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.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
But it makes units like TWC and Wraiths almost impossible to deal with. And some grey knight units, I might add as well. BA are just victims either way, so it really doesn't make any difference to me.

I believe meant to say it would require some effort to kill TWC and Wraiths, because it would require to make a plan beyond pew pew, and the move you models slightly more than pivoting.

SJ

I think it would be more than "effort" for many lists. More like impossible. An entire BA list can hardly kill them, so I've got zero chance if they can walk up with impunity.

I'll agree BAs got it pretty rough. My brother is a die hard blood angel player and he struggles against plenty of lists even being a great player. That said it's the book not terrain and I've seen death co stars blow through fully tooled wraiths and twc and actually invisible units too. I've also wiped full triple harvest wraiths on dense terrain boards. It's a different game. Those units aren't nearly impossible to deal with if your running counter assault. Either way at least it's not just jsj while raining firepower at max range or warp jumping infinitely.

Guess its just me. 7th is super balance, because I don't play on Planet Boweling Ball. All I can say is if you are complaining about balance, and you are playing with little to no terrain, that's on you. You have nothing to complain about.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Guess its just me. 7th is super balance, because I don't play on Planet Boweling Ball. All I can say is if you are complaining about balance, and you are playing with little to no terrain, that's on you. You have nothing to complain about.

SJ

7th balanced? You just lost all credibility with me. Terrain does not make wks fair. Or scatterbikes. Or twc. Or grav cents. BA dont win on heavyv terrain boards either because thete are too many lists we cant beat in cc.

Martel732 wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Guess its just me. 7th is super balance, because I don't play on Planet Boweling Ball. All I can say is if you are complaining about balance, and you are playing with little to no terrain, that's on you. You have nothing to complain about.

SJ

7th balanced? You just lost all credibility with me. Terrain does not make wks fair. Or scatterbikes. Or twc. Or grav cents. BA dont win on heavyv terrain boards either because thete are too many lists we cant beat in cc.

I already posted above how heavy use of terrain fixes the game in 7th. Not my fault if you didn't read it. Proper terrain blocks line of sight for the WK, too. It disrupts unit cohesion, funnels models into specific approaches, and forces gunlines to move. Its the great equalizer. CC armies can now get close, while shooting armies can't just camp in the corner expecting to win every game with minimal effort. Thunderwolf Cavalry still dies to lasguns, just like all MEQ and TEQ armies do. Armor saves fail given enough dice to roll. Scatter Bikes are useless if they have to get into knife fighting range just to attack. WraithKnights are wasted points if they can't just stand there and drop D on everything. Flyers become predictable, as they will have limited paths to fly point to point. MSU gets broken up and dispersed due to limited access.

All you need is three to four pieces of tall line of sight blocking terrain, at least one large centerpiece terrain, and a handful of smaller pieces of cover providing terrain, and the bulk of the current edition's issues are fixed.

SJ

I really don't think it's that easy, and this will aggravate units like TWC and Wraiths. Units the have-nots already can't kill.

I'd say it helps in some matchups, but is a death sentence in others, and is far from an equalizer. It just makes different units run over everyone. I read your post above, I just don't agree with it. It sounds like on your tables, Tau almost auto-lose. That's not a property of GK being good against Tau. That's a property of using free resources to turn their army off.

The same goes for BA against GK. If I can't shoot you, I auto-lose. Sounds like a fun time to me.

I have nothing to add regarding the original Tau vs Grey Knight discussion, but I am quite fascinated with the discussion about terrain and combat, and can't quite tell from the comments back and forth on what kind of style you guys are playing most of the time, ie. casual, campaign, or tournament, since that does color everyone's perspective.

As pointed out elsewhere, 7E gears too much towards narrative or "make it look good" rules for tables and gaming, my friends and I decided to continue on with the 6E rule for battlefield terrain, rolling a D3 for each 2'x2' section, and then each player alternates placing terrain until we meet the numbers we rolled up. And that all occurs before we determine mission and deployment as to not give any one person an advantage in setting the table.

We certainly enjoy it as it gives us a layout every time we play, but then we have more terrain than can reasonably fit on the two tables we have in our gaming space, and it makes people have to make adjustments to their tactics. And overall, we have not seen any one army or player within our group dominate everyone in doing it this way.

All you need is three to four pieces of tall line of sight blocking terrain, at least one large centerpiece terrain, and a handful of smaller pieces of cover providing terrain, and the bulk of the current edition's issues are fixed.

QFT. This is not a hypothetical like players who don't use proper terrain are speaking from. This game requires terrain for balance simple as that. Note he said "bulk" not all.

Its like an unfounded fear of pet units becoming worthless, or more units becoming broken but that is not the case. It literally just enables a broader variety of viable units. Conversely look at the current state of the game and what units/armies are declared unplayable. The game obviously isn't balanced because of no terrain which is by far the norm.

As pointed out elsewhere, 7E gears too much towards narrative or "make it look good" rules for tables and gaming, my friends and I decided to continue on with the 6E rule for battlefield terrain, rolling a D3 for each 2'x2' section, and then each player alternates placing terrain until we meet the numbers we rolled up. And that all occurs before we determine mission and deployment as to not give any one person an advantage in setting the table.

We have continued this as well although alternately players can simply agree to set up the board until both are satisfied. Little to no terrain is frowned upon here though. Its like a sign of TFG.

Been there on both sides over the last 14 years and vastly prefer a game with a viable assault phase, armies that can actually include infantry, and cover outside of JINK.

Combined with normal space marines for drop pods and then drop purifiers in on there gunline turn 1 and cleansing flame the living bejaysus out of them roast those little fishes. good way to get many dead before you even need to roast them with incinerators and then many many dead before charging next turn also you can run and hide. then have your dreadknight come in and mop up the rest

Martel732 wrote:
I really don't think it's that easy, and this will aggravate units like TWC and Wraiths. Units the have-nots already can't kill.

I'd say it helps in some matchups, but is a death sentence in others, and is far from an equalizer. It just makes different units run over everyone. I read your post above, I just don't agree with it. It sounds like on your tables, Tau almost auto-lose. That's not a property of GK being good against Tau. That's a property of using free resources to turn their army off.

The same goes for BA against GK. If I can't shoot you, I auto-lose. Sounds like a fun time to me.

LOS blocking cover doesn't mean that you don't get to shoot assault units. Tables with a good amount of terrain mean you have to be mobile, whether shooting or assaulting, especially so if you're playing with Maelstrom like objectives. As with anything 40K though, some armies are good at this, some bad...

Doesn't seem like Eldar would miss a beat to me. In fact, jetbikes are better at abusing terrain than anything BA have.

Martel - you must have a large masochistic streak to carry on playing 40K and in particularly BA.

Move on for the good of your own health

Bartali wrote:
Martel - you must have a large masochistic streak to carry on playing 40K and in particularly BA.

Move on for the good of your own health

Yeah, maybe.