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.
Cybtroll wrote: Even if I agree that mathammering is generally a very narrow and skew way to look at things, that doesn't mean that data and math should not be used to evaluate the game. Those are literally the foundation of modern society and science.
We can literally predict who someone will vote based on the meme they share on a social network.... Do you really believe there is no way to generate and feed data to have some proper analysis? How much snowflake do you think wargaming is?
From my point of view, it's not a matter of impossibility, but simply the long lasting legacy of the bean counter in chief (Kirby) and the last poisoned fruits of a corporate vision that is build upon how a snowflake GW (as a company) is. They feel they're special, and that special rules apply only to them.
To go back on topic: I'm really curious of AdMech and how they will impact the meta, and I'm even more curious about when we will reach the breaking point in terms of lethality (I think before the end of 9th codex cycle).
In my opinion, a game that requires hours and hours of work to field a model, only to remove it as soon as an enemy look at it the wrong way isn't susteinable indefinitely.
There is a trade off to have miniatures rather than token: but 40k will more and more benefit from the use of token... It's a clear indicator that something is slowly broking.
I'm not that sure about lethality increasing.
I too had that impression, but then I thought about what we faced in older editions.
There was this time where we were scared of dreadnaughts firing 4 S8 AP4 shots, which is laughable firepower now. Then I thought about old rules, and noticed that those 4 shots had not so bad chances of scrapping 2 rhinos. From very far away.
I can't think of many non-LoW models today that could do that. Not even 3 assault bikes with multimelta do it that well.
And obviously I'm not considering the whole of 7th edition, were things were just dumb.
Are we sure that lethality has increased compared to old editions?
What's interesting about the Gun Dread you bring up is a few things:
1. Like the present if near a Captain, a Ven Dread is very unlikely to miss with those shots, which equates reliability of mass shots
2. The Psybolts increasing the Autocannon to S8 meant Instant Death on a swath of new targets. That's ideal even if you don't get anywhere with the AP4 because models were paying more of a premium for extra wounds
3. Immobile vehicles might as well be dead. Glancing to death was absolutely comparable to knocking a monster/vehicle to the next wound profile
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
If you had the proper weapon, it was very damn easy to kill something. But if you didn't, there were many things that were practically impossible to kill.
The worst example being that if you lacked enough AT and run into a mechanized list, you were fethed. And of course the different death star mechanics that were meant to abuse different rules to get the most absurdly durable units (from the Paladin star in 5th to the Screamer star in 7th).
But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
SM and DG are definitely not very far from drukhari.
Show me the multiple events where DA or DG took most of top 8, and were being souped in to other armies that reached top 8. Or when were DG at 78% win rate.
If you had the proper weapon, it was very damn easy to kill something. But if you didn't, there were many things that were practically impossible to kill.
The worst example being that if you lacked enough AT and run into a mechanized list, you were fethed. And of course the different death star mechanics that were meant to abuse different rules to get the most absurdly durable units (from the Paladin star in 5th to the Screamer star in 7th).
But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
SM and DG are definitely not very far from drukhari.
Show me the multiple events where DA or DG took most of top 8, and were being souped in to other armies that reached top 8. Or when were DG at 78% win rate.
Really show me one faction that can`t do that ?
Necrons can't take out multiple Raiders out of line of sight.
If you had the proper weapon, it was very damn easy to kill something. But if you didn't, there were many things that were practically impossible to kill.
The worst example being that if you lacked enough AT and run into a mechanized list, you were fethed. And of course the different death star mechanics that were meant to abuse different rules to get the most absurdly durable units (from the Paladin star in 5th to the Screamer star in 7th).
But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
SM and DG are definitely not very far from drukhari.
Show me the multiple events where DA or DG took most of top 8, and were being souped in to other armies that reached top 8. Or when were DG at 78% win rate.
Really show me one faction that can`t do that ?
Necrons can't take out multiple Raiders out of line of sight.
Well then it just becomes a question of how to bring them intoLoS, now doesn't it?
If you had the proper weapon, it was very damn easy to kill something. But if you didn't, there were many things that were practically impossible to kill.
The worst example being that if you lacked enough AT and run into a mechanized list, you were fethed. And of course the different death star mechanics that were meant to abuse different rules to get the most absurdly durable units (from the Paladin star in 5th to the Screamer star in 7th).
But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
SM and DG are definitely not very far from drukhari.
Show me the multiple events where DA or DG took most of top 8, and were being souped in to other armies that reached top 8. Or when were DG at 78% win rate.
After watching events and playing some TTS with their pre-set tables, I think it seems like people play way too much LoS blocking, I know I have said it once already in this thread but when I play games I do not play with so much you can hide 6 raiders, i play against GSC, BA, UM, IF, DA, SoB, DG, Custodes, Tau, etc.. i play against a lot of armies on the average and most can kill 1-2 Raiders a turn if they focus them, this includes turn 1.
Karol wrote: But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
It is a fundamentally different problem. Death Stars of old, specially the ones during 6th and 7th, were mathematically impossible to kill even if they were sitting in the middle of the board, in the open, for the 7 turns a game may last.
Raiders are extremely point efficient, but if the DE player tries that you get a very death DE army. The problem isn't that Raiders are unkillable, but rather that they are too damn efficient. Death Stars of old were outright unkillable.
Cybtroll wrote: Even if I agree that mathammering is generally a very narrow and skew way to look at things, that doesn't mean that data and math should not be used to evaluate the game. Those are literally the foundation of modern society and science.
We can literally predict who someone will vote based on the meme they share on a social network.... Do you really believe there is no way to generate and feed data to have some proper analysis? How much snowflake do you think wargaming is?
From my point of view, it's not a matter of impossibility, but simply the long lasting legacy of the bean counter in chief (Kirby) and the last poisoned fruits of a corporate vision that is build upon how a snowflake GW (as a company) is. They feel they're special, and that special rules apply only to them.
To go back on topic: I'm really curious of AdMech and how they will impact the meta, and I'm even more curious about when we will reach the breaking point in terms of lethality (I think before the end of 9th codex cycle).
In my opinion, a game that requires hours and hours of work to field a model, only to remove it as soon as an enemy look at it the wrong way isn't susteinable indefinitely.
There is a trade off to have miniatures rather than token: but 40k will more and more benefit from the use of token... It's a clear indicator that something is slowly broking.
I'm not that sure about lethality increasing.
I too had that impression, but then I thought about what we faced in older editions.
There was this time where we were scared of dreadnaughts firing 4 S8 AP4 shots, which is laughable firepower now. Then I thought about old rules, and noticed that those 4 shots had not so bad chances of scrapping 2 rhinos. From very far away.
I can't think of many non-LoW models today that could do that. Not even 3 assault bikes with multimelta do it that well.
And obviously I'm not considering the whole of 7th edition, were things were just dumb.
Are we sure that lethality has increased compared to old editions?
I've been thinking a lot about this recently. The places where lethality exists shifts around, making "increased lethality" a difficult thing to pin down. However, the example you chose was from 5th edition, which had a dramatic increase in lethality of that of 4th edition by way of unit options and the removal/changing of area terrain in favor of a more literal TLOS model, which increased firing opporunities. (Sternguard being my go-to example, but many of the codexes of that era bumped up various attack numbers.)
But one thing we can look at that that I think paints a VERY clear picture is looking at the "baseline" unit of the Tactical Squad, armed against another MEQ target (which for better or worse are incredibly popular and likely to face). In these examples I'm going to keep MEQ at 1W since that was their profile through 8th, and most other infantry is 1W. I'm keeping the Damage math out for now.
In 3rd and 4th edition, at 24" range a well armed Tactical Squad (Lascannon, Plasmagun, 8 Bolter guys) did 1.99 wounds to another MEQ unit. (2x.666x.83)+(8x.666x.5x.333)
If they MOVED, they couldn't reach beyond 12" with their weapons, and couldn't fire their Lascannon at all. In 4th they could fire twice with their boltguns, a step up from 3rd where they couldn't.
In 8th ed, at 24" range the same squad did 1.7 (.666x.666x.83+(.666x.83x.83)+(8x.666x.5x.333)) pretty good?
Except that's not the full story. . .
Tactical Squads now got the Grav Cannon, which was superior against nearly every target over the Lascannon.
Combi-weapons are now not one-shot-per-game, making them a second Plasmagun in effect
REROLLS - As soon as their codex hit I was taking a Chapter Master in every battle, in addition to the Lt.
So by that point, in 8th my "baseline" Tac Squad is getting 4.4 Standing still at 24" (.888x.96x.83x2+(.888x.777x.83x4)+(.888x.6x.333x7))
That's not even counting Doctrines, Super Doctrines and Bolter Discipline In 8.5, playing UM My Tactical Squads were routinely getting 7.7 ON THE MOVE. (2x.888x.96+(4x.888x.777x.83x4)+(14x.888x.6x.5) at 24"
So my troops unit could nearly one shot another 10-man Marine unit at a 30" threat range. (within RF Plasma Range it goes to 9.4, hello Rhinos and Drop Pods)
Not to mention, in 8th edition models can now Charge after firing RF and Heavy Weapons when in 3rd-7th they could not. So my UM could combine their 9.4 with whatever they're going to do in assault. (21x.666x.5x.333)=2.3 without rerolls, 3.7 with rerolls totaling 13.1
Now, there's a really important bit about assaulting in prior editions in the sense that you could wipe out opposing units with morale, etc. An that was potentially extremely lethal. But it did actually require you to close the distance and engage with the opposing models in CC. With the math above I'm looking at about a 5X lethality increase during firefights at long ranges. It has a huuge effect on how the game feels.
If you had the proper weapon, it was very damn easy to kill something. But if you didn't, there were many things that were practically impossible to kill.
The worst example being that if you lacked enough AT and run into a mechanized list, you were fethed. And of course the different death star mechanics that were meant to abuse different rules to get the most absurdly durable units (from the Paladin star in 5th to the Screamer star in 7th).
But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
SM and DG are definitely not very far from drukhari.
Show me the multiple events where DA or DG took most of top 8, and were being souped in to other armies that reached top 8. Or when were DG at 78% win rate.
Really show me one faction that can`t do that ?
Necrons can't take out multiple Raiders out of line of sight.
Necrons have doomsctyhe and ghostark that are fast enough to get the angles and do alot of decent damage.
Is that point efficient ? Probably not, but they certainly can do that.
Also necrons have very interesting codex, Siegler almost beat that winning Dallas GT list with crons, playing some strange board army list. He could have probably have higher chance to win, if drukhari list was 100-200 pts more.
Led`s not fall to Karols level, who seem to think that you should be able to kill 6 raiders for one turn to have a chance to win the game.
Imagine thinking that empty transport is the most broken thing in the game, when playing factions with 100% WR vs new drukhari.
Karol wrote: But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
It is a fundamentally different problem. Death Stars of old, specially the ones during 6th and 7th, were mathematically impossible to kill even if they were sitting in the middle of the board, in the open, for the 7 turns a game may last.
Raiders are extremely point efficient, but if the DE player tries that you get a very death DE army. The problem isn't that Raiders are unkillable, but rather that they are too damn efficient. Death Stars of old were outright unkillable.
D-weapons destroyed old Deathstars, some formations were banned b.c how stupidly strong D-weapons can get (I mean there was a Formation to shoot Massive Blast (7" blast) D-weapon for crying out loud) You also had Auto hitting attack to ignore Invisibility with HoW, there were units to get 30-40 HoW hits (Quins Troupes could, DE Reavers, and many others) granted the 3++ re-roll saves some units had sucked but a 80pt unit could 1 shot Celestine and then another could (now she is no longer part of the unit) then kill a bike or 2. So you "could" deal with them, its just if you had the tools to or not. I played Corsairs in 7th and had 2 units with D-weapons so they were not that huge of a problem for me unless Celestine lived b.c then it was like I did nothing at all (If she lived she could tank well over 20 wounds).
I get what you mean, but like Raiders and DS's you needed the tools and I pay people with the tools, they don't have problems killing Raiders in 9th.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/13 18:54:19
Karol wrote: But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
It is a fundamentally different problem. Death Stars of old, specially the ones during 6th and 7th, were mathematically impossible to kill even if they were sitting in the middle of the board, in the open, for the 7 turns a game may last.
Raiders are extremely point efficient, but if the DE player tries that you get a very death DE army. The problem isn't that Raiders are unkillable, but rather that they are too damn efficient. Death Stars of old were outright unkillable.
Yeah, this is something a lot of people don't realize about older rules in older editions: when people say something is 'broken' today, usually what they mean is 'efficient enough that it can cause a lot of points of damage for its cost, or survive very long compared to other things of its cost.' Very rarely is something 'broken' in 8th/9th like stuff was 'broken' in older editions.
I'd point to..the current razorflail succubus build, the armies in super early 8th that would spam a gak ton of culexus assassins back before they fixed character rules, the super early iron hands 2.0 build where you could make a dreadnought harder to kill than a warlord titan, as the few examples of stuff I'd consider to be 'broken' in the same way old stuff was.
As an example, in fifth ed, demon armies HAD to deep strike, and GK had a psychic power that would prevent deep strike within a large area of the unit. It was very possible to prevent a demon opponent from even putting any models down on the board if you had GKs.
In 7th ed, Invisibility and some re-rollable 2++ invuln save abilities made it possible to have a single death star unit that could simply not be harmed meaningfully by an opposing army for the entirety of the game. That was a normal thing that many different factions had access to - functional invulnerability, provided you could roll randomly and get the correct psychic power.
it was also far more normal for the 3-4 competitive armies to completely and utterly remove almost all other armies from the meta. The single tournament datapoint that people have started bringing up of "GK in fifth werent even that broken, fifty eight percent winrate lololololol" fails to account for the fact that at that particular tournament that data comes from, the faction breakdown looked like this:
GK - 40% of players
Dark Eldar - 30% of players
Space Marines - 20% of players
Every other army combined in the entire game - 10% of players.
^that kind of breakdown with about 9 in 10 players bringing the most popular 3-4 armies was the norm that I recall from all throughout fifth, sixth, and most of seventh edition, and generally speaking, those lists would most frequently be spamming like 3-4 units. It'd be like "a farseer on a bike, plus six wave serpents all with the same gun full of dire avengers" or "eight las-plas razorbacks" or "ten venoms with 5-man wych squads inside". The meta moved EXTREMELY slowly compared to now, which meant every competitive player would quickly 'solve' the meta and theyd all have time to get one of the three functional lists made.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
While true, no one ran tactical squads in the open back then (because that was just asking a battle cannon to one shot the entire squad).
The game was almost divided between death stars that were borderline impossible to kill and weapons that were very good at killing everyone else.
Amishprn86 wrote: D-weapons destroyed old Deathstars, some formations were banned b.c how stupidly strong D-weapons can get (I mean there was a Formation to shoot Massive Blast (7" blast) D-weapon for crying out loud) You also had Auto hitting attack to ignore Invisibility with HoW, there were units to get 30-40 HoW hits (Quins Troupes could, DE Reavers, and many others) granted the 3++ re-roll saves some units had sucked but a 80pt unit could 1 shot Celestine and then another could (now she is no longer part of the unit) then kill a bike or 2. So you "could" deal with them, its just if you had the tools to or not. I played Corsairs in 7th and had 2 units with D-weapons so they were not that huge of a problem for me unless Celestine lived b.c then it was like I did nothing at all (If she lived she could tank well over 20 wounds).
I get what you mean, but like Raiders and DS's you needed the tools and I pay people with the tools, they don't have problems killing Raiders in 9th.
D-Weapons were poorly distributed, my Tyranids never got one as an example, same issue with HoW shenanigans for Invisibility. Also the 3++ re-roll was the easy mode, some death stars like the Screamer Star had a 2++ re-roll and are the reason all current rules that improve the invulnerable save are capped at either 3+ or 4+.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/13 19:06:55
While true, no one ran tactical squads in the open back then (because that was just asking a battle cannon to one shot the entire squad).
Uhhh. . . untrue. I ran them all the time.
The Battle Cannon and weapons like it (Ordinance) is another important part of the picture. A Battle Cannon could only be fired from a stationary vehicle, and it precluded the firing of any other weapons. It could also miss wildly.
It was also limited to three, as the FOC was much stricter back then.
Karol wrote: But that is the same situation we have right now. The problem is that most armies do not have a way to destroy multiple transports with inv saves, when they hide out of LoS. And it is even visible in how the win ratios were shaped over the course of 9th ed. All armies had a similar 45-55% win rates, besides one who was clearly a lot better, and now got an even better version of the same over achiving army, and non wide spread options to counter either.
It is a fundamentally different problem. Death Stars of old, specially the ones during 6th and 7th, were mathematically impossible to kill even if they were sitting in the middle of the board, in the open, for the 7 turns a game may last.
Raiders are extremely point efficient, but if the DE player tries that you get a very death DE army. The problem isn't that Raiders are unkillable, but rather that they are too damn efficient. Death Stars of old were outright unkillable.
D-weapons destroyed old Deathstars, some formations were banned b.c how stupidly strong D-weapons can get (I mean there was a Formation to shoot Massive Blast (7" blast) D-weapon for crying out loud) You also had Auto hitting attack to ignore Invisibility with HoW, there were units to get 30-40 HoW hits (Quins Troupes could, DE Reavers, and many others) granted the 3++ re-roll saves some units had sucked but a 80pt unit could 1 shot Celestine and then another could (now she is no longer part of the unit) then kill a bike or 2. So you "could" deal with them, its just if you had the tools to or not. I played Corsairs in 7th and had 2 units with D-weapons so they were not that huge of a problem for me unless Celestine lived b.c then it was like I did nothing at all (If she lived she could tank well over 20 wounds).
I get what you mean, but like Raiders and DS's you needed the tools and I pay people with the tools, they don't have problems killing Raiders in 9th.
LoL yeah they nerfed the d weapons that could deal with deathstars but not the OP spells and abilities sharing that made D weapons necessary. Competitive games in this period have 0 value imo. Just some local TO making decisions about what armies were going to win. D weapons were not the problem in any case. IMO they should be brought back with modified rules. They should just ignore all saves like belakors new sword or the night bringer. They should be pretty rare though.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/13 19:18:00
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
The Battle Cannon and weapons like it (Ordinance) is another important part of the picture. A Battle Cannon could only be fired from a stationary vehicle, and it precluded the firing of any other weapons. It could also miss wildly.
It was also limited to three, as the FOC was much stricter back then.
In 4th? I don't think so.
I'm thinking 5th edition, which is when the tank squadrons were introduced and the Paladin star dominated.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/05/13 19:21:35
The Battle Cannon and weapons like it (Ordinance) is another important part of the picture. A Battle Cannon could only be fired from a stationary vehicle, and it precluded the firing of any other weapons. It could also miss wildly.
It was also limited to three, as the FOC was much stricter back then.
In 4th? I don't think so.
I'm thinking 5th edition, which is when the tank squadrons were introduced and the Paladin star dominated.
Right, well that's part of my point about the difference between 4th and 5th ed. 5th got a lot looser with their "codex writing safeguards" or whatever. Chaplain Dreadnoughts, Special weapon spam, Draigo nonsense, 3++ Storm Shields, etc.
Karol wrote: But is always the case? If we look at a succbubs that avarges around 30+ attacks per round of fighting, then I think that even with pure math hammer we can say that something is wrong.
Same way we don't have to do a lot of testing, if we see a unit balanced around the idea of high damage, but weak to incoming damge, and then see the balanced broken, because the unit is put in to a cheap open topped, and powerful on itself, transport. With added cross cabal synergies etc. How many games does one have to playtesst to know that 6 raiders and stuff like DT liquifires is too good. And that is before one adds stuff, like the practical removal of LoS shoting and adding a ton of LoS blocking to the game, having a super high synergy with flying transports. Or the always present goes first has a higher chance of winning.
Some succubi are egregious, but not all of them.
How many permutations of them are there? Quite a few I'd imagine.
But put that 60 point succubus on a table from something with a gun. It dies. So it needs to ride a boat. How much of the boat is part of her cost? She also needs buddies incase she rolls a 1 when the transport goes. How much do the buddies contribute to the cost?
The Battle Cannon and weapons like it (Ordinance) is another important part of the picture. A Battle Cannon could only be fired from a stationary vehicle, and it precluded the firing of any other weapons. It could also miss wildly.
It was also limited to three, as the FOC was much stricter back then.
In 4th? I don't think so.
I'm thinking 5th edition, which is when the tank squadrons were introduced and the Paladin star dominated.
Right, well that's part of my point about the difference between 4th and 5th ed. 5th got a lot looser with their "codex writing safeguards" or whatever. Chaplain Dreadnoughts, Special weapon spam, Draigo nonsense, 3++ Storm Shields, etc.
I have no idea about 4th, I wasn't playing back then, so I can only compare to 5th 6th and 7th. Compared to those, I don't think that lethality has actually become that higher.
How many permutations of them are there? Quite a few I'd imagine.
But put that 60 point succubus on a table from something with a gun. It dies. So it needs to ride a boat. How much of the boat is part of her cost? She also needs buddies incase she rolls a 1 when the transport goes. How much do the buddies contribute to the cost?
So let me get this straight, because there is a theoretical possibility that somewhere in the world someone plays a bad build succubus with an army with no raiders, no DT wrecks or with wrecks but without liquifires, no drazh etc the DE stuff should not be changed?
also if the succubus is out of the she is in melee killing stuff, then here unit of bodyguard witchs has to be kill, which is not super hard, because of how aggresivly they are costed for what both of those units can do, the return is easy. Before that she is sitting in one of the 6 raiders, and it is a RR if the raider you somehow got LoS to is actually carrying her and her bodyguard of witchs. Ah and if they happen to be on an objective you have to kill all 3, which is suprisingly not easy for a supposed glass type of unit thanks to the raider being rather resilient with an inv save, higher toughness and multiple wounds.
It is a fundamentally different problem. Death Stars of old, specially the ones during 6th and 7th, were mathematically impossible to kill even if they were sitting in the middle of the board, in the open, for the 7 turns a game may last.
Raiders are extremely point efficient, but if the DE player tries that you get a very death DE army. The problem isn't that Raiders are unkillable, but rather that they are too damn efficient. Death Stars of old were outright unkillable.
It is impossible for most armies to kill 6 raiders sitting behind cover in turn 1-2 too. Heck for some armies it is just impossible to kill even one raider when they all are out LoS, because that is how 9th ed tables look like.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/13 19:54:05
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
How many permutations of them are there? Quite a few I'd imagine.
But put that 60 point succubus on a table from something with a gun. It dies. So it needs to ride a boat. How much of the boat is part of her cost? She also needs buddies incase she rolls a 1 when the transport goes. How much do the buddies contribute to the cost?
So let me get this straight, because there is a theoretical possibility that somewhere in the world someone plays a bad build succubus with an army with no raiders, no DT wrecks or with wrecks but without liquifires, no drazh etc the DE stuff should not be changed?
also if the succubus is out of the she is in melee killing stuff, then here unit of bodyguard witchs has to be kill, which is not super hard, because of how aggresivly they are costed for what both of those units can do, the return is easy. Before that she is sitting in one of the 6 raiders, and it is a RR if the raider you somehow got LoS to is actually carrying her and her bodyguard of witchs. Ah and if they happen to be on an objective you have to kill all 3, which is suprisingly not easy for a supposed glass type of unit thanks to the raider being rather resilient with an inv save, higher toughness and multiple wounds.
It is a fundamentally different problem. Death Stars of old, specially the ones during 6th and 7th, were mathematically impossible to kill even if they were sitting in the middle of the board, in the open, for the 7 turns a game may last.
Raiders are extremely point efficient, but if the DE player tries that you get a very death DE army. The problem isn't that Raiders are unkillable, but rather that they are too damn efficient. Death Stars of old were outright unkillable.
It is impossible for most armies to kill 6 raiders sitting behind cover in turn 1-2 too. Heck for some armies it is just impossible to kill even one raider when they all are out LoS, because that is how 9th ed tables look like.
You should have LoS to 1-2 raiders no matter what, if you do not then your tables terrain is bad.
The DE and all players for that matter should not be able to hide 90%+ of their army, you should have to make a choice. DO I want to hide my Raiders but leave out my Court/Hellions or leave out 2 raiders to hide my Court? I can not understand the tables some of you must be playing on to fully hide 6 raiders for 2 turns.
Also, all armies can kill a raider or two a turn, now did you take a TAC list, well thats up to your list but no army literally can't.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/13 19:58:33
Necrons have doomsctyhe and ghostark that are fast enough to get the angles and do alot of decent damage.
Is that point efficient ? Probably not, but they certainly can do that.
Also necrons have very interesting codex, Siegler almost beat that winning Dallas GT list with crons, playing some strange board army list. He could have probably have higher chance to win, if drukhari list was 100-200 pts more.
Led`s not fall to Karols level, who seem to think that you should be able to kill 6 raiders for one turn to have a chance to win the game.
Imagine thinking that empty transport is the most broken thing in the game, when playing factions with 100% WR vs new drukhari.
But if you don't kill at least 3 of the raiders or worse kill 1 or less, then on turn two you get slammed by the entire DE army and you can say the game goodbye on turn 2. Specially if you play a non horde army.
And the comment about the necron list possibly winning actually made my day. Because we have a joke about fly saying that, if it only had more training, it would reap its elephant enemy in half. The necron army lost, and the DE army cost what it costs right now.
You should have LoS to 1-2 raiders no matter what, if you do not then your tables terrain is bad.
The DE and all players for that matter should not be able to hide 90%+ of their army, you should have to make a choice. DO I want to hide my Raiders but leave out my Court/Hellions or leave out 2 raiders to hide my Court? I can not understand the tables some of you must be playing on to fully hide 6 raiders for 2 turns.
Also, all armies can kill a raider or two a turn, now did you take a TAC list, well thats up to your list but no army literally can't.
And I don't understand how you could be playing on different tables. Although that does maybe explain why some people think that marine shoting is too good. Without LoS blocking terrain they probably blast other armies while camping objectives.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/13 19:59:58
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
The Battle Cannon and weapons like it (Ordinance) is another important part of the picture. A Battle Cannon could only be fired from a stationary vehicle, and it precluded the firing of any other weapons. It could also miss wildly.
It was also limited to three, as the FOC was much stricter back then.
In 4th? I don't think so.
I'm thinking 5th edition, which is when the tank squadrons were introduced and the Paladin star dominated.
Right, well that's part of my point about the difference between 4th and 5th ed. 5th got a lot looser with their "codex writing safeguards" or whatever. Chaplain Dreadnoughts, Special weapon spam, Draigo nonsense, 3++ Storm Shields, etc.
I have no idea about 4th, I wasn't playing back then, so I can only compare to 5th 6th and 7th. Compared to those, I don't think that lethality has actually become that higher.
I think lethality has been spread out more.
In prior editions high levels of lethality were more concentrated in fewer units. Currently it's easier to have high levels of lethality "accidentally" even if you're taking more fluffy options. Twin Linked weapons now actually fire double the shots. Leman Russes can fire their Battle Cannon twice along with all the Heavy Bolters, and common mid-tier weapons like Heavy Bolters actually modify saves now. Given the fact that a lot of people play armies with either Power Armor or similar armor of some sort, the fact that these mid range weapons are now depleting saves and firing more, it makes sense that things could feel more lethal. Also, the rerolls did a lot.
A TL Heavy Bolter killed .56 a Marine in 5-7th
The same weapon does 1.33 in 8th+
With CM and Lt rerolls, plus Devastator Doctrine you get 2.75
9th is cutting back on the rerolls again, but hopefully you get my point. Without necessarily optimizing builds, it's easier for common "casual, mid-tier" units to kill more stuff.
Having my dudes run with 1 or 2 wounds each, at the points costs they have, with a +4 or +5 sv with all the multi shot and 2D weapons being thrown around, the game feels very deadly.
But this is just my army expiriance, I have no idea how playing something else feels.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Karol wrote: Having my dudes run with 1 or 2 wounds each, at the points costs they have, with a +4 or +5 sv with all the multi shot and 2D weapons being thrown around, the game feels very deadly.
But this is just my army expiriance, I have no idea how playing something else feels.
Literally one unit in the Grey Knights codex has a 4+ armor save. That would be Servitors. Nothing has a 5+ save.
How many permutations of them are there? Quite a few I'd imagine.
But put that 60 point succubus on a table from something with a gun. It dies. So it needs to ride a boat. How much of the boat is part of her cost? She also needs buddies incase she rolls a 1 when the transport goes. How much do the buddies contribute to the cost?
So let me get this straight, because there is a theoretical possibility that somewhere in the world someone plays a bad build succubus with an army with no raiders, no DT wrecks or with wrecks but without liquifires, no drazh etc the DE stuff should not be changed?
also if the succubus is out of the she is in melee killing stuff, then here unit of bodyguard witchs has to be kill, which is not super hard, because of how aggresivly they are costed for what both of those units can do, the return is easy. Before that she is sitting in one of the 6 raiders, and it is a RR if the raider you somehow got LoS to is actually carrying her and her bodyguard of witchs. Ah and if they happen to be on an objective you have to kill all 3, which is suprisingly not easy for a supposed glass type of unit thanks to the raider being rather resilient with an inv save, higher toughness and multiple wounds.
It is a fundamentally different problem. Death Stars of old, specially the ones during 6th and 7th, were mathematically impossible to kill even if they were sitting in the middle of the board, in the open, for the 7 turns a game may last.
Raiders are extremely point efficient, but if the DE player tries that you get a very death DE army. The problem isn't that Raiders are unkillable, but rather that they are too damn efficient. Death Stars of old were outright unkillable.
It is impossible for most armies to kill 6 raiders sitting behind cover in turn 1-2 too. Heck for some armies it is just impossible to kill even one raider when they all are out LoS, because that is how 9th ed tables look like.
You should have LoS to 1-2 raiders no matter what, if you do not then your tables terrain is bad.
The DE and all players for that matter should not be able to hide 90%+ of their army, you should have to make a choice. DO I want to hide my Raiders but leave out my Court/Hellions or leave out 2 raiders to hide my Court? I can not understand the tables some of you must be playing on to fully hide 6 raiders for 2 turns.
Also, all armies can kill a raider or two a turn, now did you take a TAC list, well thats up to your list but no army literally can't.
The most popular youtube streamers right now. Have a moto for setting up the table. That you should not be able to draw LOS at any point on the edge of the table to the other side of the table. Most tournmanets I see have a little bit less terrain - but only really play with 1 type....5" ruins - everywhere. maybe a few craters...maybe a few forests.
All they have really done with this change is make melee superior to shooting. LOL. Which is actually worse than shooting being dominant. .
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/13 20:24:52
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
How many permutations of them are there? Quite a few I'd imagine.
But put that 60 point succubus on a table from something with a gun. It dies. So it needs to ride a boat. How much of the boat is part of her cost? She also needs buddies incase she rolls a 1 when the transport goes. How much do the buddies contribute to the cost?
So let me get this straight, because there is a theoretical possibility that somewhere in the world someone plays a bad build succubus with an army with no raiders, no DT wrecks or with wrecks but without liquifires, no drazh etc the DE stuff should not be changed?
also if the succubus is out of the she is in melee killing stuff, then here unit of bodyguard witchs has to be kill, which is not super hard, because of how aggresivly they are costed for what both of those units can do, the return is easy. Before that she is sitting in one of the 6 raiders, and it is a RR if the raider you somehow got LoS to is actually carrying her and her bodyguard of witchs. Ah and if they happen to be on an objective you have to kill all 3, which is suprisingly not easy for a supposed glass type of unit thanks to the raider being rather resilient with an inv save, higher toughness and multiple wounds.
It is a fundamentally different problem. Death Stars of old, specially the ones during 6th and 7th, were mathematically impossible to kill even if they were sitting in the middle of the board, in the open, for the 7 turns a game may last.
Raiders are extremely point efficient, but if the DE player tries that you get a very death DE army. The problem isn't that Raiders are unkillable, but rather that they are too damn efficient. Death Stars of old were outright unkillable.
It is impossible for most armies to kill 6 raiders sitting behind cover in turn 1-2 too. Heck for some armies it is just impossible to kill even one raider when they all are out LoS, because that is how 9th ed tables look like.
You should have LoS to 1-2 raiders no matter what, if you do not then your tables terrain is bad.
The DE and all players for that matter should not be able to hide 90%+ of their army, you should have to make a choice. DO I want to hide my Raiders but leave out my Court/Hellions or leave out 2 raiders to hide my Court? I can not understand the tables some of you must be playing on to fully hide 6 raiders for 2 turns.
Also, all armies can kill a raider or two a turn, now did you take a TAC list, well thats up to your list but no army literally can't.
The most popular youtube streamers right now. Have a moto for setting up the table. That you should not be able to draw LOS at any point on the edge of the table to the other side of the table. Most tournmanets I see have a little bit less terrain - but only really play with 1 type....5" ruins - everywhere. maybe a few craters...maybe a few forests.
All they have really done with this change is make melee superior to shooting. LOL. Which is actually worse than shooting being dominant. .
Which is probably why my meta area doesn't have a big problem with DE, yeah DE is still harder to beat but nothing like you see on the forums. If you look at the examples from GW it is for sure not like that. I also love Barricades which i don't see very much of them (Some tables I see none) as they add a lot to the game (especially for MEQ units).
We try to give each side 1 larger and 1 smaller Obscuring with 1 in the no mans zone, then a few Barricades, some pipes, ruined walls, forests, crates, etc.. we normally have 2-3 pieces with difficult ground too and it really does change things, you can't just be 6" away and expect to get the charge, -2" is a bigger deal than it looks. Having lots of -1 to hit around the table also helps armies hold points a bit more, sure it doesn't stack well with DE's lightning fast, but kabals being out, or Marines, heck even Custodes likes it, just sucks some units can't get (lol like Tau suits, main they need a new book).
Necrons have doomsctyhe and ghostark that are fast enough to get the angles and do alot of decent damage.
Is that point efficient ? Probably not, but they certainly can do that.
Also necrons have very interesting codex, Siegler almost beat that winning Dallas GT list with crons, playing some strange board army list. He could have probably have higher chance to win, if drukhari list was 100-200 pts more.
Led`s not fall to Karols level, who seem to think that you should be able to kill 6 raiders for one turn to have a chance to win the game.
Imagine thinking that empty transport is the most broken thing in the game, when playing factions with 100% WR vs new drukhari.
But if you don't kill at least 3 of the raiders or worse kill 1 or less, then on turn two you get slammed by the entire DE army and you can say the game goodbye on turn 2. Specially if you play a non horde army.
And the comment about the necron list possibly winning actually made my day. Because we have a joke about fly saying that, if it only had more training, it would reap its elephant enemy in half. The necron army lost, and the DE army cost what it costs right now.
That has to make more sense in the original Polish....
You should have LoS to 1-2 raiders no matter what, if you do not then your tables terrain is bad.
The DE and all players for that matter should not be able to hide 90%+ of their army, you should have to make a choice. DO I want to hide my Raiders but leave out my Court/Hellions or leave out 2 raiders to hide my Court? I can not understand the tables some of you must be playing on to fully hide 6 raiders for 2 turns.
Also, all armies can kill a raider or two a turn, now did you take a TAC list, well thats up to your list but no army literally can't.
And I don't understand how you could be playing on different tables. Although that does maybe explain why some people think that marine shoting is too good. Without LoS blocking terrain they probably blast other armies while camping objectives.
We play on all sorts of tables. A lot of the time we alternate setting up x amount of stuff. Or random amounts of stuff. Sometimes though it's a themed table, so whatever makes sense for the theme.
But if you do manage to build a LoS blocking wall? You'd better hope you win the roll to pick your side.
In prior editions high levels of lethality were more concentrated in fewer units. Currently it's easier to have high levels of lethality "accidentally" even if you're taking more fluffy options. Twin Linked weapons now actually fire double the shots. Leman Russes can fire their Battle Cannon twice along with all the Heavy Bolters, and common mid-tier weapons like Heavy Bolters actually modify saves now. Given the fact that a lot of people play armies with either Power Armor or similar armor of some sort, the fact that these mid range weapons are now depleting saves and firing more, it makes sense that things could feel more lethal. Also, the rerolls did a lot.
A TL Heavy Bolter killed .56 a Marine in 5-7th The same weapon does 1.33 in 8th+ With CM and Lt rerolls, plus Devastator Doctrine you get 2.75 9th is cutting back on the rerolls again, but hopefully you get my point. Without necessarily optimizing builds, it's easier for common "casual, mid-tier" units to kill more stuff.
Although you have to consider that GEQ and WEQ are more survivable now, as AP 4 or 5 is no longer just ignoring their armor. I mean, as a non-Marine player I vastly prefer AP modifiers.
Xenomancers wrote: The most popular youtube streamers right now. Have a moto for setting up the table. That you should not be able to draw LOS at any point on the edge of the table to the other side of the table. Most tournmanets I see have a little bit less terrain - but only really play with 1 type....5" ruins - everywhere. maybe a few craters...maybe a few forests.
All they have really done with this change is make melee superior to shooting. LOL. Which is actually worse than shooting being dominant. .
I massively disagree, shooting being dominant means two gunlines firing at each other from one side of the table to the other, usually winning whoever went first. It is unbelievably boring. Not to say melee armies don't benefit from going first, but at least there is far more positioning involved. Also charging is inherently more fun IMHO.
Plus the poster guys have chainswords, kinda ridiculous that they would never get to use it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/13 20:52:46
Necrons have doomsctyhe and ghostark that are fast enough to get the angles and do alot of decent damage.
Is that point efficient ? Probably not, but they certainly can do that.
Also necrons have very interesting codex, Siegler almost beat that winning Dallas GT list with crons, playing some strange board army list. He could have probably have higher chance to win, if drukhari list was 100-200 pts more.
Led`s not fall to Karols level, who seem to think that you should be able to kill 6 raiders for one turn to have a chance to win the game.
Imagine thinking that empty transport is the most broken thing in the game, when playing factions with 100% WR vs new drukhari.
But if you don't kill at least 3 of the raiders or worse kill 1 or less, then on turn two you get slammed by the entire DE army and you can say the game goodbye on turn 2. Specially if you play a non horde army.
And the comment about the necron list possibly winning actually made my day. Because we have a joke about fly saying that, if it only had more training, it would reap its elephant enemy in half. The necron army lost, and the DE army cost what it costs right now.
That has to make more sense in the original Polish....
You should have LoS to 1-2 raiders no matter what, if you do not then your tables terrain is bad.
The DE and all players for that matter should not be able to hide 90%+ of their army, you should have to make a choice. DO I want to hide my Raiders but leave out my Court/Hellions or leave out 2 raiders to hide my Court? I can not understand the tables some of you must be playing on to fully hide 6 raiders for 2 turns.
Also, all armies can kill a raider or two a turn, now did you take a TAC list, well thats up to your list but no army literally can't.
And I don't understand how you could be playing on different tables. Although that does maybe explain why some people think that marine shoting is too good. Without LoS blocking terrain they probably blast other armies while camping objectives.
We play on all sorts of tables. A lot of the time we alternate setting up x amount of stuff. Or random amounts of stuff. Sometimes though it's a themed table, so whatever makes sense for the theme.
But if you do manage to build a LoS blocking wall? You'd better hope you win the roll to pick your side.
A lot of the tables i'm seeing are like this, huge LoS blocking terrain and not much else, that DG player went into a losing match b.c of that terrain, even if it was Marines with 30 Vanguard vets (the top SM player there had that) he still would had no chance b.c its like 20" on all sides of Obscuring with even more behind that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/13 20:54:19
Yup, looks like a tourney table. gak for terrain.
i've never been impressed by the terrain used in tournies. It tends to be sparse & cheap. And I get it, you have to dress dozens - maybe hundreds of tables.... You can't possibly build what we can at home (unless your actually GW).
The very worst I ever played (in 3rd/4th?)on was a largely empty board with a small hill on the far right, about 18" of split rail fence running in a broken line down the center line, & 3 trees.
My mechanized DA 3rd Co. faced off across this pasture vs.... An Imperial Guard Armoured Company from the WD pages. :(
I won. But that's because I wasn't adverse to running my rhinos/razorbacks out & using their burning wrecks as the cover I so desperately needed.
Meanwhile my lone jump assault squad deepstruck on the far flank of the tank line, used the fact that only 1 sponson + turret of the Russ could target me, charged, & blew up it with meltabombs.
While the tac & dev squads + any surviving Las/plas razors took a beating out front that jump squad leapt over each tank, blowing them up one at a time....
I was the only person that Armour player lost a game to.
15k+
Emperor's Spears 2500
Beastmen 10k
