Wych Cult. What do they need.

I think a Leman Russ is 10 in the rear so yes.

It's also a huge part of why I'm so in favor of rending. We got so wrapped up in the AV12 case that we didn't pause to consider the overall impact quality of life adjustment rending provides. We were so focused on the 5.5% chance of causing a single glance to a land raider that we didn't consider that it completely changes the interaction between Wyches and lesser transports/tanks. Currently we either need to hit a 16.6% drug before the game starts or survive until turn 4 in order to reliably harm an AV10 vehicle. Yes the squad can use 2 plasma grenades a turn in such a case, but the fact that we become innately capable of tearing such vehicles open bare handed turn 4 highlights such weapons inadequacies.

If wyches had rending or turn 2 furious charge they would always be able to clear vehicles. That they can't should not be considered an immutable fact for the unit but instead an unfortunate side effect of our publishing date. I'm also not suggesting that wyches should be straight up tank hunters, I fully accept that this is precisely the roll of SGTs with haywire grenades in this edition, but Haywire should not be the go to for clearing out exposed AV10, and if turn 5 actually mattered it wouldn't be, punches would be despite all the fluff arguments presented to the contrary.

To tie back in to my first statement the flaw with just speeding up PFP is the drop pod. For that reason and that reason alone AV12 must be possible, hence my shift to total agreement on rending.

@Betraytheworld

Currently a Primarch is WS7.5 BS7.5 S6.5 T6.5 W6 I6 A4.5 2+/4++ and the Primarch rule which is Fleet, Fearless, Fear, IWND, Eternal Warior, and Adamantium Will. Carrying an AP1/2 CC weapon. Whether that translates to 40k will come out with gathering storm 3. [.5 indicates an almost equal spread between that value and the next one up over the current 16 primarch rules] Also almost all of them move a foot.

I pretty much agree with all that. Thanks for putting it together in a concise way that people might more easily relate to. I didn't push the quality of life point on AV10 because there were what felt like so many naysayers who didn't think we should be able to hurt vehicles at all, that I thought it would invite too many sources of criticism and overwhelm me with so many people to respond to.

As for Lelith: It sounds like she might need a complete redesign to hang with the primarchs, but I would like to see her power level be in that range. How much do the primarchs typically cost in 30k?

Well bad Leman Russ, the temporary rules for Leman Russ that were put out for free when he got a model as a placeholder before Inferno comes out like next week or something, cost 400 pts.

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/PDF/fw_warscrolls/Leman%20Russ%20Rules.pdf

In 30K there are .5 statline differentiations?  Essentially twice the number of degrees of difference?  Or is that just the averages of all the Primarchs together representing say that some have 4 attacks and some have 5.

No, i'm a little vague. There is simply high variation and I used .5 as a placeholder value to suggest that the vast majority reside at the value immediately above and below this one with high variance. S6/T6 might be the most basic Primarch build in all actuality but there are enough S7 and/or T7 people that suggesting that previous statement as the standard seems wrong.

Wow, that was a lot of post in my night. Those are some insane stats. Then again with all the superheavies and gmc I guess they had to just to make the heroes not useless compared to them.
Now this might sound insane but I would rather not have such stats for lelith. I would like her to keep her stats except ws and a not to far from the rest. Give her some special rules to make her more in line with these powerhouses. Make her in some way depending on speed (initiative and ws) not thoughness and brute force. She is a scalpel, not a club.

Oh of course not, nor do I think she'd need a similar statline. Lelith is the epitome of what it is to be eldar, and fragility is a large part of that. She needs offensive power not survivability beyond a reroll for her dodge, or something like that. She really just needs fleshbane and maybe instant death.

amorrowlyday wrote:

Oh of course not, nor do I think she'd need a similar statline. Lelith is the epitome of what it is to be eldar, and fragility is a large part of that. She needs offensive power not survivability beyond a reroll for her dodge, or something like that. She really just needs fleshbane and maybe instant death.

Fleshbane, shred, instant death, and a special rule that ignores invulnerable saves!

amorrowlyday wrote:

Ynneadwraith wrote:

Couple of clarifications first. I don't think I said that it should necessarily be -1A in base contact. If you believe that a blanket -1A for a Shardnet would be a better justification of the price, and offer more options for varied unit tactics then that was what I was intending anyway.

Such a limitation would negate a call for multiple which is a foundational point to your argument of a variety of viable weapons.

First off I'd like to say thankyou, your overall post has been very helpful

Sorry, but that's not a foundational point in my argument. I'm not sure if what I was saying was unclear.

My argument regarding Wych Weapons in general is that the function of each Wych Weapon should be distinct, and provide Wyches with a different utility against different possible targets, broadening their tactical use as generalist troops.

I was intending the Shardnet to provide -1A across the entire enemy unit, (possibly per Shardnet if you like), down to a minimum of 1.

Thus, it would be both useful to take a Shardnet because it would reduce the incoming attacks against your fragile Wyches, helping you survive in combat, but also potentially fruitless against the majority of enemies to take more than 1 (given that the points would be wasted on anything with 2A or less).

It would give an incentive to take 1 per squad, but leave the door open for the squad to take other options.

This would give @BetrayTheWorld his wish of being able to field the different Wych Weapons within a squad, while still letting them do different things.

amorrowlyday wrote:

Ynneadwraith wrote:

Apologies, but I'm confused somewhat about your argument regarding allies. In the first instance, you state 'at that point, why not just use Warlocks', and then go on to say 'isn't the point that we shouldn't feel like you need to take allies?'. Wouldn't the optimum solution to that be

This is a misrepresentation of their argument. The argument was actually that in order for a troops unit to have more or less universal access to fleshbane it would have to be so overcosted as to be untenable in order for I presume the community at large to accept it. The warlocks observation is simply a point of notice that there both is a stated price point for a fleshbane dude, and that the body attached to it provides more overall utility if they are anywhere close in price. This observation is wholly within the realm of reasonable to be held by someone with a stated aim of 'isn't the point that we shouldn't feel like you need to take allies?'

Thankyou for clarifying this

amorrowlyday wrote:

Ynneadwraith wrote:

Also, I'd like some clarification on why you believe that Fleshbane for a Wych Weapon would be in any way overpowered? At face value, I suppose 15pts for 2 Fleshbane attacks might be considered powerful against GMCs, but considering that a squad of 9 Wyches, plus a Raider to get them where they need to go, that's a lot of points investment for 6 Fleshbane attacks that still need to get through a 3+ with FnP.

This is a SIGNIFICANTLY better point of reference for the previous paragraph as while I do understand Betrays argument I reject the fundamental premise: that GW cares what it's playerbase outside whomever a given work is written for thinks. I fully accept that something as short sighted as fleshbane wyches at 10ppm could absolutely happen because GW damn the spehs maehreens.

Thankyou for articulating this. Something that was running through my mind was 'so what if the other players think Fleshbane on 3/10 Wyches is OP, it's not exactly game-breaking in a world of Scatbikes and Wraithknights'.

It's not as if our codex as a whole couldn't stomach one squad that's slightly OP and still be an understrength codex.

However, more difficult is the internal balancing between Wyches/Kabalites and Wyches/Bloodbrides.

amorrowlyday wrote:

Ynneadwraith wrote:

Lastly, I don't quite follow the logical leap that a Fleshbane Wych Weapon must be overcosted in order not to be OP. Could you please walk me through the logic of that assumption?

I completely agree and second this. Though then reject everything everyone has said as I firmly believe fleshbane AND rending as squad wide USRS makes an excellent differentiator between wyches and bloodbrides.

Now that's an interesting distinction. Wyches more generally killy, and Bloodbrides specialised for tearing down big monsters.

That makes the fluff-bunny in me very happy

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

In your example, getting the fleshbane weapon costs 15 points on top of the wych that costs 10. That's 25 points. My point was that, at that price level, you may as well be paying 35 points and getting a warlock that has fleshbane, a 4++ both in AND out of combat, WS4 and psychic powers.

Thankyou, I understand it was a counter-example now. However, '25pts' was a number I pulled out of thin air. I am interested to see if there is, as Tonguekutter put it, a Goldilocks Point where 7Rending/3Fleshbane Wyches are points-efficient against GMCs compared to 7Rending/3wound-reroll Wyches.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

But regardless, it doesn't really matter. I don't want to keep going back and forth on the issue. The primary point of contention is whether they should be able to hurt vehicles or not. I think they should, you think otherwise. I feel like a lot of this stuff is just over-complicating the fix.

We've moved forward from that point of contention. It's occurred to me that the discussion of whether unenhanced Wyches should be able to harm vehicles or not is based on interpretation of the fluff. There's no real facts that can be brought to bare against it.

The only fact that can be is that our army lacks a generalised low-level anti-tank threat. I believe this is the function of Haywire Grenades on troops squads, hence why I am happy with the idea that standard Wyches should have access to HWG.

I posited that we should move on with the much more interesting discussion of what should be done with Wych Weapons, on the understanding that Wyches should be provided with squad-wide Rending/Bladestorm.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Even if they get the bladestorm version you recommended instead of rending, the rerolls to wound will synergize so well with bladestorm/rending that I doubt the fleshbane weapon would be worth taking, were it even an option. Because it would have to be priced in the area you mentioned(15 points) whereas someone could just get rerolls to wound with their rending weapon for 5 points. And higher than 5 points for a weapon that does nothing more than let you reroll to wound is too expensive, because at 10 points you could just buy another wych, providing another full compliment of attacks, which is better than rerolling failed wounds. Do you see what I'm saying? There's an interconnected web of cost vs. benefit analysis that makes pricing of certain things HAVE to be in certain areas in order to be balanced, while simultaneously preventing them from being good purchases at that price point against the other options available.

Illustration:
Wych w/ 15 point fleshbane weapon = 25 points
2 Wyches w/Rending + reroll weapon = 30 points

Thankyou. I understand the logic behind pricing the re-roll wound weapon at 5pts.

Unfortunately, I do not understand why a Fleshbane weapon would have to be priced uncompetitively (~15pts).

I understand that there is a web of interconnected cost-benefit. However, I still do not understand the logical leap that there is no place in that interconnected web for a Fleshbane weapon providing utility against GMCs. Could you please demonstrate this?

While I think I now prefer @amorrowlyday 's idea of Fleshbane on Bloodbrides to differentiate them in role from Wyches, making the specific example moot, I feel that the overarching argument of whether or not Wych Weapons should do different things would be well placed by some explanation of why it is not possible in this interconnected cost-benefit web.

amorrowlyday wrote:

If wyches had rending or turn 2 furious charge they would always be able to clear vehicles. That they can't should not be considered an immutable fact for the unit but instead an unfortunate side effect of our publishing date. I'm also not suggesting that wyches should be straight up tank hunters, I fully accept that this is precisely the roll of SGTs with haywire grenades in this edition, but Haywire should not be the go to for clearing out exposed AV10, and if turn 5 actually mattered it wouldn't be, punches would be despite all the fluff arguments presented to the contrary.

Thankyou for explaining that. Could you help explain a little further?

Why is it that Haywire should not be the go-to for clearing AV10? If individual Wyches/Kabalites could purchase them for Xpts, would that not provide the general low-level A/T ability that our army needs?

I think the opinion of the 'not fluffy' side of Rending is the feeling that no unaugmented S3 unit should be capable of damaging an AV10 vehicle in hand-to-hand. PfP is an augmentation, as are combat drugs, so I am perfectly happy with Wyches being able to hand-to-hand tanks at that point.

Ultimately though, I do believe that the fluff arguments will likely be circular. I am very interested in the 'general low-level anti-tank' argument though, and also how the discussion regarding differentiation between Wyches/Bloodbrides/Succubi/Lelith pans out

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As a closer, I'd like to thank everyone participating in this, and praise people on the decorum which has been held. So many online debates devolve rapidly into what basically amounts to sh*t-slinging. I haven't seen this here, and it's a credit to everyone involved.

I hope the testing through of people's ideas, logic and assumptions proves useful.

Ynneadwraith wrote:

Unfortunately, I do not understand why a Fleshbane weapon would have to be priced uncompetitively (~15pts).

Because 15 points for a fleshbane weapon on a troops-slot model wouldn't be viewed as overpriced by the community at large(including GW who'd make the final call on whether it's appropriate). You need to understand that fleshbane in 40k, just in general, is a very rare special ability, and doesn't exist on a SINGLE troop-slot model in all of 40k currently. The very few non-troops models that DO have it are not cheap. It's honestly not even that the fleshbane would perform better than rending+rerolls. Against many models, it wouldn't. It's just the perception that fleshbane is both rare and good, and therefore worth a lot that drives up the value.

Presumably, fleshbane is rare while poison is common to ensure that GW's precious GMC line stays universally tough. But regardless, you're talking about breaking the unwritten rule that no troops have access to fleshbane. So 15 points for a fleshbane weapon option would very likely be where GW would price such a thing, because it's NOT overpriced when looked at in a vacuum. It's just that it ends up being an inferior option when compared to the 5 point reroll weapon because the unit has rending(and hence, it's overpriced to US when compared to the alternative).

I'll take up the haywire question: Haywire can not be our go to for low AV removal because of our lack of access to sufficient attacks, and unless your taking up the fandex arguments I've seen for the wych guantlets to have haywire there will never be sufficient attacks for cost. Even 1 per body in the whole squad as suggested still amounts to either 40pts or 50pts, A full kabalite or wych squad respectively, in order to make 2 attacks per turn, and can't use their other attacks at all. At least Corsair Reavers and Craftorld Storm Guardians can have the rest of the squad shoot with their S4 shuriken weapons and fish for 6's. We can't, so if any one chooses to throw a haywire grenade the rest of the squad is useless for the turn, and the opportunity cost for those attacks becomes the total cost of the unit.

Haywire has a purpose: it's fleshbane for vehicles, and should be treated as such. Universal haywire grenades, rending, AND faster access to furious charge actually creates a really interesting relationship in that Open-topped walkers, Dreadnoughts, and Knights all become interacted with in radically different ways. It becomes very similar to the shooting effect of Kabalites with a blaster against people, in that the one or 2 haywire attacks almost definitely wound but the bulk attacks still get to do something. A rend would auto-glance the Open topped walker, a rend of 5 or 6 would glance a dreadnought, and a rend of 5 or 6 WITH furious charge would glance a knight all while doing 1-2 haywire attacks per turn per squad.

I digress to the original discussion: Universal haywire in every troopslot is precisely how we are currently intended to deal with armour values, and it's inadequacies metastasize as the way we interact with the current meta in that we need another plentiful source of AV to boat them in order to deal with mechanized armies in a TAC setting, and the opportunity cost spent there is why we don't have the points to ineffeciently build wraithknight killing prowess in to our list unless that's all we do a la the 8 squads of 6 reaver jetbikes with 2 blasters approach that was promoted at the end of last year.

amorrowlyday wrote:

wyches kill tanks, carnifexes, and non-CC meq. Bloodbrides kill wraithknights and nick primarchs. Succubi wound primarchs, and Lilith fights them to a standstill.

+1.
our gladiators should be fighting david with 'insert powerful weapon here' vs goliath battles. leaping up the side of a dreadnaught and stabbing the pilot. cutting hatches off tanks, jumping in, and butchering the crew.

although if they could do this effectively in-game, their points cost would be more worthy of elites.

just my $0.02

So the main reason we have why fleshbane would not work is because it will be priced wrong, not because it has no good price but because we know gw will deliberately price it wrong? Makes me think we need some new wych miniatures so gw can actually make them good again to boost sales.... I realize I am not looking at the big picture right now. But considering some of the big cheapskate options other factions get (special weapons on a cheap mobile platform for each model in a troop choice is also a new thing). And hey we are there to stop extreme builds so killing gmc with troops might be ok for us.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Being tired of a debate in a thread is no excuse for basically telling someone to shut up.

This is your interpretation. Looking at:

The Strange Dark One wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

...Cos I'm sure most other people are as sick of the endless argument on an entirely subjective topic as I am.

I don't know about other people, but I am.
Just sayin.

This sentence has two objective statements. One being sick of an endless argument and the other one being that of this being a subjective topic. I agree with both of these statements. In no way I have anything against you personally (and I hope it can stay that way).

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

If you aren't happy with the direction the debate is going, or that you feel a thread has been concluded for you, you don't have to participate in it's continuation, but that doesn't mean that other people who ARE interested in the discussion need be deprived of their ability to do so just because you're done with it. Be done. Let other people not be. Live and let live, right?

And I completely agree with that. You have the full right to continue with this thread in whatever direction you want with whatever people you want. But I can also state my opinion on this matter, even if you don't share my same views. End of story.

Let's just stay with the facts and don't make a drama out of it.



Damn time zone differences always postpone my answers quite a bit...

The Strange Dark One wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Being tired of a debate in a thread is no excuse for basically telling someone to shut up.

This is your interpretation. Looking at:

The Strange Dark One wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

...Cos I'm sure most other people are as sick of the endless argument on an entirely subjective topic as I am.

I don't know about other people, but I am.
Just sayin.

This sentence has two objective statements. One being sick of an endless argument and the other one being that of this being a subjective topic. I agree with both of these statements.

...I can also state my opinion on this matter, even if you don't share my same views.

You didn't include the first part, where the Count interjected into a conversation I was having with someone else, and essentially told me to stop my topic-relevent discussion with another member in this thread(ie, Shut up). When I said: "Being tired of a debate in a thread is no excuse for basically telling someone to shut up.", I was talking about what the Count said, not what you said in agreement with him. Because of his position, that has made several other people chime in and think telling someone you wish they'd just stop talking/shut up is an acceptable behavior, regardless of whether that's your opinion or not. It isn't acceptable, and the Count knows it isn't. It violates rule #1 of this forum. I wish he, or another mod would just say so, so that we can move on, and people can stop thinking jumping on the "shut up" bandwagon is OK. It's not. I may hold the opinion that a certain individual is a living, breathing turd, but despite that being my opinion, it's against the rules for me to tell them that, because it's freaking disrespectful. We do not have free reign to state ALL our opinions here. Relevent, non-disrespectful opinions are welcome. Disrespectful ones are expressly against the rules. If I was as snarky towards someone else as the Count was towards me, with my history here, I'd probably be banned right now.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

Let's just stay with the facts and don't make a drama out of it.

I wasn't making a drama out of it. I was catching you up with what happened, and expressly said we should move on. Subsequently, we DID move on, in fact. You decided to ressurect the issue with a long, point-by-point post a day and a half later, after a page and a half of productive discussion in between where the issue had been successfully dropped.

Let's successfullly drop it again, and leave it alone.

You young'uns better learn to get along or I'm gonna have to drop another train fulla Ynnadi angst up in this b****.

rofl. That's the REAL solution in all seriousness. Since wyches die in droves take them in Ynnari formations so you get benefits for it.

I'm frankly disgusted at the solution to Wyches being, essentially, free wounds for the Ynnadi heroes.

Wouldn't warriors still be better due to being cheaper, and having a use outside of instantly dying, while remaining super easy to kill?

stevethedestroyeofworlds wrote:

Wouldn't warriors still be better due to being cheaper, and having a use outside of instantly dying, while remaining super easy to kill?

I would guess warriors would still be superior but we haven't got much info yet.

Painjunky wrote:

stevethedestroyeofworlds wrote:

Wouldn't warriors still be better due to being cheaper, and having a use outside of instantly dying, while remaining super easy to kill?

I would guess warriors would still be superior but we haven't got much info yet.

yep, my guess too.

I think the the discussion about "should Wyches have rending" or "Wyches need to open AV10 more frequently" is valid, but not my biggest concern about Wyches.
I don´t need them to open AV 10-12, i use other units for that.

My problem is, and the reason i don´t play them, they die in overwatch.
For my PoV, they should just have their dodge 4+ rule applied for overwatch, and iam happy with them as a 10pt standard choice.

Maybe give them Hawire Grenades back, just for fun. If you are in 8" Range of a Vehicle with them, they will die in the following turn, so why not give the 1 lucky shot?

Alvaneron wrote:

My problem is, and the reason i don´t play them, they die in overwatch.
For my PoV, they should just have their dodge 4+ rule applied for overwatch, and iam happy with them as a 10pt standard choice.

I don't think this solution would do much for them to make them useful. So they don't die in overwatch so much. What does that mean? Only 1 died in overwatch on average anyhow. So they have 1 more body when they get into combat with those tactical marines. Now what? They still can barely wound anything, and when they do, they can't penetrate armour, so they lose combats. Here are 5 wyches against 5 non-melee tactical marines, with the wyches getting a charge bonus:

Wyches: 15A>7.5H>2.500W>0.832 Unsaved wounds
Marines: 5A>2.5H>1.665W>0.832 Unsaved wounds

So 5 wches getting 15 attacks results in a dead lock with non-melee tactical marines who are only getting 5 attacks. This is giving wyches the benefit of the charge and ZERO overwatch against them. If this is ANY of the marine factions that get a pistol and CC weapon on their tactical marines(BA), or counterattack(SW), then wyches get decimated by non-melee units under your proposed system. They NEED offensive punch in combat. I'd rather lose 1-2 in overwatch and know that the ones who make it to combat are going to kick some teeth in.

Here is the same situation, except they have rending and 1 wych died in overwatch:

Wyches: 12A>6H>1.999W>1.333 Unsaved wounds
Marines: 5A>2.5H>1.665W>0.832 Unsaved wounds

And these are only the stats for the first round of combat, in which we're giving the wyches the benefits of charging. In subsequent rounds, it'd STILL be pretty close to even with the non-melee marines since wyches would lose the extra attacks from assaulting. Under your proposed system, non-melee marines would devastate them in subsequent rounds.

The problem with wyches is that they aren't good at what they're supposed to do. Any fix to wyches should probably start by addressing that. Nothing defensive in nature that has been suggested does so.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

The problem with wyches is that they aren't good at what they're supposed to do. Any fix to wyches should probably start by addressing that. Nothing defensive in nature that has been suggested does so.

i tend to agree, yes.
But you can´t compare a Tactical Marine und a Wych 1:1 because they have different costs in points.

I agree with you that they are to weak for what they are supposed to, and in comparison with a Marine (who also can shoot his S4 Bolter), they lack in everything.

But they only cost 10 pts, not 14.

And you forgot combat drugs. Yes they are a little bit random but +1 Attack, +1 Strengh, +1 Weaponskill and +1 Toughness are all benefits in your comparison.
In 4/6 cases they are better in numbers as you calculated.
and you forgot PfP but hence the Marines could have doctrines and the math would explode in this thread, lets just forget about that atm XD

That said it should look like this (without charge bonus or overwatch):

+1S
Wyches: 10A>5H>2,5W>0,83 Unsaved wounds
Marines: 5A>2.5H>1.665W>0.83 Unsaved wounds

+1T
Wyches: 10A>5H>1,65W>0,54 Unsaved wounds
Marines: 5A>2.5H>1,25W>0,63 Unsaved wounds

+1A
Wyches: 15A>7,5H>2,48W>0,82 Unsaved wounds
Marines: 5A>2.5H>1.665W>0.83 Unsaved wounds

+1WS
Wyches: 10A>6,6H>2,18W>0,72 Unsaved wounds
Marines: 5A>2.5H>1.665W>0.83 Unsaved wounds

So, against a normal Tactical Marine, they are quite good for their costs.
i didn´t put the higher I in account, but 0,54->0,83 is not high enough to do in statistics XD

Are they a good melee Unit? no way!
They suck at what they should do, but they are cheap (and we have enough other stuff to play   )

Many peoply in this thread want to give them a high melee punch, but that is not what they are supposed to do with just 10 pts a model.
The math up there is just 5 Vs 5 without wych weapons , but if you use them in 10-15 groups, you could use the 3 extra weapons, which all suck too, but will make them a little bit better in the numbers.

Rending could help, yes, but even that isn´t going to get them on the field because we have other units that are far better.

So they stay like they are with 10pts, or they need to be reworked all along, not just with some minor special rules.

Alvaneron wrote:

But you can´t compare a Tactical Marine und a Wych 1:1 because they have different costs in points.

We absolutely can, because they're a melee-specialized unit with a weakness vs. shooting against a non-melee unit in close combat. They're also both troops slots, and the points difference is negligible. If you want to know point for point what the fight looks like in a vacuum, you just divide my results by the cost of the unit and that will give you the points-adjusted results.

Wyches: 15A>7.5H>2.500W>0.832 Unsaved wounds = 0.0166 per point spent
Marines: 5A>2.5H>1.665W>0.832 Unsaved wounds = 0.0119 per point spent

And now without giving them the advantage of assault + no wounds in overwatch:

Wyches: 10A>5H>1.665W>0.554 Unsaved wounds = 0.0110 per point spent
Marines: 5A>2.5H>1.665W>0.832 Unsaved wounds = 0.0119 per point spent

The best 3 results from combat drugs essentially improve results by roughly 25%, which would only improve their final result from 0.0110 pps to 0.0148. So, other than in 50% of cases, with lucky drug rolls under your proposed changes, our wyches lose in melee when compared on a point for point basis against a unit NOT designed for melee. And what about the fact that a single drug roll effects your ENTIRE army. So if I roll +1 initiative and have 6 units of wyches, that's 6 units that can't perform their basic function against non-melee units. We can't depend on drug rolls, and so cannot count them as any significant advantage of the unit.

In the rare circumstance that they don't lose point for point(instead getting good drug rolls), they only barely edge them out, and may STILL lose combat because of how combat rules work, and the fact that combat rules don't care how many points each model costs. If you lose 3 2-point models with a wound each, and I lose a single 100 point model with 2 wounds, you STILL lose the combat and risk having your unit swept, despite my having lost 94 more points worth of models than you.

A 10 point melee-specialized unit with a massive disadvantage against shooting(T3 w/6+ save) SHOULD defeat a 14 point shooting unit that it manages to make it into combat with, despite the point difference. The 14 point unit has plenty of opportunity to kill it in the shooting phase, where it has a huge advantage because it's a shooting unit vs. a melee unit with a shooting weakness. Once in melee, said melee unit needs to perform, because battles don't occur in a vacuum. When you consider the shooting weakness of wyches, only half of them might MAKE IT to close combat against these shooty units. So are we going to calculate the points lost by wyches vehicles exploding on them, the fact that they need vehicles to perform their function anyhow, and wyches dying to general shooting while attempting to make it within range to assault those 14 point models? There are far more variables than you're accounting for.

Alvaneron wrote:

So, against a normal Tactical Marine, they are quite good for their costs.

No they aren't.

Alvaneron wrote:

They suck at what they should do, but...we have enough other stuff to play

This is quite possibly the worst excuse for a bad unit idea I've ever heard. You sure you don't work for GW?

Give the wyches wych weapons automatically for free, they already cost more than warriors, make them worth it.

The 4+ invul save counts for overwatch.

Give wyches Smash.

You can buy combat drugs for a unit instead of rolling on the table, and buy more than one.