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.
Ya know, I for one am will to let a couple things slide for some factions. DE for instance at one point had their codex gutted and lost out on units and again lost out on a couple things transferring to the index. So sure they have an OP jet but their HQ Pool is more like a puddle
bort wrote: I’m still not sold on the Whirlwind. It was always the worst of the indirect options, though did get 5pts cheaper. And isn’t the fire twice strat like 2cp and require no LOS? Even if 1cp, which is an okay cost, the restriction is oddly limiting on some tables. You’ll have to reserve a tank sized Los blocker for a unit that has the low point cost and decent toughness of a unit you probably would prefer the enemy shot at.
I’d love to be proven wrong, I’ve had a 2nd edition Whirlwind sitting on my shelf for over 20 years that each edition I take it down, play a game or two with it, realize still sucks, and put it back up.
...Heh, also just occurred to me, the older, slightly smaller Rhino chassis is going to be easier to hide out of LOS, so mine is unintentionally modeled for advantage.
Even if a whirlwind is 20% cheaper than a wyvern it is currently much worse. But with a ~7% pts drop, shoot twice stratagem and ap - 1 the first turn it looks viable. It has slightly better BS, slightly better against t5 and t8+. Longer range, better ap and a bit tougher. Much fewer shots but overall close performance point for point now. Not better but an alternative if you need some artillery and you arent fielding an astra battalion already.
Might even have some useful chapter tactics for it too. I thought about using an airbrush already to repaint my tanks and depending on the full rules I am thinking about making my vehicles in a slightly different color and play them as a different Space Marine chapter with some better vehicle tactics. Perhaps using imperial fists to ignore cover. Doesnt matter if you have fewer shots if they are much more effective against units in cover +ap1
Thing with the "fire twice" stratagem is:
You can use it only once per phase and as it shares use with the Thunderfire Cannon, which has access to the insanely good Tremor Shells stratagem, there is prolly no argument for NOT using it on the TFC as doubling that slow effect is usually WAY more usefull than having a WW shoot twice...
Mandrakes don't need a transport. Incubi suck - no argument here. Wracks the 9 points dudes with t5 and a 4++ and poison in CC (urine buff) - please - bordering on most OP unit for the cost. Wyches are best in 20 mans from deep strike - they show up in competitive all the time.
I didn't say any of those units were bad in and of themselves.
What I said (and which you seem to have inadvertently confirmed, despite apparently arguing against it) is that there's maybe 1-2 units in the entire DE codex that get any meaningful benefit out of the Open Topped rule.
The rest of the book can't take transports (Scourges), don't want/need transports (Mandrakes), or are melee.
Xenomancers wrote: Maybe we should nerf urine because every top DE list that was winning tournaments was using him.
Your spellchecking powers are weak, old man.
Xenomancers wrote: DE might have some weak choices but their strong choices are amazing.
O...kay. I don't disagree but I'm not seeing how this is relevant to the open topped rule.
Xenomancers wrote: They aren't the best army vs vehicles but 3 void ravens and 3 ravager plus a ton of blasters can handle them.
Which aren't even transports, let alone open-topped ones.
By "massive mobility" you mean '2 fast transports and some fast units in the Fast Attack slot'.
I know I'm getting off topic now, but DE have:
0 mobile HQs 0 mobile Elites
0 mobile troops
1 mobile Heavy Support (and it's a vehicle)
You know how other armies get stuff like HQs with Jump Packs, Elites with Bikes, that sort of thing? Boy, sure am glad I'm playing an army as "mobile" as Dark Eldar. My M7" HQs feel really mobile compared to the sluggish Space marine Biker Captain and his mere 14" movement.
Are you even replying to the right person? I never denied that DE were a solid army.
What I said - and continue to say - is that the Open Topped rule is garbage for 99% of the codex. We just don't have anywhere near enough shooting units - let along enough good shooting units - to justify it. It was useful back when it also helped out melee units. Since the majority of our infantry that are eligible for transports are melee units.
I think this threads run its course. Xenomancer has raised some valid points, so have others in contrary, however it's just bickering now.
I think we all have to accept some choices made were perhaps questionable from a pro circuit perspective, some people don't understand and frankly some don't care.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
Wraithknights and Riptides did.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/15 22:12:05
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
Wraithknights and Riptides did.
Exactly. Monstrous Creatures were the main problem all along.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Still, for reroll all wounds, from what I have understood, there is an UM thing that tags a unit at the start of the battle and everything gets all rerolls on it (correct me if I'm wrong on this), so for big treats you're still guillimaned, otherwise there is a FW chapter master, but that could be patched away.
Mandrakes don't need a transport. Incubi suck - no argument here. Wracks the 9 points dudes with t5 and a 4++ and poison in CC (urine buff) - please - bordering on most OP unit for the cost. Wyches are best in 20 mans from deep strike - they show up in competitive all the time.
I didn't say any of those units were bad in and of themselves.
What I said (and which you seem to have inadvertently confirmed, despite apparently arguing against it) is that there's maybe 1-2 units in the entire DE codex that get any meaningful benefit out of the Open Topped rule.
The rest of the book can't take transports (Scourges), don't want/need transports (Mandrakes), or are melee.
Xenomancers wrote: Maybe we should nerf urine because every top DE list that was winning tournaments was using him.
Your spellchecking powers are weak, old man.
Xenomancers wrote: DE might have some weak choices but their strong choices are amazing.
O...kay. I don't disagree but I'm not seeing how this is relevant to the open topped rule.
Xenomancers wrote: They aren't the best army vs vehicles but 3 void ravens and 3 ravager plus a ton of blasters can handle them.
Which aren't even transports, let alone open-topped ones.
By "massive mobility" you mean '2 fast transports and some fast units in the Fast Attack slot'.
I know I'm getting off topic now, but DE have:
0 mobile HQs 0 mobile Elites
0 mobile troops
1 mobile Heavy Support (and it's a vehicle)
You know how other armies get stuff like HQs with Jump Packs, Elites with Bikes, that sort of thing? Boy, sure am glad I'm playing an army as "mobile" as Dark Eldar. My M7" HQs feel really mobile compared to the sluggish Space marine Biker Captain and his mere 14" movement.
Are you even replying to the right person? I never denied that DE were a solid army.
What I said - and continue to say - is that the Open Topped rule is garbage for 99% of the codex. We just don't have anywhere near enough shooting units - let along enough good shooting units - to justify it. It was useful back when it also helped out melee units. Since the majority of our infantry that are eligible for transports are melee units.
@TheFleshIsWeak
First of all - The spelling error is intentional. Kinda like people like to call my Primarch Girlyman - I call Urien Rakarth "Urine Rakarth". It's all for fun .
Second - the power of a codex comes from syerngies between units and also units being able to function on their own. DE have no need to put these things in transports because they all take care of themselves nicely. Ofc venoms are for shooty units with poor defense. And while they don't do great against vehcials they do at least average vs infantry and often excell vs tough ones. The fact you can move into rapid fire turn 1 and have what I would call "unfair amounts of defense" for such a cheap unit which is also protects 5 glass cannons inside...they are a tremendous unit. I've fooled around putting incubi in them before and it actually worked out both times even though they are a terrible unit. My beefs with the DE codex are really cosmetic - like...why don't incubi get kabal traits? and why isn't their another type of HQ for kabals to choose from? none of these things really hold the army back. Space marines have real problems. Half the units can ride in half the transports. No deep strike stratagem. Lack of invune saves accross the board except for HQ's which happen to be untargetable anyways. Overcosted weaponry (they fixed some but not all). The mobile units are punished for moving. Overcosted units core to forming stratagies (drop pods/storm ravens) reliance on plasma in an eddition where negative modifiers are everywhere(inclucing for moving with heavies) and increase the risk of outright slaying your models (SLAYING!). So forgive me for being blunt here. As a DE player myself. DE has not room to complain in a space marine thread. Unless it's about not getting any new models and with that I can sympathize (If plastic Incubi came out I would by 20 instantaniously). Also - the Voidraven is probably the sweeteest looking model in the game anyways - have noticed it's similarities with the Birttish Vulkan Bomber (probably my favorite plane in history)?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CapRichard wrote: Still, for reroll all wounds, from what I have understood, there is an UM thing that tags a unit at the start of the battle and everything gets all rerolls on it (correct me if I'm wrong on this), so for big treats you're still guillimaned, otherwise there is a FW chapter master, but that could be patched away.
Yes I believe you have to be within 6 inches of the target but it will no doubt be power. Perhaps in a very aggressive list Utlizing agressors and repuslors. Utilziign the team overwatch stratagem for protection and the reroll all wounds relic...It might just work. In my head though it seems quite suicidal.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/15 23:09:57
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
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
I'm not sure IKs are the real culprit.
I think guardsmen and PBs are just as unhealthy. Cheap models per wound with invulns are even worse imo.
Gotta whine about guard, even in a space marine thread I see. I bet all your bacon, if the totally whack command point system and allies weren't so borked out the gate, you'd not see nearly as many of any of these problem units.
PBs maybe would still be seen, but pure guard lists weren't going to be stomping the scene forever, nor were knights going to be everywhere without their command point chaff bubbles.
Guards buff was in the fact of new AP system and wound system that did a good thing for durability of guard infantry however most light infantry benefit from that change. The only reason you saw them everywhere though, was command point batteries and cheap chaff for actually swingy imperial units, like knights.
If armies were back to being mono dex, that would clear up a lot of these balance nightmares. With the nature of the game and costs, pure knight armies weren't going to rule the roost ever. You shouldn't need to spam cheap chaff to earn command points. I have no idea how they'll fix this issue but it feels like in this book they are going to be cracking down on getting the most out of your book by staying mono dex and only time will tell if that can happen enough but I bet you the guard boogeyman won't be nearly as scary without abuse in both of these venues. Just shouting one sentence " Guards is OMG OPZ !! " is obtuse at least, and dishonest at worst. The issues are far deeper than cheap guardsmen, they are baked into the core system as it stands. Unless you price guard on par with scions or sisters of battle, they'll still be the cheap chaff troop choice for imperial soup, or it'll flip all to Ad mech, and then they'll need to go up, after they just went down.
I hate to derail this thread of marine codex strength sadness but it gets pretty frustrating to keep seeing one sentence declarations that can't seem to see the forest for the trees and the actual depth of the problems but just blame one symptom.
They'd need a real big reword of core systems to fix a number of these issues as well as strong mono dex books that crack down on allies as one touch to it, and all of those things will take time.All we can do is be true about the real problems and not just point fingers because we dislike other people having it better than us for a bit. At some point you need to point the finger at GW for moving too slowly to fix an issue thats been pretty easy to see since the edition dropped and only got easier to see as book power creep began.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points. In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain.
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
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah just a friendly reminder that a night fighter with 2 dessie is 135 points. One Thirty Five. You get 2.5 of these per repulsor. What an absolute joke of game balance. Why wouldn't you take 6 eldar flyers to a tournament?
This is why I get upset. The dessie cannon has been 15 points all eddition...The DE codex is loaded with OP gak they never nerf. Your gonna nerf my repulsor though and Gman at the same time? And DE clearly win more than Ultramarines? This is really started to get absurd guys. Wake up. Demand change. If you aren't upset. You are part of the problem.
Point of order - dissies took a bigger nerf losing doom than marines took with Bobby.
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah just a friendly reminder that a night fighter with 2 dessie is 135 points. One Thirty Five. You get 2.5 of these per repulsor. What an absolute joke of game balance. Why wouldn't you take 6 eldar flyers to a tournament?
This is why I get upset. The dessie cannon has been 15 points all eddition...The DE codex is loaded with OP gak they never nerf. Your gonna nerf my repulsor though and Gman at the same time? And DE clearly win more than Ultramarines? This is really started to get absurd guys. Wake up. Demand change. If you aren't upset. You are part of the problem.
Point of order - dissies took a bigger nerf losing doom than marines took with Bobby.
They're not really a huge deal any longer.
They are still better vs t8 than a dark lance and they still wound on 3's vs primaris and 1 shot them. Plus a cross codex synergy like that shouldn't exist anyways. That would be like buffing guard with the gman aura...how do you think that would have worked out? I think wed have guard close to 100% win rate if they had gman ultras buff. It just goes to shot how bad the marine codex is - with doom and guide on their whole army - they cant manage higher than 40% win rate in competitive and they STILL nerf it. Marine hate is real even from other marine players. Rant Over. Mike drop.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/15 23:53:43
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
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
I'm not sure IKs are the real culprit.
I think guardsmen and PBs are just as unhealthy. Cheap models per wound with invulns are even worse imo.
Gotta whine about guard, even in a space marine thread I see. I bet all your bacon, if the totally whack command point system and allies weren't so borked out the gate, you'd not see nearly as many of any of these problem units.
PBs maybe would still be seen, but pure guard lists weren't going to be stomping the scene forever, nor were knights going to be everywhere without their command point chaff bubbles.
Guards buff was in the fact of new AP system and wound system that did a good thing for durability of guard infantry however most light infantry benefit from that change. The only reason you saw them everywhere though, was command point batteries and cheap chaff for actually swingy imperial units, like knights.
If armies were back to being mono dex, that would clear up a lot of these balance nightmares. With the nature of the game and costs, pure knight armies weren't going to rule the roost ever. You shouldn't need to spam cheap chaff to earn command points. I have no idea how they'll fix this issue but it feels like in this book they are going to be cracking down on getting the most out of your book by staying mono dex and only time will tell if that can happen enough but I bet you the guard boogeyman won't be nearly as scary without abuse in both of these venues. Just shouting one sentence " Guards is OMG OPZ !! " is obtuse at least, and dishonest at worst. The issues are far deeper than cheap guardsmen, they are baked into the core system as it stands. Unless you price guard on par with scions or sisters of battle, they'll still be the cheap chaff troop choice for imperial soup, or it'll flip all to Ad mech, and then they'll need to go up, after they just went down.
I hate to derail this thread of marine codex strength sadness but it gets pretty frustrating to keep seeing one sentence declarations that can't seem to see the forest for the trees and the actual depth of the problems but just blame one symptom.
They'd need a real big reword of core systems to fix a number of these issues as well as strong mono dex books that crack down on allies as one touch to it, and all of those things will take time.All we can do is be true about the real problems and not just point fingers because we dislike other people having it better than us for a bit. At some point you need to point the finger at GW for moving too slowly to fix an issue thats been pretty easy to see since the edition dropped and only got easier to see as book power creep began.
I don't want to write small novellas for people to slog through. I merely pointed out units that i think are as problematic as iks. Their common property is extremity. Extreme cheapness, extreme durability, extrerme skew. Someone else literally complained about iks breaking the game, and i was responding to that. Not whining about ig.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/15 23:57:53
I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/16 00:18:22
bort wrote: I’m still not sold on the Whirlwind. It was always the worst of the indirect options, though did get 5pts cheaper. And isn’t the fire twice strat like 2cp and require no LOS? Even if 1cp, which is an okay cost, the restriction is oddly limiting on some tables. You’ll have to reserve a tank sized Los blocker for a unit that has the low point cost and decent toughness of a unit you probably would prefer the enemy shot at.
I’d love to be proven wrong, I’ve had a 2nd edition Whirlwind sitting on my shelf for over 20 years that each edition I take it down, play a game or two with it, realize still sucks, and put it back up.
...Heh, also just occurred to me, the older, slightly smaller Rhino chassis is going to be easier to hide out of LOS, so mine is unintentionally modeled for advantage.
Even if a whirlwind is 20% cheaper than a wyvern it is currently much worse. But with a ~7% pts drop, shoot twice stratagem and ap - 1 the first turn it looks viable. It has slightly better BS, slightly better against t5 and t8+. Longer range, better ap and a bit tougher. Much fewer shots but overall close performance point for point now. Not better but an alternative if you need some artillery and you arent fielding an astra battalion already.
Might even have some useful chapter tactics for it too. I thought about using an airbrush already to repaint my tanks and depending on the full rules I am thinking about making my vehicles in a slightly different color and play them as a different Space Marine chapter with some better vehicle tactics. Perhaps using imperial fists to ignore cover. Doesnt matter if you have fewer shots if they are much more effective against units in cover +ap1
Thing with the "fire twice" stratagem is:
You can use it only once per phase and as it shares use with the Thunderfire Cannon, which has access to the insanely good Tremor Shells stratagem, there is prolly no argument for NOT using it on the TFC as doubling that slow effect is usually WAY more usefull than having a WW shoot twice...
Last time I checked that wouldn't work.
I was using Hellfire Shells on an HB in a Dev squad so I could use the Cherib to double-dip on the strat for a while before someone pointed out that it had been ruled that the strat only worked on a single firing action, I don't see any reason to believe that the new 'shoot twice' strat would be any different.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/16 00:20:25
Must be Friday.. yep another day another instance of xeno complaining about SM being garbage because repulsors went up points without owning the new codex or playing a single game with the new rules.. Yep another day at the office.
On topic, I think whirlwinds and razorbacks look like good backline dakka units. The more I think about it the more jel of the cheap invuln transport they get -_-
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/08/16 01:11:28
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
AngryAngel80 wrote: I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
How many are won by pure ik? Guard have a few annoying problem units that appear over and over bc of soup. Imo the castellan list that won earlier this year was just as reliant on 80 cheap ablatives as the actual ik. The merging of extremes is the problem. The castellan is less extreme, guardsmen are still extreme.
Maybe you never saw the threads, but i assume people dont want the same math rehashed.
Ultimately, too cheap, too expensive is as about as deep as the game gets imo.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/08/16 01:18:31
AngryAngel80 wrote: I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
How many are won by pure ik? Guard have a few annoying problem units that appear over and over bc of soup. Imo the castellan list that won earlier this year was just as reliant on 80 cheap ablatives as the actual ik. The merging of extremes is the problem. The castellan is less extreme, guardsmen are still extreme.
Maybe you never saw the threads, but i assume people dont want the same math rehashed.
Ultimately, too cheap, too expensive is as about as deep as the game gets imo.
Exactly, because of soup, thank you. I agree, soup sucks, allies and CP structure suck.
You can rehash the math all you want pure guard however aren't crushing all. It isn't them who are the issue as the book as it stands on its own is good but isn't meta breaking, or even meta leading. Guard infantry are cheap, in a book with lots of poor choices and lack luster units and some strong outliers but on its own it isn't extreme. If too cheap or too expensive was all that mattered we'd never need new books points would fix it all, they don't. Guard infantry are very good, but in their own book are a strong unit, in an ok book with lots of poor options all over.
I'm sure BA will be cool when they put out their buddy codex with BFF Necrons, a dual codex for the only true blood brothers of 40k.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points. In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain.
God, are you still whining about it?
Repuslors got nerfed for either the fact that they were the best unit for their points in our book, or it's all GW's secret plot, there's no point in whining about it for over a week.
Get over it.
warboss wrote: Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be.
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah just a friendly reminder that a night fighter with 2 dessie is 135 points. One Thirty Five. You get 2.5 of these per repulsor. What an absolute joke of game balance. Why wouldn't you take 6 eldar flyers to a tournament?
This is why I get upset. The dessie cannon has been 15 points all eddition...The DE codex is loaded with OP gak they never nerf. Your gonna nerf my repulsor though and Gman at the same time? And DE clearly win more than Ultramarines? This is really started to get absurd guys. Wake up. Demand change. If you aren't upset. You are part of the problem.
Point of order - dissies took a bigger nerf losing doom than marines took with Bobby.
They're not really a huge deal any longer.
They are still better vs t8 than a dark lance and they still wound on 3's vs primaris and 1 shot them. Plus a cross codex synergy like that shouldn't exist anyways. That would be like buffing guard with the gman aura...how do you think that would have worked out? I think wed have guard close to 100% win rate if they had gman ultras buff. It just goes to shot how bad the marine codex is - with doom and guide on their whole army - they cant manage higher than 40% win rate in competitive and they STILL nerf it. Marine hate is real even from other marine players. Rant Over. Mike drop.
No mic drop, but I'll deal with that in the morning
AngryAngel80 wrote: I hear ya man, I really do. However when all you do is say " These are bad ! These are bad ! " It gets nothing done, doesn't even give a reason for it. If all that mattered was the points cost of units, we'd be able to see GK crushing all as they've just gone down in points, i'm sure we'd find the sweet spot for them.
No ? Then the issues have to be deeper than, too cheap, too expensive.
Our ideas of whining has to be different then. As all i ever see is one sentence saying something sucks, pretty much all the time. No meat of the thought just, marines suck, guard cheap, Eldar OP, etc, etc till it comes back to BA sucks.
You can say what you want, but people are here to share ideas, there isn't really anything to share from this sucks, that is better, this is weak. I'm pretty sure everyone knows you think marines suck, guard are and will always be too cheap forever and all the standard dooms and glooms.
At this point though, is the issue really guard infantry ? How many big tournaments are pure guard winning exactly ? If it was just them, they should be rolling all tournaments on their own, if not, the problem is deeper. Deeper than cost, and deeper than just marines codex being weak feeling from some nerfs with a number of buffs.
How many are won by pure ik? Guard have a few annoying problem units that appear over and over bc of soup. Imo the castellan list that won earlier this year was just as reliant on 80 cheap ablatives as the actual ik. The merging of extremes is the problem. The castellan is less extreme, guardsmen are still extreme.
Maybe you never saw the threads, but i assume people dont want the same math rehashed.
Ultimately, too cheap, too expensive is as about as deep as the game gets imo.
Exactly, because of soup, thank you. I agree, soup sucks, allies and CP structure suck.
You can rehash the math all you want pure guard however aren't crushing all. It isn't them who are the issue as the book as it stands on its own is good but isn't meta breaking, or even meta leading. Guard infantry are cheap, in a book with lots of poor choices and lack luster units and some strong outliers but on its own it isn't extreme. If too cheap or too expensive was all that mattered we'd never need new books points would fix it all, they don't. Guard infantry are very good, but in their own book are a strong unit, in an ok book with lots of poor options all over.
I'm sure BA will be cool when they put out their buddy codex with BFF Necrons, a dual codex for the only true blood brothers of 40k.
Units need to be costed within the ally structure. Or, wait for them to be spammed in settings where data is collected. You need only raise the price till they are no longer spammed. GW goes overboard like with the flyrant triple nerf.
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points. In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain.
God, are you still whining about it?
Repuslors got nerfed for either the fact that they were the best unit for their points in our book, or it's all GW's secret plot, there's no point in whining about it for over a week.
Get over it.
GW doesn't understand the necessity of invulns on big ticket models. Its that simple. Given the new marine codex, the repulsor hike is not crazy, its just not going to work out well the way 8th plays.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/16 03:22:06
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
Just consider this please. Every weapon in the codex is affected by doctrines. I am certainly in possition to claim otherwise also. Because I have a brain and am capable of thought. The Repulsor was already overcosted. Also if this is another round of codex for every army with this new anti souping structure giving out special bonus. Will we see similar point increases on Imperial guard stuff?
Yes. Every weapon is affected by doctrines and the repulsor just happens to have far more weapons than any other vehicle. You basically made my point.
Until people play with the new codex and fully explore the combos, its all conjecture, even if you have a brain and sometimes use it.
30pts on a Repulsor is hardly game breaking anyway as you likely have reductions elsewhere that offset.
I'd say character THs were affected greater than the Repulsor.
It doesn't make sense - why single out the repuslor. If the docs affect all the weapons - every units should recieve comparable % increase in points. In fact - a lot of the units went down in price slightly. It just seems like a ploy to get people to buy the newer stuff. With the repulsor going up in price too it makes the executioner more apealing because it is just a better repulsor which has what the army neeeds (an actually formitable long range weapon) and the lowly priced impuslor seems like a bargain
.
It makes absolute sense.
A single tac marine has a bolter....that gets -1 AP for Tactical Doctrine.
A devastator has 1 weapon.
A dread often has 2 weapons, OK, but still nothing to write home about.
Those little increases are just not significant and therefore don't warrant a raise in points.
However, the repulsor often has...Hvy Onslaught, Onslaught, twin Hvy Bolter, 2 SBs, 2 ironhail hvy stubbers, 2 fragstorm launchers. What other single model has that many weapons? It's actually a little ludicrous and time-consuming IMHO. So based that 2/3 of them get an additional -1 in the first turn, and the remaining get a -1 when tactical is turned on, GW probably thought the current price was too cheap.
it's obviously not a marketing ploy, do you really think with a brand new SM codex release they don't want people buying their flagship new tanks for the over-hyped Primaris? Nah, they must want to sell more drop pods.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/16 03:28:45
Units need to be costed within the ally structure. Or, wait for them to be spammed in settings where data is collected. You need only raise the price till they are no longer spammed. GW goes overboard like with the flyrant triple nerf.
So you see the issue, but you think the fix should be rendering mono codex armies worse because the alliance system sucks ? I can't really say how head in the sand such a fix is. Especially when they already appear to notice the issue as they have been trying to slow roll fixes and nerfs to mix faction forces for awhile now. The latest codex being the ideal sign of that. If they keep pushing these changes to make it less attractive to mixed faction, and more rewarding to mono faction and fix the CPfubar they have going on, it'll be golden, without nerfs.
I have disagreed with a great many of the nerfs they rolled out. The only reason I at all agree with Gmans nerf is the fact that he unavoidably is factored into Marine costing, he's a monster they had to control or else make the only good marine lists Gman centric which sucks from a game play and fluff point of view. We will see what shakes out and if marines turn out better from it all, we'll see.
I disagree with the point raise on cultists as well, if you can dig through past stances. If your BA suck, it isn't Guards fault, as a lot of armies are better than BA, armies that function better without allies even. Look at some of the better nerfs you have seen, many of them are about limiting allies interactions with each other. Unless GW is dim they will start to see, allies make the game difficult to balance, especially with such a large pool of books in imperium armies. No amount of them nerfing Guard will make weaker armies any better, as guard arent the top right now. All you seem to do is want to be spiteful, even after acknowledging their cost isn't what knocks the game off course. I know you'll just respond with the same one sentence response but at some point you have to target the actual issues and not keep scape goating because Guard give you night terrors.
Now on topic of this post, the new marine book could be to blame for them being weaker. Though I don't think that'll be the case. We will need to see though, especially with how the changes alter actual game play and not just mental gymnastics. Until it shakes out, we just don't know for sure. Though we can all say one build to rule them all in a book is an issue to be dealt with, I just hope it shakes out better with the fixes in there.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/16 03:58:34
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
It should, but land raiders should be cheaper. You will lose games just from having such an expensive model with no invuln.
It should if it has the same transport effect as a Land Raider, which it doesn't. The models you'd put in a Repulsor vs a Land Raider aren't the same. The Primaris only restriction on the Repulsor hurts it. For another 2 days there isn't a SC you can stick in it for 1 slot. Most of the Primaris Infantry already have a shortcut across the board, or don't want to cross the board anyway. You're pretty much stuck at Aggressors and support characters - No Sternguard, No Termies, No Company Vets, no Cents, No Repair Marines - making the Repulsor being used to transport a fat juicy target destined to remind of you of the scene from Dances With Wolves - a bunch of space marines standing on top with their arms thrown back waiting for the bullet. As long as people bring enough AT shooting to down a Knight - Expensive Tanksports like the LR and Repulsor either need to be equally durable, or have a reason to make things shoot at them less, not more.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
IKs dont keep my lrs off the table. At least, not alone.
Its not the knight itself causing people to avoid the 300 point Tanksports. Its the armies that build in enough AT shooting to face a knight, just in case.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I hate how knights broke the game. Now everything from infantry to list building is based around whether or not it can withstand or destroy a knight.
In previous editions was it this bad with other Super-heavies? Did Baneblades and the like break the game the same way?
Not really. Of course people weren't taking 3 of them and a hefty bit of guard for an extra headache.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
fraser1191 wrote: Do we have a total points value on the invictor dread?
Also shouldn't the pilot be a techmarine? I thought all operators /pilots were techmarines
Nah, most fluff has the operators/pilots being Marines seconded from the reserve companies - i.e. Assault Reserve Companies piloted the Land Speeders
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: The repulsor points increase was obviously in relation to Chapter Tactics and Doctrines...especially doctrines. It has so many weapons that have automatically gained -1AP first turn and continues to add more damage when you shift to Tactical. No other marine vehicle comes close to matching the firepower. So, the test will be, was it warranted? Certainly no one is in a position right now to claim otherwise. We will have to see as the year progresses.
No, the Repulsor never wants to change out of Devastator Doctrine. Only the Storm Bolters and Grenade Launchers gain from Tactical, The Repulsor already has POTMS, so loses nothing by moving and firing. Far more of their volume of fire is Heavy X
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: I dunno "I don't wanna assmble a TFC" is a pretty good arguement
Are you kidding? That was one of my favorites. I imagine it's even better now that it's plastic. Super easy to paint.
For the record, the durability for the Land Raider isn't exactly terrible for the price. In an open field it'll get the cargo to its destination.
HOWEVER, with degrading movement outside Iron Hands (at least for a while anyway), not being able to go forward or shoot once charged by even a single Cuktist (the latter only being solved by Ultramarines), and not exactly carrying a lot of firepower, it leaves a lot to be desired. People would use the Spartan instead the previous two editions for quite a few reasons (with armored ceremite being one of them of course), and of course with the pricing on that it doesn't get used anymore.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Units need to be costed within the ally structure. Or, wait for them to be spammed in settings where data is collected. You need only raise the price till they are no longer spammed. GW goes overboard like with the flyrant triple nerf.
So you see the issue, but you think the fix should be rendering mono codex armies worse because the alliance system sucks ? I can't really say how head in the sand such a fix is. Especially when they already appear to notice the issue as they have been trying to slow roll fixes and nerfs to mix faction forces for awhile now. The latest codex being the ideal sign of that. If they keep pushing these changes to make it less attractive to mixed faction, and more rewarding to mono faction and fix the CPfubar they have going on, it'll be golden, without nerfs.
I have disagreed with a great many of the nerfs they rolled out. The only reason I at all agree with Gmans nerf is the fact that he unavoidably is factored into Marine costing, he's a monster they had to control or else make the only good marine lists Gman centric which sucks from a game play and fluff point of view. We will see what shakes out and if marines turn out better from it all, we'll see.
I disagree with the point raise on cultists as well, if you can dig through past stances. If your BA suck, it isn't Guards fault, as a lot of armies are better than BA, armies that function better without allies even. Look at some of the better nerfs you have seen, many of them are about limiting allies interactions with each other. Unless GW is dim they will start to see, allies make the game difficult to balance, especially with such a large pool of books in imperium armies. No amount of them nerfing Guard will make weaker armies any better, as guard arent the top right now. All you seem to do is want to be spiteful, even after acknowledging their cost isn't what knocks the game off course. I know you'll just respond with the same one sentence response but at some point you have to target the actual issues and not keep scape goating because Guard give you night terrors.
Now on topic of this post, the new marine book could be to blame for them being weaker. Though I don't think that'll be the case. We will need to see though, especially with how the changes alter actual game play and not just mental gymnastics. Until it shakes out, we just don't know for sure. Though we can all say one build to rule them all in a book is an issue to be dealt with, I just hope it shakes out better with the fixes in there.
Your both correct in that simplisticly Martel is correct when he says hoard infantry IG especially are too cheap, butnyour also correct in saying that it's more complex than that.
GW fundamentally fails or systematically undervalues time and time again the value of just having a model stand somewhere in 8th editions rules. This also contributes to a large part ibto why people feel Assualt armies don't work due to the requirements of movement and positioning.
Without this base value being set and then improved stats and abilities being costed on top of the basic value you end up with the mess that is 8th edition hoards, vastly different stats and power levels cosring effectively the same.
This was made even worse with GW's "Hot Fix" (actually makingnit worse) CP system changes which also rewards cheapest slot choices with a significant difference in CP generation.
The Marine's cidex shows the first step along the path to fixing aome of these issues with trying to balance 8th edition mono codex vrs souping. However untill they address the CP system I'm not entirely convinced that they have enough design space to improve certain codex's monobuild without making them the new Yannari.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
And LandRaiders are horribly priced.
Not really, but no one wants to risk taking them with knights kicking around.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can someone honestly explain to me why they think the Repulsor is overcosted? It's a landraider with more guns, fly, and all the other Repulsor crap. Plus it can transport Primaris. It's a Primaris LR. LR's are about 300pts, for just a bunch of lascannons and a SB. This thing should cost more than a landraider....
It should, but land raiders should be cheaper. You will lose games just from having such an expensive model with no invuln.
It should if it has the same transport effect as a Land Raider, which it doesn't. The models you'd put in a Repulsor vs a Land Raider aren't the same. The Primaris only restriction on the Repulsor hurts it. For another 2 days there isn't a SC you can stick in it for 1 slot. Most of the Primaris Infantry already have a shortcut across the board, or don't want to cross the board anyway. You're pretty much stuck at Aggressors and support characters - No Sternguard, No Termies, No Company Vets, no Cents, No Repair Marines - making the Repulsor being used to transport a fat juicy target destined to remind of you of the scene from Dances With Wolves - a bunch of space marines standing on top with their arms thrown back waiting for the bullet. As long as people bring enough AT shooting to down a Knight - Expensive Tanksports like the LR and Repulsor either need to be equally durable, or have a reason to make things shoot at them less, not more.
Overpriced because of knights in this case. If a land raider is fairly priced until the knight meta exists, then the issue isn't the price or you punish lists that aren't designed to kill multiple knights a turn. In an ideal world what should be happening is that knights are prevalent > people spam AT to handle knights > AT heavy lists can't handle hordes > hordes struggle to kill knights etc. so you end up with a series of hard counters that force the game to keep shifting as different stuff becomes flavour of the month and no 1 list is unable to be countered. For whatever reason this hasn't really been happening too much and the outlier is a combination of souping and knights as they plug a lot of natural holes in forces.
Ideally most mono-codex armies should be able to be built to handle anything, ie balanced lists, but that's just an ideal now I think.
Eldar- 4436 pts
