Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Horst wrote:
What about ITC is terrible? There is literally one change in the core rules, that's it. Other than that, it's just custom missions... which I think are more balanced than book missions. Have you actually played ITC?

look at the primaries/secondaries and most of them are centered around killing stuff. meaning that a leviathan loves that ruleset.

Kill, kill more : self explanatory
hold more : if you kill the enemy units, you get kill more easily

for secondaries you get :
Headhunter
Kingslayer
Marked for death
Titan slayers
Gang busters
Big game hunter
Pick your poison
Butcher's bill
The reaper
2/3 of oldschool


then you get the non kill-centric missions
Hold
Recon
Behind enemy lines
Ground control
king of the hill (technically could be favored by killing stuff so they can contest the midfield)
engineers
Linebreaker

So what happens when youve got so many different options for killing stuff? You park yourself in the center of the map and shoot at everything.




And yes, the issue is iron hands, levis are Ok when ran as other chapters. Not having chapter-specific pts cost is a huge mistake from GW, they shouldve learned from the old space marine codex where everything had "the guilliman tax" on it which made other chapters not competitive.

Gman tax is an imagined explaination. No such tax existed the marine codex was just one of the first out the gate...or I suppose GK were paying the Gman tax too? Like seriously - you could take unnerfed gman and insert him into current UM rules and current ironhands would still obliterate them. They have an absurd chapter tactic (it's 3 competitive armies tactic in 1 (tau sept/ulthwe/hawshroud). Their relic for -1 damage is absurd. Their super doctrine in absurd (ignore penalties for heavies and rr 1's because effectively +1 to hit to your whole force when moving wasn't good enough). Plus they have a 5++ aura with character protections...basically a marines dream (this isn't exactly OP but another unique durability buff that Ironhands should not have exclusive access too) When you throw this on top of the already over the top levi (not really a huge problem because every army has a unit this good or close to this good probably) and you have a recipe for disaster...

"Gman tax" may or may not have been an intentional thing (probably not). But it was *absolutely* a thing.

See, armies without Gman were nowhere close to competitive. Armies with Gman were competitive. So you have units - Tacs, Razorbacks, whatever - that were simultaneously competitive and noncompetitive at the same time. Depending on whether you took Gman. Thus, the units were fine(-ish) played with him, but clearly needed a points cut without him. As such, there was a clear difference between their value with Gman vs without Gman.

So, given the rules, the points of these units themselves could do one of several things:
a) Make these units competitive without Gman (and thus be OP with Gman)
b) Make these units competitive with Gman (and thus trash without him)
c) Make these units unfair (either way) whether Gman was included or not

Given that, there is a construct where there is a points value each such unit is worth in scenario (a), and a points value in scenario (b). The difference between them is the "tax". The unit either pays the "tax" (and thus is trash without Gman) or doesn't pay the "tax" (and thus is OP with Gman). The "Tax" was real, even if it wasn't intentional. It was a very useful construct for discussing the situation (and relative options).

Bharring wrote:
For 300 points, I can bring more than 2 Wraithlords!

Or maybe a pair of falcons! Imagine a pair of hits-on-3s (unless they moved, otherwise 4+s) with a 3+ instead of that weak 4++ at their super-sturdy T7! And with BLs, it's 3x S8 Ap-4 shots with D3 or Dd6 damage each! Sure it's only about 6 shots vs the 16 shots you get, but it does half again the damage for each hit!

300 points is cheap for that kinda dakka *or* that kinda defensive profile.

Spoletta wrote:
They are still about killing.

Don't want to say that CA18 or ITC are better or worse than the other, but they are surely different.

The objectives are different, and that accounts for a lot.

It's like reading a book about chess and then going to play a version of chess where you win when you take all enemy pawns.

Same game. Same pieces. Taking pieces will still push you toward your objective.

Tactics employed will be worlds apart.

 Togusa wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
Some friends shared this with me. I think that it's extreme, however necessary. I've played the new IH stuff with my knights. It's not even close to fun. I killed almost nothing.

When is forgeworld going to fix that model? It's beyond broken, straight unfun to play against.

Hit on 2+ reroll 1s, 4++ @T8 with 16 S8 AP-2 2 DMG shots.

Seriously.

For 300 points. You keep skipping that part very conveniently.

Why does that matter? 300 points is stupidly cheap.

I'm seeing the same lists over and over at the local stores.

Forge Father Check
Captain Check
Leiutenant Check
3 Levithans Check
20 Intercessors Check
2 Thunderfire Cannons Check

It's boring, overpowered and cheesy as hell. Meanwhile, ONCE AGAIN MY CHAOS CODEX WAS GOOD FOR ALL OF A MONTH BEFORE THEY NUTTED OBLITERATORS.

And now we're back to being a trash-tier army. Speshul Maahreens must be the best!

This is why I left the game.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
Some friends shared this with me. I think that it's extreme, however necessary. I've played the new IH stuff with my knights. It's not even close to fun. I killed almost nothing.

When is forgeworld going to fix that model? It's beyond broken, straight unfun to play against.

Hit on 2+ reroll 1s, 4++ @T8 with 16 S8 AP-2 2 DMG shots.

Seriously.

For 300 points. You keep skipping that part very conveniently.

Why does that matter? 300 points is stupidly cheap.

I'm seeing the same lists over and over at the local stores.

Forge Father Check
Captain Check
Leiutenant Check
3 Levithans Check
20 Intercessors Check
2 Thunderfire Cannons Check

It's boring, overpowered and cheesy as hell. Meanwhile, ONCE AGAIN MY CHAOS CODEX WAS GOOD FOR ALL OF A MONTH BEFORE THEY NUTTED OBLITERATORS.

And now we're back to being a trash-tier army. Speshul Maahreens must be the best!

This is why I left the game.

Off the top of my head, if you want that extra Levi, you need to buy another Heavy Support because Relic.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
For 300 points, I can bring more than 2 Wraithlords!

Or maybe a pair of falcons! Imagine a pair of hits-on-3s (unless they moved, otherwise 4+s) with a 3+ instead of that weak 4++ at their super-sturdy T7! And with BLs, it's 3x S8 Ap-4 shots with D3 or Dd6 damage each! Sure it's only about 6 shots vs the 16 shots you get, but it does half again the damage for each hit!

300 points is cheap for that kinda dakka *or* that kinda defensive profile.

Your units being bad has no point in this conversation. Stop playing martyr for Eldar for Pete's sake.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
For 300 points, I can bring more than 2 Wraithlords!

Or maybe a pair of falcons! Imagine a pair of hits-on-3s (unless they moved, otherwise 4+s) with a 3+ instead of that weak 4++ at their super-sturdy T7! And with BLs, it's 3x S8 Ap-4 shots with D3 or Dd6 damage each! Sure it's only about 6 shots vs the 16 shots you get, but it does half again the damage for each hit!

300 points is cheap for that kinda dakka *or* that kinda defensive profile.

Your units being bad has no point in this conversation. Stop playing martyr for Eldar for Pete's sake.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
For 300 points, I can bring more than 2 Wraithlords!

Or maybe a pair of falcons! Imagine a pair of hits-on-3s (unless they moved, otherwise 4+s) with a 3+ instead of that weak 4++ at their super-sturdy T7! And with BLs, it's 3x S8 Ap-4 shots with D3 or Dd6 damage each! Sure it's only about 6 shots vs the 16 shots you get, but it does half again the damage for each hit!

300 points is cheap for that kinda dakka *or* that kinda defensive profile.

Your units being bad has no point in this conversation. Stop playing martyr for Eldar for Pete's sake.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
Some friends shared this with me. I think that it's extreme, however necessary. I've played the new IH stuff with my knights. It's not even close to fun. I killed almost nothing.

When is forgeworld going to fix that model? It's beyond broken, straight unfun to play against.

Hit on 2+ reroll 1s, 4++ @T8 with 16 S8 AP-2 2 DMG shots.

Seriously.

For 300 points. You keep skipping that part very conveniently.

Why does that matter? 300 points is stupidly cheap.

I'm seeing the same lists over and over at the local stores.

Forge Father Check
Captain Check
Leiutenant Check
3 Levithans Check
20 Intercessors Check
2 Thunderfire Cannons Check

It's boring, overpowered and cheesy as hell. Meanwhile, ONCE AGAIN MY CHAOS CODEX WAS GOOD FOR ALL OF A MONTH BEFORE THEY NUTTED OBLITERATORS.

And now we're back to being a trash-tier army. Speshul Maahreens must be the best!

This is why I left the game.

Off the top of my head, if you want that extra Levi, you need to buy another Heavy Support because Relic.

TFC are heavy

 Crazyterran wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
For 300 points, I can bring more than 2 Wraithlords!

Or maybe a pair of falcons! Imagine a pair of hits-on-3s (unless they moved, otherwise 4+s) with a 3+ instead of that weak 4++ at their super-sturdy T7! And with BLs, it's 3x S8 Ap-4 shots with D3 or Dd6 damage each! Sure it's only about 6 shots vs the 16 shots you get, but it does half again the damage for each hit!

300 points is cheap for that kinda dakka *or* that kinda defensive profile.

Your units being bad has no point in this conversation. Stop playing martyr for Eldar for Pete's sake.

How many planes can you get for 303 points?

 catbarf wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
For 300 points, I can bring more than 2 Wraithlords!

Or maybe a pair of falcons! Imagine a pair of hits-on-3s (unless they moved, otherwise 4+s) with a 3+ instead of that weak 4++ at their super-sturdy T7! And with BLs, it's 3x S8 Ap-4 shots with D3 or Dd6 damage each! Sure it's only about 6 shots vs the 16 shots you get, but it does half again the damage for each hit!

300 points is cheap for that kinda dakka *or* that kinda defensive profile.

Your units being bad has no point in this conversation. Stop playing martyr for Eldar for Pete's sake.

What units compare favorably to the Leviathan at the ~300pts level? Serious question.

die toten hosen wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
They are still about killing.

Don't want to say that CA18 or ITC are better or worse than the other, but they are surely different.

The objectives are different, and that accounts for a lot.

It's like reading a book about chess and then going to play a version of chess where you win when you take all enemy pawns.

Same game. Same pieces. Taking pieces will still push you toward your objective.

Tactics employed will be worlds apart.

so you wanna just have a game about sitting on objectives and not killing? in a game with the tagline "...there is only war"?
sorry, killing enemy models is a core aspect of this game and EVERY mission requires models to die through the very mechanics presented in the mission.

need to hold more objectives? kill things near the objective/kill things of off it.
the only extras are the flavor of secondary effects GW puts into their missions.

to each their own, i just think you dont like ITC (which is fine) and just wanna bandwagon against the more popular form of public tourney play currently to my knowledge.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Horst wrote:
What about ITC is terrible? There is literally one change in the core rules, that's it. Other than that, it's just custom missions... which I think are more balanced than book missions. Have you actually played ITC?

look at the primaries/secondaries and most of them are centered around killing stuff. meaning that a leviathan loves that ruleset.

Kill, kill more : self explanatory
hold more : if you kill the enemy units, you get kill more easily

for secondaries you get :
Headhunter
Kingslayer
Marked for death
Titan slayers
Gang busters
Big game hunter
Pick your poison
Butcher's bill
The reaper
2/3 of oldschool


then you get the non kill-centric missions
Hold
Recon
Behind enemy lines
Ground control
king of the hill (technically could be favored by killing stuff so they can contest the midfield)
engineers
Linebreaker

So what happens when youve got so many different options for killing stuff? You park yourself in the center of the map and shoot at everything.




And yes, the issue is iron hands, levis are Ok when ran as other chapters. Not having chapter-specific pts cost is a huge mistake from GW, they shouldve learned from the old space marine codex where everything had "the guilliman tax" on it which made other chapters not competitive.

Gman tax is an imagined explaination. No such tax existed the marine codex was just one of the first out the gate...or I suppose GK were paying the Gman tax too? Like seriously - you could take unnerfed gman and insert him into current UM rules and current ironhands would still obliterate them. They have an absurd chapter tactic (it's 3 competitive armies tactic in 1 (tau sept/ulthwe/hawshroud). Their relic for -1 damage is absurd. Their super doctrine in absurd (ignore penalties for heavies and rr 1's because effectively +1 to hit to your whole force when moving wasn't good enough). Plus they have a 5++ aura with character protections...basically a marines dream (this isn't exactly OP but another unique durability buff that Ironhands should not have exclusive access too) When you throw this on top of the already over the top levi (not really a huge problem because every army has a unit this good or close to this good probably) and you have a recipe for disaster...

"Gman tax" may or may not have been an intentional thing (probably not). But it was *absolutely* a thing.

See, armies without Gman were nowhere close to competitive. Armies with Gman were competitive. So you have units - Tacs, Razorbacks, whatever - that were simultaneously competitive and noncompetitive at the same time. Depending on whether you took Gman. Thus, the units were fine(-ish) played with him, but clearly needed a points cut without him. As such, there was a clear difference between their value with Gman vs without Gman.

So, given the rules, the points of these units themselves could do one of several things:
a) Make these units competitive without Gman (and thus be OP with Gman)
b) Make these units competitive with Gman (and thus trash without him)
c) Make these units unfair (either way) whether Gman was included or not

Given that, there is a construct where there is a points value each such unit is worth in scenario (a), and a points value in scenario (b). The difference between them is the "tax". The unit either pays the "tax" (and thus is trash without Gman) or doesn't pay the "tax" (and thus is OP with Gman). The "Tax" was real, even if it wasn't intentional. It was a very useful construct for discussing the situation (and relative options).

Gman was a 400 point units that gave you a huge damage ramp for low str weapons...for high str weapons it was not efficient as it usually just mean you could reroll 1's and 2's instead of just 1's. Prevalence of invune saves - to hits (space marines could only reroll failed hits back then) and chapter tactics not applying vehicals (taking crappy ultras tactic doesn't matter when your best units have fly keward anyways and cant benefit from say RG or IH tacitc) That all culminated in space marines having a specific way to play that was decent against the meta (a bunch of shots rerolling everything is a great way to destroy units with 3++ saves). It wasn't as if you couldn't play in certain matchups where gman was a better choice than CM LT...I mean...400 is 20% of your army in an army with practically no defense...Very hard to win when you have no units left. Fine with the gman nerf though...just not fine with IH being so far and away better than other chapters in such an obvious way. The army can do a lot of damage as any chapter...but only 1 chapter is getting defensive buffs. This likely won be a space marines exclusive problem...like...imagine a knight with buffs like these on it? Or a baneblade/hellhammer?

 Horst wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:
Anytime a tournament starts house-ruling, its a sign of decline. No player is going to want to manage/list adjust for 5 different sets of house rules all developed by people whose goal was to nerf everything but they and their friend's faction. Its why I didn't get into this hobby until 8th ed dropped:

*Approaches FLGS desk during 5th-7th: How can I play in the tournament?

*Employee Thunks down a 20 page document. This is the official list of everything that is banned, restricted, etc. If you want to play squats, there's another packet I can give you.

During 8th ed: How can I play in the tournament?

*Employee: This is one page summary of the ITC format. Its the same used by every store in 20 miles.

*Me, looking over the list: There's no ban section...

*Employee: If you bring a titan we'll rough you up in the parking lot

*Me: Fair enough

Meh, a flat forgeworld ban isn't that uncommon. Sadly, while I like forgeworld, I think banning them from comp play altogether might be needed.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Horst wrote:


Meh, a flat forgeworld ban isn't that uncommon. Sadly, while I like forgeworld, I think banning them from comp play altogether might be needed.

Again people show that they have no clue what they are talking about.

GW WRITES ALL RULES, INCLUDING FW, IN 8TH EDITION.

 Horst wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Horst wrote:


Meh, a flat forgeworld ban isn't that uncommon. Sadly, while I like forgeworld, I think banning them from comp play altogether might be needed.

Again people show that they have no clue what they are talking about.

GW WRITES ALL RULES, INCLUDING FW, IN 8TH EDITION.

What do you mean I don't have a clue what I'm talking about? Many local tournaments have full bans on forgeworld units. ETC doesn't allow them either.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Because if you ban fw units which get their rules from gw might aswell ban anything that crawls.
Do you get it now?

 Horst wrote:
No, I don't get it. How do I not have a clue what I'm talking about?

Regardless of what YOU think about banning FW units, and if you think they're legit GW rules or not, your opinion is irrelevant. FW bans are common in tournaments.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Again people show that they have no clue what they are talking about.

GW WRITES ALL RULES, INCLUDING FW, IN 8TH EDITION.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So, no one raised a stink when the Callidus tank got straight up banned at a tournament, but THIS is too far?

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Their's no point in banning fw because fw isn't any more unbalanced than codex options. Are some fw units good? Yes but you pay for them in higher points just like the stronger codex units. The same team writes the rules for both. The problem is the codex rules that the units are interacting with. And I'd at least like to play a game against ih before screaming that they can't be beat.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Their's no point in banning fw because fw isn't any more unbalanced than codex options. Are some fw units good? Yes but you pay for them in higher points just like the stronger codex units. The same team writes the rules for both. The problem is the codex rules that the units are interacting with. And I'd at least like to play a game against ih before screaming that they can't be beat.

It comes from years of older editions where FW would make 30 units but have 1 super strong OP AF unit that everyone wanted to play with ignoring the fact that most FW units are not very good.