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.

And unsustainable. And counter to all human experience and history.

US mainline bomber in 1936 was the B-17, by 1956, you are looking at B-52s. That's 20 years. You can't sit that game out, no matter what GW says or claims.

Martel732 wrote:
It just doesn't happen enough in an actual war to make a difference. How did those German uber tanks work out for them? Slight advances aren't enough to overcome numbers, and marine tech seems pretty gakky actually.

The allies had far superior tech in Desert Storm. Not the best example. A single GENERATION can make a big difference, but there are many, many incremental improvement within a generation. One reason I say IoM's anti-tech model is actually impossible to maintain for 10K years.

To also be fair, the "German Uber Tanks" were decidedly less than uber, since while in possession of technically impressive paper stats, they didn't meet the operational and tactical requirements [not to mention that they often didn't work either]. The best German vehicles were the PZIV and the StuGIII; which were approximately comparable to the the Sherman and T-34.

Considering that the M1's and Bradleys were not only considerably more advanced than the monkey model Soviet stuff the Iraqi's had, they met the operational and tactical requirements, were supportable by the US logistical apparatus, and worked reliably, the same which cannot be said about the PZV and PZVIB.

However, the idea that a small number of warriors can defeat a greater enemy by fighting spirit and individual superiority is an idea that has been subscribed to by many, but only sometimes pans out, and arguably there are other factors at play too in such victories.

Martel732 wrote:
And unsustainable. And counter to all human experience and history.

US mainline bomber in 1936 was the B-17, by 1956, you are looking at B-52s. That's 20 years. You can't sit that game out, no matter what GW says or claims.

And 2019 and we still have B52, no matter what you says or claim. That's about 70 years already, and it is supposed to fly until 2050. One century.

 godardc wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And unsustainable. And counter to all human experience and history.

US mainline bomber in 1936 was the B-17, by 1956, you are looking at B-52s. That's 20 years. You can't sit that game out, no matter what GW says or claims.

And 2019 and we still have B52, no matter what you says or claim. That's about 70 years already, and it is supposed to fly until 2050. One century.

The B52 will rule the skies until our robot overlords take over...

ERJAK wrote:
The repulsor was never alive. It's better than it was thanks to doctrines, point drops, and IH tactic though.

Contemptors and Vendreds are not only still great options, but are better than they've been since 5th. Even standard dreadnaughts are useful if you don't have points for a vendred.

Am I the only one that noticed the Repulsor is now 215 points?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
The repulsor was never alive. It's better than it was thanks to doctrines, point drops, and IH tactic though.

Contemptors and Vendreds are not only still great options, but are better than they've been since 5th. Even standard dreadnaughts are useful if you don't have points for a vendred.

Am I the only one that noticed the Repulsor is now 215 points?

Nah people flipped their keyboards about it ages ago, same as when GW jacked the price on the executioner.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Azeroth wrote:
I just bought and assembled one of the warsuits and my only beef with them is that you have to choose which main weapon to build. They don't give you two of the elbow joints (like in the redemptor) so that you can change out the main weapon. Trying to rig something up is much more difficult. I'm not sure if GW thinks that people are really going to buy so many of these that they would buy 2 just so they can use each main weapon.

I built the flame weapon just because I really don't see myself ever use the long range one (just seems if I wanted a long range weapon on a dred that there are better options).

Other than the roll cage being extremely impractical on a dred, the model looks really good.

Hold up.

So you can't friction fit either of the main weapons like on the redemptor?

I also picked one up myself so I can confirm the kit only comes with one "elbow joint".

I over-trimmed the points so the elbow wouldn't hold at all, but the elbow ball is just thick enough to drill out a standard toothpick peg mount and the guns are hollow. Took me longer to put the bit in the pin vice than it did to actually drill the holes.

(Whatever else you can say about them I'm really glad GW went for all-plastic kits. Sooo much easier to work with.)

b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
The repulsor was never alive. It's better than it was thanks to doctrines, point drops, and IH tactic though.

Contemptors and Vendreds are not only still great options, but are better than they've been since 5th. Even standard dreadnaughts are useful if you don't have points for a vendred.

Am I the only one that noticed the Repulsor is now 215 points?

It was the first thing I noticed and many can attest it sent me on a literal ravenous tirade.

Martel732 wrote:
It just doesn't happen enough in an actual war to make a difference. How did those German uber tanks work out for them? Slight advances aren't enough to overcome numbers, and marine tech seems pretty gakky actually.

The allies had far superior tech in Desert Storm. Not the best example. A single GENERATION can make a big difference, but there are many, many incremental improvement within a generation. One reason I say IoM's anti-tech model is actually impossible to maintain for 10K years.

The german uber tanks didn't make much of a difference not just because of technology not mattering. Some of the high end tank designs such as the later variant panzers and the panther were exceptionally good tanks with little peer. Even the Tiger 1. However, some of the issues came with rushing too advanced tech out without proper testing in a rushed attempt to save the losing war. The german war machine was stopped by a simple game of numbers and lack of ability to maintain output. Not really the lack of ability of their tanks, but inability to fix them easily and keep making them to near enough of a number to matter. Couple that with being too over engineered for most to deal with on the fly, it was a desperate gamble at the least.

Other tech innovations might have changed things had they gotten them out sooner or in much greater numbers, the sooner being the first assault rifle, Jets, probably a great many more.

Like the first Jets, was a handful ever put into action and they dominated for the Axis where they engaged the enemy, they were so few in number and their tech edge made them impossible to replace and keep sustained with proper fuel or repairs. Tech and industry can go hand in hand with winning a war.

You're once more looking at real life logic and reason in a space opera battle of knights in space with power armor and big boomy guns fueled by religion and magic. The IoM sustains because it can for the story line, plot armor is stronger than any weapon.

Like the first Jets, was a handful ever put into action and they dominated for the Axis where they engaged the enemy, they were so few in number and their tech edge made them impossible to replace and keep sustained with proper fuel or repairs.

It didn't help that the ME-262 was criminally misused thanks to Hitler's insisting it be used as a bomber.

This too, but was a great many issues they had to deal with that led to systematic failure despite any positive tech gains.

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

I have come to the conclusion now that redemptors are a good choice if you're short on funds (a click together model is only £21) and you want a fluffy narrative army where one of your primaris warriors is now a dreadnought.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
There's nothing technically wrong with a redemptor, it is still a T7 13 wound walking boom tomb, but it's now not quite so "now"

"Brother Machius is critically injured, my Lord. We must get his remaining torso, left arm, and top half of his face interred into a Dreadnough Sarcophagi to preserve his years of experience and loyalty!"

"Agreed Apothecary Healus Maximus, inform the 10th Company master to prepare a new wave of recruits to replace our fallen Brother. Give them each a pistol and a knife and have them sneak into the enemy camp and hope for the best. No helmets."

"As you command!"

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
"Brother Machius is critically injured, my Lord. We must get his remaining torso, left arm, and top half of his face interred into a Dreadnough Sarcophagi to preserve his years of experience and loyalty!"

"Agreed Apothecary Healus Maximus, inform the 10th Company master to prepare a new wave of recruits to replace our fallen Brother. Give them each a pistol and a knife and have them sneak into the enemy camp and hope for the best. No helmets."

"As you command!"

It's a Marine training ritual. During their first battle most of them will go bald. Those who keep their hair are destined for greatness. Perhaps even being a protagonist one day.

AngryAngel80 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It just doesn't happen enough in an actual war to make a difference. How did those German uber tanks work out for them? Slight advances aren't enough to overcome numbers, and marine tech seems pretty gakky actually.

The allies had far superior tech in Desert Storm. Not the best example. A single GENERATION can make a big difference, but there are many, many incremental improvement within a generation. One reason I say IoM's anti-tech model is actually impossible to maintain for 10K years.

The german uber tanks didn't make much of a difference not just because of technology not mattering. Some of the high end tank designs such as the later variant panzers and the panther were exceptionally good tanks with little peer. Even the Tiger 1. However, some of the issues came with rushing too advanced tech out without proper testing in a rushed attempt to save the losing war. The german war machine was stopped by a simple game of numbers and lack of ability to maintain output. Not really the lack of ability of their tanks, but inability to fix them easily and keep making them to near enough of a number to matter. Couple that with being too over engineered for most to deal with on the fly, it was a desperate gamble at the least.

Other tech innovations might have changed things had they gotten them out sooner or in much greater numbers, the sooner being the first assault rifle, Jets, probably a great many more.

Like the first Jets, was a handful ever put into action and they dominated for the Axis where they engaged the enemy, they were so few in number and their tech edge made them impossible to replace and keep sustained with proper fuel or repairs. Tech and industry can go hand in hand with winning a war.

You're once more looking at real life logic and reason in a space opera battle of knights in space with power armor and big boomy guns fueled by religion and magic. The IoM sustains because it can for the story line, plot armor is stronger than any weapon.

40ks story is poor, and far exceeds my plot armor tolerance. A little plot armor is often necessary, but 40k is way over the top.

Its not even a good space opera compared to something like babylon 5 or the expanse.

 godardc wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

Well just look that the humble bullet. The method for launching a projectile at high speeds really hasn't changed much. Just the targeting systems have changed. Eventually a tech peaks and you just can't improve upon it anymore. Leaps in tech often require a new discovery. Like - the wing or rocket power.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

Well just look that the humble bullet. The method for launching a projectile at high speeds really hasn't changed much. Just the targeting systems have changed. Eventually a tech peaks and you just can't improve upon it anymore. Leaps in tech often require a new discovery. Like - the wing or rocket power.

That's not really true. We have a plethora of different ammo types, and leaving out the slugs, hollow points, buckshot, and fragmentation rounds that everyone has heard of there's some pretty advanced stuff out there. The military actually developed an honest to G-d explosive bullet that operates like a micro-frag grenade. Set the timer and the buller explodes in mid-air to take out targets hidding inside building. It's almost literally a Bolter round. The reason you don't hear about it much is that it's something only a sniper would be using since a) setting the timer is fiddly as hell and b) they're too expensive for mass deployment.

The Newman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

Well just look that the humble bullet. The method for launching a projectile at high speeds really hasn't changed much. Just the targeting systems have changed. Eventually a tech peaks and you just can't improve upon it anymore. Leaps in tech often require a new discovery. Like - the wing or rocket power.

That's not really true. We have a plethora of different ammo types, and leaving out the slugs, hollow points, buckshot, and fragmentation rounds that everyone has heard of there's some pretty advanced stuff out there. The military actually developed an honest to G-d explosive bullet that operates like a micro-frag grenade. Set the timer and the buller explodes in mid-air to take out targets hidding inside building. It's almost literally a Bolter round. The reason you don't hear about it much is that it's something only a sniper would be using since a) setting the timer is fiddly as hell and b) they're too expensive for mass deployment.

The projectiles might change. The method for launching them doesn't change much. It's still a chemical reaction using the same kinds of compounds getting about the same overall force to launch a projectile.

You ask this like dreads have ever been worth taking. Dreadnoughts haven't been more then a 4fun unit since at least 5th edition, and even then it was only GK rifleman dreads that were good.

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

Well just look that the humble bullet. The method for launching a projectile at high speeds really hasn't changed much. Just the targeting systems have changed. Eventually a tech peaks and you just can't improve upon it anymore. Leaps in tech often require a new discovery. Like - the wing or rocket power.

That's not really true. We have a plethora of different ammo types, and leaving out the slugs, hollow points, buckshot, and fragmentation rounds that everyone has heard of there's some pretty advanced stuff out there. The military actually developed an honest to G-d explosive bullet that operates like a micro-frag grenade. Set the timer and the buller explodes in mid-air to take out targets hidding inside building. It's almost literally a Bolter round. The reason you don't hear about it much is that it's something only a sniper would be using since a) setting the timer is fiddly as hell and b) they're too expensive for mass deployment.

The projectiles might change. The method for launching them doesn't change much. It's still a chemical reaction using the same kinds of compounds getting about the same overall force to launch a projectile.

That's like saying there is no difference between a stone knife and a chainsword, because the arm that swings them hasn't changed.

I don't think this constitutes thread necromancy since it's only 11 days old, I'm curious if people's opinions have changed now that the Invictus has been out for a while.

It hasn't displaced Dreadnaughts in my lists, but what I do see it putting the final nail in on for me is the Predator. T6 W13 isn't much flimsier that T7 W11, it's cheaper for a similar gun load, and it's not a useless lump if it winds up in melee. I honestly kind of hope that the Invictor winds up as the basic "tank-chassis" model for Primaris marines instead of the Impulsor, it would make for a very distinctive army.

The Newman wrote:
I don't think this constitutes thread necromancy since it's only 11 days old, I'm curious if people's opinions have changed now that the Invictus has been out for a while.

It hasn't displaced Dreadnaughts in my lists, but what I do see it putting the final nail in on for me is the Predator. T6 W13 isn't much flimsier that T7 W11, it's cheaper for a similar gun load, and it's not a useless lump if it winds up in melee. I honestly kind of hope that the Invictor winds up as the basic "tank-chassis" model for Primaris marines instead of the Impulsor, it would make for a very distinctive army.

predators can have quite a bit more heavy firepower though can't it? Invictor's proably the superior unit for clearing infantry, but for popping tanks, a Las pred (or a ajutocanon+las sponsons) is PROABLY still better yeah?

The LasPredator is a better AT platform but it's also significantly more expensive. The Invictor is better compared to the dakka Predator, and it's superior in several ways.

The Newman wrote:
I don't think this constitutes thread necromancy since it's only 11 days old, I'm curious if people's opinions have changed now that the Invictus has been out for a while.

It hasn't displaced Dreadnaughts in my lists, but what I do see it putting the final nail in on for me is the Predator. T6 W13 isn't much flimsier that T7 W11, it's cheaper for a similar gun load, and it's not a useless lump if it winds up in melee. I honestly kind of hope that the Invictor winds up as the basic "tank-chassis" model for Primaris marines instead of the Impulsor, it would make for a very distinctive army.

The Impulsor already is the tank chassis. The Invictor doesn't replace either the Dread or the Predator. It can fill in for either, but realistically has it's own place. The Invictor's appeal comes in the psychological factor, the pressure placed on the opponent with the shortcutting walker with a power fist.

Making me pull up the dex, dang kids.

Ironhail AC Invictor vs Dakka Pred:

Invictor is slightly less resilient vs plasma and ACs; dedicated anti-tank, like lascannons, meltas, and similar, wound both at the same rate. Invictor has more wounds with the same save.

On to weapons: the dakka pred AC has a variable shot gun, that does more damage/ wound. But the Iron hail AC always fires 6 shots.

Vs T7, Mathhammer averages, starting with Pred:
4 shots, hitting 2.666 times vs 6 hots, hitting 4.
2.666 hits wounding 1.333 times vs 4 hits wounding 2.
1.333 wounds .666 getting through vs 2 wounds 1 getting through.
.666 times 3 damage = 2 damage vs 1 wound time 2 damage = 2 damage.

They are equal on average.

So we have secondary guns: 2 heavy bolters vs 1 heavy bolter + 2 ironhail stubbers + fragstorm grenades. The predator simply goes with quality over quantity, but the invictor's quantity helps balance this out; double the lower str shots (if outside 18" range) should about even out the average hits, but invictor can be within 18" first turn, adding just that slight edge on secondary weapon damage.

Our last 2 factors: cost and FOC slot.

Invictor is 9 pts cheaper but in a fairly crowded, yet expanded FOC.

Reality: Dakka pread is not the best build to begin with, but while on average the main guns are equal, the dakka pred has a potential damage output far greater than the Invictor at range. The points disparity from what we "should" see is evened out by the invictor able to dish out some decent damage in the fight phase.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
You ask this like dreads have ever been worth taking. Dreadnoughts haven't been more then a 4fun unit since at least 5th edition, and even then it was only GK rifleman dreads that were good.

The leviathan dread is pretty good especially in an IH army, I have a feeling they will be very popular.

I would really like to see all walkers get some sort of special bonus that differentiates them from tanks. Back in the day they could fight in CC and had less movement restrictions.

I.E. currently vehicles cannot go beyond the first floor of a building, why not walkers? It wouldnt have to be a universal rule either, just a rule tacked onto walkers "Agile Walker: Unit moves in the same manner as infantry"

Breton wrote:

The Newman wrote:
I don't think this constitutes thread necromancy since it's only 11 days old, I'm curious if people's opinions have changed now that the Invictus has been out for a while.

It hasn't displaced Dreadnaughts in my lists, but what I do see it putting the final nail in on for me is the Predator. T6 W13 isn't much flimsier that T7 W11, it's cheaper for a similar gun load, and it's not a useless lump if it winds up in melee. I honestly kind of hope that the Invictor winds up as the basic "tank-chassis" model for Primaris marines instead of the Impulsor, it would make for a very distinctive army.

The Impulsor already is the tank chassis. The Invictor doesn't replace either the Dread or the Predator. It can fill in for either, but realistically has it's own place. The Invictor's appeal comes in the psychological factor, the pressure placed on the opponent with the shortcutting walker with a power fist.

The Invictor can't be the basic "tank chassis" model yet, nothing is based on it. If anything deserves that title right now for Primaris it's the Repulsor since it's the only thing has an official variant. What I was saying was that I hope that when GW does start releasing cheaper vehicle variants for Primaris that most of them are based on the Redemptor/Invictor kit (I suppose technically the Invictor is based on the Redemptor kit...) and not the Impulsor, partly because I never liked the old "we based a bunch of our main fighting vehicles on a cheap transport" paradigm and partly because I think walkers are a lot more interesting.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
...Of some note, neither of the Primaris dreads has any antitank options...

Plasma Redemptor? d6 2-damage shots is roughly equivalent to 2 d6-damage shots from a twin lascannon. Melee? Someone was testing Space Wolf Invictors at my FLGS yesterday and the WS 2+/5A on the charge certainly tore holes in my Custodians.

Just want to point out that RAW, space wolves invictor tactical warsuits DO NOT benefit from the Space Wolves, Blood Angels, or Dark Angels faction traits as invictors are ONLY vehicles and warsuits; the traits ONLY apply to INFANTRY, CAVALRY, and DREADNOUGHTS... so, pack brothers, we must wait until GW updates this...

So your opponent should not had been doing this to your custodes.