1. Catachans with Castellan + 9 Bullgryn
2. Kraken/Kronos Nids + GSC (running the Swarmlord, hell yeah!)
3. DE BDE with a single Saim Hann Farseer in an aux supp det.
4. Ynnari/DE/Unaligned CW
5. Custodes Bikes + DKoKCP Battery
6. Chaos Demons - 3x19 Bloodletters, 3x Nurglings, 3x Blightspawn, 2x PBC, Ahriman, 3 squads of cultists and some other stuff
7. Ynnari/Alaitoc/DE 8. DE Patrol det + Alaitoc wraith army. Straight up 40 wraithguard of various flavors.
9. Ynnari/Alaitoc Rangers/Serpents/DIre Avengers/Spears/Reapers
10. Alpha Legion (unreadable)
11. Tau - Mono T'au Sept 3x Riptide, coldstar, commander with 4x CIB, shield drones, 6 stealth suits, 3 strike teams,
12. Cadians (Unavailable)
13. Ynnari/Harlequins/Ulthwe Rangers/Spears/Reapers/Skyweavers/Eldrad
14.Knight Porphyrion/2 helverins + Lamenters Spearhead with 3 x Dev squads and the Lamenter character + Guard CP battery.
15. Alaitoc/Harlequins Rangers/Guardians/Spears/Banshees/Skyweavers/Razorwings
16. Castellan + 2x Gallant + CP Battery + Adeptus Astartes Battalion with Da Librarian/Scouts and a Rune Priest
Highest Orks
21. Green Tide + Battlewagon
Highest Deathwatch
27. Lots of mixed vet squads with 2x Termies and storm bolter/shield vets. Space Wolf caster detachment of Njal and 2x Rune Priests and... Murderfang?
Highest Admech
38. Cawl Ball + Styrix + Onagers + CP battery
Highest Nectons
54. CCB/Cryptek, Immortals 3x5, Overlord, Destroyers 2x5, 6 Tesla Tomb Blades, Gauss Pylon
Highest Grey Knights
77. 3x Interceptor Squad, BA Scout Battalion with smash captains, 3x seraphim, 3x sister squads.
Edit: BCP App is being weird. It just changed a bunch of these despite everyone having 6 games logged. Will revise in a couple hours when it settles down
Edit 2: Let's try this again, list two: electric boogaloo. Also took a closer look at the lists and broke them down a bit more granularly.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Was that Harlequins list primarily Harlequins? I'd definitely be interested in reading the list.
I think this is the list. I have come up with similar lists, although I do not have Shining spears. And sometimes I use prophets of flesh rather than Eldar.
Outrider - frozen stars
Troupe Master - caress
12 haywire skyweavers (9 had zephyr glaives)
Solitare with rose.
Air wing - kabal of the black heart
3 × razorwings with dissies
Battalion - alaitoc
Far seer
Warlock skyrunner
Warlocl conclave
5 rangers
5 rangers
10 guardians
5 howling banshees (this one seems odd) nm not odd, I forgot about the anti over watch.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Was that Harlequins list primarily Harlequins? I'd definitely be interested in reading the list.
I think this is the list. I have come up with similar lists, although I do not have Shining spears. And sometimes I use prophets of flesh rather than Eldar.
Outrider - frozen stars
Troupe Master - caress
12 haywire skyweavers (9 had zephyr glaives)
Solitare with rose.
Air wing - kabal of the black heart
3 × razorwings with dissies
Battalion - alaitoc
Far seer
Warlock skyrunner
Warlocl conclave
5 rangers
5 rangers
10 guardians
5 howling banshees (this one seems odd) nm not odd, I forgot about the anti over watch.
7 shining spears
So a bunch of haywire to knock down knights and dissies to mulch the rest.
Curious to see those guard lists, especially the Cadian one. I've noticed a theme of Catachan lists built around straken melee stuff being some sort of hidden gem and I'm curious to see if the Catachan Brigade is trying something similar. 9 bullgryns definitely seems to imply that. I want to say some London event had a similar idea with blood Angels do quite well back when smash captains were a thing. I'd imagine the Castellan is fulfilling that role now of killing high toughness targets guardsmen and bullgryns struggle with.
No shocker Castellans are still showing up, I'm sure the strat nerfs hurt but they'll continue to be an excellent choice for armies like infantry guard until their points go up.
Daedalus81 wrote: Err this list is different from mine in BCP. I have Daemons at 6 and other differences?
AM Kraken
Kabal
Ynnari
Custodes
Daemons
Ynnari
Alaitoc
Ynnari
Yeah, it changed like literally three times since I started writing the post. It finalized looking like yours so I'm guessing/hoping thats the final results. Dunno why it changed so much though, all the standings had six games accounted for when I started writing.
Why? We're conditioned to be used to it by now. Different models, same faction, same gak, same results. They break all the rules and then get a pass because Tolkien.
meleti wrote: Eldar have insane speed, good in all phases, and good enough durability with minuses and fliers so it's not surprising they will stay good.
It's that last one that really frustrates me. Eldar are not supposed to be durable! They're sold as squishy glass cannons that hit hard but can't take the hit themselves. But GW does the same thing every other goddamn developer does and gives the glass cannon a titanium wall to hide behind because people don't like to see their models die or their HP bars vanish.
As a girl who's always preferred tanks, control decks, stall teams, or whatever else strategy is available to grind down an enemy with superior defense until they have no good options left I've always hated the multitude of get-out-of-jail-free cards that glass cannons seem to get.
meleti wrote: Eldar have insane speed, good in all phases, and good enough durability with minuses and fliers so it's not surprising they will stay good.
It's that last one that really frustrates me. Eldar are not supposed to be durable! They're sold as squishy glass cannons that hit hard but can't take the hit themselves. But GW does the same thing every other goddamn developer does and gives the glass cannon a titanium wall to hide behind because people don't like to see their models die or their HP bars vanish.
*Laughs in wraithbone*
But seriously, if you want to argue what is “supposed to” be, Eldar should be so fast they’re impossible to hit (hmm, perhaps as some sort of penalty to hit) and with tech and materials far bypassing almost any other faction, combined with psychic foresight of what’s going to happen in the future. I think anyone who sees them as “sold as glass cannons” isn’t paying attention or just wants to complain.
But seriously, the issue seems more Ynnari-based than anything else. Also, keep in mind that they’re an army that was already strong and not hit by recent nerfs, so it makes sense they’d have a strong player base right away after the FAQ.
meleti wrote: Eldar have insane speed, good in all phases, and good enough durability with minuses and fliers so it's not surprising they will stay good.
It's that last one that really frustrates me. Eldar are not supposed to be durable! They're sold as squishy glass cannons that hit hard but can't take the hit themselves. But GW does the same thing every other goddamn developer does and gives the glass cannon a titanium wall to hide behind because people don't like to see their models die or their HP bars vanish.
As a girl who's always preferred tanks, control decks, stall teams, or whatever else strategy is available to grind down an enemy with superior defense until they have no good options left I've always hated the multitude of get-out-of-jail-free cards that glass cannons seem to get.
We did the math, and the wave serpent with the fancy engine is considerably tougher than a plague crawler.
meleti wrote: Eldar have insane speed, good in all phases, and good enough durability with minuses and fliers so it's not surprising they will stay good.
It's that last one that really frustrates me. Eldar are not supposed to be durable! They're sold as squishy glass cannons that hit hard but can't take the hit themselves. But GW does the same thing every other goddamn developer does and gives the glass cannon a titanium wall to hide behind because people don't like to see their models die or their HP bars vanish.
*Laughs in wraithbone*
But seriously, if you want to argue what is “supposed to” be, Eldar should be so fast they’re impossible to hit (hmm, perhaps as some sort of penalty to hit) and with tech and materials far bypassing almost any other faction, combined with psychic foresight of what’s going to happen in the future. I think anyone who sees them as “sold as glass cannons” isn’t paying attention or just wants to complain.
But seriously, the issue seems more Ynnari-based than anything else. Also, keep in mind that they’re an army that was already strong and not hit by recent nerfs, so it makes sense they’d have a strong player base right away after the FAQ.
You and I both know that wraith constructs aren't the "durable" units in the Aeldari codexes. If they were I wouldn't have a problem with it.
Let me ask you this: do you think Eldar should be harder to kill than Necrons?
Highest Grey Knights
77. 3x Interceptor Squad, BA Scout Battalion with smash captains, 3x seraphim, 3x sister squads.
were there any GK with GK majority models in it ? Because it looks more like a SoB army with GK and BA ally, then a GK one.
By points, the GK were the biggest faction at 805.
There's only two other players listed as GK, and one doesn't have a list posted. The last place list at 171 if 0-4 with 1470 points of GK and some Admech thrown in for CP.
I would say that's probably a healthier distribution than we had seen pre FAQ2 appart from them being all mostly shooting focused lists at first glance.
That said Aeldari looks like the highest performing group and need looking at.
I'm not surprised by the amount of CP batteries, but the fact that even Admech are taking them says to me that something more fundamental to the units involved to make the loss of synergy with the rest of the list worthwhile.
I would say that CP generation still needs improvements but once Aeldari is addressed that's probably about as closed to balanced as we can expect from th3 current codex's..
I do wonder how much orks will change the meta once they have had time to be able to post some results?
Would be interesting to see if they revisit the Alaitoc trait and change/remove it. Would probably shift the meta away from CWE lists(ynnari is a separate beast that needs addressing).
I'm not surprised by the amount of CP batteries, but the fact that even Admech are taking them says to me that something more fundamental to the units involved to make the loss of synergy with the rest of the list worthwhile.
Well maybe am wrong, and my big tournament expiriance equals the viability of GK, but isnt the foot print of IG for the points they cost something very important, besides the CP they bring? A Castellan doesn't want to get rushed turn 1 by some jetbikers, and IG allows them to do it. Any shoty imperial army benefits from an IG screen.
By points, the GK were the biggest faction at 805.
Ok, I have a different view on that. Having a castellan in the list wouldn't make it a knight list just because it costs 600+pts. It would kind of a suck to see a top GK player prize go to someone who took 700+1point in GK from someone who plays a 2000pts GK army. Although there probablly werent any GK player there, worrying considering the event with almost 200 people should have at least some casual player in it.
The problem is the Knight being a Plug-and-play addition that increases your chances you chance to win and not something you base the list around when building it from the ground...
No where in the codex or the design article was it ever said that grey knight are a plug and play addition to any other codex. If GW wanted GK to be plug and play, they should have left them the way inquisition or assasins are, with no updates.
meleti wrote: Eldar have insane speed, good in all phases, and good enough durability with minuses and fliers so it's not surprising they will stay good.
It's that last one that really frustrates me. Eldar are not supposed to be durable! They're sold as squishy glass cannons that hit hard but can't take the hit themselves. But GW does the same thing every other goddamn developer does and gives the glass cannon a titanium wall to hide behind because people don't like to see their models die or their HP bars vanish.
*Laughs in wraithbone*
But seriously, if you want to argue what is “supposed to” be, Eldar should be so fast they’re impossible to hit (hmm, perhaps as some sort of penalty to hit) and with tech and materials far bypassing almost any other faction, combined with psychic foresight of what’s going to happen in the future. I think anyone who sees them as “sold as glass cannons” isn’t paying attention or just wants to complain.
But seriously, the issue seems more Ynnari-based than anything else. Also, keep in mind that they’re an army that was already strong and not hit by recent nerfs, so it makes sense they’d have a strong player base right away after the FAQ.
Yeah, craftworld eldar was never sold to me as "glass cannon." It was sold as "less effective baseline troops, but tons and tons of specialists who are really good at one thing in particular". Dark Eldar and Harlequins are the "super fast glass cannon". Eldar has always had heavy and medium vehicles (hovertanks, wraiths, etc) and aspects that wear heavy armor as well as speedy aspects.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: No where in the codex or the design article was it ever said that grey knight are a plug and play addition to any other codex. If GW wanted GK to be plug and play, they should have left them the way inquisition or assasins are, with no updates.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, craftworld eldar was never sold to me as "glass cannon." It was sold as "less effective baseline troops, but tons and tons of specialists who are really good at one thing in particular". Dark Eldar and Harlequins are the "super fast glass cannon". Eldar has always had heavy and medium vehicles (hovertanks, wraiths, etc) and aspects that wear heavy armor as well as speedy aspects.
Craftworld Eldar have been a bit of everything through the decades.
There isn't really anything wrong with Eldar forces being "elite" - its just that in edition after edition some units have managed to get the perks without paying for them.
I also feel the "they are specialists" card hasn't really worked since 2nd edition. I mean if your Fire Dragons end up facing down Ork boys thats kind of your fault. Its no different from the Ork Players Tankbustas - your dragons have just typically been "better" (I realise they cost too much now).
But then this is tied up with "Marines are all rounders" which has always been nonsense.
Sort of related to the CA thread - Hellions are a glass cannon, Shining Spears not so much.
Not quite sure why people are praising the variety. But I guess thats what we are calling the many flavours of Soup now.
One thing that I hate that soup does, it makes a singular unit seem OP whereas when played within it's native force, it's just a good unit. In this instance, Skyweavers are now taken to take on armour and knights (due to bypassing void shield), and they do it really well. In a pure Harlequin army they are not really a problem, but will probably get nerfed now because of their use in Aeldari soup. This is not the only example.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, craftworld eldar was never sold to me as "glass cannon." It was sold as "less effective baseline troops, but tons and tons of specialists who are really good at one thing in particular". Dark Eldar and Harlequins are the "super fast glass cannon". Eldar has always had heavy and medium vehicles (hovertanks, wraiths, etc) and aspects that wear heavy armor as well as speedy aspects.
Craftworld Eldar have been a bit of everything through the decades.
There isn't really anything wrong with Eldar forces being "elite" - its just that in edition after edition some units have managed to get the perks without paying for them.
I also feel the "they are specialists" card hasn't really worked since 2nd edition. I mean if your Fire Dragons end up facing down Ork boys thats kind of your fault. Its no different from the Ork Players Tankbustas - your dragons have just typically been "better" (I realise they cost too much now).
But then this is tied up with "Marines are all rounders" which has always been nonsense.
Sort of related to the CA thread - Hellions are a glass cannon, Shining Spears not so much.
Not quite sure why people are praising the variety. But I guess thats what we are calling the many flavours of Soup now.
Still +1 for Lamenters making it.
I understand that this has changed somewhat in recent editions, but at least when I started, Eldar looked like this:
-The guardians, fire prisms, vypers and war walkers (basically, the guardian core units) had flexible upgrades like marines but paid more for being generalists.
-The aspects had one thing they were really good at and were pretty bad when thrown at anything else
Striking scorpions for anti-horde melee
Howling banshees for anti-marine melee
Shining Spears great on the charge bad in sustained fights
fire dragons good vs tanks bad vs other stuff
Spiders good at shooting tough things bad at shooting armor
Dark reapers good at shooting MEQs bad at shooting tanks/infantry
Dire avengers good at shooting infantry bad at shooting tanks because theyre basically an all-bolter unit.
Each Aeldari faction is not especially overpowered on its own bar a couple of slightly under-costed units, its the soup factor + Ynarri that brings it over the line. If they nerf Ynarri & the Alaitoc trait along with soup in general, the power will come down to what it should be.
Good mix of lists I think is a good sign of the meta. Yannari, as always, still needs to be nerfed to a reasonable level (I'm sorry, but free phases with eldar quality units is not okay).
Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
buddha wrote: Good mix of lists I think is a good sign of the meta. Yannari, as always, still needs to be nerfed to a reasonable level (I'm sorry, but free phases with eldar quality units is not okay).
Lots of armies get free phases. The issue is the units.
honestly I hope they make a ynarri codex and actually rebalance cost of units to ynarri specifically. som e units are good but not game breaking as any eldar craftworld or DE coven... but then add in ynarri and they go up to 11. likewise some units in Eldar and DE codex I think are over costed because of what they in theory would be able to do as ynarri.
Xenomancers, I don't want to be combative, but is very old that every time results from a tournament are reported, and they have lists that you don't consider competitive becomes a "Nah I could win agaisnt those lists, those lists suck, my lists are better"
Maybe those list are used in a way that you haven't seen? By experienced players? With a bit of luck for their part being honest?
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Without wanting to be confrontational - what isn't very good about the Tyranid list?
Looks like good units to me.
Be interesting to know if the list went first in most/all of the games.
In fact I wish this was as documented as whether someone went 6-0 or not.
Galas wrote: Xenomancers, I don't want to be combative, but is very old that every time results from a tournament are reported, and they have lists that you don't consider competitive becomes a "Nah I could win agaisnt those lists, those lists suck, my lists are better"
Maybe those list are used in a way that you haven't seen? By experienced players? With a bit of luck for their part being honest?
The nid list is basically spamming geensteelers with swarmlord and malanthrope. This is like...a Teir 3 option out of the nids codex. Seriously - it's not good.
My critique is that the list looks kind of like a casual list to me. So if a casual list can win - you can win with anything.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Without wanting to be confrontational - what isn't very good about the Tyranid list?
Looks like good units to me.
Be interesting to know if the list went first in most/all of the games.
In fact I wish this was as documented as whether someone went 6-0 or not.
It has practically no shooting. Realistically - geenstellers aren't good units.
Plus yeah - if the board is covered with LOS blocking and shooting armies literally can't shoot you - ofc it wins.
I'm not surprised by the amount of CP batteries, but the fact that even Admech are taking them says to me that something more fundamental to the units involved to make the loss of synergy with the rest of the list worthwhile.
Well maybe am wrong, and my big tournament expiriance equals the viability of GK, but isnt the foot print of IG for the points they cost something very important, besides the CP they bring? A Castellan doesn't want to get rushed turn 1 by some jetbikers, and IG allows them to do it. Any shoty imperial army benefits from an IG screen.
By points, the GK were the biggest faction at 805.
Ok, I have a different view on that. Having a castellan in the list wouldn't make it a knight list just because it costs 600+pts. It would kind of a suck to see a top GK player prize go to someone who took 700+1point in GK from someone who plays a 2000pts GK army. Although there probablly werent any GK player there, worrying considering the event with almost 200 people should have at least some casual player in it.
It wouldn't be a Sisters list either, then. Grey Knights seem the best category for it, yeah, I see what you mean. Bringing 668 points of X and 666 points of 2 other factions to get "top X player" seem kind of sad.
Speaking of which, what is our highest placing list? Hopefully higher than the GK-Sisters-BA list.
I think people forget that these lists are winning the missions, not the deathmatch.
I think there is a certain problem with the balance of the game when the units are perhaps balanced for a fight, but not for specific missions that have been created by the ITC folks.
I mean, I see Xenomancer complain about the lists being gak in every single comp thread so my guess is at this point that people are focusing way too much on battle capability of a unit and not its mission effectiveness.
In ITC you can score quite heavily throughout the game resulting in you coming ahead at the end regardless of how many units of you got left. In Eternal War, however, the game favors those who persevere in a fight until the last round is over. Then there is Maelstrom of War which can be so swingy that it also favors very often a killy army.
Eldarsif wrote: I think people forget that these lists are winning the missions, not the deathmatch.
I think there is a certain problem with the balance of the game when the units are perhaps balanced for a fight, but not for specific missions that have been created by the ITC folks.
I mean, I see Xenomancer complain about the lists being gak in every single comp thread so my guess is at this point that people are focusing way too much on battle capability of a unit and not its mission effectiveness.
In ITC you can score quite heavily throughout the game resulting in you coming ahead at the end regardless of how many units of you got left. In Eternal War, however, the game favors those who persevere in a fight until the last round is over. Then there is Maelstrom of War which can be so swingy that it also favors very often a killy army.
There is nothing in ether the second or third placing lists that makes them exceptionally good at missions (except perhaps the malanthrope). In fact there are a lot of things that suggest they wouldn't be...such as...naked khabs and rangers being your only objective grabbers - nether being fast or particularly survivable. (Khabs in venoms or gardians in WS...okay - now we can talk about strong at the mission) Where are the venoms??? 1 WS???. Geensteelers are at the low end of objective grabbing spectrum - they are expensive - and they aren't survivable - and once more if they are capping objectives they literally aren't doing anything else.
Trying to have honest discussion here.
Serious question - how do you win a GT with 1 dedicated shooting unit? Vs armies that probably have 10+ dedicated shooting units.
How to you win on objectives with poor objective holding units? Against armies with indirect fire and strong objective holders.
If you consistently see lists you think are weak winning major events maybe its not that the lists are weak but that your missing whats going on.
How does that Tyranid list win objectives? By parking Rippers on their objectives and Genestealers on yours.
Wanne shoot your stuff at the Rippers? Thats fine, more Genestealers will get to your lines and control your objectives while you hold none.
Ordana wrote: If you consistently see lists you think are weak winning major events maybe its not that the lists are weak but that your missing whats going on.
How does that Tyranid list win objectives? By parking Rippers on their objectives and Genestealers on yours.
Wanne shoot your stuff at the Rippers? Thats fine, more Genestealers will get to your lines and control your objectives while you hold none.
Okay - so to win at 40k - just throw melle units into opponents side of the table and cap objectives with min units?
The Nid list surrenders the units killed bonus in exchange for the objective bonus. The game the becomes about secondaries. Reaper counts models, so rippers help there. The list might bleed out on butcher's bill, though. It's unconventional, and it worked THIS time.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
buddha wrote: Good mix of lists I think is a good sign of the meta. Yannari, as always, still needs to be nerfed to a reasonable level (I'm sorry, but free phases with eldar quality units is not okay).
Lots of armies get free phases. The issue is the units.
B.c thats all you need, if you shut down certain units and win over objectives/VP you dont need to kill everything, ITC has 2ndaries that only 1 player can get, you need to get those to win.
The Swarmlord with Tyrant guard will make sure it doesnt die, force a turn 1 and turn 2 charge or VP denier/claimer, along with turn 2 GSC forcing the player to shoot there own unit, and meleeing along with the DSing of Rippers. Kraken is fast, you win on speed and 2ndaries, Guard cant shoot and kill more units if you kill them all turn 1 and 2, giving you more kills for those 1 time only VPs.
Rippers will never get touched due to size/floor 1 rules, etc.. so they can hold onto objectives all game.
Ordana wrote: If you consistently see lists you think are weak winning major events maybe its not that the lists are weak but that your missing whats going on.
How does that Tyranid list win objectives? By parking Rippers on their objectives and Genestealers on yours.
Wanne shoot your stuff at the Rippers? Thats fine, more Genestealers will get to your lines and control your objectives while you hold none.
Okay - so to win at 40k - just throw melle units into opponents side of the table and cap objectives with min units?
depends on the mission, but... yea
honestly even my take all comers ork list will not have too big of an issue in most games vs that Tyranid list... but nobody is bringing my take all comers battlewagon boys list to high level play either (honestly I think my blue tide foot marines list could also beat it). I can see compared to the competitive lists going now how it is doing well.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Ok. When are you going to go and dominate tournaments with your superior tyranid force?
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Ok. When are you going to go and dominate tournaments with your superior tyranid force?
I think I said...My casual list (in which i deliberately take weaker choices so my mates and I can have fun games) would beat this list.
The uber nids list I run would beat this with paractically 0 effort. Geenstellers vs Dakka fex is pretty gakking 1 sided in my experience.
Crimson Devil wrote: Maybe a Mod can change the title to "Xenomancer brags about stuff"
I'm not sure how you can construe this as bragging. I'm literally talking about unit selection and army design. I'm not a factor in any of this. I'm simply trying to describe how far down the list of common agreed upon things among tyranid players. Like...Mass geensteelers and swarmlord doesn't work. My uber nids list probably isn't even the best nids list. It's just ALOT better than this list.
Crimson Devil wrote: Maybe a Mod can change the title to "Xenomancer brags about stuff"
I'm not sure how you can construe this as bragging. I'm literally talking about unit selection and army design. I'm not a factor in any of this. I'm simply trying to describe how far down the list of common agreed upon things among tyranid players. Like...Mass geensteelers and swarmlord doesn't work. My uber nids list probably isn't even the best nids list. It's just ALOT better than this list.
Maybe you could offer insight into how you think the list got so far then.
Because "it can't work, it sucks, my dakkafex list would a-move win" isn't really adding anything.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Ok. When are you going to go and dominate tournaments with your superior tyranid force?
I think I said...My casual list (in which i deliberately take weaker choices so my mates and I can have fun games) would beat this list.
The uber nids list I run would beat this with paractically 0 effort. Geenstellers vs Dakka fex is pretty gakking 1 sided in my experience.
That's not really fair.
There's been a lot of talk about Kraken nids brewing since the FAQ. They're looking like serious contenders in the competitive meta. These lists are pretty much only running max strength Hive Guard for shooting.
It is an extremely high skill type of list though, positioning has to be perfect to pull it off, which might be why it looks weak. But it's really not.
I'm talking about melee heavy Nids in general here mind, there were some oddities in this specific list. Tyrant Guard!?!?
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
Why do we need to talk about it? CA isnt out yet, and some CP nerf only hurts mono not soup. We all know this, we all know they are good, we all know to wait for CA.
I'd rather talk about 2nd place nids as its more interesting, tho he also didnt fight any Ig/Knights lists.
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
That's because the biggest offenders of Aeldari have been addressed in many ways. Vect increased to 4 CP, No deepstrike on turn 1, Dark Reapers gone up in points, Flip-Belts not allowing you to jump over models, and even Farseers and Warlocks have gone up in price(none-Skyrunner that is).
Don't get me wrong, Aeldari soup is still super strong, but it has already taken several hits over the year and I wouldn't be surprised if it took more hits when CA2018 comes out.
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
Not really.
CA might slap another 100 points on the Castellan, and he's probably still going to win LVO (and yes, I know, Brandon lost the Castellan turn 1 in the final game .. still forced the Eldar guy to shoot everything and over-extend himself).
No surprises there.
He'd probably need an 300 to 400 point hike to be mathematically roughly equal in damage & resiliance to, say, Predators or something, point for point, which will never happen.
And Guardsman desperately need another 1-2 point, probably more a 4 point hike to be evenly balanced with power armour infantry, which will also never happen.
So whatever. It'll remain broken for a while (which doesn't mean other things out there might not need adjustments also).
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
Not really.
CA might slap another 100 points on the Castellan, and he's probably still going to win LVO (and yes, I know, Brandon lost the Castellan turn 1 in the final game .. still forced the Eldar guy to shoot everything and over-extend himself).
No surprises there.
He'd probably need an 300 to 400 point hike to be mathematically roughly equal in damage & resiliance to, say, Predators or something, point for point, which will never happen.
And Guardsman desperately need another 1-2 point, probably more a 4 point hike to be evenly balanced with power armour infantry, which will also never happen.
So whatever. It'll remain broken for a while (which doesn't mean other things out there might not need adjustments also).
]
A proposal for 8 point guardsmen... You can't even make a anti-guard strawman when this is the type of gak that gets posted here on the regular.
Guardsmen are like kryptonite to Dakka posters. You're not allowed to get close to them without deploying "THEY NEED TO COST X OR Y MORE POINTS" or else they'll steal your strength and unpaint your armies.
bullyboy wrote: One thing that I hate that soup does, it makes a singular unit seem OP whereas when played within it's native force, it's just a good unit. In this instance, Skyweavers are now taken to take on armour and knights (due to bypassing void shield), and they do it really well. In a pure Harlequin army they are not really a problem, but will probably get nerfed now because of their use in Aeldari soup. This is not the only example.
Soup isn’t to blame for a unit seeming OP. An OP unit is the reason a unit is seen as OP.
If a unit is OP in a soup list it is almost always OP in a mono list. The soup aspect often just highlights those OP units because competitive soup lists by their very nature aim to take the best units from a multitude of dexes.
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
It's because the standings in the OP were incorrect originally. Not sure if it was because of an error in the app or something but at first it looked like AM didn't place at all.
bullyboy wrote: One thing that I hate that soup does, it makes a singular unit seem OP whereas when played within it's native force, it's just a good unit. In this instance, Skyweavers are now taken to take on armour and knights (due to bypassing void shield), and they do it really well. In a pure Harlequin army they are not really a problem, but will probably get nerfed now because of their use in Aeldari soup. This is not the only example.
Soup isn’t to blame for a unit seeming OP. An OP unit is the reason a unit is seen as OP.
If a unit is OP in a soup list it is almost always OP in a mono list. The soup aspect often just highlights those OP units because competitive soup lists by their very nature aim to take the best units from a multitude of dexes.
This isn't true though. It would only be true if there was zero cross faction synergy - either explicitly or implicitly.
A Knight with bags of CP for instance is a lot better than a Knight without.
Harlequin bikers especially benefit from doom when it comes to taking down Knights.
Etc.
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
Go on Twitch, look for FrontlineGaming, watch the game.
The 'Obviously-OP' eldar soup killed the Castellan turn 1 and then was powerless as all the Guard hid inside building outside of 1 inch of the wall so they could not be shot or charged while 3 Hellhounds suicide exploded into the eldar army.
The table was 100% the reason that Guard list won. If the Eldar could shoot and charge as normal they could (would) have won the tournament.
I'm trying to understand the combo with Straken + 9 Bullgryns. Is he giving the Bullgryns +1A with Straken ? They don't have the Catachan keyword, this shouldn't work.
Aaranis wrote: I'm trying to understand the combo with Straken + 9 Bullgryns. Is he giving the Bullgryns +1A with Straken ? They don't have the Catachan keyword, this shouldn't work.
The Priest buffs the Bullgryns + the Guard.
Straken further buffs the Guard.
Aaranis wrote: I'm trying to understand the combo with Straken + 9 Bullgryns. Is he giving the Bullgryns +1A with Straken ? They don't have the Catachan keyword, this shouldn't work.
The Priest buffs the Bullgryns + the Guard.
Straken further buffs the Guard.
So it allows the bullgryns to output 39x S5 attacks? And all of the guardsmen to swing 3 times each? I'm not very familiar with IG.
Nope, only the Priest buffs the Bullgryn. It's something like 5 attacks each on the charge with 6 on the Bone 'ead. So 45 STR 7 AP-1 2D attacks that hit on 3's on the charge. That's 10 avg damage on a Knight or 10 dead MEQ if someone was taking a squad of 10 MEQ for some weird reason. 15 D to a Predator equivalent though, so that's nice.
Bullgryns as is are pretty damn strong though, although I think the latest faq changed their shields somewhat (I think it just explicitly stated the +2 shield does not boost invulnerable saves, but not 100% on that).
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
Go on Twitch, look for FrontlineGaming, watch the game.
The 'Obviously-OP' eldar soup killed the Castellan turn 1 and then was powerless as all the Guard hid inside building outside of 1 inch of the wall so they could not be shot or charged while 3 Hellhounds suicide exploded into the eldar army.
The table was 100% the reason that Guard list won. If the Eldar could shoot and charge as normal they could (would) have won the tournament.
I 100% agree with this, from watching bits of the stream and seeing the table setup. I can’t comment on whether or not all tables were setup like this though.
The stream table had a lot of buildings that were classed as ruins by a lot of people. If the buildings had been classed as being impassable and the “ruins” being the more traditional style of well… ruined building… Then things could have been different. It reminds me of a game I played at an event in July where every terrain piece was essentially a big open building and all my opponent had to do was hide everything inside and be “1” away from the walls”. It is also why, now, whenever I run my Knights, I go for 3 Ironstorm pods and usually a few mortar teams just to ignore LoS.
However, what I personally don’t like, more than all the “I’m in a “ruin” you can’t shoot me for the rest of the game” thing is, all the “this is my intent” that got thrown around in the few games I watched. Sure, if the aim is to be just over 1” away from the building edge, then, make sure you are. It’s just lazy otherwise and deliberately removes any potential counter play from the opponent. Sometimes I wonder how many times “my intent” gets around something not being physically possible in a game of 40k. Sure, it takes a bit of extra time to do and check, but, it’s not exactly difficult to make happen. Sure, intent is perfectly fine to state, and if you tell me your intent is to be 6” from x and 5.9” from y, then, I’d help you measure it out super quick and easy so everything is as it should be. Maybe it is one of the side effects of chess clocks and timed events, with people trying to save as much time as possible.
If all the tables were like the top table, I can 100% see how the Nid player was able to keep a lot of the army alive early on, to then be in a position to just tie everything up. I imagine the same can be said for the 40 Wraith Eldar army. Durability and point cost is irrelevant if you can’t be targeted in the first place.
Ordana wrote: ...and then was powerless as all the Guard hid inside building outside of 1 inch of the wall so they could not be shot or charged
That sounds remarkably stupid :/
It's frustrating, BUT, if you're models are on 25mm bases, you can actually still charge the unit hiding in the building, as 1” is 25.4mm, so, the models will fit. Of course, if you’re rocking 32mm bases then you’ve got no chance unfortunately.
Automatically Appended Next Post: But then, you have people that’ll try to decide pre-game that the walls are 5mm thick regardless of them only being 2-3mm thick, so you then go back to not being able to charge them.
It's frustrating, BUT, if you're models are on 25mm bases, you can actually still charge the unit hiding in the building, as 1” is 25.4mm, so, the models will fit. Of course, if you’re rocking 32mm bases then you’ve got no chance unfortunately.
This explains why Ork players at my go to store are anything but thrilled. In this case literally making charges impossible is quite frankly extremely annoying.
As for the tables it seems like the logical conclusion that clutered tables seem to favour units which don't want to get shot at and do decently in melee, probably also why that genestealer list was successfull.
My question now is, were all the tables identical? Or were there differences and how massive were they?
Because that would give us more insight then the lists themselves.
It's frustrating, BUT, if you're models are on 25mm bases, you can actually still charge the unit hiding in the building, as 1” is 25.4mm, so, the models will fit. Of course, if you’re rocking 32mm bases then you’ve got no chance unfortunately.
This explains why Ork players at my go to store are anything but thrilled. In this case literally making charges impossible is quite frankly extremely annoying.
As for the tables it seems like the logical conclusion that clutered tables seem to favour units which don't want to get shot at and do decently in melee, probably also why that genestealer list was successfull.
My question now is, were all the tables identical? Or were there differences and how massive were they?
Because that would give us more insight then the lists themselves.
Most ITC events tend to have a table standard, especially at FLG held events, however, I don’t know how good the tables were beyond the 1 we saw on the stream. I expect they were pretty similar, but, a stream table is always a showcase table so likely would have been pushed up to the max.
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
Go on Twitch, look for FrontlineGaming, watch the game.
The 'Obviously-OP' eldar soup killed the Castellan turn 1 and then was powerless as all the Guard hid inside building outside of 1 inch of the wall so they could not be shot or charged while 3 Hellhounds suicide exploded into the eldar army.
The table was 100% the reason that Guard list won. If the Eldar could shoot and charge as normal they could (would) have won the tournament.
Epic. Almost as good as the kroot wall my friend showed me once.
skchsan wrote: So literally no one here is talking about why AM + flavor of the month netted 1st place again in a major tournament?
Why the "obviously-OP" eldar soup STILL couldn't beat this list?
Go on Twitch, look for FrontlineGaming, watch the game.
The 'Obviously-OP' eldar soup killed the Castellan turn 1 and then was powerless as all the Guard hid inside building outside of 1 inch of the wall so they could not be shot or charged while 3 Hellhounds suicide exploded into the eldar army.
The table was 100% the reason that Guard list won. If the Eldar could shoot and charge as normal they could (would) have won the tournament.
Theres the ITC house rules for you. Make units indestructible so the best army can't win.
I feel like a lot of these matches are decided by the terrain and not who's driving the army or what the army contains.
With the right terrain you don't need a house rule that breaks the game.
Gotta be honest - if someone tried to pull some nonsense like the above story on me. I'd just start packing up. I'd let them know how I felt about them abusing a made up rule.
What is stupid is reasonable TO would make sure that every building has a door or something so this cant happen.
With the right terrain you don't need a house rule that breaks the game.
Gotta be honest - if someone tried to pull some nonsense like the above story on me. I'd just start packing up. I'd let them know how I felt about them abusing a made up rule.
What is stupid is reasonable TO would make sure that every building has a door or something so this cant happen.
So very much this. I could understand and potentially live with some kind of enhanced cover that imparts additional saves / hit penalties, but a flat out "nope, I R INVINCIBLE!!!!1!!"?
Crimson wrote: Please, someone explain to me how this untouchable guardsmen in a building thing happens. I'm not familiar with ITC.
units inside an enclosed building are (obviously) out of LoS.
Many models are not allowed to enter buildings (like Bikes or Monsters). So if I am inside the building and more then 1" from the wall (so a unit outside cannot be within melee range) I can not be shot at unless it ignores LoS and can't be charged by certain unit types units (like Shining Spears).
Crimson wrote: Please, someone explain to me how this untouchable guardsmen in a building thing happens. I'm not familiar with ITC.
Essentially, to make a successful charge you have to end within 1” of the target unit.
By putting a squad inside of a ruin/building, but keeping them 1.1” away from the wall the opponent can’t complete the charge because they can’t finish their move inside a wall and thus can’t place their model. You can do this even more so if the “wall” of the ruin is stated to be something stupid like 0.5” thick. This means you only need to be 0.51” away from the inside edge of the wall and then nothing can complete a charge, regardless of base size.
It’s worth noting though, in the first example with a “normal sized” wall, models on 25mm bases should normally be able to fit physically and thus can complete the charge. But then, you can get into arguments about “intent” if a player tries to declare it – so I’d advise to generally tell them you accept their intent BUT it is up to them to place their models correctly, as, if they don’t and it gives you an opportunity to charge, you can still charge.
This is applicable across all styles of play, not just the ITC as it is all surrounding how terrain and charges work.
Crimson wrote: Please, someone explain to me how this untouchable guardsmen in a building thing happens. I'm not familiar with ITC.
units inside an enclosed building are (obviously) out of LoS.
Many models are not allowed to enter buildings (like Bikes or Monsters). So if I am inside the building and more then 1" from the wall (so a unit outside cannot be within melee range) I can not be shot at unless it ignores LoS and can't be charged by certain unit types units (like Shining Spears).
The only thing I will say on buildings, is that most events don’t use any rules for “buildings” and instead either class them as “ruins” or “impassable”. As such, bikes and monsters etc CAN enter them and charge units inside of them just as long as they finish their move on the “ground” floor (unless they have FLY).
I feel like a lot of these matches are decided by the terrain and not who's driving the army or what the army contains.
This is not an inaccurate reflection of many of the most pivotal battles in human history
To be fair, the basic rules for terrain in 8E are...abysmally thin to begin with and need more fleshing out. The terrain rules were gimmicky in this instance, but should have been no surprise to anyone at this level of competition. Certainly no less gimmicky than shennanigans with characters.
Eldarsif wrote: But the charging unit could hypothetically run around the wall/building to finish the charge or am I misunderstanding the situation?
They put 1-2 units inside and wall off the entire inside of the building so it cannot be entered. If they have a mortars or two inside they can continue to fire it as it doesn't need LoS, and they also then cannot be killed themselves in the process.
If the table doesn't have an open side to the building (they always should, imo) then you basically can't do anything since your base doesn't let you fit.
Eldarsif wrote: But the charging unit could hypothetically run around the wall/building to finish the charge or am I misunderstanding the situation?
If there is space behind them/to the side of them and the unit inside has left space, then yes, they can still be charged if the charge roll is big enough. The problem is though, a lot of ruins and builds can easily be filled out with just 10 guardsmen or a couple of units of space marine scouts.
It's only of the reasons why fly in the assault phase needs to come back imo, as right now you have no way of getting over the unit into the space in the middle (if there is space)
Correct, they absolutely should not have terrain that allows this. Unfortunately, FLG actively creates and sells Terrain that allows this, so that's unlikely for their major events. I can guarantee you'll be seeing people doing it at the LVO if no changes are made to your ability to do this.
Tyel wrote: I think the answer is just to not have terrain like this.
Its a bit like the 0" charge. If you didn't have buildings where models can perch batman style then step off it wouldn't need a rule.
It’s potentially an answer yes – basically ensure that if the terrain piece is representing a ruin, it must always have at least 1 of the 4 walls “ruined”.
However, that is a harder thing to roll out across the board, especially with all the different pieces of terrain and terrain companies out there, than say, “in the assault phase, if a unit can FLY it may move over models in the unit it is charging.”
If match play rules were to say “if a building has all 4 walls intact and is outside of either players deployment zone it is considered to have been barricaded up by the owners and is classed as impassable terrain for the purpose of movement” then we could see some potential changes. I’d leave access open for buildings in each deployment zone as it represents the armies having the “time” during deployment to smash and blast their way inside.
I WOULD however also make another change to any building with a "roof" with the following -
"If a unit is inside of a building with a roof, weapons that do not require line of sight to be fired can only be fired if the bearer has line of sight to their target."
All this "it has a roof but i can still shoot 3 mortars out through the solid roof" is BS and needs changing.
Eldarsif wrote: But the charging unit could hypothetically run around the wall/building to finish the charge or am I misunderstanding the situation?
They put 1-2 units inside and wall off the entire inside of the building so it cannot be entered. If they have a mortars or two inside they can continue to fire it as it doesn't need LoS, and they also then cannot be killed themselves in the process.
If the table doesn't have an open side to the building (they always should, imo) then you basically can't do anything since your base doesn't let you fit.
However you can't not make a wall of models exactly block out a 25mm based model due to the nature of round bases, either they have to be closer to the wall to prevent a model making it into the space and hence can be attacked from outside or they are further back and a model should be able to fit between two other models and the wall.
Much like how you can get 4 ranks of 25mm bases to fight.
Also fly used to get you past this untill GW's no flying outside the movement phase knee jerk nerf.
Eldarsif wrote: But the charging unit could hypothetically run around the wall/building to finish the charge or am I misunderstanding the situation?
They put 1-2 units inside and wall off the entire inside of the building so it cannot be entered. If they have a mortars or two inside they can continue to fire it as it doesn't need LoS, and they also then cannot be killed themselves in the process.
If the table doesn't have an open side to the building (they always should, imo) then you basically can't do anything since your base doesn't let you fit.
However you can't not make a wall of models exactly block out a 25mm based model due to the nature of round bases, either they have to be closer to the wall to prevent a model making it into the space and hence can be attacked from outside or they are further back and a model should be able to fit between two other models and the wall.
Much like how you can get 4 ranks of 25mm bases to fight.
Also fly used to get you past this untill GW's no flying outside the movement phase knee jerk nerf.
Kdash wrote: By putting a squad inside of a ruin/building, but keeping them 1.1” away from the wall the opponent can’t complete the charge because they can’t finish their move inside a wall and thus can’t place their model.
Well we've been playing that 'wrong' locally then, as we just declare wobbly model syndrome and carry on.
Cephalobeard wrote: Correct, they absolutely should not have terrain that allows this. Unfortunately, FLG actively creates and sells Terrain that allows this, so that's unlikely for their major events. I can guarantee you'll be seeing people doing it at the LVO if no changes are made to your ability to do this.
Wasn't the rule brought in to existance, along side the terrain, because eldar were blowing everything up turn one with how GW terrain rules worked?
Now I get that an eldar player, may not like the fact that this is a hard counter to his army, but until eldar players make up the majority of all players, they are going to have to live with the fact that rules aren't put in to tournaments to help the minority to have fun.
Cephalobeard wrote: Correct, they absolutely should not have terrain that allows this. Unfortunately, FLG actively creates and sells Terrain that allows this, so that's unlikely for their major events. I can guarantee you'll be seeing people doing it at the LVO if no changes are made to your ability to do this.
Are you serious? That's super dishonest of them.
I don't think that's fair. They've been producing the terrain (both in damaged and non-damaged versions) for far longer than you've been able to do things, and certainly before fly was nerfed to not allow dynamic charges.
Cephalobeard wrote: Correct, they absolutely should not have terrain that allows this. Unfortunately, FLG actively creates and sells Terrain that allows this, so that's unlikely for their major events. I can guarantee you'll be seeing people doing it at the LVO if no changes are made to your ability to do this.
Are you serious? That's super dishonest of them.
I don't think that's fair. They've been producing the terrain (both in damaged and non-damaged versions) for far longer than you've been able to do things, and certainly before fly was nerfed to not allow dynamic charges.
It's just an unfortunate side effect.
Yes, it's a bit ridiculous to allow non-LOS weapons to be fired inside a box at full BS. At the very least they need -hit modifiers.
I'd propose something similar to the old forest rules of 4th edition, where you can see into the forest, but not through he forest to the other side.
A slight modification of that would still allow LOS to be drawn through non-solid walls into the building (therefore reasonable positioning would allow troops inside to be shot at), but it would still allow for units to be out of LOS behind the building.
This ought to stop the "no-charge allowable" scenario since you could inflict casualties to the unit inside and get a foothold for assault, but still allow for units to hide from shooting effectively during the game by being behind the structure.
Kind of putting them in a lose/lose scenario there, no?
On one hand they make it so firing out of an area without LoS is at a penalty, but on the other they're now actually house ruling things even further, which also makes people mad.
A bit of nuance is likely easier, by just expanding the ruins definition which allows infantry to move through walls to count as being able to "wobbly model" through them for the purpose of charges, which just completely negates this behavior.
The person who posted the third place list got it wrong. It is not a Ynnari list, it was a Brigade of DE with 1 farseer as an auxiliary.
And Brandon Grandt is a great player, who has been winning events with his Catachan guard all year. GTs - and now a major. The only thing he's changed is he's dropped a tallarn shadowsword for a castellan, as a result of the FAQ changing DS.
Guard being underpowered is fake news. And you don't see essentially mono-knights (knights + min guard) because everyone made it their mission to have an answer to knights.
Vaktathi wrote: No-los weapons should not be allowed to fire from within an enclosed building, firing a mortar into the ceiling is not going to be healthy
I feel like a lot of these matches are decided by the terrain and not who's driving the army or what the army contains.
This is not an inaccurate reflection of many of the most pivotal battles in human history
To be fair, the basic rules for terrain in 8E are...abysmally thin to begin with and need more fleshing out. The terrain rules were gimmicky in this instance, but should have been no surprise to anyone at this level of competition. Certainly no less gimmicky than shennanigans with characters.
Yeah but in real life hiding in a building doesn't make you immune to damage from demolishes cannons...or even grenades - it actually would increase the damage you take. In real life you can shoot through windows too. I'm more speaking about the artificial ITC rule and not the presence of terrain features which should play a roll - just not in stupid ways like this. This is a mockery of the game. Almost as bad as 50 foot tall titans not being able to assault the roof of a building they could probably step over or walk through - or flying units not being able to assault the second floor of a building.
IMO - with the level of idiotic rules in regards to the above - placing terrain on a board that invites these situations is foolhardy and takes away any semblance of competition.
Vaktathi wrote: No-los weapons should not be allowed to fire from within an enclosed building, firing a mortar into the ceiling is not going to be healthy
I feel like a lot of these matches are decided by the terrain and not who's driving the army or what the army contains.
This is not an inaccurate reflection of many of the most pivotal battles in human history
To be fair, the basic rules for terrain in 8E are...abysmally thin to begin with and need more fleshing out. The terrain rules were gimmicky in this instance, but should have been no surprise to anyone at this level of competition. Certainly no less gimmicky than shennanigans with characters.
Yeah but in real life hiding in a building doesn't make you immune to damage from demolishes cannons...or even grenades - it actually would increase the damage you take. In real life you can shoot through windows too. I'm more speaking about the artificial ITC rule and not the presence of terrain features which should play a roll - just not in stupid ways like this. This is a mockery of the game. Almost as bad as 50 foot tall titans not being able to assault the roof of a building they could probably step over or walk through - or flying units not being able to assault the second floor of a building.
IMO - with the level of idiotic rules in regards to the above - placing terrain on a board that invites these situations is foolhardy and takes away any semblance of competition.
Agreed. Ruins & multi-level terrains need to be limited to city-fight rules or kill team only.
Area terrain also needs to be reworked heavily IMO.
Ruins protecting line of sight from every angle shouldn't be a thing. And, also, they shouldn't be in the center of the table. My 2c. LOS blockers with cover are acceptable but you should always be able to move into a position to draw LOS from outside the building.
But that said, varied terrain makes the game interesting. Playing on a bowling ball you'd see the same armies win.
And this AM list is not a surprise, it's been dominating for some time, he's just changed from a shadowsword to a castellan.
Crimson wrote: Please, someone explain to me how this untouchable guardsmen in a building thing happens. I'm not familiar with ITC.
This isn’t ITC. Its rules of the game.
- You need to be within 1 inch to perform a melee attack.
- If you have enough guardsmen it is possible to be at 1.1 distance from the wall, and if you fill in the perimeter of the building, your basically un-killable.
- You can’t be seen as the wall is there. So no shots.
- You can’t be charged as there is not enough room for a model to be in the 1 inch on the inside of the wall without overlap of the base. And so no melee. And if they can’t come in they are out of Melee range.
At that point, If you have Mortars, put them in the center, and keep killing as you laugh in F.U.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
Crimson wrote: Please, someone explain to me how this untouchable guardsmen in a building thing happens. I'm not familiar with ITC.
This isn’t ITC. Its rules of the game.
- You need to be within 1 inch to perform a melee attack.
- If you have enough guardsmen it is possible to be at 1.1 distance from the wall, and if you fill in the perimeter of the building, your basically un-killable.
- You can’t be seen as the wall is there. So no shots.
- You can’t be charged as there is not enough room for a model to be in the 1 inch on the inside of the wall without overlap of the base. And so no melee. And if they can’t come in they are out of Melee range.
At that point, If you have Mortars, put them in the center, and keep killing as you laugh in F.U.
Correct, however, this problem is present because ITC has "closed-in" buildings where you can't draw line of sight into the building from any side. That's the problem. I don't think any GW terrain is closed-in buildings by default.
Not Online!!! wrote: Honestly mortars should not be able to be fired when A: they have a roof over them and B: the target has a roof over them.
Simply put, common sense.
Or just get rid of any instances where that could even be a problem. The whole ruleset enabling "well my units suck in melee so I'm going to place them where they can't be reached" is extremely poor game mechanic that needs to go out the window.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
Not Online!!! wrote: Honestly mortars should not be able to be fired when A: they have a roof over them and B: the target has a roof over them.
Simply put, common sense.
Also units inside a building should not be able to control an objective. As there is a rule that says objectives cannot be placed inside of buildings.
Crimson wrote: Please, someone explain to me how this untouchable guardsmen in a building thing happens. I'm not familiar with ITC.
This isn’t ITC. Its rules of the game.
- You need to be within 1 inch to perform a melee attack.
- If you have enough guardsmen it is possible to be at 1.1 distance from the wall, and if you fill in the perimeter of the building, your basically un-killable.
- You can’t be seen as the wall is there. So no shots.
- You can’t be charged as there is not enough room for a model to be in the 1 inch on the inside of the wall without overlap of the base. And so no melee. And if they can’t come in they are out of Melee range.
At that point, If you have Mortars, put them in the center, and keep killing as you laugh in F.U.
Correct, however, this problem is present because ITC has "closed-in" buildings where you can't draw line of sight into the building from any side. That's the problem. I don't think any GW terrain is closed-in buildings by default.
I'm not aware of any GW terrain defaults. ITC has specific terrain, but none of it exists as a new "ITC only Terrain" its just a codification of take these things from the games rules.
Like several issues, I wish it was fixed with Flamer weapons. Make them not need LOS. And make them do 1D6 shots per 5 models in target unit.
Crimson wrote: Please, someone explain to me how this untouchable guardsmen in a building thing happens. I'm not familiar with ITC.
This isn’t ITC. Its rules of the game.
- You need to be within 1 inch to perform a melee attack.
- If you have enough guardsmen it is possible to be at 1.1 distance from the wall, and if you fill in the perimeter of the building, your basically un-killable.
- You can’t be seen as the wall is there. So no shots.
- You can’t be charged as there is not enough room for a model to be in the 1 inch on the inside of the wall without overlap of the base. And so no melee. And if they can’t come in they are out of Melee range.
At that point, If you have Mortars, put them in the center, and keep killing as you laugh in F.U.
The part that is ITC is the immunity to shooting. Which is the real problem - this is a shooting game.
The magic bunker thing is daft as hell, if a piece of terrain completely blocks LoS then units shouldn't be allowed inside it.
Insectum7 wrote: I'd propose something similar to the old forest rules of 4th edition, where you can see into the forest, but not through he forest to the other side.
Our group pretty much does this when we're playing on tables with bad or sub-par terrain -- you can see into and out of the terrain freely, but not through to the other side. The terrain just becomes an abstract area, and it's easy enough to imagine holes being blown through the ruined walls of a building for those who are concerned with the "realism" of which miniatures are visible in the terrain. We have a quick chat beforehand about what terrain pieces it's sensible to apply this to. TLoS is fine when the terrain has been built with it in mind, but this house rule is handy when the terrain available would otherwise just serve as armour buffs with no other impact on LoS.
Crimson wrote: Please, someone explain to me how this untouchable guardsmen in a building thing happens. I'm not familiar with ITC.
This isn’t ITC. Its rules of the game.
- You need to be within 1 inch to perform a melee attack.
- If you have enough guardsmen it is possible to be at 1.1 distance from the wall, and if you fill in the perimeter of the building, your basically un-killable.
- You can’t be seen as the wall is there. So no shots.
- You can’t be charged as there is not enough room for a model to be in the 1 inch on the inside of the wall without overlap of the base. And so no melee. And if they can’t come in they are out of Melee range.
At that point, If you have Mortars, put them in the center, and keep killing as you laugh in F.U.
Correct, however, this problem is present because ITC has "closed-in" buildings where you can't draw line of sight into the building from any side. That's the problem. I don't think any GW terrain is closed-in buildings by default.
I'm not aware of any GW terrain defaults. ITC has specific terrain, but none of it exists as a new "ITC only Terrain" its just a codification of take these things from the games rules.
Like several issues, I wish it was fixed with Flamer weapons. Make them not need LOS. And make them do 1D6 shots per 5 models in target unit.
It's not "ITC only" but "ITC terrain is the only terrain you'll see at ITC events." And, they produce closed in buildings.
If it is.. ITC produced Closed in Buildings that caused this. - Who cares? That cat is out of the bag.
If it is, That terrain only exists at ITC events. - That is wrong. I know many players that swap between formats. Closed building are legal in all games, and while maybe more prevalent in ITC, they can show in any format.
Not Online!!! wrote: Honestly mortars should not be able to be fired when A: they have a roof over them and B: the target has a roof over them.
Simply put, common sense.
Also units inside a building should not be able to control an objective. As there is a rule that says objectives cannot be placed inside of buildings.
As long as the objective is not the building itself or part of the building or literally on top of the building then yes, fully support this suggestion, same with transports aswell.
Next suggestion, if you are holed up in a building and units are within 3" surrounding a building they should all be allowed to use their greanades in the meleephase before a charge, aswell as using their ws+1 instead of bs for hits with the greanades, aswell as autohit weapons (flamers) should automatically do 6 hits. That would A: implement some strategic depth since you now need to run up a squad and B make buildings with LOS and charges not moronicall to interact with.
I imagine that said 10 man IG squad would instantly get wiped like it should in such a case, even when there are just 5 models, whilest at the same time not hurting MEQ's in building to much.
Or create rules where the building is destructible. And if destroyed the terrain is removed. Obviously not going to happen in 8th but they have rules like this in Necromunda.
The game should reflect what it's supposed to be (a tabletop RTS like starcraft), not what it isn't (FPS like Call of Duty).
Enabling a mechanism that enables units to hide inside indestructible buildings don't belong in 40k.
Cover should confer negative modifier to hit, not increase one's defensive stats.
While I'm at it, it doesn't make sense to check for saves AFTER the wound has been dealt. It should naturally be:
Player 1 hits > Player 2 rolls for saves > Player 2 rolls for wound.
skchsan wrote: The game should reflect what it's supposed to be (a tabletop RTS like starcraft), not what it isn't (FPS like Call of Duty).
Enabling a mechanism that enables units to hide inside buildings don't belong in 40k.
Pretty much agree. Placing units inside of buildings is a huge pain. There should be some buildings you should go in - but they should be accessible by enemy units.
Disagree on the cover -1 to hit. The game needs a lot less to hit modifiers.
It's a quickfix solution to something that was an obvious problem at the start of 8th (most ruins aren't just solid blocks so if you don't have a rule like this then there is no LOS blocking whatsoever because you'll inevitably be able to see one model through a window and then the entire army can shoot that unit). It's no surprise that some more issues have come up, but I think just going back to RAW on this would be even worse.
skchsan wrote: The game should reflect what it's supposed to be (a tabletop RTS like starcraft), not what it isn't (FPS like Call of Duty).
Enabling a mechanism that enables units to hide inside buildings don't belong in 40k.
Pretty much agree. Placing units inside of buildings is a huge pain. There should be some buildings you should go in - but they should be accessible by enemy units.
Disagree on the cover -1 to hit. The game needs a lot less to hit modifiers.
Or perhaps the game needs MORE negative hit modifiers, specifically for shooting, as to promote healthier balance of ranged and melee?
Arachnofiend wrote: It's a quickfix solution to something that was an obvious problem at the start of 8th (most ruins aren't just solid blocks so if you don't have a rule like this then there is no LOS blocking whatsoever because you'll inevitably be able to see one model through a window and then the entire army can shoot that unit). It's no surprise that some more issues have come up, but I think just going back to RAW on this would be even worse.
It's not - any unit in a building is gonna have a cover save. Which is a free defensive stat. It reduces the damage you take. That is enough for a game like this.
I don't understand why I need to explain to you that being completely unable to prevent an opponent from shooting exactly the target they want to shoot is an undesirable game state.
skchsan wrote: The game should reflect what it's supposed to be (a tabletop RTS like starcraft), not what it isn't (FPS like Call of Duty).
Enabling a mechanism that enables units to hide inside buildings don't belong in 40k.
Pretty much agree. Placing units inside of buildings is a huge pain. There should be some buildings you should go in - but they should be accessible by enemy units.
Disagree on the cover -1 to hit. The game needs a lot less to hit modifiers.
Or perhaps the game needs MORE negative hit modifiers, specifically for shooting, as to promote healthier balance of ranged and melee?
Nah man - more negs to hit I'd pretty much quit playing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arachnofiend wrote: I don't understand why I need to explain to you that being completely unable to prevent an opponent from shooting exactly the target they want to shoot is an undesirable game state.
Theres nothing wrong with LOS blocking. Theres lots wrong with ITC first floor LOS blocking in a game that works off true LOS.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
Aggressors are better than everyone says. This game isn't played on a bowling ball, and you can keep them fairly well hidden. Any ability to deep strike them is fantastic.
skchsan wrote: The game should reflect what it's supposed to be (a tabletop RTS like starcraft), not what it isn't (FPS like Call of Duty).
Enabling a mechanism that enables units to hide inside buildings don't belong in 40k.
Pretty much agree. Placing units inside of buildings is a huge pain. There should be some buildings you should go in - but they should be accessible by enemy units.
Disagree on the cover -1 to hit. The game needs a lot less to hit modifiers.
Or perhaps the game needs MORE negative hit modifiers, specifically for shooting, as to promote healthier balance of ranged and melee?
Nah man - more negs to hit I'd pretty much quit playing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arachnofiend wrote: I don't understand why I need to explain to you that being completely unable to prevent an opponent from shooting exactly the target they want to shoot is an undesirable game state.
Theres nothing wrong with LOS blocking. Theres lots wrong with ITC first floor LOS blocking in a game that works off true LOS.
What if there were certain mechanics implemented to the game where the -hit penalties get reduced depending on the range? Or their status? Surely it would be harder to shoot at a fast moving target than it is to shoot at a stationary target -some sort of element that emphasizes ever-changing nature of a battlefield and not a Napoleonic stand off.
So, for example:
Shooting attacks made against units that advanced previous turn must re-roll successful hits, in return, assault weapons after advancing only hit on roll of 6, modifiable; remove all advance and still act normal stratagems.
All attacks, shooting and melee, always hit on natural 6's.
Terrains for the most part do not block LOS, but provide -1 to hit unless target is within 12"
Non-LOSing terrain can be charged through, albeit with -charge distance. aka, old difficult terrain.
Get rid of CT equivalent -hit bonuses.
Flyers naturally have -2 to hit, increase cost, provide easily accessible AA weapons, or provide enough emphasis on FLY keyword that a TAC list always includes a AA option.
Fine tune stratagems and focus it being more reactive than preemptive - we already have this from psychic phase. (i.e. act out of turn strats over this unit rerolls this strat, healing based strats dont magically heal units (i.e. jury rigging) but improve the healing unit's ability for the turn - can fix two vehicles instead of one, always successfully heals, heals 3 instead of 1d3, etc)
Add more universal stratagems - make a stratagem that allows you to shoot/move out of turn.
Martel732 wrote: They just die very easily. Typically not a viable solution. They work for DW, not for anyone else.
They work for space wolves and ultramarines. (as well as DW)
How many factions do they have to work for, before we acknowledge they're good?
Honestly they don't work for Ultramarines either. They're so expensive per wound you're not gonna be able to fall back and shoot. They'll be dead!
They were okay as Raven Guard. That stopped after everyone wanted to nerf Raven Guard, Alpha Legion, and Stygies for no good reason.
Space Wolves I'll grant of course.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 10 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 6 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Yeah how about you calculate that without the constant rerolls?
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 6 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Yeah how about you calculate that without the constant rerolls?
What's the point, it's trivially easy to get rerolls for marines.
It's always weird to me how people want to pretend HQ buffs don't exist. Who are these people making their lists out of three auxiliary support detachments so there aren't any aura buffs in their army?
Arachnofiend wrote: It's always weird to me how people want to pretend HQ buffs don't exist. Who are these people making their lists out of three auxiliary support detachments so there aren't any aura buffs in their army?
Because its another ~200 points and requires them to be within 6" which severely limits where you can be.
Especially if you assume most of your army is inside that 6" bubble.
Especially with Agressors limit range.
Which also means your not double shooting if your going first (and likely dead if going second)
Arachnofiend wrote: It's always weird to me how people want to pretend HQ buffs don't exist. Who are these people making their lists out of three auxiliary support detachments so there aren't any aura buffs in their army?
Well some armies don't have them, or have them on units that are dead end of turn 1.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 6 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Yeah how about you calculate that without the constant rerolls?
I mean...if we are talking about how the unit actually works - they are never not going to be buffed. It will be Gman or CM lt. combo at the min.
I play a list that is tripple repulsor with all las cannons. 14 agressors calgar and a LT an ancient and some scouts. It's just hilarious how many infantry I can kill with that build in 1 turn. It's really effective at killing everything though - it just can't take damage.
Arachnofiend wrote: It's always weird to me how people want to pretend HQ buffs don't exist. Who are these people making their lists out of three auxiliary support detachments so there aren't any aura buffs in their army?
The marine characters are very expensive so you cant hit most of your units without a castle. Which loses, because castle.
Problem with the re-roll guys is they can't get good enough shooting to make babysitting a unit for re-rolls worth it. That Lt and Captain are 150ish points and the best shooting weapon they can be armed with is a what combi-plas? storm bolter?
You end up paying a premium for CqC stats and access to good CqC weapons on a unit that you really want buffing a unit that doesn't want to get into close combat.
I guess you can charge once the aggressors are dead but it just doesn't offer the synergy that one would hope for. If that captain and LT babysitting a shooting unit could be given a gun that was worth a damn and not overcosted then they wouldn't feel like so much of a tax. But based on their stats they really want to be in the fray with a storm shield and thunder hammer not sitting back holding hands with some aggressors plinking away with a 2 shot storm bolter.
Martel732 wrote: They just die very easily. Typically not a viable solution. They work for DW, not for anyone else.
They work for space wolves and ultramarines. (as well as DW)
How many factions do they have to work for, before we acknowledge they're good?
I disagree with that assessment.
With magic bunkers - it can totally work. I'm starting to see how ITC really works. It's a completely different game. Armies don't engage - they creep around in their deployment zone. Defensive stats don't really matter when you can't be shot at but can shoot out of a building. It's kind of a joke really.
bananathug wrote: Problem with the re-roll guys is they can't get good enough shooting to make babysitting a unit for re-rolls worth it. That Lt and Captain are 150ish points and the best shooting weapon they can be armed with is a what combi-plas? storm bolter?
You end up paying a premium for CqC stats and access to good CqC weapons on a unit that you really want buffing a unit that doesn't want to get into close combat.
I guess you can charge once the aggressors are dead but it just doesn't offer the synergy that one would hope for. If that captain and LT babysitting a shooting unit could be given a gun that was worth a damn and not overcosted then they wouldn't feel like so much of a tax. But based on their stats they really want to be in the fray with a storm shield and thunder hammer not sitting back holding hands with some aggressors plinking away with a 2 shot storm bolter.
The easy solution is to have everything in the bubble - and ignore objectives you can't reach without losing your aura or you can't move away from into the aura next turn. If you can reasonably get into the middle of their army in 3 turns and they don't try to wipe you out - you'll cut them in half and they'll end up losing to space marines. Or if they are coming to you...all the better. Marines are all about concentrated force.
The problem with Aggressors is that someone turns up with a ravager (other platforms/similar weapons are available) and ruins your day.
7 hits with the Archon (who I have to take and doesn't have much else thats better to babysit), 3.5 wounds, 5/6 saves, so good chance of 3 dead. Which nets me almost a 90%~ return on the Ravagers cost. I will have 3 ravagers - I have a good chance of eating your aggressors and your buffing characters in one pass.
Now sure I expect Dissie Ravagers to go to 140-155 in CA - but I think they would still be a meta relevant hard counter to the unit.
Wow. Eldar all over the top, no surprises there, it only 1 Tyranids list. Without any real care, GWs sneaky way of nerfing Tyranids against Eldar really seems to have paid off.
Xenomancers wrote: You don't need LOS to shoot out of magic bunkers right?
1st levels of ruins block LOS for both of those shooting into and out of. It actually encourages 2nd floor ruin camping.
I'm gonna get merked at LVO.
If I'm not mistaken, the houserule was devised due to the fact that people were drawing TLOS through ruins/other porous terrain as under 8th ed rules, you couldn't claim the benefit of cover unless you were IN it. Unfortunate side effect.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 6 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Yeah how about you calculate that without the constant rerolls?
What's the point, it's trivially easy to get rerolls for marines.
It's only fair to include them into the cost of it all. If you want your full rerolls, include them in the cost for your 5 Aggressors.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 6 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Yeah how about you calculate that without the constant rerolls?
What's the point, it's trivially easy to get rerolls for marines.
It's only fair to include them into the cost of it all. If you want your full rerolls, include them in the cost for your 5 Aggressors.
Impossible to do - 6" aura can literally affect your who army as space marines and it should. I get what you are saying but -
by comparison - without the auras you only kill 14 guardsmen. Instead of 30. There is no reason you should not have your army buffed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ordana wrote: Xenomancer, if your going to complain about something atleast make sure you understand the situation first.
Trying to understand it - I dont play ITC. I don't need to fully understand a situation to complain about it ether.
All I need to know is the result. The result is unacceptable no matter what the cause. A unit you can not shoot or charge is unacceptable.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 6 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Yeah how about you calculate that without the constant rerolls?
What's the point, it's trivially easy to get rerolls for marines.
It's only fair to include them into the cost of it all. If you want your full rerolls, include them in the cost for your 5 Aggressors.
Impossible to do - 6" aura can literally affect your who army as space marines and it should. I get what you are saying but -
by comparison - without the auras you only kill 14 guardsmen. Instead of 30. There is no reason you should not have your army buffed.
Which means, in your scenario, 5 Aggressors for 185 points kills 56 points of Infantry, and the minimum 585 with Roboute kills 120 points.
Roboute and the HQ units don't just exist. You pay for them.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 6 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Yeah how about you calculate that without the constant rerolls?
What's the point, it's trivially easy to get rerolls for marines.
It's only fair to include them into the cost of it all. If you want your full rerolls, include them in the cost for your 5 Aggressors.
Impossible to do - 6" aura can literally affect your who army as space marines and it should. I get what you are saying but -
by comparison - without the auras you only kill 14 guardsmen. Instead of 30. There is no reason you should not have your army buffed.
Which means, in your scenario, 5 Aggressors for 185 points kills 56 points of Infantry, and the minimum 585 with Roboute kills 120 points.
Roboute and the HQ units don't just exist. You pay for them.
But they buff your whole army. Not to mention Gman and clagar ar CC beast. We have no metric to just cost the aura buff.
Xenomancers wrote: You don't need LOS to shoot out of magic bunkers right?
1st levels of ruins block LOS for both of those shooting into and out of. It actually encourages 2nd floor ruin camping.
I'm gonna get merked at LVO.
If I'm not mistaken, the houserule was devised due to the fact that people were drawing TLOS through ruins/other porous terrain as under 8th ed rules, you couldn't claim the benefit of cover unless you were IN it. Unfortunate side effect.
Then add bases to the ruins, which is something that is not disallowed by the rules, no need to alter them. Now you can be in ruins and claim your cover, even if you play against people that don't allow you to put the tip of your tracks over a 1/8 inch fragment of wall and claim it anyway.
Marmatag wrote: Space Marines have horde sweeper weapons. Aggressors delete hordes with 0 issue.
Only under extreme circumstances where the opposing player brings in their horde within aggressor's special ability range, which in that case, that player deserves to have his units deleted.
Footslogging aggressor is only as good as a termie.
You are getting 9.5 bolters for 40 points for 18" range. Then you have power fists. 5 man squad puts out 50 bolters. When buffed by gman that will usually turn into 20ish wounds if you are wounding on 5's or 40ish wounds wounding on 3's. That will wipe lot of powerful units.
So how much is that 5 man squad and how many points of Gaunts and Infantry does it kill?
5 Man is 185. They kill roughly 30 guardsmen if buffed by gman. Slightly less with CM Lt. That really is pretty good. The issue though...they only have 6 gaking wounds for that price. Again - the issue with space marines is not dealing damage. The issue is they can't take it. I feel like Dark angels are probably better than ultramarines for this reason and they do a little better WR wise.
Yeah how about you calculate that without the constant rerolls?
What's the point, it's trivially easy to get rerolls for marines.
It's only fair to include them into the cost of it all. If you want your full rerolls, include them in the cost for your 5 Aggressors.
Impossible to do - 6" aura can literally affect your who army as space marines and it should. I get what you are saying but -
by comparison - without the auras you only kill 14 guardsmen. Instead of 30. There is no reason you should not have your army buffed.
Which means, in your scenario, 5 Aggressors for 185 points kills 56 points of Infantry, and the minimum 585 with Roboute kills 120 points.
Roboute and the HQ units don't just exist. You pay for them.
But they buff your whole army. Not to mention Gman and clagar ar CC beast. We have no metric to just cost the aura buff.
Well those points are there. You can pay 74 points for a Captain and pay the CP to upgrade to a Chapter Master and then pay the 60ish points for the Lt.
Also at range they'd both just kill a few more haha
It is harder to compute the value of the SM aura compared to a Guard order, since the Captain can be buffing anywhere from just the unit in question to the unit in question and 500+ points of additional tanks and gun units.
In addition, the Captain is a powerful unit in his own right, with powerful close-quarters capability and potentially moderately strong ranged ability and high speed and general threat.
In addition, the captain's personal value can vary quite drastically. A captain with his master-crafted boltgun and chainsword is considerably weaker than a captain with a jump pack and thunder hammer. The former isn't particularly strong without is aura, but the latter can stand on his own as a unit without having to support anybody.
By comparison, an IG Company Commander buffs a fixed number of units [2], and has no useful additional capability, making it fairly easy to quantify the value of an Order at 15 points.
Obviously, it's unfair to count a unit as fully buffed without accounting for the cost of buffing it. That said, I think it's fairly safe to say that the aura isn't particularly costly, and probably is of lower value than the Order.
skchsan wrote: If I'm not mistaken, the houserule was devised due to the fact that people were drawing TLOS through ruins/other porous terrain as under 8th ed rules, you couldn't claim the benefit of cover unless you were IN it. Unfortunate side effect.
Then add bases to the ruins, which is something that is not disallowed by the rules, no need to alter them. Now you can be in ruins and claim your cover, even if you play against people that don't allow you to put the tip of your tracks over a 1/8 inch fragment of wall and claim it anyway.
I think you mean "add ruins to your bases," correct?
Except TLOS would make you more visible if you were to model ruins onto your base. Nothing stopping you, but nothing gained either.
The issue I think was because TLOS is in effect and the intervening terrain with arched windows had enough holes to be "seen" thru, and unlike prior editions where there existed cover saves as a separate entity of saves granted to those who were targeted through a intervening terrain, in 8th ed, you couldn't unless you were at least tiptoed into the area terrain.
Xenomancers wrote: You don't need LOS to shoot out of magic bunkers right?
1st levels of ruins block LOS for both of those shooting into and out of. It actually encourages 2nd floor ruin camping.
I'm gonna get merked at LVO.
If I'm not mistaken, the houserule was devised due to the fact that people were drawing TLOS through ruins/other porous terrain as under 8th ed rules, you couldn't claim the benefit of cover unless you were IN it. Unfortunate side effect.
Thats tournaments fault for have walls and not large blocked off terrain pieces, have a base, if on base you are in terrain, this is how my local does it, 5-7 larger pieces with random walls around the square/triangle/rectangles, etc.. we there is 0 problems getting into cover for most of your army.
Martel732 wrote: The commander can hold an objective and be invcinble b/c of character status. That's how I use mine. It's died once in like 10 games.
I don't frequently have situations where one of my CC's is sitting on a point that isn't also being held by something else, like a squad of Guardsmen or a Leman Russ or something.
But yes, their body does have some value, but it's not a whole lot of value. We can compute that more precisely based off the PC's cost. It's trivial to solve, and the result is 10 points per order.
Thats tournaments fault for have walls and not large blocked off terrain pieces, have a base, if on base you are in terrain, this is how my local does it, 5-7 larger pieces with random walls around the square/triangle/rectangles, etc.. we there is 0 problems getting into cover for most of your army.
The rule was added because a lot of stores use GW's City ruin terrain which are full of holes.
The rule itself is no problem if used with such ruins in mind because they are basically just a facade of a building.
The problem comes from allowing fully enclosed buildings to be entered.
It kind of sounds like GW needs to revisit terrain in general, even if this specific case was due to a house rule.
I for one am partial to from, I think 4th Edition, where you could see INTO terrain, but not THROUGH it. In terms of 8th, it would be a fairly simple fix - a unit IN terrain gets the cover bonus, a unit BEHIND terrain is untargetable (but the unit also cannot target foes past the terrain themselves). Couple this with a nerf to no LOS weapons (either increase points costs, or make firing them with no LOS a -1 to hit), and the terrain rules get much better.
"I'm in the building, you can't shoot or assault me ROFLL!!!!"
"My assault centurian steps up with his siege drills. Rule: Siege drills can attack buildings in melee, building is destroyed and any occupants killed."
Having now watched this I'm a little confused as to how people got the impression that noone could be charged, they could actually be charged.
It looks like it was more just the straight up brokenness of all the CC buffs made doing so when you could only kill 1 unit and then get jumped by 30+ catachans plus straken plus Priest plus bulgryn making it not worthwhile not the terrain making it not possible physically.
Insectum7 wrote: I'd propose something similar to the old forest rules of 4th edition, where you can see into the forest, but not through he forest to the other side.
I haven't read the entire ten pages of thread but this is the house rule we've been using since before I'd even heard of ITC. LoS drawn into, out of, but not through ruined buildings/forests/etc.
Probably because none of us had played since 4th and this made a hundred times more sense than whatever GW has now, or however ITC is trying to fix it. It lets cover be cover.
It makes no sense ruins do nothing if they're completely between you and your enemy. It makes equally no sense infantry can't take up positions in ruins and fire out unless they ignore LoS.
Insectum7 wrote: I'd propose something similar to the old forest rules of 4th edition, where you can see into the forest, but not through he forest to the other side.
I haven't read the entire ten pages of thread but this is the house rule we've been using since before I'd even heard of ITC. LoS drawn into, out of, but not through ruined buildings/forests/etc.
Probably because none of us had played since 4th and this made a hundred times more sense than whatever GW has now, or however ITC is trying to fix it. It lets cover be cover.
It makes no sense ruins do nothing if they're completely between you and your enemy. It makes equally no sense infantry can't take up positions in ruins and fire out unless they ignore LoS.
Unfortunately, the terrain rule in 8th ed does nothing to stop you from drawing TLOS through a ruin, hence the ITC houserule.
skchsan wrote: If I'm not mistaken, the houserule was devised due to the fact that people were drawing TLOS through ruins/other porous terrain as under 8th ed rules, you couldn't claim the benefit of cover unless you were IN it. Unfortunate side effect.
Then add bases to the ruins, which is something that is not disallowed by the rules, no need to alter them. Now you can be in ruins and claim your cover, even if you play against people that don't allow you to put the tip of your tracks over a 1/8 inch fragment of wall and claim it anyway.
I think you mean "add ruins to your bases," correct?
Except TLOS would make you more visible if you were to model ruins onto your base. Nothing stopping you, but nothing gained either.
The issue I think was because TLOS is in effect and the intervening terrain with arched windows had enough holes to be "seen" thru, and unlike prior editions where there existed cover saves as a separate entity of saves granted to those who were targeted through a intervening terrain, in 8th ed, you couldn't unless you were at least tiptoed into the area terrain.
No i meant exactly what i said, add bases to your ruins. If you play with the kind of people that say that if you are inside the perimeter of a ruin then you are not INSIDE the ruin, then just add a base to it and resolve the problem. If you are at least partially on the base of the ruin then you can claim cover (provided that something is also obscuring you). No need to change the game's rules.
Kdash wrote: By putting a squad inside of a ruin/building, but keeping them 1.1” away from the wall the opponent can’t complete the charge because they can’t finish their move inside a wall and thus can’t place their model.
Well we've been playing that 'wrong' locally then, as we just declare wobbly model syndrome and carry on.
Unfortunately wobbly model is for models that can be placed, but, due to terrain and the model in question, placing it where it ends its move would be “dangerous” to the model and other models. Thus, allowing you to safely place the model elsewhere for the purpose of the phase/turn.
You can’t end a move halfway through a wall as the model can’t be placed at all, so wobbly model wouldn’t come into play. Now, if the wall had an open section in it big enough for a base then you can still charge through the gap as you can be placed, but, with the buildings in question no such opportunities exist.
As for the comments about ITC events use “ITC” terrain, it might be the case that they all use/try to use FLG made terrain in the US, but, over here in the UK I don’t think it is used at all (I’ve never been to an event using it anyway). Everyone tries to use the same standard of x amount of big LoS blocking terrain and x amount of ruins in each deployment zone etc, but the physical terrain varies massively. The last event I went to was using terrain from the ETC event in Croatia. It was essentially cardboard cut-out terrain. The event I’m going to this weekend, GW is attending, so, I’m guessing that most of the terrain will be GW style terrain.
Having GW/other company terrain is perfectly fine, as long as you’re willing to use the 1st floor LoS blocking rule and the terrain allows some kind of counter play and is “realistic”. (i.e a rock is… a rock… and a ruin is… well… a ruined building etc etc.)
Automatically Appended Next Post: In regards to the whole LoS issue, I still maintain that my idea from months ago is the correct way to go (especially if the rumoured -1 to hit traits are taking a hit).
If the firing unit cannot draw Line Of Sight to its target and is not within 6” of a friendly unit that can draw Line Of Sight to the target, the firing unit suffers a -1 to hit penalty
In my mind, blindly firing without being able to see should not be as accurate as when you can see the target. It was one of the few things I liked about templates before.
The only issue is, is that without a current “6’s always hit” rule in place this seriously hurts Guard and T’au when they are playing against units that can stack multiple -1s to hit. If 6’s always hits was brought in, then I would push for this to follow as well.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Because melee isn't always as bad as the forum makes it out to be, but let's break down what they fought.
He went 6-0.
Round 1 : Primaris Intercessor / Hellblaster spam - 31 to 14
Round 2 : Abaddon / Ahriman Fearless Cultists, Triple Prince, 30 Tzaangors - 27 to 25
Round 3 : Tigirius Devs with IG + Wyverns - 33 to 23 (kind of a meh gunline)
Round 4 : 2 Razorwing, Voidraven, Alaitoc Exarch,Hemlock 2 Nightwing, 3 Wave Serpents - 29 to 17
Round 5 : 30 Wraithguard, 10 Wraithblades, casters, and DE patrol - 31 to 21
Round 6 : Alaitoc banshees, spears, Harlie skyweavers, 3 Razorwings - 30 to 15
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Because melee isn't always as bad as the forum makes it out to be, but let's break down what they fought.
He went 6-0.
Round 1 : Primaris Intercessor / Hellblaster spam - 31 to 14
Round 2 : Abaddon / Ahriman Fearless Cultists, Triple Prince, 30 Tzaangors - 27 to 25
Round 3 : Tigirius Devs with IG + Wyverns - 33 to 23 (kind of a meh gunline)
Round 4 : 2 Razorwing, Voidraven, Alaitoc Exarch,Hemlock 2 Nightwing, 3 Wave Serpents - 29 to 17
Round 5 : 30 Wraithguard, 10 Wraithblades, casters, and DE patrol - 31 to 21
Round 6 : Alaitoc banshees, spears, Harlie skyweavers, 3 Razorwings - 30 to 15
He scored 30+ 4 times and got 27+ every time. Pretty impressive. Melee doesn't necessarily suck, but power armor melee absolutely sucks.
Xenomancers wrote: You don't need LOS to shoot out of magic bunkers right?
1st levels of ruins block LOS for both of those shooting into and out of. It actually encourages 2nd floor ruin camping.
I'm gonna get merked at LVO.
If I'm not mistaken, the houserule was devised due to the fact that people were drawing TLOS through ruins/other porous terrain as under 8th ed rules, you couldn't claim the benefit of cover unless you were IN it. Unfortunate side effect.
Thats tournaments fault for have walls and not large blocked off terrain pieces, have a base, if on base you are in terrain, this is how my local does it, 5-7 larger pieces with random walls around the square/triangle/rectangles, etc.. we there is 0 problems getting into cover for most of your army.
Or - you just imagine that the inside has a base even if it doesn't - and if you are touching a wall you are on the base.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Because melee isn't always as bad as the forum makes it out to be, but let's break down what they fought.
He went 6-0.
Round 1 : Primaris Intercessor / Hellblaster spam - 31 to 14
Round 2 : Abaddon / Ahriman Fearless Cultists, Triple Prince, 30 Tzaangors - 27 to 25
Round 3 : Tigirius Devs with IG + Wyverns - 33 to 23 (kind of a meh gunline)
Round 4 : 2 Razorwing, Voidraven, Alaitoc Exarch,Hemlock 2 Nightwing, 3 Wave Serpents - 29 to 17
Round 5 : 30 Wraithguard, 10 Wraithblades, casters, and DE patrol - 31 to 21
Round 6 : Alaitoc banshees, spears, Harlie skyweavers, 3 Razorwings - 30 to 15
He scored 30+ 4 times and got 27+ every time. Pretty impressive. Melee doesn't necessarily suck, but power armor melee absolutely sucks.
Melle auto wins if there is too much terrain. You can walk through walls but not shoot through them. It's an obviously OP advantage and people should really try to understand this. THIS GAME IS NOT DESIGNED FOR CITYFIGHT. If you want that - play infiinity - or kill team. Those are scrimmage game. 40k is more like an RTS with large armies.
Melle auto wins if there is too much terrain. You can walk through walls but not shoot through them. It's an obviously OP advantage and people should really try to understand this. THIS GAME IS NOT DESIGNED FOR CITYFIGHT. If you want that - play infiinity - or kill team. Those are scrimmage game. 40k is more like an RTS with large armies.
ITC terrain is pretty standard. If that were the true dynamic you'd likely see those lists more.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Because melee isn't always as bad as the forum makes it out to be, but let's break down what they fought.
He went 6-0.
Round 1 : Primaris Intercessor / Hellblaster spam - 31 to 14
Round 2 : Abaddon / Ahriman Fearless Cultists, Triple Prince, 30 Tzaangors - 27 to 25
Round 3 : Tigirius Devs with IG + Wyverns - 33 to 23 (kind of a meh gunline)
Round 4 : 2 Razorwing, Voidraven, Alaitoc Exarch,Hemlock 2 Nightwing, 3 Wave Serpents - 29 to 17
Round 5 : 30 Wraithguard, 10 Wraithblades, casters, and DE patrol - 31 to 21
Round 6 : Alaitoc banshees, spears, Harlie skyweavers, 3 Razorwings - 30 to 15
How that Wraithguard list got to the top 10 is a real miracle. Was it on Twitch?
Melle auto wins if there is too much terrain. You can walk through walls but not shoot through them. It's an obviously OP advantage and people should really try to understand this. THIS GAME IS NOT DESIGNED FOR CITYFIGHT. If you want that - play infiinity - or kill team. Those are scrimmage game. 40k is more like an RTS with large armies.
ITC terrain is pretty standard. If that were the true dynamic you'd likely see those lists more.
Is it standard though? Seems highly variable from event to event.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Because melee isn't always as bad as the forum makes it out to be, but let's break down what they fought.
He went 6-0.
Round 1 : Primaris Intercessor / Hellblaster spam - 31 to 14
Round 2 : Abaddon / Ahriman Fearless Cultists, Triple Prince, 30 Tzaangors - 27 to 25
Round 3 : Tigirius Devs with IG + Wyverns - 33 to 23 (kind of a meh gunline)
Round 4 : 2 Razorwing, Voidraven, Alaitoc Exarch,Hemlock 2 Nightwing, 3 Wave Serpents - 29 to 17
Round 5 : 30 Wraithguard, 10 Wraithblades, casters, and DE patrol - 31 to 21
Round 6 : Alaitoc banshees, spears, Harlie skyweavers, 3 Razorwings - 30 to 15
I'm not discrediting the Tyranid list at all (and actually think Tyranids are strong this edition), but what exactly is it that you mean by Primaris Intercessor/Hellblaster spam? That can mean anything after all.
ITC terrain as a whole is standardized but the variety of tables is extreme. You can't assume you'll be in city fight, but you also can't assume you won't be at some point.
They need to scrap or update mission 6, it favors Guard, Orks, Tau, and all the armies that have dirt cheap HQs, that can largely be camped in one spot and never move.
I'm not discrediting the Tyranid list at all (and actually think Tyranids are strong this edition), but what exactly is it that you mean by Primaris Intercessor/Hellblaster spam? That can mean anything after all.
More specifically-
Helbrecht
2 x Primaris LT
5 x 5 Intercessor, AGL 5 Scouts
Primaris Anicent
Primaris Apoth
5 Reavers
3 x 3 Inceptors
3 x 5 Helblaster
I'm not discrediting the Tyranid list at all (and actually think Tyranids are strong this edition), but what exactly is it that you mean by Primaris Intercessor/Hellblaster spam? That can mean anything after all.
More specifically-
Helbrecht
2 x Primaris LT
5 x 5 Intercessor, AGL 5 Scouts
Primaris Anicent
Primaris Apoth
5 Reavers
3 x 3 Inceptors
3 x 5 Helblaster
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Because melee isn't always as bad as the forum makes it out to be, but let's break down what they fought.
He went 6-0.
Round 1 : Primaris Intercessor / Hellblaster spam - 31 to 14
Round 2 : Abaddon / Ahriman Fearless Cultists, Triple Prince, 30 Tzaangors - 27 to 25
Round 3 : Tigirius Devs with IG + Wyverns - 33 to 23 (kind of a meh gunline)
Round 4 : 2 Razorwing, Voidraven, Alaitoc Exarch,Hemlock 2 Nightwing, 3 Wave Serpents - 29 to 17
Round 5 : 30 Wraithguard, 10 Wraithblades, casters, and DE patrol - 31 to 21
Round 6 : Alaitoc banshees, spears, Harlie skyweavers, 3 Razorwings - 30 to 15
He scored 30+ 4 times and got 27+ every time. Pretty impressive. Melee doesn't necessarily suck, but power armor melee absolutely sucks.
Khorne Berzerkers definitely don't suck. Death Company and Sanguinary Guard definitely don't suck.
A more accurate statement would be that Vanilla Space Marines do not have easy access to powerful close quarters combat troops, which does seem generally true.
Loyalist power armor melee isn't about clearing hordes. It's about killing big things and doing a great job of it.
How many factions can kill a fething imperial knight with a 130 point model?
Loyalist melee is about killing big elite things, and they do it fabulously. If you're really interested in clearing hordes, you need to bring the anti-horde tools available to you. As the meta has shifted more towards the elite, marines are actually getting better. And melee is not a joke, it's just not about clearing hordes.
Should marines be able to slaughter elites, and also, slaughter hordes? Especially when you have the best dakka in the game for clearing hordes other than Imperial Guard (the faction that has everything).
Seriously, the shifting meta is favoring marines. Chapter approved will reduce their costs (probably) and then they'll be great in the meta. They're already good. Ultimately marines also suffer from the problem that they're eclipsed by Guard. But everyone is really eclipsed by Guard in some way, it's just 8th edition.
What sucks about melee is that for Chaos it seems that Berzerkers are the only decent choice. They've outclassed everything else. Which kinda makes sense. But possessed should be a contender, same with chosen.
Xenomancers wrote: Gonna be pretty honest here. If you can win majors with the second and third place lists. You can win with anything.
They aren't very good lists. My casual tyranids list is better than than nids list. Like - I'm not trying to be a wise ass here...but how do you win a game where the only shooting you have is 6 hive guard?
Because melee isn't always as bad as the forum makes it out to be, but let's break down what they fought.
He went 6-0.
Round 1 : Primaris Intercessor / Hellblaster spam - 31 to 14
Round 2 : Abaddon / Ahriman Fearless Cultists, Triple Prince, 30 Tzaangors - 27 to 25
Round 3 : Tigirius Devs with IG + Wyverns - 33 to 23 (kind of a meh gunline)
Round 4 : 2 Razorwing, Voidraven, Alaitoc Exarch,Hemlock 2 Nightwing, 3 Wave Serpents - 29 to 17
Round 5 : 30 Wraithguard, 10 Wraithblades, casters, and DE patrol - 31 to 21
Round 6 : Alaitoc banshees, spears, Harlie skyweavers, 3 Razorwings - 30 to 15
He scored 30+ 4 times and got 27+ every time. Pretty impressive. Melee doesn't necessarily suck, but power armor melee absolutely sucks.
Khorne Berzerkers definitely don't suck. Death Company and Sanguinary Guard definitely don't suck.
A more accurate statement would be that Vanilla Space Marines do not have easy access to powerful close quarters combat troops, which does seem generally true.
All those units suck now. The berserkers were gutted by the FAQ, and DC and SG were gutted by high points cost and the May FAQ.
The latest FAQ also killed the smash capt. Good riddance. Terrible meta unit.
chimeara wrote: What sucks about melee is that for Chaos it seems that Berzerkers are the only decent choice. They've outclassed everything else. Which kinda makes sense. But possessed should be a contender, same with chosen.
Well you said Chaos, so that's not accurate, because Bloodletter bombs are a real thing and they do work.
chimeara wrote: What sucks about melee is that for Chaos it seems that Berzerkers are the only decent choice. They've outclassed everything else. Which kinda makes sense. But possessed should be a contender, same with chosen.
Well you said Chaos, so that's not accurate, because Bloodletter bombs are a real thing and they do work.
Fair Point, I should have mentioned Chaos Marines specifically.
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Yeah - not sure why DW doesn't place better. Their weapons stats compared to marines are bonkers and exceptionally under-costed for the upgrade.
It was his first round fight - all the lists after that were more competitive.
Yeah I saw he faced some good lists. This list and mass WG are terrible though. Also Tiggy and Devs is terrible. He also faced a list with 6 eldar flyers? He probably tabled that.
Tyel wrote: DC/SG would be fine if they had anyway to avoid being very efficiently gunned to death after they hit whatever they are going after.
Berserkers just lack a good delivery system now.
...Rhinos, Warptime, and reroll charges.
I get that you can put more models on the table if you had AL (the way it used to be) and that is stronger, but Rhinos are extremely useful on the front line with the Berzerkers.
You can drag four or five of them onto the table and you'll have a 2+ armor if you don't go first and then smoke for no man's land. It would take a Castellan 3 or 4 turns to kill all of them.
I'm not discrediting the Tyranid list at all (and actually think Tyranids are strong this edition), but what exactly is it that you mean by Primaris Intercessor/Hellblaster spam? That can mean anything after all.
More specifically-
Helbrecht
2 x Primaris LT
5 x 5 Intercessor, AGL 5 Scouts
Primaris Anicent
Primaris Apoth
5 Reavers
3 x 3 Inceptors
3 x 5 Helblaster
So a whole battalion.
That list would've done SO much better just as Raven Guard or even Dark Angels. I get wanting to be aggressive and using the melee stats of Primaris to your advantage, but it really doesn't seem worth having to be Black Templars.
Kudos to him even getting 2-3 though. Who did he win against?
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Dude, Deathwatch are still overcosted and you know it. You pay a LOT for those offensive stats. The minimum cost for ONE guy is 17 points because GW thinks a Vet is worth 16 points. In reality it's MAYBE 15 like Wolf Guard. Of course GW thinks we should pay a point for the privelage to Combat Squad!
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Yeah - not sure why DW doesn't place better. Their weapons stats compared to marines are bonkers and exceptionally under-costed for the upgrade.
It was his first round fight - all the lists after that were more competitive.
Yeah I saw he faced some good lists. This list and mass WG are terrible though. Also Tiggy and Devs is terrible. He also faced a list with 6 eldar flyers? He probably tabled that.
4 points for a Storm Bolter is hardly undercosted seeing as the model is 20 points after the fact.
Yeah I saw he faced some good lists. This list and mass WG are terrible though. Also Tiggy and Devs is terrible. He also faced a list with 6 eldar flyers? He probably tabled that.
The WG list took 7th. His only loss was to the nids.
So whatever he's doing works well against stacking minus to hit - only one unit of WG had D-Scythes. Rolling up against that many Eldar flyers for a whole tournament would give me nightmares.
Yeah I saw he faced some good lists. This list and mass WG are terrible though. Also Tiggy and Devs is terrible. He also faced a list with 6 eldar flyers? He probably tabled that.
The WG list took 7th. His only loss was to the nids.
So whatever he's doing works well against stacking minus to hit - only one unit of WG had D-Scythes. Rolling up against that many Eldar flyers for a whole tournament would give me nightmares.
Holy flyers batman.
Well - I guess I can't blame him for hiding in buildings being indestructible then. If he leaves cover hes getting focused down by insane shooting.
I'm not discrediting the Tyranid list at all (and actually think Tyranids are strong this edition), but what exactly is it that you mean by Primaris Intercessor/Hellblaster spam? That can mean anything after all.
More specifically-
Helbrecht
2 x Primaris LT
5 x 5 Intercessor, AGL 5 Scouts
Primaris Anicent
Primaris Apoth
5 Reavers
3 x 3 Inceptors
3 x 5 Helblaster
So a whole battalion.
That list would've done SO much better just as Raven Guard or even Dark Angels. I get wanting to be aggressive and using the melee stats of Primaris to your advantage, but it really doesn't seem worth having to be Black Templars.
Kudos to him even getting 2-3 though. Who did he win against?
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Dude, Deathwatch are still overcosted and you know it. You pay a LOT for those offensive stats. The minimum cost for ONE guy is 17 points because GW thinks a Vet is worth 16 points. In reality it's MAYBE 15 like Wolf Guard. Of course GW thinks we should pay a point for the privelage to Combat Squad!
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Yeah - not sure why DW doesn't place better. Their weapons stats compared to marines are bonkers and exceptionally under-costed for the upgrade.
It was his first round fight - all the lists after that were more competitive.
Yeah I saw he faced some good lists. This list and mass WG are terrible though. Also Tiggy and Devs is terrible. He also faced a list with 6 eldar flyers? He probably tabled that.
4 points for a Storm Bolter is hardly undercosted seeing as the model is 20 points after the fact.
You pay 2 points for the special ammo...for 2+ to wound non vehical, or up to +2 AP. Plus really - it's the intercessors that are OP. For 20 points they do double the damage as normal intercessors AND they can take hellblasters and plasma inceptors in their squads and stack special rules on your units (one of which is the ultramarines chapter tactic...+1 lol).... I almost quit when I read the rules for DW.
Daedalus81 wrote: FLG is talking SoCal right now and are addressing the building thing.
Not sure how much discussion should be required on the topic. Change the rule to where buildings block LOS through them but not within them. Or in other words - you can't shoot through buildings BUT you can shoot into them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
I'm saying the are OP in comparison to space marine intercessors. +2 points for those stats? Gotta be kidding.
I'm not discrediting the Tyranid list at all (and actually think Tyranids are strong this edition), but what exactly is it that you mean by Primaris Intercessor/Hellblaster spam? That can mean anything after all.
More specifically-
Helbrecht
2 x Primaris LT
5 x 5 Intercessor, AGL 5 Scouts
Primaris Anicent
Primaris Apoth
5 Reavers
3 x 3 Inceptors
3 x 5 Helblaster
So a whole battalion.
That list would've done SO much better just as Raven Guard or even Dark Angels. I get wanting to be aggressive and using the melee stats of Primaris to your advantage, but it really doesn't seem worth having to be Black Templars.
Kudos to him even getting 2-3 though. Who did he win against?
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Dude, Deathwatch are still overcosted and you know it. You pay a LOT for those offensive stats. The minimum cost for ONE guy is 17 points because GW thinks a Vet is worth 16 points. In reality it's MAYBE 15 like Wolf Guard. Of course GW thinks we should pay a point for the privelage to Combat Squad!
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Yeah - not sure why DW doesn't place better. Their weapons stats compared to marines are bonkers and exceptionally under-costed for the upgrade.
It was his first round fight - all the lists after that were more competitive.
Yeah I saw he faced some good lists. This list and mass WG are terrible though. Also Tiggy and Devs is terrible. He also faced a list with 6 eldar flyers? He probably tabled that.
4 points for a Storm Bolter is hardly undercosted seeing as the model is 20 points after the fact.
You pay 2 points for the special ammo...for 2+ to wound non vehical, or up to +2 AP. Plus really - it's the intercessors that are OP. For 20 points they do double the damage as normal intercessors AND they can take hellblasters and plasma inceptors in their squads and stack special rules on your units (one of which is the ultramarines chapter tactic...+1 lol).... I almost quit when I read the rules for DW.
Regular Intercessors weren't even close to OP at 20 points. The only difference is that the Deathwatch ones can actually hurt something on occasion.
If you really think they're OP, you need to get your priorities straightened out. They're only OP if you thought Intercessors were fine at 20. Hint: they clearly weren't.
Marmatag wrote: Hemlocks are undercosted but at the end of the day if someone is running multiple of them just kill everything on the table.
Eldar are not durable, despite what the dakka peanut gallery suggests.
And i am speaking as someone who has crushed multi-flyer Eldar with Nids and also someone who plays Eldar.
It's a matchup thing. There are lists that Eldar are great at surviving against and lists that can crunch Eldar. On the whole, Eldar are a strong faction.
I'm not discrediting the Tyranid list at all (and actually think Tyranids are strong this edition), but what exactly is it that you mean by Primaris Intercessor/Hellblaster spam? That can mean anything after all.
More specifically-
Helbrecht
2 x Primaris LT
5 x 5 Intercessor, AGL 5 Scouts
Primaris Anicent
Primaris Apoth
5 Reavers
3 x 3 Inceptors
3 x 5 Helblaster
So a whole battalion.
That list would've done SO much better just as Raven Guard or even Dark Angels. I get wanting to be aggressive and using the melee stats of Primaris to your advantage, but it really doesn't seem worth having to be Black Templars.
Kudos to him even getting 2-3 though. Who did he win against?
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Dude, Deathwatch are still overcosted and you know it. You pay a LOT for those offensive stats. The minimum cost for ONE guy is 17 points because GW thinks a Vet is worth 16 points. In reality it's MAYBE 15 like Wolf Guard. Of course GW thinks we should pay a point for the privelage to Combat Squad!
And by the way, the second marines "get good," deathwatch also "gets good," which means Tyranids cease to exist. Poisoned 2+ on all your guns is flat broken, no one is talking about it because it hasn't impacted the meta in a huge way... yet.
I'm not sure it will - it's really strong but is it really better than Gman? IDK. From a balance perspective though...you can't have the DW special ammo being that good - even if space marines drop in price DW should not.
It is absolutely better, because Deathwatch has effortless access to rerolling hits and 1s to wound. And the guns poisoning on a 2+ have AP. Not to mention they can mix and match units in kill teams and also deep strike them.
Yeah - not sure why DW doesn't place better. Their weapons stats compared to marines are bonkers and exceptionally under-costed for the upgrade.
It was his first round fight - all the lists after that were more competitive.
Yeah I saw he faced some good lists. This list and mass WG are terrible though. Also Tiggy and Devs is terrible. He also faced a list with 6 eldar flyers? He probably tabled that.
4 points for a Storm Bolter is hardly undercosted seeing as the model is 20 points after the fact.
You pay 2 points for the special ammo...for 2+ to wound non vehical, or up to +2 AP. Plus really - it's the intercessors that are OP. For 20 points they do double the damage as normal intercessors AND they can take hellblasters and plasma inceptors in their squads and stack special rules on your units (one of which is the ultramarines chapter tactic...+1 lol).... I almost quit when I read the rules for DW.
Regular Intercessors weren't even close to OP at 20 points. The only difference is that the Deathwatch ones can actually hurt something on occasion.
If you really think they're OP, you need to get your priorities straightened out. They're only OP if you thought Intercessors were fine at 20. Hint: they clearly weren't.
Nah they are overcosted at 18 too. I'm saying they are OP compared to regular space marine intercessors. Which it is quite clear that they are. +2 to wounds things or in the or in the event that isn't your best choice...go to and additional ap -2 instead....That is not a 2 point upgrade.
Daedalus81 wrote: FLG is talking SoCal right now and are addressing the building thing.
What did they say?
Fairly nuanced, but came down to terrain being something you need to factor and to build your list accordingly instead of taking all flyers, etc.
In regards to 32mm charging - they said infantry ignore walls so you wobbly model the chargers.
Yeah - bring ignore LOS spam. That's my plan.
Do infantry ignore walls? or do they just move through them like they are not there? There is a difference between wobbly model syndrome and a wall cutting you in half...They are saying that infantry can charge and attack even if they can't be placed?
In general the way things are played is if the model cannot be placed it cannot complete its charge. This is a rule. Now, if ITC wants to house rule that it's fine, but that's not RAW. And I don't think people going to SoCal would have assumed that house rule, and it certainly wasn't made clear.
I thought the Spring FAQ made the change/clarification where wobbly model cannot be used to put a model into combat that can't actually be placed there.
Arachnofiend wrote: I thought the Spring FAQ made the change/clarification where wobbly model cannot be used to put a model into combat that can't actually be placed there.
Arachnofiend wrote: I thought the Spring FAQ made the change/clarification where wobbly model cannot be used to put a model into combat that can't actually be placed there.
It does yes.
And 'all flier' armies is not the problem with buildings.
The problem is putting blobs into places where they cannot ever be shot at without ignore LoS weapons, which many factions cannot competitively bring if at all.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
They actually *are* quite good. Better if you have a table with lots of ruins.
Wounding Grotesques on 2s? Flyrants on 2s? Primarch's on 2s? Dropping all to invuln save? You can't make the case this isn't good. The rest of the codex may have problems but that isn't what we're discussing here. You can also mix and match squads so they can fall back and shoot, or put a stormshield in a unit... so flexible. And can deep strike.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
They actually *are* quite good. Better if you have a table with lots of ruins.
Wounding Grotesques on 2s? Flyrants on 2s? Primarch's on 2s? Dropping all to invuln save? You can't make the case this isn't good. The rest of the codex may have problems but that isn't what we're discussing here. You can also mix and match squads so they can fall back and shoot, or put a stormshield in a unit... so flexible. And can deep strike.
These guys are still cheaper than a PAGK.
Oh don't get me wrong they are some of the best the marines can offer. I run them regularly and enjoy them. You still don't see them performing super hot in tournies either albeit that is for a variety of reasons not directly related to themselves, but rather the meta being what it is. If there was not a surplus of multiple damage weapons out there then they would be in a much better place. Also note I am talking about Primaris intercessors specifically and not the veteran squads.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
Because the problem is the same. They die to fast.
Its the GK problem. You can make em more killy but now your a more expensive marine that dies like a marine.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
Because the problem is the same. They die to fast.
Its the GK problem. You can make em more killy but now your a more expensive marine that dies like a marine.
I absolutely agree and that is my problem with them specifically. Primaris ones die too fast because of no invulns and a surplus of multiple damage weapons.
Daedalus81 wrote: FLG is talking SoCal right now and are addressing the building thing.
What did they say?
Fairly nuanced, but came down to terrain being something you need to factor and to build your list accordingly instead of taking all flyers, etc.
In regards to 32mm charging - they said infantry ignore walls so you wobbly model the chargers.
Pretty hilarious, as you can't really ever plan for terrain. Sometimes you'll get adepticon levels of gakky terrain, sometimes you get warhammer world amazing setups.
Sometimes you end up with unpainted blocks of foam.
Better make sure you activate your almonds and have a big brain the day before so you can anticipate those changes.
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah - not sure why DW doesn't place better. Their weapons stats compared to marines are bonkers and exceptionally under-costed for the upgrade.
Oh, look, it's Xenomancer has no idea what he is talking about episode.
First, DW models are overcosted across the board. All of them.
Second, even ignoring the above, these bolt pistols that are normally free for SM? They cost points in DW. Since you can't take them off Primaris, they are now overcosted from two different sources, for something you won't use in 95% of games. Gee, that sure sounds great!
Third, these ""OP"" guns? Let's take a look at them. Auto bolt rifle is really overcosted for what it does and just bad. Stalker is both overcosted and useless - because it has only 1 shot and can't even claim full bonus from special ammo - it's literally so bad that even if it was free no one would take it. Bolt rifle is OK but it makes DW Primaris mono-loadout (not even GL, seriously), inflexible unit that has a real bite only to 15 inch and is quite slow. That is not OP by any means and thanks to the two above issues is actually overcosted as package too. And that is the only Primaris unit that gets the special ammo, the Agressors or Inceptors who could actually do something with it don't get it, but they got points hike for no reason whatsoever (I am ignoring Reivers here because it's either trip to Overcostbadville with rifles or plinking away tiny number of pistol shots no one sane would be afraid of).
Now, the big boogeyman itself, the storm bolter. Sure, it's good, but nothing to write home about, it's over 20 points for single wound model that melts to literally anything, and, if you load on storm bolters, is only ever good against a narrow range of targets. Anything vehicle heavy? Auto-loss. Anything with actually good saves or FNP? Usually more point efficient than you. Anything that can stay out 12 inch range or can close the gap in 1 turn? You're frakked. The only real anti-tank DW gets is really expensive frag cannon and every single one of these in DW squad means two storm bolters less. Etc, etc, if SM are overcosted, then DW is so bad in this regard I'd rather take on good half of the armies in this game with mono-SM than mono-DW.
Funnily enough, DW veterans get a gun that would be quite good on Primaris, their own version of stalker (that frankly has stats the Primaris variant should have had in the first place to begin with) but it's a gun that is bad on veterans as they are fragile models paying for a lot of stuff stalker veterans won't ever use, while the models who could actually use it to full capacity can't. And that actually sums up DW pretty well - mythical ""OP"" stuff that is good on paper but turns out to be bad in full context of units that actually get to use it, with lack of synergies everywhere...
Xenomancers wrote: I'm saying the are OP in comparison to space marine intercessors. +2 points for those stats? Gotta be kidding.
Judging by Eldar, DE, and a few more units from other books, these ""OP"" stats should be either free to make up for overcosted models or at best 1 point (with free pistols).
Oh, wait, it's another 'Guard squads should be 10 points per model', only with DW as the scarecrow this time, isn't it?
Daedalus81 wrote: FLG is talking SoCal right now and are addressing the building thing.
What did they say?
Fairly nuanced, but came down to terrain being something you need to factor and to build your list accordingly instead of taking all flyers, etc.
In regards to 32mm charging - they said infantry ignore walls so you wobbly model the chargers.
Pretty hilarious, as you can't really ever plan for terrain. Sometimes you'll get adepticon levels of gakky terrain, sometimes you get warhammer world amazing setups.
Sometimes you end up with unpainted blocks of foam.
Better make sure you activate your almonds and have a big brain the day before so you can anticipate those changes.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
Because the problem is the same. They die to fast.
Its the GK problem. You can make em more killy but now your a more expensive marine that dies like a marine.
I absolutely agree and that is my problem with them specifically. Primaris ones die too fast because of no invulns and a surplus of multiple damage weapons.
Really - I think the consitency of flat 2 damage needs to be removed - if every weapon that was flat 2 went to d3 damage. 2 wound models all get a buff.
Flat 3 is less of a problem because it's more rare and is often comparable to a d6 weapon which has the potential to kill big things in 1 shot. The balance between these 2 is fine. Flat 2 is so much better than d3 it's not even funny.
Deathwatch were actually doing well at SoCal. Any time you win 4+ games that's a good tournament. Stop acting like you have to be top 5 to be good. People battling for the top 5 can lose and drop down to 30th.
I'm pretty sure the point, Irbis, is that in a world where the marine body is costed appropriately Deathwatch killteams would be significantly overtuned. Xeno misconstrued it with his usual "the only thing that matters is how good your shooting is" nonsense but that was the overall argument for the Deathwatch discussion.
Ah, the standard FLG response:
1. Deny there is a problem
2. Acknowledge a problem, but blame it on you
3. Produce a solution to fix you, the average player
4. Talk about how great they are.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
They actually *are* quite good. Better if you have a table with lots of ruins.
Wounding Grotesques on 2s? Flyrants on 2s? Primarch's on 2s? Dropping all to invuln save? You can't make the case this isn't good. The rest of the codex may have problems but that isn't what we're discussing here. You can also mix and match squads so they can fall back and shoot, or put a stormshield in a unit... so flexible. And can deep strike.
These guys are still cheaper than a PAGK.
If you're required to have VERY specific terrain for a unit to be good...the unit isn't good. That's not even up for discussion.
Regarding Strike Squads, they get the native Deep Strike and have 2 attacks at AP-2 DD3. I'm not defending them as fantastic but they're at least not garbage like the rest of the codex.
Arachnofiend wrote: I'm pretty sure the point, Irbis, is that in a world where the marine body is costed appropriately Deathwatch killteams would be significantly overtuned. Xeno misconstrued it with his usual "the only thing that matters is how good your shooting is" nonsense but that was the overall argument for the Deathwatch discussion.
Yep. It is an intra-marine balance issue. And no point crying about the one point bolt pistol; you effectively pay two points to have SIA on your Intercessors. And that's way too little. It's just that the Intercessor base cost is way too high to begin with, so the end result is something reasonablish.
greyknight12 wrote: Ah, the standard FLG response:
1. Deny there is a problem
2. Acknowledge a problem, but blame it on you
3. Produce a solution to fix you, the average player
4. Talk about how great they are.
Xenomancers wrote: Yeah - not sure why DW doesn't place better. Their weapons stats compared to marines are bonkers and exceptionally under-costed for the upgrade.
Oh, look, it's Xenomancer has no idea what he is talking about episode.
First, DW models are overcosted across the board. All of them.
Second, even ignoring the above, these bolt pistols that are normally free for SM? They cost points in DW. Since you can't take them off Primaris, they are now overcosted from two different sources, for something you won't use in 95% of games. Gee, that sure sounds great!
Third, these ""OP"" guns? Let's take a look at them. Auto bolt rifle is really overcosted for what it does and just bad. Stalker is both overcosted and useless - because it has only 1 shot and can't even claim full bonus from special ammo - it's literally so bad that even if it was free no one would take it. Bolt rifle is OK but it makes DW Primaris mono-loadout (not even GL, seriously), inflexible unit that has a real bite only to 15 inch and is quite slow. That is not OP by any means and thanks to the two above issues is actually overcosted as package too. And that is the only Primaris unit that gets the special ammo, the Agressors or Inceptors who could actually do something with it don't get it, but they got points hike for no reason whatsoever (I am ignoring Reivers here because it's either trip to Overcostbadville with rifles or plinking away tiny number of pistol shots no one sane would be afraid of).
Now, the big boogeyman itself, the storm bolter. Sure, it's good, but nothing to write home about, it's over 20 points for single wound model that melts to literally anything, and, if you load on storm bolters, is only ever good against a narrow range of targets. Anything vehicle heavy? Auto-loss. Anything with actually good saves or FNP? Usually more point efficient than you. Anything that can stay out 12 inch range or can close the gap in 1 turn? You're frakked. The only real anti-tank DW gets is really expensive frag cannon and every single one of these in DW squad means two storm bolters less. Etc, etc, if SM are overcosted, then DW is so bad in this regard I'd rather take on good half of the armies in this game with mono-SM than mono-DW.
Funnily enough, DW veterans get a gun that would be quite good on Primaris, their own version of stalker (that frankly has stats the Primaris variant should have had in the first place to begin with) but it's a gun that is bad on veterans as they are fragile models paying for a lot of stuff stalker veterans won't ever use, while the models who could actually use it to full capacity can't. And that actually sums up DW pretty well - mythical ""OP"" stuff that is good on paper but turns out to be bad in full context of units that actually get to use it, with lack of synergies everywhere...
Xenomancers wrote: I'm saying the are OP in comparison to space marine intercessors. +2 points for those stats? Gotta be kidding.
Judging by Eldar, DE, and a few more units from other books, these ""OP"" stats should be either free to make up for overcosted models or at best 1 point (with free pistols).
Oh, wait, it's another 'Guard squads should be 10 points per model', only with DW as the scarecrow this time, isn't it?
I guess you just aren't paying attention because I'm not saying anything that you are saying.
I'm just going to ignore your rudeness and speak to your argument.
First - a space marine intercessor costs 18 and comes with a bolt pisol and a bolt rifle.
A deathwatch intercessor comes with these things and cost 20 points. For this 2 point upgrade - both of it weapons get special issue ammo. Which will practically double your damage against most non vehical units. 11% increase in price to do probably around 100% more damage on average when applied to the right targets.
Lets shoot a hive tyrant with 2+ to wound bolt with bolt rifles.
10 man intercessor with no buffs averages barely over 2 wounds.
10 man Space marine intercessor buffed by guilliman averages 5 failed saves
10 man DW intercessor averages 6 failed saves - with full reroll to hit it's 7.2 failed saves.
Notice...DW intercessors unbuffed are better than space marine intercessors buffed by Gman - when they shoot at t5-t7 non vehicle targets
How about an IG infantry?
10 man un buffed space marine intercessor - a little over 7 kills
10 man unbuffed space marine intercessor with Gman kills 13
10 man DW Intercessor unbuffed kills 9
10 man DW with full reroll to hit kills 12
Here we are again (this is basically the worst example you can think of because intercessors are already really good at killing guardsmen) Still though - we have DW units shooting like they are buffed by GMAN himself - without paying 400 gakking points for a buff unit.
Yeah - stalker bolt rifles are bad - you just don't use them - space marine players don't use them ether. They are in fact ALOT better on a DW unit though. You can ignore aliotoc -1 to hit. Get full rerolls and put tons of ap-2 wounds on dark reapers in cover (+1 to hit units in cover bolt)
We don't even need to go into the fact you can protect your agressors and inceptors and hell blasters with much cheaper intercessor units in combined units - or the fact that these units actually confer additional bonuses to the units.
Like seriously...the guy who wrote the DW codex was high on crack when he wrote it or something. Or he maybe just had a much better idea what a space marine army (yeah...deathwatch are just space marines) should actaully play like.
It really is hard for me to imagine that ANYONE could honestly thing DW are fair standing next to space marines. If a DW intercessors is worth 20 - A space marine intercessor should be 13-14 points.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arachnofiend wrote: I'm pretty sure the point, Irbis, is that in a world where the marine body is costed appropriately Deathwatch killteams would be significantly overtuned. Xeno misconstrued it with his usual "the only thing that matters is how good your shooting is" nonsense but that was the overall argument for the Deathwatch discussion.
Not sure where I said that man.
What I am saying is in a world where a space marine intercessor is 18 points. A DW intercessor should probably be worth like 23-24. Since the space marine intercessor is overcosted by something like 3-4 points. If DW got the same base point adjustment they would be 20-21 points - Pretty much where they are now.
The really are pretty good. Anyone not playing their space marines as DW at this point is just uninformed - or stupid in the head like me. They are hands down the best space marine chapter bar none.
Arachnofiend wrote: I'm pretty sure the point, Irbis, is that in a world where the marine body is costed appropriately Deathwatch killteams would be significantly overtuned. Xeno misconstrued it with his usual "the only thing that matters is how good your shooting is" nonsense but that was the overall argument for the Deathwatch discussion.
Yep. It is an intra-marine balance issue. And no point crying about the one point bolt pistol; you effectively pay two points to have SIA on your Intercessors. And that's way too little. It's just that the Intercessor base cost is way too high to begin with, so the end result is something reasonablish.
Oh hi there! I don't know about you, but I like to play DW Intercessors. To be honest, I was sorely dissappointed with Primaris before switching to DW. Now I can benchpress 400lbs, speak Portuguese, and the girls all love a tall, dark, (xenophobic fascist) stranger.
So why not come over to the guys who put the 'prim' in 'Primaris'?
Daedalus81 wrote: FLG is talking SoCal right now and are addressing the building thing.
What did they say?
Fairly nuanced, but came down to terrain being something you need to factor and to build your list accordingly instead of taking all flyers, etc.
In regards to 32mm charging - they said infantry ignore walls so you wobbly model the chargers.
Pretty hilarious, as you can't really ever plan for terrain. Sometimes you'll get adepticon levels of gakky terrain, sometimes you get warhammer world amazing setups.
Sometimes you end up with unpainted blocks of foam.
Better make sure you activate your almonds and have a big brain the day before so you can anticipate those changes.
I think the broader point is don't complain when you brought an all jetbike army and can't get into buildings.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
greyknight12 wrote: Ah, the standard FLG response:
1. Deny there is a problem
2. Acknowledge a problem, but blame it on you
3. Produce a solution to fix you, the average player
4. Talk about how great they are.
Aside from the wobbly model syndrome thing you should probably listen directly to what he said and address his points if you disagree instead of a post like this.
If the rule is that infantry can assault into buildings with wobbly model then I think the way FLG does things is more or less fine. Gives you a reason to use those footslogging assault units instead of just spamming custodes jetbike captains. I'm preeeeetty sure that isn't actually how it works though given the FAQ.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.
Just no. This is not how this works. A lot of people are trying to build pure Primaris armies and it is completely ludicrous how much better DW are for such a build. No one is saying that DW are OP as a faction, they aren't. However, the cost difference between DW Intercessor and Vanilla intercessor is way too little (the solution is to make vanilla Intercessors cheaper instead of making DW Intercessors more expensive.) And of course as soup exists, you can't balance things for monofaction alone, you need to think about the internal balance of the entire 'Grand Alliance.'
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.
Just no. This is not how this works. A lot of people are trying to build pure Primaris armies and it is completely ludicrous how much better DW are for such a build. No one is saying that DW are OP as a faction, they aren't. However, the cost difference between DW Intercessor and Vanilla intercessor is way too little (the solution is to make vanilla Intercessors cheaper instead of making DW Intercessors more expensive.) And of course as soup exists, you can't balance things for monofaction alone, you need to think about the internal balance of the entire 'Grand Alliance.'
The Deathwatch one is barely worth the 20 points already!
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
The bonus makes up for the anemic options and access to wargear that regular SM get and deathwatch don't. They are pointed in a vacuum (mono dex) and in that case are pointed appropriately. Nobosy should be complaining about Deathwatch.....literally at all.
I sure hope GW doesn't use that logic...
well, you see GW assigning chapter tactics of massively varying power at no point cost so why would it surprise you to think they don't overcost SIA simply because DW does not have access to the same tools that SM get. And of course they don't point things with Soup in mind otherwise we wouldn't have the mess that we have right now, or the knee jerk reactions following tournament results.
If someone wants to play mono Primaris (which DW have access to the same units, and actually better in mixed versions) then yes, you'd lean toward DW. Unless perhaps you want to make the most out of Bobby G, or perhaps plasma spamming for DA (there may be a couple other exceptions). Does not mean that SIA is overcosted, it just means that the unit choices for Primaris are too prohibitive right now.
It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.
It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.
Which is why army-wide traits should have their own point cost. It would at least help to differentiate the power level of each trait and people would not feel hampered by playing Saim-hann when Alaitoc would obviously serve them better.
It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.
Which is why army-wide traits should have their own point cost. It would at least help to differentiate the power level of each trait and people would not feel hampered by playing Saim-hann when Alaitoc would obviously serve them better.
But that leads to other problems. Some traits are better with some units and terrible with others. But across a dex it becomes a bit more balanced (except the minus to hit traits). If Alaitoc was changed to something more mellow, which Craftworld would you see? Probably some Ulthwe, some Biel Tan, Saim Hann....maybe a few Iyanden. It would be more diverse. They don't need to be pointed (as you'd have to do it for each unit, not just each attribute), you just can't have one be so much better than the others.
It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.
Which is why army-wide traits should have their own point cost. It would at least help to differentiate the power level of each trait and people would not feel hampered by playing Saim-hann when Alaitoc would obviously serve them better.
But that leads to other problems. Some traits are better with some units and terrible with others. But across a dex it becomes a bit more balanced (except the minus to hit traits). If Alaitoc was changed to something more mellow, which Craftworld would you see? Probably some Ulthwe, some Biel Tan, Saim Hann....maybe a few Iyanden. It would be more diverse. They don't need to be pointed (as you'd have to do it for each unit, not just each attribute), you just can't have one be so much better than the others.
I agree - traits costing points is just another can of worms. Just bring the weaker traits up and occupy the game with enough tools that taking certain traits isn't a sure win (like with what Orks will do to the meta).
It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.
Which is why army-wide traits should have their own point cost. It would at least help to differentiate the power level of each trait and people would not feel hampered by playing Saim-hann when Alaitoc would obviously serve them better.
But that leads to other problems. Some traits are better with some units and terrible with others. But across a dex it becomes a bit more balanced (except the minus to hit traits). If Alaitoc was changed to something more mellow, which Craftworld would you see? Probably some Ulthwe, some Biel Tan, Saim Hann....maybe a few Iyanden. It would be more diverse. They don't need to be pointed (as you'd have to do it for each unit, not just each attribute), you just can't have one be so much better than the others.
Then I'll bring up the counterpoint. Kill the Batm... I mean remove traits altogether.
Actually, I have a more interesting idea. What if you made a chapter/craftworld specific army(basically there would be requirements to what you must field) and it would net you a few extra Command Points? No armywide ability, no special snowflake thing going on, only a slightly more efficient army command point-wise.
The other way would be to have a trait only apply to a certain unit. Saim-hann would only be Windrunner jetbikes, Iyanden would only be wraithguard, Alaitoc apply only to Rangers, Ulthwe would only be guardians, and so on and so on. It would limit their force multiplier drastically while encouraging thematic Craftworld units.
It's literally no different than choosing an Alaitoc Hemlock over an Iyanden one. It's a no brainer, to choose the former, but should the hemlock be priced differently in each Craftworld? No, that would be messy.
Actually were gw designers professionals they would
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Marmatag wrote: The system is fine, just alter the alaitoc keyword so that it *specifically* doesn't stack with other -1 to hit abilities.
Sure it's fine if you care nothing about fluff and balance. Traits kill fluff and the way they are implemented kills balance as well
Sure it's fine if you care nothing about fluff and balance. Traits kill fluff and the way they are implemented kills balance as well
Well, he cares about balance, which is why there shouldn't be stacking.
As for fluff - nothing is ever going to perfectly match fluff.
Haha, thank you.
And it's always funny seeing people post these "simple" suggestions like a wonky points system that needs to be completely implemented from scratch for traits, or complete top to bottom redesign of the system based purely on Eldar.
The problematic Eldar army is Ynnari. And Ynnari detachments don't get the trait bonus anyway, if you're really interested in toning Eldar down, just look at Ynnari. That's where the problem lives, end of story.
Crimson wrote: But it is still more appropriately costed than the vanilla one. This really cannot be that hard to understand...
Which is why I'm for Intercessors to be 16-17 points standard. Deathwatch being MORE appropriately priced doesn't mean they are, though. It just means we get frustrated trying to make the Vanilla codex work. Quite honestly the only thing they got that I personally want is access to Ancients. That would be INSANE.
Crimson wrote: But it is still more appropriately costed than the vanilla one. This really cannot be that hard to understand...
Which is why I'm for Intercessors to be 16-17 points standard. Deathwatch being MORE appropriately priced doesn't mean they are, though. It just means we get frustrated trying to make the Vanilla codex work. Quite honestly the only thing they got that I personally want is access to Ancients. That would be INSANE.
Deathwatch effortless get reroll to wound with their captain. And since they're deep striking with 30+ inch rapid fire guns, it's not far fetched to assume they'll be rerolling their 1s. Because in practice they are.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
They actually *are* quite good. Better if you have a table with lots of ruins.
Wounding Grotesques on 2s? Flyrants on 2s? Primarch's on 2s? Dropping all to invuln save? You can't make the case this isn't good. The rest of the codex may have problems but that isn't what we're discussing here. You can also mix and match squads so they can fall back and shoot, or put a stormshield in a unit... so flexible. And can deep strike.
These guys are still cheaper than a PAGK.
If you're required to have VERY specific terrain for a unit to be good...the unit isn't good. That's not even up for discussion.
Regarding Strike Squads, they get the native Deep Strike and have 2 attacks at AP-2 DD3. I'm not defending them as fantastic but they're at least not garbage like the rest of the codex.
Martel732 wrote: They're not op. Sheesh. Still power armor that dies easily.
Yes, but the special ammo is worth more than two points. DW Intercessors still may not be very good, but it is completely ludicrous how much better they're than the vanilla ones.
Funny how that works. They are ludicrously better than the vanilla version and still not all that good.
They actually *are* quite good. Better if you have a table with lots of ruins.
Wounding Grotesques on 2s? Flyrants on 2s? Primarch's on 2s? Dropping all to invuln save? You can't make the case this isn't good. The rest of the codex may have problems but that isn't what we're discussing here. You can also mix and match squads so they can fall back and shoot, or put a stormshield in a unit... so flexible. And can deep strike.
These guys are still cheaper than a PAGK.
If you're required to have VERY specific terrain for a unit to be good...the unit isn't good. That's not even up for discussion.
Regarding Strike Squads, they get the native Deep Strike and have 2 attacks at AP-2 DD3. I'm not defending them as fantastic but they're at least not garbage like the rest of the codex.
They have 1 attack base.
If you read my post you'll see I assumed they're equipped with Falcions
They still have 1 attack base. Falchions aren't free (opportunity cost), they come with a trade off. You will wound T8 on 6s rather than 5s, or T5 on 5s rather than 4s or 3s. And, the warding stave grants an invulnerable save in melee. Another trade off.
