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.

Though the Predator can be gunned out more than most, and has a higher base BS than LRBTs and Hammerheads. Even the Falcon tops out at 3 Lascannon-ish weapons. And that boost to S 9 for the Predator makes it better vs. heavier targets.

Eldar can upgrade their tanks to fire at the nearest target. That's a huge difference compared to just not have the penalty. How frequently do you want to put that Brightlance/Lascannon into what's actually closest to your Falcon/Pred? Now, just how frequent do you imagine it'll be if you only ignore the penalty on the nearest target? If your answer to either wasn't "extremely rarely", I'm actually surprised.

At least the Lascannon has 48" range. The Brightlance is 36", which used to be offset by most Brightlance platforms having Relentless. Now, it's 5 pts cheaper. So why should the Pred get that ability and not the Falcon/Serpent/Vyper?

Not Online!!! wrote:
Guess the point was more moving and shooting without penalty for that.
Eldar can upgrade their tanks, LRBT have grinding advance, hammerheads have markerlights support.
The predator has nothing in that regard. Frankly it does not need double shooting, what it needs is a ignore movement penalty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

The Land Raider is NOT an mbt, it is a heavy assult tank for heavy assult units. At 300+ pts it is also massively overpriced.

It's totally an MBT if you've ever played Epic.

No.
A Mbt is a general purpose direct fire support tank.
A Land Raider serves as a assult tank against massively entrenched positions and delivers it's payload of terminators. Aka a assult tank.

In Epic they're fielded in free roaming squadrons and are perfectly content with blowing other vehicles away. I get what you're saying but they easily serve both roles.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Guess the point was more moving and shooting without penalty for that.
Eldar can upgrade their tanks, LRBT have grinding advance, hammerheads have markerlights support.
The predator has nothing in that regard. Frankly it does not need double shooting, what it needs is a ignore movement penalty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

The Land Raider is NOT an mbt, it is a heavy assult tank for heavy assult units. At 300+ pts it is also massively overpriced.

It's totally an MBT if you've ever played Epic.

No.
A Mbt is a general purpose direct fire support tank.
A Land Raider serves as a assult tank against massively entrenched positions and delivers it's payload of terminators. Aka a assult tank.

In Epic they're fielded in free roaming squadrons and are perfectly content with blowing other vehicles away. I get what you're saying but they easily serve both roles.

At most they Serve as a Td without a turret. But aslong as we don't have firing positions back for sponsons and can fire 360 with all weapons that does not matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Eldar can upgrade their tanks to fire at the nearest target. That's a huge difference compared to just not have the penalty. How frequently do you want to put that Brightlance/Lascannon into what's actually closest to your Falcon/Pred? Now, just how frequent do you imagine it'll be if you only ignore the penalty on the nearest target? If your answer to either wasn't "extremely rarely", I'm actually surprised.

At least the Lascannon has 48" range. The Brightlance is 36", which used to be offset by most Brightlance platforms having Relentless. Now, it's 5 pts cheaper. So why should the Pred get that ability and not the Falcon/Serpent/Vyper?

Excuse me but an upgrade that get's it's pts back in one turn and get's to ignore base mechanics is still superior to a predator. Also eldar vehicle = high manouverbility = low chance to not beeing able to use it.
Additionally Fly.

"Excuse me but an upgrade that get's it's pts back in one turn and get's to ignore base mechanics is still superior to a predator."

So 5 pts gets my Falcon's points back in one turn by letting me shoot some Guardsmen or Marines without penalty instead of shooting at a tank? With Lascannon(light) weaponry?

Yes, CWE tanks are high manouverability. So why should Preds be better at firing while manouvering?

It is more manouverability, but unless you advance, you're still not likely to pick which model you're closest to.

I'm not arguing that Pred > Falcon. I'm arguing that the Matrix is nowhere close to as good as a flat "Ignore the penalty to move".

Not Online!!! wrote:

At most they Serve as a Td without a turret. But aslong as we don't have firing positions back for sponsons and can fire 360 with all weapons that does not matter.

Not that it matters but "Td"?

Edit: nm. Tank Destroyer.

Then wtf is the Predator not a tank destroyer then?

I think they're using the "Armored vehicle with really, really big gun" definition of Tank Destroyer. Not technically accurate, but aligns with many implementations. If you look up WW2 Tank Destroyers, you see stuff like turrets that are only partially enclosed or vanishingly little side armor on what's mostly a motorized field gun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(to be fair, I used the same definition when classifying the Fire Prism as a Tank Destroyer/Mechanised Artillery - it's really just mechanized/armored Artillery, not meant to be an MBT or TD).

 Insectum7 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

At most they Serve as a Td without a turret. But aslong as we don't have firing positions back for sponsons and can fire 360 with all weapons that does not matter.

Not that it matters but "Td"?

Edit: nm. Tank Destroyer.

Then wtf is the Predator not a tank destroyer then?

Mbt with Pred autocannon and bolters.
Td with twin Lascannon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
I think they're using the "Armored vehicle with really, really big gun" definition of Tank Destroyer. Not technically accurate, but aligns with many implementations. If you look up WW2 Tank Destroyers, you see stuff like turrets that are only partially enclosed or vanishingly little side armor on what's mostly a motorized field gun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(to be fair, I used the same definition when classifying the Fire Prism as a Tank Destroyer/Mechanised Artillery - it's really just mechanized/armored Artillery, not meant to be an MBT or TD).

WW 2 anyways had some odd outliers, considering that the stug which is a spa (self propelled artillery) worked better as a Td then it's intended use.
Frankly what is the price for a upgraded Falcon?
I could see the predator working fine if it would've been priced a tad cheaper.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Mbt with Pred autocannon and bolters.
Td with twin Lascannon.

And the Predator with Twin Las and Heavy Bolters? Not an MBT?
Land Raider with Lascannons and Heavy Bolters is a Tank Destroyer instead of an MBT? Sounds totally arbitrary. Big armored thing. Drives around. Shoots stuff. Pew pew.
Predator has access to moarbigger guns than Falcon. Wounds t8 on 3s. Longer range with all guns. Has modifier when moves.

Falcon comes to about 160 with Pulse Laser, Shuriken Cannon, Blight Lance and the Matrix. Is faster, has Fly, can carry some models and gets Craftworld bonus. That's a pretty good deal. Somebody's price definitely seems off when comparing the two.

I really wish I hadn't even mentioned this. Predators need something to make them not an auto-pass compared to Russes or Dunecrawlers. At this point, I need a reason to field BA units other than scouts and captains. Every other BA unit is basically useless., and the scouts are just there as CP life support, and contribute nothing of value. Vanilla is mostly the same, except they can bring Bobby G. The BA chapter tactic is godawful except on one trick unit. Pathetic.

How about give combat knife to all marines and a cool rule for jump pack marines (to compensate them somehow), like the inceptor have. Isn't a huge change and could be easy to implement.

Martel732 wrote:
I really wish I hadn't even mentioned this. Predators need something to make them not an auto-pass compared to Russes or Dunecrawlers. At this point, I need a reason to field BA units other than scouts and captains. Every other BA unit is basically useless., and the scouts are just there as CP life support, and contribute nothing of value. Vanilla is mostly the same, except they can bring Bobby G. The BA chapter tactic is godawful except on one trick unit. Pathetic.

Oh yeah I forgot about Dunecrawlers! They just straight up have old Relentless.

So that's basically only Predators and Hammerheads that don't have anything to compensate. I haven't heard of Tau players loving their Hammerheads so...

Rerolls rerolls rerolls.

And more big guns.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Rerolls rerolls rerolls.

And more big guns.

Which none of those armies have? Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Mechanicus have the same access to rerolls and Guard can get them just being Cadian (reroll for the Blast weapons on Catachan might be better for you. Math was done elsewhere as far as I know).

Slayer-Fan123 760395 10071929 wrote:
Oh yeah I forgot about Dunecrawlers! They just straight up have old Relentless.

So that's basically only Predators and Hammerheads that don't have anything to compensate. I haven't heard of Tau players loving their Hammerheads so...

I love my hammerheads, longstrike is a sizable part of that though. I kind of feel like they are slightly under priced, but predators have heavier anti tank with quad las. Chaos preds can spend a cp for relentless.

I think that predators ignoring movement is a great idea. Encourages mobile tanks, and most importantly, differentiates it from the razorback. It also means I don't need to go all out and whack sponsons on it too. If I just want a mobile predator autocannonor twin lascannons, I can get them for 130/140 points which is pretty reasonable.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Rerolls rerolls rerolls.

And more big guns.

Which none of those armies have? Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Mechanicus have the same access to rerolls and Guard can get them just being Cadian (reroll for the Blast weapons on Catachan might be better for you. Math was done elsewhere as far as I know).

Not as thoroughly and plentiful, off the top of my head. All to hit, 1s to wound, for potentially everything against anything.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Rerolls rerolls rerolls.

And more big guns.

Which none of those armies have? Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Mechanicus have the same access to rerolls and Guard can get them just being Cadian (reroll for the Blast weapons on Catachan might be better for you. Math was done elsewhere as far as I know).

Not as thoroughly and plentiful, off the top of my head. All to hit, 1s to wound, for potentially everything against anything.

Archons? Autarchs? Dominus? Ya know, the HQ's you're already taking, with the former two being cheaper than Captains?

Meanwhile Cadians get them just for sitting still, which really isn't hard when you ignore LoS and have a lot of range, or even both.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Mbt with Pred autocannon and bolters.
Td with twin Lascannon.

And the Predator with Twin Las and Heavy Bolters? Not an MBT?
Land Raider with Lascannons and Heavy Bolters is a Tank Destroyer instead of an MBT? Sounds totally arbitrary. Big armored thing. Drives around. Shoots stuff. Pew pew.
Predator has access to moarbigger guns than Falcon. Wounds t8 on 3s. Longer range with all guns. Has modifier when moves.

Falcon comes to about 160 with Pulse Laser, Shuriken Cannon, Blight Lance and the Matrix. Is faster, has Fly, can carry some models and gets Craftworld bonus. That's a pretty good deal. Somebody's price definitely seems off when comparing the two.

Not really, the link is not arbitrary, it has to do with the main armament which decides their specificaton. Autocannon is an allround gun, Lascannon is a At gun.

160?!? A good deal is a understatement.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Rerolls rerolls rerolls.

And more big guns.

Which none of those armies have? Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Mechanicus have the same access to rerolls and Guard can get them just being Cadian (reroll for the Blast weapons on Catachan might be better for you. Math was done elsewhere as far as I know).

Not as thoroughly and plentiful, off the top of my head. All to hit, 1s to wound, for potentially everything against anything.

Archons? Autarchs? Dominus? Ya know, the HQ's you're already taking, with the former two being cheaper than Captains?

Meanwhile Cadians get them just for sitting still, which really isn't hard when you ignore LoS and have a lot of range, or even both.

Do they get full re-rolls to hit (not just 1's) and any re-rolls to wound?

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Rerolls rerolls rerolls.

And more big guns.

Which none of those armies have? Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Mechanicus have the same access to rerolls and Guard can get them just being Cadian (reroll for the Blast weapons on Catachan might be better for you. Math was done elsewhere as far as I know).

Not as thoroughly and plentiful, off the top of my head. All to hit, 1s to wound, for potentially everything against anything.

Archons? Autarchs? Dominus? Ya know, the HQ's you're already taking, with the former two being cheaper than Captains?

Meanwhile Cadians get them just for sitting still, which really isn't hard when you ignore LoS and have a lot of range, or even both.

Do they get full re-rolls to hit (not just 1's) and any re-rolls to wound?

Do you get the same in your army without wasting 3CP?

I'd love it if *most* battle tanks could move half distance and not be penalized. Preds, Falcons, *and* HammerHeads (among others).

That said, why should the Pred get it but not the Falcon? The only battle tanks I can think of that would deserve it *less* would be the Hammerhead and Ork BattleWagon - and those are debateable. It is *really* hard to picture Preds being more mobile and fluid than the Falcon chasis.

The quad-las Pred seems decent for it's points compared to Falcons and similar. It just doesn't compete with the top-tier choices out there.

The HB/AC Pred seems a bit weaker, but mostly because you can get better shooting than HB elsewhere. The AC got a good buff recently. But if the HB were buffed (H:4 or RF2/3), that version of the Pred is better too.

Killshot having utility beyond forcing the opponent to pop one Pred immediately would help to.

So, how's this for a starting point to discuss from:
Preds: Sv 2+
HB: RF3
Killshot: 2+ Preds, wound on 1 better

Now take this long and painful argument and multiply across the entire codex, basically.

And the discussion of how to appropriately nerf leviathan dread, BA capt, and ven dread.

Ice_can wrote:
If someone really wants 2 wounds base for marines, try playing against Deathguard with an additional wound across the board and then tell me it's not game breaking.
.

I'm actually not persuaded it would be game breaking to have 2 wound Plague Marines or Rubrics. I mean really think about it, how many *competitive* Death Guard lists actually field Plague Marines. I mean the general consensus is that they aren't worth the price tag even in Death Guard compared to Cultists, Pox Walkers, Nurglings, and Plague Bearers which typically fill out the core of these types of lists. Maybe if they had that extra wound we might actually see Plague Marines in a Death Guard army. Maybe.

I'm not saying that people don't use Plague Marines casually, and I'm not saying that Plague Marines are awful for their points- but at the end of the day, nobody is taking them when preparing for a tournament. And that is because they still need help.

 akaean wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
If someone really wants 2 wounds base for marines, try playing against Deathguard with an additional wound across the board and then tell me it's not game breaking.
.

I'm actually not persuaded it would be game breaking to have 2 wound Plague Marines or Rubrics. I mean really think about it, how many *competitive* Death Guard lists actually field Plague Marines. I mean the general consensus is that they aren't worth the price tag even in Death Guard compared to Cultists, Pox Walkers, Nurglings, and Plague Bearers which typically fill out the core of these types of lists. Maybe if they had that extra wound we might actually see Plague Marines in a Death Guard army. Maybe.

I'm not saying that people don't use Plague Marines casually, and I'm not saying that Plague Marines are awful for their points- but at the end of the day, nobody is taking them when preparing for a tournament. And that is because they still need help.

Excellent points.

For me, a failed save, is a failed save, is a failed save. It still removes the model entirely. Having better armour and T doesn't matter as much in this edition as having more wounds. Chaff units have more wounds per point and, even better, they are spread out so the multi-damage weapons are wasted on them. In order for Marines to compete with "squishier" options, they need to have close to the same amount of wounds per point. 2W Plague Marines at their current cost would STILL be overlooked in favor of those 1W options that can afford to lose models.

You will never be able to justify a 1W Marine being almost as cheap as other non-Marine 1W options. Marines will have better T and armour save and will pay for it. Meaning you end up with the same situation: "Marines are too expensive, I'll just take Scouts/Guard/Cultists instead"

The changes to AP, the Wound chart and mulit-damage weapons demand Marine have more than 1 measly wound.
Otherwise, why bother? Just spam Guard and Cultists troops

-

 akaean wrote:

I'm actually not persuaded it would be game breaking to have 2 wound Plague Marines or Rubrics. I mean really think about it, how many *competitive* Death Guard lists actually field Plague Marines. I mean the general consensus is that they aren't worth the price tag even in Death Guard compared to Cultists, Pox Walkers, Nurglings, and Plague Bearers which typically fill out the core of these types of lists. Maybe if they had that extra wound we might actually see Plague Marines in a Death Guard army. Maybe.

I'm not saying that people don't use Plague Marines casually, and I'm not saying that Plague Marines are awful for their points- but at the end of the day, nobody is taking them when preparing for a tournament. And that is because they still need help.

I am all for this, but also do it for Inmortals, some orks, etc. More wounds/resiliance in general makes the game more interesting; specially with hordes or big models all around the table

 akaean wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
If someone really wants 2 wounds base for marines, try playing against Deathguard with an additional wound across the board and then tell me it's not game breaking.
.

I'm actually not persuaded it would be game breaking to have 2 wound Plague Marines or Rubrics. I mean really think about it, how many *competitive* Death Guard lists actually field Plague Marines. I mean the general consensus is that they aren't worth the price tag even in Death Guard compared to Cultists, Pox Walkers, Nurglings, and Plague Bearers which typically fill out the core of these types of lists. Maybe if they had that extra wound we might actually see Plague Marines in a Death Guard army. Maybe.

I'm not saying that people don't use Plague Marines casually, and I'm not saying that Plague Marines are awful for their points- but at the end of the day, nobody is taking them when preparing for a tournament. And that is because they still need help.

Two wound plague marines at T5 2W with 5+FNP is game changing go play that game with no point changes and tell me it's not too much.

Maybe if it was a 6+fnp it would be so bad but needing to get 3 failed saves just to remove a single 17 point model turns the game into a no fun grinding match. Rubrics ironically wouldn't benifit as much due to all is dust being for D1 weapons.

Ice_can wrote:

 akaean wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
If someone really wants 2 wounds base for marines, try playing against Deathguard with an additional wound across the board and then tell me it's not game breaking.
.

I'm actually not persuaded it would be game breaking to have 2 wound Plague Marines or Rubrics. I mean really think about it, how many *competitive* Death Guard lists actually field Plague Marines. I mean the general consensus is that they aren't worth the price tag even in Death Guard compared to Cultists, Pox Walkers, Nurglings, and Plague Bearers which typically fill out the core of these types of lists. Maybe if they had that extra wound we might actually see Plague Marines in a Death Guard army. Maybe.

I'm not saying that people don't use Plague Marines casually, and I'm not saying that Plague Marines are awful for their points- but at the end of the day, nobody is taking them when preparing for a tournament. And that is because they still need help.

Two wound plague marines at T5 2W with 5+FNP would is game changing go play that game with no point changes and tell me it's not too much.

Here's the beauty of why giving Marines 2W is no big deal: About half the weapons that kill Marines currently do multiple wounds already. In many, many cases, the weapons used to kill Marines are the ones with decent AP. Most of those also have multiple damage.
So the extra wound ONLY helps against 1D weapons.

You cannot seriously tell me that you've been successfully killing PMs with 1D weapons. You should already be shooting heavier guns at Plague Marines
But I can agree that maybe a 6+ Resilience would be a good compromise as they will also still have T5.

-

So you're saying all marines except HQ should have 2 wounds.......interesting.

Would certainly make Tacticals more viable and an alternative again to Intercessors.

But I think Scouts should still be 1 wound. they're not fully inducted yet.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Rerolls rerolls rerolls.

And more big guns.

Which none of those armies have? Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Mechanicus have the same access to rerolls and Guard can get them just being Cadian (reroll for the Blast weapons on Catachan might be better for you. Math was done elsewhere as far as I know).

Not as thoroughly and plentiful, off the top of my head. All to hit, 1s to wound, for potentially everything against anything.

Archons? Autarchs? Dominus? Ya know, the HQ's you're already taking, with the former two being cheaper than Captains?

Meanwhile Cadians get them just for sitting still, which really isn't hard when you ignore LoS and have a lot of range, or even both.

Do they get full re-rolls to hit (not just 1's) and any re-rolls to wound?

Do you get the same in your army without wasting 3CP?

I'll take your avoidance of answering the question as a "no".

More re-rolls are available to SM.