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.

I regret suggesting that my friend should start a Red Army style conscript heavy list.

jaxor1983 wrote:
But to be fair this is still all a great deal of speculation, as we don't know what sort of new regiment-specific abilities the codex will contain. All it really takes is for them to hand out some fancy strategems that you use each shooting phase for tanks to become very good, or some additional tank orders that only work if you have an all cadian tank army. There could even be a games workshop armored battle group.

And said codex might also bring in huge point increases and nerfes to guns even more...

...Pointless to speculate about what codex MIGHT bring. It might bring no regiment specific abilities whatsoever either.

We have index for now and abilities and point costs should work with those, not with some imaginary codex abilities that might or might not come with who knows what changes coming in unspecified timeframe.

edit: Not to mention all cadian tank army bonus etc would still mean russ would suck on non-cadian tank army. Not what one would call balanced game design...

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
TL;DR, there was 1 Leman Russ, 1 Basilisk, 1 Manticore, some Sentinels, 3 Chimerae full of Guardsmen, and 2 Hellhounds

Sounds like Mech Guard to me.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
We've got one absolute gak-pile of a gun,

It's one heavy weapon that is better against armor than a lascannon and better against than a heavy bolter. How does the cost of it compare to those heavy weapons? If it's comparable in price or slightly more expensive, it's a very good gun, not gak at all.

Weapons that do huge amounts of damage (which I get the feeling people are expecting) simply don't exist in this edition for anybody. It's not the offense-centered game of 7th. The Leman Russ will sit there and keep churning out damage turn after turn; that's what it's designed for. Of course it can't delete squads like it could previously -- nothing in the game can do that.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's the same as Riptides and Stormsurges. They can't just wipe out units anymore, which is causing much gnashing of teeth amongst people who were used to them being able to do that. What they are is durable.

Alcibiades wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
We've got one absolute gak-pile of a gun,

It's one heavy weapon that is better against armor than a lascannon and better against than a heavy bolter. How does the cost of it compare to those heavy weapons? If it's comparable in price or slightly more expensive, it's a very good gun, not gak at all.

Weapons that do huge amounts of damage (which I get the feeling people are expecting) simply don't exist in this edition for anybody. It's not the offense-centered game of 7th. The Leman Russ will sit there and keep churning out damage turn after turn; that's what it's designed for. Of course it can't delete squads like it could previously -- nothing in the game can do that.

I think the gun itself is fairly priced, at 22pts, but you pay so much for the platform that it's just better to get more heavy bolters or more lascannons on cheaper units. It's 162 points for a battle cannon and a heavy bolter, which is enough to get two full HWS with lascannons with points to spare, which put out more damage against both tanks AND MEQ infantry, while having the same number of wounds (though at much lower toughness). As for heavy bolters, you get four full HWS, which are also better against both tanks and infantry, and in this case you get 24 wounds! And if weapons that do huge amounts of damage don't exist anymore, you're going to need to load up on lots of guns to be able to compensate, since the enemies you will be facing are no less durable. And you just aren't getting enough dakka for your dollar with the Leman Russ as it stands.

Alcibiades wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
We've got one absolute gak-pile of a gun,

It's one heavy weapon that is better against armor than a lascannon and better against than a heavy bolter. How does the cost of it compare to those heavy weapons? If it's comparable in price or slightly more expensive, it's a very good gun, not gak at all.

Weapons that do huge amounts of damage (which I get the feeling people are expecting) simply don't exist in this edition for anybody. It's not the offense-centered game of 7th. The Leman Russ will sit there and keep churning out damage turn after turn; that's what it's designed for.

The Russ is actually pretty fragile in 8th, having only a single wound and point of toughness over the Predator

 Blacksails wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
I agree Blacksails. I've not watched it for that reason. I miss Ailaros's battle reports.

I was just about to say! That man had the best bat reps. Beautiful army too.

I hope that he makes a return, the Foleran 1st would work quite well in 8th. Most of the problems with infantry wave assault, mainly wound allocation, have now gone. I could see his typical lists being really fun. Is there some sort of bat-signal that we could send up?

 master of ordinance wrote:

The Russ is actually pretty fragile in 8th, having only a single wound and point of toughness over the Predator

That 1 point of thoughness is not to be underestimated though.
Going from T7 to T8 means that all of a sudden, every S4 weapon wounds on 6's instead of 5+, and that Missiles wound on 4+ instead of 3+, etc.

 MinscS2 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

The Russ is actually pretty fragile in 8th, having only a single wound and point of toughness over the Predator

That 1 point of thoughness is not to be underestimated though.
Going from T7 to T8 means that all of a sudden, every S4 weapon wounds on 6's instead of 5+, and that Missiles wound on 4+ instead of 3+, etc.

Compared to when a missile neede to be on its flank to need a 5+, and S4 weapons just bounced off?

 master of ordinance wrote:

 MinscS2 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

The Russ is actually pretty fragile in 8th, having only a single wound and point of toughness over the Predator

That 1 point of thoughness is not to be underestimated though.
Going from T7 to T8 means that all of a sudden, every S4 weapon wounds on 6's instead of 5+, and that Missiles wound on 4+ instead of 3+, etc.

Compared to when a missile neede to be on its flank to need a 5+, and S4 weapons just bounced off?

So? The changes are to all vehicles.
At least the russ is T8 with a 3+ instead of T6 and a 4+ save, like most necron vehicles. They went from being plasma proof to plasma fodder.

tneva82 wrote:

jaxor1983 wrote:
But to be fair this is still all a great deal of speculation, as we don't know what sort of new regiment-specific abilities the codex will contain. All it really takes is for them to hand out some fancy strategems that you use each shooting phase for tanks to become very good, or some additional tank orders that only work if you have an all cadian tank army. There could even be a games workshop armored battle group.

And said codex might also bring in huge point increases and nerfes to guns even more...

...Pointless to speculate about what codex MIGHT bring. It might bring no regiment specific abilities whatsoever either.

We have index for now and abilities and point costs should work with those, not with some imaginary codex abilities that might or might not come with who knows what changes coming in unspecified timeframe.

edit: Not to mention all cadian tank army bonus etc would still mean russ would suck on non-cadian tank army. Not what one would call balanced game design...

It's pointless of bemoan the current index we have when we know Every major faction is going to have its own codex with regiment/legion/chapter/order/dynasty specific abilities and/or strategems. All of the comparisons between armies and units we currently know about will be completely different in a couple months (or whenever 'soon' is according to forgeworld). I don't know a single person, except maybe a sisters player, who is excited about the vanilla units and abilities they've been reading about in their collective indexes.

jaxor1983 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

jaxor1983 wrote:
But to be fair this is still all a great deal of speculation, as we don't know what sort of new regiment-specific abilities the codex will contain. All it really takes is for them to hand out some fancy strategems that you use each shooting phase for tanks to become very good, or some additional tank orders that only work if you have an all cadian tank army. There could even be a games workshop armored battle group.

And said codex might also bring in huge point increases and nerfes to guns even more...

...Pointless to speculate about what codex MIGHT bring. It might bring no regiment specific abilities whatsoever either.

We have index for now and abilities and point costs should work with those, not with some imaginary codex abilities that might or might not come with who knows what changes coming in unspecified timeframe.

edit: Not to mention all cadian tank army bonus etc would still mean russ would suck on non-cadian tank army. Not what one would call balanced game design...

It's pointless of bemoan the current index we have when we know Every major faction is going to have its own codex with regiment/legion/chapter/order/dynasty specific abilities and/or strategems. All of the comparisons between armies and units we currently know about will be completely different in a couple months (or whenever 'soon' is according to forgeworld). I don't know a single person, except maybe a sisters player, who is excited about the vanilla units and abilities they've been reading about in their collective indexes.

True, but they could have at least tried to put some effort into our army, rather than going for 'Worf Effect V2.0'.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 MinscS2 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

The Russ is actually pretty fragile in 8th, having only a single wound and point of toughness over the Predator

That 1 point of thoughness is not to be underestimated though.
Going from T7 to T8 means that all of a sudden, every S4 weapon wounds on 6's instead of 5+, and that Missiles wound on 4+ instead of 3+, etc.

Compared to when a missile neede to be on its flank to need a 5+, and S4 weapons just bounced off?

With that logic Land Raiders are awful since missiles went from 6's to glace to 4+ to wound with a decent chance to do multiple wounds.
Stop living in 7th, it doesn't do anyone any good.

Predators are scared of massed S4, LR's aren't.

MaxT wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
TL;DR, there was 1 Leman Russ, 1 Basilisk, 1 Manticore, some Sentinels, 3 Chimerae full of Guardsmen, and 2 Hellhounds

Sounds like Mech Guard to me.

You would think so, but it seems that doesn't quite qualify for some.

 master of ordinance wrote:
...
Chimeras?
There was ONE chimera on the entire battlefield, and I assume it contained a command section.
Your 'Mech guard' army may or may not have done well, but that is not the point people are debating. People are looking at the damage output of our tanks, and finding them woefully lacking. And of certain units (like Ogryns) and finding them lacking for the cost.
The artillery? The Manticore CARRIED the Basilisk in terms of effectiveness.

That is what people are debating, not that one or two aspects are good, but the fact that the vast majority of the army (barring those bits people did not usually have) stink.

There were 3 Chimeras and they all had veterans in them. Maybe the problem is we are talking about different batreps.

MaxT wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
TL;DR, there was 1 Leman Russ, 1 Basilisk, 1 Manticore, some Sentinels, 3 Chimerae full of Guardsmen, and 2 Hellhounds

Sounds like Mech Guard to me.

It is mech guard. I didn't say it wasn't. What I did say was the heavy mech of the mech guard was completely worthless.

Alcibiades wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
We've got one absolute gak-pile of a gun,

It's one heavy weapon that is better against armor than a lascannon and better against than a heavy bolter. How does the cost of it compare to those heavy weapons? If it's comparable in price or slightly more expensive, it's a very good gun, not gak at all.

Weapons that do huge amounts of damage (which I get the feeling people are expecting) simply don't exist in this edition for anybody. It's not the offense-centered game of 7th. The Leman Russ will sit there and keep churning out damage turn after turn; that's what it's designed for. Of course it can't delete squads like it could previously -- nothing in the game can do that.

You seem to have missed the numbers. It's so absolutely laughably trash by all standards it isn't funny, and is just sad.

Also, if it's more expensive that a battery of Lascannons [which are superior antitank guns] and a battery of Heavy Bolters [which are superior anti-infantry weapons] combined, then it doesn't matter that it kills infantry better than a Lascannon and tanks better than a Heavy Bolter, it's gak.

And, of course, let me again bring up Hellhounds. a Hellhound and a Devil Dog are superior at killing both tanks and infantry, are more survivable, and are approximately the same price.

Durability is worthless if nobody cares enough to shoot at it.

Otto von Bludd wrote:

MaxT wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
TL;DR, there was 1 Leman Russ, 1 Basilisk, 1 Manticore, some Sentinels, 3 Chimerae full of Guardsmen, and 2 Hellhounds

Sounds like Mech Guard to me.

You would think so, but it seems that doesn't quite qualify for some.

I'm not arguing it isn't mech guard, I'm arging it shows mech guard beating an opponent who should have been outright demolished in this edition by the guard list.

That deployment shouldn't have stood a chance. That necron player was terrible.

And, we watched the batrep, and saw the units we are talking about doing nothing at all during the game. The guard player won despite having at-least 300+ points of his list achieve diddly-squat all game.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


You seem to have missed the numbers. It's so absolutely laughably trash by all standards it isn't funny, and is just sad.

Also, if it's more expensive that a battery of Lascannons [which are superior antitank guns] and a battery of Heavy Bolters [which are superior anti-infantry weapons] combined, then it doesn't matter that it kills infantry better than a Lascannon and tanks better than a Heavy Bolter, it's gak.

I saw the numbers. I haven't figured out what it costs.

Now, go over to the Tau index and compare their analogous weapons -- the Ion Accelerator and the Pulse Driver Cannon, for instance. They're more or less the same.

Fun fact: a Stormsurge can unload its entire arsenal, including all four Destroyer missiles with markerlights active, at a Leman Russ and probably will not kill it.

Alcibiades wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


You seem to have missed the numbers. It's so absolutely laughably trash by all standards it isn't funny, and is just sad.

Also, if it's more expensive that a battery of Lascannons [which are superior antitank guns] and a battery of Heavy Bolters [which are superior anti-infantry weapons] combined, then it doesn't matter that it kills infantry better than a Lascannon and tanks better than a Heavy Bolter, it's gak.

I saw the numbers. I haven't figured out what it costs.

Now, go over to the Tau index and compare their analogous weapons -- the Ion Accelerator and the Pulse Driver Cannon, for instance. They're more or less the same.

Fun fact: a Stormsurge can unload its entire arsenal, including all four Destroyer missiles with markerlights active, at a Leman Russ and probably will not kill it.

It's not the Russ's problem if the Ion Accelerator is trash too.

It is the Russ's problem that Conscripts are literally more effective at killing tanks with their Lasguns than the Battle Cannon is.

Conscripts vs. Leman Russ: 3.7 wounds average on 10000 trials.
Russ vs. Leman Russ averages 1.15 wounds, on 10000 trials.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
200 shots

I know that you are just comparing in a vacuum but it needs to be pointed out that conscripts will never get 200 shots. With casualties and spacing/ range issues you will never get 50 models within 12" of anything. The Leman Russ does have a massive footprint advantage over conscripts, which is something that needs to be considered. For instance, with good terrain coverage it may be very easy to funnel the conscripts into areas where very few of them get to attack. Imagine trying to get 100 men down a narrow street.

That is something that hasn't been addressed much: terrain. I can see terrain being a lot denser this edition, as the rules are not nearly as clunky when you use more. Things like chimeras and russes would probably do well in a cityfight level of terrain.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
200 shots

I know that you are just comparing in a vacuum but it needs to be pointed out that conscripts will never get 200 shots. With casualties and spacing/ range issues you will never get 50 models within 12" of anything. The Leman Russ does have a massive footprint advantage over conscripts, which is something that needs to be considered. For instance, with good terrain coverage it may be very easy to funnel the conscripts into areas where very few of them get to attack. Imagine trying to get 100 men down a narrow street.

That is something that hasn't been addressed much: terrain. I can see terrain being a lot denser this edition, as the rules are not nearly as clunky when you use more. Things like chimeras and russes would probably do well in a cityfight level of terrain.

Perhaps:


I'm sure there are more efficient packing schemes for the guardsmen too.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

It's not the Russ's problem if the Ion Accelerator is trash too.

It is the Russ's problem that Conscripts are literally more effective at killing tanks with their Lasguns than the Battle Cannon is.

Conscripts vs. Leman Russ: 200 shots, 70 hits, 10 wounds, 3 unsaved, average. I can bring it up and run a simulation too if we need further proof.
Russ vs. Leman Russ averages 1 wound, and only have something like a 10% chance of even doing three.

Okay. I'm very sorry. Some of your simulations have been pretty interesting, but this is now officially silly.

"Conscripts are better than russes at anti-tank! All you have to do is get all 50 right next to the tank unharmed! And also have off camera support characters dedicated to them whose points I'm not taking into account when I try to draw this comparison! Tanks are awful."

In reality, those conscripts probably wouldn't be able to get within 12" of the tank within the first turn, and possibly not within the second turn if the opponent has any idea what you're trying to do. Meanwhile, the tank has several turns of firing that your conscripts don't get, or get half the effectiveness you're showing, and that's still being generous and assuming that they're not getting fired into.

 daedalus wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

It's not the Russ's problem if the Ion Accelerator is trash too.

It is the Russ's problem that Conscripts are literally more effective at killing tanks with their Lasguns than the Battle Cannon is.

Conscripts vs. Leman Russ: 200 shots, 70 hits, 10 wounds, 3 unsaved, average. I can bring it up and run a simulation too if we need further proof.
Russ vs. Leman Russ averages 1 wound, and only have something like a 10% chance of even doing three.

Okay. I'm very sorry. Some of your simulations have been pretty interesting, but this is now officially silly.

"Conscripts are better than russes at anti-tank! All you have to do is get all 50 right next to the tank unharmed! And also have off camera support characters dedicated to them whose points I'm not taking into account when I try to draw this comparison! Tanks are awful."

In reality, those conscripts probably wouldn't be able to get within 12" of the tank within the first turn, and possibly not within the second turn if the opponent has any idea what you're trying to do. Meanwhile, the tank has several turns of firing that your conscripts don't get, or get half the effectiveness you're showing, and that's still being generous and assuming that they're not getting fired into.

This is true. The conscript are unlikely to reach appropriate range intact. Well, maybe, if they go second, the enemy tank move up 7+", then they fire. They're more fragile than the tank, but they also have fewer natural counters. They're by no means efficient at tank killing [except for the Ghost Arks, but that's also besides the point], but if you line up 50 conscripts, you will get more wounds out of them than the Leman Russ.

But, before we get into that, the conscripts are 150+20+30=200 points with their supporting officer and commissar. The Tank is 132+22+8=162 points, by itself.

This also isn't the Leman Russ optimized to kill tanks.

But let's turn this around. Let's try finding a reason to bring the Leman Russ, and the variant and loadout we want for it.

I can't think of many situations when the tank would need to move up though. It's not a plausible situation. If anything, the tank would move in any direction but. It could even kite them pretty well, since it can fire at BS while moving (significantly faster than the conscripts at that).

Also, my math shows your conscript unit at 150 + 30 + 31. Unless you're taking something different than I expect. Company commander and commissar?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Which, I think, is something else about the Russ that is getting overlooked here. They're surprisingly mobile. They're moving almost twice as fast as they could in previous editions and still fire (and at full BS). Outrunning infantry while remaining able to fire is definitely something to consider.

He's using a platoon commander for this imaginary army.

Have you run a simulation for a battle cannon vs. something that is T6 or 7 with a 3+ or 4+ save? Also, how about at BS 3+ while rerolling 1's?

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
[

It's not the Russ's problem if the Ion Accelerator is trash too.

It is the Russ's problem that Conscripts are literally more effective at killing tanks with their Lasguns than the Battle Cannon is.

Well, if they can get within 12" range and can endure counterfire. Then they're also better than lascannons and everything else. But that is unlikely to happen, because unlike the Russ they will get blown away by small-arms fire before they get there.

Following your line of thinking, all weapons are trash. Because you are judging everything on their capability to churn out damage in a short period, and weapons that churn out high amounts of damage in a short period simply do not exist now. The game is currently about ability to weather fire and return fire over time.

jaxor1983 wrote:
He's using a platoon commander for this imaginary army.

Oh yeah. I keep forgetting those are a thing.

 daedalus wrote:
I can't think of many situations when the tank would need to move up though. It's not a plausible situation. If anything, the tank would move in any direction but. It could even kite them pretty well, since it can fire at BS while moving (significantly faster than the conscripts at that).

Also, my math shows your conscript unit at 150 + 30 + 31. Unless you're taking something different than I expect. Company commander and commissar?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Which, I think, is something else about the Russ that is getting overlooked here. They're surprisingly mobile. They're moving almost twice as fast as they could in previous editions and still fire (and at full BS). Outrunning infantry while remaining able to fire is definitely something to consider.

Platoon commander is 20, IIRC.

Anyway, a Leman Russ may have range, but other tanks don't necessarily do. Particularly the vehicles you care about killing, which are called upon to advance on your lines anyway.

Conscripts aren't good at killing tanks, at optimal range or otherwise. A Leman Russ battle cannon is worse at it, though.

What you really want are Lascannon HWT's and Devil Dogs, by the look of it. A Devil Dog is terrifying this edition: it get 1D3+1 shots at S8, AP-4, that do 2D6B1 damage when they hit at 12" and 1D6 a 24", on a 11 wound platform that moves 12" a turn. And it totals up to 128 points. Lascannon teams are slower and more fragile, but they're only 72 points for a group of 3.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

What you really want are Lascannon HWT's and Devil Dogs, by the look of it. A Devil Dog is terrifying this edition: it get 1D3+1 shots at S8, AP-4, that do 2D6B1 damage when they hit at 12" and 1D6 a 24", on a 11 wound platform that moves 12" a turn. And it totals up to 128 points. Lascannon teams are slower and more fragile, but they're only 72 points for a group of 3.

I agree with this 100%. I'm rocking at least three LC HWS at 1500, and I'm definitely interested in running some Devil Dogs at some point, though I don't think that's ever going to be in the same list. I think I have either two or three hellhound chassis right now. Super excited to finally have a reason to magnetize those other weapons.

jaxor1983 wrote:He's using a platoon commander for this imaginary army.

Have you run a simulation for a battle cannon vs. something that is T6 or 7 with a 3+ or 4+ save? Also, how about at BS 3+ while rerolling 1's?

Yes on the first two. 3+ and Re-rolling 1's is mutually exclusive, because the TC can't order other TC's, but here:
(Wounds: Trials: Percentage) 10000 trials

BS4+ Re-roll 1's:
0: 3997 39.97%
1: 1291 12.91%
2: 1409 14.09%
3: 1633 16.33%
4: 615 6.15%
5: 458 4.58%
6: 314 3.14%
7: 147 1.47%
8: 82 0.82%
9: 32 0.32%
10: 13 0.13%
11: 9 0.09%
12: 0 0.0%
13: 0 0.0%
14: 0 0.0%
15: 0 0.0%
16: 0 0.0%
17: 0 0.0%
18: 0 0.0%

BS3+:
0: 3542 35.42%
1: 1296 12.96%
2: 1405 14.05%
3: 1695 16.95%
4: 703 7.03%
5: 555 5.55%
6: 392 3.92%
7: 184 1.84%
8: 126 1.26%
9: 64 0.64%
10: 24 0.24%
11: 2 0.02%
12: 8 0.08%
13: 1 0.01%
14: 2 0.02%
15: 1 0.01%
16: 0 0.0%
17: 0 0.0%
18: 0 0.0%

Alcibiades wrote:
Well, if they can get within 12" range and can endure counterfire. Then they're also better than lascannons and everything else. But that is unlikely to happen, because unlike the Russ they will get blown away by small-arms fire before they get there.

Following your line of thinking, all weapons are trash. Because you are judging everything on their capability to churn out damage in a short period, and weapons that churn out high amounts of damage in a short period simply do not exist now. The game is currently about ability to weather fire and return fire over time.

Survivability is overrated, because it's reactive, not proactive. It's easy to invalidate and easy to ignore, compared to firepower which becomes disastrous if you ignore it and can only really be rendered useless if it's out of position, which is your prerogative, not the enemy's. The enemy has to act because of your firepower, while the toughness of your units doesn't force them to do anything on it's own.


But I'm not comparing it to weapons from last edition. I'm comparing it to weapons from this edition. I'm not judging it on how it can't kill a tank in 1 turn, I'm judging it on the fact that it does less damage per turn than other options. It doesn't return fire over time very well.

What the methodology behind these tests? You're referencing trials, so I'm assuming you're using some sort of random or pseudorandom numbers. Where are you sourcing them from, out of curiosity? Are you consuming new numbers each time or are you reusing the same random number set for each set of trials?

jaxor1983 wrote:
It's pointless of bemoan the current index we have when we know Every major faction is going to have its own codex with regiment/legion/chapter/order/dynasty specific abilities and/or strategems. All of the comparisons between armies and units we currently know about will be completely different in a couple months (or whenever 'soon' is according to forgeworld). I don't know a single person, except maybe a sisters player, who is excited about the vanilla units and abilities they've been reading about in their collective indexes.

It's pointless to think about what future codex which for some armies might not be out for years(AOS has less books to release and isn't done yet...). We have what we have now and we need to look at how it works NOW not with some imaginary codex rules we don't know and which might even hit us with a nerfbat as well as give us toys. Who's to say russ doesn't get 50% price hike along with +1 to hit with some strategem available?