Switch Theme:

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

Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/01 23:06:29


Post by: phydaux


GW has been actively trying to live down the debacle that was 3rd ed. for neatly 20 years now. Each edition they have nerfed elite assault armies a little more and a little more, to the point where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.

3rd had two features that made assault very powerful - Charging out of transports after they had moved, and units getting locked in close combat once they had been assaulted. Both of these features are absent in 8th ed.

I propose that we allow infantry units to debark from transports after they have moved, and that we left them EITHER Shoot OR Charge when they have done so. This will provide some benefit to elite assault armies, but not an overwhelming one. Gunlines will still have Overwatch, Heroic Intervention, and Fall Back as options to stop elite assault units from rolling them up like an old throw rug.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/01 23:33:34


Post by: DoomMouse


Maybe a few entire assault armies are poor, but some of the game's best units are assault oriented. Custodes Jetbikes are great in assault, as are blood angels smash captains. The knight gallant is also looking pretty hot too.

Orks are really quite strong as well when you build around nothing but Boyz, stormboyz and supporting characters (though their other units are over costed)

Tyranid genestealers and Khorne berserkers are also considered decently strong with the right support

I think the assault mechanics are fine and very powerful, you just need to lower the points costs of certain garbage assault units (looking at you assault marines)


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/01 23:40:02


Post by: auticus


The other thing that went hand in hand with busted in 3rd edition were the assault units that were decked out in power weapons.

I watched a game at the Chicago GT in 1999 where it was Blood Angels vs Imperial Guard and the Blood Angels player TABLED the IG player in turn 1, and the IG player hadn't even moved yet.

Gross.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/01 23:40:53


Post by: Martel732


I think 4th finally got rid of the turn 1 tablings.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/01 23:46:49


Post by: Yarium


Yeah, in 4th-7th, Assault had been really nerfed, but I think 8th has hit a sweet spot. Pure assault armies have a real place, even if that's minimal, and in other armies assault has a purpose, even if it can't win the game on its own. In most other editions, assault could completely turn off some armies, and so it was too simple of a question "can I make it into close combat or no?", which resulted in few real tactics or strategy. Now, in 8th, you can get into close combat and still lose, but if you use proper tactics, you can mitigate some of the easy walking away from combat, and if you use proper strategy, then the assault is only one part of your plan.

I really enjoy close combat in 8th, more so than in any previous edition, including 3rd. I really feel that 8th has the best system they've ever had. Would like some better execution of that system, sure, but the basics are fantastic.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 00:15:24


Post by: the_scotsman


or, I have an alternative idea: how about we DONT do that. Elite assault is honestly pretty awesome right now (especially fast elite assault, but you also have grotesque+talos lists solidly in the meta) this change would allow for straight ludicrous threat ranges for practically all assault units because of how fast transports have become.

cheap chaff assault is fine in 8th, as is super elite fast assault. What suffers is rank-and-file midrange assault units like assault marines, non-boy orks, basic termies etc becaus eof their inability to massively murderize over their weight class or aren't cheap enough to just tie stuff up.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 00:29:19


Post by: phydaux


auticus wrote:
The other thing that went hand in hand with busted in 3rd edition were the assault units that were decked out in power weapons.

I watched a game at the Chicago GT in 1999 where it was Blood Angels vs Imperial Guard and the Blood Angels player TABLED the IG player in turn 1, and the IG player hadn't even moved yet.

Gross.


Part of that was when 3rd first dropped if you wiped out a unit in assault then you could make a 3" consolidation move, and if that move brought you into another enemy unit then you got locked in close combat with THAT unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DoomMouse wrote:
Maybe a few entire assault armies are poor, but some of the game's best units are assault oriented. Custodes Jetbikes are great in assault, as are blood angels smash captains. The knight gallant is also looking pretty hot too.

Orks are really quite strong as well when you build around nothing but Boyz, stormboyz and supporting characters (though their other units are over costed)

Tyranid genestealers and Khorne berserkers are also considered decently strong with the right support

I think the assault mechanics are fine and very powerful, you just need to lower the points costs of certain garbage assault units (looking at you assault marines)


Orks & 'Nids are horde armies, Custodes Jetbikes are Codex Creep, and Smash Captains & Berzerkers are single units limited by the Rule of 3.

People whine about Gunlines and how boring it is to play against them, but GW has written the current rules, intentionally in my opinion, so that elite assault armies are hamstrung and gunlines are the MOST viable play style.

I have a stack of unpainted Space Marines box sets that are waiting for the Space Wolves codex oto drop, and when it does I'm 99% sure I'm just gonna spray paint them blue and make a vanilla Marines gunline because that's how GW WANTS me to play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
the_scotsman wrote:
or, I have an alternative idea: how about we DONT do that. Elite assault is honestly pretty awesome right now (especially fast elite assault, but you also have grotesque+talos lists solidly in the meta) this change would allow for straight ludicrous threat ranges for practically all assault units because of how fast transports have become.

cheap chaff assault is fine in 8th, as is super elite fast assault. What suffers is rank-and-file midrange assault units like assault marines, non-boy orks, basic termies etc becaus eof their inability to massively murderize over their weight class or aren't cheap enough to just tie stuff up.


Please give examples of the various armies that can pull this off. If your answer is just one unit from one army then all you're doing is proving my point.

Back in 3rd Ed vanilla Maines, vanilla Chaos and Blood Angels were all able to pull off assault OR gunline depending on the preferences of the player. And Space Wolves & cult Chaos Marines were top notch assault specialists (because you could play a pure Khorne army then). Now, skipping Space Wolves, none of those armies can pull off assault orientation. We'll see about Space Wolves in a month.

The simple fact is that the pendulam has swung, it has swung too far in one direction, and it needs to start swing back.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 02:24:20


Post by: jcd386


I think that select transports could probably allow assault. Land raiders, mainly. They cost enough so they and the unit inside then deserves to be scary.

It would probably be unenjoyable if rhinos or DE transports could do it, and would be similar to the old deepstrike rules with first turn charges becoming much more common, and making the threat range of an assault unit fairly massive.

I think disembarking and shooting would be okay, though, like you could in 5th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I also think that most basic units, especially Marines and any other unit that was supposed to be good but not great at close combat, need 2 attacks base. They got hurt quite a bit by losing the +1 attack on the charge.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 03:17:02


Post by: Jbz`


If the full movement of a transport before disembarking and assaulting is too much couldn't it be limited to half?
With maybe some exceptions for vehicles that are designed to launch quick assaults (Land raiders/Ork Trukks/Dark Eldar Raiders etc)

Perhaps even if the unit only gets to disembark up to a certain amount from the vehicle (lets say 3" for argument's sake) and not move themselves after doing so, other than to run/charge.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 04:05:29


Post by: SHUPPET


Assault is stronger than it has been since I started playing the game. With the exclusion of ridiculous Deathstars in 6th, but I think that's a different archetype. OP you do not understand the game well enough to be making threads like this. Play more and level yourself up. That's all there is to it.


Signed, a player who mains close combat armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wow some OP's responses. This is the worst thread I've seen on here in a while.

Don't validate it by debating him, he's been here 8 years, he knows what he's doing.



Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 04:09:14


Post by: meleti


Here's some ideas for assault armies assuming OP is genuinely interested in playing assault armies instead of just whining about how bad they are.

1. Catachan brigade (~100 infantry) with Bullgryns.

2. Ork Boyz and Stormboyz. They're only going to improve with a codex.

3. BA with either DC or SG as a big hammer unit, supported by characters.

4. Custodes. Basically the entire army is an assault army. Dawneagle jetbikes are the strongest way to build it, but don't sleep on Allarus either.

5. Tyranids, in a wide number of varieties. Genestealers for a fast assault unit, Tyranid Warriors as more of a balanced shooting/assault threat, monsters spam, etc.

6. Harlequins, the entire army is lightning fast and strong in combat. Not that they can't shoot, either.

7. Thousand Sons. Daemon Princes, Magnus, Tzaangors, and Cultists. Good mix of strong elite assault units and big tarpits.

8. Nurgle daemons. A resilient, assault-focused army that's great at holding objectives.

9. Drukhari Wych cults. Shardnets are extremely powerful, letting you trap units in combat without having to surround them first.

10. Imperial Knights. Gallants, Death Grip, first turn charges, fighting twice.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 04:35:39


Post by: fe40k


auticus wrote:
The other thing that went hand in hand with busted in 3rd edition were the assault units that were decked out in power weapons.

I watched a game at the Chicago GT in 1999 where it was Blood Angels vs Imperial Guard and the Blood Angels player TABLED the IG player in turn 1, and the IG player hadn't even moved yet.

Gross.


You know else is gross?

That the game isn't more balanced this time around - the pendulum has just swung to the other side.

IG can table BA (and other melee armies) turn 1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
meleti wrote:
Here's some ideas for assault armies assuming OP is genuinely interested in playing assault armies instead of just whining about how bad they are.

1. Catachan brigade (~100 infantry) with Bullgryns.

2. Ork Boyz and Stormboyz. They're only going to improve with a codex.

3. BA with either DC or SG as a big hammer unit, supported by characters.

4. Custodes. Basically the entire army is an assault army. Dawneagle jetbikes are the strongest way to build it, but don't sleep on Allarus either.

5. Tyranids, in a wide number of varieties. Genestealers for a fast assault unit, Tyranid Warriors as more of a balanced shooting/assault threat, monsters spam, etc.

6. Harlequins, the entire army is lightning fast and strong in combat. Not that they can't shoot, either.

7. Thousand Sons. Daemon Princes, Magnus, Tzaangors, and Cultists. Good mix of strong elite assault units and big tarpits.

8. Nurgle daemons. A resilient, assault-focused army that's great at holding objectives.

9. Drukhari Wych cults. Shardnets are extremely powerful, letting you trap units in combat without having to surround them first.

10. Imperial Knights. Gallants, Death Grip, first turn charges, fighting twice.


Most of these armies are hardcountered by bringing adequate anti-infantry firepower; which itself is countered by bringing adequate armored units; which itself is countered by bringing adequate anti-armor firepower.

Welcome to the new game, it's rock-paper-scissors all the way down.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 09:29:51


Post by: DoomMouse


phydaux wrote:
auticus wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DoomMouse wrote:
Maybe a few entire assault armies are poor, but some of the game's best units are assault oriented. Custodes Jetbikes are great in assault, as are blood angels smash captains. The knight gallant is also looking pretty hot too.

Orks are really quite strong as well when you build around nothing but Boyz, stormboyz and supporting characters (though their other units are over costed)

Tyranid genestealers and Khorne berserkers are also considered decently strong with the right support

I think the assault mechanics are fine and very powerful, you just need to lower the points costs of certain garbage assault units (looking at you assault marines)


Orks & 'Nids are horde armies, Custodes Jetbikes are Codex Creep, and Smash Captains & Berzerkers are single units limited by the Rule of 3.


Well if you ignore or discuss all of the game's top assault units then of course it will appear skewed. As mentioned above, you can add dark eldar Talos, Wyches and grotesques to that list too. Custodes bikers are probably the strongest unit in the game right now, and they're an elite melee unit!

Assault as a mechanic is really strong, to the point where I'm often charging guardsmen in to tie up units, stop shooting or preventing a unit falling back and charging something else.

Again, there are plenty of poor assault units out there, but they would immediately be better if you shaved a little from their points costs.




Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 09:45:43


Post by: Stormonu


eh, is letting transports move and drop off assaulting troops that much worse than 9" deepstrike + charge (+ reroll)?

Personal opinion, but I think it's unwise to run across a battlefield into laserfire with the priority to get into hand-to-hand combat. So, I don't mind ranged combat being able to mow down troops who want to do so. But the points should definitely reflect that.

Perhaps if flanking and suppression were a bigger part of 40K, trying to gunline might not be so boring to force people to want to do so much melee to create a false sense of action.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 10:51:38


Post by: Cinderspirit


I dont think changing transports is the right fix to melee. Not all armies who are centered around melee have the ability to take transports, and it would be just the same or even better as turn 1 Deep Strike was. I do think most melee units need a serious rebalance in points and stats. Berserkers are fine cause they are pretty cheap and durable and still dish out atleast 6 pretty strong attacks each combat phase. Warp Talons suck as they pay a premium for useless rules and have only 2 attacks. Melee centered units need to be either durable for their points cost or pack a serious punch, so you can actually take 1 or 2 rounds of shooting and then either tie the enemy into lasting close combat or deal serious damage to their lines.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 11:15:07


Post by: warhead01


To me 4th and 8 have had the best combat rules.
The issue I have with units disembarking after their transport moves either to charge or shoot is...what are you going to choose to do? I feel that 905 of the time I will choose to charge. Shooting won't be as effective unless it's done by a unit killted specifically for the occasion. In 5th I used combi-plasma wolf guard in droppods jut to kill off Synaps critters on turn one.
It's the same thing. We'll see strong assault units in transports over their ranged equivalents supported by strong shooting units from the back field, tac marines will still be regarded as a poor choice. Mean while it may grant an edge over a large model count army but players will still need some kind of meat grinder units in those transports, maybe elite units get a bit stronger on the table. hard to say. But things like Green tides wont be adequately thinned out ahead of combat. Almost like, again to me, it would drag us back to a previous edition of the game.
Maybe it would balance things like ITC out for that kind of play. Don't know but I would look at how this rule effects each type of play and each type of mission format. I feel 8th is balanced to itself fairly well.
I mention ITC/competitive formats because I read a fair bit about slow games and players trying to play as quick as they can. It might speed that kind of thing up for them. If some one wants to house rule it and report results it might be interesting. The only balancing factor I would hope for such a rule is that it applies to every vehicle that can transport a unit not just some vehicles that can transport.
Just my first thoughts on it I need more coffee.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 11:39:17


Post by: the_scotsman


 Stormonu wrote:
eh, is letting transports move and drop off assaulting troops that much worse than 9" deepstrike + charge (+ reroll)?

Personal opinion, but I think it's unwise to run across a battlefield into laserfire with the priority to get into hand-to-hand combat. So, I don't mind ranged combat being able to mow down troops who want to do so. But the points should definitely reflect that.

Perhaps if flanking and suppression were a bigger part of 40K, trying to gunline might not be so boring to force people to want to do so much melee to create a false sense of action.


I think what people are missing is that transports already grant occupants the ability to move 3"+(base diameter) towards their opponent. 99% of the time, this enables a turn 2 charge, and the transports are required to weather one turn of fire to make that happen.

in concept, this is fine. It synergizes with post-FAQ deep strike, it enables you to bring other armored threats with a mechanized list to force your opponent to waste anti-armor fire that would otherwise threaten them on the transports, and it allows mechanized melee to differ from fast biker-based melee in a meaningful way.

The problem overall is that even in strong codexes, there are relatively few combinations where you actually have a fairly-priced transport, or a fairly-priced assault unit that NEEDS a transport.

Chaos Marines would have a fairly-priced assault unit paired with a half decent transport in Khorne Bezerkers in Rhinos, but KB's have access to the broken turn 1 alpha legion crutch, so you're never going to see them picking rhinos. ATM, stacking more than 10 KBs into your list pretty much just turns your army into "if I go first, I win. If I go second, I lose."

Drukhari actually do have fairly priced assault units and fairly priced transports, and will use them exactly as described. Wyches in venoms or raiders, grotesques in raiders paired with an ablative Lhamean to avoid 1s on emergency disembarks, wracks in venoms are a pretty common sight, and pair well with the overall tempo of the army trying to cause hurt turn 2.

Eldar have a fairly priced transport, but no fairly priced assault unit that wants a transport. Wraithblades, Howling Banshees, and Striking Scorpions are all overpriced, so they'll basically always use shining spears. And when I say that I mean shining spears are in every. Single. Eldar list.

Custodes: Fairly priced assault, no fairly priced transport. See Land Raiders, silly FW things that cost 9000 points.

Orks are still in the index and have overpriced transports. Guard transports are overpriced. GSC transports are overpriced. Marine transports are overpriced AND their assault units are mostly overpriced - the exceptions have jump packs and access to Blood Angels 3D6 charge strat, so don't use transports. Admech didn't have transports until recently, and just got one for FW, and guess what's amazing in it? Their assault units.

Don't 'fix' the problem of assault armies by enabling my wyches to move 14"+4"+8"+D6" and then charge across the board turn 1. Nobody is going to have fun against that.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 15:51:14


Post by: Kaiyanwang


the_scotsman wrote:
And when I say that I mean shining spears are in every. Single. Eldar list.

What a time to be alive


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 15:54:51


Post by: Formosa


the_scotsman wrote:
 Stormonu wrote:
eh, is letting transports move and drop off assaulting troops that much worse than 9" deepstrike + charge (+ reroll)?

Personal opinion, but I think it's unwise to run across a battlefield into laserfire with the priority to get into hand-to-hand combat. So, I don't mind ranged combat being able to mow down troops who want to do so. But the points should definitely reflect that.

Perhaps if flanking and suppression were a bigger part of 40K, trying to gunline might not be so boring to force people to want to do so much melee to create a false sense of action.


I think what people are missing is that transports already grant occupants the ability to move 3"+(base diameter) towards their opponent. 99% of the time, this enables a turn 2 charge, and the transports are required to weather one turn of fire to make that happen.

in concept, this is fine. It synergizes with post-FAQ deep strike, it enables you to bring other armored threats with a mechanized list to force your opponent to waste anti-armor fire that would otherwise threaten them on the transports, and it allows mechanized melee to differ from fast biker-based melee in a meaningful way.

The problem overall is that even in strong codexes, there are relatively few combinations where you actually have a fairly-priced transport, or a fairly-priced assault unit that NEEDS a transport.

Chaos Marines would have a fairly-priced assault unit paired with a half decent transport in Khorne Bezerkers in Rhinos, but KB's have access to the broken turn 1 alpha legion crutch, so you're never going to see them picking rhinos. ATM, stacking more than 10 KBs into your list pretty much just turns your army into "if I go first, I win. If I go second, I lose."

Drukhari actually do have fairly priced assault units and fairly priced transports, and will use them exactly as described. Wyches in venoms or raiders, grotesques in raiders paired with an ablative Lhamean to avoid 1s on emergency disembarks, wracks in venoms are a pretty common sight, and pair well with the overall tempo of the army trying to cause hurt turn 2.

Eldar have a fairly priced transport, but no fairly priced assault unit that wants a transport. Wraithblades, Howling Banshees, and Striking Scorpions are all overpriced, so they'll basically always use shining spears. And when I say that I mean shining spears are in every. Single. Eldar list.

Custodes: Fairly priced assault, no fairly priced transport. See Land Raiders, silly FW things that cost 9000 points.

Orks are still in the index and have overpriced transports. Guard transports are overpriced. GSC transports are overpriced. Marine transports are overpriced AND their assault units are mostly overpriced - the exceptions have jump packs and access to Blood Angels 3D6 charge strat, so don't use transports. Admech didn't have transports until recently, and just got one for FW, and guess what's amazing in it? Their assault units.

Don't 'fix' the problem of assault armies by enabling my wyches to move 14"+4"+8"+D6" and then charge across the board turn 1. Nobody is going to have fun against that.



Good list, my personal army is stuck in limbo at the moment, overpriced units in overpriced transports, add to that he DS nerf and rule of 3, pure Deathwing are in a bad place at the moment... but what else is new haha


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 16:04:06


Post by: the_scotsman


 Formosa wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Stormonu wrote:
eh, is letting transports move and drop off assaulting troops that much worse than 9" deepstrike + charge (+ reroll)?

Personal opinion, but I think it's unwise to run across a battlefield into laserfire with the priority to get into hand-to-hand combat. So, I don't mind ranged combat being able to mow down troops who want to do so. But the points should definitely reflect that.

Perhaps if flanking and suppression were a bigger part of 40K, trying to gunline might not be so boring to force people to want to do so much melee to create a false sense of action.


I think what people are missing is that transports already grant occupants the ability to move 3"+(base diameter) towards their opponent. 99% of the time, this enables a turn 2 charge, and the transports are required to weather one turn of fire to make that happen.

in concept, this is fine. It synergizes with post-FAQ deep strike, it enables you to bring other armored threats with a mechanized list to force your opponent to waste anti-armor fire that would otherwise threaten them on the transports, and it allows mechanized melee to differ from fast biker-based melee in a meaningful way.

The problem overall is that even in strong codexes, there are relatively few combinations where you actually have a fairly-priced transport, or a fairly-priced assault unit that NEEDS a transport.

Chaos Marines would have a fairly-priced assault unit paired with a half decent transport in Khorne Bezerkers in Rhinos, but KB's have access to the broken turn 1 alpha legion crutch, so you're never going to see them picking rhinos. ATM, stacking more than 10 KBs into your list pretty much just turns your army into "if I go first, I win. If I go second, I lose."

Drukhari actually do have fairly priced assault units and fairly priced transports, and will use them exactly as described. Wyches in venoms or raiders, grotesques in raiders paired with an ablative Lhamean to avoid 1s on emergency disembarks, wracks in venoms are a pretty common sight, and pair well with the overall tempo of the army trying to cause hurt turn 2.

Eldar have a fairly priced transport, but no fairly priced assault unit that wants a transport. Wraithblades, Howling Banshees, and Striking Scorpions are all overpriced, so they'll basically always use shining spears. And when I say that I mean shining spears are in every. Single. Eldar list.

Custodes: Fairly priced assault, no fairly priced transport. See Land Raiders, silly FW things that cost 9000 points.

Orks are still in the index and have overpriced transports. Guard transports are overpriced. GSC transports are overpriced. Marine transports are overpriced AND their assault units are mostly overpriced - the exceptions have jump packs and access to Blood Angels 3D6 charge strat, so don't use transports. Admech didn't have transports until recently, and just got one for FW, and guess what's amazing in it? Their assault units.

Don't 'fix' the problem of assault armies by enabling my wyches to move 14"+4"+8"+D6" and then charge across the board turn 1. Nobody is going to have fun against that.



Good list, my personal army is stuck in limbo at the moment, overpriced units in overpriced transports, add to that he DS nerf and rule of 3, pure Deathwing are in a bad place at the moment... but what else is new haha


Yeah. I mean, it boggles my mind. People say "Assault out of transports suck!" but lets see, what currently wants to assault out of transports?

-Orks. Still in the index.

-Dark Eldar, which do that just fine.

-Harlequins, which do that just fine.

-Anything imperial or chaos related runs into problems because Rhinos, Chimeras and Land Raiders are overcosted, and the units that do work well as a transport - the various flyer transports, Razorbacks, Tauroxes etc - are driven up in price because they mount guns, not because they don't want to be in assault. Valkyries, Stormravens, Blackstars, and WolfyMcwolfertons are actually really quite solid as assault transports, they're just so bloody costly that its hard to cram an assault unit expensive enough into them to justify the price of the plane. If you want to run an elite assault army and don't have strats to get in off deep strike thats the way to do it though - Dreadnought+Terminators or footy Death Guard in a Stormraven, Bullgryns in a Valkyrie, Wulfen in a WolfWolfSQUIRRELarooo, all are really nasty assault threats.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 17:19:36


Post by: Marmatag


Orks don't care about transports.

Neither do Tyranids.



Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 18:37:20


Post by: SHUPPET


 Marmatag wrote:
Orks don't care about transports.

Neither do Tyranids.


In what sense do you mean?


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 19:00:10


Post by: Insectum7


phydaux wrote:
auticus wrote:
The other thing that went hand in hand with busted in 3rd edition were the assault units that were decked out in power weapons.

I watched a game at the Chicago GT in 1999 where it was Blood Angels vs Imperial Guard and the Blood Angels player TABLED the IG player in turn 1, and the IG player hadn't even moved yet.

Gross.


Part of that was when 3rd first dropped if you wiped out a unit in assault then you could make a 3" consolidation move, and if that move brought you into another enemy unit then you got locked in close combat with THAT unit.


Uhh, don't forget Sweeping Advance, where if you broke a unit and ran it down you moved 2D6 towards the enemy and locked new units that way, too. Opposing squads got to fire at you in their turn, but it made for some fast moving battle lines.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/02 19:02:18


Post by: the_scotsman


 Marmatag wrote:
Orks don't care about transports.

Neither do Tyranids.



I mean, tyranids don't actually have them. I don't count a second model you can put down on the table to grant a unit deep strike as a transport. In that same sense Admech don't care about transports...except that they do, and a fairly priced transport for admech could (and does, to some extent with the new drill) fix a lot of really underpowered melee units that were too slow/costly to effectively make it to combat before dying.

Orks don't currently care about transports because their transports are overpriced. So they just...never bring any unit that would benefit from a fairly priced transport.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 00:32:19


Post by: phydaux


Saying that assault units are overcosted and should get a points cost cut is the EXACT SAME THING as saying that assault in general is underpowered this edition.

Also keep in mind that unless your codex offers you assaulty units as Troops choices then your assault options get hard capped by the Rule of Three.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 01:00:17


Post by: NurglesR0T


Jbz` wrote:
If the full movement of a transport before disembarking and assaulting is too much couldn't it be limited to half?
With maybe some exceptions for vehicles that are designed to launch quick assaults (Land raiders/Ork Trukks/Dark Eldar Raiders etc)

Perhaps even if the unit only gets to disembark up to a certain amount from the vehicle (lets say 3" for argument's sake) and not move themselves after doing so, other than to run/charge.


Bring back the concept of combat speed and cruising speed for vehicles - you can only disembark when moving at combat speed, but can do so after the transport has moved (following all other 8th ed rules for disembarking). Such a simple change will really bring back transports for all factions into the game (sorry Ad Mech, no transports for you)


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 07:24:40


Post by: Karol


 SHUPPET wrote:
Assault is stronger than it has been since I started playing the game. With the exclusion of ridiculous Deathstars in 6th, but I think that's a different archetype. OP you do not understand the game well enough to be making threads like this. Play more and level yourself up. That's all there is to it.


Signed, a player who mains close combat armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wow some OP's responses. This is the worst thread I've seen on here in a while.

Don't validate it by debating him, he's been here 8 years, he knows what he's doing.


yeah, but it seems like that the "good" assault units just ignore the core rules of assault. Jetbikes, custodes, demon princes, BA captins etc they all have some rule that breaks stufff, ignore overwatch, 30" assault range, super resilient, charging stuff durning opponent turn etc. On the flip side something like a melee termintors or GK strike dude is slow, has few attacks, has to pay high cost for melee weapons, but dies before he can use them etc.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 07:34:58


Post by: tneva82


the_scotsman wrote:
Orks don't currently care about transports because their transports are overpriced. So they just...never bring any unit that would benefit from a fairly priced transport.


Another issue is that 12 orks just aren't much of a threat. Many targets will cripple that in overwatch. And then you don't make much of a dent when you hit. And get killed easily. And don't get +1A. Oh and your LD sucks. In short even if trukk was 20 pts not sure would trukk boyz be all that viable...So trukks would be good for tank bustas(shooting) and maybe like mega nobz and nobz if they were worth fielding.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 09:43:19


Post by: ValentineGames


3rd was a debacle?...most fun I ever had was in 3rd.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 09:55:07


Post by: Tyel


Karol wrote:
yeah, but it seems like that the "good" assault units just ignore the core rules of assault. Jetbikes, custodes, demon princes, BA captins etc they all have some rule that breaks stufff, ignore overwatch, 30" assault range, super resilient, charging stuff durning opponent turn etc. On the flip side something like a melee termintors or GK strike dude is slow, has few attacks, has to pay high cost for melee weapons, but dies before he can use them etc.


Unfortunately this has been the case for a long time - possibly forever.

Its hard to see how "bad assault units" would become viable with a 6" extra move.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 10:03:41


Post by: SHUPPET


How is being resilient breaking assault?


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 10:07:27


Post by: nurgle5


Karol wrote:
yeah, but it seems like that the "good" assault units just ignore the core rules of assault. Jetbikes, custodes, demon princes, BA captins etc they all have some rule that breaks stufff, ignore overwatch, 30" assault range, super resilient, charging stuff durning opponent turn etc. On the flip side something like a melee termintors or GK strike dude is slow, has few attacks, has to pay high cost for melee weapons, but dies before he can use them etc.


I'm not sure how being super resilient is ignoring the core rules of assault, can you explain a bit further?

tneva82 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Orks don't currently care about transports because their transports are overpriced. So they just...never bring any unit that would benefit from a fairly priced transport.


Another issue is that 12 orks just aren't much of a threat. Many targets will cripple that in overwatch. And then you don't make much of a dent when you hit. And get killed easily. And don't get +1A. Oh and your LD sucks. In short even if trukk was 20 pts not sure would trukk boyz be all that viable...So trukks would be good for tank bustas(shooting) and maybe like mega nobz and nobz if they were worth fielding.


Ork boyz don't seem to benefit from trukks at all atm though it'd be swell if they could consolidate back into the trukks, like Speed Freaks could back in the day!

I do want to second that comment on tank bustas, IIRC the guy who won the UK GT ran two units of them in trukks, and not that I think this is a good thing, but there is at least one unit that seems to benefit from trukks at a competitive level.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 15:25:59


Post by: Morkphoiz


phydaux wrote:
auticus wrote:
The other thing that went hand in hand with busted in 3rd edition were the assault units that were decked out in power weapons.

I watched a game at the Chicago GT in 1999 where it was Blood Angels vs Imperial Guard and the Blood Angels player TABLED the IG player in turn 1, and the IG player hadn't even moved yet.

Gross.


Part of that was when 3rd first dropped if you wiped out a unit in assault then you could make a 3" consolidation move, and if that move brought you into another enemy unit then you got locked in close combat with THAT unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DoomMouse wrote:
Maybe a few entire assault armies are poor, but some of the game's best units are assault oriented. Custodes Jetbikes are great in assault, as are blood angels smash captains. The knight gallant is also looking pretty hot too.

Orks are really quite strong as well when you build around nothing but Boyz, stormboyz and supporting characters (though their other units are over costed)

Tyranid genestealers and Khorne berserkers are also considered decently strong with the right support

I think the assault mechanics are fine and very powerful, you just need to lower the points costs of certain garbage assault units (looking at you assault marines)


Orks & 'Nids are horde armies, Custodes Jetbikes are Codex Creep, and Smash Captains & Berzerkers are single units limited by the Rule of 3.

People whine about Gunlines and how boring it is to play against them, but GW has written the current rules, intentionally in my opinion, so that elite assault armies are hamstrung and gunlines are the MOST viable play style.

I have a stack of unpainted Space Marines box sets that are waiting for the Space Wolves codex oto drop, and when it does I'm 99% sure I'm just gonna spray paint them blue and make a vanilla Marines gunline because that's how GW WANTS me to play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
the_scotsman wrote:
or, I have an alternative idea: how about we DONT do that. Elite assault is honestly pretty awesome right now (especially fast elite assault, but you also have grotesque+talos lists solidly in the meta) this change would allow for straight ludicrous threat ranges for practically all assault units because of how fast transports have become.

cheap chaff assault is fine in 8th, as is super elite fast assault. What suffers is rank-and-file midrange assault units like assault marines, non-boy orks, basic termies etc becaus eof their inability to massively murderize over their weight class or aren't cheap enough to just tie stuff up.


Please give examples of the various armies that can pull this off. If your answer is just one unit from one army then all you're doing is proving my point.

Back in 3rd Ed vanilla Maines, vanilla Chaos and Blood Angels were all able to pull off assault OR gunline depending on the preferences of the player. And Space Wolves & cult Chaos Marines were top notch assault specialists (because you could play a pure Khorne army then). Now, skipping Space Wolves, none of those armies can pull off assault orientation. We'll see about Space Wolves in a month.

The simple fact is that the pendulam has swung, it has swung too far in one direction, and it needs to start swing back.


It seems you're just another salty marine player. Calling codex creep on custodes? Well, one of the first codizes (imperial guard) is still the most powerful codex to date. Also Chaos Marines are totally able to field a pure Khorne army and guess what: That causes Berzerkers to be troops which are not affected at all by the rule of three. So that point is invalid too.
Tyranid big bug lists are able to hold their own in cc, khorne berzerker armys just murder everything they touch, blood angels are VERY able to mix and match shooting and cc while having one of the most ridicoulus melee characters in the game.
Harlequins are VERY dangerous in close combat too.
Also lets not forget about knights. Those things are truly terrifying in close combat. All of them.
Of course theres a hard counter to every army but thats just how the game works. If your only Argument is "elite assault armys suck because marines suck in cc" I cannot take you seriously.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 15:57:42


Post by: Martel732


Marines do suck in cc, even ba.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 16:00:17


Post by: Mr Morden


Martel732 wrote:
Marines do suck in cc, even ba.


They do compared to dedicated Assault troops.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 16:04:06


Post by: Kap'n Krump


In my opinion, as long as the fall back mechanic remains unchanged, melee is going to continue to be an absolute joke.

I get why fall back exists, with the advent of charging after deep strike, but the fact that it's automatic, unchallenged, and often times happens without penalty (or a trifling one), means that melee armies are more or less useless.

And when you factor in the fact that twin-linked now just doubles shots, but damn near every shooting army still has abundant rerolls to hit, melee armies now get to face double the shots, who keep rerolls, and now can escape melee at will.

If fall back was based on, say, a dice roll + your move value, it would be more fair. But, in my experience, fall back is the most broken mechanic I've seen in 40k thus far. And I've been playing since 5th.

The ONE thing that might make the ork codex not suck is a dirt-cheap stratagem that disallows enemies from falling back.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 16:38:53


Post by: sfshilo


phydaux wrote:
....where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.


Yeah that's not true, people just don't know how to run them. Shooting phase is easier to play.

Too many people just don't know the rules for assault is the biggest issue. They let opponents just walk thru their models falling back (you can't do that), they don't setup their charges to soak up as much overwatch as possible (declare charges on as much as you can in case you roll that 10-12 2d6), and they think the turn 1 nerf hurt assault armies (it didn't, it actually helped.)


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 16:47:49


Post by: the_scotsman


 sfshilo wrote:
phydaux wrote:
....where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.


Yeah that's not true, people just don't know how to run them. Shooting phase is easier to play.

Too many people just don't know the rules for assault is the biggest issue. They let opponents just walk thru their models falling back (you can't do that), they don't setup their charges to soak up as much overwatch as possible (declare charges on as much as you can in case you roll that 10-12 2d6), and they think the turn 1 nerf hurt assault armies (it didn't, it actually helped.)


they also evidently pull crap like we saw in the current Cry About Marines thread where they decide that rhinos don't block LOS for some reason (I guess you can see between the tiny nubbinz in the treads when you have it down flat on the table?)

At least on the internet, there seems to be a dedicated community of people whose hobby it is to play 40k with the most asinine, legalistic interpretation of the rules possible in order to prove a point that the rules suck and everything sucks and everyone should just stop playing games and having fun and do what all the cool kids are doing, which is not play and whine about the game on the online (which they totally do because they're cool, and not because no human being can stand interacting with them thanks to the way they decided to play the game.)

between people catching snippets of that attitude online and taking those folks' word as gospel (they must be right, because they said the thing the most times and the loudest!) and not knowing how half the rules work themselves, you see a lot of fatalism regarding any aspect of the game that tends to be more complicated.



Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 16:55:53


Post by: Martel732


 sfshilo wrote:
phydaux wrote:
....where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.


Yeah that's not true, people just don't know how to run them. Shooting phase is easier to play.

Too many people just don't know the rules for assault is the biggest issue. They let opponents just walk thru their models falling back (you can't do that), they don't setup their charges to soak up as much overwatch as possible (declare charges on as much as you can in case you roll that 10-12 2d6), and they think the turn 1 nerf hurt assault armies (it didn't, it actually helped.)


Pretty sure i know how to run them. I'm just out of dudes turn 4.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 17:02:48


Post by: Brutallica


 sfshilo wrote:
phydaux wrote:
....where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.


Yeah that's not true, people just don't know how to run them. Shooting phase is easier to play.

Too many people just don't know the rules for assault is the biggest issue. They let opponents just walk thru their models falling back (you can't do that), they don't setup their charges to soak up as much overwatch as possible (declare charges on as much as you can in case you roll that 10-12 2d6), and they think the turn 1 nerf hurt assault armies (it didn't, it actually helped.)



Hahahaha, people dont know how to run them... Assault have never had it this gakky since 5th


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 17:08:13


Post by: Daedalus81


Drop the price of land raiders, give them assault ramps, and hand out some minor point drops (assault marines/terminators).



Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 19:24:04


Post by: Spoletta


 Brutallica wrote:
 sfshilo wrote:
phydaux wrote:
....where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.


Yeah that's not true, people just don't know how to run them. Shooting phase is easier to play.

Too many people just don't know the rules for assault is the biggest issue. They let opponents just walk thru their models falling back (you can't do that), they don't setup their charges to soak up as much overwatch as possible (declare charges on as much as you can in case you roll that 10-12 2d6), and they think the turn 1 nerf hurt assault armies (it didn't, it actually helped.)



Hahahaha, people dont know how to run them... Assault have never had it this gakky since 5th


As long as you don't count 6th and 7h. Assault now actually works outside deathstars, you have competitive assault armies that don't rely on cute tricks. I don't remember this happening in previous editions.

Assault represents 50% of the game right now? No, more likely 30%.

Should be 50%? I'm not sure, shooting and melee should not be equally represented just because they both exist. AoS is more focused on assault than on shooting, and one complains.
30% still makes it a necessary and core part of the game.
Sure, you could do something for the elite assault elements, which are not working right now, and raise this share to 40%, but this is without a doubt the best state assault has been in for the last 4 editions.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 19:49:03


Post by: Brutallica


Spoletta wrote:
 Brutallica wrote:
 sfshilo wrote:
phydaux wrote:
....where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.


Yeah that's not true, people just don't know how to run them. Shooting phase is easier to play.

Too many people just don't know the rules for assault is the biggest issue. They let opponents just walk thru their models falling back (you can't do that), they don't setup their charges to soak up as much overwatch as possible (declare charges on as much as you can in case you roll that 10-12 2d6), and they think the turn 1 nerf hurt assault armies (it didn't, it actually helped.)



Hahahaha, people dont know how to run them... Assault have never had it this gakky since 5th


As long as you don't count 6th and 7h. Assault now actually works outside deathstars, you have competitive assault armies that don't rely on cute tricks. I don't remember this happening in previous editions.

Assault represents 50% of the game right now? No, more likely 30%.

Should be 50%? I'm not sure, shooting and melee should not be equally represented just because they both exist. AoS is more focused on assault than on shooting, and one complains.
30% still makes it a necessary and core part of the game.
Sure, you could do something for the elite assault elements, which are not working right now, and raise this share to 40%, but this is without a doubt the best state assault has been in for the last 4 editions.


In a casual enviroment maybe.

But as a space wolf, ive never had it worse than 8th edition, everyone leaves combat shoots everything to pieces. Its way too easy for ranged to screen with junk, leave combat with said junk and shoot all the dangerous models away.

And yes im against IG and TAU mainly, i faced against them in 7th, it was hard with riptide formations and the like, but i actually managed to win games, now the game is over at turn 2 or 3. And our White Scars player are suffering them same issues.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 19:50:00


Post by: LunarSol


Spoletta wrote:

Assault represents 50% of the game right now? No, more likely 30%.

Should be 50%? I'm not sure, shooting and melee should not be equally represented just because they both exist. AoS is more focused on assault than on shooting, and one complains.
30% still makes it a necessary and core part of the game.
Sure, you could do something for the elite assault elements, which are not working right now, and raise this share to 40%, but this is without a doubt the best state assault has been in for the last 4 editions.


Realistically there's only 3-4 factions that can support assault as a primary gameplan. That's like.... 10% of the total armies? Granted, I believe in souping the game down to a more realistic 7-10 factions, so 30% is probably about right.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/03 20:12:22


Post by: Spoletta


Indeed there are 3-4 assault factions, but if you count pure shooting competitive factions there aren't many more.

The meta right now requires you to mix melee threaths and shooting threats or you are toast against many matchups, hence the souping.

Maybe only T'au lists don't use any assault specialists, and if they could ally in some they would gladly do that.

We are no longer in an edition where you can use terms like assault armies, or shooting armies. Everything works in a scale of grey now, because mixing those elements works better than focusing on one. In particular the meta right now likes fast and powerfull melee supported by long range shooting.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/04 00:11:21


Post by: SemperMortis


 nurgle5 wrote:

Ork boyz don't seem to benefit from trukks at all atm though it'd be swell if they could consolidate back into the trukks, like Speed Freaks could back in the day!

I do want to second that comment on tank bustas, IIRC the guy who won the UK GT ran two units of them in trukks, and not that I think this is a good thing, but there is at least one unit that seems to benefit from trukks at a competitive level.


No, that guy won the GT because he was slow playing like crazy, I don't believe any of his games went past turn 3. Tank bustas don't benefit from Trukkz at a competitive level, they REQUIRE trukkz to be taken.....at all, and even then it gives your opponents heavy weapons a nice juicy target to focus fire on turn 1.

 sfshilo wrote:
phydaux wrote:
....where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.


Yeah that's not true, people just don't know how to run them. Shooting phase is easier to play.

Too many people just don't know the rules for assault is the biggest issue. They let opponents just walk thru their models falling back (you can't do that), they don't setup their charges to soak up as much overwatch as possible (declare charges on as much as you can in case you roll that 10-12 2d6), and they think the turn 1 nerf hurt assault armies (it didn't, it actually helped.)
\

Sorry but the L2P argument isn't really valid here. You are saying that players who have been in the game for decades, on the tournament scene for years aren't smart enough to make assault armies work. Yeah, not right. I am well aware of the rules for assault, I know all those little tactics to ensure I don't get blasted off the board, I know how to best position my units to utilize cover and concealment to the max. I still get blasted off the board by turn 3 or 4 by Tau, Eldar and Marine players if they bring anti infantry weapons. Hell the Tau Onion of death can pretty reliably defeat any CC army with little effort or skill involved.

But mostly I really want you to explain this.
and they think the turn 1 nerf hurt assault armies (it didn't, it actually helped.)
How did making me wait 1 more turn to assault my enemies and face an entire new shooting phase benefit my CC army? please do explain.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/04 00:34:11


Post by: meleti


@SemperMortis: what's your assault army? Perhaps the problem is with your list, instead of with all assault armies in 40k.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/04 00:39:42


Post by: SemperMortis


meleti wrote:
@SemperMortis: what's your assault army? Perhaps the problem is with your list, instead of with all assault armies in 40k.
So ignore all my points and rush back to "maybe you need to L2P" awesome. My army is Orkz, and let me guess, i should wait for my codex to drop right? That worked so well in 6th and 7th....


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/04 00:48:49


Post by: meleti


SemperMortis wrote:
meleti wrote:
@SemperMortis: what's your assault army? Perhaps the problem is with your list, instead of with all assault armies in 40k.
So ignore all my points and rush back to "maybe you need to L2P" awesome. My army is Orkz, and let me guess, i should wait for my codex to drop right? That worked so well in 6th and 7th....


No, it just helps to know what you're working with. If you were playing BT, for example, I don't think there's many ways to get them working as a viable assault army. BT are kind of dead in the water as an assault army right now.

I don't think Orks are, though. Even pre-codex, you can run something like 120-180 Boyz, Weirdboyz, Big Meks, Kustom Mega Kannons, etc., and you'll have a tournament contender list. There was a 4-1 Orks player at the Dallas Open GT who I believe was undefeated going into the final round. And there's been multiple other Orks players having success with that list, not just the guy who won the Warhammer World 40k GT. Orks don't have a lot of room for variety right now (Stormboyz I guess) but that's pretty typical of index armies. No need to wait for your codex, though, there's a list that works right now and you definitely don't need to rely on slowplay to have success with it.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/04 12:47:04


Post by: nurgle5


SemperMortis wrote:
 nurgle5 wrote:

Ork boyz don't seem to benefit from trukks at all atm though it'd be swell if they could consolidate back into the trukks, like Speed Freaks could back in the day!

I do want to second that comment on tank bustas, IIRC the guy who won the UK GT ran two units of them in trukks, and not that I think this is a good thing, but there is at least one unit that seems to benefit from trukks at a competitive level.


No, that guy won the GT because he was slow playing like crazy, I don't believe any of his games went past turn 3. Tank bustas don't benefit from Trukkz at a competitive level, they REQUIRE trukkz to be taken.....at all, and even then it gives your opponents heavy weapons a nice juicy target to focus fire on turn 1.


I'm confused by the first half of your reply, I didn't say the chap won because he had tankbustas in trukks -- just that he had them. I mentioned it because it was an example of someone using trukks at a tournament, in response to a comment chain about Orks never taking units that benefit from trukks. I was actually making a similar point to you, that it seems that trukks can be useful at a competitive level.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/04 12:53:19


Post by: Karol


I'm not sure how being super resilient is ignoring the core rules of assault, can you explain a bit further?

Because it makes normal assault units worthless. If the "normal" for an assault unit means 30"+ range on top of crazy stratagems, or being something like Magnus or Tyfus along side 3-4 other flying buddies, then an actual normal assault unit like GK strikes or SW termintors, makes no sense.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/04 13:40:52


Post by: SHUPPET


I didn't ask about assault range - you said being resilient enough to make it assault is breaking the rules of assault. I don't get it. That just seems asinine, that's not a rule of assault lol


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 05:47:46


Post by: Just Tony


ValentineGames wrote:
3rd was a debacle?...most fun I ever had was in 3rd.


I'm lucky, I have a gaming group that still plays 3rd.


I'm actually baffled at how many people saw turn 1 tablings in 3rd. How was that even possible outside of BA in a Cleanse mission with everyone exactly 18" away? The biggest bitch I see about 3rd was consolidation into combat, and that was mitigated by keeping your squads at least 6" apart. Can you imagine a hard counter that costs no points? Unless, of course, you had people trying to consolidate 2D6" after a Wiped Out result, which was completely against the rules.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 06:18:46


Post by: Dandelion


Spoletta wrote:

Maybe only T'au lists don't use any assault specialists, and if they could ally in some they would gladly do that.

Tau just need expanded kroot options and they're good to go. Which I think solves the issue of every faction at least having access (of some sort) to both melee and shooting.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 06:56:23


Post by: Delvarus Centurion


phydaux wrote:
GW has been actively trying to live down the debacle that was 3rd ed. for neatly 20 years now. Each edition they have nerfed elite assault armies a little more and a little more, to the point where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.

3rd had two features that made assault very powerful - Charging out of transports after they had moved, and units getting locked in close combat once they had been assaulted. Both of these features are absent in 8th ed.

I propose that we allow infantry units to debark from transports after they have moved, and that we left them EITHER Shoot OR Charge when they have done so. This will provide some benefit to elite assault armies, but not an overwhelming one. Gunlines will still have Overwatch, Heroic Intervention, and Fall Back as options to stop elite assault units from rolling them up like an old throw rug.


Its because everyone at GW play Eldar, Tau or Necrons lol


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 07:38:12


Post by: hollow one


meleti wrote:
Here's some ideas for assault armies assuming OP is genuinely interested in playing assault armies instead of just whining about how bad they are.

1. Catachan brigade (~100 infantry) with Bullgryns.

2. Ork Boyz and Stormboyz. They're only going to improve with a codex.

3. BA with either DC or SG as a big hammer unit, supported by characters.

4. Custodes. Basically the entire army is an assault army. Dawneagle jetbikes are the strongest way to build it, but don't sleep on Allarus either.

5. Tyranids, in a wide number of varieties. Genestealers for a fast assault unit, Tyranid Warriors as more of a balanced shooting/assault threat, monsters spam, etc.

6. Harlequins, the entire army is lightning fast and strong in combat. Not that they can't shoot, either.

7. Thousand Sons. Daemon Princes, Magnus, Tzaangors, and Cultists. Good mix of strong elite assault units and big tarpits.

8. Nurgle daemons. A resilient, assault-focused army that's great at holding objectives.

9. Drukhari Wych cults. Shardnets are extremely powerful, letting you trap units in combat without having to surround them first.

10. Imperial Knights. Gallants, Death Grip, first turn charges, fighting twice.
There is too much sanity and meta knowledge in this post for it to be ignored. So i'm just going to highlight it again.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 07:49:45


Post by: Delvarus Centurion


 hollow one wrote:
meleti wrote:
Here's some ideas for assault armies assuming OP is genuinely interested in playing assault armies instead of just whining about how bad they are.

1. Catachan brigade (~100 infantry) with Bullgryns.

2. Ork Boyz and Stormboyz. They're only going to improve with a codex.

3. BA with either DC or SG as a big hammer unit, supported by characters.

4. Custodes. Basically the entire army is an assault army. Dawneagle jetbikes are the strongest way to build it, but don't sleep on Allarus either.

5. Tyranids, in a wide number of varieties. Genestealers for a fast assault unit, Tyranid Warriors as more of a balanced shooting/assault threat, monsters spam, etc.

6. Harlequins, the entire army is lightning fast and strong in combat. Not that they can't shoot, either.

7. Thousand Sons. Daemon Princes, Magnus, Tzaangors, and Cultists. Good mix of strong elite assault units and big tarpits.

8. Nurgle daemons. A resilient, assault-focused army that's great at holding objectives.

9. Drukhari Wych cults. Shardnets are extremely powerful, letting you trap units in combat without having to surround them first.

10. Imperial Knights. Gallants, Death Grip, first turn charges, fighting twice.
There is too much sanity and meta knowledge in this post for it to be ignored. So i'm just going to highlight it again.


You can't sleep on any Custodes unit, most armies would love to have 1 unit as good as just the Custodes guardians lol Its just we can't get them into CC without sinking most of our points on a land raider.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 09:02:43


Post by: Not Online!!!


Actually; Does Guard even have Assult units?
I mean there are Ogryns but compared to other melee troops they are somewhere inbetween meh and ok.
On the otherside note, why not squeeze 2 or 3 units in a chimera.
That way you can maximize fireoutput and still have a decent enough APC / Tank standing around.
Also are Valkyries really that overcosted?


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 09:12:12


Post by: Delvarus Centurion


Not Online!!! wrote:
Actually; Does Guard even have Assult units?
I mean there are Ogryns but compared to other melee troops they are somewhere inbetween meh and ok.
On the otherside note, why not squeeze 2 or 3 units in a chimera.
That way you can maximize fireoutput and still have a decent enough APC / Tank standing around.
Also are Valkyries really that overcosted?


Deathshourds, foetid bloat drone with fleshmower and poxwalkers the rest are all CSM/Daemon units. Whoops I thought you meant death guard, should have read the rest of your comment lol


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 09:18:35


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Actually; Does Guard even have Assult units?
I mean there are Ogryns but compared to other melee troops they are somewhere inbetween meh and ok.
On the otherside note, why not squeeze 2 or 3 units in a chimera.
That way you can maximize fireoutput and still have a decent enough APC / Tank standing around.
Also are Valkyries really that overcosted?


Deathshourds, foetid bloat drone with fleshmower and poxwalkers the rest are all CSM/Daemon units. Whoops I thought you meant death guard, should have read the rest of your comment lol


Imperial Guard, now are you insinuating that i am a heretic and have acess to such things?
HOW DARE YOU:

Ps: greet papa for me will you^^


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 11:40:27


Post by: BoomWolf


 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
phydaux wrote:
GW has been actively trying to live down the debacle that was 3rd ed. for neatly 20 years now. Each edition they have nerfed elite assault armies a little more and a little more, to the point where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.

3rd had two features that made assault very powerful - Charging out of transports after they had moved, and units getting locked in close combat once they had been assaulted. Both of these features are absent in 8th ed.

I propose that we allow infantry units to debark from transports after they have moved, and that we left them EITHER Shoot OR Charge when they have done so. This will provide some benefit to elite assault armies, but not an overwhelming one. Gunlines will still have Overwatch, Heroic Intervention, and Fall Back as options to stop elite assault units from rolling them up like an old throw rug.


Its because everyone at GW play Eldar, Tau or Necrons lol


Not sure about eldar or necrons, but obviously none the 8th development team gave a crap about T'au, or it wouldn't be the worst written codex of the cycle


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 11:58:09


Post by: Mr Morden


 BoomWolf wrote:
 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
phydaux wrote:
GW has been actively trying to live down the debacle that was 3rd ed. for neatly 20 years now. Each edition they have nerfed elite assault armies a little more and a little more, to the point where in 8th ed elite assault armies are completely unviable.

3rd had two features that made assault very powerful - Charging out of transports after they had moved, and units getting locked in close combat once they had been assaulted. Both of these features are absent in 8th ed.

I propose that we allow infantry units to debark from transports after they have moved, and that we left them EITHER Shoot OR Charge when they have done so. This will provide some benefit to elite assault armies, but not an overwhelming one. Gunlines will still have Overwatch, Heroic Intervention, and Fall Back as options to stop elite assault units from rolling them up like an old throw rug.


Its because everyone at GW play Eldar, Tau or Necrons lol


Not sure about eldar or necrons, but obviously none the 8th development team gave a crap about T'au, or it wouldn't be the worst written codex of the cycle


Worse than Grey Knights? I ahve not played them yet but Tau seem to have quite a few powerful units and play styles - they are not the cheese of previous era's Riptide Wing thank god - same As Marines are not Gladius cheese. or Eldar........etc


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 12:01:03


Post by: the_scotsman


Karol wrote:
I'm not sure how being super resilient is ignoring the core rules of assault, can you explain a bit further?

Because it makes normal assault units worthless. If the "normal" for an assault unit means 30"+ range on top of crazy stratagems, or being something like Magnus or Tyfus along side 3-4 other flying buddies, then an actual normal assault unit like GK strikes or SW termintors, makes no sense.


But...normal assault units also work.

We have tournament lists with everything from cheap assault units (orks, nids, catachan guard swarm, nurgle daemons, wyches) to super elite assault units (shining spears, custodes, knights gallant, daemon princes, Taloi+Grotesques). Where assault tends to waver is in the midrange, where you don't have the huge returns from shutting off the enemy shooting that you get from the super cheap assault units, and you don't have the huge returns in sheer quantity of murder that the top end assault units put out. Assault units from the 10-30 point range are the rarest, with the only ones turning up in significant numbers being stuff like grotesques and Harlequins.

Once again, because I like to keep the record straight on what the meta tends to actually be in my head, I looked through the list-dump we just saw for the ETC tournament (roughly 250 tournament level lists). The 'meta' list right now is as a previous poster said about 70% shooting 30% assault, with pure 100% shooty armies basically only being Tau and Necrons with the occasional pure imp guard.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/05 23:43:04


Post by: Cinderspirit


I guess one of the main problems is that assault units can't choose their targets the same way a ranged unit can. And GW doesn't account for that in many cases. As you said, their are 2 kinds of good melee units: Cheap/Resilient ones which swarm and tie up the enemy or expensive ones that outright kill anything they connect with. Warp Talons for example are bad, because they are only good at killing marines, but suck at dealing with cheap stuff or bulkier things, so the enemy can easily "outplay" them. Genestealers on the other hand are good, because they can deal with any kind of enemy unit. A lascannon would also suck if it always needed to shoot the closest enemy on the table and Heavy Bolters would be king in the same scenario.

But well, in the end the easiest way to make more units usefull is by reducing their points cost. Specialist melee units need to come with a discount, to make up for the risk of them being a useless pick in many games.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 00:05:02


Post by: phydaux


So it seem that for an assault oriented army to work (70-30 shooty-assault is NOT an assault-oriented army) then that army needs BOTH dedicated assault troops as a Troops choice, so as not to get nerfed by the Rule of Three) AND special rules to give the whole army either extra inches on the charge or more attacks on the charge, or BOTH.

Meanwhile all a shooting oriented army needs is to field all their best shooty units. No special rules required.

And yet people will still crow that the game is balanced, and if a Black Templar player can't win, well, it's simply because he's just a bad player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"But well, in the end the easiest way to make more units usefull is by reducing their points cost. Specialist melee units need to come with a discount, to make up for the risk of them being a useless pick in many games."

It simply doesn't matter how cheap you make, say, a vanilla Space Marines Assault Squad. The Space Marines player can still only take three of them.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 00:39:25


Post by: SemperMortis


phydaux wrote:
So it seem that for an assault oriented army to work (70-30 shooty-assault is NOT an assault-oriented army) then that army needs BOTH dedicated assault troops as a Troops choice, so as not to get nerfed by the Rule of Three) AND special rules to give the whole army either extra inches on the charge or more attacks on the charge, or BOTH.

Meanwhile all a shooting oriented army needs is to field all their best shooty units. No special rules required.

And yet people will still crow that the game is balanced, and if a Black Templar player can't win, well, it's simply because he's just a bad player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"But well, in the end the easiest way to make more units usefull is by reducing their points cost. Specialist melee units need to come with a discount, to make up for the risk of them being a useless pick in many games."

It simply doesn't matter how cheap you make, say, a vanilla Space Marines Assault Squad. The Space Marines player can still only take three of them.


I haven't seen any tournament results where Horde armies are winning except at the London GT where the guy slow played the entire tournament. Someone mentioned Dallas but I couldn't find the list nor any other results, granted I just got off work and I am not breaking the internet looking

Personally I miss my Kommandos, Speed Freakz and Kanz. I REALLY Miss my warbikers!


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 01:06:38


Post by: phydaux


"I haven't seen any tournament results where Horde armies are winning"

Even a No TMC 'Nid list that's nothing but Genestealers, Gargoyles & 'Gaunts? That list has a special place in my heart because a buddy of mine played one in 3rd when I was a new player, and it took me FOREVER to finally beat him.

When I finally did I snapped the head off of one of his Termagaunts and glued it to my Chaplain's shoulder pad as a trophy.

Just like when I was nearly tabeled on Turn Five by another buddy playing Tau. Come his go on Turn Six all I had left was my Chaplain. Same Chaplain. The only units he had in range were two units of Broadsides and a Hammerhead. Yeah, ONLY.

He shot all five rail gun shots at my Chaplain. All five hit, all five wounded, and my Chaplain made ALL FIVE Invulnerable Saves. The energy sump of his Rosarius was glowing white hot, but he as still standing. Alone, but defiant.

One of my buddy's Fire Warriors lost a Bonding Knife after that game.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 01:19:11


Post by: SHUPPET


phydaux wrote:
So it seem that for an assault oriented army to work (70-30 shooty-assault is NOT an assault-oriented army) then that army needs BOTH dedicated assault troops as a Troops choice, so as not to get nerfed by the Rule of Three) AND special rules to give the whole army either extra inches on the charge or more attacks on the charge, or BOTH.

Meanwhile all a shooting oriented army needs is to field all their best shooty units. No special rules required.

And yet people will still crow that the game is balanced, and if a Black Templar player can't win, well, it's simply because he's just a bad player.


Lololol what are all these shooting armies winning without special rules?


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 02:12:24


Post by: phydaux


Well, exactly what special rules are there that specifically favor shooty armies? The only one I can think of is For The Greater Good. And I'm not one to begrudge Tau anything.

Please give an example of an army-wide special rule that helps shooty armies as much as

Red Thirst
Blood For The Blood God
'Ere We Go

all help assault armies.

And please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that assault is OVER powered. I'm saying that absent army wide special rules to give you a helping hand assault is a no-go strategy.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 03:20:33


Post by: SHUPPET


Why is it only army rules that count? Special rules like markerlights, stratagems, and buffs or powers etc break far more "rules" than things like re-rolling charges. Hell you guys listed "being durable" as breaking the rules of assault, cmon. And BFTBG isn't even an army wide rule. Sounds like you've made arbitrary restrictions on the criteria to serve your narrative, and it falls apart under any real inspection.

I play CC armies. CC is in a great spot.

I hate to tell you this pal... But I think your struggles are not the game's fault. Although it genuinely sounds like you haven't even played yet, just took a glance at the ruleset and said "nope, not 3rd, gonna go act like I'm informed enough to rewrite the rules of the game for GW".

Shooting alone is not strong, take Necrons for example.

But I'm sure you'll find ways to disqualify all this evidence and logic from the discussion or just ignore it like you did earlier. What's even the point of this thread


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 06:47:39


Post by: meleti


SemperMortis wrote:
phydaux wrote:
So it seem that for an assault oriented army to work (70-30 shooty-assault is NOT an assault-oriented army) then that army needs BOTH dedicated assault troops as a Troops choice, so as not to get nerfed by the Rule of Three) AND special rules to give the whole army either extra inches on the charge or more attacks on the charge, or BOTH.

Meanwhile all a shooting oriented army needs is to field all their best shooty units. No special rules required.

And yet people will still crow that the game is balanced, and if a Black Templar player can't win, well, it's simply because he's just a bad player.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"But well, in the end the easiest way to make more units usefull is by reducing their points cost. Specialist melee units need to come with a discount, to make up for the risk of them being a useless pick in many games."

It simply doesn't matter how cheap you make, say, a vanilla Space Marines Assault Squad. The Space Marines player can still only take three of them.


I haven't seen any tournament results where Horde armies are winning except at the London GT where the guy slow played the entire tournament. Someone mentioned Dallas but I couldn't find the list nor any other results, granted I just got off work and I am not breaking the internet looking

Personally I miss my Kommandos, Speed Freakz and Kanz. I REALLY Miss my warbikers!


I didn’t save the Dallas Open 4-1 Ork list, but like I said, just toss together as many boyz, KMKs, weird boyz, and big meks as you can find and you’re 90% there. The undefeated list I recall from Dallas Open was DE, which incidentally had some Wyches and Skyweavers as an assault element.

Incidentally, I do appreciate that OP has noticed most assault armies need movement options that get their units into CC reliably. Yeah, that’s totally true. There’s a lot of armies like that out there. Try one of them.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 07:40:26


Post by: Karol


 SHUPPET wrote:


I play CC armies. CC is in a great spot.

I hate to tell you this pal... But I think your struggles are not the game's fault. Although it genuinely sounds like you haven't even played yet, just took a glance at the ruleset and said "nope, not 3rd, gonna go act like I'm informed enough to rewrite the rules of the game for GW".

Shooting alone is not strong, take Necrons for example.

But I'm sure you'll find ways to disqualify all this evidence and logic from the discussion or just ignore it like you did earlier. What's even the point of this thread


Ok, so if assault is so strong then why does GK assault work so bad, specially after the change to deep strike? Assault works only for those armies that were "breaking" the core rules to begin with. Assault stuff should be killable, and then there is something like Magnus, unkillable, great in melee, great caster and runs around with 3-4 mini versions of himself, with a ton of re-rolls, and still somehow the army has enough points to buy troops.

Eldar lancer bikers, are great it is impossible to stop their charge on a normal 4x4 table. Same with half of the DE stuff. But what is really the worse thing, is that all those armies aren't just assault armies. With all the psychic powers, and guns they have they are also great at shoting. At the same time normal armies have weapons that do nothing, no ap, no ignore LoS, special weapons that get negativ mods for everything. I played against an assault Inari list with flyers, like half the stuff in the army was either -2 or even -3 to hit, when my stuff moved the special weapons I had were hiting stuff worse then an orc.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 08:19:15


Post by: SHUPPET


Karol wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:


I play CC armies. CC is in a great spot.

I hate to tell you this pal... But I think your struggles are not the game's fault. Although it genuinely sounds like you haven't even played yet, just took a glance at the ruleset and said "nope, not 3rd, gonna go act like I'm informed enough to rewrite the rules of the game for GW".

Shooting alone is not strong, take Necrons for example.

But I'm sure you'll find ways to disqualify all this evidence and logic from the discussion or just ignore it like you did earlier. What's even the point of this thread


Ok, so if assault is so strong then why does GK assault work so bad, specially after the change to deep strike? Assault works only for those armies that were "breaking" the core rules to begin with. Assault stuff should be killable, and then there is something like Magnus, unkillable, great in melee, great caster and runs around with 3-4 mini versions of himself, with a ton of re-rolls, and still somehow the army has enough points to buy troops.

Eldar lancer bikers, are great it is impossible to stop their charge on a normal 4x4 table. Same with half of the DE stuff. But what is really the worse thing, is that all those armies aren't just assault armies. With all the psychic powers, and guns they have they are also great at shoting. At the same time normal armies have weapons that do nothing, no ap, no ignore LoS, special weapons that get negativ mods for everything. I played against an assault Inari list with flyers, like half the stuff in the army was either -2 or even -3 to hit, when my stuff moved the special weapons I had were hiting stuff worse then an orc.


You are literally comparing the weakest army in the game, designed for a different ruleset, with the strongest army in the game. This is not assault vs shooting.

You play one army, and every post you make is about that army. Stop mistaking that one army for being a measure of the game as a whole. You are the FIRST to point out in EVERY other thread how much weaker Grey Knights are than even other assault armies, and you never struggle to steer any conversation to the topic of your GK, as you're quite transparently attempting to do here. So drop the hypocrisy, stop singing a narrative you don't understand well enough to convince even the most impressionable of onlookers. Go borrow someones Necrons, build the shootiest list you can imagine, try to take on Tyranids or Custodes or Catachan, and tell me how OP shooting is to assault. The flaw is with GK and you well know it.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 09:51:31


Post by: nurgle5


SemperMortis wrote:I haven't seen any tournament results where Horde armies are winning except at the London GT where the guy slow played the entire tournament. Someone mentioned Dallas but I couldn't find the list nor any other results, granted I just got off work and I am not breaking the internet looking


Just for the sake any potential confusion -- the UK GT was the one that was won by the slow-playing Ork guy, the London GT was won by a Catachan close combat horde with custard bikes and BA smash captains.



Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 10:20:06


Post by: SemperMortis


 nurgle5 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:I haven't seen any tournament results where Horde armies are winning except at the London GT where the guy slow played the entire tournament. Someone mentioned Dallas but I couldn't find the list nor any other results, granted I just got off work and I am not breaking the internet looking


Just for the sake any potential confusion -- the UK GT was the one that was won by the slow-playing Ork guy, the London GT was won by a Catachan close combat horde with custard bikes and BA smash captains.



Thanks for clarifying

Also, as for army wide rules that make shooting good? don't even need army wide rules, how about the strategems and tactics and unit abilities which allow them to shoot twice in one turn? Hell look at girlyman, before his points increases he was a god in the game. Everything rerolls hits and wounds? Add in the ability to shoot twice if you get killed (looking at you plasma gunners) and poof you have a great gun line


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/06 15:46:59


Post by: SHUPPET


SemperMortis wrote:
 nurgle5 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:I haven't seen any tournament results where Horde armies are winning except at the London GT where the guy slow played the entire tournament. Someone mentioned Dallas but I couldn't find the list nor any other results, granted I just got off work and I am not breaking the internet looking


Just for the sake any potential confusion -- the UK GT was the one that was won by the slow-playing Ork guy, the London GT was won by a Catachan close combat horde with custard bikes and BA smash captains.



Thanks for clarifying

Also, as for army wide rules that make shooting good? don't even need army wide rules, how about the strategems and tactics and unit abilities which allow them to shoot twice in one turn? Hell look at girlyman, before his points increases he was a god in the game. Everything rerolls hits and wounds? Add in the ability to shoot twice if you get killed (looking at you plasma gunners) and poof you have a great gun line
exactly. A whole bunch of special rules woven all through the top gunlines, and people in here acting like re-rolls to charge somehow break the rule of the game so doesn't count as being a good raw assault unit, while at the same time acting as though shooting armies get by on virtue of pew. It's simply not the case but People are past the point of caring about reality by now lol


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 01:47:11


Post by: SemperMortis


 SHUPPET wrote:
exactly. A whole bunch of special rules woven all through the top gunlines, and people in here acting like re-rolls to charge somehow break the rule of the game so doesn't count as being a good raw assault unit, while at the same time acting as though shooting armies get by virtue of pew. People are past the point of caring about reality by now lol


yup, nothing like watching your entire army disintegrate by the end of turn 2 to an enemy gunline that you couldn't even reach let alone hurt. Tau are probably the worst offenders at this with their overwatch shenanigans. You pretty much have to shoot them off the table to win...which is ironically the best way to kill them since once you remove their markerlights they significantly drop in effectiveness.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 02:01:57


Post by: SHUPPET


SemperMortis wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
exactly. A whole bunch of special rules woven all through the top gunlines, and people in here acting like re-rolls to charge somehow break the rule of the game so doesn't count as being a good raw assault unit, while at the same time acting as though shooting armies get by virtue of pew. People are past the point of caring about reality by now lol


yup, nothing like watching your entire army disintegrate by the end of turn 2 to an enemy gunline that you couldn't even reach let alone hurt. Tau are probably the worst offenders at this with their overwatch shenanigans. You pretty much have to shoot them off the table to win...which is ironically the best way to kill them since once you remove their markerlights they significantly drop in effectiveness.

Tau feel pretty ridiculous for this right now, their shooting alpha strike is bananas. My Nids just get melted by the Tigershark lists doing well at the moment. But like you said, they lean heavily on markers and other buffs, if you can turn off their special rules you seriously impact their army. I think Tau might even be a bit too much right now, but thats a result mainly of FW not updating their costs to reflect the new super HBC that the unit was given, and maybe because FTGG with 5+ to hit thanks to Sept is a bit absurd. It's not because assault is written badly as some guys here are saying. TAU is the ones using special rules to break the rules of assault to stop that gak with their overwatch wall, not the other way around.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 02:12:31


Post by: Peregrine


 SHUPPET wrote:
I think Tau might even be a bit too much right now, but thats a result mainly of FW not updating their costs to reflect the new super HBC that the unit was given


Actually it's the other way around. The HBC is 55 points in the FW index book, 35 points with a better stat line in the Tau codex. The only reason the Tigershark is any good is because the GW update applies to the index rules, there is no "just update its cost" nerf to apply.

And, as stated in the FW legality thread, the Tigershark only looks good because the rest of the Tau codex is underwhelming. Compare the HBC Tigershark to its points in LR Punishers and it is suddenly a lot less impressive.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 02:36:56


Post by: SHUPPET


 Peregrine wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
I think Tau might even be a bit too much right now, but thats a result mainly of FW not updating their costs to reflect the new super HBC that the unit was given


Actually it's the other way around. The HBC is 55 points in the FW index book, 35 points with a better stat line in the Tau codex. The only reason the Tigershark is any good is because the GW update applies to the index rules, there is no "just update its cost" nerf to apply.

And, as stated in the FW legality thread, the Tigershark only looks good because the rest of the Tau codex is underwhelming. Compare the HBC Tigershark to its points in LR Punishers and it is suddenly a lot less impressive.





The gun got better, the price reduced, but the FW model was not in the book, so it's price was not changed to reflect this, as it probably needs to be.

The Tigershark looks good because it is good. Really damn good. Tau is NOT a weak dex lol


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 02:38:40


Post by: meleti


Tau isn’t weak, Tau players just whine a lot.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 03:11:11


Post by: Galas


I'm a Tau player and I don't whine about my Codex

#PeaceForAun'Va


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 03:45:30


Post by: Peregrine


 SHUPPET wrote:
The gun got better, the price reduced, but the FW model was not in the book, so it's price was not changed to reflect this, as it probably needs to be.


I'm not sure why you think this when the whole point of 8th edition pricing is that the carrier cost is independent from the weapon cost. If a HBC is worth 35 points on a Riptide then it's worth 35 points on a Hammerhead or 35 points on a Tigershark or 35 points on a Barracuda or 35 points on any other unit that can carry it. Nothing about the Tigershark itself changed, so the carrier cost wouldn't change either.

The Tigershark looks good because it is good. Really damn good. Tau is NOT a weak dex lol


Again, see the other thread. The math on it is just not that impressive. It's a solid unit, probably, but it's hardly OMG NERF IT NOW good compared to other tournament-level units. It only looks great when you compare it to a badly flawed codex full of underperforming units.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 09:12:50


Post by: A.T.


 Peregrine wrote:
I'm not sure why you think this when the whole point of 8th edition pricing is that the carrier cost is independent from the weapon cost.
GW and forgeworld have not been particularly good as sticking to this principle.

Also it's simply inaccurate - see power fist costs across various units for an example.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 10:26:14


Post by: hobojebus


The living rules are as animated as a zombie.

Look at imperial knights they just got a decent update, but the wraithknights that were already worse are now not even worth comparing anymore.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 14:34:02


Post by: Headlss


 SHUPPET wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
exactly. A whole bunch of special rules woven all through the top gunlines, and people in here acting like re-rolls to charge somehow break the rule of the game so doesn't count as being a good raw assault unit, while at the same time acting as though shooting armies get by virtue of pew. People are past the point of caring about reality by now lol


yup, nothing like watching your entire army disintegrate by the end of turn 2 to an enemy gunline that you couldn't even reach let alone hurt. Tau are probably the worst offenders at this with their overwatch shenanigans. You pretty much have to shoot them off the table to win...which is ironically the best way to kill them since once you remove their markerlights they significantly drop in effectiveness.

Tau feel pretty ridiculous for this right now, their shooting alpha strike is bananas. My Nids just get melted by the Tigershark lists doing well at the moment. But like you said, they lean heavily on markers and other buffs, if you can turn off their special rules you seriously impact their army. I think Tau might even be a bit too much right now, but thats a result mainly of FW not updating their costs to reflect the new super HBC that the unit was given, and maybe because FTGG with 5+ to hit thanks to Sept is a bit absurd. It's not because assault is written badly as some guys here are saying. TAU is the ones using special rules to break the rules of assault to stop that gak with their overwatch wall, not the other way around.


Do the Tau have a power that lets them buff over watch too? I know they can get to reroll 1s but there is very little that can buff overwatch.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 16:52:43


Post by: phydaux


"Do the Tau have a power that lets them buff over watch too? I know they can get to reroll 1s but there is very little that can buff overwatch."

For The Greater Good lets one squad fire Overwatch when the squad next to it gets charged, at the expense of not being able to Overwatch if THEY get charged themselves.

Add that to drones being so cheap for Tau and the assaulty player has to chose between assaulting a nearly worthless unit cheap drones, or assaulting Fire Warriors and getting overwatched by the Fire Warriors AND 2-3 units of drones.

Add to this that Tau units get to shift wounds to nearby drone units and Tau armies have a lot of bonuses.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 21:23:44


Post by: meleti


Headlss wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
exactly. A whole bunch of special rules woven all through the top gunlines, and people in here acting like re-rolls to charge somehow break the rule of the game so doesn't count as being a good raw assault unit, while at the same time acting as though shooting armies get by virtue of pew. People are past the point of caring about reality by now lol


yup, nothing like watching your entire army disintegrate by the end of turn 2 to an enemy gunline that you couldn't even reach let alone hurt. Tau are probably the worst offenders at this with their overwatch shenanigans. You pretty much have to shoot them off the table to win...which is ironically the best way to kill them since once you remove their markerlights they significantly drop in effectiveness.

Tau feel pretty ridiculous for this right now, their shooting alpha strike is bananas. My Nids just get melted by the Tigershark lists doing well at the moment. But like you said, they lean heavily on markers and other buffs, if you can turn off their special rules you seriously impact their army. I think Tau might even be a bit too much right now, but thats a result mainly of FW not updating their costs to reflect the new super HBC that the unit was given, and maybe because FTGG with 5+ to hit thanks to Sept is a bit absurd. It's not because assault is written badly as some guys here are saying. TAU is the ones using special rules to break the rules of assault to stop that gak with their overwatch wall, not the other way around.


Do the Tau have a power that lets them buff over watch too? I know they can get to reroll 1s but there is very little that can buff overwatch.


Yeah, there's a few things.

If a Markerlight hits during Overwatch, models can re-roll 1s.
T'au Sept (one of their "chapter tactics") lets you hit on 5s in Overwatch.
Suits can take a Counterfire Defense System that lets them re-roll Overwatch misses.
Nearby Tau (except most vehicles) can join together for Overwatch with For the Greater Good, but give up their own ability to Overwatch later.
Vehicles have a stratagem to Overwatch on a 5.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 22:30:24


Post by: Headlss


meleti wrote:
Headlss wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
exactly. A whole bunch of special rules woven all through the top gunlines, and people in here acting like re-rolls to charge somehow break the rule of the game so doesn't count as being a good raw assault unit, while at the same time acting as though shooting armies get by virtue of pew. People are past the point of caring about reality by now lol


yup, nothing like watching your entire army disintegrate by the end of turn 2 to an enemy gunline that you couldn't even reach let alone hurt. Tau are probably the worst offenders at this with their overwatch shenanigans. You pretty much have to shoot them off the table to win...which is ironically the best way to kill them since once you remove their markerlights they significantly drop in effectiveness.

Tau feel pretty ridiculous for this right now, their shooting alpha strike is bananas. My Nids just get melted by the Tigershark lists doing well at the moment. But like you said, they lean heavily on markers and other buffs, if you can turn off their special rules you seriously impact their army. I think Tau might even be a bit too much right now, but thats a result mainly of FW not updating their costs to reflect the new super HBC that the unit was given, and maybe because FTGG with 5+ to hit thanks to Sept is a bit absurd. It's not because assault is written badly as some guys here are saying. TAU is the ones using special rules to break the rules of assault to stop that gak with their overwatch wall, not the other way around.


Do the Tau have a power that lets them buff over watch too? I know they can get to reroll 1s but there is very little that can buff overwatch.


Yeah, there's a few things.

If a Markerlight hits during Overwatch, models can re-roll 1s.
T'au Sept (one of their "chapter tactics") lets you hit on 5s in Overwatch.
Suits can take a Counterfire Defense System that lets them re-roll Overwatch misses.
Nearby Tau (except most vehicles) can join together for Overwatch with For the Greater Good, but give up their own ability to Overwatch later.
Vehicles have a stratagem to Overwatch on a 5.


Ouch. I need to get a Homoculas then, and a Autarch skyrunner, for the no overwatch masks. Or just find some corners. For LOS.

I knew about for the greater good. I've faced that before. Didn't know they could hit on 5s.

The good thing about greater good is they pack in nice and tight, once you get a unit of wythches in there you can just climb up the ladder with consolidate and pile in from one unit to the next. That was fun.


Are you sure the unit that greater goods can't overwatch if they get charged themselves? We were playing that they could. They could only greater good once, but they could greater good and then overwatch if they were charged themselves, and then over watch again if the first charge failed and they got charged again.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 22:40:47


Post by: phydaux


If a unit fires Overwatch for another unit via For The Greater Good, it may not fire Overwatch again that turn, either for itself or another unit. It is a SACRIFICE they make For The Greater Good.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 23:03:40


Post by: Ice_can


Everyone complain's that Tau overwatch is silly, I'd like to point out that IG can get +1 when overwatching.

For the Greater Good is powerful but is useless if your being assaulted by half an Aldari Soup list turn 1.
They have no effective CC units to counter charge with, no allies to soup up with for a CC punch.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 23:38:22


Post by: meleti


Headlss wrote:

Ouch. I need to get a Homoculas then, and a Autarch skyrunner, for the no overwatch masks. Or just find some corners. For LOS.

I knew about for the greater good. I've faced that before. Didn't know they could hit on 5s.

The good thing about greater good is they pack in nice and tight, once you get a unit of wythches in there you can just climb up the ladder with consolidate and pile in from one unit to the next. That was fun.


Are you sure the unit that greater goods can't overwatch if they get charged themselves? We were playing that they could. They could only greater good once, but they could greater good and then overwatch if they were charged themselves, and then over watch again if the first charge failed and they got charged again.


The good news is that counterfire defense systems basically do not exist on the tabletop. One of the rarest systems out there, everyone just takes more general use ones. There's two big tournament septs, T'au and Bork'an, so you can expect maybe half (or a bit more) of all Tau armies to have units Overwatching on 5s.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/07 23:48:23


Post by: SHUPPET


Ice_can wrote:
Everyone complain's that Tau overwatch is silly, I'd like to point out that IG can get +1 when overwatching.

For the Greater Good is powerful but is useless if your being assaulted by half an Aldari Soup list turn 1.
They have no effective CC units to counter charge with, no allies to soup up with for a CC punch.

Aeldari Soup is almost definitely the utmost strongest way to play this game. They have gak that ruins everybodies day.

Most the rest of the armies in the game can easily find Tau's overwatch to be an absurdly difficult wall unless they are able to make multiple assaults in the one turn. Armies that rely on pushing a single assault unit up quickly to tie something up and get their game going are kinda especially neutered hard by it


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 00:14:38


Post by: Peregrine


 SHUPPET wrote:
Armies that rely on pushing a single assault unit up quickly to tie something up and get their game going are kinda especially neutered hard by it


But that seems like a poor strategy rather than a problem with Tau. If you rely on a single threat with no redundancy then you should expect to lose a lot, because putting all your eggs in one basket is bad strategy.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 00:25:35


Post by: Ice_can


 SHUPPET wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
Everyone complain's that Tau overwatch is silly, I'd like to point out that IG can get +1 when overwatching.

For the Greater Good is powerful but is useless if your being assaulted by half an Aldari Soup list turn 1.
They have no effective CC units to counter charge with, no allies to soup up with for a CC punch.

Aeldari Soup is almost definitely the utmost strongest way to play this game. They have gak that ruins everybodies day.

Most the rest of the armies in the game can easily find Tau's overwatch to be an absurdly difficult wall unless they are able to make multiple assaults in the one turn. Armies that rely on pushing a single assault unit up quickly to tie something up and get their game going are kinda especially neutered hard by it

With screening and fallback which army did this tactic actually work on? Plenty of armies can counter it fairly easily. Eg it's a bad tactic, Tau overwatch just exposes what a poor tactical decision it is.
Also BA, Raven guard, all Aeldari, Necrons choas and GSC have ways to prevent overwatch anyway, so please explain why Tau should be rewritten just because people don't want to take the options to counter their overwatch.
It's like people saying knights should be banned from match play yet they have nothing heavier than a s7 weapon in their entire list.
If your taking a list that can't work if you meet X army or Y army, congratulations you built a bad list.
It maybe your using a codex with overcosted units or some other factor outwith your control but if half the stuff Dakka Dakka claim is in need of an immediate ban/nerf why aren't these broken units steeling all the top spots at events.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 01:52:59


Post by: SHUPPET


 Peregrine wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Armies that rely on pushing a single assault unit up quickly to tie something up and get their game going are kinda especially neutered hard by it


But that seems like a poor strategy rather than a problem with Tau. If you rely on a single threat with no redundancy then you should expect to lose a lot, because putting all your eggs in one basket is bad strategy.

Swarmlord for example cannot double move two units a turn, just one.

Call it a bad tactic, but it works well on practically every army not Tau and the ones that don't just jump every single unit out of combat for free. It's not putting all your eggs in one basket, it's a tactic detailed and pushed by players WAY better than you, Matt Root for example goes into great detail on why he takes only a single unit of Genestealers, and he's #1 ITC player, so go ahead and say how it's a bad strategy, but You. Are. Wrong.








Ice_can wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
Everyone complain's that Tau overwatch is silly, I'd like to point out that IG can get +1 when overwatching.

For the Greater Good is powerful but is useless if your being assaulted by half an Aldari Soup list turn 1.
They have no effective CC units to counter charge with, no allies to soup up with for a CC punch.

Aeldari Soup is almost definitely the utmost strongest way to play this game. They have gak that ruins everybodies day.

Most the rest of the armies in the game can easily find Tau's overwatch to be an absurdly difficult wall unless they are able to make multiple assaults in the one turn. Armies that rely on pushing a single assault unit up quickly to tie something up and get their game going are kinda especially neutered hard by it

With screening and fallback which army did this tactic actually work on? Plenty of armies can counter it fairly easily. Eg it's a bad tactic, Tau overwatch just exposes what a poor tactical decision it is.


Uhhh it works on screens, and screens can be worked past in general? Screens do not stop this from happening in fact at times they can even help your goals in multiple ways. I don't think you understand what you are talking about here.

Ice_can wrote:
Also BA, Raven guard, all Aeldari, Necrons choas and GSC have ways to prevent overwatch anyway, so please explain why Tau should be rewritten just because people don't want to take the options to counter their overwatch.

This makes literally no sense. If the case was that we could all just prevent overwatch and it wasn't so strong, the nerf that only you started talking about wouldn't be a nerf at all. It's incredibly strong and you are mistaken. Also, these things don't all stop FTGG anyway. What an absurd deflection.

Ice_can wrote:
It's like people saying knights should be banned from match play yet they have nothing heavier than a s7 weapon in their entire list.

Yeah that's really not even remotely similar comparison. An accurate comparison would be if shooting at knight allowed every enemy model in range of their other knight to have a free round of CC on the firing unit before the bullets are fired, but only at 5+, and then me saying "yeah maybe this isn't quite good design when playing against a lot of the shooting armies out there"

Also please show me where I said anything about banning Tau from matched play lmfao I still own a few thousand points myself bud

Ice_can wrote:
It maybe your using a codex with overcosted units or some other factor outwith your control but if half the stuff Dakka Dakka claim is in need of an immediate ban/nerf why aren't these broken units steeling all the top spots at events.

I didn't say anything was in need of a ban or nerf, while Tau does very well in the right hands at events, and there is two Tau players in the top 16 ITC, who are the same people who describe Tau players as being rigid and inflexible in their resolute beliefs of how bad their race is in the face of all logic, and Tau generally attracting the type of player who never develops beyond a poor understanding of the game. There's more Tau mains in the top 16 than IG, for comparison.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 01:56:53


Post by: Peregrine


 SHUPPET wrote:
Call it a bad tactic, but it works well on practically every army not Tau and the ones that don't just jump every single unit out of combat for free. It's not putting all your eggs in one basket, it's a tactic detailed and pushed by players WAY better than you, Matt Root for example goes into great detail on why he takes only a single unit of Genestealers, and he's #1 ITC player, so go ahead and say how it's a bad strategy, but You. Are. Wrong.


Apparently it doesn't work because you're here complaining about how it doesn't work on Tau and armies that can disengage effectively. It sounds like what they've found is a tactic that works on some armies, and now you're complaining because it isn't an automatic win against every army.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 02:04:44


Post by: SHUPPET


 Peregrine wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
Call it a bad tactic, but it works well on practically every army not Tau and the ones that don't just jump every single unit out of combat for free. It's not putting all your eggs in one basket, it's a tactic detailed and pushed by players WAY better than you, Matt Root for example goes into great detail on why he takes only a single unit of Genestealers, and he's #1 ITC player, so go ahead and say how it's a bad strategy, but You. Are. Wrong.


Apparently it doesn't work because you're here complaining about how it doesn't work on Tau and armies that can disengage effectively. It sounds like what they've found is a tactic that works on some armies, and now you're complaining because it isn't an automatic win against every army.

lol yeah thats right, The underlying point of my message is most definitely that a single unit of Genestealers are an automatic win against every single other army in the game, what an OP build, and I'm just complaining because my insta-win strat doesn't work against Tau. How astute of you to uncover that. Eexcellent comprehension as always buddy.

I didn't say it worked on everyone. I specifically said otherwise, I said its a good strategy, but it gets shut down by aspects from other armies that are also really good.



Tau's overwatch is really strong, and the fact that you're genuinely arguing otherwise shows how little you understand this game.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 02:17:23


Post by: Peregrine


 SHUPPET wrote:
lol yeah thats right, The underlying point of my message is most definitely that a single unit of Genestealers are an automatic win against every single other army in the game, what an OP build, and I'm just complaining because my insta-win strat doesn't work against Tau. How astute of you to uncover that. Eexcellent comprehension as always buddy.

Tau's overwatch is really strong, and the fact that you're genuinely arguing otherwise shows how little you understand this game.


Complaining is exactly what you're doing. You complained that Tau overwatch is too strong against single-threat strategies, I pointed out that the problem is a lack of redundancy, and your best response is to claim that it works against other armies so it's really a good strategy and all the PRO 40K GODS OF WARGAMING #1 ITC PLAYERS do it so of course they know best. And you somehow managed to claim that a strategy that depends on getting a single unit into combat is not putting all your eggs in one basket, when it's the very definition of doing so. The fact that a single-threat strategy fails against Tau does not mean that their overwatch is too strong, it means that they need to learn the IG rule that you always take multiple copies of a threat so that one still gets the job done after the others are killed.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 02:33:21


Post by: SHUPPET


 Peregrine wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
lol yeah thats right, The underlying point of my message is most definitely that a single unit of Genestealers are an automatic win against every single other army in the game, what an OP build, and I'm just complaining because my insta-win strat doesn't work against Tau. How astute of you to uncover that. Eexcellent comprehension as always buddy.

Tau's overwatch is really strong, and the fact that you're genuinely arguing otherwise shows how little you understand this game.


Complaining is exactly what you're doing. You complained that Tau overwatch is too strong against single-threat strategies, I pointed out that the problem is a lack of redundancy, and your best response is to claim that it works against other armies so it's really a good strategy and all the PRO 40K GODS OF WARGAMING #1 ITC PLAYERS do it so of course they know best. And you somehow managed to claim that a strategy that depends on getting a single unit into combat is not putting all your eggs in one basket, when it's the very definition of doing so. The fact that a single-threat strategy fails against Tau does not mean that their overwatch is too strong, it means that they need to learn the IG rule that you always take multiple copies of a threat so that one still gets the job done after the others are killed.


The fact that you think because something doesn't work against literally every army in the game therefor its a terrible strat and a bad list, is why you have literally twenty-four thousand posts on dakkadakka and zero high level accolades, while Matt Root is ITC's #1 player with SIX first place finishes in a row at ITC events this year, using the exact strategy I describe, without the threat redundancy you feel is necessary for a unit to be able to have an impact. This is purely your entry level competitive understanding speaking, and is not actually how the game works.



I'm not complaining about anything. I'm saying something is very powerful. I didn't say Tau's overwatch is "too strong", or Tau need a nerf. The only person to say that is you guys. Did you two just see someone saying something positive about Tau and start frothing at the mouth? Remember, I'm the guy who was in here arguing that this thread was nonsense, assault is in a great place, and we do NOT need changes to help it, and I literally play Tau myself. Seems you've just extrapolated a bunch of nonsense based on your own poor understanding of competitive play, and run with it to this spot here.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 02:41:51


Post by: Peregrine


 SHUPPET wrote:
The fact that you think because something doesn't work against literally every army in the game therefor its a terrible strat and a bad list, is why you have literally twenty-four thousand posts on dakkadakka and zero high level accolades, while Matt Root is ITC's #1 player with 6 first place finishes in a row at ITC events this year.


No, the reason I have zero "high level accolades" is because I don't give a about tournament 40k. It's a joke of a game often played in a joke of a tournament structure (see recent events won by blatant slow playing), and I have many better things to do with my money than dump tons of it into traveling to major 40k tournaments. So no, I don't really care about your sad attempt at a dick measuring contest by proxy.

I'm not complaining about anything. I'm saying something is very powerful. I didn't say Tau's overwatch is "too strong", or Tau need a nerf. The only person to say that is you guys. Did you two just see someone saying something positive about Tau and start frothing at the mouth? Remember, I'm the guy who was in here arguing that this thread was nonsense, assault is in a great place, and we do NOT need changes to help it, and I literally play Tau myself. Seems you've just extrapolated a bunch of nonsense based on your own poor understanding of competitive play, and run with it to this spot here.


Now I am confused. You said this:

Most the rest of the armies in the game can easily find Tau's overwatch to be an absurdly difficult wall unless they are able to make multiple assaults in the one turn.

and this:

and maybe because FTGG with 5+ to hit thanks to Sept is a bit absurd

and this:

TAU is the ones using special rules to break the rules of assault to stop that gak with their overwatch wall, not the other way around.

You emphasize how Tau are breaking the rules and it's "absurdly difficult" for most armies to cope with, and explicitly call FTGG on a 5+ "absurd". Now, maybe it's just me, but when I call something "absurd" like that it's generally a statement that it's too good and needs to be changed. Perhaps that's not what you meant, but it's sure the obvious reading of your posts.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 02:51:53


Post by: Insectum7


I read "absurdly difficult unless they are able to make multiple assaults in one turn." Which is a hefty modifier you might be overlooking.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 02:58:08


Post by: SHUPPET


 Peregrine wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
The fact that you think because something doesn't work against literally every army in the game therefor its a terrible strat and a bad list, is why you have literally twenty-four thousand posts on dakkadakka and zero high level accolades, while Matt Root is ITC's #1 player with 6 first place finishes in a row at ITC events this year.


No, the reason I have zero "high level accolades" is because I don't give a about tournament 40k. It's a joke of a game often played in a joke of a tournament structure (see recent events won by blatant slow playing), and I have many better things to do with my money than dump tons of it into traveling to major 40k tournaments. So no, I don't really care about your sad attempt at a dick measuring contest by proxy.

If you don't play this game competitively because it's a joke to you, why are you trying to say that possibly the game's most successful player right now that his successful strategy is bad?

Excuse it however you will, but you are still wrong.



 Peregrine wrote:
I'm not complaining about anything. I'm saying something is very powerful. I didn't say Tau's overwatch is "too strong", or Tau need a nerf. The only person to say that is you guys. Did you two just see someone saying something positive about Tau and start frothing at the mouth? Remember, I'm the guy who was in here arguing that this thread was nonsense, assault is in a great place, and we do NOT need changes to help it, and I literally play Tau myself. Seems you've just extrapolated a bunch of nonsense based on your own poor understanding of competitive play, and run with it to this spot here.


Now I am confused. You said this:

Most the rest of the armies in the game can easily find Tau's overwatch to be an absurdly difficult wall unless they are able to make multiple assaults in the one turn.

and this:

and maybe because FTGG with 5+ to hit thanks to Sept is a bit absurd

and this:

TAU is the ones using special rules to break the rules of assault to stop that gak with their overwatch wall, not the other way around.

You emphasize how Tau are breaking the rules and it's "absurdly difficult" for most armies to cope with, and explicitly call FTGG on a 5+ "absurd". Now, maybe it's just me, but when I call something "absurd" like that it's generally a statement that it's too good and needs to be changed. Perhaps that's not what you meant, but it's sure the obvious reading of your posts.

Perhaps you should actually read through the flow of the conversation before taking singular statements out of context then.


The topic of conversation was literally certain people saying that "assault is weak because it's only ever successful with all it's special rules that break the rules of assault, while all shooty armies need to succeed is a vanilla shooting phase to stop all that".

I countered this by pointing out the highly successful and equally strong shooting special rules that do the same. Overwatch being an ideal example. And for you to argue otherwise and say that a T'au gunline overwatch is actually NOT an absurdly difficult wall of fire to break through by assaulting it with one unit a turn, seems like the exact sort of statements that perpetuate the Tau-player memes.

I do think 5+ Overwatch may be a bit crazy, but I am not at any point asking for nerfs. Then you came in and apparently only caught the tail end of this conversation, and apparently decided I was saying Tau need to be banned from competitive play, and went into rabid downplay mode, when I was literally saying the opposite, that one of the ways a shooting army like Tau can get around some of these crazy assault rules with an absurd overwatch phase of their own.

If you were to ask my ideal vision of the game, well I wouldn't mind a bit of a tone down to both that, and some of the first turn assault opportunities at the same time. But I understand that both sides have crazy strong options here, and at no point did I ask for anything changed, and if you read through this thread, or just filter it to my posts, you will see my stance the entire time has been that assault has a great balance with shooting right now imo.


I'll take your apology whenever you feel like it.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 11:02:15


Post by: Tyel


I think the point is that the rules - assault rules, overwatch rules, falling back etc - place a high barrier on assault units. The result is that there are a lot of assault units which are almost worthless. This is different from say a bad shooting unit - while it might not be optimal it is still likely to do something against something.

A Tau fire base of 1000-1200~ points, hitting on 5+, is a significant obstacle. If you charge it with one unit odds are that unit will disappear or be crippled. This is possible even with 2 units if the Tau player can count reasonably well. Even tougher units have to worry about things like fusion blasters hitting on 5+.

You need to charge in half your army (points wise) in one go - and this can often be difficult to accomplish unless you are lucky on charge rolls. Even still if you just hit a few screening fire warriors its not great consequence, they just walk away next turn.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 11:45:39


Post by: Headlss


Can someone post the great good rule? I have a couple questions.

For instance, can a unit fire greater good over watch if it can see the threat but the unit being charged can't?

Wytches are great against tau. Especially with shard nets. But the fire warriors still have pistols, which is a drag.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 11:55:16


Post by: Ice_can


Headlss wrote:
Can someone post the great good rule? I have a couple questions.

For instance, can a unit fire greater good over watch if it can see the threat but the unit being charged can't?

Wytches are great against tau. Especially with shard nets. But the fire warriors still have pistols, which is a drag.



2 Yes they fire overwatch as if they were also a unit being charged.
Also tau smart missiles don't need line of sight.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 12:21:34


Post by: BaconCatBug


Ice_can wrote:
Everyone complain's that Tau overwatch is silly, I'd like to point out that IG can get +1 when overwatching.

For the Greater Good is powerful but is useless if your being assaulted by half an Aldari Soup list turn 1.
They have no effective CC units to counter charge with, no allies to soup up with for a CC punch.
You do realize T'au Sept overwatch on a 5+?


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/08 15:29:08


Post by: Ice_can


 BaconCatBug wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
Everyone complain's that Tau overwatch is silly, I'd like to point out that IG can get +1 when overwatching.

For the Greater Good is powerful but is useless if your being assaulted by half an Aldari Soup list turn 1.
They have no effective CC units to counter charge with, no allies to soup up with for a CC punch.
You do realize T'au Sept overwatch on a 5+?

Yeah they are one of my armies and mordians over watch on a roll of a 5 and 6 aswell and have bullgrins to countercharger with, not exactlly game breaking when tau have 0 effective CC units
Also plent of armies have relics or otherways to make units imune to overwatch aswell. It also one subfactions bonus, who happen to have most of the useful charictors hence why you see it more commonly than mordians.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/09 06:11:44


Post by: Just Tony


The longer this thread runs on, I'm forced to ask "Why was it necessary to bag on 3rd Ed. when it had nothing really to do with balancing CC in 8.5?"


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/09 08:20:10


Post by: SHUPPET


Ice_can wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
Everyone complain's that Tau overwatch is silly, I'd like to point out that IG can get +1 when overwatching.

For the Greater Good is powerful but is useless if your being assaulted by half an Aldari Soup list turn 1.
They have no effective CC units to counter charge with, no allies to soup up with for a CC punch.
You do realize T'au Sept overwatch on a 5+?

Yeah they are one of my armies

Lol you don't say? I never would have picked it
.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/09 14:03:47


Post by: Spetulhu


 Just Tony wrote:
The longer this thread runs on, I'm forced to ask "Why was it necessary to bag on 3rd Ed. when it had nothing really to do with balancing CC in 8.5?"


If nothing else it serves as a reminder of how powerful assault used to be back then. There was literally nothing a shooting army could do to beat our Deldar player in 3rd - if he got to go first you wouldn't necessarily even get to shoot his troops once, only take a few potshots at Raiders. So we can probably agree that going back to those days would be a bit too much in trying to repair assault?

Getting away from all or nothing options would IMO be good for the game anyway. What's the fun in setting up your models when you know it will be decided by who goes first?



Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/10 06:41:45


Post by: Just Tony


Spetulhu wrote:
 Just Tony wrote:
The longer this thread runs on, I'm forced to ask "Why was it necessary to bag on 3rd Ed. when it had nothing really to do with balancing CC in 8.5?"


If nothing else it serves as a reminder of how powerful assault used to be back then. There was literally nothing a shooting army could do to beat our Deldar player in 3rd - if he got to go first you wouldn't necessarily even get to shoot his troops once, only take a few potshots at Raiders. So we can probably agree that going back to those days would be a bit too much in trying to repair assault?

Getting away from all or nothing options would IMO be good for the game anyway. What's the fun in setting up your models when you know it will be decided by who goes first?



I'm legitimately perplexed at how, barring the DE sitting behind terrain for turns to eliminate possible shooting, none of your armies could handle them. The only army that had a walk over effect on the board was Blood Angels because of the godawful Gav Thorpe rules. Even then, nothing in the book said you HAD to nestle up to the 24" no man's land. Push back 12" from the deployment zone, concentrate fire on Rhinos, profit. Worked for every army, literally. The only hiccups were the AV of the front armor on the Wave Serpent or the Chimera.

Assault wasn't even that massive in 3rd when you think about how few units really had more than 2 attacks on the charge. Even the scariest average HQ choices, discounting Greater Daemons, maxed out at 6 attacks on the charge. Anything more was a rare exception. And the units that DID have a high number of attacks either couldn't be transported in the first place, or was so expensive that it was prohibitive to run them in any decent numbers.

I'm all for ideas to fix what's already wrong with 8th, but using it as a springboard to bash 3rd constantly over misconceptions rather than facts gets my dander up.


Why assault was too powerful in 3rd, and how it can be balanced in 8.5 @ 2018/07/10 13:06:16


Post by: warhead01


 Just Tony wrote:
Spetulhu wrote:
 Just Tony wrote:
The longer this thread runs on, I'm forced to ask "Why was it necessary to bag on 3rd Ed. when it had nothing really to do with balancing CC in 8.5?"


If nothing else it serves as a reminder of how powerful assault used to be back then. There was literally nothing a shooting army could do to beat our Deldar player in 3rd - if he got to go first you wouldn't necessarily even get to shoot his troops once, only take a few potshots at Raiders. So we can probably agree that going back to those days would be a bit too much in trying to repair assault?

Getting away from all or nothing options would IMO be good for the game anyway. What's the fun in setting up your models when you know it will be decided by who goes first?



I'm legitimately perplexed at how, barring the DE sitting behind terrain for turns to eliminate possible shooting, none of your armies could handle them. The only army that had a walk over effect on the board was Blood Angels because of the godawful Gav Thorpe rules. Even then, nothing in the book said you HAD to nestle up to the 24" no man's land. Push back 12" from the deployment zone, concentrate fire on Rhinos, profit. Worked for every army, literally. The only hiccups were the AV of the front armor on the Wave Serpent or the Chimera.

Assault wasn't even that massive in 3rd when you think about how few units really had more than 2 attacks on the charge. Even the scariest average HQ choices, discounting Greater Daemons, maxed out at 6 attacks on the charge. Anything more was a rare exception. And the units that DID have a high number of attacks either couldn't be transported in the first place, or was so expensive that it was prohibitive to run them in any decent numbers.

I'm all for ideas to fix what's already wrong with 8th, but using it as a springboard to bash 3rd constantly over misconceptions rather than facts gets my dander up.


Giving me flash backs to the month I played DE. haha.
Close combat wasn't just about fighting it was about forcing units to fall back and then over run them. And the ..was it..the Cross Fire rule. (I think it was called.)
So my DE would set up a charge but park their transport or another friendly skimmer behind what ever they were going to charge. If they forced a fall back the enemy unit was just destroyed. But it also could be forced with shooting. due to LD neutering weapons and inflicting casualties. 25% was all that was needed and stack a -1 or 2 or what ever it was and it was rare not to force a fall back. Granted there were a lot of things that wouldn't directly work against but you could clear off a lot of enemy units fairly easily.
I guess the larger though is to use every took available.
Blood Angels were tough too. a 24" into combat was not uncommon on turn one.

What I am finding now is I am playing and things feel to me like I am playing an older edition and am using tricks/ doing things that just seem to come from XP from past editions and it's working well.