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.

... Fire Prisms that fire twice when they move half speed...
... but still get the full to-hit penalty if they move an inch...

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
It feels like they didn't really know what to do for the Tank trait for Catachans, and this was a proposed idea for another Regiment but they decided to just roll with this one.

Yeah, it really doesn't make much sense, the only thing I was ever able to come up with was maybe for the flame wepons since Catachans have always been big on those, but even then doesn't make much sense.

Martel732 wrote:Great firepower. Except against invulns. Or until it's dead. Or if it has to move. Yeah, real great.

Same goes for pretty much any other battletank currently, that's just the state they're in. It's not like a Russ or Hammerhead are gonna deal with invuls better.

Insectum7 wrote:

If I may, I think that your'e looking at it in the perfectly understandable sense of "I want to take 2-3 Rhinos and use them to reliably do a specific job for me."

But I'm looking at in in the way of "You mean I can get 100 T7 3+ Wound, 12" Move, immune to morale models with Aggressor-comparable shooting for 590 points?" Which I think would be a waay more obnoxious than people give it credit for. The amount of disruption you could do with that would be incredible. Assault armies in particular would be so boned by that.

That's not an unfair point, and does bear consideration, however I think if that were going to be an issue, we'd see it in some form now as I think that concept would be workable at ~700pts if it were workable at all, though that may just be me. I think that'd be a very "win big/lose big" kind of army.

Part of me also wonders why GW detached dedicated transport selection from specific units, as that exact sort of thing rears its head when you can take transports that dont have anything to carry, because thats where the problem would really lie in that equation.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
Leman Russes wouldn't bother me so much if they didn't have this stupid rule to shoot twice. "If the model hasn't moved more than half its Movement value" yeah like it needs to move with its 72" BC. Meanwhile my super-technologic Neutron Laser on my Onager shoots once at 48", go figure.

This is the solution that leaves everyone happy: Neutron lasers that shoot twice.

Because everyone who's ever been shot by one of those has thought "god, that weapon is not powerful enough. its rate of fire should be doubled."

Onagers with Laser do 3.56 damage on average on T6-T9 without counting for saves. I know it can inflict up to 18D but that happened exactly once to me in my whole life. For the record, 92 pts of Scourges, so 1 sergeant + 4 haywire shots can theoretically inflict 24 mortal wounds + 12 saves on a vehicle.

I didn't run the maths on the Leman Russes yet though so I might be surprised. From facing them I get pulped all the time as their guns are so good against AdMech. Shooting twice is just a free bonus rule that makes no sense if every main battle tank doesn't have it, and I'd rather have nothing having it than 2/3 of Tanks save the guys who actually build them (and Transports for that matter but I've given up on that).

 Vaktathi wrote:

Insectum7 wrote:If I may, I think that your'e looking at it in the perfectly understandable sense of "I want to take 2-3 Rhinos and use them to reliably do a specific job for me."

But I'm looking at in in the way of "You mean I can get 100 T7 3+ Wound, 12" Move, immune to morale models with Aggressor-comparable shooting for 590 points?" Which I think would be a waay more obnoxious than people give it credit for. The amount of disruption you could do with that would be incredible. Assault armies in particular would be so boned by that.

That's not an unfair point, and does bear consideration, however I think if that were going to be an issue, we'd see it in some form now as I think that concept would be workable at ~700pts if it were workable at all, though that may just be me. I think that'd be a very "win big/lose big" kind of army.

Part of me also wonders why GW detached dedicated transport selection from specific units, as that exact sort of thing rears its head when you can take transports that dont have anything to carry, because thats where the problem would really lie in that equation.

As to the first part, I've been on the brink of finally committing to finishing my collection for a company, and getting four more (for 10 total) just to experiment with it.

For the second part, they do need 'something' to carry, as you can only purchase one for every other type of unit (although I don't think said unit has to be transportable, that is a little strange). I also think that a Rhino is in a bit of a privileged spot, as it seems quite cheap compared to most other transports. Spamming Wave Serpents will spend your points real quick.

As a related note, I think a Rhino is in a peculiar spot for being cheap in relation to the units it's expected to carry. Like a Chimera is more expensive and can transports a much cheaper unit. Wave Serpents cost quite a lot to tote Guardians or Dire Avengers around. Ork Transports are cheap but so are their troops. The ratio of cost of 10 marines to their transport is unique to the army, making Space Marines an army of 'elites' that are cheaper to transport the bulk of their army than most others.

 Insectum7 wrote:


As to the first part, I've been on the brink of finally committing to finishing my collection for a company, and getting four more (for 10 total) just to experiment with it.

What would that list look like just out of curiosity?

For the second part, they do need 'something' to carry, as you can only purchase one for every other type of unit (although I don't think said unit has to be transportable, that is a little strange).

Yeah, being able to take a Rhino Transport for a Land Raider, Attack Bike squad, Predator or Thunderfire Cannon is a bit odd, if they could only be taken by something transportable (even if it chose not to carry anything or to carry something else instead) it would cut down on potential abuse there.

I also think that a Rhino is in a bit of a privileged spot, as it seems quite cheap compared to most other transports. Spamming Wave Serpents will spend your points real quick.

True, though a Wave Serpent is basically a battle tank with a transport capacity to boot. A Rhino is just a box on wheels by comparison.

As a related note, I think a Rhino is in a peculiar spot for being cheap in relation to the units it's expected to carry. Like a Chimera is more expensive and can transports a much cheaper unit. Wave Serpents cost quite a lot to tote Guardians or Dire Avengers around. Ork Transports are cheap but so are their troops. The ratio of cost of 10 marines to their transport is unique to the army, making Space Marines an army of 'elites' that are cheaper to transport the bulk of their army than most others.

Aye, though I think that would ultimately be the limiting factor on spamming rhinos as a large wall of wounds, because while individually cheap, the units that theyd be used with are expensive by comparison. Theorycrafting a 2k list with 10 rhinos, i think between 4 HQ's and ten 5man tac squads there's not many points to work with for upgrades and big guns.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:


Ok, but then what do you think of the Berzerker case?

With the current transport rules, I dont think a price cut on the rhino would be horrible with berzerkers.

I also think that if Rhinos were much cheaper, simply spamming Rhinos might wind up being too good. 70 points for 10 wounds at T7 3+ is really strong, in some sense.

In some sense, I totally agree, and wouldnt want to see them at 35pts again. That said, I think at 55/60pts they'd be much more functional.

If I may, I think that your'e looking at it in the perfectly understandable sense of "I want to take 2-3 Rhinos and use them to reliably do a specific job for me."

But I'm looking at in in the way of "You mean I can get 100 T7 3+ Wound, 12" Move, immune to morale models with Aggressor-comparable shooting for 590 points?" Which I think would be a waay more obnoxious than people give it credit for. The amount of disruption you could do with that would be incredible. Assault armies in particular would be so boned by that.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Tacs would be better if you could get them where you wanted, when you wanted.

Rhinos help you get Tacs where you want them, when you want them.

They're both too expensive for that now. And if you made Rhinos cheap enough to make Tacs better, they'd be too cheap to be fair transporting Sternies and Zerkers.

How much of a points difference are we talking about? Because I think they're actually pretty close to where they need to be.

Possible choices for points reduction are:

A: Rhinos
B: Basic Marine
C: Marine Weapon Upgrades

And I think of those, the weapon upgrades are the ones most likely to get hit. The basic Marine might get hit to 12? While the Rhino I think will stay right where it is.

This is also a question of: "Are Tacs really too expensive or are we just expecting the points efficiency of a Shield Captain?"

meleti wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
What exactly are people expecting from Rhinos, exactly?

They protect your models, make them more maneuverable, give overwatch screening, block los, shield from charges, provide disruption charges, and can go toe to toe point for point with basic guardsmen in a shootout with an extra storm bolter.

I think for Rhinos you need something worth transporting.10 Berserkers can get gak done once they're out of a Rhino. 10 Tactical Marines won't, and I think we need a lot of points changes before Sternguard start being a good choice to shove in a Rhino and send them down the board.

I gotta disagree there, Tactical damage output can out perform a Leman Russ or Riptide. In the other thread I showed that two squads can kill a Shield Captain with a 3++. Imo if you can coordinate them, they're pretty solid. The Rhinos help them out in innumerable ways by getting them where they need to be and protecting them while they're doing what they gotta do.

You mean that situation that required both the Chapter Master buff and the Lt. Buff?

That's what's expected. Marines are concentrating force and their HQs are leading from the front. Imo if you're not buffing them then you're not playing them competitively.

For the numbers, I believe the Riptide was similarly buffed.

So that's at minimum an additional 134 points + 3CP or 60 points + a named Chapter Master.

That's not a good investment. Saying they need to be in range of an HQ is silly because almost all other troop choices function without needing to do the same thing.

"additional 134 points yadda yadda" is misrepresenting the situation as that 134 points etc. can be buffing 2000 points worth of stuff. This conversation has happened a million times now, so I won't go down that hole again. At the end of the day, if you're not buffing them you're doing it wrong.

Well when that 2000 points is shooting 500 points of stuff let me know.

The cost needs to be in the calculation. That's how it works. You can't "assume" HQ buffs unless they were bought with the army. If for some bizarre reason the person brought a Techmarine and Chaplain that wouldn't buff the shooting, so naturally you don't need to include them in the cost. However, you specifically wanted to calculate the Chapter Master and Lt. buff, so you need to buy them. Otherwise you're presenting a dishonest argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
It feels like they didn't really know what to do for the Tank trait for Catachans, and this was a proposed idea for another Regiment but they decided to just roll with this one.

Yeah, it really doesn't make much sense, the only thing I was ever able to come up with was maybe for the flame wepons since Catachans have always been big on those, but even then doesn't make much sense.

Martel732 wrote:Great firepower. Except against invulns. Or until it's dead. Or if it has to move. Yeah, real great.

Same goes for pretty much any other battletank currently, that's just the state they're in. It's not like a Russ or Hammerhead are gonna deal with invuls better.

Insectum7 wrote:

If I may, I think that your'e looking at it in the perfectly understandable sense of "I want to take 2-3 Rhinos and use them to reliably do a specific job for me."

But I'm looking at in in the way of "You mean I can get 100 T7 3+ Wound, 12" Move, immune to morale models with Aggressor-comparable shooting for 590 points?" Which I think would be a waay more obnoxious than people give it credit for. The amount of disruption you could do with that would be incredible. Assault armies in particular would be so boned by that.

That's not an unfair point, and does bear consideration, however I think if that were going to be an issue, we'd see it in some form now as I think that concept would be workable at ~700pts if it were workable at all, though that may just be me. I think that'd be a very "win big/lose big" kind of army.

Part of me also wonders why GW detached dedicated transport selection from specific units, as that exact sort of thing rears its head when you can take transports that dont have anything to carry, because thats where the problem would really lie in that equation.

I know you're not really one for the Proposed Rules subforum, but you're definitely a Guard player. What would you have suggested for their Tank trait?

Don't worry about it - marines are basically immune to morale, as ever.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
Don't worry about it - marines are basically immune to morale, as ever.

Reading the thread and coming to that conclusion is impressive.

 Jidmah wrote:
Nerf regular line troops!

Whatever that is.

I think leadership is the best it has been since I started playing in 5th. It actually matters for all factions, even if you don't actually lose models to it that often. Horde units neither get a free pass nor free fail, elite units can be hurt by it but rarely are.

I think I have not lost more than one plague marine to moral so far, and those don't have ATSKNF. The only time I saw more than one loyalist marines run for the hills was when their player was trying to save a special weapon and took down the sergant as casualty. Otherwise, failing a moral test on a roll of 4 would mean a minimum of 5 casualties - implying that there were more than 5 models in that unit in the first place.

All factions, you say? (Looks at Custodes and Imperial Knights)

But point taken.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:


Ok, but then what do you think of the Berzerker case?

With the current transport rules, I dont think a price cut on the rhino would be horrible with berzerkers.

I also think that if Rhinos were much cheaper, simply spamming Rhinos might wind up being too good. 70 points for 10 wounds at T7 3+ is really strong, in some sense.

In some sense, I totally agree, and wouldnt want to see them at 35pts again. That said, I think at 55/60pts they'd be much more functional.

If I may, I think that your'e looking at it in the perfectly understandable sense of "I want to take 2-3 Rhinos and use them to reliably do a specific job for me."

But I'm looking at in in the way of "You mean I can get 100 T7 3+ Wound, 12" Move, immune to morale models with Aggressor-comparable shooting for 590 points?" Which I think would be a waay more obnoxious than people give it credit for. The amount of disruption you could do with that would be incredible. Assault armies in particular would be so boned by that.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Tacs would be better if you could get them where you wanted, when you wanted.

Rhinos help you get Tacs where you want them, when you want them.

They're both too expensive for that now. And if you made Rhinos cheap enough to make Tacs better, they'd be too cheap to be fair transporting Sternies and Zerkers.

How much of a points difference are we talking about? Because I think they're actually pretty close to where they need to be.

Possible choices for points reduction are:

A: Rhinos
B: Basic Marine
C: Marine Weapon Upgrades

And I think of those, the weapon upgrades are the ones most likely to get hit. The basic Marine might get hit to 12? While the Rhino I think will stay right where it is.

This is also a question of: "Are Tacs really too expensive or are we just expecting the points efficiency of a Shield Captain?"

meleti wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
What exactly are people expecting from Rhinos, exactly?

They protect your models, make them more maneuverable, give overwatch screening, block los, shield from charges, provide disruption charges, and can go toe to toe point for point with basic guardsmen in a shootout with an extra storm bolter.

I think for Rhinos you need something worth transporting.10 Berserkers can get gak done once they're out of a Rhino. 10 Tactical Marines won't, and I think we need a lot of points changes before Sternguard start being a good choice to shove in a Rhino and send them down the board.

I gotta disagree there, Tactical damage output can out perform a Leman Russ or Riptide. In the other thread I showed that two squads can kill a Shield Captain with a 3++. Imo if you can coordinate them, they're pretty solid. The Rhinos help them out in innumerable ways by getting them where they need to be and protecting them while they're doing what they gotta do.

You mean that situation that required both the Chapter Master buff and the Lt. Buff?

That's what's expected. Marines are concentrating force and their HQs are leading from the front. Imo if you're not buffing them then you're not playing them competitively.

For the numbers, I believe the Riptide was similarly buffed.

So that's at minimum an additional 134 points + 3CP or 60 points + a named Chapter Master.

That's not a good investment. Saying they need to be in range of an HQ is silly because almost all other troop choices function without needing to do the same thing.

"additional 134 points yadda yadda" is misrepresenting the situation as that 134 points etc. can be buffing 2000 points worth of stuff. This conversation has happened a million times now, so I won't go down that hole again. At the end of the day, if you're not buffing them you're doing it wrong.

Well when that 2000 points is shooting 500 points of stuff let me know.

The cost needs to be in the calculation. That's how it works. You can't "assume" HQ buffs unless they were bought with the army. If for some bizarre reason the person brought a Techmarine and Chaplain that wouldn't buff the shooting, so naturally you don't need to include them in the cost. However, you specifically wanted to calculate the Chapter Master and Lt. buff, so you need to buy them. Otherwise you're presenting a dishonest argument.

It's completely irrelevant whether my 2000 points are shooting at 500 points or not. Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused. Assuming a mathematical isolation, point-wise is dishonest.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I know you're not really one for the Proposed Rules subforum, but you're definitely a Guard player. What would you have suggested for their Tank trait?

Thinking on Catachans, they've never been a big tank heavy force really, and have very strong infantry bonuses. They've historically had an affinity for flame weapons and lighter vehicles.

In that light, off the top of my head, maybe keeping the trait but apply it only to Heavy Flamers and Inferno Cannons/Chem Cannons? That would keep it isolated to weapons that make sense and most useful on lighter vehicles, but that can potentially be applied to any vehicle in the arsenal, and without needlesly enhancing large cannon.

Alternatively, some ideas may be vehicle overwatch or vehicle CC enhancement to represent lots of up close and personal vehicle engagement that adds a slight edge in those cases? Maybe something AirCav related?

 Vaktathi wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I know you're not really one for the Proposed Rules subforum, but you're definitely a Guard player. What would you have suggested for their Tank trait?

Thinking on Catachans, they've never been a big tank heavy force really, and have very strong infantry bonuses. They've historically had an affinity for flame weapons and lighter vehicles.

In that light, off the top of my head, maybe keeping the trait but apply it only to Heavy Flamers and Inferno Cannons/Chem Cannons? That would keep it isolated to weapons that make sense and most useful on lighter vehicles, but that can potentially be applied to any vehicle in the arsenal, and without needlesly enhancing large cannon.

Alternatively, some ideas may be vehicle overwatch or vehicle CC enhancement to represent lots of up close and personal vehicle engagement that adds a slight edge in those cases? Maybe something AirCav related?

Don't one of the Regiments already have an Overwatch bonus on their tanks?

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:


Ok, but then what do you think of the Berzerker case?

With the current transport rules, I dont think a price cut on the rhino would be horrible with berzerkers.

I also think that if Rhinos were much cheaper, simply spamming Rhinos might wind up being too good. 70 points for 10 wounds at T7 3+ is really strong, in some sense.

In some sense, I totally agree, and wouldnt want to see them at 35pts again. That said, I think at 55/60pts they'd be much more functional.

If I may, I think that your'e looking at it in the perfectly understandable sense of "I want to take 2-3 Rhinos and use them to reliably do a specific job for me."

But I'm looking at in in the way of "You mean I can get 100 T7 3+ Wound, 12" Move, immune to morale models with Aggressor-comparable shooting for 590 points?" Which I think would be a waay more obnoxious than people give it credit for. The amount of disruption you could do with that would be incredible. Assault armies in particular would be so boned by that.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Tacs would be better if you could get them where you wanted, when you wanted.

Rhinos help you get Tacs where you want them, when you want them.

They're both too expensive for that now. And if you made Rhinos cheap enough to make Tacs better, they'd be too cheap to be fair transporting Sternies and Zerkers.

How much of a points difference are we talking about? Because I think they're actually pretty close to where they need to be.

Possible choices for points reduction are:

A: Rhinos
B: Basic Marine
C: Marine Weapon Upgrades

And I think of those, the weapon upgrades are the ones most likely to get hit. The basic Marine might get hit to 12? While the Rhino I think will stay right where it is.

This is also a question of: "Are Tacs really too expensive or are we just expecting the points efficiency of a Shield Captain?"

meleti wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
What exactly are people expecting from Rhinos, exactly?

They protect your models, make them more maneuverable, give overwatch screening, block los, shield from charges, provide disruption charges, and can go toe to toe point for point with basic guardsmen in a shootout with an extra storm bolter.

I think for Rhinos you need something worth transporting.10 Berserkers can get gak done once they're out of a Rhino. 10 Tactical Marines won't, and I think we need a lot of points changes before Sternguard start being a good choice to shove in a Rhino and send them down the board.

I gotta disagree there, Tactical damage output can out perform a Leman Russ or Riptide. In the other thread I showed that two squads can kill a Shield Captain with a 3++. Imo if you can coordinate them, they're pretty solid. The Rhinos help them out in innumerable ways by getting them where they need to be and protecting them while they're doing what they gotta do.

You mean that situation that required both the Chapter Master buff and the Lt. Buff?

That's what's expected. Marines are concentrating force and their HQs are leading from the front. Imo if you're not buffing them then you're not playing them competitively.

For the numbers, I believe the Riptide was similarly buffed.

So that's at minimum an additional 134 points + 3CP or 60 points + a named Chapter Master.

That's not a good investment. Saying they need to be in range of an HQ is silly because almost all other troop choices function without needing to do the same thing.

"additional 134 points yadda yadda" is misrepresenting the situation as that 134 points etc. can be buffing 2000 points worth of stuff. This conversation has happened a million times now, so I won't go down that hole again. At the end of the day, if you're not buffing them you're doing it wrong.

Well when that 2000 points is shooting 500 points of stuff let me know.

The cost needs to be in the calculation. That's how it works. You can't "assume" HQ buffs unless they were bought with the army. If for some bizarre reason the person brought a Techmarine and Chaplain that wouldn't buff the shooting, so naturally you don't need to include them in the cost. However, you specifically wanted to calculate the Chapter Master and Lt. buff, so you need to buy them. Otherwise you're presenting a dishonest argument.

It's completely irrelevant whether my 2000 points are shooting at 500 points or not. Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused. Assuming a mathematical isolation, point-wise is dishonest.

Point efficiency is the actual honest way. All units cost points. That's how it works.

Nothing. Is. Free. That means your bonuses aren't free. Hell I'm one of the last people to defend IG, but their defenders are right that some of the detractors choose not to include the points of Commanders on purpose; it is pure silliness not to.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:


Ok, but then what do you think of the Berzerker case?

With the current transport rules, I dont think a price cut on the rhino would be horrible with berzerkers.

I also think that if Rhinos were much cheaper, simply spamming Rhinos might wind up being too good. 70 points for 10 wounds at T7 3+ is really strong, in some sense.

In some sense, I totally agree, and wouldnt want to see them at 35pts again. That said, I think at 55/60pts they'd be much more functional.

If I may, I think that your'e looking at it in the perfectly understandable sense of "I want to take 2-3 Rhinos and use them to reliably do a specific job for me."

But I'm looking at in in the way of "You mean I can get 100 T7 3+ Wound, 12" Move, immune to morale models with Aggressor-comparable shooting for 590 points?" Which I think would be a waay more obnoxious than people give it credit for. The amount of disruption you could do with that would be incredible. Assault armies in particular would be so boned by that.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Tacs would be better if you could get them where you wanted, when you wanted.

Rhinos help you get Tacs where you want them, when you want them.

They're both too expensive for that now. And if you made Rhinos cheap enough to make Tacs better, they'd be too cheap to be fair transporting Sternies and Zerkers.

How much of a points difference are we talking about? Because I think they're actually pretty close to where they need to be.

Possible choices for points reduction are:

A: Rhinos
B: Basic Marine
C: Marine Weapon Upgrades

And I think of those, the weapon upgrades are the ones most likely to get hit. The basic Marine might get hit to 12? While the Rhino I think will stay right where it is.

This is also a question of: "Are Tacs really too expensive or are we just expecting the points efficiency of a Shield Captain?"

meleti wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
What exactly are people expecting from Rhinos, exactly?

They protect your models, make them more maneuverable, give overwatch screening, block los, shield from charges, provide disruption charges, and can go toe to toe point for point with basic guardsmen in a shootout with an extra storm bolter.

I think for Rhinos you need something worth transporting.10 Berserkers can get gak done once they're out of a Rhino. 10 Tactical Marines won't, and I think we need a lot of points changes before Sternguard start being a good choice to shove in a Rhino and send them down the board.

I gotta disagree there, Tactical damage output can out perform a Leman Russ or Riptide. In the other thread I showed that two squads can kill a Shield Captain with a 3++. Imo if you can coordinate them, they're pretty solid. The Rhinos help them out in innumerable ways by getting them where they need to be and protecting them while they're doing what they gotta do.

You mean that situation that required both the Chapter Master buff and the Lt. Buff?

That's what's expected. Marines are concentrating force and their HQs are leading from the front. Imo if you're not buffing them then you're not playing them competitively.

For the numbers, I believe the Riptide was similarly buffed.

So that's at minimum an additional 134 points + 3CP or 60 points + a named Chapter Master.

That's not a good investment. Saying they need to be in range of an HQ is silly because almost all other troop choices function without needing to do the same thing.

"additional 134 points yadda yadda" is misrepresenting the situation as that 134 points etc. can be buffing 2000 points worth of stuff. This conversation has happened a million times now, so I won't go down that hole again. At the end of the day, if you're not buffing them you're doing it wrong.

Well when that 2000 points is shooting 500 points of stuff let me know.

The cost needs to be in the calculation. That's how it works. You can't "assume" HQ buffs unless they were bought with the army. If for some bizarre reason the person brought a Techmarine and Chaplain that wouldn't buff the shooting, so naturally you don't need to include them in the cost. However, you specifically wanted to calculate the Chapter Master and Lt. buff, so you need to buy them. Otherwise you're presenting a dishonest argument.

It's completely irrelevant whether my 2000 points are shooting at 500 points or not. Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused. Assuming a mathematical isolation, point-wise is dishonest.

Point efficiency is the actual honest way. All units cost points. That's how it works.

Nothing. Is. Free. That means your bonuses aren't free. Hell I'm one of the last people to defend IG, but their defenders are right that some of the detractors choose not to include the points of Commanders on purpose; it is pure silliness not to.

I believe that any reasonable person can see where I'm coming from on this, and see that your suggested mathematical model is a poor representation of actual tabletop circumstances. I also believe that you simply refuse to be convinced of your error, for whatever reason. Therefore I see no use in engaging further.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:


Ok, but then what do you think of the Berzerker case?

With the current transport rules, I dont think a price cut on the rhino would be horrible with berzerkers.

I also think that if Rhinos were much cheaper, simply spamming Rhinos might wind up being too good. 70 points for 10 wounds at T7 3+ is really strong, in some sense.

In some sense, I totally agree, and wouldnt want to see them at 35pts again. That said, I think at 55/60pts they'd be much more functional.

If I may, I think that your'e looking at it in the perfectly understandable sense of "I want to take 2-3 Rhinos and use them to reliably do a specific job for me."

But I'm looking at in in the way of "You mean I can get 100 T7 3+ Wound, 12" Move, immune to morale models with Aggressor-comparable shooting for 590 points?" Which I think would be a waay more obnoxious than people give it credit for. The amount of disruption you could do with that would be incredible. Assault armies in particular would be so boned by that.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Tacs would be better if you could get them where you wanted, when you wanted.

Rhinos help you get Tacs where you want them, when you want them.

They're both too expensive for that now. And if you made Rhinos cheap enough to make Tacs better, they'd be too cheap to be fair transporting Sternies and Zerkers.

How much of a points difference are we talking about? Because I think they're actually pretty close to where they need to be.

Possible choices for points reduction are:

A: Rhinos
B: Basic Marine
C: Marine Weapon Upgrades

And I think of those, the weapon upgrades are the ones most likely to get hit. The basic Marine might get hit to 12? While the Rhino I think will stay right where it is.

This is also a question of: "Are Tacs really too expensive or are we just expecting the points efficiency of a Shield Captain?"

meleti wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
What exactly are people expecting from Rhinos, exactly?

They protect your models, make them more maneuverable, give overwatch screening, block los, shield from charges, provide disruption charges, and can go toe to toe point for point with basic guardsmen in a shootout with an extra storm bolter.

I think for Rhinos you need something worth transporting.10 Berserkers can get gak done once they're out of a Rhino. 10 Tactical Marines won't, and I think we need a lot of points changes before Sternguard start being a good choice to shove in a Rhino and send them down the board.

I gotta disagree there, Tactical damage output can out perform a Leman Russ or Riptide. In the other thread I showed that two squads can kill a Shield Captain with a 3++. Imo if you can coordinate them, they're pretty solid. The Rhinos help them out in innumerable ways by getting them where they need to be and protecting them while they're doing what they gotta do.

You mean that situation that required both the Chapter Master buff and the Lt. Buff?

That's what's expected. Marines are concentrating force and their HQs are leading from the front. Imo if you're not buffing them then you're not playing them competitively.

For the numbers, I believe the Riptide was similarly buffed.

So that's at minimum an additional 134 points + 3CP or 60 points + a named Chapter Master.

That's not a good investment. Saying they need to be in range of an HQ is silly because almost all other troop choices function without needing to do the same thing.

"additional 134 points yadda yadda" is misrepresenting the situation as that 134 points etc. can be buffing 2000 points worth of stuff. This conversation has happened a million times now, so I won't go down that hole again. At the end of the day, if you're not buffing them you're doing it wrong.

Well when that 2000 points is shooting 500 points of stuff let me know.

The cost needs to be in the calculation. That's how it works. You can't "assume" HQ buffs unless they were bought with the army. If for some bizarre reason the person brought a Techmarine and Chaplain that wouldn't buff the shooting, so naturally you don't need to include them in the cost. However, you specifically wanted to calculate the Chapter Master and Lt. buff, so you need to buy them. Otherwise you're presenting a dishonest argument.

It's completely irrelevant whether my 2000 points are shooting at 500 points or not. Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused. Assuming a mathematical isolation, point-wise is dishonest.

Point efficiency is the actual honest way. All units cost points. That's how it works.

Nothing. Is. Free. That means your bonuses aren't free. Hell I'm one of the last people to defend IG, but their defenders are right that some of the detractors choose not to include the points of Commanders on purpose; it is pure silliness not to.

I believe that any reasonable person can see where I'm coming from on this, and see that your suggested mathematical model is a poor representation of actual tabletop circumstances. I also believe that you simply refuse to be convinced of your error, for whatever reason. Therefore I see no use in engaging further.

It's reasonable to assume all the possible bonuses you can get without including them in the mathematical model as paid for?

So do you think it's reasonable to assume Infantry always have FRFSRF and Take Aim active when doing Mathhammer?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

It's reasonable to assume all the possible bonuses you can get without including them in the mathematical model as paid for?

So do you think it's reasonable to assume Infantry always have FRFSRF and Take Aim active when doing Mathhammer?

If that's how you're going to construe my argument, it's reasonable to see why I won't bother.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

It's reasonable to assume all the possible bonuses you can get without including them in the mathematical model as paid for?

So do you think it's reasonable to assume Infantry always have FRFSRF and Take Aim active when doing Mathhammer?

If that's how you're going to construe my argument, it's reasonable to see why I won't bother.

That's LITERALLY what your argument is.
If you think it's reasonable not to include the cost of buffers into a unit's damage output per point for one codex, we can assume it's okay to do it for another codex. So should we be calculating the damage output of Infantry having both those Orders from here on out?

It's an easy question to answer. Not sure why you won't answer it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's LITERALLY what your argument is.

Quote me. Highlight it.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's LITERALLY what your argument is.

Quote me. Highlight it.

"Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused."

So you don't calculate it because you simply assume the bonuses are active and you "diffuse". That's not how it works.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's LITERALLY what your argument is.

Quote me. Highlight it.

"Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused."

So you don't calculate it because you simply assume the bonuses are active and you "diffuse". That's not how it works.

I didn't say you don't calculate it. What I say there is that using the full cost is a misrepresentation of the realities of the table top. That's why when you say "LITERALLY", you are plainly misconstruing what I said. I would also not that you brought up point comparisons in the first place, which had little to do with my original comments. This rabbit-hole is all your doing, man. Which is why I'm done with it. Bye!

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's LITERALLY what your argument is.

Quote me. Highlight it.

"Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused."

So you don't calculate it because you simply assume the bonuses are active and you "diffuse". That's not how it works.

I didn't say you don't calculate it. What I say there is that using the full cost is a misrepresentation of the realities of the table top. That's why when you say "LITERALLY", you are plainly misconstruing what I said. I would also not that you brought up point comparisons in the first place, which had little to do with my original comments. This rabbit-hole is all your doing, man. Which is why I'm done with it. Bye!

That's basically your way of ignoring the unit cost. You don't just diffuse because you feel like it. For all we know you're going the Blood Angels route and those are Slamguinus variants being thrown at the enemy as suicide bombs. Certainly they wouldn't have their effect calculated in some "diffused" scenario.

If you wanna get the benefit of the buffer, you HAVE to include it in the total calculations. Now it IS true the more units you have in a radius the better, but full cost is full cost until the shot at unit is dead. I would've included the full cost of Roboute in your example if you were to calculate that.

 Crimson wrote:
I just wish my Primaris could ride in a pod (at least the non-gravis ones.) It is the one vehicle I really miss from the minimarine arsenal. Drop pod assault is an iconic marine tactic, and the Primaris even use it in the fiction.

Think we agree for the first time ever. If GW is going to commit to the new Primaris marines, they either need access to the drop pod or need their own version. It's the most iconic way a marine arrives on a battle field.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
As to the first part, I've been on the brink of finally committing to finishing my collection for a company, and getting four more (for 10 total) just to experiment with it.

What would that list look like just out of curiosity?

Something like:
10 Rhinos wi 2 Storm Bolters + Hunter Killer
6 MSU Tacs with <something>
3 MSU Devs with <something>
Captain (upgraded to Chapter Master)
Lt.
and then see where my points are.

I'd start out super-basic and tune around from there. My current list has 70 something marines, 4 Rhinos and a Razorback, and the Rhinos do gods work in almost every battle.

For the second part, they do need 'something' to carry, as you can only purchase one for every other type of unit (although I don't think said unit has to be transportable, that is a little strange).

Yeah, being able to take a Rhino Transport for a Land Raider, Attack Bike squad, Predator or Thunderfire Cannon is a bit odd, if they could only be taken by something transportable (even if it chose not to carry anything or to carry something else instead) it would cut down on potential abuse there.

Word.

I also think that a Rhino is in a bit of a privileged spot, as it seems quite cheap compared to most other transports. Spamming Wave Serpents will spend your points real quick.

True, though a Wave Serpent is basically a battle tank with a transport capacity to boot. A Rhino is just a box on wheels by comparison.

That's true. But it's somewhat crucial to my point that they don't have anything cheaper. Wave Serpents are awesome, yeah. But the Rhino being "just a box" means it costs less and frees it up do so some other work.

As a related note, I think a Rhino is in a peculiar spot for being cheap in relation to the units it's expected to carry. Like a Chimera is more expensive and can transports a much cheaper unit. Wave Serpents cost quite a lot to tote Guardians or Dire Avengers around. Ork Transports are cheap but so are their troops. The ratio of cost of 10 marines to their transport is unique to the army, making Space Marines an army of 'elites' that are cheaper to transport the bulk of their army than most others.

Aye, though I think that would ultimately be the limiting factor on spamming rhinos as a large wall of wounds, because while individually cheap, the units that theyd be used with are expensive by comparison. Theorycrafting a 2k list with 10 rhinos, i think between 4 HQ's and ten 5man tac squads there's not many points to work with for upgrades and big guns.

Well, as above I'd start out with only two HQs. I think there's probably a sweet spot at more than I'm currently running, but it would also make for an army that played quite differently, so I'm not sure how I'd end up in a 'final list'. Right now I'm still usually castle-ey. With more Rhinos I think there'd be more emphasis on maneuvering and attack, which might change how unit optimizations would work out.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I know you're not really one for the Proposed Rules subforum, but you're definitely a Guard player. What would you have suggested for their Tank trait?

Thinking on Catachans, they've never been a big tank heavy force really, and have very strong infantry bonuses. They've historically had an affinity for flame weapons and lighter vehicles.

In that light, off the top of my head, maybe keeping the trait but apply it only to Heavy Flamers and Inferno Cannons/Chem Cannons? That would keep it isolated to weapons that make sense and most useful on lighter vehicles, but that can potentially be applied to any vehicle in the arsenal, and without needlesly enhancing large cannon.

Alternatively, some ideas may be vehicle overwatch or vehicle CC enhancement to represent lots of up close and personal vehicle engagement that adds a slight edge in those cases? Maybe something AirCav related?

Don't one of the Regiments already have an Overwatch bonus on their tanks?

Yeah I forgot about Mordians. Probably because nobody plays Mordians

 Insectum7 wrote:


Something like:
10 Rhinos wi 2 Storm Bolters + Hunter Killer
6 MSU Tacs with <something>
3 MSU Devs with <something>
Captain (upgraded to Chapter Master)
Lt.
and then see where my points are.

I'd start out super-basic and tune around from there. My current list has 70 something marines, 4 Rhinos and a Razorback, and the Rhinos do gods work in almost every battle.

I think there's probably a sweet spot at more than I'm currently running, but it would also make for an army that played quite differently, so I'm not sure how I'd end up in a 'final list'. Right now I'm still usually castle-ey. With more Rhinos I think there'd be more emphasis on maneuvering and attack, which might change how unit optimizations would work out.

That's probably better than what I was thinking, more efficient anyway. You could equip all the infantry units fairly well and have ~100-200pts left over for character gear or other units. It'd be interesting from a meta perspective, though I think having concentration of firepower into a few small infantry squads may prove fatal in many games. If you end up running it'd be interesting to see how it does.

For those that, apparently, don't know:
To 'diffuse' a cost means to spread the cost.

As in pay for it from multiple sources. Assumption being you're still paying the full amount, but no one source bears that full burden.

In other words, diffusing the cost across the entire list is *literally* paying the cost. To take it to mean not paying the cost is literally stupid.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused.

Last weekend I went up against a Marine player who balled up three units of Intercessors around his buff-providing commanders. One Cyclops later, he had a single Intercessor left.

I find that this common assumption when analyzing auras, that your whole army is affected, is an unrealistic representation of the tabletop. An army of footslogging Marines clinging to the 6" radius of their characters is slow, inflexible, short-ranged, unable to effectively use cover, unable to control objectives, and unable to maximize the effectiveness of heavy weapons. An army of Catachan infantry clinging to Straken and a Priest maxes out at about four squads before it becomes impossible to maneuver in anything more cluttered than planet bowling ball.

Obviously players should be looking to maximize the effectiveness of their buffs, but you start hitting significant trade-offs, such that I don't think diffusing the cost of a character over the cost of the entire army (under the assumption the entire army will benefit) makes for a reasonable assessment.

catbarf wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Playing marines well means that more than the two Tac squads in question should be benefiting from buffs, therefore the "cost" is diffused.

Last weekend I went up against a Marine player who balled up three units of Intercessors around his buff-providing commanders. One Cyclops later, he had a single Intercessor left.

I find that this common assumption when analyzing auras, that your whole army is affected, is an unrealistic representation of the tabletop. An army of footslogging Marines clinging to the 6" radius of their characters is slow, inflexible, short-ranged, unable to effectively use cover, unable to control objectives, and unable to maximize the effectiveness of heavy weapons. An army of Catachan infantry clinging to Straken and a Priest maxes out at about four squads before it becomes impossible to maneuver in anything more cluttered than planet bowling ball.

Obviously players should be looking to maximize the effectiveness of their buffs, but you start hitting significant trade-offs, such that I don't think diffusing the cost of a character over the cost of the entire army (under the assumption the entire army will benefit) makes for a reasonable assessment.

I typically run 70+ marines in a list, plus a number of transports. I would say that my entire army is getting buffed 80-90% of the time. So it's my experience that the "cost" of a buff is spread across 1700 -2000 points of units.

There are downsides to this, naturally (and I don't know what a Cyclops is). It'd sure be nice to feel like I could spread out my forces and maneuver for board control with a little more freedom. But since the first few turns are typically about pouring on the damage, I gotta buff as much as possible to get my models worth.

I love how impossibly far from the origonal topic this thread has swayed.