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.

The_Real_Chris wrote:
I still think that the cost of a base squad should increase, but the cost of extras and spacial and heavy weapons should decrease.

I think players should be rewarded for taking things like radios, so making them a 1 point upgrade to a 50 point squad would be great. Drop special weapon costs by 2 points as well. Now you have the same before and after costs for a fully tooled up squad, but a more expensive bare bones one to reflect the fact that the guard does expect its men to fire their weapons lots before dying in droves.

Yeah, something like this would be good. It is boring that the most optimal squad is the barebones one.

Ice_can wrote:
Your overy simplifying or ignoring the advantage that NLOS gives as your unit can hunker down hold a back field objective and still shoot at anything with range. A dirrect fire weapon can be manoeuvred around.

It's also a more fundamental issue that a Guardsmen shouldn't cost 3pts like they do in HWS. Combined with mortars stacking to make it offensively undercosted.

I feel like people grossly exaggerate the firepower, resilience, and general utility of mortar teams. An average of 3.5 Bolter shots hitting on 4s at best isn't a particularly scary model. Their entire utility is that they're cheap and annoying, and in a game where battles are usually resolved by turn 3, the idea of them firing continuously for six turns has little relevance to actual gameplay. A full squad of 3 mortars has an average damage output of less than one basic Marine killed per turn. In all the games I've used them, they've struggled to make back their points, and they're trivially easy for Deep Strikers and the like to kill.

The only reason mortars are favored over the other heavy weapons is that they're the only platform that can avoid dying instantly to anything that looks at them funny. I see them used to fill Brigade slots and occupy table space more than anything else.

In any case, costing one point less per wound seems appropriate considering the combined team is vulnerable to D2+ weapons and only has one lasgun. I can see increasing the cost of mortars to match heavy bolters, or bumping them up to 8pts if basic infantry go up to 5pts, but when literally every single other configuration of HWSes is considered non-competitive I don't think it's the base unit that's the problem.

The_Real_Chris wrote:
I still think that the cost of a base squad should increase, but the cost of extras and spacial and heavy weapons should decrease.

I think players should be rewarded for taking things like radios, so making them a 1 point upgrade to a 50 point squad would be great. Drop special weapon costs by 2 points as well. Now you have the same before and after costs for a fully tooled up squad, but a more expensive bare bones one to reflect the fact that the guard does expect its men to fire their weapons lots before dying in droves.

I like that idea lot, since it penalizes CP batteries without negatively impacting kitted-up Guardsmen, and incentivizes taking heavy weapons whereas right now orders reward keeping all lasguns- but how would you balance it? Reducing the cost of special and heavy weapons army-wide would be a buff to a whole slew of units that don't need it, like vehicles. You'd need an army-wide rebalancing pass, increasing the cost of pretty much every weapon platform in the army to compensate.

Games are increasingly not resolved by turn 3. That new stratagem, and ITC style games frequently go down to the wire. Especially IG v IG.

Martel732 wrote:
Games are increasingly not resolved by turn 3. That new stratagem, and ITC style games frequently go down to the wire. Especially IG v IG.

This.

And Mortars are absolutely undercosted. Absolutely. They hit on 4s rerolling everything. For like 100 points you get 6d6 shots. The ability to deny people back-line objectives with min-sized squads - unless they're marines - is not insignificant.

The rest of the non-marine world, T3 5+ or worse as our base troop, can't stand up to mortar fire, especially when it's so accurate. Those 100 point mortars delete a min squad every turn. Meaning, you can't rely on min squads to hold objectives. The mortars dictate that you must put something beefier and therefore more expensive on any objective.

But guard have been undercosted since the jump, this is nothing new, and people will continue to apologize for them, until they see point increases in CA.

If you aren't getting mileage out of your mortars, i would honestly say you need to improve your skills. They are *fantastic* and punch WAY above their points. The top players use them to great effect, you should too.

Rerolling everything only if they’re Cadian and have an order.

And even then, it’s an average of about 23 and a half bolter hits.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Rerolling everything only if they’re Cadian and have an order.

And even then, it’s an average of about 23 and a half bolter hits.

And how many points of marine you think you'd need to take to accomplish the same?

 JNAProductions wrote:
Rerolling everything only if they’re Cadian and have an order.

And even then, it’s an average of about 23 and a half bolter hits.

Of course they're Cadian, and of course they have orders. You have to bring at least 2 company commanders for a battalion anyway.

There is no argument for that kind of firepower that cheap.

 Marmatag wrote:
They hit on 4s rerolling everything. (...) especially when it's so accurate.

I've noticed you seem to regularly do this thing where you implicitly assume very specific buffs, then talk as if those buffed capabilities are a core part of the unit's statline. I'm guessing here you're assuming Cadian doctrine and an officer giving them Take Aim orders, so that 'like 100 points' trio of squads actually requires an additional two officers (minimum of 50pts extra and unable to buff any other unit while babysitting mortars) along with a specific regimental bonus that is commonly considered overpowered (and is incompatible with the Catachan buff combo you use to complain about infantry squads).

When the 'top players' use them for anything more than filling Brigade slots (just checked the top lists from Nova), or otherwise give any indication that they aren't simply the only decent choice among a bunch of poor options, then I'll believe that they're more than slightly undercosted. I already said I'm fine with bringing their cost inline with the other light support weapons.

Maybe you can try making a case for them being significantly undercosted on their own without assuming preconditions that distort their basic value? Man, it's awfully overpowered how Tactical Marines are just 13pts for a unit that re-rolls all failed hits and wounds, isn't it?

 JNAProductions wrote:
Rerolling everything only if they’re Cadian and have an order.

And even then, it’s an average of about 23 and a half bolter hits.

23 and a half bolter hits that can hit most of the board from a unit that can hide from LOS, sounds good to me where do I sign up

 Continuity wrote:


23 and a half bolter hits that can hit most of the board from a unit that can hide from LOS, sounds good to me where do I sign up

At the nearest Astra Militarum recruitment office.

 Marmatag wrote:

Of course they're Cadian, and of course they have orders. You have to bring at least 2 company commanders for a battalion anyway.

I'm sorry but you can sod right off with that one.

I'm sorry to break this to you but no, not every IG player uses Cadian. Not every IG player wants an army that's basically built to be an immobile gunline from the get-go.

As for Orders, once again this is by no means guaranteed. Yes, you'll almost certainly have a couple of Commanders - but you've also got Infantry Squads competing for buffs. And, whilst I can't speak for others, I'd far rather keep my Commanders with the Infantry since they benefit far more from the Order toolbox. I'd far rather have FRFSRF on an Infantry Squad than be rerolling 1s with my Mortars. Not to mention that Infantry are more likely to need Move! Move! Move! or Get Back In The Fight, hence I want my Commanders sticking with them as they advance.

catbarf wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
They hit on 4s rerolling everything. (...) especially when it's so accurate.

I've noticed you seem to regularly do this thing where you implicitly assume very specific buffs, then talk as if those buffed capabilities are a core part of the unit's statline. I'm guessing here you're assuming Cadian doctrine and an officer giving them Take Aim orders, so that 'like 100 points' trio of squads actually requires an additional two officers (minimum of 50pts extra and unable to buff any other unit while babysitting mortars) along with a specific regimental bonus that is commonly considered overpowered (and is incompatible with the Catachan buff combo you use to complain about infantry squads).

When the 'top players' use them for anything more than filling Brigade slots (just checked the top lists from Nova), or otherwise give any indication that they aren't simply the only decent choice among a bunch of poor options, then I'll believe that they're more than slightly undercosted. I already said I'm fine with bringing their cost inline with the other light support weapons.

Maybe you can try making a case for them being significantly undercosted on their own without assuming preconditions that distort their basic value? Man, it's awfully overpowered how Tactical Marines are just 13pts for a unit that re-rolls all failed hits and wounds, isn't it?

You guys all try to defend guard making these kinds of silly posts wherein you claim that the obvious, "comes-up-every-single-game-scenario" doesn't come up and can't be assumed.

Assault cannons saw a points increase because of the synergy with Guilliman. Or are you prepared to make the argument that Grey Knights assault cannons were OP? This game isn't played in a vacuum and balance should (and, generally does) respond to what is actually put on the table.

Tell me, when was the last time you saw someone not take an HQ that gives orders?
When was the last time you saw someone auxiliary in a mortar team so they didn't have orders or regimental traits?

When you can answer that question with some credibility then we'll talk about not assuming the obvious.

With the rule of three, you have a max of 9 orders, not counting unique characters.

 Marmatag wrote:

catbarf wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
They hit on 4s rerolling everything. (...) especially when it's so accurate.

I've noticed you seem to regularly do this thing where you implicitly assume very specific buffs, then talk as if those buffed capabilities are a core part of the unit's statline. I'm guessing here you're assuming Cadian doctrine and an officer giving them Take Aim orders, so that 'like 100 points' trio of squads actually requires an additional two officers (minimum of 50pts extra and unable to buff any other unit while babysitting mortars) along with a specific regimental bonus that is commonly considered overpowered (and is incompatible with the Catachan buff combo you use to complain about infantry squads).

When the 'top players' use them for anything more than filling Brigade slots (just checked the top lists from Nova), or otherwise give any indication that they aren't simply the only decent choice among a bunch of poor options, then I'll believe that they're more than slightly undercosted. I already said I'm fine with bringing their cost inline with the other light support weapons.

Maybe you can try making a case for them being significantly undercosted on their own without assuming preconditions that distort their basic value? Man, it's awfully overpowered how Tactical Marines are just 13pts for a unit that re-rolls all failed hits and wounds, isn't it?

You guys all try to defend guard making these kinds of silly posts wherein you claim that the obvious, "comes-up-every-single-game-scenario" doesn't come up and can't be assumed.

Assault cannons saw a points increase because of the synergy with Guilliman. Or are you prepared to make the argument that Grey Knights assault cannons were OP? This game isn't played in a vacuum and balance should (and, generally does) respond to what is actually put on the table.

Tell me, when was the last time you saw someone not take an HQ that gives orders?
When was the last time you saw someone auxiliary in a mortar team so they didn't have orders or regimental traits?

When you can answer that question with some credibility then we'll talk about not assuming the obvious.

Orders present in the army is a given, yes. But what you constantly fail to realize is that orders are a resource, unlike reroll auras, and that even with THREE officers giving orders ONLY to your mortars, you can't cover all nine HWS. So your math is invalid right out the bat. You also assume Cadian when Catachan is currently the meta choice and there's perfectly good reasons to run Tallarn or Armageddon competitively in niche situations.

I already showed the math on why 30 bolter shots from across the map isn't as good as you guys keep letting on, 2.6 dead marines without cover or without -1 to hit for all nine mortars combined. It would take two turns for all 9 just to kick a min sized tac squad sitting out in the open off of an objective. 3-4 if RG or in cover and all fething game if both, in that last scenario, that's all 100 points of 9 mortars firing at 65 points of tactical marines and taking FIVE ROUNDS assuming no returning fire to clear them.

I've already said about three times now it is not difficult to get LOS on any one of three 60mm bases, much less 9 of them. You act like I just leave my mortars out to be shot at turn one like some type of mouthbreathing idiot, and yet I can tell you from personal experience, I'm lucky to have one full set out of three at the end of a game because there's only so many angles you can protect a footprint that large from. Your argument that you can maneuver around lanes of fire works the same for the mortars unless you're playing on extremely crowded tables.

Finally, if you happen to be playing on cityfight boards every day and somehow can't maneuver to get LOS, you can bring your own indirect fire last I checked . Just about everybody has access to it (other than I think Necrons and Orks)? Marines and Chaos have the WW Scorpius, which will completely remove the mortar problem in 1.5 turns before moving on to hit other things with 6D3 S6/AP2/2D.

 JNAProductions wrote:
With the rule of three, you have a max of 9 orders, not counting unique characters.

12 actually, platoon commander's are a thing.

 gbghg wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
With the rule of three, you have a max of 9 orders, not counting unique characters.

12 actually, platoon commander's are a thing.

It's 9, technically 10 with a stratagem. 2 per cc, 1 per pc, 1 inspired tactics. Nice try though!

You do not seem to remember the cost of those indirect fire units we all supposedly have access to.

Also AdMech don't have access to indirect fire outside FW so...

My challenge still stands for those who claim Mortars are not broken.
Find me a better option for 100 points to clear out weak objective units over the course of a game while my remaining 1900 points draw the attention, then 9d6 bolter shots at 48" without needing LoS.

 Marmatag wrote:


Of course they're Cadian, and of course they have orders. You have to bring at least 2 company commanders for a battalion anyway.

Is this not the same thread in which folks were complaining that Guard always take the Catachan Regimental trait because they're super overpowered with their "6 strength 4 attacks every turn at 4 points per model?" I guess you could take multiple detachments with different Regimental traits, but then orders are going to be even less available than normal since officers can only issue orders to units within the same Regiment, and you still have a hard max of 3 Company Commanders in matched play.

RogueApiary wrote:

 gbghg wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
With the rule of three, you have a max of 9 orders, not counting unique characters.

12 actually, platoon commander's are a thing.

It's 9, technically 10 with a stratagem. 2 per cc, 1 per pc, 1 inspired tactics. Nice try though!

urgh, brainfart sorry, thought company commanders had 3 orders for some reason.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You do not seem to remember the cost of those indirect fire units we all supposedly have access to.

Also AdMech don't have access to indirect fire outside FW so...

Good thing FW is a part of 40k then! If you don't/can't use FW, you don't belong in a thread about competitive.

I already showcased the Scorpius available to Imperium and Chaos. It's about 200 points, but it can clear the 100 points of mortars in 1.5 shooting phases, giving it plenty of time to shoot juicier targets with 6D3 S6 AP2 2D. Since it is out of LOS, and we are apparently all on the premise that means it's magically invulnerable to being shot at with direct fire, that's 4.5 rounds of pounding the gak out of things unmolested once it's done it's job.

RogueApiary wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You do not seem to remember the cost of those indirect fire units we all supposedly have access to.

Also AdMech don't have access to indirect fire outside FW so...

Good thing FW is a part of 40k then! If you don't/can't yse FW, you don't belong in a thread about competitive.

I already showcased the Scorpius available to Imperium and Chaos. It's about 200 points, but it can clear the 100 points of mortars in 1.5 shooting phases, giving it plenty of time to shoot juicier targets with 6D3 S6 AP2 2D. Since it is out of LOS, and we are apparently all on the premise that means it's magically invulnerable to being shot at with direct fire, that's 4.5 rounds of pounding the gak out of things unmolested once it's done it's job.

The ETC exists. There is a world outside the US.

 Marmatag wrote:

And Mortars are absolutely undercosted. Absolutely. They hit on 4s rerolling everything. For like 100 points you get 6d6 shots. The ability to deny people back-line objectives with min-sized squads - unless they're marines - is not insignificant.

The rest of the non-marine world, T3 5+ or worse as our base troop, can't stand up to mortar fire, especially when it's so accurate. Those 100 point mortars delete a min squad every turn. Meaning, you can't rely on min squads to hold objectives. The mortars dictate that you must put something beefier and therefore more expensive on any objective.

You see a problem with the cost of the mortars.

I see a problem with the thought process of whoever is getting shelled by them. They KNOW mortar fire is a thing. And a probable thing at that. Yet they're still trying to hold objectives with min. sized squads? Are they stupid? They aren't dedicating something to deal with the problem? Well, until they do, then they deserve to get shelled into oblivion.

Of course I guess sobbing about it & hoping GW will change your opponnents pts values for the worse is always easier than learning how to play in the 1st place or just modifying your play style.....

 Marmatag wrote:
"comes-up-every-single-game-scenario"

Everyone takes Cadians? Considering how much you complain about the Catachan traits with regards to infantry squads, and considering how many tournament lists show mortars in Catachan detachments, that's a pretty interesting claim.

Furthermore, who's keeping commanders in the back to babysit mortar teams rather than sending them forward with infantry? Especially with Cadians it's actually more points-efficient not to devote officers to them, which is probably why I've yet to see it actually done either on the tabletop or online. Why waste orders on giving mortars a ~33% buff, when your required HQ choices can be doubling the firepower of infantry squads instead?

 Marmatag wrote:
This game isn't played in a vacuum and balance should (and, generally does) respond to what is actually put on the table.

Tell me, when was the last time you saw someone not take an HQ that gives orders?
When was the last time you saw someone auxiliary in a mortar team so they didn't have orders or regimental traits?

You're right, the game isn't played in a vacuum.

So, how exactly does someone take enough officers to provide an order for every single infantry unit in the army (so that you can assume every unit has orders all the time), while simultaneously only taking the minimum number required to fill slots (so that you can ignore the non-negligible cost of unnecessary officers), and while ensuring every infantry squad is Catachan and every heavy weapons squad is Cadian?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You do not seem to remember the cost of those indirect fire units we all supposedly have access to.

Also AdMech don't have access to indirect fire outside FW so...

They also dont have access to fundamental things like a transport outside of FW (and even those are a far cry from typical Rhinos, Raiders, Chimeras, Trukks, etc), and they're the mf'ing AdMech .

The Mechanicus as whole is a half-baked incomplete faction currently

Many of the Imperium factions are designed with allies in mind. So, that's not entirely a credible argument.

 Ordana wrote:
My challenge still stands for those who claim Mortars are not broken.
Find me a better option for 100 points to clear out weak objective units over the course of a game while my remaining 1900 points draw the attention, then 9d6 bolter shots at 48" without needing LoS.

That seems like a pretty niche task. Useful, but niche. You could alter that challenge to take into account return fire and the mortar teams would probably perish a lot quicker than competitors.

 Marmatag wrote:
Many of the Imperium factions are designed with allies in mind. So, that's not entirely a credible argument.

The AdMech is not like the INQ or Assassins or Custodes, either in the background or game. They're a large subfaction of the Imperium who maintain exclusive sovereignty over many worlds, frequently defend their own worlds and wage their own wars and expeditions with their own expansive array of forces, they're just not one GW executed particularly well. The fact that the *Mechanicus* of all things doesn't have a basic transport and, outside of FW, has only one tank, is a travesty

Space Marines and the Guard both had more vehicle units in their very first codex books a quarter century ago than the AdMech codex has now

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
My challenge still stands for those who claim Mortars are not broken.
Find me a better option for 100 points to clear out weak objective units over the course of a game while my remaining 1900 points draw the attention, then 9d6 bolter shots at 48" without needing LoS.

That seems like a pretty niche task. Useful, but niche. You could alter that challenge to take into account return fire and the mortar teams would probably perish a lot quicker than competitors.

The fact that you can hide Mortars without effecting their use plays a role into them being broken.

And yes its a niche use that that is the battlefield role of Mortars in the game.

 Ordana wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You do not seem to remember the cost of those indirect fire units we all supposedly have access to.

Also AdMech don't have access to indirect fire outside FW so...

Good thing FW is a part of 40k then! If you don't/can't yse FW, you don't belong in a thread about competitive.

I already showcased the Scorpius available to Imperium and Chaos. It's about 200 points, but it can clear the 100 points of mortars in 1.5 shooting phases, giving it plenty of time to shoot juicier targets with 6D3 S6 AP2 2D. Since it is out of LOS, and we are apparently all on the premise that means it's magically invulnerable to being shot at with direct fire, that's 4.5 rounds of pounding the gak out of things unmolested once it's done it's job.

The ETC exists. There is a world outside the US.

Even still, the major events in the UK don't ban FW, see Caledonian Uprising, London GT, and the GW GT. Likewise, Australia appears to use ITC for its GT sized events. If anything, basing competitive discussion off of ETC rules is Europeans being insular. Also, isn't ETC a team format? That has its own skewed meta because of the whole captain chooses matchups pregame phase.