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.

daedalus wrote:Well, I mostly won the game because it was part of a themed league game where we used 4th ed victory point rules. I managed to keep my W6 creatures at half strengh or higher, and he got the worst possible reserve rolls on his flyers.

Had victory conditions been 6th edition, it would have been the exact opposite outcome.

My idea behind the Aegis for blobs (and blobs in general) is to still soak wounds on the lasgunners. It's not hard to have a row or two of lasgunners in front of your heavy weapons. I suppose there is less reason to actually blob them, but I don't see why a gunline isn't still effective. You need foot troops to hold objectives now, including a home court objective.

Gunlines are certainly very viable in this edition with the nerf of assault. I've already caused 3 failed charges in 5 games thanks to overwatch.

The need to have troops hold objectives hasn't changed between the editions though. The problem (for guard at least) is that the new edition has made it harder to get across the table on foot or in flimsy transports. The defense line helps with survival, but it also exacerbates the problem of movement.

well since i run a DP heavy list I will drop in behind my opponents ADL and thank him for the free Quad gun

bogalubov wrote:
Gunlines are certainly very viable in this edition with the nerf of assault. I've already caused 3 failed charges in 5 games thanks to overwatch.

Oh man, that's an understatement. I don't even bother charging with the Nids anymore if they're in cover unless I'm within 4 inches or so. I just run instead. Fleet got SLOOOOOOOW.

I don't like the lack of mobility introduced by the aegis defense line, I tried it, felt like I had to use it and got severely out-maneuvered, and clumping your army behind it is begging for blast spam


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MrMoustaffa wrote:Well its not like an aegis line can't be countered. All the artillery guard has can ignore it (since its not area terrain) and in order to utilize it effectively, you have to crowd your army behind it. It will also make an opponent less mobile, whether they want to be or not, giving mobile armies the option to roam freely across the board and try to outflank them. Plus, deepstrikers won't care, and will be able to decimate packed in units cowering behind it.

^This is, in my short lived experience - what is already beginning to happen, especially in my gaming group

Ailaros wrote: I'm envisioning a world wherein most people consider them an auto-include in ever list (unless you want a bigger fort). I'm envisioning a world wherein people spread out aegis lines and give basically their entire army 4+ cover saves and spend almost the whole game plinking with static gunlines.

Do you play on a table only 29" wide?

Godless-Mimicry wrote:

Ailaros wrote: I'm envisioning a world wherein most people consider them an auto-include in ever list (unless you want a bigger fort). I'm envisioning a world wherein people spread out aegis lines and give basically their entire army 4+ cover saves and spend almost the whole game plinking with static gunlines.

Do you play on a table only 29" wide?

Not necessarily, but throw in the recommended amount of terrain, and it's not hard to cover almost your entire deployment between area terrain and the aegis itself.

A lot of people also play on a 4x4 table for small point games. An aegis there literally would almost cover the entire deployment no problem, even if you had zero area terrain.

After playing against it and watching games with them in it, I think I've nailed down the true reason why I hate the aegis defence line. It's not because it's cheap, awesome, "win at all costs'', unfluffy, or anything like that. It's just really, REALLY boring to play against. I mean honestly, nobody wants to play a person who hides in their deployment all day and does their best turtle impression. And I'm a Guard player. I can't imagine what more mobile armies like the pointy ears and the space Egyptians think of it. I'd imagine it's driving them insane. Even if you do have a myriad of ways to deal with it (and from what I've heard, most armies can) it doesn't change the fact that the game becomes extremely predictable very quickly. You look at it, and you know immediately how it will go down. There's no big surprises, no stunning upset, nothing. You either break the siege, or get shot to pieces.

I don't want my games to be literally the same thing over and over. I like variety, weird matchups, hard choices, and close games. I don't want it to be because I'm winning games with a FOOT IG ARMY by outmaneuvering an opponent who hides behind a wall all day.

MrMoustaffa wrote:
I don't want my games to be literally the same thing over and over. I like variety, weird matchups, hard choices, and close games. I don't want it to be because I'm winning games with a FOOT IG ARMY by outmaneuvering an opponent who hides behind a wall all day.

It would be memorable though, especially if it was a DE player hiding behind it, you could always brag that your footguard outmaneuvered a Dark Eldar army

Eh, there's a reason for barrage weapons. Hunker a foot blob behind an ADL, my Biovores will send them a few hellos

60mm wrote:Eh, there's a reason for barrage weapons. Hunker a foot blob behind an ADL, my Biovores will send them a few hellos

My manticore likes that idea.

I've used it once. We rolled 3-3-2-3-3-2 for terrain.
I can see how this is A LOT of terrain, but he needed only one.

He took the biggest baddest piece of wall and placed it smack in front of my aegis line. It did exactly squat. I had no choice but to abandon it.

I'm leaning more towards the bastion. Ok, yeah, I can't place it all over the place. But it can see over most pieces of terrain, and the gun is placed up top where it isn't exactly easy to grab it.

For me, it's a must-have, since the friend I play against most is blood angels, and his death company in a Stormraven always get to charge and always kill anything they charge.

MrMoustaffa wrote:After playing against it and watching games with them in it, I think I've nailed down the true reason why I hate the aegis defence line. It's not because it's cheap, awesome, "win at all costs'', unfluffy, or anything like that. It's just really, REALLY boring to play against. I mean honestly, nobody wants to play a person who hides in their deployment all day and does their best turtle impression.

So it sounds like your problem is not the Aegis but your opponents. I use an aegis for my sisters and will use it for my SW, orks and eldar as well. MAYBE my eldar will just hunker down, but the other three armies use it as a base to protect a unit on the objective, my starting vehicles and any static heavies I have. The rest of my army will be tearing across the board to either hold the middle ground (sisters), bash your face in and hold the middle ground (SW) or just bash your face in (biker orks).

The only reason I take the Aegis is for the Quad gun. Put a veteran next to it for some BS4 twin linked goodness. No need to use up orders on a HWT at BS3. If you use a Lord Commie then the Quad gun would almost guarantee four hits, except with my rolling.

How about a Dreadnought behind an ADL? It appears it will be at least 25 % in cover and so get a 4+ cover save.

Dread could probably fire the Quad as well. Kinda hilarious.

Well, I play Tyranid and I'm thinking about taking Aegis line (scratch-building naturally .
Its either for my full-drop army, with some sealers going to ground behind the line hugging the Comm-link for mass 2+ drop on turn 2;
Or plant it mid-field and march all my Hive guard there. also good to make sure warriors/shrikes/raveners have some cover on their way to the enemy's guts.

Ratliker wrote:Well, I play Tyranid and I'm thinking about taking Aegis line (scratch-building naturally .

man, that's what is so awesome about Nids. Scratch building brutal things. Saw a guy make drop pods (mycetic spores) out of barnacles. It was fantastic.

Hell, I went and found the pics for no reason at all

Suddenly I'm tempted to make a Dark Eldar ADL out of a pair of crashed Raiders. Hunkered down in the wreckage of their transport is really the only way I can see DE defending a fixed position.

Purifier wrote:
He took the biggest baddest piece of wall and placed it smack in front of my aegis line. It did exactly squat. I had no choice but to abandon it.

See, this to me seems like classic TFG behavior. It strikes me as rude, lazy, unfluffy, and overall wimpy.

"Oh, you're taking Aegis? Well, I could maneuver around it, send in deepstrikers, and lob barrage at you, overall outplaying your static strategy, or I could just put a mountain in front of you."

Seem pretty weak? The purpose of an Aegis is to make gunline a viable, reliable playstyle, something 5th edition heard a lot of complaints about. The purpose of player terrain placement isn't to nullify certain playstyles; it's to "Forge A Narrative" and ensure every game is different and fun. That's like if there was a roll off for deciding if you could deep-strike or not. "Yeah, I got a six, that means your DOA Blood Angels is broken.

If you put a mountain in front of my gunline blob, it'd be useless. Plain and simple. Yes, it would work, yes, it would probably cause me to lose, but I wouldn't respect you as a player and you would not have outplayed me at all. You'd simply have "out-terrained" me.

Bravo, sir.
-TheCaptain

DaddyWarcrimes wrote:Suddenly I'm tempted to make a Dark Eldar ADL out of a pair of crashed Raiders. Hunkered down in the wreckage of their transport is really the only way I can see DE defending a fixed position.

I was thinking of a line of stakes with heads or impaled corpses on them. DE shock tactics or something.

Spetulhu wrote:Seeing how disgustingly strong flyers are, is there any reason for not taking at least the cheapest available AA defense? A Necron flying circus with three Doom Scythes will proceed to cripple your forces in short order unless you can make them Jink so they have to forgo firing the Death Ray next turn. You need something with a bit of punch for that - not every flyer can be glanced by basic bolters, and those will be using snap shots.

Three? I faced EIGHT of them last night. Even with a squadron of two hydras and two solo vendettas, I only managed to kill 4 of them. So yeah, portable cover that also gives me another Skyfire unit. I'll be buying and fielding one.

Ratliker wrote:Well, I play Tyranid and I'm thinking about taking Aegis line (scratch-building naturally .
Its either for my full-drop army, with some sealers going to ground behind the line hugging the Comm-link for mass 2+ drop on turn 2;
Or plant it mid-field and march all my Hive guard there. also good to make sure warriors/shrikes/raveners have some cover on their way to the enemy's guts.

Might wanna check this out
http://www.darkartstore.darkartminiatures.com/categories/FIRST-CONTACT-TERRAIN/

TheCaptain wrote:

Purifier wrote:
He took the biggest baddest piece of wall and placed it smack in front of my aegis line. It did exactly squat. I had no choice but to abandon it.

See, this to me seems like classic TFG behavior. It strikes me as rude, lazy, unfluffy, and overall wimpy.

Well, like you don't ever place terrain for strategic advantage? Seriously?
And firepower dominates 6ed battlefields, so don't you cry about "the poor, poor gunlines" .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

60mm wrote:

Ratliker wrote:Well, I play Tyranid and I'm thinking about taking Aegis line (scratch-building naturally .
Its either for my full-drop army, with some sealers going to ground behind the line hugging the Comm-link for mass 2+ drop on turn 2;
Or plant it mid-field and march all my Hive guard there. also good to make sure warriors/shrikes/raveners have some cover on their way to the enemy's guts.

Might wanna check this out
http://www.darkartstore.darkartminiatures.com/categories/FIRST-CONTACT-TERRAIN/

WoW, awesome terrain, Thanks!

TheCaptain wrote:

Purifier wrote:
He took the biggest baddest piece of wall and placed it smack in front of my aegis line. It did exactly squat. I had no choice but to abandon it.

See, this to me seems like classic TFG behavior. It strikes me as rude, lazy, unfluffy, and overall wimpy.

"Oh, you're taking Aegis? Well, I could maneuver around it, send in deepstrikers, and lob barrage at you, overall outplaying your static strategy, or I could just put a mountain in front of you."
If you put a mountain in front of my gunline blob, it'd be useless. Plain and simple. Yes, it would work, yes, it would probably cause me to lose, but I wouldn't respect you as a player and you would not have outplayed me at all. You'd simply have "out-terrained" me.

Bravo, sir.
-TheCaptain

No, he out-played you. He made a smart move and you suffer for it because you have put all your eggs in one 50 point basket. Ultimately you have no one to blame but yourself. Why don't you be the bigger man and outplay said TFG? Oh wait, it's much easier to complain about things. I forgot about that.

In any case, in response to the original thread, I don't believe that it will be Aegishammer anytime soon. Gunlines are dead and have been dead for a while. With most of the missions nowadays, you need to be moving. Otherwise you will lose or tie, every time. Plus the big problem with the Aegis for me is that moving over it is difficult terrain, which sucks pretty badly when foot Guard is slow as it is. I thought about having one in my list but in retrospect I see no need for it.

Kind Regards,
Vladsimpaler

If placing terrain in front of my opponent counts as outplaying; well, you're just wrong. Sorry. That's not strategy, that's not sportsmanship, and that's not skill; that's "I put this hill in your face; you can't shoot me now."

Pretty weak.

But if you feel good about yourself doing it; you probably don't mind. Out-terrain those gunliners to your heart's content.

What are you talking about? Seriously.

You are a competitive player, are you not? Competition means using player skill. Terrain placement is part of player skill.

If the placement of terrain was not strategic, that implies that where the terrain is is not strategic. If terrain is not strategic, then where you deploy your forces has basically no strategy in it. The only thing that would matter would be other things, like weapon ranges. If where you put your models is basically non-strategic, that means that where your models are is basically non-strategic. If where your models are is non-strategic, then the movement phase isn't strategic either, as that's merely the exercise of picking models up from one non-strategic place and placing them in some other non-strategic place.

Really, the only thing left in the game, then would be the shooting phase, the results of which are determined by die rolls. Randomness is decidedly non-strategic.

I'm rather confused why you would be against this, honestly. Unless, of course, you believe in arbitrary limits to player skill, in which case you're not really a competitive player. If you're not a competitive player, I guess I could see you being annoyed with someone playing more competitively than you are, but I thought I knew you better.