Switch Theme:

So how is 7th edition doing?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps




Phoenix, AZ, USA

No, its you guys that are vastly underestimating the tactical use of terrain to limit engagement to allow "underperforming" weapons to shine. A Raider with Lances and passengers with Blasters have more than enough "rate of fire" to murder TDA in isolation. Two of the same Raiders can kill a Knight Titan, or a WaithKnight. And by isolation, I don't mean in a vacuum. I mean between terrain to limit the engagement to just those units. Its exactly the way Podded Melta works, only on turn 2 instead of turn 1.

Also, taking an objective rarely mean killing a SH or GC. My point was about winning Maelstrom, not tabling a GC formation.

SJ

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
No, its you guys that are vastly underestimating the tactical use of terrain to limit engagement to allow "underperforming" weapons to shine.


You really can't admit you're wrong, can you?

Tactics do not make bad weapons good. I can't believe I'm having to say this. At best, good tactics can go some way towards compensating for bad weapons. That still doesn't make them good. Also, what happens if an opponent with better weapons also uses tactics? Then you're back to square one because your weapons are objectively worse.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
A Raider with Lances and passengers with Blasters have more than enough "rate of fire" to murder TDA in isolation. Two of the same Raiders can kill a Knight Titan, or a WaithKnight.


Okay, let's try this.

2 Raiders with Dark Lances, each containing 5 Trueborn with 4 Blasters. Hell, let's add a Dracon with a Blast Pistol to each squad as well. Since obviously 6" range and a target that can move twice as fast as you is nothing tactics can't overcome.

So, 14 Darklight shots. 9.3 hits. 4.66 wounds. 3.11 wounds after FNP.

Under the most optimal conditions possible, your two squads have taken off only half the WK's wounds. And, these two squads cost 200pts each (215 if you want Night Shields). That's 800pts to kill the WK in one turn, and that's assuming that it has no cover or shield, and that you can get all 4 squads within 6" of it.

Frankly though, I see no point in continuing this. You've provided nothing but demonstrably fallacious arguments, coupled with L2P ones that make it clear you haven't a clue what you're talking about. Well, I'm done arguing with you. Welcome to my ignore list. I hope your stay is a pleasant one.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in gb
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord






@Vipoid, you should know by now that those Cultists armed with sharpened sticks can take out that Land Raider if they just use tactics.


Games Workshop Delenda Est.

Users on ignore- 53.

If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 jeffersonian000 wrote:
No, its you guys that are vastly underestimating the tactical use of terrain to limit engagement to allow "underperforming" weapons to shine.

Doubtful. One of the reasons good units are good, and oblits are not, is because they are fast enough to utilize terrain due to their better speed.
If you are speaking about Raiders, it's hard to hide as many raiders as you are likely to field, considering the size of the tank. Many of the better anti-tank units are dropping in or are extremely fast as well. I don't know how you would hide 4-5 raiders from bike squadrons or drop pods.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

A Raider with Lances and passengers with Blasters have more than enough "rate of fire" to murder TDA in isolation.

I...don't really know what this is in reference to. TDA without some sort of re-rollable invul save is pretty bad. Nobody takes termies.
We were discussing how 2 oblits are fragile, you don't need a raider to kill them. RoF from small arms will do it without some sort of re-roll.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Two of the same Raiders can kill a Knight Titan, or a WaithKnight. And by isolation, I don't mean in a vacuum. I mean between terrain to limit the engagement to just those units. Its exactly the way Podded Melta works, only on turn 2 instead of turn 1.

First off, 2 raiders don't fire enough lances to kill a knight of either variety. The blaster is a close range gun, that is inferior to the melta, you may not get to fire it. Knights are incredibly fast and have great long range fire, they can eliminate the raiders pretty easy (2 hull points).
Drop pod meltas pump out 3 superior anti-tank shots for similar points to a raider squad and can target rear armor trivially. And can do it turn 1, before the unit can fight back (though really you want 2 pod units min for a knight).
If you see the two as equatable then I don't think we can have a conversation. Drop pod meltas are superior in most ways to raider lances.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Also, taking an objective rarely mean killing a SH or GC. My point was about winning Maelstrom, not tabling a GC formation.
SJ

Taking an objective can sometimes involve killing something, which 2 oblits can't do, or moving where you need to be quickly.
Oblits can't do either of these things, which make them bad objective grabbers.
MoN bikers are much better. Both are inferior to marine bikers to objective grabbing.
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

This discussion of 7th edition seems to have bogged down in the minutiae of Dark Elves for some reason.

Is it possible to relate this back to the main topic? I am sure we all recognise that imbalance, weak units and weak codexes are hardly a new feature introduced by 7th edition.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





UK

I think we can safely say that Dark Eldar aren't doing well as a stand-alone army in 7th edition

YMDC = nightmare 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Makumba wrote:
Yeah, it failed but with Maelstrom especially you can see how a more balanced list with a blend of offense, defense and mobility was supposed to work better than all-all-out war lists.

And it doesn't work at all if GW "forgets" to give your army those 3. It works well for marines and eldars with their cheap transports and bikers, and deathstars suddenly turning in to 5 or more units in last turn of game.

Please name the armies that don't have all three.

SJ

IG has no mobility , 0 defenses compering to other armies and no offense compering to other armies. Ah and it is impossible to build a Deathstar too.



IG players are still stuck in Leafblower mode, when the game has moved past static gunlines. A 50man blob behind a Chimera wall won't die to a single turn of shooting, will weathe an assault, and can knock an opponent off an objective. Yet, they are unwieldy. Veterans gravshutting out of Valks are an excellent bully unit, with enough low AP firepower to clear an objective. Add in all their artillery gor softening targets before pushing, and IG has no issues winning objective missions. If they bother to try.

A 50 man blob arrives on an objective on turn 2, maybe 3. By that time the opposing player burned through half the mission deck and is wining so much throwing the game is more viable. Vets come turn 2 and are one unit and struggle to kill anything, but the most basic stuff. They can't kill a deathstar, there are too many msu units for one vet unit to do any impact and they do nothing to armies with super durability like Necron. And the clearing part is not even that easy. One unit of vets to kill a transport and 5meq that went down or a jinking bikers may not be enough. Ah and the unit of vets costs a lot more then all msu units. And I don't know what artilery part is suppose to mean. Wyverns are ok vs armies that aren't played horde non meq lists. All other artilery units die to marine alfa strikes and stuff like scater bikes. Plus they cost an arm and a leg for what they do. Two lemman russes cost like a WK and bring two battle cannons that do nothing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/03 19:36:25


 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

Makumba wrote:
Two lemman russes cost like a WK and bring two battle cannons that do nothing.
This is the bit where someone starts commenting that "Av14 spam is op."
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps




Phoenix, AZ, USA

Its just amusing that people think Maelstrom is bad because DE can kill WraithKnights. How that logic chain works, I have no clue.

SJ

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
 
   
Made in us
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine




Well, It is incumbent on you to explain said logic chain since you just made it up.
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps




Phoenix, AZ, USA

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Well, It is incumbent on you to explain said logic chain since you just made it up.

Incorrect. I questioned which armies lacked mobility, offensive punch, and defensive resilience, because all armies have all three. This as in response to Maelstrom. What follow with others explaining how DE and IG can't kill a WraithKnight, which of cource has absolutely nothing to do with Maelstrom. If you note in my posts, I kept pointing out that my responses were to winning Maelstrom, although I did address how the same units can be use to counter Knights.

SJ

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 jeffersonian000 wrote:
 Crimson Devil wrote:
Well, It is incumbent on you to explain said logic chain since you just made it up.

Incorrect. I questioned which armies lacked mobility, offensive punch, and defensive resilience, because all armies have all three. This as in response to Maelstrom. What follow with others explaining how DE and IG can't kill a WraithKnight, which of cource has absolutely nothing to do with Maelstrom. If you note in my posts, I kept pointing out that my responses were to winning Maelstrom, although I did address how the same units can be use to counter Knights.

SJ


That's a pretty gross misrepresentation of what is being discussed.

We discussed why CSM lack mobility. All they have is bikers, because their deep striking is pretty bad (you had mentioned oblits). We also discussed their lack of offensive punch/defensive abilities as well, since 4 wounds in TDA isn't anything to write home about in today's meta.

We discussed why DE also lack offensive and defensive punch. You claimed 2 raiders could kill a knight. We then discussed why this is very hard for the raiders to do.

Since you have to capture objectives in maelstorm turn after turn, you need units that will survive and be mobile turn after turn.
This makes units like MoN bikers, regular Bikers, Teleporting CentStars, Scatbikers, Wave Serpents, wraiths, and destroyers pretty good at it. These units also have a decent offensive punch (except for the MoN bikers), so they can contribute to the battle.

Raiders are mobile, true, but it's not uncommon to lose all of them turn 3 barring a LoS blocking terrain heavy battlefield. They lack offense and defense, meaning de, despite their speed, aren't well suited for maelstorm when compared to Eldar.
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps




Phoenix, AZ, USA

Not every objective will be under a Knight Titan or WraithKnight. DE, IG, and CSM have units that are fast enough to reach objectives while being shooty enough to take them and resilient enough to hold them if needed. All the discussion provide was that in a vacuum, posters fear change, fear big models, and don't play with enough LoS blocking terrain.

SJ

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
 
   
Made in us
Blood Angel Terminator with Lightning Claws



Sioux Falls, SD

You have mentioned the MoN bikers a few times as worse is this because they don't get grav weapons or is there another reason?

edit:undoing auto correct

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/04 14:51:12


Blood for the bloo... wait no, I meant for Sanguinius!  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 TheAvengingKnee wrote:
You have mentioned the MoN bikers a few times as worse is this because they don't get grav weapons or is there another reason?

edit:undoing auto correct


I'm going to assume you were referring to me.

There are several reasons why MoN bikers are worse than regular bikers in SM.

1) T6 isn't as good as it used to be.
With many higher strength weapons in the game (Str D, Str 6 has become quite common as well, or Grav Weapons) not caring about high T, the T 6 isn't that much better than a T 5 anymore. T6 used to be amazing because it was immunity to most small arms, since they needed a 6 to wound and got to then deal with a 3+ save on top of that. The T6 was expensive but worth it.
Now it's not nearly as good due to these new weapons. Grav is pretty common sadly considering how popular marines are, and Riptides can delete a unit of bikers as well. Might as well make them cheaper. The way wound allocation works, regular bikers can have a disgusting combat lord who is absurdly tanky in the front absorbing shots. MoN bikers can't compete.

2) Their offense output is bad, relatively speaking.
When they first released, their offence was good, since a few special weapons and bolters was considered standard for a squad. They also were pretty good in CC and could fire and assault.
Now other bikers have scat guns, grav weapons, hit and run chapter tactics, or are something disgusting like Wraiths/Blades/TWC. Out of the bikers you still see getting taken, they are probably the weakest offensively now. The SM lord's equipment makes a mockery of anything Chaos can take.

Tl;dr
Their toughness isn't as relevant anymore and their offense is subpar.


Jeffersonian,
The problem is they have some units that are fast, some units that are tough, and not a lot of units that have offensive output (Though IG do have some).
Raiders are fast, but die to a stiff breeze and don't have the best firepower. It's not bad but it certainly isn't great. They can capture objectives in the first part of the game but will often be trivially (basic infantry can do it in most armies) removed from the game.
MoN bikers are tough but lack offensive output. They are weak against the high strength templates/grav weapons you see commonly these days.
IG have...I don't know what IG have that are fast. I imagine drop troops of some kind, though they suffer from their inability to capture objectives turn after turn.

TBH, the wraithknight doesn't care about LoS blocking terrain. It's insanely fast and is tall. If any model is going to ignore LoS blocking terrain, it'll be that creature. Slow moving IG tanks and oblits care a lot more about having fire lanes blocked than a jumping GMC.
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




"and don't play with enough LoS blocking terrain. "

Some battlefields, indeed many in history, are legitimately rather wide open. Not every general will choose to fight in a clogged area.

Game balance shouldn't revolve around something as arbitrary as terrain. Ie, I shouldn't have to cower behind a wall to have a chance.
   
Made in us
Blood Angel Terminator with Lightning Claws



Sioux Falls, SD

@Akiasura thank you for clarifying.

Blood for the bloo... wait no, I meant for Sanguinius!  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Martel732 wrote:
"and don't play with enough LoS blocking terrain. "

Some battlefields, indeed many in history, are legitimately rather wide open. Not every general will choose to fight in a clogged area.

Game balance shouldn't revolve around something as arbitrary as terrain. Ie, I shouldn't have to cower behind a wall to have a chance.


We'll have to agree to disagree here Martel.
I do wish GW had better examples of tables, and better terrain/LoS rules. I find that, especially in my specialist games, this becomes a bit of a headache. We've had to basically allow each player to set up terrain in turn to get around it, and it still becomes a bit of a challenge to deal with.
I think I prefer WMH, where certain people (because they are incredible generals or mages) can place extra terrain on the board. It'd be pretty cool if more redeployment/terrain placement was allowed by people who are supposed to be excellent generals.
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




What part do you disagree with? Hopefully not the historical part. d
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




No lol.
The idea that terrain can't be used for balancing. Other games manage it, but GW needs to incorporate terrain into the rules better.
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




Akiasura wrote:
No lol.
The idea that terrain can't be used for balancing. Other games manage it, but GW needs to incorporate terrain into the rules better.


It CAN be, but shouldn't HAVE to be. Big difference. Armies shouldn't auto lose to Eldar or Tau on sparse maps. If that's how you intend to balance, then assault armies need to have built-in terrain requirements, which would be very bizarre.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/04 18:20:35


 
   
Made in us
Hacking Interventor




7th is pretty fun if your playing Eldar, space marines, tau, or necrons! If you don't play any of those armies or don't wish to ally into one of them then your better off not playing in this edition. I'd recommend playing 5th ed or just putting 40k off until a new edition comes out or your army gets the same type of codex the big 4 have (not likely).

 
   
Made in gb
Worthiest of Warlock Engineers






preston

I can tell you what we IG have that is fast and can capture objectives:
Nothing
Nope
Jack diddly squat
Feth all
Still nothing
They said we have a fast attack section around here..... But all I can find are slow walkers and massively overpriced cavalry....
Still nothing over here
Elites here - we have some one use tissue paper infantry that can deepstrike... Provided you dont mind paying through the nose for them.
This corner is barren too

Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




Hellhounds definitely have a niche now.
   
Made in gb
Worthiest of Warlock Engineers






preston

They blow up if an Eldar farts too close to them. A 12/12/10 tank the requires you to get right up in your opponents face but has no real defensive measures and too little damage output to clear enough of the enemy to prevent the inevitable assault is dead in this current meta.
They also cost absurd amounts too.
[Edit]
Oh, and I nearly forgot, they are not scoring units either (thankyou Gdubs for that one).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/04 18:30:21


Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




 master of ordinance wrote:
They blow up if an Eldar farts too close to them. A 12/12/10 tank the requires you to get right up in your opponents face but has no real defensive measures and too little damage output to clear enough of the enemy to prevent the inevitable assault is dead in this current meta.
They also cost absurd amounts too.
[Edit]
Oh, and I nearly forgot, they are not scoring units either (thankyou Gdubs for that one).


12/12/10 is actually far more efficient against Eldar than any marine tank. There's a chance a 5 man scatbike squad fails to kill it. That's $$. AP 3 torrent ignores cover is also $$.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/04 18:31:30


 
   
Made in gb
Worthiest of Warlock Engineers






preston

Martel732 wrote:
 master of ordinance wrote:
They blow up if an Eldar farts too close to them. A 12/12/10 tank the requires you to get right up in your opponents face but has no real defensive measures and too little damage output to clear enough of the enemy to prevent the inevitable assault is dead in this current meta.
They also cost absurd amounts too.
[Edit]
Oh, and I nearly forgot, they are not scoring units either (thankyou Gdubs for that one).


12/12/10 is actually far more efficient against Eldar than any marine tank. There's a chance a 5 man scatbike squad fails to kill it. That's $$. AP 3 torrent ignores cover is also $$.


Only the AP4 is torrent. The AP3 requires me to quite literally face feth the target to get any real hits.

Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
 
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






Wait, so who's worse as an army? BA or IG? No allies allowed.

Aaaaaaand go!

~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




I still use the flamestorm cannon sometimes. Ignoring cover without having to use a psychic power is that good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 jreilly89 wrote:
Wait, so who's worse as an army? BA or IG? No allies allowed.

Aaaaaaand go!


We're discussing that elsewhere.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/04 18:35:32


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





UK

Elysian Drop Troops are fast, but like Tyranids, I don't want to be shoe-horned into playing a certain type of list just to compete (even though Elysians are the only part of the AM that I like).

I don't like static gunlines, but I can see the appeal to them for some players and they shouldn't be punished just for liking something.

YMDC = nightmare 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: