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.

Really? Falling back is super situational to you?

And no, Abaddon is NOT a better beatstick than GMan. He's a good one, no doubt, possibly better FOR HIS POINTS at beat stickery, but not better on a model-to-model basis.

I have no objections to you saying "CSM are better than SM" because that I agree with. But comparing the actual traits, Ultras are the CLEAR winners.

Abaddon DOOES have that "half damage" trait which makes him, situationally, more duable I belive

BrianDavion wrote:
Abaddon DOOES have that "half damage" trait which makes him, situationally, more duable I belive

But he's also got less wounds at a lesser toughness and worse save.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Really? Falling back is super situational to you?

And no, Abaddon is NOT a better beatstick than GMan. He's a good one, no doubt, possibly better FOR HIS POINTS at beat stickery, but not better on a model-to-model basis.

I have no objections to you saying "CSM are better than SM" because that I agree with. But comparing the actual traits, Ultras are the CLEAR winners.

Nah man he really is better even without buffing him out the wazoo - which you can do. He actually absorbs damage better to turning flat 2 weapons to 1. and d3's have to roll a 5/6 to deal 2 wounds. That is better reduction than a 3++ in most cases. Plus if it's vs imperials. He is doing about twice as much damage. Imperials are about 50% of the armies so it is totally relevant here. Ultras trait doesn't grant you the ability to fall back ether - literally anyone can do it. They can just fall back and shoot at reduced efficiency but not if they are locked. most of the good units in the game can do this already with no penalty if they have fly even if they are locked. It is basically a deterrent to getting more units tied up. Bl trait probably is worse but the army is better AND if you build around it is actually a pretty good first turn ability for things like terminators with plasma/ presience - marines needing to get other objectives and still take pot shots. 50% of the armies out there don't even want to charge you ether against those armies the BL trait is better because the idea is to get close faster. Again - I'm not talking up the BL trait. It is bad. But BL is a better all around army compared to Gman ultras. Shooting twice with a super unit with VotLW is flat out better than ANYTHING space marines can currently do. Maybe marines will get something like that but as it stands. Ultras have been sunk to the worst marine chapter from being the best. They need a lot of love from specila rules and strats to be considered viable.

 JNAProductions wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Abaddon DOOES have that "half damage" trait which makes him, situationally, more duable I belive

But he's also got less wounds at a lesser toughness and worse save.

which is why I said he's Situationally more durable. if you're tossing a metric ton of D1 shots at them Gulliman is easily tougher. Abaddon however is tougher if they're both getting pelted with lascanons or something

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:



ALSO I'm guessing you never bothered to ever do math on Terminators vs Lasguns ever? To say they're the death of Terminators is laughable and makes you look bad to be honest.

Considering I've POSTED the math on Terminators vs Lasguns, you lose this argument too.

10 Lasguns, 20 shots, 10 hits, 3.3 wounding hits. half a wound per turn after 2+ saves. In four turns, 40 points of Guardsman kills 40 points of Termie. In four turns the Termie only gets 8 shots vs those 10 guardsmen. (8 shots, 5.36 hit, 3.59 wounding shots - 1.18 per FOUR turns?) It starts skyrocketing when you swap a lasgun or two for a heavy and/or a special. And I'm still scoring the objective for those four turns because I have 10 Objective Secured guys to your 1 NOT- Objective Secured guys.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
GW didn't use their new S/T system to stretch out the values at all.

Nope. Toughness is removed from the game in apoc. You have a saving throw which. Is taken on a D12 or a D6 depending on how much damage you take. Your standard space marine has a 6+ save (on a d12 is worse than a 3+ on a d6) and most of the time you are only ever taking the save ona d6. Power armor is garbage in apoc. The way the game works though units that get 5+ and 4+ saves become really good because getting +1 or +2 armor is very easy with cards/unit abilities.

Apoc is on a different "scale" with a different "base unit" further compacting the basic infantry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
@Slayer-Fan

my extensive experience at the highest level of play

Do you use a macro keyboard to type this so you don't break your arm off patting yourself on the back so hard?

I'm torn between laughing at how often you say it out of what I'm guessing is a serious inferiority complex, and wondering if it's actually true in one of those "Those who do it don't have to brag about it" things.

But mostly I think I'll keep pointing out "The highest level of play" isn't necessarily some tournament. And it's definitely not the ONLY way to play. It's not your world, and we're not just living in it.

Slayer-Fan has any number of bad takes to point at, your attempts to "win" based off your

my extensive experience at the highest level of play

is not about any of them.

Breton wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:



ALSO I'm guessing you never bothered to ever do math on Terminators vs Lasguns ever? To say they're the death of Terminators is laughable and makes you look bad to be honest.

Considering I've POSTED the math on Terminators vs Lasguns, you lose this argument too.

10 Lasguns, 20 shots, 10 hits, 3.3 wounding hits. half a wound per turn after 2+ saves. In four turns, 40 points of Guardsman kills 40 points of Termie. In four turns the Termie only gets 8 shots vs those 10 guardsmen. (8 shots, 5.36 hit, 3.59 wounding shots - 1.18 per FOUR turns?) It starts skyrocketing when you swap a lasgun or two for a heavy and/or a special. And I'm still scoring the objective for those four turns because I have 10 Objective Secured guys to your 1 NOT- Objective Secured guys.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
GW didn't use their new S/T system to stretch out the values at all.

Nope. Toughness is removed from the game in apoc. You have a saving throw which. Is taken on a D12 or a D6 depending on how much damage you take. Your standard space marine has a 6+ save (on a d12 is worse than a 3+ on a d6) and most of the time you are only ever taking the save ona d6. Power armor is garbage in apoc. The way the game works though units that get 5+ and 4+ saves become really good because getting +1 or +2 armor is very easy with cards/unit abilities.

Apoc is on a different "scale" with a different "base unit" further compacting the basic infantry.

Well you kinda failed on your math here. Termies shoot 4 shots per turn, and do so even while moving and at 24" range. So you are halving his firepower and negating his huge range advantage.
Also, pitting one unit against the other is utter silly and tells you nothing about those 2 units.
By the way, even if it has no value, i should point out that if you actually care to math things correctly, a termie wins against 10 guards with lasgun(which cost more), even at short range.

Breton wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:



ALSO I'm guessing you never bothered to ever do math on Terminators vs Lasguns ever? To say they're the death of Terminators is laughable and makes you look bad to be honest.

Considering I've POSTED the math on Terminators vs Lasguns, you lose this argument too.

10 Lasguns, 20 shots, 10 hits, 3.3 wounding hits. half a wound per turn after 2+ saves. In four turns, 40 points of Guardsman kills 40 points of Termie. In four turns the Termie only gets 8 shots vs those 10 guardsmen. (8 shots, 5.36 hit, 3.59 wounding shots - 1.18 per FOUR turns?) It starts skyrocketing when you swap a lasgun or two for a heavy and/or a special. And I'm still scoring the objective for those four turns because I have 10 Objective Secured guys to your 1 NOT- Objective Secured guys.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
GW didn't use their new S/T system to stretch out the values at all.

Nope. Toughness is removed from the game in apoc. You have a saving throw which. Is taken on a D12 or a D6 depending on how much damage you take. Your standard space marine has a 6+ save (on a d12 is worse than a 3+ on a d6) and most of the time you are only ever taking the save ona d6. Power armor is garbage in apoc. The way the game works though units that get 5+ and 4+ saves become really good because getting +1 or +2 armor is very easy with cards/unit abilities.

Apoc is on a different "scale" with a different "base unit" further compacting the basic infantry.

Your math is a bit off (actually WAY off) as the Terminator doesn't just get 8 shots off. Bolter Drill goes under the assumption a Terminator never moves so it's always four shots. Also the Infantry don't get 10 Lasguns as their Sarge doesn't have one. He gets a pistol, and you're assuming Rapid Fire for whatever reason without the Terminator having Deep Strike first and shooting.

BrianDavion wrote:
as for Ultramarines remember guys chapter tactics aren't the ONLY thing going here. there are also stratigiums psykic powers (every first founding is going to get their own psykic powers now too) relics etc. so we don't have the full info yet. it's possiable that we could get a look at the ultramarines supplement and promptly decide Ultramarines are the most over powered chapter.
I honestly kinda doubt this is goin to be the case. the Ultramarines are getting the first supplement (I bet theirs was written before the white scars one too) so will likely be weaker then the others. but the fact remains we can't judge just yet

I"m pretty sure there's going to be a camp claiming they're more overpowered than ever, and a camp saying they're the worst faction ever of all time. I played them in 2nd when they were in fourth place out of four, and I'll play them in 8th when they're whatever they are.

As for which ones were written first, I doubt any of them were written before or after the others. This soon after they already released the other codex'es, AND still in the same edition, this is more of a do-over than a new Codex. They could have taken them all and done them simultaneously with a whole lof of Cut and Paste. Lest we forget people are already drawing similarities to other armies. That's the "Deathskulls treatment", remember? They're not reinventing the wheel, it's a do-over.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Your math is a bit off (actually WAY off) as the Terminator doesn't just get 8 shots off. Bolter Drill goes under the assumption a Terminator never moves so it's always four shots. Also the Infantry don't get 10 Lasguns as their Sarge doesn't have one. He gets a pistol, and you're assuming Rapid Fire for whatever reason without the Terminator having Deep Strike first and shooting.

You're right, I did forget it was Rapid Fire 2 Not Assault 2, I had the Reiver Carbine on the brain. The good news is that doesn't make it WAY off, it makes it half. But I also found another error on top of it. I ended up reporting the third that saved instead of the two thirds that didn't.

Starting from scratch. One Termie, 4 shots per turn, 2.68 hits, 1.79 hits wound, 1.2 wounds after saves.

you're assuming Rapid Fire for whatever reason without the Terminator having Deep Strike first and shooting.

You're saying you Deep Struck 200 or more points of Termies just to shoot a 40 point squad of Guard?!?!

Also the Infantry don't get 10 Lasguns as their Sarge doesn't have one

10 made for easier numbers. I also didn't give them specials or heavies, and I didn't give the Terminator (squad) a Heavy either. But if you really want to, I'd be more than happy to do three guard squads and a Heavy Weapon Squad (to offset the Heavy/Special costsAnd give me three bonus Lasguns the Sgt's don't have- and I'll have to remember 3 Laspistols) with Plasma, melta, and Heavies in addition to their lasguns vs 5 Terminators with... One heavy. with a -1 to hit for moving. Because you apparently deep strike Termies to kill a guard squad. What do you want your Termie Heavy to be? Cyclone so you get to keep the Stormbolter too? Assault Cannon? Heavy Flamer? I know it's not a Plasma Cannon. Does your Sgt normally have a power sword or a power fist, What is your normal Termie Squad so we're not tailoring vs a specific army?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
BL is miles ahead of Ultras. No point in even debating this. That could change with new space marine strats - we will see. It's likely Gman is getting nerfed though. He really should be dropped about 100 points. Because you are losing a lot of stats just for being ultas.

You're not allowed to just say something insanely wrong and act like you're right.

Black Legion as compared to Ultramarines, just looking at the chapter tactics...

Both get +1 Leadership. Slightly more valuable on Chaos Marines, as they lack ATSKNF, but basically irrelevant in 90% of games.
Ultras get fall back and shoot at -1.
Black Legion get advance and treat RF guns as Assault of the same number.

So, under the just so incredibly common situation where an enemy is more than 30" but within 36", and you roll high enough on your advance roll, you can get less than half the firepower you got had you stood still and targeted something within 24" (since you get half the shots and are shooting at -1).

But, you know, that really niche situation where you fall back from an enemy unit, instead of getting to do literally nothing, you can still shoot, just with a -1.

You're also not allowed to make up hypothetical scenarios that prove your point as fact covered in descriptors influencing the reader. The mirror of what you just did is:

How useful is falling back and shooting when your back is against the table edge?! You'd have to fall back off the board!

If you're going to do the hypothetical thing, you've got to do it neutral or not in your favor. I'm not even going to get started on why you moved to shoot at the unit 36 inches away while complaining you get half the shots you would have gotten at a unit 24 inches away with questions of why you moved if you wanted double the shots at the closer unit, or what happens when there isn't that closer unit. Oh. Maybe I did get started.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Hoping for some sort of Deep Strike/Drop Pod stratagem that boosts assaults to combo with the BT Chapter Tactic. It'd actually be fluffy, too!

drop pods should DEFINATLY be a stratagium not a unit in this edition.

Something And the Horse you rode in on! On a more serious note - You're being awful fast and loose with the models I paid for. Make Stratagems work with the models but don't screw the people who bought them.

Yes, you would deep strike your terminators. 170 points of them could take on 30 IS and 1 CC.

20 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 6 GEQ // 5 plain-ass terminators
18 * .5 * .333 * .167 = 0.5 // Full strength IS FRFSRF at 24"

This is the funny thing about math hammer, because that 0.5 is quite likely to not happen on the 3 average save rolls you have to take, but sometimes you also roll 3 1s.

Terminators drop and kill the better part of a unit and then charge a separate unit (overwatch is nearly negligible). With the new rules they're dropping 16 PF attacks, which is 7 GEQ.

So, you have a unit of 10, a unit of 4, a unit of 3, and the CC. Both of those heavily wounded units are likely to lose models to morale. But of course you get to FRFSRF @12" with a whole unit of 10 on your turn... 37 * .5 * .333 * .167 = 1

One wound. This presumes the terminators make it into combat, but really if they don't they might lose one model and then next turn they're in unless you focus with other elements from your army (which you should), but again this is where mathhammer is stupid and accounts for none of the realities on the table.

Breton wrote:
You're also not allowed to make up hypothetical scenarios that prove your point as fact covered in descriptors influencing the reader. The mirror of what you just did is:

How useful is falling back and shooting when your back is against the table edge?! You'd have to fall back off the board!

If you're going to do the hypothetical thing, you've got to do it neutral or not in your favor. I'm not even going to get started on why you moved to shoot at the unit 36 inches away while complaining you get half the shots you would have gotten at a unit 24 inches away with questions of why you moved if you wanted double the shots at the closer unit, or what happens when there isn't that closer unit. Oh. Maybe I did get started.

Because that's the range band that the Black Legion trait is actually useful.

At 30"-36", you can shoot something by advancing that you could not normally shoot.
At 24"-30", you can advance and shoot the same number of shots, at a penalty to hit.
At 18"-24", you lose half your shots advancing (since it changes Rapid Fire X to Assault X) thanks to Bolter Drill.
At 18" or less, you lose half your shots advancing even if you had to move anyway.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yes, you would deep strike your terminators. 170 points of them could take on 30 IS and 1 CC.

20 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 6 GEQ // 5 plain-ass terminators
18 * .5 * .333 * .167 = 0.5 // Full strength IS FRFSRF at 24"

This is the funny thing about math hammer, because that 0.5 is quite likely to not happen on the 3 average save rolls you have to take, but sometimes you also roll 3 1s.

Terminators drop and kill the better part of a unit and then charge a separate unit (overwatch is nearly negligible). With the new rules they're dropping 16 PF attacks, which is 7 GEQ.

So, you have a unit of 10, a unit of 4, a unit of 3, and the CC. Both of those heavily wounded units are likely to lose models to morale. But of course you get to FRFSRF @12" with a whole unit of 10 on your turn... 37 * .5 * .333 * .167 = 1

One wound. This presumes the terminators make it into combat, but really if they don't they might lose one model and then next turn they're in unless you focus with other elements from your army (which you should), but again this is where mathhammer is stupid and accounts for none of the realities on the table.

The problem is the next turn. When a tank commander fire its plasma cannons and wipes the whole unit in a single volley. If they have screens left and you DS a terminator unit you are very unlikely to charge anything worth while since even if you kill the guardsmen they still did their job of keeping you away.

I think the VS guardsmen problem is usually a good indicator if troops are good or not but kinda irrelevant in most other cases. If guardsmen are good against a target usually shows how bad the other unit is but the reverse doesnt say that unit is goodm. That terminators can be point effient against guardsmen isnt really interesting or an indicator of they are good since the opponent should have other units to counter the terminators and since the terminators cant get close enough against non chaff/screens they get countered.

This guy gets it ^^^^^^^^^

Martel732 wrote:
This guy gets it ^^^^^^^^^

So your argument is it's not fair for 400 points of IG to be able to take on 200 points of Marines? And that's why Marines (and Termies) are garbage?

Bharring wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
This guy gets it ^^^^^^^^^

So your argument is it's not fair for 400 points of IG to be able to take on 200 points of Marines? And that's why Marines (and Termies) are garbage?

No, I think the argument is that you need 600+pts of Marines just so that 200pts of Marines are LEFT after 400pts of Guard are through mulching them

-

Personally I'm not gonna harp on the UM trait. I figure they'll have better or cheaper stratagems to compensate, since they get extra CP

 Galef wrote:

Bharring wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
This guy gets it ^^^^^^^^^

So your argument is it's not fair for 400 points of IG to be able to take on 200 points of Marines? And that's why Marines (and Termies) are garbage?

No, I think the argument is that you need 600+pts of Marines just so that 200pts of Marines are LEFT after 400pts of Guard are through mulching them

-

Yup. Marines bleed points so fast to certain weapon types that are fairly numerous that its hard to to really have a vacuum discussion. Even after all the updates and whatnot, I'm still facing the reality that 300 pts of guardsmen turn off my entire BA army by standing there. Marines are bad because they bleed points very quickly to any competent opponent. Give terminators 3 wounds and everything changes. The jump from 2W to 3W is too large in this game.

 fraser1191 wrote:
Personally I'm not gonna harp on the UM trait. I figure they'll have better or cheaper stratagems to compensate, since they get extra CP

It's a good trait. Not the best (Ravenguard gets that, even with the nerf, methinks) but it's valuable.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Personally I'm not gonna harp on the UM trait. I figure they'll have better or cheaper stratagems to compensate, since they get extra CP

It's a good trait. Not the best (Ravenguard gets that, even with the nerf, methinks) but it's valuable.

No its not too bad. Plus I like using calgar so I can more or less get a free Veteran intercessor squad. Now I'll have to find a spot for Tigarius soon

 JNAProductions wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Personally I'm not gonna harp on the UM trait. I figure they'll have better or cheaper stratagems to compensate, since they get extra CP

It's a good trait. Not the best (Ravenguard gets that, even with the nerf, methinks) but it's valuable.

It is almost like not having a trait dude. Get real. If it didn't have the -1 stipulation (obviosuly not required because many traits get 3 good traits without a negative) it would be a reasonable utility trait that vehicles would gain a lot from with the -1 you are basically always better staying locked and denying a charge for the unit that is tying you up. I am saying this with a lot of experience playing ultra marines. Like...DA have a stratagem that lets a unit fall back and shoot for 1 CP. I'd rather have access to that stratagem than have this tactic for free. +1 LD? Who cares? +1 LD is not nothing - but out of the possible stats to increase - it is literally the most situational and ignorable stat in the game.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Personally I'm not gonna harp on the UM trait. I figure they'll have better or cheaper stratagems to compensate, since they get extra CP

It's a good trait. Not the best (Ravenguard gets that, even with the nerf, methinks) but it's valuable.

It is almost like not having a trait dude. Get real. If it didn't have the -1 stipulation (obviosuly not required because many traits get 3 good traits without a negative) it would be a reasonable utility trait that vehicles would gain a lot from with the -1 you are basically always better staying locked and denying a charge for the unit that is tying you up. I am saying this with a lot of experience playing ultra marines. Like...DA have a stratagem that lets a unit fall back and shoot for 1 CP. I'd rather have access to that stratagem than have this tactic for free. +1 LD? Who cares? +1 LD is not nothing - but out of the possible stats to increase - it is literally the most situational and ignorable stat in the game.

It costs 2 CP.

I don't buy the "I'd rather my QuadLas Predator sat in combat than fell back and shot" schtick. There are occasions that that's true, but not so much when a squad of Banshees or Reavers or Raptors rushes up the side and jumps in. You're gonna love being able to fallback and shoot for a -1-to-hit.

It basically invalidates a lot of tank-tie-up strategies.

Bharring wrote:
I don't buy the "I'd rather my QuadLas Predator sat in combat than fell back and shot" schtick. There are occasions that that's true, but not so much when a squad of Banshees or Reavers or Raptors rushes up the side and jumps in. You're gonna love being able to fallback and shoot for a -1-to-hit.

It basically invalidates a lot of tank-tie-up strategies.

Game play situation. I have a backline that is penetrated by a tied up chaff unit that can't hurt my tanks but can tie them up. Do I sacrifice a turn of shooting now so I can shoot next turn (after clearing out in melle) or fall back freeing up that unit to tie up 2-3 more units if I don't kill them? It is a tactical choice - often the advantage is to stay locked and bail out in CC.

Or like with custode jetbikes which are way better on the charge than in subsequent rounds. Plenty of times they are just going to fall back from you anyways so they can act instead of wound you on 5's and maybe fail to kill your probably alredy. PLus if you are degraded...you are hitting on 6's or literally can't hit with a -2. I am telling you from personal experience. The trait is incredible garbage. Literally no army would chose it. This is also true of BL and word bearers but it is also true of the Ultras trait.

This is my belief - even without the -1 to hit it is the most situational trait marines have access to. +1 LD is mostly useless because every marine army is taking the ancient banner anyways (which makes you fearless) and even without it - can be ignored for CP or by designing squad size.

It is improtant to understand the issues with marines through this edition. They do poorly because their vehicles didn't get traits.The best way to run the army because of this was with Gman and a bunch of vehicles cause they weren't getting traits anyways - taking the worst trait possible was not an issue. Now it is a real issue. Cause we already know where Ultras stand - bottom tier. Other chapters going above Ultras power level is good. Ultras not getting better is not good. I can reserve judgement until we see all the new stuff but I have a great fear that Ultras are going to get shafted for being the best chapter choice in one of the worst armies in the game.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I don't buy the "I'd rather my QuadLas Predator sat in combat than fell back and shot" schtick. There are occasions that that's true, but not so much when a squad of Banshees or Reavers or Raptors rushes up the side and jumps in. You're gonna love being able to fallback and shoot for a -1-to-hit.

It basically invalidates a lot of tank-tie-up strategies.

Game play situation. I have a backline that is penetrated by a tied up chaff unit that can't hurt my tanks but can tie them up. Do I sacrifice a turn of shooting now so I can shoot next turn (after clearing out in melle) or fall back freeing up that unit to tie up 2-3 more units if I don't kill them? It is a tactical choice - often the advantage is to stay locked and bail out in CC.

Or like with custode jetbikes which are way better on the charge than in subsequent rounds. Plenty of times they are just going to fall back from you anyways so they can act instead of wound you on 5's and maybe fail to kill your probably alredy. PLus if you are degraded...you are hitting on 6's or literally can't hit with a -2. I am telling you from personal experience. The trait is incredible garbage. Literally no army would chose it. This is also true of BL and word bearers but it is also true of the Ultras trait.

This is my belief - even without the -1 to hit it is the most situational trait marines have access to. +1 LD is mostly useless because every marine army is taking the ancient banner anyways (which makes you fearless) and even without it - can be ignored for CP or by designing squad size.

It is improtant to understand the issues with marines through this edition. They do poorly because their vehicles didn't get traits.The best way to run the army because of this was with Gman and a bunch of vehicles cause they weren't getting traits anyways - taking the worst trait possible was not an issue. Now it is a real issue. Cause we already know where Ultras stand - bottom tier. Other chapters going above Ultras power level is good. Ultras not getting better is not good. I can reserve judgement until we see all the new stuff but I have a great fear that Ultras are going to get shafted for being the best chapter choice in one of the worst armies in the game.

Can you wait till the stratagems are announced before saying for the nth time that UM are now trash? For all we know they could gain access to the best stratagems out of the codex. The sky hasn't fallen yet.

Plus it's still a better trait than Salamanders and Crimson Fists.

Klickor wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yes, you would deep strike your terminators. 170 points of them could take on 30 IS and 1 CC.

20 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 6 GEQ // 5 plain-ass terminators
18 * .5 * .333 * .167 = 0.5 // Full strength IS FRFSRF at 24"

This is the funny thing about math hammer, because that 0.5 is quite likely to not happen on the 3 average save rolls you have to take, but sometimes you also roll 3 1s.

Terminators drop and kill the better part of a unit and then charge a separate unit (overwatch is nearly negligible). With the new rules they're dropping 16 PF attacks, which is 7 GEQ.

So, you have a unit of 10, a unit of 4, a unit of 3, and the CC. Both of those heavily wounded units are likely to lose models to morale. But of course you get to FRFSRF @12" with a whole unit of 10 on your turn... 37 * .5 * .333 * .167 = 1

One wound. This presumes the terminators make it into combat, but really if they don't they might lose one model and then next turn they're in unless you focus with other elements from your army (which you should), but again this is where mathhammer is stupid and accounts for none of the realities on the table.

The problem is the next turn. When a tank commander fire its plasma cannons and wipes the whole unit in a single volley. If they have screens left and you DS a terminator unit you are very unlikely to charge anything worth while since even if you kill the guardsmen they still did their job of keeping you away.

I think the VS guardsmen problem is usually a good indicator if troops are good or not but kinda irrelevant in most other cases. If guardsmen are good against a target usually shows how bad the other unit is but the reverse doesnt say that unit is goodm. That terminators can be point effient against guardsmen isnt really interesting or an indicator of they are good since the opponent should have other units to counter the terminators and since the terminators cant get close enough against non chaff/screens they get countered.

Hence my comment : "but again this is where mathhammer is stupid and accounts for none of the realities on the table"

Here's the next problem. You just assumed that the TC is ripping into terminators, but you added nothing to the marine side of the equation to account for that, so, you unbalanced the consideration to strictly favor IG. The IS didn't keep me away if the goal was to put a hole in them - that job is done. Soaking up tank fire is an added benefit. It's what can push through that gap that will be important.

That terminators can be point effient against guardsmen isnt really interesting or an indicator of they are good since the opponent should have other units to counter the terminators and since the terminators cant get close enough against non chaff/screens they get countered.

You can say this about literally anything that is the scissors to paper.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Plus it's still a better trait than Salamanders and Crimson Fists.

Its not great, but I like Combat Squads so the Crimson Fists tactic suits me fine.

The thing that makes the UM trait not so great is the fact than in a modern marine army most vehicles have FLY anyway, so they do not benefit from the trait. I guess it is decent for more old school armies.

 Sluggaloo wrote:


Can you wait till the stratagems are announced before saying for the nth time that UM are now trash? For all we know they could gain access to the best stratagems out of the codex. The sky hasn't fallen yet.

Even if they are crap just make a UM successor chapter.

I think Ultras will have great Strats, but then so will everyone else in their own supplaments