Jump to content

Eradicators - ( released data sheet )


Recommended Posts

Let’s chalk it up to cultural and language barriers which are common with things meant to be humorous by one taken different by the other

 

.... and move on :)

I can live with that.

 

So, how 'bout them Eradicators? It's a thread about Eradicators. I honestly don't think they're going to be the meta-defining bogey-men that people are anticipating. They're a lot of firepower into a single target but they can't split fire and I find the Gravis profile to be surprisingly fragile.

 

I was heavy on Aggressors for a while and I found that at 1000 points I generally needed eight of them on the table if I wanted any of them to survive losing the first turn.

It ultimately depends on squad size. A lot of people like to point at the dark imperium wave and then the initial codex, but suppressors have been out for uhhh a year and a half(?) and are still stuck with the easy to build 3; eliminators also stayed at 3 (but got major buffs to compensate). Either the meta is going to provide such good targets that triple eradicators suddenly become a slot efficient choice, or the squad gets increased to become slot efficient. If neither of those happen, then it I can't see them being taken that often.

I think Eradicators will be well worth bringing. I don’t think they’ll be meta defining though. I need to bring a heavy support choice to unlock my Leviathan and these guys look like the best option.

 

I was watching a batrep earlier with 6 greater daemons facing four knights - mostly gallants. A unit or two of Eradicators would have been awesome there. Neither army of big guys could have easily killed them, especially if they stood behind obscuring terrain.

 

They look pretty decent even if you come up against enemy Primaris. Three of them have a good chance of wiping a 5-man squad if they’re near buffing characters. They delete stuff like aggressors.

They complete with choices that were staples of 8th edition that despite hefty points increases are still good.

 

9th edition rules seem have given big boosts to vehicles. Walkers especially. So 6 melta shots coming out of your heavy support slot and spending 1CP to be able to bring them on later in the game is powerful.

 

They're really good. Taking 9 of them and committing the CP to protect them means you have to have big chunks elsewhere in the list that kill screens and chaff. And there are plenty of ,marine units that do that well.

When there is a box set for Supressors I’m sure you’ll be able to take a five man squad.

Just like the eliminators? The "wait for the full kit" excuse has been used since shadowspear, but that's a year and a half ago and is pretty stale. How much longer can or should people expect to wait for a unit to get its definitive version of the rules?

I doubt you'll see many Leviathans anymore at the new points ... ouch.

They didn’t go up that much and they got far better.

 

In 8th the leviathan was very powerful but always a bit awkward. If you were firing you were often close enough to be tagged, wrapped and made harmless. A vehicle like that was an asset for a horde opponent if they could wrap you on an objective.

 

Now nothing wants to be in melee with a leviathan. It’s gong to massacre anything that tries to pin it.

 

Add to that the advantages it gets from obscuring terrain and moving and shooting. It’s a bit of a monster in my opinion.

 

 

I fail to see how two six-shot, S5, Ap1, D1 weapons aren't comparable because one has "bolter" in the name and the other doesn't.

Man, I really don't want to have this argument. It was a joke you seem to really not get and trying to explain it over several posts is just an annoying waste of time. So here my last attempt. If you still don't get it you have to live with it.

 

It.Was.Not.About.Having.A.Weapon.With.A.Similar.Profile.

It.Was.About.Having.The.Same.Type.Of.Weapon.With.A.Better.Profile.

 

:facepalm:

If that's what you were getting at then you went about it in a really confusing way. "Bolter != Gatling" definitely doesn't put that across, especially because the Inceptor's Assault Bolters are Assault like the Burst Cannons while an Onslaught Gatling Cannon is a Heavy. The Gatling Cannon looks like the Burst cannon, but the Assault Bolter is a lot closer to "the.same.type.of.weapon" mechanically

 

So when you joke "boy, can't wait for Marines to have a unit that makes my Burst Cannon-armed Battlesuits look bad" I don't think I'm wrong to joke back "kinda already do".

 

 

It was only confusing if you completely misunderstood the initial post, which you did big time.

 

...

 

So when you joke "boy, can't wait for Marines to have a unit that makes my Burst Cannon-armed Battlesuits look bad" I don't think I'm wrong to joke back "kinda already do".

 

It was only confusing if you completely misunderstood the initial post, which you did big time.

Nah, I'm pretty sure I groked it. I just have to stop saying Incursor when I mean Inceptor, otherwise the tongue-in-cheek response doesn't make sense.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.