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.
They can be taken by any marine faction, yeah. Though fluff wise they shouldn't really appear outside 2nd Founding Chapters.
They do a huge amount to shore up a marine army but, then again, at 350ish points they really should.
thanks. my friend has a few for sale and he still owes me stuff. Maybe I''ll get one or two, 350pts for something in a GK army isn't that much either.
Just checked the FAQ for Index Imperial Armour Adaptes Astartes.
Unfortunately GK or legion of the damned arn't legal keywords to replace chaptor that is on the Leviathans datasheet.
But ironically deathwatch is well done GW.
Karol 768146 10292715 wrote:
thanks. my friend has a few for sale and he still owes me stuff. Maybe I''ll get one or two, 350pts for something in a GK army isn't that much either.
Just checked the FAQ for Index Imperial Armour Adaptes Astartes.
Unfortunately GK or legion of the damned arn't legal keywords to replace chaptor that is on the Leviathans datasheet.
But ironically deathwatch is well done GW.
Am not even sad. Does the FWFAQ say why ? I try opening their page, but at school it always blocks me.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Karol 768146 10292715 wrote:
thanks. my friend has a few for sale and he still owes me stuff. Maybe I''ll get one or two, 350pts for something in a GK army isn't that much either.
Just checked the FAQ for Index Imperial Armour Adaptes Astartes.
Unfortunately GK or legion of the damned arn't legal keywords to replace chaptor that is on the Leviathans datasheet.
But ironically deathwatch is well done GW.
Am not even sad. Does the FWFAQ say why ? I try opening their page, but at school it always blocks me.
It's on the GW site, as Ironically forgeworld wrote the imperial armour index, but GW wrote the FAQ for the book. I assume it's a lore thing as most of the FW models are 30k units that just happen to be better than everything in the codex as Forgeworld appears to have playtested the indexes against the guard eldar Codex's as they went up in points in CA2017 to come back down in CA2018.
Karol wrote: ...Am not even sad. Does the FWFAQ say why ? I try opening their page, but at school it always blocks me.
If the FAQs said why strange things exist they'd have to explain things like why Space Marine HQs forget how motorcycles work when they go off to join the Deathwatch, or why only Terminator Sergeants are skilled enough to use power swords instead of power fists, or any of a hundred other bizarre decisions with no explanation outside "that's what we sell a kit for".
If I were to try and back-fit an explanation for you I'd suggest it might have something to do with the fact that the Deathwatch might have begged, borrowed, or salvaged Heresy-era vehicles from First/Second Founding Chapters, whereas the Grey Knights' tactical doctrine/emphasis on fighting Daemons that pop up out of nowhere at point blank range makes most of the Heresy-era arsenal of big long-ranged guns less relevant than their own baby-carrier robots for the battles they're fighting. I might also observe that the Grey Knights have their own Forge World models (admittedly not very many or very useful) where the Deathwatch don't and someone at FW was thinking "we need to make sure we make some models for everyone, but we don't make anything specifically for the Deathwatch, but they use Space Marine stuff for everything else..." and then couldn't be bothered to go out and write a specific list of models the Deathwatch do or don't have access to.
(I don't agree with either explanation, and I think the GK and the Deathwatch should both have access to variants on chassis they've got (Dreadnaughts, Rhinos, Land Raiders...) and not have access to overlarge chassis that don't fit the rapid-response nature of their combat doctrine (the Spartan/Cerberus/Typhon, the Fellblade, the Astraeus...), but I don't write the rules.)
(Also if we start asking "why do the Grey Knights not have {x}?" we have to start asking about things like the Predator, and infantry with lascannons, and we might have to start re-examining why some dolt decided to build a standalone Codex around six slight variations on one specialist infantry squad with a limited and inflexible arsenal and no non-transport vehicles.)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ice_can wrote: ...I assume it's a lore thing as most of the FW models are 30k units that just happen to be better than everything in the codex...
Not...usually. The 30k models are usually side-grades on the models in the Codex rather than being straight-up better; a Relic Contemptor or a Leviathan are larger weight classes of Dreadnaught, they're bigger but they're not more cost-effective than just taking more Venerable Castaferrums (boxnaughts/plastic Dreadnaughts), for instance.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 15:14:49
Martel732 wrote: That's true, but they're both really bad. Especially compared to SoB and DG. I don't want to pay 13 points for T4 3+, much less 16 or 17. Not in a game where (almost) nothing lives.
Plague Marines have no bite for their cost, which is why you don't see them outside niche builds like the Grenade rush.
Martel732 wrote: Double shots and attacks don't help you on their turn. That's why GK are terrible.
There's a slight difference between a 16 point model with a Storm Bolter and a 21 point model with a Storm Bolter at the same durability and you know that. Don't be disingenuous.
You have tried to debate with this guy before, right?
And I thought Sternguard with Storm Shields was meant to be worth at least testing following CA2018?
Test, sure. But both are horribly priced compared to guardsmen.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 15:20:29
Martel732 wrote: Double shots and attacks don't help you on their turn. That's why GK are terrible.
There's a slight difference between a 16 point model with a Storm Bolter and a 21 point model with a Storm Bolter at the same durability and you know that. Don't be disingenuous.
You have tried to debate with this guy before, right?
And I thought Sternguard with Storm Shields was meant to be worth at least testing following CA2018?
Test, sure. But both are horribly priced compared to guardsmen.
If your yardstick for balance is one of the most broken troop units in the game then even the good troops look bad in comparison.
Compair them to 5ppm guard with 40point HQ's and things stop looking so broken.
That GW didn't do this in CA2018 is a travesty of justice but it GW and 40K I didn't expect them to get it right.
Ice_can wrote: ...I assume it's a lore thing as most of the FW models are 30k units that just happen to be better than everything in the codex...
Not...usually. The 30k models are usually side-grades on the models in the Codex rather than being straight-up better; a Relic Contemptor or a Leviathan are larger weight classes of Dreadnaught, they're bigger but they're not more cost-effective than just taking more Venerable Castaferrums (boxnaughts/plastic Dreadnaughts), for instance.
I have to say I find my sicarans and deredeo etc always trade way better than thier equivelent points in codex models.
Maybe CA2018 might have made it less one sided, but I find I get a lot less feel badsies playing with FW marines than codex marines.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/01/02 15:30:02
Martel732 wrote: Double shots and attacks don't help you on their turn. That's why GK are terrible.
There's a slight difference between a 16 point model with a Storm Bolter and a 21 point model with a Storm Bolter at the same durability and you know that. Don't be disingenuous.
You have tried to debate with this guy before, right?
And I thought Sternguard with Storm Shields was meant to be worth at least testing following CA2018?
I don't know why the Internet seems to have lost its collective s*** over SB/SS Deathwatch Veterans. I've been using Deathwatch Veterans with Storm Bolters at 20ppm (pre-Chapter Approved) because they do a significant amount of damage, but they're also fundamentally a suicide squad that comes out of their transport, hoses down what they have to hose down, and dies very quickly if the other player decides to shoot at them; spending any points at all giving my suicide squads a 3++, especially when it isn't AP that kills them (volume of S3 will kill them if they're not in cover, if they are in cover volume of AP-1 (whatever the Strength) is plenty) isn't exactly a high-priority thing to me when I could just take the same suicide squads as before at 18ppm.
Martel732 wrote: That's true, but they're both really bad. Especially compared to SoB and DG. I don't want to pay 13 points for T4 3+, much less 16 or 17. Not in a game where (almost) nothing lives.
Plague Marines have no bite for their cost, which is why you don't see them outside niche builds like the Grenade rush.
I mean, they can take 3 special weapons per 5 men, whilst also having T5 and 3+/5++/5+++ saves.
They hardly seem bad.
They're bad as they're easier tarpitted too, and proliferation of special weapons works when you're super cheap to begin with. They gained a good amount this edition, but they're not good. I'm also still terribly butthurt they basically lost an attack this edition.
Martel732 wrote: Double shots and attacks don't help you on their turn. That's why GK are terrible.
There's a slight difference between a 16 point model with a Storm Bolter and a 21 point model with a Storm Bolter at the same durability and you know that. Don't be disingenuous.
You have tried to debate with this guy before, right?
And I thought Sternguard with Storm Shields was meant to be worth at least testing following CA2018?
They are, but do you really feel that a 3++ for 2 points is remotely defenceable as a balanced points cost. It's another GW special style of fix if you over cost Spacemarines, undercost their wargear rather than admit that a spacemarine is overcosted.
Compair a tac marine to an intercessor 's hilarious
3 points for +1 wound, +1 attack, +6 inches of range, -1AP.
It's almost as rediculous as deathwatch special issue ammo.
A horror with changeling comes pretty close to a 3++.
60 horrors pay 1.7 points for a FNP from The Changeling and 1.1 for S4 from a Changecaster. They receive 0.18 wounds per bolter shot for a total of 1.77 points of damage. A DW Vet w/ SB with SS takes 0.11 wounds for a total of 2.22 points of damage.
Horrors suffer from S6 weapons, but marines suffer from S5 and there are way more of those.
The horrors produce 3 S4 shots at 18" - 0.67 GEQ, 0.25 MEQ for 9.8 points.
We'll give the vet an average of 3 kraken shots - 1.2 GEQ, 0.58 MEQ for 20 points.
So horrors in this setup are good match in durability and lethality. They have the chance for a smite every now and then, but they're harder to get in range with all models and degrade.
Obviously, there are lots of layers for nuance here, but the notion that the SS models are going to break the scene with absurd levels of durability seems unlikely. What is *might* do is force people into taking fewer big guns.
I could get all silly and reduce the per model cost of horrors by taking 90. And grab them a +1 to wound from the caster I already paid for and pretend those shots are all in range to kill 500 points worth of DW Vets with Stormshields.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 17:20:17
Insectum7 wrote: What you call babysitting I call improving their damage output.
I have mixed feelings about the predator, but it does have the sort of thing you're looking for. Dakka Pred is pretty cheap, and if it's made of paper a Leman russ is a light cardstock.
Otherwise you have Stalkers and Whirlwinds for Autocannon equivalents.
Actually that does bring up another point; a lot of the good guns that Marines have access to are on platforms that don't get the Chapter Trait bonuses. Some of those traits are fairly significant.
Maybe not, but they do benefit from potentially immense buff auras that other factions don't get. Seems like a fairly common subfaction trait is reroll 1s to hit if you don't move, which Space Marines get a better version of anyways for just buying fairly mandatory HQs.
Plasma Cannons are on platforms that get the Chapter Traits. Dreadnoughts are cheap now. Iirc the Leviathan came down in cost, too.
Honestly, between Assault Cannons, Autocannon equivalents like the Icarus Stormcannon or Vengeance Launcher, the Leviathan Cannon-things, Predator Autocannons, Grav Cannons and oh-so-so-much-Plasma, it's not like Marines don't have options.
They don't "benefit enourmously" from those buffs, they're designed around them. Huge difference between those two. Space Marine shooting is awful without those buffs. It's not great with them.
Dreads did get more cost effective though.
That seems like some classic glass-half-empty thinking right there. I suppose the Guard gun stats and costs were done without considering Regimental traits, order buffs, etc. Right?
A lot of the Codices seem to have been done by costing units outside the buffs of HQ units.
Things aren't always what they seem. But if they are pointed around buffs, how do you square the fact that the same set of weapons costs the same for all flavors of loyalists, despite only one subfaction getting Guilliman? Even Chaos with fewer buffs pays the same.
At the end of the day it still looks to me that certain players are looking for some sort of "magic bullet gun", while the options available to the Space Marines are still providing pretty comparable options to those of other books.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 17:24:04
Martel732 wrote: Double shots and attacks don't help you on their turn. That's why GK are terrible.
There's a slight difference between a 16 point model with a Storm Bolter and a 21 point model with a Storm Bolter at the same durability and you know that. Don't be disingenuous.
You have tried to debate with this guy before, right?
And I thought Sternguard with Storm Shields was meant to be worth at least testing following CA2018?
They are, but do you really feel that a 3++ for 2 points is remotely defenceable as a balanced points cost. It's another GW special style of fix if you over cost Spacemarines, undercost their wargear rather than admit that a spacemarine is overcosted.
Compair a tac marine to an intercessor 's hilarious
3 points for +1 wound, +1 attack, +6 inches of range, -1AP.
It's almost as rediculous as deathwatch special issue ammo.
A horror with changeling comes pretty close to a 3++.
60 horrors pay 1.7 points for a FNP from The Changeling and 1.1 for S4 from a Changecaster. They receive 0.18 wounds per bolter shot for a total of 1.77 points of damage. A DW Vet w/ SB with SS takes 0.11 wounds for a total of 2.22 points of damage.
Horrors suffer from S6 weapons, but marines suffer from S5 and there are way more of those.
The horrors produce 3 S4 shots at 18" - 0.67 GEQ, 0.25 MEQ for 9.8 points.
We'll give the vet an average of 3 kraken shots - 1.2 GEQ, 0.58 MEQ for 20 points.
So horrors in this setup are good match in durability and lethality. They have the chance for a smite every now and then, but they're harder to get in range with all models and degrade.
Obviously, there are lots of layers for nuance here, but the notion that the SS models are going to break the scene with absurd levels of durability seems unlikely. What is *might* do is force people into taking fewer big guns.
I could get all silly and reduce the per model cost of horrors by taking 90. And grab them a +1 to wound from the caster I already paid for and pretend those shots are all in range to kill 500 points worth of DW Vets with Stormshields.
Sorry Daedalus81 but I'm not following the point your making.
I was more talking basic codex tac marine vrs intercessor vrs deathwatch veteran's shows some very wonky costing IMHO.
It wasn't ment to imply that deathwatch are undercosted it more that the points are just allocated inconsistently.
I think the basic marine should be cheaper but the special issue ammo and the cost of going from tac to intercessors should be larger was what I ment.
Insectum7 wrote: What you call babysitting I call improving their damage output.
I have mixed feelings about the predator, but it does have the sort of thing you're looking for. Dakka Pred is pretty cheap, and if it's made of paper a Leman russ is a light cardstock.
Otherwise you have Stalkers and Whirlwinds for Autocannon equivalents.
Actually that does bring up another point; a lot of the good guns that Marines have access to are on platforms that don't get the Chapter Trait bonuses. Some of those traits are fairly significant.
Maybe not, but they do benefit from potentially immense buff auras that other factions don't get. Seems like a fairly common subfaction trait is reroll 1s to hit if you don't move, which Space Marines get a better version of anyways for just buying fairly mandatory HQs.
Plasma Cannons are on platforms that get the Chapter Traits. Dreadnoughts are cheap now. Iirc the Leviathan came down in cost, too.
Honestly, between Assault Cannons, Autocannon equivalents like the Icarus Stormcannon or Vengeance Launcher, the Leviathan Cannon-things, Predator Autocannons, Grav Cannons and oh-so-so-much-Plasma, it's not like Marines don't have options.
They don't "benefit enourmously" from those buffs, they're designed around them. Huge difference between those two. Space Marine shooting is awful without those buffs. It's not great with them.
Dreads did get more cost effective though.
That seems like some classic glass-half-empty thinking right there. I suppose the Guard gun stats and costs were done without considering Regimental traits, order buffs, etc. Right?
A lot of the Codices seem to have been done by costing units outside the buffs of HQ units.
Things aren't always what they seem. But if they are pointed around buffs, how do you square the fact that the same set of weapons costs the same for all flavors of loyalists, despite only one subfaction getting Guilliman? Even Chaos with fewer buffs pays the same.
At the end of the day it still looks to me that certain players are looking for some sort of "magic bullet gun", while the options available to the Space Marines are still providing pretty comparable options to those of other books.
You square it off by pointing the buffer appropriately based on the different army constructions they can help.
So while Roboute is appropriate at nearly 400 points for ALL the bonuses he confers, the Ultramarines he buffs were already pointed like they had him included in the cost, which not only affects any build without him but any other Marine army as well. That's a reason I'm for consolidation of the Angels and potentially Wolves, cutting out a lot of bloat, and making units work themselves without the need for buffs.
I also really do feel this is an issue for several armies as well. Ork Boyz are priced like you take the free bomb upgrade now, whereas you didn't likely take it in the first place. Conscripts are priced like they are under Petrov's Pistol at all times. Gaunts are priced like your Synapse providers are all as cheap as Zoanthropes.
When you do that, you can start figuring out how much HQ units should be and what their buffs might be worth.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Sorry Daedalus81 but I'm not following the point your making.
I was more talking basic codex tac marine vrs intercessor vrs deathwatch veteran's shows some very wonky costing IMHO.
It wasn't ment to imply that deathwatch are undercosted it more that the points are just allocated inconsistently.
I think the basic marine should be cheaper but the special issue ammo and the cost of going from tac to intercessors should be larger was what I ment.
It seems like GW's overall goal was to reduce the cost of marines through wargear only and make them more deadly for fewer points.
The drop to VV & Chosen are needed to make them competitive in their own book - as elite units they're not obsec and against other more useful units they used to pale in comparison (if only slightly). So, 14 point VV are not an admission that GW thinks marines should be cheaper and we should probably act accordingly for now. It's time to set aside the naked marine and start putting gear on them.
Deathwatch are a weird crosspoint that muddies the waters, but then you're putting a lot of points into an army that doesn't have a lot of options other than marines. You can slap them on top a list instead of IS, but then what problem does that solve that IS have not?
Sorry Daedalus81 but I'm not following the point your making.
I was more talking basic codex tac marine vrs intercessor vrs deathwatch veteran's shows some very wonky costing IMHO.
It wasn't ment to imply that deathwatch are undercosted it more that the points are just allocated inconsistently.
I think the basic marine should be cheaper but the special issue ammo and the cost of going from tac to intercessors should be larger was what I ment.
It seems like GW's overall goal was to reduce the cost of marines through wargear only and make them more deadly for fewer points.
The drop to VV & Chosen are needed to make them competitive in their own book - as elite units they're not obsec and against other more useful units they used to pale in comparison (if only slightly). So, 14 point VV are not an admission that GW thinks marines should be cheaper and we should probably act accordingly for now. It's time to set aside the naked marine and start putting gear on them.
Deathwatch are a weird crosspoint that muddies the waters, but then you're putting a lot of points into an army that doesn't have a lot of options other than marines. You can slap them on top a list instead of IS, but then what problem does that solve that IS have not?
Yeah it's a bit of a weird direction but thinking about it a bit more what it probably does allow marines to be come is while still not really a competitive list choice they possibly stumble into the casually viable army club. Especially as a beginner army as if your wargear is undercosted and the points shovelled onto the base modem it's probably a lot more beginner friendly. As they are punished less for taking the wrong special or heavy or other cool add on over taking non. But they don't inadvertently become a broken tournament army.
I'm probably over thinking this and giving GW credit for an idea that is probably more dumb luck than design intention.
Once I equip a marine with anything, it becomes a huge liability in terms of points/wound. CA didnt really fix that. 13 pts/wound is not good. 20+ is volunteering for tabling.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/02 18:59:31
Yeah it's a bit of a weird direction but thinking about it a bit more what it probably does allow marines to be come is while still not really a competitive list choice they possibly stumble into the casually viable army club. Especially as a beginner army as if your wargear is undercosted and the points shovelled onto the base modem it's probably a lot more beginner friendly. As they are punished less for taking the wrong special or heavy or other cool add on over taking non. But they don't inadvertently become a broken tournament army.
I'm probably over thinking this and giving GW credit for an idea that is probably more dumb luck than design intention.
I'm on the fence. I was pretty sure marines needed a point cut, but I'm ok working in dirt cheap autocannons and plasma.
Take a min CSM unit:
Bolters only - 1.5 GEQ for 65 points (43.3 per)
AC and 4 bolters - 2.1 GEQ for 75 points (35.7 per) - 18% fewer points needed to kill the same amount
The unit got expressly better at killing everything. This is effectively as if those marines were more than 2 points cheaper (55 / 1.5 = 36.7).
Shooting MEQ is even better.
Bolters - 0.55 (118 per)
AC and 4 bolters (86 per) - 28% fewer points needed to kill the same amount
And the units with an AC can be shooting when other units might not be in range. Now, it doesn't get us more wounds, but it makes killing stuff easier and that's what marines should do.
I think there are several units in 40k that are undercosted, some of them extremely undercosted. I've just made a few examples, who said that other troops, if they are too cheap for what they do, should remain unchanged? The majority of the undercosted stuff also doesn't belong to the troops choices.
Sure. But it's rather strange that you bring up 3 troop choices rather than the Knights or other units that actually do the real work in lists.
Doubling the cost of every unit in the game worths nothing, it would be playing at 1000 points claiming they are 2000 points instead. You can already play at 1000 points if you want to.
I'd keep 3-4 pts range only unit that really die with a stiff breeze, like T2 no save.
Or, once again, we could double up on points and actually give ourselves some design space to work with.
Blackie wrote: Conscripts are basically guardsmen so they can't be chepaer than -1ppm compared to guardsmen.
So "basically guardsmen" equates to having:
- Worse WS - Worse BS - Drastically worse Morale
- Fail Orders on a 4+
- No Sergeant
- Can't take Special Weapons
- Can't take Heavy Weapons
Your definition of what should cost 3-4pts seems designed to arbitrarily exclude Conscripts, despite them being a really awful unit.
Blackie wrote: If I propose guardsmen at 6-7ppm, they should be 5-6ppm of course.
In which case they'd still be used. Because if IG troops are going to all be stupidly overprised, then you might as well just go with the cheapest.
IMHO one of the main issues with power armor dudes is the competition with (too) cheap troops.
Demonstrably untrue. Being cheap is no guarantee that a unit will see play. Remind me - how many competitive lists are running 6pt Kabalites?
Blackie wrote: Units like boyz are absolute trash in a 3x10 set up, which means 210 points already, worse than 3x5 tacs with no upgrades which are even 15pts cheaper, you need a lot more plus buffing characters and CPs invested on them.
So . . . are you arguing against yourself now? Because you seem to be proving that your previous statement was untrue.
Blackie wrote: Other troops instead do work very good without investing many points and/or CPs on them, that's a huge issue, especially if those units can be part of the same faction as power armor dudes with no drawbacks.
The latter part is why Allies either shouldn't exist or else should have an actual downside.
Blackie wrote: You can't expect troops to do the heavy work either if their faction has 250+ entries and every sort of buffed elite and unkillable superhero.
See above. This is why the game should be played Codex vs. Codex, not Faction vs. Faction.
Blackie wrote: Banning the soups solves a lot of problems for SM and equivalents because it cuts off the most overpowered lists, which are all soups and all hard counters to SM.
This at least is something we can definitely agree on.
Blackie wrote: Then just limit the number of CPs available since armies like SM can't have a high number of them while also bringing an effective list.
Alternatively, perhaps CPs should be tied to points invested, rather than in number of units? e.g. if you give 1CP per 100pts of troops, then it doesn't matter if your troops are cheap or expensive. Same with stuff like HQs. If you need 100pts of HQs to get 1CP, then IG need to bring 2-3 of their cheap ones to get the same benefit as a single SM Captain.
Blackie wrote: I think cheap troops in the range of T3 5+ and shooting oriented should be 6-7ppm, only close combat oriented or weaker ones could be cheaper.
And this is where you lose me. You're asking that weak troops have their points increased far beyond what those models are actually worth. And I simply can't get behind that.
Blackie wrote: No HQs should cost less than 50ppm either.
Why? Why should a HQ that's not worth 50pts have to cost 50pts anyway?
I really don't understand what you want at this point. Unless you just really like sh*tting on IG and IG players?
Blackie wrote: If you want lots of CPs you must include garbage units as a tax, that's a fair trade off.
I was right, then. You want nothing more than to sh*t on IG players. I guess you're one of those people who thinks that IG should be an NPC faction that only exists to get curb-stomped by other armies.
Because no one advocating for balance would be deliberately trying to make units "trash". If you really wanted balance, you'd be trying to make sure that *no* unit was trash.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
Because no one advocating for balance would be deliberately trying to make units "trash". If you really wanted balance, you'd be trying to make sure that *no* unit was trash.
Not to deflate or attack any side of this debate. But one unit will always end up in the trash no matter how hard the designer tries or intends for it to go.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Martel732 wrote: Ig wins without having to even see the target. And they dont pay for the privilege.
Are we still talking about IG infantry here? Because I don't recall them having a rule that lets them shoot models they can't see.
Asherian Command wrote: Not to deflate or attack any side of this debate. But one unit will always end up in the trash no matter how hard the designer tries or intends for it to go.
I'm not saying that no unit will never be trash, I'm saying that you shouldn't start out with the intention of making a unit trash.
No, the units they protect do. This combo greatly devalues power armor, and this is a thread about power armor. IG artillery should cost more, as it is functionally immune to assault.
Because no one advocating for balance would be deliberately trying to make units "trash". If you really wanted balance, you'd be trying to make sure that *no* unit was trash.
Not to deflate or attack any side of this debate. But one unit will always end up in the trash no matter how hard the designer tries or intends for it to go.
If tomorrw GW decides that Knights are no longer legal for matched play, everyone would feel the impact. If the same was done to something like GK, am not even sure most GK players would care. Non GK players wouldn't care for sure, as GK are neither good ally, a good counter, they don't do better other imperial units won't do cheaper and often times better.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Imperial Guard artillery is just flatly overpowered and has been since the start of 8th edition.
4 points for something as amazing as a Guardsman is just bonkers. They are very clearly 7 point models with all of the synergy they have.
And all of the artillery is just ridiculous icing on an absurd cake. The fact that the guns are -2 and have D3 damage is laughable, and the ones that don't get silly things like crazy shot volume and rerolls baked in.
2W, 2A base marines is where it's at. Primaris can be made into something entirely separate. Rerollable hits, wounds, and saves of 1 for all things ADEPTUS ASTARTES. Change the aura mechanic altogether.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/03 00:04:08
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
Marmatag wrote: Imperial Guard artillery is just flatly overpowered and has been since the start of 8th edition.
4 points for something as amazing as a Guardsman is just bonkers. They are very clearly 7 point models with all of the synergy they have.
And all of the artillery is just ridiculous icing on an absurd cake. The fact that the guns are -2 and have D3 damage is laughable, and the ones that don't get silly things like crazy shot volume and rerolls baked in.
2W, 2A base marines is where it's at. Primaris can be made into something entirely separate. Rerollable hits, wounds, and saves of 1 for all things ADEPTUS ASTARTES. Change the aura mechanic altogether.
7 is a bridge too far.
The artillery is good, more because of LOS than because of stats. A manticore is not particularly more scary than a battle cannon, which has the essentially the same effectiveness against anything not T5/8 (and add on the competition from the Tank Commander now).
But manticores or any of the IG artilery never fire when in LoS. And if they are in LoS of anything then it is either end game and they are doing some last turn driving or they have a juicy screen in front of them.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Marmatag wrote: 4 points for something as amazing as a Guardsman is just bonkers. They are very clearly 7 point models with all of the synergy they have.
I don't know why I bother posting in these threads.
It seems I always forget that Marine players think balance equates to "every army that isn't Marines should be nerfed into the ground, so that Marines can curb-stomp it".
Welp, since you're basically asking for my army to be made unplayably bad, let me return the favour and say that I hope your Marines remain garbage.
(To any Marine players who don't think this way, I apologise. However, I'm afraid that the level of spite I've seen in this thread has caused all my sympathy to drain away.)
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
Marmatag wrote: 4 points for something as amazing as a Guardsman is just bonkers. They are very clearly 7 point models with all of the synergy they have.
I don't know why I bother posting in these threads.
It seems I always forget that Marine players think balance equates to "every army that isn't Marines should be nerfed into the ground, so that Marines can curb-stomp it".
Welp, since you're basically asking for my army to be made unplayably bad, let me return the favour and say that I hope your Marines remain garbage.
(To any Marine players who don't think this way, I apologise. However, I'm afraid that the level of spite I've seen in this thread has caused all my sympathy to drain away.)
Honestly that idea that guardsmen... should be as expensive as guardians makes me laugh.
No guardsmen should just be 5ppm nothing more nothing less. Veterans should be a troop choice at 6ppm but with better morale and carapace armor for +1 pts per a model (+4 save) and half cost transports (*cough*).
Increasing it might do some damage to those lists but its not nearly enough the paradigm and the 'skys the limit' design of 40k 8th edition is a deteriment to everyone involved, especially things that can counter knights *cough*
Why the space marines priemer battle tank sucks beyond belief i'll never know... then our sciarian tanks which are meant to be the best space marine battle tank, could easily be replaced by a shadowsword....
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/03 00:56:40
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Marmatag wrote: 4 points for something as amazing as a Guardsman is just bonkers. They are very clearly 7 point models with all of the synergy they have.
I don't know why I bother posting in these threads.
It seems I always forget that Marine players think balance equates to "every army that isn't Marines should be nerfed into the ground, so that Marines can curb-stomp it".
Welp, since you're basically asking for my army to be made unplayably bad, let me return the favour and say that I hope your Marines remain garbage.
(To any Marine players who don't think this way, I apologise. However, I'm afraid that the level of spite I've seen in this thread has caused all my sympathy to drain away.)
Sympathy is irrelevant. There is only math. The math makes ig soul crushing to play against. The matches are always a miserable slog, even in a rare victory. The same math makes most 3+ armor units crap. Exceptions have special rules to bail them out.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/03 01:16:24
They can be taken by any marine faction, yeah. Though fluff wise they shouldn't really appear outside 2nd Founding Chapters.
They do a huge amount to shore up a marine army but, then again, at 350ish points they really should.
thanks. my friend has a few for sale and he still owes me stuff. Maybe I''ll get one or two, 350pts for something in a GK army isn't that much either.
Just checked the FAQ for Index Imperial Armour Adaptes Astartes.
Unfortunately GK or legion of the damned arn't legal keywords to replace chaptor that is on the Leviathans datasheet.
But ironically deathwatch is well done GW.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the GK slipped my mind. I can honestly see why Grey Knights don't have access to Leviathans, though. The Imperium can't actually build the things anymore.
Back on topic. I feel the Leviathan is such a popular model because of its ability to nuke anything it hits. It is one of the only Marine models that will allow you to concentrate 350 points of assets and confidently gain 300 points back. The rest of the Marine range is absurdly pillow-fisted.
