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 guess this could be considered\ a proverbial question. I did tonight. I couldn't turn the guy down, because he's a generally nice guy. And I got annihilated. And it took 4 long grueling rounds. And I wish I would have watched a movie instead.

PUGs don't exist anymore where I am, but I would have asked if they wanted to watch the movie...

Nope, but I refuse to play Apocalypse. So far I have not put my models down with a GC or SH LoW, and don't plan on it.

I would love to try that game! I might ask for more terrain density, but otherwise let's see how long I last! I actually enjoy games where I have no chance of winning on occasion, it feels more like a spacewolves or eldar battle if I am fighting to the last whilst horribly outnumbered/outgunned.

 jasper76 wrote:
I guess this could be considered\ a proverbial question. I did tonight. I couldn't turn the guy down, because he's a generally nice guy. And I got annihilated. And it took 4 long grueling rounds. And I wish I would have watched a movie instead.

I suppose I would need to know more about the context of the game. If it was a game where both sides were allowed to bring and use superheavies, I personally would agree to it (even though I don't own any superheavies).

If it was a standard game of 40k with no apocalypse units available to me, then I too would have gone home and done something else.

I definitely would, how often do you get to fight a reaver? Even more so if they were painted.

I'm sure the nice guy would return the favor in the future when you have some awesome model you want to use and abuse the opposition.

In a game like that, its no longer about the winning, though it be nice, just to face it on the table its an honor.

No.

Not a chance. I have better things to do with my time than be a target for someone else.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
I guess this could be considered\ a proverbial question. I did tonight. I couldn't turn the guy down, because he's a generally nice guy. And I got annihilated. And it took 4 long grueling rounds. And I wish I would have watched a movie instead.

I suppose I would need to know more about the context of the game. If it was a game where both sides were allowed to bring and use superheavies, I personally would agree to it (even though I don't own any superheavies).

If it was a standard game of 40k with no apocalypse units available to me, then I too would have gone home and done something else.

It was a game where I brought a standard "no-Forgeworld units" Necron army to my FLGS, and I agreed to play against the only player in the shop, with the aforementioned army, in a standard game of 40k, in the same spirit as Lythrandire Biehrellian describes above. With the Decurion being so strong, I thought I might actually win, but alas, I was destroyed utterly (tabled in 4 Rounds).

Actually I would like to play against this list, will be interesting experience and I take lots of melta in my lists all the time anyway.

No, I wouldn't bother playing that game. I'll play against LoW, but an army of nothing but LoW, including one that costs as much as a whole "normal" army, isn't going to be much fun. Either the titan wipes out everything in a couple shooting phases, or I somehow have a counter to it and win the game effortlessly in 1-2 turns. What's the point in putting models on the table for a "game" like that?

 TheNewBlood wrote:
If it was a standard game of 40k with no apocalypse units available to me, then I too would have gone home and done something else.

A "standard" game of 40k is one where LoW (including the army in the OP) are legal. There is no such thing as Apocalypse-only units anymore.

Sorry, whats PUG?

 luky7dayz wrote:
Sorry, whats PUG?

A dog.

Nah in all seriousness I dont know either.

 luky7dayz wrote:
Sorry, whats PUG?

Pickup game.

A "Pick Up Game"

Of course! Why wouldn't I? I would definitely be list tailoring but I wouldn't hesitate to play a list like that.

 jasper76 wrote:
I guess this could be considered\ a proverbial question. I did tonight. I couldn't turn the guy down, because he's a generally nice guy. And I got annihilated. And it took 4 long grueling rounds. And I wish I would have watched a movie instead.

That's like 3000pts, who plays 3000pts for a pickup game?

Points level notwithstanding, no, I don't think I'd have bothered with that game. Not only is it just an absurd amount of high AV units that don't care squat about damage table results and that is highly resistant to CC attacks , but there's a lot of D weapons (and D pieplates).

 Toofast wrote:
Why wouldn't I?

Because a list that badly skewed in one direction is unlikely to produce a game where the outcome is in doubt? Either your list can deal with a titan and you win effortlessly, or you can't deal with a titan and get massacred. There isn't much middle ground where you have an interesting game of strategy vs. counter-strategy. So why spend an hour or two moving models around just to confirm what you already knew based on your respective list choices?

If i knew it was coming, and could build a list that could fight it, sure.

Random PUG. Hell no.

I've enjoyed a few games where I was horribly outmatched. It's interesting to see how things go! I remember one game about 5 years ago, was my IG against chaos marines with a daemon in tow. the daemon dropped on turn 3, I never killed it but a squad of vets kept it occupied the whole time it was there. Sadly, with the next codex (and now the newest codex) that squad is invalid. Miss all the upgrades and wargear options that GW seems to be stepping away from.

Maybe I'm just butt-hurt, but they really should just get it over with and make every gun on the board a 96" / Large Blast / D-Strength weapon.

I think the next couple games I play I'll demand be my HQ & 4 x Tac Squad vs. your HQ & 4 x Tac Squad.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Toofast wrote:
Why wouldn't I?

Because a list that badly skewed in one direction is unlikely to produce a game where the outcome is in doubt? Either your list can deal with a titan and you win effortlessly, or you can't deal with a titan and get massacred. There isn't much middle ground where you have an interesting game of strategy vs. counter-strategy. So why spend an hour or two moving models around just to confirm what you already knew based on your respective list choices?

I just like fighting big stompy robots. One of my lists has enough melta to handle them and it's usually a fun game.

If it was the only game available - I'd still not play it, regardless of how nice the guy with the eleventy titans is.

I don't like the models - and Apoc (1st ed) was the start of me not liking the game.

Going to see a movie is a perfectly cromulent option under the circumstances. If there were no movies on that I wanted to see (quite common in recent years) I'd just go home and dig up something I wanted to watch.

And it took 4 long grueling rounds.

Is this sarcasm?

When the opponent has a grand total of 5 models to play with, and takes large chunks out of your army each turn, it shouldn't last too long.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

And it took 4 long grueling rounds.

Is this sarcasm?

When the opponent has a grand total of 5 models to play with, and takes large chunks out of your army each turn, it shouldn't last too long.

No sarcasm. The truth is my opponent was constantly looking up the rules for his various titans, but I'm not trying to complain about that, as I know how hard it is to keep track of special rules, weapon profiles, and the like.

Only mentioned "grueling" because I'd have been much more contented if I'd been tabled in 1 or 2 rounds rather than 4

What might of been fun is to play a game where you keep respawning dead units until you kill the Titan and Knights. If you lose more points than his units then you lose. Lose less and you win.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Toofast wrote:
Why wouldn't I?

Because a list that badly skewed in one direction is unlikely to produce a game where the outcome is in doubt? Either your list can deal with a titan and you win effortlessly, or you can't deal with a titan and get massacred. There isn't much middle ground where you have an interesting game of strategy vs. counter-strategy. So why spend an hour or two moving models around just to confirm what you already knew based on your respective list choices?

This is why people should try a few games against some of the things they -think- are ridiculous.
Did you know reaver titans suck at melee? That you can hold them up with a squad of tactical marines at their feet, and they can't shoot just because a marine is glaring at the monstrous robot in combat?

Yeah I'd totally try my angel's fury setup scaled up to his point value

I got a reaver Titan as a nice BA centerpiece a couple years ago. I quickly figured out from playing it that it's not really worth it's point cost, and it desperately needs an army around its feet to make sure it can keep firing without a few hundred points of rank and file grunts holding it in combat all game. That and str D has downgraded more and more, but the Titan still costs the same. I've loaned him out and played against him on request a few times, and never lost. I never hurt the thing. I just occupy it with forces costing less than half the Titan in melee, overwhelm his other forces with mine at an advantage, and then win by the mission.

I'd actually use Iyanden and see how it goes.

niv-mizzet wrote:
Did you know reaver titans suck at melee? That you can hold them up with a squad of tactical marines at their feet, and they can't shoot just because a marine is glaring at the monstrous robot in combat?

I don't really see how this solves the problem. If you can lock the titan up in melee and turn it into a 1500 point paperweight then all you've done is turn a "get tabled and have no fun" game into "table them and have no fun". Countering the titan (and even killing it on turn 1 with near-guaranteed odds) is trivially easy, the hard part is arranging a game with a list like the one in the OP where the outcome is in doubt and both players have fun.

 Peregrine wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:
Did you know reaver titans suck at melee? That you can hold them up with a squad of tactical marines at their feet, and they can't shoot just because a marine is glaring at the monstrous robot in combat?

I don't really see how this solves the problem. If you can lock the titan up in melee and turn it into a 1500 point paperweight then all you've done is turn a "get tabled and have no fun" game into "table them and have no fun". Countering the titan (and even killing it on turn 1 with near-guaranteed odds) is trivially easy, the hard part is arranging a game with a list like the one in the OP where the outcome is in doubt and both players have fun.

They have other forces. If they're decent, those other forces will be desperately clawing you out of melee so the thing can shoot, while you respond by sending more guys in to hold it up. (Or hold those counter-forces up.)

It's almost like it becomes a real tactical objective during the game as opposed to "this bottlecap is worth 3 VP at the end of the game." I've had just as many (percentage wise) Titan games come to climactic finishes as I do "normal" games.

But whatever. If you're not willing to try it, I guess you can stick to your preconceived notions. No skin off my back.