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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The a quadlas annihilator is a reasonably durable platform for its points, and still perfectly usable. Compared to a lascannon dev squad, it takes more damage before its damage average is lowered (and its average is lowered, not its maximum damage; even damaged it's helped more by a nearby captain than a half-strength dev squad), but misses out on the dev squad's fifth shot on turn one.

I completely agree. That's what I was just looking at: Even without Grinding Advance, the quadlas predator is about on par with the Leman Russ Annihilator; it misses out on one Lascannon shot but has a higher BS, faster movement (both in the absolute sense and in the "doesn't have to move half speed to actually do anything" sense), and is cheaper.

The Annihilator is one of the worst Russes! Why is being on par with that a good comparison?

Darsath wrote:
I think that the core of Xenomancer's argument is pretty accurate to be fair. Power Creep is a serious and very real problem for the balance of the game, and many codices have been balancing power around certain units and characters to make the armies competitive (such as Gulliman with marines, Celestine with sisters, Mortarion for Deathguard etc).

The whole design behind the codices, in fact, is entirely power creeping them in to line with the previous codices. This has been concerning me for a while. None of my armies have codices out yet, but I was hoping that having a codex wouldn't make your army so much more powerful than other non-codex armies.

Keep in mind that the SM and Craftworlds codices, despite being released months apart, were likely written at the same time, making this less an issue of power creep and more likely the game developers trying to give variation without gimping the toolbox of one army - which is what many players have been asking for for years.

strepp wrote:

Darsath wrote:
I think that the core of Xenomancer's argument is pretty accurate to be fair. Power Creep is a serious and very real problem for the balance of the game, and many codices have been balancing power around certain units and characters to make the armies competitive (such as Gulliman with marines, Celestine with sisters, Mortarion for Deathguard etc).

The whole design behind the codices, in fact, is entirely power creeping them in to line with the previous codices. This has been concerning me for a while. None of my armies have codices out yet, but I was hoping that having a codex wouldn't make your army so much more powerful than other non-codex armies.

Keep in mind that the SM and Craftworlds codices, despite being released months apart, were likely written at the same time, making this less an issue of power creep and more likely the game developers trying to give variation without gimping the toolbox of one army - which is what many players have been asking for for years.

I agree they were probably written at the same time. Most codex probably are already written. (They'd just have to be in order to be put through the printing process.) This doesn't mean that there isn't power creep. They easily could have made some armies more powerful and release them in order of power regardless of when they were written.

strepp wrote:

Darsath wrote:
I think that the core of Xenomancer's argument is pretty accurate to be fair. Power Creep is a serious and very real problem for the balance of the game, and many codices have been balancing power around certain units and characters to make the armies competitive (such as Gulliman with marines, Celestine with sisters, Mortarion for Deathguard etc).

The whole design behind the codices, in fact, is entirely power creeping them in to line with the previous codices. This has been concerning me for a while. None of my armies have codices out yet, but I was hoping that having a codex wouldn't make your army so much more powerful than other non-codex armies.

Keep in mind that the SM and Craftworlds codices, despite being released months apart, were likely written at the same time, making this less an issue of power creep and more likely the game developers trying to give variation without gimping the toolbox of one army - which is what many players have been asking for for years.

If anything, this makes the disparity in power levels of codices (GKs vs Choas or IG) even more questionable to be honest.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Audustum wrote:

Tristanleo wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Lets take a look at these stratagems.

-Eldar have a new one called forewarned 2CP. Allows a unit within 6" of a farseer to get a free turn of shooting against any enemy unit that deep strike that turn. Unlimited range, no negatives to hit.
Think 10 man dark reapers....
-Space marine have auspex scanner 2 CP. Allows a space marine unit to shoot at a unit entering from reserves at -1 to hit if they are within 12 inches. So -1 to hit and extremely short range...the enemy has to willing drop within range of a super unit that still wont be able to hit them with -1 to hit. for the same cost.

With regards to the stratagem, I think a vital discussion part of it has been sorely missed out... (It may have been covered, I've only checked the first page and a half before the thread seemed to wander)

Eldar can only do it within 6 inches of a Farseer, No Farseer, no Stratagem.

Space marines applies for any space marine unit that may be within 12" of the unit that just came in, which means that you are within any rapid fire ranges you may have.

It's more balanced than people make out in my opinion because whilst Eldar get the better stick because they don't suffer penalties, they have a very short leash to play with.
Space marines get the smaller stick in terms of benefits, but ANY unit can do it without a leash attached, so spread your guys liberally across your field and dare your opponent to come close to that hell blaster unit or your intercessors for some rapid fire berating.

Just wanted to highlight that I think the Space Marine one can only be used on Infantry AND gives a -1 to Hit.

That said, I'm siding with the folks in the beginning who said Grey Knights have the worst. Did you know the Codex made our Terminators more expensive? Terminators.

Greyknights are not actually as bad as marines. Also - as an allied force greyknights bring some really good stuff to the table - no one would allie a marine force for any reason - it would just make your army worse. It's okay though - we can ignore how bad the marine codex is because the greyknights codex is also bad.

Some others already addressed this but allying in a certain Blue Primarch plus your heavy dakka platform of choice is extremely common, much more so than GK. GK's are just a tag along to some AM lists.

 Xenomancers wrote:

I agree they were probably written at the same time. Most codex probably are already written. (They'd just have to be in order to be put through the printing process.) This doesn't mean that there isn't power creep. They easily could have made some armies more powerful and release them in order of power regardless of when they were written.

Which is weird, because logistically, I would expect that would have to be the case based upon printing run tunaround and all of that, but I feel like there feels like there was a fundamental change in design philosophy between the initial release and the ones that came after. Without comment on whether that's good or bad for any particular set of books, they feel like they weren't written by the same people or written at the same time, and maybe both.

360 points for a reroll 1's bubble when you can have reroll 1's for free from cadians trait....is not worth it. Guilliman is only worth it with an ultra marines army.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The a quadlas annihilator is a reasonably durable platform for its points, and still perfectly usable. Compared to a lascannon dev squad, it takes more damage before its damage average is lowered (and its average is lowered, not its maximum damage; even damaged it's helped more by a nearby captain than a half-strength dev squad), but misses out on the dev squad's fifth shot on turn one.

I completely agree. That's what I was just looking at: Even without Grinding Advance, the quadlas predator is about on par with the Leman Russ Annihilator; it misses out on one Lascannon shot but has a higher BS, faster movement (both in the absolute sense and in the "doesn't have to move half speed to actually do anything" sense), and is cheaper.

The Annihilator is one of the worst Russes! Why is being on par with that a good comparison?

Because it's the one most directly comparable to a Predator Annhilator.

What, are you upset that predators don't get battle cannons? You know codices have different options and that's a good thing, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
360 points for a reroll 1's bubble when you can have reroll 1's for free from cadians trait....is not worth it. Guilliman is only worth it with an ultra marines army.

Your consistent comparisons of apples and oranges is not doing you any favors.

Unless you're going to somehow argue the Cadians get re-roll ones while moving, just like Guilliman has (they don't).

But sure, conveniently ignoring data that does not support your viewpoint is, I suppose, consistent with the anti-intellectual bent that some sects of modern American culture has. Fortunately, some of us don't outright ignore data when it doesn't support our narrative; I only pray that GW also uses data when balancing its books, instead of listening to folks like you.

 daedalus wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

I agree they were probably written at the same time. Most codex probably are already written. (They'd just have to be in order to be put through the printing process.) This doesn't mean that there isn't power creep. They easily could have made some armies more powerful and release them in order of power regardless of when they were written.

Which is weird, because logistically, I would expect that would have to be the case based upon printing run tunaround and all of that, but I feel like there feels like there was a fundamental change in design philosophy between the initial release and the ones that came after. Without comment on whether that's good or bad for any particular set of books, they feel like they weren't written by the same people or written at the same time, and maybe both.

Well there is a clear power shift once AM was released. We started seeing things like...this gun shoots twice now and this is a rehashed stratagem but its better.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

I agree they were probably written at the same time. Most codex probably are already written. (They'd just have to be in order to be put through the printing process.) This doesn't mean that there isn't power creep. They easily could have made some armies more powerful and release them in order of power regardless of when they were written.

Which is weird, because logistically, I would expect that would have to be the case based upon printing run tunaround and all of that, but I feel like there feels like there was a fundamental change in design philosophy between the initial release and the ones that came after. Without comment on whether that's good or bad for any particular set of books, they feel like they weren't written by the same people or written at the same time, and maybe both.

Well there is a clear power shift once AM was released. We started seeing things like...this gun shoots twice now and this is a rehashed stratagem but its better.

I feel like you constantly confuse the words better and different. I guarantee you if Marines got the Eldar stratagem and Eldar got the Marine stratagem, you'd be upset that yours ties your HQs down to the heavy shooting units instead of being forwards "where they belong" while the Eldar can just use theirs on anyone "without restriction" or some-such other completely mistaken bullgak.

If you guys think vanilla is bad, just wait until C:BA tries to force meqs to get into CC with like 12 models on the table, LOL.

While many of the codices were probably already more-or-less done when 8th launched, it's been long enough that newer codices are probably now incorporating feedback from the community. Like, the new Guard codex builds in the one command squad per officer rule that got FAQ'd early on. Grinding Advance (and the similar Fire Prism rule) seem like quick patch jobs in response to everyone noticing that Russes and Prisms were terrible.

The Marine, GK, Chaos, Death Guard, and probably AdMech codices were likely in basically their final form before 8th launched. These have only minor changes relative to the index (excepting DG, obviously), presumably due to playtesting that occurred pre-launch. Marines didn't really change (though they did get a lot of new Primaris stuff). Chaos got almost nothing except for better Obliterators. GKs got nerfed Terminators (lol). The AdMech codex is kind of bizarre in what it changes, which is relatively little, and really says to me that it's not based on any sort of community feedback.

But then the Guard codex has some really well-aimed changes that seem very responsive to what people were saying in the first month or so of 8th. Scion plasma and Conscripts were nerfed. Russes and Baneblades were buffed significantly. The stuff that they didn't hit is stuff that people weren't really talking about early on (like Smite spam). They seem to have quickly decided that the Conscript nerf was insufficient (which would make sense if they were basing this on what people were saying right after 8th, since it wasn't as obvious how dominant Conscripts would be).

The Eldar codex looks something like the Guard codex insofar as it's a very extensive set of price changes. Again I think there's a lot of reason to think that this is responsive to what people were saying early on. Dire Avengers, Rangers, Falcons, and Fire Prisms immediately jumped out at people as absolutely terrible units. It was less clear at the time how bad Windriders were, and they got a relatively modest buff. One really weird change is the Hemlock buff, but remember that early in 8th lots of people were (for some reason) pretty down on most non-Stormraven flyers. In the early Eldar tactics threads lots of people were overlooking the flyers entirely.

The good news for Marines is that they came out long enough ago that the Chapter Approved in December will likely have some good changes for them. Eldar and 'Nids should probably be a little worried about being stuck with what they've got for a year.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The a quadlas annihilator is a reasonably durable platform for its points, and still perfectly usable. Compared to a lascannon dev squad, it takes more damage before its damage average is lowered (and its average is lowered, not its maximum damage; even damaged it's helped more by a nearby captain than a half-strength dev squad), but misses out on the dev squad's fifth shot on turn one.

I completely agree. That's what I was just looking at: Even without Grinding Advance, the quadlas predator is about on par with the Leman Russ Annihilator; it misses out on one Lascannon shot but has a higher BS, faster movement (both in the absolute sense and in the "doesn't have to move half speed to actually do anything" sense), and is cheaper.

The Annihilator is one of the worst Russes! Why is being on par with that a good comparison?

Because it's the one most directly comparable to a Predator Annhilator.

What, are you upset that predators don't get battle cannons? You know codices have different options and that's a good thing, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
360 points for a reroll 1's bubble when you can have reroll 1's for free from cadians trait....is not worth it. Guilliman is only worth it with an ultra marines army.

Your consistent comparisons of apples and oranges is not doing you any favors.

Unless you're going to somehow argue the Cadians get re-roll ones while moving, just like Guilliman has (they don't).

But sure, conveniently ignoring data that does not support your viewpoint is, I suppose, consistent with the anti-intellectual bent that some sects of modern American culture has. Fortunately, some of us don't outright ignore data when it doesn't support our narrative; I only pray that GW also uses data when balancing its books, instead of listening to folks like you.

I wan't presented data. I was presented an anecdote. From which I have a pretty good idea where it came from - being the first few tournaments results released and a few net lists that had guillimen and conscripts cheesing out with character dreads from forge world. Those are outclassed now by codexes with strategems. Guilliman does not show up in winning AM lists in any setting now.

I do think the CWE strat is a little better. But come on.

1) A 10-man Dark Reaper squad, on average dice, does not 1-round even a 10-man Tac squad (2x(2x3)(2x3)(2/3), worse in cover).
2) A 10-man reaper squad is a lot of points. Save your DS for a turn and shoot them (with boltguns, even). Or don't deepstrike. Or LOS. You can't ignore terrain/deployment like you usually could.
3) DSing freely is very scary for a CWE list. Getting your Tacs within doubletap range of a Dev squad and then shooting with no counterplay lets you do some damage. Getting your Tacs in doubletap range of Reapers or Fragons or Banshees does a *lot* more damage.

The CWE strat is still better. But that doesn't mean the book is better across the board.

As for traits, it is nicer to have it affect most of the army. But it's inaccurate to say the whole army. The majority of our Special Characters - our only Captain-level combat characters - can never get a Trait. Ever. Or a Warlord trait. Not even the core rules Warlord traits. I like it this way (Asurmen and Jain Zar don't belong to any Craftworld), but to say it affects everything is wrong. Still, better than RG in that vehicles and such are more common than Phoenix Lords.

The Infiltrate discussion is weird. Some points:
- You *cannot* DS both Infantry and Vehicles in the same game via strats. It is very, very clear on that. One or the other. You can pay 3 CP to do 2 Infantry or 2 Vehicles, but that's it. 2 units. For 3CP you get 3 for RG/Alpha Legion. And you don't stop there.
- RG/Alpha Legion Infiltrate is very different from Deep Strike. People disagree about which is better (actual infiltrate would probably be OP in Craftworlder hands - Fragons, ScytheGuard, Banshees, Specters and more would do so much more with that than Deep Strike).

I don't see how the CWE strats are worse than RG/Alpha Legion. Do you really want to Infiltrate/Deep Strike a Predator? Maybe a Rhino or Razorback. Maybe.

And those are only the chery-picked options where CWE is supposedly so obviously above SM. Consider these:

1) Lascannons and Brightlances. Lance vs S9, and 48" vs 36" on mostly Relentless platforms. Decent tradeoff. Until it lost Lance and Relentless. But kept S8 and 36".
2) Assault Cannons vs SL or SC
3) Gilly
4) Quad-las Pred vs BL Falcon
5) Storm Guardians

The CWE book seems overtooned. But to cherrypick two things as "Obviously OP", and to get the facts about them so wrong, doesn't help anything. See above for "proof" the other way (CWE may be more powerful than SM - just showing that there are examples in both directions).

Despite the problems, some things seem fair. Dread vs Wraithlord. Rhino vs Serpent. DA vs Tacs are close (should pay 10 pts for the Exarch, imo). ASM vs Scorpions. EML vs SM ML. Hopefully we get more of that, moving forward.

 daedalus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Or focusing fire on a threatening unit standing right next to a farseer and killing them before dropping down. Or killing the farseer before dropping down. Or maybe having multiple units deep striking, and holding onto the one that you know your opponent is going to want to shoot, and then just opting not to drop the juicy unit at the end of all your other drops - Forewarning has to be used IMMEDIATELY after a unit drops down after all, if your opponent opts not to shoot the drop pod because he's waiting for the unit of Terminators, and instead of dropping the terminators you declare a shooting attack or psychic test, then it's no longer "Immediately after a unit deep strikes" and he can't retroactively go back and shoot the drop pod. Or, as you said, dropping somewhere out of LOS of the firing unit. I like that you have the same mentality of most video game players when you use the phrase "literally zero counterplay" - that if there isn't a large, red, glowing button labeled "OBVIOUS WEAKNESS" that you can slap to stop a counter from working, then there is LITERALLY nothing you can do against it. Sometimes the counterplay is "don't be in a situation where your opponent can trigger the stratagem".

It's hard to take "just focus fire" seriously when one is a character, either can fairly trivially have a -2 to hit, and, unless I'm misunderstanding, can get at least a -3 if they really need to. Invisibility is back, you know.

Your deep-strike chicken idea is pretty awesome though. Could definitely backfire pretty hard though. One of the things I've always understood about the game, especially in the context of GK is "don't come in piecemeal."

So if you're setting their craftworld to Alaitoc (ignoring the fact that Dark Reapers are always going to be Ynnari), giving them a dedicated warlock for Conceal, spending 2CP for Lightning Fast Reflexes, and another 2CP to trigger Forewarned, can I say that I'm just going to run White Scars, Saint Celestine or whoever else and just turn 1 charge them from downtown?

This is rapidly devolving into the mythical "Bullgryn 2++" situation where you bring 200+ point celestine, spend a CP, cast two psychic powers, play on a tuesday, be in cover, and you have an invincible unkillable abusive OP unit!!!!one!

Also, what unit could possibly have more firepower than 10 Reaper Launcher Reapers hitting on 3s with 20 S5 AP-2 2 damage shots or 10 S8 AP-2 D3 shots plus a Farseer, for 370 points?

I dunno, how about Pask in a punisher? 49 shots at BS2+.
3 Dakkastelans? 54 shots at BS3+.
A stormraven? A Land Raider? Most units of that point value purely focused on long-range shooting are going to put out a heavy amount of firepower. They're one unit. If you're not on a table where you can't either A, land your stuff out of their sight, or B, they are exposed enough that you can get in and focus them down, then I don't know what to tell you other than that you've probably earned the loss of a unit.

Also, for Grinding Advance:
1) Only the Fire Prism gets the similar rule
2) That similar rule doesn't remove the -1 to hit

So it's the better half of Grinding Advance. But still not as good. And only on one option.

Bharring wrote:
I do think the CWE strat is a little better. But come on.

1) A 10-man Dark Reaper squad, on average dice, does not 1-round even a 10-man Tac squad (2x(2x3)(2x3)(2/3), worse in cover).
2) A 10-man reaper squad is a lot of points. Save your DS for a turn and shoot them (with boltguns, even). Or don't deepstrike. Or LOS. You can't ignore terrain/deployment like you usually could.
3) DSing freely is very scary for a CWE list. Getting your Tacs within doubletap range of a Dev squad and then shooting with no counterplay lets you do some damage. Getting your Tacs in doubletap range of Reapers or Fragons or Banshees does a *lot* more damage.

The CWE strat is still better. But that doesn't mean the book is better across the board.

As for traits, it is nicer to have it affect most of the army. But it's inaccurate to say the whole army. The majority of our Special Characters - our only Captain-level combat characters - can never get a Trait. Ever. Or a Warlord trait. Not even the core rules Warlord traits. I like it this way (Asurmen and Jain Zar don't belong to any Craftworld), but to say it affects everything is wrong. Still, better than RG in that vehicles and such are more common than Phoenix Lords.

The Infiltrate discussion is weird. Some points:
- You *cannot* DS both Infantry and Vehicles in the same game via strats. It is very, very clear on that. One or the other. You can pay 3 CP to do 2 Infantry or 2 Vehicles, but that's it. 2 units. For 3CP you get 3 for RG/Alpha Legion. And you don't stop there.
- RG/Alpha Legion Infiltrate is very different from Deep Strike. People disagree about which is better (actual infiltrate would probably be OP in Craftworlder hands - Fragons, ScytheGuard, Banshees, Specters and more would do so much more with that than Deep Strike).

I don't see how the CWE strats are worse than RG/Alpha Legion. Do you really want to Infiltrate/Deep Strike a Predator? Maybe a Rhino or Razorback. Maybe.

And those are only the chery-picked options where CWE is supposedly so obviously above SM. Consider these:

1) Lascannons and Brightlances. Lance vs S9, and 48" vs 36" on mostly Relentless platforms. Decent tradeoff. Until it lost Lance and Relentless. But kept S8 and 36".
2) Assault Cannons vs SL or SC
3) Gilly
4) Quad-las Pred vs BL Falcon
5) Storm Guardians

The CWE book seems overtooned. But to cherrypick two things as "Obviously OP", and to get the facts about them so wrong, doesn't help anything. See above for "proof" the other way (CWE may be more powerful than SM - just showing that there are examples in both directions).

Despite the problems, some things seem fair. Dread vs Wraithlord. Rhino vs Serpent. DA vs Tacs are close (should pay 10 pts for the Exarch, imo). ASM vs Scorpions. EML vs SM ML. Hopefully we get more of that, moving forward.

The majority of a Reaper squads damage comes from it's multi damage weapons. It 1 rounds a grandmaster dreadknight. It 1 rounds a flying hive tyrant. It 1 rounds a summoned daemon.

Lightning Fast Reflexes are only for models with Fly. Dark Reapers can't Fly.

The Hemlock was sidegraded. Conceal was a large part of what made it OP. Now Conceal targets an infantry/biker unit, instead of an aura that affects the caster and infantry/bikers. Also, Hemlocks can't cast it (or any other buffs) now. Still probably too good, but it wasn't just a buff.

Bharring wrote:
Lightning Fast Reflexes are only for models with Fly. Dark Reapers can't Fly.

It also works on Infantry, so it ends up hitting pretty much everything that was worth taking in the first place.

Odd, my 5 Reapers failed to kill an Ork tank last night. It can 1-round things, sure. But then Asurmen can do 30 wounds to a Warhound Titan. If you roll perfectly. A Dev squad or Combi Sternies or such could 1-round those targets too, potentially.

the_scotsman wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Or focusing fire on a threatening unit standing right next to a farseer and killing them before dropping down. Or killing the farseer before dropping down. Or maybe having multiple units deep striking, and holding onto the one that you know your opponent is going to want to shoot, and then just opting not to drop the juicy unit at the end of all your other drops - Forewarning has to be used IMMEDIATELY after a unit drops down after all, if your opponent opts not to shoot the drop pod because he's waiting for the unit of Terminators, and instead of dropping the terminators you declare a shooting attack or psychic test, then it's no longer "Immediately after a unit deep strikes" and he can't retroactively go back and shoot the drop pod. Or, as you said, dropping somewhere out of LOS of the firing unit. I like that you have the same mentality of most video game players when you use the phrase "literally zero counterplay" - that if there isn't a large, red, glowing button labeled "OBVIOUS WEAKNESS" that you can slap to stop a counter from working, then there is LITERALLY nothing you can do against it. Sometimes the counterplay is "don't be in a situation where your opponent can trigger the stratagem".

It's hard to take "just focus fire" seriously when one is a character, either can fairly trivially have a -2 to hit, and, unless I'm misunderstanding, can get at least a -3 if they really need to. Invisibility is back, you know.

Your deep-strike chicken idea is pretty awesome though. Could definitely backfire pretty hard though. One of the things I've always understood about the game, especially in the context of GK is "don't come in piecemeal."

So if you're setting their craftworld to Alaitoc (ignoring the fact that Dark Reapers are always going to be Ynnari), giving them a dedicated warlock for Conceal, spending 2CP for Lightning Fast Reflexes, and another 2CP to trigger Forewarned, can I say that I'm just going to run White Scars, Saint Celestine or whoever else and just turn 1 charge them from downtown?

This is rapidly devolving into the mythical "Bullgryn 2++" situation where you bring 200+ point celestine, spend a CP, cast two psychic powers, play on a tuesday, be in cover, and you have an invincible unkillable abusive OP unit!!!!one!

Also, what unit could possibly have more firepower than 10 Reaper Launcher Reapers hitting on 3s with 20 S5 AP-2 2 damage shots or 10 S8 AP-2 D3 shots plus a Farseer, for 370 points?

I dunno, how about Pask in a punisher? 49 shots at BS2+.
3 Dakkastelans? 54 shots at BS3+.
A stormraven? A Land Raider? Most units of that point value purely focused on long-range shooting are going to put out a heavy amount of firepower. They're one unit. If you're not on a table where you can't either A, land your stuff out of their sight, or B, they are exposed enough that you can get in and focus them down, then I don't know what to tell you other than that you've probably earned the loss of a unit.

I see you have gone beyond defending the stratagem as being much better than the other versions of it in the game and gone on to just kill the dark reapers - which are in cover - most likely have -1 to hit and if they went first will most likely have fortune on them as well - if that is the clear target they much go for. They can get get a warlock to cast protect on them too. For 1+ saves in cover. Yeah...shoot bolters at them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Odd, my 5 Reapers failed to kill an Ork tank last night. It can 1-round things, sure. But then Asurmen can do 30 wounds to a Warhound Titan. If you roll perfectly. A Dev squad or Combi Sternies or such could 1-round those targets too, potentially.

Keep calm and do math.

 Xenomancers wrote:

10 man squad with all with reaper-launchers...what unit in this game actually has more firepower than that?

Hellblasters
Centurions loaded out
Sternguard with Combi-plasma within 12"
Obliterators rolling average

Note how 3 of those units are in the Marine codex. C'mon man, you're not even trying.

I did the math for a 10-man Tac squad. Granted, Tacs are quite durable. So is the problem that SM don't have anything as durable as Tacs?

Or is it that that 10-man Reaper squad puts out more dakka than anything SM could field? So perhaps SM should get access to Sternies? Centurions? Hellblasters?

No, it is better than the marine stratagem you listed.

You know what else?

The Iron Hands chapter tactic is a better version of the Graia Forgeworld Dogma. Does that make Marines OP? Does that make Iron Hands good? No, it just makes this one thing better than this other similar thing.

The Raven Guard chapter is better than the Alaitoc Craftworld, because they have the same Tactic but the Raven Guard stratagem is good and the Alaitoc Stratagem is hot trash. Therefore marines are OP, and Eldar are the worst codex? Is that how this works?

oh gosh, as it turns out, if I strip away all context from rules and compare two tiny elements of two different factions in context, then try to make the claim that one WHOLE FACTION is better than the other because of that single comparison, I am just wrong!

How bout that!

In this whole post, nobody has contested the assertion you seem to be defending, that this one thing is obviously better than this other thing.

They're contesting the straight up bonkers conclusions you've made based on that comparison, namely:

1) There is no single unit in the game with more firepower than 10-man dark reapers
2) This one comparison is PROOF that Codex Space Marines is the worst codex
3) There is literally zero counterplay to this stratagem available if you may be in a situation where your opponent could make use of it

How is the Iron Hands one better than Graia?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
How is the Iron Hands one better than Graia?

It works on every wound, while Graia only works on the last wound before the model dies.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The a quadlas annihilator is a reasonably durable platform for its points, and still perfectly usable. Compared to a lascannon dev squad, it takes more damage before its damage average is lowered (and its average is lowered, not its maximum damage; even damaged it's helped more by a nearby captain than a half-strength dev squad), but misses out on the dev squad's fifth shot on turn one.

I completely agree. That's what I was just looking at: Even without Grinding Advance, the quadlas predator is about on par with the Leman Russ Annihilator; it misses out on one Lascannon shot but has a higher BS, faster movement (both in the absolute sense and in the "doesn't have to move half speed to actually do anything" sense), and is cheaper.

The Annihilator is one of the worst Russes! Why is being on par with that a good comparison?

Because it's the one most directly comparable to a Predator Annhilator.

What, are you upset that predators don't get battle cannons? You know codices have different options and that's a good thing, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
360 points for a reroll 1's bubble when you can have reroll 1's for free from cadians trait....is not worth it. Guilliman is only worth it with an ultra marines army.

Your consistent comparisons of apples and oranges is not doing you any favors.

Unless you're going to somehow argue the Cadians get re-roll ones while moving, just like Guilliman has (they don't).

But sure, conveniently ignoring data that does not support your viewpoint is, I suppose, consistent with the anti-intellectual bent that some sects of modern American culture has. Fortunately, some of us don't outright ignore data when it doesn't support our narrative; I only pray that GW also uses data when balancing its books, instead of listening to folks like you.

Are you purposely being obtuse or did the point fly right over your head? Lemme bullet point it for ya.
1. Annihilator is a lamer pattern of Russ.
2. Predator, with a similar loadout, is similarly lame.
3. You say it's fine for both of them.

I'm not asking for the fething Battle Cannon. I'm asking for a Predator that's good to run with my Iron Warriors lists.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
How is the Iron Hands one better than Graia?

It works on every wound, while Graia only works on the last wound before the model dies.

And it helps with Morale losses. That's more even than anything.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

10 man squad with all with reaper-launchers...what unit in this game actually has more firepower than that?

Hellblasters
Centurions loaded out
Sternguard with Combi-plasma within 12"
Obliterators rolling average

Note how 3 of those units are in the Marine codex. C'mon man, you're not even trying.

Helblasters have less firepower and they cost more and in order to have reasonable firepower have to risk killing themselves.
Centurions loaded out are like 140 points a peice. - you would auto lose the game for taking the unit
guess i wont deep strike withing 12 inches of sterngaurd or hellblasters for that matter
oblits are max units of 3 - they wouldn't benefit much plus can't cover as much area with 24 inch range.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The a quadlas annihilator is a reasonably durable platform for its points, and still perfectly usable. Compared to a lascannon dev squad, it takes more damage before its damage average is lowered (and its average is lowered, not its maximum damage; even damaged it's helped more by a nearby captain than a half-strength dev squad), but misses out on the dev squad's fifth shot on turn one.

I completely agree. That's what I was just looking at: Even without Grinding Advance, the quadlas predator is about on par with the Leman Russ Annihilator; it misses out on one Lascannon shot but has a higher BS, faster movement (both in the absolute sense and in the "doesn't have to move half speed to actually do anything" sense), and is cheaper.

The Annihilator is one of the worst Russes! Why is being on par with that a good comparison?

Because it's the one most directly comparable to a Predator Annhilator.

What, are you upset that predators don't get battle cannons? You know codices have different options and that's a good thing, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
360 points for a reroll 1's bubble when you can have reroll 1's for free from cadians trait....is not worth it. Guilliman is only worth it with an ultra marines army.

Your consistent comparisons of apples and oranges is not doing you any favors.

Unless you're going to somehow argue the Cadians get re-roll ones while moving, just like Guilliman has (they don't).

But sure, conveniently ignoring data that does not support your viewpoint is, I suppose, consistent with the anti-intellectual bent that some sects of modern American culture has. Fortunately, some of us don't outright ignore data when it doesn't support our narrative; I only pray that GW also uses data when balancing its books, instead of listening to folks like you.

Are you purposely being obtuse or did the point fly right over your head? Lemme bullet point it for ya.
1. Annihilator is a lamer pattern of Russ.
2. Predator, with a similar loadout, is similarly lame.
3. You say it's fine for both of them.

I'm not asking for the fething Battle Cannon. I'm asking for a Predator that's good to run with my Iron Warriors lists.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
How is the Iron Hands one better than Graia?

It works on every wound, while Graia only works on the last wound before the model dies.

And it helps with Morale losses. That's more even than anything.

It...really isn't. Admech only has 4 units total with only one wound. For every other unit, this 6++ save only applies on half their wounds or less. Also, it comes with a drawback for some reason - kill any characters and the whole army can't fall back anymore.

I love pedantic objections as much as the next guy, but how about a different example so you can try again, but maybe with a response to the actual argument presented: Iyanden and Valhalla. Iyanden is a straight up upgrade over the Valhalla trait - same for vehicles, better for infantry. Does that make Guard the single worst codex?

The key here is that it doesn't actually matter if the conclusion is wrong or right: Your reasoning is such that you can't even get to the point of being right. If your argument is "9/11 was an inside job, and the space aliens put mind control drugs in the drinking water, therefore the sky is blue" you are wrong, even if the sky is in fact blue.

Somone just told me to take devestator centurions. I am shocked.