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.

Dudeface wrote:

Marines can handle hordes without a unit firing nearly 200 shots. Simply put it's beyond excessive.

I admit i'm slightly confused. Why are people doing reroll calculations on 144 shots, which is the maximum? The average is 108 for bolters and 84 for flamers.

I think because it was argued about their ability to remove horde, so units with 11+ models, where the grenade launcher does flat 6 shots. So 12 per aggressor, shooting twice makes 144 per 6 man squad

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Marines can handle hordes without a unit firing nearly 200 shots. Simply put it's beyond excessive.

I admit i'm slightly confused. Why are people doing reroll calculations on 144 shots, which is the maximum? The average is 108 for bolters and 84 for flamers.

My apologies, it was repeated hyperbole, 144 is being used as the number because it's in direct claim that marines need 24 shot aggressors to deal with hordes (which maxes the shots) as they don't have capacity otherwise.

Ice_can wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
If everyone gets lifted up to Marine levels, then how will it feel to be the army which gets the update last? You've had to wait months/years and during that time the armies you can get fun, competitive games against has gradually dwindled down as everyone reaches a power level you cannot match. That will surely feel great for the people who have spent hundreds of <insert currency here> on their army, countless hours assembling and painting etc.

I would welcome every army getting buffed to Marine 2.0 levels. The game would be in a vastly better state of balance afterwards and armies are actually interesting to play and tinker with.
If somebody has to wait 2 years for all codizes to finish the cycle, so be it.

So your pro the game being able to table entire armies in 2-3 turns?
Everyone having an answer to everything, in a 2k list.
Volume of dice being so high you need to use an app to stop rolling dice becoming a 5 minuit affair per unit.
Also you really believe that when Other armies finally get buffed to be able to compete with marines 2.0 that the salt from marine players won't be epic.

Heck i'm looking forward to seeing how salty they are when, Scatter lasers become D2, dissy cannons become 8 shoots each D3.
Burst cannons become 12 shoots each.

I agree. Marine codex is the worst designed codex yet. An army just being able to do EVERYTHING is not good design. They should have versatile list of options to choose from and be able to adapt to the meta, but they shouldn't be able to have as many options all at once as they do.

Ice_can wrote:
So your pro the game being able to table entire armies in 2-3 turns?
Everyone having an answer to everything, in a 2k list.
Volume of dice being so high you need to use an app to stop rolling dice becoming a 5 minuit affair per unit.
Also you really believe that when Other armies finally get buffed to be able to compete with marines 2.0 that the salt from marine players won't be epic.

Heck i'm looking forward to seeing how salty they are when, Scatter lasers become D2, dissy cannons become 8 shoots each D3.
Burst cannons become 12 shoots each.

So you are pro having barren codizes where you have to spam the best three units or don't bother showing up at all to a tournament?
Where you ask yourself "why bother" with 2/3 of your units in a casual environment either?
Getting units stripped from your codex instead of added with every iteration?


Arguments for the argument's sake

a_typical_hero wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
So your pro the game being able to table entire armies in 2-3 turns?
Everyone having an answer to everything, in a 2k list.
Volume of dice being so high you need to use an app to stop rolling dice becoming a 5 minuit affair per unit.
Also you really believe that when Other armies finally get buffed to be able to compete with marines 2.0 that the salt from marine players won't be epic.

Heck i'm looking forward to seeing how salty they are when, Scatter lasers become D2, dissy cannons become 8 shoots each D3.
Burst cannons become 12 shoots each.

So you are pro having barren codizes where you have to spam the best three units or don't bother showing up at all to a tournament?
Where you ask yourself "why bother" with 2/3 of your units in a casual environment either?
Getting units stripped from your codex instead of added with every iteration?


Arguments for the argument's sake

You still seem under the illusion, that GW writes them on the go. They do not.
They allready have all the rules wirtten out.

a_typical_hero wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
So your pro the game being able to table entire armies in 2-3 turns?
Everyone having an answer to everything, in a 2k list.
Volume of dice being so high you need to use an app to stop rolling dice becoming a 5 minuit affair per unit.
Also you really believe that when Other armies finally get buffed to be able to compete with marines 2.0 that the salt from marine players won't be epic.

Heck i'm looking forward to seeing how salty they are when, Scatter lasers become D2, dissy cannons become 8 shoots each D3.
Burst cannons become 12 shoots each.

So you are pro having barren codizes where you have to spam the best three units or don't bother showing up at all to a tournament?
Where you ask yourself "why bother" with 2/3 of your units in a casual environment either?
Getting units stripped from your codex instead of added with every iteration?


Arguments for the argument's sake

I don't think you're reading his argument. His argument was not against every dex having internal balance at all.

a_typical_hero wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
So your pro the game being able to table entire armies in 2-3 turns?
Everyone having an answer to everything, in a 2k list.
Volume of dice being so high you need to use an app to stop rolling dice becoming a 5 minuit affair per unit.
Also you really believe that when Other armies finally get buffed to be able to compete with marines 2.0 that the salt from marine players won't be epic.

Heck i'm looking forward to seeing how salty they are when, Scatter lasers become D2, dissy cannons become 8 shoots each D3.
Burst cannons become 12 shoots each.

So you are pro having barren codizes where you have to spam the best three units or don't bother showing up at all to a tournament?
Where you ask yourself "why bother" with 2/3 of your units in a casual environment either?
Getting units stripped from your codex instead of added with every iteration?


Arguments for the argument's sake

1 if you think that's also not how the marine codex plays your sadly mistaken. They spam their best units still to win it's just their soo OP casual lists are the level of plent of other codex's competitive lists.

2 I've played enough editions to know GW isnt good enough at balance to get multiple units internally balanced well enough to all be viable,(they should be doing way better than they often achieve) but atleast having some level of balance is better than just dialing everything up to overkill tabled turn 2 power.

3 Lower killing power means more player choices, more chances to have those choices impact the game.

4 Maybe if GW would get over their Pimaracrap phase other factions could get their olf failcast models replaced instead of LT number 275. But you won't get units without new kits.

Ice_can wrote:

Why should any army b3 able to just wipe 150 models of the board in 1 or 2 turns?

Who said wipe off the board? Who said 1 or 2 turns? Hell the example you quoted then ignored or lied about specifically mentioned over the course of a five turn game.

Thus you need 2.5*3 7.5 actions per model over a 5 turn game to half the time kill and half the time not kill 150 "enemy" models.

Seriously if you're just going to lie about what people said, what's the point?

Well considering they have to replace the whole model line for their flag ship product, there is bound to be a lot of marine units. Sure they are GW style spread over year , but in the end probably the majority of classic marine models are going to get a replacment.

And because GW also seem to think that the way to give a new unit for new codex is to give them a hero character for 60$, we are getting a BA hero, SW hero, DA hero etc.

And if GW is going to remake a faction from ground up, then the best thing that can happen to a faction is a necron style update.

I can imagine GW making updates in their AoS style 4-5 heros, 3 units and some 1-2 big things too, with maybe some stuff being a dual kit.

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Why should any army b3 able to just wipe 150 models of the board in 1 or 2 turns?

Who said wipe off the board? Who said 1 or 2 turns? Hell the example you quoted then ignored or lied about specifically mentioned over the course of a five turn game.

Thus you need 2.5*3 7.5 actions per model over a 5 turn game to half the time kill and half the time not kill 150 "enemy" models.

Seriously if you're just going to lie about what people said, what's the point?

What on ever is this actions malarkey got to do with anything.

And plenty of TAC marine lits can remove 150 orks or guard easily enough.

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
I don't think you're reading his argument. His argument was not against every dex having internal balance at all.

Ice_can wrote:
1 if you think that's also not how the marine codex plays your sadly mistaken. They spam their best units still to win it's just their soo OP casual lists are the level of plent of other codex's competitive lists.

2 I've played enough editions to know GW isnt good enough at balance to get multiple units internally balanced well enough to all be viable,(they should be doing way better than they often achieve) but atleast having some level of balance is better than just dialing everything up to overkill tabled turn 2 power.

3 Lower killing power means more player choices, more chances to have those choices impact the game.

4 Maybe if GW would get over their Pimaracrap phase other factions could get their olf failcast models replaced instead of LT number 275. But you won't get units without new kits.

I said I would like for all armies to be buffed to Marine 2.0 levels. Simplifying it to mean "every army is able to table the opponent in 2-3 turns" is a dishonest, hyperbolic representation. Maybe ask me what I mean with it before making a strawman argument against my position for the sake of arguing.

What did Marines 2.0 bring to the army on the positive side?
- Lots of new units
- Old units have been made viable
- Tons of relics, warlord traits, stratagems and psychic disciplines
- Supplements for the most popular sub-factions
- Good internal balance for casual play

And that is what I want for every army. No idea how you could have an opposing position to that, but I'm sure somebody will quote me and tell me exactly why lol

 Nitro Zeus wrote:


I agree. Marine codex is the worst designed codex yet. An army just being able to do EVERYTHING is not good design. They should have versatile list of options to choose from and be able to adapt to the meta, but they shouldn't be able to have as many options all at once as they do.

I disagree. At 2,000 points every army should be able to do at least a little bit of everything.

Even using the relatively current points costs making half a somewhat equivalent first born old school (Cap, LT, 3x 10Tacs, Flamer, ML, 1x10 Assaults, 1x10 Devs HB, LC, PC, ML) company with a 5 man Terminator fluffy loaner from the First Company runs about 1200 points. Without the Terminators its just over the 1,000. Players have been able to take a little of everything (role wise, not named unit wise) at 2,000 for most of the history of the game.

a_typical_hero wrote:

 Nitro Zeus wrote:
I don't think you're reading his argument. His argument was not against every dex having internal balance at all.

Ice_can wrote:
1 if you think that's also not how the marine codex plays your sadly mistaken. They spam their best units still to win it's just their soo OP casual lists are the level of plent of other codex's competitive lists.

2 I've played enough editions to know GW isnt good enough at balance to get multiple units internally balanced well enough to all be viable,(they should be doing way better than they often achieve) but atleast having some level of balance is better than just dialing everything up to overkill tabled turn 2 power.

3 Lower killing power means more player choices, more chances to have those choices impact the game.

4 Maybe if GW would get over their Pimaracrap phase other factions could get their olf failcast models replaced instead of LT number 275. But you won't get units without new kits.

I said I would like for all armies to be buffed to Marine 2.0 levels. Simplifying it to mean "every army is able to table the opponent in 2-3 turns" is a dishonest, hyperbolic representation. Maybe ask me what I mean with it before making a strawman argument against my position for the sake of arguing.

What did Marines 2.0 bring to the army on the positive side?
- Lots of new units
- Old units have been made viable
- Tons of relics, warlord traits, stratagems and psychic disciplines
- Supplements for the most popular sub-factions
- Good internal balance for casual play

And that is what I want for every army. No idea how you could have an opposing position to that, but I'm sure somebody will quote me and tell me exactly why lol

- Lots of new units
That just primarachads and your not going to see such a crazy doubling in size of any other faction.
- Old units have been made viable
They haven't realy as they're never in competitive lists which is what is actually 100% viable.
- Tons of relics, warlord traits, stratagems and psychic disciplines
You might think that's good plenty of others on this forum think it's a bad thing as they have over laping effects and are way too many to memorise.
- Supplements for the most popular sub-factions
Or we could just have better subfaction rules in the codex no xeno codex includes anything like the bloat of marines
- Good internal balance for casual play
If by that you mean they are so above the level of every other codex they can take whatever, if everyone else is as OP marines won't have that any more it's a function of them being rediculous compaired to other factions.

Sorry but none of what your asking for is anything to do with the marine codex's power level, or atleast can't be still true if marines are actually balanced against other codex's.

Its an argument I don't like - because it leads into "balance is impossible/no one wants balance" - but really, when you say "everyone wants Marine codex" - its impossible, because what you want is "everyone should be overpowered/pointed too aggressively".

Because while Marines are perhaps the most egregious examples, aggressive pointing is the issue. So when say the Guard and Dark Eldar books came out they were pointed aggressively. You just got so much stuff that even the bad stuff seemed *viable* - because you could take on someone with a weaker codex.

But this is the problem of top tier codexes being valued say 7-10 on an internal balance system, while weaker codexes are balanced 4-8. So yes, if you bring that codex's meta list, composed of all the tier 8 units, it will *probably* have an advantage of the weakest selection of the top tier codex. But if you bring the weaker tier 4-5 options, its a ludicrous walkover.

But this viability is caused by the power point. If every codex was a 4-8, everyone would look at their tier 4 options and say they'd suck. Because they would.

Now admittedly if external balance could sort of be worked in this way, you would then hope internal balance could follow - and at the very least everyone would at least have a capable meta build rather than potentially being left completely out in the cold.

I'm also not convinced GW does have all the rules. They might I guess - and they undoubtedly have rules way in advance of release - but I'm suspect they are sitting on a complete set of codexes for every faction, even if playtesters may be playing certain ideas out.

A 6 man squad of agressors does 5 wounds with reroll all hits to custodian guard (with no -1 to hit even) and with their shoots twice activated with auto bolters.

Not that impressive for nearly a 300 point unit.

A unit of 20 Necron warriors with gauss Reapers (the str 5 ap-2 rapid fire gun) 2+ to hit and reroll 1's does. Does nearly 10 wounds to custodians.

They kill more intercessors too. 17 wounds. to 13.2.


LIKE WOW GUYS. And...I bet most of you would say warriors suck too? Am I right?

Imagine what this unit can do with a new stratagem that say....gives them +1 wound or something or get bonus -1 AP (hinted in their new codex). They could literally kill ANYTHING. But but but...marines OP!

The gak is checkers! It aint Chess!
Cheers to anyone who gets this!

Agressors are quite good but warriors are objective secured and are required slot selections.

The issue is that your Gauss Reapers have 7" rapid fire range. Which sort of sucks.

Now if this increases to 14" (or even 18") with a chapter tactic, I think you could be in business - but the codex isn't out yet, and that seems like something they won't do.

 Xenomancers wrote:
A 6 man squad of agressors does 5 wounds with reroll all hits to custodian guard (with no -1 to hit even) and with their shoots twice activated with auto bolters.

Not that impressive for nearly a 300 point unit.

A unit of 20 Necron warriors with gauss Reapers (the str 5 ap-2 rapid fire gun) 2+ to hit and reroll 1's does. Does nearly 10 wounds to custodians.

They kill more intercessors too. 17 wounds. to 13.2.


LIKE WOW GUYS. And...I bet most of you would say warriors suck too? Am I right?

Imagine what this unit can do with a new stratagem that say....gives them +1 wound or something or get bonus -1 AP (hinted in their new codex). They could literally kill ANYTHING. But but but...marines OP!

The gak is checkers! It aint Chess!
Cheers to anyone who gets this!

Agressors are quite good but warriors are objective secured and are required slot selections.

The complaint is about the number of dice rolled to get those 5 wounds, not their power. It's ridiculous and a waste of time, as your example proves, just as my real example earlier about when an opponent did the same against my Fellblade. It's tedious and annoying. Rerolls need to go away, for aggressors and everything else.

Tyel wrote:
The issue is that your Gauss Reapers have 7" rapid fire range. Which sort of sucks.

Now if this increases to 14" (or even 18") with a chapter tactic, I think you could be in business - but the codex isn't out yet, and that seems like something they won't do.

Oh that part is already confirmed. Sautec get 18" rapid on all their weapons. So That makes the reaper always rapid fire. It could be even better with mephrite with a stratagem.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

The complaint is about the number of dice rolled to get those 5 wounds, not their power. It's ridiculous and a waste of time, as your example proves, just as my real example earlier about when an opponent did the same against my Fellblade. It's tedious and annoying. Rerolls need to go away, for aggressors and everything else.

Exactly, people have to stop thinking the complaints are from a powerlevel perspective. Rerolls don't do much for aggressors anyway, either they dont do meaningful damage (your fellblade example) or they overkill whatever they shoot at anyway (gaunts, stealers, boys, etc)

 Xenomancers wrote:
A 6 man squad of agressors does 5 wounds with reroll all hits to custodian guard (with no -1 to hit even) and with their shoots twice activated with auto bolters.

Not that impressive for nearly a 300 point unit.

A unit of 20 Necron warriors with gauss Reapers (the str 5 ap-2 rapid fire gun) 2+ to hit and reroll 1's does. Does nearly 10 wounds to custodians.

They kill more intercessors too. 17 wounds. to 13.2.


LIKE WOW GUYS. And...I bet most of you would say warriors suck too? Am I right?

Imagine what this unit can do with a new stratagem that say....gives them +1 wound or something or get bonus -1 AP (hinted in their new codex). They could literally kill ANYTHING. But but but...marines OP!

The gak is checkers! It aint Chess!
Cheers to anyone who gets this!

Agressors are quite good but warriors are objective secured and are required slot selections.

You're missing the point. Aggressors aren't op against anything other than chaff, the complaint is the 15 minute dice throwing exercise required to do it and the fact that volume of shots makes them hard to balance against tougher targets they accidentally do well against.

@Gadzilla.
I get that rerolls are annoying. d6 system is limited in what you can do.

For insane near 100 dice rolls. You make an agreement with your opponent. How about we roll 20 dice and multiply times 5? or use dice ap?

I can agree with you. Which is why I typically only take 3 man units of agressors...YOU DONT NEED 6 man unit to wipe chaff. They are chaff obliterators - in an army that specializes in anti infantry anyways. Their roll isn't really required...Not in my games anyways and admittedly not many games in 9th yet.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
A reroll to wound against infantry would have been a better rule than shoots twice. I agree to that. It makes them good vs infantry and bad vs everything else.

Breton wrote:


Because Marines shouldn't be able to handle hordes? Can you make a TAC list without Aggressors, Eradicators, and/or Inceptors? Can it actually TAC? A few posts up you just made half the point I've been making. Does it matter if they roll X dice because of their shots or because of their rerolls? Does it matter if it's one unit doing X shots, or the whole army doing those X shots in addition to their own? A low model count TAC army needs to have some number Y (I don't know what that is, and it depends on other factors) of attacks and dice rolls to be balanced against a high model count army. Taking away the dice SM need isn't (necessarily?) balance. If you want to double (or so) the dice Non-rerolling Non-double tapping Aggressors, Dreads, Terminators, Intercessors and Tactical Marines throw out to maintain that Y number of shots per game I can get behind that. At that point it's not all the anti-infantry eggs in one or two baskets but almost the entire army is able to do the job which is probably a better design.

I've mentioned this before but I guess I'll do so again, maybe you'll respond this time. 200pts of Intercessors fires 20 shots for 14ish hits and 7ish wounds at 30' range which kill 7 ork boyz a turn. 7 orkz = 56pts, Intercessors, with just shooting, will make back their points on turn 4, and realistically before that when you add in morale. Those same 10 Intercessors are dishing out the same 14 hits vs a T7 3+ save vehicle, but instead of 7 wounds they get a bit less than 5 and at -1 it ends up doing 2.5ish damage a turn (tac doctrine over 3), not great but still a lot better than most infantry can manage. Against a Terminator elite they do 7 wounds for 2.33 dmg (tac doctrine its 3.5), so you have killed at least 1 (unless terminators get 3 wounds) terminators making back 36pts and possibly damaging another terminator. So in other words, those boring intercessors are capable of slaying hordes and elite infantry fairly well. Definitely not wiping out a squad of boyz per turn but that shouldn't even be a thing to begin with for a single unit.

Karol wrote:

Aggressors throwing out 24 shots each against a horde is simply excessive. The problem people complain about is the time the dice take, the root cause is the volume of shots. There is no need for that many shots per model.

With that knowledge, you could limit them to units of 3, make them only get the double shots against 1 target ala eradicators and they might begin to be OK, but 3 aggressors at 135 points doing as many shots at 3 wyverns is excessive.

But isn't the difference the point costs of units? orks or IG can afford to have a separate option for anti tank, anti horde, that does nothing to something else, because their basic troops cost a few points. SM either need a unit like erdictors, which kills tanks and HQ by looking at them, or they need units that are great vs horde , but still have the number of shots to kill heavy infantry or light vehicles. Otherwise if a marine players goes second and loses his specific units, then they may as well stop playing the game at all, because the disadventage is too big if your army is specilised. Isn't just a SM thing either. If someone kills the HQs in a GK army turn 1, or in a custodes army the same thing happens.

An Ork infantry unit maxed out is 240pts, 4 aggressors at 180pts can wipe them out in 1 turn. 3 Eradicators cost 120pts and can kill an Ork buggy a turn (110pts) with relative ease. These are units that are making back their value or MORE than their value in a single turn and without rerolls, stratagems or auras. I can't think of an ork unit that costs 360pts let alone 180pts that can kill 30 boyz a turn. As far as vehicles, probably our best infantry anti-vehicle unit would be Tankbustas, 120pts of Tankbustas is 7 Bustas who have full reroll to hit if they shoot vehicles, thats 7 shots for 8.16 actual shots (Dakka). 2.7 hits, reroll the 5.4ish misses for 1.8 extra hits, 4.5ish hits. Against a Buggy that is 3 wounds, against a 5+ save is 2 going through for 6 dmg....50% less dmg than the eradicators manage. In other words, to get the same dmg vs a light vehicle the Orkz have to take 180pts to the SM's 120, and those 180 are useless vs anything besides vehicles, literally losing their reroll misses so significantly worse than eradicators vs elite infantry and who is going to die quicker? a mob of 7 T4 6+ models or 3 T5 3+ 3 wound Eradicators? So Orkz can take more models than SM's but they are significantly less effective and die significantly faster and who are less useful vs other targets.

Breton wrote:

So the new tank that's going to throw out 40? What difference does it make if it's one model, one unit, or an aggregate across the army?

Those 3 aggressors vs a horde are throwing out 72 shots for 120pts, how much is that new vehicle which can put out 40?

a_typical_hero wrote:

Orks seem to do fine in the current meta with diverse lists placing well in tournaments.

Orkz have won with 2 builds. Horde and light vehicle spam. Both types have won events by playing to the mission and pretty much ignoring the enemy as far as attempting to kill units unless killing that unit was imperative to the mission. They have in turn played against SM lists that are built to attempt to table your opponent as quickly as possible. In other words, they had wonderful match ups against people who didn't want to win in the mission but were instead trying to table them. give it a few months (Covid slowness) and watch as those lists die out as SM players realize they don't need to table their opponent to win and they don't need to bring as much anti-knight weapons as they are used to. Kind of hard to kill 120 boyz with lascannons.

 Xenomancers wrote:
A 6 man squad of agressors does 5 wounds with reroll all hits to custodian guard (with no -1 to hit even) and with their shoots twice activated with auto bolters.

Not that impressive for nearly a 300 point unit.

A unit of 20 Necron warriors with gauss Reapers (the str 5 ap-2 rapid fire gun) 2+ to hit and reroll 1's does. Does nearly 10 wounds to custodians.

They kill more intercessors too. 17 wounds. to 13.2.


LIKE WOW GUYS. And...I bet most of you would say warriors suck too? Am I right?

Imagine what this unit can do with a new stratagem that say....gives them +1 wound or something or get bonus -1 AP (hinted in their new codex). They could literally kill ANYTHING. But but but...marines OP!

The gak is checkers! It aint Chess!
Cheers to anyone who gets this!

Agressors are quite good but warriors are objective secured and are required slot selections.

Also side note your maths is once again skewed and misrepresenting the facts
270 not 300 points
Vrs 240 points of warriors or 5 agressors worth of points who still do 4.7 wounds to custodes

 Xenomancers wrote:
@Gadzilla.
I get that rerolls are annoying. d6 system is limited in what you can do.

For insane near 100 dice rolls. You make an agreement with your opponent. How about we roll 20 dice and multiply times 5? or use dice ap?

I can agree with you. Which is why I typically only take 3 man units of agressors...YOU DONT NEED 6 man unit to wipe chaff. They are chaff obliterators - in an army that specializes in anti infantry anyways. Their roll isn't really required...Not in my games anyways and admittedly not many games in 9th yet.

That is an option, and I appreciate your candor. Just don't let certain other loyalist players hear you say aggressors aren't necessary for loyalists to deal with massed infantry.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
A reroll to wound against infantry would have been a better rule than shoots twice. I agree to that. It makes them good vs infantry and bad vs everything else.

That is an interesting idea. Half the actual shots but rerolling wounds against infantry. That would cut down on dice rolls and make aggressors pure chaff killers. That could work.

Also, Tactical doctrine literally doubles the damage against Custodes.

SemperMortis wrote:


I've mentioned this before but I guess I'll do so again, maybe you'll respond this time. 200pts of Intercessors fires 20 shots for 14ish hits and 7ish wounds at 30' range which kill 7 ork boyz a turn. 7 orkz = 56pts, Intercessors, with just shooting, will make back their points on turn 4, and realistically before that when you add in morale. Those same 10 Intercessors are dishing out the same 14 hits vs a T7 3+ save vehicle, but instead of 7 wounds they get a bit less than 5 and at -1 it ends up doing 2.5ish damage a turn (tac doctrine over 3), not great but still a lot better than most infantry can manage. Against a Terminator elite they do 7 wounds for 2.33 dmg (tac doctrine its 3.5), so you have killed at least 1 (unless terminators get 3 wounds) terminators making back 36pts and possibly damaging another terminator. So in other words, those boring intercessors are capable of slaying hordes and elite infantry fairly well. Definitely not wiping out a squad of boyz per turn but that shouldn't even be a thing to begin with for a single unit.

First off, Did I ever Intercessors should be able to wipe out a squad of boys per turn?
Second: What is there to reply to? That sounds like the math I put up pointing out Intercessors were a little slow but in the performance ballpark. Well technically you're trying to convert it into "winning it's points back" which isn't accurate or related to the point I'm making. You can shoot all the T1 1W 1 point models you want, if they have a thousand of them, you'll win your points back, and never been able to shoot/attack enough of them to make any headway on the objectives. You're not actually disagreeing with anything I've already said there. You're just skipping the OTHER half of my point. They either need another unit skewed/dedicated towards anti-infantry like Aggressors, or they need extra shooting to make up for the lost shooting from things like transports, Anti-tank, and so on you would see in an actual TAC list. The barebones Impulsor starts out at about 1 shot per 25 points. If you want to throw good money after bad, they get to 1 shot per 13 or so points. Transports have an entirely different set of issues - losing a turn or more of opportunity from the internal unit - making them bad. That doesn't change the fact that this is ANOTHER reason they're bad, and is an easy example of the point I'm making.

How many SM lists do you see with 6x10 troops squads? I was just playing with this the other day. You can make (the important iconic part of) a full Old Marine 2nd Company for just under to just over 2,000 points in a Batallion. You can't make the Ultra Marines 2nd Company from the Damnos book(Named character prices, Command Squad changes, Dreads, and Dev Weapon prices) , but you can get pretty close. Cap/LT vs Sicarius/Tiggy. Skip the Command Squad, skip the Dreads, technically one was a loaner from the First Company anyway - but yeah you can get close. You can't get anywhere close with Primaris - You're at just under 2400 if you use 3x10 Intercessors and 3x10 Assault Intercessors, 20 Chute Reivers as the analogue to Assault Marines and 20 Hellblasters as the analogue to Devs. Neither of those lists are particularly TAC. The Reivers and Assault Marines are/were abysmal. Aside from the Assault Marines, nothing has any speed for things like Line Breaker or some sort of Rapid Redploy objective mechanic etc.

Xenomancers wrote:


I can agree with you. Which is why I typically only take 3 man units of agressors...

When I take them, I take a 5 man'er. My eye would twitch way too hard for way too long with a 3 man squad. 100 Marines divides by 10, and it divides by 5. It does not divide by 3 or by 6.

 Xenomancers wrote:
A 6 man squad of agressors does 5 wounds with reroll all hits to custodian guard (with no -1 to hit even) and with their shoots twice activated with auto bolters.

Not that impressive for nearly a 300 point unit.

A unit of 20 Necron warriors with gauss Reapers (the str 5 ap-2 rapid fire gun) 2+ to hit and reroll 1's does. Does nearly 10 wounds to custodians.

They kill more intercessors too. 17 wounds. to 13.2.


LIKE WOW GUYS. And...I bet most of you would say warriors suck too? Am I right?

Imagine what this unit can do with a new stratagem that say....gives them +1 wound or something or get bonus -1 AP (hinted in their new codex). They could literally kill ANYTHING. But but but...marines OP!

The gak is checkers! It aint Chess!
Cheers to anyone who gets this!

Agressors are quite good but warriors are objective secured and are required slot selections.

But isn't this comparison quite unbalanced? You are comparing a unit optimized to handle T3-T4 with low saves with a Necron unit whose weaponry is optimized against units with T3-T5 with very good saves.
And then you choose as target a T5, 2+, 3++, so almost the worst you could choose for the Aggressors (only thing worse would be T8, 2+).
On the other hand I would say a 270 (?) points unit optimized to kill chaff with bad saves being able to do 5 wounds to custodian guard is pretty dang awesome. I just collect IG, but I don't see anything (Edit: designed for chaff clearing, so punishers etc.) managing that for that pricetag...
But then again maybe you meant that ironic and I just missed that. In that case sorry.

 Pyroalchi wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
A 6 man squad of agressors does 5 wounds with reroll all hits to custodian guard (with no -1 to hit even) and with their shoots twice activated with auto bolters.

Not that impressive for nearly a 300 point unit.

A unit of 20 Necron warriors with gauss Reapers (the str 5 ap-2 rapid fire gun) 2+ to hit and reroll 1's does. Does nearly 10 wounds to custodians.

They kill more intercessors too. 17 wounds. to 13.2.


LIKE WOW GUYS. And...I bet most of you would say warriors suck too? Am I right?

Imagine what this unit can do with a new stratagem that say....gives them +1 wound or something or get bonus -1 AP (hinted in their new codex). They could literally kill ANYTHING. But but but...marines OP!

The gak is checkers! It aint Chess!
Cheers to anyone who gets this!

Agressors are quite good but warriors are objective secured and are required slot selections.

But isn't this comparison quite unbalanced? You are comparing a unit optimized to handle T3-T4 with low saves with a Necron unit whose weaponry is optimized against units with T3-T5 with very good saves.
And then you choose as target a T5, 2+, 3++, so almost the worst you could choose for the Aggressors (only thing worse would be T8, 2+).
On the other hand I would say a 270 (?) points unit optimized to kill chaff with bad saves being able to do 5 wounds to custodian guard is pretty dang awesome. I just collect IG, but I don't see anything (Edit: designed for chaff clearing, so punishers etc.) managing that for that pricetag...
But then again maybe you meant that ironic and I just missed that. In that case sorry.

It's xeno.
On one side he's comparing a basic unit, on another side he's comparing a squad of 5" movement models with 7" of enemy custodians while at full strength and effected by My Will Be Done.
Meanwhile, he didn't even include Manrione Rerolls or Sadalomandor faction bonus. It's not even worth arguing with him

I'm yet to see a logical post from Xenos. Just point out one or two of the limitless logic faults in his post and keep it moving, engaging with him just ends up with him writing a narrative about you being a "marine hater" or something. It's insufferable, but it's the internet, everyone gets an opinion even those who most. definitely. should. not.