I'm planning to write a blog post in a few days that'll revolve around people who insist on using anecdotes as reasons for why things are good in 40k. You might remember from an old signature of mine, that I hate this practice, claiming that it is a fallacious practice, and it doesn't prove a point.
that I'm looking for today is some people's worst anecdotes. It can be one you created, or one you heard. Hell, it can be one I used if you can dredge one up. I just need anecdotes. Do note this material will be used elsewhere on the internet, so refrain from posting if you find that objectionable. On the other hand, full credit is always awarded for anything used.
For those of you who don't know, an anecdote is usually a short story that is used as a proof of something. While an anecdote can be used in persuasive support of an argument, it cannot be the argument itself.
This is an anecdote:
I once shot a lascannon at a land raider and it blew up.
Notice how that isn't backed up with mathematics? Notice how, while possible, there's nothing in that story that doesn't scream "I rolled well"? Those are the kinds of stories I'm looking for.
I'm paraphrasing but the most recent one that comes to mind: "hits against side facings are resolved against side armour, therefore all things resolved against side armour hit both side facings".
Back in 2nd edition, a friend wanted to play a quick skirmish against me - Marines vs Orks.
For this, completely straight faced, he proposed that he field Terminators (remember - 3+ on 2D6!) against Gretchin in a 1:1 ratio. After explaining how shockingly unbalanced and 1-sided the fight would be - he proceed to explain how actually it's a completely fair matchup "because he saw a gretchin kill a Terminator in a game".
You have NO idea how much I want to punch people when I see that argument
I've seen a few really bad one in the past, but one that I can remember now was something like Land Radiers were good because they could camp objectives(although this was back in fifth when you could capture a point while inside a vehicle)
Kain wrote:Adrenal gland termagants are totally great against vehicles because I charged them at leman russes once and they exploded.
I'm not kidding.
This was an actual argument used.
It's not been possible, surely? the best a gant can do is a glance, and the best they could get last edition was a wrecked result.
That was the point, right?
PrinceRaven wrote:I'm paraphrasing but the most recent one that comes to mind: "hits against side facings are resolved against side armour, therefore all things resolved against side armour hit both side facings".
I laughed, although this is actually an invalid argument, not an anecdote.
Like, you know those "your argument is invalid" because funny photo memes? They would be applicable then.
schadenfreude wrote:Even in large numbers AP5/AP6 multiple barage small pies are not dangerous to MEQ/crisis suits because of their crap ap.
I feel like throttling people who think this. Thank you.
MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:Back in 2nd edition, a friend wanted to play a quick skirmish against me - Marines vs Orks.
For this, completely straight faced, he proposed that he field Terminators (remember - 3+ on 2D6!) against Gretchin in a 1:1 ratio. After explaining how shockingly unbalanced and 1-sided the fight would be - he proceed to explain how actually it's a completely fair matchup "because he saw a gretchin kill a Terminator in a game".
He was not joking.
Thankyou, Mike. This is exactly what I wanted. You get internet cookies.
MarsNZ wrote: Tacticals are bad because Riptides exist.
Riptides are bad because I once charged one with three battle sisters and they tied it down from turn 4 through the end of the game (turn 6) while only losing one model to his S6 AP2 attacks over the course of 6 fight sub phases (we also rolled out turn 7... Poor riptide didn't manage to kill anything there either.)
I'd say the worst class of anecdotes that I consistently see revolve around template weapons, especially those based on the small blast template.
People have seen a single small blast hit 9 models and then wipe them out with good rolling, and then become firm believers that plasma cannons absolutely ruin space marine armies, or that grenade launchers are suddenly the business against hordes.
They never stop and ask themselves what's more likely, that blast weapons are good, or that their opponent was an unlucky idiot for that particular shot?
Before hull points, there was also a lot of awful anecdotes about how great autocannons were, even against AV12 vehicles. Of course if you throw around a hundred autocannon shots, you're going to roll a few 6's, but the amount of selection bias was flat crazy.
Though probably the worst of the worst for anecdotes was Marbo, in part because that was sort of part of his schtick. People always remember that one time that Marbo arrived and blew up something massive, and then forget all of those games where he did nothing.
I mean, I myself have two examples of Marbo single-handedly winning a game for me, one of them involving Marbo showing up behind my opponent's farsight bomb...
And subsequently vaporizing it, which pretty much just straight knocked a tau player right out of a 2v2 game.
But that's the one anecdote that sits on top of game after game of him showing up, being a blast hunter killer missile, and then disappearing.
Ailaros wrote: I'd say the worst class of anecdotes that I consistently see revolve around template weapons, especially those based on the small blast template.
People have seen a single small blast hit 9 models and then wipe them out with good rolling, and then become firm believers that plasma cannons absolutely ruin space marine armies, or that grenade launchers are suddenly the business against hordes.
They never stop and ask themselves what's more likely, that blast weapons are good, or that their opponent was an unlucky idiot for that particular shot?
Before hull points, there was also a lot of awful anecdotes about how great autocannons were, even against AV12 vehicles. Of course if you throw around a hundred autocannon shots, you're going to roll a few 6's, but the amount of selection bias was flat crazy.
Though probably the worst of the worst for anecdotes was Marbo, in part because that was sort of part of his schtick. People always remember that one time that Marbo arrived and blew up something massive, and then forget all of those games where he did nothing.
I mean, I myself have two examples of Marbo single-handedly winning a game for me, one of them involving Marbo showing up behind my opponent's farsight bomb...
And subsequently vaporizing it, which pretty much just straight knocked a tau player right out of a 2v2 game.
But that's the one anecdote that sits on top of game after game of him showing up, being a blast hunter killer missile, and then disappearing.
Kain wrote: It's a terrible anectdote because it was also outright lying.
In any case, even with glancing rules charging 30 termagants at a Leman Russ means the guard player is probably either screwed anyway or really dumb.
Agreed.
BoomWolf wrote:Also "large blasts reliably hit 4-5 models"
I use this when trying to compare a large blast to a small blast. IT doesn't matter that a large blast tends to hit about 3 dudes, people say its bigger, so it should hit more.
Ailaros wrote:I'd say the worst class of anecdotes that I consistently see revolve around template weapons, especially those based on the small blast template.
People have seen a single small blast hit 9 models and then wipe them out with good rolling, and then become firm believers that plasma cannons absolutely ruin space marine armies, or that grenade launchers are suddenly the business against hordes.
They never stop and ask themselves what's more likely, that blast weapons are good, or that their opponent was an unlucky idiot for that particular shot?
Can I quote you on that?
aliaros wrote: Before hull points, there was also a lot of awful anecdotes about how great autocannons were, even against AV12 vehicles. Of course if you throw around a hundred autocannon shots, you're going to roll a few 6's, but the amount of selection bias was flat crazy.
I still don't like S7. Never have, probably never will - it just isn't as flexible as everyone believes it is.
aliaros wrote: Though probably the worst of the worst for anecdotes was Marbo, in part because that was sort of part of his schtick. People always remember that one time that Marbo arrived and blew up something massive, and then forget all of those games where he did nothing.
Yep. I had one example of Marbo knocking out Kantor and an entire devastator squad. I still miss him dearly, despite the fact that he's so broken from this one bad experience.
Thanks for the replies, guys!
Also, I posted this in tactics because I wanted to attract answers from people who post in tactics. I apologise for misusing the subforum in this way, but there was a valid reason for it.
28 of the 30 times I ran the Doom back in 5th it killed less than half its points cost (not including the Spore cost) then immediately died on the next turn or was completely ignored and barely did any more damage.
PrinceRaven wrote: 28 of the 30 times I ran the Doom back in 5th it killed less than half its points cost (not including the Spore cost) then immediately died on the next turn or was completely ignored and barely did any more damage.
Yeah, the one time I played against the doom, it showed up, ate a squad of guardsmen, puffed up to W10 and was immediately blown apart by one of the 20 meltaguns chilling out nearby.
Yeah, an anecdote, exactly like we're talking about, but no amount of anecdoting one way or another can erase T4 with no EW.
Kain wrote:Hand of the king 44 right?
Yup.
Scipio Africanus wrote:Can I quote you on that?
Sure. I used to even make the mistake myself, and for the same reasons.
40k is a complicated game, but it is possible to deconstruct it. You don't strictly need data points when you have a rulebook and statistics. I think that because the game is so complicated, and takes a little while to get a feel for, that new players don't have much to rely on other than a few in-game experiences until they can learn the rules well enough.
But, I mean, we could have an entire other thread posted to deconstruction errors, like assuming that more special rules always = better, or that having more special rules always = overpriced.
"ATSKNF is worthless." <- Said because the person in question doesn't get any utility out of it because of the meta they play in where their opponents basically completely annihilate a squad completely before so they don't get to use it.
An interesting experience of mine was when my opponent in a 600 point tournament stated the following : "Sisters of Battle are overpowered."
His justification for this was that since an exorcist can potentially fire 6 S8 AP1 missiles per turn for 125 points, the whole army list was brokenly overpowered. Coming from a Tau player.
...to be fair, it did actually fire six missiles every turn that game, but it only lasted for three turns.
ClockworkZion wrote: "ATSKNF is worthless." <- Said because the person in question doesn't get any utility out of it because of the meta they play in where their opponents basically completely annihilate a squad completely before so they don't get to use it.
I still say it's an incredibly overrated ability. Not worthless per se, but not making meq's playable, either.
I suppose this is also especially true for really streaky weapons. 40k already laughs in the face of the law of large numbers, but it laughs a little harder at some things than others.
I overheard a tau player (before new dex) complaining because his opponent brought three deathstrikes, and all fired turn 2 and pretty much tabled him. The one time, a few months later, I gave the 3x deathstrike list a try, none of the three fired turn 2, and neither of the survivors fired turn 3. Then on turn 4, the deathstrike didn't fire because I rolled a 1, and my opponent decided not to shoot at it that turn as a sign of pity. Turn 5 it finally got to fire and kill like a half dozen guardsmen in bitter, bitter rage for the failure of the entire HS section that game.
I remember arguing with someone about their Tau Army taking down 5 IK over the course of about 4 turns.
Some of the highlights included: 1.) 2 Skyrays alpha striking and taking down one IK and dealing 2-3 HP to another 2.) The opponent almost never facing the shield towards the obvious threat 3.) Getting stuck in CC with Firewarriors for three rounds because he didn't know what Stomp was 4.) A Skyray ramming the final IK and wrecking it.
Bobthehero wrote: Not heard, but I passed about 4-5 6+ FNP agaisnt a... Mawloc I think, therefore the DKoK Quartermaster is the best thing since sliced bread, of course
How are you even getting FNP against a mawloc's S6?
"Well, that's why I always bring plasma pistols. They just kill Eldar Titans." - me.
"What do you mean, Brit?! You JUST SAW me kill that riptide with a single pathfinder a couple weeks ago! Of COURSE they're great at killing MCs! They can kill anything!" - me, actually said, last night.
The idea is to see how outrageous I can get while keeping a straight face.
I never bring troops transports, their basically free first blood and kill points -said by an ultrasmurfs player locally here.
That's right his entire army teleport deepstrikes or footsloggs it up the board like it's 1st edition week and nobody brought any long range. It's bloody embarrassing to sm players in General. He fields a land raider as an mbt and doesn't carry troops in it either.
Bobthehero wrote: Not heard, but I passed about 4-5 6+ FNP agaisnt a... Mawloc I think, therefore the DKoK Quartermaster is the best thing since sliced bread, of course
How are you even getting FNP against a mawloc's S6?
Bobthehero wrote: Not heard, but I passed about 4-5 6+ FNP agaisnt a... Mawloc I think, therefore the DKoK Quartermaster is the best thing since sliced bread, of course
How are you even getting FNP against a mawloc's S6?
Bobthehero wrote: That one then, fired a lot, passed a lot of FNP, one HWT lost 1 wound and then it died.
Yeah the Trygon's main threat is that a WS6 6 wound 3+ save MC with 7 S6 attacks (and possible biomorphs) is now in your face and may be followed by other Tyranid deep strikers.
Not it's shooting.
If you can kill it quick then the Tyranid player's probably just blown 200+ points.
He used it as a distraction Trygon, bit expensive, but he managed to get more stuff closer to the relic and forced me to move units back, which I could have used to counter his push in the middle.
I once shot the last wound off an Avatar with the final remaining marine from a squad of Chaos Marines. Chaos Marines are therefore the best models in the game.
I've had him kill himself three games in a row, twice in a row on turn one. Also causing the grots he was with to fail leadership and route. Fourth game he launched himself at my foe to actually draw firstblood but eventually gave my opponent slay the warlord. Anecdotal? He sat on the shelf for a month I was soo mad.
I've had him kill himself three games in a row, twice in a row on turn one. Also causing the grots he was with to fail leadership and route. Fourth game he launched himself at my foe to actually draw firstblood but eventually gave my opponent slay the warlord. Anecdotal? He sat on the shelf for a month I was soo mad.
hotsauceman1 wrote:"Grav guns are useless because horde armies exist"
See quote below.
BlaxicanX wrote: None of these are anecdotes.
Guys, I'm looking for *anecdotes* used as arguments, not anecdotes of arguments. We all know that idiot who thinks 3+ saves are worthless because helturkey. I'm not looking for that.
Here's an actual anecdote:
"I don't take tactical marines because this one time, I had 3 saves to take on two dudes and I failed two of them. That really soured my opinion of them."
Another one I heard:
In response to being told to lower the quality of his army "I don't get why people think wraithknights are so unfair. I remember once, I played this guy who was using those imperial guard snipers. What are they called?" [Ratlings?] "Yeah, he shot me first turn, did 5 wounds and two rends and I failed the saves. See, they die nice and easy. I don't need to take him out."
Riptides are bad because the last time I fought one with my sisters it failed it's nova charge pretty much every single turn and killed maybe a small handful of battle sisters. In the end I killed it by ramming it with a Rhino; it continued to be useless by failing death or glory and was killed without even having a single weapon pointed at it. Thus riptides are overpriced and far less useful than the crisis suit teams which managed to do a fair chunk of damage.
"Why are you taking a russ? Last time I had mine out I managed to kill my own squadron of russes with three scattered blasts, they are just simply useless. "
-Overheard over a guy arguing with someone making their list.
n0t_u wrote: I could just make one now if you wanted.
Riptides are bad because the last time I fought one with my sisters it failed it's nova charge pretty much every single turn and killed maybe a small handful of battle sisters. In the end I killed it by ramming it with a Rhino; it continued to be useless by failing death or glory and was killed without even having a single weapon pointed at it. Thus riptides are overpriced and far less useful than the crisis suit teams which managed to do a fair chunk of damage.
n0t_u wrote: I could just make one now if you wanted.
Riptides are bad because the last time I fought one with my sisters it failed it's nova charge pretty much every single turn and killed maybe a small handful of battle sisters. In the end I killed it by ramming it with a Rhino; it continued to be useless by failing death or glory and was killed without even having a single weapon pointed at it. Thus riptides are overpriced and far less useful than the crisis suit teams which managed to do a fair chunk of damage.
Oh yes, that was a good game wasn't it?
Which you still won, but the important thing was it wasn't your Riptide.
n0t_u wrote: I could just make one now if you wanted.
Riptides are bad because the last time I fought one with my sisters it failed it's nova charge pretty much every single turn and killed maybe a small handful of battle sisters. In the end I killed it by ramming it with a Rhino; it continued to be useless by failing death or glory and was killed without even having a single weapon pointed at it. Thus riptides are overpriced and far less useful than the crisis suit teams which managed to do a fair chunk of damage.
Oh yes, that was a good game wasn't it?
Which you still won, but the important thing was it wasn't your Riptide.
"You're TFG, and your army is super cheesy; it's only Terminators!"
I was playing Deathwing in 5th with the old codex.
"Necrons are OP, I wrecked a Baneblade with Rapid Fire once." That was me. Similarly: "1K sons are OP, 4 of them swept a 20 man warrior squad and a Lord!" Yeah, me again. In my defence, I was an utter noob with no idea of balance.
astro_nomicon wrote: "Nah man, MSS aren't OP. A terminator killed my Destroyer Lord with a Thunderhammer once" - every necron player ever
This.... heh.... heh....
Honestly the closest I think I can get was that one Apoc game against an opponent and even though he took out a super heavy turn 1 with Gauss shooting apparently an already glanced Monolith from a lascannon shot, that moved a few inches then was glanced 3 times by the lifta droppa wagon was cheesy and OP and how my opponent even said he would not play against that unit again... then went on to whine about it for a good 30mins taking half an hour out of the game and my turn about it, the whole FLGS hearing his voice during that time
Them: "Marines suck, a 3+ save is useless with all this anti infantry shooting."
Me: "Gee, if only you had cheap access to some sort of big metal box to put them in and make them completely immune to most anti-Infantry shots."
Them: "Nah, Rhinos suck. The last time I took a rhino it blew up turn 1."
Me: "How about Scouts?"
Them: "Scouts suck, they don't have a good enough armour save."
Any argument that uses an empirical example in a game with stats and dice to determine how effective something is against something else in a general sense is a stupid argument. It's a kin to saying I bet on Black twice at a roulette wheel and won both times, black always wins.
Them: "Marines suck, a 3+ save is useless with all this anti infantry shooting."
Me: "Gee, if only you had cheap access to some sort of big metal box to put them in and make them completely immune to most anti-Infantry shots."
Them: "Nah, Rhinos suck. The last time I took a rhino it blew up turn 1."
Me: "How about Scouts."
Them: "Scouts suck, they don't have a good enough armour save."
Pony_law wrote: Any argument that uses an empirical example in a game with stats and dice to determine how effective something is against something else in a general sense is a stupid argument. It's a kin to saying I bet on Black twice at a roulette wheel and won both times, black always wins.
Yes, but I would add in a tiny nuance. It is possible to use anecdotes as an example to more colorfully illustrate things based on the statistics.
Sort of like parables. The stories themselves aren't necessarily true, but they point towards something that is.
For example, I can deconstruct the 40k rules and see that you can win games while just ignoring fliers as your way of dealing with AA. You can then go through the reasoning based on the rules. You can then, after that, show an example of winning while ignoring airplanes to those people who aren't willing to listen to reason. That way you can at least split apart those mistrustful of your reasoning from those people who just want to win an argument on the internet and get put on an ignore list.
Pony_law wrote: Any argument that uses an empirical example in a game with stats and dice to determine how effective something is against something else in a general sense is a stupid argument. It's a kin to saying I bet on Black twice at a roulette wheel and won both times, black always wins.
Yes, but I would add in a tiny nuance. It is possible to use anecdotes as an example to more colorfully illustrate things based on the statistics.
Sort of like parables. The stories themselves aren't necessarily true, but they point towards something that is.
For example, I can deconstruct the 40k rules and see that you can win games while just ignoring fliers as your way of dealing with AA. You can then go through the reasoning based on the rules. You can then, after that, show an example of winning while ignoring airplanes to those people who aren't willing to listen to reason. That way you can at least split apart those mistrustful of your reasoning from those people who just want to win an argument on the internet and get put on an ignore list.
Useful for future discussion.
Wanna hear an anectdote someone used to seriously argue that Pyrovores were overpowered?
Them: "Marines suck, a 3+ save is useless with all this anti infantry shooting."
Me: "Gee, if only you had cheap access to some sort of big metal box to put them in and make them completely immune to most anti-Infantry shots."
Them: "Nah, Rhinos suck. The last time I took a rhino it blew up turn 1."
Me: "How about Scouts."
Them: "Scouts suck, they don't have a good enough armour save."
So you imply it is mutually exclusive?
I imply what is mutually exclusive?
Kain wrote:Wanna hear an anectdote someone used to seriously argue that Pyrovores were overpowered?
Them: "Marines suck, a 3+ save is useless with all this anti infantry shooting."
Me: "Gee, if only you had cheap access to some sort of big metal box to put them in and make them completely immune to most anti-Infantry shots."
Them: "Nah, Rhinos suck. The last time I took a rhino it blew up turn 1."
Me: "How about Scouts."
Them: "Scouts suck, they don't have a good enough armour save."
So you imply it is mutually exclusive?
I imply what is mutually exclusive?
Kain wrote:Wanna hear an anectdote someone used to seriously argue that Pyrovores were overpowered?
Me: *Trying pyrovores to try them out once when the GK codex was shiny and new in 5e*
GK player: *Shows up with draigo's dirty dozen, all given a paint job I could tell came from someone else as he was new to miniature wargaming, I fully expect to get creamed*
GK player: *Starts talking about how he's gonna purge the alien and all with his paladins*
Me: *Nods and is banking on feeding him Tervigon spawned termagants all game*
Me: *Had a swarmlord ready and so gets lucky with his landing rolls*
GK player: *Was so unworried that he bunched up his paladins*
Me: *Has 9 pyrovores in range*
GK player: *Draigo's dirty dozen is now largely toasty, the Pyrovores predictably die in the retaliatory strike, but the explosions from the force weapons kill more of Draigo's unit and end up wiping them all out as I pile them all in to bring him down*
GK player: *Fuming*
Me: *Kind of not believing what I'm seeing*
GK player: *Basically has squat on the table now besides Crowe and some purifiers and a pair of dreadknights*
GK player: *Gets swept off the board by turn four*
GK player: *Claims Pyrovores are now the most overpowered units ever*
Me: *Scratching my head*
The Pyrovore story reminded me of a battle report I remember from 5th edition. Player was fielding a Thousand Sons army first against a son with a PA Grey Knights army then against a father with another PA Grey Knights army.
He won both games by a landslide leading to the father and son to be fuming and declaring Thousand Sons to be "OP".
ClockworkZion wrote: The Pyrovore story reminded me of a battle report I remember from 5th edition. Player was fielding a Thousand Sons army first against a son with a PA Grey Knights army then against a father with another PA Grey Knights army.
He won both games by a landslide leading to the father and son to be fuming and declaring Thousand Sons to be "OP".
I remember that story. That was the best story ever.
And yeah I remember that one too Zion, I was pretty new to the forum back then.
squidhills wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote: The Pyrovore story reminded me of a battle report I remember from 5th edition. Player was fielding a Thousand Sons army first against a son with a PA Grey Knights army then against a father with another PA Grey Knights army.
He won both games by a landslide leading to the father and son to be fuming and declaring Thousand Sons to be "OP".
I remember that story. That was the best story ever.
Honestly I'm surprised someone didn't bring it up before me considering how popular that story was at the time!
I'm not sure if this is entirely applicable but I've had people tell me I shouldn't try and write house rules since everyone who tries to write house rules is a munchkin who's trying to cheat at the game since they can't win normally.
Yeah, I don't play tyranid scarcely ever, but that one time I fought against the doom, the person also had pyrovores that they could deepstrike, thanks to a special rule.
The same meltaguns that popped the Doom also pop the pyrovores. The resulting trio of thundering explosions killed more guardsmen than the Doom did, I'm pretty sure.
Take it down, take it down! Wait, take it down less! Emperor protects!
Pony_law wrote: Any argument that uses an empirical example in a game with stats and dice to determine how effective something is against something else in a general sense is a stupid argument. It's a kin to saying I bet on Black twice at a roulette wheel and won both times, black always wins.
Yes. That is the point here.
Although, empirical isn't the right word. Empirical evidence is observable and repeatable. Most anecdotes concern non-repeatable events.
Eldar Playing Friend: Wraithguard aren't that good for their points, they're only strength 5
Me: And toughness 6... With crazy ass guns...
Eldar Playing Friend: But they only have a 3+ save. They're way too expensive points wise...
Gitsmasha wrote: Eldar Playing Friend: Wraithguard aren't that good for their points, they're only strength 5
Me: And toughness 6... With crazy ass guns...
Eldar Playing Friend: But they only have a 3+ save. They're way too expensive points wise...
"Riptides aren't overpowered- they keep wounding themselves with their Nova charge and not doing enough damage to be worth their price!"
Personally I've had a 1k pts game where my opponent's single Riptide somehow managed to fail every single one of his Nova charge tests and even wounded himself twice while he's at it- still stomped my army flat almost singlehandedly with his "he's totally not overpowered if you take it" heavy burst cannon + SMS...
Galorian wrote: "Riptides aren't overpowered- they keep wounding themselves with their Nova charge and not doing enough damage to be worth their price!"
Personally I've had a 1k pts game where my opponent's single Riptide somehow managed to fail every single one of his Nova charge tests and even wounded himself twice while he's at it- still stomped my army flat almost singlehandedly with his "he's totally not overpowered if you take it" heavy burst cannon + SMS...
On the flipside, I run a farsight bomb. Once at a tournament (TOW1 if anyone cares) I lost my farsight bomb by turn two, I point-click deleted a unit per turn with riptide and tigurius (I'd rolled on div to get a 4++, got ignores cover and prescience, which saved my bacon.) My riptide kept jumping from cover to shoot, then hiding behind a bastion and my FSR the whole game.Turn 5, his riptide comes over to knock my gak, fails his nova charge and I charge in - he smashes, but because tiggy's in the unit, he's hitting on 5's, so I figure why not? Tigurius smacks through one hit, one wound and I fail my force test. He does nothing to me, but my riptide gets his down to one wound. He then proceeds to take one wound from soulblaze and dies. Moral of the story?
There was a kid, I'd put him about 15, at my local GW this past weekend. I ran Ravenwing against his DA list (that wasn't well built, only had two troops at 1,500 and they sat behind an ADL with the SoD). He wasn't the most tactically sound commander, and in a combat that lasted several turns I challenged his Techmarin warlord with Sammael, which he repeatedly refused. After the game his one complaint was how his Techmarine did nothing in combat and was totally worthless.
There is somebody at my FLGS who obviously doesn't read the background of any book but SMs (and he only runs complete WAAC netlists) who tried to argue with me that Tigurius should be able to pick his powers to reflect the lore, because Be'Lakor gets complete mastery of Telepathy (while ignoring the fact that Be'lakor is well over double the points and as old as time).
I then told him that Eldrad and Ahriman can't even get to reroll their powers like him while according to the lore either of them should be able to turn Tigurius inside-out in a psychic duel. He still is adamant that Tigurius is the most powerful psyker in the galaxy "According to the background."
herpguy wrote: There is somebody at my FLGS who obviously doesn't read the background of any book but SMs (and he only runs complete WAAC netlists) who tried to argue with me that Tigurius should be able to pick his powers to reflect the lore, because Be'Lakor gets complete mastery of Telepathy (while ignoring the fact that Be'lakor is well over double the points and as old as time).
I then told him that Eldrad and Ahriman can't even get to reroll their powers like him while according to the lore either of them should be able to turn Tigurius inside-out in a psychic duel. He still is adamant that Tigurius is the most powerful psyker in the galaxy "According to the background."
The funny thing is that Sverin Loth is the same mastery level, gets his own special power, and gets to choose his own abilities.
herpguy wrote: There is somebody at my FLGS who obviously doesn't read the background of any book but SMs (and he only runs complete WAAC netlists) who tried to argue with me that Tigurius should be able to pick his powers to reflect the lore, because Be'Lakor gets complete mastery of Telepathy (while ignoring the fact that Be'lakor is well over double the points and as old as time).
I then told him that Eldrad and Ahriman can't even get to reroll their powers like him while according to the lore either of them should be able to turn Tigurius inside-out in a psychic duel. He still is adamant that Tigurius is the most powerful psyker in the galaxy "According to the background."
The funny thing is that Sverin Loth is the same mastery level, gets his own special power, and gets to choose his own abilities.
Relentlessly troll him with this knowledge.
Uh..
Severin loths 2+ invuln bs just costs him a warp charge, it's not a psychic power.
That's right, he doesn't even give you the courtesy of possibly failing it.
herpguy wrote: There is somebody at my FLGS who obviously doesn't read the background of any book but SMs (and he only runs complete WAAC netlists) who tried to argue with me that Tigurius should be able to pick his powers to reflect the lore, because Be'Lakor gets complete mastery of Telepathy (while ignoring the fact that Be'lakor is well over double the points and as old as time).
I then told him that Eldrad and Ahriman can't even get to reroll their powers like him while according to the lore either of them should be able to turn Tigurius inside-out in a psychic duel. He still is adamant that Tigurius is the most powerful psyker in the galaxy "According to the background."
The funny thing is that Sverin Loth is the same mastery level, gets his own special power, and gets to choose his own abilities.
Relentlessly troll him with this knowledge.
Uh..
Severin loths 2+ invuln bs just costs him a warp charge, it's not a psychic power.
That's right, he doesn't even give you the courtesy of possibly failing it.
PrinceRaven wrote: Lol, according to fluff I should have to use half the floor of my club to place the equivalent numbers of Tyranids to my opponent's army.
... Do orks use the other half?
I know tyranids are grown quickly, but orks grow by dying, and from what I've seen in games, they do it very quickly.
PrinceRaven wrote: Lol, according to fluff I should have to use half the floor of my club to place the equivalent numbers of Tyranids to my opponent's army.
... Do orks use the other half?
I know tyranids are grown quickly, but orks grow by dying, and from what I've seen in games, they do it very quickly.
In terms of numbers fielded it should be
Tyranids>Orks>Guard>Cultists>Tau>Dark Eldar=Eldar>Sisters of Battle>Spehss mehreens>Grey Knights.
PrinceRaven wrote: Lol, according to fluff I should have to use half the floor of my club to place the equivalent numbers of Tyranids to my opponent's army.
... Do orks use the other half?
I know tyranids are grown quickly, but orks grow by dying, and from what I've seen in games, they do it very quickly.
In terms of numbers fielded it should be
Tyranids>Orks>Guard>Cultists>Tau>Dark Eldar=Eldar>Sisters of Battle>Spehss mehreens>Grey Knights.
Daemons fit somewhere there.
But in the actual game it's mostly
Guard>>>>Other people.
Tau can field a reasonable amount of bodies, actually. They might be twice the price of a guardsmen almost, but they'll reap that tally for their price.
PrinceRaven wrote: Lol, according to fluff I should have to use half the floor of my club to place the equivalent numbers of Tyranids to my opponent's army.
... Do orks use the other half?
I know tyranids are grown quickly, but orks grow by dying, and from what I've seen in games, they do it very quickly.
In terms of numbers fielded it should be
Tyranids>Orks>Guard>Cultists>Tau>Dark Eldar=Eldar>Sisters of Battle>Spehss mehreens>Grey Knights.
Daemons fit somewhere there.
But in the actual game it's mostly
Guard>>>>Other people.
Tau can field a reasonable amount of bodies, actually. They might be twice the price of a guardsmen almost, but they'll reap that tally for their price.
That's why they're right behind Cultists.
Kroot are also dirt cheap for what they do.
Necrons probably outnumber the Tau lorewise though.
There is no way that is even remotely true. Orks are about as common in the 40k universe as mildew. They're practically everywhere. If 40k were played by a fluff-based representation, a big majority of games would be orks vs. orks, followed eventually in a distant second by guard vs. orks.
There are a lot of gribblies in a hive fleet, but there are only so many hive fleets. The idea that we don't know how many more tyranid there are lurking at the edges doesn't really count, because that number could very well be zero.
There is no way that is even remotely true. Orks are about as common in the 40k universe as mildew. They're practically everywhere. If 40k were played by a fluff-based representation, a big majority of games would be orks vs. orks, followed eventually in a distant second by guard vs. orks.
There are a lot of gribblies in a hive fleet, but there are only so many hive fleets. The idea that we don't know how many more tyranid there are lurking at the edges doesn't really count, because that number could very well be zero.
A thousand devoured galaxies tends to give more biomass than the most common infestation of one.
In any case, Orks vs Tyranids is probably going to be a war of attrition in it's purest form as losses don't really matter to either side.
It's only a question of who slips up first.
In Ghorolla the Kaptin by all rights had won when he ambushed the Tyranids and blasted most of their fleet to rubble and only lost when he got cocky.
On Octarius itself Blaktoof was well aware of the Tyranid's tricks, and it seems that he's giving Leviathan such a rough time it's had to resort to the Swarmlord.
Of coruse, this war is so huge that the Eldar and Imperium are terrified of letting either side win; because on one hand you'd have a huge bloated hive fleet.
On the other hand you'd have an Ork Waaagh! So huge that it'd make Armageddon look like a slapfight with boyz the size of warbosses.
Either way, everyone else loses.
I think the fight was described as just the air elements from either side were so numerous that on one hand; the Sky was blotted out by Shrikes, Gargoyles, Sky-slashers, Hive Crones, Harpies, Harridans, and Flyrants. On the other hand the sky was blocked out by Stormboyz, Deffkoptaz, Fightas, Jets, Fighta-bommerz, Warkoptas, and so much anti-air munitions you could have stepped out of any random plane and walked all the way down.
On the ground, between the bug-lizards and greenskins you couldn't have seen an inch of it.
There may be lots of Orks, but they are spread out across the galaxy when Tyranid are concentrated into their fleets, so when it comes to an actual war the Tyranids would usually outnumber the Orks.
ionusx wrote: I never bring troops transports, their basically free first blood and kill points -said by an ultrasmurfs player locally here.
That's right his entire army teleport deepstrikes or footsloggs it up the board like it's 1st edition week and nobody brought any long range. It's bloody embarrassing to sm players in General. He fields a land raider as an mbt and doesn't carry troops in it either.
I've heard people call chimeras worthless because they are easy first blood. Seriously I have heard some pretty stupid hatred towards dedicated transports.
One of my early games, playing as BA against my friend's Necrons. After he had killed about 80% of my army, I finally make it to CC. I win it and ran over the Warrior squad. After that I manage to get in HtH with another squad (Immortals, I think). I killed them all. In the game I made 14 FnP rolls out of 20 (something like that if I recall correctly... it's been a while).
So after that he won the game with no problem.
It's been two (2) years.
I still keep regularly hearing how Blood Angels are OP, due to getting FnP everywhere...
I just can't take it how I lose 4 out of 5 of our games because he plays SM and I struggle with one of the worst armies in the game. But no... they're OP.
Voluntold wrote: Dating back to 3E, when Ravenwing bikers had a 6++ jink save...
"Sanchez had a biker make 19 jink saves in a row! As soon as I can afford it, I'm buying a ravenwing army."
That's some ridiculously good luck right there.
I've had luck like that with my Sisters and their 6++ invul. I started joking I was more likely to make my saves the more my opponent wanted the model dead after a while.
Kain wrote: Necrons probably outnumber the Tau lorewise though.
Lorewise there are millions of tomb worlds, so if they all wake up the Necrons would probably outnumber all of humanity, let alone the Tau.
There's also the fact they have no civilian populations- Necron Warriors were the pre bio-transference Necrontyr civilian population (and they're all totting Gauss Flayers these days).
What are you doing to get that number? 1/6=0.166 since it is a 6+ save. In order to find out what the odds are the formula should be (Chance)^(number of times you roll the way you want), which means that the answer should be a 1.64e^(-15)% or 0.00000000000000164% chance. I mean still incredible odds, but nowhere near your 1.31e^(-281) odds. Of course it has been a while since I actually had to do any math that basic in like 4 years so it wouldn't surprise me if my formula is wrong.
Kain wrote: Necrons probably outnumber the Tau lorewise though.
Lorewise there are millions of tomb worlds, so if they all wake up the Necrons would probably outnumber all of humanity, let alone the Tau.
There's also the fact they have no civilian populations- Necron Warriors were the pre bio-transference Necrontyr civilian population (and they're all totting Gauss Flayers these days).
All awakened, I think only the Orks and Nids really outnumber the Necrons.
Kain wrote: Necrons probably outnumber the Tau lorewise though.
Lorewise there are millions of tomb worlds, so if they all wake up the Necrons would probably outnumber all of humanity, let alone the Tau.
There's also the fact they have no civilian populations- Necron Warriors were the pre bio-transference Necrontyr civilian population (and they're all totting Gauss Flayers these days).
All awakened, I think only the Orks and Nids really outnumber the Necrons.
Yep.
Seems it'd be Nids > Orks > Necrons > Guard > Cultists > Tau > DELdar > CWEldar > SM = CSM > SoB > GK
Daemons don't fit in since they can be dissipated and created at a whim from their masters.
What are you doing to get that number? 1/6=0.166 since it is a 6+ save. In order to find out what the odds are the formula should be (Chance)^(number of times you roll the way you want), which means that the answer should be a 1.64e^(-15)% or 0.00000000000000164% chance. I mean still incredible odds, but nowhere near your 1.31e^(-281) odds. Of course it has been a while since I actually had to do any math that basic in like 4 years so it wouldn't surprise me if my formula is wrong.
Strange, I used the same formula you did (P/6^T, where P is the values you want and T is the number of instances.) I don't know, I just got the wrong number the first time? I *did* do the same formula as you.
You're right, I jut checked it. No idea where my first number came from.
Here are our contenders. These will probably be going in a lengthy, often incorrect blog post to do with anecdotes and standard deviation of results. With their permission, of course.
Spoiler:
MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:Back in 2nd edition, a friend wanted to play a quick skirmish against me - Marines vs Orks.
For this, completely straight faced, he proposed that he field Terminators (remember - 3+ on 2D6!) against Gretchin in a 1:1 ratio. After explaining how shockingly unbalanced and 1-sided the fight would be - he proceed to explain how actually it's a completely fair matchup "because he saw a gretchin kill a Terminator in a game".
He was not joking.
Of course this one made it in.
This video is clearly relevant:
Spoiler:
Ailaros wrote: People have seen a single small blast hit 9 models and then wipe them out with good rolling, and then become firm believers that plasma cannons absolutely ruin space marine armies, or that grenade launchers are suddenly the business against hordes.
They never stop and ask themselves what's more likely, that blast weapons are good, or that their opponent was an unlucky idiot for that particular shot?
Fantasticly true. One of the reasons doing math hammer for blast weapons is an absolute nightmare.
Aliaros wrote:Before hull points, there was also a lot of awful anecdotes about how great autocannons were, even against AV12 vehicles. Of course if you throw around a hundred autocannon shots, you're going to roll a few 6's, but the amount of selection bias was flat crazy.
I’m not taken with autocannons. They seem like a jack of all trades master of nought that isn’t really jack of all trades because it can’t even scrape AV14.
aliaros wrote:Though probably the worst of the worst for anecdotes was Marbo, in part because that was sort of part of his schtick. People always remember that one time that Marbo arrived and blew up something massive, and then forget all of those games where he did nothing.
Thankyou.
Spoiler:
ZebioLizard2 wrote: "Why are you taking a russ? Last time I had mine out I managed to kill my own squadron of russes with three scattered blasts, they are just simply useless. "
You’re up there.
Spoiler:
Kain wrote:
Me: *Trying pyrovores to try them out once when the GK codex was shiny and new in 5e*
GK player: *Shows up with draigo's dirty dozen, all given a paint job I could tell came from someone else as he was new to miniature wargaming, I fully expect to get creamed*
GK player: *Starts talking about how he's gonna purge the alien and all with his paladins*
Me: *Nods and is banking on feeding him Tervigon spawned termagants all game*
Me: *Had a swarmlord ready and so gets lucky with his landing rolls*
GK player: *Was so unworried that he bunched up his paladins*
Me: *Has 9 pyrovores in range*
GK player: *Draigo's dirty dozen is now largely toasty, the Pyrovores predictably die in the retaliatory strike, but the explosions from the force weapons kill more of Draigo's unit and end up wiping them all out as I pile them all in to bring him down*
GK player: *Fuming*
Me: *Kind of not believing what I'm seeing*
GK player: *Basically has squat on the table now besides Crowe and some purifiers and a pair of dreadknights*
GK player: *Gets swept off the board by turn four*
GK player: *Claims Pyrovores are now the most overpowered units ever*
Me: *Scratching my head*
You didn’t win the thread, but you came close Kain. Nobody wins with anecdotes.
BOOM.
Spoiler:
Voluntold wrote: Dating back to 3E, when Ravenwing bikers had a 6++ jink save...
"Sanchez had a biker make 19 jink saves in a row! As soon as I can afford it, I'm buying a ravenwing army."
If anyone would like to see an anecdotalist in action, here you go.
Jancoran wrote:
Math Hammer away friends.
As for yesterdays festivities, here are a few Pathfinder hi-lites for you.
1st Game, vs dual Storm Raven list with Dual Baal Predators and Dual Fragiosos:
I misunderstood him when speaking about the Storm Ravens and had the impression that he had dudes in hem. Because of the error, I lost 7-6 by firing at the wrong target in the ending round. However, BECAUSE of the Pathfinder threat (after all, I have two of them), he literally conceded most of the field to me and even retreated most of his stuff away from me. He simply could not win if he walked into that. So he sent his Storm Ravens ALONE to try and win it for him. He got lucky there and did just enough, but you should have seen the battlefield. At games end, we LITERALLY had taken over each others deployment zones and it took every shot he had to get the lat two points he needed. Close game, but it was most definitely the Pathfinders he feared. He had two units that could have pushed on me, and he just begged off as the game was too close to risk anything unarmored.
does this make sense to anyone else? this guy ran a kitted out pathfinder unit with rail rifles for some goddam reason
The impact of those two units was pretty impressive there. They ended up KILLING his Fragioso, which the Kroot would not have done. They also killed an entire squad of Marines and a Drop pod! DarkStrider never even got out of his devilfish for this game until the last round when I got out to take side potshots at a Baal Predator, but that was just to try and tie it up and he managed tyo avoid that with FOUR cover saves! It was, needless to say, very close.
Does it strike anyone else as odd that a unit with S6 KILLED an AV13 vehicle? Probably poor placement on his opponent's side, if it's true.
His MVP was the Fragiosi which in one fell swoop anihilated my commander and his drone swarm. He made a really ballsy drop and it paid off in round 1.
Second game.
I fought a Dark Angels player with two very tough Land Raiders. You dont see people taking advantage of those very often but they can take a pummelling.
In this game, a single Pathfinder squad killed a Whirlwind, a Tactical squad and a devastator squad plus 1 Terminator. Here again, DarkStrider never even got out of his Devilfish. this game was over MUCH more decisively. I ended up tabling him. The Pathfinders outflanked and caught the whirlwind by surprise. He fired down on me, but I was in ruins and able to take cover, minimal damage. I then popped the Dev squad while the kroot launched shots into the tactical marines, killing a few. Near the end, the Pathfinders finished all of the 7 remaining marines. Total kills was 13 marines and a Whirlwind for the one unit, plus then one stray terminator (who was all that was left from the Crisis Teams and other shooting). Excellent production and here again the htreat of a second unit of Pathfindeers was enough to keep him surging in the opposite direction and into the Riptides.
Does anyone else notice this list fields devilfish? Also, darkstrider in a devilfish, doing gak all for his 100 points.
Game 3:
I played NidZilla. VERY typical Psyker build.
In this game DarkStrider was much more important. The Pathfinders killed two Gaunt units, and a Tervigon.
10 blokes 3 drones killed 66 wounds, guys.
The second unit outflanked on the opposite side and killed the Warloird Hive Tyrant after it got grounded by another unit. and finished a Devilgaunt unit and its drop pod.
Both units got roughed up more in this game than they did in any other, from Biovore fire and from gaunt shooting. Nonetheless, very effective and they didn't die.
So just a little report on yesterdays tourney results. Pretty fun.
I just played my first game ever the other day. We only went two turns, but it convinced me that vehicles are pretty worthless. First turn a single las cannon blew up a Hellbrute in one shot. (Killed a few cultists too.) 2nd Turn a single Fusion Blaster blew up a full Rhino in one shot. Their 2nd turn saw our dreadnought go up from a single shot too. All three vehicles killed in 2 turns and all from single shots. WTF? Make me change from looking for a Hammerhead to wanting a Broadside suit.
I agree fully that vehicles seem a but under powered. Hope they get an upgrade at some point.
So I searched for the last 15 minutes and couldn't find the exact quote, but there was a battle report I wrote where someone made the comment to the effect of:
"I like Ailaros' battle reports, but I find it kind of annoying that he posts the results of die rolls. The luck stuff distracts from what's really going on in the game."
Which isn't an anecdote in and of it's self (well, it is, but for a different scope), so much as it is an anecdotalist's mission statement.
You have to have a certain sort of insane positivism to say that things happened they way they were supposed to happen when you spend most of your time rolling dice.
So I searched for the last 15 minutes and couldn't find the exact quote, but there was a battle report I wrote where someone made the comment to the effect of:
"I like Ailaros' battle reports, but I find it kind of annoying that he posts the results of die rolls. The luck stuff distracts from what's really going on in the game."
Which isn't an anecdote in and of it's self (well, it is, but for a different scope), so much as it is an anecdotalist's mission statement.
You have to have a certain sort of insane positivism to say that things happened they way they were supposed to happen when you spend most of your time rolling dice.
I like your battle reports. The dice are more exciting than the result anyday.
"What? Assault? Tau can't assault, I wiped out a full Fire Warrior squad with one marine one time! Go ahead!" Pretty standard fare, shame for him it was a commander with Fusion Blades charging in
Oh, Ailaros, I read through your essay, The Abstract Principles of 40K. Very interesting stuff... I'd say more about it, but it's 1 AM here and my brain's half asleep. Certainly changed my perspective on the game though.
"What? Assault? Tau can't assault, I wiped out a full Fire Warrior squad with one marine one time! Go ahead!" Pretty standard fare, shame for him it was a commander with Fusion Blades charging in
Oh, Ailaros, I read through your essay, The Abstract Principles of 40K. Very interesting stuff... I'd say more about it, but it's 1 AM here and my brain's half asleep. Certainly changed my perspective on the game though.
I win combat against beast pack with my farsight bomb on a regular basis.
liquidjoshi wrote: Yeah, it's great isn't it? No one ever expects assault Tau until they meet Farsight.
Don't forget about Aun`shi. That guy and his squad of fire warriors was killing Impereal Guard like nobody's business last time I took him. Very fun to be able to see "Angry Tau" on the tabletop for once.
That said, the thing that separates me from some other people with stories like this is that I recognize it was a horrible decision only done because I really wanted to see Tau kill something in close combat for once. A squad of fire warriors, an devilfish, and aun`shi cost about 3x more than the sum total of what I killed with it that game.
liquidjoshi wrote: Yeah, it's great isn't it? No one ever expects assault Tau until they meet Farsight.
Don't forget about Aun`shi. That guy and his squad of fire warriors was killing Impereal Guard like nobody's business last time I took him. Very fun to be able to see "Angry Tau" on the tabletop for once.
Ah, I remember the glorious days of Aun'shi shutting down opponents attacks (so the original Tau Codex). He had a rule called Blade Master which, in addition to giving him pseudo-Rending, allowed him to sacrifice any number of his own attacks to reduce the attacks of models attacking him by an equal amount to a minimum of 1. Literally, he could sacrifice 3 of his 4 attacks to reduce the attack characteristic of every model attacking him by 3. Add in WS5 and a 4+ invulnerable and he could tarpit CC characters pretty damn well.
Anecdote time: Using his parrying I had him lock down Calgar for an entire game in CC whilst slowly plinking away at him before killing him in the final round. Got some lucky rolls to wound and managed to pass an unusual amount of 4+ saves.
So Aun'shi, and attack denial in particular, was totally OP. Oh and so are 4+ invulnerable saves on a T3 model, according to the opponent who spent the whole game having Calgar swing ineffectually at a little blue man in a loincloth
Yeah, even regular crisis suits are better than one might usually think in close combat, what with being multi-wound space marines and all.
Though one could almost say that the idea that tau are bad in close combat is an anecdote. When was the last time you saw a tau player lose a game because of close combat? It's specious, rather than anecdotal, but you could easily see the anecdote on the other side "tau are weak because I lost a unit in close combat once."
Ailaros wrote: Yeah, even regular crisis suits are better than one might usually think in close combat, what with being multi-wound space marines and all.
Though one could almost say that the idea that tau are bad in close combat is an anecdote. When was the last time you saw a tau player lose a game because of close combat? It's specious, rather than anecdotal, but you could easily see the anecdote on the other side "tau are weak because I lost a unit in close combat once."
Actually, a regular crisis battlesuit is better in CC than even an assault marine. Stronger, same or more attacks, the only difference is WS2. It's REALLY not that big an issue.
Ailaros wrote: Yeah, even regular crisis suits are better than one might usually think in close combat, what with being multi-wound space marines and all.
Though one could almost say that the idea that tau are bad in close combat is an anecdote. When was the last time you saw a tau player lose a game because of close combat? It's specious, rather than anecdotal, but you could easily see the anecdote on the other side "tau are weak because I lost a unit in close combat once."
Actually, a regular crisis battlesuit is better in CC than even an assault marine. Stronger, same or more attacks, the only difference is WS2. It's REALLY not that big an issue.
Striking after most enemies due to I2 accentuates the weakness of the WS2, though. Pretty much everything will be hitting you on 3s and often hitting you first.
Sure. Crisis suits aren't going to beat THSS terminators in close combat, but they're not bad in close combat. You can't just chuck the remnants of a wounded squad at them and just expect that you'll win.
ionusx wrote: I never bring troops transports, their basically free first blood and kill points -said by an ultrasmurfs player locally here.
That's right his entire army teleport deepstrikes or footsloggs it up the board like it's 1st edition week and nobody brought any long range. It's bloody embarrassing to sm players in General. He fields a land raider as an mbt and doesn't carry troops in it either.
First blood is a pretty bad VP though.
I have been in the situation where me and a player constantly dodged LOS from each other in an attempt to deny first blood from each other until eventually it got to turn 5 and I only won (1 - 0) against him which was line breaker. It was a kill points game.
I think the game would be much more enjoyable if first blood was removed. It's either who has first turn or who siezes the initiative that gets it and you generally see people pick a weaker part of the opponent's army to alpha strike in turn 1 which brings minimal strategic value; just so they can get first blood.
I've played games with friends without first blood and I noticed a huge difference immediately. Less units were hiding away in LOS and were positioned in much better positions for providing the most bang for their buck.
Yeah, one of the reasons that the book missions are so bad is that it's so easy to play for a draw on primaries and force the game to be determined by secondaries.
More games than I care to admit wound up coming down to "first blood: the game". Once I realised this and started playing that way on purpose, it started to get pretty depressing just how often this became true when even just one player was doing this on purpose.
A while ago I was play a SM vs SM game, he brought rhinos, I didn't. he pretty much kicked my ass but I won the game cause I got first blood vs a rhino. It just didn't feel like a victory
Ailaros wrote: Yeah, one of the reasons that the book missions are so bad is that it's so easy to play for a draw on primaries and force the game to be determined by secondaries.
More games than I care to admit wound up coming down to "first blood: the game". Once I realised this and started playing that way on purpose, it started to get pretty depressing just how often this became true when even just one player was doing this on purpose.
There's also the case of the deathstar battle; First blood decides a game between two deathstars.
Thought for the day: First Blood may work better if it was changed so that either player could earn it by killing an enemy unit in each of their first player turn.
Thought for the day: Shooting shouldn't be so ridiculous that wiping out an entire unit on the very first turn, despite range and cover, is child's play.
I was always told that Marines, even assault Marines, were bad at assault, which is why no one uses assault Marines (except for BA since that's their gimmick, and they're on the very bottom of the trash pile right now). And now suddenly we're arguing about how crisis suits are now good assault units, because "they're basically Marines with two wounds"?
So they're as good as the worst, then? Not a compelling argument, in my opinion.
Sidstyler wrote: I was always told that Marines, even assault Marines, were bad at assault, which is why no one uses assault Marines (except for BA since that's their gimmick, and they're on the very bottom of the trash pile right now). And now suddenly we're arguing about how crisis suits are now good assault units, because "they're basically Marines with two wounds"?
So they're as good as the worst, then? Not a compelling argument, in my opinion.
Well they're marines with 2 wounds that are also S5. And Farsight is a boss who can deal enough damage on his won to make up for any lackings in his retinue. Hilarious situation is where you're playing a Farsight Enclaves army and charge Orks after softening them up with some shooting. Re-rolls to hit and wound them on 3s. Nothing like beating a close combat army with what is meant to be the worst close combat army in a fist fight
But it was less about Tau being good than it was that people expect Tau to crumble like paper in CC but Crisis Suits and Broadsides can actually fare pretty well, in some circumstances.
Sidstyler wrote: I was always told that Marines, even assault Marines, were bad at assault, which is why no one uses assault Marines (except for BA since that's their gimmick, and they're on the very bottom of the trash pile right now). And now suddenly we're arguing about how crisis suits are now good assault units, because "they're basically Marines with two wounds"?
So they're as good as the worst, then? Not a compelling argument, in my opinion.
The argument was more "Crisis battlesuits are better than people give them credit in CC. "
Okay, yeah, so they don't just get immediately erased from the table when charged. I don't know of anyone who ever suggested as much that wasn't intentionally exaggerating anyway, but yeah, in that case they're "better" than people give them credit for...in that they probably won't die until the next turn they're locked in combat. In some circumstances it might even be possible to last longer than that, but even with S5 they're pretty ineffectual in close combat with their tiny unit size and low number of attacks per model, only hitting 50% of the time against most opponents at that, and likely having to weather many more attacks in return which even a 3+ save won't save you from forever, as many dead Marines can no doubt attest to. And every turn they spend locked in melee is a turn they're not shooting, so they might as well have died when they got charged anyway for all the good they're doing you at that point. The unit will either inevitably die or be locked in combat for so long that it won't matter if they squeak out a win anyway, which his typically why you keep them out of assault at all costs.
It doesn't really seem significant enough to me in any case to be worth pointing out while exclaiming "See, Tau aren't even that bad in CC!", when they really aren't that good, either. Especially since Ailaros in particular has a strong personal distaste for the way Tau play specifically and I feel like he's trying to make some point in doing so.
Sidstyler wrote:So they're as good as the worst, then? Not a compelling argument, in my opinion.
Assault marines are FAR from the worst unit in close combat. A cursory look at even just the troops choices of other armies easily confirms this. Who is going to win an assault, assault marines or guardsmen? or grots? or guardians? or firewarriors? or termagaunts? The list goes on and on, especially when you expand out of troops (or a CCS? or sternguard? or lootas?, etc.), and then when you remember that they're better in close combat against all vehicles that aren't also walkers, and even against some walkers.
You've got to be pretty myopic to think that something with 4's in its staline and Sv3+, and frag and krak grenades and ATSKNF is going to be bad in close combat. It would be a case of comparing the good to the great and calling them bad.
Sidstyler wrote:So they're as good as the worst, then? Not a compelling argument, in my opinion.
Assault marines are FAR from the worst unit in close combat. A cursory look at even just the troops choices of other armies easily confirms this. Who is going to win an assault, assault marines or guardsmen? or grots? or guardians? or firewarriors? or termagaunts? The list goes on and on, especially when you expand out of troops (or a CCS? or sternguard? or lootas?, etc.), and then when you remember that they're better in close combat against all vehicles that aren't also walkers, and even against some walkers.
You've got to be pretty myopic to think that something with 4's in its staline and Sv3+, and frag and krak grenades and ATSKNF is going to be bad in close combat. It would be a case of comparing the good to the great and calling them bad.
Which is what generally happens, to be fair. People play Assault Marines expecting them to steamroll an assault, or carry against something like Howling Banshees or a mob of Boyz. As we know, it doesn't generally go like that, leading them to conclude that Assault Marines suck in assault when, really, they're being thrown at the wrong targets. That's my experience, anyway - I've yet to be disappointed by my assault units against Guardians and the like.
Well my riptide once charged a tyranid drop pod in close combat, failed its smash attack, then took a wound, failed its leadership test, and jumped off the table. That totally means that Riptides suck and tyranid drop pods were the perfect Riptide counter (before Mat Ward took them out of the new Tyranid codex).
Did I inspire enough nerd rage with that one or should I keep going?
dementedwombat wrote: Well my riptide once charged a tyranid drop pod in close combat, failed its smash attack, then took a wound, failed its leadership test, and jumped off the table. That totally means that Riptides suck and tyranid drop pods were the perfect Riptide counter (before Mat Ward took them out of the new Tyranid codex).
Did I inspire enough nerd rage with that one or should I keep going?
The only thing I have even remotely close is that I once had my basilisk shoot at something right in front of it, and it scattered backwards, hit the basilisk, caused a vehicle explosion, and that wiped out my CCS with its standard, causing the squad next to it (who took enough casualties from the blast) to fail its morale test and run off the board.
I don't know what that anecdote really proves other than... umm... GO GUARD!
The only thing I have even remotely close is that I once had my basilisk shoot at something right in front of it, and it scattered backwards, hit the basilisk, caused a vehicle explosion, and that wiped out my CCS with its standard, causing the squad next to it (who took enough casualties from the blast) to fail its morale test and run off the board.
I don't know what that anecdote really proves other than... umm... GO GUARD!
I once had a Vindicaire shoot away Horus Luprecal's invulnerable save and then got an improbably lucky series of rending hits from my ratlings to kill the Primarch himself.
After this, my friend never dared bring his Primarchs before snipers again, citing that their precision shots and rending/4+ wounding made Primarchs too underpowered.
After this, my Time Traveling guardsmen Medusa'd the arch-traitor's guards into ash.
I was teaching a friend the game yesterday. Talked about different weapons and the ability they have to kill vehicles.
So I put two Kanz with Big Shootas on the battlefield and we just practiced the shooting phase. When we got to Lootas I put six of them on the battlefield and said "These will probably kill our kanz in one turn."
With one piece of 4+ cover save terrain between each other those two units shot at each other for 8 turns before the last one of the Kanz finally shot the last Loota.
Friend said "I don't know why you were worried they (Lootas) don't seem good at killing these (killa kanz)."
Ailaros wrote: The only thing I have even remotely close is that I once had my basilisk shoot at something right in front of it, and it scattered backwards, hit the basilisk, caused a vehicle explosion, and that wiped out my CCS with its standard, causing the squad next to it (who took enough casualties from the blast) to fail its morale test and run off the board.
I don't know what that anecdote really proves other than... umm... GO GUARD!
O_O
My best anecdote would be the following-
Tournament game, turn one, two squads of warriors each with a Harbinger of Destruction attached sit behind cover. I played second so the other guy's Chaos Lord moved into the harbinger's range along with his giant blob of jumppack CSM by the time my first turn came, figuring I've nothing better to do with 'em I fire my first Harbinger at the squad and roll 6 on my to hit. Precision shot! Naturally I designate the Chaos Lord as the target, but alas he passed his Look Out Sir! test and so a brave marine jumped in the path of the beam and saved his Lord's life. Now comes the second Harbinger- I roll to hit landing a 6. Precision shot! AGAIN! Opponent rolls his Look Out Sir! and the dice comes up with a single pip.
Boom, Headshot. Chaos Lord goes down due to instant death. First Blood, Slay the Warlord.
Harbingers of Destruction are totally overpowered!
Ailaros wrote: The only thing I have even remotely close is that I once had my basilisk shoot at something right in front of it, and it scattered backwards, hit the basilisk, caused a vehicle explosion, and that wiped out my CCS with its standard, causing the squad next to it (who took enough casualties from the blast) to fail its morale test and run off the board.
I don't know what that anecdote really proves other than... umm... GO GUARD!
O_O
My best anecdote would be the following-
Tournament game, turn one, two squads of warriors each with a Harbinger of Destruction attached sit behind cover. I played second so the other guy's Chaos Lord moved into the harbinger's range along with his giant blob of jumppack CSM by the time my first turn came, figuring I've nothing better to do with 'em I fire my first Harbinger at the squad and roll 6 on my to hit. Precision shot! Naturally I designate the Chaos Lord as the target, but alas he passed his Look Out Sir! test and so a brave marine jumped in the path of the beam and saved his Lord's life. Now comes the second Harbinger- I roll to hit landing a 6. Precision shot! AGAIN! Opponent rolls his Look Out Sir! and the dice comes up with a single pip.
Boom, Headshot. Chaos Lord goes down due to instant death. First Blood, Slay the Warlord.
Harbingers of Destruction are totally overpowered!
was it mounted on a juggernaught? Surely it had T5 if it was on a jugger or a bike.
Ailaros wrote: The only thing I have even remotely close is that I once had my basilisk shoot at something right in front of it, and it scattered backwards, hit the basilisk, caused a vehicle explosion, and that wiped out my CCS with its standard, causing the squad next to it (who took enough casualties from the blast) to fail its morale test and run off the board.
I don't know what that anecdote really proves other than... umm... GO GUARD!
O_O
My best anecdote would be the following-
Tournament game, turn one, two squads of warriors each with a Harbinger of Destruction attached sit behind cover. I played second so the other guy's Chaos Lord moved into the harbinger's range along with his giant blob of jumppack CSM by the time my first turn came, figuring I've nothing better to do with 'em I fire my first Harbinger at the squad and roll 6 on my to hit. Precision shot! Naturally I designate the Chaos Lord as the target, but alas he passed his Look Out Sir! test and so a brave marine jumped in the path of the beam and saved his Lord's life. Now comes the second Harbinger- I roll to hit landing a 6. Precision shot! AGAIN! Opponent rolls his Look Out Sir! and the dice comes up with a single pip.
Boom, Headshot. Chaos Lord goes down due to instant death. First Blood, Slay the Warlord.
Harbingers of Destruction are totally overpowered!
was it mounted on a juggernaught? Surely it had T5 if it was on a jugger or a bike.
Nope. Just your plain ol' jump pack Chaos Lord.
This was before the release of the CSM's 6th ed codex btw.
But I was told that my Grey Hunters were cheese and OP because they were like regular Tac Marines but had Counter-attack and a bolter/bolt pistol/CCW and got an extra attack in close combat and because they were so OP if I wanted to play against someone with "normal" Marines, I had to play them like a regular tac marine without the bonuses.
But I wasn't allowed anything like a ML like Codex Marines get because it wasn't part of my codex that my troops could have that.
But I was told that my Grey Hunters were cheese and OP because they were like regular Tac Marines but had Counter-attack and a bolter/bolt pistol/CCW and got an extra attack in close combat and because they were so OP if I wanted to play against someone with "normal" Marines, I had to play them like a regular tac marine without the bonuses.
But I wasn't allowed anything like a ML like Codex Marines get because it wasn't part of my codex that my troops could have that.
That just sounds like a gakky opponent. It's not what I was looking for, but the person who told you that is a jerk. Don't play them again.
welshhoppo wrote: I once heard a guy say that is Crisis suits were better in combat than at range because they had hit and run.
My example of someone saying that snipers made Primarchs underpowered due to ignoring the points they pay for toughness and armor saves, citing me being able to down Horus with a Vindicaire and some lucky rolls from Ratlings is an anectdote, that's just standard shaky and faulty reasoning.
In a game I had a squad of 10 Tactical Marines with a Lascannon in the squad. The Lascannon shot down a Fighta Jet (I think) with a lucky shot and it crashed right into the Tactical Squad killing 9 Marines with the Lascannon Marine surviving to tell the tale.
Moral of the story is Lascannon Tactical Marines are OP and cannot be killed.
Polonius wrote: Sometimes a unit just doesn't work. There are two dozen real units in the book, and Rough Riders are the duff one.
Even under the best of circumstances, highly fragile assault units have been a poor gambit in 40k. You either need huge numbers (orks, nids, blobs), crazy good buffs (nids/blobs), or a reliable delivery method (outflank/transport). In 6th, you can't assault out of reserve or a transport, meaning the enemy will always get to shoot your light assault unit, followed by an overwatch.
In a way, the rules of logic finally caught up with 40k.
The response:
The only thing to add to that is "Sometimes a Unit Does not work for some People". I will admit that Rough Riders need something to fix them, W+1, T+1, Being able to take Las-Guns or a Second Las-Pistol, or even even just the ability to have a Priest or Comisar to take a Mount. I am probably make myself a Comisar or a mount and Take a Chaplin on a bike along with a Scouts as Allies to hopfuly give them a Punch. I have always done poorly with PSi-Riflemen Dreads [sometimes only killing 2-3 models and etire game] even vs Orks and Nids, yet mt Blood Claws [Usuayl killing off 2-3 Units a game] are the scourge of our group.
welshhoppo wrote: I once heard a guy say that is Crisis suits were better in combat than at range because they had hit and run.
they are better in close quarters combat.
My XV9 suits love the overwatch/defensive grenades/hit and run phase. I don't know what's so wrong with this statement
Full disclosure time: I can only actually be this cheeky because I know 7th edition is coming up soon and I'm guessing Tau will take one hell of a hard nerf. Ah well, I lived with it through 4th and 5th edition. At least I have that new codex I've been wanting.for ~6 years.
Demoing to a new player (I was assisting two tables, and only had my Eldar with me), a footslogging Fire Dragon squad took every shot the experienced Marine player could put out, and made every save.
liquidjoshi wrote: Yeah, it's great isn't it? No one ever expects assault Tau until they meet Farsight.
I remember one of my favorite moments running Farsight, I deepstruck (deepstriked?) him behind enemy lines with a bunch of Crisis Suits, and on the next turn, my opponent kindly reminded me that I had forgotten to do my jet pack move. The look of shock and disbelief on his face when I told him Farsight was going to assault him was just priceless.
