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.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Thats a stretch of logic. Nu-marines are here to stay with their 2 wounds, its a new design paradigm, complaining about this is just pointless and dumb.

I don't recall saying otherwise but you go right ahead and burn that straw man.

 vipoid wrote:
I've said this elsewhere but I think it bears repeating:

Venom with 2 old Splinter Cannons in RF vs. Old Marines: 1.33 dead Marines.
Venom with 2 new Splinter Cannons vs. New Marines: 1 dead Marine.

Boy, I sure am glad Splinter Cannons have been "upgraded" to be "Marine-killing weapons".

1.33 old marines, 18.6pts
1 new marine, 18pts

and that was kind of the problem with old marines, wasn't it. You never needed weaponry with any kind of AP to kill them efficiently, basic anti-infantry weaponry could just as efficiently grind through them because they were easy to wound and would eventually just fail enough 3+ saves.

Almost any weapon was effective when aimed at space marines. Elite infantry units should definitely be more durable than they previously were.

 vipoid wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Thats a stretch of logic. Nu-marines are here to stay with their 2 wounds, its a new design paradigm, complaining about this is just pointless and dumb.

I don't recall saying otherwise but you go right ahead and burn that straw man.

And yet you saw fit to compare an old design paradigm to a new one. Hardly a straw man.

 vipoid wrote:
I've said this elsewhere but I think it bears repeating:

Venom with 2 old Splinter Cannons in RF vs. Old Marines: 1.33 dead Marines.
Venom with 2 new Splinter Cannons vs. New Marines: 1 dead Marine.

Boy, I sure am glad Splinter Cannons have been "upgraded" to be "Marine-killing weapons".

Of course irrelevant vs old marines. Only relevant comparison is old sc vs new marines vs new sc vs new marines

Your comparison　is 100% worthless junk

And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.

"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"

"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."

"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"


GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.

 vipoid wrote:
And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.

"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"

"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."

"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"


GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.

God, this attitude is if anything MORE irritating than the people rping that everyone is whining that the sky is falling.It's like when someone who is agreeing with you politically is doing it by shrieking and whining like a child.

MOST reactions to this specific weapon reveal were not positive. your characterization of everyone 'eagerly gobbling it up as quickly as possible' is the raving of a delusional madman just DESPERATE to portray everyone not you as brainless sheep.

Take a step back. Actually read the responses. You've got a mixture of people going "well, it's nice that my Venoms will get to play safer now, because this allows me the same firepower vs common targets at max range (which it does, as I've pointed out, it returns nearly an identical points return vs nu-marines as it did vs old marines and it does it at max range) and others like myself saying regardless of how comparatively strong it is, it annoys me that the weapon I used to take as anti-infantry is being shifted into more of a heavy bolter role, when Kabals already have a perfectly functional dedicated anti-MEQ tool and I rarely wish I had more of a weapon like this one in my list, and that the reward for playing in a higher risk style was removed from the supposedly glass cannon army.

And then you have Xeno and Slayer bitching about how kabalite warriors will be 8ppm models with a 4+ now because how dare anything that's not a marine not instantly evaporate to any firepower regardless of their points value.

 vipoid wrote:
And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.

"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"

"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."

"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"


GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.

Old marines and venom cannons also played on a board that was 25% larger, had entirely different points values, etc. etc. etc. Its effectively a different game and the comparison is meaningless.

Honestly, I recently had my first game against drukhari in a looooong time (last time they were still called dark eldar ), and I was completely shocked to find out that those fully armored dudes didn't have a 4+ save.

Why argue with them? Just mute vipoid instead, the button is to the right. I mutet vipoid. It will increase your dakka experience tremendusly, and vipoid is free to enjoy their dakka as well.

Edit: Updated for promouns. I try to not use the masculine pronoun as default.

 Niiai wrote:
Why argue with them? Just mute vipoid instead, the button is to the right. I mutet vipoid. It will increase your dakka experience tremendusly, and vipoid is free to enjoy their dakka as well.

Edit: Updated for promouns. I try to not use the masculine pronoun as default.

Empty forums make for excellent echo chambers...

Yes, at some point you do not get any signal. But there is such a great sweet spot where you have blocked out all the noice and what is left is just pure signal. :-)

vipoid wrote:I've said this elsewhere but I think it bears repeating:

Venom with 2 old Splinter Cannons in RF vs. Old Marines: 1.33 dead Marines.
Venom with 2 new Splinter Cannons vs. New Marines: 1 dead Marine.

Boy, I sure am glad Splinter Cannons have been "upgraded" to be "Marine-killing weapons".

It's like someone missed my post. For your edification vipod.

alextroy wrote:I was curious about the new Splinter Cannon versus the Old Splinter Cannon, so I ran the numbers for a few scenarios, assuming Poison does what it does now:

Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 0.33 Wounds, Double within 18"

New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 1 Wound, 0.75 if you moved

Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 0.5 Wounds, Double within 18"

New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 1.33 Wounds, 1 if you moved

Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 0.67 Wounds, Double within 18"

New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 1.67 Wounds, 1.25 if you moved

You also have to half the wounds done by the New Splinter Cannon vs W1 (or -1 Damage) targets. Even then, the new splinter cannon is at worst a side grade if not a flat out buff to the weapon.

Sometimes it seems that GW does know what they are doing, at least twice a day

 Niiai wrote:
Yes, at some point you do not get any signal. But there is such a great sweet spot where you have blocked out all the noice and what is left is just pure signal. :-)

Different things annoy different people.

Vipoid's going to be bitter until that day in 2035 where GW release an Archon/Succubus on a bike/hoverboard/cloud of tortured souls with M 14".

Then you have other people for who Dark Eldar are essentially 3 Ravagers, 2 flyers and the rest into kabalites in Venoms. And so if that army's effective then all is right in the world. And if it isn't, then doom and gloom.

 alextroy wrote:

vipoid wrote:I've said this elsewhere but I think it bears repeating:

Venom with 2 old Splinter Cannons in RF vs. Old Marines: 1.33 dead Marines.
Venom with 2 new Splinter Cannons vs. New Marines: 1 dead Marine.

Boy, I sure am glad Splinter Cannons have been "upgraded" to be "Marine-killing weapons".

It's like someone missed my post. For your edification vipod.

alextroy wrote:I was curious about the new Splinter Cannon versus the Old Splinter Cannon, so I ran the numbers for a few scenarios, assuming Poison does what it does now:

Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 0.33 Wounds, Double within 18"

New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 3+: 1 Wound, 0.75 if you moved

Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 0.5 Wounds, Double within 18"

New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 4+: 1.33 Wounds, 1 if you moved

Old Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 0.67 Wounds, Double within 18"

New Splinter Cannon vs Sv 5+: 1.67 Wounds, 1.25 if you moved

You also have to half the wounds done by the New Splinter Cannon vs W1 (or -1 Damage) targets. Even then, the new splinter cannon is at worst a side grade if not a flat out buff to the weapon.

Sometimes it seems that GW does know what they are doing, at least twice a day

You might have noticed already, but in case you haven't (because this tripped me up at first when I read his post), his stats are based on "dead marines" whereas your stats are based on wounds caused. Likewise he is comparing old cannons vs old marines against new cannons vs new marines, whereas you compare old cannons vs new marines against new cannons vs new marines. Subtly different datasets with slightly different results.

Last time I rocked the DEldars in a tournament setting it was Baron Satonyx featuring the furius five beastmasters and the zoo.

But the way it looked through 8th I instead focused on my Nids and GSC.

 Niiai wrote:
Why argue with them? Just mute vipoid instead, the button is to the right. I mutet vipoid. It will increase your dakka experience tremendusly, and vipoid is free to enjoy their dakka as well.

Edit: Updated for promouns. I try to not use the masculine pronoun as default.

I just have to say that I like you. Good poster that I have nothing but positive things to say about.

I also agree that muting people is always a good choice.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Niiai wrote:
Last time I rocked the DEldars in a tournament setting it was Baron Satonyx featuring the furius five beastmasters and the zoo.

But the way it looked through 8th I instead focused on my Nids and GSC.

The old HQs of yore were truly wonderful things. I only hope one day we will see them come back in full force.

You might have noticed already, but in case you haven't (because this tripped me up at first when I read his post), his stats are based on "dead marines" whereas your stats are based on wounds caused. Likewise he is comparing old cannons vs old marines against new cannons vs new marines, whereas you compare old cannons vs new marines against new cannons vs new marines. Subtly different datasets with slightly different results.

Seems it would still outperform versus the most numerous units around(2 wounds or more) as the new cannon has a -1 to AP which means worse saves in general. .

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Got to be honest here, the pun in the title is of excellent grade quality, and not a single mention... You nerds to preoccupied with theory hammer.... This place has changed...

I love it <3 !
Thank you, endlesswaltz, for giving us a great title to the thread. Makes my day everytime I see it ^_^

the_scotsman wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.

"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"

"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."

"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"


GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.

And then you have Xeno and Slayer bitching about how kabalite warriors will be 8ppm models with a 4+ now because how dare anything that's not a marine not instantly evaporate to any firepower regardless of their points value.

Probably because it goes against the fluff and the playstyle of glass cannon but go off, forgetting that I've had numerous complaints about Marines to begin with.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Probably because it goes against the fluff and the playstyle of glass cannon but go off, forgetting that I've had numerous complaints about Marines to begin with.

Doesn't really go against the fluff as A) Aeldari armor is advanced high-tech armor and B) the save is also taking into account that the Aeldari is a lithe race with superhuman reflexes. Considering that the game design space is limited and more rolls do not a better game make I think this is a nice touch and solution. I predict that 4+ is going to be the standard armor value of all Aeldari going forward who wear standard Guardian-esque armor, and as I don't like playing elite horde armies I think this is a welcome change.

Only thing it goes against is the traditional stats from the old codexes but those were designed for a completely different system and old systems should in no way condemn future systems. 4+ still makes Drukhari a glasshammer due to the proliferation of AP in recent years. If anything this is a course correction due to the increase in AP.

I also predict our FnP will be going away so slightly more durability is a welcome change in return.

"Mesh armour is commonly worn by Eldar Guardians. It is formed of tens of thousands of individual pieces of thermoplas interwoven to produce a dense material resembling reptile scales or chainmail. It becomes momentarily rigid when hit, spreading force across a larger area, thereby reducing the damage. The thermoplas also disperses heat rapidly, giving reasonable protection against energy weapons.The material is psychically sensitive, automatically reacting to the wearer's movements and thoughts to maintain a glove-tight fit as they move and fight."

"Flak Armour is a light and relatively simple form of body armour used by the military forces of the Imperium of Man.

It is used as standard issue body armour for the countless millions of Imperial Guardsmen and Planetary Defence Force members across the galaxy."

Yeah, it's definitely "going against the fluff" for these two armor descriptions to not be reflected by exactly the same save value

I mean, fluff is after all a highly subjective discussion that varies from each individual.

I am personally happy to see Kabalite Warriors closer to how they appear in the fluff.

The idea that a 'glass hammer' style precludes a 4+ save seems pretty narrow-minded.

The perception of 'glassiness' is based on durability versus cost; Marine players have complained for literally decades that their T4/3+ models felt vulnerable because they were too expensive relative to their durability. A 4+ save is nice for Kabalites, but at T3/W1, bolt rifles are still going to tear through them.

And even if Kabalites become fairly durable for their cost, 'glass hammer' is an army trait for Eldar, not an individual one. Is anyone here going to argue that Eldar aren't a glass hammer army because Striking Scorpions get a 3+? Unless Wyches, Reavers, Hellions, Scourges, Raiders, Ravagers, and all the other fast-glass-hammer units are also getting massive buffs to durability, I don't think the flavor of the army is at risk.

I, for one, am glad to see a xenos race defined by its smug sense of innate superiority become a little more elite on the table. There's a lot of room to play in in terms of eliteness between Guardsmen and Marines, and historically they've always been a lot closer to the former.

Incredible how much complaining people have got out of what isn't even a full single datasheet.

Bravo chaps

 catbarf wrote:
The idea that a 'glass hammer' style precludes a 4+ save seems pretty narrow-minded.

The perception of 'glassiness' is based on durability versus cost; Marine players have complained for literally decades that their T4/3+ models felt vulnerable because they were too expensive relative to their durability. A 4+ save is nice for Kabalites, but at T3/W1, bolt rifles are still going to tear through them.

And even if Kabalites become fairly durable for their cost, 'glass hammer' is an army trait for Eldar, not an individual one. Is anyone here going to argue that Eldar aren't a glass hammer army because Striking Scorpions get a 3+? Unless Wyches, Reavers, Hellions, Scourges, Raiders, Ravagers, and all the other fast-glass-hammer units are also getting massive buffs to durability, I don't think the flavor of the army is at risk.

I, for one, am glad to see a xenos race defined by its smug sense of innate superiority become a little more elite on the table. There's a lot of room to play in in terms of eliteness between Guardsmen and Marines, and historically they've always been a lot closer to the former.

Agreed. Eldar infantry should be tougher than guardsmen. And their elites should be able to go toe to toe with marines. I see no problem with Incubi absolutely shredding marines in melee, but being less durable in general. That feels "fluffy" to me.

The only problem I see is exactly the same one we currently have with loyalists compared to CSM: "Good Eldar" will seem comparatively week compared to Dark Eldar until they get their own 9th edition codex. But that's the consequence of GW's method for updating the rules for each faction.

Umbros wrote:
Incredible how much complaining people have got out of what isn't even a full single datasheet.

Bravo chaps

So you decided to complain about complaints?

Bravo!

But seriously, it's not anything new. People spend thousands of dollars and hours and by nature are change adverse. The armor save and the splinter canon profile have been largely unchanged for over a decade now, makes perfect sense to me that some folks are going to push back. At least it's a discussion revolving around a faction that usually gets little or no time at the fore front.

Instead of labeling either side as complainers folks should just have a calm collected and fun discussion and realize not everyone has to agree either way. If your at an impasse, just agree to disagree. And if your not involved in certain posters discussions, it's probably not a good idea to start off by labeling their views as worthless complaining

A CSM Berserker squad is T4 with a 3+ save and it is widely regarded as a glasscannon unit. They die to pretty much anything except lasguns (and still, it depends on the available number of lasguns).

Thinking that a T3 W1 4+ save is too resilient is downright stupid.

 vipoid wrote:
And this is why Dark Eldar are destined to suck.

"Why are you complaining? The new Splinter Cannon is specifically designed to kill the new Marines!"

"But its worse at killing new Marines than the old one was at killing old marines, and you've also traded functionality against 1- and 3-wound infantry, whilst also being worse when used by infantry..."

"Old marines don't exist anymore, therefore your argument is invalid! It doesn't matter if Marines have gotten better, yet your already-bad weapons are just treading water!"


GW offers DE a platter of sewage, and the response from the 40k community is to gobble it up as quickly as possible and ask for seconds, whilst berating anyone with the temerity to decline the rancid offering and maybe ask for some actual food instead.

If you want to do stupid comparisons comparing to non existant rules and pretend it's relevant how about this: lascannons suck! Just d6 damage? They used to have　2d6!

the_scotsman wrote:
"Mesh armour is commonly worn by Eldar Guardians. It is formed of tens of thousands of individual pieces of thermoplas interwoven to produce a dense material resembling reptile scales or chainmail. It becomes momentarily rigid when hit, spreading force across a larger area, thereby reducing the damage. The thermoplas also disperses heat rapidly, giving reasonable protection against energy weapons.The material is psychically sensitive, automatically reacting to the wearer's movements and thoughts to maintain a glove-tight fit as they move and fight."

"Flak Armour is a light and relatively simple form of body armour used by the military forces of the Imperium of Man.

It is used as standard issue body armour for the countless millions of Imperial Guardsmen and Planetary Defence Force members across the galaxy."

Yeah, it's definitely "going against the fluff" for these two armor descriptions to not be reflected by exactly the same save value

That doesn't sound terribly protective to be honest. So what's really your point?

And yeah, if you hadn't noticed, Ork shirts and Tyranid chitin have entirely different descriptions and they have the same value.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
The idea that a 'glass hammer' style precludes a 4+ save seems pretty narrow-minded.

The perception of 'glassiness' is based on durability versus cost; Marine players have complained for literally decades that their T4/3+ models felt vulnerable because they were too expensive relative to their durability. A 4+ save is nice for Kabalites, but at T3/W1, bolt rifles are still going to tear through them.

And even if Kabalites become fairly durable for their cost, 'glass hammer' is an army trait for Eldar, not an individual one. Is anyone here going to argue that Eldar aren't a glass hammer army because Striking Scorpions get a 3+? Unless Wyches, Reavers, Hellions, Scourges, Raiders, Ravagers, and all the other fast-glass-hammer units are also getting massive buffs to durability, I don't think the flavor of the army is at risk.

I, for one, am glad to see a xenos race defined by its smug sense of innate superiority become a little more elite on the table. There's a lot of room to play in in terms of eliteness between Guardsmen and Marines, and historically they've always been a lot closer to the former.

Agreed. Eldar infantry should be tougher than guardsmen. And their elites should be able to go toe to toe with marines. I see no problem with Incubi absolutely shredding marines in melee, but being less durable in general. That feels "fluffy" to me.

The only problem I see is exactly the same one we currently have with loyalists compared to CSM: "Good Eldar" will seem comparatively week compared to Dark Eldar until they get their own 9th edition codex. But that's the consequence of GW's method for updating the rules for each faction.

It's almost like in nearly every avenue of the world, a small number of really simple psychological magic tricks that produce predictable emotional responses in peoples brains drive what the most profitable course of action is for any given business, and we've structured everything such that the most profitable course of action is rewarded in the hopes that that is also coincidentally the best or most effective course of action.

And since we're collectively hanging out in the bargaining stage we have to keep rationalizing that disconnect between the thing that's most profitable and the thing that's the best quality instead of acknowledging that everyone is working with pretty similar brain chemistry and it's pretty easy to trick that chemistry.

In this circumstance the best course of action for the game might be to roll out paradigm-shifting updates that break longstanding norms to bring units to closer parity with their narrative roots all at once to maintain balance, but the most profitable course of action might be to roll it out one faction at a time to create a buzz of excitement about that faction and manufacture discontentment with the rules that the neglected factions have.

tneva82 wrote:
If you want to do stupid comparisons comparing to non existant rules and pretend it's relevant how about this: lascannons suck! Just d6 damage? They used to have　2d6!

Ah yes, I forgot, it's always perfectly fine for Marines to get infinite buffs. It's never reasonable for already crap xeno weapons to do anything other than tread water.