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.

Karol wrote:

crzylgs wrote:
What is this post? :S

'Is 20% really all that much?'... Yes... It's 20% or 1/5.

If you take 20% away from a 2k list, you can add 400pts worth of goodness. There is a LOT you can do with 400pts.

When people are min:maxing their lists they are considering the implications of wargear that often costs <10pts, never mind 400

Also I'm yet to see a tournament with rules stating: 'Bring around 2000-2400pts worth of units, because what could that extra 20% achieve?'

Only 400pts is not the same thing for all armies. 400pts of eldar or knights, is not the same thing as taking 400pts of GK. So again the changes to really change stuff would have to be very specific and happen to very specific models and armies the most. If everything gets a 20% drop, or even just hte most used stuff. You will just end up playing games which would be 2400pts right now, only with a 2000pts label. And maybe there are some armies which are middle pack now, but at 2200 or 2300 become broken. But I doubt playing 2400 suddenly fixs most 8th ed problems.

The premise is 20% off of all marine stuff, not on all models.
Obviously it's not going to happen, marines would become completely broken. Let's take a typical DA list and let's add a couple of Talons, what could go wrong?

Related to my first post, I'm already taking two Battalions at 2000 points. Another 480 could be a Captain, Lieutenant, and three Tac/Intercessor squads. Good for another 5 CP, with the added benefit of deploying with a third buff bubble.

ERJAK wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
A 20% drop across all units seems massively unlikely, so I'd probably adjust the thought experiment a little bit to only include the more basic units. In the case of SM that would be any non-character in Power Armour and Terminators. Even dropping 2 points per PA model and 3 per Terminator, most current SM armies would get back maybe 100 points at the most. That doesn't get you much extra, frankly.

I think the most successful lists to take advantage of the points drops will probably have to start from scratch and not just adjust their current armies.

This is like I said earlier, it's not about 'How much more stuff can i bring as a result of these units being cheaper?' it's 'Now that these are cheaper, are they better than the thing I was bringing instead' The important gains made by points changes are in opportunity cost, not raw 'saved x points in y list'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
The only people who profit are GW as it means you can buy more models.

Having said that, points increases / decreases are not necessarily the best way to go about bringing balance. If GW had a vast amount of data on how each faction interacts and performs against every other faction, which I am sure they don't, then that would allow for rules amends which make sense.

Failing that, get rid of allies full stop - although that would be a fairly disingenuous solution.

You railroaded this away from the original post pretty hard here. The question posed was 'what difference does a 20% points change actually make? Is it significant?' not 'Should we have allies in 40k?'. That's a whole different thread.

Not the intention. My interpretation was that the question was intrinsically linked to balance amongst factions. Just my 2p.

Spoletta 767481 10249095 wrote:

The premise is 20% off of all marine stuff, not on all models.
Obviously it's not going to happen, marines would become completely broken. Let's take a typical DA list and let's add a couple of Talons, what could go wrong?

Well I don't play DAs. 2000pts more of GK stuff when other marines get point drops too, mean GK stay more or less the same way they are now. Without rules changes a 10% drop on only GK stuff, and all other factions staying with same points costs, would still make GK bad. So wouldn't change much. I don't care what GW does to other marines. When they try to fix other marines, they just nerf my army. They "fixed" ultramarines gunlines and nerfed GK, they wanted to limit spam and I can't run my 4 units of paladins. deep strike was too powerful vs eldar and knights, GW nerfs it and each of my GK units has the cost of turn 1 deep strike build in to it. Maybe am a pessimist, but I fully expect GW to make the GK points cost better in that they get what ever point drops or rises other marines get on the units they both share, and then getting points drops on unimportant units. I wouldn't be much suprised either, if suddenly the GM NDK had a points rise, "because everyone uses it".

It really depends on what is getting the points drop. The poster who mentioned SM termies is right. They are too slow, pack too little punch to really have a role on the battle field. The deepstrike rules really hurt them so unless they were crazy cheap (like 50% cheaper) they're just not going to see the field.

Same with centurions. Tacs/primaris on the other hand would get more play if they were cheaper. Their role is literally to be cheap wounds on the field. If they get cheaper then they are filling their role.

Termies and the other trash SM units need rules/strats to make them playable. Other units like hellblasters/inceptors need a change in the meta or tweeks to other armies to be good (too many ap-2+ d2+ cheap weapons). The vehicles are a strange case. I'm not sure 50 points off a land raider is enough but too much more than that and it gets interesting for just that amount of t8 wounds for that price.

All that said, cheaper marines just means more allies for me. I think space wolves and deathwatch would really benefit as blood claws are pretty good and if they get cheaper that's a ton of cheap s4 attacks, same with long fangs. DW would be able to ally in the anti-tank they need and will probably be pretty dangerous.

The good units (the like 4 of them) would get better and marines would probably find a good spot in soup lists but the problems with most marine units are more systemic than just being over-costed (terrible strats, bad strats, poor synergies, limited movement and a meta designed to exploit their weaknesses)

 Galef wrote:
Random thought on the upcoming CA and many of the rumours that X is getting a points decrease:
Does a 20% decrease really make much difference?

For example, if enough units get reduced in the Marine codex so that most lists end up being 20% cheaper, what could you get out of that?
On the small scale, if a Tactical Marine goes from 13ppm to 11ppm, you'd only get 1 more Marine per about 5. Is that really that big a difference?

I guess what I am asking is, what would you add to a 2000pt Marine or GK list to take advantage of roughly 200-400pts that was freed up?
How would it help compete against DE, Knights, or some other common opponent that your list struggles against?

-

Well my math is assuming a 20% cut to all marines but Guilliman, would change my current list of all primaris that is: Guilliman, Primaris Librarian, Primaris LT,15 intercessors, Primaris Ancient, Primaris Apothocary, 12 incepters, 14 Hellblasters as a Battalion to..

Guilliman, 3 more Intercessors, another LT, a small squad of Reivers, and 1 more Hellblaster to make 15.. I'd also split the Inceptors into 3 squads.

I'd gain around 20 bodies, and make my battalion into a brigade. I'd go from 11 CP to 18 CP.

and that is with a just for fun Primaris list. And I don't actually think its over powered at the new place or out of line. I still don't think it could compete at a top table.

Personally, a 100pt drop on my WK still wouldn't be enough to merit taking it, because 3 Fire Prisms would still be better
I'd take Windriders in my list again too, if they drop them to half the cost of Shining Spears.

-

Index CWE wasn't OP.
My Index CWE Aspect Spam was reasonable - a bit weak, actually.
My 1500pt Index CWE list became sub-1250 with the Codex.

My point is, when CWE got roughly a 20% points decrease, the same armies and units went from "meh" to "OP".

(Note: I'm talking Index CWE, not Index Ynnari, which was OP.)

CWE is propped up by some select units, spells, and strats. And Ynarri. Dropping the points on scorpions and banshees didn't break anything. It was reapers and farseers.

Which is why I'm glad some rumors are actually saying Shining Spears are going up in points

-

They should probably go up more than the rumors, but I'm really sick of them, so my objectivity is probably suspect.

That's what everyone said about Dark Reapers, about how the points wouldn't change anything. Yet Reapers mostly got replaced by Spears with that change.

Reapers are still way too cheap, imo. At least compared to every other heavy weapon schlub in the game. Battle sister, marine, scourge, loota, flash git, etc. Maybe hive guard are close. Maybe broadsides. The rest are all a joke compared to a dark reaper.

Would that be true if Devs got a 20% price cut? I'm not sure that Reapers would still be better.

Yeah, reapers would still be better. They have a scaling bonus, as in they ignore ALL to hit mods, including their own movement. The anti-personnel ammo is so much better than frag missiles that that alone justifies a 10 pt difference to me. And they have access to real spells. And fire and fade. Dark reapers and dissy cannons are dual-handedly keeping primaris off the table in my meta. All primaris. Because what's the point? How do you price the invalidation of an entire model line by existing?

Devs with a 20% price cut are still bad compared to Xeno shooting in general.

Yeah that's actually something I'm excited about with the current CA rumors.
Reapers and Spears do not need to go up by much, so long as other options (like most Marine options) also go down.

13ppm Marines are horrible compared to 4ppm Guardsmen, but 11ppm Marines don't; look so bad compared to 5ppm Guardsmen. The ratio is just as important as the points increase/decrease itself.

Steady increases for powerful units and steady decreases for underpowered units shifts the balance far better than taking a sledge hammer to either.
I also personally think the Reaper launchers should be Damage d3 rather than straight 3 and Dissies should only be D1, but that isn't going to happen in CA.

-

It doesn't help that marine tools for removing reapers are hilariously ineffective or overcosted or neutered by forewarned.

Yeah, 11 marines to 5 guardsmen is fine. Maybe even favors the marines, which is fine, because marine vehicles will still be inferior to guard vehicles after CA, I assure you.

Take another look:
34ppm Dark Reaper
27ppm Dev + PC

It's 36" range vs 48" range
It's Hd3 S8 vs H1 S8 or H2 S5 - so twice the shots, or same shots and nearly twice the strength
It's S/T4 vs S/T3
Cheap ablaitive bodies

It does have Gets Hot, although even its non-Overcharged shooting is comparable.
It doesn't have ignore-penalties. That is big.
Can take more per squad.

I still think those are about comparable on the per-model basis. Throw in the option for cheap ablaitive wounds and being 20% cheaper?

Plasma cannons aren't a good meta choice right now. Maybe after CA? Drukhari being able to dial up -1 at will on top of many units with -1 built in just kill plasma cannon as a meta choice. Marines can NOT afford to remove themselves. The non-overcharged profile on plasma is really bad, and that hurts too. Only one damage is not tenable for a D3 rof heavy weapon. That's almost frag missile bad.


Reapers are fire and forget. They never backfire. Never kill themselves. And foil a lot of defense by existing. That's incredibly valuable. I still have no idea how to get rid of these guys with marines, either. IG has lots of good options. But not marines.

I went with the PC because it's the most analgous to the Reaper Launcher the way it's used.

34ppm Reaper
30ppm LC Dev

48" range for both
H1 S9 AP-2 Dd6 vs H1 S8 AP-2 D3: The LC is certainly better.
S/T4 vs S/T 3
LD8 rerollable vs LD8
Cheap ablaitive bodies vs can take more full-cost full-dakka bodies

The ignore-penalties is very good, but 4ppm, better S, better D, better S/T, and better LD more than offset that.

Also, if the non-Overcharge profile (Hd3 S7 AP-2 D1) is so bad, why are Reapers with Starshot so good (H2 S5 AP-2 D2)? Two less S for D2? That's not a huge swing.

Two damage is huge. S5 wounds everything on a 5+ at worst. Doom access makes this even better. S5 D2 evaporates all primaris, the future of marines, bikes, Tau suits, you name it. Try killing those units with regular plasma. It's a huge swing going from S5 D2 to S7 D1.

Lascannons are crap in the current meta, imo. Again, it's invuln save: the game right now. The better Str is okay, but the AP rarely matters for this reason, and the S/T/LD on the marines is crap too. Come on, you know how the games go. "oh look, devs! Eat starshot/dissy cannons. LOL all dead. GG loser Astartes."

Also don't forget that MOST T8 units suck. I've purged all lascannons out of my lists for the moment. They are god awful.

Bharring wrote:
That's what everyone said about Dark Reapers, about how the points wouldn't change anything. Yet Reapers mostly got replaced by Spears with that change.

If Spears get bumped to 35-40ppm, I'd expect those Reapers to go right back into those lists

Still, the biggest issue with Spears and Reapers was Ynnari. Ynnari needs to get fixed or outright removed. Just have the 3 Ynnari characters as "plug-n-play" options that can be added to any Aeldari list without affecting keyword traits and make SfD an aura that those Characters have rather than something units get.

Martel732 wrote:
Two damage is huge. S5 wounds everything on a 5+ at worst. Doom access makes this even better. S5 D2 evaporates all primaris, the future of marines, bikes, Tau suits, you name it. Try killing those units with regular plasma.

Lascannons are crap in the current meta, imo. Again, it's invuln save: the game right now. The better Str is okay, but the AP rarely matters for this reason, and the S/T/LD on the marines is crap too. Come on, you know how the games go. "oh look, devs! Eat starshot/dissy cannons. LOL all dead. GG loser Astartes."

I have to agree.
D2 is given out far too much. Dissies and the S5 option on the RL really should just be D1.
If I had a crack at designing their rules, they'd look like this:

Dissies: S5 Assault 3, D1, AP-3
RL : S8, Assualt 1, D:d3 AP-2 --or-- S5, Assualt 3, D1, AP-2

And yes, I'd specifically make the RL Assault for 2 reasons:
A) to take advantage of Battle Focus and
B) because with this change, I'd remove the Reapers "ignore penalties to hit" rule and replace it with "ignores cover bonus"

-

I haven't even gotten into Ynarri. Just the utter incompetence of the competing heavy weapon schlubs.

I'll take a 20% discount on devs, and it gets them much closer. But reapers would STILL be better. That's how bad it is atm.

Id definitely be in favor of most Plas going back to D1. Dissies need it the most, followed by Reaper Launchers S5 shooting.

I'd not be in favor or Reapers using Battle Focus though. That's kinda part of their schtick.

Ignoring ALL to hit penalties is too hard to cost though. That mechanic just can't be a thing.

Bharring wrote:
I went with the PC because it's the most analgous to the Reaper Launcher the way it's used.

34ppm Reaper
30ppm LC Dev

48" range for both
H1 S9 AP-2 Dd6 vs H1 S8 AP-2 D3: The LC is certainly better.
S/T4 vs S/T 3
LD8 rerollable vs LD8
Cheap ablaitive bodies vs can take more full-cost full-dakka bodies

The ignore-penalties is very good, but 4ppm, better S, better D, better S/T, and better LD more than offset that.

Also, if the non-Overcharge profile (Hd3 S7 AP-2 D1) is so bad, why are Reapers with Starshot so good (H2 S5 AP-2 D2)? Two less S for D2? That's not a huge swing.

because they shot twice for free, and doom exists?

400 more points of stuff for my marines would be huge. I right now have lots of firepower, but very little screening. With this, i can ensure a proper screen, and invest in more mobile units.

It certainly cannot hurt.

Martel732 wrote:
Plasma cannons aren't a good meta choice right now. Maybe after CA? Drukhari being able to dial up -1 at will on top of many units with -1 built in just kill plasma cannon as a meta choice. Marines can NOT afford to remove themselves. The non-overcharged profile on plasma is really bad, and that hurts too. Only one damage is not tenable for a D3 rof heavy weapon. That's almost frag missile bad.


Reapers are fire and forget. They never backfire. Never kill themselves. And foil a lot of defense by existing. That's incredibly valuable. I still have no idea how to get rid of these guys with marines, either. IG has lots of good options. But not marines.

Plasma Cannons on low charge are a pretty great way to kill Reapers. Wounding on 2+ with a -3 AP at 36". My army is stacked with PCs with Banner support.

Edit:
On topic, if Marines dropped to 11 I'd field 100 of them.

I generally don't do Points, just PL, but much as people using points seem to think, I reckon Marines could really do with a cost reduction. They feel to me at the moment a bit like they're in a similar position to Orks before the latter got their Codex and the associated cost reductions. Basic marines getting a 20-25% drop in cost seems about right to me. Maybe a bit more for Assault Marines, tbh.

"because they shot twice for free, and doom exists?"
You do realize that a Dev can shoot twice, too? And can reroll wounds with support too?