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.

Don't forget assault on the eradicators also increases their threat range from turn 1. They can advance and shoot meaning they have an effective threat range of 30-35" meaning they are going to severely effect your deployment.

This gets even more sketchy with supplements/doctrines too like raven guard, white scars or ultras etc.

It gets even more farcical when you start stacking in character buffs like CM re-rolls, lieutenants and chaplains dishing out +1 to wound.

Nah, the eradicators are in a league of their own.

I think the most damning comparison was the one brought up by Not Online!!! being Obliterators. It's 1 for 3 lmao

 Red Corsair wrote:
Don't forget assault on the eradicators also increases their threat range from turn 1. They can advance and shoot meaning they have an effective threat range of 30-35" meaning they are going to severely effect your deployment.

This gets even more sketchy with supplements/doctrines too like raven guard, white scars or ultras etc.

It gets even more farcical when you start stacking in character buffs like CM re-rolls, lieutenants and chaplains dishing out +1 to wound.

Nah, the eradicators are in a league of their own.

I think the most damning comparison was the one brought up by Not Online!!! being Obliterators. It's 1 for 3 lmao

yeah it's weird, GW seems to like to price units like obliterators around shooting twice, but doesn't seem to want to price eradicators based around allllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll the gak the 90 billion space marine rules can interact with them.

Too hard, just undercost 'em, it'll be fine.

well obilts are better in combat ...

so

hahahahah ahh hh,,,, cough cough <begins to cry>

ugh.

---
Lets hope in the actual marine dex they are not 105pts for 3

Some MH for lolz

3 eradicators vs knight: firing twice long range = 4dmg
3 eradicators vs rhino: firing twice long range = 8dmg
3 eradicators vs MEQ: firing twice long range = 4 dead
3 eradicators vs guard: firing twice long range = 4 dead

1 obilt vs knight: average gun rolls = 2.66dmg
1 obilt vs rhino: average gun rolls = 3.5dmg
1 obilt vs MEQ: average gun rolls = 2 dead
1 obilt vs guard: average gun rolls = 3 dead

1 obilt vs knight: OMFG gun rolls = 5.3dmg
1 obilt vs rhino: OMFG gun rolls = 6.6dmg
1 obilt vs MEQ: OMFG gun rolls = 3 dead
1 obilt vs guard: OMFG gun rolls = 4 dead

An obilt can complete if he's shooting a knight, rolls nothing but 5's and 6's for his gun rolls and isnt within 12".

----------------

defensive:
getting shot by 5 lascannons:
1 dead eradicators

getting shot by 5 lascannons:
1 dead obit

getting shot by 20 bolters:
1.48 wounds for eradicators - none dead

getting shot by 20 bolters:
0.741 wounds for obilt - none dead

We are comparing Eradicators to a fairly bad unit in the firedragons though right? No one has really been vouching for those guys in a while.. Maybe the problem lies in them needing an upgrade more than Eradicators being world beaters? I think Eradicators look like good but reasonably well pointed unit in their own vacuum it's that other units of a similar role are probably over pointed?

fatbudda319 wrote:
I think Eradicators look like good but reasonably well pointed unit in their own vacuum it's that other units of a similar role are probably over pointed?

Well I don't think you'd get an argument about multimeltas and multimelta-based heavy units being overcosted.

Neophyte2012 wrote:
What's the problem of Eradicator? I don't understand. Low-quantity-high-quality weapons are far from satisfactory in 40k nowadays, they purely rely on luck. For the Eradicators, a max unit of 3 are just 6 shots 24" range S8 weapons, on average they can't even melt a single Leman Russ or Wave Serpent in one go, unless the IG or Eldar player are stupid enough not to screen out the flank letting Eradicators coming in within 12" of your precious cars from strategic reserve.

3 Eradicators have a 17.1% chance to kill a Leman Russ at 24”, rising to a 30% chance at 12”. That’s already egregious, it’s more efficient than any other unit in the game at 24”, and doesn’t suffer from having specific weaknesses in the same way as a Grav bomb. But that’s not all - they’re also relatively tough at 40 points, with decent melee to boot.

And yet that’s still not enough, because anyone paying attention will notice that aggressors also work better now, meaning Ultramarines with Eradicators is a serious threat to be concerned about, which is pertinent because they’re likely going to shove Guilleman with their 3x3 Eradicators, meaning at range they have a 33.4% chance to kill a Russ, and 52.3% at half range. Yes, a better than average chance to outright kill a - frankly very competitively costed - 160 point tank with a 120 point unit in one turn after moving 6”. They are utterly insane and anyone thinking you won’t see them maxed out in any marine list is nothing short of deluded.

It’s not a surprise to see marines be overpowered, it’s just frustrating and disappointing.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Don't forget assault on the eradicators also increases their threat range from turn 1. They can advance and shoot meaning they have an effective threat range of 30-35" meaning they are going to severely effect your deployment.

This gets even more sketchy with supplements/doctrines too like raven guard, white scars or ultras etc.

It gets even more farcical when you start stacking in character buffs like CM re-rolls, lieutenants and chaplains dishing out +1 to wound.

Nah, the eradicators are in a league of their own.

I think the most damning comparison was the one brought up by Not Online!!! being Obliterators. It's 1 for 3 lmao

I predict soon an uptick in complaints about that, considering how people allready bitched about a single obliterators bomb, which btw is around 500+ pts and atleast 3 cp.

For those ammount of ressources you can field casually 3x3 eradicators , hide 2 in Reserve an throw in Support charachters and have pts to spare....

fatbudda319 wrote:
We are comparing Eradicators to a fairly bad unit in the firedragons though right? No one has really been vouching for those guys in a while.. Maybe the problem lies in them needing an upgrade more than Eradicators being world beaters? I think Eradicators look like good but reasonably well pointed unit in their own vacuum it's that other units of a similar role are probably over pointed?

Not to pick on you, but it's kind of frustrating to see this exact exchange play out in a bunch of threads now.

'Eradicators are OP'.
'No, Fire Dragons have similar damage.'
'Yeah, but Eradicators have twice the range, four times the durability, and don't need DS to work.'
'Well Fire Dragons were terrible anyways, Eradicators aren't OP, they're just better than a crap unit.'

They're not just better than Fire Dragons; they're better than pretty much all infantry anti-tank in the game. They outperform multimelta Devastators, multimelta Retributors, even Tau fusion spam Commanders.

Then the argument becomes 'well melta in general sucks, this is just Melta Done Right'. But you have to really search to find another anti-tank unit that can make back its points by firing once at 24", let alone with the durability to likely get to fire again. And if a unit is reliably able to kill its own points' worth in one shooting phase, without requiring any stratagems, auras, deep strike, or strong limitations (eg short range) to do so, it cannot be considered well pointed in a vacuum.

Not trying to argue either way, but for taking up the challenge of an anti-tank infantry unit which can make a lot of points back in one go:

Souped-up shokka mek, deffskulls, with big things killer.

Average:
7 shots, S7, +1 to wound, rerolling one hit, one wound, one damage, AP-5 and Damage D6, exploding hits on 6's (can be improved to 5's and 6's).

not sure of the mathhammer, but in the games I've used it, I've shot tanks and the tanks either died or nearly died. It can also shoot twice, if it needs to finish the job.


I'm not panicking about these melta guys. I suspect that they will do well at killing tanks - as I would expect from a unit which is designed around killing tanks - but they will still struggle against infantry, or light vehicle spam (5 trukks to kill, aren't you glad you can kill one 4 times over in one turn?).


I'm waiting to see hem in action, then I will judge.

You can only have one souped-up shokka in your army, it costs a CP, last I checked it got a heavy points increase, you're including a specific subfaction bonus (I didn't make the Eradicators Salamanders!) and the restrictions on CP re-rolls now make it much more susceptible to bad rolls for shots and strength.

Even as Deathskulls, per a simulator app I wrote it averages 6.5 wounds against T8. Eradicators do more average damage, for cheaper now, and with no CP.

Also re: struggling against infantry- Eradicators shooting Intercessors make back over half their points on average in one round of shooting (killing just over 3 Intercessors on average). They're actually about three times more efficient at killing Intercessors than other Intercessors are (6 Intercessors kill 1 Intercessor on average).

They're almost as efficient as Intercessors at killing Guardsmen- 3 Eradicators kill 3.33 Guardsmen, 6 Intercessors (rapid firing) kill 4.44 Guardsmen. There's virtually no army that doesn't have a decent target for them. That's nuts.

 vaklor4 wrote:
With GW pricing Meltaguns FAR BELOW what they should (or rather, they've priced most other options to where Melta are stupidly low in comparison) and the meta generally seeming to be lots of high armor threats to hold the middle, do you think we'll see SM and CSM (And perhaps every other faction with access to it) entering a brief meta of melta spam? I've seen more than one list online from higher level players that bring a fat unit of Terminators with combi-meltas, which is NOT something I thought i'd ever see.

Melta is still too expensive compared to any of the popular unique guns in the meta and competes directly with plasma, which is on paper the superior option provided you can guarantee access to rerolls.

Eradicators are an exception to this as they are a 30pt model holding a 60pt gun for 40pts.

I don't think you'll see much melta outside of Eradicators. In 8th I ran ~15-17 melta guns in my armies as salamanders and got great mileage out of them, but Salamanders also lost their most effective bonus for melta weapons - 1 free shooting RR.

I was talking to a SoB friend about it the other day, and they also remarked on how the one-shot nature just made them to unreliable w/o some form of rerolls.

As for Eradicators, the reason they are busted is that the double-shooting ability makes them incredibly effective at killing elite models as well as big targets.

Cant have the super shokka in a tournament any more...

A.T. wrote:

fatbudda319 wrote:
I think Eradicators look like good but reasonably well pointed unit in their own vacuum it's that other units of a similar role are probably over pointed?

Well I don't think you'd get an argument about multimeltas and multimelta-based heavy units being overcosted.

This is a fair point. Multimeltas are massively too expensive, especially with the vehicle versions being hilarious bumped up 3 points for no goddam reason. The fact that the Lascannon is cheaper than a multimelta is a fething joke.

 Latro_ wrote:
Cant have the super shokka in a tournament any more...

why's that? have I missed something??

 some bloke wrote:

 Latro_ wrote:
Cant have the super shokka in a tournament any more...

why's that? have I missed something??

The CA GT mission pack made vigilous detachments go bye bye.

 some bloke wrote:

 Latro_ wrote:
Cant have the super shokka in a tournament any more...

why's that? have I missed something??

Grand tournament book bans specialist detachments.

Specialist detachments are forbidden for organized play (CA2020).

Eradicators are too good atm. Speaking of I'm selling some heheh.

Anyway my other concern is what GW is gonna do when they run out of cool unit names for blowing gak up.

the_scotsman wrote:
Yep, eradicators are definitely a better unit than fire dragons. Just the distinction between 9 T5 3+ wounds vs 5 T3 3+ wounds does that on the face of it. The fire dragons do ignore the advance and shoot penalty, and can get the "roll 3 and take the highest advance roll" exarch power, which means you can get them in range to take a shot outside melta range turn 1 if you start them in a Falcon (10"+12" range+5" average advance roll with 3d6) but they're much, MUCH more likely to be a pure suicide unit than the erads.

Honestly, I don't think the vehicle-> antivehicle meta will last all that long. I think people are sleeping on how you actually WIN the missions in 9th, and it'll quickly become apparent that investing too heavily into tanks or things to kill tanks leaves you open to stuff like "yo heres my list of a million 10-man plaguebearer squads, nurglings, and assorted other nurgle stuff have fun killing me!"

Except the Eradicator has a flat 24" and 9/10 a will have chapter master reroll. (Lets not kid ourselves here...)

FD may or may not have guide or re-roll 1's also but its not guaranteed. You can guarantee a chapter master re-roll if you choose to..

The fact they can sit in cover with a 1+ save and blap things from 24" on a much smaller board and somehow they are just fine is hilarious...

ERJAK wrote:

A.T. wrote:

fatbudda319 wrote:
I think Eradicators look like good but reasonably well pointed unit in their own vacuum it's that other units of a similar role are probably over pointed?

Well I don't think you'd get an argument about multimeltas and multimelta-based heavy units being overcosted.

This is a fair point. Multimeltas are massively too expensive, especially with the vehicle versions being hilarious bumped up 3 points for no goddam reason. The fact that the Lascannon is cheaper than a multimelta is a fething joke.

The "reason" is that they wanted to make as many points costs as possible divisible by five, and decided to round up instead of down in the case of multimeltas, the reasons for that is anyone's guess. Twin multi-meltas took an even bigger hit, going from 40 to 50, hit my Land Raider Achilles right in the heel.

dominuschao wrote:Eradicators are too good atm. Speaking of I'm selling some heheh.

Anyway my other concern is what GW is gonna do when they run out of cool unit names for blowing gak up.

Well, if these things and most other things "primaris" are any indication, they ran out a long time ago.

 Argive wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yep, eradicators are definitely a better unit than fire dragons. Just the distinction between 9 T5 3+ wounds vs 5 T3 3+ wounds does that on the face of it. The fire dragons do ignore the advance and shoot penalty, and can get the "roll 3 and take the highest advance roll" exarch power, which means you can get them in range to take a shot outside melta range turn 1 if you start them in a Falcon (10"+12" range+5" average advance roll with 3d6) but they're much, MUCH more likely to be a pure suicide unit than the erads.

Honestly, I don't think the vehicle-> antivehicle meta will last all that long. I think people are sleeping on how you actually WIN the missions in 9th, and it'll quickly become apparent that investing too heavily into tanks or things to kill tanks leaves you open to stuff like "yo heres my list of a million 10-man plaguebearer squads, nurglings, and assorted other nurgle stuff have fun killing me!"

Except the Eradicator has a flat 24" and 9/10 a will have chapter master reroll. (Lets not kid ourselves here...)

FD may or may not have guide or re-roll 1's also but its not guaranteed. You can guarantee a chapter master re-roll if you choose to..

The fact they can sit in cover with a 1+ save and blap things from 24" on a much smaller board and somehow they are just fine is hilarious...

How often do you see Aeldari player use fire dragons as their anti vehicle mainstay? I see almost all smart Elves will just take 10+ Dark Reapers and/or 2-3 blocks of 6 Skyweaver Jetbikes for AT purpose. Yes Eradicator may be better than Fire Dragons. But short range low quantity shot weapons on a relatively low mobility (M5~7-) is bad in foundation. For the same reason, what we see SM nowadays mainly brings Leviathan Dreadnought, quad las Relic Contemptor Dread, and Droppod Grav Cannon Devastator (IH, buffed by super doctrine, CM, Grav Amp Strat and Mercy is Weakness Strat) as their AT mainstay.

A Scion Meltagun Command Squad = 80pts for 4 Meltaguns, and if they are with the Iotan Gorgonnes, can be deep striked with Daring Descent (1CP) 5" away from a target (within Melta range). I killed a Pask Punisher with that today, then the following turn was able to take out the other Tank Commander the same way. Kappic Eagles can do the same with Precision Drop on T1 using a Valkyrie, and hit on a 2+...

Neophyte2012 wrote:

 Argive wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yep, eradicators are definitely a better unit than fire dragons. Just the distinction between 9 T5 3+ wounds vs 5 T3 3+ wounds does that on the face of it. The fire dragons do ignore the advance and shoot penalty, and can get the "roll 3 and take the highest advance roll" exarch power, which means you can get them in range to take a shot outside melta range turn 1 if you start them in a Falcon (10"+12" range+5" average advance roll with 3d6) but they're much, MUCH more likely to be a pure suicide unit than the erads.

Honestly, I don't think the vehicle-> antivehicle meta will last all that long. I think people are sleeping on how you actually WIN the missions in 9th, and it'll quickly become apparent that investing too heavily into tanks or things to kill tanks leaves you open to stuff like "yo heres my list of a million 10-man plaguebearer squads, nurglings, and assorted other nurgle stuff have fun killing me!"

Except the Eradicator has a flat 24" and 9/10 a will have chapter master reroll. (Lets not kid ourselves here...)

FD may or may not have guide or re-roll 1's also but its not guaranteed. You can guarantee a chapter master re-roll if you choose to..

The fact they can sit in cover with a 1+ save and blap things from 24" on a much smaller board and somehow they are just fine is hilarious...

How often do you see Aeldari player use fire dragons as their anti vehicle mainstay? I see almost all smart Elves will just take 10+ Dark Reapers and/or 2-3 blocks of 6 Skyweaver Jetbikes for AT purpose. Yes Eradicator may be better than Fire Dragons. But short range low quantity shot weapons on a relatively low mobility (M5~7-) is bad in foundation. For the same reason, what we see SM nowadays mainly brings Leviathan Dreadnought, quad las Relic Contemptor Dread, and Droppod Grav Cannon Devastator (IH, buffed by super doctrine, CM, Grav Amp Strat and Mercy is Weakness Strat) as their AT mainstay.

Except how many points are all of those options compared to Erads ?

But yeah FD are trash compared to other AT options and are super trash when compared against eradicators...

And thats sort sort of the point you just made. They are just another viable and efficient unit in a roster of super efficient units where they dont seem too efficient...
They are also easier to hid than the aforementioned.

Neophyte2012 wrote:

 Argive wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yep, eradicators are definitely a better unit than fire dragons. Just the distinction between 9 T5 3+ wounds vs 5 T3 3+ wounds does that on the face of it. The fire dragons do ignore the advance and shoot penalty, and can get the "roll 3 and take the highest advance roll" exarch power, which means you can get them in range to take a shot outside melta range turn 1 if you start them in a Falcon (10"+12" range+5" average advance roll with 3d6) but they're much, MUCH more likely to be a pure suicide unit than the erads.

Honestly, I don't think the vehicle-> antivehicle meta will last all that long. I think people are sleeping on how you actually WIN the missions in 9th, and it'll quickly become apparent that investing too heavily into tanks or things to kill tanks leaves you open to stuff like "yo heres my list of a million 10-man plaguebearer squads, nurglings, and assorted other nurgle stuff have fun killing me!"

Except the Eradicator has a flat 24" and 9/10 a will have chapter master reroll. (Lets not kid ourselves here...)

FD may or may not have guide or re-roll 1's also but its not guaranteed. You can guarantee a chapter master re-roll if you choose to..

The fact they can sit in cover with a 1+ save and blap things from 24" on a much smaller board and somehow they are just fine is hilarious...

How often do you see Aeldari player use fire dragons as their anti vehicle mainstay? I see almost all smart Elves will just take 10+ Dark Reapers and/or 2-3 blocks of 6 Skyweaver Jetbikes for AT purpose. Yes Eradicator may be better than Fire Dragons. But short range low quantity shot weapons on a relatively low mobility (M5~7-) is bad in foundation. For the same reason, what we see SM nowadays mainly brings Leviathan Dreadnought, quad las Relic Contemptor Dread, and Droppod Grav Cannon Devastator (IH, buffed by super doctrine, CM, Grav Amp Strat and Mercy is Weakness Strat) as their AT mainstay.

And yet, Eradicators are a better more efficient option for killing vehicles than any of those.

The Leviathan is almost as expensive as 3 squads of eradications (while doing nowhere near 3 squads of eradicators worth of damage to anything that has more than 2 wounds), the Quad las contemptors are a joke offensively compared to eradicators for the points, and the grav cannon dev squad has half the stats of an eradicator while being more expensive, requiring a droppod to be useful, and soaking up CP like a sponge.

Eradicators are obviously too good compared to similar options given today's rules, but they don't look like anything amazing compared to CSM suicide terminators of editions past where they could show up have good odds of deleting a tank in a single shooting round regardless of it's armor value and points cost.

Tanks shouldn't have wounds and their defense should be not getting penetrated in the first place. A tank that lets a round through its armor is a dead tank.

Refresh me on when those days of csm terminators were? Are we talking about 6th edition? I honestly can't recall when they could be compared to Erads.

dominuschao wrote:
Refresh me on when those days of csm terminators were? Are we talking about 6th edition? I honestly can't recall when they could be compared to Erads.

It started in 4th after the excellent 3.5 codex was gutted. The loadout was 3 Terminators with combi-meltas and you'd deep strike onto an icon for zero scatter, that was 3 melta shots, probably two hits near 100% chance to pen and then a reasonable chance to destroy the tank via damage table results. That was 105 points and tended to be the best way to run them. Trading 105 points for an entire Land Raider wasn't uncommon.

Here's a dakka thread about them from 2009:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/255056.page

True I had forgotten those days.
That said melta was everywhere back then and sm libbys could take PFs and destroy monoliths on the charge haha. Good times.

 Argive wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

The fact they can sit in cover with a 1+ save and blap things from 24" on a much smaller board and somehow they are just fine is hilarious...

Where is the 1+ save coming from? They have a 3+ save.
Only Imperial Fists can buff their save like that (IMHO).