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.

Martel732 wrote:
"Is the Riptides Chassis balanced for cost? Compare cost vs Dreadknight or Tyrannofex. "

I think the Riptide chassis is more valuable than the Dreadknight chassis because of its job description. As I think that I have stated. The Tyrannofex, I'm not as sure about.

"Is the HBC Riptide balanced?"

A little undercosted I think, given how hard it is to kill at HBC range, but it's close, imo.

"Is the IA upgrade appropriately costed? Compare damage vs cost to LRBT, Souldgeinder, etc per point. "

LRBT and Souldgrinder will win on a per point basis, but which one will get more shots over the course of a game? Being a vehicle is such a curse compared to an MC in this game, that this comparison is almost invalid to me. I don't care about plegm because I can hurt the soul grinder and prevent it from firing with a single "shaken" result. Given the Riptide chassis, I'd say the IA is considerably undercosted.

"Are the support system costs balanced? "

I don't know them off the top of my head. I assume Tetras are cheap because I see them constantly in large numbers.

"There is no way Tau kill everything you put in front of them every turn, it's a gross exaggeration."

If using drop pods, I would agree. But I don't use many drop pods because I don't think they are a good TAC choice for BA. But BA straight up lose the board positioning game against Tau. There is practically no chance I can get across the board against them in Rhinos and using jump packs. Too many IA shots and missile pod shots coming my way.

And you dismiss my argument about a 165pt, slightly slower DK that can shoot on par with a Riptide. Job description is moot,my he chassis pricing is what matters,mesoecially when they are similar units. All three can be long range shooters and are T6 2+.

HBC Riptide is undercosted? Then why wasn't it being used more often? Why in almost every Tau thread for years will people tell you t hey are worthless and any Riptide without IA was purposefully handicapping yourself? When the Nova has to be used the Riotide Chassis is quite balanced. You don't believe me, and have zero experience to base your statement on. As you've said, you've never seen the unit on the table. And Im telling you it's because it's balanced, and people only fielded the unbalanced Ia option in most cases.


Grinder and LRBT, there are many times they'll be shooting all game, especially when the Gringer is using the undercosted Nurgle upgrade for a 2+ cover. Both require specialized units to deal with them, ie Melta. Both are cheaper than common Riotide Builds, both put out more longe ranged firepower.

The support systems,Mike hard points.m not support units.

I'll concede the HBC Riptide is balanced, even though I still think it is too hard to kill for its points. Because I'm all too familiar with the chassis itself.

"And you dismiss my argument about a 165pt, slightly slower DK that can shoot on par with a Riptide"

I'm not dismissing it, I've just never seen that.

Martel732 wrote:
I'll concede the HBC Riptide is balanced, even though I still think it is too hard to kill for its points. Because I'm all too familiar with the chassis itself.

"And you dismiss my argument about a 165pt, slightly slower DK that can shoot on par with a Riptide"

I'm not dismissing it, I've just never seen that.

You are all too familiar with the Chassis when it has no need to use its Nova or can risk using its Nova for the Shield more often. You have no experience with the Chassis when it needs to Nova effectively every turn to function.

I know you've never seen it, because most players would never waste the CC potential of the Dreadknight for a simple ranged version. The HBC Riptide is slightly more mobile with 12" better range, but has very comparable damage output and resiliency for a slightly higher cost. That is a pretty good comparison. Its Jet Pack + 1 Wound +Nova Dependency +Secondary Weapons system vs Mastery Level 1, CC Ability, Force Weapon, ATSKNF, at a difference of 15pts in cost.

I'm just saying the option is there, and it is a pretty balanced one based on the fact we rarely see it haha!

As a tau player , my main concern/lack of use with a HBC tide is the 12 gets hot roles from the nova charged cannon. Perhaps if it was just one gets hot role per use , but playing the odds when rolling 12 dice isn't to my liking , even though i have a 2+ against them.

kambien wrote:
As a tau player , my main concern/lack of use with a HBC tide is the 12 gets hot roles from the nova charged cannon. Perhaps if it was just one gets hot role per use , but playing the odds when rolling 12 dice isn't to my liking , even though i have a 2+ against them.

I do share your concern. 1/3 Wounds per turn after a Successful Nova.

But, it is what makes it balanced, from a durability perspective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
5-26-15 Changed To

Ion Accelerator: Change To
Standard
Range: 72" Strength: 7 AP 3 Heavy 4
Overcharge
Range: 72" Strength: 8 AP 3 Heavy 1, Gets Hot, Large Blast
Nova-Charge*
Range: 72" Strength: 9 AP 2 Ordinance 1, Gets Hot, Large Blast, Nova-Charge

5-26-15 Changed To

XV104 Riptide
May exchange Heavy Burst Cannon for Ion Accelerator: 20pts
May take up to two Shielded Missile Drones: 20pts/model

so in regards to the : "Add +1 to Reanimation Protocol rolls for the Overlord from this Formation (or the model taken in place of the Overlord) and units from this Formation that are within 6" of him."

How would that work with the reclamation legion when ever living (from running decurion detachment) already gives them +1 to the entire army.
Along with the fact that reanimation protocols can't be made better than a 4+, that completely makes this rule empty.

Mantorok wrote:
so in regards to the : "Add +1 to Reanimation Protocol rolls for the Overlord from this Formation (or the model taken in place of the Overlord) and units from this Formation that are within 6" of him."

How would that work with the reclamation legion when ever living (from running decurion detachment) already gives them +1 to the entire army.
Along with the fact that reanimation protocols can't be made better than a 4+, that completely makes this rule empty.

Keep reading.

Reclamation Legion is now +1RP and Decurion only grants Reroll 1s for RP.

This switch lowers the power of Decurion to a manageable level but makes things like Crypteks useful for creating small very durable units for a cost.

Oh I see. I apologize for missing that.
Cool changes!

Mantorok wrote:
Oh I see. I apologize for missing that.
Cool changes!

Thanks! No worries. I found that simply switching of their two similar rules fixed a lot of what was wrong with Decurion and simultaneously fixed Cryoteks.

6-3-15 Add

Destroyer Cult
Extermination Protocols: Change "All units in this Formation re-roll failed To Wound rolls and Armour Penetration rolls in the Shooting phase." to "All units in this Formation re-roll failed To Wound rolls and Armour Penetration rolls of a 1 in the Shooting phase."

Automatically Appended Next Post:
6-3-15 Change To

Stimulant Injector: 10pts/40pts

Don't Destroyers already reroll to-wound rolls of 1 from Preferred Enemy?

Alcibiades wrote:
Don't Destroyers already reroll to-wound rolls of 1 from Preferred Enemy?

Haha, of course they do. Hmm.... can't believe I forgot about Preferred Enemy. I'll make it reroll armor penetration rolls. They still get Move through cover which is a good formation bonus.

Thanks for pointing that out!


6-4-15 Add

Destroyer Cult
Extermination Protocols: Change "All units in this Formation re-roll failed To Wound rolls and Armour Penetration rolls in the Shooting phase." to "All units in this Formation re-roll failed Armour Penetration rolls in the Shooting phase."

Here are a few thoughts on Tau. Note that I play primarily Tyranids and Orks, so my view on Tau is mainly related to points where it becomes an overly points-efficient counter to the armies that I play.

 Zagman wrote:
Drone Controller: 8pts

25 points

 Zagman wrote:
Target Lock: 5pts

15 points

 Zagman wrote:
Velocity Tracker: 10/20pts

Model has Skyfire. No choice involved.

 Zagman wrote:
XV104 Riptide

4 wounds. If it Nova Charges loses 1 Armor save. From a 2+ to a 3+. Invul is only against shooting.
The Riptide shouldn't be unkillable. That's just no fun. It also shouldn't be able to beat a Hive Tyrant in Close combat.

 Zagman wrote:
Sky Ray Missile Defense Gunship: 115pts, 115pts/model
Add "May take an additional Sky Ray Missile Defense Gunship... 115pts/model
Any Model may exchange both Gun Drones for one of the following... Twin-Linked Smart Missile System: 10pts
Any Model may take items from the Vehicle Battle Systems list.

Can only fire 2 missiles per turn. If using skyfire seeker missiles are AP4. If not using skyfire they become AP1.

 Zagman wrote:
Smart Missile System

It should only be 18" range. Not 30".

XV88 Broadside Team: 55pts, 55pts/Model
May upgrade one Broadside Shas'ui to a Broadside Shas'Vre: 5pts
Any Broadside Shas'ui or Shas'Vrew may exchange his Twin-Linked Heavy Rail Rifle for a Twin-Linked High-Yield Missile Pod: 15pts/model
Any Proadside Shas'Ui or Shas'Vre may exchange his Twin-Linked Smart Missile System for a Twin-Linked Plasma Rifle: Free

45 ppm, but only 1 wound. Either that or reduce the armor to a 3+. The number of times I've lost a squad of 20+ gants to 2 broadsides because they won close combat and swept the gants is insane. They die easy to melta, but armies like Nids and Orks don't have access to melta, so some adjustment is needed.

Crisis Suites

Min squad size = 2. You were really prepared to up the min squad size of Deff Koptas, but not change the min squad size of crisis suites. How many games have you seen won by a solo crisis suite deep striking onto an objective? Orks would gladly trade Deff Koptas for Crisis suites. Tyranids would gladly trade Lictors for Crisis Suites.

Wow you just sound bitter; I guess I'm going to go and neuter the IoM, Eldar, Daemons and Necrons as they're all too good compared to my mid-tier army

On the Riptide's survivability, Nova is always listed as the counter to reducing it.

The other player has no real input on Nova. Its just wait and hope.

Would reducing Nova's threat paired with reduced survivability help?

How do either of these sound (*not both*):
-Armor Save becomes 3+, Wounds become 4, but Nova wounds allow any Saves (3+ armor)
-Armor Save stays as is, wounds become 4, but Nova allows Invuln saves

As for changing Broadsides to 1HP or a 3+ armor save, if we were rewriting the 'Dex, i'd think its a good idea to revisit (t5 2w 3+ IMO), but might be a bit larger a change than is needed to balance.

SGTPozy wrote:
Wow you just sound bitter; I guess I'm going to go and neuter the IoM, Eldar, Daemons and Necrons as they're all too good compared to my mid-tier army

That is BS. The whole goal of what is going on here is to balance the things that are too good, and the things that aren't good enough. We can't do that if we can't have that discussion

Bharring wrote:
On the Riptide's survivability, Nova is always listed as the counter to reducing it.

The other player has no real input on Nova. Its just wait and hope.

Would reducing Nova's threat paired with reduced survivability help?

How do either of these sound (*not both*):
-Armor Save becomes 3+, Wounds become 4, but Nova wounds allow any Saves (3+ armor)
-Armor Save stays as is, wounds become 4, but Nova allows Invuln saves

Either of those seem like reasonable proposals. Personally I prefer the 2nd one the most.

tag8833 wrote:Here are a few thoughts on Tau. Note that I play primarily Tyranids and Orks, so my view on Tau is mainly related to points where it becomes an overly points-efficient counter to the armies that I play.
Great, Tau is an army I've been using competitively for a while and one that I'm extremely familiar with.

 Zagman wrote:
Drone Controller: 8pts

25 points
At 8 pts its not worth it on normal Crisis(You'd need a unit of at least 4 drones to mathmaticlaly break even compared to the cost of another drone, and even then you are lacking a body and aren't helped on Snap shots. 25pts, at the cost of over two additional drones, that is way unbelievably overpriced. Not to mention opportunity cost as it takes a systems slot. On Commanders its only useful in specific builds, ie MarkO style builds. Even then it requires a Commander, and uses up a System's slot. You've also failed to account for the change to markerlights, ie -1 cover for each ML used, which makes your personal armie, Tyranids, which relies on cover that much better. I ask you to really rexamine this point.

 Zagman wrote:
Target Lock: 5pts

15 points
Yikes, triple the price for an upgrade that is only used in a couple of specific scenarios. The Farsight Bomb, which has been severely fixed, and in Dual MPCrisisStars with BuffCommander(Which has been fixed), or maybe in Broadsides(Fixed) with a Buffcommander(Fixed). This is a gross kneejerk overreaction. The actual problems in those units have been fixed.

 Zagman wrote:
Velocity Tracker: 10/20pts

Model has Skyfire. No choice involved.
It was virtually never taken on anything that was not a Riptide as at 20pts it wasn't worth even considering. Now, small models have access to it for 10pts which means we may actually see it, but it comes at the cost of Interceptor, FNP, a 4+Invuln, or Target Lock all for +/-0-5pts. Not to mention your change ruins the SkyRay, absolutely makes it nonviable for its cost. Being a Skyfire Only upgrade they would never be put down on the table top because it would be an effective downgrade for almost all units that would ever consider taking one. Considering upgrades like Flakk are often on models that have other non Skyfire firing modes...

 Zagman wrote:
XV104 Riptide

4 wounds. If it Nova Charges loses 1 Armor save. From a 2+ to a 3+. Invul is only against shooting.
The Riptide shouldn't be unkillable. That's just no fun. It also shouldn't be able to beat a Hive Tyrant in Close combat.
I've discussed the Riptide multiple times in multiple places. The HBCRiptide is fairly balanced, in fact people rarely ever fielded them because they were vastly inferior to IA Riptides(Especially with EWO) in just about every instance except as an AA platform. The HBC requires usings its NOVA Reactor every turn, so over the course of a 6 Turn game that is effectively 2 wounds dealt to itself, 1.33 if it paid for FNP. IA Riptides were broken because they were always AP2 and completely removed the need to use the Nova Reactor. Early Warning Override was also undercosted which made the problem doubly worse. Stock, the Dreadknight is more durable per point than the Riptide(32.5pts/wound vs 36) Even with a HP the DK(41.5 vs 36) without factoring in the damage the NOVA deals or the CC abilities of the DK. For its cost the Riptide does not put out points efficient firepower. I've increased the cost of the IA, reduced the AP of the IA, increased the cost of the EWO, increased the cost of the ECPA, and increased the cost of Stims. HBCs got a slight nerf depending on Signature Systems and the IA got a huge nerf. Old IA with EWO was 190pts, now its 215pts and its gun is worse. Coupled with the change to Markerlights, the Riptide is now quite balanced after receiving significant nerfs where needed while preserving the HBC chassis which was fairly well balanced. Pick anything with a Battlecannon and it is virtually assured that it puts out more damage and reliable damage than the IA Riptide now, and did before, but when the IA had no need to use its NOVA it was too durable for its cost.

Now, if I were going to rewrite the Codex the Riptide would be T5, 5Ws, cheaper, and the Nova would allow Invuln Saves, and its upgrades would get a bit cheaper. It would be far less durable but its damage per point would be much better.
3+AS is a terrible idea as it breaks the HBC, .66Wounds per turn from Heavy12 and gets hot plus the .333 per turn from the NOVA just to get a chance to kill yourself with gets hot, it'd be a very ineffective unit then and would need a significant discount.
Wounds becoming 4 and allowing Invuln wouldn't be terrible, but as the sole change from the stock Riptide, no it wouldn't have addressed the core imbalance in the unit. Fixing the Ion Accelerator, Early Warning Override, and changing Markerlight and Cover did.

 Zagman wrote:
Sky Ray Missile Defense Gunship: 115pts, 115pts/model
Add "May take an additional Sky Ray Missile Defense Gunship... 115pts/model
Any Model may exchange both Gun Drones for one of the following... Twin-Linked Smart Missile System: 10pts
Any Model may take items from the Vehicle Battle Systems list.

Can only fire 2 missiles per turn. If using skyfire seeker missiles are AP4. If not using skyfire they become AP1.
This units has six shots all game, six. Thats it. Then it is an expensive mobile Markerlights platform. Flyers can fire four missiles to 2/turn is overly restrictive. I fixed SMS which was undercosted and the real problem on Tau vehicles. Your changes to Seeker Missiles make little sense. And your earlier changes to VT would have broken this unit completely. Six S8 AP3 Missiles costs 60pts in a Marine Dex in Hunter Killer Missiles. Six Shots over the course of a game costs 29pts total for a marine.

 Zagman wrote:
Smart Missile System

It should only be 18" range. Not 30".
Cost has already been addressed on most platforms.

XV88 Broadside Team: 55pts, 55pts/Model
May upgrade one Broadside Shas'ui to a Broadside Shas'Vre: 5pts
Any Broadside Shas'ui or Shas'Vrew may exchange his Twin-Linked Heavy Rail Rifle for a Twin-Linked High-Yield Missile Pod: 15pts/model
Any Proadside Shas'Ui or Shas'Vre may exchange his Twin-Linked Smart Missile System for a Twin-Linked Plasma Rifle: Free

45 ppm, but only 1 wound. Either that or reduce the armor to a 3+. The number of times I've lost a squad of 20+ gants to 2 broadsides because they won close combat and swept the gants is insane. They die easy to melta, but armies like Nids and Orks don't have access to melta, so some adjustment is needed.
My adjustments already increased the cost of HYMP by 8% which were problematic. Undercosted TLHRR has been fixed. If I were going to rewrite the entire unit they would be quite a bit different, but I settled for what needed to be fixed and fixed it.

20 Gants losing CC to 2 Broadsides AND getting swept... lets do the math on that one, I won't give anyone the charge. 20 Gant attacks at WS3, S3 and I4 is 13Hits, 4.4 wounds, and .74Ws. 4 Attacks back, 2 hits, 1.4 unsaved wounds. Guants will likely lose or most likely draw combat. If they do lose they have a tough leadership and then the chance of them being swept is... I4 vs I2... so only a 27% chance of that happening. Yes, I guess that 130pts of Broadsides does marginally beat 80pts of Gants in Assault. Too bad you can't just have them in Synapse range where they are Fearless and will win that combat through attrition or have a chance of sweeping the Broadsides. I'm really not seeing why your specific example of Gants occasionally losing to Broadsides in CC is so crazy? They are practically a terrible target for Gants to assault when they aren't in Synapse range.

Crisis Suites

Min squad size = 2. You were really prepared to up the min squad size of Deff Koptas, but not change the min squad size of crisis suites. How many games have you seen won by a solo crisis suite deep striking onto an objective? Orks would gladly trade Deff Koptas for Crisis suites. Tyranids would gladly trade Lictors for Crisis Suites.

I definitely was looking at increasing the minimum size of Crisis or mandating a Systems selection, ie no naked suit. I believe I wrote this Errata before the Ork one which is why that that or a similar change wasn't made. The problem is that they can be fielded dirt cheap, 22ppm, but when actually equipped with a weapon or two are generally much more expensive. I haven't decided which is the better alternative. Naked 23ppm Obsec Crisis in a FE army are a problem. I've actually never won or seen a single game won by a DSing solo Crisis on an objective, despite playing a significant amount of competitive play using solo suit squads. I found two marine wounds quite easy to kill when the DS. Of course, I never fielded them as throwaway units either. Your comparisons aren't very valid as they are units that perform extremely different roles.

Your post screams that you've played your Nids against some Tau builds that planned to face you. I ask you to take a step back and look at these more objectively. Just because one thing in an army is a pretty strong counter for one thing in your army doesn't mean that that thing is necessarily broken. And every point raised was already moved towards balance meaning it was defacto better than before.

Bharring wrote:On the Riptide's survivability, Nova is always listed as the counter to reducing it.

The other player has no real input on Nova. Its just wait and hope.

Would reducing Nova's threat paired with reduced survivability help?

How do either of these sound (*not both*):
-Armor Save becomes 3+, Wounds become 4, but Nova wounds allow any Saves (3+ armor)
-Armor Save stays as is, wounds become 4, but Nova allows Invuln saves

As for changing Broadsides to 1HP or a 3+ armor save, if we were rewriting the 'Dex, i'd think its a good idea to revisit (t5 2w 3+ IMO), but might be a bit larger a change than is needed to balance.

Yep, the Nova Reactor is the reduction in Riptide Durability. I covered almost all of this above and rolled it into one.

If I were rewriting the codex, which I'm not, it would be a 4-5W T5 2+/5++ Jetpack Infantry with possibly a price discount and possible allowing NOVA to be negated by Invuln. But, I'm not rewriting the dex to I balanced the Riptide by nerfing the IA forcing it to NOVA for AP2, increasing the cost of the IA, increasing the cost of the Early Warning Override, and increasing the cost of Stim Injectors. So now an IA Riptide with IA and EWO is 215pts not 190 and with stim 255 vs 225. I mean a 13% price increase and a nerfed weapon that requires using the NOVA Reactor more is a pretty solid move towards balance.

 Zagman wrote:

tag8833 wrote:Here are a few thoughts on Tau. Note that I play primarily Tyranids and Orks, so my view on Tau is mainly related to points where it becomes an overly points-efficient counter to the armies that I play.
Great, Tau is an army I've been using competitively for a while and one that I'm extremely familiar with.

 Zagman wrote:
Drone Controller: 8pts

25 points
At 8 pts its not worth it on normal Crisis(You'd need a unit of at least 4 drones to mathmaticlaly break even compared to the cost of another drone, and even then you are lacking a body and aren't helped on Snap shots. 25pts, at the cost of over two additional drones, that is way unbelievably overpriced. Not to mention opportunity cost as it takes a systems slot. On Commanders its only useful in specific builds, ie MarkO style builds. Even then it requires a Commander, and uses up a System's slot. You've also failed to account for the change to markerlights, ie -1 cover for each ML used, which makes your personal armie, Tyranids, which relies on cover that much better. I ask you to really rexamine this point.
Didn't realize it took a support slot. The only usage I ever see this put to is a commander buffing drones. Basically you are taking a BS:2 drone all the way to BS:5. That is a significant boost. Worth far more than 8 points.

 Zagman wrote:
Target Lock: 5pts

15 points
Yikes, triple the price for an upgrade that is only used in a couple of specific scenarios. The Farsight Bomb, which has been severely fixed, and in Dual MPCrisisStars with BuffCommander(Which has been fixed), or maybe in Broadsides(Fixed) with a Buffcommander(Fixed). This is a gross kneejerk overreaction. The actual problems in those units have been fixed.
I play Orks and Tyranids. I would gladly pay 15 points for Target lock on quite a few units. In my meta I rarely saw a group of 3 Broadsides that didn't have 2 Target locks. My main thought was "How much would this upgrade be worth to me, and I decided 15 points. If I could take it on Carnifexes, 25 points would be a decent value.

 Zagman wrote:
Velocity Tracker: 10/20pts

Model has Skyfire. No choice involved.
It was virtually never taken on anything that was not a Riptide as at 20pts it wasn't worth even considering. Now, small models have access to it for 10pts which means we may actually see it, but it comes at the cost of Interceptor, FNP, a 4+Invuln, or Target Lock all for +/-0-5pts. Not to mention your change ruins the SkyRay, absolutely makes it nonviable for its cost. Being a Skyfire Only upgrade they would never be put down on the table top because it would be an effective downgrade for almost all units that would ever consider taking one. Considering upgrades like Flakk are often on models that have other non Skyfire firing modes...
In my meta I see lots of Skyfire Broadsides and Commanders. I see lots of those at tournaments as well. 2 of the last 5 tournaments I attend were won by Tau. One had a Skyfire commander, the other had 2 Skyfire Missilesides. One of them had a Skyfire riptide as well.

 Zagman wrote:
XV104 Riptide

4 wounds. If it Nova Charges loses 1 Armor save. From a 2+ to a 3+. Invul is only against shooting.
The Riptide shouldn't be unkillable. That's just no fun. It also shouldn't be able to beat a Hive Tyrant in Close combat.
I've discussed the Riptide multiple times in multiple places. The HBCRiptide is fairly balanced, in fact people rarely ever fielded them because they were vastly inferior to IA Riptides(Especially with EWO) in just about every instance except as an AA platform. The HBC requires usings its NOVA Reactor every turn, so over the course of a 6 Turn game that is effectively 2 wounds dealt to itself, 1.33 if it paid for FNP. IA Riptides were broken because they were always AP2 and completely removed the need to use the Nova Reactor. Early Warning Override was also undercosted which made the problem doubly worse. Stock, the Dreadknight is more durable per point than the Riptide(32.5pts/wound vs 36) Even with a HP the DK(41.5 vs 36) without factoring in the damage the NOVA deals or the CC abilities of the DK. For its cost the Riptide does not put out points efficient firepower. I've increased the cost of the IA, reduced the AP of the IA, increased the cost of the EWO, increased the cost of the ECPA, and increased the cost of Stims. HBCs got a slight nerf depending on Signature Systems and the IA got a huge nerf. Old IA with EWO was 190pts, now its 215pts and its gun is worse. Coupled with the change to Markerlights, the Riptide is now quite balanced after receiving significant nerfs where needed while preserving the HBC chassis which was fairly well balanced. Pick anything with a Battlecannon and it is virtually assured that it puts out more damage and reliable damage than the IA Riptide now, and did before, but when the IA had no need to use its NOVA it was too durable for its cost.

Now, if I were going to rewrite the Codex the Riptide would be T5, 5Ws, cheaper, and the Nova would allow Invuln Saves, and its upgrades would get a bit cheaper. It would be far less durable but its damage per point would be much better.
3+AS is a terrible idea as it breaks the HBC, .66Wounds per turn from Heavy12 and gets hot plus the .333 per turn from the NOVA just to get a chance to kill yourself with gets hot, it'd be a very ineffective unit then and would need a significant discount.
Wounds becoming 4 and allowing Invuln wouldn't be terrible, but as the sole change from the stock Riptide, no it wouldn't have addressed the core imbalance in the unit. Fixing the Ion Accelerator, Early Warning Override, and changing Markerlight and Cover did.
Your meta must be pretty alien to mine. I rarely ever see a Tua army that includes riptides that doesn't have at least one BurstTide. Generally it is a Skyfire burstide with ECPA. I have a feeling that our understand of this is pretty far apart. A guy that goes to tournaments with me frequently takes 3 riptides most of the time. I'm pretty sure he has never lost all 3 in a game. To put that into prospective, I've been running 3 flyrants (cost more than riptides). At tournaments I end up losing all 3 in maybe 1 in 5 games. Now your argument is based around the flyrant putting out more firepower per point than a riptide? Possibly. I guess. I'd definitely trade a flyrant for a ECPA burstide.

 Zagman wrote:
Sky Ray Missile Defense Gunship: 115pts, 115pts/model
Add "May take an additional Sky Ray Missile Defense Gunship... 115pts/model
Any Model may exchange both Gun Drones for one of the following... Twin-Linked Smart Missile System: 10pts
Any Model may take items from the Vehicle Battle Systems list.

Can only fire 2 missiles per turn. If using skyfire seeker missiles are AP4. If not using skyfire they become AP1.
This units has six shots all game, six. Thats it. Then it is an expensive mobile Markerlights platform. Flyers can fire four missiles to 2/turn is overly restrictive. I fixed SMS which was undercosted and the real problem on Tau vehicles. Your changes to Seeker Missiles make little sense. And your earlier changes to VT would have broken this unit completely. Six S8 AP3 Missiles costs 60pts in a Marine Dex in Hunter Killer Missiles. Six Shots over the course of a game costs 29pts total for a marine.
It gets 6 shots, plus either 4 SMS shots, or two gundrones, and 2 markerlights.
Didn't realize the VT was what gave the Skyray skyfire. My proposal would be that it retain the ability to choose. The reason the skyray doesn't work is that it is extremely rock-paper-scissory. Generally it gets 2 tags to ignore cover, possible 1 or 2 more for BS and then racks its missiles on turn 1. You've changed the ignore cover portion of marker lights, so now the Seeker version of marker lights will be used to ignore cover and up BS. So generally you will need 6 tags to rack the missiles, and kill something. If you've got a drone controller commander with CNC you are obliterating an MC for 1st blood. If not maybe it takes you 2 turns to obliterate them. There is the reason that Tau lists regularly include 2-3 skyrays.

XV88 Broadside Team: 55pts, 55pts/Model
May upgrade one Broadside Shas'ui to a Broadside Shas'Vre: 5pts
Any Broadside Shas'ui or Shas'Vrew may exchange his Twin-Linked Heavy Rail Rifle for a Twin-Linked High-Yield Missile Pod: 15pts/model
Any Proadside Shas'Ui or Shas'Vre may exchange his Twin-Linked Smart Missile System for a Twin-Linked Plasma Rifle: Free

45 ppm, but only 1 wound. Either that or reduce the armor to a 3+. The number of times I've lost a squad of 20+ gants to 2 broadsides because they won close combat and swept the gants is insane. They die easy to melta, but armies like Nids and Orks don't have access to melta, so some adjustment is needed.
My adjustments already increased the cost of HYMP by 8% which were problematic. Undercosted TLHRR has been fixed. If I were going to rewrite the entire unit they would be quite a bit different, but I settled for what needed to be fixed and fixed it.

20 Gants losing CC to 2 Broadsides AND getting swept... lets do the math on that one, I won't give anyone the charge. 20 Gant attacks at WS3, S3 and I4 is 13Hits, 4.4 wounds, and .74Ws. 4 Attacks back, 2 hits, 1.4 unsaved wounds. Guants will likely lose or most likely draw combat. If they do lose they have a tough leadership and then the chance of them being swept is... I4 vs I2... so only a 27% chance of that happening. Yes, I guess that 130pts of Broadsides does marginally beat 80pts of Gants in Assault. Too bad you can't just have them in Synapse range where they are Fearless and will win that combat through attrition or have a chance of sweeping the Broadsides. I'm really not seeing why your specific example of Gants occasionally losing to Broadsides in CC is so crazy? They are practically a terrible target for Gants to assault when they aren't in Synapse range.
So basically you are saying that not only should Broadsides be the king of ranged shooting, but they should be better than space marines in close combat as well? I guess I feel like they should be a glass cannon. Their firepower output is so extreme that making them bad in CC seems reasonable

Crisis Suites

Min squad size = 2. You were really prepared to up the min squad size of Deff Koptas, but not change the min squad size of crisis suites. How many games have you seen won by a solo crisis suite deep striking onto an objective? Orks would gladly trade Deff Koptas for Crisis suites. Tyranids would gladly trade Lictors for Crisis Suites.

I definitely was looking at increasing the minimum size of Crisis or mandating a Systems selection, ie no naked suit. I believe I wrote this Errata before the Ork one which is why that that or a similar change wasn't made. The problem is that they can be fielded dirt cheap, 22ppm, but when actually equipped with a weapon or two are generally much more expensive. I haven't decided which is the better alternative. Naked 23ppm Obsec Crisis in a FE army are a problem. I've actually never won or seen a single game won by a DSing solo Crisis on an objective, despite playing a significant amount of competitive play using solo suit squads. I found two marine wounds quite easy to kill when the DS. Of course, I never fielded them as throwaway units either. Your comparisons aren't very valid as they are units that perform extremely different roles.
The last Tournament I attended, I made final table with my Orks. a DS crisis suite stole the relic from my green tide and won the game. He had 5 DS suites, My buddy that plays tau runs Farsight DS suites and regularly wins games with them. I don't think the comparisons are invalid. A single DS suite serves exactly the same role as a single Deff Kopta or a single Lictor. Suites can also serve lots of other roles in an army, but the single DS suite is the mode that is problematic especially if you are eliminating the 30 point single outflanking deff kopta.



Your post screams that you've played your Nids against some Tau builds that planned to face you. I ask you to take a step back and look at these more objectively. Just because one thing in an army is a pretty strong counter for one thing in your army doesn't mean that that thing is necessarily broken. And every point raised was already moved towards balance meaning it was defacto better than before.
I play in a fairly competitive meta. I've got a good buddy who plays tau, but besides him the majority of my tau opponents are in tournaments against people I've either never met before, or have only met once or twice at previous tournaments. They aren't tailoring to beat me, well not just me. They are building lists to win tournaments. They are pretty effective at it. As I said 2 of the last 5 tourneys I attended were won by Tau. My Tyranids are darn good as well, and have piled up a number of wins against Tau. There is a tendency for a top tier Tau list to be better prepared for Tyranids than they are for say Necrons, but I am trying to approach this with the idea, "If that upgrade or unit was available to me, how many points would it be worth?" I figured that is where I can bring the most insight. Why is a Riptide better than any TMC? Because it is absurdly survivable for its points. Why is a DS crisis suite better than an outflanking deff kopta or deep striking lictor? It is cheaper with a better armor save. Why do Space marines hate Tau? Unless they run Centurions it is Unkillable burstides with ECPA, and skyrays. Why do FMC Demon player hate tau? Skyfire missile commanders and broadsides. How much would I pay for target lock? 25 points on a Carnifex, 15 points on an Ork or Tyranid Warrior. I would like to think that I was being objective, but sure, I'm probably not. Its pretty impossible to be completely objective. You play Tau and feel like a dakkaflyrant should cost 260 points and have a 4+ armor save. I play Tyranids and feel like a Riptide should have 4 wounds. We both lack objectivity on those things. I would hope that our discussion could help us improve objectivity somewhat.

@tag8833

Yep, it takes up a support slot, and for the cost of that commander base they could have put 7.75 more Marker Drones on the table. Think about that. 7.75 more bodies with Markerlights. It is a bit too good on Commanders, If I were rewriting the codex it would be 5pts for +1BS. But, just like say a Storm shield on a SM Commander, somethings are a bit too good there, and a bit not god enough there. And fixing all of that requires full rewrites.

That is permodel to have Split Fire. SM gets Splitfire for 10pts on DevCents, which are better than just about any platform for Tau. How do all of these Broadsides in your Meta have both Target Locks and Velocity Trackers?? a Broadside with VT costs 85pts and is actually a poor use of a VS. The best and only place for a 20pt VS is a Commander with Dual Missile Pods and on an HBCRiptide.
Again, this is an item that is generally on Crisis suits. It has no use on a Riptide, so a Carnifex would need to cost a lot more, say 15pts.

Again, how are you facing Target Lock and Velocity Tacker Broadsides? VT HBCTides are pretty good, but this does come at the cost of a support slot, potential FNP or Interceptor, or one of the others that have use.

Most lists that have FE will have the ECPA HBCtide, as it is phenomenal. I was on of the only competitive Tau players that I have seen that ran a second besides SpamAdams in CA. I also increased the cost of the ECPA slightly, probably needs to be 40pts IMO. I'm also a very competitive Tau player, the last GT I was in was NOVA and I got 5th out of 200, and I run Farsight. I've lost more Riptides than I can count, hell I've lost 2 and nearly a third in more than one game in the first turn before. One of those games was at NOVA.

SMS is now more expensive, increases the cost of the Skyray by 9%. There was a change to Cover too. Your expeireicne is biased by SkyRays and Markerlights being a very hard counter to kill an MC in a single turn. Against a lot of other armies its less useful. One hard counter situation is not enought o nerg the unit as a whole. I ran a total of 0 SkyRays competitively.

I didn't say Broadsides should be as good as a marine in CC, point for point they are and thats because they have 2W S5 and a 2+. I made them cost more, 8% more, I debated increasing the cost 5pts more actually. What keeps their cost inline is thier vulnerability to S8+ AP2-, unfortunatly your two armies don't have a lot of that. It makes them a hard counter to your amies. Again, a specific army vs army hard counter cannot make the basis of balance. Hell we could compare the Wraithknight to Grav Cents that way and say that the Wraithknight is too vulnerabel and needs to be tougher, or more specifically is a bad comparison for the game as a whole, etc. Oh, and once you factor in the cost of upgrades they lose their CC efficiency quite quickly. And Tacticals aren't a good CC unit, they are mediocre, and Broadsides are only comparable to them, take any other CC oriented marine and Broadsides get torn apart.

That sucks a DS crisis stole the relic, must have ahd Ob Sec to pull that off? How did it DS in near the end of the game or did you fail to target it? Could this have been due to the Green Tide being so large you didn't have the ability to engage MSU? Its one reason I'm looking at upping their minimum to 2 or madating they fulfill at least one support slot.

I've played in some of the most competitive events around over the years and done well ie top 7 in every one of the handful of GT caliber evens I've played in. Remember than when you take the Errata of the whole 5-10% changes make a very big difference over all especially in a game like this that involves compound attrition.
Actually one of my worst matchups was FMC Daemons, you have to really tailor your Tau list or be lucky to handle Flying Circus. Hell, I effectively lost a game at NOVA against Kelsey's FMC Daemons in the first turn before I did anything. I don't quite know why you believe they are such a bad matchup actually.
You also seem to think Tau is more powerful than it currently is. Since 7th dropped it is basically upper middle of the pack or bottom of the top tier. I know at NOVA oustide of basically me Tau didn't have a stellar showing. And as a competitive player, Velocity Trackers on Broadsides is terribly inefficient. It increases their base cost by 31% to increase from a 31% chance of hitting FMCs and Flyers so a 140% increase in to hit and comes at the opportunity cost of EWO which was better.

I still feel your feedback is highly colored negative experience, which is roughly 3x stronger than positive experiences. Your experiences are also with your particular armies which were lower to mid tier. Had those games been post Errata I think the entire Meta would be very different and games would be much much closer. Point out one a couple of lists pre and post errata and see what I mean. Don't forget to include the main errata stuff either.

 Zagman wrote:
how are you facing Target Lock and Velocity Tacker Broadsides?

Here is a unit that I faced a ton in 6th edition, and still face occasionally. Including the RTT that I lost to Tau with my green tide. I agree that VT doesn't make the most sense, but for some reason I see it.
HYMP broadside with VT
HYMP broadside with TL
HYMP broadside with TL

 Zagman wrote:
That sucks a DS crisis stole the relic, must have ahd Ob Sec to pull that off? How did it DS in near the end of the game or did you fail to target it? Could this have been due to the Green Tide being so large you didn't have the ability to engage MSU? Its one reason I'm looking at upping their minimum to 2 or madating they fulfill at least one support slot.

I've lost lots of games for lots of reasons. This game ended because we ran out the clock, and the game ended on 4. he had 4 units of 1 OS suites, and 2 of them failed to come in until 4. The green tide was my only remaining unit, but it was on the Relic, he charged a Riptide to tarpit it, and there was just enough room to DS a suite in. The 1st suite mishapped, but the second landed on target. When the Tide failed to kill the riptide in 1 round of combat I lost. The mission also had KP, and he had a lead there as well, but if I had killed the riptide, and the suite stealing the relic I had a pretty good chance to take it. My point of that story was that DS suites do win games. You said you had never seen it happen. I have seen it happen multiple times. They are big time scorers in missions with progressive objectives or Maelstrom components, and they serve exactly the same purpose as Deff Koptas do for Orks, but they do it better, and cheaper.

 Zagman wrote:
You also seem to think Tau is more powerful than it currently is. Since 7th dropped it is basically upper middle of the pack or bottom of the top tier.

Tau can't compete with Newcrons. There are deamon builds that are a hard counter. Newdar have all the answers to tau. Centstar beats tau. There are certainly builds that beat Tau. That doesn't mean that some of the good stuff isn't too good. Who would you consider the worst codex? IG? CSM? DA? I have things that I would nerf in all 3 of those codexes. Tau may be middle of the pack. I would say Tyranids are in the same ballpark, maybe one slot below depending on army comp and missions. You feel like Deff Koptas need a nerf, does that mean you think Orks are a top tier army?

@Tag.
You are being bitter as you have the "woe is me" attitude that since you have been beaten a couple of times that the army must be nerfed into the ground.

I could say that Ork Boyz are able to tie units up too easily and therefore need to be 10 points a model and T3. Also, power klaws are too good so they should just be +1S rather than 2xS. They also get into combat too easily so I propose that they should all move d6" rather than 6".

see how silly that sounds?

SGTPozy wrote:
@Tag.
You are being bitter as you have the "woe is me" attitude that since you have been beaten a couple of times that the army must be nerfed into the ground.

I could say that Ork Boyz are able to tie units up too easily and therefore need to be 10 points a model and T3. Also, power klaws are too good so they should just be +1S rather than 2xS. They also get into combat too easily so I propose that they should all move d6" rather than 6".

see how silly that sounds?

I think you are hearing something that I'm not attempting to communicate. I don't want tau nerfed into the ground. I want a whole bunch of Tau stuff buffed, and a few, very specific things nerfed. The goal being that when I face Tau there is some variety in what I face beyond Broadsides, Riptides, Skyrays, and Suites. Don't you think Kroot should be useful? Why does the Tau fast attack suck so bad? When was the last time you saw a hammerhead? I've played against Eldar more than any other army. 2nd is Tau. Why is it that every Tau list I play is so similar? It might be the same reason that every Tyranid list is so similar. I want the same sort of nerfs and buffs to tyranids that I want for Tau.

I feel like because I mainly play against Tau instead of play as them, my input is taken to have some sort of ulterior motive that it doesn't have.

If you wanted to make those changes to Ork Boys, I would suggest that we compare how effective they are compared to other Ork Units. Right now most lists are built to minimize the number of Ork Boyz taken. The one exception is the Green tide. Then I would suggest we compare Ork boyz effectiveness to other similar units like Termagants and Guardsmen, and Cultists and Blood Letters, and space marines. I would say "How much would you pay for Ork boyz to be included in your tau / Eldar / Necron list?"

I'm not a complete Tau expert. I've only seen a Hammerhead on the table 3 or 4 times, and only in fluffy games. I've only faced Aun'Va once or twice. But I know exactly what Riptides can do. I've killed more than 300 crisis suites. I've faced more than 90 skyrays. I've seen 100's of riptides across the table from me. I don't know what makes the bad units so bad that they never make it to the table. But I can tell you exactly what makes the good units so good, and what about them is better than units available to other codexes.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
how are you facing Target Lock and Velocity Tacker Broadsides?

Here is a unit that I faced a ton in 6th edition, and still face occasionally. Including the RTT that I lost to Tau with my green tide. I agree that VT doesn't make the most sense, but for some reason I see it.
HYMP broadside with VT
HYMP broadside with TL
HYMP broadside with TL

 Zagman wrote:
That sucks a DS crisis stole the relic, must have ahd Ob Sec to pull that off? How did it DS in near the end of the game or did you fail to target it? Could this have been due to the Green Tide being so large you didn't have the ability to engage MSU? Its one reason I'm looking at upping their minimum to 2 or madating they fulfill at least one support slot.

I've lost lots of games for lots of reasons. This game ended because we ran out the clock, and the game ended on 4. he had 4 units of 1 OS suites, and 2 of them failed to come in until 4. The green tide was my only remaining unit, but it was on the Relic, he charged a Riptide to tarpit it, and there was just enough room to DS a suite in. The 1st suite mishapped, but the second landed on target. When the Tide failed to kill the riptide in 1 round of combat I lost. The mission also had KP, and he had a lead there as well, but if I had killed the riptide, and the suite stealing the relic I had a pretty good chance to take it. My point of that story was that DS suites do win games. You said you had never seen it happen. I have seen it happen multiple times. They are big time scorers in missions with progressive objectives or Maelstrom components, and they serve exactly the same purpose as Deff Koptas do for Orks, but they do it better, and cheaper.

 Zagman wrote:
You also seem to think Tau is more powerful than it currently is. Since 7th dropped it is basically upper middle of the pack or bottom of the top tier.

Tau can't compete with Newcrons. There are deamon builds that are a hard counter. Newdar have all the answers to tau. Centstar beats tau. There are certainly builds that beat Tau. That doesn't mean that some of the good stuff isn't too good. Who would you consider the worst codex? IG? CSM? DA? I have things that I would nerf in all 3 of those codexes. Tau may be middle of the pack. I would say Tyranids are in the same ballpark, maybe one slot below depending on army comp and missions. You feel like Deff Koptas need a nerf, does that mean you think Orks are a top tier army?

Interesting setup for Broadsides. Definitely limited AA. I can't see how that unit was so terrifying. Sure, broadsides were too good for their poitns... hence a points increase. And the only real way of balancing them as the HRR needed some love, so decreasing the base cost for the HRR Broadside and then making the HYMP a costly upgrade greatly increased internal balance among the unit that the cost increase for the HYMP setup increased cost of the unit overall. And as I've said I've been debating another 5pt increase for the HYMP Setup, or more likely a 5pt upgrade for the SMS upgrade. Probably a 5pt Upgrade for the SMS is going to be what i choose.

So, it wasn't a lone crisis that cost you the game, it was that you and your opponent played too slowly and the game didn't come to its normal natural conclusion. Had the game gone 5-7 turns as it probably should have you would have won that game. That was not a problem with the suit unit, but a problem in the tournament format for players that led them to be unable to finish the game. IMO, I cannot be making balance considerations thinking players won't finish a game with its natural conclusion. You should be angry that you didn't finish the game, not that an ObSec suite stole the Relic. Had the game finished or luck been more normal and those suites were forced to come in turns 2-3 its an entirely different story. Using an outlier example to argue balance is fault logic. Not to mention you were playing an army with a massive amounts of points centered into a single unit.... the kind of thing Obsec is really good against...

Your comparison to NewDar and NewCrons really doesn't matter. I'm talking about the shift in Taus place since 7th dropped. Tau's win percentage has been slowing dropping since 7th dropped.... we actually since Eldar dropped in 6th. ToF data supports this. In regards to the two Erratas of the three that I have done, I did nerf some things and brought up quite a bit more. If you'd take the time to look at the other Erratas and the general errata you'd see that. The goal of a balance errata is to take things that are too good and bring them down and take things that aren't good enough and bring them in line with a desired balance point. The only reason that DeffKoptas had their minimum size increased to two was becasue I was trying to limit the number of units in the game that were under 40pts. I never said Orks were a Top Teir army, in fact there is very very little in the Ork dex that has been nerfed, even slightly with quite a bit which has been buffed. So far every Errata has brought some stuff down and brought other stuff up. For CSM alot got brought up and only a few things got nerfed, for Eldar more things got nerfed and few things got buffed.

tag8833 wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
@Tag.
You are being bitter as you have the "woe is me" attitude that since you have been beaten a couple of times that the army must be nerfed into the ground.

I could say that Ork Boyz are able to tie units up too easily and therefore need to be 10 points a model and T3. Also, power klaws are too good so they should just be +1S rather than 2xS. They also get into combat too easily so I propose that they should all move d6" rather than 6".

see how silly that sounds?

I think you are hearing something that I'm not attempting to communicate. I don't want tau nerfed into the ground. I want a whole bunch of Tau stuff buffed, and a few, very specific things nerfed. The goal being that when I face Tau there is some variety in what I face beyond Broadsides, Riptides, Skyrays, and Suites. Don't you think Kroot should be useful? Why does the Tau fast attack suck so bad? When was the last time you saw a hammerhead? I've played against Eldar more than any other army. 2nd is Tau. Why is it that every Tau list I play is so similar? It might be the same reason that every Tyranid list is so similar. I want the same sort of nerfs and buffs to tyranids that I want for Tau.

I feel like because I mainly play against Tau instead of play as them, my input is taken to have some sort of ulterior motive that it doesn't have.

If you wanted to make those changes to Ork Boys, I would suggest that we compare how effective they are compared to other Ork Units. Right now most lists are built to minimize the number of Ork Boyz taken. The one exception is the Green tide. Then I would suggest we compare Ork boyz effectiveness to other similar units like Termagants and Guardsmen, and Cultists and Blood Letters, and space marines. I would say "How much would you pay for Ork boyz to be included in your tau / Eldar / Necron list?"

I'm not a complete Tau expert. I've only seen a Hammerhead on the table 3 or 4 times, and only in fluffy games. I've only faced Aun'Va once or twice. But I know exactly what Riptides can do. I've killed more than 300 crisis suites. I've faced more than 90 skyrays. I've seen 100's of riptides across the table from me. I don't know what makes the bad units so bad that they never make it to the table. But I can tell you exactly what makes the good units so good, and what about them is better than units available to other codexes.

I don't think you have an ulterior motive, but I do feel that our feedback is heavily biased by personal experience and by a lack of diversity in the armies you play. Playing Orks and Tyranids you will overvalue targets vulnerable to ranged S8+ AP3- etc for an example. As your two main armies don't have much of this kind of firepower targets that are balanced by that fact will appear tougher. There is no way to balance 40k that won't have some aspect of RPS, but the goal is to make everything relatively balanced, for its ability to contribute to the game in a meaningful way. Things won't be perfect, but I'm shooting for much better. By increasing cost of Broadsides by 8% they are better, by increasing cost of the EWO IA Riptide 13% and reducing its weapon profile wile increasing its need to Nova is a huge swing for balance, etc. SMS on Skyrays are more costly, the Buffcommander has been heavily nerfed, etc. Then, the weak units all got some kind of buff. All of these changes add up significantly. It won't be perfect, but it'll be a hell of a lot better than what we have. Can you not say that post errata internal and external balance is better for each dex?

Part of the problem is that there are zero weapons in the game that I know of that can actually effectively engage a Riptide at the ranges it operates at. Long range AP 2 weapons are low rate of fire and expensive. This makes the Riptide effectively immortal against weapons that should be able to at least do something. By the time you kill the thing with lascannons, your list has been blown apart. At least, this is true for marines. The whole praying for the Riptide to kill itself doesn't happen in time to stop if from causing catastrophic damage to elite infantry.

Martel732 wrote:
Part of the problem is that there are zero weapons in the game that I know of that can actually effectively engage a Riptide at the ranges it operates at. Long range AP 2 weapons are low rate of fire and expensive. This makes the Riptide effectively immortal against weapons that should be able to at least do something. By the time you kill the thing with lascannons, your list has been blown apart. At least, this is true for marines. The whole praying for the Riptide to kill itself doesn't happen in time to stop if from causing catastrophic damage to elite infantry.

And I can use the same argument for a Land Raider at Range as well. AV 13/14 at range is a similar case. You need to go after them.

Riptide's damage output is not that high. It never has been without a considerable level of markerlight support. Its less than a Leman Rus which costs ~2/3s its cost.

Riptides have had their upgrades become more expensive, the IA has been fixed and is no longer AP2. I mean the IA EWO Riptide is now 113% the cost for lower capabilities than it was before. And this doesn't factor in the change to Markerlights making cover more beneficial.

One thing I am considering is making the SMS upgrade an additional 5pts as an upgrade.

 Zagman wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Part of the problem is that there are zero weapons in the game that I know of that can actually effectively engage a Riptide at the ranges it operates at. Long range AP 2 weapons are low rate of fire and expensive. This makes the Riptide effectively immortal against weapons that should be able to at least do something. By the time you kill the thing with lascannons, your list has been blown apart. At least, this is true for marines. The whole praying for the Riptide to kill itself doesn't happen in time to stop if from causing catastrophic damage to elite infantry.

And I can use the same argument for a Land Raider at Range as well. AV 13/14 at range is a similar case. You need to go after them.

Riptide's damage output is not that high. It never has been without a considerable level of markerlight support. Its less than a Leman Rus which costs ~2/3s its cost.

Riptides have had their upgrades become more expensive, the IA has been fixed and is no longer AP2. I mean the IA EWO Riptide is now 113% the cost for lower capabilities than it was before. And this doesn't factor in the change to Markerlights making cover more beneficial.

One thing I am considering is making the SMS upgrade an additional 5pts as an upgrade.

I was speaking of the current Riptide in a general sense. I'm just letting the pro-Riptide people know where the anti-Riptide people are coming from.

"the IA has been fixed and is no longer AP2. "

AP 3 is still incredibly devastating on a unit that effectively can not die to a reasonable amount of fire. AP 2 is only necessary against ironically the Ritpide and DK because T4 2+ units just get ground down by volume of fire. Terminators, for example, even with the Zagman updates, are still never hitting the table. Basically, I'm saying that since the 40K backbone rules make 2+ infantry basically unplayable, the nerf from AP 2 to AP 3 is not as useful for elite infantry lists as it sounds. I'd rather the thing be much easier to kill so I can get it off the board if I choose.

"Its less than a Leman Rus which costs ~2/3s its cost. "

Leman Russ tanks are not immortal by a long shot, and vehicles in general are rather poor in 40K. Being an MC over a vehicle alone is such a huge advantage. Your changes would probably be fine, but they would still remain incredibly frustrating to play against. I really, really hate Riptides.

Martel732 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Part of the problem is that there are zero weapons in the game that I know of that can actually effectively engage a Riptide at the ranges it operates at. Long range AP 2 weapons are low rate of fire and expensive. This makes the Riptide effectively immortal against weapons that should be able to at least do something. By the time you kill the thing with lascannons, your list has been blown apart. At least, this is true for marines. The whole praying for the Riptide to kill itself doesn't happen in time to stop if from causing catastrophic damage to elite infantry.

And I can use the same argument for a Land Raider at Range as well. AV 13/14 at range is a similar case. You need to go after them.

Riptide's damage output is not that high. It never has been without a considerable level of markerlight support. Its less than a Leman Rus which costs ~2/3s its cost.

Riptides have had their upgrades become more expensive, the IA has been fixed and is no longer AP2. I mean the IA EWO Riptide is now 113% the cost for lower capabilities than it was before. And this doesn't factor in the change to Markerlights making cover more beneficial.

One thing I am considering is making the SMS upgrade an additional 5pts as an upgrade.

I was speaking of the current Riptide in a general sense. I'm just letting the pro-Riptide people know where the anti-Riptide people are coming from.

"the IA has been fixed and is no longer AP2. "

AP 3 is still incredibly devastating on a unit that effectively can not die to a reasonable amount of fire. AP 2 is only necessary against ironically the Ritpide and DK because T4 2+ units just get ground down by volume of fire. Terminators, for example, even with the Zagman updates, are still never hitting the table. Basically, I'm saying that since the 40K backbone rules make 2+ infantry basically unplayable, the nerf from AP 2 to AP 3 is not as useful for elite infantry lists as it sounds. I'd rather the thing be much easier to kill so I can get it off the board if I choose.

"Its less than a Leman Rus which costs ~2/3s its cost. "

Leman Russ tanks are not immortal by a long shot, and vehicles in general are rather poor in 40K. Being an MC over a vehicle alone is such a huge advantage. Your changes would probably be fine, but they would still remain incredibly frustrating to play against. I really, really hate Riptides.

I well aware that you really really hate Riptides. This is a question of balance. "can not die to a reasonable amount of fire" is misleading. Riptides can and do die, 9 Lascannon hits will kill them if they don't hurt themselves first. And the Riptides is point for point less durable than the IoM Dreadknight.

If AP3 is so devastating... Pound for Pound a player can put down two IonHeads on the table for around the cost of the Riptide, the IonHeads put out twice the firepower and the exact same S8 AP3 Gets Hot Large Blast at ridiculous range(And this is why I changed the Ion Accelerator to be in line with the Ion Cannon). AV13 at range is extremely tough to kill and usually requires specialized close range support. And each Ionhead takes 6 Lascannon hits to HP Strip, the exact same 9 hits if it even has 5+ cover and a shocking 12 hits if the strung for Dpods... sure there is a chance that you can take off the weapon or blow it up, but there are two of them. Even before my balance errata you could almost field two Ionheads for the cost of a IA Riptides, and no one did it. Two Ionheads for the same cost at range have double the damage output and depending on cover need 133% to 300% to 533%(Dpods) as many Lascannon hits to HP Strip them. Granted they lose efficiency with pens and have a 5.5% chance per hit to be destroyed, or imobolized, or Weapon Destroyed. Pound for pound the Ionheads are harder to hurt at range(what you keep talking about) than Riptides and put out double the firepower for cost.

The can't kill a Riptide at range with a Lascanon doesn't hold up, because you can't kill Ionheads(6, 9, or 12 Hits) or Leman Russes(9 or 13.5 Hits) to HP Strip at range too. Riptides can also be harmed by other forms of firepower vehicles are immune to. These vehicles generally require special dedicated squads that take them out up close and personal.

Now, I am full aware of how vehicles fair in 40k, that is why most vehicles got some kind of break under my errata while Riptides and Wraithknights got nerfed. TMCs weren't fairing well and got some much needed love.


the 2+ Infantry model is not unplayable, not by a long shot. GW was just costing them poorly, hence my basic 25% decrease in the base cost of a Terminator. They are playable, just not how GW was costing them. I really think you are underestimating how big a difference that would make. How fielding 13 instead of 10 Terminators makes a difference with compound attrition. Especially when compared to other Errated armies.

Compound Attrition example

Army A is over powered and kills at 12.5% efficiency
Army B is under powered and kills at 7.5% efficiency
100pt armies

A goes first kills 13pts of B. 100:87
B goes and kills 7pts of A. 93:87
A goes and kills 12pts of B. 93:75
B goes and kills 6pts of A. 87:75
A goes and kill 11pts of B. 87:64
B goes and kills 5pts of A. 82:64

Army A is over powered and kills at 11.0% efficiency
Army B is underpowered and kills at 9.0% efficiency
100pt armies

A goes first kills 11pts of B. 100:89
B goes and kills 8pts of A. 92:89
A goes and kills 10pts of B. 92:79
B goes and kills 7pts of A. 85:79
A goes and kill 9pts of B. 85: 70
B goes and kills 6pts of A. 79:70

The bigger the difference and lead one side has the larger the difference grows over the course of a game. Obviously these percentages aren't very predictive of a game. And starting with say 13 terminators for the cost of 10 creates a compound effect, just like everything. 5-10% changes in a unit creates rather large changes over the course of games. This is super rudimentary, but in its simplest for what balancing is trying to accomplish, to close those gaps. We have the trouble of having complicated units and instead of kill efficiency in a blank space, we have a table with terrain, movement, reserves, shootings, assault, special rules, and synergy to attempt to balance.

What I'm saying is those changes to the Riptides, just like the similar changes to other units will have much larger impacts ion a game. When something costs 13% more, and does less, or is less versatile it will have a noticeable impact on the game. When a sub-optimal army now fields 10-15% more stuff, it will be noticed and have a large impact through compound attrition. That army will kill more and take smaller proportional damage which leads to even greater proportional damage and even lower proportional losses. It makes a big difference over the course of a game. If an alpha strike took out 25% of your 1000pt force, and you could only strike back for 15% or 150pts of damage. Now you'll have left 900pts equivalent retaliation instead of 750 that yields 18% or 180pts of retaliation. So, a 10-15% change in units results in much greater results towards game end. When two lists that weren't even a matchup before and now one gets 10% more stuff and the other 10% less, thats 1.1 vs .9 or a 22% relative increase in-strength before compound attrition. I would much rather error on the side of caution for many units that start slashing or making 25-35% changes. I know with 5-10% changes for a lot of stuff and 10-15% for some of the worst stuff I can greatly improve balance. If I don't go far enough, well that can be addressed later as well.

 Zagman wrote:
And as I've said I've been debating another 5pt increase for the HYMP Setup, or more likely a 5pt upgrade for the SMS upgrade. Probably a 5pt Upgrade for the SMS is going to be what i choose.

I'd say that is a decent call. SMS is a large part of what make broadsides good. You have definitely nerfed them to the point of being reasonable from a purely theory hammer approach. Have to try it in game to see.

 Zagman wrote:
If you'd take the time to look at the other Erratas and the general errata you'd see that. The goal of a balance errata is to take things that are too good and bring them down and take things that aren't good enough and bring them in line with a desired balance point.

I read them. I think generally you are doing an excellent job. I am mainly disagreeing around the margins.

 Zagman wrote:
Playing Orks and Tyranids you will overvalue targets vulnerable to ranged S8+ AP3- etc for an example.

My proposal was to make seeker missiles S8 AP1 vs Ground targets and S8 AP4 against Air targets. I was trying to generally buff the skyray as an anti-vehicle platform while making it slightly less effective against FMC's. It would have been far better against Orks as a result. Tau are still a super awesome counter to Tyranids.

 Zagman wrote:
there is no way to balance 40k that won't have some aspect of RPS, but the goal is to make everything relatively balanced, for its ability to contribute to the game in a meaningful way.

I agree. There will always be some RPS. That doesn't mean there couldn't be a little less. For instance, Skyrays are an extreme RPS unit. Seems like it could be adjusted to contribute more regularly without being so extremely scissors.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zagman wrote:

I well aware that you really really hate Riptides. This is a question of balance. "can not die to a reasonable amount of fire" is misleading. Riptides can and do die, 9 Lascannon hits will kill them if they don't hurt themselves first. And the Riptides is point for point less durable than the IoM Dreadknight.

That is true on paper, but not on the tabletop. A Riptide has excellent range and mobility. It can Take advantage of cover in a way that a Dreadknight can't. It also has the 3++ nova ability which is generally what makes it so effective (Durable) in CC. Dread Knights are definitely durable, but because they must move towards the opponent for optimum effectiveness, they also expose themselves to many more threats.

As you said if you were redesigning a Riptide it would be far different than what it is. I wonder if you would consider taking away the 3++ ability? That would lower the absurd survivability but without touching the armor save, wounds, or Toughness. It also wouldn't reduce the damage output which you feel is statistically low for its points. It might be a reasonable compromise.


ETA: I agree 100% with all of your changes to necrons. I might tweak MSS back to something that is useful (If you fail it, you lose 1/2 of your attacks), Up the cost of Destroyers by 2 PPM, and Drop the cost of Night Scythes by 10 points, but overall, I think you nailed it.

Smash is also a big part of the Riptide to me. Shoot the choppy and chop the shooty doesn't work well when the shooty also out-chops you!

(I play a lot of infantry, usually combined arms, and my SM are PA spam. Ignoring their armor with the Riptide always felt odd.)

I'm not saying change that facet - a proper fix would require too much of a change. Just pointing out some of the frustration.

"That is true on paper, but not on the tabletop"

DKs die like slime to my BA, but Riptides are extremely difficult to engage effectively. I agree with this statement 100%. Imperial long range weapons are mostly poor and overcosted, making the Riptide a terrible matchup.

"9 Lascannon hits"

That's a lot of lascannon hits for a marine army. That's like 3 turns of shooting only that target with all my lascannons. Assuming they don't start dying. Which they probably will. Now consider triple Riptide. That requires *27* lascannon hits.