Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2014 10:49:37 GMT -6
Putting new weapons into boxes means people have to buy new boxes just for weapons. Think, people would buy all new Ravagers (along with a new Ravager formation) so that the spare weapons can be spread around their army!! You're missing the dollar signs!! The beautiful, beautiful dollar signs!!! The issue with that is it requires new boxes and new molds. Both of which are rather pricey. GW also has to do something with all the boxes at the warehouse. As much as I think GW charges to much for their goods, I don't think they are money-grubbing. They need to do something to generate new revenue, so they will likely release 1-2 models no one has yet (or plastic finecast equivalents) with every release. Rather then re-packing the old with a little shiny bit, its more lucrative to just make a new kit.
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Sept 18, 2014 14:12:30 GMT -6
And to your point Joel, 7th edition (and honestly, most of 6th edition for that matter) isn't gunline armies hunkered down behind cover all game waiting for something without grenades to charge them (silly idiots, how dare they!).
Yes, some armies are still stuck on skyshield landing pads and aegis lines - but there are so. many. targets out there in midfield for a unit like incubi to go after, even without grenades. Plus, archons have plasma grenades, so an archon with incubi doesn't give a shit about that.
And in terms of archons and trueborn - i mean taking an archon with blaster and throwing him in with blasterborn. Cheap HQ, and even more anti-armor value. Yes, you have to be careful so you don't move 12 inches straight forward into open space on turn 1 and get blown up and kill your warlord, but DE players are skilled at that anyways.
I just don't like that succubi don't have any defensive options. T3 is so fragile, I want to give her a clone field or a shadow field. Instead, I have to settle for a venom blade or agoniser, and while cheap and effective in the context you've given, wyches of any type just aren't the way to go in 6th/7th. Unless you give 5 of them haywire and send them armor hunting.
|
|
|
Post by Joelercoaster on Sept 18, 2014 21:11:48 GMT -6
I fully agree that Succubi lack options in general... I really think that the Succubus especially deserves a 5++ dodge, with the 4++ in combat (bridging the gap nicely between Wyches and Lelith). I mean, when I think of a wych Succubus, I think of a gladiator master armed with 4-5 weapons, using one to dice an enemy, leaving it embedded with the death blow, drawing the next to take out the new victim in a new fashion... rinse and repeat. It's more fun that way.
On that note, I'd love to see more gear like the Clone Field to actually replace the Shadowfield... I mean, I love it, but... sometimes you just want something beyond the generic HQ.
And you're right... especially speaking from a DE perspective, we can often out-maneuver cover you're hiding behind for a beneficial charge. And why pick a fair fight? Let a tac squad attack first, they'll maybe drop one of ours before we butcher the squad. It's all about controlling the situation. More than anything I'm miffed that Tormentor Helms no longer have an in-game effect. They were part of what made Incubi Incubi for such a long time.
Wyches... well... I can legitimately say that the new vehicle chart does do a lot in their favor. I'd still like to see teh Dodge effective vs Overwatch (and apparently much of the DE interwebs community does, too), but... shrug. They don't have near the problem *getting* to combat as so many other armies, thanks to Raiders. And they're still decent at attrition, especially with a pain token. But... venoms. I mean, they're (closer to) point and shoot. And it works. It's def an easier thing to get right, on a list of hard things to get right.
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Sept 18, 2014 21:29:25 GMT -6
I agree with everything you just said dude. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Sept 18, 2014 21:29:40 GMT -6
Second post in a
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Sept 18, 2014 21:29:50 GMT -6
Row
|
|
Andy
initiate
Posts: 219
|
Post by Andy on Sept 19, 2014 9:05:07 GMT -6
...GW also has to do something with all the boxes at the warehouse...Rather then re-packing the old with a little shiny bit, its more lucrative to just make a new kit. GW single biggest expense is their full colour packaging. Printing glossy cardboard is insanely expensive. And the real problem is that the boxes don't go down in cost the more product you sell. The other issue is that GW buy back all the "outdated" product from retailers shelves. So repacking is a crazy cost. Boxed product at the warehouse, boxes at the factory and everything on retailers shelves has to hit a critically low point. If a repack is in the works it is preferable to hold a codex in limbo whist stimulating the current boxes with a splash release. Think the Space Marine flyers before their repacks. The other way to push a current box is to leak a price rise. There was a bit of this with one of the Necron books.
|
|
|
Post by Joelercoaster on Sept 19, 2014 10:45:36 GMT -6
Interesting. In my personal experience, nearly every store I've used in the past has had a mix of old and new boxes (granted, at that point the old stuff is often discounted or just naturally cheaper)... but I've never heard of them sending back old product.
At least the shiny cardboard could be reused. Just shove new sprues in them. In theory. Heh. Yeah. Shove it in. More, More!
....
wut?
At least since the Venom already has the 2nd splinter cannon piece, the option won't go away. It will just be made prohibitively expensive... which is pretty naff, considering you're basically choosing long range anti infantry and short ranged anti-tank (venom with blaster) or long range anti-tank with short ranged anti-infantry (Raider with warriors).
It's a pretty fair trade in effectiveness... and yeah, the AI version is cheaper, but that's because err body needs all the tanks. All. Of. The. Tanks.
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Sept 19, 2014 11:06:59 GMT -6
I don't think the dual SC venom will be prohibitively expensive, but I expect it to go up slightly. Or not, who knows - I still think being HP2 and AV10 is a huge disadvantage. Being able to be taken down by BOLT PISTOLS should be counteracted by added power. I think the trade off works well right now, I don't think it needs fixing (plus, how often do you see venom lists winning tournaments or even placing high? Oh never? Because we're actually not afraid of 2HP open topped AV10 vehicles? Ok thought so).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 14:34:10 GMT -6
I don't think the dual SC venom will be prohibitively expensive, but I expect it to go up slightly. Or not, who knows - I still think being HP2 and AV10 is a huge disadvantage. Being able to be taken down by BOLT PISTOLS should be counteracted by added power. I think the trade off works well right now, I don't think it needs fixing (plus, how often do you see venom lists winning tournaments or even placing high? Oh never? Because we're actually not afraid of 2HP open topped AV10 vehicles? Ok thought so). This kind of balance thinking is a dangerous in 40k I think. Its true that DE, and in some ways Eldar, are a fragile force and that fire power should compensate for their lack of durability. That being said though, in a very alpha strike kind of game like 40k, fire power will always trump durability. A vehicle could be AV 8, but that doesn't matter is it goes first and shoots 40+ shots at anything that could threaten it. I suppose in short, what I'm saying is that it seems like durability and firepower are seen as fair trades, but they really aren't. An army with high excessively fire power (Tau, DE, Craftworld Eldar, ect) is almost guaranteed to win turn 1 alpha strikes. Durability is a serious factor, but I don't know that it justifies an extremely powerful (ranged in particular) offensive capability while durability suffers from low mobility in addition to lower fire power. Just my opinion after having played three "durable" power armored forces.
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Sept 19, 2014 15:15:16 GMT -6
Since when is DE (and eldar for that matter) a powerful Alpha Strike army? The game situation is always changing, every game is going to be different, and every army you face and the player who's playing it is going to be different. And all are determinant factors to who wins the game.
What you're talking about (going first helps you win) isn't anything to do with alpha striking or DE being better at it than anyone else - its about the ruleset they created. Shooting > assault, Vehicles > infantry. So if you have vehicles and shooting, and go first, then you've got a huge advantage no matter which army you play.
That being said, in any given game, my 4 venoms could just as easily be downed on turn one by anything that isn't a lasgun as put out 48 shots to plink 6 unsaved wounds on some space marines.
That's why the firepower has to compensate for the fragile nature of the army - if it didn't, then we'd lose every game even if we HAD the first turn. At least now, in this edition, everyone has a shot. Every army that goes first has the potential to cripple an opponent, provided you know how to deploy and the threat range of your models; that's not a DE specific issue with the game.
|
|
|
Post by Russell on Sept 19, 2014 21:34:20 GMT -6
8===D
|
|
mike
Butts
Posts: 628
|
Post by mike on Sept 20, 2014 1:05:48 GMT -6
Gotta file that down into a spike, Russel. 8===>
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Sept 20, 2014 6:41:15 GMT -6
And add a bunch of spikes along the shaft too:
8={={={=>
|
|
|
Post by Joelercoaster on Sept 20, 2014 6:59:45 GMT -6
Good thing I hadn't showered yet.
While I really like the current codex art, that Archon is just... yes. Here's hoping my hook-up can order posters of the new art and I can (maybe) find a place on my wall for this guy.
Must.... Play... Eldar...
|
|