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.

3+ and 2+ armor saves are less valuable because -1 AP, the old AP 4, cut their effectiveness greatly, AND these saves cost a lot to put on the table. Light armor is much better, because it apparently costs nothing and AP 0 is a thing as much as or more than AP -1.

 vict0988 wrote:

The Newman wrote:
And all of the talk about what Terms are weak to and what they should be weak to ignores that they're also at a wildly incorrect price point. A five-man Terminator squad has roughly the same survivability and melee output of a three-man Aggressor squad, and trades less firepower on the move* for DS. Unfortunately a Terminator costs almost as much as an Aggressor, one or both of them is significantly off the proper power curve.

* And vastly less firepower when stationary, but GW seems to have priced Aggressors as though they didn't have ways to mitigate that.

GW didn't price Aggressors, it's the same it has been since CA18 and they changed their Attacks and Wounds characteristic, which is more likely:
:GW found the exact stat changes that would make Aggressors worth it at their current price point.
:GW changed the stats to what they felt the fluff were and found that the existing pts fit exactly with how strong they were after the update.
:GW changed the stats to what they felt the fluff were and were too lazy to look at how much an Aggressor with that updated profile was worth.

...ok, you do make a good point. W2 A2 Aggressors are a lot closer to being on par with Terminators in a 1-to-1 comparison.

I've had people tell me that the current Aggressor profile is both under-costed and a garbage unit (different people, obviously), I'm inclined to think it needs a further errata so it's value in a Ultramarines or Salamanders list isn't so vastly different from it's value under Iron Hands or Black Templars, but that's a systemic problem with Marine units in general and Aggressors are just one of the most egregious examples.

While it's been very cool for each subfaction to have their own flavour and abilities, not charging points for it was a monstrous error.

I'd feel better if I got a points break for embracing my reroll morale trait instead of taking the obviously better options.

The disparity in Marine units effectiveness under different supplements really drives home the point to me.

I know Pandora's box is open now but I'd be totally fine with each army getting enough units to play different styles and return the paint scheme to our aesthetic and lore preference.

Give them back their 3+ on 2d6 like the last time there was armor modifiers.

The insane volume of fire now possible would make that painful to resolve.

"How do we solve these nearly invulnerable units?"

"Let's add more dice rolls to the game."

"Ok, now how do we solve how everything is dying too easily?"

"Second verse, same as the first."

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

nekooni wrote:

ccs wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

Necron warrior save: Almost no value in 7th, actual asset in 8th.
MEQ save: Sometimes useful in 7th but could not be dependen on due to the over abundance of AP2 and AP3 weapons, in 8th it became much harder. The old AP 6 and AP5 weapons still doesn't reduce your save, you can save against the old AP3 (now -2) and AP 2 (now -3). Still cannot save against AP1 (now -4). The only reduction in defence comes from old AP4 weapons, which reduce your save by 1.
.

Did I miss something in 7th? Didn't Necrons warriors & imperial power armor both have 3+ saves? Don't they both still have 3+ saves here in 8th?

IIRC necron warriors are 4+ in both 7th and 8th, but at some point before that they were 3+ - not sure which edition changed that.

They had 3+ saves in 3rd ed (technically 4th ed too, but Necrons never had a 4th codex)
It got changed to 4+ in 5th ed and stayed that way ever since.

Huh. I guess I did miss something then.
By 5th I was the only person in our group that had a Necron force - but I spent 5th playing lots of Guard, Tyranids, & Eldar (Iyanden). Dark Angels/assorted Marines/Chaos Marines now & then.
By 6th we played sporadically & all I used were my Khorn Demons. Still the only guy who owned any Necrons.
7th? I'm told I played 1 game. Right at it's dawn. I wasn't even aware that the edition had changed, & apparently nobody realized (or cared?) I was using a 6e codex.... And then we all drifted away from 40k for the greener pastures of WWII etc.
8e? Haven't dug the Necrons out of storage yet (probably not going to either this ed - unless someone request a game against them), so no need to buy a new codex. And you know what? I'm still the only guy in the group who owns any Necrons.