This is meant as a sort of counterpoint to the "Our weapons are useless" rule, which allows models to run away from combat if they can't hurt the enemy they're locked with. I'm mostly writing this because it's incredibly annoying to have your tanky models (Dreadnoughts, Knights, super-high T monstrous creatures, etc,) locked into combat against enemies who literally cannot hurt them, but you're not permitted to leave despite the fact that there wouldn't be any reason why you couldn't. (You're not normally allowed to leave combat because you would be overwhelmed immediately in melee attacks, like when you break and then get overrun, but that obviously can't happen in certain situations.) With all that said...

"Their Weapons are Useless"
When locked in combat, if your opponenents models are completely incapable of damaging any unit you have locked in the same combat, (Because their Strength is too low to harm you and they lack any special rule which would allow them to, their WS has been reduced to 0, or any other reason,) then you may disengage those units from combat with no penalties at the end of the assault phase. (Note that if a model would normally be vulnerable, but has had its durability increased by a Psychic Power or any other means, then it may still disengage from combat.)



My one concern is that this could be exploited to charge into combat, get locked until the enemy's assault phase, then leave so that you can shoot again, but if I only allow the player to disengage on their turn, then we get the opposite problem: The opponent can charge, be locked for the player's entire turn, and then immediately charge on their turn again.

You want to remove tarpitting as a valuable strategy. Got it

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You want to remove tarpitting as a valuable strategy. Got it

Not all tarpitting, but I don't want it to be possible to tarpit a unit unless you can at least hurt it. There's no reason why a Stompa or a Khorne Lord of Skulls should have to sit around, swinging at their toes when twenty plague zombies are standing around them, breaking sticks on their armor. I imagine it goes something like this:
"We need you to fire on those tanks!"
"No-can-do, sir, there's some grots getting themselves stuck in my toes."

All it takes is one attack that could potentially damage the target - One Meltabomb will work against anyone, a Krak Grenade will do the trick, one Rending attack, just something that makes it possible for the unit to potentially cause damage that would distract the thing they're tarpitting. Otherwise, it makes zero sense, and it isn't really a fun thing to play with or against.

Why not simply allow Walkers and Monstrous Creature to Tank shock, and update the rules for ramming MC accordingly? Add a clause that you can't charge and tank shock in the same turn or so.

Use your bulk to shove units around.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Why not simply allow Walkers and Monstrous Creature to Tank shock, and update the rules for ramming MC accordingly? Add a clause that you can't charge and tank shock in the same turn or so.

Use your bulk to shove units around.

I'm... Not sure how this would help? The problem is that weak but numerous units can lock durable shooty units in Close Combat, tying them down for the entire game. (120pts of Plague Zombies will tarpit most super-heavy walkers, no problem.) Being able to tank shock doesn't help there, because they'd already be locked in combat.

Sorry, on a phone. But the idea is to use tankshock as a Hit&Run variant, and allow disengagement via Tank Shock (so the Lord of Skulls isn't so hilariously easy to bog down too)

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Sorry, on a phone. But the idea is to use tankshock as a Hit&Run variant, and allow disengagement via Tank Shock (so the Lord of Skulls isn't so hilariously easy to bog down too)

Oh. I think that might almost be *too* powerful, since you could use it on otherwise intimidating enemies to disengage from a poor matchup combat. (For example, a bunch of Terminators with Chainfists. They might get to take their Glory or Death attack, but it's still a huge edge for the player with the titan in that case.)

IIRC, you can't engage Titans with anything that's not a superheavy anyway right?

I'd imagine it'd be more for stuff like "Dakkafex/carnifex can plow through some conscripts, to get into a better position to shoot the dudes behind them" or something more low-level like that.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You want to remove tarpitting as a valuable strategy. Got it

Not all tarpitting, but I don't want it to be possible to tarpit a unit unless you can at least hurt it. There's no reason why a Stompa or a Khorne Lord of Skulls should have to sit around, swinging at their toes when twenty plague zombies are standing around them, breaking sticks on their armor. I imagine it goes something like this:
"We need you to fire on those tanks!"
"No-can-do, sir, there's some grots getting themselves stuck in my toes."

All it takes is one attack that could potentially damage the target - One Meltabomb will work against anyone, a Krak Grenade will do the trick, one Rending attack, just something that makes it possible for the unit to potentially cause damage that would distract the thing they're tarpitting. Otherwise, it makes zero sense, and it isn't really a fun thing to play with or against.

That's because 20 plague zombies have no concept of self preservation and will climb at the vehicle trying to get the goodies inside.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
IIRC, you can't engage Titans with anything that's not a superheavy anyway right?

I'd imagine it'd be more for stuff like "Dakkafex/carnifex can plow through some conscripts, to get into a better position to shoot the dudes behind them" or something more low-level like that.

Nope. They dropped that rule when the 6th edition Apocalypse came out, and it stayed dropped when they updated things in Escalation, and eventually made the rules perma-official in 7th edition. Now, 30k Warhounds, Reavers, and Warlords have a specific note that says that they can't normally be locked in combat, but they're the exception, not the rule.

@Slayer-Fan123, that makes no sense. Zombies aren't capable of harming titans. They are S3. They cannot hurt vehicles! It doesn't matter if they're trying to "Get at the goodies inside". If they were capable of hurting tanks, then they would be hurting tanks whether or not that tank was trying to stop them - After all, immobilized vehicles have no method of trying to stop Plague Zombies from "Climbing at the vehicle, trying to get the goodies inside", but that doesn't mean that the Zombies are suddenly stronger or better at fighting.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
IIRC, you can't engage Titans with anything that's not a superheavy anyway right?

I'd imagine it'd be more for stuff like "Dakkafex/carnifex can plow through some conscripts, to get into a better position to shoot the dudes behind them" or something more low-level like that.

Nope. They dropped that rule when the 6th edition Apocalypse came out, and it stayed dropped when they updated things in Escalation, and eventually made the rules perma-official in 7th edition. Now, 30k Warhounds, Reavers, and Warlords have a specific note that says that they can't normally be locked in combat, but they're the exception, not the rule.

@Slayer-Fan123, that makes no sense. Zombies aren't capable of harming titans. They are S3. They cannot hurt vehicles! It doesn't matter if they're trying to "Get at the goodies inside". If they were capable of hurting tanks, then they would be hurting tanks whether or not that tank was trying to stop them - After all, immobilized vehicles have no method of trying to stop Plague Zombies from "Climbing at the vehicle, trying to get the goodies inside", but that doesn't mean that the Zombies are suddenly stronger or better at fighting.

No, it just means the Walker needs to take care of them before they climb inside.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
IIRC, you can't engage Titans with anything that's not a superheavy anyway right?

I'd imagine it'd be more for stuff like "Dakkafex/carnifex can plow through some conscripts, to get into a better position to shoot the dudes behind them" or something more low-level like that.

Nope. They dropped that rule when the 6th edition Apocalypse came out, and it stayed dropped when they updated things in Escalation, and eventually made the rules perma-official in 7th edition. Now, 30k Warhounds, Reavers, and Warlords have a specific note that says that they can't normally be locked in combat, but they're the exception, not the rule.

@Slayer-Fan123, that makes no sense. Zombies aren't capable of harming titans. They are S3. They cannot hurt vehicles! It doesn't matter if they're trying to "Get at the goodies inside". If they were capable of hurting tanks, then they would be hurting tanks whether or not that tank was trying to stop them - After all, immobilized vehicles have no method of trying to stop Plague Zombies from "Climbing at the vehicle, trying to get the goodies inside", but that doesn't mean that the Zombies are suddenly stronger or better at fighting.

No, it just means the Walker needs to take care of them before they climb inside.

Again, though, that makes no sense. How is a zombie going to climb inside of a Dreadnought? Or an Imperial Knight? For that matter, by your logic, then zombies should cause problems for most open-topped vehicles like Trukks and those Dark Eldar transports, and yet - Wouldn't you know it - Zombies don't cause any trouble to them, despite the fact that they should be far more vulnerable. Logically speaking there is zero reason why someone piloting a huge warmachine should care at all that there are zombies getting clogged in his toes.

Not to go too far off subject but I have a SOB squad which couldn't hit the eternity gate if they were standing two feet away from it. Either the rifling in their bolters is gone or the emperor is punishing them

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
IIRC, you can't engage Titans with anything that's not a superheavy anyway right?

I'd imagine it'd be more for stuff like "Dakkafex/carnifex can plow through some conscripts, to get into a better position to shoot the dudes behind them" or something more low-level like that.

Nope. They dropped that rule when the 6th edition Apocalypse came out, and it stayed dropped when they updated things in Escalation, and eventually made the rules perma-official in 7th edition. Now, 30k Warhounds, Reavers, and Warlords have a specific note that says that they can't normally be locked in combat, but they're the exception, not the rule.

@Slayer-Fan123, that makes no sense. Zombies aren't capable of harming titans. They are S3. They cannot hurt vehicles! It doesn't matter if they're trying to "Get at the goodies inside". If they were capable of hurting tanks, then they would be hurting tanks whether or not that tank was trying to stop them - After all, immobilized vehicles have no method of trying to stop Plague Zombies from "Climbing at the vehicle, trying to get the goodies inside", but that doesn't mean that the Zombies are suddenly stronger or better at fighting.

No, it just means the Walker needs to take care of them before they climb inside.

Again, though, that makes no sense. How is a zombie going to climb inside of a Dreadnought? Or an Imperial Knight? For that matter, by your logic, then zombies should cause problems for most open-topped vehicles like Trukks and those Dark Eldar transports, and yet - Wouldn't you know it - Zombies don't cause any trouble to them, despite the fact that they should be far more vulnerable. Logically speaking there is zero reason why someone piloting a huge warmachine should care at all that there are zombies getting clogged in his toes.

Yeah, wouldn't the walker just, like, walk through them? I mean, it has big stompy legs. Infantry are squishy. The walker should just keep going, stepping on and smacking away any infantry that gets in their way.
Really, a walker should only be locked in combat with other walkers and monstrous creatures.

Speaking of gettings locked in combat, bikes shouldn't be locked in combat either. Because they are bikes; they have to keep moving. Can you imagine a biker riding towards a melee, only to come to a complete stop and start ineffectually waving his stick around? I can, and its stupid. Bikes should have an obligate form of the hit and run rule, where they must disengage from combat after all attacks from both sides have been resolved. Failure to do so will result in the bikes receiving more damage, as they are surrounded and pulled off their vehicles by their opponents.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Yeah, wouldn't the walker just, like, walk through them? I mean, it has big stompy legs. Infantry are squishy. The walker should just keep going, stepping on and smacking away any infantry that gets in their way.
Really, a walker should only be locked in combat with other walkers and monstrous creatures.

Speaking of gettings locked in combat, bikes shouldn't be locked in combat either. Because they are bikes; they have to keep moving. Can you imagine a biker riding towards a melee, only to come to a complete stop and start ineffectually waving his stick around? I can, and its stupid. Bikes should have an obligate form of the hit and run rule, where they must disengage from combat after all attacks from both sides have been resolved. Failure to do so will result in the bikes receiving more damage, as they are surrounded and pulled off their vehicles by their opponents.

Really, if anything, bikes just shouldn't get their Toughness bonus in close combat if we want the game to function realistically. That's a concession I don't mind for game balance, though.

And yeah, "A walker should only be locked in combat with other walkers and monstrous creatures" is kind of what I was going for. I didn't specify 'Walkers and monstrous creatures', because there are many 'Infantry' level threats that are still capable of harming or even curbstomping many walkers, (Space Marine Chapter Masters and Ork Warbosses come to mind, among others,) and since the inverted version of this rule already exists (If you can't hurt a target, you're allowed to run away,) I figured the rule wasn't too much of a stretch.

We have a rule we call "Move the Pile" where a monstrous creature or walker can move as if in difficult terrain regardless of being engaged with other units (unless they are also an MC or walker). The units engaged may opt to consolidate away or if they would have enough movement, re-engage the MC after it finishes its move.

I thought fearless prevented you from using our weapons are useless or was that 6th edition ? Because if it does Plague zombies can't abuse it to escape combat (though why would you leave combat anyway if you are tar pitting)

 Rydria wrote:
I thought fearless prevented you from using our weapons are useless or was that 6th edition ? Because if it does Plague zombies can't abuse it to escape combat (though why would you leave combat anyway if you are tar pitting)

You're missing the point. This rule would prevent tarpits from bogging down enemies who are invulnerable to them. The zombies wouldn't be the ones leaving combat, the thing they're tarpitting would be.

From a gameplay perspective, do tarpitty horde units really need the nerf?

It's bad game design when units have no meaningful way of interacting with each other.
Gaunt/zombie/cultist hordes already have no way of attacking most of the big stuff. But they can at least tie them up for a while.
This proposal means they lose the ability to even hinder them slightly.

Sometimes realism has to take a backseat to gameplay, and I think this is one of those cases.

Arson Fire wrote:
From a gameplay perspective, do tarpitty horde units really need the nerf?

It's bad game design when units have no meaningful way of interacting with each other.
Gaunt/zombie/cultist hordes already have no way of attacking most of the big stuff. But they can at least tie them up for a while.
This proposal means they lose the ability to even hinder them slightly.

Sometimes realism has to take a backseat to gameplay, and I think this is one of those cases.

The problem is that it's still crappy game design, just the other way around. If I want to bring a big, shooty something, I also have to buy useless ablative wounds to sit in a circle singing kum-bay-ah so that the thing I actually want to use isn't rendered useless on turn 1. I'm not against some level of tarpitting, but big zombie units only cost 120 points and can tie down units that are vastly more expensive with impunity. Especially with the easy access to first-turn charges or deep strike assaults that several armies have, it makes it very plausible that big, tanky models that have no business being tarpitted can be rendered entirely useless by models with a fraction of their cost.

I personally have a much larger problem with 500+ point models being effectively destroyed without having any way to stop it than I do with plague zombies having one thing they can't bog down for the whole game. Tarpit units don't struggle because big units are gunning them down, they struggle because certain armies have ways of easily removing them from the board - I'm trying to make certain bad units (Stompas, Warhounds, GUOs,) more usable here.


Tarpits would still be useful, too. Just because you can't keep a warhound from shooting by getting jammed in its toes doesn't mean your units are suddenly worthless.

So your problem is that the big stompy robot has to have other units supporting it to be played effectively?


I don't really know what to say to that.

You don't use an aircraft carrier without its escort fleet. The carrier is the center of the fleet, and a powerful force projector, but by itself it's a vulnerable target.
That's how I see lords of war. They need screening units to keep them safe, and this is how things should be.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Arson Fire wrote:
From a gameplay perspective, do tarpitty horde units really need the nerf?

It's bad game design when units have no meaningful way of interacting with each other.
Gaunt/zombie/cultist hordes already have no way of attacking most of the big stuff. But they can at least tie them up for a while.
This proposal means they lose the ability to even hinder them slightly.

Sometimes realism has to take a backseat to gameplay, and I think this is one of those cases.

The problem is that it's still crappy game design, just the other way around. If I want to bring a big, shooty something, I also have to buy useless ablative wounds to sit in a circle singing kum-bay-ah so that the thing I actually want to use isn't rendered useless on turn 1. I'm not against some level of tarpitting, but big zombie units only cost 120 points and can tie down units that are vastly more expensive with impunity. Especially with the easy access to first-turn charges or deep strike assaults that several armies have, it makes it very plausible that big, tanky models that have no business being tarpitted can be rendered entirely useless by models with a fraction of their cost.

I personally have a much larger problem with 500+ point models being effectively destroyed without having any way to stop it than I do with plague zombies having one thing they can't bog down for the whole game. Tarpit units don't struggle because big units are gunning them down, they struggle because certain armies have ways of easily removing them from the board - I'm trying to make certain bad units (Stompas, Warhounds, GUOs,) more usable here.


Tarpits would still be useful, too. Just because you can't keep a warhound from shooting by getting jammed in its toes doesn't mean your units are suddenly worthless.

IOW: You admitted that my first post in the thread was correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You want to remove tarpitting as a valuable strategy. Got it

There it is! You don't care about game design. You're butthurt.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

IOW: You admitted that my first post in the thread was correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You want to remove tarpitting as a valuable strategy. Got it

There it is! You don't care about game design. You're butthurt.

No...? I want to remove one facet of tarpitting. You'd still be able to tarpit, it would just require a bit more thought, and not be so completely universal. Zombies could tarpit units of T6 or less, which means most MCs and just about every infantry unit is still vulnerable. Anyone with Krak Grenades could tarpit a Dreadnought or equivalent, and anyone with Meltabombs could tarpit effectively any unit. Plaguebearers wouldn't be able to tarpit T8, but they'd still be able to tarpit vehicles. Heck, even units that can't directly hurt an enemy (Zombies vs Stompas, for example,) could still trip them up by surrounding them and keeping them from running away until someone that can actually hurt it could show up.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

IOW: You admitted that my first post in the thread was correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You want to remove tarpitting as a valuable strategy. Got it

There it is! You don't care about game design. You're butthurt.

No...? I want to remove one facet of tarpitting. You'd still be able to tarpit, it would just require a bit more thought, and not be so completely universal. Zombies could tarpit units of T6 or less, which means most MCs and just about every infantry unit is still vulnerable. Anyone with Krak Grenades could tarpit a Dreadnought or equivalent, and anyone with Meltabombs could tarpit effectively any unit. Plaguebearers wouldn't be able to tarpit T8, but they'd still be able to tarpit vehicles. Heck, even units that can't directly hurt an enemy (Zombies vs Stompas, for example,) could still trip them up by surrounding them and keeping them from running away until someone that can actually hurt it could show up.

No, you want to make sure some of your units can be used mindlessly. If your Dread gets caught by fething Zombies, you deserve the tarpit, not a small slap on the wrist.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

IOW: You admitted that my first post in the thread was correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You want to remove tarpitting as a valuable strategy. Got it

There it is! You don't care about game design. You're butthurt.

No...? I want to remove one facet of tarpitting. You'd still be able to tarpit, it would just require a bit more thought, and not be so completely universal. Zombies could tarpit units of T6 or less, which means most MCs and just about every infantry unit is still vulnerable. Anyone with Krak Grenades could tarpit a Dreadnought or equivalent, and anyone with Meltabombs could tarpit effectively any unit. Plaguebearers wouldn't be able to tarpit T8, but they'd still be able to tarpit vehicles. Heck, even units that can't directly hurt an enemy (Zombies vs Stompas, for example,) could still trip them up by surrounding them and keeping them from running away until someone that can actually hurt it could show up.

No, you want to make sure some of your units can be used mindlessly. If your Dread gets caught by fething Zombies, you deserve the tarpit, not a small slap on the wrist.

Zombies are just one example, though it's worth pointing out that since a Tsons relic can make Zombies into jump infantry, they're actually pretty quick at getting into tarpits, though.

This also exists to make the many, many ways to get turn-one deep-strike assaults less overpowered. Space Marines and CSM both have cheap, reliable ways to get units into combat anywhere on the board turn one (Raptor Talons and Skyhammers), and most armies (except Tau,) don't have the Interceptor to stop it. Or you can just Deep Strike a unit and use Soulswitch/Electrodisplacement to get them right next to the unit you want to assault. (Heck, you could drop in a DS unit like a Raptor, then use Soulswitch to throw thirty Plague Zombies right into assault range!) Several units have ways of crossing more than 24" and still assaulting as well, which means that simply assaulting from one deployment zone to another is entirely possible. And this is just Imperial armies! If we're including armies that aren't with the Imperium... Well, I'm not as familiar with Xenos codices, but I'm pretty sure options exist.

At least with this, you'd have to bring something that could actually cause damage. It still wouldn't neuter Tarpits, not even close, but it would make it so that cheap tactics would have to have a little thought put behind them.

Or are you arguing that there should be no counter to certain cheap tactics?

You're trying to fix something that isn't broken.

Yes, big things like walkers and MCs tend to have few attacks, and are therefore vulnerable to tarpits.
However tarpit units like those zombies are themselves vulnerable to high quantities of low strength attacks, such as from squads of infantry.

So people who take a balanced army, containing a mixture of unit types, aren't going to have this problem.
If you've ignored infantry to instead spam as many knights as you can fit into an army, and those knights get tarpitted... then that's entirely on you.

If you take a skew list, then you're just going to have to deal with its weaknesses.

Arson Fire wrote:
You're trying to fix something that isn't broken.

Yes, big things like walkers and MCs tend to have few attacks, and are therefore vulnerable to tarpits.
However tarpit units like those zombies are themselves vulnerable to high quantities of low strength attacks, such as from squads of infantry.

So people who take a balanced army, containing a mixture of unit types, aren't going to have this problem.
If you've ignored infantry to instead spam as many knights as you can fit into an army, and those knights get tarpitted... then that's entirely on you.

If you take a skew list, then you're just going to have to deal with its weaknesses.

Except that those zombies aren't vulnerable to high quantities of low strength attacks either. On average, you would need 80 Space Marines firing at Rapid Fire range to kill a unit of 30 plague zombies, assuming those zombies could get a 5+ cover save.

Bringing a mixture of units can't prevent your big stuff from getting bogged down in combat. If you're playing a mostly shooty army that has fairly little on the assault side (Like, say, Tau,) then it's entirely possible that you'll have absolutely no recourse to get a unit of Zombies out of close combat, at least not quickly. Even Orks struggle to kill zombies and equivalent without using massive, overwhelming force. And of course, it's not just Zombies - 50-man 4++ fearless Guardsman blobs are a fairly commonly seen tactic too. Tarpits are already a really strong tactic.

And I'm not saying that those tarpits should go away entirely, I think I've made that perfectly clear. They absolutely have their purposes. I'm just saying that bogging down armies shouldn't be a completely unstoppable counter for certain builds.

For some reason, you seem to be assuming that I am proposing this because I try to bring spammy one-sided lists, but I don't. I like big models, but I usually stick to about one per game - The problem is, that one model amounts to 25% or more of my total army thanks to how expensive it is, and the fact that some players have a way to completely shut down a quarter or more of my army on turn one, without leaving any way for me to deal with it, is a huge problem.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

IOW: You admitted that my first post in the thread was correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You want to remove tarpitting as a valuable strategy. Got it

There it is! You don't care about game design. You're butthurt.

No...? I want to remove one facet of tarpitting. You'd still be able to tarpit, it would just require a bit more thought, and not be so completely universal. Zombies could tarpit units of T6 or less, which means most MCs and just about every infantry unit is still vulnerable. Anyone with Krak Grenades could tarpit a Dreadnought or equivalent, and anyone with Meltabombs could tarpit effectively any unit. Plaguebearers wouldn't be able to tarpit T8, but they'd still be able to tarpit vehicles. Heck, even units that can't directly hurt an enemy (Zombies vs Stompas, for example,) could still trip them up by surrounding them and keeping them from running away until someone that can actually hurt it could show up.

No, you want to make sure some of your units can be used mindlessly. If your Dread gets caught by fething Zombies, you deserve the tarpit, not a small slap on the wrist.

Zombies are just one example, though it's worth pointing out that since a Tsons relic can make Zombies into jump infantry, they're actually pretty quick at getting into tarpits, though.

This also exists to make the many, many ways to get turn-one deep-strike assaults less overpowered. Space Marines and CSM both have cheap, reliable ways to get units into combat anywhere on the board turn one (Raptor Talons and Skyhammers), and most armies (except Tau,) don't have the Interceptor to stop it. Or you can just Deep Strike a unit and use Soulswitch/Electrodisplacement to get them right next to the unit you want to assault. (Heck, you could drop in a DS unit like a Raptor, then use Soulswitch to throw thirty Plague Zombies right into assault range!) Several units have ways of crossing more than 24" and still assaulting as well, which means that simply assaulting from one deployment zone to another is entirely possible. And this is just Imperial armies! If we're including armies that aren't with the Imperium... Well, I'm not as familiar with Xenos codices, but I'm pretty sure options exist.

At least with this, you'd have to bring something that could actually cause damage. It still wouldn't neuter Tarpits, not even close, but it would make it so that cheap tactics would have to have a little thought put behind them.

Or are you arguing that there should be no counter to certain cheap tactics?

So the Chaos player is spending at minimum a TS Sorcerer of some kind with a relic or rolling for a specific power, Typhus, and then the zombies, and you think that's super cheap.

No, I don't buy it. The counter is buying high ROF weapons to deal with zombies. If you're that upset your Knights aren't up to par, load them up differently. It is all on you.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Arson Fire wrote:
You're trying to fix something that isn't broken.

Yes, big things like walkers and MCs tend to have few attacks, and are therefore vulnerable to tarpits.
However tarpit units like those zombies are themselves vulnerable to high quantities of low strength attacks, such as from squads of infantry.

So people who take a balanced army, containing a mixture of unit types, aren't going to have this problem.
If you've ignored infantry to instead spam as many knights as you can fit into an army, and those knights get tarpitted... then that's entirely on you.

If you take a skew list, then you're just going to have to deal with its weaknesses.

Except that those zombies aren't vulnerable to high quantities of low strength attacks either. On average, you would need 80 Space Marines firing at Rapid Fire range to kill a unit of 30 plague zombies, assuming those zombies could get a 5+ cover save.

Bringing a mixture of units can't prevent your big stuff from getting bogged down in combat. If you're playing a mostly shooty army that has fairly little on the assault side (Like, say, Tau,) then it's entirely possible that you'll have absolutely no recourse to get a unit of Zombies out of close combat, at least not quickly. Even Orks struggle to kill zombies and equivalent without using massive, overwhelming force. And of course, it's not just Zombies - 50-man 4++ fearless Guardsman blobs are a fairly commonly seen tactic too. Tarpits are already a really strong tactic.

And I'm not saying that those tarpits should go away entirely, I think I've made that perfectly clear. They absolutely have their purposes. I'm just saying that bogging down armies shouldn't be a completely unstoppable counter for certain builds.

For some reason, you seem to be assuming that I am proposing this because I try to bring spammy one-sided lists, but I don't. I like big models, but I usually stick to about one per game - The problem is, that one model amounts to 25% or more of my total army thanks to how expensive it is, and the fact that some players have a way to completely shut down a quarter or more of my army on turn one, without leaving any way for me to deal with it, is a huge problem.

And this is why screening units exist!
IF those zombies are going to charge you turn 1 no matter what you do, then your deployment needs to become defensive. It's your job to control what they're able to attack. Surround your big thing with other units, and they won't be able to reach it. Simple.
If you're taking a balanced list as you say, then I can't see how this is a problem.

I think it's a silly concept based on simple physics myself...but I also think tarpitting is really gamey/boring.

I think tarpitting is a good mechanic and wouldn't like to see it removed. Maybe it makes no sense in some situations but I can picture a horde of hormagaunts climbing up an imperial knight and the... driver (?) being pretty concerned about them tearing into the cockpit. Or hordes of zombies weighing down the feet, or reckless guardsmen all concentrating their shooting into a battle damaged hole somewhere in the armour as they get stood on

Whatever the scenario I think it's a good move on the table and if you're getting tarpitted by T3 bodies you should have considered that beforehand or kept a counter charge unit nearby

I can agree on the bike one to some extent, but I think you have to bear in mind a battle isn't perfectly represented by what happens on the table. If that were the case a battle involving two 1850 armies would be over in real terms in about ten minutes, or maybe just the time it takes for a devastator to shoot his lascannon 6 or 7 times. In reality the bikes probably would have their first charge but then the next time they come around it would be a lot more disordered, their formation would be gone, some guys would have been forcibly dismounted and the area the combat takes place would be larger than is represented on the table. In that situation it wouldn't be so easy to all break off at the same time together

Let me ask this from a different angle, then:
Why are you okay with the "Our weapons are useless!" Rule?
It allows the same thing I'm proposing here, but backwards. You're not allowed to tie up 50 guardsmen with a single 40-point Killa Kan, or 300 points of 'ard boys with an 80-point Penitent Engine or guard-scout-thingey. There's a penalty for running away, but it allows players a way to escape a situation where they're otherwise helpless.

So why are you okay with that rule, but not okay with it being the other way around?

"Our Weapons are Useless" is just choosing to fail a Morale Check. There is an established mechanic in place. Losing 300pts of Orks to a Penitent Engine is very likely if you disengage (Mob Rule?).

Don't forget there's already a mechanic against being swarmed by T3 chaff, Stomp attacks. Tau suits also have Hit and Run through Vectored Retro-Thrusters.

I think you should address why you feel the above is insufficient.

Yoyoyo wrote:
"Our Weapons are Useless" is just choosing to fail a Morale Check. There is an established mechanic in place. Losing 300pts of Orks to a Penitent Engine is very likely if you disengage (Mob Rule?).

Don't forget there's already a mechanic against being swarmed by T3 chaff, Stomp attacks. Tau suits also have Hit and Run through Vectored Retro-Thrusters.

I think you should address why you feel the above is insufficient.

Stomp attacks? That'll kill, what, 10 models, tops, unless your opponent charges through a bottleneck and is forced to place all of his models on top of each other. And assuming that you get the maximum number of stomps, and assuming that you don't roll any '1s' on the Stomp roll. Doing the mathhammer, assuming you can get 5 hits per Stomp, (which is generous,) you're averaging 3.5 wounds per stomp, assuming that the models you're going against don't have any kind of save or FNP. 7 wounds against Zombies is not an efficient way to kill them, not in the slightest.

And as for Vectored Retro-Thrusters, that's only available to Tau. As it happens, a lot of armies aren't Tau. Most of them aren't, in fact!


Still, I see your point about how there's a penalty for using Our Weapons Are Useless. (Sometimes, not always, but there still is a penalty.) I could point out that, in the case of Our Weapons Are Useless, it's a weak enemy running from a vastly more powerful foe, not the other way around, and that a Knight running from guardsmen would probably not have the same problem, but nonetheless. I said in my original post that I thought being able to disengage for free after any combat was too powerful, and was asking for advice on penalties. How about this: If you use "Their weapons are useless" to disengage from a combat, roll a D6. On a 2+, you automatically take a Penetrating Hit or Wound with no saves allowed. On a '6', you instead take D3 Penetrating Hits/Wounds.
(Oh, and since I don't think I added this caveat: Immobilized vehicles, or any model that is incapable of moving due to some other special rule (Such as that one Tau thing that can drop anchor,) obviously shouldn't be able to disengage.)

Most units aren't Zombies. Losing by 7W will almost certainly break morale.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Most units aren't Zombies. Losing by 7W will almost certainly break morale.

Unless you use one of the many, many, many ways to give a unit Stubborn or Fearless or some other equivalent. Like, say, a Ministorum Priest, who only costs 25pts and can give 50 guardsmen Fearless.

feth, what actually happened for you to make this thread? It reeks of butthurt.

Avoiding and creating tarpits is part of the game. It's an equalizer against many units.

I support this rule. Seems good to me.

Martel732 wrote:
Avoiding and creating tarpits is part of the game. It's an equalizer against many units.

This becomes a problem when many tarpits - specifically, loyalist and Chaos ones, I'm less familiar with xenos - have ways to be fast and unavoidable .

Can you not intercept it with any of your own units? What does a force look like that actually suffers from this game mechanic?

I don't understand your thinking with an AM blob either. They have access to 5pt meltabombs as well. So what exactly would your rule accomplish?

Which tarpits are we talking about here specifically? Like spawn?

I don't consider ASM a tarpit unit. They're just terrible at their job. So go ahead and skyhammer into my furioso.

Martel732 wrote:
Which tarpits are we talking about here specifically? Like spawn?

Spawn, sure. Or Jump zombies, soulswitch zombies/electrodisplacement guardsmen, and to a lesser extent, anyone with Deep Strike assault. 17ppm is a little high for a tarpit unit, but Havocs with T5, FNP, and Fearless will still do a pretty darn good job of it. (If nothing else they'll shrug off Stomps.)

I've considered this. My current IK list has a small army of DC right there. If you deep strike and target my knight, you'll be getting assaulted by enough angry guys to end you.

I assumed you meant raptors. They're more than 17 ppm with T5 I assume.

Electrodisplacment requires a non-trivial investment to even get onto the board. I'm more worried about being assaulted by a death star than a tarpit.

Martel732 wrote:
I've considered this. My current IK list has a small army of DC right there. If you deep strike and target my knight, you'll be getting assaulted by enough angry guys to end you.

I assumed you meant raptors. They're more than 17 ppm with T5 I assume.

Electrodisplacment requires a non-trivial investment to even get onto the board. I'm more worried about being assaulted by a death star than a tarpit.

Raptors, yeah, my bad. And I forgot to take into account mark cost - 20ppm, not 17. Still, losing a turn of shooting from a 500pt Dakka knight is no trivial thing, especially when you also have to use even more points to free up the knight.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I've considered this. My current IK list has a small army of DC right there. If you deep strike and target my knight, you'll be getting assaulted by enough angry guys to end you.

I assumed you meant raptors. They're more than 17 ppm with T5 I assume.

Electrodisplacment requires a non-trivial investment to even get onto the board. I'm more worried about being assaulted by a death star than a tarpit.

Raptors, yeah, my bad. And I forgot to take into account mark cost - 20ppm, not 17. Still, losing a turn of shooting from a 500pt Dakka knight is no trivial thing, especially when you also have to use even more points to free up the knight.

Well my list uses the Warden, so it's equipped to do both. It clocks in around 420 ish. He's throwing away 100 pts to stop my knight from shooting for a turn. Maybe I kill 100 pts with it, maybe not. Generally, I'm all about my opponent piecemealing himself for me.

Martel732 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I've considered this. My current IK list has a small army of DC right there. If you deep strike and target my knight, you'll be getting assaulted by enough angry guys to end you.

I assumed you meant raptors. They're more than 17 ppm with T5 I assume.

Electrodisplacment requires a non-trivial investment to even get onto the board. I'm more worried about being assaulted by a death star than a tarpit.

Raptors, yeah, my bad. And I forgot to take into account mark cost - 20ppm, not 17. Still, losing a turn of shooting from a 500pt Dakka knight is no trivial thing, especially when you also have to use even more points to free up the knight.

Well my list uses the Warden, so it's equipped to do both. It clocks in around 420 ish. He's throwing away 100 pts to stop my knight from shooting for a turn. Maybe I kill 100 pts with it, maybe not. Generally, I'm all about my opponent piecemealing himself for me.

Fair enough, but the Warden isn't as much the type of unit that usually needs to worry about being Tarpitted anyways, at least not to such an extent.
Also, it's worth pointing out that 6 DCA will only deal around 2.5 wounds to Death Guard models in combat. That T5/FNP combo is nasty to get through.


All in all, I guess my problem isn't with tarpits being able to tie big things down in general, it's that there are a lot of ways to bring them in without much way to stop it, and the only solution is to spend even more points to mitigate - But not completely stop - the damage. I have no problem with footslogging zombies or anything else like that, it's the units that can get into close combat without any recourse that bug me and make me think a rule like this is warranted.

Maybe make it a difficult terrain test to move out of combat if they cannot hurt you.

Or maybe dangerous terrain, the Warhound titan might slip on some zombies.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
"Our Weapons are Useless" is just choosing to fail a Morale Check. There is an established mechanic in place. Losing 300pts of Orks to a Penitent Engine is very likely if you disengage (Mob Rule?).

Don't forget there's already a mechanic against being swarmed by T3 chaff, Stomp attacks. Tau suits also have Hit and Run through Vectored Retro-Thrusters.

I think you should address why you feel the above is insufficient.

Stomp attacks? That'll kill, what, 10 models, tops, unless your opponent charges through a bottleneck and is forced to place all of his models on top of each other. And assuming that you get the maximum number of stomps, and assuming that you don't roll any '1s' on the Stomp roll. Doing the mathhammer, assuming you can get 5 hits per Stomp, (which is generous,) you're averaging 3.5 wounds per stomp, assuming that the models you're going against don't have any kind of save or FNP. 7 wounds against Zombies is not an efficient way to kill them, not in the slightest.

And as for Vectored Retro-Thrusters, that's only available to Tau. As it happens, a lot of armies aren't Tau. Most of them aren't, in fact!


Still, I see your point about how there's a penalty for using Our Weapons Are Useless. (Sometimes, not always, but there still is a penalty.) I could point out that, in the case of Our Weapons Are Useless, it's a weak enemy running from a vastly more powerful foe, not the other way around, and that a Knight running from guardsmen would probably not have the same problem, but nonetheless. I said in my original post that I thought being able to disengage for free after any combat was too powerful, and was asking for advice on penalties. How about this: If you use "Their weapons are useless" to disengage from a combat, roll a D6. On a 2+, you automatically take a Penetrating Hit or Wound with no saves allowed. On a '6', you instead take D3 Penetrating Hits/Wounds.
(Oh, and since I don't think I added this caveat: Immobilized vehicles, or any model that is incapable of moving due to some other special rule (Such as that one Tau thing that can drop anchor,) obviously shouldn't be able to disengage.)

Oh no! You don't always roll well on Stomp, the "Get Out Of Jail Free Card" for Super Heavy Walkers and Gargantuan Creatures.

A Trample rule would make sense. I'm just not sure how you implement it, since the missing ingredient here is mass. Toughness doesn't do it. Wounds doesn't do it. There are classifications (Super Heavy, heavy, etc), but without a numerical scale, i'm not sure how you'd implement it, as it'd have to be a stat vs stat comparison to determine how you'd be able to trample.

 Marmatag wrote:
A Trample rule would make sense. I'm just not sure how you implement it, since the missing ingredient here is mass. Toughness doesn't do it. Wounds doesn't do it. There are classifications (Super Heavy, heavy, etc), but without a numerical scale, i'm not sure how you'd implement it, as it'd have to be a stat vs stat comparison to determine how you'd be able to trample.

In 5th edition, Stomp let you replace your Attacks stat with the number of models in the enemy unit, with the caveat that you couldn't use your normal melee weapon and, if I recall, you had to strike at I1. If you got in a fight with a massive horde, you could actually do some real damage to it.
Of course, in 5th edition, Fearless caused the models involved to take wounds if they lost combat, and Super-heavies couldn't be locked in combat, so take that with a grain of salt. Also, it could only happen in Apocalypse games.

What about: "Their models are useless!". If the opponent decides to field something outside of internet wisdom best units, they get emidiately destroyed.

Yoyoyo wrote:
I don't understand your thinking with an AM blob either. They have access to 5pt meltabombs as well. So what exactly would your rule accomplish?

Not everyone buys melta bombs, and this rule encourages you to make combat interesting instead of just taking up time. If you have melta bombs you're rolling to kill the other unit, and fluff-wise they have to respect the threat. If your unit literally can't even attempt to roll dice to hurt the unit it is engaged with why shouldn't the enemy unit be able to ignore the harmless cannon fodder? It's ridiculous that a massive superheavy walker has to even acknowledge the existence of a bunch of guardsmen with no weapons capable of harming it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Snake Tortoise wrote:
Maybe it makes no sense in some situations but I can picture a horde of hormagaunts climbing up an imperial knight and the... driver (?) being pretty concerned about them tearing into the cockpit. Or hordes of zombies weighing down the feet, or reckless guardsmen all concentrating their shooting into a battle damaged hole somewhere in the armour as they get stood on

Then these units should have weapons capable of rolling dice to damage the knight, even if it isn't very likely that they will succeed. When the chance of damage is literally zero it's representing a situation where no possible action is going to damage the enemy unit, and there is no reason to care about the nonexistent threat.

 Peregrine wrote:
If your unit literally can't even attempt to roll dice to hurt the unit it is engaged with why shouldn't the enemy unit be able to ignore the harmless cannon fodder?

Infantry being able to exert board control is important.

Otherwise a superheavy or GMC can walk right through a Termagant screen and murder the synapse HQ they supposedly protect.

I don't see what this rule would accomplish except arbitrarily penalizing some units over others.

 Peregrine wrote:
If you have melta bombs you're rolling to kill the other unit, and fluff-wise they have to respect the threat.

Fluff-wise the smartest thing to do would be to leave, before you get blown up by a meltabomb. Duh.

Infantry is capable of wrecking optics and exterior equipment on vehicles even if they can't penetrate the hull. But in this discussion game mechanics really need to take precedence over psuedo-realistic explanations of a fake fantasy future.

A few points, any proposed name for the proposed rule has been trash, and not 40k enough.

"you are beneath me"
"you are pathetic"
something along those lines would be more 40k

Second, I dislike the proposed rule as legitimate tarpit units at legitimate costs are slow, like... Tar in fact.
If your opponent spends 400+ points supporting a tar pit to make it fast/more invulnerable, you should have quite an army advantage from there 2,000 points and under.

So... you want to make my IG tarpits unable to tarpit walkers/MC's, literally removing any counter I have to high str MC's/walkers and SHW/GC's smashing through my lines and ripping apart my vehicles. I cannot even count how many times I've learned the hard lesson that you MUST support armor and lords of war with infantry to make them survive. I always bring blobs of Guardsman because I HAVE to tarpit things if any of my heavy hitting vehicles are going to survive the first game turn.

Don't like tarpits? Try bringing something to deal with them. Do you know how easy it is to ally in IG wyverns? For 475 points you can ally in an emperor's wrath artillery formation with 2 wyverns, 1 manticore, a CCS with chimera and Volkov's cane, and a techpriest to keep them firing even if they get stunned or shaken. So for 475 points you can lay down 8 TL, shred, ignores cover small blasts, and a D3 STR 10 AP4 ordnance, ignores cover (using the orders) large blasts every turn, anywhere on the board. You can remove an entire tarpit every turn with this, snipe characters using the barrage, laugh at jink saves, and even destroy AV14 vehicles. Alternatively, you can just take an allied detachment and pay the 60 pt CCS and 60 pt vet squad tax to spam 3 wyverns.

Seriously.. it's not that hard to deal with tarpits, and IG are not the only ones with an answer to them either, so I'm just going to say "Bro, do you even tactics?"

Also, tarpits are not actually that cheap. Even a 50 man conscript squad with priest is 175 points, which is a considerable investment for a guard army, and I have to pay a tax of 2 guardsman squads and PCS squad just to get conscripts, so I usually end up using Guardsman blobs that cost 275 points with a priest instead. It get pricey.

I'm going to point something out that you people seem not to be realizing:
This rule does not stop you from using large, cheap units to exert board control. Screening units will still function in exactly the same way. You can still get in the way of models. You can still tarpit lots of enemies, too.

Also, anyone saying that it's not that hard to deal with tarpits has clearly never played a game against 120+ zombies that regenerate with two optional rolls of 4+.

Waaaghpower wrote:


Also, anyone saying that it's not that hard to deal with tarpits has clearly never played a game against 120+ zombies that regenerate with two optional rolls of 4+.

Its not hard to outrun units that can only move 6" per turn. If you regularly run across 120+ zombies, time to bring some flamers. a lot harder to successfully charge versus 4d3 wall of death. OR bring sentinel/rhino/spare dreadnought for few points to tie up their tarpit, as fearless cannot run away. And again, 600 (150 for 35, x4 for 120) points in zombies, that have no FNP with s6 able to ignore it, you should have a significant amount of army advantage versus the 1 trick pony.
Does my riptide get to ignore melee because its unreasonable for a t6 MC that shooting oriented to stay in melee?

Waaaghpower wrote:
I'm going to point something out that you people seem not to be realizing:
This rule does not stop you from using large, cheap units to exert board control. Screening units will still function in exactly the same way. You can still get in the way of models. You can still tarpit lots of enemies, too.

Also, anyone saying that it's not that hard to deal with tarpits has clearly never played a game against 120+ zombies that regenerate with two optional rolls of 4+.

No... that's exactly what the rule does. It's impossible to exert any board control against an enemy that can simply disengage his units from yours at will or wade through yours to get to your important units and smash them to pieces.

Also, I've fought zombies multiple times. They're never scary. I already provided solutions to them, solutions that don't even cost many points.

Dude... Plague Zombies in the CSM codex have a 5+ FNP, cost 4pts a model, have a 10pt champ tax, and require a 270pt HQ to unlock.

Your issue is specifically with Vraks Renegades. Which maybe you ought to finally address directly!

I personally think tarpitting is great and fluffy to a point in a narrative. you are in cc with this group, can't jus tignore them as they ae attacking or they will come up with something to hurt you. take a dreadnaught vs chaos cultists for example, while it is using its ws it is ignoring the weak attacks but maybe if it let these weaklings get behind it as it tried to keep moving then they could be a threat (sure we know cultists do not have krak grenades or melta bombs per rules but that does not mean one out in the 40k universe might not have gotten ahold of one and be waiting for a chance to use it) the threat is to great and so the dread must ensure all the cultists die

Yoyoyo wrote:
Dude... Plague Zombies in the CSM codex have a 5+ FNP, cost 4pts a model, have a 10pt champ tax, and require a 270pt HQ to unlock.

Your issue is specifically with Vraks Renegades. Which maybe you ought to finally address directly!

Typhus is 230 but whatever.

Also Vraks zombies really aren't that bad.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Infantry being able to exert board control is important.

If it's so important to exert board control with your infantry then take infantry that can damage walkers/MCs. Nobody is forcing you to use naked infantry with no weapon upgrades.

Otherwise a superheavy or GMC can walk right through a Termagant screen and murder the synapse HQ they supposedly protect.

And that's how it should be. A tank can drive right through the screen (and, in fact, force them to fall back with a failed leadership test) as if it wasn't there, so why shouldn't a walker be able to do the same? If the screen's weapons can't even theoretically hurt the walker/MC why should it even acknowledge their presence as it tramples over them to get to the real target?

Infantry is capable of wrecking optics and exterior equipment on vehicles even if they can't penetrate the hull.

Apparently not, because they can't even attempt to roll dice to damage the vehicle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 chrispy1991 wrote:
So... you want to make my IG tarpits unable to tarpit walkers/MC's, literally removing any counter I have to high str MC's/walkers and SHW/GC's smashing through my lines and ripping apart my vehicles.

Hi. I'm a melta bomb. I cost 5 points to make this problem go away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
I personally think tarpitting is great and fluffy to a point in a narrative. you are in cc with this group, can't jus tignore them as they ae attacking or they will come up with something to hurt you. take a dreadnaught vs chaos cultists for example, while it is using its ws it is ignoring the weak attacks but maybe if it let these weaklings get behind it as it tried to keep moving then they could be a threat (sure we know cultists do not have krak grenades or melta bombs per rules but that does not mean one out in the 40k universe might not have gotten ahold of one and be waiting for a chance to use it) the threat is to great and so the dread must ensure all the cultists die

Then why can a tank, a vehicle with even less ability to defend itself, smash right through a mob of infantry without slowing down?

Point being, I don't think you should adjust core mechanics over a single FW unit.

It's not like Grots or Hormagaunts are being mentioned as problematic in this conversation.

 chrispy1991 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
I'm going to point something out that you people seem not to be realizing:
This rule does not stop you from using large, cheap units to exert board control. Screening units will still function in exactly the same way. You can still get in the way of models. You can still tarpit lots of enemies, too.

Also, anyone saying that it's not that hard to deal with tarpits has clearly never played a game against 120+ zombies that regenerate with two optional rolls of 4+.

No... that's exactly what the rule does. It's impossible to exert any board control against an enemy that can simply disengage his units from yours at will or wade through yours to get to your important units and smash them to pieces.

Also, I've fought zombies multiple times. They're never scary. I already provided solutions to them, solutions that don't even cost many points.

Who says they can wade through enemies? Nowhere does this rule allows you to move through enemy models. You set up a screening unit, this rule won't let models just walk through it.

Also: The POINT OF THIS THREAD was to ask what a reasonable penalty should be, and what restrictions would be reasonable. Never did I reccomend letting this ability be free.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yoyoyo wrote:
Dude... Plague Zombies in the CSM codex have a 5+ FNP, cost 4pts a model, have a 10pt champ tax, and require a 270pt HQ to unlock.

Your issue is specifically with Vraks Renegades. Which maybe you ought to finally address directly!

Or you take a relic that costs something like 30pts. Much of this applies to other armies and units too, Zombies are just an easy go-to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
I personally think tarpitting is great and fluffy to a point in a narrative. you are in cc with this group, can't jus tignore them as they ae attacking or they will come up with something to hurt you. take a dreadnaught vs chaos cultists for example, while it is using its ws it is ignoring the weak attacks but maybe if it let these weaklings get behind it as it tried to keep moving then they could be a threat (sure we know cultists do not have krak grenades or melta bombs per rules but that does not mean one out in the 40k universe might not have gotten ahold of one and be waiting for a chance to use it) the threat is to great and so the dread must ensure all the cultists die

Okay, try something:
Take a wooden club and a 9mm pistol. Go find a tank that is currently moving around.
Let me know when you do more than scratch the paint on that tank.

And no, I don't think that pretending that a unit is carrying gear they don't ever get to have is a reasonable excuse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yoyoyo wrote:
Point being, I don't think you should adjust core mechanics over a single FW unit.

It's not like Grots or Hormagaunts are being mentioned as
problematic in this conversation.

Grots, not so much. Hormagaunts? Sure. 5ppm for fearless bodies isn't the best tarpit ever, but it's decent with fleet and... Do they get bounding leap? I don't have their codex to check.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Okay, try something:
Take a wooden club and a 9mm pistol. Go find a tank that is currently moving around.
Let me know when you do more than scratch the paint on that tank.

This is a bad justification. Infantry in close can be surprisingly effective.

In combat, the biggest cause of confusion among Finnish soldiers were Soviet tanks. The Finns had few anti-tank weapons and insufficient training in modern anti-tank tactics. However, the favoured Soviet armoured tactic was a simple frontal charge, the weaknesses of which could be exploited. The Finns learned that at close range, tanks could be dealt with in many ways; for example, logs and crowbars jammed into the bogie wheels would often immobilise a tank. Soon, Finns fielded a better ad hoc weapon, the Molotov cocktail. It was a glass bottle filled with flammable liquids, with a simple hand-lit fuse. Molotov cocktails were eventually mass-produced by the Finnish Alko corporation and bundled with matches with which to light them. Eighty Soviet tanks were destroyed in the border-zone fighting.

This is why you have infantry-armor cooperation. But I think you guys are going into the weeds trying to justify this by "logic".

Waaaghpower wrote:
Or you take a relic that costs something like 30pts. Much of this applies to other armies and units too, Zombies are just an easy go-to.

That Relic targets *one* unit every turn. So you can easily target cultists before they're affected, as well as the HQ carrying it.

Try and apply some problem-solving to these situations, at this point you're overly invested in defending your point. Targeting Cultists before they get their FNP is pretty obvious. Hormagaunts, Grots, Conscripts, and CSM Zombies have all been around for years. Why has this suddenly been discovered by you as a problem now, as opposed to anyone else when those armies were released?

Yoyoyo wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Okay, try something:
Take a wooden club and a 9mm pistol. Go find a tank that is currently moving around.
Let me know when you do more than scratch the paint on that tank.

This is a bad justification. Infantry in close can be surprisingly effective.

In combat, the biggest cause of confusion among Finnish soldiers were Soviet tanks. The Finns had few anti-tank weapons and insufficient training in modern anti-tank tactics. However, the favoured Soviet armoured tactic was a simple frontal charge, the weaknesses of which could be exploited. The Finns learned that at close range, tanks could be dealt with in many ways; for example, logs and crowbars jammed into the bogie wheels would often immobilise a tank. Soon, Finns fielded a better ad hoc weapon, the Molotov cocktail. It was a glass bottle filled with flammable liquids, with a simple hand-lit fuse. Molotov cocktails were eventually mass-produced by the Finnish Alko corporation and bundled with matches with which to light them. Eighty Soviet tanks were destroyed in the border-zone fighting.

This is why you have infantry-armor cooperation. But I think you guys are going into the weeds trying to justify this by "logic".

Yeah, that worked because soviet tanks were terrible and the Finns were badass. The equivalent of AV10, on the board, tops, maybe even AV9 - The reason that molotov cocktails worked is because the tank had openings large enough that they could burn the crew inside.

40k tanks weren't made by Soviets.

I suppose a caveat should be in order, though: If the model is a Walker, and the model they're locked in could hurt the Walker's rear armor, it can't disengage.

old Soviet tanks are probably better designed than imperium junk.

Lol.

Land Raiders do throw their tracks driving over a fence...

The land raider is probably the single most embarrassing tank in the game.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Lol.

Land Raiders do throw their tracks driving over a fence...

That's more of a crummy balance issue than anything else. Regardless, are you saying that S3 guardsmen should be able to hurt Land Raiders in close combat?

Why not at this point? It's like heaping an extra pile of dung on top of a mountain of it. Vehicles are already a total joke; it can't get much worse.

Yoyoyo wrote:
This is a bad justification. Infantry in close can be surprisingly effective.

Apparently not, because those infantry can't even attempt to roll dice against a vehicle. You can keep saying "they're effective" but 40k clearly disagrees with you.

In combat, the biggest cause of confusion among Finnish soldiers were Soviet tanks. The Finns had few anti-tank weapons and insufficient training in modern anti-tank tactics. However, the favoured Soviet armoured tactic was a simple frontal charge, the weaknesses of which could be exploited. The Finns learned that at close range, tanks could be dealt with in many ways; for example, logs and crowbars jammed into the bogie wheels would often immobilise a tank. Soon, Finns fielded a better ad hoc weapon, the Molotov cocktail. It was a glass bottle filled with flammable liquids, with a simple hand-lit fuse. Molotov cocktails were eventually mass-produced by the Finnish Alko corporation and bundled with matches with which to light them. Eighty Soviet tanks were destroyed in the border-zone fighting.

Yes, of course infantry with anti-tank weapons can be effective. Molotov cocktails would be represented by krak grenades in 40k, and a unit armed with them would prevent most walkers/MCs from disengaging.

How would you represent a crowbar or a log?

40k is a daft universe. Concentrate on game mechanics and enough with the bad logic already.

I'm fine with a unit providing a positive effect, even if it doesn't force a bunch of dice rolls.

Yoyoyo wrote:
How would you represent a crowbar or a log?

Krak grenades if they're effective against vehicles, normal melee attacks if they're not.

I'm fine with a unit providing a positive effect, even if it doesn't force a bunch of dice rolls.

And they do provide a positive effect, they just can't prevent an enemy that is literally immune to every weapon they're armed with from ignoring them as it moves past to get to the real target. Also, remember that tanks can already do this. If an AV 10/10/10 open-topped tank can drive right through a horde of infantry without even slowing down why should an AV 14/14/14 walker be forced to stop and fight them? Having more ability to fight back in melee compared to non-walker vehicles shouldn't be a liability.

AV10 open-topped can barely drive anywhere, they just get exploded and then kill the unit they're transporting. Hint, DE Raiders.

Meanwhile you want AV14 Walkers with 24" assault ranges to tank shock through screening troop units and immediately murderize whatever they contact.

Well, it's not anything worse than what Forgeworld might write.

Yoyoyo wrote:
AV10 open-topped can barely drive anywhere, they just get exploded and then kill the unit they're transporting. Hint, DE Raiders.

So what? Durability of light vehicles in general isn't the issue here. An AV 10 tank can drive straight through a horde of infantry, or even a unit of assault terminators (it will probably get charged and die next turn if it does, but it can still do it). A higher-AV walker can't smash through the infantry, because apparently having the ability to swing back in melee means you're obligated to stand there and fight helpless screening units instead of ignoring them to deal with the real target.

Meanwhile you want AV14 Walkers with 24" assault ranges to tank shock through screening troop units and immediately murderize whatever they contact.

Here's an idea: take a melta bomb in the screening troops. For 5 points you prevent the walker from getting through, since you are now capable of damaging it. Your argument here is essentially "I don't want to have to pay points to upgrade my screening infantry to have the ability to damage vehicles, they should be able to stop vehicles even without anti-vehicle weapons".

Well, it's not anything worse than what Forgeworld might write.

Ah yes, the classic "blame FW rules" approach. Here's a hint: it wasn't FW that introduced scatter laser jetbikes, Riptides, invisible death stars, formations, etc.

Yes, because adding in a 5 Point Melta Bomb upgrade is going to cripple your list. /sarcasm

That's seriously all that's needed to stop literally ANY walker. And (following the suggestion to have hits on rear armor count, not just the front facing) a regular marine squad with krak grenades will hold up a knight.

 Peregrine wrote:
So what? Durability of light vehicles in general isn't the issue here.

Yes, it is. And so is the relative value and battlefield role of infantry and tanks. Every new unit, new weapon and and new rule introduced has an indirect effect on the utility of everything around it. So the more one unit is clearly superior to the alternatives, or tends to obsolete certain opposing forces, the less you see of them.

You mentioned a lot of meta-defining units trying to justify yourself, so you clearly understand this. Complex interactions require forethought or there are unintended consequences. But in arguing that we should not consider the consequences of tank-shocking walkers, you're abandoning internal/external balance completely because reasons. That's not a coherent position.

You absolutely need to think about Hormagaunts and Raiders and everything else. Not just cry that your expensive model is less of a superhero than you'd like, because it "it doesn't make sense". You know what? Boo hoo.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Yes, because adding in a 5 Point Melta Bomb upgrade is going to cripple your list. /sarcasm

Dreads have been fighting S3 infantry since Rogue Trader. Adding a 5pt meltabomb will just be another stupid hoop to jump through in response to a poorly written rule, which will arbitrarily penalize units without easy access to S6+.

I am so unconvinced by all the appeals to irrelevant tangents. It really boils down to this.

Do screening tactics have a place in the game? If so, don't make that contingent on an upgrade.

If the rule works on rear armor, then you only need S4 for the vast majority of non-superheavy units. The only non-superheavy unit that, without buffs, that I can think of that requires S5 is a Wraithlord.

Yes, it makes guardsmen without grenades less effective, or Orks. And yes, that's an issue-but that's more an issue with the Codex than the rule. Orks and IG are pretty damn weak. Give their sergeants options for Melta Bombs (5 Points) or Krak Grenades (1, maybe 2 points) and suddenly your 62 point guard blob can now tie up a Knight.

I run a trio of Renegade Knights and Vraks zombies. Those zombies have been used to great effect, many many times.

Many many times, the problems they caused could have been easily handled if the opposing player bothered to treat them with any respect.

If you are playing orks, you have boyz. If you have boyz, you can screen your Stompa. If you screen your Stompa, you don't get tied down.

Further, if somehow Zombies do get under your Stompa, charge them with another unit of anything. Don't just "ignore the crappy zombies", but get mad when your stompa gets shut down for 5 turns.

Yoyoyo wrote:
AV10 open-topped can barely drive anywhere, they just get exploded and then kill the unit they're transporting. Hint, DE Raiders.

Meanwhile you want AV14 Walkers with 24" assault ranges to tank shock through screening troop units and immediately murderize whatever they contact.

Well, it's not anything worse than what Forgeworld might write.

I'm going to point something out that should be really obvious, but apparently you don't understand:
WALKERS CANNOT TANK SHOCK. Even if they could, Tank Shocking through a unit would still work, regardless of whether or not the walker could be locked in combat - This rule only effects the Assault Phase.

So what the hell are you on about? Those screening troops can keep on screening, no problem.

I like the idea. As Peregrine says - its kinda stupid that an AV10 vehicle can zip in and out of combat all day while the Walker must stop and swing for eternity.

In a similar vein, the "Our weapons are useless" rule has kind of the same effect for Fearless units. A unit of Berserkers can get tarpitted for the game by a walker they can't hurt, while a unit of normal CSM can potentially leave combat.

IMO it kind of brings up the silliness of 40k's "locked in combat" mechanics. It sucks that when I'm charging with a combat army, I need to try to win combat by just a small enough amount that I don't wipe the enemy out, so I can stay in for the next turn. It brings up silly tactics where I'll charge a Knight in to combat, Smash so I only cause one casualty, and stomp behind him so I don't kill anything more, just so don't have to weather another round of shooting.

IMO 40k would be better if ALL units had the option to leave during the movement phase of their turn... but combat units would need to be rebalanced so that speed-bump units weren't even more effective than they are now.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Not just cry that your expensive model is less of a superhero than you'd like, because it "it doesn't make sense". You know what? Boo hoo.

I don't own a single model that benefits from this proposal. My vehicles can already drive right through screening units, and my infantry are much more likely to be used as tarpits than to be victims of them. I still think it's stupid that units can be pinned down permanently by tarpit units that literally can not hurt them.

Do screening tactics have a place in the game? If so, don't make that contingent on an upgrade.

Do anti-tank tactics have a place in the game? If so, don't make that contingent on an upgrade, every model should have the ability to roll STR 8 AP 1 melta attacks.

What if we give everyone the ability to disengage from any other combat - it seems logical. And than cherry pick the units from which you can't disengage and grant them the "Our weapons are very useful" special rule.

 koooaei wrote:
What if we give everyone the ability to disengage from any other combat - it seems logical. And than cherry pick the units from which you can't disengage and grant them the "Our weapons are very useful" special rule.

Do you have anything to add to the discussion, or are you just going to keep making wisecracks that aren't really relevant?

Now, since there have been several things tossed about here, I'm going to put this here as a potential 'Full' version of the rules. Thoughts?

Their Weapons Are Useless:
When locked in combat, if your opponents models are completely incapable of damaging any unit you have locked in the same combat, (Because their Strength is too low to harm you and they lack any special rule which would allow them to, their WS has been reduced to 0, or any other reason,) then you may disengage those units from combat with no penalties at the end of the assault phase. (Note that if a model would normally be vulnerable, but has had its durability increased by a Psychic Power or any other means, then it may still disengage from combat.)

When you disengage, roll a d6.
On a 1, the model immediately suffers 1 wound with no saves of any kind allowed. Vehicles instead suffer a penetrating hit with no saves of any kind allowed.
On a 2-4, the model suffers 1 wound. Vehicles instead suffer a glancing hit.
On a 5-6, no effect.

They then disengage as normal, consolidating 2D6" away. If they cannot move away for any reason, (Such as models/terrain being in the way, or the consolidate move not being long enough to move them more than 1" from an enemy model) they instead remained locked in combat.


Walkers and Super-Heavy Walkers may only disengage if the enemy models cannot hurt the walker's rear armor.

Models may not use 'Their Weapons Are Useless' to disengage the combat if they charged the unit they are engaged with.


(That last caveat was to avoid players charging a weak unit, idling for a turn, then disengaging so they can't be shot at.)

EDIT: I'm also going to stop ignoring the trolls at this point. Hopefully they'll go away and we can actually discuss rule potential.

Why don't we say transporting a 200ft walking robot to the front stretches your logistical support to the level where you simply concede the game after deployment.

Also, why don't we say infantry with entrenching tools and concealed positions have better accuracy and defensive posture than the brillant tactical approach of riding a motorcycle across open terrain.

Waaaghpower wrote:
WALKERS CANNOT TANK SHOCK.

As pointed out, they should be able to. Why not, if it they can also leave combat at will?

After all, it's only logical!

Yoyoyo wrote:
Why don't we say transporting a 200ft walking robot to the front stretches your logistical support to the level where you simply concede the game after deployment.

Also, why don't we say infantry with entrenching tools and concealed positions have better accuracy and defensive posture than the brillant tactical approach of riding a motorcycle across open terrain.

Because some people are capable of discussing a particular proposed rule change without feeling obligated to simultaneously consider every single other problem with 40k. Whatever your opinions on other realism-related rule changes may be, they have nothing to do with this thread.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Thoughts?

I think you should consider how infantry should interact with walkers in a meaningful way, especially those units that can't buy cost-effective upgrades.

Imagine trying to stop a HF Dreadnought with Cultists in a 500pt game.

 Peregrine wrote:
Because some people are capable of discussing a particular proposed rule change without feeling obligated to simultaneously consider every single other problem with 40k.

Waagh's "damage on disengagement" mechanic on will strongly favor GMCs, who get not only a 3+ save on most occasions but also a FNP. Most vehicles won't get these saves, and in fact a Dread may suffer additional VDC results. So GMCs will disengage with impunity, Knights with near impunity, and Dreads will need to worry more. Correspondingly, this makes GMCs a much more competitive unit in relation to anything else, especially horde infantry who just received a serious nerf. So guess what you'll probably see more of in the meta?

But who knows, maybe this has nothing to do with this thread. Why consider every problem simultaneously, in fact why even consider at all.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Imagine trying to stop a HF Dreadnought with Cultists in a 500pt game.

Here's an idea: bring a 5-point melta bomb. Problem solved, for 1% of your points. If you refuse to take anti-vehicle weapons why should your cultists be effective against a vehicle?

Waagh's "damage on disengagement" mechanic on will strongly favor GMCs, who get not only a 3+ save on most occasions but also a FNP. Most vehicles won't get these saves, and in fact a Dread may suffer additional VDC results. So GMCs will disengage with impunity, Knights with near impunity, and Dreads will need to worry more. Correspondingly, this makes GMCs a much more competitive unit in relation to anything else, especially horde infantry who just received a serious nerf. So guess what you'll probably see more of in the meta?

And "damage on disengagement" is not the only version of the mechanic. IMO it should be a flat "units can not be locked in combat by any unit that can not hurt them", so the vehicle/MC just walks away without any penalty.

You are aware Cultists don't have Meltabombs?

Yoyoyo wrote:
You are aware Cultists don't have Meltabombs?

Then maybe you should take a unit that can have them. If you refuse to take anti-vehicle units in your army why should you be able to deal with a vehicle?

What a red herring.

"I can roll one attack a turn" doesn't salvage a mechanic that's being criticized.

Locking big creatures with tarpit units is either a fun and valid strategy, or it's not.

That's a much more important consideration than arguing over what units have or don't have meltabombs.

 Peregrine wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
You are aware Cultists don't have Meltabombs?

Then maybe you should take a unit that can have them. If you refuse to take anti-vehicle units in your army why should you be able to deal with a vehicle?

Then maybe you shouldn't take a superheavy. If you are afraid of it getting tarpitted and refuse to take any other steps towards avoiding slow and easy-to-kill footsloggers?

Going back to thread. It's clearly a buff to vehicles, superheavies and especially gmc that has a very unpraportional effect on different armies and different playstyles. It has literally no effect on shooty armies and nerfs footsloggers even harder - and they're not at their finest as is.

If you want to nerf one playstyle (that's not really all that great), the side that suffers a nerf should probably get some sort of counter-balancing rule to avoid it being one-sided. Cause otherwise you're just taking away the sole purpose of tarpits - getting frightening stuff bogged down via superior positioning and movement on the general's part.

 Peregrine wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
You are aware Cultists don't have Meltabombs?

Then maybe you should take a unit that can have them. If you refuse to take anti-vehicle units in your army why should you be able to deal with a vehicle?

If the counter-advice is telling someone what units to take and not to take, then surely the concept of rock paper scissors is alive and well, and a horde of zombies is a superheavies paper to it's rock? If a cultist list is expected to bring melta bomb units to help them against vehicles, then it's fair to expect a list featuring a superheavy to invest the points in burnas or pie plates to counter the hordes that gum it up.

 Peregrine wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
You are aware Cultists don't have Meltabombs?

Then maybe you should take a unit that can have them. If you refuse to take anti-vehicle units in your army why should you be able to deal with a vehicle?

In other words:

Player 1: Unit X can't tarpit Unit Y.
Player 2: Unit Y can be damaged if you take Upgrade Q.
Player 1: Unit X can't take Upgrade Q.
Player 2: Then take Unit Z and make the tarpit unit redundant.

The whole crux of this is so units which CAN'T damage a vehicle can still do something. By this logic, if you admit that the unit is useless, why should that unit exist? In that case, if only the best units can be taken, we'd be looking at a few units in the whole game.

Player 1 wants Unit X.
Player 2 wants Unit Y.
Why should it be Player 1 who has to change and take Unit Z instead? Why doesn't Player 2 invest in Unit A which counters Unit X.

By keeping tarpitting, the units that can't purchase tank-killing weapons are still somewhat relevant.

Except non-AV units still matter. They're cheap objective holders, they can tie up other things (like that T5 deathstar, for isntance-they can still hurt it), they can add a(n admittedly small amount of) firepower...

Waaaghpower wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
What if we give everyone the ability to disengage from any other combat - it seems logical. And than cherry pick the units from which you can't disengage and grant them the "Our weapons are very useful" special rule.

Do you have anything to add to the discussion, or are you just going to keep making wisecracks that aren't really relevant?

Sure sounds relevant to me. Right now, we have only units which have Hit & Run or run in to the "Their Weapons are Useless" situation. This thread is about trying to add to that list. Koooaei is only making a suggestion to expand that.

I note you didn't accuse the person of making wisecracks of the concept that proposed for allowing Walkers to Tank Shock. Sure, this runs in to the problem that a unit cannot Move while Engaged, which is required to Tank Shock, but that doesn't make it any less a wisecrack than what Koooaei stated.

Peregrine wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
You are aware Cultists don't have Meltabombs?

Then maybe you should take a unit that can have them. If you refuse to take anti-vehicle units in your army why should you be able to deal with a vehicle?

So every unit should be able to answer every question at all times? The game isn't set up to do that. Sure, applying the proper units to their proper targets is important, but it is not always feasible. Sometimes the best thing is for that Cultist unit to charge in to speed bump that Walker, even without Grenades/Power Fist. And sometimes, you don't want them to be Charged by it, but are not given any other option of escaping.

I think this forum is a place where people who just lost a game come to try to change what made them lost.

Walkers and MC fighting against models that cannot hurt them, and refuse to disengage due to 'Your weapons are useless' double their attacks and hit on a 3+.

This represents the lack of skills and finesse required of the walkers and monstrous creatures to kills their opponents. They have no concern in putting up an adequate defence as they don't need to, so can go on an all out attack.

Tarpit can still act as a road block, but the big nasties have an actual chance of not being held up all game.

I'd rather give re-roll to hit or wound and call it done. No reason a ws2 walker should be able to hit a ws5 assassin or something on a 3.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That is IF something had to change. I think it's fine, but I'm probably biased.

 Thunderfrog wrote:
I'd rather give re-roll to hit or wound and call it done. No reason a ws2 walker should be able to hit a ws5 assassin or something on a 3.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That is IF something had to change. I think it's fine, but I'm probably biased.

I'd put a special rule on riptides that negates my suggestion.

Or make my suggestion a special rule and give it to most walkers and MC's. Riptides, storm surges, Mortis Pattern dreadnaught... Anything shooty wouldn't get it.

Can we go back and highlight something.

If I want to bring a big, shooty something, I also have to buy _______ so that the thing I actually want to use isn't rendered useless on turn 1.

Ideally, the answer would be "a well-balanced force".

What was the actual response?

useless ablative wounds to sit in a circle singing kum-bay-ah

Maybe this is the real problem.

Going back to a possible penalty for such a rule.

Their weapons are useless-At the beginning of the assault phase, a model or unit engaged with another unit that is completely unable to damage it, may attempt to disengage by moving up to 6 inches from its current position. The unit MUST end its movement at least 1 inch away from the unit it was engaged with. If it is unable to do so, it may not disengage.

Furthermore, for every enemy model that the disengaging model pass over, that model may make a single attack that has rending, and automatically wounds targets on a roll of a 6. Furthermore the disengaging unit is treated as being at WS 1 for these attacks..

So basically this scales with the size of the tarpit. A dreadnought walking through a thick horde of zombies may be glanced to death on its way out.

I'm considering making these attacks taken against rear armor as well. It makes this a VERY dangerous option, but that may be what it should be.

I like the top part actually. It makes it able to break free after a couple turns of thinning.

I think a free auto-hit on the rear armor is reasonable, but not with Rending (which gives auto-wounding anyways). The whole point is that they can't hurt it..

Well, I'm gonna add my two cent. I agree fluff wise, it really doesn't make sense that a dread can't just bat away a guardsman and carry on walking. However, gameplay wise, I think it adds another level of tactics, and forces generals to keep on their toes. You can't just ignore the 50 man unit of conscripts, you have to allocate flamers, blast templates and high ROF weapons to kill them or put your own lighter units in the way so your heavier units can duke it out with your enemy's.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
Well, I'm gonna add my two cent. I agree fluff wise, it really doesn't make sense that a dread can't just bat away a guardsman and carry on walking. However, gameplay wise, I think it adds another level of tactics, and forces generals to keep on their toes. You can't just ignore the 50 man unit of conscripts, you have to allocate flamers, blast templates and high ROF weapons to kill them or put your own lighter units in the way so your heavier units can duke it out with your enemy's.

This has been discussed pretty heavily above, but I'll re-summarize my opinions here:
I have never said that you should be able to completely ignore the 50 man unit of conscripts. What I've said is that the 50 man unit of conscripts (Or any other similar squad) shouldn't be able to shut down 500+ point models for the entirety of the game. One unit of Conscripts with a Ministorum Priest can effectively tarpit just about any big model, and there's not much that the big model can do about it except hide on the far side of the board. This is, of course, assuming that the tarpit doesn't have any way to move quickly - The unfortunate thing is that, due to many psychic powers, relics, and other methods, it's exceedingly easy nowadays to get a tarpit within striking range very, very quickly.

Or, to put it another way: Tarpits shouldn't be a one-stop-shop to shut down any model that isn't a vehicle. (And vehicles pretty much all suck, so we'll just say 'A one stop shop to shut down any good model.') They should require some level of thought for who they'll be used against.

BA are pretty decent at breaking tarpits with DC and such. Most armies have units that can break most tarpits. You just need to bring them.

Martel732 wrote:
BA are pretty decent at breaking tarpits with DC and such. Most armies have units that can break most tarpits. You just need to bring them.

BA can kill 50 conscripts? With WHAT? Because I need to be bringing more of that. And, either way, if you're bringing several hundred points of models, in order to protect many more several hundred points invested in another model, in order to waylay 175 points of a tarpit, that's just not a winning point equation. (Srsly. Conscripts mostly lack the fast movement that zombies can get access to, but at 3ppm plus 25 to get the Priest you'll need, they're an insane amount of bodies for hardly any points. 700 points gets you 204 fearless bodies.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mathhammer trivia:
It takes 65 charging BA Assault Marines in order to kill 51 Conscripts with rerollable saves.

So by paying 5 points, the rule is negated. Seems like a pointless rule to me, because what we really need in the game is more pointless rules that force you to jump through hoops to stay effective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Mathhammer trivia:
It takes 65 charging BA Assault Marines in order to kill 51 Conscripts with rerollable saves.

It takes maybe 5 to 10 charging blood angels to hold up 51 conscripts for a lot of turns.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:


Then maybe you should take a unit that can have them. If you refuse to take anti-vehicle units in your army why should you be able to deal with a vehicle?

What Peregrine says about taking anti-vehicle units applies also to anti-infantry. If you want to slap a lazcannon on every unit, go ahead, the mechanised forces of the galaxy will tremble. But an ork horde will just laugh and tear you to pieces with power claws. And we can all agree that dead dreadnoughts are worse than tarpitted dreadnaughts.

The conscripts don't look so good if the priest gets barrage sniped. And yeah, I use whirlwinds because they are cheap and effective with the squadron bonus. The conscripts don't magically get to start in close combat with my units. My army is fast. I decide when to engage and which unit will engage.

I understand what you're saying, but you'll never convince me that tarpits are nearly as fearsome as deleting my army by turn 3.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Sort of. Adding a Meltabomb or some other equivalent weapon doesn't let you tarpit indefinitely, because you have to keep the Meltabomb alive. It lets you tarpit temporarily, while still offering the tarpitted model/s the opportunity to escape unless your whole squad can level serious damage at the target. It also means that, rather than having to kill 50+ models in order to stop a tarpit, you can snipe out certain targets and be golden.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Mathhammer trivia:
It takes 65 charging BA Assault Marines in order to kill 51 Conscripts with rerollable saves.

It takes maybe 5 to 10 charging blood angels to hold up 51 conscripts for a lot of turns.

That's only true if the blood angels charge first. If the conscripts get the charge, you aren't getting them unstuck from whatever they tarpitted. Someone brought a librarian with Soulswitch? Bye bye, Warhound.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:


Then maybe you should take a unit that can have them. If you refuse to take anti-vehicle units in your army why should you be able to deal with a vehicle?

What Peregrine says about taking anti-vehicle units applies also to anti-infantry. If you want to slap a lazcannon on every unit, go ahead, the mechanised forces of the galaxy will tremble. But an ork horde will just laugh and tear you to pieces with power claws. And we can all agree that dead dreadnoughts are worse than tarpitted dreadnaughts.

Two things:
One, Lascannons don't make mechanised forces tremble.
Two, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M SAYING. Tarpits should not be a universal solution to stopping any enemy! If you have a Tarpit, and have some kind of method of making them move slightly quicker than the norm, then you can shut down just about any enemy unit without much of a significant threat to your person.
(Two point five: Sometimes a dead dread is better, because it might explode and kill some orks, and it opens up the enemy unit to being shot at.)

Martel732 wrote:
The conscripts don't look so good if the priest gets barrage sniped. And yeah, I use whirlwinds because they are cheap and effective with the squadron bonus. The conscripts don't magically get to start in close combat with my units. My army is fast. I decide when to engage and which unit will engage.

I understand what you're saying, but you'll never convince me that tarpits are nearly as fearsome as deleting my army by turn 3.

Those conscripts have Space Marine allies that can drop them wherever they need to be. Worldwrithe/Whatever the imperial equivalent is, Gate of Infinity sort-of works, Soulswitch. Or you use a Skyhammer as a psuedo-tarpit until you can get the real one in place. (5 Assault Marines have an above-70% chance of surviving one turn of combat against a Knight, especially if they spread out. That's 85 points of models, trapping 400+ for the first turn, which is usually the most critical.)

Waaaghpower wrote:
Tarpits should not be a universal solution to stopping any enemy!

They really aren't. You also forget a simple thing. If you have means of making your tarpit faster and durable enough to not evaporate on the way, you're investing quite some points into support. And the tarpit is incapable of doing anything else other than just be there.

Those psychic powers just don't happen automatically. And librarians are easy to kill. So now you have to invest in keeping them alive. I'm personally not worried about my IK getting tarpitted in the manner in which you describe.

But tarpits aren't a universal solution. As I said, they can be killed through a variety of options that they have no real counter for. Nor do they have killing power of their own unless against similarly weak opponents, so what's the problem? If you haven't brought anything to kill lots of infantry, then sacrifice a insignificant unit to the tarpit. Like say, a 30 point sentinel. They have to disengage because their weapons are useless and they don't want to waste time on a sentinel, then charge them again. Or just bring flamers. Because, y'know, they exist for a reason.

Did I mention BA have a crap ton of flamers?

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
But tarpits aren't a universal solution. As I said, they can be killed through a variety of options that they have no real counter for. Nor do they have killing power of their own unless against similarly weak opponents, so what's the problem? If you haven't brought anything to kill lots of infantry, then sacrifice a insignificant unit to the tarpit. Like say, a 30 point sentinel. They have to disengage because their weapons are useless and they don't want to waste time on a sentinel, then charge them again. Or just bring flamers. Because, y'know, they exist for a reason.

Plus, if they've made their tarpit unit fearless/zealot, then they can't even opt to use "Our Weapons Are Useless" themselves. They have no way of escaping that 30 point sentinel, and are doomed to ineffectively scratch at its front armour til the end of time.

Arson Fire wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
But tarpits aren't a universal solution. As I said, they can be killed through a variety of options that they have no real counter for. Nor do they have killing power of their own unless against similarly weak opponents, so what's the problem? If you haven't brought anything to kill lots of infantry, then sacrifice a insignificant unit to the tarpit. Like say, a 30 point sentinel. They have to disengage because their weapons are useless and they don't want to waste time on a sentinel, then charge them again. Or just bring flamers. Because, y'know, they exist for a reason.

Plus, if they've made their tarpit unit fearless/zealot, then they can't even opt to use "Our Weapons Are Useless" themselves. They have no way of escaping that 30 point sentinel, and are doomed to ineffectively scratch at its front armour til the end of time.

Which makes sense for SOME units (Zombies, for instance) but not others (Chaplain with Assault Marines). I get that they're fearless, but they're not stupid, one would think.

...

Wait, bad example. The Chaplain has a Crozius, so it CAN hurt the Sentinel. But you get my point.

I was just amused, because this is a thread complaining about single big models getting tied up by hordes of little guys.
But here we have an example where that same horde of little guys gets tied up in the same way by a single much cheaper model.

Although in this case I suppose there's no bailing them out. Once they have that sentinel surrounded, another stronger unit won't be able to reach it.
Sucks to be those zombies I guess (can't imagine the sentinel pilot is exactly thrilled with the situation either).

Arson Fire wrote:
I was just amused, because this is a thread complaining about single big models getting tied up by hordes of little guys.
But here we have an example where that same horde of little guys gets tied up in the same way by a single much cheaper model.

Although in this case I suppose there's no bailing them out. Once they have that sentinel surrounded, another stronger unit won't be able to reach it.
Sucks to be those zombies I guess (can't imagine the sentinel pilot is exactly thrilled with the situation either).

Yeah, it smells awful in the cockpit