddled up near their HQs could be fun especialy as it has fly.
Wow if that is true it is going to be amazing. Redemptors also have d6 explosions. That is a lot of potential for mortal mayhem.
I thinks theres going to be some hidden gems. Not sure ow much any of it costs CP etc.
I like those those land mines everyone seems to have glossed over. I think ive seen some decent MW output potential to put on top of all the new dakka boosts and some new synergies im only envious off.
Might finaly move my plans up and Strat that marine black templarish army earlier than I thought.
Am I the only one who doesn't just fish for the best rules when I field my army ? Sometimes I feel like I am.
That said, drop pods have a point again, yayyy. Even if you think their cargo sucks, it's still stuff you'll need to deal with at some point as every bit of damage done is a gain for you and it still takes up firepower to get rid of.
While I generally like this edition it gets pretty damn sad when all you see is how if something is not good if it isn't the most awesome or can crush an imperial knight. It's like a tragic echo chamber. I'd love to see a list of what from each army is considered to be " Good " I think it would be an awfully small collection of models.
Racerguy180 wrote: One; you suggested it so I'm not sure that you are the best person to decide what Iwant to do and Two, ummmmmmm hell no. Why in the hell would I want to run my army that I've had for quite a few years, killed literally thousands of Orks & Tyranids and have painted lovingly. I should just ditch all that for a new entirely different type of army? What a jacked up way to play. O wait, I forgot who I was referring to. You should be last person anyone listens to about their own army. If I wanted to play ultras I would have, or scars, or wolves. There is absolutely zero about the other legions, chapters etc that remotely interest me.
If I want to play a different type of army, I have my Metalica & Flawless Host currently. Soon Sororitas will join.
Why are you talking about playing a different type of army? You play with the same units, you just pick whichever chapter's tactics/characters/etc are best for those units.
Racerguy180 wrote: One; you suggested it so I'm not sure that you are the best person to decide what Iwant to do and Two, ummmmmmm hell no. Why in the hell would I want to run my army that I've had for quite a few years, killed literally thousands of Orks & Tyranids and have painted lovingly. I should just ditch all that for a new entirely different type of army? What a jacked up way to play. O wait, I forgot who I was referring to. You should be last person anyone listens to about their own army. If I wanted to play ultras I would have, or scars, or wolves. There is absolutely zero about the other legions, chapters etc that remotely interest me.
If I want to play a different type of army, I have my Metalica & Flawless Host currently. Soon Sororitas will join.
Why are you talking about playing a different type of army? You play with the same units, you just pick whichever chapter's tactics/characters/etc are best for those units.
So outta curiosity peregrine, what army do you play?
Racerguy180 wrote: One; you suggested it so I'm not sure that you are the best person to decide what Iwant to do and Two, ummmmmmm hell no. Why in the hell would I want to run my army that I've had for quite a few years, killed literally thousands of Orks & Tyranids and have painted lovingly. I should just ditch all that for a new entirely different type of army? What a jacked up way to play. O wait, I forgot who I was referring to. You should be last person anyone listens to about their own army. If I wanted to play ultras I would have, or scars, or wolves. There is absolutely zero about the other legions, chapters etc that remotely interest me.
If I want to play a different type of army, I have my Metalica & Flawless Host currently. Soon Sororitas will join.
Why are you talking about playing a different type of army? You play with the same units, you just pick whichever chapter's tactics/characters/etc are best for those units.
So outta curiosity peregrine, what army do you play?
IG, with whichever sub-faction rules are best for what I want to do in a particular game.
I feel like this talk is never going to end well, never does.
Some people play the sub faction they love, good or bad, regardless of rules. They don't care if the rules aren't great, they play that faction, with that subfactions rules. It's fluffy for them and they consider it a point of honor.
Some people play their own faction, and use whatever the best sub faction rules are regardless of fluff, it's all about what is the best, fluff is second to effective rules.
Those who view the game these ways will never see eye to eye.
Neither side is wrong, however the rules trump all crowd is often extra vocal to tell others they are wrong for liking to stick to bad rules, or at least not the best rules.
I had one such player say it made him sick to see me run Ogryns and not Bullgryns, because bullgryns are so much better. I promptly ran more Ogryns and offered to get him a bucket if he had spew.
BrianDavion wrote: nevermind that the "power rules before all" crowd are useally the biggest problem with 40k in any edition.
No, that would be the CAAC crowd you're thinking of.
yes it was the CAAC rowd who took rules loop holes and abused them to the point of absurdity? it was the CAAC crowd who decided to abuse the ally rules to run superfriends in 6th and 7th?
BrianDavion wrote: yes it was the CAAC rowd who took rules loop holes and abused them to the point of absurdity? it was the CAAC crowd who decided to abuse the ally rules to run superfriends in 6th and 7th?
The fact that you are so insistently labeling a perfectly legal army "abuse" just demonstrates my point.
One; you suggested it so I'm not sure that you are the best person to decide what Iwant to do and Two, ummmmmmm hell no. Why in the hell would I want to run my army that I've had for quite a few years, killed literally thousands of Orks & Tyranids and have painted lovingly. I should just ditch all that for a new entirely different type of army? What a jacked up way to play. O wait, I forgot who I was referring to. You should be last person anyone listens to about their own army. If I wanted to play ultras I would have, or scars, or wolves. There is absolutely zero about the other legions, chapters etc that remotely interest me.
If I want to play a different type of army, I have my Metalica & Flawless Host currently. Soon Sororitas will join
.
Why are you talking about playing a different type of army? You play with the same units, you just pick whichever chapter's tactics/characters/etc are best for those units.
So outta curiosity peregrine, what army do you play?
IG, with whichever sub-faction rules are best for what I want to do in a particular game.
That sounds like a great way to play! Wait, what the hell, did I just get hit on the head....upon further consideration....nope. If you want to continuously change stuff up, how are you going to learn how run your army? Or are you gods gift to 40k and just have an innate(should be inane) talent on the tabletop and are able to hot swap rules, doctrines, etc in the most points/rules efficient way possible?
BrianDavion wrote: nevermind that the "power rules before all" crowd are useally the biggest problem with 40k in any edition.
No, that would be the CAAC crowd you're thinking of.
[u]yes it was the CAAC rowd who took rules loop holes and abused them to the point of absurdity? it was the CAAC crowd who decided to abuse the ally rules to run superfriends in 6th and 7th?
Racerguy180 wrote: That sounds like a great way to play! Wait, what the hell, did I just get hit on the head....upon further consideration....nope. If you want to continuously change stuff up, how are you going to learn how run your army? Or are you gods gift to 40k and just have an innate(should be inane) talent on the tabletop and are able to hot swap rules, doctrines, etc in the most points/rules efficient way possible?
How do you learn your army when you change units? How do you learn when you change missions? Or do you play the same mission with the same list every game?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well the Salamanders rules are bad anyway so who cares? Run them as something else and get a better bonus.
You have impossibly high standards if you think free re-rolls on every unit and turning -1 AP into 0 AP is bad. Their supplement isn't even out anyways.
The free rerolls didn't make them good in the first place. Gaining a durability rule worse than Iron Hands and Raven Guard helps them how?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
This guy gets it. You don't need to defend bad rules.
It's actually not a bad army trait by itself. Reolling a single hit/wound in MSU is usually all you need rather than a buff character close by which wants you to castle thus losing some board control. Saying it was bad before is fairly disingenuous because marines were just plain bad, pretty much all of them. You didn't see Ravenguard destroying people on a regular basis, even though it's supposed to be the best trait (as people claim for the Eldar).
Shrugging -1 damage rolls is excellent and will be extremely useful vs the marine lists that will be out there now. A good player will make Salamanders do work and we have yet to see what their specific supplement will provide.
Racerguy180 wrote: That sounds like a great way to play! Wait, what the hell, did I just get hit on the head....upon further consideration....nope. If you want to continuously change stuff up, how are you going to learn how run your army? Or are you gods gift to 40k and just have an innate(should be inane) talent on the tabletop and are able to hot swap rules, doctrines, etc in the most points/rules efficient way possible?
How do you learn your army when you change units? How do you learn when you change missions? Or do you play the same mission with the same list every game?
We play 90% open war so it's a different game/mission every time. My lists change with whatever mood I'm feeling, if I want to be aggressive, my list reflects that, same goes for long range, deep strike, etc...
I will only add units to my army if they;
1) Are cool/amazing/challenging(buildwise) Model
2) Fill a specific purpose/need not currently addressed
3) Fit in visually with other units in similar style
It might take me a while to figure out how best to use the unit(no math just feel and tactics) before I play it, but when I do it fits in cohesively and allows me to do something not possible before.
I dont care if UM can fall back & shoot w no penalty, IF can ignore cover, IH 6+ FNP....none of that is pertinent to how my Salamanders work/play for me.
but getting back on the topic of Drop pods....
I might have to breakdown and actually buy a couple. Just have to work out how to best use them for my playstyle. But I think the FW dredpod might do more for me.
Shrugging -1 damage rolls is excellent and will be extremely useful vs the marine lists that will be out there now. A good player will make Salamanders do work and we have yet to see what their specific supplement will provide.
I'm planning on making full use of everything in the SALAMANDERS supplement. +3" to all of the flamers in my army means a whole lotta charred enemies of the Emperor. Hopefully Melta gets some love as well.
You shouldn't be allowed to play a different chapter than the one you painted your models as.
That's the great advantage of 30k over 40k: no "your dudes" stupidity and only a few legions to choose from and I don't think I have ever seen someone playing with someone else rules.
And this is from someone playing a successor chapter (but as they are Ultramarine successors, I have never played with anything else than the UM tactics even if others would be better).
About the "ignore -1ap" part of the Salamader CT, what has -1ap ? Bolters (now) and one dynasty of necrons ? What else ?
If GW were good at keeping the different chapters at the same level I would prefer if people played with the chapter they were painted as. And also if the internal chapter balance were good too.
Lets say you have 10k points of marines of a single chapter and in the current edition only Dark Angels had usable Terminators and Bikes, Blood Angels the only usable Jump Infantry, Space Wolves dreads and normal Marines infantry tanks. Would you really force that poor Dark Angels player to only play with his 2000pts of terminators and bikes for the whole edition if he want to even have a shot of winning and shelf the other 8000pts for a few years? In some editions the difference between chapters can be HUGE, especially for certain play styles within the chapters. To force a player to then basically sit out most of an edition instead of playing a different colored marine is the most eliteiest attitude possible.
If it were low single digit % difference between which color you have on your armor I would frown on those always trying to min max instead of having fun and I would only play my marines as what they are painted as. But we aren't talking about only a 1-5% performance difference but up to 50%+ in certain cases just depending on what edition and build you are trying to play. In edition shifts you can see this problem way more when some chapter might be playing a 5 year old codex from the start of the previous edition while another chapter has a brand new codex designed with the new rules in mind.
If my opponent wouldn't play against me because I used another chapters rules while my own were complete crap I wouldn't want to play that player at all either. If they care so much more about sitting on a high horse for an almost free win than having a fun and close game then they are probably not fun at all to play against.
I actually did paint my marines in custom colors at first and removed all the chapter specific symbols on them so I could play them as Salamanders, Black Templars or Blood Angels etc. But that just made them look more bland and took much more time to prep for little reward. I love the BA play style so now I just paint my newer models with more red and keep the blood angels bits on them. Wont play them as a tank heavy Iron Hands army ever but if lets say Raven Guard or White Scars have better rules for getting in to close combat with my jump pack marines than BA then I sure as hell would play my marines built and painted as BA with the RG/WS rules. If if anyone is gonna gate keep me from that I will gladly tell them they are an idiot and should shut up unless they want to buy and paint a new army for me or make GW write better rules.
godardc wrote: You shouldn't be allowed to play a different chapter than the one you painted your models as.
What if my models aren't painted as any of the official chapters?
Do I have to repaint them the "correct" way before I'm permitted to play a game with them?
I told you, I have myself a successor chapter. My own heraldry and colors. UM successor chapter. I use Ultramarine CT. Simple
Klickor wrote: If GW were good at keeping the different chapters at the same level I would prefer if people played with the chapter they were painted as. And also if the internal chapter balance were good too.
Lets say you have 10k points of marines of a single chapter and in the current edition only Dark Angels had usable Terminators and Bikes, Blood Angels the only usable Jump Infantry, Space Wolves dreads and normal Marines infantry tanks. Would you really force that poor Dark Angels player to only play with his 2000pts of terminators and bikes for the whole edition if he want to even have a shot of winning and shelf the other 8000pts for a few years? In some editions the difference between chapters can be HUGE, especially for certain play styles within the chapters. To force a player to then basically sit out most of an edition instead of playing a different colored marine is the most eliteiest attitude possible.
If it were low single digit % difference between which color you have on your armor I would frown on those always trying to min max instead of having fun and I would only play my marines as what they are painted as. But we aren't talking about only a 1-5% performance difference but up to 50%+ in certain cases just depending on what edition and build you are trying to play. In edition shifts you can see this problem way more when some chapter might be playing a 5 year old codex from the start of the previous edition while another chapter has a brand new codex designed with the new rules in mind.
If my opponent wouldn't play against me because I used another chapters rules while my own were complete crap I wouldn't want to play that player at all either. If they care so much more about sitting on a high horse for an almost free win than having a fun and close game then they are probably not fun at all to play against.
I actually did paint my marines in custom colors at first and removed all the chapter specific symbols on them so I could play them as Salamanders, Black Templars or Blood Angels etc. But that just made them look more bland and took much more time to prep for little reward. I love the BA play style so now I just paint my newer models with more red and keep the blood angels bits on them. Wont play them as a tank heavy Iron Hands army ever but if lets say Raven Guard or White Scars have better rules for getting in to close combat with my jump pack marines than BA then I sure as hell would play my marines built and painted as BA with the RG/WS rules. If if anyone is gonna gate keep me from that I will gladly tell them they are an idiot and should shut up unless they want to buy and paint a new army for me or make GW write better rules.
I doubt GW would delete BA terminators or bikers, ever. They rarely delete a unit that had a model, mainly weapons etc (my poor razoback has to use the index haha).
The rules for terminators haven't been that good for a long time and thus, after a few attempts, I haven't play my terminators for a long time. I didn't try to use them as Deathwing or whatever, they aren't even painted white.
And tbh, I don't think a lot of person own so many codex that they can switch like this between armies with one collection.
If your models are blood angels painted Blood Angels, why would you play Raven Guard ? We are lucky enough to have a setting, well detailed stories and everything. We know what is an UM, a BA, an IF. Why playing DA ravenwing with WS bikers ?
It's not elitist at all, it's just 40k.
I wouldn't play idk, Poland cavalry in a German army for the Battle of Berlin in Bols for example.
Why don't you use Ork models for playing needs then ?
Why don't you play chess if rules are so important and models aren't ?
You seem to think of your models as pieces or pawns, which they are not.
I can't imagine playing against a black legion army using DG models for example. That would be dumb.
But I am not going to refuse a game: I'm not that guy. My main opponent plays a kraken army painted as e behemoth force. At least he has consistency and has never changed his rules.
Klickor wrote: If GW were good at keeping the different chapters at the same level I would prefer if people played with the chapter they were painted as. And also if the internal chapter balance were good too.
Lets say you have 10k points of marines of a single chapter and in the current edition only Dark Angels had usable Terminators and Bikes, Blood Angels the only usable Jump Infantry, Space Wolves dreads and normal Marines infantry tanks. Would you really force that poor Dark Angels player to only play with his 2000pts of terminators and bikes for the whole edition if he want to even have a shot of winning and shelf the other 8000pts for a few years? In some editions the difference between chapters can be HUGE, especially for certain play styles within the chapters. To force a player to then basically sit out most of an edition instead of playing a different colored marine is the most eliteiest attitude possible.
If it were low single digit % difference between which color you have on your armor I would frown on those always trying to min max instead of having fun and I would only play my marines as what they are painted as. But we aren't talking about only a 1-5% performance difference but up to 50%+ in certain cases just depending on what edition and build you are trying to play. In edition shifts you can see this problem way more when some chapter might be playing a 5 year old codex from the start of the previous edition while another chapter has a brand new codex designed with the new rules in mind.
If my opponent wouldn't play against me because I used another chapters rules while my own were complete crap I wouldn't want to play that player at all either. If they care so much more about sitting on a high horse for an almost free win than having a fun and close game then they are probably not fun at all to play against.
I actually did paint my marines in custom colors at first and removed all the chapter specific symbols on them so I could play them as Salamanders, Black Templars or Blood Angels etc. But that just made them look more bland and took much more time to prep for little reward. I love the BA play style so now I just paint my newer models with more red and keep the blood angels bits on them. Wont play them as a tank heavy Iron Hands army ever but if lets say Raven Guard or White Scars have better rules for getting in to close combat with my jump pack marines than BA then I sure as hell would play my marines built and painted as BA with the RG/WS rules. If if anyone is gonna gate keep me from that I will gladly tell them they are an idiot and should shut up unless they want to buy and paint a new army for me or make GW write better rules.
I doubt GW would delete BA terminators or bikers, ever. They rarely delete a unit that had a model, mainly weapons etc (my poor razoback has to use the index haha).
The rules for terminators haven't been that good for a long time and thus, after a few attempts, I haven't play my terminators for a long time. I didn't try to use them as Deathwing or whatever, they aren't even painted white.
And tbh, I don't think a lot of person own so many codex that they can switch like this between armies with one collection.
If your models are blood angels painted Blood Angels, why would you play Raven Guard ? We are lucky enough to have a setting, well detailed stories and everything. We know what is an UM, a BA, an IF. Why playing DA ravenwing with WS bikers ?
It's not elitist at all, it's just 40k.
I wouldn't play idk, Poland cavalry in a German army for the Battle of Berlin in Bols for example.
Why don't you use Ork models for playing needs then ?
Why don't you play chess if rules are so important and models aren't ?
GW dont have to remove the models or its rules for a certain list but some times the units costs and rules are vastly different from the SM codex and the other chapters codex. So much so that if playing for example a terminator list with X chapter you are barely competitive but still have some chance against most lists but using almost the exact same list with another codex is almost an auto loss unless your opponent plays a weak list just to humor you. Which is ok with friends but what if I want to go to a tournament setting and play 4-6 games in a weekend and not just get crushed every time. Why not play the better rules than having to play a meta list or not play my army at all.
Lets say Raven Guard would get a lot of new rules that would help with getting units like Assault Marines in to close combat and perform well there. Lets say they are noticeable better than Blood Angels at that play style. Like 20-30% better performance while doing the exact same thing. Why wouldnt I just use my BA models and play them like a normal BA list but using the much superior Raven Guard rules. Same list, same play style, same models just a different color and both me and my opponent will most likely have a more interesting game. Maybe in a few months or a year or so Blood Angels get the updated rules too and will perform as well as Raven Guard but why do I have to lose in the mean time? Does it really matter if the rules are called "xxx doctrine" instead of "red thirst" when they are basically the same? It looks like BA, it plays like BA, it performs like BA should but the name in the rule book is slightly different and that somehow ruins all of your immersion? It still vanguard veterans, assault marines, JP characters and other units shared by all marines. Sure there won't be any death company or sanguinary guard but not every BA list fields them anyway and unless I actually told you I played with RG rules you wouldn't even notice it except that perhaps my list performs well instead of you steam rolling me.
Is is very elitist. You are trying to dictate how others should play in a way that only gets you a tiny bit more enjoyment out of the game while not caring at all if it makes the other player even want to play the game at all. Using orks as tyranids isnt a good comparison at all. It would be very confusing since they share nothing in common except being 40k models. If I just did a small change in how I painted by BA army you wouldnt ever know if they were a Raven Guard or Blood Angels successor chapter unless I fielded unique units, characters or flat out told you. Its not even unfluffy. Marines are elite fighters with decades of training and very versatile and can fight well in any role. So as long as you are not using Unique units and characters in a confusing way it even fits the lore better than intentionally gimping yourself with bad rules.
Let's not forget that sub-faction rules are a new thing. Until 8th all marines were the same and it didn't matter how you painted them. So why, in 8th, should a Salamanders player be locked in to one faction rule they didn't choose while someone with bright pink marines gets to use any faction rules they want?
Peregrine wrote: Let's not forget that sub-faction rules are a new thing. Until 8th all marines were the same and it didn't matter how you painted them. So why, in 8th, should a Salamanders player be locked in to one faction rule they didn't choose while someone with bright pink marines gets to use any faction rules they want?
It literally doesn't matter.
If your guys are green play the Salamander's successor chapter. If you have more than one chapter in the army then make them distinguishable.
I think the "strict color scheme" idea is mostly for lore hounds who are going for the war reenactment narrative. Otherwise most people don't care about that your Dark Angels are Ultramarines. Hell, I've played against Imperial Fist painted Salamanders and it was just good old fun game.
godardc wrote: You shouldn't be allowed to play a different chapter than the one you painted your models as.
That's the great advantage of 30k over 40k: no "your dudes" stupidity and only a few legions to choose from and I don't think I have ever seen someone playing with someone else rules.
And this is from someone playing a successor chapter (but as they are Ultramarine successors, I have never played with anything else than the UM tactics even if others would be better).
About the "ignore -1ap" part of the Salamader CT, what has -1ap ? Bolters (now) and one dynasty of necrons ? What else ?
Autocannons of all types (Armiger, regular, Pred, etc)
Heavy Bolter
Heavy Flamer
Haywire
Multiple melee weapons
no clue about Tau/orks/Nids, don't have their books (although I think Heavy Burst Cannon is, right?).
Granted, it's not exhaustive (I may have been biased as it seems the armies I do play have lots of -1, lol)
Peregrine wrote: Let's not forget that sub-faction rules are a new thing. Until 8th all marines were the same and it didn't matter how you painted them. So why, in 8th, should a Salamanders player be locked in to one faction rule they didn't choose while someone with bright pink marines gets to use any faction rules they want?
It literally doesn't matter.
If your guys are green play the Salamander's successor chapter. If you have more than one chapter in the army then make them distinguishable.
This gak isn't rocket science.
This isn't rocket science. Paint your models however you like and use whichever rules are best for your strategy on the table, the two have nothing to do with each other.
godardc wrote: You shouldn't be allowed to play a different chapter than the one you painted your models as.
That's the great advantage of 30k over 40k: no "your dudes" stupidity and only a few legions to choose from and I don't think I have ever seen someone playing with someone else rules.
And this is from someone playing a successor chapter (but as they are Ultramarine successors, I have never played with anything else than the UM tactics even if others would be better).
About the "ignore -1ap" part of the Salamader CT, what has -1ap ? Bolters (now) and one dynasty of necrons ? What else ?
Autocannons of all types (Armiger, regular, Pred, etc)
Heavy Bolter
Heavy Flamer
Haywire
Multiple melee weapons
no clue about Tau/orks/Nids, don't have their books (although I think Heavy Burst Cannon is, right?).
Granted, it's not exhaustive (I may have been biased as it seems the armies I do play have lots of -1, lol)
Cyclic ion
Heavy Burst Cannon
HYMP Deffguns
All things that are common and love to kill Primaris.
godardc wrote: You shouldn't be allowed to play a different chapter than the one you painted your models as.
That's the great advantage of 30k over 40k: no "your dudes" stupidity and only a few legions to choose from and I don't think I have ever seen someone playing with someone else rules.
And this is from someone playing a successor chapter (but as they are Ultramarine successors, I have never played with anything else than the UM tactics even if others would be better).
About the "ignore -1ap" part of the Salamader CT, what has -1ap ? Bolters (now) and one dynasty of necrons ? What else ?
Autocannons of all types (Armiger, regular, Pred, etc)
Heavy Bolter
Heavy Flamer
Haywire
Multiple melee weapons
no clue about Tau/orks/Nids, don't have their books (although I think Heavy Burst Cannon is, right?).
Granted, it's not exhaustive (I may have been biased as it seems the armies I do play have lots of -1, lol)
Cyclic ion
Heavy Burst Cannon
HYMP Deffguns
All things that are common and love to kill Primaris.
Not to forget the heaps of Bolters/Auto bolt rifles while the Tactical Doctrine is active, or Bolt Rifles when not using the Tactical Doctrine.
Funnily enough, it seem the vast majority of AP-1 weapons belong to other Marines, so for Salamanders, their ideal match-up may be other Marines.
Martel732 wrote: Yeah, I really don't like that. Same goes for melta. Melta is awful vs xenos. Why does IoM have so many weapons that suck vs their opponents?
LOL because every space marine combo that is remotely good gets nerfed pretty quickly. IG is allowed to have good stuff....cause guard.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well the Salamanders rules are bad anyway so who cares? Run them as something else and get a better bonus.
You have impossibly high standards if you think free re-rolls on every unit and turning -1 AP into 0 AP is bad. Their supplement isn't even out anyways.
The free rerolls didn't make them good in the first place. Gaining a durability rule worse than Iron Hands and Raven Guard helps them how?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
This guy gets it. You don't need to defend bad rules.
It's actually not a bad army trait by itself. Reolling a single hit/wound in MSU is usually all you need rather than a buff character close by which wants you to castle thus losing some board control. Saying it was bad before is fairly disingenuous because marines were just plain bad, pretty much all of them. You didn't see Ravenguard destroying people on a regular basis, even though it's supposed to be the best trait (as people claim for the Eldar).
Shrugging -1 damage rolls is excellent and will be extremely useful vs the marine lists that will be out there now. A good player will make Salamanders do work and we have yet to se
e what their specific supplement will provide.
You forget a few things though:
1. The best weapons are a high RoF 2. That little density of weapons you wanna reroll in MSU with means you're still lacking density of weapons
3. Having the trait before wasn't good and it wasn't used competitively whatsoever
So nothing there actually changed. The new codex made the army less reliant on camping with an HQ, sure, but it still affects ALL models, and to get the most out of Marines you'll still need to use HQs with your most fighty and shooty units.
So the best unit with Salamanders was a 2 Lascannon Dev squad and that's still not different. Nothing changed because Raven Guard really have the same level of durability, Iron Hands got TWO extra bonuses, Imperial Fists still change how the opponent deploys, and White Scars/Black Templars can get a T1 charge
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well the Salamanders rules are bad anyway so who cares? Run them as something else and get a better bonus.
You have impossibly high standards if you think free re-rolls on every unit and turning -1 AP into 0 AP is bad. Their supplement isn't even out anyways.
The free rerolls didn't make them good in the first place. Gaining a durability rule worse than Iron Hands and Raven Guard helps them how?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peregrine wrote: Why play Salamanders when you can play the Green Drakes, an Ultramarines successor chapter using the Ultramarines rules?
This guy gets it. You don't need to defend bad rules.
It's actually not a bad army trait by itself. Reolling a single hit/wound in MSU is usually all you need rather than a buff character close by which wants you to castle thus losing some board control. Saying it was bad before is fairly disingenuous because marines were just plain bad, pretty much all of them. You didn't see Ravenguard destroying people on a regular basis, even though it's supposed to be the best trait (as people claim for the Eldar).
Shrugging -1 damage rolls is excellent and will be extremely useful vs the marine lists that will be out there now. A good player will make Salamanders do work and we have yet to se
e what their specific supplement will provide.
You forget a few things though:
1. The best weapons are a high RoF 2. That little density of weapons you wanna reroll in MSU with means you're still lacking density of weapons
3. Having the trait before wasn't good and it wasn't used competitively whatsoever
So nothing there actually changed. The new codex made the army less reliant on camping with an HQ, sure, but it still affects ALL models, and to get the most out of Marines you'll still need to use HQs with your most fighty and shooty units.
So the best unit with Salamanders was a 2 Lascannon Dev squad and that's still not different. Nothing changed because Raven Guard really have the same level of durability, Iron Hands got TWO extra bonuses, Imperial Fists still change how the opponent deploys, and White Scars/Black Templars can get a T1 charge
It is an okay trait for vehicals. Pretty worthless on infantry except for their 1 heavy. Ignore -1 is decent but it sure aint no 6+++.
chimeara wrote: So, have they mentioned anything about the rules for the Dreadclaw or Kharybdis pods
You are gonna have to wait for the errata 2 weeks after the codex release. My guess will be (and this is a total coin flip) FW will not get access to doctrines. The drop pods likely will get the drop pod rules.
godardc wrote: You shouldn't be allowed to play a different chapter than the one you painted your models as.
That's the great advantage of 30k over 40k: no "your dudes" stupidity and only a few legions to choose from and I don't think I have ever seen someone playing with someone else rules.
And this is from someone playing a successor chapter (but as they are Ultramarine successors, I have never played with anything else than the UM tactics even if others would be better).
About the "ignore -1ap" part of the Salamader CT, what has -1ap ? Bolters (now) and one dynasty of necrons ? What else ?
Autocannons of all types (Armiger, regular, Pred, etc)
Heavy Bolter
Heavy Flamer
Haywire
Multiple melee weapons
no clue about Tau/orks/Nids, don't have their books (although I think Heavy Burst Cannon is, right?).
Granted, it's not exhaustive (I may have been biased as it seems the armies I do play have lots of -1, lol)
Yeah indeed I forgot about the melee weapons !
It's quite a few indeed, but I still have to meet a flamer or heavy flamer on a battlefield of the 8th ed what's sad is now primaris got an additional -1 ap thanks to the tactical doctrine, so it's a bit less efficient.
It's marines that really spam the ap -1. Tau has a fair amount to. It's AP 2/3 that really kills marines though and it is everywhere en mass. It should really be -1 ap to a minimum of 1.
So ap-1 stays ap -1. Ap-2 becomes ap-1 and ap 3 becomes ap-2 ect.
Even with the -1 for moving, if the Cherub is still there you're getting pretty close to the same result. Even closer if the new rerolls mechanic pans out. But yeah, wait and see.
