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.

Ubiquity - being able to tackle multiple issues.

Grots are good at objective camping. They’re woefully inefficient at everything else (short ranged, poor fighting potential).

Knights are a bit crap at objective camping. But they can shoot or fight a great many things straight off the field. They’re resistant to every weapon, thanks to high Toughness, plentiful Wounds, Good Armour and an Invulnerable save.

The Knignt has ubiquity, as I can rely on it to achieve more tasks than I can rely on Grots to do the same. And not just in terms of general battle plan. It can be targets of opportunity, such as a tank left in a poor position, an enemy Commander I can go jump and down on etc etc.

I think the entire discussion of what makes something elite is fairly moot, and serves very little point over interesting game discussion here.
Since even if you try and narrow the definition it’s still fairly arbitrary what fits and what isn’t.

Guardians are for the most part elite, in that Craftworlds wouldn’t be sending untrained Eldar into battle without good support and technology.
It’s really just the weirdness of 40k and rules that make it even come up I feel.
I don’t really think I ever encounter a conversation like this in any other game.

Breton wrote:

Dudeface wrote:


Ermm, you do buy them by the head. How many marines do I get for 63 points?

for 63 points


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Breton, I’m really sorry but you’re just not making sense here.

Yeah, we may have lost each other, I'm not sure what you meant by ubiquity either.

Yes, you said we buy models by the point rather than by head count. How many marines do I get for 63 points?

I mean, in Infinity, I'd consider Heavy Infantry elite, but they have their own term. Heavy Infantry. If someone asked what made something elite in Infinity, it depends. An elite hacker is something like the Nomads Interventors and Mary Problems. An elite TAG is the Avatar. Discussing whether or not something is elite is useless at the tabletop, unless you're looking to run an elite army, but it does matter to some people. I like running an elite PanO army, Military Orders, and using just knights.

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
unless you're looking to run an elite army,

That was the instigator - Someone wishing Marines would play more elite.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
How many marines do I get for 63 points?

I suppose I was too subtle. It depends on the Marine - but you're still buying them with points as is made obvious by the "for 63 points" part.

Breton wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
unless you're looking to run an elite army,

That was the instigator - Someone wishing Marines would play more elite.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
How many marines do I get for 63 points?

I suppose I was too subtle. It depends on the Marine - but you're still buying them with points as is made obvious by the "for 63 points" part.

I'm buying a number of heads with points. The two are not completely seperable.

Model headcount is the resource, points are the currency. If it is low headcount and higher points, you may ascertain there is a scarcity combined with an increase in raw ability. You might suggest it makes them more elite.

Did this thread have a point, outside of taking guesses at what sort of drugs Breton is smoking?

 vipoid wrote:
Did this thread have a point, outside of taking guesses at what sort of drugs Breton is smoking?

Yes. Are hallucinogenic drugs elite when compared to other drugs?

 amanita wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Did this thread have a point, outside of taking guesses at what sort of drugs Breton is smoking?

Yes. Are hallucinogenic drugs elite when compared to other drugs?

2: a typewriter type providing 12 characters to the linear inch

No, it's not a typewriter.

I think some of my comments as a Grumpy Old Git in another thread may have set off this debacle.

If I’m right (I’m probably not. That’s increasingly common these days. Damn kids ??) it’s my Curmudgeonly Memory of when Space Marine Terminators and Dreadnoughts were a popular, if cash and points intensive, choice to shore up your battle line. And how since the demise of 2nd Ed, no Space Marine Elite unit has particularly distinguished itself in quite the same way.

2nd Ed Terminators could, depending on loadout, out shoot, out fight or plain old out endure pretty much anything.

Whilst never invincible, it took an actual plan to deal with them.

Then it went all Wibbly. Both the thread and Terminators.

Breton wrote:
I think a lot of people get caught up in a cosmetic difference like number of bases per unit/army/etc. but my point is exactly that - those differences are cosmetic. 20 wounds on 10 bases for 200 points isn't that far afield from 20 wounds on 20 bases for 200 points when all the tradeoffs balance out. Take the cosmetics out - Put a literal bucket on the table. The bucket has approximately 30 medium range medium strength shots and 20 wounds with the number of shots degrading in relation to the number of wounds for 200 points. Is the bucket elite? Is the bucket Space Marines or Guardians? Does it make a difference?

Those differences are not cosmetic, because we're talking about how armies "feel" and so on. I guess that's a bit much for you.

Breton wrote:
No you're just misrepresenting why they're capitalized to avoid the definition.

I don't have to avoid the definition.

You are doing both of those things.

Breton wrote:
Singularly the Grot is not elite compared to the Knight
Collectively (Plural) a bucket of 100 grots is elite compared to a knight.

That's not what it means when it says "plural" in construction. It means you can use it in a plural context grammatically, it says nothing about its meaning.

Breton wrote:
The definition you're about to trip over again a little further down.

That's cool, that's not the definition the OP of this thread used, so you're in the wrong. The fact that the board culture on dakka encourages your kind of bad-faith argumentation and inane disrespect is on the mods, more than anything else.

Breton wrote:
This does mean normally elite models or units can be considered not so impressive relative to others - like when they can flat out ignore the not currently impressive model.

Irrelevant. Numbers count. If it takes 500 grots to beat a Knight, those Grots are not elite, they are drowning the Knight in weight of numbers.

Breton wrote:
No- as I've pointed out SEVERAL times a Knight is more "elite" than A grot, but a 500 point 100 grots army is more elite than the 1 knight 500 point army.

That's not how elite is used, and it's not how OP used elite. For the grots to be elite over the Knight individual grots would have to have greater capabilities or abilities than the knight.

I will say my definition is not meant as the be-all end-all definition.

I've seen other definitions in this thread that are different from the one I gave, but fit with general usage of the term. The definitions shared similarities to mine, but did have key differences. (Too lazy to find the posts right now, but they're in this thread.)
Breton's definition is the only one I've seen that doesn't work with common usage.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

2nd Ed Terminators could, depending on loadout, out shoot, out fight or plain old out endure pretty much anything.

Ehh . . . Those Banshees and Genestealers would do a pretty good number on them in combat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Apple fox wrote:
I think the entire discussion of what makes something elite is fairly moot, and serves very little point over interesting game discussion here.
Since even if you try and narrow the definition it’s still fairly arbitrary what fits and what isn’t.

Guardians are for the most part elite, in that Craftworlds wouldn’t be sending untrained Eldar into battle without good support and technology.
It’s really just the weirdness of 40k and rules that make it even come up I feel.
I don’t really think I ever encounter a conversation like this in any other game.

There's focus on it because of Space Marines, which are "sold" as "elite" but often don't feel elite. . . namely because they're intended to be elite against Guardsmen, Guardians and Orks, and what they fight against on the table is a tank company's worth of often-anti-MEQ firepower.

Yeah, my Genestealers used to tear through Terminators like an al fresco game of Space Hulk.

Good times.

Ah ah ah!

Look at what I typed.

Yes certain units could handily dispatch my Terminators in 2nd Ed.

But the two examples given (Bumshees and Genesquealers) couldn’t out shoot or our endure Terminators.

Both were solid counters - and all three are Elite within their army.

From hence 2nd Ed’s curious balance was derived.

For whatever it is worth, this thread is an excellent example of troll feeding. I just don't get why so many folks keep throwing fish at it.

Genestealers are the 6th cheapest model in a codex with around 40 units. They aren't really elites if we are using the numbers argument.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Ah ah ah!

Look at what I typed.

Yes certain units could handily dispatch my Terminators in 2nd Ed.

But the two examples given (Bumshees and Genesquealers) couldn’t out shoot or our endure Terminators.

Both were solid counters - and all three are Elite within their army.

From hence 2nd Ed’s curious balance was derived.

I honestly have difficulty deriving that from your post. But if the idea is that they were top-if-the-line generalists, yes that's true. But I'd also argue that carried into 3rd-4th at least.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Ehh . . . Those Banshees and Genestealers would do a pretty good number on them in combat.

Not necessarily. As the Doc pointed out, it depended on the loadout. It also depended on the tactical situation - if the Banshees get charged, they're chutney. A terminator with a cyclone or assault cannon could mulch a whole squad of either and then take a smoke break.

Which is why they were elite.

There's a weird dynamic going on which reminds me of Stratego. The Field Marshal is the most powerful figure in the game. He defeats every other rank other than his peer. He is elite.

The Spy beats the Field Marshal. Super-elite! Well, other than the fact that it loses to every single model that attacks it, and only beats the Field Marshal if it strikes first.

So basically the grots can win this one weird mission type against a knight at a points value no one would ever run. Not sure what words I'd used to describe that scenario ("contrived" comes to mind) but it wouldn't be "elite."

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Ehh . . . Those Banshees and Genestealers would do a pretty good number on them in combat.

Not necessarily. As the Doc pointed out, it depended on the loadout. It also depended on the tactical situation - if the Banshees get charged, they're chutney. A terminator with a cyclone or assault cannon could mulch a whole squad of either and then take a smoke break.

Which is why they were elite.

It would be a rare event indeed if Genestealers or Banshees got charged by Terminators.

I'm not disputing the fact that they were elite. I'm just saying there were also units that could eat their lunch. But yes, the rule is punch the shooty and shoot the punchy. It's the traditional Marine position in terms of balance.

But if "depending on loadout" is referring to Thunder Hammer and Lightning Claws squads, those guys aren't outshooting anything.

 Tyran wrote:
Genestealers are the 6th cheapest model in a codex with around 40 units. They aren't really elites if we are using the numbers argument.

Yeah. Its sort of building on Insectums idea that people don't run the sub-Marine units. Which I don't think is quite right - but true in numbers. People don't bring whole armies of them - they just bring a few units and bulk out onf the rest.

Unless you are avoiding bringing your own characters, vehicles, monsters, Terminator equivalents, bikers etc - then you are probably going to have a lot of stuff that's bigger and nastier than a tactical marine.

Which is also the meta issue. "Everyone always tailors into Marines" - well, maybe, but at this point, because most people aren't running 150 Boyz, or 200 Termagants etc, they are kind of tailoring into most things.

Breton wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I think the vast majority of us can agree, in WH40K context, that elite means:

A unit superior to its peers

You may not realize it, but you're getting awfully close to my point. If a two hundred point Tactical Squad and a two hundred point Guardian squad are balanced and a 2000 point SM army vs a 2,000 point Aeldari army is balanced: Which is superior?

You got me on that one. I should have said "A unit is superior in quality to units of the same size". 20 Guardians with 2 Platforms may be better than 10 Tactical Marines, but they are not elite in comparison.

An army made up of relatively fewer Infantry models due to those models being of higher than average quality

Proper: One of the Battlefield Roles

If you can't agree to this, you are outside the norm on what "being elite" is considered to be in game context.

Bandwagon appeal aside - What makes having fewer models elite?

You mean beyond the fact that elite means of better quality and generally speaking have a model of less models means those models are highly likely to be of better quality?

Do you still have 2,000 points?

Yes and completely irrelevant. You don't have a more elite army by having much more points. You have a more elite army by having better quality of models in that army. As a general rule, if you have less models than me, yours should be of better quality if we have the same number of points in our armies.

If I put a small but appropriate footprint and height coffee cup on the table instead of based models, but otherwise follow the exact same rules as my unit (losing shots as I lose wounds, etc), is my cup elite because there's only one of them? What if I give it window dressing and put some counters on the cup to represent the wounds it has left but it's still just the one "base"? What if I call this coffee cup an Apocalypse "movement tray" and the "counters" are "models" that only leave the base during the game acting as wound counters? Units are locked in. One Grot or one Terminator can't decide to leave his unit and go off on his own. Abstracts, Forest For the Trees, amorphous representational buckets on the table - pic your reasoning/analogy. Model Count in point-for-point is - until you get to extremes - window dressing.

In a non-game context, you can go to the grocery store and buy $5 of dairy (your army). You end up with a lot more volume of dairy of you buy milk, as compared to cream, as compared to butter. The butter is more elite than the milk