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.

Personally, if I saw someone running some insane medly of crons, nids, and marines without being a really fething cool conversion/counts as army, I'd cringe. But whatever boats their float I suppose.

Akiasura wrote:
There is no such consensus. People all have different ideas of how good it is, many have no experience with it.

There may not be a concensus on precisely how undercosted the WK is. There is a concensus that the WK is undercosted.

My point is this; people all have different ideas on what the right cost for a unit is. This has been true for every op unit. Go back several pages and you will see pages of such discussion for the riptide.
You can't say there is a consensus at all. Saying it's at least X isn't helpful, it needs to be a number so the eldar player can build a list.

Go with the majority vote of those persons who play the game and are widely experienced with the different codices. I didn't make up "undercosted by 50 points." That's something that I read in other dakka threads.

Either you point out such a consensus, or you admit such a consensus doesn't exist and move on.

You are committing Loki's wager. Your reasoning is fallacious.

It's not about the codex, I'm talking about a single unit. This discussion has become about pretty much one unit. I'm asking how to fix a bad unit, which I'm betting will prove much harder then nerfing a good one.

For the record, I wouldn't call the chaos marine codex good at anything.

I played a game against someone who fielded three tanks that shot pie plates across the map. On turn 1.

Anyway...I don't know. I'm not familiar with the chaos marines codex. I don't know what a reasonable player-based solution would be. But I am sure that there is one.

Traditio wrote:

Game breakingly bad? I don't know. Part of a standard internet list? Yes...yes they were.

Standard internet list?! They were a troop option! With an entire supplement dedicated to them almost.
And are you now implying I just copy and pasted my list?

Yes. Because nobody played those in 6th edition!

Spiritseers? Only useful to field wraiths. The Farseer was FAR more common. I had a wave serpent because it was the only transport for wraithguard.
I had a jetbike squad because I didn't have very mobile troop options in an objective game.
What do you suggest I field then?

I don't think that's necessary. Just figure out what you think is an appropriate points cost for your units and build accordingly. You're playing an 1850 points casual game? Take 1500-1600 points. I will grant you this: wraith armies are cool, and it would be a shame if people didn't play them.

I paid a lot of money for a BRB and codex and supplement that lasted less than 2 years each. Why should I figure an appropriate point cost? Didn't GW get enough of my money for me to play a fun game? No, seriously. After all the time and money I put into this game. Do I not deserve that?

No. I have no idea what your character is. "Who am I to judge?"

Then why are you so adamant that I am TFG. Every description you gave, I fit apparently. Now I want to know, WHO are you to judge me?

Fortunately for everyone, there's a whole subforum for proposed rules.

Even more fortunate is there's already a thread for discussing balance issues with the WK.

It should be very easy for you to find posts on dakka declaring that the WK is undercosted by exactly 50 points then, if there are so many.
Again, do not move the goal posts around.


Oh I'm aware. I was actually emulating something you've done several times in this thread, and was curious to see how you would respond. I'm glad you're aware of it and aren't committing it out of ignorance then.


I'm not sure what the tank comment is about...are you implying such a unit is in the chaos marine codex? It isnt.

Savageconvoy wrote:Standard internet list?! They were a troop option!

They were a troop option if you ran spirit seers. As per the standard internet list.

And are you now implying I just copy and pasted my list?

I don't know. Did you?

Spiritseers? Only useful to field wraiths...I had a wave serpent because it was the only transport for wraithguard.

Yes. As per the standard internet list. Add 2 wraithknights and you've got it!

I had a jetbike squad because I didn't have very mobile troop options in an objective game.
What do you suggest I field then?

Space marines.

Or how about orks?

But I kid. I don't know...as I said, I think that wraith armies can be cool. They just so happen to be OP and undercosted. Run a wraith list, but run fewer of them? I mean, that's one option.

I paid a lot of money for a BRB and codex and supplement that lasted less than 2 years each. Why should I figure an appropriate point cost? Didn't GW get enough of my money for me to play a fun game? No, seriously. After all the time and money I put into this game. Do I not deserve that?

I understand. GW failed you. Granted, however, that they failed you, you should behave accordingly. Don't be TFG (not saying that you currently are).

Then why are you so adamant that I am TFG.

Never said that.

Every description you gave, I fit apparently.

I never said anything about you personally, man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:It should be very easy for you to find posts on dakka declaring that the WK is undercosted by exactly 50 points then, if there are so many.
Again, do not move the goal posts around.

I saw that number in one of the eldar complaints threads. Note, however, that I never claimed that the WK is undercosted by exactly 50 points.

Oh I'm aware. I was actually emulating something you've done several times in this thread, and was curious to see how you would respond. I'm glad you're aware of it and aren't committing it out of ignorance then.

To what in particular are you referring? Loki's wager?

I'm not sure what the tank comment is about...are you implying such a unit is in the chaos marine codex? It isnt.

Chaos space marines don't have a tank that shoots pie plates? What on earth was I playing against, then?

You know what? It might have been a walker that shoots pie plates. Either way, my reaction was the same: "Huh...you have 3 of those? And it's your turn one? Well...good game. I think we're done here."

No you didn't, but you made sweeping generalisation earlier on in the thread that implied anyone who even thought about using such things was TFG and should be aware of what is said about their character.

Absolutely, I dont think anyone here disagrees that there are issues. Heck, a few of us have been discussing them since the days of rogue trader. As I expect this in the hobby or even in games outside it like warmachine/hordes and such. I'm always interested in seeing how different people react to or address them. I see them as a challenge to face and avoid abusing them except in cases where it is expected such as tournaments (and even then, i take what I think happens to look cool at the moment of my list building. Heck, i remember going to a tourney with rough riders even just because I was proud of my conversions for them.
The op suggested as a way to address the issue in a thumb in the dike manner, communicating with your gaming group beforehand and working out an overall consensus what is and isnt acceptable in power building'. I feel this is a good idea but doesnt fix the underlying issues which would still rear their heads in tournaments and such so it is of limited use to most players. My own group kinda does this and we know what to bring "power wise' based on which of us we are playing. This way, we always have a fairly balanced game(in our group). I generally dont play outside it anymore (not that I get to play much at all) for this very reason. When things are addressed to my satisfaction, I will once more "go public" with my army.

Saim-Hann and Iyanden joining forces to stop a common foe is a TFG WAAC netlist.

Warp Talons, Thousand Sons and Possessed are fluffy though. We all know the strong units don't actually exist in the canon.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
No you didn't, but you made sweeping generalisation earlier on in the thread that implied anyone who even thought about using such things was TFG and should be aware of what is said about their character.

My claim is that if a person purchases and fields a model specifically because it grants him an unfair advantage, then he very well might be TFG, at least, to some extent.

Then link it. It should be easy to find a few. You may not have created it, but you claimed a consensus. A consensus on a forum should be relatively easy to find. I read that thread and would not call anything being discussed there a consensus.

Yes, I was referring to the wager. Sorry for the confusion, quoting is difficult on my phone.


Please quote the entire conversation. You said across the field. We have tanks that shoot pie plates, but 24" is hardly across the field. Vindicators are not a very good tank given their weak side armor, single shot nature, and relative point cost. You don't see marines taking them.

Traditio wrote:

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
No you didn't, but you made sweeping generalisation earlier on in the thread that implied anyone who even thought about using such things was TFG and should be aware of what is said about their character.

My claim is that if a person purchases and fields a model specifically because it grants him an unfair advantage, then he very well might be TFG, at least, to some extent.

While also dismissing the fact that maybe some people do like the models they buy, that maybe they buy models first then start list building.

So which is it? As for me personally your stance on this comes across as black and white, rather than the shades of grey that the situation is, when it comes to making pricey purchases.

Anyhoo I should stop being awake at this point, I'm on a work placement in the morning

Akiasura wrote:
Then link it. It should be easy to find a few. You may not have created it, but you claimed a consensus. A consensus on a forum should be relatively easy to find. I read that thread and would not call anything being discussed there a consensus.

If you know the thread that I'm talking about, then there's not much point in me looking for it.

At any rate, you're attacking a claim that I didn't make. "The current concensus is that the wraithknight is undercosted by exactly 50 points."

My claim is that the concensus is that the wraithknight is undercosted by 50 points or more. If you tell me that the current consensus (let us suppose) is that it's undercosted by 100 points, then you haven't contradicted my claim. The two claims are mutually consistent. If you tell me that there is no concensus about a precise number at all, that I'll get answers ranging from 60 points to 200 points, then you still haven't contradicted my claim.

Do you disagree that the wraithknight is undercosted by 50 points or more, and that pretty much everyone agrees about this?

Please quote the entire conversation. You said across the field. We have tanks that shoot pie plates, but 24" is hardly across the field. Vindicators are not a very good tank given their weak side armor, single shot nature, and relative point cost. You don't see marines taking them.

No, it wasn't a vindicator...it may have been a walker. Do chaos marines have a walker that shoots pie plates at long range?

There is nothing unfair with any model in 40k from a player's perspective. If this game had as much personality as chess, sure. But there's so many possible reasons for taking, say, a Wraithknight (fluff reasons, model appearance...). In addition, the game is competitive in nature, so playing it with the intention of winning - no matter how hardcore the actual match is - should be obvious. If you didn't intend to win, you would not shoot with your units at all.

The blame lies with GW for failing to balance their game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Traditio wrote:
No, it wasn't a vindicator...it may have been a walker. Do chaos marines have a walker that shoots pie plates at long range?

The Defiler? That unit is extremely overpriced and fragile.

To be fair, you can usually tell who is taking a unit purely for the exploit/advantage and who is taking it for the model coolness/fluff by just listening to the player talk about the army and their list. This is not always the case of course.
But it doesnt mean that someone taking it purely for the cool factor isnt gaining the same advantages the other player is of course. However, it may affect whether or not I will play them based on attitude, but of course attitude is outside of the rules and make it my personal preference.

 Ashiraya wrote:
There is nothing unfair with any model in 40k from a player's perspective. If this game had as much personality as chess, sure. But there's so many possible reasons for taking, say, a Wraithknight (fluff reasons, model appearance...). In addition, the game is competitive in nature, so playing it with the intention of winning - no matter how hardcore the actual match is - should be obvious. If you didn't intend to win, you would not shoot with your units at all.

The blame lies with GW for failing to balance their game.

I've addressed these claims previously in the thread.

The Defiler? That unit is extremely overpriced and fragile.

That was it. He had three of them. He went first, and my guys started out deployed fairly close together. I conceded turn one.

Traditio wrote:
That was it. He had three of them. He went first, and my guys started out deployed fairly close together. I conceded turn one.

If he went first, he also deployed first.

So why deploy bunched up in front of battle cannons? Why not use cover?

Even then they are BS3 and 175+ points each. They are really not good. They are AV12 balloons waiting for the needle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Traditio wrote:
I've addressed these claims previously in the thread.

It appears you unsuccessfully refuted them.

Ashiraya wrote:If he went first, he also deployed first.

So why deploy bunched up in front of battle cannons? Why not use cover?

Well, for one thing, as I said, I don't really know much about about the chaos space marines codex. For another thing, I was using cover. I had a group of guys hidden behind two rhinos, except for a small crack between the two rhinos.

Even then they are BS3 and 175+ points each. They are really not good. They are AV12 balloons waiting for the needle.

They shoot pie plates long range. Pie plates have a 1/3 chance of getting a direct hit, regardless of your BS.

It appears you unsuccessfully refuted them.

If you have specific objections to any one of my arguments, feel free to bring them up.

Traditio wrote:
Well, for one thing, as I said, I don't really know much about about the chaos space marines codex. For another thing, I was using cover. I had a group of guys hidden behind two rhinos, except for a small crack between the two rhinos.

Then you should have little issues dealing with them using any competitive list.

But the fact that he brought 3 Defilers probably means that your list was quite weak as well, in which case, they are okay. They never get better than okay unless you intentionally try to bunch up vanguard veterans in front of them or something.

I should know. I have one and I regularly use it.

They shoot pie plates long range. Pie plates have a 1/3 chance of getting a direct hit, regardless of your BS.

Spread correctly and use cover, and fire back effectively, and they will do very little.

So, basically, you can not link any such consensus reached. You feel the need to move your goal post as well.

Again, 50 points is different from 100. The eldar player must know how many points down he is playing when he brings them. You'll notice in your codex it rarely suggests that a terminator should cost 30-40 points. They tend to give exact numbers for everything, including options. You'd need to be able to do the same for your opponent.

If you lost turn 1 to 3 defilers, a unit so bad I forgot it was in the game, then I don't think we will ever see eye to eye. I'm having trouble picking how bad your deployment could be that you'd lose that many troops.
And ppeople thought I was crazy for suggesting I can score 3 hits with a small blast. What do you do against soul grinders? Lemans russes? Whirlwinds?

If you take an unbound list of Vanguard Veterans, buy thunder hammers and similar expensive weapons as much as possible (but no storm shields), and then place them outside of cover, bunched up.

Then you might feel like conceding turn 1.

But then I'd ask you why you'd do that...

Akiasura wrote:
So, basically, you can not link any such consensus reached. You feel the need to move your goal post as well.

Again, 50 points is different from 100.

If he takes one basic wraithknight for 350 points instead of 295, some people may still claim that it's undercosted. But I certainly wouldn't accuse such a person of taking advantage of bad rules or being a WAAC TFG. His actions show that he recognizes that he is at an unfair advantage and has adjusted his list accordingly.

If you lost turn 1 to 3 defilers, a unit so bad I forgot it was in the game, then I don't think we will ever see eye to eye.

And yet he was using 3, and a certain website claims that they are "a powerful beast."

I'm having trouble picking how bad your deployment could be that you'd lose that many troops.
And ppeople thought I was crazy for suggesting I can score 3 hits with a small blast. What do you do against soul grinders? Lemans russes? Whirlwinds?

Leman russes also shoot pie plates long range? I don't think I've played against a soul grinder or a whirlwind yet. My list is very infantry heavy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:
If you take an unbound list of Vanguard Veterans, buy thunder hammers and similar expensive weapons as much as possible (but no storm shields), and then place them outside of cover, bunched up.

Then you might feel like conceding turn 1.

But then I'd ask you why you'd do that...

I had a bunch of infantry who were bunched up behind a couple of rhinos.

Traditio wrote:

If he takes a basic wraithknight for 350 points instead of 295, some people may still claim that it's undercosted. But I certainly wouldn't accuse such a person of taking advantage of bad rules or being a WAAC TFG. His actions show that he recognizes that he is at an unfair advantage and has adjusted his list accordingly.

You shouldn't be accusing people of being WAAC TFG regardless of whatever handicap they play with or don't. Seriously, there is no right or wrong reason to bring a model, and your list does not define if you are WAAC TFG. You continue to imply that bringing a good model makes someone a WAAC TFG, which is absolutely a terrible attitude to have.

Blacksails wrote:You shouldn't be accusing people of being WAAC TFG regardless of whatever handicap they play with or don't. Seriously, there is no right or wrong reason to bring a model, and your list does not define if you are WAAC TFG. You continue to imply that bringing a good model makes someone a WAAC TFG, which is absolutely a terrible attitude to have.

You say "good model." I say "undercosted and overpowered." If you use a broken unit because it's broken, that says something about you.

Traditio wrote:


If you use a broken unit because it's broken, that says something about you.

No, no it doesn't!

Because, once more with feeling, YOU DON'T KNOW THE REASONS WHY SOMEONE IS PLAYING WITH 'X' UNTIL THEY STATE OUTRIGHT EVERY REASON THAT LEAD THEM TO USE THAT UNIT.

It says a lot about you though.

You, the person who's so quick to judge someone based only on a list put together for a wargame with absolutely zero idea as to all the many reasons why someone decided to play with a certain collection of miniatures, are the problem here. Not little Timmy with his WK, but you, judging everyone. You are the poisonous element.

I hope you understand how childish you sound. Its a list for a game, and yet you're stating with more or less absolute certainty that people who bring a powerful unit are WAAC TFG. Before you've shook hands, had a chat, or even rolled dice, you're judging and labelling people. Absolutely childish.

Websites claim all kinds of things. Link it, I'd like to read someone suggesting the defiler is a good choice.

A lot of tanks in the IG army fire stronger, better pieplates for cheaper at even longer ranges then the defiler. And on a stronger chasis.
The soul grinder is a demon tank that is superior to the defiler in every way.


I don't see what the first thing you posted in response to me has to do with anything I said. Could you clarify?

Cost is relative in this unbalanced game. Against necrons, let the WK fly. The decurion could likely handle it.

 Blacksails wrote:

Traditio wrote:


If you use a broken unit because it's broken, that says something about you.

No, no it doesn't!

Because, once more with feeling, YOU DON'T KNOW THE REASONS WHY SOMEONE IS PLAYING WITH 'X' UNTIL THEY STATE OUTRIGHT EVERY REASON THAT LEAD THEM TO USE THAT UNIT.

It says a lot about you though.

You, the person who's so quick to judge someone based only on a list put together for a wargame with absolutely zero idea as to all the many reasons why someone decided to play with a certain collection of miniatures, are the problem here. Not little Timmy with his WK, but you, judging everyone. You are the poisonous element.

I hope you understand how childish you sound. Its a list for a game, and yet you're stating with more or less absolute certainty that people who bring a powerful unit are WAAC TFG. Before you've shook hands, had a chat, or even rolled dice, you're judging and labelling people. Absolutely childish.

See the italicized/underlined in your post. See the italicized/underlined in my post. Do you seriously not know what the word "because" means?

Do you seriously not understand that it still doesn't matter why they took it anyways?

Unless you're seriously going to state that using powerful models make you less of a person than someone using deliberately weak models under some sort of illusion you're the superior person.

In which case, I stand by my comment that its an incredibly childish, toxic, and terrible attitude to have. Either way, you're judging people on a list in a game before you've ever really gotten to meet them.

So what if they took it partly or in whole because its strong? Honestly, it doesn't matter in the slightest and they're not WAAC TFG for bringing a strong list.

Akiasura wrote:
Websites claim all kinds of things. Link it, I'd like to read someone suggesting the defiler is a good choice.

A lot of tanks in the IG army fire stronger, better pieplates for cheaper at even longer ranges then the defiler. And on a stronger chasis.
The soul grinder is a demon tank that is superior to the defiler in every way.

Either way, I think that the general principle stands: "Thou shalt not spam non-troop choices."

I don't see what the first thing you posted in response to me has to do with anything I said. Could you clarify?

Are you referring to this?

"If he takes one basic wraithknight for 350 points instead of 295, some people may still claim that it's undercosted. But I certainly wouldn't accuse such a person of taking advantage of bad rules or being a WAAC TFG. His actions show that he recognizes that he is at an unfair advantage and has adjusted his list accordingly."

Your point was: "But is it 50? Or 100? He needs a points list!" That was my answer to that point.

Cost is relative in this unbalanced game. Against necrons, let the WK fly. The decurion could likely handle it.

Necrons are also commonly thought to be unbalanced relative to other codices, no?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blacksails wrote:
Do you seriously not understand that it still doesn't matter why they took it anyways?

Seriously. Read what you previous said in answer to my claim. Then read what I actually claimed. At this point, you're just making yourself look silly. "If someone does x because y, then z." "But you don't know why he does x!!!" Uh...great. So, there's this thing called a dictionary, and I'm pretty sure that the word "because" is in there. Check it out.

Why does it matter for the game if someone took 3 Wraithknights for fluff purposes or for their game strength?