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.
2018/10/01 13:10:10
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Trollbert wrote: Mathhammer is still a better argument than "mathhammer is not a real argument".
What he provided cannot even be identified as mathhammer. He threw random numbers about a random scenario.
Even if he did a correct analysis, since there are many factors that mathhammer cannot evaluate in this case (like the Fly keyword), it would be an incomplete analysis.
2018/10/01 13:13:03
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Yup the most disappointing thing about this nerf is it only increases how reliant everything is on soup. Now you simply take the cheapest brigade of guard to super power whatever units rise to the top. There is still no downside to soup and any faction that can’t souo or any player that doesn’t want to is at a huge disadvantage now.
2018/10/01 13:18:42
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Spoletta wrote: Astra militarum will probably receive some point nerfs in CA. Not many, because it's not like they have any unit really over the top (except artemis hellhounds, but that's FW), but in general probably some little point hikes here and there.
If Guard units are the yard stick for balanced, a lot of units across multiple codex's and even FW indexes need points drops of 20%.
Nah, the IG units that need a few points more are:
1) Basilisks, about 10-15 points
2) Infantry squads about 0,6 points, so i could see it going to 5 or staying where they are.
3) Company and platoon commanders both 10 points.
The super heavies should all get looked at too.
Whirlwinds need to be cheaper, predators need to be cheaper, vindicators need to be a lot cheaper, marines need to be cheaper.
Hammerheads need to be cheaper, Firewarriors need to be cheaper, kroot need to be cheaper.
Heck even Sicarans and other FW stuff need price drops to compete with IG codex.
As they all loose out to units you haven't listed so presumably that implies you think they are ok.
Heck even fellblades and falchions need price drops compaired to their IG equivalents.
As to scions now that they are turn 2 deepstrike only they are probably a lot lower on the list if problem units
On the subject of whirlwinds, predators, vindicators and marines, i agree. They need some help.
Hammerheads and firewarriors are more than fine. Kroot i don't understand to which IG unit you are comparing it to.
Hammerheads loose out is a straight shoot out with Russes a unit that guard players keep claiming is trash.
Firewarriors loose out to Infantry squads shooting it out and even worse against Catachan in CC.
Heck even a pure knights list is hard pushed to beat IG tank spam and Knights are apparently OP as heck according to this board.
I'm not sure hammerheads can take much of a buff without becoming broken around longstrike, but one army shouldn't have the best screens and the best tanks to hide behind said screens per point in the entire game.
Having the best shooting and the best board presence per point (mono codex) makes it very difficult for other armies to compete.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
i'll say it wasn't a fluke but it was a gimmick list built to abuse Guilliman's reroll's to counter the expected meta.
He even said at the start it was a sub optimal list that was designed to counter the expected meta.
It's not exactly a good sign that marines as a blanket army only work when you have to build every list to abuse Guilliman's reroll's
And that is why mathhammer is bad for your health.
Yes, the hammerhead loses a direct confrontation to a Russ, and? So a model to be worth more than another model must beat it in a direct confrontation? Your logic is completely flawed.
Do you know what hammerheads have that russes don't have? Fly! Higher BS (less impacted by degradation and debuffs)! 12" move!
Same for firewarriors, you can't say "Firewarriors lose in a direct fight with equal points of guardsmen so they are worst than guardsmen". Please find a real argument.
I'm not talking math hammer, hence why I didn't mention it. You interjected that because you don't want to admit that guard are one of the top mono factions.
I was talking in game results, other people have done the mathhammer and at no point do firewarriors win a shoot out with infantry squads.
But way to show your just willing to blindly argue in bad faith to support your view that guard are fine and every other faction is more OP.
2018/10/01 13:23:11
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Trollbert wrote: Mathhammer is still a better argument than "mathhammer is not a real argument".
The problem is people draw absolutes when it really should be probabilities. A unit can be better but still be sufficiently close that the discrete rolls in a game will largely make the outcome random.
Reece is a good player. He has the movement/objective side of the game down.
With that said his list does rely on Bobby G, the potentially going to be nerfed again crutch/albatross round SM's neck, and if you don't want to be UM you are out of luck.
I really like the hellfire/flakk spam - because weirdly I had an idea to go with something like this when the SM codex first dropped (before it got swept away in a tide of Stormravens and then Razorbacks).
I am hoping Part 2 on Frontline Gaming will run through how he performed in games - because I can see him eating some less optimised lists, but really want to know how he coped with Imperial/Eldar Soup.
2018/10/01 14:39:09
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Insectum7 wrote: Didn't mono-tau an mono-guard finish effectively as a tie in one of the last few major tournaments?
Shhhhhh don't bring that up or we are going to have another thread with 10 straight pages of guardsmen FRSRF into fire warriors to "disprove" the tournament data
2018/10/01 14:41:26
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Spoletta wrote: Astra militarum will probably receive some point nerfs in CA. Not many, because it's not like they have any unit really over the top (except artemis hellhounds, but that's FW), but in general probably some little point hikes here and there.
If Guard units are the yard stick for balanced, a lot of units across multiple codex's and even FW indexes need points drops of 20%.
Nah, the IG units that need a few points more are:
1) Basilisks, about 10-15 points
2) Infantry squads about 0,6 points, so i could see it going to 5 or staying where they are.
3) Company and platoon commanders both 10 points.
The super heavies should all get looked at too.
Whirlwinds need to be cheaper, predators need to be cheaper, vindicators need to be a lot cheaper, marines need to be cheaper.
Hammerheads need to be cheaper, Firewarriors need to be cheaper, kroot need to be cheaper.
Heck even Sicarans and other FW stuff need price drops to compete with IG codex.
As they all loose out to units you haven't listed so presumably that implies you think they are ok.
Heck even fellblades and falchions need price drops compaired to their IG equivalents.
As to scions now that they are turn 2 deepstrike only they are probably a lot lower on the list if problem units
On the subject of whirlwinds, predators, vindicators and marines, i agree. They need some help.
Hammerheads and firewarriors are more than fine. Kroot i don't understand to which IG unit you are comparing it to.
Hammerheads loose out is a straight shoot out with Russes a unit that guard players keep claiming is trash.
Firewarriors loose out to Infantry squads shooting it out and even worse against Catachan in CC.
Heck even a pure knights list is hard pushed to beat IG tank spam and Knights are apparently OP as heck according to this board.
I'm not sure hammerheads can take much of a buff without becoming broken around longstrike, but one army shouldn't have the best screens and the best tanks to hide behind said screens per point in the entire game.
Having the best shooting and the best board presence per point (mono codex) makes it very difficult for other armies to compete.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
i'll say it wasn't a fluke but it was a gimmick list built to abuse Guilliman's reroll's to counter the expected meta.
He even said at the start it was a sub optimal list that was designed to counter the expected meta.
It's not exactly a good sign that marines as a blanket army only work when you have to build every list to abuse Guilliman's reroll's
And that is why mathhammer is bad for your health.
Yes, the hammerhead loses a direct confrontation to a Russ, and? So a model to be worth more than another model must beat it in a direct confrontation? Your logic is completely flawed.
Do you know what hammerheads have that russes don't have? Fly! Higher BS (less impacted by degradation and debuffs)! 12" move!
Same for firewarriors, you can't say "Firewarriors lose in a direct fight with equal points of guardsmen so they are worst than guardsmen". Please find a real argument.
I mean, I guess 1 out of 2 ain't bad, but Hammerheads have identical BS to leman russes.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2018/10/01 15:10:54
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
I never wrote off bobby g. In fact, it's the only mono marine that has ever performed consistently in 8th. In fact, it's almost like every unit is priced as if Bobby G were on the table. If he had done this without using Bobby G, then there'd be something to crow about.
Acting like that is a great way to get tuned out and ignored.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/01 15:14:39
2018/10/01 15:30:49
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Spoletta wrote: Astra militarum will probably receive some point nerfs in CA. Not many, because it's not like they have any unit really over the top (except artemis hellhounds, but that's FW), but in general probably some little point hikes here and there.
If Guard units are the yard stick for balanced, a lot of units across multiple codex's and even FW indexes need points drops of 20%.
Nah, the IG units that need a few points more are:
1) Basilisks, about 10-15 points
2) Infantry squads about 0,6 points, so i could see it going to 5 or staying where they are.
3) Company and platoon commanders both 10 points.
The super heavies should all get looked at too.
Whirlwinds need to be cheaper, predators need to be cheaper, vindicators need to be a lot cheaper, marines need to be cheaper.
Hammerheads need to be cheaper, Firewarriors need to be cheaper, kroot need to be cheaper.
Heck even Sicarans and other FW stuff need price drops to compete with IG codex.
As they all loose out to units you haven't listed so presumably that implies you think they are ok.
Heck even fellblades and falchions need price drops compaired to their IG equivalents.
As to scions now that they are turn 2 deepstrike only they are probably a lot lower on the list if problem units
On the subject of whirlwinds, predators, vindicators and marines, i agree. They need some help.
Hammerheads and firewarriors are more than fine. Kroot i don't understand to which IG unit you are comparing it to.
Hammerheads loose out is a straight shoot out with Russes a unit that guard players keep claiming is trash.
Firewarriors loose out to Infantry squads shooting it out and even worse against Catachan in CC.
Heck even a pure knights list is hard pushed to beat IG tank spam and Knights are apparently OP as heck according to this board.
I'm not sure hammerheads can take much of a buff without becoming broken around longstrike, but one army shouldn't have the best screens and the best tanks to hide behind said screens per point in the entire game.
Having the best shooting and the best board presence per point (mono codex) makes it very difficult for other armies to compete.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
i'll say it wasn't a fluke but it was a gimmick list built to abuse Guilliman's reroll's to counter the expected meta.
He even said at the start it was a sub optimal list that was designed to counter the expected meta.
It's not exactly a good sign that marines as a blanket army only work when you have to build every list to abuse Guilliman's reroll's
And that is why mathhammer is bad for your health.
Yes, the hammerhead loses a direct confrontation to a Russ, and? So a model to be worth more than another model must beat it in a direct confrontation? Your logic is completely flawed.
Do you know what hammerheads have that russes don't have? Fly! Higher BS (less impacted by degradation and debuffs)! 12" move!
Same for firewarriors, you can't say "Firewarriors lose in a direct fight with equal points of guardsmen so they are worst than guardsmen". Please find a real argument.
I mean, I guess 1 out of 2 ain't bad, but Hammerheads have identical BS to leman russes.
Shock news, Leman Russes are BS 4+. It's command tanks who are 3+.
Try to be better informed about an argument when talking about it, thank you.
2018/10/01 15:35:08
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Spoletta wrote: Astra militarum will probably receive some point nerfs in CA. Not many, because it's not like they have any unit really over the top (except artemis hellhounds, but that's FW), but in general probably some little point hikes here and there.
If Guard units are the yard stick for balanced, a lot of units across multiple codex's and even FW indexes need points drops of 20%.
Nah, the IG units that need a few points more are:
1) Basilisks, about 10-15 points
2) Infantry squads about 0,6 points, so i could see it going to 5 or staying where they are.
3) Company and platoon commanders both 10 points.
The super heavies should all get looked at too.
Whirlwinds need to be cheaper, predators need to be cheaper, vindicators need to be a lot cheaper, marines need to be cheaper.
Hammerheads need to be cheaper, Firewarriors need to be cheaper, kroot need to be cheaper.
Heck even Sicarans and other FW stuff need price drops to compete with IG codex.
As they all loose out to units you haven't listed so presumably that implies you think they are ok.
Heck even fellblades and falchions need price drops compaired to their IG equivalents.
As to scions now that they are turn 2 deepstrike only they are probably a lot lower on the list if problem units
On the subject of whirlwinds, predators, vindicators and marines, i agree. They need some help.
Hammerheads and firewarriors are more than fine. Kroot i don't understand to which IG unit you are comparing it to.
Hammerheads loose out is a straight shoot out with Russes a unit that guard players keep claiming is trash.
Firewarriors loose out to Infantry squads shooting it out and even worse against Catachan in CC.
Heck even a pure knights list is hard pushed to beat IG tank spam and Knights are apparently OP as heck according to this board.
I'm not sure hammerheads can take much of a buff without becoming broken around longstrike, but one army shouldn't have the best screens and the best tanks to hide behind said screens per point in the entire game.
Having the best shooting and the best board presence per point (mono codex) makes it very difficult for other armies to compete.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
i'll say it wasn't a fluke but it was a gimmick list built to abuse Guilliman's reroll's to counter the expected meta.
He even said at the start it was a sub optimal list that was designed to counter the expected meta.
It's not exactly a good sign that marines as a blanket army only work when you have to build every list to abuse Guilliman's reroll's
And that is why mathhammer is bad for your health.
Yes, the hammerhead loses a direct confrontation to a Russ, and? So a model to be worth more than another model must beat it in a direct confrontation? Your logic is completely flawed.
Do you know what hammerheads have that russes don't have? Fly! Higher BS (less impacted by degradation and debuffs)! 12" move!
Same for firewarriors, you can't say "Firewarriors lose in a direct fight with equal points of guardsmen so they are worst than guardsmen". Please find a real argument.
I'm not talking math hammer, hence why I didn't mention it. You interjected that because you don't want to admit that guard are one of the top mono factions.
I was talking in game results, other people have done the mathhammer and at no point do firewarriors win a shoot out with infantry squads.
But way to show your just willing to blindly argue in bad faith to support your view that guard are fine and every other faction is more OP.
Mono guard is without a doubt the best mono codex of imperium and maybe of 40K.
Ok, satisfied now? I'm not defending guard, i'm trying to put a little bit of perspective in all the hate that it receives. Guards are one of my worst matchups on the table, i'm only happy if they get nerfed, but i would like to avoid overnerfing things, because i don't like it when it happens to my bugs, so i like to avoid it happening to others.
And again, putting firewarriors against guards in a direct fight is not mathhammer! It's spouting random numbers, because it is a scenario that doesn't give any useful info. I can easily put up a "mathematically correct" scenario where 5 firewarriors kill 10 guards without suffering a single casualty, so i guess that FW are ultra OP, right?
2018/10/01 15:45:20
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Spoletta wrote: Astra militarum will probably receive some point nerfs in CA. Not many, because it's not like they have any unit really over the top (except artemis hellhounds, but that's FW), but in general probably some little point hikes here and there.
If Guard units are the yard stick for balanced, a lot of units across multiple codex's and even FW indexes need points drops of 20%.
Nah, the IG units that need a few points more are:
1) Basilisks, about 10-15 points
2) Infantry squads about 0,6 points, so i could see it going to 5 or staying where they are.
3) Company and platoon commanders both 10 points.
The super heavies should all get looked at too.
Whirlwinds need to be cheaper, predators need to be cheaper, vindicators need to be a lot cheaper, marines need to be cheaper.
Hammerheads need to be cheaper, Firewarriors need to be cheaper, kroot need to be cheaper.
Heck even Sicarans and other FW stuff need price drops to compete with IG codex.
As they all loose out to units you haven't listed so presumably that implies you think they are ok.
Heck even fellblades and falchions need price drops compaired to their IG equivalents.
As to scions now that they are turn 2 deepstrike only they are probably a lot lower on the list if problem units
On the subject of whirlwinds, predators, vindicators and marines, i agree. They need some help.
Hammerheads and firewarriors are more than fine. Kroot i don't understand to which IG unit you are comparing it to.
Hammerheads loose out is a straight shoot out with Russes a unit that guard players keep claiming is trash.
Firewarriors loose out to Infantry squads shooting it out and even worse against Catachan in CC.
Heck even a pure knights list is hard pushed to beat IG tank spam and Knights are apparently OP as heck according to this board.
I'm not sure hammerheads can take much of a buff without becoming broken around longstrike, but one army shouldn't have the best screens and the best tanks to hide behind said screens per point in the entire game.
Having the best shooting and the best board presence per point (mono codex) makes it very difficult for other armies to compete.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
i'll say it wasn't a fluke but it was a gimmick list built to abuse Guilliman's reroll's to counter the expected meta.
He even said at the start it was a sub optimal list that was designed to counter the expected meta.
It's not exactly a good sign that marines as a blanket army only work when you have to build every list to abuse Guilliman's reroll's
And that is why mathhammer is bad for your health.
Yes, the hammerhead loses a direct confrontation to a Russ, and? So a model to be worth more than another model must beat it in a direct confrontation? Your logic is completely flawed.
Do you know what hammerheads have that russes don't have? Fly! Higher BS (less impacted by degradation and debuffs)! 12" move!
Same for firewarriors, you can't say "Firewarriors lose in a direct fight with equal points of guardsmen so they are worst than guardsmen". Please find a real argument.
I'm not talking math hammer, hence why I didn't mention it. You interjected that because you don't want to admit that guard are one of the top mono factions.
I was talking in game results, other people have done the mathhammer and at no point do firewarriors win a shoot out with infantry squads.
But way to show your just willing to blindly argue in bad faith to support your view that guard are fine and every other faction is more OP.
Mono guard is without a doubt the best mono codex of imperium and maybe of 40K.
Ok, satisfied now? I'm not defending guard, i'm trying to put a little bit of perspective in all the hate that it receives. Guards are one of my worst matchups on the table, i'm only happy if they get nerfed, but i would like to avoid overnerfing things, because i don't like it when it happens to my bugs, so i like to avoid it happening to others.
And again, putting firewarriors against guards in a direct fight is not mathhammer! It's spouting random numbers, because it is a scenario that doesn't give any useful info. I can easily put up a "mathematically correct" scenario where 5 firewarriors kill 10 guards without suffering a single casualty, so i guess that FW are ultra OP, right?
At one point someone did the math where the Fire Warriors get to shoot first to take into account the range advantage and they still lost.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
Then it would happen consistently. Why would nobody defend Rubric Marines in their 6th/7th edition incarnation when someone apparently proved they could win with them?
That's where the math comes in. They're lousy, simple as that. You never got any copycats for such a list or anything, and it faded into obscurity whilst the rest of us were making sure we could counter Serpents and Centurionstar.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/01 15:54:15
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2018/10/01 15:56:33
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Spoletta wrote: Astra militarum will probably receive some point nerfs in CA. Not many, because it's not like they have any unit really over the top (except artemis hellhounds, but that's FW), but in general probably some little point hikes here and there.
If Guard units are the yard stick for balanced, a lot of units across multiple codex's and even FW indexes need points drops of 20%.
Nah, the IG units that need a few points more are:
1) Basilisks, about 10-15 points
2) Infantry squads about 0,6 points, so i could see it going to 5 or staying where they are.
3) Company and platoon commanders both 10 points.
The super heavies should all get looked at too.
Whirlwinds need to be cheaper, predators need to be cheaper, vindicators need to be a lot cheaper, marines need to be cheaper.
Hammerheads need to be cheaper, Firewarriors need to be cheaper, kroot need to be cheaper.
Heck even Sicarans and other FW stuff need price drops to compete with IG codex.
As they all loose out to units you haven't listed so presumably that implies you think they are ok.
Heck even fellblades and falchions need price drops compaired to their IG equivalents.
As to scions now that they are turn 2 deepstrike only they are probably a lot lower on the list if problem units
On the subject of whirlwinds, predators, vindicators and marines, i agree. They need some help.
Hammerheads and firewarriors are more than fine. Kroot i don't understand to which IG unit you are comparing it to.
Hammerheads loose out is a straight shoot out with Russes a unit that guard players keep claiming is trash.
Firewarriors loose out to Infantry squads shooting it out and even worse against Catachan in CC.
Heck even a pure knights list is hard pushed to beat IG tank spam and Knights are apparently OP as heck according to this board.
I'm not sure hammerheads can take much of a buff without becoming broken around longstrike, but one army shouldn't have the best screens and the best tanks to hide behind said screens per point in the entire game.
Having the best shooting and the best board presence per point (mono codex) makes it very difficult for other armies to compete.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
i'll say it wasn't a fluke but it was a gimmick list built to abuse Guilliman's reroll's to counter the expected meta.
He even said at the start it was a sub optimal list that was designed to counter the expected meta.
It's not exactly a good sign that marines as a blanket army only work when you have to build every list to abuse Guilliman's reroll's
And that is why mathhammer is bad for your health.
Yes, the hammerhead loses a direct confrontation to a Russ, and? So a model to be worth more than another model must beat it in a direct confrontation? Your logic is completely flawed.
Do you know what hammerheads have that russes don't have? Fly! Higher BS (less impacted by degradation and debuffs)! 12" move!
Same for firewarriors, you can't say "Firewarriors lose in a direct fight with equal points of guardsmen so they are worst than guardsmen". Please find a real argument.
I'm not talking math hammer, hence why I didn't mention it. You interjected that because you don't want to admit that guard are one of the top mono factions.
I was talking in game results, other people have done the mathhammer and at no point do firewarriors win a shoot out with infantry squads.
But way to show your just willing to blindly argue in bad faith to support your view that guard are fine and every other faction is more OP.
Mono guard is without a doubt the best mono codex of imperium and maybe of 40K.
Ok, satisfied now? I'm not defending guard, i'm trying to put a little bit of perspective in all the hate that it receives. Guards are one of my worst matchups on the table, i'm only happy if they get nerfed, but i would like to avoid overnerfing things, because i don't like it when it happens to my bugs, so i like to avoid it happening to others.
And again, putting firewarriors against guards in a direct fight is not mathhammer! It's spouting random numbers, because it is a scenario that doesn't give any useful info. I can easily put up a "mathematically correct" scenario where 5 firewarriors kill 10 guards without suffering a single casualty, so i guess that FW are ultra OP, right?
guard are the best imperium codex solo. overall though dark eldar solo is probably the strongest solo book. now that people ar working out the kinks mono Drew Carey armies are wrecking. add in ynarri some harlies and/or craftworld for flavor and i think we are going to see a shift there, especially with the new nerfed deep strike rules and the rumored CA moving castillans to 700 points (where they should have been to start with)
10000 points 7000 6000 5000 5000 2000
2018/10/01 16:01:21
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Spoletta wrote: Astra militarum will probably receive some point nerfs in CA. Not many, because it's not like they have any unit really over the top (except artemis hellhounds, but that's FW), but in general probably some little point hikes here and there.
If Guard units are the yard stick for balanced, a lot of units across multiple codex's and even FW indexes need points drops of 20%.
Nah, the IG units that need a few points more are:
1) Basilisks, about 10-15 points
2) Infantry squads about 0,6 points, so i could see it going to 5 or staying where they are.
3) Company and platoon commanders both 10 points.
The super heavies should all get looked at too.
Whirlwinds need to be cheaper, predators need to be cheaper, vindicators need to be a lot cheaper, marines need to be cheaper.
Hammerheads need to be cheaper, Firewarriors need to be cheaper, kroot need to be cheaper.
Heck even Sicarans and other FW stuff need price drops to compete with IG codex.
As they all loose out to units you haven't listed so presumably that implies you think they are ok.
Heck even fellblades and falchions need price drops compaired to their IG equivalents.
As to scions now that they are turn 2 deepstrike only they are probably a lot lower on the list if problem units
On the subject of whirlwinds, predators, vindicators and marines, i agree. They need some help.
Hammerheads and firewarriors are more than fine. Kroot i don't understand to which IG unit you are comparing it to.
Hammerheads loose out is a straight shoot out with Russes a unit that guard players keep claiming is trash.
Firewarriors loose out to Infantry squads shooting it out and even worse against Catachan in CC.
Heck even a pure knights list is hard pushed to beat IG tank spam and Knights are apparently OP as heck according to this board.
I'm not sure hammerheads can take much of a buff without becoming broken around longstrike, but one army shouldn't have the best screens and the best tanks to hide behind said screens per point in the entire game.
Having the best shooting and the best board presence per point (mono codex) makes it very difficult for other armies to compete.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
i'll say it wasn't a fluke but it was a gimmick list built to abuse Guilliman's reroll's to counter the expected meta.
He even said at the start it was a sub optimal list that was designed to counter the expected meta.
It's not exactly a good sign that marines as a blanket army only work when you have to build every list to abuse Guilliman's reroll's
And that is why mathhammer is bad for your health.
Yes, the hammerhead loses a direct confrontation to a Russ, and? So a model to be worth more than another model must beat it in a direct confrontation? Your logic is completely flawed.
Do you know what hammerheads have that russes don't have? Fly! Higher BS (less impacted by degradation and debuffs)! 12" move!
Same for firewarriors, you can't say "Firewarriors lose in a direct fight with equal points of guardsmen so they are worst than guardsmen". Please find a real argument.
I'm not talking math hammer, hence why I didn't mention it. You interjected that because you don't want to admit that guard are one of the top mono factions.
I was talking in game results, other people have done the mathhammer and at no point do firewarriors win a shoot out with infantry squads.
But way to show your just willing to blindly argue in bad faith to support your view that guard are fine and every other faction is more OP.
Mono guard is without a doubt the best mono codex of imperium and maybe of 40K.
Ok, satisfied now? I'm not defending guard, i'm trying to put a little bit of perspective in all the hate that it receives. Guards are one of my worst matchups on the table, i'm only happy if they get nerfed, but i would like to avoid overnerfing things, because i don't like it when it happens to my bugs, so i like to avoid it happening to others.
And again, putting firewarriors against guards in a direct fight is not mathhammer! It's spouting random numbers, because it is a scenario that doesn't give any useful info. I can easily put up a "mathematically correct" scenario where 5 firewarriors kill 10 guards without suffering a single casualty, so i guess that FW are ultra OP, right?
At one point someone did the math where the Fire Warriors get to shoot first to take into account the range advantage and they still lost.
Doesn't matter. Remember when I showed how flawed the vs. Model was by proving that Tac marines out shoot Dark Reapers in a vs. Match? It's a crap model to use for anything other than the specific scenario given, and has very little "real world" bearing because actual games with whole armies involved don't function like that.
The thing that actually annoys people about the Guard is that they have to pay a lot of points for advantages that don't matter by comparison to the Guard. A Primaris Psyker is a third the cost of a Space Marine Librarian for -1S, -1T, -2Sv, and ML1 rather than 2, but gets a comparable melee profile, better psychic powers, and an invulnerable save (which Librarians haven't had outside Terminator armour since the death of armouries in 5e), which feels tremendously unfair; the endless proliferation of good-AP D2 weapons means 20pt Intercessors die just as fast as 4pt Guardsmen...
Whether or not the Guard are actually broken or problematic is independent of the fact that (depending on your viewpoint) either Guard were written for 40k and Space Marines were written for an imaginary fluffy-cloud version of 40k in which their statline is worth its cost, or Space Marines were written for 40k and Guard were written for an obnoxious min/maxxer's edition of 40k where you shave points off by lowering stats that are fundamentally irrelevant.
The other layer of annoyance is that some of us don't want to buy Guardsmen and are sick of constantly being told "yeah, we know your Codex is s***, but if you buy some Guardsmen as a crutch you could do better!"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Insectum7 wrote: ...Doesn't matter. Remember when I showed how flawed the vs. Model was by proving that Tac marines out shoot Dark Reapers in a vs. Match? It's a crap model to use for anything other than the specific scenario given, and has very little "real world" bearing because actual games with whole armies involved don't function like that.
(Model-to-model Tactical Marines and Guardsmen are fairly priced against each other. That is, in practice, a meaningless statement because a real game involves guns other than lasguns.)
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/10/01 16:14:58
AnomanderRake wrote: (Model-to-model Tactical Marines and Guardsmen are fairly priced against each other. That is, in practice, a meaningless statement because a real game involves guns other than lasguns.)
In Guardsmen terms a Marine has the toughness of a 12 point unit but the damage output of a 7 point unit.
2018/10/01 16:35:03
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
AnomanderRake wrote: The thing that actually annoys people about the Guard is that they have to pay a lot of points for advantages that don't matter by comparison to the Guard. A Primaris Psyker is a third the cost of a Space Marine Librarian for -1S, -1T, -2Sv, and ML1 rather than 2, but gets a comparable melee profile, better psychic powers, and an invulnerable save (which Librarians haven't had outside Terminator armour since the death of armouries in 5e), which feels tremendously unfair; the endless proliferation of good-AP D2 weapons means 20pt Intercessors die just as fast as 4pt Guardsmen...
Whether or not the Guard are actually broken or problematic is independent of the fact that (depending on your viewpoint) either Guard were written for 40k and Space Marines were written for an imaginary fluffy-cloud version of 40k in which their statline is worth its cost, or Space Marines were written for 40k and Guard were written for an obnoxious min/maxxer's edition of 40k where you shave points off by lowering stats that are fundamentally irrelevant.
The other layer of annoyance is that some of us don't want to buy Guardsmen and are sick of constantly being told "yeah, we know your Codex is s***, but if you buy some Guardsmen as a crutch you could do better!"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Insectum7 wrote: ...Doesn't matter. Remember when I showed how flawed the vs. Model was by proving that Tac marines out shoot Dark Reapers in a vs. Match? It's a crap model to use for anything other than the specific scenario given, and has very little "real world" bearing because actual games with whole armies involved don't function like that.
(Model-to-model Tactical Marines and Guardsmen are fairly priced against each other. That is, in practice, a meaningless statement because a real game involves guns other than lasguns.)
To be honest, I think marines are a bigger outlier. But a lot of ig stuff trumps even xeno equivalents.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/01 16:36:40
2018/10/01 16:38:09
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
AnomanderRake wrote: (Model-to-model Tactical Marines and Guardsmen are fairly priced against each other. That is, in practice, a meaningless statement because a real game involves guns other than lasguns.)
In Guardsmen terms a Marine has the toughness of a 12 point unit but the damage output of a 7 point unit.
Until you start giving the unit it's expected special and heavy weapons, buffs, and shoot at targets other than Guardsmen. I think there was some math a while ago showing that a Tac Squad can outshoot a Riptide.
Marine equipment costs so much that bc what durability they had goes in the toilet. If you are all in on alpha strike, that's an easy way to lose. A lot of marine units look good until your opponent gets a turn.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/01 16:40:58
2018/10/01 16:53:10
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
That's closer to reality than fiction atm. Guardsmen are objectively worth more than 4 pom. Mortars and wyverns seem out of whack with other ap 0 options in the game. They share the ability to easily put 100+ t 5/6+ sounds on the table with the drukhari.
2018/10/01 17:07:19
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Spoletta wrote: Astra militarum will probably receive some point nerfs in CA. Not many, because it's not like they have any unit really over the top (except artemis hellhounds, but that's FW), but in general probably some little point hikes here and there.
If Guard units are the yard stick for balanced, a lot of units across multiple codex's and even FW indexes need points drops of 20%.
Nah, the IG units that need a few points more are:
1) Basilisks, about 10-15 points
2) Infantry squads about 0,6 points, so i could see it going to 5 or staying where they are.
3) Company and platoon commanders both 10 points.
The super heavies should all get looked at too.
Whirlwinds need to be cheaper, predators need to be cheaper, vindicators need to be a lot cheaper, marines need to be cheaper.
Hammerheads need to be cheaper, Firewarriors need to be cheaper, kroot need to be cheaper.
Heck even Sicarans and other FW stuff need price drops to compete with IG codex.
As they all loose out to units you haven't listed so presumably that implies you think they are ok.
Heck even fellblades and falchions need price drops compaired to their IG equivalents.
As to scions now that they are turn 2 deepstrike only they are probably a lot lower on the list if problem units
On the subject of whirlwinds, predators, vindicators and marines, i agree. They need some help.
Hammerheads and firewarriors are more than fine. Kroot i don't understand to which IG unit you are comparing it to.
Hammerheads loose out is a straight shoot out with Russes a unit that guard players keep claiming is trash.
Firewarriors loose out to Infantry squads shooting it out and even worse against Catachan in CC.
Heck even a pure knights list is hard pushed to beat IG tank spam and Knights are apparently OP as heck according to this board.
I'm not sure hammerheads can take much of a buff without becoming broken around longstrike, but one army shouldn't have the best screens and the best tanks to hide behind said screens per point in the entire game.
Having the best shooting and the best board presence per point (mono codex) makes it very difficult for other armies to compete.
Martel732 wrote: Condescending much? The other podcasters on Reece's own website don't agree with him frequently.
They can disagree with him all they like, he still took an army you guys have written off for dead pretty much all of 8th and got a top 16 finish. And yeah, when the Anti-Guard crowd can't get basic facts about the freaking rulesets being used in the competitive meta right, I'm going to be pretty condescending when you all come into every Guard thread screaming OMG GW GUARD OP PLZ NERF.
Remember that time a Thousand Sons lost made it to a Top 8 in 6th and nobody really cared?
Flukes happen.
It's not a fluke when it's someone who consistently does well at tournaments. It's just a good list in the hands of a good player.
i'll say it wasn't a fluke but it was a gimmick list built to abuse Guilliman's reroll's to counter the expected meta.
He even said at the start it was a sub optimal list that was designed to counter the expected meta.
It's not exactly a good sign that marines as a blanket army only work when you have to build every list to abuse Guilliman's reroll's
And that is why mathhammer is bad for your health.
Yes, the hammerhead loses a direct confrontation to a Russ, and? So a model to be worth more than another model must beat it in a direct confrontation? Your logic is completely flawed.
Do you know what hammerheads have that russes don't have? Fly! Higher BS (less impacted by degradation and debuffs)! 12" move!
Same for firewarriors, you can't say "Firewarriors lose in a direct fight with equal points of guardsmen so they are worst than guardsmen". Please find a real argument.
I'm not talking math hammer, hence why I didn't mention it. You interjected that because you don't want to admit that guard are one of the top mono factions.
I was talking in game results, other people have done the mathhammer and at no point do firewarriors win a shoot out with infantry squads.
But way to show your just willing to blindly argue in bad faith to support your view that guard are fine and every other faction is more OP.
Mono guard is without a doubt the best mono codex of imperium and maybe of 40K.
Ok, satisfied now? I'm not defending guard, i'm trying to put a little bit of perspective in all the hate that it receives. Guards are one of my worst matchups on the table, i'm only happy if they get nerfed, but i would like to avoid overnerfing things, because i don't like it when it happens to my bugs, so i like to avoid it happening to others.
And again, putting firewarriors against guards in a direct fight is not mathhammer! It's spouting random numbers, because it is a scenario that doesn't give any useful info. I can easily put up a "mathematically correct" scenario where 5 firewarriors kill 10 guards without suffering a single casualty, so i guess that FW are ultra OP, right?
At one point someone did the math where the Fire Warriors get to shoot first to take into account the range advantage and they still lost.
Doesn't matter. Remember when I showed how flawed the vs. Model was by proving that Tac marines out shoot Dark Reapers in a vs. Match? It's a crap model to use for anything other than the specific scenario given, and has very little "real world" bearing because actual games with whole armies involved don't function like that.
Dark Reapers aren't durable? Shocker. Dark Reapers excel vs all the heavy targets. If you want anti-infantry you have Swooping Hawks and Dire Avengers.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2018/10/01 17:09:31
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
AnomanderRake wrote: (Model-to-model Tactical Marines and Guardsmen are fairly priced against each other. That is, in practice, a meaningless statement because a real game involves guns other than lasguns.)
In Guardsmen terms a Marine has the toughness of a 12 point unit but the damage output of a 7 point unit.
Until you start giving the unit it's expected special and heavy weapons, buffs, and shoot at targets other than Guardsmen...
And then it gets worse because Guard pay less for their Heavy/Special weapons, and have access to better heavy weapons, better buffs, and better Strategems.
Martel732 wrote: That's closer to reality than fiction atm. Guardsmen are objectively worth more than 4 pom. Mortars and wyverns seem out of whack with other ap 0 options in the game. They share the ability to easily put 100+ t 5/6+ sounds on the table with the drukhari.
Deathstrike missiles surely are not undercosted. Neither are conscripts and veterans. Nor are commissars, ratlings, servants, ogryns.
The number of actual problematic units in the IG codex is low.
Even if you go into the "good but not excellent" choices, like vanilla russes and Manticores, you surely are not going to tell me that a Russ should be a 200 point model, right? Actually if we want to go down the "direct confrontation" route, it has troubles fighting a single Vindicator, which is a 125 points "total crap" model.
Basilisks, hellhounds and company commanders are the only models who would still be decent with a +20% cost, so i can see it coming for them.
Infantry squads are a completely different matter, they are not 4 points models, but they are aren't 5 points either.
2018/10/01 17:10:16
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
Dark Reapers aren't durable? Shocker. Dark Reapers excel vs all the heavy targets. If you want anti-infantry you have Swooping Hawks and Dire Avengers.
Sounds like you agree with me that the vs. model is bad then.
AnomanderRake wrote: (Model-to-model Tactical Marines and Guardsmen are fairly priced against each other. That is, in practice, a meaningless statement because a real game involves guns other than lasguns.)
In Guardsmen terms a Marine has the toughness of a 12 point unit but the damage output of a 7 point unit.
Until you start giving the unit it's expected special and heavy weapons, buffs, and shoot at targets other than Guardsmen...
And then it gets worse because Guard pay less for their Heavy/Special weapons, and have access to better heavy weapons, better buffs, and better Strategems.
No, not better buffs. Definitely not better buffs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/01 17:11:33
Dark Reapers aren't durable? Shocker. Dark Reapers excel vs all the heavy targets. If you want anti-infantry you have Swooping Hawks and Dire Avengers.
Sounds like you agree with me that the vs. model is bad then.
AnomanderRake wrote: (Model-to-model Tactical Marines and Guardsmen are fairly priced against each other. That is, in practice, a meaningless statement because a real game involves guns other than lasguns.)
In Guardsmen terms a Marine has the toughness of a 12 point unit but the damage output of a 7 point unit.
Until you start giving the unit it's expected special and heavy weapons, buffs, and shoot at targets other than Guardsmen...
And then it gets worse because Guard pay less for their Heavy/Special weapons, and have access to better heavy weapons, better buffs, and better Strategems.
No, not better buffs. Definitely not better buffs.
The model isn't bad though. Reapers are having an advantage until Tactical Marines get into Rapid Fire.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2018/10/01 17:20:43
Subject: Post FAQ Prediction - Astra Militarum Will Continue To Be Blamed
The model isn't bad though. Reapers are having an advantage until Tactical Marines get into Rapid Fire.
5 marines with Grav Cannon face equal points of Dark Reapers at 24"
Marines: Bolters(4x.666x.666x.333)=0.59 + Grav(4×.666x.666x.83)=1.47. =2.06 for 68 points of Reapers dead
Reapers: (6×.666×.666×.666)=1.7 =23 points of marines dead
Point for point Tac marines come out way ahead at 24".
Dark Reapers aren't durable? Shocker. Dark Reapers excel vs all the heavy targets. If you want anti-infantry you have Swooping Hawks and Dire Avengers.
Sounds like you agree with me that the vs. model is bad then.
AnomanderRake wrote: (Model-to-model Tactical Marines and Guardsmen are fairly priced against each other. That is, in practice, a meaningless statement because a real game involves guns other than lasguns.)
In Guardsmen terms a Marine has the toughness of a 12 point unit but the damage output of a 7 point unit.
Until you start giving the unit it's expected special and heavy weapons, buffs, and shoot at targets other than Guardsmen...
And then it gets worse because Guard pay less for their Heavy/Special weapons, and have access to better heavy weapons, better buffs, and better Strategems.
No, not better buffs. Definitely not better buffs.
Maybe not comparing them 1-to-1 (and even then I think it's debatable) but SMs pay 2 to 3 times as much to put each buff in the list.
NVM. I looked it up. It appears snipers are useful if they are next to bobby G. Go figure.
Nah - that list is trash. Even the podcasters are like...wuuut? But it's true - anything standing next to bobby G becomes a pretty good unit. They still die just the same though.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
7000 
