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.
Marmatag,
THere were a couple different claims here.
One was that killing 20 Marines with 27 Dissie shots was within 1 StdDev. Which was clearly bogus. That's what I'm refutiing here.
As for your 10mans, as shown above, if you need to kill 7 Marines to wipe the remaining 3 in Morale, then you're more likely than not going to fail that. But the numbers are *really* close, so it'll happen frequenlty (although less than 50% of the time).
Bharring wrote: "Within reason is not the average. I'd say it's within 1 standard deviation is within reason."
I don't have a calculator handy, but your StdDev looks off.
A roughly (1/3) chance occuring 20+ times in 27 tries? I'm fairly sure the odds of that are very small.
It's not a (1/3) chance 3 times. Rerolls of 1 to hit and wound and it's only a 6+ save in the open.
the math is easy.
27 shots
3's to hit reroll 1's
3's to wound reroll 1's
6+ saves
It's 27x .89x.89 x.82 = 17.5 - That is the average.
reroll 1's is about a .77 chance, not a .89
Okay....so that math there...that's if they are buffed by Gman...LOL. Man I am tired. You are totally correct.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Marmatag wrote: You didn't factor in morale, in 10 man squads, which was the whole point. Is your reading comprehension terrible or are you grinding an axe? The whole point is that stacked leadership penalties, in 10 man squads, makes it really easy to remove them.
Surely he brought a banner right?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 23:08:02
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
You...really know nothing about Skitarii? Uh okay here's the basics without posting the codex
1. One of them is 7 points, the other 8
2. For more than an Infantry dude, they get a 4+/6++, BS3+, and a better gun
3. One of these guns is 30", S4, RF1, and has a rule to be AP-1 on a 6 to wound
4. The other gun is 18", S3, Assault 3, and a 6 to wound is D2
5. The one with the Assault gun has a toughness lowering rule, but it's irrelevant
6. Special weapons are an 18" Assault 2 Plasma Gun and a 60" S7 AP-2 DD3 Sniper Rifle. We don't talk about the Arc rifle because it's terrible
7. I don't feel like getting into the FW Dogmas. If you're that interested in how they interact with their army traits, Google it or shoot me a PM. I was doing great with my Skitarii until the army was destroyed.
So as you can imagine, the ones with the longer range would play more akin to Infantry where you camp and shoot, and the other you might treat more like Vets if they were in the Troop slot. When you think about it, these dudes are fantastic deals. For the price, they're not exactly hard to kill though. For 1 T3 4+ wound, you could instead get 2 T3 5+, which is of course more durable. With the same LD, you'd think you'd buy that one upgrade that, for ONLY 5 points, lets you reroll morale tests.
Here's the kicker though: you don't need it! Morale isn't dangerous enough that I would take that over Ignoring Cover.
Ok, so that looks like I could use morale if I needed to, and I certainly could. But because they're quite different than Guard, in a different army, I might be fighting them differently to begin with.
But for the purposes of the original debate, it doesn't look like I'd need to use it to get my points-per-model back when rapid-firing bolters at them.
The utility is still the same though, as I specifically outlined. One would be played more statically akin to Infantry, and the other mobile akin to Vets. Difference is HQ buffs, mostly.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
The problem with playing the expected value game is that it doesn't adequately represent split fire, and also, having shots determined in a sequence not all at once.
If the first vehicle rolls hot, that changes how you allocate your remaining shots.
I'm a huge fan of math hammer against single targets, but if you roll in the top third with one gunboat, that changes how the other 2 will be allocating shots.
I'm perfectly fine accepting that i've been lucky in the past. But it is a dice game.
The nice thing is that if i get unlucky, i can cover that with a pretty absurd volume of shots from everything else. And in reality i'm not firing the ravagers first, because of their range.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 23:19:47
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
You...really know nothing about Skitarii? Uh okay here's the basics without posting the codex
1. One of them is 7 points, the other 8
2. For more than an Infantry dude, they get a 4+/6++, BS3+, and a better gun
3. One of these guns is 30", S4, RF1, and has a rule to be AP-1 on a 6 to wound
4. The other gun is 18", S3, Assault 3, and a 6 to wound is D2
5. The one with the Assault gun has a toughness lowering rule, but it's irrelevant
6. Special weapons are an 18" Assault 2 Plasma Gun and a 60" S7 AP-2 DD3 Sniper Rifle. We don't talk about the Arc rifle because it's terrible
7. I don't feel like getting into the FW Dogmas. If you're that interested in how they interact with their army traits, Google it or shoot me a PM. I was doing great with my Skitarii until the army was destroyed.
So as you can imagine, the ones with the longer range would play more akin to Infantry where you camp and shoot, and the other you might treat more like Vets if they were in the Troop slot. When you think about it, these dudes are fantastic deals. For the price, they're not exactly hard to kill though. For 1 T3 4+ wound, you could instead get 2 T3 5+, which is of course more durable. With the same LD, you'd think you'd buy that one upgrade that, for ONLY 5 points, lets you reroll morale tests.
Here's the kicker though: you don't need it! Morale isn't dangerous enough that I would take that over Ignoring Cover.
Ok, so that looks like I could use morale if I needed to, and I certainly could. But because they're quite different than Guard, in a different army, I might be fighting them differently to begin with.
But for the purposes of the original debate, it doesn't look like I'd need to use it to get my points-per-model back when rapid-firing bolters at them.
The utility is still the same though, as I specifically outlined. One would be played more statically akin to Infantry, and the other mobile akin to Vets. Difference is HQ buffs, mostly.
Sure, that's fine. But it looks to me that Morale can be used against them, just as it can be used against Guard, even if it hasn't happened in your experience.
This is also a disconnect. Slayer plays ITC. You can't leave 1 guardsmen left alive, because he'll hide behind a building or inside a building, and that denies you a chance to get "kill more," which adds up. It might also stop you from getting butchers bill, or last strike, or reaper, or any secondary that requires he dies.
You don't play ITC. One sole guardsmen left alive doesn't really bother you in the same way it bothers us.
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
"The problem with playing the expected value game is that it doesn't adequately represent split fire, and also, having shots determined in a sequence not all at once.
If the first vehicle rolls hot, that changes how you allocate your remaining shots.
I'm a huge fan of math hammer against single targets, but if you roll in the top third with one gunboat, that changes how the other 2 will be allocating shots."
While true, that actually hurts you in this case.
You need exactly 7 kills on each unit. You will average short of 14, but lets pretend 14 for simplicity.
You need all 14 wounds to be exactly evenly split.
The more choices you have, the closer to the even split you can get. But the limit is the perfect split, not better. So it's good that you get to pick, but even if you *do* manage 14+ wounds, you can't guarentee they'll all be where you need them. Because you allocate in blocks of 3 attacks (to say nothing of allocating 3 weapons at a time), there's no way to prevent potential overkill when going for the 7th wound on any given unit.
As such, regardless of your choices, even if you averaged 14 kills exactly, you'd still be more likely than not to fail to do 7 wounds to each squad.
Add on the fact that you don't even average 14 kills, so if you could allocate perfectly, you're still more likely than not to succeed.
So no, you're still not more likely than not to wipe 20 Marines by killing 7 in each squad and letting the last 3 die to Ld.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (side note: with the numbers as they are, incidental fire - basically splinter rifles and such - should ensure both squads die. It's still contrived to be facing 2x10-man Marine squads instead of 4x5-mans, though.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 23:25:53
On the Skitarii front I'd have thought the interesting thing is how much Ruststalkers and Infiltrators got reduced.
A 10 man blob of stalkers has morale issues - but at 140 points with the blades I'd have thought it would be interesting. 20 wounds, movement 8, strength 5, mortals on a 6. Build a close combat detachment with Ryza for extra lols. Seems like reasonable damage potential and if it dies its not exactly the end of the world.
Marmatag wrote: This is also a disconnect. Slayer plays ITC. You can't leave 1 guardsmen left alive, because he'll hide behind a building or inside a building, and that denies you a chance to get "kill more," which adds up. It might also stop you from getting butchers bill, or last strike, or reaper, or any secondary that requires he dies.
You don't play ITC. One sole guardsmen left alive doesn't really bother you in the same way it bothers us.
Totally. One or two guardsmen is very ignorable for me, maybe even moreso because I play UM, and fragments of squads can't stop my guys from shooting.
“(side note: with the numbers as they are, incidental fire - basically splinter rifles and such - should ensure both squads die. It's still contrived to be facing 2x10-man Marine squads instead of 4x5-mans, though.)”
Unless you’re maybe playing against Insectums hordemarines who are 90+% buffed at all times. Maybe bigger squads than 5 man are involved then, but likely not.
DA could make a case for 10 man squads with their ability to limit morale losses to take advantage of things like WotDA.
Re: ITC scoring; I don’t play ITC, but I still can’t leave a single body sitting on an objective in CA or BRB missions; squads need to be wiped regardless. Missions with Kill points are more fun to me in general though.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 23:31:42
While everyone math-hammers how awesome Ravagers are at killing Marines (hint: they are good at it), I'll contemplate the rather snooze-worthy special rules Imperial marines get:
And They Shall Know No Fear: AKA the rule you never use because you don't make Morale test on 5 Man Squads.
Combat Squads: AKA the other rule you never use because there is no reason to by a maximum strength squad.
Wouldn't it be nice if these rules were rewritten to be useful? Something like:
And They Shall Know No Fear: The Astartes never flee from battle, but from time to time they fall into a coma from myriad minor injuries. Units with this rule never lose more than 1 model to a failed Morale Test.
Combat Squads: The Astartes commonly operate in divided squads that skillfully support each other in combat. When deploying, a unit with this rule that has the maximum unit size may divide into two equally sized units. These units operate independently during play.
Additionally, whenever a <Chapter> unit with this rule of minimum model size or smaller is the target of a Space Marines Stratagem, a second <Chapter> unit with this rule of minimum model size or smaller within 6" benefits from the same Stratagem at not cost in Command Points.
Marmatag wrote: This is also a disconnect. Slayer plays ITC. You can't leave 1 guardsmen left alive, because he'll hide behind a building or inside a building, and that denies you a chance to get "kill more," which adds up. It might also stop you from getting butchers bill, or last strike, or reaper, or any secondary that requires he dies.
You don't play ITC. One sole guardsmen left alive doesn't really bother you in the same way it bothers us.
Even with core rules, morale doesn't matter. I didn't START using ITC when 8th was flowing. I merely adapted it, rather than being molded by it.
Eh that wasn't that humorous.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
alextroy wrote: While everyone math-hammers how awesome Ravagers are at killing Marines (hint: they are good at it), I'll contemplate the rather snooze-worthy special rules Imperial marines get:
And They Shall Know No Fear: AKA the rule you never use because you don't make Morale test on 5 Man Squads.
Combat Squads: AKA the other rule you never use because there is no reason to by a maximum strength squad.
Wouldn't it be nice if these rules were rewritten to be useful? Something like:
And They Shall Know No Fear: The Astartes never flee from battle, but from time to time they fall into a coma from myriad minor injuries. Units with this rule never lose more than 1 model to a failed Morale Test.
Combat Squads: The Astartes commonly operate in divided squads that skillfully support each other in combat. When deploying, a unit with this rule that has the maximum unit size may divide into two equally sized units. These units operate independently during play.
Additionally, whenever a <Chapter> unit with this rule of minimum model size or smaller is the target of a Space Marines Stratagem, a second <Chapter> unit with this rule of minimum model size or smaller within 6" benefits from the same Stratagem at not cost in Command Points.
Now we have rules that can actually be used.
Prior to bringing the banner I commonly used both rules in their current form, actually. That's been less common recently, but I rather enjoy Combat Squads in particular, which I've used to rearrange what goes in Transports and what stays back. ATSKNF is. . . much less useful than it used to be though, that's very true.
It's not efficient but with the upgrade in chapter approved I'm just going to stop running tact marines and make them all veterans. They still only have one wound but for the same price as tact marines they have 2 atacks each, Sgt has 3, and a 30" rapid fire -2ap. I get a feeling the vets are what standard marines should have been. Then I'm just running primaris marines and scouts for CPs.
lolman1c wrote: It's not efficient but with the upgrade in chapter approved I'm just going to stop running tact marines and make them all veterans. They still only have one wound but for the same price as tact marines they have 2 atacks each, Sgt has 3, and a 30" rapid fire -2ap. I get a feeling the vets are what standard marines should have been. Then I'm just running primaris marines and scouts for CPs.
Well not the same exact price, but Sternguard are actually a decent pick with Storm Bolters now. You'd likely be better off with Command Squads though unless you plan to bring Heavy Weapons (why the Grav Cannon didn't drop in price we will never know).
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
lolman1c wrote: It's not efficient but with the upgrade in chapter approved I'm just going to stop running tact marines and make them all veterans. They still only have one wound but for the same price as tact marines they have 2 atacks each, Sgt has 3, and a 30" rapid fire -2ap. I get a feeling the vets are what standard marines should have been. Then I'm just running primaris marines and scouts for CPs.
Well not the same exact price, but Sternguard are actually a decent pick with Storm Bolters now. You'd likely be better off with Command Squads though unless you plan to bring Heavy Weapons (why the Grav Cannon didn't drop in price we will never know).
Or for 2pts each you get a veteran squad with stormshields and storm bolters with a ++3!
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
lolman1c wrote: It's not efficient but with the upgrade in chapter approved I'm just going to stop running tact marines and make them all veterans. They still only have one wound but for the same price as tact marines they have 2 atacks each, Sgt has 3, and a 30" rapid fire -2ap. I get a feeling the vets are what standard marines should have been. Then I'm just running primaris marines and scouts for CPs.
It's +3 points for that and it is not worth it. Really only deathwatch is good. Seeing them get points drops is kind of amusing. Then again we all expect this from GW at this point. They blow with points.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
lolman1c wrote: It's not efficient but with the upgrade in chapter approved I'm just going to stop running tact marines and make them all veterans. They still only have one wound but for the same price as tact marines they have 2 atacks each, Sgt has 3, and a 30" rapid fire -2ap. I get a feeling the vets are what standard marines should have been. Then I'm just running primaris marines and scouts for CPs.
Well not the same exact price, but Sternguard are actually a decent pick with Storm Bolters now. You'd likely be better off with Command Squads though unless you plan to bring Heavy Weapons (why the Grav Cannon didn't drop in price we will never know).
Or for 2pts each you get a veteran squad with stormshields and storm bolters with a ++3!
That too. Pop 3×4 squads like that in a Termite and go nuts with it.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
lolman1c wrote: It's not efficient but with the upgrade in chapter approved I'm just going to stop running tact marines and make them all veterans. They still only have one wound but for the same price as tact marines they have 2 atacks each, Sgt has 3, and a 30" rapid fire -2ap. I get a feeling the vets are what standard marines should have been. Then I'm just running primaris marines and scouts for CPs.
Well not the same exact price, but Sternguard are actually a decent pick with Storm Bolters now. You'd likely be better off with Command Squads though unless you plan to bring Heavy Weapons (why the Grav Cannon didn't drop in price we will never know).
Or for 2pts each you get a veteran squad with stormshields and storm bolters with a ++3!
That too. Pop 3×4 squads like that in a Termite and go nuts with it.
its what I run with Bobby G + 20 wounds is no joke!
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
And marines can take a captain to reroll 1's for multiple squads, and lieutenants to reroll 1's for wounds.
Seems like both have force multipliers.
Marines don't have that on base though... Guardsmen do. Space marines pay a premium of 65 PTS extra to have that within... 6" which again means you have to have babysit the unit. So this 65 pt unit with an additional 87 pts.... means that my unit of space marines together costs me 152pts! for 6 models! While the guard get an additional 10.... oh and an infantry commander!... so thats 24 wounds compared to my 9 wounds? Oh yeah I have a better save but they have four times the damage.... while I have 1 plasma gun and 4 bolters. Oh man at this rate I can kill 2 models a turn!
.by such a small margin that standard deviation in dice rolls is enough to throw that off.
Precentages and WPPM are dramatically higher than you read and again you ignored it!
Guard don't have it on base either though. They have to buy an officer if they want orders, and said officer only effects one squad, maybe two. Meanwhile, that 65 point captain buffs every squad in 6", and can kill an IG squad on his own practically.
You have 3 bolters, a plasma gun, and two combi-plasma. One of those combi's is hitting on 2+. Hmmm...seems like the fire power is a bit more even...
Finally, your math doesn't take everything in account. It assumes two squads on a salt flat at 6". That's not a typical game board.
Are they though? If you take the cadian special rule they reroll all ones if they didn't move. If they have an order they reroll everything until the end of that phase. That means that +1 difference is completely nullified by basic math of increase of probabilities
And marines can take a captain to reroll 1's for multiple squads, and lieutenants to reroll 1's for wounds.
Seems like both have force multipliers.
Marines cause less WPM than a guardsmen squad, take more damage from guardsmen squads PPM and have more damage to their leadership per a model per a point. They also have Less effective damage against the same units due to cost efficiencies.
...by such a small margin that standard deviation in dice rolls is enough to throw that off.
It doesn't matter if the individual model is less effective with them if the pricing is too low.
10 Infantry with a Plasma Gun and Autocannon are far more effective than 5 Marines with a Plasma Gun, even if they got that Plasma Gun for free.
Math is all that matters there.
So 65 points of guard (roughly) as opposed to 80 points of marines (again, roughly). One has 9 guys with an auto cannon and a PG. The other has 5 guys with two plasma guns (sarge's combi is the 2nd). That's not that far off in fire power from each other, or in cost once you factor in the difference between BS 3 and 4. Or that if everything is rapid firing, a PG is better than an Autocannon.
TIL: base army trait is equal to a 70+ point HQ. Lol k
Also that infantry squad with an Autocannon, Plasma Gun, and a Bolter on the Sergeant is 60 points.
That's actually 5 points less.
TIL Guard don't pay for officers. Oh wait. They still do.
As for the points, you'll notice where I said roughly. I got in the ball park, I'm fine with that.
So 65 points of guard (roughly) as opposed to 80 points of marines (again, roughly). One has 9 guys with an auto cannon and a PG. The other has 5 guys with two plasma guns (sarge's combi is the 2nd). That's not that far off in fire power from each other, or in cost once you factor in the difference between BS 3 and 4. Or that if everything is rapid firing, a PG is better than an Autocannon.
Well, I gotta correct the Marine squad to 87(now) as a nitpick. But otherwise it's a good comparison. Don't forget Krak Grenades, which I wind up using all the time as it's a much better option against Custodes than firing a Bolter.
Its not, its 2x wounds and twice as much firepower as the marine squad has with reroll on 1s for all of the models in the imperial guard squad.
It's only a poor comparison if you can't do math.
It's a slight edge on fire power for the guard. Two plasma and two auto cannons and 14 las guns vs one plasma, two combi plasma, and three bolters (five if the combi's fire both). The guard are 50% less accurate, and are 50% less likely to wound with las guns. Oh, and less likely to wound with plasma/autocannons as well, seeing as they need threes, rather than twos.
TIL: base army trait is equal to a 70+ point HQ. Lol k
Counter base-trait is -1 to hit, which will hurt guard more than reroll 1s will help.
Original and relevant claims for design change were based of single unit vs. single unit, ppm. Stick to it.
So this raven guard unit has a 157pts vs 30 guardsmen with 3 special weapons, 3 heavy weapons... rerolls all to hit on 1s.... and 21 lasgun shots, 3d6 grenade launchers, and s4 3D6 mortars.
sooooo.... 1.3 dead guardsmen per a turn from the space marine unit compared to 2.7 dead marines per a turn... IE 50% of the whole squad dead from 3 squads of shooting compared to one squad shooting into 1 platoon.
Got it.
lets do it without it and just do 1 platoon
3/6 of a chance to hit 4+
6 lasguns
3.2?
1.16 to wound
.77 to lose a marine
1d6 4+
Average of 3
3
1.5 to hit
.75 to wound
.5 To lose a marine
mortar
average 3
3
1.5
1 to wound
.66 chance to wound!
Your math is wrong. You didn't include officers in your points. You don't get those extra shots, or rerolls for guard without their officers.
Or you've never seen me play Space Marines. 90% of my army being buffed is the norm for my games. Only one model from a unit (usually 10 man) needs to be in range for the unit to get the buff. The line could be 30+ inches wide if it needs to be. I wish I didin't feel like I had to blob, but that seems like the most effective thing to do, so that's what I do.
Yeah I am calling BS on that statement. There is no way to have a 2k point list in an objectives based game all within 6inches unless you breaking squad cohesion and are bending rules. While that is also highly suspect from a rule standpoint.
Because once one unit moves into a terrain and can no longer maintain cohesion that unit can no longer move at all.
I've done it. Hell, I've been doing it for years in WHFB. It is terrain dependent, but not as bad as you seem to think, particularly if you're using transports to minimize your footprint while advancing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I already won the argument a while back. I literally have only lost units to morale ONCE since this edition has been out, because it's a garbage mechanic. To say to take advantage of morale was bad on your end, sorry.
And yeah, with your meta, you shouldn't be giving advice. Sorry.
Marmatag wrote: God I would love to play someone who spams power armored marines.
Ravagers alone would kill nearly 30 per turn, not even factoring in blasters, poison, etc.
I wouldn't even need Doom.
I'm wondering how, without substantial rerolls or other bonuses, against marines in the open without cover, 3 Ravagers with 3 Disintegrators each are going to average 10 dead marines, not 30. Even with rerolls to hit and wound, you're only averaging 20.
Unless I'm missing something?
You're not missing anything. They Hyperbole train is running on track 3!
This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2018/12/15 04:06:22
What's your point? This has been the case since the RT days. And it will continue to be true as long as a SM costs more pts than a guardsman.
No, it hasn't always been the case. Due the AP change guard resilience against small arms has markedly increased, whilst the marines remained the same. Do the math.
I don't need to do the exact math, or compare %s, etc. (besides, 1: I've got better things to do, 2: I'm sure one of you have already posted it.)
Because marines have always cost more than guardsmen (and always will). Therefore anything that kills a marine just cost the SM player more pts than it would've the IG player. The % of the change doesn't matter to me - 1 dead marine is still 1 less marine (SW to be exact atm) that I've got on the table.
Isn't Ravagers a max of 18 Dissie shots (3 boats, 2 guns each, 3 shots per gun)?
No, it's 9 shots per boat. Rerolling 1s to hit and wound, as well as leadership penalties against big squads from phantasm grenade launchers. Of course one of the 10 man units would be Doomed.
In reality it's not 30. That was an exaggeration. But i comfortably kill 2 10man squads per turn with dice leftover with these guys, thanks to leadership debuffs. I could do 3 squads, but it would require a little bit of luck.
So more like 20-25.
At the absolute worst i'm killing 2 full squads. Assuming no wargear & no primaris, that's still 260 points a turn.
Eldar annihilate marines. You guys aren't even a challenge. No offense.
Anecdotal.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Togusa wrote: I had another thought I wanted to suggest!
What if power armor and Terminator armor had the following always on ability.
" A model wearing power armor or terminator armor applies a -1 to all incoming wound rolls"
Is this something that would make a big difference in the basic marine line?
That would make a huge difference. But why not just make them T5 at that point?
Having said that, most small arms already have trouble wounding marines outside of massed numbers, so I don't imagine it would fly.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/15 06:51:34
alextroy wrote: While everyone math-hammers how awesome Ravagers are at killing Marines (hint: they are good at it), I'll contemplate the rather snooze-worthy special rules Imperial marines get:
And They Shall Know No Fear: AKA the rule you never use because you don't make Morale test on 5 Man Squads.
Combat Squads: AKA the other rule you never use because there is no reason to by a maximum strength squad.
Wouldn't it be nice if these rules were rewritten to be useful? Something like:
And They Shall Know No Fear: The Astartes never flee from battle, but from time to time they fall into a coma from myriad minor injuries. Units with this rule never lose more than 1 model to a failed Morale Test.
Combat Squads: The Astartes commonly operate in divided squads that skillfully support each other in combat. When deploying, a unit with this rule that has the maximum unit size may divide into two equally sized units. These units operate independently during play.
Additionally, whenever a <Chapter> unit with this rule of minimum model size or smaller is the target of a Space Marines Stratagem, a second <Chapter> unit with this rule of minimum model size or smaller within 6" benefits from the same Stratagem at not cost in Command Points.
Now we have rules that can actually be used.
I'm really not sure how ATSKNF should be handled, but I agree Combat Squads is basically useless right now. There's literally no reason not to take 2x 5-Marine units other than deliberately wanting to mug yourself off. I do think your solution's a little bit convoluted, though. How about:
• Reduce the Tactical Flexibility stratagem to 0 CP, also have it allow combat-squadded units to recombine (alternatively, delete the stratagem and just make this part of the CS rule)
• Any stratagems used on the unit apply to both combat squads
?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/15 13:30:42
I don't need to do the exact math, or compare %s, etc. (besides, 1: I've got better things to do, 2: I'm sure one of you have already posted it.)
Because marines have always cost more than guardsmen (and always will). Therefore anything that kills a marine just cost the SM player more pts than it would've the IG player. The % of the change doesn't matter to me - 1 dead marine is still 1 less marine (SW to be exact atm) that I've got on the table.
Of course marines have always cost more points! We're talking about resilience/points ratio. In 7th edition a Tactical Marine costed 14 points, Guardsman costed 5. So marine costed 2,8 times as much as the guardsman. However, bolters were four times more effective at killing guardsmen than marines, thus bolter killed more points of guard than marines. Bolter shots required to kill one marine (14 points) would have killed four guardsmen (20 points.) In 8th marine costs 13 points, guardsman four, so marine costs 3,3 times as much as guardsman (so relatively more than in 7th.) However, due how AP works, bolters now are only 2.7 times as killy against guardsmen than marines. Bolter shots required to kill one marine (13 points) now only kill 2,7 guardsmen (10,5 points.) So point the efficiency of bolters against the guardsmen has almost halved!
I don't need to do the exact math, or compare %s, etc. (besides, 1: I've got better things to do, 2: I'm sure one of you have already posted it.)
Because marines have always cost more than guardsmen (and always will). Therefore anything that kills a marine just cost the SM player more pts than it would've the IG player. The % of the change doesn't matter to me - 1 dead marine is still 1 less marine (SW to be exact atm) that I've got on the table.
Of course marines have always cost more points! We're talking about resilience/points ratio. In 7th edition a Tactical Marine costed 14 points, Guardsman costed 5. So marine costed 2,8 times as much as the guardsman. However, bolters were four times more effective at killing guardsmen than marines, thus bolter killed more points of guard than marines. Bolter shots required to kill one marine (14 points) would have killed four guardsmen (20 points.) In 8th marine costs 13 points, guardsman four, so marine costs 3,3 times as much as guardsman (so relatively more than in 7th.) However, due how AP works, bolters now are only 2.7 times as killy against guardsmen than marines. Bolter shots required to kill one marine (13 points) now only kill 2,7 guardsmen (10,5 points.) So point the efficiency of bolters against the guardsmen has almost halved!
That's actually not quite a third in reduced killing power. Using your math as a base. That's exactly the outcome one would expect to have from getting a 5+ armor save against a bolter. If points killed is your only issue, then 5 point guardsmen fix everything. 2.7 x 5 = 13.5. There, marines are fixed.
I don't need to do the exact math, or compare %s, etc. (besides, 1: I've got better things to do, 2: I'm sure one of you have already posted it.)
Because marines have always cost more than guardsmen (and always will). Therefore anything that kills a marine just cost the SM player more pts than it would've the IG player. The % of the change doesn't matter to me - 1 dead marine is still 1 less marine (SW to be exact atm) that I've got on the table.
Of course marines have always cost more points! We're talking about resilience/points ratio. In 7th edition a Tactical Marine costed 14 points, Guardsman costed 5. So marine costed 2,8 times as much as the guardsman. However, bolters were four times more effective at killing guardsmen than marines, thus bolter killed more points of guard than marines. Bolter shots required to kill one marine (14 points) would have killed four guardsmen (20 points.) In 8th marine costs 13 points, guardsman four, so marine costs 3,3 times as much as guardsman (so relatively more than in 7th.) However, due how AP works, bolters now are only 2.7 times as killy against guardsmen than marines. Bolter shots required to kill one marine (13 points) now only kill 2,7 guardsmen (10,5 points.) So point the efficiency of bolters against the guardsmen has almost halved!
That's actually not quite a third in reduced killing power. Using your math as a base. That's exactly the outcome one would expect to have from getting a 5+ armor save against a bolter. If points killed is your only issue, then 5 point guardsmen fix everything. 2.7 x 5 = 13.5. There, marines are fixed.
Except it is not. T4 needs to kinda be better then T3 vs S4 since it gets bumed by S5 and at S8+ it no longer matters
