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.
Outside of torpedo succubus and super drazar...they really arent that impressive.
They are fast and hit hard - but they die quickly. You will find as the "meta" is going to shift pretty soon to take all comers list because...every army requires different weapons to kill.
bullyboy wrote: So a skew list taking advantage of a single rules interaction is what defines a codex? These lists often do not survive the nerfbat, and I expect that will eventually happen with DT. GW will just need to see more data before making the cut
Not to dig at you personally. DA did survive the nerf bat. So GW track record is not good here.
Red Corsair wrote: Looking at those results I really am not seeing anything that dubious lol.
Especially considering the silly razor flail interaction and 10 point reavers are still being used apparently.
The 10 pt reavers is equal parts the fault of the inept TO's and the players disingenuous enough to take advantage of the situation.
DE are on a tear right now because they are a hard counter to the meta. The meta was small super elite multi wound units with multi damage weaponry.
DE units are small and hit just as hard but they aren't durable so they are getting twice the numbers. It's classic MSU, nothing new to the game but it's definitely a shift in the meta for 9th.
As soon as admech, sisters or other xenos show up and are also a glass hammer but conduct their work in the shooting phase then DE will be reigned in hard.
DE hate killing units like skitarii for example. They essentially charge in a more expensive unit to trade and lose out on the exchange. Marines are getting dunked on hard because they pay for 2 wounds and power armor which is meaningless to DEATM.
It's this odd decision they made in 9th, "hey lets fix marines durability issue" only to reverse it via the ever escalating damage lol. At this point marines would have been better off being 1 wound and 30% cheaper.
The game is going to suffer from this issue forever lol. Anyone remember when we all tolerated the breakneck pace of 8th's codex cycle because we were promised the idea that once everyone had their book the game would all meld together? Yeah only for supplements and then 9th edition codex cycle to literally keep that mark on the horizon.
A year from now marine players will be complaining once again that they are so terrible and they will get their second 9th codex thus breaking the meta wide open again and the cycle will repeat when 10th launches lol.
What kinda TO allows 10 point reavers? What kinda TO doesn't make a reasonable interp of the razorflail CE interaction? I would literally walk out of an event with 10 point reavers.
Honestly you couldn't have said anything more correct. LOL.
Mainly the balance in this game is always going to be horrendous with this release cycle.
Crispy78 wrote: I think that's why GW get so blindsided by some of the overpowered stuff. They seem to work on the assumption that people build fluffy thematic TAC lists like they do. Dark Technomancers is probably not that bad if it's only applying to a single unit of Wracks and a Talos within a Patrol or Raiding Party detachment. I honestly think it never crossed their minds that people would build entire 2000 point armies of DT Covens, spamming Liquifiers on everything.
The thing is while there's a lot of contempt thrown - it may not have been picked up by the playtesters. I mean we've seen some of the best players in the game running or including DE and they aren't running 30 liquifiers (or really Grots/Talos/Cronos in general). They are tending to run loads of small units. So there may be a view at the highest level of play that it doesn't work.
Exactly why isn't as clear - but it may be that if you go second, this "charge forward, ignore the objectives, just table the opponent and get all the points in turn 4 and 5" doesn't work. Its too risky to have raiders blown up on the starting line or something.
TTS is also interesting - because in theory if something is overpowered, you'd expect it to become wall to wall.
As an edit - I guess you could say 8th edition WHFB started the shift to competitive lists (not convinced, so many people had all cav armies because cav was busted and had a meltdown when 8th came out) - but that's the middle of 5th in 40k terms. Over 10 years ago now.
This highlights pretty well the difficulty with playtesting. They may have tested DT and found that it wasn't highly competetive - and it isn't. It is still a problem overall, but it got hidden by other issues.
Play test is easy. Anyone can look through a book and find the broken combos in a 20 minute time frame if they are a veteran player. You don't even need to test is - things that generate additional attacks / deal mortal wounds/ and give +1 to wound/reroll wound modifiers should already be under specific additional attention. Then ofc....nothing should make it to print without being mathed out. The only answer is they don't actually test it. 1 or 2 people make the rules - do a quick review and send it to print - laugh about a few known troublesome interactions and say..."if it's too good we will errata it" in the meantime though - units are going to be flying off the shelves.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/04/27 15:25:52
the_scotsman wrote: Honestly, I'd be fine with GW doing whatever at this point. I want that FAQ so that I can see what I'm actually working with with this faction.
However, given the game I got to play recently against drukhari with Deathwatch, I do think the explosion of Drukhari into the meta did have something to do with their success. I was able to beat down drukhari going first against me pretty good, and I can imagine I'd be able to repeat the performance against a competitive Harlequin setup.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crackedgear wrote: Just had a thought. 30k has a rule where if you have a template weapon with gets hot, you still have to roll to see if it explodes even if there’s not a hit roll. Seems like something like that might curb the enthusiasm for dark technomancers a bit.
IMO no. The mortal wounds from DT are extremely un-scary. You could guarantee 1 MW (or D3 if youre monster/vehicle) for each time you fired an autohitting weapon with DT and i think it'd still be just as powerful.
you gotta keep in mind 1, everything has a 5+ vs those mws, and 2, you have to deal 3mw to any liquifier-holding squad to actually remove a liquifier.
You know whats funny? Quinns pretty much destroy this lame DT build with their own lame OP build.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah probably. Full DT would get completely fething demolished by comp quinns. Just utterly destroyed. Also any of the weird funky skew lists like nids with the un-attackable harridan or DG with morty or Necron silver tide would probably just eat it for lunch as well.
The DT detachment that everyone is just slapping into their comp DE lists is actually just patrol, Drazar, 3x wrack squads, and the Raiders are DT if theyre not taking BH or Obrose.
That's it. but that exact same detachment appears in like 6 or 7 of the top placing drukhari lists from the last week. Nobodys bothering to bring liq grots or cronos engines at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post: its a weird, unfun skew list that I dont want to result in units and options that aren't otherwise Op getting point bumps.
they could just straight up delete DT for all i care, it's not interesting and I feel the same level of sympathy for someone who built a 2000 point army around it as i do for someone who built like a Guard infinite daemon summoning loop army in 7th ed.
I really don't care what they do - I think it would work better like this. They can chose to deal a mortal wound to themselves and their target unit any time they successfully wound something.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah probably. Full DT would get completely fething demolished by comp quinns. Just utterly destroyed. Also any of the weird funky skew lists like nids with the un-attackable harridan or DG with morty or Necron silver tide would probably just eat it for lunch as well.
The DT detachment that everyone is just slapping into their comp DE lists is actually just patrol, Drazar, 3x wrack squads, and the Raiders are DT if theyre not taking BH or Obrose.
That's it. but that exact same detachment appears in like 6 or 7 of the top placing drukhari lists from the last week. Nobodys bothering to bring liq grots or cronos engines at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post: its a weird, unfun skew list that I dont want to result in units and options that aren't otherwise Op getting point bumps.
they could just straight up delete DT for all i care, it's not interesting and I feel the same level of sympathy for someone who built a 2000 point army around it as i do for someone who built like a Guard infinite daemon summoning loop army in 7th ed.
I really don't care what they do - I think it would work better like this. They can chose to deal a mortal wound to themselves and their target unit any time they successfully wound something.
Would you play a Marine chapter where that was the whole Chapter Tactic? Deal 1 mortal wound to the target and the firing unit? You just made a very silly suggestion.
It's only silly until you realize...they have a 5+ FNP. The raiders don't but it's still a big advantage to be able to trade mortals when you know what the stakes are.
+1 to Wound and damage is obviously too good. Even +1 to wound or damage would be too good. It was just an idea anyhow - Perhaps it should come with a +1 str to the weapon being used...kinda like...infernals imperial knights.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/04/28 13:54:49
Daedalus81 wrote: Is it 9th missions that keep DE from sweeping everything? Bad matchups? Difficulty getting high scores in some games? Perhaps if LVO or Adepticon were happening right now it would be different?
It's just weird...
I suspect no army will achieve the level of dominance in 9th because the turn 1 advantage remains massive - and I feel this is no different for DE.
Then you have that if the DE are mainly taking choppy units (characters, incubi, wyches) - you can always fail a run of easy charges and consequently lose the game.
So even if DE were the best faction in the game right now regardless of matchup, you probably still wouldn't expect them to win every tournament out there - or at least not until they make up a far greater percentage of the playerbase.
Fast movement and fly keyword...typically you'll do better going second. Don't have the data but it is likely DE still do really well going second.
Sunny Side Up wrote: If anything, the situation is inverse. Drukhari are currently dominating a meta already shooting for them, while Marines at the time took the "Jim-Vesal"-Poxwalkers-Nanavati-Aberrants-&-Richard-Siegler-Tau-Meta by storm.
How exactly is the meta already gunning for DE?
Because it's been impossible to go better than 3-2 maybe for the last 6 months (if you could go to an event) if you couldn't kill 5-7 Starweavers, ObSec Troupes falling out with melta-pistols and and Skyweavers running amok. Which isn't so different from Raiders, Wyches and Hellions (just less efficient and reliable than DT Liquifiers instead of Fusion, etc..). Or trade your way through a bunch of T3 Repentia/Zephyrim charging you from 30" away.
Daedalus81 wrote: Well that was the size FAQ I was expecting. At least they got Reavers. Next few weeks should be telling.
THEY fethed UP REAVERS AGAIN SOMEHOW
they got rid of the point cost for Heat Lances. they couldnt manage to keep track of the TWO different gun upgrades you can take on one xenos unit. A+. incredible job.
inb4 - its hard for multi billion dollar companies to do things even simple things. I remember in second grade I had to correct a class mates work and turn it in for an assignment. Any errors you missed were points off...
Like...GW would be failing second grade right now. It is so effing pathetic.
Galas wrote: They didn't even fixed the succubus razorflail interactions.
Wow.
That would be in the Charadon FAQ if it is indeed warranted wouldn't it?
They could fix it on the razor fail too. They could just say on the razor flail that the bonus attacks it gives can't generate additional attacks or something. Or call out the specific interact...in the FAQ and say how it works.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/30 14:28:29
Elfric wrote: Who cares about Space Marine players and their bazillion options and bazillion codexes. Why bother even playing 40k, seems like people want their entire army intact by the end of the game without suffering a single casualty. A Succubus is no harder to kill anymore than lighting up a Solitaire is.
It does sound like you don't play Warhammer at all and are misrepresenting the situation. I play quite a few armies and of all the armies I own Death Guard is the only one that has managed to give Drukhari some challenge. The problem is not Space Marines having issues with Drukhari, but that every faction is having problem with Drukhari.
It is also quite disingenuous to imply that you just need to kill the Succubus. The Succubus is going to be in a transport and most likely dictate her assault and pay back her points easily before you ever get a chance to kill her. Then when you are finally done spending your forces on killing her the rest of the Drukhari army swoops in and finishes the job. Drukhari has a models that punch way above their weight class.
Yeah, the main thing with the succubus is that her defenses actually tend to be just as good as most characters at the end of the day, because when people target characters they're rarely flinging mass S3 Ap- D1 fire at them, theyre going for a 1hko with a melta or something they've jumped over your line, or theyve cut away the units you had within 3" and typically that means a lascannon gets lobbed the character's way. She's got a 4++ invuln. When people target characters, those characters are typically taking whatever their invuln save is. I can count on a very small number of fingers the times that (for example) my deathwatch terminator captain gets to take his 2+ armor save.
Toughness is a useless statistic in 8/9th because it lost scaling - it scales by multiplication instead of linear but the value of the stat never got trended down in points value for higher T and strength values stayed the same. It has literally never been a better time to be T5 or T3. As is typical with all the -AP proliferation - the only thing that matters is an invune. Funny how...that armies that do best are the armies that have a base invune on almost all of their models. It is actually really pathetic.
Ofc there is more too it. The hyper mobility you get from armies like quins and DE is also essentially free. You get a heavy discount on your models for being t3 1W but end up having very similar durability to something like a primaris marine who essentially is paying most of their value for defensive ability that can be completely ignored. The mobility is also a defensive statistic in reality too because being locked in melee and hitting first are very powerful in this game too.
Game has a lot of fundamental issues too. There is too much free movement going on. Advance and charge + a possible 12" charge and a 3" disembark from a vehical - you've trippled your movement statistic basically. Disembarking a vehicle should give you a movement penalty...not a bonus...and now...Both DE and Quinns can keep you locked in melee so you can't hit back...
Don't even get me started on open topped vehicals...A bunker that move quickly...yet costs less typically because of the -1 T that most of these vehicles get over say something like...a vyper. Also...totally free. You pay 0 for the ability to shoot a unit that can not take damage before you grind through a series of wounds protected by an invune...with high str weapons basically treating the vehicle like it's t7 or 8 (no real disadvantage). Something like an impulsor - which is actually pretty good for a transport in this game for some reason costs 50% more?
It is the same old gak and I am tired of it. The real issue with DE is raiders should cost like 120...not 80.
The real issue with Quinns is their starweaver should cost 100...not 80.
That is a great place to start...nerf some relics too. And as always...stop giving away so much free power with army traits. Problem is that is is entirely their intention. To keep upping the power level of the game. Okay...fine...that is what they do...THEN WHY NERF ANYTHING? Why nerf erradicatros or agressors or impulsors if you are just gonna keep making the next army OP? It makes no sense.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/03 14:00:29
addnid wrote: Losing a 60 point character after blending 150 points is a great trade, and the succubus would be played even if it had no invul at all.
Oh yeah, with the dumb 36 attack razorflails and possibly even with a triptch whip builds most certainly. The only issue with triptch whip setups that indisposes her in comparison to other bomb character builds is her complete inability to scratch vehicles, but that's a minor inconvenience in the current meta where it's easy to find 100+ points of marines for her to one-shot.
If you could save 50 points on a smash captain and in exchange for that give up his ability to harm one particular category of unit, you'd probably do that.
Heck, people have done that - they've swapped from smashman builds bieng primarily thunderhammer based to being primarily teeth of terra based.
So tag the Triptych Whip version with a dreadnought, tank or whatever to bounce off of.
They just need to fix the obviously broken stuff (36 attack Succubus, DT, but the rule, not the units/weapons it affects ), then see how that shakes out. If they're still to good, bump some points (slightly) in the next CA. Worst case scenario? You have to build for DE as well as elite factions for a while and DE win more games. The sky isn't falling.
You are describing a process that takes a 6 months to a year...
Also what are you talking about? "Tag" a succubus with a dread? The way you beat a succubus is with sniper weapons. Or it is going to kill twice it's value in a single turn practically automatically and it can be even worse.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/03 14:33:17
Bosskelot wrote: It's an incredibly stupid line of reasoning and rationale. All that sort of thing does is contribute to overall winrates or placements looking equal, but it is meaningless within an actual game situation.
Why? Well, Orks, Admech and Sisters may very well counter Drukhari.
But that's meaningless information for my Necrons or Craftworlds that currently just look to auto-lose the matchup.
If 40k was a properly competitive game and didn't have such a gigantic buy-in and time investment necessary then that sort of line of thinking would actually be reasonable. Oh there exist counters to this problematic thing in my fave competitive videogame/Esport? Cool, I can just switch over to them if I ever spot them.
That isn't how 40k works though and is not how a tabletop game should be balanced or designed.
Agreed.
Well if you really think about it...armies have the counters for DE already in their arsenal...they just can't customize their list against them cause that is not how we do it...
Imagine how bad a game starcraft would be if you had to pick your army units pregame and couldn't counter their units you weren't prepared for? The game wouldn't last...Thats just one more issue with the game. Some armies TAC list is just better than everyone elses TAC list. Pretty sure. If every space marine army was taking 3 TFC 3 wirlwinds and massing heavy bolters everywhere else a DE army would get smoked.
addnid wrote: Losing a 60 point character after blending 150 points is a great trade, and the succubus would be played even if it had no invul at all.
Oh yeah, with the dumb 36 attack razorflails and possibly even with a triptch whip builds most certainly. The only issue with triptch whip setups that indisposes her in comparison to other bomb character builds is her complete inability to scratch vehicles, but that's a minor inconvenience in the current meta where it's easy to find 100+ points of marines for her to one-shot.
If you could save 50 points on a smash captain and in exchange for that give up his ability to harm one particular category of unit, you'd probably do that.
Heck, people have done that - they've swapped from smashman builds bieng primarily thunderhammer based to being primarily teeth of terra based.
So tag the Triptych Whip version with a dreadnought, tank or whatever to bounce off of.
They just need to fix the obviously broken stuff (36 attack Succubus, DT, but the rule, not the units/weapons it affects ), then see how that shakes out. If they're still to good, bump some points (slightly) in the next CA. Worst case scenario? You have to build for DE as well as elite factions for a while and DE win more games. The sky isn't falling.
You are describing a process that takes a 6 months to a year...
Also what are you talking about? "Tag" a succubus with a dread? The way you beat a succubus is with sniper weapons. Or it is going to kill twice it's value in a single turn practically automatically and it can be even worse.
Not at the rate they release FAQs nowadays. And I was specifically talking about the Triptych Whip version, which as Scotsman says has trouble scratching vehicles. I'm assuming the 36 attack combo will be erataed in the BOR FAQ. Maybe it won't, but you can't nerf the transports of a faction designed to rely upon them into the ground. Maybe bump the DL version to 95 PPM, but 120? Settle down.
and impulsor with a missle launcher is 130 points. A ML and 2 SB is probably equal value to the d3+3 darklance.
The raider is more durable vs most weapons. (+1 W for imulsor +1 save and +2 T) but no 5++.
The raider allows you to shoot protected inside the transport...the impuslor allows you to get out and shoot...(Id still say advantage raider here but both are good ability...we can call that a wash)
The raider is significantly faster +4" and has fly...
The raider has actual close combat ability. The impuslor does not...
Like seriously...if a raider is worth 85...what is an impuslor worth? Considering the raider is better in almost every way and where it loses out it is just barely. Are you saying that the raider should be undercosted because that is how the army is intended to be played? That doesn't make sense.
addnid wrote: Losing a 60 point character after blending 150 points is a great trade, and the succubus would be played even if it had no invul at all.
Oh yeah, with the dumb 36 attack razorflails and possibly even with a triptch whip builds most certainly. The only issue with triptch whip setups that indisposes her in comparison to other bomb character builds is her complete inability to scratch vehicles, but that's a minor inconvenience in the current meta where it's easy to find 100+ points of marines for her to one-shot.
If you could save 50 points on a smash captain and in exchange for that give up his ability to harm one particular category of unit, you'd probably do that.
Heck, people have done that - they've swapped from smashman builds bieng primarily thunderhammer based to being primarily teeth of terra based.
So tag the Triptych Whip version with a dreadnought, tank or whatever to bounce off of.
They just need to fix the obviously broken stuff (36 attack Succubus, DT, but the rule, not the units/weapons it affects ), then see how that shakes out. If they're still to good, bump some points (slightly) in the next CA. Worst case scenario? You have to build for DE as well as elite factions for a while and DE win more games. The sky isn't falling.
You are describing a process that takes a 6 months to a year...
Also what are you talking about? "Tag" a succubus with a dread? The way you beat a succubus is with sniper weapons. Or it is going to kill twice it's value in a single turn practically automatically and it can be even worse.
Not at the rate they release FAQs nowadays. And I was specifically talking about the Triptych Whip version, which as Scotsman says has trouble scratching vehicles. I'm assuming the 36 attack combo will be erataed in the BOR FAQ. Maybe it won't, but you can't nerf the transports of a faction designed to rely upon them into the ground. Maybe bump the DL version to 95 PPM, but 120? Settle down.
and impulsor with a missle launcher is 130 points. A ML and 2 SB is probably equal value to the d3+3 darklance.
The raider is more durable vs most weapons. (+1 W for imulsor +1 save and +2 T) but no 5++.
The raider allows you to shoot protected inside the transport...the impuslor allows you to get out and shoot...(Id still say advantage raider here but both are good ability...we can call that a wash)
The raider is significantly faster +4" and has fly...
The raider has actual close combat ability. The impuslor does not...
Like seriously...if a raider is worth 85...what is an impuslor worth? Considering the raider is better in almost every way and where it loses out it is just barely. Are you saying that the raider should be undercosted because that is how the army is intended to be played? That doesn't make sense.
And no one has used the Impulsor in all of 9th, maybe the Impulsor is a problem and needs a buff.....
That could be the problem but DE are the army with a 70%+ win rate. I would wager 3 raiders + is a pretty standard build. My 2000 point list includes 6 - at that point costs why not? Impuslor clearly costs too much but the raider also clearly costs too little.
Doesn't Mike Brandt work for GW now?
If this is their attitude to design it sure explains a lot.
Warhammer does not work as a rock-paper-scissors game. It doesn't matter that Admech and Orks will gak all over DE when your not playing one of those armies.
And how do they "cut the top off"? What does that even mean? Do whole units and army builds suddenly become completely unviable to bring because Admech and Orks exist as an army?
We had that with Knights before where every list that couldn't kill a knight per turn was unplayable competitively, it was gak and suffocated the meta.
I'm sure I can find some fun playing games with my friends at our local club (when that opens again). But I enjoyed competitive 40k aswell and 9th just looks horrible. The base rules are fine enough but the codexes look to ruin it.
Every game is rock-paper-scissors, there is no way everything to be perfectly balanced with so many factions and units. Obviously some things will be better vs certain things and that cannot be considered bad, because it prevent spam of certain type of units, because there is really had counter, it keep the field honest.
That is the reason in team tournaments where you have control of what the army is playing, extreme builds are more popular.
What is problematic is when certain combination of units is good vs 90% of the field for the mission played.
Units like say...harlie troops or DE wyches that reliably charge 20 + inches out of a transport through a breachable wall you can't shoot through? And the game mandates you have such large pieces of terrain in literally every game?
Yeah dude...that is gonna work vs practically everything and it isn't any surprise. The game is gross right now.
Every game is rock paper scissors. The issue is this game forces you to chose to play rock paper or scissors before you know what you are fighting. It is the same old tired argument about tactical squads...tactical squads are flexible and can take a lot of different weapon options....but they aren't flexible at all in game because you have to choose a plasma gun or a flamer during list contruction. OFC this is true of every armies units but...it also means tactical marines aren't any more flexible than any other type of unit.
I wonder if people would have any interest in variable army builds depending on matchup. Kind of like a magic sideboard.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/03 16:46:23
yukishiro1 wrote: A DL is absolutely one of the best anti-tank weapons in the game. I can't believe you are actually disputing that. That it may or may not be better than a multi-melta is like saying "well repentia aren't one of the best melee units in the game because incubi might be better."
Scotsman knows he is wrong. He is literally comparing an open topped transports shooting potential to dedicated shooting platforms. I assure you - a raider loaded with khabalites with 2 blasters and a DL - outshoots a ravager and some when you consider the splinter rifles.
All while carrying an objective seccured unit with 20 CC attacks that are ap -1 on 6's to wound with 10 additional wounds. The Ravager is literally unplayable with the raider costing this much.
I will care less and less the longer this game can't make simple balancing moves. Impuslor is a brand new unit which should be getting attention. It is infeiror to the raider in most respects. It should not cost 50% more. With such flagrant misbalance of the game going on in plane sight. Why should we care about anything balance related? The game is not balanced and therefore you should not care to discuss balance about it.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Snipping to point 3... I'll try and rephrase/reframe (and tell me if I got it wrong Yuki). No other AT in the game is as strong and ubiquitous as the dark lance. Certain bespoke weapons are certainly better, multimelta is better... but can anybody bring as much Multimelta to bear per point as DE can bring Dark Lances? I guess you can get more dense with immolators. But you don't have fly, and you don't have open topped.
I don't know if I agree with the point overall but I think that's what he was getting at; not the weapon itself but the packaging of the weapon and the availability.
Of the top DE lists they had between 6 and 7 lances.
6 * .666 * .666 * 5.5 = 14.6
8 * .666 * .666 * 3.5 = 12.3
All the dark lances in a DE army are not terribly much more damage than a single unit of eradicators with a MM at 24".
No one is saying a DL is better than a MM. It is not. It is certainly more mobile and has longer range. Plus it does a reliable minimum 4 damage to make it a much superior heavy infantry killer. You can also split all these shots up at different targets...not a trivial thing ether.
Also...A pure Khabal list can easily get 12 DL and 12 blasters out of 6 raiders with khabs with DL and 2x blaster. Plus you can still fit in drazar a master archon a succubus min wych and a few squad of incubi and a VRB.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Snipping to point 3... I'll try and rephrase/reframe (and tell me if I got it wrong Yuki). No other AT in the game is as strong and ubiquitous as the dark lance. Certain bespoke weapons are certainly better, multimelta is better... but can anybody bring as much Multimelta to bear per point as DE can bring Dark Lances? I guess you can get more dense with immolators. But you don't have fly, and you don't have open topped.
I don't know if I agree with the point overall but I think that's what he was getting at; not the weapon itself but the packaging of the weapon and the availability.
Of the top DE lists they had between 6 and 7 lances.
6 * .666 * .666 * 5.5 = 14.6
8 * .666 * .666 * 3.5 = 12.3
All the dark lances in a DE army are not terribly much more damage than a single unit of eradicators with a MM at 24".
No one is saying a DL is better than a MM. It is not. It is certainly more mobile and has longer range. Plus it does a reliable minimum 4 damage to make it a much superior heavy infantry killer. You can also split all these shots up at different targets...not a trivial thing ether.
Also...A pure Khabal list can easily get 12 DL and 12 blasters out of 6 raiders with khabs with DL and 2x blaster. Plus you can still fit in drazar a master archon a succubus min wych and a few squad of incubi and a VRB.
Fantastic - out of curiosity, is anyone actually doing that to win events? Or are you just kind of...listing a thing you can do with a 2000pt army?
I frankly don't care what the new super pro 40k players are doing in "competitive" events - largely they are the ones responsible for the terrible state of the game. Because they have clout. They get early model releases and their opinions matter and are part of the playtesting process that has developed. They will be the first to exploit the obviously busted Competitive edge ability which is clearly not intended and literally anyone using it is a certified D bag.
Insectum7 wrote: Maybe Marines don't need to be able to fire out of their Transports because they aren't 1W T3 models with no save.
So why does their transport have a firing hatch literally built into the model? Should we just ignore that Marines seem to have forgotten how to use their equipment between editions?
So to reiterate, Dark Lance is not OP. Raider possibly undercosted.
The DL is indisputably OP compared to a lascannon because it literally costs less(or the same) and is objectively better even against t8 and t9. It is insanely better against everything t7 or less AND is AP-4 all the time. Which actually does matter.
The raider IS undercosted. It is an open topped transport with a 5++ save. It can carry a host of awesome units which are cheap enough not not care about losing 1 or 2 from rolling 1's if it gets destroyed...It flys over walls in an edition that is overcluttered with cover. It carries a standard strong gun with a very clear roll at what it does. It should realistically cost more than an impulsor.
Fly / invune / and open topped are FREE abilities I suppose....granted they are the most important factors to consider on a transport....Meanwhile...toughness and armor save - the least important factors because they can be entirely ignored...those have to come at a hefty price.
Insectum7 wrote: Maybe Marines don't need to be able to fire out of their Transports because they aren't 1W T3 models with no save.
So why does their transport have a firing hatch literally built into the model? Should we just ignore that Marines seem to have forgotten how to use their equipment between editions?
So to reiterate, Dark Lance is not OP. Raider possibly undercosted.
The DL is indisputably OP compared to a lascannon because it literally costs less(or the same) and is objectively better even against t8 and t9. It is insanely better against everything t7 or less AND is AP-4 all the time. Which actually does matter.
The raider IS undercosted. It is an open topped transport with a 5++ save. It can carry a host of awesome units which are cheap enough not not care about losing 1 or 2 from rolling 1's if it gets destroyed...It flys over walls in an edition that is overcluttered with cover. It carries a standard strong gun with a very clear roll at what it does. It should realistically cost more than an impulsor.
Fly / invune / and open topped are FREE abilities I suppose....granted they are the most important factors to consider on a transport....Meanwhile...toughness and armor save - the least important factors because they can be entirely ignored...those have to come at a hefty price.
So what do you think about the Grav Cannon? Iirc it costs less than a Lascannon and is better at AT and against Infantry.
Grav cannons are really good. More comparable to the dessie though...which is always 2 damage instead of sometimes 2 damage if they have a 3+ save. No one takes ether because -1 damage exists.
Xenomancers wrote: Grav cannons are really good. More comparable to the dessie though...which is always 2 damage instead of sometimes 2 damage if they have a 3+ save. No one takes ether because -1 damage exists.
Still better than a Lascannon against vehicles, while also costing less, like the Dark Lance.
It is significantly worse against vehicles and monsters with 4+ saves...Like a raider.
Mid-strength high ROF weapons are broken due to the new wounding chart. Most posters know this and the proposed rules section keeps running into this issue when they try to ensure that, for example, the HB, Assault Cannon, and Autocannon all have distinct and viable roles without one clearly overshadowing the others without needing to then change every other weapon to match.
But the DL isn't a mid-strength high ROF...
Have you considered that perhaps it is the lascannon what is UP instead of every other viable AT weapon being OP?
Is there a difference? Is there a target power level that everything should be aimed at? Cause I don't see it? I see far too many examples of units/weapons which the points are literally backwards based on ability. UP or OP is semantics. There is a big discrepancy is the issue.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/04 20:21:14
Gadzilla666 wrote: Echoing Yukishiro1: Everyone here seems to agree that Raiders are underpriced (and most seem to agree by how much), so what are we arguing about?
Because I don't think people agree how much. Open topped used to come with a negative...now it doesn't. Open topped is the main issue here combined with the invune. The DL is just icing as it is straight up better than a lascannon...and the codex came out at the beginning of the same edition.
Yeah before DE no one played the Ghost Ark and after DE no one still will, so taking DE out of the meta means nothing to the Ghost Ark which tells me that the Ghost ark is over costed not necessarily the Raider under costed.
Edit: Grammar
I am not sure I am understanding your line of argument here. Because other armies stuff is overcosted it is okey for DE stuff to be over costed and better, because the weaker armies don't get played?
The Argument is IMO the Raider actually is fine and its most other transports that are not, no one has been using them for a reason, so instead of crying "OMG a useful transport we must nerf it" maybe look at the gakky ones no one uses and ask "Wait why are my transport so crappy?"
Also its DT that makes Raiders feel strong, outside of DT the Raider does the same thing they always have been for 23yrs, rush up, shoot once, and unload murdering melee units.
K - Youll have no problem with me bringing 95 point implusors then in our next game?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/05 16:51:14
Gadzilla666 wrote: Echoing Yukishiro1: Everyone here seems to agree that Raiders are underpriced (and most seem to agree by how much), so what are we arguing about?
Because I don't think people agree how much. Open topped used to come with a negative...now it doesn't. Open topped is the main issue here combined with the invune. The DL is just icing as it is straight up better than a lascannon...and the codex came out at the beginning of the same edition.
Yeah before DE no one played the Ghost Ark and after DE no one still will, so taking DE out of the meta means nothing to the Ghost Ark which tells me that the Ghost ark is over costed not necessarily the Raider under costed.
Edit: Grammar
I am not sure I am understanding your line of argument here. Because other armies stuff is overcosted it is okey for DE stuff to be over costed and better, because the weaker armies don't get played?
The Argument is IMO the Raider actually is fine and its most other transports that are not, no one has been using them for a reason, so instead of crying "OMG a useful transport we must nerf it" maybe look at the gakky ones no one uses and ask "Wait why are my transport so crappy?"
Also its DT that makes Raiders feel strong, outside of DT the Raider does the same thing they always have been for 23yrs, rush up, shoot once, and unload murdering melee units.
K - Youll have no problem with me bringing 95 point implusors then in our next game?
Me? Yes, 100%, I think its way over costed and bringing them opens up an entirely new playstyle that marines are not able to do right now effectively at all, b.c why take them when another squad is better. It gives you less boots on the ground but equal wounds and protection for less for a turn of huge movement. I also think Tauroxs and Primes are 10-15pts too much, Rhino are 10pts over, Ghost Arks 25-30pts over costed, Devilfish 10pts over, Trukks 10pts over, and some others.
PS: My favorite game in the history of all of 40k was 7th against White Scar when they got free Rhinos and filled them full of Tac marines with 2 specials, Disembark, shoot and getting a free re-embarkment back into the rhino. Good times, games are more fun with different levels of armor on the table.
Well then that is the answer. Not much point playing the game if everyone knows the rules are unfair. Be adults - discuss what needs to change. Institute the change. GW has proven again and again to suck at making rules. Who cares if it is house rules? You will be having more fun - you might even get a following if enough people start doing it.
The issue with gladius is it was a marine horde. It worked. The army should play more like custodians and less like AM though.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/05 19:17:24
Were there tons of people in the meta playing mass S5/S6 firepower to justify this being the reason they're suddenly so good?
or was that basically nonexistent in favor of melta on everything, against which the change from T5-T6 is meaningless?
You could add 30pts to Raiders, if you really thought it made that big a difference, and that would probably go a long way to balancing the army along with removing the obviuos broken combos, but then you'd just have yet another siuation of super overtuned infantry with super overcosted transports. It'd be no different than the situation with intercessors/necron warriors/orks/ whatever else throughout 8th - people would just spam the infantry unit and never bother with the transport if a raider was bumped up 40% in point cost.
In theory it's easier for many armies to readjust to DE if their S5 and S6 guns each move up a breakpoint against Raiders. Heavy Bolters, Assault Cannons and a dozen other weapons across the game become more viable against them.
And 115 points would not be super overcosted or anywhere near it.
In your eyes, a 33% increase in durability against specifically S5 and S6 weaponry (doubt people were shooting many lasguns at raiders), an increase in transport capacity by 1, and an increase in firepower against 4+ wound targets by 35% is worth an increase in overall cost by 40%?
I guess I disagree, particularly given that previously, and I'm pretty certain I have noted this before in this thread, you used to be able to give Raiders a 6+ fnp by sticking them in Black Heart, meaning they got less durable against S4, S7, S8 and S9 weapons with the update.
I do not think a Dark Lance is only a 15pt gun on a vehicle target. The difference between a Raider and a Ravager should not be 25 points when a ravager is literally the same thing with 2 additional dark lances.
115 would be on the high end of where they should be. 5 intercessors is 100 points...110 with a dessie...you realize 5 intercessors will never kill a raider in game right? So many units need fixes. I havnt seen a single ravager in 9th ed being played ether...I wonder why...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Amishprn86 wrote: Imagine with the Ravager was like the Falcon and Razorback that could transport 6 models and loses open top lol. I think it would break the community.
Falcon is very good currently. Probably the best unit CWE have access too atm. It doesn't have an invune though and it's transport ability is not that useful but you'll take it as it really doesn't pay for it. Imagine the wave serpant was open topped though...Pretty sure CWE would be a top army in that situation.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/05 19:45:39
Were there tons of people in the meta playing mass S5/S6 firepower to justify this being the reason they're suddenly so good?
or was that basically nonexistent in favor of melta on everything, against which the change from T5-T6 is meaningless?
You could add 30pts to Raiders, if you really thought it made that big a difference, and that would probably go a long way to balancing the army along with removing the obviuos broken combos, but then you'd just have yet another siuation of super overtuned infantry with super overcosted transports. It'd be no different than the situation with intercessors/necron warriors/orks/ whatever else throughout 8th - people would just spam the infantry unit and never bother with the transport if a raider was bumped up 40% in point cost.
In theory it's easier for many armies to readjust to DE if their S5 and S6 guns each move up a breakpoint against Raiders. Heavy Bolters, Assault Cannons and a dozen other weapons across the game become more viable against them.
And 115 points would not be super overcosted or anywhere near it.
Are you saying Raiders should take a 30 PPM nerf and be made more vulnerable to anti-infantry weapons? Or just one or the other? You'd also make them less durable against all the S10 floating around.
I'm saying it is currently worth between 100 and 115 to be in the playable range. I have no issue with it's stats. It just needs to pay proper points.
Xenomancers wrote: Falcon is very good currently. Probably the best unit CWE have access too atm. It doesn't have an invune though
What do we reckon's the over-under on Sprit Stones getting shifted to that away from a FNP?
Xenomancers wrote: Imagine the wave serpant was open topped though...Pretty sure CWE would be a top army in that situation.
...but what does the pipe dream of turning the WS into a hardier Ravager that can pack in 12 Dark Reapers have to do with the price of fish? It's a non sequitur.
I was merely demonstrating the power of open topped. It is not trivial at all. It probably should represent at least 20-30% increase in cost to a comparable unit that isn't open topped.
FNP is better than an invune in some situations but a 5++ I would say is probably worth double to a 6+++ on a vehicle. It is possible they will just change spirit stones to be 5++ saves but I kinda like them with 6+ FNP. My ulthwe would really appreciate a 5++ on those serpents though . I doubt they will make the change. Personally I think spirt stones should function more like ork ramshackle and reduce damage to 1 on a 6.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/05 20:42:06
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Open-topped Vehicles also modified the vehicle damage roll, so they could be destroyed in a single shot more easily or lose more functionality.
Which really wasn't a downside because you were looking to glance vehicles to death for the most part.
It was a downside.
Barrage and template weapons were the bane of opened top. It was a long time ago but I played GK against DE quite often. I can remember my tempest flamers on the dreadknights being a source of major fear as not only did they do a lot of damage to the vehicle they also fried some dudes inside. open topped only being a positive is a massive joke. It is a new problem from 8th and 9th. It has always had a negative.
catbarf wrote: Agreed with the_scotsman. If certain units overperform then you nerf those units; if the whole army overperforms then look for things the whole army shares. Admittedly I'm not a DE player, but Blade Artists seems very secondary as an army-wide rule compared to Power From Pain, and less tied to their identity given that it just appeared.
I mean, they could just do a points cost pass and hike them all up 10%, but thanks to granularity and relative cost (base model vs wargear) issues, that's more difficult and more likely to have unintended consequences.
The main issues with 8th and now 9th are chapter tactics and their equivalent. I said this way back in the early days of the index and I stand by it now. You cannot possibly implement accurate points to a faction whos special rules are so different and have zero cost.
People are actually starting to look past the impact too. Take the dark lance for example, it was literal garbage 2 months ago and all they did were change two things.
1 was a nerf moving it from assault to heavy on vehicles.
The other was giving it flat min damage.
Now suddenly it's busted?
Heres a hint fellas, it's not, what is busted is a free trait that lets you reroll a single hit roll per unit. That's fething massive especially when the idiots at GW were supposed to be applying core in order to remove rerolling (usually only 1's BTW) from the game on transports and they managed to give totally free chapter master rerolls on every unit with a single shot anywhere on the table.
I would personally LOVE if easily accounted for rules like blade artist were added to every faction, but cult creeds, regimental doctrines etc etc were all completely removed. It would make the game so much cleaner and more easily balanced. But hey fellas, I am sure someone out their is going to try to convince me that Army wide obsec and a free pregame move is totally in line with and equal in value to +1 leadership and turn rapid fire 1 weapons into assault 1 when advancing lmao.
I would argue that increasing the average damage from 3.5 to 5 is a more significant change than making the hit roll go from .66 to .87.
Well you are getting both. Black heart getting a free reroll be squad is huge. Obsidian getting a free reroll to wound per unit is also huge. It also works from inside the transort! Yet at the same time removed flayed skulls reroll 1s from inside the transport? WTF?
Im tellin yah - the stuff that is crushing tournaments is busted. Succubus relics and WL traits are silly. Drazar is just flat OP. Raiders costing to little is actually more of an issue for kabal focus armies which are being avoided because melee is better this eddition due to objective game. If it was about pure attrition in combat. Obsidian and DH raider boats spam is utterly insane.
yukishiro1 wrote: The DT change isn't enough. DT should just only give the +1 to wound when used with auto-hitting weapons, that makes it still strong but not ridiculous any more.
I'd still take it. But, I wouldn't make it all-consuming then.
When you nerf something - you shouldn't also buff it at the same time. LOL.
catbarf wrote: Agreed with the_scotsman. If certain units overperform then you nerf those units; if the whole army overperforms then look for things the whole army shares. Admittedly I'm not a DE player, but Blade Artists seems very secondary as an army-wide rule compared to Power From Pain, and less tied to their identity given that it just appeared.
I mean, they could just do a points cost pass and hike them all up 10%, but thanks to granularity and relative cost (base model vs wargear) issues, that's more difficult and more likely to have unintended consequences.
The main issues with 8th and now 9th are chapter tactics and their equivalent. I said this way back in the early days of the index and I stand by it now. You cannot possibly implement accurate points to a faction whos special rules are so different and have zero cost.
People are actually starting to look past the impact too. Take the dark lance for example, it was literal garbage 2 months ago and all they did were change two things.
1 was a nerf moving it from assault to heavy on vehicles.
The other was giving it flat min damage.
Now suddenly it's busted?
Heres a hint fellas, it's not, what is busted is a free trait that lets you reroll a single hit roll per unit. That's fething massive especially when the idiots at GW were supposed to be applying core in order to remove rerolling (usually only 1's BTW) from the game on transports and they managed to give totally free chapter master rerolls on every unit with a single shot anywhere on the table.
I would personally LOVE if easily accounted for rules like blade artist were added to every faction, but cult creeds, regimental doctrines etc etc were all completely removed. It would make the game so much cleaner and more easily balanced. But hey fellas, I am sure someone out their is going to try to convince me that Army wide obsec and a free pregame move is totally in line with and equal in value to +1 leadership and turn rapid fire 1 weapons into assault 1 when advancing lmao.
You don't think changing the damage of a weapon from d6 to 3+d3 could make it OP?
You think 50% more average damage with half the standard deviation is nothing?
Average is one way to look at it. Minimum is a really a lot more relevant though. Min 4 is VERY powerful. 1 shotting attack bikes...gravis...custodian teramintors...and 3 wounds autokilling 10/12 wound units is the key.
. I doubt they will make the change. Personally I think spirt stones should function more like ork ramshackle and reduce damage to 1 on a 6.
