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.
This all banks on commissars only being able to effect a single unit of conscripts at a time, which again isn't what currently happens, a commissar can effect two conscript units easily, three if you push things.
But then if someone's only bringing one commissar to babysit that many points, it becomes EVEN MORE WORTHWHILE to bring that squad of snipers to take him out, right? Eh, eh? Right? So they're either not bringing redundancy and can be manageable by a sniper squad in one turn with something like 60-70% odds (it's been a few pages since the math), or they're taking plenty of commissars to be safe and the point balance is more along the lines of what would be expected for the price. (Or still, for n means of dealing with commissars, the number of commissars in a given army is always equal to N+1)
Yay, we've gone from page 6 back to page 2! And now you say that there's too much terrain he can hide the commissars behind, and then I post three more pictures of competitive tournament games and ask where, and then the thread gets ignored until someone new starts it over with either the same arguments from page 1 again or some easy and obvious solution that they came up with that makes either the army or the game literally unplayable. And then we go back to about page 3.
How is that Marine centric? Marines have rarely benefited from cover outside of jink saves or night fighting. Are you saying having 33% reduction of incoming fire is not worth anything? Or are you talking about how Aegis Defense Line isn't as good?
That's what I'm saying is marine-centric about thinking it was just a flat net win for guard. I'm poking fun at it likely not occurring to many marine players to have given much thought to that 5+ save being the same one guard mostly tried to get through cover in older editions, which happened much more frequently back then.
Unit1126PLL wrote: That's not how math works though - he has a 2/3rds to hit, and it's absolute, so he either hits or he doesn't. If he hits, it's 1/2, if he doesn't it's nothing. The nothing is already accounted for by the fact that it's 2/3rds and not 1, so the hit has a 50% chance to wound, because when you scale it up to large squad sizes, that's how it works.
I clearly stated that I was calculating the average amount of damage that the marine/the three conscripts will deal, fractions of damage are perfectly acceptable as averages. Katherine based her calculations on one commissar per 50 conscripts, which is why each conscript is counted as 3.6 points to account for the overhead for support. So 29 of those conscripts would cost 105 points.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/07/24 19:48:48
Unit1126PLL wrote: The damage is absolutely the issue. Katherine demonstrated that against most weapons a Conscript and a Marine's toughness are about right, point for point.
No, I don't believe anyone has except when comparing marines in cover to conscripts outside of cover. It's a fairly easy calculation. Four conscripts are a point less than a space marine, if we assume one commissar per two squads of conscripts then four conscripts per space marine is actually almost perfect as a balancing point.
Given that: Nine bolter hits on conscripts results in four wounds (9*2/3*2/3), for 12 points lost. Nine bolter hits on space marines results in 1.5 wounds (9*1/2*1/3) for 19.5 points lost. Inside cover, marines lose (9*1/2*1/6) for a total of .75 wounds, 9.75 points.
So, should conscripts stranding out in the open screening be closer to marines in cover than they are to marines in the open? Again, debatable. I'm of the opinion no.
Unit1126PLL wrote: You're doing Shroedinger's Conscripts again. Is the commissar hiding from snipers behind LOS blocking terrain? If so, is he tying two or three conscript units to that one terrain piece as well as one? And if he is out where the squads can appropriately be spread out, the problem goes away because he can be sniped. Oh, and if the conscripts are trying to get 3 units in range of the Commissar, are they all packed together also? Or are they providing a screen? If it's a screen, if a conga-line back to the commissar takes 10 models, you might as well buy another commissar for the unit...
...seriously, all this stuff requires tabletop tactics.
You do remember that friendly models, such as the large tanks you are screening, can block enemy line of site? Also, how far away are the tanks going to be from terrain for you to need more than 2-3 conscripts to form a line?
daedalus wrote: \And now you say that there's too much terrain he can hide the commissars behind.
Is there some rule where tanks and other large models don't block LoS I somehow overlooked in the rulebook or what? If so my entire group has been misplaying horribly. You need terrain to hide tanks and artillery absolutely, you can just use the tanks/artillery you are screening to block LoS to the commissar however.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/07/24 19:56:25
How is that Marine centric? Marines have rarely benefited from cover outside of jink saves or night fighting. Are you saying having 33% reduction of incoming fire is not worth anything? Or are you talking about how Aegis Defense Line isn't as good?
That's what I'm saying is marine-centric about thinking it was just a flat net win for guard. I'm poking fun at it likely not occurring to many marine players to have given much thought to that 5+ save being the same one guard mostly tried to get through cover in older editions, which happened much more frequently back then.
Well you aren't paying 75 points for a Defence Line anymore. I'd say that is a pretty big change. If you are still paying for a Defence Line I find that a bit questionable unless you're going for that rare and miraculous 3+ armor save on your infantry via Psychic power and ADL.
daedalus wrote: You... don't have anything in your list to deal with vehicles, either?
Hey, 1 in 6 chance killing it puts some mortal wounds on the commissar too, so there's that!
Which puts me back to getting in a long range shootout with the guard tanks, because I can't use any melee/short range anti tank with the conscript screen, which is extremely durable unless I kill the commissar, which I can't snipe unless I kill the tanks/vehicles blocking line of sight. So I'm back to finding something efficient enough to wipe the morale immune conscripts before the big guns shoot me off the field (and I've discussed how such units are simply not present for most armies) or I can just bring long range guns and struggle because again that's guard's specialty.
You see, this is why this is both extremely annoying and a balance issue, conscripts just invalidate large swaths of other armies and force them to fight guard on their terms. The fact the tactics they invalidate are things infinitely more interesting than "shooting gallery" don't help. There needs to be an actual weakness somewhere.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/24 20:09:59
Unit1126PLL wrote: That's not how math works though - he has a 2/3rds to hit, and it's absolute, so he either hits or he doesn't. If he hits, it's 1/2, if he doesn't it's nothing. The nothing is already accounted for by the fact that it's 2/3rds and not 1, so the hit has a 50% chance to wound, because when you scale it up to large squad sizes, that's how it works.
I clearly stated that I was calculating the average amount of damage that the marine/the three conscripts will deal, fractions of damage are perfectly acceptable as averages. Katherine based her calculations on one commissar per 50 conscripts, which is why each conscript is counted as 3.6 points to account for the overhead for support. So 29 of those conscripts would cost 105 points.
I understand now, as I mentioned before.
Your math is off though - Commissars are 31 points, IIRC (I forgot the bolt pistol last time), meaning that 29 conscripts plus commissar is 118.
daedalus wrote: You... don't have anything in your list to deal with vehicles, either?
Hey, 1 in 6 chance killing it puts some mortal wounds on the commissar too, so there's that!
Which puts me back to getting in a long range shootout with the guard tanks, because I can't use any melee/short range anti tank with the conscript screen, which is extremely durable unless I kill the commissar, which I can't snipe unless I kill the tanks/vehicles blocking line of sight. So I'm back to finding something efficient enough to wipe the morale immune conscripts before the big guns shoot me off the field (and I've discussed how such units are simply not present for most armies) or I can just bring long range guns and struggle because again that's guard's specialty.
You see, this is why this is both extremely annoying and a balance issue, conscripts just invalidate large swaths of my army and force me to fight guard on their terms. The fact the tactics they invalidate are things infinitely more interesting than "shooting gallery" don't help. There needs to be an actual weakness somewhere.
Only one tank is blocking LOS to the commissar - you don't have to get in a shoot-out with the entire Guard army, just need to nail one tank, then snipe the commissar.
Surely your army has enough AT to kill a single tank?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/24 20:10:21
They have 1 attack. Counting the pistol as an attack is incredibly disingenuous considering the pistol can only be fired on the marine's turn.
Which means for every full game turn a marine stays locked in combat and survives, he gets 3 attacks, not 4, as her math would imply.
As for the math, just look at the end fractions.
Against MEQ, a boltgun round from a Space Marine has a (1/9) chance to deal 1 damage (a failed save wound). A Lasgun shot from a conscript has a (1/27) chance for the same.
Commissars can and are split between 2 conscript squads in practice. So, the cost is 15 points per 150, for a 10% increase. Let's say she's right about the cost of the order at 0.4.
That puts the total cost for a conscript at 3.7 points, with the cost of the marine being 13. Rapid fire comparison:
(1/27) * 4 = 0.148 (1/9) * 2 = 0.222
For the Marine Boltgun you're paying 13 points for 0.222 damage. Or, 0.017 damage per point.
For the Conscript Lasgun you're paying 3.7 points for 0.148 damage. Or, 0.04004 damage per point.
Per point in this scenario, the Conscripts are roughly 2.355 times as efficient against MEQ. Because rapid fire is a scalar 2x multiple that is applied equally to both the Conscript and the Marine, the Conscript is also 2.355 times as efficient when both are outside of rapid fire range.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/24 20:33:24
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.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Only one tank is blocking LOS to the commissar - you don't have to get in a shoot-out with the entire Guard army, just need to nail one tank, then snipe the commissar.
Surely your army has enough AT to kill a single tank?
I'm now having to take enough long range anti tank to kill it in a single turn (otherwise the commissar can move behind a different one) and enough snipers to kill the commissar in one turn (otherwise he ducks behind a different one again, and chances are my anti tank is now too damaged to get a second one turn KO) and then I can try to clear the infantry, so then I can finally try to get the majority artillery and tanks before they wipe me my army off the field.
All that, to counter the extremely clever and skillful tactic of sitting in the corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies. This is, frankly, not a reasonable level of counter play and tailoring at this point.
Marmatag wrote: Katherine also gives marines 2 attacks in melee.
They have 1 attack. Counting the pistol as an attack is incredibly disingenuous considering the pistol can only be fired on the marine's turn.
Which means for every full game turn a marine stays locked in combat and survives, he gets 3 attacks, not 4, as her math would imply.
As for the math, just look at the end fractions.
Against MEQ, a boltgun round from a Space Marine has a (1/9) chance to deal 1 damage (a failed save wound). A Lasgun shot from a conscript has a (1/27) chance for the same.
Commissars can and are split between 2 conscript squads in practice. So, the cost is 15 points per 150, for a 10% increase. Let's say she's right about the cost of the order at 0.4.
That puts the total cost for a conscript at 3.7 points, with the cost of the marine being 13. Rapid fire comparison:
(1/27) * 4 = 0.148
(1/9) * 2 = 0.222
For the Marine Boltgun you're paying 13 points for 0.222 damage. Or, 0.017 damage per point.
For the Conscript Lasgun you're paying 3.7 points for 0.148 damage. Or, 0.0494 damage per point.
Per point in this scenario, the Conscripts are roughly 2.89 times as efficient against MEQ. Because rapid fire is a scalar 2x multiple that is applied equally to both the Conscript and the Marine, the Conscript is also 2.89 times as efficient when both are outside of rapid fire range.
Commissars can be split between two conscript squads if:
1) You bring 2 conscript squads.
2) Your conscript squads are very close together.
3) Your commissar is not hiding behind terrain, unless you're comfortable using a good portion of your conscripts to make a conga line (and if you are, this has repercussions for your casualty removal).
I'm not sure it's a safe assumption to just divide the Commissar in half and call it a day. Having 1 commissar affect 2 squads is not without its limitations to list-building, play, and deployment.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Only one tank is blocking LOS to the commissar - you don't have to get in a shoot-out with the entire Guard army, just need to nail one tank, then snipe the commissar.
Surely your army has enough AT to kill a single tank?
I'm now having to take enough long range anti tank to kill it in a single turn (otherwise the commissar can move behind a different one) and enough snipers to kill the commissar in one turn (otherwise he ducks behind a different one again, and chances are my anti tank is now too damaged to get a second one turn KO) and then I can try to clear the infantry, so then I can finally try to get the majority artillery and tanks before they wipe me my army off the field.
All that, to counter the extremely clever and skillful tactic of sitting in the corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies. This is, frankly, not a reasonable level of counter play and tailoring at this point.
You and I will have to disagree on how much counterplay an army should require. I believe it should require more than "CHARGE!". Destroying a single tank in a single turn with my entire army save two squads of snipers is not hard. I have done it more than once.
Incidentally, if you're truly worried about an army castled in a corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies - don't, unless you're hell bent on not playing objective missions that makes them move.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/24 20:27:18
Marmatag wrote: For the Conscript Lasgun you're paying 3.7 points for 0.148 damage. Or, 0.0494 damage per point.
It's 0.04 not 0.0494 giving an efficiency slightly above 2, otherwise correct.
Good catch - I used the base conscript cost in excel. updating.
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.
Unit1126PLL wrote: You and I will have to disagree on how much counterplay an army should require. I believe it should require more than "CHARGE!". Destroying a single tank in a single turn with my entire army save two squads of snipers is not hard. I have done it more than once.
Incidentally, if you're truly worried about an army castled in a corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies - don't, unless you're hell bent on not playing objective missions that makes them move.
Well yes, counter play is good and should be required in equal measure.
An army who sits in the corner just trying to table you with no real tactics beyond "shoot guns at appropriate target" should not require the level of counter play we discussed. It's like stormravens, yes I can beat a stormraven heavy list even before the nerf, it was just an unreasonable level of work to counter what amounted to "take under priced units and shoot stuff".
Quick question...what would happen if they were to simply change the max squad size for conscripts from 50 to 30 like every other horde unit in the game?
Wake. Rise. Destroy. Conquer.
We have done so once. We will do so again.
Unit1126PLL wrote: You and I will have to disagree on how much counterplay an army should require. I believe it should require more than "CHARGE!". Destroying a single tank in a single turn with my entire army save two squads of snipers is not hard. I have done it more than once.
Incidentally, if you're truly worried about an army castled in a corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies - don't, unless you're hell bent on not playing objective missions that makes them move.
Well yes, counter play is good and should be required in equal measure.
An army who sits in the corner just trying to table you with no real tactics beyond "shoot guns at appropriate target" should not require the level of counter play we discussed. It's like stormravens, yes I can beat a stormraven heavy list even before the nerf, it was just an unreasonable level of work to counter what amounted to "take under priced units and shoot stuff".
That army won't succeed though if you play smart against it. It just won't. If castle-in-a-corner-and-shoot was the end-all-be-all of 40k, Tau would be fighting with Guard for the top spots. Instead, the top spot is Sororitas, and Tau are somewhere way down on the bottom.
There is something else special about Guard beyond the usual castle-and-shoot tactic. I believe it is plasma scions, as well as the ease of access to superheavy vehicles.
Ah yes, hold on while we castle in a corner and shoot with our 24" range and no LoS problems whatsoever from all that LoS blocking terrain we're allegedly using to hide our commissars.
Unit1126PLL wrote: You and I will have to disagree on how much counterplay an army should require. I believe it should require more than "CHARGE!". Destroying a single tank in a single turn with my entire army save two squads of snipers is not hard. I have done it more than once.
Incidentally, if you're truly worried about an army castled in a corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies - don't, unless you're hell bent on not playing objective missions that makes them move.
Well yes, counter play is good and should be required in equal measure.
An army who sits in the corner just trying to table you with no real tactics beyond "shoot guns at appropriate target" should not require the level of counter play we discussed. It's like stormravens, yes I can beat a stormraven heavy list even before the nerf, it was just an unreasonable level of work to counter what amounted to "take under priced units and shoot stuff".
That army won't succeed though if you play smart against it. It just won't. If castle-in-a-corner-and-shoot was the end-all-be-all of 40k, Tau would be fighting with Guard for the top spots. Instead, the top spot is Sororitas, and Tau are somewhere way down on the bottom.
There is something else special about Guard beyond the usual castle-and-shoot tactic. I believe it is plasma scions, as well as the ease of access to superheavy vehicles.
If they can't handle those, what about the below? I mean, if 150 Conscripts with some Commissars and commanders is beyond 'equal counter play'... here's a rather plain Steel Legion list. Ignore the part where it has 133 T7 3+ save wounds; they're not Conscripts so should be easy to handle:
Unit1126PLL wrote: You and I will have to disagree on how much counterplay an army should require. I believe it should require more than "CHARGE!". Destroying a single tank in a single turn with my entire army save two squads of snipers is not hard. I have done it more than once.
Incidentally, if you're truly worried about an army castled in a corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies - don't, unless you're hell bent on not playing objective missions that makes them move.
Well yes, counter play is good and should be required in equal measure.
An army who sits in the corner just trying to table you with no real tactics beyond "shoot guns at appropriate target" should not require the level of counter play we discussed. It's like stormravens, yes I can beat a stormraven heavy list even before the nerf, it was just an unreasonable level of work to counter what amounted to "take under priced units and shoot stuff".
That army won't succeed though if you play smart against it. It just won't. If castle-in-a-corner-and-shoot was the end-all-be-all of 40k, Tau would be fighting with Guard for the top spots. Instead, the top spot is Sororitas, and Tau are somewhere way down on the bottom.
There is something else special about Guard beyond the usual castle-and-shoot tactic. I believe it is plasma scions, as well as the ease of access to superheavy vehicles.
If they can't handle those, what about the below? I mean, if 150 Conscripts with some Commissars and commanders is beyond 'equal counter play'... here's a rather plain Steel Legion list. Ignore the part where it has 133 T7 3+ save wounds; they're not Conscripts so should be easy to handle:
Unit1126PLL wrote: You and I will have to disagree on how much counterplay an army should require. I believe it should require more than "CHARGE!". Destroying a single tank in a single turn with my entire army save two squads of snipers is not hard. I have done it more than once.
Incidentally, if you're truly worried about an army castled in a corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies - don't, unless you're hell bent on not playing objective missions that makes them move.
Well yes, counter play is good and should be required in equal measure.
An army who sits in the corner just trying to table you with no real tactics beyond "shoot guns at appropriate target" should not require the level of counter play we discussed. It's like stormravens, yes I can beat a stormraven heavy list even before the nerf, it was just an unreasonable level of work to counter what amounted to "take under priced units and shoot stuff".
That army won't succeed though if you play smart against it. It just won't. If castle-in-a-corner-and-shoot was the end-all-be-all of 40k, Tau would be fighting with Guard for the top spots. Instead, the top spot is Sororitas, and Tau are somewhere way down on the bottom.
There is something else special about Guard beyond the usual castle-and-shoot tactic. I believe it is plasma scions, as well as the ease of access to superheavy vehicles.
If they can't handle those, what about the below? I mean, if 150 Conscripts with some Commissars and commanders is beyond 'equal counter play'... here's a rather plain Steel Legion list. Ignore the part where it has 133 T7 3+ save wounds; they're not Conscripts so should be easy to handle:
Heavy Weapons Squad [3 PL, 27pts] . Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
Heavy Weapons Squad [3 PL, 27pts] . Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
Heavy Weapons Squad [3 PL, 27pts] . Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
+ Dedicated Transport +
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
++ Total: [110 PL, 1995pts] ++
Any particular reason for not running a commissar or two?
Not really. Could remove a command squad for 1, clear a few points elsewhere for 2.
Automatically Appended Next Post: To explain further: the squads are so small a Commissar's LD and SE benefit are pretty small to minuscule. I rated it as inferior to squeezing in more firepower. With 10 man squads and LD7, you have to kill 4-5 guardsman to have an average chance of forcing any battleshock losses (assuming a 3.5 on a D6).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/24 23:33:43
I see a lot of math for conscripts vs marines, but I dont think I've seen the math include any special/heavy weapons on the marines, despite the fact that conscripts are assumed to have commissars standing nearby. Two Plasma Guns and a Heavy Bolter ought to change the outcome between (real world) units. Plasmas aren't cheap but they wound on 2s and allow no save.
Not to mention Frags, which average more kills than a bolter double-tap vs. Conscripts, and Combat Squads allow two throws.
Unit1126PLL wrote: That army won't succeed though if you play smart against it. It just won't. If castle-in-a-corner-and-shoot was the end-all-be-all of 40k, Tau would be fighting with Guard for the top spots. Instead, the top spot is Sororitas, and Tau are somewhere way down on the bottom.
There is something else special about Guard beyond the usual castle-and-shoot tactic. I believe it is plasma scions, as well as the ease of access to superheavy vehicles.
Castle and shoot guard can easily table most armies, making objectives a bit of a non issue. I've seen this strategy used to table multiple armies reliably. We literally have a player in our group who does this, I've literally been running you through how we beat it, playing smart doesn't cut it when your enemy has a huge chunk of virtually untouchable guns firing every turn.
Tau are crap because they are overcosted for the amount of firepower they bring. I can and have out shot tau with CSM in 8th. Now that shield drones can actually soak wounds, maybe the staying power will make them more worthwhile, but they were doing abdly because of pricing.
SoB are another shooty army with high toughness and firepower for their cost, trading the range of IG for mobility. It's not hard to realize why they are good.
Insectum7 wrote: I see a lot of math for conscripts vs marines, but I dont think I've seen the math include any special/heavy weapons on the marines, despite the fact that conscripts are assumed to have commissars standing nearby. Two Plasma Guns and a Heavy Bolter ought to change the outcome between (real world) units. Plasmas aren't cheap but they wound on 2s and allow no save.
Not to mention Frags, which average more kills than a bolter double-tap vs. Conscripts, and Combat Squads allow two throws.
Full Squad output (combi-squadded for extra grenade, assume Missile Launcher for multipurpose) ~ 6.86 kills.
Its because most special weapons dont help. Marine plasma is worse than bolters vs conscripts due to the high cost. The ML is a little better but not much. Heavy bolter is quite a bit better but its the gun you didn't take.
Unit1126PLL wrote: You and I will have to disagree on how much counterplay an army should require. I believe it should require more than "CHARGE!". Destroying a single tank in a single turn with my entire army save two squads of snipers is not hard. I have done it more than once.
Incidentally, if you're truly worried about an army castled in a corner with a bunch of artillery and bodies - don't, unless you're hell bent on not playing objective missions that makes them move.
Well yes, counter play is good and should be required in equal measure.
An army who sits in the corner just trying to table you with no real tactics beyond "shoot guns at appropriate target" should not require the level of counter play we discussed. It's like stormravens, yes I can beat a stormraven heavy list even before the nerf, it was just an unreasonable level of work to counter what amounted to "take under priced units and shoot stuff".
That army won't succeed though if you play smart against it. It just won't. If castle-in-a-corner-and-shoot was the end-all-be-all of 40k, Tau would be fighting with Guard for the top spots. Instead, the top spot is Sororitas, and Tau are somewhere way down on the bottom.
There is something else special about Guard beyond the usual castle-and-shoot tactic. I believe it is plasma scions, as well as the ease of access to superheavy vehicles.
If they can't handle those, what about the below? I mean, if 150 Conscripts with some Commissars and commanders is beyond 'equal counter play'... here's a rather plain Steel Legion list. Ignore the part where it has 133 T7 3+ save wounds; they're not Conscripts so should be easy to handle:
Heavy Weapons Squad [3 PL, 27pts] . Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
Heavy Weapons Squad [3 PL, 27pts] . Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
Heavy Weapons Squad [3 PL, 27pts] . Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
. Heavy Weapon Team: Mortar
+ Dedicated Transport +
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Chimera [5 PL, 93pts]: Heavy Bolter, Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
++ Total: [110 PL, 1995pts] ++
The big difference is things like lascannons can drill down multiple wounds on those chimeras, killing those vehicles might blow them up hurting other vehicles etc. Also killing them actually hurts your damage out put. Consider this for each Chimera you could have 31 Conscripts. So equal points of concripts would be 310 wounds, that only go down 1 at a time.
Sorry. Conscripts don't need a nerf. Here is why you are wrong if you think they do.
They are not that good.
If you think conscripts are strong because of cost+ unit synergy you are inexperienced in 40k or are not used to fighting hordes.
30 termagants with devourers can churn out 90 s4 shots at 18 inches at BS4+ for 240 pts. Within synapse they ignore the morale phase.
Ork boyz can pump out similar shot count or bury an opponent with an obscene amount attacks that can hit on 2s. Oh and their mobs are fearless too.
30 boyz with choppas and sluggas will typically also kill a leman russ equivalent in a single assault.
For conscripts to be "combat effective" you are almost paying baneblade prices.
361 pts for two 50 man squads with a company commander and a commissar. 400 (200 per 50 man squad in 12") S3 shots in rapid fire. IF all those conditions are met, they COULD kill ONE leman russ or equivalent. OR wipe out MOST of a unit of boyz/gaunts.
Know what else can reliably kill a tank for half the points? 2 lascannon squads.
Know what else can kill a ton of boyz? Mortars for around 1/3 the cost
I will agree to an extent that certain weapons should do more damage vs hordes (namely things that used to be blasts), but if you are losing to conscripts, you are losing to all hordes.
Stop whining, and improve your game.
And no... I don't use conscripts. Never have, never will. I just know how to fight hordes. My regular opponents have been orks and nids for a long time.
Unit1126PLL wrote: That army won't succeed though if you play smart against it. It just won't. If castle-in-a-corner-and-shoot was the end-all-be-all of 40k, Tau would be fighting with Guard for the top spots. Instead, the top spot is Sororitas, and Tau are somewhere way down on the bottom.
There is something else special about Guard beyond the usual castle-and-shoot tactic. I believe it is plasma scions, as well as the ease of access to superheavy vehicles.
Castle and shoot guard can easily table most armies, making objectives a bit of a non issue. I've seen this strategy used to table multiple armies reliably. We literally have a player in our group who does this, I've literally been running you through how we beat it, playing smart doesn't cut it when your enemy has a huge chunk of virtually untouchable guns firing every turn.
Tau are crap because they are overcosted for the amount of firepower they bring. I can and have out shot tau with CSM in 8th. Now that shield drones can actually soak wounds, maybe the staying power will make them more worthwhile, but they were doing abdly because of pricing.
SoB are another shooty army with high toughness and firepower for their cost, trading the range of IG for mobility. It's not hard to realize why they are good.
If you're getting tabled by Guard, you need tougher units. Guard firepower is numerous but mediocre; a Falchion, for example, is an SM vehicle that can make short work of many threats, and just sit there enduring the entire IG army's firepower for the rest of eternity, especially if it has cover or the (recently nerfed) VSG. Even if guard destroy the rest of the army, the Falchion is invulnerable, and presuming you moved it and your other stuff to get objectives and the IG player is just castled, you win. Ta-daa!
WingedCamel wrote: Sorry. Conscripts don't need a nerf. Here is why you are wrong if you think they do.
They are not that good.
If you think conscripts are strong because of cost+ unit synergy you are inexperienced in 40k or are not used to fighting hordes.
30 termagants with devourers can churn out 90 s4 shots at 18 inches at BS4+ for 240 pts. Within synapse they ignore the morale phase.
Ork boyz can pump out similar shot count or bury an opponent with an obscene amount attacks that can hit on 2s. Oh and their mobs are fearless too.
30 boyz with choppas and sluggas will typically also kill a leman russ equivalent in a single assault.
For conscripts to be "combat effective" you are almost paying baneblade prices.
361 pts for two 50 man squads with a company commander and a commissar. 400 (200 per 50 man squad in 12") S3 shots in rapid fire. IF all those conditions are met, they COULD kill ONE leman russ or equivalent. OR wipe out MOST of a unit of boyz/gaunts.
Know what else can reliably kill a tank for half the points? 2 lascannon squads.
Know what else can kill a ton of boyz? Mortars for around 1/3 the cost
I will agree to an extent that certain weapons should do more damage vs hordes (namely things that used to be blasts), but if you are losing to conscripts, you are losing to all hordes.
Stop whining, and improve your game.
And no... I don't use conscripts. Never have, never will. I just know how to fight hordes. My regular opponents have been orks and nids for a long time.
The difference is that the conscripts aren't the damage dealers in the army, but instead just wounds to protect the damage dealers. They are not offensively scary, the are obnoxious because they block access to the stuff that kills you. The ability to fall back without penalty is very good for them. I'm not sure they "need" a nerf, but they are one of the best screening units in the entire game, and are half the points of the horde units you mention.
Insectum7 wrote: I see a lot of math for conscripts vs marines, but I dont think I've seen the math include any special/heavy weapons on the marines, despite the fact that conscripts are assumed to have commissars standing nearby. Two Plasma Guns and a Heavy Bolter ought to change the outcome between (real world) units. Plasmas aren't cheap but they wound on 2s and allow no save.
Not to mention Frags, which average more kills than a bolter double-tap vs. Conscripts, and Combat Squads allow two throws.
Full Squad output (combi-squadded for extra grenade, assume Missile Launcher for multipurpose) ~ 6.86 kills.
Its because most special weapons dont help. Marine plasma is worse than bolters vs conscripts due to the high cost. The ML is a little better but not much. Heavy bolter is quite a bit better but its the gun you didn't take.
It's what you actually see on the table. People are mathhammering against units that don't exist. Whereas plasma, combi-plasma, Missile Launcher is a pretty legit build for a Tac Squad.
Points wise the specials dont always help, but they sure help the squad. Besides, the plasma in my example appears to be the only loss-per-point, while everything else gives a gain.
