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.

 tenebre wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
There is quite the difference between a super heavy LOW and a infantry LOW like Ghazghull or Dante who can both be easily taken out by bolter fire...

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
In-game, you're right, just like there's a difference between a battlewagon and a loota squad. But you can't say I can't bring a battlewagon because you can't kill it with bolters. Which you actually can, technically.....

Does that mean that fielding a Thunderhawk Gunship is completely fine?

It can be shot down by Bolters after all

if you actually bought and built one I would gladly play against it!

I was just pointing out that any form of "Can't take that Unit because it can't X" is not really a good excuse for players to ban certain Units.

The rules allow for LoW, Superheavies, Gargantuans and other "less balanced" Units.
But such "Unbalanced" Units can also be found in Infantry, Beasts, Monstrous Creatures and other "standard" Units.

Voice your concerns for certain "abusive lists", but don't make it a Rule set in stone. In the end, it is up to Games Workshop to balance their system, or House-rule how to do it for them

Just faced a Stompa for the first time last night. They're so good looking and they might actually be worth their points with a few Meks tossed inside.

I'm adding it to my Wishlist for my Orks.