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.

tneva82 wrote:

 Galef wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Galas wrote:
First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Only if you put no thought into tactics before deploying.
There's a simple consideration that stops the fastest and even the meanest melee unit cold - the game is a maximum of seven turns.
A smart player sets up terrain and his/her units so any melee unit can kill a maximum of one unit per turn. How many places can a Deathstar be at once?

3 TWC is not much of a death star and terrain etc doesn't really matter much as protection when you charge 37" pulping down shooty army unit without effort(sure 3 TWC isn't much of a monster unit. But beats anything shooty units generally offer).

37" quaranteed charge is "bit" extreme.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

No they're not a deathstar but you are right, three Thunderwolves will overkill medium blobs of infantry. So, if they're almost guaranteed to reach and kill off ten Fire Warriors what do you do?

You don't spend more points buying weapons for melee or take bigger squads to try to fight the TWC off - you take two squads of five and deploy them so the TWC are forced to kill 45 points per turn over two turns rather than having the potential of mutilating more than a hundred points in a single turn.

I know an AM player who flat out laughts at Deathstars.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Galas wrote:
First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Only if you put no thought into tactics before deploying.
There's a simple consideration that stops the fastest and even the meanest melee unit cold - the game is a maximum of seven turns.
A smart player sets up terrain and his/her units so any melee unit can kill a maximum of one unit per turn. How many places can a Deathstar be at once?

Depends on the size of the deathstar. You ever seen a full squad of thunderwoofs with as many characters with cyberwoof "wargear" as possible? Or the 50 woof strong cyberwoof formation which then had a bunch of characters attached to it? Green tide (the formation, not the concept)? They can cover a truely absurd amount of area and because multi-charge is a thing, it's very, very possible to assault half a dozen (or more!) units across the entire legnth of a battlefield, even on Dawn of War deployment. Gets even worse for the handfull of have-not armies that aren't immune to morale since (in 7th anyway) each unit gets to take a check against total casualties caused, so enjoy testing at -17 since their combat characters got into a squad or 2 of squishies while their chaff is re-rolling their 4++.

Proper deathstars can kill far, far more than 1 unit a turn. God forbid you end up with those sort of rules and what used to be superheavies/GMC's keep their 12" move. Can you imagine 5 IK's/WK's with a 36" (or 37", whatever) threat range every turn? No thanks.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
No they're not a deathstar but you are right, three Thunderwolves will overkill medium blobs of infantry. So, if they're almost guaranteed to reach and kill off ten Fire Warriors what do you do?

You don't spend more points buying weapons for melee or take bigger squads to try to fight the TWC off - you take two squads of five and deploy them so the TWC are forced to kill 45 points per turn over two turns rather than having the potential of mutilating more than a hundred points in a single turn.

I know an AM player who flat out laughts at Deathstars.

And 3 TWC costs what...100 pts or so? So you would have about double the units. Lose half of them in first turn without getting to do anything in return. I doubt you will kill TWC with rest.

And of course he might not go for your fire warriors but crisis team, broadside, riptides etc. 37" threat range allows getting into those pretty well...

 Drasius wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Galas wrote:
First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Only if you put no thought into tactics before deploying.
There's a simple consideration that stops the fastest and even the meanest melee unit cold - the game is a maximum of seven turns.
A smart player sets up terrain and his/her units so any melee unit can kill a maximum of one unit per turn. How many places can a Deathstar be at once?

Depends on the size of the deathstar. You ever seen a full squad of thunderwoofs with as many characters with cyberwoof "wargear" as possible? Or the 50 woof strong cyberwoof formation which then had a bunch of characters attached to it? Green tide (the formation, not the concept)? They can cover a truely absurd amount of area and because multi-charge is a thing, it's very, very possible to assault half a dozen (or more!) units across the entire legnth of a battlefield, even on Dawn of War deployment. Gets even worse for the handfull of have-not armies that aren't immune to morale since (in 7th anyway) each unit gets to take a check against total casualties caused, so enjoy testing at -17 since their combat characters got into a squad or 2 of squishies while their chaff is re-rolling their 4++.

Proper deathstars can kill far, far more than 1 unit a turn. God forbid you end up with those sort of rules and what used to be superheavies/GMC's keep their 12" move. Can you imagine 5 IK's/WK's with a 36" (or 37", whatever) threat range every turn? No thanks.

I play Space Wolves in Apocalypse games, I'm familliar with all these things.
Space Wolf deathstars can be beaten by a bottle neck. If a melee Deathstar can only reach one unit per turn it can only kill one unit per turn no matter how big, fast or nasty it is.

Imperial Knights and Wraithknights aren't Deathstars, they're their own brand of nonsense that I think should be relegated back to Apocalypse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
No they're not a deathstar but you are right, three Thunderwolves will overkill medium blobs of infantry. So, if they're almost guaranteed to reach and kill off ten Fire Warriors what do you do?

You don't spend more points buying weapons for melee or take bigger squads to try to fight the TWC off - you take two squads of five and deploy them so the TWC are forced to kill 45 points per turn over two turns rather than having the potential of mutilating more than a hundred points in a single turn.

I know an AM player who flat out laughts at Deathstars.

And 3 TWC costs what...100 pts or so? So you would have about double the units. Lose half of them in first turn without getting to do anything in return. I doubt you will kill TWC with rest.

And of course he might not go for your fire warriors but crisis team, broadside, riptides etc. 37" threat range allows getting into those pretty well...

Thunderwolf cavalry costs 120 points if they have no upgrades.
Is the concept of using terrain to limit movement just lost on some people? Too much time demanding an open shooting range?

Too much time on an open shooting range actually.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thunderwolf cavalry costs 120 points if they have no upgrades.
Is the concept of using terrain to limit movement just lost on some people? Too much time demanding an open shooting range?

So you have less than 10 firewarriors to shoot down 3 TWC. If they survive less than 5 to try to finish.

And terrain? With 37" you can pretty much bypass until charge and then -2". Wopedoo. 35" is also enough that you can just T1 tie up your crisis teams etc.

How anybody can think having 37" threat range is good thing is pretty odd. That basically removes any chance of shooting them and all terrain that's not impassable(but preferably not LOS blocking) as credible threat to slow down opponent.

There is the fact that we simply do not now what movement anything except Marines/Dreadnoughts and Guilliman actually have.
There is no guarantee that TWC will have M 12.
As one of the "heaviest" cavalry they might actually be slower than now.

So replace TWC with tzeentch screamers, slaanesh riders, jump packs etc. Point is less about specific unit but more about ability to have ridiculously long threat range like 37" that would be for M12 units(and doubtful jump packs will take slowdown effect...) that allows T1 combats cheaply without ability to shoot regardless of pretty much any terrain that's not impassable(and even that doesn't stop jump packs)...

How anybody can think having 37" threat range is good thing is pretty odd.

You mean like pretty much every high damage shooting platform?

I actually agree on this, that huge charge ranges should not be easily achieved as being able to get into an opponents back line with multiple units, that they cant really hurt is, not ideal.

However I think that some reliability would have been better (say a blanket 4+d6 or half movement, minimum 3 + D6).
The idea of first turn charges isn't such a bad thing, in a world when your opponent can disengage from said combat at will. Or should we also suggest that first turn shooting is also unfair, because large threat ranges are wrong?

If we were looking for parity between shooting and assault, I would actually be ok with keeping 2D6 for charging, but also reduce the range of all weapons by 12, and then make them add 2D6 to their range, also Id make all shooting be declared before resolving any of it, so that its actually possible to make mistakes in the amount of force you choose to apply to things (you know like the choices that close combat focused armies have to make).

Earth127 wrote:
Plz don't make such off topic jokes.

So much of this depends on stuff we don't know. Let's just w8 and see I guess.

Please don't use text-speech words. "W8" is not a word. If you're going to throw stones at someone else, please sell your glass house.

On topic...I play daemons and I recognize the thematic role of overwatch. Plus, it makes you vary your list to try to deal with it. I have no issue with overwatch and I expect my guys to have nice and enjoyable charge ranges (lots of wings, lots of Slaanesh). Maybe I can use my Keeper of Secrets again?!

 CadianGateTroll wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

i like that but why did they not do it?

Not sure but perhaps they thought a min move distance +d6 and potential within 1 inch was too much of a head-start to charge.. For termies that would be 5+1d6 plus 1 inch. 7 inch threat range for an auto charge. 8 inch for marines.

Lot of passion on this topic and I do not fault anyone for it though I feel I could go either way.

Really looking forward to today's update!

Souleater wrote:II am scratching my head at the prohibition on moving within one inch of an enemy you aren't assaultin. Didn't we have that a couple of editions ago and it was found to be exploitable?

We have that now. In fact its one of the reasons why Multiple Assaults have a rule for Charging multiple units. Indeed, that is one of the things it specifically mentions in the linked article.

Now, currently there are consequences for doing a Multiple Charge, but they haven't said if there are any similar consequences for doing so in the next Edition.