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.
2019/04/09 14:29:52
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
But saying a unit sucks because it is not used in tournaments winning lists, I think is wrong, because tournament lists use the most busted units by definition.
Not saying it sucks, I'm saying it wasn't a competitive choice, ever, as some people have said.
Galas wrote: And I know. Complaining that bowser sucks instead of using fox is a scrub mentality but this is not a videogame, I payed as much for my miniatures and rules as the next guy, I think I deserve for them to be balanced and usable, each one with his own tactical uses.(And please refrain from the "you only want any random mix of units to be equally powerfull? Lololo")
I can dig it for sure, I don't think it's a scrub mentality, but I also don't think it impacts what I've said.
P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it.
2019/04/09 14:52:39
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.
There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.
Your reply is so weak.
You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .
Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?
You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"
That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.
Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.
So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?
My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.
So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.
Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,
Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.
So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.
2019/04/09 14:57:53
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
Probably will come out the same time as the Big FAQ. They often hold off on Codex FAQ releases if another large FAQ is about to be released as well and just release them at the same time.
2019/04/09 17:01:56
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.
There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.
Your reply is so weak.
You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .
Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?
You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"
That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.
Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.
So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?
My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.
So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.
Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,
Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.
So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.
DP, f.e.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/09 17:02:56
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/04/09 17:07:27
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
Lemondish wrote: The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.
You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.
I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.
I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.
Except here is the problem.
Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.
This is me laughing in your face.
Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.
10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.
This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.
Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.
This happened to me two days ago.
Math is great! Doing statistics is also great, but it really doesn't mean much on the table top, where dice do not behave properly due to imperfections, or rolling manipulation.
Of the 22 Storm of Fire shots fired at me, he hit with 20 of them (Ultramarines reroll strat) wounded with 12, and I lost 2 of three obliteratiors.
2019/04/09 19:04:51
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
Lemondish wrote: The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.
You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.
I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.
I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.
Except here is the problem.
Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.
This is me laughing in your face.
Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.
10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.
This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.
Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.
This happened to me two days ago.
Math is great! Doing statistics is also great, but it really doesn't mean much on the table top, where dice do not behave properly due to imperfections, or rolling manipulation.
Of the 22 Storm of Fire shots fired at me, he hit with 20 of them (Ultramarines reroll strat) wounded with 12, and I lost 2 of three obliteratiors.
One moment...
I just sampled 100000 such shooting attacks with MATLAB [because I'm lazy]. The average number of wounds dealt was a little under 2.5 wounds, the standard deviation was 1.3 wounds. Less than 0.04% of trials resulted in 8 or more wounds being dealt.
I believe your situation is most accurately referred to as "unlucky" and "edge case".
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/09 19:10:53
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2019/04/09 19:16:19
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
Lemondish wrote: The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.
You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.
I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.
I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.
Except here is the problem.
Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.
This is me laughing in your face.
Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.
10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.
This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.
Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.
This happened to me two days ago.
Math is great! Doing statistics is also great, but it really doesn't mean much on the table top, where dice do not behave properly due to imperfections, or rolling manipulation.
Of the 22 Storm of Fire shots fired at me, he hit with 20 of them (Ultramarines reroll strat) wounded with 12, and I lost 2 of three obliteratiors.
One moment...
I just sampled 100000 such shooting attacks with MATLAB [because I'm lazy]. The average number of wounds dealt was a little under 2.5 wounds, the standard deviation was 1.3 wounds. Less than 0.04% of trials resulted in 8 or more wounds being dealt.
I believe your situation is what we refer to as "unlucky" and "edge case".
Nope, nopenopenope! if something unlikely happens to somebody, it is never because it is unlikely and unlikely things happen but very rarely, it is always because of Flaw In Uncontrollable Circumstance or Veiled Implication of Cheating. And, this is the important part, ALL those results should definitely be considered when deciding what is best for game balance.
Which is definitely why space marine double lascannon+missile launcher centurions should be nerfed. Sure, STATISTICALLY They're worse then dreadnoughts in every way, but I have this special set of three loaded dice that I've learned to trick-roll that always roll 6s that I always use when I make shooting attacks for my centurions.
Statistics are great and all, but balance decisions should be based on dice with imperfections and cheating.
Or at least, it should when I'm caught being disingenuous and probably exaggerating, anyway.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2019/04/09 19:29:55
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.
There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.
Your reply is so weak.
You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .
Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?
You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"
That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.
Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.
So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?
My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.
So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.
Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,
Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.
So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.
DP, f.e.
DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.
2019/04/09 19:31:25
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.
There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.
Your reply is so weak.
You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .
Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?
You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"
That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.
Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.
So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?
My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.
So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.
Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,
Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.
So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.
DP, f.e.
DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.
Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/04/09 20:18:55
Subject: Re:Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
SemperMortis wrote: I don't even play Chaos, but yeah, RAW Those obliterators are 65pts a model. It is very clearly a Fethup on GW's part, because you know, apparently hiring an editor or actual play testers is just too demanding for a company GW's size.
What makes it clear that it's a mistake? Balance alone clearly isn't a consensus, is there anything else that makes it clearly a printing mistake? Asking again because last time I got no response.
Obliterators were clearly one of the stronger units in the game and already used in competitive lists. They are a staple in chaos soup lists. With this unit getting a lot better it makes no sense for it's cost not to go up. Then again this is GW - they make the strongest units stronger all the time without even realizing it. Sometimes they raise the cost of underperforming units. There is no telling what they want the cost to be. I'll just say - with them costing 115 they are still better than dev centurions who for 110 get 2 LC and a hurricane bolter with -1 wound 0 close combat ability no invun saves, no deep strike, and no assault weapons. They also can't shoot twice ether.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/04/10 01:48:20
Subject: Re:Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
SemperMortis wrote: I don't even play Chaos, but yeah, RAW Those obliterators are 65pts a model. It is very clearly a Fethup on GW's part, because you know, apparently hiring an editor or actual play testers is just too demanding for a company GW's size.
What makes it clear that it's a mistake? Balance alone clearly isn't a consensus, is there anything else that makes it clearly a printing mistake? Asking again because last time I got no response.
Because they just had a new dataslate put out with a significantly higher cost. Add that to the fact that GW has been making more errors then ever when releasing codex's and its highly likely if not "Very clearly" a fethup. Granted, you can't take stupidity for granted, they very well might have just decided "meh feth it", i mean, look at the Stompa in the new ork codex.
Ork Players: The stompa is about 30-50% over priced and can never be played in anything approaching a competitive game unless we purposely want to lose.
GW STAFF: We have increased the fire power of its useless guns by 50%!
Ork Players: COOL! Did you dramatically reduce the price or give it another major enhancement.....like a FNP or Invuln save?
GW STAFF: We didn't reduce the price but we did give it a cool Invuln save and the ability to Deep strike!
Ork Players: COOL!!!!!!! How do we get that for the Stompa?
GW STAFF: By using this super cool detachment, it will cost you about 1700pts to field but you can then spend CP to deep strike and give the Stompa a relic invuln save!
Ork Players:.........................................
Lemondish wrote: The great news is that everybody in my local group believes that you need to show your rules if asked. Since the only place this exists is in the new codex, GW has already made a boatload of money on the power gamers looking to take advantage of the mistake.
You gotta love the power gamers. They instantly gravitate to the broken rules interactions they read about online - makes it easier to police the game in a casual setting. Easy enough to say no to a cheesy list like that.
I do feel really bad about those who will be in a tournament setting against these gamers, though. Unless TOs unilaterally decide otherwise (it's their right), they have a compelling argument to play with those rules.
I also will feel really bad for everybody if their points costs aren't addressed. I feel like Oblits staying at 65 points per will be a huge mistake for both internal and external balance for however long the issue remains. And I will laugh in your face if you legit try and argue it's fair. It isn't.
Except here is the problem.
Bolt Rifle + Storm of Fire = 4+ saving Oblits. They die to a stiff breeze. They're a glass cannon, and it's fine for them to stay at 65 pts.
This is me laughing in your face.
Well, that's typically what one does when they cannot form an honest rebuttal you ones statement.
10 Intercessors + 1 Captain, Bolt Rifles + Storm of Fire = 2 of three dead obliterators.
This seems like an edge case situation. I'd be more concerned about the fact that they're 1W less tough against FRF SRF guardsmen than a blob of space marine intercessors.
Also, 10 Intercessors + Captain w/ Storm of Fire results in an average of 20*(2/3+1/6*2/3)*(1/6*1/3+1/6*1/2)=2 wounds from the Intercessors and half a wound from the Captain, for considerably less than 2/3 dead obliterators. The same unit without Storm of Fire nets 2.16 average wounds per turn, so introducing into the matter Storm of Fire doesn't seem to have a significant effect.
This happened to me two days ago.
Math is great! Doing statistics is also great, but it really doesn't mean much on the table top, where dice do not behave properly due to imperfections, or rolling manipulation.
Of the 22 Storm of Fire shots fired at me, he hit with 20 of them (Ultramarines reroll strat) wounded with 12, and I lost 2 of three obliteratiors.
One moment...
I just sampled 100000 such shooting attacks with MATLAB [because I'm lazy]. The average number of wounds dealt was a little under 2.5 wounds, the standard deviation was 1.3 wounds. Less than 0.04% of trials resulted in 8 or more wounds being dealt.
I believe your situation is what we refer to as "unlucky" and "edge case".
Nope, nopenopenope! if something unlikely happens to somebody, it is never because it is unlikely and unlikely things happen but very rarely, it is always because of Flaw In Uncontrollable Circumstance or Veiled Implication of Cheating. And, this is the important part, ALL those results should definitely be considered when deciding what is best for game balance.
Which is definitely why space marine double lascannon+missile launcher centurions should be nerfed. Sure, STATISTICALLY They're worse then dreadnoughts in every way, but I have this special set of three loaded dice that I've learned to trick-roll that always roll 6s that I always use when I make shooting attacks for my centurions.
Statistics are great and all, but balance decisions should be based on dice with imperfections and cheating.
Or at least, it should when I'm caught being disingenuous and probably exaggerating, anyway.
Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak. But by all mean, go on insinuating I'm a liar.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/10 03:04:12
2019/04/10 03:05:18
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.
Having played this game for many years now, I've realized that statistics actually mean a great deal - most of the time.
Sure, those 10 guardsmen with FRFSRF might kill a full squad of MEQ's. It's not impossible, but unlikely, and on occasion it will happen.
Far more likely however is that they do 2 wounds to said unit of MEQ's - which is about average.
Trying to balance a game around potential freak accidents is a bad idea. With so many dice rolls involved, weird stuff is bound to happen sometimes, but more often than not, trying to balance the game around "averages" and "statistics" is the best course of action.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/10 04:24:33
5500 pts 6500 pts 7000 pts 9000 pts 13.000 pts
2019/04/10 07:05:51
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.
There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.
Your reply is so weak.
You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .
Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?
You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"
That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.
Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.
So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?
My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.
So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.
Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,
Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.
So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.
DP, f.e.
DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.
Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.
Edit: scrap my original post, it's not going to add value to someone who will openly make wild judgements on someone's character.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/10 07:11:15
2019/04/10 07:38:59
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.
There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.
Your reply is so weak.
You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .
Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?
You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"
That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.
Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.
So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?
My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.
So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.
Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,
Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.
So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.
DP, f.e.
DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.
Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.
Edit: scrap my original post, it's not going to add value to someone who will openly make wild judgements on someone's character.
Where excactly did i judge your charachter?
I stated you seem to have a chip on your shoulder nothing more nothing less and that you are not interested in a discussion.
Last i deducated do to you willingly missrepresenting the DP case above, and first due to the fact that you ignore the results Shuppet brought to the table.
Shuppet f.e. brought you the results, that Oblits never reach toptables in two years.
For a unit that is a Fire and forget unit with a Deepstrike the margine is extremely small inbetween not good and extremely good, due to the nature of it.
And here lies the problem, also just to make the accurate math, have you factored in the actual CP cost in pts for the unit?
The cheapest 5 CP you are going to get is 315 pts, (170 for when R&H would be allowed, but frankly nobody fields them in a competitive environment.)
So 315 / 5 = 63/pp per CP, if you go RC, then 315/8 = 39,375 pp/ CP.
You need 2 so even with RC you will end up with 78,75 pts on top of the unit just to factor in CP generation cost., if you also need to call in VoTWL that would be another 78,75 pts on top.
AND you will need to call it in relatively often due to the sorcerer that could and should babysitt them not beeing really mobile. And even if you manage that would be another 90pts on top for the unit to factor in.
AND SO ON.
Yeah obliterators are a great unit if supported propperly, problem is when you look at the cost of oppurtunity and what you need to fullfill with it to be bonkers you realise that you near knight level fast.
And here is the kicker, A dakka brute now costs less then a Oblit, is more reliable, get's a cheap shoot twice on a condition, has more range, etc.
So i am sorry to say but Shuppet is right on point when he stated that you seemed to miss the point.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/04/10 08:49:29
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.
Having played this game for many years now, I've realized that statistics actually mean a great deal - most of the time.
Sure, those 10 guardsmen with FRFSRF might kill a full squad of MEQ's. It's not impossible, but unlikely, and on occasion it will happen.
Far more likely however is that they do 2 wounds to said unit of MEQ's - which is about average.
Trying to balance a game around potential freak accidents is a bad idea. With so many dice rolls involved, weird stuff is bound to happen sometimes, but more often than not, trying to balance the game around "averages" and "statistics" is the best course of action.
You're both kind of right and kind of wrong. The thing is, statistics are complicated, difficult to understand and often counter-intuitive. Averages are just a small part of statistics.
Most of the discussions here on dakka are basing their arguments on the expected average result of some offensive stat lines against some defensive stat lines. However, there is also a chance attached to actually archiving that average or a number close to that average, which is usually ignored. For example you would say, an overcharged plasma gun does 1.852 to a primaris marine, which means 0 dead marines on average, Togusa would then counter that from experience his plasma guns do usually kill a primaris marine or two.
Calculate the chance of 0. 1 or 2 shots damaging marines without knowing which formula to use is doable, but already a lot of work, doing the same work for Cawl’s Wrath takes hours let alone figuring out the chances of an entire Castellan worth of shooting killing 0-10 primaris marines.
Since these formulas need be know and understood and till take quite some time to solve some resort to programming to just toss a million dice at a problem and see what happens. While this is a viable approach, random numbers in computers aren't actually random, and few people are actually able to determine whether the implementation of "random" in their current tools is random enough for such an experiment. Last, but not least, many people fail to properly initialize and/or implement randomization in their code, so even a million dice that should be random enough could yield a different result than what actually should mathematically happen.
And then there is the issue of dice luck. Over in the ork thread there are people fighting over whether the SSAG is great or not, because some keep deleting knights with it, while others have yet to do more than 3 damage to a single target.
There is also a scientific paper on the web somewhere proving that one guy just sucks at dice rolling - his average roll across hundreds of thousands of dice was 2.8 while other people rolling the same dice just as many times had the average 3.5.
Last, but not least, points somehow try to put a price tag on a mix of damage output, resilience, speed and utility. Statistics can only cover the first two, so the only way to find a proper price tag is through iteration.
TL;DR: Averages are not a good tool to balance anything, but statistics done properly are. However, statistics aren't the only thing that matters, it's just one of multiple tools to find proper price tag.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2019/04/10 09:39:25
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
The codex contains a printing error. The data slate is inconsistent with the price sheet: one says 1-3 models, the other says 3. So we know one of the two must be incorrect.
Which one is it? The data slate that has recently been fundamentally changed, in line with a new model release for the unit?
Or the points sheet that is identical to the old unit not only in price but models-per-unit?
To argue the former is not really reasonable: you're supposing, for some reason, that GW changed the model and the unit composition and the stats and the points, then decided 14 days later to immediately change the points back and the unit composition back, whilst keeping the new model and the new stats, but failed to properly update the codex to reflect this about-face.
As opposed to supposing that they just mistakenly copy-pasta'd from the old document. It's just Occam's Razor.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I will admit, though, that it's weird that GW haven't auto-FAQ'd this like they immediately did with the SW codex...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/10 09:45:20
2019/04/10 14:49:56
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.
There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.
Your reply is so weak.
You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .
Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?
You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"
That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.
Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.
So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?
My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.
So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.
Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,
Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.
So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.
DP, f.e.
DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.
Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.
Edit: scrap my original post, it's not going to add value to someone who will openly make wild judgements on someone's character.
Where excactly did i judge your charachter?
I stated you seem to have a chip on your shoulder nothing more nothing less and that you are not interested in a discussion.
Last i deducated do to you willingly missrepresenting the DP case above, and first due to the fact that you ignore the results Shuppet brought to the table.
Shuppet f.e. brought you the results, that Oblits never reach toptables in two years.
For a unit that is a Fire and forget unit with a Deepstrike the margine is extremely small inbetween not good and extremely good, due to the nature of it.
And here lies the problem, also just to make the accurate math, have you factored in the actual CP cost in pts for the unit?
The cheapest 5 CP you are going to get is 315 pts, (170 for when R&H would be allowed, but frankly nobody fields them in a competitive environment.)
So 315 / 5 = 63/pp per CP, if you go RC, then 315/8 = 39,375 pp/ CP.
You need 2 so even with RC you will end up with 78,75 pts on top of the unit just to factor in CP generation cost., if you also need to call in VoTWL that would be another 78,75 pts on top.
AND you will need to call it in relatively often due to the sorcerer that could and should babysitt them not beeing really mobile. And even if you manage that would be another 90pts on top for the unit to factor in.
AND SO ON.
Yeah obliterators are a great unit if supported propperly, problem is when you look at the cost of oppurtunity and what you need to fullfill with it to be bonkers you realise that you near knight level fast.
And here is the kicker, A dakka brute now costs less then a Oblit, is more reliable, get's a cheap shoot twice on a condition, has more range, etc.
So i am sorry to say but Shuppet is right on point when he stated that you seemed to miss the point.
My apologies if i misunderstood the tone of your post in that case, it appeared you were essentially calling me a salty thick headed loser who can't learn from a mistake.
That's a much better discourse and yes when you factor in support costs their points do shoot up dramatically, it will cost more points to maximise output from them when in comparison to a prince which is fairly self sufficient outside of needing it's screen.
I find the helbrute to be a better comparison but there are enough differences in keywords and deployment to consider on their own merits. But this is a well structured and logical argument and will bow to that.
However I don't think whether a unit hits the top tables is fair definition of whether a unit itself is broken or not. Partly because we've not had chance to see the new oblits at their old cost in a competitive environment, partly because the units people do consider OP also have massive supporting cost elements.
That and ultimately 95%+ of the player base (myself included) have no aspirations of being a top table player, in which case the benchmark comes "is the unit efficient/capable enough for its points that it seems exceptional value", which I think new profile & old points is for us filthy casuals.
2019/04/10 14:59:20
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
I didn't cite my own results genius, I referenced the results of TOP TOURNAMENT PLAYERS, who's results, and statements, both clash your baseless assertions. This is what competitive means - the ability to make top tables.
There was no cherry picking, I literally cited EVERY SINGLE GT SO FAR IN 8TH as my point of reference without a single exception lol.
Your reply is so weak.
You have a low level grasp on the game, you have no supporting evidence to your argument, you are just trying to dismiss overwhelming evidence that you might be wrong, with antisocial behavior "laugh in your face" .
Why did all the guys who picked Obliterators end up missing the top tables while all the Chaos players who did make top 8s or even 16s, didn't run them?
You are arguing that they can perform well at a lower level of play, and that's exactly my point. They are a scrub crusher and they have one big turn so people remember that. They were never a top competitive unit at all, not even close. If you are going to dismiss the stats that verify that and the top players who've said the same, you need to formulate a more compelling counter argument than "here's my LOL'ing in your face #rekt"
That's all wonderful, but your data is only useful gauging them in the perspective as a top table unit. They can be too strong without being instant-win GT broken. Plenty of people consider the loota ball really strong, but that didn't sweep the top tables by storm either. More to the point I'm fairly sure at the new profile at 65 points they fall into that window.
Mhm, atleast unlike you he defined his position accuratley and consciesly.
So let me ask you, what do you then deem to strong?
My definition of too strong is a unit that could reliably recoup more than it's own points value turn on turn safely with few to no real hard counters. New oblits at 200 pts a unit throwing out 36 autocannon rounds on a bad day with just basic stratagems has a fair chance of getting close to that ideal.
So, oblits since the start of 8th were a throwaway one trick Pony.
Secondly ppm recuperation rate says not anything about the unit,
Thirdly: using cp for the 36 rounds makes this unit not good, it just goes to show that the stratagem is bonkers, which remained unchanged since the codex. So since gw does not balance around stratagems half the time and the other half suddenly incorporates cost in pts tax for units there is a case to be made that you would've to cut the ammount of shots in half, too 18, which would seem a lot less bad.
So to clarify, to gauge if it's a good unit, it's ability to return on it's points isn't relevant and it's only fair to consider it without buffs from external sources. Find me a unit that in isolation is better value for points in the chaos book please.
DP, f.e.
DP has to have warptime, wings and start outside 30" or out of los, at which point it does 6 damage including smite on napkin maths. It takes 2 damage from overwatch and 2 in melee. Daemon prince kills obliterators in 3 turns total and loses 6 wounds more or less. Given how many variables that takes and doesn't cover the obliterators ability to deep strike. So not convinced in isolation yet.
Clearly you are not interested in an actual discussion and rather in missrepresenting any counter argument.
I suspect this due to having not screened propperly and promptly getting your backside handed to you.
And instead of learning something out of the experience, you now have a Chip on your shoulder.
Edit: scrap my original post, it's not going to add value to someone who will openly make wild judgements on someone's character.
Where excactly did i judge your charachter?
I stated you seem to have a chip on your shoulder nothing more nothing less and that you are not interested in a discussion.
Last i deducated do to you willingly missrepresenting the DP case above, and first due to the fact that you ignore the results Shuppet brought to the table.
Shuppet f.e. brought you the results, that Oblits never reach toptables in two years.
For a unit that is a Fire and forget unit with a Deepstrike the margine is extremely small inbetween not good and extremely good, due to the nature of it.
And here lies the problem, also just to make the accurate math, have you factored in the actual CP cost in pts for the unit?
The cheapest 5 CP you are going to get is 315 pts, (170 for when R&H would be allowed, but frankly nobody fields them in a competitive environment.)
So 315 / 5 = 63/pp per CP, if you go RC, then 315/8 = 39,375 pp/ CP.
You need 2 so even with RC you will end up with 78,75 pts on top of the unit just to factor in CP generation cost., if you also need to call in VoTWL that would be another 78,75 pts on top.
AND you will need to call it in relatively often due to the sorcerer that could and should babysitt them not beeing really mobile. And even if you manage that would be another 90pts on top for the unit to factor in.
AND SO ON.
Yeah obliterators are a great unit if supported propperly, problem is when you look at the cost of oppurtunity and what you need to fullfill with it to be bonkers you realise that you near knight level fast.
And here is the kicker, A dakka brute now costs less then a Oblit, is more reliable, get's a cheap shoot twice on a condition, has more range, etc.
So i am sorry to say but Shuppet is right on point when he stated that you seemed to miss the point.
My apologies if i misunderstood the tone of your post in that case, it appeared you were essentially calling me a salty thick headed loser who can't learn from a mistake.
That's a much better discourse and yes when you factor in support costs their points do shoot up dramatically, it will cost more points to maximise output from them when in comparison to a prince which is fairly self sufficient outside of needing it's screen.
I find the helbrute to be a better comparison but there are enough differences in keywords and deployment to consider on their own merits. But this is a well structured and logical argument and will bow to that.
However I don't think whether a unit hits the top tables is fair definition of whether a unit itself is broken or not. Partly because we've not had chance to see the new oblits at their old cost in a competitive environment, partly because the units people do consider OP also have massive supporting cost elements.
That and ultimately 95%+ of the player base (myself included) have no aspirations of being a top table player, in which case the benchmark comes "is the unit efficient/capable enough for its points that it seems exceptional value", which I think new profile & old points is for us filthy casuals.
No worries, i did call you salty but in this hobby if you are not having atleast some NaCl generated you must have patience like a Rock.
That said i say due to Oblits not hitting top table as a fire and forget unit, which needs to happen for a fire and forget unit to be considered good imo, the new old Shadowspear price of 115 ppm still overpriced.
Mind you i find the typo or not typo situation not better but on the opposite end and the fact that Gw did NOT ship an instant faq like with SW frankly a bit absurd. Because A: gw suddenly got a surge of lazyness or B: they have no idea for the new cost ppm.
Both i find not optimal for the consumers.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/04/10 15:51:15
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
The codex contains a printing error. The data slate is inconsistent with the price sheet: one says 1-3 models, the other says 3. So we know one of the two must be incorrect.
Which one is it? The data slate that has recently been fundamentally changed, in line with a new model release for the unit?
Or the points sheet that is identical to the old unit not only in price but models-per-unit?
To argue the former is not really reasonable: you're supposing, for some reason, that GW changed the model and the unit composition and the stats and the points, then decided 14 days later to immediately change the points back and the unit composition back, whilst keeping the new model and the new stats, but failed to properly update the codex to reflect this about-face.
As opposed to supposing that they just mistakenly copy-pasta'd from the old document. It's just Occam's Razor.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I will admit, though, that it's weird that GW haven't auto-FAQ'd this like they immediately did with the SW codex...
THey have no reason to change it - it's not like they have a reputation to uphold. If this results in selling a bunch more shadowspear boxes it's genius. That is the only way to get the new obliterators currently. Plus if you end up with a ton of primaris marines and daemon engines out of the process - you might just decide to start a whole new space marine army and buy the lord discordant this weekend. It's so smart actually...it almost can't be an accident.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/04/10 17:58:53
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.
Having played this game for many years now, I've realized that statistics actually mean a great deal - most of the time.
Sure, those 10 guardsmen with FRFSRF might kill a full squad of MEQ's. It's not impossible, but unlikely, and on occasion it will happen.
Far more likely however is that they do 2 wounds to said unit of MEQ's - which is about average.
Trying to balance a game around potential freak accidents is a bad idea. With so many dice rolls involved, weird stuff is bound to happen sometimes, but more often than not, trying to balance the game around "averages" and "statistics" is the best course of action.
Averages are important for sure. But 10 bolt guns can only do 20 wounds max for 130 points. Lasguns with FRFSRF can potentially kill 40 max for 40 points. The ability to do something needs to be taken into account even if it is a long shot. This game doesn't factor that in AT ALL.
Lots of dice has a lot of really great outlier outcomes. This is one of the main reasons why elite armies are not good.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/10 18:57:20
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/04/10 19:10:56
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
That is true, spread is important specially if you don't plan to play 2000 games vs each opponent to get those nice and round 3,5 dmg on a lascannon.
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.
2019/04/10 19:29:55
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
Having played the game for many years now, Statistics mean jack gak.
Having played this game for many years now, I've realized that statistics actually mean a great deal - most of the time.
Sure, those 10 guardsmen with FRFSRF might kill a full squad of MEQ's. It's not impossible, but unlikely, and on occasion it will happen.
Far more likely however is that they do 2 wounds to said unit of MEQ's - which is about average.
Trying to balance a game around potential freak accidents is a bad idea. With so many dice rolls involved, weird stuff is bound to happen sometimes, but more often than not, trying to balance the game around "averages" and "statistics" is the best course of action.
Averages are important for sure. But 10 bolt guns can only do 20 wounds max for 130 points. Lasguns with FRFSRF can potentially kill 40 max for 40 points. The ability to do something needs to be taken into account even if it is a long shot. This game doesn't factor that in AT ALL.
Lots of dice has a lot of really great outlier outcomes. This is one of the main reasons why elite armies are not good.
39* shots though.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2019/04/10 19:36:36
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
well 36 lasguns and 2 bolter shots for 41 points is what you really get. Beyond the point. Each shot is a potential kill. There needs to be an overall value for the chance a kill as baseline. A baseline cost just for having 1 wound. These are things that are needed to make elite infantry have some relevance.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/10 19:37:04
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/04/10 19:56:35
Subject: Are Obliterators worth their new points cost?
While I agree that potential max damage is something that is important to recognize, I think in cases like 40 lasguns inflicting 40 wounds that the numeric baseline value for that potential would be so low that it would be irrelevantly small. I think the better place for that to have relevance is in balancing between weapons themselves when given options. A baseline cost for a wound is something that I agree should have value, but that's a hard thing to judge, and I think the granularity we have at the current scale is going to make that difficult, and it's something that definitely changes with the scale of the game you're playing at (hence why most games don't try to fit in all the stuff 40k does).
The more important aspect of volume I think is consistency, your results will more closely match the expected average and better avoid issues where a single bad roll will break something critical. Costing for that is difficult. A lot of "balance" mechanisms around this concept only operate on a meta scale and are basically a practice in controlled knee-capping (e.g. kill points pricing by actual points value killed or by discrete unit kill counts).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/10 20:02:25
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
5500 pts 
6500 pts 
7000 pts 
9000 pts 
13.000 pts 
