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.
My main complaints;
* first day DLC / campaign books where you spend £30 just to get access to 3-4 pages of matched play rules
* rules bloat / already needing to take 3-5 books to a game/tournament. partly due to the above
* codex creep
I'm hopeful that the codex creep will be addressed through the FAQ's and regular points updates, which are both good for the game.
The rules bloat is only going to continue while they carry on using the current model.
The campaign style books with 3-4 pages of faction specific matched play rules are a blatent gouge.
The game is still in the best place in terms of balance and fun that I can remember since I started playing Rogue Trader in the late 80's.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/26 13:50:21
Nurglitch wrote: I'm not sure that's a problem with 40k and moreso with the way large vehicles are represented in the game. If they were done like Titans in the old Epic 2nd edition, and you could do things like immobilize them or shoot off their weapons, or have them do interesting things when damaged (more interesting than the 1/2, 1/4, 1/6 penalities to WS/BS/S), then they wouldn't be quite so fun-sucking as they are.
I think people have mentioned that stuff is more lethal, but when your only option for units to address other units is by trying to remove them from the board rather than some kind of suppression or engagement, it makes for a bit of a crapshoot.
That's one of the problems those of us who favor the old system prefer. vehicles had rules that made them feel like vehicles. part of the problem with lethality is the fact that you used to have to bring AT weapons to deal with armor, but with the armor reduction system and the move to make all vehicle monsterous creatures. mid power anti-infantry weapons with a high ROF now kill vehicles (and everything else) better than AT weapons.
....Except that they don't.
People take dedicated antitank weapons all the time in the current edition. People are whinging about Dark Lances, Multi-Meltas, the new admech chicken super-lascannon, etc.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
aphyon wrote: Yes i have and aside from the super broken things like eradicators the increased fixed damage of things like autocannons and heavy bolters (hell in 8th stalker bolters in the hands of my friends crimson fists murdered my vehicles) make them good at killing everything. prior to the 8th ed switch over a leman russ or a land raider never worried about such things
Oh yeah, that's true, why you'd only need, lets see...
...twenty-seven space marines firing autocannons at a leman russ to kill it, wheras in pre-8th that weapon couldn't even damage a leman russ*
*unless it got behind it in which case a single autocannon fired by a bs3+ model had an 88% chance to roll on the damage table, at least preventing the russ from shooting for the turn, at most destroying it instantly.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/26 14:04:24
"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!"
People take dedicated antitank weapons all the time in the current edition. People are whinging about Dark Lances, Multi-Meltas, the new admech chicken super-lascannon, etc.
Because they double dip as anti marine weapons. If the game had something like multi shot str 6-7 ap 2/3 weapons doing 2 or more wounds, on valid platforms, people would spam them. Because they would kill marines and vehicles. In fact from what kind of vehicles are being run by majority armies right now, single shot anti tank weapons are really bad. Becaue more often then not you get to shot them, maybe once per game, and they either get killed or traded, or they get engaged in melee and can't use the weapons.
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.
Dark Lances are not anti-marine weapons, they are a single shot high damage that hilariously overkills one marine model. Its sibling the Disintegrator is a fantastic anti-marine weapon, but no one takes it over the Dark Lance.
Same goes for the new Admech lascannon.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/26 14:24:43
2021/05/26 14:38:26
Subject: Re:How Do You Feel About the State of 40k?
Generally speaking, I'm rather neutral on the topic. There were some pretty big issues in 7th that 8th took care of, but I think the pendulum swung too far back the other way towards simplicity.
I've been playing since 4th and the amount of stuff to remember was far, far greater than 8th onwards. Vehicle explosions for example, several possible results depending on how it was destroyed, each result doing a different effect. 5th slimmed it down into one damage table, but it still had a bit of character:
- "Oh no, my tank ground to a halt, dead in the water!" = Nothing - "Oh no, the ammo compartment took a hit and detonated!" = Units within 6" take D6 S4 hits - "Oh crap! The fuel and ammo have detonated in a spectacular explosion!" = Units take a stronger hit, passengers inside unlikely to survive.
It had that little bit of extra cinematic quality which I enjoyed. Now it's just "On a 6, you do Mortal Wounds". Boring as balls.
Everything has to be Mortal Wounds now. It's a lazy overused mechanic which should be used at the absolute bare minimum. In the newer codexes it seems that other mechanics (+1 to hit, can't fall back, 6's to hit autowound) are just being copy/pasted across the board in stratagems and relics. In addition we're starting to see the pinnacle of GW's model-based policy with the Plague Marines, Wyches and now Skitarii's options limited in a pointless and wordy manner.
I'm also just getting sick of the Primaris lot now. I didn't mind the Primaris Marines when they were first released, thought they were pretty cool and interesting stats. Now it's just getting tiresome. Why do Primaris need 3 different kinds of Land Speeders? Good thing the flyer-hunter variant has BS2+ basic, heaven forbid they have to hit on 3's! Why do we suddenly need new and improved Melta weapons? Didn't realise our anti-tank was that bad.
Perhaps it's the lack of any games due to Covid, perhaps I am just getting tired of the game as a whole, who knows, but overall I think 8th was a bit of fresh air compared to the state of 7th. 9th was a good spot to make improvements given the player base has had a few years to get used to a radically different system, and GW blew it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/26 14:59:50
Nurglitch wrote: I'm not sure that's a problem with 40k and moreso with the way large vehicles are represented in the game. If they were done like Titans in the old Epic 2nd edition, and you could do things like immobilize them or shoot off their weapons, or have them do interesting things when damaged (more interesting than the 1/2, 1/4, 1/6 penalities to WS/BS/S), then they wouldn't be quite so fun-sucking as they are.
I think people have mentioned that stuff is more lethal, but when your only option for units to address other units is by trying to remove them from the board rather than some kind of suppression or engagement, it makes for a bit of a crapshoot.
That's one of the problems those of us who favor the old system prefer. vehicles had rules that made them feel like vehicles. part of the problem with lethality is the fact that you used to have to bring AT weapons to deal with armor, but with the armor reduction system and the move to make all vehicle monsterous creatures. mid power anti-infantry weapons with a high ROF now kill vehicles (and everything else) better than AT weapons.
....Except that they don't.
People take dedicated antitank weapons all the time in the current edition. People are whinging about Dark Lances, Multi-Meltas, the new admech chicken super-lascannon, etc.
No, heavy bolters and ACs are TOTALLY the best way to kill tanks. Why, it only takes 108 shots from either from a BS3 platform to kill a Land Raider (144 if it pops Smokescreen). Please, everyone leave your multi-meltas and dark lances at home and try to kill my 2+ save tanks and -1 to all incoming damage dreadnoughts with heavy bolters and splinter cannons! Please don't throw me into that briar patch!
For the record, I don't think that multi-meltas and dark lances are too good at killing vehicles either. They're just doing what they're supposed to do. They're a bit too cheap on some platforms, but really, people should stop thinking that they can drive their tanks straight into the guns of a dedicated anti-tank unit and win.
When all premier AT weapons were D6 damage, before the Melta changes, its true that people generally did not bring much dedicated AT weapons.
Because d6 damage simply wasn't reliable enough while you payed premium prices for them.
This is no longer the case for those armies that have been updated.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/26 14:58:51
I mean, there was a phase before GWFAQ'd Imperial Fists (back when their HBs did two damage before the change to Str 7 and above) where an Imperial Fists list took only Heavy Bolters and Onslaught Cannons as anti-tank.
Now HBs are Damage 2, though fortunately Onslaught cannons aren't. Still, I wait for the day that some low-strength high-ROF weapon becomes D2. Punisher Cannons (for example) will be the best AT in the game.
People take dedicated antitank weapons all the time in the current edition. People are whinging about Dark Lances, Multi-Meltas, the new admech chicken super-lascannon, etc.
Because they double dip as anti marine weapons. If the game had something like multi shot str 6-7 ap 2/3 weapons doing 2 or more wounds, on valid platforms, people would spam them. Because they would kill marines and vehicles. In fact from what kind of vehicles are being run by majority armies right now, single shot anti tank weapons are really bad. Becaue more often then not you get to shot them, maybe once per game, and they either get killed or traded, or they get engaged in melee and can't use the weapons.
Yeah, you're just wrong. One common example of a low-ROF high-Strength antitank weapon is generally not very good (regular lascannons) and plenty of people are taking alternatives that have reliable damage profiles.
And theyre not taking them because you can shoot a Dark Lance at a marine, lol. They're taking them because they reliably kill tanks. Because theyre fething antitank weapons.
"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!"
Nurglitch wrote: I'm not sure that's a problem with 40k and moreso with the way large vehicles are represented in the game. If they were done like Titans in the old Epic 2nd edition, and you could do things like immobilize them or shoot off their weapons, or have them do interesting things when damaged (more interesting than the 1/2, 1/4, 1/6 penalities to WS/BS/S), then they wouldn't be quite so fun-sucking as they are.
I think people have mentioned that stuff is more lethal, but when your only option for units to address other units is by trying to remove them from the board rather than some kind of suppression or engagement, it makes for a bit of a crapshoot.
That's one of the problems those of us who favor the old system prefer. vehicles had rules that made them feel like vehicles. part of the problem with lethality is the fact that you used to have to bring AT weapons to deal with armor, but with the armor reduction system and the move to make all vehicle monsterous creatures. mid power anti-infantry weapons with a high ROF now kill vehicles (and everything else) better than AT weapons.
....Except that they don't.
People take dedicated antitank weapons all the time in the current edition. People are whinging about Dark Lances, Multi-Meltas, the new admech chicken super-lascannon, etc.
No, heavy bolters and ACs are TOTALLY the best way to kill tanks. Why, it only takes 108 shots from either from a BS3 platform to kill a Land Raider (144 if it pops Smokescreen). Please, everyone leave your multi-meltas and dark lances at home and try to kill my 2+ save tanks and -1 to all incoming damage dreadnoughts with heavy bolters and splinter cannons! Please don't throw me into that briar patch!
For the record, I don't think that multi-meltas and dark lances are too good at killing vehicles either. They're just doing what they're supposed to do. They're a bit too cheap on some platforms, but really, people should stop thinking that they can drive their tanks straight into the guns of a dedicated anti-tank unit and win.
I'm not really sure that's the issue. More that a dedicated anti-tank elements can just turn up, point at a tank and it dies before it drives anywhere or accomplishes anything.
Nurglitch wrote: I'm not sure that's a problem with 40k and moreso with the way large vehicles are represented in the game. If they were done like Titans in the old Epic 2nd edition, and you could do things like immobilize them or shoot off their weapons, or have them do interesting things when damaged (more interesting than the 1/2, 1/4, 1/6 penalities to WS/BS/S), then they wouldn't be quite so fun-sucking as they are.
I think people have mentioned that stuff is more lethal, but when your only option for units to address other units is by trying to remove them from the board rather than some kind of suppression or engagement, it makes for a bit of a crapshoot.
That's one of the problems those of us who favor the old system prefer. vehicles had rules that made them feel like vehicles. part of the problem with lethality is the fact that you used to have to bring AT weapons to deal with armor, but with the armor reduction system and the move to make all vehicle monsterous creatures. mid power anti-infantry weapons with a high ROF now kill vehicles (and everything else) better than AT weapons.
....Except that they don't.
People take dedicated antitank weapons all the time in the current edition. People are whinging about Dark Lances, Multi-Meltas, the new admech chicken super-lascannon, etc.
No, heavy bolters and ACs are TOTALLY the best way to kill tanks. Why, it only takes 108 shots from either from a BS3 platform to kill a Land Raider (144 if it pops Smokescreen). Please, everyone leave your multi-meltas and dark lances at home and try to kill my 2+ save tanks and -1 to all incoming damage dreadnoughts with heavy bolters and splinter cannons! Please don't throw me into that briar patch!
For the record, I don't think that multi-meltas and dark lances are too good at killing vehicles either. They're just doing what they're supposed to do. They're a bit too cheap on some platforms, but really, people should stop thinking that they can drive their tanks straight into the guns of a dedicated anti-tank unit and win.
I'm not really sure that's the issue. More that a dedicated anti-tank elements can just turn up, point at a tank and it dies before it drives anywhere or accomplishes anything.
I do see this as a big weakness in the current game - while shorter ranges and more cover options have generally made it so you can keep light infantry units alive, it's generally quite a bit harder to keep tanks safe unless you have the perfect goldilocks board setup with Obscuring cover to hide them behind.
GW is slowly porting reliable 1cp -1 to hit strats for vehicles through the new Smokescreen thing, but generally speaking it does still seem very easy to just reach out and boop an expensive tank top of turn 1, as compared to how difficult it is to do that vs infantry stuff.
That comes compounded by the fact htat many new defensive abilities require you to turn them on in YOUR command phase (meaning theyre off top of 1 if your opponent goes first) and while you deploy, you cant know if youre going first or second, so reserving your big thing might be a huge missed tempo opportunity if you do end up going first and you could have used your first punch to hit your opponent's glass cannon antitank units and remove them from contention.
Nurglitch wrote: I'm not sure that's a problem with 40k and moreso with the way large vehicles are represented in the game. If they were done like Titans in the old Epic 2nd edition, and you could do things like immobilize them or shoot off their weapons, or have them do interesting things when damaged (more interesting than the 1/2, 1/4, 1/6 penalities to WS/BS/S), then they wouldn't be quite so fun-sucking as they are.
I think people have mentioned that stuff is more lethal, but when your only option for units to address other units is by trying to remove them from the board rather than some kind of suppression or engagement, it makes for a bit of a crapshoot.
That's one of the problems those of us who favor the old system prefer. vehicles had rules that made them feel like vehicles. part of the problem with lethality is the fact that you used to have to bring AT weapons to deal with armor, but with the armor reduction system and the move to make all vehicle monsterous creatures. mid power anti-infantry weapons with a high ROF now kill vehicles (and everything else) better than AT weapons.
....Except that they don't.
People take dedicated antitank weapons all the time in the current edition. People are whinging about Dark Lances, Multi-Meltas, the new admech chicken super-lascannon, etc.
No, heavy bolters and ACs are TOTALLY the best way to kill tanks. Why, it only takes 108 shots from either from a BS3 platform to kill a Land Raider (144 if it pops Smokescreen). Please, everyone leave your multi-meltas and dark lances at home and try to kill my 2+ save tanks and -1 to all incoming damage dreadnoughts with heavy bolters and splinter cannons! Please don't throw me into that briar patch!
For the record, I don't think that multi-meltas and dark lances are too good at killing vehicles either. They're just doing what they're supposed to do. They're a bit too cheap on some platforms, but really, people should stop thinking that they can drive their tanks straight into the guns of a dedicated anti-tank unit and win.
I'm not really sure that's the issue. More that a dedicated anti-tank elements can just turn up, point at a tank and it dies before it drives anywhere or accomplishes anything.
That sounds like a "heavy melta rifle Eradicators" problem. I think I've said repeatedly that I think a melta unit that does the same damage at max range as other melta does at half is bad design, but they aren't going away. I'd definitely put them into my "too damned cheap for what they do" category. Right at the top of it, in fact.
Tyran wrote: Eradicators are way too damn slow, they are not one-shooting a tank in the enemy deployment zone, at least not turn one.
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
"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!"
Unit1126PLL wrote: 7th was gross, 4th with some tweaks is where it is at.
Any edition where people are playing in such a way as to not purposefully create a worse play experience is the best edition.
If players are playing in such a way as to purposefully create a worse play experience (i.e. competitively) I will take 9th over any other past edition, because the competitive list setups in every other edition besides this one made me want to projectile vomit into the player's face like linda blair.
Right now? I can at least look at a competitive list and go "yeah, that looks like a Death Guard list. They've got models in power armor. Theyre slow, theyre tough, they're doing what Death Guard is supposed to do. They have more than 3 different types of unit on the board."
"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!"
Unit1126PLL wrote: 7th was gross, 4th with some tweaks is where it is at.
Too bad everyone focuses on 5th when it comes to Oldhammer for some weird reason.
Personally I think if you are going to play with an alternative ruleset, you are better making your own than trying to refit a decade old ruleset that is just changing some design flaws for others.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/26 15:46:32
Tyran wrote: Eradicators are way too damn slow, they are not one-shooting a tank in the enemy deployment zone, at least not turn one.
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
Not sure about the ostriches, but most of that stuff shouldn't be deleting a tank turn one unless you stick it out in the open. Attack bikes can, if you deploy them way up your dz, but if you don't get turn one that's risky. And obviously I'm assuming that by "just turning up" Voss meant coming out of reserves. My apologies to Voss if that was wrong.
Tyran wrote: Eradicators are way too damn slow, they are not one-shooting a tank in the enemy deployment zone, at least not turn one.
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
Not sure about the ostriches, but most of that stuff shouldn't be deleting a tank turn one unless you stick it out in the open. Attack bikes can, if you deploy them way up your dz, but if you don't get turn one that's risky. And obviously I'm assuming that by "just turning up" Voss meant coming out of reserves. My apologies to Voss if that was wrong.
The main problem is, outside of being totally behind Obscuring terrain, being behind Dense Cover, or simply not being on the board, there is generally no good way to keep that kind of firepower from hitting your big stuff, because its crazy long range, and generally crazy high AP, so your Sv stat is mostly just wasted.
The only relevant stats for vehicles vs anti-vehicle weaponry are:
-minus to hit
-invulns sometimes
-minus to damage
-Toughness 7 to toughness 8, again sometimes.
Anti-infantry weaponry *tends* to be shorter range and lower Ap, so a unit having a higher sv stat or simply being placed farther back can actually matter as a way to easily protect the unit from firepower top of 1.
"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!"
Tyran wrote: Eradicators are way too damn slow, they are not one-shooting a tank in the enemy deployment zone, at least not turn one.
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
Not sure about the ostriches, but most of that stuff shouldn't be deleting a tank turn one unless you stick it out in the open. Attack bikes can, if you deploy them way up your dz, but if you don't get turn one that's risky. And obviously I'm assuming that by "just turning up" Voss meant coming out of reserves. My apologies to Voss if that was wrong.
The main problem is, outside of being totally behind Obscuring terrain, being behind Dense Cover, or simply not being on the board, there is generally no good way to keep that kind of firepower from hitting your big stuff, because its crazy long range, and generally crazy high AP, so your Sv stat is mostly just wasted.
The only relevant stats for vehicles vs anti-vehicle weaponry are:
-minus to hit
-invulns sometimes
-minus to damage
-Toughness 7 to toughness 8, again sometimes.
Anti-infantry weaponry *tends* to be shorter range and lower Ap, so a unit having a higher sv stat or simply being placed farther back can actually matter as a way to easily protect the unit from firepower top of 1.
Yeah, maybe that's why I'm not seeing it. Because every vehicle I play has, or can have, at least one of those. A couple have three out of 4. Whoops.
Tyran wrote: Eradicators are way too damn slow, they are not one-shooting a tank in the enemy deployment zone, at least not turn one.
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
Not sure about the ostriches, but most of that stuff shouldn't be deleting a tank turn one unless you stick it out in the open. Attack bikes can, if you deploy them way up your dz, but if you don't get turn one that's risky. And obviously I'm assuming that by "just turning up" Voss meant coming out of reserves. My apologies to Voss if that was wrong.
The main problem is, outside of being totally behind Obscuring terrain, being behind Dense Cover, or simply not being on the board, there is generally no good way to keep that kind of firepower from hitting your big stuff, because its crazy long range, and generally crazy high AP, so your Sv stat is mostly just wasted.
The only relevant stats for vehicles vs anti-vehicle weaponry are:
-minus to hit
-invulns sometimes
-minus to damage
-Toughness 7 to toughness 8, again sometimes.
Anti-infantry weaponry *tends* to be shorter range and lower Ap, so a unit having a higher sv stat or simply being placed farther back can actually matter as a way to easily protect the unit from firepower top of 1.
Yeah, maybe that's why I'm not seeing it. Because every vehicle I play has, or can have, at least one of those. A couple have three out of 4. Whoops.
Yeah, but you have to know that isn't actually the norm for vehicles in 40k. And that you limit yourself to playing those that do (or even have multiple) is pretty telling, yeah?
Tyran wrote: Eradicators are way too damn slow, they are not one-shooting a tank in the enemy deployment zone, at least not turn one.
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
Not sure about the ostriches, but most of that stuff shouldn't be deleting a tank turn one unless you stick it out in the open. Attack bikes can, if you deploy them way up your dz, but if you don't get turn one that's risky. And obviously I'm assuming that by "just turning up" Voss meant coming out of reserves. My apologies to Voss if that was wrong.
The main problem is, outside of being totally behind Obscuring terrain, being behind Dense Cover, or simply not being on the board, there is generally no good way to keep that kind of firepower from hitting your big stuff, because its crazy long range, and generally crazy high AP, so your Sv stat is mostly just wasted.
The only relevant stats for vehicles vs anti-vehicle weaponry are:
-minus to hit
-invulns sometimes
-minus to damage
-Toughness 7 to toughness 8, again sometimes.
Anti-infantry weaponry *tends* to be shorter range and lower Ap, so a unit having a higher sv stat or simply being placed farther back can actually matter as a way to easily protect the unit from firepower top of 1.
Yeah, maybe that's why I'm not seeing it. Because every vehicle I play has, or can have, at least one of those. A couple have three out of 4. Whoops.
Yeah, but you have to know that isn't actually the norm for vehicles in 40k. And that you limit yourself to playing those that do (or even have multiple) is pretty telling, yeah?
I'm not exactly "limiting" myself to those. They're just what I've been using since IA13. The only thing that's changed is that the Achilles and Sicaran have come out of retirement since they got updated rules. It isn't the norm for vehicles still playing with 8th edition rules, but most with 9th edition rules have some of that. Or something like Quantum Shielding. So another problem caused by the way gw updates factions.
Edit: Fixed quotations.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/26 16:57:10
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
But the thing is that those things aren't low shots, long range weapons. no on is running a single MM bike as their anti tank. People run 4-6 of them. Raiders don't have just one dark lance, they also have shoting from everything that is inside it, plus there is 6 of them. Even sisters don't run singles of melta weapons, and they have miracle dice to max out at least one damage roll.
Having 3 MM or 3 Lascanons on 3 dreadnoughts does not suddenly make the army destroy every tank in sight. Specially if they have inv saves.
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.
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
But the thing is that those things aren't low shots, long range weapons. no on is running a single MM bike as their anti tank. People run 4-6 of them. Raiders don't have just one dark lance, they also have shoting from everything that is inside it, plus there is 6 of them. Even sisters don't run singles of melta weapons, and they have miracle dice to max out at least one damage roll.
Having 3 MM or 3 Lascanons on 3 dreadnoughts does not suddenly make the army destroy every tank in sight. Specially if they have inv saves.
No one is running ANY weapon as a single pick in their army and expecting it to singlehandedly get rid of its preferred target.
"I'll run a single lascannon as anti tank"
"I'll run a single assault cannon as anti-infantry"
are things that no good player ever says. 40k listbuilding has redundancy at its core. You take multiples of what you need.
Yeah, mostly I'm thinking of stuff like mobile MM attack bikes/whatever the sisters tank with the meltas is/myphitiic blight-haulers and PBCs with the super lascannons, Dark Lances, new admech shooty ostriches.
You know, all the low-shots long range dedicated antitank weaponry that nobody takes because I'm complaining about some phenomenon from a full edition ago to try and convince people that the edition that brought you Scatterbikes and D-weapon rules is somehow better.
But the thing is that those things aren't low shots, long range weapons. no on is running a single MM bike as their anti tank. People run 4-6 of them. Raiders don't have just one dark lance, they also have shoting from everything that is inside it, plus there is 6 of them. Even sisters don't run singles of melta weapons, and they have miracle dice to max out at least one damage roll.
Having 3 MM or 3 Lascanons on 3 dreadnoughts does not suddenly make the army destroy every tank in sight. Specially if they have inv saves.
Yes....obviously? A single lascannon on average does not do that much to a tank. I didn't realize people were taking offense at the fact that they couldn't bring one twin las dreadnought and be hunky-dory vs all armor in their fething 2k list
I'm responding here to the claim that "nobody uses dedicated antitank weapons, everybody just uses high volume of fire weapons to bring tanks down because blablabla 8th edition bad because it got rid of the magical table of randomly instantly kabooming vehicles."
People do bring dedicated antitank weapons. Smart people bring enough of them to actually kill a tank instead of just bringing like one and hoping to bring a tank down over 3-4 turns - weird behavior I know.
For your convenience, I'll save you the time responding:
"B-but my grey knight army only has access to one lascannon on a broken land raider I bought from a horrible Latvian in a back alley for nine hundred dollars! Three of its lascannons are broken off, and the people at my store force me to only play it with one lascannon to adhere to wysiwyg and after we play they take me out to the back of the game shop and stab me in the stomach with rusty switchblades! If I cannot compete with all armies in the game with this amount of antitank, the game is imbalanced forever!"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/26 17:48:12
"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!"
The exact balance of what you need to bring to remove a range of targets is kind of secondary to the fact that you either remove them or they remove you. It's boring.
Nurglitch wrote: The exact balance of what you need to bring to remove a range of targets is kind of secondary to the fact that you either remove them or they remove you. It's boring.
oh it 100% makes for boring gameplay. I've laid off 40k since the DG codex in favor of a game that rewards the player's strategic skill much more than the listbuilding and "rolling to get first turn" skill
Yes....obviously? A single lascannon on average does not do that much to a tank. I didn't realize people were taking offense at the fact that they couldn't bring one twin las dreadnought and be hunky-dory vs all armor in their fething 2k list
I'm responding here to the claim that "nobody uses dedicated antitank weapons, everybody just uses high volume of fire weapons to bring tanks down because blablabla 8th edition bad because it got rid of the magical table of randomly instantly kabooming vehicles."
People do bring dedicated antitank weapons. Smart people bring enough of them to actually kill a tank instead of just bringing like one and hoping to bring a tank down over 3-4 turns - weird behavior I know.
Well losing the ability to take twin autocanon dreadnoughts, when you have 2 of them is, from my expirance not a fun. But that is besides the point here, well with small exeption of the argument to make all MM 35pts. If that happens, then the raider dark lances should cost something like 25pts.
People aren't using stuff like dark lances or multi meltas, because of tanks or vehicles in general . they are taken, because they can one shot something like a blade guard. The fact that they can also do damage to tanks is a secondary things, because tanks, the way they are pointed right now, do not see much play. And you actually do see it for weapons that do not kill marines well. No one wants to buy a lascannon and see it do 1W to an intercessor or bounce of, at the cost it has, from a inv save. In 8th the plasma gun was a "anti tank" weapon of choice, and it was again the weapon of choice for most armies, because it also happened to kill marine class targets real well.
Why would I buy anything from a Latvian, when there are recasters two streets away from me. I don't really understand the argument? Also if DE are suppose to not be punished in their point costs, because someone may play a less efficient version of them. Then according to your logic. A MM in an army without access to attack bikes or eradictors should not go up in points either. But we know it would, so it looks like the thing that should go up in point is the thing that carries the weapon that should change points. But this , again, according to GW, costs just as much as it should.
No one is running ANY weapon as a single pick in their army and expecting it to singlehandedly get rid of its preferred target.
"I'll run a single lascannon as anti tank"
"I'll run a single assault cannon as anti-infantry"
are things that no good player ever says. 40k listbuilding has redundancy at its core. You take multiples of what you need.
That is interesting because through out 8th ed, the GK codex and rule set was design the idea, that somehow every target was suppose to be down with str 4 storm bolters. Also slot limitations. Specially if something is in elites, and you have them full or almost full in your army. But yeah, if the army is hyper point optimized, by accident of course , because as we know GW would never do it on purpose, you can run multiple dark lances, liquifires and still have enough point to take other stuff. Even the slots aren't a problem.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/26 18:05:56
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.
Yes....obviously? A single lascannon on average does not do that much to a tank. I didn't realize people were taking offense at the fact that they couldn't bring one twin las dreadnought and be hunky-dory vs all armor in their fething 2k list
I'm responding here to the claim that "nobody uses dedicated antitank weapons, everybody just uses high volume of fire weapons to bring tanks down because blablabla 8th edition bad because it got rid of the magical table of randomly instantly kabooming vehicles."
People do bring dedicated antitank weapons. Smart people bring enough of them to actually kill a tank instead of just bringing like one and hoping to bring a tank down over 3-4 turns - weird behavior I know.
Well losing the ability to take twin autocanon dreadnoughts, when you have 2 of them is, from my expirance not a fun. But that is besides the point here, well with small exeption of the argument to make all MM 35pts. If that happens, then the raider dark lances should cost something like 25pts.
People aren't using stuff like dark lances or multi meltas, because of tanks or vehicles in general . they are taken, because they can one shot something like a blade guard. The fact that they can also do damage to tanks is a secondary things, because tanks, the way they are pointed right now, do not see much play. And you actually do see it for weapons that do not kill marines well. No one wants to buy a lascannon and see it do 1W to an intercessor or bounce of, at the cost it has, from a inv save. In 8th the plasma gun was a "anti tank" weapon of choice, and it was again the weapon of choice for most armies, because it also happened to kill marine class targets real well.
Why would I buy anything from a Latvian, when there are recasters two streets away from me. I don't really understand the argument? Also if DE are suppose to not be punished in their point costs, because someone may play a less efficient version of them. Then according to your logic. A MM in an army without access to attack bikes or eradictors should not go up in points either. But we know it would, so it looks like the thing that should go up in point is the thing that carries the weapon that should change points. But this , again, according to GW, costs just as much as it should.
Not necessarily. Gw has been giving some weapons different points costs on different platforms. It's entirely possible that they could increase the price of multi-meltas on, say, Attack Bikes, but not on the ones that you can take as an optional pintle mount on a Land Raider.
