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.

 erick99 wrote:

 Lothar wrote:

 erick99 wrote:


The Vendetta, pre-AM, was hands down the best flyer around. With AM, it's still good (still the best imo), but they did that by upping the points cost and dropping transport capacity. This FAQ took what made the heldrake great and put it back to mediocre. If the rest of the codex were a bit more competitive, I doubt we'd be hearing as many complaints.

Pre-AM Vendetta was the best AT around, it was OP and needed to tone down - quest completed. Now I dont see vendettas around me at all. Players i know replaced it with Lemans and LC blobs (which will be replaced again, because there is now not that cheesy prescience anymore). Helldrake has always been the best flyer overall because of its ability to destroy light vehicles (mostly transports) and in the same turn grill the transported soldiers or just burn the marines on foot. All that with IWND and 5+ invul and 360 degree firearc AND torrent rule AND ignoring the shake/stunned AND his bonus rule (one use only, wounding and pene reroll)...no wonder we have seen armies on tournaments based on helldrakes...

And since you are saying it was "a little OP" I see you are clearly somehow biased...it was not little, not at all...

I'm biased both ways. I understand how OP it is, but there's a reason that it is Codex: Hellturkey.
I'm both glad and upset it got nerfed. It did need it, but it is a blow to a struggling codex. Personally, I wish they'd gone with a 90 degree arc.
As for seeing tournament armies based on Helldrakes, what else are CSM supposed to base a competitive army on?

Khorne Berzerkers. NO WAIT! Mono-nurgle! Forgefiends? I give up. I'm out of options.

Also, to those who are saying "BRING MORE TURKEYS!" well, one, that's the whole reason we're having this problem now. Because CSM players DID bring enough turkeys to make the 3+ armor cry. So we are here now. The other problem with "BRING MORE TURKEYS" is that if we do that, then we can't bring anything else in our fast slots.

And I think this might be the bottom line of ridiculous that has come up now: One the one hand, Heldrakes were too good, so they got nerfed to make them more reasonable. But by nerfing them, now we have to take more.....er?

I'm sorry, aren't you the chap who posted this...

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:
Ok, I'm done with this and all threads like this now. Especially with virtually three or four threads having the same discussions with the same people coming to the same damn conclusions. Actually, this thread reminded me why it took me so long to come back to Dakka for anything besides the pictures.

Just a short while ago?

Anyone that thinks the Heldrake is still good obviously doesn't play good players. IT will come in flame 1 unit if your opponent is a good player it will maybe kill 4 models. Then it will either have to hover or fly off the table to actually do anything.
You will never get the points invested in it back unless your opponent is terrible. If you run 2 or 3 you are sinking a ton of points into something that might come in on turn 2.

IF the actual CSM codex was good there would be other options to take. Sadly there isn't

I actually enjoy coming to dakka to listen to people that don't actually play 40k talk about how a unit is or isnt good anymore. When I say don't play I mean you don't actually play good players who know how to play.

Sorry Az. What I meant to say was, I'm done with you. And now you are blocked. And my day was made that much brighter.

 erick99 wrote:

I'm biased both ways. I understand how OP it is, but there's a reason that it is Codex: Hellturkey.
I'm both glad and upset it got nerfed. It did need it, but it is a blow to a struggling codex. Personally, I wish they'd gone with a 90 degree arc.
As for seeing tournament armies based on Helldrakes, what else are CSM supposed to base a competitive army on?

Partially I understand you. However, if some codex is strugling, the solution is not to make one of its units super strong. You are not the only one with non-competitive codex. From time to time I check the winners or top ten players of notable tournaments. For some time now, there are always Eldar-Tau-Daemons(with CHSM allies) in the first ranks, followed by Space marines. Before them it was Grey knights all around. Now I presume it will be Daemons - Eldar - Grey knights - Tau, but its a guess and only time will tell. As long as I play warhammer it has always been like this.

I dont believe that an army, winning army, should be based on one unit. Its the same with vendettas - that was the only great unit in struggling codex. And I still believe it had to be toned down!

 Tyrius wrote:
Anyone that thinks the Heldrake is still good obviously doesn't play good players. IT will come in flame 1 unit if your opponent is a good player it will maybe kill 4 models. Then it will either have to hover or fly off the table to actually do anything.
You will never get the points invested in it back unless your opponent is terrible. If you run 2 or 3 you are sinking a ton of points into something that might come in on turn 2.

IF the actual CSM codex was good there would be other options to take. Sadly there isn't

I actually enjoy coming to dakka to listen to people that don't actually play 40k talk about how a unit is or isnt good anymore. When I say don't play I mean you don't actually play good players who know how to play.

You're undervaluing forcing your opponent to act, if you make your oppo move models out of the way of a Heldrake, and he either didn't want to move, or move in that direction, then you have gained something. This could be moving out of cover, moving his unit so they are out of range of his weapons or Into range of yours, forcing guys armed with heavy weapons to fire snap shots etc etc..

Not every contribution a unit makes to the game can be measured in casualties inflicted.

For instance, my Bloodthirster in my Khorne list is often gunned down mercilessly within two turns, but more often, when that happens, the two Princes who got off scott free for two turns then have the opportunity to pick up the shortfall, and on occasion, luck or bad decision making means all three get to play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:
Sorry Az. What I meant to say was, I'm done with you. And now you are blocked. And my day was made that much brighter.

Lol, fair enough.

Can't say I'll be able to resist knowing you won't see my posts to embark on shenanigans though, but then, keep posting in the manner you have been and you won't be around for much longer.

 Lothar wrote:

 erick99 wrote:

I'm biased both ways. I understand how OP it is, but there's a reason that it is Codex: Hellturkey.
I'm both glad and upset it got nerfed. It did need it, but it is a blow to a struggling codex. Personally, I wish they'd gone with a 90 degree arc.
As for seeing tournament armies based on Helldrakes, what else are CSM supposed to base a competitive army on?

Partially I understand you. However, if some codex is strugling, the solution is not to make one of its units super strong. You are not the only one with non-competitive codex. From time to time I check the winners or top ten players of notable tournaments. For some time now, there are always Eldar-Tau-Daemons(with CHSM allies) in the first ranks, followed by Space marines. Before them it was Grey knights all around. Now I presume it will be Daemons - Eldar - Grey knights - Tau, but its a guess and only time will tell. As long as I play warhammer it has always been like this.

I dont believe that an army, winning army, should be based on one unit. Its the same with vendettas - that was the only great unit in struggling codex. And I still believe it had to be toned down!

So now the IG have a struggling codex too? Isn't this the army with uber armor and telephone polls that leave greasy smears in the terrain everywhere they go? Who could also snap fire 40+ las shots at a daemon prince and force 20 grounding tests? I'm sure my numbers are off since I don't have that codex and such, but I didn't thing the IG were "struggling." Especially now with the new name and Astra Tempestus. Upon first glance, it looked to me like the IG transports just got stronger than the Space Marine rhinos, and that is a blasphemy all on its own.

Why do you guys have to be so hostile against each other?

Put down your weapons and hug in the malefic embrace of Chaos.

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:

So now the IG have a struggling codex too? Isn't this the army with uber armor and telephone polls that leave greasy smears in the terrain everywhere they go? Who could also snap fire 40+ las shots at a daemon prince and force 20 grounding tests? I'm sure my numbers are off since I don't have that codex and such, but I didn't thing the IG were "struggling." Especially now with the new name and Astra Tempestus. Upon first glance, it looked to me like the IG transports just got stronger than the Space Marine rhinos, and that is a blasphemy all on its own.

I believe he meant of the old IG book.

Also grounding tests don't work like that anymore. And Guard Transports have been stronger than Rhinos since 5th.

 Tyrius wrote:

You will never get the points invested in it back unless your opponent is terrible.
IF the actual CSM codex was good there would be other options to take. Sadly there isn't

Are you saying that CHSM Sorcerer is not a good option? And what about obliterators? Havocks with ACs (about 115 points for 8 BS 4 S7 shots? - hell yeah, I would take it!)? And so on...None of those units is OP. None can be compared to the old helldrake - which is a good thing, because that Turkey had been clearly broken. But those are hardly bad units. You know what is bad? Warp talons. Or basic CHS Marines. But in every codex there are - sadly - good options and bad options. Some codex have OP options (Eldar probably the most of them now).

 Ashiraya wrote:
Why do you guys have to be so hostile against each other?

Put down your weapons and hug in the malefic embrace of Chaos.

No hostility here, more amusement/bemusement that someone can get that worked up over the subject.

Just for the record though, and with no hostility, venom or aggression, coming in between two people who really ARE angry with each other, and saying "why don't you guys just chill out?" may result in serious physical injury to your person if not protected by the warm fluffy blanket of virtual ness.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Why do you guys have to be so hostile against each other?

Put down your weapons and hug in the malefic embrace of Chaos.

No hostility here, more amusement/bemusement that someone can get that worked up over the subject.

Just for the record though, and with no hostility, venom or aggression, coming in between two people who really ARE angry with each other, and saying "why don't you guys just chill out?" may result in serious physical injury to your person if not protected by the warm fluffy blanket of virtual ness.

Or, in my case, a fair amount of experience in Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.

Still, no matter your emotion, please hold to rule #1.

(I feel like a backseat mod. Sorry. :C)

 obsidiankatana wrote:

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:

So now the IG have a struggling codex too? Isn't this the army with uber armor and telephone polls that leave greasy smears in the terrain everywhere they go? Who could also snap fire 40+ las shots at a daemon prince and force 20 grounding tests? I'm sure my numbers are off since I don't have that codex and such, but I didn't thing the IG were "struggling." Especially now with the new name and Astra Tempestus. Upon first glance, it looked to me like the IG transports just got stronger than the Space Marine rhinos, and that is a blasphemy all on its own.

I believe he meant of the old IG book.

Also grounding tests don't work like that anymore. And Guard Transports have been stronger than Rhinos since 5th.

Wait, why are we talking about old IG dex? And I said "could" as in, 6th ed guard did not seem to want for anything seeing as how I'm sure they were able to fire mortars out of their transports some how. And on that note, how is that explainable? That the IG now have better vehicles than the Space Marines who are supposed to have the best of everything? Leman Russ better than Pred. Fine. I'll believe it. Chimera better than Rhino? What? Or that new humvee/bus they got for the AM? Better than Rhino, why? o__O Are we getting rid of the Rhino soon then? Because this doesn't make any sense to me.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Why do you guys have to be so hostile against each other?

Put down your weapons and hug in the malefic embrace of Chaos.

No hostility here, more amusement/bemusement that someone can get that worked up over the subject.

Just for the record though, and with no hostility, venom or aggression, coming in between two people who really ARE angry with each other, and saying "why don't you guys just chill out?" may result in serious physical injury to your person if not protected by the warm fluffy blanket of virtual ness.

Or, in my case, a fair amount of experience in Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.

Still, no matter your emotion, please hold to rule #1.

(I feel like a backseat mod. Sorry. :C)

I'm not being impolite am I?

If so, please feel free to yellow triangle my relevant posts, this stuff isn't important enough for people to actually get upset about.

Plus, have a cookie for pulling the classic ITG routine. I'm 2m and 300lbs, all the martial arts in the world won't save you if I pick you up and drop you on your head.

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:

So now the IG have a struggling codex too? Isn't this the army with uber armor and telephone polls that leave greasy smears in the terrain everywhere they go? Who could also snap fire 40+ las shots at a daemon prince and force 20 grounding tests? I'm sure my numbers are off since I don't have that codex and such, but I didn't thing the IG were "struggling." Especially now with the new name and Astra Tempestus. Upon first glance, it looked to me like the IG transports just got stronger than the Space Marine rhinos, and that is a blasphemy all on its own.

Mr. Obsidian above got it right. I dont know about Astra Militarum. That codex is out in the open only for a while so it is just too soon to make conclusions about its strenght in tournaments. I will give it about half a year, you can ask me again after that. But the old codex IG? Yup, for a long time (since 6th edition) this codex had been used as Codex:Imperial Allies because of vendettas used by space marines. As a primary detachment, it was strugling (Not counting FW units, only the codex).

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:

Wait, why are we talking about old IG dex? And I said "could" as in, 6th ed guard did not seem to want for anything seeing as how I'm sure they were able to fire mortars out of their transports some how. And on that note, how is that explainable? That the IG now have better vehicles than the Space Marines who are supposed to have the best of everything? Leman Russ better than Pred. Fine. I'll believe it. Chimera better than Rhino? What? Or that new humvee/bus they got for the AM? Better than Rhino, why? o__O Are we getting rid of the Rhino soon then? Because this doesn't make any sense to me.

I think to draw the comparison of: IG had an iffy codex with really good fliers -> flyer got nerfed. Parallel to Chaos now.

The Taurox probably isn't better than the Rhino (not AV wise, has better guns, but also costs more). But the Chimera as been superior for quite some time. I suppose the intended argument here is that the Rhino's cargo is theoretically better, but it usually isn't.

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:
Wait, why are we talking about old IG dex? And I said "could" as in, 6th ed guard did not seem to want for anything seeing as how I'm sure they were able to fire mortars out of their transports some how. And on that note, how is that explainable? That the IG now have better vehicles than the Space Marines who are supposed to have the best of everything? Leman Russ better than Pred. Fine. I'll believe it. Chimera better than Rhino? What? Or that new humvee/bus they got for the AM? Better than Rhino, why? o__O Are we getting rid of the Rhino soon then? Because this doesn't make any sense to me.

Chimeras, while 'better' than a rhino, are a different beast. Rhinos exist to move marines from point A to point B so that marines can do the fighting. Chimeras are there to help the Guard as an IFV, rather than as an APC. They end up being a 'better' unit, but they fill a different role. The Rhino is still king of the metal boxes, and that isn't something I expect will change anytime soon.

@obsidiankatana IG had a decent codex (see below) with an OP flier, flier got nerfed. New book is new. Taurox (imo) is worse than a Rhino point for point.

@Lothar it waasn't 'struggling' because it was a bad primary (that said, it wasn't good either), it was 'struggling' because it was the best imperial ally.

IG were never a bad codex. They were the #1 ally for every army in 6th edition and probably the only army who could make a really solid army with no allies.

I thought it was OP as well, but a 90 degree arc would have been more reasonable.

Loss of 315 degrees of threat is huge!

 Thokt wrote:
I thought it was OP as well, but a 90 degree arc would have been more reasonable.

Loss of 315 degrees of threat is huge!

Dont really think people know hull mounted rules and how narrow the firing arc actually is and probably play it much differently.

Every player I've played seemed pretty well aware of hull mounted rules..

 Vineheart01 wrote:

GoliothOnline wrote:
The Drake itself is boned on multiple accounts

For one, it's impossible to draw LoS from the "Gun Barrel" since the drakes nose is always pointed down and over the gun (Even if you wanted to state that RAI just measure from the tip of the nose, that doesn't mean the model itself is any less broken with the new rules).

That is the lamest excuse to not bring a vehicle ever. Stating a model cannot draw line of sight because of the way its constructed is the dumbest claim ever. People tried that with numerous models that "dont have eyes" and it got shot down every time. Its not a hull mounted gun, so it can pivot even if its modeled fixed.

Helldrakes are still strong, theyre just not auto-win broken for the cost like they were. My friend used them before the turret-FAQ to great success, all that faq did is make him not even have to think about how to use it. Welcome to every other flier's life of having to "aim" the vehicle.

The necron fluff states that its tesla destructors are turret mounted, yet everyone plays them hull mounted. Generally the only way to determine whether a gun is turret mounted or hull mounted is to either look at the model or for it to balatantly state so in its rules or FAQ. I wouldn't force an opponent to draw TLOS with it and let him ignore any intervening pieces of the model. But I don't see why someone should be able to play with their weapons as turret mounted without a clear reason for why it is.

 Thokt wrote:
Every player I've played seemed pretty well aware of hull mounted rules..

45 degree firing arc is not "good" or "best flier" that people keep saying that it is. Its severely gimped as a hull mounted weapon.

 Tyrius wrote:

 Thokt wrote:
Every player I've played seemed pretty well aware of hull mounted rules..

45 degree firing arc is not "good" or "best flier" that people keep saying that it is. Its severely gimped as a hull mounted weapon.

Let's look at it this way. A flier with Vector Dancer is never going to get hit by a Heldrake unless it happens the turn the Heldrake comes out. On that note, Vector Dancer might help the 45* arc a lot better, but 45* is still tripe. 90 or 180. I vote 180 being the only reasonable way to play it, since you can still hose viable targets without shooting behind you. 90* is more like the compromise between 180 and 45 and is still pretty crap.

 azreal13 wrote:

JubbJubbz wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:


With regard to the Heldrake, I posted this over in the general hull mounted thread in discussion, I'd be interested if anyone can argue a reason why this can't be done, otherwise, it makes hitting stuff much easier.

The model, if assembled officially, points it's gun roughly straight forwards and level. (Along the x axis)

People are assuming that the arc = x +/- 22.5 degrees.

Nothing says that the fire arc cannot be taken as x -45 degrees, meaning it cannot fire above itself at all, but can target 45 degrees down.

Spoiler:

As you can see, 45 degrees vertically, no clarification that it has to be split evenly around the x axis.

I think you have to assume that when it says 45 degrees it means centered about the gun barrel axis. If you don't assume this then one center of the arc is no better than any other. If you want to pick a central axis 22.5 degrees below the gun barrel why not just choose an axis behind the heldrake so you can use it like before? The axis along the gun barrel is the only one that makes sense ruleswise. Honestly I wish they'd have left it turret and nerfed it some other way if they must. A fire breathing dragon that can't flame stuff it passes over is absurd. Additionally the hadesdrake didn't deserve the collateral damage.

The x axis is the horizontal, a flat level line running through the model nose to tail, and extending infinitely in both directions. You are told, explicitly, to measure range and LOS from the gun barrel, you must do this, so no, you can't just pick any point and use it like before.

The "x axis" as you define it is irrelevant. The gun is not, nor has to be, horizontal. If you actually read the rules that you yourself posted you will see it says to measure LoS along the gun barrel, not from the gun barrel as you say. Along the barrel indicates that the relevant axis is that of the gun barrel not horizontal anything. You are assuming horizontal is what matters, it is not, only the axis along which the gun points.

You use the word "assume" several times in your response, which is telling, because you can assume things, but not necessarily be correct. Taking a 45 degree fire arc starting with level and moving down not only satisfies RAW, as far as I can see, but makes sense fluff wise, and makes the Heldrake function more like people think it should.

I use the word "assume" because I know what it means and its the right word to use, thus how you use the word "telling" is ironic because your backhanded comment is more telling about you than me. The rule book does not state what orientation the firing arc has so therefore any opinion on where it is centered is an assumption.

There is no stipulation that any part of the arc has to be above the gun, there is no stipulation that the arc has to be centred on the barrel, merely 45 degrees vertical and horizontal, which my idea complies with.

Which I never refuted you on. If you comprehend what I wrote, it was that if you follow just the words as they are written it does not say 'swivel 45 degrees starting from its modeled mount' it simply says you can swivel a total of 45 degrees with no reference point on where you must start or end. So RAW, you can literally pick any direction you want to face your 45 degree arc. Furthermore, RAW it doesn't even clarify it must be the same arc every time you shoot. This is why RAW arguments are silly. If you are allowed to choose where your arc begins, so is everyone else, and the since rulebook doesn't specify where the arc starts, one can choose it to be behind if they want. My point wasn't that you're wrong for RAW, it was that such an interpretation of the RAW opens the door to even more obscene abuse than your already ridiculous suggestion. The only reasonable way to play it is centered along the barrel, as everyone does. Any other attempt is rules lawyering to the extreme.

Its also worth noting that its the gun that is said to swivel, not just the line of sight. As you must measure LOS along the barrel you must actually pretend to swivel the barrel and then draw line of sight. If you do not swivel the barrel first (physically or imaginatively) there is no way to draw LOS along the barrel.

Firstly, you seem to be defending yourself, when in actual fact I wasn't in any way attacking you, but the rules system that forces you into making "assumptions," might be best to ask me to clarify rather than embarking on a massive, slightly ranty, post in future.

Secondly, measuring along the barrel in the example I was citing (where the gun on the Heldrake in official pics, is, more or less, parallel to the ground) is a distinction without a difference.

Finally, you appear to be agreeing with me, so why all the defensiveness? A

EDIT

Reread some of the end of the post, so you don't actually agree, you just have no reason to tell me I'm wrong? Fair enough. Personally, I wouldn't expect to be able to play it this way, but I think it makes a lot of sense for ALL fliers, as then Drake isn't the only model that has an issue with this (Stomraven missiles for instance, the Ork flier I think as well, just as a couple of examples) and you really can't base rules arguments on assumptions, reasonable behaviour or anything else that is subjective and can vary from individual to individual, because you're always vulnerable to someone thinking the exact opposite and also thinking the assumptions they've made are reasonable.

Ha ha ha so I'm not alone in finally being willing to field the drake now that it got nerfed! Anyways, overall, the baledrake was far too god previously. Currently, it still feels like it is worthwhile, possibly being the best CSM unit (even if that isn't saying all that much). As per the Autodrake, I'll admit I just don't see much a point in taking it really now.

 azreal13 wrote:

Reread some of the end of the post, so you don't actually agree, you just have no reason to tell me I'm wrong? Fair enough. Personally, I wouldn't expect to be able to play it this way, but I think it makes a lot of sense for ALL fliers, as then Drake isn't the only model that has an issue with this (Stomraven missiles for instance, the Ork flier I think as well, just as a couple of examples) and you really can't base rules arguments on assumptions, reasonable behaviour or anything else that is subjective and can vary from individual to individual, because you're always vulnerable to someone thinking the exact opposite and also thinking the assumptions they've made are reasonable.

But we can and do base rules off reasonable behavior and assumptions, we are forced to everyday. We assume that a model doesn't need eyes to draw line of sight because its reasonable. There doesn't really need to be any clarification we understand based on context. If every little detail was spelled out in unambiguous clarity the rules would be 10x the size they are read like a legal document. Heck, even legal matters often appeal to things like 'reasonable doubt' because spelling out every possible circumstance isn't worth it. There are many many instances in rules all over the place that can be deconstructed and in the most simple RAW interpretation do not make sense or work in the way they are intended. If two reasonable people disagree each starting from reasonable view they should not have a problem coming to some conclusion in a very brief amount of time.

Its actually important to the game that we do this, and more on topic, important to the heldrake. The verticle swivel does not actually allow you to place the template within 12" of the base. However most people play it the way they interpret which is to allow 45 degrees on the table with little regard to it being too close to the base to be within the actual firing arc.

Truth!

 Tyrius wrote:
Truth!

This is beautiful