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.

Danny slag wrote:
Go into any armies tactics thread, any of them. Every single one is about 0% actual tactics, and just "spam x unit." Where x is whatever the cheapest unit in the codex or an allied codex is.
Scroll through any of them and you'll occasionally see someone trying to discus something tactics, immediately followed by "all units are trash, they're worthless, if you take anything but spamming unit X you're army is garbage."
cheap fodder units have something you can't adjust with points cost, board control, which is why if you honestly go look at tactics you'll see exactly what I just described and why adjusting army comp so we have some actual armies on tables instead of ridiculousness spam lists would be good for adding some actual competition to the game.

When most people say "competitive" what they actually mean is the least amount of competition possible. They want the game to boil down to showing each other their lists and declaring a victor. I prefer games that are won based on how you play with your army men on the table.

Exactly this.

The game is spiraling out of control only 6 months in AFTER A FULL HARD RESET, and everyone feels that.

Even the biggest of GW fanboys is locking eyes with the dumpster fire that is 8th edition rules and feeling the heat.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Because the pred has to sometimes move and can't ignore LoS.

Manticores are better than almost any tank in any army anywhere. They play like 180 pt models.

We've been through this. They're matching the firepower of an LRBT turret against 95% of targets, but without any of the possible 3 other weapons (sponson and hull), with lower T and fewer wounds, they suffer penalties to firing if they do have to move (if something gets into the backline, not by any means impossible), and only have 4 turns of fire total over the course of a potentially 7 turn game. All it gets in return is the ability to fire without LoS. While that isn't nothing, it's highly variable depending on the opponent, board setup, terrain, deployment zones, etc. If Manticores were 180pts, you would never see one on a table.

Maybe. I guess we'll see what march brings. It seems still super undercosted, along with most of the IG codex.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Because the pred has to sometimes move and can't ignore LoS.

Manticores are better than almost any tank in any army anywhere. They play like 180 pt models.

We've been through this. They're matching the firepower of an LRBT turret against 95% of targets, but without any of the possible 3 other weapons (sponson and hull), with lower T and fewer wounds, they suffer penalties to firing if they do have to move (if something gets into the backline, not by any means impossible), and only have 4 turns of fire total over the course of a potentially 7 turn game. All it gets in return is the ability to fire without LoS. While that isn't nothing, it's highly variable depending on the opponent, board setup, terrain, deployment zones, etc. If Manticores were 180pts, you would never see one on a table.

When games are typically done deals by turn 3, only being able to fire for four turns is an irrelevant disadvantage. Like a dnd character taking a crippling fear of white bengal tigers to get bonus points elsewhere.

Being str 10 is just a super insult to every T8 unit in the game at the manticore's price point. Make the manticore more expensive or make every T8 unit a lot cheaper because this thing exists. You can't hide from it, you can't get out of range, there is no counterplay other than your own gunline. If it's a low terrain board.

I must be the only person who doesn't see this "spiralling out of control" or "over by turn 3" thing. In the last seven months since 8th's release I have seen nothing of the sort. In fact this edition has been nothing but a breath of fresh air and a lot more fun. Perhaps that is because it is a game designed around casual play now rather than competitive?

Actually, they are using tourney data to balance it. So, no. It's not designed around casual play. Whatever that even is.

 BlackLobster wrote:
I must be the only person who doesn't see this "spiralling out of control" or "over by turn 3" thing. In the last seven months since 8th's release I have seen nothing of the sort. In fact this edition has been nothing but a breath of fresh air and a lot more fun. Perhaps that is because it is a game designed around casual play now rather than competitive?

Being a filthy casual as well, I sort of agree, but actually think its the opposite if you look a little closer.

The power level between lists taking the most efficient options as well as lists tuned to the meta and lists taken based on other approaches are needed if you want that sort of fun to be part of a tournament game. It's like deck building in Magic: The Gathering. If all cards were equal and you couldn't get an advantage by figuring out which were best or figuring out how to create synergy between cards many people would stop playing.

40k is the same way. I think it's more of what the hardcore tournament players want and fails the not quite as serious player the most. But only when there's a mismatch of expectations. When your opponent is doing something totally different with the game.

I too have not seen any "spiraling out of control" in my games because I play with like minded individuals. If I took the little forces I build and put them together into a 2500 point army and played against a tuned and designed from the ground up tournament army, I wouldn't stand a chance. Especially given that the person who plays such an army is also interested in it winning as much as possible where I think my approach is more RPG like. I play to see what happens.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Actually, they are using tourney data to balance it. So, no. It's not designed around casual play. Whatever that even is.

If you just take what you think looks cool, what excites you to paint, make sure you have variety and don't just spam the same unit over and over again and play interesting scenarios and your opponent does the same thing, 8th edition 40k works amazingly.

If you take what you think is the strongest for the points, build synergies into the list to get even more power than the points would otherwise indicate and do everything you can to make sure you have the best chance of winning in any potential scenario coming up and your opponent does the same thing, 8th edition 40k works amazingly.

Martel732 wrote:
Actually, they are using tourney data to balance it. So, no. It's not designed around casual play. Whatever that even is.

I know that tournament players and organisers were used to test this edition and help provide info for the Index books. However reading these forums and my own gaming experiences I would say that competitive play is where things are breaking down. Turn up and play with a basic casual list and you'll find that all these problems being discussed on here right now just melt away.

Martel732 wrote:
Being str 10 is just a super insult to every T8 unit in the game at the manticore's price point. Make the manticore more expensive or make every T8 unit a lot cheaper because this thing exists.

What, like Russ tanks?

You can't hide from it, you can't get out of range, there is no counterplay other than your own gunline. If it's a low terrain board.

How's that different than every other edition this unit existed in? You couldn't hide from it or outrange it in 5th, 6th, or 7th, what makes 8th different?

 niv-mizzet wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Because the pred has to sometimes move and can't ignore LoS.

Manticores are better than almost any tank in any army anywhere. They play like 180 pt models.

We've been through this. They're matching the firepower of an LRBT turret against 95% of targets, but without any of the possible 3 other weapons (sponson and hull), with lower T and fewer wounds, they suffer penalties to firing if they do have to move (if something gets into the backline, not by any means impossible), and only have 4 turns of fire total over the course of a potentially 7 turn game. All it gets in return is the ability to fire without LoS. While that isn't nothing, it's highly variable depending on the opponent, board setup, terrain, deployment zones, etc. If Manticores were 180pts, you would never see one on a table.

When games are typically done deals by turn 3, only being able to fire for four turns is an irrelevant disadvantage. Like a dnd character taking a crippling fear of white bengal tigers to get bonus points elsewhere.

Yes, the game is alpha strikey, very much so, but lets not make it out like missing out on 1-3 turns of potential shooting in the last few turns isn't nothing either, especially from a back-line support unit that may be the only thing you have to reach out and touch a far away objective. It's definitely less crippling than something like the Deathstrike which can't shoot turn 1 at all, but it's not unimportant either.