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.

Martel732 wrote:
It's always fun to see the Eldar lose.

Eldar are the Patriots of the 40k world.

I feel like if we buffed eldar a little, maybe they are like the only factions that can use the other transports and such, ya know make them 10x better, people will just accept their supremacy. Right now, people whine to much about losing to them. If we make it a given that they’ll lose, you fix the need to whine about it from other players. Then both players can just focus on having fun in the game because the outcome is known. /seriousnotjoking

Reemule wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
ITC is better than the sewage gw passes off as missions.

This I agree with. ITC missions are bland boring and simplistic and feel like they were designed by a committee. (and they kinda were). All they really have going for them is they are fair. GW missions feel like they should be on a SAW movie and someone self amputates an arm.

Picture painted. You sir, are a poet.

Daedalus81, on what world does that count as "lots of terrain"? Some blocking walls and crates does not equate to a meaningful amount except in the most minimal sense.

The amount should be at least doubled and have a healthy dose of scatter terrain on top of that. Then add Cities of Death on top and the game gets good.

Which is better ITS or GW missions? Well there is no actual answer to that question since that is a 100% opinion based. They both have their pros and cons.

However, what is factual is ITC missions are so different than GW missions that it is in essence playing a very different game. This starts to become a problem when GW uses large events like LVO to make balance changes. There are a number of units that really shine in the ITC world that are not amazing in GW mission land. The opposite is also true.

I have been a big proponent of GW coming out with an actual mission set that is to be used for competitive events. Something along the lines of Warmachine/Hordes steamroller packet. Just like Privateer press they would be able to update it yearly. This would make balancing the game a bit easier since everyone would be using the same rule sets for competitive events.

The Salt Mine wrote:
I have been a big proponent of GW coming out with an actual mission set that is to be used for competitive events. Something along the lines of Warmachine/Hordes steamroller packet. Just like Privateer press they would be able to update it yearly. This would make balancing the game a bit easier since everyone would be using the same rule sets for competitive events.

Isn't this exactly what Chapter Approved is meant to be?

 Burnage wrote:

The Salt Mine wrote:
I have been a big proponent of GW coming out with an actual mission set that is to be used for competitive events. Something along the lines of Warmachine/Hordes steamroller packet. Just like Privateer press they would be able to update it yearly. This would make balancing the game a bit easier since everyone would be using the same rule sets for competitive events.

Isn't this exactly what Chapter Approved is meant to be?

I dont see how. Its chapter approved, not tournament pack.

Re watched the final and i have to congratulate Brandon Grant for his tactic, he did not choke and always targeted the right targets durring the game.
The score really lies, Grant was in control in all the game an the Ynnari player needed miracle dices to win the game.
Ynnari 1 turn - the Ynnari player targeted and kiled the bulgrins, 1 wyvern, some infantry and managed to put the 2 wyvern to 3 wounds.
IG 1 turn - Grant targeted and killed on of the 9 man windrides squads and after he was done managed to get 1 of the DE flyers, the wyvern got lucky and managed to finish it. But the main point is he moved the infantry into the central objective and the point generation started.
Ynnari 2 turn - Ynnari player moved his warlock and farseer and casted jinx and doom on the knight, Yvraine failed word, Vect stopped the rotation on the shields and almost everything hit the Castellan. It was not enough and the knight remained on 7 wounds.
IG 2 turn - Vect stopped the Machine Spirit Resurgent and the Ynnari player run out of CP, Grant continio the plan the remove Ynnari groun units, most of the second windriders squad was killed. The Castellan rolled pretty poorly and managed to kill only 1 of the DE flyers. Infantry leaded by Straken pored into middle objective and the the fear of catachan charge forced Ynnari player to play passive with his little ground troops. Strangelly the Farseer was not charged, probably Grant did not want to expose his infantry to windrider fire. The warlock was to exposed after the first round so he died(not entirely sure maybe he died in the next round).
Ynnari 3 turn - doom was cast on the already weekened Casstellan, word of the phoenix failed again. The planes managed to get the Casstellan and hurt one of the fire tanks, some infantry go down, but not really enough.
IG 3 turn - rough riders come from reserve near the exposed farseer and put some damage to him, grant started killing the little eldar infantry, so there was little chance of late comeback. Eldar army did not had any way to beat Straken in melee combat.
Ynnari 4 turn - nothing spectacular flyers killing the tank(wyvern never died, but it was outside of the cam so i`m not sure), the rought riders and a bunch of infantry.
IG 4 - straken and a 1 infantry squad charged and killed the farseer, infantry shooted according to the comment 120 times on the hemlock and did a bunch of wounds on him.
The ground control contionio to punp points for Grant and was ensuring his victory since there was little chance for 6 turn.
Ynnari turn 5 - nothing to say the flyers and the leftovers of the eldar tried to kill enough of the infantry in the middle, so they can engage and tried to get the mid obj. The dice were not favorable and a bunch of commanders were left in mid to control the obj.
IG 5 - nothing here to say, the commanders moved on the obj and it was clear the IG have won the game, since there was no time for round 6.

Grant played very strong tactical game, he give priority on easy to kill units that can clear his infantry from turn one, he knew the flyers will rule supreme but after the last FAQ they can`t control objective so he was not worried about that. He did not fall in the trap of trying to kill the Crimson Hunters, who are -2 to hit. Castellan took almost 1.5 turn of shooting and if he was not so unclucky could have done even more damage to the DE flyers, so he could have removed even more dakka from killing his cheap infantry.
He abused the fact that the eldar don`t have melee and used the big building in mid for his adv. Have to give credit to Harrison who targeted the bulgrins in the first turn, before his windriders got killed and before Grant had time to put them in the mid building in cover.
Really i don`t see a way Harrison could have won this game, it was uphill battle from turn one. It was nice to see flyers killing staff all game, but in he end the cheap bodies won it.
Maybe his only chance was to play super fast and had time, so he can make alone turn 6, kill the characters with the flyers and get some extra points. Of course that is easy to say after you saw all the game in replay, without him calculating his moves he could have lost because of critical mistake.

Salute to Grant you had the best army and he knew what to do with it against every opponent, without doing big mistakes, he followed the plan in his head to the tooth, without panic and without doing risky moves.

Marin wrote:
Re watched the final and i have to congratulate Brandon Grant for his tactic, he did not choke and always targeted the right targets durring the game.
The score really lies, Grant was in control in all the game an the Ynnari player needed miracle dices to win the game.
Ynnari 1 turn - the Ynnari player targeted and kiled the bulgrins, 1 wyvern, some infantry and managed to put the 2 wyvern to 3 wounds.
IG 1 turn - Grant targeted and killed on of the 9 man windrides squads and after he was done managed to get 1 of the DE flyers, the wyvern got lucky and managed to finish it. But the main point is he moved the infantry into the central objective and the point generation started.
Ynnari 2 turn - Ynnari player moved his warlock and farseer and casted jinx and doom on the knight, Yvraine failed word, Vect stopped the rotation on the shields and almost everything hit the Castellan. It was not enough and the knight remained on 7 wounds.
IG 2 turn - Vect stopped the Machine Spirit Resurgent and the Ynnari player run out of CP, Grant continio the plan the remove Ynnari groun units, most of the second windriders squad was killed. The Castellan rolled pretty poorly and managed to kill only 1 of the DE flyers. Infantry leaded by Straken pored into middle objective and the the fear of catachan charge forced Ynnari player to play passive with his little ground troops. Strangelly the Farseer was not charged, probably Grant did not want to expose his infantry to windrider fire. The warlock was to exposed after the first round so he died(not entirely sure maybe he died in the next round).
Ynnari 3 turn - doom was cast on the already weekened Casstellan, word of the phoenix failed again. The planes managed to get the Casstellan and hurt one of the fire tanks, some infantry go down, but not really enough.
IG 3 turn - rough riders come from reserve near the exposed farseer and put some damage to him, grant started killing the little eldar infantry, so there was little chance of late comeback. Eldar army did not had any way to beat Straken in melee combat.
Ynnari 4 turn - nothing spectacular flyers killing the tank(wyvern never died, but it was outside of the cam so i`m not sure), the rought riders and a bunch of infantry.
IG 4 - straken and a 1 infantry squad charged and killed the farseer, infantry shooted according to the comment 120 times on the hemlock and did a bunch of wounds on him.
The ground control contionio to punp points for Grant and was ensuring his victory since there was little chance for 6 turn.
Ynnari turn 5 - nothing to say the flyers and the leftovers of the eldar tried to kill enough of the infantry in the middle, so they can engage and tried to get the mid obj. The dice were not favorable and a bunch of commanders were left in mid to control the obj.
IG 5 - nothing here to say, the commanders moved on the obj and it was clear the IG have won the game, since there was no time for round 6.

Grant played very strong tactical game, he give priority on easy to kill units that can clear his infantry from turn one, he knew the flyers will rule supreme but after the last FAQ they can`t control objective so he was not worried about that. He did not fall in the trap of trying to kill the Crimson Hunters, who are -2 to hit. Castellan took almost 1.5 turn of shooting and if he was not so unclucky could have done even more damage to the DE flyers, so he could have removed even more dakka from killing his cheap infantry.
He abused the fact that the eldar don`t have melee and used the big building in mid for his adv. Have to give credit to Harrison who targeted the bulgrins in the first turn, before his windriders got killed and before Grant had time to put them in the mid building in cover.
Really i don`t see a way Harrison could have won this game, it was uphill battle from turn one. It was nice to see flyers killing staff all game, but in he end the cheap bodies won it.
Maybe his only chance was to play super fast and had time, so he can make alone turn 6, kill the characters with the flyers and get some extra points. Of course that is easy to say after you saw all the game in replay, without him calculating his moves he could have lost because of critical mistake.

Salute to Grant you had the best army and he knew what to do with it against every opponent, without doing big mistakes, he followed the plan in his head to the tooth, without panic and without doing risky moves.

Are you blind? Both played well.

 Burnage wrote:

The Salt Mine wrote:
I have been a big proponent of GW coming out with an actual mission set that is to be used for competitive events. Something along the lines of Warmachine/Hordes steamroller packet. Just like Privateer press they would be able to update it yearly. This would make balancing the game a bit easier since everyone would be using the same rule sets for competitive events.

Isn't this exactly what Chapter Approved is meant to be?

Yes. the GW Matched Play missions are meant to be used for competitive play. But as you can see, people dislike that the Eternal War missions have little twists which are meant to counteract being able to build what you want and help balance things out by making you aware of them, and Maelstrom (which are also really good in CA18 due to being able to remove certain cards) are loathed even more because the cards are still random, despite this being part of the intentional balance as since you aren't sure what you could pull, you need to build a list that can handle a variety of situations instead of a skew gimmick that does one thing very well.

So instead you have bland ITC missions that only have two points: Kill units and hold objectives, with no twist or anything to encourage anything else, which means all you see are these gimmick lists designed to kill units or hold objectives (such as that degenerate 7 flyer Eldar list) since nothing else matters, and secondary objectives you can pick and choose which add more listbuilding; it was changed recently but at one point The Reaping gave you 1 VP if you killed 10 or more models, 2 if 20 or more; so you'd see everyone running big squads at 19 to deny 1 VP. While this was changed (it's now just 10+ IIRC) it's an example of how gamey ITC missions were and how they put even more emphasis on list building.

Fact based here. ITC is always going to have the best chance of being better because they can easily steal the best ideas from GW’s missions.

So the odds are always going to be that competitively, ITC are better.

How do you know what gw's missions are meant for? GW is the beer and pretzels arm, itc the competitive arm.

I dislike GW still not being able to write good missions. Not the twists. The twists are bad and maelstrom is a dumpster fire even pulling some cards out.

The Salt Mine wrote:
Which is better ITS or GW missions? Well there is no actual answer to that question since that is a 100% opinion based. They both have their pros and cons.

However, what is factual is ITC missions are so different than GW missions that it is in essence playing a very different game.

This is my issue. If I went to a tournament I'd expect to be playing 40K with default missions. I don't like the ITC missions at all. 40K has missions built into the rulebook that are fine and balanced for basic competitive play, whether they be objective based or kill point scoring (I think objectives are better for tournament play though).

Martel732 wrote:
How do you know what gw's missions are meant for? GW is the beer and pretzels arm, itc the competitive arm.

I dislike GW still not being able to write good missions. Not the twists. The twists are bad and maelstrom is a dumpster fire even pulling some cards out.

And yet don't the official Warhammer GTs, you know, the ones at Warhammer World, use their own matched play missions and not fanmade ones? I'm pretty sure there's a major tournament in Europe that uses Maelstrom as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackLobster wrote:

The Salt Mine wrote:
Which is better ITS or GW missions? Well there is no actual answer to that question since that is a 100% opinion based. They both have their pros and cons.

However, what is factual is ITC missions are so different than GW missions that it is in essence playing a very different game.

This is my issue. If I went to a tournament I'd expect to be playing 40K with default missions. I don't like the ITC missions at all. 40K has missions built into the rulebook that are fine and balanced for basic competitive play, whether they be objective based or kill point scoring (I think objectives are better for tournament play though).

Well to be fair the base rulebook ones aren't amazing. But the 2018 ones are great.

Do they? I thought GW got out of the tournament business.

That's a major tournament I would never go to.

2018 eternal war missions are just more IG autowins. They are not good.

Open war is the beer and pretzel (and damn fun), CA missions are the competitive ones.

The biggest official 40k event uses those afterall.

Martel732 wrote:
Do they? I thought GW got out of the tournament business.

That's a major tournament I would never go to.

2018 eternal war missions are just more IG autowins. They are not good.

They have the GT Heats at Warhammer World in Nottingham, which I would consider to be more official than any ITC event since they are actually run by GW themselves, not GW endorsed through a third party.

That's arguable, I suppose. GW did partially surrender their authority on this when they stomped off, though.

I really like the fact that ITC champions missions provide some downside for guardsmen. Not enough, evidently.

I just don't think GW missions do enough to slow down IG park and kill.

Martel732 wrote:
That's arguable, I suppose. GW did partially surrender their authority on this when they stomped off, though.

I really like the fact that ITC champions missions provide some downside for guardsmen. Not enough, evidently.

I just don't think GW missions do enough to slow down IG park and kill.

??
ITC is full of points for killing, it allows lists like the 7 flyers to exist because you don't have to worry about controlling 6 objectives on the table every turn.
Yes ITC does more to punish Hordes (Guard and otherwise) but GW's missions that force you out onto the table to control objectives are much worse for Guard to play in then ITC where they can sit in their deployment zone and send 1 Ogryn unit forward.

You cant control six obj vs ig anyway. Yes, there are points for killing in itc, but that includes reaper and butchers bill. There is at least some remote downside to hordes.

IG move faster than my jump troops. And cant be removed in a reasonable manner. They dominate power armor at take and hold. That's why I dont bother to play against ig in gw missions.

I mean more that the only thing you have to care about in ITC is killing and objectives.

The GW missions have twists to punish some of the really skewy lists like that 7 flyer abomination. Those things that people rail against are exactly what will help to reel in some of the problems.

Twists that don't make up for lack of horde punishment, imo.

Guardsmen aren't skew. They are just amazing in every conceivable situation.

Yeah. The only thing that was included to counterbalance the power of cheap bodies failed miserably (morale system)

Then why do we rarely see lots of guard crush everyone? This LVO seems to be the exception, most of the other major tournaments haven't been won by huge hordes, it's usually been Ynnari or Aeldari overwhelming firepower lists.

Note I don't mean "a list that has Guard" like Loyal 32, I mean an actual Guard army. I can't remember them dominating many of the big tournaments before now, at least not since the latest round of nerfs, although I think they have a good win rate.

Or is that the point, that if ITC was using the 2018 Eternal War missions it would be Guard all the way down?

I that ig would do much better with ca 2018 missions, yes. Reaper and butchers bill does just enough to reign in mono ig. But then they plug in castellan.

Soup is an issue, but not the only issue.

 Sherrypie wrote:
Daedalus81, on what world does that count as "lots of terrain"? Some blocking walls and crates does not equate to a meaningful amount except in the most minimal sense.

The amount should be at least doubled and have a healthy dose of scatter terrain on top of that. Then add Cities of Death on top and the game gets good.

I suppose you need to see it in person to get a feel for it, but there is enough to block LOS to a Castellan at times, so it's not just a bunch of crates. Keep in mind the area occupied by 3 large ruins.

I'm not sure how you could double that and have a functional (let alone afforable) table.

Most of the high-placing LVO lists I looked at had 60 Guardsmen, not 30.

 Sherrypie wrote:
Daedalus81, on what world does that count as "lots of terrain"? Some blocking walls and crates does not equate to a meaningful amount except in the most minimal sense.

The amount should be at least doubled and have a healthy dose of scatter terrain on top of that. Then add Cities of Death on top and the game gets good.

For a large scale tournament that's more terrain than I generally have seen. I agree though that over all that is not a lot of terrain and certainly not a lot of LOS blocking terrain. The lack of scattered terrain which leads to a ton of open fire space hurts the game.

Martel732 wrote:
I that ig would do much better with ca 2018 missions, yes. Reaper and butchers bill does just enough to reign in mono ig. But then they plug in castellan.

Soup is an issue, but not the only issue.

And yet outside of ITC IG are no more running rampant then they are in ITC (which is to say they are very much a top tier codex and winning their fair share of events, but its not wall to wall).

Isnt etc pretty big?