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.

A.T. wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
After three turns, there are 18.5 Intercessors (314.5 points) left.
There are 26.91 CSM (296.01) left.

That is surprisingly respectable given that the Intercessors got the first turn and faced no multi-damage weapons.

Alright, give me a loadout to face 30 Bolt Rifle Intercessors. I'll run the math.

A 20 point differential of remaining units after the Primaris went first is indeed respectable, especially after 3 turns.

So the game is pretty balanced after all of it would seem.

 Ishagu wrote:
A 20 point differential of remaining units after the Primaris went first is indeed respectable, especially after 3 turns.

So the game is pretty balanced after all of it would seem.

...

No. No it's not. Because the scenario is heavily tilted in favor of the CSM, and it STILL didn't work in their favor.

Hell, just adding morale adds another few casualties turn one to the CSM, while leaving the Intercessors untouched!

It really isn't some staggering disparity I'm afraid to say. If one was wiped out by the other, or suffered 50% more casualties than maybe.

Now if you throw in some damage 2 weapons those Chaos Marines are suddenly far more durable by comparison.

How do 30 Intercessors fare against a double gattling chaos Knight after 3 turns compared to 50 Chaos Marines?

Surely the elite Intercessors would still win?

 Ishagu wrote:
It really isn't some staggering disparity I'm afraid to say. If one was wiped out by the other, or suffered 50% more casualties than maybe.

Now if you throw in some damage 2 weapons those Chaos Marines are suddenly far more durable by comparison.

Great-give me a loadout. I'll run the math.

Edit: I'll use a 68-point 5-Man CSM squad with Combibolter on the Champ and Plasma on one guy. 7 of them are 476 points, so I'll add 3 spare bodies, making them 509 points.

I will give the CSM first turn, but start them 31" away. They might deploy on the line, but Intercessors won't. I will, however, IGNORE the risk of overcharging.



The math now looks like:

353.6 points of Intercessors remain.
110.44 points of CSM remain.

No subfaction traits were in use this time.

Assuming we're not pretending morale doesn't exist, the double gatling knight wipes about 9.6 (round it to 10) CSM per turn, and 8 Intercessors per turn, morale being the principle difference. 110pts vs 136pts. Does not seem to be a particularly glaring weakness such as to warrant the intercessors getting the entire doctrine+superdoctrine system, at least IMO.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Next shall we prove that khorne bezekers are the weakest unit in the entire game and hellblasters are OP because if you line them up 12" away from hellblasters and they shoot for 3 turns, the hellblasters kill like 10x more points of khorne bezerkers?

Or are we not pretending it's odd that we've set up a scenario whereby an army with a close-combat doctrine is set up against an army with a "stay 12" or farther away from me" doctrine, they stand farther than 12" away and shoot, and the close-combat doctrine force wins?

the_scotsman wrote:
Assuming we're not pretending morale doesn't exist, the double gatling knight wipes about 9.6 (round it to 10) CSM per turn, and 8 Intercessors per turn, morale being the principle difference. 110pts vs 136pts. Does not seem to be a particularly glaring weakness such as to warrant the intercessors getting the entire doctrine+superdoctrine system, at least IMO.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Next shall we prove that khorne bezekers are the weakest unit in the entire game and hellblasters are OP because if you line them up 12" away from hellblasters and they shoot for 3 turns, the hellblasters kill like 10x more points of khorne bezerkers?

Or are we not pretending it's odd that we've set up a scenario whereby an army with a close-combat doctrine is set up against an army with a "stay 12" or farther away from me" doctrine, they stand farther than 12" away and shoot, and the close-combat doctrine force wins?

Does that include a FNP, from either Iron Hands or an Apothecary that's been upgraded?

The direct vs. model is flawed anyways. It's not a very useful metric. This is the same metric where I "proved" that Tacticals were better point for point than Dark Reapers at the height of Dark Reaper spam.

 JNAProductions wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Assuming we're not pretending morale doesn't exist, the double gatling knight wipes about 9.6 (round it to 10) CSM per turn, and 8 Intercessors per turn, morale being the principle difference. 110pts vs 136pts. Does not seem to be a particularly glaring weakness such as to warrant the intercessors getting the entire doctrine+superdoctrine system, at least IMO.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Next shall we prove that khorne bezekers are the weakest unit in the entire game and hellblasters are OP because if you line them up 12" away from hellblasters and they shoot for 3 turns, the hellblasters kill like 10x more points of khorne bezerkers?

Or are we not pretending it's odd that we've set up a scenario whereby an army with a close-combat doctrine is set up against an army with a "stay 12" or farther away from me" doctrine, they stand farther than 12" away and shoot, and the close-combat doctrine force wins?

Does that include a FNP, from either Iron Hands or an Apothecary that's been upgraded?

no. The more variables you add to an example, the more misleading it becomes. For example, this is already a misleading example - the gatling cannon is ideally chosen as a perfect anti-primaris weapon. Even so, just making the primaris IH with a 6+ FNP would instantly turn even that ideal situation in their favor.

Ishagu wrote:And Chaos get nothing?

No Bolter rules? No Veterans? No great rules for Legions like Alpha Legion or Night Lords?

Night Lords got some good strategems in pa. Less than loyalists have without pa. Our trait is still next to useless, and still only affects infantry, bikers, and dreadnoughts.

JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
It really isn't some staggering disparity I'm afraid to say. If one was wiped out by the other, or suffered 50% more casualties than maybe.

Now if you throw in some damage 2 weapons those Chaos Marines are suddenly far more durable by comparison.

Great-give me a loadout. I'll run the math.

Edit: I'll use a 68-point 5-Man CSM squad with Combibolter on the Champ and Plasma on one guy. 7 of them are 476 points, so I'll add 3 spare bodies, making them 509 points.

I will give the CSM first turn, but start them 31" away. They might deploy on the line, but Intercessors won't. I will, however, IGNORE the risk of overcharging.

Spoiler:

CSM T1
No damage-they either move up and get blasted with Rapid Fire, or stand still and never get any closer. I will assume they move with Advance to 23".

SM T1 (Dev Doctrine)
60 shots
40 hits
20 wounds
10 failed saves
28 CSM remain with 5 Plasma Guns

CSM T2
56 Bolt and 5 Plasma shots
37.33 Bolt and 3.33 Plasma hits
18.67 Bolt and 2.78 Plasma wounds
6.22 Bolt and 5.56 Plasma damage
24.11 Intercessors remain

SM T2 (Tac Doctrine)
48.22 shots
32.15 hits
16.08 wounds
10.72 failed saves
17.28 CSM remain with 3 Plasma Guns

CSM T3
34.56 Bolt and 3 Plasma shots
23.04 Bolt and 2 Plasma hits
11.52 Bolt and 1.67 Plasma wounds
3.84 Bolt and 2.78 Plasma damage
20.8 Intercessors remain

SM T3 (Tac Doctrine)
41.6 shots
27.73 hits
13.87 wounds
9.24 failed saves
8.04 CSM remain with 2 Plasma Guns

The math now looks like:

353.6 points of Intercessors remain.
110.44 points of CSM remain.

No subfaction traits were in use this time.

In other words, this is what you'd get with any legion besides Alpha Legion, because they have the only useful trait.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Ishagu wrote:And Chaos get nothing?

No Bolter rules? No Veterans? No great rules for Legions like Alpha Legion or Night Lords?
Night Lords got some good strategems in pa. Less than loyalists have without pa. Our trait is still next to useless, and still only affects infantry, bikers, and dreadnoughts.

JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
It really isn't some staggering disparity I'm afraid to say. If one was wiped out by the other, or suffered 50% more casualties than maybe.

Now if you throw in some damage 2 weapons those Chaos Marines are suddenly far more durable by comparison.

Great-give me a loadout. I'll run the math.

Edit: I'll use a 68-point 5-Man CSM squad with Combibolter on the Champ and Plasma on one guy. 7 of them are 476 points, so I'll add 3 spare bodies, making them 509 points.

I will give the CSM first turn, but start them 31" away. They might deploy on the line, but Intercessors won't. I will, however, IGNORE the risk of overcharging.

Spoiler:

CSM T1
No damage-they either move up and get blasted with Rapid Fire, or stand still and never get any closer. I will assume they move with Advance to 23".

SM T1 (Dev Doctrine)
60 shots
40 hits
20 wounds
10 failed saves
28 CSM remain with 5 Plasma Guns

CSM T2
56 Bolt and 5 Plasma shots
37.33 Bolt and 3.33 Plasma hits
18.67 Bolt and 2.78 Plasma wounds
6.22 Bolt and 5.56 Plasma damage
24.11 Intercessors remain

SM T2 (Tac Doctrine)
48.22 shots
32.15 hits
16.08 wounds
10.72 failed saves
17.28 CSM remain with 3 Plasma Guns

CSM T3
34.56 Bolt and 3 Plasma shots
23.04 Bolt and 2 Plasma hits
11.52 Bolt and 1.67 Plasma wounds
3.84 Bolt and 2.78 Plasma damage
20.8 Intercessors remain

SM T3 (Tac Doctrine)
41.6 shots
27.73 hits
13.87 wounds
9.24 failed saves
8.04 CSM remain with 2 Plasma Guns

The math now looks like:

353.6 points of Intercessors remain.
110.44 points of CSM remain.

No subfaction traits were in use this time.

In other words, this is what you'd get with any legion besides Alpha Legion, because they have the only useful trait.

Shockingly, Black Legion actually would provide some benefit here!

They could advance and shoot T1, at a -1 hit penalty. But... That's not nearly enough to make a difference.

the_scotsman wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Assuming we're not pretending morale doesn't exist, the double gatling knight wipes about 9.6 (round it to 10) CSM per turn, and 8 Intercessors per turn, morale being the principle difference. 110pts vs 136pts. Does not seem to be a particularly glaring weakness such as to warrant the intercessors getting the entire doctrine+superdoctrine system, at least IMO.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Next shall we prove that khorne bezekers are the weakest unit in the entire game and hellblasters are OP because if you line them up 12" away from hellblasters and they shoot for 3 turns, the hellblasters kill like 10x more points of khorne bezerkers?

Or are we not pretending it's odd that we've set up a scenario whereby an army with a close-combat doctrine is set up against an army with a "stay 12" or farther away from me" doctrine, they stand farther than 12" away and shoot, and the close-combat doctrine force wins?

Does that include a FNP, from either Iron Hands or an Apothecary that's been upgraded?

no. The more variables you add to an example, the more misleading it becomes. For example, this is already a misleading example - the gatling cannon is ideally chosen as a perfect anti-primaris weapon. Even so, just making the primaris IH with a 6+ FNP would instantly turn even that ideal situation in their favor.

I think that actually works the opposite to what you're trying to say, that an army who paid points for an expensive and fragile upgrade firing at their prime targets are negated be your opponent going "oh they're Iron hands today" with no further cost or input is disproportionate.

Edit: ignore me, I thought you meant chaincannon, swapping between different units in your posts is confusing!

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Ishagu wrote:And Chaos get nothing?

No Bolter rules? No Veterans? No great rules for Legions like Alpha Legion or Night Lords?
Night Lords got some good strategems in pa. Less than loyalists have without pa. Our trait is still next to useless, and still only affects infantry, bikers, and dreadnoughts.

JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
It really isn't some staggering disparity I'm afraid to say. If one was wiped out by the other, or suffered 50% more casualties than maybe.

Now if you throw in some damage 2 weapons those Chaos Marines are suddenly far more durable by comparison.

Great-give me a loadout. I'll run the math.

Edit: I'll use a 68-point 5-Man CSM squad with Combibolter on the Champ and Plasma on one guy. 7 of them are 476 points, so I'll add 3 spare bodies, making them 509 points.

I will give the CSM first turn, but start them 31" away. They might deploy on the line, but Intercessors won't. I will, however, IGNORE the risk of overcharging.

Spoiler:

CSM T1
No damage-they either move up and get blasted with Rapid Fire, or stand still and never get any closer. I will assume they move with Advance to 23".

SM T1 (Dev Doctrine)
60 shots
40 hits
20 wounds
10 failed saves
28 CSM remain with 5 Plasma Guns

CSM T2
56 Bolt and 5 Plasma shots
37.33 Bolt and 3.33 Plasma hits
18.67 Bolt and 2.78 Plasma wounds
6.22 Bolt and 5.56 Plasma damage
24.11 Intercessors remain

SM T2 (Tac Doctrine)
48.22 shots
32.15 hits
16.08 wounds
10.72 failed saves
17.28 CSM remain with 3 Plasma Guns

CSM T3
34.56 Bolt and 3 Plasma shots
23.04 Bolt and 2 Plasma hits
11.52 Bolt and 1.67 Plasma wounds
3.84 Bolt and 2.78 Plasma damage
20.8 Intercessors remain

SM T3 (Tac Doctrine)
41.6 shots
27.73 hits
13.87 wounds
9.24 failed saves
8.04 CSM remain with 2 Plasma Guns

The math now looks like:

353.6 points of Intercessors remain.
110.44 points of CSM remain.

No subfaction traits were in use this time.

In other words, this is what you'd get with any legion besides Alpha Legion, because they have the only useful trait.

Shockingly, Black Legion actually would provide some benefit here!

They could advance and shoot T1, at a -1 hit penalty. But... That's not nearly enough to make a difference.

What Black Legion actually came in usefull for once

I know, shocking!

 JNAProductions wrote:
I know, shocking!

I mean i'd given more credit to wb then bl trait wise .

Otoh all this math showed is that csm are not fun against ap1 .

I also rekon that the math wouldn't nearly Turn out as decisive if you'd Run nearly all other troop choices..

Not Online!!! wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
I know, shocking!

I mean i'd given more credit to wb then bl trait wise .

Otoh all this math showed is that csm are not fun against ap1 .

I also rekon that the math wouldn't nearly Turn out as decisive if you'd Run nearly all other troop choices..

The new ap/armour save and cover system is what ruined the meq stat line in 8th. In previous editions the equivalent of ap1 was no more powerful against meq than ap0. No longer.

Loyalists have been given upgrades to help make them feel elite again, but for csm and elite xenos factions our infantry no longer feel as they should.

Until gw addresses that problem the salt shall flow.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
I know, shocking!

I mean i'd given more credit to wb then bl trait wise .

Otoh all this math showed is that csm are not fun against ap1 .

I also rekon that the math wouldn't nearly Turn out as decisive if you'd Run nearly all other troop choices..

The new ap/armour save and cover system is what ruined the meq stat line in 8th. In previous editions the equivalent of ap1 was no more powerful against meq than ap0. No longer.

Loyalists have been given upgrades to help make them feel elite again, but for csm and elite xenos factions our infantry no longer feel as they should.

Until gw addresses that problem the salt shall flow.

This ^^^^^

Although I'll say they "fixed" the loyalists in poor ways. Marines are not supposed to be glass cannons.

You're right Martel, they're not. Under the old system marines were mobile because they didn't care about cover until ap3 or better showed up. That meant they played different than guardsmen who hugged cover because it gave them a guaranteed save. Now cover benefits units with a 3+ save more than geq units, so it only contributes to the problem of marine gun lines and castles. It helps turn marines into tau.

This problem CSM has is partially why BA have become codex: tripoint. We can only survive the shooting phase if we are illegal targets.

Likewise, there is no excuse for chaos infused death machines to be so easily dispatched. The stalker bolt rife and Tau D3 damage spam (with ways to boost AP of course) make even plague marines easily dispatched.

I don't understand what GW is going for anymore.

I'd argue that cult marines should have 3 wounds at this point. This means we need to give custodes 5 wounds, though. This is just to get these units back to a level of respect. Of course this means a direct lascannon hit only kills them two thirds of the time, which doesn't seem right, either. It's a LASCANNON.

Again, I don't know what they are doing.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
I know, shocking!

I mean i'd given more credit to wb then bl trait wise .

Otoh all this math showed is that csm are not fun against ap1 .

I also rekon that the math wouldn't nearly Turn out as decisive if you'd Run nearly all other troop choices..

The new ap/armour save and cover system is what ruined the meq stat line in 8th. In previous editions the equivalent of ap1 was no more powerful against meq than ap0. No longer.

Loyalists have been given upgrades to help make them feel elite again, but for csm and elite xenos factions our infantry no longer feel as they should.

Until gw addresses that problem the salt shall flow.

It has way more to do with volume of fire than AP and cover. Cover actually benefits marines more compared to 7th etc. Like I was saying before, volume of fire became the anti-horde instead of morale and templates. The problem is volume of fire works against everything, even moreso because of the new wounding table.

MOAR dice.

Insectum7 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
I know, shocking!

I mean i'd given more credit to wb then bl trait wise .

Otoh all this math showed is that csm are not fun against ap1 .

I also rekon that the math wouldn't nearly Turn out as decisive if you'd Run nearly all other troop choices..

The new ap/armour save and cover system is what ruined the meq stat line in 8th. In previous editions the equivalent of ap1 was no more powerful against meq than ap0. No longer.

Loyalists have been given upgrades to help make them feel elite again, but for csm and elite xenos factions our infantry no longer feel as they should.

Until gw addresses that problem the salt shall flow.

It has way more to do with volume of fire than AP and cover. Cover actually benefits marines more compared to 7th etc. Like I was saying before, volume of fire became the anti-horde instead of morale and templates. The problem is volume of fire works against everything, even moreso because of the new wounding table.

Agreed on your points on volume of fire and the new wounding table.

The problem with the new cover and save/ap mechanics is how it changes how marines are played as I stated in my reply to Martel above. Meq units shouldn't benefit from cover more than geq. Unfortunately that's exactly what the new system does.

Cover should be a flat bonus independent of armor type. It should apply to all models evenly. Like light cover blocks 20% of all fire, and heavy blocks 40%. Then everything else is the same. That way, it's even for everyone.

Martel732 wrote:
Cover should be a flat bonus independent of armor type. It should apply to all models evenly. Like light cover blocks 20% of all fire, and heavy blocks 40%. Then everything else is the same. That way, it's even for everyone.

You mean like the old cover system?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Cover should be a flat bonus independent of armor type. It should apply to all models evenly. Like light cover blocks 20% of all fire, and heavy blocks 40%. Then everything else is the same. That way, it's even for everyone.

You mean like the old cover system?

The old cover system often didn't give any benefit to marines, though. To do what Martel is saying you'd need an extra die roll.

I get what you're saying about the old system encouraging more marine movement though, that was often a point I'd bring up in it's favor. That said, there are a whole host of contributing factors, Bolter Discipline being an obvious one.

Edit2: I have to point out that this isn't much of a problem with classics though, which I use exclusively. Despite Bolter Discipline I still have to maneuver my Plasma into range, so I'm usually not camping with my Tacticals, etc. Intercessors only have "bolters", so their less incentivised to scoot about. Prior to Bolter Discipline being a thing I was advocating an extra shot per range band for bolters (so 3 at 12" and 2 at 24") which would have kept the incentive to move more, but obviously add even MOAR dice. I suppose you could just go with an extra shot in the close band, and keep only 1 at 24" for 3/1 Bolters. That Imo would be plenty of incentive to get out of camp, as well as not poop so hard on Tau Pulse Rifles.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Cover should be a flat bonus independent of armor type. It should apply to all models evenly. Like light cover blocks 20% of all fire, and heavy blocks 40%. Then everything else is the same. That way, it's even for everyone.

You mean like the old cover system?

No. Because it disproportionately helped weak armor. A flat percentage is even.

Not a die roll. Just some math. 10 hits becomes 8 hits in light cover.

Martel732 wrote:

Not a die roll. Just some math. 10 hits becomes 8 hits in light cover.

And if you have small or non-cleanly divisible numbers? The current system adds 17% to everyone's chances, which seems similar enough and requires less math.

Honestly I'm not sure I see the balances changing much with your proposed switch to begin with.

It's not always 17%.

Going from 3+ to 2+ is a 50% decrease in casualties vs AP 0 for example.

They'll have anti-Cawl (Fabius Bile) create a new breed of Chaos Space Marine because of reasons and force the poor Chaos players to have to re-buy their entire army.

Martel732 wrote:
It's not always 17%.

Going from 3+ to 2+ is a 50% decrease in casualties vs AP 0 for example.

It's also a 17% chance increase from 66% to 83% (3+ to 2+), and a 17% chance increase from 33% to 50% (3+ to 4+). Oooorrr. . . it's also 50% increase in saves from 33% to 50%. And a 0% increase of AP0 against a 2+ save because 1s always fail. But when you say "Like light cover blocks 20% of all fire, and heavy blocks 40%. Then everything else is the same. That way, it's even for everyone." In dice terms that's like rolling a D10 first and hoping for 8s and 6s respectively, then rolling the normal armor save.

But the real question is what are you going for exactly, and how does it help the game? Like, it seems unnecessary and I'm not sure it really changes much in the end when compared to the current system, with the exception of 2+ saves against AP0. Which. . . *shrug*?