White is the New Black (Ravenwing Vs. White Scars)

[SvenONE]

So, what you're saying is that every unit is exactly worth it's points cost and there's no such thing as cost efficiency or under costed units.

 

I don't need to waste time explaining; the Dakka Pole is example enough. If you think the points cost on that is justified, then I suggest you go and work at the Games Workshop. I here they have openings.

 

Also, if the Ravenwing are a handicap, why do they hold an acceptable standing at tournaments?

 

I can't comment on EVERY tournament, but at Adepticon this year the top most DA player was 43rd and some followed after him.  Most of them didn't run allies (after all, there aren't a lot of points left to do so).  But I will say that your assumption of Ravenwing holding an acceptable standing is prior to the release of C:SM and the new White Scars rules.  We will have to see how future tournaments turn out I guess.

 

Also, I agree with Shabbadoo in that there isn't compensation.  That's been one of my points -- that we have to continually spend MORE to become level with C:SM while also missing out on some pretty solid supporting units when running Ravenwing-centric forces.  As I said earlier, if the Dakka pole is the sole saving grace of the C:DA, we're still spending a TON of points into a very limited FOC.

 

I'll still play Ravenwing! But I think the ship [bike] has sailed.  If you're playing RW, you're playing because you love DA.  That's absolutely ok, because after all, it's just a game.

 

Ride Safe!

[Retaliation]

Meanwhile ravenwing took 7th in the NOVA open (out of 223 people and eldar/tau spam). Then there's the issue that 40k tournaments mess up balance themselves due to time constraints and wonky mission rules.

[Brother dean]

Meanwhile ravenwing took 7th in the NOVA open (out of 223 people and eldar/tau spam). Then there's the issue that 40k tournaments mess up balance themselves due to time constraints and wonky mission rules.

Time constraints and wonky mission rules have won me around half of my games when I shouldnt have because I would have been tabled due to low model count...

[Azrael Turnbull]

So, what you're saying is that every unit is exactly worth it's points cost and there's no such thing as cost efficiency or under costed units.

I don't need to waste time explaining; the Dakka Pole is example enough. If you think the points cost on that is justified, then I suggest you go and work at the Games Workshop. I here they have openings.

Also, if the Ravenwing are a handicap, why do they hold an acceptable standing at tournaments?

I can't comment on EVERY tournament, but at Adepticon this year the top most DA player was 43rd and some followed after him. Most of them didn't run allies (after all, there aren't a lot of points left to do so). But I will say that your assumption of Ravenwing holding an acceptable standing is prior to the release of C:SM and the new White Scars rules. We will have to see how future tournaments turn out I guess.

Also, I agree with Shabbadoo in that there isn't compensation. That's been one of my points -- that we have to continually spend MORE to become level with C:SM while also missing out on some pretty solid supporting units when running Ravenwing-centric forces. As I said earlier, if the Dakka pole is the sole saving grace of the C:DA, we're still spending a TON of points into a very limited FOC.

I'll still play Ravenwing! But I think the ship [bike] has sailed. If you're playing RW, you're playing because you love DA. That's absolutely ok, because after all, it's just a game.

Ride Safe!

I can't help but feel you didn't read my post fully or misunderstood it. At least you're politer about it.

I was not not talking about White Scars when I referred to Ravenwing's standard at tournaments. I using tournaments as an example that Ravenwing are not a handicap. Whether White Scars turn out to be better or worse (I'm sure there'll be on par with us or close to), our Ravenwing aren't bad. I would certainly not blame my list for a lost game if I were playing a Ravenwing army, but my opponent playing well (or one of those dice games that pop up once every 20 games). 7th out of 223 can't just be blamed on wonky mission rules, even if they are a contributing factor.

I did not say that the Dakka Pole was the only thing the Ravenwing had. I said I didn't want to waste me time and just used that as my main example. But, now that I'm here, I'll offer a couple more examples. The Black Knights, although it's difficult to do the maths on such a diverse unit, are undercosted, I'm sure. They are my unit of the match time after time after time. There's clearly something unbalanced about the unit. I would happily pay the same points cost for the Plasma Talons alone; the assault capability is a massive bonus. Don't try to counter this by saying 'they always get caught out and focussed'. Yes, sometimes unexpected things can leave them out in the open, but that happens to every scary unit. the Black Knights will be focussed if caught out in the open whether the are 10 points for the whole squad or 500. They get focussed because they're a scary unit, irrelative of points. It's their overrall performance that makes me certain they deserve a points increase or a nerf to their close combat potential (one less attack, lose rending or something).

The Ravenwing are hampered by unit choice, yes, but so is every codex. You wouldn't take a Nephilim to a competative game, but White Scars wouldn't take Legion of the Damned (they never learn), etc. We all have cost efficient units and units that are plainly crap.

The Black Knights are units I would class as 'under costed'. The main unit I would use for an example of 'cost efficiency' is the Dark Shroud. Sorry if this post is too long, but I will need to explain my reasons or else get flamed by a lot of people.

The Dark Shroud works on cost efficiency as it's not constant like other units. It's clearly variable. If you have more units that benefit from that moving added cover save (Ravenwing, for example), the cost efficiency increases. For more units in your army that do not benefit from such a unit, the cost efficiency decreases. Pretty simple.

Now, following up from my previous argument, let's pretend for a moment that every unit is game tested perfectly, balanced and worth it's points cost. When testing the Dark Shroud hundreds of times, two outcomes are possible:

- The Dark Shroud was gametested with a full Ravenwing army. The Ravenwing army would, therefore, have a lot of unused teleport homers. The Dark Shroud's points would be adjusted until the game testing shows even results, so yes, the Dark Shroud does assist a Ravenwing army in becoming viable.

- The Dark Shroud was used in a game with mixed units. The Dark Shrouds cost would be represented as such and, therefore, become undercosted when fielded with a full Ravenwing army. In the latter case, this would actually give the Ravenwing a slight advantage!

If the Games Workshop tested their games properly, they'd have found a points cost that rested between the two values, or used the former and assumed no one would take one without a full or at least 90% Ravenwing army.

Therefore, The Dark Shroud, the Black Knights and the Dakka Pole are just three independant ways of compensating for the teleport homers in a pure Ravenwing force. You aren't forced to take all of these and can happily manage with one. It's not 'forcing' you hand, as two of those units are purely Ravenwing, anyway; you never had many units to choose from in the first place.

If you're still not swayed by this logic, then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Tl;dr Tough!

[Brother dean]

I did not say that the Dakka Pole was the only thing the Ravenwing had. I said I didn't want to waste me time and just used that as my main example. But, now that I'm here, I'll offer a couple more examples. The Black Knights, although it's difficult to do the maths on such a diverse unit, are undercosted, I'm sure. They are my unit of the match time after time after time. There's clearly something unbalanced about the unit. I would happily pay the same points cost for the Plasma Talons alone; the assault capability is a massive bonus. Don't try to counter this by saying 'they always get caught out and focussed'. Yes, sometimes unexpected things can leave them out in the open, but that happens to every scary unit. the Black Knights will be focussed if caught out in the open whether the are 10 points for the whole squad or 500. They get focussed because they're a scary unit, irrelative of points. It's their overrall performance that makes me certain they deserve a points increase or a nerf to their close combat potential (one less attack, lose rending or something).

 

We did end up with a unit of Thunderwolves...   1 Attack less, limited weapon choices but we traded those in for TL Plasma...   

 

I have to agree that they are unbalanced...  Undercosted I dont know...  the fact that they take away at least a unit and a half that would otherwise be scoring I think goes some way to offset that.

[SvenONE]

I don't know if they are that unbalanced considering the cost of everything else in that army vs model count.  if you take any of the aspects that make them BKs (as opposed to regular bikes) I think they'd be significantly overcosted (e.g. Skilled Rider, +1A on stat line, +1A from Corvus/Bolt Pistol, Plasma Talon).  Let's not forget that they cost 2 points less per model than DW Terminators and can never become a scoring unit (aside from The Scouring), and still a 3+ (not forgetting about the T5, but 3+ is obviously a lot less reliable than 2+).  When I field BKs, my fear is never AP weapons, but rather volume of shots.  Which let's be honest -- wins games.

 

I said in my initial post that the BKs gave a slightly better alpha strike to Ravenwing as opposed to White Scars, and I think they DO give an edge overall as long as you field them in numbers in your fast attack slot.  You just really have to hope you get that first turn, otherwise you're going to lose a lot of power up front.  

 

I no doubt agree with you that the Black Knights, Command Squad/Banner, and Darkshroud are ways that set RW apart from WS; after all I included them in my initial post as such.  I do however have a different view of what compensation is.  I see compensation as: "Oh, you miss out on x,y,z so because of that we'll give you this."  Your example of compensation to me looks like this in other words:

 

"You already have to pay for teleport homers, so here are 3 other options you can further pay for on top of your already pricier expensive units -- that are doing the same than their WS equivalents"

 

If anything C:SM/WS are getting compensation.  "You guys don't get any of those 3 goodies that RW get, so here is a badass chapter tactics, cheaper bikes, and a solid but cheaper HQ unit"

[hallodx]

Sorry if I missed something in the long thread.

There's something WS can never match RW, like being able to play multiple small unit style, perfect cooperating with DW, killy HQ, Black Knights...etc.

MSU, you just let your units, 4 units from a single slot, run all over the table. That means you have enough choice all the time, you never waste fire power, you put your eggs in so many baskets. And because they are all troop, you don't need to worry OBJ taking or denying.

They have scout and built-in beacon so your fellow termie deep striking without scatter at turn 1. At safe place or not you have them covering each other. Also this covered the disadvantage bikes can't charge enemy at different level.

Sammael is surely killy, AP2 sword, T5, 4++, EW, so many wins on him. Even WS love him, for he can make their bikes 3+ jink!

Black knights are mentioned above. So many wins.

 

So if someone come and ask me which is batter? I'll say they can't be compared. They serve different kind of players. WS is more straight, having more powerful weapon choices, lower cost per bike, cooperating other dedicated vehicle...etc, while RW has more tactical advantages and real death star unit.

 

I hope I'm not wrong.

[ValourousHeart]

 

shabbadoo, on 14 Sept 2013 - 01:27, said:

 

No, there is no "compensation". "Compensation" would mean getting "something-for-nothing" (i.e underpaying for something; which is a horrible way to go about things from rules writing standpoint) from those other things you mentioned. We pay an appropriate amount for those units/wargear, so there is no "compensation" (not that there needs to be for an army that is purposely built to NOT make use of some of its wargear). So, we knowingly play at a slight disadvantage when running a full Ravenwing force. That is just the way it is. It is too bad that the teleport homer was not changed to be a locator beacon, as then Deepstriking Land Speeders could use it too.  Then there would be a use for everything in a pure Ravenwing force.

 

 

That is a very interesting definition, mind referencing the source.  Every dictionary I can find defines Compensation as “something given or received as an equivalent for something.”

 

I have never found my army lacking due to teleport homes that are never used.  I personally don’t feel that we pay for them at all.  There is no price listed anywhere in our codex for them.

 

In my opinion it was stupid in our last codex for people to pay 170 – 190 pts for a unit that the whole point of the unit was to be wiped out in turn 1, right after the DW arrived.  Now that is too much to pay for a teleport homer.

 

On the other hand I loved the look on my opponents face when I would tell him “yes each bike has a teleport homer and yes every 3^rd bike does have a plasma gun… but don’t worry, the real objective is the one I face after my troops get past your army, so the DW are going to wait on the ship until we get past you and the bikes are going to save their ammo.” ;) 

 

So yes a 2000 pt pure RW list will have a lot of teleport homers that they won’t use, but they certainly didn’t cost me anything.  Kind of like the repair ability on a Rhino.  If the Rhino is never immobilized what use is the repair ability?

[Freman Bloodglaive]

That said, given the cost of Rhinos (marginally more than a Ravenwing biker) the repair ability is hardly a price breaker.

 

The issue, I think, is that Ravenwing pay for everything they get. They have stubborn, they have teleport homers, they have scout, they have hit and run, and cost 27 points, or 22% more than a Codex Marine biker. White Scars don't pay for their abilities. A Black Templar biker, with adamantium will and crusader (which are pretty much useless to bikes) costs exactly as much as a White Scar biker with improved jink, ignore difficult terrain, hit and run, and +1 strength to their HoW, which are all powerful abilities on bikes, and would probably be worth three or four extra points, if paid for. The closest they get to "paying" is buying Khan for the scout ability, but even then a Captain with bike and power weapon is only 15 points cheaper than Khan on bike.

 

Nor do White Scars have an opportunity cost, because they get everything else in the Space Marine codex without limitation (except Crusader squads, which Templars have to give up Librarians to get anyway).

 

What are effectively free upgrades means that White Scars will be able to field a larger army than Ravenwing and, especially against the overwhelming firepower in sixth, numbers count.

[hallodx]

But comparing to Sammael, Khan IS the tax. He takes up a slot, WARLORD SLOT, not being killy because his sword is AP3. Normally he just being no difference to an average captain on bike when combat, with no better save or strength, and his trait, damn, you have to make him kill opponent's warlord to make it work! How can you expect him kill a greater daemon or some challenge machine, like murder blade Chaos lord, the most seen build?

Of course we can built a "Eternal burning bike chapter master", but now we have no scout, and seriously damaged our tactical choice, pushed ourselves into passive.

And Sammael, you pay Sammael for himself. Even if you field Azrael  you lost nothing.

[shabbadoo]

shabbadoo, on 14 Sept 2013 - 01:27, said:

No, there is no "compensation". "Compensation" would mean getting "something-for-nothing" (i.e underpaying for something; which is a horrible way to go about things from rules writing standpoint) from those other things you mentioned. We pay an appropriate amount for those units/wargear, so there is no "compensation" (not that there needs to be for an army that is purposely built to NOT make use of some of its wargear). So, we knowingly play at a slight disadvantage when running a full Ravenwing force. That is just the way it is. It is too bad that the teleport homer was not changed to be a locator beacon, as then Deepstriking Land Speeders could use it too. Then there would be a use for everything in a pure Ravenwing force.

That is a very interesting definition, mind referencing the source. Every dictionary I can find defines Compensation as “something given or received as an equivalent for something.”

By all means, I will provide some definitions for you:

Definition (source: Merriam -Webster; for your sake I hope you have heard of them):

1 a [noncount] : something that is done or given to make up for damage, trouble, etc.

▪ Example: She offered to pay for lunch as compensation for keeping me waiting.

b [count] : something good that acts as a balance against something bad or undesirable

▪ Example: Moving to the coast had some drawbacks, but there were also compensations.

Even more (source: the Oxford Dictionaries; if you haven't heard of them, well, I really just don't know what to say):

• the action or process of awarding someone money as a recompense for loss, injury, or suffering.
• something that counterbalances or makes up for an undesirable or unwelcome state of affairs.

▪ Further Example Relevant To Our Topic: Ravenwing bikes pay X points for teleport homers that they cannot use when deployed in a pure Ravenwing force, but in compensation they get X for no points cost whatsoever.

Pure Ravenwing get not a single bit of *compensation* for being "forced" to pay for teleport homers as a part of their bike package (not that they should).

And so our vocabulary lesson for the day is over, children. Go write the word compensation, and its definition, five times. That ought to help y'all remember it.

Other than that, if I were in the habit of running a pure Ravenwing force, I would very much like the option for my bikes to NOT take teleport homers and so cost 3-4 points less, such that I could include even more of them, or something else altogether.

[Lucien Eilam]

Um, full marks for patronage, but none of those definitions means "something for nothing". They all mean something to make up for something else. Which is exactly what he said.

[Chaplain Lucifer]

Please, do not stray from topic and please stop with the "dictionary melta blasts" which is a poor way to conduct a discussion. The thread itself is just an "sky is falling /kneejerk reaction to something new" (lacking better words) and this kind of discussion is not making it any better or pleasant to read. 

[Master Avoghai]

I see lots of people her arguing that "we pay for a teleport homer and that would explained why we have more expensive bikes"

 

But I want to say that

 

- we have no proof of that... What if the TH was just "a free gift"?

- the cost of an option when given to an entire squad could not be compared to an option given to a unique model. In some case it should be more expensive, it most of the case it should be less expensive because of the redundancy. So I hardly see a TH costing more than 1pts per model... So if there's a discount when comparing a WS army to a RW it wouldn't be more than 15pts... Nothing fancy...

- costs are made regarding the army book as a whole.

 

And the last point are very important. GW already recognized that terminator or bike only armies are not a common feature of the DA. For them, codex is made to play termi heavy or bike heavy.

 

Hence, if you chose to play full RW then you can't complain cos you chose a way to play that was not intended by GW and was not made to be as balanced.

Same thing for me when I play my TS only CSM army...

[FerociousBeast]

Here, to attempt to bring this discussion into a more analytical arena, I put together a couple minimal lists, one w/ White Scars, one w/ Ravenwing.

 

WHITE SCARS

KOR'SARRO KHAN -- 150

 

Wargear

- Power armor

- Bolt pistol

- Frags/kraks

- Iron Halo

- Moondrakkan (SM Bike w/ D3 Hammer of Wrath hits)

- TL bolter

- Moonfang (S4,AP3,Instant Death on a 6+ to wound)

 

Special Rules

- Independent Character

- ATSKNF

- Furious Charge

- Scouts (Master of the Hunt)

- Skilled Rider (Born in the Saddle)

- +1S Hammer of Wrath (Born in the Saddle)

- Hit & Run (Fight on the Move)

 

Warlord Trait

- +D3 VP when killing enemy Warlord in a challenge (and only in a challenge, contrast with "The Hunt")

 

BIKE SQUAD 1 - 320

 

1 Biker Veteran Sergeant w/ powerfist

7 Space Marine Bikers w/ 2 meltaguns

1 Attack Bike w/ multi-melta

 

Wargear

- 2 meltaguns

- 1 powerfist

- 1 multi-melta

- 9 TL bolters

- Frags, kraks, BPs

 

Special Rules

- ATSKNF

- Scouts (Master of the Hunt)

- Skilled Rider (Born in the Saddle)

- +1S Hammer of Wrath (Born in the Saddle)

- Hit & Run (Fight on the Move)

- Combat Squads

 

BIKE SQUAD 2 - 320

(Identical to #1)

 

TOTAL COST - 790

 

RAVENWING

SAMMAEL -- 200

 

Wargear

- Power armor

- Bolt pistol

- Frags/kraks

- Night Halo (Iron Halo)

- Jetbike

- Plasma cannon

- TL storm bolter

- Raven Sword (S4,AP2,Master-crafted)

- Teleport homer

 

Special Rules

- Independent Character

- Fearless (Inner Circle)

- Eternal Warrior (Adamantine Mantle)

- Hit & Run

- Preferred Enemy (Chaos Space Marines) (Inner Circle)

- Scouts

- Skilled Rider

 

Warlord Trait

- 2D6-pick-highest Run and +D6" faster turbo-boost

 

RAVENWING ATTACK SQUADRON 1 - 346

 

1 Ravenwing Veteran Sergeant w/ powerfist

5 Ravenwing Bikers w/ 2 meltaguns

1 Ravenwing Attack Bike w/ multi-melta

1 Land Speeder w/ Typhoon

 

Wargear

- 2 meltaguns

- 1 powerfist

- 1 multi-melta

- 7 TL bolters

- Frags, kraks, BPs

- Teleport homer

- 1 heavy bolter
- 1 Typhoon missile launcher

 

Special Rules

- ATSKNF

- Stubborn (Grim Resolve)

- Scouts

- Hit & Run

- Ravenwing Combat Squads

 

RAVENWING ATTACK SQUADRON 2 - 346

(Identical to #1)

 

TOTAL COST - 892

[facmanpob]

Thanks, FB. Looking at the lists, let's try to compare similar things.....

 

So, RW get - Sammy, 12 bikes, 2 MMAB, 2 LS Typhoons - 892

WS get - Khan, 16 bikes, 2 MMAB

 

So, if we drop 4 WS bikes, and the 2 RW LS Typhoons, we end up with lists containing a HQ, 12 bikes and 2 MMAB......

 

The WS list would cost - 706

The RW list would cost - 742

 

WS get Born in the Saddle which makes their bieks a bit better than ours, we get Sammy, who is better than Khan, and will give one of our bike squads Skilled Rider if he attaches to it.....

 

Overall, not that dissimilar, I would say.

 

where the White Scars and Ravenwing diverge, is in the supporting units and wargear options. WS get access to Scouting dedicated transports and grav gun command squad, Centurions etc; RW get access to Black Knights with plasma talons and RWGL, combat multiplier banners, Deathwing, Dark Shrouds etc....

 

For me, and I have already said this a couple of times in this thread, the basic bikes aren't that dissimilar, it is in the supporting forces where the divergence comes, and I don't think that the Dark Angels come off worse at all. :)

[Chaplain Lucifer]

My money would be on the Ravenwing. the 2 Land Speeders and Sammael's plasma cannon can make a difference. My 2 cents.

[facmanpob]

My money would be on the Ravenwing. the 2 Land Speeders and Sammael's plasma cannon can make a difference. My 2 cents.

I agree, especially about Sammy. A BS5 plasma cannon, Eternal Warrior, an AP2 sword that hits at initiative, and a warlord trait that is useful in every game turn is much much better than what Khan brings to the table imho.

 

:)

[Brother dean]

facmanpob, on 18 Sept 2013 - 07:30, said:

Chaplain Lucifer, on 18 Sept 2013 - 07:08, said:

My money would be on the Ravenwing. the 2 Land Speeders and Sammael's plasma cannon can make a difference. My 2 cents.

I agree, especially about Sammy. A BS5 plasma cannon, Eternal Warrior, an AP2 sword that hits at initiative, and a warlord trait that is useful in every game turn is much much better than what Khan brings to the table imho.

BS5 TL Assault Cannon and TL Heavy Bolter... I am routinely making 7 hits on what I am targeting... Wounds arent too shabby either.

---

Edit: And to follow on... the above example (Ferocious Beast's) can pump out (specials not included)

WS: 19 TL bolter shots and 2 Multi melta shots (21 total) at up to 5 different targets

RW: 14 TL bolter shots, 2 Multi Melta shots, 2 Missile Launchers (4), 2 Heavy bolters (6) and a plasma cannon. (27 total) at up to 9 different targets.

(Special weapons not included, 24" range assumed for bolters, 12" range will shift the ratios slightly towards the WS....) In our Firepower centered edition I will take the more shots and flexiblility...

Re-edit for the actual weapons... Silly me assuming AC/HB speeders....(but adding those 4 shots only helped the RW numbers)

[FerociousBeast]

Sorry it's kind of hard to read. I tried to put it in a table with BB code, but it didn't work.

RAVENWING vs. WHITE SCARS ROUND 1 -- CHARACTERS

I want to start by carefully comparing the two armies' required characters, Khan and Sammael. Both armies can be fielded without these characters--for White Scars, substituting any captain or company master on a bike, and for Ravenwing, Azrael--but the comparison starts to break down since White Scars wouldn't have Scouts and Azrael would be a big liability without including lots of non-Ravenwing elements in the army.

People have often complained about having to take Sammael in a Ravenwing force, but when you compare him to Khan, he looks really good indeed. On almost every point he equals or outclasses Khan. Khan has a bike, Sam has a jetbike. Khan has a TL bolter, Sam has a TL stormbolter. Khan has an AP3 power sword (w/ 1/6 chance of ID), Sam has an AP2 master-crafted power sword. Khan's Warlord Trait only works if he kills the enemy Warlord in a challenge, while Sam's can be used in every turn if needed. Khan is ATSKNF, Sam is Fearless.

And Sammael also has a plasma cannon and Eternal Warrior and Preferred Enemy (CSM) and a teleport homer.

Khan does have Furious Charge, though, and much better Hammer of Wrath. And he's 50 points cheaper.

But overall, for what Sammael gets for those extra 50 points, he looks like a steal compared to Khan.

ROUND 1 WINNER -- Ravenwing by a mile!

[SvenONE]

I see lots of people her arguing that "we pay for a teleport homer and that would explained why we have more expensive bikes"

 

But I want to say that

 

- we have no proof of that... What if the TH was just "a free gift"?

- the cost of an option when given to an entire squad could not be compared to an option given to a unique model. In some case it should be more expensive, it most of the case it should be less expensive because of the redundancy. So I hardly see a TH costing more than 1pts per model... So if there's a discount when comparing a WS army to a RW it wouldn't be more than 15pts... Nothing fancy...

- costs are made regarding the army book as a whole.

 

And the last point are very important. GW already recognized that terminator or bike only armies are not a common feature of the DA. For them, codex is made to play termi heavy or bike heavy.

 

Hence, if you chose to play full RW then you can't complain cos you chose a way to play that was not intended by GW and was not made to be as balanced.

Same thing for me when I play my TS only CSM army...

 

Well, if they intended it to be DW heavy supporting greenwing, or RW heavy supporting Greenwing, then the inclusion of THomers on RW bikes is confusing.  That's suggesting that you are meant to use your [more expensive] bikes with your [more expensive] terminators.  You ultimately end up with just a smaller force in general, as someone else mentioned, in an edition where shot volume and models are king.

 

Again, RW bikes are paying a lot and have even more expensive supporting units.  When the C:DA first came out, one of the bigger advantages people recognized was cheaper tactical squads.  Well the new release reduced them all to 70 points (oh by the way sergeants can get a teleport homer as a piece of wargear!).

 

Anyway I don't think this argument of WS bike army vs RW bike army is entirely a kneejerk reaction to something new.  I think it's entirely viable discussion -- this thread however may have run its course, not sure if there's really anything much more to be said about WS vs RW.  

 

The C:DA codex to begin with really wasn't that great (and almost a year later I think that's been proven).  The strongest aspect was the RW aspect of the book, something that really set DA apart from the other bike bearing codices.  Now, C:SM comes out with the capability to run a very comparable army that can achieve the same thing while putting more models on the board with better and more affordable supporting units.  Now if I wanted to put my tinfoil hat on, I'd say that it was GW's intention to make a codex that everyone wants to ally with.  But that's a discussion for another day....

[Brother dean]

 

 

Well, if they intended it to be DW heavy supporting greenwing, or RW heavy supporting Greenwing, then the inclusion of THomers on RW bikes is confusing.  That's suggesting that you are meant to use your [more expensive] bikes with your [more expensive] terminators.  You ultimately end up with just a smaller force in general, as someone else mentioned, in an edition where shot volume and models are king.

How many times have we heard that the rules dont fit the background.  Our background says exactly that RW and DW work together....   And there are complaints arising because our rules actually fit the fluff?   Do you want your cake to look at or do you want to eat it?

 

We are still arguing whether the intangibles really do add up to "More Expensive" or not...   Yes, they cost more points but are we getting compensation for those points...  (since we cant even agree what compensation means....)

[FerociousBeast]

RAVENWING vs. WHITE SCARS ROUND 2 -- PER MODEL

 

Next, I want to analyze what you get on a model by model basis.  The White Scar biker costs 21 points, the Ravenwing biker costs 27 points, so hopefully Ravenwing gets something substantial for those 6 points, right?

 

Well, as far as wargear and special rules go, the two models are similar, but the Ravenwing biker has a teleport homer and stubborn, while the White Scar has skilled rider and +1S HoW. (We're assuming that Khan is the Warlord, so the White Scar does have Scouts.)

 

The White Scar will therefore hit harder in close combat and will more reliably move through cover (assuming Sammael hasn't joined the Ravenwing biker's unit), while the Ravenwing biker will offer options for Deathwing teleportation and more reliably stick in a close combat he's losing.

 

Since we're looking at these models in a vacuum, however, the teleport homer offers nothing to the Ravenwing biker himself. So really it's stubborn versus +1S HoW and Skilled Rider and a 6 point discount. Which is no contest.

 

ROUND 2 WINNER -- White Scars by a mile!

 

This, by the way, is where much of the commentary has focused in this thread and other analyses I've read on the internet. Since the White Scar so clearly wins this matchup, commentary has therefore assumed that pure White Scars beat pure Ravenwing just as handily. We'll see.

[Brother dean]

...waits for Ferocious Beast to write a Squad vs Squad comparison...   to see if I am close...

[Master Avoghai]

Since we're looking at these models in a vacuum

That's actually the problem... Comparison in the vacuum doesn't bring a lot as its a game based on units combination