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.

Bharring wrote:

That's why max-size Spectre, Reaper, and Spears squads have been so garbage this edition....

All of those had an invu save though, plus minus to hit, shoot twice, move twice, stratagems and the like. Not a fair comparison.

Shadow Spectres have a -1 to hit. But also has only T3 (vs T8). And 28ppw (vs 18ppw).

Reapers have none of the above. But still T3 vs T8.

Spears have no to-hit penalty, but do have a 4++ vs shooting (but not CC). However, it's T4 vs T8.

I wouldn't call those fair comparisions; the Repulsor out-survives all three per point easily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Only on DakkaDakka is 18ppw too high a price for a T8 gunboat, but 28ppw is too low a price for T3 infantry.

Bharring wrote:
Shadow Spectres have a -1 to hit. But also has only T3 (vs T8). And 28ppw (vs 18ppw).

Reapers have none of the above. But still T3 vs T8.

Spears have no to-hit penalty, but do have a 4++ vs shooting (but not CC). However, it's T4 vs T8.

I wouldn't call those fair comparisions; the Repulsor out-survives all three per point easily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Only on DakkaDakka is 18ppw too high a price for a T8 gunboat, but 28ppw is too low a price for T3 infantry.

I don't know why are you so smug about this. Comparing to tanks to infantry is never a fair comparison, imagine apples and a coconut tree. I don't think most people have a problem with Shining Spears, Reapers (you brough these to the discussion even though they were only broken when Ynnari was a thing) and especially spectres. If you were right you would see Repulsors left and right, and that isn't happening right now. That's all there is to it.

What's a Castellan at these days. 25 ppw?

Kraetor,
I don't think you realize what I'm arguing.

I'm not saying this vehicle is OP, or that those options or trash.

I'm trying to show that the specific claim that anything 18ppw or higher is going to be worthless.

All three of the above have been great at 18ppw or higher. And while they had other rules, they didn't have T8.

Bharring wrote:
Kraetor,
I don't think you realize what I'm arguing.

I'm not saying this vehicle is OP, or that those options or trash.

I'm trying to show that the specific claim that anything 18ppw or higher is going to be worthless.

All three of the above have been great at 18ppw or higher. And while they had other rules, they didn't have T8.

Sorry then I completely misunderstood you. In fact I agree with you, I dont think ppw is a good indicative of the power of a unit, in relation to the Repulsor, I think it's main disadvantage is its lack of invu.

What do you think about bringing a Deredeo with Atomantic Pavise to protect a Repulsor (Executioner, for instance) and a Redemptor? The thing is expensive but it brings it weight in superautocannon shots in addition to the aura. Throw in a Chapter Master and lieutenant to buff the whole lot, and some cheap Hellblasters in the Repulsor.
This sounds more viable with the (hopefully cheaper) Macro Plasma Incinerator, it doesn't feel so wrong to lose double shooting first turn to position it (and cargo) well.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Keep in mind Im probably gonna buy 2 of these. They are going to get blown up on turn 1 - probably both of them. Joy and expectation will be sucked from my soul. All the hard work of painting them and building them will trivialized by bad rules and lack of fun. When I damage enemy units they get a save and I don't. Talk about unfun.

This really resonates with me. I paint my marines (I paint them well to be honest) and I paint my friends Tau. So I put in a great effort to create a battlefield that could be a diorama and yet most of the game I'm just placing my models then retrieving them later.

Hyperbole aside some points are true


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lemondish wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
290 seems quite good. Too good, at the moment.

I wouldn't say too good. I'd say it's what I expected to be honest, a little under 300. I think that Primaris phase 2 is where slots are gonna get real competitive between classic marines and Primaris

I've long felt that Stratagem support will always be the key that makes or breaks a lot of these new elite Primaris units. Exactly like it did with Knights.

I feel like this is hitting the nail on the head. 9 times out of 10 we could all deal with dark reapers, but then there's the fire and fade stratagem, now they're significantly harder to deal with and you get way more value out of them

 Xenomancers wrote:
Keep in mind Im probably gonna buy 2 of these. They are going to get blown up on turn 1 - probably both of them. Joy and expectation will be sucked from my soul. All the hard work of painting them and building them will trivialized by bad rules and lack of fun. When I damage enemy units they get a save and I don't. Talk about unfun.

Most of my units are on 6+ or worse against incoming fire, and I don't have too much of a problem with that in the general sense. [I do have a problem with the fact that my infantry can reliably get 4+, 3+, and 2+ saves but my tanks will never get better than a 5+, usually a 6+]

If you don't like your army taking casualties, you should probably play an RPG.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
I don't understand why people are glazing over the glass cannon problem.

It's a version of stockholm syndrome. I think.

Is this about Marines or about the Repulsor? Marines, especially Intercessors, are not glass cannons in the slightest. This new Repulsor might be though, but I'm more concerned with a rather disappointing show with regards to firepower vs. the ordinary and a points cost at the level of a Knight, since it's resiliency doesn't seem to be anywhere near real glass cannon levels.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I don't understand why people are glazing over the glass cannon problem.

I'm not so sure it's a glass cannon when it can hit models from 72" away. I'm looking at it form the perspective that it can function as a tank killer at extreme range, but has the defensive capability to protect itself from stuff that could normally be used to shut something like that down. Land Raiders have that irritating problem where if a model touches it, it stops firing, and it's Heavy Bolters can't stop units threatening to contact it. On the right table, I can see the RE being pretty tough to interfere with.

Do we play the same game? I am often assault turn 1 by shinning spears deploy literally as far away as I possibly can. You can't hide...if they can see an antenna you can be shot.

I usually state when setting up that I do not consier aerials, hedgerow cutters, tank commanders, long gun barrels etc to be "part of the tank". It makes it pretty easy to define when and where the tank can be shot. This doesn't work as well for poseable models like Dreadnoughts.

I usually state when setting up that I do not consier aerials, hedgerow cutters, tank commanders, long gun barrels etc to be "part of the tank". It makes it pretty easy to define when and where the tank can be shot. This doesn't work as well for poseable models like Dreadnoughts.

I imagine most people are willing to be reasonable about this. but a WAAC TFG is going to be inflexable and insist thats incorrect.course someone like that you don't wanna play anyway

BrianDavion wrote:

I usually state when setting up that I do not consier aerials, hedgerow cutters, tank commanders, long gun barrels etc to be "part of the tank". It makes it pretty easy to define when and where the tank can be shot. This doesn't work as well for poseable models like Dreadnoughts.

Well it is different between the dreads as to what you can pose but LOS is gonna be different on a "regular" dread vs a levi, Redemptor, contemptor w missle rack, & a deredeo. Is what's visible part of the hull, turret, copula, then yes. Aerials, antennae, small arms, etc no but if using CA18 rules -1 to hit with +1 to the save really works in evening out being targeted.

I imagine most people are willing to be reasonable about this. but a WAAC TFG is going to be inflexable and insist thats incorrect.course someone like that you don't wanna play anyway

Ummm, yeah, they probably proxy everything and have a massive grey army so.........if they wont put in the effort to make sure both their opponent and themselves has an enjoyable game, by all means avoid them like a plague marine(unless you're a nurgling, then stay away like its hand sanitizer).

It is waaayyyyyyyyy more fun to play on a battlefield that has choke points, fatal funnels, tank traps. the CA18 rules are some of the best they've had so far in 8th and wish they'd be made part of the core rules.

So the NZ pre-order is up...appears to confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt that it will carry 6. Also appears to come with the full Repulsor kit on top of the new sprue, which kind of explains the upcharge.

I'm still going with 18 ppw is too much on a tank with no meaningful defenses. You probably can't hide it, and tables aren't big enough to leverage the range most of the time. Repulsors should probably be 240 ish with gear because of their lack of defenses. You can have all the guns you want... for a turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Shadow Spectres have a -1 to hit. But also has only T3 (vs T8). And 28ppw (vs 18ppw).

Reapers have none of the above. But still T3 vs T8.

Spears have no to-hit penalty, but do have a 4++ vs shooting (but not CC). However, it's T4 vs T8.

I wouldn't call those fair comparisions; the Repulsor out-survives all three per point easily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Only on DakkaDakka is 18ppw too high a price for a T8 gunboat, but 28ppw is too low a price for T3 infantry.

I think you know what I mean. Stop being obtuse.

"I usually state when setting up that I do not consier aerials, hedgerow cutters, tank commanders, long gun barrels etc to be "part of the tank"

Most events, they are. As such, I'd have to insist they are targetable.

"T8 3+ is not an ameliorating factor?"

I think you know the answer to that, too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DanielFM wrote:
What do you think about bringing a Deredeo with Atomantic Pavise to protect a Repulsor (Executioner, for instance) and a Redemptor? The thing is expensive but it brings it weight in superautocannon shots in addition to the aura. Throw in a Chapter Master and lieutenant to buff the whole lot, and some cheap Hellblasters in the Repulsor.
This sounds more viable with the (hopefully cheaper) Macro Plasma Incinerator, it doesn't feel so wrong to lose double shooting first turn to position it (and cargo) well.

Repulsor doesn't fit wholly within 6". I already tried.

Bharring wrote:


My concern is all the FUD that goes on in this thread:
Upthread there's complaints about Doom always doubling the CWE force's firepower (despite only bumping it ~30%, and only doing that *~40%* of the time). In the same matchup, both Repulsors - and the Preds - are effectively doubled: most of their weapons are hitting on a 3+ or 4+ and wounding on a 5+ (shooting at vehicles). A 3+ followed by a 5+ is x2 factor. A 4+ followed by a 5+ is a x2.5 factor. In other words, the CWE's list's dakka is getting buffs bumping their dakka by about 12%, whereas the SM list is getting buffs bumping their dakka by over 100%. And the complaints are that the CWE dakka buffs are OP?

Doubled discarded wounds are still discarded. Double Zero because it's a smoking crater is still zero. I'm not entirely sure why you think hitting on 3's and wounding on 5's in the normal game mechanic is some sort of doubling, but you're glossing over multiple points of comparison. The save modifier, volume of fire, plus potential suicidal tendencies of overcharged plasma and other drawbacks need to be factored into their Dakka - to be completely in depth, one would also have to compare diminishing returns after each wound bracket, and how fast/often they get pushed into those brackets based on durability.

Upthread there's complaints that the Serpent is 4x as durable for the point. As shown above, it's roughly half the cost stock, and roughly as durable (wins some, loses some). It can approach twice as durable (thus hit 4x per point) in it's absolute best case, but not in most cases. The Serpent can be more durable (purchased upgrades, powers, strats, etc), but those have a cost, too.

Don't the powers, strats, etc. buffing the Repulsors and Predators you were talking about above have a cost too?

Upthread there's complaints that the Repulsor should be much closer to the Serpent in price; there's no argument that they're close to eachother in durability per model, but the Serpent is no better a transport, and has only a fraction of the dakka.

TLDR: Yes, the Serpent is better per point. It's a flying brick. But the Repulsor is *much* better per model - so the two shouldn't be anywhere close in points.

(@secretForge - thank you for calling me out on this.)

Wait, what? The model you say is a higher target priority - even we accept your premise they have the same durability, better Dakka says Repulsor is a higher target priority that a Serpent - Isn't a better transport? The model that will get shot up less often while transporting your plastic dudes is not a better transport than the model that will get shot up more often while transporting your plastic dudes?

The serpent is better per point, but the Repulsor is better per model? What kind of logic is that?

The Imperial Guardsman is better per point, but the Terminator is better per model. Sure you can get about 10 guardsmen per Terminator - and 10 guardsmen get 20 shots, 10 hits, 3-4 wounds, one dead Termie per every other turn or so, while the Termie gets 4 shots, 3-4 wounds, 3-4 dead guardsmen per turn. After two turns, one termie will be dead, and 7 Guardsmen will be dead. Of course the Guard player has 3 guardsmen left, and the SM player is tabled. But the Terminator is better per model.

Another example - A squad of guardsmen with an extremely basic kit are 60 points give or take. A Warlord Titan is somewhere around 3,000 points. The Warlord Titan is much better per model. Which doesn't do you a lot of good in a 2,000 point game.

Neither better per point or better per model is - by itself - a full value measure. But better per point is a whole lot closer. But you still have to take Force Org slot, points per list size, and other feasibility factors into account. If two wave Serpents (with better durability - but lets accept your premise they're about the same again) have similar dakka to one Repulsor, (and via force org + points costs/limits) you can easily take two Serpents per Repulsor The two serpents are better than one Repulsor for the same reason two marines are better than one Primaris Marine - or 10 guardsmen are better than one terminator.

Repulsor doesn't fit wholly within 6". I already tried.

Nothing in Deredeo rules suggests "wholy within". It's "a unit within". AFAIK (and as long as it hasn't been FAQed) you only need a part of one model of the unit within 6" to get the save.

 DanielFM wrote:

Repulsor doesn't fit wholly within 6". I already tried.

Nothing in Deredeo rules suggests "wholy within". It's "a unit within". AFAIK (and as long as it hasn't been FAQed) you only need a part of one model of the unit within 6" to get the save.

You really need to keep more upto date on your FAQ' that was changed at big FAQ 1


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Shadow Spectres have a -1 to hit. But also has only T3 (vs T8). And 28ppw (vs 18ppw).

Reapers have none of the above. But still T3 vs T8.

Spears have no to-hit penalty, but do have a 4++ vs shooting (but not CC). However, it's T4 vs T8.

I wouldn't call those fair comparisions; the Repulsor out-survives all three per point easily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Only on DakkaDakka is 18ppw too high a price for a T8 gunboat, but 28ppw is too low a price for T3 infantry.

While I don't disagree with the argument your trying to make you forgot or didnt include the stacking -1 from alitoc already for those units.
That's really the mean reason those units are far more durable than model cost/wounds implies.

Lemondish wrote:
So the NZ pre-order is up...appears to confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt that it will carry 6. Also appears to come with the full Repulsor kit on top of the new sprue, which kind of explains the upcharge.

That is rather surprising but does at least explain the increase. I wonder how easy it would be to build it interchangeably between regular Repulsor and Executioner.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


Cute, but incorrect. 18 pts/w is too high for the way 8th plays currently.

Naw, it's fine. 18ppw is decent for its offensive output and capabilities.

Why must you spout nonsense? It's not just PPW ether. It's effective wounds. Repsulor denies practically 0 damage from anti tank weapons. Most the time it gets only a 6+ save. So not only really high points per wound - almost 0 ability to deny damage. It's basically the juiciest target on the battlefield no matter what. which is not to be confused with other units not being good. It's just the least protected valuable target no matter what.

So exactly the same as the Repulsor, yet someone managed to win a GT with a list with two of those

https://www.40kstats.com/throneofwar

I think the truth is that building a list around something like this you need to understand its strengths and weaknesses and list build for those. In that winning list you can see a load of tough vehicles. If on the other hand you take just one tank in an infantry list then that tank had better have an amazing invulnerable save to mitigate the weakness you designed into the list - which is why lone Imperial Knights do better than lone tanks.

Also anything which grants an invulnerable save to nearby units could mitigate the whole problem - e.g. Deredeo with pavaise.

So to my mind there are two list building strategies that could work.
1. Accept the drawback and double-down on the the advantages. Go for target saturation and assume enough survives to devastate your opponent in return.
2. Find ways to mitigate the drawback even if that is at the cost of diluting the strength.

Seems to me that both approaches are available so its just up to competitive players how they want to approach it. Being slightly a glass cannon is only an insurmountable problem if you can adopt neither of those strategies.

You really need to keep more upto date on your FAQ' that was changed at big FAQ 1

Hence the "if it hasn't been FAQed clause". Sometimes it's difficult to keep up with the most obscure ones.

Way to ruin an expensive, non overpowered unit GW.

Edit: sorry for delving deeper into the off-topic, but I can definitely fit a Repulsor wholly within 6 of a Deredeo. You just have to keep them touching, side by side. Not practical, but doable.

 Karhedron wrote:

Lemondish wrote:
So the NZ pre-order is up...appears to confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt that it will carry 6. Also appears to come with the full Repulsor kit on top of the new sprue, which kind of explains the upcharge.

That is rather surprising but does at least explain the increase. I wonder how easy it would be to build it interchangeably between regular Repulsor and Executioner.

Extremely. Worst/Easiest case you magnetize the top plate. Its easiest because you just green stuff a few places to hold the magnet and swap the entire top plate with/without the cups for the mini turrets, and put the correct top turret on. Worst case because that's going to hardest to fit. If the turret is directly swappable, I suspect more than a few people will run the old chassis with empty cups for the mini turrets, and the new big turret. I wonder if we'll get to buy the upgrade sprue seperately like they eventually did with the Land Raider Crusader Sprue.

 DanielFM wrote:
What do you think about bringing a Deredeo with Atomantic Pavise to protect a Repulsor (Executioner, for instance) and a Redemptor? The thing is expensive but it brings it weight in superautocannon shots in addition to the aura. Throw in a Chapter Master and lieutenant to buff the whole lot, and some cheap Hellblasters in the Repulsor.
This sounds more viable with the (hopefully cheaper) Macro Plasma Incinerator, it doesn't feel so wrong to lose double shooting first turn to position it (and cargo) well.

The fact that the base Derereo is only 30ish points more than a Redemptor is disturbing.

If you don't like FW for whatever reason a Custodes Vexilla brings an area Invuln with a 3" larger bubble for half the points along with a pretty darn good melee statline, and it's a character so it's easier to protect. Not necessarily a better option, just a different one.

https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/06/40k-primaris-executioner-a-look-inside.html
So around 300 points, give or tank.

 DanielFM wrote:

You really need to keep more upto date on your FAQ' that was changed at big FAQ 1

Hence the "if it hasn't been FAQed clause". Sometimes it's difficult to keep up with the most obscure ones.

Way to ruin an expensive, non overpowered unit GW.

Edit: sorry for delving deeper into the off-topic, but I can definitely fit a Repulsor wholly within 6 of a Deredeo. You just have to keep them touching, side by side. Not practical, but doable.

I think the repulsor is longer than 6", making it impossible.

293 Points with Laser, 284 with Plasma Incinerator.

Seems cheap as feth and honestly wouldn't be taking any other anti-vehicle units

That's not cheap at all. Do the math per wound.

Right. Points per wound is only thing that matter after all

Martel732 wrote:
That's not cheap at all. Do the math per wound.

It is when you consider that it has an enourmous range and only LoS can stop it from shooting.

BTW the Admech vehicle seems op as feth for its cost:


Disintegrator:
85 + 6 + 0 + 25 (or 20) + 0 = 116 or 111 pt

Dunerider:
65 + 4 + 4 + 0 = 74 pt

So far the only complaint I have is that it's a heavy support slot

I think the repulsor is longer than 6", making it impossible.

No? You measure 6 from each side of the base of the Deredeo (80 mm/ 3.15 inches) and you get a 15.15 diameter aura. The Repulsor is 6.7x4.33 inches. How is it not fitting there?
You don't put the Repulsor in front of the Deredeo by the narrow end, you put it sideways.


Edit: graphical demonstration with real measurements

KurtAngle2 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
That's not cheap at all. Do the math per wound.

It is when you consider that it has an enourmous range and only LoS can stop it from shooting.

BTW the Admech vehicle seems op as feth for its cost:


Disintegrator:
85 + 6 + 0 + 25 (or 20) + 0 = 116 or 111 pt

Dunerider:
65 + 4 + 4 + 0 = 74 pt

I'm talking about the opponent turn, not your turn. Plus, invulns hurt this thing badly.