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 I've just recently started hearing the rumors (I live in a cave) of 40k including super heavies on non-Apocalypse size rosters.

Now if that were the case, how do you think it will change the outlook of the game? Will it be more fun? More annoying? More unbalanced? Definitely more expensive, right?

Thoughts?

I think that would be the final straw for myself. In order to stay competitive, You would have to shell out hundreds of dollars for a super heavy of some sort. Not really my idea of a good time.

It is a supplement. My guess it is like cities of death or something.

The rumor is that it's an expansion, and like any expansion, it's a different game of 40k. You don't do a Cities of Death or Battle Mission game without asking your opponent first. In other words, it's nothing to worry about.

The Spearhead expansion already allows a super-heavy to be taken in a non-apocalypse game (if I remember right, the super-heavy spearheads started the game with D6 less wounds/structure points than their profile if they start on the table). Given that, a new expansion just for the express purpose of fighting super-heavy units in normal sized games probably would be something used for campaigns and the like rather than tournament play (and besides, if Cities of Death is anything to go by it will probably include a page or two of anti-super heavy wargear to help even things out).

Man, to have a Shadowsword... that'll put some holes in a riptide list.

Until the Shadowsword gets blown up.

vyndetta85 wrote:
I think that would be the final straw for myself. In order to stay competitive, You would have to shell out hundreds of dollars for a super heavy of some sort. Not really my idea of a good time.

That depends on whether the superheavy itself is competitive. Baneblades are outdone by the same points worth of Leman Russes - more bodies means harder to destory all hull points, more guns which admittedly can't split fire on each tank, but each tank being a single model means they can. The ability to hide better, and move their own separate ways on the table.

There's a reason superheavies aren't popular in 'competitive' games of Apocalypse - in general, they're not worth their points. You need to start hitting the bigger Titans before they are, and those are too expensive for 'normal' games anyway. They're an 'all your eggs in one basket' choice, and even in large games of Apocalypse eat up too many points to be 'efficient'. A drop podded Sternguard squad full of Meltas will remove such a huge amount of points that it's just not viable brining most superheavies. And those podded Sternguard are great against pretty much everything else.

vyndetta85 wrote:
I think that would be the final straw for myself. In order to stay competitive, You would have to shell out hundreds of dollars for a super heavy of some sort. Not really my idea of a good time.

Eh, depends on what superheavies were allowed. You certainly wouldn't need to shell out if it were just like Baneblades and Stompas, Loki hit the nail on the head there, 3 Leman Russ tanks will generally get you more value than one Baneblade. If it were SH's with multiple D weapons that's another story, because GW's points-costing on superheavies stops making sense at the "Baneblade" level.

I will just use my Bandai M61A5 Main Battle Tank “Semovente” Phantom Element

It's....related to the title.

Maybe the rumour is based on the Lord of War from FW 30k?

Not sure about this... True, superheavies are sexy, but I once thought about fielding a Renegade Malcador Heavy Tank in my army. When I compared its cost (both points- and real monies-wise) to good ol' Chaos Tanks, I bought 2 Chaos Tanks They are cheaper, specialised and separate vehicles which I can play in a normal WH40K game and Apocalypse.

Even if they get into normal 40k it really depends on the rules/points costs. Since I'm assuming they'll be re-tooled for normal 40k instead of allowing us to use D weapons and 24 hullpoint titans like it was Apocalypse.

it's completely optional, so i don't see how it could ruin anyone's game. Just like forgeworld it can be grossly op but you're under no obligation to play with or against it, and i expect that gamers who shell out for a super heavy will be the minority.

 DerT84 wrote:
Maybe the rumour is based on the Lord of War from FW 30k?

That's basically the rumor as I've heard it which would lock superheavies out of small games (2k+ and no more than 25% of your total points limit for a Lords of War slot choice).

...Maybe they're redoing Spearhead?

I am hoping they do include Super heavies into regular WH40K. and not just the tanks. I believe that it will open all sorts of Narritive gameplay, ( David vs. Goliath scenarios anyone?)

With that being said, for tournament and league play. Super Heavies are the Eggs in one basket strategy. You can usually get bigger bang for the points buck with smaller units.

SYKOJAK wrote:
I am hoping they do include Super heavies into regular WH40K. and not just the tanks. I believe that it will open all sorts of Narritive gameplay, ( David vs. Goliath scenarios anyone?)

With that being said, for tournament and league play. Super Heavies are the Eggs in one basket strategy. You can usually get bigger bang for the points buck with smaller units.

If it's Lords of War style you'll need to be playing some really big games to take some of those models anyways (Nearly 10k to take a Reaver!) so I'd be fine with this. D weapons might need a banning though since super-heavies would be the only way to take them and that'd be nigh-broken in a game against someone who doesn't have the ability to take their own.

you dont even need an "expansion" to do this. Agree upon it and field them. I imagine Str D would still be a nono since not every super heavy has it.

Unless its included in the original BRB, which means 7th edition comes a bit early, you need to confer with your opponent if youre using any side rules. If i ended up facing against a super heavy in a typical 1850pt list and he said nothing about it prior, i would just pick up my models and leave since thats an unfair advantage if i dont have any or if im not dedicating half my army to deal with it.

We have tried this before it was the old stompa vs equal points of an ig blobs and needless to say ut didn't end well for the ig. The next day we tried it again with a baneblade on the ig side vs the stompa and some orks and it was a much better game. Somebody brought a shadowsword for one game and didn't preform too well since it couldn't put out enough fire to melt the hordes o' boyz. I brought my pylon to a game where they had a superheavy and gibbed it right away and that was all it did besides gib a few more marines that strayed too close.

Needless to say it depends on what superheavies are used for balance, D weapons usually don't put out enough fire to tackle the hordes of weak troops thrown at it unless its like a warhound with the 4 D blasts