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.
2020/08/03 16:15:27
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Not sure I can imagine it. To me it often seems random. I like the Atticus theory of two teams, one doing a pro codex and one doing a for fun one.
The csm book for example, is unexplainable, if one assumes GW is trying to balance armies, or even make books that are fun to play.
GW design goes way above my ability to understand stuff. Who knows maybe they plan things 5 years in advance or they really want people to play 1-2 w40k army, 1-2 AoS army , side games and on top of it paint or read books as a basic hobby starter pack. And wanting to have one army, and to have fun with it is just a fool thing to do. Only GW and people that work for them know.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2020/08/03 16:30:04
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Actually if you look at BCP results, marines are performing quite bad, but BA are going strong
No, I'm not serious before someone jumps on my throath for that.
We can't really conclude anything from just a dozen or so small event results.
I do find it amusing that no one wants to talk about the buggy Orks taking 1st and DE 3rd in a 42 player tournament as quickly though.
Theyd hate to admit I was right. HAHA. Really though you should be seeing a lot more of these type lists.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2020/08/03 17:22:24
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Karol wrote: Well one should not compare stuff to bad pointed units. and second thing that is important is the fact that in the necron stuff, it they stand up, just like almost the whole necron army.
They are a 3 man unit, which needs a transport to work and every death hurts them a lot.
Yeah, the melee Destroyers really aren't that good, so saying that Bladeguard outperform them honestly doesn't say anything.
It is said codex creep is like a tree.
That is often the case, but I wouldn't use the new melee Destroyers in the last Necron codex if they were an option so I don't see your point.
Well and to be fair I figured theyd use more squigg buggies. All the buggies are really good though. Realistically with 9th edd being a turn shorter the emphasis really is on mobility.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Eradicators seem a little under pointed. They should probably be 50 points. However - their transport options are overpointed significantly so you are forced to put them on foot. I would be more than happy to see repulsors drop in price and they can fix eradicators. How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/03 17:36:46
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2020/08/03 22:38:08
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Custodes are top five strongest in the entire game, possibly top three.
Are these rankings valid for 1K games as well?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: generally one thing I've learned about Dakka is the natural reaction to a new unit is to scream it's OP and should be banned rather then discuss how to counter the unit.
Funnily enough, I have yet to see anyone doing that for the new Necron units?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/03 22:39:25
2020/08/03 22:41:02
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Karol wrote: Well one should not compare stuff to bad pointed units. and second thing that is important is the fact that in the necron stuff, it they stand up, just like almost the whole necron army.
They are a 3 man unit, which needs a transport to work and every death hurts them a lot.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Yeah, the melee Destroyers really aren't that good, so saying that Bladeguard outperform them honestly doesn't say anything.
TIL that Bullgryns, GK paladins, and Custodian Guard are all bad pointed units.
The hubris of primaris marine players with indomitus is unlike anything I've seen in 40k since I've followed the meta. Even with battle company, shining spear spam, or the Castellan triumvirate, possessed bomb + plauge bearers, and even SM codex 2.0 + supplements, the players would admit that it was broken, the only way their army could be competitive, that they haven't been good in a long time, or that they simply like to win. But it seems like this time around primaris players are almost entirely unapologetic. They could at least say the army needs some tough melee unit and yes it should be ten more points to be more inline with the sister unit released at the same time and filling the same niche, but instead there is some kind of glee that primaris marines are going to be even betterer, or even going as far as to say woe is us for needing to take a transport to make the best use of our OP units. Custodes and don't even have a viable transport.
Tyel wrote: Mmmm. If you believe the Spoletta doctrine , that Eradicators won't be under a 5++/5+++ (or you can pull them apart from such buffs - difficult given the 24" range, but...) then I don't think they are *that* hard to kill.
Sure they are still miles better than comparable units full stop the end and should be at least 55 points per model - but its probably not the point where you should insta-quit the game if someone brings them.
As for the bladeguard... yeah. I mean I think they are too cheap for what you get - but as people have argued, they are arguably just a bit better custodian guard. And you wouldn't normally run away from them (even if Custodes are top tier now).
To address the bladeguard, yes each one is just a bit better (constant damage 4 attacks at WS 3+ vs random damage 3 attacks at WS 2+), but they are about 70% the cost. Give them normal power swords or two wounds each and they'd be fine
While the total package is probably better for the Veterans, let's not give false numbers.
Custodes have a ranged attack, +1S and +1T over veterans. They are obviously going to cost more.
Yeah sure, in a direct fight Veterans win on equal points, but that doesn't actual mean anything in mathammer terms. Putting one unit against another one in a direct fight has always been a bad habit of this board, but it actually carries zero value. Units are evaluated at what they are supposed to do. For example, for keeping an objective Custodes are surely better due to that +1T and Obsec. 14 point better? That can be discussed.
S6 to S5 is the least significant strength change in the game for changes under S10, +1T is a small condolence when so much of these unit's durability comes from THP/AGA, and it's not like SM are hurting for obsec with all their troop choices. In fact, bladeguard are far superior for holding objectives because they are only 105 points a squad. When you start comparing the token shooting attacks on overwhelmingly melee-oriented units, you should know you are grasping at straws to defend the undefendable.
2020/08/04 01:46:53
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Eipi10 wrote: TIL that Bullgryns, GK paladins, and Custodian Guard are all bad pointed units.
I think it's pretty telling how you can name basically any Marine unit that overperforms compared to its non-Marine counterparts, and there will always be a Marine player to say 'my unit isn't too good, yours just isn't good'.
Especially when the units that 'aren't good' are some of the best units in their codices.
I'm not overpowered, it's just that everything else is underpowered...
Xenomancers wrote: How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?
Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......
2020/08/04 03:13:40
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Eipi10 wrote: TIL that Bullgryns, GK paladins, and Custodian Guard are all bad pointed units.
I think it's pretty telling how you can name basically any Marine unit that overperforms compared to its non-Marine counterparts, and there will always be a Marine player to say 'my unit isn't too good, yours just isn't good'.
Especially when the units that 'aren't good' are some of the best units in their codices.
I'm not overpowered, it's just that everything else is underpowered...
I wonder if it's because there are so many other marine players that their standard for what is good and what isn't is so skewed. They spend their time thinking about marine units and playing against marine units, so when someone points out that most armies don't have 12 wound T7 tanks with a 2+ save, invuln, FNP, and excellent shooting and melee for ~180 points, they don't know what to say or even how to process it, as the idea that a unit which would ever be worse than that is alien to them and there must instead be some problem with the player in question. It's like they are playing a different game with a different power scale.
Xenomancers wrote: How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?
Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......
Umm... He... He made a typo...
He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.
It doesn't even make sense with how...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/04 03:18:19
2020/08/04 03:44:39
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Xenomancers wrote: How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?
Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......
Umm... He... He made a typo...
He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.
It doesn't even make sense with how...
Obviously . He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get.
2020/08/04 04:22:04
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Karol wrote: Well one should not compare stuff to bad pointed units. and second thing that is important is the fact that in the necron stuff, it they stand up, just like almost the whole necron army.
They are a 3 man unit, which needs a transport to work and every death hurts them a lot.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Yeah, the melee Destroyers really aren't that good, so saying that Bladeguard outperform them honestly doesn't say anything.
TIL that Bullgryns, GK paladins, and Custodian Guard are all bad pointed units.
The hubris of primaris marine players with indomitus is unlike anything I've seen in 40k since I've followed the meta. Even with battle company, shining spear spam, or the Castellan triumvirate, possessed bomb + plauge bearers, and even SM codex 2.0 + supplements, the players would admit that it was broken, the only way their army could be competitive, that they haven't been good in a long time, or that they simply like to win. But it seems like this time around primaris players are almost entirely unapologetic. They could at least say the army needs some tough melee unit and yes it should be ten more points to be more inline with the sister unit released at the same time and filling the same niche, but instead there is some kind of glee that primaris marines are going to be even betterer, or even going as far as to say woe is us for needing to take a transport to make the best use of our OP units. Custodes and don't even have a viable transport.
Tyel wrote: Mmmm. If you believe the Spoletta doctrine , that Eradicators won't be under a 5++/5+++ (or you can pull them apart from such buffs - difficult given the 24" range, but...) then I don't think they are *that* hard to kill.
Sure they are still miles better than comparable units full stop the end and should be at least 55 points per model - but its probably not the point where you should insta-quit the game if someone brings them.
As for the bladeguard... yeah. I mean I think they are too cheap for what you get - but as people have argued, they are arguably just a bit better custodian guard. And you wouldn't normally run away from them (even if Custodes are top tier now).
To address the bladeguard, yes each one is just a bit better (constant damage 4 attacks at WS 3+ vs random damage 3 attacks at WS 2+), but they are about 70% the cost. Give them normal power swords or two wounds each and they'd be fine
While the total package is probably better for the Veterans, let's not give false numbers.
Custodes have a ranged attack, +1S and +1T over veterans. They are obviously going to cost more.
Yeah sure, in a direct fight Veterans win on equal points, but that doesn't actual mean anything in mathammer terms. Putting one unit against another one in a direct fight has always been a bad habit of this board, but it actually carries zero value. Units are evaluated at what they are supposed to do. For example, for keeping an objective Custodes are surely better due to that +1T and Obsec. 14 point better? That can be discussed.
S6 to S5 is the least significant strength change in the game for changes under S10, +1T is a small condolence when so much of these unit's durability comes from THP/AGA, and it's not like SM are hurting for obsec with all their troop choices. In fact, bladeguard are far superior for holding objectives because they are only 105 points a squad. When you start comparing the token shooting attacks on overwhelmingly melee-oriented units, you should know you are grasping at straws to defend the undefendable.
Man, your SM hate is reaching levels where it becomes useless to discuss with you. For a second I thought about explaining to you in a logical manner why you are wrong, but then I read again your past comments and... yeah, that would be useless.
You know what? You are right! SM are super duper OP in whatever they do and every SM player should be burned on the stake because they make the game miserable for everyone else! You are right on everything, your argument are so solid that no retort is possible!
2020/08/04 10:04:14
Subject: Re:Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
The hubris of primaris marine players with indomitus is unlike anything I've seen in 40k since I've followed the meta. Even with battle company, shining spear spam, or the Castellan triumvirate, possessed bomb + plauge bearers, and even SM codex 2.0 + supplements, the players would admit that it was broken, the only way their army could be competitive, that they haven't been good in a long time, or that they simply like to win. But it seems like this time around primaris players are almost entirely unapologetic. They could at least say the army needs some tough melee unit and yes it should be ten more points to be more inline with the sister unit released at the same time and filling the same niche, but instead there is some kind of glee that primaris marines are going to be even betterer, or even going as far as to say woe is us for needing to take a transport to make the best use of our OP units. Custodes and don't even have a viable transport.
All I remember getting from players that played eldar pre nerf of the castellan builds, was learn to play and the claims that their armies aren't that good, on top of stories how they don't use dark reapers or spears. Why should primaris players, and I am not one as GW decided to not make primaris GK, suddenly feel obliged to feel that they should ask for their armies nerfs. When eldar where beating everything left and right, the only thing the eldar players asked for was new models. Heck they even claimed to be treated bad by GW, because back in the day they were even more OP. And when 2.0 marines finaly dethroned eldar making, eldar players lost their collective minds.
All I learned after and edtion of 8th that either someone is rich and plays all armies, or if you play one army, you care for that to be good and powerful. Worrying for others is a waste of time .
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2020/08/04 11:10:36
Subject: Re:Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
In Fairness Karol you saw this kind of gak about Eldar too back in the day, I distinctly remember seeing someone likewise suggest refusing to play vs eldar. you also saw people proposing banning Imperial Knights from play, even when the codex.. wasn't all THAT great
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
2020/08/04 11:30:03
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
That is true. But the end of 8th tought me an important lesson. But I am slow to get hang of thinks took me a year to understand that GW doesn't care about balance, and that there is no obligation for them to produce good rules. 2 years to understand that people only say they want balance, but what they mean is that they want toher armies to be balanced, and their own armies to be better and fun to play.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2020/08/04 11:33:55
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Actually if you look at BCP results, marines are performing quite bad, but BA are going strong
No, I'm not serious before someone jumps on my throath for that.
We can't really conclude anything from just a dozen or so small event results.
I do find it amusing that no one wants to talk about the buggy Orks taking 1st and DE 3rd in a 42 player tournament as quickly though.
This thread is called "Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes", so...
It's also hilarious that Xeno thinks that he was right about Squig Buggies, when in fact it was the only buggy that wasn't in the list. He literally brought all the others, including a wartrike and a snazzwagon.
It's pretty safe to assume that the six scrapjets and two bonebreakers were giving any primaris he encountered hell. It also does a decent job at denying secondaries, despite buggies not being especially durable, killing six of them is still a ton of wounds you need to go through.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/08/04 13:37:54
Subject: Re:Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
The hubris of primaris marine players with indomitus is unlike anything I've seen in 40k since I've followed the meta. Even with battle company, shining spear spam, or the Castellan triumvirate, possessed bomb + plauge bearers, and even SM codex 2.0 + supplements, the players would admit that it was broken, the only way their army could be competitive, that they haven't been good in a long time, or that they simply like to win. But it seems like this time around primaris players are almost entirely unapologetic. They could at least say the army needs some tough melee unit and yes it should be ten more points to be more inline with the sister unit released at the same time and filling the same niche, but instead there is some kind of glee that primaris marines are going to be even betterer, or even going as far as to say woe is us for needing to take a transport to make the best use of our OP units. Custodes and don't even have a viable transport.
All I remember getting from players that played eldar pre nerf of the castellan builds, was learn to play and the claims that their armies aren't that good, on top of stories how they don't use dark reapers or spears. Why should primaris players, and I am not one as GW decided to not make primaris GK, suddenly feel obliged to feel that they should ask for their armies nerfs. When eldar where beating everything left and right, the only thing the eldar players asked for was new models. Heck they even claimed to be treated bad by GW, because back in the day they were even more OP. And when 2.0 marines finaly dethroned eldar making, eldar players lost their collective minds.
All I learned after and edtion of 8th that either someone is rich and plays all armies, or if you play one army, you care for that to be good and powerful. Worrying for others is a waste of time .
I remember plenty of Eldar players lamenting that Alaitoc flyer spam was the only way to make Eldar function in a competitive sense in 8th. Iyanden wraith armies or Biel-Tan Guardian armies or anything using aspect warriors (minus Dark Reapers, before their nerf) weren't beating anybody, let alone 'everything left and right'. The vast majority of the Eldar codex is poorly treated by GW, and it was that one gimmick (well, plus Ynnari) that punched above its weight, and I can find you plenty of topics with Eldar and non-Eldar players alike complaining about it.
And I certainly don't remember this laundry list of excuses to the state of balance, or Eldar players rapidly oscillating from 'my units aren't that good, they're only slightly better than your best units, so it's fine' to 'it's not that my units are good, it's that all of yours are bad, so it's fine' to 'well I can't make them even BETTER because I lack [x], so it's fine' to 'in theory you might have one specific unit that will hard counter me if I don't target it first (which I will), so it's fine' to 'this unit can do a bunch of things really well simultaneously but it can't do EVERYTHING and isn't invulnerable, so it's fine'. It's just such a predictable pattern at this point.
Believe it or not, I do want Marines to be effective with casual lists so that their owners can have fun too. This is not a zero-sum game, and it was not fun to repeatedly crush my Dark Angels-playing friend with my Guard in the early days of 8th, but the pendulum swung pretty hard in the other direction with SM2.0 and now Indomitus has pushed it further. I don't think it's too much to ask to expect a modicum of objectivity.
Karol wrote:That is true. But the end of 8th tought me an important lesson. But I am slow to get hang of thinks took me a year to understand that GW doesn't care about balance, and that there is no obligation for them to produce good rules. 2 years to understand that people only say they want balance, but what they mean is that they want toher armies to be balanced, and their own armies to be better and fun to play.
Most people don't play in a sociopath meta, Karol.
I play Guard and you can find in my post history, going back to early 8th Ed, me saying that I think Guardsmen are too cheap and should be more expensive. I've also stated on numerous occasions my dislike for soup, and how Guard facilitated easy CP in 8th.
People invested in the health of the hobby as a whole, rather than just their army, can recognize when something they play is problematic. Reducing it to 'make my army good / make everyone else suck' is an incredibly toxic attitude.
I remember plenty of Eldar players lamenting that Alaitoc flyer spam was the only way to make Eldar function in a competitive sense in 8th. Iyanden wraith armies or Biel-Tan Guardian armies or anything using aspect warriors (minus Dark Reapers, before their nerf) weren't beating anybody, let alone 'everything left and right'. The vast majority of the Eldar codex is poorly treated by GW, and it was that one gimmick (well, plus Ynnari) that punched above its weight, and I can find you plenty of topics with Eldar and non-Eldar players alike complaining about it.
the sad truth of the matter is, that alot of slightly bigger dexes are full of these units.Even smaller dexes.
I mean, people remember possessed pre bomb, right?
Without AL shenanigans and them beeing the most easily facilitate buffstack body they sucked hard.
They sucked for what's it now? 4.5 editions atleast.
the hellturky at launch some of the most broken cheese there was, after it, nerfed into oblivion, for the better part of 2 editions.
Conscripts for guard? when was the last time you'd actually consider them above Infantry squads, even when these were forced into beein platoons?
In some cases, like eldar, the whole dexes feel bad. beyond some outliers which themselves are so oppressive that you feel forced into them even when you play casual against some better internally balanced armies.
And with any edition suddendly these units change around.
There are very few that remained constantly good or bad.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2020/08/04 14:13:44
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Karol wrote: Well one should not compare stuff to bad pointed units. and second thing that is important is the fact that in the necron stuff, it they stand up, just like almost the whole necron army.
They are a 3 man unit, which needs a transport to work and every death hurts them a lot.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Yeah, the melee Destroyers really aren't that good, so saying that Bladeguard outperform them honestly doesn't say anything.
TIL that Bullgryns, GK paladins, and Custodian Guard are all bad pointed units.
The hubris of primaris marine players with indomitus is unlike anything I've seen in 40k since I've followed the meta. Even with battle company, shining spear spam, or the Castellan triumvirate, possessed bomb + plauge bearers, and even SM codex 2.0 + supplements, the players would admit that it was broken, the only way their army could be competitive, that they haven't been good in a long time, or that they simply like to win. But it seems like this time around primaris players are almost entirely unapologetic. They could at least say the army needs some tough melee unit and yes it should be ten more points to be more inline with the sister unit released at the same time and filling the same niche, but instead there is some kind of glee that primaris marines are going to be even betterer, or even going as far as to say woe is us for needing to take a transport to make the best use of our OP units. Custodes and don't even have a viable transport.
Tyel wrote: Mmmm. If you believe the Spoletta doctrine , that Eradicators won't be under a 5++/5+++ (or you can pull them apart from such buffs - difficult given the 24" range, but...) then I don't think they are *that* hard to kill.
Sure they are still miles better than comparable units full stop the end and should be at least 55 points per model - but its probably not the point where you should insta-quit the game if someone brings them.
As for the bladeguard... yeah. I mean I think they are too cheap for what you get - but as people have argued, they are arguably just a bit better custodian guard. And you wouldn't normally run away from them (even if Custodes are top tier now).
To address the bladeguard, yes each one is just a bit better (constant damage 4 attacks at WS 3+ vs random damage 3 attacks at WS 2+), but they are about 70% the cost. Give them normal power swords or two wounds each and they'd be fine
While the total package is probably better for the Veterans, let's not give false numbers.
Custodes have a ranged attack, +1S and +1T over veterans. They are obviously going to cost more.
Yeah sure, in a direct fight Veterans win on equal points, but that doesn't actual mean anything in mathammer terms. Putting one unit against another one in a direct fight has always been a bad habit of this board, but it actually carries zero value. Units are evaluated at what they are supposed to do. For example, for keeping an objective Custodes are surely better due to that +1T and Obsec. 14 point better? That can be discussed.
S6 to S5 is the least significant strength change in the game for changes under S10, +1T is a small condolence when so much of these unit's durability comes from THP/AGA, and it's not like SM are hurting for obsec with all their troop choices. In fact, bladeguard are far superior for holding objectives because they are only 105 points a squad. When you start comparing the token shooting attacks on overwhelmingly melee-oriented units, you should know you are grasping at straws to defend the undefendable.
Quite honestly a lot of those units aren't great, particularly the Paladins and Bullgryns, because the only way they can be "good" is stacking buff after buff and Stratagem after Stratagem. Plus you'll notice based on the math that Custodes are pretty close anyway. So your statement is bad and you should feel bad.
Heaven forbid a unit is capable by itself, transportation not included!
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.
2020/08/04 16:59:49
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Quite honestly a lot of those units aren't great, particularly the Paladins and Bullgryns, because the only way they can be "good" is stacking buff after buff and Stratagem after Stratagem.
You're gonna need to run that by me re: Bullgryns, which don't have any particularly useful stratagems and don't get subfaction bonuses, yet were commonly featured in AM lists all through 8th.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Plus you'll notice based on the math that Custodes are pretty close anyway.
Soooo you just ignored all the math where Custodes lose by a significant margin in a straight fight, barely win if they get the charge, and get absolutely wrecked if they get charged?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/04 17:01:54
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Quite honestly a lot of those units aren't great, particularly the Paladins and Bullgryns, because the only way they can be "good" is stacking buff after buff and Stratagem after Stratagem.
You're gonna need to run that by me re: Bullgryns, which don't have any particularly useful stratagems and don't get subfaction bonuses, yet were commonly featured in AM lists all through 8th.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Plus you'll notice based on the math that Custodes are pretty close anyway.
Soooo you just ignored all the math where Custodes lose by a significant margin in a straight fight, barely win if they get the charge, and get absolutely wrecked if they get charged?
I'm starting to think that is thread is what has given me such a bad opinion of primaris players. I wonder if it's how brazen they are being or if it's having the math done out for me that some of the best units in top armies are invalidated, not with hard counters, but with better versions of the same thing. I mean, Paladins sold out almost immediately when the ritual of the damned came out, just like the thunderfire cannon, there is no way you can call them bad by any definition.
The hubris of primaris marine players with indomitus is unlike anything I've seen in 40k since I've followed the meta. Even with battle company, shining spear spam, or the Castellan triumvirate, possessed bomb + plauge bearers, and even SM codex 2.0 + supplements, the players would admit that it was broken, the only way their army could be competitive, that they haven't been good in a long time, or that they simply like to win. But it seems like this time around primaris players are almost entirely unapologetic. They could at least say the army needs some tough melee unit and yes it should be ten more points to be more inline with the sister unit released at the same time and filling the same niche, but instead there is some kind of glee that primaris marines are going to be even betterer, or even going as far as to say woe is us for needing to take a transport to make the best use of our OP units. Custodes and don't even have a viable transport.
All I remember getting from players that played eldar pre nerf of the castellan builds, was learn to play and the claims that their armies aren't that good, on top of stories how they don't use dark reapers or spears. Why should primaris players, and I am not one as GW decided to not make primaris GK, suddenly feel obliged to feel that they should ask for their armies nerfs. When eldar where beating everything left and right, the only thing the eldar players asked for was new models. Heck they even claimed to be treated bad by GW, because back in the day they were even more OP. And when 2.0 marines finaly dethroned eldar making, eldar players lost their collective minds.
All I learned after and edtion of 8th that either someone is rich and plays all armies, or if you play one army, you care for that to be good and powerful. Worrying for others is a waste of time .
I remember plenty of Eldar players lamenting that Alaitoc flyer spam was the only way to make Eldar function in a competitive sense in 8th. Iyanden wraith armies or Biel-Tan Guardian armies or anything using aspect warriors (minus Dark Reapers, before their nerf) weren't beating anybody, let alone 'everything left and right'. The vast majority of the Eldar codex is poorly treated by GW, and it was that one gimmick (well, plus Ynnari) that punched above its weight, and I can find you plenty of topics with Eldar and non-Eldar players alike complaining about it.
And I certainly don't remember this laundry list of excuses to the state of balance, or Eldar players rapidly oscillating from 'my units aren't that good, they're only slightly better than your best units, so it's fine' to 'it's not that my units are good, it's that all of yours are bad, so it's fine' to 'well I can't make them even BETTER because I lack [x], so it's fine' to 'in theory you might have one specific unit that will hard counter me if I don't target it first (which I will), so it's fine' to 'this unit can do a bunch of things really well simultaneously but it can't do EVERYTHING and isn't invulnerable, so it's fine'. It's just such a predictable pattern at this point.
Believe it or not, I do want Marines to be effective with casual lists so that their owners can have fun too. This is not a zero-sum game, and it was not fun to repeatedly crush my Dark Angels-playing friend with my Guard in the early days of 8th, but the pendulum swung pretty hard in the other direction with SM2.0 and now Indomitus has pushed it further. I don't think it's too much to ask to expect a modicum of objectivity.
I think there was a time in 6th or early 7th where eldar could make an army with a random number generator and it would still be top tier. And in all fairness, I don't think Codex 2.0 is what did it, that was a just a good codex by itself, it was all the supplements that came on top of it that broke the game.
Karol wrote:That is true. But the end of 8th tought me an important lesson. But I am slow to get hang of thinks took me a year to understand that GW doesn't care about balance, and that there is no obligation for them to produce good rules. 2 years to understand that people only say they want balance, but what they mean is that they want toher armies to be balanced, and their own armies to be better and fun to play.
Most people don't play in a sociopath meta, Karol.
I play Guard and you can find in my post history, going back to early 8th Ed, me saying that I think Guardsmen are too cheap and should be more expensive. I've also stated on numerous occasions my dislike for soup, and how Guard facilitated easy CP in 8th.
People invested in the health of the hobby as a whole, rather than just their army, can recognize when something they play is problematic. Reducing it to 'make my army good / make everyone else suck' is an incredibly toxic attitude.
Back at the height of the Castellan meta, I played my admech + DW against the someone using the textbook Castellan list to help him prepare for LVO or adepticon or something. I was tabled in 3 turns and he still had 6 CP. He told me he felt like an donkey-cave for doing that and was really sorry, but I convinced him to keep his army the way it was because I knew he would be up against the same thing at the tournament, I think he went 3-3. Meta-chasers are a real thing in any game, especially MTG which I used to play, but I've rarely known them to be as petty as karol makes them out to be, except some of the primaris players this time around.
2020/08/04 18:38:45
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Xenomancers wrote: How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?
Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......
Umm... He... He made a typo...
He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.
It doesn't even make sense with how...
Obviously . He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get.
Oh no - I admit that eradicators are too cheap. I literally posted it in that thread lol. The executioner is dang near 100 points over costed though. At least 80. Twin Heavy bolters are all overcosted too. 6 str5 ap -1 is not worth 30 points. That is literally insane.
I'll break it down. Executioner lost it's special ability...POTMS - all non vheicals get that. Lost the ability to fail back and shoot. Half the heavy weapons in the game give it no save when you shoot it. Why the heck would I not just take 3 vindicators for the points? 33 t8 3+ wounds compared to 16...
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2020/08/04 19:04:54
Subject: Re:Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Because those 3 vindiactors arn't equiped with the stupidly powerful heavy 4 72 inch range S10 AP-4/5 D3-6 weapon aswell as the 18 other options and the ability to transport 6 Primaris or 3 Gravis.
2020/08/04 19:11:12
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Xenomancers wrote: How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?
Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......
Umm... He... He made a typo...
He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.
It doesn't even make sense with how...
Obviously . He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get.
Oh no - I admit that eradicators are too cheap. I literally posted it in that thread lol. The executioner is dang near 100 points over costed though. At least 80. Twin Heavy bolters are all overcosted too. 6 str5 ap -1 is not worth 30 points. That is literally insane.
I'll break it down. Executioner lost it's special ability...POTMS - all non vheicals get that. Lost the ability to fail back and shoot. Half the heavy weapons in the game give it no save when you shoot it. Why the heck would I not just take 3 vindicators for the points? 33 t8 3+ wounds compared to 16...
What if those heavy bolters were s5 ap -1 d2?
2020/08/04 19:19:58
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Actually if you look at BCP results, marines are performing quite bad, but BA are going strong
No, I'm not serious before someone jumps on my throath for that.
We can't really conclude anything from just a dozen or so small event results.
I do find it amusing that no one wants to talk about the buggy Orks taking 1st and DE 3rd in a 42 player tournament as quickly though.
This thread is called "Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes", so...
It's also hilarious that Xeno thinks that he was right about Squig Buggies, when in fact it was the only buggy that wasn't in the list. He literally brought all the others, including a wartrike and a snazzwagon.
It's pretty safe to assume that the six scrapjets and two bonebreakers were giving any primaris he encountered hell. It also does a decent job at denying secondaries, despite buggies not being especially durable, killing six of them is still a ton of wounds you need to go through.
I literally said that myself and laughed. You have no sense of humor bro. All ork buggies are good. You are going to see LOTS of them. Squig buggy probably is the best buggy though. ESP with the obscuring rules. It is a lot easier to hide them. You can literally sit back with 9 squig buggies chucking 24 d3 str 6 ap-1 d3 damage shots and 10 smash guns and just blow armies apart. I say again though - all the buggies are really good. I know because I play against them a lot. I agree though...lets get back on topic. how good are squig buggies vs gravis units...wow...so they are faster - can shoot over walls at them and a single failed save can be a dead gravis.
If the topic is custodes. I can confirm pretty handely that gravis get merked by custodians. 2+ saves make your auto bolters and flamers worthless unless you are in tactical doctrine.In melee Custodes hit on 2's compared to 4's to wound on the same number and a 4++ vs a 6+ save.They are literally killing at twice the rate in CC for being only 30% more expensive?
Xenomancers wrote: How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?
Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......
Umm... He... He made a typo...
He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.
It doesn't even make sense with how...
Obviously . He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get.
Oh no - I admit that eradicators are too cheap. I literally posted it in that thread lol. The executioner is dang near 100 points over costed though. At least 80. Twin Heavy bolters are all overcosted too. 6 str5 ap -1 is not worth 30 points. That is literally insane.
I'll break it down. Executioner lost it's special ability...POTMS - all non vheicals get that. Lost the ability to fail back and shoot. Half the heavy weapons in the game give it no save when you shoot it. Why the heck would I not just take 3 vindicators for the points? 33 t8 3+ wounds compared to 16...
What if those heavy bolters were s5 ap -1 d2?
There is no point in trying to balance the game if you are going to give 1 army a blanket rule that doubles the damage of a weapon and every other army has to pay the points for the weapon at half the efficiency. Even in this case that only works for 1 turn (the first turn) and you could just hide from it and then they just have over-costed weapons.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/04 19:24:50
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2020/08/04 19:28:27
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Actually if you look at BCP results, marines are performing quite bad, but BA are going strong
No, I'm not serious before someone jumps on my throath for that.
We can't really conclude anything from just a dozen or so small event results.
I do find it amusing that no one wants to talk about the buggy Orks taking 1st and DE 3rd in a 42 player tournament as quickly though.
This thread is called "Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes", so...
It's also hilarious that Xeno thinks that he was right about Squig Buggies, when in fact it was the only buggy that wasn't in the list. He literally brought all the others, including a wartrike and a snazzwagon.
It's pretty safe to assume that the six scrapjets and two bonebreakers were giving any primaris he encountered hell. It also does a decent job at denying secondaries, despite buggies not being especially durable, killing six of them is still a ton of wounds you need to go through.
I literally said that myself and laughed. You have no sense of humor bro. All ork buggies are good. You are going to see LOTS of them. Squig buggy probably is the best buggy though. ESP with the obscuring rules. It is a lot easier to hide them. You can literally sit back with 9 squig buggies chucking 24 d3 str 6 ap-1 d3 damage shots and 10 smash guns and just blow armies apart. I say again though - all the buggies are really good. I know because I play against them a lot. I agree though...lets get back on topic. how good are squig buggies vs gravis units...wow...so they are faster - can shoot over walls at them and a single failed save can be a dead gravis.
If the topic is custodes. I can confirm pretty handely that gravis get merked by custodians. 2+ saves make your auto bolters and flamers worthless unless you are in tactical doctrine.In melee Custodes hit on 2's compared to 4's to wound on the same number and a 4++ vs a 6+ save.They are literally killing at twice the rate in CC for being only 30% more expensive?
How are squigbuggies shooting through walls? They don't do that. Also, 3d3 S6 Ap-1 dD3 shots at ork ballistic skill is just..not that impressive for 110 points. I dunno what to say. The new marine turret thing is 6 S7 AP-1 d2 shots at ballistic skill 2+ for ~80 points.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/08/04 19:37:51
Subject: Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes
Xenomancers wrote: If the topic is custodes. I can confirm pretty handely that gravis get merked by custodians. 2+ saves make your auto bolters and flamers worthless unless you are in tactical doctrine.In melee Custodes hit on 2's compared to 4's to wound on the same number and a 4++ vs a 6+ save.They are literally killing at twice the rate in CC for being only 30% more expensive?
Are you really complaining that your elite anti-horde shooting specialists lose out in melee to elite melee-specialized anti-elite specialists? Let alone trying to portray your free army-wide special ability, that can turn those anti-horde specialists into a credible threat to those super-tough elites, as a weakness?
I mean good lord, when you are in Tactical doctrine (on turns 2 and 3, when 24" infantry are most relevant), a trio of Aggressors kills half their points cost against one of the worst match-ups possible for them.
I'll play a sad, sad song on the world's tiniest violin for Scissors having the gall to complain that it sometimes loses to Rock.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/04 19:39:10
Actually if you look at BCP results, marines are performing quite bad, but BA are going strong
No, I'm not serious before someone jumps on my throath for that.
We can't really conclude anything from just a dozen or so small event results.
I do find it amusing that no one wants to talk about the buggy Orks taking 1st and DE 3rd in a 42 player tournament as quickly though.
This thread is called "Eradicators, Aggressors, Bladeguard Vets, Outriders etc vs Custodes", so...
It's also hilarious that Xeno thinks that he was right about Squig Buggies, when in fact it was the only buggy that wasn't in the list. He literally brought all the others, including a wartrike and a snazzwagon.
It's pretty safe to assume that the six scrapjets and two bonebreakers were giving any primaris he encountered hell. It also does a decent job at denying secondaries, despite buggies not being especially durable, killing six of them is still a ton of wounds you need to go through.
I literally said that myself and laughed. You have no sense of humor bro. All ork buggies are good. You are going to see LOTS of them. Squig buggy probably is the best buggy though. ESP with the obscuring rules. It is a lot easier to hide them. You can literally sit back with 9 squig buggies chucking 24 d3 str 6 ap-1 d3 damage shots and 10 smash guns and just blow armies apart. I say again though - all the buggies are really good. I know because I play against them a lot. I agree though...lets get back on topic. how good are squig buggies vs gravis units...wow...so they are faster - can shoot over walls at them and a single failed save can be a dead gravis.
If the topic is custodes. I can confirm pretty handely that gravis get merked by custodians. 2+ saves make your auto bolters and flamers worthless unless you are in tactical doctrine.In melee Custodes hit on 2's compared to 4's to wound on the same number and a 4++ vs a 6+ save.They are literally killing at twice the rate in CC for being only 30% more expensive?
Xenomancers wrote: How in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?
Are you suggesting that Repulsor Executioners should cost 2000 ppm like Warhound titans? Or 6000 ppm like Warlords? That's the best idea you've ever had Xeno! What a great way to get those eyesores off the table! Maybe then loyalists will start using some of their real tanks like Sicarans. No, wait, you want a tank that can also act as a transport but still have lots of guns while being really tough. I know, Land Raider Achilles! And it's only 14 ppm more than an Executioner with the big laser whatever it is (because we all know nobody takes the big plasma whatever it is). What a brilliant idea to beautify the game, I love it. Now, how do we get rid of those godawful Ninja Not Really a Dreadnoughts......
Umm... He... He made a typo...
He meant "Who in here thinks Repulsor executioners should cost as much as a titan?" Who, not How.
It doesn't even make sense with how...
Obviously . He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get.
Oh no - I admit that eradicators are too cheap. I literally posted it in that thread lol. The executioner is dang near 100 points over costed though. At least 80. Twin Heavy bolters are all overcosted too. 6 str5 ap -1 is not worth 30 points. That is literally insane.
I'll break it down. Executioner lost it's special ability...POTMS - all non vheicals get that. Lost the ability to fail back and shoot. Half the heavy weapons in the game give it no save when you shoot it. Why the heck would I not just take 3 vindicators for the points? 33 t8 3+ wounds compared to 16...
What if those heavy bolters were s5 ap -1 d2?
There is no point in trying to balance the game if you are going to give 1 army a blanket rule that doubles the damage of a weapon and every other army has to pay the points for the weapon at half the efficiency. Even in this case that only works for 1 turn (the first turn) and you could just hide from it and then they just have over-costed weapons.
I'm extrapolating from the invictor changes and it would be on the assumption it was game wide
. He was implying that the executioner is overpriced, which it isn't. It goes back to your own point about how loyalist players see their units. Everything should be at least +1 of what everyone else has, for less points. So I fed him some satire. A flying tank with that many guns? And it only took a 16% hit? Compared to the points increase other armies got? And of course he wants it to be cheaper so loyalists can use it to move the already grossly underpriced eradicators quickly and safely up the board. Right, cut points for loyalists, they need all the help they can get. 
