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.

 Insectum7 wrote:

sossen wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Drive up to them in tanks.

Then you have to include the cost of the transports and account for the losses that all units trying to get into charge range will suffer. It's the same problem that berzerkers or genestealers suffer. The issue is removing the screen and getting into melee with the backline without losing your whole army in the process. That's why we are looking for efficient shooting solutions which can remove the screen without having to expose the melee units - if berzerkers have to spend a round out in the open after they have killed most or all of the conscripts then they will be killed. The same will happen to tac marines trying to get up close and flame them to death.

The IG gunline could be attacking your transports, OR they could be attacking the stuff you have that more directly threatens their firebase (like your own firebase).

That's why it's a game, decisions matter.

They will inevitably have a much larger firebase than you given that the conscripts only represent a small portion of the AM points and the marines have already spent more than 3x the cost of conscripts on things that are only intended to kill conscripts in one turn. Because of their superior firebase they can afford to do both.

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

sossen wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Drive up to them in tanks.

Then you have to include the cost of the transports and account for the losses that all units trying to get into charge range will suffer. It's the same problem that berzerkers or genestealers suffer. The issue is removing the screen and getting into melee with the backline without losing your whole army in the process. That's why we are looking for efficient shooting solutions which can remove the screen without having to expose the melee units - if berzerkers have to spend a round out in the open after they have killed most or all of the conscripts then they will be killed. The same will happen to tac marines trying to get up close and flame them to death.

The IG gunline could be attacking your transports, OR they could be attacking the stuff you have that more directly threatens their firebase (like your own firebase).

That's why it's a game, decisions matter.

They can attack all of it. That's the problem you aren't getting. They've got undercosted choices on top of undercosted conscripts.

Undercosted or more specialized? The fact that we get super-cheap lascannon HWTs (for example) is because they vaporize more easily than a quad-las predator.

Now I know you think there's no value in being a generalist and that everyone should just be specialists, but IMHO that's one of the Marine's weaknesses: being okay at everything means you have to pay to be mediocre at whatever you're doing at the time.

Posting error

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


But what if the conscripts are all FRFSRFing in rapid-fire range while simultaneously screening the guard army while also having a daisy-chain of conscripts back to the commissar who is also bubblewrapped by the conscripts so deep strikers can't get close and who is also out of Line of Sight of everything while the conscripts advance up field!

WHAT THEN

You say that like it's hard to do all those things at once. It's really not, other than the fact that whatever models are in the daisy chain aren't going to be rapid-firing.

Martel732 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The tanks that the rest of the guard just smoked? Those tanks? Every pro-conscript poster here forgets that the real issue here is the other 1500 pts of stuff that has to be dealt with. Conscripts are busted IN CONTEXT more than in a vacuum. Want to keep conscripts the same? The rest of the guard gets a 25% price hike. Then it's fair again.

And every anti-conscript poster here forgets that the reason Conscripts are so good is that Infantry Squads are so trash.

I disagree. T3 5+ for 4 pts is not bad.

If it wasn't for the Officer tax to give orders, Infantry squads would be better than conscripts

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

sossen wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Drive up to them in tanks.

Then you have to include the cost of the transports and account for the losses that all units trying to get into charge range will suffer. It's the same problem that berzerkers or genestealers suffer. The issue is removing the screen and getting into melee with the backline without losing your whole army in the process. That's why we are looking for efficient shooting solutions which can remove the screen without having to expose the melee units - if berzerkers have to spend a round out in the open after they have killed most or all of the conscripts then they will be killed. The same will happen to tac marines trying to get up close and flame them to death.

The IG gunline could be attacking your transports, OR they could be attacking the stuff you have that more directly threatens their firebase (like your own firebase).

That's why it's a game, decisions matter.

They can attack all of it. That's the problem you aren't getting. They've got undercosted choices on top of undercosted conscripts.

Undercosted or more specialized? The fact that we get super-cheap lascannon HWTs (for example) is because they vaporize more easily than a quad-las predator.

Now I know you think there's no value in being a generalist and that everyone should just be specialists, but IMHO that's one of the Marine's weaknesses: being okay at everything means you have to pay to be mediocre at whatever you're doing at the time.

It's a critical weakness. Always has been. In editions without fru-fru-la-la gimmicks marines are a marginal list. I know most of the posters on here don't remember that, or have selective memories, but that's the way it was. 8th ed is now triple downing on that weakness it seems.

Insectum7 wrote:

Xenomancers wrote:

Insectum7 wrote:

Concentrated Tactical Squads will kill them, hands down.

Concentrated anything the the level of 4-5x the points of the target will bring anything down. I can't believe people are even suggesting this.

Right? I mean... it should be obvious...

You can kill terminators with an equal amount of points in one turn via plasma scion command squads. There are no such solutions for conscripts.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Concentrated Tactical Squads will kill them, hands down.

Concentrated anything the the level of 4-5x the points of the target will bring anything down. I can't believe people are even suggesting this.

Right? I mean... it should be obvious...

 Deathypoo wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


But what if the conscripts are all FRFSRFing in rapid-fire range while simultaneously screening the guard army while also having a daisy-chain of conscripts back to the commissar who is also bubblewrapped by the conscripts so deep strikers can't get close and who is also out of Line of Sight of everything while the conscripts advance up field!

WHAT THEN

You say that like it's hard to do all those things at once. It's really not, other than the fact that whatever models are in the daisy chain aren't going to be rapid-firing.

I suddenly get the impression you've never actually played with conscripts (or even against them?) before...

... because what you assert is possible and what actually is possible are completely different things. (e.g. a daisy chain cannot simultaneously take up only a few conscripts and still manage to bubblewrap the commissar from every direction to protect him from multiple deep-striking units, while he is also out of line-of-sight of the snipers and therefore essentially glued to the terrain piece while the conscripts advance into rapid-fire range and the officer stays within 6" while also being glued to that out-of-line-of-sight terrain piece which apparently moves up with them...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Why are you guys assuming the Guard get to fire first?

They have more drops. The tanks can drive up 18", dick around (blow smoke to make the IG hit on a 5+ and the Conscripts hit on a 6+?), some will get killed, some won't, but either way the infantry disembarks 9" (or 3" if their tank is destroyed and moves 6") putting them 27" upfield. That means anything within 35" of their original deployment is in-range, and in certain deployments that literally means there is 1" between the board edge and their maximum range.

They have about a 30% chance to go first if they blow a command point on the Seize Roll, roughly. I mean, that's 30% on two die rolls, so it's more than a little vulnerable to improbable outcomes, kinda like how assuming a single die roll is going to get a result of 3.5. Honestly, I think that seeming assumption is an underlying indicator of the greater issue, but I'm not sure there's any solving that, particularly when three viable looking solutions have been suggested already, and we went back to page 1 immediately after.

 daedalus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Why are you guys assuming the Guard get to fire first?

They have more drops. The tanks can drive up 18", dick around (blow smoke to make the IG hit on a 5+ and the Conscripts hit on a 6+?), some will get killed, some won't, but either way the infantry disembarks 9" (or 3" if their tank is destroyed and moves 6") putting them 27" upfield. That means anything within 35" of their original deployment is in-range, and in certain deployments that literally means there is 1" between the board edge and their maximum range.

They have about a 30% chance to go first if they blow a command point on the Seize Roll, roughly. I mean, that's 30% on two die rolls, so it's more than a little vulnerable to improbable outcomes, kinda like how assuming a single die roll is going to get a result of 3.5. Honestly, I think that seeming assumption is an underlying indicator of the greater issue, but I'm not sure there's any solving that, particularly when three viable looking solutions have been suggested already, and we went back to page 1 immediately after.

Yeah, though that 30% cost them a command point, so it's not like it's 'free'. It cost as many points as taking two relics as Space Marines does.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Kind of like it's obvious that when you focus your best units to kill 3 point modles when you are getting blasted by heavy artillery losing 4-5x more points per turn - you auto lose the game. This should be obvious.

So Tactical Squads are your best units now?

Side note real fast as a brainstorm activity:

If I'm reading the rules right, if I infiltrate say, 30 melee scouts, I end up going second because of the advance deployment rule?

If you truly think that tac marines with flamers in transports are a good solution then I suggest that you try it in practice. They have the exact same problems that khorne berzerkers have, amplified by the fact that the khorne berzerkers are more efficient conscript killers. It might even work out, due to luck or poor positioning by the AM player.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Deathypoo wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


But what if the conscripts are all FRFSRFing in rapid-fire range while simultaneously screening the guard army while also having a daisy-chain of conscripts back to the commissar who is also bubblewrapped by the conscripts so deep strikers can't get close and who is also out of Line of Sight of everything while the conscripts advance up field!

WHAT THEN

You say that like it's hard to do all those things at once. It's really not, other than the fact that whatever models are in the daisy chain aren't going to be rapid-firing.

I suddenly get the impression you've never actually played with conscripts (or even against them?) before...

... because what you assert is possible and what actually is possible are completely different things. (e.g. a daisy chain cannot simultaneously take up only a few conscripts and still manage to bubblewrap the commissar from every direction to protect him from multiple deep-striking units, while he is also out of line-of-sight of the snipers and therefore essentially glued to the terrain piece while the conscripts advance into rapid-fire range and the officer stays within 6" while also being glued to that out-of-line-of-sight terrain piece which apparently moves up with them...

It's true that my real life examples don't include the los blocker because I don't bring snipers, but it wouldn't really hurt my normal opponent's set-up to put those officers behind a tank.

The way GW handled the Flyer Spam lists has made me want to find a creative way of discouraging people from using to many conscripts. Maybe conscripts cant hold objectives?

I feel like most people screaming against conscripts have never played with or against them yet. Ive used them now and yes they are good but i don't feel like they are the ultimate powerhouse everyone is making them out to be.

The reason i feel they are good and not broken is that they really can only do one thing at a time. People constantly point out they are broken because they can
1. screen units
2. dish out massive shots with FRFSRF
3. Not be removed from objectives
Its true that they can do all three of these things but its impossible to do all three at one time. If you are bubble wrapping your army you cannot get your units all into rapid fire range and you cannot take objectives. If you take objectives you are not bubble rapping your army and are likely out of range of the rapid fire FRFSRF. If you are maximizing shots for FRFSRF you are not bubble wrapping or taking objectives. If you are holding an objective and an opponent makes in into CC you cannot just "fallback and shoot" without giving up the objective and most of the time after eating a round of shooting and CC your unit is reduced enough to not be a real shooting threat to most units. Furthermore if you are doing anything other then a conga line wrap you will not have a commander that is 1. in range of two units 2. protected from multi charge by 2 units 3. 1-2 apply to commissar. So that increases the total cost of the unit. If you want to use one of each for both squads you give up all maneuverability and any good general will now out maneuver. Honestly any mission rolled up that isn't straight kill points where your conscripts can just sit back and bubble wrap they really aren't broken in.

TL;DR
Obviously this is my opinion but I'm curious how many people calling them broken have actually seen conscript span fielded or played against it. On paper the unit is broken but when adding in maneuverability and real gameplay the unit is strong but not broken imo

 Howscat wrote:
The way GW handled the Flyer Spam lists has made me want to find a creative way of discouraging people from using to many conscripts. Maybe conscripts cant hold objectives?

That makes little sense and still prevents you from capping the objective.

sossen wrote:
If you truly think that tac marines with flamers in transports are a good solution then I suggest that you try it in practice.

I think Tac Marines with Bolters and Frag (armed with AT weapons otherwise) and supported with more specialist equipment like TLAC Razorbacks are an adequate solution. And I will play it, thanks!

That implies that the AM player isn't tabling their opponent. Surviving until the end of the game is rare enough for most armies that an AM player with enough firepower doesn't need to worry about objectives.

Asmodios wrote:
I feel like most people screaming against conscripts have never played with or against them yet. Ive used them now and yes they are good but i don't feel like they are the ultimate powerhouse everyone is making them out to be.

The reason i feel they are good and not broken is that they really can only do one thing at a time. People constantly point out they are broken because they can
1. screen units
2. dish out massive shots with FRFSRF
3. Not be removed from objectives
Its true that they can do all three of these things but its impossible to do all three at one time. If you are bubble wrapping your army you cannot get your units all into rapid fire range and you cannot take objectives. If you take objectives you are not bubble rapping your army and are likely out of range of the rapid fire FRFSRF. If you are maximizing shots for FRFSRF you are not bubble wrapping or taking objectives. If you are holding an objective and an opponent makes in into CC you cannot just "fallback and shoot" without giving up the objective and most of the time after eating a round of shooting and CC your unit is reduced enough to not be a real shooting threat to most units. Furthermore if you are doing anything other then a conga line wrap you will not have a commander that is 1. in range of two units 2. protected from multi charge by 2 units 3. 1-2 apply to commissar. So that increases the total cost of the unit. If you want to use one of each for both squads you give up all maneuverability and any good general will now out maneuver. Honestly any mission rolled up that isn't straight kill points where your conscripts can just sit back and bubble wrap they really aren't broken in.

TL;DR
Obviously this is my opinion but I'm curious how many people calling them broken have actually seen conscript span fielded or played against it. On paper the unit is broken but when adding in maneuverability and real gameplay the unit is strong but not broken imo

I am primarily objecting to #3, combined with #2 just a bit. I'm not trying to play a gimmick list, so the bubblewrap doesn't bother me. Two conscript squads give me at least 4 dead cards in my maelstrom deck, and give them 4 auto score cards. The concripts are cheap enough that they can do this and bring all the anti-infantry and anti-tank they could ever need. The conscripts leave too many points left over for the IG to work with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

sossen wrote:
If you truly think that tac marines with flamers in transports are a good solution then I suggest that you try it in practice.

I think Tac Marines with Bolters and Frag (armed with AT weapons otherwise) and supported with more specialist equipment like TLAC Razorbacks are an adequate solution. And I will play it, thanks!

I think you are dead wrong and will find out the harsh reality. Maybe you'll end up agreeing. Although we really need GW to agree more than posters. IG has tabled me all three times I've played them. Conscripts were part of that equation, functioning as a super tarpit.

Martel732 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The tanks that the rest of the guard just smoked? Those tanks? Every pro-conscript poster here forgets that the real issue here is the other 1500 pts of stuff that has to be dealt with. Conscripts are busted IN CONTEXT more than in a vacuum. Want to keep conscripts the same? The rest of the guard gets a 25% price hike. Then it's fair again.

And every anti-conscript poster here forgets that the reason Conscripts are so good is that Infantry Squads are so trash.

I disagree. T3 5+ for 4 pts is not bad.

Sure, it's not bad...but it's 10 guys with no real survivability and that can become a mishmash of range bands for effectiveness, and the Orders that used to give some interesting effects to the whole squad("Fire on my Target!" and its Ignores Cover trait, for example) no longer exist so you want squads that are set up for specific weapons.

That's why Conscripts are so wildly effective, they synergize with FRSRF because you have a whole squad with the exact same weapon that benefits so heavily from the Order.

Martel732 wrote:

I think you are dead wrong and will find out the harsh reality.

I doubt it.

So maybe make infantry squads 20 or 25 guys, put them back to 5pts a model and call it a day. And again, T3 5+ is much better than it used to be.

Having orders and commissar effects hit 50 guys at a time is far too powerful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

I think you are dead wrong and will find out the harsh reality.

I doubt it.

I guess we'll see. Tac squads are getting cut out of my lists for intercessors as time goes on anyway.

Martel732 wrote:

I think you are dead wrong and will find out the harsh reality. Maybe you'll end up agreeing. Although we really need GW to agree more than posters. IG has tabled me all three times I've played them. Conscripts were part of that equation, functioning as a super tarpit.

Was it the same opponent in each game?

 daedalus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

I think you are dead wrong and will find out the harsh reality. Maybe you'll end up agreeing. Although we really need GW to agree more than posters. IG has tabled me all three times I've played them. Conscripts were part of that equation, functioning as a super tarpit.

Was it the same opponent in each game?

One guy twice, and then another guy. Lists were 60%ish similar. One guy had Vendetta, which was just brutal. My jumpers can hide from the conscripts, but not the Wyverns and Manticores. But I can't close on the conscripts because I can't afford to take the extra fire on top of the indirect fire tanks. It's a total gakstorm. Any tanks with anything resembling anti-infantry get lascannoned. They don't care about anti-tank guns, because they are willing to throw them away to kill my anti-infantry. Units with anti-tank can't do anything to conscripts or even 4 X IG squads.

"I am primarily objecting to #3, combined with #2 just a bit. I'm not trying to play a gimmick list, so the bubblewrap doesn't bother me. Two conscript squads give me at least 4 dead cards in my maelstrom deck, and give them 4 auto score cards. The concripts are cheap enough that they can do this and bring all the anti-infantry and anti-tank they could ever need. The conscripts leave too many points left over for the IG to work with. "
The thing with #3 is melee. Any army with a decent CC unit can get it in and you are either forced to run or they will just crush you over a few turns. This happened to me against CSM army last night. You get beat down in CC and you either have to run (giving up the objective thats the whole point) and while you are doing that the conscripts can't do there real job which is screening your good stuff. Once again they are very good but i think many of those crying broken haven't seen conscripts in practice. Id be fine with conscripts losing orders honestly though because in reality there true purpose is just being meat shields and the orders are just a useful bonus and makes your opponent have to play with half a brain and not park a unit 2' from a conscript blob

Asmodios wrote:
"I am primarily objecting to #3, combined with #2 just a bit. I'm not trying to play a gimmick list, so the bubblewrap doesn't bother me. Two conscript squads give me at least 4 dead cards in my maelstrom deck, and give them 4 auto score cards. The concripts are cheap enough that they can do this and bring all the anti-infantry and anti-tank they could ever need. The conscripts leave too many points left over for the IG to work with. "
The thing with #3 is melee. Any army with a decent CC unit can get it in and you are either forced to run or they will just crush you over a few turns. This happened to me against CSM army last night. You get beat down in CC and you either have to run (giving up the objective thats the whole point) and while you are doing that the conscripts can't do there real job which is screening your good stuff. Once again they are very good but i think many of those crying broken haven't seen conscripts in practice. Id be fine with conscripts losing orders honestly though because in reality there true purpose is just being meat shields and the orders are just a useful bonus and makes your opponent have to play with half a brain and not park a unit 2' from a conscript blob

The melee units get crippled before they can assault. Or they assault, kill 20 guys, and then get erased. IG guy can afford to lose 20 conscripts in exchange for a HTH unit all day. IG firebase is too big and they have too many wounds on the table. Hard stop. I don't know many other ways to explain this. And yes, I'm playing IG guys building the most abusive stuff they can think of. Gak happens.

"will just crush you over a few turns"

This is fine for the IG player. He is paying a 150 pt squad to buy time holding off 300+ pts. No matter what you do, it's a win-win-win for the IG.

Martel732 wrote:

 Howscat wrote:
The way GW handled the Flyer Spam lists has made me want to find a creative way of discouraging people from using to many conscripts. Maybe conscripts cant hold objectives?

That makes little sense and still prevents you from capping the objective.

It basically gives your opponents army obsec which at a tournament level is a huge boost. Sure the IG player can prevent you from scouring that point buy setting his unit on top of the objective but he is not scouring it either. From my experience at competitive tournament level games, conscripts are good but they can be dealt with. What conscripts give the guard is the ability to not worry about always having 2nd turn. The Alpha Strike is big in 8th ed. and conscripts are padding against it.

" conscripts are padding against it."

Not really. They don't provide cover for anything. They are a physical movement barrier. That's what they really do. And if you get too close, they shoot you 200 times. But that's something you volunteer for, they can't make that happen. Maybe a mobile Eldar mech list that lances/shuricannons down all the IG anti-tank might have a shot. Maybe. But nothing the marines can field really stands up. Quad las preds are expensive and fragile, and stormravens can't be taken in sufficient numbers anymore (rightfully so). Devs are inefficient. Land speeders cost a TON.