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.

There is something fundamentally wrong in the game if 'Cheaper MSU' is legitimate argument for something being better than the other. Basically people are only taking certain units because they have to in order to get CPs.

I wanna see what happens when only Troops choice can score objectives, is this too anarchistic?

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Completely irrelevant. Bolter Marines aren't being used because bolters aren't good enough.

They aren't being used because Imperial Knights, Custode Jetbikes, and Blood Angel Captains are a thing.

No. The choice is between marines and guarddmen (or cultists). All those units require CP to function. IG fits that role well, because they are cheap and effective. If marines can be made to be more effective then you've cut away some of that gap.

3 bikes can carry a storm bolter and 3 twin boltguns for 65. With a 14" move and no need to be within 12" they can be places where it suits their durability and still shoot well. It's 55 points for a squad of IS with commander.

Remember when I mentioned Bolter Marines, and you said they're good, but only if they're bikes? What a strange way to reply.

lol, no.

I'm highlighting different aspects of the change. You can see my other posts about tacs and csm.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Who is actually using the aspirings to cast spells? Every perils is 2d3 rubrics dead instantly. Noone is casting with their aspirings. They are basically sargeants with force staffs. Their only actual use is to help complete the psyker trio required for the cabalistic focus stratagem.

Me. I rarely peril and I have cp for when I do. Maybe 1 out of 20 games I have a catastrophe.

You're crazy not to leverage them to free up hq casting.

Ghorgul wrote:
There is something fundamentally wrong in the game if 'Cheaper MSU' is legitimate argument for something being better than the other. Basically people are only taking certain units because they have to in order to get CPs.

I wanna see what happens when only Troops choice can score objectives, is this too anarchistic?

That happens everywhere tho. It's the reason brimstone horrors are better than the blues, that guardsmen are better than tacs, cultists better than CSM etc. There are a lot of stuff fundamentally wrong in the game, true. But since it is what it is, it makes sense to compare two otherwise identical units in their cost as well.

Ghorgul wrote:
There is something fundamentally wrong in the game if 'Cheaper MSU' is legitimate argument for something being better than the other. Basically people are only taking certain units because they have to in order to get CPs.

I wanna see what happens when only Troops choice can score objectives, is this too anarchistic?

This was in my mind, what made 5th eddition so great (along with not using progressive scoring). It made troops so important because if you didn't have some left by the end, you weren't going to win, regardless of how much you had invested into killing your opponent).

Of course such a rule might not work any more in an edition where hordes of troops are already very effective, and progressive scoring is so popular.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Ghorgul wrote:
There is something fundamentally wrong in the game if 'Cheaper MSU' is legitimate argument for something being better than the other. Basically people are only taking certain units because they have to in order to get CPs.

I wanna see what happens when only Troops choice can score objectives, is this too anarchistic?

That happens everywhere tho. It's the reason brimstone horrors are better than the blues, that guardsmen are better than tacs, cultists better than CSM etc. There are a lot of stuff fundamentally wrong in the game, true. But since it is what it is, it makes sense to compare two otherwise identical units in their cost as well.

Agreed, it is what it is. But I'm still gonna call the Emperor naked if he has no clothes.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

Ghorgul wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

Karol wrote:
But how do you find points for running bolter armed models in a chaos list. You need the cultists chaff, and the rest of points are being eaten by the 3-4 princes and the 1ksons casters. a 75pts csm unit just does not cut it, and your not going to take 3-4 such units. one AC won't be efficient enough and 3-4 aren't good enough to be worth the drop in efficiency of the cultist chaff. Plus if you want under 100pts hvy weapons why not just take a dreadnought.

Honestly, you should be happy they even remembered to add Heretic Astartes to this rule. The fact that Rubrics aren't treated like terminators is probably not something they thought out, it's more likely it's just something they never bothered to consider. The primary goal of this rule was to improve Adeptus Astartes, the fact that Heretic Astartes got included at all is a minor miracle.

It wouldn't be the first time they didn't think of how a new beta rule would affect the Thousand Sons. Conveniently, that first example is also an example of GW recognizing the mistake and correcting it in the final version. They gave us that email address for a reason!

I'm not sure how this is relevant. You are looking at older editions and making justifications based on that. This beta rule is already significant buff to Thousand Sons. Positioning in general should become more meaningful, so giving units bonuses for staying stationary certainly makes positioning more meaningful.

In larger picture looks like GW has no idea what they want troops to actually do, other than work as CP batteries and screens, all the killing power is increasingly concentrated on few specialised units.

I'm talking about the psychic focus rule, which was 8th. Originally Rubricae were pretty seriously screwed by it because the idea that they're putting out a consistent mortal wound per unit is factored into their points cost, so when the people started emailing GW about the problem they fixed it by giving Thousand Sons (and Grey Knights, who were in a similar situation) a specific exception to the rule.

This isn't nearly as egregious of an issue, but I do think it's worth pointing out whether GW decides to modify All Is Dust to work with the new rule or not.

Who is actually using the aspirings to cast spells? Every perils is 2d3 rubrics dead instantly. Noone is casting with their aspirings. They are basically sargeants with force staffs. Their only actual use is to help complete the psyker trio required for the cabalistic focus stratagem.

Haha are you kidding? I cast every turn with every aspiring sorc, because if you have two brain cells to rub together the odds of perils with them is 0.9% (2*36/6 because you hold a one-die reroll from either Gaze of Fate or Tactical Reroll). That's the same odds as rapid firing 3 plasma gunners in a reroll 1s aura and losing all 3 to gets hot. When was the last time you saw someone braindead enough to give up shooting a plasma gun on overcharge if they have reroll 1s?

Not using your aspiring sorcerors as casters when the Change discipline exists is ridiculous.

Well, tying CP generation to the ability to cheaply fill the troop slots was the biggest mistakes they did with this edition, and most of the game's problems stem from it.

 Crimson wrote:
Well, tying CP generation to the ability to cheaply fill the troop slots was the biggest mistakes they did with this edition, and most of the game's problems stem from it.

Can't disagree with that, it also encourages min-maxing bonuses as your already taking the time to optimize detachments for CP.

the_scotsman wrote:

Not using your aspiring sorcerors as casters when the Change discipline exists is ridiculous.

But saying that Gaze of Fate or a CP are always available is just as ridiculous. We all know the odds are low, nevertheless gak happens very often when you play this army, and losing half a squad of Rubrics or Ahriman / Daemon Prince because of a Peril is something that happens every other game.

Anyway, this rule is a step in the right direction even though I also hope that the final version will allow Rubrics and Plague Marines to move and shoot as if stationnary. I dream of playing an army of Rubric Marines moving forward slowly while shooting. Right now it's just a dream.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Isn't that what most GW rules are though? Most of them seem poorly thought out, just look at the current Stratagem abuse with warlord traits with Knight Titans.

Rubric marines et al are outside the scope of the beta rule. It would be silly to write up all the exceptions into this rule. It would also be silly to solidify a rule when it isn't necessarily in it's final form.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Marines need better stratagems. Period. That aren't just locked to the terrible primaris units.

Along with bolter weapons being increased in potential, this is a good rule for some units. Dreadnoughts, Terminators, Bikes, land raider crusaders all excel in potential firepower in terms of anti-infantry. which is great. But marines weren't struggling against horde armies, they never were. They struggled against titan units, and super heavies. They also suffered in close combat and morale. This is a band aid at best.

Exactly, when I look in my Custodes and Eldar codex, their stratagems are crazy in comparison. I understand Custodes need great strats as they have so few CP 's but then again so do SM's and eldar sure as hell don't.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Ghorgul wrote:
There is something fundamentally wrong in the game if 'Cheaper MSU' is legitimate argument for something being better than the other. Basically people are only taking certain units because they have to in order to get CPs.

I wanna see what happens when only Troops choice can score objectives, is this too anarchistic?

That happens everywhere tho. It's the reason brimstone horrors are better than the blues, that guardsmen are better than tacs, cultists better than CSM etc. There are a lot of stuff fundamentally wrong in the game, true. But since it is what it is, it makes sense to compare two otherwise identical units in their cost as well.

None of those statements are true. (Except for the brimstone>blues thing, that's pretty dumb) They are only true if you decide to play a hoard army.

Cheaper MSU isn't even how the hoard armies are played, cultists are taken in large squads not min squads, etc etc etc.

You can mitigate the current guard meta by driving around in T7 transports, but people like to believe the internet when it says "rhinos and chimeras are garbage". They aren't garbage if you are facing a gunline full of mortars, lasguns, and autoguns. You'd be amazed how much you can screw with these hoard armies just by going a bit more armored.

But that's ok, decry my use of transports as misguided, choose to believe this internet rage about MSU.

While I'm on this rant, I also cannot believe how many people complain about hoards, but turn around and take plasma in every squad lol.

 sfshilo wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Ghorgul wrote:
There is something fundamentally wrong in the game if 'Cheaper MSU' is legitimate argument for something being better than the other. Basically people are only taking certain units because they have to in order to get CPs.

I wanna see what happens when only Troops choice can score objectives, is this too anarchistic?

That happens everywhere tho. It's the reason brimstone horrors are better than the blues, that guardsmen are better than tacs, cultists better than CSM etc. There are a lot of stuff fundamentally wrong in the game, true. But since it is what it is, it makes sense to compare two otherwise identical units in their cost as well.

None of those statements are true. (Except for the brimstone>blues thing, that's pretty dumb) They are only true if you decide to play a hoard army.

Cheaper MSU isn't even how the hoard armies are played, cultists are taken in large squads not min squads, etc etc etc.

You can mitigate the current guard meta by driving around in T7 transports, but people like to believe the internet when it says "rhinos and chimeras are garbage". They aren't garbage if you are facing a gunline full of mortars, lasguns, and autoguns. You'd be amazed how much you can screw with these hoard armies just by going a bit more armored.

But that's ok, decry my use of transports as misguided, choose to believe this internet rage about MSU.

While I'm on this rant, I also cannot believe how many people complain about hoards, but turn around and take plasma in every squad lol.

Agree - I think people are mixing up taking something like the loyal 32 and taking IG to really fill out a list. The loyal 32 does jack all by itself other than grant CP, which is the cheap MSU shtick. IG with mortars, catachans, priests, etc are NOT cheap MSU.

If you're using cultists to fill in CP, it's 50 for 10 or 65 for 5 CSM. You are paying 45 points (over 3 units) more for lots more durability (and now more damage, too). 10 cultists die to a stiff breeze. They're all but worthless unless they're holding an objective out of LOS. CSM can hunker down even more easily and are capable of useful upgrades as well.

But NONE of that is the same as saying you want to take 40 cultists and make use of the economies of scale that 40 models can achieve.

 Nym wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Not using your aspiring sorcerors as casters when the Change discipline exists is ridiculous.

But saying that Gaze of Fate or a CP are always available is just as ridiculous. We all know the odds are low, nevertheless gak happens very often when you play this army, and losing half a squad of Rubrics or Ahriman / Daemon Prince because of a Peril is something that happens every other game.

Anyway, this rule is a step in the right direction even though I also hope that the final version will allow Rubrics and Plague Marines to move and shoot as if stationnary. I dream of playing an army of Rubric Marines moving forward slowly while shooting. Right now it's just a dream.

Yep, just about the odds of me having an imperial guard plasma gun and not having a reroll 1s to hit available. That's about as frequently as I don't cast my aspiring sorcs.

1 scion with plasma gun: 20pts. Odds of losing him to gets hot with reroll 1s and rapid fire: 2/36. Cost in Gets Hot'd scions when firing a plasma gun with reroll 1s: 1.11 points.

3 Rubrics+1 Sorc: 78pts. Odds of losing those to Perils with a reroll available: 2/36/6. Cost in Rubrics when casting with a reroll available: .73 points. Without a reroll: 4.40 points.

With a one-die reroll available, the rubrics' babysmite is as efficient at damaging a vehicle versus the risk of points lost as the scion's plasma gun. And everyone knows that scion plasma guns are considered horrendously inefficient, and nobody ever rapid fires them with reroll 1s because it's just too risky, amirite?

the_scotsman wrote:


Yep, just about the odds of me having an imperial guard plasma gun and not having a reroll 1s to hit available. That's about as frequently as I don't cast my aspiring sorcs.

1 scion with plasma gun: 20pts. Odds of losing him to gets hot with reroll 1s and rapid fire: 2/36. Cost in Gets Hot'd scions when firing a plasma gun with reroll 1s: 1.11 points.

3 Rubrics+1 Sorc: 78pts. Odds of losing those to Perils with a reroll available: 2/36/6. Cost in Rubrics when casting with a reroll available: .73 points. Without a reroll: 4.40 points.

With a one-die reroll available, the rubrics' babysmite is as efficient at damaging a vehicle versus the risk of points lost as the scion's plasma gun. And everyone knows that scion plasma guns are considered horrendously inefficient, and nobody ever rapid fires them with reroll 1s because it's just too risky, amirite?

Yea, my priority is always:

- Gaze with a +1
- Must succeed spells
- Cabal spell
- Other HQ spells
- Rubrics

If I still have my CP and Gaze by the time I get to Rubrics then i'm casting with all of them. If I don't then I'm prioritizing needs and skipping a squad here and there.

But then a potential perils on the Rubrics will suck up your CP/Gaze for the shooting or the fight phase, which you don't know if you will need or not because they follow.

Would you risk it for 1 mortal wound on a target you don't really control with your 5" move?

You're risking it for 1MW, because there is only a 1/36 chance of costing a CP, and a 1/216 chance of costing a CP and still Periling. Those are fairly good odds.

topaxygouroun i wrote:
But then a potential perils on the Rubrics will suck up your CP/Gaze for the shooting or the fight phase, which you don't know if you will need or not because they follow.

Would you risk it for 1 mortal wound on a target you don't really control with your 5" move?

It's not just smite. They easily provide breathing room by casting temporal, weaver, or sometimes firestorm.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 sfshilo wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Ghorgul wrote:
There is something fundamentally wrong in the game if 'Cheaper MSU' is legitimate argument for something being better than the other. Basically people are only taking certain units because they have to in order to get CPs.

I wanna see what happens when only Troops choice can score objectives, is this too anarchistic?

That happens everywhere tho. It's the reason brimstone horrors are better than the blues, that guardsmen are better than tacs, cultists better than CSM etc. There are a lot of stuff fundamentally wrong in the game, true. But since it is what it is, it makes sense to compare two otherwise identical units in their cost as well.

None of those statements are true. (Except for the brimstone>blues thing, that's pretty dumb) They are only true if you decide to play a hoard army.

Cheaper MSU isn't even how the hoard armies are played, cultists are taken in large squads not min squads, etc etc etc.

You can mitigate the current guard meta by driving around in T7 transports, but people like to believe the internet when it says "rhinos and chimeras are garbage". They aren't garbage if you are facing a gunline full of mortars, lasguns, and autoguns. You'd be amazed how much you can screw with these hoard armies just by going a bit more armored.

But that's ok, decry my use of transports as misguided, choose to believe this internet rage about MSU.

While I'm on this rant, I also cannot believe how many people complain about hoards, but turn around and take plasma in every squad lol.

Agree - I think people are mixing up taking something like the loyal 32 and taking IG to really fill out a list. The loyal 32 does jack all by itself other than grant CP, which is the cheap MSU shtick. IG with mortars, catachans, priests, etc are NOT cheap MSU.

If you're using cultists to fill in CP, it's 50 for 10 or 65 for 5 CSM. You are paying 45 points (over 3 units) more for lots more durability (and now more damage, too). 10 cultists die to a stiff breeze. They're all but worthless unless they're holding an objective out of LOS. CSM can hunker down even more easily and are capable of useful upgrades as well.

But NONE of that is the same as saying you want to take 40 cultists and make use of the economies of scale that 40 models can achieve.

Well you quite freely adopt the MSU approach there? And please, lets cut out the crap now shall we? You can go read top placing lists at Blood of Kittens, MSU cultists are far more prevalent than people could believe from both of your replies.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
There is a lot of talk on other forums that Sisters should be getting this rule as well, which is frickin' hysterical. Apparently an unmodified nun with a gun should be equal to a genetically and bionically enhanced super human.

Eh, when it comes to shooting stuff, why not? Wouldn't bother me. It's not like Sister's aren't also wearing advanced power armor with a lifetime of intense training from childhood and artisanally crafted weapons. The genetic engineering stuff is far more relevant to close combat and logistical factors than shooting.

 Crimson wrote:
Well, tying CP generation to the ability to cheaply fill the troop slots was the biggest mistakes they did with this edition, and most of the game's problems stem from it.

It's definitely an issue. I think the bigger issue is the "take anything you want from any source, just buy anything and run it with whatever you want" army construction, with CP being tied to Troops as the primary "soft" method of attempting to control the worst excesses of that freedom turning out to be used as a super-charger for Stratagems that I suspect were not originally intended to be used quite as freely as they are.

Ghorgul wrote:
Well you quite freely adopt the MSU approach there? And please, lets cut out the crap now shall we? You can go read top placing lists at Blood of Kittens, MSU cultists are far more prevalent than people could believe from both of your replies.

Oh god. Blood of Kittens. I just went to their December top listings and there's literally one Chaos list in there and no cultists. November? Still no cultists.

Yes, people use MSU cultists to get CP. They literally do jack else once someone shoots them. Are you taking Abaddon to prop up 10 T3 6+ wounds? No, you aren't. They're LD6 - They. Die. Fast.

They point being that CSM are capable of filling that bare bones role in a much better way* - especially now that this rule is out.

You want to get cultists off an objective in cover? 24 bolter shots and morale takes care of the rest. CSM? 90 bolter shots. Facing Drukhari? The splinter rifles that take care of cultists just fine struggle on CSM and they'd need dissies to dig them out.

*Unless you want zone spreading, which as stated many times, is less of an issue with no deepstrike turn 1.

Oh please, like Morale ever actually mattered.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Oh please, like Morale ever actually mattered.

That really depends if you accidentally overkill them or if you have an objective to kill units. LD6 is not hard to move. 6 dead means they have no leadership at all, so a 50/50 to lose the rest. 7 dead is 66%.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
There is a lot of talk on other forums that Sisters should be getting this rule as well, which is frickin' hysterical. Apparently an unmodified nun with a gun should be equal to a genetically and bionically enhanced super human.

Also, am I right in thinking that this rule does not apply to Fallen Angels? They lack the Adeptus Astartes or Heretic Astartes rules.

Who wear power armor, carry and use heavy weapons just the same way as space marines, have actually better bolters, and treat their weapon as an instrument of divine retribution, and it's training as a sacred task?

I can wear my Dad's clothes, but it doesn't make me him.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
There is a lot of talk on other forums that Sisters should be getting this rule as well, which is frickin' hysterical. Apparently an unmodified nun with a gun should be equal to a genetically and bionically enhanced super human.

Also, am I right in thinking that this rule does not apply to Fallen Angels? They lack the Adeptus Astartes or Heretic Astartes rules.

Who wear power armor, carry and use heavy weapons just the same way as space marines, have actually better bolters, and treat their weapon as an instrument of divine retribution, and it's training as a sacred task?

I can wear my Dad's clothes, but it doesn't make me him.

Sure, but you can learn to do his job like he can.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Oh please, like Morale ever actually mattered.

That really depends if you accidentally overkill them or if you have an objective to kill units. LD6 is not hard to move. 6 dead means they have no leadership at all, so a 50/50 to lose the rest. 7 dead is 66%.

They're LD7 with the leader still alive.

Also I still call the morale mechanic overall meaningless. It's constantly ignored, passed, or you killed so many dudes in the first place that a single 5 point model running away is no big deal.
If morale was a more reliable mechanic, the subfactions that make use of it would be seen more. Night Lords, The Silent Shroud, Dark Brotherhood (or whatever the Covens one was), and specific Warlord Traits regarding morale would be more neat rather than bad gimmicks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
There is a lot of talk on other forums that Sisters should be getting this rule as well, which is frickin' hysterical. Apparently an unmodified nun with a gun should be equal to a genetically and bionically enhanced super human.

Also, am I right in thinking that this rule does not apply to Fallen Angels? They lack the Adeptus Astartes or Heretic Astartes rules.

Who wear power armor, carry and use heavy weapons just the same way as space marines, have actually better bolters, and treat their weapon as an instrument of divine retribution, and it's training as a sacred task?

I can wear my Dad's clothes, but it doesn't make me him.

Sure, but you can learn to do his job like he can.

Also you cited their Bolter being better before but you never provided a source on it.

Ice_can wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Well, tying CP generation to the ability to cheaply fill the troop slots was the biggest mistakes they did with this edition, and most of the game's problems stem from it.

Can't disagree with that, it also encourages min-maxing bonuses as your already taking the time to optimize detachments for CP.

CP is a terribly lazy and uninspired system. You can see how the lazy mechanic spews garbage into every corner of the game. Will CPEENESS last forever? Will it be abandoned as “bad” like templates,points, and terrain rules? Oh my! Lets wait and see!!!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Also you cited their Bolter being better before but you never provided a source on it.

The old Witch Hunter codex (3rd?) said that the Godwyn-De'az pattern bolter was superior to others. I'll dig out the exact quote if Mmmpi doesn't.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Also you cited their Bolter being better before but you never provided a source on it.

Witch Hunters Codex, page 19 describes the Godwyn-De'az pattern bolter as superior to other weapons of its class.

What that actually means...who knows.

Ultimately, I don't think anything about Space Marines that would make them notably better at Bolter work than Sisters (as opposed to close combat or extended duration field operations, etc).

 Vaktathi wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Also you cited their Bolter being better before but you never provided a source on it.

Witch Hunters Codex, page 19 describes the Godwyn-De'az pattern bolter as superior to other weapons of its class.

What that actually means...who knows.

Ultimately, I don't think anything about Space Marines that would make them notably better at Bolter work than Sisters (as opposed to close combat or extended duration field operations, etc).

Probably ten thousand years of refined tradition, superhuman sight, and super human reflexes.