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.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Plaugebearers aren't intended to kill things. They are a tarpit unit. If they locked in with intercessors they would be there the whole game.

If I spend 295 points (30 Plaguebearers, Instrument and Icon) on a unit, manage to get all 30 into close combat and actually swing with all of them, while buffing them with my locus, a Scrivener, a Poxbringer, AND a Daemon Prince, I kill 90-100 points of MEQ. One minimum squad. A third of points I spent on the unit alone, not even counting the buffers.

If I don't buff them up a ton, and just manage to get all 30 in combat and swinging without any casualties, I kill one Heavy Intercessor. Right about 10% of their cost.

I'm perfectly willing to accept that Bloodletters and Daemonettes are killier. As they should be. But to say "Your unit isn't allowed to kill anything" is infuriating to hear.

Not to mention, what SHOULD I kill Intercessors or Tac Marines with? Or should nothing I have be allowed to kill anything?

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Plaugebearers aren't intended to kill things. They are a tarpit unit. If they locked in with intercessors they would be there the whole game.

If I spend 295 points (30 Plaguebearers, Instrument and Icon) on a unit, manage to get all 30 into close combat and actually swing with all of them, while buffing them with my locus, a Scrivener, a Poxbringer, AND a Daemon Prince, I kill 90-100 points of MEQ. One minimum squad. A third of points I spent on the unit alone, not even counting the buffers.

If I don't buff them up a ton, and just manage to get all 30 in combat and swinging without any casualties, I kill one Heavy Intercessor. Right about 10% of their cost.

I'm perfectly willing to accept that Bloodletters and Daemonettes are killier. As they should be. But to say "Your unit isn't allowed to kill anything" is infuriating to hear.

Not to mention, what SHOULD I kill Intercessors or Tac Marines with? Or should nothing I have be allowed to kill anything?

They are a tarpit unit though, but I understand the frustration, especially when they can be buffed up pretty dramatically.

As far as what should kill intercessors and Heavy intercessors in your army? according to a few marine players here...nothing Marines R'da Bestest and needz more durability than anyone else.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Firewrriors aren't there to outshoot intercessors. They are there to keep your riptides killing intercessors at a massive rate.

Exactly, a SM tac unit should absolutely out perform a dedicated troop choice in its role, point for point.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Tyranids are fething bad. One of my favorite armies too it is disgraceful. Though - with advance and charge - geensteelers ALWAYS hit intercessors first and pretty much maul the unit for a weak reprisal and then fight again and wipe them out.

Exactly, don't worry about doing the math, just trust me, and also, always give the advantage to the Nids because reasons. Oh, and ignore anyone who shows you the math that Genestealers actually LOSE to Intercessors if the intercessors go first.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Plaugebearers aren't intended to kill things. They are a tarpit unit. If they locked in with intercessors they would be there the whole game.

I'll actually give you this one, that is in fact their purpose...however, they aren't locked in combat thanks to GW's new rules So you are wrong in that regard.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I mean nothing you are saying is wrong but not sure what the point is. Intercessors can't do a lot of things firewarriors can...like put a reroll 1's to hit buff on any unit within 36". Give supporting fire for units being charged within 6" of them for free. Plus with a str 5 weapon they aren't bad for chipping wounds off 3+ save t8 tanks. Intercessors might as well be guardsmen vs t8 tanks.

Yeah i'm lost on your 1st part here, Firewarriors can not give a hit buff to other units. Unless you are talking about the buff to the Sgt and than giving him a markerlight...but even than its only a 50/50. Atm Firewarriors are 9pts or basically half of what intercessors are. 20 Firewarriors = 9 Intercessors. At Max range 20 firewarriors get 10 hits, 5 wounds and 1.66 dmg. At Max range 9 Intercessors get 18 shots, 12 hits, 4 wounds and 2 Dmg. So yet again, Intercessors out perform Tau Firewarriors LMAO! Dude you keep trying to make these arguments but never do the math.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Go ahead and try it. Pay 600 points for your 30 intercessors that have no ability to engage tanks and remove infantry at a "decent" clip unless they can with a 6 inch move and without advancing if they want to shoot with a bolt rifle make it into melee without being destroyed (unlikely).

Just proved that they are BETTER vs T8 3+ vehicles than those firewarriors, and proved before that they are better at killing infantry than those firewarriors. They also are ridiculously better in CC. And since 9th relies on you taking and holding an objective...

 Xenomancers wrote:
It's like you guys play in metas where ap-2/3/4 weapons with multiple shots and multi damage aren't the norm. Like...the legit norm.

I think basically everyone plays in that meta now because the biggest part of the meta right now is...Space Marines. And Space Marines gear themselves to take on....space marines.

It helps to actually be right when making claims.
A space marine - is designed to kill light troops and ignore small arms fire (firewarriors). A firewarrior is designed to be a front line screening unit with decent armor and provide supporting fire. Not sure how a unit with ap-0 is designated to kill heavy infantry. It's really not.
Firewarriors can take a marker light....it give a reroll 1s buff to your whole army on a 4+ against that target. Extremely valuable...for a support unit...which fire warriors are...stop me if I am blowing your mind K.

You are 100% wrong its common sense. When you have double the number of shots per point and wound twice as much with those double shots its easy to know the firewarrior wins. Firewarriors vs intersessors vs and imperial knight. I don't even need to do that math to know the firewarriors are better. 18 points of firewarriors average .22 wounds vs an imperial knight. An intercessor (20 points) averages .12. This is also true of anything T5 or higher that doesn't have a 2+ save. The firewarrior will out damage the intercessor. OFC this ins't imperssive. Until you facotr in a fireblade giving them 3 shots in rapid fire range and get them to 3+ reroll 1's to hit and +1 to wound. Now 30 firewarriors averages 11 wounds to an IK (pretty good retruns for a useless chaff unit) 15 intercessors rerolling all hits (which they can't even do anymore only 1 unit can) only does a little less than 3 wounds 5ish if 10 rapid fire.

SemperMortis wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Plaugebearers aren't intended to kill things. They are a tarpit unit. If they locked in with intercessors they would be there the whole game.

If I spend 295 points (30 Plaguebearers, Instrument and Icon) on a unit, manage to get all 30 into close combat and actually swing with all of them, while buffing them with my locus, a Scrivener, a Poxbringer, AND a Daemon Prince, I kill 90-100 points of MEQ. One minimum squad. A third of points I spent on the unit alone, not even counting the buffers.

If I don't buff them up a ton, and just manage to get all 30 in combat and swinging without any casualties, I kill one Heavy Intercessor. Right about 10% of their cost.

I'm perfectly willing to accept that Bloodletters and Daemonettes are killier. As they should be. But to say "Your unit isn't allowed to kill anything" is infuriating to hear.

Not to mention, what SHOULD I kill Intercessors or Tac Marines with? Or should nothing I have be allowed to kill anything?

They are a tarpit unit though, but I understand the frustration, especially when they can be buffed up pretty dramatically.

As far as what should kill intercessors and Heavy intercessors in your army? according to a few marine players here...nothing Marines R'da Bestest and needz more durability than anyone else.

I imagine there are some pretty glaring holes in a mono god deamons detachment. IMHO GW may have had the right idea in AOS of splitting deamons up into seperate armies with mortal troop back up

Xenomancers wrote:
Example of best stand alone units in the game pls. You can't say eradicators...they are going to be heavily nerfed. They are a mistake unit and everyone knows it.

Honestly ? Any of them. Theyre models that have a good defensive profile and BS3/WS3 with access to loads of weapons that give them an edge over whatever threat they want.

A unit that hits on 3's doesnt NEED rerolls to be good.
Are they better with character support? Absolutely no doubt on that but it doesn't suddenly become "impossible to win" without their characters.

Xenomancers wrote:

Go ahead and try it. Pay 600 points for your 30 intercessors that have no ability to engage tanks and remove infantry at a "decent" clip unless they can with a 6 inch move and without advancing if they want to shoot with a bolt rifle make it into melee without being destroyed (unlikely).

It's like you guys play in metas where ap-2/3/4 weapons with multiple shots and multi damage aren't the norm. Like...the legit norm.

Hmm, its funny how your basic infantry that carries 4 -2 2 guns can't engage tanks. I've certainly never lost multiple tanks (even ones with invulns) to intercessor spam. Its also funny how i need to spam a single weapon type to deal with the basic troop of an army. 600 pts for 60 wounds with a 3+ save. Hmmmm surely these are too fragile and die like flies.

EDIT: Oh, and not every army even has access to high ap, multi shot, multi damage weapons.

Tyel wrote:
I don't think we are miles apart.
I guess my issue is that if say "Tau melee" was "bad for its points" (or at least worse than "fighty factions") - then the reality is it will never get used. Which makes it a dead unit, and bad game design. It doesn't necessarily have to be "Khorne Berzerker 2.0" - it can be different - but it shouldn't be objectively *bad*.

Yeah, I think a lot of people hone in on the idea of intentionally making units 'bad for their points' because they don't 'fit' the faction, and that is not how you design a game. People invoke army context waaaaaay too often to justify points costs being off.

If I wanted to design units to let Tau build towards the close assault army archetype, I'd filter it through the lens of Tau having shooting as core to their identity. So taking a page from Farsight, I'd design a unit with fusion blades that can be used both as short-ranged guns and as melee weapons. They wouldn't be as good in melee as a Khorne Berseker, but they'd be able to shoot effectively and immediately charge. That combination of shooting + melee would give them a one-two punch that would fulfill the close assault role and make them worth their points, but their melee profile alone wouldn't be as good as that of a Berserker, because being super good in melee isn't Tau's thing. Does that make sense?

Tyel wrote:
I mean to go with the example - Tomb Blades exist. Nothing stops you bringing 27 of them if you want, making up about 40%~ of a 2k points army.
They are tougher than say Eldar bikes (base stats and rules) - and not quite as fast. But the combination is still reasonable in itself.

Is this fluffy/not fluffy?

Perfectly fine, bolded for emphasis. That lets being super fast and glassy continue to be the Eldar's shtick, with the differences in the factions reflected in the unit design.

If those Tomb Blades were just as fast and just as glassy, you'd wonder what Eldar are supposed to do special, if Necrons can do their 'thing' just as well. And if those Tomb Blades were just as fast and tougher, you'd have Eldar players annoyed that this non-Eldar unit does their 'thing' better than them.

That's where we are with Marines, and that's where the salt comes from. I don't want Marine specialists to be overpriced; I just want:
-Their cost to take their durability and general combat ability (eg Devastators are not as helpless in melee as Guard heavy weapon teams) into account, and
-To reserve unique game-rule-breaking abilities (like dropping off troops after moving) for the factions to which they are most appropriate.

2 Fire Warriors at 30" do .11 wounds to an IK.
1 Intercessor does the exact same (4+) or .15 wounds (5+).

And here's the thing-Daemons have their own Codex, and the different gods have less overlap than different colors of Marines do. They share three units (Furies, Soul Grinders, and Daemon Princes). The rest are entirely unique. And, while you can technically build a generic-unit only Daemons list... You can't build a good one. You don't have troops, for one.

OK, Xeno, if Fire Warriors with their S5 gun are intended to be 'fire support' for killing 'light infantry' then what the hell are breachers supposed to be for? If you get them within suicide range, a full squad of 10 kills a whopping TWO 20 point intercessors.

S5 Ap-2 - is that not for killing heavy infantry?

 JNAProductions wrote:
2 Fire Warriors at 30" do .11 wounds to an IK.
1 Intercessor does the exact same (4+) or .15 wounds (5+).

And here's the thing-Daemons have their own Codex, and the different gods have less overlap than different colors of Marines do. They share three units (Furies, Soul Grinders, and Daemon Princes). The rest are entirely unique. And, while you can technically build a generic-unit only Daemons list... You can't build a good one. You don't have troops, for one.

I literally put both units up in their best conditions...this assumes good generalship. Both are in rapid fire range (bolter dis is conditional on not moving - pretty rough when you consider...you have all these great melee stats you want to use right?). It is disingenuous to evaluate units in different situations. It teaches nothing anyways.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
2 Fire Warriors at 30" do .11 wounds to an IK.
1 Intercessor does the exact same (4+) or .15 wounds (5+).

And here's the thing-Daemons have their own Codex, and the different gods have less overlap than different colors of Marines do. They share three units (Furies, Soul Grinders, and Daemon Princes). The rest are entirely unique. And, while you can technically build a generic-unit only Daemons list... You can't build a good one. You don't have troops, for one.

I literally put both units up in their best conditions...this assumes good generalship. Both are in rapid fire range (bolter dis is conditional on not moving - pretty rough when you consider...you have all these great melee stats you want to use right?). It is disingenuous to evaluate units in different situations. It teaches nothing anyways.

Both standing at max range and shooting, since neither want to be within 15" of an Imperial Knight. That will result in their swift demise.

 Xenomancers wrote:

It helps to actually be right when making claims.
A space marine - is designed to kill light troops and ignore small arms fire (firewarriors). A firewarrior is designed to be a front line screening unit with decent armor and provide supporting fire. Not sure how a unit with ap-0 is designated to kill heavy infantry. It's really not.
Firewarriors can take a marker light....it give a reroll 1s buff to your whole army on a 4+ against that target. Extremely valuable...for a support unit...which fire warriors are...stop me if I am blowing your mind K.
You are 100% wrong its common sense. When you have double the number of shots per point and wound twice as much with those double shots its easy to know the firewarrior wins. Firewarriors vs intersessors vs and imperial knight. I don't even need to do that math to know the firewarriors are better. 18 points of firewarriors average .22 wounds vs an imperial knight. An intercessor (20 points) averages .12. This is also true of anything T5 or higher that doesn't have a 2+ save. The firewarrior will out damage the intercessor. OFC this ins't imperssive. Until you facotr in a fireblade giving them 3 shots in rapid fire range and get them to 3+ reroll 1's to hit and +1 to wound. Now 30 firewarriors averages 11 wounds to an IK (pretty good retruns for a useless chaff unit) 15 intercessors rerolling all hits (which they can't even do anymore only 1 unit can) only does a little less than 3 wounds 5ish if 10 rapid fire.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
2 Fire Warriors at 30" do .11 wounds to an IK.
1 Intercessor does the exact same (4+) or .15 wounds (5+).

I literally put both units up in their best conditions...this assumes good generalship. Both are in rapid fire range (bolter dis is conditional on not moving - pretty rough when you consider...you have all these great melee stats you want to use right?). It is disingenuous to evaluate units in different situations. It teaches nothing anyways.

LMAO, sorry I really laughed out loud when I saw this. You put both units in their best conditions...which apparently means Tau Firewarriors want to be 15' from the enemy.... Funny how you put Firewarriors in the "best" condition but left out putting Intercessors even closer and in Tactical Doctrine turn. So they can double tap at -2AP and than charge into CC and do more damage with their 3 attacks each. But hey lets not get into that and just let you put Firewarriors 15' away from the enemy, because that is where they want to be.

the_scotsman wrote:
OK, Xeno, if Fire Warriors with their S5 gun are intended to be 'fire support' for killing 'light infantry' then what the hell are breachers supposed to be for? If you get them within suicide range, a full squad of 10 kills a whopping TWO 20 point intercessors.

S5 Ap-2 - is that not for killing heavy infantry?

Breechers are for killing heavy infantry. I dont exactly remember their PA buff but I remember something meshing really well with breechers. Short range is hard to get around. Plus we also have to remember tau don't have a 9th eddition codex yet for a 2 point increase in 9th eddition manual just because...reasons? In any case - they are intended to be used with devilfish...which are also unfortunately bad as are most transports.

Still though..90 points to kill 40 points is pretty good returns. Better returns than the intercessors get they only average 27 points of damage. Likely though...there is probably something more important to kill than these intercessors right?

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
2 Fire Warriors at 30" do .11 wounds to an IK.
1 Intercessor does the exact same (4+) or .15 wounds (5+).

And here's the thing-Daemons have their own Codex, and the different gods have less overlap than different colors of Marines do. They share three units (Furies, Soul Grinders, and Daemon Princes). The rest are entirely unique. And, while you can technically build a generic-unit only Daemons list... You can't build a good one. You don't have troops, for one.

I literally put both units up in their best conditions...this assumes good generalship. And to represent that good generalship, I believe we should ignore a special rule the space marines get that would allow them to destroy the fire warriors from maximum range and force the fire warriors, a unit that does not want to be close to me, to come closer to me to have a chance. This is good and makes sense in my brain.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
2 Fire Warriors at 30" do .11 wounds to an IK.
1 Intercessor does the exact same (4+) or .15 wounds (5+).

And here's the thing-Daemons have their own Codex, and the different gods have less overlap than different colors of Marines do. They share three units (Furies, Soul Grinders, and Daemon Princes). The rest are entirely unique. And, while you can technically build a generic-unit only Daemons list... You can't build a good one. You don't have troops, for one.

I literally put both units up in their best conditions...this assumes good generalship. And to represent that good generalship, I believe we should ignore a special rule the space marines get that would allow them to destroy the fire warriors from maximum range and force the fire warriors, a unit that does not want to be close to me, to come closer to me to have a chance. This is good and makes sense in my brain.

If space marines are sitting back not moving shooting at tau. The game is already in the bag for tau. Trust me...I've tried.

Then again I play Ultramarines...not a chapter like ironhands or IF that have much better special rules than me. IF probably do beat tau in a firefight. Because they have broken special rules.

 Xenomancers wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
OK, Xeno, if Fire Warriors with their S5 gun are intended to be 'fire support' for killing 'light infantry' then what the hell are breachers supposed to be for? If you get them within suicide range, a full squad of 10 kills a whopping TWO 20 point intercessors.

S5 Ap-2 - is that not for killing heavy infantry?

Breechers are for killing heavy infantry. I dont exactly remember their PA buff but I remember something meshing really well with breechers. Short range is hard to get around. Plus we also have to remember tau don't have a 9th eddition codex yet for a 2 point increase in 9th eddition manual just because...reasons? In any case - they are intended to be used with devilfish...which are also unfortunately bad as are most transports.

Still though..90 points to kill 40 points is pretty good returns. Better returns than the intercessors get they only average 27 points of damage. Likely though...there is probably something more important to kill than these intercessors right?

Better than Plaguebearers (unbuffed) getting a 10% return on Heavy Intercessors or a little less than 15% on regular Intercessors.

Or their 30% returns on Tac Marines, when buffed by a Scrivener, a Poxbringer, a Daemon Prince, and their Locus.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
OK, Xeno, if Fire Warriors with their S5 gun are intended to be 'fire support' for killing 'light infantry' then what the hell are breachers supposed to be for? If you get them within suicide range, a full squad of 10 kills a whopping TWO 20 point intercessors.

S5 Ap-2 - is that not for killing heavy infantry?

Breechers are for killing heavy infantry. I dont exactly remember their PA buff but I remember something meshing really well with breechers. Short range is hard to get around. Plus we also have to remember tau don't have a 9th eddition codex yet for a 2 point increase in 9th eddition manual just because...reasons? In any case - they are intended to be used with devilfish...which are also unfortunately bad as are most transports.

Still though..90 points to kill 40 points is pretty good returns. Better returns than the intercessors get they only average 27 points of damage. Likely though...there is probably something more important to kill than these intercessors right?

Better than Plaguebearers (unbuffed) getting a 10% return on Heavy Intercessors or a little less than 15% on regular Intercessors.

Or their 30% returns on Tac Marines, when buffed by a Scrivener, a Poxbringer, a Daemon Prince, and their Locus.

Seems like a specific beef with plauge bearers. That DP has no issue mincing marines.

 Xenomancers wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
OK, Xeno, if Fire Warriors with their S5 gun are intended to be 'fire support' for killing 'light infantry' then what the hell are breachers supposed to be for? If you get them within suicide range, a full squad of 10 kills a whopping TWO 20 point intercessors.

S5 Ap-2 - is that not for killing heavy infantry?

Breechers are for killing heavy infantry. I dont exactly remember their PA buff but I remember something meshing really well with breechers. Short range is hard to get around. Plus we also have to remember tau don't have a 9th eddition codex yet for a 2 point increase in 9th eddition manual just because...reasons? In any case - they are intended to be used with devilfish...which are also unfortunately bad as are most transports.

Still though..90 points to kill 40 points is pretty good returns. Better returns than the intercessors get they only average 27 points of damage. Likely though...there is probably something more important to kill than these intercessors right?

You hit enter twice and that caused you to forget about the devilfish you said they're supposed to use, aw beans!

Devilfish+2 Gun drones+Burst Cannon+10 Breachers = 193.

AsSuMe GoOd GeNeRaLsHiP, the breachers are magically able to get within 3" of the intercessors. Them plus their transport causes 5.77 unsaved wounds, round to 6, that's 60pts return. 31%.

the space marine army then responds to kill the suicide unit. Between shooting and melee, the 7 intercessors are able to easily destroy the breacher squad down to a man. 90pts/their original cost of 200pts = 45% return.

This is EXACTLY the gak that people are talking about, RIGHT HERE. Even when you magically teleport a specialist unit to exactly where they want to be to kill a marine generalist unit that has thirty inches of optimal range, the marine unit ends up getting superior points return by taking the punch to the face, turning around, and responding to kill the unit you just suicided against them.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
OK, Xeno, if Fire Warriors with their S5 gun are intended to be 'fire support' for killing 'light infantry' then what the hell are breachers supposed to be for? If you get them within suicide range, a full squad of 10 kills a whopping TWO 20 point intercessors.

S5 Ap-2 - is that not for killing heavy infantry?

Breechers are for killing heavy infantry. I dont exactly remember their PA buff but I remember something meshing really well with breechers. Short range is hard to get around. Plus we also have to remember tau don't have a 9th eddition codex yet for a 2 point increase in 9th eddition manual just because...reasons? In any case - they are intended to be used with devilfish...which are also unfortunately bad as are most transports.

Still though..90 points to kill 40 points is pretty good returns. Better returns than the intercessors get they only average 27 points of damage. Likely though...there is probably something more important to kill than these intercessors right?

Better than Plaguebearers (unbuffed) getting a 10% return on Heavy Intercessors or a little less than 15% on regular Intercessors.

Or their 30% returns on Tac Marines, when buffed by a Scrivener, a Poxbringer, a Daemon Prince, and their Locus.

Seems like a specific beef with plauge bearers. That DP has no issue mincing marines.

You mean the Daemon Prince that kills two and a half MEQs a round on average? That one?

But yes, do tell me about how if I spend 495 points for three foot Princes, I can have a 20% of killing one ten-man squad, if they all make it to combat.

And do tell me how when I spend 635 points on Troops and HQs to buff the troops, manage to get them into combat completely unscathed, and manage to cram 30 bases in the new half an inch of half an inch combat rules, I should expect to kill 90-100 points of Marines.

Tell me about that.

Sigh...

Daemon prince with wings and sword, the usual build: 195pts.

5A with the talons - kills 2 space marines. 20% points return vs intercessors.

Intercessors shooting and then charging a daemon prince with wings: 4.63 wounds. Theoretically a 119pt return, if you use something else to supplement the damage and kill him, 60% points return.

TIL 2 marines per turn is just really RRRRRRRRRIPPIN into them, just MINCING them oh my god.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
OK, Xeno, if Fire Warriors with their S5 gun are intended to be 'fire support' for killing 'light infantry' then what the hell are breachers supposed to be for? If you get them within suicide range, a full squad of 10 kills a whopping TWO 20 point intercessors.

S5 Ap-2 - is that not for killing heavy infantry?

Breechers are for killing heavy infantry. I dont exactly remember their PA buff but I remember something meshing really well with breechers. Short range is hard to get around. Plus we also have to remember tau don't have a 9th eddition codex yet for a 2 point increase in 9th eddition manual just because...reasons? In any case - they are intended to be used with devilfish...which are also unfortunately bad as are most transports.

Still though..90 points to kill 40 points is pretty good returns. Better returns than the intercessors get they only average 27 points of damage. Likely though...there is probably something more important to kill than these intercessors right?

You hit enter twice and that caused you to forget about the devilfish you said they're supposed to use, aw beans!

Devilfish+2 Gun drones+Burst Cannon+10 Breachers = 193.

AsSuMe GoOd GeNeRaLsHiP, the breachers are magically able to get within 3" of the intercessors. Them plus their transport causes 5.77 unsaved wounds, round to 6, that's 60pts return. 31%.

the space marine army then responds to kill the suicide unit. Between shooting and melee, the 7 intercessors are able to easily destroy the breacher squad down to a man. 90pts/their original cost of 200pts = 45% return.

This is EXACTLY the gak that people are talking about, RIGHT HERE. Even when you magically teleport a specialist unit to exactly where they want to be to kill a marine generalist unit that has thirty inches of optimal range, the marine unit ends up getting superior points return by taking the punch to the face, turning around, and responding to kill the unit you just suicided against them.

I am not specifically defending breechers or saying they are a valid strategy. I literally pointed out how bad a devil fish is and they are intended to be used with one.

What breechers really need is deep strike (they don't have it). Just take broadsides with the -1 missile army trait and blow the marines off the board. cry less.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
Sigh...

Daemon prince with wings and sword, the usual build: 195pts.

5A with the talons - kills 2 space marines. 20% points return vs intercessors.

Intercessors shooting and then charging a daemon prince with wings: 4.63 wounds. Theoretically a 119pt return, if you use something else to supplement the damage and kill him, 60% points return.

TIL 2 marines per turn is just really RRRRRRRRRIPPIN into them, just MINCING them oh my god.

How is it that you guys are so bad that you get charged by units slower than you?

I was thinking Dual Talons. That's how I usually run them.

And again-if I spend 495 points on three wingless Dual Talon Princes, and charge them all into one ten-man squad of Marines, I have a just over 20% chance of wiping the squad. They will then get wrecked by everything else the Marines have.

I have to fundamentally disagree with the people that says non-optimal units for armies that don't have that playstile should be just worse in a point by point basis.

Thats NOT how you make good games and choices. If you give Tau a meele unit and it sucks because of course Tau meele units can't be good , then literally no Tau will use it and your unit becomes worthless.

Bullgryns are an example of a good "unit out of context", they are good meele units. Very good units. But they are support choice. They can't be the core of your army or your strategy, and they lack the amount of support and sinergies proper meele armies have around playing meele. They offer a deffensive meele unit for Imperial Guard.

You can have armies having varied playstiles and they all be different. Necrons, Orks, Chaos Marines and Sisters of Battle all can have reasonable meele based armies and all play differently just like in Fantasy you had shooting armies like Dwarfs, the Empire, Wood Elves, some builds of High or Dark Elves, Tomb Kings, and they all played differently. And then most of those if not all of those armies could be also played in other styles!

This "each faction should have only ONE viable playstile and all others should be suboptimal" maybe works for AoS armies with 6 units but in warhammer 40k thats not only extremely boring but just bad design.

If you have given meele units for sisters of battle and sinergies for sister of battle meele units they SHOULD be an equal fighting force than a full meele khorne army. You know why? Because it doesnt matter that Sisters of Battle have shooting options if I don't use them and my army has enough units and synergies to support a meele playstile. If I'm using 2000 points of my army they should be balanced agaisnt 2000 of your army unless.
Of course that doesnt mean both armies play the same, maybe khorne meele units are individually more powerfull and sisters of battle need more tricks to be equal, etc... but asking for actual unbalance in the game is just... what?


For example, giving Tau a meele element based around Kroots: Of course they aren't gonna put up a fight 1vs1 agaisnt khorne berzerkers but they can still have a place as fast, skirmish, ambush, stealth based units with light shooting and capable meele. They would be completely different in how they are played, but they should not be just "bad" by points. Just don't give Tau elite meele units designeds to go toe to toe and kill primarchs in meele.

If I'm paying +600€ and spendings hundreds of hours un building and painting my army I want them to give me the most fun they can. If I can only play them one way because "lol mu shooting" (And you can have many different ways of playing a shooting army, for example T'au taus and Farsight taus are completely different ways of playing a pure shooting army), thats horrible.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I am not specifically defending breechers or saying they are a valid strategy. I literally pointed out how bad a devil fish is and they are intended to be used with one.

What breechers really need is deep strike (they don't have it). Just take broadsides with the -1 missile army trait and blow the marines off the board. cry less.

"Just play a completely different army because only one build works". Cry less.

Oh wait wait wait, ive got a better one!!

"Just play Guilliman parking lot and blow everything off the board", cry less about index marines.

 Galas wrote:
I have to fundamentally disagree with the people that says non-optimal units for armies that don't have that playstile should be just worse in a point by point basis.

Thats NOT how you make good games and choices. If you give Tau a meele unit and it sucks because of course Tau units can't be good , then literally no Tau will use it and your unit becomes worthless.

Bullgryns are an example of a good "unit out of context", they are good meele units. Very good units. But they are support choice. They can't be the core of your army or your strategy, and they lack the amount of support and sinergies proper meele armies have around playing meele. They offer a deffensive meele unit for Imperial Guard.

You can have armies having varied playstiles and they all be different. Necrons, Orks, Chaos Marines and Sisters of Battle all can have reasonable meele based armies and all play differently just like in Fantasy you had shooting armies like Dwarfs, the Empire, Wood Elves, some builds of High or Dark Elves, Tomb Kings, and they all played differently. And then most of those if not all of those armies could be also played in other styles!

This "each faction should have only ONE viable playstile and all others should be suboptimal" maybe works for AoS armies with 6 units but in warhammer 40k thats not only extremely boring but just bad design.

If you have given meele units for sisters of battle and sinergies for sister of battle meele units they SHOULD be an equal fighting force than a full meele khorne army. You know why? Because it doesnt matter that Sisters of Battle have shooting options if I don't use them and my army has enough units and sinergyes to support a meele playstile. If I'm using 2000 points of my army they should be balanced agaisnt 2000 of your army unless.
Of course that doesnt mean both armies play the same, maybe khorne meele units are individually more powerfull and sisters of battle need more tricks to be equal, etc... but asking for actual unbalance in the game is just... what?


For example, giving Tau a meele element based around Kroots: Of course they aren't gonna put up a fight 1vs1 agaisnt khorne berzerkers but they can still have a place as fast, skirmish, ambush, stealth based units with light shooting and capable meele. They would be completely different in how they are played, but they should not be just "bad" by points. Just don't give Tau elite meele units designeds to go toe to toe and kill primarchs in meele.

If I'm paying +600€ and spendings hundreds of hours un building and painting my army I want them to give me the most fun they can. If I can only play them one way because "lol mu shooting" (And you can have many different ways of playing a shooting army, for example T'au taus and Farsight taus are completely different ways of playing a pure shooting army), thats horrible.

+1, this is exactly what I was trying to say. There is a very big difference between an army having a theme/identity versus an army being pigeonholed into one build.

You guys seriously need to ignore him and move on or there's gunna be more pages spent endlessly debunking his nonsense than there are variations of bolter in the new codex.

Its astounding how one person can be proven wrong so often by using facts and basic math, but keep coming in ranting about the same, easily disproved nonsense.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I am not specifically defending breechers or saying they are a valid strategy. I literally pointed out how bad a devil fish is and they are intended to be used with one.

What breechers really need is deep strike (they don't have it). Just take broadsides with the -1 missile army trait and blow the marines off the board. cry less.

"Just play a completely different army because only one build works". Cry less.

Oh wait wait wait, ive got a better one!!

"Just play Guilliman parking lot and blow everything off the board", cry less about index marines.

Big difference between take these units that every tau has access to instead of these bad ones. Compared to take this unit that only 3% of marines have access to as your only means to win. It is a pretty drastic difference.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
You guys seriously need to ignore him and move on or there's gunna be more pages spent endlessly debunking his nonsense than there are variations of bolter in the new codex.

if you could point out the nonsense that would be great. Otherwise I am reporting you for breaking the fourm rules. Because you are. I am making valid points often supported by correct math.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SemperMortis wrote:
Its astounding how one person can be proven wrong so often by using facts and basic math, but keep coming in ranting about the same, easily disproved nonsense.

What's astounding is how much dakka hates marines. Valid points ignored. Always comes to...but but...I cant wipe 200 point infantry squads with cheaper units like I used to do in 7th eddition when space marines were garabge...then youll even argue marines werent garbage in 7th...

SemperMortis wrote:
Xeno's argument when talking about other peoples army.

Spoiler:

 Xenomancers wrote:

For years TS were at the top of the charts for win rates. Virtually every choas army was taking a TS detachment.

 Xenomancers wrote:

This is how choas functions. They are specifically designed this way. In 8th - no one was bringing mono army so it's pointless to even make this argument. Interestingly...can you name another army other than marines that has to give up all their special rules to take allies? It's almost like they are specifically designed to be a mono force.

 Xenomancers wrote:

LOL you guys are literally clowns. Look at TS WR. IT is as the top. No one takes it as a primary detachment. Literally clowns.

Talking about his army.

Spoiler:

 Xenomancers wrote:

The majority of what you are talking about is imperial soup.

While some effective hero hammer type armies could really do well and even dominate the game. That really has nothing to do with the space marine codex. Invisibility was a spell that every army had access too and pretty much every winning army was abusing it in some way shape or form...Just some broken forge world option let you pick your power...(also...not in the space marine codex) ofc.

Bark star...thunder star...Cent star...Super friends? Space marines right? Actually no...we call that hero hammer for a reason. It was a broken game.

Xenomancers wrote:This antimarine sentiment is outrageous. Almost as outrageous as how bad marines were in 8th eddition before they got a real codex. 40% WR in competitive for 2 consecutive years. Where was the outrage then?

 Xenomancers wrote:
For several editions marines have been my primary army. It's always been below top tier. Requiring gimmicks to function with better armies.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Like seriously Marines were the worst army in 40k for the 85% of the edition and the best for the last 15%.

So to summarize, Thousand Sons are in a great place in 8th and 9th because they can soup with Chaos and do well. But Space Marines, while winning tournaments and placing extremely well in LVO and Adepticon, were trash because they had to soup, and had a low W/L rate. Also, SM's were only the best in 8th edition for "15%" of the time. Just ignore the index phase, change the definition of "Worst" from meaning the most terrible option to "Not the best" and than ignore Tournament results and assume that SM 2.0 was only 15% of the game

Woah that's quite crazy. Thanks for putting those quote together, really brings some perspective into it.
Xenomancer is really someone with opinions .

What can Marines not do?

They can't mass Deep Strike.
They can't hold an extended gunline (across the board)
They don't have the bodycount to spread themselves thinly.
They can't Smite spam.
They can't diversify their list to cover multiple aspects reliably (psyker, heavy gunline, area denial, close combat, heavy assault), its basically all-in on one or a couple of them.
They are vulnerable to attrition.

There's a very solid point there. Marine's have pretty meh board control. Yeah the areas they can control they can control very well, but they can only control so much area. Where orks, guard, nids and a few others would be able to make a larger area pretty much impassable. Though other factions such as knights and custodies would be able to put even more power into very small areas.