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.

 Dysartes wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
melta suffers from the "Really good in an older edition" curse.

Any chance we can have the edition where Plasma suffers from that, pretty please?

What if plasma got its Necromunda stats instead, S5 ap-1 rapid. S7 ap-2 gets hot, loses rapid. i forget their damage values off the top of my head its either 1/2 or 2/3

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's not them killing 100% of their points.

Three Eradicators, 12" from a Leman Russ Tank Commander. 6 shots, 4 hits, 2 wounds, ave 9 damage. That's 3/4 of the TC. TC with a Battle Cannon and Heavy Bolter is 172pts, so that's 129pts of damage.

Eradicators cost 120pts, so that's killing 108% of their points in one volley.

Bonus round: Make the LRTC the ever-popular Punisher with hull and sponson heavy bolters, for 196pts. Shoot it with Eradicators from maximum range and they average 7 damage. That's 58% damage, or 114pts of damage, 95% of their cost. If they survive to shoot a second time, it's all gravy. If they're Salamanders, that bumps them to well over 100% return from 24" away.

How many infantry with 24" range can reliably make back 75+% of their cost in one round of shooting, or > 100% if they get to half range or take the right subfaction, with no auras or CP support whatsoever? Serious question.

Yeah, Melta always looks good when you're in half range, but did you math it when they're at max range which is usually the case? You'll find it isn't very high like you showed. Then you say "if they survive", which is around 10-12 points per wound that susceptible to multi-damage.

I think you're going to be okay.

Bruh. You literally quoted me giving the math for Eradicators firing from their maximum range.

 Nitro Zeus wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
It is absolutely disigenuous to include the full cost of buffing units when in reality they can be buffing your entire army. Besides, we've already given multiple examples where they return more than their points worth unbuffed.

Some people want their broken I win button units and they will happily throw balance into the eye of terror for that haha your army sucks feeling, at a certain point engaging with them is utterly pointless, walk away before the drag you down to their level and beat you death.

cosign this. I'm reading this thread but there's no point in actually debating with a certain person or two. Just take a look at who you're discussing the game with, and ask yourself if you genuinely think that there is ANY amount of logic that will convince them to step back and say yeah I might be wrong on this one, lol.

See, I think you don't spend enough time reading everything I wrote. And you haven't offered any logic. All you do is say, "haha you stupid for thinking differently, rite guyz?". So brave.

Because originally I said:

GW need to nerf the gak out of these guys straight out of the gate.

And I wasn't sure how to take it:

Maybe regular metlas become dirt cheap? Even then....I have no idea how to reconcile this.

I certainly had my doubts:

Yes, no points. It's possible the points could be higher than the PL indicates. But this is enough for me to sit on my hands and wait to see the points rather than buying the box straight up.

And then I started to actually think about it a little more deeply. So you keep on your high horse if you want and we'll see what people are actually successful with in a couple months (I guess in Europe, because I can't foresee tournaments in the US any time soon).

 catbarf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's not them killing 100% of their points.

Three Eradicators, 12" from a Leman Russ Tank Commander. 6 shots, 4 hits, 2 wounds, ave 9 damage. That's 3/4 of the TC. TC with a Battle Cannon and Heavy Bolter is 172pts, so that's 129pts of damage.

Eradicators cost 120pts, so that's killing 108% of their points in one volley.

Bonus round: Make the LRTC the ever-popular Punisher with hull and sponson heavy bolters, for 196pts. Shoot it with Eradicators from maximum range and they average 7 damage. That's 58% damage, or 114pts of damage, 95% of their cost. If they survive to shoot a second time, it's all gravy. If they're Salamanders, that bumps them to well over 100% return from 24" away.

How many infantry with 24" range can reliably make back 75+% of their cost in one round of shooting, or > 100% if they get to half range or take the right subfaction, with no auras or CP support whatsoever? Serious question.

Yeah, Melta always looks good when you're in half range, but did you math it when they're at max range which is usually the case? You'll find it isn't very high like you showed. Then you say "if they survive", which is around 10-12 points per wound that susceptible to multi-damage.

I think you're going to be okay.

Bruh. You literally quoted me giving the math for Eradicators firing from their maximum range.

Yeah and I pointed out it wasn't that high, and it was likely the range you're going to be shooting from a majority of the time. I worded that sentence pretty poorly so my apologies on that. I meant to ask if you actually looked at your own math for the max range.

So regardless, you're going to be okay.

"A unit destroying 100% or more of its points cost in a single shooting phase isn't that high."

You realize this means that you're saying an army which can destroy 100% or more of its points cost (i.e. the entire enemy army or more) isn't that high. Since, you know, armies are made up of units, and if each unit killing 100% of its own points in a single shooting phase is expected.... well... you get tabled in one shooting phase!

Fun game you've got there Slayer. Mind if I don't play it?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah and I pointed out it wasn't that high, and it was likely the range you're going to be shooting from a majority of the time. I worded that sentence pretty poorly so my apologies on that. I meant to ask if you actually looked at your own math for the max range.

Give some examples of other anti-tank units that easily hit 95+% efficiency from 24" without any CP or subfactions.

 catbarf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah and I pointed out it wasn't that high, and it was likely the range you're going to be shooting from a majority of the time. I worded that sentence pretty poorly so my apologies on that. I meant to ask if you actually looked at your own math for the max range.

Give some examples of other anti-tank units that easily hit 95+% efficiency from 24" without any CP or subfactions.

I was thinking Dark Reapers but six of them only gets 5.3 wounds on a Predator, while the Eradicators get 9.3 at 24"

I forget what Dark Reapers cost, 30-something iirc.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah and I pointed out it wasn't that high, and it was likely the range you're going to be shooting from a majority of the time. I worded that sentence pretty poorly so my apologies on that. I meant to ask if you actually looked at your own math for the max range.

Give some examples of other anti-tank units that easily hit 95+% efficiency from 24" without any CP or subfactions.

I was thinking Dark Reapers but six of them only gets 5.3 wounds on a Predator, while the Eradicators get 9.3 at 24"

I forget what Dark Reapers cost, 30-something iirc.

31 in 8ed. So you would take 4 Reapers to compare against 3 Eradicators.
As far as I know, there is no infantry based AT that compares favourably.

Other units that come close will probably be marine units. Plasma Devs get 8.08 against a Predator with Signum and Cherub(one use), for 134 (current) points. Lower toughness, fewer wounds, on 1s to hit they die and they have a penalty for movement. Longer range though.

Edit: Gravs get same 8.08, Lascannons get 7.07

dhallnet wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah and I pointed out it wasn't that high, and it was likely the range you're going to be shooting from a majority of the time. I worded that sentence pretty poorly so my apologies on that. I meant to ask if you actually looked at your own math for the max range.

Give some examples of other anti-tank units that easily hit 95+% efficiency from 24" without any CP or subfactions.

I was thinking Dark Reapers but six of them only gets 5.3 wounds on a Predator, while the Eradicators get 9.3 at 24"

I forget what Dark Reapers cost, 30-something iirc.

31 in 8ed. So you would take 4 Reapers to compare against 3 Eradicators.
As far as I know, there is no infantry based AT that compares favourably.

Actually it's pretty much confirmed at this point they aren't likely to be 40 points each the points for intercessors at 5PL etc etc all say these lads 100points band macimum they will be is 105. And 35 each

Ice_can wrote:
Actually it's pretty much confirmed at this point they aren't likely to be 40 points each the points for intercessors at 5PL etc etc all say these lads 100points band macimum they will be is 105. And 35 each

The values given to playtesters leaked yesterday, it said 40ppm. Could change after playtesting, I suppose.

 catbarf wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Actually it's pretty much confirmed at this point they aren't likely to be 40 points each the points for intercessors at 5PL etc etc all say these lads 100points band macimum they will be is 105. And 35 each

The values given to playtesters leaked yesterday, it said 40ppm. Could change after playtesting, I suppose.

Yeah apparently they went down not up
Not that it matters as it now looks like marines now have 2++ terminators and Custodes will presumably get the same so we have GW nre 7th edition invisibility spam

My 10-sister Retributor squad with 4 MM's clock in at +1W, -2T, and -2 shots unless I spend both Armorium Cherubs in the same turn (which is once per game).

At least the MM squad diminishes with wounds better, but hardly worth the extra 100 points they cost.

Not being salty here, but like... everyone not playing Primaris sees the stat lines and the projected costs and PL and knows these guys are busted. Like the EXTERNAL balance of these models is terrible.

Will I not play a player who sets them down on the table? Probably not. I don't think it is that big of a deal, and if they set down 3 squads with the intention of blowing me off of the table turn 2... I probably don't want to be involved in that game anyways. But I do think these models are criminally under-costed compared to any other similar model outside of the Primaris world, and that's causing all of this salt.

Inside the Primaris world? They're middling at best. Which should say all sorts of things about the state of all things Space Marine as they fully immerse themselves in the Primaris model range.

Silver lining? I think there is some serious competition for their slots right now, and if they're running in Heavy Support (please for the love of god don't make these guys Elites), that means less Eliminators and other friends.

Ice_can wrote:

Not that it matters as it now looks like marines now have 2++ terminators

How's that?

NM, I see it in rumors. That'll get FAQed.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Not that it matters as it now looks like marines now have 2++ terminators

How's that?

Stormshield change.
Hopefully it get's FAQ'ed but so far yes GW fethed kinda up again.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Not that it matters as it now looks like marines now have 2++ terminators

How's that?

Stormshield change.
Hopefully it get's FAQ'ed but so far yes GW fethed kinda up again.

Given it looks like (from leaks of unknown providence) GW deemed to make these guys cheaper after play testing them at 40ppm. This is very much the SM can't loose edition.

Points are going up game wide so we have more room to fine tune balance appart from Marines who despite being meta for a year are going to stay about the same. Appart from the non competitive old marine units.

Ice_can wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Actually it's pretty much confirmed at this point they aren't likely to be 40 points each the points for intercessors at 5PL etc etc all say these lads 100points band macimum they will be is 105. And 35 each

The values given to playtesters leaked yesterday, it said 40ppm. Could change after playtesting, I suppose.

Yeah apparently they went down not up
Not that it matters as it now looks like marines now have 2++ terminators and Custodes will presumably get the same so we have GW nre 7th edition invisibility spam

The 2++ thing is not a thing. It's going to be 1+ modifiable by AP.

Martel732 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Actually it's pretty much confirmed at this point they aren't likely to be 40 points each the points for intercessors at 5PL etc etc all say these lads 100points band macimum they will be is 105. And 35 each

The values given to playtesters leaked yesterday, it said 40ppm. Could change after playtesting, I suppose.

Yeah apparently they went down not up
Not that it matters as it now looks like marines now have 2++ terminators and Custodes will presumably get the same so we have GW nre 7th edition invisibility spam

The 2++ thing is not a thing. It's going to be 1+ modifiable by AP.

as per page 5 of the core rules No die can be modified to less than a 1, so save passed.

 Insectum7 wrote:

I was thinking Dark Reapers but six of them only gets 5.3 wounds on a Predator, while the Eradicators get 9.3 at 24"

Right, but then we're suddenly undervaluing something shooting from twice the range.

Why does MM suck ? Because you can get a LC for less cost and twice the range, most things don't care about AP, etc. Why spend on a weapon that might not safely get into range? Those were typical discussions had in months past.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

I was thinking Dark Reapers but six of them only gets 5.3 wounds on a Predator, while the Eradicators get 9.3 at 24"

Right, but then we're suddenly undervaluing something shooting from twice the range.

Why does MM suck ? Because you can get a LC for less cost and twice the range, most things don't care about AP, etc. Why spend on a weapon that might not safely get into range? Those were typical discussions had in months past.

At the moment I'm not interested. Can you answer the challenge and name an AT unit that nets ~100% points return at 24 or more inches?

(also the Multimelta costs less than the Las in 8th, and LOTS of units care about AP)

Ice_can wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Actually it's pretty much confirmed at this point they aren't likely to be 40 points each the points for intercessors at 5PL etc etc all say these lads 100points band macimum they will be is 105. And 35 each

The values given to playtesters leaked yesterday, it said 40ppm. Could change after playtesting, I suppose.

Yeah apparently they went down not up
Not that it matters as it now looks like marines now have 2++ terminators and Custodes will presumably get the same so we have GW nre 7th edition invisibility spam

The 2++ thing is not a thing. It's going to be 1+ modifiable by AP.

as per page 5 of the core rules No die can be modified to less than a 1, so save passed.

No one I know plays it that way, and I'm sure that was not the intended effect. It's just like the assault weapon "mistake".

As for the melta boys, I think their biggest issue is their range. It's too easy to cash in the big damage. Its hard to get to 12", so a 100% return vs optimal targets is feasible. 24" is a lot easier. Current melta should be yielding 100% returns with as hard as it is to employ.

With the distance between deployment zones typically being 24", the jump from 24" -> 36" is much less impactful than the jump from 12" -> 24".

I see people calling the 24" of the Eradicators short range and treating it as a significant weakness, but I don't personally see it. On the new standard 44" x 60" table, there is nowhere on the board that is safe from an Eradicator squad either appearing on a table edge or starting in the deployment zone.

Melta weapons with 12" range on non-DSing platforms having very high returns on a single turn of shooting is completely fine with me, because that's hard to pull off. 24" changes the equation considerably.

 Insectum7 wrote:
At the moment I'm not interested. Can you answer the challenge and name an AT unit that nets ~100% points return at 24 or more inches?

(also the Multimelta costs less than the Las in 8th, and LOTS of units care about AP)

I couldn't - I don't have points and can only speculate. The points a unit returns also depends on the points it is shooting.

A Levi currently returns 31% of a knight, so 125 to 150 points and costs 275 or so. Are Leviathans now bad? Or are there other considerations to be made there?

So, time for more salt - new space marine fortification (?) - Hammerfall Turret.

8 heavy bolters/Heavy Flamers & effectively a Typhoon Missile Launcher on steroids. Given HB are 10 currently and supposed to be going up to 15 on vehicles and a TyML is 32 currently - I would assume the better str on the superfrag/superkrak put it on 40 points, you're looking at a minimum of 120 points of weapons, going up to 152 with heavy flamers.

I am expecting the chassis to be T8 with 16-18 wounds and probably BS3+ at least, if not BS2+.

Which should mean it costs around 220-250 (I am cutting the current cost of a land raider in half to account for the assumed immobility after it lands).

What's the betting it's 130-150 points?

sanguine40k wrote:
So, time for more salt - new space marine fortification (?) - Hammerfall Turret.

8 heavy bolters/Heavy Flamers & effectively a Typhoon Missile Launcher on steroids. Given HB are 10 currently and supposed to be going up to 15 on vehicles and a TyML is 32 currently - I would assume the better str on the superfrag/superkrak put it on 40 points, you're looking at a minimum of 120 points of weapons, going up to 152 with heavy flamers.

I am expecting the chassis to be T8 with 16-18 wounds and probably BS3+ at least, if not BS2+.

Which should mean it costs around 220-250 (I am cutting the current cost of a land raider in half to account for the assumed immobility after it lands).

What's the betting it's 130-150 points?

Im going to laugh if they make it BS5 and make it useless like every other fortification

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
At the moment I'm not interested. Can you answer the challenge and name an AT unit that nets ~100% points return at 24 or more inches?

(also the Multimelta costs less than the Las in 8th, and LOTS of units care about AP)

I couldn't - I don't have points and can only speculate. The points a unit returns also depends on the points it is shooting.

A Levi currently returns 31% of a knight, so 125 to 150 points and costs 275 or so. Are Leviathans now bad? Or are there other considerations to be made there?

There are other considerations, sure. . . but if we're going to try and quantify things this is a good place to start. Or we can reframe it this way: 20 Levi Stormcannons average 11 wounds at 24" against a Predator, for the 275(or something) points. In this case Eradicators DOUBLE the points return of this very competitive unit.

sanguine40k wrote:
So, time for more salt - new space marine fortification (?) - Hammerfall Turret.

8 heavy bolters/Heavy Flamers & effectively a Typhoon Missile Launcher on steroids. Given HB are 10 currently and supposed to be going up to 15 on vehicles and a TyML is 32 currently - I would assume the better str on the superfrag/superkrak put it on 40 points, you're looking at a minimum of 120 points of weapons, going up to 152 with heavy flamers.

I am expecting the chassis to be T8 with 16-18 wounds and probably BS3+ at least, if not BS2+.

Which should mean it costs around 220-250 (I am cutting the current cost of a land raider in half to account for the assumed immobility after it lands).

What's the betting it's 130-150 points?

Gotta wait for the rules and point values on this one. Looks cool though.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
At the moment I'm not interested. Can you answer the challenge and name an AT unit that nets ~100% points return at 24 or more inches?

(also the Multimelta costs less than the Las in 8th, and LOTS of units care about AP)

I couldn't - I don't have points and can only speculate. The points a unit returns also depends on the points it is shooting.

A Levi currently returns 31% of a knight, so 125 to 150 points and costs 275 or so. Are Leviathans now bad? Or are there other considerations to be made there?

Well, if what gw said about most things going up in points then these things will be getting an even better return. Especially considering that their primary targets will likely be armed with blast weapons and therefore getting a bigger price hike.

To reiterate: the problem is that these things would be considered awesome for any faction but loyalist marines, who just look at them compared to their other options and think "Meh, seems ok. Maybe I'll use them, maybe I won't ". Gw just can't stop piling More Newer More Better units and rules on primaris while neglecting everyone else. It's not healthy for the game. Eventually people will get sick of it and possibly just stop playing. (And no, I'm not one of them, so don't go there.)

 Insectum7 wrote:

sanguine40k wrote:
So, time for more salt - new space marine fortification (?) - Hammerfall Turret.

8 heavy bolters/Heavy Flamers & effectively a Typhoon Missile Launcher on steroids. Given HB are 10 currently and supposed to be going up to 15 on vehicles and a TyML is 32 currently - I would assume the better str on the superfrag/superkrak put it on 40 points, you're looking at a minimum of 120 points of weapons, going up to 152 with heavy flamers.

I am expecting the chassis to be T8 with 16-18 wounds and probably BS3+ at least, if not BS2+.

Which should mean it costs around 220-250 (I am cutting the current cost of a land raider in half to account for the assumed immobility after it lands).

What's the betting it's 130-150 points?

Gotta wait for the rules and point values on this one. Looks cool though.

I'm with Insectum on this one - more info required - though I'm a little disappointed the Necron fortification from the same article didn't get a weapon preview as well.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

That's not them killing 100% of their points. You're not including the points for the Chapter Master, nor the potential 2CP for it too. Support doesn't just exist.

Like I told Daedelus, the CM cost isn't just poured into this one unit, but distributed amongst eveything they're buffing. And yeah, just check your math.

If you like, without any buffs they knock 12 wounds off a Redemptor that starts at 125 and pays 30 points for a Plasma-something. Without buffs they kill a Predator, which is 170? Points. With Oath Relic buffs (1CP) they put 17.9 wounds into a Repulsor type target, which has got to be clost to 300 points.

Lets make a game. What's the most expensive target these guys can kill with average rolls? 2 categories, buffed and unbuffed. Go!

Expensive = pts? PL? $$$?

 Dysartes wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
melta suffers from the "Really good in an older edition" curse.

Any chance we can have the edition where Plasma suffers from that, pretty please?

I mean plasma has been kinda bad before like I think maybe 4th plasma was pretty meh. Granted, it's been awhile and melta has been increasingly feeling less good each edition past 5th. Plasma has stayed about the same for awhile. So no, don't take my plasma away, I loves it, my precious.