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.

 daedalus wrote:
That's a valid point, though it does somewhat limit aura shenanigans, slingshots, and magic conga lines.

Kinda, yes.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
That's a valid point, though it does somewhat limit aura shenanigans, slingshots, and magic conga lines.

Kinda, yes.

Outside of tau it also helps against overwatch too.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
An easy short term fix would be to have you not able to do Deepstrike more than half your POINTS rather than UNITs.

This is an interesting thought. I do often see people taking like cheap HQs or vehicles or something so they can use the "Half reserve" rule to still deepstrike the majority of their units that they really want to anyways, basically to circumvent the rule.

Wayniac wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
An easy short term fix would be to have you not able to do Deepstrike more than half your POINTS rather than UNITs.

This is an interesting thought. I do often see people taking like cheap HQs or vehicles or something so they can use the "Half reserve" rule to still deepstrike the majority of their units that they really want to anyways, basically to circumvent the rule.

These are cases of obvious rules abuse - should have been adressed in the first chapter approved. Hopefully it will be adressed in this one.

Changed my mind about it. feth subtlety.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/753326.page#9890873

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
I've totally been that guy to call people out when they're not up to a reasonable standard.

Last fall I was playing a guy with gray plastic models at a large ITC tournament. I told him that I could either go and get a judge and the judge would remove models from his army, or I could auto-win the first turn roll-off. We settled for me getting +1 to the first turn roll (and since I finished deploying first, it was a net +2).
At the SAME tournament, some other guy had Marine models, with identical paint schemes, that he was claiming were in different Chapters (Wolves and Ultra, I think). I called a TO and got that shut down.

I spend loads of time prepping my models, and even sacrifice other important things to make my tournament showing a priority. I don't stand for lazy hobbyists at tournaments. I consider it very disrespectful to lassiez-faire your way through a major event.

Just report him to the TO. If they're any good, they'll do something about it. If they aren't, you know to avoid for next time. Also spread your story, it helps other people avoid the same shenanigans.

Edit: And yeah, I don't really care if reporting people is overreacting, or whatever else might be thought about it. There's a standard, and I hold myself to it, and I expect others to hold themselves to it as well. If you don't believe that, then abolish the standard.

emphasis is mine.

That's from the LVO 2017 Best GK Player, apparently.

And it's gak like that which is the reason why some people scoff at tournaments.

 daedalus wrote:
Changed my mind about it. feth subtlety.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/753326.page#9890873

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
I've totally been that guy to call people out when they're not up to a reasonable standard.

Last fall I was playing a guy with gray plastic models at a large ITC tournament. I told him that I could either go and get a judge and the judge would remove models from his army, or I could auto-win the first turn roll-off. We settled for me getting +1 to the first turn roll (and since I finished deploying first, it was a net +2).
At the SAME tournament, some other guy had Marine models, with identical paint schemes, that he was claiming were in different Chapters (Wolves and Ultra, I think). I called a TO and got that shut down.

I spend loads of time prepping my models, and even sacrifice other important things to make my tournament showing a priority. I don't stand for lazy hobbyists at tournaments. I consider it very disrespectful to lassiez-faire your way through a major event.

Just report him to the TO. If they're any good, they'll do something about it. If they aren't, you know to avoid for next time. Also spread your story, it helps other people avoid the same shenanigans.

Edit: And yeah, I don't really care if reporting people is overreacting, or whatever else might be thought about it. There's a standard, and I hold myself to it, and I expect others to hold themselves to it as well. If you don't believe that, then abolish the standard.

emphasis is mine.

That's from the LVO 2017 Best GK Player, apparently.

And it's gak like that which is the reason why some people scoff at tournaments.

I agree with the person.

I went to a lot of effort to be there and play. Why didn't you?

I don't think that's the point. The point is, if someone isn't following the rules you should talk to a judge. Not use it to leverage a different advantage.

Blackmail is worse than unpainted

The problem isn't calling someone out for not following the rules.

The problem is NOT calling someone out for not following the rules so you can coerce them into giving you specific bonuses.

One person not following the rules does not mean that you get to also not follow the rules. I thought we got taught this as children.

I'm not entirely certain of your qualms with that.

The guy isn't, technically, even allowed to play in an ITC tournament using a grey army following the basic guidelines.

If the players agree that it's fine, which they can do, based on stipulations, fine. Each tournament is allowed to okay or not okay whatever they want. The TO might of told Mr. GK to Feth off when he'd report the army, as well.

Don't bring grey models to a tournament.

Edit: There's far more glaring things we could focus on as actual problems, like the topic of this thread for example.

Unit1126PLL wrote:
And Alpha-Striking is still possible for point (1). I see it a lot, but I've played a few alternating activation games and in my experience, if alpha is powerful, then alpha is powerful, whether it's from activating your whole army first, or activating one powerful unit first.

Just think about the assault phase right now in 40k if you need an example: swinging first is a powerful ability, even with alternating activation. In a 1v1 scenario, it's basically turn-based anyways, and even in a 1v3 or 1v4 scenario, if the 1 gets to go first it can still cripple or annihilate the greatest threat to it with no risk of response. Alternating activation does not solve the alpha problem - it just redefines it in terms of single, powerful units. A Baneblade will alpha super well in an alternating-activation system.

Going back to the idea of alternating activation, the issue of going first with a massive unit could be resolved by giving units back an Initiative attribute. However, instead of being a racial thing, it would be there to represent units that can quickly respond to battlefield conditions and units that are more ponderous and need more time to maneuver and set up. So, something like a Space Marine Land Speeder would have a high Initiative attribute, whereas something like a Baneblade would have a low one.

With that in place, there could be a strat that lets a unit jump the order, the way there currently is in close combat. Make it pretty expensive, but maybe make it cost -1CP (to a minimum of 1) for every friendly same- faction unit that's already activated.

I hate the idea of precision deep strike. I miss the days of variable landings. The terminator teleporting off the table edge could easily be handled with another try the next turn or they show up on that table edge. Simple and it don't handicap anyone too much.

The game goes too much on units and not points since 3rd ed.

2nd edition solved all that by making 50% max characters
50% max support (tanks, heavy weapon teams, dreadnoughts,etc)
and a minimum 25% troops.....this is points.

The best games were the ones were 50% min for troops made the game very fun.

Night Fight - 2CP: You can play this stratagem after objectives have been placed, but before you deploy any models. For the first round all units suffer a -1 penalty to hit rolls.


There, fixed.

Spoletta wrote:
Night Fight - 2CP: You can play this stratagem after objectives have been placed, but before you deploy any models. For the first round all units suffer a -1 penalty to hit rolls.


There, fixed.

I don't mind it but suggesting more negatives to hit isn't popular around here.

 admironheart wrote:
I hate the idea of precision deep strike. I miss the days of variable landings. The terminator teleporting off the table edge could easily be handled with another try the next turn or they show up on that table edge. Simple and it don't handicap anyone too much.

The game goes too much on units and not points since 3rd ed.

2nd edition solved all that by making 50% max characters
50% mac support (tanks, heavy weapon teams, dreadnoughts,etc)
and a minimum 25% troops.....this is points.

The best games were the ones were 50% min for troops made the game very fun.

personally i love it mostly because its 200% less a pain in the ass to set up and get on with the game.

if anything reserves before was a roll of a dice and scatter. remove the scatter, keep the roll to see if in.

The last thing this game needs is more ways for luck to decide who wins the game. I'd much prefer a fixed amount of units you're allowed to deep strike on a turn (spitballing 0 on turn 1, 2 on turn 2, the rest on turn 3) than to just auto-lose if you happen to roll 3 1's on the most important rolls in the game.

I kinda of like the idea of a limit on the number of units you can place in deep strike. Like maybe a 1 per detachment rule (per turn). So you can drop 3 flying hives - I do this is my competitive list and it does just fine. There are plenty of other great units in the nid codex. None are as underpointed as the hive tyrant but that doesn't mean you can't make a better list than just flying hives. Tyranids also have the ability to shoot you off the table with carnifex. I really hope reapers get the nerf they deserve because they are basically the reason carnifex aren't more common.

 Earth127 wrote:
Blackmail is worse than unpainted

Absolutely this.

If you care about sportsmanship you won't behave like a dick just because some people don't enjoy painting as much as you do (or are not willing or able to dedicate as much time to it as you do). Sure, people suddenly declaring Blood Angels to be Ultramarines isn't okay, but really now, if the tournament organizer allows unpainted models then you just have to accept that the actual gameplay takes priority over what you consider "mandatory investment in other hobby aspects". Take it to the TO and complain about HIS rules for HIS event rather than trying to bully your way to the top against your fellow players. If the other player is violating the rules of the tournament by playing unpainted models then you still take it to the TO right away instead of trying to get as many advantages out of it as possible through de facto bribes before another player takes the issue to the TO (which is massively unfair to all the other players that are still going to or were going to play against the grey tide player). If anything that should get you disqualified as well.

@Topic: IMO the biggest thing is reducing the ability of the player going first to completely cripple the other players army before he/she can even react, making going first an absolute no-brainer auto pick choice. Whoever goes second needs advantages that balance that out and give an incentive to SERIOUSLY consider if you actually want to go first if you win the roll-off. Turn one-charges can be countered by using chaff, turn 1 shooting cannot unless you are lucky enough to have enough terrain, particularly LoS blocking one, one your side of the deployment zone. Just being able to lose completely without being able to do anything about it is the worst balance issue the game has. There isn't an easy solution, but if the rule writers find one than the biggest issue by far is solved.

All the talk about deep strikes is missing the point IMO as it still does not fix the issue of certain armies deploying on the table in their entirety without reserves and still blasting the other player off the table without him ever getting a chance to react or even move his models.

Edit: Gak. Thread moved on. Didn't realize it was many pages.

My pitch for a fix to alpha strike is the player who goes 2nd gets +1 save on the 1st player turn. We could call it "Night Fighting".

 Xenomancers wrote:
I kinda of like the idea of a limit on the number of units you can place in deep strike. Like maybe a 1 per detachment rule (per turn). So you can drop 3 flying hives - I do this is my competitive list and it does just fine. There are plenty of other great units in the nid codex. None are as underpointed as the hive tyrant but that doesn't mean you can't make a better list than just flying hives. Tyranids also have the ability to shoot you off the table with carnifex. I really hope reapers get the nerf they deserve because they are basically the reason carnifex aren't more common.

...Xeno, a limit of 1 unit per detachment for deepstrike? You already know what I'm gonna say.

The solution to alpha strike is to implement Star Wars Legions suppression mechanic (or a derivation thereof). Said mechanic introduces the concept of diminishing returns to the game, so focus-firing units off the table is an inherently less efficient strategy, which in turns make precision targeted alpha strikes less efficient and thus less effective.

Two points on addressing alpha strikes:

1. When coming in from reserve during turn 1, you either can only come in from your deployment zone or the minimum distance required from enemy models is increased from 9" to 12". This way, reserves utilization can be focused towards strategic post-deployment deployment, and not "HAH OVERCHARGED PLASMA AT DOUBLE TAP RANGE IN YOUR FACE!" Few units with special rule may circumvent this general rule however.
2. When weapons that do not require LOS to shoot, it suffers -1 to hit unless it can draw a LOS to the target.

IMO, there's not much brokeness for turn-1 charges - many of these manuevers burn through hefty amount of CP's. These all-in moves shouldn't be penalized I think.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Night Fight - 2CP: You can play this stratagem after objectives have been placed, but before you deploy any models. For the first round all units suffer a -1 penalty to hit rolls.


There, fixed.

I don't mind it but suggesting more negatives to hit isn't popular around here.

I have always advocated for some pre-game start strategems we can buy to mitigate "possibly" going second

The Above one i have always liked...however the rule should be "unstackable" and no worse then 6+. There are a couple others as well. - 2CP +1 save on all units(no better than 2+) "unstackable", -2CP half the range of opponents shooting weapons.

3 strats that i think would help alot.

These would only be applicable for the first turn only and would only be able to be choosen pre first turn.

My fix for Alpha strike would be to only allow it from turn 2 onwards. It gives the person a turn to reposition and take ground and deal damage to the smaller army as a trade-off for holding units in reserve.

Not perfect, but would be a start.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
My fix for Alpha strike would be to only allow it from turn 2 onwards. It gives the person a turn to reposition and take ground and deal damage to the smaller army as a trade-off for holding units in reserve.

Not perfect, but would be a start.

The problem with that is there are many builds that dont require Deep strike to be able to effectivly Alpha strike an opponent into submission.

How about this:
Change Overwatch to the following:
A unit that did not move in its movement phase may declare Overwatch in its subsequent shooting phase instead of shooting. If it does so it gains +1 to its armor save against shooting attacks (stacks with cover) and may fire at a single unit that charges it until its next turn (at full ballistic skill with modifiers).
All units begin the game on Overwatch unless otherwise specified.

Ine quick fix could be 5th edition cover rules. A flat 4++.

 zedsdead wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
My fix for Alpha strike would be to only allow it from turn 2 onwards. It gives the person a turn to reposition and take ground and deal damage to the smaller army as a trade-off for holding units in reserve.

Not perfect, but would be a start.

The problem with that is there are many builds that dont require Deep strike to be able to effectivly Alpha strike an opponent into submission.

Sisters can obliterate a guard parking lot down to single models without deepstriking anything.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Niiai wrote:
Ine quick fix could be 5th edition cover rules. A flat 4++.

Yeah, like I want to go up against 3++ infantry squads and mortar teams.

I think having flat cover save that isn't negated by AP will help force more diversity in weapon choices but such a change would require some overhall in game mechanics as ignore cover isn't as common or evenly distributed to the different factions. Also an overhall on cover/terrain in general so its not so zogging difficult to actually meet the requirements for cover beyond being a static shooting unit parked inside a piece of area terrain (devs for example). Having more LoS based cover (your shooting through another unit or shooting through that wreckage) makes it so you need clean avenues of fire so it might discourage clumping up for aura buffs and also make it so units behind other units aren't so easy to kill. Would also discourage nothing but plasma spam as historically plasma was fairly meh against units in hard cover but deadly against units out in the open.

I do caution against general mechanics that do the whole "add 1 to your save" or -"1 to hit" as it dis-proportionally benefits certain units way more than others. +1 to your save is basically garbage for an Ork loota thats camping these ruins and gets *drumroll*.... a 5+ armor save (look at me, i am the guardsman now)... oh that plasma just ripped through all of that so i get no save . A Dev marine camping in terrain goes from a 3+ to 2+ so now that Dev has the save of a terminator which is a much bigger bump in survivablity compared to going from a 6+ to 5+. The whole minus to hit thing really hurts low accuracy shooting units like (once again) Orks with their base 5+ to hit with ranged where as your high accuracy units like Space Marines, Eldar, etc have a lot more ground to give before they are missing wildly (sorta similar yet the opposite problem of invisibility really messing up elite units while Orks sorta shrugged at snap shooting). On a d6 system stacking those modifers really gets crazy when you have entire factions unable to make a shooting attack because the roll they need to make a hit is 7+ and thus impossible to make (why is 6 always hits not core rule?).

Turn 1 deep strikes contributes to the alpha strike problem but the core issue is how generally effective it is to just focus on removing units from the board asap and how little there is that you can do to mitigate that. If deep strikes are delayed but alpha striking is still superior then putting units in deep strike reserve is just putting your own dakka/choppa power on ice meaning those points aren't contributing to tenemy unit removal immediately and thus allow more time for their units to remove your units. The benefit of placement or the safety of being off the board needs to outweigh the lose of a turn or two of combat output.

As mentioned, you have to understand that “alpha strike” is not just related to deep striking – rather the ability to destroy half of your opponent’s army right away. Part of it is getting the odd charge off, but a lot more is down to shooting (from starting on the table and from deep strike).

So, if you want to improve durability to alpha strike, my suggestions would be –
1. On a 2+ the first turn has Night Fighting in effect – all shooting suffers -1 to hit. Change minus to hit penalties to allow a natural roll of a 6 to always hit. This is rolled by the player with 1st turn, and cannot be re-rolled.
2. Half your deep striking units can arrive turn 1 (rounding up), the rest turn up in turns 2 and 3.
3. Change the 9” deep strike bubble to 3D6” or 5D3”. This offers a big risk/reward for assault units. (makes the average 10.5/10” but greatly reduces the lower figure to 3/5”)
4. Shooting without LoS incurs a -1 to hit penalty, 6’s always hit. (I suggested this right back at the start of 8th but Guard were top, so backlash)
5. “Woods” terrain completely blocks LoS regardless of whether you can see through it.
6. Ruins need to move officially to the ITC version – ground floor is LoS blocking.
7. A hit roll of a natural 1 when overcharging plasma deals 1 mortal wound even if you re-roll the result using a character aura and subsequently get a 2+ (the re-rolled hit would still count as a hit – however, if you use the re-roll stratagem you do not suffer the wound unless you roll another natural 1). How does missing and have the gun explode get “fixed” by hitting again???

There are some issues with doing things like this though – namely fast, horde, assault armies would hit your gun-lines easier – which could be argued to be a good thing.

Even if just options 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 are introduced (as they all kinda work together and the terrain rules would help the game anyway) I reckon we’d see a lot more units making it to turn 2. It then becomes a game of objectives and beta strike mitigation.

3 and 7 are just things that I think would generally improve the game, but can get a little complicated.