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.

DAaddict wrote:
So 1st turn - assuming nothing gets into range - no dead.
2nd turn - 12 dead orks.
3rd turn - (no I should have both paladins in range.) 24 dead orks
4th turn - 24 more dead orks.
5th turn - 24 more dead orks. ( and this is assuming I never approach and pin him into getting charged.)

Assuming blocks of 30, then the Draigowing player hasn't killed any units, and no vehicles at all. Or, the Draigowing player takes some time to finish off damaged units, meaning he scores less kills over-all. His 2,000 points have killed 84 orks.

That's 500 points. How does anyone think that's OP?

 Jidmah wrote:

Chancetragedy wrote:
I didn't miss the point? If your situation was the case i would continue playing. I would get crushed say good game as long as you weren't a butthead. Then think about how I could have done things differently. I would not quit on turn one and waste everyone's time. Especially time put into playing a game with me by my opponent.

You failed to seize initiative. Then you lost all your melta guns. What could you have done differently?

How to deploy your melta guns safely. How to bait the land raiders into doing what you want them to do through maneuvering. How to be a decent non TFG sport and realize its a game and you made a mistake. How to play the mission when you don't have a clear advantage? Seriously, how rediculous is your argument? There are ALWAYS lots of things you can learn from games played winning or losing. How big of a poor sport do you have to be to pull a turn 1 baby quit? To me it's simple. You entered into a verbal contract to play a game against someone who is taking time out of whatever they could be Doing. Only to quit 10 minutes in because your mad you lost some troops. Why even agree to play?

You entered into a verbal contract and got smoked on turn one. I don't see it as a baby manuever to quit. You see the hand writing on the wall after a complete turn 1. So I should sit and burn another hour or two. (I doubt it will take more than an hour.) The GK pllayer smoked one unit on the first turn and the failed charge ensured a second unit's death while the other paladin unit rakes a 3rd unit. He was going to be down to 40 orks real quick. 40 orks vs 20 paladins sounds to me like astute use of his time.

Sigh and shake hands, the game is over.

Chancetragedy wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Chancetragedy wrote:
I didn't miss the point? If your situation was the case i would continue playing. I would get crushed say good game as long as you weren't a butthead. Then think about how I could have done things differently. I would not quit on turn one and waste everyone's time. Especially time put into playing a game with me by my opponent.

You failed to seize initiative. Then you lost all your melta guns. What could you have done differently?

How to deploy your melta guns safely. How to bait the land raiders into doing what you want them to do through maneuvering. How to be a decent non TFG sport and realize its a game and you made a mistake. How to play the mission when you don't have a clear advantage? Seriously, how rediculous is your argument? There are ALWAYS lots of things you can learn from games played winning or losing. How big of a poor sport do you have to be to pull a turn 1 baby quit? To me it's simple. You entered into a verbal contract to play a game against someone who is taking time out of whatever they could be Doing. Only to quit 10 minutes in because your mad you lost some troops. Why even agree to play?

No...you aren't learning how to deploy your melta guns safely. If there is any point you learn that, it is just as they die. Then there is nothing else to learn, the rest is just a punishment, which is no fun for either player (unless the other guy enjoys a pointless game). There is nothing you can learn from this example after that first turn, apart from just how spaced out your guys can be, and still be flamed to death. Which isn't a lesson worth the time or the effort. Its not a TFG move to call it at a point like in this example, I find it impossible to follow your reasoning as to how it is TFG. I consider myself a good sport, and I've called things turn one, just look at my example earlier in the thread. And you agree to play because it'll hopefully be a good game which you learn something from. The thing you learn could be how better to deploy your meltagunners on turn 1. That is learnt on Turn 1. Then the game is effectively over. You aren't quitting because you are mad you lost your troops, you are quitting because there is no reason to continue. Can you not grasp this?

I've seen quite a few people give up on turn one. If you've got no anti-tank after the first turn and your opponent has land raiders, the whole games just going to be land raiders frying your forces piecemeal. Its no fun for you, and your opponent won't actually be learning any good habits.

So actually yes, I'd say this would be justified. I've had the heavy armour thing happen to me, and I hated it. Every turn having to repack about 10 troops til the end of the game, knowing that I didn't have a chance to return fire or even catch the tanks.

Just gonna say I'm done arguing with brick walls. And I'm glad you guys don't play where I do. Because I'd be fairly ticked if my only game of the week walked off after turn 1. It's fairly unbelievable to me that anyone would do this. But to each his own.

I'm hearing people comparing this to people losing all anti-tank on tun one against 3LRs, but this guy only lost reportedly 300ish points out of 2000, and lost a charge. There is nothing comparable in these examples.

I wasn't aware we were comparing the two cases, I thought we were arguing against people saying 'turn 1 calling of a game is never ok'. Well thats how I was using it anyway. There is a big difference between the two cases, but I still stand by what I said in that the Ork player could have quit as he did without any bad feelings (so long as he did it in a nice way)

Ah, I see. If that was the case then never mind. Nonetheless, if anyone was intending to compare the cases, it is not truly parallel.

 Aun Tier wrote:
Ah, I see. If that was the case then never mind. Nonetheless, if anyone was intending to compare the cases, it is not truly parallel.

Definitely not parallel, sorry if I gave that impression to anyone reading.

Also, is there a reason that people are assuming in their calculations that this will be the standard casualty rate for the entire game? As I read it, the Grey Knights player had very good rolls and the Ork player had very bad rolls. There is no reason to assume that these odds won't be completely reversed in turn two. (bar supersticious nonsense, of course.)

The average math is pretty darn gross when the Paladins have Prescience (which they did in this scenario, and can rely on getting if the have an Inquisitor in the army); then on average dice they only miss 1 in 9 shots.

 Ailaros wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:Part of the point of the game being focused on objectives for the 5th and 6th editions is that it often allows you to win even if your army gets trashed by the other guy's, as long as you have superior position and focus on the mission.

I think this is actually an important part of the problem. In 5th ed, one mission had no objectives, one mission had 2 objectives and one mission had 3-5 objectives. In most games, if you were down and nearly out, you could always kill of one last unit to take a draw with KP, or could still defend your objective in capture and control. There was still a chance you could win, or at least draw, even with just a couple of models on the board.

Now, most missions are 2-6 objectives. If you're playing scouring, and your opponent has 3 objectives and you only have the remaining troops choices to hold two of them, odds are very good that you have no chance whatsoever of winning. If your opponent also takes first blood, the odds of you fighting back to a draw are pretty low on most missions. Put another, way, you know very early on if there is no possible way to win the game because you can really no longer pull off a win if you only have a couple of models left on the board in most missions.

I disagree entirely. 6th has actually mitigated this matchup issue. In 5th 1/3 of the games were Kill Points, which was a very difficult scenario in which to beat Draigowing. And a single unit of Scoring Paladins could hold multiple objectives at one time. Now Kill Points are only 1/6 of missions, and a given unit of Paladins can only hold one objective. You can still win or draw with only a few models left on the board in 6th, and in fact it's easier than it used to be against lists like Draigowing with a few, very tough units.

Is this your first edition change?

 Aun Tier wrote:
I'm hearing people comparing this to people losing all anti-tank on tun one against 3LRs, but this guy only lost reportedly 300ish points out of 2000, and lost a charge. There is nothing comparable in these examples.

Orks... initiative 2 S3 AP 6 W1 vs Paladins I4( at least S4 AP2 W2.... Go ahead and charge 10 paladins with 30 orks... They will hit you 10 times and kill about 5. You - assuming shoota orks will get 75 attacks hit 38, wound 19 and maybe kill 1.5 paladins. This is the best case scenario. You have not been shot at and not lost 12 orks to fire before you went in. Now comes the next turn... They kill - to keep it good - 4 now your mighty orks take 42 swings, hit 21 times, wound 7 and perhaps you kill that 2nd paladin. You are going to tie him up but again we are assuming 12 orks didn't get shot up before they charged and we are assuming that the ork charged.

I believe he failed a charge with 20 storm boyz... So we go on to turn 2, I am not even going to waste my prescience on the palys that will charge them. I advance closer to ensure the charge hits home. I shoot 20 shots, hit 13 and kill 7 of them. Now I charge 30 attacks, 15 hit, 8 kill. Hmm 5 orks get to swing back 15 attacks 8 hit 3 wound... I think that they are toast. Meanwhile my other unit - with prescience is taking 20 shots of which 18 are going to hit and 12 dead orks. Wonderfull. You have no mobility and 2 or 3 scoring units left of which 2 of them are already at risk of death in shooting.

When 1/3 of the arny is smoked on Turn one and now I am down to 40 orks versus 20 paladins. It is over. We don't need to prove anything. You have won. I will kick myself for playing an overmatched list. I will look at what I could have done different. I might even apologize for giving you such a poor test for your army. But I am not going to waste 2 more hours proving the enevitable.

Part of the point, though, is that unless the Ork player feeds the GK player units foolishly by assaulting the Pallies, the Paladins still, best case scenario, are going to kill 4-5 units each over the course of the game, and hold two objectives at most. If the Orks have more than 8-10 units (which they easily can at that point level), they can hold and/or contest enough objectives to still win, despite massive casualties.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Part of the point, though, is that unless the Ork player feeds the GK player units foolishly by assaulting the Pallies, the Paladins still, best case scenario, are going to kill 4-5 units each over the course of the game, and hold two objectives at most. If the Orks have more than 8-10 units (which they easily can at that point level), they can hold and/or contest enough objectives to still win, despite massive casualties.

Exactly.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Part of the point, though, is that unless the Ork player feeds the GK player units foolishly by assaulting the Pallies, the Paladins still, best case scenario, are going to kill 4-5 units each over the course of the game, and hold two objectives at most. If the Orks have more than 8-10 units (which they easily can at that point level), they can hold and/or contest enough objectives to still win, despite massive casualties.

I agree but the ork army - as described- had some high priced units. (stormboys and nobs in a bw) Also - as described the ork play had no speed to zip around and stay out of range.
From the description the ork player took a fluffy CC ork list and was really behind the 8 ball from the beginning. His list dictated he HAD to go for HTH and seeing he was guaranteed losing worse the longer he stalled, he went for it and lost. Now the stormboyz were not going to win the CC but perhaps if it had hit, he could have killed 1 or god forbid 2 paladins. Then - without being shot at - he could have charged in a 2nd unit of foot boyz and tarpitted one of the paladin units without ever getting shot at. That would have allowed him some mobility to get Linebreaker and perhaps preserve something to at least contest an objective.

For what the ork player was described as playing he was plain overpowered by a bunch of terminators with 2 wounds each spitting out 90% accurate S5 fire. If that is all the ork player had, the Draigo wing was OP. If not, shame on the ork player for making an almost guaranteed to lose list.

However, Draigo wing is not OP. I would like to see it face down my Vulkan list that packs 3 vindicators and 18+ meltas. I think the draigo wing would be in trouble.

Now most orks don't have it but it would be interesting to see a Draigo wing take on an Ork Deffwing - Gazzgull and a warboss with 20 or so meganobz. Lots of popping going on.
Hehe.

if i go through the trouble of unpacking 2055(a ludicrous point value designed to circumvent the whole "fit your army to a limit" dynamic) i would never play them again.

on the same token, i would ask you to drop 55 before we played. what's next? a 1369 point game because that's my totally with all of the stuff i want to bring? silly.

So now it comes down to lists. Both players had limitations to their lists, and as much as I'd like to say its fair, draigowing is like a ravendeath list. Its absolute cheese. Yes, you'd have been directed to it, but it is still a hard list to beat for orks, even with pre-knowledge.

Thanks for all the comments everyone! I apologize for not being able to comment more in my own thread but my work schedule had been brutal these past few days. After reading every post thus far, I feel I must clarify a few things:

* When I first met the Ork player, right off the bat the first thing I told him was that I was running a Draigowing army and if he still wanted to battle me, he said sure. I am well aware of Draigowing's reputation, justified or not, and I didn't want to seem like an donkey-cave for not telling him what army I was using. So the point is I did not pull a fast one on him and surprise him with my 20 Paladins, from the beginning he knew I would be using paladins, and he still agreed to fight me.

* About the unusual points value, I know a big deal had been made of this but among my friends we do this sort of thing all the time. Currently I am the only one of my 40k friends with a steady source of income at the moment and thus the only one who can maintain and update his armies whenever I feel like. All my other friends have built their armys sporadically over the months whenever they get enough money saved up. Thus it is a big deal for them when they get a new unit or a new vehicle or whatever, and thus they want to field their new model/unit along with the rest of their army to see what it does. Obviously, this leads to some wonky points values in games, like 1953 or something in one case. Point is, I did not see the big deal playing with a non standard points game, because my friends would do it all the time. Reading the comments here I now see that was an error on my part and I should have played at a flat 2000.

But really, the first thing two players should agree on first on a 40k game is the points, and when I brought up 2055 as a number, he said sure. There was no hesitation, and if he really didn't want to fight me there were two other guys looking for games at the time. If he had said no, and asked to play a different point value or s, be if standard like 2000 or not, I would have agreed. My 2055 "wishlist" was to test out if psybolt ammo and mastercrafted psycannons were ever worth the points (obviously they were in this case), but obviously a bigger concern for me was seeing if Draigowing was even viable at all now that they weren't characters. I would have been fine if he had refused my points limit.

*just one question I feel I should ask here instead of starting a whole new topic: does prescience and master crafted stack with each other? During the game, I only rerolled my prescience Psycannons once, but my friend told me I should have been able to reroll at least one shot per psycannon twice. is this true?

I believe the 'you can never reroll a reroll' rule still exists.

Prescience allows you to re-roll them all, so you re-roll them, then master-crafted does nothing unless prescience doesn't go off.

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
*just one question I feel I should ask here instead of starting a whole new topic: does prescience and master crafted stack with each other? During the game, I only rerolled my prescience Psycannons once, but my friend told me I should have been able to reroll at least one shot per psycannon twice. is this true?

As already said, the little section on rolling dice in the start of the rulebook still forbids rerolling more than once, no matter the source of the reroll.

Forfeiting on turn one, while a bit disappointing, was really not a bad call in this instance. You had the firepower to deplete or wipe out both his remaining 10+ model units next turn. Then he'd have nothing capable of dealing with terminators except the Warboss w. Nobz and possibly the other Warboss if he wasn't running away at the time. It would have been one more round of you shooting, then the remaining few orks charging into close combats. And if the Ork characters didn't challenge you had characters there capable of doing so, meaning he'd be unable to direct any power klaw attacks against the Paladins. Partly his own fault for giving you targets ofc, but still a clear loss at that point.

What one could have done different would be to offer a new game, with better setup for the ork player so his units could do something instead of serve as punching bags from the start.

@DAaddict

"When 1/3 of the arny is smoked on Turn one"

Well, I count 34 dead Orks on turn one (204pts) and a stormboy unit that's in lots of trouble. I'm going to hazard a guess of 200ish points for 20 Stormboys (though it could well have been more like 10, and I may even be overestimating their price), so if the worst case comes about, and he loses just as many orks in turn 2 (even though bad rolls were already mentioned and the first Pali unit can't target anything except the Stormboyz), then at the end of turn 2, he has lost 600 points of Orks out of 2000.
I don't know where you got 1/3 of his army dead on turn one, but I've just roughly calculated a well worse than average result for the ork player; and he hasn't even lost your estimation at the end of turn two. There was every chance that his rolls could have picked up immensely and lost only a handful of Orks in turn two, the Paladins could have had terrible rolls in combat, and the Ork player could have lucked out and blown away a group of Paladins (and before you say it wouldn't happen, I've seen Terminators fail 4/5 armour saves on several occasions).
Going by this positive turn out, he may have only lost another 100pts in his turn (bringing his casualties to a mere 300pts), and taken out two or three paladins, which depending on their cost per model would be over 120pts.
Now we have about 7% separation in casualties, and the Ork player has far more scoring units than the GK player.

The point that I'm making here, is that whilst the luck was certainly against the Ork player in turn one, there was no reason to assume that the situation was hopeless. There was every chance that it could have swung around for him, and so to say forfeiting at this point was justified is essentially saying that it is justified to bail out of a 2000pt game on turn one because your Land Raider got wrecked with a handful of scattered dead marines. (And no, that isn't exaggerating. A Land Raider costs more points than the Ork players losses, and about 5 dead marines brings it not far off of the supposedly damned Stormboyz).

If you still feel that he was justified in a forfeit, then I don't know what else I can say to you except that we have very different values.
If this is the case, I won't bother you any more with my opinion of the matter.

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
2 = 1580

I do not know the point values of his list, but he had 1 units of 30 boyz, 1 unit of 30 hardboyz, 20 or so stormboyz (I forget the exact count), 2 warbosses with powerclaws, one warboss was with one of the boyz unit, the other was in a Trukk(?) with 8 nobz, finally he had 5 deffkoptas that were in reserve and a what may have been a battle wagon (dont know enough about orks to tell). He may have had some more units in reserve, but I forget (and because he quit at the end of turn 1, it doesn't really matter.)

My first turn I use libbys Prescience on Draigo's unit. With it I manage to kill all but 9 boyz in one unit (pretty much every shot went through). They fail their leadership and start to retreats. The other unit with my Libby does almost as good, killing 13 boys in the other unit. That ends my turn since I scouted and I couldn't assault.

As described, the ork pllayer had 80 boyz , 8 nobz and 5 deffcoptas. First turn the draigo wing reduced his mobz by 34 boyz again per description. So by ork turn 1, we have a mob of 9 boyz, a mob of 17 boyz, a mob of 20 stormboyz, 8 nobz and 5 deffkoptas. He fails his charge on the stormboyz. So at this point, I anticipate the stormboyz getting shot and charged, prescience going on the other unit and shooting up the other boyz. The stormboyz should be dead and the other unit - assuming 21 casualties from prescience shotits.
Hmm that means for ork turn 2 I will have 9 boyz, 8 nobz and 5 deffkoptas.

I am saying it is regrettable but I understand where the ork player was coming from. He gave it the best go he could.

I do not fault the ork player for resigning but I do hold him at fault for even dreaming his list had a prayer. He was told he was facing Draigo-wing and brought this POS list to challenge him. As I said, if this were all the orky models I had, I would have declined to even play the game.

As described, the ork pllayer had 80 boyz , 8 nobz and 5 deffcoptas.

That's MAYBE a thousand points, depending on upgrades. Clearly a lot was left out of the OP's listing of Ork stuff.

After two pages of reading I have to ask, has anyone considered, knowing full well how expensive the hobby is, that perhaps this Ork opponent DIDN'T HAVE an army capable of taking out the Paladins? It sounds kinda like he had AoBR and the Ork Battlebox with some extras. There sounds to be a good chance he put what models he had into the game and just realized he, quite literally, got BOUGHT out of the game.

Nobody wants to wander into a friendly game only to realize that after putting together a sweet looking and fluffy army list of Orks, modeling them, painting them and showing up to have fun that their opponent out spent them on a list meant for competition only. I wouldn't know by looking at or hearing the name of a specified build that I was going to lose immediately. Why is everyone assuming that he had, or should have known better and gotten, tons of experience and combs the forums for tactics. Maybe he just got into the hobby or competition isn't his thing so he doesn't meta game like that.

And I love how people pull the backhanded thing with,"Well, I wouldn't blame him for pulling out of the game BUT I WOULD NEVER HAVE DONE THAT." Such two-faced BS....

20 Stormboys is not a trivial unit to buy & field. It's not battlebox, that's for sure.

Like I was saying, I really have no clue about pricing for non-CSM armies either in dinero or points-wise. I guess that showed pretty quick, huh?

ive been in games where its a curb stomping early. sometimes i dish it out, and others i end up taking it. most recently i ended up playing a semi draigo wing / crowe list with my crons. the GK had crowe and some purifiers, a wing of palladins with draigo, a few strike squads, dread and DK, with a SR moving the pallys around. my necrons featured 2 tesla immortals with nightscythes, 2 ccb overlords, 2 annihlation barges 5 wraiths and a doomsday ark. needless to say the dice went very heavy in my favor and the GK couldnt make a save to well...save. at one point i managed to wipe out the 10 man purifer squad with a single tesla immortal squad in a single turn. lots of 6's to hit, lots of 4+ for wounds, and just a raft of 1 or 2's on the GK saves. this game was pretty much over turn 1. (GK went first couldnt do anything, my 1st turn killed the purifers, shot down the SR, the dread was left stunned, immobilized and 1 weapon gone, and the pallys lost 2 guys.) turn 2 for the gk not much better, and at the end of 2 everything but the pallys was dead, and they were engaged with my wraiths and one of my overlords.

gk wanted to call the game here... i asked to continue, and we did, so big credit there. but its definitily not fun "playing out" a battle that really... you cant win. ive had games of fantasy that way... all my warmachines self destruct, my wizards miscast and kill themselves or loose magic levels, then next turn i fail any and all panic checks, get charged and yea.. at that point its game over. ive conceded those a few times - but i always offer an immediate rematch with maybe a diffierent scenario. that way i can redeploy, change dice and maybe have a better game. - and the other guy dosent feel like he gets no game.

Chancetragedy wrote:
Just gonna say I'm done arguing with brick walls. And I'm glad you guys don't play where I do. Because I'd be fairly ticked if my only game of the week walked off after turn 1. It's fairly unbelievable to me that anyone would do this. But to each his own.

picking up dead models when you cant do a thing when your opponent is killing you for 2 turns can hardly be called a game . Its like you end up clinched up in hth in WFB and you know neither of you can/will break , but you will win through attrition in 4 turns. technicly you could roll it , but some dont bother . they would rather start a game against someone else.

gk wanted to call the game here... i asked to continue, and we did, so big credit there. but its definitily not fun "playing out" a battle that really... you cant win. ive had games of fantasy that way... all my warmachines self destruct, my wizards miscast and kill themselves or loose magic levels, then next turn i fail any and all panic checks, get charged and yea.. at that point its game over. ive conceded those a few times - but i always offer an immediate rematch with maybe a diffierent scenario. that way i can redeploy, change dice and maybe have a better game. - and the other guy dosent feel like he gets no game

I had one like this week . I was playing a nercon scyth wing .second turn I blowed up all transports the orc player had and made his lootas run 12"[2 turns to get back in to range of shoting my dudes if I didnt move] . I didnt want to get 3 turns of rolling shoting and him doing nothing , so we stoped and played some warmachine .

Edited by Mannahnin