Jump to content

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, jarms48 said:

 

Before, so after we lose it the bombast will be far worse. As the best you will hit on is 4+ rather than 3+, and you become AP-2 instead of AP-3 after take aim.

 

 

Yeah, but even with the math I've showed you above it takes 4 bombasts to kill 8 guardsmen on average, with take aim. That's before factoring in things like light cover, dense cover, artillery debuff. The situation just gets worse and worse the more you add into it. 

Yeah I agree the bombast has proven to be less than great, but the malleus still has some potential 

Yeah. Honestly, this is what I would do to buff them:

 

- Drop them all to 60 points, so 120 points for the unit.

- Bombast becomes Heavy D3+3. So while they are slightly better autocannon shots, you're at least putting out a minimum of 8.

- Malleus gets indirect fire. It's stats are fine honestly. 

- Lascannon, as I said, it's the best option already currently. Just a small point drop would make it more appealing. 

Edited by jarms48

I thought bombast was the best currently? Or does this take into account the removal of data slate? Meaning that las cannon is now best?

 

Is this really the best way to get 2 las cannons?

Edited by INKS

Yeah, both the Malleus and the Heavy Las atm have to answer the question: why should I not just pay 25p more and take a Punisher/Demolisher, who can basically do the same thing, but are way tougher, way more mobile and way more flexible.

 

A points drop would help with that

Got 2 waiting on sprues, awaiting an official statement/rule regarding LoS. 

If we get to keep indirect without penalties, I'll assemble them as Bombasts (with Take Aim they're decent).
If not I'll assemble them as Heavy Lascannons and probably only use them on rare occasions for the memes...

12 minutes ago, Minsc said:

Got 2 waiting on sprues, awaiting an official statement/rule regarding LoS. 

If we get to keep indirect without penalties, I'll assemble them as Bombasts (with Take Aim they're decent).
If not I'll assemble them as Heavy Lascannons and probably only use them on rare occasions for the memes...

We have gotten an official statement.

the datasheet won’t apply to the new codex

On 12/3/2022 at 11:55 PM, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Has anyone done the math hammer on each option?

Guard.thumb.png.221cbd0827183ed767fd7cb596f9be61.png

 

This is just the base output, no doctrines, orders, and without the indirect penalty, but does include

  • Armor of Contempt
  • Turret weapon +1 to hit
  • Cadian Lasgun & Laspistol exploding 6s (so the chimera is slightly buffed)

 

The funny thing is, implementing the indirect penalty across the board will mean Guard is even stronger, as the Basilisk/Manticore is ~30% worse per point than a LRBT, and LRBTs are really strong.  So we'll just stop taking indirect and take more LRBTs.   If GW wants to stop the indirect spam, I think they could do something like 'in a Strike Force Match Play game, the Guard player may pick up to 3 units and those units do not suffer the indirect penalty".  Then arty isn't spammable, but isn't dog :cuss:with a diarrhea gravy either.

 

Compared to regular guardsmen, the FOBs are actually durable.  The problem is that they're still guard, and will still die to any concentrated firepower.  Their only advantage is that the FOBs will be farther back, meaning they'll take away firepower from the closer infantry, sentinels, bullgryns & LRBTs.  So they might survive thru target saturation & priority.  But there is a TON of "ifs" around that.  9th is just so lethal that we have to assume anything in the open is just gonna die

Edited by OldWherewolf

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.