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.

Land Raiders also got a buff against Grav & Necrons.

You can't glance them to death effortlessly. This is where LR were really dying in 7th. Not due to melta.

EDIT: did forget about doublefire there, too many numbers, thx for the reminder

Still, a Battlecannon Russ with a Hull Lascannon at 164pt is going to take 6 turns of fire to kill a Land Raider in 8E, that doesn't feel inappropriate.



That said, looking at the Vanq versus the Land Raider, in 7E we needed an average of 7.6 turns of fire (assuming no cover) with a Lascannon Vanq to kill a Land Raider, in 8E we need 8.4 turns. The Vanq was just...super poorly designed.

Moar maths!

4 HP
1/6 chance of glancing with Gauss
2/3 chance of hitting
36 Shots to kill a Land Raider, or less than a full squad rapid-firing

As compared to...

16 HP
1/3 chance of failing a save
1/6 chance of wounding
2/3 chance of hitting
432 shots to kill.

4 HP
11/36 chance of glancing AND immobilizing with Grav
2/3 chance of hitting
14.73 Grav Cannon with Amp shots to kill a Land Raider. And about 5 to make it useless, via Immobilization.

As compared to...

16 HP
2 Damage a shot on average
2/3 chance of failing a save
1/3 chance of wounding
2/3 chance of hitting
54 shots to kill.

And Leman Russes have Grinding Advance, which doubles their shots.

LR were buffed from 7th that's for sure. They got more consistent, previously you had the risk of the first lascannon shot from your enemy taking it out right there. Now at least it takes a whole lot of attention to take one down (especially at 1+). The LR has other problems now, not durability. I would start looking from the fact that it is a transport in a faction where you don't have anything good to transport.

A leman russ is a fraction of the points of a land raider. A more honest comparison would be like 3 leman russes double firing into a land raider. Because points matter.

 Marmatag wrote:
Land Raiders also got a buff against Grav & Necrons.

You can't glance them to death effortlessly. This is where LR were really dying in 7th. Not due to melta.

D weapons made them unplayable. They were unplayable anyways though.

D weapons were stupid and shouldn't have existed.

 Marmatag wrote:
D weapons were stupid and shouldn't have existed.

I actually loved D weapons. They were the counter to things that were too hard to kill - the game needs something like this now IMO. Invo saves are too strong right now.

Silly stacking aside, hard to kill stuff tends to be overpriced this edition.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
D weapons were stupid and shouldn't have existed.

I actually loved D weapons. They were the counter to things that were too hard to kill - the game needs something like this now IMO. Invo saves are too strong right now.

No it doesn't. That thing is Mortal Wounds, which are fine from weird sources like psykers, but shouldn't be doled out like candy for other weapons. Down that road lies spam and horrid design cul-de-sac, which renders units like terminators and land raiders and what-nots even worse than they are, since they pay so much for their armour. What should be done would be to rather reduce the doling out of invulnerables so that the proper AP values would actually be useful against xenos targets too.

 Marmatag wrote:
A leman russ is a fraction of the points of a land raider. A more honest comparison would be like 3 leman russes double firing into a land raider. Because points matter.

3 Battlecannon Russ tanks with hull Lascannons at 492pts (164pts each) doublefiring with no movement penalties are averaging 7.5 wounds against a (iirc) 360pt Land Raider.

So, it takes about a thousand points of BC/LC Russ tank fire to kill a Land Raider.

 Marmatag wrote:
D weapons were stupid and shouldn't have existed.

200% truth.

A least outside of specially set up large games involving special use of rare big units like Reaver Titans. When they started handing them out to things like infanry units, and flyera and the smallest of superheavy classes, they got absurd.

When they started to have to be relied on for dealing with especially tough units, that should have indicated a major game design issue.

Mortal wounds are okay now. Haywire is a great example. Effective against vehicles, but not terminators.

Maybe the game needs better haywire.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
D weapons were stupid and shouldn't have existed.

I actually loved D weapons. They were the counter to things that were too hard to kill - the game needs something like this now IMO. Invo saves are too strong right now.

This continuos escalation is what leads to the eventual collapse of a game system (and the mandatory reboot).
How much this is intentional is anyone's guess.

 Marmatag wrote:
Mortal wounds are okay now. Haywire is a great example. Effective against vehicles, but not terminators.

Maybe the game needs better haywire.

The haywire is too good IMO. It wrecks vehcials and infantry - basically a TAC weapon...not really fair.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
D weapons were stupid and shouldn't have existed.

I actually loved D weapons. They were the counter to things that were too hard to kill - the game needs something like this now IMO. Invo saves are too strong right now.

This continuos escalation is what leads to the eventual collapse of a game system (and the mandatory reboot).
How much this is intentional is anyone's guess.

IDK about that - it kinda turns to RPS. RPS is more fun that "this list always wins".

 Xenomancers wrote:

IDK about that - it kinda turns to RPS. RPS is more fun that "this list always wins".

That's all fine and dandy until you realize that not everyone had rocks. Rocks were a privilege of specific pointy-eared fellows in the example you made above.
Also, the lack of 0-1 choices has an additional, deleterious effect IMHO: "normal" units without super weapons (or sometimes whole armies) are just not deployed*.
Said this, as a design PRINCIPLE - better executed - I am all with you.

*Edit: to elaborate on that - if every army has one specific "delete that" unit, and such unit is well designed and perhaps has one specific, thematic fault in each army (be this fault the delivery, the range, or whatever) you can build an army of normal units around that as a support. But this is not what happens in Spamhammer 40k.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Mortal wounds are okay now. Haywire is a great example. Effective against vehicles, but not terminators.

Maybe the game needs better haywire.

The haywire is too good IMO. It wrecks vehcials and infantry - basically a TAC weapon...not really fair.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
D weapons were stupid and shouldn't have existed.

I actually loved D weapons. They were the counter to things that were too hard to kill - the game needs something like this now IMO. Invo saves are too strong right now.

This continuos escalation is what leads to the eventual collapse of a game system (and the mandatory reboot).
How much this is intentional is anyone's guess.

IDK about that - it kinda turns to RPS. RPS is more fun that "this list always wins".

Haywire is the exact opposite of TAC. It is good at killing vehicles and that's it. AT weapons at least are good against vehicles and monsters.

No it's not. It's excellent against infantry too with d6 str 4 ap-1 shots. Each one is a plasma grenade basically.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IDK about that - it kinda turns to RPS. RPS is more fun that "this list always wins".

That's all fine and dandy until you realize that not everyone had rocks. Rocks were a privilege of specific pointy-eared fellows in the example you made above.
Also, the lack of 0-1 choices has an additional, deleterious effect IMHO: "normal" units without super weapons (or sometimes whole armies) are just not deployed*.
Said this, as a design PRINCIPLE - better executed - I am all with you.

*Edit: to elaborate on that - if every army has one specific "delete that" unit, and such unit is well designed and perhaps has one specific, thematic fault in each army (be this fault the delivery, the range, or whatever) you can build an army of normal units around that as a support. But this is not what happens in Spamhammer 40k.

OFC - every army should have access to rock scissors and paper. Current the game doesn't support that. Plus many armies posses rock paper and scisors on the same unit. It just starts getting silly.

 Xenomancers wrote:
No it's not. It's excellent against infantry too with d6 str 4 ap-1 shots. Each one is a plasma grenade basically.

For 45 points?

Tyel wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
No it's not. It's excellent against infantry too with d6 str 4 ap-1 shots. Each one is a plasma grenade basically.

For 45 points?

That is the cost of the entire unit - which is actually higher if you give it the glaive (and you should) The weapon costs 15. Which it basically makes up every-time it shoots at a vehicle and after that it's mobility plus range means you are putting ap-1 en mass on infantry

Lets just say you take 18 of them (not a bad idea) That kills 23 gardsmen with average rolls - then they can charge and kill 32 more. Nearly all the gardsmen in a brigade killed in a single turn...I wouldn't say they are really lacking in the anti infantry department.

Yes I know that is 900 points of bikes lol.

Eh, I would argue that Haywire is a good place overall.

It's specialized.

Not the most optimal choice to fight infantry.

Not the most optimal choice against vehicles without an invulnerable save.

Has the ability to wound high toughness, great invulnerable save vehicles.

It's a niche use case. It's use case is amplified by knights being common.

 Xenomancers wrote:
That is the cost of the entire unit - which is actually higher if you give it the glaive (and you should) The weapon costs 15. Which it basically makes up every-time it shoots at a vehicle and after that it's mobility plus range means you are putting ap-1 en mass on infantry

Lets just say you take 18 of them (not a bad idea) That kills 23 gardsmen with average rolls - then they can charge and kill 32 more. Nearly all the gardsmen in a brigade killed in a single turn...I wouldn't say they are really lacking in the anti infantry department.

Yes I know that is 900 points of bikes lol.

I'd say that was pretty terrible for your 900 points under close to optimal conditions.

If you are shooting less effectively than Necron Warriors outside of rapid fire range you are not an effective anti-infantry choice.

 Marmatag wrote:
Eh, I would argue that Haywire is a good place overall.

It's specialized.

Not the most optimal choice to fight infantry.

Not the most optimal choice against vehicles without an invulnerable save.

Has the ability to wound high toughness, great invulnerable save vehicles.

It's a niche use case. It's use case is amplified by knights being common.

Haywire on it's own is annoying but not OMG OP but Haywire plus Doom is OP.

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Eh, I would argue that Haywire is a good place overall.

It's specialized.

Not the most optimal choice to fight infantry.

Not the most optimal choice against vehicles without an invulnerable save.

Has the ability to wound high toughness, great invulnerable save vehicles.

It's a niche use case. It's use case is amplified by knights being common.

Haywire on it's own is annoying but not OMG OP but Doom is OP.

Here, fixed.

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Eh, I would argue that Haywire is a good place overall.

It's specialized.

Not the most optimal choice to fight infantry.

Not the most optimal choice against vehicles without an invulnerable save.

Has the ability to wound high toughness, great invulnerable save vehicles.

It's a niche use case. It's use case is amplified by knights being common.

Haywire on it's own is annoying but not OMG OP but Haywire plus Doom is OP.

Not even. Knights still have a 5+++ against mortal wounds for 1 CP.

Doom is only good if your opponent sinks a ton of points into big things.

There is a different between being effective and being Op.

 Marmatag wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Eh, I would argue that Haywire is a good place overall.

It's specialized.

Not the most optimal choice to fight infantry.

Not the most optimal choice against vehicles without an invulnerable save.

Has the ability to wound high toughness, great invulnerable save vehicles.

It's a niche use case. It's use case is amplified by knights being common.

Haywire on it's own is annoying but not OMG OP but Haywire plus Doom is OP.

Not even. Knights still have a 5+++ against mortal wounds for 1 CP.

Doom is only good if your opponent sinks a ton of points into big things.

There is a different between being effective and being Op.

So, like mortars then? Because as the math has shown you're not clearing gak off of an objective with them if they have any kind of defensive bonus.

Tyel wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
That is the cost of the entire unit - which is actually higher if you give it the glaive (and you should) The weapon costs 15. Which it basically makes up every-time it shoots at a vehicle and after that it's mobility plus range means you are putting ap-1 en mass on infantry

Lets just say you take 18 of them (not a bad idea) That kills 23 gardsmen with average rolls - then they can charge and kill 32 more. Nearly all the gardsmen in a brigade killed in a single turn...I wouldn't say they are really lacking in the anti infantry department.

Yes I know that is 900 points of bikes lol.

I'd say that was pretty terrible for your 900 points under close to optimal conditions.

If you are shooting less effectively than Necron Warriors outside of rapid fire range you are not an effective anti-infantry choice.

They are about as effective as a necron warrior at 24" - yes. When you put it like this - it kinda doesn't sound so bad "18 harlie bikes are as effective as 60 necron warriors shooting at infantry."

Outside of Rapid Fire range, mind you. With optimal conditions for the bikes.

Or, if we assume optimal for both...

Bikes kill, as per your math, 55 Guardsmen.
Warriors kill...



62.22 Guardsmen under the same optimal circumstances.

Against Guardsmen, they are LESS EFFECTIVE than Necron flipping Warriors. A crappy unit.

 Marmatag wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Eh, I would argue that Haywire is a good place overall.

It's specialized.

Not the most optimal choice to fight infantry.

Not the most optimal choice against vehicles without an invulnerable save.

Has the ability to wound high toughness, great invulnerable save vehicles.

It's a niche use case. It's use case is amplified by knights being common.

Haywire on it's own is annoying but not OMG OP but Haywire plus Doom is OP.

Not even. Knights still have a 5+++ against mortal wounds for 1 CP.

Doom is only good if your opponent sinks a ton of points into big things.

There is a different between being effective and being Op.

Why did you assume it was Haywire vrs knights?
It's more the general interaction of the two that is supper busted, much like the interactions between Guilliman and things like assualt cannons etc that GW needs to address as haywire without doom and haywire with doom is not worth close to the same points cost.

Rerolling 1's sort of works as it still favours taking the right weapon for a given target, however all wounds rerolls leads to some terrible rules interactions.

Ice_can wrote:
Why did you assume it was Haywire vrs knights?
It's more the general interaction of the two that is supper busted, much like the interactions between Guilliman and things like assualt cannons etc that GW needs to address as haywire without doom and haywire with doom is not worth close to the same points cost.

Because Knights are the only real target (I guess Baneblade Variants and some Forgeworld stuff) where the return on your points starts to get too good.

As Marmatag said - doom is beneficial on big things. You put doom on a 100 point vehicle - okay, its going to die - but that Farseer wasn't free and doom isn't automatic.
By contrast you might shoot your whole army at a Castellan to kill it - and your whole army gets the benefit of doom. You are making say 1000 points more efficient rather than the two hundred or whatever you might have expected to kill that 100 point vehicle. This is where the return on your points becomes overpowered.

Much like Guilliman. The issue is you castle around him, and he effectively improves the expected damage output of everything around him by 100%+. So you can "gain" 1000 points worth of damage output. Which is a bit stupid (or certainly would be if Marines had great options to begin with.)

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
A leman russ is a fraction of the points of a land raider. A more honest comparison would be like 3 leman russes double firing into a land raider. Because points matter.

3 Battlecannon Russ tanks with hull Lascannons at 492pts (164pts each) doublefiring with no movement penalties are averaging 7.5 wounds against a (iirc) 360pt Land Raider.

So, it takes about a thousand points of BC/LC Russ tank fire to kill a Land Raider.

Yes, to kill it in a single turn. Most games last longer than one turn.

The Raider would have a high chance of death in the second turn. It also would only average 6.63 wounds against the combined 36 wounds of Russ tanks.

Doesn't matter, though. The most efficient way to remove a Land Raider is 4 points of bayonet rendering it essentially worthless