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.

CaptainA wrote:

bunkermonkey9 wrote:
I want to see the Dark Angel list and the Space Wolves list.

Brandon was a great player and a good gent. Had one of my funnest games with him and I lost! From memory as I'm at the airport right now heading home he had.

DA
Libby PFG
Libby PFG
10 Tacs Drop Pod (Metla I think)
10 Tacs Drop Pod (Melta again I think)
5 Assault Drop Pod 2 Flamers

IG
2 Priests
30 Conscripts
30 Conscripts
Platoon Command Squad
2 10 Man Guardsmen 1 Lascannon
Platoon Command Squad
2 10 Man Guardsmen 1 Lascannon
Leman Russ Vanquisher
2 Leman Russ (ones with the 20 rending shots) 1 with Pask.

It was unusual for sure, but Brandon played it tight and in an objective heavy field, had a ton of bodies to throw around the table. I made a big mistake near the end that cost me the game. he was my only loss.

Is something missing? This only comes to 1750?

TSMango wrote:

CaptainA wrote:

bunkermonkey9 wrote:
I want to see the Dark Angel list and the Space Wolves list.

Brandon was a great player and a good gent. Had one of my funnest games with him and I lost! From memory as I'm at the airport right now heading home he had.

DA
Libby PFG
Libby PFG
10 Tacs Drop Pod (Metla I think)
10 Tacs Drop Pod (Melta again I think)
5 Assault Drop Pod 2 Flamers

IG
2 Priests
30 Conscripts
30 Conscripts
Platoon Command Squad
2 10 Man Guardsmen 1 Lascannon
Platoon Command Squad
2 10 Man Guardsmen 1 Lascannon
Leman Russ Vanquisher
2 Leman Russ (ones with the 20 rending shots) 1 with Pask.

It was unusual for sure, but Brandon played it tight and in an objective heavy field, had a ton of bodies to throw around the table. I made a big mistake near the end that cost me the game. he was my only loss.

Is something missing? This only comes to 1750?

Was he running the librarians with the 30 mam blobs? The PFG effects the models within 3 inches not units within 3 inches, those librarians with PFG seem of little use in this list to me. Unless I am missing something?

3" covers a lot of area. He doesnt have to put the libby in the back, just behind enough models he feels is sufficient. Lets assume hes a smart player and planned for incoming fire.

When Hand 2 hand begins. Same rules apply, Libby towards front to cover models closest to enemy.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
Was he running the librarians with the 30 mam blobs? The PFG effects the models within 3 inches not units within 3 inches, those librarians with PFG seem of little use in this list to me. Unless I am missing something?

He was my Round 1 opponent. He placed one libby smack in the middle of each conscript blob. I did chop the edges off those units, but not enough to do any real damage.

 Brothererekose wrote:

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
Was he running the librarians with the 30 mam blobs? The PFG effects the models within 3 inches not units within 3 inches, those librarians with PFG seem of little use in this list to me. Unless I am missing something?

He was my Round 1 opponent. He placed one libby smack in the middle of each conscript blob. I did chop the edges off those units, but not enough to do any real damage.

So how was he playing the PFG? I really don't see how it was beneficial with only a 3 inch radius protecting only the models within 3 inches. How did the rest of the army work against you? I am thinking he was a good player vs having a super strong list.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
Was he running the librarians with the 30 mam blobs? The PFG effects the models within 3 inches not units within 3 inches, those librarians with PFG seem of little use in this list to me. Unless I am missing something?

He was my Round 1 opponent. He placed one libby smack in the middle of each conscript blob. I did chop the edges off those units, but not enough to do any real damage.

So how was he playing the PFG? I really don't see how it was beneficial with only a 3 inch radius protecting only the models within 3 inches. How did the rest of the army work against you? I am thinking he was a good player vs having a super strong list.

I would think that the PFG is just icing on the cake, offering a little more protection to some models (maybe even the tanks). The unit is mostly meant to tie things up and hold objectives in the middle of the field. Keeping assault units away from the pask-star. Definitely more of a finesse, objective based list than something that blows the other guy off the table.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
So how was he playing the PFG? I really don't see how it was beneficial with only a 3 inch radius protecting only the models within 3 inches. How did the rest of the army work against you? I am thinking he was a good player vs having a super strong list.

Better player than me, for certain. I forgot to use bubble-wrap strategy for the Serpents and he went first alpha striking with two Drop Pods. I don't recall as PFG really came into play, as I never recovered from Turn 1.

My Turn 2, S-Hawks and Spiders Deep Striked (Struck?) where they could shoot, but too close to the blob in center table. I had shot at it a lot, hoping to budge the libby, but couldn't do enough. Even with Battle Focus and Spidery jumping away, both units were caught in h2h on his Turn 3 and eliminated.

So, 3 Serpents down, Spiders and Hawks gone, my jetbikes, WK and last Serpent couldn't get it done. I think he earned a full 10 points.

did the results for the poll get posted yet?

The questions regarding changes to rules were unclear, confusing and you couldn't select to get rid of mods to 2++ re roll and invisible.

AtC needs to go.

 Crablezworth wrote:
did the results for the poll get posted yet?

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2015/03/11/lvo-2015-40k-poll-results/

 Blackmoor wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
did the results for the poll get posted yet?

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2015/03/11/lvo-2015-40k-poll-results/

Looks like CTA allies might be on the chopping block. I wouldnt mind. I am actually a bit of a fluff guy myself and seeing nids with eldar and necrons all fighting for the same cause just makes my skin crawl!

On CTA allies,

What is the consensus on Eldar being able to summon demons if CTA allies are out?

Breazeal wrote:
On CTA allies,

What is the consensus on Eldar being able to summon demons if CTA allies are out?

I'd be OK with it. Dabbling in the warp and all that.

 Tomb King wrote:

 Blackmoor wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
did the results for the poll get posted yet?

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2015/03/11/lvo-2015-40k-poll-results/

Looks like CTA allies might be on the chopping block. I wouldnt mind. I am actually a bit of a fluff guy myself and seeing nids with eldar and necrons all fighting for the same cause just makes my skin crawl!

CTA is actually a good thing for the game. Makes it very very hard to build one list that can counter everything. IMO when not playing with ranged d, the competitive side of this game is more player skill based then it has ever been before. Building a great list is not enough to get you through a gt anymore.

CtA should be on the chopping block because the allied system is totally balanced for all races........

[this may have been said in a sarcastic tone]

CtA would only be a fluff issue. Which is silly because fluff is what we want it to be in the 41st M. What out there breaks the game as CtA allies?

The other problem is that GW heavily favored CTA in the 7th edition allies chart. My necrons used to be desperate allies with IG. Now they're CTA.

Breazeal wrote:
On CTA allies,

What is the consensus on Eldar being able to summon demons if CTA allies are out?

It has nothing to do with CtA.

CtA devalues the game and takes it towards an MtG mindset where the only thing that matters is winning.

Oh my Chapter Master has two pet Flyrants... Right .

It's competitive play in a tournament, the only thing that matters is winning.

 Tyran wrote:
It's competitive play in a tournament, the only thing that matters is winning.

Going to have to disagree here... I love winning as much as the next guy but I would like to enjoy a win or a loss in the process. Kind of holding back from D weapons as they can suck the fun right out of the game. I would rather just beat you with my ability to play the game rather then my list being the best money can buy... . Competitive 40k is quickly becoming about the people that have the money to buy the latest and greatest toys.

Well yes, balance is an important factor. But CtA doesn't really affects balance like a rerolleable 2++ or invisibility or ranged D. I believe no one of the top 8 list had CtA allies.

Fluff on the other hand isn't really important in a competitive tournament.

It still sucks to have to play against because it goes against the fluff. Its not all about winning either but you're entitled to your opinion.

Tomb King wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
It's competitive play in a tournament, the only thing that matters is winning.

Going to have to disagree here... I love winning as much as the next guy but I would like to enjoy a win or a loss in the process. Kind of holding back from D weapons as they can suck the fun right out of the game. I would rather just beat you with my ability to play the game rather then my list being the best money can buy... . Competitive 40k is quickly becoming about the people that have the money to buy the latest and greatest toys.

You can play tough as nails armies and still win. Some of the best gt games I have are vs good players with great armies, its all about both players mindsets....

Tyran wrote:Well yes, balance is an important factor. But CtA doesn't really affects balance like a rerolleable 2++ or invisibility or ranged D. I believe no one of the top 8 list had CtA allies.

Fluff on the other hand isn't really important in a competitive tournament.

I agree about the fluff, in a gt setting fluff is not a concern. There are plenty of fluff centertic events to play in if that is what you enjoy. Cta allies actually are a great thing in terms of game balance.

 krootman. wrote:


CTA is actually a good thing for the game. Makes it very very hard to build one list that can counter everything. IMO when not playing with ranged d, the competitive side of this game is more player skill based then it has ever been before. Building a great list is not enough to get you through a gt anymore.

I am going to disagree. When you allow everything people just take whatever the latest and greatest formation is. How many Adamantine Lance formations were there at the Nova Open, and how many Leviathan formations were at the LVO?

It is becoming less skill based because if you do not take one of the few top armies you will have no chance no matter how good you are.

 Blackmoor wrote:
When you allow everything people just take whatever the latest and greatest formation is. How many Adamantine Lance formations were there at the Nova Open, and how many Leviathan formations were at the LVO?

I know there's always churn to the latest good build, but yeah, seeing all those Flyrants tacked onto completely unrelated armies for the LVO isn't that great for the game as a whole, imo, even if it provides "balance" by letting everyone take the best FMC...

I don't have a solution, just wanted to agree with that point.

So many people go to GTs to have fun. I have to say I've seen lots of people roll their eyes when they see those types of armies. I hope Reecius will make a command decision. It was only like 20 percent of the attendees who responded to the poll.

 Blackmoor wrote:

 krootman. wrote:


CTA is actually a good thing for the game. Makes it very very hard to build one list that can counter everything. IMO when not playing with ranged d, the competitive side of this game is more player skill based then it has ever been before. Building a great list is not enough to get you through a gt anymore.

I am going to disagree. When you allow everything people just take whatever the latest and greatest formation is. How many Adamantine Lance formations were there at the Nova Open, and how many Leviathan formations were at the LVO?

It is becoming less skill based because if you do not take one of the few top armies you will have no chance no matter how good you are.

Well accept for the fact, plenty of the "not few top armies" scored high and did well at LVO....

CTA makes as much sense as games where people bring 2 or 3 named characters... Why would Tigurius, Calgar, and Loth be at this small skirmish of 50 to 100 men?

in either case, its part of the game, and again you are made aware of the rules prior to paying for the tourney, dont agree with it, dont go.

At least Calgar Loth and Tiggy are all Marines.

Why would EVERY daemon army have Fatey or Be'lakor ? They should come with the codex now .

Tsilber wrote:

Well accept for the fact, plenty of the "not few top armies" scored high and did well at LVO....

Again, I disagree. (Except for the Orks that were a counter-meta army, and I think only one of them did well)

A lot of people look at the packaging and think that the top armies are different. Do you think that spending 300 points out of 1850 on lictors makes your army a lictor army when you spend about that much on one hive tyrant? Sean's list was hive tyrants and mawlocs. Those 6 models were 2/3 of his points and they did most of the killing. Everything else helped, and synergized well, but the TMCs did all of the heavy lifting.

Nick's scout army had less than 500 points of scouts in it, but what it really was is a centurion star featuring rock hard HQ/ICs and centurions to do most of the killing.

Don't get confused by what tangential units are around the killing units.

Well said Alan you've blown away the smoke screen

 Blackmoor wrote:

Tsilber wrote:

Well accept for the fact, plenty of the "not few top armies" scored high and did well at LVO....

Again, I disagree. (Except for the Orks that were a counter-meta army, and I think only one of them did well)

A lot of people look at the packaging and think that the top armies are different. Do you think that spending 300 points out of 1850 on lictors makes your army a lictor army when you spend about that much on one hive tyrant? Sean's list was hive tyrants and mawlocs. Those 6 models were 2/3 of his points and they did most of the killing. Everything else helped, and synergized well, but the TMCs did all of the heavy lifting.

Nick's scout army had less than 500 points of scouts in it, but what it really was is a centurion star featuring rock hard HQ/ICs and centurions to do most of the killing.

Don't get confused by what tangential units are around the killing units.

Alan, if you think this game is about killing things, you're more lost than I'd hoped.