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.

 Ailaros wrote:

Vaktathi wrote: there's many Deep Striking/outflanking/fast moving heavy flamer options or armies that can take them in sufficient quantity that it's impossible to stop them all.

Well, and even if you can't completely stop them (though you sure can cut down on the damage with proper displacement), you sort of don't need to. When you straddle the line between marines and hordes, you need to straddle the line with your thinking about them as well. In this case, you've got to be able to draw from the "they're cheaper than marines, thus more expendable" nature of horde armies here.

And here's the issue, because they're not always cheaper than marines, or at least not proportionately so.

A nightmare (read: avoidable) scenario of a helldrake nailing 6 longfangs is a disaster. A hellhound killing 6 firewarriors or scouts is much less so.

Yes, but that's also comparing a squad of MEQ's upgraded with heavy weapons to the cheapest 4+sv infantry unit in the game. The Heldrake also isn't much more expensive than the long fangs, while you can get similar firepower to the hellhound put onto targets for far fewer points, even if it may require a bit more effeort, often heavy flamer platforms are very cheap and/or maneuverable/DS/etc. a 60pt Land Speeder with a heavy flamer can do some horrific things to a squad of Fire Warriors or Dire Avengers or Carapace vets and be cheaper than the unit its annihilating, while to kill that MEQ unit there isn't an option to kill it as efficiently with a cheaper unit (even at the cost of being more fiddly like the hull heavy flamer vs hellhound). It just doesn't exist.

Well, and that's part of my point. You never see Sv5+ out in the open because it's complete suicide. The advantage of Sv4+ is that you CAN go out in the open, because it isn't.

Right, and that's a point I granted, though, that said, even for 4+sv units, depending on the army you're facing, it can be just as suicidal.

Plus, there are Ap6 and Ap- weapons out there wherein the Sv4+ is still 50% better.

Yes but that 50% increase is only resulting in 16.7% more wounds getting through. Is that nice? Of course. I'm not saying a 4+sv is worthless and will never have any utility over a 5+sv. The point I'm making is that is it worth the 40% increase in unit cost? Probably not.

And for how easy it is to say "look how much Ap4 there is", it's way easier to say "look how much Ap5 there is".

Yes there's quite a lot of AP5, but given how much of that has to be engaged and how 5+sv units often function, the AP5 weapons are doing a majority of the killing in most cases. I don't lose most of my guardsmen to bolters when I'm playing a MEQ army, I lose most of them to CC and heavy weapons fire.

Yes, there are times when a cover save is an equalizer, regardless of Sv, but even ignoring for a moment the above argument of not NEEDING cover is better than needing cover, that argument then cuts both ways. After all, what's the point of having Sv3+ armor when both marines and guardsmen get a 2+ cover save behind an aegis, but a guardsmen gets it for a fraction of the price?

The 3+sv's are ignored a lot less than the 4+sv's and aren't paying the same premium for that save as the 4+sv units are for their enhanced save over the 5+. Those guardsmen also aren't shooting if they're doing that, they're having to give up way more to achieve that save, but relative to the 4+ armor all they've got to do is get a couple toes behind something and suddenly they've equalized their utility.

You're taking my argument to the point of absurdity here and not looking at the relative proportional differences I'm trying to point out. I'm saying that, due to the huge gap between what's AP3 (usually AT guns and Ordnance weapons) and what's AP4 (a huge swath of common anti-infantry weapons like heavy bolters, assault cannons, heavy flamers, whirlwinds, missile pods, autocannons, etc), coupled with the relatively small proportional cost difference between most 4+sv and most 3+sv units relative to the much larger proportional gap in cost between 5+sv and 4+sv units, that the 4+sv is generally overcosted and/or undercapable.

I understand your argument and definitely agree for the 5ed dexs. The new Eldar and Tau dexs seem to be reasonably balanced but are hard to judge due to extra abilities, etc.

The most striking example to mind mind are carapace vets in the IG dex. They pay so much for that ability that it starts putting them in line with SM.

You can also look at it this way, are weapons with AP4 valued for it? These weapons are HB, HF, and AC which are seen all over the place yet HB is considered bad, HF is considered anti-horde (ie 5+ models), and AC is light tank. What weapon is taken for its ability to kill 4+ save units?

DA assault marines, 17 points per model. T4 3+ ld8 ATSKNF, jump infantry.

DE scourges, 22 points per model. T3 4+/6++ ld8, jump infantry.

What special rule am I paying scourges for that outperform what DA assault marines have?

You pay the price for being a dirty xenos.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You pay the price for being a dirty xenos.

... But we're so good at partying...

Baronyu wrote:
DA assault marines, 17 points per model. T4 3+ ld8 ATSKNF, jump infantry.

DE scourges, 22 points per model. T3 4+/6++ ld8, jump infantry.

What special rule am I paying scourges for that outperform what DA assault marines have?

Night vision and poison weapons. Don't you have drugs and S4 weapons as well?

 Melissia wrote:
With a markerlight boost (assuming it can be markerlighted?) that sounds brutal.

They can and typically are(Except for 12 of those shots, in which i negated to need for them with the Spectrum Suite and C&C node)

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Baronyu wrote:
DA assault marines, 17 points per model. T4 3+ ld8 ATSKNF, jump infantry.

DE scourges, 22 points per model. T3 4+/6++ ld8, jump infantry.

What special rule am I paying scourges for that outperform what DA assault marines have?

Night vision and poison weapons. Don't you have drugs and S4 weapons as well?

True but the DA have stubborn and ATSKNF and str 4 base

Scourges are overcosted a bit, but you forget the special weapons they can also take, like haywire blasters.

Thinking of the Stormtroopers or Grenadiers there right?

With your first line about exhorbitant prices for AP 3 out of AT/Ordnance stuff and the general post.

A few months ago, I would've agreed without hesitation, but now? Eh we do have Grenadiers for 12 pts, that's cheaper than any MQ.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Thinking of the Stormtroopers or Grenadiers there right?

With your first line about exhorbitant prices for AP 3 out of AT/Ordnance stuff and the general post.

A few months ago, I would've agreed without hesitation, but now? Eh we do have Grenadiers for 12 pts, that's cheaper than any MQ.

12 points in only 2 points cheaper than a DA space marine

 EmilCrane wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Baronyu wrote:
DA assault marines, 17 points per model. T4 3+ ld8 ATSKNF, jump infantry.

DE scourges, 22 points per model. T3 4+/6++ ld8, jump infantry.

What special rule am I paying scourges for that outperform what DA assault marines have?

Night vision and poison weapons. Don't you have drugs and S4 weapons as well?

True but the DA have stubborn and ATSKNF and str 4 base

Ai, but the base scourge weapon (shard carbine, I believe?) is much nastier than the Assault Marines' bolt pistol and sword.

What is it, an Assault 3 poison weapon, that hits on 3s? In a squad of 5 that's 15 poison shots at max range, and they can charge after and strike at I5. That's handy.

 EmilCrane wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Thinking of the Stormtroopers or Grenadiers there right?

With your first line about exhorbitant prices for AP 3 out of AT/Ordnance stuff and the general post.

A few months ago, I would've agreed without hesitation, but now? Eh we do have Grenadiers for 12 pts, that's cheaper than any MQ.

12 points in only 2 points cheaper than a DA space marine

Yes but they're a 4+ Save AP 3 weapon and ignore morale test when it comes to shooting

 Bobthehero wrote:

Yes but they're a 4+ Save AP 3 weapon and ignore morale test when it comes to shooting

True, its getting better, storm troopers are 16 points a model, aren't Death Korps, and in exchange get a pistol and spec ops, Grenadiers are a much better deal IMHO

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Baronyu wrote:
DA assault marines, 17 points per model. T4 3+ ld8 ATSKNF, jump infantry.

DE scourges, 22 points per model. T3 4+/6++ ld8, jump infantry.

What special rule am I paying scourges for that outperform what DA assault marines have?

Night vision and poison weapons. Don't you have drugs and S4 weapons as well?

True but the DA have stubborn and ATSKNF and str 4 base

Ai, but the base scourge weapon (shard carbine, I believe?) is much nastier than the Assault Marines' bolt pistol and sword.

What is it, an Assault 3 poison weapon, that hits on 3s? In a squad of 5 that's 15 poison shots at max range, and they can charge after and strike at I5. That's handy.

Assault 2. Poisoned is a bit situational, I'd say, against T4, it's basically like a hypothetical unit of jump tactical marines without upgrade, T3, worse, T5+ is where poisoned really make a difference, but then DE have much better options for poisoned shooting than to pay that much for a couple of dudes with wings. Also no drugs on scourges.

I think it's a bit unfair to compare shooting on a shooting unit to an assault unit, could also say scourges can't charge into terrain, doesn't carry 2 CCW, and even though they strike at higher initiative, those low number of S3 AP- attacks aren't gonna do anything, but we could look at what each unit brings to their respective army instead?

Scourges, as hotsauceman1 said, allow for some special weapons that only them and one other unit can take, but HWB is only an average AT weapon(average 1 glance per turn? 2 if you're lucky, assuming a minimal unit of 5) and terrible AI weapon, also taking HWB on them increases their cost by a bit, not improving their durability, competing with reavers and beast pack for the slot, etc etc... What I'm saying is that scourges are quite terrible.

Now assault marines... Well, I guess that depends on which eh... chapter? But I don't play them, so I don't know how good they really are... But they do provide an unique function for the army, power armour jump infantry.

EDIT: Shardcarbines are indeed assault 3... Boy, it's been so long since I used an unit that uses that...

Why not compare the actual codices instead? SM, IG and DE will get new codices this year or early next year.
For Eldar and Tau there is no right to complain about this - at least in my mind. Not that their codices are over the top but they are pretty strong yet seem to be balanced.
Besides all that from my experience AP is not worth too much but maybe I am biased because I played orks for too long. But no matter how good your armour is, nuff dakka will bring your boyz down. That counts for SV3 as well as SV4. Where I really like to have SV3 is in cc because there are not too many things with AP3 or better which strike on I.

just my two cents feel free to enlighten me

 EmilCrane wrote:
12 points in only 2 points cheaper than a DA space marine

I can understand complaints about 4+ in comparison to 5+, but I don't understand why you guys keep bringing up 3+ as a comparison.

NOBODY takes allies just to access MEQ troops. If DA are so great, why don't you take DA allies to get some of those awesome tactical marines?

Vaktathi wrote:The 3+sv's are ignored a lot less than the 4+sv's and aren't paying the same premium for that save as the 4+sv units are for their enhanced save over the 5+.

Except for two things.

Firstly, the ability to ignore armor saves isn't the only thing that's important. What you're saying only really makes sense in a world where lasguns can't kill terminators. By only looking at Ap vs. Sv you're missing the nuance. Yes, you have to pay more for Sv4+ than Sv5+, but that's because it gets to ignore the Ap of various weapons, while at the same time you don't have to pay much more for Sv3+ because space marines can still fail armor saves against any weapon.

The fact that you have to pay a big price hike for the switch from Sv5+ to Sv4+ is indicative of just how many Ap5 weapons there are compared to Ap4. Meanwhile, the price hike from Sv4+ to Sv3+ is small because there just aren't that many Ap3 weapons out there, relative to Ap4. On the other hand, against things which you get to make saves against, the jump to Sv4+ is 50% better than Sv5+ while the jump from Sv3+ is only 33% better than Sv4+. That jump SHOULD cost less.

It's also the reason why terminators aren't that much more expensive than marines, because this effect is even more pronounced. If you took a regular CSM and gave him a combi-bolter and a power weapon, he'd cost 28 points, and terminators get that for 31, but they also get a 2+, and a 5++ and +1A, and deepstrike, and access to a bunch of other stuff. Shows you just how little the jump to Sv3+ to Sv2+ matters, I suppose.

As such, what you're seeing is the jump from 5+ to 4+ being expensive, because it's useful, the jump from 4+ to 3+ being less so, because it's less so, and the jump from 3+ to 2+ being practically free, because there's not that much relative improvement going on.

Secondly, as everyone else has been mentioning, you can't JUST compare the Svs. Comparing a firewarrior to a marine just on armor doesn't make sense when they're otherwise not equal. You also have to control for the fact that the pulse rifle is better than a bolter, and in an army that has markerlights. As mentioned, stormtroopers are as expensive as marines, but gain deepstrike, infiltrate, Ap3, etc. It would only make sense to complain about how much that stormtroopers have to pay for their armor if that was the only thing that differentiated them from marines.

Isn't the big difference between Tac Marines and IG Stormtroopers the fact that the IG Stormtroopers get an armour save against bolters, but the Tac Marines don't get an armour save against hot-shot lasguns?

As to the worst value power armour unit in the game, I'd say Inquisitorial Henchmen, but that's subjective opinion. I largely agree with the fact that 4+ is poorly costed relative to 3+, but I do think the pricing has more to do with relative abundance of AV5 weaponry than anything else.

Mythal wrote:
Isn't the big difference between Tac Marines and IG Stormtroopers the fact that the IG Stormtroopers get an armour save against bolters, but the Tac Marines don't get an armour save against hot-shot lasguns?

If you look at the math, they lower S of the Hotshot Lasgun relative to the lower save rate of the 4+sv and lower T of the ST's means they merely trade wounds at an equal rate assuming both are in the open and at 9" or under. If cover comes into play or ranges exceed that, the Tac marines win out even with the AP3. There's a huge premium put on AP3 that very often leads to units sporting AP3 to be costed so high that they often are worse for it. IG Stormtroopers aren't the only example, CSM Thousand Sons, Inquisitorial Henchmen taking Hotshot Lasguns, and until recently Eldar Dark Reapers were in the same boat.

Ailaros wrote:
Except for two things.

Firstly, the ability to ignore armor saves isn't the only thing that's important. What you're saying only really makes sense in a world where lasguns can't kill terminators. By only looking at Ap vs. Sv you're missing the nuance. Yes, you have to pay more for Sv4+ than Sv5+, but that's because it gets to ignore the Ap of various weapons, while at the same time you don't have to pay much more for Sv3+ because space marines can still fail armor saves against any weapon.

So, the 4+sv has to pay more because it gets to ignore the AP of various weapons, but the 3+sv, because it's not invincible, doesn't have to pay the premium, despite significantly fewer weapons (typically with fewer shots as well) sporting AP3 than AP4? That makes no sense.

The fact that you have to pay a big price hike for the switch from Sv5+ to Sv4+ is indicative of just how many Ap5 weapons there are compared to Ap4. Meanwhile, the price hike from Sv4+ to Sv3+ is small because there just aren't that many Ap3 weapons out there, relative to Ap4.

Two things, First, you're making one point for me, stating that yes, AP3 is rare relative to AP4 and thus there's a rather odd gap (in fact AP3 is the rarest AP in the game, there are more AP2 weapons than AP3 weapons). The other...why on earth should that make the 3+sv cheaper?

On the other hand, against things which you get to make saves against, the jump to Sv4+ is 50% better than Sv5+ while the jump from Sv3+ is only 33% better than Sv4+. That jump SHOULD cost less.

And against the many common AP4 weapons the survivability of a 3+sv unit is increased by 300%, what's you're point? There's a ton of AP4 weapons out there as well, often that either ignore cover or have long ranges and typically either are template/blast weapons or have multiple shots, while most AP3 weapons are single shot barring a couple exceptions with a few limited blast weapons and, barring the heldrake, a very limited number of template weapons.

There's a reason people typically drool at AP3 and "meh" at AP4, because it's relatively rare while AP4 is much more common and widely available.

It's also the reason why terminators aren't that much more expensive than marines, because this effect is even more pronounced. If you took a regular CSM and gave him a combi-bolter and a power weapon, he'd cost 28 points, and terminators get that for 31, but they also get a 2+, and a 5++ and +1A, and deepstrike, and access to a bunch of other stuff. Shows you just how little the jump to Sv3+ to Sv2+ matters, I suppose.

Actually with just the combi-bolter and power weapon he'd be 31 (using the pts available in the CSM codex), however, is it the armor save here that's being discounted, or the other parts you're looking at? Straight from that, we can't tell (the CSM codex doesn't have a 2+sv by itself available as an upgrade). However looking at the DA codex where it is available by itself and was the next closest release to the CSM book, it's a 20pt upgrade.

Really, those costs however are for Characters, not for squad members. A Lord Commissar for example pays 10pts for Carapace where a CCS pays 20 for for 5 men and a Veteran squad pays 30 for 10 men, why are we judging what a W1 squad member should pay by what Characters pay for them? I think there's an issue looking at character pricing for such comparisons.

Secondly, as everyone else has been mentioning, you can't JUST compare the Svs. Comparing a firewarrior to a marine just on armor doesn't make sense when they're otherwise not equal. You also have to control for the fact that the pulse rifle is better than a bolter, and in an army that has markerlights. As mentioned, stormtroopers are as expensive as marines, but gain deepstrike, infiltrate, Ap3, etc. It would only make sense to complain about how much that stormtroopers have to pay for their armor if that was the only thing that differentiated them from marines.

There's a reason I mentioned a range of units, not just Firewarriors and Stormtroopers. I've also fairly clearly explained the issues with ST's and how, at their absolute best and in optimal conditions, it merely puts them on par with MEQ units in a rapid fire shooting war in terms of casualty trading assuming just T4 3+sv w/bolters vs T3 4+sv w/Hot Shot lasguns, and in all other conditions (longer ranges, charges, CC, etc) the ST's are at a marked disadvantage. Either way, this isn't about Stormtroopers, or about one unit in particular, but about the general state of the 4+sv.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Mythal wrote:
Isn't the big difference between Tac Marines and IG Stormtroopers the fact that the IG Stormtroopers get an armour save against bolters, but the Tac Marines don't get an armour save against hot-shot lasguns?

If you look at the math, they lower S of the Hotshot Lasgun relative to the lower save rate of the 4+sv and lower T of the ST's means they merely trade wounds at an equal rate assuming both are in the open and at 9" or under. If cover comes into play or ranges exceed that, the Tac marines win out even with the AP3. There's a huge premium put on AP3 that very often leads to units sporting AP3 to be costed so high that they often are worse for it.

That's a good point. Power swords seem poorly costed vs. power mauls, just because they bypass power armour. At the same time, given the stupid amounts of AP2 that new codices bring to the table, 3+ isn't as useful as it used to be.

Baronyu wrote:

Now assault marines... Well, I guess that depends on which eh... chapter? But I don't play them, so I don't know how good they really are... But they do provide an unique function for the army, power armour jump infantry.

The only Chapter that I've ever seen include Assault Marines in a competetive min-max list is Blood Angels, and theirs are better than everyone else. Assault Marines are utter garbage.

Anyone who has ever fielded 'ard boyz knows how "awesome" 4+ armor is compared to 6+ t-shirt saves. Against incomming fire, it pretty much does nothing at all, for a lot of points.

Most anti-infantry weaponry ignores that save anyways and comes with a decent amount of shots per point spent. In addition, very few large blasts have an AP as low as 5. You can pretty much have a look at any random list and find enough firepower to blow 20 T4 4+ models right off the table, without the creator of that list spending a single thought on it.

I think the AP system works rather well, and in most cases the upgrade cost to improve a units' save is quite reasonably priced.

I view each AP value somewhat differently though (with each category including the preceding):

6+ is protection vs normal melee attacks
5+ is protection from light shooting (also a big jump by virtue of being twice as effective)
4+ is protection from normal firearms (a big jump in number of enemy weapons impacted)
3+ is protection from heavy Anti personnel weapons (another good jump as now most effective guns have few shots)
2+ is protection from most things.

Each jump tends to add loads of opportunities to make the save in question, and/or significantly decrease the number of shots which would ignore it.

The big problem I have is that that jump from the 4+ to the 3+ is rather huge (because you're basically going from anti-infantry weapons to anti-tank weapons) while most 4+sv units aren't much cheaper (or aren't cheaper at all) relative to to their 3+sv counterparts, while the relative gap between the 4+sv unit cost and 5+sv unit cost is significantly higher for less benefit.

Baronyu wrote:
DA assault marines, 17 points per model. T4 3+ ld8 ATSKNF, jump infantry.

DE scourges, 22 points per model. T3 4+/6++ ld8, jump infantry.

What special rule am I paying scourges for that outperform what DA assault marines have?

DA assault marines, 17 points per model. T4 3+ ld8 ATSKNF, jump infantry.
DE Hellions, 16points per model. T3, 5+ ld8 jump infantry


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
The big problem I have is that that jump from the 4+ to the 3+ is rather huge (because you're basically going from anti-infantry weapons to anti-tank weapons) while most 4+sv units aren't much cheaper (or aren't cheaper at all) relative to to their 3+sv counterparts, while the relative gap between the 4+sv unit cost and 5+sv unit cost is significantly higher for less benefit.

The problem, like most things in the game is the Pro-Marine Bios. Marines get a ton of stuff for basically nothing. 3+ armor being one of them.

Hm...would I are take 10 Dire Avengers or 10 DA Marines...

I think the Avengers have a leg up here. Effective 24" range with 2 shots, bladestorm...and then battle focus into hiding or out of the enemy's effective rapid fire range.

You can't look at points cost and save alone.

Otherwise Hive Tyrants are way overcosted and I demand they be cheaper!

 ductvader wrote:
Hm...would I are take 10 Dire Avengers or 10 DA Marines...

I think the Avengers have a leg up here. Effective 24" range with 2 shots, bladestorm...and then battle focus into hiding or out of the enemy's effective rapid fire range.

The DA marines have more deployment options, and if they make it into 12" range (not impossible) they'll outshoot the Dire Avengers, and they'll certainly outfight them in close combat, while the heavy weapon will allow them to engage not only a larger variety of targets but also targets at ranges beyond which the Dire Avengers can respond.

The only situation in which the DA's are on any sort of upper-footing is between 12< and >24" at closer or longer ranges (or against tanks), and against a much larger number of common heavy weapons, the Marines are better off.

Exergy wrote:]

The problem, like most things in the game is the Pro-Marine Bios. Marines get a ton of stuff for basically nothing. 3+ armor being one of them.

Personally I'm thinking the issue is that AP3 is generally treated much the same as AP2, largely present only on ant-tank weaponry, while AP4 is generally handed out quite liberally. It feels like there's a deliberate avoidance of AP3 weaponry, so that we end up with things like S10 multi-shot ordnance barrage weapons, quad shot S8 cannon, and gigantic bio-artillery on 2+sv monsters, all of which can wreak havoc on battle tanks, but won't penetrate Power Armor.

 Melissia wrote:

 EmbracetheChaos wrote:
4th edition D&D was the first major overhaul I can think of (changing how the game worked to better balance classes and races) and it was *terrible*.

Actually, I'd say it was pretty good. Just too hack-n-slashy for my taste.

As for the difference between 4 and 3... yeah, I can see where you're coming from. But I hav to ask, how many facitons actually HAVE 4+ by default, IE before upgrades?

Necrons, Tau, Eldar (so long as they are aspect warriors), and Scout marine armies (what few of them exist).

All I can say it don't waste the points on 4+ armor. Though I have found that Nob Bikkers in CC will use their 4+ armor save a heck of a lot, But there are lots of times when only their Cybork and FNP are used. Against things that ignore cover, I get to use the 4+ armor instead of the 4+ cover.
I don't think they need to overhaul the system, I just think you need to decide if the points you are spending on 4+ armor is worth it, because it does serve a purpose, obviously not enough of one for you.