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.

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

Razerous wrote:
Good report, keep em coming please

Thanks!




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
How come both of you want Endurance over Invis?

I'm finding Invis to be over-rated, especially when we've both got easy access to Prescience. Besides I was more concerned with the Crap-ton of S10 attacks he had and he was concerned about the crap-ton of Force weapons I had in my army.

But if he double or force weapon you, the 4+ FNP would be useless?

I don't really care about the 4+ FNP. Do you realize how many ID wounds a 2W Eternal Warrior character with a 2++ can tank? Against an army with a lot of ID offense, endurance is what you want to go for not so much for the FNP as it is for Eternal Warrior.

Ahh that's right, def gonna keep that in mind

First I would like to say I like how there are random azz bottles of liquor everywhere. LOL

Great report, I enjoyed it I like having a visual of what the new units can do.

jy2 I voted 1650 as well. I hate seeing all these top tier armies only getting to turn 4 in big games at LVO, BAO and the like. How do you like the new scoring format. Seems kind of odd to me personally, but taking a second look it might be a bit more balanced if more tricky to understand on the front end.

Good work, like I commented on the FLG page (I'm parker btw) I'm not a real big fan of deathstars, but when they play each other and they are both super durable like yours and your opponent's it makes the game a tad more 'balanced.' Good show jy2. I look forward to more batreps in the future! I love this style of batreps.

BTW, if you can get ahold of a bottle of TX whiskey, yes I'm from Texas and shamelessly plugging my local whiskey, it is FANTASTIC. Just a suggestion If not, Maker's mark is my preferred adult beverage that isn't BEER.

 CKO wrote:
First I would like to say I like how there are random azz bottles of liquor everywhere. LOL

Great report, I enjoyed it I like having a visual of what the new units can do.

We were playing Whiskey-hammer/garage-hammer. Just goes to show that you can have a good time even while playing beat-down lists.

 Castellan Alaric wrote:
jy2 I voted 1650 as well. I hate seeing all these top tier armies only getting to turn 4 in big games at LVO, BAO and the like. How do you like the new scoring format. Seems kind of odd to me personally, but taking a second look it might be a bit more balanced if more tricky to understand on the front end.

Good work, like I commented on the FLG page (I'm parker btw) I'm not a real big fan of deathstars, but when they play each other and they are both super durable like yours and your opponent's it makes the game a tad more 'balanced.' Good show jy2. I look forward to more batreps in the future! I love this style of batreps.

BTW, if you can get ahold of a bottle of TX whiskey, yes I'm from Texas and shamelessly plugging my local whiskey, it is FANTASTIC. Just a suggestion If not, Maker's mark is my preferred adult beverage that isn't BEER.

I'm really digging the new scoring format. I think that it is an improvement from the previous version. Now, the ITC game isn't as 2nd-Turn dependent as it used to be, which is a good thing IMO. It does take a little getting used to, but once you get the hang of it, it's pretty simple, which to me is a sign of a good system.

Everyone loves to hate deathstars and I don't blame them. Deathstars are such an extreme army that not all armies can deal with them, hence the frustration with many players. However, they do have exploitable weaknesses that more experienced players can take advantage of. When I play against another deathstar army, I usually ignore the deathstar and focus on killing the rest of the army. How you beat a deathstar is to focus on the support units. It might not be as fun or as glamorous as to try to kill the star itself, but it is usually how you beat them.

 jy2 wrote:

I'm really digging the new scoring format. I think that it is an improvement from the previous version. Now, the ITC game isn't as 2nd-Turn dependent as it used to be, which is a good thing IMO. It does take a little getting used to, but once you get the hang of it, it's pretty simple, which to me is a sign of a good system.

How does the maelstrom scoring now work on the last game turn, since there's no "next turn" at that point? The new guidelines don't say, and I couldn't quite figure it out from your report either.

That is correct. Since the game did not continue, the Maelstrom objectives on the last turn can never be scored. They will only count if the game continues because they are only scored at the beginning of your next turn. But if you do not have a next turn, then they can't be scored.

JY2, thanks for the report. Brilliant as always.
Gating is very risky, but in maelstrom games almost inevitable for a cent-star.

J2Y I agree with the death star frustration. What do you think about adjusting the army composition rules to 3 Cad/Formatiin but only two sources max. In other words your army would have to drop the white scar faction from the librarius conclave simply to gain hunters eye or you would have to lose the red scar faction. I think this puts a lot more strategy in army selection. Maybe even if you only use one source then you can have 4-5 cad or formation. That would help out the coven but maybe push Nids very the top.

I just get tired of seeing the Swiss Army knife imperial lists that have a crazy amount of options to handle any situation.

 wuestenfux wrote:
JY2, thanks for the report. Brilliant as always.
Gating is very risky, but in maelstrom games almost inevitable for a cent-star.

Thanks.

I normally go for Levitation with Loth for extra mobility, but in this case, I went for Endurance due to the amount of S10 Insta-killing attacks in my opponent's army. I think next time, I will go back to Levitation. I really missed the extra mobility in this game.

 Fishboy wrote:
J2Y I agree with the death star frustration. What do you think about adjusting the army composition rules to 3 Cad/Formatiin but only two sources max. In other words your army would have to drop the white scar faction from the librarius conclave simply to gain hunters eye or you would have to lose the red scar faction. I think this puts a lot more strategy in army selection. Maybe even if you only use one source then you can have 4-5 cad or formation. That would help out the coven but maybe push Nids very the top.

I just get tired of seeing the Swiss Army knife imperial lists that have a crazy amount of options to handle any situation.

I like it. It would definitely help to curb certain deathstar builds (mainly Imperial ones), though the Xenos ones like the Seer Council or Farsight-bomb will remain unaffected.

It wouldn't help out Nids. Nids can already do as many as 8 Flyrants under the current rules (Leviathan + Leviathan + CAD). What Tyranids can benefit from are allies of some sort, even if they are Come the Apocalypse allies. At the very least, it will allow for more variety for them other than flyrant-spam. Personally, I think Genestealer Cults should be Battle Brother allies with Tyranids.

I sent my suggestion to Frankie. I hope it gains some traction. Looking forward to seeing you at NOVA again this year.

 jy2 wrote:
That is correct. Since the game did not continue, the Maelstrom objectives on the last turn can never be scored. They will only count if the game continues because they are only scored at the beginning of your next turn. But if you do not have a next turn, then they can't be scored.

Not sure itc guys play it like this.. watch their livestream and i think they just count it at the end of the last turn.

 Tomb King wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
That is correct. Since the game did not continue, the Maelstrom objectives on the last turn can never be scored. They will only count if the game continues because they are only scored at the beginning of your next turn. But if you do not have a next turn, then they can't be scored.

Not sure itc guys play it like this.. watch their livestream and i think they just count it at the end of the last turn.

That is wrong.

There is nothing in their mission pack that makes an exception for Maelstroms counting on the same turn on the last turn.

Which live stream broadcast is this? Link? Thanks.