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.

Martel732 wrote:
And that's why the IoM might as well spam grav.

And really only centurions do it well...

WKs, yes. But not Riptides or dreadknights, or any other T6 BS MC in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And that's why the IoM might as well spam grav.

And really only centurions do it well...

Yeah, BA grav bikers really aren't that great to be honest.

The vehicle weapons tend to be upgrade costs over having a HB.

Falcon vs LasPred has been mathed to death. Per model, they are just about equal. But the LasPred costs less.

WarWalkers cost, what 90 PPM for 2 BL?

A Dev squad with 4 LC is a *lot* cheaper than a pair of BL WarWalkers, actually.

A Dred, even a Riflemen, is a good CC threat. A WW will get trounced by a couple Marines.

The Razorback does seem overcosted, though.

Bharring wrote:
Since when is an SC not the same range as a PC? I'm fairly sure they are both 36". The only CWE standard heavy with 48" range is the EML.

Odds of an SC hitting twice in one round is 4/9. Less than half the time.

Odds of an SC doing 2 wounds to a WK (pre-saves for simplicity)?
(2/3)(2/3)(1/6)(1/6) just for a wound before saves. That is 1/81. Well below 1%.

The odds of the average SC shot doing a wound (pre saves) is:
(2/3)(1/6), or (1/9). So an EV of 2/9 wounds/round to save against.

A PC has a huge chance to hit (1/3 + (2/3)* odds that 2d6 is less than 4 + Small Blast radius + WK radius). Let's call that (1/3)+(2/3)(2/3), or 7/9ths.

That puts the EV of the PC at (7/9)(1/3), or (7/27).

(7/27) vs (6/27). Even lowballing the PCs chance to hit, its better at killing WKs than an SC.

You are right I was thinking aobut the sun-cannon range.

Bharring wrote:
The vehicle weapons tend to be upgrade costs over having a HB.

Falcon vs LasPred has been mathed to death. Per model, they are just about equal. But the LasPred costs less.

WarWalkers cost, what 90 PPM for 2 BL?

A Dev squad with 4 LC is a *lot* cheaper than a pair of BL WarWalkers, actually.

A Dred, even a Riflemen, is a good CC threat. A WW will get trounced by a couple Marines.

The Razorback does seem overcosted, though.

CC doesn't matter because everything dies before it gets to CC. IoM units are paying for CC capabilities that either a) they never use or b) don't matter vs WK.

Bharring wrote:
The vehicle weapons tend to be upgrade costs over having a HB.

Falcon vs LasPred has been mathed to death. Per model, they are just about equal. But the LasPred costs less.

WarWalkers cost, what 90 PPM for 2 BL?

A Dev squad with 4 LC is a *lot* cheaper than a pair of BL WarWalkers, actually.

A Dred, even a Riflemen, is a good CC threat. A WW will get trounced by a couple Marines.

The Razorback does seem overcosted, though.

No they are 70 point with 2 BL or 2 SL. They have a 5++ save too.

Yeah, the Suncannon is ugly.

Maybe this game would be better if we saw more Star Cannons and Brightlances than Suncannons and Heavy Wraithcannons. And more Plasma than Grav.

So SC edges out the PC against Riptides and DKs, and the PC edges out the SC vs WKs. And beats the SC vs Vehicles. And destroys it vs units.

Still seems like a wash.

Las preds are also awful units, which means Falcons are probably awful as well. There's a reason no one uses either anymore. Lascannons are a joke now. An utter joke as all the MCs and TWC and WK laugh all the way to bank.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Yeah, the Suncannon is ugly.

Maybe this game would be better if we saw more Star Cannons and Brightlances than Suncannons and Heavy Wraithcannons. And more Plasma than Grav.

So SC edges out the PC against Riptides and DKs, and the PC edges out the SC vs WKs. And beats the SC vs Vehicles. And destroys it vs units.

Still seems like a wash.

If you say so, but in my experience, I'd take the sc all day every day and twice on tuesdays. The plasma cannon is no longer even a remote consideration in any list I build. It's a terrible weapon.

Xeno,
They are still more expensive. And its 4 HP on AV10 open topped 5++. Vs 5 t4 3+ bodies. Even with the invuln, the survivability isn't that far off.

Bharring wrote:
The vehicle weapons tend to be upgrade costs over having a HB.

Falcon vs LasPred has been mathed to death. Per model, they are just about equal. But the LasPred costs less.

WarWalkers cost, what 90 PPM for 2 BL?

A Dev squad with 4 LC is a *lot* cheaper than a pair of BL WarWalkers, actually.

A Dred, even a Riflemen, is a good CC threat. A WW will get trounced by a couple Marines.

The Razorback does seem overcosted, though.

The ability to move and shot is the kicker.

We could just change Grav guns to their older graviton cousins and remove the stupid Pseudo MC/GCs that exist and make a Walker counter part: Riptide, Stormsurge, Ta'unar, Wraith Knight, Dreadknight, Castellan Robot(these should be Infantry, not MC).

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
The vehicle weapons tend to be upgrade costs over having a HB.

Falcon vs LasPred has been mathed to death. Per model, they are just about equal. But the LasPred costs less.

WarWalkers cost, what 90 PPM for 2 BL?

A Dev squad with 4 LC is a *lot* cheaper than a pair of BL WarWalkers, actually.

A Dred, even a Riflemen, is a good CC threat. A WW will get trounced by a couple Marines.

The Razorback does seem overcosted, though.

The ability to move and shot is the kicker.

This. I never use devs anymore for this exact reason.

Move 6", and BF back d6, sure, but 12" less range.

I think Tactical Spam has it right.

Martel732 wrote:
Las preds are also awful units, which means Falcons are probably awful as well. There's a reason no one uses either anymore. Lascannons are a joke now. An utter joke as all the MCs and TWC and WK laugh all the way to bank.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Yeah, the Suncannon is ugly.

Maybe this game would be better if we saw more Star Cannons and Brightlances than Suncannons and Heavy Wraithcannons. And more Plasma than Grav.

So SC edges out the PC against Riptides and DKs, and the PC edges out the SC vs WKs. And beats the SC vs Vehicles. And destroys it vs units.

Still seems like a wash.

If you say so, but in my experience, I'd take the sc all day every day and twice on tuesdays. The plasma cannon is no longer even a remote consideration in any list I build. It's a terrible weapon.

falcon can transport 6 units. plus its a fast vehicle. It has it's uses I think. Plus it can jink.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Las preds are also awful units, which means Falcons are probably awful as well. There's a reason no one uses either anymore. Lascannons are a joke now. An utter joke as all the MCs and TWC and WK laugh all the way to bank.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Yeah, the Suncannon is ugly.

Maybe this game would be better if we saw more Star Cannons and Brightlances than Suncannons and Heavy Wraithcannons. And more Plasma than Grav.

So SC edges out the PC against Riptides and DKs, and the PC edges out the SC vs WKs. And beats the SC vs Vehicles. And destroys it vs units.

Still seems like a wash.

If you say so, but in my experience, I'd take the sc all day every day and twice on tuesdays. The plasma cannon is no longer even a remote consideration in any list I build. It's a terrible weapon.

falcon can transport 6 units. plus its a fast vehicle. It has it's uses I think. Plus it can jink.

It would have uses in C:BA, but not in C:Eldar, Because they have much better stuff to bring.

The Falcon actually is fairly good, as long as you're using all its capabilities, and you take the shuricannon hullmount and holo-fields.

Then again, if your baseline for "crappiest unit that can be called good" is a scatbike, then everything in the game is atrocious. (But to me, scatbikes are OP, so they're not my baseline for "good unit".)

AV12/12/10 Jink vs AV13/11/11
More mobility vs longer range
Some Transporting vs better firepower

The Falcon also costs notably more.

I see them so much it's hard for them to not be the standard for me. It's kind of like the Spitfire for the Germans in WWII. It might have been unfair to compare other fighters in 1940, but that was what the Germans had to beat. And they couldn't. Same with the scatterbike. It is the standard because of the ubiquity of the unit.

While I see your point about ubiquity, the problem with making that the baseline for what's considered good, is that everything else is garbage in comparison. And if every unit except one is garbage, then that one non-garbage unit is too strong, not everything else is too weak.

Tactical marines don't hold a candle to scatpacks. Neither do Kabalite Warriors, Battle Sisters, Fire Warriors, Acolytes, Kroot, Guardians, Dire Avengers, Windriders with TL shuricats, or hell, even Windriders with shuricannons (though they're the closest). And that's just the basic troops from the other armies I play. (Boyz, Guardsmen, Gaunts, Necron Warriors, etc don't stack up any better.)

So to me the answer to that is nerfing scatbikes.

Though, I'll admit, at this point, I'd never go to a shop I'm not known at trying to get a pickup game with Eldar or Tau. At least not without some serious restrictions:

Tau: No 2+, no HYMP or missile pods, no S10, no AV13, no markerlights on platforms with better than T3, no Ghostkeels or Stormsurges.

Eldar: No scatter lasers, no D weapons, no Wraith units, no more than two Wave Serpents, no more than five tanks of any kind, no flyers, no more than 10 total shuriken cannon bikes per 2000 points.

And probably folks would still chase me out at bolterpoint for trying it...

While that's true remember the following:
Nerf Grav all you want to. That doesn't make me want to take Lascannons or Plasma Cannons.

In fact, all that does is replace Grav with Plasma Guns in my list. All you did was make it harder to kill G/MC's.

And harder to kill everything with a half decent save.

Bharring wrote:
And harder to kill everything with a half decent save.

Infantry with a good save are already lambs to the slaughter. The scatterlaser sees to that. As does bladestorm.

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
And harder to kill everything with a half decent save.

Infantry with a good save are already lambs to the slaughter. The scatterlaser sees to that. As does bladestorm.

The problem they have is with marines killing anything. Didn't you know Space Marines are supposed to be nothing more than target dummies?

I would not mind a change to grav so long as the change keeps them at their current effectiveness against MCs/GMCs, SHVs and Vehicles. In other words base the effectiveness on size. I could go with them losing effectiveness against vehicles if they made melta and las ect effective at the job instead of complete garbage. Only time melta is good is when you can have 4+ of it in a unit with the ability to drop them right into melta range before gettting shot to pieces.

The whole problem with marines as a whole is they lack firepower in numbers. For instance the tactical squad. The most you are gonna have (barring max squad size which is a trap imo) is two overpriced weapon upgrades and one of those is a one shot weapon. Marines lack RoF. The things that get spammed in marine lists are the units that have RoF on every unit and the mobility to make the most of it all game.

IoM also pays a premium for things that are stock but hardly ever used.

No.

The size idea is awful. The point of Graviton weaponry in 40k is to deal with heavily armored targets. That's why it Wounds versus Armor Saves rather than Toughness.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Remind me again, but when was the last time Guardsmen and Orks where commonplace within the hobby. These days everyone is doing FOTM Tau, Mary Sue marines, Elday or Necrons. Or Nidzilla.

Or gravspam

 Kanluwen wrote:
No.

The size idea is awful. The point of Graviton weaponry in 40k is to deal with heavily armored targets. That's why it Wounds versus Armor Saves rather than Toughness.

Okay, if the idea is so bad, then why don't you give us a viable alternative that doesn't make grav useless.

I realize what the intent of the weapon is. Problem is, Space Marines already have a weapon that does that (granted it does it poorly). It is called Plasma (gets hot really kills this as an effective weapon). Plasma could be easily fixed by making it S6 AP2 without gets hot. Melta and Las ect could be made to cause extra wounds against vehicles. Grav could be made to work against MCs and GMCs and other large items such as that. Maybe not the original intended role, but it certainly give it a role without negating the other stuff. NO ARMY should have a single weapon so effective that that is all they ever use. Unfortunately several armies do. For Space Marines it is grav.

At the same time certain overpowered units need to be fixed and vehicles need to get more durable.

Why not make grav salvo 2/2 and heavy grav salvo 4/4 with no re-rolls? It'd be reasonable.
Grav's problem is rof right now.

You need the RoF because MCs/GMCs have so many wounds. And GMC get free FNP which grav NEVER denies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NorseSig wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
No.

The size idea is awful. The point of Graviton weaponry in 40k is to deal with heavily armored targets. That's why it Wounds versus Armor Saves rather than Toughness.

Okay, if the idea is so bad, then why don't you give us a viable alternative that doesn't make grav useless.

I realize what the intent of the weapon is. Problem is, Space Marines already have a weapon that does that (granted it does it poorly). It is called Plasma (gets hot really kills this as an effective weapon). Plasma could be easily fixed by making it S6 AP2 without gets hot. Melta and Las ect could be made to cause extra wounds against vehicles. Grav could be made to work against MCs and GMCs and other large items such as that. Maybe not the original intended role, but it certainly give it a role without negating the other stuff. NO ARMY should have a single weapon so effective that that is all they ever use. Unfortunately several armies do. For Space Marines it is grav.

At the same time certain overpowered units need to be fixed and vehicles need to get more durable.

Marines pay a lot for CC stats that never get used to good effect.

 NorseSig wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
No.

The size idea is awful. The point of Graviton weaponry in 40k is to deal with heavily armored targets. That's why it Wounds versus Armor Saves rather than Toughness.

Okay, if the idea is so bad, then why don't you give us a viable alternative that doesn't make grav useless.

The "viable alternative" is simply to start bringing the old weapons up to the current edition.

I realize what the intent of the weapon is. Problem is, Space Marines already have a weapon that does that (granted it does it poorly). It is called Plasma (gets hot really kills this as an effective weapon). Plasma could be easily fixed by making it S6 AP2 without gets hot.

Plasma Guns and Cannons should have been given a dual profile ages ago. A "restrained" profile and an "unrestrained" profile that has Gets Hot.

A safer, less powerful version and the plasma we all know and love.

Melta and Las ect could be made to cause extra wounds against vehicles.

They already do that. It's called the vehicle damage table and Melta/Las being AP 1/2 respectively.

And those two weapons aren't considered lackluster because of an inability to kill vehicles. It's because killing vehicles is not done with penetrating hits this edition; it's spamming lots of glancing hits.

Grav could be made to work against MCs and GMCs and other large items such as that. Maybe not the original intended role, but it certainly give it a role without negating the other stuff. NO ARMY should have a single weapon so effective that that is all they ever use. Unfortunately several armies do. For Space Marines it is grav.

The "original intended role" is to Wound things that have a high armor save/Toughness. GMCs/MCs fall under that category for the most part. The Tau's Stormsurge is an exception to the rule, purportedly one of their designers said at an event that the Stormsurge was given a 3+ rather than a 2+ specifically to increase its survival versus Grav.

At the same time certain overpowered units need to be fixed and vehicles need to get more durable.

That and legacy weapons need to be made viable, along with the basic rules for older weapon types to get overhauled as well.

"They already do that. It's called the vehicle damage table and Melta/Las being AP 1/2 respectively.

And those two weapons aren't considered lackluster because of an inability to kill vehicles. It's because killing vehicles is not done with penetrating hits this edition; it's spamming lots of glancing hits. "

In large part due to AP 1/2 being nerfed in 7th. They tried to make vehicles better, but all they did was make the scatterlaser better. And trashcan two key Imperial weapons even further.