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.

 Traditio wrote:

War Kitten wrote:Considering that most of the time most SM players seem to be taking a Gladius that Razorback costs you nothing. Is a Wyvern then 65 points better than that free Razorback?

I run mine with 6 free rhinos. No razorbacks.

That has no bearing on the discussion. Most SM players take the free Razorbacks, so are you really going to argue that the Wyvern is 65 points better than the Razorback?

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

Peregrine wrote:Because apparently it's a 65 point model that is going to table your army if you don't?

Eh, it's not that good. I'm not particularly afraid of two S4, AP 6 small blasts.

With shred... and Ignores Cover. Point it at a horde, Traditio. It will no doubt rack up many more kills than your tacticals will.

True dat. It is a rather massive "Feth you" to orks.

What do you think the appropriate cost for a wyvern is, TS?

 Traditio wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

Peregrine wrote:Because apparently it's a 65 point model that is going to table your army if you don't?

Eh, it's not that good. I'm not particularly afraid of two S4, AP 6 small blasts.

With shred... and Ignores Cover. Point it at a horde, Traditio. It will no doubt rack up many more kills than your tacticals will.

True dat. It is a rather massive "Feth you" to orks.

What do you think the appropriate cost for a wyvern is, TS?

65 points.

Tactical_Spam wrote:65 points.

Show your math?

 Traditio wrote:

Tactical_Spam wrote:65 points.

Show your math?

AV12/10/10 HP3 Open Topped tank with four souped-up mortars. Nothing spectacular

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

Tactical_Spam wrote:65 points.

Show your math?

AV12/10/10 HP3 Open Topped tank with four souped-up mortars. Nothing spectacular

I just realized:

It has 2 of those mortar things.

So it's actually 4 small blasts per turn.

The closest comparison I can think of is this:

A devastator squad with 4 heavy bolters. That's 110 points. Without shred. Without ignore cover. Without barrage. And without being a tank.

 Traditio wrote:
Show your math?

37 points for the hull (AV 12 + AV 10 + AV 10 + 3 HP), then +4 points each for the two STR 4 mortars, then subtract 6 points for AP 6, then +30 points for the hull-mounted heavy bolter. Total: 65 points.

 Traditio wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

Tactical_Spam wrote:65 points.

Show your math?

AV12/10/10 HP3 Open Topped tank with four souped-up mortars. Nothing spectacular

I just realized:

It has 2 of those mortar things.

So it's actually 4 small blasts per turn.

The closest comparison I can think of is this:

A devastator squad with 4 heavy bolters. That's 110 points. Without shred. Without ignore cover. Without barrage. And without being a tank.

Mortars =/= Heavy Bolters. Mortars have AP6; Heavy Bolters are AP4

 Peregrine wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
Show your math?

37 points for the hull (AV 12 + AV 10 + AV 10 + 3 HP), then +4 points each for the two STR 4 mortars, then subtract 6 points for AP 6, then +30 points for the hull-mounted heavy bolter. Total: 65 points.

A heavy bolter is 10 points.

The closest equivalent to a single one of the mortars is essentially 2 frag missiles (10 points each).

Heavy bolter + 4 frag missiles = 50 points. + Rhino chassi (35 points.)

I'm already at 85 points.

 Traditio wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

Tactical_Spam wrote:65 points.

Show your math?

AV12/10/10 HP3 Open Topped tank with four souped-up mortars. Nothing spectacular

I just realized:

It has 2 of those mortar things.

So it's actually 4 small blasts per turn.

The closest comparison I can think of is this:

A devastator squad with 4 heavy bolters. That's 110 points. Without shred. Without ignore cover. Without barrage. And without being a tank.

That squad of Devs is probably more durable than my AV 12/10/10 box.

War Kitten wrote:That squad of Devs is probably more durable than my AV 12/10/10 box.

No, they aren't.

Your AV 12/10/10 box can hide completely out of line of sight the whole game. It doesn't need to see.

It depends. The Wyverns are probably so far away that the AV 12 front matters. AV 12 is more durable than meqs in general.

The wyvern is very nice, and perhaps a tad undercosted, but it's in a weak codex and really far down the "fix-it" line.

 Traditio wrote:

War Kitten wrote:That squad of Devs is probably more durable than my AV 12/10/10 box.

No, they aren't.

Your AV 12/10/10 box can hide completely out of line of sight the whole game. It doesn't need to see.

I think you're overestimating the effectiveness of barrage. The scatter die ensures that a lot of shots are going to miss, so the twin-linked is what makes the mortar decent.

Martel732 wrote:
It depends. The Wyverns are probably so far away that the AV 12 front matters. AV 12 is more durable than meqs in general.

The wyvern is very nice, and perhaps a tad undercosted, but it's in a weak codex and really far down the "fix-it" line.

That's basically my opinion. The wyvern should easily cost 100 points. And the whirlwind should cost as much.

That said, it's probably not game-breaking that it isn't (that said, I rarely play against IG, and don't really want to,either).

"That's basically my opinion. The wyvern should easily cost 100 points. And the whirlwind should cost as much. "

Umm no.

War Kitten wrote:I think you're overestimating the effectiveness of barrage. The scatter die ensures that a lot of shots are going to miss, so the twin-linked is what makes the mortar decent.

That too. Firing a twin-linked barrage weapon is, for all intents and purposes, BS 4 shooting. Blasts are essentially BS 2; twin-linking that raises it to BS 4.

 Traditio wrote:

War Kitten wrote:I think you're overestimating the effectiveness of barrage. The scatter die ensures that a lot of shots are going to miss, so the twin-linked is what makes the mortar decent.

That too. Firing a twin-linked barrage weapon is, for all intents and purposes, BS 4 shooting. Blasts are essentially BS 2; twin-linking that raises it to BS 4.

Math fail. BS 3 for twinlinked blast.

Martel732 wrote:Math fail. BS 3 for twinlinked blast.

There is a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit on a 6 sided scatter die. Twin-link means that you may reroll a miss, which, again, has a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit.

1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3 = BS 4

That's not exactly how you do probability Traditio....

 Traditio wrote:

Martel732 wrote:Math fail. BS 3 for twinlinked blast.

There is a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit on a 6 sided scatter die. Twin-link means that you may reroll a miss, which, again, has a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit.

1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3 = BS 4

Umm, nope. Maybe this is why you have problems understanding how good something is.

You multiply chances for failure and then subtract from unity. So 1 - (.66666)(.6666) = .556

Martel732 wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

Martel732 wrote:Math fail. BS 3 for twinlinked blast.

There is a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit on a 6 sided scatter die. Twin-link means that you may reroll a miss, which, again, has a 1/3 chance of rolling a direct hit.

1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3 = BS 4

Umm, nope. Maybe this is why you have problems understanding how good something is.

You multiply chances for failure and then subtract from unity. So 1 - (.66666)(.6666) = .556

1 - (2/3 X 2/3), then?

2/3 X 2/3 = 4/9.

1/1 (9/9) - 4/9 = 5/9

It's in between BS 3 and BS 4.

I'ts much closer to BS 3 as it is 50% vs 66% and the actual number is 55.6%.

Note that this is also the save rate on 5++/5+++. This number comes up a LOT in 40K.

 Traditio wrote:

War Kitten wrote:That squad of Devs is probably more durable than my AV 12/10/10 box.

No, they aren't.

Your AV 12/10/10 box can hide completely out of line of sight the whole game. It doesn't need to see.

Oh yeah? Well those devs can sit up on an upper floor of a ruin and not be charged by bikes while the tank cannot. Thus they can completely hide from melee in or out of LoS if they wanted to.

Can't bikes drive up the ruin by rolling enough charge distance?

Actually looking it up it looks like they even removed the bit about bikes not being able to climb up floors anyway. Probably doesn't help I've somehow not seen normal bikes since 5th.

Martel732 wrote:
Can't bikes drive up the ruin by rolling enough charge distance?

They can, but they'll have to roll higher thanks to difficult terrain, and they'll take Dangerous Terrain tests in the process. It's risky for them to do so.

 War Kitten wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Can't bikes drive up the ruin by rolling enough charge distance?

They can, but they'll have to roll higher thanks to difficult terrain, and they'll take Dangerous Terrain tests in the process. It's risky for them to do so.

I guess. White scars ignore all that thanks to move through cover. I'll take my chances in general to assault a weapon team. Actually, I'm not sure bikes are ever slowed by terrain. I'd have to double check that.

 Traditio wrote:
(that said, I rarely play against IG, and don't really want to,either)

So what exactly do you want to play against? You hate Tau and Eldar (and think Tau and Eldar players are WAAC TFGs), you don't like Necrons because they're too durable, and you probably don't like Tyranids because they have too many MCs. And now you don't like IG, for some bizarre reason. So what is left? The only armies I've seen you say anything favorable about are orks (because you can beat them easily) and your own tactical marine spam.

 Traditio wrote:
Your AV 12/10/10 box can hide completely out of line of sight the whole game. It doesn't need to see.

And then flyers, drop pods, etc, gain LOS on it and AV 10 becomes a fatal problem. Don't forget that a single "shaken" result keeps you from shooting at all.

 Traditio wrote:
A heavy bolter is 10 points.

The closest equivalent to a single one of the mortars is essentially 2 frag missiles (10 points each).

Heavy bolter + 4 frag missiles = 50 points. + Rhino chassi (35 points.)

I'm already at 85 points.

That's not how it works at all. In case you missed the point of my absurd example points you can't just add up the prices of individual components and get the final price of the unit. And you certainly can't do it the way you're trying to do it. Just to point out the most obviously wrong point cost in your total you're counting the full price of the Rhino for a unit that doesn't get the Rhino's storm bolter or transport capacity. The Rhino hull alone can not possibly be 35 points.

twin linked lets you reroll the scatter plus you have 2 chances to roll an amount equal to 5 or less to land a decent hit to start from. It's pretty good chances - thats why wyverns are so boss. I run whirlwinds with the supression force and get similar results with the large blast. Also can go str 5 and do some serious damage to light vehicle squads with ordnance. The only reason these units are not spammed beyond belief is because invisibility exists. It only takes an oppoent one time to realize infantry can not survive with massive shred pie plates raining on them from 48 inches. my opponents usually go for them first now.

Thinking it over, I definitely don't see them as undercosted as much as just ignored. In every game I've used it the thing went the whole game untouched, not because it was hidden in some remote corner; it was because no one felt the need to go after it. If you ignore a unit that will shoot you every turn for the whole game instead of going after it then it's your fault it killed so much stuff, ignoring any unit that's shooting stuff every turn is going to end with a lot of dead stuff.

It wasn't for lack of opportunities, either. Any sort of DS, a majority of fast attack choices, artillery of your own, charging a transport or vehicle of your own up to it... it crumples like paper if you breath on it.

Oh, you think I'm going to keep it protected from CC and melta? Well now the pricing points go out the door. If I'm going bare minimum protection it's 50 points for a squad of 10 guardsmen. These guys are so far back on the table they'll be lucky to shoot twice a game, and will be out of order range, if you don't go after my wyvern. Even then, it's 10 guardsmen. If you can't kill 10 guardsmen then the wyvern is the least of your worries.

And if you're going to compare it to something go off the chimera chassis (which so help me, if you think a chimera is underpriced). 65 points for a chimera which has the same armor and a hull mounted HB. What you're swapping out for the mortar is the ability to transport a vet squad with 2 fire points (who can be a lot more killy than the wyvern if they're ignored), has a multilaser turret, and can fire at two additional targets using the side lasgun arrays. Multilaser and lasguns? Meh, pretty nice. The fact that it's the only way to get melta and plasma up the field safely though, that's what balances it out.