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.
Killing Guardsmen is not the metric of the game. Killing Space Marines is the metric. I wonder how many wounds they guys would do to a MEQ unit?
2 Attacks base +1 for Shock Assault +1 for Chainsword = 4 Attacks per model
5 Models including Sgt = 21 attacks for a minimum-sized unit
21 * 2/3 (WS 3+) * 1/2 (S 4 v T 4) * 2/3 (3+ Sv with AP -2) = 4.67 wounds
So a minimum unit of Assault Intercessors would just about wipe out a 5-model unit of mini-marines, producing more than twice the wounds of a unit of Intercessors in combat (1.89 W with only 17 assuming a sarge with Chainsword and also in Assault Doctrine). They also have 5 AP -2 Bolt Pistol attacks to make before the charge if they want.
So yes, they are not Bolt Rifle Intercessors, but we are making a lot of assumptions regarding rules and cost at this point. I guess we will have to see if GW has learned enough to realize the pistol/melee weapon isn't actually a balanced swap for a rifle.
Ice_can wrote: So far we have been told terrain rules have been completely changed.
We have also been told reserves have changed.
We have been told that points are being rebalanced due to core rules changes.
Arguably intercessors and more primaris troops are currently undercosted.
(Increases in the points of shooty primaris would give these guys half a chance of being able to find a niche)
I'm also interested to see just how long GW keep trying to pretend that vigilous rules should still be a thing as we are soon to be two codex's on from the codex it was designed to buff and some of the combos's it's allowing are beyond belief broken, add in more CP and it will only get more gamebreaking.
LOL imagine trying to be serious saying Intecessors and other Primaris are undercosted instead of actually blaming the real problem of rules bloat.
What other troop choice from any army has even half a change against iprimaris troops in a point for point engagement? Serious question as is they compressed the scale for every other troop way too much and its a mess down there.
Without doctrines, quite a few actually just not the troops that are already bad.
alextroy wrote: I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.
*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!
That's almost a 50% return, which is really good.
But doctorines are a thing and original marines aren't out their breaking the game with doctrines.
You want to keep primaris and ditch rules that's one way to balance them, but it also kinda admits that with all the rules they have they are less points than they should be.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/25 15:06:16
Ice_can wrote: So far we have been told terrain rules have been completely changed.
We have also been told reserves have changed.
We have been told that points are being rebalanced due to core rules changes.
Arguably intercessors and more primaris troops are currently undercosted.
(Increases in the points of shooty primaris would give these guys half a chance of being able to find a niche)
I'm also interested to see just how long GW keep trying to pretend that vigilous rules should still be a thing as we are soon to be two codex's on from the codex it was designed to buff and some of the combos's it's allowing are beyond belief broken, add in more CP and it will only get more gamebreaking.
LOL imagine trying to be serious saying Intecessors and other Primaris are undercosted instead of actually blaming the real problem of rules bloat.
What other troop choice from any army has even half a change against iprimaris troops in a point for point engagement? Serious question as is they compressed the scale for every other troop way too much and its a mess down there.
Without doctrines, quite a few actually just not the troops that are already bad.
alextroy wrote: I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.
*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!
That's almost a 50% return, which is really good.
But doctorines are a thing and original marines aren't out their breaking the game with doctrines.
You want to keep primaris and ditch rules that's one way to balance them, but it also kinda admits that with all the rules they have they are less points than they should be.
They are rules that shouldn't have existed to begin with, though. My statement is fair.
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.
alextroy wrote: I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.
*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!
That's almost a 50% return, which is really good.
For a melee unit that needs to spend 2-3 turns crossing the table and is going to get wiped the turn after they charge because the other guy falls back and they take a battle cannon shell to the face?
alextroy wrote: I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.
*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!
That's almost a 50% return, which is really good.
For a melee unit that needs to spend 2-3 turns crossing the table and is going to get wiped the turn after they charge because the other guy falls back and they take a battle cannon shell to the face?
To be fair I was just talking about the return, I made no mention of practicality!
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.
alextroy wrote: I hadn't even considered how filthy AP -1 Chainswords would be in Assault Doctrine (aka -2 AP Chainswords). That's some pretty good killing power for a Primaris Marine on the charge.
*gasps* Killing 1.7 Guardsmen on the charge? Amazing!
That's almost a 50% return, which is really good.
For a melee unit that needs to spend 2-3 turns crossing the table and is going to get wiped the turn after they charge because the other guy falls back and they take a battle cannon shell to the face?
Gaurdsmen are not the optimal target for AP-1 Chainswords.
If they hit T2 (Tactical Doctrine) they kill, assuming 4 attacks on the charge (5 on the Sarge)...
21 attacks
14 hits
28/3 wounds
14/3 failed saves
144.67 points of Dark Reapers. If they're costed the same as regular Intercessors, that's more than 150% return.
Once you get a point of AP, you want to go after better armored models. 2+ to 3+ doubles damage, whereas 5+ to 6+ increasing damage by 25%.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
The biggest "hole" in the Primaris Space Marine range has been close combat. As in, we have no dedicated close combat units. Reviers don't count. They are hot garbage in Elites, a section that has so many other good choices... anyways, Assault Intersessors.
2W models hitting on 3's with 3-4 attacks each? And heavy bolt pistols? In Troops? In the Assault Doctrine? Yes please! Especially with the sort of strategems we've seen regular Intersessors get (auto hit, fall back and assault again, etc. etc.). All assuming that they don't have "Primaris Chainswords" or some other special rules. Allowing the Sergeant to have a P-fist or T-hammer or P-sword... When I see how well that kind of Sergeant currently does in close combat, having him backed up with a dedicated close combat unit... oh yeah.
Stand by for the Impulsor Rush!
Kara Sloan shoots through Time and Design Space for a Negative Play Experience
I've done okayish with reivers. And that's with the mythical BA elite slot. They absorb close range punishment far better than one wound assault choices in most cases.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/26 15:56:42
Martel732 wrote: I've done okayish with reivers. And that's with the mythical BA elite slot. They absorb close range punishment far better than one wound assault choices in most cases.
Except why would anyone attempt to punish them? They have like no melee output or range output for the price.
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.
Martel732 wrote: I've done okayish with reivers. And that's with the mythical BA elite slot. They absorb close range punishment far better than one wound assault choices in most cases.
Except why would anyone attempt to punish them? They have like no melee output or range output for the price.
And don't you have 2-Wound, 2+ save Sanguinary Guard?
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
Martel732 wrote: I've done okayish with reivers. And that's with the mythical BA elite slot. They absorb close range punishment far better than one wound assault choices in most cases.
Except why would anyone attempt to punish them? They have like no melee output or range output for the price.
And don't you have 2-Wound, 2+ save Sanguinary Guard?
Which also Fly instead of Fake Fly?
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.
Martel732 wrote: I've done okayish with reivers. And that's with the mythical BA elite slot. They absorb close range punishment far better than one wound assault choices in most cases.
Except why would anyone attempt to punish them? They have like no melee output or range output for the price.
And don't you have 2-Wound, 2+ save Sanguinary Guard?
Yes, but they are still weaker than reivers vs AP and mortals. And can't take phobos buffs.
Martel732 wrote: I've done okayish with reivers. And that's with the mythical BA elite slot. They absorb close range punishment far better than one wound assault choices in most cases.
Except why would anyone attempt to punish them? They have like no melee output or range output for the price.
Objectives? Threatening a tripoint?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/05/26 16:42:58
Martel732 wrote: I've done okayish with reivers. And that's with the mythical BA elite slot. They absorb close range punishment far better than one wound assault choices in most cases.
Except why would anyone attempt to punish them? They have like no melee output or range output for the price.
And don't you have 2-Wound, 2+ save Sanguinary Guard?
Yes, but they are still weaker than reivers vs AP and mortals. And can't take phobos buffs.
Martel732 wrote: I've done okayish with reivers. And that's with the mythical BA elite slot. They absorb close range punishment far better than one wound assault choices in most cases.
Except why would anyone attempt to punish them? They have like no melee output or range output for the price.
Objectives? Threatening a tripoint?
There's better ways to hold objectives if that's the ultimate goal, and they're not fast enough to catch a unit for your tri-pointing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/26 19:08:00
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.
