Man, what bugs me about the Deathstrike rules...

[Commissar Lewis]

I was reading through my codex again today, and what bugs me about the Deathstrike missile's rules is its blast size. The descriptions build it up as a Weapon of Mass Destruction, when it's kinda missing the Mass Destruction; it's more Minor Destruction. 3" -6" really isn't befitting a giant missile IMO. When a massive ICBM has only the blast radius of a Leman Russ tank shell, someone in the Munitorium screwed up.

Now I fully understand it's for game balance purposes, as having a Baneblade cannon-size template is broken. The ignoring cover saves is good and the fact it can just barely touch a vehicle and use full strength is rather nice, but still though...

I dunno, do they Apoc rules for the Deathstrike? If so, that'd likely be more my style. I was reminded of this issue after seeing that video review of the kit (which is totally awesome) and I wanted one merely for the sake of having a WMD. Nothing makes one feel feared like a ICBM.

Also, I don't know if this is the right forum to post this rant/discussion/whatever, so if it isn't, then BoLS admins, please relocate it to where it is.

[Dorsai]

First of all, it a 3" + d3" radius. The large blast marker is only 5" in diameter. So the deathstrike will have minimum radius of 4". Or 8" across. It is possible to have a 12" diameter. It is also applying its full strength to the entire area of the blast. So even if a vehicle is not hit by the center of the blast, it still suffers a hit from the full S10. And as no cover saves are allowed, it will destroy anybody hit by it. With AP1, only invulns will save people.

At first I was like you as well, then I really started reading the rules. I realized that this missile has the potential to really blow a hole in enemy lines. Would I deploy one in a regular sized game field? Probably not. But some like a large field that is three time the normal length, perhaps. As I would have the chance of hitting something that nobody could do anything about. I see this as having the most impact in Apoc games than regular matches.

[Commissar Lewis]

Oh damn, my bad, misread the rules then. Heh, what wonders Benadryl does for one's reading comprehension, eh?

[AbusePuppy]

Also remember that the Deathstrike is an Ordnance Barrage weapon, so it always hits side armor on vehicles and rolls 2d6 for penetration, keeping the highest. And it never allows cover saves, as per its own rules.

A poor scatter roll can screw you with it, but let it not be said that the Deathstrike doesn't possess the capacity to deal out damage comparable to its reputation.

[DarkLink]

What sort of moron deploys ICBMs on the front lines?

[TSINI]

What sort of moron deploys ICBMs on the front lines?

somebody who wants to see the whites of his enemy's eyes before totally and utterly destroying them to an atomic level.

[Commissar Lewis]

Yep, nothing says "total and utter WTF-OVERKILL" like shooting your foe with a ICBM at point-blank range!

[Bean]

It is true that the Deathstrike's one shot is very powerful, but this doesn't change either the fact that the unit is not very good or the fact that the execution of its concept in the rules is almost unbelievably asinine.

The Manticore, now: that's a very fine artillery piece.

[Porty1119]

Burt the turtle says nuclear bombs are fun!
Sadly, no nuke on the Deathstrike. Makes me sad. Why can''t the rules just say 'drop a napalm canister on the table and light it on fire when this thing fires?'

[Commissar Lewis]

It is true that the Deathstrike's one shot is very powerful, but this doesn't change either the fact that the unit is not very good or the fact that the execution of its concept in the rules is almost unbelievably asinine.

The Manticore, now: that's a very fine artillery piece.


As for it not being very good, it's rather subjective. Against, say, a rhino wall, it'd be pretty decent. But yeah, in small scale 40k games it's a bit unnecessary. Still, though, how many other armies get ICBMs?

[Bean]

It's not that subjective. Honestly, if it could launch turn 1, it would be pretty good. But it can't. It launches on some random turn. You have very little control over when, and it's not very difficult to prevent it from launching at all. It's one of the few tanks that's likely to die without actually doing anything at all.

Its one shot is very good. If I knew I was pretty much always going to get it when I wanted it, I might bring the Deathstrike. But, you don't. Its power doesn't even come close to making up for its almost ludicrous lack of reliability, and that's basically not the result of a subjective analysis. It's just an estimate of how much it's likely to do, given the limitations on when it can fire.

[AbusePuppy]

It isn't good. It's awesome. Other armies wish they got stuff that totally sweet and cool. Tyranids? When they get trash, it's stuff like Old One Eye and Pyrovore. Oooh, he can make a couple extra I1 attacks! Oooh, he has a heavy flamer! How unique and interesting!

But Guard? Guard get a missile to blow up the world. I don't care what anyone else thinks, that's the best thing in the codex.

Oh, and anyone who thinks that the Deathstrike is a silly weapon should look up the old Cold War-era plans for things like the Davey Crockett, nuclear land mines, and Pluto missile system. Truth is always stranger than fiction.

[Commissar Lewis]

Well, Bean, I'm going to pull a line from The Dude here:

"yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man."

[Bean]

Well, Bean, I'm going to pull a line from The Dude here:

"yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man."

Sure, but all that does is illustrate that you don't know what the word "opinion" means. =P

Seriously. Lots of people simply don't understand what the words subjective and objective really mean. It's not a crime--they're fairly involved concepts--but you really ought to make an effort to use them correctly if you're going to use them. You obviously haven't.

It's not a matter of opinion. I might be right, and I might be wrong, but either way, it's a question of fact--objective fact--not a question of opinion or some subjective matter. The statement of mine to which you object is not a statement of opinion. It is a statement of fact. If you disagree with it, say that you disagree and then tell me why. Dismissing it as an opinion is simply incorrect.

[Commissar Lewis]

Alright, I'm rather sleep-deprived at the moment, but really are we going to get in an argument over this? So maybe the Deathstrike isn't an optimum unit. It has a cool factor, which I like. It does have a number of flaws, but having an ICBM as a unit is pretty cool.

However how good it is depends on the situation, really. In Apoc games it'd be pretty damn good, especially against groups of vehicles or a green tide formation.

[Bean]

We don't have to argue about it. I don't really care whether you like the Deathstrike or not.

What bothered me is that you dismissed my assertion on the grounds that it is an opinion, even though it is not, in fact, an opinion. As long as you're not going to continue asserting that my position is an opinion, I'm willing to drop it.

But, if you want to argue about the Deathstrike, then I'd point out that it's not really good in Apocalypse, either. In fact, very, very few things remain good in Apocalypse, since most of the Apocalypse-only items so obviously surpass the normal stuff.

Almost nothing is as good as warhounds, reavers, warlords, hierophants, or most of the flyers, point for point, and that certainly includes the Deathstrike (which, in turn, renders the Deathstrike along with everything else in that category bad.)

Though it's true that the size of Apocalypse games (both the size of the table and the size of the armies) makes the Deathstrike a better choice in apocalypse than it is in regular games, it still isn't a good choice. You'd be better off with a Thunderbolt for 20 more points, a Hellblade (for, what, 35 less?) hands down.

A warhound is far, far better than five Deathstrikes.

[Hugz4Genestealers]

Yeah, but I'd still feel really cool bringing a battery of ICBM's to a fight...

[Commissar Lewis]

True, Bean, you do make some good points as to why the Deathstrike isn't the best choice.

However, though, it's one of those "style over substance" situations. And besides, how many other codices' bad options are as cool as a frickin' ICBM?

It's a choice for the lulz, really. Sure you can max one's HS choices with Russes, but sometime breaking a Deathstrike out can throw off one's opponent. After all if they are seldom taken, people don't know what to expect. They could throw a lot at it, only for it to do nothing and thus provide a good distraction, or the can ignore it and it wipes out a huge chunk of their force.

But, your stance on the subject is valid, though. Sorry about declaring it an opinion - that's just my saving throw I use to avoid online arguments as they often devolve into ugly messes; although you were pretty respectable about it.

[Bean]

It does have some undeniable style, I'll give you that.