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.

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Surtr wrote:
Little question about RP.

If one Model with multiple weapons shoots at one unit with RP. Do i roll for RP after every weapon or after it has shoot every weapon?

After the unit has concluded its attacks (the latter). E.G. you get shot by a Tactical Squad: they fire their bolters, missile launcher, and flamer - everything they've got - before you roll RP. Rinse & repeat

Is there a condition where "each time an enemy unit shoots or fights, after it makes it's attacks...", it makes more attacks in that phase? It is a contradiction in terms.


Edit: also, what's up with the hyperspace hunter key word on the hexmark?

bored1 wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Surtr wrote:
Little question about RP.

If one Model with multiple weapons shoots at one unit with RP. Do i roll for RP after every weapon or after it has shoot every weapon?

After the unit has concluded its attacks (the latter). E.G. you get shot by a Tactical Squad: they fire their bolters, missile launcher, and flamer - everything they've got - before you roll RP. Rinse & repeat

Is there a condition where "each time an enemy unit shoots or fights, after it makes it's attacks...", it makes more attacks in that phase? It is a contradiction in terms.


Edit: also, what's up with the hyperspace hunter key word on the hexmark?

If an enemy unit gets to then fight again in any way after it has performed it’s normal bunch, namely the type you’re talking about where it specifically says it’s a new bunch of attacks, you roll RP before they make the second lot of attacks then again after the second, to my understanding.

The Hyperspace Hunter keyword is on Hexmarks and the new Hexmarks destroyer dude. Allows them both to take advantage of a strat and maybe some other abilities I’m not aware of.

tneva82 wrote:

 CKO wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
On the bolded part - again, this applies to all units and is also very difficult to quantify. I'm always wary when people invoke the "git gud" argument because it's not usually backed up by any solid, useful reasoning. On top of that 40k isn't exactly the most tactically complex game so skill difference is often not as important as the difference in power between units. If a unit is just worse than other options, or doesn't fill a niche well no amount of player skill helps it. My primary problem with Ophydians is the lack of durability if they fail that DS charge. Pretty much any army can easily wipe a unit with the Ophydian's defensive profile without much problem so you really need to make that charge.

I am a firm believer in the "git gud" argument. I believe in player progress and getting the most out of your units. Every unit in a codex is not going to have an A grade like the Nightbringer. All players should try to "git betta" or you will find yourself constantly blaming your units for the lost. You are correct 40k isn't a tactically complex game but winning requires tactical skills.

So you "git good". So does opponent except he has better unit.

You are basically just aiming noob smashing. But the moment you　go out of noob opponents you lose.

That's basically the point I was trying to make, just done more succinctly

The thing with the lack of tactical depth is that the above remains true in many more scenarios than for a more tactically complex game. Take the DS example I gave. There's not really much player skill in carefully measuring out 9" exclusion zones when you know your opponent can Deep Strike and the smaller board sizes make it even easier to zone out opponents. That's why I pointed that out as a problem with trying to DS Ophydians. It's not really a skill to block them, just an item on a checklist so you're relying either on playing someone who doesn't know about such a basic skill or whose army can't zone out well, which is a pretty bad list in 9th edition given the importance of board control.

Again, I'd love to be wrong about Ophydians because I love the models but I just can't see them fitting in anywhere very well with their current statline and what we know about the options available to them in the Codex.

tneva82 wrote:
So you "git good". So does opponent except he has better unit.

You are basically just aiming noob smashing. But the moment you　go out of noob opponents you lose

Both armies will have good units, example we have the Nightbringer and Spyders. As far as wins and loses are concerned I am a very hard opponent, regardless of my opponents skill level.

Slipspace wrote:
That's basically the point I was trying to make, just done more succinctly

The thing with the lack of tactical depth is that the above remains true in many more scenarios than for a more tactically complex game. Take the DS example I gave. There's not really much player skill in carefully measuring out 9" exclusion zones when you know your opponent can Deep Strike and the smaller board sizes make it even easier to zone out opponents. That's why I pointed that out as a problem with trying to DS Ophydians. It's not really a skill to block them, just an item on a checklist so you're relying either on playing someone who doesn't know about such a basic skill or whose army can't zone out well, which is a pretty bad list in 9th edition given the importance of board control.

Again, I'd love to be wrong about Ophydians because I love the models but I just can't see them fitting in anywhere very well with their current statline and what we know about the options available to them in the Codex.

The reason why my response don't have alot of tactical depth is due to the fact I don't want to type an essay and it be dismissed easily. I could write 3 paragraphs worth of information and someone would follow it up with they can die to bolters so they suck! In this case I have repeatedly told everyone what makes them different but people are to focus on durability and deep striking.

Oddly enough, protecting your units by using their mobility or terrain requires player skill. If you don't have a place to DS, than land in a safe spot where next turn you can use their 10 inch movement to easily get the charge. Do you think they are worried about the believed to be horrible Ophydians when Nightbringer or a unit of 3 spyders are about to be in cc? This type of stuff makes more sense with a visual display thus the reason why I will be making videos.

 CKO wrote:


The reason why my response don't have alot of tactical depth is due to the fact I don't want to type an essay and it be dismissed easily. I could write 3 paragraphs worth of information and someone would follow it up with they can die to bolters so they suck! In this case I have repeatedly told everyone what makes them different but people are to focus on durability and deep striking.

Oddly enough, protecting your units by using their mobility or terrain requires player skill. If you don't have a place to DS, than land in a safe spot where next turn you can use their 10 inch movement to easily get the charge. Do you think they are worried about the believed to be horrible Ophydians when Nightbringer or a unit of 3 spyders are about to be in cc? This type of stuff makes more sense with a visual display thus the reason why I will be making videos.

Ok here is the thing, let's say your opponent is a moron and doesn't screen an important unit and you can DS close you still have a 9" charge to make or they die. Now you can choose your dynasty so this is an 8" charge and spend a command point to reroll, ok so 65% of the time they make it. That still leaves 35% of the time they do absolutely nothing and die to a light breeze. Now let's say your opponent has played a few games before and knows how to screen, your deepstrike can only threaten fodder if it can even land behind the enemy. You then mention that in these situations you DS them somewhere "safe", there won't be safe places for them in the enemy deployment zone or in the mid-field cause all it takes to threaten this unit is bolters and LOS, which leaves you with your deployment zone which is not where you want your melee unit as it's still going to die moving up the field.

Now you mention target saturation with Nightbringer and spyders, yes that will help(I would hope there are other units in the list). But the weapons that are going to target those units aren't the same that are going to shred the Ophydians. Heavy weapons will target those units and light fire from basic troops is all that is needed to handle t4 4+..

 CKO wrote:
The reason why my response don't have alot of tactical depth is due to the fact I don't want to type an essay and it be dismissed easily.

Uhhh, sure

 CKO wrote:
This type of stuff makes more sense with a visual display thus the reason why I will be making videos.

Making up hypothetical situations in which Ophydians might conceivably be okay yet are still inferior to other choices isn't exactly a compelling argument. Your entire "if you're a good player you're going to be able to use them well" shtick is, to put it mildly, a little tiresome. Decisions are not made in a vacuum.

Ophydians aren't a bad unit. Anybody who says they're just "bad" is wrong. They do good damage, are fast, and can DS. Unfortunately they're competing against two units that have similar maneuvrability, do similar amounts of damage, but are far more durable. The people saying that they're outclassed by other choices are clearly correct. DS is not really impactful on a dedicated melee unit without being able to reliably make the charge. Yes, you could take the +1 to charge trait, but then you're ignoring far better abilities that will be more widely beneficial across an army. And this argument about how if you're a good player you're going to be able to use them well is just stupid. Ultimately the increased durability of Skorpekhs & Wraiths makes them easier to use & more reliable on the tabletop. It's really that simple.

Ophydians need a rework from the ground up. Even if they drop to let's say 25 points they would not be worth taking unless you build your entire list to revolve around them. I wonder if GW is willing to move on from their BS "datasheets are set in stone" stance.

Magic Eightball says no, so I guess for Ophydians it's better luck in 10th edition.

Acehilator wrote:
Ophydians need a rework from the ground up. Even if they drop to let's say 25 points they would not be worth taking unless you build your entire list to revolve around them. I wonder if GW is willing to move on from their BS "datasheets are set in stone" stance.

Magic Eightball says no, so I guess for Ophydians it's better luck in 10th edition.

The ability to advance and charge would help them greatly.

Thats the weird bit on the new necron dex.

We have a ton of deadly melee units, most of which are pure dedicated melee.

Not a single one has adv+charge or innate reroll charge. So weird. Ophydians are the ones that make the most sense to get those abilities since theyre supposed to be pretty quick.

Even though it bugs me when pure melee units dont have such a rule in general.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Thats the weird bit on the new necron dex.

We have a ton of deadly melee units, most of which are pure dedicated melee.

Not a single one has adv+charge or innate reroll charge. So weird. Ophydians are the ones that make the most sense to get those abilities since theyre supposed to be pretty quick.

Even though it bugs me when pure melee units dont have such a rule in general.

It would really make sense for them. Advance charge rules can be dangerous in a stratagem because one unit can be too good to have such an ability. Ophydians though...I can't imagine they don't advance ever.

It's a real pity the re-roll charges warlord trait only works on CORE. That would have been extremely helpful here. But yeah, something like that would really help Ophydians.

I'm not super sold on ophidians either, but I don't think the +1T and +1Sv of the Skorpekhs actually makes that much difference. Both units are going to evaporate to heavy weapons if they're exposed.

Acehilator wrote:
Ophidian Destroyers fit nowhere. 105 points is too much for a throwaway unit. An 8" charge out of DS is still terrible, especially with the new rule being forced to reroll both dice on the Charge reroll. They are also rather large models on large bases. Just no.

If you want something with DS for secondary/action shenanigans, five Flayed Ones for 65 points are hard to beat. The Hexmark is even easier to hide, but 10 points more and a character (which excludes him from some actions).

I disagree. I think the Ophidians are odd for sure but they definitely have practical uses, albeit very specific.

There simplest use isn't a through away unit, it's a 3 man units that threaten the enemy backfield considering they can DS and even DS again late game. The strongest relic in the book continues to be the veil, but we only get that once.

They definitely are a miss if your looking for a large unit leading the charge, wraiths IMO beat out both skorpehks and Ophidians for that matter. It's hilarious how many folks I keep hearing disregarding wraiths now despite their new 35ppm cost lol. They are for sure the fastest, most flexible and most durable with basically the same quality attacks plus the heroic intervention strat that is nuts.

I think folks need to look at them (Ophidians) as a single unit or 3 tossed into armies for tactical flexibility. 105pts for 9 t4 4+ wounds is not that bad, 9 flayed ones or 9 warriors would cost 117 and are slower even after you alternate deploy them, and much harder to hide/fit anyway.

i'm the type that if the unit isnt auto-lose bad and looks cool, i get it anyway and try to make it work.
Ophydians fall under that category. ~110pts for a distraction isnt a bad idea, just specific.

still think they could use some buffing but unless they literally do nothing (like the sulfur hounds for admech) i'll use them.

Honestly I see more flexibility from them then skorpehks. Most of the games I have seen the skorpehks impress in were with the previous version of reanimation protocols. Currently, they lose out to wraiths as vanguard fighting unit and IMO they REALLY lose out next to praetorians. Most of my lists have a harder time justifying skorpehks if anything.

If Ophydians had the FLY keyword or the wraith's phasing ability they would be an auto include. Necrons need fast jump infantry to perform actions for secondaries and we basically only have Praetorians for it and they don't get any dynasty bonuses.

I think if you really want to use Ophydians they certainly have some utility, they are just undercooked. It's funny how the community can think of a hundred different rules or strats that would fix them already.

As they currently are, I'd only use them as support for Skorpekh's with a Lord. Deep strike them in as the second wave

Moosatronic Warrior wrote:
I'm not super sold on ophidians either, but I don't think the +1T and +1Sv of the Skorpekhs actually makes that much difference. Both units are going to evaporate to heavy weapons if they're exposed.

The problem with ophidians is that they die even to good old S4 AP-1 bolter fire, i.e. the most common kind of gun in the game right now. Skorpekhs take less than *half* the damage that ophidians take from this profile.

Also, skorpekhs have a -1 to wound strat, which works against both shooting and melee. This COMPLETELY changes things. Skorpekhs with -1 to wound are essentially immune to S4 fire, for example, and make even anti-tank pretty inefficient for killing them, as even a multi-melta or lascannon is only wounding on 4s.

For those objecting to invulnerable saves on Eldar units based on movement, can I ask how you would suggest improving the resilience of elite Eldar units to put them more in line with Marines?

 vipoid wrote:
For those objecting to invulnerable saves on Eldar units based on movement, can I ask how you would suggest improving the resilience of elite Eldar units to put them more in line with Marines?

I wouldn't put eldar durability on part with marines. I would give them more ability to strike first.
Advance and charge like harlequins can as standard part of battle focus. I'd also increase the base move of most eldar units by 1 or 2. I'd also increase the range on shuriken weapons...never understood why the more advanced race has shorter range weapons. SC should just be assault 2 24" with Avenger being 30" with 3 shots.

Stuff like that IMO is how you fix eldar.

Acehilator wrote:
Ophydians need a rework from the ground up. Even if they drop to let's say 25 points they would not be worth taking unless you build your entire list to revolve around them. I wonder if GW is willing to move on from their BS "datasheets are set in stone" stance.

Magic Eightball says no, so I guess for Ophydians it's better luck in 10th edition.

I would auto take a squad of them at 25 points each. They would be incredibly good at that price point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
For those objecting to invulnerable saves on Eldar units based on movement, can I ask how you would suggest improving the resilience of elite Eldar units to put them more in line with Marines?

I wouldn't put eldar durability on part with marines. I would give them more ability to strike first.
Advance and charge like harlequins can as standard part of battle focus. I'd also increase the base move of most eldar units by 1 or 2. I'd also increase the range on shuriken weapons...never understood why the more advanced race has shorter range weapons. SC should just be assault 2 24" with Avenger being 30" with 3 shots.

Stuff like that IMO is how you fix eldar.

I agree, every army doesn't need to be as Durable as SM, especially not an army based around T3. There are plenty of other knobs and dials to turn for them.

Acehilator wrote:
Ophydians need a rework from the ground up. Even if they drop to let's say 25 points they would not be worth taking unless you build your entire list to revolve around them. I wonder if GW is willing to move on from their BS "datasheets are set in stone" stance.

25 point Ophydians would be wildly undercosted for how much damage and speed that unit puts out. 18 Ophydians for 450 would be ridiculous.

Lets not kid ourselves, Ophydians might fair worst in direct comparisons to Wraiths and Skorpekhs in many situations, but they are an extremely high damage unit.

Asymmetric wrote:

Acehilator wrote:
Ophydians need a rework from the ground up. Even if they drop to let's say 25 points they would not be worth taking unless you build your entire list to revolve around them. I wonder if GW is willing to move on from their BS "datasheets are set in stone" stance.

25 point Ophydians would be wildly undercosted for how much damage and speed that unit puts out. 18 Ophydians for 450 would be ridiculous.

Lets not kid ourselves, Ophydians might fair worst in direct comparisons to Wraiths and Skorpekhs in many situations, but they are an extremely high damage unit.

Their damage is indeed nutts. Has anyone does a legit comparison with damage per point vs varying toughness/save units? My money would probably be on Opyhdians being the highest damage per point option in the dex. That or Reaper warriors.

Praetorians could be contenders. Good shooting and good melee. Tbh I don't think 25 point Ophydians would be any better than 25 point Praetorians are, and nobody is saying they are OP

 Xenomancers wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
For those objecting to invulnerable saves on Eldar units based on movement, can I ask how you would suggest improving the resilience of elite Eldar units to put them more in line with Marines?

I wouldn't put eldar durability on part with marines. I would give them more ability to strike first.
Advance and charge like harlequins can as standard part of battle focus. I'd also increase the base move of most eldar units by 1 or 2. I'd also increase the range on shuriken weapons...never understood why the more advanced race has shorter range weapons. SC should just be assault 2 24" with Avenger being 30" with 3 shots.

Stuff like that IMO is how you fix eldar.

I think I somehow posted that question in the wrong thread. Not quite sure how I managed that.

Cynista wrote:
Praetorians could be contenders. Good shooting and good melee. Tbh I don't think 25 point Ophydians would be any better than 25 point Praetorians are, and nobody is saying they are OP

If you combine shooting and melee. You are probably right. That is 4 str 5 ap-3 flat 2 damage attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
LOL no prob Vipoid.

Any news on release dates for Monolith? Hexmark? Ophydians?

Their damage really isn't "nuts." People need to run the math rather than eyeballing it. For example, against MEQ, skorpekhs do MORE damage than ophydians (5.02 vs 4.88). Skorpekhs also perform better against T5, and far better against T8, which opyidians really can't scratch.

Ophydians do much better than skorpekhs against 1W trash, obviously. But flayed ones do even better than ophydians - 8 flayed ones (1 point less) kill 11.11 GEQ, compared to ophidians' 8.13.

If Ophydians were S5 like skorpekhs, or if you could give all 3 reap-blades, they'd be a real choice mathematically. But they aren't, and you can't, so they really don't have any role that either flayed ones or skorpekhs don't fulfil better 95% of the time.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Their damage really isn't "nuts." People need to run the math rather than eyeballing it. For example, against MEQ, skorpekhs do MORE damage than ophydians (5.02 vs 4.88). Skorpekhs also perform better against T5, and far better against T8, which opyidians really can't scratch.

Ophydians do much better than skorpekhs against 1W trash, obviously. But flayed ones do even better than ophydians - 8 flayed ones (1 point less) kill 11.11 GEQ, compared to ophidians' 8.13.

If Ophydians were S5 like skorpekhs, or if you could give all 3 reap-blades, they'd be a real choice mathematically. But they aren't, and you can't, so they really don't have any role that either flayed ones or skorpekhs don't fulfil better 95% of the time.

Yes, people should run the math...

Against MEQ (T4/3+/2W),

Skorpekh Destroyers (unit of 3):
3 attacks at S7 -4AP 3D
8 attacks at S5 -3AP 2D

Normal:
1.56 unsaved wounds at 3 damage
3.46 unsaved wounds at 2 damage

Rad-Wreathed:
1.94 unsaved wounds at 3 damage
3.46 unsaved wounds at 2 damage


Ophydian Destroyers (unit of 3):
3 attacks at S6 -4AP 3D
8 attacks at S4 -3AP 2D
6 attacks at S4 -1AP 1D

Normal:
1.94 unsaved wounds at 3 damage
2.59 unsaved wounds at 2 damage
1.17 unsaved wounds at 1 damage

Rad-Wreathed:
2.43 unsaved wounds at 3 damage
3.46 unsaved wounds at 2 damage
1.56 unsaved wounda at 1 damage

From this, it's pretty easy to say Ophydian do MORE damage to MEQ, even without Rad-Wreathed. I'm sure we can find plenty of scenarios where one unit is better than the other, but I wouldn't write this unit off so easily though.

I feel like people are misunderstanding me. I am going to go back and re-read what I said to make sure I wasn't misleading anyone.

 CKO wrote:
I am defending the Ophydian Destroyers, I like the unit most people are dismissing it.

When did I say it was better than Skorpekh Destroyers or Wraiths? When did I say DS and charging was a good tactic? I like the unit is not saying the unit is flawless.

 CKO wrote:
We have to take player skill into consideration with our analysis of units. A competitive player and a casual player will get different results if they use these units.

I get so much whenever I mention player skill. Is there a problem with there being a difference between the guy that flys across the country participating in Grand Tournaments and the guy who plays every other week with a beer in his hand? I am not saying one person has extreme intellect capable of making extraordinary precise decisions to win every game and the other player is incapable of doing this, I am saying one has more experience and puts more effort into the game. Hell, some people can care less about the game or the outcome they just want to have fun and roll the dice. Depending on the response to this post, I may never use the word skill again it is a trigger word in this forum.

 CKO wrote:
I think the Skorpekh unit is easier to use due to its toughness and 3+ save but the Ophydian Destroyers has a purpose.

I even admitted that Skorpekh destroyers are easier to use therefore better! I said Ophydians have a purpose with their DS ability, and others agree with that point.

 CKO wrote:
Ophydian's extra movement is huge because it is a cc unit, 2 inches could mean a 7-inch charge vs a 9-inch charge. Ophidians also have 17 attacks with the chance of exploding 6's vs 11 attacks by the Skorpekhs. With the -1 to hit hordes will hate this unit hitting on 5's. The true purpose of this unit is that they can tunnel up and kill those small units that people like to keep on objectives, you have access to +1 to charge dynasties to make them more effective. A small investment of 105 points for a unit that can pop up and kill stuff is good. ( AP 4 Novokh AP 2 Claws for hordes)

This is their purpose, I think Red Corsair agrees with me.

 Red Corsair wrote:
I disagree. I think the Ophidians are odd for sure but they definitely have practical uses, albeit very specific.

There simplest use isn't a through away unit, it's a 3 man units that threaten the enemy backfield considering they can DS and even DS again late game. The strongest relic in the book continues to be the veil, but we only get that once.

I think folks need to look at them (Ophidians) as a single unit or 3 tossed into armies for tactical flexibility. 105pts for 9 t4 4+ wounds is not that bad, 9 flayed ones or 9 warriors would cost 117 and are slower even after you alternate deploy them, and much harder to hide/fit anyway.

Do you think it is a coincidence that we both mentioned the ability to pop up for 105 points is at a minimum viable due to flexibility?

 CKO wrote:
With all that said it still gets a B ish grade. 8 inch charges are not guaranteed and most players have a hard time protecting units

I gave it a slightly above average unit grade. Why do I feel like I am being attacked because of that? A unit that can potentially kill 5 Primaris marines in one charge is never bad especially when they cost only 5 more points than the marines. I know they have a difficult 8-9 inch charge if you deep strike them and they can die to bolter fire I posted it. Identifying the weakness of the unit doesn't end my evaluation of a unit it is part of it

I didn't glorify the unit I simply was telling people its purpose. I agree, an extra rule such as fly or can charge after advancing would be nice but we have to take what we can get.

Necronplayer wrote:


From this, it's pretty easy to say Ophydian do MORE damage to MEQ, even without Rad-Wreathed. I'm sure we can find plenty of scenarios where one unit is better than the other, but I wouldn't write this unit off so easily though.

But they don't. MEQ have two wounds. Skorpekhs come out very marginally ahead, though it's effectively equal. The point is that, contrary to the claims of others in the thread, they actually don't do much more damage than skorpekhs against hardly anything except 1W models. The difference is very marginal against other profiles, except for the ones that skorpekhs are significantly better at, namely T5 and T8.

If you want to talk about rad-wreathed go for it, I can't imagine why I'd ever, ever take it as opposed to ob-sec on everything. But if you want to run things that way they are less clearly worse than skorpekhs.
Obviously against 1W targets Ophydians do more damage, as I noted above. But again, flayed ones do even more.