PDA

View Full Version : Vendetta gunship/transport undercost?



DA_WarM
17-06-2010, 13:56
Who here thinks that the 3-twinlascannon vendetta is undercost for it does?

My friend was able to disable my two land raiders on turn one with two of these.
And the two are filled with veterans that deep strike in your face...

Any opinions?

Bunnahabhain
17-06-2010, 14:00
Yes, vendettas are a little undercosted. Anybody who picked up the IG codex for more than about 30 seconds has noticed this. It's more that they are fast vehicles, so get to make the best of the vehicle rules.

However, the book still has more overcosted klunkers than it does under-priced units.

Erwos
17-06-2010, 14:04
Put it this way: I can buy three lascannons for my Havocs for about 25 points less than the whole Vendetta costs. That's not including the actual guys to carry them, and, of course, they can't run 6-12" over whatever terrain they feel like and shoot them. Or outflank. Or deep-strike. Or get bored and run the hell across the table at 24". Or transport some other squad packed with meltaguns to finish up whatever's left over should they fail.

And, oh by the way, the Vendettas use the generally neglected fast attack slot, so you're not even losing tanks by taking them (excepting the points cost). And their lascannons are _twin-linked_, so they hit more than my Havocs will.

So, yes, Vendettas and even Valkyries might be just a LITTLE BIT undercosted. Or my Havocs might be horrifically overcosted. Take your pick.

wickedvoodoo
17-06-2010, 14:17
Compared to other units that can pack multiple lascannons, yeah i think it is a little cheap. However it was a new codex unit. These are almost always like this (i know pyrovores are the exception) it is to encourage you to buy more of them.

Or maybe i am being a tad cynical.

DA_WarM
17-06-2010, 14:20
It's like having 100-point predators annihilators! It's completely insane.

And predators have only one twin-linked lascannon...

Bunnahabhain
17-06-2010, 14:32
Put it this way: I can buy three lascannons for my Havocs for about 25 points less than the whole Vendetta costs. That's not including the actual guys to carry them, and, of course, they can't run 6-12" over whatever terrain they feel like and shoot them. Or outflank. Or deep-strike. Or get bored and run the hell across the table at 24". Or transport some other squad packed with meltaguns to finish up whatever's left over should they fail.

And, oh by the way, the Vendettas use the generally neglected fast attack slot, so you're not even losing tanks by taking them (excepting the points cost). And their lascannons are _twin-linked_, so they hit more than my Havocs will.

So, yes, Vendettas and even Valkyries might be just a LITTLE BIT undercosted. Or my Havocs might be horrifically overcosted. Take your pick.

Actually Guard fast attack slots are rather crowded. None of the options available are at all bad. The skimmers are the best though.

Also, the only other place you can get three lascannons on a guard unit is a 105 point, BS3, heavy weapons squad. 6 T3 wounds, and they can only get twin linked or such like when ordered so by the company command squad, and they pass a Ld 7 test...

If you want long range, heavy AT, you either have to go to Manticores (heavy support), Vendettas, or are stuck with the klunkers- Vanquishers or Lascannons HWS. There simply isn't a middle ground.

In a codex with better internal balance, vendettas would cost more, vanquishers would work, and Heavy weapon squads would be somewhat less fragile- what would be wrong with 50 pts + weapons, Sergeant + 9 man squad, up to 3 Heavy weapons costed appropriatly, option for Vox, ie a heavy weapon squad that can sit in a patch of 4+ cover, and when shot at, only has to take a break test, rather than simply being dead, which we currently have...

ehlijen
17-06-2010, 15:01
If that Vendetta wants to use all those lascannon it's not being a fast transport. If it wants to get troops places quickly it won't fire all those lascannon. It's capablities don't complement each other well.

And compared to 6 wounds in cover, a single AV12 vehicle prancing about miles above any cover isn't really that resilient either. And it can't even take orders, let alone try to pass them on ld7.

Should triple twin las have happened in the fast attack slot? Probably not. But that is the only real problem I see here. They should have just added the vulture instead.

Erwos
17-06-2010, 15:05
Actually Guard fast attack slots are rather crowded. None of the options available are at all bad. The skimmers are the best though.
But when you can take squads of Hellhounds and Sentinels, you're not giving up a whole hell of a lot taking one slot for your squad of Vendettas. You're also not giving up any of those Manticores, LR squads, or artillery batteries you reference later.


Also, the only other place you can get three lascannons on a guard unit is a 105 point, BS3, heavy weapons squad. 6 T3 wounds, and they can only get twin linked or such like when ordered so by the company command squad, and they pass a Ld 7 test...
If you didn't have S10 artillery in heavy support, some of it actually in squads, I might feel for you. :)

Besides, to use the Chaos example again: without throwing them on infantry squads (which is a waste, and we both know it), I can get maybe 12 lascannons in my army, total. And three of those would be on dreads, which are rather unreliable. One undercosted FA choice in the IG army can put out as much lascannon fire as _my entire army_, do it faster, and probably cost 1/3 to 1/2 the points while doing it. You'll forgive me for thinking I might be at a slight disadvantage. :)


If you want long range, heavy AT, you either have to go to Manticores (heavy support), Vendettas, or are stuck with the klunkers- Vanquishers or Lascannons HWS. There simply isn't a middle ground.
Isn't there some artillery that can lay out S10? Medusas or something?

Brother Loki
17-06-2010, 15:08
I definitely think the Vendetta should have given up some of its transport capacity in return for its weapons. Even with capacity 6 it would still be a bargain.

ehlijen
17-06-2010, 15:22
Isn't there some artillery that can lay out S10? Medusas or something?

Not only that, with the bastion breaching shells it punches through tanks harder than railguns.

There are quite a few options for ranged AT in a guard army:

Command squads with lascannon. They even shoot well. Fragile but cheap.
Platoon command squads with lascannon. Even cheaper, but don't hit as often.
Infantry squads with lascannon. Waste of lasguns, but it's pretty resilient.
Heavy weapon squads. Point for point the cheapest lascannon in the game, so those weaknesses are well justified.
Veteran squads with lascannon. Starting to get expensive, but they shoot well and have lot's of bodies.
Vendettas - so good even guard players complain.
Russ - not great, but decent against anything up to AV13 with a hull lascannon
Vanquisher - The most resilient of the IG tank hunters.
Basilisk - Better than the Russ, but more fragile too.
Medusa - a bit short ranged unless you take the breaching shells. Then it eats land raiders for breakfast. Needs good cover though.
Manticore - said already.

That's a lot of options, each with their own quality vs quantity vs resilience tradeoffs.

Bunnahabhain
17-06-2010, 15:32
for your squad of Vendettas. .....LR squads, atillery batteries .... in squad[rons]s


You are aware of how bad the squadron rules are, especially for shooty stuff?

Try an experiment. Find a friendly player, and get them to let you use the CSM list, but with squadrons instead of single vehicles - probably without the option for daemonic possession, as being immune to shaken or stunned actually makes the squadron useful- (see Apoc. for proof) rather than a pure disadvantage over single vehicles...


Ehlijen, do you really thing single lascannons in inafntry units constitute a sensible AT policy?

madden
17-06-2010, 15:35
You can bring all the las cannon you like I have no armour in my chaos force anyway. Lol

Keichi246
17-06-2010, 16:22
If you didn't have S10 artillery in heavy support, some of it actually in squads, I might feel for you. :)

Besides, to use the Chaos example again: without throwing them on infantry squads (which is a waste, and we both know it), I can get maybe 12 lascannons in my army, total. And three of those would be on dreads, which are rather unreliable. One undercosted FA choice in the IG army can put out as much lascannon fire as _my entire army_, do it faster, and probably cost 1/3 to 1/2 the points while doing it. You'll forgive me for thinking I might be at a slight disadvantage. :)

You know - if you didn't have infantry that DIDN'T fold up like wet paper bags in close combat, or didn't have access to Lash of Submission, or didn't have access to Obliterators - I might feel for you. ;)

Do I think the Vendetta is undercosted? Yeah - a little.
But not as much as you might think. Av12 is NOT that hard to crack, and it has the target profile of a barn door - so almost always a viable target. And if it is manuvering close to deliver meltavets - it's not firing all three lascannons.

In most the games I've been playing - the Vendetta has been a one shot wonder. It might get one good shot off and then dies horribly - because it is a priority target. I RARELY see Vendettas make it past turn 2.

Besides - losing two Land Raiders to Vendettas in turn one is *not* going to be a common occurrance, statistically.

The odds of a Vendetta getting a first turn kill on a Land Raider work out to be about 12.5%, by my calculations. (.75 chance to hit * .166 chance of a Pen * .333 chance of a destroy ) *3 shots = ~12.5%.

Add in the 12.5% or so of Immobilize results. (.75 chance to hit *.166 chance to glance * .1666 chance to immobilze) *3 shots (*2 - because the Pen immobilize has the exact same chance as a Glance Immobilize) = ~12.5

Basically - a single Vendetta has about a 25% chance of generating a mission kill on a Land Raider on Turn 1.

As a side note - a 3 man Obliterator Squad has about a 3% less chance of accomplishing the same task - and is FAR sturdier (3 wounds, smaller target profile, invulnerable/cover saves).

What's my point? My point is that it sounds like you got unlucky. The chances of losing BOTH Land Raiders were something like 6%.

Hashmal
17-06-2010, 16:31
Who here thinks that the 3-twinlascannon vendetta is undercost for it does?


Oh my, yes. Cross-book comparisons are rarely valid, but look at it this way: my Dark Eldar's Heavy Support "tank" is an 11/11/10 open-topped Fast Skimmer with 3 Dark Lances. For 35 more points, I can get 3 Lascannons (superior weapons entirely as the only AV they are worse against is 14), close-topped, one point better front and side armor, transport capacity, and the ability to take them as Fast Attack.

So yes, I am firmly in the undercosted camp. Then again, it doesn't take a mathematical wizard to glance at that page and figure that out right quick.

I will admit that the Vendetta does have its egregiously large profile and squadron rules working against it.

edit: I did not mention the Lascannons are twin-linked, but I usually leave that out of the comparison since Ravagers are BS4. The probability of a TL BS3 weapon hitting is only 8.33% higher than a BS4 single shot weapon, so I give the Vendetta the benefit of the doubt. It is better, but not by enough for me to care all that much.



My friend was able to disable my two land raiders on turn one with two of these.
And the two are filled with veterans that deep strike in your face...


As noted above, your friend rolled hot.



However, the book still has more overcosted klunkers than it does under-priced units.

This is quite true, painfully so at times.


You are aware of how bad the squadron rules are, especially for shooty stuff?


Quoting for greater justice. Squadron rules are a serious detriment to vehicles that I guess were designed to counterbalance the player's ability to cram more vehicles in the list. It's such a severe drawback that I rarely see squadrons at all unless someone's cramming 9 Speeders into an army.

Nobody should ever confuse it for a bonus to taking the vehicle.

Erwos
17-06-2010, 16:35
You know - if you didn't have infantry that DIDN'T fold up like wet paper bags in close combat, or didn't have access to Lash of Submission, or didn't have access to Obliterators - I might feel for you.
You seem to not understand my point about fast attack vs heavy support. Pretty much _everything_ that can reliably kill a tank from far away is in heavy support for Chaos. When you take your Vendetta, it doesn't cost you a Demolisher (or a Vindicator, in my case). When I take that Obliterator squad, I am suffering some real loss in other areas.

Also, an Oblit squad costs almost 50% more than your Vendetta. If they weren't tough and weapons-morphing, they'd be totally worthless for the cost. As it is, they die fast enough if your opponent knows what he or she is doing.

I'm not saying the Vendetta is overpowered, but it definitely needs to cost more like 160-170 points.

(Also, I'm not the guy who lost a Land Raider to a Vendetta... I just agree with him.)

Keichi246
17-06-2010, 17:00
Oh - I understood your point.
I just disagree... :D

Sure everything that can reliably kill a tank from far away in the Chaos army is in Heavy Support. But pretty much ALL your units can perform adequately in close combat, and some of your units are tough as nails, PERIOD. (Try shifting a large squad of Plague Marines off an objective with just small arms fire...)

My point is - armies are different. You have rock solid infantry, one of the most versatile heavy support choices in the game, and at least one psychic power that is considered top tier by nearly everyone. The IG have guns, guns, guns. Oh - and more guns... That's why they are different armies.

(And I'll flip your comment - Vendettas die fast enough if your opponent knows what they are doing... :D Like I said - most of the time they don't last past turn 2 in my experience)

The opportunity costs of the Vendetta are Sentinels and the Hellhound varients - niether of which are to be sneered at, either.

Also remember that points costs are also calculated by the value within it's own army list. Frankly - if the Vendetta was 160-170 points - it would be nearly useless. It's too fragile at that cost, and Hellhounds really are pretty good.

I'd argue that 145-150 is about right. Unlike most vehicles - it can't really hide in cover - which makes it a giant flying target...

ehlijen
17-06-2010, 18:25
Ehlijen, do you really thing single lascannons in inafntry units constitute a sensible AT policy?

For the cost, yes they do. What I am not a fan of is pretending options I don't fully endorse don't exist.

For just over a land raider you can get a 35 wound platoon with 4 lascannon. That platoon will destroy that landraider sooner or later, while also bringing 4 scoring units to the table.

You asked for more wounds in your lascannon squads. The price for that is less lascannon.

105 points gets you 3 fragile, as you say, lascannon or one lascannon backed by 9 guys at stubborn ld9. Both can work, pick which one suits you better, but don't deny the other option exists.



And on comparing the vendetta to the ravager: That isn't going to work. Regardless of whether the vendetta is priced right or not, the Ravager is from a rules set several editions out of date. There is no way of being sure it is correctly pointed in the environment of 5th ed. Then using it as a baseline to test the balance of a 5th ed unit is just not accurate. I don't even neccessarily disagree, I'm just saying that this example comparison doesn't offer useful data due to the DE codex age.

Vaktathi
17-06-2010, 19:31
Who here thinks that the 3-twinlascannon vendetta is undercost for it does? Yes.



My friend was able to disable my two land raiders on turn one with two of these.
And the two are filled with veterans that deep strike in your face...

That is rather unlucky on your part, and could have been done by IG heavy weapons teams as well for fewer points potentially. Your LR's (if they were lascannon ones) would probably win a shooting war against the Vendettas in the long run. Had you gone first your LC's would have stood a good chance of slapping the vendetta's down.

They are not going to routinely mulch two land raiders turn 1, don't take that incident as what they are always going to do.

Bestaltan
17-06-2010, 19:43
The greatest irony is that the only people in tournaments who complain about my KFF.......have been IG players.

There is a LOT of too-good stuff in that codex. An undercosted vendetta is merely one aspect of it. It is what it is.

badguyshaveallthefun
17-06-2010, 20:43
Yes, it's overcosted, but it is what is is. We'll have to live with it until the release of the next IG codex 6-8 years from now.

They're easy enough to counter though if you know what you're doing.

RCgothic
17-06-2010, 21:40
My objection to the vendetta has nothing to do with the points cost (although I agree it is undercosted), but the logic that says a Valkyrie capable of powering a single energy weapon must clearly be able to power a six-weapon variant. It's just the single ugliest piece of non-fluffy codex design ever.

To reduce it to absurdity, if a Vendetta can pack six lascannons, there's no reason a Vulture shouldn't be able to pack ten, and the standard valkyrie should at least have a TL-Multilaser with the option for wing-weapons that aren't based on solid munitions.

Jayden63
17-06-2010, 22:18
I think all of the transport options in the IG codex are undercosted. But as others have said. It is what it is.

Grand Master Raziel
17-06-2010, 22:50
Well, either the Vendetta is significantly undercosted, or the SM tri-las Pred is significantly overcosted. Or both. Look at it this way: the two platforms have roughly equivalent AV - the Vendetta trading the Pred's better front AV for better side AV. Both platforms generate about the same number of hits per turn - the Vendetta's 3 BS3 TLLCs causing almost exactly the same percentage of hits per turn as the Pred's BS4 1 TLLC and 2 single LCs. However, the Vendetta also brings Fast Skimmer to the party, has transport capacity, and is significantly cheaper than the Pred! Maybe being an exceptionally large target partially mitigates this glaring inbalance, but in no way does it even come close to totally doing so.

Axeman1n
17-06-2010, 23:54
Don't forget that when you buy the Vendetta as a transport you are not comparing it to a Rhino or a Razorback or a Landraider, or what ever other transports are available in your army. The vendetta is replacing a Chimera, which is the best transport in the game point for point. When you place a squad of melta vets, they cannot shoot unless they get out.
In 5th edition it's all about anti-Armor14. Discounting a lance weapon because it is only better when compared to Armor 14 is like saying, that gun is only good against marines, it would do nothing to guardsmen. The whole world is marines and Land Raiders. Since 5th edition has come out, every tourney I play I face 2 or 3 marines, and all of them have at least 1 landraider, often they have 2.
Compare that Vendetta against a squad of Devildogs. They are fast, and have the ability to take two melta weapons. Those are far more likely to get the job done than 3 TLLC.

People say, But they can't transport anything. Vendattas get to do ONE thing in a game before they die. If they are transporting a squad, then thats all they get to do. If they are hunting tanks, then that's all they will do. If you get to do both, it's because you opponent wasn't paying attention.

Sentinels are too useful. Rough Riders are too useful. Banewolves are too useful. Devildogs are too useful. Hell hounds are too useful. Armored Sentinels are too useful. Who is not filling up their FA slot as IG?

Vandur Last
18-06-2010, 00:03
It get worse when you start comparing it to the Eldar equivalent, the Brightlance equipped Falcon.

Less accurate shots, lower strength, less transport capacity, more points an takes up a hotly contested Heavy slot.

This from the supposed masters of fast-skimmer tranport technology.. ?

Bloodknight
18-06-2010, 00:09
However, the Vendetta also brings Fast Skimmer to the party, has transport capacity, and is significantly cheaper than the Pred!

Don't forget that it can outflank. The Vendetta is the single most undercosted item in the Guard codex, I could easily see it at 160 points (still slightly cheaper than the Triple-Pred due to the worse front armour and the massive disadvantage at getting a cover save), and that would be without transport capacity.

As it is it costs much less than a Tri-Las-Predator and is better in basically every possible way, and it costs slightly more than a Ravager which it outperforms massively. And that is comparing a Fast Attack choice (something that's been traditionally weak in most codices and especially the Guard) to Heavy Support stuff.


Sentinels are too useful. Rough Riders are too useful. Banewolves are too useful. Devildogs are too useful. Hell hounds are too useful. Armored Sentinels are too useful. Who is not filling up their FA slot as IG?

I don't. I don't own any of the flyers yet and traditionally haven't gotten much use out of the other FA choices. Almost 14 years of playing Guard and I've never had a Sentinel doing anything but falling over at the first sharp glance from an enemy unit.
The Hellhound is pretty worthless in my metagame, so are the other Hounds (and frankly, you get almost 3 Chimeras for a Hellhound with a bit of kit. I know what I take). Armoured Sentinels cost too much compared to the other choices. Rough Riders are pretty good, but not good enough compared to what the Valkyrie and Vendetta offer.

Chiron
18-06-2010, 01:08
All vehicles should probably have a 50 point increase to be honest, this is especially true for transport vehicles so we dont constantly end up with armoured companies (alternatively being in an exploding vehicle needs to be made more deadly)

Vaktathi
18-06-2010, 01:49
I certainly don't think all vehicles need to be increased by 50pts or that AC's, in and of themselves, are a bad thing. Increasing all vehicles by 50pts would see almost none ever taken, not something we want. Additionally, heavy armored/mechanized forces can be quite in keeping with the background, and aren't anything to discourage, but rather for the codex designers to keep in mind so that other builds can counter them.


It get worse when you start comparing it to the Eldar equivalent, the Brightlance equipped Falcon.

Less accurate shots, lower strength, less transport capacity, more points an takes up a hotly contested Heavy slot.

This from the supposed masters of fast-skimmer tranport technology.. ? While the Vendetta is a bit undercosted, the Falcon can sport an array of wargear making it painfully hard to kill, additionally survivable against immobilizations, and give it extra movement. The falcon could use a price decrease and a little reworking, but I wouldn't call the vendetta plainly better in an absolute sense, although in a cost effectiveness comparison it is.

Vandur Last
18-06-2010, 08:27
Sorry Vaktahi i think youre reminicing about 4th ed. When you describe the Falcon so favourably. As others have said of the Vendetta, av12 is easy to kill.
As i said its a more expensive Vendetta with less firepower and less tricks.
Eldar would kill for that many S8+ shots, let alone S9, let alone twin linked, let alone in FA slot. To hear Imperial players describe this as any less than awesome makes me think how spoilt they are compared to xenos.

Vaktathi
18-06-2010, 08:37
Sorry Vaktahi i think youre reminicing about 4th ed. When you describe the Falcon so favourably. As others have said of the Vendetta, av12 is easy to kill.
As i said its a more expensive Vendetta with less firepower and less tricks.
Eldar would kill for that many S8+ shots, let alone S9, let alone twin linked, let alone in FA slot. To hear Imperial players describe this as any less than awesome makes me think how spoilt they are compared to xenos.It is awesome, I won't lie, the Vendetta is undercosted, but the Falcon isn't terrible either. It's not the instant I Win button it used to be, but its still not terrible, and a Holofield Falcon is still one of the hardest vehicles in the game to kill.

The Falcon's strengths have never been its raw firepower, but its speed, survivability and transport ability combined.

Vandur Last
18-06-2010, 09:38
heh, ok. While i dont think youre really wrong, were still going to have to disagree on our evaluation of the Falcon.
It just gets under my skin when my supposed MBT cant compare favourably to someones FA choice.

Vaktathi
18-06-2010, 09:44
heh, ok. While i dont think youre really wrong, were still going to have to disagree on our evaluation of the Falcon.
It just gets under my skin when my supposed MBT cant compare favourably to someones FA choice.
As a gunship, in a purely offensive firepower role, I agree, but, contrary to GW's fluff, the Falcon really worked as an MBT, but as a frustratingly difficult to kill transport, even in 4E. As a transport, I'd take a holofield falcon over a Vendetta any day of the week. People use Vendettas essentially the way they'd use a Trilas predator, the Falcon has never worked that way, or at least, not in since 2nd edition.

EmperorEternalXIX
18-06-2010, 10:49
You are aware of how bad the squadron rules are, especially for shooty stuff?

Try an experiment. Find a friendly player, and get them to let you use the CSM list, but with squadrons instead of single vehicles - probably without the option for daemonic possession, as being immune to shaken or stunned actually makes the squadron useful- (see Apoc. for proof) rather than a pure disadvantage over single vehicles... Squadron rules really aren't that bad. Fast vehicles in squadrons do a lot better than others, because when they get stunned, it downgrades to shaken, and they can just spend the turn they can't fire going flat out for a save.

Or in the Vendetta's case, dropping it's payload while crossing over an objective or other juicy target, while doing constant repositioning you would never normally do because you would not want to lose weapon fire potential.

Squadrons also allow you to allocate the bad hits. Shoot at 1 vendetta with 2 pens and a glance; shoot at 2 vendettas and suddenly you've got one taking 2 pens and the other only taking the glance. I max out my speeder squadrons all the time to take advantage of this and find that they generally are useful a lot longer than when they are separated. If separate they are much easier to neutralize with weapon destroyed results and such.

I wouldn't squadron Vendettas just because they are so stupidly mobile and have such a ridiculous range ability that having them able to aim at separate targets with their obscene armament is more valuable. But I have also seen a ton of guard armies win games just because of a single Vendetta. Outflanking 24" deep and dropping off a scoring unit FTW. The whole thing is ********.

I've had these arguments many times about the Guard, but only here at Warseer. What I've found is this: a lot of Guard players think they win because they're brilliant, and it has absolutely nothing to do with having the most powerful vehicles in the game at their disposal in numbers no other army can even hope to match. Go ahead, ask...they'll be the first to tell you.


Ehlijen, do you really thing single lascannons in inafntry units constitute a sensible AT policy?In a Space Marine squad, this is "versatile" and the ubiquitous SM heavy weapon is often brought up in defense of my constant berating of the pitiful vanilla Tactical Squad. In a Guard squad (whereby there will be 10 others to back it up, instead of 2 others with tac squads) it is all of a sudden foolish.

Bunnahabhain
18-06-2010, 12:32
^^^^ If you can't deal with a single vendetta outflanking 24", and dropping off a single guard squad somewhere, you're not a very good player.

If it is outflanking, then it is probably dropping them off by turn 3, ( chance, before astropath etc, or reserves having turned up.. T2 1/2, T3, 5/6, T4, 35/36, T5 215/216) If it is not outflanking, then it is sat on the board as a giant AV 12 shoot me sign...

and if the skimmer is moving fast, then the squad has taken dangerous terrain tests as it went out the back, so is probably down to 8 men before you start, even assuming the extra dangeous scatter rules don't totally wipe out the squad. And if they've deep struck, they will have to run to get into cover, as you can't DS into it, so they're not shooting either...

Yes, being able to deploy a unit whilst moving fast is useful and powerful, but the sheer danger to the unit doing it balances it out.

Dropping off a scoring unit at the last minute is no worse than having it sat inside a transport that SMF'd there at the last minute....ie falcons.

The board we have is simply too small for all these fast skimmers. If you try using a 6 x 8 board for standard sized games, it helps alot

Doomseer
18-06-2010, 13:07
I do feel that they are undercosted but they certainly aren't unstoppable. I run 4 Vendettas in my Catachan Air Cav list and realised very early on that they are incredibly good for the points.

I have stopped playing this army as I can't stand the attitude it gets me from opponents for how cheesy/broken they are. They have a large footprint, can rarely hide and incurr many dangerous terrain checks as they often have at least part of their hull ending over a terrain piece as every table seems to be 60% cover these days. Only embarking/disembarking and assaulting units may occupy space under the V's which further reduces the table space.

Woe is me!

Vendettas are far cheesier when accompanying ChiMelta Vet spam though, which seems to be very popular for some reason?!:)

Erwos
18-06-2010, 13:28
The "large footprint" argument is true (could you even fit nine of them on a table without it turning into a mess?), but TLOS in 5E makes that a less compelling argument to me, because you can generally get shots in on vehicles most of the game these days.

I think that Rhinos and Chimeras are undercosted, too, so I'm not just bagging on the IG here. The survivability upgrade that 5E gave vehicles does not seem to be at all factored into the new codexes for some reason.

Chem-Dog
18-06-2010, 14:08
Put it this way: I can buy three lascannons for my Havocs for about 25 points less than the whole Vendetta costs. That's not including the actual guys to carry them, and, of course, they can't run 6-12" over whatever terrain they feel like and shoot them. Or outflank. Or deep-strike.

Your Havocs can't get nixed by a single lucky trooper with an AT weapon though ;)


If that Vendetta wants to use all those lascannon it's not being a fast transport. If it wants to get troops places quickly it won't fire all those lascannon. It's capablities don't complement each other well.

Same has been said about the Chimera and that baby packs a helluva lot less punch, can't help but agree with you here.


But when you can take squads of Hellhounds and Sentinels, you're not giving up a whole hell of a lot taking one slot for your squad of Vendettas. You're also not giving up any of those Manticores, LR squads, or artillery batteries you reference later.

Apart from running out of Armylist to wedge it all in to....




I definitely think the Vendetta should have given up some of its transport capacity in return for its weapons. Even with capacity 6 it would still be a bargain.

I thought this when I first saw it....Landraider variants gain space for giving up their Godhammers, why shouldn't the reverse be true of the Valks...especially given the whole weight.
I see no reason why it wouldn't sacrifice it's whole transport capacity to carry the guns and honestly assumed it's a copy paste error from the Valk as there's no reason the Vendetta's armaments couldn't be listed as options for the Valk.


You seem to not understand my point about fast attack vs heavy support. Pretty much _everything_ that can reliably kill a tank from far away is in heavy support for Chaos. When you take your Vendetta, it doesn't cost you a Demolisher (or a Vindicator, in my case). When I take that Obliterator squad, I am suffering some real loss in other areas.

Tell me where in the IG army I can get an auto on target DS-ing MC that can charge on the turn it arrives or _anything_ that can hold an objective that can shrug off Bolter shots (let alone T5/FNP) or the myriad of "ignores cover" weapons in the game....
I'm not saying you're wrong, meerly suggesting your comparison is highly subjective. :)



For just over a land raider you can get a 35 wound platoon with 4 lascannon. That platoon will destroy that landraider sooner or later, while also bringing 4 scoring units to the table.

Or form the platoon up giving a 30 wound heavy weapon squad that CAN have a Vox and a Commissar. 2 Kp's then.


Squadron rules really aren't that bad. Fast vehicles in squadrons do a lot better than others, because when they get stunned, it downgrades to shaken, and they can just spend the turn they can't fire going flat out for a save.

Or in the Vendetta's case, dropping it's payload while crossing over an objective or other juicy target, while doing constant repositioning you would never normally do because you would not want to lose weapon fire potential.

Squadrons also allow you to allocate the bad hits. Shoot at 1 vendetta with 2 pens and a glance; shoot at 2 vendettas and suddenly you've got one taking 2 pens and the other only taking the glance. I max out my speeder squadrons all the time to take advantage of this and find that they generally are useful a lot longer than when they are separated. If separate they are much easier to neutralize with weapon destroyed results and such.

Point 1: If it's shaken it can't fire the Lascannons....it's not blowing up whole battle groups of Landraiders in that turn.
Point 2: In your analysis of the Squadron rules you're ignoring the fact that the immobilised result totally wipes a vehicle from the board, that's 1 lucky glancing shot, or a mediocre Penetrating hit. Not to hard to rack them up againt a AV12 vehicle.

Bilmengar
18-06-2010, 15:21
Yeah, it is too cheap. I would agree with that. And somehow it frustrates me especially because it has this "want to sell new model"-stink. I mean, seriously, who even uses Valkyries? I loved the model I first saw it in the IA books. I also loved the Vulture, and there is a difference between those two - one is a fast transport with supporting firepower, the other is a gunship. Now you have that bastard, better armed then a tank-hunting Vulture, same transport qualities as the valk. Buy new Shiny plastic kit. "It is no fast moving transport cuz it can't fire then"? Yeah, sure, that must be why everybody uses the naked valk as fast transport...

I would have preferred the vulture as gunship. No transport capacity, different loadouts, one of them multiple LCs.

And why exactly is this a seperate Unit? Could be an option under the valkyrie entry...

DA_WarM
18-06-2010, 15:46
Never thought my post would create a commotion like this.

Bunnahabhain
18-06-2010, 15:53
Yeah, it is too cheap. I would agree with that. And somehow it frustrates me especially because it has this "want to sell new model"-stink. I mean, seriously, who even uses Valkyries? I loved the model I first saw it in the IA books. I also loved the Vulture, and there is a difference between those two - one is a fast transport with supporting firepower, the other is a gunship. Now you have that bastard, better armed then a tank-hunting Vulture, same transport qualities as the valk. Buy new Shiny plastic kit. "It is no fast moving transport cuz it can't fire then"? Yeah, sure, that must be why everybody uses the naked valk as fast transport...

I would have preferred the vulture as gunship. No transport capacity, different loadouts, one of them multiple LCs.

And why exactly is this a seperate Unit? Could be an option under the valkyrie entry...

Errrr, lots of people use the valkyrie. Multi laser and MRPs ( + heavy bolters if you like) and it makes a very useful anti horde tool. The MRPs being defensive also means it can move faster and fire effectively.

As to the last point, mainly as GW has rubbish codex lay out....

Hashmal
18-06-2010, 16:00
And on comparing the vendetta to the ravager: That isn't going to work. Regardless of whether the vendetta is priced right or not, the Ravager is from a rules set several editions out of date. There is no way of being sure it is correctly pointed in the environment of 5th ed. Then using it as a baseline to test the balance of a 5th ed unit is just not accurate. I don't even neccessarily disagree, I'm just saying that this example comparison doesn't offer useful data due to the DE codex age.

As I said before, cross-book comparisons are rarely useful. I should have added doubly so when comparing to DE. However, I feel DE is still a useful comparison; one of the only things anyone playing against a DE player complains about anymore is our ability to take a massed amount of cheap anti-tank fire. Even compared to some of the newer codices (Tri-Las Predator, naked Falcon, naked Fire Prism, current Leman Russes, I can go on), the Ravager is still a points-efficient and deadly vehicle that must be neutralized quickly. The Vendetta comparison is still valid from that angle since we are talking about the effectiveness of fast, not-too-survivable vehicles with massed anti-tank capabilities.

Make no mistake; my beef isn't about the Vendetta, aside from the fact that I think it needs to be 10 more points (I'm not sure about 160... seems a little pricey). My beef is that it is a fast attack vehicle that severely outperforms, for its points, several armies' Heavy Support choices.


The greatest irony is that the only people in tournaments who complain about my KFF.......have been IG players.

There is a LOT of too-good stuff in that codex. An undercosted vendetta is merely one aspect of it. It is what it is.

I'm curious. Aside from the Vendetta/Valkyrie and the ability to take Veterans as a much better alternative to Guardsmen, what do you think is too-good? My personal opinion is that the Officer of the Fleet should be 50 or 55 points (and I'd still encourage everyone I know to take him), but it ends there. Aside from Vendettas/Valkyries, Veterans, and OotF, everything else strikes me as pretty reasonable or overcosted (poor Stormtroopers; you'll be good someday...).


Squadron rules really aren't that bad. Fast vehicles in squadrons do a lot better than others, because when they get stunned, it downgrades to shaken, and they can just spend the turn they can't fire going flat out for a save.


...which the entire squadron must do to maintain coherency, so everyone loses the ability to shoot. In exchange for a special rule that is granted by a 5-10 point (can't remember; don't play an army that gets it) Extra Armor upgrade, your average mortality on a Penetrating hit rises by 17%. That is significant. Additionally, non-AP1 Glances can now kill non open topped vehicles. AP1 weapons get that much better and open-topped vehicles eat it that much worse. This is only one of the many reasons few people take squadrons of Sentinels... or any, for that matter.



Squadrons also allow you to allocate the bad hits. Shoot at 1 vendetta with 2 pens and a glance; shoot at 2 vendettas and suddenly you've got one taking 2 pens and the other only taking the glance. I max out my speeder squadrons all the time to take advantage of this and find that they generally are useful a lot longer than when they are separated. If separate they are much easier to neutralize with weapon destroyed results and such.


This also allows me to suppress two vehicles with one squad's shooting. I am so okay with this.

If you got a points break for taking vehicles in squadrons, I could understand this line of reasoning. However, since you don't, I cannot see the squadron rules as anything but a severe penalty for the ability to take more vehicles than you'd typically be able; a questionable benefit that wholly relies on the rest of your army's composition.


I've had these arguments many times about the Guard, but only here at Warseer. What I've found is this: a lot of Guard players think they win because they're brilliant, and it has absolutely nothing to do with having the most powerful vehicles in the game at their disposal in numbers no other army can even hope to match. Go ahead, ask...they'll be the first to tell you.


That doesn't advance anybody's argument and is entirely subjective. The best 40k players I know are Guard players


^^^^ If you can't deal with a single vendetta outflanking 24", and dropping off a single guard squad somewhere, you're not a very good player.


I'll just quote that for justice.

mdauben
18-06-2010, 16:16
Yeah, it is too cheap. I would agree with that. And somehow it frustrates me especially because it has this "want to sell new model"-stink.
This is true, but I think (like is often the case when people complain about how) it ignores the weaknesses of unit/vehicle in favor of focusing on the strenghts. It seems to be a fact that the Ven seldome gets more than one attack run per game against a competent opponent. :(


Now you have that bastard, better armed then a tank-hunting Vulture, same transport qualities as the valk.
I agree that this is a valid complaint. The Ven should have either given up some of its transport capacity to fit in all those LCs, or else it should have been a varient of the Vulture instead of the Valk with no transport capacity at all. :shifty:

Bunnahabhain
18-06-2010, 16:24
I agree that this is a valid complaint. The Ven should have either given up some of its transport capacity to fit in all those LCs, or else it should have been a varient of the Vulture instead of the Valk with no transport capacity at all. :shifty:

I thoroughly agree. I'd guess at 140 pts, no transport capacity, or maybe 150 pts with capacity for 6....


I am wondering a bit about the number of complaints on this thread that could reasonably be paraphrased as 'Guard shooting is too good' or 'Guard Shooty stuff is better than our shooty stuff'.

From somewhat neglected feeling Tau players this is one thing, but from everybody else, it's a little over the top. Guard are the shooty army. They do it very well, they have to as most other armies standard (not their powerful CC specialists) units will wipe the floor with anything the Guard can put up in CC.

Erwos
18-06-2010, 16:36
Make no mistake; my beef isn't about the Vendetta, aside from the fact that I think it needs to be 10 more points (I'm not sure about 160... seems a little pricey). My beef is that it is a fast attack vehicle that severely outperforms, for its points, several armies' Heavy Support choices.
QFT. But, let me say, if 150-155 points seems right on the edge, that's actually a fairly compelling argument for making it 155 points. One of the problems that seems to pop up in codexes far too often is that certain items are costed so that it's a total no-brainer to take them (see: Rhinos), and they wind up crowding out the ones that are marginal.

As for "waaah, the IG are more shooty than my 'nids!" and the like, there's probably some of that, but the other question is whether more shooty should mean "cheaper shooty" or "can take more shooty". The IG seem to have both in spades, and there is some reason to wonder how healthy that is.

Vaktathi
18-06-2010, 19:29
Squadron rules really aren't that bad. Fast vehicles in squadrons do a lot better than others, because when they get stunned, it downgrades to shaken, and they can just spend the turn they can't fire going flat out for a save. They are actually pretty bad, and even moreso on Valk/Vends.

You have a 16.66% greater chance of losing a vehicle on a pen and a chance to lose one on a glance, effectively returning the vehicles to the 4E damage table in terms of destruction. Additionally they are hideously vulnerable in CC, a powerfist getting into one can kill a vehicles that aren't even within 12" of the assaulting model as a result of the squadron allocation rules. Add to that the inability to split fire and the requirement to stay within 4" (awkward especially with Valks) and you'll find they are rather punitive. There's a reason you generally only see people taking very small and cheap vehicles in squadrons, stuff like sentinels, kans, hydras and griffons, not vendettas and LRBT's. The marginal value of the additional vehicle is very little in most cases and thus rather pointless.

Also, for Valks/Vends, they already come with EA, so the squadrons benefit does nothing in this regard.



Squadrons also allow you to allocate the bad hits. Shoot at 1 vendetta with 2 pens and a glance; shoot at 2 vendettas and suddenly you've got one taking 2 pens and the other only taking the glance.If you had two in two units now you've got one taking two pens and a glance and another that's just fine and dandy however. Why bother taking the 2nd vendetta in the same unit just to offload hits when you could instead buy more units elsewhere?


I max out my speeder squadrons all the time to take advantage of this and find that they generally are useful a lot longer than when they are separated. If separate they are much easier to neutralize with weapon destroyed results and such. The greater chance of destruction, and especially vulnerability to CC attacks, with the greater ability of the enemy to concentrate firepower instead of having to divert between multiple targets, mitigates the usefullness of this.



I wouldn't squadron Vendettas just because they are so stupidly mobile and have such a ridiculous range ability that having them able to aim at separate targets with their obscene armament is more valuable. But I have also seen a ton of guard armies win games just because of a single Vendetta. Outflanking 24" deep and dropping off a scoring unit FTW. The whole thing is ********. If only mine pulled off such amazing wins routinely by such means.



I've had these arguments many times about the Guard, but only here at Warseer. What I've found is this: a lot of Guard players think they win because they're brilliant, and it has absolutely nothing to do with having the most powerful vehicles in the game at their disposal in numbers no other army can even hope to match. Go ahead, ask...they'll be the first to tell you. Why do you always seem to have this hatred of IG players? You always seem to make IG players out to be cheesemongering WAAC napoleon complex jerks who couldn't play if they didn't have the zomguberbroken codex.



In a Space Marine squad, this is "versatile" and the ubiquitous SM heavy weapon is often brought up in defense of my constant berating of the pitiful vanilla Tactical Squad. In a Guard squad (whereby there will be 10 others to back it up, instead of 2 others with tac squads) it is all of a sudden foolish.A tac squad can split into two units, one with a lascannon the other with a powerfist and flamer, and perform two different roles. A 5man combat squad with a lascannon is far more capable in just about every role than a 10man Infantry squad with a lascannon. That said, I'll agree still not the best AT unit in the world, but when used in the above manner is more useful than an IG infantry squad trying to do it.

EmperorEternalXIX
18-06-2010, 21:52
If only mine pulled off such amazing wins routinely by such means. I realize that Warseer often finds my stories to be unrealistic (I remember the time that I mentioned I got a sweeping advance on a Chaos Marine unit with a Scout Squad, what a hoot I had THAT week defending the logistics of the situation). I have a personal belief -- and I realize this is going to sound very vain, but so be it -- that the people I play against and routinely deal with as players running my gaming group, are a cut above your average 40k player. Or at least it seems so, because we seem to have a lot of people winning in consistent tactics that Warseer constantly derails as stupid or hyperbole based on a rare but not common outcome.

That being said, the Vendetta has become the first kill priority in every battle one is in at my club, for precisely the reason that it often wins games with its drop-off ability. Players are often agitated when it doesn't arrive early from reserves because they fear it arriving on turn five, turbo-boosting over an objective, and dropping off troops to claim/contest a victory.


A tac squad can split into two units, one with a lascannon the other with a powerfist and flamer, and perform two different roles. A 5man combat squad with a lascannon is far more capable in just about every role than a 10man Infantry squad with a lascannon. That said, I'll agree still not the best AT unit in the world, but when used in the above manner is more useful than an IG infantry squad trying to do it.If I made this argument the other way around, using the Pred in comparison to the Vendetta, I would get back a lot of "but comparing things across books is useless". On Warsser the logistics get very lopsided very quickly. I often tell stories at my club, or am greeted by people who witness my debates here, wondering how things are so non-sensical on here. This is of course rare, but it happens often enough that I would consider myself less wrong than my fellow Warseers would have me believe.

Pertaining to the matter at hand, a Guard infantry squad with a lascannon is going to not do much on its own. But like all Guard players who argue with me, you seem to ignore the fact that the we should be considering equivalent points in the discussion. Guard guys love to go "But my guys suck" as an excuse for cheap points and uber gear without ever acknowledging the fact that they can have 3x as many of them as almost any other army. You are correct in that 1:1 the tac squad is superior in every way, but the fact that there could be a as many as a dozen or more of these lascannons on the field to the tac squad's average of 3 or 4 is what I was intending to draw attention to. Neither is the best policy, of course; on this we are in agreement.


Why do you always seem to have this hatred of IG players? You always seem to make IG players out to be cheesemongering WAAC napoleon complex jerks who couldn't play if they didn't have the zomguberbroken codex. Not this stuff. It's not really that bad. My stereotype has a lot more logic to it than you might think. Guard folks are not cheesemongering or WAAC by default, but they do seem to have an amazing propensity for not understanding the greater balance of the game at large. As I already mentioned, they tend to cling to BS3 and T3 as huge excuses for the whole army, while other armies have to endure this handicap at mass. What I dislike about Guard players (or, I should say, that particular cadre of them that argues with me on here all the time...not all guard players fit my bill, no doubt), is that they think all this stuff is not only perfectly reasonable, but that some of it is crap.

Case in point: just a few days ago someone was saying how the grav chute ability of the Vendetta was crap and that you could take its ability to transport away entirely and no one would care in the slightest about the change because of how worthless this tactic is. In my area this very ability has won many games for all of our guard players (in an incredibly lame fashion). I consider this a prime example of guard fanboy ignorance -- and that is what I dislike, not guard players themselves.

They cling to T3 as the argument for everything's power level. "Oh you can just charge me with one marine and sweeping advance my whole army." This is my MAIN gripe about the guard defenders here -- they ALWAYS talk in a vacuum, and then write off anything you say as non-viable for the purposes of arguing.

You even just did it; 1 lascannon in 1 guard squad vs 1 lascannon in 1 tac squad. Be realistic. How many lascannon teams would you use if you decided to put them in a lot of your infantry squads? We all have to take two troop choices so that's 4 lascannons right there if you are taking platoons vs. 2 lascannons to the Space Marines. the numbers only become more favorable as they go up. Now, this isn't necessarily better, of course, but just off the top of my head, for around 500ish points the SMs are going to get two tactical squads with a Rhino and the Guard are going to get FIFTY MODELS with twice the weaponry and FOUR chimeras. This is the kind of raw and obvious over-the-top setup that Guard players, when arguing with me, like to pretend that they don't have the obscene advantage of. I didn't even factor in orders or give the platoon command squads any kit in my example, either.

The people who argue with me about the guard ALWAYS ignore this kind of stuff. ALWAYS. And you can argue with me all day, but at the end of the line the reality is you don't even come close to needing 4x the troop and weapon capacity as other armies just because you are BS3/T3.

MystheDevourer
18-06-2010, 22:10
Yes, vendettas are a little undercosted. Anybody who picked up the IG codex for more than about 30 seconds has noticed this. It's more that they are fast vehicles, so get to make the best of the vehicle rules.

However, the book still has more overcosted klunkers than it does under-priced units.

Not true my Aviation Orandance Buddy thinks that they are not worth the points. . .I plan on proving him wrong. . . .

Balerion
18-06-2010, 22:23
You are aware of how bad the squadron rules are, especially for shooty stuff?


Care to expand on this? Particularly re: LR squadrons. I mean, yeah, sure, they die to immobilized results... but you also virtually guarantee that your front AV will be taking every shot.



I am wondering a bit about the number of complaints on this thread that could reasonably be paraphrased as 'Guard shooting is too good' or 'Guard Shooty stuff is better than our shooty stuff'.

From somewhat neglected feeling Tau players this is one thing, but from everybody else, it's a little over the top. Guard are the shooty army. They do it very well, they have to as most other armies standard (not their powerful CC specialists) units will wipe the floor with anything the Guard can put up in CC.
I think there's a general distaste for powerful, long-range shooting, because it takes no skill to apply beyond prioritizing your targets (whereas a successful assault usually has to be earned).

Bunnahabhain
18-06-2010, 22:39
Care to expand on this? Particularly re: LR squadrons. I mean, yeah, sure, they die to immobilized results... but you also virtually guarantee that your front AV will be taking every shot.


They die to immobilised.

Damage results get spread about. For squadronned shooty stuff, the least bad damage result is a weapon destroyed, as at least the rest of the guns are shooting. Therefore you can shut down several vehicles shooting by shooting at the one.

Front armour means little to meltas or power fists

Overkill. A pair of Russes would frequently( not always) be better off shooting at two separate targets, not overkilling one.

For the skimmers, they already have the extra armour the squadron rules give them, so they only get the downsides...

Personally, I've found that the only Russes you can sensibly run as a squadron are Demolishers or standard Battle tanks with little equipment. Anything more just gets too expensive, for too little extra results over a single one...

MajorWesJanson
18-06-2010, 23:08
My objection to the vendetta has nothing to do with the points cost (although I agree it is undercosted), but the logic that says a Valkyrie capable of powering a single energy weapon must clearly be able to power a six-weapon variant. It's just the single ugliest piece of non-fluffy codex design ever.

To reduce it to absurdity, if a Vendetta can pack six lascannons, there's no reason a Vulture shouldn't be able to pack ten, and the standard valkyrie should at least have a TL-Multilaser with the option for wing-weapons that aren't based on solid munitions.

Looking at the FW kits for the Vendetta, the guns have power packs like the infantry ones. Likely liminted in shots compared to a Land Raider with dedicated generators for the las cannon, but enough for 6-10 shots each gun.

Vaktathi
18-06-2010, 23:30
I realize that Warseer often finds my stories to be unrealistic (I remember the time that I mentioned I got a sweeping advance on a Chaos Marine unit with a Scout Squad, what a hoot I had THAT week defending the logistics of the situation). Weird stuff happens, I wouldn't doubt that this incident occured, most people have seen such silly things, sometimes the dice just want to upend the expected outcome. I had a squad of carapace vets sit in combat for 4 rounds with Possessed and ended up wiping out the possessed in a game last month because the dice came up ridiculously amazing for me every time and mediocre for my opponent. That said, it's nothing I would expect or count on.




That being said, the Vendetta has become the first kill priority in every battle one is in at my club, for precisely the reason that it often wins games with its drop-off ability. Players are often agitated when it doesn't arrive early from reserves because they fear it arriving on turn five, turbo-boosting over an objective, and dropping off troops to claim/contest a victory.
While possible, I've never personally seen a game won this way, IG troops don't tend to stay long if disembarked.

Also, wouldn't this be a role more suited to a normal Valkyrie that can move and shoot to full effect against advancing infantry and not a tank hunter that is at its most fearsome when moving 6" or less?




Pertaining to the matter at hand, a Guard infantry squad with a lascannon is going to not do much on its own. But like all Guard players who argue with me, you seem to ignore the fact that the we should be considering equivalent points in the discussion. 5 combat squadded SM's with a lascannon is effectively what, 90pts? (don't have the book here right now). 10man IG squad with a lascannon is 75, a bit of a difference yes, but not huge. I'd still favor the 5man tac over the 10man IS. Granted you have to be 10 strong to get that lascannon, so lets compare a tac squad with a melta and a lascannon against two las/melta IG infantry squads. You get about a 20pt discount with the IG, more dudes and more guns. However there is relatively little CC capability, and the IG units weapons will generally never both be used at the same time, and won't hit as often, while the SM units can split and engage the enemy with advancing melta and stationary lascannon, and engage enemy armor in CC. Doesn't sound too off to me.


Guard guys love to go "But my guys suck" as an excuse for cheap points Well yes, if the statline and gear sucks, it should be cheap. If it's not going to contribute much it shouldn't cost much.


and uber gear What uber gear to guard infantry get? Or are you referring to the vehicles? Granted the Vendetta is totally undercosted, I'm not going to debate that, although maybe the degree (personally I'm thinking it should be more in the ballpark of 155-165)


without ever acknowledging the fact that they can have 3x as many of them as almost any other army. Nobody forgets that. But that's the classic archetype of the army, it wins by outgunning and outnumbering its enemies *because* individually each unit is


You are correct in that 1:1 the tac squad is superior in every way, but the fact that there could be a as many as a dozen or more of these lascannons on the field to the tac squad's average of 3 or 4 is what I was intending to draw attention to. Right, but they are less accurate and easier to remove, hence the need for quantity. You'd get about 11 Infantry Squads with a lascannon for 4 10man tac's with a flamer, Pfist and lascannon. Sounds about right where it should be to me.


Neither is the best policy, of course; on this we are in agreement.Indeed.




Not this stuff. It's not really that bad. My stereotype has a lot more logic to it than you might think. Guard folks are not cheesemongering or WAAC by default, but they do seem to have an amazing propensity for not understanding the greater balance of the game at large. As I already mentioned, they tend to cling to BS3 and T3 as huge excuses for the whole army, while other armies have to endure this handicap at mass. What I dislike about Guard players (or, I should say, that particular cadre of them that argues with me on here all the time...not all guard players fit my bill, no doubt), is that they think all this stuff is not only perfectly reasonable, but that some of it is crap. ? Not quite sure what you mean by this. It's reasonable, but crap? Are you referring to our previous discussion?




Case in point: just a few days ago someone was saying how the grav chute ability of the Vendetta was crap and that you could take its ability to transport away entirely and no one would care in the slightest about the change because of how worthless this tactic is. Its useful, I wouldn't ever say the ability to move 24" and disembark isn't, but wouldn't be a humongous loss if it went away either.


In my area this very ability has won many games for all of our guard players (in an incredibly lame fashion). I consider this a prime example of guard fanboy ignorance -- and that is what I dislike, not guard players themselves. I find it difficult however to believe that this consistently wins games, especially when there isn't a need to disembark to claim an objective, they can simply stay in the skimmer and claim it. If you've got something on the objective already it's pretty simple to keep a Valk/Vend from interfering, as it can't tank shock you off, and you can probably spread out to ensure that it can't end it's move, or legally disembark anything, within 3" of the objective.

Of course, if its a naked objective, then such is life, and the ability to jet a skimmer with a scoring unit to an objective is not exactly the sole providence of the Imperial Guard alone, certain other armies are infamous for this, and even SM's can pull off the whole "reserved outflanking scoring unit fast skimmer" thing.





You even just did it; 1 lascannon in 1 guard squad vs 1 lascannon in 1 tac squad. Be realistic. It wasn't meant to be a direct comparison in that manner, rather how it a lascannon in a tac squad can be utilized more effectively than in an IG unit, and why, while it's not the most amazing thing with an SM unit, it's more useful than dedicating an IG infantry squad to that role. It wasn't meant to straight up compare them one on one.


How many lascannon teams would you use if you decided to put them in a lot of your infantry squads? We all have to take two troop choices so that's 4 lascannons right there if you are taking platoons vs. 2 lascannons to the Space Marines. the numbers only become more favorable as they go up. Now, this isn't necessarily better, of course, but just off the top of my head, for around 500ish points the SMs are going to get two tactical squads with a Rhino and the Guard are going to get FIFTY MODELS with twice the weaponry and FOUR chimeras. At 500pts you'd need platoon commands too. If you want 4 chimeras with lascannon infantry squads, it'd be 520pts base, then at least another 60 for the two base naked footslogging platoon commands, making it 580, at which point you could get 3 full 10man tac squads with lascannons and meltaguns IIRC, and split them into six 5 man units each with an AT weapon. Not a bad matchup. Or give the platoon commands a lascannon and a chimera as well, and you've got enough points for 4 such tac squads, or 3 with a rhino or razorback depending on how you wish to use them. Outnumbered roughly 2-2.5x either way, about where it should be.


This is the kind of raw and obvious over-the-top setup that Guard players, when arguing with me, like to pretend that they don't have the obscene advantage of. I didn't even factor in orders or give the platoon command squads any kit in my example, either. You also seem to neglect some of the issues above, as well as the strengths of SM squads, such as the ability to combat squad, their far superior staying power and greater flexibility of role, and greater success rates in hitting targets. You seem to be stuck on the fact that IG are in fact fully capable of outshooting Marines. This is how the army works. They are one dimensional in this manner and cannot engage the enemy in the multiple vectors that SM's can. If you try and compare on straight firepower and numbers then, of course, the Imperial Guard will win. You however seem to be neglecting the much greater flexibility of Space Marines and the value of that staying power in favor of simply looking at numbers and guns, which doesn't tell the whole story.



The people who argue with me about the guard ALWAYS ignore this kind of stuff. ALWAYS. And you can argue with me all day, but at the end of the line the reality is you don't even come close to needing 4x the troop and weapon capacity as other armies just because you are BS3/T3.How did we go from 20v50 (2.5x) to 4x here? Either way, IG units shoot. That's all they really do. They shoot and have numbers. They are static in nature generally and have only one avenue of attack open to them against all but the weakest of foes, unlike SM's which can not only engage the enemy at range but in assaults with confidence as well. The army operates by having more bodies and more guns than an opponent, it always has and always will and makes no secret of it and is promoted in exactly that manner by GW.

It's not about the BS and T3, there's also the WS3, S3, I3 Ld7/8 5+sv. Guardsmen individually do *nothing* well, hence the need for large numbers. It generally takes about 3x the amount of fire to inflict the same casualties on an SM unit as an IG unit (assuming its not something like a battlecannon of course, which are generally exceptions), likewise for non-PW CC attacks. SM units don't run as easily and regroup when they do, and can really take the fight to the enemy in close combat and stand even if charged themselves. In such a light, why wouldn't the IG heavily outnumber such units?

I'm not understanding why that's such an issue as long as you aren't trying to beat them in the area where they are strongest.

EmperorEternalXIX
19-06-2010, 01:48
While possible, I've never personally seen a game won this way, IG troops don't tend to stay long if disembarked.

Also, wouldn't this be a role more suited to a normal Valkyrie that can move and shoot to full effect against advancing infantry and not a tank hunter that is at its most fearsome when moving 6" or less? Actually, yes, if you assume as much. Like I said, my players think more outside the box than most. What is done is the Vendetta flies about with a small scoring unit in it, engaging from maximum range and avoiding anything but the occasional lascannon or ML return fire. If this is done successfully, it will still be alive during Turn 5 (or 6 or 7). it drops the units to objectives the Vendetta can't really capture due to it's base



5 combat squadded SM's with a lascannon is effectively what, 90pts? (don't have the book here right now). 10man IG squad with a lascannon is 75, a bit of a difference yes, but not huge. I know you get to it later in the post, but here is a classic example: An SM squad is always 160 points base, before weapons, and must always be 10-men to even HAVE a weapon. These restrictions must be considered when doing a comparison of being equivalent or not.


I'd still favor the 5man tac over the 10man IS. Granted you have to be 10 strong to get that lascannon, so lets compare a tac squad with a melta and a lascannon against two las/melta IG infantry squads. You get about a 20pt discount with the IG, more dudes and more guns. However there is relatively little CC capability, and the IG units weapons will generally never both be used at the same time, and won't hit as often, while the SM units can split and engage the enemy with advancing melta and stationary lascannon, and engage enemy armor in CC. Doesn't sound too off to me. It is comparable, but again we must account for the fact that there will be many more IG models (and thus, many more opportunities to succeed...which is more vital than any statline in 40k).


What uber gear to guard infantry get? Or are you referring to the vehicles? Every vehicle in the Imperial Guard codex massively outperforms its equivalents in other armies. We see this all the time; compare Guard heavy support (which, granted, should be solid) to other armies and you will find their options utterly smash almost any opposing vehicle configurations for firepower, strength, survivability and versatility. The IG possess a transport that outshoots most dedicated Heavy Support and a Fast Attack that is a better tank hunter than almost any unit in the game.


Right, but they are less accurate and easier to remove, hence the need for quantity. You'd get about 11 Infantry Squads with a lascannon for 4 10man tac's with a flamer, Pfist and lascannon. Sounds about right where it should be to me. An even match until you consider the transports each is packing. You will blow apart the Rhinos before they even come close, and with 11 las shots a turn it is going to be a long walk for those SMs. The guard, because of sheer volume of units, does not have this disadvantage. They can send half forward, keep half back for heavy weapon fire, and STILL outgun the target while maintaining strong board control.


Not quite sure what you mean by this. It's reasonable, but crap? Are you referring to our previous discussion? Sorry, sort of a misrepresented comment there. What I mean was, most guard players don't view anything in the codex as powerful, and there are many things in it that other armies would love that guard players consider garbage. Even in this thread, the handful of people who agree about the transport, seem to think that it is undercosted by an almost pointless margin (you are not among these folks, just to clarify). That thing costing any less than 150ish is a joke and an insult to anyone who built a tri-las pred.


Its useful, I wouldn't ever say the ability to move 24" and disembark isn't, but wouldn't be a humongous loss if it went away either. I find it difficult however to believe that this consistently wins games, especially when there isn't a need to disembark to claim an objective, they can simply stay in the skimmer and claim it. If you've got something on the objective already it's pretty simple to keep a Valk/Vend from interfering, as it can't tank shock you off, and you can probably spread out to ensure that it can't end it's move, or legally disembark anything, within 3" of the objective. As I already mentioned, most of our players use it as though it's empty, engaging from long range. It works well because this technique keeps the ship safe until the end of the game, and by grav-chuting, it can affect a lot. I once saw it drop off models to contest one objective while moving itself to contest another a bit further off -- masterfully taking 2-1 game and turning it into a 0-1 game, securing a victory that would have been impossible for almost any other army (except of course the Blood Angels, I guess...but their plane is just as stupidly out of place in 40k as the Vendetta is).


Of course, if its a naked objective, then such is life, and the ability to jet a skimmer with a scoring unit to an objective is not exactly the sole providence of the Imperial Guard alone, certain other armies are infamous for this, and even SM's can pull off the whole "reserved outflanking scoring unit fast skimmer" thing. Yes, but the destructive force and sheer ease of map control that the Guard has in virtually unparalleled; when you couple this with a more durable and specialized vehicle that can do everything the Land Speeder Storm can but better, it makes for a much more useful and less "occasional" tactic.


It wasn't meant to be a direct comparison in that manner, rather how it a lascannon in a tac squad can be utilized more effectively than in an IG unit, and why, while it's not the most amazing thing with an SM unit, it's more useful than dedicating an IG infantry squad to that role. It wasn't meant to straight up compare them one on one. Understood.


At 500pts you'd need platoon commands too. If you want 4 chimeras with lascannon infantry squads, it'd be 520pts base, then at least another 60 for the two base naked footslogging platoon commands, making it 580, at which point you could get 3 full 10man tac squads with lascannons and meltaguns IIRC, and split them into six 5 man units each with an AT weapon. Not a bad matchup. Or give the platoon commands a lascannon and a chimera as well, and you've got enough points for 4 such tac squads, or 3 with a rhino or razorback depending on how you wish to use them. Outnumbered roughly 2-2.5x either way, about where it should be. You are correct. Of course, you can also fit all of this into ONE infantry platoon, yielding 45 models and 4 chimeras (not including kit for the PCS) for 500ish points just the same. On the other side of the board there will be two rhinos and 4 unique weapons, while the guard enjoy 4 Chimeras and 8 unique weapons. this is still outnumbering by 2.5, which makes sense. What doesn't make sense is why the Guardsmen are armed to the teeth. Out of each of these chimeras comes 9x 36" shots, and 1x 48" lascannon shots. That is 40 shots that can reach almost across the whole table, able to engage multiple targets thanks to the fire point rules, and that is all without even bothering to use 36 of your 45 models.

What I'm getting at is, IG outnumber by the right volume, but the powerful storm of fire at long range is ridiculously powerful and capable. Their units are MORE than capable of defending themselves especially when working in concert with one another, but the greater Guard community would have you believe that powerful additions like the Vendetta are needed because the army somehow can't get to objectives/do long range tank-hunting without it.


You also seem to neglect some of the issues above, as well as the strengths of SM squads, Beyond it's statline, the SM has no strengths. A bold statement, but that's my stance.


such as the ability to combat squad, A liability that ensures both halves of your unit will be easily overcome as well as cutting your army's mobility in half in the process. Terrible option, rarely beneficial to do en masse. At least for a tactical squad, anyway.


their far superior staying powerThe 3+ save is horrifically overrated. On a T6 MC in the Nid codex it is regarded as worthless by much of the community, but for some reason, put it on a marine, and it instantly becomes something that is allegedly reliable. When armies like the guard have such huge advantages in rate of fire. high strength weaponry, and the omnipresent safety of vehicle support, this is often a moot point. All the 3+ save does in 5th edition is make cover worthless to us.


and greater flexibility of role, An IG squad can do anything a Space Marine squad can do, it is just less likely to be successful. But for every one marine squad you will have something like 3-5 IG units of various types that can attempt to work on the same goal. A Tac squad has no flexibility, only restrictions; you want to see a truly flexible troop choice, look no further than Grey Hunters. They are what a Space Marine should be.


and greater success rates in hitting targets.I often ignore this because of the numbers involved in the comparison. What is more likely to do 5 wounds -- 5 bolters, or 20 guard?


You seem to be stuck on the fact that IG are in fact fully capable of outshooting Marines. This is how the army works. They are one dimensional in this manner and cannot engage the enemy in the multiple vectors that SM's can. If you try and compare on straight firepower and numbers then, of course, the Imperial Guard will win. You however seem to be neglecting the much greater flexibility of Space Marines and the value of that staying power in favor of simply looking at numbers and guns, which doesn't tell the whole story. In gameplay, I think it DOES tell the whole story. What difference does it make to IG whether I choose to go an assault or alpha strike or mechanized or combat squad route? IG have enough to blow any of those things away before they accomplish their goals, and if they DO accomplish their goals they are killed shortly thereafter. The Vendetta is perfect proof of this; it is more flexible than anything in the Space Marine arsenal, except for one thing -- The Vendetta "Power Armor Edition" that the Blood Angels got.


How did we go from 20v50 (2.5x) to 4x here?The number of weapons and vehicles rather than troop to troop comparison. Three Leman Russes is more heavy weapons than the average entire opposing army.


Either way, IG units shoot. That's all they really do. They shoot and have numbers. They are static in nature generally and have only one avenue of attack open to them against all but the weakest of foes, unlike SM's which can not only engage the enemy at range but in assaults with confidence as well. The army operates by having more bodies and more guns than an opponent, it always has and always will and makes no secret of it and is promoted in exactly that manner by GW. This is perfectly fine. But nowhere in the game was there any need for a flying super-transport skimmer with the best armament in the game for an almost laughable point value. You could delete the Vendetta from the codex and the army would be just as incredibly effective as it is now.


It's not about the BS and T3, there's also the WS3, S3, I3 Ld7/8 5+sv. Guardsmen individually do *nothing* well, hence the need for large numbers. It generally takes about 3x the amount of fire to inflict the same casualties on an SM unit as an IG unit (assuming its not something like a battlecannon of course, which are generally exceptions), likewise for non-PW CC attacks. SM units don't run as easily and regroup when they do, and can really take the fight to the enemy in close combat and stand even if charged themselves. In such a light, why wouldn't the IG heavily outnumber such units? I don't have a problem with how the IG codex is put together. It's very fluffy and very correct to the source material, as well as very effective and highly competitive. All codices should be like this. The thing that bothers me is, they are NOT all like that, and the Guard guys seem to think that they are. This thread is full of it: people bring up the tri-las pred and the fans are going "Nope nope, cross-codex comparisons don't mean anything because of internal balance." These people have no idea what that even means.


I'm not understanding why that's such an issue as long as you aren't trying to beat them in the area where they are strongest.Well as Space Wolves and with a big red bullseye on Valkyries and Leman Russes, I do well against the Guard most times. But again, I must thank the TRULY versatile units of the Wolves codex for that; as the standard Marines I suffered so many en route casualties and was so understaffed with proper weaponry in all my lists it became a running gag at my club.

Either way, I hate the Vendetta. My reasons are a thousandfold but my main one is simply that planes do not belong in 40k.

senorcardgage
19-06-2010, 02:33
I think that the vendetta is way under costed. The damn thing has three twin linked las cannons, is fast, has extra armor, has scout, and can carry twelve guys... Even if it had no transport capacity it would be a steal. Even if it didn't have scout and no transport capacity it would be a steal...

Solar_Eclipse
19-06-2010, 03:46
EmperorEternalXIX, please don't presume that your gaming group plays better than others.

Also, i would be curious if you have ever played Imperial Guard, as the weaknesses of a statline filled with 3's, a gun with 3's and a 5+ save *is* very hampering, and unlike armies with similar statlines we dont have many ways of mitigating it.

Eldar have Fleet, powerful offensive stats
Tau have great guns, 4+ armour and Fish of Fury.
Nids are fast, have good offensive stats generally and great supporting units.
Sisters have good BS, guns and power armour, as well as acts of Faith

Guard have to rely on masses of shooting, they have no real method of resilience beyond Chimeras (weapons platforms, not very fast) and their Tanks (Resilient except against most dedicated Anti tank weapons)

The crippling lack of Close Combat and armour really is worth the boons we get, however few they are. One of the only uber upgrades for infantry i can see as worth it is demolitions for Veterans, and that has its own disadvantages.

I myself have just changed from an infantry horde supported by tanks (not very good, my own experience as a player was the only thing that kept me in a game compared to my opponents who are newer to the game but with vastly better lists) to a Mechvets list.

Its amazing how people think Mechvets is so overpowered, Chimeras are quite easy to kill, even the Russ isnt too hard once you get close, Unlike most tanks it generally doesn't move over 6" to get protection from combat.

really, i just think you are being quite unfair in saying that marines, for example, dont get any useful bonuses compared to guard, especially when the basic marine has a godlike basic weapon, a pistol, frag and Krak grenades, the ability to split a squad, the ability to choose to fail a Ld Test and automatically rally after fleeing. The Guardsmen Gets a lasgun, Frag Grenades and the ability to join other units into a bigger unit.

You say Marines cant buy Heavy/Special weapons until you buy 10 models?

Funnily enough, Guardsmen have this same restriction, except we dont have the ability to choose less than 10, our Heavy weapons list doesnt include the Plasma Cannon, we need to use 2 models for a Heavy weapon, and our low BS means that we dont have a good chance of hitting with our guns.

ehlijen
19-06-2010, 03:49
Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever considered using the alternate Vendatta wing weapons option (hellfury? the cover ignoring rockets)?

Lord Inquisitor
19-06-2010, 04:00
My opinion is that giving both the Valkyrie and Vendetta scout was a huge mistake (scout on a transport vehicle, in a game where you can achieve first turn charges with embarked infantry, really needs to be considered carefully - made worse by the fact that this particular army has cheap troops capable of carrying three special weapons, meltabombs and a demo charge in one squad).

As for the Vendetta is boggles the mind why it has a transport capacity at all. It has three twin-linked lascannons versus the Valkyrie, whose weaponry seems to be external apart from a single multilaser. The Land Raider has to give up 6-marine's worth of capacity to mount the cells and capacitors for two twin-lascannon. Extrapolating therefore, one would assume that a Valkyrie would have to give up 9-men-worth of transport capacity to mount the ammo for the guns, plus it would weigh rather more than a human cargo. So really, there shouldn't be space for anyone else on board

ehlijen
19-06-2010, 04:09
Actually, it would need to give up 7-8 men as one TL lascannon replaces the single lascannon that the Valkyrie is apparently perfectly capable of carrying. But your point stands strong regardless of my nitpicking.

Bunnahabhain
19-06-2010, 12:26
Actually, yes, if you assume as much. Like I said, my players think more outside the box than most. What is done is the Vendetta flies about with a small scoring unit in it, engaging from maximum range and avoiding anything but the occasional lascannon or ML return fire. If this is done successfully, it will still be alive during Turn 5 (or 6 or 7). it drops the units to objectives the Vendetta can't really capture due to it's base


Earlier, that vendetta was unstoppably outflanking....Do make you mind up as to how it's overpowered...



An even match until you consider the transports each is packing. You will blow apart the Rhinos before they even come close, and with 11 las shots a turn it is going to be a long walk for those SMs. The guard, because of sheer volume of units, does not have this disadvantage. They can send half forward, keep half back for heavy weapon fire, and STILL outgun the target while maintaining strong board control.


And do be a little more careful with your comparisons. There were no transports there to be considered....



As I already mentioned, most of our players use it as though it's empty, engaging from long range. It works well because this technique keeps the ship safe until the end of the game, and by grav-chuting, it can affect a lot. I once saw it drop off models to contest one objective while moving itself to contest another a bit further off -- masterfully taking 2-1 game and turning it into a 0-1 game, securing a victory that would have been impossible for almost any other army (except of course the Blood Angels, I guess...but their plane is just as stupidly out of place in 40k as the Vendetta is).


So your group plays with hidden contents in transports then? Or you can't remember what is in them by turn 5?


Yes, but the destructive force and sheer ease of map control that the Guard has in virtually unparalleled; when you couple this with a more durable and specialized vehicle that can do everything the Land Speeder Storm can but better, it makes for a much more useful and less "occasional" tactic.

And still much easier to stop than a DAVU Falcon swooping on an objective....



You are correct. Of course, you can also fit all of this into ONE infantry platoon, yielding 45 models and 4 chimeras (not including kit for the PCS) for 500ish points just the same. On the other side of the board there will be two rhinos and 4 unique weapons, while the guard enjoy 4 Chimeras and 8 unique weapons. this is still outnumbering by 2.5, which makes sense. What doesn't make sense is why the Guardsmen are armed to the teeth. Out of each of these chimeras comes 9x 36" shots, and 1x 48" lascannon shots. That is 40 shots that can reach almost across the whole table, able to engage multiple targets thanks to the fire point rules, and that is all without even bothering to use 36 of your 45 models.


The guardsmen have to be armed to the teeth, or they will die pointlessly. See what happens to guardsmen with just lasguns. You also exaggerate somewhat (as always); a decent proportion of people choose not to have heavy weapons in mounted squads, and very few have heavy stubbers on the chimeras...



Beyond it's statline, the SM has no strengths. A bold statement, but that's my stance.
And a wrong one. ATSKNF? Probably the most powerful special rule in the game. Free grenades for everyone?




The 3+ save is horrifically overrated. On a T6 MC in the Nid codex it is regarded as worthless by much of the community, but for some reason, put it on a marine, and it instantly becomes something that is allegedly reliable. When armies like the guard have such huge advantages in rate of fire. high strength weaponry, and the omnipresent safety of vehicle support, this is often a moot point. All the 3+ save does in 5th edition is make cover worthless to us.


Possibly because MCs are commonly engaged by S7+, AP1-3 weapons , that ignore that save, whereas marines commonly get engaged with lasguns and bolters and such like, where that 3+ means they ignore 2/3rds of them...



An IG squad can do anything a Space Marine squad can do, it is just less likely to be successful. But for every one marine squad you will have something like 3-5 IG units of various types that can attempt to work on the same goal. A Tac squad has no flexibility, only restrictions; you want to see a truly flexible troop choice, look no further than Grey Hunters. They are what a Space Marine should be.
Assuming you are being half way sane, and not talking about totally unequipped squads, no. The cheapest normal squad you can get sits at 50-55 points- ie cheap special weapon squad, command squad, or basic infantry squad. Therefore you get about 3.1 of these to a full tactical squad with basic equipment.



I often ignore this because of the numbers involved in the comparison. What is more likely to do 5 wounds -- 5 bolters, or 20 guard?

You're comparing apples and oranges here. Guardsmen are a unit, bolters are weapons. Do you actually mean 5 marines? 5 marines that come with bolt pistols as well, and grenades, and, and....



Three Leman Russes is more heavy weapons than the average entire opposing army.

Nonsense. Are 3 heavy or ordnance weapons, and 3-9 hull and sponson weapons (not all of which are heavy weapons..) are more than an average army? Did you leave you the words '750 point' or 'Daemon' from that sentence, as otherwise, it's rubbish.



This is perfectly fine. But nowhere in the game was there any need for a flying super-transport skimmer with the best armament in the game for an almost laughable point value. You could delete the Vendetta from the codex and the army would be just as incredibly effective as it is now.

If it's so much more good, powerful, useful, and underpriced than anything else in the game ( and by implication, codex) as you say, then removing it would reduce the power of the codex... You can't have your cake and eat it.
Yes, it is overpowered/underpriced. I was the first to admit this in the thread, and have never disputed it, I've just sought to tone down some of the hyperbole...



I don't have a problem with how the IG codex is put together. It's very fluffy and very correct to the source material, as well as very effective and highly competitive. All codices should be like this.
It's inelegant, stuffed with un-necessary special rules, badly laid out, and full of under-powered or over-powered units. It got the core units about right, and is so much more powerful than the last, but is still not good.



Either way, I hate the Vendetta. My reasons are a thousandfold but my main one is simply that planes do not belong in 40k.

No fast skimmers with their current implementation belong in 40k as is.

EDIT: I know I shouldn't bother arguing with you, as you're wrong, hate the Guard with a passion beyond reason, and don't listen, but it's more effective than coffee for waking up....

mdauben
19-06-2010, 13:59
I think there's a general distaste for powerful, long-range shooting, because it takes no skill to apply beyond prioritizing your targets (whereas a successful assault usually has to be earned).
I have heard this sort of thing all the time with regard to Tau and I think its false. That winning a game by shooting is somehow easier/cheezier/inferior to winning by close combat. Personally, my experience has always been that low skill players are much more successful with CC armies than with shooty armies.

Now, I'm not an IG player but my third hand experience has been that sucessful IG players (like successful Tau players) tend to be better players and tacticians than sucessful players of most other 40K armies. YMMV.

Chiron
19-06-2010, 14:03
I have heard this sort of thing all the time with regard to Tau and I think its false. That winning a game by shooting is somehow easier/cheezier/inferior to winning by close combat. Personally, my experience has always been that low skill players are much more successful with CC armies than with shooty armies.

Indeed, Assault is much more likely to win you battles than firepower. A couple of squads of assault marines and terminators and you can just butcher your way through an enemy army.

Solar_Eclipse
19-06-2010, 15:06
EDIT: I know I shouldn't bother arguing with you, as you're wrong, hate the Guard with a passion beyond reason, and don't listen, but it's more effective than coffee for waking up....

Agree with this sentiment, my girlfriend rolled her eyes at me, but it woke me up like a shot. Nothing like anger and bewilderment for getting the blood pumping :P

Lord Inquisitor
19-06-2010, 17:02
Actually, it would need to give up 7-8 men as one TL lascannon replaces the single lascannon that the Valkyrie is apparently perfectly capable of carrying. But your point stands strong regardless of my nitpicking.

Thing was, when I started playing with the new Guard codex, one of the mistakes I made (including thinking that all Ogryns had Feel No Pain - I couldn't figure out why people were saying they were rubbish, I thought they were excellent! :rolleyes::o) was that I assumed that the Vendetta as a heavy gunship had no transport capacity or scout move. It wasn't until I read through extra carefully that I noticed it and even then I was checking all over to see if there was any reason it was excepted.

It doesn't make sense from a background perspective, a unit feel perspective (is it a gunship or a transport?) or from a game balance perspective.

It definately feels like a unit that was stuck in the codex with little thought or playtesting. No model (apart from a forgeworld kit) and it seems likely that it wasn't well playtested. Indeed, with the vast number of units and vehicle variants available to the guard, I wonder how many were adequately playtested at all (some are amazing and others suck rather badly).

Inquisitor_Tolheim
19-06-2010, 18:35
It definately feels like a unit that was stuck in the codex with little thought or playtesting. No model (apart from a forgeworld kit) and it seems likely that it wasn't well playtested. Indeed, with the vast number of units and vehicle variants available to the guard, I wonder how many were adequately playtested at all (some are amazing and others suck rather badly).

In my opinion, the Vendetta was born out of Cruddace's (or GW suits', depending on your particular conspiracy) to include a gunship flier as a compliment to the transport flier. Rather then put the Vulture (the most logical choice) into the codex, they decided to simplify the models being used so they could sell the Valkyries for both roles.

While this is a confusing stance when looked at with the rest of the codex (they had no trouble putting OTHER FW only stuff (at the time, at least) in) the real flub up was that, unlike the Land Raider or most other Transport/gun base hybrid vehicles, the Vendetta is a weapons swap with no additional changes. I strongly suspect the error was caused via copy/paste, because otherwise why not just have the lascannons as weapon options for the Valkyrie? It's not like they gave each Leman Russ (half of which have different armor profiles) their own army list location.

EmperorEternalXIX
19-06-2010, 20:14
Agree with this sentiment, my girlfriend rolled her eyes at me, but it woke me up like a shot. Nothing like anger and bewilderment for getting the blood pumping :PI aim to please.

Bunns doesn't argue with me, he just selectively picks things and tries to make me look stupid. If you want an actual point-counterpoint debate the only person around here who does those when I discuss the Guard is Vaktathi. He doesn't bring up unrelated and almost pointless comparisons when we do our little headbutting debates over this codex

People who just come out and say "you're wrong obviously but I argued with you for my entertainment" are being foolish anyway.

When I come back from going out, I will reply in the more severe manner which you've all come to know and loathe. Until then, Bunns can keep feeling smug that he's won an argument about the Vendetta because of the fact that the Space Marines have frag grenades.

MegaPope
19-06-2010, 20:25
The Vendetta does rather smack of being a last minute addition to the army list. I'm pretty sure someone on here mentioned that once, although I can't remember when or where, so I may just be suffering from false memory syndrome.

The other unfortunate thing is...it rather makes the Vulture (the actual GUNship, which has no transport capacity at all in exchange for weaponry) feel rather undergunned. Perhaps they should've just made the Vendetta into an alternative Vulture type vehicle - no transport capacity (or nominal at best) but studded with guns and rockets like a Soviet Hind. Literally a floating weapons battery par excellance - but one to an FA slot.

Solar_Eclipse
20-06-2010, 02:51
I aim to please.

Bunns doesn't argue with me, he just selectively picks things and tries to make me look stupid. If you want an actual point-counterpoint debate the only person around here who does those when I discuss the Guard is Vaktathi. He doesn't bring up unrelated and almost pointless comparisons when we do our little headbutting debates over this codex

People who just come out and say "you're wrong obviously but I argued with you for my entertainment" are being foolish anyway.

When I come back from going out, I will reply in the more severe manner which you've all come to know and loathe. Until then, Bunns can keep feeling smug that he's won an argument about the Vendetta because of the fact that the Space Marines have frag grenades.

A forum is for discussion, not arguement.

If i got into an arguement with you, and i must say that i wanted to, then i would probably get a warning.

Really, i know your not right, as a player for a number of years against all kinds of opponents. Guard is not overpowered in any real way because our innate statline IS a hindrance. Sure there are units (like the Vendetta) which are undercosted. But every codex has that.

Reinholt
21-06-2010, 06:27
One of the problems with guard (and, to be fair, armor-heavy armies in general) is the multiplicity benefit of the units. The Vendetta, as a stand-alone option in a force that is mostly infantry with a handful of mechanized components, is fine; don't get me wrong, it's pretty good, but it's not game-breaking. The Vendetta, as one of twelve objects with an armor value in a heavily mechanized force, is not. The stress this creates for the opponents AP weaponry, paired with board control it offers against units without anti-tank, is the real issue.

Some of these things are undercosted a bit alone, but dramatically undercosted in groups. As an Eldar player, I can tell you players find my army far, far harder to beat when I wave serpent / falcon / fire prism / nightspinner spam than they do when I only take one or two of them...

MegaPope
21-06-2010, 13:32
As an Eldar player, I can tell you players find my army far, far harder to beat when I wave serpent / falcon / fire prism / nightspinner spam than they do when I only take one or two of them...

The technical term is 'Force Multiplier' - the concept works with just about anything. Even massed Tactical Marines. Someone I know has a Dark Angel army that uses the 'Wall of Iron' gambit. It can be an utter pain on a table with a decent amount of scenery. I use it myself with Chaos Marines.

People probably wouldn't mind the Vendetta so much if it still used the original Valkyrie armour values from IA1 - that is to say 11. I used to think twice about how I played them when they could be brought down by Heavy Bolter fire...I never used them against Tau for one thing.

In theory, there's nothing to stop the Valkyrie airframe carrying such weaponry - if anthing the normal Valk without MRPs is a bit underarmed. I fail to understand why anyone in their right mind thought two one use Hellfury Missiles a fair swap for twin-linked Lascannons.

IMO, the basic costs and weaponry for the two should have been:

-Valkyrie: 125 points: Multilaser, 2 x Heavy Bolters (come on, who doesn't fit them?) 2 x Hellfury Missiles. Options: Replace Multilaser with Lascannon at 15, Replace Hellfuries with MRPs at 50.
Special Rules as now. Squadron option.

This one is the dedicated transport, so it has the weaponry to clear an LZ of infantry based opposition - why this one currently has the option for the anti-tank missiles I'll never know. FW had them to make it multirole, since at the time it was meant only for Stormtroopers and had a BS of 4.

-Vendetta: 135 points: Twin-linked Lascannon, 2 x Heavy Bolters, 2 x Hellstrike Missiles. Options: replace Hellstrikes with 2 x Twin-Linked Lascannon for 55.
Special Rules as now but NO Scout. One per FA slot.

This one is the dedicated tank killer, designed for a more stand-off role (hence the lack of Scout). It is a Heavy Gunship with the capacity to land troops, compared to the Medium Gunship (Vulture) - like comparing the Hind to the Bell Cobra.

Malkov
21-06-2010, 16:59
IMO these get blown out of proportion. Sure they're useful but def not OP.

More than 2x the cost of a Chim and easier to kill.

They're only TL BS3(~BS4) Everyone needs to stop compairing these to preds! Preds have BS4 with TL options, and AV 13, and cover saves.

Scout and DS are damn near useless, and transporting is ineffective.

Large footprint. How manoeuvrable are these things in the middle of a mech horde army? Then there's this stuff called terrain.

Lord Inquisitor
21-06-2010, 17:22
More than 2x the cost of a Chim and easier to kill.
I find 12/12/10 rather tougher than 12/10/10.


They're only TL BS3(~BS4) Everyone needs to stop compairing these to preds! Preds have BS4 with TL options, and AV 13, and cover saves.
A predator scores an average of 2.2 lascannon hits when firing turret and two sponsons. A vendetta scores an average of 2.3. They're quite equivalent.

The pred also has lower side armour than the vendetta, so that's fairly situational as to whether it is tougher than a vendetta or not.


Scout and DS are damn near useless, and transporting is ineffective.
Are you kidding? Scout makes the tank the :cheese: it is. If you go first it can scout to an advantageous firing (i.e. flanks of your vehicles) position or close enough to deploy troops. If you go second it can outflank and alpha-strike on the turn it arrives. Either way, it can deploy troops armed with plasma guns, flamers or meltaguns and meltabombs direct into the enemy army. As a non-dedicated transport you can even wait until you know what you're facing before deciding which squad goes in there. Such a suicide squad can often take out or tie up a big chunk of the enemy's army, and with the Vendetta's ability to deploy troops to the front, can effect a first-turn charge.


Large footprint. How manoeuvrable are these things in the middle of a mech horde army? Then there's this stuff called terrain.
Given that it's a fast skimmer with scout I rarely find that it needs to go anywhere near the rest of the army or disadvantageous terrain.

brother_fandango
21-06-2010, 17:22
to the OP, just curious how your opponent disable 2 vehicles, I thought you could only declare 1 target per vehicle? Sorry for my confusion.

Lord Inquisitor
21-06-2010, 17:27
He used two Vendettas ;)

Max zero
21-06-2010, 17:49
The technical term is 'Force Multiplier' - the concept works with just about anything. Even massed Tactical Marines. Someone I know has a Dark Angel army that uses the 'Wall of Iron' gambit. It can be an utter pain on a table with a decent amount of scenery. I use it myself with Chaos Marines.

People probably wouldn't mind the Vendetta so much if it still used the original Valkyrie armour values from IA1 - that is to say 11. I used to think twice about how I played them when they could be brought down by Heavy Bolter fire...I never used them against Tau for one thing.

In theory, there's nothing to stop the Valkyrie airframe carrying such weaponry - if anthing the normal Valk without MRPs is a bit underarmed. I fail to understand why anyone in their right mind thought two one use Hellfury Missiles a fair swap for twin-linked Lascannons.

IMO, the basic costs and weaponry for the two should have been:

-Valkyrie: 125 points: Multilaser, 2 x Heavy Bolters (come on, who doesn't fit them?) 2 x Hellfury Missiles. Options: Replace Multilaser with Lascannon at 15, Replace Hellfuries with MRPs at 50.
Special Rules as now. Squadron option.

This one is the dedicated transport, so it has the weaponry to clear an LZ of infantry based opposition - why this one currently has the option for the anti-tank missiles I'll never know. FW had them to make it multirole, since at the time it was meant only for Stormtroopers and had a BS of 4.

-Vendetta: 135 points: Twin-linked Lascannon, 2 x Heavy Bolters, 2 x Hellstrike Missiles. Options: replace Hellstrikes with 2 x Twin-Linked Lascannon for 55.
Special Rules as now but NO Scout. One per FA slot.

This one is the dedicated tank killer, designed for a more stand-off role (hence the lack of Scout). It is a Heavy Gunship with the capacity to land troops, compared to the Medium Gunship (Vulture) - like comparing the Hind to the Bell Cobra.

So 190 points for a triple TL-Lascannon 12/12/10 Hull?

Why wouldn't I just buy a freaking LR Executioner for the same points? Both stuck moving 6" a turn. Except one has semi useful transport capacity (which cripples it's shooting) instead of heavy armour and the ability to use cover.

What a deal!

As for the Valk. I could spend 170 points on a single transport. Or I could buy 3 Chimeras.

brother_fandango
21-06-2010, 17:51
He used two Vendettas ;)

Oh wow... My brain is mush. Bad New Amsterdam, bad. Thanks.

Hal'jin
21-06-2010, 18:44
People probably wouldn't mind the Vendetta so much if it still used the original Valkyrie armour values from IA1 - that is to say 11. I used to think twice about how I played them when they could be brought down by Heavy Bolter fire...I never used them against Tau for one thing.

They also were fliers outside of VTOL mode so much harder to hit. And correct me if I'm wrong but weren't they cheaper too?

190 pts for a Vendetta is just stupid. It's a huge and clunky model. Sure it has huge firepower, but on proper tables with enough los-blockers it still is visible pretty much anywhere and dies if AT sneezes on it. It would be a total waste of points. 150 points, or cutting the transport capacity somewhat could work, I guess, since it is a tad underpriced at 130 points, not denying that.

But honestly, most of my opponents know how to deal with them easily. If you're having problems with Vendettas alone, maybe look at your game instead of just whinning at GW, which seems to be an ever increasing trend on this forums (I'm used to whine here, but in the recent days it's gone beyond my expectations)

Erwos
21-06-2010, 19:17
I'm getting tired of the whole "you just suck because you can't handle a lone Vendetta" talk. No one's saying that they can't take down a Vendetta or two, as if they're some sort of super-heavy tank. People are saying that the Vendettas are undercosted for their abilities. That is all. The fact that I can kill some thing more easily than some other thing doesn't necessarily justify its points cost.

Lord Inquisitor
21-06-2010, 19:17
But honestly, most of my opponents know how to deal with them easily. If you're having problems with Vendettas alone, maybe look at your game instead of just whinning at GW, which seems to be an ever increasing trend on this forums (I'm used to whine here, but in the recent days it's gone beyond my expectations)

You're not understanding the complaint. The problem with Vendettas is precisely that they cannot be prevented from a devastating alpha-strike. It's not even necessarily a case of being undercosted (although they surely are), but it's a game-breaking combo for first turn (or first turn they arrive from reserve).

A vendetta can scout forward, putting it 12" away, it can disgorge a vet squad first turn and they can get within melta range and assault range, while the vendetta retreats firing or further flanks your vehicles. The issue isn't "dealing" with Vendettas - that damn thing is dead sooner or later - but by the time it is "dealt with" it has done a disproportionate amount of damage to your army. If the guard player doesn't get first turn, then it can outflank reliably with an astropath and in any case it can move on and fire 48" lascannon into the flank of the enemy.

There really isn't any reasonable response to a couple of Vendettas. You sneer and suggest we look to our game but what tactics are there to deal with such an alpha strike? Many of these things are not even really issues with the Vendetta but with the core rules and the Vendetta - and the Valkyrie for that matter - just happens to have the right combination. Scout and outflank allow you first turn charges or moving on from the edge, there's no overwatch mechanic to protect you from first turn or outflank maneuvers/charges. Scout stipulates that the vendetta need be more than 12" away but the 2" disembark brings the squad inside within melta/flamer/assault range. The guard player knows (sieze aside) that he'll go first or second and can position the valk/vendetta appropriately or hold them in reserve. With a first turn assault, all enemy vehicles are stationary and can be blown away or assaulted easily.

What systems are there to mitigate this? If going second you can deploy further back ... but you need to be 39" away to avoid the troops inside charging/meltaing you. If you do this, then unless you're super-shooty (tau or other guard) then you're dead meat, it's total suicide to engage guard in a long range artillery duel - not to mention the vendetta can just hang back and use it's 48" range instead! You can hide behind your biggest tanks, but a melta squad with meltabombs will take out anything. Conversely a couple of vendettas with troops inside can make a mech army walk. As for an outflanking vendetta, there's just nothing you can do. You need to keep your front armour towards the rest of the guard army, it's going to hit your flank and there's absolutely nowhere to hide as the vendetta can easily range the whole board on the turn it comes on with an astropath. Castling up against a guard army with manticores is likewise idiotic.

None of this presumes the Vendetta is actually going to survive very long, but it can virtually guarantee to have a great effect on the game, either turn 1 or turn 2 and cripple whatever you feel is the most important aspect of the enemy army. Not to mention that it can pull fire away from the rest of the Guard army. The only actual tactic that can allow you to avoid a turn-1/2 alpha-strike is an all-reserve denial army. And they're big and clever, right? All of this applies to the Valkyrie as well, but since these days everyone plays fully mechanised lists, the Vendetta gets all the attention as the prime targets for an alpha-strike are vehicles.

DA_WarM
21-06-2010, 19:46
Indeed, Assault is much more likely to win you battles than firepower. A couple of squads of assault marines and terminators and you can just butcher your way through an enemy army.

I've tried this one and got unlucky. He destroyed one raider and immobilized the second one on turn one. He destroyed the second one on turn two...

He pretty much butchered the rest of my army by turn 5.

MegaPope
21-06-2010, 20:16
Let's get one thing straight - I'm actually an IG player, and tbh I'm quite amused that this thing which is so shockingly useful is in the Codex. It looks very much like a last-minute army list entry and its weapon options (Hellfurys or 2x twin Lascannons) are so uneven in effectiveness that the fact that one is a free swap for the other must've been put in there by someone who couldn't read.

I'm not trolling, just trying to play devil's advocate (apart from the bit about the two variants mounting the wrong sort of rockets for their respective roles) - I think I've pretty much nailed down what the non-Guard players think the two should be like, give or take. Or what's likely to happen when the thing gets smashed good and proper with the nerf-bat.

BTW, the comparison with the LR Executioner? Everyone should know at this point that IG tanks are mostly for killing infantry, not other tanks. Thus, even at the same theoretical points cost, the Executioner and the Vendetta are filling totally different roles.

Malkov
21-06-2010, 21:14
When you can hide a Chim in cover or out of LOS, and block the sides with more vehicles it's... harder to kill than a Vendetta.:rolleyes: Oh yeah, don't forget about smoke launchers either.

Outflanking is smart... why? You're bringing anti-transport units that won't shoot till turn 2 if you're lucky. That'll keep people real far back. Outflanking is a Valk's job, same with scouting ahead. Either you already have side shots after deployment (48" guns hello) or the enemy either clumped up (yay for lg blasts) or reserved.

Lord Inquisitor
21-06-2010, 21:25
When you can hide a Chim in cover or out of LOS, and block the sides with more vehicles it's... harder to kill than a Vendetta.:rolleyes: Oh yeah, don't forget about smoke launchers either.
So what? Okay, well done, you're castling up. That doesn't alpha strike my lines turn 1.


Outflanking is smart... why? You're bringing anti-transport units that won't shoot till turn 2 if you're lucky. That'll keep people real far back. Outflanking is a Valk's job, same with scouting ahead. Either you already have side shots after deployment (48" guns hello) or the enemy either clumped up (yay for lg blasts) or reserved.
Because you don't die turn 1 and let your heavy tanks or chimera bear the brunt of the enemy's firepower.

Obviously this is situational and if you can scout and hide your vendetta then obviously that's the best idea, but it retains the capacity to outflank and alpha strike and depending on what sort of armour the opponent is bringing then it can be extremely effective (e.g. Tau).

This is all rather beside the point, which is that the vendetta can alpha strike far above its weight.

TheDilz
21-06-2010, 21:34
I think most people are missing the point...

In GWs eyes the only cost that matters is the kit cost.

Valk kits cost is very high, and therefore GW wants to sell very many.

Thus the "cost" in the codex is unbalanced in game terms, because it is driven purely by real world cost considerations.. i.e. profit.

Axeman1n
21-06-2010, 23:42
/sarcasm on
I don't think that the reason for lower point costs is kit cost. That would mean that GW is fixing their point costs to sell more mini's!

"What! No one is buying the Terminators because they say they die like wheat?"
"Let's errata them an upgraded 5+ invul for no points cost increase and claim some lame fluffy reason for it."
"Brilliant!"
/sarcasm off

Won't be the first time

Chiron
21-06-2010, 23:47
To be fair Terminators sucked **** before the 5+ ward, or at least they did compared to the golden days when they got a 3+ on 2d6

EmperorEternalXIX
22-06-2010, 05:34
Yeah, lots of fans believe this, but most signs in the game point to it being wrong.

The Carnifex kit is expensive. He sure didn't get a buff, did he?

Vulkan Hestan didn't get a model until like a year after his codex came out and green became the new blue.

GW has flat out said they will NEVER be producing a Thunderwolf model and, uhh, don't know if you caught on, but that's a pretty popular unit, too.

The Pariah is also pretty expensive.

My point is, if you pay a little more attention you will see that your generalization is pretty illogical.

ehlijen
22-06-2010, 06:30
Sarcasm is easy if you throw the obvious accusations at the obvious foe. But let's face it, if GW were to change their ways, would the internet notice? Or would they continue to slander it?

Let's not forget that there is in fact no Vendetta kit. You can in fact not make any of the Vendetta options out of the Valkyrie kit, even if you call the hellstrikes hellfuries, as it lacks a second lascannon.

Cynicism now dictates that someone say that they want us to buy multiple kits, so let me do that. But let me also add that the Valkyrie does in fact have several advantages over the Vendetta:
The basic Valkyrie can kill just as much as the Vendetta can in one turn, short of AV12+ vehicle squadrons. It's just not as reliable.
The basic Valkyrie is cheaper.
The Valkyrie with lascannon is still cheaper.
The Valkyrie has the superior AP fire options (hellfuries are good, but you can't also have a multilaser).
Any valkyrie config can be made with the box.

Therefore my statement is: GW wants us the use the Valkyrie as much as they can make us :p

EmperorEternalXIX
22-06-2010, 07:13
I finally have some time to reply to my good friend, Bunns, on his rather haphazard reply to some of my earlier posts re: the guard army's playstyle and how the Vendetta fits in.

This one's for you, old buddy. :)


Earlier, that vendetta was unstoppably outflanking....Do make you mind up as to how it's overpowered...Well number one that it can do either, and it doesn't break the bank at all to take two and do both. However, as was obvious from the line of discussion we were having (which you seem to have ignored/missed), what I described is how you utilize a Vendetta that has come onto the table before the last turn of the game.


And do be a little more careful with your comparisons. There were no transports there to be considered....IG transports are superior in every way in any of the examples I gave throughout this thread, because they are better armed, longer range, and will usually outnumber other army troop units 2:1. No discussion. That being said, I had assumed their presence, as only a fool would not take that god-forsaken vehicle for every squad he could.


So your group plays with hidden contents in transports then? Or you can't remember what is in them by turn 5?As I already said, nobody has a problem blowing up the Vendetta when it's there. In my group, if you DON'T blow up the Vendetta, it wins the game. The point is, it hangs out far away and avoids the most severe damage potential. None of us has any trouble killing it; in fact it often dies. But like I said, if it doesn't die, it wins the game.


And still much easier to stop than a DAVU Falcon swooping on an objective.... Because the Falcon doesn't have the option to appear on the board and contest/claim multiple objectives. It is, like every other thing in the game besides the BA's Vendetta 2.0, able to only interfere with one. It also has a much shorter range and certainly isn't going to be blowing holes in anyone's rear armor 50" away while it drops off its' cargo.


The guardsmen have to be armed to the teeth, or they will die pointlessly. See what happens to guardsmen with just lasguns. What guardsmen AREN'T armed to the teeth?

Actually I'm glad you brought this up. Ironically, just this weekend at my gaming group, our local guard devotee used his one Vendetta with a squad of Flamer vets to singlehandedly win the game against an Eldar army. He just flew across the board disembarking as needed; the Vendetta destroyed transports and the veterans destroyed the infantry. Next turn they'd hop back aboard and zoom off to another area where enemies were pushing for an objective and do the same thing. What ended up happening -- and I swear to God I am not making this up -- is exactly the kind of scenario I described earlier in this thread: the Vendetta and it's squad were responsible for crippling objective holders and their transports, turning a 2-1 game into a 1-0 game in under three turns.


You also exaggerate somewhat (as always); a decent proportion of people choose not to have heavy weapons in mounted squads, and very few have heavy stubbers on the chimeras... I was talking about a hypothetical. Theoryhammer, if you will. For not much more points, your (likely already) static chimera can have a lascannon and 3 extra str4 shots coming out of it. The point I was making is that the guard can have so many Chimeras with units in them on the board that it wouldn't be that unfeasible because you could advance half while keeping the other half back.

If you had read the whole thread instead of skimming for quote-snipes, you would have seen me talk about this.


And a wrong one. ATSKNF? Probably the most powerful special rule in the game. Free grenades for everyone?ATSKNF is the most powerful special rule in the game? I can see you've never been on the business end of an army making full use of Lumbering Behemoth. And congratulations on finding the clearly critical correlation between the price of the Vendetta and the fact that the Space Marines get frag grenades. I know that all the close combat Space Marine armies out there winning GTs against chimeltavet lists really help to illustrate what a broken benefit this is. /sarcasm


Possibly because MCs are commonly engaged by S7+, AP1-3 weapons , that ignore that save, whereas marines commonly get engaged with lasguns and bolters and such like, where that 3+ means they ignore 2/3rds of them... Well holy crap, there IS something based in reality in here. I was beginning to wonder! The thing you fail to mention, my friend, is that in a Space Marine army there are no MCs. So what do you think happens? All the Str7/AP1-3 weapons which you are referencing, are pointed right at the basic power armor 1-wounders all over the field. So we're eating all that insta-kill firepower, ON TOP of the bajillions of lesser shots.

Ignoring 2/3 of your damage is not that impressive when the enemy has 20ish chances to hurt you. But as you said, IG are "the shooting army" so they should be expected to do that kind of damage. Unfortunately I don't live in the fantasy world where you and the other detractors of my opinions live, where the two space marines left alive on turn 5 against IG manage to quadruple charge 400 models and get one sweeping advance FTW, and so I will have to make due with some actual work to win my games. But I guess I would live in a dream world too if I played an army that almost doesn't even have to move to dismantle its enemies.


Assuming you are being half way sane, and not talking about totally unequipped squads, no. The cheapest normal squad you can get sits at 50-55 points- ie cheap special weapon squad, command squad, or basic infantry squad. Therefore you get about 3.1 of these to a full tactical squad with basic equipment.Vaktathi's 2.5:1 is a more perfect number, but the fact remains that you can still massively ignore the Force Organization Chart with these units, no matter what you decide to do with them. The rest of us have 17 units, give or take the odd transport/non-FOC squad, with which to act. You can have most of that in a single troop choice -- all of it armed to the teeth. I can understand the whole "we need three chances to do something because our guys suck at it" but you still have a 50/50 chance to hit with that mass of BS3 nobodies. What happens when you have a couple of good rolls? Your army dismantles anything in front of it, and if you don't get into the lines early and intact you have no hope against a competent general. This is where the Vendetta comes in -- it forces you to divide your army and focus your fire elsewhere, whilst the rest of the IG monster force rolls over you at it's leisure. It must be destroyed quick, but there are many times (i.e. outflanking arrivals) where it will accomplish a crippling attack or will drop in to seize a backfield objective you have no hope of reaching alive with your front line forces. That is why -- at least out here in the REAL world -- the Vendetta is a huge issue.


You're comparing apples and oranges here. Guardsmen are a unit, bolters are weapons. Do you actually mean 5 marines? 5 marines that come with bolt pistols as well, and grenades, and, and....You can only shoot one gun at a time (at least here; I don't know how it is in Warhammer 40,000 Bunns Edition). So having a million guns means jack (especially when one of them is a shorter range, less-shot equivalent of the standard one). Your guardsmen also come with pistols and grenades, if I remember correctly...


Nonsense. Are 3 heavy or ordnance weapons, and 3-9 hull and sponson weapons (not all of which are heavy weapons..) are more than an average army? Did you leave you the words '750 point' or 'Daemon' from that sentence, as otherwise, it's rubbish. It really depends on the list, but 12 heavy weapons comprised off of 3 vehicles is a very huge start. I'm sure my numbers are off because I neglect that I currently play Space Wolves, and other than my Long Fangs I don't have any heavy weapons. However I am willing to bet that in most armies guard would easily double the average of heavy weapons, with the dozen on the omni-present Leman Russes accounting for a good chunk of it. Taking a Vendetta adds another three. Plus two for every chimera, too.


If it's so much more good, powerful, useful, and underpriced than anything else in the game ( and by implication, codex) as you say, then removing it would reduce the power of the codex... You can't have your cake and eat it. The codex is fine as it is, but it was nowhere close to needing the best skimmer in the game. This thing and all it's abilities belong in the Eldar and Tau codices, not this one. It isn't even remotely fluffy to the Guard way of war (masses of guys and tanks...wtf where did that plane come from!?). Either way, though, this is ridiculous; for one, I just saw the damn thing do exactly what I have claimed it could do this past weekend. For two, you yourself went on to say:


Yes, it is overpowered/underpriced. I was the first to admit this in the thread, and have never disputed it


I've just sought to tone down some of the hyperbole... Actually what really happened is you sought to take some jabs at me for expressing my personal opinions and experiences. But whatever helps you sleep at night. You're the hyperbole expert; after all you brought up my frag grenades and bolt pistols in defense of a vehicle that isn't even in my army...


It's inelegant, stuffed with un-necessary special rules, badly laid out, and full of under-powered or over-powered units. It got the core units about right, and is so much more powerful than the last, but is still not good. Inelegant? You know I worked in print media for 8 years doing layouts, right? There are much, much more poorly put together books than this one. The Tyranid one is the current worst of the new dexes. The Guard codex does not even come close to being that confusing or overcomplicated.


No fast skimmers with their current implementation belong in 40k as is.Fast vehicles that hover off the ground makes a lot of sense. My dreadnought killing a plane by somehow jumping up in the sky and punching it does not.


EDIT: I know I shouldn't bother arguing with you, as you're wrong, hate the Guard with a passion beyond reason, and don't listen, but it's more effective than coffee for waking up....I'm glad that your entire goal with your post was to antagonize and belittle the opinion of another. :rolleyes:

Perhaps I am not the only one who needs to tone down his hyperbole. ;)

senorcardgage
22-06-2010, 07:39
OMG, holy long post, Batman

Max zero
22-06-2010, 07:49
Let's get one thing straight - I'm actually an IG player, and tbh I'm quite amused that this thing which is so shockingly useful is in the Codex. It looks very much like a last-minute army list entry and its weapon options (Hellfurys or 2x twin Lascannons) are so uneven in effectiveness that the fact that one is a free swap for the other must've been put in there by someone who couldn't read.

I'm not trolling, just trying to play devil's advocate (apart from the bit about the two variants mounting the wrong sort of rockets for their respective roles) - I think I've pretty much nailed down what the non-Guard players think the two should be like, give or take. Or what's likely to happen when the thing gets smashed good and proper with the nerf-bat.

BTW, the comparison with the LR Executioner? Everyone should know at this point that IG tanks are mostly for killing infantry, not other tanks. Thus, even at the same theoretical points cost, the Executioner and the Vendetta are filling totally different roles.

Yeah and they would be wrong. No one would take Vendettas at 190 points. No one. So if your goal is to completely removed Vendettas from competitively play, mission accomplished.

Nerf bat? This isn't WoW son. GW aren't going to release a IG book 'patch' with a points increase to Valk/Vens. The only change (if there is to be one) will be when the next IG book comes out in several years time.

Well technically there is nothing quite like a Vendetta in the IG book. Long range, accurate, anti tank firepower has been a dream of IG for quite some time. Most attempts have been spectacular failures (see Vanquisher), the Vendetta is the first time it's been gotten right. Make it 190 it just becomes another failure.

Max zero
22-06-2010, 07:51
OMG, holy long post, Batman

Yeah quote wars is great isn't it? It's like a contest of who can quote snipe and take things out of context better.

Hal'jin
22-06-2010, 12:29
Yay, it's like sticking a stick into an anthill. I am fully aware of what Vendetta is capable of, after all, I ussually have two myself. But they are not the only unit capable of devastating alpha strikes as you call them. Outflanking isn't a rare commodity.

As I said, I agree it is undercosted at least a bit. But


Yeah and they would be wrong. No one would take Vendettas at 190 points. No one. So if your goal is to completely removed Vendettas from competitively play, mission accomplished.

is totally true.

Nuage
22-06-2010, 13:14
Yeah well.
The best part of the quote war is when both parties willfully admit that they agree, and that, yes, the Vendetta may be a little bit over the top - even if, in an environnement that is not about cutting your opponent throat with a spoon, it is a funny unit that give Guard a bit of respite from the "Gimme fifty more guys and ten more Chimera chassis !".

Nuage.

Bunnahabhain
22-06-2010, 14:58
If there is one thing, I can't stand, I absolutely can't stand, it's people going utterly over the top and losing all sense of proportion when arguing over something. If I've said it once, I've said it a million times, there is no better way to discredit all the things you are right about then over-exaggerating them!

Please read with language set to Ironic, Sarcastic, and self knowing...

Candles
22-06-2010, 15:14
I've been taking a Vendetta for a while and quite honestly I'm gonna drop it out the force. As already noted it rarely gets to Turn 2 and mostly useless against Arm14, which is what I really wanted it for.

I do agree it looks undercosted at first, but for whatever reason I haven't personally experienced that.

Not saying how well it's costed or not, just stating my personal experience. I'd probably like it more if it was on an old fashioned flying base :)

Oh and the most important point. They're hell to transport. They don't fit in any boxes and I'm not gonna lie. That was also a part of me dropping them :)

hacksaaw
22-06-2010, 17:50
1 vendetta in a force is fine, multiple valks and vendettas have synergy that rapidly increases the value of the units. especially when the artillery the IG brings is surviving because you have to deal with the flyers first, which can mean that the IG has still eliminated your army on turn 2 even when its lost its flyers making sure the job got done.

Max zero
22-06-2010, 18:10
1 vendetta in a force is fine, multiple valks and vendettas have synergy that rapidly increases the value of the units. especially when the artillery the IG brings is surviving because you have to deal with the flyers first, which can mean that the IG has still eliminated your army on turn 2 even when its lost its flyers making sure the job got done.

Eliminated your army on turn 2 hey?

mdauben
22-06-2010, 18:40
1 vendetta in a force is fine, multiple valks and vendettas have synergy that rapidly increases the value of the units. especially when the artillery the IG brings is surviving because you have to deal with the flyers first,
What about when there are no other vehicles? I'm current working on a tri-Ven list, with no tanks or artillery (rest of the army is unmounted infantry and a few Sentinels). I guess I can look forward to hearing a lot of whining from my opponents? :rolleyes:


which can mean that the IG has still eliminated your army on turn 2 even when its lost its flyers making sure the job got done.
I suppose if you are spamming landraiders you could effectivly "lose" your army to a squadron of Vendettas by Turn 2, but IMO anyone running LR-Spam deserves to get spanked. :p

TheDilz
22-06-2010, 19:13
Yeah, lots of fans believe this, but most signs in the game point to it being wrong.

The Carnifex kit is expensive. He sure didn't get a buff, did he?

GW has flat out said they will NEVER be producing a Thunderwolf model and, uhh, don't know if you caught on, but that's a pretty popular unit, too.



My point is, if you pay a little more attention you will see that your generalization is pretty illogical.

I think you miss the point on both counts here.

The Trygon is a more expensive kit then the carny (which tyranid players already owned 6 or so of each) and was the new poster boy for GWs sell the biggest/most expensive kits with new and powerful rules technique.

Thunderwolf cav does indeed have a model- which lots of people have bought multiples of. But this is not a KIT, it is a metal casting, and does not represent such a huge use of their resources and plastic mould capacity (which is the real money pit if they release plastic kits that dont sell)

Dont be blind to the reality of the business. They sell models. They make rules that make the models they need to sell, sell better. They aim at new kits so existing armies will need to have new pieces to play with, and they aim to make these new kits "must have" kits, so old customers make new purchases.

It may be generalizations, but when you pay attention, it is actually nothing but logical. And good business in GWs eyes.

So under/overcosting in game terms is all relative to the cost of business.

Lord Inquisitor
22-06-2010, 19:25
It's so random that it's hard to understand. There are many counter-examples - Chaos Spawn and Possessed were big splash releases with gorgeous new plastic kits and rules so bad that you'd be handicapping yourself to take them. Oddly enough Chaos Terminators were also released then, and are actually a good unit and cost double the amount that possessed do, for the exact same amount of plastic, so make of that what you will.

Many units are released that are so powerful that everyone needs one but conspiciously lack models. The Skaven Abomination, for example.

It's possible that cruddace was given the mission statement with the valkryie to "not make this unit suck" but I'm not sure to what degree the sales requirements drive game balance - I think we can attribute powerful units to other factors. For example, under a revision of the codex, the writer has access to years of compiled experience playing with existing units (basilisks, leman russ, demolishers) but any entirely novel units like the valkyrie is not going to have that level of playtesting by definition.

EmperorEternalXIX
22-06-2010, 19:33
Many units are released that are so powerful that everyone needs one but conspiciously lack models. The Skaven Abomination, for example. It's these ones that confuse me the most.

I don't know, it doesn't make sense. They seemed to be pretty certain the Valkyrie kit would sell (and I mean, it's obvious it would). But what about the other no brainer kits? The Ironclad Dreadnought had all of us SM guys frothing at the mouth when we heard about the codex but it actually released a full year later, after we'd all converted our own. Same goes for Vulkan Hestan. Probably the weirdest example of this was the T-wolves, who GW actually said they had no intentions of making a model of. That guy in Russia has made a small fortune sculpting these things for people because GW didn't. How hard/expensive would it have been for them to have put a 4-piece thunderwolf mount add-on kit out?

Clearly some of the Vendetta's situation is to sell models. But I'm not questioning WHY it was made as good as it is, I am questioning why it was put in there in the first place. Surely GW could have made a boatload of money off of just doing the new tank kits?


If there is one thing, I can't stand, I absolutely can't stand, it's people going utterly over the top and losing all sense of proportion when arguing over something. If I've said it once, I've said it a million times, there is no better way to discredit all the things you are right about then over-exaggerating them!

Please read with language set to Ironic, Sarcastic, and self knowing...

Here, this should help your reading.


Hyperbole (, from ancient Greek 'exaggeration') is a rhetorical device in which statements are exaggerated. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.

A bold, deliberate overstatement, eg, "I'd give my right arm for a piece of pizza." Not intended to be taken literally, it is used as a means of emphasizing the truth of a statement.

A boldly exaggerated statement that adds emphasis without in-tending to be literally true

electricblooz
22-06-2010, 19:43
Here, this should help your reading.

there's a difference between hyperbole and full-on HWFO.

EmperorEternalXIX
22-06-2010, 20:09
Uh huh. **looks at topic** Hmm. So uh, you... considering talking about the Vendetta at all? -_-

electricblooz
22-06-2010, 21:17
Uh huh. **looks at topic** Hmm. So uh, you... considering talking about the Vendetta at all? -_-

Nope - everything that needed to be said about that subject was being said. However, you're implicit assertion that everything you said was justified because it was hyperbole needed to be addressed.

EmperorEternalXIX
22-06-2010, 22:42
If I were not accused of hyperbole as a synonym for lying each time I discuss the Guard codex here, perhaps it would not be so.

I think that people are very foolish in pointing that finger at me. You'd be hard pressed to find any actual exaggeration; my points make perfect sense. Hyperbole (when I actually use it) is merely to emphasize my points. If they weren't solid claims, then how come I have 10 witnesses at my LGS last weekend who saw EXACTLY the kind of Vendetta usage I described win the game by crippling multiple objectives off of a mid-game outflank with the aid of arguably mediocre cargo?

If anything it is a testament to the reality of my statements that me saying something literal like "the Guard can field triple/quadruple the long range heavy weapons of any other army in the game" and having it be mistaken as hyperbole.

I use hyperbole all the time because it is very effective at getting people to pay attention. When people take it too literally, it is on them and their cognitive skills, not me. When people bring this up it is merely a smokescreen; they cannot argue my points and so instead attack me for my numbers or hypotheticals, as though they are literal, in order to get a leg up.

The fact remains that everyone in this thread agrees the Vendetta is undercosted, but the main debate seems to be the power level of the vehicle. I have had a lot of resistance to the idea that fielding one with clever usage can easily change the outcome of the game.

I fail to see how eyewitness accounts and recurring facts equate to hyperbole and exaggeration. But in a thread like this it is to be expected; after all, even people who agree the thing needs a price hike are completely subjective. I see a lot of people who don't seem to find the transport or grav chute capacity to mean very much.

I have lots of reasons for disliking the thing (like how stupid it is when you blow it up and the guys fall out of the sky safely below it, or the fact that I can leap up in the sky and punch it in the rear armor, or the fact that technically shots made against like 60% of it don't count because it's not "the hull"). But it adds a lot of punch to an army that -- by admission of most of my detractors and their storied claims of IG being "the shooting army" -- doesn't need any of what it does.

I maintain my previous stance that this thing belongs in the Tau or Eldar codex.

Solar_Eclipse
23-06-2010, 01:36
I maintain my previous stance that this thing belongs in the Tau or Eldar codex.

Because Guard arnt allowed to have nice things?

Guard is the army with some of the most variation, saying "All Guard shouldnt have this skimmer" makes the army one dimensional and not as fun. Despite the horde of background surrounding the Imperial Navy, The Valk is seen as 'Not Guard'.

EmperorEternalXIX
23-06-2010, 04:30
40k battles are ground wars. The Imperial Navy should not be involved. If you want to be that black and white about it, there's a lot of fluff about the primarchs and the Emperor...let's put them in too. And the Chaos Gods, while we're at it.

It has nothing to do with Guard not being allowed to have nice things. You have a ton of nice things. What reason, what niche is there for this vehicle? The IG already has almost every other advantage an army can have in the game: numbers, scoring units, prodigious volumes of powerful weapons, ways to mitigate their own shortcomings with orders, and a ton of vehicles way more lethal than their counterparts in any codex. What possible justification is there to also give them the best fast transport in the game, AND make it the best long range tank hunter in the game...AND make it able to scout...AND make it not lose any transport capacity while doing so...AND make it able to drop off units after moving at a speed no other transport in the game (until the BA one) could possibly do?

Inquisitor_Tolheim
23-06-2010, 06:00
I fail to see how eyewitness accounts and recurring facts equate to hyperbole and exaggeration. But in a thread like this it is to be expected; after all, even people who agree the thing needs a price hike are completely subjective. I see a lot of people who don't seem to find the transport or grav chute capacity to mean very much.


NOTE: I am NOT taking a side here. This has gotten way bigger then I want to get into.

That having been said, eyewitness accounts do not a valid discourse make. There are far too many other variables (skill of the players involved, luck of the dice, terrain on the table, environmental distractions during the game, etc.) to make saying "I've seen a unit do X" to make it proof that X is the most common case of what happens with the unit.

In statistics, this is like surveying one (or a handful) of people and claiming their opinions are a perfect model for the opinions of everyone on the planet. The theoryhammer evidence (math stuffs like comparative costs, damage potential per turn vs various units, etc.) makes for much more compelling arguments. I've seen you present this evidence and it's made your point much better then your current "I've seen this happen" stuff.

Vaktathi
23-06-2010, 07:02
40k battles are ground wars. The Imperial Navy should not be involved. If you want to be that black and white about it, there's a lot of fluff about the primarchs and the Emperor...let's put them in too. And the Chaos Gods, while we're at it. The primarch's are 10,000 years in the past or immovable deep within the Eye of Terror, and the Chaos Gods are not going to make a personal appearance on a battlefield.

The Imperial Navy very much functions in a direct support role to the Imperial Guard and there are orders of magnitude more airborne IG regiments than there are SM chapters for instance, not to mentions Inquisitorial use of Valkyrie aircraft. The Imperial Navy provides close air support, transport, logistics, etc roles for the Imperial Guard very much within the context of 40k battles. It's not just space stuff that the IN does, but pretty much anything that requires flight. We aren't talking about Starfighters or air superiority aircraft, but rather close air support and air cav, Black Hawk equivalents, which are very much an element of ground warfare.

By the thinking that 40k battles can't involve anything from Space or involving flight,, why involve SM fleet assets with drop pods, thunderhawk dropped Land Raiders, terminators teleporting from orbit, Stormravens, Orbital Bombardments, etc?



It has nothing to do with Guard not being allowed to have nice things. You have a ton of nice things. What reason, what niche is there for this vehicle? This is a much better argument, however given the IG's lack of Land Raider/Battlewagon style transports, utter lack of realistic assault capability, and generally static nature of the army, access to some sort of speed element above and beyond the chimera (let's face it, for all its strength's, it's not considered for its speed) was warranted for the nature of 5E play.

Now, it's restricted to the FA slot and not a dedicated transport, it lacks the "Tank" unit type so can't tank shock stuff off objectives thus meaning for the Valk to take an objective whatever is there has to be blown off first, and lacks the special defensive mechanisms of the skimmer races like Holofields, Disruption Pods, and Energy Fields, making up for it with the Scout ability.

Is the *basic* valkyrie (2 missiles+ML) that scary? No, you very rarely see players take it as it lacks firepower and the transport capability by itself is unlikely to win games all that often unless an opponent ****'s up, and even the rocket pod upgrade isn't complained about really. It's the firepower utility of the Vendetta that is a problem, not the fact that it's an AV12 fast skimmer carrying weeny dudes.

Had they given the Valk/Vend the ability to outflank only and not make Scout moves (leading to the silly melta alpha strikes), or at least not move flat out on a scout move, and added 20-30pts to the Vendettas cost I think you'd see almost no complaints.

EmperorEternalXIX
23-06-2010, 07:24
NOTE: I am NOT taking a side here. This has gotten way bigger then I want to get into.

That having been said, eyewitness accounts do not a valid discourse make. There are far too many other variables (skill of the players involved, luck of the dice, terrain on the table, environmental distractions during the game, etc.) to make saying "I've seen a unit do X" to make it proof that X is the most common case of what happens with the unit.

In statistics, this is like surveying one (or a handful) of people and claiming their opinions are a perfect model for the opinions of everyone on the planet. The theoryhammer evidence (math stuffs like comparative costs, damage potential per turn vs various units, etc.) makes for much more compelling arguments. I've seen you present this evidence and it's made your point much better then your current "I've seen this happen" stuff.Well said, and exactly correct. The fact I've seen these things happen doesn't really fly as an argument due to, as you say, a variety of outside factors. Thank you for disagreeing with me in an objective fashion; you are absolutely correct.


By the thinking that 40k battles can't involve anything from Space or involving flight,, why involve SM fleet assets with drop pods, thunderhawk dropped Land Raiders, terminators teleporting from orbit, Stormravens, Orbital Bombardments, etc? You raise a valid point. Of course I don't like half of these things being in the game either. I assume that if your fleet is still capable of orbital bombardment than there was little point to having the ground war of the game you're playing anyhow; T-hawk Land Raiders is as stupid on the table as it is in the fluff, and I don't really consider dropping a huge tank out of the sky very realistic either; The Stormraven is just the same BS I complain about with the Vendetta with even more offense and transport capability. There are however some valid points: Drop Pods and Terminator teleports deal with how units enter the battle, and the fluff of the Space Marines is rife with examples of these tactics. What irks me about the Valk/Vend as being "unfluffy" is that, well...how many stories are there in the Imperial Guard codex about tanks, bodycount, and artillery winning the day, and how many are there about swarms of Guardsmen saving the day at the last minute parachuting down from a plane? (I'm asking this legitimately BTW, not facetiously; I haven't read a lot of the fluff in the codex).


This is a much better argument, however given the IG's lack of Land Raider/Battlewagon style transports, utter lack of realistic assault capability, and generally static nature of the army, access to some sort of speed element above and beyond the chimera (let's face it, for all its strength's, it's not considered for its speed) was warranted for the nature of 5E play.

Now, it's restricted to the FA slot and not a dedicated transport, it lacks the "Tank" unit type so can't tank shock stuff off objectives thus meaning for the Valk to take an objective whatever is there has to be blown off first, and lacks the special defensive mechanisms of the skimmer races like Holofields, Disruption Pods, and Energy Fields, making up for it with the Scout ability.

Is the *basic* valkyrie (2 missiles+ML) that scary? No, you very rarely see players take it as it lacks firepower and the transport capability by itself is unlikely to win games all that often unless an opponent ****'s up, and even the rocket pod upgrade isn't complained about really. It's the firepower utility of the Vendetta that is a problem, not the fact that it's an AV12 fast skimmer carrying weeny dudes. This is all very good reason for why it was added. But I still don't think it fits the army's theme overall. And the plane itself is one thing. But as you say, the firepower is the real F-You of the thing. Who thought giving this thing three free twin-linked lascannons was necessary?

ehlijen
23-06-2010, 07:54
If the Imperial Navy and flyers were to have a place in the game, they'd also need a major overhaul of the flyer movement rules. Flyers are not just fast skimmers.

Drop troopers should be handeled by the deep strike rules.
Air strikes should be handeled similar to the old FW flyer rules.

Hovertanks should be distinct in their tabletop performance from aircraft, not inferior in all respects as they currently are.

Honestly, 40k is still too small a scale to have air support as anything other than scenario rules.

I love the Valkyrie model, but I think both air support and offboard artillery just don't offer anything in the way of fun to the game that is 40k as it currently exists in the way they have been shoehorned in as of now.

Vaktathi
23-06-2010, 08:23
What irks me about the Valk/Vend as being "unfluffy" is that, well...how many stories are there in the Imperial Guard codex about tanks, bodycount, and artillery winning the day, and how many are there about swarms of Guardsmen saving the day at the last minute parachuting down from a plane? (I'm asking this legitimately BTW, not facetiously; I haven't read a lot of the fluff in the codex). The elysian and stormtrooper fluff is all about this stuff primarily, dropping from the skies and taking the fight to the enemy. Imperial 3,4 and 8 have a lot about such engagements. Eisenhorn IIRC also has some stuff about airborne infantry.



This is all very good reason for why it was added. But I still don't think it fits the army's theme overall. Admittedly it doesn't fit every IG armies theme, such as for the Death Korps, Vostroyans, Mordians, etc (I've thus far managed to keep myself from fielding them with my DKoK army), but for running an elite infantry or air cav army, which very certainly does exist within the IG fluff, the stuff is well warranted, such as for Elysians, Stormtroopers, Kasrkin Grenadiers (carapace Vets), etc.


And the plane itself is one thing. But as you say, the firepower is the real F-You of the thing. Who thought giving this thing three free twin-linked lascannons was necessary?Well, Cruddace apparently. It certainly wasn't what most people were expecting when the IG codex came out, or when the rumors of a Valk kit were circulating. Such armament would fit a Vulture much better, which is an HS choice with no transport capacity.

If this remained the case, where the Valk only really got the rocket pods and the triple TL lascannons were instead relegated to a transportless HS choice, things probably would be less contentious, as well as better capable of effectively portraying an actual air-cav army by allowing aircraft as HS and not just slow ground tanks.



If the Imperial Navy and flyers were to have a place in the game, they'd also need a major overhaul of the flyer movement rules. Flyers are not just fast skimmers. I agree, however given that Valks are VTOL aircraft akin to helicopters in function and not airplanes, allowing the skimmer rules to at least function well enough for a 40k engagement where such aircraft would basically just be providing close air support flying very near the ground for a couple minutes before they sped off again.

Max zero
23-06-2010, 16:03
Actually I can see how Valks/Ven's do fit into an IG army. The kind of close in Air support/transport is a very common thing in modern military (which the IG is loosely based off).

For my mind I don't think they specialized the Vendetta enough. It should have no transport capacity but more firepower (prob lose Scout as well). Make it a real Gunship.

Which of course makes me wonder why they didn't bring in the Vulture and leave the Vendetta out entirely.

Erwos
23-06-2010, 16:24
Actually I can see how Valks/Ven's do fit into an IG army. The kind of close in Air support/transport is a very common thing in modern military (which the IG is loosely based off).
The IG is based off the WWI British military, not the modern military. I'm pretty sure the Brits weren't fielding sophisticated helicopter-gunships in WWI.

Chiron
23-06-2010, 16:47
The IG is based off the WWI British military, not the modern military. I'm pretty sure the Brits weren't fielding sophisticated helicopter-gunships in WWI.

I'm pretty sure the Brits werent fielding Paratroops or IFV's in WW1 as well

Or small mutants good at shooting, or large mutants good at charging stuff (and no the Scots dont count, Highlanders were Napoleonic)

Max zero
23-06-2010, 17:01
The IG is based off the WWI British military, not the modern military. I'm pretty sure the Brits weren't fielding sophisticated helicopter-gunships in WWI.

Yeah there were a lot of APCs, Laser/Plasma weapons and Rocket Artillery in WW1.

Lord Inquisitor
23-06-2010, 17:25
The Imperial Navy very much functions in a direct support role to the Imperial Guard and there are orders of magnitude more airborne IG regiments than there are SM chapters for instance, not to mentions Inquisitorial use of Valkyrie aircraft.
The question is not so much whether it is possible for the Navy to be included reasonably in the army list but whether it serves the central role or imagery of the list.

In this regard, incidentally, I would be far more supportive of the Valk/Vendetta being in the Inquisition list, given that they have direct authority over the Navy and commonly operate as strike forces. Not that the guard shouldn't also have them, but certainly it fits the Inquisition's theme better - not to mention the Inquisition's woeful lack of ranged anti-tank options, a gunship support would be well-received.


Had they given the Valk/Vend the ability to outflank only and not make Scout moves (leading to the silly melta alpha strikes), or at least not move flat out on a scout move, and added 20-30pts to the Vendettas cost I think you'd see almost no complaints.
And removed the transport capacity from the Vendetta, sure.

Another example, the Valkyrie is available to Imperial Guard armies in Epic: Armageddon, but only the Stormtrooper platoons can take them as dedicated transports (whereas vultures can be taken as supporting formations all their own).

In 40K, then, if the Valkyrie or Vendetta could only be taken as a dedicated transport for a Stormtrooper squad, it'd go a ways towards balancing the aircraft and making Stormtroopers more attractive.

Erwos
23-06-2010, 17:33
I'm pretty sure the Brits werent fielding Paratroops or IFV's in WW1 as well
They were actually experimenting with APCs and IFVs at the time of WWI. Paratroops... not so much. But glider-infantry (which is, incidentally, the MO for storm trooper deep-striking given in an earlier codex) and paratroopers were present in WWII.


Yeah there were a lot of APCs, Laser/Plasma weapons and Rocket Artillery in WW1.
Rocket artillery was more WWII.

So, perhaps it should be more "odd amalgamation of WWI and WWII". Helicopter gunships have no thematic presence in either.

RCgothic
23-06-2010, 19:39
The IG is based off the WWI British military, not the modern military. I'm pretty sure the Brits weren't fielding sophisticated helicopter-gunships in WWI.

This is an utterly narrow minded view of the IG. In the 40k universe the IG encompass the entire range of possibility, from primitive regiments wielding nothing more than ccws, through Naploeonic equivalents like the Mordians, WW1ers like the DKoK, WW2ers like the Vostroyans, Vietnam-era Catachans and Cadians, and modern infantry like the Tanith, Eleysians and Harakoni.

There is certainly room for close air support in the IG paradigm.

The Vendetta is an abomination however, because it usurps the role of the Vulture, massively outguns the Valkyrie for no drawbacks, and is about 10-20pts too cheap for what it is, although it's possibly costed appropriately for what it should be - minus all transport capacity.

Vaktathi
23-06-2010, 20:07
They were actually experimenting with APCs and IFVs at the time of WWI. Theory crafting and wild experimentation at best. It wasn't until the late 1930's that anything actually came into realistic practice, and only really came into being in the 1940's. IFV's, something like the Chimera, didn't exist until the late 1960's.


Paratroops... not so much. But glider-infantry (which is, incidentally, the MO for storm trooper deep-striking given in an earlier codex) and paratroopers were present in WWII.Except there is tons of fluff on Elysians, Stormtroopers, and Kasrkin operating as modern helicopter borne air-cav infantry, not just WW2 equivalent airborne infantry.




Rocket artillery was more WWII. None of the IG units really resemble such units however, they are much closer to modern rocket artillery. IG don't have Katyusha's.



So, perhaps it should be more "odd amalgamation of WWI and WWII". Helicopter gunships have no thematic presence in either. As said above, that's an incredibly narrow view of the IG that just isn't accurate. It's an amalgamation of far more than just that. We have troops representing WW1 trench fighters (Krieg), modern day and scifi infantry (Cadians, Elysians), WW2 russian infantry (Valhallans), Czarist russians (Vostroyans), Lawrence of Arabia types (Tallarn), Fallschirmjaeger (Steel Legion), Vietnam US infantry (Catachan's), US marine dress uniforms (Mordians) and turn of the century British troops (Praetorians), as well as various others (Last chancers, Tanith, etc)

Erwos
23-06-2010, 23:09
As said above, that's an incredibly narrow view of the IG that just isn't accurate. It's an amalgamation of far more than just that. We have troops representing WW1 trench fighters (Krieg), modern day and scifi infantry (Cadians, Elysians), WW2 russian infantry (Valhallans), Czarist russians (Vostroyans), Lawrence of Arabia types (Tallarn), Fallschirmjaeger (Steel Legion), Vietnam US infantry (Catachan's), US marine dress uniforms (Mordians) and turn of the century British troops (Praetorians), as well as various others (Last chancers, Tanith, etc)
Yes, it's a narrow view. But, for years and years, the IG codex has reflected that narrow view. Suddenly, everyone's got Valkyries and flying around the field, not to mention their massive, super-powerful tanks. It's like someone decided that the IG needed to be the Tau.

Vaktathi
23-06-2010, 23:11
Yes, it's a narrow view. But, for years and years, the IG codex has reflected that narrow view. Suddenly, everyone's got Valkyries and flying around the field, not to mention their massive, super-powerful tanks. It's like someone decided that the IG needed to be the Tau.

It's not exactly something new, the Valk has been referenced and pictured for many years, it was shown in the INQ books and 4E rulebook, and has had a model and IA rules since...2002? 8 years?

Erwos
23-06-2010, 23:19
It's not exactly something new, the Valk has been referenced and pictured for many years, it was shown in the INQ books and 4E rulebook, and has had a model and IA rules since...2002? 8 years?
Sorry, I keep forgetting that people think 4E is old. Try the RT / 2E time frame.

Lord Inquisitor
23-06-2010, 23:22
Nevertheless, the point is that the "feel" and distinction is being degraded. Epic has valkyries, but as only Stormtroopers can take them, the IG army remains different in feel to the Eldar unless you take a metric crapload of stormtroopers. It's also a skimmer there, not a true aircraft.

I don't think there's a big issue with the Valkyrie itself in terms of theme. Certainly, a Catachan army supported by Valkyries has a great 'nam feel to it and there are other IG armies that could be justified in having Valkryies - Elysians or Inquisitorial Strike Forces. However, it does jar with the typically WWI or WWII appearance and mechanics of the rest of the army.

This brings us back to the vehicle itself. Why do Eldar and Tau players feel that the Valkyrie is stealing their thunder while there was no outcry against the Land Speeder Storm? The Valkyrie/Vendetta does it all - excellent transport capacity, decent armour (for a skimmer), horrifically heavy armament (the Valkryie with missile pods can put out more anti-personnel firepower at 12" than any other skimmer, while the vendetta outclasses even tau tanks for AT firepower), plus scout, plus the ability to deploy troops all around without using hatches, plus a special deployment rule.

Fundamentally, it's not that it shouldn't exist, it is just badly designed so that it's better than just about any other skimmer out there.

Vaktathi
23-06-2010, 23:25
Sorry, I keep forgetting that people think 4E is old. Try the RT / 2E time frame.

If you're using that as a reference, half the stuff in 40k didn't exist then. RT functionally was an entirely different universe where Commissars rode Jetbikes, IG had dreadnoughts and Land Raiders, and Eldar Guardians used Lasguns. 2E was still fairly primitive, Eldar didn't even get tanks until like the end of 2E, I think the Fire Prism in 3E? Dark Eldar didn't even exist.

Bunnahabhain
23-06-2010, 23:31
Yes, it's a narrow view. But, for years and years, the IG codex has reflected that narrow view. Suddenly, everyone's got Valkyries and flying around the field, not to mention their massive, super-powerful tanks. It's like someone decided that the IG needed to be the Tau.


Actually, the Guard codex for years and years has tried to represent lots of things, but only a combined arms, semi gunline, looks quite like a modern army has been anywhere near viable. See things like the warrior weapons doctrine for proof of intent, and failure to execute in a useful fashion....

This codex, many of these alternate styles become viable in anything iother than highly competitive seetings, and all are at least playable in a meaningful fashion.

Thornz
23-06-2010, 23:56
Yes, vendettas are a little undercosted. Anybody who picked up the IG codex for more than about 30 seconds has noticed this. It's more that they are fast vehicles, so get to make the best of the vehicle rules.

However, the book still has more overcosted klunkers than it does under-priced units.
Vendettas & Psychic Battle Squads are as a Imperial Guard player 2 units which I don't play with! Simply because they are VERY OP for their points cost. Any unit which minimizes the FUN for your opponent is one that should be removed.

EmperorEternalXIX
24-06-2010, 02:25
Don't even get me started on the psyker battle squad. I hate that IG psykers are more reliable and easier to use than those of the other races. And if it doesn't work out...hey who cares, it only cost a fraction of what other armies' psykers do. *rolls eyes*

Sykorax
24-06-2010, 02:34
I can't believe I havent found this gem of a thread until now.

The most significant issues I have with the Vendetta/Valk is the grav chute insertion and scout. These rules effectively makes this beast faster and more efficient transports than Eldar (& Tau) skimmers. So overnight with the IG codex the basic human has become more technologically advanced than a race who have been developing craft for millenia. Not only that, but in all the time Eldar have been engaged in warfare have they considered deep striking or outflanking. It took the genius of human minds to come up with that.

The ability to drop off a unit, move flat out and scout just allows devastating alpha strikes or last turn objective denials which no other army can spam or perform so reliably. This is the point Emperor Eternal has been pointing out the last few pages but people have failed to read. They just read what they want in order to say "I'm right, it's just his experience which means nothing". Math hammer is not necessary or even possible to prove the abilities this unit brings.

I despise all those who keep saying how justified the cost is or how bad they are since they have AV 12 and die easily. The same goes with Chimeras. Great, fire a few AT shots at the vehicle and pop it which takes ~1/3 of the AT weapons the army carries while the plethora of the other AV 12 in addition to LRBTs run around unscathed

Finally, IG are meant to be the hammer of the imperium. Quantity over quality; mass fire over accuracy. If that's the case, why are they able to perform precision strikes with the best of them at anytime anywhere on the board?

Just seeing that last post, PBS are pretty ironic too. The basic army of man can pack more psykers into an army than Eldar and Chaos.

Solar_Eclipse
24-06-2010, 03:19
Don't even get me started on the psyker battle squad. I hate that IG psykers are more reliable and easier to use than those of the other races. And if it doesn't work out...hey who cares, it only cost a fraction of what other armies' psykers do. *rolls eyes*

Yeah, what were they thinking adding a psyker squad which was worth a damn.

Anyone can see that their Ws2 S2 asses will be handed to them by literally ANYTHING in combat, any psychic nullification will not only mess with them, but start to kill them as Perils kills D3 of them.

Sure they are powerful, but they arent that great since their Direct attack has a variable AP, and their Ld modifying attack is dependant on them surviving, and doesnt work against the stupid amount of fearless units out there, and even a minus 6 can be saved alot of the time as most armies get rerolls somehow.

Jeez.

To those thinking that the Valk/Vendetta doesnt fit the Imperial Guards theme, the main problem with this stance is that not all Imperial Guard is the same, it has alot more variation than, say, Space Marines do in the background.

Thus, having the OPTION for the Valkyrie/Vendetta for the Guard armies who do use it is nice for those players, those players who have a list which doesnt fit that playstyle (ie. Krieg) shouldnt take them if they want to remain an army list following the fluff (or modify their fluff to suit it)

Sykorax
24-06-2010, 03:36
Yeah, what were they thinking adding a psyker squad which was worth a damn.

Anyone can see that their Ws2 S2 asses will be handed to them by literally ANYTHING in combat, any psychic nullification will not only mess with them, but start to kill them as Perils kills D3 of them.

Wow, as blunt as they come aren't you. When was the last time WS and S mattered to a unit which shoots? From the safety of a Chimera no less. "Anyone can see" that your arguments are moot as the stats you point out mean nothing about how they perform effectively.

Also FYI, nullifying a psychic power from casting does not equal a perils of the warp.



Sure they are powerful, but they arent that great since their Direct attack has a variable AP, and their Ld modifying attack is dependant on them surviving, and doesnt work against the stupid amount of fearless units out there, and even a minus 6 can be saved alot of the time as most armies get rerolls somehow.
Well then don't cast it on a fearless unit genius. As a backup, nuke that unit with soulstorm. No one is forcing you to use weakened resolve on fearless. If you dont think an assault 36" (42" with Chim move) large blast up to Str 9 is great, you're insane. Random AP matters less with all the cover saves around but with the potential to get +1 to vehicle damage or ignore terminator armor, it's well worth the gamble. You really have nothing to lose when you roll for AP here


To those thinking that the Valk/Vendetta doesnt fit the Imperial Guards theme, the main problem with this stance is that not all Imperial Guard is the same, it has alot more variation than, say, Space Marines do in the background.

Thus, having the OPTION for the Valkyrie/Vendetta for the Guard armies who do use it is nice for those players, those players who have a list which doesnt fit that playstyle (ie. Krieg) shouldnt take them if they want to remain an army list following the fluff (or modify their fluff to suit it)

Except now, Vendetta abuse & mech spam is the playstyle. Sure, modify it so the option is there but don't sell it as the "way too good must have unit" as it is now. Have it as a rarity, not the new way of fighting.

Vaktathi
24-06-2010, 07:53
Don't even get me started on the psyker battle squad. I hate that IG psykers are more reliable and easier to use than those of the other races. And if it doesn't work out...hey who cares, it only cost a fraction of what other armies' psykers do. *rolls eyes*

How are they more reliable and easier to use? They are only T3 5+sv Ld9 and don't have the Ld10 T4 3+sv's and psychic hoods or t3 3+/4+ invuls with ghosthelms and whatnots.

The Primaris is a decent unit but I don't think I've ever heard anyone really complain about them, and while the Ld reducing ability of the sanctioned psyker squad is silly, they certainly aren't more reliable and easier to use than other races dudes.

Hal'jin
24-06-2010, 08:21
Don't even get me started on the psyker battle squad. I hate that IG psykers are more reliable and easier to use than those of the other races. And if it doesn't work out...hey who cares, it only cost a fraction of what other armies' psykers do. *rolls eyes*

A fraction? They cost 110 points for a full squad that dies if something sneezes on them if you do not buy a Chimera for additional points for them. And for the "awesome" reliability see above post...

Sure, they can possibly withstand more perils than other psykers, if you're lucky rolling, but with each their ability diminishes.

Solar_Eclipse
24-06-2010, 11:04
Wow, as blunt as they come aren't you. When was the last time WS and S mattered to a unit which shoots?

When any unit charges them and whipes them with no kills back, my Guardsmen at least have a chance to do some damage in combat, not much damage, but some.

Yes, i was blunt, because EmperorEternals arguments aggravated me, i spoke out of anger.


Also FYI, nullifying a psychic power from casting does not equal a perils of the warp.

Thanks for the information! Funny how the 2 main pieces of psyker nullification are shadows of the warp of the Tyranids and Runes of Warding of the Eldar, both cause Perils to happen more often.


Well then don't cast it on a fearless unit genius. As a backup, nuke that unit with soulstorm. No one is forcing you to use weakened resolve on fearless. If you dont think an assault 36" (42" with Chim move) large blast up to Str 9 is great, you're insane. Random AP matters less with all the cover saves around but with the potential to get +1 to vehicle damage or ignore terminator armor, it's well worth the gamble. You really have nothing to lose when you roll for AP here

Wow, as blunt as they come, arent you?

Please, why is it that on the internet noone assumes that other people think?! Of course i wont cast weaken resolve on a fearless unit, but alot of the time in 40k, the units worth hitting with it are fearless, or stubborn, or Ld10 with a reroll, and usually after a few kills you'll be reducing Ld to about 4-5 and thats easily passed usually.

Also, A S9 Large blast with Random AP is not as useful as you would think, especially as i can already do that on so many other platforms, i need squads to do stuff my demolishers /Manticores/Valkyries cant

Now if we assume that you buy the Psyker unit at full strength and then a Chimera, thats 165 points. Or you could spend 160 on a Manticore, or 150 on a Russ of the basic type, or a Demolisher for 165. You could take a squad of 8-10 Stormtroopers (ive been taking them alot recently, amazing unit!). you could take 4 Ogryns, you could take a Hellhound Variant.

Weaken resolve is what the psykers are for, Soulstorm isnt needed in the army because so many other things do that better. If i wanted something to make things die, i would take one of the above units, since they all do something which the psykers dont.

Except now, Vendetta abuse & mech spam is the playstyle. Sure, modify it so the option is there but don't sell it as the "way too good must have unit" as it is now. Have it as a rarity, not the new way of fighting.

No, make them balanced with everything else. I dislike when people say that units or upgrades should be artificially points raised or something to suit fluff.

I play a Mechvets list with Valkyries, i dont really have a place for more than 1 Vendetta and thats at around 2000 points. Its not that useful.

Sure, its underpriced, but even so it doesnt do anything which my army really cant do already.

MystheDevourer
24-06-2010, 18:09
I think most people are missing the point...

In GWs eyes the only cost that matters is the kit cost.

Valk kits cost is very high, and therefore GW wants to sell very many.

Thus the "cost" in the codex is unbalanced in game terms, because it is driven purely by real world cost considerations.. i.e. profit.

If that was the case a Trygon would be about 140 pts for its cost of the kit. . . I wont bring up Baal Preds. . . 160 tops and I am golden with them . . .

Brettila
25-06-2010, 05:38
As a looongtime CSM player, I'll go with your havocs being overcosted. Like most the rest of our codex...

EmperorEternalXIX
25-06-2010, 05:45
Also, A S9 Large blast with Random AP is not as useful as you would think, especially as i can already do that on so many other platforms, i need squads to do stuff my demolishers /Manticores/Valkyries cantI'm curious. What exactly would this be?

I guess if my army had most of the strength 6-10 ordnance weapons in the game in its codex I would consider this ability pretty "not useful" too.

Sykorax
25-06-2010, 07:32
Well guess what - a PBS takes up an elite slot so you can take those in addition to all the demos/manticores/LRBTs and whatever else ordnance you tote a long. This unit turns a chimera into a full out battletank for 110 pts. I'll take 3 thx. How is that not useful?! You're able to haul high str high AP, large blasts in elite, fast and heavy slots at a cheap price.

As for psychic defense - LOL. If you worry about nids as guard youre off your rocker. Shadows is so minor considering their codex for the majority is absolutely awful and if you struggle as guard vs them you have issues. Eldar have to pay for their RoW and more often than not is not purchased.

Your arguments have less and less value considering you think storm troopers are an amazing unit in addition to mentioning taking ogryns.

Axeman1n
25-06-2010, 07:33
I'm curious. What exactly would this be?

I guess if my army had most of the strength 6-10 ordnance weapons in the game in its codex I would consider this ability pretty "not useful" too.

That is exactly the point. The power of any given unit is only to be taken in context of their own codex. The PBS ordnance is not nearly as useful in an IG army because we do have access to a lot of other ordnance.

EmperorEternalXIX
25-06-2010, 08:40
I just don't understand the IG frame of mind, I guess. I realize the units have to be considered relative to their codex, but I was asking more in relation to the second part.

The PBS is another one of those units that people seem to label as "terrible" when really it's "very good I just have so much other stuff in here that is better that I won't bother."

Vaktathi
25-06-2010, 08:53
The PBS's power as a blast weapon unit is highly variable on unit strength and your AP roll, and *has* to be taken in a chimera or it won't live to do anything, and even then doesn't get its power off as often as most other psykers being only Ld9, being at best at least as reliable as other psykers, although typically less so as most are Ld10.

It's big capability is the morale reduction power. It's great, don't get me wrong, but it's again subject to unit strength (and the enemy not being Fearless) and requires some setup to use properly (need to get it off, then have something around to hit the enemy unit hard enough that it takes a test), and is primarily there to break Deathstar units, whereas you can just tack on a couple more heavy weapons squads and likely get the same end effect against the vast majority of other units.

noobzilla
25-06-2010, 09:01
As for psychic defense - LOL. If you worry about nids as guard youre off your rocker. Shadows is so minor considering their codex for the majority is absolutely awful and if you struggle as guard vs them you have issues. Eldar have to pay for their RoW and more often than not is not purchased.

I laughed pretty hard at the absolute arrogance of this statement. Only on the internet are the Tyranids are so sucky like everyone claims. Having played the Nids, and played as them, I find they're a much better codex than everyone claims they are, and while Shadow in the Warp isn't the greatest Psychic defense I'll admit, once that Chimera is gone, the psykers are pretty easy to take down.

Paying 10 points for runes of warding? Who doesn't spend the 10 points if they have it? I know my Local Meta game dictates you better not leave home without psychic defense if you have it.

Solar_Eclipse
25-06-2010, 11:10
I'm curious. What exactly would this be?

I guess if my army had most of the strength 6-10 ordnance weapons in the game in its codex I would consider this ability pretty "not useful" too.


Ill use an example from the game i just had

On turn 3, the Eldar were being mightily trashed by my guard, but still had the ability to turn it around if they played right.

A farseer Guided and fortuned the unit of Dire Avengers he was with, and then left the unit to attack a nearby Chimera with his Witchblade.

The Dire avengers murdered a veteran squad (my second to last one), the Eldar Farseer attacked the Chimera, knocked a weapon off and stopped it from moving and shooting

So my turn rolled around. Of available shooting, i had a Demolisher with lascannon and 2 plasma cannons, a Manticore who was being molested by Jetbikes, but still able to fire, and a valkyrie.

Now, What would a psyker squad have been able to do?

Another Blast really doesnt add anything as he was hidden by a chimera and i would probably lose the chimera with a bad scatter.

Instead, my Valk dropped off my stormtroopers and dakka'd and meltad the farseer to death while shooting at the Dire Avengers.

See? Having more blasts doesnt mean i win, the psyker squadrons soulstorm isnt very useful because it doesnt add anything i couldnt do already with my army, i rely on each of my units to be able to tackle different enemies and situations. Overloading on Ordnance doesnt help because there are alot of units where that doesnt work, and situations where it can be nullified.

EmperorEternalXIX
25-06-2010, 12:34
Instead, my Valk dropped off my stormtroopers and dakka'd and meltad the farseer to death while shooting at the Dire Avengers. Couldn't you have used a PBS to annihilate most of those dire avengers in one shot?


I laughed pretty hard at the absolute arrogance of this statement. Only on the internet are the Tyranids are so sucky like everyone claims. Having played the Nids, and played as them, I find they're a much better codex than everyone claims they are, and while Shadow in the Warp isn't the greatest Psychic defense I'll admit, once that Chimera is gone, the psykers are pretty easy to take down.Around my way the Tyranids are laughable. Just stay in cover and watch how they become awful. Even Lash Whip warriors lose CCs to people around our way. We let them struggle to kill the vehicles and then we stay in the wreckage and watch as any nid that hops the rubble becomes I1 due to no frag grenades.

At that point it's a mop-up job.

Bunnahabhain
25-06-2010, 13:02
Couldn't you have used a PBS to annihilate most of those dire avengers in one shot?



Assuming there are no runes in play, the blast has 5/6th chance of going off, a 2/3rds chance of rolling a good enough AP to beat their armour. I'll assume S5+, so 5/6th wound. I'll be generous and assume you have a 2/3 chance of scatter putting the blast somewhere useful....

5/6 x 2/3 x 5/6 x(2/3 + (1/3 x 1/2)) = .074
power works, scatter, wounds, casualties allowing and denying saves.

So you have a roughly 7.4% chance of landing that blast in a devastating fashion on a squad of Dire avengers.

Assuming runes in play, and the squad still at 5+ pykers somehow.... IIRC a Ld9 unit has just under a 50% chance of the power working...falls out as 4.4% or so


That's why the blast power isn't awfully useful with plenty of other, more reliable and better large blasts about, and the Ld reducing power, that just requires the Psychic check to work, is.

Solar_Eclipse
25-06-2010, 14:10
Couldn't you have used a PBS to annihilate most of those dire avengers in one shot?


Well, What Bunnahanhain said, plus the Avengers were in cover with Fortune on them.


Around my way the Tyranids are laughable. Just stay in cover and watch how they become awful. Even Lash Whip warriors lose CCs to people around our way. We let them struggle to kill the vehicles and then we stay in the wreckage and watch as any nid that hops the rubble becomes I1 due to no frag grenades.

I thought you said that your players were generally better than usual?

Tyranids are an army to worry about sometimes. They can overload many enemies with Target saturation much like Mech Guard.

noobzilla
25-06-2010, 15:43
Around my way the Tyranids are laughable. Just stay in cover and watch how they become awful. Even Lash Whip warriors lose CCs to people around our way. We let them struggle to kill the vehicles and then we stay in the wreckage and watch as any nid that hops the rubble becomes I1 due to no frag grenades.

At that point it's a mop-up job.

I actually watched a Guard Player get tabled by Tyranids while playing a fully meched list at 1500.

Hive Guard wipe the floor with Chimeras and big MC's don't give a crap about cover or not. When a Trygon charges a Guard squad it's not pretty at all for the Guardsmen.

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 15:54
Attention.. BS3 lascannons guys. Really.... If you move more than 6 your getting to shoot 1 set of twin linked BS3 lascannons. Ask many eldar players how well BS3 brightlances on wave serpents do. They have the same rules minus the outflank unless your throwng scorps in them with shadowstrike.

I wont deny they may be a tad bit undercosted, but they arent as game changing as some in this thread make it out to seem.

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 15:56
If you're using that as a reference, half the stuff in 40k didn't exist then. RT functionally was an entirely different universe where Commissars rode Jetbikes, IG had dreadnoughts and Land Raiders, and Eldar Guardians used Lasguns. 2E was still fairly primitive, Eldar didn't even get tanks until like the end of 2E, I think the Fire Prism in 3E? Dark Eldar didn't even exist.

Dont forget dreadnoughts had jump packs... :D

Erwos
25-06-2010, 16:05
Attention.. BS3 lascannons guys. Really.... If you move more than 6 your getting to shoot 1 set of twin linked BS3 lascannons.
Let's say it again: a twin-linked BS3 weapon hits MORE than a regular BS4 weapon. Also, for most of us, moving AT ALL limits how many we can shoot.

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 16:10
Let's say it again: a twin-linked BS3 weapon hits MORE than a regular BS4 weapon.

Maybe, but at the end of the day its still one BS3 Lascannon shot your talking about at more than 6 inches of movement. I never do anything with one Lascannon shot. Against light transports or MC's sure I can see its value. But they never pop landraiders. Melta vets in Chimeras are guards only real anti land raider threat.

Valks are nice, but they don't dominate unless the person your playing makes mistakes or is unlucky. Or your super lucky with your hit rolls etc.

I have had marine players pop them out of the air with a plasma weapon and I failed my cover save roll. Does that mean that plasma guns need to be nerfed? Bottom line, there are too many variables for people to make statements about the Valk/Vendettas dominance.

Luck influences how people view these units. Hydras on the other hand are for sure undercosted. The amount of firepower they can spit out for 75 points is pretty massive. But they are sweet for sure.

Bunnahabhain
25-06-2010, 16:11
Let's say it again: a twin-linked BS3 weapon hits MORE than a regular BS4 weapon.
True. EDIT Razormasticator-All lascannons on the Vendetta are twin linked. Each weapon it fires hits 3/4 of the time, not 1/2.... /EDIT

Also, for most of us, moving AT ALL limits how many we can shoot.

it depends- Eldar, Dark Eldar, Blood Angels, Tau ( who doesn't take the upgrade to shoot as per fast vehicles), plenty of Orks and now Guard... The fast vehicles everywhere camp is scarcely a minor faction....

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 16:17
@ Bunnahabhai, I realize this. But how many players while utilizing the transport function that someone was mentioning pages earlier are only going to move 6" to get the full fire power capability of this unit? Really?

Most of the time, a Vendetta is moving its 12, and firing ONE twin linked BS3 lascannon.
Deploying its troops and then moving on to harass etc. like most other transports in the game.

Now if your talking about someone running them as a purely anti-tank option and not utilizing the transport function and moving 6 and shooting all of its lascannons, well then I can understand some of the frustration. But then they aren't going to benefit from a cover save at all. Its a trade off just like every other fast transport.

Erwos
25-06-2010, 16:35
Most of the time, a Vendetta is moving its 12, and firing ONE twin linked BS3 lascannon.
Deploying its troops and then moving on to harass etc. like most other transports in the game.
Actually, they usually outflank, move 24", drop their troops on an objective, and then start popping tanks as fast as they can while standing still or moving 6". I don't know who you think moves 12" and fires one shot, but that's no one around here.

I'm not asking for the Vendetta to be dropped from the game, but it's a lot of awesome for the points it costs.

Bunnahabhain
25-06-2010, 16:38
Or do the converse, potter about at the back doing 6" a turn, then move 24 on turn 5+ to contest, or drop scoring units on objectives...

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 16:41
Well they aren't moving 24 and dropping their troops unless they are taking a risk. Then they are expecting to make their cover save vs. all the fire they are opening themselves up too. Things that pop tanks are a dime dozen in 40k for most lists these days. So thats no argument in my eyes.

As I stated above, luck influences how people view these units. Granted, I already agreed they are undercosted. But not by alot. Outflank is a sweet ability and mallable with the officer of the fleet/astropath combo.

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 16:43
You guys are minimizing luck here. The vendetta is useful and has alot for a good point cost. No argument there. But in my experience, they are only a tool that is as useful as a good general and luck will allow.

In every scenario spelled out above, things like the turn in comes in from reserves on, whether you make your cover save or not and whether or not you can manage to hit and penetrate are all factors that can limit its effectivness.

Which is that way with any other unit in the game, but we are still talking about BS3, Armor 12 and a 4 or 3 Plus cover save depending on the variables. Much like eldar.

Erwos
25-06-2010, 17:17
Well they aren't moving 24 and dropping their troops unless they are taking a risk. Then they are expecting to make their cover save vs. all the fire they are opening themselves up too. Things that pop tanks are a dime dozen in 40k for most lists these days. So thats no argument in my eyes.
Duh. They move 24", don't drop troops, and then drop them off the next turn. If they get shot down before the next turn, who cares, the troops bail out onto the objective anyways.

Also, this "just shoot it down with everything you've got, durrr" concept that some people are espousing is ludicrous. Vendettas are overly cheap, but they are not the only dangerous thing in the IG list. Most of my powerful long-range anti-armor firepower has to be directed at the more deadly threats of artillery and tanks. THAT is the difference between the IG and the Eldar.

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 18:11
Duh. They move 24", don't drop troops, and then drop them off the next turn. If they get shot down before the next turn, who cares, the troops bail out onto the objective anyways.

Also, this "just shoot it down with everything you've got, durrr" concept that some people are espousing is ludicrous. Vendettas are overly cheap, but they are not the only dangerous thing in the IG list. Most of my powerful long-range anti-armor firepower has to be directed at the more deadly threats of artillery and tanks. THAT is the difference between the IG and the Eldar.

Whats with the attitude? Really, not one part of my post was snotty.

As I stated above, a single marine with a plasma rifle cant take a valk/or a vendetta down. Fail your cover save and they roll well and boom.Its happened to me.
Then T3 on guardsman, if you bail you may lose 2-3 on crappy armor saves.
It boils down to luck. Are they a bit cheap for what they can do... sure.
But its not game breaking.
How and what you shoot at is certainly your perogative. But it does not take a full army of heavy weapons etc. to bring one of these down.

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 18:12
Duh. They move 24", don't drop troops, and then drop them off the next turn. If they get shot down before the next turn, who cares, the troops bail out onto the objective anyways.

Also, this "just shoot it down with everything you've got, durrr" concept that some people are espousing is ludicrous. Vendettas are overly cheap, but they are not the only dangerous thing in the IG list. Most of my powerful long-range anti-armor firepower has to be directed at the more deadly threats of artillery and tanks. THAT is the difference between the IG and the Eldar.

I was confused and I was reffering to a storm trooper option. The grav chute thing etc.

Vaktathi
25-06-2010, 19:28
I actually watched a Guard Player get tabled by Tyranids while playing a fully meched list at 1500.

Hive Guard wipe the floor with Chimeras While I don't doubt some good rolling can produce unexpected results and Hive Guard are great units, "wiping the floor" with chimeras sounds a bit overly optimistic. On average you need about 7 hive guard firing to kill off a Chimera, and the Chimeras need to be in range, whereas the chimeras can sit back 36" away and deal some decent hurt right back at the hive guard, about 3-4 Chims (assuming ML/HB) to kill off a Hive Guard.



When a Trygon charges a Guard squad it's not pretty at all for the Guardsmen.Right, but you'd likely still end up breaking and running down a guard squad with a single Warrior for almost 1/7th the cost. Trygons charging guardsmen is grossly overkill and a waste of a Trygon unless its a massive blob squad.

EmperorEternalXIX
25-06-2010, 19:51
I thought you said that your players were generally better than usual?

Tyranids are an army to worry about sometimes. They can overload many enemies with Target saturation much like Mech Guard.They are above average, I would say. This is part of the reason the Tyranids are no threat to any of our players. Target priority is really easy and you endure almost NO return fire until they reach assault range.

The MAJOR weakness of the Tyranids is one that many players often forget -- they no longer have any sort of frag grenades on most of their units. So you just blast them and then once they reach you, you stand behind a rock, and suddenly they are a bunch of T3/4 models with awful saves going at initiative 1. By that point most of them are dead anyway.


In every scenario spelled out above, things like the turn in comes in from reserves on, whether you make your cover save or not and whether or not you can manage to hit and penetrate are all factors that can limit its effectivness.Actually I've already detailed ad nauseum what happens when it comes in early, and how the Vendetta can float at its maximum range, keeping itself and its cargo relatively save until it's time to make that final divebomb toward the objective. Players do this all the time at my club, and when the situation goes favorably, they can even manage to interfere with TWO objectives at the end thanks to the grav chute.


Also, this "just shoot it down with everything you've got, durrr" concept that some people are espousing is ludicrous. Vendettas are overly cheap, but they are not the only dangerous thing in the IG list. Most of my powerful long-range anti-armor firepower has to be directed at the more deadly threats of artillery and tanks. THAT is the difference between the IG and the Eldar.This. IG are the only army in the game with so many high-danger-level threats. Target priority is tough against them. Vendetta than Leman Russes is my standard push and it tends to work but the IG player has so many options to hit you with it is seldom likely to be easy, and you will NEVER have your full firepower available to shoot at a lone Vendetta.


I actually watched a Guard Player get tabled by Tyranids while playing a fully meched list at 1500.

Hive Guard wipe the floor with Chimeras and big MC's don't give a crap about cover or not. When a Trygon charges a Guard squad it's not pretty at all for the Guardsmen.If a Trygon charges a guard squad the guard player should be ashamed of themselves, with the amount of things they have that can nix his save. The Vendetta-mounted squad can take care of the Hive Guard easily enough, too.

I don't know where on god's green earth you got that MCs don't care about cover. The number one reason why the Nids are so easy to beat is because anything AP3 or better is usually high enough strength that T6 means nothing and it ignores their armor.

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 20:18
But thats my point. You don't need your FULL fire power to take it down. One lone space marine with a plasma weapon can do it if you fail your cover save or they roll well.

I lose valks to plasma all the time. It happened at this years Ard Boys in which I placed 4th. Sisters/Marines/Inquisition allied force. Are you guys going to tell me plasma is not prevalant in marine lists?

Against guard Valks are succeptible to Hydras etc. The Valk/Vendetta is no less or more deadly or useful than a Wave Serpent kitted out and packing Dire Avengers.

There are way to many variables to consider. They are great and useful. But not the be all end all game breaking unit some of you are making them out to sound like.

Erwos
25-06-2010, 20:29
But thats my point. You don't need your FULL fire power to take it down. One lone space marine with a plasma weapon can do it if you fail your cover save or they roll well.
Are you kidding me? Yes, that _could_ happen. But the likelihood is minimal, especially with the cover save.

Your argument basically devolves into "you can get lucky". But, guess what? I can get unlucky, too. On average, a single plasma shot has a 3.6% chance of bringing it down, and that's not including a cover save. Are you seriously trying to tell me that I should be banking on a 3.6% chance of bringing it down? My odds are much better in terms of "doing anything at all to it", but as we've discussed so much, the Vendetta can actually do stuff other than shoot.

I genuinely think you do not understand the objections being put forth against the Vendetta's points cost. It's not just the Vendetta; it's also the army the Vendetta gets used in.

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 20:46
Dude, it has happend to me twice in the last month and half. 1 Space marine shooting it out of the air with a plasma rifle.

a 4+ cover save is 50% odds.

ah, so there is the rub. your problem lies more with the guard codex and less with the vendetta itself.

and yes, the vendetta can do things other than shoot. but so can the battlewagon and the wave serpent.




You know - if you didn't have infantry that DIDN'T fold up like wet paper bags in close combat, or didn't have access to Lash of Submission, or didn't have access to Obliterators - I might feel for you. ;)

Do I think the Vendetta is undercosted? Yeah - a little.
But not as much as you might think. Av12 is NOT that hard to crack, and it has the target profile of a barn door - so almost always a viable target. And if it is manuvering close to deliver meltavets - it's not firing all three lascannons.

In most the games I've been playing - the Vendetta has been a one shot wonder. It might get one good shot off and then dies horribly - because it is a priority target. I RARELY see Vendettas make it past turn 2.

Besides - losing two Land Raiders to Vendettas in turn one is *not* going to be a common occurrance, statistically.

The odds of a Vendetta getting a first turn kill on a Land Raider work out to be about 12.5%, by my calculations. (.75 chance to hit * .166 chance of a Pen * .333 chance of a destroy ) *3 shots = ~12.5%.

Add in the 12.5% or so of Immobilize results. (.75 chance to hit *.166 chance to glance * .1666 chance to immobilze) *3 shots (*2 - because the Pen immobilize has the exact same chance as a Glance Immobilize) = ~12.5

Basically - a single Vendetta has about a 25% chance of generating a mission kill on a Land Raider on Turn 1.

As a side note - a 3 man Obliterator Squad has about a 3% less chance of accomplishing the same task - and is FAR sturdier (3 wounds, smaller target profile, invulnerable/cover saves).

What's my point? My point is that it sounds like you got unlucky. The chances of losing BOTH Land Raiders were something like 6%.

This pretty points out the deal with the vendetta right here.

@ Erwos, I get the whole tone of your posts and I see you have been railing against it since page 1.

So we can just agree to disagree about it in general.
I have already agreed its a bit on the cheap side.

EmperorEternalXIX
25-06-2010, 21:41
You are saying the best vehicle in the game is fine because it can possibly be shot down?

Well butter my biscuit, I'm relieved.

/sarcasm

razormasticator
25-06-2010, 21:46
No I am saying its an av 12 transport that shoots on a BS3. Kelchi spelled it out and I agree.

EmperorEternalXIX
25-06-2010, 21:58
It is a lot more than an AV12 transport that shoots on a BS3, dude.

senorcardgage
25-06-2010, 22:05
No I am saying its an av 12 transport that shoots on a BS3. Kelchi spelled it out and I agree.


It is a lot more than an AV12 transport that shoots on a BS3, dude.

Kelchi's math was wrong, first off. Second, his comparison with obliterators is completely ridiculous. How can you compare a 225 point, six wound, slow and purposeful heavy support choice to a 130 point, fast, scouting, transporting, fast attack vehicle?

And saying that the Vendetta has the disadvantage of being bigger and less likely to get cover is unfair, as it also has the bonus of reducing the odds of its targets receiving cover saves.

Erwos
25-06-2010, 22:08
This pretty points out the deal with the vendetta right here.

@ Erwos, I get the whole tone of your posts and I see you have been railing against it since page 1.

So we can just agree to disagree about it in general.
I have already agreed its a bit on the cheap side.
Oh, it's nothing personal. But every time you go "it's an AV12 BS3 lascannon", you are basically lying to everyone here about what it can do.

So, yes, I agree to disagree. I don't agree to just letting you give an utterly distorted picture of what a Vendetta is.

Another point of comparison: Chaos Predator Annihilator is 165 points. Slightly better armored in front than a Vendetta, but worse on the side. Not fast, not scouting, not a transport, not a skimmer, and, oh by the way, sucks down a heavy support slot.

noobzilla
25-06-2010, 22:25
While I don't doubt some good rolling can produce unexpected results and Hive Guard are great units, "wiping the floor" with chimeras sounds a bit overly optimistic. On average you need about 7 hive guard firing to kill off a Chimera, and the Chimeras need to be in range, whereas the chimeras can sit back 36" away and deal some decent hurt right back at the hive guard, about 3-4 Chims (assuming ML/HB) to kill off a Hive Guard.

Not if the Chimeras are at the front of the line. 3 Hive Guard seems to be the magic number for penning a Chimera at least 2x against the front armor and killing it. At least around my area. Against side armor is only better.



Right, but you'd likely still end up breaking and running down a guard squad with a single Warrior for almost 1/7th the cost. Trygons charging guardsmen is grossly overkill and a waste of a Trygon unless its a massive blob squad.

Unless it has something better to do against Guardsmen I don't see why it shouldn't. Considering most of the other stuff the Trygon SHOULD go for was already dead courtesy of a T-Fex and his Hive Guard buddies.

Badger[Fr]
25-06-2010, 22:34
Seriously people, how do could anyone fail to shake a huge Av12 vehicle that cannot, more often than not, even claim a cover save? It's not like Space Marines have tens of long-ranged anti-vehicle weapons...

Vaktathi
25-06-2010, 22:36
Not if the Chimeras are at the front of the line. 3 Hive Guard seems to be the magic number for penning a Chimera at least 2x against the front armor and killing it. At least around my area. Against side armor is only better.

With 3 hive guard you will get an average of 1.33 pens against a chimera (6*(0.66)BS4=4hits*(0.33)=1.33 penetrating hits*(0.33)=0.44 destroyed/explodes), which equates to about 0.44 kills per 3 hive guard. Ergo, about 7 for every 1. The chimera's outrange the hive guard and only require about 4 to kill a single Hive Guard in cover on average.

If you are routinely killing a chimera with 3 hive guard every time they fire, your dice are on fire I guess.




Unless it has something better to do against Guardsmen I don't see why it shouldn't. Right, but waxing on about how a trygon messus up IG infantry is like singing the praises of using a howitzer to kill a roach. Yeah, it'll do it, but just about anything else will do the same job at a fraction of the cost. If there's nothing else, that's fine, but it's not anything to go on about.


Considering most of the other stuff the Trygon SHOULD go for was already dead courtesy of a T-Fex and his Hive Guard buddies.
A T-fex is actually only about half as effective against a chimera as 3 hive guard are. 2 T-fex's and 9 Hive Guard will on average inflict 1.77 destroyed results against chimeras per turn, assuming all are in range, at just under 1000pts for all that.

noobzilla
25-06-2010, 22:43
I prefer not to do any math-hammering here and just go by what I've consistently seen. I've seen the T-Fex wrecking AV14, and the Hive Guard do work against the Chimeras. I know the averages of mathhammer but if I had only seen average work done by these units so far, I wouldn't be here advocating how good they are and being against the assertion that the entire Tyranid codex as a whole is complete trash when in fact it is not.

His dice are pretty on fire I guess then, he seems to wreck all sorts of Chimeras very quickly as well as any other transport, without so much as a single Zoanthrope. But considering his list has 42 T6 wounds to try to deal with (with Varying saves) its tough to take it all down.

Vaktathi
25-06-2010, 22:53
I prefer not to do any math-hammering here and just go by what I've consistently seen. I think if you track the math with your games, it should be pretty equivalent


I've seen the T-Fex wrecking AV14 Nobody said it couldn't :confused:

Although that said, it's not the most cost effective method of doing so either.


and the Hive Guard do work against the Chimeras. Nobody said they didn't. They are actually pretty decent anti-transport units, but they aren't simply going to wipe Chimeras off the board left and right every turn as was intimated earlier.

EmperorEternalXIX
25-06-2010, 23:04
You could just do like some others in this thread and live in a fantasy world. In Badger's land where the Space Marine army packs apparently hundreds of long-range anti-tank weapons and has no other AV12+ targets worth mentioning against the IG, the Vendetta is easily neutralized by a shaken result. Which clearly prevents it from launching across the board, claiming a save, only being hit in CC on a 6, dropping a deadly shooty unit en route, and contesting an objective or two.

Without a doubt, this model is utterly useless once it is shaken. :\ (Sorry to be facetious, but I am trying to make a point here)

Nevermind the fact that some very vocal folks amongst the IG fans out there that like to claim that the wings and tail don't count as the hull, allowing it to hide behind a tree and fire at full effectiveness while getting a 4+ save.


Let me just reiterate that no one has trouble killing or defeating this thing. I kill it every time I see it in-game merely as a point of prejudice. The point overall is it adds a significant advantage to an already extremely capable force, and adds a highly-mobile priority target that most armies will need to engage with static heavy weaponry (which, in layman's terms, means it can avoid you easily).

It is easily the best vehicle in the game for speed, transport capacity, and firepower combination, and it forces your entire army to focus on it. You can't shake this thing and forget about it; you have to put it down and put it down for good, fast or else it and the dude using it are going to beat you, no question.

noobzilla
25-06-2010, 23:04
I didn't mean to imply that the T-Fex can't take out AV14, but its a lot better at it than people "average" it out to be.

Also, I see about a transport or so destroyed every turn when this Tyranid list is played.

Wolf Lord Balrog
25-06-2010, 23:24
You know what this reminds me of? The wraithlord arguments back during 3rd Ed, back when GW had their own forums. Ahh, those were the days. :D

Sykorax
25-06-2010, 23:55
Another Blast really doesnt add anything as he was hidden by a chimera and i would probably lose the chimera with a bad scatter.

Instead, my Valk dropped off my stormtroopers and dakka'd and meltad the farseer to death while shooting at the Dire Avengers.

See? Having more blasts doesnt mean i win, the psyker squadrons soulstorm isnt very useful because it doesnt add anything i couldnt do already with my army, i rely on each of my units to be able to tackle different enemies and situations. Overloading on Ordnance doesnt help because there are alot of units where that doesnt work, and situations where it can be nullified.


Well, What Bunnahanhain said, plus the Avengers were in cover with Fortune on them.

Your writing is fairly poor but if I understand it correctly you dropped off the stormtroopers to shoot at the farseer and used the valk to shoot the DA? I would've thought you would shoot the FS with the valk and stormtroopers into the DA but you mentioned you melta'd the FS. Either way, if this was the case how would storm troopers+valk do any better than a PBS against fortuned DA in cover. Neither have an edge on doing significant wounds.

Furthermore, one game does not represent how well a unit performs. The example you gave is situational and a negative hypothesis where you select information which only shows your point of view (that PBS are not useful), thus in your eyes proves your view to be correct. If you broadcast the larger picture, what else could the PBS fire at? Can't tell me nothing on turn 3 whilst believing the game can still be turned around.


The Valk/Vendetta is no less or more deadly or useful than a Wave Serpent kitted out and packing Dire Avengers.
Not even close. WS + DA cost way more than a Vendetta + Melta vets, is not a significant threat to any armor or high T units, cannot drop off the unit if they go more than 12" and has far fewer shots on the transport. Once the WS drops the DA off it has 1 good weapon while the Vendetta or Valk is a full out gunship capable of trashing units on its own. A WS with just a bright lance upgrade with DA including a power & exarch is just under 300 points for minimum upgrades. Vendetta & Vets are 230 pts fully armed.


I prefer not to do any math-hammering here and just go by what I've consistently seen. I've seen the T-Fex wrecking AV14, and the Hive Guard do work against the Chimeras. I know the averages of mathhammer but if I had only seen average work done by these units so far, I wouldn't be here advocating how good they are and being against the assertion that the entire Tyranid codex as a whole is complete trash when in fact it is not.
Are you actually tracking all the results or believing in just what you remember? Saying things don't follow math hammer in your area is just like when people playing poker say they always lose to bad beats and odds don't apply to them which is clearly false. How about all those other hands which they won and should have lost or the hands they were losing and folded (equivalent to non pens/glance and other damage table results)? Losing a bad beat or seeing a vehicle destroyed is a situation which stands out in your mind compared to the other events and as such seem to occur more often than it really does.

EmperorEternalXIX
26-06-2010, 00:30
I didn't mean to imply that the T-Fex can't take out AV14, but its a lot better at it than people "average" it out to be.

Also, I see about a transport or so destroyed every turn when this Tyranid list is played.You know the game is sometimes only 5 turns long, and that the IG typically field over a dozen vehicles in the higher point levels, right?

t-tauri
26-06-2010, 08:56
A swathe of off topic and argumentative posts removed. Please post on topic.

t-tauri

The Warseer Inquisition

Bloodknight
26-06-2010, 09:49
Not even close. WS + DA cost way more than a Vendetta + Melta vets, is not a significant threat to any armor or high T units, cannot drop off the unit if they go more than 12" and has far fewer shots on the transport. Once the WS drops the DA off it has 1 good weapon while the Vendetta or Valk is a full out gunship capable of trashing units on its own. A WS with just a bright lance upgrade with DA including a power & exarch is just under 300 points for minimum upgrades. Vendetta & Vets are 230 pts fully armed.




The WS does have one major advantage over the Valk: it'S a tank and thus can tank shock stuff off objectives or bunch enemy units up. That is a very useful ability, I must say.

EmperorEternalXIX
26-06-2010, 11:43
I would agree but the Guard have no shortage of vehicles that can do that.

That is essentially the one and only thing the Valkyrie/Vendetta can't do.

Bloodknight
26-06-2010, 14:24
Show me a guard vehicle that can do a 24" tank shock that ignores terrain;).
I've seen Serpents TSing like 3 units (ok, they were Tau, but still) off their positions in one go.

The only things that come close to that in the Guard are the Hellhound variants, and they're slower and have to negotiate terrain.

Seriously, the WS is an awesome passive weapon.

razormasticator
26-06-2010, 14:56
Once again the argument is more with the guard codex as a whole rather than the Vendetta/Valk itself.


And no-one should ever underestimate the value/utility of the wave serpent. If the vendettas is the best transport in the current meta game, the wave serpent is second.

Axeman1n
26-06-2010, 22:06
Chimera is still the best Transport in meta game. 5 firepoints, upgrade to stealth, it's nearly unkillable if you turtle up.

Solar_Eclipse
27-06-2010, 01:47
Chimera is still the best Transport in meta game. 5 firepoints, upgrade to stealth, it's nearly unkillable if you turtle up.


That upgrade is rarely worth it for the 75 points it makes the Chimera (85 with a stubber, 100 if you want extra armour)

The thing is powerful because the guard players who use it are good at making sure you dont get many hits on that squishy armour 10 side.

Wolf Lord Balrog
27-06-2010, 04:44
This is all a bit off-topic as we are supposed to be talking about the Valk/Vendetta, but: Tau look at your 55 pt AV12 transport with 2 nice guns and 5 fire points with envy. They pay 50% more for a slightly more survivable transport with laughable firepower containing paper-mache Troops.

Vaktathi
27-06-2010, 04:50
This is all a bit off-topic as we are supposed to be talking about the Valk/Vendetta, but: Tau look at your 55 pt AV12 transport with 2 nice guns and 5 fire points with envy. They pay 50% more for a slightly more survivable transport with laughable firepower containing paper-mache Troops.

Under 4E when that book came out that devilfish was infinitely better than that Chimera and was considered an awesome unit. Far more survivable, greater utility, and mobile firepower than a chimera, and was functionally fewer points after kit as well.

It's an edition change, when Tau get updated I'm sure they'll get the Devilfish recosted significantly downward.

Wolf Lord Balrog
27-06-2010, 04:55
Under 4E when that book came out that devilfish was infinitely better than that Chimera and was considered an awesome unit. Far more survivable, greater utility, and mobile firepower than a chimera, and was functionally fewer points after kit as well.

It's an edition change, when Tau get updated I'm sure they'll get the Devilfish recosted significantly downward.

No doubt you are correct, but that is how it stands at the moment, and for the (minimum) next 18 months until that update happens. :(

Lord Inquisitor
27-06-2010, 06:20
In this comparison, however, it should be noted that the Chimera is really, really good for 55 points with the current rules. It's an amazing little APC and what really makes it is the ability to act as a light tank AND allow the carried squad to fire 5 weapons out. That gives it a higher potential fire output than any other APC, and it's the second cheapest.

Saying that Vendettas aren't that amazing, just look at the Chimera - well, Chimera are also amazing.

Axeman1n
27-06-2010, 06:32
What I'm saying is that the Vendetta must be compared to it's own competion. The Chimera is an amazing transport, and if the Vendetta were to be taken in it's stead, it must be better, and it is. If the Vendetta were worse, or cost more, then people would simply take chimeras.
Just in case it wasn't clear, I'm on the Vendetta/Valk are very close to balanced for their codex oppinion.

Wolf Lord Balrog
27-06-2010, 08:52
What I'm saying is that the Vendetta must be compared to it's own competion. The Chimera is an amazing transport, and if the Vendetta were to be taken in it's stead, it must be better, and it is. If the Vendetta were worse, or cost more, then people would simply take chimeras.
Just in case it wasn't clear, I'm on the Vendetta/Valk are very close to balanced for their codex oppinion.

Back when the Valk was still a FW piece, cost 30 pts more, didn't have all the special rules it has now, and the Vendetta configuration didn't exist, people still took it. Why? Because it was, and is, a damn cool looking model, and it still provided unique capabilities. But the Valk and Vendetta are at least 20 pts too cheap as they stand now.

Escaflowne_Z
27-06-2010, 10:19
Man, am I glad that I was done buying Guard models a couple years ago except for basic trooper boxes. Almost pulled the trigger on getting a Valkyrie, then decided that I didn't want to put together and paint a model that big.

My 1 Chimera, no skimmer Guard that I've been using for years win at a nice rate. Perhaps my gaming circles are too used to seeing scads of tanks/skimmers, and are unprepared for my old style previous book army build.

Oh, and on topic. The models are sweet, the Valkyrie is just fine, and the Vendetta appears to be undercosted a smidgeon.

As ever, it's only really a problem when it's taken to an extreme. Vendetta spam, before that Monstrous Creature spam, and even before that Harlequin/Falcon spam.

EmperorEternalXIX
27-06-2010, 11:13
A smidgeon? Really?

Solar_Eclipse
27-06-2010, 12:21
A smidgeon? Really?

I'd drop its capacity to 6 troops and make it 150 points, its not that bad really.

If its capacity is 6, only Command squads, special weapons squads and 6 man stormtrooper teams can get in it, No veterans will get there, which is one of the main problems with it.


This is all a bit off-topic as we are supposed to be talking about the Valk/Vendetta, but: Tau look at your 55 pt AV12 transport with 2 nice guns and 5 fire points with envy. They pay 50% more for a slightly more survivable transport with laughable firepower containing paper-mache Troops.


Im sorry?!

The Devilfish is an amazing transport with its 4+ cover outside of 12" and its 12-11-10 armour, the fact that its a skimmer allows the fish of fury tactic which is still amazing when used properly, when the drones are used to extend the no go zone.

Axeman1n
27-06-2010, 13:13
Back when it was 20pts more expensive, the Chimera was 85pts nekkid. The chimera is cheaper and better than it was, so the Vendetta/Valk must get better and cheaper to keep up.
The Valk is not an auto win machine. It has a role to play, and one that the IG codex desperately needed. If you are going to get all upset about it's carrying capacity (btw cap of 6 would make it worthless to the guard) then please compare it to the Chimera. It's not a WSerpent, or any other codex competition.

Cain1001
27-06-2010, 15:41
I don't see any real world issues w/ the Vendetta/Valk - only issues I see are from people who feel a need to point and say, "Cheese". In most games my two flyboys go down in flames even when outflanking. They do demand attention, but they are the force that you see in game from things like deepstriking Termies or rushing Landraiders.

12 armor can be handled by every army. They are good to great units, but not cheese.

Badger[Fr]
27-06-2010, 15:51
The issue is, most players fail to realize how important long-ranged anti-vehicle firepower is. Shaking an Av12 vehicle that can seldom claim a cover save should be easy, and yet, most Space Marine players adamantly refuse to field Typhoon Land Speeders, HK Missiles, LC Razorbacks, Predators, or Dreadnoughts, then whine when their slow, short-ranged Vulkan or Kantor builds get slaughtered by a long-ranged gunline.

piperider361
27-06-2010, 16:08
With so many people saying that Valkyrie hulls are so strong, I'm starting to feel bad about my Elysian list. Would people still feel so strongly about facing an onslaught of Valkyries if there was no heavy support to back them up? I run 4 Valk hulls in my 1k, and 9 in my 2k lists, but have no other vehicles at all currently. (Will eventually get some Tauros!)

Wolf Lord Balrog
27-06-2010, 17:59
Im sorry?!

The Devilfish is an amazing transport with its 4+ cover outside of 12" and its 12-11-10 armour, the fact that its a skimmer allows the fish of fury tactic which is still amazing when used properly, when the drones are used to extend the no go zone.

Cover is so easy to get these days that being able to carry it with you against medium-long range fire isn't much of an advantage. The 'Fish with D-Pod is also 85pts, with no other upgrades, over 50% more than a basic Chimera. And nobody with a brain uses 'Fish of Fury' anymore. Our troops are too weak and vulnerable to be outside a transport, ever. They don't even have any of redeeming features of IG Troops, like special weapons, CC weapons, or BS4 Vets.

The Devilfish was an amazing transport, in 4th Ed. Now its just a bit above average but costs way too much.

FabricatorGeneralMike
27-06-2010, 18:49
With so many people saying that Valkyrie hulls are so strong, I'm starting to feel bad about my Elysian list. Would people still feel so strongly about facing an onslaught of Valkyries if there was no heavy support to back them up? I run 4 Valk hulls in my 1k, and 9 in my 2k lists, but have no other vehicles at all currently. (Will eventually get some Tauros!)

I see NP with that, I think the problem is Vendetta spam. Yes its under-costed, yes its the flavour of the month for guard. Just wait until the Storm Raven gets a model. All those 'timmys' with SR spam....sighs...bet it gets a Index Astarties artical to let it in normal SM armies.....any takers....sighs guess not.

I think Valks are perfectly fine, especially in a Elysian list. I would love to do a air-cav Elysian list, the models are so beautiful. I got one squad of them and I would love a whole army.

razormasticator
27-06-2010, 22:26
I don't see any real world issues w/ the Vendetta/Valk - only issues I see are from people who feel a need to point and say, "Cheese". In most games my two flyboys go down in flames even when outflanking. They do demand attention, but they are the force that you see in game from things like deepstriking Termies or rushing Landraiders.

12 armor can be handled by every army. They are good to great units, but not cheese.

Exactly, and contrary to what others have said it does NOT take an entire army to bring one or even 3 down in a turn.

Solar_Eclipse
28-06-2010, 01:21
Cover is so easy to get these days that being able to carry it with you against medium-long range fire isn't much of an advantage.

Wha? Its a vehicle, Cover is hard for vehicles to get if you follow the rules, and nearly impossible to get for the Valkyrie/Vendetta.


. The 'Fish with D-Pod is also 85pts, with no other upgrades, over 50% more than a basic Chimera.

So a pair of Drones, extra side armour, a 4+ cover save against all shooting outside of 12" and a pair of side doors arent worth 30 points?

Your dreaming.


And nobody with a brain uses 'Fish of Fury' anymore. Our troops are too weak and vulnerable to be outside a transport, ever.

Nobody with a brain should be that arrogant. Its a very powerful tactic because if you play your army right, you should be able to destroy most any enemy targets in rapid fire range and have the cover save from your Devilfish eliminate pretty much anything that would hurt you.

Youve Got 4+ saves, and a 4+ cover save and a method to not get charged, why do you think your so easy to kill? My Veterans can sit outside their transports and dont die instantly like yours apparently do.


They don't even have any of redeeming features of IG Troops, like special weapons, CC weapons, or BS4 Vets.

Close Combat weapons?

And BS5 Firewarriors from Markerlights who can ignore alot of cover?

and Seriously, your basic 30"range S5 Ap5 gun isnt something special?

Jesus christ, remember your strengths before ranting on your weaknesses.


The Devilfish was an amazing transport, in 4th Ed. Now its just a bit above average but costs way too much.

So the devilfish should, what, cost the same as a Chimera for its incredible resilience, side doors, 4+ all the time cover, Skimmer Status and Drone helpers.

Hell, the tactic you can use with it to tank shock an enemy unit off an objective in the second half of the last turn, confidant that even if you lose the tank in its tank shock, if the drones survive they can still contest the objective.

but no, im sure it will be dead before that.

Hell, in the campaign im running right now, one of the dominating players is a Tau fish of Fury player.

Wolf Lord Balrog
28-06-2010, 06:30
Wha? Its a vehicle, Cover is hard for vehicles to get if you follow the rules, and nearly impossible to get for the Valkyrie/Vendetta.

I don't know about where you play, but we always have a decent amount of terrain on our table. Cover is almost never hard to find.


So a pair of Drones, extra side armour, a 4+ cover save against all shooting outside of 12" and a pair of side doors arent worth 30 points?

Your dreaming.

The drones aren't regarded as a bonus by most Tau players. They just make the DFish 2 KPs instead of 1.
The extra side armor isn't an issue most of the time. My DFish spend all their time lurking out of sight until its time to grab an objective (or the whole game in KP games). I can count on one hand the number of times somebody has taken a side shot at one of my transports in 5th Ed, its really not a big deal.
Side doors? Who ever uses those anyway? For doors to be an issue my FWs would have to disembark, which they don't do.


Nobody with a brain should be that arrogant. Its a very powerful tactic because if you play your army right, you should be able to destroy most any enemy targets in rapid fire range and have the cover save from your Devilfish eliminate pretty much anything that would hurt you.

Ok, best case scenario: 12 Fire Warriors rapid-firing w/ BS5 courtesy of Pathfinders, against MeQs: 24 shots, 20 hits, 13.67 wounds, 4.44 dead MeQs. Even assuming you've done the FoF correctly and you can't be charged, you've just left your 12 T3 4+ save Troops hanging in the wind. Your opponent, if he's awake, will use every means at his disposal to then grab that KP/eliminate a scoring unit. Congratulations, you sacrificed a whole unit of Troops for 4-5 marines. Fire Warriors do not disembark, ever.


Youve Got 4+ saves, and a 4+ cover save and a method to not get charged, why do you think your so easy to kill? My Veterans can sit outside their transports and dont die instantly like yours apparently do.

All I can conclude from this is that your opponents aren't very sharp. T3 4+ save Troops not in cover are a dead unit waiting to happen. I've never seen otherwise.




Close Combat weapons?

I was just listing something Tau don't have. I wasn't saying they should have them, just noting that they don't.



And BS5 Firewarriors from Markerlights who can ignore alot of cover?

See above about FWs never disembarking. Also, Markerlights are for battlesuits and tanks.



and Seriously, your basic 30"range S5 Ap5 gun isnt something special?

No it isn't. Statistically its no deadlier than a bolter because of our ballistic skill. Oh yeah, and Tau Troops can never show their faces to use it.



Jesus christ, remember your strengths before ranting on your weaknesses.

I know the army's strengths just fine. And if you use the single build that is still viable, they are competitive with anything out there. But the multitude of deficiencies the army also has is why only 1 build and 1 general strategy is still viable.



So the devilfish should, what, cost the same as a Chimera for its incredible resilience, side doors, 4+ all the time cover, Skimmer Status and Drone helpers.

See above about why all those things are not as good as you think. Except resilience, I'll give you that the DFish is slightly more survivable than a Chimera. But not 50% more, not even close, and the Chimera is a much better AFV, due to its fire points and better support weapons, with only slightly inferior resilience.


Hell, the tactic you can use with it to tank shock an enemy unit off an objective in the second half of the last turn, confidant that even if you lose the tank in its tank shock, if the drones survive they can still contest the objective.
Yes, if 2 drones survive, and if you go second. That's a big if. That's not a tactic, that's a Hail Mary when everything else has gone wrong.



but no, im sure it will be dead before that.

Hell, in the campaign im running right now, one of the dominating players is a Tau fish of Fury player.

I'm pleased your Tau-playing friend is doing so well. But he is winning in spite of FoF, not because of it.

Max zero
28-06-2010, 07:21
IG actually do fear Nids if they go Tervigon spam. Without Vendettas can be tricky to get enough wounds on a 4 Trev + 2 T-Fex build at 1750. Throw in 10 HG and you got real problems.

Solar_Eclipse
28-06-2010, 12:51
I don't know about where you play, but we always have a decent amount of terrain on our table. Cover is almost never hard to find.

Me too, you must just be very generous with your 50%, we like to play to the rules.


See above about FWs never disembarking. Also, Markerlights are for battlesuits and tanks.


Sorry, youve never given a valid reason why Firewarriors dont disembark, you just say it. Maybe you should try using them for once, rather than hiding their rather resilient asses compared to some others in a tank.


The drones aren't regarded as a bonus by most Tau players. They just make the DFish 2 KPs instead of 1.


Then most Tau Players are wrong. Christ, how could you not see them as a benefit, they can delay that enemy unit for another turn, they can shoot off to contest another objective, etc etc. Your seriously saying that ignoring your assets are the way to win?


The extra side armor isn't an issue most of the time. My DFish spend all their time lurking out of sight until its time to grab an objective (or the whole game in KP games). I can count on one hand the number of times somebody has taken a side shot at one of my transports in 5th Ed, its really not a big deal.
Side doors? Who ever uses those anyway? For doors to be an issue my FWs would have to disembark, which they don't do.

The Extra Side armour is important, since the extra armour+Dpods not only will save you abit more than not having them, but it might make some players not want to shoot that target at all because not much of a risk.

Hell, armour 11 means you can only be glanced on the side by S5, not Penetrated like Chimeras can be.

Also, Side doors are massively useful, you just dont realise it till you dont have them.


Ok, best case scenario: 12 Fire Warriors rapid-firing w/ BS5 courtesy of Pathfinders, against MeQs: 24 shots, 20 hits, 13.67 wounds, 4.44 dead MeQs. Even assuming you've done the FoF correctly and you can't be charged, you've just left your 12 T3 4+ save Troops hanging in the wind. Your opponent, if he's awake, will use every means at his disposal to then grab that KP/eliminate a scoring unit. Congratulations, you sacrificed a whole unit of Troops for 4-5 marines. Fire Warriors do not disembark, ever.

Congratulations, you can make an entirely unrealistic scenario.

How about instead of saying "my Firewarriors cant kill a marine squad in one shooting phase! Wah!" maybe, just maybe, you could consider:

1. There are alot of armies out there who arent marines.
2. Your tau, marine squads are NOT full strength by the time you are in rapid fire range. Thats why you have Crisis suits/Stealth Suits/Broadsides/Hammerheads/Long range Pulse Fire, if the marine squad is still full strength then your doing it wrong.

Christ, lets consider my "overpowered" Melta Veterans in Chimera.

3 shots, 2 melta hits around 2 kills.
13 lasshots, 8-9 hits, 2-3 wounds, 1 kill.

oh noes! You did more damage with your firewarriors than i do, sure im less expensive, but im also MUCH easier to kill.

Your firewarriors in Devilfish kill squadrons that they can kill, jeez, you take on an infantry unit who is around 170-180 points of pure resilience then of course your not going to kill them.


All I can conclude from this is that your opponents aren't very sharp. T3 4+ save Troops not in cover are a dead unit waiting to happen. I've never seen otherwise.

Fish of fury, maneuver right and you'll never not be in cover unless you get hit by Barrage or Template, both of which are trouble to any unit.

Maybe you need some more experience with your army? Your Fire warriors are one of the most powerful non marine troops there are, your basic guns are murderous, your accuracy and your maneuverability are quite excellent, and your tanks durability helps you get where you need, how can you not be succeeding, seriously? All of the building blocks are there.

Im not going to continue this quote war since its off topic, but seriously. Alot of Tau players need to man up abit and use the codex they have and stop treating their armour like tissue paper. Seriously, if Guard players can manage, if ork players can manage, if Eldar Players can manage, Tau can too.

mdauben
28-06-2010, 15:29
Then most Tau Players are wrong.
So, all those people who have been playing Taus for years know less about their army than you do? Sorry, its you are wrong. Under 5e rules, the drawbacks of the 'Fish mounted drones are greater than their benefits. Fish of Fury also suffered severly under 5e rules and is much less effective now.


Also, Side doors are massively useful, you just dont realise it till you dont have them.
They are "massivly useful" for close combat troops who may have to disembark in close proximity to the enemy. For shooty troops not so much.


Congratulations, you can make an entirely unrealistic scenario.
How so? Sound like exactly the sort of thing I see all the time.


1. There are alot of armies out there who arent marines.
True, if you are just counting codexes, but in the metagame at least half the opponents I see are either SM or MEQ.


2. Your tau, marine squads are NOT full strength by the time you are in rapid fire range. Thats why you have Crisis suits/Stealth Suits/Broadsides/Hammerheads/Long range Pulse Fire, if the marine squad is still full strength then your doing it wrong.
I generally find my Crisis Suits more than occupied with Tanks, APCs, Skimmers, Termis, etc. I need to rely on my Troops to kill my opponent's Troops (in this case, SM Tac Squads). If I have to dedicate markerlights to making their shooting half-way effective, that means I'm not using it to benefit my Crisis, Broadside, or Hammerheads who often need it just as much.



Your Fire warriors are one of the most powerful non marine troops there are,
This one statement shoots your credibility to pieces. FW are at best middling good Troops, while SM are one of the best Troops in the game.


Seriously, if Guard players can manage, if ork players can manage, if Eldar Players can manage, Tau can too.
Guard is probably one of the strongest codexes in the game currently. Despite being a bit old, Eldar are still strong, too. In the hands of a good player, Tau can still sometimes perform well, but that is in spite of their codex, not becuase of it.

eyescrossed
28-06-2010, 15:47
Jesus christ, remember your strengths before ranting on your weaknesses.


Christ, how could you not see them as a benefit, they can delay that enemy unit for another turn, they can shoot off to contest another objective, etc etc. Your seriously saying that ignoring your assets are the way to win?


Christ, lets consider my "overpowered" Melta Veterans in Chimera.

Jesus doesn't use this forum to my knowledge.

fluffstalker
28-06-2010, 16:27
Of course I do. Now what seems to be the problem, my child?

Bunnahabhain
28-06-2010, 16:27
Jesus doesn't use this forum to my knowledge.
No, but Gav Thorpe is about sometimes. In context, close enough...

eyescrossed
28-06-2010, 16:29
Of course I do. Now what seems to be the problem, my child?


No, but Gave Thorpe is about sometimes. In context, close enough...

Despite being a devout Christian, both of these made me chuckle heartily :D

Wolf Lord Balrog
28-06-2010, 19:08
mdauben handled most of the salient issues, so I'll just take the one he missed:



Christ, lets consider my "overpowered" Melta Veterans in Chimera.

3 shots, 2 melta hits around 2 kills.
13 lasshots, 8-9 hits, 2-3 wounds, 1 kill.

oh noes! You did more damage with your firewarriors than i do, sure im less expensive, but im also MUCH easier to kill.


You neglect to mention that your ChimVets don't have to get out of their transport to use those 3 meltas and 2 of the lasguns. Fire Warriors have to disembark to fire anything.

Also, T3 S4+ is not resilient, by any stretch of the imagination. If you don't see that, we have an irreconcilable difference in observation.

Max zero
28-06-2010, 19:36
Despite being a devout Christian, both of these made me chuckle heartily :D

No sacred cows on the Internet.

Bunnahabhain
28-06-2010, 19:44
There ought to be some kind of warning at the entrance to the interwebz- " Taking everything here seriously is bad for you, please employ a sense of humour."

Cerraand
28-06-2010, 19:52
Last week, in a 2k points game, my opponent used a vendetta and a valkyrie which both outflanked. He managed to destroy the railgun from my hammerhead and kill 5-6 fire warriors. On my turn he lost both vehicle and the content of the valkyrie.

Even though it's only one game, it's far from the instant win button some people have been talking in this thread...



Also, Markerlights are for battlesuits and tanks.


Either you're saying that troops can't use them and you are wrong or you're saying they should not use them and you're also wrong imo

Axeman1n
28-06-2010, 23:24
Pointing how how good the Chimera is only goes to prove what a perfectly costed option the Valk/Vendetta is. Rolling around the board shooting melta in your face is nice.

Wolf Lord Balrog
29-06-2010, 00:51
Either you're saying that troops can't use them and you are wrong or you're saying they should not use them and you're also wrong imo

I'm saying your battlesuits and tanks should have first priority for marker usage, unless you have some very situational exception that obviously overrides that general priority.

I reiterate: if your Fire Warriors are disembarking their DFish either you or your opponent has done something very wrong.


Pointing how how good the Chimera is only goes to prove what a perfectly costed option the Valk/Vendetta is. Rolling around the board shooting melta in your face is nice.

If all the Valk/Vendetta were was a flying Chimera, you'd be right. But it is much more than that.

No2Wookie
29-06-2010, 00:53
Jesus doesn't use this forum to my knowledge.

He does, but he plays Skaven.

Also, I have played a grand total of 12 DIFFERENT guard players in my 3 haunts. This is about 30-40 games with guard players. I have seen one of the two fliers in all but one game. Discounting that, I have seen multiple fliers in every game over 1,000 points. I have seen vendetta(s) in all of those games.

And someone back there mentioned that heavy weapon teams are lousy compared to vendettas. They're 25 points cheaper, tend to get that 4+ cover save and need 3-6 failed saves to bring down, and can't be shaken. They can claim/contest objectives and can defend themselves against really minor threats that might get a lucky immobilization glance on the vendetta. In addition, their lack of mobility is offset by the lascannon's extreme range. They also get both an anti-cover bonus or rerolled hits with orders.

If you want to know why I think vendettas are undercosted though, look at how much the storm raven costs and realize it has less firepower and equal armor.

eyescrossed
29-06-2010, 01:19
No sacred cows on the Internet.
Pardon? Sorry, I'm as dull as a brick.



He does, but he plays Skaven.
-tumbleweed-

:p

Lord Inquisitor
29-06-2010, 02:22
The key thing about the Vendetta is not that it's a transport per se or even that it carries heavy weaponry. It's the combination with transport capacity and scout that scares me.

I regularly face off against guard (I also have a guard army but no vendettas, I know, stupid) and the critical thing with the vendetta particularly (less with the valkyrie) is the alpha strike and that's what I consider overpowered.

Especially if the guard player gets turn 1, the vendetta and cargo is used to cripple my APCs and MBTs. The vet squad inside can also melta another vehicle or ash a forced-disembarked squad. The vendetta and vet squad are such a nuisance that it is a priority target. This isn't really a question of "getting your points back" or significant damage to the enemy, although it often is, but being able to reliably crack my transports turn 1 before landing ordinance on the disembarked troops or the rest of the army - well, that's pretty mean. Even if 500-points worth of vendettas and vets take out only 4 rhinos (140 points), that can be game changing. It removes the transportation and forces the enemy to waste a turn dealing with the threat rather than advancing towards the main battle line or returning fire effectively.

They're far less useful if the Guard player doesn't go first, but an outflanking manuever can be devastating, depending on who you're playing.

I think all this comparison with Tau is relatively pointless. Devilfish are good transports, true, but they don't even remotely scare me like a Vendetta or three on the table. They, nor the troops inside, cannot achieve a first turn alpha strike. Tau fire warriors can shoot well, yes, but without melta weapons they don't threaten my battletanks and require big cahoonas to deploy against a unit in a transport in case the army's anti-tank doesn't crack the transport or the squad inside doesn't die from the firepower.

Certainly Tau are an army I hate to face and in the hands of a competent general actually scare me more than some of the new powerhouses like BA or SW (although this is more because my army is set up to deal with aggressive armies), but I cannot say that the humble devilfish + fire warrior squad compares at all to the sort of first-turn havoc a vendetta can cause.

The Vendetta is an abomination as it carries more AT firepower than the heaviest Imperial land vehicle with no apparent consideration for the supposed fluff behind twin lascannons coupled with a transport capacity inappropriate for a gunship anyway plus scout and scout exacerbates everything allowing vets with 3 special weapons, a heavy weapon and meltabombs/demo charges in melta/charge range turn 1.

Wolf Lord Balrog
29-06-2010, 02:36
Actually the comparisons were between the DFish and the Chimera, and we were being almost entirely off-topic. I just mentioned the Valk/Vendetta problem a couple times to try and contrinute to the main subject of the thread a bit. :)

isaac
29-06-2010, 04:14
If it was a HS vulture variant I would love it and Stormies could take Valks. It would make a great full Elysian force with rapid strikes.

Solar_Eclipse
29-06-2010, 05:16
So, all those people who have been playing Taus for years know less about their army than you do? Sorry, its you are wrong. Under 5e rules, the drawbacks of the 'Fish mounted drones are greater than their benefits. Fish of Fury also suffered severly under 5e rules and is much less effective now.

Taus...hehehe.

Anyway, no, its not just me. Its me talking tactics with my best friend who is the Tau player kicking **** in the campaign.

And yes, much less effective, not useless, less effective than 4th. Still awesome, though.


They are "massivly useful" for close combat troops who may have to disembark in close proximity to the enemy. For shooty troops not so much.


Actually no, since if there is an enemy unit with a 5+ save and no cover on them at the moment, you dont want to have to spin to use the rear door so they get a 4+ cover, the side doors mean you can still angle your front to the enemy army without giving your enemy a cover save from shooting under the fish.


How so? Sound like exactly the sort of thing I see all the time.


Seriously? You let marine squads cross the board with absolutely no casualties?


True, if you are just counting codexes, but in the metagame at least half the opponents I see are either SM or MEQ.

So in other words your tactics change due to your metagame?

*gasp*

In my current metagame there are:
1. Tau
2. Chaos marines
3. 2x Eldar
4. 2x Guard
5. Space Marines
6. Tyranids
7. Orks
8. Dark Eldar.


I generally find my Crisis Suits more than occupied with Tanks, APCs, Skimmers, Termis, etc. I need to rely on my Troops to kill my opponent's Troops (in this case, SM Tac Squads). If I have to dedicate markerlights to making their shooting half-way effective, that means I'm not using it to benefit my Crisis, Broadside, or Hammerheads who often need it just as much.

"Making my shooting halfway effective"?!

If you find your S5 Ap5 30" range guns just arent effective then your just doing it wrong.

I made do with mass footslogging Lasgun fire and went really well, how can you not be doing well with your awesome guns?


This one statement shoots your credibility to pieces. FW are at best middling good Troops, while SM are one of the best Troops in the game.

What? Did you read what i said?

Ill quote it here: "Your Fire warriors are one of the most powerful non marine troops there are,"


Guard is probably one of the strongest codexes in the game currently. Despite being a bit old, Eldar are still strong, too. In the hands of a good player, Tau can still sometimes perform well, but that is in spite of their codex, not becuase of it.


Your codex still has some horrible tricks up its sleeve and most of its basic stuff still rocks.

no, the Tau player is a very capable player AND has a rather good codex.

And ha ha to all the religion jokes, sorry it was early and i was getting annoyed, i tend to type more like a speak when i get annoyed.

EmperorEternalXIX
29-06-2010, 05:31
I made do with mass footslogging Lasgun fire and went really well, how can you not be doing well with your awesome guns? I can't believe someone even asked this.

Look at your model count, look at a Tau army's model count, and then ask that again.

Plus to Guard guys "Infantry Horde" is just your troops choice, and you forget that you have pretty much all of the best vehicles and ordnance in the game at your back.

I'm hoping the Tau get their railguns updated to go through multiple vehicles in the next codex just to watch them own smug Guard players, hehe.

Wolf Lord Balrog
29-06-2010, 07:39
@Solar See the Tau section here (http://kirbysblog-ic.blogspot.com/p/armies-in-5th-edition-articles.html) to get educated about how a competitive Tau player wins games and why. If your Tau friend isn't already doing most of the things Kirby recommends, he isn't winning because he or his force are great, he's winning because his opponents' are not great.

@Isaac Great idea, move the Vendetta to Heavy Support (and cut its transport capacity to 6 models). <bam> Problem solved.

Max zero
29-06-2010, 07:46
@Solar See the Tau section here (http://kirbysblog-ic.blogspot.com/p/armies-in-5th-edition-articles.html) to get educated about how a competitive Tau player wins games and why. If your Tau friend isn't already doing most of the things Kirby recommends, he isn't winning because he or his force are great, he's winning because his opponents' are not great.

@Isaac Great idea, move the Vendetta to Heavy Support (and cut its transport capacity to 6 models). <bam> Problem solved.

Stelek's blog is better. He probably was the biggest Tau booster while everyone else thought they were bad.

http://www.yesthetruthhurts.com/

I love all the people who want heavy handed Vendetta nerfs. The lastest nerf herding is in full swing. Without Vendettas Broadside spam can cripple a IG list. IG don't have a lot of long range AP2 weaponry. There are some nasty 9 Broadside 1750 lists around.

As for Lascannon HWS. They may be 25 points cheaper, but they are also less accurate, easier to kill and unreliable. All it takes is 1 casualty and you are taking a ld 7 check. In 2500 you can get away with Vendettas and Las HWS (real Lascannon spam) but not sub 2000.

Vaktathi
29-06-2010, 08:23
If you find your S5 Ap5 30" range guns just arent effective then your just doing it wrong.

Sorry, but FW's aren't great. functionally against most things, BS3 S5 guns are equivalent to BS4 S4 guns. The 30" range is great...if you're shooting in infantry in the open, didn't move, and aren't in a transport. Not typical in 5E games.

Fire Warriors are very expensive for what they do, likewise devilfish. 180something points for an AV12 transport and 10 T3 S3 WS2 BS3 I2 Ld7 4+ sv dudes with no organic weapons fire capability isn't exactly competitive. IG vets may not have S5 guns but for the same points they get 3 meltaguns, +1 WS, +1 BS, +1 I, and +1Ld, with better transport guns, and can fire from within the transport. Tau have some good stuff, but in all honesty, in competitive terms, they are rather mediocre and are held aloft by 1 piece of 5pt wargear and Broadsides.

isaac
29-06-2010, 09:45
As an IG player I see the movement of Vendettas to HS (and lack of transport capability) as a good thing. If you want mobile lascannon batteries you have to bleed a bit.

But I actually made a thread about this. I would love feedback.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=264283

Max zero
29-06-2010, 10:46
As an IG player I see the movement of Vendettas to HS (and lack of transport capability) as a good thing. If you want mobile lascannon batteries you have to bleed a bit.

But I actually made a thread about this. I would love feedback.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=264283

6" move is mobile? Especially after it loses scout to boot?

Disagree with it in the strongest terms.

Bunnahabhain
29-06-2010, 10:56
I also disagree. You're copying GWs very bad example-

Codex re-write teamsomething is too good- lets tone it down by doing X or Y or Z.....Hang on, how did the toned down by X and Y and Z version make it into the print run?

The internet Waaaaa!!! They broke my starcannon/Carnifex/whatever!!

Chop out the transport capacity, of course, and increase the price tag, but moving it to heavy support? No! Keep the fast section for honestly fast stuff. Scout? Not sure...

Something that could work, to sell more of them, and allow full airborne armies to work well, would be to have some kind of commander upgrade ( jump training?) that moves vendettas only ( not valks) to heavy support. Giving you a FA section of armed transports, and a HS section of skimmer gunships...

Badger[Fr]
29-06-2010, 10:57
I'm hoping the Tau get their railguns updated to go through multiple vehicles in the next codex just to watch them own smug Guard players, hehe.
To be fair, they already do, if played correctly. Broadsides are nigh invincible, and the sheer amount of long-ranged S7 Missiles and S6 Plasma shots a Tau army can field is usually enough to cripple most mechanized armies.

Solar_Eclipse
29-06-2010, 13:27
;4774047']To be fair, they already do, if played correctly. Broadsides are nigh invincible, and the sheer amount of long-ranged S7 Missiles and S6 Plasma shots a Tau army can field is usually enough to cripple most mechanized armies.

Dont bother, Badger. Apparently the players here think Tau is the weakest army possible and will instalose to guard turn 1.

fluffstalker
29-06-2010, 13:38
Tau have excellent tools to deal with most guard armies that are in the medium spectrum. They have anti light vehicle, anti heavy vehicle, anti horde and decent enough survivability to take return fire. Their problems come in higher points games (1750 and above) against opponents who overload one spectrum of the field- either too much armour or too little, leaving at least a portion of the Tau army without juicy targets.

Keichi246
29-06-2010, 16:18
Dont bother, Badger. Apparently the players here think Tau is the weakest army possible and will instalose to guard turn 1.

Nah - it's not QUITE that bad...

'though if the Guard player is at all on his toes - the Tau player is in for a world of hurt. The current Guard codex IS better than the current Tau codex right now - with the ability to spam large numbers of pie plates, cheaper transports, the Vendetta we have been discussing, etc. Railguns are great - but they can really only kill one target at a time. Medusa batteries can destroy SWATHES of things...

The blocking tactics mentioned in the articles above don't really help much against artillery spam. IF (and I make this comment specifically because Broadsides CAN be tough to kill) the Guard player can neutralize the Broadsides quickly - it is all over but the screaming...

Of course - if the Broadsides stay alive more than a turn or two - most of the screaming will be from the IG player, instead - as hundreds of points of transports and armor become burning wreckage.

It really comes down to this. Player quality/army list composition CAN make up a big difference in relative codex power; but only if there is a large gap between the players/army list quality. Given players with roughly equal quality - the IG player will have an advantage under the current codices. Not an unsurmountable one, grant you - but enough to be noticable.

No, My vote for most crippled "instalose" codex has to be the new Daemonhunters codex PDF. No allies, no inductees, no artillery, limited transports, and vastly overpriced units. Anyone who wins with them right now *deserves* the win...

mdauben
29-06-2010, 16:49
Dont bother, Badger. Apparently the players here think Tau is the weakest army possible and will instalose to guard turn 1.
Not really. I think that overall IG is a stronger list than Tau, but on the other hand IG is a really good match-up for Tau.

This is becuase Tau don't fear Armoured Vehicles, Tau don't fear Infantry Hoards. What Tau fear are the one thing IG doesn't have (although most other armies do); fast, tough CC troops. Once SM, CSM, Eldar, etc. get their CC troops stuck into a Tau gunline, Tau are hosed. That's why the most competative Tau list is MechTau, and the most competative Tau tactics call for cowering in their transports.

Bunnahabhain
29-06-2010, 17:01
And a decent set of Terrain helps no End.

Tau Firepower, is on average, more manoeuvrable than Guard firepower. If people have to work harder to get those clean, cover free, shots, it reduces the gap between the lists no end. With CC not being the preferred option for either army, it allows different tactics..

Unless you have to i.e. tournaments, if you play on planet bowling ball, you lose any right to complain about big guns hurting. If you think the table is too open, talk to you opponent, and get more terrain on there, it's not complex...

Wolf Lord Balrog
29-06-2010, 17:32
Dont bother, Badger. Apparently the players here think Tau is the weakest army possible and will instalose to guard turn 1.

Reductio ad absurdum much? Nowhere did I imply Tau are a weak army, let alone the weakest army. I even provided a link to Kirby's article about how Tau armies kick ass. What I've been saying is that you are wrong about what the armies strengthes and weaknesses are. Additionally, the codex is very inflexible because there is only 1 build and 1 strategy that works right now.

About the Valk/Vendetta: definitely reduce the Vendetta's transport capacity, I didn't say anything about removing Scout from it (it can keep it as long as something else is done to balance it), and either move it to HS or increase the cost by at least 20 points (I'd be happy with either).

Badger[Fr]
29-06-2010, 19:39
'though if the Guard player is at all on his toes - the Tau player is in for a world of hurt. The current Guard codex IS better than the current Tau codex right now - with the ability to spam large numbers of pie plates, cheaper transports, the Vendetta we have been discussing, etc. Railguns are great - but they can really only kill one target at a time. Medusa batteries can destroy SWATHES of things...
Medusas are Av12 and can be easily shaken, and yet aren't of much use against spread out Broadsides.

So far, the only reliable way to beat Tau is to kill their Broadside and Crisis suits, which is easier said than done, considering the sheer amount of long-ranged, durable firepower (in that regard, the Tau actually outperform the Imperial Guard) and throw away units a Tau army can field.

Vaktathi
29-06-2010, 20:12
This is becuase Tau don't fear Armoured Vehicles, Tau don't fear Infantry Hoards. As a Tau player, I fear *lots* of armor. In a somewhat typical 2k game, I can kill 4 Land Raiders without having to sweat too much. Dealing with heavy armor is one thing. I can't deal with an IG army like the one I field for tournaments, sporting 12-16 AV12/14 vehicles. Especially if Vendetta's are involved, as they are very good at slapping Broadsides, and either get to shoot first or they outlank and hit something from the sides later.

Tau have extremely effective anti-tank guns, but unless they are loading up on 9 broadsides (which, on average, with an alpha strike, will kill 2.25 chimeras), they don't have enough, and DS'ing crisis suits with meltas often just aren't cost effective when you are losing a 150~pt unit to kill a 55pt unit.

EDIT: TL;DR Tau can deal very well with quality armor, not so much quantity armor.


What Tau fear are the one thing IG doesn't have (although most other armies do); fast, tough CC troops. They don't need to be great CC troops, just somewhat more competent than Tau at CC. A basic 50pt 10man Infantry Squad is on average going to defeat a 100pt 10 Fire Warrior squad in CC. 3 basic tac squad Space Marines are on average going to have an edge over 10 Fire Warriors. Tau fear anything that can simply make it to them, they needn't be dedicated CC troops.

mdauben
29-06-2010, 21:15
Anyway, no, its not just me. Its me talking tactics with my best friend who is the Tau player kicking **** in the campaign.
Honestly, if you have a Tau player in your local group who is "kicking ****" I have to agree with what some other posters have said, it must be due to a significant disparity in skill and experience with his opponents. Tau are not a bottom of the barrel army by any means, but they are not one of the top tier armies in the current version of the rules and codex. Looking at your list of local armies, SM, CSM, IG, and Eldar should all beat Tau well over 50% of the time, given equal skill on the part of each player.


And yes, much less effective, not useless, less effective than 4th. Still awesome, though.
Its still a viable tactic, but hardly "awsome"


Seriously? You let marine squads cross the board with absolutely no casualties?
Well, if my opponent was so foolish as to walk his Tac Squads across the board, yes, I would shoot them to pieces. With Infiltration, Jump Packs, Turbocharged Rhinos, Deep Striking, however, there are so many ways for SM to get quickly in your face while suffering minimal or even no casualties there is often little Tau can do in to stop them.


I made do with mass footslogging Lasgun fire and went really well, how can you not be doing well with your awesome guns?
IG Infantry are cheaper per man than Fire Warriors, alowing quantity to overcome quantity. Plus IG Infantry have access to heavy and special weapons that Tau have to rely on HQ, Elite, or Fast Attack units for.


Ill quote it here: "Your Fire warriors are one of the most powerful non marine troops there are,"
And I will say again, based on my experience with Tau, and the experience of the vast majority of the Tau players I have communicated with, you are totally wrong.

In the current incarnation, Fire Warriors are overpriced, only decent shooters without significant Markerlight support, and are horribly fragile when faced with even mediocre Close Combat opponents. The few Troops in the game that are somewhat equivalent to FW (Eldar Guardians & IG Infantry) have access to in-squad heavy and/or special weapons that vastly increase the effectiveness of the unit.

Badger[Fr]
29-06-2010, 22:39
Well, if my opponent was so foolish as to walk his Tac Squads across the board, yes, I would shoot them to pieces. With Infiltration, Jump Packs, Turbocharged Rhinos, Deep Striking, however, there are so many ways for SM to get quickly in your face while suffering minimal or even no casualties there is often little Tau can do in to stop them.

If by little, you mean movment blocking and several layers of cheap, expendable units, maybe. In my experience, it is usually more than enough, because few units can survive being in range of an entire Tau gunline.

Wolf Lord Balrog
30-06-2010, 00:36
;4775681']If by little, you mean movment blocking and several layers of cheap, expendable units, maybe. In my experience, it is usually more than enough, because few units can survive being in range of an entire Tau gunline.

Those tactics work, and are much of the basis of how the Tau currently work and win. But I've never liked them. Its not how the fluff describes the army as fighting. The Tau don't do 'throw away' units, and the only 'blocking' they do is stopping the enemy in their tracks with weight of fire.

That's why, to me at least, the Tau codex still seems broken. The only tactics that work don't resemble the fluff in the slightest. I'm sure competitive players don't care one wit for that, but its part of the fun for me.

And somebody better say something else about the Valk/Vendetta thing too. :D

Keichi246
30-06-2010, 18:21
;4775681']If by little, you mean movment blocking and several layers of cheap, expendable units, maybe. In my experience, it is usually more than enough, because few units can survive being in range of an entire Tau gunline.

Uh - remember that line about Medusa killing swathes of troops?
And your reply of "Medusa aren't that good at killing spread out Broadsides"?

These "cheap, expendable units" are the swathes I was talking about...
Even one medusa can rip a large hole in the blocking units, and is fairly easily shielded by a Chimera wall (to give it an all important cover save). Sure - Pathfinders and markerlights MIGHT be able to remove the cover save - but that puts them in range for assorted other IG nastiness.

Meanwhile - Vendettas, Leman Russes, and every spare weapon on the field are trying to hammer down the Broadsides and/or visible Crisis Suits as soon as possible...

Pretty much the major Tau hopes for a win rely on "who gets to shoot first?" and it's follow up question of "how long do the Broadsides survive?" If the Tau can shake/stun/kill enough of the Guard firepower before it kills them outright - the Tau have a chance. If not?

I play both IG and Tau. My buddy plays IG/Sisters (or maybe the proper term is *did play*now that the PDF codex annihilated inducted Guard/allies). I have a fair amount of experience on both sides of the equation...

"Blocking" Tau does not work NEARLY as well against the IG as it does against some other armies... (at least not in my experience...) Again - it's not that I think the Tau are a bad army - it's that the IG really are a top flight army right now...

And the Vendetta has a little to do with that....