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.

For one point-ONE POINT-Tomb Blades gain:

-Twin-Linked Main Gun
-The Jetbike unit type

With the only penalty being one worse armor save. (Which they can improve to be the same for 2 points, making them only 3 points more expensive for the same or better in every possible way.)

Tomb Blades are dramatically underpriced, like most bike units in this edition, and yes, the armor save upgrade is most definitely absurdly underpriced.

I have a hunch that bikes and jetbikes are priced the way they are because GW sees an increased chance of falling back off the table as a big negative.

While Tomb Blades are mildly underpriced regarding the Armor upgrade, Immortals have two issues.
1. They can't a transport outside of the Scythe, which means they see the field T2 at earliest if they want to be in the midst of it.
2. They're footslogging otherwise.

They'd be a bit more attractive if they could take Ghost Arks like Warriors as a Dedicated trasport, or at the very least hijack one from Warriors that are above 10 dudes. Durability doesn't mean anything if you can't get up the field at a reasonable pace.

Immortal centric lists also suffer from the fact they can't take up the majority of the Decurion compared to warriors.

Immortals are also Troops choices, which sometimes matters for objective secured.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
While Tomb Blades are mildly underpriced regarding the Armor upgrade, Immortals have two issues.
1. They can't a transport outside of the Scythe, which means they see the field T2 at earliest if they want to be in the midst of it.
2. They're footslogging otherwise.

They'd be a bit more attractive if they could take Ghost Arks like Warriors as a Dedicated trasport, or at the very least hijack one from Warriors that are above 10 dudes. Durability doesn't mean anything if you can't get up the field at a reasonable pace.

Immortal centric lists also suffer from the fact they can't take up the majority of the Decurion compared to warriors.

3) They can use the eternity gate from a Monolith. I find monoltihs can be good, but its very dependant on how much anti-armor you are facing. Its not a very good option overall but it is a option none the less.

But for the main point. I think the tomb blade options are underpriced and the immortals are two points over costed. JMHO.

I think that they're both underpriced.

 Traditio wrote:
I think that they're both underpriced.

And you think FMC's should be capped at a 4+ because you buy Flakk missiles. Nobody cares.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Table wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
While Tomb Blades are mildly underpriced regarding the Armor upgrade, Immortals have two issues.
1. They can't a transport outside of the Scythe, which means they see the field T2 at earliest if they want to be in the midst of it.
2. They're footslogging otherwise.

They'd be a bit more attractive if they could take Ghost Arks like Warriors as a Dedicated trasport, or at the very least hijack one from Warriors that are above 10 dudes. Durability doesn't mean anything if you can't get up the field at a reasonable pace.

Immortal centric lists also suffer from the fact they can't take up the majority of the Decurion compared to warriors.

3) They can use the eternity gate from a Monolith. I find monoltihs can be good, but its very dependant on how much anti-armor you are facing. Its not a very good option overall but it is a option none the less.

But for the main point. I think the tomb blade options are underpriced and the immortals are two points over costed. JMHO.

I haven't used the Monolith since 4th. It just isn't that great.

However, I don't think Immortals are overpriced. There just needs to be some compensation for their crap mobility. Having a land vehicle like an Ark to start in would help them considerably.

Niether are immortals overpriced, nor are the tomb blades underpriced.

Its the tomb blade's upgrades who are criminally underpriced.

Tomb blades are underpriced, Immortals are fine, warriors are pretty heavily underpriced as well but nowhere near as badly as the Tomb blades. IMO they should be at least 26 ppm for what they do.

Dantes_Baals wrote:
Tomb blades are underpriced, Immortals are fine, warriors are pretty heavily underpriced as well but nowhere near as badly as the Tomb blades. IMO they should be at least 26 ppm for what they do.

Wholeheartedly agreed

Dantes_Baals wrote:
Tomb blades are underpriced, Immortals are fine, warriors are pretty heavily underpriced as well but nowhere near as badly as the Tomb blades. IMO they should be at least 26 ppm for what they do.

Warriors are most certainly not underpriced. They're 4 points away from an Immortal.