Switch Theme:

Railgun vs Knights  [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
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

Hey, Tankbustas doubled or even tripled their shot count!

That totally makes up for turning into Heavy and therefore halving the number of hits, right?

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





SemperMortis wrote:

So to summarize, you admit they were heavily into some lists until people realized that MM attack bikes were better because they had more durability/speed with slightly less firepower. Likewise, a lot of people ran Dev MM because the overall cost might be slightly higher, but they were a 175pt auto-delete anything on the table unit in a drop pod, something that Eradicators couldn't have because apparently its too hard to retrofit a drop pod to handle an extra 4 inches of Primaris Marine

The point was that yes they were heavily relied upon in a lot of lists, in competitive lists they made frequent appearances until people realized that with the 9th mission set it would be better to go for speed teamed with that ridiculous firepower put out by the newly buffed MM.

BTW, SM Players, I was promised my Tankbustas were going to get a similar treatment to MMs.....still waiting for that


And to summarize you admit that Eradicators weren't actually a problematic unit, because they had drawbacks that had to be considered in terms of how the game plays and that just looking directly at a unit's performance doesn't tell you how it will play out in the missions and against various armies.

6 months from now we may be talking about how T'au players moved away from using four HH, because <insert flaw here>.

   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

“Other units do it better” doesn’t mean the first unit is bad.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter




Eradicators main problem is they were born with two extremely special rules. 1, double shoot
and 2. New melta damage styles. Gone were the old style of 2d6 drop the lowest, now these double shooting 24" blasters with assault did at minimum, 4-10 damage, where as before they did 1-6.

Eradicators weren't the problem, their guns were.
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Eradicators main problem is they were born with two extremely special rules. 1, double shoot
and 2. New melta damage styles. Gone were the old style of 2d6 drop the lowest, now these double shooting 24" blasters with assault did at minimum, 4-10 damage, where as before they did 1-6.

Eradicators weren't the problem, their guns were.

Double shoot isn't a property of the gun, so no.

And the d6+2 matters less because the new melta profile got left behind as more armies escalated the damage problem (and the Hammerhead is part of the continued escalation).

An 'even more better meltagun' seemed ridiculous at the beginning of the edition when we weren't used to where 9th edition was going. Its still a symptom of the same design problem, its just been left behind as the lethality problem keeps growing unchecked (and is even encouraged).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/17 01:44:54


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 JNAProductions wrote:
“Other units do it better” doesn’t mean the first unit is bad.

Aye, especially since "doing it better" often comes down to points. One of the reasons Attack Bikes are better than eradicators is that they're a bit cheap for what they do, while most of their preferred targets are a bit on the overpriced side.

Which, coming back to the topic at hand, is the problem I'm seeing with the HH and Stormsurge: they're very aggressively priced compared to similar units. The leaked prices for the HH puts it in the same price range as a "bare" Sicaran or Leman Russ, while the Stormsurge is cheaper than a Repulsor Executioner or an Achilles. We do have a new CA coming up, and the leaks are saying that the Custodes Ares and Orion are both getting 50 PPM drops, so maybe gw has finally realized that they've overpriced most heavy vehicles in the "new AT" paradigm, and we'll see similar drops for other heavy vehicles. But if we don't, it looks bad.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 JNAProductions wrote:
“Other units do it better” doesn’t mean the first unit is bad.


I'm not saying they were bad. I'm saying the reaction to the unit was over done and I am making the parallel between Eradicators and the HH.

My gut tells me that T'au are going to want to take other things than just HH and that by proxy alleviates the threat to Knights a little.

Obviously that doesn't make facing HH with big models an enjoyable experience.

   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




 Daedalus81 wrote:

Obviously that doesn't make facing HH with big models an enjoyable experience.


Really? Eleven pages of tangents and argumentative blather, and it ends in 'oh, yeah, that probably isn't fun?'

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2022/01/17 03:05:40


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Voss wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:

Obviously that doesn't make facing HH with big models an enjoyable experience.


Really? Eleven pages of tangents and argumentative blather, and it ends in 'oh, yeah, that probably isn't fun?'


Knights don't have their book. I can't predict how lists will shape, when books will come out, and what rules they'll have. We can debate GW's strategy there, but it won't change anything.

That doesn't mean the HH will get spammed. Someone rolling hot with other units is part of the game. If people can't deal with big swings they need to rethink their approach. It's harder for knights, but four titanics was kind of a gak boring army to play against so I won't exactly lament their need to pull in armigers.

   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

 Daedalus81 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
You mean the Eradicators which heavily featured in every single Marine list for the first few months after their codex was released until they received a 12% increase in price and Marine players decided to switch over to the MM attack bikes which were ALMOST as damaging but significantly more durable/faster. You are right, I do remember them being oppressive in their ability to delete units at will.


No.

Eradicators featured heavily in some lists. Namely hamfisted Salamanders lists. At the same time Drop pod devs, attack bikes, and BGV featured quite a lot as well.

An Eradicator went to 45 points. An Attack Bike was 55. Attack Bikes were popular for far longer than Eradicators ever were even though they were less powerful on paper. Why? Because there's a lot more than "this unit does a lot of damage!" to 40K.

We'll see lists with four HH and then people will probably learn that there are better more nuanced lists that are more effective.


Attack bikes spam was (is?) a fairytale in real life. They're old firstborn models, not many players are really going to invest a lot on such models. Eradicators on the other hands were shiny new models and available for very cheap through the starter. So yeah, they've always been extremely popular, much more than attack bikes which is true that they were spammed at events but not really that much from average SM players, unlike eradicators.

And it is possible to still be OP even if there's something even more OP .

 
   
Made in gb
Rampaging Khorne Dreadnought




 Blackie wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
You mean the Eradicators which heavily featured in every single Marine list for the first few months after their codex was released until they received a 12% increase in price and Marine players decided to switch over to the MM attack bikes which were ALMOST as damaging but significantly more durable/faster. You are right, I do remember them being oppressive in their ability to delete units at will.


No.

Eradicators featured heavily in some lists. Namely hamfisted Salamanders lists. At the same time Drop pod devs, attack bikes, and BGV featured quite a lot as well.

An Eradicator went to 45 points. An Attack Bike was 55. Attack Bikes were popular for far longer than Eradicators ever were even though they were less powerful on paper. Why? Because there's a lot more than "this unit does a lot of damage!" to 40K.

We'll see lists with four HH and then people will probably learn that there are better more nuanced lists that are more effective.


Attack bikes spam was (is?) a fairytale in real life. They're old firstborn models, not many players are really going to invest a lot on such models. Eradicators on the other hands were shiny new models and available for very cheap through the starter. So yeah, they've always been extremely popular, much more than attack bikes which is true that they were spammed at events but not really that much from average SM players, unlike eradicators.

And it is possible to still be OP even if there's something even more OP .


They were only available through a limited run box for a long time, they were far from cheap on the 2nd hand market, they're still not cheap now. Where as a lot of players have attackbikes from way back when, it's as much a fairy tale list as 18 eradicators are.

Again to reiterate, hammerheads do not do the most damage in the game, even against invuln units (see above eradicators) either in total or per point. They're not going to break the game, but they're also a dumb design that's unfun.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Both erradicator spam and attack bike spam has been part of many top placing armies before drukhari and admech flipped the meta upside down to no longer favor melta.

I'm 100% with Dudeface on hammerheads. All-or-nothing mechanisms are neither competitive nor fun.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/17 12:18:23


Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







Glad we are getting down to the conclusion.

Fun game, GW. (/s)
   
Made in us
Huge Hierodule




Mexico

Voss wrote:

Double shoot isn't a property of the gun, so no.

And the d6+2 matters less because the new melta profile got left behind as more armies escalated the damage problem (and the Hammerhead is part of the continued escalation).

An 'even more better meltagun' seemed ridiculous at the beginning of the edition when we weren't used to where 9th edition was going. Its still a symptom of the same design problem, its just been left behind as the lethality problem keeps growing unchecked (and is even encouraged).

Eradicators are a curious unit, born in the jump of 8th to 9th design paradigms. Double shoot is in many ways an 8th edition rule, it was a prominent mechanic in many 8th edition codexes, it still is in the remaining ones (IG's Leman Russes, Tyranid Exocrines, Tyrannofexes and Single-minded Annihilation), while 9th edition codexes have pretty much lost double shoot rules (e.g. Kastelan Robots).

We see similar old 8th edition rules in other parts of the Space Marine codex, for example Iron Hands' 6+++ when all other 9th edition codexes have lost subfaction trait 6+++ rules, and Space Marine vehicles being notable fragile while other 9th edition vehicles have layers of defensive rules (Dreadnoughts being the exception with their -1D).

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/01/17 15:02:09


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Glad we are getting down to the conclusion.


Not really.

In any case the Wraithknight stats are leaked and it gives a vision into the future. It went from W24 to W22, but it also picked up -1D.

That's a pretty curious and important change there. If the WK kept 24 wounds and had -1D then it would be the be-all end-all of titanics that could stand up to the Rail Gun and would squelch other AT guns as well. As it is it creates an environment where you don't want to rely on plink damage to take it down so AT is required.

This is going to force lists with low long range AT to pick them up if they really want to tackle the WK. I'm curious to see how Knights will change now, too.


   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Glad we are getting down to the conclusion.


Not really.

In any case the Wraithknight stats are leaked and it gives a vision into the future. It went from W24 to W22, but it also picked up -1D.

That's a pretty curious and important change there. If the WK kept 24 wounds and had -1D then it would be the be-all end-all of titanics that could stand up to the Rail Gun and would squelch other AT guns as well. As it is it creates an environment where you don't want to rely on plink damage to take it down so AT is required.

This is going to force lists with low long range AT to pick them up if they really want to tackle the WK. I'm curious to see how Knights will change now, too.


I'm having trouble seeing what's "curious" or "important" about the Wraithknight's wound change. A 24 wound Wraithknight with the -1 damage ability wouldn't be the "all-end-all" of titanics that could stand up to the Rail Gun. Any of the 26+ wound LOWs can already take a hit from one without being bracketed, and two without going down.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/19 19:02:48


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Glad we are getting down to the conclusion.


Not really.

In any case the Wraithknight stats are leaked and it gives a vision into the future. It went from W24 to W22, but it also picked up -1D.

That's a pretty curious and important change there. If the WK kept 24 wounds and had -1D then it would be the be-all end-all of titanics that could stand up to the Rail Gun and would squelch other AT guns as well. As it is it creates an environment where you don't want to rely on plink damage to take it down so AT is required.

This is going to force lists with low long range AT to pick them up if they really want to tackle the WK. I'm curious to see how Knights will change now, too.



Well, the other effect of lowering the wounds and adding -1 damage is it makes 1 damage weapons much more effective. So you've made medium guns (autocannons) and heavy guns (battlecannons) less effective, but actually increased the relative effectiveness of tiny guns (lasguns) and some medium guns (Reaper autocannons).

The number of lasgun hits required to kill a WK went from 432 (wounding on 6s, 3+ save) to 396. The Imperial Guard only has to bring 605 points of Guardsmen, instead of 660. I know it's an absurd example,, but I'm fairly certain that's an unintended consequence. Let's go with a different example:

Bare-Bones LRBT vs Wraithknight (old first, then new)
8 Russes (rounded up from 7.6) with battlecannon and HB to kill an old WK (1280 pts)
15 Russes (rounded up from 14.9) with battlecannon and HB to kill a new WK (2520 pts)

Bare-Bones LR Punisher vs Wraithknight (old first, then new)
9 Punishers (rounded up from 8.8) with punisher cannon and HB to kill an old WK (1665 pts)
9 Punishers (rounded up from 8.9) with punisher cannon and HB to kill a new WK (1665 pts)

What this tells me is the Punisher barely lost any efficiency at all (with only the HB suffering, basically counteracting the 2-wound change) whilst the basic Battlecannon Russ is almost halved in effectiveness. Furthermore, the Punisher has now eclipsed (DRAMATICALLY) the normal Russ in the anti-WK role. That seems counter-intuitive to me - in fact, it seems downright backwards.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2022/01/19 19:04:22


 
   
Made in us
Huge Hierodule




Mexico

They both suck at anti-WK as neither are anti-tank weapons.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I'm having trouble seeing what's "curious" or "important" about the Wraithknight's wound change. A 24 wound Wraithknight with the -1 damage ability wouldn't be the "all-end-all" of titanics that could stand up to the Rail Gun. Any of the 26+ wound LOWs can already take a hit from one without being bracketed, and two without going down.


You're going to naturally see in-codex titanics way more than FW models. The other FW will be FAQ'd at some point. As it stands a WK will be better than a 28 wound knight by virtue of -1D and the fact that it's 200+ points cheaper.

e.g. 18 Dark Lances have a 91% chance to kill a W26 Titanic, 45% vs W28 5++, and 47% against the W22 5++ -1D WK.

Had the WK remained at 24 wounds it would 38% and 0% against Rail Guns, which is far and away more survivable than a W26 titanic ( and W28 5++ ) in the same cost bracket with no invulnerable save.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Well, the other effect of lowering the wounds and adding -1 damage is it makes 1 damage weapons much more effective. So you've made medium guns (autocannons) and heavy guns (battlecannons) less effective, but actually increased the relative effectiveness of tiny guns (lasguns) and some medium guns (Reaper autocannons).

The number of lasgun hits required to kill a WK went from 432 (wounding on 6s, 3+ save) to 396. The Imperial Guard only has to bring 605 points of Guardsmen, instead of 660. I know it's an absurd example,, but I'm fairly certain that's an unintended consequence. Let's go with a different example:

Bare-Bones LRBT vs Wraithknight (old first, then new)
8 Russes (rounded up from 7.6) with battlecannon and HB to kill an old WK (1280 pts)
15 Russes (rounded up from 14.9) with battlecannon and HB to kill a new WK (2520 pts)

Bare-Bones LR Punisher vs Wraithknight (old first, then new)
9 Punishers (rounded up from 8.8) with punisher cannon and HB to kill an old WK (1665 pts)
9 Punishers (rounded up from 8.9) with punisher cannon and HB to kill a new WK (1665 pts)

What this tells me is the Punisher barely lost any efficiency at all (with only the HB suffering, basically counteracting the 2-wound change) whilst the basic Battlecannon Russ is almost halved in effectiveness. Furthermore, the Punisher has now eclipsed (DRAMATICALLY) the normal Russ in the anti-WK role. That seems counter-intuitive to me - in fact, it seems downright backwards.


This just shows that plink damage is relatively better - not that it is an efficient means of taking down a knight. Whether or not the Battlecannon keeps D3 will change how it interacts with -1D. Doing the average math on D3 will just make it look worse in these scenarios since you're always reducing it to 1D.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/19 19:48:17


   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I'm having trouble seeing what's "curious" or "important" about the Wraithknight's wound change. A 24 wound Wraithknight with the -1 damage ability wouldn't be the "all-end-all" of titanics that could stand up to the Rail Gun. Any of the 26+ wound LOWs can already take a hit from one without being bracketed, and two without going down.


You're going to naturally see in-codex titanics way more than FW models. The other FW will be FAQ'd at some point. As it stands a WK will be better than a 28 wound knight by virtue of -1D and the fact that it's 200+ points cheaper.

e.g. 18 Dark Lances have a 91% chance to kill a W26 Titanic, 45% vs W28 5++, and 47% against the W22 5++ -1D WK.

Had the WK remained at 24 wounds it would 38% and 0% against Rail Guns, which is far and away more survivable than a W26 titanic ( and W28 5++ ) in the same cost bracket with no invulnerable save.


Do we know the price of a Wraithknight already? And are you factoring defensive stratagems into your math? Because nobody is going to pay that much for a unit and not use those. And what do you mean by "FW will be FAQ'd at some point"?
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







 Daedalus81 wrote:
This just shows that plink damage is relatively better - not that it is an efficient means of taking down a knight. Whether or not the Battlecannon keeps D3 will change how it interacts with -1D. Doing the average math on D3 will just make it look worse in these scenarios since you're always reducing it to 1D.


Right, relatively better.

One can say "the change to the WK makes medium to heavy weapons worse against it, so you need MEGA DAMAGE to stop it!"
One can also say "the change to the WK makes weapons that have no business hurting it at all more effective than they already were."

My fear for the IG codex is the Baneblade will get an invuln and -d3 damage or something like that. "It's a rolling fortress!" says GW. "It should be durable!" Meanwhile, all they're doing is reducing the inefficiency of high-power multidamage weapons, and increasing the relative efficiency of lasguns against it. Rolling fortress indeed.

Giving it a 2+ armor save will actually sort this problem, but that's the extent of it. There's no way to make it more durable against small arms without a bespoke special rule (i.e. feel-no-pain-save against weapons Strength 7 or lower or whatever). Or a -1 damage flat, no "to a minimum of 1" cap... but that's just making tanks immune to small arms, which I thought was a selling point of 8th (despite my dislike personally).
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Do we know the price of a Wraithknight already? And are you factoring defensive stratagems into your math? Because nobody is going to pay that much for a unit and not use those. And what do you mean by "FW will be FAQ'd at some point"?


PL 23 ( 2 more than present ).

The Phantom Titan and other FW units like T'au equivalents will certainly get tweaks after the codexes come out.

No buffs factored, because I don't want to bounce around all the possibilities that would also include craftworld spells.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Right, relatively better.

One can say "the change to the WK makes medium to heavy weapons worse against it, so you need MEGA DAMAGE to stop it!"
One can also say "the change to the WK makes weapons that have no business hurting it at all more effective than they already were."

My fear for the IG codex is the Baneblade will get an invuln and -d3 damage or something like that. "It's a rolling fortress!" says GW. "It should be durable!" Meanwhile, all they're doing is reducing the inefficiency of high-power multidamage weapons, and increasing the relative efficiency of lasguns against it. Rolling fortress indeed.

Giving it a 2+ armor save will actually sort this problem, but that's the extent of it. There's no way to make it more durable against small arms without a bespoke special rule (i.e. feel-no-pain-save against weapons Strength 7 or lower or whatever). Or a -1 damage flat, no "to a minimum of 1" cap... but that's just making tanks immune to small arms, which I thought was a selling point of 8th (despite my dislike personally).


I think the only real issue is what role D2 can play with -1D being so relevant when not shooting it at MEQ.

When this is said and done you should hopefully have a compelling reason to take a Vanquisher as well as other LRBT variants.



This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2022/01/19 20:29:08


   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







Sure, though it is a bit weird that the Battlecannon Russ is increasingly a worse generalist tank than the Punisher as more invulns, 1+ or better armor saves, and damage reduction continue to compound.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Do we know the price of a Wraithknight already? And are you factoring defensive stratagems into your math? Because nobody is going to pay that much for a unit and not use those. And what do you mean by "FW will be FAQ'd at some point"?


PL 23 ( 2 more than present ).

The Phantom Titan and other FW units like T'au equivalents will certainly get tweaks after the codexes come out.

No buffs factored, because I don't want to bounce around all the possibilities that would also include craftworld spells.

So about 460 PPM. I hope they actually pay some attention to older units this CA. And it's a bit annoying seeing these -1 damage abilities handed out piecemeal. No tank should fear "plink" damage.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






Chaos Jim wrote:
To the Knight players, the railgun is busted. You can’t hide, you lose a Knight every turn because the Tau player has 2 hammerheads, you can’t shoot back that well because they’ll either be hiding, or you’re bracketed so you can’t hit the broadside of a barn, or you’re dead.
This got me thinking about something I thought about awhile ago.
What if you just bring an all armiger/war dog army?
You still get to play knights, but armiger class knights don’t have the titanic keyword. So they can hide.
I’ve done the calculations and you could run 14 armiger class knights in a standard 2k point game, and then equip half of them with autocannons.
Of course you’d have to buy 14 armigers, but they’re faster, are still quite tanky, and more expendable. Plus they all have obsec if you’re running mono knights, and they all count as 5 models for objectives.
I want to know if this is a decent counter play to the railgun if you still want to play mono knights.



No. If this is happening, you are playing knights wrong, and need to go back and get in the books.




At Games Workshop, we believe that how you behave does matter. We believe this so strongly that we have written it down in the Games Workshop Book. There is a section in the book where we talk about the values we expect all staff to demonstrate in their working lives. These values are Lawyers, Guns and Money. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Grot 6 wrote:
Chaos Jim wrote:
To the Knight players, the railgun is busted. You can’t hide, you lose a Knight every turn because the Tau player has 2 hammerheads, you can’t shoot back that well because they’ll either be hiding, or you’re bracketed so you can’t hit the broadside of a barn, or you’re dead.
This got me thinking about something I thought about awhile ago.
What if you just bring an all armiger/war dog army?
You still get to play knights, but armiger class knights don’t have the titanic keyword. So they can hide.
I’ve done the calculations and you could run 14 armiger class knights in a standard 2k point game, and then equip half of them with autocannons.
Of course you’d have to buy 14 armigers, but they’re faster, are still quite tanky, and more expendable. Plus they all have obsec if you’re running mono knights, and they all count as 5 models for objectives.
I want to know if this is a decent counter play to the railgun if you still want to play mono knights.



No. If this is happening, you are playing knights wrong, and need to go back and get in the books.



Huh? Lots of people are having success with armigers. It's a far more flexible list than just all titantic.

   
Made in us
Trustworthy Shas'vre





Cobleskill

I can say that I enjoy fielding a single melee Despoiler (in reserve) and playing with a swarm of Autocannon Wardogs.
but then, I'm more than a little strange.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/23 02:55:17


'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!'
Racerguy180 wrote:
rules come and go, models are forever...like herpes.
 
   
Made in gb
Boosting Space Marine Biker




Northampton

I play Tau and I've been loosely following the leaks and the previews from Warcom.

I'm not sold on the Railgun. Its a very good weapon for sure, but only against specific targets. and since its a single shot there is always the possibility that the rolls spike low, and you either miss, or fail to wound. you are more likely to be successful than not, but the possibility of failure means that I would need to double or triple up on Hammerheads to guarantee a kill. The downside of that is hammerheads are relatively big models, and while you can use the mortals against other units to thin them down, its not efficient. they are also a relatively fragile chassis, so its very much a case of 'use it and lose it'. The only time when Hammerheads will be worth maxing out is if you are going up against Titanic units and you list tailor, so Knights, Greater Daemons, Mortarian etc since they can't hide behind obscuring terrain, but hammerheads can. You will also be giving your enemy easy secondaries because i find it highly unlikely given the brilliant buffs Devilfish are getting they will not be appearing in numbers.

Complicating this are the facts that Riptides appear to be moving to HS, and broadsides just got quite a lot more relevant. While getting HS slots is easy, there is a CP cost associated, and a lot of the cooler abilities tau have are stratagem locked. Broadsides, specifically Railsides with Plasma I think are going to be the surprise winners. They are now infantry, so they can benefit from cover, so they will rock a 1+, When shooting a unit with markerlights they all benefit, and with the much simplified 'spend a markerlight to get +1 to hit' you are looking at 2 Str 9 AP -4 D3+d3 +1MW shots, and 2 S8 AP-4 D3 shots each at 3+ to hit, and they appear to rock in at a little under 2 broadsides per hammerhead in points.

They will reliably punch out heavy infantry, i can see broadsides shredding aggressors, eradicators, custodes, terminators of all varieties. they have the volume high damage shots to put down vehicles. they will be relatively mobile turns 1-3 if you use Mont'ka with no loss of accuracy. and they are surviveable. for about the same points as 3 hammerheads, you can take 6 broadsides (broadsides are the more expensive choice though) that have a higher damage cap, are more useful against a variety of targets, have a better save, and are more efficient for markerlights.
Riptides too seem to be a good HS choice, the ion accelerator is decent, they are a bit tougher as standard(4++ if the leaks are correct) and as tough as before if they nova charge (4++ 5+++) or preferably they just use the nova charge to dive back behind cover since they arent titanic and not get shot at all

all that being said, I will try out hammerheads, but as it stands before playing a few games, I can forsee taking, at the most, 1 Hammerhead with a railgun to keep other players honest when they consider leaving things like swarmy out in the open to bait shooting. 1 shot and he could very well be finished, or at least open to being slapped by a wet hankerchief to finish him off.

In short then, its weird reading everyones comments about how the hammerhead railgun is going to break the game. I think it is a good weapon, but the changes to: crisis teams, commanders, devilfish, fire warriors, and so forth are much more interesting. if they lean heavily into plasma, tau are going to give elite armies palpitations. and fire warriors with AP-1 (or -2 if in mont'ka) will shred light infantry
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







The more people that don't want to play the hammerhead, the less afraid my Chaos Daemons are. So I hope your opinion spreads.

Pulse rifles are indistinguishable from Bolters against my light infantry.

All your high damage AT weapons grant me the invuln except the HH, which is why high damage AT weapons have rarely been the best way to kill a Keeper.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/27 13:53:23


 
   
Made in gb
Boosting Space Marine Biker




Northampton

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The more people that don't want to play the hammerhead, the less afraid my Chaos Daemons are. So I hope your opinion spreads.

Pulse rifles are indistinguishable from Bolters against my light infantry.

All your high damage AT weapons grant me the invuln except the HH, which is why high damage AT weapons have rarely been the best way to kill a Keeper.


whats changed though, is that unlike before, tau have good access to +1 to hit. Currently (for the next week or so) you need 5 markerlights on a target, usually requiring a lot of ML shots to achieve. when the new rules drop its going to be a lot easier, just 1 ML hit gives a unit +1 to hit with all its weapons, and that on a 3+.
Markerlight changes alone are a massive buff to Tau armies. throw in the buffs to a lot of tau weapons (plasma being STR8 D3 weapons for example) and tau crisis teams, and broadside teams are going to hit a lot harder than before.
you also have to take into account the growing prevalence of -1D abilities so the weapons that are good against a KoS (for the tau this would currently be a missile pod) are terrible against other things. Its harder for missile pods rolling exactly average damage to take down a Redemptor dreadnought without an invuln than it is to take out a KoS with one (you are both T7 and will both get a 5+ save unless its an exalted with a 4++ in which case its still easier to kill the KoS, this is discounting FnP rolls ofc, which both can get so it evens out somewhat). whats most frightening about Daemons, Slaanesh in particular is not the durability (they are very fragile) its their speed.

The issue i think is that the Railgun is only good against a very specific set of targets, and if you lean heavily into them then if you meet that target then you are laughing. bonus points if you are borkan and take a stormsurge as well for extra lols. If you don't meet the target your railguns are very specifically good at fighting, then you are wasting a massive number of points which could be spent on units that are still good at smacking around tough targets, but also good against things the railgun fails at fighting.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: