Centurions: How to make them work?

[Captain Idaho]

I'd say a compromise of 40pts per model for Devastator Centurions seems fair actually. They HAVE to have weapons upgrades that pumps up the cost. Consider that a unit of 3 with dual Heavy Bolters and Hurricane Bolters would be 210pts and slow but still have 6 Heavy Bolters and 18 Bolters.

 

That's still a bargain but on an expensive slow platform that multi damage weapons will counter.

[justicarius6]

 

 

Not with the weapons. Remember they are slow moving, delicate guys with no invul.

They are T5, 3 wounds 2+ and can benefit from cover (and the shooty ones should). And they also have Omniscope and Decimator Protocols.

You're telling me that's all worth only 4 pts more than a Terminator chassis? (trading off the 5++)

That seems a little too generous to me.

You're right of course, compared to terminators that would be too generous. But compare them to other codex weapons platforms such as the aforementioned destroyer and it skews right. Points cost balance across codices is completely off right now. Edited March 21, 2018 by justicarius6

[Captain Idaho]

Terminators should be cheaper too.

[Brother Christopher]

Currently, I can't see Centurions work. I'd even go so far as to say they are a liability since for their priece you can get other, more decent things. This bothers me greatly since I got 3 of them painted last edition and haven't had a chance to use them. And on top of that I grew to not dislike the models, which is a feat on its own. I'm curious whether GW will fix some of the issues with their next point upgrade. Centurions, Terminators, Stormtalons and Landspeeders are things I'd like to see adjusted so that they are not a burden for the army.

Edited March 21, 2018 by Brother Cristopher

[Ishagu]

Terminators should be cheaper too.

 

Exactly. Don't compare them to Termies.

 

I'd say 5 Termies with power fist and storm bolters should be no more than 150!

[Captain Idaho]

200pts at the most but that's a different issue at least. (I've got regular opponents who are shocked how easy it is to kill Terminators!)

[9x19 Parabellum]

 

Terminators should be cheaper too.

 

Exactly. Don't compare them to Termies.

 

I'd say 5 Termies with power fist and storm bolters should be no more than 150!

 

 

Why not?  They have a similar statline.  I agree their function is completely different, but if we proceed with the assumption that weapons are appropriately priced (which is a hell of an assumption, I agree, but that's how GW is doing it this edition), and are de-coupled from the base model, we can make a reasonable comparison to the closest models of the same statline (which, I would argue, is some kind of hybrid of terminators and bikes).

 

Look, guys, I want useable Devastators too, but making them 30 pts each is WAAAAY too cheap and I don't want to be playing the cheese army.

 

I'd also add that that 5++ is not nearly as useful or good as it probably gets credit for.  Out of cover, it only helps for Melta and other AP-4 weapons, of which there is very little.  In cover, the basic armor save is better for everything else (4+ or better) and the same for Melta.  That's probably more a problem with Terminators than it is with trying to compare Devastators to Terminators, of course.  My point here is only that 2+, T5,W3 is more durable than 2+/5++, and needs to be costed as such.  Combined with the fact that, for Dev Cents at least, they are likely to be in cover all the time (as opposed to Termies who want to advance to make use of that tasty power fist), most of the time, Devs are going to be saving on 1+.  The statline durability combined with in-play durability means these guys' base cost needs to be significantly more than Termies. (but not 54 points more)

 

 

 

Not with the weapons. Remember they are slow moving, delicate guys with no invul.

They are T5, 3 wounds 2+ and can benefit from cover (and the shooty ones should). And they also have Omniscope and Decimator Protocols.

You're telling me that's all worth only 4 pts more than a Terminator chassis? (trading off the 5++)

That seems a little too generous to me.

You're right of course, compared to terminators that would be too generous. But compare them to other codex weapons platforms such as the aforementioned destroyer and it skews right. Points cost balance across codices is completely off right now.

 

 

Precisely why I did not compare them "across codices" :-D  .  Comparing them to something within their codex is by far a more useful endeavor.

Edited March 21, 2018 by 9x19 Parabellum

[justicarius6]

 

 

 

 

Terminators should be cheaper too.

Exactly. Don't compare them to Termies.

 

I'd say 5 Termies with power fist and storm bolters should be no more than 150!

Why not? They have a similar statline. I agree their function is completely different, but if we proceed with the assumption that weapons are appropriately priced (which is a hell of an assumption, I agree, but that's how GW is doing it this edition), and are de-coupled from the base model, we can make a reasonable comparison to the closest models of the same statline (which, I would argue, is some kind of hybrid of terminators and bikes).

 

Look, guys, I want useable Devastators too, but making them 30 pts each is WAAAAY too cheap and I don't want to be playing the cheese army.

 

I'd also add that that 5++ is not nearly as useful or good as it probably gets credit for. Out of cover, it only helps for Melta and other AP-4 weapons, of which there is very little. In cover, the basic armor save is better for everything else (4+ or better) and the same for Melta. That's probably more a problem with Terminators than it is with trying to compare Devastators to Terminators, of course. My point here is only that 2+, T5,W3 is more durable than 2+/5++, and needs to be costed as such. Combined with the fact that, for Dev Cents at least, they are likely to be in cover all the time (as opposed to Termies who want to advance to make use of that tasty power fist), most of the time, Devs are going to be saving on 1+. The statline durability combined with in-play durability means these guys' base cost needs to be significantly more than Termies. (but not 54 points more)

 

 

Not with the weapons. Remember they are slow moving, delicate guys with no invul.

They are T5, 3 wounds 2+ and can benefit from cover (and the shooty ones should). And they also have Omniscope and Decimator Protocols.

You're telling me that's all worth only 4 pts more than a Terminator chassis? (trading off the 5++)

That seems a little too generous to me.

You're right of course, compared to terminators that would be too generous. But compare them to other codex weapons platforms such as the aforementioned destroyer and it skews right. Points cost balance across codices is completely off right now.

Precisely why I did not compare them "across codices" :-D . Comparing them to something within their codex is by far a more useful endeavor.

Surely we should be seeking cross-codex balance and internal codex when it comes to points costs? When similar, almost identical platforms, are so out of sync with other's (and this is long before we take into account CSM sub-par stratagems and chapter tactics) why should we be the ones seeking to have a handicapped army just to suit internal codex balance?

[Race Bannon]

Although not against the rules, per se, can we please select conversations to quote versus whole posts?

 

Think of the children!

[9x19 Parabellum]

 

Surely we should be seeking cross-codex balance and internal codex when it comes to points costs? When similar, almost identical platforms, are so out of sync with other's (and this is long before we take into account CSM sub-par stratagems and chapter tactics) why should we be the ones seeking to have a handicapped army just to suit internal codex balance?

 

 

I agree that we can/should have cross-codex balance, justicar.  I just think it's harder to achieve, and more complicated to compare 2 statlines across different armies (than it is comparing 2 statlines within the same army), due to all sorts of reasons (synergy with chapter tactics, potential for allies, stratagems, synergy with relics and warlord traits, synergy with other units, etc.)  It's hard enough to do that intra-codex, let alone inter-codex.

Edited March 21, 2018 by 9x19 Parabellum

[Ishagu]

In the interest of game balance across all armies, a Terminator with weapons included can't cost more than 28-30 points. A Storm Shield and Thunder Hammer will fetch a higher price however. Aggressors need to match this reduction also.

 

Same with Centurions - they have loads of limitations, and really shouldn't cost any more than 30 points for the basic model. Look at Necron Destroyers for example.

[9x19 Parabellum]

In the interest of game balance across all armies, a Terminator with weapons included can't cost more than 28-30 points. A Storm Shield and Thunder Hammer will fetch a higher price however. Aggressors need to match this reduction also.

 

Same with Centurions - they have loads of limitations, and really shouldn't cost any more than 30 points for the basic model. Look at Necron Destroyers for example.

 

But necron destroyers cost...what...43 pts per model as of the index? (I don't know if they changed in the codex).  Centurions get a 2+ armor save vs. their 3+, which makes them more durable. Both ignore heavy weapon move penalties.  Cents ignore cover, Destroyers reroll 1's.   Destroyers are far more mobile, but centurions get the privilege of packing far more firepower.  All in all I'd say Cents come out ahead, but only by a little bit, putting them mid to high 40's...about where exactly I had imagined them earlier (50 pts).

Edited March 21, 2018 by 9x19 Parabellum

[justicarius6]

Destroyers are 30pts as per the codex leaks so far. They're exceedingly more mobile than Centurions (10" FLY move compared to 4" stumble), they can get out of melee and still shoot (which is perfect for a weapons platform imo). As for the privilege of packing more firepower, I'd actually call it a hindrance as you're investing a ton of points into one 3 wound model if you do so.

 

Even if they were equal points to a destroyer I'd say the Centurion still comes off slightly worse if anything, the 50 point difference just makes it laughable.

[Ishagu]

Destroyers are well priced at 30, also they have fantastic mobility.

 

Really a Centurion should be 20 if compared to them.

 

Hurry up FAQ!

[Race Bannon]

^ I support this dream.

[9x19 Parabellum]

Destroyers are 30pts as per the codex leaks so far. They're exceedingly more mobile than Centurions (10" FLY move compared to 4" stumble), they can get out of melee and still shoot (which is perfect for a weapons platform imo). As for the privilege of packing more firepower, I'd actually call it a hindrance as you're investing a ton of points into one 3 wound model if you do so.

 

Even if they were equal points to a destroyer I'd say the Centurion still comes off slightly worse if anything, the 50 point difference just makes it laughable.

 

THIRTY POINTS!?!?!?!?  

 

(ok now that I've gotten over the shock....)

 

Well, look, 30 points is ridiculous for that profile, there's no question. Two wrongs don't make a right here.  Centurions at 20-30 points would be overpowered in comparison to...pretty much everything else.  I don't deny they need a serious reduction but 20 points as Ishagu wants is simply jumping the shark. 

[Aothaine]

While I think they are a bit expensive right now I think 30 points per model before weapons are adding is a good price. The issue starts to come out when they are affordable and you start seeing 18 of these guys on the board with Guilliman. People are going to freak. Centurions are in a rough spot right now. I'm not entirely sure how to fix them but I love the way the models look so I will eventually be fielding them. I'm still trying to work on lists that work with them. I can see and infantry heavy list with apothecaries and primaris working decently well. But you give up a lot to make this dream come true.

[UnkyHamHam]

Centurion ML could use a price drop as well to make it worth it. Maybe a -5pt cut to see use, or a -10pt cut to be competitive.

[justicarius6]

You're right Parabellum, personally I think that profile is worth around 40pts. But that would need to be reflected across other codices as well. It's a problem with the whole points cost system right now, but it's affecting CSM more as we've such a weak codex compared to most of the others at the moment.

[Ishagu]

The profile is not worth 40 points at all.

 

Remember, a Grav Cannon is 28, Hurricane Bolters are 10. Even if they cost 30 points the most popular load out is going to be 68 points, or 100+ with Las Cannons and Missiles which is still pretty crazy.

 

30 Point should be the MAX before we consider them.

[Captain Idaho]

If 40pts and equipped with Heavy Bolters and Hurricane Bolters they would total 70pts a piece. That's reasonable I reckon, especially when you compare them to Inceptors who are slightly lighter but faster for the most part.

[justicarius6]

The profile is not worth 40 points at all.

 

Remember, a Grav Cannon is 28, Hurricane Bolters are 10. Even if they cost 30 points the most popular load out is going to be 68 points, or 100+ with Las Cannons and Missiles which is still pretty crazy.

 

30 Point should be the MAX before we consider them.

That's why I said 40pts it needs to be considered with across the board changes. At 30 pts, you've got a 2+ marine with 3 wounds and 2 attacks, T5, S5, etc etc. Standard 1 wound Marines are 13 pts.

 

What they need to do is get their equations and formulae right in the first place so profiles across codices match up in terms of points costs.

[9x19 Parabellum]

 

The profile is not worth 40 points at all.

 

Remember, a Grav Cannon is 28, Hurricane Bolters are 10. Even if they cost 30 points the most popular load out is going to be 68 points, or 100+ with Las Cannons and Missiles which is still pretty crazy.

 

30 Point should be the MAX before we consider them.

That's why I said 40pts it needs to be considered with across the board changes. At 30 pts, you've got a 2+ marine with 3 wounds and 2 attacks, T5, S5, etc etc. Standard 1 wound Marines are 13 pts.

 

What they need to do is get their equations and formulae right in the first place so profiles across codices match up in terms of points costs.

 

 

I personally don't place much value on a WS3+, S5, A2 model that has no way to leverage those melee attacks with AP and/or multi-damage. It's one of my critical objections to the "elite" space Marine profile in general (ie, that Tacs are over-costed because their WS3+,S4 melee profile is overvalued, given they rarely use it, and when they do, it rarely makes a difference; this is not WHFB, where Strength also modifies the armor save). Advantage: NO ONE.

 

In the comparison with Destroyers, who have 14" move and can fly, I don't think Decimator Protocols is nearly as good as their Repulsor Platform special rule.  Sure, it's the same thing, but it's infinitely more useful on them.  So I'll grant you guys that one. Advantage: NECRONS.

 

Given how easy it is for SM armies to get the reroll 1's buff, I'd put a higher value on our Omniscope than their Hardwired Hatred rule.  Advantage: MARINES

 

But I don't think you guys are giving quite enough value to how good a 2+ save is, and especially how good it is when you consider that Dev Cents are usually going to be in cover.  (Someone over on the Dakka forums recently demonstrated to me how a 2+ save is double the durability over 3+, because what you really care about is the number of guys that fail the save, not the number that make the save.)  Advantage: MARINES

 

And I still think the ability to take more overall guns on Centurions has real value.  You don't want to be spending x points for an elite chassis/body, but without any combat efficacy. That doesn't make sense.  On the other hand, you don't want to put all your eggs in one basket (and, let's face it, while Centurions are tough, they aren't Land Raider tough).*  Even so, there are a couple tricks you can pull...you don't HAVE to make all 3 of your Centurions the same weapon loadout.  One could be lascannon/missile, and the other 2 cheaper with heavy bolters and hurricane bolters.  Advantage: MARINES

 

*But we also have to be fair here; Space Marines have other options if we only need/want a single heavy weapon.  A small scout squad can carry a missile launcher for 80 points. If you only want 1 or 2 lascannons, Devastators can get that done for 90-115. So we *have* other options for cheaper heavy weapons loadouts, if that's what you want. Necrons don't, hence why they can buy their Heavy Destroyers one at a time and only have to buy 1 big gun.

Edited March 22, 2018 by 9x19 Parabellum

[justicarius6]

I don't think Dark Reapers are complaining about their lack of options when it comes to weaponry.

 

Without being too pithy, CSM are paying through the nose for our much vaunted flexibility, epitomised in the useless Centurion chassis, and that flexibility is pretty much irrelevant in the setting of 8th.

Edited March 22, 2018 by justicarius6

[Ishagu]

Remember that Destroyers can return to life and have ways to boosting those chances?

 

I value the mobility FAR more than a 2+ save. Not to mention they can leave combat and shoot, fly over terrain, etc. I think 25 points might actually be the more fair value to put on Centurions.

 

I'd also drop Marines to 11pts, Primaris to 15 base, but that's a different topic entirely.

Edited March 22, 2018 by Ishagu