Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mmmpi wrote:
I'd go with:

1d6= 4
1d3= 2
1d2=2

Melta weapons would be damage 5 or 6 at half range.

Same thing for number of shots.

The only one of these I consider problematically variable is 1d6. I think replacing it with 2D3 would help a lot.

 lolman1c wrote:
Units shouldn't have the ability to 1 turn kill units that are double or triple their points! Or you're having games where elite only armies stand no chance. I believe there should be anti elite units but they should be appropriately priced. And when I say unit, I mean weapons included in that unit so I mean overall points not base unit. If a terminator unit had a higher toughness to defend against plasma or all had 6 heavy shots each, then it wouldn't be a problem because a cheap unit isn't going to 1 turn kill it and it can fight back.

But i use this as an example for the overall problem. Deathwatch marines is another example.

But i hear gw fixed this problem with golden Mehriens.

Uhm, what? Why shouldn't a unit be able to one-turn units that are double or triple their points? Is this some law of game design? Can pawns not capture queens?

And even setting aside the game-design question of whether a unit should be able to one-turn something double or triple its price, most things in 40k won't. In fact, even your example is flawed, because:

4 Plasma Gun Scions = 22 points per model = 88 points. In rapid fire against tactical terminators: 8 shots, 5.33 hits, 4.44 wounds (assuming overcharge), 2.9 or 3 dead terminators (assuming overcharge). For ~120 points, again assuming overcharge. That's hardly double or triple its points.

Most of the time you're also including a Prime, which ups the hits a bit, but significantly bumps the price as well.

 LunarSol wrote:
Most of the time you're also including a Prime, which ups the hits a bit, but significantly bumps the price as well.

Yes, if you're using a Prime, then it becomes:

129 points for a marginal increase in power. (1/2 of all misses are re-rolled, and 2/3 of the re-rolls become hits, so an extra 33% hits or something like that for almost ~50% more cost).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
Units shouldn't have the ability to 1 turn kill units that are double or triple their points! Or you're having games where elite only armies stand no chance. I believe there should be anti elite units but they should be appropriately priced. And when I say unit, I mean weapons included in that unit so I mean overall points not base unit. If a terminator unit had a higher toughness to defend against plasma or all had 6 heavy shots each, then it wouldn't be a problem because a cheap unit isn't going to 1 turn kill it and it can fight back.

But i use this as an example for the overall problem. Deathwatch marines is another example.

But i hear gw fixed this problem with golden Mehriens.

Uhm, what? Why shouldn't a unit be able to one-turn units that are double or triple their points? Is this some law of game design? Can pawns not capture queens?

And even setting aside the game-design question of whether a unit should be able to one-turn something double or triple its price, most things in 40k won't. In fact, even your example is flawed, because:

4 Plasma Gun Scions = 22 points per model = 88 points. In rapid fire against tactical terminators: 8 shots, 5.33 hits, 4.44 wounds (assuming overcharge), 2.9 or 3 dead terminators (assuming overcharge). For ~120 points, again assuming overcharge. That's hardly double or triple its points.

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

 Bobthehero wrote:
4 Scions with plasma guns aren't killing 5 terminators in one turn, unless you get good rolls.

~22% chance to kill 5.
48% to kill 4.

Terminators are just not good in 8th edition. Almost all their defensive benefits are actually useless.
The extra wound does nothing against Overcharged plasma and almost nothing against Lascannons and equiv.
Few weapons have -4 AP to make the invul save do anything.

If they only had 1W and no invul they would function the same in many cases while being significantly cheaper.

Custodes overcome this problem by having 3 wounds (So plasma still needs 2 shots) and a 4+ invul that actually helps against AP -3.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

Generally speaking, in an IGYG system, nothing should "kill its points" in one turn unless it significantly lacks the ability to get the first strike in.

Custodes are also T5. Going from 4 to 5 toughness is a significant boost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

Generally speaking, in an IGYG system, nothing should "kill its points" in one turn unless it significantly lacks the ability to get the first strike in.

I challenge this.

Shooting is entirely different than melee. Melee units have to be strong because getting there is already incredibly difficult.

 Marmatag wrote:
Custodes are also T5. Going from 4 to 5 toughness is a significant boost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

Generally speaking, in an IGYG system, nothing should "kill its points" in one turn unless it significantly lacks the ability to get the first strike in.

I challenge this.

Shooting is entirely different than melee. Melee units have to be strong because getting there is already incredibly difficult.

Melee units being able to do more damage then shooting can be fair. But considering the abundance of T1 charges in 8th (or units fighting 3 times per phase) I don't think the situation where it would be ok exists right now.

 Marmatag wrote:
Custodes are also T5. Going from 4 to 5 toughness is a significant boost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

Generally speaking, in an IGYG system, nothing should "kill its points" in one turn unless it significantly lacks the ability to get the first strike in.

I challenge this.

Shooting is entirely different than melee. Melee units have to be strong because getting there is already incredibly difficult.

You can tell by all the lists that deep strike/infiltrate in Berzerkers and charge all across the line before their opponent can react.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

And yet, for editions, we didn't bat an eye when >50 points worth of meltagun infantry could take out a 250+ point land raider in a single shot.

And really nothing has changed as far as damage/odds go:

Plasmagun on BS4 against termies previously:
3+ to hit, 2+ to wound, 5+ save

Plasmagun on BS3+ against termies now:
3+ to hit, 2+ to wound, 5+ save

Point costs and delivery options changed, sure, but the base effectiveness of plasma didn't really go anywhere. And again, previously you could blow up vastly more expensive things in one lucky shot than you can now.

Yeah IDK where this "you shouldn't be able to one-shot more expensive things" comes from.

That's literally the mechanic by which you killed vehicles since vehicle rules existed in 40k, and in 6th and 7th you had the option of one-shotting them OR hull-pointing them, which could also happen with cheaper units.

I'm confused about why that's suddenly bad, lol.

To be fair Terminator armour hasn't worked as advertised since 2nd I believe? At least as long as I have been in the hobby and that's 6th.

The whole you shouldn't kill your points worth of shooting is weird. It should be does this unit make good on its points troighout the game? A suicide squad (like the scions) has to do it in 1 turn. RG on the other hand.

Or nothing is entirely true and not even that.

And the other weird thing is where this surprise and indignance about terminator armor not being good came from anyway.

Terminators have been pretty bad as long as I can remember. Storm Shields were awesome, but not Terminators.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Custodes are also T5. Going from 4 to 5 toughness is a significant boost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

Generally speaking, in an IGYG system, nothing should "kill its points" in one turn unless it significantly lacks the ability to get the first strike in.

I challenge this.

Shooting is entirely different than melee. Melee units have to be strong because getting there is already incredibly difficult.

You can tell by all the lists that deep strike/infiltrate in Berzerkers and charge all across the line before their opponent can react.

Yes, Alpha Legion can infiltrate Berzerkers and have a 100% chance to charge turn 1 if they go first. Berzerkers are the boogieman unit for melee combat in this edition and are incredibly strong.

Not everyone plays Berzerkers, or chaos. There are other melee units in the game. Outside of this one very specific case that depends on going first, melee comes with considerable drawbacks by virtue of how strong shooting is.

I would not make Melee units better in terms of damage output compared to shooting ones, but definitely 20%/33% cheaper than their shooting counterpart would be a godsend and needed to sustain the inevitable losses that they would suffer from distance

 Marmatag wrote:
Custodes are also T5. Going from 4 to 5 toughness is a significant boost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

Generally speaking, in an IGYG system, nothing should "kill its points" in one turn unless it significantly lacks the ability to get the first strike in.

I challenge this.

Shooting is entirely different than melee. Melee units have to be strong because getting there is already incredibly difficult.

"Getting there" is exactly the kind of thing I mean by difficulty getting the first strike in.

 daedalus wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

And yet, for editions, we didn't bat an eye when >50 points worth of meltagun infantry could take out a 250+ point land raider in a single shot.

And really nothing has changed as far as damage/odds go:

Plasmagun on BS4 against termies previously:
3+ to hit, 2+ to wound, 5+ save

Plasmagun on BS3+ against termies now:
3+ to hit, 2+ to wound, 5+ save

Point costs and delivery options changed, sure, but the base effectiveness of plasma didn't really go anywhere. And again, previously you could blow up vastly more expensive things in one lucky shot than you can now.

Actually we all did and that's why the system has fundamentally changed to prevent something like this from happening again

I would agree that generally speaking, melee needs something to make it a bit more compelling. I think they should bring back the +1 attack on the charge rule or make it require some effort to get out of melee, even if it's just a flat die roll.

 daedalus wrote:
I would agree that generally speaking, melee needs something to make it a bit more compelling. I think they should bring back the +1 attack on the charge rule or make it require some effort to get out of melee, even if it's just a flat die roll.

I think all the T1 charges has made melee more attractive then it has been in a while.

The only issue melee has is the ability to freely move out of combat for the enemy when combined with chaff screens.

The removal of initiative and giving it to the assault is probably a better change than the +1, which scales weirdly and is hard to control across the variety of models it applies to.

 Ordana wrote:
I think all the T1 charges has made melee more attractive then it has been in a while.

The only issue melee has is the ability to freely move out of combat for the enemy when combined with chaff screens.

I dunno, maybe. I can't really speak too well to that as I tend to play pretty shooty armies. Even my GK I try to shoot with far more than rely on the assault options.

I still think the underlying issues with the game at the present are sort of the core mechanics they baked into the game. There's sort of a cascading effect there. Walking away from melee sucks because it's stupid and largely undermines stabby armies, but to get rid of that, you need to get rid of first turn assault, and to get rid of that you either need to set some artificial "no touching" rule for turn one (which is also stupid) or you need to get rid of reliable deep strike-ish rules on turn 1, but those existing rules are also kinda stupid, so I'd be okay with seeing them go (even in spite of my large Stormtrooper army).

 techsoldaten wrote:


Not exactly.... I have a Lord of Skulls and have not fielded him in 8th edition.

I say this because my 3 Laspreds die too easily. Some games, they are all gone before I get my first turn. You pay a lot of points for them, they have a lot of destructive potential, but so does everything else.

For about the same price, I can field 120 Cultists. They're not going to shoot up anything from across the board, but they are not going to be blown away in a single turn. I have stratagems that let me sit them on objectives where nothing can move them.

The trade off between elite units versus lots of bodies seems to be leaning too heavily towards the bodies. That's what people are really saying.

I fell out of the loop on this thread, but I wanted to comment on this, because it seems particularly odd.

You lose 3 laspreds in a turn, because your opponent invested a TON of points in anti-tank (plus some luck most likely). If you suddenly take 120 cultists instead that doesn't make the cultists a more useful choice, because all you've done is made his guns useless. If spend the points it takes to kill 3 laspreds in 1 turn and instead spent it on anti-infantry weapons you'd find a vastly different result. Until people stop taking only lascannon equivalents you won't see the meta shift out of this mold until someone starts being successful with more unconventional lists.

 Ordana wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Custodes are also T5. Going from 4 to 5 toughness is a significant boost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

That's broken, in fact even reaching an 1:1 is generally viewed as insanely powerful (and there's a reason with 1:2 trades are considered somewhat efficient in the game)

Generally speaking, in an IGYG system, nothing should "kill its points" in one turn unless it significantly lacks the ability to get the first strike in.

I challenge this.

Shooting is entirely different than melee. Melee units have to be strong because getting there is already incredibly difficult.

Melee units being able to do more damage then shooting can be fair. But considering the abundance of T1 charges in 8th (or units fighting 3 times per phase) I don't think the situation where it would be ok exists right now.

Abundance? I'm BA, and I can do ONE. Where's my abundance? Oh yeah, and I hit 4 ppm guardsmen. Melee is trash.

Martel732 wrote:

Abundance? I'm BA, and I can do ONE. Where's my abundance? Oh yeah, and I hit 4 ppm guardsmen. Melee is trash.

Oh? Is there something wrong with BA?

No. It's just that first turn charges are a huge gamble for anyone and usually hit worthless models to boot. So people should quit acting like they are some revelation.

I do think it's a bit funny when people are upset that counter tactics exist.

Screens are a counter tactic to turn 1 charges. Yes, they're an easy, probably too easy, counter. But hard counters are a thing in gaming. If one tactic is super good in most situations, then it should be super bad when meeting its hard counter; it's the best way to discourage its use and make it not an auto-take strategy.

I've quit bothering to try. Which basically turns off my codex in practice. I'm back to shooting like everyone else. Which puts me at a huge disadvantage.

I'm not upset at the tactic itself. It's just way too easy and there are no downsides.

Martel732 wrote:
I've quit bothering to try. Which basically turns off my codex in practice. I'm back to shooting like everyone else. Which puts me at a huge disadvantage.

I'm not upset at the tactic itself. It's just way too easy and there are no downsides.

Well, there are some downsides. Screens cost points, are clumsy, and generally lack the damage output of the other choices.

But I honestly think the real reason screens seem so OP right now is that they shut off what would otherwise be super OP themselves: deep strike alphas, whether melee or ranged. Seriously, I try to imagine a world in which screens do not exist and all I can imagine is deep-striking armies totally wrecking face with little recourse for the not-deep-striking armies.

Just putting dudes in Rhinos screws over deep strike alpha too. But cheap screens let people be greedy and the best of all worlds. And IG screens have amazing damage for their cost.

Melee deep strike alphas are never going to be good even without screens because rolling a 9" charge is brutally difficult for a whole army.

Oh, and fallback is a thing. Yes, first turn alpha melee would have been good in the older editions. Not anymore.