Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Naw wrote:

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
Most of the complaints about terrain are from tournaments, where you have to use the provided terrain and can't use your own.

Surprised people don't just take Bastions or something, though sometimes those are banned too.

Are you actually suggesting that I spend points to buy a LOS blocker for my army?

Why not? All the fortifications that are part of the rules basically have that function. They are legal and logical options. How is it different than using a rhino or landraider as a mobile LOS blocker?.

Naw wrote:

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
Most of the complaints about terrain are from tournaments, where you have to use the provided terrain and can't use your own.

Surprised people don't just take Bastions or something, though sometimes those are banned too.

Are you actually suggesting that I spend points to buy a LOS blocker for my army?

i would definitely consider the aegis defence line
dont know about fortress
and i might buy bastion or skyshield landing pad for kicks and giggles

Wrong thread..

My point still stands. I should not be forced to pay points to have LOS blocker. That does not make this game more fair.

This whole LOS blocking terrain thing is a huge wild card. GW needed to have explicitly stated the assumptions for the game. I rarely get to play with substantial LOS blocking terrain, which explains some of my experiences.

Martel732 wrote:
This whole LOS blocking terrain thing is a huge wild card. GW needed to have explicitly stated the assumptions for the game. I rarely get to play with substantial LOS blocking terrain, which explains some of my experiences.

But, it kind of does. It tells you to pool all available Terrain pieces. Then gives you free choice for deployment from buildings, to ruins, to area terrain. It lists a building as a substantial terrain piece example. Giving a full selection of terrain there is no reason why you couldn't make all of your selections block LOS against Serpent Spam armies or Tau. The BRB makes this assumption and if you aren't doing this you are handicapping yourself. By not having a full compliment of terrain available you are playing at a disadvantage. Bring your own terrain or play mutually agreed upon terrain, so long as it is fair. Don't play Serpent Spam gunline armies on mutually agreed upon poor terrain boards expecting to win, and certainly don't complain about it afterwards. Will LOS blocking terrain completely even out the Meta, absolutely not, but does it make it much better, yes.

Now, tournaments are a different story, but all of them that I have been to recently have done very well in this respect and in tournaments with adequate LOS blocking terrain the meta distribution is better. There may be some bad tables, but most have adequate LOS blocking terrain. The problems being with an imbalance that is exacerbated by poor terrain. Tournament goers assume poor terrain and plan and take armies accordingly. Any imbalance gets compounded and exacerbated.

Martel732 wrote:
This whole LOS blocking terrain thing is a huge wild card. GW needed to have explicitly stated the assumptions for the game. I rarely get to play with substantial LOS blocking terrain, which explains some of my experiences.

I'm not sure why people feel so bound by what GW says. Especially if it seems lacking.

If it's a wild card then why not remove that from the game? Unless somehow people feel that is important.

ie Tournament organizers could use three template set ups (sparse terrain, medium terrain, and heavy terrain). Specific details could be posted so players now just focus on list building and tactics. Then terrain could be standardized across tournaments and even versions of the rules.

gravitywell wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
This whole LOS blocking terrain thing is a huge wild card. GW needed to have explicitly stated the assumptions for the game. I rarely get to play with substantial LOS blocking terrain, which explains some of my experiences.

I'm not sure why people feel so bound by what GW says. Especially if it seems lacking.

If it's a wild card then why not remove that from the game? Unless somehow people feel that is important.

ie Tournament organizers could use three template set ups (sparse terrain, medium terrain, and heavy terrain). Specific details could be posted so players now just focus on list building and tactics. Then terrain could be standardized across tournaments and even versions of the rules.

Because it's something people can agree on. All the Taudar players want parking lots to play on. I would rather it not be a parking lot. We need a codified, consistent method for overcoming this disagreement.

GW's section on setting up a table is awful with the emphasis on making it look nice to forge a narrative. It mentions you should only use the Alternating Terrain method if you and your opponent can't agree a narrative (to forge). LOS blocking terrain is mentioned once in the :rolleyes: "Forge the Narrative" box out.

Even in the Alternating Terrain instructions, it tells you to use the Terrain Pieces you have available and then randomizes how many you can place. There's some instruction to what a terrain piece can be in point 3, but on a whole it's woefully inadequate

I don't see myself agreeing with the Taudar... ever. Ping pong table world is not acceptable, so random terrain it is.

Martel732 wrote:

...something people can agree on...
... We need a codified, consistent method...

I'm not sure how using standardized board templates for tournaments wouldn't address this.

gravitywell wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

...something people can agree on...
... We need a codified, consistent method...

I'm not sure how using standardized board templates for tournaments wouldn't address this.

It does. I mean for pickup games.

Martel732 wrote:

gravitywell wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
This whole LOS blocking terrain thing is a huge wild card. GW needed to have explicitly stated the assumptions for the game. I rarely get to play with substantial LOS blocking terrain, which explains some of my experiences.

I'm not sure why people feel so bound by what GW says. Especially if it seems lacking.

If it's a wild card then why not remove that from the game? Unless somehow people feel that is important.

ie Tournament organizers could use three template set ups (sparse terrain, medium terrain, and heavy terrain). Specific details could be posted so players now just focus on list building and tactics. Then terrain could be standardized across tournaments and even versions of the rules.

Because it's something people can agree on. All the Taudar players want parking lots to play on. I would rather it not be a parking lot. We need a codified, consistent method for overcoming this disagreement.

You been given it. You alternate placing Terrain from a wide selection. You have the choice to put down something that blocks LOS with every selection while the TauDar player places simple Area terrain. That is the method for overcoming the discrepancy.

Alternating Terrain Placement form a wide selection is the answer. You can guarantee that you will have a couple of LOS blocking terrain pieces. You opponent can say otherwise with his/her selections. This is fair and balanced as you each get to see the terrain you want to see, at least half of it anyway.

This is going to require me to make my own terrain. And for them to allow me to use it. I might be completely hosed vis a vis this LOS stuff.

Martel732 wrote:
This is going to require me to make my own terrain. And for them to allow me to use it. I might be completely hosed vis a vis this LOS stuff.

You have rules support and fair play on your side. Show them the rules and how alternating selection from a large pool works, explain to them that the way they are placing and detmining terrain with minimal LOS blocking terrain is giving gunline armies an unfair advantage and is against the rules.

A Dilapidated Bastion is a perfectly legal terrain choice for you to choose during deployment. So long as you are making varied terrain that is of approximate size and composition of GW terrain you shouldn't have a problem.

A 1" x 4" x 8" wall is a perfectly legal LOS blocking Terrain Piece.

If you tables don't have anything approaching this...



or...



you need to reevaluate your LOS Blocking Terrain setup.

With some foamboard, a craft knife, a few pins and some glue (and then paint, but a 'concrete' spray can do it quickly) you can make quite reasonable looking ruins that are the right sizes.

How would you do it

I'm actually looking forward to making my own terrain. All my funds are going toward my army at the moment though.

Hmm, is it just me or has the last couple of pages just been a completely new topic?

Don't want to fan the fires of OT discussion, but I hate the new way of terrain placement. Really makes for some of the dumbest looking tables I have ever seen.

I know making standardized tables would be "ok" but then that wouldn't add any flavor to the game. I bought a bit of terrain and I've been building. I like lots of LoS blocking terrain and I'm getting into a shooty army.. it's just more realistic.

 Matt1785 wrote:
Hmm, is it just me or has the last couple of pages just been a completely new topic?

Don't want to fan the fires of OT discussion, but I hate the new way of terrain placement. Really makes for some of the dumbest looking tables I have ever seen.

I know making standardized tables would be "ok" but then that wouldn't add any flavor to the game. I bought a bit of terrain and I've been building. I like lots of LoS blocking terrain and I'm getting into a shooty army.. it's just more realistic.

Not really, proper use of LOS blocking terrain is tantamount to the Wave Serpent Rage. Without LOS blocking terrain many armies have no options and spend two hours picking up their models. With proper LOS blocking terrain Wave Serpents are still king, but to a much lesser degree.

Not using proper LOS blocking terrain is the same as giving shooty armies a free turn of shooting.

thats why we we love heavy terrain against guard

I never really use my serpents for more than being a transport for my wraithguard. I bring three in my Iyanden army but then again with my low model count, I kind of need that sort of thing to take a few extra blows before dying horribly.

While, sure it has some cool weapon load outs, I'd rather use them to get my meager troop units to the objective and use it as a shield for them. And they've only lasted more than a couple turns in one game against a DE player. Sadly he'd rolled terribly the whole game so I really didn't lose much of anything and damn near tabled him. Not much you can do when your Grotesques fail to pen the rear armor on a charge.

And Matt 1785, the new terrain layout ends up giving you some cool tables if you and your opponent go for a theme. At my FLGS they've been building a lot of terrain that goes very well together like fencing and a gate and some guard towers, or crumbling ruins set up to laid out like city streets. Good stuff and wonderful LOS blockers. Saved my bacon more than once.

That's all I use mine for as well... Carrying wraith-guard.
Though my d scythe carrying serpent has been renowned for slaying 2 vendettas over 2 games with triple sixes (6 to hit, 6 to pen, 6 to blow) from my serpent shield. No I don't understand they should just be used for primary transports not long range. All my opponents are fine(which doesn't really matter) with me using dual serpents to transport scythe and cannon guard(compared to 5 man DA in wave serpents)

I think it's biggest problem is that it is a Dedicated transport, so it doesn't limit your FOC use, if it took up slots, it'd be fine as it wouldn't be nearly as spammable.

Eldercaveman wrote:
I think it's biggest problem is that it is a Dedicated transport, so it doesn't limit your FOC use, if it took up slots, it'd be fine as it wouldn't be nearly as spammable.

I would certainly second that but what slot

 hiveof_chimera wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:
I think it's biggest problem is that it is a Dedicated transport, so it doesn't limit your FOC use, if it took up slots, it'd be fine as it wouldn't be nearly as spammable.

I would certainly second that but what slot

Fast. Make the Eldar choose.

I love my Aegis Defense Line with the Quad TLAC. It's taken for the interceptor and skyfire rules, and the cover save is just a bonus to me. Taking a Wall of Martyrs, Fortress of Redemption, Skyshield Landing Pad, or Bastion should NOT be the solution to Wave Serpent Spam. Does the Eldar player have to purchase a Fortification? No. The Eldar player would very happily spend the points on another Wave Serpent.

Terrain Placement should help mitigate the problem. However, terrain could hamper your own army just as much as your opponent's army.

My personal experience- I played a 1500 point "Highlander" style tournament this last weekend. Basically, you could only use one choice from each force allocation chart. I.e.; you could only take one Company Captain from the HQ section, or only one unit of Sternguard from Elites, or one Land Raider from the HS section. You could take multiple different selections from each slot though (like Terminators and Sternguard from Elites). Troops were exempt from this rule, as well as dedicated transports. I brought a pretty vanilla take on all comers Space Marine list. Game one, I faced...

1xFarseer on Jetbike
1x Warlock Council (3 of them) on Jet bikes
Dire Avenger squad, Wave Serpent
Dire Avenger Squad, Wave Serpent
Jetbike Squad (3 models)
Rangers
Fire Dragons, Wave Serpent
Wraithguard, Wave Serpent
Warp Spiders

I'm sure someone has crunched the numbers, but from my rough calculations, it was going to take 14 Lascannon shots to take out one Wave Serpent, or 16 Missile Launcher shots, or a similar amount of Melta depending on range. Or I get very, very lucky. How many Lascannons did I have? Zero. How many Missile Launchers did I have? Six. How many Meltaguns? Three. Meltabombs? Five. Assault Cannons? Two. By the end of the game, I had stripped some HP's off all of them, stunned a couple of them twice, and took out one Scatter Laser. Due to the terrain, I was never able to focus my fire on any one Wave Serpent. Can you see how terrain can help the Eldar player just as much as you? Wave Serpents are Fast Skimmers, and they can move where they need to be, and they can utilize terrain very effectively.

Why the Waveserpent hate? It's an incredibly points efficient tank/transport with good AV, awesome maneuverability, fantastic weapon options, the Serpent Shield effectively making all penetrating hits glances, not to mention it's gun, and it's a transport. It's very easy to use- "player friendly". Either sit in the back field and shoot Serpent Shield, or move around, use cover, shoot Scatter Laser (or whatever weapon). Fall back/move around in LoS terrain as required. Early game, sit back, shoot Serpent Shield, get First Blood. Mid game, move around, use LoS blocking terrain, take shots of opportunity with secondary weapons, keep shield up. Late game, move up, dump out models, take objectives. Get Line Breaker. Last turn- if you are the bottom player- pop off all Serpent Shields.

As a Space Marine player, yes, I can defeat them. In the above game, I managed to seize the relic on the last turn with my last full Tactical Squad that managed to wither a ton of fire down to three models to win the game by one point. My opponent lost 3 Wraithguard, one unit of Dire Avengers, the Jet bike Squad, and half the Warp Spiders. I was down to a handful of models barely hanging on to contest/keep objectives. The losses by my opponent had more to do with the fact that my opponent was an inexperienced player. What was so frightening to me was how well my opponent performed even after making a constant stream of mistakes. This was a tournament, so I had to worry about other armies when I was writing my list. If I was specifically playing against Eldar, I would have taken a much different list.

What to do about them? That's a whole new can of worms, and it's hard to say what to do. I'd say change the Serpent Shield. Take away the shooting aspect of it would solve a lot of problems.

Its undercosted. Its not the first vehicle in the game of 40k history that's been undercosted.

BA razorbacks were undercosted in 5th, but not like this.

I'm remembering back to psydreads when the GK codex was released.

Or psybolt razorbacks.

Heck -- all of the GK codex was horribly undercosted then. Some of it still is.

At least the GK stuff would die. Wave Serpents are frustratingly immortal.