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.

okay, then, no. Just no.

download Vassal40k. Take "x" points worth of NightScythe, I'll take "x" points worth of Razorbacks. And oh God, let me take the most prevalent Space Marine variant, GK. I'll absolutely massacre you. It won't be close. I don't care if you're Eienstein, I can take any of a number of different loadouts for the Razorbacks that'll be individually cheaper than the NightScythes and individually better than the NightSycthes.

You are falling into the trap, of making a very silly unrealistic comparison, in a vacuum. This isn't how the game works, and your entire premise here is flawed.
I mean really, a Razorback Slugfest when Night Scythes is a scenario that intrinsically favors the Razorbacks. This isn't accounting for things like Dropping off units, Claiming Objectives last minute, hell the rest of each others armies. Y

This kind of completely unrealistic scenario Is beyond silly, and doesn't serve any kind of point. It's just not how the game works.

That being said, I'm going to go ahead and point out some of the mistakes you've made with your math.

Equal numbers, Nightscythe first shot:
s7 x4 * 8/9tl * 1/2 cover * 1/2 pen == 8/27 glance, 16/27 hit, round up to 1 full-on hit, ap '-', 50% shaken/stun, 33% weapon/immob, 16% kill. say 33% can't shoot back.

I don't see anything accounting for the Additional hits generated by the Tesla Rule. Also, What about Arcing?

Razorspam return fire:
ac
s7 x4 * 8/9tl agh rend eff it == more than twice as effective, less than half the models can't shoot back, they'll win. Too one-sided, try lasplas

Assault cannons are Strength 6. Autocannons are strength 7.

as/plas
s7 x2 * 8/9tl * 1/2 pen == same 8/27 glance, 16/27 hit, 33% shaken/stun, 33% weapon/immob, 33% kill.

This is assuming Rapidfire range, which is unrealistic.

Sasori wrote:That being said, I'm going to go ahead and point out some of the mistakes you've made with your math.

Yeah, not so much.

Sasori wrote:I don't see anything accounting for the Additional hits generated by the Tesla Rule. Also, What about Arcing?

Assault cannons are Strength 6. Autocannons are strength 7.

This is assuming Rapidfire range, which is unrealistic.

Tesla - dude, you've got a 16/27 chance for a *penetrating* hit, I gave you a 27/27 - back of napkin. Splash is S5. Your shooters flake on a 1/6 shaken, 1/2 stun, mine are 1/12th across the board. Think that maybe not digging into the splash/shake/stun comes out in your favor? Assault cannons are S7 if you're GK, like I said, "most common variant". Rapid fire range, okay, maybe, you'll have to get "x" NightScythes into range, the models are HUGE while mine are compact, and I can move 6" and shoot, again, okay, maybe.

After I bump my models down to the same number as yours and give you first shot, you're being sorta pissy, aren't you? Want to bet, oh, $1,000.00 on this right now and play it straight up, see how good my math is?

Didn't think so.

Here's an idea: how about simply having Transports have a rule called "Safety First" (or a much better special rule name). Vehicles with this special rule counts Destroyed - Explodes results as Destroyed - Wrecked instead. This prevents transports from becoming a death trap to whomever they are carrying, but doesn't really solve the survivability.

A way to solve the survivability, especially if the 6th Edition rumours about vehicles having Structure Points is true, is to have some vehicles be "Well Built". Vehicles that are Well Built count any Destroyed results as Damaged - Immobilized instead. This would also make Repair special rules a lot more enticing as a unit with repair that was inside the transport could simply hop out and attempt to repair it to get it back moving again. It also adds a bit of a cinematic value to transports, as the unit being transported pours out to defend the vehicle as they try to get it moving again.

Yeah, not so much.

Someone doesn't like to be wrong, Do they?

Tesla - dude, you've got a 16/27 chance for a hit, I gave you a 27/27 - back of napkin.

If you're going to bring your Mathhammer into this, then do the entire thing correctly.

Splash is S5

Which is enough to Glance.

Your shooters flake on a 1/6 shaken, 1/2 stun, mine are 1/12th across the board. Think that maybe not digging into the splash/shake/stun comes out in your favor? Assault cannons are S7 if you're GK, like I said, "most common variant".

GK Are not more common than BA/SW/SM Combined. The Most common variant would be a regular Razorback.

Rapid fire range, okay, maybe, you'll have to get "x" NightScythes into range, the models are HUGE while mine are compact, and I can move 6" and shoot, again, okay, maybe.

I can Move 12' and fire my weapons. Easy enough to stay out of rapidfire range.

After I bump my models down to the same number as yours and give you first shot, you're being sorta pissy, aren't you? Want to bet, oh, $1,000.00 on this right now and play it straight up, see how good my math is?

You're the one that sounds like they got their Ego Bruised. As I pointed out, looks like someone can't take being wrong. Which you are. Look at the way you're reacting? You get really childish when you're upset it seems. A Grown-man challenging someone on the internet, who he has never met, to a bet over a game of Toy Soldiers. Doesn't get much more pissy than that.

Plus, what would a single game prove? Anecdotal evidence like that means almost nothing, especially from a single game.


As I pointed out, in the beginning of my Post, Your entire premise is completely flawed. You can do your same silly scenario with the Venom, and I'm sure the Razorbacks would come out in top in an Army comprised entirely of both. Does that make the Venom an Uncompetitive, and overcosted unit? No, it doesn't. It's quite the opposite in fact. It just shows that these outlandish scenarios, serve no purpose.

Sasori wrote:If you're going to bring your Mathhammer into this, then do the entire thing correctly.

Lol dude, do you not know what, and I quote from the quickie maths post, "Back of the napkin quickie numbers" means? It means I'm throwing out secondary effects and rounding. Do you somehow believe that I'm not giving your Nightscythes a fair shake here? You think you're going to get a higher hit/kill probability than I allowed you? I assure you, I rounded in your favor. And this...

GK Are not more common than BA/SW/SM Combined. The Most common variant would be a regular Razorback.

I said:

Randall Turner wrote:And oh God, let me take the most prevalent Space Marine variant, GK.

Reading comprehension for the win, dude.

Sasori wrote:You're the one that sounds like they got their Ego Bruised. As I pointed out, looks like someone can't take being wrong. Which you are. Look at the way you're reacting? You get really childish when you're upset it seems. A Grown-man challenging someone on the internet, who he has never met, to a bet over a game of Toy Soldiers. Doesn't get much more pissy than that.

Plus, what would a single game prove? Anecdotal evidence like that means almost nothing, especially from a single game.

I'm calling BS on you, Sasori. I'm saying put up or shut up. (In a not-grumpy, know it's not going to happen way.) I don't care how many games we play, we both know you simply can't support your position with real life performance. I'm not upset at all. I just wanted to prove the point. Which it sounds like you're conceding, which is fine too - you should. But why say such silly stuff in the first place? You know it's not true, just admit our transports aren't as good as theirs. Why posture on the opposing side? It just makes you look not-so-smart.

ps - do you still not get that splash hits are outweighed by shaken/stun result negation? When you write, "Which is enough to glance", you know that's a -3 mod, right? Which to evaluate means we'll have to get into another level of probability analysis that's just as complex as the pen/kill calculations but largely gets negated for both sides, ie, a lot of maths work for very little impact on the final calculation? And GK have a huge advantage there [edit: negation chance], so throwing it out probably doesn't disadvantage the scenario from your point of view, *certainly* not significantly, right?

ol dude, do you not know what, and I quote from the quickie maths post, "Back of the napkin quickie numbers" means? It means I'm throwing out secondary effects and rounding. Do you somehow believe that I'm not giving your Nightscythes a fair shake here? You think you're going to get a higher hit/kill probability than I allowed you? I assure you, I rounded in your favor. And this...

In my favor or not, if you're not going to do all the math correctly, then don't do it at all. Simple.

And oh God, let me take the most prevalent Space Marine variant, GK.

So, what is your premise here. Are you saying that Rhino/Razorbacks are superior to Night scythes, are you saying that Grey Knight Rhino/Razorbacks are Superior to Night Scythes, or both are? You didn't start bringing up GK Rhino/Razorbacks until you Mathhamer post. Fortitude makes a large difference. I'll agree that Tesla Destructors are not best weapons against Fortitude Vehicles.Which is fairly obvious anyway.

I'm calling BS on you, Sasori. I'm saying put up or shut up

Internet Tough Guy Strikes. . Can't prove a point in a reasonable fashion, so you resort to kind of foolishness. Nice.

I don't care how many games we play, we both know you simply can't support your position with real life performance.

I disagree.

I'm not upset at all. I just wanted to prove the point.

Which you haven't.

Which it sounds like you're conceding, which is fine too - you should.

I'm not. You haven't proved anything.

But why say such silly stuff in the first place? You know it's not true, just admit our transports aren't as good as theirs. Why posture on the opposing side? It just makes you look not-so-smart

You are not looking at the entire picture. Your silly scenario, only addresses a small part of the game play. All you did was pit two units, which do a lot more than shoot, and have them just shoot each other. It doesn't prove anything, except a weak grasp of the game.

ps - do you still not get that splash hits are outweighed by shaken/stun result negation? When you write, "Which is enough to glance", you know that's a -3 mod, right? Which to evaluate means we'll have to get into another level of probability analysis that's just as complex as the pen/kill calculations but largely gets negated for both sides, ie, a lot of maths work for very little impact on the final calculation? And GK have a huge advantage there [edit: negation chance], so throwing it out probably doesn't disadvantage the scenario from your point of view, *certainly* not significantly, right?

Do all of the math, or none of it.

We've simply altered the results on the Vehicle Damage Table.

If a transport is wrecked, passengers must pass a morale check or they are "suppressed" (they may move their next turn but may not shoot or assault). If they pass they are free to move, shoot and assault.

If a transport explodes, passengers must pass a morale check or they are pinned. If they pass, they are still suppressed regardless of the successful morale check.

Passengers and models within the blast radius all take a S4 AP- rending hit.

Sasori wrote:

I'm calling BS on you, Sasori. I'm saying put up or shut up

Internet Tough Guy Strikes. . Can't prove a point in a reasonable fashion, so you resort to kind of foolishness. Nice.

That's the second or third time you've taken a quote out of context. You're sort of sneaky that way, aren't you? Do you think I'm being too "tough", or are you posturing again? The quote in context isn't that "tough"...

Randall Turner wrote:I'm calling BS on you, Sasori. I'm saying put up or shut up. (In a not-grumpy, know it's not going to happen way.)

This, on the other hand, sounds downright dictatorial...

Sasori wrote:Do all of the math, or none of it.

I did enough to get the picture, you do some, it's work! And for someone who brought up fire support when I was originally talking about transport/protection effects this is a turnaround...

All you did was pit two units, which do a lot more than shoot, and have them just shoot each other. It doesn't prove anything, except a weak grasp of the game.

As for this...

Sasori wrote:You are not looking at the entire picture. Your silly scenario, only addresses a small part of the game play.

Again, YOU were the one who brought up fire support, NOT me. Here's the bottom line. There are a lot more factors involved in determining unit value. And the synergy's on the SM transport's side. They make the units around them better. They can spotlight and smoke. They can provide and use cover, which is huge. You can buy them cheap. You can gear them up. You can just hold ground with them. Nightscythes on the other hand come in one expensive configuration, are faster, have effective but short-ranged armament, and have low survivability. The last is the killer, and isn't being reflected in this little Razorback shootout, because where they really suffer is in a full game context where the opponent has long range weaponry. The proof of this is that the SM transports are taken by nearly every SM list, while the Nightscythes are novelties.

ps - protip, Sasori : most readers have a clue about the survivability of AV11 flyers. This isn't news.

I'm calling BS on you, Sasori. I'm saying put up or shut up. (In a not-grumpy, know it's not going to happen way.)

Even will full context, this still makes you look like an internet tough guy. It adds nothing to the discussion at hand, and just makes you look foolish and absurd.

I did enough to get the picture, you do some, it's work! And for someone who brought up fire support when I was originally talking about transport/protection effects this is a turnaround...

Really? In my very first post, I brought up Transport effectiveness, Fire Support, Speed, just about everything about the Night Scythe. I was making a full comparison, between the two. You are the one that switched it to a Slug-fest.

Again, YOU were the one who brought up fire support, NOT me.

When did I bring up Just fire support? Of course I'm going to bring it up as ONE of my points. I've been thorough in talking about every aspect that they bring. You just choose to focus on Fire support, despite the other points about the Night Scythe I've brought up.

Here are the quotes that pertain to this. As you can see, I brought up fire support, in conjunction with my other points.

The Night Scythe has a Twin-linked Destructor, Aerial Assault, and Supersonic. It is actually the quickest transport in the game. It's also got a very large carrying capacity, at 15 models. Now, with just those rules, you can understand why it's over double the points of a Rhino. Another thing to keep mind, even though it's only speculation, is that if Vehicles start seriously harming passengers in the next edition when they get destroyed, then the Night Scythes special rule comes into play as well. This may already be factored into it's cost. Possible flyer rules as well.

Or here?

I think it's a bit hard to compare them, like that. The Necron Transports are a lot closer to Stormravens, than they are Rhinos/Razorbacks. How many points do you value the Tesla-Destructor at? How many points for being a skimmer? How many points for Living Metal? Etc etc. For a Razorback to get a comparable weapon to the Destructor (Let's say the Asscan) It has to pay 35 points, bumping it up to 75. If you end up factoring in the rest of the Night Scythe rules, it does appear to be very cost efficient.

I never just focused on just fire support.

Here's the bottom line. There are a lot more factors involved in determining unit value. And the synergy's on the SM transport's side. They make the units around them better. They can spotlight and smoke. They can provide and use cover, which is huge.
You can buy them cheap. You can gear them up. You can just hold ground with them.

I agree with all of this. Rhinos and Razorbacks provide excellent value. I've never disputed this.

Nightscythes on the other hand come in one expensive configuration, are faster, have effective but short-ranged armament, and have low survivability. The last is the killer, and isn't being reflected in this little Razorback shootout, because where they really suffer is in a full game context where the opponent has long range weaponry.

I'll agree with a portion of this. In full game context though, an enemy has a lot more to deal with, things like Solar pulses really mitigate the fragility of the Night Scythes, for instance. They are also very durable when it comes to Shaken/Stunned results

The proof of this is that the SM transports are taken by nearly every SM list, while the Nightscythes are novelties.

Of course SM transports are taken in nearly every list, they wouldn't be competitive at all, without them. I've never said they were not efficient. As I stated on the last page, You haven't really seen any form of the Scythes taken, because the model wasn't available and proxying it is completely impractical.

As a good example, JY2 has starting bringing two Scythes in his Wraith-wing list. He's a pretty high-profile player, and takes a very competitive list. I don't think he thinks they are a "Novelty"

ps - protip, Sasori : most readers have a clue about the survivability of AV11 flyers. This isn't news.

Hey Randall, "Protip" Only children or immature adults use internet memes in this fashion. Grow up, you can get a point across without resorting to that kind of rubbish.

You simply cannot beat Sasori in a Necron Off, he simply is the best there is.

Sasori wrote:Of course SM transports are taken in nearly every list, they wouldn't be competitive at all, without them. I've never said they were not efficient. As I stated on the last page, You haven't really seen any form of the Scythes taken, because the model wasn't available and proxying it is completely impractical.

As a good example, JY2 has starting bringing two Scythes in his Wraith-wing list. He's a pretty high-profile player, and takes a very competitive list. I don't think he thinks they are a "Novelty"

Oh, proxying it's not that big a deal aside from quality, I have a Doomscythe sitting here on my desk and I'm not exactly the Michelangelo of modeling. Not sure about the acceptance criteria for GT's.

I saw J2y's battle report against (?? Dark Eldar) and yes, he usually makes sense - but I also think he experiments and he's getting a little bored, we don't have much variety in our codex. I have a hard time following those battle reports in terms of evaluating unit performance. Regardless, J2y's whole philosophy is going to allow marginal units to survive if he's ahead of the power curve. As long as he's winning, and keeps the Nighscythes flat-out, his opponent won't have time to target them. That doesn't make them good. When his opponent can spare some firepower they'll drop like pigeons. I sat down and took a hard look at these guys - as a final add to a list, post HQ/FA/HS, they are useful but not as a backbone unit, only on a par with the rest of our marginal units. If 6th adds any sort of slot interchangeability I don't think we'll be seeing them. (well, unless they also add some flyer buff.)

Hey Randall, "Protip" Only children or immature adults use internet memes in this fashion. Grow up, you can get a point across without resorting to that kind of rubbish.

C'mon Sasori. You're at least as condescending as I am. Here's another protip - if you were friendly, I'd be friendly. Honestly, you're kind of goofy thinking you're going to get a positive result from telling someone as old as your pop to grow up.

C'mon Sasori. You're at least as condescending as I am. Here's another protip - if you were friendly, I'd be friendly. Honestly, you're kind of goofy thinking you're going to get a positive result from telling someone as old as your pop to grow up.

I was being friendly, until you started in with the silly garbage like the bet. Perhaps my tone doesn't translate well over the internet, but I'm not intentionally being rude. Well, I wasn't at least, till a certain point.

Irregardless of your age, that doesn't change the fact that you've written some very immature responses in this thread. They served no point in the discussion except to antagonize me.

Randall Turner wrote: ...we don't have much variety in our codex...

I really hope you never play another army, because if you think Necrons lack variety as an army, you wouldn't be able to build a list with most others.

Well, I have a California speaking style and it translates to text. I also don't want to make the effort to be formal, this is recreation for me. In this discussion you jumped in on a marginally off-topic tangent.

Modifying the effect of a transport explosion on its passengers as a means of balancing transport effectiveness isn't actually related to a transport's "fixed" value. It's only related to the "value added" by transporting the passenger. So when we started down the path of comparing factions' transports I was already grumpy at an irrelevancy.

You understand that? This thread is about how many passengers to kill when their transport explodes. Or whether they should be pinned, etc. It's to discourage transport spam a bit by reducing the benefit passengers get from transports. As we went further and further down the path of how good Space Marine vs. Necron transports were, I'm getting grumpier and grumpier. I didn't even want to talk about it, but I really didn't want to put up with someone telling me their excellent transports weren't as good as my mediocre ones, so it was okay covering the table with armored boxes.

Now, you and I eventually got into some issues that were probably worth dealing with - ie, do Space Marines need their transports to be successful at all? (And note that when I say Space Marines, I mean Space Wolves, Grey Knights and Blood/Dark Angels, ie, the opponents I'm familiar with.) But I was already not happy with you going down what I felt was a digression, then taking what I feel is an unsupportable position vis a vis transport quality. Basically, I wanted that tangent to stop.

So betting - the bet's nothing. There won't be any money changing hands unless you want it to, I don't care, I don't have money issues any more. But the gathering of empirical data to prove or disprove a theory, the scientific method, now that's how you resolve disagreements! Doesn't have to be confrontational. Just has to be some process of measurement applied. Frankly I thought it was so completely obvious that SM transports as fire support were vastly superior that you'd just drop it. Y'know, after taking a closer look they're closer than I thought. I still don't think it's worth playing out, but it might be worth precisely mathhammering a SW razorback, with some reasonably medium loadout, against some range of hard and soft targets. (Which by the way is a LOT of WORK, dammit!)

Anyway. I'm going back to saying "dude" now. And I think you're head's completely up your ass on Nightscythes, dude! But that's really not what this thread is supposed to be about, perhaps we should chat a bit about SM ability to win without transports.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Shas'o_Longshot wrote:

Randall Turner wrote: ...we don't have much variety in our codex...

I really hope you never play another army, because if you think Necrons lack variety as an army, you wouldn't be able to build a list with most others.

I played IG before this, and Orks back in the hop-splat field gun days.

We have fewer units than it seems, because a good handful of them aren't deployable in even a semi-serious list. You have to be in goof around mode to get much variety, and I mean real goof around mode. Edit: and you have to play certain ways, which is important too. I get tired of night fighting and rushing up to the opponent. Edit2: and GK have more varieties of Razorbacks than we have armored vehicles total. We don't get *options* on our stuff. (Except for those weird bike thingies.)

Just sayin', Tau and SoB have one competitive build each. Tyranids can go in a few directions, as can most armies, but there's pretty much two ways of playing Eldar. Off the top of my head, Necron lists can be Scarab Farm, Imotehk and an entourage of ,solar flares, C'tan Worldscape, Zandrekh backed up by Oberon teleporting around, Death and Despair, triple Barge... That's more competent lists than Tau, SoB and Eldar have combined. You can make an entire list based around each of these, not to mention the idea that you could make a balanced list without any of them and still do ok.

Sure, you're hardly Space Wolves competitive, but claiming you have little variety is clearly false. Your individual units might have few options, but the combinations you can take, and still have a solid list, are numerous. The only choice Tau players get is "Pathfinders or Piranhas", and the thing SoB have to decide is whether they want to bring Dominions or Seraphim.

I'm of the opinion that Mat Ward did a great job of making a balanced codex with loads of good choices.

Also: complaining the army with the most ability to rearrange themselves, teleport and deep strike in enemies turns has few vehicles is a bit like complaining my Tau are terrible at close combat. It's not that one is better than the other, but the army is clearly designed to do one of them. Though, at least you HAVE the option to go the other way...

Well, you're not wrong as far as it goes, but there are some "hidden" limitations to variety, revolving around "you could make a balanced list without any of them" doesn't mean we can make an effective list if we go too far off the conservative path. I agree, however, that Matt Ward did a great job with this codex - I think it's the best one available, it's effective in completely new ways. I'm not sure you realize just how limited our options are, though - our troop FAC has one option *total*, our transports have one option *total* (and that one's swapping out gun types on a CCB that hardly ever shoots. ) That means our entire page 91, troops and dedicated transports, has two options *total*. pp92, Elites, two options *total* for praetorians and lychguard, then the C'Tan which is totally configurable. But you get the idea - when you buy a Necron unit it's usually a set thing. No fussing over which force weapon to pick.

Some things are "musts". Night fight isn't an option - either Imotekh or more often Solar Pulses are an auto-include, because we can't fight long range. Then we've got eight slots for HQ, FA and HS units that hold the meaningful core of our combat power. There are different ways to put those eight slots together, and they're all darn good so we do have a variety of army "types", you're right about that. I've shuffled those eight slots around in my head often enough that perhaps I'm getting jaded.

Now, realizing you're Tau I'm a little reluctant to say the next part, but - a lot of those teleport, deep strike and "interesting" options are with units a bit less than top flight, or very narrowly specialized. But, okay, i didn't really have your codex in mind when I made the original statement, you have my sympathies. Hang in there, I'm sure you're right towards the top of the list for a codex update.

Well, in response to that, I'd say that's what the Royal Court are for... But yeah, in every codex there's gonna be choices that don't measure up, and I should probably have picked up that you want effective over balanced (we're clear on that distinction, I think?), although I think Necrons as a army sort of can't justify individual upgrades (they have always been a uniform front, opposed to the divergent Tyranids or the Imperium... argument from fluff, not balance)

In short, perhaps, as a Tau player, my own experience has coloured what a codex needs to be

And it's cool, man... We can't be much longer... *wipes away tear*

Having said all this, my own experience in a heavily meched meta is limited, so I shall return to skulk around the Background forums till the summer holidays and I can play some games...

Sasori wrote:

C'mon Sasori. You're at least as condescending as I am. Here's another protip - if you were friendly, I'd be friendly. Honestly, you're kind of goofy thinking you're going to get a positive result from telling someone as old as your pop to grow up.

I was being friendly, until you started in with the silly garbage like the bet. Perhaps my tone doesn't translate well over the internet, but I'm not intentionally being rude. Well, I wasn't at least, till a certain point.

Irregardless of your age, that doesn't change the fact that you've written some very immature responses in this thread. They served no point in the discussion except to antagonize me.

Just to hop in, it doesn't. To a neutral observer, you sound rational and make valid points, backing them up with hard facts. Randall going ad hominem so soon is sad to see because the discussion itself, overpowered transporters, is really interesting.

Ghost Arks are overcosted imo. They cost a lot of points and don't have enough to back it up. In any normal list, they are a huge points sink. Having a list built around them, though, can even prove to be fun and efficient. Warrior Phalanx, backed up by 1-2 Ghost Arks, 1 with the Royal Court inside, is nothing to sneeze at and while being vulnerable to melee, keep in mind that your enemy will be spammed with bolter fire as soon as he comes near your AV 13 (!) transports.

But overall, yes, they are far too expensive. Pity, as the model looks awesome. Even worse considering the fact that the other unit you can build out of the kit is a Doomsday Ark. Yuk.

Sasori is right about Night Sycthes. They are absolutely fantastic. They move extremely fast and have a very potent gun. While they obviously suffer from a terrible AV of only 11, they still got enough special rules to back it up and moving flat out and then only being hit on a 6 is worth something as well. Still, AV 12 wouldn't have hurt them. At least they aren't open-topped.

Even Pretorians, but especially Lych Guard heavily profit from Nightscythes as the latter will just get mowed down on the open field, yet in a transport, they can get in close and start killing stuff. Competitive? I don't think so. But that's the problem of 5th's metagame, not the codex.

And last but not least: if the transporter gets destroyed, the passengers aren't harmed. Not even a scrath as they simply get put in reserves.