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.

@Killkrazy: Thanks. That would definitely make tau more competitive. I really like that system in general - there's something about playing 40k when you feel you need to go for a massacre instead of just a win that feels wrong. Being penalized for not winning by enough, and being rewarded for grinding your opponent down to nothing doesn't necessarily create the best games and maybe limits the amount of lists deemed "competitive".

P.S. thanks for the information blackmoor

lambadomy wrote:I have a question - I don't know where the results are but one thing I read in the past is that for the UK GT they use a straight 3-1-0 scoring system - 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie and 0 for a loss. As opposed to in the US where there tends to be massacre, solid victory, minor victory, etc. Is this true?

No.

30 points for a win.

10 points for a draw.

1 point for a loss.

0 points if you concede.

You also add up VPs which acts as a tie breaker.

Despite an appalling lack of practise and a list I just didn't get round to changing, I managed 2 wins, 2 draws, and 2 losses.

Pretty much every ork list was either ghaz on foot with a gazillion orks, or 3-4 battlewagons with obligatory KFF.

I think I might have been the only chaos list wihtout a lash ?

All good games though, played armies I wouldn't have done otherwise, saw my geek buddies, drank a lot. Drank some more, And, perhaps most importantly of all...





... we beat man U 4-1 ! All else is irrelevant.

whitedragon wrote:5th is a much better ruleset. The codicies are what are breaking the game.

Bingo.

But I think we're in pretty good shape on the 40K side compared to what's happened in WFB lately. It's interesting that in both systems, GW's doing a decent job with the core rules but making playtesting gaffes with the codices/army books.

Here are the full results:

http://warhammerworld.typepad.com/files/wh40ktosgt-final-mkii-r6.pdf

The three top ranking armies were also the most popular armies, accounting for half the field.

CSM -- 21
Orks -- 20
Eldar -- 19

Of course you would expect the most common armies to get into the money if the codexes were balanced, just by luck/law of averages/whatever.

However you could also expect the strong codexes to be the most popular, because of being the strongest.

The final includes only players who placed highly in previous rounds, who are presumably stronger players and better matched against each other.

I don't know if you have to play the same codex through all rounds.

Blackmoor wrote:The natural enemy and counter of the Orks are Dual Lash Chaos. In the UK where they have a history of no comp, they unabashedly bring the hardest lists they can, and that means a lot of Lash wielding Chaos armies. In the US, people still are left with a legacy of comp and a lot of people still hold back from bringing the truly nasty chaos armies that can beat orks.

That might be part of it. Although I also wonder how many of the dual lash armies in the UK are in fact new armies built for the GTs. I kinda have the feeling that a lot of Chaos armies here haven't really been built for the dual lash/oblit paradigm and are more likely to be older armies originally designed for the mono-god and Legions lists from the old book. Some of it could be codex hangover as opposed to comp hangover.

Kilkrazy wrote:

The final includes only players who placed highly in previous rounds, who are presumably stronger players and better matched against each other.

I don't know if you have to play the same codex through all rounds.

You can use any army for the final, in previos years it was quite common for people to take their serious hardor army tot he qualifier, and then roll out some themed or funny or fluffy list for the final. That generally seems to have ceased a bit in the last few years. There was a gorgeous ratling guard army done out in Napoleonic colours, he even had them all ranked up on WOTR style bases.

I suspect one of the reasons Daemons didn't do as well as they might was because of the 6-round tournament. Daemon lists tend to win if the dice go their way and lose if they don't, and in a 6-round tournament there's more chances for dice to go sub-par for a game or two. The top Daemon list came in 14th, and that's with 4 wins, a draw, and a loss.

Spots 7 - 15 were all 4-1-1 records. So the main difference was VPs.

Funny, when I play against Daemons it is usually a dual-bloodbath. You'd think the VPs would be higher for them.

looks like the demon player that finished at 14th blew his last game on table 2 or he could have finished first or second with a win in the last game.
so orks demons chaos and eldar all seemed like they were in the running.

haha way to represnet Black Templars!

but is it just a coincidence that the most popular and strong lists are from the most recently revamped codexes??Just a thought.

And so on and so forth . . . .

We get the idea.

I'm a Dark Angel player. I know I'll get fixed eventually, sooner than DE anyway.

are you agreeing with me uriels??just wondering

If you read the list upside down it is even more entertaining.

Templars
Guard
Space Marines
Guard
Tyranids
Demons
Orks
Space Marines
Space Marines
Daemonhunters

7/10 are LoyaLists!

willydstyle wrote:Actually the survivability of seer council on jetbikes comes from the rerollable 3+ armor/turboboost cover save.

Foot seercouncil is not nearly as good because all they have is the 4+ invulnerable.

They can get the re-rollable armor save, but not the re-rollable turboboost cover save. Can't do anything else (including trying to cast Fortune) if the unit turboboosts. Call your opponents out if they are trying this.

Good point. But I still think it's the re-rollable armor save that keeps them alive, and makes them good. Otherwise you'd see foot-council lists dominating just as much as bike-council.

Sarigar wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Actually the survivability of seer council on jetbikes comes from the rerollable 3+ armor/turboboost cover save.

Foot seercouncil is not nearly as good because all they have is the 4+ invulnerable.

They can get the re-rollable armor save, but not the re-rollable turboboost cover save. Can't do anything else (including trying to cast Fortune) if the unit turboboosts. Call your opponents out if they are trying this.

You are incorrect. Fortune is cast at the start of the round, before movement. The description also says " the unit rerolls any failed saves...". So the 3 + cover save would be rerolled.

KeithGatchalian wrote:

Sarigar wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Actually the survivability of seer council on jetbikes comes from the rerollable 3+ armor/turboboost cover save.

Foot seercouncil is not nearly as good because all they have is the 4+ invulnerable.

They can get the re-rollable armor save, but not the re-rollable turboboost cover save. Can't do anything else (including trying to cast Fortune) if the unit turboboosts. Call your opponents out if they are trying this.

You are incorrect. Fortune is cast at the start of the round, before movement. The description also says " the unit rerolls any failed saves...". So the 3 + cover save would be rerolled.

It's more accurate to say that you can't turbo-boost if you use fortune (assuming the farseer is on a bike and joined to the squad), because turbo-boosting prevents taking any other actions that turn.

whitedragon wrote:
5th is a much better ruleset. The codicies are what are breaking the game.

EDIT:

And speaking of conversions, I want to see their models . I loves me a good jetbike mounted warlock.

Maybe for assault based armies. But shooty armies took it in the rear. Thus the stupid power that IG are getting in their new codex to compensate for table wide cover saves and ridiculously one sided HTH resolution.

Sorry, 5th ed has killed most of my interest in 40K. The new uber codexs that are coming out to compensate for 5th ed. short comings are proof that something is still not right.

Centurian99 wrote:

KeithGatchalian wrote:

Sarigar wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Actually the survivability of seer council on jetbikes comes from the rerollable 3+ armor/turboboost cover save.

Foot seercouncil is not nearly as good because all they have is the 4+ invulnerable.

They can get the re-rollable armor save, but not the re-rollable turboboost cover save. Can't do anything else (including trying to cast Fortune) if the unit turboboosts. Call your opponents out if they are trying this.

You are incorrect. Fortune is cast at the start of the round, before movement. The description also says " the unit rerolls any failed saves...". So the 3 + cover save would be rerolled.

It's more accurate to say that you can't turbo-boost if you use fortune (assuming the farseer is on a bike and joined to the squad), because turbo-boosting prevents taking any other actions that turn.

While accurate, it's not quite complete.

You can:
a) have the other Farseer Fortune the council before they boost;
b) have the Farseer Fortune his council buddies, then detach; or
c) have the Farseer Fortune his council buddies, detach, then move the boosting Warlocks in such a way as to bring him back into coherency at the end of his/their move.

As the boosting squad has to finish it's move at least 18" away to get the cover save, c) aint possible.

I'd also generally question the survivability of an unfortuned jetseer milling around on his own. A farseer/eldrad following behind the bikers in a falcon however...

c) is possible. Just station the farseer 4" in front of the last warlock bike. When they turboboost, that bike moves 18" forward to claim the cover save, with the other bikes in a short conga line back to it (it should only take ~2 or 3 away from the frontline that moves 24"). That bike is now 14" away from the farseer. The farseer moves 12", and is now within 2" of the squad therefore he joins it automatically at the end of the movement phase.

OddJob. wrote:As the boosting squad has to finish it's move at least 18" away to get the cover save, c) aint possible.

I'd also generally question the survivability of an unfortuned jetseer milling around on his own. A farseer/eldrad following behind the bikers in a falcon however...

C is quite possible, especially given the 60mm flying bases for Eldar jetbikes. All that's necessary is for a) the Farseer to start at/near the "front" of the unit; and b) at least one warlock to start at least 2" behind him.

Step 1: The Farseer casts Fortune.
Step 2: The Warlocks turbo-boost 18"; the rear-most warlock is now ~14" away from Mr. Farseer (18" of movement, minus 2" of initial distance, minus >2" of base diameter).
Step 3: The Farseer easily moves back into coherency with the squad, without boosting.

The above can be performed with a single warlock. Starting with additional warlocks allows at least some of the front 'locks to move a full 24", in order to preserve penetration distance. As a bonus, it spreads the squad out nicely to reduce template/marker damage.

I'm the Eldar player who finished 4th. This was the toughest GT final so far - the days of people bringing 'fun' armies to final after qualifying seemed to be in decline last year and are now for intents and purposes gone. The bottom table had Battlewagons vs Double Lash on it at one point on day 2.

Farseers were ruled to be unable to turbo-boost on the turn they use fortune, so if attached to a squad, no turbo-boosting for that squad. I don't think the turbo-boosting is particularly important for the unit anyway, so its not great loss.

I'd refute the notion that Stelek was somehow responsible for the jetlock army. It stares you in the face when you look at the codex - one of the Italian players used one (di Tommaso I think) as soon as the new codex came out and I used them in the final (4th edition rules then) a year ago. My army for the final was as reported, although it could be improved upon, and I would admit, it was very lucky at significant times.

There were nob bikers floating around in the Heats, but they didn't win any of them. I played the all nob-biker army in round 5 and tabled it. Sometimes the dice gods smile.

The player who won, Ugo, is widely recognised in Europe as one of the top players, and thoroughly deserves a GT title. His army was very well balanced and had I been an independent observer of our game, I would have rooting for him, not me.

Torgoch, what exactly was your list? The Council is obvious, but what units do you use to support it? That's the hardest part of making a list, is selecting the supporting cast.

Have you put Tau on the shelf for a while, Torgoch?

Kilkrazy wrote:Have you put Tau on the shelf for a while, Torgoch?

Funnily enough I was just plotting my Tau Open War list

I decided I wanted a break from Tau last year. I might go back to them for next season, but that isn't something I want to think about too much yet!

Blackmoor wrote:
In the US, people still are left with a legacy of comp and a lot of people still hold back from bringing the truly nasty chaos armies that can beat orks.

Hahahahhahahhaa... "hold back"... hahahahahahahhaahaaa....

You don't game the US Southeast area do you?

The Green Git wrote:

Blackmoor wrote:
In the US, people still are left with a legacy of comp and a lot of people still hold back from bringing the truly nasty chaos armies that can beat orks.

Hahahahhahahhaa... "hold back"... hahahahahahahhaahaaa....

You don't game the US Southeast area do you?

It's California...They got some strange ideas out there...

torgoch wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Have you put Tau on the shelf for a while, Torgoch?

Funnily enough I was just plotting my Tau Open War list

I decided I wanted a break from Tau last year. I might go back to them for next season, but that isn't something I want to think about too much yet!

How much do you think Tau have been weakened by the 5e rules changes?

I value your opinion as an historically successful Tau GT player.