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.

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 buddha wrote:
I'll take any points drops for Necrons but they need a whole rework from the ground up since RP just doesn't work.

This is how I feel about my Daemons, more or less.

Would love to think points will change it, but realistically they're waiting for another book unless I'm content playing nothing but troop choices.

And one of the issues with "X just needs a points drop" is that if A, B, C and X, Y, Z all get dropped in cost, what was the point? The net affect is that X is still more expensive than other options.
It's actually why I really hope the rumors are true that MEQs are only getting dropped by a little, but that chaff units are getting more expensive.
The proportions of cost are what need to be changed, not just a wholesale drop in points.

It's also a pretty lame approach to just lower the cost of a unit that still wound get to use a fun fluffy rule. The rule should be useful too, even if the unit pays less for it.

-

Not inveting maths. Talking about hypothetical situations.

Just trying to dispel the notion that RP becomes more useless as points go up. It doesn't. Also - it is fine. It's one of the stronger army wide abilities. Necrons just have some bad units that need point drops (this is a big deal).

A better stratagem to improve RP or possibly to strat rolling RP before a unit gets destroyed or maybe a 1 time use ability for units.

I tried to ignore that conversation, but:

Lets say in a small game, you have 3 theats shooting at 1 unit. Lets say they have a 1/6 chance of surviving. So there's a 1/6 chance they get RP.

Lets say a large game has 12 threats shooting at 4 units. You plan to divide it so you have 3 shooting at each. You shoot the first 3 at unit 1, next 3 at unit 2, and so forth. Each, in theory, has a 1/6 chance.

Assuming you don't deviate, there is a higher chance RP (1-(5/6)^4) actually impacts the larger game. However, the impact of one RP happening in the larger game is a quarter of the impact of RP in the smaller game. So it's a more normalized impact. At worst, it's the same boat as the smaller game: each unit has a 1/6 chance of getting RP, with 4 chances at it for a quarter the impact each in the larger game.

However, all that demands you don't deviate. Consider, in the larger game, what happens if your first 2 units wipe out threat #1. Your 3rd unit can now be reallocated, reducing the odds of one of the other units by a lot. There are no situations that take the odds of any of those squads getting RP *up* throughout the turn, but many scenarios that allow reallocation to take the odds *down*.

You might say "but that requires that one of the four sets of units skew high!" - that's true. But if any one of them skews high, the odds of RP on the other sets drops a lot. If any one of them skews low, the odds of RP on the other sets are not impacted.

Finally, there's the bracketing. Lets say it takes 3 of your units to wipe one of his in one turn. Lets say each of those units is worth half of one RP-capable blob. In a game where you have 6 of those units, and he has 3 of his, you can wipe 2 in one turn. In a game where you have 2 and he has 1, you can't wipe even a single unit. However, as points go up, the remainder of [your unit count] mod 3 continues to average the same constant value. Thus, it becomes a smaller and smaller factor in the game. For instance, if you have 4 units and he has 2, having 25% of your units run into RP is much less of a loss than in a game where you have 40 and he has 20: in the latter case, it's only 2.5% of your units that run into RP.

There are many reasons why RP is a bigger deal in smaller games than bigger ones.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Not inveting maths. Talking about hypothetical situations.

Just trying to dispel the notion that RP becomes more useless as points go up. It doesn't. Also - it is fine. It's one of the stronger army wide abilities. Necrons just have some bad units that need point drops (this is a big deal).

A better stratagem to improve RP or possibly to strat rolling RP before a unit gets destroyed or maybe a 1 time use ability for units.

But your example is wrong. You wont target 5 units and everyone has a chance of surviving. You target the first unit till dead, then the second, and so on. Still there should be a unit or to with loses in the end, but some units will be destroyed.

Still I am also thinking points adjustments should be enough to bring Necrons back on track.

My guess is Grey Knights and Daemons are the hardest to get right.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Not inveting maths. Talking about hypothetical situations.

Just trying to dispel the notion that RP becomes more useless as points go up. It doesn't. Also - it is fine. It's one of the stronger army wide abilities. Necrons just have some bad units that need point drops (this is a big deal).

A better stratagem to improve RP or possibly to strat rolling RP before a unit gets destroyed or maybe a 1 time use ability for units.

Thats why I love dakkadakka
Always knowing the value and strength of certain abilities, units, lists better than actual pro players and their results in tournaments!

Put it this way:
"small" game: You can kill ~30 Warriors a turn.
1 20man dies with high likelyhood.
1 20man has ~ 10 left.
You roll 10 RPs.

"large" game: You can kill 300 Warriors a turn.
14 20man units die with high likelyhood.
1 20man has a ~50/50 of getting a high number of RPs - up to 19.
1 20man unit has ~50/50 chance of getting a low number of RPs.
Those last two cases are mutually exclusive, and added together come out to an EV of just slightly below 20/2 - or 10.

So with those numbers, a small game has ~10 RP rolls and a game 10x that size has ~10 RP rolls. And each successful roll in the small game has 10x the impact of a successful roll in the large game.

Cinderspirit wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Not inveting maths. Talking about hypothetical situations.

Just trying to dispel the notion that RP becomes more useless as points go up. It doesn't. Also - it is fine. It's one of the stronger army wide abilities. Necrons just have some bad units that need point drops (this is a big deal).

A better stratagem to improve RP or possibly to strat rolling RP before a unit gets destroyed or maybe a 1 time use ability for units.

But your example is wrong. You wont target 5 units and everyone has a chance of surviving. You target the first unit till dead, then the second, and so on. Still there should be a unit or to with loses in the end, but some units will be destroyed.

Still I am also thinking points adjustments should be enough to bring Necrons back on track.

My guess is Grey Knights and Daemons are the hardest to get right.

Grey Knights need pts drops badly, but they'd also benefit massively from getting their old Nemesis Strike Force rule back i.e. let them deepstrike turn 1. They used to be able to do it when no one else could, it was their unique thing.

But yeah, your way of disproving the maths is correct. You focus down units until dead, you don't divide your firepower up into 5ths and then say " oh well, onto the next unit" if your allocated 5th fails to kill a unit. You just keep shooting it until it's gone. There might be some trickle shots at the end that can't finish off a unit, but realistically against a good player, only one unit will ever get to roll RP. The rest will get wiped.

Again - that is not how games work - as the number of target prorities goes up the more difficult it becomes to efficiently target 1 unit.

Things like rapid fire - nonoptimal weapon choices. When you consider these factors - shooting a unit to wipe them out with the wrong weapons - decreases your chances of destroying another unit. It just doesn't work the way you are saying. There is a point where you have to let a unit go so you can shoot the right targets with the right weapons. Plus ofc - the worse you are rolling the more of a factor this is. Since dice roll worse than average 50% of the time...I fail to understand how your units get destroyed every game - everytime - no fail. Maybe check your opponents dice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Put it this way:
"small" game: You can kill ~30 Warriors a turn.
1 20man dies with high likelyhood.
1 20man has ~ 10 left.
You roll 10 RPs.

"large" game: You can kill 300 Warriors a turn.
14 20man units die with high likelyhood.
1 20man has a ~50/50 of getting a high number of RPs - up to 19.
1 20man unit has ~50/50 chance of getting a low number of RPs.
Those last two cases are mutually exclusive, and added together come out to an EV of just slightly below 20/2 - or 10.

So with those numbers, a small game has ~10 RP rolls and a game 10x that size has ~10 RP rolls. And each successful roll in the small game has 10x the impact of a successful roll in the large game.

The argument is that RP is useless in larger games. When you are in fact more likely to get more RP rolls in a large game. Also the way I like to put it - you could have an actually worthless ability called ATSKNF. Also - the majority of RP's power is in forcing non optimal weapons to shoot units to finish them off. That effect only gets bigger as games get bigger.

Any chance we can move on from RP? We can agree that a better RP mechanic would be best for everybody. This same discussion seems to start up every other page. We all hope it ends up being better, because most people want to face capable, thematically colourful Necron armies, and my opponent wants their cool, thematic rule to feel great. I think we're all on the same page, for the most part. Until there's some news or rumours about Necron changes, I'm not sure its worth rehashing this over and over again.

We can talk about how greater daemons are still crap if you like. The only way I can think of fixing them is by allowing lesser daemons absorb wound for them .

I am curious if we will see any actual datasheet changes. Since those Tau rumors were false, it makes that seem less likely.

 dan2026 wrote:
We can talk about how greater daemons are still crap if you like. The only way I can think of fixing them is by allowing lesser daemons absorb wound for them .

Hive Tyrants work. Greater Daemons just need a 4+ save and a points drop to be on curve with the Tyrant. Or a big drop in points. Bigger problems are things like Crushers, Fiends, Beasts of Nurgle, Seekers, Screamers, Chariots, Heralds of Tzeentch, ... Okay, like 80% of the book is a problem.

Cinderspirit wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
We can talk about how greater daemons are still crap if you like. The only way I can think of fixing them is by allowing lesser daemons absorb wound for them .

Hive Tyrants work. Greater Daemons just need a 4+ save and a points drop to be on curve with the Tyrant. Or a big drop in points. Bigger problems are things like Crushers, Fiends, Beasts of Nurgle, Seekers, Screamers, Chariots, Heralds of Tzeentch, ... Okay, like 80% of the book is a problem.

Horrors. Just make them make any kind of sense in Matched.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I am curious if we will see any actual datasheet changes. Since those Tau rumors were false, it makes that seem less likely.

The only other place I've seen it mentioned was in passing in the original thread where the FWS live stream leaks were gathered. It hinted at there being some, but that the leaker wasn't aware of which ones.

I imagine that's as thin as a rumour can get. Still hope, but probably not that likely...

New rumour from B&C suggested a mini would be involved in the package. Cue the Primaris Lieutenant jokes. I'm not inclined to believe this particular rumour...but I imagine if there's any model that would be included, it would have to be that Sisters of Battle sculpt they originally showed off in the announcement.

JadonR wrote:

Cinderspirit wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
We can talk about how greater daemons are still crap if you like. The only way I can think of fixing them is by allowing lesser daemons absorb wound for them .

Hive Tyrants work. Greater Daemons just need a 4+ save and a points drop to be on curve with the Tyrant. Or a big drop in points. Bigger problems are things like Crushers, Fiends, Beasts of Nurgle, Seekers, Screamers, Chariots, Heralds of Tzeentch, ... Okay, like 80% of the book is a problem.

Horrors. Just make them make any kind of sense in Matched.

Horrors are atleast somewhat usable. A unit which gets +1S and Flickering Flames from a Herald has some power. The problem would rather be the overcosted Herald. He costs more than a Neurotrope while being dramatically worse.

Lemondish wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I am curious if we will see any actual datasheet changes. Since those Tau rumors were false, it makes that seem less likely.

The only other place I've seen it mentioned was in passing in the original thread where the FWS live stream leaks were gathered. It hinted at there being some, but that the leaker wasn't aware of which ones.

I imagine that's as thin as a rumour can get. Still hope, but probably not that likely...

New rumour from B&C suggested a mini would be involved in the package. Cue the Primaris Lieutenant jokes. I'm not inclined to believe this particular rumour...but I imagine if there's any model that would be included, it would have to be that Sisters of Battle sculpt they originally showed off in the announcement.

Yeah, I hope certain big problem characters, like Guilliman get looked at and possibly new data sheets. Just changing his points doesn't work. But yeah, that is a pretty thin rumor.

As for the mini, I would be fine with a Sister of Battle, even though I don't play them or have any desire to play them. But...it will be a Lieutenant. Because we only have like eight different molds of it. Seriously, not enough.

We're getting a bit off-topic with the wishlisting about reanimation protocols and what GW should do. It's been talked to death; please take that discussion to the 40k Proposed Rules forum.

A little bit of wishlisting is OK, but this debate has gone on long enough.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I am curious if we will see any actual datasheet changes. Since those Tau rumors were false, it makes that seem less likely.

The only other place I've seen it mentioned was in passing in the original thread where the FWS live stream leaks were gathered. It hinted at there being some, but that the leaker wasn't aware of which ones.

I imagine that's as thin as a rumour can get. Still hope, but probably not that likely...

New rumour from B&C suggested a mini would be involved in the package. Cue the Primaris Lieutenant jokes. I'm not inclined to believe this particular rumour...but I imagine if there's any model that would be included, it would have to be that Sisters of Battle sculpt they originally showed off in the announcement.

Yeah, I hope certain big problem characters, like Guilliman get looked at and possibly new data sheets. Just changing his points doesn't work. But yeah, that is a pretty thin rumor.

As for the mini, I would be fine with a Sister of Battle, even though I don't play them or have any desire to play them. But...it will be a Lieutenant. Because we only have like eight different molds of it. Seriously, not enough.

Love it to be the Sister - but yeah its likely yet another Marine. Hoping for some leaks about the Sister beta dex soon!

 Mr Morden wrote:


Love it to be the Sister - but yeah its likely yet another Marine. Hoping for some leaks about the Sister beta dex soon!

Well, keep in mind that the originals sculpt they showed us at Warhammer Fest (not Adepticon, sorry) specifically mentioned this...

This Battle Sister will be the first you’ll be able to get your hands on, a special preview release ahead of the main wave to make the wait a little bit more bearable.

Chapter Approved with a beta Sisters Codex is a great place for that to happen...

Lemondish wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:


Love it to be the Sister - but yeah its likely yet another Marine. Hoping for some leaks about the Sister beta dex soon!

Well, keep in mind that the originals sculpt they showed us at Warhammer Fest (not Adepticon, sorry) specifically mentioned this...

This Battle Sister will be the first you’ll be able to get your hands on, a special preview release ahead of the main wave to make the wait a little bit more bearable.

Chapter Approved with a beta Sisters Codex is a great place for that to happen...

Sounds great to me

Lemondish wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:


Love it to be the Sister - but yeah its likely yet another Marine. Hoping for some leaks about the Sister beta dex soon!

Well, keep in mind that the originals sculpt they showed us at Warhammer Fest (not Adepticon, sorry) specifically mentioned this...

This Battle Sister will be the first you’ll be able to get your hands on, a special preview release ahead of the main wave to make the wait a little bit more bearable.

Chapter Approved with a beta Sisters Codex is a great place for that to happen...

That is a VERY good point! That has me convinced!

I really hope we get to see something starting next week, but my guess is previews are at least two weeks away. But time will tell.

So far, based on the rumors, I will have a few more points for my army. At the very least, enough to look at more options in my list. If the 5-10% decrease on SM units is true, I can think of a lot of things I can do with 100-200 pts. Maybe even turn my Rhino into a Land Raider Crusader!

I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.

If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.

drbored wrote:
I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.

If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.

It will certainly be allowed. Tournaments always use beta rules.

 Xenomancers wrote:

drbored wrote:
I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.

If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.

It will certainly be allowed. Tournaments always use beta rules.

Not quite. NOVA, for instance, did not allow any of the Forgeworld Custodes beta rules.

Audustum wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

drbored wrote:
I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.

If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.

It will certainly be allowed. Tournaments always use beta rules.

Not quite. NOVA, for instance, did not allow any of the Forgeworld Custodes beta rules.

Interesting - they aren't super strong or anything - I wonder why?

They have used all the proposed beta rules for DS/Character targeting/Smite - ect.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Audustum wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

drbored wrote:
I'm sure we'll see quite a few shifts in the meta after all of this. My big hope is that the beta codex is accepted by tournaments for Sisters to use so that we can get a lot of good playtesting at big events from sisters players.

If it's not allowed for whatever dumb reason, then that'll be troublesome.

It will certainly be allowed. Tournaments always use beta rules.

Not quite. NOVA, for instance, did not allow any of the Forgeworld Custodes beta rules.

Interesting - they aren't super strong or anything - I wonder why?

They have used all the proposed beta rules for DS/Character targeting/Smite - ect.

I have no idea why, but you can read the thread where I asked about them right here on dakkadakka here:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/748645.page

Generally the 40k studio beta rules are used everywhere. The FW beta rules (written by the FW studio) generally are not used.

 Danarc wrote:
- Rites of Banishment is getting removed or changed, seems GK are getting the regular Smite power

If this is true, I wonder if TS Aspiring Sorcerers will get regular Smite as well. It'd go some way towards incentivizing people to actually take Rubrics in a TS army again.

Gk with actual smite would be legit. Same for rubrics.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Gk with actual smite would be legit. Same for rubrics.

I think that would take Rubrics from good to too strong. No one would ever see a squad over 5 ever again.