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.

 Sigvatr wrote:
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.

well, apart from 20 shots that are, in essence, S8 to a landraider. but besides that, no, no shots.

Eihnlazer wrote:
landspeeders with flamers take a 100% damage nerf as well, im not complaining though.

If i have to jink i'll just flat out em somewhere they can be of use the next turn.

Indeed, Landspeeders are at the losing end, while Serpents and Annihilation Barges don't lose too much.

Doesn't the doomsday ark still have the broad side guass flayers?

Beyond that though, another thing to consider is that we are leaving out that a penetrating hit is forcing you to snapshot 66% of the time (less for AP1 (33%) or 2(50%).)

So if we look back at this again.

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.

So lets look at the 28% of failed jink saves at AP2 for the lascannon in this case

14% (half) of those results cause you to snapfire anyway, so jinking costs nothing. (reduce 72% by 14 to 58%)
4.7% of the time you die, and thus jinking cost you nothing (if you are not alive snapfiring does not matter.) (redcue 58% by 4.7 to 53.3%)
So you are close to 50-50 for if it is a good idea. Based on that.
If you only have 1 weapon on your skimmer, then another 4.7% needs to be added, because if you lose your weapon, snapfiring is irrelevant (so 48.6%)

Then consider the 28% that you save. Half of that would leave you snapfiring anyway, so eating the damage does not guarantee full shooting.

Essentially of the 56% danger 37.3% leave you snapfiring or dead anyway (which is actually true for any AP value).

That is not to say the free save was not better for offensive power. But it is certainly not cut and dry that current jinking is always bad. The real risk is against glancing hits which don't cause damage rolls.

I would think of it this way, if you are not in cover and if a unit is likely to

a.) Glance you to death (do enough hull points on average to kill your skimmer)
b.) reliably penetrate at all(66-100% of results, may make snap firing irrelevant)

You should jink.


That is not to say you should jink against a single lascannon, but squads with say 5 lascannons, or multiple melta guns. I would jink.

Breng77 wrote:
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.

The thing is, if you're dropping multiple pods, they're probably going to land between the Skimmers . or behind them. or one close to each potential target. So the change may even be implied by the opponent, in which case the big difference between 6th and 7th is 4+ with 25-100% damage reduction for 1T vs 5+ with nothing. I would say that if you're being meltapodded it's probably a good time to Jink and it may even be (not calculated so it remains to be seen) equal to 6th in terms of efficiency - who knows, maybe even better. Without math though... it's probably a wash.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 some bloke wrote:

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.

A naive analysis is an analysis that ignores very obvious factors.
A non-numeric analysis like yours that blatantly ignores points I have explained is of course no better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breng77 wrote:
Doesn't the doomsday ark still have the broad side guass flayers?

Beyond that though, another thing to consider is that we are leaving out that a penetrating hit is forcing you to snapshot 66% of the time (less for AP1 (33%) or 2(50%).)

So if we look back at this again.

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.

So lets look at the 28% of failed jink saves at AP2 for the lascannon in this case

14% (half) of those results cause you to snapfire anyway, so jinking costs nothing. (reduce 72% by 14 to 58%)
4.7% of the time you die, and thus jinking cost you nothing (if you are not alive snapfiring does not matter.) (redcue 58% by 4.7 to 53.3%)
So you are close to 50-50 for if it is a good idea. Based on that.
If you only have 1 weapon on your skimmer, then another 4.7% needs to be added, because if you lose your weapon, snapfiring is irrelevant (so 48.6%)

Then consider the 28% that you save. Half of that would leave you snapfiring anyway, so eating the damage does not guarantee full shooting.

Essentially of the 56% danger 37.3% leave you snapfiring or dead anyway (which is actually true for any AP value).

That is not to say the free save was not better for offensive power. But it is certainly not cut and dry that current jinking is always bad. The real risk is against glancing hits which don't cause damage rolls.

I would think of it this way, if you are not in cover and if a unit is likely to

a.) Glance you to death (do enough hull points on average to kill your skimmer)
b.) reliably penetrate at all(66-100% of results, may make snap firing irrelevant)

You should jink.


That is not to say you should jink against a single lascannon, but squads with say 5 lascannons, or multiple melta guns. I would jink.

Your calculations are wrong.

For the 28% failed jink saves at AP2. 33% not half, cause a snapfire anyway. You can push it from 72% to 63%.
At AP1 this would be 16% or 67% wrong, AP3 is half, 58%.

16.6% is an Explodes result, down to 58%.

Then two separate cases:
Skimmer with 2+ weapons: snapfiring and losing a weapon is worse than just losing a weapon.
Skimmer with 1 weapons: snapfiring is obviously of no consequence, push down to 53.3%

This is different depending on AP values, AP1 rolls +2 and makes Jink a lot more interesting.
On the other hand, you picked AV10, which is really the best case for Jink (interesting too that), the numbers are much worse for AV12.

Pretty epic troll going on right here; I didn't expect this to last beyond page 1

 some bloke wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
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.

well, apart from 20 shots that are, in essence, S8 to a landraider. but besides that, no, no shots.

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhm....

...first of all...you can never shoot both sides at the same enemy. Secondly...what on earth is that Doomsday Ark doing 12'' next to a Land Raider?! Thirdly: you got, at max, 10 shots that hit at 6s...woopdiwoop. About 1-2 hits...1-2 0.17 chances to cause a glance.

Come on. The Doomsday Ark is the worst model in the entire codex and one of the worst models in the entire game.

The kit basically is a Ghost Ark kit with extra parts for custom Sentry Pylons.

morgoth wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
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.

The thing is, if you're dropping multiple pods, they're probably going to land between the Skimmers . or behind them. or one close to each potential target. So the change may even be implied by the opponent, in which case the big difference between 6th and 7th is 4+ with 25-100% damage reduction for 1T vs 5+ with nothing. I would say that if you're being meltapodded it's probably a good time to Jink and it may even be (not calculated so it remains to be seen) equal to 6th in terms of efficiency - who knows, maybe even better. Without math though... it's probably a wash.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 some bloke wrote:

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.

A naive analysis is an analysis that ignores very obvious factors.
A non-numeric analysis like yours that blatantly ignores points I have explained is of course no better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breng77 wrote:
Doesn't the doomsday ark still have the broad side guass flayers?

Beyond that though, another thing to consider is that we are leaving out that a penetrating hit is forcing you to snapshot 66% of the time (less for AP1 (33%) or 2(50%).)

So if we look back at this again.

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.

So lets look at the 28% of failed jink saves at AP2 for the lascannon in this case

14% (half) of those results cause you to snapfire anyway, so jinking costs nothing. (reduce 72% by 14 to 58%)
4.7% of the time you die, and thus jinking cost you nothing (if you are not alive snapfiring does not matter.) (redcue 58% by 4.7 to 53.3%)
So you are close to 50-50 for if it is a good idea. Based on that.
If you only have 1 weapon on your skimmer, then another 4.7% needs to be added, because if you lose your weapon, snapfiring is irrelevant (so 48.6%)

Then consider the 28% that you save. Half of that would leave you snapfiring anyway, so eating the damage does not guarantee full shooting.

Essentially of the 56% danger 37.3% leave you snapfiring or dead anyway (which is actually true for any AP value).

That is not to say the free save was not better for offensive power. But it is certainly not cut and dry that current jinking is always bad. The real risk is against glancing hits which don't cause damage rolls.

I would think of it this way, if you are not in cover and if a unit is likely to

a.) Glance you to death (do enough hull points on average to kill your skimmer)
b.) reliably penetrate at all(66-100% of results, may make snap firing irrelevant)

You should jink.


That is not to say you should jink against a single lascannon, but squads with say 5 lascannons, or multiple melta guns. I would jink.

Your calculations are wrong.

For the 28% failed jink saves at AP2. 33% not half, cause a snapfire anyway. You can push it from 72% to 63%.
At AP1 this would be 16% or 67% wrong, AP3 is half, 58%.

16.6% is an Explodes result, down to 58%.

Then two separate cases:
Skimmer with 2+ weapons: snapfiring and losing a weapon is worse than just losing a weapon.
Skimmer with 1 weapons: snapfiring is obviously of no consequence, push down to 53.3%

This is different depending on AP values, AP1 rolls +2 and makes Jink a lot more interesting.
On the other hand, you picked AV10, which is really the best case for Jink (interesting too that), the numbers are much worse for AV12.

Sorry your math is wrong. The damage chart 1-4 snap fire only, 5 weapon destroyed, 6 immobilized, 7 destroyed.

So at ap 2 you are are at +1 to your roll, so that would be 1-3 or 50%,. So my numbers are right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And I already stated the 2 cases. Snap fire and losing a weapon is worse, if you have multiple weapons. I also did not pick av 10 that is what you picked earlier, so I expanded it. Sure it is not as good for higher av vehicles, so essentially with the higher av your vehicle the less often you will want to jink. It is also situational, if survival trumps shooting at that point you jink.

Breng77 wrote:

Sorry your math is wrong. The damage chart 1-4 snap fire only, 5 weapon destroyed, 6 immobilized, 7 destroyed.

So at ap 2 you are are at +1 to your roll, so that would be 1-3 or 50%,. So my numbers are right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And I already stated the 2 cases. Snap fire and losing a weapon is worse, if you have multiple weapons. I also did not pick av 10 that is what you picked earlier, so I expanded it. Sure it is not as good for higher av vehicles, so essentially with the higher av your vehicle the less often you will want to jink. It is also situational, if survival trumps shooting at that point you jink.

Actually, 1-3 is snap fire, 4 is snap fire + no move, I think that confused me but you're right.
The 56% pen is AV10 against a LasCannon.

I think it would be interesting to do the simulation for AV12 / AV12+ Holo vs "standard threats" including pie plates that do not allow any jink for non-targeted models, etc.

It pretty my hosed my Ravenwing army.... Skimmers and Bikes.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
It pretty my hosed my Ravenwing army.... Skimmers and Bikes.

Basically, everything that is assault or open-topped or Snap Firing anyway is buffed by the 7th Edition Jink.

For the others... it's a matter of comparing the type of damage and related %wrong for Jink, factoring in the number of turns remaining for that unit, and the 50% to 100% relative increase in durability against v6 Jink (50% is from 5+ to 4+, 100% is from 3+ to 2+, for a shrouded or stealth+holo or whatever +2 cover combination) for one turn, weighting likely damage types, etc. etc.

If you want to analyze a unit's value rather than its raw power with the new changes, you will have to first figure out what the new Jink changed exactly for your unit, and then look at the other changes from v7 that would make them more or less relevant.
Some of those changes:

Vehicles are now more resilient
This in turn means that MCs are less relevant than before in comparison to vehicles, and good AT weapons are more relevant
If your bikes or skimmers have meltas, it will weigh in the balance

The game has shifted more towards objectives:
This means that troops are more relevant than before
This in turn implies that non-troops are less relevant than before.

DTs have gained Objective Secured from the troops they transport:
This means that DTs are more relevant than before
This in turn means that anything else is less relevant than before.

If your conclusion is that all of your units are worse in raw power and no more relevant than before, yes you've been hosed

morgoth wrote:

If your conclusion is that all of your units are worse in raw power and no more relevant than before, yes you've been hosed

I'll agree with you here.

and as everything is scoring now (unless you're death company), everything is more relevant now. you don't have to be objective secured to get linebreaker, or score unmanned objectives, or simply prevent other non OS units from securing objectives.

even if we assume that scoring isn't helpful because everyone has it (like legs, for example, no use because almost everyone has them) then the only things that got nerfed are the heavy support tanks for eldar and tau (dark eldar have flicker fields and necrons love snapshooting & can't jink with a monolith). and as they have long range weaponry, you can put them behind some cover and be as good as ever, but now scoring, so better.

so yes, jink has nerfed skimmer gunships which are sat in the open. the simple solution is not to sit in the open, problem solved.

 some bloke wrote:

morgoth wrote:

If your conclusion is that all of your units are worse in raw power and no more relevant than before, yes you've been hosed

I'll agree with you here.

and as everything is scoring now (unless you're death company), everything is more relevant now. you don't have to be objective secured to get linebreaker, or score unmanned objectives, or simply prevent other non OS units from securing objectives.

even if we assume that scoring isn't helpful because everyone has it (like legs, for example, no use because almost everyone has them) then the only things that got nerfed are the heavy support tanks for eldar and tau (dark eldar have flicker fields and necrons love snapshooting & can't jink with a monolith). and as they have long range weaponry, you can put them behind some cover and be as good as ever, but now scoring, so better.

so yes, jink has nerfed skimmer gunships which are sat in the open. the simple solution is not to sit in the open, problem solved.

Actually I got it wrong on the scoring aspect favoring troops:

Before, only troops were scoring, now only troops are Objective Secured.
Before, non-troops were non-scoring, now they are scoring but not secured.

If anything it means that troops are slightly less relevant than before, because they're not the only ones to get objectives anymore, even though they do get them better.
The only clear winner there is the Dedicated Transport, which went from non-scoring to good scoring.

I still disagree on your analysis of the net impact, but since that's mostly about how you intend on using your tools, I guess the best thing is to simply keep the conclusions separate: Fast Skimmer gunboats are worse gunboats, Dedicated Transports are better tools because they're Objective Secured.

You are right on that one Morgoth. Troops couldn't be contested by non troops in 6th anyway for the most part. They got a nerf in 7th, Unless however they are both troops and transport where they got a big buff. The survivable ones the better, having skimmer speed, being able to fly over and through other units and being able to jink AV12 to 3+ with 3 HP and uncontestable is freaking amazing. Biggest buff received in 7th.

You are forgetting that before they could be contested by ANYONE, now they can only be contested by other troops, in addition flying things dont contest/score anymore so it is much harder to steal objectives from troops than anyone else. Big boost to fast OS units.

That is true

In World War 1 the mass introduction of barbed wire, trenches and the machine gun totally changed the battlefield environment. Despite this, incompetent generals still used the old tactic early on of advancing their troops at a walk in line formation. This resulted in horrendous casualties and was all due to the fact that they had tunnel vision from the old strategies and tactics.
What was learned from this lesson of history was that changes to the battlefield environment meant a change in battlefield strategy was needed.
Glean from history what you will...

morgoth wrote:

Ok, let's use more general numbers: every Skimmer loses about 25-70% DPS when Jinking.

That's a HUGE loss.

Even 25% less DPS for 33% Resilience is a bad deal when faced with the decision of Jinking, which as I said implies that a smart enemy will change target as soon as Jink is enabled, thereby limiting its positive effect while not changing anything to drawbacks.

That's because you're not losing just 25-70% DPS for 33% Resilience, as soon as you lose it on one Skimmer, the target moves to another Skimmer, for which you also lose 25% DPS, and so forth.

Not only may it not be worth it at all for any Skimmer losing >50% DPS, it's just horrible for everyone fielding more than one Skimmer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Let's not drift to Eldar or Wave Serpent people, this topic is Jink in 7th Edition, why it's a nerf.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Corollax wrote:
I know you're thinking more about Eldar than Necrons here, but remember that Necrons also get skimmers. And twin-linked tesla loses very little effectiveness when snap-fired.

Not everyone is worse off with the changes.

Everyone with shooting is worse off with the changes, including Necrons, because Jinking means your opponent switches to a non-jinked target that does not have the protection and can still lose 25-70% of its DPS.

A 33% increase in protection on an objective secured unit is actually VERY good trade-off in a game where 11 out of 12 missions are won mostly on objectives.

I can't believe people still argue about the Wave Serpent in a thread that is not about the Wave Serpent.

Your conclusions on the Wave Serpent depend on the use you make of that Wave Serpent, they are not mathematically provable.

Since only half the scenarios use those pesky objectives, and only a few of those objectives will be handled differently in 6th and 7th (i.e. not clearly out of reach for one army / too risky), you cannot say that the Objective Secured on transports is worth the 25-100% DPS nerf when choosing to Jink, especially for all those Skimmers that do not have Objective Secured, from the non-Fast Skimmers who appreciate the new Jink at times to the Fire Prism to WS taken for elite that will not have Objective Secured.

I can find tons of conditions in which raw power will outweigh Objective Secured, even more so in Tactical Objectives games where the opponent takes less optimal positions to try and activate/contest objectives.

Drop it, accept that the new Jink is a nerf for a lot of shooting Skimmers, and take that objective secured talk to another thread, because this one is not about that.

Well, the socalled Serpent nerf is an issue for players who started Eldar in the 6th ed. I used to play Eldar at the competitive level starting the 3rd edition. Retrospectively, the Serpent is still the best transport in the game.

The nerf of Landspeeders is much harder since its armament is not twin linked and heavy flamers become useless after jinking.

morgoth wrote:


I can find tons of conditions in which raw power will outweigh Objective Secured, even more so in Tactical Objectives games where the opponent takes less optimal positions to try and activate/contest objectives.

We are definitely sure that you can. Players with considerably more experience than you, especially players who take part in competitive tournaments, disagree. Objective Secured is a very important ability to have, and in the case of WS, you get OS along with extremely high mobility, high firepower and strong defensive abilities. WS were strong before and got even better in 7th due to the aforementioned changes.

The fact that you're an apologist that refuses to assume mere common sense doesn't really improve your position.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:


The nerf of Landspeeders is much harder since its armament is not twin linked and heavy flamers become useless after jinking.

I have problems remembering the last time I even saw a Landspeeder

I used to play Eldar in 4th and 5th.

In my opinion, the Wave Serpent is infinitely better now because it's got firepower and Laser Lock.

It's a lot worse against Assault, but that's really the whole 6th/7th deal.

Retrospectively, the Serpent has always been very expensive and awesome.

The Landspeeder... when is the last time that thing was good ? It always seemed to me like a Vyper.. expensive, fragile, wtf. maybe when you get an excellent movement phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:

We are definitely sure that you can. Players with considerably more experience than you, especially players who take part in competitive tournaments, disagree. Objective Secured is a very important ability to have, and in the case of WS, you get OS along with extremely high mobility, high firepower and strong defensive abilities. WS were strong before and got even better in 7th due to the aforementioned changes.

I don't know why you choose to underestimate my abilities or why you feel it's necessary to state it.

I don't feel its necessary for me to state my opinion of your abilities or the face you have shown.

Well, in earlier editions fast skimmers could only be hit at 6+ in cc. In the 6th ed this was compensated by making them gun boats and more durable vs shooting.

Landspeeders equipped with assault cannons (rending shots by rolling 6 to hit) were great in the 4th edition.

morgoth wrote:
I can't believe people still argue about the Wave Serpent in a thread that is not about the Wave Serpent.

That's enough hypocrisy out of you for today Mr Thread Derailer.

What's the matter, all those off-topic arguments about Wave Serpents that you started in other peoples threads coming back to bite you? People recognizing you as "that Wave Serpent TFG" and associating it to every post you make?

You have no-one to blame but yourself. Also, Wave Serpent is a skimmer and quite definitely the most relative unit to this thread. Unlike the Riptide thread you derailed and killed for example.

I'm surprised nobody has compiled a detailed report of your trolling/baiting/flaming yet, although I guess it's only a matter of time.

morgoth wrote:


I don't know why you choose to underestimate my abilities or why you feel it's necessary to state it.

I don't feel its necessary for me to state my opinion of your abilities or the face you have shown.

I belittle you because of your terrible behavior and the resulting lack of respect and because your posts lack the perspective more experienced players have.

The thread is about a nerf to shooting skimmers (to begin with: pretty much all skimmers are shooting skimmers) and you only refer to the offensive power the respective vehicles have, aka their potential damage. This is an extremely limited perspective and severly limits your capability to constructively take part in a discussion on said matter. If you want to talk about shooting skimmers, you have to take all points into consideration - and you do not do so. Therefore, your points lack substance and are void.

 Sigvatr wrote:

I belittle you because of your terrible behavior and the resulting lack of respect and because your posts lack the perspective more experienced players have.

The thread is about a nerf to shooting skimmers (to begin with: pretty much all skimmers are shooting skimmers) and you only refer to the offensive power the respective vehicles have, aka their potential damage. This is an extremely limited perspective and severly limits your capability to constructively take part in a discussion on said matter. If you want to talk about shooting skimmers, you have to take all points into consideration - and you do not do so. Therefore, your points lack substance and are void.

I... whatever.

Ok--let's get the thread back on topic (and more objective) please--consider it a general warning for all involved---next alert/inappropriate post gets a vacation from the thread.

Ryan