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.

Yeah We're gonna do Reaver vs Army (modeled on the stompa mission above) in a few weeks, those kind of games are pretty fun.

Jack

Bookwrack wrote:

Neconilis wrote:Don't mind him, it's Bookwrack. He's like Gwar! but without the subtle charm. Which yes, is saying a lot.

Given how infrequently I post, it's charming that you're butthurt enough to care.

Aww, I love you too snookums. But I hate it when we fight so

Bookwrack wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

LunaHound wrote:I thought all IA units can be used in normal 40k.

That is a kinda strange assumption. What made you think that?

The statement in the IA books that it's fine to use the following units. Of course, super-heavies were always the exception since they required the use of a second FoC in order to field in the first place, which meant special arrangements needed to be made before hand to use them. Although even for the non-superheavies, if you're using the apocalypse rules for them instead of what was printed in the relvant IA, that's a condition that will require special mention.

So Forgeworld states that it is fine to use Forgeworld rules, huh?

Well, CC Services states that it is fine to use CC Services rules. So those units are ok too, right?

CC Services only have an extremely limited printrun of any of its rule books and since I am the owner, I always get a copy.



Show me a statement from GW concerning going beyond page 86 of the rule book and you are right. Statements from Forgeworld have the same value as statements from CC Services.

DogOfWar wrote:I assumed that we were talking about the standard sized games of 1000-3000 points and I felt a super heavy would cause too much of an impact on games of that size.

Based on experience, a 2k game is about the smallest side where one side can include a single super-heavy and the other will not need to make special accommodations to account for it, and that's sticking to things no more than baneblade sized. Fielding a manta or a reaver in anything less than a full on Apocalypse game is going to be severly unbalancing, but using the Baneblade as the benchmark, a single unit on that scale is certainly not going to be overwhelming in a 3K game, and still feasible at the 2k limit.

KingCracker wrote:Yanno, I was told by a guy at a store I usually buy my stuff at, that they played a cool game with a stompa. What they did was have a stompa on one side, and the opponent has like 1500 pts or something like that. Then the stompa has a small turn number to kill like 1000pts. I dont remember it exactly as he told me about it months ago (And I dont play APOC so didnt really pay attention)

I think the rules were in WD. Ork player has a stompa stomping from one side of the board to the other. Opponent is trying to stop it. I think they start with 500 points on the table, with 500 more in reserve. Or it might've been 250 on the table and 250 in reserve. All I remember is thinking that the size of the army opposing the stompa seemed like it was much too small, but I've never seen it in action so I can't really say if they work or not.

Neconilis wrote:

Bookwrack wrote:

Neconilis wrote:Don't mind him, it's Bookwrack. He's like Gwar! but without the subtle charm. Which yes, is saying a lot.

Given how infrequently I post, it's charming that you're butthurt enough to care.

Aww, I love you too snookums. But I hate it when we fight so

Well if the make-up sex wasn't so damn good...

Steelmage99 wrote:So Forgeworld states that it is fine to use Forgeworld rules, huh?

Well, CC Services states that it is fine to use CC Services rules. So those units are ok too, right?

Funny, I don't remember GW having a division called CC Services whose publications have a GW logo printed prominently on the spine. I guess I should spend more time reading the rumors forum.

Bookwrack wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:I assumed that we were talking about the standard sized games of 1000-3000 points and I felt a super heavy would cause too much of an impact on games of that size.

Based on experience, a 2k game is about the smallest side where one side can include a single super-heavy and the other will not need to make special accommodations to account for it, and that's sticking to things no more than baneblade sized. Fielding a manta or a reaver in anything less than a full on Apocalypse game is going to be severly unbalancing, but using the Baneblade as the benchmark, a single unit on that scale is certainly not going to be overwhelming in a 3K game, and still feasible at the 2k limit.

Well reasoned, but I disagree.

If you want to field superheavies, I think it makes sense to just go ahead and play apocalypse. That's what it's there for and then everyone is on a level playing field.

If you've specifically got a battle in mind as part of a campaign wherein the superheavy must be destroyed so that blah blah blah, then maybe it would be okay because that would add some difficulty for the opposing player and some fluff to keep things interesting.

But just fielding a Baneblade in 2k points seems like trouble. Your friends would probably say it's okay but most random opponents would probably say gtfo. I'm not saying it's impossible, nor should no-one ever try it because I said so, but I doubt it will be as much fun as one would hope.

But this is one of those discussions where there isn't a 'right' answer. You think it would be fine and I have my doubts. Nothing save for playing enough games wherein everything goes smoothly and the game isn't dominated by the superheavy will convince me otherwise. Everything else is just someone's opinion, no matter how much experience they have.

As always, YMMV.

DoW

Bookwrack wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

LunaHound wrote:I thought all IA units can be used in normal 40k.

That is a kinda strange assumption. What made you think that?

The statement in the IA books that it's fine to use the following units. Of course, super-heavies were always the exception since they required the use of a second FoC in order to field in the first place, which meant special arrangements needed to be made before hand to use them. Although even for the non-superheavies, if you're using the apocalypse rules for them instead of what was printed in the relvant IA, that's a condition that will require special mention.

This is of course ignoring the statement in the most recent Imperial Armour book, Imperial Armour Apocalypse (which replace Imperial Armour update 2006, so it is an official Imperial Armour book, despite the title), that only the codices and main rulebook are "official" official, and that Imperial Armour is "official" in the same way that Cities of Death is "official"--the rules apply by mutual agreement, and not by default.