Don't the eldar get Frag-Krak grenades in one, programable packgae so they can select the one they need in the moment?
From Left to Right: Frag, Krack, Smoke, Screamer
Melta Bomb
A Different Breed (Warhammer 29K)
It seems we have not yet unlocked tandem-charge grenades.
RandomTechPriest
He Who Steals Toasters
I question the usefulness of Krak grenades in our formations. Our infantry Sublasters should have equal or greater anti-armor then a standard Krak grenade. I recommend giving every unit 1 or even 2 equipment slots worth of Frag grenades to allow them to easily deal with hoards which our Sublasters struggle with.
- Pronouns
- Reader
this is very basic grenades tech that we just developed with bonesinger. more advanced options will require research.
I'd suggest Melta weapons. just as good as detering hoards, helps clear out Ork spores too.
RandomTechPriest
He Who Steals Toasters
True, but have you considered having everyone in a detachment being able to throw out 50 grenades each?
- Pronouns
- Reader
Have you considered them lobbing those same grenades out of an open topped transport as they fly overhead?
Also I think they would need specialist armor to carry that many.
Though we have both plasma weapons and basic grenades already, so it shouldn't take much to unlock it.
Professor Vesca
Good News Everyone!
Grenades can be thrown over obstructions, into structures and vehicles, and otherwise tossed without exposing the person throwing it to direct enemy fire. They can be used for traps, or to flush enemies out of cover where they can be more easily shot.
The usefulness of the grenade is not in its killing power, it just needs some amount of it to be useful, unless it's a smoke grenade. Considering grenades in terms of their destructive potential or comparing them to guns is, in my opinion, a mistake. That's not the niche they should be filling.
Making an actual blob is detrimental to your health if the enemy has artillery, but concentrating a large portion of your mobile assets for an assault relying on local superiority to punch through is pretty textbook.
- Pronouns
- Reader
Mobile arrowheads would work best in my experience. The majority of 3 squads(max number of squads per detachment is 3) in our iterant light grav chassis(for now) with two squad members on jet bikes playing escort and guarding it's flank.
RandomTechPriest
He Who Steals Toasters
The Vau-Vulkesh tank meta is going to be absolutely infuriating. Invisible, flying tanks with armor and shielding penetrating weaponry. Who the hell balanced this shit?
Last edited:
Good question. Blame Tzeentch.
Why?
because the mollusk probably did it for his "just as planned" shtick.
RandomTechPriest
He Who Steals Toasters
Tzeentch being in charge of balancing games makes far to much sense.
Okay, to expand on cost-per-slot economy to find out how much mechanization would work better for us. I'm assuming bodies don't cost EP, and ranged+ weapons are equivalent to their system slot costs (e.g. 1 vehicle weapon = 6 ranged)
Insights:
1) mechanized infantry is in the same ballpark cost-wise as properly done tanks. Can be a bit more cheap or more expensive. With a fully mechanized doctrine (which I really don't see us diverging from except maybe for a craftworld defense militia) we should use whatever makes more sense tactically because costs of fielding infantry/tanks are not a big factor.
2) notable exception could be terminator-equivalents with integrated weapon hardpoints. They can bring a lot of melee or ranged dakka for cheap.
3) jetbikes would be a very good weapon platform, very fast, cheap and better protected than just a trooper. We should design one from scratch sometimes.
4) There's not much point to selecting cheap weapons when expensive would work better. E.g. vehicle weapon slot on Fata Morgana vehicle slot implicitly costs about 48 EP, and the difference between fielding the cheapest weapon in that slot (Lascannon, 20+48=68 EP) and most expensive non-exotic (grav thruster lance, 65+48=113 EP) is 1.6x and not 3x as implied by just bare weapon costs.
5) Starhammer, cloudbust and razorwind are obsolete. Too high costs per slot and not that well protected.
| Type | With ranged weapon | With heavy weapon | With Light Grav Transport attached |
| Brigandine | 2 | 0.6 | +7.2 |
| WGV | 6 | 2 | +7.2 |
| Ithilmar | 12.5 | 5.8 | +7.2 |
| Assault HPA with +2 melee slots | 2.3 | 1.5 | +7.2 |
| Devastator HPA with +Heavy slot | 1.8 | 1.3 | +7.2 |
| Vehicle | Cost per slot |
| Razorwind | 11 |
| Cloudburst | 15 |
| Starhammer | 14 |
| Star Anvil | 11.5 |
| Fata Morgana (projected) | 8 |
| Light Grav Iteration (projected) | 7.2 |
| Jetbike iteration (projected), no holofield, vgw rider, +2 ranged slots | 5.5 |
| Jetbike iteration (projected), holofield, vgw rider | 10 |
Insights:
1) mechanized infantry is in the same ballpark cost-wise as properly done tanks. Can be a bit more cheap or more expensive. With a fully mechanized doctrine (which I really don't see us diverging from except maybe for a craftworld defense militia) we should use whatever makes more sense tactically because costs of fielding infantry/tanks are not a big factor.
2) notable exception could be terminator-equivalents with integrated weapon hardpoints. They can bring a lot of melee or ranged dakka for cheap.
3) jetbikes would be a very good weapon platform, very fast, cheap and better protected than just a trooper. We should design one from scratch sometimes.
4) There's not much point to selecting cheap weapons when expensive would work better. E.g. vehicle weapon slot on Fata Morgana vehicle slot implicitly costs about 48 EP, and the difference between fielding the cheapest weapon in that slot (Lascannon, 20+48=68 EP) and most expensive non-exotic (grav thruster lance, 65+48=113 EP) is 1.6x and not 3x as implied by just bare weapon costs.
5) Starhammer, cloudbust and razorwind are obsolete. Too high costs per slot and not that well protected.
Actually that curse may really be an own goal for nurgle. Because now with it being openly known to the eldar Isha can draw on the accumulated wrath of 'angry mother at her babies being killed' from across time and space.
- Location
- Utrecht
Before nurgle was murdering her grandbabies in front of her, and she was powerless to stop him. It was a cause for despair. Nurgle plan was that eventually she'd lose count, go numb and stop caring.
Now that she has hope, every death is more fuel on the fire that will steel her resistance and strengthen her resolve. I can imagine her repeating "one day, you will pay" like a mantra for every nascent soul she feels wither.
Last edited:
- Location
- Germany
Overall pretty nice analysis.
Some stuff that falls kind of to the side:
- It's much comparably cheaper to play defense onion with vehicles compared to infantry
- Vehicles in general are much faster than infantry, to get infantry up to speed you need to invest into transporters
- We can assume a general increase in overall firepower as we go higher up the weapon slot chain.
-- That likely isn't linear with the slot cost.
The reason that infantry is need is that they have a few jobs that they are needed for.
- Taking/clearing Buildings
- Dense Terrain where medium chassis+ vehicles can't navigate/drive
-- Example clearing out a voidship/installation, tunnel fighting, some urban environments.
-- + General Infiltration + Assassination.
Our vehicles can do a pretty damn good job as scouts and can be used for Assassinations (vehicle scale Fatebender cannon should do a pretty good job a lot of the time) in a lot of situations.
Also, something to note for general detachment/warhost building.
We will need a lot of Anti Air be that our own aircraft to keep the skies clear or good ground based AA best a mix of the two, because aircraft/transports are with our most likely speed to be the only enemy reinforcement that could actually make it to the fight in time before it is likely over.
Last edited:
Or Graviton Thrusters. Striking from ambush against unsuspecting targets ought to be one of the best use-cases for those, since it gives plenty of time to identify and target vital points.
RandomTechPriest
He Who Steals Toasters
Graviton Thrusters short range require them to be very close to execute the ambush however. While it is possible to get within those ranges, especially with a holo-field, doing so is not always possible or preferable.
Starting with heavy version they're long range, comparable to other lances.
Yeah. Once you reach the larger scale Thruster Lances, they've got standard range, absurd penetration, and bypass most shields; their weakness is that they've low hitstrength without some kind of called target/crit mechanic, and even with it they're going to be very aim-dependent.
Fatesever Cannon are autocannon that auto-hit and auto-crit anything without shields or very heavy armor, and have some degree of indirect fire capability.
They would actually pair very well for the assassin role, hitting different kinds of targets and having different ways of bypassing defenses and line-of-sight limitations. Fata Morgana probably works fine for the chassis, but I'd really want better sensors and perhaps some kind of stealth upgrade before trying to complete a design.
Fatesever Cannon are autocannon that auto-hit and auto-crit anything without shields or very heavy armor, and have some degree of indirect fire capability.
They would actually pair very well for the assassin role, hitting different kinds of targets and having different ways of bypassing defenses and line-of-sight limitations. Fata Morgana probably works fine for the chassis, but I'd really want better sensors and perhaps some kind of stealth upgrade before trying to complete a design.
Are we sure Thruster Lances bypass shields? The QM has stated that Point Singularity Projectors do not bypass shields because they fire a projectile and the Thrusters are described as firing a beam.
Edit:
As stated by the QM the reason for why many Grav-Weapons can bypass shields is because they aren't directly firing a projective, rather they project a field of gravity that affects the target like in these descriptions:
Graviton Thrusters Excerpt said:
Edit:
As stated by the QM the reason for why many Grav-Weapons can bypass shields is because they aren't directly firing a projective, rather they project a field of gravity that affects the target like in these descriptions:
Imploder said:
Amplifier said:
Vibration Weapon said:
My guess is that Sheers also fall under the category of Grav-Weapons that don't bypass shields since they are stated to project "blades" of gravity:Sweeper said:
Sheer said:
Last edited: