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.

So I've been playing casually since the tail end of 6th. Probably played about 10 or so games. I play dark angels. I run multiple 2k lists, sometimes deathwing or ravenwing. It's all pretty standard though. Maybe a land raider or something.

I played someone last week that brought necron/tau. He had a riptide, which I tend to ignore, but he brought this c'tan dude that pretty much destroyed my forces in 2 turns. I didn't find it fun and I questioned why I even set my guys up. He said the list is legal, which it is, but I pretty much poured every shot I had into the c'tan and only managed 4 wounds.

I killed a total of 3 models on his side. Is it rude to say I don't want to play lists that have LoW? I don't have anything to combat them nor do I want to buy stuff just to combat them. The guy said these are becoming the standard games in 7th. If so I'm a bit discouraged.

You can choose to play, or not play, against any list you want.

Its a gakky situation. I guess you can always talk to him and ask to play him without Lords of War.

Welcome to wonderful GW balance, ruining games for casuals for years. If you want balanced games you'd be best off swapping to one of the many other better games. If you're adamant about sticking with 40k you'll need to find the modifications necessary for you to enjoy it - banning some or all LoWs is one easy way to improve balance, but it's still pretty bad even after that. It fragments the playerbase, but you're better off not playing games like this that you won't enjoy so you should stick to your guns and say "sure I'll play but no LoWs, no daemon factories, single detachments etc"

How about you get your own LoW and pump it full of turbo laser shots? That or read up on some tactics about how to combat them with a standard list. Everything seems OP if you don't know how to play against it.

Of all the LoW I've faced the Necron C'tan thing is the BS one, the others are equal to "putting all your eggs in 1 basket" with varying effectiveness.

Baneblades and baneblade variants effectiveness depends on the main gun but that is still 1/4 of the IG point in a 2000 game for a single unit that has just as much chance dieing like any other tank. I've found the most effective (from me using them) to be the Stormsword with its Hellhammer Siege Gun that can flatten everything infront of it, expecially Tau or Eldar who like to hide in cover.

Others like the chaos khorne thing were meh but again the C'tan had some stupidly powerful stuff for its points, same with a proper titan like the Warhound or the eldar ones which should only be in full Apoc battles.

My tactics were to hit him with everything I had. I hit him with a rad grenade from my black knights to lower his toughness to 8, but all my plasma shots needed 5+. I hit with las cannons too, bolsters, anything. The model has an invul and FNP with 6 wounds to boot.

The thing about it, he can kill me in the movement phase. In one movement he took out numerous bikes, wrecked a land speeder, and dropped 3 hull points off my LR. Then shot.

In turn 2 I tried to lock him up in combat with some DW knights. Smite mode S10 hits, but due to its high initiative the squad almost got wiped before they could hit.

I've had a lot of fun up until this game. Even when I received a big butt whooping the game at least felt close and fun. Guess I still have a lot to learn.

What models do you own? Dark Angels will have a bit of a rough time with this compared to other marines, since they lack both of the big counters to a C'Tan: decent flyers and gravguns. If you have the option, it might be worth playing under Codex: Space Marines instead.

Alternatively, you could just ignore it and focus on the mission. DA shouldn't have much trouble skirting around one model whose most dangerous attacks only reach about 18". Dismantle the rest of his army instead and focus on grabbing objectives and so on. If he has 30-50% of his points tied up in a single model that won't be too hard.

Only reach 18"? equipped properly he MOVES 18" while D everything under it, then shoot 2 15" hellfire D templates. if you are within 30", you are screwed.

The Tctan is absurdly strong compared to other lords of war.

The C'Tan only has one Str D shooting attack, the other Hellstorm is S6. He also requires line of sight to shoot at a target, even with a template weapon, so good use of terrain can help.

Also remember that Transliminal Stride is (unusually) an AP- D weapon. That means unless he rolls a 6 on the Destroyer table, you get armour saves against it.

The Tctan can double up his powers RAW. and most places that allow LoW rule out that its correct.

Lords of War lead to uninteresting, one-sided games. All they accomplish is forcing you to buy their counters, which is all GW wants.

Don't play their game, work out a better system with your group.

Don't play someone who would bring a Transcendant C'Tan to a casual game without asking first. Certainly don't purchase anything just to be able to combat one. Same deal if someone brings a Titan.

These units are not designed for the sort of 40k game you want to play, so it's perfectly reasonable to refuse the game.

Lesser LoW are something you should consider playing against though, as they don't start getting crazy until they hit ~750 pts.

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
How about you get your own LoW and pump it full of turbo laser shots? That or read up on some tactics about how to combat them with a standard list. Everything seems OP if you don't know how to play against it.

This is the wrong answer, no one wants to be forced into buying about $200+ worth of merchandise between the model and the books to run it JUST to keep playing the game they already bought an army for.

The correct answer is to make a concession with the person, ask them if they wouldn't mind not playing the C'tan against you. If that fails then just find other people to play against. If you can't do that then continue you play against the C'tan but ask the player if you can have a point handicap, that MIGHT help balance things out. IF all of the above fail, then it might be time to find a different game.

Make sure you were taking armor saves against the D-weapon hits in the Movement Phase.

LoWs are generally frowned upon for friendly games, and most tournies outright say theyre illegal. The trend GW is making where the big name character of a race is LoW isnt that bad but allowing LoW means people are going to bring C'Tans, Stompas, Baneblades, etc ... not freakin overpriced Ghazgkhull lol.

My group and i have an agreement that LoW type stuff, including knights even though they are NOT LoW, shouldnt be on the table until we hit 3k points or more. Then the floodgates are open. That being said, i need to build my stompa so i can play a 4k game with my orks

On the other hand, just saying "no Lords of War," isn't really a solution, as now you're ruling out models like Ghazghkull Thraka, who are nowhere near the scary end of the LoW spectrum.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
LoWs are generally frowned upon for friendly games, and most tournies outright say theyre illegal. The trend GW is making where the big name character of a race is LoW isnt that bad but allowing LoW means people are going to bring C'Tans, Stompas, Baneblades, etc ... not freakin overpriced Ghazgkhull lol.

My group and i have an agreement that LoW type stuff, including knights even though they are NOT LoW, shouldnt be on the table until we hit 3k points or more. Then the floodgates are open. That being said, i need to build my stompa so i can play a 4k game with my orks

except knights for their point value are pretty balanced. LOWs and super heavies are like any other unit in 40k. some are over priced and ineffectual. some are under priced and scary good, and some are just right.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
LoWs are generally frowned upon for friendly games, and most tournies outright say theyre illegal. The trend GW is making where the big name character of a race is LoW isnt that bad but allowing LoW means people are going to bring C'Tans, Stompas, Baneblades, etc ... not freakin overpriced Ghazgkhull lol.

My group and i have an agreement that LoW type stuff, including knights even though they are NOT LoW, shouldnt be on the table until we hit 3k points or more. Then the floodgates are open. That being said, i need to build my stompa so i can play a 4k game with my orks

except knights for their point value are pretty balanced. LOWs and super heavies are like any other unit in 40k. some are over priced and ineffectual. some are under priced and scary good, and some are just right.

^This.

Apart from the trancendent C'Tan, and the crazy eldar titan, the rest are reasonable for their points and these two just give it a bad name. Much like Serpent spam with wraithknight support and riptide spam with markerlight support gives eldar and tau bad names respectively.
Admittedly I've played fairly few LoW. But from my limited experience of dealing with them combined with checking them out on paper, im pretty fine with them.
I would still expect prior warning of such if not in a tournament. Even 'I MIGHT take a LoW' will be good enough.

I just had the misfortune of playing in a tournament that allowed unrestricted unbound armies. The TO told us that since the missions were objective based they would favour battle forged lists. The problem was that it's impossible to play the objective game when you're losing 2-3 units a turn to a warhound Titan.

I think lows and super heavies can be great fun in goofy casual games where both players are aware of their presence beforehand, I think that is definitely where their place is. They are cool models after all. However they don't belong anywhere near a competitive (be it casual or tournament) game. I do not think this is a failure on the part of GW for offering the player a large range of game options, rather on the part of the community to regulate itself efficiently.

I refuse to play my T-C'tan below 2000-pnt games and even then I'm not sure I would take one.
What fun is there in doing that more than once? Especially if your opponent doesn't expect it.

Until recently my group ruled out all things formerly for Apocalypse use only. This included all Superheavies including Imperial Knights and Gargantuan Creatures. No Lords of War and no Unbound. We did allow any number of allies, so none of the tournament style "2 rules sources" stuff.

That is until the GK leak and we realised the trend of the big name in the Codex being a LoW, which we unanimously agreed is wrong...so now in our group we can field Draigo, Logan and Ghaz as HQ units

I think many groups are too quickly to ban stuff.
Why ban Unbound? It seems that everyone in the group is against cheese.. Why not keep Unbound legal and have a gentlemen's agreement against cheesy stuff?
Have you actually fought against Lords of War, like the Imperial Knights?

Kangodo wrote:
I think many groups are too quickly to ban stuff.
Why ban Unbound? It seems that everyone in the group is against cheese.. Why not keep Unbound legal and have a gentlemen's agreement against cheesy stuff?
Have you actually fought against Lords of War, like the Imperial Knights?

We ban Unbound because we enjoy fluffy armies and hate spammy or unfluffy armies (outside IG where spammy is fluffy). We don't want to see 6 Wraightknights and Wave Serpents galore without excellent reason.
Plus its easier to keep track of. With so many different detachments now its getting overwhelming. We use a standardised FOC for all armies and factions. You may take the usual FOC we've come to know, and the allies detachment from 6th Ed. You can take any number of allies, dataslates, etc, as long as they fulfill requirements such as 1+ HQ.
We also believe that super heavies and GCs should remain in Apocalypse only, as they were originally intended.

ask your opponent if he really wants to play with his unbound Ctan guy if he can kindly choose powers that wont make the game one sided, if he refuses dont play him.

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
This is the wrong answer, no one wants to be forced into buying about $200+ worth of merchandise between the model and the books to run it JUST to keep playing the game they already bought an army for.

Despite you seemingly having found ultimate and objective truth, I'll dare to disagree. The OP got his ass handed to him by an opponent fielding a unit the OP had no experience of. I've had my ass handed to me in the past, and I went away, thought about it, and came back with either better tactics or different units (which sometimes meant having to spend out on them). What I didn't do was come back and ask my opponent not to play a completely legal list. 40k has changed (since Escalation in 6th) and players need to adapt. When more tanks came into 40k, people changed tactics or bought their own. When flyers came in, the same thing happened. LoW are here now, so the same two options apply.

 Deadshot wrote:


We ban Unbound because we enjoy fluffy armies and hate spammy or unfluffy armies (outside IG where spammy is fluffy). We don't want to see 6 Wraightknights and Wave Serpents galore without excellent reason.
Plus its easier to keep track of. With so many different detachments now its getting overwhelming. We use a standardised FOC for all armies and factions. You may take the usual FOC we've come to know, and the allies detachment from 6th Ed. You can take any number of allies, dataslates, etc, as long as they fulfill requirements such as 1+ HQ.
We also believe that super heavies and GCs should remain in Apocalypse only, as they were originally intended.

Thanks for sharing how your gaming group house rule it. Personally I'll follow the rules as published in the rule book. BAO allowed LoW (with, admittedly, some limitations) and there were no LoW lists in the top 10 (although a few Knight Titans, who have D weapons, but for some reason are considered 'okay'). This shows that a large part of the community want LoW. Taking a LoW is usually a big gimping factor to your army. If it goes down, it's usually game over.

Concerning unbound, this actually allows me to put armies that are even more fluffy and themed on the table. If your group would use it as a means to spam the headiest units possible, that's an issue with your gaming group, not the game.

fact is, a gaming group whom all loves fluffy units is absolutly the best gaming group to play unbound with. because they're apt to sue unbound to have more fun with fluff, doing things that are fluffy, but "CAD breaking"

LoW are here now, so the same two options apply.

The difference is to counts as a ctan he can use any necron size model and to get an anti ctan you have to order a baneblade from china, and it isn't that good against the ctan. Or your community would have to accept FW, but then one may as well stop playing as it stops to even matter, if you have the cash to buy models.

Makumba wrote:

LoW are here now, so the same two options apply.

The difference is to counts as a ctan he can use any necron size model and to get an anti ctan you have to order a baneblade from china, and it isn't that good against the ctan. Or your community would have to accept FW, but then one may as well stop playing as it stops to even matter, if you have the cash to buy models.

You could say the same thing when flyers came in (they're not cheap either). Also, the OP could just ally in Necroms and take his own. If he bought a Baneblade it's about £65 from a discount store (so no need for China?!?), or there's EBay. If you can't afford £65 you're in the wrong hobby. Finally, what community doesn't accept FW these days?

Did your oponent mention that when he brings a LoW, you are allowed to roll on the escalation Warlord table, wich have insane buffs towards fighting LoW's? Sounds like you played against TFG. Sorry for your bad exerience.

Honestly, whats with the "3000 point game" thing? I took down knights in 1000 point games, and I took down even Tvault in that points.
A Tctan would be impossible, as the model itself is absurdly OP, but with the exception of the trinity (Tctan, eldar revenant, warhound), the superheavies range from "ok" to "worthless", with the majorety standing on the "subpar" section.