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.
Thanks - that's pretty brutal. The double tap won't have a reroll, but he can still have a good chance to put some characters on the ropes. I imagine that with wounding on 2s and only 4 wounds that CCs would be killed closer to 55 to 60% of the time.
Don't CCs have a 4++? With a 4++, that's nearly a 50% "nope" off the top (slightly less - you could do 4 MW, but the odds are ~ 60%*(2/3)(1/2)(1/3)(1/6) - or about 1% chance).
Thanks - that's pretty brutal. The double tap won't have a reroll, but he can still have a good chance to put some characters on the ropes. I imagine that with wounding on 2s and only 4 wounds that CCs would be killed closer to 55 to 60% of the time.
Don't CCs have a 4++? With a 4++, that's nearly a 50% "nope" off the top (slightly less - you could do 4 MW, but the odds are ~ 60%*(2/3)(1/2)(1/3)(1/6) - or about 1% chance).
You can't take invulnerable saves against a Vindicare's weapons. Poor Warlocks with their 2 wounds...
I'll do a breakdown for the probabilities with a CP reroll later (and show how it's worked out) for those interested in how the maths works.
Bravo.
So, really ~39% danger zone for casting and 13% catastrophe. Reroll will kick it up a bit and this is against a character with a 1 pip advantage to wounding.
Tiggy has only 4 wounds. It's 40% kill without a reroll. Probably a reroll on the damage would be most efficient if you roll a 1 and reroll on mortal wounds to try to ensure a kill if you get 2 or 3 damage on the roll. This should get you over 50% kill.
Tiggy is roughly a 25% chance without reroll, probably somewhere in the 40s *with* reroll - my original numbers didn't take into account the increased wounds (d6 vs d3) on a 6 to wound, but that only factors in roughly once every 18 unsaved wounds.
Thanks - that's pretty brutal. The double tap won't have a reroll, but he can still have a good chance to put some characters on the ropes. I imagine that with wounding on 2s and only 4 wounds that CCs would be killed closer to 55 to 60% of the time.
Don't CCs have a 4++? With a 4++, that's nearly a 50% "nope" off the top (slightly less - you could do 4 MW, but the odds are ~ 60%*(2/3)(1/2)(1/3)(1/6) - or about 1% chance).
You can't take invulnerable saves against a Vindicare's weapons. Poor Warlocks with their 2 wounds...
Thanks, spaced that.
Drager has much better numbers. Not only did he not forget the chance of the larger damage die, but also I used upper bounds whereas he used the actual values (because I'm lazy and he's awesome).
Yeah, Warlocks are boned.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/15 14:41:28
I'll do a breakdown for the probabilities with a CP reroll later (and show how it's worked out) for those interested in how the maths works.
Bravo.
So, really ~39% danger zone for casting and 13% catastrophe. Reroll will kick it up a bit and this is against a character with a 1 pip advantage to wounding.
Tiggy has only 4 wounds. It's 40% kill without a reroll. Probably a reroll on the damage would be most efficient if you roll a 1 and reroll on mortal wounds to try to ensure a kill if you get 2 or 3 damage on the roll. This should get you over 50% kill.
Thanks for the corrections on the wound (I'm not a marine player), your maths is a little off though, it's 25.1% to kill a 4 wound 3+sv character with no reroll and 47.4% with a reroll.
I was just trying to figure it in my head. I've seen it in action too many times. I've even abused it to the max with gman giving reroll 1's to hit. It really is too much. Eliminators are terrible in comparison even rerolling hits and wounds (and they are pretty good units).
Automatically Appended Next Post: bharing I'm not doing this math. The above chart is stating a 40.7% chance to do 4 wounds to a 3+ save character.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Wait we have different charts going around. Whatever...Point is. These are the averages. For people that can't fail 4+'s it's pretty much auto kill.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/04/15 14:53:19
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
I'll do a breakdown for the probabilities with a CP reroll later (and show how it's worked out) for those interested in how the maths works.
Bravo.
So, really ~39% danger zone for casting and 13% catastrophe. Reroll will kick it up a bit and this is against a character with a 1 pip advantage to wounding.
Tiggy has only 4 wounds. It's 40% kill without a reroll. Probably a reroll on the damage would be most efficient if you roll a 1 and reroll on mortal wounds to try to ensure a kill if you get 2 or 3 damage on the roll. This should get you over 50% kill.
Thanks for the corrections on the wound (I'm not a marine player), your maths is a little off though, it's 25.1% to kill a 4 wound 3+sv character with no reroll and 47.4% with a reroll.
I was just trying to figure it in my head. I've seen it in action too many times. I've even abused it to the max with gman giving reroll 1's to hit. It really is too much. Eliminators are terrible in comparison even rerolling hits and wounds (and they are pretty good units).
Automatically Appended Next Post: bharing I'm not doing this math. The above chart is stating a 40.7% chance to do 4 wounds to a 3+ save character.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Wait we have different charts going around.
11.9%+13.2%=40.75%?
That's a hot spicy take right there.
"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!"
So what happens to the math when these <4 wound support charaters hide behind a wall or vehicle and continue to support and be useful?
What happens to the math when the Vindi has to move to get LoS on something, thereby forfeiting his "ignore penalties to hit" ability and now hitting on 3+ (at best)?
It is not all 'doom and gloom' and the opponent of a Vindi has it in their control to mitigate losing their characters.
They only thing undercosted about Vindis is the shoot twice strat, which should probably cost 2CPs instead of 1.
I'll do a breakdown for the probabilities with a CP reroll later (and show how it's worked out) for those interested in how the maths works.
Wait we have different charts going around. Whatever...Point is. These are the averages. For people that can't fail 4+'s it's pretty much auto kill.
This might be semantics, but that is a probability distribution, not an average. It can be used to calculate average damage and gives an average damage of 1.9 to 2 s.f.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galef wrote: So what happens to the math when these <4 wound support charaters hide behind a wall or vehicle and continue to support and be useful?
That's an easy one. If all characters on the field are not visible and the vindicare can't move to make them visible, then the maths gives 100% 0 Damage.
Galef wrote: What happens to the math when the Vindi has to move to get LoS on something, thereby forfeiting his "ignore penalties to hit" ability and now hitting on 3+ (at best)?
I'm possibly going to calculate this later, but not show my work as it's too time-consuming to do for every calculation. If I do, I'll let you know.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/15 15:11:49
Galef wrote: So what happens to the math when these <4 wound support charaters hide behind a wall or vehicle and continue to support and be useful?
What happens to the math when the Vindi has to move to get LoS on something, thereby forfeiting his "ignore penalties to hit" ability and now hitting on 3+ (at best)?
It is not all 'doom and gloom' and the opponent of a Vindi has it in their control to mitigate losing their characters.
They only thing undercosted about Vindis is the shoot twice strat, which should probably cost 2CPs instead of 1.
-
I mean, this is a question that you could ask for any other sniper unit in the game. It's just that none of them are anywhere near as effective as the Vindicare even when they're a similar price point.
Galef wrote: So what happens to the math when these <4 wound support charaters hide behind a wall or vehicle and continue to support and be useful?
That's an easy one. If all characters on the field are not visible and the vindicare can't move to make them visible, then the maths gives 100% 0 Damage.
Exactly. I was just trying to add some perspective on the math. Essentially, if a Character gets shot by a Vindi, it's either because the owning player wanted their character shot, of there isn't enough terrain on the table. But I don't think it's fair to assume that a Vindi can always get LoS on its ideal target.
Burnage wrote: I mean, this is a question that you could ask for any other sniper unit in the game. It's just that none of them are anywhere near as effective as the Vindicare even when they're a similar price point.
True, but the Vindi requires a bit more invested than points, such as another detachment or CP. It also won't have ObSec like Troop Sniper units. And is itself vulnerable to said Sniper units (although maybe not too much)
-
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/15 15:23:02
nordsturmking wrote: I would like to see the following things to be addressed. Some of this is probably too much for an FAQ.
Terrain needs better rules.
Ynnari needs a little nerf.
Knights:
The Castellan needs to be toned down. I am not even sure it should be a playable option in a 2000p game. 604 points in one model is just too big. Especially when you can bring it back to full power with a stratagem.
A knight list with 6 models in total(4 big knight 2 small ones) schould not have 12 CP so easly. There is no tax for them to get the CP. Everything you need to take to get them you would alredy take anyway.
GK and BA and a few others need a buff
This interests me, because the downside to getting those cp is that your army consists of 6 models. Yes they're big, scary durable models, but 6 dudes doesn't help cap objectives an you have no screening to speak of. No psychic phase or input into it either.
If people want to invest 30% of their force into one model that's a decision for then to make, as when it blows up they will feel the repercussions of it keenly.
A player could also take Castelllan + 2xCrusader + 64 IG and have 15+ CP and all the opsec he wants.
Have you killed a Castellan behinde a screen of 60+ models? Some armys just don't have the shooting to kill the Castellan when it has its 3++.
So what you were really complaining about wasn't that knights generate cps for their lance detachments, but that they quickly get out of hand when you insert cheap screening bodies and cp on top of one.
A sentiment shared quite heavily through the thread, it just struck me as odd as you were the only person I'd seen pull out the lance rules specifically as something to tone down.
I am trying to say that they either need to limit the CP a knight can use or change cp cost. So either lance detachments should generate less cp or cp should be bound the detachment which they came from.
Really a formation that is minimum 1k + points often more likely to be 1.2.1.5k points shouldn't generate 6CP?
A formation that's minimum 700 points generating 3CP is obviously broken, when you can build an IG brigade with 12CP for under 600 points.
At that point your basically calling for their codex to be squatted.
I am trying to say that they either need to limit the CP a knight can use or change cp cost. So either lance detachments should generate less cp or cp should be bound the detachment which they came from.
First one would make souping just even more obvious. Mono should be boosted over soup instead
Galef wrote: So what happens to the math when these <4 wound support charaters hide behind a wall or vehicle and continue to support and be useful?
That's an easy one. If all characters on the field are not visible and the vindicare can't move to make them visible, then the maths gives 100% 0 Damage.
Exactly. I was just trying to add some perspective on the math. Essentially, if a Character gets shot by a Vindi, it's either because the owning player wanted their character shot, of there isn't enough terrain on the table.
But I don't think it's fair to assume that a Vindi can always get LoS on its ideal target.
-
Yes, which sort of underlines my initial string of posts - if Vindicares take (and they should) then people bringing bodyguards and transports will be sort of mandatory, which alters the meta a fair bit and potentially more for Castellan soup.
Eliminators and the Vindicare is the best combo I've tested. I start with the eliminators and see if I can get a wound or a few on a character I can see then if the Vindi can finish the job.
I'll do a breakdown for the probabilities with a CP reroll later (and show how it's worked out) for those interested in how the maths works.
Wait we have different charts going around. Whatever...Point is. These are the averages. For people that can't fail 4+'s it's pretty much auto kill.
This might be semantics, but that is a probability distribution, not an average. It can be used to calculate average damage and gives an average damage of 1.9 to 2 s.f.
Well, there are a couple different meanings of "average" here:
One is the average wounds (expected value of wounds) - as above
One is that, in the average occurence - meaning most likely - what happens. The usage is more colloquial then technical, and the definition is frequently fuzzy, but in this case it's clearly about "Did the target die or not". The numbers say the target is not killed.
Galef wrote: What happens to the math when the Vindi has to move to get LoS on something, thereby forfeiting his "ignore penalties to hit" ability and now hitting on 3+ (at best)?
I'm possibly going to calculate this later, but not show my work as it's too time-consuming to do for every calculation. If I do, I'll let you know.
Braver man than I. Without the reroll, it wouldn't be asking much. But the reroll complicates matters (and you're far more precise than the upper-bound method I posted earlier).
Galef wrote: So what happens to the math when these <4 wound support charaters hide behind a wall or vehicle and continue to support and be useful?
That's an easy one. If all characters on the field are not visible and the vindicare can't move to make them visible, then the maths gives 100% 0 Damage.
Exactly. I was just trying to add some perspective on the math. Essentially, if a Character gets shot by a Vindi, it's either because the owning player wanted their character shot, of there isn't enough terrain on the table.
But I don't think it's fair to assume that a Vindi can always get LoS on its ideal target.
-
Yes, which sort of underlines my initial string of posts - if Vindicares take (and they should) then people bringing bodyguards and transports will be sort of mandatory, which alters the meta a fair bit and potentially more for Castellan soup.
Not all factions have Bodyguards, have Transports that block LOS to models on the ground, or can leverage their HQs when their HQs don't have LOS.
A bubble HQ can hide behind a wall, but a psyker or shooter who targets enemies can't.
(Edit: incorrect examples listed, so removed)
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/15 16:23:50
nordsturmking wrote: I would like to see the following things to be addressed. Some of this is probably too much for an FAQ.
Terrain needs better rules.
Ynnari needs a little nerf.
Knights:
The Castellan needs to be toned down. I am not even sure it should be a playable option in a 2000p game. 604 points in one model is just too big. Especially when you can bring it back to full power with a stratagem.
A knight list with 6 models in total(4 big knight 2 small ones) schould not have 12 CP so easly. There is no tax for them to get the CP. Everything you need to take to get them you would alredy take anyway.
GK and BA and a few others need a buff
This interests me, because the downside to getting those cp is that your army consists of 6 models. Yes they're big, scary durable models, but 6 dudes doesn't help cap objectives an you have no screening to speak of. No psychic phase or input into it either.
If people want to invest 30% of their force into one model that's a decision for then to make, as when it blows up they will feel the repercussions of it keenly.
A player could also take Castelllan + 2xCrusader + 64 IG and have 15+ CP and all the opsec he wants.
Have you killed a Castellan behinde a screen of 60+ models? Some armys just don't have the shooting to kill the Castellan when it has its 3++.
So what you were really complaining about wasn't that knights generate cps for their lance detachments, but that they quickly get out of hand when you insert cheap screening bodies and cp on top of one.
A sentiment shared quite heavily through the thread, it just struck me as odd as you were the only person I'd seen pull out the lance rules specifically as something to tone down.
I am trying to say that they either need to limit the CP a knight can use or change cp cost. So either lance detachments should generate less cp or cp should be bound the detachment which they came from.
Really a formation that is minimum 1k + points often more likely to be 1.2.1.5k points shouldn't generate 6CP?
A formation that's minimum 700 points generating 3CP is obviously broken, when you can build an IG brigade with 12CP for under 600 points.
At that point your basically calling for their codex to be squatted.
I agree on some part. But what are you going to do with those 12 spend them on the 600p brigade which generated them? I think not.
CP are much more effective on the knights. I realized the lance formation is not the problem the knight stratagems are.
I am not calling for their codex to be squatted. Thats a total exaggeration. Even without CP a Knight list is pretty good andeven more so with AM added.
I am trying to say that they either need to limit the CP a knight can use or change cp cost. So either lance detachments should generate less cp or cp should be bound the detachment which they came from.
First one would make souping just even more obvious. Mono should be boosted over soup instead
I agree. And i hope GW comes up with some thing that makes the game more fun for every one.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/15 16:24:55
nordsturmking wrote: I would like to see the following things to be addressed. Some of this is probably too much for an FAQ.
Terrain needs better rules.
Ynnari needs a little nerf.
Knights:
The Castellan needs to be toned down. I am not even sure it should be a playable option in a 2000p game. 604 points in one model is just too big. Especially when you can bring it back to full power with a stratagem.
A knight list with 6 models in total(4 big knight 2 small ones) schould not have 12 CP so easly. There is no tax for them to get the CP. Everything you need to take to get them you would alredy take anyway.
GK and BA and a few others need a buff
This interests me, because the downside to getting those cp is that your army consists of 6 models. Yes they're big, scary durable models, but 6 dudes doesn't help cap objectives an you have no screening to speak of. No psychic phase or input into it either.
If people want to invest 30% of their force into one model that's a decision for then to make, as when it blows up they will feel the repercussions of it keenly.
A player could also take Castelllan + 2xCrusader + 64 IG and have 15+ CP and all the opsec he wants.
Have you killed a Castellan behinde a screen of 60+ models? Some armys just don't have the shooting to kill the Castellan when it has its 3++.
So what you were really complaining about wasn't that knights generate cps for their lance detachments, but that they quickly get out of hand when you insert cheap screening bodies and cp on top of one.
A sentiment shared quite heavily through the thread, it just struck me as odd as you were the only person I'd seen pull out the lance rules specifically as something to tone down.
I am trying to say that they either need to limit the CP a knight can use or change cp cost. So either lance detachments should generate less cp or cp should be bound the detachment which they came from.
Really a formation that is minimum 1k + points often more likely to be 1.2.1.5k points shouldn't generate 6CP?
A formation that's minimum 700 points generating 3CP is obviously broken, when you can build an IG brigade with 12CP for under 600 points.
At that point your basically calling for their codex to be squatted.
I agree on some part. But what are you going to do with those 12 spend them on the 600p brigade which generated them? I think not.
CP are much more effective on the knights. I realized the lance formation is not the problem the knight stratagems are.
I am not calling for their codex to be squatted. Thats a total exaggeration. Even without CP a Knight list is pretty good andeven more so with AM added.
Hence the issue isn't knights or even their stratageums, it's 12CP for under 600 points that's the problem.
To balance strategums between mono and soup each lance would have to give atleast 12CP or more, that's not a good solution and rebalancing codex's on the assumption that everyone is taking 600 points of pure cheese is terrible for balance and downright lazy game design.
Yes, which sort of underlines my initial string of posts - if Vindicares take (and they should) then people bringing bodyguards and transports will be sort of mandatory, which alters the meta a fair bit and potentially more for Castellan soup.
not all armies have access to bodyguard models, in fact I think most armies don't have them. And being forced to take a Land Raider to protect an HQ for armies that are already high cost seems like a win/win situation for the vindicare player.
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.
nordsturmking wrote: I would like to see the following things to be addressed. Some of this is probably too much for an FAQ.
Terrain needs better rules.
Ynnari needs a little nerf.
Knights:
The Castellan needs to be toned down. I am not even sure it should be a playable option in a 2000p game. 604 points in one model is just too big. Especially when you can bring it back to full power with a stratagem.
A knight list with 6 models in total(4 big knight 2 small ones) schould not have 12 CP so easly. There is no tax for them to get the CP. Everything you need to take to get them you would alredy take anyway.
GK and BA and a few others need a buff
This interests me, because the downside to getting those cp is that your army consists of 6 models. Yes they're big, scary durable models, but 6 dudes doesn't help cap objectives an you have no screening to speak of. No psychic phase or input into it either.
If people want to invest 30% of their force into one model that's a decision for then to make, as when it blows up they will feel the repercussions of it keenly.
A player could also take Castelllan + 2xCrusader + 64 IG and have 15+ CP and all the opsec he wants.
Have you killed a Castellan behinde a screen of 60+ models? Some armys just don't have the shooting to kill the Castellan when it has its 3++.
So what you were really complaining about wasn't that knights generate cps for their lance detachments, but that they quickly get out of hand when you insert cheap screening bodies and cp on top of one.
A sentiment shared quite heavily through the thread, it just struck me as odd as you were the only person I'd seen pull out the lance rules specifically as something to tone down.
I am trying to say that they either need to limit the CP a knight can use or change cp cost. So either lance detachments should generate less cp or cp should be bound the detachment which they came from.
Really a formation that is minimum 1k + points often more likely to be 1.2.1.5k points shouldn't generate 6CP?
A formation that's minimum 700 points generating 3CP is obviously broken, when you can build an IG brigade with 12CP for under 600 points.
At that point your basically calling for their codex to be squatted.
I agree on some part. But what are you going to do with those 12 spend them on the 600p brigade which generated them? I think not.
CP are much more effective on the knights. I realized the lance formation is not the problem the knight stratagems are.
I am not calling for their codex to be squatted. Thats a total exaggeration. Even without CP a Knight list is pretty good andeven more so with AM added.
Hence the issue isn't knights or even their stratageums, it's 12CP for under 600 points that's the problem.
To balance strategums between mono and soup each lance would have to give atleast 12CP or more, that's not a good solution and rebalancing codex's on the assumption that everyone is taking 600 points of pure cheese is terrible for balance and downright lazy game design.
Honestly I'd just like to see them revert the CP change to Brigades and Battalions while giving all battleforged armies something like +4 CP to start with. The gap in terms of CP efficiency between armies that can field cheap HQs/troops and those that can't increased dramatically with that buff.
Yes, which sort of underlines my initial string of posts - if Vindicares take (and they should) then people bringing bodyguards and transports will be sort of mandatory, which alters the meta a fair bit and potentially more for Castellan soup.
not all armies have access to bodyguard models, in fact I think most armies don't have them. And being forced to take a Land Raider to protect an HQ for armies that are already high cost seems like a win/win situation for the vindicare player.
Not all factions have Bodyguards, have Transports that block LOS to models on the ground, or can leverage their HQs when their HQs don't have LOS.
A bubble HQ can hide behind a wall, but a psyker or shooter who targets enemies can't.
I'd be using a rhino not a land raider, but then Ahriman will probably be on foot. The goal is to block LOS to the vindi - not their whole army, if possible. The biggest issue is the first time the vindicaire comes down from orbit, but he usually needs protection so he's limited.
GKs are potentially in a good position to absorb sniper shots with lots of terminator HQs. Tau have drones. Orks have grots (at the expense of Lootas).
The vindicaire player has to have his own protection as well and then it becomes a sort of arms race. Do drones and bodyguard nullify assassins enough to keep them out of the meta? I'm not sure.
At this point I just want GW to get off their arse and release it.
Without question we'll see additional stratagem CP adjustments.
I think we'll see more tweaking of the Fly keyword.
Finalized Tactical Reserves rule.
Finalized Prepared Positions.
Finalized Tactical Restraint with hopefully some minor tweaks to make Ultramarines great again.
Wishlisting...
Return to 3 and 9 CP's for the Battalion and Brigade detachments respectively.
Return to the original Character targeting rules (i.e. closest visible).
Alter Psychic Focus.to limit Smite to once per turn also.
oni wrote: At this point I just want GW to get off their arse and release it.
Without question we'll see additional stratagem CP adjustments.
I think we'll see more tweaking of the Fly keyword.
Finalized Tactical Reserves rule.
Finalized Prepared Positions.
Finalized Tactical Restraint with hopefully some minor tweaks to make Ultramarines great again.
Wishlisting...
Return to 3 and 9 CP's for the Battalion and Brigade detachments respectively.
Return to the original Character targeting rules (i.e. closest visible).
Alter Psychic Focus.to limit Smite to once per turn also.
closest visible is stupid because then you get things like 2 rhino's parked almost back to back which block LoS to everything but your character for my lascannon.
"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!"
"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!"
Burnage wrote: Honestly I'd just like to see them revert the CP change to Brigades and Battalions while giving all battleforged armies something like +4 CP to start with. The gap in terms of CP efficiency between armies that can field cheap HQs/troops and those that can't increased dramatically with that buff.
Quick thought on the Battle-forged bonus - wouldn't it make more sense for it to scale by game size, than be a static bonus?
I mean, in theory 3CP means a heck of a lot more at 1k points than 10k.
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...
oni wrote: At this point I just want GW to get off their arse and release it.
Without question we'll see additional stratagem CP adjustments.
I think we'll see more tweaking of the Fly keyword.
Finalized Tactical Reserves rule.
Finalized Prepared Positions.
Finalized Tactical Restraint with hopefully some minor tweaks to make Ultramarines great again.
Wishlisting...
Return to 3 and 9 CP's for the Battalion and Brigade detachments respectively.
Return to the original Character targeting rules (i.e. closest visible).
Alter Psychic Focus.to limit Smite to once per turn also.
closest visible is stupid because then you get things like 2 rhino's parked almost back to back which block LoS to everything but your character for my lascannon.
The character rules as they are, are fine.
I strongly disagree. I understand the Character sniping tactic, but it really is the lesser of evils. I've experienced too many games where my shooting has been effectively turned off because of one pesky, hiding model stopping me from targeting a lone Character charging up the backfield in the wide open. It doesn't make for good game play.
Burnage wrote: Honestly I'd just like to see them revert the CP change to Brigades and Battalions while giving all battleforged armies something like +4 CP to start with. The gap in terms of CP efficiency between armies that can field cheap HQs/troops and those that can't increased dramatically with that buff.
Quick thought on the Battle-forged bonus - wouldn't it make more sense for it to scale by game size, than be a static bonus?
I mean, in theory 3CP means a heck of a lot more at 1k points than 10k.
It already does scale. A player is able to take more detachments at higher point levels.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/15 18:09:55
oni wrote: At this point I just want GW to get off their arse and release it.
Without question we'll see additional stratagem CP adjustments.
I think we'll see more tweaking of the Fly keyword.
Finalized Tactical Reserves rule.
Finalized Prepared Positions.
Finalized Tactical Restraint with hopefully some minor tweaks to make Ultramarines great again.
Wishlisting...
Return to 3 and 9 CP's for the Battalion and Brigade detachments respectively.
Return to the original Character targeting rules (i.e. closest visible).
Alter Psychic Focus.to limit Smite to once per turn also.
closest visible is stupid because then you get things like 2 rhino's parked almost back to back which block LoS to everything but your character for my lascannon.
The character rules as they are, are fine.
Nah - character targeting rules are bad. Targets should have to be visible and eligible targets to shoot to screen for characters. Then its fine.
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
oni wrote: At this point I just want GW to get off their arse and release it.
Without question we'll see additional stratagem CP adjustments.
I think we'll see more tweaking of the Fly keyword.
Finalized Tactical Reserves rule.
Finalized Prepared Positions.
Finalized Tactical Restraint with hopefully some minor tweaks to make Ultramarines great again.
Wishlisting...
Return to 3 and 9 CP's for the Battalion and Brigade detachments respectively.
Return to the original Character targeting rules (i.e. closest visible).
Alter Psychic Focus.to limit Smite to once per turn also.
closest visible is stupid because then you get things like 2 rhino's parked almost back to back which block LoS to everything but your character for my lascannon.
The character rules as they are, are fine.
Nah - character targeting rules are bad. Targets should have to be visible and eligible targets to shoot to screen for characters. Then its fine.
Character rules should be tweaked though such that monsters and vehicles are targetable. It makes no sense that a Dreadnought Character cannot be shot, but any other Dreadnought can be. Same thing with Demon Princes.... a gigantic demon prince is an easy target when standing next to smaller infantry. Or maybe a rule that Characters cannot be shot only if they're within 6" of another model with the same Keyword. Like infantry with infantry, vehicles with vehicles, monsters with monsters. Then it would make sense that you can't pick out an individual monster at that range.
Ehhh - certain units are quite useless without being characters without significant points adjustments. Gman/Malenthrope/Daemon princes come to mind. They would probably need to be elevated to 12 or more wounds in this case. I totally agree though - not being able to shoot the units you want is VERY frustrating and doesn't make for fun game play.
Burnage wrote: Honestly I'd just like to see them revert the CP change to Brigades and Battalions while giving all battleforged armies something like +4 CP to start with. The gap in terms of CP efficiency between armies that can field cheap HQs/troops and those that can't increased dramatically with that buff.
Quick thought on the Battle-forged bonus - wouldn't it make more sense for it to scale by game size, than be a static bonus?
I mean, in theory 3CP means a heck of a lot more at 1k points than 10k.
I think you are on the right track.
I'd say - increase the bonus for being battle forged based on point level. Like say 15 CP for a 2000 point game and then have additional detachments beyond your first cost you additional CP (subtracted from your total) and have allied detachments cost you MORE cp. Then with everyone starting on basically the same CP - you can balance all stratagems against each other.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/15 18:44:36
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
