Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 1030/02/06 15:29:57


Post by: Pancakey


In 8th edition becuase of the aura effect, everyone (Just like AOS) seems to plop a their army in a huge disgusting blob on one side of the table facing another huge disgusting blob that is the other army.

The "BLOB-STAR" is just damn ugly and it looks rather stupid.

How many times have you seen and used BLOBBY G?

So far both of their premier games are all about BLOBBING.

Is the BLOB-STAR the future of ALL GW wargaming?


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:31:23


Post by: Elbows


It's a design feature I dislike (it's up there with re-rolling). However, I'll take it over the mess that 7th produced all day, every day.

I believe auras are far too present, and they seem to be designed individually without looking at the codex as a whole and determining how they interact.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:40:39


Post by: Pancakey


I agree aura-hammer creates a lazyness not seen before in deployment and tactics.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:43:50


Post by: Kanluwen


Putting it bluntly the only one I really feel is problematic is Guilliman. His stuff applied to everything Ultramarines rather than just those with Ultramarines Chapter Tactics(which was in and of itself another issue since CT only applied to limited things).


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:44:33


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


Pancakey wrote:
The "BLOB-STAR" is just damn ugly and it looks rather stupid.


To clarify, your argument against it is purely aesthetic?

I like the synergy and combos that it brings to the game.

I would also argue blob construction is tactical in its own way, just like anything else.

Let me know if you sell your stuff though, I might be interested.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:48:14


Post by: Breng77


I do wish that the aura abilities were more a unit within x can do y. Instead of all units, it just makes for a bit more balance. If the abilities were akin to IG orders for instance.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:49:54


Post by: tneva82


Luckily hh avoids that. Only game gw has now that has anything resembling decent game


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:50:42


Post by: Pancakey


I only play with fully painted terrain and models. The epic look of a 10,000 point fully painted game is one of the major reasons why I play tabletop wargames.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote:
Luckily hh avoids that. Only game gw has now that has anything resembling decent game


We do play HH as well and the constrast is stark!!


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:52:13


Post by: the_scotsman


tneva82 wrote:
Luckily hh avoids that. Only game gw has now that has anything resembling decent game


Yeah you never see big gunline blobs around a huge unkillable aura-buffer primarch character in Horus Heresy.

neeeeeeeeever see that.



Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:53:59


Post by: Xenomancers


I didn't vote because I really don't think it's a problem considering the worst offender of blob star (Guilliman) is actually part of the weakest army in the game and even with ultimate blobstar power still can't place highly in tournaments. however - if other armies had access to this style of play - it would be overwhelming to the point it would break the game.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 15:59:29


Post by: Kanluwen


Breng77 wrote:
I do wish that the aura abilities were more a unit within x can do y. Instead of all units, it just makes for a bit more balance. If the abilities were akin to IG orders for instance.

Ehh...I'd go with the Tau abilities rather than Orders. Most Orders are extremely generic while Tau have some weapon specific stuff that is broader and affects more.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 16:06:24


Post by: The Mattler


I didn't vote either because I like aurahammer, but I wish the power level of the effects was inversely proportional to the radius. For example:

12" morale/leadership, re-roll
6" re-roll 1s to hit/wound
3" re-roll all hits/wounds, +1/-1 to hit/wound

I think conventions along those lines would solve most of the complaints.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 16:09:33


Post by: NoiseMarine with Tinnitus


Well 7th was guilty of 'castling' and that was worse imho. 'I nominate this corner of the table, come get me!'


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 16:14:51


Post by: Pancakey


 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Well 7th was guilty of 'castling' and that was worse imho. 'I nominate this corner of the table, come get me!'


Castling felt like a strategy.

It seems everyone does the BLOB-STAR because you don't have a choice, this is HOW 8th ed works.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 0003/12/26 16:23:31


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


Pancakey wrote:


Castling felt like a strategy.

It seems everyone does the BLOB-STAR because you don't have a choice, this is HOW 8th ed works.


I have to say I see a lot more castling in tournaments than the mythical blob-star. You know the tactics section often discusses what works under optimal circumstances right? You know that if you make your blob too big it basically doesn't work in tournament because you won't be able to move everything fast enough to finish in the time limit?

Yes, in theory, I could build a list that spam Horrors and just outnumbers you on objectives and cover the whole table.

You know how feasible that army is in tournament? Not at all. Ultimate fail, good luck placing in the top 50.

So yes, maybe at your local game store, the local jackhole shows up with 500 Horrors and claims "I have built the most annoying army in the world to play against!", and you know what? He's right. But he's not winning any tournaments, that's for sure.

Also, I love that castling seems like a strategy, but ranked and supported troop formations doesn't? Where's the line on this? Can you define for us what constitutes a strategy and what's just aesthetically displeasing to you?


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 16:26:54


Post by: Pancakey


Just talking about how everyone plays a giant blob now. This is my experience and I don't like the way it looks or the way it plays. Maybe you do. Thats great!

Also in regards to strategy if you don't have a choice and have to BLOB-STAR because of game mechanics like auras. Is it a strategy?


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 16:36:07


Post by: supreme overlord


I agree that it's unsightly to look at. A way to stop this would be to re-introduce templates (at least the flamer) and/or to say units with this rule gain this ability instead of units within 3"


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 16:52:34


Post by: Elbows


Is it unsightly to look at?



Perhaps you could call it "Codex Cover Hammer". So, my question would become: If you love HH and hate 8th...then go play HH or indeed keep playing 7th. No one is stopping you from doing so.

If 8th "crushed" your gaming group - sorry to hear it. I've experienced the opposite in two gaming groups I'm part of, with dozens of players actually coming back and digging up old armies. Oddly we all play plenty of "strategic" wargames. 40K is just for fun pushing around cool models and telling stories.

I'd argue if you think 7th ed. 40K is "tactical" or "strategic" in any way shape or form, you're missing out on a world of actual strategic wargames --- 40K is the kiddie pool of actual military wargames.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 17:07:29


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


Pancakey wrote:
Just talking about how everyone plays a giant blob now. This is my experience and I don't like the way it looks or the way it plays. Maybe you do. Thats great!

Also in regards to strategy if you don't have a choice and have to BLOB-STAR because of game mechanics like auras. Is it a strategy?


I could say the same thing about castling though, if you play an army that caters to gunline, most likely you're going to castle most of the time. At that point is it a strategy or is it the methodology demanded by the exigencies of your list?

Some lists will favor a blob or ranked deployment (nobody actually deploys as a random blob), others will favor castling, still others will favor minimizing troops on the table in favor of deep striking their most important aspects.

I would avoid viewing the 40k world through the lenses of the tactics forum, useful as input, not as worldview.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 17:07:52


Post by: pismakron


Blob-stars are not a problem if you play with maelstrom or other styles of progressive scoring. If you play Eternal War the game of course suffers a lot, and you will see the dreaded corner deploy a lot.

But even at its worst it is still a million times better than the invisible death-stars of 7th edition.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/09 19:53:20


Post by: Farseer_V2


So I play Eldar/Ynnari and almost never deploy in anything remotely approaching a blob. I may maximize my LoS blocking deployment on turn 1 but after that my army breaks apart into multiple pockets of effective units.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 17:10:33


Post by: the_scotsman


Pancakey wrote:
Just talking about how everyone plays a giant blob now.


Statement with no evidence. There are plenty of different list archetypes in the current competitive meta that do not involve circling around an aura character, it is one strategy among many.

Pancakey wrote:
This is my experience and I don't like the way it looks or the way it plays. Maybe you do. Thats great!


Anecdote, opinion. All I can agree with here is the fact that one competitive list archetype has changed from "tons of razorbacks with heavy bolters deployed in a parking lot" to "Tons of razorbacks with twin assault cannons deployed in a parking lot with guilliman". Yowza. What change. Very different.

Pancakey wrote:
Also in regards to strategy if you don't have a choice and have to BLOB-STAR because of game mechanics like auras. Is it a strategy?


I don't think this is even a sentence, let alone an argument. Nobody's forced to play around aura characters, you can leave them out of your army if you want to. For certain armies (Vanilla Marines, Admech) it is arguably the most optimal way to play, but nobody is actually coming to your house and jamming that awful plastic guilliman sculpt in your bag and screaming "REMEMBER, TWO THIN COATS!!!"


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 17:10:53


Post by: Elbows


Eldar generally don't need blobs - their version of auras is predominantly spell-driven. Only a few armies are really based around auras.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 17:10:59


Post by: Eldarain


tneva82 wrote:
Luckily hh avoids that. Only game gw has now that has anything resembling decent game

You should give the Middle Earth game a whirl. Vastly superior rules to anything else in thier stable.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 17:29:38


Post by: Pancakey


 Elbows wrote:
Is it unsightly to look at?



Perhaps you could call it "Codex Cover Hammer". So, my question would become: If you love HH and hate 8th...then go play HH or indeed keep playing 7th. No one is stopping you from doing so.

If 8th "crushed" your gaming group - sorry to hear it. I've experienced the opposite in two gaming groups I'm part of, with dozens of players actually coming back and digging up old armies. Oddly we all play plenty of "strategic" wargames. 40K is just for fun pushing around cool models and telling stories.

I'd argue if you think 7th ed. 40K is "tactical" or "strategic" in any way shape or form, you're missing out on a world of actual strategic wargames --- 40K is the kiddie pool of actual military wargames.


I agree , but I would like a few inches of water in the kidde pool!


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 17:58:06


Post by: NoiseMarine with Tinnitus


 Elbows wrote:
Is it unsightly to look at?



Perhaps you could call it "Codex Cover Hammer". So, my question would become: If you love HH and hate 8th...then go play HH or indeed keep playing 7th. No one is stopping you from doing so.

If 8th "crushed" your gaming group - sorry to hear it. I've experienced the opposite in two gaming groups I'm part of, with dozens of players actually coming back and digging up old armies. Oddly we all play plenty of "strategic" wargames. 40K is just for fun pushing around cool models and telling stories.

I'd argue if you think 7th ed. 40K is "tactical" or "strategic" in any way shape or form, you're missing out on a world of actual strategic wargames --- 40K is the kiddie pool of actual military wargames.


Yep, see. All in one corner. Clearly castling


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 18:22:55


Post by: Kap'n Krump


Characters auras, and rules in general, are one of my top 3 complaints about 8th. I feel like they wanted to limit the prevalence of deathstars, but instead gave us deathblobs.

So, now we have armies with auras and army special rules that just stack and stack on each other, and it gets a bit ridiculous. I mean, using someone like abbadon to babysit a chaos gunline seems very anti-fluffy and boring. But it's effective.

I think command type auras would be a lot better off if they only affected one unit. And special characters like G-man would be able to affect 3, or D3, or something. But having a character sitting in the middle of a parking lot and giving like 10+ units rerolls is straight dumb.

So, yeah. Overlapping character auras is a big, dumb problem, that isn't getting better anytime soon. Hell, I'd prefer they bring back the old IC rules, and if they wanted to limit deathstars, maybe limit the amount of characters that can be attached to a unit. I think it would make the rules a lot simpler and more fair.

But, no one cares what I think - least of all geedubz.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 18:24:31


Post by: Martel732


Put in more viable sniper units. By which I mean make something other than ratlings or sniper drones worth taking.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 18:24:39


Post by: Zid


Reminds me of Warmahordes in a way, which wouldn't be bad, except Warmahordes didn't exclusively use Auras for EVERYTHING.

I think limiting Auras would be fine, using them sparingly, and making the auras shorter range so they would apply to one to two units max. However, the character rules and all that can go to hell as well; IC's weren't broken, and I liked attaching characters to units.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 18:27:54


Post by: Vaktathi


I don't mind auras in theory, but I don't like Characters being completely untargetable either, which I think contributes to some of the issues with such abilities. Some of the stacking and universal application is an issue as well, some abilities really do need to be restricted to work only on certain units or unit types, and some need to not be able to stack with other similar abilities.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 18:35:33


Post by: BlackLobster


I haven't voted because I don't think it's an issue. I've never seen a full blob deployment. Closest I've ever seen is simply having a couple units close enough to HQ option to get buffs. Everything else gets deployed along the full deployment zone.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 19:52:55


Post by: Nym


I dislike anything that leads to a less mobile game.

I think 9th edition needs to bring a "Hero phase" and to turn Auras into Orders. But Orders with a chance of failure (like "My will be done"). Not those we have right now which are just better Psychic Powers.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 20:05:05


Post by: Desubot


What other blob stars are there? it seems to mostly be a girlyman problem and we all know he is one type of issue.



Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 20:14:46


Post by: supreme overlord


 Desubot wrote:
What other blob stars are there? it seems to mostly be a girlyman problem and we all know he is one type of issue.



I've played against a necron and blood angel blob. They weren't very effective but the "smashed" together units made for a not very thematic game.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 20:18:10


Post by: Desubot


 supreme overlord wrote:
 Desubot wrote:
What other blob stars are there? it seems to mostly be a girlyman problem and we all know he is one type of issue.



I've played against a necron and blood angel blob. They weren't very effective but the "smashed" together units made for a not very thematic game.


I mean realistically these leaders would be no where near the battle and just command from above but asides from that they probably should be near the center leading their armys as they all push up forward is a pretty thematic look.

it doesn't work for everyone and some armies or units should probably be more autonomously flanking or doing a thing. but personally i dont think it looks that bad.

game wise i dont think it would be as much of an issue if 1) melee was better as characters are more susceptible in cc or 2) snipers were more abundant or just better in general)


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/26 20:21:09


Post by: Arachnofiend


 supreme overlord wrote:
 Desubot wrote:
What other blob stars are there? it seems to mostly be a girlyman problem and we all know he is one type of issue.



I've played against a necron and blood angel blob. They weren't very effective but the "smashed" together units made for a not very thematic game.

Sounds like the players didn't know what they're doing. The necron equivalent to an HQ aura only affects a single unit so there's no reason to blob up and blood angels' entire thing is super-mobile assault units, trying to make a blob army with them is just wasting your advantages and playing a gakky version of Ultramarines.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 02:04:49


Post by: Primark G


I currently play Ultramarines but have avoided running Bobby G because I think he’s too much of a crutch and overall dumbs down developing solid tactics. That said I’ve played against him and he is really good but well costed imo.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 02:31:42


Post by: clownshoes


Auras should be nerfed down to 3 inches.

Bobby G should be dropped to 380 points and given 12 to 14 wounds.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 03:32:36


Post by: Insectum7


It bothers me a bit, but only certain armies really do it. I did an Abaddon blob for a while but got a little bored with it. It's easy enough to not blob too, or at least multiblob, which opens up the table more.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 07:00:33


Post by: Shadenuat


Auras could affect only very specific unit type, or work only in specific phase too. Cheaper specialized commanders could affect melee units during fight phase so they'd have to charge or do glorious intervention, while more expensive ones could use long range orders with limited amount of targets.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 07:50:18


Post by: Spoletta


clownshoes wrote:
Auras should be nerfed down to 3 inches.

Bobby G should be droped to 380 points and given 12 to 14 wounds.


At 380 points and targetable he would never see play.

In general i don't think that blobbing is an issue, it rarely happens (mostly Gman) and even if that happens that's still better than the "2000 points in a single unit" we had in 7th.

The only thing one could change for aura abilities is having a max number of affected units, base value should be 3 for captains, 2 for LTs and 4 for Chapter Masters.

Edit: After thinking about it, i think that Bobby would still see play like that...


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 08:15:12


Post by: mew28


clownshoes wrote:
Auras should be nerfed down to 3 inches.

Bobby G should be dropped to 380 points and given 12 to 14 wounds.


Dropped to 380 points when he cost 360 seems legit.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 08:17:50


Post by: tneva82


 Elbows wrote:


I'd argue if you think 7th ed. 40K is "tactical" or "strategic" in any way shape or form, you're missing out on a world of actual strategic wargames --- 40K is the kiddie pool of actual military wargames.


It's not whether 7th ed is tactical or strategic compared to top line of games. It's question is it more tactical/strategical than 8th ed that's just roll dice in huge blop.

You do know there's more than 2 choices? Like big hunking huge scale of various shades. And 40k models don't fit other games that well and other games don't have background 40k and even less players. There are reasons why players might want to play best game set in 40k rather than rule that's best just on rules. Games have after all more than just rules to consider. Models, background, player availability to name a few.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 09:23:20


Post by: Klowny


Blob is an issue, for literally one faction in the game, because of one character that is very good.

Where are the nid blobs, the chaos blobs, the demon blobs, the GSC blobs, the guard blobs.

You get my point.

You dont like bobby g, cool. But dont make a post decrying the entirety of a game because you dont like how one faction plays competitively.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 10:04:41


Post by: craftworld_uk


I don't see blob star often outside of Guilliman. And like, you would rally around a Primarch, wouldn't you? So it's not a problem for me.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 11:51:02


Post by: Blackie


The aura concept is very good IMHO, better than letting characters join other units. Some of them are just too powerful.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 13:45:49


Post by: A Town Called Malus


craftworld_uk wrote:
I don't see blob star often outside of Guilliman. And like, you would rally around a Primarch, wouldn't you? So it's not a problem for me.


But not to the point of the whole army sitting around him. Hannibal wouldn't have succeeded in his campaigns if all his men just huddled around him staring in awe at his sandals in every battle. It's a guaranteed way to get surrounded and decimated.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 13:51:42


Post by: Ratius


An ok mechanic in principal but wildly over used to the point of tedium and one dimensionality.
My last few games it feels like its all auras, re rolls and shooties.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 13:57:44


Post by: Imateria


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
craftworld_uk wrote:
I don't see blob star often outside of Guilliman. And like, you would rally around a Primarch, wouldn't you? So it's not a problem for me.


But not to the point of the whole army sitting around him. Hannibal wouldn't have succeeded in his campaigns if all his men just huddled around him staring in awe at his sandals in every battle. It's a guaranteed way to get surrounded and decimated.

That is the worst comparison ever.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 14:11:46


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 Imateria wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
craftworld_uk wrote:
I don't see blob star often outside of Guilliman. And like, you would rally around a Primarch, wouldn't you? So it's not a problem for me.


But not to the point of the whole army sitting around him. Hannibal wouldn't have succeeded in his campaigns if all his men just huddled around him staring in awe at his sandals in every battle. It's a guaranteed way to get surrounded and decimated.

That is the worst comparison ever.


Not really, just because you have a strong, capable leader does not mean you have to be standing next to him to benefit from that. If even in the ancient world commanders were able to exert influence over a whole battlefield, I see no reason that in 40K units would have to cluster around a general to benefit.

IMO army commanders should instead generate CP per turn (up to a maximum limit) and unlock access to unique powers using CP, and you can only spend command points whilst your army general is alive and on the board. That actually introduces player choices, do you spend your 2CP this turn to increase the defence of your front line infantry or wait until next turn to spend 3CP to increase the effectiveness of the flanking cavalry charge you're about to perform? If you wait your line might break, making your general vulnerable but if you don't wait, your cavalry may not be able to rout the enemy on the charge and will be vulnerable to a counter attack.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 14:28:54


Post by: Breng77


That would be a cool mechanic especially if various HQ generated a different amount. Dropzone commander has a similar mechanic where you leader generates a specific amount of command cards each turn, and more expensive commanders generate more. So maybe you would tie it to being the warlord. If x character is your warlord he generates y cp each turn.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 14:45:03


Post by: supreme overlord


 Ratius wrote:
An ok mechanic in principal but wildly over used to the point of tedium and one dimensionality.
My last few games it feels like its all auras, re rolls and shooties.


This has been exactly my experience. blobbed to the point it looks like a herd of cattle ready to run each other over just to get that re-roll. and on the point of re-rolls I was kind of hoping we'd see an end to most of it after 7th edition, especially the 2+ re-roll. I was wrong. Playing Dark Angels last week left me wondering why this is even called a dice game, he was re-rolling nearly everything


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 15:00:37


Post by: Farseer_V2


It's wild to me that so many people see nothing but this 'blob' play style when there aren't that many armies that favor it. Granted you might see bugs and guard blobbed up but that's the nature of a horde army. As far as armies clustered around characters - again playing Eldar I never do it or at most have have 1 character with a unit. Obviously marines favor it but their strength as an army is their auras. I rarely see chaos doing it (I see cultists hanging around a boss for morale but that's about it). I guess personally I don't mind units clustered near buffing characters because it generally makes sense to me.

I certainly don't think the game looks any better worse or than it did in 6th or 7th by virtue.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 15:33:02


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Not really, just because you have a strong, capable leader does not mean you have to be standing next to him to benefit from that. If even in the ancient world commanders were able to exert influence over a whole battlefield, I see no reason that in 40K units would have to cluster around a general to benefit..


Yes, but 40k tries to evoke a more Roman style, I tend to think of it like Julius Caesar, who would show up in his red cloak to sections of the battle that needed inspiration and rally the troops by the sight of his red cloak.

I think the auras are great, they make characters powerful without hiding them in squads. There is definitely a tactical aspect to singling out those characters and getting hits on them.

As for blob-stars, some armies are specifically designed to have that feeling. Death Guard is pretty specifically designed for the blob concept, obviously because they want to create the sense of the shambling horde of the dead, and it works. DG has tons of overlapping auras, they all do different things, and using them effectively means your blob isn't a shapeless mass, but a very specifically formed and designed rank concept. Disparaging it as banal, or simplistic is either oversimplifying the concept or missing the point.

Nobody claimed that Roman phalanxes were blob-stars requiring no skill, imagination or tactical skill, yet, superficially, according to this conversation, they are.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 15:50:16


Post by: Kap'n Krump


 supreme overlord wrote:


This has been exactly my experience. blobbed to the point it looks like a herd of cattle ready to run each other over just to get that re-roll. and on the point of re-rolls I was kind of hoping we'd see an end to most of it after 7th edition, especially the 2+ re-roll. I was wrong. Playing Dark Angels last week left me wondering why this is even called a dice game, he was re-rolling nearly everything


In some fairness, at least there isn't any such thing as a 2+ rerollable save anymore.

That being said, yeah, there is still plenty of stuff (shooting, mostly), that is a 2+ rerollable, which I still don't like. Like you said, it's barely a dice game at that point.

Like morty, for example. Rerolls 1s to hit and to wound, and he hits and typically wounds on 2s.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 15:50:25


Post by: Galas


Characters are at last usefull without needing to be combat mpnsters or psykers. Let them be.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 17:43:38


Post by: ERJAK


 Xenomancers wrote:
I didn't vote because I really don't think it's a problem considering the worst offender of blob star (Guilliman) is actually part of the weakest army in the game and even with ultimate blobstar power still can't place highly in tournaments. however - if other armies had access to this style of play - it would be overwhelming to the point it would break the game.


this is factually bullgak

Below is the current breakdown of what armies are winning events. The list combines all the top lists for 8th edition 2017 ITC season events only, taking only the top three from each Major or GT.

20 Astra Militarum
17 Chaos Space Marines
16 Ultramarines
16 Daemons
16 Ynnari
7 Orks
4 Space Marines
4 T’au Empire
4 Grey Knights
3 Officio Assassinorum
3 Blood Angels
3 Sisters of Battle
3 Death Guard
2 Genestealer Cults
2 Imperial Knights
2 Renegade Knights
2 Adeptus Mechanicus
2 Tyranids
1 Space Wolves
1 Adeptus Custodes
1 Dark Angels


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 19:37:00


Post by: Spoletta


That list though does not contain any games with CA. You can expect Astra Militarum, Chaos Marines and Ultramarines to drop a bit.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 19:41:01


Post by: Desubot


Whats the breakdown of those armies?

how many of them are blobstars?



Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 20:31:32


Post by: ItsPug


 mew28 wrote:
clownshoes wrote:
Auras should be nerfed down to 3 inches.

Bobby G should be dropped to 380 points and given 12 to 14 wounds.


Dropped to 380 points when he cost 360 seems legit.


Bobby G was increased to 385 in the Chapter Approved book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I didn't vote because I really don't think it's a problem considering the worst offender of blob star (Guilliman) is actually part of the weakest army in the game and even with ultimate blobstar power still can't place highly in tournaments. however - if other armies had access to this style of play - it would be overwhelming to the point it would break the game.


this is factually bullgak

Below is the current breakdown of what armies are winning events. The list combines all the top lists for 8th edition 2017 ITC season events only, taking only the top three from each Major or GT.

20 Astra Militarum
17 Chaos Space Marines
16 Ultramarines
16 Daemons
16 Ynnari
7 Orks
4 Space Marines
4 T’au Empire
4 Grey Knights
3 Officio Assassinorum
3 Blood Angels
3 Sisters of Battle
3 Death Guard
2 Genestealer Cults
2 Imperial Knights
2 Renegade Knights
2 Adeptus Mechanicus
2 Tyranids
1 Space Wolves
1 Adeptus Custodes
1 Dark Angels


You fail to factor in sample sizes, Ultramarines placed 12.4% of the time, Sisters of Battle placed 2.3% of the time. Now on the face of it, Ultramarines are over five times as likely to place as opposed to Sisters, but if there are 20 Ultramarines to every Sisters player than it would mean each Sisters player is more likely to place than an Ultramarines player.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 20:50:34


Post by: cosmicsoybean


 Xenomancers wrote:
I didn't vote because I really don't think it's a problem considering the worst offender of blob star (Guilliman) is actually part of the weakest army in the game and even with ultimate blobstar power still can't place highly in tournaments. however - if other armies had access to this style of play - it would be overwhelming to the point it would break the game.

Wooaaah there, share some of that warp dust with the rest of us!


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 21:55:07


Post by: Insularum


Even if we accept that aura blob-star is as powerful as the previous invisible/2++ re-roll-able invincible deathstars (IMO it isn't even close), its nowhere near as broken as some of the other current mechanics; for example since CA the clarification on character targeting has provided a practically unbeatable counter to the typical Guilliman parking lot or static gunline - an army of chaplain ven dreads with one or two deepstrikers dropping out of LOS. No auras required and would be free to navigate the table taking any/all objectives while casually returning fire as everything is a character with less than 10 wounds and therefore illegal to select as a target.

My take on this is that since psychic activity has shifted away from friendly buff casts (invisibility, endurance, prescience) to offensive power (smite, smite, smite), auras have moved into the power vacuum. This makes a wider range of characters compete for a place in your list so is in general good for the game.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 22:08:21


Post by: bananathug


ERJAK wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I didn't vote because I really don't think it's a problem considering the worst offender of blob star (Guilliman) is actually part of the weakest army in the game and even with ultimate blobstar power still can't place highly in tournaments. however - if other armies had access to this style of play - it would be overwhelming to the point it would break the game.


this is factually bullgak

Below is the current breakdown of what armies are winning events. The list combines all the top lists for 8th edition 2017 ITC season events only, taking only the top three from each Major or GT.

20 Astra Militarum
17 Chaos Space Marines
16 Ultramarines
16 Daemons
16 Ynnari
7 Orks
4 Space Marines
4 T’au Empire
4 Grey Knights
3 Officio Assassinorum
3 Blood Angels
3 Sisters of Battle
3 Death Guard
2 Genestealer Cults
2 Imperial Knights
2 Renegade Knights
2 Adeptus Mechanicus
2 Tyranids
1 Space Wolves
1 Adeptus Custodes
1 Dark Angels


Check out the tourney results from since the craft world eldar list was dropped. Um got 9 of those wins in the first months of 8th edition when they were the only codex in town. Check out the most recent FLG podcast for a real good breakdown of how armies are doing now and what the competitive meta has evolved into. It isn't Gman and his blob.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017/12/18/chapter-tactics-50-year-in-review-and-which-factions-dominated-2017/

It's 2 hours but will give you a very good basis for how the actual game is being played and what is winning (hint, it's not any flavor of vanilla marines).

I guess bobby G is dominating the local meta scene or something but as far as real competitive warhammer 40k it's AM, Chaos, Demons and Eldar all punching way above their weight (numbers courtesy of my arse but they are just an illustration of my point: 20% of armies are guard but 40% of top 3 finishers are guard vs same 20% of armies are SM and 5% of top 3 finishers are SM)

I still don't think they talk enough about early edition dominance of SM due to codex release schedules in their analysis but they mention it and do a pretty good numbers break down. I'm curious to see what LVO brings but the only "competitive" SM builds with Girlyman feature 3x stormravens (will probably be fire-raptors) and then whatever else to capture some objectives with the 4-500 points left over.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 22:51:09


Post by: Pandabeer


bananathug wrote:
ERJAK wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I didn't vote because I really don't think it's a problem considering the worst offender of blob star (Guilliman) is actually part of the weakest army in the game and even with ultimate blobstar power still can't place highly in tournaments. however - if other armies had access to this style of play - it would be overwhelming to the point it would break the game.


this is factually bullgak

Below is the current breakdown of what armies are winning events. The list combines all the top lists for 8th edition 2017 ITC season events only, taking only the top three from each Major or GT.

20 Astra Militarum
17 Chaos Space Marines
16 Ultramarines
16 Daemons
16 Ynnari
7 Orks
4 Space Marines
4 T’au Empire
4 Grey Knights
3 Officio Assassinorum
3 Blood Angels
3 Sisters of Battle
3 Death Guard
2 Genestealer Cults
2 Imperial Knights
2 Renegade Knights
2 Adeptus Mechanicus
2 Tyranids
1 Space Wolves
1 Adeptus Custodes
1 Dark Angels


Check out the tourney results from since the craft world eldar list was dropped. Um got 9 of those wins in the first months of 8th edition when they were the only codex in town. Check out the most recent FLG podcast for a real good breakdown of how armies are doing now and what the competitive meta has evolved into. It isn't Gman and his blob.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017/12/18/chapter-tactics-50-year-in-review-and-which-factions-dominated-2017/

It's 2 hours but will give you a very good basis for how the actual game is being played and what is winning (hint, it's not any flavor of vanilla marines).

I guess bobby G is dominating the local meta scene or something but as far as real competitive warhammer 40k it's AM, Chaos, Demons and Eldar all punching way above their weight (numbers courtesy of my arse but they are just an illustration of my point: 20% of armies are guard but 40% of top 3 finishers are guard vs same 20% of armies are SM and 5% of top 3 finishers are SM)

I still don't think they talk enough about early edition dominance of SM due to codex release schedules in their analysis but they mention it and do a pretty good numbers break down. I'm curious to see what LVO brings but the only "competitive" SM builds with Girlyman feature 3x stormravens (will probably be fire-raptors) and then whatever else to capture some objectives with the 4-500 points left over.


Hum, I'll have to watch that sometime. I must be missing something huge because Chaos Daemons seem to be having a piss-weak index to me.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/27 22:54:42


Post by: Kap'n Krump


 Galas wrote:
Characters are at last usefull without needing to be combat mpnsters or psykers. Let them be.


I always thought characters were plenty useful - now, at least for orks, characters are almost a liability. I mean, KFF, warboss, waaagh banner, and to a lesser extent painboyz are helpful, but all of the above, ESPECIALLY warbossi, need to stay far, far away from combat, which is decidedly un-orky.

I mean, the way characters work now, getting a warboss into combat is basically a death sentence. Mega armor helps, and ghaz is decent, but a 4+ armor save boss, even biker bosses like zhard, are just easy kill points in CC. And it feels dumb to not send a warboss into combat, but it feels dumber to just watch them get instantly killed by anything more threatening than fire warriors.

And if you EVER make a positioning mistake and your opponent can target a character, they're just gone.

I just wish characters could be useful, but not so fragile - like last edition.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 00:36:07


Post by: Zid


 Kap'n Krump wrote:
 Galas wrote:
Characters are at last usefull without needing to be combat mpnsters or psykers. Let them be.


I always thought characters were plenty useful - now, at least for orks, characters are almost a liability. I mean, KFF, warboss, waaagh banner, and to a lesser extent painboyz are helpful, but all of the above, ESPECIALLY warbossi, need to stay far, far away from combat, which is decidedly un-orky.

I mean, the way characters work now, getting a warboss into combat is basically a death sentence. Mega armor helps, and ghaz is decent, but a 4+ armor save boss, even biker bosses like zhard, are just easy kill points in CC. And it feels dumb to not send a warboss into combat, but it feels dumber to just watch them get instantly killed by anything more threatening than fire warriors.

And if you EVER make a positioning mistake and your opponent can target a character, they're just gone.

I just wish characters could be useful, but not so fragile - like last edition.


Bring back IC's I say! Unit attachments helped a lot in this regard, but I get that some people abused these rules (like taking 10 chump troops as obligatory wounds for their awesome HQ), but it worked better than now where you have to decide who is closer to who and if its a legal target, plus the Characters have to be X distance from the unit to distinguish themselves as not being part of that unit, and people still shield their characters anyway with obligatory wounds.... needlessly complicated it. Also, this is where Auras started to come into play; before your IC's would confer benefits to the unit they attached to, now your characters give aura effects to everyone and their mother. How does my Chaos Lord allow my tanks to reroll ones to hit? Who knows... warhammer and stuff.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 02:07:26


Post by: DarknessEternal


I just don't see this in actual gameplay, and I only play in competitive settings.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 04:45:45


Post by: Gwarok


This complaint is beyond my understanding. Yes, there are auras, yes players take advantage of them. Don't like the fact armies group up around their leaders? It's "ugly and looks stupid"? Any other abilities that ruin your enjoyment of the game because you think it should look better? As mentioned, there so many options to play it's odd that instead of playing one you hope that a fundamental aspect of the game be retooled.




Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 14:32:50


Post by: Xenomancers


ERJAK wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I didn't vote because I really don't think it's a problem considering the worst offender of blob star (Guilliman) is actually part of the weakest army in the game and even with ultimate blobstar power still can't place highly in tournaments. however - if other armies had access to this style of play - it would be overwhelming to the point it would break the game.


this is factually bullgak

Below is the current breakdown of what armies are winning events. The list combines all the top lists for 8th edition 2017 ITC season events only, taking only the top three from each Major or GT.

20 Astra Militarum
17 Chaos Space Marines
16 Ultramarines
16 Daemons
16 Ynnari
7 Orks
4 Space Marines
4 T’au Empire
4 Grey Knights
3 Officio Assassinorum
3 Blood Angels
3 Sisters of Battle
3 Death Guard
2 Genestealer Cults
2 Imperial Knights
2 Renegade Knights
2 Adeptus Mechanicus
2 Tyranids
1 Space Wolves
1 Adeptus Custodes
1 Dark Angels

What is the date on all of those ultra marine victories? It's also good to know that Tau and Greyknights are top 10 competitive armies right now.

Beware of unfiltered data. It will lead you to the wrong conclusions 100% of the time.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 15:02:58


Post by: the_scotsman


One could also say to beware of massively over-filtering data through one's own biases.

Space Marines certainly aren't "the meta" currently, but they're nowhere near "the worst army". You almost definitely have Grey Knights, Dark Eldar, Necrons, Admech, Space Wolves, Genestealer Cult, Tau, Thousand Sons, and unless someone finds some bonkers new combo in the new codex that is not immediately obvious Dark Angels behind you.

At this point you've constructed a mental fortress by which any data from the past can be disregarded as out of date because the gigantic nerfs that Space Marines received in chapter approved will surely delete them from the game, any data from the present can be disregarded as of course the game is in a state of flux and every current index army will be receiving huge buffs to make them more powerful than marines in the future, and any possibility of future buffs for marines can be disregarded as impossible because GW has never in their history gone back and rebalanced a flagship faction they released early in an edition to ensure they're keeping up with the joneses (Certainly not in Age of Sigmar with the stormcasts and not in 7th edition with various campaign books and angels of death for Marines). So therefore you can conclude that Marines are and always will be the worst faction ever in 40k, horribly oppressed, impossibly outmatched to auto-lose forever.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 15:37:19


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


the_scotsman wrote:
At this point you've constructed a mental fortress by which any data from the past can be disregarded as out of date because the gigantic nerfs that Space Marines received in chapter approved will surely delete them from the game, any data from the present can be disregarded as of course the game is in a state of flux and every current index army will be receiving huge buffs to make them more powerful than marines in the future, and any possibility of future buffs for marines can be disregarded as impossible because GW has never in their history gone back and rebalanced a flagship faction they released early in an edition to ensure they're keeping up with the joneses (Certainly not in Age of Sigmar with the stormcasts and not in 7th edition with various campaign books and angels of death for Marines). So therefore you can conclude that Marines are and always will be the worst faction ever in 40k, horribly oppressed, impossibly outmatched to auto-lose forever.


Thanks, I was looking for a single statement to summarize all of Xeno's arguments, this will do nicely.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
I always thought characters were plenty useful - now, at least for orks, characters are almost a liability. I mean, KFF, warboss, waaagh banner, and to a lesser extent painboyz are helpful, but all of the above, ESPECIALLY warbossi, need to stay far, far away from combat, which is decidedly un-orky.

I mean, the way characters work now, getting a warboss into combat is basically a death sentence. Mega armor helps, and ghaz is decent, but a 4+ armor save boss, even biker bosses like zhard, are just easy kill points in CC. And it feels dumb to not send a warboss into combat, but it feels dumber to just watch them get instantly killed by anything more threatening than fire warriors.


Honestly, this is the way the game goes in hand to hand for everyone at this point. There are a couple characters that can really wade into melee and not worry too much, but they are honestly few and far between.

Positioning is extremely important for characters now, mistakes will typically end up with dead characters, as it should really. This doesn't just apply to Orks, my Chaos Lord is definitely not the hand to hand monster he used to be, he adds a few extra strong attacks and buffs the mainline troops, but that's about it, I make sure to position him carefully and limit his exposure to return attacks, just like shooting. I think the principles in positioning to mitigate return fire are largely the same ones you have to use in hand to hand.

I enjoy the extra level of complexity involved in trying to get the most out of your characters without leaving them exposed.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 19:38:23


Post by: Xenomancers


the_scotsman wrote:
One could also say to beware of massively over-filtering data through one's own biases.

Space Marines certainly aren't "the meta" currently, but they're nowhere near "the worst army". You almost definitely have Grey Knights, Dark Eldar, Necrons, Admech, Space Wolves, Genestealer Cult, Tau, Thousand Sons, and unless someone finds some bonkers new combo in the new codex that is not immediately obvious Dark Angels behind you.

At this point you've constructed a mental fortress by which any data from the past can be disregarded as out of date because the gigantic nerfs that Space Marines received in chapter approved will surely delete them from the game, any data from the present can be disregarded as of course the game is in a state of flux and every current index army will be receiving huge buffs to make them more powerful than marines in the future, and any possibility of future buffs for marines can be disregarded as impossible because GW has never in their history gone back and rebalanced a flagship faction they released early in an edition to ensure they're keeping up with the joneses (Certainly not in Age of Sigmar with the stormcasts and not in 7th edition with various campaign books and angels of death for Marines). So therefore you can conclude that Marines are and always will be the worst faction ever in 40k, horribly oppressed, impossibly outmatched to auto-lose forever.

Of course - you are wrong and I am right. Ultra marines winning some tournaments with storm raven spam in the first few weeks of 8th edition before anyone had a codex or when they had the only codex is 100% worthless data. Use a good filter like...say...tournament results since the release of the tyranid codex. You'll see they aren't even a middle tier army - they are flatly on the bottom even with Guilliman and are outperformed by several index books.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 19:41:43


Post by: Galas


Space Marines are bottom tier with Guilliman and are outperformed by several index books?


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 19:56:49


Post by: Xenomancers


 Galas wrote:
Space Marines are bottom tier with Guilliman and are outperformed by several index books?

Sisters of battle and daemons to be specific.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 19:59:28


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


 Xenomancers wrote:
Of course - you are wrong and I am right. Ultra marines winning some tournaments with storm raven spam in the first few weeks of 8th edition before anyone had a codex or when they had the only codex is 100% worthless data. Use a good filter like...say...tournament results since the release of the tyranid codex. You'll see they aren't even a middle tier army - they are flatly on the bottom even with Guilliman and are outperformed by several index books.


Obligatory Xeno response:
At this point you've constructed a mental fortress by which any data from the past can be disregarded as out of date because the gigantic nerfs that Space Marines received in chapter approved will surely delete them from the game, any data from the present can be disregarded as of course the game is in a state of flux and every current index army will be receiving huge buffs to make them more powerful than marines in the future, and any possibility of future buffs for marines can be disregarded as impossible because GW has never in their history gone back and rebalanced a flagship faction they released early in an edition to ensure they're keeping up with the joneses (Certainly not in Age of Sigmar with the stormcasts and not in 7th edition with various campaign books and angels of death for Marines). So therefore you can conclude that Marines are and always will be the worst faction ever in 40k, horribly oppressed, impossibly outmatched to auto-lose forever.

Anyways, I'll try asking again, but Xeno never shows his work, so here we go. Where are you pulling your results from Xeno? As mentioned previously, the guy selling them off the back of a truck downtown, not reliable.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 20:09:55


Post by: bananathug


 Galas wrote:
Space Marines are bottom tier with Guilliman and are outperformed by several index books?

Here's my attempt at current meta power rankings. Mostly based around % of entrants vs % of top finishers. If an army is 5% of entrants yet 20% of top finishers it would be upper tier vs an army that is 40% of entrants and 25% of top finishers would be mid-bottom tier.

Top:
AM
CSM
Chaos soup (partially index?)
Ynarri (index)
CWE

Mid:
Orcs (index)
Nids (TBD? I really want to put them top tier but isn't born out by the data YET)
GSC (index)
UM
Blood Angels
Dark Angels (maybe bottom?)
SOB (index)

Bottom:
AdMech
Vanilla SM (non guilliman)
Demons (index)
Tau
Wolves
Grey Knights (perform better in soup but mono faction?)
Inquisition (Knights, custodes, SoS, Assassins and Inquistion should really all be the same faction right?)

Seems to be the current state of the Meta from all results I can find.

I think the real problem is the power difference between those armies which are top tier vs the rest of the pack where 80-90%% of top finishers come from that top group and the rest of the armies are fighting for scraps. If the jump from tier 1 to tier 2 wasn't so bad (could actually have a competitive game between reasonably competitive lists from both tiers) I personally would be much less salty.

Also the complaint of those in the mid-bottom tier which already have their codexes seems to be that codex creep seems to be a real thing this edition (DA seem to have gotten the short end of that stick but for the most part codex armies are much stronger than their index iteration) so the fear that index armies performing near/above codex armies will out-perform those same codex armies once the index armies has a codex seems to be based on pretty solid precedent. So as it stands now UM are pretty solid mid tier, problem is mid tier may as well be bottom tier when facing a well constructed top tier army (not to mention the salt in the wound of CA nerfing the most viable SM build and the new ITC champion missions further reducing the Tournament viability of those armies to solid bottom tier)

Meta hasn't settled yet, there are a lot of codexes yet to come for some traditionally powerful factions (tau) and I don't think the meta has digested Nids yet but the fact that people are still hung up over the early success of guilliman armies has lead to (IMnot so humbleO) an over nerf of that faction without proper attention paid to other more powerful armies and the issue of codex power creep.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 20:13:53


Post by: Stormonu


As someone whose played tyranids, small aura ranges are extremely annoying. At the same time, buffs that work from anywhere can be problematic as well. I’d like to see commander buffs have a range of about 18”, possibly limited to X number of units for balance. This allows some lattitude in speading units out, while forcing the buffer to remain somewhat close to the action. The unit limitation enforces some strategizing and prioritizing.

I wish there was a hiearchy to auras - supercommanders like Primarchs handing down buffs/commands to officers, and then those officers passing commands down to their troops. But that system would slow things down too much, I think.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/28 20:29:18


Post by: Crimson


If you blob your entire army in one place, how you're gonna score objectives?


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 02:16:30


Post by: the_scotsman


Curious that you've separated "Ultramarines" and "non-UM" here just for Marines but we don't see where "Non-alaitoc CWE" or "non-mars Admech" or "non-Alpha Legion CSM" fall.

You've also listed Ynnari as top tier. You know they basically got deleted except for a single two-unit combo right? As an army, they are gone. CSM without soup also appear just about as much as Marines without guilliman.

An accurate tier list would be:

Top: Guard Eldar Nids Chaos Imperium

Mid: Orks SOB Marines

Low: Admech GSC

Too early to call: BA DA

Sir not appearing in this film: DE Tau SW GK Necrons

That top tier is about 75% of top lists, mid tier about 20, low about 5.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 02:27:55


Post by: Martel732


BA and DA still suffer heavily from working with... marines. They're probably better than SM without Bobby G, and worse than marines with. And that makes them 100% irrelevant I fear.

I think BA were supposed to be a foil to -1 to hit armies, but we have no way around screens still.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 02:37:05


Post by: Luciferian


With my DG list, I don't have the option NOT to blob up. I have a huge squad of Plague Marines supported by characters and screened by cultists. Un-blobbed, any single element of it would easily be killed. In a blob, it's slightly less easy. In certain cases blobbing is heavily incentivized, but it's not the entire meta by any means. I pretty much must do it, but that doesn't make my list competitive.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 04:58:45


Post by: admironheart


back in the day GW had characters divided into Heros, Mighty Heros and Champions for stats.

If the new characters could be divided as such you would have like Warlocks, Commisaars, Meckboyz and such as Heros
Marine Captains, Farseers and Archons as Mighty Heroes

Special and Named characters as Champions.

If you then decided Heroes could only buff 1 unit, Mighty Heros could buff 2 units and Champions could do 3 then the blob would spread out more.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 05:19:19


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


I don't really have a huge problem with the blobs.

There's not enough space on the board not to be a blob in games larger than 1000-1500 points. I think the BRB recommends 4x8 for 2k and up, which I can honestly agree with.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 09:10:18


Post by: Spoletta


The game works a lot better at the 1500 points mark, that's for sure. It's just that we got used to the points creep and to field 2 Prymarchs, tanks and loads of infantries on a table, so when 8th edition made big stuff and big weapons cost more, we answered by increasing the standard point limit (from 1850 to 2000).

Now we cry about alpha strikes, blobs and such, but that is a byproduct of playing at a non standard point mark.

The table is too small because 2000 point is exactly the divider between using a 4x6 or a 4x8.

IMHO the game should be played at 500, 750, 1250, 1500, 1750.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 09:27:14


Post by: tneva82


Insularum wrote:
Even if we accept that aura blob-star is as powerful as the previous invisible/2++ re-roll-able invincible deathstars (IMO it isn't even close), its nowhere near as broken as some of the other current mechanics; for example since CA the clarification on character targeting has provided a practically unbeatable counter to the typical Guilliman parking lot or static gunline - an army of chaplain ven dreads with one or two deepstrikers dropping out of LOS. No auras required and would be free to navigate the table taking any/all objectives while casually returning fire as everything is a character with less than 10 wounds and therefore illegal to select as a target.

My take on this is that since psychic activity has shifted away from friendly buff casts (invisibility, endurance, prescience) to offensive power (smite, smite, smite), auras have moved into the power vacuum. This makes a wider range of characters compete for a place in your list so is in general good for the game.


How would that work? Isn't the unit out of LOS supposed to be closest target? In 8th ed getting unit reliably out of LOS at will seems awfully tricky proposition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gwarok wrote:
This complaint is beyond my understanding. Yes, there are auras, yes players take advantage of them. Don't like the fact armies group up around their leaders? It's "ugly and looks stupid"? Any other abilities that ruin your enjoyment of the game because you think it should look better? As mentioned, there so many options to play it's odd that instead of playing one you hope that a fundamental aspect of the game be retooled.




Good luck finding non 40k game that has 40k fluff, works with 40k models and has opponents to play with. Tell me answer to that riddle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Crimson wrote:
If you blob your entire army in one place, how you're gonna score objectives?


How often you get to play more than 3 turns without one side getting wiped out?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote:
The game works a lot better at the 1500 points mark, that's for sure. It's just that we got used to the points creep and to field 2 Prymarchs, tanks and loads of infantries on a table, so when 8th edition made big stuff and big weapons cost more, we answered by increasing the standard point limit (from 1850 to 2000).


Which then was responded by GW lowering points from indexes with codex releases so suddenly 2000 pts codex army is more like 2100-2200 index army. And GW thanks all the extra sales as players need to buy more models to make 2k list.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 10:19:13


Post by: Spoletta


Only 3 missions out of 12 use scoring at the end of the game.

Also, you are right that Codex armies do have around 100 points more to play on after the transition, but those come from points reductions on models that didn't get much spotlight, if you played a top competitive army list, chances are that you got the same or even less points to play with.
Naturally at this point you will buy even MORE models, since what you had is no longer the absolute best and you will revamp your army completely to get that 2% more of efficency!


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 10:31:22


Post by: tneva82


Generally point drops were often precisely on units that got hefty point increases in indexes. In particular vehicles. Model was vehicle? Index point up. Codex? Point drop. Point increases didn't really happen from index to codex at least in significant amount. Generally it was index + rule boosts+free bonuses+point drops.

And unless you house rule(with new scenarios) wipeout is pretty much win always regardless of scenario points.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 10:46:49


Post by: Tyel


the_scotsman wrote:
Curious that you've separated "Ultramarines" and "non-UM" here just for Marines but we don't see where "Non-alaitoc CWE" or "non-mars Admech" or "non-Alpha Legion CSM" fall.

You've also listed Ynnari as top tier. You know they basically got deleted except for a single two-unit combo right? As an army, they are gone. CSM without soup also appear just about as much as Marines without guilliman.

An accurate tier list would be:

Top: Guard Eldar Nids Chaos Imperium

Mid: Orks SOB Marines

Low: Admech GSC

Too early to call: BA DA

Sir not appearing in this film: DE Tau SW GK Necrons

That top tier is about 75% of top lists, mid tier about 20, low about 5.


This seems about right.
Really though its hard to talk of a meta when the game is shifting - often quite considerably - every 6 weeks. I think Chaos has potentially been hit by chapter approved and the psychic changes - or at least the more skewed lists have been.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 11:15:40


Post by: Elemental


the_scotsman wrote:
One could also say to beware of massively over-filtering data through one's own biases.


You must be new here.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 12:01:47


Post by: Crimson


tneva82 wrote:

How often you get to play more than 3 turns without one side getting wiped out?

Pretty much always.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 12:51:46


Post by: the_scotsman


Tyel wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Curious that you've separated "Ultramarines" and "non-UM" here just for Marines but we don't see where "Non-alaitoc CWE" or "non-mars Admech" or "non-Alpha Legion CSM" fall.

You've also listed Ynnari as top tier. You know they basically got deleted except for a single two-unit combo right? As an army, they are gone. CSM without soup also appear just about as much as Marines without guilliman.

An accurate tier list would be:

Top: Guard Eldar Nids Chaos Imperium

Mid: Orks SOB Marines

Low: Admech GSC

Too early to call: BA DA

Sir not appearing in this film: DE Tau SW GK Necrons

That top tier is about 75% of top lists, mid tier about 20, low about 5.


This seems about right.
Really though its hard to talk of a meta when the game is shifting - often quite considerably - every 6 weeks. I think Chaos has potentially been hit by chapter approved and the psychic changes - or at least the more skewed lists have been.



I agree. It's not clear how the loss of Malefic Lords will affect the Chaos umbrella faction but I doubt it'd be as much as the functional loss of Ynnari affected the Aeldari umbrella. Magnus, Mortarion, and some alpha bezerkers and some brimstone horrors is still a solid core for a list, and the new tzeentch bonus will only make the defensiveness of the tzeentch screening squad more efficient (no reason not to run Changeling+Horrors as their own detachment since they're HQ and troops, just gotta add one herald or something).

The psychic change would have affected them heavily if they still had the malefic lords, but as-is if tournaments adopt the smite change it shouldn't affect them too much. As long as magnus and morty get their smites, they're happy.

Pending upcoming balance changes or new codexes, nids, eldar, imperium soup heavy on guard and chaos will continue to be The Big Four. I can definitely see BA joining mid tier as about on par with UM (I think Martel heavily underestimates how good something like a DC-oriented list that isn't heavily reliant on deep strike to make their melee alpha happen might be against the possibility of the meta shifting towards something more Dark Reaper shaped. Their matchup is good vs guard, maybe not quite as good as the genestealer/alpha zerker matchup, but much better against eldar since they don't get to use Forewarned.)


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 14:46:20


Post by: Xenomancers


the_scotsman wrote:
Curious that you've separated "Ultramarines" and "non-UM" here just for Marines but we don't see where "Non-alaitoc CWE" or "non-mars Admech" or "non-Alpha Legion CSM" fall.

You've also listed Ynnari as top tier. You know they basically got deleted except for a single two-unit combo right? As an army, they are gone. CSM without soup also appear just about as much as Marines without guilliman.

An accurate tier list would be:

Top: Guard Eldar Nids Chaos Imperium

Mid: Orks SOB Marines

Low: Admech GSC

Too early to call: BA DA

Sir not appearing in this film: DE Tau SW GK Necrons

That top tier is about 75% of top lists, mid tier about 20, low about 5.

It's because marines without guilliman belong in the not appearing in this film section and with Guilliman are basically at the admech level.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 14:53:54


Post by: quickfuze


One problem that needs to be fixed is the blatant Bias that the Imperium gets and Xenos/Chaos are out in the cold. Alot of the abilities that the Imperium just "get" for having aura's, the other side has to waste valuable spell slots a turn or CP. This is also evident in the faction keyword area....look at what can be "Imperium" versus, for example the new demon codex where you have to refine yourself ALLLLLL the way down to a single god devotion to get a loci. A loci that for all intent and purposes is garbage on the power level. The faction keyword mechanic needs to be adjusted to be a minimum of 2 shared words for aura and buff benefits.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 14:59:59


Post by: Xenomancers


 quickfuze wrote:
One problem that needs to be fixed is the blatant Bias that the Imperium gets and Xenos/Chaos are out in the cold. Alot of the abilities that the Imperium just "get" for having aura's, the other side has to waste valuable spell slots a turn or CP. This is also evident in the faction keyword area....look at what can be "Imperium" versus, for example the new demon codex where you have to refine yourself ALLLLLL the way down to a single god devotion to get a loci. A loci that for all intent and purposes is garbage on the power level. The faction keyword mechanic needs to be adjusted to be a minimum of 2 shared words for aura and buff benefits.

Can you be more specific? Are we specifically talking about guillimans 12" imperium buff? It's just a reroll 1's aura that add +1 to your advance or charge move - if you are paying 360 (now 385) for that...you are over paying for sure. I can't think of any other imerpium aura - help me out so we can discuss.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 15:08:20


Post by: the_scotsman


 Xenomancers wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Curious that you've separated "Ultramarines" and "non-UM" here just for Marines but we don't see where "Non-alaitoc CWE" or "non-mars Admech" or "non-Alpha Legion CSM" fall.

You've also listed Ynnari as top tier. You know they basically got deleted except for a single two-unit combo right? As an army, they are gone. CSM without soup also appear just about as much as Marines without guilliman.

An accurate tier list would be:

Top: Guard Eldar Nids Chaos Imperium

Mid: Orks SOB Marines

Low: Admech GSC

Too early to call: BA DA

Sir not appearing in this film: DE Tau SW GK Necrons

That top tier is about 75% of top lists, mid tier about 20, low about 5.

It's because marines without guilliman belong in the not appearing in this film section and with Guilliman are basically at the admech level.


I just don't see where you're getting that second statement. Unless you've got a wealth of info stashed away somewhere, the most recent major tournament events I'm finding (like the Seven Circles of Hull event on Nov 25th) have marines with guilliman appearing just as much as the other mid-tier dexes. They're NOWHERE NEAR as rare as the other oddballs like admech, GSC, or Grey Knights.

I agree that marines outside the optimal subfaction are basically never seen, just like every non-optimal subfaction of every faction besides guard and tyranids. I can count the number of times I've seen non-AL CSM, non-Alaitoc Eldar, non-tzeentch daemons or non-Mars Admech on one finger (one admech list in I think 3rd place of some event in november used a substantial Stygies contingent).

For nids, you see Kronos and Kraken. For guard, you see Cadians and Catachans (talking recent results here, pre gutting of Tallarn). That is the privilege of being absolute tippy-top top tier: You get two subfactions appearing instead of one.

This is why your little whine-crusade is so irritating to me. Marines are not some poor, oppressed, kicked puppies because they're limited to a single optimal subfaction. They are literally playing the same game as absolutely everyone else. I'd love to see everyone having some tournament playtime, and I think once we get the other 8 or so codexes out, as long as we don't get too many stinkers like DA, we should start to see that. That should be the priority right now, not rushing back to ensure Marines are in the top tier to coddle your ego.

You have never once provided any kind of evidence to prove Marines are in a somehow worse spot than any of the "non big four" factions despite rejecting every single little bit of data that's ever put in front of you as either "too small of a sample size" if it's recent data or "too out of date" if it's a large sample. Yet you continually make claims like "marines are on par with admech" despite never providing any evidence of that yourself, or any evidence at all to back up anything you say.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 15:46:31


Post by: Farseer_V2


[MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - Alpharius]


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 15:56:52


Post by: Martel732


A more fair way to look at it is to say that marines will END UP down with admech. I'm guessing every codex that comes out this year is also better than marines. Then GW will have to figure out how to unbury their poster boys.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 16:04:10


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017/12/18/chapter-tactics-50-year-in-review-and-which-factions-dominated-2017/

Just finished listening to this on the way into work, they do a really good breakdown of armies played, changes in numbers from end of 7th to beginning of 8th, from beginning of 8th until current, representation changes over the course of the year, and lots more. It's very comprehensive.

Basically, the rough conclusions:
AM wins tournaments more than any other codex, we're all terribly surprised.
Chaos comes in second in its various flavors, again, not surprising, but the caveat here being they don't know how the Malefic Lord nerf will change the numbers going forward.
Orks win a lot more than I would have thought.
Marines are heavily represented, middle tier, which is what most rational minds around here kind of thought anyways.
Eldar were discussed a bit, but don't seem to have heavily slanted the data one way or another yet, definitely not as well represented as they were in 7th.

There's a lot of good information in there, they break down data from all the official ITC events (which is a lot of data, over 11000 players worth of data) over the past year and slice and dice the data in a lot of interesting ways.

I'll be curious to hear their round up at the end of next year to see how things have changed over the course of new releases.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 16:05:52


Post by: Martel732


Are marines middle because they have so many representatives, though? That's my concern. I have no faith in the marine codex to stand up to a Tau or Drukhari codex at all.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 16:14:02


Post by: the_scotsman


Martel732 wrote:
A more fair way to look at it is to say that marines will END UP down with admech. I'm guessing every codex that comes out this year is also better than marines. Then GW will have to figure out how to unbury their poster boys.


Could be. I can definitely see a situation like AOS saw with the early books (which were also pre-written before the game dropped and ended up very low on the power scale) which led to the re-release of the Stormcast battletome very early on in the rotation.

But then again, they also could not be. Tau, DE and Necrons in particular are in a *very* bad spot with the index, and a DA-level codex that doesn't really fix any of their issues will leave them exactly where DA are right now: basically in the same spot with a few extra cookies that don't fundamentally fix much. And those factions are all fairly elite, so they lack the natural "we're a horde faction so we work pretty well in 8th" defense that GSC and Orks are currently benefitting from in the index. They certainly didn't demonstrate that they understood what any of those other elite factions needed to compete in Chapter Approved...The Tau and Dark Eldar stuff that they added were just laughably inept.

But at the present moment, Marines are not sharing a tier with Sisters, GSC, Admech, GK or the other also-rans. They're in the same shoes as mono- or light ally DG, CSM, Orks, and the rest of the mid-tier, showing up about a quarter of the time with cute little counter-meta strategies to beat the top tier armies.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 16:15:13


Post by: Martel732


Interestingly, I haven't beat sisters yet with marines of any kind. I consider sisters head and shoulders above any kind of marine list. They just aren't in plastic.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 16:25:00


Post by: the_scotsman


Martel732 wrote:
Are marines middle because they have so many representatives, though? That's my concern. I have no faith in the marine codex to stand up to a Tau or Drukhari codex at all.


Man, you have a lot of faith in GWs ability to buff Tau and Drukhari out of the hole they're in then.

What tells you that GW has figured out what Drukhari and Tau need to work then? is it the multiple weapon option tables where they're almost all exactly the same but one is always completely superior 100% of the time (Wych weapons, Tau Specials, Haemonculus weapons, Scourge weapons, Reaver melee attachments, etc) or was it the stellar rules they got in Chapter Approved that addressed tons of their current issues (Advance and Shoot trait for Tau characters, Trait that doesn't function at all until turn 3 for the Succubus, etc)?

At the end of the day, maybe marines are winning more because more people are picking marines than other mid/low tier factions, but if they were simply mathematically inferior you wouldn't see them sneaking into the top tables with their countermeta stuff. At the end of the day, marines are just not currently the worst faction around, or even close, and if they are after all the rest of the codexes are released? Great, then they should be buffed along with anyone else who can't compete.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 16:27:20


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


Martel732 wrote:
Interestingly, I haven't beat sisters yet with marines of any kind. I consider sisters head and shoulders above any kind of marine list. They just aren't in plastic.


They actually discuss the fact that Sisters were fairly well represented (or at least better represented than they would have expected) and tended to point out in tournament settings pretty well. They did a breakdown of the average points total that various factions ended up with at the end of a tournament, which was very interesting. Basically, Sisters tend to point out in ITC tournament settings at around 60 points or so, which was slightly above average (Necrons tended to point out at 53, which is the lowest). The other thing they mentioned with that though is that there are some really good Sisters players who just know how to use their army well, so you have low representation, but higher average player skill coming into play a bit, whereas with Marines you might just be seeing results that are slanted to a certain extent by simple weight of representation.

Chaos flavors tended to point out of tournaments with the highest average point total (somewhere in the 70s), even though AM won more tournaments, they tended to have a lower average point total across tournaments, this may also have to do with representation and average player skill level.

Edited for clarification and typos.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 16:28:09


Post by: Martel732


Nids and Eldar were poor before their codices, too. I think GW has more freedom with those factions. Look at all the crap they just made up for Nids. Little nodules that give carnifex -1 to be hit? Heavy venom cannons for all?

I personally can't recommend too many changes for marines until I see every codex. I will say that I think IG and Nids are gonna need massive nerfs going forward. But I guess we'll see. Basically every tyranid list I've seen makes me feel like I don't even know where to begin against them.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 16:41:07


Post by: the_scotsman


I think you'd end up playing a little less whack-a-mole if you started post codex balancing by making the game in general a little less slanted towards cheap plentiful units (I'd start by removing Insane Bravery and do something like double results of all random shot weapons against units with 10 or more models, something to simulate the effects of old blasts) but yeah, we may still see pretty extensive rebalancing of nids and guard.

In my eyes, Eldar and BA win "most improved" award for 8th from index to codex. Everything else that's come out really big has started from a decent core from the index in the first place. I wasn't at all surprised when nids and guard came out big in the codexes, and I will also not be surprised if Orks, GSC, Harlequins and Sisters end up in the higher tiers as well, as they all function fairly well out of the index.

Dark Eldar, Necrons, and Tau are all going to rely on GW being able to pull some of that ol game design creativity out of their butts and ground-up redesign some of the stuff that just currently does not function at all. I have less optimism about how they'll turn out.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 17:04:31


Post by: Martel732


Yeah, nids didn't surprise me, but the extent of goodies they got really did.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 17:18:20


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


the_scotsman wrote:
In my eyes, Eldar and BA win "most improved" award for 8th from index to codex. Everything else that's come out really big has started from a decent core from the index in the first place. I wasn't at all surprised when nids and guard came out big in the codexes, and I will also not be surprised if Orks, GSC, Harlequins and Sisters end up in the higher tiers as well, as they all function fairly well out of the index.


This didn't really surprise me that much, Eldar psychic powers were weak in the Index, but you knew they were going to be amazing in Codex, traditionally Chaos and Eldar have always had the strongest psychic power foundations in the game (which I feel is in line with the fluff).

Blood Angels honestly are second only to Ultramarines in terms of their ubiquity to the Imperial storyline, I suspect they are going to perform well once players really have a handle on their meta and how best to use it.

GSC will be fine, they have AM guns and arguably the best of Tyranid hand to hand combined with the best deep strike rules in the game.

Harlequins will be fine by virtue of being associated with the Eldar soup, if nothing else.

Orks are the only one I'm concerned about. I've heard a couple shooting solutions for them I liked, one being that they hit on a 5+ all the time, the other being to give them +1 to hit for every 10 models in the squad, which would make things like Lootas good initially, but less and less impressive as they take casualties. But that's all conjecture, who knows what GW will do to encourage list diversity in the Ork codex.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 17:22:42


Post by: Xenomancers


 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Interestingly, I haven't beat sisters yet with marines of any kind. I consider sisters head and shoulders above any kind of marine list. They just aren't in plastic.


They actually discuss the fact that Sisters were fairly well represented (or at least better represented than they would have expected) and tended to point out in tournament settings pretty well. They did a breakdown of the average points total that various factions ended up with at the end of a tournament, which was very interesting. Basically, Sisters tend to point out in ITC tournament settings at around 60 points or so, which was slightly above average (Necrons tended to point out at 53, which is the lowest). The other thing they mentioned with that though is that there are some really good Sisters players who just know how to use their army well, so you have low representation, but higher average player skill coming into play a bit, whereas with Marines you might just be seeing results that are slanted to a certain extent by simple weight of representation.

Chaos flavors tended to point out of tournaments with the highest average point total (somewhere in the 70s), even though AM won more tournaments, they tended to have a lower average point total across tournaments, this may also have to do with representation and average player skill level.

Edited for clarification and typos.

There is a much more simple explanation for SOB low participation rate. Their models are rare and very few men (the majority of players in this game) want to play an army of girls. They are better than space marines in every way though. Player skill accounts for very little in this game. It is mostly list building -followed by dice rolls. Player skill is basically knowing when you should go for a table or when to win by objectives and what order to kill things in- not very hard to figure out.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 17:37:53


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


 Xenomancers wrote:
There is a much more simple explanation for SOB low participation rate. Their models are rare and very few men (the majority of players in this game) want to play an army of girls.


Please, most serious tournament players would play an army of Orks wearing tutus if the rules were there, I think this has very little to do with it. Honestly, if it does, seek therapy, you have issues.

 Xenomancers wrote:
They are better than space marines in every way though.


I think we can discount this as according to you, every faction in the game is superior to marines in every way. The way you pitch it they could be beaten by coma patients.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Player skill accounts for very little in this game.


According to you, but this fails to explain people who win with clearly inferior factions. Players that know how to use the strengths of their army are always going to outperform painters who show up with pretty models, regardless of faction.

 Xenomancers wrote:
It is mostly list building -followed by dice rolls.


Hey, welcome to the last 25 years of 40k, what astounding insight! Players get lucky? NO! Players construct good lists that mitigate the effects of luck? NO! Seriously, I assume you have never followed any professional sport, but here's the thing, championships always involve good roster construction and a little luck.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Player skill is basically knowing when you should go for a table or when to win by objectives and what order to kill things in- not very hard to figure out.


Yet, it's often where players make mistakes in tournament settings, it's almost like a, what's the word I'm looking for, a skill! It's amazing how often people will screw up the math in their head at the table and either don't go for a kill when they have it, choose the wrong target, make a bad placement, or simply underestimate their opponent. I know you live in a mathhammer world Xeno, but really, people make mistakes, frequently, especially when you add in the extra pressure of a tournament.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 17:39:19


Post by: deviantduck


 Xenomancers wrote:
There is a much more simple explanation for SOB low participation rate.
The lack of sisters players is completely driven by the dollar cost of models, the lack of plastic models, and historic lack of codex support. Do I want to be a masochist and start a metal SoB army, or 2 other plastic armies? Tough call.
 Xenomancers wrote:
Their models are rare and very few men (the majority of players in this game) want to play an army of girls.
Rare-ish. The bulk of the line is still easy to get a hold of. I don't know many 40k players that go, "Ewwww... Guuurls." But, I also rarely play against 10 year olds.
 Xenomancers wrote:
They are better than space marines in every way though.
Smartest thing you've ever said. They always have been and always will be. Its the marines turning traitors that started this whole mess.
 Xenomancers wrote:
Player skill accounts for very little in this game. It is mostly list building -followed by dice rolls. Player skill is basically knowing when you should go for a table or when to win by objectives and what order to kill things in- not very hard to figure out.
I.... I don't know to reply to this. I'm a firm believer in the 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 model of "List, Luck, Skill". I think you vastly oversimplify things.


Dang it TwinPoleTheory! You beat me.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 18:02:12


Post by: bananathug


the_scotsman wrote:
I think you'd end up playing a little less whack-a-mole if you started post codex balancing by making the game in general a little less slanted towards cheap plentiful units (I'd start by removing Insane Bravery and do something like double results of all random shot weapons against units with 10 or more models, something to simulate the effects of old blasts) but yeah, we may still see pretty extensive rebalancing of nids and guard.

In my eyes, Eldar and BA win "most improved" award for 8th from index to codex. Everything else that's come out really big has started from a decent core from the index in the first place. I wasn't at all surprised when nids and guard came out big in the codexes, and I will also not be surprised if Orks, GSC, Harlequins and Sisters end up in the higher tiers as well, as they all function fairly well out of the index.

Dark Eldar, Necrons, and Tau are all going to rely on GW being able to pull some of that ol game design creativity out of their butts and ground-up redesign some of the stuff that just currently does not function at all. I have less optimism about how they'll turn out.


I'd agree with most of this outside of your lack of optimism for Tau and Necrons (not sure about DE outside of eldar soup). I think Tau have the framework for a good army if they get some point reductions and figure out something to do with markerlights that isn't pants on head stupid. I think Necrons have some interesting abilities that if tweaked could end up with a very powerful army.

But looking at this list really highlits my concern that SM are already mid to low tier (can we call them lower middle class?) that are about to get leapfroged (and to me all signs are pointing to this happening) by GSC, Sisters, Tau, Necrons and Orcs. Going from mid to bottom in a game where the difference from top to mid is almost insurmountable and doesn't make for a fun game for either side. Reducing my options for fun games to a handful of other underpowered armies (GK, DA, Inquisition, DE?, AdMech) or against intentionally handicapped "regular" opponents.

Also, I parsed out non-ultra marines from marines mostly because I'm salty from coming back from 5th edition where my black templars had our own codex to this edition where it's ultramarines or die. The difference between UM and say the flavors of CWE is that there are models available to the different SM chapters that are not available to the other chapters so it's more than just a "my guys are the wrong color (which is a big effing issue if you know how difficult it is to paint 60 white shoulder pads over black primer)" but that's really a personal issue and one that I probably just need to buck-up and deal with if I want to keep playing this game.

And CA has really undermined what little faith I had in GW to use CA to balance armies. SM a mid tier army at best got their most competitive units nerfed while the top tier armies escaped mostly unscathed (malefic lords TBD but recent results seem to indicate that Chaos is still performing at top tier without them). I've said it before but it seemed like a hamfisted attempt to sell more primaris/GW models at the expense of FW in some cases(except for fire raptors, I still don't get that one), rather than an attempt to balance the meta.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 18:31:43


Post by: the_scotsman


bananathug wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
I think you'd end up playing a little less whack-a-mole if you started post codex balancing by making the game in general a little less slanted towards cheap plentiful units (I'd start by removing Insane Bravery and do something like double results of all random shot weapons against units with 10 or more models, something to simulate the effects of old blasts) but yeah, we may still see pretty extensive rebalancing of nids and guard.

In my eyes, Eldar and BA win "most improved" award for 8th from index to codex. Everything else that's come out really big has started from a decent core from the index in the first place. I wasn't at all surprised when nids and guard came out big in the codexes, and I will also not be surprised if Orks, GSC, Harlequins and Sisters end up in the higher tiers as well, as they all function fairly well out of the index.

Dark Eldar, Necrons, and Tau are all going to rely on GW being able to pull some of that ol game design creativity out of their butts and ground-up redesign some of the stuff that just currently does not function at all. I have less optimism about how they'll turn out.


I'd agree with most of this outside of your lack of optimism for Tau and Necrons (not sure about DE outside of eldar soup). I think Tau have the framework for a good army if they get some point reductions and figure out something to do with markerlights that isn't pants on head stupid. I think Necrons have some interesting abilities that if tweaked could end up with a very powerful army.

But looking at this list really highlits my concern that SM are already mid to low tier (can we call them lower middle class?) that are about to get leapfroged (and to me all signs are pointing to this happening) by GSC, Sisters, Tau, Necrons and Orcs. Going from mid to bottom in a game where the difference from top to mid is almost insurmountable and doesn't make for a fun game for either side. Reducing my options for fun games to a handful of other underpowered armies (GK, DA, Inquisition, DE?, AdMech) or against intentionally handicapped "regular" opponents.

Also, I parsed out non-ultra marines from marines mostly because I'm salty from coming back from 5th edition where my black templars had our own codex to this edition where it's ultramarines or die. The difference between UM and say the flavors of CWE is that there are models available to the different SM chapters that are not available to the other chapters so it's more than just a "my guys are the wrong color (which is a big effing issue if you know how difficult it is to paint 60 white shoulder pads over black primer)" but that's really a personal issue and one that I probably just need to buck-up and deal with if I want to keep playing this game.

And CA has really undermined what little faith I had in GW to use CA to balance armies. SM a mid tier army at best got their most competitive units nerfed while the top tier armies escaped mostly unscathed (malefic lords TBD but recent results seem to indicate that Chaos is still performing at top tier without them). I've said it before but it seemed like a hamfisted attempt to sell more primaris/GW models at the expense of FW in some cases(except for fire raptors, I still don't get that one), rather than an attempt to balance the meta.


Here's where I'm going to disagree a little bit: the difference between top and mid is almost insurmountable *in a maximum competitive setting* and *when you don't make any meta predictions*. The reason why we so often see the mid or lower tier factions appearing right at the top tables, but not nearly as much in the middle, is because those players brought along a solid countermeta list that even in the maximum competitive setting of the tournament, is still able to compete and even excel because it tailors to beat the big bad boys.

Also, it is somewhat disingenuous to say that because Space Marines got a nerf to one character, one weapon, and one vehicle, the top tier armies "escaped unscathed" in comparison. Also, remember at the time CA was written Space Marines were still solidly considered to be in the top bracket, as Guard, SM, DG, GK, AM and CSM were the only codexes being considered for balance. SM didn't really drop down into the mid tier until the eldar+nid release fully impacted the meta.

Malefic Lords, one of the major tools of the chaos soup lists, are straight up gone. No longer exist as an option in any competitive sense. Eldar lost Ynnari from their pack of tools just before CA as well as Shadow Spectres which pre the Ynnari change were arguably their second most competitive unit. Celestine, far and away the best SOB unit, got a nerf. A good chunk of guard stuff also got adjusted, from conscripts to primaris psykers to earthshaker carriages to manticores - at the time CA was being written, those units were the competitive guard list, you can't exactly hold it against them too hard that they didn't nerf what the competitive guard players pivoted to after they nerfed the first set of stuff. Guard have at this point been nerfed on four separate occasions, if I'm counting correctly.

The eldar codex and tyranid codex had just dropped, probably after the writing work for CA was completed. THose armies (barring ynnari) were absent from the tournament scene previously. They would have had no way to know what kind of impact they would have.

It's true that daemons got no adjustments, but I'm not going to call them unscathed until we get the leaks from their upcoming codex. Will we see adjustments to princes, horrors, and exalted flamers? we don't know yet.

CA was premature, and as a result somewhat cautious with the main GW Line. I was unimpressed, but not surprised, to see it didn't have a huge impact.

Outside of maximum competitive games, where people are slinging soup allies and multiple detachments to maximise benefits, I'm supremely unconvinced that balance is as impossible as people on here make it sound. Whether one army is seen more frequently on the competitive circuit than another is an omnipresent and extremely convenient excuse for a loss, and while I will always feel for the Martels who live in a permanent tournament-level hellscape of utterly fluff-shredding army lists in a sea of gray plastic and dull mathhammer, I think the numbers of people who actually have to deal with competitive lists on a daily basis is much, much, much lower than the internet would have you believe. The level of play where you are actually forced to abandon your preferred subfaction to play the competitive hotness is at a higher bar than most people play in the real world. It's just that griping about it is easy, the change from one to the other is easy to see and point out, and actually improving the way you play the game is hard enough that a lot of people either don't bother or don't think the choices exist.

The number of people you're going to find in this corner of the internet who have IQs of 9000, simulate their games in their heads down to the last die roll, and have determined that the only thing that matters is the list, the roll of the dice and the fickle balance ineptitude of the hated foe games workshop who listens to their phone calls in order to ruin their hopes and dreams is about the same as the number of people you'll run across in other places online who strangely frequently are doctors, lawyers, professional economists, skilled hackers or elite commandos ready to hunt you down with the skills they learned in Irack.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 19:00:09


Post by: Sluggaloo


 Xenomancers wrote:
I didn't vote because I really don't think it's a problem considering the worst offender of blob star (Guilliman) is actually part of the weakest army in the game and even with ultimate blobstar power still can't place highly in tournaments. however - if other armies had access to this style of play - it would be overwhelming to the point it would break the game.


Here we go


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 19:12:15


Post by: Xenomancers


This whole edition is premature Scotsmen.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 19:38:04


Post by: bananathug



The number of people you're going to find in this corner of the internet who have IQs of 9000, simulate their games in their heads down to the last die roll, and have determined that the only thing that matters is the list, the roll of the dice and the fickle balance ineptitude of the hated foe games workshop who listens to their phone calls in order to ruin their hopes and dreams is about the same as the number of people you'll run across in other places online who strangely frequently are doctors, lawyers, professional economists, skilled hackers or elite commandos ready to hunt you down with the skills they learned in Irack.


Unfortunately this is my corner of the gaming world. Looking at the most recent poll about 50% of people see tourney level lists at least 50% of the time so I don't think writing off those of us that struggle with a hyper competitive meta as special unicorns who need to play another game instead of trying to get some sort of balanced product out for is good for a significant percentage of the player base.

A more balanced game doesn't hurt those that don't play in that competitive of a space but it really helps those of us that show up to game night knowing we will see chaos monster mash, craftworld spear/reaper spam, IG damn near anything, Nids genestealer/flyrant spam escape the treadmill of chasing the new hotness. Even "casually" constructed armies from these factions will make a mockery of a SM list that isn't stormravens/fire raptors, especially under the ITC champions missions.

The difference between one of these lists and the best I can put out as a SM player is insurmountable and that makes for just not a bad game for me but also for my opponent when it's obvious who will win by the end of turn 2. I probably should just go out and buy a new army but I'm stubborn, like to complain on the internet, actually enjoy painting and modeling my own army and don't have the time available to do that at this point in my personal/professional life (although this could be considered a lack of will on my part and I should just buy something competitive if I want to be competitive which I don't really have a solid counter for outside of having to spend another 2-5 years collecting/painting a new army from scratch just isn't in the cards for me and seems like a pretty big eff u, none of my buddies have to buy new golf clubs to go play the new course but I feel like I'm being pushed to have to buy a new army to enjoy this edition. I couldn't imagine if they had to build their clubs from scratch not knowing if their newly constructed 7 iron would be legal by the time they got it bought, built and out to the course...)

To get back to the subject. Blob-star seems to be a lazy but unsurprising result of GWs rules. You'll notice the more powerful armies are able to escape it (more fun to play and more powerful...) and those armies reduced to pathetically clinging to the shadow of one or two models seem to fall victim to the more mobile, less blobby armies. I like mini-blob star. A unit or two packed around a leader is actually a fun way to construct and play an army. Having to try to fit as much of your army around one guy is not fun to build or play (with or against). I'm not sure this will get any better with the anticipated drop of MORE primarchs but luckily as other codexes get more powerful you will see less and less marines (which are the main blob-star offenders) and this issue should self-resolve until those OP primarchs show up and we find ourselves having this conversation next year...


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 19:59:57


Post by: Tyel


the_scotsman wrote:
Here's where I'm going to disagree a little bit: the difference between top and mid is almost insurmountable *in a maximum competitive setting* and *when you don't make any meta predictions*. The reason why we so often see the mid or lower tier factions appearing right at the top tables, but not nearly as much in the middle, is because those players brought along a solid countermeta list that even in the maximum competitive setting of the tournament, is still able to compete and even excel because it tailors to beat the big bad boys.


I am not sure they have counter-meta lists though. Those have never really been a thing in 40k. Its just about having what are crudely the best units (which can be determined reasonably accurately with stats) and then being lucky.

I would be surprised if Orks or other non-top tier armies ever got near the top unless they were lucky enough to get the first turn in most of their tournament games. Which may be unlikely for one player in one tournament, but isn't that unlikely with a large number of players in lots of tournaments. Having got the first turn they have a far greater chance of winning a game than they do going second. (I have no stats on this - but its what happens, and hard to see how it wouldn't).

What is strange is why other factions are not even getting this. I suspect its because armies like Necrons do not really benefit from getting the first turn. They have very limited alpha strike (or damage at all) and as a result will tend to be beaten down. DE also suffer from a fistful of crap unit entries and everything doing inferior damage for its points than the current meta. I guess Tau have the same problem.

So the odds of them winning repeatedly to place in a tournament are so low its not happening.

As it is I think Necrons, Tau and DE can all be "fixed" with massive points drops. DE are still going to be a broken faction though, doing the same thing they have been doing since 5th edition with minor tweaking. Warriors in venoms, lances on other platforms. Everything else being a confused mess.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 20:03:48


Post by: the_scotsman


...but I don't notice that. I notice that armies that have a "reroll everything" character can be constructed around that character, and that that has become the dominant build for two factions in particular, Space Marines with guilliman and Admech with Cawl.

But we also see, for instance, other armies that could do that but don't, because it isn't the strongest thing available. There was a tournament list a little while ago that traded out Guilliman for Dante and ran the flyer spam list using him for the rerolls (because with his jump pack he could keep up better with the flyers, which that player judged more useful than the reroll to wound).

But that isn't how BA lists in the new codex are shaking out. You have units that drop in with buffers (typically Death Company or Sang Guard) but you don't rally the whole army around the character, you send in one unit to efficiently use stratagems and essentially "attach" the character to the one unit, just like how characters were used last edition.

Chaos can also run a similar list with Abbaddon, which is not good enough to be seen in the competitive meta. Alpha Zerkers, which are not a blob-star, are.

I can't help but think that the only reason this guy thinks "blobs" are actually the competitive meta is that that's what people he plays with are currently playing, he's seen competitive lists like that in the past, and now he thinks "competitive=blob-star with guilliman! Oh woe is me I'm only playing against competitive lists..."

The reality of the situation is that once you get down to even semi-competitive lists that aren't 100% crazy tournament hotness, you can compete even with lists that are sub optimal. I've played too many games with and against the factions people complain about, seen too many games with and against them that are not complete stomps to believe what you're saying about "damn near anything guard brings auto-beats marines and I CANT make a list that can ever compete." I play in a comparatively casual meta, where people buy, build, and paint their collections and only a couple people are mass-ebaying to get the competitive hotness, but it's also a massive meta, with a ton of different players. I've played my Dark Eldar into cadian guard, catachan guard, admech into tallarn tank guard, dark eldar wyches into pre-nerf Ynnari, and I've never once felt like I couldn't include the units that I love and that I've painted up over the years if I wanted a chance to win.

Was every list I played against five detachments with five different sets of regimental doctrines spamming the best units with no extra upgrades with soup allies? no. But according to the internet, if I take Thousand Sons with only a single unit of tzeentch daemons and no magnus against catachans with artillery, harker, and the infinite CP warlord+relic combo, I should pretty much autolose. and it just doesn't happen. I have a close game that gets decided on objectives (another thing the internet says never happens).

I just can't help but wonder if the folks playing in these ruthless competitive metas either don't know what an actually casual list is, or if they just never really play against it so they assume it's the same all the way down, and because they lose against 100 naked infantry backed up by Celestine and 8 basilisks they would also lose against a casual list that's just someone's collection that they've played for years. I don't know. But I can't agree with things I see the evidence against right in front of me every single week played across 5-10 tables.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 20:13:57


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


Tyel wrote:
I would be surprised if Orks or other non-top tier armies ever got near the top unless they were lucky enough to get the first turn in most of their tournament games. Which may be unlikely for one player in one tournament, but isn't that unlikely with a large number of players in lots of tournaments. Having got the first turn they have a far greater chance of winning a game than they do going second. (I have no stats on this - but its what happens, and hard to see how it wouldn't).


Orks win more than I would have thought honestly, the FLG podcast goes through the statistics pretty exhaustively and have a huge amount of data they are pulling from, so clearly someone knows how to play greenskins and win.

Tyel wrote:
I suspect its because armies like Necrons do not really benefit from getting the first turn.


Necrons definitely have issues, however, they have won a tournament according to ITC.

Tyel wrote:
So the odds of them winning repeatedly to place in a tournament are so low its not happening.


But it is happening, the percentages are bad, for sure, but stating that they simply can't win is not true, they have.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/29 21:01:30


Post by: Tyel


 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
But it is happening, the percentages are bad, for sure, but stating that they simply can't win is not true, they have.


Is it?

I don't think I have seen a tournament with a Necron victor. Or Tau or DE.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/30 02:04:05


Post by: Insularum


tneva82 wrote:
Insularum wrote:
Even if we accept that aura blob-star is as powerful as the previous invisible/2++ re-roll-able invincible deathstars (IMO it isn't even close), its nowhere near as broken as some of the other current mechanics; for example since CA the clarification on character targeting has provided a practically unbeatable counter to the typical Guilliman parking lot or static gunline - an army of chaplain ven dreads with one or two deepstrikers dropping out of LOS. No auras required and would be free to navigate the table taking any/all objectives while casually returning fire as everything is a character with less than 10 wounds and therefore illegal to select as a target.

My take on this is that since psychic activity has shifted away from friendly buff casts (invisibility, endurance, prescience) to offensive power (smite, smite, smite), auras have moved into the power vacuum. This makes a wider range of characters compete for a place in your list so is in general good for the game.


How would that work? Isn't the unit out of LOS supposed to be closest target? In 8th ed getting unit reliably out of LOS at will seems awfully tricky proposition.

Using a supreme command detachment, fill up on chaplain dreads, use your elite slot for something cheap with a small footprint. For easy use play as Ravenguard and use your stratagem to infiltrate the elite slot unit into a hard to reach spot that is closer than the dreads. Duplicate this detachment until you hit the points limit, i.e. you can get 4 dreads with twin lascannon and another 5 with assault cannon plus two units of aggressors in three supreme command detachments for under 2000 points. There are plenty of cheaper single unit models in the elites slot available for space marines that could replace the agressors - but they have at least some staying power if the opponent has weapons that ignore line of sight.

It's back to rock/paper/scissors but a static gunline such as Guilliman and his razorbacks cannot win if they cannot shoot anything.



Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/30 08:33:12


Post by: Spoletta


I like necrons, they have all the tools needed to compete and to form a wide variety of lists with radically different playstiles.
They are overpriced, but if you just shave a few points here and there they can become competitive really fast.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/30 10:53:00


Post by: Tyel


Spoletta wrote:
I like necrons, they have all the tools needed to compete and to form a wide variety of lists with radically different playstiles.
They are overpriced, but if you just shave a few points here and there they can become competitive really fast.


Are they? Their heavy guns and vehicles are approaching 50% more points than other factions. They have very limited access to mortal wounds or psychic powers. It will take more than a few points here and there.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/30 14:42:55


Post by: Skawt


Nerfing re-roll aura ranges to 3" would be a huge positive change for this game.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/30 15:28:48


Post by: Breng77


Tyel wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
I like necrons, they have all the tools needed to compete and to form a wide variety of lists with radically different playstiles.
They are overpriced, but if you just shave a few points here and there they can become competitive really fast.


Are they? Their heavy guns and vehicles are approaching 50% more points than other factions. They have very limited access to mortal wounds or psychic powers. It will take more than a few points here and there.


I think it would be cool if necrons ignored mortal wounds


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/30 17:01:19


Post by: Spoletta


Tyel wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
I like necrons, they have all the tools needed to compete and to form a wide variety of lists with radically different playstiles.
They are overpriced, but if you just shave a few points here and there they can become competitive really fast.


Are they? Their heavy guns and vehicles are approaching 50% more points than other factions. They have very limited access to mortal wounds or psychic powers. It will take more than a few points here and there.


They have access to some mechanics that are unique to them and that if correctly costed can be scary.

- God Shards
- Transports with delocalized contents
- AP on basic weapons
- Highly durable deep striking transports
- A character that neutralizes Gman like models

Looking at top lists you can easily see that psychic powers and mortal wounds are hardly a need. The usual AM and SM list don't have any.

What necrons need is for their peculiar play style to emerge, and what is needed is IMHO just some point shaving.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/30 17:24:35


Post by: JNAProductions


Spoletta wrote:
Tyel wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
I like necrons, they have all the tools needed to compete and to form a wide variety of lists with radically different playstiles.
They are overpriced, but if you just shave a few points here and there they can become competitive really fast.


Are they? Their heavy guns and vehicles are approaching 50% more points than other factions. They have very limited access to mortal wounds or psychic powers. It will take more than a few points here and there.


They have access to some mechanics that are unique to them and that if correctly costed can be scary.

- God Shards
- Transports with delocalized contents
- AP on basic weapons
- Highly durable deep striking transports
- A character that neutralizes Gman like models

Looking at top lists you can easily see that psychic powers and mortal wounds are hardly a need. The usual AM and SM list don't have any.

What necrons need is for their peculiar play style to emerge, and what is needed is IMHO just some point shaving.


God Shards are bad.

Their transports are worse than regular transports, by a mile.

Intercessors and Stormtroopers say hi.

Reasonably durable, badly deep striking (12" distance, rather than 9") NOT-Transport. Again, their transports are worse than regualr ones.

And that's one unique character, who, if he's close enough to neutralize the G-Man, is close enough to be charged by him.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/31 09:42:48


Post by: Spoletta


Ok, you are not on the right mindset to discuss this and it is OT after all, so i'll just drop this.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2017/12/31 09:48:29


Post by: ERJAK


 Skawt wrote:
Nerfing re-roll aura ranges to 3" would be a huge positive change for this game.


Would it? Why? It wouldn't effect "problem armies" and would make armies that use but don't rely on the auras worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Interestingly, I haven't beat sisters yet with marines of any kind. I consider sisters head and shoulders above any kind of marine list. They just aren't in plastic.


They actually discuss the fact that Sisters were fairly well represented (or at least better represented than they would have expected) and tended to point out in tournament settings pretty well. They did a breakdown of the average points total that various factions ended up with at the end of a tournament, which was very interesting. Basically, Sisters tend to point out in ITC tournament settings at around 60 points or so, which was slightly above average (Necrons tended to point out at 53, which is the lowest). The other thing they mentioned with that though is that there are some really good Sisters players who just know how to use their army well, so you have low representation, but higher average player skill coming into play a bit, whereas with Marines you might just be seeing results that are slanted to a certain extent by simple weight of representation.

Chaos flavors tended to point out of tournaments with the highest average point total (somewhere in the 70s), even though AM won more tournaments, they tended to have a lower average point total across tournaments, this may also have to do with representation and average player skill level.

Edited for clarification and typos.

There is a much more simple explanation for SOB low participation rate. Their models are rare and very few men (the majority of players in this game) want to play an army of girls. They are better than space marines in every way though. Player skill accounts for very little in this game. It is mostly list building -followed by dice rolls. Player skill is basically knowing when you should go for a table or when to win by objectives and what order to kill things in- not very hard to figure out.


K, sooo....no. The majority of men want to play an army that's awesome. How many players do you know happen to be Orkz or Nids IRL?

Some people play SoB because of the Gothicness of the models, some people play them because they like the fluff, some people play them because they're rare, some people play them because they ARE an army of women.

Of the people who DON'T play SoB a small minority don't play them because they're female, sure, but I highly doubt it's a big enough proportion to skew the data that much. It's nowhere near the number of people who don't play them because they're metal. (And Slaanesh is cried about constantly in the community and if plenty of men wanna play that but all but 'a few' get scared off by other types of female characters then there are WAY worse problems than game balance here...)

The last few sentences have me questioning if you even play 40k; and if you do, really go a long way to explain why you hold the beliefs you do. Firstly, yes, in term of speed and firepower within 12" SoB tend to be better than marines but holy crap are we useless outside of that. Maybe he who has abundandt lascannons shouldn't throw stones. SoB are also hilariously terrible in melee, only Tau is worse.

And you try to dismiss player skill and then list a bunch of things that require pinpoit decision making at the competitive level, kill order, when to grab an objective vs when to go for board control, etc are all decisions that make or break games all the time and are almost never cut and dry. (Which is deliberate, if you build a list that loses if your opponent kills unit AB and C in that order, it's a bad army. Even double primarch lists aren't THAT obvious.)

Frankly, it sounds like you're frustrated with the outcome of your games and have looked for, and found, as many external reasons as possible for why you're not winning when most of your problem is the 'not very hard to figure out' player skill stuff.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2018/01/05 04:06:49


Post by: Pancakey


So it looks like a majority or people agree that the blob is terrible but at the core of some armies.

So whats the answer? As long as auras work they way they do now, BLOBHAMMER will live!!!


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2018/01/05 13:26:17


Post by: the_scotsman


Pancakey wrote:
So it looks like a majority or people agree that the blob is terrible but at the core of some armies.

So whats the answer? As long as auras work they way they do now, BLOBHAMMER will live!!!


I don't think there needs to be an answer. Just like a majority of people don't like playing against gunline armies as much as they like playing against mixed combined arms forces, that doesn't change the fact that it is possible to construct gunlines within the rules and that's not a bad thing.

"blobhammer" is just a variation on attached-character megablobs that we had in earlier editions. Just like then, it's possible to set up, but not terribly effective in a competitive sense because you're putting all your eggs in one basket (how many major GTs did we see Jancoran sweeping with his infamous unbeatable guard blob o' doom list in 7th, for instance)

It was a small issue very early in the edition before the influence of the codexes and their powerful stratagems started to appear, but now you rarely see multiple units blobbed around a single character and more frequently see stuff falling back into more of the 7th ed vein with either unsupported spammed MSU units (Infantry squads, brimstone horrors soon to be rest in piece sweet obnoxious princes, eldar rangers) or heavily supported maxed-out units designed to take advantage of stratagems and one-per psychic powers (Ork Boyz mobs, genestealer mobs, maxed Dark Reaper squads, or any of various flavors of superheavies used in the same manner). For the former, no auras are used usually. For the latter, there would be no difference in function if auras worked how they did now or if they did attached characters ala 7th and earlier. If an aura is buffing one big giant unit, it might as well not be an aura.

You're tilting at a windmill here, there is no actual widespread problem outside (most likely) your local meta.


Is the BLOB-STAR good for the game? @ 2018/01/05 16:37:17


Post by: TwinPoleTheory


Pancakey wrote:
So whats the answer? As long as auras work they way they do now, BLOBHAMMER will live!!!


You know, I think my problem with this thread is that it seems to suggest that "blobhammer" is something new. It's not. Not even vaguely new.

Tyranids and to a lesser extent Orks (they call it mobz, they even have special rules to let them do it better) have always had a "blobhammer" aesthetic/mechanic, I would argue it's simply the nature of horde armies to mob up.

But now that Death Guard have been designed to favor a mob setup in some configurations, it's this terribly heinous assault on the aesthetics and mechanics of the game? I question the logic of this conclusion.

Then you have the factions that tend to castle, but that's not the same as blobbing? Seems to me a castle is just a blob that doesn't move, or maybe the blob is a castle that moves?

This whole thread really just feels like one gigantic semantics argument.