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.

 ausYenLoWang wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
It has a titan holofield, which essentially ignores hits on a 4+ including D weapons.

Adding that it's easy enough with the movement and cost of it to get it an invul, like the skyshield, or get it cover, hiding behind a bastion.

You'll have to remember that it's superheavy too, so every one of the 9 hull points has to go away before you affect it's firepower at all. which will be about 27 glance/pens with the off chance you'll get some more with explosions.

iv asked it before and ill ask it again, does it fit on a skyshield with the sides folded up? the base for my thunderhawk might, beyond that i think youd be struggling

Easily unless you give it a monstrous base. Revenants are pretty thin.

 viewfinder wrote:

big difference: there are defenses against flyers. with D-weapons, your list doesn't really matter, it's just who goes first. hiding is about the only tactic against weapons that generally can cover the table. in a tournament setting, no fun. in a friendly game, I'll try my damnedest to build against that monster.

Why is it fun in a non tournament setting and not fun in a tournament setting? What is the difference between a triple tide list, a Tau/Eldar list or any other abusive list? Complain about one, then you need to complain about all. People asked for GW to combat Deathstars, GW gave us the tools.

Better watch for what you wish for. What you get you just may not like.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 OzTeG8ndPwRfl wrote:
Assuming you give 4 of them two melta guns, that makes 8 melta shots twin linked with tank hunter. 6 hit the first time, 4.5 hit the second time. Tank hunter means there is a 4 or 5% chance one fails to pen. 4.5 HP right off the bat half cause explosions which do +D3 HP so 2.25 do that, assuming adverage rolls that makes 9HP average in a turn... That is ridiculous I know, but easy to do, and your interceptors would hit 16 drones with 4+ cover saves in the open two of which have 3+ invulnerable saves.

You don't get twin linked against the 2nd roll to hit. It's not actually a "to hit" roll as such, it's to check whether you fired at the actual target or a holo-field image instead. So if the Revenant didn't move, you have 8 melta shots, 6 hit the first time, only 2 actually get through on average. The Revenant then jumps away and destroys the unit with StrD blasts.

We covered that already man. I tried doing some math hammer for my current favorite fluff list vs one.

Turn one:
One crisis squad on the table able to damage it. 8 missile pods that hit on a 4+ and 2 that hit on a 2+ with tank hunter. 5.67 hits the first time, 3.389 hits the second time making .386 glances and .386 pens.

Hopefully I can deny him line of sight by hiding behind something, otherwise he has a 55% chance of hitting and a 46% chance of killing any given crisis suit.

Turn two:
Deep strikers arrive, one melta squad one plasma rifle squad. Melta squad has 4 melta that hit on a 4+ and 1 that hits on a 2+ twin linked. 2 of the 4+ hit and .97 of the one 2+ shot hit the first time, 1.81 get through the second time, .41 shots get through most likely a pen if it does get through.
Plasma squad fires 12 shots at 4+, makes 6 hits, 3 after the second time. 1.5 get through the shield making .25 glances.
If the other squad survives it can do the above again.

So even after firing over 1000 points at the thing over two turns I would do on average only 2.2 hull points of damage and that is if I suffer zero casualties. I expect that I could not kill a relevant with my standard tournament list if I tried. Though I can say this is not because of D weapons, but primarily because the relevant titan is just plain stupid hard to kill. I would not remove the D weapons necessarily, but rather would see the thing as fair without the holofield which is the point at which the model gets broken.

Davor wrote:

 viewfinder wrote:

big difference: there are defenses against flyers. with D-weapons, your list doesn't really matter, it's just who goes first. hiding is about the only tactic against weapons that generally can cover the table. in a tournament setting, no fun. in a friendly game, I'll try my damnedest to build against that monster.

Why is it fun in a non tournament setting and not fun in a tournament setting? What is the difference between a triple tide list, a Tau/Eldar list or any other abusive list? Complain about one, then you need to complain about all. People asked for GW to combat Deathstars, GW gave us the tools.

Better watch for what you wish for. What you get you just may not like.

in a friendly game, I can be prepared for the super-heavy. It would be a challenge and a goal. In tournamemts, you don't have the luxury of tailoring your list to one specific foe. and if I pay to go to a tournament, I'd like for the outcome to be determined on more than who went first and who spent the most money on their army.

Escalation isn't any more "part of normal 40k" than Planetstrike or Cities of Death is. And you've never gone to a tournament where you play The Relic while the guy on the table over is playing Planetstrike for the same round.

 Wilytank wrote:
Escalation isn't any more "part of normal 40k" than Planetstrike or Cities of Death is. And you've never gone to a tournament where you play The Relic while the guy on the table over is playing Planetstrike for the same round.

My thoughts exactly. Escalation and stronghold assault are supplemental rulebooks, like apocalypse, cites of death, planetstrike, ect.

Bit different actually, Escalation and Stronghold Assault are defiend as "supplements" while stuff like Planetstrike and Cities of Death are "expansions".

 viewfinder wrote:

Davor wrote:

 viewfinder wrote:

big difference: there are defenses against flyers. with D-weapons, your list doesn't really matter, it's just who goes first. hiding is about the only tactic against weapons that generally can cover the table. in a tournament setting, no fun. in a friendly game, I'll try my damnedest to build against that monster.

Why is it fun in a non tournament setting and not fun in a tournament setting? What is the difference between a triple tide list, a Tau/Eldar list or any other abusive list? Complain about one, then you need to complain about all. People asked for GW to combat Deathstars, GW gave us the tools.

Better watch for what you wish for. What you get you just may not like.

in a friendly game, I can be prepared for the super-heavy. It would be a challenge and a goal. In tournamemts, you don't have the luxury of tailoring your list to one specific foe. and if I pay to go to a tournament, I'd like for the outcome to be determined on more than who went first and who spent the most money on their army.

How can you prepare in a friendly game? You are list tailoring then if you are. I guess if you know ahead of time, then yes, but I am talking about a pick up game with a stranger. That is just like going to a tourney. You don't know who or what you going to play, unless you don't do that.

Just trying to understand your point of view, not saying you are wrong.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Wilytank wrote:
Escalation isn't any more "part of normal 40k" than Planetstrike or Cities of Death is. And you've never gone to a tournament where you play The Relic while the guy on the table over is playing Planetstrike for the same round.

My thoughts exactly. Escalation and stronghold assault are supplemental rulebooks, like apocalypse, cites of death, planetstrike, ect.

wait WHAT?

the relic is a MISSION TYPE... if you look IN the books for escalation and SA then you will find that id modifies the basic FOC for NORMAL everyday games of 40k, to include a LOW slot.

So some books are allowed to alter tournament play but not others?

 Wilytank wrote:
So some books are allowed to alter tournament play but not others?

Ever been to a Planetstrike tournament? how about a Battle Missions one?

A tournament organiser can rule in or out any book he likes.

You could set up a tournament for 5th edition rules, excluding all Xenos codexes, for example, if you thought it might be a fun idea. Call it the Imperial Civil War.

You can within reason rule out sections of the rulebook, as long as the basic functionality is preserved. You could run a tournament with no Allies, and it would work fine as a game, but you could not exclude the rules for movement or firing, though.

exactly, hence the popularity of 1999+1 tournaments. some armies, like Space Wolves, can get crazy amounts of HQs on the table. TOs can house rule anything they wish. At our FLGS, the TO rolls for Night Fighting for the entire room, preventing an screwiness between early/late scoring due to night conditions. It also makes it a lot simpler during the course of the day.

 viewfinder wrote:
exactly, hence the popularity of 1999+1 tournaments. some armies, like Space Wolves, can get crazy amounts of HQs on the table. TOs can house rule anything they wish. At our FLGS, the TO rolls for Night Fighting for the entire room, preventing an screwiness between early/late scoring due to night conditions. It also makes it a lot simpler during the course of the day.

I like the one roll for night fighting idea, might have to bring that up at the next local tourney I go to.

 ausYenLoWang wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Wilytank wrote:
Escalation isn't any more "part of normal 40k" than Planetstrike or Cities of Death is. And you've never gone to a tournament where you play The Relic while the guy on the table over is playing Planetstrike for the same round.

My thoughts exactly. Escalation and stronghold assault are supplemental rulebooks, like apocalypse, cites of death, planetstrike, ect.

wait WHAT?

the relic is a MISSION TYPE... if you look IN the books for escalation and SA then you will find that id modifies the basic FOC for NORMAL everyday games of 40k, to include a LOW slot.

I'm not sure what you are saying. I was agreeing that stonghold assault and escalation are not part of regular 40k. Because they aren't.