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.

 labmouse42 wrote:

Look up a few posts in this thread and I talk about the point-per-resiliance. 10 PMs will last longer than 18 CSM from bolter fire.

That is bolter fire though, against S7+ weaponry PM will last about 2/5 longer and against a demolisher cannon they would both be as vulnerable so itsn't really as cut and dried as you suggest. PM are more points efficent that standard CSM but not by much. To be honest PM should have lost their basic BP/CCW and boltgun armament, that would put them much closer to CSM in points efficency.

As I have an army full of PMs though I'm not overly concerned

amended my previous post...nothing to see here.

DAaddict wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:

DAaddict wrote:
The only advantage is fearless.

And better durability. Lets not forget that they are tougher-point for point than CSM vs hoards.

Oh, and in assault. Lets not forget that PMs are better in assault than CSMs due to the poisoned weapons.

And shooting. Don't forget that you can have 2 PGs for every 5 PMs.

PMs are not quite as good as GHs, but their close.

I was not speaking about PM but about all the named marines... However I question the value of even PM. 5 PM with 2 PG is going to cost you 145 Almost for the same cost I can get 10 naked CSM with 2 PG. Of course I lose the survivability but also - extrapolating out the core... If you fill all 6 troop slots, you have 30 plague marines where as I have 60 CSM with the same number of plasma shots. (870 vs 960 pts) I have said it is questionable which is better in this case (CSM vs PM). My point it is almost a slam dunk with the other 3 which is the better buy. The only point you have is fearless in the other 3 that you can hold over a standard CSM squad and that can be mitigated by giving them VoTLW.

true but in close combat the plague marines can destroy high toughness models the naked marines not so much. Also one battlecanno will do a number on your guys on the plagues the still get cover and feel no pain

 captain collius wrote:

true but in close combat the plague marines can destroy high toughness models the naked marines not so much.

Actually, 1 PM is better in close-combat than 2 (bolter only) CSMs against every opponent, and only barely worse than 2 (bp+ccw) CSMs. And of course they can take charges better (because of the Blight Grenades).

 kcwm wrote:
Replacing the Champions power weapon with a lightning claw, power fist, or chain fist is actually cheaper for Terminators than other models in the codex (25 points for a power fist on a power armor champion vs 10 for the Terminator). Yeah, those prices are REAL absurd.

The Power Armour Champion is upgrading from a chainsword. The Terminator is upgrading from a Power Weapon. Power Weapons cost 15 points. 25-15=10.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 kcwm wrote:
Replacing the Champions power weapon with a lightning claw, power fist, or chain fist is actually cheaper for Terminators than other models in the codex (25 points for a power fist on a power armor champion vs 10 for the Terminator). Yeah, those prices are REAL absurd.

The Power Armour Champion is upgrading from a chainsword. The Terminator is upgrading from a Power Weapon. Power Weapons cost 15 points. 25-15=10.

If you're gonna go that route, then that means removing the Power Weapon from the cost of a Terminator means he's a 16 point model. For 3 points more than a bare bones Chaos Marine, you're getting a 2+ armor save, +1 LD, +1 A, a 5+ invul, and a TL Bolter. That's pretty damn good.

kcwm wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:Terminators are generally more expensive than they were previously...

Not so much. In the fourth edition codex, Terminators were 30 points apiece and a Champion was 10 points more. So, you're looking at 150 or 160 with a Champ. For the same unit, it's now 157. How is that generally more expensive?

The champ gave an extra attack last edition, he does not do so now and his wargear is costed to what it should be for a powerful IC not a unit champion.

If you wanted to give them all powerfists, that's 200 or 210 points. Again, how are the new edition Terminators generally more expensive than they were before? 185 is less than 200.

Because there was never a reason to give them all powerfists?

The Champion over pays for some of the upgrades when replacing their combi-bolter. The combi-weapons? They were 10 points in the old codex but 7 for the champ in the new one.

Combi's were 5pts in the last book.

The melee upgrades when replacing your combi-bolter? Of course they are expensive...you're generally going to get a 2nd melee attack out of it

only if it's a paired weapon and nowhere near worth what they're costed at for a single extra attack on one marine-statline model.

Replacing the Champions power weapon with a lightning claw, power fist, or chain fist is actually cheaper for Terminators than other models in the codex (25 points for a power fist on a power armor champion vs 10 for the Terminator). Yeah, those prices are REAL absurd.

Compared to the last codex, in many ways they are compared to what you're replacing.


A typical loadout for last edition may have been say, 6 termi's, one with an icon of Glory, 2 powerfists and 3 combi's, 225pts. Now, that's 217 without an icon and lower leadership, 242 with a Fearless icon or 235 with VotLW or 260 for both. The unit didn't really become any more effective than it was, 2+sv's are harder to crack in CC but there's no safe DS delivery method anymore either and CC is harder to utilize.

 kcwm wrote:
[The Reaper Autocannon isn't anything to sneeze at, but it's no CML. We have no answer for that.

You made an excellent post.

Palindrome wrote:
That is bolter fire though, against S7+ weaponry PM will last about 2/5 longer and against a demolisher cannon they would both be as vulnerable so itsn't really as cut and dried as you suggest.

I don't know about your meta, but most of the armies weapons I see today are bolter-equse weapons. (Lasguns, shootas, etc)
While there are higher STR weapons, they are proportionally the smaller amount of fire that I see on the board. Easily 2/3 of the wounds thrown on my armies today are STR 5 and lower.

If your local meta is full of IG vet squads with 3 PGs each, you might want to look at something other than PMs.

 AtoMaki wrote:
Actually, 1 PM is better in close-combat than 2 (bolter only) CSMs against every opponent, and only barely worse than 2 (bp+ccw) CSMs. And of course they can take charges better (because of the Blight Grenades).

+1

The reason is the poisoned weapon. Lets look at a PM vs a Chosen. One would think the Chosen with 2 base attacks and an extra CCW would be better....

Chosen
1/2 hit, 1/2 wound = 1/4 of attacks wound. 3 attacks per chosen gives 3/4 wounds per chosen.

PM
1/2 hit, 3/4 wound = 3/8 of attacks wound. 2 attacks per PM gives 3/4 wounds per PM.

 Eiluj The Farseer wrote:
It is GW I know, but if everyone in GW talked with eachother and made more balanced codexes, we wouldn't have anything to complain about.. lol

This is definitely the key here. If GW only knew how to actually write decent, consistent rules we wouldn't be seeing these stupid threads EVERY time a new codex comes out. Instead GW has its authors writing their books as if they are in isolation from one another until the book is printed and isolation from any other books that have been released for a current edition as well. It is just silly. With a bit of effort they could effectively establish the power level of the game and keep it there consistently over all the codex lists, but they just don't know how to do it. For those complaining that they "changed" things for no apparent reason instead of fixing things needs to go back and look at how GW has written its books for the last 15 years to realize that such is the way they do it every time. Why fix problems with the rules when you can change them and make different problems instead? That is the GW way.

I've said my bit about the new chaos codex months ago and see no point in taking part in the continued horse beatings on that level...

Skriker

 labmouse42 wrote:

What does it mean?
PMs are extremely durable on a RPP scale from normal attacks. They are probably the best RPP unit in the game from STR 4 attacks that give normal saves.

Plague zombies come tantilizingly close at 84.38
Wraithlords are much higher though....

 AresX8 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 kcwm wrote:
Replacing the Champions power weapon with a lightning claw, power fist, or chain fist is actually cheaper for Terminators than other models in the codex (25 points for a power fist on a power armor champion vs 10 for the Terminator). Yeah, those prices are REAL absurd.

The Power Armour Champion is upgrading from a chainsword. The Terminator is upgrading from a Power Weapon. Power Weapons cost 15 points. 25-15=10.

If you're gonna go that route, then that means removing the Power Weapon from the cost of a Terminator means he's a 16 point model. For 3 points more than a bare bones Chaos Marine, you're getting a 2+ armor save, +1 LD, +1 A, a 5+ invul, and a TL Bolter. That's pretty damn good.

Nope, opportunity cost also plays in. The point is you're upgrading a Power Weapon instead of a Chainsword.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Terminators are generally more expensive than they were previously, unless loading up on lots of powerfists and the like (if you didn't kit out the entire squad with them last edition, you won't notice any savings), and the Champion pays absurd prices for wargear upgrades for no discernible reason.

Chalenges and precision strikes. Been through this at least once before in threads.

DrDuckman wrote:
My experince with the new codex has actually being very positive compared to the old one, and it made me expand my army quite a bit. I love the fact that now it encourages mono-god themed lists instead of a mish mash of Plague Marines and Khorne bezerkers with 2 DPs at all time.

Most of the arguments you made in the OP are isolations of the bad without the good. For example, yes oblits are lower leadership and need to switch weapons, but now are cheaper, and most importantly, CAN BE T5. This is amazing. Oblits have been boosted simply because of that overall. No longer will they get constantly sniped by Lascannons. It's gotten to the point that noone actually ever shoots at my obliterators any more, cause a T5 2+ 2W monster is not worth shooting at with anything short of a Railgun/Vindicator.

The main things that got really nerfed is DPs and Bezerkers, and DPs are still very good in most situations.

I think people are complaining because they dont want variety, they want SW style undercosted obvious choices. That's bad codex design though.

Khorne Bezerkers are underpower not just next to GK which even BA don't look that next to GK
Khorne Bezerkers should be alot more like Blood Claws WS 3 would be very fluffy since Korn "dose not care where the blood comes from as long as the blood flows" also make them 15pts with 1 or 2 Khorne Bezerkers having PW or PF.
I can't see the 2 PF being a gamebreaker if every GK gets a force weapon for 20pts

DPs are not bad. They are costed so that if you don't give them wings, your wasting your points

How does that logic even work? If it's overcosted, giving them wings gives them an actual "Purpose" I guess you could say.

Except that it means that they need a very specific loadout to work, which in this case means that the original points cost is bunk because you'll always need to add wings..Which means it's points cost is wrong for what it's power is supposed to be compared to what it needs to be to work.

 labmouse42 wrote:
Easily 2/3 of the wounds thrown on my armies today are STR 5 and lower.

As most weapons are S5 and below that isn't suprising. Anything that will throw out 18 S4 shots is very likely to also have something that will throw out at least 1 S7+ shot as well though which is nearly as likely to kill a PM as a CSM. I am not denying that PMs are more survivable than CSM but what I am saying is that their costing isn't that far off from a survivability point of view.

A reaper autocannon is simply a twin linked autocannon, it has 2 shots.

 yorkskargrimironklaw wrote:

DrDuckman wrote:
My experince with the new codex has actually being very positive compared to the old one, and it made me expand my army quite a bit. I love the fact that now it encourages mono-god themed lists instead of a mish mash of Plague Marines and Khorne bezerkers with 2 DPs at all time.

Most of the arguments you made in the OP are isolations of the bad without the good. For example, yes oblits are lower leadership and need to switch weapons, but now are cheaper, and most importantly, CAN BE T5. This is amazing. Oblits have been boosted simply because of that overall. No longer will they get constantly sniped by Lascannons. It's gotten to the point that noone actually ever shoots at my obliterators any more, cause a T5 2+ 2W monster is not worth shooting at with anything short of a Railgun/Vindicator.

The main things that got really nerfed is DPs and Bezerkers, and DPs are still very good in most situations.

I think people are complaining because they dont want variety, they want SW style undercosted obvious choices. That's bad codex design though.

Khorne Bezerkers are underpower not just next to GK which even BA don't look that next to GK
Khorne Bezerkers should be alot more like Blood Claws WS 3 would be very fluffy since Korn "dose not care where the blood comes from as long as the blood flows" also make them 15pts with 1 or 2 Khorne Bezerkers having PW or PF.
I can't see the 2 PF being a gamebreaker if every GK gets a force weapon for 20pts

Khorne Berzerkers should not, under any circumstance, be reduced to WS3. Their entire fluff revolves around them being awesome but crazy melee fighters. If anything, they should get the same profile as Death Company minus the ranged options, but be scoring to compensate.

And a Power Fist is much better than a Force Weapons against vehicles, T4 and lower and anything immune to ID or that only has one wound. It's also AP2.

Palindrome wrote:
As most weapons are S5 and below that isn't suprising. Anything that will throw out 18 S4 shots is very likely to also have something that will throw out at least 1 S7+ shot as well though which is nearly as likely to kill a PM as a CSM. I am not denying that PMs are more survivable than CSM but what I am saying is that their costing isn't that far off from a survivability point of view.

You just proved my point.

You take 18 shots that are STR 4, and then 2 shots that are STR 7+ (PG, MG, MM, ML)
That means on average, 2 MEQ would die from bolters, and 1.111 MEQ die from the STR 7+ AP3 weapons.
On average, 0.882 PM will die from bolters, and 0.74 PM will die from the STR 7+ AP3 weapons

Assuming 17 points per MEQ, you lost 52.887 points of MEQ
At 24 points per PM, you lost 38.928 points of PM.

PMs are, point for point, much more survivable than MEQ.

Palindrome wrote:
A reaper autocannon is simply a twin linked autocannon, it has 2 shots.

Your right. I misread it when I looked at the entry yesterday. I take that back, a CSM is better than a reaper.

 labmouse42 wrote:

PMs are, point for point, much more survivable than MEQ.

They aren't much more, they are a bit more and a lot depends on exactly what they are shot with. That isn't the whole story though is it, the ranged damage potentially of an equally pointed CSM squad is a lot higher due to the sheer number of shots.

PM are more points efficient but not by a huge margin.

If I was running a non legion force I would be happy to run multiple squads of CSM and with no legion troops at all.

50% more efficient is not a huge margin?

His maths are off. CSM cost 13 ppm so actually only 40 points of CSM die (46 with CCW/BP + bolter which drops down to 41ish with MoN). Basically the difference is effectively negligable in this rather limited scenario which can change to favour either option depending on exactly what is shooting at them.

Of course PM are a lot better in assaults but then they do cost 11 PPM more.

Palindrome wrote:
They aren't much more, they are a bit more and a lot depends on exactly what they are shot with.

Take the scenario showed above, which is a average squad shooting in today's meta. The MEQ lose 3.111 models, the PM lose 1.622 models. That means the PM are 92% better at taking fire than MEQ. That's a repeatable scenario you can expect to see multiple times per game.

Let me put it this way. Would you rather have a job making $55,000 a year, or $105,600 a year. That's what a 92% increase in repeatable values provides.

Even talking pure RPP values, the PMs are 36% better at taking damage from the scenario. Even 36% is the difference between $55,000 a year and $74,800 a year.

Palindrome wrote:
That isn't the whole story though is it, the ranged damage potentially of an equally pointed CSM squad is a lot higher due to the sheer number of shots.

I would not say a 'lot higher'. CSM does have more shots, surely. Lets compare apples to apples. You want a CSM squad that is good at holding mid-board. Given an extra CCW, and vets of long war pushes your CSM to 16 points a pop. That unit can do the job of mid-board control well.

PMs don't have the 10 point champion surcharge, so for every 10 PMs on the board, you can bring 14.3 CSM with bolters. The CSM will have 43% more shooting for the same cost -- but less durability, lack of fearless, less ability in CC, lack of defensive gernades, etc...

Now, is 43% a lot higher? That depends if you think that 36% is a lot higher

Palindrome wrote:
His maths are off. CSM cost 13 ppm so actually only 40 points of CSM die

Your comparing apples to oranges. Your 13 point CSM does not fill the same role in the game. That's like comparing a LRR to a predator. Their completely different units with different purposes. A better comparison there would be cultists vs CSM.

Your 13 point CSM is designed to hold objectives and not get close. They are fragile in CC and easily swept.
I priced the MEQ at 17 points a model, as that is roughly what you need to have the same role as PM. Mid-board control.

 labmouse42 wrote:

I priced the MEQ at 17 points a model, as that is roughly what you need to have the same role as PM. Mid-board control.

In other words you chose a random number to back up your results.

There are a huge number of variables but on a point for point basis CSM and PM are well costed compared to each other.

At the end of the day X points of PMs are approximately as surviviable as X points of CSM, thats really all there is to it.

Palindrome wrote:
In other words you chose a random number to back up your results.

Or I picked a number that one would pay for models to fill the same role.

Palindrome wrote:
At the end of the day X points of PMs are approximately as surviviable as X points of CSM, thats really all there is to it.

How about we agree to disagree on this.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Terminators are generally more expensive than they were previously, unless loading up on lots of powerfists and the like (if you didn't kit out the entire squad with them last edition, you won't notice any savings), and the Champion pays absurd prices for wargear upgrades for no discernible reason.

Chalenges and precision strikes. Been through this at least once before in threads.

Neither of which justify *that* much of a premium. I'd be surprised to see DA terminator sergeants pay the same prices.

There IS a discernible reason, you just disagree on the value placed on the price premium

Had a team Tourney Adepti style yesterday at local game store. Lost 2 games, tied 1. The tied one was against GK and vanilla marines, the two losses Necrons then to Nids... The Necrons and Nids it was an up hill battle the entire game, the Necrons we held them until the end, but the nids it was a slow death from the beginning and we stole innitiative. It is really hard I think to be competative, esp. with horde armies and Necrons. Though I think everyone has a problem with Necrons right now. The Necrons just had so many flyers and so many things that could outrun us, they were able to outmaneuver us at all times. Nids the main problem was speed and their MC have so many wounds that stopping them in time was difficult even while concentrating fire. Their main HQ man he is a beast in CC, my PM held him off as long as they could, but even end of game he still had 1 wound left. I know tactics and everything is an issue, but I have posted my records I am not a bad player (not the best), I have better records with my Eldar and Orks and Chaos Daemons and they are all old codexes. Sorry just a little downtrodden.

These are the questions I ask after I play games. I ask them harder when I lose. This is why I try and play better players so I can continue to improve my game.

1) What did I field?

2) What did I find was missing?
- long range support
- anti-flyer
- counter-assault?

3) What did my opponent do that caused me a lot of problems?
- What would have been a good counter to them?

4) What worked out well for me?
- How can I make sure to do that again and again?

5) How could I have deployed/moved differently?

Edit : If your looking to win, check out CD again. Flamers/Screamers are so overpowered right now its not even funny. I've still be doing very well with my fatecrusher list. (I bring fatecrusher with 18 flamers and 6 screamers)

Palindrome wrote:
His maths are off. CSM cost 13 ppm so actually only 40 points of CSM die (46 with CCW/BP + bolter which drops down to 41ish with MoN). Basically the difference is effectively negligable in this rather limited scenario which can change to favour either option depending on exactly what is shooting at them.

Of course PM are a lot better in assaults but then they do cost 11 PPM more.

The arguement of survivability is moot. No one is going to deny that PM is more survivable than CSM. The other side of the arguement is damage potential.
145 for 5 PM with 2 Plasma - 160 for 10 CSM with 2 Plasma. 3 bolter shots and 2 plasma versus 8 bolter and 2 plasma shots double that if under 12".
HTH is going to be about even except for the poison giving them a bonus. Now it adds to the cost but VotLW, MoK or MoS, adding CCW will tip it more in favor of CSM over PM.

I can't help but notice, my original arguement was that CSM were superior to all the "chosen" marines. The only arguement that is going on is that Plague Marines are better but Berzerkers, Noise Marines, and 1000 Sons no arguement. So GW managed to get one out of four right - 25% is not that good of a success rate.

 labmouse42 wrote:
These are the questions I ask after I play games. I ask them harder when I lose. This is why I try and play better players so I can continue to improve my game.

1) What did I field?

2) What did I find was missing?
- long range support
- anti-flyer
- counter-assault?

3) What did my opponent do that caused me a lot of problems?
- What would have been a good counter to them?

4) What worked out well for me?
- How can I make sure to do that again and again?

5) How could I have deployed/moved differently?

Edit : If your looking to win, check out CD again. Flamers/Screamers are so overpowered right now its not even funny. I've still be doing very well with my fatecrusher list. (I bring fatecrusher with 18 flamers and 6 screamers)

1.)What did we play - well I played a LordNurgle CombiMelta and fist in Termi armour, 2 squads of Plague marines 7 man - 1 with 2 melta and combi melta and 1 with 2 plasma and combi plasma, 1 havok squad 5 man MK Nurgle Autocannons 4, Helldrake with Bale Flamer, Oblits 2 MkNurgle... My partner ran Ahriman, 1 Tson list 9 man with Sorc Force Ax, 1 Tson 8man Sorc Force Ax, Havoks 4 man missile with flakk and aegis with icarus las cannon

2.)Missing stuff, well I do not like the Icarus with one shot I just find it too unreliable, if anything I would take the Quad, but that was not my choice. I think T-sons are cool, but too expensive and most things get cover so AP3 not so great.
I think I need to take more plasma as the Melta was hard to get into range
We had the most problems dealing with Flyers - Necrons and their overall mobility compared to ours, With Nids there high toughness - high wound characters are so ridiculous - we trying to hit the hive tyrant straight away killed one body guard put a wound on the tyrant- in the end the tyrant had one wound and had killed my lord and two pm squads with help mind you - some yrmgryl and tervigon and babies - but he did most of the work
the last game the Termie paladins with 2 wounds and FNP are a pain to deal with and Draigo forget about it. I just tryed to shoot him and not engage but a big part of the mission was the relic - try taking a relic away from paladins - we made him drop it 3 times, but could not widdle them down enough to kill the squad - 3 termies, apoth and draigo
3.) Counter assault - high ap long range or high S with more dakka, as well as anti air and anti horde - pretty hard for chaos marines to do this with 1000 points per adepticon team, keep racking my brain on it.... losing is always a good lesson and playing really good players are fun playing WAAC jackass players - not so much fun.... I played 2 nice groups, 1 group who had the advantage with their army were really jerky, which is never fun
4.) The Plague marines I found were solid units and took a lot to kill, they just don't have enough dakka, but if I went with more plasma and hit them at range may be. I think the Oblits and Havoks did quite well. The helldrake did great 1 game, but the first 2 games after making an entrance got knocked out of the air by all the Necron aircraft and the nid flying bugs. I think another helldrake would be good or maybe more heavy support, but can only take 1 per team mate 1 person may take an extra Heavy though.
5.) One of our biggest mistakes I believe was putting our Aegis too far forward in 1 game, which was against my decision, however the other times I thought our deployment was decent, but maybe hold stuff more back and letting the enemy come to them. Bu you can not always do this for each mission.

Thanks for the advice it often helps to step by step go through it.

I worry that the dividing line between a 'good' codex and a 'bad' codex will be flyers. The ability to take flyers as Dedicated Transports is pretty powerful, and the CSM Flak Missiles aren't that great.