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.

So, I'll begin by saying I'm broadly happy that they buffed marines. I have zero interest in playing imperium (outside of sisters) but the fellows were genuinely struggling.

However, I am really not fond of the drop pod exception. There are a lot of factions who should have that kind of ability and when they said "hey, we should be able to DS turn 1" GW said no one, period dot, was going to be able to do that. It really feels pretty bad for drop pods to now break that rule completely and overtly.

Again, not a knock on drop pods (which were not good and heck might still not be great) or that marines, broadly, didn't need help. But this really feels like a jerk move given the very consistent story of "no turn 1 deepstrike".

did other factions have to spend an additional 80 points to basicly add deep strike to a unit?

Agreed, Drop Pods needed this to be even remotely viable. Now if GW can give this exception to the Webway Gate and it might see use too, other than just as a pretty terrain piece

-

BrianDavion wrote:
did other factions have to spend an additional 80 points to basicly add deep strike to a unit?

Or $40+?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

drakerocket wrote:

So, I'll begin by saying I'm broadly happy that they buffed marines. I have zero interest in playing imperium (outside of sisters) but the fellows were genuinely struggling.

However, I am really not fond of the drop pod exception. There are a lot of factions who should have that kind of ability and when they said "hey, we should be able to DS turn 1" GW said no one, period dot, was going to be able to do that. It really feels pretty bad for drop pods to now break that rule completely and overtly.

Again, not a knock on drop pods (which were not good and heck might still not be great) or that marines, broadly, didn't need help. But this really feels like a jerk move given the very consistent story of "no turn 1 deepstrike".

Perhaps GW thought "You know, we'd kinda like people to buy this $40+ model we make. What can we do about that? Hmmm.... Let's make it more useful."

No turn one DS should never have been a thing to start with.

BrianDavion wrote:
did other factions have to spend an additional 80 points to basicly add deep strike to a unit?

Yeah, kind of. To deepstrike two of my craftworlder units, I need 3 CP. A batallion requires 3 troops and gives me 5 CP. So 60% of the troop tax goes towards deepstriking. Instead of getting a semi-durable vehicle with a huge footprint, I get avengers or storm guardians or rangers. Which are all okay-to-good in their own right. Assuming I use triple rangers for my troops, I spend 180 points for the 5CP. 60% of 180 is 108.

So basically, I'm spending 108 points to deepstrike 2 units instead of 65 points (the current cost of drop pods; not 80) to deepstrike 10 models. And I get 15 rangers out of the deal instead of a toughness 6 hunk of metal with a huge footprint.

Rangers are great, but that doesn't seem like a jarringly imbalanced set of choices to me.

The new drop pod marines throw a bone to oldschool marines who, generally speaking, kind of needed something. I'm not sure I love this particular approach to making oldmarines or drop pods desirable, but it's an interesting attempt.

People are making too big a deal about this IMO. They still aren't going to be much good unless the points went down that im not aware of. SM still don't have much of anything worth spending 65 points to deepstrike, turn one or not.

So...uh...yeah? Tyranid Tyranocytes are very similar and can't do this. Nids certainly aren't rocking any tournaments sans perhaps as a bit of a support for GSC, much like marines. A lot of space marine stuff can deep strike on its own.

Like, the entire GSC army was based fundamentally around turn 1 deep strikes. That was 100% their central theme. GW said no one is going to do it regardless of cost, so we will do other things for you guys. Turning around and then giving drop pods of all things the ability to break what they said was an unbreakable rule is bad form.

Again, this isn't to say that drop pods were/are good. I said upfront I believe in and am happy for SM to get buffs. I am even happy for drop pods to get buffs (either in points costs or by other means). But this was supposed to be an unbreakable rule (they said as much) and now they've broken it. I think that is bad form.

As for $40 or whatever; look, a lot of people have gakky units. Ask everyone who thought wraithknights were slick cool models how much they are getting used. The cycle happens; I would like for drop pods to be solid things to use. But I don't think breaking a rule that applies to everyone else like this (when, again, they said it wouldn't get broken) is the good route to that.

drakerocket wrote:

Like, the entire GSC army was based fundamentally around turn 1 deep strikes. That was 100% their central theme. GW said no is going to do it regardless of cost, so we will do other things for you guys. Turning around and then giving drop pods of all things the ability to break what they said was an unbreakable rule is bad form.

Again, this isn't to say that drop pods were/are good. I said upfront I believe in and am happy for SM to get buffs. I am even happy for drop pods to get buffs (either in points costs or by other means). But this was supposed to be an unbreakable rule (they said as much) and now they've broken it. I think that is bad form.

Agreed. I'm not really against the changes to drop pods, but I do have a little marine envy at not having other similarly undesirable units buffed in a similar fashion. Maybe tyrannocites and webway gates will get similar buffs in a chapter approved or something.

This is fine. Drop pods being immobile is such a huge penalty in 8th edition that you're honestly spending points to make your opponent's army better. Seriously - being able to assault the drop pod, which doesn't really fight back, and so avoid lethal shooting is phenomenal.

But let's remember point #2 - Space Marine bolters really only start to get good on turn 2 when they can initiate the Tactical Doctrine now. If super-deadly bolters become a thing (which is possible with veterans), you'll likely have Space Marines choosing to wait until turn 2 to bring these pods in anyways.

So, really... I don't think this is a big deal.

It's largely irrelevant, between a ton of new infiltrators, rules benefiting units that come in a turn two and drop pods still being overpriced, you'll likely never see them outside of some cheesy go second strat.

Wyldhunt wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
did other factions have to spend an additional 80 points to basicly add deep strike to a unit?

Yeah, kind of. To deepstrike two of my craftworlder units, I need 3 CP. A batallion requires 3 troops and gives me 5 CP. So 60% of the troop tax goes towards deepstriking. Instead of getting a semi-durable vehicle with a huge footprint, I get avengers or storm guardians or rangers. Which are all okay-to-good in their own right. Assuming I use triple rangers for my troops, I spend 180 points for the 5CP. 60% of 180 is 108.

So basically, I'm spending 108 points to deepstrike 2 units instead of 65 points (the current cost of drop pods; not 80) to deepstrike 10 models. And I get 15 rangers out of the deal instead of a toughness 6 hunk of metal with a huge footprint.

Rangers are great, but that doesn't seem like a jarringly imbalanced set of choices to me.

The new drop pod marines throw a bone to oldschool marines who, generally speaking, kind of needed something. I'm not sure I love this particular approach to making oldmarines or drop pods desirable, but it's an interesting attempt.

You also get several more CP's, you get to deepstrike TWO units, not one for the cost you're comparing to deepstriking ONE unit And you get all those troop units. AND you get units of rangers. You're comparing the price of your total package - the troops, the CP's that matter but not the extra ones, and your units that will Deepstrike to the "upgrade" cost of only the drop pod that doesn't have much Dakka, can't move - and thus transport again, can't re-embark - and thus protect a unit, and can be virtually ignored once it's been used. To be honest the Drop Pod should have had enough weaponry to make it painful to ignore. Once it's deployed it's a giant immobile storm bolter that isn't worth shooting at. The weapons that can hurt it will get more bang for their buck shooting at virtually ANYTHING else.

Breton wrote:

You also get several more CP's, you get to deepstrike TWO units, not one for the cost you're comparing to deepstriking ONE unit And you get all those troop units. AND you get units of rangers. You're comparing the price of your total package - the troops, the CP's that matter but not the extra ones, and your units that will Deepstrike to the "upgrade" cost of only the drop pod that doesn't have much Dakka, can't move - and thus transport again, can't re-embark - and thus protect a unit, and can be virtually ignored once it's been used. To be honest the Drop Pod should have had enough weaponry to make it painful to ignore. Once it's deployed it's a giant immobile storm bolter that isn't worth shooting at. The weapons that can hurt it will get more bang for their buck shooting at virtually ANYTHING else.

Not sure I followed all of that. A couple of points though:
* A single droppod transports up to 10 models. So technically that 65 point cost transports up to 10 units, but more realistically it probably transports two 5-man squads or 1 squad and 1+ characters.

* I'm probably not deepstriking my troops (unless they're a ~200 point guardian blob at which point the effective points cost of deepstriking goes up more. So the price of the units being deepstruck is no more included in that 108 price tag than the cost of drop podding units are included in the cost of the drop pod itself.

* Admittedly, the troop tax of a batallion to pay for a stratagem is a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison. For a cleaner comparison look at the tyrannocite. Basically a drop pod, but also worse in many ways.

I'm not taking the stand that drop pods are secretly amazing or anything. I'm just saying, in response to BrianDavion's post, that other factions do in fact have to spend finite resources to deepstrike their units. And pointing out that the cost to do so is probably vaguely on par with the cost paid to drop pod units.

'Nids do it with tyrannocytes using points. Other factions generally use command points. A few things let you use special abilities. So depending on how many points you feel a command point or deepstriking special ability (think the Deceiver) functionally costs, that's how much other armies pay to deepstrike.


To play droppod's advocate for just a moment though...

* You point out that people don't usually want to shoot at them with heavy weapons. That actually makes them slightly better objective holders as a result.

* GW ruled that the doors are part of the model meaning a drop pod is actually a pretty large movement blocker.

* I feel like one of the biggest problems with drop pods is just what you put inside it. Marines don't have a ton of units that A.) don't already deepstrike, B.) are really scary specifically when they deepstrike, and C.) can fit into a drop pod. If I could stick, say, fire dragons inside of a drop pod for 65 points instead of using CP to do it, I'd strongly consider that option.

Conversly the drop pods size often also works against it if your trying to deploy it especially if your opening those doors.

The other thing is those CP arn't spent untill deployment, so you know the terrain and opponents list before committing to spending those CP, drop pods are points spent a list building.

That added flexibility is a cost that way too many player's undervalue constantly.

Wyldhunt wrote:

Not sure I followed all of that. A couple of points though:
* A single droppod transports up to 10 models. So technically that 65 point cost transports up to 10 units, but more realistically it probably transports two 5-man squads or 1 squad and 1+ characters.

You're with me so far. The Drop Pod is basically one unit - and you said the Stratagem allowed you to deep strike two. That means you'd have to either halve your cost, or double the SM cost.

* I'm probably not deepstriking my troops (unless they're a ~200 point guardian blob at which point the effective points cost of deepstriking goes up more. So the price of the units being deepstruck is no more included in that 108 price tag than the cost of drop podding units are included in the cost of the drop pod itself.

It is when you're trying to include the price you paid for those troops to generate the CP to fuel the stratagem. You're not including the cost SM have to pay to be battle forged and generate CP.

* Admittedly, the troop tax of a batallion to pay for a stratagem is a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison. For a cleaner comparison look at the tyrannocite. Basically a drop pod, but also worse in many ways.

I'm not taking the stand that drop pods are secretly amazing or anything. I'm just saying, in response to BrianDavion's post, that other factions do in fact have to spend finite resources to deepstrike their units. And pointing out that the cost to do so is probably vaguely on par with the cost paid to drop pod units.

'Nids do it with tyrannocytes using points. Other factions generally use command points. A few things let you use special abilities. So depending on how many points you feel a command point or deepstriking special ability (think the Deceiver) functionally costs, that's how much other armies pay to deepstrike.

Its especially apples to oranges when you divide that cost only on the CP, and not the other benefits. You didn't determine which fraction of your troop costs were paying for the CP Generation compared to which fraction of the troop costs was paid for a bunch of screens, shots, wounds, and etc, then determine which fraction of that fraction was your CP Generation used on the stratagem. Its not like you have to sacrifice X% of your troop models to power the stratagem, you still have them, they're still performing a function.

To play droppod's advocate for just a moment though...

* You point out that people don't usually want to shoot at them with heavy weapons. That actually makes them slightly better objective holders as a result.

No it doesnt. They're not objective secured, and they're model count 1. When you're ready to score the point, you charge it with two throw away models that also aren't objective secured (or even one that is), and you win. Until then, you can usually just ignore the shooting it does.

* GW ruled that the doors are part of the model meaning a drop pod is actually a pretty large movement blocker.

Not if you're charging it when you're done not caring about it. This, (mostly) not the points, or the turn 1 deep strike was the problem with a Drop Pod. All the comedic relief of "I'll shoot them with my Rhino" and none of the (continuing) movement around the covering terrain.

* I feel like one of the biggest problems with drop pods is just what you put inside it. Marines don't have a ton of units that A.) don't already deepstrike, B.) are really scary specifically when they deepstrike, and C.) can fit into a drop pod. If I could stick, say, fire dragons inside of a drop pod for 65 points instead of using CP to do it, I'd strongly consider that option.

I feel like one of the biggest problems is people keep treating it like a fire and forget Use Once object and they're OK with it. Swap that Storm Bolter for a twin linked assault cannon, or a tas-talon or something still "Bolter" ranged but with enough punch, or enough volume of fire to matter and things become different.

If I drop that pod on you on turn 1 - Storm Bolter gets 2 shots the first turn, and 4 per turn after (Rapid Fire 2 and the thing is literally immobile after the turn it drops) that's 22 shots for the entire game. 100% (-2 to save with Tactical Doctrine vs a 5+ GEQ Save) of 9.87558 wounds from 67% of 14.74 hits (67% of 22 shots) means the drop pod is statistically incapable of removing a 10 man guard squad sitting 4 inches away on an objective in a 6 turn game. And you didn't pay 150% of a Guard Squad's points to deepstrike 400% of a Guard Squad's points to kill a Guard Squad, so the unit that was in the Pod probably has other plans.

Statistically speaking, there is no reason to move the 10 man guard squad away from a Drop Pod that dropped on the same objective they're securing - At the end of the game, there will be a drop pod, and one badly mauled guardsman bleeding out but still alive on top of the objective. And the Guardsman gets to score the point(s). Give the Immobile Drop Pod a serious 24inch'ish threat weapon so it functions as a Dawn of War turret after the drop, and it starts looking viable. And Assault Marine gets deep strike AND 12" move for what, 2 points ? - a 10 man squad for 20? If I'm going to pay another 40+ for what's left over after the deep strike, it should at least make you think about doing something about it.

Just wanting to point out that deployed pods, ie with doors down, are basically a secured objective if they land directly on top of the objective. With the doors down no other unit can get within 3" of the objective. Not so useful for objectives in your opponents back field, but good for those no man's land objectives at the start.

Cheers

Andrew

Yes, they can. They can charge the pod, and win.

 AndrewC wrote:
Just wanting to point out that deployed pods, ie with doors down, are basically a secured objective if they land directly on top of the objective. With the doors down no other unit can get within 3" of the objective. Not so useful for objectives in your opponents back field, but good for those no man's land objectives at the start.

Cheers

Andrew

Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors. If i have more models than one there i control that objective. A model on a 25mm base can get within 3" of the objective, when it moves between drop pod doors, and stays 1.1" away from them.

 p5freak wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
Just wanting to point out that deployed pods, ie with doors down, are basically a secured objective if they land directly on top of the objective. With the doors down no other unit can get within 3" of the objective. Not so useful for objectives in your opponents back field, but good for those no man's land objectives at the start.

Cheers

Andrew

Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors. If i have more models than one there i control that objective.

And you can choose to attack with your fists instead of your normal melee weapon with minimum models in range to fight ensuring combat lasts as long as possible, meaning your unit can't be shot at while it holds the objective!

 Stux wrote:

And you can choose to attack with your fists instead of your normal melee weapon with minimum models in range to fight ensuring combat lasts as long as possible, meaning your unit can't be shot at while it holds the objective!

Great idea

 p5freak wrote:

Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors. If i have more models than one there i control that objective. A model on a 25mm base can get within 3" of the objective, when it moves between drop pod doors, and stays 1.1" away from them.

I respectfully disagree with that statement. The rules (barring a faq of which I am unaware or missed) Objective control has no interaction with combat and relies purely on model count within 3" of the centre of it. Charging the pod and reaching the doors do nothing to take control of that objective. I also disagree with your assertion that a 25mm base can get within 3" of the centre of an objective while remaining 1" away from the drop pod. Taking the base on its own, the radius from the centre is app 1 3/4", to the edge. There is no way you can get within the 3" without being within 1" of the model.

The reason why GSC can’t Deepstrike turn 1 is due to their rules, and how they can get easy charges with units that can wipe nearly any unit 8n a game in 1 round of combat. It’s because they can essentially win turn 1 with it. Marines whilst having some interesting and potent combos for this will not be a true ruin the game alpha strike.

Also, marines have been able to do drop pod assault for years, GSC are still new. Marines are the ICONIC force in the game for doing this and I’m glad they are back to be able to do so... they need the help.

 AndrewC wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors. If i have more models than one there i control that objective. A model on a 25mm base can get within 3" of the objective, when it moves between drop pod doors, and stays 1.1" away from them.

I respectfully disagree with that statement. The rules (barring a faq of which I am unaware or missed) Objective control has no interaction with combat and relies purely on model count within 3" of the centre of it. Charging the pod and reaching the doors do nothing to take control of that objective. I also disagree with your assertion that a 25mm base can get within 3" of the centre of an objective while remaining 1" away from the drop pod. Taking the base on its own, the radius from the centre is app 1 3/4", to the edge. There is no way you can get within the 3" without being within 1" of the model.

Charging allows you to get within 1" of the door, and thus within 1" of the center, and absolutely within 3" of the objective.


The part about close combat just meant that as long as they were clanging S4 combat knives off of T6 Drop Pod walls, other units can't shoot them because of the locked in close combat problem - not that it had any bearing on which group gets to control the objective.

Breton wrote:

Charging allows you to get within 1" of the door, and thus within 1" of the center, and absolutely within 3" of the objective.


The part about close combat just meant that as long as they were clanging S4 combat knives off of T6 Drop Pod walls, other units can't shoot them because of the locked in close combat problem - not that it had any bearing on which group gets to control the objective.

Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with. Does the DP still come with POTMS? I thought I heard somewhere that all POTMS can choose to explode rather than roll?

 AndrewC wrote:

Breton wrote:

Charging allows you to get within 1" of the door, and thus within 1" of the center, and absolutely within 3" of the objective.


The part about close combat just meant that as long as they were clanging S4 combat knives off of T6 Drop Pod walls, other units can't shoot them because of the locked in close combat problem - not that it had any bearing on which group gets to control the objective.

Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with. Does the DP still come with POTMS? I thought I heard somewhere that all POTMS can choose to explode rather than roll?

It was the first thing he wrote. You even quoted it.

 p5freak wrote:

Not true. I can charge the pod and get in contact with the doors.

I've never heard of anyone suggesting POTMS allows vehicles to commit suicide. No, the Drop Pod does not have POTMS, and I'm not sure if it ever did.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm also not even sure this is new, or if we just noticed it. I looked in my ebook and it has a Drop Pod Assault Rule that says at "the end of ANY of your movement phases..." {Emphasis mine) I would assume Turn 1 gives you a movement phase that would count as ANY of them

Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.

Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?

 AndrewC wrote:

Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols.

I suggest you read the rules. You cant shoot with pistols at enemy units which are within 1" of friendly models. Only the models which are 1" within enemy units can shoot with pistols. And they have to shoot the closest enemy model, which doesnt have to be from the enemy unit they are within 1". What unit is closest is determined on a model to model basis.

Models cannot target enemy units that
are within 1" of friendly models – the risk
of hitting your own troops is too great.

A model can fire a Pistol even if there are
enemy units within 1" of its own unit, but
it must target the closest enemy unit. In
such circumstances, the model can shoot
its Pistol even if other friendly units are
within 1" of the same enemy unit.

 Nazrak wrote:

Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.

Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?

I think that's close but not quite - and depends on how literal you are with the rules. Technically - a model with a pistol can fire it's pistol, but only ever at the closest unit and can still shoot if other friendly models within 1" of their target enemy unit. It's implied this is in addition to normal shooting and/or when the firing model/unit is within that 1" zone, but this isn't specified. Close Combat isn't required either, though it would be a rare case where models are within 1" of each other and not in close combat.

Breton wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.

Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?

I think that's close but not quite - and depends on how literal you are with the rules. Technically - a model with a pistol can fire it's pistol, but only ever at the closest unit and can still shoot if other friendly models within 1" of their target enemy unit. It's implied this is in addition to normal shooting and/or when the firing model/unit is within that 1" zone, but this isn't specified. Close Combat isn't required either, though it would be a rare case where models are within 1" of each other and not in close combat.

Yeah, unless I'm being really dense here, I can't really see any circumstances where you're going to be able to target a unit with pistols unless you're already in CC with that unit.

I'm wondering if the drop pod rule will extend to the FW pods. As a Chaos player, I'd like to take advantage of a T1 DS too.

 Nazrak wrote:

Breton wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

Stux wrote:
Which is not what he wrote. And, I realise that this may be nitpicking, yes other units can shoot your unit now locked in combat if they use pistols. Which, IIRRC, all marines come with.

Only if the unit with Pistols is also in combat with the unit attacking the Pod, right?

I think that's close but not quite - and depends on how literal you are with the rules. Technically - a model with a pistol can fire it's pistol, but only ever at the closest unit and can still shoot if other friendly models within 1" of their target enemy unit. It's implied this is in addition to normal shooting and/or when the firing model/unit is within that 1" zone, but this isn't specified. Close Combat isn't required either, though it would be a rare case where models are within 1" of each other and not in close combat.

Yeah, unless I'm being really dense here, I can't really see any circumstances where you're going to be able to target a unit with pistols unless you're already in CC with that unit.

The closest unit could still be several inches away, it’s fairly common to shoot the unit before you charge it. Not here of course, you don’t care if you kill the drop pod, and get defended if you don’t unless the other player comes over to counter charge you.