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.

Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

Well, at the very least we can take solace in the fact a D1 (or week2) FAQ should in fact nerf at least the new-vect strat.

After all, if its too good for DE, its for sure too good for GSC who can pump out CP much more easily.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

THe chance of getting 10 or more unsaved wounds is....
.001
A literal %1 chance to wipe a guardsman unit. And that's when we ignoring how gunslinger actually works (since the chance of generating the extra shot adds an additional 5/6 to the equation), the assuming the guardsmen are out of cover. I guess you are right through, he can wipe out an Infantry squad.

He just needs to kill 8 to guarantee a failed morale test to wipe the squad, otherwise the guard player will have to spend 2CP to save it.

Still an 8% chance. Besides the point, we're still talking about wiping a unit out that costs less than the Kelly, there's not really a point spending the CP to save it even if he does kill most of the unit. Good luck does not equate to overpowered.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Ignoring how lame of a mechanic and how unimportant morale is, did you do the math for other units? Cultists for example are far less durable and more expensive at the same time

I didn't feel the need to, since the subject was on Infantry as the specific example. Anything tougher than that? He's not going to suddenly be better at killing. Cultist and Grots? Can be taken in larger than 10, so can't be wiped short of spending a bunch of CP on one model. And all the math I did was without considering cover. So at the end of the day, I'm not sure what comparing other units would do, other than feed into the usual point efficiency nonsense.

You can't just ignore doing the math for those units because they MIGHT be in squads larger than 10. Same thing for things like Skitarii units or Ork Boyz (where you'd be more looking for straight casualties anyway, which someone showed they get a nice amount dead). Then you have Intercessors and Deathwatch Vets and Dire Avengers and even Custodes (where he wounds the regular dudes AND the bikes at the same rate).

There's a lot to unpack from his stats and abilities.

He does wound custodes at the same rate as custode bikes. That rate is "2 wounds on average, assuming they are not in cover".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also...does he make his points back vs intercessors? By my math he kills 2 out of cover, not quite 2 in cover, aren't they only 17ppm at this point for regular marines?

Or are we looking at this still in the lens of "he drops in, uses Vect to avoid getting blown away by servo-skull, then uses the 3CP shoot twice stratagem because nobody else was going to use that, and if you burn 6CP THEN he makes his points back vs intercessors OP OP OP"?

The only primaris marines he makes his points back against with one round of shooting are characters and Hellblasters, at least by the points I'm seeing from battlescribe. I guess it's a coinflip with the aggressors because he kills 1.47 on average, so if that's 2 then he does make his points, if it's 1 he makes 50% of his points.

in general unless you're a character without a storm shield he doesn't seem that great at going after marines, probably because of the whole S4 thing. When something like a Ravager shooting marines gets a 50% points return that's so killer because it's doing it from a really durable chassis at 36" range. A guy who's got to be up there licking your nostril with T3 5++ had better be recouping his points quick because odds are real good he's a suicide bomb, and you already used 3CP on a vect for the privilege of using him anyway.

I was inspired by another post (Someone rewrote green eggs and ham along the same vain as this) and I had to share.

To the "Spider-man" theme song:

Three armed man three armed man
Shoots whatever his pistols can
from a blip what a suprize
shoots your warlord and he dies
Look out here comes the three armed man
Is he fast listen bud
He's got crazy genestealer blood
Can he hide that's his bread
Sir look out "Bang" your dead
Hay there! There goes the three armed man
In the heat of the night at the scene of a war
Draws his guns fast as light
Heads blow up see the gore
Three armed man Three armed man
Revolutionary three armed man
By the empire he'd deplored
Killing them, is his reward
Look out!! there goes the three armed mannnnn!!

C4790M wrote:
To everyone panicking about the flamer acolytes, the strat to get them 3” away prevents them charging. So yes, it is really powerful, but once you pop off (twice for another 3cp, for 5 total), you’ve effectively got 20 overpriced guardsmen sitting out of cover waiting for a stiff breeze to blow them over. Add in the opportunity cost of not being able to use either the 3” deep strike or the shoot twice strat on the Keller at the same time.

Also, the gsc handflamers are the same stat line as every other faction got in CA18 (they should be 2-3 points though)

If their hand flamer was 3 points then they'd be normal priced, in my opinion. Otherwise you're killing Ork Boyz with super cheap hand flamers that almost always get their points back and need to be killed to the man, because of fearless.

T3 5+ is not broadly different from T4 6+ except in edge cases.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

C4790M wrote:
To everyone panicking about the flamer acolytes, the strat to get them 3” away prevents them charging. So yes, it is really powerful, but once you pop off (twice for another 3cp, for 5 total), you’ve effectively got 20 overpriced guardsmen sitting out of cover waiting for a stiff breeze to blow them over. Add in the opportunity cost of not being able to use either the 3” deep strike or the shoot twice strat on the Keller at the same time.

Also, the gsc handflamers are the same stat line as every other faction got in CA18 (they should be 2-3 points though)

If their hand flamer was 3 points then they'd be normal priced, in my opinion. Otherwise you're killing Ork Boyz with super cheap hand flamers that almost always get their points back and need to be killed to the man, because of fearless.

T3 5+ is not broadly different from T4 6+ except in edge cases.

Why are acolytes always fearless now? Are we giving them a 120-point buffing HQ just for that? Because I was under the impression they actually had no special morale rules unless you gave them that particular, one-per-detachment, buff HQ that costs 2/3 as much as the whole squad of hand flamer guys.

Yep, they make their points back if they drop in on unprotected ork boyz and spend 2CP. Genestealer Cults can spend 2cp to be 75% as effective at chaff clearing as guard infantry are with orders. Then that ork army can charge a unit of ork boyz from 7" away, with a...let's see... 91% chance to get in if they don't have Evil Sunz, and they can kill that squad of acolytes in melee with exactly the same amount of resources spent except 0CP.

Another fun fact: If you didn't take those acolytes with hand flamers and they just deep struck in, shot and charged those ork boyz, they would do more damage than with the hand flamers (21.7 dead orks vs 19.4 with the flamers).

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

They're also glass cannons, and as such are going to be difficult to pilot. The average 40k player is very, very bad at the game. A cursory look around dakka is evidence of this enough.

GSC Won't be taking the game by storm. Smart players who use GSC will be, but that's true with almost any army.

the_scotsman wrote:


Why are acolytes always fearless now? Are we giving them a 120-point buffing HQ just for that? Because I was under the impression they actually had no special morale rules unless you gave them that particular, one-per-detachment, buff HQ that costs 2/3 as much as the whole squad of hand flamer guys.

Yep, they make their points back if they drop in on unprotected ork boyz and spend 2CP. Genestealer Cults can spend 2cp to be 75% as effective at chaff clearing as guard infantry are with orders. Then that ork army can charge a unit of ork boyz from 7" away, with a...let's see... 91% chance to get in if they don't have Evil Sunz, and they can kill that squad of acolytes in melee with exactly the same amount of resources spent except 0CP.

Another fun fact: If you didn't take those acolytes with hand flamers and they just deep struck in, shot and charged those ork boyz, they would do more damage than with the hand flamers (21.7 dead orks vs 19.4 with the flamers).

I find it a reasonable expectation that people will have patriarchs, who are no slouch in the movement phase or in melee and also casts a spell - basically a daemon prince, but cheaper and there are lots of those.

How did those Boyz get to within 7" exactly? Because if you're not jumping or deepstriking then GSC have the advantage to move markers in response to their first turn movements and clear out of the way and then respond in the best approach possible.

Another fun fact: If you didn't take those acolytes with hand flamers and they just deep struck in, shot and charged those ork boyz, they would do more damage than with the hand flamers (21.7 dead orks vs 19.4 with the flamers).

Yes, they sure can. Another fun fact - I only have to pay a single point per model to be able to have units that do both, because I have another stratagem that gets me D6" closer with a +1 or +2 to charge and also disrupt melee armies from wanting to charge me when i'm that close (think Daemons).

 Daedalus81 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


Why are acolytes always fearless now? Are we giving them a 120-point buffing HQ just for that? Because I was under the impression they actually had no special morale rules unless you gave them that particular, one-per-detachment, buff HQ that costs 2/3 as much as the whole squad of hand flamer guys.

Yep, they make their points back if they drop in on unprotected ork boyz and spend 2CP. Genestealer Cults can spend 2cp to be 75% as effective at chaff clearing as guard infantry are with orders. Then that ork army can charge a unit of ork boyz from 7" away, with a...let's see... 91% chance to get in if they don't have Evil Sunz, and they can kill that squad of acolytes in melee with exactly the same amount of resources spent except 0CP.

Another fun fact: If you didn't take those acolytes with hand flamers and they just deep struck in, shot and charged those ork boyz, they would do more damage than with the hand flamers (21.7 dead orks vs 19.4 with the flamers).

I find it a reasonable expectation that people will have patriarchs, who are no slouch in the movement phase or in melee and also casts a spell - basically a daemon prince, but cheaper and there are lots of those.

How did those Boyz get to within 7" exactly? Because if you're not jumping or deepstriking then GSC have the advantage to move markers in response to their first turn movements and clear out of the way and then respond in the best approach possible.

Another fun fact: If you didn't take those acolytes with hand flamers and they just deep struck in, shot and charged those ork boyz, they would do more damage than with the hand flamers (21.7 dead orks vs 19.4 with the flamers).

Yes, they sure can. Another fun fact - I only have to pay a single point per model to be able to have units that do both, because I have another stratagem that gets me D6" closer with a +1 or +2 to charge and also disrupt melee armies from wanting to charge me when i'm that close (think Daemons).

How did...

Where was this other unit of 20 ork boyz the acolytes with 6" range hand flamers killed? The moon?

I'm going to assume if you're using a 6" range weapon on me you are REASONABLY CLOSE TO MY ARMY.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, if your acolytes are fearless, then my ork boyz are 5++/6+++. You get 120 points of buffers, I get 120 points of buffers. So we're trading 20 acolytes for 13 ork boyz now.

the_scotsman wrote:


How did...

Where was this other unit of 20 ork boyz the acolytes with 6" range hand flamers killed? The moon?

I'm going to assume if you're using a 6" range weapon on me you are REASONABLY CLOSE TO MY ARMY.

Well, then I'm getting first strike. I imagine those Boyz will be under KFF they 'll keep half their unit, but if you have to back up to avoid being murdalated by overwatch then you might not get the distance to snag both units effectively especially depending on terrain and such.

Cephalobeard wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

They're also glass cannons, and as such are going to be difficult to pilot. The average 40k player is very, very bad at the game. A cursory look around dakka is evidence of this enough.

GSC Won't be taking the game by storm. Smart players who use GSC will be, but that's true with almost any army.

You don't even need to look around dakka. This thread here pretty much embodies it. The gsc whining has been linked to and meme'd all over discord and facebook, I even saw a reddit chain mocking dakka for this one. I'm interested to see if next weeks podcasts start memeing it too.

I don't think some people realise how far their badness actually reaches. Dakka is used to being an echo chamber for CAAC/Ork players, that doesn't mean this stuff doesn't make it elsewhere lol

 Daedalus81 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


How did...

Where was this other unit of 20 ork boyz the acolytes with 6" range hand flamers killed? The moon?

I'm going to assume if you're using a 6" range weapon on me you are REASONABLY CLOSE TO MY ARMY.

Well, then I'm getting first strike. I imagine those Boyz will be under KFF they 'll keep half their unit, but if you have to back up to avoid being murdalated by overwatch then you might not get the distance to snag both units effectively especially depending on terrain and such.

Aha, if you receive first strike then we must be playing a new Chapter Approved mission! And if we're playing a new Chapter Approved mission, there is a 1/6 chance that it is the airborne supplies mission, and none of the units in GSC have fly, while the rest of the 1800 points in my ork lists are made up of only stormboyz and deffcoptas!

Check

and

Mate, Atheists.

Daed, I am speaking as someone who usually sees you as a voice of relative sanity on these forums.

You remember all those times you've thought to yourself "wow, this argument *usual suspect crazy whiner poster* is making is really disconnected from reality, and relies on a lot of assumed and not very honestly put forward factors to hold water. It's really annoying that they're doing this."

You've been acting like that practically this entire thread. You've decided for some reason that this codex is your windmill to tilt at, and you've used practically every dishonest tactic that I know you've called out and gotten annoyed by in the past when other posters are trying to say something is broken/OP/whatever and want to warp the data to back that assertion up. These ridiculous counterexamples are not intended to be "realistic situations" they're attempts to get you to see what you've been doing.

Stop embarrassing yourself. Wait until the codex comes out and see if these combos are really as difficult to play against as you are making them out to be.

the_scotsman wrote:


You remember all those times you've thought to yourself "wow, this argument *usual suspect crazy whiner poster* is making is really disconnected from reality, and relies on a lot of assumed and not very honestly put forward factors to hold water. It's really annoying that they're doing this."

You've been acting like that practically this entire thread. You've decided for some reason that this codex is your windmill to tilt at, and you've used practically every dishonest tactic that I know you've called out and gotten annoyed by in the past when other posters are trying to say something is broken/OP/whatever and want to warp the data to back that assertion up. These ridiculous counterexamples are not intended to be "realistic situations" they're attempts to get you to see what you've been doing.

Stop embarrassing yourself. Wait until the codex comes out and see if these combos are really as difficult to play against as you are making them out to be.

I can appreciate and understand that. I really do. I respect everyone's opinion here.

I've stepped back from my crazy boycott position - that was foolish to say. I don't think I've made any dishonest statements. I've seen strawmen that I know would bug me from the "other side".

It's impossible to say how *all* of a game will play out, but there are so many facets to this game and GSC kind of ignores a lot. Like in the above example - I'd be more than likely to toss Psychic Stimulus on the closest unit so that even if you did charge I get to strike first. It's brutal to ponder if a DE flyer comes anywhere 24" of a caster they can simply be removed from the table.

I'm totally happy to be wrong on this even if it makes me a pariah.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


You remember all those times you've thought to yourself "wow, this argument *usual suspect crazy whiner poster* is making is really disconnected from reality, and relies on a lot of assumed and not very honestly put forward factors to hold water. It's really annoying that they're doing this."

You've been acting like that practically this entire thread. You've decided for some reason that this codex is your windmill to tilt at, and you've used practically every dishonest tactic that I know you've called out and gotten annoyed by in the past when other posters are trying to say something is broken/OP/whatever and want to warp the data to back that assertion up. These ridiculous counterexamples are not intended to be "realistic situations" they're attempts to get you to see what you've been doing.

Stop embarrassing yourself. Wait until the codex comes out and see if these combos are really as difficult to play against as you are making them out to be.

I can appreciate and understand that. I really do. I respect everyone's opinion here.

I've stepped back from my crazy boycott position - that was foolish to say. I don't think I've made any dishonest statements. I've seen strawmen that I know would bug me from the "other side".

It's impossible to say how *all* of a game will play out, but there are so many facets to this game and GSC kind of ignores a lot. Like in the above example - I'd be more than likely to toss Psychic Stimulus on the closest unit so that even if you did charge I get to strike first. It's brutal to ponder if a DE flyer comes anywhere 24" of a caster they can simply be removed from the table.

I'm totally happy to be wrong on this even if it makes me a pariah.

I guess from the other side, I can see it this way:

If I am playing a genestealer cult army and my opponent has a competitive DE list with 3 flyers, 3 ravagers, and a swarm of venoms, I am going to have a hell of a time removing any kind of significant amount of stuff with my melee deep strike focused army. He can use those flyers to screen a huge amount of his line from deep strikers and the weight of firepower he can bring to bear will tear through my army that most likely consists of about the average number of GEQ wounds that an imperial soup list brings just for their screening purposes...minus the knight that they typically bring along.

Mental onslaught is an extremely powerful psychic power. No argument there. In its current form it is on par with Doom, and if it gets through a 2-week FAQ without being reduced in power (to non-vehicle models, or to use base unmodified LD values) then it is undoubtedly the best offensive power in the game followed by Mind War and then probably Executioner.

That doesn't make this not very likely a losing matchup anyway.

And as for psychic stimulus, that power exists in the game currently, is pretty worthless and is likely to remain pretty worthless for the same reason that an ability like that is only useful if your whole army has it: Your opponent gets to select the first unit. It changes nothing if I charge those acolytes with a single unit of boyz and then select those boyz to go first.

Hypotheticals only take you so far, and at the end of the day there is no way to get around the fact that there are many cases where a 160 point unit can spend 2CP and put out very similar damage output to hand flamer acolytes, if not better, safer or cheaper. 160 points gets you 4 FRFSRF infantry squads, or 8 SS/SB storm bolter vets deep striking, or 20 tzaangors fighting twice. A big unit burning 2CP gets you a ton of examples where you can go "oh god look they can pay for themselves instantly how OP!" because CP are designed to maximise a unit's impact like that.

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

They're also glass cannons, and as such are going to be difficult to pilot. The average 40k player is very, very bad at the game. A cursory look around dakka is evidence of this enough.

GSC Won't be taking the game by storm. Smart players who use GSC will be, but that's true with almost any army.

Yes those Aberrants seem extremely fragile. Not to mention we know how tanky the Kabal of the Black Heart's units are but they seem to manage....

I'll look forward to revisiting this thread once GSC have been out in the wild and tournaments start reflecting the evolved meta. It'll be interesting to see how many of you that have literally called people 'noobs', 'CAAC' or any other insult apologise should you be proven wrong.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


You remember all those times you've thought to yourself "wow, this argument *usual suspect crazy whiner poster* is making is really disconnected from reality, and relies on a lot of assumed and not very honestly put forward factors to hold water. It's really annoying that they're doing this."

You've been acting like that practically this entire thread. You've decided for some reason that this codex is your windmill to tilt at, and you've used practically every dishonest tactic that I know you've called out and gotten annoyed by in the past when other posters are trying to say something is broken/OP/whatever and want to warp the data to back that assertion up. These ridiculous counterexamples are not intended to be "realistic situations" they're attempts to get you to see what you've been doing.

Stop embarrassing yourself. Wait until the codex comes out and see if these combos are really as difficult to play against as you are making them out to be.

I can appreciate and understand that. I really do. I respect everyone's opinion here.

I've stepped back from my crazy boycott position - that was foolish to say. I don't think I've made any dishonest statements. I've seen strawmen that I know would bug me from the "other side".

It's impossible to say how *all* of a game will play out, but there are so many facets to this game and GSC kind of ignores a lot. Like in the above example - I'd be more than likely to toss Psychic Stimulus on the closest unit so that even if you did charge I get to strike first. It's brutal to ponder if a DE flyer comes anywhere 24" of a caster they can simply be removed from the table.

I'm totally happy to be wrong on this even if it makes me a pariah.

You asked me in the other thread if I'd ever before seen you act the way it was being claimed you were - I too freely admitted no I hadn't , but that you shouldnt feel it means nothing you do can ever be like that. I agree with scotsman. You're a better caliber of poster than the people joining in on this frothfest this week. But that should be why you should be able to have the self awareness to recognise yourself being guilty of the same things you've recognised in others before, and maybe take a step back and critically analyse your own statements with the same dilligence that you would others, because you may have gotten a little swept away here.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I'll look forward to revisiting this thread once GSC have been out in the wild and tournaments start reflecting the evolved meta. It'll be interesting to see how many of you that have literally called people 'noobs', 'CAAC' or any other insult apologise should you be proven wrong.

Well, I have to play against them a lot (probably more than any other faction really), so I'll be curious as well. I've already been playing against Anointed Throng Aberrants/Abominant quite a bit and they are nasty, but not overpowering. GSC psychic powers already annoyed me, so I tend to be prepared for their BS, but playing Chaos I probably have a few more options against psykers than a lot of armies. Killing the Magus with Daemonic Possession is very satisfying.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

They're also glass cannons, and as such are going to be difficult to pilot. The average 40k player is very, very bad at the game. A cursory look around dakka is evidence of this enough.

GSC Won't be taking the game by storm. Smart players who use GSC will be, but that's true with almost any army.

Yes those Aberrants seem extremely fragile. Not to mention we know how tanky the Kabal of the Black Heart's units are but they seem to manage....

I'll look forward to revisiting this thread once GSC have been out in the wild and tournaments start reflecting the evolved meta. It'll be interesting to see how many of you that have literally called people 'noobs', 'CAAC' or any other insult apologise should you be proven wrong.

I get you're being sarcastic here, but a model that costs the same as a Grotesque/Spawn but has half the number of wounds doesn't strike you as a bit of a glass cannon?

The best thing about Grotesques is that they spike hard in defenses vs high quality firepower, and the models LOOK like the kind of thing you want to shoot a plasma gun at. They're a reverse distraction carnifex. T4, W2, 5++ for 27ppm minimum is an incredibly efficient target to shoot with lasguns/boltguns.

Thanks guys - I appreciate the tough love. I'm still muddling through this.

Hypotheticals only take you so far, and at the end of the day there is no way to get around the fact that there are many cases where a 160 point unit can spend 2CP and put out very similar damage output to hand flamer acolytes, if not better, safer or cheaper. 160 points gets you 4 FRFSRF infantry squads, or 8 SS/SB storm bolter vets deep striking, or 20 tzaangors fighting twice. A big unit burning 2CP gets you a ton of examples where you can go "oh god look they can pay for themselves instantly how OP!" because CP are designed to maximise a unit's impact like that.

Kinda sort of? It would be 220 for those IS to have company commanders, which is only 72 shots and 36 hits of the same "caliber". That's a fairly wide gap even if I would need to spend 2 CP. IS have double the wounds, so it's not without upsides, but then they have to keep commanders safe from KM, which means bodyguards and more cost. But that means i'm not getting a flamer bomb within 3" that turn.

It's really a very complex interaction.

8 SS/SBs with -2 (if they're within 9") is 32 * .666 * .666 = 14 GEQ. The flamer bomb is 23 GEQ. The Deathwatch will surely be more useful overall, though.

20 Tzaangors on double swing is probably something that stands up mathematically, but comes with a greater chance of absolute failure and up to twice the CP spend (deepstrike and reroll) for an army where it's a bit harder to squeeze in CP.

I'm certain other units can achieve spectacular results on paper, but can they do it with so little support and as cheaply and reliably as GSC? I'm not sure and that's where my distress lies.

the_scotsman wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

They're also glass cannons, and as such are going to be difficult to pilot. The average 40k player is very, very bad at the game. A cursory look around dakka is evidence of this enough.

GSC Won't be taking the game by storm. Smart players who use GSC will be, but that's true with almost any army.

Yes those Aberrants seem extremely fragile. Not to mention we know how tanky the Kabal of the Black Heart's units are but they seem to manage....

I'll look forward to revisiting this thread once GSC have been out in the wild and tournaments start reflecting the evolved meta. It'll be interesting to see how many of you that have literally called people 'noobs', 'CAAC' or any other insult apologise should you be proven wrong.

I get you're being sarcastic here, but a model that costs the same as a Grotesque/Spawn but has half the number of wounds doesn't strike you as a bit of a glass cannon?

The best thing about Grotesques is that they spike hard in defenses vs high quality firepower, and the models LOOK like the kind of thing you want to shoot a plasma gun at. They're a reverse distraction carnifex. T4, W2, 5++ for 27ppm minimum is an incredibly efficient target to shoot with lasguns/boltguns.

No, I don't think they're fragile for their cost. I think they're a steal considering their damage output.

They have a 5+++ and damage reduction on multi damage weapons (which are the bane of multi wound models). Their T can be increased to 5, their 5+++ can become a 4+++.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Thanks guys - I appreciate the tough love. I'm still muddling through this.

Hypotheticals only take you so far, and at the end of the day there is no way to get around the fact that there are many cases where a 160 point unit can spend 2CP and put out very similar damage output to hand flamer acolytes, if not better, safer or cheaper. 160 points gets you 4 FRFSRF infantry squads, or 8 SS/SB storm bolter vets deep striking, or 20 tzaangors fighting twice. A big unit burning 2CP gets you a ton of examples where you can go "oh god look they can pay for themselves instantly how OP!" because CP are designed to maximise a unit's impact like that.

Kinda sort of? It would be 220 for those IS to have company commanders, which is only 72 shots and 36 hits of the same "caliber". That's a fairly wide gap even if I would need to spend 2 CP. IS have double the wounds, so it's not without upsides, but then they have to keep commanders safe from KM, which means bodyguards and more cost. But that means i'm not getting a flamer bomb within 3" that turn.

It's really a very complex interaction.

8 SS/SBs with -2 (if they're within 9") is 32 * .666 * .666 = 14 GEQ. The flamer bomb is 23 GEQ. The Deathwatch will surely be more useful overall, though.

20 Tzaangors on double swing is probably something that stands up mathematically, but comes with a greater chance of absolute failure and up to twice the CP spend (deepstrike and reroll) for an army where it's a bit harder to squeeze in CP.

I'm certain other units can achieve spectacular results on paper, but can they do it with so little support and as cheaply and reliably as GSC? I'm not sure and that's where my distress lies.

Last time I checked a single FRFSRF infantry squad put down 37 shots in 12". So 4 squads with 2 commanders would be 220pts for 148 shots, 74 hits. This is entirely ignoring the round of shooting from 24" that they would most likely get turn 1 when the acolytes are sitting off the board waiting to deep strike.

You're looking at this from a very specific lens if you're like "but what about the kellermorphs!" - I'm looking very generally. What do I take to clear out infantry chaff screens?

How many points is it?

How much CP to I need to spend?

When does the chaff clear happen (do i need to wait until turn 2 when I deep strike)?

How reliable is it (i.e. do I have to make any dice rolls to make it happen/am I highly reliant on winning first turn, making a charge roll, casting a psychic power)?

The current "standard" chaff clearing tactics that you see in competitive army lists if I were to give a brief list for comparison would be stuff like:

-A Da Jumped squad of 30 ork choppa boyz with the evil sunz clan.

210 points. Requires one weirdboy of support minimum, most competitive lists flex a weirdboy between Fists of Gork and Warpath so you can either clear more chaff or buff up your smashboss. Requires the casting of a WC7 psychic power with a +3 on the dice, and then a charge with a free 1 or 2 dice reroll and +1 on the dice.The compound probability is something like a 17% chance of failure to get in. Puts down 120 WS3+ S4 attacks minus overwatch casualties with an option to attack again at the end of the phase for 3CP. Happens turn 1 so you can use deep strike to put in an antiarmor threat turn 2.

-A SS/SB deathwatch squad.

200 points, 1cp or a relic if you use the turn 1 beacon trick. Optional captain to support. Puts down 40 boltgun shots that wound on 2s or have AP-1. Happens turn 2/turn 1 with beacon. Biggest pro is they're tough to remove and often have ways to sneak out of combat if you tie them up.

-FRFSRF infantry

Usually 6 squads/3 commanders for brigade if they're not just "I expect you to die" loyal 32, so 240pts, 90pts of support. no CP. Biggest con is they put out half the firepower turn 1 when they're not in rapid and they're sucsceptible to being cleared by opponent's stuff.

-DE Venoms

90 points per, puts out 20 poisoned shots each. No support needed but I have seen people use Doom if the opponent presents their screen as a single huge unit. Happens turn 1.

Looking at them alongside other competitive anti-chaff measures, I see a couple problems with the flamer acolytes. First and biggest is that they come in turn 2, delaying your anti armor hit past the screen until turn 3, which is pretty much competitive endgame. Second is because they can ONLY be used with a stratagem (their hand flamers don't work off the deep strike otherwise) you get only one unit of them and nothing else gets to use that stratagem that turn. It also has basically no staying power unless you're making it no longer cheap by giving them defensive aura buffs. The big upside you pointed out: it's pretty cheap. no support characters needed really, and only 160 points. I wouldn't bother trying to give them iconwards and patriarchs nearby to keep them alive, it's just extra points you're investing that will die being that close to enemy lines.

I think it's a good and effective antichaff solution, on par with other things currently in the meta, and it's got its own set of benefits and drawbacks.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

They're also glass cannons, and as such are going to be difficult to pilot. The average 40k player is very, very bad at the game. A cursory look around dakka is evidence of this enough.

GSC Won't be taking the game by storm. Smart players who use GSC will be, but that's true with almost any army.

Yes those Aberrants seem extremely fragile. Not to mention we know how tanky the Kabal of the Black Heart's units are but they seem to manage....

I'll look forward to revisiting this thread once GSC have been out in the wild and tournaments start reflecting the evolved meta. It'll be interesting to see how many of you that have literally called people 'noobs', 'CAAC' or any other insult apologise should you be proven wrong.

I get you're being sarcastic here, but a model that costs the same as a Grotesque/Spawn but has half the number of wounds doesn't strike you as a bit of a glass cannon?

The best thing about Grotesques is that they spike hard in defenses vs high quality firepower, and the models LOOK like the kind of thing you want to shoot a plasma gun at. They're a reverse distraction carnifex. T4, W2, 5++ for 27ppm minimum is an incredibly efficient target to shoot with lasguns/boltguns.

No, I don't think they're fragile for their cost. I think they're a steal considering their damage output.

They have a 5+++ and damage reduction on multi damage weapons (which are the bane of multi wound models). Their T can be increased to 5, their 5+++ can become a 4+++.

Where is that increase to BV coming from? The Iconward only allows them to reroll 1s for BV rolls. On the increase to Toughness, that's a random roll from a character that can only be done to a unit once a game, at the possible expense of a dead Abberant. You'll likely want to go for the Strength or Attack roll anyway.

They're not 'fragile', but they are a 5+/5+++. At only 2 wounds. They go down pretty easily if they get stuck outside of combat, which considering how well they swing, they very well might.

"Guys if you spend 5 CP, Have 350pts in Supporting Characters, some of which are useless and need random buffs, you can totally make a unit do x or y", the Thread.

These units are not in a vacuum. We cannot compare them apples to apples against things.

Aberrants, by and large, are the heaviest hitting thing that GSC have access to. Do we also then recognize that, because they only have a 5+/5+++ and reduce damage by 1, and are t4, that they are still hilariously fragile and can die to cultists?

Because a 40 Man squad of Cultists, even without double tapping, still kills 5-6 Aberrants on their own with no buffs, and 12 with a single CP used on them.

A SINGLE Cadian HWT Team kills an Entire Aberrant every turn.

This is their strongest unit, and as a result it NEEDS to produce more damage, because that is it's purpose. It comes in, it smashes, and then it dies to a stale fart carried by the wind.

You want so desperately to be correct and snarkily shove it in peoples faces that you refuse to recognize why things may be the way they are, and apply even a little bit of nuance.

 Carnikang wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

They're also glass cannons, and as such are going to be difficult to pilot. The average 40k player is very, very bad at the game. A cursory look around dakka is evidence of this enough.

GSC Won't be taking the game by storm. Smart players who use GSC will be, but that's true with almost any army.

Yes those Aberrants seem extremely fragile. Not to mention we know how tanky the Kabal of the Black Heart's units are but they seem to manage....

I'll look forward to revisiting this thread once GSC have been out in the wild and tournaments start reflecting the evolved meta. It'll be interesting to see how many of you that have literally called people 'noobs', 'CAAC' or any other insult apologise should you be proven wrong.

I get you're being sarcastic here, but a model that costs the same as a Grotesque/Spawn but has half the number of wounds doesn't strike you as a bit of a glass cannon?

The best thing about Grotesques is that they spike hard in defenses vs high quality firepower, and the models LOOK like the kind of thing you want to shoot a plasma gun at. They're a reverse distraction carnifex. T4, W2, 5++ for 27ppm minimum is an incredibly efficient target to shoot with lasguns/boltguns.

No, I don't think they're fragile for their cost. I think they're a steal considering their damage output.

They have a 5+++ and damage reduction on multi damage weapons (which are the bane of multi wound models). Their T can be increased to 5, their 5+++ can become a 4+++.

Where is that increase to BV coming from? The Iconward only allows them to reroll 1s for BV rolls. On the increase to Toughness, that's a random roll from a character that can only be done to a unit once a game, at the possible expense of a dead Abberant. You'll likely want to go for the Strength or Attack roll anyway.

They're not 'fragile', but they are a 5+/5+++. At only 2 wounds. They go down pretty easily if they get stuck outside of combat, which considering how well they swing, they very well might.

It's a 27/33 point model that dies faster to boltguns than a tactical marine.

If on one hand you're going to point at every other multiwound model and say "people will just target this model with multiple wounds with their D2 weaponry so that stat doesn't count" then why do you not point at this model and say "people will just NOT target this model with a damage reduction with their D2 weaponry, so that rule doesn't count"?

Guardsmen without FRFSRF get 100% points return shooting an aberrant with pick. That is the definition of a glass cannon unit.

Even with math, we'll still be told we're all wrong.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Carnikang wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

drbored wrote:
Good to see people freaking out about combos before the codex is out. Yes I'm aware there are full reviews of every single page and such, but I'm not about to believe a tier list this early in the game. Theres also the 2 week faq to consider which may change things and may not. Who knows! Nobody.

They have a Vect equivalent stratagem, incredibly efficient units and can soup with Guard or Nids. Of course they're going to be top tier.

They're also glass cannons, and as such are going to be difficult to pilot. The average 40k player is very, very bad at the game. A cursory look around dakka is evidence of this enough.

GSC Won't be taking the game by storm. Smart players who use GSC will be, but that's true with almost any army.

Yes those Aberrants seem extremely fragile. Not to mention we know how tanky the Kabal of the Black Heart's units are but they seem to manage....

I'll look forward to revisiting this thread once GSC have been out in the wild and tournaments start reflecting the evolved meta. It'll be interesting to see how many of you that have literally called people 'noobs', 'CAAC' or any other insult apologise should you be proven wrong.

I get you're being sarcastic here, but a model that costs the same as a Grotesque/Spawn but has half the number of wounds doesn't strike you as a bit of a glass cannon?

The best thing about Grotesques is that they spike hard in defenses vs high quality firepower, and the models LOOK like the kind of thing you want to shoot a plasma gun at. They're a reverse distraction carnifex. T4, W2, 5++ for 27ppm minimum is an incredibly efficient target to shoot with lasguns/boltguns.

No, I don't think they're fragile for their cost. I think they're a steal considering their damage output.

They have a 5+++ and damage reduction on multi damage weapons (which are the bane of multi wound models). Their T can be increased to 5, their 5+++ can become a 4+++.

Where is that increase to BV coming from? The Iconward only allows them to reroll 1s for BV rolls. On the increase to Toughness, that's a random roll from a character that can only be done to a unit once a game, at the possible expense of a dead Abberant. You'll likely want to go for the Strength or Attack roll anyway.

They're not 'fragile', but they are a 5+/5+++. At only 2 wounds. They go down pretty easily if they get stuck outside of combat, which considering how well they swing, they very well might.

It's a 27/33 point model that dies faster to boltguns than a tactical marine.

If on one hand you're going to point at every other multiwound model and say "people will just target this model with multiple wounds with their D2 weaponry so that stat doesn't count" then why do you not point at this model and say "people will just NOT target this model with a damage reduction with their D2 weaponry, so that rule doesn't count"?

Guardsmen without FRFSRF get 100% points return shooting an aberrant with pick. That is the definition of a glass cannon unit.

Agree completely (I don't know if you meant to quote me or English). Most of the time, my Abberants die that way, to massed D1 fire... fire warriors and that damnable FtGG.

I can't seem to understand all the hate and rage this Codex is getting.

@scotsman

On the frfsrf stuff - the IS can't just pop up in 12". You can MMM to get in 12 next turn, but then you halve your shots turn 1.

I'll circle back on the rest and some thoughts an aberrants after work.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Well, at the very least we can take solace in the fact a D1 (or week2) FAQ should in fact nerf at least the new-vect strat.

After all, if its too good for DE, its for sure too good for GSC who can pump out CP much more easily.

No.

Sry to pee on your parade comrade but it will not be FAQ'd.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Carnikang wrote:
Where is that increase to BV coming from? The Iconward only allows them to reroll 1s for BV rolls. On the increase to Toughness, that's a random roll from a character that can only be done to a unit once a game, at the possible expense of a dead Abberant. You'll likely want to go for the Strength or Attack roll anyway.

They're not 'fragile', but they are a 5+/5+++. At only 2 wounds. They go down pretty easily if they get stuck outside of combat, which considering how well they swing, they very well might.

It's a 27/33 point model that dies faster to boltguns than a tactical marine.

If on one hand you're going to point at every other multiwound model and say "people will just target this model with multiple wounds with their D2 weaponry so that stat doesn't count" then why do you not point at this model and say "people will just NOT target this model with a damage reduction with their D2 weaponry, so that rule doesn't count"?

Guardsmen without FRFSRF get 100% points return shooting an aberrant with pick. That is the definition of a glass cannon unit.

Says more about Guardsmen than Aberrants imo. It is also not the definition of a glass cannon. It is your definition. I disagree with it.

You make it sound like these units don’t have native access to deep strike and can’t pick (see what I did there?) whatever fights they want. They are very likely to pop up turn 2 and mulch their target. Depending on what that target is they may well make their points back. These aren’t units you should or will slog across the board. Shooting at them with the weapon that kills them best is all well send good but by then they’ve likely wiped something more valuable anyway and they have access to a fight again stratagem that is flat better than the Ork equivalent. Their native deepstrike (and even the blip deployment) is also the reason I can safely say people will end up having to use multi damage weapons against them. They can pick their fights, whether that’s turn 1 or 2. They also have the best cc weapons in the game if I’m not mistaken. For ludicrous points?

I’m not sure what gives the 4+++ but Geoff mentioned it in his video so I assume it’s legit.