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.

@Reece - I get your point, that the tanking ability in CC is amazingly stupid for units with a 2++ re-roll. That is exactly 1 unit in the game, the harliestar. Chaos terminators w Fateweaver and Chronometron escorted Necron Lords have a 2+ re-roll, slightly less powerful but still a tank nonetheless. Are there others? Possibly, though I can't think of any at the time.

The point i'm making is don't let the ability of a single 'trick' make the game have a 'bad set of rules'. A good, smart player will and can see the way around these cc stars the same as 5th - directional shooting, avoidance, and careful placement of models in CC (My powerfist is in B2B with the archon, so he can't take any wounds from my chainswords until harlequins do) will all do wonders to reduce the effectiveness of the star. Also as you agreed to, these lists don't win games in 6th! Even more of a reason for me to ignore the unit, or throw up some fodder for it to assault into while my other scoring units make their way across the board and my elites focus on killing the enemy scoring units.

All i'm saying is good on you and Frankie for putting together a stupid good combo that basically lets an archon never die. However it won't change my play style, and as more flyers come out (come on Harpy and another AA flying beast, nids!) the harliestar will have even less to assault.

Oh, PS - If FAQs take away the ability for fortune's power to effect an archon, fateweaver's to effect chaos terms, and plus the fact that the chrono-tek only gives 1 re-roll per phase and this isn't broken anymore - someone who chooses to tank with their character vs a buttload of attacks will eventually fail enough saves to lose that character. Statistically that is.

@Tetrisphreak

Man, I hope they do FAQ that stuff out.

The other really common combo that gives a 2+ with a reroll are Space Wolves. Grey Hunters with Wolf Guard in Terminator armor and a wolf standard can do it too, which is crappy.

And I think I wasn't being clear enough, which is understandable. I don't think the entire rules set is bad, just some of the rules. I think 6th is pretty damn awesome, actually, allies, the mini-dexes coming out, the updated rules in WD, is all fething awesome. Just a few of the main game mechanics are too easily abused and don't do what they were meant to do and I am afraid it will make people not enjoy the game as much when they encounter it.

I could be wrong of course, wouldn't be the first time! Haha

But if they do FAQ that stuff out, awesome. That would make the game more enjoyable, IMO.

I'm a bit surprised the sentiment is that people want these things FAQ'd to not work as it currently does. I'd think people would be more upset that such sharing of rules is only limited to Brother's in Arms...if you give the sharing rule to more codex' then everyone gets to enjoy wonky rules and just not a few builds here and there.

i don't see them being faq'd. why would they? it seems kinda the point of being brothers in arms in the first place. It's the first thing we all thought of when we heard there were going to be allies. (or at least it was the first thing in my mind). Kairos in paticular, the archons and fateseers a close second.

it's part of 6th edition. i'd stop thinking that they are going to up and change things around just because they are unbalancingly (yeah, there's a word for ya) good. they have a points cost. that's the balance IMO.

I am surprised no one mentioned the assasin that removes war gear saves. hit vect first and remove the shadow field. Then just hit them with ap2 weapons. Without the inv save this unit is no where near as scary.

@Sargow

Don't forget he also has Stealth and Shrouding thanks to the Harlies, which means he can always take a 4+ or 2+ cover save, which can also be rerolled.

And that is a solution only Grey Knights have access to.

@Painnen

The points cost these models have were not written with the knowledge that they would be used with armies from other codices, especially not the 4th ed books we're dealing with. I really don't see an argument to be made that they are balanced as is as they are being used in ways that weren't known to the writers at the time they were written.

Sargow wrote:I am surprised no one mentioned the assasin that removes war gear saves. hit vect first and remove the shadow field. Then just hit them with ap2 weapons. Without the inv save this unit is no where near as scary.

Yeah! And while you're at it, hit Eldrad as well!

Reecius wrote:@Sargow

Don't forget he also has Stealth and Shrouding thanks to the Harlies, which means he can always take a 4+ or 2+ cover save, which can also be rerolled.

And that is a solution only Grey Knights have access to.

Yeah. It won't do much to him in shooting, but it'll help if you have to assault that unit. They won't be nearly as scary without the 2++ and 3++ in combat....though it's still stupid to assault that unit with anything in the GK codex except paladins and psykabroke grenades.


BTW, grey knights can also get re-rollable 2++'s with a warding stave librarian and psychic powers.

Reecius wrote:@Painnen

The points cost these models have were not written with the knowledge that they would be used with armies from other codices, especially not the 4th ed books we're dealing with. I really don't see an argument to be made that they are balanced as is as they are being used in ways that weren't known to the writers at the time they were written.

I'd tend to agree with this other than the fact that the Brothers in Arms alliances and the dirty lil tricks they can pull off had to have been well known to the developers of 6th edition. Someone had to look at Kairos + Tzeench Terminators and say..."yeah, powerful but expensive. low model count but tough. a current codex icon and an old codex unit that gets some new love. print it and we'll make some money from it." Same exact thing could be said about Eldrad, Harlies, and Archons. The only balancing thing that comes to mind when talking about these type of alliances is the relatively high points cost per model/unit. That is what I was getting at when talking about their points cost being balanced. However truely unbalanced they might be by being 1-2 editions old, the only way I justify them being approved for such alliances in the first place is the inherant cost of the models and followed second by their limited function (footslogging, nonscoring) on the tabletop.

Can't look out sir be used to pass off the shield breaker shot anyway?

yakface wrote:
Can't look out sir be used to pass off the shield breaker shot anyway?

Yes. Ironically, while "sniping" has grown easier overall thanks to buffs to barrage and the chance of Directed Attacks from sniper rifles and characters, the only preexisting sniper units in the game-- the Vindicare Assassin and Sergeant Telion-- actually got substantially worse thanks to Look Out, Sir!

"When a wound from this round is allocated to a model, that model loses.... Remaining saves, if any, can then be taken."

- GK codex


I don't think you can use LOS on its special effect. LOS can only be used to deflect a wound (or unsaved wound) and not other effects of a shot, I think. Just like when a stormraven fires mindstrike missiles at a psyker. He may be able to LOS the wound, but he still takes the Perils.

Fetterkey wrote:

yakface wrote:
Can't look out sir be used to pass off the shield breaker shot anyway?

Yes. Ironically, while "sniping" has grown easier overall thanks to buffs to barrage and the chance of Directed Attacks from sniper rifles and characters, the only preexisting sniper units in the game-- the Vindicare Assassin and Sergeant Telion-- actually got substantially worse thanks to Look Out, Sir!

Tell that to the guy holding the Wolf Standard in a Grey Hunters unit.

jy2 wrote:"When a wound from this round is allocated to a model, that model loses.... Remaining saves, if any, can then be taken."

- GK codex


I don't think you can use LOS on its special effect. LOS can only be used to deflect a wound (or unsaved wound) and not other effects of a shot, I think. Just like when a stormraven fires mindstrike missiles at a psyker. He may be able to LOS the wound, but he still takes the Perils.

Yeah, I can definitely see that point of view. But on the counter side the LOS rules do say at one point that you are 're-allocating' the wound, which heavily implies that it is replacing the normal allocation process the way a re-roll replaces an original roll.

I personally think that's rather a different situation than the Mindstrike missile, which causes a perils to be taken when a psyker is HIT by it (which in that case is when they're at least partially covered by the mindstrike blast). In this case, the trigger is on the wound be allocated to a model, which the LOS rule theoretically changes the target of that allocation...or else I think you're stuck in a RAW situation where both the original model and the model who gets the wound allocated to him via LOS *both* suffer the effect of the Shield Breaker, which I would think is a solution most people would find fairly ludicrous (although I could be wrong).

Reecius wrote:
The points cost these models have were not written with the knowledge that they would be used with armies from other codices,

And again, he's using this combo to create an army that loses.

DarknessEternal wrote:And again, he's using this combo to create an army that loses.

the army list doesn't lose every time.

i played an 1850 game today with my version of the list and won vs. a Grey Knight list. GK's had 4 scoring units and I had 7. (one of which I forgot in reserves all game). Actually lost/tied multiple rounds of combat vs. the knights in CC with the harliestar. Had an Archon and Eldrad ID'd but in the end I had enough mobility with the rest of the list to be both evasive and surgical. Oddly enough, turn 5 we would have tied had it ended. Turn 6 was a 4 point swing for me.

@Darkness Eternal

Hahaha, OK, you already said that? What point are you trying to make?

I already told you we aren't showing these lists to win every game, but to show how the rules work. I have also said, multiple times, that I think the best lists will be balanced lists.

And, as pointed out, the army doesn't lost the minute you put it on the table. It is quite easy to win with it, actually.

I do not see your point here, at all.

@Painnen

I think what you said is very logical, however, I had a chance to talk to an individual involved with play-testing 6th and when I asked why they allowed this craziness in to the game I was told that they didn't think people would do it. Just like Jervis said they didn't think people would make 5 man/2 Assault Cannon termie squads in 4th ed since there was only 1 assault cannon in a box of models.

That is one of the reasons I get so mad at GW and bitch about some of the rules as they could have SO easily been fixed. A beta would have eliminated all of this nonsense before the product went to print and the game would have been so much healthier for it.

Also, as I have been told, they are taking a long view with 6th ed, and accepting the fact that some of the books will be out of whack with the overall vision of 6th ed until they get redone. Just like Daemons in 7th ed Fantasy were stupid broken but came into a more realistic power level with 8th ed, etc.

Reecius wrote: What point are you trying to make?

You're trying to fix something you've demonstrably proven isn't broken.

Your series of videos show that you knee-jerk straight into sad-sack Eeyore mode every time things seemingly turn against you despite nothing actually being against you.

You and he even comment on this particular trait of yours in the video. Your objectiveness on the matter completely disappears after you Nob Biker charge and you start whining about how unfair (unfair was your word) this unit is despite your victory.

This is just further mountain-making out of the molehill you imagine you see.

I'd ask you to go watch this video you posted. Don't just try and remember what happened. Then try to objectively state you're not letting your personal bias from something that happened in the moment color your opinion of something that just isn't that big of a deal.

He spent almost half his points on a unit that you ended up beating (by neutering it, outmaneuvering it, and limiting it's impact on the game). You won, not only the game, but the interaction with this unit. You only lost some rounds of assault.

Why is this such a big deal? Something that cost a lot of points is powerful. Shouldn't it be?

DarknessEternal wrote:

Reecius wrote: What point are you trying to make?

You're trying to fix something you've demonstrably proven isn't broken.

Your series of videos show that you knee-jerk straight into sad-sack Eeyore mode every time things seemingly turn against you despite nothing actually being against you.

You and he even comment on this particular trait of yours in the video. Your objectiveness on the matter completely disappears after you Nob Biker charge and you start whining about how unfair (unfair was your word) this unit is despite your victory.

This is just further mountain-making out of the molehill you imagine you see.

There is at least one way this can be abused, and I mean that in it's most literal sense, at tournaments: slow playing.

Last turn objective grabbing is how Eldar usually win games. Anyone who played against double autarch/full reserve Eldar in 5th can tell you it doesn't matter how much damage the army puts out, it is whether or not they survive long enough to turbo onto objectives and contest the game. Jetbikes are cheap scoring troops that can litterally travel the length of the board now.

Now what does that have to do with the price of tea in china?

Since we can no longer fully reserve, we need another insulating tactic for those cheap but fragile jet bikes. One possible way to insulate them would be to drag the game turns out to reduce the number of turns played in any one round of a tournament. In this scenario the Harliestar wouldn't have to do a lot but take up time. If you decide to be TFG and roll every save one at a time, you could very easily take one turn off the game length if not more. Every turn that you take off of the game length, the less fire gets dedicated to those super mobile game winners. While it would be nice to say that you could ignore the harliestar and focus on the jetbikes, the jetbikes are already going to be in reserve. So you are denied at least one turn of shooting via reserves, and at least one from abusing wound allocation. Given that the bikes have absurd range of movement, and so don't need to be anywhere near an objective, this gives an opposing player 3 turns max to shoot them while they huddle in the far corner of the board out of line of sight.

This isn't a full proof strat. What it is, is a demonstration of how to use the worst part of the new wound allocation shenanigans, the amount of time that it eats, to give you an advantage. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe at one point Frank/Reece mentions that at 1500pts, this game is taking around 3 hours? While some of that time is certainly due to unfamiliarity with the new rules, the majority is in dealing with these time sinks.

TL: DR- The new wound allocation rules are almost a good idea. But min/maxing gaming, as you see in a tournament setting, is going to see this mechanic being abused for an advantage.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Reecius wrote: What point are you trying to make?

You're trying to fix something you've demonstrably proven isn't broken.

Your series of videos show that you knee-jerk straight into sad-sack Eeyore mode every time things seemingly turn against you despite nothing actually being against you.

You and he even comment on this particular trait of yours in the video. Your objectiveness on the matter completely disappears after you Nob Biker charge and you start whining about how unfair (unfair was your word) this unit is despite your victory.

This is just further mountain-making out of the molehill you imagine you see.

I'd ask you to go watch this video you posted. Don't just try and remember what happened. Then try to objectively state you're not letting your personal bias from something that happened in the moment color your opinion of something that just isn't that big of a deal.

He spent almost half his points on a unit that you ended up beating (by neutering it, outmaneuvering it, and limiting it's impact on the game). You won, not only the game, but the interaction with this unit. You only lost some rounds of assault.

Why is this such a big deal? Something that cost a lot of points is powerful. Shouldn't it be?

Hahaha, no need to result to insults.

You can think whatever you want of me, our videos, whatever, I don't really care. We never even put forth the pretense that these would be bias free, or scientific analysis, so I don't understand where you're getting the notion that that's what we're trying to do.

These are our OPINIONS of the game along with examples of the mechanics in action. Take what you will form that.

We've said a million times in this thread and others that we are mad about the rules that allow these kinds of things to happen because they aren't fun (again, in our opinions) not because they are OP. People encountering this are going to be upset, and rightly so. You keep seeming to miss that somehow. But whatever.

@Dash2012

Games are going a LOT faster with familiarity, but combats are still slow as mud. You could very easily slow play in this rule set if you were so inclined. With complex units, rerolls, LoS!, moving each individual model as many as 5 times in a combat, etc. they really just drag out.

I think you have a very valid concern that this will be an issue in tournament play.

Reecius wrote:@Sargow

Don't forget he also has Stealth and Shrouding thanks to the Harlies, which means he can always take a 4+ or 2+ cover save, which can also be rerolled.

And that is a solution only Grey Knights have access to.

@Painnen

The points cost these models have were not written with the knowledge that they would be used with armies from other codices, especially not the 4th ed books we're dealing with. I really don't see an argument to be made that they are balanced as is as they are being used in ways that weren't known to the writers at the time they were written.

Not to mention the archon or vect can just 2+ look out sir that shot away and not lose the invuln save.

Reecius wrote:
These are our OPINIONS of the game along with examples of the mechanics in action

We've said a million times in this thread and others that we are mad about the rules that allow these kinds of things to happen because they aren't fun (again, in our opinions) not because they are OP. People encountering this are going to be upset, and rightly so. You keep seeming to miss that somehow. But whatever.

You've just declared them unfair and unfun, but given no justification. And actually proved they had mostly a disadvantageous affect of the person choosing to spend 900 points on one unit.

Who is this unfair to? Who is it unfun for? The person who made the mistake of buying this unit? The person who lost?

You were neither. Why was it unfair and unfun to you?

DarknessEternal wrote:

Reecius wrote:
These are our OPINIONS of the game along with examples of the mechanics in action

We've said a million times in this thread and others that we are mad about the rules that allow these kinds of things to happen because they aren't fun (again, in our opinions) not because they are OP. People encountering this are going to be upset, and rightly so. You keep seeming to miss that somehow. But whatever.

You've just declared them unfair and unfun, but given no justification. And actually proved they had mostly a disadvantageous affect of the person choosing to spend 900 points on one unit.

Who is this unfair to? Who is it unfun for? The person who made the mistake of buying this unit? The person who lost?

You were neither. Why was it unfair and unfun to you?

I wouldn't call it rocket science on who it's unfun to...

Even in 5th I would run my Seer Coucil against an oppoenent and watch them get rage pissed in the face as their entire army fired at the unit for 3 turns and only killed 2-3 model... and that was with a 3+ rerollable. A can't fathom that an opponent would find it "fun" to fire at a unit only to have a 2+ save guy with a reroll laugh at an entire armies worth of shots as he takes the saves one at a time over and over. Unfair I wouldn't go so far to say since there is a pointcost and tactics to counter it, but unfun is a no brainer.

Is there no longer fun to be hand in beating something that is problematic? When did we decide it was no longer fun when things are easy?

Sure, if you beat it.

If you get steam rolled by it because you literally couldn't cause a wound, not fun. Or even sitting there waiting for your opponent to roll 150 hits with rerolls and not wound a single model, gonna go with not fun on that one either.

@Darkness Eternal

I think you are getting defensive and letting it become personal. No reason for that. If I made you feel like you were getting attacked, sorry, I wasn't trying to.

BlueDagger made the point about how it is unfun to watch your attacks do nothing, so I won't remake it.

Just please don't insult anybody else, me included, as it doesn't progress the discussion.

I'm glad this thread is still active, because I've had a couple gaming moments that I want to share with Reece, primarily becuase I am in total disagreement about wound allocation being a crappy rule.

If you don't mind, I'll attempt to paraphrase his point, keep mind these aren't his words...

Wound allocation isn't fun because you are allowed to keep allocating wounds to a single model until it dies at every initiative step. If you have a rerollable 2++ that makes it hard to kill anything.

I thought about this particular instance of wound allocation and wound allocation in general for a long time this week. I also started asking what new rules also came out alongside wound allocation?

For shooting, we have already discussed how balanced wound allocation is. Static armies can use barrage, and mobile armies can just move to a point where they dictate wound allocation. But what about close combat?
The other very important rule that needs to be considered whenever you are considering wound allocation are precision strikes. Every precision strike you land that isn't off of someone in a challenge goes where you want it to.

So what? You might ask.

Well, something I really love about this edition is that independent characters are good, and expensive independent characters can be very good as well. Here is why, then I'll get back to my point. In the olden days of 5th, non independent characters were, for all intents and purposes, unkillable, so buying that eavy armor or storm shield was foolish, and likewise independent characters were infinitely killable, so buying a power fist was generally a no-no as they'd die before they used it. But nowadays, non independent characters are less survivable, and independent characters, particularly in units with multiple independent characters can be much much more survivable.

Ok, so how do you make something like the harlie star combat more interesting and more balanced. Well, a typical harliestar has 3 independent characters in it and the possibility of three more characters. That means that they can tank a challenge with one independent character, tank all the wounds coming in with another, and have a third independent character free to just dole out wounds, with occasional precision strikes, along with all other characters. If there is an unfavorable challenge for an archon (swarmlord for example) then a non independent character like the shadowseer can step in.

What every codex can and should use if they want to combat this wound allocation trick on fair ground, is to stack ICs and characters.

Here is an anecdote.

To prove this theory, I had my blood angels friend come over, and I asked him to make a pure blood angels army that can compete with the dark eldar army using similar tools. As you might imagine, his army had stormravens in it, and assault marine troops, but the deathstar was as follows...

dante
librarian with jump pack rolling twice on divination
sanguinary priest with jump pack
5x sanguinary guard with 3x infernus pistols and a power fist

my deathstar was predictably

farseer runes of warding, runes of witnessing, fortune
archon shadow field agonizer
archon shadow field agonizer
10x harlequins with kisses and a shadowseer

He nailed misfortune on his first roll and kept it, and as he charged he got it to stick past runes and deny the witch. (34% chance)

He issued a challenge with dante which I decided to take with the shadowseer, because, thanks to hammer of wrath and misfortune, one of my shadow fields shorted out. With dante in the challenge, this freed up his librarian and his sanguinary priest to swing away and try to trigger precision strikes, they did, and I lost two harlequins to that. The other archon tried to tank all of the sanguinary guard wounds, but his field shorted out and he died immediately after. When all was said and done, I lost combat by 4. I ran away and got swept in one combat. But that was more of a byproduct of misfortune cancelling fortune...

We did some analysis afterwards, and even with fortune up, the precision strikes coming off of his three characters would have cost me enough harlequins to keep losing combat, and my version of the deathstar isn't fearless.

The point of this discussion is that the combat, while very rules and bookkeeping intensive, did in fact feel "cinematic". It was because there were characters on both sides of the combat, calling shots, cutting off heads, while two of the combatants were focused on each other.

What people aren't going to like, is a fight where there is a unit of 5 characters fighting against an expensive unit of no characters, but really, the new reality of 6th edition is that independent characters are really quite powerful when used correctly. What happens in the movies when 5 named heroes fight against a mob of 30 orks. They each take turns doing something spectacular, maybe one of them is specializing in countering the blows of all of the enemies, while others are smashing through and killing the boys that are carrying big shootas. It just isn't fun when you are the schmuck who didn't bring enough characters, because at that point, you are the dungeonmaster and your opponent brought the adventurers.

I guess I could boil all of that down by saying, the archon tanking all wounds isn't going to be some epidemic that needs to be cured once everyone else figures out that characters are good and that precision strikes are an amazing way to break a stalemate. Participate in the arms race by adding your own death stars, or, go MSU and work to make their unit an overinvestment.

I think we've all come to embrace flyers for the most part, and so it seemed that wound allocation was the last thing I needed to defend (fanboi)

Shep is more eloquent than me. Thank you, Shep, for digging me out of that hole.

Um couple of issues there...

#1. Misfourtune forces rerolling armor saves, not invul saves.
#2. Did doom+harlie kisses do nothing for you? That is a pile of rending attacks...


#1 however pretty much invalidates that whole fight.

Edit: nm just saw you didn't take stones or doom... Both of which are rather crucial there.

Reecius wrote:We've said a million times in this thread and others that we are mad about the rules that allow these kinds of things to happen because they aren't fun (again, in our opinions) not because they are OP. People encountering this are going to be upset, and rightly so. You keep seeming to miss that somehow. But whatever.

.

I think Darkness Eternal is being a little rude but I can see where he is coming from. You say that your point is that the unit is unfun and not OP. It seems that if it is not OP it wont matter how unfun it is because people wont use it.

Essentially this thread has demonstrated that it is possible to create a situation where an assault can take a huge amount of time.

The disscussion and futher testing has shown that there is really no reason for anyone to create this situation other than to prove that it can be done.

The only reason I would expect to see anyone feilding this combo is because they heard some people making a fuss on the internet!

If the wound allocation rules need changing this is not the reason. The game rules do not need to be changed to adress something as pointless as this which will never effect the vast majority of players.

Keep up the good work investigating these things though!

yakface wrote:

jy2 wrote:"When a wound from this round is allocated to a model, that model loses.... Remaining saves, if any, can then be taken."

- GK codex


I don't think you can use LOS on its special effect. LOS can only be used to deflect a wound (or unsaved wound) and not other effects of a shot, I think. Just like when a stormraven fires mindstrike missiles at a psyker. He may be able to LOS the wound, but he still takes the Perils.

Yeah, I can definitely see that point of view. But on the counter side the LOS rules do say at one point that you are 're-allocating' the wound, which heavily implies that it is replacing the normal allocation process the way a re-roll replaces an original roll.

I personally think that's rather a different situation than the Mindstrike missile, which causes a perils to be taken when a psyker is HIT by it (which in that case is when they're at least partially covered by the mindstrike blast). In this case, the trigger is on the wound be allocated to a model, which the LOS rule theoretically changes the target of that allocation...or else I think you're stuck in a RAW situation where both the original model and the model who gets the wound allocated to him via LOS *both* suffer the effect of the Shield Breaker, which I would think is a solution most people would find fairly ludicrous (although I could be wrong).

Someone posted this question on YMDC.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/466897.page

So to sum up my opinion, it really depends on how you define Wound. Is it just a "wound" or is it really a "wound + extras"?

Frankly, I don't really see the difference between getting hit by a Mindstrike and the Shieldbreaker round. You can LOS only the wound, but you still suffer any other extraneous effects of the "Wound".

I suggest we finish this discussion in the YMDC link above so as to not throw this thread OT.



-----------------------------------------



@Shep

But not everyone runs MSU or deathstar armies. I really don't like this "arms race" idea to build a deathstar army just to counter another deathstar. Firstly, I think that the majority of 40k players are more casual players. Then when they come up against this type of list, it can become really frustrating and even discouraging for them. And while the truly competitive players may like the challenge of dealing with such armies, ultimately on the whole I don't think it is good overall for the gaming community.

Take for example, one of the our own dakkalites who used to post here in the battle reports forum, Zid. He played in 1 tournament and afterwards, quit playing 40k. What did he face? 2 Harliestar armies and a necron air force. Now it may be because people were playing them wrong, but it got to point that Zid, who is a fairly competitive player himself, was so frustrated in his games that he decided to give up on it.

I think this type of build is going to polarize the 40k gaming community. The more competitive players may embrace them - partly because we relish the challenge and partly because we will have no choice as everyone start to jump onto the "power build" bandwagon - but the gaming community on the whole may suffer as many people get turned off from such a drastic rift between competitiveness and casual gaming that has suddenly appeared.

Secondly, all these extra steps - wound allocation, Look Out Sir, pile-in, etc. - really slows down the game. And no matter how well you know the rules or how good the players are, the games will be slower because you now have more steps to take when resolving combat (or shooting). In a competitive environment, most people just won't be able to finish the game in time even at the reduced points levels. And as Dash2021 pointed out, slow-playing, whether intentional or unintentional, has just become a bigger factor in tournament play.

Personally, I don't have a big issue with these types of armies (the deathstars). As a competitive player, I actually relish the challenge that these types of army poses. However, I do see the new mechanics and rules as making 6E more extreme than it was probably intended by the games creators. And my concern is that this is may perhaps turn off and discourage a lot of players into our hobby.

BlueDagger wrote:Um couple of issues there...

#1. Misfourtune forces rerolling armor saves, not invul saves.
#2. Did doom+harlie kisses do nothing for you? That is a pile of rending attacks...


#1 however pretty much invalidates that whole fight.

Edit: nm just saw you didn't take stones or doom... Both of which are rather crucial there.

You're wrong about #1:

Misfortune isa malediction that targets asingle enemyunit
within 24". Whilst the power is in effect,the target unit must
re-roll successful saving throws.