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.

 some bloke wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Then you take my Eldar Mech, I take your army, I force you to jink all of your things, and I table you.

I'll take that challenge up. you bring my orks, and I'll bring mech eldar. here's how it'll go:

Morgoth: "My lootas are shooting at that waveserpent, do you want to jink?"

me: "Well, as I'm a clever player and have put my vehicle in cover behind a ruin, no, I don't need to."

and that response would be the same regardless of what army you brought against me if I had mech eldar.

so in reality, it's not a nerf, it's just changed, and you have to put some thought into your actions rather than relying on simply being able to survive anything by virtue of being a few feet off the ground.

and I have played my armies against mech eldar, and forced all 4 waveserpents to jink for the first 3 turns. by turn 4, the rest of his army (oh look, list synergy rather than reliance on one type of unit) had focussed on the lootas and the threat was gone! turn 4 he still had 2 waveserpents left which promptly ruined me. and I only killed 2 of them because I had a trukk-rush and charged in with powerklaws and 44 S4 attacks. so please don't claim that jinking will cause you to be tabled. it's a ludicrous assumption based on people trying to run a 6th edition army in 7th, with 6th edition tactics. any normal vehicle left in the open has less chance of survival than a skimmer. a skimmer in 6th in the open has less chance of survival than a skimmer in 7th. it isn't a nerf. in terms of survivability, skimmers are twice as durable than non-skimmers. but a skimmer in cover is as durable as a non-skimmer in cover.

tactics dear boy, tactics.

I guess that if you're playing a city in ruins table, you do have ruins left right and center.. I also think that would favor Orks immensely because no LoS = no damage until it's too late. You don't need more than 1000 points of Orks in assault to take down any 2000 points Eldar army.

If you play Orks and cannot make contact before the end of turn 3 on a 48"x72" table, well I don't know, but I think your Lootas Jinking all 4 WS for three turns gave you enough chances already.

You claim tactical superiority, yet you haven't ever played against me, and your read of the BRB did not uncover how important that nerf to Shooting Skimmers was.

The only argument you've put forward so far is "It doesn't matter if they're in cover". I think everybody agrees on that. Do you have anything else ?

oh I made contact on turn 2. the fact that I was against an eldar player who wasn't relying on waveserpents but also had a seer council and 2 wraithknights was what won it for him.

the fact that I was shooting his serpents and was lucky to get 1 hullpoint of damage through if he jinked meant that jink was worth it.

I claim tactical superiority simply because we are in the tactics forum, and all you've done is complain about how skimmers have been nerfed because their jink makes them snapfire (we won't mention that they no longer have to move to get it or that it's 4+ not 5+, though, that would detract from your argument). I have offered solutions. you based your entire strategy of tabling a mech eldar army on making me jink - I used an incredibly simple tactic to make this technique useless.

and thinking that I would be stupid enough to sit still whilst your orks were charging towards me... well, I don't know. perhaps you perceive that as an ork player I would have no Idea how to use skimmers properly, and would believe that they would magically stand up to assault.

The very act of jinking is actually liberating to a skimmer. don't believe me? here's the scenario:

1: orks fired some shots, waveserpent doesn't jink and survives with 1 HP left. it now finds itself starting the turn with orks up close, and full BS. it has the choice of staying still and firing everything, moving back 6" and firing 2 guns at full BS and 1 gun snapping, or moving back 12" and snapshooting everything. moving back will likely see it survive another turn, but will limit its damage potential. staying still will see it causing damage but being wrecked by orks. moving 6" back is a gamble on charge range.

2: orks fire at the waveserpent, it jinks and only loses 1 hullpoint. it finds itself starting the turn with orks close up. as it is already snapfiring, it moves 12" backward and fires snapshots, and survives until its next turn.

whilst I do appreciate that your skimmers are no longer godlike vehicles of nigh-untouchable all-moving all-firing terrain-ignoring super-flat-out-ing-ness, they aren't worse than before, because now they're all that, but have to choose between all-shooting and nigh-untouchable, and get the ability to park next to an objective and steal it off any non-troop enemy.

1. I'm not complaining. I'm stating a fact.

2. On a 48" x 72" table, with 2WK 4WS and 1 SeerStar, you're playing at 2500 points, half the table is full of orks, there is no avoiding anything if the Ork player doesn't want you to.

3. Go read the BRB, a WS shoots 2 weapons at full BS having moved 12", 3 if moving 6". Once again, on a 48"x72" table, 7 inch length WS and a 24" deployment zone, how many times do you think a WS can move back 12" ?

4. You don't seem to know the rules that relate to this situation. Why do you discuss the researched conclusion of someone else then ? Do you hold your opinion as more valuable than someone else's research and logical proof ?

Because of the last couple of posts I have a very graphic image of Orks swarming through a ruined city like the one in The Last Of Us, just kicking in doors and Skirmish fighting a platoon of Eldar Wave Serpents rolling through the streets, Ork mobs dragging 5 man emplacements of Dire Avengers out of their stationed vantage points in building rooms overlooking the street, while Lootas shoot down at the Serpents from window to window, and a pair of Wraith Knights just strolling through the Serpent column, evaporating anything Green that spends too long scrambling to its next vantage point.


I now want to build ruined-cityscape themed Orks.

Orks will do that to your brain.

I've been playing 40 k for 19 years and you think I don't know how to play this game? Sounds to me like you can't understand my tactics so you continue to go on and on about jink saves being worse when they are clearly not. I think the problem here is you haven't had the chance to play versus someone who knows how to run an eldar army without having to rely on serpent spam. When you do, you will find that you won't be able to make all of the skimmers jink. You won't get close enough to assult, even with Orks, and you won't table the Eldar player.

Roadkill Zombie wrote:
I've been playing 40 k for 19 years and you think I don't know how to play this game? Sounds to me like you can't understand my tactics so you continue to go on and on about jink saves being worse when they are clearly not. I think the problem here is you haven't had the chance to play versus someone who knows how to run an eldar army without having to rely on serpent spam. When you do, you will find that you won't be able to make all of the skimmers jink. You won't get close enough to assult, even with Orks, and you won't table the Eldar player.

Very interesting opinion.

Do you have any facts or researched conclusions you would like to bring to this discussion ?

And somehow Morgoth got this back onto wave Serpents.... Didn't also start a thread for that....

Yes, Jinking is a nerf for offensive potential for a shooting skimmer, but while Jinking the unit gains increased resilience and can Jink turn 1. There are many fast Skimmers who benefit immensely, and the seem to get little mention. The biggest is the Devilfish, doesn't rely on shooting, and Jonks for a 3+. As a pire gunboat platform it is a moderate nerf, that can easily be mitigated by good play and utilizing cover.


Taking Jink as a whole, we should mention flyers as well, I can't think of a single flyer that thinks 7th Ed Jink is a nerf.

Morgoth, insulting anyone who disagrees with you, or makes a valid argument on using cover for Wave serpents is not acceptable. Just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make them a bad player. The GT winners I know unanimously agree Wave Serpents were buffed as awhile, despite their situational nerf.

The serial shooting at subsequent Serpents to force jinks has drawbacks as well.

#1 It's common strategy to focus fire on available targets to actually damage them. Tickling each skimmer to force a jink seems like a sure way not to kill anything while still allowing them some shooting.

#2 Most players consolidate their primary anti tank weapons to increase point efficiency. This means they are more likely to have fewer stronger primary anti tank units instead of multiple weaker units and this gives fewer opportunities to serially shoot each un-jinked skimmer.

#3 Players shouldn't be jinking the odd anti tank shoot fired by non primary anti tank weapons such as plasma guns. They do not represent a sufficient level of risk. This goes along with #2 above.

In my view, building an army to exploit the perceived nerf results in an overall weaker army than one that was built "normally"

 Zagman wrote:
And somehow Morgoth got this back onto wave Serpents.... Didn't also start a thread for that....

Yes, Jinking is a nerf for offensive potential for a shooting skimmer, but while Jinking the unit gains increased resilience and can Jink turn 1. There are many fast Skimmers who benefit immensely, and the seem to get little mention. The biggest is the Devilfish, doesn't rely on shooting, and Jonks for a 3+. As a pire gunboat platform it is a moderate nerf, that can easily be mitigated by good play and utilizing cover.


Taking Jink as a whole, we should mention flyers as well, I can't think of a single flyer that thinks 7th Ed Jink is a nerf.

Morgoth, insulting anyone who disagrees with you, or makes a valid argument on using cover for Wave serpents is not acceptable. Just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make them a bad player. The GT winners I know unanimously agree Wave Serpents were buffed as awhile, despite their situational nerf.

1. This thread is about Shooting Skimmers.
2. You have yet to bring a researched conclusion that backs your conclusion that Jink v7 is not a nerf to shooting skimmers
3. You can make a thread about the units that benefitted from the Jink Change, from open-topped skimmer Transports to Devilfish (not sure you're right on that, they also tend to fire at people) and others. It may actually help a lot of people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 minigun762 wrote:
The serial shooting at subsequent Serpents to force jinks has drawbacks as well.

#1 It's common strategy to focus fire on available targets to actually damage them. Tickling each skimmer to force a jink seems like a sure way not to kill anything while still allowing them some shooting.

#2 Most players consolidate their primary anti tank weapons to increase point efficiency. This means they are more likely to have fewer stronger primary anti tank units instead of multiple weaker units and this gives fewer opportunities to serially shoot each un-jinked skimmer.

#3 Players shouldn't be jinking the odd anti tank shoot fired by non primary anti tank weapons such as plasma guns. They do not represent a sufficient level of risk. This goes along with #2 above.

In my view, building an army to exploit the perceived nerf results in an overall weaker army than one that was built "normally"

Very good.

#1 > It used to be common strategy, right now logic dictates that forcing Skimmers to Jink results in less damage output and the exact same number of shots to kill them all.
#2 > Considering most Skimmers have AV12 front, to the notable exception of our new overlords, I think you can find at least 4 S6+ shooting units in every competitive army list. It may be a strong argument against army lists that only have a couple very dangerous AV threats like say 4 Lascannons on the same platform or a unit of Fire Dragons in Melta range. Those are real world cases where the new Jink is slightly better than the old jink, undeniably better for resilience but still at a cost rather than free.
#3 > You're perfectly correct, and that means that they will not have any protection against that "not-so-dangerous-but-potentially-deadly" shooting that can be found in abundance in most competitive army lists. Where before they had a 5+ or better, for free.

I think your arguments are very good, taking them to their conclusion gives us an even better view of the big picture.

 Zagman wrote:

Morgoth, insulting anyone who disagrees with you, or makes a valid argument on using cover for Wave serpents is not acceptable. Just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make them a bad player. The GT winners I know unanimously agree Wave Serpents were buffed as awhile, despite their situational nerf.

Wave Serpents gained a massive buff, not because of the changes to Jink, but because of them now being (super) scoring.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

Morgoth, insulting anyone who disagrees with you, or makes a valid argument on using cover for Wave serpents is not acceptable. Just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make them a bad player. The GT winners I know unanimously agree Wave Serpents were buffed as awhile, despite their situational nerf.

Wave Serpents gained a massive buff, not because of the changes to Jink, but because of them now being (super) scoring.

Interesting opinion.
How does that affect the game compared to v6 ? Under which conditions does it make a difference ? What difference does it make ? How does that balance out against the Jink nerf ?
This thread is about the Jink nerf, not about Wave Serpents.

This whole thread is reminding me of a lovely proverb:

"Never try to argue with an imbecile, he'll only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

Every attempt has been made to show that the change to jink is an improvement or at minimum a nominal change to the tactically minded General, but it will only fall on deaf ears.

Morgoth doesn't want a discussion,

He wants people to agree and validate him.

morgoth wrote:

You're still wrong... let me explain:

44% of the time there is no danger, so Jinking is a bad thing.
56% of the time however, there is danger, so Jinking should be a good thing.
Unfortunately, since Jink is considered a 50% save, Jink will only protect you 28% of the time (half of 56%) and not protect you the other 28% (half of 56%), which means you took a debuff for no reason.

Together, Jink is a bad idea 72% of the time because it results in getting a debuff although danger is not real 44% of the time or danger could not be avoided another 28% of the time.

Ahh, this way of explaining it made more sense to me. Thanks for being patient and going through that math with me a couple times.

morgoth wrote:

How does that affect the game compared to v6 ? Under which conditions does it make a difference ? What difference does it make ? How does that balance out against the Jink nerf ?
This thread is about the Jink nerf, not about Wave Serpents.

Right, Jink changes didn't affect Wave Serpents at all. What a naive assumption!

 Arrias117 wrote:
This whole thread is reminding me of a lovely proverb:

"Never try to argue with an imbecile, he'll only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

Every attempt has been made to show that the change to jink is an improvement or at minimum a nominal change to the tactically minded General, but it will only fall on deaf ears.

Morgoth doesn't want a discussion,

He wants people to agree and validate him.

Given such proverbs can be applied at will and to anyone, I guess we should stick to facts and logic.

Do you have any fact or logic underpinning a conclusion that has anything to do with the topic of this thread ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:

morgoth wrote:

How does that affect the game compared to v6 ? Under which conditions does it make a difference ? What difference does it make ? How does that balance out against the Jink nerf ?
This thread is about the Jink nerf, not about Wave Serpents.

Right, Jink changes didn't affect Wave Serpents at all. What a naive assumption!

Read before you post, that reply is to a post that started talking about Wave Serpents and the Objective Secured change that supposedly in the mind of some people balances out the Jink nerf, which is actually the topic of this thread, not the Wave Serpent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kooshlord wrote:

morgoth wrote:

You're still wrong... let me explain:

44% of the time there is no danger, so Jinking is a bad thing.
56% of the time however, there is danger, so Jinking should be a good thing.
Unfortunately, since Jink is considered a 50% save, Jink will only protect you 28% of the time (half of 56%) and not protect you the other 28% (half of 56%), which means you took a debuff for no reason.

Together, Jink is a bad idea 72% of the time because it results in getting a debuff although danger is not real 44% of the time or danger could not be avoided another 28% of the time.

Ahh, this way of explaining it made more sense to me. Thanks for being patient and going through that math with me a couple times.

I guess I could explain it better the first time. Thanks for trying to understand.

morgoth wrote:

Read before you post, that reply is to a post that started talking about Wave Serpents and the Objective Secured change that supposedly in the mind of some people balances out the Jink nerf, which is actually the topic of this thread, not the Wave Serpent.

Think before you post, that is the exact point. When we're talking about balance, we're talking about more than minor parts of a model. The jink change is a good buff to the WS because it allows it to rush for objective grabbing and get a higher amount of safety compared to what it got before - you could even sit more reliably on objectives now.

morgoth wrote:

Roadkill Zombie wrote:
I've been playing 40 k for 19 years and you think I don't know how to play this game? Sounds to me like you can't understand my tactics so you continue to go on and on about jink saves being worse when they are clearly not. I think the problem here is you haven't had the chance to play versus someone who knows how to run an eldar army without having to rely on serpent spam. When you do, you will find that you won't be able to make all of the skimmers jink. You won't get close enough to assult, even with Orks, and you won't table the Eldar player.

Very interesting opinion.

Do you have any facts or researched conclusions you would like to bring to this discussion ?

I already did. You chose to ignore it. That doesn't mean what I said was wrong. Then you chose to take it to a personal level by claiming that because i have apparently never faced an opponent who shoots only enough stuff at my skimmers to make them jink, but not enough to destroy them that somehow that makes me auto lose so obviously i must not know how to play this game.

So, I refuted your claims. Now, are you done with your silly personal attacks so you can get on with the thread topic?

 Sigvatr wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Read before you post, that reply is to a post that started talking about Wave Serpents and the Objective Secured change that supposedly in the mind of some people balances out the Jink nerf, which is actually the topic of this thread, not the Wave Serpent.

Think before you post, that is the exact point. When we're talking about balance, we're talking about more than minor parts of a model. The jink change is a good buff to the WS because it allows it to rush for objective grabbing and get a higher amount of safety compared to what it got before - you could even sit more reliably on objectives now.

Off-topic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Roadkill Zombie wrote:

I already did. You chose to ignore it. That doesn't mean what I said was wrong.

You quoted personal experience, I don't see how anyone could say that's wrong.

I'm looking for facts, logic, statistics, reasoning.

If you have anything like that, it could shed some light on the inadequacies of the logic and reasoning I've used to come to this conclusion.

morgoth wrote:

It's a nerf to 1 round of shooting if you make use of it.
If you don't make use of it, you have the same damage output as in 6th edition and no Jink save.
If you make use of it, you have 0-75% of your damage output, and a slightly better Jink save.
If you make use of it, you have 100% chance that your opponent will target another unit because he knows you won't be doing much next turn with that one.

It's not a nerf to one round, if the improved save keeps you alive.
If you died with the 5+ cover, or if you died with the no cover for being hit turn 1, then the new Jink rules is a billion times better. Please resolve this math:
8+D6 snap shots divided by ZERO equals what %?

You also do not have a 100% chance the opponent will target another unit. If you jink, and I score 2 hull points of damage, I may be inclined to go for the kill against the jinking serpent, vs try to make another jink. One dead forever is often better than 2 jinking now.

-Matt

Been following this for a while. This thread has thoroughly convinced me that jink is fantastic, and that my serpents are better than ever. My darkshroud also loves this stuff, considering it is just there to block charges and provide cover. I can't wait till I am forced to jink again, hell I might just jink because It is too much fun.

One MAJOR thing nobody has addressed is that you can jink while immobolized. This is kind of a big deal...

morgoth wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Read before you post, that reply is to a post that started talking about Wave Serpents and the Objective Secured change that supposedly in the mind of some people balances out the Jink nerf, which is actually the topic of this thread, not the Wave Serpent.

Think before you post, that is the exact point. When we're talking about balance, we're talking about more than minor parts of a model. The jink change is a good buff to the WS because it allows it to rush for objective grabbing and get a higher amount of safety compared to what it got before - you could even sit more reliably on objectives now.

Off-topic.

I am glad to see that you agree with me and admit having been wrong.

I think the mistake in the idea that Jink is a definitive nerf to anything is that there are assumptions in this argument.

Assumption 1.) I have multiple dangerous anti-tank units. The argument of "you jink, then I shoot something else" relies on being able to bring guns to bear on that something else. The example given was I shoot lascannon, you jink, I shoot lascannon, you jink, I shoot lascannon, you jink. Assumes that you have a bunch of seperate lascannons. Which while not impossible it is not always the case.

Assumption 2.) All your dangerous anti-tank threats have range to multiple vehicles. What if you are drop podding in Melta guns, they may not have the ability to reach all those skimmers, certainly not in melta range.

Assumption 3.) I haven't used skimmers to give cover to other skimmers. People do this all the time with smoke launchers, put a vehicle in front for cover, then jink if it is shot at, while the others get cover from the front vehicle.

Assumption 4.) There are no targets that require snap firing anyway. Oh I jinked last turn, guess I'll shoot that flyer.

Assumption 5.) No unit is more dangerous than a single lascannon. Using Lootas since they were brought up. Say a squad of 15. Well that could be 45 shots (do you roll shots before or after jink?). With 6e jink that is a dead Av12 or less skimmer almost every time, even with old jink. Now there is a reasonable chance that if you jink you survive (average 2.5 hull points of damage to AV 12.


Also not ever skimmer is fast, so moving meant possibly giving up shots to snap fire last edition anyway, now I can stay put, and still benefit from a jink save if needed, and if not, I fire everything at full bs.

Is it a small nerf, probably, but only because you actually need to make a choice about its use. Single lascannon, you weigh the importance of the skimmer and what it is going to do next turn and roll the dice.

 HawaiiMatt wrote:

It's not a nerf to one round, if the improved save keeps you alive.
If you died with the 5+ cover, or if you died with the no cover for being hit turn 1, then the new Jink rules is a billion times better. Please resolve this math:
8+D6 snap shots divided by ZERO equals what %?

You also do not have a 100% chance the opponent will target another unit. If you jink, and I score 2 hull points of damage, I may be inclined to go for the kill against the jinking serpent, vs try to make another jink. One dead forever is often better than 2 jinking now.
-Matt

Divided by zero = +infinite, that's a really big number, I doubt you can get that kind of firepower on the table though.

If you died for rolling a 4, which would have kept you alive with the new Jink, and happens in 16% of the cases where you get shot and choose to Jink, the new Jink is better.
The chances of dying of a single shot (not even hit) of anti-tank weapons are relatively slim though, so you would have to calculate those chances, multiply that by 1 sixth and then consider the relative probability of that situation (jink being necessary, deciding to jink, etc.) happening.
The chances of losing 25-100% of the Skimmer's damage output in case of Jinking are of 100%.

Now, if you died for not rolling, which happens when you choose not to Jink, the v6 Jink would have protected you in 33% of those cases.

For first turn, as has been discussed in the OP, worst case defensive deployment scenario has two Skimmers in LoS, with the possibility of 4+ jink and loss of two skimmer's damage output vs the possibility of no Jink and no loss of damage output.
If you assume that there would be enough firepower to take down the two Skimmers with v6 Jink, it's also likely that with Jink, one of them still dies, and the other has reduced damage output, a third may even have been targeted because causing Jinks is a tactic now.

If you assume that there would be enough firepower to take down just one Skimmer with v6 Jink, v7 Jink wil lleave you with a half-dead WS, and two reduced damage output WS for less than the total, which results in less alpha strike than v6 Jink.

As I said in the OP, it is clear that in that case, worst case defensive deployment, the new Jink is a win.

On average, most weapons do not do one Hull Point damage per shot, it is far more likely that the Jink will be useless, as has been demonstrated with the statistics of firing a LasCannon at a Skimmer.

One dead now is not always worse than two Jinking, especially not for combos that need Alpha.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breng77 wrote:
I think the mistake in the idea that Jink is a definitive nerf to anything is that there are assumptions in this argument.

Assumption 1.) I have multiple dangerous anti-tank units. The argument of "you jink, then I shoot something else" relies on being able to bring guns to bear on that something else. The example given was I shoot lascannon, you jink, I shoot lascannon, you jink, I shoot lascannon, you jink. Assumes that you have a bunch of seperate lascannons. Which while not impossible it is not always the case.

Assumption 2.) All your dangerous anti-tank threats have range to multiple vehicles. What if you are drop podding in Melta guns, they may not have the ability to reach all those skimmers, certainly not in melta range.

Assumption 3.) I haven't used skimmers to give cover to other skimmers. People do this all the time with smoke launchers, put a vehicle in front for cover, then jink if it is shot at, while the others get cover from the front vehicle.

Assumption 4.) There are no targets that require snap firing anyway. Oh I jinked last turn, guess I'll shoot that flyer.

Assumption 5.) No unit is more dangerous than a single lascannon. Using Lootas since they were brought up. Say a squad of 15. Well that could be 45 shots (do you roll shots before or after jink?). With 6e jink that is a dead Av12 or less skimmer almost every time, even with old jink. Now there is a reasonable chance that if you jink you survive (average 2.5 hull points of damage to AV 12.


Also not ever skimmer is fast, so moving meant possibly giving up shots to snap fire last edition anyway, now I can stay put, and still benefit from a jink save if needed, and if not, I fire everything at full bs.

Is it a small nerf, probably, but only because you actually need to make a choice about its use. Single lascannon, you weigh the importance of the skimmer and what it is going to do next turn and roll the dice.

1) A competitive list rarely has less than three serious AT threats, and some mixed threats.
2) If you are drop-podding meltas, it's unlikely that you're short on total AT threats.
3) Of course, but that's having cover, and has been discussed and acknowledged in the OP. When Jink does not matter, there is indeed no difference.
4) Very true, flyers are a silver lining. It certainly reduces the total impact of the nerf in some situations.
5) Very well, bring other possible enemies that we can figure out how that changes.


I think you underestimate the importance of this nerf:

If being behind cover is a ton better than being in the open, where a Jink will reduce you to useless, then you have to be in cover, and have lost most of your mobility.
In addition, in every case where you choose not to jink, you effectively lose a 5+ cover save that v6 granted for free (to fast skimmers).

So we are on to shooting fast skimmers now?

1.) Plenty of competitive lists have less than 3 serious RANGED, anti tank threats. If your threats are short ranged, you lose the option of. Well I'll just shoot that other target instead, because you may not be in range to do so.

2.)See 1. Sure you are not light on total anti-tank. You are low on long range. So you may not have many options for your anti-tank to change targets once commited. Also if pods go first jink is better now.

3.)But jink does matter, because the save from jink is better than it used to be, so using that front skimmer for cover means you have one skimmer with good cover screening for the others.

4.) Yup, flyers, FMCs, Invisibility, moving a non-fast skimmer, (like an annhilation barge or ghost ark) 12" etc. There are things you can do.

Other possible enemies. SO lets look at a AV10, against say long fangs with 5 lascannons. So there is a 1.7% chance that the squad will not penetrate at all, and the squad averages 2.8 Pens.

So without jinking that is almost any skimmer dead, drops to 1.4 pens with jink. So I would say jink is the right idea.

I will also say that skimmers being scoring and denial, and some having Objective secured, is a larger buff than Jink is a nerf.

What I'm seeing concerning new jink is that peoples main view of it as a buff is that it works if you don't move.

can I get someone who does good mathhammer in here to check this over please:

the survivability of a generic AV12 skimmer with jink on the first turn, going second, deployed as far forward in an "I don't care about cover I can jink" position.

there is a 50% chance of night fighting.

a BS3 lascannon shoots at 24" range, so the skimmer gets stealth due to night fighting. these remain the same through both editions.

so we have a 50% chance to hit, followed by a 50% chance to penetrate - as it's a single shot we'll ignore a glance, as it doesn't have much of an effect.

so far a 25% chance of getting a penetrating hit.

now, in 6th edition, jink requires that you move so you don't get it. so 83% of that 25% goes through, as stealth gives you a 6+.
result in 6th edition: 20.83% of a penetrating hit. so 5 BS3 lascannons and it's going through.

over to 7th edition, jink doesn't require that you move. so if you don't jink, you have the same odds of survival - 20.83%.

if you do jink, you have a 3+ save due to night fighting. so you have 33.3% of that 25% is getting through, which is 0.083%, meaning you need 12 BS3 lascannons to get a penetrating hit.

so by this math, if you're night fighting and going second, jink is 2.4 times better than in 6th.

if you don't night-fight, in 6th you have a 25% chance of a penetrating hit on turn 1, in 7th a mere 12.5%. so only twice as good.

so averaging for the 50% chance of night fighting, it's 2.2 times better for keeping your tanks alive to be able to do anything at all in the game, ever.

Breng77 wrote:
So we are on to shooting fast skimmers now?

1.) Plenty of competitive lists have less than 3 serious RANGED, anti tank threats. If your threats are short ranged, you lose the option of. Well I'll just shoot that other target instead, because you may not be in range to do so.

2.)See 1. Sure you are not light on total anti-tank. You are low on long range. So you may not have many options for your anti-tank to change targets once commited. Also if pods go first jink is better now.

3.)But jink does matter, because the save from jink is better than it used to be, so using that front skimmer for cover means you have one skimmer with good cover screening for the others.

4.) Yup, flyers, FMCs, Invisibility, moving a non-fast skimmer, (like an annhilation barge or ghost ark) 12" etc. There are things you can do.

Other possible enemies. SO lets look at a AV10, against say long fangs with 5 lascannons. So there is a 1.7% chance that the squad will not penetrate at all, and the squad averages 2.8 Pens.

So without jinking that is almost any skimmer dead, drops to 1.4 pens with jink. So I would say jink is the right idea.

I will also say that skimmers being scoring and denial, and some having Objective secured, is a larger buff than Jink is a nerf.

1) I don't think them being ranged matters a whole lot, and unless you clump them all in one spot the options are on the table.
2) =1
3) Don't mix points !
4) A few more. nice one.

Run the numbers for the Long Fangs against AV10/12/13 12 Holo and then we can discuss the conclusion if you'd like.

This thread is not about the Wave Serpent, there's another thread for that if you want.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 some bloke wrote:
What I'm seeing concerning new jink is that peoples main view of it as a buff is that it works if you don't move.

can I get someone who does good mathhammer in here to check this over please:

the survivability of a generic AV12 skimmer with jink on the first turn, going second, deployed as far forward in an "I don't care about cover I can jink" position.

there is a 50% chance of night fighting.

a BS3 lascannon shoots at 24" range, so the skimmer gets stealth due to night fighting. these remain the same through both editions.

so we have a 50% chance to hit, followed by a 50% chance to penetrate - as it's a single shot we'll ignore a glance, as it doesn't have much of an effect.

so far a 25% chance of getting a penetrating hit.

now, in 6th edition, jink requires that you move so you don't get it. so 83% of that 25% goes through, as stealth gives you a 6+.
result in 6th edition: 20.83% of a penetrating hit. so 5 BS3 lascannons and it's going through.

over to 7th edition, jink doesn't require that you move. so if you don't jink, you have the same odds of survival - 20.83%.

if you do jink, you have a 3+ save due to night fighting. so you have 33.3% of that 25% is getting through, which is 0.083%, meaning you need 12 BS3 lascannons to get a penetrating hit.

so by this math, if you're night fighting and going second, jink is 2.4 times better than in 6th.

if you don't night-fight, in 6th you have a 25% chance of a penetrating hit on turn 1, in 7th a mere 12.5%. so only twice as good.

so averaging for the 50% chance of night fighting, it's 2.2 times better for keeping your tanks alive to be able to do anything at all in the game, ever.

The problem is that you start from the assumption that Jinking is free, which makes it a simple survival statistics calculation, in which case the new Jink is simply 4+ over 5+ yay win.
It's not free, meaning there is a cost to it, meaning the opponent will seek to maximize those costs, which doesn't result in simple things like "twice as good", 2.2 times better and other conclusions.
There is some value in evaluating more the real impact of the first turn Jink, but it's far from being as great as per your naive analysis.

You missed that he was talking about turn 1 if you had yet to move so no jink at all in 6E.

as for My stuff.

1.) It still matters because if they were dispersed you were shooting multiple targets anyway, so the "you jink I change: think still is irrelevant in that scenario. Now if you jink with everything the result might be the same, but it is no longer a choice.

morgoth wrote:
as per your naive analysis.

oooh, and you were so close to having a civilised debate. shame on you morgoth, you're letting the side down.


I agree that snapfiring after jinking is worse than not snapfiring after jinking. however that is the only thing that's worse from jink.

What got better:
can now jink if immobilised
can now jink on turn 1
jink is a 4+ not a 5+
you can now jink if you don't move (big for a doomsday ark I can tell you, always had to buy them a skyshield)

what stayed the same:
shooting a skimmer behind cover still uses the cover save

what got worse:
you have to snapfire afterwards.

talk about suing superman because he hurt your hand when he was saving your life.

Eh....the Doomsday Ark was absolute trash before and it still is..absolute trash. If you jink with a Doomsday Ark now, you cannot fire ANY weapon as you can only Snap Fire...and blast weapons cannot be snapfired.