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.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) But, as Vaktathi has shown, Predators don't need Grinding Advance to be good. The Predator Annihilator is as good a tank hunter as the best Leman Russ tank hunter, including Grinding Advance.

2) They don't have them. I'm sorry, but they don't. They seem fine without it - I've certainly seen more than zero Predators in lists - but they don't. I don't know what to tell you. I didn't make the decision, write the codex, or the like. They don't have it.

Why are you comparing a Predator to a Russ anyways? You make it sound like you want the Predator to be as good as a Russ.

It isn't really the best Tank Hunting Russ. The Annihilator with a Heavy Bolter (180 points) is getting 5.3 damage on a t8 vehicle with a 3+. Against the same kind of vehicle, a Battle Cannon Russ with a Lascannon (slightly cheaper) is getting 7 wounds total. I also have points left there for a HK Missile, so that'll potentially make the damage greater. What the math is on that I don't know because I don't know the HK states off the top of my head. Either way, that's not including any regimental bonuses for offensive power (you'd probably just do Cadian for the Annihilator and Catachan for the Battle Cannon, correct?)

Why is the Annihilator being touted as the gold standard?

Your math for the battlecannon is wrong.

Battlecannon Russ w/ Lascannon:
- Battlecannon: Shoots twice (7 shots avg). Hits 3.5 times. Wounds 1.75 times. Gets through the save with 1.16 wounds, doing 2.3 damage.
- Lascannon: Shoots once (1 shot). Hits .5 times. Wounds .33 times. Gets through the save with .28 wounds, doing .97 damage.

Total: 3.2 damage

Annihilator Russ w/ Heavy Bolter:
- Twin Lascannon: Shoots twice (4 shots). Hits 2 times. Wounds 1.33 times. Gets through the save with 1.11 wounds, doing 3.89 damage.
- Heavy Bolter: Shoots once (3 shots). Hits 1.5 times. Wounds .5 times. Gets through the save with .25 wounds, doing .25 damage.

Total: 4.14 damage

EDIT:
Just for completeness:

- Hunter-Killer Missle: Shoots once (1 shot). Hits .5 times. Wounds .25 times. Gets through the save with .17 wounds, doing .583 wounds, bringing the Battlecannon Russ up to a total of 3.78 damage, still less than the Annihilator.

My bad. The calculator messed up super heavily when I added the Lascannon.
That said, we weren't adding Regiment bonuses. Doing everything one at a time instead of all at once, I'm getting 4.8 with a Cadian bonus, and 4 with the Catachan bonus.
It's barely any better vs T8, and that goes to 5 with T7. I'm still gonna call BS on it being the premier tank hunting Russ.

The logical step upon calling it 'not the best Russ at tank hunting' is to show which loadout is better.

Please provide your data or we will keep assuming that the Vanquisher is the premier tank hunting Russ.

[mods, please delete]

 Galef wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Eh, credit where it is due. the models are very kickass and "Primaris Marine" isn't that bad of a name, at least not compared to "Aelf" or "Duardin", which sounds like someone sneezed on the autocorrect.

And the rules are pretty cool too. 2 wound Marines with 30" AP -1 bolters? Yes please.

Intercessors are everything Tactical Marines should be. I've ordered those sexy Mk3 Boarding Shield Marines from FW as my stand-ins, with a couple of Combi-Bolters to help represent the Aux Grenade function.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ordana wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) But, as Vaktathi has shown, Predators don't need Grinding Advance to be good. The Predator Annihilator is as good a tank hunter as the best Leman Russ tank hunter, including Grinding Advance.

2) They don't have them. I'm sorry, but they don't. They seem fine without it - I've certainly seen more than zero Predators in lists - but they don't. I don't know what to tell you. I didn't make the decision, write the codex, or the like. They don't have it.

Why are you comparing a Predator to a Russ anyways? You make it sound like you want the Predator to be as good as a Russ.

It isn't really the best Tank Hunting Russ. The Annihilator with a Heavy Bolter (180 points) is getting 5.3 damage on a t8 vehicle with a 3+. Against the same kind of vehicle, a Battle Cannon Russ with a Lascannon (slightly cheaper) is getting 7 wounds total. I also have points left there for a HK Missile, so that'll potentially make the damage greater. What the math is on that I don't know because I don't know the HK states off the top of my head. Either way, that's not including any regimental bonuses for offensive power (you'd probably just do Cadian for the Annihilator and Catachan for the Battle Cannon, correct?)

Why is the Annihilator being touted as the gold standard?

Your math for the battlecannon is wrong.

Battlecannon Russ w/ Lascannon:
- Battlecannon: Shoots twice (7 shots avg). Hits 3.5 times. Wounds 1.75 times. Gets through the save with 1.16 wounds, doing 2.3 damage.
- Lascannon: Shoots once (1 shot). Hits .5 times. Wounds .33 times. Gets through the save with .28 wounds, doing .97 damage.

Total: 3.2 damage

Annihilator Russ w/ Heavy Bolter:
- Twin Lascannon: Shoots twice (4 shots). Hits 2 times. Wounds 1.33 times. Gets through the save with 1.11 wounds, doing 3.89 damage.
- Heavy Bolter: Shoots once (3 shots). Hits 1.5 times. Wounds .5 times. Gets through the save with .25 wounds, doing .25 damage.

Total: 4.14 damage

EDIT:
Just for completeness:

- Hunter-Killer Missle: Shoots once (1 shot). Hits .5 times. Wounds .25 times. Gets through the save with .17 wounds, doing .583 wounds, bringing the Battlecannon Russ up to a total of 3.78 damage, still less than the Annihilator.

My bad. The calculator messed up super heavily when I added the Lascannon.
That said, we weren't adding Regiment bonuses. Doing everything one at a time instead of all at once, I'm getting 4.8 with a Cadian bonus, and 4 with the Catachan bonus.
It's barely any better vs T8, and that goes to 5 with T7. I'm still gonna call BS on it being the premier tank hunting Russ.

The logical step upon calling it 'not the best Russ at tank hunting' is to show which loadout is better.

Please provide your data or we will keep assuming that the Vanquisher is the premier tank hunting Russ.

I did provide the data. Like, right there. I understand my math was like crazy off the first time but I admitted it.

However, nobody should be defending the Vanquisher. That's hot garbage right there. 2 S8 shots? No thanks. It needs additional AP (probably AP-4) and some sorta minimum damage rule.

 Melissia wrote:
[mods, please delete]

...this whole thread.

Bharring wrote:
Orkz?

Ork shootas are assault 2 and marine bolters are rapid fire 1 - that proves marines are the worst codex ever. GW pls buff!!1

 Vaktathi 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?

The Annihilator is actually probably one of the better variants, particularly for tank hunting, especially against T8 targets. Against a T8 3+sv tank target, the FW Annihilator is putting out 4.86 wounds for 192pts, a las Vanq is outputting....2.83 for 167pts (3.45 wounds against a T7 target), a Quadlas Predator is doing 5.2 wounds against T7 and T8 targets for 190pts.

Its better than the very worst russ? It must be great then!

Reads 9 pages, sees no proof.

Didn't marines just win the first GT?

Carries on with life.

If Marines suck, and you think thy have sucked since 2nd edition, why have you played them for twenty years? Go buy some Guard. Or Eldar. Or any faction you think is overpowered.

 koooaei wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Orkz?

Ork shootas are assault 2 and marine bolters are rapid fire 1 - that proves marines are the worst codex ever. GW pls buff!!1

Better nerf Orks, I'd say.
I hope the new codex will make things right.

If Ynnari and Alaitoc, you're doing it wrong. Not as in bad, but as in not game-legal.

Reapers were nasty in Ynnari list and decent/good in CWE lists. They got buffed, so now they're nasty in CWE lists, and still even better in Ynnari lists. Didn't need that.

Although the rules allowing Ynnari units to use CWE stratagems is BS (it does require a CWE detatchement somewhere in your army, but that's not too difficult).

The new book means CWE-Craftworld isn't strictly inferior to CWE-Ynnari. Certainly overtuned. (No, this thread still doesn't prove SM are the worst book in the game.)

Yes, GK exist, and the other loyalist power armor lists are going to exist. So this thread will never be accurate in fact, only partially in spirit.

From the concensus of this thread. Space marines aren't the worst - greyknights are the worst. No one seems to want to argue that space marines aren't the second worst. Yet. As a player of both armies GK and Ultramarines. I can confirm through my own accounts that GK are a much more skillfull army and can reward you when well played. Ultramarines without guilliman are just inferior to everything in the game and with guilliman can really only win if they go first. I just won a game last night going second with my GK Against a Ynnari harliquens list that would have pulverized my ultras. Gk aren't going to go deep into a tournament because the second they run into a parking lot of wave serpants or imperial guard they will fall - but they are pretty good against everything else.

GK autolose to screens. That's a terrible, terrible flaw in 8th. Just ask my BA.

Martel732 wrote:
GK Monobuild short-range firepower and close-combat armies autolose to screens. That's a terrible, terrible flaw neat design feature that discourages two types of monobuilds in 8th. Just ask my BA.

FTFY.

If you have nothing useful to add, please just put me on ignore. Autolose is NOT the way to discourage "monobuilds". GK and BA have no viable options vs screens. If you think that's okay, please put me on ignore and never reply again.

Martel732 wrote:
GK autolose to screens. That's a terrible, terrible flaw in 8th. Just ask my BA.

We don't really need to ask when you give that info so readily every other post.

But yeah, GK need some buffs that's for sure.

Martel732 wrote:
If you have nothing useful to add, please just put me on ignore. Autolose is NOT the way to discourage "monobuilds". GK and BA have no viable options vs screens. If you think that's okay, please put me on ignore and never reply again.

Except for the options I gave you that you don't want to use because of some other reason unrelated to screens or something. (I think it was "but Death Guard!")

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
GK autolose to screens. That's a terrible, terrible flaw in 8th. Just ask my BA.

We don't really need to ask when you give that info so readily every other post.

But yeah, GK need some buffs that's for sure.

I suppose that's true. The challenge is what buffs do you give GK? They're the same buffs BA need, but aren't going to get. Huge model counts of models that cost very little rule the day. Low model count lists can't throw the dice sufficient to get the job done.

I'd improve incinerators for one thing. Either changing them to 2D3 with a stacking +1 to hit or another D3 for every 10 models (course I advocate this for most flamers to begin with) with a price drop.

Scaling flamers would help a lot of armies a LOT. Lots of lists pay ~600 pts to make non-Khorne assault lists just lose.

I think I'm not seeing the same concensus. I'm seeing Orkz being regarded as worst. And not many claims that SM are worse than SoB, Necrons, Tau, and many others.

My UM do fine against things like Harlies. My Harlies fear UM more than GK.

The consensus does seem to think, but not really commit to, CWE being stronger than UM. But most of those also seem to think we haven't *proven* UM is worse than CWE. To say nothing of UM vs almost every other forces(AM and Chaos might be the exceptions).

There is almost no evidence that UM are worse than even half the forces in the game. And some evidence that it's top-3.

I think the upcoming Tyranid codex will embarrass marines, setting the trend of every Xeno codex being substantially better. Yes, I know, CWE is not *proven* better, but I think it is a lot better, and this will be proven out.

While better than many index lists, I think Drukhari play better atm and Tau can easily match them by playing spammy lists.

We can then bring Rowboat vs non-Rowboat lists into discussion.

Oh nobody disagree's that Ork's are the worst right now., but that's not the argument at hand because they don't have a codex. Which is what the argument is going for because it's discussing that out of all the codexes the SM one is the worst.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Oh nobody disagree's that Ork's are the worst right now., but that's not the argument at hand because they don't have a codex. Which is what the argument is going for because it's discussing that out of all the codexes the SM one is the worst.

GK is worse because they are even MOAR marine than marines. And the marine scheme does not work in 8th. Yeah, I know there's not enough proof yet, but there will be. In 8th, you don't want to be losing 13 ppm minimum per mortal wound coming in or per failed save.

CWE: I think I'd agree CWE is probably better than SM. Not sure I'd agree it fully outclasses it, but notably better.
AM: I think AM is better than SM, too. I think it's in the same class.
GK: Worse
CSM: Demons are good. Alpha Legion Zerkers can do things. Not sure if it's better or worse than SM
DG: Morty OP dovetails nicely with Gilly OP. Beyond that, what puts them so far above SM?

What other Codexes are there?

Of those, 2 we agree are better, 1 we agree is worse, and 2 I don't know I'm convinced either way on yet.

There's only 1 more book we've agreed is better than SM than books we've agreed are worse. Hardly significant. And with only 2 more to discuss, will it really be significant?

That's why many people were discussing Index factions as well as codexes. There simply aren't a lot of them out there.

(Also, most of the 'proof' that gets bandied about here isn't really proof. Much of it is based on faulty understandings of the rules, the game, or asymetric balance.)

CSM have screening units. That alone makes them better than UM.

I think IG and CWE massively outclass marines, but time will tell. I have no "proof".

The problem being with proof is that many thought that Riptides that absorbed 40 lascannon shots were just fine in 7th.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Oh nobody disagree's that Ork's are the worst right now., but that's not the argument at hand because they don't have a codex. Which is what the argument is going for because it's discussing that out of all the codexes the SM one is the worst.

Orks...don't...have a codex? They are omitted from this discussion be default.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
CWE: I think I'd agree CWE is probably better than SM. Not sure I'd agree it fully outclasses it, but notably better.
AM: I think AM is better than SM, too. I think it's in the same class.
GK: Worse
CSM: Demons are good. Alpha Legion Zerkers can do things. Not sure if it's better or worse than SM
DG: Morty OP dovetails nicely with Gilly OP. Beyond that, what puts them so far above SM?

What other Codexes are there?

Of those, 2 we agree are better, 1 we agree is worse, and 2 I don't know I'm convinced either way on yet.

There's only 1 more book we've agreed is better than SM than books we've agreed are worse. Hardly significant. And with only 2 more to discuss, will it really be significant?

That's why many people were discussing Index factions as well as codexes. There simply aren't a lot of them out there.

(Also, most of the 'proof' that gets bandied about here isn't really proof. Much of it is based on faulty understandings of the rules, the game, or asymetric balance.)

AM and space marines aren't in the same class - we are literally talking about the best army in the game and the worst. And saying they are in the same class.

I think that's because many people dismiss codex-only comparisons as limited, academic, and inherently misleading. Being the worst of the top 3 or so isn't nearly as meaningful as being the worst in the game.

So, by default, most people included them in the conversation. Omitting most armies wasn't my default.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
If the game were balanced, the top army and the bottom army would be in the same class. Tournies have shown SM lists reliably hit the top 3. But in any case, being worse than the best, or even the best 2 or 3, isn't a huge surprise when there are so many factions in the game.

Still, I think the worst sign is that there are index armies that, in my view, are as good as or better than SM with a codex.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Oh nobody disagree's that Ork's are the worst right now., but that's not the argument at hand because they don't have a codex. Which is what the argument is going for because it's discussing that out of all the codexes the SM one is the worst.

GK's are better than space marines IMO.

They have a viable troop choice with strike squad marines.
Every unit has mini smite that goes off on 4's.
They have an actual workhorse unit in GMDK
All the units that are actually good are also in the GK codex - Razorbacks/Storm Ravens/Storm Talons - they dont have preds but Storm Ravens are better anyways.
Vortex of doom with empiric channeling
And most importantly - they have strong alpha strike regardless off who goes first.


Things Space marines have that GK don't have?
Guilliman