Shadowspear Unit Impressions

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.

**Not Online!!!**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Karol wrote:
The Newman wrote:
Thanks Crimson.

So an armed Eliminator is cheaper than an Infiltrator? What kind of [expletive] sense does that make?

33 points for a Suppressor ... that's cheaper than either variety of Inceptor! That doesn't make any [expletive] sense either.

Probably make as much sense as a single obliterator costing more then a shoty dreadnought.

Now now, i got constantly told the new obliterators are better

That's because they are good.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ap0k wrote:
The driving factor in this improvement at 3 Obliterators is Endless Cacophony and other target-squad buffs. Your buffs are now effectively targeting another half-squad of Old Obliterators through the addition of the extra New Obliterator.

Except when they're not, like maybe when you're playing into GSC/Aeldari.

This is why factoring stratagems into the numbers is completely misrepresenting their efficiency.

If your Oblits are garbage when you play Aeldari/GSC because they don't get propped up by stratagems, then you can't put them into a list. It's just bad list-building.

If you don't expect to ever face either of those factions, then sure, you can make a case for assumed stratagem success, but given both factions apparent popularity, it's completely disingenuous to claim they're 'better'.

edit: Furthermore, unless I'm misunderstanding something, relative efficiency vs number fielded is not an entirely useful metric when they jacked up the cost by 75%.

Relative efficiency per point spent is what matters, because that's what determines whether your points are going further than they previously were. For the price of 9 oldblits you can get just over 5 newblits. Thats a total of 36 shots and 27 wounds (oldblits) vs 30 shots and 20 wounds (newblits). Is T5 really worth 7 fewer wounds? In some cases, maybe. In others, definitely not. Given there was no change beyond number of shots, I think everyone can agree that 36 shots is better than 30 shots, right?

Then bait with another Strategem. It isn't my fault you can't make your opponent choose between Cacophony or ToT or VotLW.

Ahh the age old GIt GUD argument, lacking however any answer to the points apok made. Great.
Also who in the right mind would block VotLW when you have slaanesh oblits down. Common sense man.

**Karol**

BrianDavion wrote:
if the only thing to dislike about a unit is the points cost at least you can buy some for casual play and for modeling and know eventually it'll proably be playable

I really need to see the GW definition of what casual actually suppose to be, because non of the list I have seen on this forum or polish forums, came close to being equal to the venguard stuff. Singular models may find a place in some marine lists, but venguard as an army just doesn't make sense. And it aint even the rules, although does sometimes don't help, it is the point costs. 20+pts for a bolter is worse then a GK strike. But I don't claim to be a master list designer. Maybe people who wrote the rules build some ultra soup lists that makes extensive use of venguard units. Great, I hope those people in the design team will post those list.

In fact I would love to see that for all w40k faction. Designers and play testers posting the armies they used and tested, maybe with some insight why they thought the stuff works. Not why it should work, but doesn't. I want to have stuff explained, so I can get a better understanding what GW may plan in the future.

**WisdomLS**

Have we actually seen pics of these points?

Seems to me that the infiltrators and eliminstors may have just been switched, would make each about right in my mind.

**casvalremdeikun**

WisdomLS wrote:
Have we actually seen pics of these points?

Seems to me that the infiltrators and eliminstors may have just been switched, would make each about right in my mind.

Multiple reviews for the books have said what the prices are. That is about as good as gold to me.

**Wayniac**

Karol wrote:
Wouldn't it be funny if the box, at least as model design and rules goes, was done 2 or more years ago, and that is why the infiltration guys are costed the way they are aka they have cost matching the pre CA fix primaris ?

That's exactly what I'm guessing. They do things so far out and either forget they have an update coming or are just too lazy to go back and double-check points after it comes out. Almost everything in the box is slightly overcosted but matches pre-CA points in most cases. Take the Venomcrawler for example. 130 points are definitely overcosted, but that's because CA gave daemon engines a drop in points across the board. GW just seemed to forget that Chapter Approved did this so never went back to say "Hey wait, we dropped points for these type of things in Chapter Approved".

Not to rehash this but this is a big reason why their devotion to print is so awful. They have such a lead time between print that things can and often do change in the middle and then we get stuck with what are basically rules from 6 months ago and waiting another 6 months or more for them to come around to update them, while during that time yet more stuff comes out without taking the changes into effect.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Not Online!!! wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Karol wrote:
The Newman wrote:
Thanks Crimson.

So an armed Eliminator is cheaper than an Infiltrator? What kind of [expletive] sense does that make?

33 points for a Suppressor ... that's cheaper than either variety of Inceptor! That doesn't make any [expletive] sense either.

Probably make as much sense as a single obliterator costing more then a shoty dreadnought.

Now now, i got constantly told the new obliterators are better

That's because they are good.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ap0k wrote:
The driving factor in this improvement at 3 Obliterators is Endless Cacophony and other target-squad buffs. Your buffs are now effectively targeting another half-squad of Old Obliterators through the addition of the extra New Obliterator.

Except when they're not, like maybe when you're playing into GSC/Aeldari.

This is why factoring stratagems into the numbers is completely misrepresenting their efficiency.

If your Oblits are garbage when you play Aeldari/GSC because they don't get propped up by stratagems, then you can't put them into a list. It's just bad list-building.

If you don't expect to ever face either of those factions, then sure, you can make a case for assumed stratagem success, but given both factions apparent popularity, it's completely disingenuous to claim they're 'better'.

edit: Furthermore, unless I'm misunderstanding something, relative efficiency vs number fielded is not an entirely useful metric when they jacked up the cost by 75%.

Relative efficiency per point spent is what matters, because that's what determines whether your points are going further than they previously were. For the price of 9 oldblits you can get just over 5 newblits. Thats a total of 36 shots and 27 wounds (oldblits) vs 30 shots and 20 wounds (newblits). Is T5 really worth 7 fewer wounds? In some cases, maybe. In others, definitely not. Given there was no change beyond number of shots, I think everyone can agree that 36 shots is better than 30 shots, right?

Then bait with another Strategem. It isn't my fault you can't make your opponent choose between Cacophony or ToT or VotLW.

Ahh the age old GIt GUD argument, lacking however any answer to the points apok made. Great.
Also who in the right mind would block VotLW when you have slaanesh oblits down. Common sense man.

I'm literally the last person to use the Git Gud argument and you know that.

And yes you can bait the opponent into doing that. It's about prioritizing targets that are more likely to die from the VotLW unit firing at it.
Even if Cacophony gets denied...they spent 3-4 to deny you a 2CP one. Newblits don't need the Strategem, they simply rock with it.

**Karol**

If you have something like a castelan, or oblits your opponent will never use it on anything else, as those things like castellan standing up of oblits double taping is the biggest return for CP.

**Amishprn86**

Karol wrote:
If you have something like a castelan, or oblits your opponent will never use it on anything else, as those things like castellan standing up of oblits double taping is the biggest return for CP.

There is a couple Admech ones as well, but yeah normally the play with stop very few stratagems, baiting doesnt really work.

**Ap0k**

Newblits don't need the Strategem

Now you're just trolling.

You realise 585pts of newblits do less damage than 585pts of oldblits. Right?

**happy_inquisitor**

Wayniac wrote:

That's exactly what I'm guessing. They do things so far out and either forget they have an update coming or are just too lazy to go back and double-check points after it comes out. Almost everything in the box is slightly overcosted but matches pre-CA points in most cases. Take the Venomcrawler for example. 130 points are definitely overcosted, but that's because CA gave daemon engines a drop in points across the board. GW just seemed to forget that Chapter Approved did this so never went back to say "Hey wait, we dropped points for these type of things in Chapter Approved".

Did you actually expect them to put out an errata/FAQ a week before the thing is even published? Even if this was a digital publication would you really expect the publisher to have corrections out for something they have not published yet but which has been leaked?

Chill. They may or may not already have the points thing in hand but they are only going to errata/FAQ it after it gets published. Usually 2 weeks after.

**Lord Damocles**

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Did you actually expect them to put out an errata/FAQ a week before the thing is even published?

Well... *Looks at Codex: Space Wolves*

**Wayniac**

happy_inquisitor wrote:
Wayniac wrote:

That's exactly what I'm guessing. They do things so far out and either forget they have an update coming or are just too lazy to go back and double-check points after it comes out. Almost everything in the box is slightly overcosted but matches pre-CA points in most cases. Take the Venomcrawler for example. 130 points are definitely overcosted, but that's because CA gave daemon engines a drop in points across the board. GW just seemed to forget that Chapter Approved did this so never went back to say "Hey wait, we dropped points for these type of things in Chapter Approved".

Did you actually expect them to put out an errata/FAQ a week before the thing is even published? Even if this was a digital publication would you really expect the publisher to have corrections out for something they have not published yet but which has been leaked?

Chill. They may or may not already have the points thing in hand but they are only going to errata/FAQ it after it gets published. Usually 2 weeks after.

No but my point was print means they can't go back beforehand and remember they adjusted the costs.

**NurglesR0T**

Ap0k wrote:
Newblits don't need the Strategem

Now you're just trolling.

You realise 585pts of newblits do less damage than 585pts of oldblits. Right?

I've never played Slaneesh Oblits so never used EC and they've always performed really well for me.

**AngryAngel80**

Quick thoughts, the box feels overly expensive.

On the bright side, the models look nice though some are less interesting, like the flying auto cannon guys, but I don't like inceptors much either. I don't like the mini codex feel, hope its easy to lock them into current marine armies. Though I only use primaris with deathwatch as my DA army and SW ones are all old marine stuff so don't want to add in the new hotness but the Deathwatch army is newish for me so doesn't matter as much to me.

I do love they added use for smoke grenades though, one of the things I wondered why they didn't use smoke for as long as I played from back in early 3rd ed so they tickles me. I doubt any of this will shake up any metas but it is interesting and could always get better. With a less flashy paint job I think they will look fine, well aside from the high top sneaker looking boots of the phobos armor. Now, if they'd just make a primaris light transport of some kind...ever..

All in all an alright box if you split it, which I am and getting some money off the final price. That said, I don't feel it was worth all the hype for it though seems a bit over the top for the offerings.

**Karol**

happy_inquisitor 772481 10375188 wrote:

Did you actually expect them to put out an errata/FAQ a week before the thing is even published? Even if this was a digital publication would you really expect the publisher to have corrections out for something they have not published yet but which has been leaked?

Chill. They may or may not already have the points thing in hand but they are only going to errata/FAQ it after it gets published. Usually 2 weeks after.

I see this argument being brought forth time and time again, and I don't see how is it valid. If GW knows the rules months, if not years in advance, then changing something is that hard. You really don't need to wait 2 weeks for an FAQ or errata. Also a lot of time when people are told to "chill" the change or FAQ does not happen. What follows is the argument to chill more till the next big FAQ, then chill even more till the next CA, and if it still doesn't get change either people are told to wait for a codex or told that stuff doesn't work or doesn't get fixed, because GW is too busy with the new stuff.

From all we know the game was being tested years, before it was printed. This means they had years to notice that stuff doesn't work, years to proof read stuff or really hammer down how they want stuff to work. Hey maybe GW wants some of their stuff to be bad. From what I have been told, they have a history of nerfing armies like chaos.

**Wayniac**

Karol wrote:
happy_inquisitor 772481 10375188 wrote:

Did you actually expect them to put out an errata/FAQ a week before the thing is even published? Even if this was a digital publication would you really expect the publisher to have corrections out for something they have not published yet but which has been leaked?

Chill. They may or may not already have the points thing in hand but they are only going to errata/FAQ it after it gets published. Usually 2 weeks after.

I see this argument being brought forth time and time again, and I don't see how is it valid. If GW knows the rules months, if not years in advance, then changing something is that hard. You really don't need to wait 2 weeks for an FAQ or errata. Also a lot of time when people are told to "chill" the change or FAQ does not happen. What follows is the argument to chill more till the next big FAQ, then chill even more till the next CA, and if it still doesn't get change either people are told to wait for a codex or told that stuff doesn't work or doesn't get fixed, because GW is too busy with the new stuff.

From all we know the game was being tested years, before it was printed. This means they had years to notice that stuff doesn't work, years to proof read stuff or really hammer down how they want stuff to work. Hey maybe GW wants some of their stuff to be bad. From what I have been told, they have a history of nerfing armies like chaos.

What I meant, in any event, was if they were working on Shadowspear, and Chapter Approved came out and changed points, they should have gone back to Shadowspear and readjusted the points to reflect how they were changing things in Chapter Approved (i.e. they dropped the cost of almost all daemon engines). Instead, it looks like they either forgot that chapter approved changed points and kept these at pre-CA levels, or just didn't care to go back and update them.