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.

Watching alot of battle reports online, and man the alpha strike can be so devastating in most cases. The newest flavor faction Dark Eldar, can have devastating alpha-strikes. Watching someone eliminate so much of the opposing forces just because they went first can be dis-heartening.

Wondering if anyone has any ideas to help mitigate turn one advantage. Im thinking perhaps the defending side could be "dug in" giving them some sort of cover advantage as they would logically be bracing themselves for the enemy alpha-strike. Or giving the opposing side some sort of "counter-strike" advantage, giving some of their units a better chance of hitting on their turn.

bat702 wrote:
Watching alot of battle reports online, and man the alpha strike can be so devastating in most cases. The newest flavor faction Dark Eldar, can have devastating alpha-strikes. Watching someone eliminate so much of the opposing forces just because they went first can be dis-heartening.

Wondering if anyone has any ideas to help mitigate turn one advantage. Im thinking perhaps the defending side could be "dug in" giving them some sort of cover advantage as they would logically be bracing themselves for the enemy alpha-strike. Or giving the opposing side some sort of "counter-strike" advantage, giving some of their units a better chance of hitting on their turn.

Alpha strike is so strong because damage is so high. The game is to lethal, its to easy to remove multiple units off the table each turn.

The solution to that isn't bandaids like 8th editions prepared position or limiting turn 1 movement (and banning deepstrikes). And if you do you run the risk of turning it into Beta strikes being to strong.

The simple and obvious answer is to not make the game this frigging lethal to begin with. Bring down all damage profiles, less damage buffs, less attack buffs ect.

Why are space marines now 2 wounds when they were fine for many editions at 1?
Why do C'tan and Ghazghkull need rules that prevent them from being 1 shot?

The game is to lethal.

 Ordana wrote:

bat702 wrote:
Watching alot of battle reports online, and man the alpha strike can be so devastating in most cases. The newest flavor faction Dark Eldar, can have devastating alpha-strikes. Watching someone eliminate so much of the opposing forces just because they went first can be dis-heartening.

Wondering if anyone has any ideas to help mitigate turn one advantage. Im thinking perhaps the defending side could be "dug in" giving them some sort of cover advantage as they would logically be bracing themselves for the enemy alpha-strike. Or giving the opposing side some sort of "counter-strike" advantage, giving some of their units a better chance of hitting on their turn.

Alpha strike is so strong because damage is so high. The game is to lethal, its to easy to remove multiple units off the table each turn.

The solution to that isn't bandaids like 8th editions prepared position or limiting turn 1 movement (and banning deepstrikes). And if you do you run the risk of turning it into Beta strikes being to strong.

The simple and obvious answer is to not make the game this frigging lethal to begin with. Bring down all damage profiles, less damage buffs, less attack buffs ect.

Why are space marines now 2 wounds when they were fine for many editions at 1?
Why do C'tan and Ghazghkull need rules that prevent them from being 1 shot?

The game is to lethal.

I completely agree with this. Alphastrikes are a problem with the very core of the game, no quick fix can ever resolve this.

The game's been in a constant escalating race. Ultimately I this comes from several factors;
Firstly, GW prefers to buff rather than nerf. People like receiving buffs, they feel good and it makes buying the codex or new models satisfactory. Nerfs feel bad, like GW is anti-fun, and it makes buying the codex or book feel like a punishment. So the game moves ever upwards.
This lethality also allows players to field large, impressive armies without actually bogging things down too much, as it's all gone by the end of turn two.
Further, dealing damage is fun, it makes it feel like you're achieving something.
In 7th edition I would say defence exceeded offence (at least in some cheese builds). There were constant gripes about unkillable smashcaptains and invis-stars.
I have a friend that refuses to play Deathguard because he can't sweep them off the board as easily and he finds it so unfun to shoot and not kill things that he prefers not to play them at all. I'm sure people will have opinions on whether or not his decision is fair, but it's the core reasoning that's very relevant.
9th edition has brought many mechanics to combat this. The new supreme characters have abilities to hard-cap the amount of damage they can take. But now they're also implementing new abilities which counter those other abilities as the arms race continues!

But also IgoUgo is a big problem, I get my entire army to smash into you before you can get any response at all.

I think there's multiple solutions which should be implemented together;
Move away from IgoUgo. Have players activate in smaller groups or even individual units (plus characters) in an alternating activation type system. This will greatly reduce the extent of the damage you can cause before your opponent gets a response.
Secondly, reduce lethality and replace it with pinning/morale effects. This allows you to effect enemy units in a satisfactory way without removing them from the table. And no, the current morale rules of "oh you've lost a lot of models? Lose even more!" don't count and are exactly the opposite of what the game needs.
The game will have to get smaller. The size of army you can currently field at 1000pts might now be 1500pts or even 2000pts. When players can no longer think purely in terms of "delete that unit, now delete that unit", this increases the value of any given unit and increases tactical depth.

Those suggestions aren't something that can be bolted onto 9th, they'd need a 10th edition overhaul that'd probably feel larger than the 7th-8th overhaul. But imo it'd be worth it. Make 40k fun!

Speed, range, and universal application of weaponry are also problems.

In 9th you can hose down your opponent with small arms from the far side of the board, shoot up tanks with anti-infantry weapons, and reposition large distances with no effect on your lethality.

Yeah, I gotta say, the lethality + IGOUGO system is a little hilarious sometimes. It’s SO swingy and tends to end up with one side getting wrecked, just cos they lost the roll off to go first.

I do feel like they went in a cool direction with weapons getting specific dmg, and S/T being simplified, etc, etc. But they need to take that and redo the core of how much dmg stuff does, and the IGOUGO system and change it into some form of alternate activation, even if it was phase based like LoTR tabletop.

It annoys me haha because I love a lot about the game, but there are some big core mechanics that seriously hurt it (IMO!).

 Ordana wrote:

bat702 wrote:
Watching alot of battle reports online, and man the alpha strike can be so devastating in most cases. The newest flavor faction Dark Eldar, can have devastating alpha-strikes. Watching someone eliminate so much of the opposing forces just because they went first can be dis-heartening.

Wondering if anyone has any ideas to help mitigate turn one advantage. Im thinking perhaps the defending side could be "dug in" giving them some sort of cover advantage as they would logically be bracing themselves for the enemy alpha-strike. Or giving the opposing side some sort of "counter-strike" advantage, giving some of their units a better chance of hitting on their turn.

Alpha strike is so strong because damage is so high. The game is to lethal, its to easy to remove multiple units off the table each turn.

The solution to that isn't bandaids like 8th editions prepared position or limiting turn 1 movement (and banning deepstrikes). And if you do you run the risk of turning it into Beta strikes being to strong.

The simple and obvious answer is to not make the game this frigging lethal to begin with. Bring down all damage profiles, less damage buffs, less attack buffs ect.

Why are space marines now 2 wounds when they were fine for many editions at 1?
Why do C'tan and Ghazghkull need rules that prevent them from being 1 shot?

The game is to lethal.

Or go back to some old rules like

Can't kill model you can't see (outside of blast/flamer/ignore los)
Can't kill models outside of your gun range
Cover is not just +1 to saves but some cover (heavy for example) should give a straight invul as well (even if its a 5+ compare to a 3+/4+/5+ in older editions, its still something)

Just those 3 things completely changes the game and the lethality of the game, the fact that a unit of Mortifiers with 36" range can be within range of 1 model by 1mm can now kill off 10 models even if 9 of them are out of range and behind cover is freaking stupid, eveything is all or thing now.

I have not had a game where I lost more than 10% or so of my army in the first turn unless I chose to expose myself. You really, really don't need to be on those objectives right away and there are plenty of tools to keep yourself protected.

But I'd like to watch that game you saw if you had a link handy?

Tell that to the poor Knight army's of 9th. Yes, 1st turn Lethality is FAR too high now. If you have never lost great than 10% of your army in first turn, you haven't played any strong lists. Granted I play Custodes, but even with all my 2/3/4++ saves, I can't keep the majority of my forces alive to turn 3 these days, let alone turn 2.

I hate having a 50/50 chance at losing the game in the first 10 minutes.

I agree.

As someone who plays Slaanesh daemons, it is trivial to get the first charge off for me.

Even if someone hides from me the first turn (already a tall order given the smaller DZs - they can't deploy as deep into it as before and the corners are much closer to the center than in the older larger boards), I can just sit there - after all, we're hidden from each other. Furthermore, they've had to sacrifice so much board space to get out of the ~30" threat range of a KOS that one move won't take them onto objectives, typically - which means they're moving out into the open at least once for my keepers to pounce on before they get to objectives.

If they DO get onto the central objectives, I can just murder them. The damage output of a KOS is RIDICULOUS. It's balanced, I think, but it's a demonstration of how utterly flying rodent gak insane the lethality has gotten where 10 Flat 3 damage attacks with -3 rend is "pretty good I guess".

So yeah, we can spend the entire game hiding from each other, but you've got to come out someday, and that day my Slaanesh will run across the board and tear you in half. Several games now I've played games of chicken, where I can't come out of cover first (or I'll get blown to smithereens) but also where the enemy can't advance/move much (or they'll get absolutely annihilated in melee with ranges exceeding 30" in many cases).

Yep, it's a big problem. I don't know what the quick and easy solution is, or if GW actually wants there to be one. it seems like they're just encouraging more and more and more extreme deadliness. I hope we keep seeing more different forms of durability put into the game with stuff like the ork release and nid release and such, but the way GW adds durability vs the way they add lethality is...jesus.

Take Belakor for example. He's roughly doubling in value most likely, I'd be amazed to see him under 470 points. He's got twice the wounds, and he's gone from a re-rollable 5++ (55%) to -1 to hit, -1 to wound (one of which is ranged-only) 4++, with double the wounds.

that's not exactly double the durability. He's not got character protection anymore and you're noooot hiding that dude, if an opponent wants to sling lascannons at him to deal some damage, they can, from turn 1.

Damage though? 6 Str 7 Ap-5 D3 attacks going to 6 Strength 10 AP-4 D3+d3 attacks that ignore invulns or 12 strength 8 AP-3 D1 attacks in case someone tries to tie you up.

Nothing blocks that. Your best bet to have any chance to survive melee is 2+ armored models wielding storm shields to get yourself a 5+ save, his piercing strikes only manage to kill 3.5 of those guys in a swing (actually, honestly, TH/SS terminators are kind of the ideal weapon to kill him with, they ignore the most of his abilities)

At this point when Sisters get their dex in 2022 they will have RF 5 Bolters with S6, AP 3 D4 damage, and a flat 6 wound sister.

Wee need a thread for "Rediculous power creep predictions and prognostications"

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At this point when Sisters get their dex in 2022 they will have RF 5 Bolters with S6, AP 3 D4 damage, and a flat 6 wound sister.

Wee need a thread for "Rediculous power creep predictions and prognostications"

No one here has actually predicted anything though? Everyone is talking about things which actually exist today, comparing them to prior iterations that existed in the past.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At this point when Sisters get their dex in 2022 they will have RF 5 Bolters with S6, AP 3 D4 damage, and a flat 6 wound sister.

Wee need a thread for "Rediculous power creep predictions and prognostications"

Yeah I kind of dread to think of what they will do to stuff like Tyranids monsters who are supposed to be absolute CC nightmares.

We are all playing with terrain to be able to obscure 80%+ of your army turn one right? If your not, you are making the game exceedingly hinged on the turn one roll off. I truly believe terrain set up to be just as important as good army list creation to a fair/competitive game.

The difference between a table with good obscuring and not is night and day for surviving first turn.

I imagine most of the competitive players here are doing it right, but that many casual players are not. And even if you are not playing competitive, I recommend spending the time to do terrain right.

Now, drukhari are different and bear their own discussion imo. Its insane the mobility and damage they put out. The one Drukari player at my store is undefeated every game so far (6~8 games), with not a single game even being somewhat close. Its been a one-sided massacre every game. And hes not even a competitive player haha.

Furthermore, yes, the igougo is frankly a problem. There is just an inherent advantage being able to play the game and progress your board state while harming your opponents before they can do anything. I would be in favor of alternating activations on units, but doubt we will ever see that.

Now, I really dont believe first turn in a normal game is as absolutely integral as most here would seem to believe. With proper terrain placement and positioning, second player should be the first player to actually get to attack, as players one turn they should just be moving out of cover and into position on objectives. Having that objective lead is huge, but they shouldnt have an obscene damage lead. And, the final turn being able to score at end of turn is actually pretty big advantage for going second. Goonhammer data supports this, with their first turn advantage article lending what, I believe a 57% winrate for 1st turn? Thats above average, and a problem as Ive mentioned, but not the 75-80% that some would lead you to believe.

 Ordana wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At this point when Sisters get their dex in 2022 they will have RF 5 Bolters with S6, AP 3 D4 damage, and a flat 6 wound sister.

Wee need a thread for "Rediculous power creep predictions and prognostications"

Yeah I kind of dread to think of what they will do to stuff like Tyranids monsters who are supposed to be absolute CC nightmares.

Use FW tyranid ones for point of comparison, the Dimacheron for example.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At this point when Sisters get their dex in 2022 they will have RF 5 Bolters with S6, AP 3 D4 damage, and a flat 6 wound sister.

Wee need a thread for "Rediculous power creep predictions and prognostications"

No one here has actually predicted anything though? Everyone is talking about things which actually exist today, comparing them to prior iterations that existed in the past.

My point was to be able to, I just want to laugh at preditions of silly power creep. It wasn't a remark about stuff I HAD seen, but more wanted to see, because it could get silly.

It sucks as a way to win the game because it is a function of list building and rules imbalances, not actual gameplay.

A good in GW games comparison is with Epic and SM orbital drops. That managed to tread the fine line between being strong and being overpowered in that you got where you wanted to go but needed to be supported or be overwhelmed in any counter-attack. It wasn't a turn one win move (and whats more the opposition would know you were coming turn 1, 2 or 3 because they would see the spaceship approaching so you had to declare in advance...) but part of a multi-turn strategy.

 Ordana wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At this point when Sisters get their dex in 2022 they will have RF 5 Bolters with S6, AP 3 D4 damage, and a flat 6 wound sister.

Wee need a thread for "Rediculous power creep predictions and prognostications"

Yeah I kind of dread to think of what they will do to stuff like Tyranids monsters who are supposed to be absolute CC nightmares.

Traditionally? Have the fluff in the codex rant and rave about how dangerous they are, and have the rules be... not that.
Fearful mediocrity has been the bane of many a tyranid codex. The exceptions stand out, but 'nids tend to be a mess.

Nids need to be almost Drukari levels of melee to be taken seriously. And they absolutely should be that powerful.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Tell that to the poor Knight army's of 9th. Yes, 1st turn Lethality is FAR too high now. If you have never lost great than 10% of your army in first turn, you haven't played any strong lists. Granted I play Custodes, but even with all my 2/3/4++ saves, I can't keep the majority of my forces alive to turn 3 these days, let alone turn 2.

I hate having a 50/50 chance at losing the game in the first 10 minutes.

I've played custodes multiple times, a sisters list that nearly matched the one that won a tournament this past week, and some marines.

The sister's player absolutely thrashed me by turn three, but by no means did he have the ability to cause excessive turn 1 damage unless I chose to allow it.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I've played custodes multiple times, a sisters list that nearly matched the one that won a tournament this past week, and some marines.

It's certainly true that not everything in 40k is based on alpha strikes - sisters being an example of an army with very little of it (and potentially even less in 9th with things like the exorcist getting nerfed), and to some extent being an example of the anti-alpha strike glass hammer list where excessive overkill is wasted on a lot of potentially dangerous but not particularly valuable units.

I find the alpha strike problem to be directly related to the speed of an army.

Most players at this point are using pretty good terrain where it is not possible to set up a castle and just shoot dz to dz. This helps a lot.

So where do the alpha strikes come from? Fast armies that can charge on the first turn don't care about terrain. Fast armies like DE can use their raiders to get around terrain and still shoot on turn 1. Turn 1 drop pods filled with devastators from iron hands or space wolves don't care about your terrain.

The game is very lethal in general, but I would say in most games both players still have models left at the end. But if you choose an army with high speed (or options that simulate high speed) the alpha strike problem can be very real.

I think this is an improvement over 8th where just taking long range guns often meant you could get off a great alpha strike. Against a lot of armies in 9th they don't hit very hard on turn 1 anymore due to terrain. But beware going against anyone fast.

 Ordana wrote:

bat702 wrote:
Watching alot of battle reports online, and man the alpha strike can be so devastating in most cases. The newest flavor faction Dark Eldar, can have devastating alpha-strikes. Watching someone eliminate so much of the opposing forces just because they went first can be dis-heartening.

Wondering if anyone has any ideas to help mitigate turn one advantage. Im thinking perhaps the defending side could be "dug in" giving them some sort of cover advantage as they would logically be bracing themselves for the enemy alpha-strike. Or giving the opposing side some sort of "counter-strike" advantage, giving some of their units a better chance of hitting on their turn.

Alpha strike is so strong because damage is so high. The game is to lethal, its to easy to remove multiple units off the table each turn.

The solution to that isn't bandaids like 8th editions prepared position or limiting turn 1 movement (and banning deepstrikes). And if you do you run the risk of turning it into Beta strikes being to strong.

The simple and obvious answer is to not make the game this frigging lethal to begin with. Bring down all damage profiles, less damage buffs, less attack buffs ect.

Why are space marines now 2 wounds when they were fine for many editions at 1?
Why do C'tan and Ghazghkull need rules that prevent them from being 1 shot?

The game is to lethal.

Bad arguement - marines were not "fine" at 1 wound lol.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

bat702 wrote:
Watching alot of battle reports online, and man the alpha strike can be so devastating in most cases. The newest flavor faction Dark Eldar, can have devastating alpha-strikes. Watching someone eliminate so much of the opposing forces just because they went first can be dis-heartening.

Wondering if anyone has any ideas to help mitigate turn one advantage. Im thinking perhaps the defending side could be "dug in" giving them some sort of cover advantage as they would logically be bracing themselves for the enemy alpha-strike. Or giving the opposing side some sort of "counter-strike" advantage, giving some of their units a better chance of hitting on their turn.

Alpha strike is so strong because damage is so high. The game is to lethal, its to easy to remove multiple units off the table each turn.

The solution to that isn't bandaids like 8th editions prepared position or limiting turn 1 movement (and banning deepstrikes). And if you do you run the risk of turning it into Beta strikes being to strong.

The simple and obvious answer is to not make the game this frigging lethal to begin with. Bring down all damage profiles, less damage buffs, less attack buffs ect.

Why are space marines now 2 wounds when they were fine for many editions at 1?
Why do C'tan and Ghazghkull need rules that prevent them from being 1 shot?

The game is to lethal.

Bad arguement - marines were not "fine" at 1 wound lol.

so your saying marines have not been good at any point from Rogue Trader until 9th edition?
A bold statement but then I wouldn't expect anything less from you.

Custodes used to be able to Alpha strike, until we forgot how, in the great Forgetting. Almost like how we forgot how to use Bolter Discipline, and Shock assault, and They shall know no fear. We should just let the IF guard the damned palace.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bad arguement - marines were not "fine" at 1 wound lol.

They were fine.

Add more terrain. ITC should not be the goal you strive for in terrain setup. You need large terrain pieces, you need things that can slow down units. You need things that benefit the defender.

Most of these games are played on a board with like 1-2 LOS blocking pieces and ruins. That is the issue.

I really have not found more terrain helps against speed. More terrain helps against slow armies and castles.

Continuously increasing unit and weapon lethality with each codex update, IGOUGO instead of alternating activations, standard weapons being able to shoot over halfway across the table (ex. 30" bolt rifles), and decreased board sizes. It's no surprise that first turn advantage is huge in this game.

RandomHeretic wrote:
I really have not found more terrain helps against speed. More terrain helps against slow armies and castles.

Entirely depends on the opponent. If it is the DE DT list and they're going to bee-line to your DZ then you need to reduce your footprint. If they're just going mid there should be enough to keep them from getting too many good angles.