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.

Chaos is Republicans.

RedWingArmada, how many games have you played with the new heldrake?

I haven't gotten any yet, but that's because I've been trying out rhino-borne troops and maulerfiends and helbrutes, and having a grand time with them. I suggest you try it, and see how you like it!

MasterOfGaunts wrote:
Really interesting how some guys think, the Helldrake was okay how it was.

It was and still is a highly mobile torrent-flamer-template that kills nearly everything that has no invulnerable save or 2+ armor. Even if you spread your units rigth it will hit a lot due to torrent. I really dont understand the complaints. Its like it was with the Vendetta where a 20 Point increase and decreased transport capacity turned a unit from OP to utterly crap....

I really have sympathies for chaos players complaining about their overall bad Codex, buts its no excuse for an obvious OP unit.

If your opponent is near the 2" max coherency you'll get about 4 dudes under the template. That's 4 infantry per turn under the old rules starting usually at turn 2 and eventually having to fly off the board at some point or hover and lose all flyer benefits. 4 dead infantry per turn is not a lot of firepower in the current game. The baleflamer with turret rules really and truly wasn't as bad as the internet made it out to be. The baledrake never was an auto-take, spawn and bikes have always been top contenders in the book.

JubbJubbz wrote:

If your opponent is near the 2" max coherency you'll get about 4 dudes under the template. That's 4 infantry per turn under the old rules starting usually at turn 2 and eventually having to fly off the board at some point or hover and lose all flyer benefits. 4 dead infantry per turn is not a lot of firepower in the current game. The baleflamer with turret rules really and truly wasn't as bad as the internet made it out to be. The baledrake never was an auto-take, spawn and bikes have always been top contenders in the book.

That's all well and good on a flat board with one squad of infantry and a single drake. Having played 1500pt games against drakes with terrain, I can tell you that spacing even three 10 man squads is a pain while keeping them effective for my purposes.

 obsidiankatana wrote:

That's all well and good on a flat board with one squad of infantry and a single drake. Having played 1500pt games against drakes with terrain, I can tell you that spacing even three 10 man squads is a pain while keeping them effective for my purposes.

'

A pain to be sure, but to completely neuter one of your opponents units that he counts on, worth it.

JubbJubbz wrote:

 obsidiankatana wrote:

That's all well and good on a flat board with one squad of infantry and a single drake. Having played 1500pt games against drakes with terrain, I can tell you that spacing even three 10 man squads is a pain while keeping them effective for my purposes.

'

A pain to be sure, but to completely neuter one of your opponents units that he counts on, worth it.

Debatable, given that 170 points neuter up to 500 of mine without even killing them, and still losing 3-4 models to it.

Except you're then potentially exposing yourself to fire from other avenues.

The "if they're spaced out it reduces their effectiveness" argument if fine and dandy, but in reality, with the amount of cover available, the positions of your other units and those of your opponent, the optimum space to fill with a unit isn't always available.

Besides, if you do anything because of what your opponent may or may not do that you wouldn't have chosen to do regardless, it is a small victory for him.

 azreal13 wrote:
Except you're then potentially exposing yourself to fire from other avenues.

The "if they're spaced out it reduces their effectiveness" argument if fine and dandy, but in reality, with the amount of cover available, the positions of your other units and those of your opponent, the optimum space to fill with a unit isn't always available.

Besides, if you do anything because of what your opponent may or may not do that you wouldn't have chosen to do regardless, it is a small victory for him.

So you're saying you have to take into account cover from other sources of fire, positioning, and that these choices will affect the effectiveness of the unit vs other units? This is basically just describing a wargame and doesn't indicate that the heldrake was overpowered. In my experience it was really the constant VS'ing in combination with the flamer that made the heldrake a powerful (but not overly so) unit. Now your opponent really has to go out of their way for you to be able to pull off both in a turn and as a result its damage output cannot keep up with what we see in games now. This was a different story when CSM first came out and we had yet to see the power increase that shooting would see. Whats really depressing was the hadesdrake going from a decent choice to just plain laughable.

Doing something based on what your opponent may or may not do is the essence of any strategic and/or tactical based game play. How can you play a game without regard to what the enemy is doing? I agree that you don't want to be constantly on your back foot trying to react and put out fires, but because you see a certain tactic coming and act accordingly isn't a bad thing. The heldrake doesn't have much choice it what it does, it has one gun. Its coming so you know spreading out will be worth it. Its like bubble wrapping against drop melta, you know its coming so act accordingly.

 Spellbound wrote:
RedWingArmada, how many games have you played with the new heldrake?

I haven't gotten any yet, but that's because I've been trying out rhino-borne troops and maulerfiends and helbrutes, and having a grand time with them. I suggest you try it, and see how you like it!

I wish I could say "enough" but that's not true. Since 7th Ed came out, I've been having to move and deal with a broken ankle, plus kids, legal affairs and my wife losing her mind in the process (but in the good way, not the way that sees someone in jail. She's upset becomes I'm not around currently).

On top of that, I'm dealing with extremely limited means and army (no joke, I've got two DV Helbrutes, a Rhino and a Heldrake [Heldark was the "showcase" piece I bought first, and not even for game play. I just liked the damn thing]). So while my physical experience may be limited in playing games, my tactical is not. I've watched enough BatReps and seen enough games played first hand to see what kind of effect the new Heldrake is going to have on armies. I've even randomly play tested my crap Chaos army against itself, just to see how difficult it would be to turn around and flame again without getting chewed up by something that could hit it in the three turns it took to double back.

It's simple math and strategy, although I won't argue that replaces experience by any means. Just contributing.

And also guys, I'd like to say one thing about the title of this thread. Ok, so I get there is hyperbole there. I did that as a form of "character," not to be taken as literally as I think some of the opposition has come in here and rabble roused about. Seriously? Is there anyone actually "lamenting" over this damn game? I don't like it, but I'm not in bed crying myself to sleep over it.

Come on kids. A little perspective goes a long way. lol

Yes, yes, let the hate flow through you. . .

As an Ork player I get to play the ultimate "Codex got nerfed, boo hoo card"... At least for a couple of weeks.

Chaos still gets a good flier, better than the Ork ones. Also

OBLITERATORS!!! Holy Gork and Mork I wish we had something like that or Sternguard.

Oh, and you get awesome ID causing MC's. None of those in Codex:Orks.

Nah, I still side with Spikey Boyz over SM's. Why would anyone debase themselves just to win?

JubbJubbz wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Except you're then potentially exposing yourself to fire from other avenues.

The "if they're spaced out it reduces their effectiveness" argument if fine and dandy, but in reality, with the amount of cover available, the positions of your other units and those of your opponent, the optimum space to fill with a unit isn't always available.

Besides, if you do anything because of what your opponent may or may not do that you wouldn't have chosen to do regardless, it is a small victory for him.

So you're saying you have to take into account cover from other sources of fire, positioning, and that these choices will affect the effectiveness of the unit vs other units? This is basically just describing a wargame and doesn't indicate that the heldrake was overpowered. In my experience it was really the constant VS'ing in combination with the flamer that made the heldrake a powerful (but not overly so) unit. Now your opponent really has to go out of their way for you to be able to pull off both in a turn and as a result its damage output cannot keep up with what we see in games now. This was a different story when CSM first came out and we had yet to see the power increase that shooting would see. Whats really depressing was the hadesdrake going from a decent choice to just plain laughable.

Doing something based on what your opponent may or may not do is the essence of any strategic and/or tactical based game play. How can you play a game without regard to what the enemy is doing? I agree that you don't want to be constantly on your back foot trying to react and put out fires, but because you see a certain tactic coming and act accordingly isn't a bad thing. The heldrake doesn't have much choice it what it does, it has one gun. Its coming so you know spreading out will be worth it. Its like bubble wrapping against drop melta, you know its coming so act accordingly.

Fair enough, just scatter the word "disproportionate" and similar over my original post and call it done.

If you really want to lament, let me quote the old Marks of Chaos.

- Mark of Khorne - Fearless, +1 Attack, Reroll charge range
= Aside from always needing to sweeping advance, fairly similar.

- Mark of Nurgle - Fearless, +1 Toughness, True Grit
= That last ability means bolter counts as a close combat weapon.

- Mark of Slaanesh - Fearless, Enemy gets -1 Initiative in close combat
= Effectively the same thing as the +1 Initiative they now get.

- Mark of Tzeentch - Fearless, + 1 Wound, Slow and Purposeful, no Veteran abilities, Sorcerers ALWAYS pass psychic tests.
= DAFUQ?? Is this even the same game???


Notice a word in each of those that is missing from Modern 40k? FEARLESS!


I used to play a Tzeentch and Khorne army and it was lots of fun... assault was actually useful, Bloodthirsters were scary STR 8 beasts with 5 attacks, and chaos space marines marked by Tzeentch were effectively Thousand Sons with double the hitpoints. Sorcerers were also masters of magic and never failed at casting Doombolts, which you could give to your entire squad if you wanted. Heck, units of Chosen marked by Tzeentch were ALL considered Sorcerers. Every single one of them could have Doombolt and never needed to even attempt a psychic test.

Some people complain about the Traitor Legions, others the lack of our old Dreadnoughts, some just want Daemons to be part of the default army again. But damnit, even the Marks of Chaos have been nerfed.

 PipeAlley wrote:
Yes, yes, let the hate flow through you. . .

As an Ork player I get to play the ultimate "Codex got nerfed, boo hoo card"... At least for a couple of weeks.

Chaos still gets a good flier, better than the Ork ones. Also

OBLITERATORS!!! Holy Gork and Mork I wish we had something like that or Sternguard.

Oh, and you get awesome ID causing MC's. None of those in Codex:Orks.

Nah, I still side with Spikey Boyz over SM's. Why would anyone debase themselves just to win?

Orks were pretty good in 3rd, 4th and 5th.

I mean Orks had the most updates besides Nids and SM (up until 5th/6th, which was strange).

Heck the only reason you are weak now is due to age and codex creep, rather then straightforward nerfs on the ork codex.