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.

Once in not fluff.

 krootman. wrote:

gungo wrote:
With limited detschments cta is balanced. If anything lVO showed that. There is absolutely no reason any tournsmrnt organizer needs to take any overreaching steps to nerf it. This isn't 5th edition grey Knights, 6th edition eldar dominance. People forget Sean lost at LVO and he was the only flyrant or tyranid list to even make thr championship and nicks Game was so close he probably should have won if he didn't nerf himself. If anything needed to be done with flyrants I'd say play fmc as the rules are written and just left skyfire blasts hit them. But even still I have a feeling that in another week after adepticon unless a chaos flying demon or tyranid list wins people will be crying about nerfing necrons or whatever lists wins that tourney. But in regards to LVO that tournament had a fairly balanced playing field.

You can't take data at adepticon too seriously, their army construction is so far off the accepted gt norm (2 sources) that any 3-5 source crazy list you see at adepticon you will never see again this gt season, they are also allowing lords of war like the typhon which are banned at every other event for a reason.

LVO allowed the Lynx, which placed third and ruined a lot of people's days from the sound of it. What makes the Typhon so much worse?

Well considering I was eldar player who lost to Tyler to make it into the top 8, I can say that while it didn't lose me the game, losing 3 units to ranged d seriously hurt my chances of winning that game.. As I have already stated (this is not me complaining I fully knew what I was getting into at lvo when I signed up) but when your interaction with a d weapon is lifting your models off the table there needs to be a serious consideration as to if said mechanic should be allowed in competitive play.

Ranged D is stupid. Period. However, genestealers controlling a Warlord titan is pretty cool. I can go for that.

 jy2 wrote:
Ranged D is stupid. Period. However, genestealers controlling a Warlord titan is pretty cool. I can go for that.

ranged D is pretty over the top, especially when the ITC faq disallows mundane things like say, two different IC pykers both shooting smite even if they are in the same unit.

To further push ranged D over the top, only one race really got access to it with the allowed LOW list.


I would have liked to see the psychic powers as at least a question on the out poll... summon spam is a horrible strategy, but it seems like the nerfs were meant to nerf summon spam, even though it really doesn't need nerfing. The effect is to also nerf pyskers across the board, after they already took a hit in 7th.

 jy2 wrote:
However, genestealers controlling a Warlord titan is pretty cool. I can go for that.

That's because you're a cheese ball.

Ranged D is just silly no matter how you slice it.

Psychic powers while not needing any imposed Nerfs are still quite potent for some armies that can generate a lot of warp charge.

Yeah, the Lynx seems like a bit of an oversight on those ban lists. AV11 seems like a weakness until you look at how Holofields work and realize that they're still pretty darn durable because of it.

Requizen wrote:
Yeah, the Lynx seems like a bit of an oversight on those ban lists. AV11 seems like a weakness until you look at how Holofields work and realize that they're still pretty darn durable because of it.

My opponent had it on a storm shield protected by firedragons, I think I shot it once.....it wasn't even worth the effort to attempt to kill.

 Tyran wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Like I said everyone has an opinion and it's not like Chaos must have a Knight with the Lord of Skulls. Some people might try to make a case for Nids and AM as BB so they field stealer cult armies (rolls eyes).

I can run my Nids with a Warlord Titan, it is in the fluff!!! (Nids actually infested and used a Warlord Titan in the fluff).

Yea and lorgar took a plasma blast direct hit from point blank range from a warhound titan and lived to tell the tale. Also astra militarium lose half their numbers to madness when fighting chaos in the fluff. If that was true... !

 jy2 wrote:
Ranged D is stupid. Period. However, genestealers controlling a Warlord titan is pretty cool. I can go for that.

Ranged D may or may not be stupid (period). But if your point is that it makes the game less 'interactive', then there are other things that, while maybe giving the impression that they allow for 'interaction', do not.

Have you run the numbers on a GravCent Star compared to a Lynx shooting at the same targets? Assume that both of the Lynx's blasts hit. How does picking up your models due to a buffed up death star amount to anything different from picking them up for a Lynx--how is it more 'interactive'? How about vs. Hierodule supported by a Malanthrope, in Ruins, vs. an Imperial Knight (supported by the AdLance formation), obscured by Ruins for a 4+ cover save too, and vs. a 10-man TH/SS Terminator squad, also in Ruins, supported by Lias Issodon for Shrouding (so they get a 2+ cover save).

Assume Prescience and Perfect Timing are available to the GravStar (and Invisibility).

After running them compared to those three targets, run them against each other. I don't think there will be a clear winner. Happy to be wrong.

I like CTA and I use it to build and model fluffy armies

DCannon4Life wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Ranged D is stupid. Period. However, genestealers controlling a Warlord titan is pretty cool. I can go for that.

Ranged D may or may not be stupid (period). But if your point is that it makes the game less 'interactive', then there are other things that, while maybe giving the impression that they allow for 'interaction', do not.

Have you run the numbers on a GravCent Star compared to a Lynx shooting at the same targets? Assume that both of the Lynx's blasts hit. How does picking up your models due to a buffed up death star amount to anything different from picking them up for a Lynx--how is it more 'interactive'? How about vs. Hierodule supported by a Malanthrope, in Ruins, vs. an Imperial Knight (supported by the AdLance formation), obscured by Ruins for a 4+ cover save too, and vs. a 10-man TH/SS Terminator squad, also in Ruins, supported by Lias Issodon for Shrouding (so they get a 2+ cover save).

Assume Prescience and Perfect Timing are available to the GravStar (and Invisibility).

After running them compared to those three targets, run them against each other. I don't think there will be a clear winner. Happy to be wrong.

The comparison is reasonable, but not black and white.

First of all, the points costs scale hugely from Lynx > Tyranid stuff > GravStar (assuming Draigo, Lvl3 Libby, Tiggy, 4-5 Cents w/ grav)

Next, consider that the Lynx and Nid stuff are powerful innately, while the GravStar requires not only the randomness of getting the right powers (ignoring Draigo's Gate) but then also casting / not being blocked to use those powers.

Another thing to consider is targets that can be hit. The GravStar can hit 2 units per turn, while the others hit one.

Not saying there is a clear winner here, and I think your point is sound (that stuff in normal 40k can be just as over the top) but I think its valuable to give more the full picture.

I don't know why people do not want CtA allies. a fluff based argument is very, very weak especially since GW got rid of most of their fluff in 4th edition.

If it is to nerf Leviathan formations, then it is not necessary. Generally the meta changes and adapts to what ever the current cheese is, and then it becomes more of a non-factor. Adamantium Lance was all over the place at the Nova Open, but I would wager than everyone in the top half of the LVO tables could deal with it.

Now after the LVO everyone wants to do something about the Leviatian formation, but that will not be an issue at next years tournaments. The problem with addressing issues is they are shutting the barn door after the horses have already left. What tournaments are very bad at is addressing problems before they happen.

Also if they next cheese is imperial CtA banning will have no impact.

While nids won thd tournament they were not undefeated. Furthermore it was the only leviathan in the top 8.

And the only real cent star mishapped and lost; a Lynx on a skyshields doesn't rely on that kind of luck to win.

 Blackmoor wrote:
I don't know why people do not want CtA allies. a fluff based argument is very, very weak especially since GW got rid of most of their fluff in 4th edition.

If it is to nerf Leviathan formations, then it is not necessary. Generally the meta changes and adapts to what ever the current cheese is, and then it becomes more of a non-factor. Adamantium Lance was all over the place at the Nova Open, but I would wager than everyone in the top half of the LVO tables could deal with it.

Now after the LVO everyone wants to do something about the Leviatian formation, but that will not be an issue at next years tournaments. The problem with addressing issues is they are shutting the barn door after the horses have already left. What tournaments are very bad at is addressing problems before they happen.

Also if they next cheese is imperial CtA banning will have no impact.

Then why not allow unbound? That is true freedom.

FYI - DraigoStar can and should take Loth for Invisibility.

Hasn't this thread ran its course...

 Hulksmash wrote:
I like CTA and I use it to build and model fluffy armies

Hmmmm wouldn't Orks + Tyranids be... fluffy?

Why?

...

...

...

...

'cuz of LOOTED BUGS!!!!!!!








Hmmmm... I've got a feth-ton of orks and old rogue trader era 'nids.


Dammit man, I may have to build this now!

When I see the cheesy CtA armies it makes want not to play 40k. You can talk about fluffy bunnies til all the cows come home but we all know that's not why people posting here are all hot and bothered about it.

And here I thought Hulk's comment was going to get no traction because it wasn't outlandish enough. I stand corrected

Edit: I'm referring to the looted bugs, in case that wasn't clear

 Byte wrote:
Hasn't this thread ran its course...

No, no. How could the angry germs keep up the population count!




In case you missed it earlier in the thread. It's self sustaining at this point, even the mods can't help it!

 Dozer Blades wrote:
When I see the cheesy CtA armies it makes want not to play 40k. You can talk about fluffy bunnies til all the cows come home but we all know that's not why people posting here are all hot and bothered about it.

So judging by your blog, and this actually is an honest question:

There are cent stars with Draigo and Bike Stars with wolf lords in the fluff?

I'm a bad guy enthusiast, and 40k is the game where my Megatrons can march alongside my Cobra Commander (with penalties).

I admit Leviathan plus CAD may be over the top, but no more so than Draigo Cent Stars or Eldar with Tau Fire Cadre.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
When I see the cheesy CtA armies it makes want not to play 40k.

Good?

There have been a ton of cheesy, unfun to play armies over the years. CtA isn't anything different than what you can do wtihout CtA except that it allows armies arbitrarily hammered by the allied table to be able to play the same game as the other, less hampered members of the allied table.

White Scars and Space Wolves fighting together make sense to me as they are both clan oriented IMO. DraigoStar not so much but I rarely play it tbh for whatever that's worth.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
White Scars and Space Wolves fighting together make sense to me as they are both clan oriented IMO. DraigoStar not so much but I rarely play it tbh for whatever that's worth.

Not once is not fluff

Lol !!!

DCannon4Life wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Ranged D is stupid. Period. However, genestealers controlling a Warlord titan is pretty cool. I can go for that.

Ranged D may or may not be stupid (period). But if your point is that it makes the game less 'interactive', then there are other things that, while maybe giving the impression that they allow for 'interaction', do not.

Have you run the numbers on a GravCent Star compared to a Lynx shooting at the same targets? Assume that both of the Lynx's blasts hit. How does picking up your models due to a buffed up death star amount to anything different from picking them up for a Lynx--how is it more 'interactive'? How about vs. Hierodule supported by a Malanthrope, in Ruins, vs. an Imperial Knight (supported by the AdLance formation), obscured by Ruins for a 4+ cover save too, and vs. a 10-man TH/SS Terminator squad, also in Ruins, supported by Lias Issodon for Shrouding (so they get a 2+ cover save).

Assume Prescience and Perfect Timing are available to the GravStar (and Invisibility).

After running them compared to those three targets, run them against each other. I don't think there will be a clear winner. Happy to be wrong.

The lynx is about 430-pts only. The centstar is about 1K. You seriously want to compare the 2? Yes, the centstar can potentially erase a unit or maybe even 2 a turn if they get lucky. However, backing the centstar in a typical 1850 list is only about 800-pts of marines. Backing the lynx is 1400-pts of the best army in the codex. And that doesn't include the fact that the 430-pt lynx can potentially wipe out the entire 1000-pts of Gated centstar with a good hit. Nor does it factor in the fact that centurions can do nothing to Void Shields (in the ITC format).

So yes, the lynx is stupid in normal games of 40K. BTW, so is the centurionstar, but the difference is, like Daemon Summoning, the censtar has been legal since the very beginning. The lynx, like CtA allies, is the red-headed stepchild of the ITC which is more easily swept under the rug in a popularity contest.

Fine, run the numbers and then divide them by the number of points it takes (430 vs. 'about' 1K). I still don't think it will be lopsided. We are, after all, talking about 'interaction' between players, which roughly means, 'do I get to roll dice to try to save my models after my opponent rolls dice to try to destroy them?' As such, the COST of the units is not the point, how 'interactive' they are is.

EDIT: Just to be clear, my point is that you only THINK you are 'interacting' when facing a buffed CentStar when, in reality you aren't--the effective result is the same. And, in some cases (i.e. some of the 'targets' I listed above), you are actually better off being shot at with a 2-shot D-weapon than a CentStar.

I suppose if you want to keep expanding the parameters/shifting the focus of the example, fine, but at some point please do the analysis.

Remember when 40k wasn't apoc? I miss that.

DCannon4Life wrote:
Fine, run the numbers and then divide them by the number of points it takes (430 vs. 'about' 1K). I still don't think it will be lopsided. We are, after all, talking about 'interaction' between players, which roughly means, 'do I get to roll dice to try to save my models after my opponent rolls dice to try to destroy them?' As such, the COST of the units is not the point, how 'interactive' they are is.

EDIT: Just to be clear, my point is that you only THINK you are 'interacting' when facing a buffed CentStar when, in reality you aren't--the effective result is the same. And, in some cases (i.e. some of the 'targets' I listed above), you are actually better off being shot at with a 2-shot D-weapon than a CentStar.

I suppose if you want to keep expanding the parameters/shifting the focus of the example, fine, but at some point please do the analysis.

Is there a buff out there that gives Centurions the "Ignores Cover, Ignores Invulnerable Saves" special rule? If not then any ranged D weapon is considerably different than a Centurion Star.

Divination gives ignores cover. Invul, not so much.

DCannon4Life wrote:
Fine, run the numbers and then divide them by the number of points it takes (430 vs. 'about' 1K). I still don't think it will be lopsided. We are, after all, talking about 'interaction' between players, which roughly means, 'do I get to roll dice to try to save my models after my opponent rolls dice to try to destroy them?' As such, the COST of the units is not the point, how 'interactive' they are is.

EDIT: Just to be clear, my point is that you only THINK you are 'interacting' when facing a buffed CentStar when, in reality you aren't--the effective result is the same. And, in some cases (i.e. some of the 'targets' I listed above), you are actually better off being shot at with a 2-shot D-weapon than a CentStar.

I suppose if you want to keep expanding the parameters/shifting the focus of the example, fine, but at some point please do the analysis.

I don't need to run the numbers. I know that they both erase units with little interaction (though you are still guaranteed Invuln saves against the centstar). They are both "stupid" builds/units. However, the difference is this:

1. The Centstar has been established for a long time now, just like the seer council, just like the farsight-bomb. It is not going away. The Lynx, on the other hand, is a bubble LoW unit at a point where the integration of LoW's is still debatable. It is more likely to "go away" with a ban than the censtar will ever be.

2. My point about the costs of the 2 units isn't which gives you more bang-for-the-buck in terms of killiness. Rather, it was to compare the rest of the army. It is actually easier to deal with the centstar because you only have to deal with about 800-pts of marines and then you stand a decent chance of beating the centstar army. But with the Lynx, it is hard to kill and so is the other 1400-pts of Eldar if you choose to ignore the Lynx.