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.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/05 05:16:26
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
If you can't find a way to deepstrike them you obviously never read the 9th edition rules, aka you are willfully obtuse. Which is what I expect out of you at this point, but even without it they are way to good for their point cost.
Its a BRB Strat? I've been looking in the codex and Supplements. I looked in the BRB too but only found one that allowed what basically amounted to Outflank not Deepstrike so I went back to codex, supplements, campaign books, etc. Which one is it? Whats the name of the strat? Which page? I miss the EBooks where you could use a search function.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Yes, but it's what everyone is talking about when they talk about putting eradicators into reserves. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure Breton knows it. These things seem designed to come in from a board edge turn 2 or 3 and melt stuff. That's why I think it's silly to consider auras when talking about them. They practically have "Operate behind enemy lines without support" written on them.
If you can't find a way to deepstrike them you obviously never read the 9th edition rules, aka you are willfully obtuse. Which is what I expect out of you at this point, but even without it they are way to good for their point cost.
Its a BRB Strat? I've been looking in the codex and Supplements. I looked in the BRB too but only found one that allowed what basically amounted to Outflank not Deepstrike so I went back to codex, supplements, campaign books, etc. Which one is it? Whats the name of the strat? Which page? I miss the EBooks where you could use a search function.
It's actually essentially outflank, it's called strategic reserves, it's in the BRB.
And you knew this is what he meant, and you are clearly being purposely obtuse to make some kind of point. Badly.
Eradicators range means that in 90% of situations, the outflank is equally as effective as deepstrike. It has a few downsides, but they're outweighed by the fact that Eradicators can use it to appear anywhere along a table edge and delete an enemy unit.
It's marginally easier to screen your tanks from units coming from reserves, but if you have enough of a horde of screens to fully protect your vehicles from all sides, then you can also protect them from deepstrikers, so the difference is moot. Plus if you're running that many hordes, the eradicators probably don't have many decent targets anyway.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Yes, but it's what everyone is talking about when they talk about putting eradicators into reserves. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure Breton knows it. These things seem designed to come in from a board edge turn 2 or 3 and melt stuff. That's why I think it's silly to consider auras when talking about them. They practically have "Operate behind enemy lines without support" written on them.
No, I was actually looking for Deep Strike. I was thinking deep strike onto the Center Mosh Pit when I was told they could Deep Strike for 1CP.
Edit to Add: One of the things I didn't like about them was they were slow. Outflanking onto the short board edge and then foot slogging 15 turns to get back to the middle doesn't make them sound any better. Pairing them with Guilliman for his advance bonus is better than that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/05 05:34:56
I'm just annoyed with them now because, to sound like a broken record, Aggressors lost their shoot twice (and didn't even keep the ability to not lose accuracy with advance + shoot) yet Eradicators kept it for...reasons. Either both units should have it or neither should have it. The inconsistency from GW is infuriating at times.
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.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Yes, but it's what everyone is talking about when they talk about putting eradicators into reserves. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure Breton knows it. These things seem designed to come in from a board edge turn 2 or 3 and melt stuff. That's why I think it's silly to consider auras when talking about them. They practically have "Operate behind enemy lines without support" written on them.
No, I was actually looking for Deep Strike. I was thinking deep strike onto the Center Mosh Pit when I was told they could Deep Strike for 1CP.
Edit to Add: One of the things I didn't like about them was they were slow. Outflanking onto the short board edge and then foot slogging 15 turns to get back to the middle doesn't make them sound any better. Pairing them with Guilliman for his advance bonus is better than that.
M5 is slow?
Gimme a Rest lad.
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.
Samuhell wrote: I don't mean to sound stupid (though I'm about to) but Eradicators are 40ppm yeah? you're paying for a t5 3w 3+ dude with a 24" single shot melta, that can double its shots if he and all his unit target one thing.
I'm just not understanding the hype/outrage, what makes them good? Am I missing something?
That was my original question. They're good. They're not as good as most of the people whining about them are making them out to be. That Melta Rifle is an Assault Weapon, meaning they can advance + shoot. 5" move plus 3.5" advance + 1" Guilliman + It's always Tactical In Eradicataor Town (Multiple Warlord Trait/Strat Shenanigans) is pretty good. Supposedly there's some way to Deep Strike them, but I never found it.
Strategic Reserves: BRB pages 256 and 257.
in fairness thats a liiiitle more limited then deep striking so if someone used the words "deep strike" (I've not seen anyone making that error HERE) that could throw him off
Yes, but it's what everyone is talking about when they talk about putting eradicators into reserves. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure Breton knows it. These things seem designed to come in from a board edge turn 2 or 3 and melt stuff. That's why I think it's silly to consider auras when talking about them. They practically have "Operate behind enemy lines without support" written on them.
No, I was actually looking for Deep Strike. I was thinking deep strike onto the Center Mosh Pit when I was told they could Deep Strike for 1CP.
Edit to Add: One of the things I didn't like about them was they were slow. Outflanking onto the short board edge and then foot slogging 15 turns to get back to the middle doesn't make them sound any better. Pairing them with Guilliman for his advance bonus is better than that.
Why do you need to walk into the center of the board?
6" deployed from the edge, 24" range. your already reaching 30" on a 60" board.
Why are you fixated on needing to be in the center of the board?
What Eradictors need to do is be able to get range to their target, which is very likely going to happen.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/05 09:10:06
Nitro Zeus wrote: lol at listing Dreadnoughts as being nerfed because they lost Bolter discipline. Yeah forget about everything they gained right, they are NERFED because they lost one rule that barely even makes a difference for their usual loadouts.
Deceptive was right. Wow.
I said I was going to list nerfs. That was a nerf. If I said I was going to call everything out then I would be being deceptive, but you're just a goon looking to pick a fight so push off, yea?
The conversation was whether the changes actually nerfed Space Marines, or whether they were just changed, and what was ACTUALLY made worse. You came in with an example of a nerf that was in fact, exactly what he said - a unit that had something changed yet wasnt weaker at all. Why would someone not point this out? It's incredibly relevant to the dishonest point you attempted to make.
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. If you feel I'm disagreeing with you at a higher rate than anyone else, perhaps you should take a look at the quality of the posts you've been making mate.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/05 10:15:20
Any time you want to take a rest, you feel free. You are pretty tiring.
As mentioned at the time anything foot slogging was "slow".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ordana wrote: Why do you need to walk into the center of the board?
6" deployed from the edge, 24" range. your already reaching 30" on a 60" board.
But not at optimal ranges. Deep Strike to the center lets you dodge incoming fire before you Deep Strike 9" away inside of the 12" Multi-Melta Range. You probably want to take it up with the guy who originally said you could deep strike them. As I mentioned then and still prefer now, faster melta that can redeploy to other areas is my preference.
Why are you fixated on needing to be in the center of the board?
What Eradictors need to do is be able to get range to their target, which is very likely going to happen.
You probably want to take it up with the guy who originally said you could deep strike them.
Why do you think "getting to the center of the board" isn't a litmus test instead of a literal obsession? As I mentioned then and still prefer now, faster melta that can redeploy to other areas is my preference. A melta speeder can hit both sides of the board much easier than infantry. What makes you think going from edge to center is an obsession and not a litmus test? A unit that can quickly move from Edge to Center can usually also hit both back corners where tanks, artillery and so on like to hide.
Nitro Zeus wrote: The conversation was whether the changes actually nerfed Space Marines, or whether they were just changed, and what was ACTUALLY made worse. You came in with an example of a nerf that was in fact, exactly what he said - a unit that had something changed yet wasnt weaker at all. Why would someone not point this out? It's incredibly relevant to the dishonest point you attempted to make.
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. If you feel I'm disagreeing with you at a higher rate than anyone else, perhaps you should take a look at the quality of the posts you've been making mate.
Daedalus81 replied to a post that claimed that nothing changed for the overall power level with an possible incomplete list of changes that impact the efficiency of units / wargear in a negative way without giving an opinion wether all changes made to a unit / wargear made it stronger overall despite the nerf.
You are picking a fight and have a gak discussion culture. Instead of joining into accusing them of being deceptive, you could just have pointed out that Dreads did get buffs and probably became better overall.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/05 11:06:53
Designer's Note: Hardened Veterans can be represented by any Imperial Guard models, but we've really included them to allow players to practise their skills at making a really unique and individual unit. Because of this we won't be making models to represent many of the options allowed to a Veteran squad - it's up to you to convert the models. (Imperial Guard, 3rd Edition)
Nitro Zeus wrote: The conversation was whether the changes actually nerfed Space Marines, or whether they were just changed, and what was ACTUALLY made worse. You came in with an example of a nerf that was in fact, exactly what he said - a unit that had something changed yet wasnt weaker at all. Why would someone not point this out? It's incredibly relevant to the dishonest point you attempted to make.
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. If you feel I'm disagreeing with you at a higher rate than anyone else, perhaps you should take a look at the quality of the posts you've been making mate.
Daedalus81 replied to a post that claimed that nothing changed for the overall power level with an possible incomplete list of changes that impact the efficiency of units / wargear in a negative way without giving an opinion wether all changes made to a unit / wargear made it stronger overall despite the nerf.
You are picking a fight and have a gak discussion culture. Instead of joining into accusing them of being deceptive, you could just have pointed out that Dreads did get buffs and probably became better overall.
There's only so many times we give a person the benefit of the doubt before we start to realise that the arguments being put forth are deliberately sculpted to paint an inaccurate picture. He admitted as much in his response. So no I'm not picking a fight. I'm calling it exactly what it was - a deceptive argument. Dreadnoughts losing Bolter Discipline doesn't mean that Dreadnoughts were nerfed. They are definitely a better choice than before, and stronger than alternative equivalents from many other armies so I don't see this as a nerf.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/05 11:33:42
Designer's Note: Hardened Veterans can be represented by any Imperial Guard models, but we've really included them to allow players to practise their skills at making a really unique and individual unit. Because of this we won't be making models to represent many of the options allowed to a Veteran squad - it's up to you to convert the models. (Imperial Guard, 3rd Edition)
a_typical_hero wrote: I don't think they can, as reviews are out there and nobody mentioned it as of yet. Somebody would have said something if that were the case.
Truthfully, I would have expected someone to mention it either way.
It's pretty important if GW eliminated or continued transport Tetris.
There's only so many times we give a person the benefit of the doubt before we start to realise that the arguments being put forth are deliberately sculpted to paint an inaccurate picture. He admitted as much in his response. So no I'm not picking a fight. I'm calling it exactly what it was - a deceptive argument. Dreadnoughts losing Bolter Discipline doesn't mean that Dreadnoughts were nerfed. They are definitely a better choice than before, and stronger than alternative equivalents from many other armies so I don't see this as a nerf.
You are so positively ridiculous that I can't even. I didn't say "Dreadnoughts were worse". I listed nerfs. A list. As in these things are nerfs. feth.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Then. How. Is. It. An. Example. Of. Space. Marines. Being. Weaker?
Jesus Christ how slow do we have to go for you.
Back up, let's slow it down for you. A unit receiving a nerf, doesn't mean it's weaker by default, it may receive other buffs.
Objectively speaking, Daedalus gave you a list of nerfs as clearly stated.
At no point did they or anyone else say conclusively those were evidence for a unit or the army being weaker. They are categorically nerfs.
Let's give a made up example. Ork warboss gets -1 BS next ork codex. That is a nerf. Same time the unit gets +99 to all other stats. The unit is better overall, but still received a nerf.
So when someone guesses Marines overall didn’t get a nerf, and marine players are just pretending things got nerfed when they are just fine. And you respond to this by listing a unit getting one negative change and ignoring the positive changes for it that leave it in a better place before, and you use this response as an example of a nerf in direct response to his post, how is this not proving EXACTLY what he’s saying?
It was absolutely a deceptive example, there’s no two ways about it, and if you guys weren’t so deeply biased here there’s no way you wouldn’t say the exact same thing about someone else doing the same thing.
The sad part is that it’s completely unnecessary, Marines did overall get nerfs, and there was absolutely zero need to mention Dreadnoughts to make the exact point he was trying to make.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/05 14:16:57
You either defend codex Astartes as having bern nerfed to unplayable trash and having been unfairly downgraded from a B teir to a D tier codex.
Or you got smashed for a year with marine cheese, and the codex when from being A tier to A tier.
Turthfully it probably has been changed up enough that if the marine player ties they can take a weaker list, which was almost impossible before.
However in the real world where people are not deliberately sabotaging their own codex at list building
They went from A+ to A tier. The problem is a lot of factions are stuck with 8th edition codex's anf as a result are solidly lodged in B tier at best with a few being C and D with Tau and GSC being deciededly F tier and just fundamentally flawed with the changes to mission design.
Going from 1st to still 1st and saying woe is me is bound to generate a hostile response as it highlights a significant lack of awareness.
Yeah very true post Ice Can. Tho I think GSC are above F, I’ve seen some scary lists, but not everyone has the collection to pull it off. My GSC is a small detachment so I can’t unfortunately. I do think they are probably the #1 slept on faction right now, but only because people view them so low.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Yeah very true post Ice Can. Tho I think GSC are above F, I’ve seen some scary lists, but not everyone has the collection to pull it off. My GSC is a small detachment so I can’t unfortunately. I do think they are probably the #1 slept on faction right now, but only because people view them so low.
I'm going on goonhammer analysis as I think most of the best "GSC lists" are more some form of soup with either nids or guard.
I think your probably right and could go top tier if someone works out how to bypass the designed for 8th multi detachments of multiple subfactions nature of their codex, and also how to avoid being zones off the table with your main gimic.
But given most competitive players have 2+ factions it's easier to just pick a higher tier codex and skip the 6 months of loosing to unlock the secret 1000IQ list.
Nitro Zeus wrote: So when someone guesses Marines overall didn’t get a nerf, and marine players are just pretending things got nerfed when they are just fine. And you respond to this by listing a unit getting one negative change and ignoring the positive changes for it that leave it in a better place before, and you use this response as an example of a nerf in direct response to his post, how is this not proving EXACTLY what he’s saying?
It was absolutely a deceptive example, there’s no two ways about it, and if you guys weren’t so deeply biased here there’s no way you wouldn’t say the exact same thing about someone else doing the same thing.
The sad part is that it’s completely unnecessary, Marines did overall get nerfs, and there was absolutely zero need to mention Dreadnoughts to make the exact point he was trying to make.
And yet you overcorrected and decided to focus on a single item within that list ignoring the rather major nerfs like Skilled Riders to prove your made up bs point you relentless hypocrite.
Nitro Zeus wrote: So when someone guesses Marines overall didn’t get a nerf, and marine players are just pretending things got nerfed when they are just fine. And you respond to this by listing a unit getting one negative change and ignoring the positive changes for it that leave it in a better place before, and you use this response as an example of a nerf in direct response to his post, how is this not proving EXACTLY what he’s saying?
It was absolutely a deceptive example, there’s no two ways about it, and if you guys weren’t so deeply biased here there’s no way you wouldn’t say the exact same thing about someone else doing the same thing.
The sad part is that it’s completely unnecessary, Marines did overall get nerfs, and there was absolutely zero need to mention Dreadnoughts to make the exact point he was trying to make.
And yet you overcorrected and decided to focus on a single item within that list ignoring the rather major nerfs like Skilled Riders to prove your made up bs point you relentless hypocrite.
What made up bs point? My only point was that at least one inclusion on your list was deceptively added. Please, tell me what other “made up bs point” makes me a “relentless hypocrite” here? I know you struggle with comprehension, I know you struggle HARD with it, but go ahead - answer the question, and quote where I made whatever point you are calling made up bs, or how I’m a hypocrite.
Deceptively added. Right. I made a list. I made no judgements on the items that list. It's you who has a stick up your ass and can't handle when someone doesn't tow the line so you come in like a giant donkey-cave. You don't discuss. You just pretend to be high and mighty and force gak down people's throats.
