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.

So for the first time ever we would have a rule from GW that was not thought through...... how surprising.

RaW is not always the best way to play it as it can be stupid as you mention.

That is why (if you happen to read my post) i mention that i would not play it like that.

sleekid wrote:
So for the first time ever we would have a rule from GW that was not thought through...... how surprising.

RaW is not always the best way to play it as it can be stupid as you mention.

That is why (if you happen to read my post) i mention that i would not play it like that.

Not sure why you are taking this personally. An argument was made multiple times before you chimed in, your last post mentioned it in passing and I pointed how ridiculous that argument is.

Anyway, you seem to be trying for some middle ground which can only happen by a bunch of house ruling. I'd rather just take effected in any way to mean when targeted. Otherwise it opens up a whole mess of problems, some of which cause alternate universes to form lol

"Does that summoned unit contest my objective" "Nope that is affected by psychic powers"

"Does that psychic shooting attack kill that unit?" "Nope I need it to shield my unit to get cover saves"

"Can I move through that summoned unit" "Yep, otherwise their movement is affected by psychic powers"

We have a more modern ruling for the same piece of wargear. That is how I would play it and expect others to do the same. It is two editions old from a different time when wording for psychic powers was completely different.

 Leth wrote:
"Does that summoned unit contest my objective" "Nope that is affected by psychic powers"

"Does that psychic shooting attack kill that unit?" "Nope I need it to shield my unit to get cover saves"

"Can I move through that summoned unit" "Yep, otherwise their movement is affected by psychic powers"

We have a more modern ruling for the same piece of wargear. That is how I would play it and expect others to do the same. It is two editions old from a different time when wording for psychic powers was completely different.

This. The wording in GK codex is obviously too old. New wording of the same wargear in Inquisition codex explains how we should play this nowadays.

I play against a player who wraps his psyker in centurions to keep him alive and drops about 800-1000 points in that unit with other models. I know at least one is Draigo. He also stacks BB so that he gets rerollable psychic choices (granted only three) on 19 powers.

It is basically unkillable with invis and other types of defensive psychic powers he gets to choose because he can take so many powers.

When te psyker is wrapped in a monsteous unit like that then the 'kill the caster' advice is useless.
When the unit can deep strike anywhere and drop an armies worth of shots and grav weapons etc on ANYTHING on the board then 'ignoringthem and claiming objectives' is useless.
DTW might work in some armies but what exactly can cron/Tau do when they get AT MOST 6 charges to DTW against 15+.

I am o the opinion that invis IS the current state of game. But that's just me.

seism85 wrote:
I play against a player who wraps his psyker in centurions to keep him alive and drops about 800-1000 points in that unit with other models. I know at least one is Draigo. He also stacks BB so that he gets rerollable psychic choices (granted only three) on 19 powers.

It is basically unkillable with invis and other types of defensive psychic powers he gets to choose because he can take so many powers.

A couple Culexus assassins would make it sad. (Couple, so that you have better board coverage.) Centurions snap-firing at a thing they need 6s to wound means they're not going to be killing the assassin even if he doesn't have any kind of cover. If your local meta is so full of psychic deathstars... a few assassins might make all the difference.

When the unit can deep strike anywhere and drop an armies worth of shots and grav weapons etc on ANYTHING on the board then 'ignoringthem and claiming objectives' is useless.

MSU is the answer to epic unkillable deathstars. They can only shoot one unit and maybe kill another with psychic powers.

sleekid wrote:
So for the first time ever we would have a rule from GW that was not thought through...... how surprising.

RaW is not always the best way to play it as it can be stupid as you mention.

That is why (if you happen to read my post) i mention that i would not play it like that.

If you want to fight RAW fire with fire, point out that the last clause of invisibility doesn't say ONLY the targetted enemy hits only on a 6. I say GW did a fine job of balancing the shooting defense by nerfing the units ability to hit in close combat. Fluffwise, they must be unable to find their close combat weapons. "in it" can refer to close combat, not just the casting unit.

Mavnas wrote:

seism85 wrote:
I play against a player who wraps his psyker in centurions to keep him alive and drops about 800-1000 points in that unit with other models. I know at least one is Draigo. He also stacks BB so that he gets rerollable psychic choices (granted only three) on 19 powers.

It is basically unkillable with invis and other types of defensive psychic powers he gets to choose because he can take so many powers.

A couple Culexus assassins would make it sad. (Couple, so that you have better board coverage.) Centurions snap-firing at a thing they need 6s to wound means they're not going to be killing the assassin even if he doesn't have any kind of cover. If your local meta is so full of psychic deathstars... a few assassins might make all the difference.

When the unit can deep strike anywhere and drop an armies worth of shots and grav weapons etc on ANYTHING on the board then 'ignoringthem and claiming objectives' is useless.

MSU is the answer to epic unkillable deathstars. They can only shoot one unit and maybe kill another with psychic powers.

I play crons. I can't access the infinite playbox of broken combos that the Imperium armies can, but i shall look into taking them as a 'come te Apoc' Ally

problem with "come the apoc" allies is you cant even benefit from it then unless youre fielding about as many imperials/other races that have it than you are crons.

Invisibility is more of an annoyance on most units, since it makes just about anything stupid durable. The units that become utterly insane are usually expensive as gak and probably will make your ally formation cost ~800 easily if not more depending on the race. Then you gotta hope you get the right spell lol.

Quite frankly i find it dumb that Templates cannot target invisible models. Blasts i can understand since theyre usually long range weapons in fluff (few oddballs obviously) and you arent going to see a shimmering figure like you do in Starcraft when Ghosts are invisible at extreme distances.
Templates really should be allowed to hit them because theyre all short ranged weapons, making it likely you can tell something is there so you just blanked the area in flame. Even if they made it have a penalty like -1 strength or something it would make sense and make invisibility less insane.

Also find it dumb that it makes melee attacks hit on a 6+.....when the worst you can hit on normally is 5+....wth

Invisibility to me...Is certainly a bit over the top right now. When combined with psychic shriek the unit is nigh on un-tarpitable, and in addition to that, if the unit is has the ability to get around the map quickly, your looking at a unit dissapearing off the table each turn due to the nature of the Invisible units ususally being something along the lines of a deathstar.

The easiest way to deal with a death star is to ignore it, however it's hard to ignore deathstars that will be capable of chasing you down and wiping you out with ranged fire rather than melee, and this is what is the great case to be made here. So many people are looking at the game of deathstars in that of terms to a melee unit that still needs to travel to where it needs to go to. However due to the number of gate of infinity, t bikers, and drop pod assault rise, ranged death stars are far from unimaginable. A ranged death star is much tougher to get through than a melee death star because you have to go through a legitimate over watch with pimped TL Fire/prescience, and while people say take mass amount of fliers or go MSU, one has to take note of the fact that not every faction is really capable of doing so/effectively and even then they will be shot down with considerable ease from a ranged death star.

Right now we are seeing melee invisible death stars. What happens when we start seeing people take up multiple libbies and psychers attaching them to multiple ranged units that happen to be OBS. Now there are all of a sudden 2 extremely hard ranged units to kill in a game that is very much sides toward ranged warfare. The game changes drastically, because you can't shoot them off. While I don't consider the ability to be OP as of yet... I do think that there will be quite a lot of Rage in the next few tournaments coming up next where we see Invisibility was completely abused, making even the most simplistic units to kill, a nightmare when it comes end game and you need to score those objectives. I heard a lot of people stating how flyers need 6s to hit as well, but they aren't O.P. and yes you are right, and that is because when YOU take a flier you can hit it with NORMAL balistic skill rather than 6s. Invisibility is 6s to hit at all times, no exceptions. If fliers were in the same boat I bet you this game would contain armies of at least 2 fliers if not more.

I personally believe that after some tournaments where we see this power in full effect we'll have to probably consider changing the ruling for this power to something along the lines of 5+ to hit rather than 6. 5+ to hit, while not good is certainly more capable than 6s while still keeping the same similiar result of invisibility now which nullifies the capabilities of everything to be of really any effect to such a unit when it is casted.

Crudelix is the answer to 500+ pt psychic deathstars.

Tarpit his invisible unit with a fearless blob and ignore it.

They can deepstrike out of the tarpit.

Yeah, so tarpit + Culexus assassin, who is now also stealing their warp charges to shoot other stuff

(Though it would be hilarious if the enemy had like 10+ charge in one place on the board and you had your assassin there and took 13+ AP1 shots at things.

 OldSkoolGoff wrote:
Tarpit his invisible unit with a fearless blob and ignore it.

Name an example?

Because a Seeker blob /w locus of beguilement herald is putting down 85 WS5 rending attacks on the charge, that all re-roll failed to-hits. And your Nob/Commissar/Priest is being challenged out and killed during the first assault phase due to LoB not allowing your characters to decline challenges.

You ain't tarpittin' nuthin mate.

It is, and I am totally not saying that because I rely on blasts to do most of the damage. I think its stupid at that ''We can't see the target, so we'll avoid flattening the area where we think they might be''.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 OldSkoolGoff wrote:
Tarpit his invisible unit with a fearless blob and ignore it.

Name an example?

Because a Seeker blob /w locus of beguilement herald is putting down 85 WS5 rending attacks on the charge, that all re-roll failed to-hits. And your Nob/Commissar/Priest is being challenged out and killed during the first assault phase due to LoB not allowing your characters to decline challenges.

You ain't tarpittin' nuthin mate.

Not familiar with the unit you're describing but wouldn't

30 Slugga Boyz in 'eavy armour with a boss nob with a powerklaw, accompanied by a Warboss with a powerklaw and 'eavy armour (or possible mega armour), and a painboy hold it in place at least for a while?

But 85 WS5 rending attacks sounds pretty scary. I'd probably be shooting that unit up with just about everything on the table for a few turns before it got to me. No one in my area plays daemons though, so again, I'm not familiar with the unit.

edit: Any old painboy won't work, it needs to be the named character PB.

Aye, it's pretty horrifying- especially for its price and speed. 380 points gets you 20 seekers and the herald, which is ML2 and has the Locus of Beguilement for re-rolling hits. The seekers are WS5/I5 with 3 base attacks that are rending, while the herald is WS7/I7 with 5 rending attacks base and an AP2 sword option for 10 points. The unit collectively has a 12'' move and a D6+6'' run, along with fleet, which pretty much allows it to be in your deployment zone at the top of turn 2. Against boyz in 'eavy armor, it's killing 19 of them on the charge, losing five seekers from the boyz attacks, then wiping the boyz out during the next fight phase. With average rolls, of course.

Now, take that and make it invisible.

You're totally right that whittling it down with guns is the best way to handle it, but that brings us back around to invisibility. The unit moves so quickly that you're only getting one turn to shoot at it before it's safely in assault, but all your shots are hitting on 6's. Granted, for Orks that's not a big deal. Da boyz don't need no fancy BS!

I won't comment on how it is broken, this has been discussed at length. I rather ask myself why it is this way and how it could be tackled.

I think the why is mainly because there is no general rock-paper-scissory remedy to it. While flyers can also only be hit on a 6 you have the skyfire rule. If you had invisibility, but also had a power that gives "sense invisibility" that is available to most armies then it already would be less broken and rather a part of the meta ("Do I have to spend points to get the counter or can I live with dealing with the uncountered power"). Toning it down would help a bit, but either it is still strong which means it will still be used and considered unfair or it is not strong anymore and will not be used at all again.

For tournaments I would probably think about banning the power. From GW I really hope about including it in the USR, introducing counters. But this will not come by FAQ (too complicated and extensive), rather in a new edition. It's a bit like with flyers. In 6th there were less counters and they were strong (Helldrake auto-include, anyone...), in 7th I feel you have quite some answers to a flyer heavy army.

Really just making Invis work like the Culexus's Etherium rule were attacks against the unit are resolved at WS1 and BS1. Its relatively the same but lets blasts and templates be an answer to it and lets melee units not be completely neutered against it since they'll hit on 5's now (and could hit on 4+ if they can lower the target's WS to 1 or 2 as well with like fear or something)

Invisibility is the kind of broken that I'd hoped was limited to WHFB's magic phase.

It's the sort of effect that just shouldn't exist. Snap-shots are an awful mechanic at the bet of times, and this just highlights that.

I mean, it's not even as if the affect fits the fluff. e.g. why, when there is an invisible unit nearby, do men with flamers and blast weapons refuse to fire them? Surely these would be the absolute best weapons for locating an invisible unit?

 vipoid wrote:

I mean, it's not even as if the affect fits the fluff. e.g. why, when there is an invisible unit nearby, do men with flamers and blast weapons refuse to fire them? Surely these would be the absolute best weapons for locating an invisible unit?

Good point. One could argue, however that while the player knows the location of the unit by looking at the (obviously not invisible) models, the commander "in game" or the unit would not know where to place their shots, even the general direction or distance might be totally wrong.

 Murenius wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

I mean, it's not even as if the affect fits the fluff. e.g. why, when there is an invisible unit nearby, do men with flamers and blast weapons refuse to fire them? Surely these would be the absolute best weapons for locating an invisible unit?

Good point. One could argue, however that while the player knows the location of the unit by looking at the (obviously not invisible) models, the commander "in game" or the unit would not know where to place their shots, even the general direction or distance might be totally wrong.

But they at least know they're there as indicated by being able to Snap Shot at them.

 Murenius wrote:

Good point. One could argue, however that while the player knows the location of the unit by looking at the (obviously not invisible) models, the commander "in game" or the unit would not know where to place their shots, even the general direction or distance might be totally wrong.

Except that they have enough of an idea of the unit's position to target them with regular shooting.

In which case, Flamers and Blasts remain the best weapons because an indirect hit can still inflict damage.

Hell, I'd have thought flamers would be perfect - since they cover a wide area and you should be able to see the flames flow around the invisible bodies (or, even better, set them on fire) - thus highlighting them for the rest of your squads to fire at.

Captyn_Bob wrote:
The best counter I can see is imperial knights. Stomp cares not you rolls to hit, and if you roll a six, they vanish.

ya... I definitely forgot about that in a recent tournament. I made several mistakes actually...

silly tournament allowed Lords of War and all unbound.
my stupid idea for a list was...

Transcendent C'tan
Seer Council on bikes with Baron

his list was

Kustom Stompa (even more broken than invisibility)
bunch of lootas and some grots

long story short... I screwed up my deployment and the c'tan was too far away. i didn't want to waste his shots on the stompa knowing that it wouldn't go down with its 12 HP and it's invul save. (I couldnt get into D range).
I knew the Stompa was going to kill my c'tan.. baron broke off and hid on objective out of line of site.

the c'tan died... my seer council shrieked most of his other Orks off the board.

despite my big guy going down... i was still confident that I could take the game with the council.

then my mistake... I forgot that I didn't have hit and run without baron :(

so I allow myself to get into assault with the stompa.... 2 turns nothing happens.
last turn of the game he rolls the 6. council disappears. tabled.

the awesome part was that I'd killed his lootas all off by the time he killed my c'tan.
the first time he tried to target me with the stompa and I told him he couldnt was so awesome.

the council bounced around completely unimpeded. shooting, casting, harrassing. a smarter player could have easily won the game with the council and invisibility. the only way he could damage me at that point was combat.

so yes.... stomping does work. painfully lol.

 easysauce wrote:
if they had made snap shots only -2 to BS... that would have fixed this,and sooooo many other things.

but noooooo, you orks have the same chance to hit snap shots as the best shot assassin in the galaxy...

Don't hate on the orks haven't they suffered enough at the hands of Matt ward and gw..

Zimko wrote:

 Murenius wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

I mean, it's not even as if the affect fits the fluff. e.g. why, when there is an invisible unit nearby, do men with flamers and blast weapons refuse to fire them? Surely these would be the absolute best weapons for locating an invisible unit?

Good point. One could argue, however that while the player knows the location of the unit by looking at the (obviously not invisible) models, the commander "in game" or the unit would not know where to place their shots, even the general direction or distance might be totally wrong.

But they at least know they're there as indicated by being able to Snap Shot at them.

Then here's the matter of indirect fire weapons that can fire even when they can't see the enemy which now cannot fire because they cannot see the enemy?

Dumbest rule made imo. I hold out hope that they will see this and FAQ to require attackers use WS1/BS1.

Was discussing this with my group today. We decided that flamers should get D3 hits on an invisible unit like they do on overwatch, not full hits.

Does invisibility go away after a unit has been hit, similar to illuminating a unit in night fighting?

Yeah, as a Necron player we can't reliably Deny anything....ever. But, I did quickly learn the first time I played against the new Invis is that you shoot it with Tesla. There you go. An Eldar player got Invis on an Autarch, Farseer and Dark Reapers. Needless to say after two rounds of 2 different night scythes shooting, I took out most of them.