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.

Melta is still awful, though. It could be free and still be pretty bad because its taking a plasma slot.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

And need I remind everyone that the hellforged unit's Machine Malifica rule means they can only regain wounds by killing things in close combat, while the loyalist units can be repaired by techmarines and other methods.

Yes, but what is the cost of that? It's only (typically) going to be one model. Crunch-a-munching with vehicles mid-table could be valuable. I don't know.

I'd *like* to think they were making that consideration, but it seems unlikely for what been mostly an afterthought for 8th. The new books will certainly tell us one way or another though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Melta is still awful, though. It could be free and still be pretty bad because its taking a plasma slot.

What if you need to shoot a T5 W3 3+ model with a 5+++? Not saying it would be likely, but a melta has way more ability to remove the agency if its target and this edition seems to be really close quarters so far.

Not Online!!! wrote:Now we get even more at 5 pts, units that have no buissness beiing there. We have 6 pts cultists and 5 pts IS.
We . Have. Grots. At. 5 Pts.

I suppose it's bad, yes. But funny story there, Dark Reapers were also 5 points for most of 8th edition (plus cheap guns on top of that). Difference in quality between a grot and IG trooper is about as big as between trooper and Dark Reaper. But every time I pointed out how broken the unit is I got a lot of clown replies 'they are totally balanced, git gud'. Funny how things look in reverse, eh?

yukishiro1 wrote:Eradicators are a complete mess at the current points value, and a good test of whether someone's ideas about game balance are worth taking seriously. Nobody can seriously say these aren't hugely undercosted. They looked undercosted when we first saw the datasheet, and they absolutely are.

Nice historical revisionism. Because I recall some headless doom heralding chickens ""predicting"" they will be 20 points, then proclaiming they will be massively undercosted, yes. Lo and behold, they are double that, and the whole doomsaying from back then proved to be laughably inaccurate and just wrong.

They are strong, sure. But pretending the 'first look' which proved to be nothing but straw windmill in La Mancha says anything about balance ideas being any good is just silly.

catbarf wrote:Can you name some other anti-tank infantry that reliably kill their own points' worth of vehicles in one attack? Or just infantry in general that get a 100% return against their preferred target? Bonus points if they're not Marines.

Tau commanders, for easy one. Initial Dark Reapers were also almost as good as eliminators are now, but, they could shoot twice thanks to broken double action rules, making them by far most laughably OP unit of the whole 8th edition (imagine the salt if melta rifles could shoot four times, and you will get a pretty good approximation). Funny though, one had million posts saying it's totes balanced bro, lift the ""unfair"" GW limit, the other just had smug Eldar players saying 'git gud, it's bad unit'. So, yeah, let me play this here smallest violin to commemorate mental gymnastics used to defend these back then

Unit1126PLL wrote:I found it, here's what I proposed:
"If I was a game designer, I'd make "all purpose" guns (like a Leman Russ Battlecannon) needing a 4-1 ratio against most targets (e.g. you need 4x the points of a Leman Russ with Battlecannon to completely destroy a unit worth 1x points). Specialized guns (e.g. the Exterminator autocannon against multi-wound infantry) would need a 3-1 against their specialist targets (so only a 3x points advantage to totally wipe a unit in one round of shooting) and a 5-1 against suboptimal targets. Then, hyperspecialized units (e.g. Ork tankbustas) need a 2-1 to wipe a unit of their preferred target type, and a 6-1 to wipe a unit of another type."

In this case, the Eradicators should need a 3x points advantage to wipe out a tank, and a 5-1 to wipe out other things (e.g. guardsmen). The only reason I didn't rule them as hyperspecialized is because of their melee capability, which makes them fairly alright against light hordes of infantry; they aren't as hyperspecialized as, say, Ork Tankbustas.

5-1 you say? Ok, let's see. Eradicators shoot IG 6 times, hit 4, kill 3. Ok, let's be generous, kill 4. That's just 20 points killed by 120 pts squad.

Conclusion: by your own metric, Eradicators are underpowered and need buffing with additional rifle shot to actually do the 5-1 design target

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

And need I remind everyone that the hellforged unit's Machine Malifica rule means they can only regain wounds by killing things in close combat, while the loyalist units can be repaired by techmarines and other methods.

Yes, but what is the cost of that? It's only (typically) going to be one model. Crunch-a-munching with vehicles mid-table could be valuable. I don't know.

I'd *like* to think they were making that consideration, but it seems unlikely for what been mostly an afterthought for 8th. The new books will certainly tell us one way or another though.

So what's your theory on the points discrepancies I pointed out? Shooty loyalist leviathans 50 ppm cheaper than shooty chaos leviathans, the superior relic contemptor the same price as a hellforged contemptor, an astreus with void shields, fly, and an anti-charge mechanic 162 points cheaper than a fellblade? Favoritism or lack of knowledge on what they were doing?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Irbis wrote:

Spoiler:

Unit1126PLL wrote:I found it, here's what I proposed:
"If I was a game designer, I'd make "all purpose" guns (like a Leman Russ Battlecannon) needing a 4-1 ratio against most targets (e.g. you need 4x the points of a Leman Russ with Battlecannon to completely destroy a unit worth 1x points). Specialized guns (e.g. the Exterminator autocannon against multi-wound infantry) would need a 3-1 against their specialist targets (so only a 3x points advantage to totally wipe a unit in one round of shooting) and a 5-1 against suboptimal targets. Then, hyperspecialized units (e.g. Ork tankbustas) need a 2-1 to wipe a unit of their preferred target type, and a 6-1 to wipe a unit of another type."

In this case, the Eradicators should need a 3x points advantage to wipe out a tank, and a 5-1 to wipe out other things (e.g. guardsmen). The only reason I didn't rule them as hyperspecialized is because of their melee capability, which makes them fairly alright against light hordes of infantry; they aren't as hyperspecialized as, say, Ork Tankbustas.

5-1 you say? Ok, let's see. Eradicators shoot IG 6 times, hit 4, kill 3. Ok, let's be generous, kill 4. That's just 20 points killed by 120 pts squad.

Conclusion: by your own metric, Eradicators are underpowered and need buffing with additional rifle shot to actually do the 5-1 design target

Why are you shooting anti-tank weapons at light infantry? Are you new to the game? Would you like some friendly pointers?

 Irbis wrote:
Tau commanders, for easy one.

Already addressed that in the other thread, try again. Commanders with quad fusion cap out at about 2/3 the efficiency of Eradicators.

 Irbis wrote:
Initial Dark Reapers were also almost as good as eliminators are now, but, they could shoot twice thanks to broken double action rules, making them by far most laughably OP unit of the whole 8th edition (imagine the salt if melta rifles could shoot four times, and you will get a pretty good approximation). Funny though, one had million posts saying it's totes balanced bro, lift the ""unfair"" GW limit, the other just had smug Eldar players saying 'git gud, it's bad unit'. So, yeah, let me play this here smallest violin to commemorate mental gymnastics used to defend these back then

I was one of the people arguing that they were overpowered, actually, but let's get the facts straight: Dark Reapers only get two shots base on a S5, AP-2, D2 profile. The more powerful one is S8, AP-2, D3, which is similar to melta albeit at lower AP... except they only get one shot.

At the time when you argue Dark Reapers were brokenly OP (with shoot-twice) they were firing the same number of shots as Eradicators (two each), but at a lower AP. They also cost 31pts apiece, so over three-quarters the cost of an Eradicator, but T3/W1/3+.

So, just to make sure your position is clear:
-31pt model getting 2 shots at S8/AP-2/D3, with a T3/W1/3+ profile: Brokenly overpowered and deserved the nerf.
-40pt model getting 2 shots at S8/AP-4/DD6, with a T5/W3/3+ profile: Perfectly balanced.

Yeah? 9pt increase (a mere 29% premium) significantly outweighs the higher damage, higher AP, and 4-6x tougher defensive profile?

And just to be clear: Even with shoot-twice, they still don't have the same efficiency as Eradicators. That lower AP makes a difference.

Oh, and that was 8th Ed points. 40ppm for Eradicators is 9th Ed, under the higher baseline. Dark Reapers are 35pts now. That's a joke of a comparison with the shoot-twice gone.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So what's your theory on the points discrepancies I pointed out? Shooty loyalist leviathans 50 ppm cheaper than shooty chaos leviathans, the superior relic contemptor the same price as a hellforged contemptor, an astreus with void shields, fly, and an anti-charge mechanic 162 points cheaper than a fellblade? Favoritism or lack of knowledge on what they were doing?

Yea I don't think they really considered it as "this is a shooty dread so it may not benefit as greatly". It was likely, "hey these guys can shoot into combat and heal - increase!". They're not entirely wrong. I'm totally putting melee weapons back on contemptors and taking the c-beams off.

As for the Astreus and Fellblade - I think a portion of the increase comes down to the Fellblade being T9 W26 where Astreus is T8 W24. Void shields are cool and all, but they don't really do much these days.

As a barometer - 23 LC to kill Astreus and 33 to kill Fellblade. Or in nu-40k terms -- 12 Eradicators to kill Astreus and 20 for the Fellblade.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Right, but a plasma dropped 2 when a melta dropped by 5. The GL goes up, because it finds a little bit of new life. The changes are not favoring plasma, but your post indicates that they'll take it anyway (even though I've not seen plasma on guard all edition). So at that point why even worry about points for anything else?

Did you not get what I said about being the most generally useful? The Meltagun isn't the most generally useful as it has such a short range. The Grenade Launcher isn't the most generally useful as it doesn't cause enough of an impact (and never has). The flamer has the same issue as the Melta, only more pronounced, and it can't hurt the same range of targets. The Plasma, on the other hand, reaches out to 24" at high strength with decent armour penetration capabilities. It is the most generally useful, and if they're all equal, why wouldn't you take it?

What you're saying about the changes not favouring plasma and then listing the fact that the melta went down more points really doesn't mean anything. It costs less. That doesn't make it more applicable to most situations. The plasma remains a superior generalist weapon.

And if you're arguing that the changes do not favour the plasma gun because the melta went down more points than the plasma gun did, then you're just arguing raw figures outside of any actual context.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
But if you instead find yourself facing down a lot of infantry at the end of the game and most of your plasma killed itself would it still have been the best choice?

That's a specific scenario, and is quite irrelevant when creating lists unless your local meta is that you're always facing lots of infantry. Again, the plasma is the most generally useful in most situations. And if it costs the same as everything else there is little reason to bring anything else except in specialist units that can maximise the usage of the other weapon types (but, again, those are specialist, not general).

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Did GW create some grand hidden scheme here? gak no. A basic and soft target like an IS typically dies so fast that special weapons can easily be a waste. The impact is so limited that having intricately pointed weapon options doesn't seem like it changes the calculus for them much at all.

I disagree completely. Plasma Guns are better than these other weapons in general application, and things should be worth their cost. Grenade Launchers are worse than plasma guns in almost all respects, and should be cheaper (or rather plasmas should cost more). Meltaguns should cost more than Grenade Launchers because they are better than Grenade Launchers, but not as much as Plasma Guns as they don't have the same broad level of application.

This isn't some "grand hidden scheme" or whatever else you're talking about. This is simple points comparisons. We've been doing this for decades. It ain't hard.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

So what's your theory on the points discrepancies I pointed out? Shooty loyalist leviathans 50 ppm cheaper than shooty chaos leviathans, the superior relic contemptor the same price as a hellforged contemptor, an astreus with void shields, fly, and an anti-charge mechanic 162 points cheaper than a fellblade? Favoritism or lack of knowledge on what they were doing?

Yea I don't think they really considered it as "this is a shooty dread so it may not benefit as greatly". It was likely, "hey these guys can shoot into combat and heal - increase!". They're not entirely wrong. I'm totally putting melee weapons back on contemptors and taking the c-beams off.

As for the Astreus and Fellblade - I think a portion of the increase comes down to the Fellblade being T9 W26 where Astreus is T8 W24. Void shields are cool and all, but they don't really do much these days.

As a barometer - 23 LC to kill Astreus and 33 to kill Fellblade. Or in nu-40k terms -- 12 Eradicators to kill Astreus and 20 for the Fellblade.

Perhaps, but the increase on the hellforged leviathan comes from the weapons, butcher cannon arrays are 25 points more than storm cannons. The base price is the same, so I don't think Machine Malifica was the reason. Melee weapons are the same for both loyalist and hellforged dreadnoughts, both contemptors and leviathans.

As for the astreus vs the Fellblade, remember how good we've been thinking the fly keyword will be in 9th? Guess we'll have to wait and see.

Still doesn't explain why the Karybdis got the axe when the model is still available from fw.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What if you need to shoot a T5 W3 3+ model with a 5+++? Not saying it would be likely, but a melta has way more ability to remove the agency if its target and this edition seems to be really close quarters so far.

Ok. That clarifies things pretty well. You don't get it. You keep coming up with specific examples where one weapon is superior to another. This isn't about specifics. This is about the overall points values of weapons, and their relative worth at various points scales.

"That lower AP makes a difference."

Vs loser targets.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What if you need to shoot a T5 W3 3+ model with a 5+++? Not saying it would be likely, but a melta has way more ability to remove the agency if its target and this edition seems to be really close quarters so far.

Ok. That clarifies things pretty well. You don't get it. You keep coming up with specific examples where one weapon is superior to another. This isn't about specifics. This is about the overall points values of weapons, and their relative worth at various points scales.

No, I do. I fully understand plasma will be the prime choice.

The specifics is what determines the value of a weapon. Plasma IS the best generalist weapon, but it can also kill you. There is an opportunity cost to assess if you're going to make sure reroll 1s are available.

If you had four people play IG and each of them built their lists around squads that take one type of special weapon (Catachan / Pyro, Slum Fighter - Flamers, Vostroyan / Cadian - Plasma, Fire from the Hip / Tallarn - Melta, Wilderness Survival - GL) and then logged each time a model with that weapon "scored points" by killing a model you'd likely find the overall net impact is not so vast that spending 12 extra points on GLs or saving 6 points on PGs makes an appreciable difference.

A GL being 3 points isn't going to convince anyone looking at plasma to pick the GL. If someone wants to bust hordes they might be inclined to pick it, because over time it will do better - IF they encounter larger units more often. But again, I understand, few will choose to do so.

Killing a guardsmen is a non-drawback in practice.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Perhaps, but the increase on the hellforged leviathan comes from the weapons, butcher cannon arrays are 25 points more than storm cannons. The base price is the same, so I don't think Machine Malifica was the reason. Melee weapons are the same for both loyalist and hellforged dreadnoughts, both contemptors and leviathans.

As for the astreus vs the Fellblade, remember how good we've been thinking the fly keyword will be in 9th? Guess we'll have to wait and see.

Still doesn't explain why the Karybdis got the axe when the model is still available from fw.

Butcher Cannon Arrays are pretty nice though.

36" 8 S8 AP1 D2 -2LD
24" 10 S7 AP2 D2

Now it may be they're overvaluing the -2 LD in the new edition. I think the reason you don't see BCAs making waves is because CSM don't have the same crap to make a Levi stay around forever so it just isn't as popular. That and CSM lack reroll wounds that can be key to the SCA effectiveness.

Karybdis is probably a goof...maybe...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Killing a guardsmen is a non-drawback in practice.

Sure, but if games are coming down to the wire like we've seen a single dude surviving morale with his special weapon could be useful near the end of the game.

"Sure, but if games are coming down to the wire like we've seen a single dude surviving morale with his special weapon could be useful near the end of the game."

That's way too cornercase. YOu can't dance around the fact that plasma should cost considerably more than the others. It's just way better.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What if you need to shoot a T5 W3 3+ model with a 5+++? Not saying it would be likely, but a melta has way more ability to remove the agency if its target and this edition seems to be really close quarters so far.

Ok. That clarifies things pretty well. You don't get it. You keep coming up with specific examples where one weapon is superior to another. This isn't about specifics. This is about the overall points values of weapons, and their relative worth at various points scales.

No, I do. I fully understand plasma will be the prime choice.

The specifics is what determines the value of a weapon. Plasma IS the best generalist weapon, but it can also kill you. There is an opportunity cost to assess if you're going to make sure reroll 1s are available.

If you had four people play IG and each of them built their lists around squads that take one type of special weapon (Catachan / Pyro, Slum Fighter - Flamers, Vostroyan / Cadian - Plasma, Fire from the Hip / Tallarn - Melta, Wilderness Survival - GL) and then logged each time a model with that weapon "scored points" by killing a model you'd likely find the overall net impact is not so vast that spending 12 extra points on GLs or saving 6 points on PGs makes an appreciable difference.

A GL being 3 points isn't going to convince anyone looking at plasma to pick the GL. If someone wants to bust hordes they might be inclined to pick it, because over time it will do better - IF they encounter larger units more often. But again, I understand, few will choose to do so.

Yeah Plasma can kill you. That sucks on more expensive models like Hellblasters, where those wounds are pretty pricey. However, saying Plasma can kill you with a 5 point model is pretty much never an issue.

It's actually a problem with the plasma rules being quite inconsistent. With some plasma weapons, when you overheat you not only suffer the mortal wounds, but the weapon is destroyed. If you applied that to all plasma weapons, I can assure you that it would be less common.

About plasma I think I'd just remove the possibility of re-rolling 1s. If they roll a 1, no matter what aura-ability they can have and the model suffer that mortal wound. Maybe even D3 mortal wounds.

And plasma weapons should probably go back to the single profile, removing the overcharged one. I don't think they should cost more than meltas, just tone down their efficiency.

So, the overall message I am getting from 9th ed rules and the points changes is that ...

... if you play horde, GW wants you to go and play another army....

Eldenfirefly wrote:
... if you play horde, GW wants you to go and play another army....

...Every edition change is there to convince as many people as possible that they need to buy a different army...

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
... if you play horde, GW wants you to go and play another army....

...Every edition change is there to convince as many people as possible that they need to buy a different army...

Right. So that's why they failed spectacularly. Me : 1. Evil Plan : 0!

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
And I've just started.

I'd suggest stopping. Nothing you find is going to make you happy. The FW points were an afterthought. I mean can we even be sure that the person writing them even understood the difference between a 'Relic' unit and a non-relic unit? We'll need to wait for the new books.

If into the FW points you go, only pain will you find.

Or nothingness.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Why are you shooting anti-tank weapons at light infantry? Are you new to the game? Would you like some friendly pointers?

Because it's round two+ & the AT guys finished their primary task in the previous round? Because at the moment there's no better targets in LOS?
I mean, you don't seriously think I'm just going to stop shooting at things do you?

Because for whatever reason I need that squad dead (or at least shot up) now? When the goal is to make it go away I'm not choosy about what I hit it with.

ccs wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Why are you shooting anti-tank weapons at light infantry? Are you new to the game? Would you like some friendly pointers?

Because it's round two+ & the AT guys finished their primary task in the previous round? Because at the moment there's no better targets in LOS?
I mean, you don't seriously think I'm just going to stop shooting at things do you?

Because for whatever reason I need that squad dead (or at least shot up) now? When the goal is to make it go away I'm not choosy about what I hit it with.

True, specialy when you start to score at the begining of your turn. I expect to see games where a single grot or cultist is taking fire power to the face, which could flatten a tank just because he is one of two last ones sitting on an objective.

But maybe mr Gadzia is talking about narrative games, where you are expected to engage melee units in melee, give your opponents chance to have fun and not kill of their units before they can score.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
... if you play horde, GW wants you to go and play another army....

...Every edition change is there to convince as many people as possible that they need to buy a different army...

Right. So that's why they failed spectacularly. Me : 1. Evil Plan : 0!

In my case they'd have more success by designing cool models. Oh, drat, they realized that along time ago....

Has anyone worked out what the points values of the Indomitus armies are? This is a long thread to catch up on!

Well mr Daedalus posted this no so long ago.
Could be helpful to count the point cost of stuff.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IRnHYqQfUNymy6be2vn9iZAczaR8HTblA-Id1qEBnlU/htmlview?usp=sharing&pru=AAABc28f5BQ*i1oy0PpyaMx8v5lwdPxlmA

Primaris side is 1015, Necrons are 995, from the top off my head.

So relatively even. You'll never get ~2k points of models cheaper again

 Irbis wrote:

Nice historical revisionism. Because I recall some headless doom heralding chickens ""predicting"" they will be 20 points,

Source?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Melta is still awful, though. It could be free and still be pretty bad because its taking a plasma slot.

If they're equal points I'm not so sure. Melta can hit tougher units really hard and that's definitely worth something, and it doesn't risk killing my own model to do so. I will definitely bring some Melta to the party in my lists, at the very least giving characters combi-Meltas since it's less risky than combi-Plas and will have a nice 2+ to hit on Captains.

ccs wrote:
In my case they'd have more success by designing cool models. Oh, drat, they realized that along time ago....

Same. Rules come and go with each codex, edition, errata or FAQ. Awesome looking models that make you want to field that unit or army are staying with you for decades (Hello Eldar farseer sculpts! Hello Emperor's champion!)

a_typical_hero wrote:
Primaris side is 1015, Necrons are 995, from the top off my head.

So relatively even. You'll never get ~2k points of models cheaper again

Cool, this is a lot more generous than I remember for starting kits (though it's forever since I last looked at one).