Armies that always been good and those that alway been bad?

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.

**Bharring**

The argument being made (by me and others), is that SM have been good more often than most books. Specifically, which books are good the most often? CWE and SM.

**Martel732**

SW have been far more consistent than vanilla marines.

**Vaktathi**

To be fair, SWs have also had fewer releases, SM's have gotten a codex book for every single edition, SW's didnt get one for 4th or 6th, and went almost a decade between the 3E and 5E books. That said, most have been pretty strong, though Id only really call their 2E and 5E books OP and clearly superior to the vanilla book, in 7E I'm not sure Id say that pure SW were better than pure Vanilla marines, though superfriend deathstars certainly were a ridiculous thing that was all sorts of busted.

**Xenomancers**

the_scotsman wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Scotsmen left out an important group.

Perpetual marine haters - They literally seek out posts about marines to undermine how bad they suck. Probably because they feel their army is historically worse off than marines. When In fact - marines have been near the bottom in terms of power in every edition relying on gimmicks to stay relevant with horrendously over-costed units in a game that is designed to make their units irrelevant. Typically they play orks or imperial guard almost exclusively.

That's right. How dare they fail to take into account the DEU canon that the poster hails from that informs the nature of their reality and determines the location of the goalposts of a given discussion.

Pro tip: if you're looking to construct an ad hominem line of attack on me specifically, it's not a smart idea to try and figure out "my army". As people from most of the tactics threads have learned, I've been in this hobby for 15+ years, and I play or have played nearly everything. Including marines. I just base my observations on relative faction power on a basis of reality that seems to be shared by a larger number of people.

Also, it may be possible to determine (maybe by looking at titles of posts) whether you are in fact being followed around by a posse of people aiming to attack Space Marine threads, or whether threads might become Space Marine threads when you enter them. Hypothetically of course.

Can you point out directly where I was deliberately targeting you with any of that? I too have been in the hobby for approximately the same amount of time and play a number of armies. I can tell you without a doubt that space marines have been the worst army I have owned in every edition I have played and it's been getting progressively worse since 4th eddition. In 7th They got Gladius which was silly but if that amount of silliness went to any other army it would have been a lot worse. Like - Imagine breachers with free devilfish...Imagine Wraithgaurd with free wave serpents or veterans with free chimeras...That kind of stuff would have been better than ynnari.

The core units in the space marine codex are terrible. They have always been terrible. I don't mean average ether - terrible. There isn't a single space marine option I would take over something else in another codex - they have had some OP forge world entries but who hasn't?

**Martel732**

I know it doesn't mean a thing to most posters, but I'm still a bit traumatized by how bad vanilla/DA/BA were in 2nd. Most are probably leaving this data point out, but I can't.

**the_scotsman**

Martel732 wrote:
SW have been far more consistent than vanilla marines.

This is definitely true. However for a ton of that time when Space Wolves were more powerful, I'm talking most of fifth, the units that were strong for them were just the very same units available in the marine 'dex, but better. It was extremely (and I mean almost universally) common practice for folks in the period of "lazplazrazspam plus Grey Hunters plus Long Fangs" to simply take their marine army, however they were painted, and declare them "space wolves." Pretty much in exactly the same way people currently declare all their Eldar to be Alaitoc. Same models, extra rules for free. It wasn't until the big Thunderwolf Cavalry meta where people actually had to start fielding Space Wolf models.

Many people did a really similar thing when Blood Angels were powerful.

I'm never going to claim that a powerful Grey Knight meta or a powerful Thunderwolf Cav meta is pretty much the same as those metas, but I've got a hard time feeling much sympathy for marines being "terrible" during the Long Fang/Razorback/Grey Hunters meta or the BA Rhino Rush meta...because you could just declare them as the other set of better rules without having to change a single model.

If they came out with Codex: Schmorks and it had all the same units as Orks but with better stats, and they left Orks in the index forever, I'd be pretty unjustified in complaining that I am a Codex Orks player and MY rules are terrible, only Shmorks are OP!

After all, when you're saying that Eldar are OP, exactly how much credence do you lend to people who say "no only Alaitoc is OP I'm a Biel-Tan player and my guys suck, zero lists in competitive games so far!"

**Martel732**

I think vanilla marines were far more fearsome in 3rd than in 5th. 5th ed brought lists like 16 chimeras, and vanilla marines didn't have the AT to knock them out.

**the_scotsman**

Xenomancers wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Scotsmen left out an important group.

Perpetual marine haters - They literally seek out posts about marines to undermine how bad they suck. Probably because they feel their army is historically worse off than marines. When In fact - marines have been near the bottom in terms of power in every edition relying on gimmicks to stay relevant with horrendously over-costed units in a game that is designed to make their units irrelevant. Typically they play orks or imperial guard almost exclusively.

That's right. How dare they fail to take into account the DEU canon that the poster hails from that informs the nature of their reality and determines the location of the goalposts of a given discussion.

Pro tip: if you're looking to construct an ad hominem line of attack on me specifically, it's not a smart idea to try and figure out "my army". As people from most of the tactics threads have learned, I've been in this hobby for 15+ years, and I play or have played nearly everything. Including marines. I just base my observations on relative faction power on a basis of reality that seems to be shared by a larger number of people.

Also, it may be possible to determine (maybe by looking at titles of posts) whether you are in fact being followed around by a posse of people aiming to attack Space Marine threads, or whether threads might become Space Marine threads when you enter them. Hypothetically of course.

Can you point out directly where I was deliberately targeting you with any of that? I too have been in the hobby for approximately the same amount of time and play a number of armies. I can tell you without a doubt that space marines have been the worst army I have owned in every edition I have played and it's been getting progressively worse since 4th eddition. In 7th They got Gladius which was silly but if that amount of silliness went to any other army it would have been a lot worse. Like - Imagine breachers with free devilfish...Imagine Wraithgaurd with free wave serpents or veterans with free chimeras...That kind of stuff would have been better than ynnari.

The core units in the space marine codex are terrible. They have always been terrible. I don't mean average ether - terrible. There isn't a single space marine option I would take over something else in another codex - they have had some OP forge world entries but who hasn't?

I mean. Dark Eldar, Necrons, Orks, Nids, Admech, Harlequins etc...? Forgeworld pretty much only makes rules for three factions and then like 3-4 other things for every other faction in the game. The odds of getting something good are pretty slim if you're not Marines, CSM, or Guard just because there's so little of it. The one sisters thing is good I think, the eldar stuff is solidly terrible now but was good at one point, and the 3 tau things are ok. But to my knowledge the Necron Ork and Dark Eldar stuff has always been basically crap. Unless you think an alternate list that let you run the super powerhouse unit the Deff Dread as the troop for your ork army is super broken.

Yes, right, marines are terrible, I know your shtick.

**Xenomancers**

the_scotsman wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
SW have been far more consistent than vanilla marines.

This is definitely true. However for a ton of that time when Space Wolves were more powerful, I'm talking most of fifth, the units that were strong for them were just the very same units available in the marine 'dex, but better. It was extremely (and I mean almost universally) common practice for folks in the period of "lazplazrazspam plus Grey Hunters plus Long Fangs" to simply take their marine army, however they were painted, and declare them "space wolves." Pretty much in exactly the same way people currently declare all their Eldar to be Alaitoc. Same models, extra rules for free. It wasn't until the big Thunderwolf Cavalry meta where people actually had to start fielding Space Wolf models.

Many people did a really similar thing when Blood Angels were powerful.

I'm never going to claim that a powerful Grey Knight meta or a powerful Thunderwolf Cav meta is pretty much the same as those metas, but I've got a hard time feeling much sympathy for marines being "terrible" during the Long Fang/Razorback/Grey Hunters meta or the BA Rhino Rush meta...because you could just declare them as the other set of better rules without having to change a single model.

If they came out with Codex: Schmorks and it had all the same units as Orks but with better stats, and they left Orks in the index forever, I'd be pretty unjustified in complaining that I am a Codex Orks player and MY rules are terrible, only Shmorks are OP!

After all, when you're saying that Eldar are OP, exactly how much credence do you lend to people who say "no only Alaitoc is OP I'm a Biel-Tan player and my guys suck, zero lists in competitive games so far!"

Eldar units don't suck though - their bonuses are just insult to injury. I play Ulthwe and it's nearly as brutal as aloitoc and in a lot of cases it's better. My friend plays Siamhan which is actually the eldar spears that are recking people in tornaments because they can advance and charge and their autarch has an incredibly beast relic - plus their wave serpents can make really long charges with reroll charge and that ruins peoples day. Space marines have a lot of the same army traits as eldar but it does not win them games because their units suck and they have no stratagems and their army traits don't affect their tanks. It's all about the units.

Scottsmen are you not familiar with figures of speech?

**Martel732**

Base marines were probably overpowered for most of 3rd ed, but I think it's gone back to almost 2nd ed levels of futility. We can debate the time in between, of course.

**LunarSol**

the_scotsman wrote:

If they came out with Codex: Schmorks and it had all the same units as Orks but with better stats, and they left Orks in the index forever, I'd be pretty unjustified in complaining that I am a Codex Orks player and MY rules are terrible, only Shmorks are OP!

After all, when you're saying that Eldar are OP, exactly how much credence do you lend to people who say "no only Alaitoc is OP I'm a Biel-Tan player and my guys suck, zero lists in competitive games so far!"

I will be quite happy when the game finds a happy middle ground between the overly fractured Imperium and the factions that lack any variants. Seeing both sides move towards the middle is one of my favorite bits of 8th edition.

**the_scotsman**

Xenomancers wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
SW have been far more consistent than vanilla marines.

This is definitely true. However for a ton of that time when Space Wolves were more powerful, I'm talking most of fifth, the units that were strong for them were just the very same units available in the marine 'dex, but better. It was extremely (and I mean almost universally) common practice for folks in the period of "lazplazrazspam plus Grey Hunters plus Long Fangs" to simply take their marine army, however they were painted, and declare them "space wolves." Pretty much in exactly the same way people currently declare all their Eldar to be Alaitoc. Same models, extra rules for free. It wasn't until the big Thunderwolf Cavalry meta where people actually had to start fielding Space Wolf models.

Many people did a really similar thing when Blood Angels were powerful.

I'm never going to claim that a powerful Grey Knight meta or a powerful Thunderwolf Cav meta is pretty much the same as those metas, but I've got a hard time feeling much sympathy for marines being "terrible" during the Long Fang/Razorback/Grey Hunters meta or the BA Rhino Rush meta...because you could just declare them as the other set of better rules without having to change a single model.

If they came out with Codex: Schmorks and it had all the same units as Orks but with better stats, and they left Orks in the index forever, I'd be pretty unjustified in complaining that I am a Codex Orks player and MY rules are terrible, only Shmorks are OP!

After all, when you're saying that Eldar are OP, exactly how much credence do you lend to people who say "no only Alaitoc is OP I'm a Biel-Tan player and my guys suck, zero lists in competitive games so far!"
Eldar units don't suck though - their bonuses are just insult to injury. I play Ulthwe and it's nearly as brutal as aloitoc and in a lot of cases it's better. My friend plays Siamhan which is actually the eldar spears that are recking people in tornaments because they can advance and charge and their autarch has an incredibly beast relic - plus their wave serpents can make really long charges with reroll charge and that ruins peoples day. Space marines have a lot of the same army traits as eldar but it does not win them games because their units suck and they have no stratagems and their army traits don't affect their tanks. It's all about the units.

Scottsmen are you not familiar with figures of speech?

The Saim-Hann shining spears used in tournament Eldar lists are Ynnari, not Eldar, which is a COMPLETELY different army. No similarities at all. Completely different. Eldar aren't OP they're just gimmicks tacked onto OP eldar soup lists.

Prove me wrong. Make sure you provide data or else I'm going to say you didn't provide data and disregard you, and make sure that data is from my particular playgroup and not from tournaments, because tournaments use houserules and are obviously not useful.

You have to do that, or I am right and Eldar are the worst army in the game.

**Bharring**

Well not completely different. It's about the equivelent of SM + IG. But if the army functioned only because of IG's special rules.

**the_scotsman**

(FTR, I am being sarcastic. I do understand that a Ynnari/Eldar soup list is 99.9% Eldar units and I consider it a pure Eldar list. Ynnari is just a really strong, very awkward to get at army trait available to all three eldar factions)

**Xenomancers**

the_scotsman wrote:
(FTR, I am being sarcastic. I do understand that a Ynnari/Eldar soup list is 99.9% Eldar units and I consider it a pure Eldar list. Ynnari is just a really strong, very awkward to get at army trait available to all three eldar factions)

I don't disagree with that. Ynnari is a nice addition to an eldar list but it's far from required. It's a give and take situation. You get bonus damage at the lost of a defensive trait and the ability to advance and shoot assault weapons with no penalty. For a unit like spears - IMO they are better as CWE (esp after the beta deep strike rules). For a unit like reapers - they are better as ynnari (but they are still a lot easier to kill without fnp or -1 to hit.) I consider the ynnari list to be bugged though - there is no reason ynnari units should retain their faction keywords or be able to take eldar relics. The only reason the army is more successful than CWE in tournaments is because of the keyword interactions between ynnari and CWE codex. When the Ynnari codex comes out it's pretty much assumed this will be fixed.

**the_scotsman**

Xenomancers wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
(FTR, I am being sarcastic. I do understand that a Ynnari/Eldar soup list is 99.9% Eldar units and I consider it a pure Eldar list. Ynnari is just a really strong, very awkward to get at army trait available to all three eldar factions)

I don't disagree with that. Ynnari is a nice addition to an eldar list but it's far from required. It's a give and take situation. You get bonus damage at the lost of a defensive trait and the ability to advance and shoot assault weapons with no penalty. For a unit like spears - IMO they are better as CWE (esp after the beta deep strike rules). For a unit like reapers - they are better as ynnari (but they are still a lot easier to kill without fnp or -1 to hit.) I consider the ynnari list to be bugged though - there is no reason ynnari units should retain their faction keywords or be able to take eldar relics. The only reason the army is more successful than CWE in tournaments is because of the keyword interactions between ynnari and CWE codex. When the Ynnari codex comes out it's pretty much assumed this will be fixed.

What does the beta deep strike rule have to do with shining spears? The reason they're better as Ynnari is because you can pop the Saim-Hann stratagem and then charge and attack twice. Do you need CWE to get them to move twice with Quicken or something - weren't you just saying in another thread that a 22" move gets you into combat 100% always guaranteed?

You can consider it "bugged" if you want but it is exactly how the stratagem rules work. I can take a regular Heretic Astartes detachment and take some of my guys as Emperors Children and some others as Iron Warriors and get access to their stratagems. A ynnari detachment is exactly that, an Asuryani keyword that then exchanges that for the Ynnari keyword and keeps the <craftworld> keyword that you select. It's exactly how the rule works from the FAQ, there's zero ambiguity at this point.

You might as well consider it bugged that Guard in Genestealer Cult detachments dont get to pick <regiments>, or that <chapter> doesn't apply to vehicles. As you like to say, you can houserule if you like...

**Xenomancers**

Humm since you can't really alpha strike with deep strike spears anymore and you have to start on the board - a defensive buff if more useful that the chance to attack twice. Since you are more than likely going to need to advance to get into CC - the no penalty to advance is also a really nice thing to have.

Ultimately - Ynarri will probably get a lot of the stratagems in the CWE codex anyways. I seriously doubt they will have access to their craftworld specific traits.

If you can't see how it is obviously unfair to have ynnari have access to chapter specific traits I will explain it to you. All other armies have to have pure detachments in order to maintain their detachment buff - ynnari maintain army trait even with multiple army keywords in them.

So ynnari gets to pick and chose in a single detachment whatever relic/or stratagem best suits a unit all in a single detachment. That's not going on anywhere in the game - I'm not sure GW even understands how this works. It's nothing like chapter tactics sucking (they literally spell out what units can use them - it is intended). GSC also has their own specific armies abilities - they should not maintain AM traits or be able to use their stratagems - this is how it should work

**the_scotsman**

Xenomancers wrote:
Humm since you can't really alpha strike with deep strike spears anymore and you have to start on the board - a defensive buff if more useful that the chance to attack twice. Since you are more than likely going to need to advance to get into CC - the no penalty to advance is also a really nice thing to have.

Ultimately - Ynarri will probably get a lot of the stratagems in the CWE codex anyways. I seriously doubt they will have access to their craftworld specific traits.

If you can't see how it is obviously unfair to have ynnari have access to chapter specific traits I will explain it to you. All other armies have to have pure detachments in order to maintain their detachment buff - ynnari maintain army trait even with multiple army keywords in them.

So ynnari gets to pick and chose in a single detachment whatever relic/or stratagem best suits a unit all in a single detachment. That's not going on anywhere in the game - I'm not sure GW even understands how this works. It's nothing like chapter tactics sucking (they literally spell out what units can use them - it is intended). GSC also has their own specific armies abilities - they should not maintain AM traits or be able to use their stratagems - this is how it should work

Obviously Unfair is different from Not Working As GW Intends it to Work.

it is obviously unfair that space marines dont get CTs on vehicles. But GW has released like 10 codexes now where marines dont get traits on vehicles.

As it stands in the game Ynnari is not a <keyword> and SfD is not an army trait, it is a special rule, like Rising Crescendo, And They Shall Know No fear, or Power from Pain. if I make a mixed Drukhari detachment, I can choose whatever stratagems and relics I like from the various <subfactions> just like a Ynnari detachment, and I still get Power from Pain. That's how the game works, the only difference youre perceiving is the strength of the ability, which is not an "its bugged" issue.

Ynnari, by the rules of the game, have no Army Trait, just a very powerful army wide special rule. Their detachment works identically to a subfaction-less Asuryani or Drukhari detachment otherwise.

**ShredderShards**

the_scotsman wrote:
ShredderShards wrote:
I'm not game to take the bait that is getting into an argument about it with some of the more vocal people on here, but I just want to say that I've seen way too many threads in my lifetime of people pretending Gladius wasn't a top tier formation. Why is it always one group of players so insistent on this fact...

You have to understand the canon of the Dakka Expanded Universe a little bit. When you read things by certain posters, you have to understand the perspective of the alternate reality that those posters exist in. You might read a post and say "wait, that has no bearing on objective reality" but remember this is the INTERNET, and everyone exists in their own reality (which you can't possibly disregard as unrealistic because You Dont Know Them)

Allow me to familiarize you with a few of the groups:

The Casual Police State Resistance: These players exist in a twisted universe where all tactical thought and competitive list-building has been banned with an irrevocable penalty of exile. Dakka is the only place where these poor individuals can exist in anonymity free of their oppressive overlords The Enforced Casual Gaming Group. If they were ever to display any hint of competitive acumen to this BeernPretzelstapo, they would be irrevocably exiled and unable to ever again play 40k (in fact, this may have already happened to some posters). Their only recourse is to attempt to spread the gospel of Why Powergaming Is Perfectly Good and Should Be Encouraged online, hoping one day to change the course of history.

The Eternal Victims of the Ninth Circle of Powergaming Hell: The mirror universe, if you will, of the Casual Police State, the Victims exist in an anarchic society where they have seen the utter collapse of any and all unspoken rules of conduct for gaming. They, alone in their world, adore and adhere to the fluff of their army, lovingly painting their collection which they slowly accumulate by saving up spare pennies scrounged from the couch cushions and found in the laundry. Once every decade when they can afford a GW kit, they assemble and permanently glue it based solely on the appearance and aesthetic of the model, knowing it would be dishonorable to think any impure thoughts about tactical use or in-game power while creating a work of art. Sadly, their gaming group does not share this sentiment. They ruthlessly exploit every rules loophole and broken unit combo solely for the joy of crushing the fluff and dreams of the Victim.

The Virtuous Paragon: Surrounded by a cackling legion of negative jackals who complain and jeer endlessly at every effort by GW to improve the game, the Virtuous Paragon must resort to vigiliante-style positivity online. He has seen his playerbase cut down from thousands of joyful, jovial lovers of the Great Games Workshop Hobby down to a mere handful of unjustifiably negative and bitter complainers. He is the last of his kind. He must warn those who may seek to create a community elsewhere, and he must take to the internet to do Battle with those who would ceaselessly kvetch and moan about every single problem with the game.

The Persecuted Faction Die-Hard: Similar to the Victim, but distinct in that this poster has chosen just one single faction to dedicate his life and existence to, and his evil gaming group have taken to exploiting every Unfair and Cruel counter that may exist within the game to destroy them. If they play a Marine faction, every game is against 500 plasma guns and army-wide AP-4. If they play orks, impenetrable gunlines bristling with high-rate of fire anti infantry weapons tear apart their army in two turns. All theoretical opponents possess all possible countermeasures to any suggested tactic that might be proposed or any change in strategy that could be conceived. it doesn't matter what some tournament players have managed, THEIRS is the worst faction in the game, and any that disagree are clearly and terribly wrong.

Damn, I should have checked this thread again sooner! What an incredible reply lol

Xenomancers wrote:Scotsmen left out an important group.

Perpetual marine haters - They literally seek out posts about marines to undermine how bad they suck. Probably because they feel their army is historically worse off than marines. When In fact - marines have been near the bottom in terms of power in every edition relying on gimmicks to stay relevant with horrendously over-costed units in a game that is designed to make their units irrelevant. Typically they play orks or imperial guard almost exclusively.

Ah nah, I think this is probably more your persecution complex, and sounds like its directly tied into that final group he mentioned

**Tyel**

Martel732 wrote:
I know it doesn't mean a thing to most posters, but I'm still a bit traumatized by how bad vanilla/DA/BA were in 2nd. Most are probably leaving this data point out, but I can't.

2nd edition was 20+ years ago. Don't you think it is time to get over it?

I don't really get this mentality of picking a faction back in 1995 and then deciding you shall play it, and lament its performance every year thereafter, down until the breaking of the world.

**Blacksails**

Tyel wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
I know it doesn't mean a thing to most posters, but I'm still a bit traumatized by how bad vanilla/DA/BA were in 2nd. Most are probably leaving this data point out, but I can't.

2nd edition was 20+ years ago. Don't you think it is time to get over it?

I don't really get this mentality of picking a faction back in 1995 and then deciding you shall play it, and lament its performance every year thereafter, down until the breaking of the world.

Especially considering each one of those factions has been a top tier codex in at least one edition since 2nd. Big time persecution complex.

**Martel732**

Leave your arm chair psychology at the door. I do not think i'm being persecuted. I just think gw can't do math.

**Blacksails**

Martel732 wrote:
Leave your arm chair psychology at the door. I do not think i'm being persecuted.

You have said you still feel traumatized from 2nd, which was what, two decades ago? The fact that you complain about marines because of that trauma but seem to be completely unaffected by the amazing vanilla marines books that came after, not to mention specifically for you when BA had a very strong codex in 5th.

If you're still bitching about marines being bad from 2nd, its because you're looking to be a victim.

The simple, undeniable truth of the matter is that marines, either as vanilla marines, or by and large the power armour forces of the Imperium, have been treated exceptionally well in rule, model, and fluff support, rivaled only by Eldar in rule support.

I just think gw can't do math.

Can't disagree there. Their ability to balance leaves much to be desired.

**A.T.**

Blacksails wrote:
The simple, undeniable truth of the matter is that marines, either as vanilla marines, or by and large the power armour forces of the Imperium, have been treated exceptionally well

Correction: marines, and only marines, both loyalist and traitor.

The other power armour factions consist of sisters, inquisition (sort of), and the SoS - and their combined releases over the past decade don't hold a candle to any one of the recent chaos or loyalist marine releases.

**Martel732**

Doubling down, huh? I'm not a victim, either. Just stop.

**Billagio**

Blacksails wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Leave your arm chair psychology at the door. I do not think i'm being persecuted.

You have said you still feel traumatized from 2nd, which was what, two decades ago? The fact that you complain about marines because of that trauma but seem to be completely unaffected by the amazing vanilla marines books that came after, not to mention specifically for you when BA had a very strong codex in 5th.

If you're still bitching about marines being bad from 2nd, its because you're looking to be a victim.

The simple, undeniable truth of the matter is that marines, either as vanilla marines, or by and large the power armour forces of the Imperium, have been treated exceptionally well in rule, model, and fluff support, rivaled only by Eldar in rule support.

I just think gw can't do math.

Can't disagree there. Their ability to balance leaves much to be desired.

Agreed, someone who thinks that marines are perennial bottom feeder armies every edition clearly hasnt played other armies like orks, or cant make a decent list

**SemperMortis**

Vaktathi wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Thats never really been their thing, just like IG has never had bikers or beastly CC commanders. Thats what Powerklaws and Tank Hammas are for (though some assistance in their use could certainly have been warranted).

Lootas however were absolute murder to light and medium vehicles and tanks up until 8E however. If you werent AV13 or 14, even a depleted unit of Lootas stood a good chance of killing any vehicle they shot at and a full unit was almost guaranteed to.

Lootas were absolute murder in 7th were they?

A unit of 5 Lootas (A Depleted squad) can dish out 10 shots on average, for 3.33 hit and against AV 11 that is 1/6th chance to Glance and a 1/3rd chance to Pen. They didn't have AP2 or 1 so no + to explode which means ZERO chance to kill it outright, So when you say they were murder what you mean is that they were capable of inflicting 1 HP of damage a turn with 5 of them.
Lets put that in some context. While they give up the 1/9 chance on any successful hit to explode that a Lascannon enjoys vs AV11, that depleted 5man unit is exceeding a trio of BS3 Lascannons for HP damage output by almost a third (1.66 HP's for the Lootas, 1.25 HP's for the Lascannons, and you sure weren't getting a trio of those for 75pts even for Guard), and odds are you'll kill the target through HP loss by the time you'd land an Explodes result with the Lascannons most of the time either way. Compared to an IG Heavy Weapons squad with autocannons for the same cost as 5 Lootas, the guardsmen are easier to kill and break, and are only averaging only 3 hits a turn vs the Lootas 3.33, and are more vulnerable to S6+ weaponry (a single S6+ hit forces an Ld7 break test), while 75pts gets you naked 5 Chaos Havocs wondering who looted their autocannons, a naked Predator Destructor, a "we forgot how to shoot at the ground" Hydra, a couple of Autocannon sentinels (not quite two armored ones), half a Russ Exterminator, Two thirds of a Rifleman Dread? Maybe two MP crisis suits or a single scatterlaserspamming War Walker?

Yeah the lack of Mob Rule sucked, but when they got to do their thing they were great long range fire support.

Conversely a unit of 15 Lootas was capable of putting out 30 shots on average, 10 hits and 5 glances/pens on an AV 11 vehicle, unless they had any number of bonuses like cover night fighting, or invuln saves. Against an AV12 vehicle that went down to 2.5 on average
Against AV12 that should average to 3.33 (30 shots, 10 hits, 1.66 glances, 1.66 pens, 3.33 total HP's), either way though we can average to 3. This means that, barring cover saves (which affects everything), on average such a unit would kill any light or medium 3HP vehicle (80%+ of vehicles in the game) in a single round of fire at up to 48". Relative to most other autocannon-esque platforms that's a pretty good damage output for the points invested, and, with snapshots, had more mitigation to the accuracy loss than other armies when moving.

Damn it you are right, i forgot that Lootas were kings of the battlefield and were used every single game by Ork players who were winning events because there damage output was AMAZING! wait...thats right....that never happened. Sorry but lootas sucked in 7th, but so did the entire codex so it didn't stand out as bad compared to everything else. Lootas are as durable as guardsmen, T4 6+ save is about equal to T3 5+ save. As for leadership issues, lootas suffered horribly since Mob rule didn't help them and I believe they were Leadership 7.

So yeah compared to other platforms for Autocannon style damage, lootas were ok for damage out put, but they folded as soon as they got shot at and everyone knew that. I stopped taking mine to competitive events because my opponents would just use 1-2 ignores cover weapons and kill ALL my models because 6+ saves were basically useless against ignores cover weapons.

**Vaktathi**

SemperMortis wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Thats never really been their thing, just like IG has never had bikers or beastly CC commanders. Thats what Powerklaws and Tank Hammas are for (though some assistance in their use could certainly have been warranted).

Lootas however were absolute murder to light and medium vehicles and tanks up until 8E however. If you werent AV13 or 14, even a depleted unit of Lootas stood a good chance of killing any vehicle they shot at and a full unit was almost guaranteed to.

Lootas were absolute murder in 7th were they?

A unit of 5 Lootas (A Depleted squad) can dish out 10 shots on average, for 3.33 hit and against AV 11 that is 1/6th chance to Glance and a 1/3rd chance to Pen. They didn't have AP2 or 1 so no + to explode which means ZERO chance to kill it outright, So when you say they were murder what you mean is that they were capable of inflicting 1 HP of damage a turn with 5 of them.
Lets put that in some context. While they give up the 1/9 chance on any successful hit to explode that a Lascannon enjoys vs AV11, that depleted 5man unit is exceeding a trio of BS3 Lascannons for HP damage output by almost a third (1.66 HP's for the Lootas, 1.25 HP's for the Lascannons, and you sure weren't getting a trio of those for 75pts even for Guard), and odds are you'll kill the target through HP loss by the time you'd land an Explodes result with the Lascannons most of the time either way. Compared to an IG Heavy Weapons squad with autocannons for the same cost as 5 Lootas, the guardsmen are easier to kill and break, and are only averaging only 3 hits a turn vs the Lootas 3.33, and are more vulnerable to S6+ weaponry (a single S6+ hit forces an Ld7 break test), while 75pts gets you naked 5 Chaos Havocs wondering who looted their autocannons, a naked Predator Destructor, a "we forgot how to shoot at the ground" Hydra, a couple of Autocannon sentinels (not quite two armored ones), half a Russ Exterminator, Two thirds of a Rifleman Dread? Maybe two MP crisis suits or a single scatterlaserspamming War Walker?

Yeah the lack of Mob Rule sucked, but when they got to do their thing they were great long range fire support.

Conversely a unit of 15 Lootas was capable of putting out 30 shots on average, 10 hits and 5 glances/pens on an AV 11 vehicle, unless they had any number of bonuses like cover night fighting, or invuln saves. Against an AV12 vehicle that went down to 2.5 on average
Against AV12 that should average to 3.33 (30 shots, 10 hits, 1.66 glances, 1.66 pens, 3.33 total HP's), either way though we can average to 3. This means that, barring cover saves (which affects everything), on average such a unit would kill any light or medium 3HP vehicle (80%+ of vehicles in the game) in a single round of fire at up to 48". Relative to most other autocannon-esque platforms that's a pretty good damage output for the points invested, and, with snapshots, had more mitigation to the accuracy loss than other armies when moving.

Damn it you are right, i forgot that Lootas were kings of the battlefield and were used every single game by Ork players who were winning events because there damage output was AMAZING! wait...thats right....that never happened.

I dont recall ever making such a statement. Such was never my argument. Not sure where that came from.

My point was that Lootas were effective light/medium vehicle killers. Nothing more.

Sorry but lootas sucked in 7th, but so did the entire codex so it didn't stand out as bad compared to everything else. Lootas are as durable as guardsmen, T4 6+ save is about equal to T3 5+ save. As for leadership issues, lootas suffered horribly since Mob rule didn't help them and I believe they were Leadership 7.

So yeah compared to other platforms for Autocannon style damage, lootas were ok for damage out put, but they folded as soon as they got shot at and everyone knew that.

So did just about all those other platforms I listed, at least on a point for point basis with Lootas.

Yeah, they werent Scatterbikes, but they were hardly garbage either.

I stopped taking mine to competitive events because my opponents would just use 1-2 ignores cover weapons and kill ALL my models because 6+ saves were basically useless against ignores cover weapons.

same with anything that didnt sport a 3+ save, I dont know what makes Lootas so unique there, especially when they had more range than most such Ignores Cover platforms (save for DS flamers and the like obviously). Glass cannons sure, but workable ones.

Im not saying that Lootas were gonna save Orks against a Decurion, Gladius, or Scatterbikes and Wraithknights. They were not. My point was that, at least for light and medium vehicles, Lootas were effective AT, not that they were a crutch to deadlift Orks to victory over the absurdity that reigned in 7th.

**SemperMortis**

You called them "Absolute Murder" I believe, I was just pointing out that they were not in fact "absolute Murder" they were a good autocannon platform but Autocannons were by far not the kings of the battlefield in 7th, and while they did match IG for damage output point for point that wasn't saying much either since in 7th Guard were crap as well.

**Vaktathi**

SemperMortis wrote:
You called them "Absolute Murder" I believe

Against light and medium vehicles.

Which I believe we showed, a unit of 10 would wipe most any AV10-12 vehicle in a single round of fire typically, which, for 150pts, outside of the most ridiculous things like Scatterbikes, was great firepower against such targets.

I was just pointing out that they were not in fact "absolute Murder" they were a good autocannon platform but Autocannons were by far not the kings of the battlefield in 7th

S6/7 weapons were pretty big in 7E, able to wound infantry on 2's and strip HP's through volume of firepower, that was a big grinding point about the edition, but ultimately I was never making the point that Lootas or Autocannons were the kings of the 7E battlefield in and of themselves, only that Lootas were really good at killing light and medium vehicles.