Switch Theme:

"Elite" Armies?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

So I play an elite army then, with 3 models at 1500 points for a total of 78 wounds, or just over 19 points per wound.

And I've certainly had very little trouble doing well. I don't think the problem is elites, I think the problem is something else.
   
Made in ca
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion





I think generally pseaking we should consider a few differant things

1st: Hoard armies. these are armies that have a whole on of bodies on the table. Imperial Guard being the most obvious example.
2: Conventional armies: These are the base line we use for comparison for everything else. Space Marines and their varients basicly.
3: Elite armies - things like grey knights, custodes. often more expensive space marines


there's also of course armies with a mix. 'nids for example can run a horde style, but can also run a nidzilla eltie all big critters list.

Space Marines and their varients can also run a elite list, and CSMs can even run a horde army with their cultists. So there is definatly some hybridization, but yeah useally when someone talks an elite army, as opposed to a "list of elites" they mean armies that don't have a choice, Grey Knights, death watch... custodes

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




I think we are trying to figure out what an "elite" army is but honestly the problem is with non-specialized armies or units that pay for abilities they don't use.

Dark Reapers are pretty elite but they are super competitive because they really only pay for abilities that they use, same with plasma scions, shining spears, brimstone horrors or most any of the units that make up competitive lists.

I don't think it is an elite vs non-elite argument but a generalist vs specialist and the specialists win very handily in 8th ed.

Also, 8th is super killy so if you are going to pay for survivabliity you really need to be survivable or those are wasted points. t4 vs t3 is not survivability that matters, hell 1 wound vs 2 wounds doesn't really matter that much. T6 4++ is or ridiculous cheap ppw, or ability to get your shot off first (deepstrike/no movement penalty to hit/stratagems), -2 to hit, quantum shielding those all help and are worth the ticket price. T4 3+ isn't worth as much as it was previous editions, especially that 3+.

Hell there was a whole thread about magnus not being tough enough. Crazy but if have to tune your army to remove a t7, 3++ reroll 1s, -1 to hit 18 wound model in one turn after getting alpha struck you are bringing enough firepower to delete as many marines as I can afford to put on the table.
   
Made in gb
Lethal Lhamean




Birmingham

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Is it possible for an army to be elite without the faction being elite?

For example, an MT army of all officers and command squads with plasma guns has the cheapest model ring up at 22 ppm, but most people wouldn't consider it an 'elite army' I don't think. Not like Custodes.

An Eldar Wraith army can be very elite, mines got about 40 bodies and no vehicles. The cheapest models in the list are the Shadow Spectres at 33pts each.

A Drukhari Haemonculus Coven list can be very elite if you load up on Grotesques and Talos, my list runs with about 30 bodies, it's very survivable but sadly Coven units have no teeth in the index.
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So I play an elite army then, with 3 models at 1500 points for a total of 78 wounds, or just over 19 points per wound.

And I've certainly had very little trouble doing well. I don't think the problem is elites, I think the problem is something else.


My vague cost-per-wound model isn't useful in all cases, true.

However it does provide an interesting illustration of some of the "elite unit" problems running around in the game; your Knights' T8 wounds are cheaper than GK/Deathwatch's T4 wounds. 19pts/wound is what you'd get if your entire army was naked Deathwatch Marines, if you want the guns to be actually effective you're spending more like 25pts/wound.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
bananathug wrote:
I think we are trying to figure out what an "elite" army is but honestly the problem is with non-specialized armies or units that pay for abilities they don't use.

Dark Reapers are pretty elite but they are super competitive because they really only pay for abilities that they use, same with plasma scions, shining spears, brimstone horrors or most any of the units that make up competitive lists.

I don't think it is an elite vs non-elite argument but a generalist vs specialist and the specialists win very handily in 8th ed...


The reason this is getting framed as "elite vs non-elite" is that the thing that's usually getting paid for while being useless is durability. New players walk into a Space Marine army seeing the heavy armour and hearing the fluff about how cool it is expecting it to allow them to deploy a few power-armoured models on the table and expect them to last a turn or two, then get casually deleted because T4/3+ isn't enough to endure any amount of fire in the vast storms of high-power bullets of an actual game of 8th, and then get annoyed because a) their expectation of what their "elite units" should do is pretty wrong, and b) because their "elite units" are actually pretty bad.

So it isn't about some mechanical property of "eliteness" so much as it is an expectation of "eliteness" that isn't held up, especially with regard to Space Marines.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/13 02:17:52


Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in au
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine




Oz

Here's how i look at it. If you look at the prices per model of 'conventional' armies, there are 4 rough bands:
1. Horde. ~4ppm for troops
2. Average. ~8ppm for troops
3. Elite. ~12ppm for troops
4. sorry son, you're probably going to lose. ~16ppm and up for troops

Things like knights and superheavies don't really fit into this (or 40k in general), but with 'conventional' armies that have infantry and tanks, it describes the situation very well. Unfortunately, at 3 - 'elite', the basic troops just don't pull their weight very well. You can talk about generalists vs specialists here, or lack of relative dps potential, but basically they're not worth their points. They're costed as if their minor stat increases (which is usually +1 compared to a 'horde' model attribute) are significant.

Then you get 4 - mariner marines. Grey knights, death watch, and look now - custodes. Paying even more points for basically the same profile that marines get (oh custodes are a bit more +1, but cost even more points). Aka sorry son, you're probably going to lose.

The problem starts at 3, it's no real surprise that armies at 4 have an even harder time of it.

 
   
Made in us
Irked Necron Immortal




I would put it like this. An elite army tends to have low model count due to high model cost. So really any army can be an "elite army." However, an elite faction would have this aspect baked in. Like others have noted these would be Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Custodes, and ill throw in 1ksons (well any of the god specific armies really).

The issue Elite armies/factions tend to suffer from is less board control while casualties tend to hit twice as hard. When your basic troops tend toward the high end it gets even worse. My (highly unoptimized) 10-man Deathwatch Kill team is 356p, my 10-man Strike Squad is 214, and the 5-man Custodian Guard is 285. If I was to put that all into a single detachment that is 1055 in just Troops 20 of which is Power Armor 1W models. The only upside is that I get lots of special weapons with some crappy smite from the GK
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

I still maintain that "low model count armies" can do perfectly well, like my 3 at 1500.

If that isn't elite, I don't know what is.

The real problem, as someone mentioned before, is specialization vs. generalization.
   
Made in no
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I still maintain that "low model count armies" can do perfectly well, like my 3 at 1500.

If that isn't elite, I don't know what is.

The real problem, as someone mentioned before, is specialization vs. generalization.



there is a difference between an army of say 15-20 models consisting of the "classical" 3 wounds in a 2000p list and 3 knights/super tanks whit what, 15+ wounds per model? (idk the wound count on thouse large models)
the huge models has a chanse as it take a large amount of dedication to actualy take them down. 3 wound elites whitout 5+++ invul saves dies in 1 turn.....

darkswordminiatures.com
gamersgrass.com
Collects: Wild West Exodus, SW Armada/Legion. Adeptus Titanicus, Dust1947. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






If it cost more than 12 points and isn’t actually going to kill a whole lot, then it’s gak. Extra 1-2 wounds or toughness or invuln below 3+ are just wasted points.

A tac marine is a questionable investment even at 10 points. A grey knight terminator at 35 would be maybe okay? Most “elite infantry” cost a fourth to one third more than they should.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/15 09:07:16


 
   
Made in fr
Longtime Dakkanaut




I think bananathug hit the nail on the head. Elite units can be good, as long as they can leverage everything that they pay for. And the game has many examples of such units.

Most examples of crappy elite units/army involve units that pay a lot for a good armor save. I think it's mostly because armor saves can't be relied upon. If your defense relies on cheap wounds, or good invul, there's not much the opponent can do about it. It's almost impossible to kill 4pts models efficiently, and invul saves can be taken most of the time. The same goes for great offensive power that can't be removed before it's used (deep-striking units, units hiding in good transports, etc.).
   
Made in au
Unrelenting Rubric Terminator of Tzeentch





 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I still maintain that "low model count armies" can do perfectly well, like my 3 at 1500.

If that isn't elite, I don't know what is.

The real problem, as someone mentioned before, is specialization vs. generalization.


Because you can't seem to understand that spamming super units invalidates large swathes of your opponents army (even in 8th) while requiring you to lose many more wounds before you have any loss of offensive capabiity. "Oh, I take 3 undercosted super units and do fine, therefore high cost low model count armies must be fine".

The issue is that most "elite" units are overcosted, usually because their improved defensive stats aren't worth the increased points they pay (though sometimes it's a case of their improved offense isn't anough to counter how squishy they are for the points). Things like smiteor other mortal wound generators hurt extra hard on "elite" units that pay extra for invulnerable saves since it makes what is usually an already fragile unit even more paper thin. The old fallback example for incorrect costing is terminator vs tacticals. The terminators shtick is meant to be improved durability, but the basic tactical, which is already a pretty sub-par choice, is more resilient against a wide variety of weapons while also having more "firepower" (and I use that word litghtly 'cause bolters aren't threatening much these days) per point.

 Peregrine wrote:
What, you don't like rolling dice to see how many dice you roll? Why are you such an anti-dice bigot?
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: