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.

Martel732 wrote:
Because they are lists that people would never take in a general situation.

Why not?

Why do the Marines shoot first?

Because they have first turn the vast majority of the time, and they're (presumably) deploying from rhinos on turn 2.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Why do the Marines shoot first?

The reason I gave in my post is that I am simply following the same lazy conventions other people do when they mathhammer: the unit you're trying to prove is strong goes first in order to skew the results toward the predetermined conclusion.

However, in this case it would be easy to rationalize as being the result of space marines easily finishing deployment first, and therefore getting first turn.

First turn also likely wouldn't be enough to let the Termagaunts win (though it would give them a *chance* with favorable RNG), it would just extend the shootout well past turn 7 and result in the Space Marines barely limping away, but still victorious. Unless the Space Marines leverage the other advantages that they were ignoring to turn it back into a curb-stomp.

 daedalus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Because they are lists that people would never take in a general situation.

Why not?

Because Nidzilla exists.

So nobody should have to consider the possibility that they might face a horde?

Martel732 wrote:

Because Nidzilla exists.

I don't know what a Nidzilla list looks like, but remember that what we keep saying to do HAS space for anti-tank/anti-TMC units still, so long as you're playing games higher than 500-600 points (which is fundamentally broken point levels anyway).

 master of ordinance wrote:
What if I told you that actually Guardsmen are about right for their points cost and that upping that cost would nerf them into oblivion? What if I told you that the real problem is this entrenched thought process amongst certain factions that they should be easily able to win against certain armies and now that this is no longer possible they are struggling to grasp the fact that their outdated tactics need to be thrown out and that they need to adapt?
But yes, why bother thinking when you are the chosen faction and you can just whine and whine until GW come running with the dummy and a sweet nerf to fix that nasty booboo.

What if I told you that not everyone that sees conscripts as a problem play a faction that was previously powerful? That is the problem with your whole " well if you had suffered you'd want to be OP too!" mantra, that idea gets the crap we have had forever instead of thinking, hey this might be too good, maybe if it were tweaked the game would be better for it. I'm all for buffs to other IG stuff that currently sucks. I want a game where variety is possible. The problem right now is that we have fallen back into the realm of skew lists that I was hoping this edition would fix. Most armies cannot realistically handle 5 knights and 200 conscripts with a single army build.

 ross-128 wrote:
So nobody should have to consider the possibility that they might face a horde?

Remember that despite what everyone thinks some players still want to run *small group of super elite mary sues* and as this tends to be what they face they build and optimise for that one thing. Sadly this means that when they face a horde army they find themselves woefully under equipped.

 ross-128 wrote:
So nobody should have to consider the possibility that they might face a horde?

I never said that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Because Nidzilla exists.

I don't know what a Nidzilla list looks like, but remember that what we keep saying to do HAS space for anti-tank/anti-TMC units still, so long as you're playing games higher than 500-600 points (which is fundamentally broken point levels anyway).

I guess we're just going to have to see, because I can't pack in enough anti-T3 to a reasonable 2K BA list to have a hope vs IG. No good IG player is going lose to the three Rhinos of tac marines. That list gets crushed against my losing BA lists probably.

Especially when all 3 Rhinos are fairly likely to die on turn 1.

Breng77 wrote:
Especially when all 3 Rhinos are fairly likely to die on turn 1.

That doesn't even have to be true. The bottom line is that you are still dedicating huge chunks of a list to kill units that the IG don't need to kill you back.

Breng77 wrote:
Especially when all 3 Rhinos are fairly likely to die on turn 1.

So what you're saying is, your opponent is dedicating 630+ points of dedicated, high-yield anti-tank units to taking down your cheap-ass 70pt rhinos, basically guaranteeing that your own long-ranged firepower gets two free turns of shooting basically without being shot back at.

Martel732 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Especially when all 3 Rhinos are fairly likely to die on turn 1.

That doesn't even have to be true. The bottom line is that you are still dedicating huge chunks of a list to kill units that the IG don't need to kill you back.

True, but looking at the winning list from BAO the 5 basilisks and 6 plasma scion squads are pretty likely to kill those Rhinos, or most anything else they want. I will say here that basilisks having effectively unlimited range and no need for LOS is a bit silly as well.

Yeah, that's pretty beefy.

 Melissia wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Especially when all 3 Rhinos are fairly likely to die on turn 1.

So what you're saying is, your opponent is dedicating 630+ points of dedicated, high-yield anti-tank units to taking down your cheap-ass 70pt rhinos, basically guaranteeing that your own long-ranged firepower gets two free turns of shooting basically without being shot back at.

Shooting at what? in the winning BAO list assuming it goes second, turn 1 your heavy weapons shoot conscripts, then turn 2 maybe they shoot scions, but at that point your Rhinos are dead, as well as likely their contents.

Breng77 wrote:
Shooting at what? in the winning BAO list assuming it goes second, turn 1 your heavy weapons shoot conscripts, then turn 2 maybe they shoot scions, but at that point your Rhinos are dead, as well as likely their contents.

Actually, those top-tier BAO lists often had very close games. Your apocalyptic vision of them easily winning without any effort and laughing off anything you throw at them is nothing more than worthless hyperbole, just like 90% of the posts in this thread arguing for nerfs to Conscripts are.

 Melissia wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Shooting at what? in the winning BAO list assuming it goes second, turn 1 your heavy weapons shoot conscripts, then turn 2 maybe they shoot scions, but at that point your Rhinos are dead, as well as likely their contents.

Actually, those top-tier BAO lists often had very close games. Your apocalyptic vision of them easily winning without any effort and laughing off anything you throw at them is nothing more than worthless hyperbole, just like 90% of the posts in this thread arguing for nerfs to Conscripts are.

Did they, I seem to remember them winning pretty easily all things considered. Further if they only had close games on the top tables playing against other top tier broken armies....that says something. Like close games vs Other IG,Tau Commander Spam, Brimstone horror spam, Guiliman/Azreal bubble. None of those lists are particularly fun or good for the game.

 Melissia wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Shooting at what? in the winning BAO list assuming it goes second, turn 1 your heavy weapons shoot conscripts, then turn 2 maybe they shoot scions, but at that point your Rhinos are dead, as well as likely their contents.

Actually, those top-tier BAO lists often had very close games. Your apocalyptic vision of them easily winning without any effort and laughing off anything you throw at them is nothing more than worthless hyperbole, just like 90% of the posts in this thread arguing for nerfs to Conscripts are.

How well would IG have to do over the next few months for you to think maybe there is a problem?

Well, I mean if your position is that every single unit in every single one of the top 15 lists needs to be nerfed into the ground... at least you're consistent I guess?

 Quickjager wrote:

I wasn't aware I was in the civil conscripts thread, where we were always civil. And if you want to chide me on tone, you better get glasses that aren't one way after how you've been acting to sossen.

If you read back on it, I think sossen and I got on rather well, coming to an agreement about Tactical Squads armed appropriately having better anti-tank firepower than conscripts, point for point. The time I got short (admittedly it reads much harsher than I was intending) with him was after he appeared to get short with someone else for showing how well Ork boyz killed conscripts in melee, as though assault units aren't allowed in the conversation.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The "nerf-conscript" camp has more reasonable people than the other side.

Tell you what, let's keep going and see where this line of conversation gets us. Probably not very far. But I'm sure we can go back and find some gems of hyperbole.

Let's put it aside and go back to basics, if we want to have a conversation:

100 Overwatch shots by conscripts = slightly less than 2 dead marines.
100 conscript shots = 3.6 marine casualties, or 1 Land Raider wound. They're decent against infantry, pretty terrible against vehicles.
"Amazing durability": Agreed. They are very durable as a unit if you can't kill their Commissar, which is admittedly pretty difficult. I'm not the type to assume they will be easily sniped.

That said, Conscripts are vulnerable to massed small arms fire, and assaults that can do a lot of casualties at once, so they can't return fire very effectively. As for things specifically good at killing conscripts, we've got the TLAC Razors (which are effective, but you need a bunch and you're probably better off shooting them at something that can hurt you more.) But have any of you guys done the math yet on the Repulsor? I don't have the SM book, but form the leaks I'm seeing the following possible build:

1 Heavy Onslaught Gatling Cannon: 12 S5 ap-1 shots
1 Onslaught Gatling Cannon: 6 S5 ap-1 shots
Twin Heavy Bolters: 6 S5 ap-1 shots
Ironhail Heavy Stubber 3 S4 ap-1 shots
2 Krakstorm Grenade Launchers 2 S6 ap-1 shots
5 Fragstorm Grenade Launchers 5D6 S4 ap0 shots

I don't know the points, but that's a total 27x 3+ to hit, 3+ to wound, -1 AP shots, plus 2x 3+ to hit, 2+ to wound, -1 AP shots, plus 5D6x 3+ to hit, 3+ to wound, 0 AP shots. For which my math gives me 16 Conscripts kills a round, on the move (it has Machine Spirit) and without buffs. Nobody in a tournament wouldn't be buffing that thing.

As has been shown, 10 Berzerkers can do a pretty good number on Conscripts, and 10 Berzerkers in a Rhino is 230 compared to the Conscripts+Support of 210 (I think)

Orks will plow through them if they get there. I know that's situational, but nobody I've seen running a successful Ork army brings less than 90 Boyz, and that's by far the low end.


I'll stand by my assertion that Conscripts are strong, but actually ok. Deep Striking Scions with a 7 point Plasma Gun is my issue.

Tyel wrote:
How well would IG have to do over the next few months for you to think maybe there is a problem?

It's very possible for me to think of most of the people whining in this thread as whiners who whine because they lost a match, and also think some adjustments need to be made. And maybe if you bother to look instead of being lazy, you might notice I have done exactly that.

And yet people say I'm angry all the time, gee I wonder why I appear annoyed so much.

Conscripts aren't the core of the problem. They are, at best, an ancillary part. Even without Conscripts, IG wouldn't really be any less powerful. If they don't use conscripts, they can use guardsmen for barely any more points who when played right are just as good defensively and actually better offensively. Conscripts are easier to use than guardsmen to be sure; but no more effective in the end and in many ways less so. And given that Conscripts are a fluffy unit that takes a LOT of time to assemble and paint, I'm not really keen on just nerfing them in to non-existence.

The core of the problem is GW basically radically redesigned the Guard army-- Guard actually changed the most out of all the armies-- and did so without considering the consequences of doing so and adjusting accordingly.

 ross-128 wrote:
Well, I mean if your position is that every single unit in every single one of the top 15 lists needs to be nerfed into the ground... at least you're consistent I guess?

The powerful ones found most common should be more than likely. Just as things that never see play likely should be buffed.

 ross-128 wrote:
Overall I'd be willing to bet that point for point, termagaunts get curb-stomped by literally any other faction's basic infantry. At least, as long as you're mathhammering a shootout in ideal range on planet bowling ball. Boyz might have to assault to do it, but why would Boyz ever not assault.

Wait, what? You made the contest unbalanced to begin with. Space Marines are not "basic" infantry. They're elite galactic soldiers, MEQs if you will. You show an example of hordes getting mowed down by elite infantry then act like that's strange. Here's a fun bit... Terminators will mow down Marines too. Medium infantry COUNTERS Light infantry just as Heavy infantry counters the Mediums. Light infantry is meant to die and overwhelms small packs of super elite infantry by drowning them in fire.

If you wanted to prove some kind of point, at least compare them to other Light Infantry. Maybe Cultists?

 Melissia wrote:

So what you're saying is, your opponent is dedicating 630+ points of dedicated, high-yield anti-tank units to taking down your cheap-ass 70pt rhinos, basically guaranteeing that your own long-ranged firepower gets two free turns of shooting basically without being shot back at.

Fun fact: Takes about five earthshakers to kill an average rhino.

I'd make that trade as a SM player.

Do you know why we don't talk about LRBT? Or chimeras? Or hellhounds? Or Rough Riders?

Because we KNOW they're over costed. Or people forgot the last one even existed.

Do you know why we do talk about conscripts? Or plasma scions? Or Rawbutt Girlyman? Or stormravens, Celestine, etc?

Because we know they are in fact undercosted due to the fact they are in almist EVERY list that can take them. Because they for their statline are insanely efficent and then add bonuses on top with reroll or anti deepstrike or insane mobility and firepower.

So when people bring up conscripts it isn't because like SOME people have said, "waaah they hurt marines", but because they represent an incredibly stupid point outlier.

 Arkaine wrote:
Wait, what? You made the contest unbalanced to begin with. Space Marines are not "basic" infantry. They're elite galactic soldiers, MEQs if you will.

If they're so elite, why do I see so damn many of them?

 daedalus wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:
Wait, what? You made the contest unbalanced to begin with. Space Marines are not "basic" infantry. They're elite galactic soldiers, MEQs if you will.

If they're so elite, why do I see so damn many of them?

You shouldn't. Maybe your opponents are cheating.

13 pts model vs 4 pts a model. There should 3 times as many cultists/gaunts/guard on the field.

So basically the argument returns, once again, to "Marines should roflstomp everyone else ezpz".

Sorry, it was meant more as a poke at the number of space marine players out there, myself included. I feel like when I used to go to the game store, it was at least 50% (if not more) marine armies.

That might actually be part of the problem. It's easier to kill marines because it's what you're expecting with a random player/army.