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.

 Zewrath wrote:

 Commissar Benny wrote:
Chimeras. At their present cost, why would anyone ever field one? Its getting -1BS whenever it moves, lost its rear firing port & amphibious rule. With the update to move, move move order your infantry can move nearly as far as if they were in a transport. Transporting Ogryn? Again, why would you ever need a chimera? Unless you are fighting a Tau gunline, your opponent is going to be rushing you. You need those Ogryn/Bullgryn next to your men to counter assault.

Chimeras in 8th edition are overpriced garbage. Its being specifically done to sell the Taurox models that no one wants.

There's 8 points of difference between a Chimera and a Taurox....
Chimera gains +1 T and +2 transport capacity and a las gun array. Want more resilience vs S6-7 weapons? Take the chimera. Want an extra buff character for the infantry/veteran squads? Take a chimera. Do you play against a fast melee heavy meta and wish for better over watch options because acces to flamers? Take a chimera

The good thing about the buff of the Taurox is that now there's an actual reason to take them and they have different roles that justifies their inclusion on their own merits. It's a matter of choice and how you built your list, rather than being a no brainer with the chimera. "Overpriced garbage" though? Not even close.
Also let's not pretend the amphibious rule was actually a thing. That rule was literally a meme for being the most useless rule in the game. The strike down rule had more relevance than the amphibious ever had.

I just can't see myself ever using a chimera this edition. Even though I have 4 of them. They do not fulfill any detachment requirements. In an edition where command points mean everything. Its just throwing points away. Move, move, move grants all the mobility you need for infantry. If you need linebreaker or to flank your opponent you can use stormtroopers/rough riders. Hellhounds are comparable in price to a chimera, are just as durable, fulfill a fast attack slot, and have incredible damage output. I agree the amphibious rule was rarely if ever used, but the loss of the rear firing port was a huge blow. Even with their increased durability Chimeras got slammed this edition.

 Lance845 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
Tervigon's. Nothing new, overpriced junk for three editions running now. However, they fixed the Swarmlord and further nerfed the Tervigon this edition, bumping him up a place on the ladder of "most expensive ways to waste points" in the dex.

Complete nonsense. 2 tervigons and 3 30 blobs of termagants (10 devourers 20 flesh borers each). That's 150 shots rerolling 1s to hit and to wound with psychic support that can recover up to 20 models a turn. Also 28 wounds of tervigons to try to displace. This costs
980 points.

Crazy good core for an army.

Good fething luck everybody else.

Swarmlord and 3 maxed out squads of Genestealers, or two Tervigons and some Termagants. DIFFICULT CHOICE.

Seriously, 980 points is half your army. You have 500 points of Tervigon doing borderline nothing offensively, just making back 80 points of its cost every turn, ASSUMING your opponent decides to target the Termagants first. And it's not even bringing back the useful Termagants, its bringing back the body shield ones.

You can seriously get like 10 Carnifexes for that price. Tervigon is ridiculously overcosted.

 Melissia wrote:
The riptide may not be as broke-as-feth as it was, but I still think it's pretty powerful.

It's literally the worst unit in the game for the cost now. bs4+ which hit's on 5's if it moves? Have 1 decent gun and a secondary weapon system for around 400 points? For this cost you can get some absurdly good stuff...Why wouldn't you take longstrike and a hammerhead in it's place and be twice as survivable do and twice the damage - whilst being mobile?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SHUPPET wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
Tervigon's. Nothing new, overpriced junk for three editions running now. However, they fixed the Swarmlord and further nerfed the Tervigon this edition, bumping him up a place on the ladder of "most expensive ways to waste points" in the dex.

Complete nonsense. 2 tervigons and 3 30 blobs of termagants (10 devourers 20 flesh borers each). That's 150 shots rerolling 1s to hit and to wound with psychic support that can recover up to 20 models a turn. Also 28 wounds of tervigons to try to displace. This costs
980 points.

Crazy good core for an army.

Good fething luck everybody else.

Swarmlord and 3 maxed out squads of Genestealers, or two Tervigons and some Termagants. DIFFICULT CHOICE.

Seriously, 980 points is half your army. You have 500 points of Tervigon doing borderline nothing offensively, just making back 80 points of its cost every turn, ASSUMING your opponent decides to target the Termagants first. And it's not even bringing back the useful Termagants, its bringing back the body shield ones.

You can seriously get like 10 Carnifexes for that price. Tervigon is ridiculously overcosted.

Tervigon is absolute trash. I concur. Why the heck wouldn't I just bring 63 gaunt for her price?

Any Terminator unit.

The change to AP really hit +2 armor hard. They are slow, extremely expensive, and very poor in close combat. The boost to the storm bolter doesn't come close to making up for their cost. GW said that terminators will really feel like terminators in this edition. Instead they just leave you disappointed that you didn't just take twice as many 3+ models for the same number of shots, and attacks for cheaper.

Voidblades. For 3 points more, you get a weapon that's absolutely the same as a hyperphase sword. What a bargain!

DarkOnes wrote:
Any Terminator unit.

The change to AP really hit +2 armor hard. They are slow, extremely expensive, and very poor in close combat. The boost to the storm bolter doesn't come close to making up for their cost. GW said that terminators will really feel like terminators in this edition. Instead they just leave you disappointed that you didn't just take twice as many 3+ models for the same number of shots, and attacks for cheaper.

Deep strike them with Combi-weapons and a Lord/Captain for re-rolls. They are a 2+/5++ unit with 2 wounds each that can drop directly in front of the enemy turn 1 (or wait a few turns and surprise attack an enemy unit going for an objective), they are extremely dangerous and your opponant will have to dedicate most of their firepower to wiping the unit and the Lord/Captain if they don't want to get their shooty units bogged down in combat for a turn. What's wrong with that?

 mrhappyface wrote:

DarkOnes wrote:
Any Terminator unit.

The change to AP really hit +2 armor hard. They are slow, extremely expensive, and very poor in close combat. The boost to the storm bolter doesn't come close to making up for their cost. GW said that terminators will really feel like terminators in this edition. Instead they just leave you disappointed that you didn't just take twice as many 3+ models for the same number of shots, and attacks for cheaper.

Deep strike them with Combi-weapons and a Lord/Captain for re-rolls. They are a 2+/5++ unit with 2 wounds each that can drop directly in front of the enemy turn 1 (or wait a few turns and surprise attack an enemy unit going for an objective), they are extremely dangerous and your opponant will have to dedicate most of their firepower to wiping the unit and the Lord/Captain if they don't want to get their shooty units bogged down in combat for a turn. What's wrong with that?

he did say their point cost, which can quickly turn anything from useable to useless no matter what they are equipped with

 SHUPPET wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:

DarkOnes wrote:
Any Terminator unit.

The change to AP really hit +2 armor hard. They are slow, extremely expensive, and very poor in close combat. The boost to the storm bolter doesn't come close to making up for their cost. GW said that terminators will really feel like terminators in this edition. Instead they just leave you disappointed that you didn't just take twice as many 3+ models for the same number of shots, and attacks for cheaper.

Deep strike them with Combi-weapons and a Lord/Captain for re-rolls. They are a 2+/5++ unit with 2 wounds each that can drop directly in front of the enemy turn 1 (or wait a few turns and surprise attack an enemy unit going for an objective), they are extremely dangerous and your opponant will have to dedicate most of their firepower to wiping the unit and the Lord/Captain if they don't want to get their shooty units bogged down in combat for a turn. What's wrong with that?

he did say their point cost, which can quickly turn anything from useable to useless no matter what they are equipped with

Aye, but 300-400pts to effectively shut down any fire upon the rest of your army turn 1 + the damage they're going to do with their combi-plasmas/meltas/bolters to your opponants army + if they get the charge off they have completely shut down one or more enemy, units not for one turn but, for two turns since they have to back out of combat and wait. From the games I've played with them so far I think they're worth it (6W 1D 1L using Terminator alpha strike so far).

Pick something that isn't. New results in for a big ETC tournament the Caledonian. Tau got stomped and tabled (not an uncommon event) the flyer spam that won the first tournament in NA took the first European tournament too.

Tau placed even worse in this tournament and it was a larger sample size than the last. I wish I could get their lists, but I recall drones being worked around/killed around without too much problems. If that is being circumvented so easily our best unit int he codex has failed us and we need a complete rework.

Tau rebalance when?

 Gamgee wrote:
Pick something that isn't. New results in for a big ETC tournament the Caledonian. Tau got stomped and tabled (not an uncommon event) the flyer spam that won the first tournament in NA took the first European tournament too.

Tau placed even worse in this tournament and it was a larger sample size than the last. I wish I could get their lists, but I recall drones being worked around/killed around without too much problems. If that is being circumvented so easily our best unit int he codex has failed us and we need a complete rework.

Tau rebalance when?

Tau not winning tournaments

SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH THE GAME



Give it more than a week or two buddy, we will see where it stands in time

 Gamgee wrote:
Pick something that isn't. New results in for a big ETC tournament the Caledonian. Tau got stomped and tabled (not an uncommon event) the flyer spam that won the first tournament in NA took the first European tournament too.

Tau placed even worse in this tournament and it was a larger sample size than the last. I wish I could get their lists, but I recall drones being worked around/killed around without too much problems. If that is being circumvented so easily our best unit int he codex has failed us and we need a complete rework.

Tau rebalance when?

As the Shuppet said, give it a while. Tau are doing overwhelmingly bad at the moment (worse than Orks) which suggests to me that they've taken the nerf hammer a bit too hard but with these results that can't just be it. Tau will find their niche eventually. If we're still having this conversation in a few weeks then, if I were you, I'd hope to god that the Tau codex brings something to the table.

 mrhappyface wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
Pick something that isn't. New results in for a big ETC tournament the Caledonian. Tau got stomped and tabled (not an uncommon event) the flyer spam that won the first tournament in NA took the first European tournament too.

Tau placed even worse in this tournament and it was a larger sample size than the last. I wish I could get their lists, but I recall drones being worked around/killed around without too much problems. If that is being circumvented so easily our best unit int he codex has failed us and we need a complete rework.

Tau rebalance when?

As the Shuppet said, give it a while. Tau are doing overwhelmingly bad at the moment (worse than Orks) which suggests to me that they've taken the nerf hammer a bit too hard but with these results that can't just be it. Tau will find their niche eventually. If we're still having this conversation in a few weeks then, if I were you, I'd hope to god that the Tau codex brings something to the table.

For the record some of the ETC players have a more forward thinking attitude and are already saying playing against Tau is a waste of time in tournaments since they can't win.

In my local meta no Tau wins yet for any of the Tau players of numerous games. Actually most of the Tau players are hanging up their armies now. "A bit too hard" is a massive understatement. I dare say the current Tau index is one of the worst codices put out by GW ever. Even at the heights of crappy chaos space marine they had lists that could win in casual formats and we're not even seeing that for Tau.

An Ork player took second place at the big tournament I'm talking about. No one is very sure of what his list was though so I can't say.

For Tau, I think the decision to give them (nearly) across-the-board BS 4+ is the mistake: it's based on previous editions' Markerlight mechanics where getting BS 5 or better (BS 2+ with rerolls) was trivial, whereas now it takes 5 hits to get a +1 (though, granted, multiple attacking units will get the +1). Give all Shas'ui and Shas'vre units (Stealth, Crisis, Ghostkeel, Broadside, Riptide, Stormsurge, plus Fire Warrior and Pathfinder squad leaders) BS 3+. Shas'o-tier guys already get BS 2+. Or maybe give BS 3+ only to Shas'vres, but modify one of the suit wargear items to let all suits in the same squad use the bearer's BS if firing at the same target as the bearer, so you could take that on your Shas'vre and all your Shas'uis would hit on a 3+ if shooting the same target as the 'vre.

As far as useless units, the Riptide really got hit hard and Breachers have a pretty marginal role (displaced by, of all things, Vespids, so I can't say I'm mad, since I actually want Vespids for the first time in, oh, ever). However, the big loser would be the humble Shield Drone, with the change to how Savior Protocols works. Drop the 4++ and replace it with an always-on 5+ FNP-equivalent and we've got something interesting.

 Gamgee wrote:
For the record some of the ETC players have a more forward thinking attitude and are already saying playing against Tau is a waste of time in tournaments since they can't win.

In my local meta no Tau wins yet for any of the Tau players of numerous games. Actually most of the Tau players are hanging up their armies now. "A bit too hard" is a massive understatement. I dare say the current Tau index is one of the worst codices put out by GW ever. Even at the heights of crappy chaos space marine they had lists that could win in casual formats and we're not even seeing that for Tau.

An Ork player took second place at the big tournament I'm talking about. No one is very sure of what his list was though so I can't say.

Perhaps. Perhaps my view of Tau is scewed, at time of writing I've only seen one Tau game: Tau Vs DE, the Tau player won which was surprising as reports suggested the DE player should have run away with it (they were both veteran players). Hopefully, if you let GW know how bad Tau are now, by the time the Tau codex is released they'll have some new buffs, gear, rules, etc.

I'm not saying Tau can't win, but the odds are stacked extremely heavily against them. The player base could be very low skill or uber casual or bad units we have no way to know, but overall at a glance the picture is grim.

 Gamgee wrote:
I'm not saying Tau can't win, but the odds are stacked extremely heavily against them. The player base could be very low skill or uber casual or bad units we have no way to know, but overall at a glance the picture is grim.

Ether that or your tau meta is full of people that invested HEAVILY into what was hot in the last edition and are clinging to that play style.

or not i dont know.

what kinda lists are they running and against what that is causing them to get rekted.

From the sounds of the new tournament results I spoke of they brought an 8th edition geared list.

Edit
My Tau meta? They are trying my suggestions to use more drones and things like Vespids ect but I suspect they aren't meeting too much success or else they would have been all happy about the tips I gave them.

 mrhappyface wrote:

DarkOnes wrote:
Any Terminator unit.

The change to AP really hit +2 armor hard. They are slow, extremely expensive, and very poor in close combat. The boost to the storm bolter doesn't come close to making up for their cost. GW said that terminators will really feel like terminators in this edition. Instead they just leave you disappointed that you didn't just take twice as many 3+ models for the same number of shots, and attacks for cheaper.

Deep strike them with Combi-weapons and a Lord/Captain for re-rolls. They are a 2+/5++ unit with 2 wounds each that can drop directly in front of the enemy turn 1 (or wait a few turns and surprise attack an enemy unit going for an objective), they are extremely dangerous and your opponant will have to dedicate most of their firepower to wiping the unit and the Lord/Captain if they don't want to get their shooty units bogged down in combat for a turn. What's wrong with that?

Well most terminators cannot take Combi-weapons. So your argument limits you to Space Wolfs and Chaos.

Unless your army is very fast your basically leaving 700 points in the enemy deployment zone.

Every time I've dropped ten terminators in I'm left with two or three by my next turn. It just seems like the Stormlord or BaneBlade that I constantly face are way better than terminators.

10 man kitted out terminators are no where near 700 points.

Exalted sorcerors, Ahriman (they are our hqs and are useless when you have Magnus around. possessed. They *could have 3 attacks but even then they seem underwhelming.

 Gamgee wrote:
From the sounds of the new tournament results I spoke of they brought an 8th edition geared list.

Edit
My Tau meta? They are trying my suggestions to use more drones and things like Vespids ect but I suspect they aren't meeting too much success or else they would have been all happy about the tips I gave them.

yea, tau seem to be back where they were in 5th everything they have is over-costed no real winners. they can play objectives and win but barring some discounts in the codex they are going to be staying a bottom tier army without tournament wins for the foreseeable future. the riptide needed an increase but it suffered the same fat as the Wraithknight which is to say they overadjusted it

 fwlr wrote:
Exalted sorcerors, Ahriman (they are our hqs and are useless when you have Magnus around.

I thought TS players were saying Ahriman was pretty good? He's a fast moving psyker that can cast 3 spells with a +1 to cast, isn't too shabby in cc (for a sorceror) and, unlike Magnus, you can hide him from enemy fire.

possessed. They *could have 3 attacks but even then they seem underwhelming.

I agree with this completely, why they couldn't have made them slightly more expensive and given them d6 attacks I don't know.

 Desubot wrote:
10 man kitted out terminators are no where near 700 points.

Not to start a fight, but a Chaos Terminator with Power Sword and Combi-Plasma is 50pts. 10 of them, plus the mentioned Chaos Terminator Lord with Sword/Plasma, comes out to 641pts.
If you were to go a bit further with Icons or Reapers, 700pts seems like a fair estimate.

Going through the Blood Angels book, and I'm having a hard time justifying any melee infantry simply because a Company Veteran with Storm Bolter is so good. Between RF2 and his base A2, they put competitors to shame, and they can contribute from Turn1 without risking a 9" charge.
For them to come in only 1pt more than a naked Death Company seems scary.

Mozzamanx wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
10 man kitted out terminators are no where near 700 points.

Not to start a fight, but a Chaos Terminator with Power Sword and Combi-Plasma is 50pts. 10 of them, plus the mentioned Chaos Terminator Lord with Sword/Plasma, comes out to 641pts.
If you were to go a bit further with Icons or Reapers, 700pts seems like a fair estimate.

Going through the Blood Angels book, and I'm having a hard time justifying any melee infantry simply because a Company Veteran with Storm Bolter is so good. Between RF2 and his base A2, they put competitors to shame, and they can contribute from Turn1 without risking a 9" charge.
For them to come in only 1pt more than a naked Death Company seems scary.

its not a fight its a discussion

besides

DarkOnes wrote:

Well most terminators cannot take Combi-weapons. So your argument limits you to Space Wolfs and Chaos.

Unless your army is very fast your basically leaving 700 points in the enemy deployment zone.

Every time I've dropped ten terminators in I'm left with two or three by my next turn. It just seems like the Stormlord or BaneBlade that I constantly face are way better than terminators.

first line implies that the subject was standard terminators as the following line excludes space wolves of chaos

but thats me selectively reading.

DarkOnes wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:

DarkOnes wrote:
Any Terminator unit.

The change to AP really hit +2 armor hard. They are slow, extremely expensive, and very poor in close combat. The boost to the storm bolter doesn't come close to making up for their cost. GW said that terminators will really feel like terminators in this edition. Instead they just leave you disappointed that you didn't just take twice as many 3+ models for the same number of shots, and attacks for cheaper.

Deep strike them with Combi-weapons and a Lord/Captain for re-rolls. They are a 2+/5++ unit with 2 wounds each that can drop directly in front of the enemy turn 1 (or wait a few turns and surprise attack an enemy unit going for an objective), they are extremely dangerous and your opponant will have to dedicate most of their firepower to wiping the unit and the Lord/Captain if they don't want to get their shooty units bogged down in combat for a turn. What's wrong with that?

Well most terminators cannot take Combi-weapons. So your argument limits you to Space Wolfs and Chaos.

Unless your army is very fast your basically leaving 700 points in the enemy deployment zone.

Every time I've dropped ten terminators in I'm left with two or three by my next turn. It just seems like the Stormlord or BaneBlade that I constantly face are way better than terminators.

Who said anything about 10 man Terminator units? I was talking 5 man units. As for fast? Well depends on your army: if you're shooty then you Terminators were sent in to bog down enemy units that are fast and are trying to rush forward to get into cc and if you're cc orientated I should hope you are fast, but even if you aren't the Terminators can hold up deadly shooty units while you move up.

Why are you sending Terminators after a Baneblade varient!? That isn't the Terminators fault, that's poor target priority!

Real News wrote:

 Zewrath wrote:


Overcharging plasma Plask with las cannon 1 shots a tervigon. The 3 basilisks takes the other.

...or if you don't have magic dice, you'll cause 7-8 wounds to each one.

... or if you take Pask as warlord and give him warlord trait that reroll 1's. He will have 7-8 hits on average with plasma and wound 5-6 of those. He will save 1-2 and take 2 damage each. Already we have 8 damage. This is before las canon.
Go ahead and try, I regularly 1 shot vehicles and big monsters with him.

SemperMortis wrote:
Flash Gitz: Same problems as last edition, 27pts for a 6+ armor save, and if you put them in a Wagon to protect your investment then you are losing out on all buffs and rerolls, not to mention creating a 300-450pts unit that is barely effective at shooting because of range and restrictions (If it moves those super expensive 4+ to hit gunz become 5+)

Not arguing it is not so, but where comes the 'not being able to reroll' while in a Wagon come from? Also does this include the rolling a 6 to let them fire again? Couldn't find it in the rules myself.

 Gamgee wrote:
I'm not saying Tau can't win, but the odds are stacked extremely heavily against them. The player base could be very low skill or uber casual or bad units we have no way to know, but overall at a glance the picture is grim.

I do pretty well with my tau.

These units are actually exceptionally good - just build around them.

Commanders/Gun drones/ Longstrike/Broadsides/ Firewarriors (darkstrider/fireblades). I havn't lost a game with my 3 hammerhead list - but it's only played 1 game.

Straight up - Harlequins are OP and they murder tau. They need nerfs. Armies of all fliers need TO to do something about it (taking assault out of the game is BS) limit to 1-2 flyers per army (easy fix). Once those things are sorted out. Tau might be able to do well.

 mrhappyface wrote:

DarkOnes wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:

DarkOnes wrote:
Any Terminator unit.

The change to AP really hit +2 armor hard. They are slow, extremely expensive, and very poor in close combat. The boost to the storm bolter doesn't come close to making up for their cost. GW said that terminators will really feel like terminators in this edition. Instead they just leave you disappointed that you didn't just take twice as many 3+ models for the same number of shots, and attacks for cheaper.

Deep strike them with Combi-weapons and a Lord/Captain for re-rolls. They are a 2+/5++ unit with 2 wounds each that can drop directly in front of the enemy turn 1 (or wait a few turns and surprise attack an enemy unit going for an objective), they are extremely dangerous and your opponant will have to dedicate most of their firepower to wiping the unit and the Lord/Captain if they don't want to get their shooty units bogged down in combat for a turn. What's wrong with that?

Well most terminators cannot take Combi-weapons. So your argument limits you to Space Wolfs and Chaos.

Unless your army is very fast your basically leaving 700 points in the enemy deployment zone.

Every time I've dropped ten terminators in I'm left with two or three by my next turn. It just seems like the Stormlord or BaneBlade that I constantly face are way better than terminators.

Who said anything about 10 man Terminator units? I was talking 5 man units. As for fast? Well depends on your army: if you're shooty then you Terminators were sent in to bog down enemy units that are fast and are trying to rush forward to get into cc and if you're cc orientated I should hope you are fast, but even if you aren't the Terminators can hold up deadly shooty units while you move up.

Why are you sending Terminators after a Baneblade varient!? That isn't the Terminators fault, that's poor target priority!

he didnt say anything about 10 man squads either. I assumed he was talking about dropping 2x5 man squads, i.e. 10 all up. Not sure it makes a massive difference however. Not sure how bogged down you expect anyone to get by 10 termies in combat in 8th though.

 Desubot wrote:
10 man kitted out terminators are no where near 700 points.

Choas ones are - Max space marine terms is in the 550 range depending on how you arm your Sargent and how many chain-fists you take. Kinda a lot for 8 powerfist hits don't you think? OFC this is with 100 points of CML.