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.

The decimator is just garbage in comparison to the contemptor, its cheaper but I'd go with the contemptor every time. Its CC siege claws are terrible, they are nearly as expensive as the contemptors chainclaw its got +2 instead of x2 st it has -3 ap instead of the contemptors -4 and 3 damage instead of 4 and the points difference in the CC weapons pretty much make them equal in points. The contemptor also has 2+ WS and BS only has one less inch in movement granted the Decimators movement isn't reduced by damage which is great but I mean in comparison to the contemptor it is hilariously bad. The contemptor also has a better ++ in CC. The decimator has one extra attack but whoopty do.

I suggest it gets x2 strength but also an option to double its attacks on st +2 against hords. Give it WS2 BS3, no ++ but a 3+ ++ for CC attacks. That would make it far different from the contemptor (which the Decimator is just a very poor version of that) also giving it more khorney flavour and more CC orientated.

How say you?

Also its ridiculous that FW have increased their prices and yet so much of its rules are garbage. Have no idea what that company is doing.

Given a list with 3 decimators came second at one of tge massive ITC events I don't think they are that bad, soulburner petarts make them motral wound machines.

It's not terrible but not great either. Same with the contemptor honestly. Decimators are perfectly ok rules-wise. It's a cheap heavy weapons platform with a few strengths and a few big weaknesses. And their cost is very reasonable.

The close combat version is worse since it is totally outclassed by daemon princes for roughly the same points cost.

The shooting version is far better than a contemptor since you're paying almost 100pts less for the same number of butcher cannon shots.

Consider running DPs instead of CC decimators?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
My main problem with the decimator is that the model is huge (bigger than a leviathan dread) and impossible to hide. Black Legion double butcher decimators with Abaddon is a huge amount of S8 shooting for the points. They are very effective in properly screened gunlines.

Hellflamers/siege claws is the wrong way to run decimators.

As a CC unit its terrible.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
As a CC unit its terrible.

Lol probably. Yeah.

How is a model that can deal MW by simply hitting with a ranged weapon garbage ? No other model can do that.

 p5freak wrote:
How is a model that can deal MW by simply hitting with a ranged weapon garbage ? No other model can do that.

Read the thread. It is absolutely 'garbage' as a CC unit. Kitting it out with 2 siege claws makes it an incredibly bad unit, especially compared to contemptors.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
How is a model that can deal MW by simply hitting with a ranged weapon garbage ? No other model can do that.

Read the thread. It is absolutely 'garbage' as a CC unit. Kitting it out with 2 siege claws makes it an incredibly bad unit, especially compared to contemptors.

Simply stop trying to use it in the worst configuration possible then, seems a fairly simple solution.
The units not the problem it the player, it is like complaining a scouts suck as a CC unit. Play it properly and it's a good unit your just using it wrong

Ice_can wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
How is a model that can deal MW by simply hitting with a ranged weapon garbage ? No other model can do that.

Read the thread. It is absolutely 'garbage' as a CC unit. Kitting it out with 2 siege claws makes it an incredibly bad unit, especially compared to contemptors.

Simply stop trying to use it in the worst configuration possible then, seems a fairly simple solution.
The units not the problem it the player, it is like complaining a scouts suck as a CC unit. Play it properly and it's a good unit your just using it wrong

Scouts aren't terrible with the CCW but they aren't good either. More importantly they fill their role okay.

If Decimators have so many melee options but aren't good at it, maybe there's an issue with their melee?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Scouts aren't terrible with the CCW but they aren't good either. More importantly they fill their role okay.

If Decimators have so many melee options but aren't good at it, maybe there's an issue with their melee?

It has 4 shooting weapons and 1 CCW, rhat to me says its a shooting unit.

Ice_can wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
How is a model that can deal MW by simply hitting with a ranged weapon garbage ? No other model can do that.

Read the thread. It is absolutely 'garbage' as a CC unit. Kitting it out with 2 siege claws makes it an incredibly bad unit, especially compared to contemptors.

Simply stop trying to use it in the worst configuration possible then, seems a fairly simple solution.
The units not the problem it the player, it is like complaining a scouts suck as a CC unit. Play it properly and it's a good unit your just using it wrong

You have very poor reading comprehension. I'm taking about how bad it is as a CC unit, even in the OP did you here me mention any ranged weaponry...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Scouts aren't terrible with the CCW but they aren't good either. More importantly they fill their role okay.

If Decimators have so many melee options but aren't good at it, maybe there's an issue with their melee?

It has 4 shooting weapons and 1 CCW, rhat to me says its a shooting unit.

well you are wrong its obviosly not as you can take 2 CC weapons lol

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
How is a model that can deal MW by simply hitting with a ranged weapon garbage ? No other model can do that.

Read the thread. It is absolutely 'garbage' as a CC unit. Kitting it out with 2 siege claws makes it an incredibly bad unit, especially compared to contemptors.

Simply stop trying to use it in the worst configuration possible then, seems a fairly simple solution.
The units not the problem it the player, it is like complaining a scouts suck as a CC unit. Play it properly and it's a good unit your just using it wrong

You have very poor reading comprehension.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Scouts aren't terrible with the CCW but they aren't good either. More importantly they fill their role okay.

If Decimators have so many melee options but aren't good at it, maybe there's an issue with their melee?

It has 4 shooting weapons and 1 CCW, rhat to me says its a shooting unit.

well you are wrong its obviosly not as you can take 2 CC weapons lol

I can read fine your just miss playing a unit and blaming its rules instead of adressing the real issue.

Given someone can come 2nd in a major tournament with 3 of them in his list the unit isn't a bad unit.

Ice_can wrote:
Now your just breaking the forum rules.

Someone topping once or twice doesnt prove your point though. They're like Dreads in that they're supposed to be able to go in with a melee weapon and a gun, though it's always been better to specialize in one or the other.

So it CAN do gunning, but can it do melee? I'm inclined to agree with the OP that it's probably bad on that end, so how would you fix it?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Now your just breaking the forum rules.

Someone topping once or twice doesnt prove your point though. They're like Dreads in that they're supposed to be able to go in with a melee weapon and a gun, though it's always been better to specialize in one or the other.

So it CAN do gunning, but can it do melee? I'm inclined to agree with the OP that it's probably bad on that end, so how would you fix it?

Why does it need to be better? Every unit has strengths and weaknesses, making every unit able to perform aswell as each other is a fundamentally flawed concept. It removes the distinction between units and turns the game into a homogenized mess.
It has sufficient CC to make assualting it a risk, dreadnaughts arn't CC monsters in this edition, just because 1 weapon configuration out of its 15 is sub optimal doesn't scream this unit needs rules changes.

Also the OP failed to mention that a Contemptor with the same weapons (as close as they can be) is 33 points more than a decimator.

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Now your just breaking the forum rules.

Someone topping once or twice doesnt prove your point though. They're like Dreads in that they're supposed to be able to go in with a melee weapon and a gun, though it's always been better to specialize in one or the other.

So it CAN do gunning, but can it do melee? I'm inclined to agree with the OP that it's probably bad on that end, so how would you fix it?

Why does it need to be better? Every unit has strengths and weaknesses, making every unit able to perform aswell as each other is a fundamentally flawed concept. It removes the distinction between units and turns the game into a homogenized mess.
It has sufficient CC to make assualting it a risk, dreadnaughts arn't CC monsters in this edition, just because 1 weapon configuration out of its 15 is sub optimal doesn't scream this unit needs rules changes.

Also the OP failed to mention that a Contemptor with the same weapons (as close as they can be) is 33 points more than a decimator.

Yeah but the seige claws are 30pnts each and they are garbage especially for a walker. The claws should be free for how bad they are.

Siegeclaw with "INBUILT HELLFLAMER", don't forget that since this alone adds another 17 pts to the cost for a single siegeclaw.

Basically its a 47 pts cost for a melee weapon and a fancier heavy flamer.
Additionally the siege claw atleast had some use last edition when the thing could deepstrike and if melee attacking a transport was able to burn the content in the transport.
(we are not even talking that the strenght+2 is not really all that impressive.) On a positive sidenote butcher autocannons are great, petards are great, and one claw is more then enough if you want a fleixble enough unit.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Siegeclaw with "INBUILT HELLFLAMER", don't forget that since this alone adds another 17 pts to the cost for a single siegeclaw.

Basically its a 47 pts cost for a melee weapon and a fancier heavy flamer.
Additionally the siege claw atleast had some use last edition when the thing could deepstrike and if melee attacking a transport was able to burn the content in the transport.
(we are not even talking that the strenght+2 is not really all that impressive.) On a positive sidenote butcher autocannons are great, petards are great, and one claw is more then enough if you want a fleixble enough unit.

Except it's 30 points for the CC weapon as the flamer is pointed separately, whether flamers are pointed correctly is a different question. So its 30 points for 5 strength 9 -3AP 3 Damage attacks, sounds about right given a Captain pays 21points for 4 s8 -3AP 3Damage attacks at WS3

Ice_can wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Siegeclaw with "INBUILT HELLFLAMER", don't forget that since this alone adds another 17 pts to the cost for a single siegeclaw.

Basically its a 47 pts cost for a melee weapon and a fancier heavy flamer.
Additionally the siege claw atleast had some use last edition when the thing could deepstrike and if melee attacking a transport was able to burn the content in the transport.
(we are not even talking that the strenght+2 is not really all that impressive.) On a positive sidenote butcher autocannons are great, petards are great, and one claw is more then enough if you want a fleixble enough unit.

Except it's 30 points for the CC weapon as the flamer is pointed separately, whether flamers are pointed correctly is a different question. So its 30 points for 5 strength 9 -3AP 3 Damage attacks, sounds about right given a Captain pays 21points for 4 s8 -3AP 3Damage attacks at WS3

A) Nope, as much as you insist that's right, it isnt, since you still NEED to buy it constantly with the claw basically the claw is always going to cost 47 pts regardless.

B) A hellbrute fist is 40 pts and doubles the strength of the Hellbrute, bringing it up to 12 which is 3 more then a Decimator that costs considerably more. (the double fist loadout even gives it the excact same ammount of attacks at a higher strength.

C) Compairing a spacemarine captain to a decimator / Hellbrute is literally questionable in itself.

Edit:

D) Hellbrutes profit from legion traits: Which are massive boons regardless of loadouts. Dakka Hellbrutes profit massively from Alpha legion trait, iron warriors trait. World eaters boost attacks , etc. All things a decimator at a higher pricetag can't do / get.

Your deliberately trying to run a sub obtimal build, no dreadnaughts rules are designed to run a pure CC dreadnaught. Stop trying to force something to work against the designers intent.

A) the flamer is or is not 17 points? While it might be mandatory, it's still giving you a shooting attack which is what that 17 points is for.

B) A hell brute fist with heavy flamer the comparable loadout is not 40 points its 57 compair apples for apple and be honest. A double fist decimator gets 6 attacks does not make it a smart way to equip it.

C) I was compairing a Thunder hammer which is 21 points for 4 S8 -3AP 3Damage CC attacks. As it's the closest comparable CC attack stats I can remember without books.

D) Codex vrs forgeworld, unfortunately GW forgets that FW exsists when writing codex's thats an issue with GW codex righters not the decimators rules.

So your in the free CC weapons aswell camp then?
So a 90 point T7 regenerating wounds 8W model with a3+, 5++ 10 inch move with 6 S9 -3AP 3Damage attacks should be 90 points.

Yeah enjoy displacing disintegration cannons as th3 most broken thing in the game.

Ice_can wrote:
Your deliberately trying to run a sub obtimal build, no dreadnaughts rules are designed to run a pure CC dreadnaught. Stop trying to force something to work against the designers intent.

A) the flamer is or is not 17 points? While it might be mandatory, it's still giving you a shooting attack which is what that 17 points is for.

B) A hell brute fist with heavy flamer the comparable loadout is not 40 points its 57 compair apples for apple and be honest. A double fist decimator gets 6 attacks does not make it a smart way to equip it.

C) I was compairing a Thunder hammer which is 21 points for 4 S8 -3AP 3Damage CC attacks. As it's the closest comparable CC attack stats I can remember without books.

D) Codex vrs forgeworld, unfortunately GW forgets that FW exsists when writing codex's thats an issue with GW codex righters not the decimators rules.

So your in the free CC weapons aswell camp then?
So a 90 point T7 regenerating wounds 8W model with a3+, 5++ 10 inch move with 6 S9 -3AP 3Damage attacks should be 90 points.

Yeah enjoy displacing disintegration cannons as th3 most broken thing in the game.

First of all I haven't even fielded it yet in 8th and even if I had, I don't only field cheese or "optimal' units. Yeah we aren't talking about that we are talking about its 'CC' abilities. If the points are that much and you have the OPTION of running a CC unit, it better be worth the points with range, range and CC or just CC. This is what you sound like: we are talking about its CC ability and you keep repeating yeah its got big guns though. I don't know why you are arguing, do you think its a good CC unit and a good unit for the points? and don't mention its ranged weapons.

Ice_can wrote:
Your deliberately trying to run a sub obtimal build, no dreadnaughts rules are designed to run a pure CC dreadnaught. Stop trying to force something to work against the designers intent.

A) the flamer is or is not 17 points? While it might be mandatory, it's still giving you a shooting attack which is what that 17 points is for.

B) A hell brute fist with heavy flamer the comparable loadout is not 40 points its 57 compair apples for apple and be honest. A double fist decimator gets 6 attacks does not make it a smart way to equip it.

C) I was compairing a Thunder hammer which is 21 points for 4 S8 -3AP 3Damage CC attacks. As it's the closest comparable CC attack stats I can remember without books.

D) Codex vrs forgeworld, unfortunately GW forgets that FW exsists when writing codex's thats an issue with GW codex righters not the decimators rules.

So your in the free CC weapons aswell camp then?
So a 90 point T7 regenerating wounds 8W model with a3+, 5++ 10 inch move with 6 S9 -3AP 3Damage attacks should be 90 points.

Yeah enjoy displacing disintegration cannons as th3 most broken thing in the game.

First of stop putting words in my mouth, i never said they should be free, or agreed with op's intent on the rebalance of things. I agree only in regards to the fact that the CC build is compared to shooting bad and even compared to melee hellbrutes.

Secondly: you also have no idea on the design behind it, since you are certainly not a member of FW/GW.

Now to answer your counter pts:
A) The hellflamer just like the heavy flamer literally don't matter and you are always forced to buy both if you want the claw, ERGO the decimator claw is worth statwise less as a weapon then the Hellbrute fist and forced to costs more for a questionable terrible flamer on top of it. That is not a problem? For a unit that is allready more expensive then a Hellbrute?

B) A hellbrute fist does not have a included Heavy flamer, it has THE OPTION TO INCLUDE ONE. And even then it would be superior since s12 is better at AT duty then s9 no?

C) Again a Spacemarine captain is neither a vehicle, nor a walker, nor has he the same job as one. What was that with apples to apples comparisons?

D) That is correct, infact i to this day don't understand that CSM or sm have no chapter tactics on their vehicles anyways. Additionally everything points to the FW indexes beeing unprepared rushjobs (simply look at the R&H cultist entry not even copy and paste seems to work properly so good is their communication and coordination.)

A) I'll agree hevay flamers etc are overvosted currently but thats a wider issue of templates not surviving the 8th edition transition.
But the CCW part is 30 points vrs 40 pts. That doesn't seem unreasonable for the stat diffrences.

B) S12 vrs S9 in 8th edition actually only matters at T6 being and T9 they would T7 and T8 most vehicals the same.

C) if you can find a pointa cost for a S9 Ap-3 D3 weapon with 5 attacks to compair to I'm listening, I'm using that as its the closest statline with I points cost of the weapons I know of the top of my head.

D) Forgeworld were told about 8th edition when they released the info publicly, according to FW employee's.
GW spent a lot of time carving the place into tiny cells to prevent leaking so no-one knows what's going on in the rest of the business.

I think it's worth 30 points all day for 5 S9 AP-3 D3 CC attacks.

I would like to remind all participants that rule #1 is not optional.

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Now your just breaking the forum rules.

Someone topping once or twice doesnt prove your point though. They're like Dreads in that they're supposed to be able to go in with a melee weapon and a gun, though it's always been better to specialize in one or the other.

So it CAN do gunning, but can it do melee? I'm inclined to agree with the OP that it's probably bad on that end, so how would you fix it?

Why does it need to be better? Every unit has strengths and weaknesses, making every unit able to perform aswell as each other is a fundamentally flawed concept. It removes the distinction between units and turns the game into a homogenized mess.
It has sufficient CC to make assualting it a risk, dreadnaughts arn't CC monsters in this edition, just because 1 weapon configuration out of its 15 is sub optimal doesn't scream this unit needs rules changes.

Also the OP failed to mention that a Contemptor with the same weapons (as close as they can be) is 33 points more than a decimator.

So under your logic, CCW Dreads shouldn't have gotten any buff to their last edition because that's not what the designers intended?