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.

 Vankraken wrote:
Yo dawg I heard you liked rolling dice so I put a strength roll before your to wound roll so when you go to shoot you will be rolling to see if you can wound before you roll to see if you do wound.

Even better, Gets Hot means that your roll to hit is also a roll to see if your weapon wounds your own unit.
You could even call it a type of wound roll. The meme-possibilities are left as an exercise for the reader.

As with most equipment it's not about whether the item itself is costed corrected in the abstract, it's that you pretty much only see if on models that are going to get a disproportional use out of said item. You rarely see storm shields on foot units, terminator characters and usually one or two at most on vanguards. That because it doesn't benefit them much. Instead you see it on two main units, Chapter master Smash and TWC, both units that are already powerful on their own, that have the combination of durability via toughness and wounds, mobility via movement types and strong offensive output due to other weapons being available.

Same reason you rarely see a melee upgrades on tactical marines, the benefit isn't worth the cost, but you would probably never take vanguard with out upgrades.

Army theme is also relevant to the point costs.

Marines flavor wise are supposed to be very durable, beaten on that front only by necrons. They lack incredible MC's, crazy jet bike troops with heavy weapons, guys that jump out of the way instead of getting shot etc etc. For marines, a good invuln save item is very in-theme with the army design and thus doesn't cost all that much.

Similar to the color pie in magic, a red "counterspell" would cost much more than RR, which would just be a color swap of the original blue version. You pay a premium, either in cost or additional downsides to get an out-of-color-effect.

In the same vein, getting storm shields on ork nobs, having good melee weapons for tau fire warriors, or carrying around scatter lasers on daemons are extremely out of theme with the rest of the army, and such options are either very rare/nonexistent, have other downsides, or cost way more than they would in an army that the option is in-theme for.

Now that is THEORETICALLY what the designers should be going for. (After all, if everyone just paid the same points for every effect, the game would effectively be just one real army with a bunch of counts-as models.) However, GW's rules designers haven't always been the most adept at their job, so there are plenty of times where things just don't make sense from any kind of balance perspective.

But no in this specific case I think marine storm shields are fairly appropriately costed compared to other invuln gear of other armies, given that good saves is in-theme for marines.

pm713 wrote:
Do CSM have a weapon that doesn't work most of the time?

Nope, we have two.

 welshhoppo wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Do CSM have a weapon that doesn't work most of the time?

Nope, we have two.

Really what?

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
One reason why Storm Shields are "cheap" is because many of the models that can take one already have an invulnerable save. So you're
usually paying to upgrade an existing invulnerable save, rather then getting one you didn't have to begin with.

Hit the nail on the head. The only thing I can think of that don't have invulnerable saves built in, are veterans. Even then they just retain their 3+.

Tl;Dr Space Marines get less out of most invulnerable saves compared to other races.

pm713 wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Do CSM have a weapon that doesn't work most of the time?

Nope, we have two.

Really what?

The key and the scroll. Both of them are so niche you will never see them on the board. And the mace's high AP means that it is very rarely seen outside of daemon prices. And our best weapon, the axe of khorne. Only works on a single type of model.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
One reason why Storm Shields are "cheap" is because many of the models that can take one already have an invulnerable save. So you're
usually paying to upgrade an existing invulnerable save, rather then getting one you didn't have to begin with.

Hit the nail on the head. The only thing I can think of that don't have invulnerable saves built in, are veterans. Even then they just retain their 3+.

Tl;Dr Space Marines get less out of most invulnerable saves compared to other races.

So because Marines are supposed to be extremely durable they get cheaper access to invulnerable saves. I am ok with that logic, but lets continue with it. Orks are supposed to be extremely durable in general, even without armor, they are also supposed to be AMAZING in close combat, so by that logic shouldn't orks have more toughness then Marines, or have access to good CCWs for cheaper? I mean we pay the same price for a PK as a SM Sergeant pays for his PF.

In reality GW only follows that solid logic for armies it likes, Tau, SM and Eldar. They each have one or two things they excel at and have cheap options for them, other armies don't have that logic applied to them.

SemperMortis wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
One reason why Storm Shields are "cheap" is because many of the models that can take one already have an invulnerable save. So you're
usually paying to upgrade an existing invulnerable save, rather then getting one you didn't have to begin with.

Hit the nail on the head. The only thing I can think of that don't have invulnerable saves built in, are veterans. Even then they just retain their 3+.

Tl;Dr Space Marines get less out of most invulnerable saves compared to other races.

So because Marines are supposed to be extremely durable they get cheaper access to invulnerable saves. I am ok with that logic, but lets continue with it. Orks are supposed to be extremely durable in general, even without armor, they are also supposed to be AMAZING in close combat, so by that logic shouldn't orks have more toughness then Marines, or have access to good CCWs for cheaper? I mean we pay the same price for a PK as a SM Sergeant pays for his PF.

In reality GW only follows that solid logic for armies it likes, Tau, SM and Eldar. They each have one or two things they excel at and have cheap options for them, other armies don't have that logic applied to them.

You're misunderstanding the previous posters. It has nothing to do with fluff, just gameplay and rules. They are simply pointing out that the upgrade benefits models like terminators less because they are simply upgrading a 5++ to a 3++, not creating a 3++ where nothing existed before.

SemperMortis wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
One reason why Storm Shields are "cheap" is because many of the models that can take one already have an invulnerable save. So you're
usually paying to upgrade an existing invulnerable save, rather then getting one you didn't have to begin with.

Hit the nail on the head. The only thing I can think of that don't have invulnerable saves built in, are veterans. Even then they just retain their 3+.

Tl;Dr Space Marines get less out of most invulnerable saves compared to other races.

So because Marines are supposed to be extremely durable they get cheaper access to invulnerable saves. I am ok with that logic, but lets continue with it. Orks are supposed to be extremely durable in general, even without armor, they are also supposed to be AMAZING in close combat, so by that logic shouldn't orks have more toughness then Marines, or have access to good CCWs for cheaper? I mean we pay the same price for a PK as a SM Sergeant pays for his PF.

In reality GW only follows that solid logic for armies it likes, Tau, SM and Eldar. They each have one or two things they excel at and have cheap options for them, other armies don't have that logic applied to them.

What? They get cheaper Invulns because they already paid for one.

If we have two models, with the same statline, and Model A has a S4 AP5 12" Pistol. This pistol is reflected in Model A's being more expensive than Model B.
Both models have the option to take a S5 AP5 12" Pistol, which replaces any other weapons. Should Models A and B pay the same price for the weapon?

My logic would be that, because A has already paid for their own default pistol, they should not pay the same price as B. Instead, they should pay the amount of points that brings them equal to B's cost when B buys the upgraded pistol, as they then become identical.
According to your logic, they should pay the same, which would then make A more expensive, although they have the same equipment and will get the same useage out of the same weapon.

Now, that formula may be off in GW's points system, but it does make sense to charge an SM Captain less for a storm shield than it would an Ork Warboss (ignoring the Warboss' increased Toughness and Captain's power armour).

Again, with the rest of your points, Orks are meant to be tougher than Guardsmen, but not Space Marines. The d6 system puts them appropriately on the list.
You shouldn't get cheaper CCWs UNLESS you:
A) Would be less effective with them than SMs (lower Strength, Wounds, Toughness, Weapon Skill, Initiative, Attacks, etc etc)
B) Had already paid for a weapon which the CCW replaces

Your system of "X is meant to be etc etc" leads to Riptides, to Wraithknights, and to the upper tier codexes being powerful, because GW's "Of course Eldar/Tau/Space Marines should wipe out the filthy xenos/weaker mortals/baddies because they're the best!" attitude.
If we went by the logic of "X is meant to be...", then Space Marine players would always win, because Space Marines are the heroes, and heroes never lose.

 greyknight12 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
One reason why Storm Shields are "cheap" is because many of the models that can take one already have an invulnerable save. So you're
usually paying to upgrade an existing invulnerable save, rather then getting one you didn't have to begin with.

Hit the nail on the head. The only thing I can think of that don't have invulnerable saves built in, are veterans. Even then they just retain their 3+.

Tl;Dr Space Marines get less out of most invulnerable saves compared to other races.

So because Marines are supposed to be extremely durable they get cheaper access to invulnerable saves. I am ok with that logic, but lets continue with it. Orks are supposed to be extremely durable in general, even without armor, they are also supposed to be AMAZING in close combat, so by that logic shouldn't orks have more toughness then Marines, or have access to good CCWs for cheaper? I mean we pay the same price for a PK as a SM Sergeant pays for his PF.

In reality GW only follows that solid logic for armies it likes, Tau, SM and Eldar. They each have one or two things they excel at and have cheap options for them, other armies don't have that logic applied to them.

You're misunderstanding the previous posters. It has nothing to do with fluff, just gameplay and rules. They are simply pointing out that the upgrade benefits models like terminators less because they are simply upgrading a 5++ to a 3++, not creating a 3++ where nothing existed before.

Well the only good CC weapon an Ork can take is a PK, it actually reduces our attacks by 1 but increases our already high strength and makes it AP2, so again by that logic it should be cheaper for an Ork then it is for a SM but it isn't.

or we could go full slow and point out that Mad Dok paying points for a Cybork body that gives him a 6+ FNP and he already has a 5+ FNP. So shouldnt it be free? Nope.

The logic you are putting forth is only relevant if you are one of the chose 3 codexs that was given "I Win" buttons. Tau/Eldar/SM. The other codexs have nothing like that....well maybe Necrons.

What are you talking about? Necrons and Daemons are easily as durable as anything you can concoct in the SM codex, and neither Tau nor Eldar have durability as a theme.

Again, it has nothing to do with fluff. The reason why storm-shields are cheap in the SM codex is because a 3++ has higher diminishing returns on a 3+sv model then on a 4-6+sv. The cost of an invulnerable save is directly proportional to the value of the unit's armor save- the better the unit's armor save, the cheaper the invulnerable save will generally cost.

Again, with the rest of your points, Orks are meant to be tougher than Guardsmen, but not Space Marines. The d6 system puts them appropriately on the list.
You shouldn't get cheaper CCWs UNLESS you:
A) Would be less effective with them than SMs (lower Strength, Wounds, Toughness, Weapon Skill, Initiative, Attacks, etc etc)
B) Had already paid for a weapon which the CCW replaces

Then in that case
Your space marines shouldn't have access to such ridiculous Invul saves unless

A) Would be less effective with them then my Orks (Worse save, works only against Shooting or only in CC, your model has lower T value)
or
B) You had already paid more a ridiculously expensive Invulnerable save that only worked against shooting.

How much does a Rosarius cost? Because I have a feeling it is a significantly cheaper upgrade option then my KFF bubble which only works in the shooting phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Blax X wrote:
What are you talking about? Necrons and Daemons are easily as durable as anything you can concoct in the SM codex, and neither Tau nor Eldar have durability as a theme.

Again, it has nothing to do with fluff. The reason why storm-shields are cheap in the SM codex is because a 3++ has higher diminishing returns on a 3+sv model then on a 4-6+sv. The cost of an invulnerable save is directly proportional to the value of the unit's armor save- the better the unit's armor save, the cheaper the invulnerable save will generally cost.

Again then by that logic, where is the 15pt or hell even 20pt upgrade option for my MA warboss to get his 3++ or 4++?


And in regards to my original post, you didn't understand what I was saying. I am not referring to fluff or specifically to durability in the other examples. Tau are good at shooting, they have ridiculously good shooting upgrades for cheap. Eldar are good at....everything, and almost everything is extremely cheap for them.

SemperMortis wrote:Well the only good CC weapon an Ork can take is a PK, it actually reduces our attacks by 1 but increases our already high strength and makes it AP2, so again by that logic it should be cheaper for an Ork then it is for a SM but it isn't.

Again, Orks should have more CCWs, but the PK example is wrong.
Your attacks are reduced just as much as a Space Marines' are, but you STILL have more attacks.
You get a higher strength as a result of the doubling effect over SMs'.
AP2 works for both armies.

It should be MORE for an Ork of the same durability as the Marine, because the ork gets more out of it (higher S and more Attacks) than the Space Marine.

or we could go full slow and point out that Mad Dok paying points for a Cybork body that gives him a 6+ FNP and he already has a 5+ FNP. So shouldnt it be free? Nope.

Why would you even buy it then if you already have the 5+ FNP? It should be free in that case?

The logic you are putting forth is only relevant if you are one of the chose 3 codexs that was given "I Win" buttons. Tau/Eldar/SM. The other codexs have nothing like that....well maybe Necrons.

Cue "All Tau/Eldar/SM players are WAAC TFGs who can't lose games."

SemperMortis wrote:

Again, with the rest of your points, Orks are meant to be tougher than Guardsmen, but not Space Marines. The d6 system puts them appropriately on the list.
You shouldn't get cheaper CCWs UNLESS you:
A) Would be less effective with them than SMs (lower Strength, Wounds, Toughness, Weapon Skill, Initiative, Attacks, etc etc)
B) Had already paid for a weapon which the CCW replaces

Then in that case
Your space marines shouldn't have access to such ridiculous Invul saves unless

Why not? SM are just as susceptible to AP1-3 as Orks. It only affects SM more because they pay points for a save they never get. Standard Orks, on the other hand, treat anything lower than AP6 as exactly the same. AP1-3 means nothing to them, because it's already punctured their armour. By allowing T-shirt armoured Orks to get 3++/4++ Invulns, they'd get more use out of the Invuln, because they would use it more - therefore becoming more expensive.

A) Would be less effective with them then my Orks (Worse save, works only against Shooting or only in CC, your model has lower T value)

Could you explain this one, I genuinely do not understand this?

B) You had already paid more a ridiculously expensive Invulnerable save that only worked against shooting.

Why the only shooting restriction? Why are measuring from the KFF, instead of perhaps BUFFING the KFF, which I am in favour of? And actually, yes, a Captain already HAS a 4++. They've already got an Invuln built in.

How much does a Rosarius cost? Because I have a feeling it is a significantly cheaper upgrade option then my KFF bubble which only works in the shooting phase.

A 4++ according to Codex CSM and Tau is 25 points.
The Ork one IS overpriced. It should be brought into the standard fold.

Blax X wrote:
What are you talking about? Necrons and Daemons are easily as durable as anything you can concoct in the SM codex, and neither Tau nor Eldar have durability as a theme.

Again, it has nothing to do with fluff. The reason why storm-shields are cheap in the SM codex is because a 3++ has higher diminishing returns on a 3+sv model then on a 4-6+sv. The cost of an invulnerable save is directly proportional to the value of the unit's armor save- the better the unit's armor save, the cheaper the invulnerable save will generally cost.

Again then by that logic, where is the 15pt or hell even 20pt upgrade option for my MA warboss to get his 3++ or 4++?

Because that Warboss HAS NO INVULN SAVE ANYWAY.
They are paying for a flat out 3++, otherwise seen as a +4 to their Invuln save.
A Space Marine is paying for a simple +1 to their Invuln save.

The SM will cost less because they are getting less from it than your Ork.

Accordingly, if a +1 Invuln costs 15 points, the Ork's one should cost 60, because 4 x 15 = 60.

And in regards to my original post, you didn't understand what I was saying. I am not referring to fluff or specifically to durability in the other examples. Tau are good at shooting, they have ridiculously good shooting upgrades for cheap. Eldar are good at....everything, and almost everything is extremely cheap for them.

That should not be a thing. Because Tau are good at shooting, their shooting upgrades should be MORE EXPENSIVE.
If two models can access the same gun, but one model has a better BS, the one with higher BS should pay more as they get more out of the weapon, no?

Remove the idea of "X is good at Y, so gets cheaper access to Y Weaponry", because it doesn't help balance the game.

SemperMortis wrote:
Orks are supposed to be extremely durable in general, even without armor, they are also supposed to be AMAZING in close combat, so by that logic shouldn't orks have more toughness then Marines, or have access to good CCWs for cheaper?

Leaving aside the fact that there are Space Marine Chapters that specialize in CC too, Warbosses are T5 while Captains and Chapter Masters are T4. Orks ARE tougher already.

 welshhoppo wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Do CSM have a weapon that doesn't work most of the time?

Nope, we have two.

Really what?

The key and the scroll. Both of them are so niche you will never see them on the board. And the mace's high AP means that it is very rarely seen outside of daemon prices. And our best weapon, the axe of khorne. Only works on a single type of model.

Last I checked neither of those are weapons or I don't know what you're talking about. Niche or not they still work rather than being literally useless against half the armies in the game including the most popular faction.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Well, Tau shield generators are 25 points for a 4++ (the 50 points isn't for "twin linked", its for ghostkeel and stormsurge)
Nobody ever takes it. even on Commanders (are are T4 with 4 wounds and armor 3, and as such easy kills for heavy guns) its a rare take.

So one would argue, that rather than being too cheap for marines-its too expensive for everyone else.

Commanders are T5 4W 2+ armour and cost 25 points more than listed. Irridium is even more mandatory than artificer armour for marines.

You do see buffmanders take a shield, very occassionally the Mark'O but that's about it. Rarely a shooty commander (rare as that is itself) will also take one, but you've usually only got one slot left and stims give a double layered save for 10 points less and allows cover saves (which are free).

.

It's basically the same old problem of gear's cost not scaling with the unit's entry. TWC get it for the same price as vanguard vets. TWC are allready underpriced to begin with.

Honestly, the game has loads of weirdly costed things. Stormshields on TWC aren't even close to the worst offenders. They're just a decent choice. It's a fully melee unit in a meta that hardly allows melee to survive. gak man, throw the wolves a bone. They have to deal with having a damn sled riding around.

DE are a hard army to play at best. Has some strengths, but no, high invulnerable saves ain't it. And it shouldn't be.

Tau... holy hell, if you want to start giving the only advantage that the Wolves have to god damn Tau... then where are all the shooty guns and special shooty rules for the Wolves?

Even if all the codex were balanced, you couldn't just cherry pick advantages that you want too in your codex. They're not supposed to be carbon copies of each other.

 Purifier wrote:
Honestly, the game has loads of weirdly costed things. Stormshields on TWC aren't even close to the worst offenders. They're just a decent choice. It's a fully melee unit in a meta that hardly allows melee to survive. gak man, throw the wolves a bone. They have to deal with having a damn sled riding around.

It's sad how I agree with this. SS are some of the only things that allow Space Wolves to be relatively competitive. Look at the other melee focussed armies. They need some help, badly!

Storm Shields also fit nicely with the Wolves' aesthetic. Viking marines etc. There just needs to be something out there to aid melee players, it doesn't have to be cheap 3++, that seems more like a band aid fix than anything else.

 Purifier wrote:
Stormshields on TWC aren't even close to the worst offenders.

You're right, Wulfen are .

20pts for a Thunderhammer AND a SS? On a model that starts with a 4+ Armour save? With that pretty awesome stat line?
Bonkers.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
One reason why Storm Shields are "cheap" is because many of the models that can take one already have an invulnerable save. So you're usually paying to upgrade an existing invulnerable save, rather then getting one you didn't have to begin with.

Captain with 3W benefits most from this in theory, but as you note he's only improving the Inv he already paid for 4++, is baked into his cost.
Sergeant with 1W has no inv save to upgrade, so gains a defense against low ap attacks. Note that this is 15pts, the price of a marine in his squad- in case of high ap attacks, he'd benefit more from a battle brother with a gun.


This is the only example I can think of where universal pricing works out well.

Totally depends on who's holding it.

A DE archon going from a 5+ to a 2++? A 40 point cost is (maybe) justified. It could have 5 or 10 points shaved off, possibly, but it's a huge improvement in durability and in particular allows him to be very tanky in a very non-tanky codex, so there's the added utility of having him stand in front of some other unit.

On a standard marine character...it depends. A SS is just about right on a terminator, very bad on a regular PA t4 duder (because he can just get instant deathed quite easily), and OP on certain platforms like thunderwolves/bikes. But still, generally it gets eclipsed by the REALLY dumb item, the Shield Derpternal or its brother, Gorgons Chain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
want to see a REAL item imbalance?

Shield Eternal vs Supa Cybork.

Same points cost.

Eternal Warrior on both....

3++ on one...

regular, bog-standard FNP on the other. Oh, and hilariously, Relentless. Which has basically zero use in the ork codex, with all of one heavy weapon option available.

After reading through some of this, honestly seems like a player who is just salty because TH/SS terminators did what they are freaking designed to do, take lots of hits, and be hard to kill.

also it does not take into account that if a terminator is using a SS, he only has access to a TH, which means he is striking at I1.

On top of that, the reason it is so cheap is because terminators for all their strength only get 1 bloody wound and are T4. Compare that to Ork Meganobs who have 2 wounds, which is a big freaking deal, and have 3 attacks base. and you can take 5 models for less then it cost to field Terminators.

This thread is going no where because people are always going to find room to complain about it, be thankful they cost as much as they do, before it was a free swap for terminators.

the_scotsman wrote:
Totally depends on who's holding it.

A DE archon going from a 5+ to a 2++? A 40 point cost is (maybe) justified. It could have 5 or 10 points shaved off, possibly, but it's a huge improvement in durability and in particular allows him to be very tanky in a very non-tanky codex, so there's the added utility of having him stand in front of some other unit.

On a standard marine character...it depends. A SS is just about right on a terminator, very bad on a regular PA t4 duder (because he can just get instant deathed quite easily), and OP on certain platforms like thunderwolves/bikes. But still, generally it gets eclipsed by the REALLY dumb item, the Shield Derpternal or its brother, Gorgons Chain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
want to see a REAL item imbalance?

Shield Eternal vs Supa Cybork.

Same points cost.

Eternal Warrior on both....

3++ on one...

regular, bog-standard FNP on the other. Oh, and hilariously, Relentless. Which has basically zero use in the ork codex, with all of one heavy weapon option available.

Your forgetting that the SM Captain/Chapter master who takes Shield Eternal is almost certainly going to be T4 so in theory S8-10 weapons as well as D and Instant Death weapons are nerfed versus this character because of Eternal warrior buff. For that Ork character, he is almost certainly going to be a Warboss and is T5 so he is actually getting less benefit from this item as S8 and 9 weapons don't inflict Instant death on him, and realistically how many S10 weapons are floating about? There are probably more D weapons then S10 weapons . And that Captain/CM gains a 3++ where as the ork gets a 5+ FNP.....which I don't think he gets versus Instant death and Strength D Weapons.

What is bizarre is that a model wearing underpants and carrying a storm shield is in fact just as hard to kill as a model wearing power armour and carrying a storm shield!

 thegreatchimp wrote:
What is bizarre is that a model wearing underpants and carrying a storm shield is in fact just as hard to kill as a model wearing power armour and carrying a storm shield!

That is generally how over buffed invuls work.

well in a more complex rule set you would only get a forward arc save, have variable armour values per side and such

but this is way too big for that to work. so you just get blanket save

The 3++ stormshild has been something of an underpriced bargain and a driver of "stat bloat" for several editions at this point. It is what it is, but I'm still of the opinion that such should only work in CC. Invuls that strong really should be quite rare, not the baseline theyve become.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The 3++ stormshild has been something of an underpriced bargain and a driver of "stat bloat" for several editions at this point. It is what it is, but I'm still of the opinion that such should only work in CC. Invuls that strong really should be quite rare, not the baseline theyve become.

I'm just gonna come right out and say it.

Too late now..... we got WAY bigger fish to fry than 3++ saves on infantry when it comes to things driving game imbalance.

Do you have a minute to talk about our lord and savior Jink USR aka "lets just casually double the durability of ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL these unit types, what's the worst that could happen?"