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.

I really find it hard to believe that thing like the warhound titan is hard to beat with a TAC list. Most the people I have talked with seem to think most of the bigger Super-heavies aren't really worth taking for their points.

Khadorstompy wrote:
I really find it hard to believe that thing like the warhound titan is hard to beat with a TAC list. Most the people I have talked with seem to think most of the bigger Super-heavies aren't really worth taking for their points.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I've been seeing also. I think the call to preemptively ban them is just a knee jerk fear reaction based on prior editions. In 8th, the big guys obviously get worse as they take damage and units that could never have scratched a Titan in 7th can now would on a 6 in 8th. Literally every unit in the game can hurt a Titan.

You guys are trolling hard or just playing ignorant..... warlord titans are 4000pts and are well out of any competitive matched play point limit. Its not even worth doing the numbers because its POINTLESS discussing warlord titans in a ban list when they aren't allowed BY DEFAULT...... There is NO preemptive ban list... warlord titans are banned regardless.

If you would have said the scout titan which is 1500 pts I could have at least given you the credit of a actual reply but the fact is I doubt either of you have ever seen anyone play with a titan period let alone a $2,000 warlord titan. But at this point you might as well go troll somewhere else any discussion with you two have gone into the toilet already.

gungo wrote:
You guys are trolling hard or just playing ignorant..... warlord titans are 4000pts and are well out of any competitive matched play point limit. Its not even worth doing the numbers because its POINTLESS discussing warlord titans in a ban list when they aren't allowed BY DEFAULT...... There is NO preemptive ban list... warlord titans are banned regardless.

If you would have said the scout titan which is 1500 pts I could have at least given you the credit of a actual reply but the fact is I doubt either of you have ever seen anyone play with a titan period let alone a $2,000 warlord titan. But at this point you might as well go troll somewhere else any discussion with you two have gone into the toilet already.

You're the first one to mention Warlord Titans, my friend. Everyone else has been talking about Warhounds.

Also, to be clear, I've seen many games featuring Titans of various kinds. Then again, I've been involved with this hobby for many years and worked for GW for awhile, so maybe my experience isn't common.

I'm also not sure what you mean by a competitive matched play point limit. The rule book doesn't have one for matched play. It does have organized event guidelines for games of up to 3000 points, but there is no mention anywhere that 3000 is an upper limit for matched play. I assume this is a simple misunderstanding of the basic matched play army construction rules. No biggie.

I said TITANS and specifically SCOUT TITANS (which are 1500 pts and inside the normal pt limits of most tournaments) not warlord titans. I even went into the specifics about the scout titans wpns not being costed correctly as FW gave both a turbo laser and a mega bolter the same zero cost.

Try again!!! I'll assume its just your basic misunderstanding of how to play 40k....
Also the title of this thread is really hard to read for you I can understand words are difficult.... "Power Level 31+ Units in 2k Tournaments"
Ill give you another +1 to your trolling stat....

gungo wrote:
You guys are trolling hard or just playing ignorant..... warlord titans are 4000pts and are well out of any competitive matched play point limit. Its not even worth doing the numbers because its POINTLESS discussing warlord titans in a ban list when they aren't allowed BY DEFAULT...... There is NO preemptive ban list... warlord titans are banned regardless.

The sad part is the lack of your understanding of competitive play. A 4k model vs a 4k army stands almost zero chance.

If you would have said the scout titan which is 1500 pts I could have at least given you the credit of a actual reply but the fact is I doubt either of you have ever seen anyone play with a titan period let alone a $2,000 warlord titan.

We have in our larger tournaments. They have never been competitive in any larger point values.

gungo wrote:
I said TITANS and specifically SCOUT TITANS (which are 1500 pts and inside the normal pt limits of most tournaments) not warlord titans. I even went into the specifics about the scout titans wpns not being costed correctly as FW gave both a turbo laser and a mega bolter the same zero cost.

Try again!!! I'll assume its just your basic misunderstanding of how to play 40k....
Also the title of this thread is really hard to read for you I can understand words are difficult.... "Power Level 31+ Units in 2k Tournaments"
Ill give you another +1 to your trolling stat....

You were literally the first person to bring up Warlord Titans...

"You guys are trolling hard or just playing ignorant..... warlord titans are 4000pts and are well out of any competitive matched play point limit. Its not even worth doing the numbers because its POINTLESS discussing warlord titans in a ban list when they aren't allowed BY DEFAULT...... There is NO preemptive ban list... warlord titans are banned regardless.

If you would have said the scout titan which is 1500 pts I could have at least given you the credit of a actual reply but the fact is I doubt either of you have ever seen anyone play with a titan period let alone a $2,000 warlord titan. But at this point you might as well go troll somewhere else any discussion with you two have gone into the toilet already."

Given that NOBODY was talking about Warlord Titans, I wasn't sure why you freaked out about them. You brought them up first. Everyone else was talking about Warhound Scout Titans.

The ban on power level is to support MSU which certain organizations want to be on the top tables.


Currently there is a perceived alpha strike problem because most of the "tournament" armies are built around small units which are not very durable but can carry a lot of special/heavy weapons for their points and then flyers.

These armies would normally not be able to alpha strike as GW actually balanced the game more on release than for example the ITC 8th version has. The reason being is if you take a lot of units that are cheap due to being very fragile, but have 2-3 plasma or meltas you end up with a lot of units on to deploy and will not go first.

In ITC format the inherent balance there is broken allowing you to still possibly go first just with the opponent having +1 to go first, and then you still get to try and seize.

A warhound is powerful, but out of all the editions warhounds have existed (which is all of them) in 8th they are the weakest they have ever been. The flamestorm template is gone, many things wound them on a 5+ instead of not being able to hurt them at all.

The problem isn't power level 31+ units, the problem is ITC format not wanting them in as hard targets for the MSU spam some of the event organizers want to see and are themselves running. Which is why places like BOLS say there is an alpha strike problem, there is an ITC problem not an alpha strike problem.

Except that's not true either since horde armies such as brimstone or conscript blobs or ork boys blobs or genestealer blobs or crow blobs are not msu.
Also the 15 or so units that are not terrain and are legal to field under 2000pts that are pl 33+ has absolutely no effect on what's good this edition. If you honestly think those units will change what's powerful in other lists you haven't played 40k long. The biggest threat to msu isn't superheavy is anti infantry spam like stormravens with thier 400 bolter shots. If anything those superheavies marginalized other tough units such as land raiders even more they are this edition. There are very few super heavies that can deal with multiple small units. Generally taking your main gun and shooting 20 powerful shots that do 2 wounds into 5 man units is a waste and the other titan weapons are even worse dealing with msu. Because dealing 2d6 damage to my ork boy is pretty pointless as well.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kriswall wrote:

gungo wrote:
I said TITANS and specifically SCOUT TITANS (which are 1500 pts and inside the normal pt limits of most tournaments) not warlord titans. I even went into the specifics about the scout titans wpns not being costed correctly as FW gave both a turbo laser and a mega bolter the same zero cost.

Try again!!! I'll assume its just your basic misunderstanding of how to play 40k....
Also the title of this thread is really hard to read for you I can understand words are difficult.... "Power Level 31+ Units in 2k Tournaments"
Ill give you another +1 to your trolling stat....

You were literally the first person to bring up Warlord Titans...

"You guys are trolling hard or just playing ignorant..... warlord titans are 4000pts and are well out of any competitive matched play point limit. Its not even worth doing the numbers because its POINTLESS discussing warlord titans in a ban list when they aren't allowed BY DEFAULT...... There is NO preemptive ban list... warlord titans are banned regardless.

If you would have said the scout titan which is 1500 pts I could have at least given you the credit of a actual reply but the fact is I doubt either of you have ever seen anyone play with a titan period let alone a $2,000 warlord titan. But at this point you might as well go troll somewhere else any discussion with you two have gone into the toilet already."

Given that NOBODY was talking about Warlord Titans, I wasn't sure why you freaked out about them. You brought them up first. Everyone else was talking about Warhound Scout Titans.

sorry thought you guys mentioned warlord not Warhound.

gungo wrote:
A turbo laser that does a possible 72 (or 144) str16 wounds with chances at d3 mortals wounds per wound of 6 or 20 str6 hits that do 2 damage each

I don't know, depends on how many conscripts are on the table. That turbolaser isn't so impressive when it's massively overkilling cheap cannon fodder.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 oni wrote:
The IA FAQ's are proof enough that FW doesn't play test.

Their new FAQ's consist of 2-6 questions, preceded by 3 PAGES of corrections.

They don't even proof read their material let alone play test.

IOW, exactly like the GW index books and their day one FAQs.

MSU armies are not ruling the day. ATC was the strong example of armies abusing the deploy first rule, 6 model armies getting perfect scores and literally killing every single opposing model they faced, etc. Also the warhound inflicts an average of 32 wounds per weapon to T7 vehicles. Or picks up a 10 man squad with each weapon. And can fire one twice. Also most weapons wound it on a 6. Only S6+ wounds it on a 5 or better.

I don't have a strong opinion in this discussion. Titans are extraordinarily unfun to play against if you didn't tool for them correctly. So is flyer spam. With the game being so new, codexes not out yet, etc, it's completely understandable some events would want to ease into some of the more extreme things possible. If you think the average attendee is going to be excited about facing 250 brims and a warhound in their first big event of the new edition, I don't know what to say.

gungo wrote:
Again we went over this 2 pages back. You lost that argument then no need to rehash the point that something being broken doesn't require 6 months of testing to see how utterly overpowers it is. You are just going in circles now. Titans are not even remotely costed correctly every weapon has a zero point cost regardless of its A turbo laser that does a possible 72 (or 144) str16 wounds with chances at d3 mortals wounds per wound of 6 or 20 str6 hits that do 2 damage each.

Edit macro wpns double wounds vs titans and buildings

Each Turbo Laser also only has 2D3 shots, so that's a maximum of 48 dead models (assuming both roll 6 shots, then you only roll 6s to Wound and then roll 3s for the number of Mortal Wounds).
And of those 48 models, only 2 units can be targeted.

Wow, so scary. 48 dead models from 2 units a turn.
A typical 1500 pt army can do so much more.

Of course, anything it shoots is going to suffer greatly, but it's also 1500pts.


And that's maximum damage assuming you roll like an absolute god - something so unlikely to happen that it may as well be impossible.

The turbo laser is weak. The problem is the titan inferno gun. Warhounds inflict 8d6 autohits if they move before charging at s7 ap4 d4. Starting on turn 2 when they're in the middle of their armies, they inflict 12d6.

There is a reason they are 1500 points. Against most balanced armies, they'll kill the things that can hurt them on one.

MVBrandt wrote:
The turbo laser is weak. The problem is the titan inferno gun. Warhounds inflict 8d6 autohits if they move before charging at s7 ap4 d4. Starting on turn 2 when they're in the middle of their armies, they inflict 12d6.

AP -3, not AP -4, and I'm not sure where you're getting the extra 4D6 from. Two inferno guns is 8D6 total, and the Warhound has no other weapons. And it's really not that impressive, the average of 4D6 auto-hits is 28 hits, compared to an average of 33 for a pair of the "weak" mega bolters at BS 2+, or 26.6 at BS 3+. Same AP -3, and the extra +1 strength on the flamer doesn't matter nearly as much in 8th as it did in previous editions. And the flamer has only 18" range, compared to 72" range for the mega bolter. I'm just not seeing why this is supposed to be so scary.

 Peregrine wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:
The turbo laser is weak. The problem is the titan inferno gun. Warhounds inflict 8d6 autohits if they move before charging at s7 ap4 d4. Starting on turn 2 when they're in the middle of their armies, they inflict 12d6.

AP -3, not AP -4, and I'm not sure where you're getting the extra 4D6 from. Two inferno guns is 8D6 total, and the Warhound has no other weapons. And it's really not that impressive, the average of 4D6 auto-hits is 28 hits, compared to an average of 33 for a pair of the "weak" mega bolters at BS 2+, or 26.6 at BS 3+. Same AP -3, and the extra +1 strength on the flamer doesn't matter nearly as much in 8th as it did in previous editions. And the flamer has only 18" range, compared to 72" range for the mega bolter. I'm just not seeing why this is supposed to be so scary.

Same here. It's nasty, but it's not 1500 points nasty. Also... to everyone who says it's just going to wipe out anything that can hurt it on turn 1... you know it needs line of sight to hit things, right? If your opponent has a Warhound and you deploy out in the open, you deserve whatever hellfire it rains down on you. Deploy out of line of sight and it'll have nothing particularly interesting to shoot at. I'm wondering if the people who say it's overpowered and can wipe a table if it gets first turn are playing with enough terrain.

A friend played a warhound in a friendly tournament on the weekend. He got tabled by turn 3 each game. 3+ armour and 5+ (you won't keep it at 4 for long) void just doesn't cut it against things like heavy flamers and heavy bolters. The damage output of a warhound is laughable too. Compared to a ~800p falchion, which does well over double the damage with its twin volcano and 8 lascannons.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:
The turbo laser is weak. The problem is the titan inferno gun. Warhounds inflict 8d6 autohits if they move before charging at s7 ap4 d4. Starting on turn 2 when they're in the middle of their armies, they inflict 12d6.

AP -3, not AP -4, and I'm not sure where you're getting the extra 4D6 from. Two inferno guns is 8D6 total, and the Warhound has no other weapons. And it's really not that impressive, the average of 4D6 auto-hits is 28 hits, compared to an average of 33 for a pair of the "weak" mega bolters at BS 2+, or 26.6 at BS 3+. Same AP -3, and the extra +1 strength on the flamer doesn't matter nearly as much in 8th as it did in previous editions. And the flamer has only 18" range, compared to 72" range for the mega bolter. I'm just not seeing why this is supposed to be so scary.

Same here. It's nasty, but it's not 1500 points nasty. Also... to everyone who says it's just going to wipe out anything that can hurt it on turn 1... you know it needs line of sight to hit things, right? If your opponent has a Warhound and you deploy out in the open, you deserve whatever hellfire it rains down on you. Deploy out of line of sight and it'll have nothing particularly interesting to shoot at. I'm wondering if the people who say it's overpowered and can wipe a table if it gets first turn are playing with enough terrain.

So deploy your static shooting elements (most threats to the titan) out of LOS? So that when they move they get -1 to hit the Titan? I mean it is better than dying, but not exactly great when they then die the next turn.

The issue with the flamer is that it is largely unaffected by a diminished statline. Also each flamer does on average 23.3 wounds to any T7 vehicle, and 15 to any thing T8 or higher. It kills 7 models per turn with each one. So against light infantry it isn't super scary but against anything with multiple wounds it deletes 2 units (without assaulting) every turn.

Breng77 wrote:
The issue with the flamer is that it is largely unaffected by a diminished statline.

Sure, but by the time you're diminishing its stat line to the point that the mega bolter is significantly worse than the flamer you're getting close to killing the titan entirely. The extra damage given by the mega bolter's vastly superior range will almost certainly offset the short period of low-BS shooting.

Also each flamer does on average 23.3 wounds to any T7 vehicle, and 15 to any thing T8 or higher.

Now compare that firepower to 750 points of melta guns/lascannons/etc. It's easy to look at the big scary numbers in isolation, but you're still talking about a 1500 point unit with limited ability to hurt hordes or MSU. It should do a lot of damage because that one model is almost your entire army.

I'm not sure hiding out of LOS of a model that big that can move 24" is all that effective.

I'll reiterate my main point - curtailing some of the more extreme stuff to deal with early on is a reasonable modus operandi by event organizers who see the full spectrum of players and outcomes. Keeping things like Warhound Scout Titans out of the picture in early events on an event-by-event basis isn't crazy talk just ruining the game, it's controlling crazy outliers while average players get settled in. Same could be said if people wanted to curtail flyer spam.

TOs aren't banning units left and right; they're looking out for the experience of the average player while the edition settles. It's not like the PL31 ban Reece did for BAO was an ITC ruling anyway.

The Mega Bolter isn't even in remotely the same league as the Inferno gun. The range difference is quite literally pointless.

Edit: Long and short, IMO it's not really a balance question. If an individual TO feels his/her particular attendees are likely not going to be well prepared to deal with something, it is within their purview to curtail it. Early on, I find that more acceptable than if the edition was fully settled in, all the codexes were out, etc.

MVBrandt wrote:
The Mega Bolter isn't even in remotely the same league as the Inferno gun.

Except, as I just pointed out, it really is in the same league. The damage advantage against single-wound models is negligible at best, and even a disadvantage for the opening shots where the Warhound hasn't lost any wounds yet. The only difference between the two is that the inferno gun has 4 damage vs. 2 damage, while the mega bolter has 72" range instead of 18" range. And if you're talking about MSU armies or hordes of cannon fodder the inferno gun is the clear loser.

The range difference is quite literally pointless.

Uh, no. The Warhound can move 24" to get into range of one target, but it still has to pick a single point to shoot from. With 18" of range you need to make sure you pick a spot that is within range of both targets you want to shoot, avoid getting too close to enemy melta guns while trying to reach the key target behind them, etc. With 72" range you just go wherever you want and have the whole table in range no matter where you are. That's a significant advantage in flexibility in positioning.

Mathematically, given a Dawn of War Deployment, a Warhound's Titan Inferno Guns can hit all but the 15" left and right edges of an opponent's deployment zone on Turn 1. It can then hit anywhere else they were at on Turn 2, leaving nowhere "alone" by choosing to simply go after one or the other. And in so doing can completely ignore someone's ability to hide behind things for LOS safety. And wounds vehicles on a 4+ instead of a 5+. I'm not sure the point in the debate if you're suggesting a Vehicle with a 42" range on its auto-hitting weapons is somehow handicapped by not having a 96" range on a 6x4 table.

MVBrandt wrote:
There is a reason they are 1500 points. Against most balanced armies, they'll kill the things that can hurt them on one.

This can be said about many thing in the current spam meta. Robby G + Razor or Ravens, Raven spam, Flocks. No current balanced list will do well against spam type armies. Currently, its bring your spam and hope it beats someone else spam.

MVBrandt wrote:
There is a reason they are 1500 points. Against most balanced armies, they'll kill the things that can hurt them on one.

A balanced army with all their AT piled into one or two units?

And Transports will negate this turn 1 destruction. As would units that don't deploy on the table. And it's not like the anhilated units cause break tests to nearby units, so you could start with most everything in range and just accept that you'll lose 2 units per turn until you defeat that titan (or die trying).

As an aside, that 39 power level Khorne Lord of Skulls took a pretty major points drop this edition. I can field one with minimum gear for 621pts, meaning I could field a super heavy detachment of 3 Lords of Skulls in a 2k game. I think the Lord of Skulls is probably weaker than a 23 power renegade knight, though that would depend on the Knight's loadout.

Deleted comment

It kinda depends on what the unit is. We had a guy mess around with a warhound in a 1.5k semi-casual/semi-competitive tournament and it didn't do well. I seized the init with a command point, took it to 8 or so wounds turn 1, lost 4 models to it in his turn 1, and killed it turn 2.

I can only speak from experience as the TO of the BFS Tournament last Columbus day weekend.

We ran the 31+ power level limit as well as a restriction of FW units per detatchement.

I spoke with a number of players and a vast majority of the players found the limits created a more enjoyable Tournament atmosphere. We had 70+ players. Not everyone agreed with that as well and said it didn't matter.

Only a couple of players had to make major changes to there list. Most felt it a welcomed change.

I am glad we did it however YMMV.

-ed