|
Post by piersonsmuppet on May 15, 2022 23:15:47 GMT
Or maybe they will realize they overpriced then and give us a break with the next slate. This especially now that fearless can be turned off and things like dread tests that bypass fearless exist. 7-8ppm for t3 5+ ld5. I had underwhelming performance with them before recent developments. Only worse now. 1ppm would likely be fair adjustment I’ve actually had 10-man horms w/ ag work well for me. I usually just throw em 16” with the strat to distant objectives so they were never usually in my synapse bubble anyway. Score stranglehold and deny opponent primary well for a turn, anything more is gravy. Though this depends on SL for the rr’s, they don’t function as well without em.
|
|
|
Post by purestrain on May 15, 2022 23:44:45 GMT
Cost comparison should not take sub-faction traits into account. If Warriors were only undercosted in Leviathan, they would only primarily show up in Levi lists. Since they show up as the primary troop choice in just about every fleet, they are by definition overcosted. They should only be common in strong fleets and uncommon in weak fleets if costed appropriately. Now its really only the BS/DS that is the root of the pts disparity. I don’t think anyone can say that DBS and scything talons are equivalent… They're the mainstay of every fleet because gaunts/gants/goyles are worse, not because they are super-efficient. if horms and termas were 5-6ppm they would be coming out in droves with some msu warriors for synaptic link layering.
|
|
|
Post by piersonsmuppet on May 16, 2022 2:17:30 GMT
Gants/Gargs/Horms are bad because warriors are very efficient, not because they are over priced. All 3 of the horde units are reasonably priced when compared to other faction’s similar units. Warriors are overly cheap when compared to similar options in other factions.
|
|
|
Post by yoritomo on May 16, 2022 3:55:55 GMT
I made devilgaunts work back when they were 9 points a pop. 7 points per gaunt isn’t ideal, but it’s still doable. Still, I kind of wish they were 6 points per model.
Warriors on the other hand are about 8 points per wound and have two more points of strength and toughness, one better armor save Ws and Bs, synapse, shadow in the warp, and decent close combat ability. That’s an awful lot for one extra point per wound.
|
|
|
Post by No One on May 16, 2022 4:37:21 GMT
I'm talking about an exception for Tyranids as an unique trait for the faction. Only way to turn off Synapse and SitW would be to kill the Synapse creatures. But fun and fluffy factors in a game, gods forbid... We know how they say 'this is not an aura'. They say 'this is not an aura'. Like they have for us: see, imperatives. Is it thematic? No, but lots of stuff isn't (e.g. casting, though that's at least cooler with link casting). It's 6", morale is meh, and our gribblies are also meh (though losing one or two e.g. ravs to morale would hurt, but should generally either have backup Synapse or be so far in that probably out of Synapse anyway and any living to take morale is a good thing). I think you're really overestimating how much it matters that Synapse is an aura. Most also turn it off for a single unit, often with a 3d6 check against our high ld, so outside those that prevent being affected by, redundant Synapse fixes that if it's an actual issue. Since they show up as the primary troop choice in just about every fleet, they are by definition overcosted. Or, they're appropriately priced, or all the other options are overpriced (it's not like you can easily forgo troops), or most lists want more Synapse more than what other troop options bring to the table etc. They're definitely not overcosted (or undercosted ) 'by definition'. In reality? Probably, but honestly I don't think by much.
|
|
|
Post by xtztxtxz on May 16, 2022 7:07:18 GMT
What still feels weird is paying 7-8 for horde units, when GSC, Militarum, Admech, Tau, Chaos, or basically every other army rolls out 5-6 max. Maybe now the image of hordes of talons can finally rest in peace and we can rest the laurels that Nids are not what Starship Troopers is. Unfortunately overcosted 1W troops is an issue across several 9E codexes. GW seem to have kneejerked hard from the 8th edition days of boyz, poxwalker and cultist spam lists and taken a very different design approach. They over-value troops in particular since there has been more emphasis on obsec & actions this edition. Now there's a 5ppm minimum cost on all models regardless of effectiveness, and they keep adding gimmicks like T5 ork boyz or S5 AP1 fleshborers to 'justify' further point increases. Because of this I'm not holding my breath for any point cuts to gaunts. The one small glimmer of hope is that recently IG got some free wargear options for their subpar guardsmen units, so it's possible that in future we see something like a flat cost for AG/TS on more troops.
|
|
|
Post by bigpig on May 16, 2022 7:14:36 GMT
Or maybe they will realize they overpriced then and give us a break with the next slate. This especially now that fearless can be turned off and things like dread tests that bypass fearless exist. 7-8ppm for t3 5+ ld5. I had underwhelming performance with them before recent developments. Only worse now. 1ppm would likely be fair adjustment I’ve actually had 10-man horms w/ ag work well for me. I usually just throw em 16” with the strat to distant objectives so they were never usually in my synapse bubble anyway. Score stranglehold and deny opponent primary well for a turn, anything more is gravy. Though this depends on SL for the rr’s, they don’t function as well without em. ah cool. One overcosted unit did pretty well in an army otherwise mostly made up of the usual suspects? Nice. You could probably have done similar with Gargoyles or Raveners, and raveners would have been more resilient and more of a threat. Have you tried run your games with troops being Terms, Horms, and gargs.... and not just a minimum troop tax but actually putting some focus into it
|
|
|
Post by bigpig on May 16, 2022 7:16:34 GMT
I made devilgaunts work back when they were 9 points a pop. 7 points per gaunt isn’t ideal, but it’s still doable. Still, I kind of wish they were 6 points per model. Warriors on the other hand are about 8 points per wound and have two more points of strength and toughness, one better armor save Ws and Bs, synapse, shadow in the warp, and decent close combat ability. That’s an awful lot for one extra point per wound. and strat support. 6ppm would be manageable
|
|
|
Post by No One on May 16, 2022 9:15:07 GMT
The one small glimmer of hope is that recently IG got some free wargear options for their subpar guardsmen units And a price increase and strat support. 6ppm would be manageable Or better devs: paying points for that just baffles me. 8 ppm for old devs with new Codex? Sure. 7 ppm is 'you sure you can't find 10 pts' or 'tervs'.
|
|
|
Post by bolk on May 16, 2022 10:16:00 GMT
I'm talking about an exception for Tyranids as an unique trait for the faction. Only way to turn off Synapse and SitW would be to kill the Synapse creatures. But fun and fluffy factors in a game, gods forbid... We know how they say 'this is not an aura'. They say 'this is not an aura'. Like they have for us: see, imperatives. Is it thematic? No, but lots of stuff isn't (e.g. casting, though that's at least cooler with link casting). It's 6", morale is meh, and our gribblies are also meh (though losing one or two e.g. ravs to morale would hurt, but should generally either have backup Synapse or be so far in that probably out of Synapse anyway and any living to take morale is a good thing). I think you're really overestimating how much it matters that Synapse is an aura. Most also turn it off for a single unit, often with a 3d6 check against our high ld, so outside those that prevent being affected by, redundant Synapse fixes that if it's an actual issue. Since they show up as the primary troop choice in just about every fleet, they are by definition overcosted. Or, they're appropriately priced, or all the other options are overpriced (it's not like you can easily forgo troops), or most lists want more Synapse more than what other troop options bring to the table etc. They're definitely not overcosted (or undercosted ) 'by definition'. In reality? Probably, but honestly I don't think by much. Otherwise the Synaptic Imperatives and Synaptic Links mechanics feel really thematic and cool yes. Not sure what you're trying to say here. Atm gribblies are meh yes, but it's not sure they will be in an upcoming points adjustment. I've had several games come down due to me losing 1 or 2 models to morale in a unit holding an objective. Maybe that is just me being unlucky, but morale can be vital. High leadership? Hormagaunts and Raveners for example are leadership 5.
|
|
|
Post by No One on May 16, 2022 11:14:59 GMT
Otherwise the Synaptic Imperatives and Synaptic Links mechanics feel really thematic and cool yes. Not sure what you're trying to say here. That Synapse being an aura is intentional, Synapse not being tagged as such was just a typo that's not really relevant because they miss it half the time anyway and only fix it a quarter of that. And that thematics (correctly) take a back seat to balance considerations: though in this specific case I don't think Synapse/SitW not being an aura would've been a problem, I can see why GW would be leery about doing so. Basically all of our Synapse is 9 or 10, and the ld check is (generally? always?) for turning off the aura, rather than the 'can't be affected by auras'. For sure an unlucky morale can swing a game. But is it a thing that's reliably going to do so? Can the ability that does so reliably trigger it, when needed, on the target that matters? Is it better to just take stuff that'll more reliably kill the target than remove fearless for a morale trigger? Like key morale on an almost dead unit...is key because it's almost dead. A bit more, and it's actually dead. A bit less to focus on morale stuff, and now it doesn't die. Worrying about morale is basically only worth if it's minimal investment: aura removal is very rarely minimal investment, either in opportunity cost for options, or actual use.
|
|
|
Post by piersonsmuppet on May 16, 2022 12:16:32 GMT
ah cool. One overcosted unit did pretty well in an army otherwise mostly made up of the usual suspects? Nice. You could probably have done similar with Gargoyles or Raveners, and raveners would have been more resilient and more of a threat. Have you tried run your games with troops being Terms, Horms, and gargs.... and not just a minimum troop tax but actually putting some focus into it I don’t think gargoyles/Raveners would work as well for how i’ve used horms. 17” Mv vs 13-18” means they often get in range for the charge more reliably, 0 reliance on onslaught is nice, and the 6” pile-in makes getting onto objectives easier. There is also the fact that I don’t own Raveners or gargoyles, so after playing a few test games with them in TTS I’ve had swap to figuring out how to make horms work on the physical table. Fleet plays a big part, Horms are not effective in Levi, Jorm, or Kronos, and gargs/ravs will usually work better in Kraken as you mentioned. As for focusing on them? No not really. I only need 2-3 sacrificial 10-mans to score VP. Big blocks are too pts heavy and have a lot of wasted offense to overkill.
|
|
|
Post by bolk on May 16, 2022 12:28:22 GMT
Otherwise the Synaptic Imperatives and Synaptic Links mechanics feel really thematic and cool yes. Not sure what you're trying to say here. That Synapse being an aura is intentional, Synapse not being tagged as such was just a typo that's not really relevant because they miss it half the time anyway and only fix it a quarter of that. And that thematics (correctly) take a back seat to balance considerations: though in this specific case I don't think Synapse/SitW not being an aura would've been a problem, I can see why GW would be leery about doing so. Basically all of our Synapse is 9 or 10, and the ld check is (generally? always?) for turning off the aura, rather than the 'can't be affected by auras'. For sure an unlucky morale can swing a game. But is it a thing that's reliably going to do so? Can the ability that does so reliably trigger it, when needed, on the target that matters? Is it better to just take stuff that'll more reliably kill the target than remove fearless for a morale trigger? Like key morale on an almost dead unit...is key because it's almost dead. A bit more, and it's actually dead. A bit less to focus on morale stuff, and now it doesn't die. Worrying about morale is basically only worth if it's minimal investment: aura removal is very rarely minimal investment, either in opportunity cost for options, or actual use. Yes, it seems it was supposed to be an Aura. What I've been trying to say all along is how much cooler it would be, hypothetically, if both Synapse and SitW could not be turned off. Balance should come first yes, but it's still possible to make cool thematic rules. And this edition they actually give out balance updates frequently. Our Synapse units yes, I was talking about our non-synapse units. If they lose Synapse, they're gone. Well, again hypothetically. We'll see how the meta shifts regarding if Morale will matter more. My point was it might become a problem for us.
|
|
|
Post by infornography on May 16, 2022 13:39:15 GMT
Anyone who feels our gaunt forms are appropriately costed, I encourage to try taking a list with no, or minimal warriors and invest heavily in Gaunts, Gants, and Gargs. Test it out. If it works well for you, post your list and how it worked out.
Devourers are particularly silly so I won't say including those would be part of this challenge, but I am genuinely curious if some interactions could make our gaunt forms more than troop slot fillers and slightly expensive msu action/objective sitters. I don't think a gaunt carpet strategy could work well, but a couple medium to large units and some dedicated support for them to see if they can perform at the level that their cost validates.
My feeling is that they are all about 1 point overcosted and devourers should be free.
My feeling on warriors is that they MIGHT be a point or two undercosted but mostly Deathspitters and Boneswords should cost a point or two more rather than the bodies.
|
|
|
Post by piersonsmuppet on May 17, 2022 16:30:19 GMT
Anyone who feels our gaunt forms are appropriately costed, I encourage to try taking a list with no, or minimal warriors and invest heavily in Gaunts, Gants, and Gargs. Test it out. If it works well for you, post your list and how it worked out. Devourers are particularly silly so I won't say including those would be part of this challenge, but I am genuinely curious if some interactions could make our gaunt forms more than troop slot fillers and slightly expensive msu action/objective sitters. I don't think a gaunt carpet strategy could work well, but a couple medium to large units and some dedicated support for them to see if they can perform at the level that their cost validates. My feeling is that they are all about 1 point overcosted and devourers should be free. My feeling on warriors is that they MIGHT be a point or two undercosted but mostly Deathspitters and Boneswords should cost a point or two more rather than the bodies. I've taken a Behemoth list a few times with 3x10 Horms w/ AG, 30x Terms w/ FB backed by a Tervigon, and only a min-man Warrior unit for the backfield (is that heavily enough?). The army doesn't revolve around the gants/gaunts though, they have a specific purpose of scoring VP and dying (not necessarily in that order). Works well but likely will struggle to go undefeated at tournaments. Lists looking to use Gants/Gaunts as the main focus point are hurting with the current cost, but they aren't unplayable as some BR's here on the Hive have shown. Maybe the Synapse nerf will help pave the way for reducing gant/gaunt costs though, cheap hordes that ignore morale weren't in line with what GW wants the game to be. Devs should certainly be free, a worse option overall and only better than FBs most of the time in Gorgon (even an argument that Spine fists are better than Devs in Gorgon atm).
|
|