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.

In normal 40k games like at the 1500 points level, are players allowed to use superheavy vehicles or things like warhound or reaver titans (if they can still finish their FOC of course)?

If it's listed in the Escalation book or FW Escalation-approved list, then yes, you can bring one in your army for each CAD you use.

However, some people don't like facing them, so check with local players before spending tons on a Titan.

If everyone is playing with the full rules, and the superheavy is listed as a regular 40k LOW, then yes.

In the end it comes down to whether the other player wants to play that, rather than 'legal', though.

So that means reaver titans could be used in regular 40k games? I have somebody who's interested in trading one with me so I was wondering if I could even use it in games between 1500-2000 points :x

Yes, you CAN use a reaver at 1500; you just need to find a detachment (not just the CAD from the BRB, other detachments allow Lords of War as well) that has a LOW slot, that you can fill at 1500

From memory the reaver is 1400 - 1450 points, so good luck finding a detachment that you can fulfill the mandatory requirements of....

Else, you can go unbound where you do not use detachments. This is also perfectly fine, as long as your opponent agrees.

The main issue with only having say, one vehicle, is the same problem people have with all-mech armies now: a large proportion of their army may be unable to affect it at all, and so they feel it is worthless. However with all mecfh you can, after blowing the vehicle up, get to the guys inside, whereas with a reaver there ARE no guys inside...

 Ascalam wrote:

In the end it comes down to whether the other player wants to play that, rather than 'legal', though.

Mainly this. No one is obligated to play you, even if everything in your list is within the rules. Some Lords of War fundamentally alter game-play (a Reaver definitely does), so always check with your opponent first.

 the_Armyman wrote:

 Ascalam wrote:

In the end it comes down to whether the other player wants to play that, rather than 'legal', though.

Mainly this. No one is obligated to play you, even if everything in your list is within the rules. Some Lords of War fundamentally alter game-play (a Reaver definitely does), so always check with your opponent first.

Since GW does not want to limit your purchases most things are "legal".
It has been a change in thought that players are more choosy of what they will play against.
You may have to come to a tournament-like army selection rule system to ensure you pick lists that are competitive but people are still willing to play against.

Actually GW has stated in the rules that both players must agree as to how they're going to select their armies.

If it's legal and people won't play you if you bring it, then they're TFG. It's like saying "I won't play you if you bring drop pods because I don't like them"...

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
If it's legal and people won't play you if you bring it, then they're TFG. It's like saying "I won't play you if you bring drop pods because I don't like them"...

Nope. GW grew the game beyond what some people like. Their choices are stop playing altogether (not good for anyone really), play a game they won't enjoy (most of my army has any role to play in this game) or politely decline to play against things that dramatically move the game away feom what they enjoy. Choosing the last hardly makes someone TFG.

Indeed, people are welcome to play against what they like.
Bringing a LoW is not TFG behavior, but nor is declining to play against it.

Rules of 40k:
1) Don't be a dick
2) Be adults.

In time, LoW will be as much part of the game as allies, fliers and named characters.

The bigger issue is probably the reaver not giving you a whole lot of fun games, since playing a single unit will get boring after a couple of games, after which you'll have an expensive model that took a lot of work to build and paint sitting on the shelf.

If you want to invest in a LoW, pick one of the smaller ones (<400 points), so you are fielding an actual army alongside them, for example a CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT, or on a more serious note, a macharius heavy tank are still powerful assets to your army, but they are still just a part of your army.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
If it's legal and people won't play you if you bring it, then they're TFG. It's like saying "I won't play you if you bring drop pods because I don't like them"...

Uh, I decline games all the time. Some people play a different style of game from me, some people can't stop talking about inane things, some never intend to paint their armies, whatever... I try to play with people who I know I'll enjoy playing against. Seems pretty common sense to me and not TFG in the least.

Imperial Knights are Superheavies that are legal to play in 40k, and do not require a LoW slot. Logan, Draigo, and Gaz are LoW that are neither Superheavies nor Gargantuan. The 40k landscape is changing, and we can't just arbitrarily say "no LoW" or "no SHV" or "no digital-only units" without unfairly limiting some armies over others. Its much easier, and slightly more fair, to say "no duplicate formations" or "highlander style", although even that can be too limiting to some. A much better solution, yet still by no means perfect, is a "don't be a D-Bag" policy, or a "peer review" process for list building. Probably the best solution is to assume "'Ard Boyz at 1500pts", and build around that.

In the end, play to your local meta, don't be dick.

SJ

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Indeed, people are welcome to play against what they like.
Bringing a LoW is not TFG behavior, but nor is declining to play against it.

Rules of 40k:
1) Don't be a dick
2) Be adults.

honestly, just rule #1 needs to apply...


social contract game people... this is D&D that you paint yourself and have multiple characters in...

As others have said, you can but there's currently a stigma associated with superheavies, especially Titans so if you show up to a friendly game with a titan, you might not make friends. If you arrange it beforehand (e.g. "I just got a Titan, who wants to have a fun game and try to stop it?") then it might be fun, but in general it's a d-bag move to turn up to a regular game and plop down a Titan if your opponent isn't expecting one.

WayneTheGame wrote:
As others have said, you can but there's currently a stigma associated with superheavies, especially Titans so if you show up to a friendly game with a titan, you might not make friends. If you arrange it beforehand (e.g. "I just got a Titan, who wants to have a fun game and try to stop it?") then it might be fun, but in general it's a d-bag move to turn up to a regular game and plop down a Titan if your opponent isn't expecting one.

That or bring a second army with you and give them the option of witch to fight.

The big thing about the LoW fear/hatred it the fact that many show up and not tell anyone. If they know in advance I have found that most are ok with one if they know it is showing up.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
If it's legal and people won't play you if you bring it, then they're TFG. It's like saying "I won't play you if you bring drop pods because I don't like them"...

Who is more of a TFG: the guy who brings a 2000pt army consisting of Horus and a Reaver titan, or the guy with the normal TAC list who doesn't want to play against that?

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
If it's legal and people won't play you if you bring it, then they're TFG. It's like saying "I won't play you if you bring drop pods because I don't like them"...

Who is more of a TFG: the guy who brings a 2000pt army consisting of Horus and a Reaver titan, or the guy with the normal TAC list who doesn't want to play against that?

The guy who's being a Jerk about the other guy's list

If its so commonly accepted that people play armies of superheavies in normal 40k it wont be a problem to find a different opponent than me. Simple.

Really what is a 'normal' game of 40k these days? If it's a tournament then there will be rules, otherwise just talk with your opponent beforehand and make sure you're on the same page.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
.... It's like saying "I won't play you if you bring drop pods because I don't like them"...

Indeed it is.

And neither is a problem. I've turned down games in the past because the player had an army that I didn't particularly want to play against. That's not being 'TFG'... it's not wasting your precious hobby time on a game that you're not going to enjoy.

If someone wants to play a boardgame, and you say 'Sure... but not Monopoly! That gak bores me to tears' ... is that being unreasonable?

 insaniak wrote:
And neither is a problem.

Except that's not really true. If you say you're not going to play against tactical squads people are going to think you're being unreasonable (or even TFG), and you're going to have a hard time finding anyone interested in playing with you. But if you refuse to play against LoW those same people will support you and accuse your opponent of being unreasonable (or even TFG) for bringing a LoW without begging for special permission first. There's a clear double standard here where most, if not all, non-LoW codex options are assumed to be included by default but you need special permission for LoW/FW/etc.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
If it's legal and people won't play you if you bring it, then they're TFG. It's like saying "I won't play you if you bring drop pods because I don't like them"...

Not quite the TFG, at least they are not wasting your time.
I tend to look at what a TFG does to you, refusing to play is an "oh well" moment.

If I see the "net list of the month" while I brought the "Fluff factor 5000" army, I conclude that person wants to play a different game than me and it would suck on both counts.
Plus only the truly sadistic want to play a full game with someone where they table them: look for some challenge.
I HAVE seen people that intentionally try to have a game with the weakest army opponent they can find, feels rather abusive in outlook.

SO superheavies! love them! Really want a big game playing them since joe troopers would be in short supply due to the points suck (2000+ pts).
Fielded a Baneblade a couple times, gave warning about that beast and nothing else so a nasty surprise was not had.
Each instance of giving warning made a pretty close fight, I had fun and my opponent had some answers to that bad boy so they had fun too.

Guess I am saying in summary: Telling each other what "Lord of war" unit you are taking and nothing else may help keep it fair.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
If it's legal and people won't play you if you bring it, then they're TFG. It's like saying "I won't play you if you bring drop pods because I don't like them"...

Who is more of a TFG: the guy who brings a 2000pt army consisting of Horus and a Reaver titan, or the guy with the normal TAC list who doesn't want to play against that?

That's not exactly a normal case though. most people who run a LOW just wanna use a baneblade with their Imperial guard. that list is an unbound list of 2 LOWs, one of which isn't, strictly speaking, even a legal 40k unit

 Peregrine wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
And neither is a problem.

Except that's not really true. If you say you're not going to play against tactical squads people are going to think you're being unreasonable (or even TFG), and you're going to have a hard time finding anyone interested in playing with you. But if you refuse to play against LoW those same people will support you and accuse your opponent of being unreasonable (or even TFG) for bringing a LoW without begging for special permission first. There's a clear double standard here where most, if not all, non-LoW codex options are assumed to be included by default but you need special permission for LoW/FW/etc.

>Then have an open discussion with the group about how you would like to play a LoW, but you don't want to be TFG. Point out things like they are all part of the game now.
>Suggest a LoW Tournament, requiring everyone to take one. Then everyone will see that they are not that bad.

The same can be said for Unbound.

 Peregrine wrote:
Except that's not really true. If you say you're not going to play against tactical squads people are going to think you're being unreasonable (or even TFG), and you're going to have a hard time finding anyone interested in playing with you. But if you refuse to play against LoW those same people will support you and accuse your opponent of being unreasonable (or even TFG) for bringing a LoW without begging for special permission first. There's a clear double standard here where most, if not all, non-LoW codex options are assumed to be included by default but you need special permission for LoW/FW/etc.

Do you know anyone that refuses to play against Tactical Marines?
If not: Argument invalid.

The most important part about a game is that you both have fun.
And for many games both players have a certain expectation of what a game of WH40k will be.
Fighting against a 1000-point Lord of War isn't fun for many people.
And while I agree that they shouldn't complain and at least try it, I also think that you should inform the opponent if you're doing such a thing.
Likewise I also expect my opponent to inform me if he is going to play a tournament list, so that I will know what to expect from a game.

If I should expect a Lord of War for every single game, my lists would become very standard and include a gigantic amount of heavy firepower, more than I usually (want to) take.
That also effects the player that does not have a Lord of War, because his two or three vehicles will get blown away in my first turn of shooting.

 Anpu42 wrote:
>Then have an open discussion with the group about how you would like to play a LoW, but you don't want to be TFG. Point out things like they are all part of the game now.
>Suggest a LoW Tournament, requiring everyone to take one. Then everyone will see that they are not that bad.

And this just confirms the double standard. I don't have to have an open discussion about how I would like to use a tactical squad, or have a "everyone must take a tactical squad" tournament to justify my decision to use them. I just show up with tactical squads in my army, and my opponents are obligated to accept it. So why should it be any different with LoW?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kangodo wrote:
Do you know anyone that refuses to play against Tactical Marines?

No, and that's exactly the point. In theory the "both players have to agree" and "you can refuse a game for any reason" rules apply equally to titans and tactical squads. But in practice certain categories of units (LoW, FW, etc) are treated as if they require special permission, while others are assumed to be legal without question and you're TFG if you even think about refusing to allow them.

'Preparing for Battle', under the heading 'Choosing Your Army' in bold type.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
>Then have an open discussion with the group about how you would like to play a LoW, but you don't want to be TFG. Point out things like they are all part of the game now.
>Suggest a LoW Tournament, requiring everyone to take one. Then everyone will see that they are not that bad.

And this just confirms the double standard. I don't have to have an open discussion about how I would like to use a tactical squad, or have a "everyone must take a tactical squad" tournament to justify my decision to use them. I just show up with tactical squads in my army, and my opponents are obligated to accept it. So why should it be any different with LoW?

About Tactical Squads, no you don't, but Yes with LoW.
Not Because it is LoW, but because it is a issue with the group. There are lots of groups with issues, not that I have to tell you. We had the same discussions when 6th and then 7th cam out:
>Flyers
>LoW
>Unbound
>Fortifications
In the end we have no issues with any of them once everyone's concerns and fears were addressed.
Now our group would most likely go "Cool a Reaver Titan!" rather than "No you can't play that."
We also feel it is not unreasonable to go "Fred...this is the 10th time you brought out your Riptide SPAM in a row, you want to bring something else, it is getting real boring to fight you."