Is the Vendetta still worth it at 170 points?

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.

**Jancoran**

I think its not the end of the world.Its really not going to affect a lot of lists anyways due to other changes. cheaper hydras will help compensate in my case a little. Maybe a little less craziness on this or that and I'll more or less keep my list in tect,

**-Loki-**

Vaktathi wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Furyou Miko wrote:
But when an army list has no non-choices, it gets derided as... well, whatever it is haters are complaining about C:AS today.

What does that even mean?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
At any rate, units that die easily need to be rather cheap in 6th. Hellhound, I'm looking at you. Can GW be THIS dumb? Or are they just trolling their own customers?
I don't think they really play their own game, and they certainly don't pay attention to anything outside their office really. Otherwise we probably wouldn't have had stuff like half the top Adepticon armies being Eldar-INQ-something

I think it's more they don't play it the way people expect them to play it. They're old timer gamers who seem pretty stuck in their ways. They also put a lot of emphasis on narrative. There would be a lot of gentleman's agreements during their games to get them to play out how they're expected. If their narrative expects a weak unit to do something good, it would be let alone to do it.

Personally speaking, my friends and I do something similar. If we want a fun melee showdown in the middle of the battle between our warlords, we'll sometimes agree to leave them alone to meet in the middle. But then sometimes we'll also shoot them in the back with a multimelta. All part of the narrative.

**Makumba**

Jancoran wrote:
I think its not the end of the world.Its really not going to affect a lot of lists anyways due to other changes. cheaper hydras will help compensate in my case a little. Maybe a little less craziness on this or that and I'll more or less keep my list in tect,

have you seen the rules for hydras ? They are just 2 twin linked AC now ,don't ignore cover , don't have interceptor.

Transport costs did go up, but tank prices dropped so really no you are not worse off.

So I save 40 pts on lemman russes . lose 80 on vendettas , lose 30 on chimeras , save 30 on vets , but new vets can't have 3 special weapons , making vets questionably good .
Power weapons went up , so that is points lost again . The orders and relics and warlord traits better be realy awesome and help against inv saves and LoW .

Technicly they do save me points , by removing utility units like marbo , removing my medusa. And in stead give me a high ap medium strenght almost thunder cannon with shred .

**Kain**

Jancoran wrote:
I think its not the end of the world.Its really not going to affect a lot of lists anyways due to other changes. cheaper hydras will help compensate in my case a little. Maybe a little less craziness on this or that and I'll more or less keep my list in tect,

Hydras which no longer ignore jink saves it seems.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Blacksails wrote:
Its looking like the Vendetta will still rule the FA slot unfortunately.

GW thought it would be a great idea to keep the Hellhound at 130pts, and then make the Eradicator 120pts. Amazing.

Hells yes! Flying twin-linked lascannons? Can still drop plasma vets with grav chute? AV 12?

Six BS4 GEQs with fancy guns is still Six GEQs. I.E, will instantly die when anything shoots at them or assaults them.

Even grots.

When even thirty bug bricks of gaunts with shrouded and catalyst evaporate with serious efforts to kill them, I don't see a mere six vets surviving retaliatory or interceptor fire in any combat ready capacity.

**Furyou Miko**

Blacksails wrote:
Furyou Miko wrote:
But when an army list has no non-choices, it gets derided as... well, whatever it is haters are complaining about C:AS today.

You mean the army with one or two choice per slot?

Hardly a compelling argument.

My point is that that's what an army with no dross units looks like. Either you have dross options filling out everything, or you have only one or two options per slot, because any more 'variety' and you're just making more or less effective versions of the same thing.

Martel732 wrote:
Furyou Miko wrote:
But when an army list has no non-choices, it gets derided as... well, whatever it is haters are complaining about C:AS today.

What does that even mean?

It means that people look at one of only two codices with no "dross units" in it, and declare it to be limited and lacking in variety and purpose because it doesn't have a hundred crappy options to make the two good ones look powerful.

Much like Games Workshop stores existing to make independent retailers look cheap, units like Armoured Sentinels exist to make Vendettas look awesome. That was the design decision behind all those non-modelled units in the previous editions, although they kind of dropped the ball on Tervigons.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Furyou Miko wrote:
Blacksails wrote:
Furyou Miko wrote:
But when an army list has no non-choices, it gets derided as... well, whatever it is haters are complaining about C:AS today.

You mean the army with one or two choice per slot?

Hardly a compelling argument.

My point is that that's what an army with no dross units looks like. Either you have dross options filling out everything, or you have only one or two options per slot, because any more 'variety' and you're just making more or less effective versions of the same thing.

...or the choices could be somewhat balanced? Or is that not an option?

Martel732 wrote:Much like Games Workshop stores existing to make independent retailers look cheap, units like Armoured Sentinels exist to make Vendettas look awesome. That was the design decision behind all those non-modelled units in the previous editions, although they kind of dropped the ball on Tervigons.

I'm pretty sure GW never thought that deeply about non-modeled units, as frequently they were actually quite good.

**Boggy Man**

Jancoran wrote:
Boggy Man wrote:
No. The price hike would be warranted if it stayed as is, or it could have stayed the same price and just drop the transport all together. The hell am I transporting in 6 slots? Ratlings?

Platoon commands

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would you want a commanding unit inside a transport where their orders are useless, or grav-chuting across board where they can be easily wiped out?

**Furyou Miko**

AllSeeingSkink wrote:...or the choices could be somewhat balanced? Or is that not an option?

Not really, because they're just slightly different versions of the same thing, and there fore are either better or worse than the original thing, and therefore not balanced. For example, Sentinels. You have one kind of Sentinel, and they are a good choice. You create a second kind of Sentinel, and say, name it Armoured Sentinels, and make it not Open-Topped but take away its ability to Scout. Conceptually, it's just "a bit different", but in real terms, Scout is far more useful than Enclosed, and therefore the two units are imbalanced - Armoured Sentinels are underpowed compared to Scout Sentinels, even at five to ten points cheaper.

Martel732 wrote:I'm pretty sure GW never thought that deeply about non-modeled units, as frequently they were actually quite good.

Well, it's a theory, anyway.

Boggy Man wrote:

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would you want a commanding unit inside a transport where their orders are useless, or grav-chuting across board where they can be easily wiped out?

Because platoon command squads can carry four special weapons, and their commander job can be done by a company command squad, but better. Since the CCS can issue two orders per turn, and the PCS only one, and the CCS orders are generally better....

**Boggy Man**

Furyou Miko wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:...or the choices could be somewhat balanced? Or is that not an option?

Not really, because they're just slightly different versions of the same thing, and there fore are either better or worse than the original thing, and therefore not balanced. For example, Sentinels. You have one kind of Sentinel, and they are a good choice. You create a second kind of Sentinel, and say, name it Armoured Sentinels, and make it not Open-Topped but take away its ability to Scout. Conceptually, it's just "a bit different", but in real terms, Scout is far more useful than Enclosed, and therefore the two units are imbalanced - Armoured Sentinels are underpowed compared to Scout Sentinels, even at five to ten points cheaper.

Martel732 wrote:I'm pretty sure GW never thought that deeply about non-modeled units, as frequently they were actually quite good.

Well, it's a theory, anyway.

Boggy Man wrote:

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would you want a commanding unit inside a transport where their orders are useless, or grav-chuting across board where they can be easily wiped out?

Because platoon command squads can carry four special weapons, and their commander job can be done by a company command squad, but better. Since the CCS can issue two orders per turn, and the PCS only one, and the CCS orders are generally better....

Thank you, that's a fair point, but I'm going to miss 10 scoring veterans with 3 flamers.

**MWHistorian**

Furyou Miko wrote:
Blacksails wrote:
Furyou Miko wrote:
But when an army list has no non-choices, it gets derided as... well, whatever it is haters are complaining about C:AS today.

You mean the army with one or two choice per slot?

Hardly a compelling argument.

My point is that that's what an army with no dross units looks like. Either you have dross options filling out everything, or you have only one or two options per slot, because any more 'variety' and you're just making more or less effective versions of the same thing.

Martel732 wrote:
Furyou Miko wrote:
But when an army list has no non-choices, it gets derided as... well, whatever it is haters are complaining about C:AS today.

What does that even mean?

It means that people look at one of only two codices with no "dross units" in it, and declare it to be limited and lacking in variety and purpose because it doesn't have a hundred crappy options to make the two good ones look powerful.

Much like Games Workshop stores existing to make independent retailers look cheap, units like Armoured Sentinels exist to make Vendettas look awesome. That was the design decision behind all those non-modelled units in the previous editions, although they kind of dropped the ball on Tervigons.

As a SOB player I can safely say that I'd love more options even if they were less than optimal. We have 1 troop choice and the two elites we have are practically worthless. I'd love other choices and I'd hate for other codexes to get the same treatment.

**Jancoran**

Boggy Man wrote:
Jancoran wrote:
Boggy Man wrote:
No. The price hike would be warranted if it stayed as is, or it could have stayed the same price and just drop the transport all together. The hell am I transporting in 6 slots? Ratlings?

Platoon commands

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would you want a commanding unit inside a transport where their orders are useless, or grav-chuting across board where they can be easily wiped out?

Yup. I drop off a pair of quad meltagun units that score. It has won me games. Scoring units that can streak across the board, like eldar jet bikes is pretty cool. Then blast something and go to ground

**Furyou Miko**

I will continue to use 3 special, a heavy and a breacher charge in my Veteran squads. At least until IA15 and the next Elysian list.

I'm starting to worry that the Imperial Armour books won't be able to keep up with their high quality though. :( I hope they switch over to a fluff bible / stat books model.

**Sihdhartha**

Considering the crap flyers my DA & Tau have I'll weep for you.... oh, no I won't!!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Considering the crap flyers my DA & Tau have I'll weep for you.... oh, no I won't!!

**Peregrine**

Furyou Miko wrote:
I will continue to use 3 special, a heavy and a breacher charge in my Veteran squads.

If you haven't seen it already, the nerf to two special weapons on vets was a translation error in the spanish codex that leaked first. They get to keep their 3x specials + heavy in the real codex, so nothing is lost.

**Andilus Greatsword**

Peregrine wrote:
Furyou Miko wrote:
I will continue to use 3 special, a heavy and a breacher charge in my Veteran squads.

If you haven't seen it already, the nerf to two special weapons on vets was a translation error in the spanish codex that leaked first. They get to keep their 3x specials + heavy in the real codex, so nothing is lost.

Interesting news. They probably would have been fairer with 2 admittedly, but I ain't complaining.

**Makumba**

Sihdhartha wrote:
Considering the crap flyers my DA & Tau have I'll weep for you.... oh, no I won't!!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Considering the crap flyers my DA & Tau have I'll weep for you.... oh, no I won't!!

as if tau needed flyers with interceptor/skyfire riptides and buffmanders.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Furyou Miko wrote:
Not really, because they're just slightly different versions of the same thing, and there fore are either better or worse than the original thing, and therefore not balanced. For example, Sentinels. You have one kind of Sentinel, and they are a good choice. You create a second kind of Sentinel, and say, name it Armoured Sentinels, and make it not Open-Topped but take away its ability to Scout. Conceptually, it's just "a bit different", but in real terms, Scout is far more useful than Enclosed, and therefore the two units are imbalanced - Armoured Sentinels are underpowed compared to Scout Sentinels, even at five to ten points cheaper.

That's true of some things that are very similar, but for many things that's not true and it's as simple as GW buggered up the points values and/or effectiveness of them. The Tyranid codex has things like Raveners who don't perform the same task as other Fast Attack choices, but are still poor choices simply because they are overpriced, don't do enough damage and are too easy to kill. Lictors are unique in the Elite slot, but they are outclassed by the other choices because they suck, not because they are the same but worse.

The artillery tanks IG had previously all filled different roles and despite being the same choice and all being artillery based on a chimera hull, they weren't "non-choices".

**PrinceRaven**

Raveners are actually outperformed by Shrikes for the same role. Shrikes, meanwhile, are overpriced and fragile.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Well the Raveners Deep Strike and move through cover as well, but deep striking fragile assault units doesn't really work as you'd hope. If the game were balanced, you could easily have Raveners and Shrikes in the same army doing completely different things that the other unit could not possibly do.... but because the rules aren't balanced Raveners and Shrikes are not appealing fast attack choices. Not because they are superfluous, rather because the choices aren't properly balanced.

**PrinceRaven**

Shrikes can Deep Strike, and while they don't have Move Through Cover, they do have Synpase (and by extension, Fearless), Shadow in the Warp, and access to a greater array of biomorphs and close combat weapons, which includes assault grenade equivalents.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Wait, they can? Doh, totally forgot all Jump Infantry can Deep strike, LOL, as you can tell I normally don't take Shrikes.

But yeah, you don't need to convince me Raveners suck... they are some of my favourite models in the game and I hate the rules for them. They SHOULD be a glass cannon unit, but they're all glass and no cannon.

Raveners should be different to Shrikes in that they should have lots more attack a lots more impact. So your enemy has to think: target the Shrikes if to get rid of synapse or target the Raveners so I don't get eaten in CC.

**Martel732**

So the transport nerf does nothing? That's good to know.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Martel732 wrote:
So the transport nerf does nothing? That's good to know.

Well, it makes any scoring unit dropped from the Vendetta more fragile due to not having as many bodies, but it's not like 10 Guardsmen were that sturdy to begin with...

**TheKbob**

The change hits me a bit harder as I had more options when I used IG as allies to sisters. I feel like the transport capacity was unnecessary, just the price increase.

**Martel732**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
So the transport nerf does nothing? That's good to know.

Well, it makes any scoring unit dropped from the Vendetta more fragile due to not having as many bodies, but it's not like 10 Guardsmen were that sturdy to begin with...

I can tell you that not even BA are not going to change their decisions based on 6 vs 10 guardsmen on an objective.

**PrinceRaven**

Martel732 wrote:
So the transport nerf does nothing? That's good to know.

It means you have to put Veterans in it instead of a regular Infantry squad, which you were probably doing anyway.

**Crazyterran**

It's still probably the best flyer in the game. Maybe the Night Scythe gives it a bit more of a run for it's money at this point, but seeing as you can still Chute out 3 Plasma Guns out of each of them...

**AllSeeingSkink**

PrinceRaven wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
So the transport nerf does nothing? That's good to know.

It means you have to put Veterans in it instead of a regular Infantry squad, which you were probably doing anyway.

Actually Veterans are 10 models in a unit. So if you want to poop 3 plasmas out of a Vendetta, it's going to be a suicide special weapons squad. Not nearly as effective as dropping a suicide Vet unit.

**Trickstick**

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
PrinceRaven wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
So the transport nerf does nothing? That's good to know.

It means you have to put Veterans in it instead of a regular Infantry squad, which you were probably doing anyway.
Actually Veterans are 10 models in a unit. So if you want to poop 3 plasmas out of a Vendetta, it's going to be a suicide special weapons squad. Not nearly as effective as dropping a suicide Vet unit.

Stick a Scion command squad with 4 melta in there. Much better than vets and can do orders too.

**Sihdhartha**

Makumba wrote:
Sihdhartha wrote:
Considering the crap flyers my DA & Tau have I'll weep for you.... oh, no I won't!!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Considering the crap flyers my DA & Tau have I'll weep for you.... oh, no I won't!!

as if tau needed flyers with interceptor/skyfire riptides and buffmanders.

As if IG needed more help with AT weapons?