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.
I do imagine, however, that Rotate Ion Shields could become some sort of Transhuman for Knights. Some minus to wound mechanic, minus to damage, half damage, etc. It sucks to have to deal with this issue without a quick patch for sure.
Knights having some form of damage reduction or damage cap per phase would make them much better, but with what we’ve been seeing from new rule leaks I’m also worried that GW might make knights become the 7th edition masters of murder again.
I’m worried that the big numbers won’t have another big number to limit it. That being points.
and it’s also the fact that the Tau player, after shooting the HH railguns, still have them rest of the army to shoot with.
Eradicators spam at the beginning of 9th was much more of a threat to knights, did the sky fall down then?
Eradicators have a 24” range, the railgun has 72”.
You tell me that isn’t much more a Knight counter than eradicators.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SamusDrake wrote: Only thing is we're comparing 9th edition Tau rules against 8th edition rules + patches for Imperial / Chaos Knights. The situation might change when their 9th edition codices arrive...
That said, Armigers are definitely undervalued due to their mobility, are still Lords of War themselves and can now occupy objectives. Its worth mentioning that in Combat Patrols they're the only option for a Knight player; so they'll be going up against the Hammerhead anyway in that situation.
Speak of the devil; while I'm waiting for the Knight codices, my two warglaives could do with a helverin to back'em up and make up a patrol. Its a shame they don't have their own Household soliders to fill in the odd points...
The Knight codex is still a long way away, and I agree with armigers being underrated.
There are custom households you can make for your armigers.
Hammerheads will no doubt be eating Knights for breakfast for a few months... then bam! The Knights will get a shinny all singing, all dancing new powerful Codex.
And thus the cycle of imbalance will forever continue in 40k.
It’ll be HH, then Knights, then whatever else GW decides to make good next.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2022/01/08 16:49:13
God, can you imagine Knights with a damage limit per phase?
"Like sorry, I know you did 30 damage to me in melee, but I can only take 8 and I'm guaranteed to hit you with my Str 16 weapon that probably ignores invulns because that's a thing now."
Daemons gonna be sad.
This game is already insane
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/08 17:22:32
Unit1126PLL wrote: God, can you imagine Knights with a damage limit per phase?
"Like sorry, I know you did 30 damage to me in melee, but I can only take 8 and I'm guaranteed to hit you with my Str 16 weapon that probably ignores invulns because that's a thing now."
Daemons gonna be sad.
This game is already insane
“Yeah so about all your damage…”
Daemons are screwed if more and more factions just keep getting ignore invuln save weapons, unless they get FNP saves
Chaos Jim wrote: To the Knight players, the railgun is busted. You can’t hide, you lose a Knight every turn because the Tau player has 2 hammerheads, you can’t shoot back that well because they’ll either be hiding, or you’re bracketed so you can’t hit the broadside of a barn, or you’re dead.
This got me thinking about something I thought about awhile ago.
What if you just bring an all armiger/war dog army?
You still get to play knights, but armiger class knights don’t have the titanic keyword. So they can hide.
I’ve done the calculations and you could run 14 armiger class knights in a standard 2k point game, and then equip half of them with autocannons.
Of course you’d have to buy 14 armigers, but they’re faster, are still quite tanky, and more expendable. Plus they all have obsec if you’re running mono knights, and they all count as 5 models for objectives.
I want to know if this is a decent counter play to the railgun if you still want to play mono knights.
Many people and myself have spent quite a while building and painting our IKs. Suggesting we shouldn`t use them because an opponent can bring weapon X to the table is bad advice.
Many people and myself have spent quite a while building and painting our IKs. Suggesting we shouldn`t use them because an opponent can bring weapon X to the table is bad advice.
I have also painted a few knights myself, and I’m not saying don’t play knights. I’m saying the railgun is a big scary anti Vehicle weapon Knight players now have to deal with. It’s the fact that the railgun is literally un-interactable, it’s just does damage, especially because of the new markerlight rules that GW have said will be good for HH, and the stratagem that lets it re-roll a hit roll, on top of a CP re-roll for the wound roll, on top of the rest of their entire army still shooting as well. I just don’t want Tau to become that army like admech, or drukhari where no one wants to play against them, because I have a friend who plays Tau.
Knights shouldn't be factored into balance at all as a faction, which is to say that whether or not a weapon/unit/army/whatever feths them should be irrelevant because knights should never have existed as an army. I'm not an anti-LoW purist, but an army that is rewarded for playing nothing but 24+ wound T8 vehicles in a skew list is always going to be a balance issue. Unfortunately the genie is out of the bottle now and can't be put in, so knight players are going to have to accept that either the codex is always going to be competitively niche at best (basically nothing more than a gatekeeper army in tournaments without having any consistent top table viability) or it has to be redesigned in way that basically forces you to take one big knight and then nothing but armigers.
The idea of making knights only able to take like a third of its wounds in a round is so horrible it's insane tbh. At around their current price point that would be extremely toxic and frankly broken, and some armies would have no way to really take a knight out in one turn.
I love my knight house but if I choose to play it, I am actively handicapping myself.
The castellan wrecks stuff but often gets removed with surprising ease. I'll agree that Armigers are more fun to play and I do want to round out the 6 models I have with more Warglaives. Then a couple Moirax to run an all Armiger list.
Strg Alt wrote: Many people and myself have spent quite a while building and painting our IKs. Suggesting we shouldn`t use them because an opponent can bring weapon X to the table is bad advice.
I have also painted a few knights myself, and I’m not saying don’t play knights. I’m saying the railgun is a big scary anti Vehicle weapon Knight players now have to deal with. It’s the fact that the railgun is literally un-interactable, it’s just does damage, especially because of the new markerlight rules that GW have said will be good for HH, and the stratagem that lets it re-roll a hit roll, on top of a CP re-roll for the wound roll, on top of the rest of their entire army still shooting as well. I just don’t want Tau to become that army like admech, or drukhari where no one wants to play against them, because I have a friend who plays Tau.
Just to make matters a little worse, Chaos Jim, the re-roll to hit from Targeting Array appears to just be a standard special rule on the Hammerhead, not a strat.
Going by the preview article, anyway. Still a CP option to re-roll one of the To Wound rolls over the course of the phase.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Eradicators have a 24” range, the railgun has 72”.
You tell me that isn’t much more a Knight counter than eradicators.
They can outflank and shoot with no penalty though, and with more shots fired they'll likely be more reliable. They're also much cheaper than hammerheads and arguably even much more resilient.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/09 07:42:39
ihockert wrote: I'm not sure looking at the average damage for Hammerhead Shots is a great way of looking at them. Assuming BS3 a Hammerhead has a 58% chance of inflicting 10-12 wounds to a toughness 8 Knight. At BS4 it has a 49.5% chance of doing 10-12 wounds. The average isn't that useful because if the weapon hits and wounds you get smashed, but if it doesn't then nothing happens. Squads with multiple shots are going to have less skew in their results. I'm not saying the sky is falling when it comes to Tau as there is not enough information out there to make a judgement about anything.
There are already are guns like the SAG who have very similar math. A roughly 50% chance of doing nothing and a 20% chance to blow away a knight in one go.
In the end, those things never end up being played because this cuts in both directions. Losing a game and thus ruining all your chances of placing well in a tournament because your three single-shot knight killers all picked the wrong side of the coin is not an option for competitive play.
SAG was spammed in 8th, good argument to show railgun HH have a chance of being spammed
Chaos Jim wrote: Eradicators have a 24” range, the railgun has 72”.
You tell me that isn’t much more a Knight counter than eradicators.
Knights can charge the HH /sarcasm
Blackie wrote: I very much doubt that I'll see players losing a knight every turn
Tau will be gak unless they can. I know how strong S5 can be against Knights and Fire Warriors will be AP-1. You might not even bother killing a Knight if it has 1-5 wounds left since it will die in Overwatch assuming FtGG and 5+ Overwatch is still a thing.
The Knight codex is still a long way away, and I agree with armigers being underrated.
There are custom households you can make for your armigers.
Indeed, we could be looking at summer before that new Chaos Knight is finally revealled. But I'm hoping that they'll go for a dual Imperial / Chaos release, maybe with a revised Imperial Knights: Renegade pack.
Have to admit that upon returning to the hobby I felt that Knights and Titans didn't have any place in 40K but in Epic, but those Armigers have made me smile. Not too big but still an intimidating sight, and working out at £22.50 each they're really good value.
Its just a shame they don't have other weapon options.
The Knight codex is still a long way away, and I agree with armigers being underrated.
There are custom households you can make for your armigers.
Indeed, we could be looking at summer before that new Chaos Knight is finally revealled. But I'm hoping that they'll go for a dual Imperial / Chaos release, maybe with a revised Imperial Knights: Renegade pack.
Have to admit that upon returning to the hobby I felt that Knights and Titans didn't have any place in 40K but in Epic, but those Armigers have made me smile. Not too big but still an intimidating sight, and working out at £22.50 each they're really good value.
Its just a shame they don't have other weapon options.
There are additional weapon options for FW, you could kitbash them.
vict0988 wrote: SAG was spammed in 8th, good argument to show railgun HH have a chance of being spammed
It was spammed because you could increase the output of one sixfold by giving it the SSAG and stacking stratagems, while doubling the output of another one through the bad moons stratagem and gain re-rolls for hit, wound and damage through deff skulls. So in reality those spammed three SAG big meks had the output of 9-10 railguns and doubt that anyone would disagree that this would bad. It also immediately stopped being spammed after being raised to 120 points, at least 20 point less than the future hammer head will be, despite not losing its damage potential. The current SAG mek with better BS and the same gun than the one spammed in 8th still sees zero play despite being cheaper and harder to kill than hammer heads.
If you insist on taking examples from almost three years ago, from an old codex in another game with different rules and a different meta, you should at least understand why a weapon was spammed and why it isn't anymore.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/09 08:41:11
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
deTox91 wrote: So given current codex configuration, 3 HHs + Longstrike which is BS 2+ and makes HHs 2+ too with innate reroll, adding in a CP reroll for a failed wound roll, what's the odd of loosing 2 knights turn 1? Not forgetting that this still leave the Tau with 1300 more pts for the rest of the army and to pink off eventual last wounds, if a knight is left with 4w after two rail gun shots you'd definitely not shoot the third railgun at it
Let's play a game.
You bring the aforementioned HHs, and I bring 3x6 salamander eradicators with HQ support.
See who gets to destroy more knights per turn.
Skew lists have always existed. Doesn't mean that they get played and that you should worry about them.
Knights play a skew list by definition, so obviously they are in big trouble if someone makes an anti skew list tailored against them. That's the nature of that faction. You live on the fact that your opponent has to face a lot of things which aren't knights, so he won't bring 800 points in 4 shots, the same way he won't bring 18 eradicators.
Do you think that the covenant DE lists are terrified by the prospect of facing an Orrery Dnaught spam? No, because those lists are not around.
vict0988 wrote: SAG was spammed in 8th, good argument to show railgun HH have a chance of being spammed
It was spammed because you could increase the output of one sixfold by giving it the SSAG and stacking stratagems, while doubling the output of another one through the bad moons stratagem and gain re-rolls for hit, wound and damage through deff skulls. So in reality those spammed three SAG big meks had the output of 9-10 railguns and doubt that anyone would disagree that this would bad.
It also immediately stopped being spammed after being raised to 120 points, at least 20 point less than the future hammer head will be, despite not losing its damage potential.
The current SAG mek with better BS and the same gun than the one spammed in 8th still sees zero play despite being cheaper and harder to kill than hammer heads.
If you insist on taking examples from almost three years ago, from an old codex in another game with different rules and a different meta, you should at least understand why a weapon was spammed and why it isn't anymore.
I smell moving goalposts. 8th and 9th are not that different, the way terrain is used in many modern 40k tournaments alone is a huge damper on the SAG, unfortunately, HH can move 12" and shoot without a heavy penalty. The SAG can lumber around 5" and then lose 33% of its firepower, bleh in 9th.
Necron Lokhust Heavy Destroyers seem more popular than Lokhust Destroyers despite them having a third as many shots and costing 20% more per model, the extra range, S, AP and D make up for the lack of volume.
You said never OP and I said probably OP. I did not say SAG's could never be bad, I said they were spammed, all it takes is a low enough pts cost.
The BS is nice, but damage is still pretty similar to previously because of other changes. You also cannot fish for S11 anymore with a CP re-roll for the relic SAG, a Hammerhead can re-roll a wound roll, getting 200 pts of extra shooting for 1CP.
Character protection has been degraded in 9th, so I don't know I'd say that a SAG is more survivable than a HH. Yesterday I killed a unit of infantry with my infantry and then sniped the character hiding behind them from across the board with an anti-tank weapon despite that character not being the closest target because there was no unit within 3" of the character any longer. Then there is the fact that you cannot use the Grot Oiler as an ablative wound or to tank a C'tan sniper power.
I know exactly why SAGs were so good since I played 20ish games against 1-3x SAG. GW have said that HH can be boosted by markerlights, a relic railgun also isn't out of the question and Longstrike giving HH a bonus is almost a certainty.
Any unit's viability is determined entirely based on its pts-efficiency, if you have a unit that wins you the game automatically turn 1 it will still have no impact if it is 2001 pts. The main problem is how much of a glass cannon a HH is, there is no points value where it is a fun unit, it's bad game design.
If it gets a permanent -1 damage or -1 to hit from chaff launchers or whatever Tau call them then maybe it could be a healthy unit at 220-ish points. But a 13W T7 3+ Sv unit with no invuln or defensive abilities that is 200 points to account for its offense is just not fun IMO.
"Almost 3 years" is weird way to spell "less than 2 years", LVO 2020 had 8 SAGs in the top 3 Ork lists.
vict0988 wrote: No, but you can just magnetize your kitbashed lightning locks on your regular Armiger and call it a Moirax.
But that's against regulations! I'd be told off!
What regulations? Talk to your TO/opponent before. As long as everything is clear then you'll be fine, especially in casual games if you are picking a variety of weapons and modelled them so you can tell them apart and not just one powerful loadout you can put on 9 of your Armigers.
4x railgun HH is not specifically a Knight-counter list. Kill 8 Deathshroud Terminators, 8 Eradicators, 4 Raiders, 20 Vanguard or 5 laser chickens.
How many Vanguard or Deathshroud Terminators do 18 Eradicators kill at 24" range? Not to mention the Eradicator death ball is 800 pts without character support, that's another 150 pts that have to ball around the Eradicators to keep them working at a level where they outperform railgun HH outside 12".
People don't run 18 Eradicators because they are too vulnerable to getting bad-touched and there is not enough space to move them around and keep them hidden, not to mention they are so lethal that the meta has shifted away from the units they are best at taking out. HH moves 12" and shoots 72". You're not taking down 4 HH on turn 1. You try to bad touch a railgun HH and you'll have a bad time.
Spoletta wrote: 4 railgun kill 6 DS terminators. 18 eradicators kill 6,5 before buff, outside 12" and without being salamanders.
4 railgun kill 4.6 chickens. 18 eradicators kill 12 before buff, outside 12" and without being salamanders.
Sorry but 4 HH is by all means a skew list.
Amazing how 8 unsaved wounds (18*2/1,5/1,5/2) with D6-1 damage translates into 6,5 dead 3W models. I'm not saying I cannot roll that well, sounds about average for me, but I'd be shocked if anyone else did it.
4 HH is much more skew than 18 eradicators, that's for sure. At the end of the day 18 gravis dudes aren't unreasonable for average SM armies, 4 vehicles might be for a tau army. Not to mention that those vehicles are single shot models, complete hit or complete miss, while eradicators have a much higher rate of fire, which makes them quite less swingy and more versatile.
Eradicators can combat squad, as infantries they can do other stuff than shooting and having their wounds split into multiple bodies and multiple squads they can really soak a lot of damage.
I honestly think that 9-12 eradicators are a pretty standard build for SM.
Eldenfirefly wrote: It may not be very easy to hide multiple Hammerhead gunships. Those things are huge.
Wait, really?
Oddly enough for this thread, I play BOTH armies. I started with Tau, and picked up Knights for an OPFOR. As for the OP, that was more or less my go to plan for most games; a swarm of Wardogs with a melee Despoiler in reserve.
dreadblade wrote: Are we talking tournaments here? I very much doubt I'll see 4 hammerheads at my FLGS.
You almost certainly WILL see 4 hammerheads in an army, at least once people start getting them. Assuming that Longstrike stays a HQ and doesn't get downgraded to an upgrade again.
But I will say that I don't like Sept locking my force - I have Farsight, R'alai and R'myr. I hate taking the same force time after time, preferring some tactical flexibility in my list construction and I'd hate to think that I am alone in this, considering how easy the Tau force is to magnetize.
Jidmah wrote: I'd wager that most people don't even have 3 hammerheads to begin with.
A lot of old Tau players will have more than 3 I'd say... now how many of them have Railguns and not Iron cannons is the real question.
Wait... you mean that people DON'T keep their unused bits? Just as the suits are easily magnetized, so are T'au vehicles. Anyone who got the old Skyray kit can use their chassis (what's the plural?) as Devilfish, any flavor of Hammerhead, or as a Skyray (Which I'm fairly certain is ANY way that they want). In this way, I like the new statline for Smart Missiles, considering that the Recon Drone (which can fit on top of the Chassis on the turret hole - i just hope that the burst cannon doesn't swing out locking it in place). Assuming that the rules for the Recon drone doesn't change...
Oh and last shameless plug. I got a valiant that I haven't used once on the field. Would anyone be interested in trading for it? I'd be interested in a magnetized baneblade, a warden or a desecrator. https://photobucket.com/u/carldooley
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/09 14:22:10
'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!'
You can hide 4 Hammerheads on GW terrain which is apparently "totes balanced" according to Warhammer Marketing.
Spoletta wrote: d6+2 damage, which becomes d6+1 against DR, which means a chance of 5/6 to kill.
8*5/6 = 6.66.
I rounded to 6.5.
24"
Assault 1
8
-4
D6 Each time an attack made with this weapon targets a unit within half range, that attack has a Damage characteristic of D6+2.
More than 12" out that's D6.
Let's just say I you were doing the math for heavy melta rifles, I don't feel like quibbling any more over this subject since it's totally possible the unit will be 230 pts and therefore bad and in any case as a Necron player I have 5 units that are particularly afraid of it and they are all bad anyway because of Eradicators and I can always just play casually and refuse to play anyone with 2+ railgun HH.
I still think Eradicators, multi-meltas, demolisher cannons, D3+3 lasers and doomsday weaponry do too much damage. So let's say I agree that Eradicators do more damage at 24" and railgun HH trade some of that damage for a lot more range, that's still too much.
Blackie wrote: Not to mention that those vehicles are single shot models, complete hit or complete miss, while eradicators have a much higher rate of fire, which makes them quite less swingy and more versatile.
They are twin-linked and probably BS 3+, they are hit or hit and even if you have 4 you are unlikely to get a failed wound if you use your CP re-roll for re-rolling the wound roll on one of them. Rolling 2 1s on 5 dice is unlikely and single shot makes it sound like they cannot kill 2 Deathshrouds or 4 Rangers in one shot. It's not like you cannot flub a roll for a unit of Eradicators either. Eradicators can also roll too hot, sometimes 6 melta shots is more than you need, but it's what you're getting, the possibility of doing 20 damage to a Leman Russ when you get within 6" pulls the math of Eradicators up. The extreme range on the HH and the mobility means it can shoot at unwounded targets every turn to make the most of its gun.
What regulations? Talk to your TO/opponent before. As long as everything is clear then you'll be fine, especially in casual games if you are picking a variety of weapons and modelled them so you can tell them apart and not just one powerful loadout you can put on 9 of your Armigers.
I was being playful in my last comment, being a casual player and all.
As I very much doubt that I'll see players losing a knight every turn .
We aren't seeing many Knight players in competitive play atm, but when they were all the rage in 8th every single army in the game was fundamentally built with the understanding that it needed to kill a Knight a Turn. As far as 4 HHs? Most tau players I know have at least 3, it is not at all unlikely that even friendly players will purchase some more and bring them to the table. As an anecdote, I'm the only hardcore Ork player at my FLGS, as in, I'm the only one who only ever brings orkz and nothing else. When our Codex got released, the very next escalation league and next ITC events had 4+ Ork players on average, and most of these guys had 2-6 Rukkatrukkz and they weren't meta gamers They were gamers who had an ork collection and when it was the orkz time to shine they figured it would be fun to dust off the old collection, pickup a few of hte new hotness if they didn't have any yet and poof, Pro gamer move
SAG was spammed in 8th, good argument to show railgun HH have a chance of being spammed
SAG wasn't spammed in 8th because it was OP, it was spammed in 8th because what else were you going to do with your HQ choices? Ork players were bringing triple battalions to maximize CP because we ate through CP like it was no ones business. We had 6 mandatory HQ slots to fill. 3 Weirdboyz and then 3 SAG Mekz, you could take a warboss if you really wanted to but they definitely weren't as good as they are now.
And as far as the SAG, it was only good because of 8th rules policies regarding force multipliers in Stratagems, something GW has noticeably changed course on and is actively discouraging/getting rid of.
I only ever took 1 SAG for the relic, but the guys who took 3 were doing it for the CP burns. 1 SAG becomes the relic SSAG from the special detachment, this gives him his own shoot twice stratagem. The other 2 use bad moonz to get their re-roll 1s and shoot twice stratagem. The Relic SAG shoots essentially 4D6 shots while the 2 non-relics shoot 3D6 shots. By Todays standard that is in fact equivalent to 7 SAG Big Mekz. A shoot twice SSAG put out 14 shots on average, with exploding 5s and 6s which averaged 6 hits a turn. To equal 6 hits a turn the current Big Mekz would need 3 turns. And how much was that 1 big mek with SSAG? 80pts. How much is a modern SAG? 110pts it also lost dakka on 5s and shoot twice stratagems, but because so many people complained that orkz had a reliable shooting platform it was nerfed into the ground
So why was the SAG spammed in 8th? Because we had 6 minimum HQ slots to fill and because they were somewhat reliable. I don't think comparing The railgun to the SAG is a fair argument. Orkz had Weirdboyz and Big Mekz as reliable/good HQ units and usually a 1 off Warboss with Da Killa Klaw.
Spoletta wrote: d6+2 damage, which becomes d6+1 against DR, which means a chance of 5/6 to kill.
8*5/6 = 6.66.
I rounded to 6.5.
Per your own math you were mathing them like they were over 12" away which means their damage is only D6, not D6+2.
Also, why are you comparing 810 points of Eradicators to four hammerheads which are atm about 605 points? Are you assuming hammerheads will have their price jacked up to be comparable? Like you assumed they would be BS4+ when doing the math in the other thread?
Your calculations appear consistently disingenuous and bluntly no one should take them seriously.
Spoletta wrote: d6+2 damage, which becomes d6+1 against DR, which means a chance of 5/6 to kill.
8*5/6 = 6.66.
I rounded to 6.5.
Per your own math you were mathing them like they were over 12" away which means their damage is only D6, not D6+2.
Also, why are you comparing 810 points of Eradicators to four hammerheads which are atm about 605 points? Are you assuming hammerheads will have their price jacked up to be comparable? Like you assumed they would be BS4+ when doing the math in the other thread?
Your calculations appear consistently disingenuous and bluntly no one should take them seriously.
. 
They were gamers who had an ork collection and when it was the orkz time to shine they figured it would be fun to dust off the old collection, pickup a few of hte new hotness if they didn't have any yet and poof, Pro gamer move 
