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.

I'm pretty sure the Grey Knights chart is worse but yeah the Marine chart is pretty blech.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm pretty sure the Grey Knights chart is worse but yeah the Marine chart is pretty blech.

The one saving grace for GK spells is vortex of doom. Noticeably worse than Infernal Gateway but at least it has high damage potential. I once did 18 mortals with it. Sanctuary is pretty good but it is no protect...I'd love to get those 1+ saves for GMDK...would be too good I guess.

The usecases should be different between the two spells.

Jinx - "That unit there - have a really bad day".

Null Zone - "Marines are here. Y'all gonna have a really bad day."

So Jinx should be usable without fully committing, but should only impact the target unit. Null Zone should require the Librarian be committed, but should affect all nearby units. NOt as a suicide - the use case should be the libby commits *with* a bunch of Marines and stuff, not alone.

Jinx should be easier to manifest because it can impact at most one unit. Jinx should be targetable whereas Null Zone should be an aura from the user. Jinx should feel like the psykers are messing with you again, whereas Null Zone should feel like This gak Got Real.

To that end, I think it's closer to where it should be than you think. A wider range would be great, but giving everything near your guys a save penalty is a big boon over just touching one unit.

(not that I'd be against a buff to it, just not everything stated).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, especially now that you pick powers, having 1-2 A-rank spells is better in many ways than having 6 B-rank spells. Much better if you're not spaming pskers.

Bharring wrote:
Devs:
-Signum (Sarge)
-Cheribum

Dark Reapers:
-Crack Shot (Sarge)
-Inescapable Accuracy

So they both have different special rules. Inescapable Accuracy is one really good rule, but they both have two rules.

It's not the special rules on Reapers that make them better. They're undercosted a bit - that's what makes Reapers themselves OP. And the support they can get - better interceptor and Ynnari - make it even worse.

Raven Guard do for Devs what Alaitoc does for Reapers. But Alaitoc/RG/etc being common makes Inescapable Accuracy worth even more.

In theory, Tac Marines at 12" from Reapers and getting the alpha shoud win that firefight. Also, in theory, if equal or even quite a bit fewer points of Marines charge equal points of Reapers, the Marines should win. Also, in theory, Reapers and Marines in equal points starting across the board from eachother in a head-to-head should mean Reapers win.

Repeat that paragraph replacing "Reapers" with "Devs".

Repeat both paragraphs replacing "Tac Marines" with "Dire Avengers".

All of that should be true. Most of it is. The two exceptions I can think of are Reapers beat the Marines at close range, and Dire Avengers lose to Devs at CQC. The first is a blowout in the wrong direction. The second is rare, and thematic, and proper.

Rather than compare the two units against each other, I like to compare their offensive and defensive abilities.

If you compare range damage per point, DA are better than Tacs, and would be even without their AP bonuses for 6s. Once you factor that in, they get even better. They have a bit less range, but longer effective range and the ability to advance and shoot so I'm gonna call that a wash and just look at damage.

They are also more efficient in close combat except against T6 and T7.

None of these comparisons take special weapons or upgrades into account, just the basic Maine and DA profiles and weapons.

Defence wise, they lose less points than Tacs do per shot from every weapon I compared (lasguns, bolters, heavy bolters, assault cannons, plasma, and OC plasma).

So if you think DA are bad...Tacs might be worse.

How are DAs more efficient than Tacs in CC? They hit at S3, same number of attacks, same weaponskill. For only 1 less ppm. In contrived examples - anything T5 or T8+ with S8+ and AP-4 - they eek out a very slight points advantage. Otherwise, they lose substantially.

I shouldn't have included that part about DAs in that writeup. I agree they're a little better than Tacs (specifically, I think they'd be even if the Exarch were +10pts).

As for points lost per shot:
Boltgun:
Marine:
13x(1/2)(1/3) = ~2.1
DA:
12x(2/3)(1/2) = ~4

What stats do you think DAs have?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Of those, the one where Marines and DAs are the closest in points lost per shot is OC Plasma out of cover:
Marine:
13x(5/6)(5/6)

DA:
12x(5/6)(1)

That looks like about 11 pts of Marines compared to 12 pts of DAs - and, of your list, that's the case that should have been most in DA's favor.

DA should probably cost 9 and guardians should cost 7 with storm guardians costing 6.

They just need to eliminate the Storm Guardian entry. It makes no sense for fluff and with crunch they don't do anything special.

It's the only CWE squad that can take special weapons.

Which would matter if or or 2 meltas or flamers in a squad meant something (which is kinda the same problem Tacs have).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm actually good with where Guardian Defenders are at, and DAs need to go up, not down (per unit - they're fine per model).

The problem is, lets say we do 10ppm Tacs - won't they destroy 8ppm Guardians?

And if we drop Guardians to adjust for that to, lets say, 6ppm, won't they just destory other things?

Bharring wrote:
How are DAs more efficient than Tacs in CC? They hit at S3, same number of attacks, same weaponskill. For only 1 less ppm. In contrived examples - anything T5 or T8+ with S8+ and AP-4 - they eek out a very slight points advantage. Otherwise, they lose substantially.

I shouldn't have included that part about DAs in that writeup. I agree they're a little better than Tacs (specifically, I think they'd be even if the Exarch were +10pts).

As for points lost per shot:
Boltgun:
Marine:
13x(1/2)(1/3) = ~2.1
DA:
12x(2/3)(1/2) = ~4

What stats do you think DAs have?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Of those, the one where Marines and DAs are the closest in points lost per shot is OC Plasma out of cover:
Marine:
13x(5/6)(5/6)

DA:
12x(5/6)(1)

That looks like about 11 pts of Marines compared to 12 pts of DAs - and, of your list, that's the case that should have been most in DA's favor.

Woops I had my numbers wrong. Lol. Yeah Tacs are better per point in melee and defensively, but DA are better offensively. So maybe they are equally bad lol.

Bharring wrote:
It's the only CWE squad that can take special weapons.

Which would matter if or or 2 meltas or flamers in a squad meant something (which is kinda the same problem Tacs have).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm actually good with where Guardian Defenders are at, and DAs need to go up, not down (per unit - they're fine per model).

The problem is, lets say we do 10ppm Tacs - won't they destroy 8ppm Guardians?

And if we drop Guardians to adjust for that to, lets say, 6ppm, won't they just destory other things?

DA don't need to go up in points per unit IMO. To fix the game most specialized infantry need to come down in points.
Tacs 10
DA 9
Gardian 7
Storm guardian 6



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
The usecases should be different between the two spells.

Jinx - "That unit there - have a really bad day".

Null Zone - "Marines are here. Y'all gonna have a really bad day."

So Jinx should be usable without fully committing, but should only impact the target unit. Null Zone should require the Librarian be committed, but should affect all nearby units. NOt as a suicide - the use case should be the libby commits *with* a bunch of Marines and stuff, not alone.

Jinx should be easier to manifest because it can impact at most one unit. Jinx should be targetable whereas Null Zone should be an aura from the user. Jinx should feel like the psykers are messing with you again, whereas Null Zone should feel like This gak Got Real.

To that end, I think it's closer to where it should be than you think. A wider range would be great, but giving everything near your guys a save penalty is a big boon over just touching one unit.

(not that I'd be against a buff to it, just not everything stated).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, especially now that you pick powers, having 1-2 A-rank spells is better in many ways than having 6 B-rank spells. Much better if you're not spaming pskers.

Why should jinx be effective alpha strike but not null zone? This game is decided by turn 1 most of the time. 6" aura for a libby is suicide in most cases too - he doesn't even have an invo save. Any spell that requires a turn to setup is worthless - Nullzone would actually work great with quicken - maybe space marines should get a quicken type spell. So they can actually utilize their assult units / nullzone / ect. I have a feeling you'd be much happier with a buff to nullzone to make it less useless.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
They just need to eliminate the Storm Guardian entry. It makes no sense for fluff and with crunch they don't do anything special.

I play Ulthwe so i have a soft spot for them BUT I can't imagine ever using them. Removal is fine IMO.

Removal? God no. They serve a thematic purpose, at least in theory. I'd rather jack them up to 50ppm than remove them!

At any rate, back to Marines:
Jinx can help with Alpha against one unit.

If you want Null Zone to add to Alpha, give it a radius > 9". With a 12" radius, a DSing libby (among other things) can put it on the leading edge of the enemy.

If you're getting destroyed by Jinx, take 2 good units instead of one godly unit?

I think the issue with DA is that their gun costs too much. Unless they have some kind of +1 to hit, the AP bonus only makes the gun at best 75% better than a bolter (vs a 2+ save) and at worst the same if there is no armor save. A storm bolter is twice as effective a bolter against all targets, and it only costs half of what the DA gun does. 0-2 points would be fine. The Necron basic gun is better than bolters and DA guns and it's 0 points.

Bharring wrote:
Removal? God no. They serve a thematic purpose, at least in theory. I'd rather jack them up to 50ppm than remove them!

At any rate, back to Marines:
Jinx can help with Alpha against one unit.

If you want Null Zone to add to Alpha, give it a radius > 9". With a 12" radius, a DSing libby (among other things) can put it on the leading edge of the enemy.

If you're getting destroyed by Jinx, take 2 good units instead of one godly unit?

I think a 12" aura is way better than what I was suggesting.

jcd386 wrote:
I think the issue with DA is that their gun costs too much. Unless they have some kind of +1 to hit, the AP bonus only makes the gun at best 75% better than a bolter (vs a 2+ save) and at worst the same if there is no armor save. A storm bolter is twice as effective a bolter against all targets, and it only costs half of what the DA gun does. 0-2 points would be fine. The Necron basic gun is better than bolters and DA guns and it's 0 points.

You can't look at the cost of the guns just like that when comparing codices. Remember that the Bolter costs a point in the AM codex but 0 in the SM one, and that the Gauss Blaster is absurdly expensive if you looked at a Heavy Bolter.

jcd -
Shuriken weaponry shooting T8 2+/5++ targets does 4x as much damage as Boltguns.

Those targets are very rare, but the shuriken:boltgun output ratio increases as the target gets harder.

Conversely, against anything with a 7+, or a better/equal Invuln to their armor, Shuriken is exactly as powerful as boltguns - while giving up other advantages to get it.

I do like considering the Necron Gauss and CWE Shuriken as equals.

One problem with the gun being so cheap (or cheaper) is the twin Catapault is the no-brainer best way to run DAs (Glaive/Shield might be marginally better in a 10-man, but 2x5mans naked are much better than that 10man. And their CC weapons are on one model with S3.).

I generally think of it as 7 ASCs are about the same as 5 boltguns and 2 PGs.

The marine with 2 plasma cost significantly more than those avengers and has 6"+d6 less effective range. That's the kicker.

I meant to say 3 boltguns and 2PGs. 5 boltguns and 2 PGs readily outperform 7 ASCs. I wouldn't consider 93 to 84 'significantly more'.

DAs have 6" +d6 more threatrange for doing doubletap, but 6" -d6" for shooting at all. DAs can doubletap 6" further than Marines - giving a 6" range where they have effectively double firepower. But then Marines have far more than double - half their normal vs exactly 0 - firepower for the next 6".

Put another way, here are their threat profiles:
0"-1": Marines destroy - Pistols + much better CC even naked
1"-~5": Marines win by a lot - doubletap + easy charge
~5"-7": Marines probably win - because probable charge
8"-12": About equal - probably no charge, and doubletap vs assault weapons
13"-18": DAs win - Marines don't doubletap
18"-24": Marines win - they only get singletap, but DAs have a reasonable chance of being unable to fire while being very exposed.

Battle Focus goes a long way to mitigate this, but leaves you closer to the enemy. And DAs are destroyed by naked Tacs in RF range. And many things in this game don't have trouble covering 18" to get into CC in one round. Finally, if they count on Battle Focus to get into range to fire, there's a very reasonable chance - unless they only need 1" - that they will expose themselves without even being able to fire.

Bharring wrote:
I meant to say 3 boltguns and 2PGs. 5 boltguns and 2 PGs readily outperform 7 ASCs. I wouldn't consider 93 to 84 'significantly more'.

DAs have 6" +d6 more threatrange for doing doubletap, but 6" -d6" for shooting at all. DAs can doubletap 6" further than Marines - giving a 6" range where they have effectively double firepower. But then Marines have far more than double - half their normal vs exactly 0 - firepower for the next 6".

Put another way, here are their threat profiles:
0"-1": Marines destroy - Pistols + much better CC even naked
1"-~5": Marines win by a lot - doubletap + easy charge
~5"-7": Marines probably win - because probable charge
8"-12": About equal - probably no charge, and doubletap vs assault weapons
13"-18": DAs win - Marines don't doubletap
18"-24": Marines win - they only get singletap, but DAs have a reasonable chance of being unable to fire while being very exposed.

Battle Focus goes a long way to mitigate this, but leaves you closer to the enemy. And DAs are destroyed by naked Tacs in RF range. And many things in this game don't have trouble covering 18" to get into CC in one round. Finally, if they count on Battle Focus to get into range to fire, there's a very reasonable chance - unless they only need 1" - that they will expose themselves without even being able to fire.

Exarch can take 2 cats. The cost is 76 compared to 93. It is significant.

There is 0 chance of exposing and not being able to fire - if you get a poor advance move you just move another direction.

At which point you're still closer to the enemy than when you started the turn, didn't get to shoot, and now it's their turn. As a glass cannon.

The Exarch can take 2 cats. The Exarch is what puts DAs above Tacs right now, as I've said. And Cats would have to cost a lot more to make double Cat exarchs not the automatic choice.

At any rate, we should proably get back to Marines.

Bharring wrote:
At which point you're still closer to the enemy than when you started the turn, didn't get to shoot, and now it's their turn. As a glass cannon.

The Exarch can take 2 cats. The Exarch is what puts DAs above Tacs right now, as I've said. And Cats would have to cost a lot more to make double Cat exarchs not the automatic choice.

At any rate, we should proably get back to Marines.

Well this is a marine topic. We are comparing tacs (which are bad) to DA (which are also pretty bad) both units need points drops IMO. It's hard to talk about dropping the points of tacs and not other units that deserve it to.

The both die like slime to mortars, while doing nothing significant in return.

Bharring wrote:
jcd -
Shuriken weaponry shooting T8 2+/5++ targets does 4x as much damage as Boltguns.

Those targets are very rare, but the shuriken:boltgun output ratio increases as the target gets harder.

Conversely, against anything with a 7+, or a better/equal Invuln to their armor, Shuriken is exactly as powerful as boltguns - while giving up other advantages to get it.

I do like considering the Necron Gauss and CWE Shuriken as equals.

One problem with the gun being so cheap (or cheaper) is the twin Catapault is the no-brainer best way to run DAs (Glaive/Shield might be marginally better in a 10-man, but 2x5mans naked are much better than that 10man. And their CC weapons are on one model with S3.).

I generally think of it as 7 ASCs are about the same as 5 boltguns and 2 PGs.

Ah, i see now. Clearly today is not my day for math. Woops.

I thought this was a bunch of knee jerk over reacting in terms of suggested buffs. After reading the Drukhari codex... woo lad. SM codex feels very limited and poorly thought out.

Did GW ever explain their reasoning for limiting SM and CSM's chapter tactics/legion traits to infantry, bikes, and dreads? If not I'd like to see that answered in the FAQ.

Not even Chaos Steed HQ dudes get any benefit. Because.

Neither does Guilliman profit from (his own) chapter tactics because he has the <monster> keyword.

 Kelligula wrote:
I thought this was a bunch of knee jerk over reacting in terms of suggested buffs. After reading the Drukhari codex... woo lad. SM codex feels very limited and poorly thought out.

Did GW ever explain their reasoning for limiting SM and CSM's chapter tactics/legion traits to infantry, bikes, and dreads? If not I'd like to see that answered in the FAQ.

We find out in 25 minutes if they have fixed marines in any meaningful way.

So Guilliman is up to 400.

That's it

Prepare to get tabled by Drukhari. A lot.

And Fire Raptor up to 280pts base (+90)
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand i'm cancelling my Forgeworld order.

It was clearly too cheap.