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.

 DeffDred wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
Oh, look, Stormonu basically agrees with my exact sentiments.

I guess we are both trolls, we both have unrealistic conceptions of game balance and we should both quit, right?

Simply put, 40k isn't for you. You're looking for Chess or Checkers.

No way. White having the "always go first" rule is to OP for him.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 DeffDred wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
Oh, look, Stormonu basically agrees with my exact sentiments.

I guess we are both trolls, we both have unrealistic conceptions of game balance and we should both quit, right?

Simply put, 40k isn't for you. You're looking for Chess or Checkers.

No way. White having the "always go first" rule is to OP for him.

Oh i bet he would just LOVE the AoS rules for being able to steal the initiative every turn and have the possibility of you opponent never going.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
No way. White having the "always go first" rule is to OP for him.

OP knight forked my king and bishop I should be able to win without moving anything but pawns pls nerf ok gw ty

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 DeffDred wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
Oh, look, Stormonu basically agrees with my exact sentiments.

I guess we are both trolls, we both have unrealistic conceptions of game balance and we should both quit, right?

Simply put, 40k isn't for you. You're looking for Chess or Checkers.

No way. White having the "always go first" rule is to OP for him.

Oh i bet he would just LOVE the AoS rules for being able to steal the initiative every turn and have the possibility of you opponent never going.

Uh, there are no such rules in AoS... But he's dumb enough to believe there would be.

Guys, yesterday I was using my footslogging marines army (because transports only let me fire with 2 models instead of the entire unit! So weak...) and, of course, not caring about cover (cover is for those pansies in the Guard!); however, my opponent brought a most outlandish unit this time - guys riding horses.
Yeah, you read it right - HORSES. How can people even care about riding freaking animals in the future?!?

I laughed at the notion and at his unit, but the oaf dared to charge them into my advancing tacticals. To my surprise, they had I5, S5, AP3 attacks!!! That's absurd and totally OP! GW, nerf that unit at once! In fact, I bet it's not even legal - horse riders, come on...

 Vector Strike wrote:
Guys, yesterday I was using my footslogging marines army (because transports only let me fire with 2 models instead of the entire unit! So weak...) and, of course, not caring about cover (cover is for those pansies in the Guard!); however, my opponent brought a most outlandish unit this time - guys riding horses.
Yeah, you read it right - HORSES. How can people even care about riding freaking animals in the future?!?

I laughed at the notion and at his unit, but the oaf dared to charge them into my advancing tacticals. To my surprise, they had I5, S5, AP3 attacks!!! That's absurd and totally OP! GW, nerf that unit at once! In fact, I bet it's not even legal - horse riders, come on...

That's so OP. They're also just as fast as a bike! The horror!

 Vector Strike wrote:
Guys, yesterday I was using my footslogging marines army (because transports only let me fire with 2 models instead of the entire unit! So weak...) and, of course, not caring about cover (cover is for those pansies in the Guard!); however, my opponent brought a most outlandish unit this time - guys riding horses.
Yeah, you read it right - HORSES. How can people even care about riding freaking animals in the future?!?

I laughed at the notion and at his unit, but the oaf dared to charge them into my advancing tacticals. To my surprise, they had I5, S5, AP3 attacks!!! That's absurd and totally OP! GW, nerf that unit at once! In fact, I bet it's not even legal - horse riders, come on...

You mentioned Rough Riders. You win.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:
Hmm, spirited conversation, this. Is this kind of thread common nowadays? I remember these forums as slightly quieter.

Only with Dakka's favorite troll taking the bait here. If not for him, things are quieter.

(Sisters of Battle-related stuff and Australian shipping, excluded, of course...)

There's also my ongoing effort to convince Martel the Blood Angels are less terrible than he thinks that occasionally takes random threads off on a funny tangent.

Martel will not miss an opportunity to tell people how bad Blood Angels are.

 Traditio wrote:

Peregrine wrote:You've already stated that "hide on the objectives and hope you don't lose your whole army" is not an acceptable option because it isn't fun.

It's not fun. However, purely from a game balance point of view, I accept that it should be a viable possibility.

It is a viable possibility, for some armies (like Necrons in a Decurion, or perhaps Nurgle Daemons). At least, some units in some armies are suited to it. Personally I don't think the whole army should be able to do this and win, for the same reason I don't think you should be able to win at StarCraft by building nothing but static defenses.

 Traditio wrote:

Wait, I thought I should be able to win at the exact same 50/50 rate as everyone else, no matter what I bring? Why should I suffer tactically because I didn't bring infantry to follow my tanks and mop up?

And this is where you're just making a strawman of my position.

You're one to talk about strawman arguments...

 Traditio wrote:
I don't think that a cultist should be exactly equal to an LRBT.

Cultists and LRBTs should clearly have different playstyles associated with them, different strengths, different weaknesses, etc.

I think that 40 (or however many) cultists should have a better ability to hold objectives and kill light infantry than a single LRBT.

Guess what? They do. A large blob of Cultists can swamp many infantry units, overwhelming them with sheer numbers, whereas a LRBT will use powerful weapons to kill those infantry. Same result, different approaches. However, every unit in the game shouldn't be an infantry killer, otherwise tanks would be invincible and you'd be crying about that (rightly so if literally nothing could hurt tanks!). Different units should have different jobs, so figuring out which units to put in a TAC list becomes a bit of a balancing act.

 Traditio wrote:
I think that an LRBT should be much more durable and should be much more efficient at taking individual, heavily armored targets.

But ultimately, I think that if I have x points of cultists and you have the same number of points of LRBTs, that it should be roughly equiprobable, independently of player skill, that either I or you will win the game.

But it shouldn't. Not really. Think about it; if one army consists of Leman Russes exclusively, and the opposing one consists of cultists exclusively, it should be one-sided against the cultists. As the game progresses, those tanks are going to be shooting and killing the cultists, while meanwhile the cultists have little if anything that can even scratch a tank. So factor in attrition, and a few turns in there is 50% of the cultists left, vs. 100% of the tanks. To me, that suggests that the cultists should lose, since as they lose units their ability to hold the objectives diminishes, while the tanks continue to have the same ability to hold the objectives (since they aren't losing units). It's really not that hard to understand.

 Traditio wrote:
Yes, your tanks should hit harder and be hard to kill. But they should also lack volume of fire, be expensive and not have the same capacity to hold objectives.

They do, and they are, for the most part.

 Traditio wrote:
Hiding in cover and swarming the field with bodies should a real strategy.

It is for some armies. Ever heard of the Green Tide?

Martel732 wrote:
S8 AP3 large blast at least can kill several models. However, I don't care much for the battle cannon myself. And it has extra efficacy vs vehicles. But it's still a blast, so meh. The step from battle cannon to ion accelerator is so huge and the points just don't show it.

Um what you do realize the ion accelerator is only available on one model in the entire army right? Plus it should be better than a battle cannon as if you actually read any of the lore you'd realize tau tech > imperial tech. Its funny your complaining about the ion accelerator and by extension the riptide yet ice lost my riptide to Ork artillery that would only scratch the paint work of a leman Russ.

Ain't better tech supposed to cost more points?

 koooaei wrote:
Ain't better tech supposed to cost more points?

It does though. To give you a example
Crisis battle suits cost 2 more bare bones cultists in terms of points vs space marines and all I get for that is +1 wound attack and become jetpack infantry I still have to buy guns too.
The riptide is actually quite expensive for what it does outside of riptide wing as its fire power is rather lacking for the cost but its more of a durable tank.
Of I was to take 185 points of crisis suits with guns they would probably do more damage but not be as tanky

Exchange your riptides for 150 lrbt and let's see how your games go and who's lacking what. Stop derailing a troll thread!

 koooaei wrote:
Exchange your riptides for 150 lrbt and let's see how your games go and who's lacking what. Stop derailing a troll thread![/quote
I'm sorry hut what? If anyone derailed the thread its Martel my point simply was stop comparing 2 units who don't even do the same roll in the army. If he wants to compare the lemon Russ to anything it should be the hammer head.]

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
stop comparing 2 units who don't even do the same roll in the army. If he wants to compare the lemon Russ to anything it should be the hammer head.

The problem is that the Riptide does have the same role as the LRBT (and the same role as the ion Hammerhead). It's a long-range shooting platform with a primary target of MEQs. Except the Riptide gets AP 2 instead of AP 3, vastly better mobility, better durability, better upgrades and secondary weapons, and no vehicle damage table. It's just plain better at everything, without the appropriate point cost increase to pay for that superiority. If I could use the Riptide's rules for my LRBT models in my IG army I'd take that trade every time.

 Peregrine wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
stop comparing 2 units who don't even do the same roll in the army. If he wants to compare the lemon Russ to anything it should be the hammer head.

The problem is that the Riptide does have the same role as the LRBT (and the same role as the ion Hammerhead). It's a long-range shooting platform with a primary target of MEQs. Except the Riptide gets AP 2 instead of AP 3, vastly better mobility, better durability, better upgrades and secondary weapons, and no vehicle damage table. It's just plain better at everything, without the appropriate point cost increase to pay for that superiority. If I could use the Riptide's rules for my LRBT models in my IG army I'd take that trade every time.

Better secondary weapons? ERM nope I don't think so. Yes it gets AP2 on its gun because unlike guard we don't have easy access to long range high strength high ap weapons unlike any of the imperial armies. Yes the riptide is durable but guess what its our only durable unit.

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
stop comparing 2 units who don't even do the same roll in the army. If he wants to compare the lemon Russ to anything it should be the hammer head.

The problem is that the Riptide does have the same role as the LRBT (and the same role as the ion Hammerhead). It's a long-range shooting platform with a primary target of MEQs. Except the Riptide gets AP 2 instead of AP 3, vastly better mobility, better durability, better upgrades and secondary weapons, and no vehicle damage table. It's just plain better at everything, without the appropriate point cost increase to pay for that superiority. If I could use the Riptide's rules for my LRBT models in my IG army I'd take that trade every time.

Better secondary weapons? ERM nope I don't think so. Yes it gets AP2 on its gun because unlike guard we don't have easy access to long range high strength high ap weapons unlike any of the imperial armies. Yes the riptide is durable but guess what its our only durable unit.

Stormsurge. Tau'nar. Iridium/stimm buff'mander. Ghostkeels. all are very durable. Long range? TL HYMP, Regular missile pods. Seeker missiles. Ion rifles. HRR. Railrifles. Ion cannons. All but the ion rifles and rail rifles are 36" iirc, and and are S7 or better, and AP4 or better. Rail rifle is 30" S6, AP1, and ion is 30" S7 AP4 (or S8 AP4, blast gets hot) Riptide secondary weapons: TL 4 shot S5 AP 5 ignores cover and LoS, TL plasma rifles, or TL fusion blasters, compared to plasma cannons, HBs/HFs, or multi meltas (none of which are TL, and the base LRBT makes those fire snap shots).

Riptides OR hammerheads > LRBTs
Tau ranged shooting > guard ranged shooting
Tau durable units > guard durable units
Tau model count < guard model count (not that it matters)

 Wolfblade wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
stop comparing 2 units who don't even do the same roll in the army. If he wants to compare the lemon Russ to anything it should be the hammer head.

The problem is that the Riptide does have the same role as the LRBT (and the same role as the ion Hammerhead). It's a long-range shooting platform with a primary target of MEQs. Except the Riptide gets AP 2 instead of AP 3, vastly better mobility, better durability, better upgrades and secondary weapons, and no vehicle damage table. It's just plain better at everything, without the appropriate point cost increase to pay for that superiority. If I could use the Riptide's rules for my LRBT models in my IG army I'd take that trade every time.

Better secondary weapons? ERM nope I don't think so. Yes it gets AP2 on its gun because unlike guard we don't have easy access to long range high strength high ap weapons unlike any of the imperial armies. Yes the riptide is durable but guess what its our only durable unit.

Stormsurge. Tau'nar. Iridium/stimm buff'mander. Ghostkeels. all are very durable. Long range? TL HYMP, Regular missile pods. Seeker missiles. Ion rifles. HRR. Railrifles. Ion cannons. All but the ion rifles and rail rifles are 36" iirc, and and are S7 or better, and AP4 or better. Rail rifle is 30" S6, AP1, and ion is 30" S7 AP4 (or S8 AP4, blast gets hot) Riptide secondary weapons: TL 4 shot S5 AP 5 ignores cover and LoS, TL plasma rifles, or TL fusion blasters, compared to plasma cannons, HBs/HFs, or multi meltas (none of which are TL, and the base LRBT makes those fire snap shots).

Riptides OR hammerheads > LRBTs
Tau ranged shooting > guard ranged shooting
Tau durable units > guard durable units
Tau model count < guard model count (not that it matters)

And your point is? Guard should be inferior to tau in the shooting because guess what that is all we frigging do we have access to no psychic buffs unlike guard our transport costs more than yours and does less than a bloody chimrae.

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
Better secondary weapons? ERM nope I don't think so.

Uh, yes, better secondary weapons. SMS/fusion/plasma that can fire twice per turn are way better than a hull heavy bolter that you have to fire at BS 1 because your main gun is ordnance.

Yes it gets AP2 on its gun because unlike guard we don't have easy access to long range high strength high ap weapons unlike any of the imperial armies.

Uh, lol? Tau have the same plasma/melta that IG have, Broadsides have STR 8 AP 1 to match IG lascannons if you want long range single shots, and the Riptide is just as good as any of the IG artillery at killing elite infantry. Giving the Riptide AP 2 without even having to nova charge the gun was sheer lunacy.

Yes the riptide is durable but guess what its our only durable unit.

The Stormsurge and Ghostkeel would like to disagree with that claim, even without considering the ridiculously durable FW Riptide variants. And it's not like IG have any durable units besides the LRBT and Baneblade, so you wouldn't get much sympathy even if it was true.

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
stop comparing 2 units who don't even do the same roll in the army. If he wants to compare the lemon Russ to anything it should be the hammer head.

The problem is that the Riptide does have the same role as the LRBT (and the same role as the ion Hammerhead). It's a long-range shooting platform with a primary target of MEQs. Except the Riptide gets AP 2 instead of AP 3, vastly better mobility, better durability, better upgrades and secondary weapons, and no vehicle damage table. It's just plain better at everything, without the appropriate point cost increase to pay for that superiority. If I could use the Riptide's rules for my LRBT models in my IG army I'd take that trade every time.

Better secondary weapons? ERM nope I don't think so. Yes it gets AP2 on its gun because unlike guard we don't have easy access to long range high strength high ap weapons unlike any of the imperial armies. Yes the riptide is durable but guess what its our only durable unit.

Stormsurge. Tau'nar. Iridium/stimm buff'mander. Ghostkeels. all are very durable. Long range? TL HYMP, Regular missile pods. Seeker missiles. Ion rifles. HRR. Railrifles. Ion cannons. All but the ion rifles and rail rifles are 36" iirc, and and are S7 or better, and AP4 or better. Rail rifle is 30" S6, AP1, and ion is 30" S7 AP4 (or S8 AP4, blast gets hot) Riptide secondary weapons: TL 4 shot S5 AP 5 ignores cover and LoS, TL plasma rifles, or TL fusion blasters, compared to plasma cannons, HBs/HFs, or multi meltas (none of which are TL, and the base LRBT makes those fire snap shots).

Riptides OR hammerheads > LRBTs
Tau ranged shooting > guard ranged shooting
Tau durable units > guard durable units
Tau model count < guard model count (not that it matters)

And your point is? Guard should be inferior to tau in the shooting because guess what that is all we frigging do we have access to no psychic buffs unlike guard our transport costs more than yours and does less than a bloody chimrae.

My point is you're wrong. we have PLENTY of long range shooting, and high S low AP shooting, and some VERY VERY durable units. Not to mention our plasma doesn't have gets hot! so it's safer to spam. (in exchange for S6 which is meaningless if you're hunting MEQs/TEQs)

But he has vespids! So it's perfectly fine. Bad stuff to balance out the amazingly good stuff. Now if he had to take both and not just two of the amazingly good stuff...

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
And your point is? Guard should be inferior to tau in the shooting because guess what that is all we frigging do

You do know that the movement phase exists, right? I know many Tau players don't know how to do anything besides set up a gunline at the back edge of the table and roll dice until someone wins, but the Tau have tons of mobile shooting. JSJ crisis suits, deep strike everywhere, Piranha swarms that can dump seeker missiles/drones and respawn next turn with all of their losses replaced, etc. IG have nowhere near the same level of mobility, so if anything the Tau should have weaker shooting to make up for it.

we have access to no psychic buffs unlike guard

Yes you do. They're called markerlights.

our transport costs more than yours and does less than a bloody chimrae.

So what? That's one Tau unit that isn't obviously better than its IG equivalent. And the Devilfish is actually a very good unit. It costs a bit more but it's way more durable and being able to jump over terrain has a lot of value if you're playing on a table with a proper amount of terrain. And of course, unlike IG infantry, Tau units aren't utterly dependent on having a transport in the first place. You've got deep striking JSJ infantry all over the codex, having a less than perfect transport gives you zero sympathy.

Guard are in a MUCH worse place than tau, and pretending otherwise is completely dishonest. Just because we have a few bad/subpar units doesn't mean anything (i.e. vespids, devilfish, hammerheads, ethereals, pathfinders vs the drone formation), especially when we have FANTASTIC formations.

 BBAP wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
No way. White having the "always go first" rule is to OP for him.

OP knight forked my king and bishop I should be able to win without moving anything but pawns pls nerf ok gw ty

Truth to be told, Queens should be nerfed, at least for internal balance reasons.

I mean come on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:


You do know that the movement phase exists, right? I know many Tau players don't know how to do anything besides set up a gunline at the back edge of the table and roll dice until someone wins, but the Tau have tons of mobile shooting. JSJ crisis suits, deep strike everywhere, Piranha swarms that can dump seeker missiles/drones and respawn next turn with all of their losses replaced, etc. IG have nowhere near the same level of mobility, so if anything the Tau should have weaker shooting to make up for it.

Thank you Peregrine. I felt liver pain reading that "muh Tau superior firepower". GW refuses to conceive IG as more than a gunline, hence IG should have the biggest firepower. Fullstop.

You automatically assumed I play a gun line when I actually play mech tau. Guards should get a buff to their gunlines? You do realize how boring it is to face a gunline right there's only 1 stationary unit in my army and that's my broadside everything else in my army moves whether that be up the board or retreats so most of my army is in the 12" supporting fire bubble from the hunter cadre

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
You automatically assumed I play a gun line when I actually play mech tau. Guards should get a buff to their gunlines? You do realize how boring it is to face a gunline right there's only 1 stationary unit in my army and that's my broadside everything else in my army moves whether that be up the board or retreats so most of my army is in the 12" supporting fire bubble from the hunter cadre

And? that has nothing to do with what you were talking about.

 Wolfblade wrote:

Champion of Slaanesh wrote:
You automatically assumed I play a gun line when I actually play mech tau. Guards should get a buff to their gunlines? You do realize how boring it is to face a gunline right there's only 1 stationary unit in my army and that's my broadside everything else in my army moves whether that be up the board or retreats so most of my army is in the 12" supporting fire bubble from the hunter cadre

And? that has nothing to do with what you were talking about.

Actually it does one person automatically assumed I play a gun line like a lot of tau players and then someone else brought up imperial guard gunlines.
I should make it clear by long range good ap weapons I mean with a longer range than 24 and ap of 3 or better

Why do you need long range low AP weapons if you're playing a very mobile force? And if you do, ion heads. IA riptides. Stormsurges. Tau'nar (if anyone would let you play it/you have the money for it). Skyrays/that pirahna formation that refills drones/missiles. Deepstriking crisis suits. All of those are ways to get AP 3 or better with long range, or at least the ability to get close enough to use it.

You guys have no idea just how amused I am by the turn that this thread has taken.

You made the thread to mock me for saying that death guard rules are OP.

And here we have a tau player claiming that riptides are not OP and that, indeed, the riptide is necessary for a tau codex that otherwise wouldn't fare very well at all.

Because the tau codex is full of units that are neither durable, have long range nor hit hard.

Lol.

 Traditio wrote:
You guys have no idea just how amused I am by the turn that this thread has taken.

You made the thread to mock me for saying that death guard rules are OP.

And here we have a tau player claiming that riptides are not OP and that, indeed, the riptide is necessary for a tau codex that otherwise wouldn't fare very well at all.

Because the tau codex is full of units that are neither durable, have long range nor hit hard.

Lol.

I guess trolls who take the bait attract more trolls, eh Traditio?