Can the MeQ statline be saved?

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**

Martel732 wrote:
There are several issues with your concept. Some weapons, like plasma, have no preferred target type.

I'll take your word on the lasguns because many games the IG guy doesn't even need to fire them. Because mass, cheap Str 8+ dominates that thoroughly. I'd actually be ecstastic if I could make lasguns matter in a matchup.

So how do you calculate points efficiency then? Besides, I actually agree that plasma is a huge problem, and it is a huge problem because it is a generalist that outperforms specialists which is why generalists should always be worse. A plasma gun should never be a better choice than a meltagun against tanks and should never be preferred over the Storm Bolter against hordes, yet it is because its too good.

So I ask again, and hope you don't dodge this time: What's the ideal points efficiency ratio for a weapon system? Mine's 3-to-1 against preferred targets.

Also, Lasguns matter against my Sororitas, when his Leman Russ scores a points efficiency of... hmm...
7 battle cannon shots, 3.5 hits, 1.9 wounds past armour. 3 Heavy Bolter shots, 1.5 hits, 0.5 wounds, for 2.5 dead sororitas. 152 points for 22.5 dead sororitas. Or a nearly 7 to 1 points efficiency ratio.

**Melissia**

Lasguns matter against marines, too. Otherwise, Martel wouldn't have complained so much about conscripts. He just conveniently forgot that for this discussion.

**Martel732**

I think 3 to 1 is probably a bit low and makes games a bit slow.

I'd go 2.5 to 1 for hard counters.

Recalculate the Russ against marines. It's a lot more favorable. That's my issue.

It's also not just plasma. It's cheap basilisk, cheap manticore, double firing battlecannons that reroll their number of hits, etc. We could add dark reapers, but I suspect something will happen to them.

**Unit1126PLL**

Martel732 wrote:
I think 3 to 1 is probably a bit low and makes games a bit slow.

I'd go 2.5 to 1 for hard counters.

Recalculate the Russ against marines. It's a lot more favorable. That's my issue.

LRBT will do 1.9 wounds with its battle cannon to Marines, and 0.5 wounds with it's heavy bolter, for 2.5 dead marines again, or 32.5 points.

The Leman Russ costs 152 points. 152:32.5 = a points efficiency ratio of 4.7 to 1.

Not good.

Manticore vs Marines is 143 points vs the same number of deaths (being functionally identical in this situation to a LRBT) giving it a points efficiency of a whopping 4.4 to 1.

[sarcasm]Truly I can now see why you cannot endure firepower of such staggering magnitude.[/sarcasm]

**Martel732**

But much better than against the Sisters. Much better.

Also, what do you consider the Russ's optimal target?

4.4 to 1 is pretty good when it ignores line of sight, is difficult to counter attack, and can easily switch to juicier targets. 4.4 to 1 is not bad at all as secondary function. Even by your own metrics.

**fraser1191**

BoomWolf wrote:
Honestly, the amount of people here that don't even understand thier own suggestions is staggering.

Yes, lets make all bolters -1 AP, or rapid fire 2. simple change to 1 gun.
Oh, wait. now we make SoB broken, all primarisrubric, sternguard and other "elite marine gun" are pointless and overpriced-unless they get an equal change and then they are broken as hell, the entire SM armory is overpriced compared to the bolter so you'll never take special/heavy weapons any more, etc.

You CANT change the most basic gun in the game without breaking half of it. the more things an item is connected to, the greater the ripple that any change to it creates-and the bolter is connected to a LOT of things.

Oh, so lets change the tactical marine statline to have +1 <stat> whatever.
Yea, now you gotta compare all other marine units in the game. like zerkers, or rubrics, or sternguard, terminators, GK, etc. you can bet your ass SOME of these will break the game, no matter what edit you did to basic marine stats.

If you want to change the marine STATS, or base weapons, you need to redesign half the units in the game, because they are all connected.

Your only option to have an "easy fix", is with points. and honestly its not that hard. marines units are already mostly viable, even if not top tier. most marine units can get a 1-2 point drop and that's ENOUGH. any more than this and you'll end up in the reverse scenario where marines are being horded and overly dominant, just like we have with base guard today.

Lmao yes you can.

Just add a "space marine" prefix to literally everything and boom every weapon in the codex can have a different profile

**Unit1126PLL**

Also, I'm going to propose a range for things, going off my lascannon vs ork example:

3-to-1 is my ratio for preffered targets (lascannons vs Rhinos for example) and 10 or 11-to-1 is my ratio for the opposite (the target hard-counters the weapons, such as guardsmen vs lascannons).

**Amishprn86**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
I think 3 to 1 is probably a bit low and makes games a bit slow.

I'd go 2.5 to 1 for hard counters.

Recalculate the Russ against marines. It's a lot more favorable. That's my issue.

LRBT will do 1.9 wounds with its battle cannon to Marines, and 0.5 wounds with it's heavy bolter, for 2.5 dead marines again, or 32.5 points.

The Leman Russ costs 152 points. 152:32.5 = a points efficiency ratio of 4.7 to 1.

Not good.

Manticore vs Marines is 143 points vs the same number of deaths (being functionally identical in this situation to a LRBT) giving it a points efficiency of a whopping 4.4 to 1.

[sarcasm]Truly I can now see why you cannot endure firepower of such staggering magnitude.[/sarcasm]

Martel732 wrote:But much better than against the Sisters. Much better.

Also, what do you consider the Russ's optimal target?

Yeah

7 battle cannon shots, 3.5 hits, 1.9 wounds past armour. 3 Heavy Bolter shots, 1.5 hits, 0.5 wounds, for 2.5 dead sororitas. 152 points for 22.5 dead sororitas. Or a nearly 7 to 1 points efficiency ratio.
The Leman Russ costs 152 points. 152:32.5 = a points efficiency ratio of 4.7 to 1.

But no.. T3 doesnt matter in 8th, just remember that

**Melissia**

fraser1191 wrote:
Just add a "space marine" prefix to literally everything and boom every weapon in the codex can have a different profile

So is it a Space Marine Bolter or a Space Marine Bolter, or perhaps it's a Space Marine Bolter instead of a Space Marine Bolter or a Space Marine Bolter?

**fraser1191**

"Astartes boltgun" rapid fire 2 S4 ap-1 1d

Literally doesn't affect anything outside of marines and CSM

**Unit1126PLL**

Martel732 wrote:
But much better than against the Sisters. Much better.

Also, what do you consider the Russ's optimal target?

Yes, much better than against sisters, but still not very good.

I actually considered Marines to be the Russ's optimal target in every edition (Str 8 AP 3 really only ever was good against really light tanks or Space Marines until 6th Edition when it became only really good against Marines and nothing else). After seeing these numbers I'm beginning to believe it is a generalist in 8th, so it has no preferred target but will perform between 4-to-1 and 8-to-1 against most targets. *shrug*

**Tyel**

Not a fan on 3-1. The problem is you start with that base,nthen chuvk stratagems to get even more efficient. 4-1 was better.
I don't get why people like games nearly determined after the first turn

**Martel732**

You also forget that many marines have some expensive equipment,too. The efficiency quickly climbs. Sisters usually get storm bolters, so at least they remain cheap.

**Unit1126PLL**

fraser1191 wrote:
"Astartes boltgun" rapid fire 2 S4 ap-1 1d

Literally doesn't affect anything outside of marines and CSM

Ah, yes, when a zero-point regular weapon on a single guy began to out perform the Storm Bolters wielded by everyone else.

I'd be terrified to see what an Astartes Storm Bolter would do. Rapid fire 4, perhaps? Ap -3 while we're at it?

**AlmightyWalrus**

Melissia wrote:
Lasguns matter against marines, too. Otherwise, Martel wouldn't have complained so much about conscripts. He just conveniently forgot that for this discussion.

Conscripts would've been good even without Lasguns because they functionally made the stuff behind them immune to melee while they were still on the table..

**pismakron**

A Leman Russ is supremely good, simply because it costs less than 13 points per wound. Think about that for a second. The wounds of a Leman Russ is less expensive than the wounds of Tactical Marines in spite of having twice the Toughness. The Leman Russ is simply super tanky. Which makes a lot of sense, I guess. I play Orks so tanks never really bothered me

**Martel732**

Melissia wrote:
Lasguns matter against marines, too. Otherwise, Martel wouldn't have complained so much about conscripts. He just conveniently forgot that for this discussion.

I never once complained about their offense. Not once. It was always gravy in my book. They were broken by existing and being a physical meat shield. You are the worst one for "bad faith".

**Unit1126PLL**

Tyel wrote:Not a fan on 3-1. The problem is you start with that base,nthen chuvk stratagems to get even more efficient. 4-1 was better.
I don't get why people like games nearly determined after the first turn

We can make a whole thread on what "optimum points efficiency" is against various targets. I went roughly with "killing a Rhino should be about 200 points, and 3 times its cost is about 210." so it's very rough, but people have various opinions.

Martel732 wrote:You also forget that many marines have some expensive equipment,too. The efficiency quickly climbs. Sisters usually get storm bolters, so at least they remain cheap.

That's a player's choice, how they load up Marines. We're talking about basic models and stat blocks, not optional upgrades. Also, the models that actually carry the gear will be the last to die, so if it takes 3 turns of a battlecannon shooting at them to kill a 10-man squad, then it's getting ~4.7-1 points efficiency for 2 turns, with a spike at the end. But since, presumably, said special weapons will be shooting back at the tank, it may degrade... etc. etc.

**Melissia**

fraser1191 wrote:
"Astartes boltgun" rapid fire 2 S4 ap-1 1d

Literally doesn't affect anything outside of marines and CSM

This fix violates the lore. Boltguns used by Sisters of Battle are described in the Sisters codex as being just as powerful as Astartes-wielded ones. Aside from lore violations, this change would create further complications; for example, it makes storm bolters useless. Storm Bolters compared to Astartes Boltguns as you describe would be 2 points for losing the AP value. Certain primaris-specific equipment would also become flat out useless and inferior to the bog standard boltgun as well.

Saying "every marine gets a super special awesome bestest quality evar storm bolter!" is hardly much of a good quality fix.

**Martel732**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
Tyel wrote:Not a fan on 3-1. The problem is you start with that base,nthen chuvk stratagems to get even more efficient. 4-1 was better.
I don't get why people like games nearly determined after the first turn

We can make a whole thread on what "optimum points efficiency" is against various targets. I went roughly with "killing a Rhino should be about 200 points, and 3 times its cost is about 210." so it's very rough, but people have various opinions.

Martel732 wrote:You also forget that many marines have some expensive equipment,too. The efficiency quickly climbs. Sisters usually get storm bolters, so at least they remain cheap.

That's a player's choice, how they load up Marines. We're talking about basic models and stat blocks, not optional upgrades. Also, the models that actually carry the gear will be the last to die, so if it takes 3 turns of a battlecannon shooting at them to kill a 10-man squad, then it's getting ~4.7-1 points efficiency for 2 turns, with a spike at the end. But since, presumably, said special weapons will be shooting back at the tank, it may degrade... etc. etc.

Well most special weapons can't REACH the tank, but sure, we'll leave that stuff out.

Bottom line: I think GW is overvaluing melee combat stats in particular and this shines though in spades with tac marines. I'm more willing to pay for toughness than melee combat stats in 8th for sure. That I'll agree with.

**pismakron**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
fraser1191 wrote:
"Astartes boltgun" rapid fire 2 S4 ap-1 1d

Literally doesn't affect anything outside of marines and CSM

Ah, yes, when a zero-point regular weapon on a single guy began to out perform the Storm Bolters wielded by everyone else.

I'd be terrified to see what an Astartes Storm Bolter would do. Rapid fire 4, perhaps? Ap -3 while we're at it?

An inferno combibolter is Rapid-fire 2, R24", S4, AP-2. And it costs 3 points. A cultists heavy stubber costs 4 points. It really doesn't mean a lot outside of context, though.

**skchsan**

Why can't scouts be just another flavor of marines, and price them same as a tac marine?

**Unit1126PLL**

Martel732 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Tyel wrote:Not a fan on 3-1. The problem is you start with that base,nthen chuvk stratagems to get even more efficient. 4-1 was better.
I don't get why people like games nearly determined after the first turn

We can make a whole thread on what "optimum points efficiency" is against various targets. I went roughly with "killing a Rhino should be about 200 points, and 3 times its cost is about 210." so it's very rough, but people have various opinions.

Martel732 wrote:You also forget that many marines have some expensive equipment,too. The efficiency quickly climbs. Sisters usually get storm bolters, so at least they remain cheap.

That's a player's choice, how they load up Marines. We're talking about basic models and stat blocks, not optional upgrades. Also, the models that actually carry the gear will be the last to die, so if it takes 3 turns of a battlecannon shooting at them to kill a 10-man squad, then it's getting ~4.7-1 points efficiency for 2 turns, with a spike at the end. But since, presumably, said special weapons will be shooting back at the tank, it may degrade... etc. etc.

Well most special weapons can't REACH the tank, but sure, we'll leave that stuff out.

I was assuming a lascannon, but yeah. There's no specialist anti-tank special weapon that jives well with the lascannon. We could of course Combat Squad, but that's a fairly naff rule in my opinion.

So, you understand my point, though, right? Manticores and Leman Russes aren't that really efficient against Marines, especially considering back in the day I considered Russes to have Marines as their preferred target, and the math in this thread actually turned out way worse than I thought it would. Almost twice what you'd consider, and half again worse than what I'd consider, to be a weapon platform firing at its optimal target.

EDIT to reply to Martel's edit:
So how much is T4 worth do you think vs T3? 1ppm? Do you think T4 Guardsmen would be reasonable at 5ppm (or 6, if the rumored change is true?).

**Melissia**

skchsan wrote:
Why can't scouts be just another flavor of marines, and price them same as a tac marine?

Depends on if you believe their lowered armor save is worth the additional special rules they have.

**pismakron**

Melissia wrote:
fraser1191 wrote:
Just add a "space marine" prefix to literally everything and boom every weapon in the codex can have a different profile
So is it a Space Marine Bolter or a Space Marine Bolter, or perhaps it's a Space Marine Bolter instead of a Space Marine Bolter or a Space Marine Bolter?

You can just use the word "boltrifle", just as Intercessors do. Scouts could still world "boltguns" or whatever they are called. Scouts are not struggling in the meta.

But apart from that Rapid Fire 2 is completely bonkers.

**Martel732**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Tyel wrote:Not a fan on 3-1. The problem is you start with that base,nthen chuvk stratagems to get even more efficient. 4-1 was better.
I don't get why people like games nearly determined after the first turn

We can make a whole thread on what "optimum points efficiency" is against various targets. I went roughly with "killing a Rhino should be about 200 points, and 3 times its cost is about 210." so it's very rough, but people have various opinions.

Martel732 wrote:You also forget that many marines have some expensive equipment,too. The efficiency quickly climbs. Sisters usually get storm bolters, so at least they remain cheap.

That's a player's choice, how they load up Marines. We're talking about basic models and stat blocks, not optional upgrades. Also, the models that actually carry the gear will be the last to die, so if it takes 3 turns of a battlecannon shooting at them to kill a 10-man squad, then it's getting ~4.7-1 points efficiency for 2 turns, with a spike at the end. But since, presumably, said special weapons will be shooting back at the tank, it may degrade... etc. etc.

Well most special weapons can't REACH the tank, but sure, we'll leave that stuff out.

I was assuming a lascannon, but yeah. There's no specialist anti-tank special weapon that jives well with the lascannon. We could of course Combat Squad, but that's a fairly naff rule in my opinion.

So, you understand my point, though, right? Manticores and Leman Russes aren't that really efficient against Marines, especially considering back in the day I considered Russes to have Marines as their preferred target, and the math in this thread actually turned out way worse than I thought it would. Almost twice what you'd consider, and half again worse than what I'd consider, to be a weapon platform firing at its optimal target.

Then the IG are even more miscosted than I thought, because they are still snowblowering me off the table with 4:1 efficiency weapons.

**Unit1126PLL**

Martel732 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Tyel wrote:Not a fan on 3-1. The problem is you start with that base,nthen chuvk stratagems to get even more efficient. 4-1 was better.
I don't get why people like games nearly determined after the first turn

We can make a whole thread on what "optimum points efficiency" is against various targets. I went roughly with "killing a Rhino should be about 200 points, and 3 times its cost is about 210." so it's very rough, but people have various opinions.

Martel732 wrote:You also forget that many marines have some expensive equipment,too. The efficiency quickly climbs. Sisters usually get storm bolters, so at least they remain cheap.

That's a player's choice, how they load up Marines. We're talking about basic models and stat blocks, not optional upgrades. Also, the models that actually carry the gear will be the last to die, so if it takes 3 turns of a battlecannon shooting at them to kill a 10-man squad, then it's getting ~4.7-1 points efficiency for 2 turns, with a spike at the end. But since, presumably, said special weapons will be shooting back at the tank, it may degrade... etc. etc.

Well most special weapons can't REACH the tank, but sure, we'll leave that stuff out.

I was assuming a lascannon, but yeah. There's no specialist anti-tank special weapon that jives well with the lascannon. We could of course Combat Squad, but that's a fairly naff rule in my opinion.

So, you understand my point, though, right? Manticores and Leman Russes aren't that really efficient against Marines, especially considering back in the day I considered Russes to have Marines as their preferred target, and the math in this thread actually turned out way worse than I thought it would. Almost twice what you'd consider, and half again worse than what I'd consider, to be a weapon platform firing at its optimal target.

Then the IG are even more miscosted than I thought, because they are still snowblowering me off the table with 4:1 efficiency weapons.

How... does that make any sense?
The points cost is directly related to efficiency. The points cost is accounted for in the calculation. You can't say "they're miscosted because their points efficiency is 4:1 and they still kill me!" because points efficiency is directly related to cost.

I'm not sure if you truly don't understand how efficiency is calculated, or if you are just outright ignoring facts.

**skchsan**

Melissia wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Why can't scouts be just another flavor of marines, and price them same as a tac marine?
Depends on if you believe their lowered armor save is worth the additional special rules they have.

I meant lowering the cost of tac marines down to level of scouts.

**Unit1126PLL**

skchsan wrote:
Melissia wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Why can't scouts be just another flavor of marines, and price them same as a tac marine?
Depends on if you believe their lowered armor save is worth the additional special rules they have.
I meant lowering the cost of tac marines down to level of scouts.

Scouts are still the better unit, because their improved deployment options and weapons flexibility is more useful ingame than +1 armour save is, in my opinion.

**Martel732**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Tyel wrote:Not a fan on 3-1. The problem is you start with that base,nthen chuvk stratagems to get even more efficient. 4-1 was better.
I don't get why people like games nearly determined after the first turn

We can make a whole thread on what "optimum points efficiency" is against various targets. I went roughly with "killing a Rhino should be about 200 points, and 3 times its cost is about 210." so it's very rough, but people have various opinions.

Martel732 wrote:You also forget that many marines have some expensive equipment,too. The efficiency quickly climbs. Sisters usually get storm bolters, so at least they remain cheap.

That's a player's choice, how they load up Marines. We're talking about basic models and stat blocks, not optional upgrades. Also, the models that actually carry the gear will be the last to die, so if it takes 3 turns of a battlecannon shooting at them to kill a 10-man squad, then it's getting ~4.7-1 points efficiency for 2 turns, with a spike at the end. But since, presumably, said special weapons will be shooting back at the tank, it may degrade... etc. etc.

Well most special weapons can't REACH the tank, but sure, we'll leave that stuff out.

I was assuming a lascannon, but yeah. There's no specialist anti-tank special weapon that jives well with the lascannon. We could of course Combat Squad, but that's a fairly naff rule in my opinion.

So, you understand my point, though, right? Manticores and Leman Russes aren't that really efficient against Marines, especially considering back in the day I considered Russes to have Marines as their preferred target, and the math in this thread actually turned out way worse than I thought it would. Almost twice what you'd consider, and half again worse than what I'd consider, to be a weapon platform firing at its optimal target.

Then the IG are even more miscosted than I thought, because they are still snowblowering me off the table with 4:1 efficiency weapons.

How... does that make any sense?
The points cost is directly related to efficiency. The points cost is accounted for in the calculation. You can't say "they're miscosted because their points efficiency is 4:1 and they still kill me!" because points efficiency is directly related to cost.

I'm not sure if you truly don't understand how efficiency is calculated, or if you are just outright ignoring facts.

I'll let you think about what I could possibly mean by that a bit.