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.
More importantly, why are you trying to justify a bad unit just like you did with Warp Talons before? Is it hard to accept some units are just useless and that's the end of it?
LOL, ok.
Let's play a game. Below are two tables. Each has a set of data for one of 3 units (Cultists, CSM, and Bolt Rifle Primaris). No traits or bonuses. These units are all the same total price (5 point cultists, 11 CSM, 17 primaris). Any fractional models are still counted, so 3.2 Primaris would get 3.2 and 6.4 shots respectively. Each mode is a different position within the battlefield (i.e. RF range, moving, etc).
The first table is damage dealt by the unit. Damage dealt numbers have been multiplied by a common factor to prevent backing into the result. Please rank the units A,B, and C as to which you think is best. Please also determine which you think is Cultist, CSM, and Primaris.
The second table is damage received by the unit. Please rank units D, E, and F as to which you think it best. Please also determine which you think is Cultist, CSM, and Primaris.
I'm curious is it the order of: primaris, csm, cultist on the ABC table and then: primaris, cultist, csm on the DEF table?
Also how do you explain how unit A is so much more efficient at killing GEQ?
I'm also curious what is meant by "No traits or bonuses". Don't cultists not get chapter tactics, and that is a drawback to them? Also, don't space marines get like 4-5 different abilities nowadays? Also, aren't we comparing a 30" range band to a 24" range band to a 12" range band, or have we picked a range the 3 units are operating in? Given that none of the rows contain a number, then 0, then 0, it doesn't seem like you're taking pains to represent the main turn 1 advantage enjoyed by the primaris marine, who does not need to move to deal full damage to something in the opponent's deployment zone turn 1.
To answer the question, I say A primaris, B CSM, C Cultist, D cultist, E csm, F primaris.
Since no one else seems willing to take this on here's the detail.
Spoiler:
Obviously spotting the differences in damage taken was pretty easy, but I find it pretty telling that people assumed the unit that did the most damage were Primaris. Let's validate the numbers real quick. 5 CSM are 55 points, which is 3.2 Primaris.
CSM:
5 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 1.5
Primaris
3.2 * .666 * .666 * .833 = 1.2
The cultists were 10.6 models plus a heavy stubber (so a bit of mathematical advantage since I should have run it as 9.6 plus stubber). They did lots of damage at 12", but like the CSM this is a more difficult scenario to make use of especially considering the original scenario was considering the usefulness of these units as objective holders.
In any case, the CSM produce 25% more damage than Primaris. Clearly that gets made up by their 30" range on top of all the bonuses they can get. AND they're more durable according to the table above, right? Well, not if we tie it to points lost:
Spoiler:
CSM have a 7 "point" disadvantage with D1 weapons, but a 14 point advantage when D2 enters the picture. Of course, none of this means CSM are better or approaching being as good as Primaris.
What it does tell me is two things:
1) People that take CSM as objective holders over Cultists are not making a poor choice and, in context, CSM are not "trash". (The calculus changes if cultists go back to 4, but not terribly - and changes again if CSM get good traits)
2) Bias is a hard thing to shake and even when the names of units were removed people still assumed the biggest number must be Primaris.
As I already said, even without upgrades (which I couldn't tell with the Cultists having the Heavy Stubber in the first place as I initially tried to calculate and couldn't get anything correct) Primaris can be Stalkers for free or Autos for 5 points total.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lemondish wrote: I fear Daedalus spent a lot of time trying to teach something to a poster that doesn't seem to even play 40k.
I do, and clearly more than you based on your unit biases.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/27 15:26:18
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Not Online!!! wrote: Why not use 11 cultists to get the clearer picture in your first exemple?
Using parameters set by others earlier in the discussion as a stubber was offered as a useful upgrade. The cultists would suffer more mathematically without it.
As a Chaos/DG/Daemons player, nice to see Cultists go to 4 ppm, but the increase of Plaguebearers to 8 ppm really hurts and seems unwarranted, especially against new Marines. Nice to see Possessed go to 17 ppm as well, seems like that makes them decently useful. The drop on Deathshroud Terminators is nice as well.
Wait, does this mean the the cost for an Inquisitor to get an Incinerator has dropped from 20(the just released WD) to 9(the GK and Inquisition section)?
The base cost of a Chaos Terminator now matches the base cost of a Loyalist one, so instead of complaining about how their Terminators cost more for no ____ing reason they'll have to complain about how poorly Terminators compare to the Loyalist's new Primaris toys instead.
The Newman wrote: The base cost of a Chaos Terminator now matches the base cost of a Loyalist one, so instead of complaining about how their Terminators cost more for no ____ing reason they'll have to complain about how poorly Terminators compare to the Loyalist's new Primaris toys instead.
We're beyond points cost now. The layered and free buffs across your range and pulling in 6 different directions have made points costs impossible to properly balance unless they adjust per Chapter
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/29 01:20:16
BlaxicanX wrote: A young business man named Tom Kirby, who was a pupil of mine until he turned greedy, helped the capitalists hunt down and destroy the wargamers. He betrayed and murdered Games Workshop.
The Newman wrote: The base cost of a Chaos Terminator now matches the base cost of a Loyalist one, so instead of complaining about how their Terminators cost more for no ____ing reason they'll have to complain about how poorly Terminators compare to the Loyalist's new Primaris toys instead.
Nah that's ok. We'll keep our deep striking/some of the best looking models in the game (that goes for all three marks) terminators.
Eldarain wrote: We're beyond points cost now. The layered and free buffs across your range and pulling in 6 different directions have made posts costs impossible to properly balance unless they adjust per Chapter
WELL maybe there shouldn't be that many Supplements with that many Strats and Relics and there shouldn't be that many codices to begin with.
Just a theory.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Add a single attack to the profile for possessed and they would be actually pretty good I would think... it’s about time they messed with something on the data sheet instead of adding stratagems/formations/HQ units that bring them from crap to mediocre... I just wish that they tooled something besides the points cost. They honestly should be like Berzerkers except tougher, faster, more expensive, and should output less attacks than the Berzerkers. (Overall slightly or moderately crappier Berzerkers when all those deviations are compared together). But still enough that people really don’t want possessed in their gun lines... because D3 attacks goes from crap to decent very erratically... and the decent part only happens if you are lucky 2 out of 6 turns...
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut
The Newman wrote: The base cost of a Chaos Terminator now matches the base cost of a Loyalist one, so instead of complaining about how their Terminators cost more for no ____ing reason they'll have to complain about how poorly Terminators compare to the Loyalist's new Primaris toys instead.
Nah that's ok. We'll keep our deep striking/some of the best looking models in the game (that goes for all three marks) terminators.
You keep your ugly lore ruining primaris.
I'm talking about stats and game performance. Aesthetics and lore are irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion (i.e. "here are some of the new points values, discuss), and in that context either Terminators need to get cheaper or Aggressors and Assault Centurions need to get more expensive or both.
(I don't want to derail the thread but I'm not a big fan of the current Terminators. It's the way they're posed rather than anything wrong with the design of the armor, I liked the old metal ones just fine.)
The Newman wrote: The base cost of a Chaos Terminator now matches the base cost of a Loyalist one, so instead of complaining about how their Terminators cost more for no ____ing reason they'll have to complain about how poorly Terminators compare to the Loyalist's new Primaris toys instead.
Nah that's ok. We'll keep our deep striking/some of the best looking models in the game (that goes for all three marks) terminators.
You keep your ugly lore ruining primaris.
I'm talking about stats and game performance. Aesthetics and lore are irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion (i.e. "here are some of the new points values, discuss), and in that context either Terminators need to get cheaper or Aggressors and Assault Centurions need to get more expensive or both.
(I don't want to derail the thread but I'm not a big fan of the current Terminators. It's the way they're posed rather than anything wrong with the design of the armor, I liked the old metal ones just fine.)
Yeah I know. But you were taking a jab at chaos players so I took one back.
As far as stats/performance goes we're not getting primaris so I see no reason to worry about that. The problem is all the rules loyalists have gotten recently that other factions haven't gotten equivalents of.
Before c:sm got those primaris weren't that big of a problem.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/29 08:27:17
Eldarain wrote: We're beyond points cost now. The layered and free buffs across your range and pulling in 6 different directions have made points costs impossible to properly balance unless they adjust per Chapter
That looks like the way they are going.
Marines have different points costs for different chapters in this CA.
Just look at the few DA spoilers. The basic marine cost seems to be 11.
So GW thinks GK strikes should cost more then 1ksons. Interesting, maybe they are really making a huge book with rule for GK to use. Because the point changes look strange. If everyone gets their point costs cut, then the cuts only matter to top and mid tier armies. The bad ones will stay bad.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Karol wrote: So GW thinks GK strikes should cost more then 1ksons. Interesting, maybe they are really making a huge book with rule for GK to use. Because the point changes look strange. If everyone gets their point costs cut, then the cuts only matter to top and mid tier armies. The bad ones will stay bad.
Strikes have the same problem loyalist Terminators do - they pay for having weapons that are pretty good for both shooting and close combat and therefore end up being pretty bad at both due to cost. If GW insists on sticking to fixed costs for wargear they're going to need to start slashing the base cost of things like GK to compensate but they seem reluctant to do that for some reason. I agree with you about the points cuts. I don't think constantly reducing the cost of almost everything is they way to go as it just leads to a further increase in damage output.
Otoh i don't think supplement style add on rules are great aswell..
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Karol wrote: So GW thinks GK strikes should cost more then 1ksons. Interesting, maybe they are really making a huge book with rule for GK to use. Because the point changes look strange. If everyone gets their point costs cut, then the cuts only matter to top and mid tier armies. The bad ones will stay bad.
Strikes have the same problem loyalist Terminators do - they pay for having weapons that are pretty good for both shooting and close combat and therefore end up being pretty bad at both due to cost. If GW insists on sticking to fixed costs for wargear they're going to need to start slashing the base cost of things like GK to compensate but they seem reluctant to do that for some reason. I agree with you about the points cuts. I don't think constantly reducing the cost of almost everything is they way to go as it just leads to a further increase in damage output.
And an increase in sales as people are forced to buy models to fill in gaps...
Karol wrote: So GW thinks GK strikes should cost more then 1ksons. Interesting, maybe they are really making a huge book with rule for GK to use. Because the point changes look strange. If everyone gets their point costs cut, then the cuts only matter to top and mid tier armies. The bad ones will stay bad.
Strikes have the same problem loyalist Terminators do - they pay for having weapons that are pretty good for both shooting and close combat and therefore end up being pretty bad at both due to cost. If GW insists on sticking to fixed costs for wargear they're going to need to start slashing the base cost of things like GK to compensate but they seem reluctant to do that for some reason. I agree with you about the points cuts. I don't think constantly reducing the cost of almost everything is they way to go as it just leads to a further increase in damage output.
And an increase in sales as people are forced to buy models to fill in gaps...
Considering the broad strokes of the point decreases is , all in all considering , quite significant.
I had a marine based CSM list with 55 CSM in it. The list is allready now 110 pts cheaper, that is literally a whole other CSM squad.
Not to mention that the 30 cultist blob also got cheaper by 30 pts aswell.
And that is just expected model cuts, not to go into detail on some special weapory.
I also doubt that Havocs will remain 14 ppm aswell.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Unless ndks or draigo went down in points, my army has 95 free points now, so I have enough to buy a 5 man strike squads extra, if interceptors droped to 17pts per model and not stayed at 20, I could buy a unit of them too.
not sure how a unit of 5 dudes is going impact the army though, specially as all armies seem to get point drops.
I wouldn't be suprised if some people just didn't start to play 1850games or 1900pts, just to not buy extra models.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Karol wrote: So GW thinks GK strikes should cost more then 1ksons. Interesting, maybe they are really making a huge book with rule for GK to use. Because the point changes look strange. If everyone gets their point costs cut, then the cuts only matter to top and mid tier armies. The bad ones will stay bad.
Strikes have the same problem loyalist Terminators do - they pay for having weapons that are pretty good for both shooting and close combat and therefore end up being pretty bad at both due to cost. If GW insists on sticking to fixed costs for wargear they're going to need to start slashing the base cost of things like GK to compensate but they seem reluctant to do that for some reason. I agree with you about the points cuts. I don't think constantly reducing the cost of almost everything is they way to go as it just leads to a further increase in damage output.
And an increase in sales as people are forced to buy models to fill in gaps...
Considering the broad strokes of the point decreases is , all in all considering , quite significant.
I had a marine based CSM list with 55 CSM in it. The list is allready now 110 pts cheaper, that is literally a whole other CSM squad.
Not to mention that the 30 cultist blob also got cheaper by 30 pts aswell.
And that is just expected model cuts, not to go into detail on some special weapory.
I also doubt that Havocs will remain 14 ppm aswell.
Chosen should come down as well. But then again raptors didn't. My contemptor will be at least 8 points cheaper thanks to the drop on chainfists.
Still hoping for a drop on the fellblade. They dropped the wraithknight so that's one non ik/ck low down. Didn't make the eldar players happy though. Always want more.
They don't have 2 wounds, but the inferno bolter is free, so they clock at a a total of 16.
Not sure how I feel about that in the face of 14 point PMs...
not good.
I mean rubrics allready were a tough call for in the context of the competitors.
Now PM are cheaper , have just a better profile and ability overall and alot more usefull dakka options.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
They don't have 2 wounds, but the inferno bolter is free, so they clock at a a total of 16.
Not sure how I feel about that in the face of 14 point PMs...
not good.
I mean rubrics allready were a tough call for in the context of the competitors.
Now PM are cheaper , have just a better profile and ability overall and alot more usefull dakka options.
The gun is better and the psychic ability is useful. The T5, 5++, the melee ability, and support characters just punch me in the nuts a bit.
I hope the Soulreaper went down. I have no reason to those models.
More than a primaris marine for that POS is just silly. They have friggen 1 base attack.
Daermons got mad point drops. Go for all choas!
Crons got drops...including their best units...They will likely be OP now.
Looks like every space wolf unit got drops. Plus they will be getting doctrines and super doctrines soon. Will likely overtake Ironhands as top spot while naturally Ultra marines will be the worst chapter in the game. Just like every eddition previous to this.
Don't see any knight drops here. Those could be big.
No IG points here...could also be big.
No tau points here...heard they had a lot of their weapons getting cheaper (maybe good for crisis suits?) With riptides and shield drones going up it's a wash though. They will still be strong.
Really can't wait to see the final product here but I am saddend.
Really all I want for Christmas is storm ravens and landraiders to get points drops and be playable. Looks like they will be overlooked. (mainly because they are the only heavies GK can really utilize)
They don't have 2 wounds, but the inferno bolter is free, so they clock at a a total of 16.
Not sure how I feel about that in the face of 14 point PMs...
PM is obviously worth more than 14 points. Whatevers.
Rubric is still going to be pretty good with all that high AP 1 damage coming out of marines these days. They dropped 2 points as well I think too. Magnus also dropped. Now that Daemon price isn't autoinclude...You might be be taking a magnus in their place. Personally I'd rather play with magnus anyways.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/11/29 16:39:16
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
60PL 
12PL 
