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.

 vercingatorix wrote:
What would a tau suit that was a titan killer be armed with?

2 guns, each S(D). That's enough, and of the appropriate power level for 350-ish pts.

Alternately, 2x S10 AP2 guns with the Anchoring rule for 4x S10 shots per turn.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


Sorry, all, wall-o-text incoming...

The big units are generally not unfairly costed - they are fairly designed and competitively costed.

They're undercosted. It's very hard to find equivalent points (aside from units generally designed to engage units such as them) that will give you the same return on investment. 300pts of Dire Avenger, Falcons, Dark Reapers, Wraithlords, etc is not going to give you the same value as 300pts of Wraithknight.

The only problem is that you're bringing a rusty fork (an overpriced Guard Codex) to the battle, not a shiny new sword (i.e. Decurion, Craftworld, Knights, Marines) - that's your fault for not surfing the meta.

We're talking a difference of months here basically. I'm also not "surfing the meta" here because my point was that these big models weren't selling like hotcakes and being voted "fave" beforehand because they weren't auto-includes before.

Fairly priced, the BB variants should come in around 300-350 points (roughly half of 600), with 2 sponsons or AV14 side included.

As much as it would be obviously beneficial for me, I never saw anything really wrong with most Baneblade costing (except the basic BB getting bumped 75pts with sponsons for like no reason). ~400-500 was always pretty appropriate. They're maybe 10-15% overcosted with the sponson options currently.

More fundamentally, these units simply should not constitute that small a proportion of one's force. If we're playing games where a 2k list could ostensibly include three Baneblades with a company of mechanized infantry support (3 CAD's, each with CCS+2 vets, all loaded in Chimeras, with a Baneblade, for a total force of 75 infantry, 9 Chimeras, and 3 Superheavy tanks) that's something that really should be reserved for an "Apocalypse" game, or a small game of Epic Armageddon, not something to just put together and throw down for a pickup game. That's an issue with the scale of the game running off on itself.

And the Leman Russ? Hold on a sec. In the Leman Russ thread, didn't some random goofball state that the majority of Russ variants are overcosted?

the LRBT and Demolisher are basically too expensive as single weapon platforms and non-functional with other weapons, the Vanquisher is actually amusingly bad at being an anti-tank unit with the way vehicle kill works now, the Executioner is simply far too likely to kill itself (over a 6 turn game a plasma equipped tank will kill itself on average without the enemy having to do anything), and the FW Annihilator faces the same problem the Vanquisher does.

You'll note I had specific issues with these variants and specific rules interactions. It's not a matter of costing so much as their actual functionality. I actually think that Eradicators, Exterminators, and Punishers are pretty allright. The issues with the above variants I explained pretty clearly, in that they have specific functionality issues (e.g. the Executioner being likely to kill itself without an enemy having to devote any effort towards it).

Pretending for a moment that quote is accurate *and* the poster actually knows something about the Imperial Guard, *and* that he has some reasonable clue what Leman Russ tank variants ought to cost for how they perform in the current meta. If so, the LRBT should be more like 125 pts, and 140 for the Demolisher, instead of the overpriced 150 & 170. With the Leman Russ baseline corrected, a Baneblade should be priced like a Leman Russ + a Demolisher combined, as that is the best match for what it is. So again, in the 350 pts range, just like all of the other big toys.

I wouldn't argue that those prices would be more appropriate, but a Baneblade is bringing triple the hull points, vastly superior CC resiliency, and much bigger guns and able to independently target its weapons, is worth a lot more than ~260pts.

I say this as someone who owns 4 Baneblades and thinks that the IG are in dire need of help. That's simply an absurdly cheap price for something of that scale and capability, and just drives & reinforces the absurd level of power creep we're seeing and contributing to the dramatic devaluing of units like the Leman Russ tank. You couldn't get that level of firepower and resiliency out of the same investment in any other combination of units, and that's an issue.

As for how much one pays for Paskquisher? Don't care. He shouldn't even exist as an option in any Codex, so yes, price him to the moon, but don't use him as any sort of rational reference point when we talk balance.

On what basis? Just a personal subjective one? There's hardly anything broken about him, he unit is generally considered pretty good without being overpowered, just from a game-balance perspective I don't see anything wrong with the comparison. Just because you don't like the unit concept doesn't mean he can't be a valid basis for comparison.

According to Army Builder, I have the Baneblade (Apoc 6E) at 575 pts when fitted with 2 sponsons, 625 with 4 sponsons. Only under Escalation is the BB at 525 points with 2 sponsons, but it's back up at 625 with 4 sponsons. Near as I can tell, GW pegs the Baneblade at 600-ish points, and has done so pretty consistently since the first FW models came out over a decade ago.

FW had BB's at ~640 in 3E with no quad-sponson option (and Shafdowswords at ~535?) and yes back then they were painfully overcosted (mainly because the damage table was absurdly punitive).

GW made them 500 in the first outing of Apocalypse, with sponsons (600pts with quad sponsons). For some reason they bumped it up to 525 without any sponsons and 575 with sponsons and 625 with double sponsons in Escalation & 6E Apoc, but most are still closer to 500 than 600 even with sponsons, some under 500.

Over 8+ years, the BB has been a modeling / collector mainstay, but never competitive, because it's always been 600-ish points when fitted properly (and 4 sponsons is always the correct fit for a Baneblade).

I've only ever put 1 set on most because they look silly with two and because that second sponson set has such major LoS issues (can't shoot through the turret/sponson housing in front of it) that they're usually just not worth putting on.

I think more to the point however, until very recently, you couldn't just bring superheavies & gargantuan creatures to just *any* game, they were restricted to Apocalypse games.

You know, it's annoying that you keep mono-focusing on the WK, when I've repeatedly stated that the class of light Superheavies / GCs to be starting at 350 points or so.

Second, in that "matter of months", GW released several new-style Codices that defined a new meta.

Third, 40k *is* Apocalypse, ever since Knights came out. You might as well argue against the tide coming in and night falling. What's done is done, and you should accept it.

Fourth, it's really grating that you insist on acting as if I ever claimed 260 when I've specifically clarified 350 for the basic BB, and shown the clear derivation of where my number comes from. It's like you're not even bothering to read what you quote. Despite the appearance of addressing my comments point-by-point.

Also, ipso facto, any/every Knight-class model provides generally similar power and toughness in the 350-point range that defines the class. Even moreso when fielded in the Codex specific formations. To claim that the BB should not be competitive with the rest of the class is more shouting against the tide.

Me hoping Pask gets the Doomrider / Brother Bethor treatment is more realistic than your campaign to undo the reality of Knight-class models defining 7E 40k.

As I clearly demonstrated via several examples, the models that actually hit the table are closer to 600 points. The junk variants and no sponson versions are fewer points, but nobody fields them, so they might as well not exist.

At this point, I am tired of dealing with your counterfactuals here, because you're just making stuff up in your attempts to refute my statements and wishlist the very successful and popular Knight-class of models out of the game.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
You know, it's annoying that you keep mono-focusing on the WK, when I've repeatedly stated that the class of light Superheavies / GCs to be starting at 350 points or so.

Again, I think I've mentioned Knights repeatedly as well, the WK is just the easiest punching bag because it's the most egregious.

Second, in that "matter of months", GW released several new-style Codices that defined a new meta.

And they switch this every year or so, just as the 2014 books were all significantly toned down from the from the 2013 books and the 2012 DA/CSM books (DA might have been Jan 13, but I'll lump 'em in with CSM's) were toned down relative to the Ward-era 5E books. Who knows what 2016 will hold?.

Third, 40k *is* Apocalypse, ever since Knights came out. You might as well argue against the tide coming in and night falling. What's done is done, and you should accept it.

That's not really a response, you're just saying "well you can't change it, might as well not discuss it". You're not actually addressing the scale issue or problems with what we were talking about.

Fourth, it's really grating that you insist on acting as if I ever claimed 260 when I've specifically clarified 350 for the basic BB

That was a typo on my part, in my last post there. I have big fingers and the phone keyboard is small

However, when you said they should be half what they are now, ~260 is exactly what many would cost, just because you insist they all should always have 100pts worth of upgrades just because, doesn't change that.

That said, the point still stands for 300/350pt Baneblades, you're getting triple the value of a Russ tank (probably moreso since it is much more resistant to CC attacks, can't be shaken or have weapons destroyed, can independently target its weapons) for only about double the price. This devalues the Russ tank, and dramatically over-emphasizes investment in the Baneblade.

Also, ipso facto, any/every Knight-class model provides generally similar power and toughness in the 350-point range that defines the class.

A Knight does not offer the same firepower as a Baneblade. a Knight gives you 2 Battlecannon shots and a couple heavy stubbers, a Baneblade gives you significantly more firepower, an S10 pieplate and an S9 AP2 10" pieplate, with, at minimum, an autocannon and TL'd heavy bolter to boot. While the Knight has D melee attacks, it often won't be able to make effective use of both weapon sets in the same turn, especially the first two where such firepower is most important.

Likewise, while the Baneblade lacks the shield, it has 50% more hull points and better armor on the front and sides. With the 4+ save, the Knight can somwhat *match* the BB for resiliency in *one* arc, but it's not all-round the same toughness.

Me hoping Pask gets the Doomrider / Brother Bethor treatment is more realistic than your campaign to undo the reality of Knight-class models defining 7E 40k.

You're going off on a tangent here, my point was that the unit wasn't a bad basis for comparison in regards to the original statement and you wanted to discard it just because you apparently don't like the unit concept (which, admittedly, I'm not a huge fan of either).

As I clearly demonstrated via several examples, the models that actually hit the table are closer to 600 points.

If you're giving them basically every upgrade option (which, as I pointed out, is of minimal value) and only looking at a couple of variants.

The junk variants and no sponson versions are fewer points, but nobody fields them, so they might as well not exist.

If we're talking about making them potentially basically only 210pts (like the Doomhammer) then yes that becomes an altogether different issue. 200pt AV14 9 HP 25-40man capacity transports that can't be shaken or stunned would justifiably cause some heartburn.

At this point, I am tired of dealing with your counterfactuals here, because you're just making stuff up in your attempts to refute my statements and wishlist the very successful and popular Knight-class of models out of the game.

Well, you can call them whatever you want and put whatever words in my mouth you wish, you didn't actually address most of anything I said and are hand-waving the rest away, and are just reinforcing my original statement that these units are popular & successful *because* they're so cheap.

Doesn't actually make it counter-factual or mean I'm making anything up, you're just wanting to abandon the conversation

If it makes you feel better, go ahead and say so,

Holy crap. How many times are you going to fail to comprehend that that I'm pegging the standard (2-sponson) Baneblade at 350-ish points, like the rest of the light Supers?

If you're not going to bother reading what I write, stop replying.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Holy crap. How many times are you going to fail to comprehend that that I'm pegging the standard (2-sponson) Baneblade at 350-ish points, like the rest of the light Supers?

I got that, however that wasn't part of your original statement and your backtracking is primarily what I was addressing, and you're hand-waving away of every other point I was trying to make.

If we're pegging a quad sponson BB is packing 5 TL heavy bolters, 4 Lascannons, a 10" S9 SP2 pieplate, an autocannon, and a demolisher cannon with AV14/13/12 and 9HP, at 350pts. How on earth do you justify a kitted Russ at anything more than 100pts by comparison?

That said, if we're calling a 4 sponson BB 350pts, how cheap do you make a no-sponson BB? Are we going to call a naked BB 250pts? Again, relative to it's smaller cousins, this is simply an absurdly cheap price point.

This model nails the coffin for super heavies and Gargantuans dominating the game to a greater degree than ever before. I think we need to accept this and move on.

And an entire codex made of Super heavies didn't?

No, we shouldn't. That's the last thing we should do. Just because something bad is happening regularly or is accepted doesn't mean we should just accept it.

I wrote (and you quoted):

The Baneblade chassis is criminally overpriced. This thing costs 360 points, and a Wraithknight costs 295 pts. An Imperial Knight costs 350 points. A Baneblade costs something like 600 points, roughly twice as much as the Tau or Eldar counterpart. Cut all Baneblade points in half, to where it's comparable to this Tau suit, and squadron them like this Tau suit, and I guarantee that you will see them fly off the shelves

Go read that again, and actually try to comprehend what I wrote.

I wrote "A Baneblade costs something like 600 points". Not 525 or 410 or whatever the hell you're pulling out of your ass. 600.

I continued "roughly twice as much as the Tau or Eldar counterpart" which we know to be 360 or 295 points, because I actually gave those numbers above when I wrote "this [Tau] thing costs 360 points, and a Wraithknight costs 295 pts."

Then I wrote "Cut all Baneblade points in half, to where it's comparable to this Tau suit, " which is clearly 360 points, because that's what I had written.

Then you started making gak up about cut price Baneblades (after I had very clearly stated "something like 600" points) and 260 points (after I had very clearly written "comparable to this Tau suit, " which is clearly 360 points.")


Later, you started in on this side tangent for what you think Baneblades cost, ignoring what they look like on the table. And failing to understand that 575 points is closer to 600 points than 500 points.

Now, you're making gak up about how I said that the 4 sponson BB should be 350 points, when I had clearly pegged 350-ish for the 2 sponson version?

tl;dr

1. Baneblade is overpriced, should cost 300-350 pts base, 350-400 with 4 sponsons.
2. Leman Russ is overpriced, should cost 125-150 pts base, 150-180 full kit.
3. Tau Knight is fairly priced.
4. Wraithknight is not really a problem.
5. Imperial Knight is fairly priced.

And now you're claming that I'm backtracking? Despite the fact that I have been clear about my price points from the beginning? Point values that you yourself quoted?


Stop with the trolling. Because that's what your posts have devolved to. Trolling. Next one is getting reported as such.

Come on guys please give it a rest.

EDIT: Nevermind, I'll let it rest, JohnHwangDD, feel free to report whatever you want. I did mis-read the part on the sponson's, for some reason read that as "two-set", point to you on that, however, ultimately, I still think that the price points that you're mentioning are way too low.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Come on guys please give it a rest.

Will do, and glad to stop.

I'm just glad the Tau are getting a nice big toy for the tabletop, something that won't just collect dust.

Meh, I'm hoping farsight will get a buff and applicable price-readjustment and be made LoW. I'm not a fan of big mecha myself. Although I do like the ghostkeel, after I do something about the doofy head.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Meh, I'm hoping farsight will get a buff and applicable price-readjustment and be made LoW. I'm not a fan of big mecha myself. Although I do like the ghostkeel, after I do something about the doofy head.

It'll be interesting to see if the Farsight Enclave book remains valid or if they'll update it too. Unfortunatley mostly what I've seen it used for is to just spam extra Riptides

Many people have asked this, whether openly or in their heads.....

.....How is that not a Walker-Class Vehicle with Armour Values?! Is Games Workshop trying to slowly transition from walkers being vehicles and treated like meat-bags?

 Da Kommizzar wrote:
Many people have asked this, whether openly or in their heads.....

.....How is that not a Walker-Class Vehicle with Armour Values?! Is Games Workshop trying to slowly transition from walkers being vehicles and treated like meat-bags?

No, one will notice that Titans remain walkers.

It's just a way to make them more gimmicky. You can add more special rules and stat variations to GC's than you can walkers, and in most cases you can make them significantly tougher.

 Da Kommizzar wrote:
How is that not a Walker-Class Vehicle with Armour Values?! Is Games Workshop trying to slowly transition from walkers being vehicles and treated like meat-bags?

High-tech forces (Eldar, Tau & GKs) get GMCs.

Low-tech forces (Orks, Imperials) are stuck with Walkers.

This allows GW to have different kinds of things to create artificial distinctions of a sort.

There is never really a clear line on what the difference is between the two. Really they just need to get rid of walkers and GMC.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
There is never really a clear line on what the difference is between the two. Really they just need to get rid of walkers and GMC.

Aye. It used to be that MC's/GC's were living things, and the old Wraithlord had a case as it was made of Wraithbone and inhabited by a spirit instead of piloted, but they've just removed the line completely.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Da Kommizzar wrote:
How is that not a Walker-Class Vehicle with Armour Values?! Is Games Workshop trying to slowly transition from walkers being vehicles and treated like meat-bags?

High-tech forces (Eldar, Tau & GKs) get GMCs.

Low-tech forces (Orks, Imperials) are stuck with Walkers.

This allows GW to have different kinds of things to create artificial distinctions of a sort.

So why is it that Eldar also have Walkers and CSM have GCs? If any distinction is artificial, it's your own.

I would not be surprised to find the largest Eldar Titans converted to GMCs at some later date.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I would not be surprised to find the largest Eldar Titans converted to GMCs at some later date.

All the more reason for people to not play against Revenants and Phantoms.

I'd be amused at Poison weapons actually being able to hurt them

That said, I'd be surprised to see them get made GC's, at least the big one, but nothing out of GW shocks me anymore.

Not that it matters overmuch since it has Fearless from being a gargo, but I've seen a few people state the Stormsurge has Ld 8.

It's actually Ld 9!



This picture also dispels my vague notion that it had toughness 8 - the original photo was somewhat unclear, but this one is not.

Baneblades isn't overpriced due to firepower, it has 3 more hullpoints than the knights. If it were a six hullpoints superheavy you knock 100 points off. (Superheavies have a minimum 6 hullpoints and start at 100 points for those six. Then each additional 3 hullpoints adds 100 points to the total.)

Leman Russ tanks are costed appropriately, if you add the caveat that heavy vehicles ignore the penalty for ordinance.

And lastly, I believe the wraithknight's points cost may be a typo and should be exactly 100 points more expensive.

If you want to see how things stack up, you can build them in the vehicle/monstrous creature design rules linked in my signature.

Anyone else see the new pics that show the crew of the suit is apparently OPEN-TOPPED? Wth is with this idiocy.

 Quickjager wrote:
Anyone else see the new pics that show the crew of the suit is apparently OPEN-TOPPED? Wth is with this idiocy.

What is realistically going to be able to fire into that cabin?

Indirect fire ordnance or things that are flying/perched really high above the Stormsurge.

'Oh noes! It's open-topped! I must add one to the...er...monstrous creature damage chart?'

That's just aesthetics, nothing to see.

Unless...you meant design wise? In which case I fully agree, it's a stupid design. You'd want to protect your pilots from shrapnel.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Anyone else see the new pics that show the crew of the suit is apparently OPEN-TOPPED? Wth is with this idiocy.

What is realistically going to be able to fire into that cabin?

Indirect fire ordnance or things that are flying/perched really high above the Stormsurge.

It is up there with the Dreadknight. Also the model is so unbalanced (weight wise) they made rules for anchoring pistons just so people wouldn't question what they were doing there.