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.
D10s and D12's don't need to be that big. They can be just as big as D6's.
Given the huge amount of dice some units can pump out nowadays however, using apps becomes more and more attractive, even if it does rely on pRNG (not that real dice are truly random anyway, initial conditions and whatnot).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 14:08:12
Sigh, some of us like to go into an actual store a buy stuff as opposed to ordering online and waiting. I realized I am in the minority on that particular issue, but my overall point is that there are SEVERAL inconveniences with rolling non-d6s en masse. Regardless of how a d12 system would benefit the balance of the game (which is debatable since the rules around it can always be just as imbalanced/unfair), it wouldn't be as fun/convenient as rolling d6s.
But I think we've derailed the discussion enough, so to get back on topic: I also expect the Big FAQ to coincide with several Codex FAQs and hopefully we see some of the bigger issued addressed. I'd like to be able to use my Webway Gate, but since it cannot even be legally deployed in most games, I just can't get the inspiration to finish painting it.
-
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/11 14:08:43
I think the move to D10/D12/D20 would require a change of granularity.
At the moment, each model makes its own attacks, so 10 model units will always throw at least 10 dice for every attack. If units were instead treated as a single thing that can attack, and you only had like 2 attacks for a 10 model units, then it would be much easier to use big dice (and the number of wounds generated could be a difference between attack dice and defense dice, or something). But that would be a game quite different from 40K.
The main issue is really that 40K games have too many models for a ruleset that works on a per-model basis. Over the years the game size (in terms of # of models) has increased a lot, and 8th ed. made it even worse by handing rerolls like free candy.
That's also why I dislike 2,000pts game, and prefer smaller games.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: So GW came out and publicly stated FAQ will not be making any large changes from now on.
Here's something they can FAQ out. Kellermorphs need to be removed from the game, entirely. Or at least made show they can't pop in out of nowhere, delete a character or two. Oh and you can have 3 of them. Nononononononononono.
Over simplifing a unit or faction in to unuse does not seem to be something that can stop GW from acting. I do doubt something like that would happen to the kellermorph, but if they wanted they can blast any army in to oblivion. BA were good for what 2-3 months, before they got the ax?
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Karol wrote: Over simplifing a unit or faction in to unuse does not seem to be something that can stop GW from acting. I do doubt something like that would happen to the kellermorph, but if they wanted they can blast any army in to oblivion. BA were good for what 2-3 months, before they got the ax?
BA was never "good" as far as marines are perceived. It was smash captains and only smash captains that got somewhat nerfed. Nothing else in their codex was harmed.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
It's hard for that to temper my expectations because I don't know if I have a good grasp of what GW would consider a seismic change. Doom getting FAQed to only work with Asuryani units would feel like a huge change for Aeldari lists but is technically only a small tweak. The same could be said for most Command Point change suggestions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 15:58:17
Karol wrote: Over simplifing a unit or faction in to unuse does not seem to be something that can stop GW from acting. I do doubt something like that would happen to the kellermorph, but if they wanted they can blast any army in to oblivion. BA were good for what 2-3 months, before they got the ax?
BA was never "good" as far as marines are perceived. It was smash captains and only smash captains that got somewhat nerfed. Nothing else in their codex was harmed.
Which means again 2-3 months of being good, and then getting nerfed hard. Before the deep strike nerf BA players who wanted play something else then cpts and scouts could at least have had hope that DC or something may end up fixed. After the change it doesn't matter, it would require a codex rewrite, and I doubt GW is going to be doing any loyalist books that won't be focused on chad marines in the near future.
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.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I seriously can't believe some people are still arguing that Guard squads are not overpowered for their cost. And I was a die-hard fan of IG up until I played a different army and saw how easy guard have it.
The current state of guard is literally indefensible by logic, only by woo and irrationality.
Your forgetting the first rule of guard club
Never admit how powerful your units are. Like EVER !!!
I must admit I'm looking forward to seeing the data from the upcoming ITC season with best infaction requiring pure lists.
I suspect it's going to be interesting watching the results and how people try to spin those results.
What results? You're so far away from competitive play you have no idea what the changes to BiF even means. The change means absolutely nothing in terms of what takes top 8 at majors, which will still be soup. The only difference now is that soup players won't be taking BiF awards as consolation prize for not taking best in ITC. As for mono codex power, Mono-Guard are completely shut out of top tables by Eldar and I don't see that changing as long as -2/-3 is so stupidly easy to stack.
As for dealing with FRFSRF bogeymen, I would like to introduce you to the humble Deathwatch Intercessor.
10 Deathwatch Intercessors in cover vs FOUR Infantry squads and two company commanders with FRFSRF starting at 30"range. 180 points vs 220 points.
Turn One
One dead guard squad. Straight up deleted with hellfire rounds and reroll 1's to wound.
Guard squads move into 24" range, engage FRFSRF on three of the squads. 54 shots, 1.4 wounds after save, let's be generous and say we dropped an Intercessor. Without cover, it's 3 wounds, so either way, still 9 models left.
Turn Two
Second guard squad loses 9 men, probably not spending CP to save one guardsmen, he runs.
Guard squads move to 18", let's again be generous and say they're Armageddon, so now they're getting full value on FRFSRF. 72 shots. Another dead intercessor, two more dead intercessors out of cover.
Turn Three
Third guard squad takes 8 casualties, 7 if the Intercessors have not been in cover this whole time. We'll say the Guard player spent a CP to make it a 1D3 morale check and they passed though.
Guard squads move to 12", FRFSRF on the three survivors from squad three and the untouched squad. 49 shots. 1.29 wounds. feth it, let's just say they dropped another Intercessor cause the Guardsmen need the help at this point.
Turn Four
Intercessors can easily clean up with a round of shooting + charging. The company commanders might now be tying them up for the rest of the game, but the Guard player in this scenario burned 1 CP, has been wasting 4/6 possible orders the whole game, tied up or lost 220 points of their own units, and in ITC gave up at least four primary points on approach, with a probable two more from either Butcher's Bill or Reaper.
You could MMM all four of the squads turn one into RF range, but at that point, the play is to move up 6", split fire at the two furthest squads, and charge the full strength one before they can get a FRFSRF volley.
And when your Guard squads cost as much as a DW Intercessor Squad, you can complain about how weak they are. But why stop there? A guard squad can't compare to a Leviathan, NERF THE LEVIATHAN.
See, you can't compare the two. It's silly to do so. Also please point to me the lists loading out 8 squads of DW Intercessors that are winning majors. Hell, point to me the list of any DW w/ pure intercessors squads. So in effect, that is not a fair argument. DW is not in any way breaking the Meta with their overpoweredness.
Also you gave all the boneses to Intercessors, and took the guard out of RF range. This is horribly skewed. LOS exists for a reason.
I'm not complaining about how weak guardsmen are, I'm pointing out that FRFSRF guardsmen are not some OP punch above their weight squad in a realistic scenario and even used MORE points in guardsmen than Intercessors. Yes, if you magically got them all into RF range then they will punch above their weight. But unless you're a mouthbreather, the Guard player is never going to get that opportunity.
Because the guardsmen don't start in RF range. And there's no way you're maneuvering 40 models without at least one squad of them being in LOS. If anything, this was skewed in favor of the guardsmen. The guardsmen have 40 points and two extra CP in this scenario and the best possible regiment tactic for FRFSRF. Cadian can't get rerolls on the move.
I didn't give DW 'all the bonuses', I gave them their chapter tactic and standard ammo for a T3 target. That's like complaining about me simulating Raven Guard getting their -1 to hit.
I have never seen a player in game make the choice to send intercessor squads after entrenched guard squads holding objectives. I wonder why.
Because they can sit at 30" and kill a squad per turn without receiving any return fire?
Where I play it's the other way round, with the guard squads sitting at 48" and the Marines eating Autocannon fire for at least two turns before they can retaliate at all.
To get back on topic:
I'll add another +1 to the call for Beta Bolters to get adjusted so it doesn't do the most good for the units that need it the least.
I'll also restate that Beta Bolter needs to do something for Autobolters, Stalkers, and other 'Bolter' weapons that are not Rapid fire.
Reivers still really need some CC options for their Sergeants.
Primaris transport segregation hasn't gotten any less stupid. And I say that as someone who absolutely favors the Repulsors.
Custodian Guard Storm Shields and power swords are both blatently overpriced. I'm not sure they can be fixed with just a price change (Custodes are too expensive to kit out with less than the best gear), but it makes zero sense for the sword-and-shield combo to be more expensive that the Guardian Spear and Misocondria while also being much worse.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 16:36:13
Karol wrote: Over simplifing a unit or faction in to unuse does not seem to be something that can stop GW from acting. I do doubt something like that would happen to the kellermorph, but if they wanted they can blast any army in to oblivion. BA were good for what 2-3 months, before they got the ax?
BA was never "good" as far as marines are perceived. It was smash captains and only smash captains that got somewhat nerfed. Nothing else in their codex was harmed.
Which means again 2-3 months of being good, and then getting nerfed hard. Before the deep strike nerf BA players who wanted play something else then cpts and scouts could at least have had hope that DC or something may end up fixed. After the change it doesn't matter, it would require a codex rewrite, and I doubt GW is going to be doing any loyalist books that won't be focused on chad marines in the near future.
If you think one unit taking a moderate nerf counts as nerfing a whole army hard I have no idea what to tell you. BA wasn't the only army to be affected by that change. And, no, it doesn't require a codex rewrite.
Where I play it's the other way round, with the guard squads sitting at 48" and the Marines eating Autocannon fire for at least two turns before they can retaliate at all.
So both the marines and the guard are on the table edge and the guard have nothing but autocannons? Because marines deploying on the line with 30" guns can reach the other table edge with one move.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 16:19:43
Daedalus81 wrote: So both the marines and the guard are on the table edge and the guard have nothing but autocannons? Because marines deploying on the line with 30" guns can reach the other table edge with one move.
We play on somewhat larger boards so that maneuvering actually matters. However on a standard 4×6 at 1000 points it's not that hard for a Guard player to castle in the corners with a silly number of ACs and just wreck a Primaris force that can't afford to ignore one corner while clearing out the other.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 16:50:17
as the continued popularity of the ITC ruleset has made abundantly clear, units in 40k can't really be balanced around a particular ruleset, even all the particular rulesets released by GW. Some popular tournament organizer might just go ahead and say "hey you know that style of objective that doesn't exist at all anymore in GWs official missions? All our missions are going to have that as a possible secondary objective, because it favors the kind of armies we like to see."
GW has pretty much totally abandoned kill points in favor of the (IMO) far better compromise between total granularity and gameplay expediency which is "kill X power level worth of enemy units".
"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!"
Daedalus81 wrote: So both the marines and the guard are on the table edge and the guard have nothing but autocannons? Because marines deploying on the line with 30" guns can reach the other table edge with one move.
We play on somewhat larger boards so that maneuvering actually matters. However on a standard 4×6 at 1000 points it's not that hard for a Guard player to castle in the corners with a silly number of ACs and just wreck a Primaris force that can't afford to ignore one corner while clearing out the other.
Then I'm sorry to say that your points just aren't even relevant to any discussion about balance.
as the continued popularity of the ITC ruleset has made abundantly clear, units in 40k can't really be balanced around a particular ruleset, even all the particular rulesets released by GW. Some popular tournament organizer might just go ahead and say "hey you know that style of objective that doesn't exist at all anymore in GWs official missions? All our missions are going to have that as a possible secondary objective, because it favors the kind of armies we like to see."
GW has pretty much totally abandoned kill points in favor of the (IMO) far better compromise between total granularity and gameplay expediency which is "kill X power level worth of enemy units".
by doing that they more or less killed any elite army, that has not super above avarge kill power, in the game. Plus what is wrong with multi unit armies being punished for having hordes of units? They already have a ton of stuff going in their favour, starting from army foot print, through objective claiming, to being favoured by random generators of the game. Kill count being important seems like a logical way to limit those horde armies. Otherwise you either play horde, or you need to break the game rules in a legal way, like armies build around flyer stands do.
If you think one unit taking a moderate nerf counts as nerfing a whole army hard I have no idea what to tell you. BA wasn't the only army to be affected by that change. And, no, it doesn't require a codex rewrite.
If an army consits of two types of models and one gets nerfed, then it is a 50% nerf to an army. I can give a better example, the nerf to BA captins and how they deployed and moved around, nerfed the entire GK army. So you can even have zero units nerfed, but get a 100% nerf to the entire army.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 18:01:06
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.
Daedalus81 wrote: So both the marines and the guard are on the table edge and the guard have nothing but autocannons? Because marines deploying on the line with 30" guns can reach the other table edge with one move.
We play on somewhat larger boards so that maneuvering actually matters. However on a standard 4×6 at 1000 points it's not that hard for a Guard player to castle in the corners with a silly number of ACs and just wreck a Primaris force that can't afford to ignore one corner while clearing out the other.
Then I'm sorry to say that your points just aren't even relevant to any discussion about balance.
By that logic anyone who isn't playing with atleast 32 guardsmen in their list just isn't relevant to any discussion about balance.
Daedalus81 wrote: So both the marines and the guard are on the table edge and the guard have nothing but autocannons? Because marines deploying on the line with 30" guns can reach the other table edge with one move.
We play on somewhat larger boards so that maneuvering actually matters. However on a standard 4×6 at 1000 points it's not that hard for a Guard player to castle in the corners with a silly number of ACs and just wreck a Primaris force that can't afford to ignore one corner while clearing out the other.
Then I'm sorry to say that your points just aren't even relevant to any discussion about balance.
By that logic anyone who isn't playing with atleast 32 guardsmen in their list just isn't relevant to any discussion about balance.
So we're balancing around bigger tables or playing half points on a standard sized table?
No.
Why don't we balance for a 10'x10' table? I bet IG artillery would really enjoy that!
as the continued popularity of the ITC ruleset has made abundantly clear, units in 40k can't really be balanced around a particular ruleset, even all the particular rulesets released by GW. Some popular tournament organizer might just go ahead and say "hey you know that style of objective that doesn't exist at all anymore in GWs official missions? All our missions are going to have that as a possible secondary objective, because it favors the kind of armies we like to see."
GW has pretty much totally abandoned kill points in favor of the (IMO) far better compromise between total granularity and gameplay expediency which is "kill X power level worth of enemy units".
by doing that they more or less killed any elite army, that has not super above avarge kill power, in the game. Plus what is wrong with multi unit armies being punished for having hordes of units? They already have a ton of stuff going in their favour, starting from army foot print, through objective claiming, to being favoured by random generators of the game. Kill count being important seems like a logical way to limit those horde armies. Otherwise you either play horde, or you need to break the game rules in a legal way, like armies build around flyer stands do.
If you think one unit taking a moderate nerf counts as nerfing a whole army hard I have no idea what to tell you. BA wasn't the only army to be affected by that change. And, no, it doesn't require a codex rewrite.
If an army consits of two types of models and one gets nerfed, then it is a 50% nerf to an army. I can give a better example, the nerf to BA captins and how they deployed and moved around, nerfed the entire GK army. So you can even have zero units nerfed, but get a 100% nerf to the entire army.
Right like that most unviable and highly elite of armies, the Imperial Knights.
2k of imperial knights definitely DOES NOT have the same killing power as almost any other shooting-oriented 2k point army, even if you do go entirely Castellans/Crusaders/Helverins.They also don't have very good objective control. somehow they manage to work fine, and when you move away from ITC rules, you start to see armies with multiple knights taken in top armies instead of being locked into one specific meta setup.
"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!"
Daedalus81 wrote: So both the marines and the guard are on the table edge and the guard have nothing but autocannons? Because marines deploying on the line with 30" guns can reach the other table edge with one move.
We play on somewhat larger boards so that maneuvering actually matters. However on a standard 4×6 at 1000 points it's not that hard for a Guard player to castle in the corners with a silly number of ACs and just wreck a Primaris force that can't afford to ignore one corner while clearing out the other.
Then I'm sorry to say that your points just aren't even relevant to any discussion about balance.
By that logic anyone who isn't playing with atleast 32 guardsmen in their list just isn't relevant to any discussion about balance.
So we're balancing around bigger tables or playing half points on a standard sized table?
No.
Why don't we balance for a 10'x10' table? I bet IG artillery would really enjoy that!
Oh right, nothing outside of tournament standard rules is relevant. Right. Forgot where I was for a minute there.
Also, try taking an all-Primaris list into an guard list that maxed out on infantry squads and heavy weapon squads with ACs even under normal deployment rules and see how you do. Here's a hint, you won't get to take a second turn.
Back on topic, why the heck is a Hurricane Bolter 10 points? Twin-linked weapons are usually cheaper and the Hurricane is just three linked Storm Bolters. If anything it should be like 5 points.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 18:50:03
Daedalus81 wrote: So both the marines and the guard are on the table edge and the guard have nothing but autocannons? Because marines deploying on the line with 30" guns can reach the other table edge with one move.
We play on somewhat larger boards so that maneuvering actually matters. However on a standard 4×6 at 1000 points it's not that hard for a Guard player to castle in the corners with a silly number of ACs and just wreck a Primaris force that can't afford to ignore one corner while clearing out the other.
1k is on a 4x4, that is standard..... did you not look at the chart?
Oh right, nothing outside of tournament standard rules is relevant. Right. Forgot where I was for a minute there.
Also, try taking an all-Primaris list into an guard list that maxed out on infantry squads with ACs even under normal deployment rules and see how you do. Here's a hint, you won't get to take a second turn.
I'm sorry, but it's just absurd to try and balance every configuration that 1% of the player base uses. That's like asking Starcraft to balance around custom maps.
30 autocannons kills 3 primaris in cover, so, yes I would get a second turn.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I seriously can't believe some people are still arguing that Guard squads are not overpowered for their cost. And I was a die-hard fan of IG up until I played a different army and saw how easy guard have it.
The current state of guard is literally indefensible by logic, only by woo and irrationality.
Your forgetting the first rule of guard club
Never admit how powerful your units are. Like EVER !!!
I must admit I'm looking forward to seeing the data from the upcoming ITC season with best infaction requiring pure lists.
I suspect it's going to be interesting watching the results and how people try to spin those results.
What results? You're so far away from competitive play you have no idea what the changes to BiF even means. The change means absolutely nothing in terms of what takes top 8 at majors, which will still be soup. The only difference now is that soup players won't be taking BiF awards as consolation prize for not taking best in ITC. As for mono codex power, Mono-Guard are completely shut out of top tables by Eldar and I don't see that changing as long as -2/-3 is so stupidly easy to stack.
As for dealing with FRFSRF bogeymen, I would like to introduce you to the humble Deathwatch Intercessor.
10 Deathwatch Intercessors in cover vs FOUR Infantry squads and two company commanders with FRFSRF starting at 30"range. 180 points vs 220 points.
Turn One
One dead guard squad. Straight up deleted with hellfire rounds and reroll 1's to wound.
Guard squads move into 24" range, engage FRFSRF on three of the squads. 54 shots, 1.4 wounds after save, let's be generous and say we dropped an Intercessor. Without cover, it's 3 wounds, so either way, still 9 models left.
Turn Two
Second guard squad loses 9 men, probably not spending CP to save one guardsmen, he runs.
Guard squads move to 18", let's again be generous and say they're Armageddon, so now they're getting full value on FRFSRF. 72 shots. Another dead intercessor, two more dead intercessors out of cover.
Turn Three
Third guard squad takes 8 casualties, 7 if the Intercessors have not been in cover this whole time. We'll say the Guard player spent a CP to make it a 1D3 morale check and they passed though.
Guard squads move to 12", FRFSRF on the three survivors from squad three and the untouched squad. 49 shots. 1.29 wounds. feth it, let's just say they dropped another Intercessor cause the Guardsmen need the help at this point.
Turn Four
Intercessors can easily clean up with a round of shooting + charging. The company commanders might now be tying them up for the rest of the game, but the Guard player in this scenario burned 1 CP, has been wasting 4/6 possible orders the whole game, tied up or lost 220 points of their own units, and in ITC gave up at least four primary points on approach, with a probable two more from either Butcher's Bill or Reaper.
You could MMM all four of the squads turn one into RF range, but at that point, the play is to move up 6", split fire at the two furthest squads, and charge the full strength one before they can get a FRFSRF volley.
And when your Guard squads cost as much as a DW Intercessor Squad, you can complain about how weak they are. But why stop there? A guard squad can't compare to a Leviathan, NERF THE LEVIATHAN.
See, you can't compare the two. It's silly to do so. Also please point to me the lists loading out 8 squads of DW Intercessors that are winning majors. Hell, point to me the list of any DW w/ pure intercessors squads. So in effect, that is not a fair argument. DW is not in any way breaking the Meta with their overpoweredness.
Also you gave all the boneses to Intercessors, and took the guard out of RF range. This is horribly skewed. LOS exists for a reason.
I'm not complaining about how weak guardsmen are, I'm pointing out that FRFSRF guardsmen are not some OP punch above their weight squad in a realistic scenario and even used MORE points in guardsmen than Intercessors. Yes, if you magically got them all into RF range then they will punch above their weight. But unless you're a mouthbreather, the Guard player is never going to get that opportunity.
Because the guardsmen don't start in RF range. And there's no way you're maneuvering 40 models without at least one squad of them being in LOS. If anything, this was skewed in favor of the guardsmen. The guardsmen have 40 points and two extra CP in this scenario and the best possible regiment tactic for FRFSRF. Cadian can't get rerolls on the move.
I didn't give DW 'all the bonuses', I gave them their chapter tactic and standard ammo for a T3 target. That's like complaining about me simulating Raven Guard getting their -1 to hit.
I have never seen a player in game make the choice to send intercessor squads after entrenched guard squads holding objectives. I wonder why.
Because they can sit at 30" and kill a squad per turn without receiving any return fire?
Here is a guard player trying to defend 4ppm guardsmen before, because you apparentlyhaven't seen this argument that is already over a year old.
GW has given up and is now bringing other troops down to the bottom floor of ppm which is crowned by Guard.
Take a basic squad of each thing, no buffs, and go from there.
???
But I did. Multiple times, and they come out ahead in every scenario against other unbuffed infantry. And when I do that people are all like "but you have to consider the faction as a whole" so I do the math again but with buffs affecting both sides, and guard still win handily. And then people go "orders are different from auras so it's not the same" and then just declare all the math unrepresentative. Or even better, that the comparison involves units that don't have the same role and so is wrong.
And it really baffles me when people downplay the effects of FRFSRF, saying it doesn't do much because it's S3. I mean, 3 guard infantry squads can use FRFSRF to keep up with a double tapping Russ Punisher's firepower, and that's at long range. At half range, the punisher is completely outdone. And most Guard players seem to think that the punisher needs a point increase, so...
Ok, so I’ve just done a bit more math myself in regards to “who comes out on top unbuffed”. That even means not rapid firing – but being able to shoot from turn 1. This is also not taking into account morale losses. (As a morale trade off, I’ve not taken the decision of presuming you’d remove Guard sergeants first – otherwise morale would play a bigger factor).
Vs Marines.
2 squads of Guard vs 1 squad of 6 Marines (80 points v 78)
If Guard go first, the Marines are dead at the end of turn 4 with only 17.26% Casualties.
If Marines go first, the Marines are dead at the end of turn 6. 29.23% Casualties.
Guard win.
Vs T’au
2 squads of Guard vs 11 Fire warriors (80 points v 77)
If Guard go first, Guard win. 37.55% Casualties vs 91.83%
If T’au go first, Guard win. 65.55% Casulaties vs 62.72%.
Advantage to Guard. Neither side is “tabled”.
Vs Nids
2 squads of Guard vs 3 Warriors with Deathspitters (not even going to bother with it being vs 10 Termagants with devourers) (80 points v 75)
If Guard go first, Guard win. 55.56% Casualties vs 66.67%.
If Nids go first, Nids win. 33.33% Casualties vs 77.78%.
Draw over 6 turns, with slight advantage to Nids. Neither side is “tabled”.
Vs Thousand Sons
6 squads of Guard vs 11 Rubrics (one with Soulreaper and killing off Sorcerer first) (240 points v 240)
If Guard go first, Guard win. 35.5% Casualties vs 59.92%
If Sons go first, Guard win. 44.34% Casualties vs 47.1%.
Guard win, though, it is pretty close if Sons go first. Neither side is “tabled”.
Vs Orks
3 squads of Guard vs 20 Boyz (120 points vs 120)
If Guard go first, Guard win. Orks tabled turn 5. 16.54% Casualties.
If Orks go first, Guard win. Orks tabled turn 6. 29.71% Casualties.
Easy Guard win.
Vs Necrons
3 squads of Guard vs 1 unit of Warriors
If Guard go first, Necrons win. 33.61% Casualties to 50.5%.
If Necrons go first, then Necrons win. 41.09% Casualties vs 57.28%.
Necrons win over 6 turns. Neither side is “tabled”.
Vs Admech (Rangers)
1 squad v 1 squad (40 points each)
If Guard go first, Guard win. Admech tabled turn 6. 27.8% Guard Casualties.
If Admech go first, Guard win. 51.9% Casualties vs 80.06%.
Guard win.
So - from a DURABILITY point alone (one of the points that seems to get mentioned over and over again, Guardsmen aren't the "best" across the board troop for troop.
Of course, this changes when you start having other squads shoot at the Guardsmen etc, but, in the troop v troop situation it is slightly different.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 19:05:56
Oh right, nothing outside of tournament standard rules is relevant. Right. Forgot where I was for a minute there.
Also, try taking an all-Primaris list into an guard list that maxed out on infantry squads with ACs even under normal deployment rules and see how you do. Here's a hint, you won't get to take a second turn.
I'm sorry, but it's just absurd to try and balance every configuration that 1% of the player base uses. That's like asking Starcraft to balance around custom maps.
30 autocannons kills 3 primaris in cover, so, yes I would get a second turn.
I've played that matchup a dozen times and never made it to my second turn with more than 7 Marines left on the table. I suppose I should have said "a second turn that was worth bothering with."
Edit: I also recognize that those results might be statistically unusual now that I think about it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/11 19:15:51
15k+
Beastmen 10k
