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.

I want pictures :(

This is supposed to get released March, correct?

April. Battle Missions in March.

You get more Death Company when you take Devastators because it's meant to encourage a rounded out army. This is all still secondhand information anyway. I'm still doubting the validity of any of it until there's a codex in my hands, and I encourage you all to do the same.

Worst case scenario, you take 4 dudes with rocket launchers in your army. Oh no, the sky is falling!

Enlighten a non SM player please, why are devastators so undesirable? Whenever I play against 'em they seem to do just fine.

They take up a Heavy Support slot. Which can be better used with taking a LR.

In tournaments they apparently don't have their place.

Like 'ard boyz....2500pts lets you spam 5 LR's with Vulkan. Dev's are also not effective due to them needing to be in a rhino to stay safe from anti-infantry tactics thus limiting the squad to 2 Heavies at a time.

If it wasn't for lash prince armies being able to pull devs out of cover into the open they'd be viable in the cutthroat scene. Thankfully I only play friendly games and the Devs I face are normally HB or ML and they work just fine. Just not "fine enough" to be feared in tournaments. Those slots are better taken by LR's and vindicators.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Funny how back in 3rd ed and even 4th only a moron took LR's because they died too easy and were generally not worth it.

Now everyone in tournaments spams LR's (though to me the only one worth spamming is LRC or LRR) and no tournament player takes devs.

I wonder if 6th will change that.

Brother SRM wrote:Worst case scenario, you take 4 dudes with rocket launchers in your army. Oh no, the sky is falling!

It's redundant, all Marines come with rocket launchers as standard anyway. At least that's what I heard from the Nid players who can't get over the loss of Eternal Warrior.

Odd. In my gaming group all Marines come with HB's.

Either way, BS4 HBs & MLs just don't cut it! XD

Unless they finally price them right...

Jack

Yeah, I'm just glad my group aren't tournament people so use whatever is fun.

2 ML and/or HB squads annoy me as a Nid and Eldar player.

Fateweaver wrote:Yeah, I'm just glad my group aren't tournament people so use whatever is fun.

2 ML and/or HB squads annoy me as a Nid and Eldar player.

What?! My guardians love HBs!

Guardians are just there to catch bullets so I don't think their opinion counts.

That is totally not what they do >.> (He's on to us! Hide!)

Fateweaver wrote:Yeah, I'm just glad my group aren't tournament people so use whatever is fun.

Ah good. The implication that tournament/playing competitively is mutually exclusive to using fun units.

You're worse than John sometimes Fate, honestly.

Fun units to me are units like Pyrovores or Devastators, Lictors and Ymgarl Stealers. None of those apparently are not or will not be used competitively, hence to me they are obviously "units only used for fun and not because the one using them wants to win".

That's the attitude I get from cutthroats. I'm sure "fun" units for tournament gamers are tervigons, LR spam, Hive guard, 2x primes, 3x trygons because they apparently outperform everything else in their respective slot. Those, to me, aren't "fun" units. A "fun" unit IMO is a unit taken not because it's good or bad but because it's "fun" to take regardless of how well it does.

I played 'Stealer shock in 4th before the bandwagoners jumped from nidzilla to SS in 5th. I'm sure I would have gotten my ass handed to me by a Nidzilla player but to me Nidzilla wasn't fun.

My opponents build lists that would get laughed at on the forums but none of us attend tournaments so what would be considered laughable lists at 'ard boyz or any GT do quite well amongst our circle of non-WAACers.

Just one venue of speculation I thought we should explore:

1. GW wants to make BA the Assault Marine army of 40k.

2. Assault Marines, as described in C:SM, seem to suck.

What can GW do overcome this obstacle? Making them troops is not enough if rhino / razorback spam keeps being more effective.

A. They can add to the assies' (to coin a term) survivability. Maybe that's what the Tantalus is for.

B. They can reduce their points cost. Bit of a no-brainer.

C. They can up their abilities. Army-wide FC will go a long way, but what I'm really hoping for is more attacks. It just seems to be AMs major drawback vs. let's say orks.

D. They can give them more options for nasty weapons. Worked wonders for Grey Hunters. Hints of Melta pistols point in this direction.

What do you think? How will GW avoid pushing an army that relies on subpar units?

What do you think? How will GW avoid pushing an army that relies on subpar units?

You already mentioned the ways but just one won't be enough. They have to lower the points cost significantly and give them more abilities and weapons. I just don't see this happening. Based on these rumours my feeling is BA will be footsloggers arriving via Drop Pods with a bunch of Furiosos or Death Company Dreadnoughts etc.

Fateweaver wrote:Fun units to me are units like Pyrovores or Devastators, Lictors and Ymgarl Stealers. None of those apparently are not or will not be used competitively, hence to me they are obviously "units only used for fun and not because the one using them wants to win".

That's the attitude I get from cutthroats. I'm sure "fun" units for tournament gamers are tervigons, LR spam, Hive guard, 2x primes, 3x trygons because they apparently outperform everything else in their respective slot. Those, to me, aren't "fun" units. A "fun" unit IMO is a unit taken not because it's good or bad but because it's "fun" to take regardless of how well it does.

I played 'Stealer shock in 4th before the bandwagoners jumped from nidzilla to SS in 5th. I'm sure I would have gotten my ass handed to me by a Nidzilla player but to me Nidzilla wasn't fun.

My opponents build lists that would get laughed at on the forums but none of us attend tournaments so what would be considered laughable lists at 'ard boyz or any GT do quite well amongst our circle of non-WAACers.

Oh that's just silliness. A prerequisite of being a "fun" unit is that it can't have competitive value? Trygons are not a "fun" unit? They seem fun to me. Melta Vets in a chimera aren't "fun"? I have fun with them when they pop out to suicide melt a Land Raider full of assault termies. A lash prince forcing a unit of guardsmen to line up like sheep to a slaughter before one of those template dropping noise marine squads tear em up isn't fun? I know my friend enjoys doing it.

Also, what isn't fun about LR spam? 3-4 of those big beauties in a deployment zone is daunting.

As you say, you play stealer shock, and did before it was as competitve as nidzilla. That's awesome, I have always loved the idea of SS army. Is your army suddenly less fun because it can compete in a tournament? Did you rewrite your list in disgust when you realized that your list was functional?

"fun" and "competitive" don't need to be mutually exclusive, and the WAAC style of play comes from the player, not the units or composition he uses. I play these games to have a lot of fun and some laughs, and in the end it isn't a big deal who wins. That doesn't mean I don't try my hardest to outhink and outstrategize my opponent during play. Part of that comes from writing a good list. This doesn't automatically make me WAAC or TFG, that comes down to the individual.

Kveldulv wrote:
What can GW do overcome this obstacle? Making them troops is not enough if rhino / razorback spam keeps being more effective.

A. They can add to the assies' (to coin a term) survivability. Maybe that's what the Tantalus is for.

B. They can reduce their points cost. Bit of a no-brainer.

C. They can up their abilities. Army-wide FC will go a long way, but what I'm really hoping for is more attacks. It just seems to be AMs major drawback vs. let's say orks.

D. They can give them more options for nasty weapons. Worked wonders for Grey Hunters. Hints of Melta pistols point in this direction.

What do you think? How will GW avoid pushing an army that relies on subpar units?

Hopefully all of the above, then they'll be both varied and viable.

Jack

BA AM will have Scoring AM, AM as troops, AM with more options, and wider range of options.

The key is reasonable cost. SM get Tacs & Rhino/Razor/Pod cheap and pay premium for JP. BA should get JPs cheap, and pay premium for OCE Rhino and extra premium for Razor. The Tantalus as a Fast Pred-armored Transport is great to set the top end.

JohnHwangDD wrote:BA AM will have Scoring AM, AM as troops, AM with more options, and wider range of options.

The key is reasonable cost. SM get Tacs & Rhino/Razor/Pod cheap and pay premium for JP. BA should get JPs cheap, and pay premium for OCE Rhino and extra premium for Razor. The Tantalus as a Fast Pred-armored Transport is great to set the top end.

But currently AM's are only 2 pts more a model than Tac Marines in the new SM book. 2 pts./model for jump packs and trading the bolter for a CCW isn't unreasonable,considering the BA AM's will also be considered Troops. I really can't see 15-16 point AM's with Furious Charge as a scoring unit.

But jump pack troops aren't really better then Tactical Marines, since they trade the protection of transports for only slightly greater mobility (since transports also provide that) and pay more. Really they need to come in cheaper for ten men then a ten man squad with rhino, as the rhino also provides a whole extra unit to contest and fight with.

Jack.

Presumably, GW playtested the BA Troops and knows even at +2 pts, SM AM are less good than Tacs.

10 SM are 90 pts for 5 SM base + 16 pts extra SM w/ Tactics + 35 pts for Rhino / Pod = 170 for 10 SM & 35 for Rhino = 205 total..

Try 100 pts base for 5 BA AM + 18 pts extra BA AM, with FC & Scoring for "FREE" = 190 total.

BA AM could go 5 or 10 cheaper, even still.


Note: I assume BA AM get VS & 2 specials to match the SM "free" guns

JohnHwangDD wrote:Presumably, GW playtested the BA Troops and knows even at +2 pts, SM AM are less good than Tacs.

10 SM are 90 pts for 5 SM base + 16 pts extra SM w/ Tactics + 35 pts for Rhino / Pod = 170 for 10 SM & 35 for Rhino = 205 total..

Try 100 pts base for 5 BA AM + 18 pts extra BA AM, with FC & Scoring for "FREE" = 190 total.

BA AM could go 5 or 10 cheaper, even still.

If you can get a Tactical Squad with twin-linked MM and flamer (Vulkan) and a Rhino for 205 points, the same price has to be able to buy 10 BA AM (furious charge etc) with one or two special weapons and a power fist.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Try 100 pts base for 5 BA AM + 18 pts extra BA AM, with FC & Scoring for "FREE" = 190 total.

BA AM could go 5 or 10 cheaper, even still.

Yeah I'd be pretty happy with ~180 for ten AM including Sergent and two special weapons/power weapons.

Jack

Yup. I'll note the VS & specials above to clarify

Presumably, GW playtested the BA troops...

You mean GW is actually gonna start playtesting!?

Therion wrote:
If you can get a Tactical Squad with twin-linked MM and flamer (Vulkan) and a Rhino for 205 points, the same price has to be able to buy 10 BA AM (furious charge etc) with one or two special weapons and a power fist.

Except you don't get Vulkan for free.

DruidODurham wrote:

Presumably, GW playtested the BA troops...

You mean GW is actually gonna start playtesting!?

Given how flat the 40k balance is, the odds of it being untested pure luck are infinitesmal.