Simiel Posted August 24, 2014 Author Share Posted August 24, 2014 A valid argument, if not for the fact that the Inner Circle Preferred Enemy rule only works against one army, while every one of the forces you sited have abilities that work against ALL armies. A bit of a difference there. Besides, all but GKs can can get the equivalent of our Inner Circle abilities, in addtion to their own Chapter Tactics, simply by fielding Chaplains. In this way even DA Interrogator-Chaplains are slighted, as they don't give squads they join a comparably increased level of effectiveness simply because the Inner Circle and Zealot rules effecitively give comparable benefits so far as the Morale effects are concerned. And so we lost out there too, gaining only part of the benefits of the Zealot rule (the re-roll to hit on the first round bit), and none of the Morale benefits (because Inner Circle already proivides them), which were not replaced by some other minor benefit (such as Fear). DA fall short yet again. DA Chapter Tactics is simply not comparable to those of other Chapters. Yes, Preferred Enemy only works against one army, but Fearless/Stubborn works against all. Yes Grim Resolve may not be the best Chapter Tactic as it's harder to effectively make use of compared to say The Salamanders or Ravenguard's. Yes non Dark Angels can put chaplains in there units for the same effect, but chaplains aren't that useful in support units, where as Librarians are. Basic Dark Angels Chaplains are sub-par compared to codex one yes as they effectively have no chapter tactics, But saying interrogator-chaplains are slighted is wrong, the Inner Circle rule is printed pretty much purely for fluff reasons, the IC is not paying for it, but is paying for the +1 BS, W, I, and A and Preferred Enemy which still grants him a reroll on 1's to wound against Chaos marines ( which for a total of 20pt's is a bit of a steal in my book ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Avoghai Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 Actually I think the problem with the terminator is deeper.. I've never understood why GW sticks with WS 3/4... I mean... If IG is WS3 and SM is WS4 why then A termi/vet isn't WS5? A captain WS6 A chapter master WS7? That still would leave WS 8/9/10 for khorne lords/Abbadon/bloodthirster... But at least termis could hit a SM or an ork on 3+ rather than 4+... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrandMasterAralia Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 Actually I think the problem with the terminator is deeper.. I've never understood why GW sticks with WS 3/4... I mean... If IG is WS3 and SM is WS4 why then A termi/vet isn't WS5? A captain WS6 A chapter master WS7? That still would leave WS 8/9/10 for khorne lords/Abbadon/bloodthirster... But at least termis could hit a SM or an ork on 3+ rather than 4+... Oh I think you hit the head of the nail, right there Brother! For the Emperor's sake, let His most fearsome warriors clad in venerable tactical dreadnought armour strike out at His unworthy foes... And not miss half the time!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Sheol Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 I agree Avoghai... Having the veterans only with on attacks more is kind disappointing... We have shooting veterans (sternguard, company veterans and so on) that have the same shooting ability of a tactical marine... Scouts WS3 BS3 Basic marine WS4 BS4 Company veteran/DWT/BK WS5 BS5 DWK WS6 BS5 Techmarine/chaplain/librarian WS5 BS5 Company master WS6 BS6 Grand Master WS7 BS7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aradiel Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 the core of that problem is that gw sticks to a d6 system and the skill range is way to limited for great variations. in theory it goes from 1 to 10 but how many units have a profile that goes under 3 or over 6? so we are in a skill range mostly of 4 rather than 10. the to hit melee chart goes from 3 best hit to 5 worst. a WS 6 model will hit a WS 3 (or 2 or 1) one in a 3+, just like a WS 4 will. the WS 3 model needs a 4+ to hit a target regardless if its WS is 3 or 6, and a 5+ if from 7 to 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Avoghai Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 Don't forget that a BS6 reroll a miss and hit the 2nd roll on a 6+, 5+ for a BS7 etc etc As for the WS, it will just make more models with the ability to hit on a 3+ and be hit on a 5+... Maybe GW could even make some high CC models hit on a 2+ and/or be hit on a 6... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadMek83 Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 lol, we probably get 7th edition codex sometimes next year or year after that... :P And we probably get 10p off our flyers, Azrael as Lord of War and our terminators 2p less, bikes 2 or 3p less and for that fun we pay another 39€ for the codex. Well, that's good we're stubborn. Or else we wouldn't have survived entire 5th edition with 4th edition codex. Being underdog is what Dark Angels do best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simiel Posted August 24, 2014 Author Share Posted August 24, 2014 lol, we probably get 7th edition codex sometimes next year or year after that... And we probably get 10p off our flyers, Azrael as Lord of War and our terminators 2p less, bikes 2 or 3p less and for that fun we pay another 39€ for the codex. Well, that's good we're stubborn. Or else we wouldn't have survived entire 5th edition with 4th edition codex. Being underdog is what Dark Angels do best. Having a "balanced" codex encourages sound tactics, and playing the mission not just blowing everything off the board with spammed uber unit X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twopounder Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 Actually I think the problem with the terminator is deeper.. I've never understood why GW sticks with WS 3/4... I mean... If IG is WS3 and SM is WS4 why then A termi/vet isn't WS5? A captain WS6 A chapter master WS7? That still would leave WS 8/9/10 for khorne lords/Abbadon/bloodthirster... But at least termis could hit a SM or an ork on 3+ rather than 4+... Because of the massive disparity between a single point. For example, it's the difference between a str 3 IG that can't hurt a vehicle and a Str 4 marine that can potentially rip the engine out of the back of a tank. The difference between str 7 and str 8 is the potential to destroy every vehicle in the game. Likewise, the difference between ws 3 and ws 4 is 2 weeks of hand to hand training in boot camp vs years as a black belt master. WS 6 is 10 Bruce Lees packed into one person. It's a level of godly martial prowess that no human could even remotely approach. So obtaining each level of weapon skill is supposed to be a considerable feet. Why do chapter masters even have ws 6 now? Mostly power creep. Yes, they had ridiculous ws back in 2nd ed, but the entire game system worked differently. A 50% hit rate actually is pretty good. Watch some real martial arts tournaments and see the outcome. Fighting is a lot harder than a rulebook makes it out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Avoghai Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Yes we it comes to strength, the equation is different as we not only have the simple crossing table but also the addition of a D6 against a tank or the insta kill level... Your parallel with reality is nice but I'm talking here only regarding game balance, not reality things. Don't forget that if marines were what they're supposed to be, you'd play a squad of ten in a 1500pts game. Indeed the v2 system was different but that's the point of my argument : GW cannot resolve the balance of termis just by a level of points. They should take a breath, take time and say "ok! rather than the points level we should change something else" On a particular level I've made the suggestion to consider bolters/storm bolters as melee weapon ONLY FOR TDA MODELS. That would give a boost to sgt or even Belial with sword. Then, I suggest a more general change. Complete revamp of the WS attribution. This would apply to termis but also could apply to other models like aspect warriors or orks nobz to create real difference in profile. This would prevent some cases of units becoming totally crap or totally overpowered because either their points costs change drastically or they gein/lose the strength or AP point that change everything. Like you've said : strength is something critical when it comes. And if you really want "reality point", I still don't understand why a weak warrior ALSO have 1/2 to hit a warrior like a SM... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberame Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 yet they changed the hellbrute cost in the csm faq. that is one of the things that really annoys me regarding gw, they change some things, but refuse (or simply dont care) to change others far more in need of change (the L2 librarian cost as stated above, the nephilin cost and rules (missile lock ? its a rule we actually can use now as oposed upon codex release)) That was to fix a misprint, only the English language codex was priced wrong for helbrute cost so they'd fixed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shabbadoo Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 One last bit (I hope ). Isn't everyone so happy that Belial now has a teleport homer? He should have always had one, and it is so great that he has one now considering all of the untis which can make use of it. Well, models that choose not to Deathwing Assault can use it, but that is it. That is really going to require a Land Raider to get Bleial somewhere that you would even want Turn 2 teleporting Deathwing Terminators to show up at in all but the rarest of occasions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortysl Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 I still remember when Deathwing Terminators were 52 points per model and didn't even have the 5+ Invulnerable save, so I'm just fine with paying 44 points. I don't give a crap about points comparisons with other codices because we're the First Legion so we'll always be the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aradiel Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I still remember when Deathwing Terminators were 52 points per model and didn't even have the 5+ Invulnerable save, so I'm just fine with paying 44 points. I don't give a crap about points comparisons with other codices because we're the First Legion so we'll always be the best i remember those terminators too. with a pure deathwing army in one of the first tourneys i played at, i ended up going against a local power gamer with a typical eldar starcannon spam army. when i deployed the army he actually laughed. DA? ha! ha! terminators? ha! ha! just over 20 models at 1500p pts? ha! ha! ha!. i hit the bushes, managed the fire lines and with the blessings of the dice gods managed to pull a draw. mmmmmm, it felt awesome. he did not have much will to ha! ha! ha! in the end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prot Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Wow, that is impressive because I remember those days too. You'd take your 20 models, and not only was it cheapo starcannon madness, but at that time the 'bodyguard' consisted of Eldrad flanked by Two Wraithlords and the Avatar. But now that I think about it, is it really any better nowadays or is it still the same smell, just a different pile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Sheol Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I remember the days of 52 points terminators Too... And the happiness when they lowered the points to 47... But that was 3rd edition with a different meta game... Now our terminators are still overcosted... And vanilla ones too... Considering that CSM ones costs 31 points I think that the right points cost for vanilla would be 36 points per model and DWT should be 40 points per model... With DWK at 43 points per model... Period... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garath Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 In my area ,people started using ETC 40k faq in standard games... And it balances those 10 pts nicely . For example, they ruled that Standard of devastation effects "all bolters" . That means storm bolters, hell even bolt pistols. From that perspecive a single Terminator is still expensive - but with a little synergy his killyness is improved greatly.A unit of 5 guys DS turn one to fire 20 twin linked SB shots + a Cyclone split fire sure looks ok for the points. You do need a command squad , tho. Imagine a whole army like that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Avoghai Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 In my area ,people started using ETC 40k faq in standard games... And it balances those 10 pts nicely . For example, they ruled that Standard of devastation effects "all bolters" . That means storm bolters, hell even bolt pistols. This is in ETC's conventions? :blink: This is strange as ETC often tries to stick with former FAQs and their logic, hence with this case would have used the v6 FAQ mentioning only bolters hurricane bolters and combi bolters... I was just thinking about a strange thing concerning our termi sgt and the non swappable weapons. Don't you find strange that the standard sgt in a tactical squad has access to the shooting/CC weapons and that the termi sgt is not allowed to grab a terminator weapon? Wouldn't it be simpler to add a point in the termi description stating that the sgt may choose weapon in the terminator weapons section? I would be more than happy to convert my sgts with combi flamers :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garath Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I am not sure on why exactly they ruled SoD in such a way, but they did. There was a situation where one thing was written in the Faq pdf format and another in the digital Faq. The ETC team in my area are all playing that way, and since all other players sort of look up to them - everyone plays like that here. 2 RW Land speeders with 2 HB each firing 24 shots for a little over a hundred points Predator Destructor for a 100 pts firing 2 Autocannon shots ,8 Heavy bolter,4 Storm bolter etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkProdigy Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Odd way to handle heavy bolters, should be 16 shots by my count unless they treat me as salvo 3/6 but that wouldn't have any basis in any rules. Heavy bolters at salvo 2/4 would still be an upgrade cause that's 4 shots normally and 2 shots if you move instead of 3 snap fires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.