PDA

View Full Version : Bikes - a success story?



TheBearminator
01-12-2014, 14:24
During my 13 years in this game (I switched to 40k during 3rd), I can't recall any unit types getting the treatment that bikes have received.

1) Gaining turbo boost (making bikes and jet bikes faster than fast vehicles
2) Gaining jink save
3) Gaining true toughness (pretty darn awesome boost to characters!)
4) Gaining hammer of wrath (auto hits in close combat anyone?)
5) And lately seeing massive price cuts

This on top of other cool rules that bikes already enjoyed. Like the luxury of firing all kinds of guns counting as stationary. And what price do they pay? Then can't go to ground. Big deal. But in the meantime, has any other unit type got nearly as many powerful buffs?

Edit: And another super awesome benefit of being a bike. It tends to and to your armour save. For some reason a squishy T3 5+ space elf on a jetbike gains MEQ status on top its 48" movement. Not bad.

Ironbone
01-12-2014, 14:55
Yeah, I too realyy dislike bike rules. From 4th ed onwards they only keep geting better and better :rolleyes:.

Vipoid
01-12-2014, 15:39
I've thought the same recently.

A lot of bikers really don't seem to pay enough for all the benefits they get.

It's a big problem because they tend to out-compete a lot of more reasonably priced units. e.g. in many cases, bikers are barely more expensive than jump units, but get so many extra benefits. In the case of jetbikes, they don't even lose out on the 'jump' aspect.

Scribe of Khorne
01-12-2014, 16:06
Bikes still dont rule the table. I think the issue here, is jumpers are not nearly as good as they need to be (perhaps they are buffed in 8th) and GW is still afraid of assault armies.

Harwammer
01-12-2014, 16:46
Don't bikers suffer on tables with multi level terrain?

Should we all be fighting over half ruined mechanicum manufacturing compounds and so on?

SirBlackmane
01-12-2014, 16:54
Don't bikers suffer on tables with multi level terrain?
Not really, it counts as difficult terrain and they're allowed to move up to their move distance, AFAIK.


Should we all be fighting over half ruined mechanicum manufacturing compounds and so on?

Yes, we should be doing this anyways. Always makes for a more interesting game.


Bikes still dont rule the table. I think the issue here, is jumpers are not nearly as good as they need to be (perhaps they are buffed in 8th) and GW is still afraid of assault armies.

They kind of do rule the table though. Not in an "absolute domination" way, but in a "vastly more effective than the alternative" way.

One need only look at the more popular lists to realize that Eldar and Marine players are well aware of this. Biker Marines, Jetseer stars, and jet bike troops are everywhere. They're the new equivalent of the all-terminator army.

And compare the benefits, at least as far as they can be. A Marine Biker costs 2/3rds of a newer, cheaper terminator (for those codexes that have them) or half the cost of a traditional Terminator. Both give relentless, but one gives double the movement, a guaranteed 12" "run", a 4+ cover save at will, +1 toughness, an extra hit in close combat, and hit and run. The other one does give a true invulnerable save and a power weapon, but usually requires an investment in an expensive delivery vehicle to get them into the fray, easily doubling the cost of the unit.

You can play with what you have amongst friends all you want, but if you're going to buy models for a new unit which would you choose?

insectum7
01-12-2014, 18:25
And compare the benefits, at least as far as they can be. A Marine Biker costs 2/3rds of a newer, cheaper terminator (for those codexes that have them) or half the cost of a traditional Terminator. Both give relentless, but one gives double the movement, a guaranteed 12" "run", a 4+ cover save at will, +1 toughness, an extra hit in close combat, and hit and run. The other one does give a true invulnerable save and a power weapon, but usually requires an investment in an expensive delivery vehicle to get them into the fray, easily doubling the cost of the unit.

Note: Marine Bikes don't give Hit-and-Run. That's given by the White Scars Chapter Tactics, and applies to all non-Terminator, non-Centurion models.

Edit: Default Terminator weapons include a Powerfist, not Power Weapon, which is a considerable step up. They also have 2 attacks base, so hit much harder, longer in CC. Lightning Claw Terminators have 3 attacks w/o charging.

AngryAngel
01-12-2014, 18:37
Clarification aside, bikes do come out ahead of terminators.

I don't see vanilla terminator lists being near competitive, where as their bike lists can be.

DA armies, Ravenwing is far more viable then Deathwing, from a competitive view point.

Bikes have gotten cheaper and more ability edition after edition, some for good reason because they were poop for awhile. Jump pack troops have gotten cheaper and some more utility, but not enough to make them really go against bikes. Terminators suffer mostly from ancient unit syndrome, they've been the same for so damn long GW thinks they just work and never really amend them. If Storm Shields still did the 4++ in CC only, I don't think we'd see many Terminators at all anymore aside from the random GK player and Hard Core Deathwing addict. The 3++ to storm shields is really their only big change in what like 3 editions now ?

insectum7
01-12-2014, 18:47
I'm not about to start the old argument about which one is better, since they're very different units to begin with, and have very different purposes. I'm just pointing out that if you want to do unit comparisons, you should at least be accurate about it.

Personally I'm not a huge fan of bikes, but since I see the occasional White Scar list I'm beginning to think of taking Terminators as a strong counter, since you don't get Jink in CC.

Terminators themselves have gone through several amendments since the beginning of 3rd. They might be lagging a bit but I think GW chose to focus on Centurions instead. Vanilla Marines have yet to see a 7th Ed. codex.

Edit: Terminators are the only unit with access to Chainfists, making them pretty dang effective against Knights in CC, too. 8+2D6 armor pen bypassing the field with many attacks.

TheBearminator
01-12-2014, 19:55
I do like bikes. The only reason I haven't had a bike army the last ten years is because I hate painting them. I think it's more fair to compare them to jump infantry though than terminators. At least they were what I had in mind when I started the thread, I just didn't wanna make this a bikes-jumpers comparison.

But while we're at it, I can't see what jump infantry has gained during this period that keeps them on par with bikes. Or have I overlooked something in the bigger picture? The core rules and meta aspects? I don't think so. The game now is more shooty. Most bike units can do that very well, and with all kinds of heavy and special weapons, often even twinlinked, while a lot of jumpers are armed with pistols of different kinds. The game now is more about movement. Great news for bikes again, they're kings of the hill in this department.

iamcjb
01-12-2014, 20:59
One well placed shot from a Vindicator and a third of your army is dead. Don't underestimate the pitfalls of having so few models on the tabletop.

Greyhound
01-12-2014, 21:02
From an ork bike perspective I find that they do very well until you face an opponent with cover avoiding weapons, like the wyverns, in which case the bikes die too quickly and crumble.

IAMNOTHERE
01-12-2014, 21:08
From my point of view (and i do use them) they are slightly over powered.

My solution would be get rid of relentless.

Vaktathi
01-12-2014, 21:14
Bikes have clearly won the arms race as the game stands currently. They're a pretty big reason why jump-pack marines and foot-guardians, and even tactical squads, often simply aren't taken.

They can Jink (and the Jink mechanic in general is in dire need of some addressing) which does nothing to harm their assault capabilities while most of their guns are Twin Linked to mitigate that. They get enhanced toughness. They have crazy mobility and speed (especially Eldar jetbikes). And they're often Troops (or can be made Troops) and often have HQ or other benefits that make them even more effective (e.g. White Scars).

A basic SM biker for 20pts next to an Assault Marine at 17 is a no-brainer, the Biker is significantly better in every way for a relatively insignificant price increase.



That said, I've never been a fan of the way bikes work in 40. Trying to aim those front mounted guns would be basically impossible, and fighting from a bike the way 40k does melee combat would be incredibly stupid and a quick way to get killed, as sitting down while trying to match blades with someone is really stupid, when they really should be something more akin to Vector Strike where they speed through and knock things about as the zip away (like the opening scene of Akira). Meanwhile the T increase seems to have really no basis in any sort of reality but rather a holdover from Fantasy where cavalry have better armor. Shots hitting the bike is a bad thing, you wouldn't want that any more than the rider themselves being hit (because popping a tire or hitting the gas tank or whatnot is a a good way to crash and burn). Meanwhile Jinking on a bike is something that would really be very dangerous, and great ticket to a skin graft quite often.

Garven Dreis
01-12-2014, 21:25
Woah I remember when bikes weren't even worth taking, and now look at them!

TheRiverTrollKing
01-12-2014, 21:38
So, its good idea to do a White Scars army?

Latro_
01-12-2014, 22:17
Dont think they are 'that' good, i mean heldrakes, LR redemeers etc are gonna give them head aches, they aint much good against flyers, mons creatures and elite inf will butcher them in CC...

as has been said they just totally outclass assault marines for more or less the same pts.

ehlijen
01-12-2014, 22:41
How is one vindicator going to wipe out a third of a large biker army?

The whole point is that bikes aren't that much more expensive than foot or jump troops anymore and thanks to their larger bases they can spread out more and reduce the impact of blast weapons. And if the enemy does get a lucky hit with a demolisher cannon, there's jink.

Like skaven Jezzails in WHFB 6th/7th, bikes are so good that the main reason they're not everywhere by now is that their $-cost/model is rather high. A full bike squad will easily run you 3 times the $ but only about an extra ~50% of points over a tactical squad.

GW either mistakenly believed the cost problem that kept bike armies rare to be a rules problem and overcommitted on boosting bikes, or they're deliberately pushing what's one of the most expensive units per points. Or bikes were just lucky in the nerf/boost lottery GW plays before each book...

T10
01-12-2014, 23:05
But while we're at it, I can't see what jump infantry has gained during this period that keeps them on par with bikes.

Lower cost (Assault Marines used to be 25 points when Space Marines were 15 points).
Mobility options (jump pack for speed, on foot for dangerous terrain).
Hammer of Wrath.
Deep Strike deployment.

It's something at least.

Latro_
01-12-2014, 23:27
Will be rather funny if the BA codex comes out and BA assault marines are suddenly must have allies. Not sure how they'd make em better thou... grav cannons? heh

Yvain
02-12-2014, 00:15
Bikes have clearly won the arms race as the game stands currently. They're a pretty big reason why jump-pack marines and foot-guardians, and even tactical squads, often simply aren't taken.

They can Jink (and the Jink mechanic in general is in dire need of some addressing) which does nothing to harm their assault capabilities while most of their guns are Twin Linked to mitigate that. They get enhanced toughness. They have crazy mobility and speed (especially Eldar jetbikes). And they're often Troops (or can be made Troops) and often have HQ or other benefits that make them even more effective (e.g. White Scars).

A basic SM biker for 20pts next to an Assault Marine at 17 is a no-brainer, the Biker is significantly better in every way for a relatively insignificant price increase.



That said, I've never been a fan of the way bikes work in 40. Trying to aim those front mounted guns would be basically impossible, and fighting from a bike the way 40k does melee combat would be incredibly stupid and a quick way to get killed, as sitting down while trying to match blades with someone is really stupid, when they really should be something more akin to Vector Strike where they speed through and knock things about as the zip away (like the opening scene of Akira). Meanwhile the T increase seems to have really no basis in any sort of reality but rather a holdover from Fantasy where cavalry have better armor. Shots hitting the bike is a bad thing, you wouldn't want that any more than the rider themselves being hit (because popping a tire or hitting the gas tank or whatnot is a a good way to crash and burn). Meanwhile Jinking on a bike is something that would really be very dangerous, and great ticket to a skin graft quite often.

I think this hits in on the head. The brokeness of jink is the main problem. After that it is stacking rules on to the bike without adding enough to the cost.

Greyhound
02-12-2014, 01:34
I don't find jink an issue when shooting at dark Angels bikes. Being an ork that 3+ armour save is better than jink anyway

SamaNagol
02-12-2014, 01:43
lol Jink isn't great. Just put weight of fire into bikes. In competitive 40k, Marine Bikes are good because of the number of special weapons they can take and how quickly they can get to points of influence on the board. The Command Squad/Chapter Master combo is very durable and allows the character to get into combat.

Eldar Jetbikes are incredibly good for their points.

They are both round about where units should be though. Assault Marines and Guardians need to be buffed so they are worth taking in comparison to Bikes etc

Vaktathi
02-12-2014, 01:48
How much do you buff Guardians until they're Dire Avengers? Likewise, Assault Marines have gotten speed boosts and extra charge attacks, how much more do you boost them. It's also not just Guardians and Assault Marines they're competing against, but even Tac marines (bikes can be taken as Troops) and Dire Avengers.

SamaNagol
02-12-2014, 03:01
Dire Avengers do fine. Because they are a cheap way of running Serpents.

Same with Tac Marines with certain Chapter Tactics. Scouting Rhino WS tacs, Drop Pod Sallies or even Iron Hands (IWND Obsec Drop Pods)

You buff them by either dropping their points or improving their upgrade options if you would be directly competing with other units by buffing their stats. Tac Marines actually got nicely buffed in the new book and 7th in general. Subtle improvement. They're actually worthwhile.

If they combined Guardians and Storm Guardians options they would be worthwhile as well. Guardians with Fusion Guns would be nice.

Ssilmath
02-12-2014, 03:14
Dire Avengers do fine. Because they are a cheap way of running Serpents.

It is a sad state of affairs when a solid infantry troop unit is considered secondary to their battle taxis.

Bikes and Jetbikes are too good for their points, else you wouldn't see them taken over other options in "competitive" lists. I mean, I run Tacticals and no bikes, but that's partly because I believe Space Marines should have a core of Tacs, and partly because I can't afford bikers.

Vaktathi
02-12-2014, 03:30
Dire Avengers do fine. Because they are a cheap way of running Serpents. That should be explicitly indicative that something is wrong when their primary function is as a tax on their overpowered battle tank transport.


Same with Tac Marines with certain Chapter Tactics. Scouting Rhino WS tacs, Drop Pod Sallies or even Iron Hands (IWND Obsec Drop Pods) Again, we're talking about having to rely on another unit here, and those chapter tactics also can be used by Bikers, the White Scars in fact significantly more capably with bikers.


You buff them by either dropping their points or improving their upgrade options if you would be directly competing with other units by buffing their stats. Tac Marines actually got nicely buffed in the new book and 7th in general. Subtle improvement. They're actually worthwhile. How much more do you drop their points? Already they're only 14pts (and significantly more capable than they were a couple editions ago), how much lower do you go before you start getting into Ork/Guardsmen territory. As for upgrading options and stats, that seems to be breaking one thing to compensate for something else instead of fixing what was originally wrong.

SamaNagol
02-12-2014, 03:37
Tactical Marines are fine as they are. I would say allow them to take two special weapons at 10 men. That would increase their functional value. But in 7th ed missions, full size tac squads in a transport are very good.

Ssilmath
02-12-2014, 03:52
That would increase their functional value. But in 7th ed missions, full size tac squads in a transport are very good.

Yes, they are. Doesn't mean that bikes aren't better for their points cost. A good rubric for whether something is undercosted/overpowered is if you're passing up good/solid units in favor of the unit in question.

AngryAngel
02-12-2014, 04:48
I'm not about to start the old argument about which one is better, since they're very different units to begin with, and have very different purposes. I'm just pointing out that if you want to do unit comparisons, you should at least be accurate about it.

Personally I'm not a huge fan of bikes, but since I see the occasional White Scar list I'm beginning to think of taking Terminators as a strong counter, since you don't get Jink in CC.

Terminators themselves have gone through several amendments since the beginning of 3rd. They might be lagging a bit but I think GW chose to focus on Centurions instead. Vanilla Marines have yet to see a 7th Ed. codex.

Edit: Terminators are the only unit with access to Chainfists, making them pretty dang effective against Knights in CC, too. 8+2D6 armor pen bypassing the field with many attacks.

So how does them focusing on Cents help out other armies with a lot of terminators ? Like DA for instance ? Deathwing are meh, for more points then their vanilla kin. They are more versatile but pay for such a bit overly so. I guess on what is better it really depends on how you take the game. Speed, high toughness and nice access to special weapons, all factor into being good as well as point cost, which is less then that of the cost of a terminator, which isn't very mobile, doesn't shoot overly well and lacks from special weapons really.

I think the bikers just come out ahead in their use. Now I love terminators, I have like 30 for Space wolves, about 40 or 50 in DA, but I can clearly see how they fail vs bikers in their uses. I think what it boils down to is the storm bolter is dated and tac terminators basically just have that for ranged, it needs a touch up, same as the Dread Missile launcher needs to be brought into range of the typhoon and cyclone to make it actually something you'd care to take.




Dont think they are 'that' good, i mean heldrakes, LR redemeers etc are gonna give them head aches, they aint much good against flyers, mons creatures and elite inf will butcher them in CC...

as has been said they just totally outclass assault marines for more or less the same pts.

Elite infantry will butcher terms aside from TH SS ones in CC as well. LR Redeemers are meh and I never see any of them let alone enough to scare bikers really. Marines can have their own flyers for anti flyer so I don't see what that has to do with anything, unless your saying other units like assault marines, tacs, terms or some such are good at dealing with flyers, which they aren't. Their speed and specials give them a chance vs MC's, leaving hell drakes being the only real problem.

They just out class assault marines, and most infantry for marines for utility and potency for pretty cost effective points.


It is a sad state of affairs when a solid infantry troop unit is considered secondary to their battle taxis.

Bikes and Jetbikes are too good for their points, else you wouldn't see them taken over other options in "competitive" lists. I mean, I run Tacticals and no bikes, but that's partly because I believe Space Marines should have a core of Tacs, and partly because I can't afford bikers.

I do agree with you on this.

Freman Bloodglaive
02-12-2014, 06:06
While terminators are better than bikes in close combat how does that matter? Terminators are slow, and cost twice as much per model as a bike. I honestly cannot see any way in which terminators get into combat unless the bike player allows them to. Meanwhile bikes carry melta, plasma and grav guns. Weapons that kill terminators as easily as they do tactical marines. Even their bolters are as effective against terminators as against equal points of tactical marines.

Terminators keep getting worse while bikes keep getting better. Terminators are certainly not a counter to bikes.

MajorWesJanson
02-12-2014, 07:32
Eldar Jetbikes need to lose the 3+ armor save. All other bikers are relatively balanced (barring Nob Bikers, who ought to only pay 14-15 points for their bikes, not 27) except for Eldar jetbikes, which grant 3+ armor for zero cost.

TheBearminator
02-12-2014, 08:17
Eldar Jetbikes need to lose the 3+ armor save. All other bikers are relatively balanced (barring Nob Bikers, who ought to only pay 14-15 points for their bikes, not 27) except for Eldar jetbikes, which grant 3+ armor for zero cost.
I've been saying this forever. I'm ok with 3+ on hyper elite shiny spears. But on troops, with 48" movement, T4, jink and objective secured? Forget it. It's just ridiculous. But not the only severely overpowered thing in the codex. Guess we'll just have to live with it for a year or two.

Greyhound
02-12-2014, 08:20
Nob bikers, when in a Warbiker unit start at +7 points compared to a space marine warbike.

Both have to put stuff on top to be effective like guns for one and powa klaw for the other.

The nobs however have morale issue, and although they can suck up a few more wounds they will also fail more saves.

I am not convinced that they need to be cheaper (and I play orks)

Losing Command
02-12-2014, 08:22
Jink just is such a rediculusly good rule this edition, and might be the main thing that makes them better than most (if not all) jump pack infantery. Not every army can throw out the weight of fire required (specially with weapons bikes want to Jink) to take out a unit of bikes with just one of their own units. And even then, at least the bikers have a chance to survive on a 4+ and only shoot less effective, whereas most jump pack units can only go for the 6+ and do nothing at all for a turn. Now the jump packers could ofcourse huddle in terrain, but dangerous terrain tests are still dangerous.

And even if cover is ignored, all shooting attacks up to Str.6 are going to do less wounds on average when shooting bikes, and having to take less saves is still a more effective way of staying alive than having to succesfully pass a larger number of saves in my humble opinion.

Greyhound
02-12-2014, 08:27
Interesting looks like your army seems to be able to have enough accurate wounds at ap3 but not ignoring cover.
I'm the opposite, I can land plenty of hits and will gladly have half of them saved as I don't have enough ap3

Harwammer
02-12-2014, 09:07
While terminators are better than bikes in close combat how does that matter? Terminators are slow, and cost twice as much per model as a bike. I honestly cannot see any way in which terminators get into combat unless the bike player allows them to. Meanwhile bikes carry melta, plasma and grav guns. Weapons that kill terminators as easily as they do tactical marines. Even their bolters are as effective against terminators as against equal points of tactical marines.

Terminators keep getting worse while bikes keep getting better. Terminators are certainly not a counter to bikes.

I think when doing a unit by unit comparison it isn't always the most helpful to see which of the two is better against each other, other targets need to be considered as well. It's not like bikes are the only thing taken in 40k and I don't believe anyone is claiming terminators are a counter to bikes.

TheBearminator
02-12-2014, 10:03
The cyber deamons apparently ate my last post from yesterday. What I was gonna say back then is that we all know GW are suckers for anything flying (skimmers and flyers are vehicles are always better than ground vehicles, bikes can't do anything that a jetbike can't do just as good or better) . With this in mind I think it's a bit surprising that jump units are left out in the cold. Compared to bikes, and especially jetbikes, they're really inferior in almost every sense. And what disturbs me is how shallow their rules are in comparison. Bikes come in three different classes, bikes, jetbikes and (dark) eldar jetbikes. Jump packs are jump packs (jet packs could be argued to be a second variant). There's not even a a skilled rider equivalent. It shouldn't be hard to make them a bit more interesting. Give them some advantage that bikes or other units don't have to start with.

Still Standing
02-12-2014, 10:24
3 bikes, 2 Grav Guns, Combi Grav is one of the best sacrificial units in the game. It's pretty much guarunteed to kill a MC or small Terminator squad in 1 roung of shooting. If bikes lost Relentless a huge amount of the issues with them go away. A seperate issue is Grav Guns, which I think is one of the worst decisions GW have made for Marines in a while.

A.T.
02-12-2014, 10:51
Give them some advantage that bikes or other units don't have to start with.A couple of factions do have rules to help them stand out, notably the blood angels accurate and reliable turn 2 deepstriking (and having melta guns and FnP helps). With the new BA book on the horizon it'll be interesting to see how their bikes and jump troops stack up against one another.

Vipoid
02-12-2014, 11:00
lol Jink isn't great. Just put weight of fire into bikes.

T5 with a 3+ save isn't the easiest thing to torrent. Especially for people who aren't just spamming the most broken units.

Also, doesn't it tell you something is wrong if telling people to torrent them down because the AP of their weapons is basically worthless?


It is a sad state of affairs when a solid infantry troop unit is considered secondary to their battle taxis.

Bikes and Jetbikes are too good for their points, else you wouldn't see them taken over other options in "competitive" lists. I mean, I run Tacticals and no bikes, but that's partly because I believe Space Marines should have a core of Tacs, and partly because I can't afford bikers.


Yes, they are. Doesn't mean that bikes aren't better for their points cost. A good rubric for whether something is undercosted/overpowered is if you're passing up good/solid units in favor of the unit in question.

We seem to disagree about a lot, Ssilmath, but here I agree with every word you've said. :)


Jink just is such a rediculusly good rule this edition, and might be the main thing that makes them better than most (if not all) jump pack infantery. Not every army can throw out the weight of fire required (specially with weapons bikes want to Jink) to take out a unit of bikes with just one of their own units.

Agreed.


Give them some advantage that bikes or other units don't have to start with.

Shouldn't we first look to removing some of the rules from bikes?

I mean, as it stands, jump infantry do exactly what they supposed to - they jump. If we're having to add extra rules to them to keep them competitive, then that seems to smack of problems elsewhere - either with the core rules, or with competing units (*cough* bikes *cough*) getting too many extras.

Ironbone
02-12-2014, 12:16
Shouldn't we first look to removing some of the rules from bikes?

I would start from that freaking T bonus wich drive me nuts sometimes.

I too will join the chorus. While not all bikes are broken (some are simply very good), all that can be taken as replacement for basic foot troops are. Bikes have (huuuge) edge in mobility, durability (increased T and jink combined are more or less equliament of better save. Ofc worse in some circumstances, but better in at least as many other ), while sacreficing none of their rules, or ranged power. And on top of that their cost does not even come close to justify all of above.

Althenian Armourlost
02-12-2014, 13:55
The main problem with bikers is when the special rules stack with the characters abilities and wargear - most notably the bike command squads that are led by a chapter master with a storm shield, and an apothecary. When 3++ invul, look out sir and FnP are stacked - and you get one turn to shoot them down before they charge you - what can you do?

By the way, the guy who runs this calls me cheesey for using Eldrad(telepathy..for invisible) and 8 wraithblades as the only unit I can field that has a chance against this. Even unloading a sun cannon into the unit has only ever killed a single grunt at best.

Still Standing
02-12-2014, 14:00
Shoot it with Guardians. Shoot it with Wave Serpents. Shoot it with War Walkers. Charge it with that Wraithknight. Charge it with Wraithlords. Eldar are not short of options.

NikolaeV
02-12-2014, 14:03
Bikes OP? Are you kidding me?

Bikes are good, they're actually worth using, because unlike tactical marines, they actually DO things.

However, in a 1500-1750 point game, we're talking about what, 20-25 models on the table? Bikes have their special abilities because there are so few of them, that they need some way of actually staying alive to do what they do.

A.T.
02-12-2014, 14:16
However, in a 1500-1750 point game, we're talking about what, 20-25 models on the table?Yes, assuming you are averaging 70-75 points per bike.

But bikes don't cost anywhere near that much.

Konovalev
02-12-2014, 14:20
Shouldn't we first look to removing some of the rules from bikes?

I mean, as it stands, jump infantry do exactly what they supposed to - they jump. If we're having to add extra rules to them to keep them competitive, then that seems to smack of problems elsewhere - either with the core rules, or with competing units (*cough* bikes *cough*) getting too many extras.

I agree that bikes could stand to lose some rules, like relentless(though I seem to recall making this argument before in a bikes vs jump pack topic) but maybe the easier fix is simply to buff jump packs a bit?

Unlike bikes, jump pack users tend to exclusively be geared towards close combat so:
Would giving +1 Initiative to anyone with a jump pack make enough of a positive difference without negatively impacting core rules/other units?

or allow their Hammer of Wrath hits to be made with weapons(excluding unwieldy) at their modified strength?

or if that's not enough, on the more extreme end allow jump pack users to ignore the unwieldy rule outright?

Vipoid
02-12-2014, 14:27
I guess I just dislike seeing endless escalation. If so many units are apparently needing extra rules in order to be worthwhile, then perhaps we should be actually be looking at the core rules - and seeing if they can be changed so that units can function with minimum basic rules.

If, instead, you just add more and more rules to units that aren't taken - without removing any - it seems you'll just end up with a big, bloated mess.

NikolaeV
02-12-2014, 14:30
Yes, assuming you are averaging 70-75 points per bike.

But bikes don't cost anywhere near that much.

Apparently you think people take only troop bikes in a 1500 list.

Still Standing
02-12-2014, 14:32
Apparently you think people take only troop bikes in a 1500 list.

We see loads more infantry in non-bike armies, right? Oh, wrong.

T10
02-12-2014, 14:35
Apparently you think people take only troop bikes in a 1500 list.

Apparently "average" means different things to different people.

-T10

A.T.
02-12-2014, 14:46
Apparently you think people take only troop bikes in a 1500 list.Well then I don't see what point you were trying to make with your original post - you've just claimed that 1500-1750pt armies have 20-25 models in them and then made no logical connection at all between that number and the bikes.

If you wanted to make a point for lower numbers of models on board it would have made more sense to compare them to regular infantry, where you get around 3 grunts for every 2 bikes.

Ssilmath
02-12-2014, 15:01
If, instead, you just add more and more rules to units that aren't taken - without removing any - it seems you'll just end up with a big, bloated mess.

Very much this. In theory, if everything is overpowered then nothing is, but in that case the outcome is determined by who points their overpowered stuff first. Bikes could stand to lose a bit of their special rules or having them modified slightly (Can't assault the next turn if jinking, for example).

Ironbone
02-12-2014, 15:10
However, in a 1500-1750 point game, we're talking about what, 20-25 models on the table?
Even in this points, 20-25 bikes still leaves with plenty of pts to spare on support and characters. And even models may be few, killing each one can sometimes reqire effort similar to wrestling deraged shark :shifty:.

Zustiur
02-12-2014, 15:58
Removing relentless from bikes would render attack bikes completely pointless.
I'd look at making bike units subject to the same equipment rules as tac squads; can't take the second special weapon until the squad is full size.
Also, make it so that bike units can't ever benefit from 2 close combat weapons.
Grav guns and/or the salvo rules need to be redesigned.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

Still Standing
02-12-2014, 16:12
Removing relentless from bikes would render attack bikes completely pointless.
I'd look at making bike units subject to the same equipment rules as tac squads; can't take the second special weapon until the squad is full size.
Also, make it so that bike units can't ever benefit from 2 close combat weapons.
Grav guns and/or the salvo rules need to be redesigned.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

Tag Relentless on to the sidecar of the Attack Bike then. Rather than Relentless, something along the lines of "Rapid Assault: Counts Heavy Weapons as Assault Weapons for all purposes."

Hendarion
02-12-2014, 16:37
Yeah, I too realyy dislike bike rules. From 4th ed onwards they only keep geting better and better :rolleyes:.And there's yet too many of them sitting on shelves unused and unbought.

Greyhound
02-12-2014, 18:47
Removing relentless from bikes would render attack bikes completely pointless.
I'd look at making bike units subject to the same equipment rules as tac squads; can't take the second special weapon until the squad is full size.
Also, make it so that bike units can't ever benefit from 2 close combat weapons.
Grav guns and/or the salvo rules need to be redesigned.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

This is a space marine view of the game. Ork bikes need their assault punch.

insectum7
02-12-2014, 20:57
So how does them focusing on Cents help out other armies with a lot of terminators ? Like DA for instance ? Deathwing are meh, for more points then their vanilla kin. They are more versatile but pay for such a bit overly so. I guess on what is better it really depends on how you take the game. Speed, high toughness and nice access to special weapons, all factor into being good as well as point cost, which is less then that of the cost of a terminator, which isn't very mobile, doesn't shoot overly well and lacks from special weapons really.

I think the bikers just come out ahead in their use. Now I love terminators, I have like 30 for Space wolves, about 40 or 50 in DA, but I can clearly see how they fail vs bikers in their uses. I think what it boils down to is the storm bolter is dated and tac terminators basically just have that for ranged, it needs a touch up, same as the Dread Missile launcher needs to be brought into range of the typhoon and cyclone to make it actually something you'd care to take.


All well and good, but like I said before they're totally different units. Comparing them directly isn't as important as how they work not-in-vacum, as always.


While terminators are better than bikes in close combat how does that matter? Terminators are slow, and cost twice as much per model as a bike. I honestly cannot see any way in which terminators get into combat unless the bike player allows them to. Meanwhile bikes carry melta, plasma and grav guns. Weapons that kill terminators as easily as they do tactical marines. Even their bolters are as effective against terminators as against equal points of tactical marines.

Terminators keep getting worse while bikes keep getting better. Terminators are certainly not a counter to bikes.

From my perspective and in my army, which is already extremely heavy on the special weapons, I just don't get much new utility out of adding bikes to my army. Also, because I already bring that crapload of special weapons it's easy for me to force bikers to Jink. Once bikers are Jinking they aren't that dangerous in the shooting phase, so CC becomes a good option. For CC, Terminators are a good option vs. Bikes, because (White Scars) bikers just won't survive to hit and run.

As for maneuverability, since I'm Drop Podded and Rhinoed up to begin with, it's not that big of an issue. Terminators teleport, and are just infantry, sure. But if the opponent is going to allow me to chase him off objectives, that works for me as well.

Because I'm already loaded up on special weapons other options look better. A fine fellow at the club decided not to use some bikes that he bought, and gave the to me, so I actually have six bikers and six grav guns just sitting in a box because they aren't really adding much to my list. This means I go and finish my Terminators first, since they give me a new ability that's actually useful to me.

For shootiness, the three man grav squad is definitely a compact set of special weapons, but since a popular list here is Wave Serpents, little Bike Squads will just get wasted. I prefer my marines in Rhinos and with more bodies, so Tacticals fit the bill quite nicely. Also, to really get the most out of bikers I'd have to play White Scars, and since I prefer the UM tactics anyways that just isn't going to happen. Different army set up, different choices look better, that's all.



Very much this. In theory, if everything is overpowered then nothing is, but in that case the outcome is determined by who points their overpowered stuff first. Bikes could stand to lose a bit of their special rules or having them modified slightly (Can't assault the next turn if jinking, for example).

That would be a pretty strong play, IMO.

TheBearminator
02-12-2014, 21:19
Can't assault is very much all or nothing, but it could be balanced one way or the other. I find it really strange that jink forces you to make snap shots, while the unit can still assault without any penalty at all. But for some bikes denying assaults would be extremely harsh (not yo mention the game already favours shooty armies). For example armour 5+ reavers, who are a very cc orientated bike unit and will be forced to jink pretty much every time they're shot at. Place a barrage blast over them from the other side of the table and they're harmless next turn. Maybe it would be enough that they lost their charge bonus attack (disordered charge?).

Firaxin
03-12-2014, 07:30
The worst thing about SM bikes in my opinion is they make no sense thematically or realistically. They're a bad 80's fad that should've been cut from the rules at the same time as hoverboards...

Snake Tortoise
03-12-2014, 12:36
Yea bikes are pretty ridiculous when you think of them in practice. I like to think of my bikers using their bikes the same way you'd use a mongoose in Halo- get into the fighting quickly then jump off and get stuck in. The idea of fighting in close combat from the seat of a bike is ludicrous :D

I think the idea of marines on bikes outside of battle is pretty cool though. Tearing across the landscape to get somewhere hundreds of miles away quickly (if flight isn't an option) or escorting rhinos and land raiders a bit like fighters surrounding a big starship

...

When 7th dropped and all units got scoring I was expecting stuff like bikes and jump infantry to go up in price. It seemed obvious they were only so cheap in 6th because troops were scoring, but now that isn't the case.

Zustiur
03-12-2014, 15:28
This is a space marine view of the game. Ork bikes need their assault punch.

Touche. I don't know anything about orks.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

Mack
03-12-2014, 15:28
I like the theory of bikes when used like the Dark Eldar Reavers last codex but tweaked.

Attacks are basically a drive by rather than a stop and fight hand to hand. They should be fast and brutal avoiding stationary CC, but also high risk if they do get caught in stationary CC. To do a drive by attack (basically move through an enemy unit), it should give a boost to STR or # of attacks or something, but their should be an entanglement or dismounted test that could lock them in CC, but would then take away some of the benefits of a bike (like the +1 to T goes away when locked in CC). If a bike does get locked in CC, it can then hit and run test, but while in CC, they should be neutered.

In short, Bikes are fast and hit hard and those type of attacks should be brutal, however, they lose all advantages when stationary.

Vipoid
03-12-2014, 15:39
I like the theory of bikes when used like the Dark Eldar Reavers last codex but tweaked.

Attacks are basically a drive by rather than a stop and fight hand to hand.

Which is perhaps ironic, since the new book made them ram their targets instead.


but would then take away some of the benefits of a bike (like the +1 to T goes away when locked in CC).

Honestly, I don't see why they should have +1T in the first place. Especially now that the extra toughness also protects them from instant death.

I mean, how exactly is this supposed to work for characters? Let's say I have a SM captain on a bike, and he gets hit by a lascannon (and fails his armour save). Well, that should kill him outright, but didn't... because he was on a bike. :confused:

What exactly is supposed to have happened? Did the lascannon hit the bike instead? If so, a) why did the bike get to use the Captain's invulnerable save, b) why is the captain wounded, and c) why isn't the bike a smoking pile of wreckage? :wtf:

T10
03-12-2014, 15:40
The worst thing about SM bikes in my opinion is they make no sense thematically or realistically. They're a bad 80's fad that should've been cut from the rules at the same time as hoverboards...

Bike-mounted weapons have been with us along as we've had both motorcycles and guns in the same room.

http://www.forgottenweapons.com/guns-and-motorcycles-a-photo-essay/

The obvious benefits in real-world terms is:

* A stable weapon's mount, especially if the bike is standing still. Even while moving, the weapon can maintain a forward direction even though the bike is essentially jumping up and down as it moves across uneven terrain. A running infantryman may have trouble matching this kind of accuracy.

* Carrying capacity, bringing a bigger gun with more ammunition.

-T10

Vipoid
03-12-2014, 15:58
Bike-mounted weapons have been with us along as we've had both motorcycles and guns in the same room.

http://www.forgottenweapons.com/guns-and-motorcycles-a-photo-essay/

The obvious benefits in real-world terms is:

* A stable weapon's mount, especially if the bike is standing still. Even while moving, the weapon can maintain a forward direction even though the bike is essentially jumping up and down as it moves across uneven terrain. A running infantryman may have trouble matching this kind of accuracy.

* Carrying capacity, bringing a bigger gun with more ammunition.

-T10

A few points:

1) Note that you said these bikes can maintain fire in a *forward* direction when moving. GW bikes can fire in any direction, with no loss of accuracy, even when moving at maximum speed.

2) None of those look like they would provide much, if any, protection to their riders. Yet, GW bikes apparently offer enough resilience to their riders to survive a lascannon blast that would otherwise vaporise them.

3) I'm guessing most of those bikes can't weave around fast enough to avoid half of all incoming fire, with no risk to themselves beyond loss of accuracy.

4) I'm also betting that those bikers didn't draw swords and charge into melee with the enemy, whilst never once leaving their seats.

I don't think anyone is disputing that bikers existed in real life - it's just that the GW bikers bear no resemblance to them (or to common sense, for that matter).

In fact, if I had to guess what GW used as inspiration for their bikes, it would probably be something like this:

204022

Still Standing
03-12-2014, 17:09
Also, running infantrymen do not fire their weapons. At least those who have had any sort of training.

Vaktathi
03-12-2014, 17:59
Bike-mounted weapons have been with us along as we've had both motorcycles and guns in the same room.

http://www.forgottenweapons.com/guns-and-motorcycles-a-photo-essay/

The obvious benefits in real-world terms is:

* A stable weapon's mount, especially if the bike is standing still. Even while moving, the weapon can maintain a forward direction even though the bike is essentially jumping up and down as it moves across uneven terrain. A running infantryman may have trouble matching this kind of accuracy.
Notice that most those weapons however are all sidecar mounted. Only 1 bike model in 40k has a sidecar, the other biker models have fixed forward weapons. Aiming those fixed weapons would be largely impossible however, if anything wasn't literally directly forward and on the same elevation plane, it won't be hit, and having to aim by changing the bike's direction obviously has its own problems. Also most of those motorcycles would generally stop to fire, the ones without sidecars would have no choice but to stop as they would require the same hands used for steering and acceleration/braking.

Konovalev
03-12-2014, 19:52
I'm also betting that those bikers didn't draw swords and charge into melee with the enemy, whilst never once leaving their seats.

I don't think anyone is disputing that bikers existed in real life - it's just that the GW bikers bear no resemblance to them (or to common sense, for that matter).

In fact, if I had to guess what GW used as inspiration for their bikes, it would probably be something like this:

Think of 40k bikes as cavalry and suddenly it all makes sense(within the confines of the 40kverse where close combat in the face of machinegun fire is still viable).

204028

Greyhound
03-12-2014, 19:55
Ork ones make sense... Because orks

Mack
03-12-2014, 20:30
It's important to keep reality out of the discussion when talking about a fantastic futuristic game... :cheese:

There are plenty of real life mechanics that debunk bike rules, but bikes are 40's equivalent of fantasy's cavalry and the rules represent super fantastic uber units doing super fantastic uber things. It's not real at all nor I doubt intended to be... :shifty:

Vipoid
03-12-2014, 20:35
It's important to keep reality out of the discussion when talking about a fantastic futuristic game... :cheese:

Why? If we're having to suspend all logic and reasoning, then it smacks of a significant problem with those rules.

Suspension of disbelief can only be stretched so far before it snaps. You need some degree of verisimilitude, something that makes the game feel like an abstraction - rather than a load of illogical nonsense.

Angelwing
03-12-2014, 20:47
What exactly is supposed to have happened? Did the lascannon hit the bike instead? If so, a) why did the bike get to use the Captain's invulnerable save, b) why is the captain wounded, and c) why isn't the bike a smoking pile of wreckage? :wtf:

What we have now is a result of streamlining bikes from being separate vehicles in 2nd ed. I think this is a good thing. On the other hand, I think bikes are a bit much at the moment, but I believe that this is a core rules issue that leads to special rules for units bloat.

Hrw-Amen
03-12-2014, 20:56
A large bike rushing a crowd of people is a good way to get them to move out of the way, I have seen it done in real life (At a bike show, some drunk rode his bike through a crowd towards the stage.) and it was most effective. I guess though no one was shooting at it and he was not shooting at them, but as a way of making people kove it was pretty good. A SM bike is a lot bigger and as such would have a bigger effect. Trouble is as many have said once you stop you are vunerable. In the case I saw the chap was literally dragged off his bike and beaten up quite easily.

So, yes bikes are effective at rushing crowds, probably with guns blazing even better, even if they are not actually aimed, who is going to want to take the chance especially if there are several of them in a line? Also if you have a sidecar mounted weapon then that is a better anbd different thing altogether.

But, best just get into a situation where your bikers can ride on through as if they are slowed, forced into CC, then they have pretty much had it. At least that is how I see the reality of the situation anyway, not taking into account any W40K far flunf fantasy stuff of course which could make them a whole lot better.

Still Standing
03-12-2014, 21:09
So, yes bikes are effective at rushing crowds, probably with guns blazing even better, even if they are not actually aimed, who is going to want to take the chance especially if there are several of them in a line? Also if you have a sidecar mounted weapon then that is a better anbd different thing altogether.


Anybody with an ounce of military training and self discipline. Assume a prone firing position and that weapon cannot hit you, then just shoot the stupid prick.

Sephillion
03-12-2014, 21:28
I seem to recall in a Dark Angels novel that Ravenwing bikes are somehow connected to the user, so the user can drive the bike while aiming the gun at the same time. I don’t recall the specifics. But the novel also make it clear that the bikes are the 40K equivalent to mounted knights.

I don’t think we can expect realism in such games because IRL, bikes and vehicles don’t stop, and things move simultaneously.

Also, I don’t think we can really find a way to balance the bikes in the game without changing some or all the individual bike stats/point costs. Some of the proposed changes would terribly nerf some armies or make some units borderline trash – while they would be appropriate for other bikes.

But for the sake of the discussion, if we’re looking to reduce bike’s efficiency, I’d suggest changing their cost and removing the +1 to T. It makes no sense, and while it’s good to have ways to improve attributes (so not all SM have T4… or not all Eldar are stuck with T3!) I think it’s their biggest advantage over a lot of other units.

If we’re looking to improve assault marines, I’d say a simple bonus – not a rule – like +1A or Init would suffice. Or just make sure individual profiles have something to compensate, since they suffer by comparison to bikers. This could be either a rule, or a bonus, a points reduction, better wargear options…

But again, I feel it’d be better to look at individual profiles.

druchii
03-12-2014, 21:48
The important thing to remember is that rules need not be realistic. No one wants to play a realistic wargame (well not really). The rules are abstractions of concrete concepts built to give play-ability. I get that people want a convincing back story as to why sentient space fungus trade their own teeth for guns, well that's fine for them. I'm OK with being told "just cause they're orks, dude."

In reality almost every rule in the game makes very little sense in a real world setting, but I'm OK with that because it erases a lot of the micromanagement from the game and streamlines play.

I still think bikes are too cheap for what you get, and an easy fix would be a 5pt point bump or losing the extra (admittedly random) bump in T.

d

Scammel
03-12-2014, 22:22
I'm reading all the complaints about 80s fads and Biker Mice From Mars and thinking that folks can't see the woods for the trees. Irrespective of their current rules, space bikes with guns are METTTAAALLLLLL!!!!

AngryAngel
03-12-2014, 22:30
As well Biker Mice from Mars are pretty awesome, imagine, Ogryns on Giant Bikes !!! Think about it.

Snake Tortoise
03-12-2014, 22:38
I suppose for CC, even if it lasts a few rounds, we could just imagine the whole thing occurring as the bikers charge, attack and pass through the unit on the other side.

To reference Halo again, a brute chopper is a wheeled one man vehicle that can only move and shoot forwards, which makes it a bit awkward but it does make it easier to picture bikes in action.

A guy lying prone presents a smaller target for a biker and can fire more accurately, but then a bike coming straight towards you probably only presents a head to aim at over the shielded handlebars. If it's moving horizontal to the shooter it would be harder to hit as a fast moving target, and even though the bike is moving and aiming is difficult, the prone gunman isn't a moving target to hit.

What I'd really like to see is a BL book based on a SM/CSM biker to help figure out the practicalities. There probably already is, but even in Scars I can't remember any fighting from the perspective of a biker.

SamaNagol
04-12-2014, 02:45
Bikes are good mobile shooting platforms, and they also offer a way of getting durable smash units into combat.

In an edition where mobile shooting is king, and the only assault units worth taking are durable fast moving ones they are going to come out well.

The problem is GWs inability to balance Power Armoured Infantry models. (And Jump Packs as well for that matter). Bikes aren't OP as they sit in a nice Upper Mid Tier sweet spot where you should aim for most units.

Harwammer
04-12-2014, 07:27
imagine, Ogryns on Giant Bikes !!! Think about it.

Rediculous... Riding giant trikes on the other hand.... :D

Firaxin
04-12-2014, 07:29
Attacks are basically a drive by rather than a stop and fight hand to hand.
They don't work like that though, they're basically battering rams that get stuck in the first time they hit a Grot mob. And as others have mentioned, it's not just the hand-to-hand that doesn't make sense, it's the shooting platforms.


The obvious benefits in real-world terms is:

* A stable weapon's mount, especially if the bike is standing still. Even while moving, the weapon can maintain a forward direction even though the bike is essentially jumping up and down as it moves across uneven terrain. A running infantryman may have trouble matching this kind of accuracy.
* Carrying capacity, bringing a bigger gun with more ammunition.
Look, Bikes make a certain amount of sense for a faction like the Imperial Guard. And jetbikes (or their equivalents) make sense for Tau or Eldar. Bikes especially make sense for Orks because it fits them thematically. Note that word. I complained SM bikes, specifically, don't make sense realistically or thematically. Why? Because each Space Marine is a walking tank. That's their theme. Speed? Their enhanced physique combined with their power armor's actuators allows them to sprint as fast as an automobile, indefinitely, since they don't get tired or need to sleep and their armor effectively has an unlimited power supply. Stable firing platform? Their 1-ton armor would absorb a bolter's recoil so smoothly that they may as well be firing lasers. Ability to mount heavier armament? Normal bikes only carry twin-linked bolters; a Space Marine could just as easily sprint around with a Storm Bolter if he wanted. For heavy weapons, a Land Speeder is faster, more maneuverable, and can carry more weapons for the same amount of crew as an attack bike. For rapid redeployment, a Rhino is safer for the precious marines inside and more efficient in terms of fuel expended and more efficient in reducing their footprint for stealth/under-the-guns redeployment.

Remember: Space Marine = Tank. Putting a Tank on a bike is as silly as putting a space marine on a wolf... that's why it doesn't make sense thematically.



bikes are 40's equivalent of fantasy's cavalry and the rules represent super fantastic uber units doing super fantastic uber things. It's not real at all nor I doubt intended to be... :shifty:
So you're okay with Thunderwolves, I take it? Nobody should bat an eye at those because it's super-fantastic uber-units doing super-fantastic uber things?


Anybody with an ounce of military training and self discipline. Assume a prone firing position and that weapon cannot hit you, then just shoot the stupid prick.
Agreed. I read a book a long time ago--I think it was in the StarFist series--where a bunch of primitive natives tried to charge this squad of marines. The marines full-auto'd their plasma rifles into the sand between them and the horses ended up charging into molten lava :angel: Cavalry charges were abandoned by the end of WW1 for a reason, and the weapons of the 41st millennium would make a cavalry charge even more suicidal.



But for the sake of the discussion, if were looking to reduce bikes efficiency, Id suggest...
Back in the day, there was a unit, maybe just Imperial Guard bionics but I forget, that got a simple Invul save to represent the chance of the shot hitting the machine rather than their flesh. Bikes would be more realistic with a 5 or 6+ Invul save than +1 Toughness. Realistically though a solid hit into the bike should remove the model, in the same way as a plasma weapon overheating removes the model without necessarily killing it.


I'm reading all the complaints about 80s fads and Biker Mice From Mars and thinking that folks can't see the woods for the trees. Irrespective of their current rules, space bikes with guns are METTTAAALLLLLL!!!!
...what decade do you think the Metal fad occurred? :p


A guy lying prone presents a smaller target for a biker and can fire more accurately, but then a bike coming straight towards you probably only presents a head to aim at over the shielded handlebars. If it's moving horizontal to the shooter it would be harder to hit as a fast moving target, and even though the bike is moving and aiming is difficult, the prone gunman isn't a moving target to hit.
I don't think you know what you're talking about when it comes to how shooting works... besides, you don't need to hit the driver, shooting the front wheel of a charging bike is just as likely to kill the rider by sending him flying over the handlebars and into the dirt at 80mph.

Scammel
04-12-2014, 07:52
...what decade do you think the Metal fad occurred?


What made you think it ended? ;) But in all seriousness, an awful lot of 40k came into being on the basis of whether or not it would look good on an album cover. All this talk about historical use of particular weaponry, physics and theme is strictly secondary compared to the fact that you can mock-scream the lyrics to Bat Out Of Hell whilst pushing your dudes along the tabletop and that's not a joke.

TheBearminator
04-12-2014, 08:19
Playing the moderator here.

During the years, which other unit types have seen great buffs? I'm thinking vehicles firing big guns, they weren't even able to move and fire ordnance before. Now you even get to subtract your BS from the scattered distance, and the whole blast radius is now (again) full strength against vehicles.

Snake Tortoise
04-12-2014, 08:42
I don't think you know what you're talking about when it comes to how shooting works... besides, you don't need to hit the driver, shooting the front wheel of a charging bike is just as likely to kill the rider by sending him flying over the handlebars and into the dirt at 80mph.

I imagine SM bikes are extremely durable and resistant to firepower, but that aside I think you're applying too much logic to the game of 'Drive me closer, I want to hit them with my sword!' As long as thunderwolf cavalry exist I can't get worked up about the practicalities of bikes

I agree with your points anyway

T10
04-12-2014, 09:28
Notice that most those weapons however are all sidecar mounted. Only 1 bike model in 40k has a sidecar, the other biker models have fixed forward weapons. Aiming those fixed weapons would be largely impossible however, if anything wasn't literally directly forward and on the same elevation plane, it won't be hit, and having to aim by changing the bike's direction obviously has its own problems. Also most of those motorcycles would generally stop to fire, the ones without sidecars would have no choice but to stop as they would require the same hands used for steering and acceleration/braking.

I can only offer up a quasi-anectodal example of a normal bike by referencing a "weapons documentary" I can't even remember the title of. Anyway, on its treatment of assault rifles or something it also featured a Thompson machine-gun mounted on the handlebars of a WWII-era bike. The show's face-man tried it out, sceptical at first.

It looked incredibly awkward to use, mounted as it were on the bike's center axis and fired using one hand. Since the guy used other hand to steer, he had to sort of lean towards his steering hands to fire directly forward.

Still: The face man concuded that firing was surprisingly stable and predictable, scoring a significant number of hits even while moving at a speed comparable to a run/sprint.

-T10

Mack
04-12-2014, 14:12
I am fine with super fantastic uber units doing super fantastic uber things while playing a super fantastic uber game set in a super fantastic uber setting...

For the record, my comment on keeping realism out of this type of discussion was both tongue in cheek to lighten the mood(notice font in that post...hard to get sarcasm across on the internet :P) but also legitimate. We are not playing a simulation game based on anything real...otherwise, we would play flames of war.

I play 40k games as a release from everyday real life BS. We can sit here and come up with all kinds of great ideas, or as many do, bitch, but neither will have any impact on the game. GW will continue to spit out rules, some we agree with, some we don't. While it's fine to discuss, once it crosses over into "that's not realistic", well then, we shouldn't be talking about 40K, which isn't real. This is a comic book setting full of super heros and villians. I suppose we should start discussing the realism of many recent Marvel movies? I guess I would rather play the game.

My local gaming group used to like to bitch about the state of the game after each new release. Recently, we all decided we like getting together and playing, regardless of how bad GW screws it up, we will continue to have fun rather than bitch hoping to maximize the results in our favor. We now enjoy the game immensely because we enjoy getting together and playing.

Break bread, enjoy a beer and the company you are with, It's very refreshing...

Cheers!

Harwammer
04-12-2014, 14:19
Space Marines have got to have bikes with guns cos Judge Dredd had em!

I think Citadel even made a 2000AD Judge on bike model? Or was it just a 40k Arbites Judge? dunno. Either way the 2000AD bike is really similar to the Space Marine one. I assume Judge Dredd did it first?

Regarding in game, I was playing a jet bike lord yesterday and it was amazing how many wounds that +1 T was able to prevent!

AngryAngel
04-12-2014, 19:02
Rediculous... Riding giant trikes on the other hand.... :D

I like it !! GW Make it so !! Now !!


I can only offer up a quasi-anectodal example of a normal bike by referencing a "weapons documentary" I can't even remember the title of. Anyway, on its treatment of assault rifles or something it also featured a Thompson machine-gun mounted on the handlebars of a WWII-era bike. The show's face-man tried it out, sceptical at first.

It looked incredibly awkward to use, mounted as it were on the bike's center axis and fired using one hand. Since the guy used other hand to steer, he had to sort of lean towards his steering hands to fire directly forward.

Still: The face man concuded that firing was surprisingly stable and predictable, scoring a significant number of hits even while moving at a speed comparable to a run/sprint.

-T10

They could be useful but in a very limited niche use. However, as a side note this comes down to GW don't like units having unit synergy seemingly. Like spotters for artillery, scout units to lower or remove cover saves from hard targets, etc. They break every unit down to kill power which is really boring and dull game design. I think bikes would work well for a mobile scouting element, like scout bikes ?? Hmmmmm Just give them more synergy with other taken units. Scout bikers gain some additions that help fit that niche, like mining terrain, carrying a locator beacon, etc. Doing things you'd imagine a rapid recon force to do.

Bikes being shooting platforms, sure, but assault vehicles ? Hell no, but it requires effort to think of cool uses for bikes aside from just, kill your enemies. Effort I don't think GW wants to put out there for unit redesigns or re thinks, probably why so many units have stayed just about same for so many editions.

AngryAngel
04-12-2014, 19:02
Loathsome phantom double post, just assume it was awesome and bike filled.

insectum7
04-12-2014, 19:53
Space Marines have got to have bikes with guns cos Judge Dredd had em!

I think Citadel even made a 2000AD Judge on bike model? Or was it just a 40k Arbites Judge? dunno. Either way the 2000AD bike is really similar to the Space Marine one. I assume Judge Dredd did it first?


Hells yeah it's inspired by Dredd. Big time.

http://longboxgraveyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/johnwagnermikemcmahon.jpg

http://quietus_production.s3.amazonaws.com/images/articles/8947/dreddmain_1338504921_crop_550x359.jpg

I specifically like how the guns appear to be in the wheel. You could even say that GW added realism in this case. :)

Konovalev
04-12-2014, 23:07
Remember: Space Marine = Tank. Putting a Tank on a bike is as silly as putting a space marine on a wolf... that's why it doesn't make sense thematically.

No no no. Space Marines quite clearly = Knights, and bikes = horses. There's plenty of parallels like this in 40k. Guard = peasants/foot infantry. Orks = barbarians/orcs. Elder = exotic easterners/elves. And ever and on.

But this is 40k so we can't have space marines on horses we need to put them on something over the top and indeed metal. Thus giant bikes. Likewise, Chaos badasses cannot simply ride on giant bikes like corpse worshiping space marines, therefore they ride on giant fiery brass rhino's.

druchii
04-12-2014, 23:10
Likewise, Chaos badasses cannot simply ride on giant bikes like corpse worshiping space marines, therefore they ride on giant fiery brass rhino's.

Uhh..

Or bikes.

With spikes.

d

Harwammer
04-12-2014, 23:38
this is 40k so we can't have space marines on horses we need to put them on something over the top and indeed metal
Nothing is more over the top and metal than riding a massive wolf to battle.

Bugaboo
05-12-2014, 04:06
Any time I read threads complaining about how OP a unit is, I think of the Heldrake. And then I laugh when I think about how people reacted when it was nerfed like asked for.

So look at the complaints for Bikers. High toughness? Check. Cheap as chips for what they do? Check. Relentless special/heavy weapon trolleys? Check.

I doubt relentless is going anywhere any time soon. So we'll have to deal with that for a while. But let's speculate over possible changes.

-1 T. Goodbye Raven Wing armies. Goodbye Bikers as a FA in SM armies. Don't know enough about the bikes/jetbikes of other races to comment, so will not.

CSM players will keep doing as they do and slap the MoN on any biker in their army to bring them back to their "former glory" (see: Oblits). And nothing much will change short of their charies actually dying to ID from S10 weapons.

Points change? I don't really delve into points costs and whether or not they make sense, but I can agree that the 20 exp per model for their apparent effectiveness (in SM armies, at least) is laughable at best. And were they to have a points increase in addition to nerfing, well, they would be deemed even more a useless unit.

So the end result would be LS taking up the FA in SM armies, and FA will go the way of Elite in CSM armies.

Harwammer
05-12-2014, 08:40
Well T4 oblits are a little different to T4 bikers as the extra toughness stops their extra wound being made irrelevant by ID attacks. It would still very useful for multi wound characters on bikes though.

T10
05-12-2014, 10:35
The Toughnes bonus is there to represent the presumed increase in durability the model gains from being made up of two parts, the rider and the bike. If one wanted to change this to something different within the same rule set, I would go for one of the following:

1. +1 Wound. Seems to work fine for weapon teams but kind of step on the toes of the attack bike.
2. Re-roll failed armour saves.

This takes bikes out of the bag of tricks to avoid Instant Death, which appears to be a major gripe.

-T10

Harwammer
05-12-2014, 10:41
Well, I don't think avoiding instant death is THAT big a gripe (even though I keep mentioning it) as the majority of bikes seem to only have a wound and no FNP.

Ironbone
05-12-2014, 15:17
Well, I don't think avoiding instant death is THAT big a gripe (even though I keep mentioning it) as the majority of bikes seem to only have a wound and no FNP.
On normal bikes not so much, but it's big issiue with characters. Chapter master feel no paining anything short of orbital bombardment is simply absurd.

itcamefromthedeep
05-12-2014, 17:51
Bikes are cool.

Marines are armored like tanks. Putting a tank on top of a faster tank strikes me as reasonable.

Bikes are a bit too good (your mileage may vary). Sign me up for the reduced Toughness petition. I think a hit that kills either the rider or crashes the bike leaves you with one fewer biker.

Eldar Guardian bikes don't deserve a 3+ armor save.

Assault Marines are poor in comparison. I think chainswords should get Shred, and that would go a long way toward allowing those minis to make sense. It's hard for me to think of models with chainswords that are problematically effective (Grey Hunters maybe?).

Muad'Dib
06-12-2014, 10:46
Well done ! You have discovered that there are overpowered units in Warhammer :D - in this case created by stacking special rules (or should bike rules be called 'general rules' ?) on a unit and then giving them a far too low point cost; so they can use the "We don't know how to cost special rules." idiot-excuse.
And yes they are doing it on purpose.
Same thing happened to Space Marines in general, monstrous cavalry in fantasy and probably few other things.

Spiney Norman
06-12-2014, 11:04
Eldar Guardian bikes don't deserve a 3+ armor save.


Armour saves granted by bikes are all over the shop currently, dark Eldar Reavers add +1 to their riders save while Eldar Jetbikes add +2 to their riders save, which, given the respective designs of the bikes seems fair. However space marine bikes (which are physically heavier in construction than either of the Eldar variants) don't increase their riders save at all, which is a complete nonsense.

IMHO they need to do away with bikes enhancing armour saves at all, put Reavers back down to their 6+ wyche suit and guardians down to their 5+ armour and let the toughness increase represent the sturdier comstruction of the bike itself. Jetbikes should also give a Jink bonus above what regular bikes could achieve, perhaps allowing their riders to ignore the snap shots penalty while jinking.

SirBlackmane
06-12-2014, 11:42
Marines are armored like tanks. Putting a tank on top of a faster tank strikes me as reasonable.
[emoji1]

Assault Marines are poor in comparison. I think chainswords should get Shred, and that would go a long way toward allowing those minis to make sense. It's hard for me to think of models with chainswords that are problematically effective (Grey Hunters maybe?).
Heresy chainswords are all AP5, although that's barely relevant as there is only one unit in that setting with a 5+ save.

And I believe you were thinking of the old Grey hunters. The new ones have to pay for their chainswords and are remarkably less impressive

Inquisitor Kallus
06-12-2014, 14:30
Lower cost (Assault Marines used to be 25 points when Space Marines were 15 points).
Mobility options (jump pack for speed, on foot for dangerous terrain).
Hammer of Wrath.
Deep Strike deployment.

It's something at least.

And they can go to ground whereas bikes can not

Imperial Stag
06-12-2014, 14:41
I blame overwatch for making assualt marines weaker than they should be. On most tables an assault squad, which is almost a 5-man squad, will deep strike, get shot, move to assault, assault unit in cover, get shot at by overwatch, then get stuck in close combat. Or use one of the special weapons available to get at the enemies weakest spot... and them get shot and most likely die.

ehlijen
06-12-2014, 15:17
I blame overwatch for making assualt marines weaker than they should be. On most tables an assault squad, which is almost a 5-man squad, will deep strike, get shot, move to assault, assault unit in cover, get shot at by overwatch, then get stuck in close combat. Or use one of the special weapons available to get at the enemies weakest spot... and them get shot and most likely die.

If you use a 5 man squad, ie a minimum investment, you'll get the minimum potential. What kind of squad are they charging? Another minimum size one?

Also, deep strike is supposed to be a situational tool. If you can't see any advantageous landing spots during set up (somewhere they can land with LOS to most of the enemy blocked) then you need to consider deploying them normally and simply moving up using cover as best you can.

Assault has a few problems in 6th (and 7th just ruined 6th further), but overwatch is actually the least of them (other than Tau, no one counts on it doing anything). The general increase in firepower effectiveness and reduced points costs is the real culprit.

Vipoid
06-12-2014, 15:23
I think another aspect is that a lot of people seem to want to use Jump troops to deep strike.

However, in that case, you might as well just use a drop pod - which can come in automatically on turn 1 and has virtually none of the risks involved with deep striking normally.

Inquisitor Kallus
06-12-2014, 18:48
Jump pack troops that deep strike can redeploy again fairly quickly whereas foot troops arriving from a pod arent as quick. A drop pod deploying on turn one is commited whereas anything deepstriking after has the advantage of seeing the game from a later stage when deciding where to DS on the battlefield. Both have advantages and disadvantages, the Jump troops being less safe, but then they dont give away an extra VP like a unit with a drop pod would if both are destroyed.

insectum7
07-12-2014, 03:02
Jump pack troops that deep strike can redeploy again fairly quickly whereas foot troops arriving from a pod arent as quick. A drop pod deploying on turn one is commited whereas anything deepstriking after has the advantage of seeing the game from a later stage when deciding where to DS on the battlefield. Both have advantages and disadvantages, the Jump troops being less safe, but then they dont give away an extra VP like a unit with a drop pod would if both are destroyed.

Models committed via Drop Pod on turn one are usually not around very long. :)

But they do deploy very fast, esp. with Combat Squads and a 6" disembark gets a huge spread if you need it. Deep Striking jumpers just get a run.

AngryAngel
07-12-2014, 05:26
Deep striking Jump Marines often just leads to a dead or useless jump pack squad. Your best bet is just about always to jump them up the board.

Firaxin
07-12-2014, 06:52
No no no. Space Marines quite clearly = Knights, and bikes = horses. There's plenty of parallels like this in 40k. Guard = peasants/foot infantry. Orks = barbarians/orcs. Elder = exotic easterners/elves. And ever and on.


I disagree. In what way are they at all like knights? Their closest WHFB comparison would be Vampires, not Bretonnians.

Besides, 40k is not just a reskin of WHFB, and shame on anyone who tries to shoehorn it into being such.

Harwammer
07-12-2014, 07:49
I believe the poster meant they are comparable to historical mounted knights.

They are super speedy, super strong, super well armoured.

Not Applicable
07-12-2014, 08:09
The extra toughness for bikers I understand. A big armoured dood is going to be even tougher when mounted on a big armoured bike. It's not as though all that armoured faring he's tucked behind is going to be cruicial to the performance of the bike should it get hit by incoming shots.

As for assault marines, it's just a pity they cant jump in movement as well as assault like the raven guard do.

TheBearminator
07-12-2014, 11:06
So. Nobody had any examples of other unit types getting nice buffs over the years? Ordnance vehicles are still my best contribution. Move and fire + better hit rate. All of the blast marker back to full strength. And the illogical indirect sniper barrages.

ehlijen
07-12-2014, 11:41
Rapid fire weapons got better. Used to be 12" 1 shot only back in the day. Then they gained rapid shot even when moving and then they gained long range even when moving and then the Tau ones gained +3" rapid fire range. All while points costs were going down.

But that doesn't really matter in the age of spammable heavy weapons and AV12+ vehicles.

Vaktathi
07-12-2014, 11:45
So. Nobody had any examples of other unit types getting nice buffs over the years? Ordnance vehicles are still my best contribution. Move and fire + better hit rate. All of the blast marker back to full strength. And the illogical indirect sniper barrages.
Lets not forget however the changes to Leman Russ tanks from Lumbering Behemoth to the current "Heavy" rule and how that has largely left most Ordnance bearing Leman Russ tanks off of tables (especially as the basic LRBT stayed the same price while almost all the others went down massively, except the only other Ordnance Russ, the Demolisher, which got *more* expensive) or at the very least not taking any of the upgrade options available.

That said, Ordnance weapons in general have improved over time, but most still remain somewhat awkward and highly situational. The Leman Russ ordnance platforms deal with the issues above, half the other IG ordnance platforms got removed from the codex while the Bassy still has its absurdly long minimum range and the Manticore has lost most of its anti-tank effectiveness since 5th edition with the changes to vehicles, Defilers can't make use of their Ordnance weapon and their secondary weapons/assault potential at the same time, Vindicators serve a very specific niche use, etc.

Mandragola
07-12-2014, 20:50
I think that it's kind of absurd to give bikers relentless. It's particularly a problem with grav guns, because they are salvo. So this is supposedly a difficult gun to aim, which requires some kind of setting up. A guy on foot kind of struggles, but meanwhile his mate can ride around on a motorbike firing it one-handed with 3 shots at double the range the guy on foot can? Well that's just nonsense. It's particularly stupid to charge the guy on foot the same price for the gun as the guy on a bike, because the guy on a bike has, in effect, a far better weapon.

Add on to that the fact that characters really like riding on bikes because they get better toughness, and you've got a recipe for why bikes do so well. This is especially the case for marine characters who want to get into cc and don't want to have to buy a land raider. The bike is a fairly trivial amount of extra points even if you just got the +1T, but on top of that you get immune to pinning, much faster movement, and even a gun to play with.

Freman Bloodglaive
08-12-2014, 06:33
Bikes have relentless because bikes are an odd mix of vehicle and infantry.

In third I recall only the bike mounted weapons being affected, but Chaos could bike mount their plasma guns while loyalists could only hand hold them. Subsequently the relentless rule was extended to cover the hand held weapon also.

naloth
08-12-2014, 17:20
Yes, dropping Relentless is logical. Shooting becomes a trade off with assaulting with the rapid fire weapons. Salvo weapons get reduced firepower. Heavy weapons (Shock Attack Gun!) aren't easily used while you're riding around on a bike. Attack Bikes (sidecar, passenger firing) should be able to fire a heavy weapon on the move without penalty, but the guy driving shouldn't be able to do more than he could do on foot.

I have mixed feelings about better saves or improving Toughness. From a fluff perspective, I don't see the need. From a mechanics point of view, if theywant to make them an upgrade over jump troopers, they just need to be costed accurately for their extra durability.

Marines are already about as well protected before they hop on a bike. Furthermore, Jinking (Dodging) for assault bikers is almost a free cover save since shooting is merely a bonus.

Konovalev
08-12-2014, 18:10
I disagree. In what way are they at all like knights? Their closest WHFB comparison would be Vampires, not Bretonnians.

Besides, 40k is not just a reskin of WHFB, and shame on anyone who tries to shoehorn it into being such.

Parallels is the keyword here. I'm not trying to shoehorn them together I'm pointing out parallels. Also I really don't see how you don't get that Space Marines are very like knights. They display their heraldry on their armor, they wear what is essentially full plate, and they are the "warrior caste" of humanity with a strong code of honor to their chapter and the Imperium. One of their chapters is even called Templar after the Knights Templar.

But about bikes. Why do they even have jink? If bikes have jink why not jump units? Jink has already been given to bikes, skimmers, and flyers(even if they're hovering/gliding). Furthermore, don't bikes also get Hammer of Wrath? They don't lose that by moving 12" but somehow jump units do.

If I remember right the only races that use bikes are Space Marines and Orks, while Eldar, Dark Eldar, jet bikes. So how bad would it be for Orks/SM if their bikes lost jink? For that matter, give orks their old dust cloud rule back if it hurts their bikes too much.

Freman Bloodglaive
08-12-2014, 21:51
Hammer of wrath represents a big heavy bike charging into someone. Jump packs only get it when they choose to use their jump packs to charge because (counter-intuitive though it is) a marine on foot doesn't charge hard enough to create the impact. Jump packs can't jink because the user doesn't really have controlled flight, they're just bouncing around the place. Flyers, skimmers and bikes are fast moving controlled units being able to weave and evade while in motion.

Bikes (especially White Scar bikes) are probably underpriced, but not by too much. Ravenwing bikes are overpriced. They are still paying more than Tactical Marines per model, and Tactical Marines aren't completely terrible at the moment. Their relentless rule only comes into effect when firing salvo and heavy weapons, and when assaulting after shooting. For the most part, point for point, bikes are bad assault units (although White Scars are a bit better) and one weapon isn't worth degrading the function of bikes over. Just don't give grav guns to Tactical squads.