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.

 krodarklorr wrote:

What's the point? Apparently our ideas of fluffy are completely different.

The point is that's what discussions are for. I think your idea of fluffy is wrong, specifically, that its too narrow and lacks imagination. A battle of 40k can be represent a number of things, from a small localized skirmish, to a snapshot of a much larger battle. In either case, having a force consisting of a handful of repeat units is perfectly fluffy; in the case of the skirmish, its represents a specific task force put together to accomplish a specific goal requiring specific equipment. In the case of the snapshot, you have to imagine how the forces got to where they are and what might be happening all around them. That Guard force of a feth ton of arty and some meatshield infantry makes a whole lot more sense if you imagine the opposing force having broken through the main Guard battle line and are not taking out the reserves and arty batteries. A battle could also represent an ambush where a bunch of the same unit are being brought to the frontline to replace casualties but are attacked by skirmishers.

Further, the doctrines used by the armies are not set in stone and change depending on the sub faction and the conditions affecting them. In the case of your min/max warriors in Night Scythes backed by Barges, use your imagination. Its a small awakening world in which the lords and their heavy equipment were the first to awaken with their small escorts and are moving rapidly to awaken the rest of the world before the enemy beats them there. Boom.

Just about anything is fluffy if you make it fluffy. Exceptions exist, of course. White Scars can't take dreads because they abhor them, as one example. But outside of specific GW canon, just about anything is fair game.

Depending on the formation, you are absolutely correct. Again, Min/maxing will never go away, especially in this game. However, lets say you min/max, say, Canoptek Harvests. Are you taking them in a Decurion? If so, you have to spend a minimum of, what, 479 points on a Reclamation Legion? That's if you really want it bare bones. Then, you're bringing minimum 1 squad of Scarabs per unit of Wraiths, with no option to do otherwise. So, if you want to bring multiple units of Wraiths, you have to bring multiple units of Scarabs. That gets expensive, and quick. Is it an option over just bringing 3 units of Wraiths in a CAD? Yes. Is it an auto-include? Not even close.

And the issue around power creep only gets worse as new formations get even more powerful while some are total jokes. The original assertion that formations and other crazy additions to the game has helped make balance even worse is true. Its not the whole truth, as there's more to the balance issues than just formations, but they really aren't helping.

Well, Tau may not be out long enough to build a top level army list. In three months after the Tau release we will see clearer.

 Blacksails wrote:

The point is that's what discussions are for. I think your idea of fluffy is wrong, specifically, that its too narrow and lacks imagination. A battle of 40k can be represent a number of things, from a small localized skirmish, to a snapshot of a much larger battle. In either case, having a force consisting of a handful of repeat units is perfectly fluffy; in the case of the skirmish, its represents a specific task force put together to accomplish a specific goal requiring specific equipment. In the case of the snapshot, you have to imagine how the forces got to where they are and what might be happening all around them. That Guard force of a feth ton of arty and some meatshield infantry makes a whole lot more sense if you imagine the opposing force having broken through the main Guard battle line and are not taking out the reserves and arty batteries. A battle could also represent an ambush where a bunch of the same unit are being brought to the frontline to replace casualties but are attacked by skirmishers.

Further, the doctrines used by the armies are not set in stone and change depending on the sub faction and the conditions affecting them. In the case of your min/max warriors in Night Scythes backed by Barges, use your imagination. Its a small awakening world in which the lords and their heavy equipment were the first to awaken with their small escorts and are moving rapidly to awaken the rest of the world before the enemy beats them there. Boom.

Just about anything is fluffy if you make it fluffy. Exceptions exist, of course. White Scars can't take dreads because they abhor them, as one example. But outside of specific GW canon, just about anything is fair game.

Well, okay. I read the codexes for fluff, and some short stories/novels occasionally. Most of my fluff interpretations come from the various codexes themselves, however. For example, Hive Tyrants are excellent fighters and generals, created by the Hive Mind to lead the Tyranid Swarms. So for what far-fetched reason would the Hive Mind send nothing but a swarm of these guys at the enemy?

And Eldar. They're a dying race. Every person is valuable. In fact, everything is valuable. Losing forces in a battle is a big deal for Eldar. Yet they can afford to give every one of their jetbikes a Heavy Weapon. And Wraithknights are used to explore Crone Worlds and recover fallen soulstones. But yet, every craftworld can manage to send a few of them to every battle.

It's things like such as those that leave a bad taste in my mouth. Technically, you could argue anything is fluffy. But seeing Admech commandeer as many Drop pods as they'd like, even though they're designed for Astartes personnel, is weird.

And the issue around power creep only gets worse as new formations get even more powerful while some are total jokes. The original assertion that formations and other crazy additions to the game has helped make balance even worse is true. Its not the whole truth, as there's more to the balance issues than just formations, but they really aren't helping.

And yeah, some of the formations are just silly. Like, stupid silly. But I'd still rather have the option of taking them. In a game of imbalance, if you take away the formations, you still have imbalance. So I'd rather have the formations than not.

 krodarklorr wrote:


Well, okay. I read the codexes for fluff, and some short stories/novels occasionally. Most of my fluff interpretations come from the various codexes themselves, however. For example, Hive Tyrants are excellent fighters and generals, created by the Hive Mind to lead the Tyranid Swarms. So for what far-fetched reason would the Hive Mind send nothing but a swarm of these guys at the enemy?

The rest of the forces each tyrant was 'commanding' were mostly killed, so they merged their forces in a last ditch effort to take a particularly important objective. Or it represents the snapshot of all the forces merging on the final point of resistance on the planet where all the Tyrants happens to fight together because there's literally no other enemy to fight.

And Eldar. They're a dying race. Every person is valuable. In fact, everything is valuable. Losing forces in a battle is a big deal for Eldar. Yet they can afford to give every one of their jetbikes a Heavy Weapon. And Wraithknights are used to explore Crone Worlds and recover fallen soulstones. But yet, every craftworld can manage to send a few of them to every battle.

Putting heavy weapons on everything is actually logical if everything is valuable. The weapon itself isn't the valuable piece, its the rider, so equipping him and replacing the bike is fairly simple. Might as well arm him to the teeth to protect him as much as possible. WKs being used on important missions like recovering soulstones sounds perfectly reasonable. Some craftworlds are more daring than others and have more resources for such missions.

It's things like such as those that leave a bad taste in my mouth. Technically, you could argue anything is fluffy. But seeing Admech commandeer as many Drop pods as they'd like, even though they're designed for Astartes personnel, is weird.

It makes a lot more sense if you don't think of them as literal drop pods, but instead as Mechanicus High Orbit Insertions Pods, a newly implemented vehicle that hasn't seen widespread acceptance among the mechanicus.

And yeah, some of the formations are just silly. Like, stupid silly. But I'd still rather have the option of taking them. In a game of imbalance, if you take away the formations, you still have imbalance. So I'd rather have the formations than not.

I don't necessarily have an issue with formations as a concept. But if they continue to be so poorly balanced, I'll still dislike them. If they had a points cost attached, I'd feel a lot better.

 Blacksails wrote:

The rest of the forces each tyrant was 'commanding' were mostly killed, so they merged their forces in a last ditch effort to take a particularly important objective. Or it represents the snapshot of all the forces merging on the final point of resistance on the planet where all the Tyrants happens to fight together because there's literally no other enemy to fight.

Okay, I'll accept that. But then, I really start to think how often that scenario happens. Judging by most Tyranid players, the Hive Mind just doesn't send other units into battle. Like, ever. Or they're elsewhere on the battle, but the Flyrants are all stars in Days of Our Lives, and thus the only important characters.

Putting heavy weapons on everything is actually logical if everything is valuable. The weapon itself isn't the valuable piece, its the rider, so equipping him and replacing the bike is fairly simple. Might as well arm him to the teeth to protect him as much as possible. WKs being used on important missions like recovering soulstones sounds perfectly reasonable. Some craftworlds are more daring than others and have more resources for such missions.

Sure. And my Star Gods, even as shards, should be immensely powerful. If you're not going to give everyone fluffy rules, don't give it to an army that was already really good. You're reasoning makes sense, but it gaks on game balance. Then it comes down to the broad thinking that I entail with fluff. Why does every craftworld mainly send Jetbikes to every mission? I know every craftworld is not Saim-Hann.

It makes a lot more sense if you don't think of them as literal drop pods, but instead as Mechanicus High Orbit Insertions Pods, a newly implemented vehicle that hasn't seen widespread acceptance among the mechanicus.

I guess.

I don't necessarily have an issue with formations as a concept. But if they continue to be so poorly balanced, I'll still dislike them. If they had a points cost attached, I'd feel a lot better.

Well, I can agree to that. Like in the new Wulfen book. Apparently the Daemon formations are poop. And half, if not most, of the Tyranid ones are bad. And so on, and so forth. I'd be okay with a points cost added to them, but then I'd also like some of them to be more loose as far as requirements. Sure, you could bring a Destroyer Cult, and give them the rules for 100 points. But you still have to take a ton of Destroyers? Eesh.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, Tau may not be out long enough to build a top level army list. In three months after the Tau release we will see clearer.

Marines won a major tournament the week their book came out. I remember reading about it and being shocked. Even eldar dident do that. Necrons were first month though.

 Orock wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, Tau may not be out long enough to build a top level army list. In three months after the Tau release we will see clearer.

Marines won a major tournament the week their book came out. I remember reading about it and being shocked. Even eldar dident do that. Necrons were first month though.

This isn't like magic. There aren't 5000 Friday night tourneys every week across the country, each with its own subset of players constantly tweaking their armies to respond to the meta.

It DOES take time for a new codex to settle in. Even if the Tau players played 3 practice games a week from the time their book dropped to LVO while making tweaks, that's what, two dozen games? Serious magic players go through two dozen games in a night when deck testing and tweaking.

And yet again, games are won and lost by incredibly slim margins at the top tables. Maelstrom rolls deciding to go your way, reserves flaking out, warlords failing morale and fleeing the field, deep strike mishap unit deaths... I've had all those and more happen in tourneys. Any list that makes it in like the top 10% could have easily won in a slightly different universe. Couple different matchups and dice rolls, and we could've easily been talking about how tau dominated top 8.

The point of that second part being that the army in first place isn't necessarily the best. It just had a sweet combo of piloting, list strength, and dice luck. Don't tunnel vision on the top list.

wow dude, CALM DOWN. i play tau, I voted against the nerfs, and im not as mad, you just gotta dust your hands off, shrugh your shoulds and relax.

Wow. Those lists are gross. Just 100% WAAC. No real theme to speak of. Just the most powerful units spammed enough times to excell at their role. We need a more restrictive allies matrix. I'm sick of seeing enemies used as allies. At Cancon (our biggest tournament of the year) this year I saw a daemons/Eldar/space marines army. It's getting ridiculous and killing the soul of the game.

its a tournament, what do you expect? Every marine to have an individual name and story?

 Kavish wrote:
Wow. Those lists are gross. Just 100% WAAC. No real theme to speak of. Just the most powerful units spammed enough times to excell at their role. We need a more restrictive allies matrix. I'm sick of seeing enemies used as allies. At Cancon (our biggest tournament of the year) this year I saw a daemons/Eldar/space marines army. It's getting ridiculous and killing the soul of the game.

WAAC is the point of the competitive part of the tournament.

They also have a narrative tournament/campaign for people who aren't interested in the "WAAC" type gaming.

The game's "soul" depends on who is playing it. There is a lot of potential for variation.

It's taking over all events though. Everyone starts taking power lists because because they are afraid of getting tabled every time.

Maybe, but I'd think players who participate enjoy that environment, lest they'd stop going or find a more narrative-focused scene.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
So there's five different armies in the top 8 and this is somehow proof that ITC hates diversity? Do you even reflect on what you post?

Heh. No doubt.
It's all a cycle man. There are some years when specific armies are on top and others are on bottom. Just wait for the new codex's to come out for a switch.

In the meantime, having 5 different armies in the top eight is quite diverse.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
So there's five different armies in the top 8 and this is somehow proof that ITC hates diversity? Do you even reflect on what you post?

Heh. No doubt.
It's all a cycle man. There are some years when specific armies are on top and others are on bottom. Just wait for the new codex's to come out for a switch.

In the meantime, having 5 different armies in the top eight is quite diverse.

Somewhat. The major outlier is more than 1/3 of the top 30 are Eldar

So hey guys, I've been compiling the lists for the LVO, and I have a good chunk of the top 50 currently in my opinion, along with some lists outside of it, including the top Ork list. You can find the link in my signature for the full data base, it has multiple Renegade lists and you'll notice the SoB list was actually Salamanders Marines because there was an error in the reference material.

That being said, one thing I noticed in all the lists was the massive diversity of them. Honestly, every time I thought I'd see more stability, I'd get a new list that made me scratch my head. I think I've seen it all now, but who knows, the last list to really make me go "hu, that's cool" was a full Nurgle only Daemon list that placed 36th or 37th, I honestly didn't expect that as it literally ran Nurgle only.

 krodarklorr wrote:


All of those examples are perfectly fluffy. Mind explaining why you feel they aren't?

Have you ever read any 40k books or even read the codices?

Let me help you understand. The formation detachments in the codices are the most true to lore ways to run Armies. And that's all there is to it really. If fact, that's why they made those detachments in the first place.

eleven11 wrote:

Let me help you understand. The formation detachments in the codices are the most true to lore ways to run Armies. And that's all there is to it really. If fact, that's why they made those detachments in the first place.

Not for BT they aren't, and I'm sure the same goes for other armies as well.

 Tinkrr wrote:
So hey guys, I've been compiling the lists for the LVO, and I have a good chunk of the top 50 currently in my opinion, along with some lists outside of it, including the top Ork list. You can find the link in my signature for the full data base, it has multiple Renegade lists and you'll notice the SoB list was actually Salamanders Marines because there was an error in the reference material.

That being said, one thing I noticed in all the lists was the massive diversity of them. Honestly, every time I thought I'd see more stability, I'd get a new list that made me scratch my head. I think I've seen it all now, but who knows, the last list to really make me go "hu, that's cool" was a full Nurgle only Daemon list that placed 36th or 37th, I honestly didn't expect that as it literally ran Nurgle only.

It's a shame that the winning list turned out to be SpiderSpam. Much preferred last year where Scouts and LictorShame were the top two lists.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
its a tournament, what do you expect? Every marine to have an individual name and story?

That's very much like it used to be actually :(

 Orock wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, Tau may not be out long enough to build a top level army list. In three months after the Tau release we will see clearer.

Marines won a major tournament the week their book came out. I remember reading about it and being shocked. Even eldar dident do that. Necrons were first month though.

Maybe Tau players just aren't as good.

eleven11 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:


All of those examples are perfectly fluffy. Mind explaining why you feel they aren't?

Have you ever read any 40k books or even read the codices?

Let me help you understand. The formation detachments in the codices are the newest scheme GW has come up with to sell unshifting stock.. And that's all there is to it really.

I fixed that for you since you must have meant this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cindis wrote:

 Orock wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, Tau may not be out long enough to build a top level army list. In three months after the Tau release we will see clearer.

Marines won a major tournament the week their book came out. I remember reading about it and being shocked. Even eldar dident do that. Necrons were first month though.

Maybe Tau players just aren't as good.

someday things will be better, dont give up!