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.

Oshova wrote:It was all going well until I read that Raiders were more expensive!!! MORE EXPENSIVE!!!???

That's a massive dislike from me. =/

Anyone else's thoughts on more expensive transports?

Oshova

Aren't they insanely cheap right now?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that there is going to be a ton of point shuffling in the codex, as the entire thing is being redone. I bet you will get discounts on some things and increased prices on others. Panic?

I think that if they really are still 10/10/10 they shouldn't get more expensive, not without some optionall upgrades that is.

They're 55 points atm. But it's just that every other transport has been getting cheaper when the codex has been redone. Especially SMs and their variants. 35 point Rhinos, they have better armour, same capacity, less firepower, and move slower . . . so they won't be AS cheap, but they should still be cheaper.

Oshova

Oshova wrote:Anyone else's thoughts on more expensive transports?

It's not a good thing unless the price hike is 5 pts and bundles in a ton of previously optional stuff in the process.

warmonger wrote:This is everything that I've seen posted supposedly from the codex compiled together from varies sources. Take it for what you will!

Actually, you just copypasted my summary in the first post of Dakka's "Dark Eldar Rules Discussion" thread without any changes.
I am not amused that you want to get all credits for my work, especially when it is done so bluntly for everyone to see.

@Oshova - I agree with you quite a bit. 55 points was not an insane deal of super brokeness, it was a solid value for what the Raider was.

When I look at other vehicles that cost less or equivalent to the Raider I usually feel that the DE were either on parity or (perhaps) having to pay too much.

More expensive Raiders with no change to their stat line and capabilities will be worrisome.

I'm guessing (hoping) that we're getting some sort of additional value we're unaware of at this point if there is a price hike.

This is my problem with the eldar too. The vehicles cost way to much and if the raiders cost more than in the past it was just the wrong way to go. With marine vehicles being so cheap but still having a lot of options and seeing the guard vehicles so cheap I wonder what the xenos do to cause their construction costs to go so high hehe.

I would rather have cheaper vehicles with the option to spend more on them, instead of them bundling together stuff and hiking the price up.

Oshova

Fishboy wrote:This is my problem with the eldar too. The vehicles cost way to much and if the raiders cost more than in the past it was just the wrong way to go. With marine vehicles being so cheap but still having a lot of options and seeing the guard vehicles so cheap I wonder what the xenos do to cause their construction costs to go so high hehe.

Soaking every component in the blood of a thousand innocents adds considerably to labour costs.

If the Venom is on the codex as rumoured that might factor in to a more geared but more expensive Raider.

5 pts isnt that bad of a increase, I'm hoping that the upgrade to get a 5+ invul will be cheap.

Thor665 wrote:@Oshova - I agree with you quite a bit. 55 points was not an insane deal of super brokeness, it was a solid value for what the Raider was.

When I look at other vehicles that cost less or equivalent to the Raider I usually feel that the DE were either on parity or (perhaps) having to pay too much.

More expensive Raiders with no change to their stat line and capabilities will be worrisome.

I'm guessing (hoping) that we're getting some sort of additional value we're unaware of at this point if there is a price hike.

Well, some people have said that Raiders will have a 5+ "invulnerable" save and have the capacity to "flat out" an additional 2d6 inches. If all other things remain the same, would that justify a 5-10 point increases to you?

In a vacuum, sure, but it's going to depend heavily on the cost/effectiveness of other units like reavers, hellions and the Venom.

As we know something can be "worth the points" in theory but not be the best choice in a book...which is the equivalent of being completely useless to certain people.

Your assuming they will not make us pay for those options as well..

Saldiven wrote:

Thor665 wrote:@Oshova - I agree with you quite a bit. 55 points was not an insane deal of super brokeness, it was a solid value for what the Raider was.

When I look at other vehicles that cost less or equivalent to the Raider I usually feel that the DE were either on parity or (perhaps) having to pay too much.

More expensive Raiders with no change to their stat line and capabilities will be worrisome.

I'm guessing (hoping) that we're getting some sort of additional value we're unaware of at this point if there is a price hike.

Well, some people have said that Raiders will have a 5+ "invulnerable" save and have the capacity to "flat out" an additional 2d6 inches. If all other things remain the same, would that justify a 5-10 point increases to you?

Also, even through the cheap rhinos and transports of 5th edition, the raider remained a steal.

I think it's deserving of a points increase. The vehicle can move 24 inches, claim a cover save in the open after going flat out, allow any infantry unit a whopping 24~ inch charge out of it ignoring most terrain due to it's skimmer status, carries an anti tank weapon, can zip around empty and contest objectives later in the game, can leap frog units stranded from their own Raiders being destroyed due to open top status - for 55 points?

The Raider has been far too cheap for it's own good, it was under priced in 3rd edition when everyone else was paying 55 points for Rhinos, and it was still under priced when everyone started paying 35 points for rhinos. Lower armor values aside, it out performs other transports on a point for point basis.

Even if they cost 70+ points, I still think you will see 10 of them on the table in a lot of games. The utility is too much to ignore.

Kroothawk wrote:

Actually, you just copypasted my summary in the first post of Dakka's "Dark Eldar Rules Discussion" thread without any changes.
I am not amused that you want to get all credits for my work, especially when it is done so bluntly for everyone to see.

Actually I copied from a different site which had no pictures with it and I took no credit for anything. I simply stated that this was everything I've seen about the codex compiled together. This was only done after several comments about things that were covered before, I just pasted it in this thread for those to lazy to read the first one.

As far as you being amused or not, I don't really care! Too many people with an ego complex' ruin threads like this and the hobby in general, whatever happened to just sharing the information and discussing it? so sad

Ill trade you 1 wave serpent with brightlance for 3 raiders with dark lances.. Wish theyd give eldar a throw away transport

Kirasu wrote:Ill trade you 1 wave serpent with brightlance for 3 raiders with dark lances.. Wish theyd give eldar a throw away transport

Haha...and I wish they'd give DE one that had a legitimate chance to survive turn 3....

Warmonger, please, [Mod Edit - Rule #1 - Learn it. Live it.]


Kroot goes to an insane amount of trouble to gather any and all info for everyone, so we arent just finding out little bits and pieces here and there.
For that, he deserves a bit of respect.
[Mod Edit - Rule #1 - Learn it. Live it.]

Problem is you can't compare the price of a raider vs that of a rhino. For example, how much is a Warrior now? Are they still 8 pts even though they now have poisoned weapons? Vs double that almost for a Space Marine? All our guys can shoot out of a raider. None of theirs can. All our guys can assault from a raider. None of their guys can.

It really depends what happens to the cargo of the raider to determine if they're truly overcosted. If a warrior is still super cheap though? Probably warranted.

Saldiven wrote:

Thor665 wrote:More expensive Raiders with no change to their stat line and capabilities will be worrisome.

I'm guessing (hoping) that we're getting some sort of additional value we're unaware of at this point if there is a price hike.

Well, some people have said that Raiders will have a 5+ "invulnerable" save and have the capacity to "flat out" an additional 2d6 inches. If all other things remain the same, would that justify a 5-10 point increases to you?

Well, codices should start taking into account the numerous perks that 5th edition has granted vehicles over both 4th and 3rd editions rule books. A fifth edition raider is far superior to a 3rd edition raider due to massive benefits in survivability to both the raider itself and its passengers as well as fire power in the case of passengers. I just wish they had started this trend when the 5th edition SM codex came out.

My memory is admittedly a bit hazey, but from what I can remember, compared to 3rd:

Passengers may now double tap when moving

Skimmers no longer auto destroyed on an immobolized result (In 4rth they were auto destroyed if moving over 6")

Glancing can only destroy raiders on a 6 (-2 glancing, +1 open topped), rather than a 4-6 (imobolized and open top penalty)

Passengers aboard a fast vehicle going flat out no longer take double wounds when vehicle is destroyed

Blast templates strength is 1/2 if the hole isn't over the hull, allowing raiders to bunch up without much worry of suffering multiple casualties from a single hit

Ordinance no longer has the chance of inflicting instant death on passengers

2/3 of missions are won via objectives vs. (VP/KP); which puts greater value on transports

Cover saves (vs always glancing if moving over 6"); giving the nerf to the glancing chart in 5th edition, I would say that the cover save is preferable

Compared to 4th, infinately better:

Passengers no longer auto pinned when vehicle is destroyed

Passengers no longer need to get out of the box when vehicle suffers a penetrating shot

Even if surrounded in an assault and the vehicle explodes on a 6, the passengers stick around

Ignoring a damage result all together due to cover is far superior to simply having a a penetrating shot being reduced to a glancing shot on a 4+

I agree that, as Saldiven has stated, DE will be likely be getting bundled gear options.

The only thing that vehicles have really lost is that you don't always need 6s to hit skimmers (unless the vehicle moves over 6") and you hit on back armour in CC (not very meaningfull to a raider).

@Wyomingfox

You missed something pretty big.

Currently, if a Raider moves greater than 6", then none of the passengers may fire from it. This is a HUGE downgrade for the usefulness of Warriors mounted on the Raider compared to previous editions.

Honestly, I actually prefer SMF to the current rules. In previous editions, my Raiders never moved less than 6" unless stunned in a previous turn. Since I had this benefit all the time, I didn't have to worry about terrain to obtain "Hull Down" for the same effect. Currently, you only gain the cover save if you move the vehicle so fast that it can neither shoot nor embark/disembark troops.

Another big loss from previous editions is the inability to embark onto a vehicle as part of your post combat consolidation move. In 3rd, I used that one a lot to protect my wyches from being shot off the board on a turn after they wiped out an opponent's unit.

I have to wonder, though, that if the Raider is getting some sort of 5+ "invulnerable" save, how will that combine with the 4+ cover that every skimmer gets for moving flat out?

Saldiven wrote:

You missed something pretty big.

Currently, if a Raider moves greater than 6", then none of the passengers may fire from it. This is a HUGE downgrade for the usefulness of Warriors mounted on the Raider compared to previous editions.

Agreed .

Honestly, I actually prefer SMF to the current rules. In previous editions, my Raiders never moved less than 6" unless stunned in a previous turn. Since I had this benefit all the time, I didn't have to worry about terrain to obtain "Hull Down" for the same effect.

Yes, but a glancing hit would destroy a raider (effectively) on a 4+ (immobolized=wrecked, and open topped) in 3rd.

Currently, you only gain the cover save if you move the vehicle so fast that it can neither shoot nor embark/disembark troops.

Yes, but there is the tactical advantage to having one raider in front of another given that blast weapons strength are halved.

Another big loss from previous editions is the inability to embark onto a vehicle as part of your post combat consolidation move. In 3rd, I used that one a lot to protect my wyches from being shot off the board on a turn after they wiped out an opponent's unit.

Also agreed.

Saldiven wrote:@Wyomingfox
Honestly, I actually prefer SMF to the current rules. In previous editions, my Raiders never moved less than 6" unless stunned in a previous turn. Since I had this benefit all the time, I didn't have to worry about terrain to obtain "Hull Down" for the same effect. Currently, you only gain the cover save if you move the vehicle so fast that it can neither shoot nor embark/disembark troops.

That's such a perfect summary of why this was such a great change...

Now there is actually a trade off for skimmers, be safer or be aggressive, an actual decision for the player to make.

Jack

People shouldn't freak out over the rumored cost increase for raiders until they actually know the cost and the rules for the vehicle. If it's the exact same thing, but simply costs more, that might be head-scratching, but if it has some special rules attached for a price increase, then it may still be awesome.

so no new models untill games day germany? when is that

SweetLou wrote:so no new models untill games day germany? when is that

Around the 17th.

Jackmojo wrote:

Saldiven wrote:@Wyomingfox
Honestly, I actually prefer SMF to the current rules. In previous editions, my Raiders never moved less than 6" unless stunned in a previous turn. Since I had this benefit all the time, I didn't have to worry about terrain to obtain "Hull Down" for the same effect. Currently, you only gain the cover save if you move the vehicle so fast that it can neither shoot nor embark/disembark troops.

That's such a perfect summary of why this was such a great change...

Now there is actually a trade off for skimmers, be safer or be aggressive, an actual decision for the player to make.

Jack

Agreed. More tactical decisions makes for a better game.

On the raider points cost i can't imagine a raider coming with a 5+ inv or a 2D6 boost as standard, it all seems very expensive for a transport that is mainly use dto get troops into position then often destroyed without much concern from the DE player. I think they'll be upgrades, so the DE player has the option to make his raiders more durable if he wants.

And let's not forget there may be other delivery systems in the codex as well besides raiders.

We have heard web-way portals are in.....but are there any other modes to deliver your units....like outflank or deep strike (though I expect this from scourges, but we'll see)?

All this in conjunction with the Raider's alleged cost increase might be somewhat warranted, providing one with a more broad set of options to get your forces on the field in a somewhat "safer" manner.....the Venom (if true) could be interesting as well.

Thats a point, how many points is the Venom going for?

Its going to be the same basic stats as a raider but with less of everything.

Do we know if the new metal Archon is the only metal Archon they're doing? I'd be quite disappointed if it was...