Do armigers have Eternal warrior and other dodgy knight rules

[MichaelCarmine]

5 hours ago, Nagashsnee said:

I too find 200 too steep for an armiger, but also agree 150 is just re creating the issue in the opposite. 

 

Cant we just all compromise at 175-180 points?

And why can't we just agree, that 200pts is balanced?

 

You may think of them as nothing more than overpriced "dreads".

 

I (we) think of them as a tax to include the big stuff. A scoring, tough mini-Dread, that can deal with a much broader array of targets than, lets say, a Tac-Squad does for a Marine Army. That is fast, gets +1 to its Cover Saves, has really good weapons, stock! 

And, as mentioned many times before - can stay out of the majority of Weapon-Ranges [Bolters (and nearly all variants), Meltaguns/Multimelta, Plasmaguns/Plasmablaster, Volkite Calivers, Flamers,...], that would be able to shoot it, thanks to its 36"/64" Main guns.

Edited September 28, 2023 by MichaelCarmine

[MichaelCarmine]

On 9/27/2023 at 10:33 AM, Razorblade said:

It lacks 12" range compared to the Gravis Lsscannon which is still cheaper. The only meaningful guns it outranges are multimeltas and, crucially, Missiles, Volkites, Auto- and Lascannons all outrange it.

That would be true if a) armigers had a 2+ save so they couldn't be targetted by anti-infantry firepower or b) both armigers and big bois were not overcosted to the point that target saturation is practically impossible to create.

 

I do not, I simply assume it as a given for a factions only line troop.

And they would most certainly not. Even at 150 a 180 point contemptor would still be much tougher and outperform them outside of their 24-36" bracket. 

Not to mention they'd probably need to cost around 50 to be considered the most broken thing in a game with telepathy, LasHSS reactions and Custodes.

That would imply that the big bois are (too) good for their points to balance out the :cuss:ty armigers, which most certainly is not the case.

A bit wrong there, i compared melta against melta - while it is true, that the other weapons outrange the Melta-Variant, they themselve are outranged by atleast 16" by the Cannon-Variant =]

 

Again, i agree, that they are more vulnerable against anti-infantry weapons, but the majority of those weapons simply lack range against an Armiger. Depending on the Mission played, you simply stay out of range for the first few game turns and pick at targets ,that could hurt you most, largely withou even have to fear retaliation. =]

 

Yes, you assumed, but you simply leave it completely out of the conversation, when constantly comparing Armigers against Contemptors. 

 

i don't know, 150pts for WS/BS 4, T7, 6W, 3+/5++, I4, 3A, Str9Ap2 melee, 8" movement, move through cover + Fleet (2) for 14" Run moves, Eternal Warrior, Sturbborn, Skirmisch and line seems pretty broken to me, even without considering the really good and versatile weapons! =]

 

[Xenith]

As you can tell from this thread, I feel Armigers are still OP at 200ppm (even without the incorrect special rules), however this isn't the place to discuss that 

[Noserenda]

The problem is, the Knight list as a whole is wonky and needs a good look over to bring it in line with space marines design space, which isnt going to happen; or at least a good faq-ing, which apparently isnt going to happen either. Quibbling about points is treating the symptoms rather than looking for a cure at this point.

[Razorblade]

9 hours ago, MichaelCarmine said:

And why can't we just agree, that 200pts is balanced?

Because their terrible at that price point and your constant ignorance of the math doesn't change that.

9 hours ago, MichaelCarmine said:

I (we) think of them as a tax to include the big stuff.

As I said before, this statement makes zero sense considering that the big stuff miraculously manages to be just as bad as the armigers

9 hours ago, MichaelCarmine said:

A scoring, tough mini-Dread, that can deal with a much broader array of targets than, lets say, a Tac-Squad does for a Marine Army. That is fast, gets +1 to its Cover Saves, has really good weapons, stock!

Half as tough as a dread, with one decent weapon between both variants and like incapable of taking out that tactical squad over the course of a standard length game.

9 hours ago, MichaelCarmine said:

And, as mentioned many times before - can stay out of the majority of Weapon-Ranges [Bolters (and nearly all variants), Meltaguns/Multimelta, Plasmaguns/Plasmablaster, Volkite Calivers, Flamers,...], that would be able to shoot it, thanks to its 36"/64" Main guns.

It's funny that you bring up this point again and again because it is not an argument. Unless your only playing Hammer and anvil on empty boards you're not getting reliable firing lines of 49" or longer. And even if you did the fact that these are your only scoring units mean you have to get into engagement Range anyway.

(All core missions score progressively so no waiting for the last turn either)

7 hours ago, MichaelCarmine said:

A bit wrong there, i compared melta against melta - while it is true, that the other weapons outrange the Melta-Variant, they themselve are outranged by atleast 16" by the Cannon-Variant =]

That comparison doesn't make sense given the lascannon is comparatively priced and does the same job, whereas the Gravis-melta is 20pts cheaper. And while the helverine has some extra range which its unlikely to ever use (see above) the Lascannon can actually do meaningful damage to meaningful targets.

7 hours ago, MichaelCarmine said:

i don't know, 150pts for WS/BS 4, T7, 6W, 3+/5++, I4, 3A, Str9Ap2 melee, 8" movement, move through cover + Fleet (2) for 14" Run moves, Eternal Warrior, Sturbborn, Skirmisch and line seems pretty broken to me, even without considering the really good and versatile weapons! =]

 

Everyone in their right mind would still take the 30 points and -12" on the main gun for WS/BS5 2+ and Brutal 3 

[MichaelCarmine]

14 hours ago, Razorblade said:

Because their terrible at that price point and your constant ignorance of the math doesn't change that.

As I said before, this statement makes zero sense considering that the big stuff miraculously manages to be just as bad as the armigers

Half as tough as a dread, with one decent weapon between both variants and like incapable of taking out that tactical squad over the course of a standard length game.

It's funny that you bring up this point again and again because it is not an argument. Unless your only playing Hammer and anvil on empty boards you're not getting reliable firing lines of 49" or longer. And even if you did the fact that these are your only scoring units mean you have to get into engagement Range anyway.

(All core missions score progressively so no waiting for the last turn either)

That comparison doesn't make sense given the lascannon is comparatively priced and does the same job, whereas the Gravis-melta is 20pts cheaper. And while the helverine has some extra range which its unlikely to ever use (see above) the Lascannon can actually do meaningful damage to meaningful targets.

Everyone in their right mind would still take the 30 points and -12" on the main gun for WS/BS5 2+ and Brutal 3 

No - they are "terrible", because all you do is compare them to a non-scoring gun platform lice the contemptor. If, for once, you'd consider seeing them as what they are, and compare them to other scoring units, like Tac-/despoiler squads, you may, by accident see their worth and not only focus on everything, you consider "bad". =]

What math am i ignoring exactly? That 2+ armor makes more saves on average? That WS/BS5 on average hits more often than WS/BS4? Where did i ever question that? 

 

Lets see, all the contemptor has, that makes it tougher, is a 2+ save, compared to a 3+ save. (and WS5 in Melee). The Armiger is immune to Special rules, that target Dreads/Automata/vehicles, gets +1 to its cover saves and has eternal warrior, so Instant Death only deals 1 wound, instead of D3. He also is quick enough to "outrun" the Dreadnought, if one would ever want to force himself into CC with an Armiger [MtC and Fleet(2)].

So a .83 chance (2+) compared to .66 chance (3+) even without adding all the benefits of the Armiger Subtype/Profile is half as tough for you? Who is ignoring math here? ^^

 

 That's why i also wrote, that it depends on the mission being played  ^^ And Blood Feud, Onslaught, Shatter Strike and Tide of Carnage, so 4 out of 6 core missions from the RB require either destruction, or last turn scoring(end of game) as their Primary objective - so no immidiate close engagement required. Just for your consideration! ^^ EDIT: just looked up to be sure - War of Lies also just requires destruction and last Turn scoring (end of game), so 5 out of 6 Missions, which makes it about 50% of the Missions, if you add the Core Missions from the Cthonian book, (which not everybody has/is playing)^^ END EDIT

 

And no, i just dont play with just LoS blocking terrain.

 

If you'd like to read the rules for Gravis Melta and Gravis Lascannon, You'd maybe see, that the GravisLascannon is not twinlinked and has Sunder, which doesn't work on non-vehicles.

Whereas the GravisMelta has Armourbane(Melta), is twinlinked and has Str. 8Ap1 24".

So, which weapon do you think makes more sense to compare against a Meltalance, which is 36", Str 8 Ap2 Armourbane (Melta) and Twin linked? The mostly seen/fielded GravisMelta with nearly the exact same rules, or the Gravis Lascannon? 

And again - The Armiger does not do the same Job as a Dreadnought, so why compare it to one? Why compare a Scoring weapon-Platform, that is required to field the big knights against one of the umltimate Deathmachines in Marine-Armies?

Let me say this - i really don't want to sound offensive, or anything! In my opinion, we are all bros/sis's in this Community - but you have to see, that your comparisons make the least amount of sense here.

 

Edited September 29, 2023 by MichaelCarmine

[MichaelCarmine]

18 hours ago, Xenith said:

As you can tell from this thread, I feel Armigers are still OP at 200ppm (even without the incorrect special rules), however this isn't the place to discuss that 

I would'nt call them OP, just balanced, if you know how to field them correctly =]