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.
Gadzilla666 wrote: ...Personally, I'd calm down with all of this sky is falling stuff until I knew what the Contagions rules did. If they're a bust, then break out the salt.
Especially when you get the one that gives you army-wide 5+++ on top of your -1D...
Spoletta wrote: By the way, with the new rules point per point a possessed out-melees blade guard veterans, TH/SS terminators, Claw/Shield veterans...
And that's without hateful assault!
When did the new point costs get leaked?
Right, I was going under the assumption that they didn't change in cost, which was indeed rushing things.
What do we expect as new point cost for them? Same cost as a PM now that they have same T and same W? They will keep the +2 over PM cost? Probably the latter since they now gain DR.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/12/11 06:58:45
Because that's the first hill we die on. Then it's the fluff hill. Then it's the vehicle rule that makes our vehicles crap. We will probably see mass infantry from DG now that vehicles are gak. Unless they cut the points in half for them.
I'm fairly certain that with the changes we've seen so far, assuming no massive points increases, this will make Death Guard vehicles cheaper, more durable, with better melee, and with comparable or better firepower than most Imperial Guard vehicles.
I am curious... With the removal of the 5+ FNP (the bloat drones LOST one wound), in what way will they be cheaper, MORE durable, have better melee and even have better firepower than most IG tanks?
A pbc with the new rules is essentially a tank commander that can't fire the turret weapon twice. Given a similar load out (battle cannon, las cannon and sponson bolters vs entropy cannons and slugger) in not firing the mortar twice the pbc gains:
65 points cheaper (currently)
-1 damage
A 5++ save
No penalty firing into combat
Unless it goes up in points, it makes a leman russ look far too expensive.
Castozor wrote: I'm not happy with this rule for myself and for my opponents, but for some reason you had to take it personally and thought DG players like myself are privileged for trying to keep a rule we always had. If that is indeed the take of all DE players then yes, suffer like we do.
Good point about DE players, we had a lovely 5th edition codex that was completely stripped of options, so that certainly makes me less sympathetic when I hear complaints about a rules change.
What I don't understand is why DG players are choosing the plague marine hill to die on. Bring up the changes to disgustingly resilient and how it affects vehicles and demon engines, we would all agree then that the rule is worse. The math will actually be on your side, then. The math is not on your side when it comes to the durability of a plague marine, so it really shouldn't be the point you try to drive home about being nerfed.
Because that's the first hill we die on. Then it's the fluff hill. Then it's the vehicle rule that makes our vehicles crap. We will probably see mass infantry from DG now that vehicles are gak. Unless they cut the points in half for them.
Crap? It's the same as Relentless Hatred/Duty Eternal, which I've heard lots of people call "broken" (it's not). You don't want -1D on all of your tanks? Cool, can I have it for mine? I'm sure players of lots of factions would love to have that rule for their vehicles.
Chopping the effectiveness of 2D weapons in half on your now 2W infantry will also be great once everyone starts loading up on 2D weapons to deal with all of the now 2W marines running around, especially once all of the spikey boys get their buffs. Sure, they're weaker against D3, but how much cheap, available D3 is there floating around? And if your opponent wants to shoot their meltas at your Plague Marines, good, that means they aren't shooting them at your tanks, which means they don't know what they're doing, which means you've already won.
Personally, I'd calm down with all of this sky is falling stuff until I knew what the Contagions rules did. If they're a bust, then break out the salt.
If I got to choose between 5fnp and -1D on my vehicles, I'd choose the 5+++. Hands down.
If my opponent had two psychic powers: One that grants 5+++ and one that grants -1D, I would throw all the dice at the 5+++ every single time.
Cheap d3 dmg? Almost every single melee attack Custodes have (has?).
Yeah, they're shooting at my obsec units. Sure, they absolutely doesn't know what they're doing when they remove all my obsec. It's not like objective is the name of the game in 9th.
I guess I'll just go cap all objectives with my Rhinos and Bloat Drones that doesn't even have FNP anymore. The Drones, not the Rhino.
Because that's the first hill we die on. Then it's the fluff hill. Then it's the vehicle rule that makes our vehicles crap. We will probably see mass infantry from DG now that vehicles are gak. Unless they cut the points in half for them.
I'm fairly certain that with the changes we've seen so far, assuming no massive points increases, this will make Death Guard vehicles cheaper, more durable, with better melee, and with comparable or better firepower than most Imperial Guard vehicles.
I am curious... With the removal of the 5+ FNP (the bloat drones LOST one wound), in what way will they be cheaper, MORE durable, have better melee and even have better firepower than most IG tanks?
A pbc with the new rules is essentially a tank commander that can't fire the turret weapon twice. Given a similar load out (battle cannon, las cannon and sponson bolters vs entropy cannons and slugger) in not firing the mortar twice the pbc gains:
65 points cheaper (currently)
-1 damage
A 5++ save
No penalty firing into combat
Unless it goes up in points, it makes a leman russ look far too expensive.
Yeah, so we have one (!) unit that's kinda good. One. Before the codex, we had three.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/11 08:11:12
Castozor wrote: I'm not happy with this rule for myself and for my opponents, but for some reason you had to take it personally and thought DG players like myself are privileged for trying to keep a rule we always had. If that is indeed the take of all DE players then yes, suffer like we do.
Good point about DE players, we had a lovely 5th edition codex that was completely stripped of options, so that certainly makes me less sympathetic when I hear complaints about a rules change.
What I don't understand is why DG players are choosing the plague marine hill to die on. Bring up the changes to disgustingly resilient and how it affects vehicles and demon engines, we would all agree then that the rule is worse. The math will actually be on your side, then. The math is not on your side when it comes to the durability of a plague marine, so it really shouldn't be the point you try to drive home about being nerfed.
Because that's the first hill we die on. Then it's the fluff hill. Then it's the vehicle rule that makes our vehicles crap. We will probably see mass infantry from DG now that vehicles are gak. Unless they cut the points in half for them.
Crap? It's the same as Relentless Hatred/Duty Eternal, which I've heard lots of people call "broken" (it's not). You don't want -1D on all of your tanks? Cool, can I have it for mine? I'm sure players of lots of factions would love to have that rule for their vehicles.
Chopping the effectiveness of 2D weapons in half on your now 2W infantry will also be great once everyone starts loading up on 2D weapons to deal with all of the now 2W marines running around, especially once all of the spikey boys get their buffs. Sure, they're weaker against D3, but how much cheap, available D3 is there floating around? And if your opponent wants to shoot their meltas at your Plague Marines, good, that means they aren't shooting them at your tanks, which means they don't know what they're doing, which means you've already won.
Personally, I'd calm down with all of this sky is falling stuff until I knew what the Contagions rules did. If they're a bust, then break out the salt.
If I got to choose between 5fnp and -1D on my vehicles, I'd choose the 5+++. Hands down.
If my opponent had two psychic powers: One that grants 5+++ and one that grants -1D, I would throw all the dice at the 5+++ every single time.
Cheap d3 dmg? Almost every single melee attack Custodes have (has?).
Yeah, they're shooting at my obsec units. Sure, they absolutely doesn't know what they're doing when they remove all my obsec. It's not like objective is the name of the game in 9th.
I guess I'll just go cap all objectives with my Rhinos and Bloat Drones that doesn't even have FNP anymore. The Drones, not the Rhino.
Because that's the first hill we die on. Then it's the fluff hill. Then it's the vehicle rule that makes our vehicles crap. We will probably see mass infantry from DG now that vehicles are gak. Unless they cut the points in half for them.
I'm fairly certain that with the changes we've seen so far, assuming no massive points increases, this will make Death Guard vehicles cheaper, more durable, with better melee, and with comparable or better firepower than most Imperial Guard vehicles.
I am curious... With the removal of the 5+ FNP (the bloat drones LOST one wound), in what way will they be cheaper, MORE durable, have better melee and even have better firepower than most IG tanks?
A pbc with the new rules is essentially a tank commander that can't fire the turret weapon twice. Given a similar load out (battle cannon, las cannon and sponson bolters vs entropy cannons and slugger) in not firing the mortar twice the pbc gains:
65 points cheaper (currently)
-1 damage
A 5++ save
No penalty firing into combat
Unless it goes up in points, it makes a leman russ look far too expensive.
Yeah, so we have one (!) unit that's kinda good. One. Before the codex, we had three.
If you can't see how losing a wound on the drones is a buff I can't help you, but there isn't an analogous entry in guard for a hauler or drone.
Assuming points didn't change comparing a marine dread to a blight hauler at current points would be 25 points cheaper than a melta/missile dread, faster, better in melee, more durable with +1 wound and a 5++, give aura buffs and able to be taken in units.
The daemon engines are in no way bad even after these changes and could all stand to be readjusted.
If we abstract for a second from the fact that multimelta platform exists, which negates pretty much all vehicles/monsters in the game, then the demon engines are seriously scary now.
Even with this new DR rules, a point increase is likely to happen. Not a big one though.
Spoletta wrote: If we abstract for a second from the fact that multimelta platform exists, which negates pretty much all vehicles/monsters in the game, then the demon engines are seriously scary now.
Even with this new DR rules, a point increase is likely to happen. Not a big one though.
Even then the 5++ makes them better in the melta world compared to most.
Castozor wrote: I'm not happy with this rule for myself and for my opponents, but for some reason you had to take it personally and thought DG players like myself are privileged for trying to keep a rule we always had. If that is indeed the take of all DE players then yes, suffer like we do.
Good point about DE players, we had a lovely 5th edition codex that was completely stripped of options, so that certainly makes me less sympathetic when I hear complaints about a rules change.
What I don't understand is why DG players are choosing the plague marine hill to die on. Bring up the changes to disgustingly resilient and how it affects vehicles and demon engines, we would all agree then that the rule is worse. The math will actually be on your side, then. The math is not on your side when it comes to the durability of a plague marine, so it really shouldn't be the point you try to drive home about being nerfed.
Because that's the first hill we die on. Then it's the fluff hill. Then it's the vehicle rule that makes our vehicles crap. We will probably see mass infantry from DG now that vehicles are gak. Unless they cut the points in half for them.
Crap? It's the same as Relentless Hatred/Duty Eternal, which I've heard lots of people call "broken" (it's not). You don't want -1D on all of your tanks? Cool, can I have it for mine? I'm sure players of lots of factions would love to have that rule for their vehicles.
Chopping the effectiveness of 2D weapons in half on your now 2W infantry will also be great once everyone starts loading up on 2D weapons to deal with all of the now 2W marines running around, especially once all of the spikey boys get their buffs. Sure, they're weaker against D3, but how much cheap, available D3 is there floating around? And if your opponent wants to shoot their meltas at your Plague Marines, good, that means they aren't shooting them at your tanks, which means they don't know what they're doing, which means you've already won.
Personally, I'd calm down with all of this sky is falling stuff until I knew what the Contagions rules did. If they're a bust, then break out the salt.
If I got to choose between 5fnp and -1D on my vehicles, I'd choose the 5+++. Hands down.
If my opponent had two psychic powers: One that grants 5+++ and one that grants -1D, I would throw all the dice at the 5+++ every single time.
Cheap d3 dmg? Almost every single melee attack Custodes have (has?).
Yeah, they're shooting at my obsec units. Sure, they absolutely doesn't know what they're doing when they remove all my obsec. It's not like objective is the name of the game in 9th.
I guess I'll just go cap all objectives with my Rhinos and Bloat Drones that doesn't even have FNP anymore. The Drones, not the Rhino.
Because that's the first hill we die on. Then it's the fluff hill. Then it's the vehicle rule that makes our vehicles crap. We will probably see mass infantry from DG now that vehicles are gak. Unless they cut the points in half for them.
I'm fairly certain that with the changes we've seen so far, assuming no massive points increases, this will make Death Guard vehicles cheaper, more durable, with better melee, and with comparable or better firepower than most Imperial Guard vehicles.
I am curious... With the removal of the 5+ FNP (the bloat drones LOST one wound), in what way will they be cheaper, MORE durable, have better melee and even have better firepower than most IG tanks?
A pbc with the new rules is essentially a tank commander that can't fire the turret weapon twice. Given a similar load out (battle cannon, las cannon and sponson bolters vs entropy cannons and slugger) in not firing the mortar twice the pbc gains:
65 points cheaper (currently)
-1 damage
A 5++ save
No penalty firing into combat
Unless it goes up in points, it makes a leman russ look far too expensive.
Yeah, so we have one (!) unit that's kinda good. One. Before the codex, we had three.
If you can't see how losing a wound on the drones is a buff I can't help you, but there isn't an analogous entry in guard for a hauler or drone.
Assuming points didn't change comparing a marine dread to a blight hauler at current points would be 25 points cheaper than a melta/missile dread, faster, better in melee, more durable with +1 wound and a 5++, give aura buffs and able to be taken in units.
The daemon engines are in no way bad even after these changes and could all stand to be readjusted.
Ofc I can see the "buff" losing a wound is. The drones asre still worse. I can't tell you the ammount of times my drones have survived two rounds of full armies shooting them all thanks to the 5+++. -1D would have had no impact in those cases. If i take 6dmg from a melta now, the drone will take 5 dmg. If that same drone took 6dmg from a melta with the old rules, it usually took 3-4. I don't care what the math says, I'm telling you what usually happened in practice.
Oh, so your lascannon did 6 wounds, eh? Joke is on YOU! I only take five! Take that!
Not so impressive.
Oh, so your lascannon did 6 wounds, eh? Joke is on YOU! I take 0-6, where 3-4 is the norm.
If our daemon engines doesn't get any further boosts without strats, they need to drop significantly in points.
Sure, they might not be bad compared to Rhinos or other factions, but they are way worse than what they used to be. And they still were far from OP.
Spoletta wrote: If we abstract for a second from the fact that multimelta platform exists, which negates pretty much all vehicles/monsters in the game, then the demon engines are seriously scary now.
Even with this new DR rules, a point increase is likely to happen. Not a big one though.
Even then the 5++ makes them better in the melta world compared to most.
@Dudeface: So you think a loss in wounds and -1D is making them scarier than when they had more wounds and could shrug ALL damage?
Is it more scary and annoying to do 5 dmg than maybe none, but usually only 3-4 when rolling a six for dmg roll on a D6?
So a 5++ makes them better melta carriers than SM melta everything?
Take into account the points costs and rerolls.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/11 08:35:48
Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
Kall3m0n wrote: @Dudeface: So you think a loss in wounds and -1D is making them scarier than when they had more wounds and could shrug ALL damage?
Is it more scary and annoying to do 5 dmg than maybe none, but usually only 3-4 when rolling a six for dmg roll on a D6?
So a 5++ makes them better melta carriers than SM melta everything?
Take into account the points costs and rerolls.
Yes, because losing a wound gets rid of their degrading profile, they just got an increase in bs/ws as well so they're more deadly.
Yes -1d is worse than 5+++ but its only relevant if you're regularly taking more than 3 damage each hit, so it's hardly a landslide.
I didn't say they were better melta carriers, although in this instance, yes they are. Because they're not tied into being a castle with 200 points of character support.
Edit: I won't preface with a "not trying to be rude", but you did just waste 2 pages arguing about bolter fire because you didn't even bother working it out. You're very much firing half formed opinions off as facts here.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/12/11 08:43:11
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Kall3m0n wrote: @Dudeface: So you think a loss in wounds and -1D is making them scarier than when they had more wounds and could shrug ALL damage?
Is it more scary and annoying to do 5 dmg than maybe none, but usually only 3-4 when rolling a six for dmg roll on a D6?
So a 5++ makes them better melta carriers than SM melta everything?
Take into account the points costs and rerolls.
Yes, because losing a wound gets rid of their degrading profile, they just got an increase in bs/ws as well so they're more deadly.
Yes -1d is worse than 5+++ but its only relevant if you're regularly taking more than 3 damage each hit, so it's hardly a landslide.
I didn't say they were better melta carriers, although in this instance, yes they are. Because they're not tied into being a castle with 200 points of character support.
Edit: I won't preface with a "not trying to be rude", but you did just waste 2 pages arguing about bolter fire because you didn't even bother working it out. You're very much firing half formed opinions off as facts here.
Sure, they might be more deadly, but they used to be this flying pretty deadly thing that was impossible to get rid of. Now it's a glass cannon at best.
The two weapons that's the most common to shoot at a drone: 1D and D6. -1D does basically nothing against that.
No, instead the BlightHaulers are destined to crumble and die since they're moving up the board..I hope I'm wrong regarding that, but I fear I'm not.
I don't take it as being rude at all, so.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/11 08:48:49
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Statistically it's less of a bullet sink against anything with damage 4 or higher or D1, the same against D3 and better against D2. The question then becomes what weapons are you more likely to be defending against? I think the new DR rules give Deathguard a big advantage with the way the current meta is going as it's generally most effective against D2 weapons which are becoming very prevalent.
We also have no idea on the points costs yet. What we do know is that DG stuff is going to be more resilient than equivalent units in other armies thanks to generally having +1T and DR, or in the case of vehicles having a lot of 5++ saves. That seems fluffy to me and gives the DG a niche they fill. Of course, they could be terrible if GW overpoints them by a lot, but equally they may be hugely broken if they're too cheap. We just don't know yet.
Oaka wrote: That's been a very poor attitude throughout today, though. As a Xenos player, It's like an insult. New codex comes out, your Troops go up from 1 W to 2 W. That's fantastic.
If I get 2W Wracks in the new Drukhari codex I wouldn't dare say it doesn't count. I'll save that remark for the new Incubi rules that are immediately countered by the new disgustingly resilient rule.
They only showed off the stat profile and weapon of incubi not their special rules right?. for all we know they still have lethal precision +2d on 6's to wound so they could cleave the deathguard terminators in half on a 6 (4d). seems fine to me.
"If you are forced to use your trump card, then the battle is already lost"
There is actually quite little difference between -1D and 5+++ against D6 weapons.
In the first case a D6 weapon averages 2,66 wounds, in the second one it averages 2,31.
Is it a nerf? Yes.
Is it a big one? Not at all.
Against D2 is better, against D3 is identical, against Dd3 is identical (1,33 average wounds).
So you have lost a little bit of durability against D6 weapons. There is NOTHING in that definition which makes those tanks glass.
To really get some meaningful differences, you need to be shot at with some of the new D3+3 weapons, in which case you now suffer 21% more damage.
If a d6 weapon rolls a 6 on an unsave wound, it will now take 5. Period.
Under the old rules, it would usually take 3-4. I don't care what statistics say, those are the actual numbers in practice, based on 40+ games during 8th.
Add the fact that you get no buff at all against D1 weapons.
We've lost A LOT of duration against D1 weapons, and in prectice about 40% against D6 weapons.
100 marine bolters, unboosted, 7.4 dmg new rules
100 marine bolters, unboosted, 4.9
That's a HUGE nerf!
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Statistically it's less of a bullet sink against anything with damage 4 or higher or D1, the same against D3 and better against D2. The question then becomes what weapons are you more likely to be defending against? I think the new DR rules give Deathguard a big advantage with the way the current meta is going as it's generally most effective against D2 weapons which are becoming very prevalent.
We also have no idea on the points costs yet. What we do know is that DG stuff is going to be more resilient than equivalent units in other armies thanks to generally having +1T and DR, or in the case of vehicles having a lot of 5++ saves. That seems fluffy to me and gives the DG a niche they fill. Of course, they could be terrible if GW overpoints them by a lot, but equally they may be hugely broken if they're too cheap. We just don't know yet.
Yes, statistically FNP saves two out of 6 wounds. However, it's way more common it saves more than that.
What weapons are more likely to shoot at my drones? D1 and D6 weapons.
If they stay at the exact same points, they'll be over costed. If they get 50p cheaper, they're hilariously broken. A discount of 10-15 points are very much needed.
Buuuuuut it's GW ´we're talking about here. They'll probably increase their points by 10-20.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/12/11 10:00:32
There is actually quite little difference between -1D and 5+++ against D6 weapons.
In the first case a D6 weapon averages 2,66 wounds, in the second one it averages 2,31.
Is it a nerf? Yes.
Is it a big one? Not at all.
Against D2 is better, against D3 is identical, against Dd3 is identical (1,33 average wounds).
So you have lost a little bit of durability against D6 weapons. There is NOTHING in that definition which makes those tanks glass.
To really get some meaningful differences, you need to be shot at with some of the new D3+3 weapons, in which case you now suffer 21% more damage.
If a d6 weapon rolls a 6 on an unsave wound, it will now take 5. Period.
Under the old rules, it would usually take 3-4. I don't care what statistics say, those are the actual numbers in practice, based on 40+ games during 8th.
Add the fact that you get no buff at all against D1 weapons.
We've lost A LOT of duration against D1 weapons, and in prectice about 40% against D6 weapons.
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Statistically it's less of a bullet sink against anything with damage 4 or higher or D1, the same against D3 and better against D2. The question then becomes what weapons are you more likely to be defending against? I think the new DR rules give Deathguard a big advantage with the way the current meta is going as it's generally most effective against D2 weapons which are becoming very prevalent.
We also have no idea on the points costs yet. What we do know is that DG stuff is going to be more resilient than equivalent units in other armies thanks to generally having +1T and DR, or in the case of vehicles having a lot of 5++ saves. That seems fluffy to me and gives the DG a niche they fill. Of course, they could be terrible if GW overpoints them by a lot, but equally they may be hugely broken if they're too cheap. We just don't know yet.
Yes, statistically FNP saves two out of 6 wounds. However, it's way more common it saves more than that.
What weapons are more likely to shoot at my drones? D1 and D6 weapons.
If they stay at the exact same points, they'll be over costed. If they get 50p cheaper, they're hilariously broken. A discount of 10-15 points are very much needed.
Buuuuuut it's GW ´we're talking about here. They'll probably increase their points by 10-20.
There is actually quite little difference between -1D and 5+++ against D6 weapons.
In the first case a D6 weapon averages 2,66 wounds, in the second one it averages 2,31.
Is it a nerf? Yes.
Is it a big one? Not at all.
Against D2 is better, against D3 is identical, against Dd3 is identical (1,33 average wounds).
So you have lost a little bit of durability against D6 weapons. There is NOTHING in that definition which makes those tanks glass.
To really get some meaningful differences, you need to be shot at with some of the new D3+3 weapons, in which case you now suffer 21% more damage.
If a d6 weapon rolls a 6 on an unsave wound, it will now take 5. Period.
Under the old rules, it would usually take 3-4. I don't care what statistics say, those are the actual numbers in practice, based on 40+ games during 8th.
Add the fact that you get no buff at all against D1 weapons.
We've lost A LOT of duration against D1 weapons, and in prectice about 40% against D6 weapons.
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Statistically it's less of a bullet sink against anything with damage 4 or higher or D1, the same against D3 and better against D2. The question then becomes what weapons are you more likely to be defending against? I think the new DR rules give Deathguard a big advantage with the way the current meta is going as it's generally most effective against D2 weapons which are becoming very prevalent.
We also have no idea on the points costs yet. What we do know is that DG stuff is going to be more resilient than equivalent units in other armies thanks to generally having +1T and DR, or in the case of vehicles having a lot of 5++ saves. That seems fluffy to me and gives the DG a niche they fill. Of course, they could be terrible if GW overpoints them by a lot, but equally they may be hugely broken if they're too cheap. We just don't know yet.
Yes, statistically FNP saves two out of 6 wounds. However, it's way more common it saves more than that.
What weapons are more likely to shoot at my drones? D1 and D6 weapons.
If they stay at the exact same points, they'll be over costed. If they get 50p cheaper, they're hilariously broken. A discount of 10-15 points are very much needed.
Buuuuuut it's GW ´we're talking about here. They'll probably increase their points by 10-20.
Ok, this is getting painful.
Please. Learn. Math.
I agree.
Please. Learn. The. Difference. Between. Theory. And. Practice.
There is actually quite little difference between -1D and 5+++ against D6 weapons.
In the first case a D6 weapon averages 2,66 wounds, in the second one it averages 2,31.
Is it a nerf? Yes.
Is it a big one? Not at all.
Against D2 is better, against D3 is identical, against Dd3 is identical (1,33 average wounds).
So you have lost a little bit of durability against D6 weapons. There is NOTHING in that definition which makes those tanks glass.
To really get some meaningful differences, you need to be shot at with some of the new D3+3 weapons, in which case you now suffer 21% more damage.
If a d6 weapon rolls a 6 on an unsave wound, it will now take 5. Period.
Under the old rules, it would usually take 3-4. I don't care what statistics say, those are the actual numbers in practice, based on 40+ games during 8th.
Add the fact that you get no buff at all against D1 weapons.
We've lost A LOT of duration against D1 weapons, and in prectice about 40% against D6 weapons.
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Statistically it's less of a bullet sink against anything with damage 4 or higher or D1, the same against D3 and better against D2. The question then becomes what weapons are you more likely to be defending against? I think the new DR rules give Deathguard a big advantage with the way the current meta is going as it's generally most effective against D2 weapons which are becoming very prevalent.
We also have no idea on the points costs yet. What we do know is that DG stuff is going to be more resilient than equivalent units in other armies thanks to generally having +1T and DR, or in the case of vehicles having a lot of 5++ saves. That seems fluffy to me and gives the DG a niche they fill. Of course, they could be terrible if GW overpoints them by a lot, but equally they may be hugely broken if they're too cheap. We just don't know yet.
Yes, statistically FNP saves two out of 6 wounds. However, it's way more common it saves more than that.
What weapons are more likely to shoot at my drones? D1 and D6 weapons.
If they stay at the exact same points, they'll be over costed. If they get 50p cheaper, they're hilariously broken. A discount of 10-15 points are very much needed.
Buuuuuut it's GW ´we're talking about here. They'll probably increase their points by 10-20.
Ok, this is getting painful.
Please. Learn. Math.
I agree.
Please. Learn. The. Difference. Between. Theory. And. Practice.
Who on earth is rapid firing 5 full intercessor squads into a single blight drone. Then proclaiming it bad when it only loses 7.4 wounds.
Please go look at other units in other armies, battlescribe is good for a brief over view. Nobody is regularly firing 6 damage shots into a small-mid size vehicle unless that's the biggest thing in your army.
"my personal perception of a limited data set is more reliable than the field of statistics and maths, on which the world is based"
If we're saying that doesn't matter, for all you know every single damage roll with come up a 2 from now on. It's about as useful a discussion point.
There is actually quite little difference between -1D and 5+++ against D6 weapons.
In the first case a D6 weapon averages 2,66 wounds, in the second one it averages 2,31.
Is it a nerf? Yes.
Is it a big one? Not at all.
Against D2 is better, against D3 is identical, against Dd3 is identical (1,33 average wounds).
So you have lost a little bit of durability against D6 weapons. There is NOTHING in that definition which makes those tanks glass.
To really get some meaningful differences, you need to be shot at with some of the new D3+3 weapons, in which case you now suffer 21% more damage.
If a d6 weapon rolls a 6 on an unsave wound, it will now take 5. Period.
Under the old rules, it would usually take 3-4. I don't care what statistics say, those are the actual numbers in practice, based on 40+ games during 8th.
Add the fact that you get no buff at all against D1 weapons.
We've lost A LOT of duration against D1 weapons, and in prectice about 40% against D6 weapons.
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Statistically it's less of a bullet sink against anything with damage 4 or higher or D1, the same against D3 and better against D2. The question then becomes what weapons are you more likely to be defending against? I think the new DR rules give Deathguard a big advantage with the way the current meta is going as it's generally most effective against D2 weapons which are becoming very prevalent.
We also have no idea on the points costs yet. What we do know is that DG stuff is going to be more resilient than equivalent units in other armies thanks to generally having +1T and DR, or in the case of vehicles having a lot of 5++ saves. That seems fluffy to me and gives the DG a niche they fill. Of course, they could be terrible if GW overpoints them by a lot, but equally they may be hugely broken if they're too cheap. We just don't know yet.
Yes, statistically FNP saves two out of 6 wounds. However, it's way more common it saves more than that.
What weapons are more likely to shoot at my drones? D1 and D6 weapons.
If they stay at the exact same points, they'll be over costed. If they get 50p cheaper, they're hilariously broken. A discount of 10-15 points are very much needed.
Buuuuuut it's GW ´we're talking about here. They'll probably increase their points by 10-20.
Ok, this is getting painful.
Please. Learn. Math.
I agree.
Please. Learn. The. Difference. Between. Theory. And. Practice.
Who on earth is rapid firing 5 full intercessor squads into a single blight drone. Then proclaiming it bad when it only loses 7.4 wounds.
Please go look at other units in other armies, battlescribe is good for a brief over view. Nobody is regularly firing 6 damage shots into a small-mid size vehicle unless that's the biggest thing in your army.
Those 7.4 wounds used to be 4.9. I can't understand how you think that's not a nerf, or even bad when you compare it.
Well, Drones, blighthaulers and Rhinos ARE the biggest things in MY regular army list. I rarely take Mortarion, and I dislike the mortars with a passion. The same goes for Defiler (who actually might have gotter straight better with the new codex) and the useless Helbrute.
Sure the Daemon Prince might be better and scarier, but you can't shoot him, so.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kirotheavenger wrote: "my personal perception of a limited data set is more reliable than the field of statistics and maths, on which the world is based"
If we're saying that doesn't matter, for all you know every single damage roll with come up a 2 from now on. It's about as useful a discussion point.
Yes, you are totally correct. Theory and practice are always the exact same thing. That's why you never have to try stuff that works on paper.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/11 10:19:02
I miss old fnp4+ a secondary armour roll that could be bypassed by Double s correlating to t value.
It was fast protected against small and in PM case medium weaponry and not slowing down since it was all or nothing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/11 10:28:25
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.
There is actually quite little difference between -1D and 5+++ against D6 weapons.
In the first case a D6 weapon averages 2,66 wounds, in the second one it averages 2,31.
Is it a nerf? Yes.
Is it a big one? Not at all.
Against D2 is better, against D3 is identical, against Dd3 is identical (1,33 average wounds).
So you have lost a little bit of durability against D6 weapons. There is NOTHING in that definition which makes those tanks glass.
To really get some meaningful differences, you need to be shot at with some of the new D3+3 weapons, in which case you now suffer 21% more damage.
If a d6 weapon rolls a 6 on an unsave wound, it will now take 5. Period.
Under the old rules, it would usually take 3-4. I don't care what statistics say, those are the actual numbers in practice, based on 40+ games during 8th.
Add the fact that you get no buff at all against D1 weapons.
We've lost A LOT of duration against D1 weapons, and in prectice about 40% against D6 weapons.
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Statistically it's less of a bullet sink against anything with damage 4 or higher or D1, the same against D3 and better against D2. The question then becomes what weapons are you more likely to be defending against? I think the new DR rules give Deathguard a big advantage with the way the current meta is going as it's generally most effective against D2 weapons which are becoming very prevalent.
We also have no idea on the points costs yet. What we do know is that DG stuff is going to be more resilient than equivalent units in other armies thanks to generally having +1T and DR, or in the case of vehicles having a lot of 5++ saves. That seems fluffy to me and gives the DG a niche they fill. Of course, they could be terrible if GW overpoints them by a lot, but equally they may be hugely broken if they're too cheap. We just don't know yet.
Yes, statistically FNP saves two out of 6 wounds. However, it's way more common it saves more than that.
What weapons are more likely to shoot at my drones? D1 and D6 weapons.
If they stay at the exact same points, they'll be over costed. If they get 50p cheaper, they're hilariously broken. A discount of 10-15 points are very much needed.
Buuuuuut it's GW ´we're talking about here. They'll probably increase their points by 10-20.
Ok, this is getting painful.
Please. Learn. Math.
I agree.
Please. Learn. The. Difference. Between. Theory. And. Practice.
Just because you’re used to rolling better than average doesn’t change the numbers.
Basically; your argument is...”I’m super lucky so I want to keep rolling these BS luck dice that shouldn’t be coming up so often.” Too bad.
Your whinging is just ridiculous at this point.
I for one hate mountains of randomness. Dice hate me...I hate them back. I play this game to outplay my opponent to win. I hate when there’s so much RNG injected in (see crappy doomsday cannons in Necron army) that I can expertly outplay someone and still get smacked down due to dice rolls being outrageous. I build to mitigate; but when your opponents roll 50-75% of their 5+++ on a constant basis it gets unfun fast as there is no skill stopping you just dumb luck.
There is actually quite little difference between -1D and 5+++ against D6 weapons.
In the first case a D6 weapon averages 2,66 wounds, in the second one it averages 2,31.
Is it a nerf? Yes.
Is it a big one? Not at all.
Against D2 is better, against D3 is identical, against Dd3 is identical (1,33 average wounds).
So you have lost a little bit of durability against D6 weapons. There is NOTHING in that definition which makes those tanks glass.
To really get some meaningful differences, you need to be shot at with some of the new D3+3 weapons, in which case you now suffer 21% more damage.
If a d6 weapon rolls a 6 on an unsave wound, it will now take 5. Period.
Under the old rules, it would usually take 3-4. I don't care what statistics say, those are the actual numbers in practice, based on 40+ games during 8th.
Add the fact that you get no buff at all against D1 weapons.
We've lost A LOT of duration against D1 weapons, and in prectice about 40% against D6 weapons.
Jidmah wrote: Losing a wound on the drone is a buff because it no longer degrades.
Yes. It also dies faster. Especially with the loss of FNP.
But I do agree that over all, the drop of a wound is a buff.
However, it did lose melee capabilities.
The flamer is better, and so is the BS.
However, it's won't be nearly the bullet sink it used to be.
Statistically it's less of a bullet sink against anything with damage 4 or higher or D1, the same against D3 and better against D2. The question then becomes what weapons are you more likely to be defending against? I think the new DR rules give Deathguard a big advantage with the way the current meta is going as it's generally most effective against D2 weapons which are becoming very prevalent.
We also have no idea on the points costs yet. What we do know is that DG stuff is going to be more resilient than equivalent units in other armies thanks to generally having +1T and DR, or in the case of vehicles having a lot of 5++ saves. That seems fluffy to me and gives the DG a niche they fill. Of course, they could be terrible if GW overpoints them by a lot, but equally they may be hugely broken if they're too cheap. We just don't know yet.
Yes, statistically FNP saves two out of 6 wounds. However, it's way more common it saves more than that.
What weapons are more likely to shoot at my drones? D1 and D6 weapons.
If they stay at the exact same points, they'll be over costed. If they get 50p cheaper, they're hilariously broken. A discount of 10-15 points are very much needed.
Buuuuuut it's GW ´we're talking about here. They'll probably increase their points by 10-20.
Ok, this is getting painful.
Please. Learn. Math.
I agree.
Please. Learn. The. Difference. Between. Theory. And. Practice.
Just because you’re used to rolling better than average doesn’t change the numbers.
Basically; your argument is...”I’m super lucky so I want to keep rolling these BS luck dice that shouldn’t be coming up so often.” Too bad.
Your whinging is just ridiculous at this point.
I for one hate mountains of randomness. Dice hate me...I hate them back. I play this game to outplay my opponent to win. I hate when there’s so much RNG injected in (see crappy doomsday cannons in Necron army) that I can expertly outplay someone and still get smacked down due to dice rolls being outrageous. I build to mitigate; but when your opponents roll 50-75% of their 5+++ on a constant basis it gets unfun fast as there is no skill stopping you just dumb luck.
So you would prefer to remove dice and just go on statistics?
Spoletta wrote: If we go by personal experience, then you are totally right, this is 100% a nerf since all D6 weapons always roll 1 damage cp rerolled into a 1!
kirotheavenger wrote: "my personal perception of a limited data set is more reliable than the field of statistics and maths, on which the world is based"
If we're saying that doesn't matter, for all you know every single damage roll with come up a 2 from now on. It's about as useful a discussion point.
Yes, you are totally correct. Theory and practice are always the exact same thing. That's why you never have to try stuff that works on paper.
There's theory and practice being different, then there's just completely misunderstanding and dismissing the maths. Guess which one you're doing? We can't make determinations of effectiveness based on statistical outliers. Yes, it's possible that an old DG unit took 9 wounds from two d6 Damage weapons and saved 8 out of them with DR, but it's equally possible that same unit saved none. In one case it works out better, in the other it works out worse. We shouldn't base any judgements on that though, because it's completely random. That's why you can't just ignore the maths and use experience as proof. Also, 40+ games is nowhere near a large enough sample size.
We also need to take into account overall damage reduction and the likelihood of a scenario happening. Your bizarre example involving 100 bolters is a case in point. Yes, DG vehicles now take more damage against D1 weapons but just look at the numbers involved. You're talking about 100 bolter shots to do hardly any damage at all and nobody in their right mind fires bolters at vehicles.
kirotheavenger wrote: "my personal perception of a limited data set is more reliable than the field of statistics and maths, on which the world is based"
If we're saying that doesn't matter, for all you know every single damage roll with come up a 2 from now on. It's about as useful a discussion point.
Yes, you are totally correct. Theory and practice are always the exact same thing. That's why you never have to try stuff that works on paper.
There's theory and practice being different, then there's just completely misunderstanding and dismissing the maths. Guess which one you're doing? We can't make determinations of effectiveness based on statistical outliers. Yes, it's possible that an old DG unit took 9 wounds from two d6 Damage weapons and saved 8 out of them with DR, but it's equally possible that same unit saved none. In one case it works out better, in the other it works out worse. We shouldn't base any judgements on that though, because it's completely random. That's why you can't just ignore the maths and use experience as proof. Also, 40+ games is nowhere near a large enough sample size.
We also need to take into account overall damage reduction and the likelihood of a scenario happening. Your bizarre example involving 100 bolters is a case in point. Yes, DG vehicles now take more damage against D1 weapons but just look at the numbers involved. You're talking about 100 bolter shots to do hardly any damage at all and nobody in their right mind fires bolters at vehicles.
I agree that it's more likely to be shot with anti vehicle weapons than with basic unbuffed bolters. (FYI, it's more likely for bolters to have an AP and rerolls)
But even in the event of getting shot with a D6 weapon, we now take more damage in total.
