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.

 daedalus wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
@Ailaros- Terminators are useless. They are the worst example you could use IMO. Terminators get better the MORE expensive their opponent gets generally. They are also grossly over priced in this edition.

Are you doubtful about terminators being borderline useless? Or confused by the proposition that they are better against more expensive units?

If it's the first thing...well, that should be self-evident at this point.

If it's the second...Think about it this way: A unit of terminators charge a 10 man guard infantry squad and slaughter them; they killed maybe 60-70 points worth of dudes. OR Those same terminators charge a tac marines squad and slaughter ~170 points worth of dudes. In which situation where those terminators better?

I'm confused over the initial premise. I just can't say I've ever seen a situation where Terminators were useless. You don't take nothing but terminators and expect to win, obviously, but I think that calling them useless has got to be some excessive exaggeration.

The problem is that for terminators everything you pay for is easily negated in the current environment.

With ignore cover Tau shooting AP 2 large blasts on interceptor you cant really deep strike them in a tournament setting. As such you need to either walk them across the board against said guns, meaning they are not doing anything for a few turns or buy them an expensive vehicle. At this point you are 400-500 points in just to make them work. And then you can get other things that do it better for cheaper.

So instead of "Useless" these people really mean very sub optimal

Now that sounds closer to reality.

As far as the competitive scene, I've decided I'm done with it until such a time that a 5 model 1000 point unit teamed up with a superheavy that somehow got legal for play isn't shooting entire armies off of tables.

I enjoy wargames. I'm not sure what competitive play is, but it's not one of those anymore.

Oh yea, sorry. I should have said sub optimal but I am a bit of a cynic in that department as I have a 2500pt logan wing army collecting dust currently. They are useful for looking at but not much else, and those are scoring terminators that start at 33 pt rather then 40 and can field combi weapons....yup still terrible.

The problem is how many points your spending per wound which is why I don't like vets being overly cost. I like the carapace but I am not a fan of camo gear. If they still had infiltrate it would be another story, but the problem is you need to get them to cover. Home field doesn't count really because then why not just camp with a platoon? So they gain nothing while they ride or walk to their goal really.

Now carapace is almost an auto buy. A vet squad used to be 70 naked now its 75 with a 4+ at the loss of something they almost never got to use, Krak grenades.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Oh yea, sorry. I should have said sub optimal but I am a bit of a cynic in that department as I have a 2500pt logan wing army collecting dust currently. They are useful for looking at but not much else, and those are scoring terminators that start at 33 pt rather then 40 and can field combi weapons....yup still terrible.

The problem is how many points your spending per wound which is why I don't like vets being overly cost. I like the carapace but I am not a fan of camo gear. If they still had infiltrate it would be another story, but the problem is you need to get them to cover. Home field doesn't count really because then why not just camp with a platoon? So they gain nothing while they ride or walk to their goal really.

Now carapace is almost an auto buy. A vet squad used to be 70 naked now its 75 with a 4+ at the loss of something they almost never got to use, Krak grenades.

Fair enough. The only termies I ever field are either Deathwing, or GK, and then those are used sparingly, so I'm a little biased in that I at least have scoring ones, but I could see where they become diminishing returns otherwise.

And in any case, it doesn't relate to the point. Sv2+ is still better than Sv3+ a vast majority of the time.

 Ailaros wrote:
And in any case, it doesn't relate to the point. Sv2+ is still better than Sv3+ a vast majority of the time.

In the abstract, yes. In actual fact, the points GW charges for 3+ or 2+ saves are frequently not worth it even a little.

That makes no sense. The only time when Sv2+ isn't just straight better is against AP1 and 2 weapons. Take any codex, and tell me what the ratio of Ap2 to Ap3+ weapons is. Then look at the carriers (I'm going to have a lot more lasguns than plasma guns in my guard army, I can tell you that for sure). Then look at non-shooting ways of doing damage.

Once again, you're looking at a tiny, tiny slice of hard counters and then extrapolating that they're useless. EVERYTHING looks useless when only compared to their hard counters. Of course Sv2+ is going to look expensive if you just shout "meta" and mean that to mean only things that support your point of view.

No, I'm saying that instead of paying 200+ points for 5 terminators, I'd prefer to buy double the number of power armor marines (and end up with points left over). Even if I was only ever facing lasguns or wyverns or autocannons, with a hard guarantee that there would be no plasma or lascannons or whatever, I would prefer power armor marines, because terminators are not good.

Anyway, I'm sorry. This is off topic for an IG thread.

The price for vets to get the grenadiers doctrine is well worth the points, which I think we all agree on.

tomjoad wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
And in any case, it doesn't relate to the point. Sv2+ is still better than Sv3+ a vast majority of the time.

In the abstract, yes. In actual fact, the points GW charges for 3+ or 2+ saves are frequently not worth it even a little.

Exactly, terminators are way over priced.

Ailaros wrote:That makes no sense. The only time when Sv2+ isn't just straight better is against AP1 and 2 weapons. Take any codex, and tell me what the ratio of Ap2 to Ap3+ weapons is. Then look at the carriers (I'm going to have a lot more lasguns than plasma guns in my guard army, I can tell you that for sure). Then look at non-shooting ways of doing damage.

Once again, you're looking at a tiny, tiny slice of hard counters and then extrapolating that they're useless. EVERYTHING looks useless when only compared to their hard counters. Of course Sv2+ is going to look expensive if you just shout "meta" and mean that to mean only things that support your point of view.

This is ridiculous. It all boils down to resiliency per point. a 2+ save is 16% better then a 3+ yet terminators are 300% the price of marines. Sure lets look at small arms shall we. A single bolter wound has a 16% chance to kill a single terminator or a 0% chance to kill the same points in marines (33% chance to off 1 of 3 wounds). This is why terminators suck. With fewer models you pay much more for hitting the bell curve for your armor saves. We don't even need to look at low AP weapons which ironically the most popular currently, 2, is more damaging to 2+ saves.

Back OT
Has anyone tried deep striking a platoon of SW scions yet? I am curious to hear of it's effectiveness.

Actually I'd be interested to hear about scions. I've always wanted to build an inquisitorial force and one of those aspects would be building Inquisitorial Storm Troopers which would be taken to represent a support branch to IG forces that are being besieged. Will they work or is it more worth just keeping a set of small units?

 Red Corsair wrote:
a 2+ save is 16% better then a 3+...

Isn't it 100% better, as you will take half the number of wounds (ignoring AP weapons)?

tomjoad wrote:No, I'm saying that instead of paying 200+ points for 5 terminators, I'd prefer to buy double the number of power armor marines (and end up with points left over).

And you lose powerfists, deepstrike, and an invul save.

Which should also enter into calculations. A +1 to Sv helps terminators over tac marines because there's more to protect. Likewise, veterans can have over half the models in the squad upgraded with a Ap2 or better weapon. Wounds are scarcer with vets, and the bodies need to be preserved more.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
a 2+ save is 16% better then a 3+...

Isn't it 100% better, as you will take half the number of wounds (ignoring AP weapons)?

Yes. The percentage of the change in number isn't what's important, it's the number of wounds that goes unsaved.

Which is one part of why terminator armor is so pricey, among many other reasons.

 Red Corsair wrote:

tomjoad wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
And in any case, it doesn't relate to the point. Sv2+ is still better than Sv3+ a vast majority of the time.

In the abstract, yes. In actual fact, the points GW charges for 3+ or 2+ saves are frequently not worth it even a little.

Exactly, terminators are way over priced.

Ailaros wrote:That makes no sense. The only time when Sv2+ isn't just straight better is against AP1 and 2 weapons. Take any codex, and tell me what the ratio of Ap2 to Ap3+ weapons is. Then look at the carriers (I'm going to have a lot more lasguns than plasma guns in my guard army, I can tell you that for sure). Then look at non-shooting ways of doing damage.

Once again, you're looking at a tiny, tiny slice of hard counters and then extrapolating that they're useless. EVERYTHING looks useless when only compared to their hard counters. Of course Sv2+ is going to look expensive if you just shout "meta" and mean that to mean only things that support your point of view.

This is ridiculous. It all boils down to resiliency per point. a 2+ save is 16% better then a 3+ yet terminators are 300% the price of marines. Sure lets look at small arms shall we. A single bolter wound has a 16% chance to kill a single terminator or a 0% chance to kill the same points in marines (33% chance to off 1 of 3 wounds). This is why terminators suck. With fewer models you pay much more for hitting the bell curve for your armor saves. We don't even need to look at low AP weapons which ironically the most popular currently, 2, is more damaging to 2+ saves.

Back OT
Has anyone tried deep striking a platoon of SW scions yet? I am curious to hear of it's effectiveness.

Um, what?

A single Lasgun wound has a 66% chance to kill a Veteran but a 0% chance to kill that many points in Guardsmen! Aiiiie! Vets must suck.

Now I'd repeat this ad infinitum just to point out how lacking in credit that statement is but I am in fact typing on a phone. As Ailaros points out, context and looking at the wider strengths is everything.

Terminators aren't fantastic for most armies but they're not useless, some variants of them especially are quite reasonable.

 Mr.Omega wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

tomjoad wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
And in any case, it doesn't relate to the point. Sv2+ is still better than Sv3+ a vast majority of the time.

In the abstract, yes. In actual fact, the points GW charges for 3+ or 2+ saves are frequently not worth it even a little.

Exactly, terminators are way over priced.

Ailaros wrote:That makes no sense. The only time when Sv2+ isn't just straight better is against AP1 and 2 weapons. Take any codex, and tell me what the ratio of Ap2 to Ap3+ weapons is. Then look at the carriers (I'm going to have a lot more lasguns than plasma guns in my guard army, I can tell you that for sure). Then look at non-shooting ways of doing damage.

Once again, you're looking at a tiny, tiny slice of hard counters and then extrapolating that they're useless. EVERYTHING looks useless when only compared to their hard counters. Of course Sv2+ is going to look expensive if you just shout "meta" and mean that to mean only things that support your point of view.

This is ridiculous. It all boils down to resiliency per point. a 2+ save is 16% better then a 3+ yet terminators are 300% the price of marines. Sure lets look at small arms shall we. A single bolter wound has a 16% chance to kill a single terminator or a 0% chance to kill the same points in marines (33% chance to off 1 of 3 wounds). This is why terminators suck. With fewer models you pay much more for hitting the bell curve for your armor saves. We don't even need to look at low AP weapons which ironically the most popular currently, 2, is more damaging to 2+ saves.

Back OT
Has anyone tried deep striking a platoon of SW scions yet? I am curious to hear of it's effectiveness.

Um, what?

A single Lasgun wound has a 66% chance to kill a Veteran but a 0% chance to kill that many points in Guardsmen! Aiiiie! Vets must suck.

Now I'd repeat this ad infinitum just to point out how lacking in credit that statement is but I am in fact typing on a phone. As Ailaros points out, context and looking at the wider strengths is everything.

Terminators aren't fantastic for most armies but they're not useless, some variants of them especially are quite reasonable.

A single Lascannon has a higher-than-zero percent chance of killing a Leman Russ, and a 0% chance of killing the equivalent points in guardsmen.

Therefore, guardsmen > Leman Russ.

derp

MEQ are far superior to TEQ when it comes to durability per point when being shot at.

TEQ are far superor in CC which isn't happening much in 6e. If 7e goes back to 5e assault out of transports rules then we will see teq return to the meta.

we should get back on topic.

 schadenfreude wrote:
MEQ are far superior to TEQ when it comes to durability per point when being shot at.

TEQ are far superor in CC which isn't happening much in 6e. If 7e goes back to 5e assault out of transports rules then we will see teq return to the meta.

we should get back on topic.

The only transport that Terminators can ride in can already be assaulted out of...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:
MEQ are far superior to TEQ when it comes to durability per point when being shot at.

TEQ are far superor in CC which isn't happening much in 6e. If 7e goes back to 5e assault out of transports rules then we will see teq return to the meta.

we should get back on topic.

The only transport that Terminators can ride in can already be assaulted out of...

If Eldar and MEQ can assault out of rhinos and wave serpents then the meta goes cc crazy. Once the meta goes cc crazy the ability to ignore ap3 ap4 power weapons matters again. Now wer're double off topic with 7e speculation.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm having a lot of trouble fitting in all the Troops I want, plus having points left over for support. I don't know if it's a effect of New Codex Syndrome making my want to try new things, or there's something else going on. Mathematically, there's no reason I shouldn't be able to make my exact army list I used to run, but with some Priests using the points saved on Leman Russ tanks. I think I'm just indecisive.

Just build a hierarchy and then go from there.

Problem is that I am guessing you are trying to fit too many combos into the same list. Which is really easy to do. I have yet to find myself keeping special weapons in a squad.

Biophysical wrote:
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm having a lot of trouble fitting in all the Troops I want, plus having points left over for support. I don't know if it's a effect of New Codex Syndrome making my want to try new things, or there's something else going on. Mathematically, there's no reason I shouldn't be able to make my exact army list I used to run, but with some Priests using the points saved on Leman Russ tanks. I think I'm just indecisive.

That's the issue I've been having. The biggest problem is that there's new stuff you "need", but nothing really got cheaper to be able to take it.

The game I played on Monday I could barely fit in 5 chimeras at 1750. I was using only the cheapest russes too. Between the vendetta's massive point hike, mech infantry getting more expensive, and nothing really getting cheaper than upgrades (which are really easier to justify taking than before, so more points), it's hard to feel like you have as much on the table as you did before. Unless someone comes up some obnoxious killer combo, I think guard will be firmly a "mid-tier" army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Leth wrote:

Problem is that I am guessing you are trying to fit too many combos into the same list. Which is really easy to do. I have yet to find myself keeping special weapons in a squad.

You mean to say you're not running special weapons? I don't understand.

Yep, but the things that were optimal before are not as optimal now, so it doesnt make sense to run them. If you are still running more than 2 vendettas it is probably not as optimal, without buying krak grenades the veterans in chimera only went up 5 points. Personally I think the carapace upgrade is worth it for 15 points so 20 more.

I dont run special weapons because I am finding it better to spend those points else where. I will take a wyvern anyday over 4 plasma guns. One concept I want to test is running units with only a lascannon or Autocannon. In my armies I need more bodies on the table to protect my other assets than I do needing an extra heavy or special weapon.

Why dont you throw up your list as a tactica exercise more so than a critique

 Leth wrote:

Why dont you throw up your list as a tactica exercise more so than a critique

Sure. Still have it in Evernote even.



Went up against a drop pod SW army that had a Whirlwind. Kill points, Dawn of War. He must have heard my roommate talking about how good the DP/DW combo was for him, because he reinvented the wheel on that one. Psykers went one in each IS chimera, and then one in the blob. Blob held down the Aegis with the PCS on the quadgun for the BS4 from the commander on the shots. Chimeras rolled forward to get the infantry in range with everything else shooting around it. The vendetta managed to miss its target the first two times I shot it (pretty bad luck on the die rolls). I'll spare you the full batrep, but I actually held my own pretty solidly until the bottom of the 5th, when he wound up taking 3 more kill points than me. I might have been able to make up to two KP back, but I was poised to lose at least another one or two, and it was getting late in the right, so we called it then and there.

Looking at the list, the camo cloaks and carapace armor on the vets/CCS were expensive, but worth it I think. I made use of the camo cloaks twice on the CCS, and they saved their lives each time. The carapace armor I rolled for frequently, and I think it's an autoinclude now, especially since it got so cheap.

Astropath managed to take out a Lone Wolf that was wrecking my tanks. I was kind of impressed, though I don't know if he's worth his points in a unit already so killy. Priest sat in the blob for a fearless unit. The original idea with that was to make an amazing objective holder. Armored sentinels are nice now for how cheap they are. I feel like the PP/PG idea for IS Chimera squads is too expensive to really be effective, even with some prescience loving. I mean, if you could somehow get them close enough to repeatedly use the guns, it would be more worth it, but as it stands, I think I got maybe one use out of each one. I'd rather have had another squad at that point. I'm actually thinking about only taking 2 special weapons on my Vets now that the Chimera fire points are different.

Your thoughts?

So i have a crazy idea I want to explore. I have now some unused bullgryns and roughriders. I want to make a list using bullgryns/cypher/psychic/priest in one infiltarting squad, deathriders following behind a DKoK Chim w/ dozers in the anoither squad and fill in the blanks from there. I guess it would be AM main and DKoK allies.

Company Commander with T.A.R.T.

Still makes me chuckle...

I'm not sure infiltrate is bestowed upon units that way.

It is allowed in many tournaments - we won't argue it but assume it is

 daedalus wrote:

 Leth wrote:

Why dont you throw up your list as a tactica exercise more so than a critique

Sure. Still have it in Evernote even.

[spoiler]
CCS
- Tactical Autoreliquary of Tyberius
- Carapace armor
- Plasmagun x 3
- Medipack
- Camo Cloaks
- Astropath
- Chimera
- Searchlight

Why do you have three plasma guns in this unit as well as the astropath? While in a chimera you can only fire two things from the hatch

Primaris Psyker x 3

Priest x 1

Platoon Command Squad
- Autocannon
Infantry Squad
- Autocannon
Infantry Squad
- Autocannon

Infantry Squad
- Plasmagun
- Plasma Pistol
- Chimera
- Searchlight
Infantry Squad
- Plasmagun
- Plasma Pistol
- Chimera
- Searchlight

Why are you taking plasma pistols? They are way overpriced for what they do? Would it make more sense to take veterans in a chimera for 10 extra points with the option of carapace?

SWS
- Sniper Rifle x 3

I would be careful with these, they are not really going to do much and are a easy first blood against armies like tau with SMS, or anyone with barrage

Veteran Squad
- Metagun x 3
- Grenadiers
- Camo Cloaks
- Chimera
- Searchlight
I think in general you are gonna want grenadiers more than camo cloaks, especially in a chimera, both is kinda meh

Armored Sentinel
- Plasma Cannon

Armored Sentinel
- Plasma Cannon

Vendetta

Leman Russ Punisher
- Heavy Bolters

Leman Russ Eradicator

Why not take these two as a HQ choice with pask. A regular punisher just doesnt hold a candle to pask and he is worth every point. Especially if you can get prescience on him by throwing one of the primaris in the infantry blob
Aegis Defence Line with Quad-gun

I think that in this list you are getting into the classic trap of over spending on things. I can see an easy 100+ points that you can remove to get more points in. One of the big things with guard is that you are not durable in general, so the more points spend on things that easily die the worse. Spend points on the things that will live, keep the things that will die cheap.

I like it overall however and I think your strategy is sound. I dont see a good way for you to take out enemy heavy armor. You only have 3 melta guns and thats it for what can hurt AV 14.
Any thoughts?

I'm colorblind. For whatever reason, the red coloring against the quote box is actually painful on my eyes to read. I don't mind making the effort, I just like to point it out to spread awareness though.

Why do you have three plasma guns in this unit as well as the astropath? While in a chimera you can only fire two things from the hatch

I'm expecting the chimera to blow up, honestly, or I'm expecting those guys to bail out and then wipe out a squad. In this case, I put them against the side of the board that had a wolf prist, four terminators, and two thunderwolf cavalry. Honestly, I figured the astropath would just suck and die. I was surprised this time. I may go buff heavy on the CCS and just have one plasma and astropath in the future.

Why are you taking plasma pistols? They are way overpriced for what they do? Would it make more sense to take veterans in a chimera for 10 extra points with the option of carapace?

I was trying a theory proposed earlier in this thread (I think by Ailaros). The short range doesn't make up for the lack of firepower. It was experimental and I came to the same conclusion you have.

I would be careful with these, they are not really going to do much and are a easy first blood against armies like tau with SMS, or anyone with barrage

Something else experimental. The argument was that they were the cheapest troop unit you could have next to allying in henchmen. A source of pinning and another unit to have to worry about shooting is nice too. They didn't do much, but for as cheap as they were (and making my points come out even with the searchlights) I figured it was worth it. I'm skeptical of them, but I think they warrant another shot. I might take two next time to see how it goes.

I think in general you are gonna want grenadiers more than camo cloaks, especially in a chimera, both is kinda meh.

I agree, it's just sooo cheap. I'll probably drop a melta next time. I may or may not keep the camo cloaks. I just keep picturing the chimera blowing up and wishing I had the bonus in the crater.

Why not take these two as a HQ choice with pask. A regular punisher just doesnt hold a candle to pask and he is worth every point. Especially if you can get prescience on him by throwing one of the primaris in the infantry blob

I did on the same set of tanks in the first game I played. It was nifty, and he's worth his points, but you need to be able to have the points to begin with. There were things I could have dropped to get them, but I wanted to see how they performed without Pask this time. Pask might be an include for the next one, but I think I'm going to try vanilla russes first.

I think that in this list you are getting into the classic trap of over spending on things. I can see an easy 100+ points that you can remove to get more points in. One of the big things with guard is that you are not durable in general, so the more points spend on things that easily die the worse. Spend points on the things that will live, keep the things that will die cheap.

I like it overall however and I think your strategy is sound. I dont see a good way for you to take out enemy heavy armor. You only have 3 melta guns and thats it for what can hurt AV 14.
Any thoughts?

AV14 isn't really in my meta, or the tournament meta from what I've seen. I'd run it in a heartbeat personally, but until I start seeing it, I'm not really worried about it. I sometimes bring a manticore also, but in this case, I figured between the vendetta and the meltas, if I saw it, I'd have at least SOMETHING to deal with it.