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.

Bolters maybe, but the marines can at least bring a lascannon.

That situation is also just an artifact of the wound table. They're both rolling the exact same to wound and save, and the return fire makes a mockery of their defensive stats, so of course the weaker (and therefore cheaper) weapon on the flimsier (therefore cheaper) platform is "more efficient".

If you stick strictly to small arms, technically the most efficient way to bring down a Wraithknight would be a mass of S1 AP- weapons carried by WS6+ S1 T1 A1 Sv7+ models, with the best BS you can put on that stat line for 1 point. Assuming you can get them all in range.

A proper anti tank weapon would probably be more efficient than any small-arms option though.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Let me just play another army; great answer. Or the better one "just ally in Guardsmen".

You got NO answer, Conscripts are just part of the problem and you won't even acknowledge it.

You are Deathwatch. You have frag cannons. You have flamers. You have a lot of horde killing stuff. All I am saying is make use of it. Or do the solution that so many Marine players gave to Guard players and ally in units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arkaine wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I apologize-- the thread has gone by so fast that I missed yoru first post in it.

That's alright, and expected, and why I calmly restate my perspective so often for those who may have missed a point somewhere.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/720/733977.page#9527529

That is a fair perspective to a point, however you fail to acount for numbers. 1v1 Light Infantry will die to Mediums and likewise Mediums to Heavies. What we have with conscripts, though, is a horde of Light Infantry taking on a very small unit of Heavy Infantry. Conscripts vs Marines will still lose in a 1v1 game, but when it comes to 5v1 the tables start to turn ever so slightly.

Ah yes. Flamers and Frag Cannons! Please show the math on those!

 Blackie wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

7th ed. is totally irrelevant to the discussion, honestly.

It's not. Because the majority of players that are complaining about conscripts wants to play like a no brainer. Just like they probably did in 7th edition. With SM mostly.

Conscripts' spam is not the reason why the AM is the current top tier army.

This is completely insulting and not warranted at all. Marines were NOT an auto anything in 7th by default. They had ONE specific formation/detachment that made them competitive and everything else was invisible super friends death stars. Most marine units in 7th were actually poor. And this seems to have carried over to 8th. The fundamental concept of marines does not seem to work as intended in a game like this.

If you couldn't beat a casual marine list in 7th, you are a terrible player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

1296 conscript shots in a turn, at 1 shot per conscript, is 3,888 points.
648 marine shots in a turn, at 1 shot per marine, costs 8,424 points.

Marines are a less efficient way to kill a Wraithknight.

Yes. They're a particular amount of shooting. That's factored into their points. So is that power armor. So is that pistol. So are those krak grenades.

There's all that statline too. Oh, and that crazy ability that lets you capture points that other squads are on.

And this is why tac marines are turning out to be STILL be a dumpster fire. They pay for things are aren't always relevant. Or even commonly relevant.

Which formation was that? The free transports one, or the assault from deepstrike one or the buffed libby one or the Scout one or the...

 Arkaine wrote:

At 4 shots per conscript, 216 conscripts are needed to

have a roughly 50% chance to

kill a Wraithknight in a single shooting phase.

when all 216 of them teleport to 12" radius range, which they do. No, seriously. I've seen it. It's not even a rule or anything the player does to physically move the models. They just fething teleport. I've been trying to contact CERN or Dr. Hawking or even just Bill Nye but the moment I say "Warhammer" they tell me to go read a book and maybe go outside and hang up the phone.


[Removed flawed circle diagram for number of 1" bases in rapid fire radius thanks to Insectum7 spotting it.]

 master of ordinance wrote:
Which formation was that? The free transports one, or the assault from deepstrike one or the buffed libby one or the Scout one or the...

The scout one?

Pretty sure SM had the double gladius and psychic super friends in 7th. There was much teeth gnashing for the Skyhammer, and much complaining, but I don't remember it ever really dominating tournaments.

Softer marine lists tended to struggle. The reason being that the regular marine is quite expensive. Once you start tooling him up with weapons he becomes very expensive. And he is not that hard to kill.

With that said I am not sure how twin assault cannon razorbacks "were a thing two weeks ago". Okay they are not great against tanks - but they beat a lot of things in an SM list if the meta were to go all mech.
Twin las isn't too bad either, especially if you are thinking about predators.

Tyel wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Which formation was that? The free transports one, or the assault from deepstrike one or the buffed libby one or the Scout one or the...

The scout one?

Pretty sure SM had the double gladius and psychic super friends in 7th. There was much teeth gnashing for the Skyhammer, and much complaining, but I don't remember it ever really dominating tournaments.

Softer marine lists tended to struggle. The reason being that the regular marine is quite expensive. Once you start tooling him up with weapons he becomes very expensive. And he is not that hard to kill.

With that said I am not sure how twin assault cannon razorbacks "were a thing two weeks ago". Okay they are not great against tanks - but they beat a lot of things in an SM list if the meta were to go all mech.
Twin las isn't too bad either, especially if you are thinking about predators.

Something tells me that a lot of Marine woes could be solved by removing all the broken stuff they have and instead going the Infinity route with Heavy Infantry each having 2 wounds apiece.

 daedalus wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:

At 4 shots per conscript, 216 conscripts are needed to

have a roughly 50% chance to

kill a Wraithknight in a single shooting phase.

when all 216 of them teleport to 12" radius range, which they do. No, seriously. I've seen it. It's not even a rule or anything the player does to physically move the models. They just fething teleport. I've been trying to contact CERN or Dr. Hawking or even just Bill Nye but the moment I say "Warhammer" they tell me to go read a book and maybe go outside and hang up the phone.



Fun fact: It's pretty darn likely that those conscripts can't physically fit into rapid fire range around the Wraithknight.

I don't know how large the WL base is, but here's the most optimal possible arrangement of circles in a 16" diameter circle:

That's 196 conscripts MAXIMUM in a 16" circle, in case you didn't want to count each one. If the WL base is larger than 4", then you'd be able to fit more in, but obviously the center can't be occupied by conscripts up to a 1" circle around it, so that's going to remove quite a few as well. I don't think it can be done, and I certainly don't think it can be done should the other player not be complicit.

Since you're trying to manipulate my post by cutting out the 90% that describes the complete opposite of what you said, namely that it doesn't require them to do so in a single shooting phase or even have 216 conscripts to do so (see the 1 blob part, ~50 conscripts) and tries to make fun of mathhammer in general, I'll just post my original comment here.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/780/733977.page#9527900

I'll also throw in what was originally stated as the method by which the Conscripts downed the Wraithknight mention that apparently began all of this back and forth.

 Arkaine wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
That's some immensely lucky rolling. With T8, 24 wounds, and a 3+ save it would take on average 2,400 conscript lasgun shots to take down. And if you Fortune'd your wraithknight that increases the number of shots on average to over three thousand. Yes, sure, it can happen faster; but it's not likely to.

Having a single conscript squad take down a wraithknight is about as likely for a single Terminator Captain with a thunder hammer to take down a Wraithknight on its lonesome. Actually, less likely than the captain.

Actually he did this when the FAQ hadn't clarified the searchlight rules. Conscripts were hitting on 2+ and wounding on 6+ while shooting 4 times. So every Conscript had about a 50% chance of causing a wound. 3+ saves can fail.

Remove the Regiment keyword, possibly make them Auxilia. This would prevent them from taking orders.

Add a rule where if they're forced to take a morale test, they lose X additional models, even if the test was passed. Could be a fixed number, like 2 or 3, or a random D3 or D6. This would keep Commisars useful for them and other units while keeping them from sticking around forever.

Both or either would tone Conscipts down a bit while keeping them useful and cheap.

Conscripts don't need to be toned down.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Long story short though, 1296 Conscript shots to kill a WK.

Sadly that's not even the least effective way to kill a Wraithknight.

Sooo... A single SM squad throwing a single Frag grenade at it every turn?

1296 conscript shots in a turn, at 1 shot per conscript, is 3,888 points.
648 marine shots in a turn, at 1 shot per marine, costs 8,424 points.

Marines are a less efficient way to kill a Wraithknight.

That's why Marines get Lascannons, Melta, Powerfists, etc. We actually did this one earlier, optimally equipped Tac Squads handily beat out Conscripts against high T/AV targets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:


I don't know how large the WL base is, but here's the most optimal possible arrangement of circles in a 16" diameter circle:

That's 196 conscripts MAXIMUM in a 16" circle, in case you didn't want to count each one. If the WL base is larger than 4", then you'd be able to fit more in, but obviously the center can't be occupied by conscripts up to a 1" circle around it, so that's going to remove quite a few as well. I don't think it can be done, and I certainly don't think it can be done should the other player not be complicit.

Why is the diameter of the circle only 16"? Rapid fire Range is 12" Your circle should be 30ish inches in diameter.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Long story short though, 1296 Conscript shots to kill a WK.

Sadly that's not even the least effective way to kill a Wraithknight.

Sooo... A single SM squad throwing a single Frag grenade at it every turn?

1296 conscript shots in a turn, at 1 shot per conscript, is 3,888 points.
648 marine shots in a turn, at 1 shot per marine, costs 8,424 points.

Marines are a less efficient way to kill a Wraithknight.

That's why Marines get Lascannons, Melta, Powerfists, etc.

Stop it, you are suggesting that the Marines actually use any one of the countless advantages they have and as we have seen in this thread as soon as Conscripts get involved all of those advantages magically vanish.

I can do it all day just like you cowboy, lets calculate a powerfist v. conscripts. Oh wait, I don't need to the -1 to hit already makes it less point efficient even if it was equally priced. I was unaware Osteogenesis imperfecta became commonplace in the IG and they can't hold their melta or lascannons anymore. I'll send a Sister of Battle their way so she can hold it for them.

 Quickjager wrote:
I can do it all day just like you cowboy, lets calculate a powerfist v. conscripts. Oh wait, I don't need to the -1 to hit already makes it less point efficient even if it was equally priced. I was unaware Osteogenesis imperfecta became commonplace in the IG and they can't hold their melta or lascannons anymore. I'll send a Sister of Battle their way so she can hold it for them.

Wat?

10 chars.

 Quickjager wrote:
I can do it all day just like you cowboy, lets calculate a powerfist v. conscripts. Oh wait, I don't need to the -1 to hit already makes it less point efficient even if it was equally priced. I was unaware Osteogenesis imperfecta became commonplace in the IG and they can't hold their melta or lascannons anymore. I'll send a Sister of Battle their way so she can hold it for them.

I was on about the WK arguement, but I have noted that as soon as Conscripts enter any given comparison scenario all Marine units instantly lose their advantages. The same with Conscript vs Marine scenarios.

Look I am simply reminded of this thread I am about to link to go on anymore. It has almost all the same actors to an extent, just sub out the IG for the Tau players (or T'au? wtf are they called now).

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/641860.page

 Arkaine wrote:

Since you're trying to manipulate my post by cutting out the 90% that describes the complete opposite of what you said, namely that it doesn't require them to do so in a single shooting phase or even have 216 conscripts to do so (see the 1 blob part, ~50 conscripts) and tries to make fun of mathhammer in general, I'll just post my original comment here.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/780/733977.page#9527900

I'll also throw in what was originally stated as the method by which the Conscripts downed the Wraithknight mention that apparently began all of this back and forth.

Manipulate your post?! Gosh! Not I!

Actually, on a more serious note: No. I did it for brevity, and to highlight the specific point I was addressing. My post was already long enough without including, for example, 9 lines of extraneous text and a decent size graphic inside of a quote box that I was actually directly addressing anyway. For example.

And yeah, you DO say afterward, spread out across four turns. It's not that you're wrong, it's that you initially express it in a form that's fundamentally flawed, and then turn it into something that's ultimately not terribly useful.

And that doesn't address the other point that I made about your math: it's not a kill, it's the average kill on a very wide spectrum of possibilities. That means that, in reality, your math isn't showing that there's there's still some 48-49% chance that the conscripts do LESS than 24 wounds. That's why mathhammer averages are junk math.

Fun fact: Where it says "Arkaine wrote:" in that quote box there from where I "manipulated your post"? You can click on that and see your original post were anyone so inclined to do so.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:


Why is the diameter of the circle only 16"? Rapid fire Range is 12" Your circle should be 30ish inches in diameter.

That's a fair point. I was trying to get out of the office and rushed it. With that in mind I guess it would actually be viable.

 Quickjager wrote:
Look I am simply reminded of this thread I am about to link to go on anymore. It has almost all the same actors to an extent, just sub out the IG for the Tau players (or T'au? wtf are they called now).

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/641860.page

No really. Are you aware what you posted "Powerfists vs. Conscripts" in response to?

You mean taking stuff out of context...? Like Moo has been doing? IG get all that stuff to the extent I don't even know why you're talking about in efficient ways to kill WK.

These magical advantages SM? Like Rob G.? Who we already know is too strong?

EDIT: It really is like the godforsaken Riptide threads.

 daedalus wrote:
And yeah, you DO say afterward, spread out across four turns. It's not that you're wrong, it's that you initially express it in a form that's fundamentally flawed, and then turn it into something that's ultimately not terribly useful.

That's generally how math works. One step at a time to arrive at a finality. That's like arguing that it's fundamentally flawed to say that it takes on average 12 shots to land a wound, it's merely a step in the overall analysis. The step is not wrong, as mine was not, and since I -already- recognized without you needing to tell me that 216 conscripts on the field might be a bit much, I went a step further and made it enter the realm of reality with the single blob. Which you apparently took issue with for reasons I'll never comprehend fully lacking your unique thought process.

 daedalus wrote:
And that doesn't address the other point that I made about your math: it's not a kill, it's the average kill on a very wide spectrum of possibilities. That means that, in reality, your math isn't showing that there's there's still some 48-49% chance that the conscripts do LESS than 24 wounds. That's why mathhammer averages are junk math.

It doesn't have to address it because I made it abundantly clear in my own post when I stated "average". For those who don't understand what the word means, I can do no more than hold my face in my hands and shake my head slowly. Probability is little more than that, probability, a spectrum analysis with plenty of standard deviations to consider when using it for real world applications. But that's a bit excessive for a forum post, wouldn't you agree? After all, your own math was legitimately faulty due to being brief and not checking your work. Keeping things simple is a great way to avoid such errors.

 daedalus wrote:
Fun fact: Where it says "Arkaine wrote:" in that quote box there from where I "manipulated your post"? You can click on that and see your original post were anyone so inclined to do so.

Or since many won't out of laziness, I could simply point out and relink it to highlight the point that you butchered my point to suit your own. I like keeping things transparent rather than allowing such shady and underhanded silliness to go unnoticed by the less observant people.

 Quickjager wrote:
You mean taking stuff out of context...? Like Moo has been doing? IG get all that stuff to the extent I don't even know why you're talking about in efficient ways to kill WK.

The context as I understand it:

Most, if not all, mathammer involving conscripts has involved, A: Conscripts, B: A Commissar, C: Somebody to give orders. aka. The ideal setup, the one we figure is most likely to occur.

Comparisons often happen between Conscripts and Tacticals, for whatever reason.

The Tacticals in the case vs. the Wraithknight, were assumed only to have bolters, which is pointless. It's not an accurate representation of what you'd see on the table. Just as it would be silly to run scenarios in which Conscripts are without their Orders and Commissar.


When MoO agreed with me, you appeared to respond with: "But Powerfists vs. Conscripts are terrible." Which is bizarro.

 Arkaine wrote:

That's generally how math works. One step at a time to arrive at a finality. That's like arguing that it's fundamentally flawed to say that it takes on average 12 shots to land a wound, it's merely a step in the overall analysis. The step is not wrong, as mine was not, and since I -already- recognized without you needing to tell me that 216 conscripts on the field might be a bit much, I went a step further and made it enter the realm of reality with the single blob. Which you apparently took issue with for reasons I'll never comprehend fully lacking your unique thought process.

Starting with x number of conscripts at 4 shot range in one turn and then extrapolating from there what it would turn into if you took them to a different range and and number of turns is a logical progression? Seems backwards to me. To each their own I suppose.

It doesn't have to address it because I made it abundantly clear in my own post when I stated "average". For those who don't understand what the word means, I can do no more than hold my face in my hands and shake my head slowly. Probability is little more than that, probability, a spectrum analysis with plenty of standard deviations to consider when using it for real world applications. But that's a bit excessive for a forum post, wouldn't you agree? After all, your own math was legitimately faulty due to being brief and not checking your work. Keeping things simple is a great way to avoid such errors.

The circle math was flawed, yeah. Totally. If that's the worst mistake I make today, I'm doing pretty fine for myself.

I don't presume to know whether or not people here know what averages are. Based upon how they get used and the things people claim, I would suspect that the vast majority of them don't. And the only time you ever used the word 'average' is when you were referring to the Wraithknight armor saves. I saw what you were doing, which is why I called you out on it.

By the way, you included FRFSRF but you didn't include Fortune, so you're cherry picking buffs there as much as anyone.

And no, I do not think it is excessive in one of two forum threads that's continued on for > 20 pages of people loudly bickering back and forth about the same thing and not getting anywhere. At some point you have to use as precise a tool to prove the point as you can, or just walk away and be done with it.

Or since many won't out of laziness, I could simply point out and relink it to highlight the point that you butchered my point to suit your own. I like keeping things transparent rather than allowing such shady and underhanded silliness to go unnoticed by the less observant people.

Oh, sure. Transparent like setting up the initial story about the conscripts killing the wraithknight in the game at your store, and then LATER mentioning that it was because of rules that have been changed (because everyone knew they were broken)

 daedalus wrote:
I don't presume to know whether or not people here know what averages are. Based upon how they get used and the things people claim, I would suspect that the vast majority of them don't. And the only time you ever used the word 'average' is when you were referring to the Wraithknight armor saves. I saw what you were doing, which is why I called you out on it.

Assume everyone's an idiot, great way to go about it. I did my math correctly and you didn't. I'll take your advice and from now forever explain the minutia to you specifically since you've proven yourself worthy of your own reasoning.

 daedalus wrote:
By the way, you included FRFSRF but you didn't include Fortune, so you're cherry picking buffs there as much as anyone.

You're right, how dare I presume they shoot at the target when it hasn't been buffed with skills that are entirely usable by their own army. Silly me. I guess we should also assume that Conscripts always have Celestine near them and Guilliman is now de facto pick in every SM army. Even though people generally make comparisons for either with, without, or both.

 daedalus wrote:
And no, I do not think it is excessive in one of two forum threads that's continued on for > 20 pages of people loudly bickering back and forth about the same thing and not getting anywhere. At some point you have to use as precise a tool to prove the point as you can, or just walk away and be done with it.

Such as by using pie plate diagrams to prove a point other than the one your quoted opponent was referring to? Sounds simple enough, I guess that's why it was... how'd you put it... flawed.

 daedalus wrote:
Oh, sure. Transparent like setting up the initial story about the conscripts killing the wraithknight in the game at your store, and then LATER mentioning that it was because of rules that have been changed (because everyone knew they were broken)

I think you mean transparent as in being completely honest about the circumstances of the kill rather than never mentioning that fact at all when my math still proved that Conscripts can kill a Wraithknight before the game ends, and what a trade! Just look at that point differential.

You're a typical Dakkanaut, assuming everyone else is trying to be as deceitful while you are OPENLY being with your selective reading. You're reading posts as though you yourself were writing them. Now go back and read them like a normal person would with no ulterior motive behind them. An off the cuff remark turns into full disclosure yet I'm the one being less than transparent? On what planet, mate? On what planet... Not Earth.

Between your one million pushups, your fake circle graph, and your accusations that honesty is proof of ill intentions, I can conclude you are 100% ignorable.

 Arkaine wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
I don't presume to know whether or not people here know what averages are. Based upon how they get used and the things people claim, I would suspect that the vast majority of them don't. And the only time you ever used the word 'average' is when you were referring to the Wraithknight armor saves. I saw what you were doing, which is why I called you out on it.

Assume everyone's an idiot, great way to go about it. I did my math correctly and you didn't. I'll take your advice and from now forever explain the minutia to you specifically since you've proven yourself worthy of your own reasoning.

Sigh. Okay... so, there are kids here. More than a few, last time I checked, though I was away for a while. I don't expect kids to necessarily understand enough about averages to know how applicable they are in particular situations. Further, some people are just bad at math. I know several people like that in real life and they're not idiots. They're just bad at math. I'm going to call that out when I see it, but that doesn't mean that I think people are idiots.

So then, are you twisting my words around to make me seem like the bad guy? Or do you think people who aren't good at math are idiots? If it's the first one, then I would hope that you would show me instead the courtesy you expect for yourself. If it's the second one, then, well, that's kinda rude.

Also, my simulations are accurate. The circle (which is independent from my simulator) wasn't large enough, because I made it a radius instead of diameter. If you're calling my simulations into account, you can feel free to vet the source code. You can find it for free in my sig. And even then, the model for the circle IS useful, even if not particularly applicable in the given situation. Averages though, even when calculated correctly, are really not.

 daedalus wrote:
By the way, you included FRFSRF but you didn't include Fortune, so you're cherry picking buffs there as much as anyone.

You're right, how dare I presume they shoot at the target when it hasn't been buffed with skills that are entirely usable by their own army. Silly me. I guess we should also assume that Conscripts always have Celestine near them and Guilliman is now de facto pick in every SM army. Even though people generally make comparisons for either with, without, or both.

No. Fortune was in the very same comment. You were just complaining about how it was brought up that the WK could have received fortune but FRFSRF wasn't considered. This has nothing to do with Celestine, Guilliman, Harker, Eldrad, or anyone or anything else. It was literally within the specific context of the comment.

 daedalus wrote:
And no, I do not think it is excessive in one of two forum threads that's continued on for > 20 pages of people loudly bickering back and forth about the same thing and not getting anywhere. At some point you have to use as precise a tool to prove the point as you can, or just walk away and be done with it.

Such as by using pie plate diagrams to prove a point other than the one your quoted opponent was referring to? Sounds simple enough, I guess that's why it was... how'd you put it... flawed.

Well, "garbage in, garbage" out as they say. I dunno what else you want from me.

 daedalus wrote:
Oh, sure. Transparent like setting up the initial story about the conscripts killing the wraithknight in the game at your store, and then LATER mentioning that it was because of rules that have been changed (because everyone knew they were broken)

I think you mean transparent as in being completely honest about the circumstances of the kill rather than never mentioning that fact at all when my math still proved that Conscripts can kill a Wraithknight before the game ends, and what a trade! Just look at that point differential.

I mean, yeah, they _can_ do it, maybe, if you don't like, attack them with something, or something. For that matter, a handful of meltaguns could do it too if you left them alone for four rounds standing within 12 inches. Guard can get those pretty cheaply too. I guess it depends on how you feel like losing your WK. Not my place to tell you how to play your army.

You're a typical Dakkanaut, assuming everyone else is trying to be as deceitful while you are OPENLY being with your selective reading. You're reading posts as though you yourself were writing them. Now go back and read them like a normal person would with no ulterior motive behind them. An off the cuff remark turns into full disclosure yet I'm the one being less than transparent? On what planet, mate? On what planet... Not Earth.

I'm just saying, for all amount of jumping on me for "misrepresenting" what you're saying, you don't do an awful lot of good representing yourself when you leave out details like that until the page after when everyone crunches the numbers to state how impossible it was. If you're going to be so anal retentive as to link (additionally, if I wanted to obfuscate your original message, I would have) back to that original post, you'd probably be more concerned with amending your off the cuff remarks to reflect reality.

You know, thinking about it, I probably did jump the gun a little with the circle diagram. I'll give you that. I've been in both thread since the beginning until I just recently quit the other one. Don't remember where it was, but I think we were at a minimum of 20 pages. In those 20 pages, we had conscripts lining deployment zones, we had them stretched out over/around/behind tanks, we had 20 man conga llnes, and then the next thing you know, they'd all snap to 12" away from anything, immediately FRFSRFing, totally unharmed by any enemy fire. So yeah, after about 40 pages of that, I probably did see a little red when I saw what looked like it was the start of yet another bad comparison.

Between your one million pushups, your fake circle graph, and your accusations that honesty is proof of ill intentions,

Still don't get the pushups thing, huh?
The graph was real, and will be useful in the future. It was just inaccurate to the situation.
Just because it's (eventually) honest doesn't mean that it's not unhelpful. And then, it's only helpful if you read through both pages, in order, following the conversations, to get to that conclusion. But if you thought people were going to do that, you wouldn't have had to link back to your original comment initially. It's like a news organization, publishing a story, and then posting on twitter that it turned out to not be real, but never redacting the story. Sure, it was confirmed false. It's still out there though.

I can conclude you are 100% ignorable.

Hey, we found a mutual common ground!

28 pages and very few concessions made by anyone. It's the Tau/Eldar all over again. And Waveserpents before that. And GK before that. And IG before that.

Martel732 wrote:
28 pages and very few concessions made by anyone. It's the Tau/Eldar all over again. And Waveserpents before that. And GK before that. And IG before that.

With regards to the issue at hand, I'm glad a lot of IG players who argue against the more dramatic changes still agree that no orders on conscripts would be a good change. That's the best it can get I think.

Personally, the reason I keep coming back to this these threads is because I want someone to complete the Craftworld Eldar Challenge. I've yet to see anything that even comes close to beating 100 conscripts with full buffs (commissar, officer, searchlights), for the 400~450 point price.

That, and I'm annoyed at blatantly incorrect math getting thrown around ("2400 shots to kill a Wraith Knight"... ugh it hurts, I'm glad someone else addressed it).

There's no need to "concede" when your argument consists of 90% hyperbole in a blatant attempt to try to push for harsher and harsher nerfs than are actually needed.

The ridiculous notions that conscripts need a 6+ save, a lower to-hit than they already have, lower toughness, and/or increased points is over the top nonsense. The only thing making Conscripts more powerful than intended is their ability to synergize far too well with IG characters.

And yet when changes to that synergy were suggested those were also shot down as too harsh....

Unfortunately I'm not able to spend too much time pouring over Index Xenos atm, but I feel like an important move for Eldar is to threaten Commissars with Rangers. I looked and Doom appears to not require LOS, seems like if the Guard player slipped you could Doom-snipe the Commissars, commanders, etc.

Its not a full solution yet, but its one that can hamper enemy movement while the rest of your army does whatever it needs to. Its true that Eldar dont have much high-rate-of-fire guns though. Still mulling it over.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
There's no need to "concede" when your argument consists of 90% hyperbole in a blatant attempt to try to push for harsher and harsher nerfs than are actually needed.

Yeah, lets ratchet up the tone again with more acusations.

 Melissia wrote:
There's no need to "concede" when your argument consists of 90% hyperbole in a blatant attempt to try to push for harsher and harsher nerfs than are actually needed.

The ridiculous notions that conscripts need a 6+ save, a lower to-hit than they already have, lower toughness, and/or increased points is over the top nonsense. The only thing making Conscripts more powerful than intended is their ability to synergize far too well with IG characters.

You are just wrong. Conscripts aren't OP because of synergy. They are Flat out OP to begin with - then they get synergy on top of it - making them the best unit on all of 40k BY FAR.