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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 02:58:58
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
Pain4Pleasure wrote:Eh might as well say 27 ppm for windriders as, yes I'm even guilty, we usually load them up with scatter lasers. But even if we do the cannon it's still 27 ppm. Only when it's the catapult is it 17 ppm
I proposed a 1 in 3 heavy weapon restriction in addition to the 24 ppm windrider.
I mean, what would you personally do?
72 points for the windriders plus 10 points for scatter laser?
Or would you take the squad of dire avengers (for 12 points less, mind you)?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
niv-mizzet wrote:The issue there is that it's possible to have them not be troops. By adjusting point cost, you're either making them undercosted obsec troop bikes or overcosted fast attacks.
I disagree with this. I don't think that their position on the FoC really changes whether they are under or over costed. [Incidentally, I was under the impression that all models in a CAD get objective secured? Is it only troops?]
The fact that bikes are able to be taken as troops only put just how undercosted they are into sharp relief. If they were fast attacks, then they would be competing for the slot with potentially even better stuff, but that wouldn't change the fact that they're still undercosted.
A windrider is, for all intents and purposes, a dire avenger. What does the bike add?
1. +1 to the armor save
2. +1 toughness (Chaos space marines pay 3 ppm for this vis a vis mark of nurgle)
3. Additional movement and hammer of wrath (in effect what a jumppack, which is worth 3 ppm, confers).
4. Relentless
5. The ability to jink.
2 and 3 alone are 5 ppm worth of special rules and stat bonuses.
But Eldar players only actually pay FOUR ppm for that (because feth fairness and balance, right?). Compare this to a space marine biker, who pays SEVEN points per model (over a tactical marine) for fewer advantages. The space marine bike, for all intents and purposes, confers:
1. Twin-linked bolter
2. +1 toughness (Chaos space marines pay 3 ppm for this vis a vis mark of nurgle)
3. Additional movement and hammer of wrath (in effect what a jumppack, which is worth 3 ppm, confers).
4. Relentless
5. The ability to jink
Is all of that really only worth 7 ppm? Again, 2 and 3 alone are worth 6 ppm. If you upgrade a SM captain to a bike, that's a 20 point upgrade.
I think that my proposal to increase the cost of bike units up to (10 + cost of the non-bike version of the model) is rather conservative.
I'm happy with the bikes current cost until you hand it obsec and get to knock your subpar tacticals out of the list. The change in efficiency for the list there is quite drastic. More than any slight point adjustment will cover.
Windriders would be cool at their current cost as fast attacks, but the ability to cross the board and win the game in addition to not having to take foot troops is where it gets crazy. People focus on the lasers a lot, but they're just a red herring. It's that obsec 48" move that will end up taking the game from you.
Again, I'm fine with bikes as troop choices. It makes sense for some armies. It makes sense for white scars players to have bike armies.
The key is to make sure that bikes aren't better than their points equivalence in basic troops. This is where appropriate pricing comes in (as well as formation bonuses).
If bikes were appropriately priced, the white scars player would have to choose between:
1. A 72 point bike squad (without upgrades)
2. A 70 point 5 man tactical squad and rhino (without upgrades)
|
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2016/04/22 06:20:35
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 03:18:31
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Trustworthy Shas'vre
california
|
Traditio wrote:Pain4Pleasure wrote:Eh might as well say 27 ppm for windriders as, yes I'm even guilty, we usually load them up with scatter lasers. But even if we do the cannon it's still 27 ppm. Only when it's the catapult is it 17 ppm
I proposed a 1 in 3 heavy weapon restriction in addition to the 24 ppm windrider.
I mean, what would you personally do?
72 points for the windriders plus 10 points for scatter laser?
Or would you take the squad of dire avengers (for 12 points less, mind you)?
The thing is this. I can see a points increase if we remain allowed to take 3 scatter lasers. Like 35 ppm which is an 8 point increase. However if we go the 1 in 3 route I feel points should remain what they are
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 03:20:17
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
Pain4Pleasure wrote:The thing is this. I can see a points increase if we remain allowed to take 3 scatter lasers. Like 35 ppm which is an 8 point increase. However if we go the 1 in 3 route I feel points should remain what they are
See my reply to Nev-Mizzet.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 03:36:22
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Trustworthy Shas'vre
california
|
Traditio wrote:Pain4Pleasure wrote:The thing is this. I can see a points increase if we remain allowed to take 3 scatter lasers. Like 35 ppm which is an 8 point increase. However if we go the 1 in 3 route I feel points should remain what they are
See my reply to Nev-Mizzet.
You make a few points, as my dark eldar reavers compete in fast attack. As long as I take the real space raiders detachment then this is ibviously somewhat negated, but still a concern none the less. And unlike the eldar bretheren, my reaver bikers don't really add a TON for their points at all. Heck, their armor save stays 5+! Yet I still pay 16 ppm for them, plus 15 for a caltrop which might or might not do much. So I get what you mean, but I do stick by the not as much of an increase for the 1 f 3 method vs a decent increase if kept to every model may take method
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 03:46:50
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine
Little Rock, Arkansas
|
@traditio
In regards to CAD obsec, yes, ONLY the troop selections in a CAD get obsec. The other units get nothing. (Other than the warlord who gets a reroll on the core book warlord traits.)
As for the point costs, all my experience in local and tournament 40k play tells me that battlefield role DOES matter. Having to make your list a little less efficient by tossing in 110 points of scouts, 140 of tac marines, or 130 of dire avengers that don't fit with your overall list strategy is a big deal. Lists that win large GT's have usually min-maxed down to the last point or few, and forced suboptimal choices in 3 digit point value hurt them severely. (I personally went over my last GT winning list something like 30 times moving around like...20 points, and every little wargear option mattered at some point or another.)
In addition to reduced list efficiency by the bikes not filling in for the subpar troops, making them fast attack hurts them in other ways:
1- They now compete for spots with other fast attacks. Not especially important for marines, but wind riders would be competing with warp spiders!
2- They can't get obsec as mentioned before, without using some formation that grants it. (Which I also advocate killing all formations with nuclear weaponry until they can do them right, so in my perfect 40k universe, that wouldn't even be a consideration.) Obsec doesn't seem like all that much on standard guys, but to units that can cross the table in a turn or two? It is worth it's weight in gold. There is a reason that nearly every eldar tourney player runs a CAD with several bike units instead of snagging their mega-formation. Obsec on those few speedy guys is literally better than the army wide super-battle-focus.
3- They are worth VP's to the enemy in "the scouring" mission and tournament missions based on it, such as ITC mission 4.
4- only 3 FA slots in a CAD, so not only do they compete with other FA, you can't take 6x3 in a single detachment either.
That's all I can really elaborate on it. If you're still convinced that changing battlefield role isn't relevant to a unit's value, then I just have to disagree and bid you good night.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/22 03:48:28
20000+ points
Tournament reports:
1234567 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 03:59:25
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
niv-mizzet wrote:That's all I can really elaborate on it. If you're still convinced that changing battlefield role isn't relevant to a unit's value, then I just have to disagree and bid you good night. 
What you say makes sense. I'm fully prepared to admit that putting all bikes into the fast attack slot would be a nerf to bikes.
That said, even if that were to happen, that wouldn't change the fact that at least some bike units, regardless of their FOC slot, are fundamentally undercosted. The value of the special rules and bonuses that they derive from the bikes over and beyond what they would normally have without those bikes exceeds the points value of what players actually pay.
That needs to change. Regardless of the FoC slot, a windrider should cost 10 ppm more than a dire avenger.
Even if windriders were a fast attack in the FoC, this change wouldn't alter the fact that windriders cost far too little at 17 ppm, whereas dire avengers cost 13 ppm. That bike confers a whole heck of a lot more than a 4 point value.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 04:11:26
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine
Little Rock, Arkansas
|
Oh yeah I'm certainly not trying to say that all bikes are perfectly costed. Was just saying that them getting to be a troop was the most offensive balance issue they had going to me.
After they get moved to (or kept in) FA, they could then easily have minor tweaks.
|
20000+ points
Tournament reports:
1234567 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 04:14:15
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
Pain4Pleasure wrote:You make a few points, as my dark eldar reavers compete in fast attack. As long as I take the real space raiders detachment then this is ibviously somewhat negated, but still a concern none the less. And unlike the eldar bretheren, my reaver bikers don't really add a TON for their points at all. Heck, their armor save stays 5+! Yet I still pay 16 ppm for them, plus 15 for a caltrop which might or might not do much. So I get what you mean, but I do stick by the not as much of an increase for the 1 f 3 method vs a decent increase if kept to every model may take method
Actually, now that you mention it, this just hammers in just how ridiculous the windrider unit is. A wych costs 10 ppm. The reaver jetbike costs 16 ppm without caltrops. The dire avenger only pays 4 ppm to upgrade, but the wych has to pay 6? Do you really mean to tell me that the reaver jetbike is only 1 ppm less valuable in practice than a 17 ppm windrider model? AND WHY DOES A SPACE MARINE HAVE TO PAY SEVEN FOR LESS BENEFITS THAN BOTH?
Do you know how much an ORK biker costs? EIGHTEEN POINTS PER MODEL! That's a whopping TWELVE point increase from what a standard boy costs.
Regardless of whether or not eldar windriders can spam scatter lasers or not (that's a separate issue), the simple fact is that windrider jetbikes are horribly undercosted, and bikes in general are sharply discounted from what they actually should cost. [Except orcs. Orcs might actually be overcosted. Seriously, what they have to pay for their bikes (THAT THEY CAN'T EVEN UPGRADE) is fething ridiculous]
Regardless of whether or not windriders can spam heavy weapons, these are the simple facts.
Bike units (regardless of the codex), from what I can see, are just NOT fairly costed. There need to be points price changes.
For EVERYONE, that change should be 10 points over and above the points cost of the base model.
Reaver jetbikes should cost 20 ppm.
Windriders should cost 24 ppm.
Space marine bikes should cost 24 ppm.
Space marine scout bikes should cost 21 ppm.
Ork bikes might actually cost LESS at 16 ppm (or else, they should cost 20 points if we compare them to boys in heavy armor).
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/04/22 04:38:02
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 04:44:35
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Cackling Chaos Conscript
|
Im not saying they are better than windriders but don't forget that Ork bikers also get 3 S5 twin-linked shots each and have 3+ jink after Turbo-boost. Most Ork lists i've seen include them.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 06:06:33
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
Sonic Keyboard wrote:Im not saying they are better than windriders but don't forget that Ork bikers also get 3 S5 twin-linked shots each and have 3+ jink after Turbo-boost. Most Ork lists i've seen include them. So what? Space marine bikers get twin-linked bolters. Eldar jetbikes confer twin-linked shuriken catapults and ridiculous levels of mobility, as well as +1 armor save. Dark Eldar jetbikes confer a splinter rifle and ridiculous levels of mobility, not to mention bladevanes. (By the way, Dark Eldar have to restrict themselves to 1 heavy weapon in 3, and they take up a FAST ATTACK slot.) Ork bikes get a gun (which ain't hitting much) and a 3+ cover if they turbo boost. Are these all worth the same thing? I don't claim that. But they're all worth at least 10 points each. Eldar jetbikes being, in effect, a 4 point upgrade is an offense, an insult, a slap in the face to all other codices.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/22 06:14:19
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 06:07:43
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Traditio wrote:This thread is basically a response to comments in the Simple Balance for Codex: Eldar.
In that thread, various recommendations were made for nerfs/points adjustments. I would like to enumerate what I think are basically fair nerfs for Codex: Space Marines.
1. A full battle company should only confer free rhinos and drop pods for minimum 5 man squads. A full 10 man squad is needed to field a free razorback or drop pod.
2. Command squads should not be able to purchase a dedicated transport if they elect to travel on bikes.
3. Scout bikes should cost 21 ppm.
4. Space Marine bikers should cost 24 ppm.
5. The librarians should not be able to not use powers which reroll saves or cause teleportation.
6. Centurions should cost 65 ppm.
7. Grav-guns should be rapidfire weapons
8. Grav cannons should be 48" range, heavy 1, blast weapons. In compensation for this, a grav cannon and amp should only cost 25 ppm.
9. The "Intertial Guidance System" for the drop pod should be rewritten to say "keep rerolling the scatter dice until you legally can land and deploy; if at any point the scatter dice would have the drop pod land off of the table, the drop pod remains in reserves and you must roll reserves for it again next turn."
10. The shield eternal should be 70 ppm.
11. Drop pods should cost 45 ppm.
12. Storm shields should cost 15 ppm as an upgrade.
13: A buff, not a nerf, but one that's sorely needed: Flakk missiles should cost 5 ppm as an upgrade to missile launchers, not 10 ppm.
Boom. Codex fixed.
Your fixes are stupid and you should feel terrible for posting them.
1. The vehicles shouldn't be free in the first place. Free bonuses are worse than free units.
2. Who cares? They're not going to travel in it, and having multiple CAD's makes the Slot issue a non-issue. Ten Tacticals can still get a Razorback, after all, and they can't ride unless they Combat Squad.
3. Nobody is taking Scout Bikers in the first place, and you propose making them more expensive.
4. Bikers are fine. You need to make the Tactical Marine more appealing.
5. So Librarians can't roll on Sanctic, Divination, and Telekinesis. Got it.
6. Centurions are priced fine. Make the Grav Cannon + Amp 35 points like on everyone else and we're doing better.
7. Ah yes, neuter the damage output of Tactical and Biker Marines more. They were barely doing damage with Plasma Guns as is. Make them Salvo 2/2.
8. And then nobody takes Grav Cannons. Notice how nobody takes Plasma Cannons? The Blast profile is garbage.
9. That makes the game take even longer.
10. That's stupid. EW is worth 25-30 points, and the SS is 15 points. So we would pay over 20+ for AW? Uh, no. That's stupid.
11. Maybe 40 points, but 45 is pushing it. 10 more gets you a Razorback.
12. They're already 15 points.
13. Flakk Missiles should be already included in the cost because the ML isn't doing anything well.
I swear, it is like you didn't even read the things you listed before you posted.
|
CaptainStabby wrote:If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote:BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote:Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote:ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 06:31:49
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:1. The vehicles shouldn't be free in the first place. Free bonuses are worse than free units.
I have no a priori reason to agree with you.
2. Who cares?
Presupposing they are in a battle company, that's an extra rhino, drop pod or razorback that they shouldn't be getting.
3. Nobody is taking Scout Bikers in the first place, and you propose making them more expensive.
4. Bikers are fine. You need to make the Tactical Marine more appealing.
I give an extended defense of why bikers should cost more in an earlier posting(s) of this thread.
5. So Librarians can't roll on Sanctic, Divination, and Telekinesis. Got it.
Of course they can. They just have to reroll if they end up with shenanigans.
Better yet? Remove shenanigans from those tables.
6. Centurions are priced fine. Make the Grav Cannon + Amp 35 points like on everyone else and we're doing better.
No. They aren't. A devastator marine is 14 ppm. They get +1 toughness. That right there is a 3 ppm upgrade (mark of nurgle). They get a twin-linked heavy bolter and a hurricane bolter. Sounds like a 20 ppm upgrade to me. We're at 37 ppm at this point. They get slow and purposeful. How much is that worth? Shooting protocols? +1 strength? 2+ armor save? 2 wounds?
There is no sense in which this is a 55 point model in terms of actual value.
A true fair estimation of this model is more like 75 ppm (50 base X 1.5 for the extra wound). We move that down to an even 70.
7. Ah yes, neuter the damage output of Tactical and Biker Marines more. They were barely doing damage with Plasma Guns as is. Make them Salvo 2/2.
Absolutely not. At 15 ppm, they should be at strict parity with plasma guns. I will grant that as rapidfire weapons, however, their ranges should be increased. 24 inches seems appropriate.
8. And then nobody takes Grav Cannons. Notice how nobody takes Plasma Cannons? The Blast profile is garbage.
At 48 inch range, that grav cannon is going to work better (given the fact that it can be rerolled) than a lascannon against a wraithknight. Probably overcosted, though. 20 ppm seems more appropriate.
9. That makes the game take even longer.
The wording of the rule could be changed. The idea is to get rid of the "minimum distance" thing.
10. That's stupid. EW is worth 25-30 points, and the SS is 15 points. So we would pay over 20+ for AW? Uh, no. That's stupid.
25-30 points is an undervaluation of Eternal Warrior.
11. Maybe 40 points, but 45 is pushing it. 10 more gets you a Razorback.
If you're running a drop pod army, would 45 points make you want to get razorbacks instead?
12. They're already 15 points.
False. See p. 138 of the space marines codex.
I swear, it is like you didn't even read the things you listed before you posted.
Given the fact that you strike me as a competitive space marines player, your vehement protests to the nerfs in question tell me that they are a step in the appropriate direction.
People don't like having their own stuff nerfed. Thus cheese and power creep.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2016/04/22 06:46:31
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 06:56:43
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
I'll reply as to why you're wrong tomorrow as I don't have my computer in front of me, but I'm actually a competitive Necron player for any tournament I attend. Space Marines are for fun.
|
CaptainStabby wrote:If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote:BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote:Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote:ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 07:02:07
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Cackling Chaos Conscript
|
I meant that warbikes dont need points decrease whilst i agree with you on increasing the other bikes cost
Or how about the following for bikes/jetbikes:
1) -1 BS if moved more than 6" that turn
2) do not grant bonus Toughness in close combat and for toughness tests, so a bit less auto-take for HQs
3) and can never be Troops
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 07:02:45
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Crushing Black Templar Crusader Pilot
|
Traditio wrote:Slayer-Fan123 wrote:1. The vehicles shouldn't be free in the first place. Free bonuses are worse than free units.
I have no a priori reason to agree with you.
And you're giving a unit away for free in conjunction with a squad that can't travel in it due to transport size restrictions. There should be your reason.
Traditio wrote:3. Nobody is taking Scout Bikers in the first place, and you propose making them more expensive.
4. Bikers are fine. You need to make the Tactical Marine more appealing.
I give an extended defense of why bikers should cost more in an earlier posting(s) of this thread.
I gotta agree with the fact that nobody takes Scout Bikes, so unless you're giving them an overall buff and/or reason for people to take them, what's the point in changing them at all?
Traditio wrote:5. So Librarians can't roll on Sanctic, Divination, and Telekinesis. Got it.
Of course they can. They just have to reroll if they end up with shenanigans.
Better yet? Remove shenanigans from those tables.
Yet I don't see you giving us alternative tables to roll on in the case that these "Shenenigans" are removed. Care to give us some alternatives other than "Don't roll on them"?
Traditio wrote:6. Centurions are priced fine. Make the Grav Cannon + Amp 35 points like on everyone else and we're doing better.
No. They aren't. A devastator marine is 14 ppm. They get +1 toughness. That right there is a 3 ppm upgrade (mark of nurgle). They get a twin-linked heavy bolter and a hurricane bolter. Sounds like a 20 ppm upgrade to me. We're at 37 ppm at this point. They get slow and purposeful. How much is that worth? Shooting protocols? +1 strength? 2+ armor save? 2 wounds?
There is no sense in which this is a 55 point model in terms of actual value.
A true fair estimation of this model is more like 75 ppm (50 base X 1.5 for the extra wound). We move that down to an even 70.
I have to agree that Centurians are priced just fine.
Traditio wrote:7. Ah yes, neuter the damage output of Tactical and Biker Marines more. They were barely doing damage with Plasma Guns as is. Make them Salvo 2/2.
Absolutely not. At 15 ppm, they should be at strict parity with plasma guns. I will grant that as rapidfire weapons, however, their ranges should be increased. 30 inches seems appropriate.
Why change this at all? We don't need to nerf Tactical and Biker Marines. We also don't need Rapid Fire weapons at a Range of 30". I mean who are they? Tau?
Traditio wrote:8. And then nobody takes Grav Cannons. Notice how nobody takes Plasma Cannons? The Blast profile is garbage.
At 48 inch range, that grav cannon is going to work better (given the fact that it can be rerolled) than a lascannon against a wraithknight. Probably overcosted, though. 20 ppm seems more appropriate.
Grav Cannons don't need to be changed. Plasma Cannons could possibly do with a buff (the operative word being 'possibly).
Traditio wrote:10. That's stupid. EW is worth 25-30 points, and the SS is 15 points. So we would pay over 20+ for AW? Uh, no. That's stupid.
25-30 points is an undervaluation of Eternal Warrior.
No it's not. The whole premise of increasing the points cost at all for the Shield is because you're getting the combination of these things.
Traditio wrote:11. Maybe 40 points, but 45 is pushing it. 10 more gets you a Razorback.
If you're running a drop pod army, would 45 points make you want to get razorbacks instead?
Well at 45 points for a baseline DP, people might re-think taking a DP army.
Traditio wrote:12. They're already 15 points.
False. See p. 138 of the space marines codex.
That's for one particular squad. I hardly call that a generic price for the item.
Traditio wrote:I swear, it is like you didn't even read the things you listed before you posted.
Given the fact that you strike me as a competitive space marines player, your vehement protests to the nerfs in question tell me that they are a step in the appropriate direction.
I'm not a competitive player and yet I'm in agreement with many of their points. Does this also tell you that it's a step in the right direction? Also, do you honestly think that because one person vehemently disagrees with what you're doing, you're going in the right direction? That's flawed logic right there.
Traditio wrote:People don't like having their own stuff nerfed. Thus cheese and power creep.
People never like their stuff being nerfed, but if it means a more balanced game, most poeple will accept it and get over it.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 07:20:40
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
IllumiNini wrote:And you're giving a unit away for free in conjunction with a squad that can't travel in it due to transport size restrictions. There should be your reason.
I thought of a convenient way to solve this problem. See the edited OP.
I gotta agree with the fact that nobody takes Scout Bikes, so unless you're giving them an overall buff and/or reason for people to take them, what's the point in changing them at all?
Fairness. It is not fair for a scout bike to cost 18 ppm. A scout costs 11 ppm, and the toughness and mobility enhancements alone afforded by the bike are worth 6 ppm. Not to mention the free twin-linked bolter, jink special rule and relentless special rule.
All bikes must cost 10 ppm in addition to the cost of the model that they are upgrading. Nice. Even. Fair for everybody.
Have you seen how much orks pay for their bikes?
Yet I don't see you giving us alternative tables to roll on in the case that these "Shenenigans" are removed. Care to give us some alternatives other than "Don't roll on them"?
I just did. You rolled shenanigans? Reroll on the same table until you don't get shenanigans.
I have to agree that Centurians are priced just fine.
Ok. Then please, give me a line by line estimation of what you think all of those special rules and upgrades are worth.
I want to see how you come up with 55 ppm.
Why change this at all? We don't need to nerf Tactical and Biker Marines. We also don't need Rapid Fire weapons at a Range of 30". I mean who are they? Tau?
...
...
Grav Cannons don't need to be changed. Plasma Cannons could possibly do with a buff (the operative word being 'possibly).
1. I changed the range in the OP.
2. It's commonly admitted that grav is op and has too high of a fire rate. You can't expect for the people who get their stuff targeted by grav to accept nerfs, but leave grav intact as is.
Plasma Cannons could possibly do with a buff (the operative word being 'possibly).
No. Enough is enough. No more buffs. Nerfs for everybody.
No it's not. The whole premise of increasing the points cost at all for the Shield is because you're getting the combination of these things.
What you just said doesn't make sense to me.
Would you please explain at greater length?
Well at 45 points for a baseline DP, people might re-think taking a DP army.
And the bolded is the key word. That's when you know that something has been sufficiently balanced.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2016/04/22 07:28:06
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 07:40:43
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Crushing Black Templar Crusader Pilot
|
Traditio wrote:IllumiNini wrote:And you're giving a unit away for free in conjunction with a squad that can't travel in it due to transport size restrictions. There should be your reason.
I thought of a convenient way to solve this problem. See the edited OP.
Still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to include Razorbacks in there at all, but if we haven't convinced you that Razorbacks don't fit by now, I'm not going to try anymore.
Traditio wrote:I gotta agree with the fact that nobody takes Scout Bikes, so unless you're giving them an overall buff and/or reason for people to take them, what's the point in changing them at all?
Fairness. It is not fair for a scout bike to cost 18 ppm. A scout cost 11 pm, and the toughness and mobility enhancements alone afforded by the bike are worth 6 ppm. Not to mention the free twin-linked bolter, jink special rule and relentless special rule.
All bikes must cost 10 ppm in addition to the cost of the model that they are upgrading. Nice. Even. Fair for everybody.
Have you seen how much orks pay for their bikes?
Well I still think there's no need to increase the price of Scout Bikes just because you're doing your bonus-by-bonus maths.
As for the Orks, they're over-priced, under-powered, or both. So Orks aren't a good comparison to make.
Traditio wrote:Yet I don't see you giving us alternative tables to roll on in the case that these "Shenenigans" are removed. Care to give us some alternatives other than "Don't roll on them"?
I just did. You rolled shenanigans? Reroll on the same table until you don't get shenanigans.
Maybe consolidate the tables instead of being lazy? I don't know, but come up with something better than "Re-roll". Personally, I don't see any particular need to re-roll these shenanigan results because I've never had a problem with them and I don't see enough of a problem in a theoretical sense to remove themm
Traditio wrote:I have to agree that Centurians are priced just fine.
Ok. Then please, give me a line by line estimation of what you think all of those special rules and upgrades are worth.
I don't need to. They've been play tested a number of times and you're the only person I've ever talked to who has said they are under-priced or in real need of a change. Plus your component-by-component breakdown is a really good and fast way to make things over-priced.
Traditio wrote:Why change this at all? We don't need to nerf Tactical and Biker Marines. We also don't need Rapid Fire weapons at a Range of 30". I mean who are they? Tau?
...
...
Grav Cannons don't need to be changed. Plasma Cannons could possibly do with a buff (the operative word being 'possibly).
1. I changed the range in the OP.
2. It's commonly admitted that grav is op and has too high of a fire rate. You can't expect for the people who get their stuff targeted by grav to accept nerfs, but leave grav intact as is.
I'll admit that I think Grav is powerful, but does it need a nerf? That's arguable. You start nerfing things and other things become OP and people will whinge about them. Should we keep nerfing until everything does nothing?
Traditio wrote:Plasma Cannons could possibly do with a buff (the operative word being 'possibly).
No. Enough is enough. No more buffs. Nerfs for everybody.
Balancing doesn't mean nothing can get buffed. If you can't wrap your head around that, then maybe you shouldn't be trying to balance anything at all.
Traditio wrote:No it's not. The whole premise of increasing the points cost at all for the Shield is because you're getting the combination of these things.
What you just said doesn't make sense to me.
Would you please explain at greater length?
So for example, if you got all the upgrades and benefits the Shield grants you from a bunch of different items, than can be restrictive. For example, if you got 'Adamantium Will' from a piece of Special Issue Wargear, you wouldn't be able to get an additional piece of Special Issue Wargear. So with this sort of idea in mind, you're paying for the convenience of having it all in one item.
Traditio wrote:Well at 45 points for a baseline DP, people might re-think taking a DP army.
And the bolded is the key word. That's when you know that something has been sufficiently balanced.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough:
If you increase the price to 45 points, people will more than likely find alternate possibilities because the DP is no longer worth buying given the comparative price of other options. I think 35 points is balanced for a DP (40 being the max, I'd say). Think I'm wrong? Consider the fact that people still run Rhinos (which are the same price as a current DP).
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 07:55:50
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle
|
Considering you seem to only run suboptimal lists with no chance of reconsideration, I would take a gander at the fact you think everyone who runs an optimal list is a WAAC TFG. Your proposed rules are "meh" at best and do little to solve any issues.
|
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:04:09
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
Tactical_Spam wrote:Your proposed rules are "meh" at best and do little to solve any issues.
Would you care to go into any greater detail?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:12:11
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle
|
Traditio wrote:Tactical_Spam wrote:Your proposed rules are "meh" at best and do little to solve any issues.
Would you care to go into any greater detail?
Your proposed rules lack play-testing and perspective. For instance, due to my Meta, I never, ever bring grav. Formations give me a chance against my opponents. I actually have a use for heavy bolters. The Shield Eternal keeps my Chapter Master alive long enough to paste the enemy warlord.
|
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:13:42
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
IllumiNini wrote:As for the Orks, they're over-priced, under-powered, or both. So Orks aren't a good comparison to make.
These are the numbers I ended up with:
Reaver jetbikes should cost 20 ppm.
Windriders should cost 24 ppm.
Space marine bikes should cost 24 ppm.
Space marine scout bikes should cost 21 ppm.
Ork bikes should cost 20 ppm.
Do you think that this is basically fair in comparison to each other?
don't need to. They've been play tested a number of times and you're the only person I've ever talked to who has said they are under-priced or in real need of a change. Plus your component-by-component breakdown is a really good and fast way to make things over-priced.
You've never heard anyone complaining about centurions being undercosted or otherwise too good for their points cost?
I'll admit that I think Grav is powerful, but does it need a nerf? That's arguable. You start nerfing things and other things become OP and people will whinge about them. Should we keep nerfing until everything does nothing?
Slippery slope fallacy.
The nerf in grav corresponds directly to a nerf to Eldar, Tau, etc. MCs.
Balancing doesn't mean nothing can get buffed. If you can't wrap your head around that, then maybe you shouldn't be trying to balance anything at all.
I suggested a buff to missile launchers in the OP.
So for example, if you got all the upgrades and benefits the Shield grants you from a bunch of different items, than can be restrictive. For example, if you got 'Adamantium Will' from a piece of Special Issue Wargear, you wouldn't be able to get an additional piece of Special Issue Wargear. So with this sort of idea in mind, you're paying for the convenience of having it all in one item.
I still fail to see how this lends support to the notion that 30 ppm for eternal warrior is an undervaluation of the special rule.
If you increase the price to 45 points, people will more than likely find alternate possibilities because the DP is no longer worth buying given the comparative price of other options. I think 35 points is balanced for a DP (40 being the max, I'd say). Think I'm wrong? Consider the fact that people still run Rhinos (which are the same price as a current DP).
Rhinos are considered a suboptimal choice. People generally express shock and surprise when I tell them that I don't run drop pods.
Rhinos and drop pods generally are not considered equivalent in actual tactical value.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tactical_Spam wrote:Your proposed rules lack play-testing and perspective. For instance, due to my Meta, I never, ever bring grav. Formations give me a chance against my opponents. I actually have a use for heavy bolters. The Shield Eternal keeps my Chapter Master alive long enough to paste the enemy warlord.
Do you have any opinions about specific changes I recommended and why they are fair or unfair?
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/22 08:15:06
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:19:28
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle
|
Traditio wrote:
People generally express shock and surprise when I tell them that I don't run drop pods.
I bet the shock comes from the fact you don't run vehicles and believe bolters should kill a Titan.
Tactical_Spam wrote:Your proposed rules lack play-testing and perspective. For instance, due to my Meta, I never, ever bring grav. Formations give me a chance against my opponents. I actually have a use for heavy bolters. The Shield Eternal keeps my Chapter Master alive long enough to paste the enemy warlord.
Do you have any opinions about specific changes I recommended and why they are fair or unfair?
No, I just believe you are narrow-minded about proposing rules. I won't give myself a headache telling you I hate all your rules and why for you to refuse to look at them from a different angle.
|
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:23:15
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
Tactical_Spam wrote:I bet the shock comes from the fact you don't run vehicles and believe bolters should kill a Titan.
I run vehicles.
No, I just believe you are narrow-minded about proposing rules. I won't give myself a headache telling you I hate all your rules and why for you to refuse to look at them from a different angle.
I am pretty sure I already know why you hate all of the proposed rules.
"Because it would nerf my army."
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/22 08:23:44
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:27:39
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Auspicious Daemonic Herald
|
Traditio wrote:Tactical_Spam wrote:I bet the shock comes from the fact you don't run vehicles and believe bolters should kill a Titan.
I run vehicles.
No, I just believe you are narrow-minded about proposing rules. I won't give myself a headache telling you I hate all your rules and why for you to refuse to look at them from a different angle.
I am pretty sure I already know why you hate all of the proposed rules.
"Because it would nerf my army."
Ah yes, Tradito's trump card. If they disagree with you its because they are TFG trying to game the system right? That's the only possibility right?
You can't possibly be wrong. /sarcasm.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:30:26
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
CrownAxe wrote:Ah yes, Tradito's trump card. If they disagree with you its because they are TFG trying to game the system right? That's the only possibility right?
You can't possibly be wrong. /sarcasm.
If anyone disagrees with the second rule I proposed in the OP, it is LITERALLY because he is TFG trying to game the system.
Rule 2 was specifically crafted to prevent TFG from gaming the system.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/22 08:33:02
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:33:18
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
[MOD]
Not as Good as a Minion
|
And rule 1 of this site is be polite. That means not blanketing everyone who disagrees with you as tfg in an insulting and dismissive manner.
|
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:34:07
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Auspicious Daemonic Herald
|
Traditio wrote:CrownAxe wrote:Ah yes, Tradito's trump card. If they disagree with you its because they are TFG trying to game the system right? That's the only possibility right? You can't possibly be wrong. /sarcasm. If anyone disagrees with the second rule I proposed in the OP, it is LITERALLY because he is TFG trying to game the system. Rule 2 was specifically crafted to say: "Hey. No gaming the system." Or they could disagree with it because they think there is a better way to fix that problem. Seriously, you calling everyone TFG is why no one respects your opinions.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/22 08:34:50
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:36:08
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Crushing Black Templar Crusader Pilot
|
Traditio wrote:IllumiNini wrote:As for the Orks, they're over-priced, under-powered, or both. So Orks aren't a good comparison to make.
These are the numbers I ended up with:
Reaver jetbikes should cost 20 ppm.
Windriders should cost 24 ppm.
Space marine bikes should cost 24 ppm.
Space marine scout bikes should cost 21 ppm.
Ork bikes should cost 20 ppm.
Do you think that this is basically fair in comparison to each other?
Whether or not I think it's a fair comparison is irrelevant. Scout Bikes don't need any sort of change that doesn't involve giving people an incentive to actually use them and most certainly don't need to be more expensive simply because the formula you cling to says so.
Traditio wrote: don't need to. They've been play tested a number of times and you're the only person I've ever talked to who has said they are under-priced or in real need of a change. Plus your component-by-component breakdown is a really good and fast way to make things over-priced.
You've never heard anyone complaining about centurions being undercosted or otherwise too good for their points cost?
Nope. Never. Plus - like with anything - they can be annihilated with the proper counter and I've seen that done plenty of times.
Traditio wrote:I'll admit that I think Grav is powerful, but does it need a nerf? That's arguable. You start nerfing things and other things become OP and people will whinge about them. Should we keep nerfing until everything does nothing?
Slippery slope fallacy.
The nerf in grav corresponds directly to a nerf to Eldar, Tau, etc. MCs.
Given your apparent opposition to buffing things, it isn't a slippery slope falacy at all.
And how do you figure they're all correlated?
Traditio wrote:Balancing doesn't mean nothing can get buffed. If you can't wrap your head around that, then maybe you shouldn't be trying to balance anything at all.
I suggested a buff to missile launchers in the OP.
And yet you criticised my suggestion out of hand simply because it was a buff...
Traditio wrote:So for example, if you got all the upgrades and benefits the Shield grants you from a bunch of different items, than can be restrictive. For example, if you got 'Adamantium Will' from a piece of Special Issue Wargear, you wouldn't be able to get an additional piece of Special Issue Wargear. So with this sort of idea in mind, you're paying for the convenience of having it all in one item.
I still fail to see how this lends support to the notion that 30 ppm for eternal warrior is an undervaluation of the special rule.
Like with everything else, you seem to be stuck with your little formula and fail to realise that what you're suggesting will make it over-priced. Like with the Razorbacks, it's obvious I can't convince you.
Traditio wrote:If you increase the price to 45 points, people will more than likely find alternate possibilities because the DP is no longer worth buying given the comparative price of other options. I think 35 points is balanced for a DP (40 being the max, I'd say). Think I'm wrong? Consider the fact that people still run Rhinos (which are the same price as a current DP).
Rhinos are considered a suboptimal choice. People generally express shock and surprise when I tell them that I don't run drop pods.
Rhinos and drop pods generally are not considered equivalent in actual tactical value.
Maybe in your particular meta, but in general, I would definitely not call Rhinos a sub-optimal choice. It is also by no means shocking if somebody does no run Drop Pods. Also, there's always context. Would your friends still be shocked if I told them I don't run Drop Pods.... BUT I run a Land Raider Spearhead?
On the topic of what Tactical_Spam has said, they may have a point.
Your suggestions (with the exception of the Grav) don't really address any real issues, the reasoning behind your changes seem to be based on a purely mathematical perspective combined with a hunch, and from what I can tell: your main motivation for doing all this is wanting to play god with the rules.
Traditio wrote:I am pretty sure I already know why you hate all of the proposed rules.
"Because it would nerf my army."
Do I really have to tell you again that if the nerfing is justified and the game is balanced after the army is nerfed (as well as the nerfing making sense in the first place), then people will accept it?
If these changes were mostly sensible changes with a decent reason why, then people wouldn't be complaining.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:36:50
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle
|
Traditio wrote:If anyone disagrees with the second rule I proposed in the OP, it is LITERALLY because he is TFG trying to game the system.
Or maybe he isn't a TFG and and assumed there was a topographical error with that page and was confined to the thought that "It would be really odd if I gave my Command Squads bikes and a drop pod."
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/22 08:37:11
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/22 08:37:18
Subject: Simple Balance for Codex: Space Marines
|
 |
Terminator with Assault Cannon
|
motyak wrote:And rule 1 of this site is be polite. That means not blanketing everyone who disagrees with you as tfg in an insulting and dismissive manner.
Currently, there apparently is a practice of fielding command squads, putting them on bikes, and then using the battle company rules to get that squad a free razorback that they can't even ride in.
That sounds an awful lot like "gaming the system" to me.
Is it a TFG practice?
It certainly sounds like a rules-lawyering, disrespectable and cheesy practice to me.
But hey. That's just me.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tactical_Spam wrote:Or maybe he isn't a TFG and and assumed there was a topographical error with that page and was confined to the thought that "It would be really odd if I gave my Command Squads bikes and a drop pod."
A drop pod that they can't even deploy in?
|
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2016/04/22 08:43:27
|
|
 |
 |
|