Just picking out interesting things from the article. What stood out to you? (Yes, I know Eradicators goan be nutz)
The Primaris Hover Tanks all lost the FLY keyword and their ability to reduce enemy charge distance has been moved to the Grav Pulse stratagem.
Almost anything that isn’t a vehicle, a character, or a Centurion is CORE. Dreadnoughts and bikes are, ATVs are not. The big losers here are non-Dreadnought vehicles, which are completely absent from CORE.
The Infiltrator Helix Adept now no longer heals but instead sets the damage of the first failed save to 0.
I thought the ATV was a Vehicle was it not? Or both? Seems like a prime candidate for an FAQ since people were bewildered about it being a vehicle.
Apothecaries can now only natively heal models which haven’t died yet (this is more useful now that all Marines have 2 wounds); the “bring an INFANTRY/BIKER model back to life” trick is now a 1CP stratagem (or free for Chief Apothecaries with their new warlord trait), but it also brings the model back at full wounds… and yes it works on Invader ATVs. All 8 wounds of an ATV. Have fun with that.
he Judiciar gets some huge changes. His Tempermortis ability is now only 3”, but a wording change now means that it works how many people online thought it did – the enemy unit he picks is not eligible to fight this phase until after all eligible units your side have done so.
Duty Eternal is in the datasheet and is a flat -1 to all damage (to a minimum of 1). Dread explosions also got toned down, with regular Dreads now just 1 mortal wound instead of d3, and the Redemptor (and Invictor) going down from d6 to d3 mortal wounds.
Eliminators ignore LoS (look out sir) but don’t ignore LoS (line of sight) any more. Also if the sarge has a carbine they get to move after shooting if they’re not in Engagement Range, so that’s neat. However, they can’t fall back on overwatch any more, and they no longer get the +1 to hit/wound for giving up the Sergeant’s shooting. Mortis rounds go to a flat 2 damage instead of d3, as is the pattern.
YES!
Vindicator siege shields exist again after having an edition off, and if you take one now they get +1 to saves against ranged weapons.
Hammerfall Bunker can't deepstrike, lol.
Grav-cannons – now 30” range and flat 2 damage.
I know i'll shoot anti-tank at them, but I mean come on...
Unyielding in the Face of the Foe is new here, a 1 CP stratagem that gives a Mk. X Gravis unit +1 to its saves against incoming attacks with a damage characteristic of 1.
If they were going to be shifted out of troops, I’d rather they went to FA. While they might not be jumping around or zooming up the field on bikes, they have the deployment options. Classically they could also move through cover IIRC.
Regardless, what thy bring is more movement/location based, which is the realm of FAIMHO.
Lots of interesting things seem to be going on with this book. Will be nice to sit down and digest it once it releases.
Daedalus81 wrote: Dread explosions also got toned down, with regular Dreads now just 1 mortal wound instead of d3, and the Redemptor (and Invictor) going down from d6 to d3 mortal wounds.
As someone who lost 22 Skitarii Vanguards today to one Invictor exploding, I approve of this change
Between the two books, I think Elite has lost its meaning somewhat.
Instead of actual elites, its becoming more the 'catch-all' category. Not troops, but not fast or big guns either.
Both scouts and Spyders ended up there, and praetorians scooted off to fast attack.
There's definitely quite a bit of 'the army should look/feel the way we say it should' to these changes.
Voss wrote: Between the two books, I think Elite has lost its meaning somewhat.
Instead of actual elites, its becoming more the 'catch-all' category. Not troops, but not fast or big guns either.
Both scouts and Spyders ended up there, and praetorians scooted off to fast attack.
Yeah, there's definitely a weird bit of "what to do with units that aren't fast, aren't heavy, but aren't elite that aren't the core of your army". I think the 30k solution (Troops that just don't take up compulsory slots) was pretty good for this. I mean, where would you even put something like a Tactical Support Squad without that?
There's definitely quite a bit of 'the army should look/feel the way we say it should' to these changes.
I don't really have an issue with that.
Arguably, what GW want is for tournament lists to be reflective of what "fluffy" lists should look like, and I'm all for that.
If the "good" Space Marine army is an army featuring as few power armoured Space Marines as possible, then that's an issue.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I mean, where would you even put something like a Tactical Support Squad without that?
Heavy like Hellblasters and Havocs when they had Specials or Elites like Chosen or Dark Angels Vets that can take a large number of specials. The idea of Tactical Support style squads still exists in 40K in several armies and they're never Troops choices. Heavy Support and Elites as sections have always been closer to meaning "Fire Support" and "Specialists" than their usual English meanings.
Voss wrote: Between the two books, I think Elite has lost its meaning somewhat.
Instead of actual elites, its becoming more the 'catch-all' category. Not troops, but not fast or big guns either.
Both scouts and Spyders ended up there, and praetorians scooted off to fast attack.
Yeah, there's definitely a weird bit of "what to do with units that aren't fast, aren't heavy, but aren't elite that aren't the core of your army". I think the 30k solution (Troops that just don't take up compulsory slots) was pretty good for this. I mean, where would you even put something like a Tactical Support Squad without that?
There's definitely quite a bit of 'the army should look/feel the way we say it should' to these changes.
I don't really have an issue with that.
Arguably, what GW want is for tournament lists to be reflective of what "fluffy" lists should look like, and I'm all for that.
If the "good" Space Marine army is an army featuring as few power armoured Space Marines as possible, then that's an issue.
Without Primaris DPs and the death of vehicles, Meta marine forces all look like Imperial fists setting up a grand last stand these days. There's only a handful of circumstances where a marine force should be operating not mechanized, but they went and nerfed the primaris mechanized options so that the best way to play marines is all on foot.
Daedalus81 wrote: I really like the new orbital bombardment. "Get off this objective or die".
What is Orbital Bombardment now ?
Pulling the quote from the article:
Orbital Bombardment also has a major overhaul. It’s used once per game in the Command phase if your warlord is on the battlefield – pick a point on the table and in your next Command phase roll a D6; on a 2-5 anything within 6” of that point takes D3 mortal wounds and on a 6 they take D6. Units within 3” of the marker are +1 to the roll – and yes, that means they can be auto-hit – while CHARACTER models are -1. Do take care to note that it hits units in this range, not enemy units; the Battle Barge bombarding you from the stratosphere is not in fact able to avoid hitting your own guys if they stand on the point. That’s a very cool adjustment that both works thematically while also making the stratagem as much about area denial as doing damage – you can pick a key objective that you aren’t going to be able to contest, and dare your opponent to come and take it at the risk of their unit being obliterated from space.
That's extremely exciting to me. Also, it can hurt your own units.
ATSKNF (And They Shall Know No Fear) lets a unit ignore Combat Attrition modifiers, a change from the prior edition’s rule that had Marines re-roll Morale checks.
Daedalus81 wrote: I really like the new orbital bombardment. "Get off this objective or die".
What is Orbital Bombardment now ?
Pulling the quote from the article:
Orbital Bombardment also has a major overhaul. It’s used once per game in the Command phase if your warlord is on the battlefield – pick a point on the table and in your next Command phase roll a D6; on a 2-5 anything within 6” of that point takes D3 mortal wounds and on a 6 they take D6. Units within 3” of the marker are +1 to the roll – and yes, that means they can be auto-hit – while CHARACTER models are -1. Do take care to note that it hits units in this range, not enemy units; the Battle Barge bombarding you from the stratosphere is not in fact able to avoid hitting your own guys if they stand on the point. That’s a very cool adjustment that both works thematically while also making the stratagem as much about area denial as doing damage – you can pick a key objective that you aren’t going to be able to contest, and dare your opponent to come and take it at the risk of their unit being obliterated from space.
That's extremely exciting to me. Also, it can hurt your own units.
That's going to be nasty against Deathguard as they will struggle to get out of a blast radius. Of course on the flip side they also have DR to mitigate some of the damage. So swings and roundabouts I suppose.
Against fast armies it's going to be pretty hard to do anything except create a no go area though, but I suppose being able to do that is good in and of itself
Well, throughout 8th a Great Unclean One could resurrect a Myphitic Blight Hauler(150pts) on a 4+ I assume it was never Faqed because the GUO is pretty expensive and so the combo never was used in large amounts.
My scouts have always been elites and due to the nature of that unit the SM ones always seemed odd in the troop section. Their equivalents from other codexes, like kommandos or mandrakes, aren't troops.
There seems to be an awful lot of focus on this Apothecary-resurrecting-ATV thing... I'll posit that if that's what you're doing, you're wasting the bike's potential, having it sat back where the Apothecary can actually reach it.
Super Ready wrote: There seems to be an awful lot of focus on this Apothecary-resurrecting-ATV thing... I'll posit that if that's what you're doing, you're wasting the bike's potential, having it sat back where the Apothecary can actually reach it.
I suppose, yea. It is just mentally gross to have a W8 model pop back up and it sort of forces that to be the best scenario for its use. 85 + 105 for a couple melta shots. You could just opt not to shoot them and let the Apothecary go to waste, too. Big brain might be Heavy Intercessors on an objective.
3x5 to infinity Scout Squads the player hardly cared about for 6 Elites, and 3 Heavies needed to be removed. Or whatever Mutli-Det Skew list bieng made. Scouts themselves didn't need to be moved from troops. My standard lists were a 10 man sniper squad and 2x Tacs, or Intercessors, or Infiltrators etc for almost as long as I've been playing. The problem wasn't the scouts, it was abusing the scouts. And now I hear those commercials about them filing for bankruptcy.
Daedalus81 wrote: Big brain might be Heavy Intercessors on an objective.
Or, you know, a blob of storm shield terminators, dunno why everyone is fixated on far less durable primaris units still...
Because you can probably get 50% or so more Heavy Intercessors who will have ObSec without some sort of Gotcha Strat. I mean we still have to go on a couple assumptions:
1) Heavy Intercessors will be 28 points per model based on Power Level to Points average Ratios.
2) Terminators will not plummet (or Skyrocket) in price.
If those are accurate - you can pull down about 7.5 Heavy Intercessors for the same price as 5 TH/SS Terminators. And supposedly the TH did go up in price.
Using the TH/SS blob has it's place - say Deep striking on the furthest objective, - Especially with the Teleport Redployment shenanigans they just added - but the HI as the generic approach also works.
Vindicator siege shields exist again after having an edition off, and if you take one now they get +1 to saves against ranged weapons.
Heh, yeah, somewhere deep within the Eye of Terror the Iron Warriors just found something to finally be happy about. Dig it.
So one change that interests me is the one to weapons that used to have the Armourbane rule, e.g. chainfists and dreadnought chainfists. Both got a damage buff: a swingy one against everything that isn't a vehicle and a solid one against vehicles, with chainfists going for D2 to Dd3 against non vehicles and D3 against vehicles, and dreadnought chainfists going from D4 to D2d3 against non vehicles and D6 against vehicles. So a possible 50% increase against non vehicles and a solid 50% increase against vehicles. Think that will be applied to everything that used to have the Armourbane rule? Like maybe a VERY BIG GUN on a VERY BIG TANK available to marines of both the boring and the spiky varieties?
3x5 to infinity Scout Squads the player hardly cared about for 6 Elites, and 3 Heavies needed to be removed. Or whatever Mutli-Det Skew list bieng made. Scouts themselves didn't need to be moved from troops. My standard lists were a 10 man sniper squad and 2x Tacs, or Intercessors, or Infiltrators etc for almost as long as I've been playing. The problem wasn't the scouts, it was abusing the scouts. And now I hear those commercials about them filing for bankruptcy.
Daedalus81 wrote: Big brain might be Heavy Intercessors on an objective.
Or, you know, a blob of storm shield terminators, dunno why everyone is fixated on far less durable primaris units still...
Because you can probably get 50% or so more Heavy Intercessors who will have ObSec without some sort of Gotcha Strat. I mean we still have to go on a couple assumptions:
1) Heavy Intercessors will be 28 points per model based on Power Level to Points average Ratios.
2) Terminators will not plummet (or Skyrocket) in price.
If those are accurate - you can pull down about 7.5 Heavy Intercessors for the same price as 5 TH/SS Terminators. And supposedly the TH did go up in price.
Using the TH/SS blob has it's place - say Deep striking on the furthest objective, - Especially with the Teleport Redployment shenanigans they just added - but the HI as the generic approach also works.
3x5 to infinity Scout Squads the player hardly cared about for 6 Elites, and 3 Heavies needed to be removed. Or whatever Mutli-Det Skew list bieng made. Scouts themselves didn't need to be moved from troops. My standard lists were a 10 man sniper squad and 2x Tacs, or Intercessors, or Infiltrators etc for almost as long as I've been playing. The problem wasn't the scouts, it was abusing the scouts. And now I hear those commercials about them filing for bankruptcy.
Daedalus81 wrote: Big brain might be Heavy Intercessors on an objective.
Or, you know, a blob of storm shield terminators, dunno why everyone is fixated on far less durable primaris units still...
Because you can probably get 50% or so more Heavy Intercessors who will have ObSec without some sort of Gotcha Strat. I mean we still have to go on a couple assumptions:
1) Heavy Intercessors will be 28 points per model based on Power Level to Points average Ratios.
2) Terminators will not plummet (or Skyrocket) in price.
If those are accurate - you can pull down about 7.5 Heavy Intercessors for the same price as 5 TH/SS Terminators. And supposedly the TH did go up in price.
Using the TH/SS blob has it's place - say Deep striking on the furthest objective, - Especially with the Teleport Redployment shenanigans they just added - but the HI as the generic approach also works.
A quick note that Assault Termies are 33 +10 for TH.
Ice_can wrote: Haven't seen the datasheet but I thought from what was posted it actually has both because you know primaria chad got to have the best of both worlds.
Because apparently proof reading ia beyond GW's.
...ah, the irony. I do agree with the ATV becoming the "new" attack bike, and having rules to suit that.
What I disagree with, is the attack bike having ever strayed from being a vehicle in the first place...
Ice_can wrote: Haven't seen the datasheet but I thought from what was posted it actually has both because you know primaria chad got to have the best of both worlds.
Because apparently proof reading ia beyond GW's.
...ah, the irony. I do agree with the ATV becoming the "new" attack bike, and having rules to suit that.
What I disagree with, is the attack bike having ever strayed from being a vehicle in the first place...
Eh I'm posting in a forum not print media for money though.
But yeah irony strikes again.
It's blatantly obvious its a vehical I suspect it's probably been given bike because of some ravenwing or such rules probably requiring bike keyword but they missed that also allowed them to be resurrected at full wounds for 0CP.
Though it does make the chief appocothory stupidly cheap 25 points for saving 4 CP which nets you 4x85 points aka 340 points of new models, even on eradicators he nets 160 points in new models.
3x5 to infinity Scout Squads the player hardly cared about for 6 Elites, and 3 Heavies needed to be removed. Or whatever Mutli-Det Skew list bieng made. Scouts themselves didn't need to be moved from troops. My standard lists were a 10 man sniper squad and 2x Tacs, or Intercessors, or Infiltrators etc for almost as long as I've been playing. The problem wasn't the scouts, it was abusing the scouts. And now I hear those commercials about them filing for bankruptcy.
Daedalus81 wrote: Big brain might be Heavy Intercessors on an objective.
Or, you know, a blob of storm shield terminators, dunno why everyone is fixated on far less durable primaris units still...
Because you can probably get 50% or so more Heavy Intercessors who will have ObSec without some sort of Gotcha Strat. I mean we still have to go on a couple assumptions:
1) Heavy Intercessors will be 28 points per model based on Power Level to Points average Ratios.
2) Terminators will not plummet (or Skyrocket) in price.
If those are accurate - you can pull down about 7.5 Heavy Intercessors for the same price as 5 TH/SS Terminators. And supposedly the TH did go up in price.
Using the TH/SS blob has it's place - say Deep striking on the furthest objective, - Especially with the Teleport Redployment shenanigans they just added - but the HI as the generic approach also works.
A quick note that Assault Termies are 33 +10 for TH.
Ugh, I hate how they did the points in the codex. So does that 33 points include the lightning claws? They're not listed in the prices. If so, and if lightning claws are still 5 points apiece, does that mean the new 3 wound terminators are 23 PPM base? Just trying to figure out what the price for three wounds terminators of the spikey variety. will be
140 base
The majority (4 pages) of the marine points went up in rumour thread last night, Heavy Intercessors are 28ppm, +10 for a heavy bolter variant. So a 5 man squad with upgrade would be 150
Ugh, I hate how they did the points in the codex. So does that 33 points include the lightning claws? They're not listed in the prices. If so, and if lightning claws are still 5 points apiece, does that mean the new 3 wound terminators are 23 PPM base? Just trying to figure out what the price for three wounds terminators of the spikey variety. will be
Default gear is universally included in the base cost.
Lightning claw costs are weird in this book. A single LC is +3 for a vanguard or company vet, +5 for sternguard, +5 for a tactical (sergeant), but for a captain or lieutenant, they're +5 for a single OR a pair.
I presume it has something to do with the gear they're replacing.
If a weapon or gear doesn't appear in the units point list, it explicitly costs nothing, so apparently storm shields are free for TH/SS terminators. (Or baked into the cost of the TH, somehow. At least for that unit, since they definitely cost points on characters)
Ugh, I hate how they did the points in the codex. So does that 33 points include the lightning claws? They're not listed in the prices. If so, and if lightning claws are still 5 points apiece, does that mean the new 3 wound terminators are 23 PPM base? Just trying to figure out what the price for three wounds terminators of the spikey variety. will be
It says that you only need to pay for upgrades if they have a listed point cost in the entry. So the claws are included in the 33 points.
Ugh, I hate how they did the points in the codex. So does that 33 points include the lightning claws? They're not listed in the prices. If so, and if lightning claws are still 5 points apiece, does that mean the new 3 wound terminators are 23 PPM base? Just trying to figure out what the price for three wounds terminators of the spikey variety. will be
It says that you only need to pay for upgrades if they have a listed point cost in the entry. So the claws are included in the 33 points.
Ok, so if a 3 wound T4, 2+, 5++ body with deep strike is worth 33 PPM with two lightning claws what can we extrapolate the price of the same body with a combi-bolter and a chainaxe to be?
3x5 to infinity Scout Squads the player hardly cared about for 6 Elites, and 3 Heavies needed to be removed. Or whatever Mutli-Det Skew list bieng made. Scouts themselves didn't need to be moved from troops. My standard lists were a 10 man sniper squad and 2x Tacs, or Intercessors, or Infiltrators etc for almost as long as I've been playing. The problem wasn't the scouts, it was abusing the scouts. And now I hear those commercials about them filing for bankruptcy.
Daedalus81 wrote: Big brain might be Heavy Intercessors on an objective.
Or, you know, a blob of storm shield terminators, dunno why everyone is fixated on far less durable primaris units still...
Because you can probably get 50% or so more Heavy Intercessors who will have ObSec without some sort of Gotcha Strat. I mean we still have to go on a couple assumptions:
1) Heavy Intercessors will be 28 points per model based on Power Level to Points average Ratios.
2) Terminators will not plummet (or Skyrocket) in price.
If those are accurate - you can pull down about 7.5 Heavy Intercessors for the same price as 5 TH/SS Terminators. And supposedly the TH did go up in price.
Using the TH/SS blob has it's place - say Deep striking on the furthest objective, - Especially with the Teleport Redployment shenanigans they just added - but the HI as the generic approach also works.
A quick note that Assault Termies are 33 +10 for TH.
Ugh, I hate how they did the points in the codex. So does that 33 points include the lightning claws? They're not listed in the prices. If so, and if lightning claws are still 5 points apiece, does that mean the new 3 wound terminators are 23 PPM base? Just trying to figure out what the price for three wounds terminators of the spikey variety. will be
they way they did it is both much more legible, especially for marines and their 100000000 options, and more adjustable. You don't have to do this weird "Plasma guns are 10 points except for scions where they are 15" thing any more on a separate chart, all the points costs are baked into the options a unit takes, and since GW is dedicated to eliminating conversions and diverse weapon lists ANYWAYS, may as well have this as a benefit.
Do their arms ever get tired swinging that pendulum?
well of course they were getting a nerf.....they just became available for Dark Angels.
I'm bummed they didn't get CORE and also lost Stable Platform (Seriously, bikes are stable but Centurions aren't? How the [censored] does that make any sense?), but the point difference between Hurricane Bolters and Centurion Missile Launchers means I care a lot less than I might and if I'm Reserve Deploying Assault Cents I'll have less incentive to babysit them with a buffing character. They didn't need missing out on the keywords on top of a points increase thought.
Did anyone else catch that Lightning Claws are now an extra attack per claw instead of for the pair? That gets a lot closer to even with a Power Fist per point.
Super Ready wrote: There seems to be an awful lot of focus on this Apothecary-resurrecting-ATV thing... I'll posit that if that's what you're doing, you're wasting the bike's potential, having it sat back where the Apothecary can actually reach it.
Arguably, what GW want is for tournament lists to be reflective of what "fluffy" lists should look like, and I'm all for that.
If the "good" Space Marine army is an army featuring as few power armoured Space Marines as possible, then that's an issue.
The problem is that for some armies (CSM) they want to punish players for taking unfluffy units while also not making their fluffy units good. GW thinks it's some armies' job to lose.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Primario kart is a new model they want to sell a lot of, these "oversights" are by design.
Ugh, I hate how they did the points in the codex. So does that 33 points include the lightning claws? They're not listed in the prices. If so, and if lightning claws are still 5 points apiece, does that mean the new 3 wound terminators are 23 PPM base? Just trying to figure out what the price for three wounds terminators of the spikey variety. will be
Yea pretty much. It also looks like a lot of gear is costed bespoke to some units.
Servitors pay 5 for HBs. VV pay 3 for Claws / 8 for PF - basically a 2 point discount for the chainsword/pistol, I guess?
Ok, so if a 3 wound T4, 2+, 5++ body with deep strike is worth 33 PPM with two lightning claws what can we extrapolate the price of the same body with a combi-bolter and a chainaxe to be?
Storm Bolters on some other units are weirdly expensive 3 points on SG / 5 on vehicles. A chainaxe will probably be 2 or 3. I'd bet 28 points for that setup barring a spike tax.
Arguably, what GW want is for tournament lists to be reflective of what "fluffy" lists should look like, and I'm all for that.
If the "good" Space Marine army is an army featuring as few power armoured Space Marines as possible, then that's an issue.
The problem is that for some armies (CSM) they want to punish players for taking unfluffy units while also not making their fluffy units good. GW thinks it's some armies' job to lose.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Primario kart is a new model they want to sell a lot of, these "oversights" are by design.
Really? Then why are the tanks and new speeder so mediocre and the executioner and impulsor so much worse and the new monolith saddled with such silly restrictions? Is it because 'new models OP cause money' is a stupid take that's never been reflective of GW's 'throw darts at a wall in the dark' approach to putting new models on the power curve?
Really? Then why are the tanks and new speeder so mediocre and the executioner and impulsor so much worse and the new monolith saddled with such silly restrictions? Is it because 'new models OP cause money' is a stupid take that's never been reflective of GW's 'throw darts at a wall in the dark' approach to putting new models on the power curve?
Yeah, 'New Models= OP' definitely doesn't fly with these new releases.
A lot of the infantry [bar eradicators] seem OK, but serious mathhammer work needs to be done to show that they're even marginally better than existing units. There's way too many with roles that overlap with other units (even for the necrons- the ophydians have to fight for a spot with skorpekhs, wraiths and even praetorians).
Bladeguard are good, but they're not clearly better than terminators good (which actually isn't that high a bar), and there a bunch of other options that need to be looked at by comparison (vanguard vets with storm shield and Power [anything] are 26 to 35 points, with 35 being thunder hammer and stormshield, same as the 35 points for the blade guard). They don't actually stand out.
The vehicles... are just kind of indifferent.
Monolith is ungodly expensive, and costs CP, and doesn't benefit from jack.
The anti tank gladiator is the cheapest one, but pays through the nose for its two worthwhile shots.
Super Ready wrote: There seems to be an awful lot of focus on this Apothecary-resurrecting-ATV thing... I'll posit that if that's what you're doing, you're wasting the bike's potential, having it sat back where the Apothecary can actually reach it.
My main opponent plays Deathwatch, so I know he's pretty excited about just having the apothecary in teleport and bringing it down next to whatever unit loses a model, on whatever turn they lose it. This would allow a unit of 3 ATVs to be mobile.
Bladeguard were probably the best new unit of the bunch before they made eradicators even more ridiculous with the new codex.
I agree with the general point re: GW's balance philosophy being more "get drunk, put on a blindfold and lob darts in a random direction" than "evil masterminds," though.
One thing I am unhappy to be right about is that, just like I said, it turns out <CORE> is actually more of a nerf for everybody else than for space marines, who inexplicably get it on pretty much their entire army.
Ok, so if a 3 wound T4, 2+, 5++ body with deep strike is worth 33 PPM with two lightning claws what can we extrapolate the price of the same body with a combi-bolter and a chainaxe to be?
Storm Bolters on some other units are weirdly expensive 3 points on SG / 5 on vehicles. A chainaxe will probably be 2 or 3. I'd bet 28 points for that setup barring a spike tax.
That's my guess as well. No thoughts on gw basically giving Armourbane back to chainfists? Assuming Hellforged Contemptors are WS3 now then a double chainclaw unit will average 16 wounds against T8 3+ targets (remember, no invuls for knights in cc) give it Diabolic Strength and Prescience and that jumps to 29. Dead knight. If they follow this pattern for all formerly Armourbane weapons Fellblade accelerator cannon AE shells would be Heavy 2, S14, Ap-4, D3d3/9 against vehicles. Add some kind of durability buff to equal what Armoured Ceramite used to do against melta and that price tag starts to make a little sense.
The Newman wrote:Did anyone else catch that Lightning Claws are now an extra attack per claw instead of for the pair? That gets a lot closer to even with a Power Fist per point.
I did. It means once warp talons get 2 wounds 5 can beat bladeguard in cc if they charge first, 10 can beat 6. Lions drug down by a pack of wolves. Groovy.
yukishiro1 wrote:Honestly if people want to take the primariocart derp bikes and apothecaries I'd much rather they do that than take eradicators.
Overall the codex looks pretty good balance wise, with the conspicuous absence of sense when it comes to eradicators.
I hope they didn't nerf too many things too much. That there are only two supposedly busted units in the codex, I think that's a huge improvement and I think this edition is on track to being significantly more balanced than before. I can't wait to get my codex =D
yukishiro1 wrote: One thing I am unhappy to be right about is that, just like I said, it turns out <CORE> is actually more of a nerf for everybody else than for space marines, who inexplicably get it on pretty much their entire army.
What do you mean "inexplicably?" They're the protagonist faction.
It's a bit too early to claim that the CORE rule nerfs other factions.
For now, we know for a fact that it was a big nerf to marines, while a BUFF to necrons.
Remember that most of the buffs that are now CORE restricted in the necron codex, were warriors only before that, including the iconic MWBD. The CORE keyword in the necron case wasn't used to restrict the applicability of buffs, but to expand it.
We can tentatively say that the CORE keyword was meant as a nerf to marines, but that too would be just a random guess until we see at least 2-3 more factions. For sure though, right now there is nothing at all to support a narrative where the CORE keyword was some kind of indirect buff to marines.
Spoletta wrote: It's a bit too early to claim that the CORE rule nerfs other factions.
For now, we know for a fact that it was a big nerf to marines, while a BUFF to necrons.
Remember that most of the buffs that are now CORE restricted in the necron codex, were warriors only before that, including the iconic MWBD. The CORE keyword in the necron case wasn't used to restrict the applicability of buffs, but to expand it.
We can tentatively say that the CORE keyword was meant as a nerf to marines, but that too would be just a random guess until we see at least 2-3 more factions. For sure though, right now there is nothing at all to support a narrative where the CORE keyword was some kind of indirect buff to marines.
You marine defenders are such a treat. Core looked up to be a decent nerf to marines but nah basically all their infantry and dreads got it, I'm pretty sure this will not be rolled out to all the other factions. I'm all for fluffy armies but as it stand it seems GW thinks all kinds of marine infantry is core for no reason and the other armies can go and pound sand,
For your info, I'm a tyranid, sister and TS player, but sure feel free to call me a marine defender and ignoring my opinion if that makes you feel better.
Where did you see that? Were they barebones or upgraded a bunch? That's way out of whack for PL to Point ratios. That's more than a shooty Terminator and they have a power fist, and invuln. A terminator without the fist is 26.. Even if the 2+ 5++ is a wash with ObSec around the 2ppm estimated difference, 38 is insane. Ten Regular Intercessors is barely more than that.
Where did you see that? Were they barebones or upgraded a bunch? That's way out of whack for PL to Point ratios. That's more than a shooty Terminator and they have a power fist, and invuln. A terminator without the fist is 26.. Even if the 2+ 5++ is a wash with ObSec around the 2ppm estimated difference, 38 is insane. Ten Regular Intercessors is barely more than that.
Its wrong. Points are floating around, Heavy Intercessors are 28/model, and the heavy bolter variants are all +10. Maybe some confusion that those were the base weapons, perhaps?
Anyway, 5 man heavy intercessors are 140, 150 if you want a bigger gun on one.
Argive wrote: so all the Sm dreads get serpent shield or something ?
Duty Eternal went away as a Stratagem. Instead all Dreadnoughts always take 1 less damage from all attacks (minimum 1).
Ohh.. SO its a better serpent shield coz it works in CC.. Cool cool..
But the dreads no longer get bolter discipline. Obviously its all such a nerf.
Yeah that was a weird one.
I was also going to add that quite a few dread weapons got improved. Not just multi-melta, but the Primaris Redemptor dreads are pretty disgusting. Either more shots or more damage on their main weapons and fist.
Spoletta wrote: It's a bit too early to claim that the CORE rule nerfs other factions.
For now, we know for a fact that it was a big nerf to marines, while a BUFF to necrons.
Remember that most of the buffs that are now CORE restricted in the necron codex, were warriors only before that, including the iconic MWBD. The CORE keyword in the necron case wasn't used to restrict the applicability of buffs, but to expand it.
We can tentatively say that the CORE keyword was meant as a nerf to marines, but that too would be just a random guess until we see at least 2-3 more factions. For sure though, right now there is nothing at all to support a narrative where the CORE keyword was some kind of indirect buff to marines.
You marine defenders are such a treat. Core looked up to be a decent nerf to marines but nah basically all their infantry and dreads got it, I'm pretty sure this will not be rolled out to all the other factions. I'm all for fluffy armies but as it stand it seems GW thinks all kinds of marine infantry is core for no reason and the other armies can go and pound sand,
except that many people noted it likely wasn't intended as a nerf to marines but rather to direct people to build fluffier armies. the rules going to "infantry, dreads and bikes" was predicted almost as soon as it was announced. if you had your hopes up this was some "super marine nerf hahaha" then wel, no one's fault but your own
yukishiro1 wrote: Honestly if people want to take the primariocart derp bikes and apothecaries I'd much rather they do that than take eradicators.
Overall the codex looks pretty good balance wise, with the conspicuous absence of sense when it comes to eradicators.
Its not Either/Or. Outriders are FA, and a badly needed worthwhile FA choice. Erads are HS. I've been playing with resurrecting my Combi-wing army using Bone White Heavy Intercessors (with their actual rules whatever they may be) as the troops, DW Terminators and Bone White Aggressors in Elite, Ravenwing in Elite and FA, and some Bone White Erads in HS - The Primaris might not get Inner Circle/Death Wing rules/keywords but I'm tired of waiting for GW to fix it themselves and I'm just going to pretend rank and file Primaris have finally started metriculating into the First Company and this is how they'll be fielded.
except that many people noted it likely wasn't intended as a nerf to marines but rather to direct people to build fluffier armies. the rules going to "infantry, dreads and bikes" was predicted almost as soon as it was announced. if you had your hopes up this was some "super marine nerf hahaha" then wel, no one's fault but your own
Yeah it was pretty easy to predict Infantry, Walkers, Bikes, potentially TFC/Artillery.
How convenient then that fluffy for marines means basically all their power units and every other army gets nothing. I, unfortunately it seems, thought Core meant core units ala old WHFB style, and not every infantry unit and their mother too. Specialist units should not be core, because it seems Marines are still ahead of the pack by all measures. GW really missed the mark here imo.
Scouts moved to elite? Fair enough, but don't tell me all the special elite infantry is core then.
Spoletta wrote: It's a bit too early to claim that the CORE rule nerfs other factions.
For now, we know for a fact that it was a big nerf to marines, while a BUFF to necrons.
Remember that most of the buffs that are now CORE restricted in the necron codex, were warriors only before that, including the iconic MWBD. The CORE keyword in the necron case wasn't used to restrict the applicability of buffs, but to expand it.
We can tentatively say that the CORE keyword was meant as a nerf to marines, but that too would be just a random guess until we see at least 2-3 more factions. For sure though, right now there is nothing at all to support a narrative where the CORE keyword was some kind of indirect buff to marines.
Wait, nope. MWBD was all necron <dynasty> infantry previously, not just warriors. So included Immortals, Deathmarks, Lychguard, Flayed Ones, and even Destroyers (who were and are still infantry). It got expanded to Tomb Guard, but Flayed Ones and Destroyers lost access to it.
Core is a GW fluff/'how armies should look' thing, and little more than that.
Necrons Core is models that are Necrons (not Canopteks) and sane (so not destroyers and flayed ones). What people are overlooking is there are very good buffs for Destroyer and Canoptek keywords that don't give two figs about Core.
Marines got slightly nerfed by Core. As non-dread vehicles lose out and so do most (all?) Characters (and frankly SM vehicles are looking pretty poor compared to their infantry, so a 'tuned' marine list will barely feel it in that regard). But smash captains aren't buffing themselves, or being buffed by Lieutenants That is gone.
The main difference between the two books is thematic. Unlike Destroyers and Flayed Ones which are functionally 'rogue units.' There are very few situations where any Space Marine infantry is going to 'forget' how to take orders. That's what Core is based on for Marines. It does give a wider gameplay bonus, but its one of those very GW decisions where the deciding factor is 'fluff' and 'feel.'
----
For future books, we can make a few guesses:
HQs (and characters in general) will pretty much universally not be Core. It knocks a lot of self buffs out, and gets rid of a lot of 'I order myself where to aim to be more accurate' sillyness
Wraith units won't be Core for Craftworlds, much like Destroyers or Canopteks, they'll have their own buffs tuned to their own keyword.
Guard auxiliary units won't be Core, obviously. Tanks... I'm honestly not sure. Based on marines they shouldn't be, but tanks are far more Core to Guard than they are to marines.
Death Guard- I doubt very much that Poxwalkers or Cultists will be Core. Non-core solves the original problem with cultists (getting all the buffs) and hopefully they'll reign in the stupid point premium on them. I also doubt daemon engines will be Core, and Chaos marines in general will probably follow the Marine pattern and have non-Core Tanks.
Some, I have no idea what they're going to do. Daemons for example, and the mess they've made of Dark Eldar. Maybe you'll have to choose a primary god or primary subfaction and those models get Core.
----
@Castozor- Troops already mean Core in the old WHFB sense. It wasn't ever going to be a 1:1 Troops = Core, or even close to that. That'd be completely pointless.
Core is a GW fluff/'how armies should look' thing, and little more than that.
Really it's a way to ensure that armies that are supposed to be bad remain bad. They will use this to stop people from making low powered codices useful through creative list-building.
I have nothing to add, but just wanted to say that these threads you keep creating are very interesting and add great value to the forum, so thanks for that daedalus
Spoletta wrote: It's a bit too early to claim that the CORE rule nerfs other factions.
For now, we know for a fact that it was a big nerf to marines, while a BUFF to necrons.
Remember that most of the buffs that are now CORE restricted in the necron codex, were warriors only before that, including the iconic MWBD. The CORE keyword in the necron case wasn't used to restrict the applicability of buffs, but to expand it.
We can tentatively say that the CORE keyword was meant as a nerf to marines, but that too would be just a random guess until we see at least 2-3 more factions. For sure though, right now there is nothing at all to support a narrative where the CORE keyword was some kind of indirect buff to marines.
But this is just totally, flat-out wrong. You obviously don't play necrons. The <CORE> change nerfs necrons way, way harder than marines. There is only one change in the whole book I can think of that actually benefits <CORE> - one of the special character rules now impacts more than just warriors. Everything else, buffs that used to work on other stuff got shut down. Your own example is simply wrong - MWBD used to work on any <dynasty> infantry (and briefly any <dynasty> unit in the indomitus box version, weirdly). There are a number of other abilities that are now restricted to <CORE> that used to go on a much wider variety of targets.
<CORE> is a significant nerf to Necrons while for marines it pretty much only impacts stuff you weren't taking anyway in a competitive list.
If GW was trying to nerf marines with <CORE> they ended up accomplishing the exact opposite, because Marines take a far smaller nerf from it than the other faction released at the same time, a faction that was literally the worst in the game from a competitive results perspective in 9th. Even GW isn't that incompetent.
Marines maine nerf came in the form of nerfing their auras. You have to pay points for the chapter master and he only gives 1 unit full rerolls. Core was not necessary. All it does is force list choies. Strangely it's hurting marines a lot less than crons atm.
Deathwing infantry, like terminator squads and most DA characters, just got a new inner circle rule that gives an innate transhuman physiology (can't be wounded on 1-2-3). And terminators have a strata that up their toughness to T5 for 1 CP : great units.
So I'm very happy with the changes and I'll paint all my termi.
Yeah, DA got some nice stuff. Good to be last, I guess? (Though we'll see if the actual supplement is as nice as the index).
Not having access to Sternguard or Vanguard is OK
----
SW lost Wolf Scouts. No idea how this works fluffwise, since SW don't use their newbies for Scouts.
Bjorn is ridiculously durable with duty eternal and his feel no pain.
-----
BA have dreadnoughts for days. Just in general marines can go crazy with dreads.
Death Company Intercessors are... confusing. If I'm reading this right, if you switch to pistol and chainsword, no one can have a power weapon.
Voss wrote: Death Company Intercessors are... confusing. If I'm reading this right, if you switch to pistol and chainsword, no one can have a power weapon.
Yeah, that doesn't look great to me either. Seems you get that initial option to choose between either a bolt rifle unit, or a chainsword unit, and that then limits you to:
- bolt rifle unit: one guy gets to take a fancy pistol/chainsword/power sword instead of the rifle, and can take a fancy melee weapon if they didn't swap their rifle for one.
- chainsword unit: two fancy pistols. That's your lot.
Something tells me this is either shortsighted dumbness lined up to what will be available in the Assault Intercessors... OR, short-lived dumbness that will be overridden by the Codex alongside having more options in the Assault Intercessors kit when it drops.
SW lost Wolf Scouts. No idea how this works fluffwise, since SW don't use their newbies for Scouts.
...I don't know why it didn't occur to me before, but - Scouts are Elite now anyway. Very little reason to keep them separate, though I doubt Wolf Scouts were the reason for moving them there.
SW lost Wolf Scouts. No idea how this works fluffwise, since SW don't use their newbies for Scouts.
...I don't know why it didn't occur to me before, but - Scouts are Elite now anyway. Very little reason to keep them separate, though I doubt Wolf Scouts were the reason for moving them there.
Well, there are a couple things going on:
Fluffwise, it makes no sense.
Rules-wise, Wolf Scouts are 'fully fledged Space Marines'- they should have 2W now. Basic scouts don't.
Modelwise, Wolf scouts had access to a bunch of weapons scouts didn't, and people who bought wolf scouts have unusable models now.
that's a pile of 'feels bad.' And a weird one, since they didn't hesitate on dataslates for everything else (skyclaws made the trip!, and once upon a time SW were infamous for keeping their feet on the ground and disdaining jump packs). Nor did they hesitate on denying SW a list of units from the main book.
2d3 str9 ap-3 blast Land speeder vengeance.... sure it overheats on a 1 but who cares, that is 120pts for up to 6 las cannon shots with 3 damage, 4 with strat, big winner for me right there.
All Deathwing Terminators and dark angels characters having this too
"Each time an attack is made against this unit, if this unit has the Infantry keyword, an unmodified wound roll of 1-3 always fails, irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or
the model making that attack may have."
Jidmah wrote: I have nothing to add, but just wanted to say that these threads you keep creating are very interesting and add great value to the forum, so thanks for that daedalus
Castozor wrote: How convenient then that fluffy for marines means basically all their power units and every other army gets nothing. I, unfortunately it seems, thought Core meant core units ala old WHFB style, and not every infantry unit and their mother too. Specialist units should not be core, because it seems Marines are still ahead of the pack by all measures. GW really missed the mark here imo.
Scouts moved to elite? Fair enough, but don't tell me all the special elite infantry is core then.
Not to be totally pedantic but Centurions didn't get CORE, and Assault Cents were one of the grosser things in the codex.
Formosa wrote: 2d3 str9 ap-3 blast Land speeder vengeance.... sure it overheats on a 1 but who cares, that is 120pts for up to 6 las cannon shots with 3 damage, 4 with strat, big winner for me right there.
All Deathwing Terminators and dark angels characters having this too
"Each time an attack is made against this unit, if this unit has the Infantry keyword, an unmodified wound roll of 1-3 always fails, irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or the model making that attack may have."
The strat that gives +1 dmg (weapon of the dark age) is gone, it doesn't exist anymore.
Deathwing terminators just got very good, and deathwing knight are WS/BS 2+.
Formosa wrote: 2d3 str9 ap-3 blast Land speeder vengeance.... sure it overheats on a 1 but who cares, that is 120pts for up to 6 las cannon shots with 3 damage, 4 with strat, big winner for me right there.
All Deathwing Terminators and dark angels characters having this too
"Each time an attack is made against this unit, if this unit has the Infantry keyword, an unmodified wound roll of 1-3 always fails, irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or
the model making that attack may have."
The strat that gives +1 dmg (weapon of the dark age) is gone, it doesn't exist anymore.
Deathwing terminators just got very good, and deathwing knight are WS/BS 2+.
My pure deathwing army has sat on a shelf since 5th so I am finally gonna dig them out I think and get some pure deathwing games in
Formosa wrote: 2d3 str9 ap-3 blast Land speeder vengeance.... sure it overheats on a 1 but who cares, that is 120pts for up to 6 las cannon shots with 3 damage, 4 with strat, big winner for me right there.
All Deathwing Terminators and dark angels characters having this too
"Each time an attack is made against this unit, if this unit has the Infantry keyword, an unmodified wound roll of 1-3 always fails, irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or
the model making that attack may have."
The strat that gives +1 dmg (weapon of the dark age) is gone, it doesn't exist anymore.
Deathwing terminators just got very good, and deathwing knight are WS/BS 2+.
My pure deathwing army has sat on a shelf since 5th so I am finally gonna dig them out I think and get some pure deathwing games in
Same ! But don't go too hard until the supplement get out so we can still play them in a few month ...
Jidmah wrote: I have nothing to add, but just wanted to say that these threads you keep creating are very interesting and add great value to the forum, so thanks for that daedalus
I presume this is sarcasm?
Has Dakka corrupted you this much that you think it's sarcasm ? I think the same as Jidmah, you often make interesting threads, thanks for that !
Voss wrote: Between the two books, I think Elite has lost its meaning somewhat.
Instead of actual elites, its becoming more the 'catch-all' category. Not troops, but not fast or big guns either.
Both scouts and Spyders ended up there, and praetorians scooted off to fast attack.
There's definitely quite a bit of 'the army should look/feel the way we say it should' to these changes.
I mean, I think "Elite" for "Specialist Infantry" works. Units in the Heavy Support are armor and artillery, units in Fast Attack are highly mobile light units for recon or hit-and-run type things, and units in Elite are specialist infantry. Auxiliary infantry units that aren't core to the formation the player is fielding [would be attached from either the parent or another unit], like Scouts, Conscripts etc. don't really belong in Troops and shouldn't get ObSec, and trash auxiliary infantry is neither common enough nor diverse enough to warrant a whole slot type.
Anyway, I don't think there's a calling for Elite slot units to be strictly representing veterancy so much as being a specialist infantry unit. After all, it's not like there aren't exceptions to the other slots [like Eliminators, which are medium sniper infantry and neither armor, heavy weapons, or artillery]
Voss wrote: Between the two books, I think Elite has lost its meaning somewhat.
Instead of actual elites, its becoming more the 'catch-all' category. Not troops, but not fast or big guns either.
Both scouts and Spyders ended up there, and praetorians scooted off to fast attack.
There's definitely quite a bit of 'the army should look/feel the way we say it should' to these changes.
I mean, I think "Elite" for "Specialist Infantry" works. Units in the Heavy Support are armor and artillery, units in Fast Attack are highly mobile light units for recon or hit-and-run type things, and units in Elite are specialist infantry. Auxiliary infantry units that aren't core to the formation the player is fielding [would be attached from either the parent or another unit], like Scouts, Conscripts etc. don't really belong in Troops and shouldn't get ObSec, and trash auxiliary infantry is neither common enough nor diverse enough to warrant a whole slot type.
Anyway, I don't think there's a calling for Elite slot units to be strictly representing veterancy so much as being a specialist infantry unit. After all, it's not like there aren't exceptions to the other slots [like Eliminators, which are medium sniper infantry and neither armor, heavy weapons, or artillery]
Well, I don't think it strictly represents anything at this point. But it certainly isn't specialist infantry, what with all the monsters and walkers in the slot. And even jump troops, sometimes.
Similarly, heavy support is often a far cry from armor and artillery (most armies don't even have the latter).
Overall the system is loose and pretty arbitrary. HQs wander into elites because of lack of slots, FA and HS and Troops wander into elites to diversify or move troublesome units out of slots, but its left a lot without a definition or saddled with an inappropriate one.
The WHFB Core/Special/Rare may suit this muddled mess better than the existing Force Org.
Xenomancers wrote: Marines maine nerf came in the form of nerfing their auras. You have to pay points for the chapter master and he only gives 1 unit full rerolls. Core was not necessary. All it does is force list choies. Strangely it's hurting marines a lot less than crons atm.
Ok heres the thing..
CM does give FULL rerolls to 1x <core> unit.
However, it is my nderstanding he also gives rerolls 1's to everybody anyway? And with max -1 penalty.. that's sort of enough?
ALSO - The thing about your repulsor not getting CM full reroll ? Well.. you can now pay a CP to give it rerolls anyway.. (Something something machine spirit something startegem)
So yay?
So... It all really seems like a bunch of side grades, straight up buffs (dreads) and some minor nerfs.
But really the re-rolls are still there. Its just not simple as plotting down a CM and giving him a 9" aura relic and chad your way to victory while removing your opponents army from the game. From what ive seen it all seems to equate a side shuffle rather than some sort of Nerf.
Apologies if I have seem of these wrong. Just going on what ive glimpsed from bat reps.
Nothings really changed for the rest of the community until their codexes come out..
Rerolls matter. It's more than raw averages. When you're rolling two dice the chance for a really bad result can fall well outside average. Also, I don't see a reroll strat?
In any case an Executioner used to score 3.92 hits out of 4. Now it gets 1.66 with with its +1 to hit. Even if it still had four shots it'd be 3.33. The downstream impact of that is a 15% drop in damage with just hit rerolls with similar shots (the real drop is 58%).
My major concern is whether or not Leviathans get rerolls. If they do then all bets are off. Then again since they don't have half damage any more and Ironstone is off the table...
Daedalus81 wrote: Rerolls matter. It's more than raw averages. When you're rolling two dice the chance for a really bad result can fall well outside average. Also, I don't see a reroll strat?
In any case an Executioner used to score 3.92 hits out of 4. Now it gets 1.66 with with its +1 to hit. Even if it still had four shots it'd be 3.33. The downstream impact of that is a 15% drop in damage with just hit rerolls with similar shots (the real drop is 58%).
My major concern is whether or not Leviathans get rerolls. If they do then all bets are off. Then again since they don't have half damage any more and Ironstone is off the table...
Some starts I've noticed mentioned on previews/bat reps that seem really strong
Wrath of the machine spirit (or something) Reroll hits for vehicle unit (?)
Being able to move back to dev doctrine for a unit
Having ALL doctrines active for a unit - why... Why... all
These could just have been played/read incorrectly so Im not putting too much stock. But it seems eerily like 2.0 all over again. Doesn't seem so bad until you then see all the trait+doctrine+strat combo wombo ..
Yeah.. We need those codex's for everyone else.
Its still pretty much looks like a wash. A Nerf doesn't mean much if you are still better then most of what everyone else has access to..
Guilliman with tanks hasn't been a competitive list for literally years now, and it certainly wouldn't be competitive in 9th.
I do think Guilliman is making a comeback though with the explosion of Gravis Infantry carrying Assault weapons, with his Chapter Master not being nerfed (so far) - he gives them a bonus inch to their Advance roll offsetting the -1MV from Gravis, they give him Look Out Sir! Plus he's a built in LT. A roving brick of Gravis anchored by Guilliman feels like it might be pretty decent.
CM does give FULL rerolls to 1x <core> unit.
However, it is my nderstanding he also gives rerolls 1's to everybody anyway? And with max -1 penalty.. that's sort of enough?
One of the things I noticed - and it's a really minor thing that probably wouldnt come up that often but entertains me anyway - the CM picks a unit in the Command Phase, and gives them the ability. They don't have to STAY within 6". So Unit A gets the buff, and splits off to take over Objective A, while the Cappy and Unit B continue on to Objective 2.
Because this is the the price you pay for going supplement instead of codex.....all the buffs, all the time. You should be happy now.
They lost Dark Age and some other stuff. I'm not sure how to weigh 1+ 4++ 5+++ terminators who get +1 to hit when charged though. I'll smite the crap out of them, but 3 wounds each....they are 47 points though - not steep, but not cheap.
They lost Dark Age and some other stuff. I'm not sure how to weigh 1+ 4++ 5+++ terminators who get +1 to hit when charged though. I'll smite the crap out of them, but 3 wounds each....they are 47 points though - not steep, but not cheap.
A Natural 1 is still a failure isn't it? I roll a 1 for my armor save vs a AP0 weapon, I still lose, right? Sounds like the solution is what it's (almost) always been. Lots and lots of flashlights. Shoot em for the 1's.
They lost Dark Age and some other stuff. I'm not sure how to weigh 1+ 4++ 5+++ terminators who get +1 to hit when charged though. I'll smite the crap out of them, but 3 wounds each....they are 47 points though - not steep, but not cheap.
A Natural 1 is still a failure isn't it? I roll a 1 for my armor save vs a AP0 weapon, I still lose, right? Sounds like the solution is what it's (almost) always been. Lots and lots of flashlights. Shoot em for the 1's.
They lost Dark Age and some other stuff. I'm not sure how to weigh 1+ 4++ 5+++ terminators who get +1 to hit when charged though. I'll smite the crap out of them, but 3 wounds each....they are 47 points though - not steep, but not cheap.
A Natural 1 is still a failure isn't it? I roll a 1 for my armor save vs a AP0 weapon, I still lose, right? Sounds like the solution is what it's (almost) always been. Lots and lots of flashlights. Shoot em for the 1's.
They're 3 wounds now. That's 100+ per guy.
What else are your Guardsmen doing? Don't get me wrong, I like the change. Terminators needed something to get them back on the table. Their Achilles Heel has been massed rapid fire basic shooting or choppas etc for quite some time. The thing they were supposed to excel at "tanking". They used to be 3+ on 2D6 and weapons had save mods from nada to -6; so you saved a Lascannon on a 9+ on 2D6. Then they were changed to 3+ (I think?) on 1D6, then 2+(I think?), then 2+ 5++ but ever since their Armor save went to one dice per save they've been out of whack. GW has been trying to fix them for what 7 editions now? They're still even missing something. Bolter Drill helps the Shootinators, but not the Fightinators. The change to 2LC's was probably primarily aimed at the Fightinators.
It's 200+ per guy in just 3 years. It's kinda sad that Wulfen used to have twice the wounds of terminators and now they have less than them. At least they got their T buffed, although it's basically a compensation for the loss of 3++.
Too bad I've sold my WG termies, they were good before but they're beasts now.
Yep finally looks like Terminators are in a good place for the first time in decades.
As for the not being able to wound deathwing on a 1-3, I am calling mistake right now, that seems to be a mistake OR they are throwing it in there as a playtest rule, I am doubtful it will make it to the codex.
Formosa wrote: As for the not being able to wound deathwing on a 1-3, I am calling mistake right now, that seems to be a mistake OR they are throwing it in there as a playtest rule, I am doubtful it will make it to the codex.
I thought we were getting that straight from the codex leaks?
Gonna love some marines getting quantum shielding.
Formosa wrote: Yep finally looks like Terminators are in a good place for the first time in decades.
As for the not being able to wound deathwing on a 1-3, I am calling mistake right now, that seems to be a mistake OR they are throwing it in there as a playtest rule, I am doubtful it will make it to the codex.
That was hysterical. Yeah I doubt it'll last very long. It's going to be CHARACTER Inner Circle or something.
If they do take it away then they should at least give back transhuman strat as an option. Deathwing have been crap for years, it will be great to see them on the table again.
Formosa wrote: As for the not being able to wound deathwing on a 1-3, I am calling mistake right now, that seems to be a mistake OR they are throwing it in there as a playtest rule, I am doubtful it will make it to the codex.
I thought we were getting that straight from the codex leaks?
Gonna love some marines getting quantum shielding.
n
No, that's straight from the DAFAQ on the GW site.
No leaks, no rumor, just direct game rules.
I suspect it's going to be the 'trendy rule' of 9th edition books. It's part of quantum shielding too, and I suspect it will show up for other 'supposed to be tough, but aren't really' units in books to come.
Jidmah wrote: I have nothing to add, but just wanted to say that these threads you keep creating are very interesting and add great value to the forum, so thanks for that daedalus
I presume this is sarcasm?
I understand why you might feel that way, but it is not. I personally believe that honestly speaking your mind is not just telling people when I believe that they are wrong, but also telling them when I believe they are doing good things. You are in the rare position of being on both sides of the coin
Question for you all - how would you feel about the Inner Circle rule being a 3+, instead of a 4+...? Gives a little more survivability to some of the higher Strength weapons, without being too nuts - albeit, it doesn't do anything against plasma and equivalents, which does seem to be the bane of Termie units at the moment.
Super Ready wrote: Question for you all - how would you feel about the Inner Circle rule being a 3+, instead of a 4+...? Gives a little more survivability to some of the higher Strength weapons, without being too nuts - albeit, it doesn't do anything against plasma and equivalents, which does seem to be the bane of Termie units at the moment.
Are all the other rules like it going to a 4+ too? I mean it's Transhuman Physiology that's always on. In theory it's 5 battle rounds, 2 turns per battle round, maybe two turns the first and the last you won't see combat, it's still 8 turns of a 2CP strat that's always on. Per unit. It's insane. Not that I don't love it for my Combi-wing, but it's nuts. It's also a somewhat a lie. The tie breaker goes to the weapon. (attacker's priority pg 362) Something that always wounds on 2+'s will still wound something that can't be wounded on less than 4.
Super Ready wrote: Question for you all - how would you feel about the Inner Circle rule being a 3+, instead of a 4+...? Gives a little more survivability to some of the higher Strength weapons, without being too nuts - albeit, it doesn't do anything against plasma and equivalents, which does seem to be the bane of Termie units at the moment.
The things it really screws over is anything with +1 to wound abilities/strays - BA Chapter Tactic and T'au Sept strat are prime examples - due to the inclusion of 'unmodified' - +1 to wound only has any effect if the strength is lower than the toughness of the target and you're generally going to be looking at T4/5 for almost any inner circle infantry, I believe?
Super Ready wrote: Question for you all - how would you feel about the Inner Circle rule being a 3+, instead of a 4+...? Gives a little more survivability to some of the higher Strength weapons, without being too nuts - albeit, it doesn't do anything against plasma and equivalents, which does seem to be the bane of Termie units at the moment.
The things it really screws over is anything with +1 to wound abilities/strays - BA Chapter Tactic and T'au Sept strat are prime examples - due to the inclusion of 'unmodified' - +1 to wound only has any effect if the strength is lower than the toughness of the target and you're generally going to be looking at T4/5 for almost any inner circle infantry, I believe?
Meh. On the one hand I get it it's insane. On the other, it's not THAT much different from the Drukhari Poisoned Weapon rule. It's just flowing backwards a little, and results in a little more downside. S4 on T4 was already only wounding on 4+. S7 Plasma was only wounding on 3+. You only lost the one successful roll (not counting modifiers) but Plasma was for the Save Mod not the S anyway. Ironically I think Grav (If you've got it) is the way to go. It feels like they tried to hard to make Heavy Bolters a viable option to Grav, but Grav is still king more often than not, so will squeeze out the heavy bolter when there's an option.
Sidetracked myself but back on track - Grav, Plasma Shuriken Somethings, Power Swords, Lightning Claws, Hellblades, Gatling/Bolt Cannons, Just about every Grey Knight with a force weapon ever, Hot Shot Volley Guns, Vulcan Mega Bolters, Punisher Gatling Canons, oooooh CHEM CANONS! - TL Assault Cannons - Just about everything about Shining Spears, Twin Starcannon. There's no shortage of S4/5/6 -2/-3/-4 weapons on stuff you were probably already taking or might have been taking. It could definitely shift the meta (assuming it lasts, and it's widespread enough to go beyond just DA or DA gets super popular because of it but I think it'd be a mistake to chase DA as a Flavor of the Month.) More if not all of that was already wounding on 4's what little wasn't was either wounding on 5's because it was S3 or a few wounding on 3's.
Super Ready wrote: Question for you all - how would you feel about the Inner Circle rule being a 3+, instead of a 4+...? Gives a little more survivability to some of the higher Strength weapons, without being too nuts - albeit, it doesn't do anything against plasma and equivalents, which does seem to be the bane of Termie units at the moment.
The things it really screws over is anything with +1 to wound abilities/strays - BA Chapter Tactic and T'au Sept strat are prime examples - due to the inclusion of 'unmodified' - +1 to wound only has any effect if the strength is lower than the toughness of the target and you're generally going to be looking at T4/5 for almost any inner circle infantry, I believe?
Meh. On the one hand I get it it's insane. On the other, it's not THAT much different from the Drukhari Poisoned Weapon rule. It's just flowing backwards a little, and results in a little more downside. S4 on T4 was already only wounding on 4+. S7 Plasma was only wounding on 3+. You only lost the one successful roll (not counting modifiers) but Plasma was for the Save Mod not the S anyway. Ironically I think Grav (If you've got it) is the way to go. It feels like they tried to hard to make Heavy Bolters a viable option to Grav, but Grav is still king more often than not, so will squeeze out the heavy bolter when there's an option.
Sidetracked myself but back on track - Grav, Plasma Shuriken Somethings, Power Swords, Lightning Claws, Hellblades, Gatling/Bolt Cannons, Just about every Grey Knight with a force weapon ever, Hot Shot Volley Guns, Vulcan Mega Bolters, Punisher Gatling Canons, oooooh CHEM CANONS! - TL Assault Cannons - Just about everything about Shining Spears, Twin Starcannon. There's no shortage of S4/5/6 -2/-3/-4 weapons on stuff you were probably already taking or might have been taking. It could definitely shift the meta (assuming it lasts, and it's widespread enough to go beyond just DA or DA gets super popular because of it but I think it'd be a mistake to chase DA as a Flavor of the Month.) More if not all of that was already wounding on 4's what little wasn't was either wounding on 5's because it was S3 or a few wounding on 3's.
Deathwing knights are also relatively cheap and killy. Terminators got a big boost in the marine codex, what with getting to be core and an extra wound and all, and this effect nerfs hard the weapons that benefit from the invul nerf to storm shields.
But really, mouth out how hard it is for any of those to kill a deathwing squad. Then math the reverse.
Deathwing knights are also relatively cheap and killy. Terminators got a big boost in the marine codex, what with getting to be core and an extra wound and all, and this effect nerfs hard the weapons that benefit from the invul nerf to storm shields.
But really, mouth out how hard it is for any of those to kill a deathwing squad. Then math the reverse.
Its not often you see models with a price tag approaching Custodian Guard called relatively cheap.
Until you get to S8/S10 vs T4/T5 You're only losing 16.667% of wound rolls. A power sword is what? 5ish points give or take, army from army? even 2 attacks S3/4/5 vs T4/5 You were already wounding on 4's and forcing/washing the Invuln. What's a Multi-Melta? Overkill and 20+ points for 2 and only 2 attacks while that power sword is as many as you can find on the model? I'm not saying it's not good, I'm saying the meta can shift this into practically irrelevant pretty fast. Its not like DA would be the only army 20+ power sword attacks on a unit might be useful against. I wouldn't even mind if this went to all Terminators in any chapter, even the spikey Terminators in the Legions. All this does is slightly shrink the optimal window for weapon stats. I just looked at most of the codex I could find on the web. Just about everyone has something in this window. Some are better some are worse than others, but they all have something, having to take them in case DA will still find a use for them in case Aggressors, or Heavy Intercessors, or so on and so on. This feels meta shifting not game breaking.
Deathwing knights are also relatively cheap and killy. Terminators got a big boost in the marine codex, what with getting to be core and an extra wound and all, and this effect nerfs hard the weapons that benefit from the invul nerf to storm shields.
But really, mouth out how hard it is for any of those to kill a deathwing squad. Then math the reverse.
Its not often you see models with a price tag approaching Custodian Guard called relatively cheap.
Until you get to S8/S10 vs T4/T5 You're only losing 16.667% of wound rolls. A power sword is what? 5ish points give or take, army from army? even 2 attacks S3/4/5 vs T4/5 You were already wounding on 4's and forcing/washing the Invuln. What's a Multi-Melta? Overkill and 20+ points for 2 and only 2 attacks while that power sword is as many as you can find on the model? I'm not saying it's not good, I'm saying the meta can shift this into practically irrelevant pretty fast. Its not like DA would be the only army 20+ power sword attacks on a unit might be useful against. I wouldn't even mind if this went to all Terminators in any chapter, even the spikey Terminators in the Legions. All this does is slightly shrink the optimal window for weapon stats. I just looked at most of the codex I could find on the web. Just about everyone has something in this window. Some are better some are worse than others, but they all have something, having to take them in case DA will still find a use for them in case Aggressors, or Heavy Intercessors, or so on and so on. This feels meta shifting not game breaking.
All terminators are fairly superior to custodian guard. Custodian guard are kinda bad. They sit around on a backfield and take a bit too much to die, but have limited effect on the battlefield anyways.
Terminators get some real choice in their weapon options, better shooting and better melee. Heck terminators hae always gotten better melee options than even custodes terminators, but their toughness buff and the shift in how auras work really benefit terminators here. The holdback was a loss of transhuman, which deathwing now always gets.
I'm not sure why you think the meta will suddenly shift to all power swords, I mean an extremely meta unit is already power swords. You know, bladeguard. But this effects those too now. 16 percent damage nerf is quite strong.
I'm not sure why you think the meta will suddenly shift to all power swords,
I don't. I don't think this lasts that long. But if it did... nor would it necessarily only be power swords. Not all armies have those. But they all have something. I did make that big long list.
I mean an extremely meta unit is already power swords. You know, bladeguard. But this effects those too now. 16 percent damage nerf is quite strong.
I'm not sure it would be BGV, I mean if we're talking equal points (are we talking Deathwing Knights?) 5/10 you're looking at what (around so I'm not posting exactly points costs) 250/500 That's 2.5/5 BGV units. You might see 2, I doubt you'd see 5. 10 Knights vs 4x3 BGV + an ancient (the rounding goes in opposite directions so 5x3 would be way more, while the ancient is about the same less than a full BGV).4x3modelsx3A (36)per + 4x3x1 (12) (Shock Assault) + 3x1(3) (Sgts) 51A hitting on 2's (Ancient Ability) 42.84 hits, 21.42 wounds, 2+-3+1 4+ or 4++ 10.71 saves, 21 damage with some lost to 3W models. Without Transhuman, 42.84 hits, 28 wounds, 14 saves, 28 damage. if the DWK strike first, - 2 squads of 5 so they max Sgt Bonus too - 32 Attacks (24 Mace, 8 Flail) 24, 20, 16.8, 8.4, 24 Damage(with 1/3 lost for a D3 mace = 16 Damage, + 8, 6.72, 4.5, 2.25 4.5 (Flail: None Lost) 20.5 damage. I think Marines would do it with Grav. Figure 60-65% of the 5 DWK cost for Grav Devs. 16 shots, 10.72 hits, 5.36 wounds 2.68 saves, 5.36 damage with some lost. Ratio the points per damage and it's about 8.3 with some lost. You'll get about 3 TwinLC Terminators per 2 DWK - 5 twinLC Terminators will get 26 attacks 2+2 (for LCs, right?) + 1 Shock Assault = 5 per + 1 for Sgt - 26 17 hits 8.5 wounds + 4.25 wounds for rerolls, 12.75 wounds 2+ -2 +1 means armor save on a 3+ 2.8 damage, 3.8 after points ratio. So point for Point BGV will kill 70% of a DWK, 90% of a TH/SS Terminator, Gravs kill 50-60% without getting a strike back, LC Terminators kill 20% of a DWK then get obliterated? 15 Harlequin Troupes is roughly the same cost as 5DWK, 60 attacks 40 hits, 20 wounds, 10 saves, 10 damage, none lost. 3 dead, 1 wounded. Custodian guard will get more than 75% of that, but not much more at BS2 and D3D on the spear. Shining Spears are also a 3 per 2 price ratio and kill not quite 60% of a DWK point for point. You're looking for high rate of "fire" S4/5/6 -3save with multi-damage if you can. High Strength high ROF -3 is both harder to find and super expensive. I used the power sword as an example because it was the cheapest S4ish -3 D1 you can probably find.
As I said it's not like these units - Grav Devs, Shining Spears, Bonesword Warriors - which may be in trouble at only -2 - and so on and so on wouldn't carve Terminators, Heavy Intercessors, or even regular Intercessors to ribbons if there isn't a DA Terminator to be found.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: We don't need Transhuman back as a Strat, period. Those kinds of Strats are garbage design.
Agreed. Anything that makes the already bad wounding table worse needs to go. That goes for Transhuman, VOTLW, the Salamanders super doctrine, etc., etc..
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: We don't need Transhuman back as a Strat, period. Those kinds of Strats are garbage design.
Agreed. Anything that makes the already bad wounding table worse needs to go. That goes for Transhuman, VOTLW, the Salamanders super doctrine, etc., etc..
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: We don't need Transhuman back as a Strat, period. Those kinds of Strats are garbage design.
Agreed. Anything that makes the already bad wounding table worse needs to go. That goes for Transhuman, VOTLW, the Salamanders super doctrine, etc., etc..
Agree.. Baking it into units is terrible..
No, just it existing in general is pretty terrible. Especially for T4 or less.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: We don't need Transhuman back as a Strat, period. Those kinds of Strats are garbage design.
Agreed. Anything that makes the already bad wounding table worse needs to go. That goes for Transhuman, VOTLW, the Salamanders super doctrine, etc., etc..
Agree.. Baking it into units is terrible..
No, just it existing in general is pretty terrible. Especially for T4 or less.
Yeah I meant that.. It shouldn't be baked in or be a strategem..
I don't really see an issue with it being a stratagem - you're limited to one use per phase, so only one unit benefits at a time, and it costs you CP to do so - so you're not going to be doing it all game.
Baking it into a unit is a really bad idea unless that unit is paying a points premium for the privilege - and even then, I'd want to limit it to maybe special one-offs like a named character or a LoW.
Super Ready wrote: I don't really see an issue with it being a stratagem - you're limited to one use per phase, so only one unit benefits at a time, and it costs you CP to do so - so you're not going to be doing it all game.
Baking it into a unit is a really bad idea unless that unit is paying a points premium for the privilege - and even then, I'd want to limit it to maybe special one-offs like a named character or a LoW.
Its bit like LFR start before modifier cap and re-roll everything...
Anything that makes a unit be able to soak up disproportionate amount of fire power seems a bit gotcha..
I actually would like it. We need more rules like this in the game for slow close combat elite units. My gripe isn't with a couple of terminator units having this, it's why it isn't default for all terminators. It's not a balance problem, because the DA knights pay quite a bit for this stuff (47 points each, a standard termi is 38 I think), but a fluff problem. Why should the DA termies be this super elite unit and not the wolfguard ones or black templar ones? They are all first companies.
Transhuman probably should have been -1 to wound, not only wounding on a 4+; it makes little sense that being super-human has no effect on normal bullets but makes titan battle cannons bounce off you half the time. That would make it the inverse of vets, and would be a nice thematic duality - CSM more focused on killing, loyalists on enduring.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: We don't need Transhuman back as a Strat, period. Those kinds of Strats are garbage design.
Agreed. Anything that makes the already bad wounding table worse needs to go. That goes for Transhuman, VOTLW, the Salamanders super doctrine, etc., etc..
Are Blood Ravens still valid? I recall they had this and the community went "meh". Am I misremembering some restrictions or something else?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote: Transhuman probably should have been -1 to wound, not only wounding on a 4+; it makes little sense that being super-human has no effect on normal bullets but makes titan battle cannons bounce off you half the time. That would make it the inverse of vets, and would be a nice thematic duality - CSM more focused on killing, loyalists on enduring.
That makes them scary durable against small arms as well as anti-TEQ though. -1 to wound would be better in every way except when doubling out, right?
Spoletta wrote: I actually would like it. We need more rules like this in the game for slow close combat elite units. My gripe isn't with a couple of terminator units having this, it's why it isn't default for all terminators.
It's not a balance problem, because the DA knights pay quite a bit for this stuff (47 points each, a standard termi is 38 I think), but a fluff problem. Why should the DA termies be this super elite unit and not the wolfguard ones or black templar ones? They are all first companies.
Knights are 47, but a lot of that is gear and stats (their maces are thunderhammers without the -1 to hit, and they get WS 2+. The WS upgrade (and lack of -1) is costing them 4 points, basically) . But standard DA terminators get it too, and they're priced the same as every other terminator. (Actually, they get a slight discount, as they're priced at 33 but have to pay for their power fists (4x5), which the sgt doesn't have, so he stays at 33), but normal marine terminators are all 38 pts per model, so the sergeant is paying for a power fist he doesn't have)
But in general, I also like the rule. I was pondering what would happen if some eldar units got a similar rule, but for 'to hit' rolls. Not advocating it, necessarily, but tossing it out as an idea.
Spoletta wrote: I actually would like it. We need more rules like this in the game for slow close combat elite units. My gripe isn't with a couple of terminator units having this, it's why it isn't default for all terminators.
It's not a balance problem, because the DA knights pay quite a bit for this stuff (47 points each, a standard termi is 38 I think), but a fluff problem. Why should the DA termies be this super elite unit and not the wolfguard ones or black templar ones? They are all first companies.
Knights are 47, but a lot of that is gear and stats (their maces are thunderhammers without the -1 to hit, and they get WS 2+. The WS upgrade (and lack of -1) is costing them 4 points, basically) . But standard DA terminators get it too, and they're priced the same as every other terminator. (Actually, they get a slight discount, as they're priced at 33 but have to pay for their power fists (4x5), which the sgt doesn't have, so he stays at 33), but normal marine terminators are all 38 pts per model, so the sergeant is paying for a power fist he doesn't have)
But in general, I also like the rule. I was pondering what would happen if some eldar units got a similar rule, but for 'to hit' rolls. Not advocating it, necessarily, but tossing it out as an idea.
I shudder at the screeching we would hear.. My punt is that eldar wil just flat out ignore the -1 cap or something equally stupid.
Oh, yeah. There would definitely be complaints. But it would let bad BS armies function while providing a defensive buff to the army/units.
The big problem its really unintuitive to punish 'good' marksmen over bad ones, even though it could be better gameplay.
But I don't think they'll go to stacking penalties again. It makes a really horrific division between shooting armies that can soak the penalties and shooting armies that really can't, and can't function if they're globally penalized. They're just not fun.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: We don't need Transhuman back as a Strat, period. Those kinds of Strats are garbage design.
Agreed. Anything that makes the already bad wounding table worse needs to go. That goes for Transhuman, VOTLW, the Salamanders super doctrine, etc., etc..
Are Blood Ravens still valid? I recall they had this and the community went "meh". Am I misremembering some restrictions or something else?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote: Transhuman probably should have been -1 to wound, not only wounding on a 4+; it makes little sense that being super-human has no effect on normal bullets but makes titan battle cannons bounce off you half the time. That would make it the inverse of vets, and would be a nice thematic duality - CSM more focused on killing, loyalists on enduring.
That makes them scary durable against small arms as well as anti-TEQ though. -1 to wound would be better in every way except when doubling out, right?
The thing you're missing is Deathwing get the benefit for free on top of everything else, where the wounding part taking up a whole Chapter Tactic wasn't very good for those W1 models. Then the second half of the tactic was meh. SUPER opportunity cost choosing that route and none of that here.
The thing you're missing is Deathwing get the benefit for free on top of everything else, where the wounding part taking up a whole Chapter Tactic wasn't very good for those W1 models. Then the second half of the tactic was meh. SUPER opportunity cost choosing that route and none of that here.
I think the core unit changes make a much bigger difference than people are giving it credit for. Not only did the CM ability change as to what it affects, and how it affects them, but core not including tanks seems like a very deliberate design to prevent something like gladiators or executioners being babysat by a CM to keep playing that Iron Hands castle.
The core units changes seem fine to me. They do seem to reduce some of the silliness of having a spare captain do nothing but babysit some tanks, or to having a chaplain hang back and inspire a tank to shoot better. Or a lieutenant to help the wound better.
I think this book is pretty well designed. hope you all enjoy it as much as we have been looking forward to it locally here!
Automatically Appended Next Post: also, I'm surprised no one mentioned that Aggressors lost their double shoot ability.
The issue is that minor nerfs have the community going "Well except for eradicators, all this is totes balanced now! yay!" And, it's not. Marines remain codex number 1 if you deleted the eradicator entry from the game.
Was there any changes to inceptors? With the nerf to agressors brutalizing everything (good riddance), the assault bolter variant seems like it would be a viable alternative if you want the mobility over the aggressor's melee weapons.
Formosa wrote: Yep finally looks like Terminators are in a good place for the first time in decades.
As for the not being able to wound deathwing on a 1-3, I am calling mistake right now, that seems to be a mistake OR they are throwing it in there as a playtest rule, I am doubtful it will make it to the codex.
I hope it stays and other faction termintors get it too.
Formosa wrote: Yep finally looks like Terminators are in a good place for the first time in decades.
As for the not being able to wound deathwing on a 1-3, I am calling mistake right now, that seems to be a mistake OR they are throwing it in there as a playtest rule, I am doubtful it will make it to the codex.
I hope it stays and other faction termintors get it too.
Be careful what you wish for. *laughs in death guard*
The change to DA Terminator surprised me: I've got a Deathwing army that is gathering dust from 4th edition, so, it's really interesting but I'm also inclined to think this will be a brief moment of glory (even if, in my guts, I know DA will be as usual between the last codex to be updated).
Just as a side note: there is a nerf in the Inner Circle (a small but thematic one) that disallow you to Fall Back. Unfortunately, I feel that it's redundant in 9th. Also, all the Ravenwing bikes and characters have the same cap on wound roll (but I suppose with R5 it's slightly less relevant).
Seems like Dark Angel can finally create a decent Ravenwing and Deathwing force. I was particularly surprised by the fact that a lots of options really use very few choices from the FOC.
You can have two Talonmaster for an HQ choice, the Command Squad allows you to include at least two different FNP (Banner and Apothecary) without taking a slot in the Force Organization Chart... a single Vanguard detachment will probably be more than enough for a lot of goodies up to 2000 points.
Also with the limits on minus to hit the era of the Darkshroud came to an end, and as already said the plasma version are now 120 points extremely well used.
Generally speaking, you can build an army to negate secondaries that is extremely mobile and very sturdy: Land Speeder with invulnerable save (5+ or even 4+), very resilient unit (Terminator of Bikes, wounded only on 4+, with a 5+/4+ invulnerable, and a 6++ or 5++ FNP).
You can contest objectives provided some Tactical with Objective Secured is nearby, and thanks to Combined Assault you need a 6" charge (a Drop Pod to inhibit enemy around objective and bring some ObjSec bodies fast will be handly).
I'm not playing during this months due to Covid, but I suspect this is an overcorrection caused by both the further increase in lethality/number of shot and the abysmal results of Dark Angel in tournament.
I also suspect it's a little too much when you consider any possibly interaction mixing this stuff with the Space Marine Codex.
I mean, when was the last time a SM aircraft had an Invulnerable save? (also, here is some kind of loop I don't understand: the Nephilim have listed Jink as abilities, but Jink require the Chapter Tactics, and the model souldn't have it anymore since it's a vehicle... it's some kind of twisted loop in traditional GW style).
I suspect (and to be honest, fear a little) that Dark Angel will be the new Iron Hands (even if for a short time). Maybe they won't be as easy to use (if your opponent manage to cripple the Ravenwing or swarm the table to keep your Deathwing away you will be in serious trouble), but I feel like all this is a little too much.
P.S: I suppone if the Inner Circle rules goes to all Terminator, Death Guard will be nasty, but not so bonkers. You can already give the equivalent to DR to Deathwing. It's more of a meta shift because you can have a unit that is both resistant to anti tanks (wound rule and Invulnerable) and to mass small fire (armor save, FNP and +1 wound).
Vindicator siege shields exist again after having an edition off, and if you take one now they get +1 to saves against ranged weapons.
Heh, yeah, somewhere deep within the Eye of Terror the Iron Warriors just found something to finally be happy about. Dig it.
So one change that interests me is the one to weapons that used to have the Armourbane rule, e.g. chainfists and dreadnought chainfists. Both got a damage buff: a swingy one against everything that isn't a vehicle and a solid one against vehicles, with chainfists going for D2 to Dd3 against non vehicles and D3 against vehicles, and dreadnought chainfists going from D4 to D2d3 against non vehicles and D6 against vehicles. So a possible 50% increase against non vehicles and a solid 50% increase against vehicles. Think that will be applied to everything that used to have the Armourbane rule? Like maybe a VERY BIG GUN on a VERY BIG TANK available to marines of both the boring and the spiky varieties?
I'm happy about it too, I was planning on getting a vindicator for my warband, so this is good
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: We don't need Transhuman back as a Strat, period. Those kinds of Strats are garbage design.
Agreed. Anything that makes the already bad wounding table worse needs to go. That goes for Transhuman, VOTLW, the Salamanders super doctrine, etc., etc..
Are Blood Ravens still valid? I recall they had this and the community went "meh". Am I misremembering some restrictions or something else?
I wasn't specifically targeting the new DA rules, I was talking about anything that affects the wounding table. The new DA rules are actually less problematic than strategems like VOTLW or Transhuman Physiology, because you already know its there and can plan accordingly. Those strategems, however, can cause "gotcha" moments. When suddenly all those S5 chaincannon shots are wounding your knight on 4s instead of 5s, or your S16 volcano cannon is wounding T4 or T5 primaris infantry on 4s instead of 2s it's not always something you saw coming. It also screws with balance, because how do you balance those S5 guns when for 1CP they can become effectively S8?
stratigo wrote: Plenty have people have mentioned agressors.
The issue is that minor nerfs have the community going "Well except for eradicators, all this is totes balanced now! yay!" And, it's not. Marines remain codex number 1 if you deleted the eradicator entry from the game.
Community is saying that because it is true.
Except for eradicators, there is no more reason to complain about marines now. They are really well designed and surely solid, but not OP.
They are also not doing particularly well in the unnerfed version at the moment, so what makes you think that they will be number 1 in the post nerf?
If I were to toss my bet on a faction being number one now, it would be sisters.
But in general, I also like the rule. I was pondering what would happen if some eldar units got a similar rule, but for 'to hit' rolls. Not advocating it, necessarily, but tossing it out as an idea.
Not a bad idea for things like Harlequinns. One issue is To Hit is more potent than To Wound is more potent than save mods. Another is that To Hit is generally army based not weapon type based. Keeping it To Wound seems better, and you can fluff it as the acrobats twisting to deflect the shot off an armor plate.
stratigo wrote: Plenty have people have mentioned agressors.
The issue is that minor nerfs have the community going "Well except for eradicators, all this is totes balanced now! yay!" And, it's not. Marines remain codex number 1 if you deleted the eradicator entry from the game.
Community is saying that because it is true.
Except for eradicators, there is no more reason to complain about marines now. They are really well designed and surely solid, but not OP.
They are also not doing particularly well in the unnerfed version at the moment, so what makes you think that they will be number 1 in the post nerf?
If I were to toss my bet on a faction being number one now, it would be sisters.
Ehh, there are still some power level issues with the Marine dex, even without eradicators. A lot of stuff got fixed, but there are still quite a few things that are outliers that need to be fixed.
Cybtroll wrote: The change to DA Terminator surprised me: I've got a Deathwing army that is gathering dust from 4th edition, so, it's really interesting but I'm also inclined to think this will be a brief moment of glory (even if, in my guts, I know DA will be as usual between the last codex to be updated).
Just as a side note: there is a nerf in the Inner Circle (a small but thematic one) that disallow you to Fall Back. Unfortunately, I feel that it's redundant in 9th. Also, all the Ravenwing bikes and characters have the same cap on wound roll (but I suppose with R5 it's slightly less relevant).
Seems like Dark Angel can finally create a decent Ravenwing and Deathwing force. I was particularly surprised by the fact that a lots of options really use very few choices from the FOC.
The DA supplement will be the last Marine supplement, but it’ll also be one of the first four-ish releases.
I’m waiting for the supplement but I’m already playing with Heavy Intercessors for troops (painted bone white). If they get/can get Inner circle/Deathwing fine, if not fine. Fill out with some Termies bikes, speeders, aggressors and Eradicators in a Batallion.
stratigo wrote: Plenty have people have mentioned agressors.
The issue is that minor nerfs have the community going "Well except for eradicators, all this is totes balanced now! yay!" And, it's not. Marines remain codex number 1 if you deleted the eradicator entry from the game.
Community is saying that because it is true.
Except for eradicators, there is no more reason to complain about marines now. They are really well designed and surely solid, but not OP.
They are also not doing particularly well in the unnerfed version at the moment, so what makes you think that they will be number 1 in the post nerf?
If I were to toss my bet on a faction being number one now, it would be sisters.
Ehh, there are still some power level issues with the Marine dex, even without eradicators. A lot of stuff got fixed, but there are still quite a few things that are outliers that need to be fixed.
All codici have some power spikes here and there and don't enjoy a perfect internal balance. Even with those though, the codex has a decent internal balance, especially considering the massive amount of choices it has to balance.
For external balance time will tell, but at the moment there are no immediately visible issues (except eradicators).
Cybtroll wrote: The change to DA Terminator surprised me: I've got a Deathwing army that is gathering dust from 4th edition, so, it's really interesting but I'm also inclined to think this will be a brief moment of glory (even if, in my guts, I know DA will be as usual between the last codex to be updated).
Just as a side note: there is a nerf in the Inner Circle (a small but thematic one) that disallow you to Fall Back. Unfortunately, I feel that it's redundant in 9th. Also, all the Ravenwing bikes and characters have the same cap on wound roll (but I suppose with R5 it's slightly less relevant).
Seems like Dark Angel can finally create a decent Ravenwing and Deathwing force. I was particularly surprised by the fact that a lots of options really use very few choices from the FOC.
The DA supplement will be the last Marine supplement, but it’ll also be one of the first four-ish releases.
Actually, it won't, not even in the first 6. The known releases we know for 2020 are:
Marines, necrons, space wolves, blood angels, death watch, Death Guard, so thats 6 codices and/or supplements. Da's are still going to be early so not a huuuge deal but, in the day of Marine hyperbole I figured it's best to note this
3 redemptors, 3x aradicators, cm/iron father + (hq of choice) and 3 x heavy intercessors or somethig similiar is how I imagine everyone and their mother going to be putting down on the table on the casual...
Thats not even a full list and already i cant see this going very well for a lot of armies..
Seabass wrote: I think the core unit changes make a much bigger difference than people are giving it credit for. Not only did the CM ability change as to what it affects, and how it affects them, but core not including tanks seems like a very deliberate design to prevent something like gladiators or executioners being babysat by a CM to keep playing that Iron Hands castle.
The core units changes seem fine to me. They do seem to reduce some of the silliness of having a spare captain do nothing but babysit some tanks, or to having a chaplain hang back and inspire a tank to shoot better. Or a lieutenant to help the wound better.
I think this book is pretty well designed. hope you all enjoy it as much as we have been looking forward to it locally here!
Automatically Appended Next Post: also, I'm surprised no one mentioned that Aggressors lost their double shoot ability.
A lot of people were hoping CORE was going to reign in Eradicators. No one really worried a ton about the tanks. I'm nonplussed about Dreads as CORE since codex dreads were never a huge problem to begin with.
When Eradicators could have just the melta rifle and one multimelta in a unit of 3 - it seemed manageable. Now that they have a heavy melta rifle for all models and can combat squad a unit of 6 with no other real restrictions it's a bit silly.
Now Eradicators did get weaker by proxy. They can't take on a horde to save their life - especially not things like daemons. Their backup via Aggressors and TFCs got nerfed considerably. The new HI has a much smaller density of shots for troops and the dakka tank has no rerolls. Marine players should in effect be forced to take fewer Eradicators - likely not fewer than before and with better guns - but time will tell.
Argive wrote: 3 redemptors, 3x aradicators, cm/iron father + (hq of choice) and 3 x heavy intercessors or somethig similiar is how I imagine everyone and their mother going to be putting down on the table on the casual...
Thats not even a full list and already i cant see this going very well for a lot of armies..
Am I missing something that'll make redemptor dreads awesome in this new codex?
Argive wrote: 3 redemptors, 3x aradicators, cm/iron father + (hq of choice) and 3 x heavy intercessors or somethig similiar is how I imagine everyone and their mother going to be putting down on the table on the casual...
Thats not even a full list and already i cant see this going very well for a lot of armies..
That leaves only about 300 points. How do you play the 5/6 mission objectives? What are the secondaries?
Argive wrote: 3 redemptors, 3x aradicators, cm/iron father + (hq of choice) and 3 x heavy intercessors or somethig similiar is how I imagine everyone and their mother going to be putting down on the table on the casual...
Thats not even a full list and already i cant see this going very well for a lot of armies..
Am I missing something that'll make redemptor dreads awesome in this new codex?
Seabass wrote: I think the core unit changes make a much bigger difference than people are giving it credit for. Not only did the CM ability change as to what it affects, and how it affects them, but core not including tanks seems like a very deliberate design to prevent something like gladiators or executioners being babysat by a CM to keep playing that Iron Hands castle.
The core units changes seem fine to me. They do seem to reduce some of the silliness of having a spare captain do nothing but babysit some tanks, or to having a chaplain hang back and inspire a tank to shoot better. Or a lieutenant to help the wound better.
I think this book is pretty well designed. hope you all enjoy it as much as we have been looking forward to it locally here!
Automatically Appended Next Post: also, I'm surprised no one mentioned that Aggressors lost their double shoot ability.
A lot of people were hoping CORE was going to reign in Eradicators. No one really worried a ton about the tanks. I'm nonplussed about Dreads as CORE since codex dreads were never a huge problem to begin with.
When Eradicators could have just the melta rifle and one multimelta in a unit of 3 - it seemed manageable. Now that they have a heavy melta rifle for all models and can combat squad a unit of 6 with no other real restrictions it's a bit silly.
Now Eradicators did get weaker by proxy. They can't take on a horde to save their life - especially not things like daemons. Their backup via Aggressors and TFCs got nerfed considerably. The new HI has a much smaller density of shots for troops and the dakka tank has no rerolls. Marine players should in effect be forced to take fewer Eradicators - likely not fewer than before and with better guns - but time will tell.
Wouldn't 3 redempts, and storm bolters be the horde answer ?
Wouldint 3 redempts, and storm bolters be the hord answer ?
3 redemptors seem like auto take to me now.
For sure, but you're talking 540 points. You might be better off with fragstorm since bolter drill is gone. But then we're talking 18".
If you wanted to shoot Orks you'd have 20 AP2/1 shots wounding on 3s and 4 to 7 AP0/1 wounding on 4s for 180. 4 Aggressors would be 38 to 48 AP0/1 shots wounding on 4s. Redemptors are probably better at being aggressors, but then probably suffer more against other Eradicators.
I meant other sources like termies with storm bolters or other platforms lik the flying potato hurricane bolter, dang assult bolter intercessors or whatever...
It amazes me some are people loosing their mind that agressors are trash now and marines without eradicators are just ok now (because aggressors trash allegedly) and that some how space marines don't have answer to hordes all of a sudden.
That you have to make a conscious choice to bring the right unit for a job is baffling to some people..
If most armies got half of those 98 data sheets and rules they be laughing all the way to their paint desks dudes..
Argive wrote: I meant other sources like termies with storm bolters or other platforms lik the flying potato hurricane bolter, dang assult bolter intercessors or whatever...
It amazes me some are people loosing their mind that agressors are trash now and marines without eradicators are just ok now (because aggressors trash allegedly) and that some how space marines don't have answer to hordes all of a sudden.
That you have to make a conscious choice to bring the right unit for a job is baffling to some people..
If most armies got half of those 98 data sheets and rules they be laughing all the way to their paint desks dudes..
Meh. I wouldn't say they're trash. I think GW, as usual, overcorrected. They should have removed Fire Twice and kept Advance and shoot without penalty. I think this ended up making Dakka Inceptors better as they are also high volume shooters with a slightly better weapon statline for slightly cheaper - and may or may not get FLY shenanigans. Not that I mind, I usually took one of each. I'd say between the speed and gun statline, plus a marginal points shaving you're still not making a choice. Dakka Inceptors win a straight up point for point mathhammer. Had Aggressors kept Scoot and Shoot then it would have been closer and come down to personal tastes re: Fists vs Fly/speed/deepstrike. For those who need Inceptors, look for Wake The Dead on Ebay. If I remember right those were full kit not ETB - much better looking models( ETB Inceptor feet are UGLY due to single piece grav boot things), plus the Plasma option.
Xenomancers wrote: Marines maine nerf came in the form of nerfing their auras. You have to pay points for the chapter master and he only gives 1 unit full rerolls. Core was not necessary. All it does is force list choies. Strangely it's hurting marines a lot less than crons atm.
I know this is off topic, but the Necron CORE restrictions are really annoying, and a bit too restricted if you ask me. They already had restrictions in the past in regards to canoptek and triarch units, but now MOST of their codex is not core. Pretty annoying lack of synergy for so many abilities and stratagems, but the models seem to be points costed effectively for the most part (lulz poor Canoptek Reanimator).
I think some folks are downplaying just how big a nerf losing CORE is for space marine vehicles. The new Gladiator Lancer and the Executioner are poster children for this: they cannot shoot twice, so only 2 shots on the main gun. For the price you pay for these tanks, losing the consistency of rerolls (and in the Executioner ALSO losing half its shots) is too much for them. The only thing they've gained is the smokescreen stratagem, but they've also lost FLY and the repulsor field -2 to charge (moved to strats). They've pretty much gutted them and left their points the same (or higher). You will never, ever take these over Dreadnoughts, unless you just like the models (understandable IMO).
Personally, I LOVE dreadnoughts and it's why I have Iron Hands, so I'm overall net bonus here as I have a bunch of dreads, but it's still a bum deal for non-dread vehicles/tanks. Heck, the only faction for which these tanks are now even remotely viable is Iron Hands, due to their chapter tactic and super doctrine, and even then why would you take these over dreadnoughts who have duty eternal and can smash face in combat?
I like the concept of the CORE keyword mechanic, but some of the units left out need some sort of compensation. In the meantime, I'll be enjoying my march of the ancients up the field
Xenomancers wrote: Marines maine nerf came in the form of nerfing their auras. You have to pay points for the chapter master and he only gives 1 unit full rerolls. Core was not necessary. All it does is force list choies. Strangely it's hurting marines a lot less than crons atm.
I know this is off topic, but the Necron CORE restrictions are really annoying, and a bit too restricted if you ask me. They already had restrictions in the past in regards to canoptek and triarch units, but now MOST of their codex is not core. Pretty annoying lack of synergy for so many abilities and stratagems, but the models seem to be points costed effectively for the most part (lulz poor Canoptek Reanimator).
I think some folks are downplaying just how big a nerf losing CORE is for space marine vehicles. The new Gladiator Lancer and the Executioner are poster children for this: they cannot shoot twice, so only 2 shots on the main gun. For the price you pay for these tanks, losing the consistency of rerolls (and in the Executioner ALSO losing half its shots) is too much for them. The only thing they've gained is the smokescreen stratagem, but they've also lost FLY and the repulsor field -2 to charge (moved to strats). They've pretty much gutted them and left their points the same (or higher). You will never, ever take these over Dreadnoughts, unless you just like the models (understandable IMO).
Personally, I LOVE dreadnoughts and it's why I have Iron Hands, so I'm overall net bonus here as I have a bunch of dreads, but it's still a bum deal for non-dread vehicles/tanks. Heck, the only faction for which these tanks are now even remotely viable is Iron Hands, due to their chapter tactic and super doctrine, and even then why would you take these over dreadnoughts who have duty eternal and can smash face in combat?
I like the concept of the CORE keyword mechanic, but some of the units left out need some sort of compensation. In the meantime, I'll be enjoying my march of the ancients up the field
Has the signum from iron father remained being able to be used for any unit or just core? Then that galdiator lancer is hitting on 2+... I mean... Just coz you cant have ALL of them reroll everything does not invalidate them and the fact redempts got such a buff just goes back to the whole "well this unit is clearly OP so its better than everything else so everything else is trash" which we have seen time and time again until the OPSM Unit A gets a slight nerf then the other thing that was trash a few minutes earlier actualy is ok (because its still damn good compared to everybody else..)
Xenomancers wrote: Marines maine nerf came in the form of nerfing their auras. You have to pay points for the chapter master and he only gives 1 unit full rerolls. Core was not necessary. All it does is force list choies. Strangely it's hurting marines a lot less than crons atm.
I know this is off topic, but the Necron CORE restrictions are really annoying, and a bit too restricted if you ask me. They already had restrictions in the past in regards to canoptek and triarch units, but now MOST of their codex is not core. Pretty annoying lack of synergy for so many abilities and stratagems, but the models seem to be points costed effectively for the most part (lulz poor Canoptek Reanimator).
I think some folks are downplaying just how big a nerf losing CORE is for space marine vehicles. The new Gladiator Lancer and the Executioner are poster children for this: they cannot shoot twice, so only 2 shots on the main gun. For the price you pay for these tanks, losing the consistency of rerolls (and in the Executioner ALSO losing half its shots) is too much for them. The only thing they've gained is the smokescreen stratagem, but they've also lost FLY and the repulsor field -2 to charge (moved to strats). They've pretty much gutted them and left their points the same (or higher). You will never, ever take these over Dreadnoughts, unless you just like the models (understandable IMO).
Personally, I LOVE dreadnoughts and it's why I have Iron Hands, so I'm overall net bonus here as I have a bunch of dreads, but it's still a bum deal for non-dread vehicles/tanks. Heck, the only faction for which these tanks are now even remotely viable is Iron Hands, due to their chapter tactic and super doctrine, and even then why would you take these over dreadnoughts who have duty eternal and can smash face in combat?
I like the concept of the CORE keyword mechanic, but some of the units left out need some sort of compensation. In the meantime, I'll be enjoying my march of the ancients up the field
Has the signum from iron father remained being able to be used for any unit or just core?
Then that galdiator lancer is hitting on 2+... I mean... Just coz you cant have ALL of them reroll everything does not invalidate them and the fact redempts got such a buff just goes back to the whole "well this unit is clearly OP so its better than everything else so everything else is trash" which we have seen time and time again until the OPSM Unit A gets a slight nerf then the other thing that was trash a few minutes earlier actualy is ok (because its still damn good compared to everybody else..)
Its any Iron Hands keyword unit, but it did change to be +1 to hit instead of a flat 2+
Meh. I wouldn't say they're trash. I think GW, as usual, overcorrected. They should have removed Fire Twice and kept Advance and shoot without penalty.
I disagree, they're still very powerful. 70 shots and power fists on a quite durable but still cheap platform are a bargain. For the same price there aren't many units that can fire that many shots, are that durable and also have punch in combat.
People complain about them because they mostly have marines vs marines in mind, but aggressors are amazing against pretty much every other faction. Not trash against other marines either.
Meh. I wouldn't say they're trash. I think GW, as usual, overcorrected. They should have removed Fire Twice and kept Advance and shoot without penalty.
I disagree, they're still very powerful. 70 shots and power fists on a quite durable but still cheap platform are a bargain. For the same price there aren't many units that can fire that many shots, are that durable and also have punch in combat.
People complain about them because they mostly have marines vs marines in mind, but aggressors are amazing against pretty much every other faction. Not trash against other marines either.
You realize you quote tweeted me saying exactly that? They're not trash? Then tried to imply I said they were trash? Oh wait, of course you did. Because you snipped the entire rest of my argument that explained exactly why they should have kept Scoot And Shoot.
Whole Quote, Emphasis and commentary new, and obviously mine:
Meh. I wouldn't say they're trash. I think GW, as usual, overcorrected. They should have removed Fire Twice and kept Advance and shoot without penalty. I think this ended up making Dakka Inceptors better as they are also high volume shooters with a slightly better weapon statline for slightly cheaper -
Notice no mention of who they'd be shooting at AP1 vs AP0 doesn't really favor an opponent and has the same effect on ALMOST everyone. Notice the emphasis here, lest Blackie try and imply I wasn't aware of 6+/4++ Harlequins or some such.
and may or may not get FLY shenanigans. Not that I mind, I usually took one of each. I'd say between the speed and gun statline, plus a marginal points shaving you're still not making a choice.
Still no mention of Tailoring for opposition army comp.
Dakka Inceptors win a straight up point for point mathhammer. Had Aggressors kept Scoot and Shoot then it would have been closer and come down to personal tastes re: Fists vs Fly/speed/deepstrike. For those who need Inceptors, look for Wake The Dead on Ebay. If I remember right those were full kit not ETB - much better looking models( ETB Inceptor feet are UGLY due to single piece grav boot things), plus the Plasma option.
Still no mention of army comp, though I do admit there was an anti-marine thought in there when it comes to ugly ETB units having less detail in the sculpt.
You realize you quote tweeted me saying exactly that? They're not trash? Then tried to imply I said they were trash? Oh wait, of course you did. Because you snipped the entire rest of my argument that explained exactly why they should have kept Scoot And Shoot.
I wanted to say that they're are still very very good, close to be an auto take, which isn't what you said or at least it isn't what I though you said. I don't think they have been overcorrected at all, in fact I'd definitely nerf them even more as their stats and damage output are still extremely high for that price.
5 TWC are 250-275 points for a full CC unit. 5 Meganobz are 200 points for a full CC unit, etc... Aggressors IMHO should be less powerful or be +10-15ppm each.
You realize you quote tweeted me saying exactly that? They're not trash? Then tried to imply I said they were trash? Oh wait, of course you did. Because you snipped the entire rest of my argument that explained exactly why they should have kept Scoot And Shoot.
I wanted to say that they're are still very very good, close to be an auto take, which isn't what you said or at least it isn't what I though you said. I don't think they have been overcorrected at all, in fact I'd definitely nerf them even more as their stats and damage output are still extremely high for that price.
5 TWC are 250-275 points for a full CC unit. 5 Meganobz are 200 points for a full CC unit, etc... Aggressors IMHO should be less powerful or be +10-15ppm each.
Brought to you by the same guy who wants to make a Gravis-capable Impulsor with worse guns for twice the price.
Now your 5TWC cav are 225 Base. What upgrades are we giving them to get to 25-275? Plasma Pistols, Frost Swords, Power Axes, or Fists?
Hey wait, at 275 are they TH/SSTWC?
Are we going to count the Mount attacks, or are we hoping to only compare the rider to the Aggressor? Are we planning to just dismiss them as irrelevant when someone brings them up because they don't fit our narrative?
5 Aggressors are 225 and move 5 instead of the TWC 10. Nor do they get an extra 3 mount attacks.
You realize you quote tweeted me saying exactly that? They're not trash? Then tried to imply I said they were trash? Oh wait, of course you did. Because you snipped the entire rest of my argument that explained exactly why they should have kept Scoot And Shoot.
I wanted to say that they're are still very very good, close to be an auto take, which isn't what you said or at least it isn't what I though you said. I don't think they have been overcorrected at all, in fact I'd definitely nerf them even more as their stats and damage output are still extremely high for that price.
5 TWC are 250-275 points for a full CC unit. 5 Meganobz are 200 points for a full CC unit, etc... Aggressors IMHO should be less powerful or be +10-15ppm each.
Brought to you by the same guy who wants to make a Gravis-capable Impulsor with worse guns for twice the price.
Now your 5TWC cav are 225 Base. What upgrades are we giving them to get to 25-275? Plasma Pistols, Frost Swords, Power Axes, or Fists?
Hey wait, at 275 are they TH/SSTWC?
Are we going to count the Mount attacks, or are we hoping to only compare the rider to the Aggressor? Are we planning to just dismiss them as irrelevant when someone brings them up because they don't fit our narrative?
5 Aggressors are 225 and move 5 instead of the TWC 10. Nor do they get an extra 3 mount attacks.
So are Aggressors now considered to be the fair measure of performance for their points?
If so I have a long list of xeno units needing 5-10PPM points reductions.
So are Aggressors now considered to be the fair measure of performance for their points?
If so I have a long list of xeno units needing 5-10PPM points reductions.
Hard to say, I don't even have the book yet. GW basically shook the snow globe so hard we can't see anything yet, and the plastic snow won't sink until at least Saturday if not longer. But I would have preferred they kept the Scoot and Shoot to make people think about whether they want Inceptors or Aggressors. Ultimately I'd like to see us all agonize over choices that don't have a wrong answer. And I don't think they did that here. As I said it depends on how everything lands, but so far it sounds like they just swapped flavor of the month from Aggressors to Inceptors. You get the same number of better shots for slightly cheaper on a unit that probably can do some FLY shenanigans.
If they had 5-6 shots each, like they should, they'd be fine with Scoot and Shoot.
225 points for that amount of wounds, shots and punch in combat is still quite undercosted.
In the TWC example I made I was considering shields of course because 5 points added to 45 is nothing, and no one would play them without. Not hammers or fists, because it's not their best loadout, but rather claws, swords or even free chainswords. At 275 (shield+claw/sword for everyone) or 250 (shield+chainsword) points they surely have better speed, durability, and way more attacks in combat (with hammers or fists they'd be 300-315 though) than aggressors but they're still one dimensional, a full CC unit.
Aggressors are very resilient for their points, they unleash a crazy amount of firepower and they are no jokes in combat. Very few units in the game have all these qualities for that amount of points.
I actually can't really think about a unit in the entire game than can be fairly compared to them without being outperformed.
Blackie wrote: If they had 5-6 shots each, like they should, they'd be fine with Scoot and Shoot.
225 points for that amount of wounds, shots and punch in combat is still quite undercosted.
In the TWC example I made I was considering shields of course because 5 points added to 45 is nothing, and no one would play them without. Not hammers or fists, because it's not their best loadout, but rather claws, swords or even free chainswords. At 275 (shield+claw/sword for everyone) or 250 (shield+chainsword) points they surely have better speed, durability, and way more attacks in combat (with hammers or fists they'd be 300-315 though) than aggressors but they're still one dimensional, a full CC unit.
You get 4 Aggressors (38 shots with Auto+Grenade) per 4 SB/PF + 1AC/PF Teleporting Terminators (22 shots) Terminators also get Teleport Shenanigans and an invuln. At 200 points you'll get about 5 Inceptors doing 30 shots and jumping plus the mortal wound thing. You'll get just under 4 and a half Aggressors those 38 shots.
When you point out TWC are a one dimensional full CC unit, are you saying they're costed differently? Their cost doesn't count? Fighting in the fighting edition somehow isn't worth the points cost?
Anyway, they're what 45 ppm with stormshield? same price? And on the charge they get what... 25 S4 -1 D1 attacks, and another 18 S5 -1 D1 attacks? 33 Attacks? All -1 D1? About a third at S5? And they have a 2+ 4++, bolt pistols, and twice the movement rate? Wait, those Inceptors only get 30 shots with the same movement rate, and they don't have 2+ 4++.
vs T4 3+
Well lets see, 25 attacks, 16.75 hits, 8.35 wounds, 4.1875 damage 18 attacks, 12 hits, 8 wounds, 4 damage 8 total damage.
38 shots, 25 hits, 12 wounds, 4 Damage.
That can't be right. How can those Thunderwolves put out more damage than Aggressors? I know, maybe it's just the 3+ armor save, how do they do against T4 6+?
Aggressors are very resilient for their points, they unleash a crazy amount of firepower and they are no jokes in combat. Very few units in the game have all these qualities for that amount of points.
I actually can't really think about a unit in the entire game than can be fairly compared to them without being outperformed.
Inceptors are also overpowered.
Color me shocked to see you to claim yet another Marine unit is overpowered. I'm speechless. This really came out of left field.
How much damage did your TWC do again? 8 damage? Admittedly 6 Inceptors are slightly cheaper than 6 TWC.
Maybe it's the Durability. You've mentioned that in passing a couple times.
4 Devs with Grav Cannon + Amp. That's a typical MEQ/TEQ weapon.
16 shots, 10.72 hits, (Everyone is T5) 5.36 wounds -3 to save. Your 3+ becomes a 2+ -3 goes back to a 5+ so you're on 4++. Their 3+ becomes a 6+. Your TWC take 5.36 damage (Save half, double the rest ignore lost wounds as it's universal we're all 3W here) The Primaris take 5.36 wounds save 1/6th and take 4.5x2 9 Damage.
Something's fishy here. The things you're complaining about, damage output and durability have both come out in favor of your TWC not those Aggressors. The Inceptors got to do what 10-15% more damage point for point, but they also ate almost 200% of the wounds catastrophically losing the durability comparison.
Are your TWC broken? They're TWICE as durable as Aggresors AND put out more damage.
Are your TWC broken? They're TWICE as durable as Aggresors AND put out more damage.
Except they don't. Shooting is pointing and rolling for damage. Fighting is getting very close to the enemy, rolling for charges and then rolling for causing damage. Typically a melee focused unit will find some screeners in its way that need to be dealt with, meaning that another unit has to do part of the job for the melee specialists or the melee specialists can't attack their juicy target. That's why fighting is not even remotely as good as shooting.
Aggressors just point and fire, like any other shooting oriented unit, and at the same time can deal with a fight. You can put the on some objective and they can still do most of their job shooting while being perfectly able to defend that objective from chargers. TWC can't just sit somewhere like them as they have no shooting.
How much damage will cause those aggressors overall, in a full game? 2x or 3x than the TWC is my guess. Assuming no one will fire at those two units, aggressors will fire 3-5 turns and maybe fight at some points, TWC will fight 1-2 turns. Of course if they suffer casualties their damage output drops correspondingly. Now your numbers should reflect that. If you play 10 games and keep record about what the two units achieved you can see what I mean.
Again there's no unit in the game that is as durable, cheap, effective in shooting and melee as aggressors. Not even among other SM stuff, let alone from different factions. If all factions can get them they'd be considered the best unit by most of them, but of course for a SM player they're just ok, fine or even trash!, dead to me!!, useless!!!
Are your TWC broken? They're TWICE as durable as Aggresors AND put out more damage.
Except they don't. Shooting is pointing and rolling for damage. Fighting is getting very close to the enemy, rolling for charges and then rolling for causing damage. Typically a melee focused unit will find some screeners in its way that need to be dealt with, meaning that another unit has to do part of the job for the melee specialists or the melee specialists can't attack their juicy target. That's why fighting is not even remotely as good as shooting.
Aggressors just point and fire, like any other shooting oriented unit, and at the same time can deal with a fight. You can put the on some objective and they can still do most of their job shooting while being perfectly able to defend that objective from chargers. TWC can't just sit somewhere like them as they have no shooting.
How much damage will cause those aggressors overall, in a full game? 2x or 3x than the TWC is my guess. Assuming no one will fire at those two units, aggressors will fire 3-5 turns and maybe fight at some points, TWC will fight 1-2 turns. Of course if they suffer casualties their damage output drops correspondingly. Now your numbers should reflect that. If you play 10 games and keep record about what the two units achieved you can see what I mean.
Again there's no unit in the game that is as durable, cheap, effective in shooting and melee as aggressors. Not even among other SM stuff, let alone from different factions. If all factions can get them they'd be considered the best unit by most of them, but of course for a SM player they're just ok, fine or even trash!, dead to me!!, useless!!!
Who could have predicted your unit that has twice the durability, and more damage output wouldn't be broken when compared to those OP Aggressors.
Oh wait, I could have.
Fighting in the fighting edition somehow isn't worth the points cost?
Completely unexpected to see you say your stuff is fine, and other people's stuff is broken even when your stuff out performs it in every area you mention.
I think aggressors are now terrible for their points. No way worth it any longer when there are units that are much better at shooting or melee. It is a weird slow hybrid unit that I rarely expect to see on the gaming table now.
broxus wrote: I think aggressors are now terrible for their points. No way worth it any longer when there are units that are much better at shooting or melee. It is a weird slow hybrid unit that I rarely expect to see on the gaming table now.
They are quite fine actually. They hit a lot of the sweet spots of this edition.
If it wasn't for the fact that they are slow and short ranged, they would be quite OP.
broxus wrote: I think aggressors are now terrible for their points. No way worth it any longer when there are units that are much better at shooting or melee. It is a weird slow hybrid unit that I rarely expect to see on the gaming table now.
They're a shooting unit that can get more than half their points back shooting at a good target. And that's without buffs.
They're a melee unit that can get more than half their points back attacking a good target. And that's without buffs.
They're a highly durable unit that can take large amounts of firepower, and have enough threat that they kinda have to be taken down. Again, without any buffs.
Name a unit from another Codex that's better, point for point, at shooting or melee while being similar levels of durable. Or something that's so much better at doing damage that their durability is irrelevant.
The rebalanced Aggressors are probably trash in 8th ITC format where standing back and killing everything from your deployment zone was a viable tactic.
But since the table is smaller and much of 9th is about brawling in the middle they are still a very good unit. Perhaps not the best in any 1 role but they are very versatile. They lost some ranged output but instead picked up some defensive buffs. Cheaper transhuman, new gravis +save stratagem and easy access to both FNP and invul save without having to be IH.
Just have to use them a bit differently if you played UM or Salamanders since you cant abuse double shooting anymore. But other chapters were already using them without relying on double shoot.
broxus wrote: I think aggressors are now terrible for their points. No way worth it any longer when there are units that are much better at shooting or melee. It is a weird slow hybrid unit that I rarely expect to see on the gaming table now.
They're a shooting unit that can get more than half their points back shooting at a good target. And that's without buffs.
They're a melee unit that can get more than half their points back attacking a good target. And that's without buffs.
They're a highly durable unit that can take large amounts of firepower, and have enough threat that they kinda have to be taken down. Again, without any buffs.
Name a unit from another Codex that's better, point for point, at shooting or melee while being similar levels of durable. Or something that's so much better at doing damage that their durability is irrelevant.
To be fair I can think of quite a few units that fall in that category in other codici. Sisters for sure at least.
Retributor multi melta sisters have an higher than 100% return when firing at T7 3+ targets, they can also do that from reserve since they have no penalty for moving and shooting. That's without using cherubs or getting in melta range, or they get close to 200% efficency on some targets.
Bloody rose seraphim clear 127% of their value in orks from deepstrike and slightly less than 100% in guards.
Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
Just to be clear, this doesn't say anything about aggressors. I was just pointing out that the escape door that you left in that comparison was too easily taken
To get back on topic, I noticed that standard Dreads have the Multimelta on their weapon list now. The only current Dread kit with a Multimelta is the Space Wolf Venerable Dread, that seems like a slightly weird thing to have made it through. Especially since the Multimelta is so much cheaper than the twin Lascannons.
Retributor multi melta sisters have an higher than 100% return when firing at T7 3+ targets, they can also do that from reserve since they have no penalty for moving and shooting. That's without using cherubs or getting in melta range, or they get close to 200% efficency on some targets.
Bloody rose seraphim clear 127% of their value in orks from deepstrike and slightly less than 100% in guards.
Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
Just to be clear, this doesn't say anything about aggressors. I was just pointing out that the escape door that you left in that comparison was too easily taken
I'm not familiar with AS so please correct what I am missing.
5 BR Seraphim cost 75pts they get 10 shots for 6.6 hits, 3.3 wounds at -1 AP because of BR special rules So they kill 24-32pts of boyz. So nowhere near their cost. nowhere near as durable as Gravis models at T3 3+ and 1 wound.
Repentia cost 15ppm, get 3 attacks on the charge hitting on 4s rerolling for 2ish hits. S6 = wounding on 3s so 1.33 wounds at -3 so 6+ save = 1.11 dead Primaris Marines. So yeah they do earn back their points pretty easily, but only in CC and they are T3 7+ save with a 5+ FNP and 1 wound so nowhere near as durable as Gravis Aggressors.
The Newman wrote: To get back on topic, I noticed that standard Dreads have the Multimelta on their weapon list now. The only current Dread kit with a Multimelta is the Space Wolf Venerable Dread, that seems like a slightly weird thing to have made it through. Especially since the Multimelta is so much cheaper than the twin Lascannons.
Did Dreads lose their multi Melta arm for a while? I hadn’t noticed that, but they’d had it so long I would have just assumed they kept it.
Repentia cost 15ppm, get 3 attacks on the charge hitting on 4s rerolling for 2ish hits. S6 = wounding on 3s so 1.33 wounds at -3 so 6+ save = 1.11 dead Primaris Marines. So yeah they do earn back their points pretty easily, but only in CC and they are T3 7+ save with a 5+ FNP and 1 wound so nowhere near as durable as Gravis Aggressors.
Poor Spoletta. Follow the “rules” of the question exactly -
a unit from a different codex,
that either matches durability and damage, or vastly exceeds damage
In shooting or close combat
Only to be told they don’t count.
Who could have predicted this? Being right or accurate doesn’t matter. Nerfing marines is what matters.
broxus wrote: I think aggressors are now terrible for their points. No way worth it any longer when there are units that are much better at shooting or melee. It is a weird slow hybrid unit that I rarely expect to see on the gaming table now.
one of the best anti-horde units in the game, capable of tearing apart tanks and heavy infantry with ease, point for point better than most melee options entire factions have. Yeah, I can see why you think they suck.
Breton wrote: That’s what I thought, but it’s not unheard of for your brain to fill in what you expect to see so I thought I’d ask.
It's a weird double-legacy option. It was originally there when the Blood Angels Dreadnought was released in 2nd Ed, and then again with the Battle for McDonald's starter box in 4th Edition. For whatever reason it's never been part of the plastic Dread kit.
Breton wrote: That’s what I thought, but it’s not unheard of for your brain to fill in what you expect to see so I thought I’d ask.
It's a weird double-legacy option. It was originally there when the Blood Angels Dreadnought was released in 2nd Ed, and then again with the Battle for McDonald's starter box in 4th Edition. For whatever reason it's never been part of the plastic Dread kit.
actually the MM dread was in ABR, the 5th edition starter
Repentia cost 15ppm, get 3 attacks on the charge hitting on 4s rerolling for 2ish hits. S6 = wounding on 3s so 1.33 wounds at -3 so 6+ save = 1.11 dead Primaris Marines. So yeah they do earn back their points pretty easily, but only in CC and they are T3 7+ save with a 5+ FNP and 1 wound so nowhere near as durable as Gravis Aggressors.
Poor Spoletta. Follow the “rules” of the question exactly - a unit from a different codex, that either matches durability and damage, or vastly exceeds damage In shooting or close combat
Only to be told they don’t count.
Who could have predicted this? Being right or accurate doesn’t matter. Nerfing marines is what matters.
If only we had some kind of evidence of what the original question was...ohh wait, here it is.
JNAProductions wrote: They're a shooting unit that can get more than half their points back shooting at a good target. And that's without buffs. They're a melee unit that can get more than half their points back attacking a good target. And that's without buffs. They're a highly durable unit that can take large amounts of firepower, and have enough threat that they kinda have to be taken down. Again, without any buffs.
Name a unit from another Codex that's better, point for point, at shooting or melee while being similar levels of durable. Or something that's so much better at doing damage that their durability is irrelevant.
So are repentia better at shooting? no. Are repentia better at melee? meh, definitely not when you add in the second part "Durability" Are repentia more durable? no so that leaves being so good at damage that their durability is irrelevant. Are they? No
Spoletta even went ahead and gave them the buff of a faction Bloody Rose. So lets take that away.
You are left with a T3 5+FNP model that has 2 attacks at S6 -3AP 2D that rerolls hits on the charge but hits on 4s. So you can take 3 of them per aggressor. T3 Vs T5, so not as tough, 3+ save Vs 5+ FNP So not as good of a save, No shooting vs 6+D6 S4 shots at 18' range, and finally, in CC, 6 attacks at S6 Vs 4 Attacks at S8
So they are nowhere near as durable, they literally have no shooting and in CC where they excel, they are marginally better....of course, since they are T3 and have no real save, its going to be hell trying to get them into CC. I mean...I would possibly try an overwatch against them with my ork boyz just because they are so fragile I could probably whittle a few down. A mob of shoota boyz kills about 4.4 of them in overwatch
So, please explain to me how they meet your own defined criteria of
that either matches durability and damage, or vastly exceeds damage In shooting or close combat
Or do you think 6 attacks at S6 "Vastly exceeds damage" of 4 S8 attacks, both hitting on 4s, both -3AP and 1 does D2 where the other does D3.
Argive wrote: Its almost as if SM aggressors are a good unit...
The mental gymnastics some of these Marine defenders go through to try and make their units seem worse than they are is amazing. He literally compared them to an unarmored suicide squad that requires a transport to survive past turn 1 and who even then dies to SHOOTA BOYZ in overwatch. And I even screwed up the math. Shoota boyz actually get 13.3 hits not 10, I forgot DDD. So they are actually killing just about 6 in over watch, and the biggest squad size is 9, so 2/3rds dead by ORK overwatch if they try to charge. Tau would just laugh themselves to death at the idea of these things charging, and SMs? I can only imagine they get some kind of buff to shooting that makes killing most of them with 3 overwatching aggressors relatively easy.
Name a unit from another Codex that's better, point for point, at shooting or melee while being similar levels of durable. Or something that's so much better at doing damage that their durability is irrelevant.
So are repentia better at shooting? no.
Are repentia better at melee? meh, definitely not when you add in the second part "Durability"
Are repentia more durable? no
so that leaves being so good at damage that their durability is irrelevant. Are they? No
Spoletta even went ahead and gave them the buff of a faction Bloody Rose. So lets take that away.
You are left with a T3 5+FNP model that has 2 attacks at S6 -3AP 2D that rerolls hits on the charge but hits on 4s. So you can take 3 of them per aggressor. T3 Vs T5, so not as tough, 3+ save Vs 5+ FNP So not as good of a save, No shooting vs 6+D6 S4 shots at 18' range, and finally, in CC, 6 attacks at S6 Vs 4 Attacks at S8
So they are nowhere near as durable, they literally have no shooting and in CC where they excel, they are marginally better....of course, since they are T3 and have no real save, its going to be hell trying to get them into CC. I mean...I would possibly try an overwatch against them with my ork boyz just because they are so fragile I could probably whittle a few down. A mob of shoota boyz kills about 4.4 of them in overwatch
So, please explain to me how they meet your own defined criteria of
that either matches durability and damage, or vastly exceeds damage
In shooting or close combat
Or do you think 6 attacks at S6 "Vastly exceeds damage" of 4 S8 attacks, both hitting on 4s, both -3AP and 1 does D2 where the other does D3.
Spoletta wrote:]Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
But that doesn't count, because we're hating on Marines here, not damage or balance or anything.
Retributor multi melta sisters have an higher than 100% return when firing at T7 3+ targets, they can also do that from reserve since they have no penalty for moving and shooting. That's without using cherubs or getting in melta range, or they get close to 200% efficency on some targets.
Bloody rose seraphim clear 127% of their value in orks from deepstrike and slightly less than 100% in guards.
Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
Just to be clear, this doesn't say anything about aggressors. I was just pointing out that the escape door that you left in that comparison was too easily taken
I'm not familiar with AS so please correct what I am missing.
5 BR Seraphim cost 75pts they get 10 shots for 6.6 hits, 3.3 wounds at -1 AP because of BR special rules So they kill 24-32pts of boyz. So nowhere near their cost. nowhere near as durable as Gravis models at T3 3+ and 1 wound.
Repentia cost 15ppm, get 3 attacks on the charge hitting on 4s rerolling for 2ish hits. S6 = wounding on 3s so 1.33 wounds at -3 so 6+ save = 1.11 dead Primaris Marines. So yeah they do earn back their points pretty easily, but only in CC and they are T3 7+ save with a 5+ FNP and 1 wound so nowhere near as durable as Gravis Aggressors.
I even underlined to which point I was answering, which was the "So powerful they don't need durability".
Also, I was counting hand flamers on the seraphim and a CP which then kill 13,2 boyz.
And the repentia have -4P, so those are 1,33 intercessors down.
But most importantly, didn't you understand from my post that I was half jocking when I answered? Why is this been made into some kind of big deal
Spoletta wrote:]Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
But that doesn't count, because we're hating on Marines here, not damage or balance or anything.
So to be clear here, you think a 15pt repentia model is as good as an aggressor? I want to be clear here because you dodge points and move goal posts like crazy.
I even underlined to which point I was answering, which was the "So powerful they don't need durability".
Also, I was counting hand flamers on the seraphim and a CP which then kill 13,2 boyz.
And the repentia have -4P, so those are 1,33 intercessors down.
But most importantly, didn't you understand from my post that I was half jocking when I answered? Why is this been made into some kind of big deal
I appreciate the info, like I said, I don't play against SOB often so I had no idea. I'm relying on Battle Scribe to tell me about these units and they don't show as having access to hand flamers in there, so how much are the hand flamer equipped seraphim? And repentia would only be -4 AP with BR correct?
So, based on your knowledge of the faction, are any of those units as good as Aggressors without buffs? IE no extra weapons no strats, no bonuses or faction buffs? I'm guessing they aren't
Spoletta wrote:]Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
But that doesn't count, because we're hating on Marines here, not damage or balance or anything.
So to be clear here, you think a 15pt repentia model is as good as an aggressor? I want to be clear here because you dodge points and move goal posts like crazy.
I think you're moving those goalposts all your own to tell a half truth by making it 1 15 point model instead of:
I think Spoletta said out they do 200% of their points in damage against a less than optimal target.
I think even when they had double shots and Scoot And Shoot 6 aggressors weren't killing 66-67 boys.
9.5 (average Shots) x 6 (aggressors x 2 (attacks per shot) = 114 * .67 = 76.38. Uh oh, we're already in trouble. * 0.5 = 38.19 *.84 = 32. Uh oh, that's only 94% of their points. not even 100% of their points let alone 200%.
Do you want to move the goalposts again and toss in Captains and Lieutenants? Do you think adding 2/3 of 1/3 of all misses and half of all glances/duds/whatever you want to call hits that don't wound will double their output?
Maybe you want to send Aggressors against a less than optimal opponent too. 114 shots, 76 hits, 38 wounds, 12 damage against T4 3+ Intercessors (Same unit) That's 6 Intercessors. Uh oh. That's only 44% of their points.
Well its your choice. Where WOULD you like to move the goalposts this time?
Spoletta wrote:]Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
But that doesn't count, because we're hating on Marines here, not damage or balance or anything.
So to be clear here, you think a 15pt repentia model is as good as an aggressor? I want to be clear here because you dodge points and move goal posts like crazy.
I even underlined to which point I was answering, which was the "So powerful they don't need durability".
Also, I was counting hand flamers on the seraphim and a CP which then kill 13,2 boyz.
And the repentia have -4P, so those are 1,33 intercessors down.
But most importantly, didn't you understand from my post that I was half jocking when I answered? Why is this been made into some kind of big deal
I appreciate the info, like I said, I don't play against SOB often so I had no idea. I'm relying on Battle Scribe to tell me about these units and they don't show as having access to hand flamers in there, so how much are the hand flamer equipped seraphim? And repentia would only be -4 AP with BR correct?
So, based on your knowledge of the faction, are any of those units as good as Aggressors without buffs? IE no extra weapons no strats, no bonuses or faction buffs? I'm guessing they aren't
Again, I wasn't trying to compare them to aggressors! I even wrote that in the first answer!
I was just joking that your definition "Hurts so much that durability doesn't count" was too easily met!
By the way, Seraphim with hand flamers are 83 points.
Again, I wasn't trying to compare them to aggressors! I even wrote that in the first answer!
I know. That's what makes it even funnier. They keep coming up with these "tests" and rules for these tests, then complain when someone passes their test. One of them tried to compare to TWC. And the TWC did too well, so people who compared the TWC as requested were "obsessed" for doing exactly as asked. You do exactly as asked, and... there's all sorts of reasons it doesn't count.
I was just joking that your definition "Hurts so much that durability doesn't count" was too easily met!
By the way, Seraphim with hand flamers are 83 points.
broxus wrote: I think aggressors are now terrible for their points. No way worth it any longer when there are units that are much better at shooting or melee. It is a weird slow hybrid unit that I rarely expect to see on the gaming table now.
Comments like this are the reason why I love SM players.
Retributor multi melta sisters have an higher than 100% return when firing at T7 3+ targets, they can also do that from reserve since they have no penalty for moving and shooting. That's without using cherubs or getting in melta range, or they get close to 200% efficency on some targets.
Bloody rose seraphim clear 127% of their value in orks from deepstrike and slightly less than 100% in guards.
Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
Just to be clear, this doesn't say anything about aggressors. I was just pointing out that the escape door that you left in that comparison was too easily taken
All these units are real glasscannons though, and all one dimensional: either melee or shooting.
broxus wrote: I think aggressors are now terrible for their points. No way worth it any longer when there are units that are much better at shooting or melee. It is a weird slow hybrid unit that I rarely expect to see on the gaming table now.
Comments like this are the reason why I love SM players.
All these units are real glasscannons though, and all one dimensional: either melee or shooting.
Comments like this are the reason why I love SM Haters.
Name a unit from another Codex that's better, point for point, at shootingormelee while being similar levels of durable. Or something that's so much better at doing damage that their durability is irrelevant.
For what it's worth I'm a Marine player, I still think they are good and while I know that their output has been nerfed, it feels better to use them now.
Double shooting was penalising in two ways:
- It was not fun to go through all the dice rolls
- It felt bad when you wanted/needed to move
They remain a threat to most infantry units in shooting and melee and serve as my anti-horde backbone.
Melee units can't deal any damage if they're dead before they get there. That's the problem with mathammer, you compare everything in a vacuum.
I didn't make the test, I just laughed when someone else passed it. By the same token Aggressor units can't double fire if they're dead before they shoot. Oops.
Melee units can't deal any damage if they're dead before they get there. That's the problem with mathammer, you compare everything in a vacuum.
I didn't make the test, I just laughed when someone else passed it. By the same token Aggressor units can't double fire if they're dead before they shoot. Oops.
non argument is non argument, the chance that you shoot is comparatively a lot higher then the chance that you get in melee unmolested.
While obviously true, 9th has seen a rise in 1st turn charges on our local tables. It is less likely than being in range for the gun, but not nearly as how it was in previous editions.
a_typical_hero wrote: While obviously true, 9th has seen a rise in 1st turn charges on our local tables. It is less likely than being in range for the gun, but not nearly as how it was in previous editions.
honestly the smaller tables are imo a mistake IF gw insists on maintaining super heavies and transports.. but alas
The fact that overwatch was more or less curbed did certainly help melee, but it still remains that movement shenaigan melee units that have deepsstrike or other tricks are far outperforming regular melee infantry which still doesn't see play really.
a_typical_hero wrote: While obviously true, 9th has seen a rise in 1st turn charges on our local tables. It is less likely than being in range for the gun, but not nearly as how it was in previous editions.
Do you mean the player going first, or the player going 2nd? I think the player going second can often do a turn 1 charge if player 1 moves into the mid-board, rather than camping at the back, as was more prevalent in 8th.
I think aggressors remain very good, although they might be a bit more chapter dependent than before. I don't see how you can look at say a white scars aggressor and think that's a bad unit. There might be better options - but that's surely testament to the strength of the Marine Codex, and the fact that for at least the foreseeable future, its still setting the meta.
a_typical_hero wrote: While obviously true, 9th has seen a rise in 1st turn charges on our local tables. It is less likely than being in range for the gun, but not nearly as how it was in previous editions.
Do you mean the player going first, or the player going 2nd? I think the player going second can often do a turn 1 charge if player 1 moves into the mid-board, rather than camping at the back, as was more prevalent in 8th.
I was already wondering if Infiltrating on Objectives was the wrong play. You put Infiltrators on a 12 inch centerline objective and it's 50/50 even Ork Boys or Termies are charging you Turn 1. Its better than 50/50 for a 6"+ mover like Assault Intercessors etc.
I think aggressors remain very good, although they might be a bit more chapter dependent than before. I don't see how you can look at say a white scars aggressor and think that's a bad unit. There might be better options - but that's surely testament to the strength of the Marine Codex, and the fact that for at least the foreseeable future, its still setting the meta.
Well I start by looking at it and saying it's not a Bike. Then I say it's White Scars. Nah, Aggressors are good. I don't know if it's setting the Meta though after this shakes out and people re-evaluate. It's certainly part of the Meta, but I don't know that it's going to set it. Too many players got too many new "toys" to play with for a new Flavor of the Month to NOT appear. Someone's going to find a new pony to teach a trick to. 6 Tac Squads in Pods. Relic Terminators with Reapers and CCW. 3 Bunkers shooting everything that moves if the terrain allows it. Those Firestrike Turrets pasting a bunch of Gravis/bikes/lightvehicles/etc. Heck the very fact that it will be new and people won't have a counter in their list is reason enough for a lot of the players to find the new trick.
a_typical_hero wrote: While obviously true, 9th has seen a rise in 1st turn charges on our local tables. It is less likely than being in range for the gun, but not nearly as how it was in previous editions.
honestly the smaller tables are imo a mistake IF gw insists on maintaining super heavies and transports.. but alas
The fact that overwatch was more or less curbed did certainly help melee, but it still remains that movement shenaigan melee units that have deepsstrike or other tricks are far outperforming regular melee infantry which still doesn't see play really.
Not really, in almost all of my games so far getting a unit into melee from deep strike was much harder than in 8th precisely because of the smaller tables.
From a gut feeling, right now fast moving melee units or a melee units in a transports are better than deep striking melee units, who are only slightly better than units moving at regular speed (6-7" or 5" with advance&charge).
Deep strikers are great tools for getting to places where few or no units are, which is fairly important for scoring VP, but they won't be able to help you take midfield or break into a protected backfield.
a_typical_hero wrote: While obviously true, 9th has seen a rise in 1st turn charges on our local tables. It is less likely than being in range for the gun, but not nearly as how it was in previous editions.
honestly the smaller tables are imo a mistake IF gw insists on maintaining super heavies and transports.. but alas
The fact that overwatch was more or less curbed did certainly help melee, but it still remains that movement shenaigan melee units that have deepsstrike or other tricks are far outperforming regular melee infantry which still doesn't see play really.
Not really, in almost all of my games so far getting a unit into melee from deep strike was much harder than in 8th precisely because of the smaller tables.
From a gut feeling, right now fast moving melee units or a melee units in a transports are better than deep striking melee units, who are only slightly better than units moving at regular speed (6-7" or 5" with advance&charge).
Deep strikers are great tools for getting to places where few or no units are, which is fairly important for scoring VP, but they won't be able to help you take midfield or break into a protected backfield.
Like i said i dislike the smaller boards.
Fast moveing melee is still> then transported melee, and i think for exemple regular CSM berzerkers will still be used most often in conjunction with AL if only to achieve the movement necessary for them. That's the crux really, i doubt you'd see footsloggers without backup perform close to their price.
Most of those issues are caused by the large boards though - too many good spots to deep strike, too much space for shooting units to avoid combat and too much advantage for fast moving units.
Our group gave both kinds of tables multiple tries and regular footslogging melee units being much more viable on the smaller tables was one of the main reasons we are now playing almost all our games on 44x60. A DA player I face regularly has DW terminators just walking into melee because they are more likely to get into a fight than when he deep strikes them, our WE player has had the first wins with his armies since 8th edition because you can no longer back away from his objective secured zerkers unless you give up primaries completely, slanesh daemons have become insanely powerful and I have no problems getting my deathshroud terminators, MANz or dreads into combat without deep striking them. Footsloggers are doing just fine.
WE have a 9" movement stratagem as well by the way, the main reason why you see AL all the time is -1 to hit and the ability to use slanesh units and thus endless cacophony.
It's also worth noting that the detachment changes have rendered most lords of war unplayable or at least really bad choices.
Blackie wrote: If they had 5-6 shots each, like they should, they'd be fine with Scoot and Shoot.
225 points for that amount of wounds, shots and punch in combat is still quite undercosted.
In the TWC example I made I was considering shields of course because 5 points added to 45 is nothing, and no one would play them without. Not hammers or fists, because it's not their best loadout, but rather claws, swords or even free chainswords. At 275 (shield+claw/sword for everyone) or 250 (shield+chainsword) points they surely have better speed, durability, and way more attacks in combat (with hammers or fists they'd be 300-315 though) than aggressors but they're still one dimensional, a full CC unit.
Aggressors are very resilient for their points, they unleash a crazy amount of firepower and they are no jokes in combat. Very few units in the game have all these qualities for that amount of points.
I actually can't really think about a unit in the entire game than can be fairly compared to them without being outperformed.
Inceptors are also overpowered.
Melee damage should scale with unit speed like range weapons do based on range per cost.
Much like a MM and melta gun have different points costs when they used to have the exact same profile - except one was half the range so they had a different cost. CC stats are not as valuable on slow moving platforms units with 5" move literally never make it into cc with faster cc units unless they get charged (which they will likely get wiped) or the opponent misplays.
Like...they aren't durable. Do you consider a Praetorian durable? They are 12.5 points per T5 wound. Aggressors are 15 points per T5 wound.
The praetorians are also faster. Have reanimation protocols which is pretty close to having a 5+ FNP. I still wouldn't consider them Durable ether. Always pretty worried they are gonna get blown up without doing anything.
If you consider them durable It's likely do the the fact you are shooting them with AP-0. I'd recommend removing every weapon with AP-0 from your list that you aren't required to take. These weapons are garbage. Oh BTW. Look what aggressors have!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
a_typical_hero wrote: For what it's worth I'm a Marine player, I still think they are good and while I know that their output has been nerfed, it feels better to use them now.
Double shooting was penalising in two ways:
- It was not fun to go through all the dice rolls
- It felt bad when you wanted/needed to move
They remain a threat to most infantry units in shooting and melee and serve as my anti-horde backbone.
(Playing Blood Angels)
Please tell me why you'd take one over a bike? Like ever?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Really wish that we could focus on the obvious unfairness of certain aspects of the codex.
Like Core being handed out like Candy.
Compared to the Necrons it is an absolute joke.
Dreads are core? Devestators? HellBlasters? Heck it's easier to list the non core units for marines.
Crons have 5 Core units.
-Immortals
-Warriors
-Lychgaurd
-Deathmarks
-Tomblades (WTF toomblades are core but not Destroyers?)
Scarabs aren't core...
Flayed ones aren't core...
Not surprisingly - Monoliths aren't core but it's pretty strange considering how CORE Monoliths are in practice.
I also see no obvious points paid for core ability...In fact in the marine codex...most core units are better per point than non core. It is as expected it would be a random willy nilly decision.
I would really hope that in the future when you people decide to whine about things - you learn to wine in the right way..
Don't say "Nerf X "- Say "I want my own X". Now we have this literally random mechanic making the game less fun in general and OFC - marines got the better end of it.
OMG why did dreads get -1 damage? Redemptor dread is literally going to face roll own everything now. d3+3 damage fist too. LOL. 1 shots a custodies Term or bike and wounds them on 2's. In return they have to roll a 5/6 to not deal 1 damage against for most their units against it.
Man redemptor needed a buff...but like...T8 woulda been fine.
a_typical_hero wrote: For what it's worth I'm a Marine player, I still think they are good and while I know that their output has been nerfed, it feels better to use them now.
Double shooting was penalising in two ways:
- It was not fun to go through all the dice rolls
- It felt bad when you wanted/needed to move
They remain a threat to most infantry units in shooting and melee and serve as my anti-horde backbone.
(Playing Blood Angels)
Please tell me why you'd take one over a bike? Like ever?
- I like the aesthetics of the unit
- I'm going Primaris only (Outrider weren't a thing until recently)
- They are an excellent roadblock unit that does need focused firepower to remove
- They are dangerous if left alone
- Can shoot and melee reasonably well
I won't give you a site long post explaining mathematically why Aggressors are precisely 2.3% more effective for their cost than unit B that I could take instead. I'm just going by my own game experience with my local meta and my personal likings. But even on an objectively based review of them, they remain a good unit.
You are too quick to label something as trash or broken in my opinion. That's my impression of you from past threads. And maybe your local meta has not adapted well to 9th edition, yet. You said you'd like the games to be more focused on blowing the opponent off the table than playing to the objectives. This approach to the game could skew your perceived strengths of units.
a_typical_hero wrote: For what it's worth I'm a Marine player, I still think they are good and while I know that their output has been nerfed, it feels better to use them now.
Double shooting was penalising in two ways:
- It was not fun to go through all the dice rolls
- It felt bad when you wanted/needed to move
They remain a threat to most infantry units in shooting and melee and serve as my anti-horde backbone.
(Playing Blood Angels)
Please tell me why you'd take one over a bike? Like ever?
- I like the aesthetics of the unit
- I'm going Primaris only (Outrider weren't a thing until recently)
- They are an excellent roadblock unit that does need focused firepower to remove
- They are dangerous if left alone
- Can shoot and melee reasonably well
I won't give you a site long post explaining mathematically why Aggressors are precisely 2.3% more effective for their cost than unit B that I could take instead. I'm just going by my own game experience with my local meta and my personal likings. But even on an objectively based review of them, they remain a good unit.
You are too quick to label something as trash or broken in my opinion. That's my impression of you from past threads. And maybe your local meta has not adapted well to 9th edition, yet. You said you'd like the games to be more focused on blowing the opponent off the table than playing to the objectives. This approach to the game could skew your perceived strengths of units.
No I mean. You basically get the same firepower out of space marine bikes...at longer range...while moving 3x the speed and yo still have decent close combat ability with chainswords (which is better than melee ability you can't use cause you are too slow). Aggressors aren't any more durable per point than a tactical marine so they are just as much of a roadblock as literally any unit in the army.
Aggressors do look pretty cool but they don't have a roll in the army. They would be great in an eldar army that needs a unit like that. In a marine army where literally every unit has good anti infantry ability and a 3+ save it it is redundant. They certainly aren't the worst unit in the game but given the army they are in without double shoot they are a sub par option that doesn't even outperform the units with much better threat range.
No I mean. You basically get the same firepower out of space marine bikes...at longer range...while moving 3x the speed and yo still have decent close combat ability with chainswords (which is better than melee ability you can't use cause you are too slow). Aggressors aren't any more durable per point than a tactical marine so they are just as much of a roadblock as literally any unit in the army.
Aggressors do look pretty cool but they don't have a roll in the army. They would be great in an eldar army that needs a unit like that. In a marine army where literally every unit has good anti infantry ability and a 3+ save it it is redundant. They certainly aren't the worst unit in the game but given the army they are in without double shoot they are a sub par option that doesn't even outperform the units with much better threat range.
I'd do it based on synergy.
If they're on their lonesome or with Sammael, I'd take Bikes and Speeders
To partner with Calgar, Guilliman, or a Gravis Captain, I'd take Aggresors and Erads
To partner with Shrike I'd take Inceptors and Vanguard Vets.
I may even be taking Victrix with Guilliman/Calgar now. The absolute target defense they provide layered with Look Out Sir! is intruiging if possibly overkill.
Spoletta wrote:Bloody rose repentia clear 200% of their value in intercessors in melee, and that's not their best target.
Blood Rose Repentia are 1' faster than Aggressors, people here have been saying they are too slow to get into melee so they suck. BR Repentia are functionally USELESS until they get into CC and have 1 T3 wound with only a 5+ FNP to save them from getting killed. To put that in perspective, 3 Aggressors who you say suck, are hosing down 8 to 9 of them a turn at 18' range with no buffs. So 120 to 135pts dead in 1 turn of shooting...or about 100% return on investment. BR repentia get 3 attacks at 15pts which hit on 4s rerolling on the first round of combat thats 2.25 hits, S6 Vs T4 = 1.5 wounds and -4 AP (BR bonus) means 1.5 dead Intercessors. So 30pts of dead Intercessors. Exactly 200% return on investment. So than the question becomes, does the trade off in durability = return on possible damage in CC? and the answer is a resounding no. Good Luck getting 135pts (9 repentia) across the board, they will require a Rhino to do anything besides die turn 1, so tack on 78pts to their price, and pray to god the enemy isn't capable of popping a T7 Rhino, because if they do you just lost your 200pt distraction carnifex with minimal effort on the part of the enemy.
SemperMortis wrote: So to be clear here, you think a 15pt repentia model is as good as an aggressor? I want to be clear here because you dodge points and move goal posts like crazy.
I think you're moving those goalposts all your own to tell a half truth by making it 1 15 point model instead of:
Point for point. it takes 3 bolter hits to guarantee 1 dead repentia. 3 hits = 2 wounds vs 5+ FNP = 1.33 dead Repentia. To kill 3 repentia (45pts) it takes a bit less than 7 bolter hits. Aggressor. it takes 27 Bolter hits. 27 hits = 9 Wounds, vs 3+ save = 3 wounds. So Aggressors are more than 400% more durable vs small arms fire.
Shooting Phase. Point for point. Repentia get 0 shooting. So they aren't worth points in the shooting phase. Aggressors for 45pts get 9.5 shots on average, against hordes its a solid 12. BS 3+ = 6 to 8 hits on average (depending on unit size) and S4 = 3-4 wounds against T4 troops. Against repentia as previously mentioned, 1 Aggressor is killing 3 a turn.
CC Phase. Point for Point. 3 BR Repentia kill 4.5 Intercessors. probably their most efficient target to attack Aggressors with no buffs kill about 1.4 Intercessors, which isn't their most efficient target to attack.
So Aggressors are 400% more durable than Repentia, they shine in the shooting phase and in CC the Repentia finally win something, being 3x more effective at killing intercessors than Aggressors...of course, that is including the buff of a faction where as the Aggressors received ZERO buffs.
So are Repentia, point for point, as good as aggressors?
Breton wrote: I think Spoletta said out they do 200% of their points in damage against a less than optimal target.
I think even when they had double shots and Scoot And Shoot 6 aggressors weren't killing 66-67 boys.
9.5 (average Shots) x 6 (aggressors x 2 (attacks per shot) = 114 * .67 = 76.38. Uh oh, we're already in trouble. * 0.5 = 38.19 *.84 = 32. Uh oh, that's only 94% of their points. not even 100% of their points let alone 200%.
Do you want to move the goalposts again and toss in Captains and Lieutenants? Do you think adding 2/3 of 1/3 of all misses and half of all glances/duds/whatever you want to call hits that don't wound will double their output?
Maybe you want to send Aggressors against a less than optimal opponent too. 114 shots, 76 hits, 38 wounds, 12 damage against T4 3+ Intercessors (Same unit) That's 6 Intercessors. Uh oh. That's only 44% of their points.
Well its your choice. Where WOULD you like to move the goalposts this time?
So first off, Seraphim, they can take a minimum of 5 with 2 special weapons for 83pts, with those wonderful new buffs to flamers that 4D6 shots at S3 + 6 shots at S4 BS3. 4D6 = 14 hits, about 4-5 wounds and with BR 4-5 dead orkz. Again, requiring a buff (BR). If the boyz mob is 11+ its 24 shots for 8 wounds and 8 dead Orkz, the 6 pistols get 4 hits and 2 wounds for another 2 dead ork boyz
I don't know what strat he was referencing because again I don't play SoB, but since we are measuring units without buffs and I already gave them a buff in BR i'm not going to worry about it. So thats 83pts of SoB killing 10 orkz or 80pts, requires the SoB to be within 12' of the orkz which means next turn they are effectively dead. As far as "optimal" the only more optimal target for them in my entire codex would be Grotz, but I can promise you, I will never be taking mobz bigger than 10 of grotz if i ever take them again at 5ppm.
But again the comparison was to aggressors originally. So lets give the Serpahim SoB the BR buff and the aggressors nothing.
Shooting: Sisters of Battle pull a slight victor, however, closer range, more dead orkz but likely dead the next turn vs. longer range, less kills but likely safe the following turn from charges. So in reality its a suicide squad.
SoB: 10 dead boyz 80pts almost a 100% return on investment. 12' range though. Aggressors: 2 aggressors are 90pts, they kill 6.66 boyz at 18' range or just shy of 60% return on investment.
CC: Aggressors win by 300% margin.
SoB: 6 attacks, 4 hits, 1.33 wounds for 1.16 dead Ork boyz. less than 10% return. Aggressors: 8 attacks, 4 hits, 3.33 dead Boyz. just under 30% return.
Durability: Aggressors win hands down, about twice as durable.
SoB: 5 T3 wounds with 3+ requires about 23-24 bolter hits to kill. Aggressors: 6 T5 Wounds 3+ requires 54 bolter hits to kill
So now the question again, are Seraphim better than Aggressors point for point?
Can't tell if you enjoy lying with your numbers or if you just plain forgot again. If you are killing 32 boyz with 6 aggressors double shooting than they would get 12 shots each not 9.5 because of the blast rules. So those 6 aggressors would get 144 shots, Those seraphim require buffs (weapon upgrades AND order bonus (BR) as well as a strat to get that 200% return) the aggressors used to get enough damage to kill 40 boyz a turn which is 320pts or an 118% return on investment in 1 shooting phase NO BUFFS REQUIRED. Now you have to settle for 6 of them only getting 160pts dead in 1 shooting phase, poor guy only gets a 60% return in 1 shooting phase without any buffs.
If you want to add in the buff the BR got, a chapter bonus, then your numbers likewise go up. Even with the nerf, if those aggressors are IF they are getting 72 shots for 25 wounds, Crimson fists would get 72 shots for....72 hits, 36 wounds and 30 dead boyz. Both score more kills if its in the Tactical turn. So your 270pt unit is now killing 240pts of boyz in a single shooting phase or 288pts if its tactical doctrine turn. Add in the other bonuses the SoB were given like strats and I am sure you can boost those numbers even higher.
Little fun math for you as well, CF or IF Aggressors in tac doctrine are doing 23.75 dmg to Intercessors which is 11-12 dead Intercessors or 220-240pts
294pts of BR Seraphim would get 4 dmg with bolt weapons and 3.5 dmg with flamers. Or just about enough to kill 4 to 5 Intercessors or 80 to 100pts. Still damn good return, but nowhere near as good as Aggressors.
So against their best match up, with buffs, with CP, yeah BR SoB units can be good, but are always a fraction of the durability of Aggressors and are nowhere near as good in the other phase as Aggressors.
Melee units can't deal any damage if they're dead before they get there. That's the problem with mathammer, you compare everything in a vacuum.
I didn't make the test, I just laughed when someone else passed it. By the same token Aggressor units can't double fire if they're dead before they shoot. Oops.
No, what you did was move the goal posts, put up biased 1vs1 comparisons and left out buffs or numbers that you didn't want reflecting in the fact that the unit people are complaining about is significantly better than basically any comparable unit in another faction. What was hilarious was the goal posts moving from a unit being as good with no buffs to you trying to defend the for fun comparison spoletta made where he gave them 3 separate buffs, Order buff, upgraded weapons and a CP strat. As of right now, nobody has provided an example of any unit from a non-space marine faction that is comparable to either eradicators or aggressors. The closest was Spoletta jokingly putting foward his SoB units and handing out buffs like crazy, and even then you had to ignore the durability difference and either melee or shooting to even come close to the damage/durability of Aggressors.
We can keep playing with what ifs and what abouts. But lets stick to some basic questions. Do you think Aggressors are good? Do you think BR SoB units mentioned are as good OVERALL as Aggressors? Do you think they excel so much in their 1 area that it makes up for being significantly worse in the other two?
Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
I think aggressors on their own is a better unit than Repentias but dont make everything else look worse than they are just to gak on marines.
Klickor wrote: Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
You can, if you have two sixes saved, get sixes on the advance and ONE charge die.
Not both.
Klickor wrote: Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
You can, if you have two sixes saved, get sixes on the advance and ONE charge die.
Not both.
You can do both. A charge roll is 2 dice in one individual dice roll so you can change both of them. Takes 2 dice though since you want to replace both.
You can even get +1 to advance and charge for the repentia and if you have Triumf close you could even get away with a 4 to get a 6" advance. So a 25" threat range with a 4, a 5 and a 6 saved.
Klickor wrote: Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
I think aggressors on their own is a better unit than Repentias but dont make everything else look worse than they are just to gak on marines.
couple things. First off, I have openly admitted several times I am no expert in SoB. if they have that rule that allows them to advance and charge I don't know where to find it because I am relying on Battlescribe. Secondly, your scenario requires a host of other things to happen before that threat range is possible. How do they get miracle dice? Do they start the game with them? if not than a 25' threat range is useless because Turn 2+ charges aren't as hard to get as Turn 1, and that threat range becomes significantly less important.
I am not downplaying SoB units, I am pointing out that in comparison to a Marine unit which several players have openly said is "Trash" or "bad", they aren't as good.
Klickor wrote: Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
I think aggressors on their own is a better unit than Repentias but dont make everything else look worse than they are just to gak on marines.
couple things. First off, I have openly admitted several times I am no expert in SoB. if they have that rule that allows them to advance and charge I don't know where to find it because I am relying on Battlescribe. Secondly, your scenario requires a host of other things to happen before that threat range is possible. How do they get miracle dice? Do they start the game with them? if not than a 25' threat range is useless because Turn 2+ charges aren't as hard to get as Turn 1, and that threat range becomes significantly less important.
I am not downplaying SoB units, I am pointing out that in comparison to a Marine unit which several players have openly said is "Trash" or "bad", they aren't as good.
Also.. how do you know you have not used the miracle dice of a 6 on a damage roll int he shooting phase..?
I mean I get it. Marines were nerfed so bad they clearly need buffs now. AmIright ?
I am not saying Aggressors are bad but only refuting the argument that Repentias are slow and thus wont survive until combat. There is some preparation involved but if you use Repentias you have probably planned for it and then they are very fast. If you knew you need a 6 for the charge and uses it in shooting you are an idiot. "But what if he didnt move in the movement phase and cant reach in the charge phase? You see shooting is much better than melee!!!"
Its like saying that pre 9th BA index Death Company with JP were barely faster than White scars aggressors who can advance and charge. Without stratagems sure but everyone who knows BA knows they had 3 stratagems that all but guaranted turn 1 charges for up to 2 units. Forlorn Fury gave a 13-19" pre game move and uwof+doa gave a 3d6+1 charge from reserves turn 1. Ofc, a BA player need to know he has those stratagems, cp to use it and remember to put the units on the table and not reserves. But can we expect an average player to know such secret combos or are they just for the WAAC types? So the truth is perhaps closer to that they are only 1" faster than WS aggressors and we should do all comparisons with that "fact" in mind.
If you compare units you shouldnt use only the stats on their datasheets if the faction have some key combos that increase their effectiveness by massive amounts. Like you wouldnt have obliterators in a comparison and ignore the strats that more than double their output. Smaller increases like doctrines that give 1ap or reroll ones that wont always be there can safely be ignored most of the time since most lists will have some of that anyway, even if not marines.
But you cant just hand wave away DOUBLING the average threat distance while also making it more reliable and boil it down to 1" extra movement just to suit your narrative. If its at that level then why even discuss it at all?
If you consider them durable It's likely do the the fact you are shooting them with AP-0. I'd recommend removing every weapon with AP-0 from your list that you aren't required to take. These weapons are garbage. Oh BTW. Look what aggressors have!
Not everyone can have AP-1 (let alone AP-2) on basic weapons. 3 out of 4 armies I played in 8th-9th didn't have them. Orks have very few weapons with AP-1 in the entire roster while AP-2 is reserved for anti tank weapons like rokkits and only flash gitz, which now cost a fortune, have high AP and high rate of fire. I can't upgrade sluggas, choppas or shootas with better weapons.
I know, a joke compared to SM which can have AP-2 on troops but that's what we've got. Drukhari infantries and venoms basically have poisoned AP0 weapons. Adepta Sororitas don't get primaris bolters or doctrines, they have access to AP-1 or better but not for cheap.
I'd recommend evaluating every unit without considering SM primaris as possible opponents.
If you consider them durable It's likely do the the fact you are shooting them with AP-0. I'd recommend removing every weapon with AP-0 from your list that you aren't required to take. These weapons are garbage. Oh BTW. Look what aggressors have!
Not everyone can have AP-1 (let alone AP-2) on basic weapons. 3 out of 4 armies I played in 8th-9th didn't have them. Orks have very few weapons with AP-1 in the entire roster while AP-2 is reserved for anti tank weapons like rokkits and only flash gitz, which now cost a fortune, have high AP and high rate of fire. I can't upgrade sluggas, choppas or shootas with better weapons.
I know, a joke compared to SM which can have AP-2 on troops but that's what we've got. Drukhari infantries and venoms basically have poisoned AP0 weapons. Adepta Sororitas don't get primaris bolters or doctrines, they have access to AP-1 or better but not for cheap.
I'd recommend evaluating every unit without considering SM primaris as possible opponents.
Seconded, the most common weapons Chaos has are also AP0. Standard rifles with AP -1 are something that only marines seem to have as of yet.
Klickor wrote: Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
You can, if you have two sixes saved, get sixes on the advance and ONE charge die.
Not both.
You can do both. A charge roll is 2 dice in one individual dice roll so you can change both of them. Takes 2 dice though since you want to replace both.
You can even get +1 to advance and charge for the repentia and if you have Triumf close you could even get away with a 4 to get a 6" advance. So a 25" threat range with a 4, a 5 and a 6 saved.
Where is the +1 to Advance and Charge rules in the Repentia rules?
Where is the special rules that allow a repentia to Advance AND Charge?
IF you have a Repentia Superior (Additional Character) you can re-roll advance and charge rolls. (what Black Templars get as part of their generic Chapter tactic)
Where are you getting this information?
I can't recall the time I had 3 MDs 6 at any one time??
Klickor wrote: Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
You can, if you have two sixes saved, get sixes on the advance and ONE charge die.
Not both.
You can do both. A charge roll is 2 dice in one individual dice roll so you can change both of them. Takes 2 dice though since you want to replace both.
You can even get +1 to advance and charge for the repentia and if you have Triumf close you could even get away with a 4 to get a 6" advance. So a 25" threat range with a 4, a 5 and a 6 saved.
Where is the +1 to Advance and Charge rules in the Repentia rules?
Where is the special rules that allow a repentia to Advance AND Charge?
IF you have a Repentia Superior (Additional Character) you can re-roll advance and charge rolls. (what Black Templars get as part of their generic Chapter tactic)
Where are you getting this information?
I can't recall the time I had 3 MDs 6 at any one time??
Most units uses rules not on their datasheet. There is a reason Repentias are a good unit. The ability to advance and charge from a strat is one of them. Getting bonus to advance and charge is another(its one of their "canticle" bonuses if I remember right)
It is not that you always can or need to charge the max distance. They are faster than they look and miracle dice make them very reliable. If you have a 2 4s and a 5 you KNOW you can move 6", advance 5" and then charge 10" with 0 risk of failing. That is a guaranteed 22" threat without even having a 6 available. Even with factions that have advance and charge with rerolls available you will fail from time to time even when doing short charges. Knowing what will happen in a dice game is super powerful. Even with just having 2s or 3s available you can play around knowing you wont roll that snake eyes and miss that 3" charge and lose the game.
Repentias are super fast and very reliable. Cant believe people try to refute that. Very different from aggressors. They arent a good comparison to aggressors at all. Might as well compare heavy weapons teams or nurglings.
If you consider them durable It's likely do the the fact you are shooting them with AP-0. I'd recommend removing every weapon with AP-0 from your list that you aren't required to take. These weapons are garbage. Oh BTW. Look what aggressors have!
Not everyone can have AP-1 (let alone AP-2) on basic weapons. 3 out of 4 armies I played in 8th-9th didn't have them. Orks have very few weapons with AP-1 in the entire roster while AP-2 is reserved for anti tank weapons like rokkits and only flash gitz, which now cost a fortune, have high AP and high rate of fire. I can't upgrade sluggas, choppas or shootas with better weapons.
I know, a joke compared to SM which can have AP-2 on troops but that's what we've got. Drukhari infantries and venoms basically have poisoned AP0 weapons. Adepta Sororitas don't get primaris bolters or doctrines, they have access to AP-1 or better but not for cheap.
I'd recommend evaluating every unit without considering SM primaris as possible opponents.
Orks and DE can take lots of AP -4 though. Nothing forces you to take beyond 1-3 troop squads. I mean I agree with you on this. You should build your list like you are going to be play against space marines. It's why I don't even consider Tesla in my Necron lists ATM. It would be great vs daemons or imperial gaurd but since there is a good chance I play marines any given game - it wont do anything to them - better to take gauss all around. Better to take ap-4 laser cannons.
Most units uses rules not on their datasheet. There is a reason Repentias are a good unit. The ability to advance and charge from a strat is one of them. Getting bonus to advance and charge is another(its one of their "canticle" bonuses if I remember right)
It is not that you always can or need to charge the max distance. They are faster than they look and miracle dice make them very reliable. If you have a 2 4s and a 5 you KNOW you can move 6", advance 5" and then charge 10" with 0 risk of failing. That is a guaranteed 22" threat without even having a 6 available. Even with factions that have advance and charge with rerolls available you will fail from time to time even when doing short charges. Knowing what will happen in a dice game is super powerful. Even with just having 2s or 3s available you can play around knowing you wont roll that snake eyes and miss that 3" charge and lose the game.
Repentias are super fast and very reliable. Cant believe people try to refute that. Very different from aggressors. They arent a good comparison to aggressors at all. Might as well compare heavy weapons teams or nurglings.
And ork shoota boyz kill 5-6 of them in overwatch. Against literally any unit that has high ROF they can't charge because its worth over watching them thanks to T3 and 5+ FNP. Against any unit or army that has "Fight first" rules, they are effectively useless. Regardless, we were talking about units on their own and comparing them, when you want to start adding in buffs, stratagems, "Miracle" dice etc, the same can be done to the aggressors unit. You can add in the CM and LT to dramatically increase their dmg output, you can add in the Apothecary to give them the FNP and bringing back a dead model. You can throw in faction bonuses and doctrines which make them -1 AP and have extra hits on 6s etc. And as far as threat range, in 9th edition where the brawl is happening in the no mans land between the two armies fighting for capture points, well, a massive threat range is worth a lot less than it once was, even with the nerf to overwatch.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: Orks and DE can take lots of AP -4 though. Nothing forces you to take beyond 1-3 troop squads. I mean I agree with you on this. You should build your list like you are going to be play against space marines. It's why I don't even consider Tesla in my Necron lists ATM. It would be great vs daemons or imperial gaurd but since there is a good chance I play marines any given game - it wont do anything to them - better to take gauss all around. Better to take ap-4 laser cannons.
Orkz can not take a lot of AP -4 unless you are talking about Close Combat and then its Killsaws. We have Snasha Gunz for AP-4....that is about it. The SAG is effectively dead thanks to a massive nerf (73% increase in price).
So at most you are talking about 18 Mek Gunz equipped with Smasha's sitting back field for 720pts. If you face an Ork list with 18 Mek gunz, they are either great kitbashers or filthy rich, thats $900 worth of models And you will likely win the game since they aren't ob sec and they move 3' a turn.
Aggressors are still amazing with Salamanders. The removal of shoot twice was required. Especially considering every chapter now has access to a strat that makes units count as standing still. But I guess some people think a 6 man 240pt unit getting 144 shots is fair and balanced lol.
Xenomancers wrote: They have smasha/SAG/kill saws. Thats about all you need.
If you never plan on taking objectives, sure
Mega nobs though?
Marine Players: We don't have enough numbers to hold objectives with our 20pt T4 2 wound 3+ save troops.
Also Marine Players: You have meganobz to hold objectives you're fine.
Two of the 3 units/gear you mentioned are long range artillery or are MASSIVELY overpriced. A SAG Big Mek is 120pts for D6 shots at BS5+ 2D6 strength. Averages 1 hit per turn at S7 -4AP D6dmg. Would you pay 120pts for that? No, no you wouldn't.
The other is Smasha Gunz which are great.
Finally, Killsaws.... So either kill all SM's with my $900 of Smasha gunz, or kill them with a massively over priced SAG, and finish off whats left with our killsaws....sure.
Yeah, eradicators as they are wouldn't be a problem at all if they were 50$ each model like smasha gunz.
Because you know, even if they are massively overpowered, there would be very low chances to see even a single 3man squad for that price. Smasha gunz are extremely good, but it's unlikely to see even a few of them on the table, let alone a list with tons of them: theoryhammer not always matches real life.
Klickor wrote: Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
You can, if you have two sixes saved, get sixes on the advance and ONE charge die.
Not both.
You can do both. A charge roll is 2 dice in one individual dice roll so you can change both of them. Takes 2 dice though since you want to replace both.
You can even get +1 to advance and charge for the repentia and if you have Triumf close you could even get away with a 4 to get a 6" advance. So a 25" threat range with a 4, a 5 and a 6 saved.
Where is the +1 to Advance and Charge rules in the Repentia rules?
Where is the special rules that allow a repentia to Advance AND Charge?
IF you have a Repentia Superior (Additional Character) you can re-roll advance and charge rolls. (what Black Templars get as part of their generic Chapter tactic)
Where are you getting this information?
I can't recall the time I had 3 MDs 6 at any one time??
Most units uses rules not on their datasheet. There is a reason Repentias are a good unit. The ability to advance and charge from a strat is one of them. Getting bonus to advance and charge is another(its one of their "canticle" bonuses if I remember right)
It is not that you always can or need to charge the max distance. They are faster than they look and miracle dice make them very reliable. If you have a 2 4s and a 5 you KNOW you can move 6", advance 5" and then charge 10" with 0 risk of failing. That is a guaranteed 22" threat without even having a 6 available. Even with factions that have advance and charge with rerolls available you will fail from time to time even when doing short charges. Knowing what will happen in a dice game is super powerful. Even with just having 2s or 3s available you can play around knowing you wont roll that snake eyes and miss that 3" charge and lose the game.
Repentias are super fast and very reliable. Cant believe people try to refute that. Very different from aggressors. They arent a good comparison to aggressors at all. Might as well compare heavy weapons teams or nurglings.
Ahh we are adding strats in as well now - yes there is a strat that allows Repentia to Advance and Charge - are they any Marine 1CP strats that could boost Agressors? Ah yes - Death to the Traitors - re-roll all hits in melee.
The Sacred Rite does give +1 to Assault and Charge.
So we we need to add in that Assault Doctorine to make the fists - 4AP alongside the shooting bonues from previous turns.
On the other hand each repentia only gets 2 S6 AP-3 D2 attacks as compared to the dedicated shooting Agreessors where each unit gets 4 S8 AP-3 D2 attacks
C'mon Agressors are a great unit for shooting and no slouch in melee - Repentia are pretty damn good in Combat and IF you have rolled the right Miracle dice likely to get into comabt when you want to. On ther other hand Repentia don't have guns.
Xenomancers wrote: They have smasha/SAG/kill saws. Thats about all you need.
If you never plan on taking objectives, sure
Mega nobs though?
Marine Players: We don't have enough numbers to hold objectives with our 20pt T4 2 wound 3+ save troops.
Also Marine Players: You have meganobz to hold objectives you're fine.
Two of the 3 units/gear you mentioned are long range artillery or are MASSIVELY overpriced. A SAG Big Mek is 120pts for D6 shots at BS5+ 2D6 strength. Averages 1 hit per turn at S7 -4AP D6dmg. Would you pay 120pts for that? No, no you wouldn't.
The other is Smasha Gunz which are great.
Finally, Killsaws.... So either kill all SM's with my $900 of Smasha gunz, or kill them with a massively over priced SAG, and finish off whats left with our killsaws....sure.
I mean...you have other strong weapons too. Those are just the AP -4 ones. Pretty sure the wombast cannon on the flyer is ap-4 too but it might be AP -3. Then you've got the chinork with 2+ to hit squig bombs...those are ap-3 or 4. You've got the buggies with the zap guns at AP-3 and the dragster. Those all have really good weapons for killing marines.
I mean...you have other strong weapons too. Those are just the AP -4 ones. Pretty sure the wombast cannon on the flyer is ap-4 too but it might be AP -3. Then you've got the chinork with 2+ to hit squig bombs...those are ap-3 or 4. You've got the buggies with the zap guns at AP-3 and the dragster. Those all have really good weapons for killing marines.
Correct me if I guess wrong, but I think you are talking about the Wazbom Mega Kannon which is basically just a worse version of the KMK. D3 S8 -3 D6D, hit rolls of 1 cause 1 Mortal wound to itself
Averages .77 hits a turn, against Gravis its 0.51 wounds and -3 its 0.43 chance to go through armor and do 3.5 dmg. So its got less than a 50% chance to kill 1 gravis model a turn.
The Chinork is a FW model, it doesn't have "Squig Bombs", it has LEGENDS access to big bombs. So literally no idea what you are talking about here.
Buggies don't have Zzap gunz, The KBB has a Rivet Kannon which averages 1 dead Marine a turn (non gravis). The Scrapjet kills about 1.5 Marines a turn (non gravis). The RTSB averages 1 Dead marine a turn (non Gravis), the SJD averages 1 dead Marine a turn (non gravis)
So all those buggies are 90-110pts and kill about 1 Marine a turn. Not exactly slaying bodies my friend.
Klickor wrote: Repentia having only 1" more move compared to aggressors isnt really telling the whole story. You make them sound very slow when in fact they are one of the reliably fastest units in the game. I believe they can advance and charge and in combination with miracle dice you can get an automatic 3 sixes on those 3 dice. Thats a 25" threat range. Not adding in the 3" disembark from the rhino.
Thats twice what you usually see aggressors have and even if white scars with buffs they are still half a feet slower.
You can, if you have two sixes saved, get sixes on the advance and ONE charge die.
Not both.
You can do both. A charge roll is 2 dice in one individual dice roll so you can change both of them. Takes 2 dice though since you want to replace both.
You can even get +1 to advance and charge for the repentia and if you have Triumf close you could even get away with a 4 to get a 6" advance. So a 25" threat range with a 4, a 5 and a 6 saved.
Where is the +1 to Advance and Charge rules in the Repentia rules?
Where is the special rules that allow a repentia to Advance AND Charge?
IF you have a Repentia Superior (Additional Character) you can re-roll advance and charge rolls. (what Black Templars get as part of their generic Chapter tactic)
Where are you getting this information?
I can't recall the time I had 3 MDs 6 at any one time??
Most units uses rules not on their datasheet. There is a reason Repentias are a good unit. The ability to advance and charge from a strat is one of them. Getting bonus to advance and charge is another(its one of their "canticle" bonuses if I remember right)
It is not that you always can or need to charge the max distance. They are faster than they look and miracle dice make them very reliable. If you have a 2 4s and a 5 you KNOW you can move 6", advance 5" and then charge 10" with 0 risk of failing. That is a guaranteed 22" threat without even having a 6 available. Even with factions that have advance and charge with rerolls available you will fail from time to time even when doing short charges. Knowing what will happen in a dice game is super powerful. Even with just having 2s or 3s available you can play around knowing you wont roll that snake eyes and miss that 3" charge and lose the game.
Repentias are super fast and very reliable. Cant believe people try to refute that. Very different from aggressors. They arent a good comparison to aggressors at all. Might as well compare heavy weapons teams or nurglings.
Ahh we are adding strats in as well now - yes there is a strat that allows Repentia to Advance and Charge - are they any Marine 1CP strats that could boost Agressors? Ah yes - Death to the Traitors - re-roll all hits in melee.
The Sacred Rite does give +1 to Assault and Charge.
So we we need to add in that Assault Doctorine to make the fists - 4AP alongside the shooting bonues from previous turns.
On the other hand each repentia only gets 2 S6 AP-3 D2 attacks as compared to the dedicated shooting Agreessors where each unit gets 4 S8 AP-3 D2 attacks
C'mon Agressors are a great unit for shooting and no slouch in melee - Repentia are pretty damn good in Combat and IF you have rolled the right Miracle dice likely to get into comabt when you want to. On ther other hand Repentia don't have guns.
Ofc we have to add some strats and outside rules when discussing units. Especially for units like repentias that live or die by those outside rules. Miracle dice etc are quite crucial to that unit. You wouldnt ignore reanimation protocol for Necron units, order for AM or canticles for ad mech when discussing them. Or stratagems that are made for/intended for certain units.
Aggressors are definetly a better unit in isolation than for example Repentias. It is quite obvious and even pointless discussing further that point. And for the record I dont even think the 2 units can be compared in a useful manner at all. They are just too different and play nothing alike and Repentias dont even work on their own. Nothing wrong with Repentias for that. They obviously are not intended to be able to just march up the board without 0 support and consideration about synergies. Most marine units are, especially now that auras and strats were reigned in a lot.
Ofc we have to add some strats and outside rules when discussing units. Especially for units like repentias that live or die by those outside rules. Miracle dice etc are quite crucial to that unit. You wouldnt ignore reanimation protocol for Necron units, order for AM or canticles for ad mech when discussing them. Or stratagems that are made for/intended for certain units.
Aggressors are definetly a better unit in isolation than for example Repentias. It is quite obvious and even pointless discussing further that point. And for the record I dont even think the 2 units can be compared in a useful manner at all. They are just too different and play nothing alike and Repentias dont even work on their own. Nothing wrong with Repentias for that. They obviously are not intended to be able to just march up the board without 0 support and consideration about synergies. Most marine units are, especially now that auras and strats were reigned in a lot.
Than by that same metric, give those Aggressors similar buffs from outside units/traits/strats and watch the pendulum swing even further.
To make those Repentia worthy even taking you have to use all those buffs, Aggressors are already good enough on their own, when you increase their durability or dmg potential with outside sources it skews the results even further in their direction, and that is the point we are making. If you want to throw on CP to make repentia good, than do the same to aggressors and go ahead and compare again. I'll bet you dollars to donuts Repentia are not nearly as good, even fully buffed, as Aggressors fully buffed
I mean...you have other strong weapons too. Those are just the AP -4 ones. Pretty sure the wombast cannon on the flyer is ap-4 too but it might be AP -3. Then you've got the chinork with 2+ to hit squig bombs...those are ap-3 or 4. You've got the buggies with the zap guns at AP-3 and the dragster. Those all have really good weapons for killing marines.
Correct me if I guess wrong, but I think you are talking about the Wazbom Mega Kannon which is basically just a worse version of the KMK. D3 S8 -3 D6D, hit rolls of 1 cause 1 Mortal wound to itself
Averages .77 hits a turn, against Gravis its 0.51 wounds and -3 its 0.43 chance to go through armor and do 3.5 dmg. So its got less than a 50% chance to kill 1 gravis model a turn.
The Chinork is a FW model, it doesn't have "Squig Bombs", it has LEGENDS access to big bombs. So literally no idea what you are talking about here.
Buggies don't have Zzap gunz, The KBB has a Rivet Kannon which averages 1 dead Marine a turn (non gravis). The Scrapjet kills about 1.5 Marines a turn (non gravis). The RTSB averages 1 Dead marine a turn (non Gravis), the SJD averages 1 dead Marine a turn (non gravis)
So all those buggies are 90-110pts and kill about 1 Marine a turn. Not exactly slaying bodies my friend.
Sorry I was wrong about the squig bomb - it comes from the tank bustas inside and it's not ap -3 its 2. It does d6 damage though. They hit on 2's.
Friend uses it - chinork with 10 tank bustas - it's pretty nasty.
I mean...you have other strong weapons too. Those are just the AP -4 ones. Pretty sure the wombast cannon on the flyer is ap-4 too but it might be AP -3. Then you've got the chinork with 2+ to hit squig bombs...those are ap-3 or 4. You've got the buggies with the zap guns at AP-3 and the dragster. Those all have really good weapons for killing marines.
Correct me if I guess wrong, but I think you are talking about the Wazbom Mega Kannon which is basically just a worse version of the KMK. D3 S8 -3 D6D, hit rolls of 1 cause 1 Mortal wound to itself
Averages .77 hits a turn, against Gravis its 0.51 wounds and -3 its 0.43 chance to go through armor and do 3.5 dmg. So its got less than a 50% chance to kill 1 gravis model a turn.
The Chinork is a FW model, it doesn't have "Squig Bombs", it has LEGENDS access to big bombs. So literally no idea what you are talking about here.
Buggies don't have Zzap gunz, The KBB has a Rivet Kannon which averages 1 dead Marine a turn (non gravis). The Scrapjet kills about 1.5 Marines a turn (non gravis). The RTSB averages 1 Dead marine a turn (non Gravis), the SJD averages 1 dead Marine a turn (non gravis)
So all those buggies are 90-110pts and kill about 1 Marine a turn. Not exactly slaying bodies my friend.
Xeno not knowing gak about orks is not a new thing. You can literally assume every single thing he ever writes about orks is as wrong as it can be.
He frequently gets stomped by his ork friend because he can't play his own army well and then assumes that everything defeating him is extremely powerful.
But yes, the only AP-4 or better weapons in the ork codex is the smasha gun, the stompa's deff kannon and the SAG.
Ofc we have to add some strats and outside rules when discussing units. Especially for units like repentias that live or die by those outside rules. Miracle dice etc are quite crucial to that unit. You wouldnt ignore reanimation protocol for Necron units, order for AM or canticles for ad mech when discussing them. Or stratagems that are made for/intended for certain units.
Aggressors are definetly a better unit in isolation than for example Repentias. It is quite obvious and even pointless discussing further that point. And for the record I dont even think the 2 units can be compared in a useful manner at all. They are just too different and play nothing alike and Repentias dont even work on their own. Nothing wrong with Repentias for that. They obviously are not intended to be able to just march up the board without 0 support and consideration about synergies. Most marine units are, especially now that auras and strats were reigned in a lot.
Than by that same metric, give those Aggressors similar buffs from outside units/traits/strats and watch the pendulum swing even further.
To make those Repentia worthy even taking you have to use all those buffs, Aggressors are already good enough on their own, when you increase their durability or dmg potential with outside sources it skews the results even further in their direction, and that is the point we are making. If you want to throw on CP to make repentia good, than do the same to aggressors and go ahead and compare again. I'll bet you dollars to donuts Repentia are not nearly as good, even fully buffed, as Aggressors fully buffed
Depends. You dont get as much extra out of each CP spent on aggressors compared to what you get from Repentia. Aggressors also dont really give marines something you couldnt get from just using other units while repentias gives something sisters cant easily get somewhere else.
In my BA lists I would rather have buffed repentias than some aggressors since they would fit my play style more. Vastly different units in vastly different roles in vastly different armies cant really be compared. Might as well compare servitors in aggressive marine lists to Tank Commanders in guard lists. I would vote on servitors being the better unit. They hold objectives and can do actions for a faction of the cost.
Depends. You dont get as much extra out of each CP spent on aggressors compared to what you get from Repentia. Aggressors also dont really give marines something you couldnt get from just using other units while repentias gives something sisters cant easily get somewhere else.
In my BA lists I would rather have buffed repentias than some aggressors since they would fit my play style more. Vastly different units in vastly different roles in vastly different armies cant really be compared. Might as well compare servitors in aggressive marine lists to Tank Commanders in guard lists. I would vote on servitors being the better unit. They hold objectives and can do actions for a faction of the cost.
So there are other SM units running around which in the shooting phase earn back 60% of their points cost shooting at horde units, and who can jump into CC and deal 4 S8 -3 AP attacks each? I'm joking. I know (Thank god) no other Marine unit like that exists.
As far as adding in bonuses and what not to make them better? Umm...yeah, there are a ton. For instance, there's the little free bonus of a chapter trait like exploding 6s, and -1 AP in tactical phase. That alone ups Aggressors from doing 3.33 dmg to ork boyz per model to 5. Add in support like a Chapter Master and its just about 7 dead ork boyz, or a 124% return on just the aggressor. I think doubling efficiency vs a target is kind of important, hell, you could even add in an LT if you wanted. The most hilarious part? some of the players here still think Aggressors suck and have said as much.
I wont go into the stratagems because I am not as familiar with those, but I would assume there are some in there that are amazing, even if its as bland as auspex scan which basically lets them shoot on your opponents turn.
I never paid much attention to the eyesore Primaris vehicles, but with this new 'Dex did one of them go from being a Transport to a Heavy Support slot?
H.B.M.C. wrote: I never paid much attention to the eyesore Primaris vehicles, but with this new 'Dex did one of them go from being a Transport to a Heavy Support slot?
Compared to being overpriced, (more) overcosted, losing some key traits (like fly) and others converting to a CP cost, the slot is the least of its problems.
All told it moved from 'I will probably never buy this model' to 'I will definitely never buy this model.'
It still has a bucket of mid-range, mid-strength guns, but, well, those aren't rare for marines. (Can't fact check it at the moment, but I think a pair of redemptors is about the same points with a slightly better weapon loadout between them, and the whole permanent -1 damage buff)
right now it's just to shrug, no one really bothered with repulsors anyway. when heavy intercessor models are avaliable and people use them on the table there's the possiability we MIGHT feel it a bit more as we're not going to be able to put them in Impulsors,but yeah by and large "no one took them anyway so no one cares"
Blackie wrote: Yeah, eradicators as they are wouldn't be a problem at all if they were 50$ each model like smasha gunz.
Because you know, even if they are massively overpowered, there would be very low chances to see even a single 3man squad for that price. Smasha gunz are extremely good, but it's unlikely to see even a few of them on the table, let alone a list with tons of them: theoryhammer not always matches real life.
Yeaahhh but an ork player could just tip out the contents of your workspace bin (the one under the desk we all have), squirt some glue on the pile and just pick up whatever gets glued together, stick a piece of straw for a barrel and voila...
Blackie wrote: Yeah, eradicators as they are wouldn't be a problem at all if they were 50$ each model like smasha gunz.
Because you know, even if they are massively overpowered, there would be very low chances to see even a single 3man squad for that price. Smasha gunz are extremely good, but it's unlikely to see even a few of them on the table, let alone a list with tons of them: theoryhammer not always matches real life.
Yeaahhh but an ork player could just tip out the contents of your workspace bin (the one under the desk we all have), squirt some glue on the pile and just pick up whatever gets glued together, stick a piece of straw for a barrel and voila...
It was only in the last year my Primaris only army really filled up on heavy support options between the Eliminators (both a squad of Stalker Bolt Rifles and Las Fusils), Hellblasters (5 or each type), Repulsor, Repulsor Executioner and Eradicators. I also plan on getting a Gladiator at very least further adding options to that slot.
I run lists of what I want and have over what is best. I mean, I generally run 20 Reivers (and lean heavy with Primaris Phobos stuff) if that gives you any idea of the Primaris army lists I write. That said, I already leaned towards few vehicles for my Primaris army often foregoing any vehicles since mine aren't completely painted, tougher to transport to the FLGS and I have never been that big of a fan of any 40k vehicle aesthetic. Not to mention every other miniatures war game I always leaned heavier on infantry over any other unit type. Heck, my GSC doesn't even have enough Heavy Support units to fill a Brigade yet. So my Repulsor and Repulsor only saw the table a couple of times already back when my collection had a tough time filling Heavy Support, anti-tank or even 2,000pts. This was made that much easier with the repulsor being Dedicated Transport though.
It makes a sort of sense that the repulsor is being listed more as a gunboat than transport. So I am not upset about it and understand the general 'shrug' comments. I certainly didn't use them as transports. However, I now that I have too few Heavy Support slots filled with units I generally like to take more but not enough to justify spending CP for an extra detachment for more slots it is going to be tough to fit in. So regardless if the repulsor was a good or bad datasheet, I am unlikely to field anywhere close to few times I already did. Chances are my model will only see the table when I finish painting it to kinda show it off before it is relegated to just being a wallflower in future army on parade photos.
Which in some respects it is a waste. But I think its mere presence in parade photos make the army look more complete and helps break up fairly large number of Primaris infantry I have. Worst comes to worse, I can probably have it count as another Executioner should I want a list to have two of them at some point.
I mean it makes sense to me as the repulsor is basicly the primaris land raider and LRs haven't been DTs since 5th edition. but yeah, it's moved from a "unlikely to take" to a "never take"
H.B.M.C. wrote: And maybe the fly thing was taken away to differentiate them from the new Primaris Land Speeder.
I mean, if they can all fly around as skimmers, why even have the Landspeeder?
Well Fly didn't make much sense how they were presented in the lore. And the cheezy things that could be done with it always led to the 'feels bad' which was also the lemon juice of salted wound of the Codex: Space Marine 2.0 for 8th. I would argue that the model didn't really need it to be effective either. I would have much rather some of the weapons on the Repulsor/Repulsor Executioner be treated as point defense weapons only useable in Overwatch and Close-Quarters. Both reducing the points cost while keeping the model something not any geek off the street wants to get entangled with.
BrianDavion wrote: Fly never made sense for them. the tanks aren't flying around, they're hovering just above the ground
To be fair, other skimmers aren't "flying around" either. They're skimmers. They skim!
If they could just fly around like that then there'd be no distinction between them and actual aircraft.
Friend of mine always thought that Eldar Grav-Tanks were light fighter jets. I kept telling him that if that were the case, why would the Eldar have actual fighter jets? Closest they can be is troop-carrying helicopters and helicopter gunships (with the Valk somewhere in between!). This would apply to Marine Land Speeders, Tau hover tanks, Dark Eldar Raiders, and so on.
And if the new Stormspeeder had Fly, and the Impulsor/Repulsor/Gladiator also had Fly... then they wouldn't really be any different, would they?
Also, I quite like the idea that the Imperium can do hover-tanks, but that they present no real advantage over their standard ground-based vehicles.
Blackie wrote: Yeah, eradicators as they are wouldn't be a problem at all if they were 50$ each model like smasha gunz.
Because you know, even if they are massively overpowered, there would be very low chances to see even a single 3man squad for that price. Smasha gunz are extremely good, but it's unlikely to see even a few of them on the table, let alone a list with tons of them: theoryhammer not always matches real life.
Yeaahhh but an ork player could just tip out the contents of your workspace bin (the one under the desk we all have), squirt some glue on the pile and just pick up whatever gets glued together, stick a piece of straw for a barrel and voila...
All my mek gunz are scratch built, and I wouldn't even consider an ork collection a proper one if it hasn't got tons of conversions and self-made models, but not all players can actually scratch build stuff. All those converted models are also illegal at events.
Blackie wrote: All my mek gunz are scratch built, and I wouldn't even consider an ork collection a proper one if it hasn't got tons of conversions and self-made models, but not all players can actually scratch build stuff. All those converted models are also illegal at events.
Since games workshop deletes datasheets that don't have models, this attitude is in direct contravention to GW's vision for the game (see: Biker Warboss).
My Battlewagons have always been Heavy Support, even without a single ranged or melee weapon.
Honestly I don't think expensive and highly armored gunboats like those SM tanks should be dedicated transports, the change is a good one. It doesn't really affect the game that much but it makes a lot of sense.
Blackie wrote: All my mek gunz are scratch built, and I wouldn't even consider an ork collection a proper one if it hasn't got tons of conversions and self-made models, but not all players can actually scratch build stuff. All those converted models are also illegal at events.
Since games workshop deletes datasheets that don't have models, this attitude is in direct contravention to GW's vision for the game (see: Biker Warboss).
Ok 1: the Bike warboss was moved out of legends because it's being moved into the FW Index... for a TOURNY minded player thats actually GOOD news.
2: as he said those conversions are all illegal at most tournies anyway so I'd assume if he's using them he's likely willing to use legends.
Blackie wrote: All my mek gunz are scratch built, and I wouldn't even consider an ork collection a proper one if it hasn't got tons of conversions and self-made models, but not all players can actually scratch build stuff. All those converted models are also illegal at events.
Since games workshop deletes datasheets that don't have models, this attitude is in direct contravention to GW's vision for the game (see: Biker Warboss).
I was talking about scratch building models with existing datasheets, instead of buying the official ones. Like mek gunz.
Blackie wrote: All my mek gunz are scratch built, and I wouldn't even consider an ork collection a proper one if it hasn't got tons of conversions and self-made models, but not all players can actually scratch build stuff. All those converted models are also illegal at events.
Since games workshop deletes datasheets that don't have models, this attitude is in direct contravention to GW's vision for the game (see: Biker Warboss).
Ok 1: the Bike warboss was moved out of legends because it's being moved into the FW Index... for a TOURNY minded player thats actually GOOD news.
2: as he said those conversions are all illegal at most tournies anyway so I'd assume if he's using them he's likely willing to use legends.
Not legends, conversions of codex models. Tournaments typically allow only official GW models, not 3rd party miniatures or vehicles in plasticard.
BrianDavion wrote: Ok 1: the Bike warboss was moved out of legends because it's being moved into the FW Index... for a TOURNY minded player thats actually GOOD news.
Why are you trying to blow smoke up my ass? Orks are *losing* datasheets while Space Marines are gaining them at an unprecedented rate. Dark Eldar can't even mount an HQ on a jetbike. This is not good news for anyone but the primaris fanclub. For an ork player who wants to play in tourneys, this is bad news, unequivocally.
My Battlewagons have always been Heavy Support, even without a single ranged or melee weapon.
Honestly I don't think expensive and highly armored gunboats like those SM tanks should be dedicated transports, the change is a good one. It doesn't really affect the game that much but it makes a lot of sense.
Honestly few people cared. People who hate Marines love it because it's a nerf of any kind. The LR/Repulsor hull is the only thing that can transport Terminators/Gravis so Dedicated Transport might make sense. People who only play Orks might bitch because while their Trukks can transport MANz, the grass is always greener and the only Transport of any kind for Terminators/Gravis shouldn't be a Dedicated Transport. Even if they are so bad people rarely take them.
The other reason for the move is that Custodes LR's are Heavy Support, and if you take that away they have zero GWHS models, just FW.
Depends. You dont get as much extra out of each CP spent on aggressors compared to what you get from Repentia. Aggressors also dont really give marines something you couldnt get from just using other units while repentias gives something sisters cant easily get somewhere else.
In my BA lists I would rather have buffed repentias than some aggressors since they would fit my play style more. Vastly different units in vastly different roles in vastly different armies cant really be compared. Might as well compare servitors in aggressive marine lists to Tank Commanders in guard lists. I would vote on servitors being the better unit. They hold objectives and can do actions for a faction of the cost.
So there are other SM units running around which in the shooting phase earn back 60% of their points cost shooting at horde units, and who can jump into CC and deal 4 S8 -3 AP attacks each? I'm joking. I know (Thank god) no other Marine unit like that exists.
As far as adding in bonuses and what not to make them better? Umm...yeah, there are a ton. For instance, there's the little free bonus of a chapter trait like exploding 6s, and -1 AP in tactical phase. That alone ups Aggressors from doing 3.33 dmg to ork boyz per model to 5. Add in support like a Chapter Master and its just about 7 dead ork boyz, or a 124% return on just the aggressor. I think doubling efficiency vs a target is kind of important, hell, you could even add in an LT if you wanted. The most hilarious part? some of the players here still think Aggressors suck and have said as much.
I wont go into the stratagems because I am not as familiar with those, but I would assume there are some in there that are amazing, even if its as bland as auspex scan which basically lets them shoot on your opponents turn.
Sure, no other unit is exactly like the aggressors but that doesnt mean that aggressors are needed or extremely good in a space marine army. You get 2 intercessors with assault 3 rifles that have obsec and take up a troop slot for the same price as an aggressor. They are more mobile and have more range and with 6 ranged shots and 6 melee attacks they arent bad against hordes. Since I need troops anyway I will already have some anti horde capacity.
Lots of lists have bikes now since they are fast and you get a lot of shots+melee attacks on them. Or Invictors/redemptors that are also faster than Aggressors and have lots of dakka. Aggressors are a good unit but they dont stand out in marines because they dont give you something that you really need in most cases. If you go all out on eradicators and BGV then Aggressors shine but in most lists you dont need them.
If you dont need their anti horde clearing ability then you are paying premium for some slow melee threat. Doesnt matter how effective they are compared to other armies units in that regard. Different armies value different things.
People compare units straight up to each other too much. It works with sub factions and between almost identical armies like chaos knights vs imperial knights or guard vs brood brothers. Outside of that how the individual units perform against each other is unimportant.
Eradicators looks to be too good and it doesnt really matter if there are other melta units that are better or worse in other armies at doing that job. Guard have cheaper melta and anti tank but that isnt seen as a problem because they are a weaker army with more weaknesses. It is fine for them to have more effective anti tank point for point since they dont get easy access to cheap and rather durable and versatile troops. In the same way aggressors are fine in marines since cheap anti horde, good melee and durable bodies arent valued high in that army. Cheap and easy to get anti tank at range without weaknesses/risks on the other hand is something marines probably shouldnt get. At least drop pod devastators or combi/special weapon veterans are vulnerable after delivering their payload and marine vehicles with good anti tank have always been very expensive(in the main codex, not FW dreads). If eradicators just had the normal meltagun range, and no MM, they would be fine. Durable, slow and short range anti tank without great delivering mechanism fits in fine in marines without breaking anything.
Having a unit kill x% of their cost in for example ork boys might be valuable in a knight or custodes army but in a marine army that is usually valued much lower. So just comparing them % vs % is quite useless.
Honestly few people cared. People who hate Marines love it because it's a nerf of any kind. The LR/Repulsor hull is the only thing that can transport Terminators/Gravis so Dedicated Transport might make sense. People who only play Orks might bitch because while their Trukks can transport MANz, the grass is always greener and the only Transport of any kind for Terminators/Gravis shouldn't be a Dedicated Transport. Even if they are so bad people rarely take them.
Termies can deep strike for free, they don't need transports and they're even faster than Manz on foot. Manz can ride in trukks but SM have rhinos/razorbacks/pods/stormravens that can carry several SM units, even dreads. I don't think any other faction can transport dreads. With new smaller tables and outflank options shooting oriented units don't really care about a ride, unless maybe they are glasscannon, which isn't the case of gravis dudes or any SM unit actually.
Give primaris a tank with T6-7 and a couple of bolters so it can be their dedicated transport. If GW designs a land raider equivalent that tank should definitely be a heavy support.
Give primaris a tank with T6-7 and a couple of bolters so it can be their dedicated transport. If GW designs a land raider equivalent that tank should definitely be a heavy support.
And now they can theoretically re transport, which was another benefit to Transport over Deep Strike. But its still not a transport. And They still don't fit in a Rhino. Nor is there a Rhino version of the Impulsor. But it never counts unless it's a nerf to Marines, is it?
Jidmah wrote: But isn't the impulsor the primaris rhino?
Nope, 6 or less. It's more like the Primaris Razorback. Most of the Rhino Hulls can be made by the Impulsor - the Whirlwind/Hunter/Stalker is roughly the Missile Launcher top, the Vindicator is roughly the Orbital Bombardment Top, the HB Razorback is roughly the gun top. But none of them have a transport 10's top. The only Primaris vehicle that transports 10 Intercessors is the Repulsor.
I assume it was never Faqed because the 
I appreciate the kind words.
