Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Instant death: too rare to matter.

Blind: too rare to matter.

Poison: GMCs are immune, 2+ armor MCs don't care

Fleshband: GMCs and 2+ armor MCs don't care

Shred: GMCs and 2+ armor MCs dont' care

Concussive: None of these things are dying, so this doesn't matter.

Str 2-3: You can't mass enough to matter because you are wounding on 6's. If guardsmen came in squads of 200 men, maybe.

You know what's common as feth? S 6/7 and melta. So please tell me about all the problems MCs have with these outlier attacks.

You know what destroys regular monstrous creatures (especially the one you were referring to directly, with toughness 5 and no armor save) is str6/7 and melta. I know full well the issues between superheavies and fmcs, I address them in my houserules. But the question was asked about the demon Prince in particular. I answered truthfully on all accounts there.

So, retract you snark a bit and read what I said instead of jumping straight to giving people an attitude.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, there are two armies who can inundate he board with instant death (grey knight) and poison (dark eldar) and bladestorm does nothing against vehicles.

Sounds pretty common to me...

Melta is damn near useless vs MCs. Taking off one wound at time? Get real. My army's dead before that process is finished. All that S 6/7 has to get through the usual MC armor of 3+. Fine, the demon price has special problems I guess. But it's not typical for an MC. Grey Knights can go step on vehicles with their DK. DE are in a bit a bad spot as lances are pretty miserable in 7th ed. Eldar have Dweapons for vehicles, bladestorm is there to hurt MCs and make a mockery of all things spess muhreen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Sorry, but isn't Grav the hotness? Doesn't it do pretty wall against MCs and GMCs? Am I missing something?

Only grav cannons. And even then, you need a prohibitive amount vs a Stimtide.

'Not a typical MC'

Ah... for the most part the DP is fairly typical. Riptides and Dreadknights are outliers.

Unless you're saying:
-Talos
-Chronos
-Necron Spyders
-Carnifexes
-Wraithlords
-Foot Tyrants
-Mawlocs
-Trygons
etc, etc.

Are all atypical compared to the Riptide and Dreadknight?

Traditio wrote:

There's no comparison between a "tax" of scatbikes and a farseer, on the one hand, and an assault marine squad, on the other hand.

That's a pretty disingenuous comparison.

The warhost has a choice of tax units as does the gladius.

Yes assault squads suck but so do storm guardians.

Why are you comparing (repeatedly) scatter bikes to assault squads when anyone sensible will be taking grav bikes in that slot?

If they added rules that made them balanced, I'd be all for it.

Martel732 wrote:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Instant death: too rare to matter.

Blind: too rare to matter.

Poison: GMCs are immune, 2+ armor MCs don't care

Fleshband: GMCs and 2+ armor MCs don't care

Shred: GMCs and 2+ armor MCs dont' care

Concussive: None of these things are dying, so this doesn't matter.

Str 2-3: You can't mass enough to matter because you are wounding on 6's. If guardsmen came in squads of 200 men, maybe.

You know what's common as feth? S 6/7 and melta. So please tell me about all the problems MCs have with these outlier attacks.

You know what destroys regular monstrous creatures (especially the one you were referring to directly, with toughness 5 and no armor save) is str6/7 and melta. I know full well the issues between superheavies and fmcs, I address them in my houserules. But the question was asked about the demon Prince in particular. I answered truthfully on all accounts there.

So, retract you snark a bit and read what I said instead of jumping straight to giving people an attitude.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, there are two armies who can inundate he board with instant death (grey knight) and poison (dark eldar) and bladestorm does nothing against vehicles.

Sounds pretty common to me...

Melta is damn near useless vs MCs. Taking off one wound at time? Get real. My army's dead before that process is finished. All that S 6/7 has to get through the usual MC armor of 3+. Fine, the demon price has special problems I guess. But it's not typical for an MC. Grey Knights can go step on vehicles with their DK. DE are in a bit a bad spot as lances are pretty miserable in 7th ed. Eldar have Dweapons for vehicles, bladestorm is there to hurt MCs and make a mockery of all things spess muhreen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Sorry, but isn't Grav the hotness? Doesn't it do pretty wall against MCs and GMCs? Am I missing something?

Only grav cannons. And even then, you need a prohibitive amount vs a Stimtide.

You can't kill even ONE MC? I think that's your problem Martel, not the game system's.

You can kill one. But without invis, you lose a lot in return.

Martel732 wrote:
You can kill one. But without invis, you lose a lot in return.

Honestly, that sounds like a you problem. Are you saying if I brought ~3 dakkafexes I'd be unstoppable?

 Wolfblade wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can kill one. But without invis, you lose a lot in return.

Honestly, that sounds like a you problem. Are you saying if I brought ~3 dakkafexes I'd be unstoppable?

You'd certainly be a problem for BA. I know other lists wouldn't care, for sure. I was more thinking of Riptides, though. The original discussion how much grav it takes to down a Riptide/Stormsurge.

Martel732 wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can kill one. But without invis, you lose a lot in return.

Honestly, that sounds like a you problem. Are you saying if I brought ~3 dakkafexes I'd be unstoppable?

You'd certainly be a problem for BA. I know other lists wouldn't care, for sure. I was more thinking of Riptides, though. The original discussion how much grav it takes to down a Riptide/Stormsurge.

This honestly sounds like a "you" problem, and not specifically a BA problem as I've watched a Baal Predator shred a carnifex. Not saying BAs are crazy good or even Near what they should be, but they can handle more than you're suggesting.

Librarians automatically come with force weapons, including mephiston.

So your army has instant death.
Also, I dont think there was there a serious conversation in this thread about grav killing riptides. This is talking about gargantuan creatures and superheavy vehicles...

Martel732 wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can kill one. But without invis, you lose a lot in return.

Honestly, that sounds like a you problem. Are you saying if I brought ~3 dakkafexes I'd be unstoppable?

You'd certainly be a problem for BA. I know other lists wouldn't care, for sure. I was more thinking of Riptides, though. The original discussion how much grav it takes to down a Riptide/Stormsurge.

Well in that case why generalize "MC" when you are talking about "riptide"? Sounds like your problem is not with MC but with one specific unit...

 Chapter Master Angelos wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can kill one. But without invis, you lose a lot in return.

Honestly, that sounds like a you problem. Are you saying if I brought ~3 dakkafexes I'd be unstoppable?

You'd certainly be a problem for BA. I know other lists wouldn't care, for sure. I was more thinking of Riptides, though. The original discussion how much grav it takes to down a Riptide/Stormsurge.

This honestly sounds like a "you" problem, and not specifically a BA problem as I've watched a Baal Predator shred a carnifex. Not saying BAs are crazy good or even Near what they should be, but they can handle more than you're suggesting.

A Baal typically won't do much damage to a Carnifex. Anecdotes don't mean much.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can kill one. But without invis, you lose a lot in return.

Honestly, that sounds like a you problem. Are you saying if I brought ~3 dakkafexes I'd be unstoppable?

You'd certainly be a problem for BA. I know other lists wouldn't care, for sure. I was more thinking of Riptides, though. The original discussion how much grav it takes to down a Riptide/Stormsurge.

Well in that case why generalize "MC" when you are talking about "riptide"? Sounds like your problem is not with MC but with one specific unit...

Because BA don't have grav cannons, they still really struggle with MCs in general. Don't have enough shooting power, and fighting them in assault sucks, too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
Librarians automatically come with force weapons, including mephiston.

So your army has instant death.
Also, I dont think there was there a serious conversation in this thread about grav killing riptides. This is talking about gargantuan creatures and superheavy vehicles...

BA libbies don't get telepathy, which makes them not usually worth taking in a general list.

Since when is not having access to the most powerful psychic power the reason not to take them?

You have your own discipline and bio.amcy to help your melee guys, you have force, you have a tool to deal with the units you're complaining about but because you don't have to tool to invalidate the enemy army's entire ability to do damage you won't take them.

Yeah, the problem you are having against monstrous creatures isn't really based on your codex my friend.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
Since when is not having access to the most powerful psychic power the reason not to take them?

You have your own discipline and bio.amcy to help your melee guys, you have force, you have a tool to deal with the units you're complaining about but because you don't have to tool to invalidate the enemy army's entire ability to do damage you won't take them.

Yeah, the problem you are having against monstrous creatures isn't really based on your codex my friend.

I use lists with libbies; they just aren't nearly as good as their vanilla counterparts.

BA, for the most part, are stuck with old Imperial heavy weapons only, none of which are cost effective vs MCs.

"]Since when is not having access to the most powerful psychic power the reason not to take them?"

A pretty good reason, I'd say.

I have access to it with most of my armies and don't bother to. Not a good reason to not take Libbie's at all actually.

Since you claim to take them, and then give reasins why you don't take them, what are you actually putting in your list?

Not trying to be snarky here. But you said specifically that you don't take a unit because of a reason, then said you run the unit. Then said that the reason you don't run the same unit is a valid one. Legitimately confused...

so is the poll showing 60%-41% to anyone else right now?

Also ive been driving across America for 3 days so I know but havent had time to really respond to posts, but I find it funny that a lot of people flipped out over my comment that bringing leman russes at 500pts being a dick move was ridiculous. I mentioned it wasnt good in the very next sentence but apparently noone read that far.

Back in 5th, it WAS considered a cheesy thing to do, and I remember people talking about it in early 6th too. The fact that it wasnt good had nothing to do with it. It was just really annoying when most people could barely afford two troops and an hq but you were bringing two heavy support choices with the strongest front armor in the game. You know, to back up my point that just because not all superheavies are good doesnt change the fact that theyre annoying to me.

But that was all several pages ago, just didnt want people to think i was ignoring them

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
so is the poll showing 60%-41% to anyone else right now?

Yep, I am too. Gotta love rounding error haha.

 IllumiNini wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
so is the poll showing 60%-41% to anyone else right now?

Yep, I am too. Gotta love rounding error haha.

Clearly the poll was incorrectly made and we need a new one for unbiased answers.

Time to make the "Sould Superheavies and GMC's be allowed in non apocalypse games, 3rd try's the charm edition: This time its Pollsernal" thread

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 IllumiNini wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
so is the poll showing 60%-41% to anyone else right now?

Yep, I am too. Gotta love rounding error haha.

Clearly the poll was incorrectly made and we need a new one for unbiased answers.

Time to make the "Sould Superheavies and GMC's be allowed in non apocalypse games, 3rd try's the charm edition: This time its Pollsernal" thread

As entertained as I was by this (I actually laughed out aloud), the frustration, the repetition, the trolling, and yet more talk of the strongly misguided 'Strong Minority' idea might actually drive this sub-forum into chaos haha.

On topic, though: I think it's fair to say that the poll is holding relatively steady, with the majority of people saying that the units in question should be kept in non-Apoc games. That being said, it is worth remembering that there is a lot of grey area that the poll hasn't (and cannot in its present form) take into account.

 IllumiNini wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 IllumiNini wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
so is the poll showing 60%-41% to anyone else right now?

Yep, I am too. Gotta love rounding error haha.

Clearly the poll was incorrectly made and we need a new one for unbiased answers.

Time to make the "Sould Superheavies and GMC's be allowed in non apocalypse games, 3rd try's the charm edition: This time its Pollsernal" thread

As entertained as I was by this (I actually laughed out aloud), the frustration, the repetition, the trolling, and yet more talk of the strongly misguided 'Strong Minority' idea might actually drive this sub-forum into chaos haha.

On topic, though: I think it's fair to say that the poll is holding relatively steady, with the majority of people saying that the units in question should be kept in non-Apoc games. That being said, it is worth remembering that there is a lot of grey area that the poll hasn't (and cannot in its present form) take into account.

Definitely, although 60-40 split is a pretty rough divide that probably isnt good. If it was something like 90-10 thats a clearly ignorable but vocal minority. With this though thats a 2/5 th's disagreement over a major change.

its bad for GW because its now a "damned if you do, damned if you dont" situation because no matter who you side with, roughly half of the community (according to this poll) will be unhappy.

Late to this party....

While in other threads I've sounded quite salty, railing against the use of D-weapon Wraithknight, because I personally have never killed one against one player (who brings the shooty D) in about 2 dozen games, and only managed to kill ONE of the other main eldar player's WK (and that took me multi charging with two knights)


As in the other threads, I think that they should be permissible, but that in future editions of the game, they need to be balanced better. I mean, the same guy with his shooty WK has played me using multiple knights with his Crons, and managed to kill one by turn 2, and the other one in turn 3.

So, the short of it is, it would by hypocritical of me, a guy who uses Knights as a primary detachment, to say that no, super heavies should be banned from "regular" 40k. But, I think that work could and should be done to better balance the game as a whole to accommodate this new trend.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Definitely, although 60-40 split is a pretty rough divide that probably isnt good. If it was something like 90-10 thats a clearly ignorable but vocal minority. With this though thats a 2/5 th's disagreement over a major change.

its bad for GW because its now a "damned if you do, damned if you dont" situation because no matter who you side with, roughly half of the community (according to this poll) will be unhappy.

Yeah, 60 - 40 is a pretty close split, but not so close that you can't deduce a clear result from it. If it was 55 - 45 or closer, then I'd agree that the results are too close to draw any conclusion, but I reckon the results as they stand are far enough apart to draw a solid conclusion.

And I don't think that GW can fix this. I think the best solution here is for GW to leave the units in question alone so that they are still allowed in non-Apoc games, and then let the players decide whether or not they want to play a game which involves said units. Any other solution to the problem isn't going to do any better than this solution.

 IllumiNini wrote:

And I don't think that GW can fix this. I think the best solution here is for GW to leave the units in question alone so that they are still allowed in non-Apoc games, and then let the players decide whether or not they want to play a game which involves said units. Any other solution to the problem isn't going to do any better than this solution.

I disagree with this....

Lets say that I'm playing a 2000 point game against the guy in my shop who runs with the shooty D-weapon WK. Ok, my 2000 point list is my 5 knight exalted court. Based on past experience, I'd be packing up my army and maybe try to set up another game, perhaps with another person after 3 turns. That is how quickly his one, under 300 point unit could deal with 5 models.

Yeah, a 5 knight list may seem rough, but each time I've played it, the games are quite close (I've yet to run it against an Eldar army though), and if my opponents' reactions are anything to go by, fun was had by all. Having a 5 model army is also risky for myself, because there is literally no chaff for opponents to deal with.

I do think that there can be, and should be a points, or rules balancing done.... without using house rules (which we have done in past "huge" games)

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 IllumiNini wrote:

And I don't think that GW can fix this. I think the best solution here is for GW to leave the units in question alone so that they are still allowed in non-Apoc games, and then let the players decide whether or not they want to play a game which involves said units. Any other solution to the problem isn't going to do any better than this solution.

I disagree with this....

Lets say that I'm playing a 2000 point game against the guy in my shop who runs with the shooty D-weapon WK. Ok, my 2000 point list is my 5 knight exalted court. Based on past experience, I'd be packing up my army and maybe try to set up another game, perhaps with another person after 3 turns. That is how quickly his one, under 300 point unit could deal with 5 models.

Yeah, a 5 knight list may seem rough, but each time I've played it, the games are quite close (I've yet to run it against an Eldar army though), and if my opponents' reactions are anything to go by, fun was had by all. Having a 5 model army is also risky for myself, because there is literally no chaff for opponents to deal with.

I do think that there can be, and should be a points, or rules balancing done.... without using house rules (which we have done in past "huge" games)

Fair enough. I just don't see a better solution than can be applied as a blanket solution to this apparent problem (I say 'apparent' because I've never been in a situation where my opponent has brought along or asked to bring one of the units in question).

 IllumiNini wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 IllumiNini wrote:

And I don't think that GW can fix this. I think the best solution here is for GW to leave the units in question alone so that they are still allowed in non-Apoc games, and then let the players decide whether or not they want to play a game which involves said units. Any other solution to the problem isn't going to do any better than this solution.

I disagree with this....

Lets say that I'm playing a 2000 point game against the guy in my shop who runs with the shooty D-weapon WK. Ok, my 2000 point list is my 5 knight exalted court. Based on past experience, I'd be packing up my army and maybe try to set up another game, perhaps with another person after 3 turns. That is how quickly his one, under 300 point unit could deal with 5 models.

Yeah, a 5 knight list may seem rough, but each time I've played it, the games are quite close (I've yet to run it against an Eldar army though), and if my opponents' reactions are anything to go by, fun was had by all. Having a 5 model army is also risky for myself, because there is literally no chaff for opponents to deal with.

I do think that there can be, and should be a points, or rules balancing done.... without using house rules (which we have done in past "huge" games)

Fair enough. I just don't see a better solution than can be applied as a blanket solution to this apparent problem (I say 'apparent' because I've never been in a situation where my opponent has brought along or asked to bring one of the units in question).

Because a blanket solution isn't a good solution, each SHV/GMC should be reevaluated, then have their points adjusted to prevent wastes of space ( malcadors) and auto takes (WKs)

 Wolfblade wrote:
Because a blanket solution isn't a good solution, each SHV/GMC should be reevaluated, then have their points adjusted to prevent wastes of space ( malcadors) and auto takes (WKs)

In all honesty, I keep coming back to a Blanket Solution because if experience has taught me anything, GW is unlikely to do the changes we're looking for them to make properly (assuming they do them at all). A Blanket Solution is generally easier to write and definitely easier to apply (and the likely route GW would take).

That being said, I do agree with you that what we need is a complete re-evaluation of every Surper-Heavy and Gargantuan Creature.

Lets say that I'm playing a 2000 point game against the guy in my shop who runs with the shooty D-weapon WK. Ok, my 2000 point list is my 5 knight exalted court. Based on past experience, I'd be packing up my army and maybe try to set up another game, perhaps with another person after 3 turns. That is how quickly his one, under 300 point unit could deal with 5 models.

That....seems a little excessive. I'm assuming the rest of the army is doing some of the heavy lifting unless he's throwing loaded dice. Wraithknights are underpriced and lethal, but even putting two heavy cannon shots into a knight has only about a 20% chance of a deathblow hit, and without one he should struggle to take more than a couple of hull points off.... what the hell happens?

Yeah, a 5 knight list may seem rough, but each time I've played it, the games are quite close (I've yet to run it against an Eldar army though), and if my opponents' reactions are anything to go by, fun was had by all. Having a 5 model army is also risky for myself, because there is literally no chaff for opponents to deal with.

I'm building a Knight List at the moment, so I'm glad to hear people do enjoy the games. I'll be honest, Ive had fun even with games where I literally can't hurt the enemy (massed spawned termagants are better annoyances than you think against vehicle lists which can't tank shock) but I get the impression most people wouldn't.

Blanket solutions are.....problematic. If you're going to have one, I like the Horus heresy approach, which essentially has five:

1) 'Normal' Lords of War are only available in 2000pts and up, and are limited to one (or two smaller ones like knights) per army, and 25% of your points value (across both if relevant)

2) You can take a lord of war in an army that violates this, but only by taking the Leviathan detachment - which means you get naff all else, as all you have is an allied detachment. Fighting battle titan on his own versus an army is interesting and not as easy as it sounds (see the comment about no support units)

3) Some superheavies feature as heavy support choices in army lists, but only specifically chosen ones (like the Malcador, as mentioned above).

4) The only 'pure superheavy army' is the Knight household, which has points and options rebalanced in light of this.

5) Monstrous creatures are essentially limited purely to Mechanicum forces (or bolt-on mechanicum elements) and whilst even tougher than a riptide (the Thanatar Siege-Automata is T8 with a 2+ save!) they come with their own downsides - expensive, never scoring, slow as hell, and likely to act on their own accord without an also expensive 'buddy' with a cortex controller nearby to keep them pointed the right way....

I agree entirely that it should be agreed upon prior to the game whether they will be used or not, but I voted No purely because since they can freely be taken in 40k games, my local gaming meta seems to drop various super heavies in casual games even as small as 1000 points just because they can, and using that as a defense to do so when you ask why theres two imperial knights in a 1000 point game against your ork boys

That is however just my local area, I cant speak for anywhere else.