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.
Already playtested in AoS, extensively and in big events.
It was still broken, all factions tried to ally in at least some form of summoning to get those bonus points.
Reinforcements points are fine, they are the lesser evil.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/08/19 18:59:36
Talamare wrote: No one cares about Balance at this moment! It's not about nerfing or buffing. It's just a straight question as to why does Horrors pay RP and Necrons or Apothecaries don't?
.
One is creating new units, one is replenishing units. Two different mechanics.
With the same end result, more troops on the table.
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
The couple ideas that can be taken away from this thread.
Everyone thinks free models is fine and not worth it if there in their army.
Everyone that plays against an army that gets free models thinks its broken and loses to them often.
On another note its becoming clear that every army has a box where you have to play it and build your list within the restraints of that box or you have an under par unusable army that will continually get smashed. Only one way to play each army effectivly and that is an issue. With so many options and combinations available they all should be able to work effectively and not feel over/undpowered. Gw has a long ways to go before that will happen.
PEACE is a lie, there is only Passion,
through passion, I gain STRENGTH,
through strength, I gain POWER,
through power, I gain VICTORY through. victory, MY CHAINS are BROKEN.
vaurapung wrote: The couple ideas that can be taken away from this thread.
Everyone thinks free models is fine and not worth it if there in their army.
Everyone that plays against an army that gets free models thinks its broken and loses to them often.
On another note its becoming clear that every army has a box where you have to play it and build your list within the restraints of that box or you have an under par unusable army that will continually get smashed. Only one way to play each army effectivly and that is an issue. With so many options and combinations available they all should be able to work effectively and not feel over/undpowered. Gw has a long ways to go before that will happen.
Don't know which faction you are talking about, but at least for 'nids we have an almost perfect internal balance and can play whatever we want. Downside of that is that no matter how much we optimize our lists, we don't get out of the mid tier (relatively a problem, since this should be the norm for all factions).
That is correct otherwise it would be unbalanced, as the pure options gives you nothing until you acutally equip your unit with that weapon.
That's a ridiculous premise though. A unit without special weapons is simply not going to be as viable as one with special weapons.
Of course a unit with special weapons is better as the same without. Never said anything else. What i said is if you have a weapon option and don´t take one you are not any better than a same unit without weapon option.
And thus shouldn´t pay any "weapon option tax".
vipoid wrote:The assumption has to be that you are going to take at least one special weapon, and I believe they are costed with that in mind.
I don't think 'opportunity costs' is the phrase you're looking for, otherwise this would be impossible and would go against the whole definition of an opportunity cost.
However, opportunity costs are a good reason as to why your premise is flawed. Put simply, the entire cost of a squad is the opportunity cost, and compared to that the cost of a special weapon just isn't significant. Hence, you are going to take a special weapon, otherwise you are just wasting the opportunity cost of the squad itself.
That is your believe. My is the "no weapon option tax". I can´t convince you and you can´t convine me. I can live with that.
vipoid wrote:
Firefox1 wrote: Imagine in the weapon cost is e. g. 1 point just to take it and the other points are what the weapon is actually worth.
That doesn't work though. Because once you start adding those options - especially for stuff like combi-weapons, plasmaguns and plasma pistols (which are straight upgrades over the base weapons), then there just isn't a reason not to take them. If you are already paying for the squad then there is simply no reason to not also invest in one of those weapons.
You seem to have misunterstood me. In my assumption there is no "weapon option tax" in the squad costs. As you are voting for such a tax, i just wanted to if there would be such, than it is better to add it to the weapon.
And with that increased weapon costs it would be at least more viable not to take the weapon.
As it is the points calculation GW has done, don´t know such "opportunity costs". Take a look at the IG, Infantry Squads and Special Weapon Squads have the same statline and are just paying for that.
Special Weapon Squads are elites though. They also can't take any Heavy Weapons (i.e. it's not a straight gain in options).
What slot they are doesn´t matter since we got for everything a special detachment. Of course anyone can rate it different but there is a difference in options 3 special weapon vs. 1 special weapon and 1 heavy weapon.
vipoid wrote:
Firefox1 wrote: Or even a better example: Space Marine Tacticals, Devastators and Assaults (without Jump-Pack) all are 13 Points and have very different weapon options.
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here. All those squads have options[. They might not have the same options (although I believe the sergeants are), but they still have options.
I´m still on the topic that there is no "weapon option tax". As you have said it the option are very different and they all still costs the same. So there can´t be a "weapon option tax" as you believe.
Or are you really rating the option to take 1 special weapon and 1 heavy weapon as good as the option to take 4 heavy weapon?
You are right. But Space Marines in general would have a low drop count and how many tactical squads of 10 are actually taken in a 2000 point army? 4?
When chapter approved is released you the worth will drop further, as the lower drop count won´t autostart but receives just a +1 to a roll off.
Bear in mind that part of the reason why it isn't as useful is because Marines got a free buff in that they can now take a Heavy Weapon in a 5-man squad.
I appreciate that this isn't a Necron comparison, but I can tell you that I'd absolutely love it if my IG Infantry Squads or DE Kabalite Warriors had the Combat Squads rule.
I guess have misunderstood me again. I have said before that taking 2 tac-squads of 5 give you more "flexibility" than taking one squad of 10. The 2 can have each a special or heavy weapon, so you can end with 2 heavy weapons for taking ten marines. That why i see no need of combats squads.
I´m also playing guard, but have much more the need to combine 2 inf squads. Wondering why you would split an inf squad?
Off topic: I expect a conscript nerf more sooner than later. And may be even that hard that inf squads has take the task of meatshields. In those squads i won´t take special weapons.
This isn't an exhaustive list by any means, but to name just a few:
- Far more long-range weapons.
- Better mobility.
- More and superior buffs/auras
- Access to psychic powers
- Vastly superior melee ability
- Pistols even on basic squads
- Options for MSU - Cheap(er) transports
(You've also got Stratagems and Chapter Tactcs, to which Necrons currently have no equivalent.)
A Warrior-focused Necron army will have to move in unwieldy blocks, will have to largely stick together (clustering around buffs), will have a maximum range of 24" for the vast majority of its weapons and a mere 12" optimum range for those weapons.
I don´t diagree, but you get lost. I never compared whole armies just necron warriors vs. tactical marines.
I guess the marines could do that. For that scenario you have to add how fast they can reach CC.
Wall of text: Marines charging Warriors
So points-wise 10 marines, 1 with PG and the Sarge with PP and power axe (155 points) facing 12,92 necron warriors. I know with fractions it looks hilarious, but it is just the average.
Turn 1
Let´s say the marines are the first to move starting 24.1" away. Wanting to CC they advance let´s say 10".
Now the Necrons wouldn´t close but move away 5" so distance is 19.1" and their non RF-shooting takes 1,67 Marines down.
Turn 2
The Marines have to advance again 10" (as with 6" they wouldn´t be in assault range) after the necrons move another 5" away the distance is 14.1", again taking down 1,67 Marines.
Turn 3
Now the Marines move 6" closing to 8.1" range. Of the remaining 6,67 4,67 RFing their bolter killing 1,56 necrons, 1 RFing his PG killing 0,67 and the Sarge killing 0,44. Then let´s assume they made their charge roll and charge.The remaining 10,25 Necrons are overwatching and kill 0,85 marines. The remaining 4,82 marines attack in CC with that number, killing 0,8 warriors and the Sarge kills 0,74, leaving 8,71 warriors. The warriors are defending and killing 0,97 marines, leaving 3,85+Sarge.
On their turn of the 4,21 killed warriors 1,4 are reanimated, numbering now 10,11. Hitting the marines in CC and killing 1,12. 2,73+Sarge remaining.
Anyone who can see the marines winning might continue. I can´t.
And if the Necrons move in Turn 2 toward the Marines instead of away from them. Could have rapid-fired and then charged and denied the turn 3 RF the Marines had. But yes they would have received overwatch fire.
The thing is though, this assumes that the Necrons will be able to endlessly evade the Marines. I mean, sure, they can evade them for a couple of turns, but imagine how much distance that will cost them in an actual game. Even if the Necrons beat those marines in combat it will be a Pyrrhic victory at best - because the squad will be stuck basically at their deployment line, miles from anything else.
Assuming you're not just playing kill points, the Necrons are going to have to walk forward to try and take your objectives off you (since they lack the long-range firepower to just blast you off them), so they really can't rely on evading combat in the manner you're suggesting.
They don´t need to evade endlessly. As you have seen in the example, in the better case they would have only evaded once.
I do agree that the Warriors are at least one of the most survivable Necron units.
But to bring down them down it just takes multiple times their worth in points.
Is that not the case for virtually all units though?
As the adage goes, you don't kill 250pts of your opponent's army with 250pts of your army - you kill 250pts of your opponents army with 500pts of your army.
What's more, durability is the core of Necrons - you'd expect them to be the best at it.
You misunderstood me. I wasn´t complaining that it takes multiple units to destroy them. You are right each unit usually needs multiple points to take them down.
That statement was towards the denial of RP rolls as Klowny said he get´s hard 3 RP rolls in game.
I just wanted to say that having enough firepower in range to kill a whole squad of 20 warriors is not as easy or common as it seems by Klowny´s statement. Nothing more nothing less.
I have yet to see that RP is paid for with their base costs and if so why they cost even less than marines.
But you also refuse to accept that Marines should pay for any of the myriad of advantages they get to which Warriors don't have access. What's more, you don't seem to grasp that just because you think option costs should be included in the weapons, that doesn't mean GWactually did that. You are asking others to prove that RP is included in the cost of Warriors, yet you have not yet proved that the option costs for Marines is included in their weapons.
I could say the same about you, that you refuse to accept that there are no weapon option costs. Just to repeat myself: "You seem to have misunterstood me. In my assumption there is no "weapon option tax" in the squad costs. As you are voting for such a tax, i just wanted to if there would be such, than it is better to add it to the weapon.". I never said that GW added any weapon option costs and don´t vote for it. On the contrary i said there are no weapon option costs added by GW.
It is just you who believes that there are some.
Klowny said the RP are included in their costs. So i asked for how much. But i must correct myself of course the RP costs must be included in the base costs, it just seems to me that these RP costs are just 0 points.
Necron warrior are just better than tactical marines and thus either the warriors are undercosted or the tactical marines are overcosted.
Spoletta wrote:Comparing a necron warrior to a marine in a vacumm is meaningless.
The factions architectures are completely different, SM are a faction based around powerful aura abilities, reason why the single SM units seem weaker compared to other equivalents.
Comparing units in a vaccum is very viable. Every effect coming from outside simply would make it harder to rate the points of a unit.
Sorry but aura are paid by the char that has them not the receiving unit, and yes some benefit more of them than others. And then i must ask how much captains and lieutenants are your SM player fielding.
Most of the SM army don´t get the benefit of being close to one.
vipoid wrote:Personally, I think a solution to Summoning Daemons was needed, but I don't think Reinforcement Points was a good solution. Summoning units can be powerful but making people pay full price for units summoned during the game during the list-building stage would seem to make it niche at best.
What if instead, daemon armies had some sort of reserve pool, based on the point level of the game? So they could have 125pts in a 500pt game, 250pts in a 1000pt game etc. These points would be used in the same way as the current system, but don't come out of your starting total (so a 1000pt army would have 1000pts plus 250pts of reserve points). Any unspent points are automatically added to the reserve pool.
This would put a hard-cap on the number of daemons that can be summoned during a game , but without handicapping the army itself.
Any thoughts?
Reinforcement points are the solution for spawning (, for "healing" it depends on the view). You pay for what you get. So if it says 2000 points for the game, then you simply can´t bring a standing 2000 and a further 500 "reserve". Other each and every army needs to get some "reserve" options.
Now i´m shutting down with the result that 2 guard players look very different on some things.
Have fun!
you're a GUARD player, saying that Necron RP is the most OP broken thing in the game?!!?!?!!?
Oh mah gawd.
this has made my day. You literally have the strongest codex out of all right now, with the most broken units, and you're calling one of the bottom tier codex's OP?
Just for reference, when I say I don't get RP, my main opponent is a guard player. So I cannot take what you are saying seriously, if your guard are having problems clearing out 20 warriors your doing something seriously wrong in your list building my friend.
I used to take a GA with a lord and cryptek in it, Grand Illusion it and 40 warriors into cover and everything was wiped in 1.5 turns of shooting. Thats 40 warriors with a 3+/5++ save, double tapping 4+ RP and had the alpha strike so it was 100 gauss flayer shots coming downrange into the guard frontline. Took one turn of his army to wipe my warriors, then the next to kill my HQ's and Ghost Ark.
Just throwing this out there, I no have fight several mention players this edition and have not even come closer to losing, to the point everyone in my area is convinced they aren't worth playing (hyper competitive environment). Also I play daemons and love the reinforcement pts, paying full cost is fine as you get the option to tailor your list to your opponent. My list is currently using 425 reinforcement pts in a 2k any that has played over 20 games and won two tourneys without losing even once. People in my area are no slouches either, they run full gully gunlines, AM conscript/manticore spam, storm ravens, brim/prince spam, SoB Dom/repressor rush, good variety of competitive armies and it is no issue starting with only 1575 on the board. Anyone who thinks you need to start everything on the board at the start of just plain dumb.
12,000