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:
If any significant amount of the lascannons or lances are coming through the ion shield, you're out of luck. But if you deep strike fusion suits/melta/fire dragons on its side, it dies. Get scatterbikes on its side for two turns, it dies.

Yeah, I can usually handle knights by outflanking them.

Too bad MC's saves aren't facing-dependent and also work in CC :(

Martel732 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I wouldn't count on dark lances to get the job done. AP 2 sucks really bad now at anti-tank.

IK has better firepower than a Russ, but only twice the HP for more than twice the points. And weaker armor values.

Rapid fire battle cannon and a stubber is about equivalent to a normal battle cannon, hull mounted las cannon, and sponsons of whatever variety, don't you think?

And I was suggesting lances because it at least knocks it down to a 4+ to hurt compared to, say, a lascannon. WAsn't really counting on explode result

You won't take off the 6HP before it has stomped all over your list, though. That's why I quit using lascannons altogether in every list I build.

IK has rapid fire battle cannon is much better than normal battle cannon, and it's got a triple krak launcher on the carapace, and a meltagun in the hull. If you trade out the battle cannon for the avenger gatling cannon, it's much better than a Russ, because it can hurt MCs now. Well, some MCs. DKs and Riptides are still immortal. It's funny how 2+ is crap on infantry models, but put it on a T6 multiwound model, and it becomes crazy. Oh, GW.

At least it's got rending.

Do you really want to know how many avenger gatling cannon shots it takes to kill a DK or Riptide? It's way more shots than you'll ever get in a game. The rending is almost useless with that few shots. Basically, these 200ish point models can laugh at a 400+ pt model. Super fair.

That's only ranged though, at least you can wreck it in melee. I still think a Knight is a good unit, provides a distraction carnifex, decent firepower output, and scary in melee.

Unless you're a wraithknight

Which are cheaper. Because reasons. I guess that 3%chance of hurting it with a BS 5 pulse rifle totally warrants the 100+ point discount over a knight. Totally.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I wouldn't count on dark lances to get the job done. AP 2 sucks really bad now at anti-tank.

IK has better firepower than a Russ, but only twice the HP for more than twice the points. And weaker armor values.

Rapid fire battle cannon and a stubber is about equivalent to a normal battle cannon, hull mounted las cannon, and sponsons of whatever variety, don't you think?

An IKT is roughly equal to a pair of no-sponson LRBTs glued together. With a carapace Pod, it's comparable to LRBT's with 1 or 2 sets of sponsons. But it's more concentrated, and sucks less in Assault.

One can reasonably compare the damage output from a Knight with Krak-Missile-Pod to a pair of LRBT with LC's on the hulls.

Except, the Knight moves twice as fast. And has an Invul Save. And instead of fearing assault, is quite at home in it. And Stomps.

Like all things, if you solo an aggressive unit, it will be chewed up. But if you send a pair, or three... you'll have good results. Knights DO NOT fear overwatch.

Yes, WK are undercosted by a solid 100 points, but that doesn't make IK "Bad".

greatbigtree wrote:Yes, WK are undercosted by a solid 100 points, but that doesn't make IK "Bad".

Just pointing out:

This opinion has the strong support of public opinion, as displayed in my wraithknight thread in the proposed rules forum.

Traditio wrote:
Just pointing out:

This opinion has the strong support of public opinion, as displayed in my wraithknight thread in the proposed rules forum.

You mean the one that was hijacked by (as you put it) "trolls", and is meaningless?

Peregrine wrote:You mean the one that was hijacked by (as you put it) "trolls", and is meaningless?

I've addressed this criticism sufficiently in the other thread. I'm not going into it here.

Suffice to say, the public opinion overwhelmingly supports an increase in the WK cost by over 100 points.

There was likely some combination of 1. trolls and 2. WAAC TFGs and 3. people who are legitimately ignorant of just how OP and undercosted the WK represented in the poll, but these represented a very weak minority.

I also wish to point out that roughly 170 voted in that poll.

Not that many people troll me on a regular basis. 5-10 do. 170? Not so much.

Traditio wrote:
I've addressed this criticism sufficiently in the other thread. I'm not going into it here.

No, you've just declared that "votes that don't agree with me are 'trolls', votes that do agree with me are legitimate". Once you reject the validity of a poll because of "trolls" you are stating that it can no longer be trusted because people are not answering it honestly. You don't get to change your mind and decide that the poll is legitimate after all just because it turns in your favor.

Suffice to say, the public opinion overwhelmingly supports an increase in the WK cost by over 100 points.

No, public opinion overwhelmingly supports keeping the cost the same, or even reducing it. It's just unfortunate that the poll was hijacked by "trolls" that voted for obviously absurd answers to ruin your poll.

There was likely some combination of 1. trolls and 2. WAAC TFGs and 3. people who are legitimately ignorant of just how OP and undercosted the WK represented in the poll, but these represented a very weak minority.

There was likely some combination of 1. trolls and 2. WAAC (non-Eldar) TFGs and 3. people who are legitimately ignorant of just how UP and overcosted the WK represented in the poll, and these represented a strong majority.

Peregrine:

I'm not going to argue the point. What the poll clearly displays should be self-evident to any non-trolls and persons without a vested interest in "taking the strongest possible selections in the codex" to ensure an easy win.

Traditio wrote:

greatbigtree wrote:Yes, WK are undercosted by a solid 100 points, but that doesn't make IK "Bad".

Just pointing out:

This opinion has the strong support of public opinion, as displayed in my wraithknight thread in the proposed rules forum.

Fortunately the cost is actually 100 points higher than the profile! Thanks to the units required to unlock it! Just like the Gladius free but not free transports are!

That doesn't make the Gladius transports not free, you still take 2000pts of army, just not necessarily whatever you want.

Likewise WK's aren't undercosted just because you can't take them on their own, those other units still have value, function, and purpose completely distinct from the WK.

Do I need to point out where I'm joking every single time......

 Vaktathi wrote:
That doesn't make the Gladius transports not free, you still take 2000pts of army, just not necessarily whatever you want.

Likewise WK's aren't undercosted just because you can't take them on their own, those other units still have value, function, and purpose completely distinct from the WK.

Not to mention that those units are perfectly viable (and undercosted) apart from the wraithknight. 27 point scatterbike? Farseers? Lol.

There's no comparison between a "tax" of scatbikes and a farseer, on the one hand, and an assault marine squad, on the other hand.

Traditio wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
That doesn't make the Gladius transports not free, you still take 2000pts of army, just not necessarily whatever you want.

Likewise WK's aren't undercosted just because you can't take them on their own, those other units still have value, function, and purpose completely distinct from the WK.

Not to mention that those units are perfectly viable (and undercosted) apart from the wraithknight. 27 point scatterbike? Farseers? Lol.

There's no comparison between a "tax" of scatbikes and a farseer, on the one hand, and an assault marine squad, on the other hand.

I actually thought of that with the cheap units. So a single Warlock and Rangers. Tell me those are particularly OP choices.

pm713 wrote:
Do I need to point out where I'm joking every single time......

Sorry, I'm a wee bit inebriated

 greatbigtree wrote:
One can reasonably compare the damage output from a Knight with Krak-Missile-Pod to a pair of LRBT with LC's on the hulls.

Except, the Knight moves twice as fast. And has an Invul Save. And instead of fearing assault, is quite at home in it. And Stomps.

Like all things, if you solo an aggressive unit, it will be chewed up. But if you send a pair, or three... you'll have good results. Knights DO NOT fear overwatch.

Yes, WK are undercosted by a solid 100 points, but that doesn't make IK "Bad".

IK aren't bad I guess compared to other vehicles.

pm713 wrote:

Traditio wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
That doesn't make the Gladius transports not free, you still take 2000pts of army, just not necessarily whatever you want.

Likewise WK's aren't undercosted just because you can't take them on their own, those other units still have value, function, and purpose completely distinct from the WK.

Not to mention that those units are perfectly viable (and undercosted) apart from the wraithknight. 27 point scatterbike? Farseers? Lol.

There's no comparison between a "tax" of scatbikes and a farseer, on the one hand, and an assault marine squad, on the other hand.

I actually thought of that with the cheap units. So a single Warlock and Rangers. Tell me those are particularly OP choices.

That's not a tax for the WK. To get the WK, the Eldar player is going to be using a Craftworld warhost. The core of that warhost is going to be scatter bikes and a farseer on a bike. He is then going to select a Wraith Construct auxillary (which allows him just to select a Wraithknight) and a Wraith host, which is going to include wraithguard with d-scythes, a wraithknight, a spiritseer and a wraithlord.

The idea of an eldar "tax" for those wraithknights is just laughable.

To get that "free" rhino, I have to pay 70+ points for an assault marine squad (for starters).

The eldar player "has" to pay for scat bikes.

Traditio wrote:

pm713 wrote:

Traditio wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
That doesn't make the Gladius transports not free, you still take 2000pts of army, just not necessarily whatever you want.

Likewise WK's aren't undercosted just because you can't take them on their own, those other units still have value, function, and purpose completely distinct from the WK.

Not to mention that those units are perfectly viable (and undercosted) apart from the wraithknight. 27 point scatterbike? Farseers? Lol.

There's no comparison between a "tax" of scatbikes and a farseer, on the one hand, and an assault marine squad, on the other hand.

I actually thought of that with the cheap units. So a single Warlock and Rangers. Tell me those are particularly OP choices.

That's not a tax for the WK. To get the WK, the Eldar player is going to be using a Craftworld warhost. The core of that warhost is going to be scatter bikes and a farseer on a bike. He is then going to select a Wraith Construct auxillary (which allows him just to select a Wraithknight) and a Wraith host, which is going to include wraithguard with d-scythes, a wraithknight, a spiritseer and a wraithlord.

The idea of an eldar "tax" for those wraithknights is just laughable.

To get that "free" rhino, I have to pay 70+ points for an assault marine squad (for starters).

The eldar player "has" to pay for scat bikes.

The idea of a tax on Gladius vehicles is laughable too. As is claiming "I have a strong minority" all the time while ignoring everything else.

Are they though? I very rarely see actual Warhosts. There isn't any reason to use them. Actually I've never seen or heard of any army like the one your describing. Sure you aren't making it up?

1. The idea of a tax is laughable, you say?

Fine. Then play a gladius in such a way as to maximize the vehicles you could get for free...and then don't use those free vehicles. Pay for them. Tell me how that goes.

2. How do you get the second wraithknight on the table?

No, there is a tax to unlock Gladius. It's just that it ends up not mattering. The Gladius doesn't have to be killy, it just has to BE. It's unfluffy as hell, really, but it does win you a lot of games. And it's mostly unfluffy because tac marines are an embarrassment on the tabletop. But their job in Gladius is to just stand there and score. Maybe fire a grav cannon a couple of times.

Traditio wrote:
1. The idea of a tax is laughable, you say?

Fine. Then play a gladius in such a way as to maximize the vehicles you could get for free...and then don't use those free vehicles. Pay for them. Tell me how that goes.

2. How do you get the second wraithknight on the table?

Sure send me the money to buy that army and I'll report back.

CADs. You take CADs. If for some reason you have multiple Wraithknights. Which I also don't see because 1 is enough.

pm713 wrote:Sure send me the money to buy that army and I'll report back.

It was rhetorical. I already know the answer. "Poorly. It went poorly."

CADs. You take CADs. If for some reason you have multiple Wraithknights. Which I also don't see because 1 is enough.

Maybe you should spend less time raising trivial objections to me and more time reading the army lists subforum, then.

Traditio wrote:

pm713 wrote:Sure send me the money to buy that army and I'll report back.

It was rhetorical. I already know the answer. "Poorly. It went poorly."

CADs. You take CADs. If for some reason you have multiple Wraithknights. Which I also don't see because 1 is enough.

Maybe you should spend less time raising trivial objections to me and more time reading the army lists subforum, then.

No the answer is it varies depending on what you face.

I do read the forum as it happens. Maybe you should get off your high and crazy horse and stop being a troll. Then people will be more civil to you.

Eldar don't need to field more than one WK to stomp all over the competition. I think the scatbike is actually a bigger issue, as they do more work and score more points than WK.

Here's an idea: give MCs two armor profies: one vs shooting and one vs assault. Make the Riptide have only 4+ armor in assault, and make the nova shield not work in assault. Give them a bit of the IK's weakness.

Likewise, make the DK 4+ armor vs shooting and 2+ armor in assault.

Martel732 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

And on a note of MCs, are they seriously that strong? Give me an example of an " Overpowered, overly durable, undercosted regular monstrous creature." Actually, on second thought make a poll of it

Rarely do I agree with Traditio, but in this case I agree with him. The Riptide is an overpowered, overly durable, undercosted regular monstrous creature.

There it is again, the word "regular". A daemon prince is a monstrous creature, does that make it OP? A type of unit is not the problem, the balancing is. The question should not be "should they be allowed", but how can they be made fair.

It's OP compared to a vehicle of identical cost. Can't be one-shotted, can't be supressed, can't fail dangerous terrain, can't be stunned, can't be shaken, can't lose weapons, doesn't lose durability in CC.

Susceptible to blind, poison, fleshbane, shred, concussive, and can be hurt by strength 2-3. Name one vehicle where those are a problem. Oh yeah, and may be one shotted by instant death.

Instant death: too rare to matter.

Blind: too rare to matter.

Poison: GMCs are immune, 2+ armor MCs don't care

Fleshband: GMCs and 2+ armor MCs don't care

Shred: GMCs and 2+ armor MCs dont' care

Concussive: None of these things are dying, so this doesn't matter.

Str 2-3: You can't mass enough to matter because you are wounding on 6's. If guardsmen came in squads of 200 men, maybe.

You know what's common as feth? S 6/7 and melta. So please tell me about all the problems MCs have with these outlier attacks.

I want to clarify. By "regular," all I meant was "not gargantuan."

Martel732 wrote:
Instant death: too rare to matter.

Blind: too rare to matter.

Poison: GMCs are immune, 2+ armor MCs don't care

Fleshband: GMCs and 2+ armor MCs don't care

Shred: GMCs and 2+ armor MCs dont' care

Concussive: None of these things are dying, so this doesn't matter.

Str 2-3: You can't mass enough to matter because you are wounding on 6's. If guardsmen came in squads of 200 men, maybe.

You know what's common as feth? S 6/7 and melta. So please tell me about all the problems MCs have with these outlier attacks.

You know what destroys regular monstrous creatures (especially the one you were referring to directly, with toughness 5 and no armor save) is str6/7 and melta. I know full well the issues between superheavies and fmcs, I address them in my houserules. But the question was asked about the demon Prince in particular. I answered truthfully on all accounts there.

So, retract you snark a bit and read what I said instead of jumping straight to giving people an attitude.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, there are two armies who can inundate he board with instant death (grey knight) and poison (dark eldar) and bladestorm does nothing against vehicles.

Sounds pretty common to me...

Sorry, but isn't Grav the hotness? Doesn't it do pretty wall against MCs and GMCs? Am I missing something?