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.

Ezekiel

Bladeguard Ancient, Remembrance ( -1D to one unit )
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
10x Assault Terminators, 6 dual LC, 4 TH/SS, Homer

Talonmaster, Obsec bubble trait
Talonmaster
Chap on Bike

Chief Apothecary

3x MM Attack Bikes
2x MM Attack Bikes
2x MM Attack Bikes

3x3 Bikes, LC Sarge, Dual CS

Fin.

Looks to be less about Inner Circle spam and more about adding obsec and turning off obsec at the right places.

Given few the low amount of psykers in the game at the moment I wonder how it would fair if it can't turn off obsec.

That MM nerf can't come fast enough.

Spoletta wrote:
That MM nerf can't come fast enough.

25 Points Lascannon-like profile with better damage and double the shots...WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG!?

Spoletta wrote:
That MM nerf can't come fast enough.

Why do you think the MM played an outsized role in his games?

I'd argue that the Multimelta is reasonable, but the boards are too small.

 Insectum7 wrote:
I'd argue that the Multimelta is reasonable, but the boards are too small.

Well, the board size definitely isn't changing at this point. But I don't think you can just adjust range, even if you nerfed MMs to say 18" range, it wouldn't make much difference on those bikes, they're so mobile.

18" changes a lot actually. It puts them much more in harms way, especially if they want the bonus damage. Those things have invul only at range.

Spoletta wrote:
18" changes a lot actually. It puts them much more in harms way, especially if they want the bonus damage. Those things have invul only at range.

If they're not in harms way then they're probably not getting the bonus.

I run three ABs in my Ravenwing list, but spread them out in bike units.

Maybe the rule of three should just apply to models and not units. So no more than 3 AB w/ MM on the field. You could have 3 AB w/ HB though.

What tournament was this?

Ananiel

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
18" changes a lot actually. It puts them much more in harms way, especially if they want the bonus damage. Those things have invul only at range.

If they're not in harms way then they're probably not getting the bonus.

Yes and no.
Being within 12" is usually being close to your opponents claws, but not always.

12" for example is a decent distance away from a DS termie to shoot at him and have a few chances to see the next turn.

Spoletta wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
18" changes a lot actually. It puts them much more in harms way, especially if they want the bonus damage. Those things have invul only at range.

If they're not in harms way then they're probably not getting the bonus.

Yes and no.
Being within 12" is usually being close to your opponents claws, but not always.

12" for example is a decent distance away from a DS termie to shoot at him and have a few chances to see the next turn.

Also, critically, it would remove MMs from being able to get the melta damage bonus on the drop.

the_scotsman wrote:
Also, critically, it would remove MMs from being able to get the melta damage bonus on the drop.

Bikes and Eradicators aren't really dropping in. Moving it to 18" would just solidify ABs as the go to.

Don't shrink the MM range, either play on larger tables or introduce more reserve-type mechanics to provide counterplay.

So I guess the chaplain has the « reduce to 5++ » relic (or does he?), but does he also get the super chaplain upgrade extra WLT ?
What is everyone thinking about this ?

I like this list a lot, I will try it this Saturday but with blade guards instead of bikes, and with less attack bikes as I don’t own as many (who has 8 attack bikes ??).

Ananiel wrote:
I run three ABs in my Ravenwing list, but spread them out in bike units.

Maybe the rule of three should just apply to models and not units. So no more than 3 AB w/ MM on the field. You could have 3 AB w/ HB though.

What tournament was this?

Ananiel

Eeh...with units minimum 5 models out there i really doubt that works


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 addnid wrote:
So I guess the chaplain has the « reduce to 5++ » relic (or does he?), but does he also get the super chaplain upgrade extra WLT ?
What is everyone thinking about this ?

I like this list a lot, I will try it this Saturday but with blade guards instead of bikes, and with less attack bikes as I don’t own as many (who has 8 attack bikes ??).

Tournament players for one. That's what tournaments are. Spam broken stuff

 Insectum7 wrote:
I'd argue that the Multimelta is reasonable, but the boards are too small.

It is a cost / damage problem.

MM is so good in terms of damage per point that it is OK if you lose it after a DS or whatever, it is hard to screen against it (e.g. bikes, sisters strat), so it feels oppressive.

If losing the MM squad were to be really painful point wise, then it'd be a better risk / reward scenario. As it is, they punch way above their weight.

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
18" changes a lot actually. It puts them much more in harms way, especially if they want the bonus damage. Those things have invul only at range.

If they're not in harms way then they're probably not getting the bonus.

Yes and no.
Being within 12" is usually being close to your opponents claws, but not always.

12" for example is a decent distance away from a DS termie to shoot at him and have a few chances to see the next turn.

Also, critically, it would remove MMs from being able to get the melta damage bonus on the drop.

Oh 18" changes a lot generally, don't get me wrong. Just not particularly if what you are concerned about is attack bike spam. It just makes attack bikes even more clearly superior to other mountings for MMs.

Grey40k got it, it's a cost/damage problem.

Boards aren't small, they're finally ok as melee is actually happening as a key part of the game after ages and we can play using home tables much easier now.

Some platforms that can carry multi meltas are simply too cheap, probably even the multi melta itself. IMHO it's a 25/30ppm weapon, not a 20ppm one.

Combos that allow to fire twice for cheap like armorium cherubs should go too, or maybe make them work on 4+ and/or add a -1 (or greater) to hit penalty.

Give the -1 to hit penalty for firing heavy weapons to anything but vehicles and monsters. Bikes would get it, as it should be.

Do we know what secondaries this guy was taking?

The Hunt was nerf so that might hurt this list a little.

 Blackie wrote:
Grey40k got it, it's a cost/damage problem.

Boards aren't small, they're finally ok as melee is actually happening as a key part of the game after ages and we can play using home tables much easier now.

If you can reach melee easier, you can reach MM range easier. The ease of getting into range is part of the "damage" in that equation.

Multimeltas sort of recieved several boosts.
1: Board is smaller
2: Objectives are more central and necessary to hold
3: Obscuring terrain making it easier to conceal small units carrying Meltas
4: Melta Stat boosts themselves

It all works in their favor. Sure you can always adjust points, but it's the shallowest variable. Imo board size is the variable that needs adjusting. Larger tables give more reason for long range weapons and transports. I've seen it said that transports aren't worth it because the table is too small.

We're never going back to a bigger board size. It just isn't going to happen. You can't go back after a change like that; it's bad enough to change in the first place and force everyone to cut their own boards down, if they went back to the large size now it's be a fiasco of epic proportions.

yukishiro1 wrote:
We're never going back to a bigger board size. It just isn't going to happen. You can't go back after a change like that; it's bad enough to change in the first place and force everyone to cut their own boards down, if they went back to the large size now it's be a fiasco of epic proportions.

No one was forced to do anything, there are no rules for table size outside of "if you play on smaller surface than this, the game breaks" and I would argue that for games smaller than 2K, the game is already broken at the minimum size (just saw a few 1K game boards, it looks terrible).
And close combat would still be needed and as effective as today (it isn't really better than before in itself, it's just a good tool now instead of just a different way to deal with something). Nothing changed with the board size, the missions don't care, movement value didn't change, range values didn't change, there is no fiasco waiting to happen.

Actually reducing ranges (logically you would reduce all ranges not just the MM) WOULD force the smaller boards on everyone.

yukishiro1 wrote:
We're never going back to a bigger board size. It just isn't going to happen. You can't go back after a change like that; it's bad enough to change in the first place and force everyone to cut their own boards down, if they went back to the large size now it's be a fiasco of epic proportions.

Man, that word "minimum" must be really poorly understood....

ccs wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
We're never going back to a bigger board size. It just isn't going to happen. You can't go back after a change like that; it's bad enough to change in the first place and force everyone to cut their own boards down, if they went back to the large size now it's be a fiasco of epic proportions.

Man, that word "minimum" must be really poorly understood....

Well players are their worst enemies. Complaining all the time about how GW is making things more expensive when they themselves are big fault for that. Complain about GW changing base sizes and then themselves are only ones actually requiring bases to be changed.

And all the time blaming GW for everything they themselves do.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Looks to be less about Inner Circle spam and more about adding obsec and turning off obsec at the right places.

Given few the low amount of psykers in the game at the moment I wonder how it would fair if it can't turn off obsec.

The min size squad of bikes (they're "good" for primaries or secondaries obj since they probably have obsec here) and command squads implies that it probably also has a lot to do with what secondaries were taken.

I think the MM attack bikes might be the only part of the list that you can replace by something else (even though they might be a bit too cheap right now)

Curious about what was the Chap on bike used for (prob +1 to hit) ?

How do smaller/larger boards impact multi-meltas on mobile platforms at all?

This seems like people who didn't even give the smaller boards a chance are talking nonsense once again.

 Jidmah wrote:
How do smaller/larger boards impact multi-meltas on mobile platforms at all?

This seems like people who didn't even give the smaller boards a chance are talking nonsense once again.

Smaller boards impact MMs, which is what is being discussed (look up second post), not particularly the bikes.

Also not sure about the claim towards smaller boards being healthier but whatever.

Blackie wrote:
Some platforms that can carry multi meltas are simply too cheap, probably even the multi melta itself. IMHO it's a 25/30ppm weapon, not a 20ppm one.

Combos that allow to fire twice for cheap like armorium cherubs should go too, or maybe make them work on 4+ and/or add a -1 (or greater) to hit penalty.

Give the -1 to hit penalty for firing heavy weapons to anything but vehicles and monsters. Bikes would get it, as it should be.

Insectum7 wrote:If you can reach melee easier, you can reach MM range easier. The ease of getting into range is part of the "damage" in that equation.

Multimeltas sort of recieved several boosts.
1: Board is smaller
2: Objectives are more central and necessary to hold
3: Obscuring terrain making it easier to conceal small units carrying Meltas
4: Melta Stat boosts themselves

It all works in their favor. Sure you can always adjust points, but it's the shallowest variable. Imo board size is the variable that needs adjusting. Larger tables give more reason for long range weapons and transports. I've seen it said that transports aren't worth it because the table is too small.

Yes, board sizes matter. But it is not the only thing that has made MM oppressive.

It is how good MM is for its cost, which is ultimately what dictates games: getting point efficient trades.

Currently, the game is filled with units that punch way above their weight (or perform in non attack roles way too well):

[*]Vanguard vets
[*]Eradicators
[*]Retributors
[*]Bladeguard veterans
[*]Repentia (though DG has made them "weaker")
[*]Keeper of Secrets
[*]Silver tide necrons
[*]Attack bikes
[*]Death korps ponies
[*]Soon a bunch of dark eldar units (among others)

The game is super lethal, so launching this units into the enemy and getting a good trade can be oppressive for armies that can't get such super point efficient exchanges, e.g. custodes.

Blackie makes a good point about "boosters". These are, in part, why some units are massively point efficient. Cherubs, double shooting, and certain stratagems make even worse the already very good point efficiency of some of these key units.

dhallnet wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
How do smaller/larger boards impact multi-meltas on mobile platforms at all?

This seems like people who didn't even give the smaller boards a chance are talking nonsense once again.

Smaller boards impact MMs, which is what is being discussed (look up second post), not particularly the bikes.

Also not sure about the claim towards smaller boards being healthier but whatever.

How do they do that? Armies start exactly the same amount of inches apart as they did ten years ago. The main difference is that you have less space to evade backwards to the left and right. For a 24" gun in a game with healthy amounts of LoS blocking and obscuring terrain, this is utterly irrelevant, for infantry melee units moving 5" or 6" it's a huge difference.

If anything, larger boards make it easier to deep strike multi-meltas.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey40k wrote:
It is how good MM is for its cost, which is ultimately what dictates games: getting point efficient trades.

Spoiler:

Currently, the game is filled with units that punch way above their weight (or perform in non attack roles way too well):

[*]Vanguard vets
[*]Eradicators
[*]Retributors
[*]Bladeguard veterans
[*]Repentia (though DG has made them "weaker")
[*]Keeper of Secrets
[*]Silver tide necrons
[*]Attack bikes
[*]Death korps ponies
[*]Soon a bunch of dark eldar units (among others)

The game is super lethal, so launching this units into the enemy and getting a good trade can be oppressive for armies that can't get such super point efficient exchanges, e.g. custodes.

Agree, but there are plenty of MM units which aren't great or even outright bad: Helbrutes, MBH, devil dogs and the Gladiator Valliant come to mind. I also don't think I've ever seen a MM on a tactical squad.
So there is definitely more to it than just MM = OP.