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.

Yeah I just don't want to see Orkz at 7ppm and Space Marines being reduced to 11 or even 10. At that point you can basically just kiss Ork boyz goodby and say hello to MSU Grot spam to fill up troop slots and have the Ork codex rely on Gimmicky CP Spam units and mass deep strike.

 fraser1191 wrote:
Some units need more than 15%

A redemptor dread would still be at 170. Still worse than an armiger, provided they don't give it another rule of course.

T8, or a 5++ would help but I'd rather T8 since he's a big boy.

Which armiger? Because the Redemptor has a fist and the Helverin does not, which makes direct comparison difficult especially since the Redemptor is more for killing infantry.

If it's the Warglaive - the Redemptor goes to S14 instead of 12, which is helpful and has a heck of a lot more (anti-infantry) shooting than a couple multi-melta shots. It also doesn't need it's own LoW detachment to exist. Yes, it's slow. Yes, it has no invuln. But if you drop it too low you open the window to spam them and others with RG, which means the cost of RG needs to go up and he becomes unusable without those specific units.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

SemperMortis wrote:
Yeah I just don't want to see Orkz at 7ppm and Space Marines being reduced to 11 or even 10. At that point you can basically just kiss Ork boyz goodby and say hello to MSU Grot spam to fill up troop slots and have the Ork codex rely on Gimmicky CP Spam units and mass deep strike.

If anything GW will move them 1 point tops.

 Toofast wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
You can go look at GW's job openings right now, on their own website, and it will say right there in the application form that they do not hire based on skill.

Could you show me where, because I see this :

"We select candidates for interview based on what they tell us in their letter or video."

Which is very different from what you're saying.

Anecdotal - but my local GW just hired a new casual who has never played any GW based games before. When I walked in the manager was giving him a demo game of AOS. At first I thought it was just some newbie who wondered into the store but nope, new staff member and everything.

I've heard first hand from several GW staff over the years, especially recently, that hiring is mostly based on attitude and customer service. Everything else can be taught.

I had a former manager tell me when I was interviewing that they hire based on sales ability and attitude/enthusiasm. They don't care that I've been building, painting, playing, and teaching other people the game for 20 years. They hired a guy who used to work at CarMax and had never built/painted a model or played a GW game in his life because he had more experience than I did in commission based sales jobs. He lasted 3 months because he tried to make all kinds of crazy house rules for the events at the store, and they always made things worse because he barely understood how the core game worked. By that time, I had a job in marketing for a Fortune 500 company that I still have today. I guess I'm cut out to work in marketing for one of the largest companies in North America, but not cut out to sell models that I have 20+ years of experience with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nurgle5 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:Only thing happened is that GW realized they can accelerate that process from codex to codex to FAQ to FAQ. End result is still same. No balance. It's not in their goal. They don't WANT balance as it hurts the balance of their checkbooks. Less profits for the big bosses.

I'm going to ask again where the Rule of 3 fits in with this theory? Because it effectively limits how many of any given kit a competitive player is likely to buy.

It also forces people to buy kits they might not otherwise buy. GW spends just as much creating an infantry kit as they do with something like a riptide. It's better for them if people are buying lots of different kits instead of 2k points of 1 or 2 kits. That is not an indication that they care more about balance than selling models.

Could this be why Militarum Tempestus didn’t get a Codex?

 Xenomancers wrote:

Tyel wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The Newman wrote:

To be fair, everything in the entire marine book needs to be 15%-30% cheaper

That is a very strong overstatement, I think.

It's really not.

I can think of a few exceptions. Scout bikes are probably properly costed. Stalkers are about right. Some characters are about right but most are overcosted.

You got any examples other than what I listed that aren't at least 15% over?

As an aside - why do you rate the Stalker?
I keep thinking it should be the answer to say Ravagers - but it just isn't really. Not for that many points.

Dono if there is a better option in the game for killing ravagers at range to be honest. So I can't claim that it's overcosted. Though it is situational and the max ap-1 really hurts it. The hunter though - it's probably more than 30% overcosted. A single reroll to hit las cannon on a tough chassie - seems like about a 65 point model to me.

Hunter is probably the only proper costed vehicle in the SM arsenal. If you want to show how overpriced are SM vehicles you have much better examples.

Spoletta wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Tyel wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The Newman wrote:

To be fair, everything in the entire marine book needs to be 15%-30% cheaper

That is a very strong overstatement, I think.

It's really not.

I can think of a few exceptions. Scout bikes are probably properly costed. Stalkers are about right. Some characters are about right but most are overcosted.

You got any examples other than what I listed that aren't at least 15% over?

As an aside - why do you rate the Stalker?
I keep thinking it should be the answer to say Ravagers - but it just isn't really. Not for that many points.

Dono if there is a better option in the game for killing ravagers at range to be honest. So I can't claim that it's overcosted. Though it is situational and the max ap-1 really hurts it. The hunter though - it's probably more than 30% overcosted. A single reroll to hit las cannon on a tough chassie - seems like about a 65 point model to me.

Hunter is probably the only proper costed vehicle in the SM arsenal. If you want to show how overpriced are SM vehicles you have much better examples.

Very few units worst than the hunter in the whole of the game. True though - lots of them are in the space marine codex. Centurians - Landraiders - landspeeders. All garbage level.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Some units need more than 15%

A redemptor dread would still be at 170. Still worse than an armiger, provided they don't give it another rule of course.

T8, or a 5++ would help but I'd rather T8 since he's a big boy.

Which armiger? Because the Redemptor has a fist and the Helverin does not, which makes direct comparison difficult especially since the Redemptor is more for killing infantry.

If it's the Warglaive - the Redemptor goes to S14 instead of 12, which is helpful and has a heck of a lot more (anti-infantry) shooting than a couple multi-melta shots. It also doesn't need it's own LoW detachment to exist. Yes, it's slow. Yes, it has no invuln. But if you drop it too low you open the window to spam them and others with RG, which means the cost of RG needs to go up and he becomes unusable without those specific units.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

SemperMortis wrote:
Yeah I just don't want to see Orkz at 7ppm and Space Marines being reduced to 11 or even 10. At that point you can basically just kiss Ork boyz goodby and say hello to MSU Grot spam to fill up troop slots and have the Ork codex rely on Gimmicky CP Spam units and mass deep strike.

If anything GW will move them 1 point tops.

200 point models without invun saves don't make it to close combat. Plus has reduced shooting efficiency on the move - unlike an armiger.

I agree there is room for improvement. I just disagree on how much would be wise.

Drop the land raider's cost to lower than a knight gallant and let it shoot after falling back, give the redemptor T8 and make it cost less than an armiger, and I'll be closer to happy.

But then you still have vanguard vets with hammers/shields/melta costing 200 points for five models and all kinds of other stuff costing too much... it's gonna take more than chapter approved for me to be happy with marines.

Look at the leviathan - redemptors stats should be similar - perhaps with bs3+ but cheaper because it has weaker weapons.

The Newman wrote:

There are admittedly some things where it feels like the price isn't the issue though. The Redemptor is one of them, both for T7 and for having a much worse set of weapon options than an Armiger. The Vindicator also comes to mind, it feels like it needs Grinding Advance more than any points adjustment.

Terminators, too. For 13 points more than a Custodian Guard, you get an assault cannon/power fist Terminator that is slower, has fewer wounds, worse BS/WS, lower toughness, strength, and attacks, and does marginally more damage to GEQ past 12" if stationary. Oh, but it can deep strike.

It should be 50% it's current price, but it can't be, because its wargear is half the damn point cost.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I agree there is room for improvement. I just disagree on how much would be wise.

You want love taps. What is needed is just as Newman stated 15-30% point reductions across the board.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lemondish wrote:

The Newman wrote:

There are admittedly some things where it feels like the price isn't the issue though. The Redemptor is one of them, both for T7 and for having a much worse set of weapon options than an Armiger. The Vindicator also comes to mind, it feels like it needs Grinding Advance more than any points adjustment.

Terminators, too. For 13 points more than a Custodian Guard, you get an assault cannon/power fist Terminator that is slower, has fewer wounds, worse BS/WS, lower toughness, strength, and attacks, and does marginally more damage to GEQ past 12" if stationary. Oh, but it can deep strike.

It should be 50% it's current price, but it can't be, because its wargear is half the damn point cost.

Whats more a custodian guard isn't even very good for it's points. No wonder they see 0 competitive play.

Lemondish wrote:

The Newman wrote:

There are admittedly some things where it feels like the price isn't the issue though. The Redemptor is one of them, both for T7 and for having a much worse set of weapon options than an Armiger. The Vindicator also comes to mind, it feels like it needs Grinding Advance more than any points adjustment.

Terminators, too. For 13 points more than a Custodian Guard, you get an assault cannon/power fist Terminator that is slower, has fewer wounds, worse BS/WS, lower toughness, strength, and attacks, and does marginally more damage to GEQ past 12" if stationary. Oh, but it can deep strike.

It should be 50% it's current price, but it can't be, because its wargear is half the damn point cost.

When I said 15%-30% I meant for everything, wargear included. Half the problem with Marines is that they pay for being better at everything that a Guardsmen, then they also pay more for the same weapons. A Lascannon (or whatever) doesn't need to cost 25% more in a Marine's hands, you already paid for eveything that makes that Lascannon better when you paid 9 more points for the guy carrying it.

I wouldn't cry about Termies dropping to 30ish points though.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I agree there is room for improvement. I just disagree on how much would be wise.

You want love taps. What is needed is just as Newman stated 15-30% point reductions across the board.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lemondish wrote:

The Newman wrote:

There are admittedly some things where it feels like the price isn't the issue though. The Redemptor is one of them, both for T7 and for having a much worse set of weapon options than an Armiger. The Vindicator also comes to mind, it feels like it needs Grinding Advance more than any points adjustment.

Terminators, too. For 13 points more than a Custodian Guard, you get an assault cannon/power fist Terminator that is slower, has fewer wounds, worse BS/WS, lower toughness, strength, and attacks, and does marginally more damage to GEQ past 12" if stationary. Oh, but it can deep strike.

It should be 50% it's current price, but it can't be, because its wargear is half the damn point cost.

Whats more a custodian guard isn't even very good for it's points. No wonder they see 0 competitive play.

Except you can't do a 20-30% point reduction across the board because then gorram Girlyman becomes a major problem again. 15% is probably doable, but after that Girlybro starts compounding additional firepower on itself and the whole army spirals out of control, just like in the Indexes.(Index Space marines with quad Stormravens are STILL the most powerful army, relative to available field, we've seen in 8th).

The stuff that's really bad: Most of the vehicles, terminators, assault marines, etc. could drop that much and probably still be fine. But you start messing around too much with Centurions or Stormravens or even just devastators and you're setting up for another Girlydude leafblower gunline.

Judging from the ork codex, some good stratagems and better chapter tactics (on all units!) might be much more important than dropping points.

Ork lootas went from being overcosted junk to ok without a single change to the datasheet or points.

Not saying there are no point drops needed, but an overhaul of the stratagems and chapter tactics do more for marine players.

I would go at it by just making bolters better, then giving it a 3 point cost and a 6 point cost to storm bolters. Reduce model costs so that model + bolter/stormbolter is the same cost. Now you made the basic loadouts better and the toys cheaper, which are the biggest issues of marine factions.

 cole1114 wrote:
Drop the land raider's cost to lower than a knight gallant and let it shoot after falling back, give the redemptor T8 and make it cost less than an armiger, and I'll be closer to happy.

But then you still have vanguard vets with hammers/shields/melta costing 200 points for five models and all kinds of other stuff costing too much... it's gonna take more than chapter approved for me to be happy with marines.

lol my dudes cost 200pts before any hammers, special weapons or storm shields

Judging from the ork codex, some good stratagems and better chapter tactics (on all units!) might be much more important than dropping points.

That is true, but how much of it is also orcs being cheap? If the anti flyer cannon cost 150-200pts, like it would if it was an SM artiliery pice, it would be horrible.
Sm probably need everything, point cost drops, and actual good rules both on their units and their stratagems. And in the end it doesn't really mater if GW makes marines tanky, with some special units that are ment to kill stuff in mono lists or the killing being out sourced to knights etc, or if marines become the super killers and the scoring is left to ally or some cheap scouts. As long as the armies work it should be ok. If more then one way of playing is possible, then it is going to be even more awesome.

Karol wrote:
That is true, but how much of it is also orcs being cheap? If the anti flyer cannon cost 150-200pts, like it would if it was an SM artiliery pice, it would be horrible.

You have completely missed my point. Some units have gone from trash tier to decent just because they can benefit from clan kultures and stratagems, with next to no changes to them otherwise. This has zero to do with what orks cost. If anything, space marines tend to be equally or more efficient than comparable ork units, except they have bad chapter tactics and no stratagems to boost them. For example, a unit of tractor cannons is almost equal to a unit of space marine devastators with lascannon against most targets.

You are also comparing apples to oranges - I might as well claim that space marines are fine because Roboute Gulliman is so much cheaper than a stompa.

 Jidmah wrote:

Karol wrote:
That is true, but how much of it is also orcs being cheap? If the anti flyer cannon cost 150-200pts, like it would if it was an SM artiliery pice, it would be horrible.

You have completely missed my point. Some units have gone from trash tier to decent just because they can benefit from clan kultures and stratagems, with next to no changes to them otherwise. This has zero to do with what orks cost. If anything, space marines tend to be equally or more efficient than comparable ork units, except they have bad chapter tactics and no stratagems to boost them. For example, a unit of tractor cannons is almost equal to a unit of space marine devastators with lascannon against most targets.

You are also comparing apples to oranges - I might as well claim that space marines are fine because Roboute Gulliman is so much cheaper than a stompa.

Often paying the same and getting more rules means you get better. Space marine players have suggested both points drops and rules changes to fix the codex. Both are met with huge opposition because marine haters are never in short supply in this game.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Often paying the same and getting more rules means you get better. Space marine players have suggested both points drops and rules changes to fix the codex. Both are met with huge opposition because marine haters are never in short supply in this game.

Calling them marine haters does disservice to their arguments. I'm sure we all have our biases though.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Karol wrote:
That is true, but how much of it is also orcs being cheap? If the anti flyer cannon cost 150-200pts, like it would if it was an SM artiliery pice, it would be horrible.

You have completely missed my point. Some units have gone from trash tier to decent just because they can benefit from clan kultures and stratagems, with next to no changes to them otherwise. This has zero to do with what orks cost. If anything, space marines tend to be equally or more efficient than comparable ork units, except they have bad chapter tactics and no stratagems to boost them. For example, a unit of tractor cannons is almost equal to a unit of space marine devastators with lascannon against most targets.

You are also comparing apples to oranges - I might as well claim that space marines are fine because Roboute Gulliman is so much cheaper than a stompa.

Often paying the same and getting more rules means you get better. Space marine players have suggested both points drops and rules changes to fix the codex. Both are met with huge opposition because marine haters are never in short supply in this game.

As far as I can tell, the people telling marines they are fine are the same as the people that used to tell orks before the codex that they are fine.

I have Dark Angels, Crimson Fists, Imperial Fists and Space Wolves in my gaming group as regular opponents. The universal truth is that marines suck and need help. The ones who do best out of that pile are dark angels - because they have a powerful chapter tactic and strong stragems.
I'd argue if you just take the ork datacards and kultures instead of the marine ones, the army would already be a lot more powerful.

A bit late to the thread, but do we have any firmer date on the release of CA? I know nothing official has been set yet.

I'm really itching for some updates to my Crons, while hoping they don't do anything silly to my Nids and Thousand Sons.

 Jidmah wrote:

Karol wrote:
That is true, but how much of it is also orcs being cheap? If the anti flyer cannon cost 150-200pts, like it would if it was an SM artiliery pice, it would be horrible.

You have completely missed my point. Some units have gone from trash tier to decent just because they can benefit from clan kultures and stratagems, with next to no changes to them otherwise. This has zero to do with what orks cost. If anything, space marines tend to be equally or more efficient than comparable ork units, except they have bad chapter tactics and no stratagems to boost them. For example, a unit of tractor cannons is almost equal to a unit of space marine devastators with lascannon against most targets.

You are also comparing apples to oranges - I might as well claim that space marines are fine because Roboute Gulliman is so much cheaper than a stompa.

It has everything to do with cost. Lets say a super awesome stratagem or rule gets added to land raiders, but their cost stays the same or even goes up. Who cares about the unit then? I tell you who, no one. Plus those type of fixs, unlike a point cost change, is not going to happen in a CA or FAQ, or at least that is what people have been telling me.

And it effects me double, my faction is glued to space marine point costs. I don't have a Gulliman, las devs etc and the chance to get new rules in a new codex, is close to zero next year. You play a cheap army, so getting big returns on certain units is easier, even fitting in weaker unit is easier. If I would decide to take something like 10 purificators in a normal points games I just blew 1/4 of all my points, while your freebooters are just weaker goffs or skulls.



By the way I don't understand the devs vs traktor cannons example. Orcs are cheaper then devs. so after building a 2000pts list, the orc players will have more points left to buy more cannons then a marine player is going to have devs with lascannons. It gets even drastic for armies like GK. After 3 troops, I maybe will have enough left points to buy 1 unit of support, while the orc player could easily buy 3 gun sections.

I don't think any reasonable person is against marine buffs. Marines are the crappiest codex behind grey knights and MAYBE necrons.

I also personally didn't think ork boyz needed to go to 7 points, but w/e. Guardsmen now feel even more out of place than they already did at 4ppm. I think they should go to 5ppm in this CA and get it over with so people will stop complaining about how good guard chaff is in relation to everything else.

Skitarii rangers should go to 8ppm though, or we are going to see guardsmen chaff being replaced with ranger chaff in soup lists.

Karol wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Karol wrote:
That is true, but how much of it is also orcs being cheap? If the anti flyer cannon cost 150-200pts, like it would if it was an SM artiliery pice, it would be horrible.

You have completely missed my point. Some units have gone from trash tier to decent just because they can benefit from clan kultures and stratagems, with next to no changes to them otherwise. This has zero to do with what orks cost. If anything, space marines tend to be equally or more efficient than comparable ork units, except they have bad chapter tactics and no stratagems to boost them. For example, a unit of tractor cannons is almost equal to a unit of space marine devastators with lascannon against most targets.

You are also comparing apples to oranges - I might as well claim that space marines are fine because Roboute Gulliman is so much cheaper than a stompa.

It has everything to do with cost. Lets say a super awesome stratagem or rule gets added to land raiders, but their cost stays the same or even goes up. Who cares about the unit then? I tell you who, no one. Plus those type of fixs, unlike a point cost change, is not going to happen in a CA or FAQ, or at least that is what people have been telling me.

And it effects me double, my faction is glued to space marine point costs. I don't have a Gulliman, las devs etc and the chance to get new rules in a new codex, is close to zero next year. You play a cheap army, so getting big returns on certain units is easier, even fitting in weaker unit is easier. If I would decide to take something like 10 purificators in a normal points games I just blew 1/4 of all my points, while your freebooters are just weaker goffs or skulls.



By the way I don't understand the devs vs traktor cannons example. Orcs are cheaper then devs. so after building a 2000pts list, the orc players will have more points left to buy more cannons then a marine player is going to have devs with lascannons. It gets even drastic for armies like GK. After 3 troops, I maybe will have enough left points to buy 1 unit of support, while the orc player could easily buy 3 gun sections.

First off lets destroy that first point. Lootas are absolute CRAP, in the codex without strats they are far to expensive, lack any kind of durability and on average can dish out about 5 damage a turn to a T7 vehicle with a 3+ but only if they roll average and only if they upgrade to the 15 boy unit which costs....255pts. As soon as the enemy sees them though they will die to a stiff breeze because at T4 with a 6+ save and each model costing 17pts they suck. Now after the codex came out and gave us access to strats and klan tactics they are ok, not great but ok. Using 2 units of 15 and 10 you can combine them with a strat to make a unit of 25, then another strat lets them trigger dakkax3 on 5s and 6s (also makes them always hit on 5s and 6s) give them another bonus for being Bad moon and now they reroll 1s, and finally pay another strat and poof they can now shoot twice a turn. So against a T7 vehicle you are averaging 50 shots a turn, which is about 24 hits a turn with rerolling and exploding 5s and 6s. Those 24 do 12 wounds on average vs T7 and against a 3+ save they will do about 12 damage, almost enough to obliterate a vehicle in 1 turn, and they get to fire a second time The grot unit is there to die as meat shields which covers up their other biggest issue, dying to a stiff breeze.

Same thing for deff dreadz, they are a terrible unit....until I can tellyporta a group of 3 of them into 9' range of the enemy and then have a 8' charge due to klan Evil Sunz. Suddenly, their biggest weakness (Durability/speed) is negated by being able to get into CC so quickly, same thing for the 2 nauts as well as other slow units like battlewagons.

Also, your other complaint that orkz are so much cheaper and we can afford to take more stuff.....yeah no kidding, we suck at shooting and as a rule we aren't as durable as comparable units so we get to be cheaper because we die quicker. Go figure But with your example, no we don't have more points left over to buy more guns because to get the same results with our units we have to buy MORE of them. SO yeah Devestators might cost more than Lootas, but my 5 man unit of lootas isn't doing a whole hell of a lot compared to a 5 man unit of devs. That is why I usually have to bring 3x as many for the same benefits.

 Sasori wrote:
A bit late to the thread, but do we have any firmer date on the release of CA? I know nothing official has been set yet.

I'm really itching for some updates to my Crons, while hoping they don't do anything silly to my Nids and Thousand Sons.

Last year the pre-order was just after Thanksgiving/Black Friday, so not long now. With made to order this week we'll see previews next week I imagine.

Also, your other complaint that orkz are so much cheaper and we can afford to take more stuff.....yeah no kidding, we suck at shooting and as a rule we aren't as durable as comparable units so we get to be cheaper because we die quicker. Go figure But with your example, no we don't have more points left over to buy more guns because to get the same results with our units we have to buy MORE of them. SO yeah Devestators might cost more than Lootas, but my 5 man unit of lootas isn't doing a whole hell of a lot compared to a 5 man unit of devs. That is why I usually have to bring 3x as many for the same benefits.

I wasn't talking about lootaz, so I don't understand why you mention them. And my argument was not that orcs are too cheap. My argument was that in low point cost armies, it is much easier to do fixs by adding single rules or stratagems. Also the problem is not that space marine units one vs one are worse or better then some other armies unit, unless you play narrative or something. It is just that a unit of devs is that cost X times the points an orc unit doing the same costs, is not X times better. It is the same way with IG. People take a squad of them and a squad of marines compare them, and say that IG aren't that much better. What they forget is that marines cost a lot more.

Same thing for deff dreadz, they are a terrible unit....until I can tellyporta a group of 3 of them into 9' range of the enemy and then have a 8' charge due to klan Evil Sunz. Suddenly, their biggest weakness (Durability/speed) is negated by being able to get into CC so quickly, same thing for the 2 nauts as well as other slow units like battlewagons.

ok. now you play marines get the same teleport option, by the way GK can teleport their stuff. Lets say somehow marines also get the speed boost of some sort so the charge is not an above avarge roll. You are not going to fit 3 dreadnoughts or 3 NDKs in case of GK, in to a space marine list. You wil be droping 1. Now what happens next? unless the opposing army consists of 5 model units with teq stats and no stormshields, the dread is either going to bounce or will get tar pited.
The stratagem you use as an example of being good, only works because a deff dread and the other stuff in the orc army is cheap enough to do such stuff. Now am not saying it is totally impossible for marines to build a cheap list. But I doubt many people want to play with 3x5 scouts in every army, not to mention the fact that there are marine armies like GK or DW that do not have scouts, and can't even ,if they wanted to, fit 3 dreads in a list.

Deff Dreadz are 105pts with 6 attacks in CC and no dakka. Dreadnoughts are 134pts for 4 attacks in CC and 6 shots with a S6 AP-1 weapon and 4 shots with a S4 weapon hitting on 3s.

Deff dreadz are 4 attacks at S10 and 2 at S9 Dreadnoughts are 4 attacks at S12.

so 29pts gets you +2 strength and a lot of dakka but 2 less attacks.....I wouldn't be "bouncing" off targets, I would be killing specific targets just like I am with my dreadz. I don't just launch them into fodder units, i make them run into vehicles and heavy infantry so I can carve them up.

So I would call that about a draw as far as points/damage. And the reason I brought up lootas was because you said Space Marine units are terrible and need major fixes as well as price drops, I was giving examples of terrible units that got better with just strats and no changes.

And yeah, Space Marine units are significantly more expensive then a comparable unit in the IG but you keep comparing only 1 aspect of them...damage. But glossing over the fact that those Marines have a 2+ in cover with their heavy weapons (Devestators) while the IG Heavy weapons team gets at best a 4+ in cover. In other words you are also paying for better chances to hit and more durability.

Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

Darsath wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:
Necron Wishlist:

Warriors: Give them back the gauss rule (MW on 6+ to wound vs vehicles) and/or pts drop.

Monolith: Inv save and pts drop. Allow unit to disembark the turn it deepstrikes.

Flyers: God knows. Pts drop + ignore move and firing heavy as standard at the least.

Flayed ones: Ap-1 in combat.

Lychguard: pts drop.

Stratagems: Enhanced RP to 1CP (it still wouldn't be great,but it's hilariously bad at 2CP.

Entropic strike: make it apply to all attacks, not just the first one.


There a ton more changes tbh, but these are the big ones. RP is what it is, no point hoping for an overhaul there.

Those are all fine. Except the mortals on 6's for warriors. That is ultimately insane - with that rule alone you would never lose a game just spamming warriors. Warriors just need their 3+ save back. Rp is totally fine too. You have to understand this ability is to be messure against other army wide abilites. Marines have a completely useless ability called ATSKNF - eldar get battle focus (decen't but not game breaking), tau get supporting fire, RP could potentially bring back 19 warriors from death...seriously. It is fine. Necrons aren't in nearly as bad of shape as anyone claims. They have some extremely overcosted weapon options and those need to be fixed - they have some bad units that could use point drops (but literally every army has these complaints in some form that isn't named DE or AM).

Don't Deathmarks already do Mortals on 6's in addition to their normal damage though? I don't see them being spammed as a result.

They aren't troops and aren't in units of 20.