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.

Contemptor mortis dreads rock four lascannons at a BS2+ for 160ish points.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At the expense of sound dumb, again, I just want to point out that saying things like "The Repulsor isn't the MBT of the Marines" is essentially saying you know what is coming in the future. You very likely don't. There is no fluff around the repulsor, and no fluff around the Predator/Land Raiders. Therefor, this very well could be the MBT and who could dispute it? Just because it's a transport doesn't make it a tank. The armor and weapons make it a tank.

What is a razorback then? And more importantly if the Executioner is NOT the MBT then what could you possibly expect to come after it other than a super heavy?

If 40k is modeled after wwi, there are no mbts.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
yeah but lots of times you are wounding on the same number....that's is the point

Far more frequently, you're saving on the same.

Unless you spam Lascannons to kill Marines, you're better off bringing the weapons that wounds the big stuff at +1 over weapons that drop a 3+ to a 7+ instead of a 6+.

Why would you think having your AT kill Marines 16% faster is anywhere near as useful as having your AT kill the big stuff 33% faster?

And if you *are* bringing heavy weapons to kill marines, the Plasma Cannon does it better than the Brightlance by a lot.

As for 36" range vs 48" range, it's kinda a big deal. A 48" weapon can sit in your backfield with good board coverage (if you position right). A 36" range can only touch the midfield unless it moves up to the midfield. And staying in the backfield is very important for weapons that suffer a to-hit penalty on the move and/or aren't that durable. Look at it this way: a backfield unit with Lascannons will be at +1S *and* relative +1BS vs the Brightlance unit going after it (at least for the first round).

Once again, it's a case of "Marine good, Space Elf bad" bias.

That is just not that case. The competitive meta is not representative of all the units in the game you can face. Your average tank is a t7 3+ profile. That profile sucks. So people don't use it. The most common infantry profile is t4 3+ save or less. Bright lance is better against both those profiles. There is literally 0 reason it should cost less than a las cannon.

yeah except GW bases their points etc around everythin, not the dozen or so units you only see at a toruny. if a gun has more value against harder targets then yes it has more value, even if those harder targets aren't "in favor with the meta right now"

More value vs harder targets? The the expense of being weaker vs medium target is a trade off. Trade offs don't require a price spike. ESP when medium targets are more plentiful than hard ones. You are missing the point about the meta. When points are made every unit in the game has to be considered. Not just the 20 units you see in a tournament.

 Togusa wrote:

What financial benefit do they get out of spending more time/resources making a beautiful game?

Gee. I dunno, more sales? Happy customers = more profit?

You're talking about a game that has way too many factions, way too many sub factions, rules spread across 30 different books, FAQ's, Chapter Approved, White Dwarf, and even in BL books. 8th Edition has gone a long way to fixing some of the most glaring issues with the game, however it's not hit critical mass yet. I think a lot of people underestimate the damage the previous CEO did to the company, and massive (in years) lead time on things currently coming out. Heck, a lot of the recent releases were probably planned over 6 years ago, under a different corporate structure with a different philosophy. It takes a massive amount of time to work on something this big, and I am thinking that 9th edition will take the next step towards more balance and army composition.

I don' think anyone underestimates the previous CEO's damage to the brand. Also, GW knows its customers plenty well. You guys seem to think I'm making GW out to be dastardly villains sitting in a tower somewhere rubbing their hands greedily....that's not the case, but they are very pragmatic (despite their apparent enthusiasm) about how to make money. They're no different from any other large organization.

I've got close friends who were store managers and even regional managers. GW is a money making business, they're just in it for the fun of the game or the goodness of their hearts, etc.

Honestly, a properly designed game of 40K could actually be beautifully balanced, but that means more structure, more editing, more play-testing, more control, more people, more resources, etc. Even at it's current size, it's very do-able. The benefit does not outweigh the cost of doing so. GW knows they'll sell minis regardless as long as they're not forcing players to rage quit the game. As much as people complain on here, they're still buying minis. Even half of the folks here on Dakka who insist they don't play - do (or are still collecting models, etc.). That's fine.

And GW is absolutely setting rules to help shift away from classic marines to Primaris. That makes sense, and will continue.

Lances have less range and get boned by invulns even worse. There is a low rof weapon problem, not a lance vs lascannon problem.

Martel732 wrote:
The bs 2+ ones. And ven dreads i guess. Which i dont get.
Razorbacks do not provide good utility for their cost. Thats my overall experience playing against them mostly.

Sterling191 wrote:
Contemptor mortis dreads rock four lascannons at a BS2+ for 160ish points.

I'd worry that those would be too much of a target, but sure, they seem pretty solid. I'm hesitant to start going the FW route as I dislike updating my army with more than one book. The Contemptor Mortis with Las or Autocannon a cool looking model though, I'll keep it in mind.

I like the Razors for their wounds, HK mount, ability to transport and block LOS. I also like that they're "free" from a force Org standpoint. I have some standard/Ven Dreads that I still got to paint up with all their weapon options, but I'm looking forward to fielding them. Because I have the Chapter Master option I rarely tend to need a BS2+.

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
yeah but lots of times you are wounding on the same number....that's is the point

Far more frequently, you're saving on the same.

Unless you spam Lascannons to kill Marines, you're better off bringing the weapons that wounds the big stuff at +1 over weapons that drop a 3+ to a 7+ instead of a 6+.

Why would you think having your AT kill Marines 16% faster is anywhere near as useful as having your AT kill the big stuff 33% faster?

And if you *are* bringing heavy weapons to kill marines, the Plasma Cannon does it better than the Brightlance by a lot.

As for 36" range vs 48" range, it's kinda a big deal. A 48" weapon can sit in your backfield with good board coverage (if you position right). A 36" range can only touch the midfield unless it moves up to the midfield. And staying in the backfield is very important for weapons that suffer a to-hit penalty on the move and/or aren't that durable. Look at it this way: a backfield unit with Lascannons will be at +1S *and* relative +1BS vs the Brightlance unit going after it (at least for the first round).

Once again, it's a case of "Marine good, Space Elf bad" bias.

That is just not that case. The competitive meta is not representative of all the units in the game you can face. Your average tank is a t7 3+ profile. That profile sucks. So people don't use it. The most common infantry profile is t4 3+ save or less. Bright lance is better against both those profiles. There is literally 0 reason it should cost less than a las cannon.

yeah except GW bases their points etc around everythin, not the dozen or so units you only see at a toruny. if a gun has more value against harder targets then yes it has more value, even if those harder targets aren't "in favor with the meta right now"

More value vs harder targets? The the expense of being weaker vs medium target is a trade off. Trade offs don't require a price spike. ESP when medium targets are more plentiful than hard ones. You are missing the point about the meta. When points are made every unit in the game has to be considered. Not just the 20 units you see in a tournament.

The "average" tank may be T7 3+ profile, but the average tank is either T8 or has a 4+ save.
There might be more T7 3+ profile vehicles than T8 vehicles, 4+ save vehicles, *or* Invuln-possesing vehicles individually, but not combined.
In other words, the list of targets you're bringing Brightlances or Lascannons for are more likely to not be T7 3+, as there's a plurality of profiles. For every Pred or Serpent, there's also a Knight or Vyper or Venom or War Walker or Leman Russ or Land Raider or Demon Prince or... the list goes on for days. And the Brightlance loses to the Lascannon for every single one of those targets.

It might *feel* like the T7 3+ profile is the most common, but it is only so by plurality. Other hard targets significantly outnumber them.

As for "The most common infantry profile is t4 3+ save or less", are you seriously arguing that Marines outnumber Guardsmen? Brightlances marginally outperform Lascannons against T4 3+ provided range isn't an issue, but they have absolutely no upside vs anything with a 4+ or any invuln whatsoever. And the units with either a 4+ or some sort of invuln *heavily* outnumber the 3+/no invuln options. In number of entries, frequency of use, or frequency of relevance. So even if you're bringing these weapons to shoot basic infantry (which is dumb), the Lascannon is still the superior weapon.

There is a tradeoff. 5 extra points gives you 33% more damage vs the biggest threats and more range, vs saving 5 points for 16% more damage vs the weaker threats and shorter range. Drop the points from that tradeoff, and the Lascannon is clearly superior.

Martel732 wrote:
The bs 2+ ones. And ven dreads i guess. Which i dont get.

Razorbacks do not provide good utility for their cost. Thats my overall experience playing against them mostly.

I keep 1 Tiwnlas Razorback per Long Fangs section in my list [most of the time, since it's a pretty soupy list and I can only Keen Senses+Wolfs Eye 1 squad, that's 1 razorback]

I think it gives good utility. The unit starts inside the tank, along with a Rune Priest in the 6th chair. Turn 1, they bail from the tank into a tower and start shooting, and the Rune Priest either hangs out to grant Cloaked by the Storm, or deploys forward to get stuck in and fighting. Sometimes it loads up a new unit and take both the priest and the other unit forward. It's good for protecting high cost-density units from fire, puts out good fire of its own, provide good mobility, and drop reduction. I wouldn't feel bad about having more razorbacks in my list.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At the expense of sound dumb, again, I just want to point out that saying things like "The Repulsor isn't the MBT of the Marines" is essentially saying you know what is coming in the future. You very likely don't. There is no fluff around the repulsor, and no fluff around the Predator/Land Raiders. Therefor, this very well could be the MBT and who could dispute it? Just because it's a transport doesn't make it a tank. The armor and weapons make it a tank.

What is a razorback then? And more importantly if the Executioner is NOT the MBT then what could you possibly expect to come after it other than a super heavy?

I apologize, are we arguing the same point? I am saying the Executioner IS the new MBT for the SMs.

My take on the Executioner (and most of the Primaris line)?
Nothing says "Space Marines" like "Moar Dakka" and "Bigga iz best". Apparently.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At the expense of sound dumb, again, I just want to point out that saying things like "The Repulsor isn't the MBT of the Marines" is essentially saying you know what is coming in the future. You very likely don't. There is no fluff around the repulsor, and no fluff around the Predator/Land Raiders. Therefor, this very well could be the MBT and who could dispute it? Just because it's a transport doesn't make it a tank. The armor and weapons make it a tank.

What is a razorback then? And more importantly if the Executioner is NOT the MBT then what could you possibly expect to come after it other than a super heavy?

I apologize, are we arguing the same point? I am saying the Executioner IS the new MBT for the SMs.

Sorry I read isn't as is - my bad!

As the self appointed "man who spouts infrequent nonsense" belt holder, I understand.

 Togusa wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

What financial benefit do they get out of spending more time/resources making a beautiful game?

Gee. I dunno, more sales? Happy customers = more profit?

You're talking about a game that has way too many factions, way too many sub factions, rules spread across 30 different books, FAQ's, Chapter Approved, White Dwarf, and even in BL books. 8th Edition has gone a long way to fixing some of the most glaring issues with the game, however it's not hit critical mass yet. I think a lot of people underestimate the damage the previous CEO did to the company, and massive (in years) lead time on things currently coming out. Heck, a lot of the recent releases were probably planned over 6 years ago, under a different corporate structure with a different philosophy. It takes a massive amount of time to work on something this big, and I am thinking that 9th edition will take the next step towards more balance and army composition.

Yea, i'm actually quite optimistic. If they carry over the damage phase from Apocalypse it could go a long way to eliminating alpha strike concerns.

I wouldn't be at all surprised is both Apoc and KT are test beds for what will eventually be 9th Edition. Charging in the movement phase is brilliant, reactions to being charged, max/min range penalties, move even if charge is failed. Good stuff.

Your assuming that they won't actually just finally admit that 40k doesn't work across the scales and split up the game into sub games. And 9th edition will be apoc and kill team only.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The bs 2+ ones. And ven dreads i guess. Which i dont get.
Razorbacks do not provide good utility for their cost. Thats my overall experience playing against them mostly.

Sterling191 wrote:
Contemptor mortis dreads rock four lascannons at a BS2+ for 160ish points.

I'd worry that those would be too much of a target, but sure, they seem pretty solid. I'm hesitant to start going the FW route as I dislike updating my army with more than one book. The Contemptor Mortis with Las or Autocannon a cool looking model though, I'll keep it in mind.

I like the Razors for their wounds, HK mount, ability to transport and block LOS. I also like that they're "free" from a force Org standpoint. I have some standard/Ven Dreads that I still got to paint up with all their weapon options, but I'm looking forward to fielding them. Because I have the Chapter Master option I rarely tend to need a BS2+.

98% is better than 89%. Especially with as many logic gates in 40k.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The bs 2+ ones. And ven dreads i guess. Which i dont get.

Razorbacks do not provide good utility for their cost. Thats my overall experience playing against them mostly.

I keep 1 Tiwnlas Razorback per Long Fangs section in my list [most of the time, since it's a pretty soupy list and I can only Keen Senses+Wolfs Eye 1 squad, that's 1 razorback]

I think it gives good utility. The unit starts inside the tank, along with a Rune Priest in the 6th chair. Turn 1, they bail from the tank into a tower and start shooting, and the Rune Priest either hangs out to grant Cloaked by the Storm, or deploys forward to get stuck in and fighting. Sometimes it loads up a new unit and take both the priest and the other unit forward. It's good for protecting high cost-density units from fire, puts out good fire of its own, provide good mobility, and drop reduction. I wouldn't feel bad about having more razorbacks in my list.

The rest of us dont get to play with long fangs. Changes the picture. For 110 pts, you dont get much compared to xenos or ig.

Martel732 wrote:

98% is better than 89%. Especially with as many logic gates in 40k.

Obviously. Although not necessarily worth paying for.

The 2+ stands up better vs neg to hit as well. FW dreads are what the rest of marine vehicles could be.

Martel732 wrote:
The 2+ stands up better vs neg to hit as well. FW dreads are what the rest of marine vehicles could be.

Locally, they tend to be big fat targets for Castellans, etc. This is why I usually don't take expensive vehicles. Although the Contemptor probably hides better than the Leviathan.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The 2+ stands up better vs neg to hit as well. FW dreads are what the rest of marine vehicles could be.

Locally, they tend to be big fat targets for Castellans, etc. This is why I usually don't take expensive vehicles. Although the Contemptor probably hides better than the Leviathan.

They have 5++ and 4++ saves, Which is a chance for them to say...nope.

At LVO I played with a castellan vs Relic contemptors. Put 4 wounds on a contemptor with relic plasma. Makes 3 5++ out of 4. Obviously lucky. But dude would get 0 saves on a razorback and would have been automatically destroyed. Just having the chance to survive is huge. Even if it is a 6++ save. It is a chance to turn d6 damage into 0 damage.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Lances have less range and get boned by invulns even worse. There is a low rof weapon problem, not a lance vs lascannon problem.

Yeah - 1 shot weapons are bad period. But these 2 weapons are equal value. I've even seen it debated that rockets are better pointed than lascannons. Rockets are a bright lance with -2 AP instead of -4 LOL (they cost the same). It's really getting bonkers in here. It's like you guys have never played marines and got hit with AP-4 on basically every weapon and you get 0 save. Then you shoot a lascannon at a fireprism and they make a 6+....Dude...trust me. The weapons are of equal value.

^True, although I tend towards the direction of 'more targets last longer'. I'm not saying it's necessarily better, it's just a reasonably viable alternative in my experience. Like, if I take Razors I take 4-6 of them.

If the Contemptor Mortis really packs a BS 2+, 4 Lascannons and a 5++ for 160ish, that seems like a unit I might use.

Yeah, marines are really leaning on fw atm. My 5th ed self is in the corner vomiting.

Well if we get a double shooting Plasma Destructor with POTMS and a billion other weapons....It will be a top teir option for marine armor if it's pointed around the same cost as the current repulsor. The cool thing about that plasma weapon is it doesn't destroy you if you roll a 1. It just does 1 wound. It will be best as DA most likely though. with a -1 to hit blanket on it and I believe it will be able to use weapons of the dark age on it as well.

Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, marines are really leaning on fw atm. My 5th ed self is in the corner vomiting.

I struggle to think of a time when I've even used FW.

Here's the thing about the Contemptor Mortis, which appears closer to 170. It's 10W. While it COULD save a few incoming Lascannon shots with it's 5++, 3 solid Lascannon hits could also knock it out immediately (technically 2 could, but the chances of that are slim). I don't feel I can 'lean' on something like that, especially if I have a deployment that doesn't allow me some good place to hide it. 2 Razorbacks gives me double the wounds, on two different targets. And I can have a 5+ save vs. AP-3 just by using the Cover Strat. I'm also less likely to hide them, because they're bigger and I'd feel less precious about them, which oddly makes them more accurate when I don't have to move them to fire at a good target.

Lot's of FW stuff has solid stats, but rarely do I see them drastically outperforming codex choices in most cases.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^True, although I tend towards the direction of 'more targets last longer'. I'm not saying it's necessarily better, it's just a reasonably viable alternative in my experience. Like, if I take Razors I take 4-6 of them.

If the Contemptor Mortis really packs a BS 2+, 4 Lascannons and a 5++ for 160ish, that seems like a unit I might use.

An ideal dreadnought spam list involves 3 Contemptor Mortis Dreadnoughts with lascannons and 3 Venerable Dreadnoughts with missile launchers and lascannons. It packs quite a nasty punch when facing lists with heavy amounts of armor.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^True, although I tend towards the direction of 'more targets last longer'. I'm not saying it's necessarily better, it's just a reasonably viable alternative in my experience. Like, if I take Razors I take 4-6 of them.

If the Contemptor Mortis really packs a BS 2+, 4 Lascannons and a 5++ for 160ish, that seems like a unit I might use.

An ideal dreadnought spam list involves 3 Contemptor Mortis Dreadnoughts with lascannons and 3 Venerable Dreadnoughts with missile launchers and lascannons. It packs quite a nasty punch when facing lists with heavy amounts of armor.

That just doesn't seem like a very smart list for longevity, though.

But the two Lazorbacks are also 70 points more expensive.

None of the marine equipment has the brutal efficiency necessary in 8th, unfortunately. No plague crawler, no ravager, no wave serpent.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^True, although I tend towards the direction of 'more targets last longer'. I'm not saying it's necessarily better, it's just a reasonably viable alternative in my experience. Like, if I take Razors I take 4-6 of them.

If the Contemptor Mortis really packs a BS 2+, 4 Lascannons and a 5++ for 160ish, that seems like a unit I might use.

An ideal dreadnought spam list involves 3 Contemptor Mortis Dreadnoughts with lascannons and 3 Venerable Dreadnoughts with missile launchers and lascannons. It packs quite a nasty punch when facing lists with heavy amounts of armor.

That just doesn't seem like a very smart list for longevity, though.

The key is also playing with enough cover that alpha striking is impossible. Ideally little to nothing should be able to shoot over the entire board clearly without cover saves getting involved.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
But the two Lazorbacks are also 70 points more expensive.

I don't know the exact cost of the Contemptor, but looking at CA it appears to be 88 base, plus two twin Lascannons for 168 total. The two Lazorbacks are 232, for a difference of 64 points. It's true they are more expensive in total.

Advantages for the Razors that matter to me.
A: double the wounds
B: More guns for the Alpha strike
C: can carry guys, synergyzing well with my "lots of power armor" armies. Good for missions where you're looking for fewer drops.
D: can block LOS for my guys, which is something I wind up doing a bunch.
E: Faster speed for the occasions when I want to pre-empt a charge, which is also something I do fairly often.

Advantage Contemptor
A: Higher base BS
B: 5++
C: Easier to hide
D: Lower cost.
E: Chapter Tactics

I think that's a fair breakdown. IMO, the Contemptor is better for certain uses. But also, imo, the Razors are better in other uses. Therefore, I don't see the Contemptor as being a "hands-down-better" option. It's a competing option for the AT role, which might work better for your army context, but is not necessarily better in every army/context. Neither appear to be bad choices, and seem pretty balanced. Personally, I don't like to give my opponent the opportunity for a 'fluke'. To me the Contemptor is 'fluke-able', because a couple solid hits can take it out because it only has 10 wounds. But that's just my personal preference in army building/play style.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wyzilla wrote:

The key is also playing with enough cover that alpha striking is impossible. Ideally little to nothing should be able to shoot over the entire board clearly without cover saves getting involved.

I agree. That's just not a guarantee, however.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^True, although I tend towards the direction of 'more targets last longer'. I'm not saying it's necessarily better, it's just a reasonably viable alternative in my experience. Like, if I take Razors I take 4-6 of them.

If the Contemptor Mortis really packs a BS 2+, 4 Lascannons and a 5++ for 160ish, that seems like a unit I might use.

An ideal dreadnought spam list involves 3 Contemptor Mortis Dreadnoughts with lascannons and 3 Venerable Dreadnoughts with missile launchers and lascannons. It packs quite a nasty punch when facing lists with heavy amounts of armor.

That just doesn't seem like a very smart list for longevity, though.

The key is also playing with enough cover that alpha striking is impossible. Ideally little to nothing should be able to shoot over the entire board clearly without cover saves getting involved.

Thats not remotely a reliable plan. It cant be the "key". If your army needs to turn off enemy shooting for free, that means your units are too fragile. The good lists can win on bowling ball.