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.

 Blackie wrote:


Maybe, but what are the alternatives for drukhari for that role? SM have several solutions, drukhari don't.

Again, I'm all in favor of getting things priced correctly but if some of the most effective drukhari units and wargear gets a price hike, then the underperforming stuff should be buffed or discounted. A flat nerf to an army that isn't overpowered at all would be dumb. AM should get tons of price hikes since one year and a half and yet their undercosted weapons still bully the tables.

One of the issues here is that we all (myself included) compare everything to space marine units. Everyone knows their stats so it is a good thing to work against and is a generally accepted baseline, the problem with it is they are a very badly costed thing to compare against as they just aren't good in this edition, they are not a middle thing to balance against they are bottom of the pile. Ideally the best things should be nerfed and the worst things improved but that is a hard thing to get right.

As you said comparing against other units/options from other codex's is apples to oranges and doesn't take into account many contributing factors but perhaps comparing Ravagers to other things in the DE book will show why people consider them just too cheap.

The ravager is designed, in fluff and rules, to take on heavy infantry and tanks - taking dissy for killing heavy infantry and dark lances for anti tank.
At the moment players are taking Dissy for both these roles as they are better against tanks than dark lances in most cases and considerably better against heavy infantry. Added to this you (or someone else perhaps) have mentioned that they are also being used as your anti horde weaponry as well. This isn't a role in which they have been designed to be points effective but due to how cheap they are they are being used for that as well.
This should show us that the Dissy should cost at least as much as a dark lance, which most would agree is a well costed weapon (cheaper than a lascannon and about as good) whilst also showing us that perhaps the DE anti infantry weapons could do with either a cut in points or a boost in their effectiveness or the same for the units that carry them.

No weapons should ever be the most cost effective weapon at killing - Light infantry & heavy infantry & Tanks/monsters - if a weapon is then something is badly wrong with the internal balance one way or another.

I'm no expert on DE weapons as all I seem to have played against have been Dissy cannons and Haywire both of which seem to be excellent at their specialised role but also very good at engaging other types of targets. Whether this shows that DEs more specialised weapons are overcosted or these more versatile weapons are undercosted is the real question.

"You guys have farseers, which are a multiplier comperable to gulliman with less points and more, and better units being effected."
They're like Guilliman, except:
-They only give one target reroll-to-hit instead of *every unit within 6"*, and it's shooting only. Also, you're complaining about a DE player - only what they ally in with the Farseer can be affected.
-They only Doom on target with reroll-wounds-against, instead of *every unit firing from within 6"*.
-Gman's are automatic. Farseers are very likely to get one of their two powers off, but both aren't nearly as reliable. More than most psykers, but not even close to as reliable as an aura.

So when you say the Farseer gets "more, better" units using it, do you even know what the Farseer's rules are?

Also, on Reapers: The complaint about "auto-delete any deepstriker" is crazy. They don't even remove a Tac squad with that 2pt stratagem.

Bharring wrote:
"You guys have farseers, which are a multiplier comperable to gulliman with less points and more, and better units being effected."
They're like Guilliman, except:
-They only give one target reroll-to-hit instead of *every unit within 6"*, and it's shooting only. Also, you're complaining about a DE player - only what they ally in with the Farseer can be affected.
-They only Doom on target with reroll-wounds-against, instead of *every unit firing from within 6"*.
-Gman's are automatic. Farseers are very likely to get one of their two powers off, but both aren't nearly as reliable. More than most psykers, but not even close to as reliable as an aura.

So when you say the Farseer gets "more, better" units using it, do you even know what the Farseer's rules are?

Also, on Reapers: The complaint about "auto-delete any deepstriker" is crazy. They don't even remove a Tac squad with that 2pt stratagem.

You also forgot Roboute is 1/5 of your army at 400 points. Of COURSE as a model he does more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 WisdomLS wrote:

 Blackie wrote:


Maybe, but what are the alternatives for drukhari for that role? SM have several solutions, drukhari don't.

Again, I'm all in favor of getting things priced correctly but if some of the most effective drukhari units and wargear gets a price hike, then the underperforming stuff should be buffed or discounted. A flat nerf to an army that isn't overpowered at all would be dumb. AM should get tons of price hikes since one year and a half and yet their undercosted weapons still bully the tables.

One of the issues here is that we all (myself included) compare everything to space marine units. Everyone knows their stats so it is a good thing to work against and is a generally accepted baseline, the problem with it is they are a very badly costed thing to compare against as they just aren't good in this edition, they are not a middle thing to balance against they are bottom of the pile. Ideally the best things should be nerfed and the worst things improved but that is a hard thing to get right.

As you said comparing against other units/options from other codex's is apples to oranges and doesn't take into account many contributing factors but perhaps comparing Ravagers to other things in the DE book will show why people consider them just too cheap.

The ravager is designed, in fluff and rules, to take on heavy infantry and tanks - taking dissy for killing heavy infantry and dark lances for anti tank.
At the moment players are taking Dissy for both these roles as they are better against tanks than dark lances in most cases and considerably better against heavy infantry. Added to this you (or someone else perhaps) have mentioned that they are also being used as your anti horde weaponry as well. This isn't a role in which they have been designed to be points effective but due to how cheap they are they are being used for that as well.
This should show us that the Dissy should cost at least as much as a dark lance, which most would agree is a well costed weapon (cheaper than a lascannon and about as good) whilst also showing us that perhaps the DE anti infantry weapons could do with either a cut in points or a boost in their effectiveness or the same for the units that carry them.

No weapons should ever be the most cost effective weapon at killing - Light infantry & heavy infantry & Tanks/monsters - if a weapon is then something is badly wrong with the internal balance one way or another.

I'm no expert on DE weapons as all I seem to have played against have been Dissy cannons and Haywire both of which seem to be excellent at their specialised role but also very good at engaging other types of targets. Whether this shows that DEs more specialised weapons are overcosted or these more versatile weapons are undercosted is the real question.

Be careful, Blackie ignores all the math.

"You also forgot Roboute is 1/5 of your army at 400 points. Of COURSE as a model he does more."
Who suggested otherwise?

There was a claim that Farseers (1) do as much *despite* costing less, and (2) impact more, and better units, again despite costing less.

The response points out that Gman does *more*. With no argument that Gman costs *more*. Only that Farseers do not do more.

Do I need to rattle off the whole "I'm not saying Marines are OP" diatribe every single post? Would that even stop the strawmen?

(And before you say, but you can have 3 Farseers for the points: you can, but you still can't Guide/Doom more than one unit. And Gman almost always impacts far more than 3 units. But again, note that none of this claims Gman is OP or Farsseers aren't.)

farseer can buff any eldar tribe. Bobby g is only smurfs. That's the huge difference I see.

Martel732 wrote:
farseer can buff any eldar tribe. Bobby g is only smurfs. That's the huge difference I see.

Then you have no idea how the unit works. A Farseer can buff *ONE* unit with a single buff, with a limit of two possible buffs cast (which are by no means guaranteed to go off). Rowboat has no limit to how many smurfs get supercharged.

When did they FAQ the 'reroll all hits of 1 for all IMPERIUM' within 12"?

If you're being pedantic, Farseers can only *buff* Craftworlders. If you're not being pedantic, 'reroll all hits of 1' for a 12" bubble is a hell of a lot stronger than 'reroll failed wounds' on only *one* target. If you have no other Marines, that's a hell of a lot of Guardsmen (or whatever) you're buffing.

Guilliman just needs changing but that almost certainly isn't happening until Marines 2.0. I suspect this is why Marine changes are going to be timid when they should be sweeping.

Doom is almost as good as Guilliman in certain special situations - i.e. when you need that Castellan to die and you will happily shoot your entire army at it to achieve that goal. If Knights were not a thing then Doom would be a lot less powerful. Its by no means amazing when cast on a unit costing 100-150 points.

Bharring wrote:
When did they FAQ the 'reroll all hits of 1 for all IMPERIUM' within 12"?

If you're being pedantic, Farseers can only *buff* Craftworlders. If you're not being pedantic, 'reroll all hits of 1' for a 12" bubble is a hell of a lot stronger than 'reroll failed wounds' on only *one* target. If you have no other Marines, that's a hell of a lot of Guardsmen (or whatever) you're buffing.

I would never pay his cost for that buff, though. He may as well be ultrasmurf only. Rerolling all wounds is rare and powerful, and this drives farseer and smurfs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sterling191 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
farseer can buff any eldar tribe. Bobby g is only smurfs. That's the huge difference I see.

Then you have no idea how the unit works. A Farseer can buff *ONE* unit with a single buff, with a limit of two possible buffs cast (which are by no means guaranteed to go off). Rowboat has no limit to how many smurfs get supercharged.

That doesnt contradict what I said.

Martel732 wrote:
farseer can buff any eldar tribe. Bobby g is only smurfs. That's the huge difference I see.

Well one is a Aura ability and can not be denied

The other has to be cast, only works on one unit and can be denied by other Psykers and reduced in chance with units like Sisters of Silence.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
farseer can buff any eldar tribe. Bobby g is only smurfs. That's the huge difference I see.

Well one is a Aura ability and can not be denied

The other has to be cast, only works on one unit and can be denied by other Psykers and reduced in chance with units like Sisters of Silence.

But Bobby G is Ultramarines Specific could you imagine marines with Bobby G and the -1 to hit army wide?

It's currently called Alitoc Eldar, that was the point he was making every marine unit is priced like it's permanently being bobby G buffed, it would be like the craftworld codex being correctly priced for Ynarri+DOOM.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Well one is a Aura ability and can not be denied

Auras can be denied by necrons. But the necron character has to get within 12" of the enemy character.

Math time.

Archon plus trait and 3 Dissie Ravs vs BobbyG and Asscans with output as a ratio of effectiveness to points.

Bobby G is about equal against weaker models. Upping it to 6 RBs makes him better vs weaker, but is still unable to close the gap against disintegrators.

Disintegrators would absolutely dominate if not for the rule of three therefore disintegrators are much better than TACs, QED.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Math time.

Archon plus trait and 3 Dissie Ravs vs BobbyG and Asscans with output as a ratio of effectiveness to points.

Bobby G is about equal against weaker models. Upping it to 6 RBs makes him better vs weaker, but is still unable to close the gap against disintegrators.

Disintegrators would absolutely dominate if not for the rule of three therefore disintegrators are much better than TACs, QED.

That's just damage output to - not even factoring into the equation that the razors probably moved to get in range so now they hit on 4's. Plus game play mechanics - vehicals can't fall back and shoot unless they have fly. (which every dissie platform has) nor to mention the fact that flayed skull dessie have ignore cover and reroll 1's to hit naturally with no move and shoot penalties.

It's not even close.

Nobody (as far as I can see) is saying that Bobby G is more broken than Farseers. The following claims are what are being claimed and refuted (in parethenses, my findings):
-A Farseer buffs more & better units better than Bobby G, despite the points difference (not true)
-Farseers buff any type of Eldar (technically not true, practically partially true)
-Auras are better than deniable powers (true)
-Bobby G does not buff non-UltraMarines (not true)
-Bobby G buffs non-Ultramarines more than a Farseer buffs non-Craftworlders (true)
-That people, when discussing whether Farseers buff more than Bobby G despite costing less, didn't realize that Farseers cost less (not true)

The above math is without farseers. With Farseers it's friggen hilarious.

I do agree that Dissie Ravagers are more OP than Bobby G Assault Cannons.

That said, you're not factoring in the force multiplication Bobby G has on the other 1200 or 900 points of the list.

The Archon also impacts the rest of the list, but not nearly as much as Bobby G. Although an added Farseer wouldn't impact more than one target.

People saying dissie should be increased to cost the same as dark lance - you realize no one takes dark lances, right? Dark Lances are not good.

And Guilliman is army-wide guide, and army-wide doom, without the ability to be denied. His gun isn't bad, and his melee is pretty good, too.

 Marmatag wrote:
People saying dissie should be increased to cost the same as dark lance - you realize no one takes dark lances, right? Dark Lances are not good.

And Guilliman is army-wide guide, and army-wide doom, without the ability to be denied. His gun isn't bad, and his melee is pretty good, too.

Yeah it's nuts. Whats really nuts is even with that space marines can't win games. Imagine if Astra Militarum could take Gman and have the ultra marines buff. Everything would be tabled in 2 turns.

Also if a dark lance is bad - how bad are lascannons? they even cost 5 points more. (looks like they might be getting dropped in some leaks).

Bharring wrote:

That said, you're not factoring in the force multiplication Bobby G has on the other 1200 or 900 points of the list.

Bobby and 6 Assbacks are worse overall for the points and come in at 1100. Just how many things are you going to fit within 6" of RG while still grabbing objectives?

That's a really good point. There is a limit in what you can get within his 6" aura.

I still consider DE or CWE more OP than Gman UltraMarines. Gman does more buffing than DE/CWE, which needed to be corrected.

Dissies are yet another case of Plas being OP this edition.

Bharring wrote:
That's a really good point. There is a limit in what you can get within his 6" aura.

I still consider DE or CWE more OP than Gman UltraMarines. Gman does more buffing than DE/CWE, which needed to be corrected.

Dissies are yet another case of Plas being OP this edition.

Dessie are the prefect weapon.

Str 5 is the most efficient str in the edition - they have more than enough AP to shoot at any target and reduce to invo or something even more pathetic and flat 2 damage with 3 shots is a huge amount of potential damage.

Can you really call it plas if it doesn't overheat ether?

Dark Lances being strength 8 gimps them hard.

And plasma is strength 8. There is a colossal difference between STR8 and STR5.

A better comparison to Dissie is Grav Cannon.

Both str5, both ap-3, and one is 2 versus d3

 Marmatag wrote:
People saying dissie should be increased to cost the same as dark lance - you realize no one takes dark lances, right? Dark Lances are not good.

And Guilliman is army-wide guide, and army-wide doom, without the ability to be denied. His gun isn't bad, and his melee is pretty good, too.

Dark Lances are bad in the shadow of Disintegrators.

Dark Lances are certainly better against vehicles, but not by a wide enough margin to ignore the all-round effectiveness of the Disintegrator. Couple that with the fact that Disintegrators offers the best benefit for force multiplication with Doom and you can see why no one takes lances.

Dark Lances beat out Las Preds easily and are equal in effectiveness to almost an entire army of RG LC. RG's raw damage output will be really high by comparison, but we're comparing a group of ~500 points to those 2x or 3x their cost.

"Can you really call it plas if it doesn't overheat ether?"
IoM can fire S7 D1 plas that doesn't overheat.
CWE can fire S6 Dd3 plas that doesn't overheat.
DE can fire S5 D2 plas that doesn't overheat.

Funny how the Heavy Bolter was the "worst thing" in this edition, and Grav was considered terribad, because S5 doesn't double out T3. But when it's xenos that have S5, suddenly it's the best thing since sliced bread.

Dark and Bright Lances really need to have a rule that lets them always wound on a 4+ (as opposed to making the S9).

Give me Assault on my Brightlances, and I'm a happy camper.

Two things about Index CWE were a travesty to me: 17ppm (!) Dire Avengers (I mean, omgwtfbbq what were they thinking), and CWE Gravtanks - such as Falcon Cloudhunters - being BS-1 after moving 1". The Codex fixed one, I'm still sour about the other.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Dark and Bright Lances really need to have a rule that lets them always wound on a 4+ (as opposed to making the S9).

They basically had that prior to 8th. No idea why they didn't adapt that over.
It's simple - "If the target's toughness is higher than this weapon's strength, it wounds on a 4+"

 Marmatag wrote:
Dark Lances being strength 8 gimps them hard.

And plasma is strength 8. There is a colossal difference between STR8 and STR5.

A better comparison to Dissie is Grav Cannon.

Both str5, both ap-3, and one is 2 versus d3

So in this comparison a Grav cannon is worth say...12 points? Currently pays 28?

Seems like one is undercosted and the other is overcosted. But Grav Cannon is probably the closest IoM weapon to the Dissie.