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.

Not bad, it will certainly wreck face against some things in close combat.
However it does have to get their first which is where it suffers. That and the giant congaline of attacks and bodies you are not getting.

Removing the Lascannons and splitting this into two 20 man blobs with Meltas might be a good idea.

 War Kitten wrote:
Honestly, It's an ok unit. But it will be wrecked by a squadron of wyverns. And for much cheaper to boot. I don't care if you have a 4+ invuln. A squadron of wyverns firing on that blob will force so many wounds through that the blob WILL lose models.

Yup. You'll lose some models. Did i say otherwise? Nope.

Also: there are 1300-1400 points of "kill the wyverns and other stuff we dont like" trying to mitigate that damage. Including the blob which may well get to ignore cover (gotta roll for it but...). You're not wrong. We will take damage EVERY turn from all kinds of stuff. I don't think that was in doubt.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Experiment 626 wrote:


I do enjoy how it's assumed that this unit will always have the necessary psychic supports... I
I've played against a few Guard 'deathblobs' with a highly friendly Tzeentch Daemon list, (including Flamers, Locus of D6 Str. Horrors, 'counts as' Beasts), and never once had trouble dealing with it.

You "love it" how that was assumed? Even though I mention in multiple posts it may not happen? Hmm... Weird.

Though a 5+ re-rollable save actually isnt terribad either and thats happened of course!

And before you say "IK suck because: three units of Wraithguard (becaue thats the kind of arguments Dakkadakka loves) I have already conceded that it COULD be killed. in fact it was. Exactly once. I imagine before my life is over or this codex expires it may well happen again. But if it does... Shall I hand back all the wins i got before it? Or should I keep those?

Newer generals sometimes shift their lists constantly with each loss. and thats fine. Veterans understand the simple truth that its a dice game. you could not win them all if you tried. but you can stack the probabilities up like cordwood and This unit does that. So I'll take my chances and when and if the Aforementioned Daemons are still flying around when it matters and if they kill the blob (which could tactically speaking not matter) and when the score is tallied and I've lost, I'll shake your hand and say "Cool. Lets play again".

That's 40K.

 Jancoran wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

No, with marines I'd drop 3 drop pods on this squad and pretty much cripple it. .

Travis thought so too. This simply is not the case though. He dropped in with that AND his Fragioso! 35 hits. Pretty good sicne I was dpread out. that's 23 wounds. Saves: 11 or 12 dead. Also pretty good. My multicharge took them all out in a few phases. and hid me from two rounds of his shooting. 30 marines gone. Seems like a poor exchange. But he had to try something right?

Travis should have dropped his pods in such a way that a multicharge is impossible. It's not that hard. Even beasts have issues getting multicharges.
35 hits out of 60 shots (30 marines) is below average (it's what I'd expect from Guard, not marines. Certainly not with chapter tactics). If he had flamers this is even worse, as the flamer only needs to score 2 hits to be better than a bolter.
So, if Travis clumped up his guys so you can multicharge and managed to punch way under par, I'm not surprised you won.
Against a competent opponent who sets up better and manages to roll the average, I would expect the math I posted above to win out.

Which matches with what everyone has been telling you this entire time.

 Jancoran wrote:

Well if you're playing Space Marines youre not too likely to be using an IG blob are you? Lol. So as Imperial Guard lists went, I note that BOTH the unit was absent and IG were absent from the top rankings simultaneously. Hmm... I see a correlation there somewhere... Or maybe its just a coincidence. Probably is. But you cant demonstrate that so...

If the blob was as strong as you think it is, people would play IG.
Do you really think every competitive player out there not taking this unit is a coincidence?

 Jancoran wrote:

eh... no. The Centurion star isnt going to win that combat friend.

Sure, even assuming you can get everyone into range with this small squad you are looking at;
6's to hit (invisibility)
6's to wound
2+ save or invul on tiggy.

You're much more likely to face something else in CC with a marine army though. Being so slow, you can't dictate the fight.

Again, assuming the enemy even lets you reach CC. Tiggy is frequently deep striking these guys all over the place. The most common loadout would allow them to fire
5 gravshots with rerolls to wound
6 TL bolter shots
Per model. They can easily decimate the squad in a round of shooting if needed as well, though I'd rather use something more suited to this like pods.

A wraith wing would be actively trying to tackle this squadron, possibly after 1 round of it being softened up. Though it doesn't need to.

 Jancoran wrote:

But...I didnt show any batreps. SO im not sure what youre talking about.

You've mentioned several times examples of actual play. You've also linked us to your blog which has batreps.

 Jancoran wrote:

It actually doesn't. Situation is always king.

A unit this slow with no ranged firepower and being this weak to bolters, of all things, must reach CC to earn it's points back. It's too expensive for anything else, not to mention too fragile.
Would you like to see how it fares against cents at ranged or scatbikes? I assure you, it's not great.

 Jancoran wrote:

 War Kitten wrote:
Honestly, It's an ok unit. But it will be wrecked by a squadron of wyverns. And for much cheaper to boot. I don't care if you have a 4+ invuln. A squadron of wyverns firing on that blob will force so many wounds through that the blob WILL lose models.

Yup. You'll lose some models. Did i say otherwise? Nope.

Also: there are 1300-1400 points of "kill the wyverns and other stuff we dont like" trying to mitigate that damage. Including the blob which may well get to ignore cover (gotta roll for it but...). You're not wrong. We will take damage EVERY turn from all kinds of stuff. I don't think that was in doubt.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Experiment 626 wrote:


I do enjoy how it's assumed that this unit will always have the necessary psychic supports... I
I've played against a few Guard 'deathblobs' with a highly friendly Tzeentch Daemon list, (including Flamers, Locus of D6 Str. Horrors, 'counts as' Beasts), and never once had trouble dealing with it.

You "love it" how that was assumed? Even though I mention in multiple posts it may not happen? Hmm... Weird.

Though a 5+ re-rollable save actually isnt terribad either and thats happened of course!

And before you say "IK suck because: three units of Wraithguard (becaue thats the kind of arguments Dakkadakka loves) I have already conceded that it COULD be killed. in fact it was. Exactly once. I imagine before my life is over or this codex expires it may well happen again. But if it does... Shall I hand back all the wins i got before it? Or should I keep those?

Newer generals sometimes shift their lists constantly with each loss. and thats fine. Veterans understand the simple truth that its a dice game. you could not win them all if you tried. but you can stack the probabilities up like cordwood and This unit does that. So I'll take my chances and when and if the Aforementioned Daemons are still flying around when it matters and if they kill the blob (which could tactically speaking not matter) and when the score is tallied and I've lost, I'll shake your hand and say "Cool. Lets play again".

That's 40K.

Fair enough. It's just been my experience that blobs don't tend to do that well, even with priest/psyker support. Maybe that's just bad dice luck for me as you said. Oh well. Good Luck convincing the others though.

Akiasura wrote:


Travis should have dropped his pods in such a way that a multicharge is impossible. It's not that hard.

If the blob was as strong as you think it is, people would play IG.
Do you really think every competitive player out there not taking this unit is a coincidence?

A wraith wing would be actively trying to tackle this squadron, possibly after 1 round of it being softened up. Though it doesn't need to.

You've mentioned several times examples of actual play. You've also linked us to your blog which has batreps.
t.

No because he had special weapons and i assume a pistol for the sergeant so 35 isnt really a bad roll at all. So whatevs

So you think he controls scatter dice with his mind? And you think that he perhaps can avoid a multi-charge from a unit that large? Eh... You're grasping at straws now.

And what I think, Akiasura, is that many a person listens to naysayers far more often than they listen to new possibilities. I think people in their quest to try and look right are hell bent on zero sum thinking within which one thing must NOT be good for another thing TO be good. any winner in life doesnt subscribe to that kind of thinking. Therefore there's plenty of them. Here I concede points when they are there to be conceded (the terrain comment, the point on it not being invulnerable, the point on it definitely taking wounds from a crap ton of bikerz and so on). I stand when standing makes sense.

That's what I think. I think that its a fact that these guys who go to tournaments ARENT all top tier. I also note factually that this tool isnt being used and incidentally these maybe-competitiors aren't taking the gold either. Would they? neither of us knows. But until we DO know, you have no more reason to doubt it and more than I can say it would solve their woes. Maybe they just suck. maybe they are just too wrapped up in Forge World tom foolery. Who knows.

What I am doing here for the benefit of anyone willing to learn from a success story is explaining how and why.

It doesnt affect anything that you disagree and a lot of your disagreements have come without any convincing argument other than you said so and some appeal to higher authority. So while i appreciate that you are right that there are powerful units like Centurion Stars that exist and do their thing, THIS thread was about other factiosn getting the Tau treatment and all i'm here to testify to is that the IG dont NEED it. it would be nice. But lots of things are nice and yet not necessary. Lots.

So do you play Astra Militarum?






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 War Kitten wrote:

Fair enough. It's just been my experience that blobs don't tend to do that well, even with priest/psyker support. Maybe that's just bad dice luck for me as you said. Oh well. Good Luck convincing the others though.

The General matters. Terrain matters. the dice matter. The matchup matters. the random number of turns matter. The list that SURROUNDS the blob matters. It's quite difficult to know in the grand totality of things, how those all combined to create whatever experience we have. What I can say is that the overwhelming evidence I have says that it overcomes all those obstacles if they are obstacles, more often than it doesn't. A lot more often. Like overwhelmingly often. And what more is a general looking for on these boards than a nugget of possibility that might spark them to great success and tons o fun?

This is such a nugget. Took me a couple games to really get the hang of the unit and not be as tentative as i was used to being with Guardsman. Once I got that outta my system, it was party time!

 Jancoran wrote:
THIS thread was about other factiosn getting the Tau treatment and all i'm here to testify to is that the IG dont NEED it. it would be nice. But lots of things are nice and yet not necessary. Lots.

I'm pretty sure, if you were to ask the IG players, they would pretty overwhelmingly tell you that the IG *do* need a series of significant buffs to reach Decurion-level power.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/651867.page

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
THIS thread was about other factiosn getting the Tau treatment and all i'm here to testify to is that the IG dont NEED it. it would be nice. But lots of things are nice and yet not necessary. Lots.

I'm pretty sure, if you were to ask the IG players, they would pretty overwhelmingly tell you that the IG *do* need a series of significant buffs to reach Decurion-level power.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/651867.page

Everyone whines. What's new. Lol. I'm an IG player. Im a Tau Empire player. I play Chaos Space Marines, Grey Knights, Eldar, Dark eldar, Orks and the list goes on. i am well versed in them, and not just from reading. All I can say is that an upgrade WILL be cool. I'm not disagreeing. i just think that whining about what you have now is misplaced.

If IG were roughly competitive with SMs and Tau and Eldars and Necrons, that would be one thing. However, they are not competitive in their current book. Nobody is saying how IG are broken and need to be banned. That would be a sign of the IG having some decently competitive units and builds.

Instead IG are getting pity like CSMs and Sisters.

I, the original poster, here by decree that the debate, that rages on reffering to the strength of the unit of Imperial Guard mentioned, end with this simple answer to this debate....

Its decent and it's effectiveness is situational.

Now on to more troublesome topics... Like other factions and maybe some improvements we want to see?

This post is turning into an argument and is ruffling my petticoats.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
If IG were roughly competitive with SMs and Tau and Eldars and Necrons, that would be one thing. However, they are not competitive in their current book. Nobody is saying how IG are broken and need to be banned. That would be a sign of the IG having some decently competitive units and builds.

Instead IG are getting pity like CSMs and Sisters.

You don't understand! He gets results at his locals where lists are below mediocre! It means something, even though he won't attend high end tournaments because apparently he has nothing to prove!

You should see his posts in the FW thread. It's bloody hilarious.

 Jancoran wrote:

Akiasura wrote:


Travis should have dropped his pods in such a way that a multicharge is impossible. It's not that hard.

If the blob was as strong as you think it is, people would play IG.
Do you really think every competitive player out there not taking this unit is a coincidence?

A wraith wing would be actively trying to tackle this squadron, possibly after 1 round of it being softened up. Though it doesn't need to.

You've mentioned several times examples of actual play. You've also linked us to your blog which has batreps.
t.

No because he had special weapons and i assume a pistol for the sergeant so 35 isnt really a bad roll at all. So whatevs

30 marines fire 60 shots. 40 should hit, more with chapter tactics. If he took meltas, and dropped in against this squad, that was a bad call. He should have targeted something else and just took long range shots at this unit, since it's long range firepower isn't anything special.
If he took flamers, that's really bad. Flamers should do more hits than a bolter, so the numbers should go up.
Do you mean he took a plasma pistol? Pistols in general are awful pieces of wargear.
Did the pods not have their Str 5 pie plates? It costs a marine and generally does more than a marine, there is little reason not to take one.

 Jancoran wrote:

So you think he controls scatter dice with his mind? And you think that he perhaps can avoid a multi-charge from a unit that large? Eh... You're grasping at straws now.

Not really. You deploy in a triangle, with the drop pod blocking the charge lane. Every unit is going to get about 6-7 kills, so that should cost some inches providing you deploy correctly since the IG player has to spread out.
While you don't control scatter dice, drop pods are incredibly accurate in scattering since you can deploy from them and they are quite large, and can't mishap. This unit leaves a large enough foot print where its easy to get it near different edges.
If the IG player bunches up, you brought 3 Str 5 pieplates to the game to land even more kills. That also happen to be coming from the front, and increase the charge range.
You are roughly 15-16 inches away from his units, and he is down to less than 22 models after the inital shots. Less if he decided to bunch up for some reason. Him managing to move 6" in every direction and then roll 9-10 on the die and make every charge is grasping at straws.
I've faced IG blobs before. They weren't scary then, they aren't scary now.

 Jancoran wrote:

And what I think, Akiasura, is that many a person listens to naysayers far more often than they listen to new possibilities. I think people in their quest to try and look right are hell bent on zero sum thinking within which one thing must NOT be good for another thing TO be good. any winner in life doesnt subscribe to that kind of thinking. Therefore there's plenty of them. Here I conced points when they are there to be conceded (the terrain comment, the point on it not being invulnerable, the point on it definitely taking wounds from a crap ton of bikerz and so on).

I like to think most people listen to math, but I'm a scientist so my outlook is obviously biased.
If facebook has taught me anything, it should really be that people don't care about math at all.
I find that most of the winners in life usually define winning in a way that applies to their own life and moves forward from there. They tend not place these definitions of winning on others, and are content with themselves. YMMV, and that is wildly off topic.

 Jancoran wrote:

That's what I think. i think that its a fact that these guys who go to tournaments ARENT all top tier. I also note factually that this tool isnt being used and incidentally these maybe-competitiors aren't taking the gold either. Would they? neither of us knows. But until we DO know, you have no more reason to doubt it and more than I can say it would solve their woes. Maybe they just suck. maybe they are just too wrapped up in Forge World tom foolery. Who knows.

Forge world isn't actively encouraged, and in many tournaments LoWs and GMCs are banned (which only benefits your unit). Yet you still don't see it played.
I'm not sure what your "taking the gold" comment means. Are you implying that we can't see the winning lists? We can.
Sure not everyone is going to be top-tier at a tournament. Lots of people go to play strangers.
But if I'm looking for good units in a game like 40k, I browse the tournament lists and see what's going on after running some initial calculations. They serve to verify my thoughts on a unit (they are taken) or cause me to double check a unit for something I missed (like what happened with swooping hawks earlier, which I am very happy about).

But really you've given us two real choices here, in regards to this blob and competitive play;
1) Every competitive player and all the math is wrong, and this unit is fine and the IG are in a good spot.
2) You and the people in your meta (a meta that includes someone who thinks 3 pods is list tailoring, a meta that thinks 20 scat bikes is rarely seen list tailoring, a meta that includes a guy who charges a wounded wraithknight into one of the few squads in the IG codex that can kill it with OW, despite it being an insanely fast GMC) are so amazing that none of the other large tournament players approach you.
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.

 Jancoran wrote:

What I am doing here for the benefit of anyone willing to learn from a success story is explaining how and why.

What you are doing is defending your meta and poor decisions. I don't think anyone so far as said this unit is good and can compete.
If your objective was really to help anyone willing to learn, I think you've failed.

 Jancoran wrote:

It doesnt affect anything that you disagree and a lot of your disagreements have come without any convincing argument other than you said so and some appeal to higher authority.

Let's be clear, both of our arguments are based around "Because I said so". Most arguments are.
My arguments have the backing of math and a gander at what some of the best players around are taking.
Your argument completely relies on "Because I said so".

 Jancoran wrote:

So while i appreciate that you are right that there are powerful units like Centurion Stars that exist and do their thing, THIS thread was about other factiosn getting the Tau treatment and all i'm here to testify to is that the IG dont NEED it. it would be nice. But lots of things are nice and yet not necessary. Lots.

And my argument, and most of the other posters who have chosen to speak in this and other threads is that you are flat out wrong. IG do need a buff. So do DE, BA, and CSM. Probably orks too, but most ork players I know don't seem to care too much about playing and just want to yell waaaagh and roll dice.

The strength of a dex is relative, and relative to the better dexes, the IG fall short. This blob does nothing to fix it. For IG, this blob isn't bad, but against the better dexes it'll fall over without them trying too hard or accomplishing anything.

 Jancoran wrote:

So do you play Astra Militarum?

Not since 5th. I haven't faced them much since 7th, since nobody wants to play them. Horde armies in general have gotten less popular since it's a pain to carry and they tend to be bad (oh how the tables have turned).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kharne the Befriender wrote:
I, the original poster, here by decree that the debate, that rages on reffering to the strength of the unit of Imperial Guard mentioned, end with this simple answer to this debate....

Its decent and it's effectiveness is situational.

Now on to more troublesome topics... Like other factions and maybe some improvements we want to see?

This post is turning into an argument and is ruffling my petticoats.

I think listing what changes need to be made to each dex is probably too taxing and GW won't listen.

In general, the weaker armies suffer because the vast majority of their dex is bad. They need more internal balance, which would offer more options for actual gameplay instead of the monobuild nature of many of these armies we currently see, even in casual play.

For the armies with fan bases that seem the most angry, its because the special rules are bad or actively punish the player. They need to be completely re-worked. On dakka this would include DE, BA, CSM, Orks, IG. For CSM, Orks, and IG I believe it's because they used to have "chapter tactics" of their own, and lost them while marines (and eldar in a way) still have them.
Bringing those back would be a big step in the right direction.

Chaos is hampered most of all by it's ancient model line... We just need a full on re-do ala Dark Eldar, which would then allow for GW to finally bring our armoury out of 3rd edition and into 7th edition.
While everyone else's basic weaponry & upgrade have gotten better, whether by being cheaper, or gaining an improved profile, or else simply gaining new toys, we're still stuck using the exact same Plasma guns & Autocannons that were beginning to fall behind the curve waaaaaaay back in early 4th edition!

'Legion Tactics' or 'Chaos Doctrines' similar to Chapter Tactics would be amazaballs, but I'm not holding my breath.

They need to reboot the game and call it WH50k

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
If IG were roughly competitive with SMs and Tau and Eldars and Necrons, that would be one thing. However, they are not competitive in their current book. Nobody is saying how IG are broken and need to be banned. That would be a sign of the IG having some decently competitive units and builds.

Instead IG are getting pity like CSMs and Sisters.

Well... I play Sisters of Battle and have won more tournaments with them than any other army. So I suppose I won't be that sympathetic to those comparisons.

I get the idea you're trying to express. IG arent broken. I agree. But they aren't some decrepit 90 year old in a Decathalon either. I've given one extremely solid example of the way IG can compete. if soneone doesn't actually wanna' do it, that's not because the codex doesn't allow it. Just saying. that's choice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

You've mentioned several times examples of actual play. You've also linked us to your blog which has batreps.

None of those showed this force. So again...

Kharne the Befriender wrote:
They need to reboot the game and call it WH50k

Nah, 41K. That would mean you could have it being the imperium reeling from the chaos win during the 13th crusade. Imagine if they took out the astronomicon. That would limit the imperium to short ranged calculated jumps, and cut out most form of FTL communication. This would allow the other armies to take advantage of this and make huge gains, with groups like the tau growing to a reasonable scale so that they can be considered a galactic threat, and big enough so they could suffer real losses without being destroyed completely.

Akiasura wrote:

30 marines fire 60 shots. 40 should hit, more with chapter tactics. If he took meltas, and dropped in against this squad, that was a bad call. He should have targeted something else and just took long range shots at this unit, since it's long range firepower isn't anything special.
If he took flamers, that's really bad. Flamers should do more hits than a bolter, so the numbers should go up.
.

Who cares? This is so irrelevant! He has what he HAS. Youre now going to try and make this about him? "Should" is not even an ARGUMENT. Holy crap! What a bizarre argument to even try to make about this. YOU said 30 marines could do it. Since WHEN do Drop Pod marines not use freaking Meltas more often than they dont? How is this a "mistake"? Are you even listening to yourself? Here is this guy firing what i would guess were 51 shots, hitting 35 times. THAt is not WEIRD in the LEAST and you're making it some kind of an argument? Give. me. A. Break!




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Kharne the Befriender wrote:
They need to reboot the game and call it WH50k

Nah, 41K. That would mean you could have it being the imperium reeling from the chaos win during the 13th crusade. Imagine if they took out the astronomicon. That would limit the imperium to short ranged calculated jumps, and cut out most form of FTL communication. This would allow the other armies to take advantage of this and make huge gains, with groups like the tau growing to a reasonable scale so that they can be considered a galactic threat, and big enough so they could suffer real losses without being destroyed completely.

Plus Tau Empire would RULE if the Astronomicon took a dump. YUS!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:

Not really. You deploy in a triangle, with the drop pod blocking the charge lane. Every unit is going to get about 6-7 kills, so that should cost some inches providing you deploy correctly since the IG player has to spread out.
While you don't control scatter dice, drop pods are incredibly accurate...
.

Situation is king. not your theoryhammer. Theyre factually not more accurate, just less affected by the innaccuracy. LESS. And theres terrain that YOU are not considering that he did! So why are you even questioning this when the dice nd terrain decided it all? He did his best and the dice LIKE ALWAYS did the rest. Yet you are now going to argue that this is somehow his fault? Lol. Its jut laughable.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
If IG were roughly competitive with SMs and Tau and Eldars and Necrons, that would be one thing. However, they are not competitive in their current book. Nobody is saying how IG are broken and need to be banned. That would be a sign of the IG having some decently competitive units and builds.

Instead IG are getting pity like CSMs and Sisters.

You don't understand! He gets results at his locals where lists are below mediocre! It means something, even though he won't attend high end tournaments because apparently he has nothing to prove!

You should see his posts in the FW thread. It's bloody hilarious.

If he's won on generalship at a large enough event, then I'd agree there's nothing to prove. If not, well, maybe I'll continue to be a touch skeptical.

Duly noted.
____

Akiasura wrote:

Kharne the Befriender wrote:
Now on to more troublesome topics... Like other factions and maybe some improvements we want to see?

I think listing what changes need to be made to each dex is probably too taxing and GW won't listen.

In general, the weaker armies suffer because the vast majority of their dex is bad. They need more internal balance, which would offer more options for actual gameplay instead of the monobuild nature of many of these armies we currently see, even in casual play.

For the armies with fan bases that seem the most angry, its because the special rules are bad or actively punish the player. They need to be completely re-worked. On dakka this would include DE, BA, CSM, Orks, IG. For CSM, Orks, and IG I believe it's because they used to have "chapter tactics" of their own, and lost them while marines (and eldar in a way) still have them.
Bringing those back would be a big step in the right direction.

The weaker armies suffer because they have poor external balance. Making a weak Codex uniformly weak regardless of what you take doesn't make it competitive - it makes it playable against itself, a la 30k. Massively buffing (via formations, if necessary) and deliberately undercosting a small number of units in an otherwise mediocre or weak Codex makes for an externally-balanced monobuild, which will do just fine for both sales and competitive play.

As an IG player, I would not mind it if Platoons got a BOGO formation, and the Russ formation added a free Command Tank to every squadron. That would be competitive and highly playable. It would encourage certain builds, and that would be totally fine, because it would be thematic.

The biggest issue with the armies you call out is that they are not effectively Fearless like SMs and Nids and Necrons. Losing entire units when things start to turn is what kills armies dead.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

If he's won on generalship at a large enough event, then I'd agree there's nothing to prove. If not, well, maybe I'll continue to be a touch skeptical.

Duly noted.
____
.

Nice. Which large tournament allowed you to have your opinions? Just curious.

Ive been to two Seattle GT's, and they talked me into finally going to TSHFT. I've only ever lost one game at each of those events. My paint wont ever put me in the higher echelons of those anyways. My paint is so poor its like crayons (not literally, but...). Although after my Cornea Transplants 1+ years ago, it has significantly improved. =)

So I haven't won a "big tournament" that allows me to post on Dakkadakka like you and the other Adepticon champs here (got a stack of em, but no majors). But I have done so well, that I thought I'd venture some opinions anyways.

Now anyone who HASN'T won is on notice that you, JohnHwangDD, will be skeptical of their opinions. Even if they have won a lot. Sorry fella's.

You know though... Here's a thought from left field to join all my other ones. What if we assumed just to be civil that people who win a lot might have...earned it? Might have something to share? Might even be on this board without winning a single major! Whuuuuuut? But yes! That would be crazy, yet... consider the possibilities...

 Jancoran wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

30 marines fire 60 shots. 40 should hit, more with chapter tactics. If he took meltas, and dropped in against this squad, that was a bad call. He should have targeted something else and just took long range shots at this unit, since it's long range firepower isn't anything special.
If he took flamers, that's really bad. Flamers should do more hits than a bolter, so the numbers should go up.
.

Who cares? This is so irrelevant!

Considering you are using this experience as a counter-example to my argument that 3 drop pods can take down the blob, it's relevant. If your opponent rolled worse than average, or made tactical mistakes, it makes the example non-equitable and a useless counter point from you.

 Jancoran wrote:

He has what he HAS. Youre now going to try and make this about him?

Actually, you did that first. I'm explaining why it's not equitable. I don't like to bring personal experiences into things since people can be making them up, or dice can perform weird, or people get strange ideas about how good their local meta is.
If you want I can tell you how I recently defeated the local undefeated WMH player with my Cryx army 11 times in a row. It doesn't prove Cryx is broken or that trolls are weak though, so it seems pointless.

 Jancoran wrote:

"Should" is not even an ARGUMENT.

Sure it is. On average, a unit "should" inflict so many wounds/hits/kills. If a unit did below that, it's underperforming when compared to an expected value.
Do you not know how averages and SDs work? I can compute the SDs if you want, they'll be higher for the marines since there isn't a ton of shots, but it won't be that high.
Especially considering you are claiming he had a flamer, which should have saw him go above the average.

 Jancoran wrote:

Holy crap! What a bizarre argument to even try to make about this.
YOU said 30 marines could do it. Since WHEN do Drop Pod marines not use freaking Meltas more often than they dont?

Drop pod marines genuinely come in 2 flavors;
1) Melta spam. These go after tanks or MCs if no tanks are available. Typically you see 2 Mg's and a combi-mg to try to ensure the tank dies.
This type of unit should not go after a horde, unless you literally took no tanks or better targets.

2) PG spam. These go after infantry, heavy or otherwise. This is, IMO, more common, since 2 plasma shots are pretty good against rear armor when compared to one melta shot. These have been more common since 6th edition, to answer your question, since tanks now die to massed fire rather than meltas.
These should have gone against your infantry blob. Its the same number of shots, with a slightly better to wound chance.

Either way, where were the drop pod weapons? They are cheap and aren't bad.

 Jancoran wrote:

How is this a "mistake"? Are you even listening to yourself? Here is this guy firing what i would guess were 51 shots, hitting 35 times. THAt is not WEIRD in the LEAST and you're making it some kind of an argument? Give. me. A. Break!

It's a tactical mistake if he used a dedicated anti-tank unit to target an IG blob, when IG are known for taking...well tanks.
It's a tactical mistake to deploy in such a way that a multicharge against all 3 units is possible.
It's a tactical mistake to use the flamer in such a way that only 1-2 hits were scored (unless you weren't counting those among the 35 hits? It seemed you were and I made it clear I was, you didn't correct me). It's a flamer against a blob, how is he scoring so few hits?
It's a list mistake to not take drop pod weapons. They are great and a no-brainer choice.

Either way, your counter example of this Travis person isn't equitable and fails to dismiss my claim that 30 marines in drop pods can kill your unit. I made the following assumptions;
The unit had no special weapons. Your person had 9 anti-tank weapons.
The unit is deployed in such a way that a multi-charge, after casualties, is extremely difficult.
The unit takes the drop pod weapons, since it's a bit of a no-brainer.

You may want to calm down. You seem awful heated, and this is an internet debate about a sub-par faction when we all own or play against sub-par factions. We aren't discussing the future leader of the free world, your grades in my class, or a debt.

 Jancoran wrote:

Situation is king. not your theoryhammer. Theyre factually not more accurate, just less affected by the innaccuracy. LESS. And theres terrain that YOU are not considering that he did! So why are you even questioning this when the dice nd terrain decided it all? He did his best and the dice LIKE ALWAYS did the rest. Yet you are now going to argue that this is somehow his fault? Lol. Its jut laughable.

Of course it's his fault. It's drop pods, not a DS unit.
Drop pods scatter, yes, but they move to where they can deploy first in the case of a situation where they can't land, so its not hard to get them close to where you want them.
Then you have the base of the model, which is quite large.
Then you can deploy 6" out from that.
It's very hard to not be in effective range when coming out of a drop pod. They are amazing, while normal DS is crap because of the scatter and mishap issues. Hence why I claim that oblits are bad at objective grabbing but DPing marines are amazing at it (though bikes still beat the both of them).

If the terrain is so heavy that there is no where to position in 12" of a 40 man spread out IG blob, then don't target them. Go after something else. As you say, you still have 1200 points or more of other stuff. Saying "Screw that, I'm going to mash all my guys together and hope I roll well over average or beat him in CC when he charges me with a slow unit I could easily avoid just by deploying anywhere else " is entirely his fault.

Akiasura wrote:

Considering you are using this experience as a counter-example to my argument that 3 drop pods can take down the blob, it's relevant. If your opponent rolled worse than average, or made tactical mistakes, it makes the example non-equitable and a useless counter point from you.
.

Except that makes no sense. He hit 35 out of 51. So. Literally... Everything you're saying here... Makes no sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:


Actually, you did that first. I'm explaining why it's not equitable. I don't like to bring personal experiences into things since people can be making them up, or dice can perform weird, or people get strange ideas about how good their local meta is.
If you want I can tell you how I recently defeated the local undefeated WMH player with my Cryx army 11 times in a row. It doesn't prove Cryx is broken or that trolls are weak though, so it seems pointless.
.

You... Dont recall that it was you who said three drop pods could handle it... and yet... You're now goingto state after I pointed out that they DIDNT in fact handle it with all those shots, that this is now about HIM....

Again...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:


{should is an argument} On average, a unit "should" inflict so many wounds/hits/kills...

And you understand of course that statistics actually are a function of the number of opportunities you have to create the bell curve. and you also understand that 35 out of 51 is...uh.. Actually one higher than average riiiiight? Lol.

No it isn't the average, since apparently IF Chapter Tactics was used.

Akiasura wrote:

It's a tactical mistake if he used a dedicated anti-tank unit to target an IG blob, when IG are known for taking...well tanks.

Wait. So... What was he supposed to attack with if tnot the 30 marines you told me he should attack with?

You're backtracking.

With Imperial Fists, it should've been just about 40 shots.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
No it isn't the average, since apparently IF Chapter Tactics was used.

Huh? i never said that. Travis didn't have Chapter Tactics.

Somebody else did. If that's the case either way, you should actually be more embarrassed. Marines have Chapter Tactics by default.

 Jancoran wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

Considering you are using this experience as a counter-example to my argument that 3 drop pods can take down the blob, it's relevant. If your opponent rolled worse than average, or made tactical mistakes, it makes the example non-equitable and a useless counter point from you.
.

Except that makes no sense. He hit 35 out of 51. So. Literally... Everything you're saying here... Makes no sense.

Again, this was not my example that I used when I said that 30 marines can kill this blob over two turns.
No anti-tank weapons were used (a small difference).
The blob is not able to multi-charge 3 different squads in marines, despite casualties and being 12" away.
The 2 surviving squads have 2 turns total to target the blob.
None of these happened. And you mentioned he included a flamer in those 35 hits, so he should have been way over the average (Flamers score way more hits against a blob than a bolter).

 Jancoran wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:


Actually, you did that first. I'm explaining why it's not equitable. I don't like to bring personal experiences into things since people can be making them up, or dice can perform weird, or people get strange ideas about how good their local meta is.
If you want I can tell you how I recently defeated the local undefeated WMH player with my Cryx army 11 times in a row. It doesn't prove Cryx is broken or that trolls are weak though, so it seems pointless.
.

You... Dont recall that it was you who said three drop pods could handle it... and yet... You're now goingto state after I pointed out that they DIDNT in fact handle it with all those shots, that this is now about HIM....

Again...

I claimed that 30 marines could destroy this blob over 2 squads assuming no special weapons (PGs would be fine, meltas drag it down obviously. PGs are more common in the competitive scene unless they are specializing).
To get 2 turns (which your friend failed to do) requires the player be able to use Drop pods effectively to not get multicharged by an incredibly slow unit. He's got 12" of range plus whatever he gets from kills.
With drop pod guns, he should be buying at least 3" of space if you are spread out (if you aren't the pods kill more and you can't maintain unit cohesion and get all 3) making it unlikely you can get to all 3 squads.
Your friend obviously failed to do that.
Of course if someone can't pull a strategy off correctly it won't work. That should be obvious.

 Jancoran wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:


{should is an argument} On average, a unit "should" inflict so many wounds/hits/kills...

And you understand of course that statistics actually are a function of the number of opportunities you have to create the bell curve. and you also understand that 35 out of 51 is...uh.. Actually one higher than average riiiiight? Lol.

Please read above. The situation I used and the mistakes your friend made are not remotely the same.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

It's a tactical mistake if he used a dedicated anti-tank unit to target an IG blob, when IG are known for taking...well tanks.

Wait. So... What was he supposed to attack with if tnot the 30 marines you told me he should attack with?

You're backtracking.

No, I never claimed a unit that takes 9 Melta guns (obviously kitted out for anti-tank) and that, for some reason, decided not to take the drop pod weapons should deploy close enough and grouped up enough to allow a multi-charge against 3 different squads despite being 12" away + kills.
He should have gone after 3 different tanks instead, since he kitted them out for, you know, tanks.
He probably could have done it in 2 turns if he didn't drop in such a way that you are able to multi-charge all 3 squads. And used the good chapter tactics.

Did you even read my example of how a commonly taken unit could destroy this?

Akiasura wrote:

It's a tactical mistake if he used a dedicated anti-tank unit to target an IG blob, when IG are known for taking...well tanks.
It's a tactical mistake to deploy in such a way that a multicharge against all 3 units is possible.
It's a tactical mistake to use the flamer in such a way that only 1-2 hits were scored (unless you weren't counting those among the 35 hits? It seemed you were and I made it clear I was, you didn't correct me). It's a flamer against a blob, how is he scoring so few hits?
It's a list mistake to not take drop pod weapons. They are great and a no-brainer choice.

You're..an educator?

To the point at hand:

You dont "deploy in such a way" when deepstriking. you deep strike and see what you CAN do.
You dont tell anyone to take 30 Marines to kill a blob and then ignore that someone did so and it didn't work. it WONT work most of the time. Your advice is terrribly misguided and dripping with a surety it does not deserve in the face of actual games played. Sorry man.

The drop pods should pay for the launchers? Because those would be so useful against Imperial Knights? No tlike he knew what i was going to play til he got there. Should he take it against FMC spam too? But wait... Like we said... he doesnt know who he will face. RIGHT? Right! So as a tournament list you're telling Dakkadakka.com how obvious it is that they take 20 point pod upgrades?

Riiiiight. No wonder you don't think 11 pods is good. You spent all your points on their blast templates so you could fire them at Wraith knights and Scatterbikes in the final round. Makes sense.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Somebody else did. If that's the case either way, you should actually be more embarrassed. Marines have Chapter Tactics by default.

Blood Angels man. Blood Angels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:


No, I never claimed a unit that takes 9 Melta guns (obviously kitted out for anti-tank) and that, for some reason, decided not to take the drop pod weapons should deploy close enough and grouped up enough to allow a multi-charge against 3 different squads despite being 12" away + kills.
He should have gone after 3 different tanks instead, since he kitted them out for, you know, tanks.
He probably could have done it in 2 turns if he didn't drop in such a way that you are able to multi-charge all 3 squads. And used the good chapter tactics.

Did you even read my example of how a commonly taken unit could destroy this?

i am amused by this hair splitting wherein you say that him having a melta vs a bolter matters. A total of 3 shots difference against my 4+ invul. but sure if you're selling that whatever. The way i deployed forced him outward nd though his Fragioso got its flamer in there it couldnt hit a lot of them because of how I bubble deployed.

Here's my bottom line. if he wanted that unit dead, he ws goingto have to shoot it. If he was going to have to shoot it he was going to have to use his Marines and his Dreads. He did. that's it. He also DID kill three tanks the same turn by the way. So his army did what it was supposed to. it was successful in anti tank operations and he got me good on the blob. And normally it would have been impressive. but this was a different kind of blob. So it wasn't impressive. And it usually isn't.

And therein lies the point.

 Jancoran wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

It's a tactical mistake if he used a dedicated anti-tank unit to target an IG blob, when IG are known for taking...well tanks.
It's a tactical mistake to deploy in such a way that a multicharge against all 3 units is possible.
It's a tactical mistake to use the flamer in such a way that only 1-2 hits were scored (unless you weren't counting those among the 35 hits? It seemed you were and I made it clear I was, you didn't correct me). It's a flamer against a blob, how is he scoring so few hits?
It's a list mistake to not take drop pod weapons. They are great and a no-brainer choice.

You're..an educator?

Specifically, I am a professor of chemistry and biochemistry at a state university.
I teach general chemistry, physical chemistry, and biochemistry at the graduate level. My research is mainly in cancer treatments, though I've worked on various poisons in the past.

 Jancoran wrote:

To the point at hand:

You dont "deploy in such a way" when deepstriking. you deep strike and see what you CAN do.

And for every other unit but drop pods, this would be correct.
With drop pods, you don't worry about mishaps so you can drop where you want. Even if you do scatter, you have the base size of the model + 6 to get into position.
It's really hard to mess up drop pods so bad that you end up with 3 different squads clustered together, if they were supposed to deploy as far away as possible.
So...reasonable assumption is your friend made a mistake with deployment and this got him killed.

 Jancoran wrote:

You dont tell anyone to take 30 Marines to kill a blob and then ignore that someone did so and it didn't work. it WONT work most of the time. Your advice is terrribly misguided and dripping with a surety it does not deserve in the face of actual games played. Sorry man.

We can agree to disagree. When something doesn't met in expected outcome, you usually analyze it first to see what went wrong. Believe it or not, experimental errors are common, especially when experience is lacking.
I think 3 squads in rapid fire range without being close to each other is a reasonable thing to achieve. You clearly think it's completely random.
I'm not going to convince you otherwise, and I've personally done it many times against IG blobs in the past with little trouble.
I detailed how to do it and the math supports that it's possible. You're free to think what you will.

 Jancoran wrote:

The drop pods should pay for the launchers? Because those would be so useful against Imperial Knights? No tlike he knew what i was going to play til he got there. Should he take it against FMC spam too? But wait... Like we said... he doesnt know who he will face. RIGHT? Right! So as a tournament list you're telling Dakkadakka.com how obvious it is that they take 20 point pod upgrades?

The launchers should always be taken.
It's a str 5 pie plate that costs a little more than a marine, and will almost always do more damage than a single marine. It forces your opponent to target the drop pods and dedicate shots into an extremely cheap unit rather than ignore them.
Put it this way;
If you face Knights or FMCs, eh, you wasted 60 points. Not the biggest issue.
If you face scat bikes, GEQ, MEQ, bikers from other armies, or really any infantry unit at all, they will probably earn their points back. Especially in absorbing shots where they would be ignored before.
If I could take them on rhinos I would in a heart beat.

 Jancoran wrote:

Riiiiight. No wonder you don't think 11 pods is good. You spent all your points on their blast templates so you could fire them at Wraith knights and Scatterbikes in the final round. Makes sense.

11 pods is bad because splitting your entire army up is a bad move. At best you took min sized squads so it's only 55 marines with pods. So about a 1/4 to 1/3 of your army won't arrive until turn 2+, and it has the inferior firepower offered by podded troops (unless they are containing a lot of sternguards).
If it's full squads its even worse.
I don't see how you can think the launchers are bad when they nearly always earn their points back except against rare exceptions (Wraithknight spam, IK spam) but 11 pods is an excellent strategy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:


No, I never claimed a unit that takes 9 Melta guns (obviously kitted out for anti-tank) and that, for some reason, decided not to take the drop pod weapons should deploy close enough and grouped up enough to allow a multi-charge against 3 different squads despite being 12" away + kills.
He should have gone after 3 different tanks instead, since he kitted them out for, you know, tanks.
He probably could have done it in 2 turns if he didn't drop in such a way that you are able to multi-charge all 3 squads. And used the good chapter tactics.

Did you even read my example of how a commonly taken unit could destroy this?

i am amused by this hair splitting wherein you say that him having a melta vs a bolter matters. A total of 3 shots difference against my 4+ invul. but sure if you're selling that whatever. The way i deployed forced him outward nd though his Fragioso got its flamer in there it couldnt hit a lot of them because of how I bubble deployed.

Really, its the fact he let a multi-charge happen and didn't take the launchers. Which is different from the scenario I outlined.

Here's my bottom line. if he wanted that unit dead, he ws goingto have to shoot it. If he was going to have to shoot it he was going to have to use his Marines and his Dreads. He did. that's it. He also DID kill three tanks the same turn by the way. So his army did what it was supposed to. it was successful in anti tank operations and he got me good on the blob. And normally it would have been impressive. but this was a different kind of blob. So it wasn't impressive. And it usually isn't.

 Jancoran wrote:

Lascannons dont move, rest of the unit does. They fire at full BS, re-rolling with prescience (possibly with more rules from orders) like all heavy weapons that don't move within their units. The Lascannons cannot be hidden better in any place on the board than they can in the 40 man blob so they are safer there. In addition it takes away the enemies option to say "Well I cant beat it in melee but I can stop the incoming fire and lessen it". Which they probably WOULD wish to do, thinking from my opponents realistic side of his brain. the Prescience is useful in all phases so having it affect the cannons necessarily gives my melee the boost it also needs without a second casting being necessary so its more efficient use of the Psyker dice as well..

No, no and no. The lascannons are being taken as part of the blob, meaning the *have* to move. The're the same goddamn unit. If you've been playing this where the lascannons don't move all game, but everyone else does, you've been cheating.

Also you completely mislead us that don't want to read your stupid blog. "Space Marines" is a lot different than "Blood Angels".