IH leviathans banned at local event

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.

**AngryAngel80**

Yeah I agree with the response above, this is a GW made monster they need to wrangle down. Bans are just bad for the community at large, especially knee jerk ones.

**Slayer-Fan123**

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Togusa wrote:
chimeara wrote:
Some friends shared this with me. I think that it's extreme, however necessary. I've played the new IH stuff with my knights. It's not even close to fun. I killed almost nothing.

When is forgeworld going to fix that model? It's beyond broken, straight unfun to play against.

Hit on 2+ reroll 1s, 4++ @T8 with 16 S8 AP-2 2 DMG shots.

Seriously.

For 300 points. You keep skipping that part very conveniently.

Firstly, I'm loath to ban anything like that as it feels like a knee jerk reaction to a problem we all see.

Secondly, just because it costs so many points isn't some promise of greatness. I don't know why you keep trotting that out as some kind of justification. I mean lets see some high point suck choices shall we ? Lets here, Land raiders, super expensive, pretty poop. Logan on storm rider, almost 200 pts, not very wonderful. Vendettas pretty poop, around 230 pts. I mean really, if we take a look at many books a great number of the units aren't very good or worth what point cost they have. Just because it costs 300 pts doesn't mean it has to be good, it should be good but then when so much is bad for its cost and it's so good its an auto include that is a huge hint of a problem.

The problem may not be that the Levi is too good, the fact may be that most other choices are just so bad. The unmistakable issue is that you need to raise up poor units, drag down OP no brainer choices and either make everything ho hum or make everything feel like an auto include. Anything less and you have balance issues that will frustrate people and force these knee jerk bans and I think we know GW love to punish FW so I might not get too used to Levis if this process continues.

As well as much as I dislike banning things because it's good, if a choice becomes a no brainer inclusion to most any list that can take it, that can't be allowed to stay as it is or you can't say you want to balance the game at all. I don't even use a levi, nor have I ever played against one but I'll be damned if I haven't learned all about it from every battle report, and online chatter about it, that tells me something. IH just twists the unit up just that touch more where as before it was a no brainer now it also buffs it out which says as much about IH. Time will tell how it shakes out but I can't imagine these IH lists are much fun to play against which also leads to people crying for bans as they get bitter or angry. Much like how people cry about guard infantry squads even though they are totally fine in a mono guard list. People are just tired of seeing them in so many lists with knights so they want them nerfed and never seen again, the levi ban is just being perhaps more honest with the intent.

This all goes back and falls at GWs feet who really need to work harder on making some level of better balance, fix the borked core rules to limit some of the abuses of the shaky system and admit they are either poor at doing this or really don't want to either way its time for honesty on their end and I for one would applaud them for being forthright, finally.

What I'm saying is, if you pay so much for a unit, you should expect some sorta great performance, with those bad units you listed having their own set of issues (Land Raiders are stopped by a single Gaunt sitting in front of it, and now they can't drop off their cargo! Oh and transport rules basically suck).

**Daedalus81**

Not Online!!! wrote:

You can't deny the fact that the missions fundamentally change the flow of the game, as do the ITC terrain rulings.
Spoletta mentioned that in etc someone did run harlequin troupes, something not really seen in ITC.
So it has no influence and we are biased against it because we don't know it?

An anecdote without any data to analyze is pretty useless. There is usually pretty healthy LOS blocking terrain for ITC, so, non-use is a matter of Meta and not Mission. Elves have limited options on what works against vehicles so there is often little room to play around with other units.

20 points MINIMUM for a T3 model with a single melta shot, no rerolls, and no bonus unless they're at 3". I'd also imagine ITC blocking first floor actually HELPS Troupes get across the board.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ordana wrote:
Sigmatron wrote:
So when is the Eldar flyer spam gonna get banned at events? Hopefully more events don't follow this example.
Eldar flyers are less of an issue if your playing the actual game GW writes instead of ITC.

Please elaborate how they become less of a problem.

**Amishprn86**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:

You can't deny the fact that the missions fundamentally change the flow of the game, as do the ITC terrain rulings.
Spoletta mentioned that in etc someone did run harlequin troupes, something not really seen in ITC.
So it has no influence and we are biased against it because we don't know it?

An anecdote without any data to analyze is pretty useless. There is usually pretty healthy LOS blocking terrain for ITC, so, non-use is a matter of Meta and not Mission. Elves have limited options on what works against vehicles so there is often little room to play around with other units.

20 points MINIMUM for a T3 model with a single melta shot, no rerolls, and no bonus unless they're at 3". I'd also imagine ITC blocking first floor actually HELPS Troupes get across the board.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ordana wrote:
Sigmatron wrote:
So when is the Eldar flyer spam gonna get banned at events? Hopefully more events don't follow this example.
Eldar flyers are less of an issue if your playing the actual game GW writes instead of ITC.

Please elaborate how they become less of a problem.

For first part, unless its against Tau, and for the 2nd part, Non-ITC missions dont have a lot of kill objectives and has more holding objectives, 300 Orks in all 10mans will win vs 7 CWE flyers, b.c they can hold objectives long enough to matter and never needing to kill 1 flyer.

ITC is 70% "Who can kill better" where GW missions are not.

**AngryAngel80**

Arguing about which missions favor what more, more is a sign with how GW aren't good at balance, again.

If all that mattered was boots on the ground, horde armies would almost always win. If all that matters is killing it makes certain units useless. The system should have enough utility that both kinds of units are equally or close to equally important which just highlights some key issues.

I suppose selling wise it's fine, as it means they sell lots of both types of units to be used in those different types of missions and maybe that is part of the design.

**Inquisitor Lord Katherine**

Yeah, cost isn't a guarantee of greatness, nor does it mean a unit should be good.

4 point Guardsmen are pretty great.
400 point Macharius are pretty crap.

Theoretically, capability/cost should be constant, but it isn't, because there's no real way to pre-emptively quantify capability except by testing and experience. So the units with a high ratio are good, and units with a low ratio are bad.

**AngryAngel80**

It's almost like they should have some more extensive play testing done with the units. What a crazy thought.

**Gadzilla666**

Crimson wrote:
Sigmatron wrote:
Ordana wrote:
Sigmatron wrote:
So when is the Eldar flyer spam gonna get banned at events? Hopefully more events don't follow this example.
Eldar flyers are less of an issue if your playing the actual game GW writes instead of ITC.

Few tournaments are "GW games" as apposed to ITC. So they are a problem.

Sounds like the ITC is the problem. It is not really GWs fault if your houserules cause unintended consequences.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

LunarSol wrote:

FWIW, the Leviathan isn't even the best Dreadnaught for its points. Even the good old Missile/Las Venerable is slightly more efficient for its points against a surprising number of targets and the Mortis variants are better than that. A pair of those will get you better output. It's big advantage basically comes down to having weaponry that's less swingy in a world of to-hit debuffs and invul saves and its "all the eggs in one basket" nature making it a better buff target.

But you absolutely need to consider buffability and other such factors when assessing the power of a unit.

That's the problem. The leviathan was always good but it's points reflected that. Now thanks to the buffs given by the new sm codex and supplements it's under costed in those armies vastly so in the ih. First it gets doctrines, then if ultra marines it can fall back and still shoot, in raven guard it counts in cover, and in ih it gets to be death guard, hawkshroud, and tau. Plus all the new strategems and other buffs the loyalist marines get. And you know when they nerf it the chaos version will go right with it and it got nothing. All the loyalist sm units should have gotten a points increase. Instead many got points drops. Meanwhile csm are stuck where they were at the same price without even atsknf. And the loyalist leviathan already had a better invul at the same price.

**AngryAngel80**

I don't agree with it, but you're probably right. GW just hates to actually do real work so they will probably just toss out the baby with the bathwater. That is their way, GW gonna GW.

**bullyboy**

Vaktathi wrote:
bullyboy wrote:

So you chose to play a FW army.....so? You don't play in that particular event, sorry. Your choice.
I've TO'd many FOW events, and I hear the same excuses. Why can't my Soviets play in a Normandy themed event? Really?
It's not all events, just some.
If we're talking about a narrative themed event, thats one thing, but then we're also not talking about a run of the mill event at that point.

But anyway, yes I chose to play an FW army, how and why is that different than choosing to play Space Marines generally?

Just to return to this since I've been gone most of the day..

I can answer the second part pretty easily.
When I stop by my GW store (or FLGS) on the way home, point me to the shelf where I can buy the FW army? Or even on the games-workshop online store. They are vastly different entities.

**drbored**

I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a push-back on a lot of FW stuff with this new marine Codex. Until other factions get similarly codex-creeped updates, this sort of problem is going to keep coming up.

Xiphons, Leviathans, Deredeos, and plenty of other combos besides that haven't been figured out yet. GW balances the Codexes using the plastic models that they make, with little consideration for the FW side of things, telling FW to handle their own rules (conjecture, idk if that's how it works, but that's how it dang well feels).

I agree with the above, though. ITC is meh at best and also ban-lists are the beginning of the end for an edition and a sign of degradation of gameplay. GW obviously doesn't want there to be ban-lists because that's models they're not selling. If they catch wind of tournaments starting to put bans on models, they'll rebalance them either via points or rules.

If you find a problem with balance, send it to GW's FAQ team. They need to start compiling this crazy stuff so we can get a good Chapter Approved.

Not 2019. Chapter Approved 2020. I don't expect all the problems with the Space Marines to be solved by the end of the year.

**Pain4Pleasure**

Eh. If we have to nerf marines no one honestly should care much. The poster boys are meant to be more of a punching bag on the tabletop than anything

**Gadzilla666**

drbored wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a push-back on a lot of FW stuff with this new marine Codex. Until other factions get similarly codex-creeped updates, this sort of problem is going to keep coming up.

Xiphons, Leviathans, Deredeos, and plenty of other combos besides that haven't been figured out yet. GW balances the Codexes using the plastic models that they make, with little consideration for the FW side of things, telling FW to handle their own rules (conjecture, idk if that's how it works, but that's how it dang well feels).

I agree with the above, though. ITC is meh at best and also ban-lists are the beginning of the end for an edition and a sign of degradation of gameplay. GW obviously doesn't want there to be ban-lists because that's models they're not selling. If they catch wind of tournaments starting to put bans on models, they'll rebalance them either via points or rules.

If you find a problem with balance, send it to GW's FAQ team. They need to start compiling this crazy stuff so we can get a good Chapter Approved.

Not 2019. Chapter Approved 2020. I don't expect all the problems with the Space Marines to be solved by the end of the year.

No that's not how it works. The same team writes the rules for fw and codex units. And apparently they don't take into account the codex options either because they didn't realize how the dreadnought character strategem would affect dreadnoughts with less than 10 wounds. Or how powerful this codex would make repulsor executioners. Or sm flyers. It's not just fw stuff. Resin isn't magically better than plastic.

**Eldarain**

It is 100% the crazy Marine books not the units from FW. They either need to bring the game up to this insane level or knock the Marines back down.

More likely they nerf units and everyone just adjusts to the next most broken unit.

**Eonfuzz**

Why are banlists seen as "Bad"? Other WAYYY more competitive games have them.

ie:
Street Fighter
Tekken 7
Dota 2
League of legends etc

Infact I find community moderation to be a GOOD thing, as it directly highlights end users are not happy with corporate bs

**Vaktathi**

Eonfuzz wrote:
Why are banlists seen as "Bad"? Other WAYYY more competitive games have them.

ie:
Street Fighter
Tekken 7
Dota 2
League of legends etc

Infact I find community moderation to be a GOOD thing, as it directly highlights end users are not happy with corporate bs

To be fair, the rules exist to facilitate the sale of models, fundamentally the game is about playing with toy soldiers. When you tell people they can't play with their (expensive) toy soldiers, they tend to get irate about it.

In this case however, given the narrowness, it's probably not a huge deal (you can still run the unit, the army will just have to be built differently and won't be able to take advantage of as much stuff), but one can understand the feeling.

**Eonfuzz**

Vaktathi wrote:
Eonfuzz wrote:
Why are banlists seen as "Bad"? Other WAYYY more competitive games have them.

ie:
Street Fighter
Tekken 7
Dota 2
League of legends etc

Infact I find community moderation to be a GOOD thing, as it directly highlights end users are not happy with corporate bs
To be fair, the rules exist to facilitate the sale of models, fundamentally the game is about playing with toy soldiers. When you tell people they can't play with their (expensive) toy soldiers, they tend to get irate about it.

In this case however, given the narrowness, it's probably not a huge deal (you can still run the unit, the army will just have to be built differently and won't be able to take advantage of as much stuff), but one can understand the feeling.

But money IS time, and people that spent hours learning or "maining" a character in those games doesn't get irate to the extent people do over miniatures.
And honestly, to even have a IF Bigboidred means you are meta chasing. I think meta chasers should be aware it's a risky investment and not chuck the dummy when things go slightly awry

**Amishprn86**

Eonfuzz wrote:
Why are banlists seen as "Bad"? Other WAYYY more competitive games have them.

ie:
Street Fighter
Tekken 7
Dota 2
League of legends etc

Infact I find community moderation to be a GOOD thing, as it directly highlights end users are not happy with corporate bs

B.c people are not spending 100's of dollars on those games for 1 unit. Thats like if each character could cost up to 300$ and then they ban him after a lot of players buy him. No one would accept that.

**Eonfuzz**

Amishprn86 wrote:
Eonfuzz wrote:
Why are banlists seen as "Bad"? Other WAYYY more competitive games have them.

ie:
Street Fighter
Tekken 7
Dota 2
League of legends etc

Infact I find community moderation to be a GOOD thing, as it directly highlights end users are not happy with corporate bs

B.c people are not spending 100's of dollars on those games for 1 unit. Thats like if each character could cost up to 300$ and then they ban him after a lot of players buy him. No one would accept that.

But time IS money, as I said earlier.
If I spend 20+ hours (at least!) getting good with a character at lets say an average way of $30 an hour, that's $600+ worth of time spent learning how to play them.

People do accept that however.

**Amishprn86**

Eonfuzz wrote:
Amishprn86 wrote:
Eonfuzz wrote:
Why are banlists seen as "Bad"? Other WAYYY more competitive games have them.

ie:
Street Fighter
Tekken 7
Dota 2
League of legends etc

Infact I find community moderation to be a GOOD thing, as it directly highlights end users are not happy with corporate bs

B.c people are not spending 100's of dollars on those games for 1 unit. Thats like if each character could cost up to 300$ and then they ban him after a lot of players buy him. No one would accept that.

But time IS money, as I said earlier.
If I spend 20+ hours (at least!) getting good with a character at lets say an average way of $30 an hour, that's $600+ worth of time spent learning how to play them.

People do accept that however.

Equally i can spend 20+ hours playing with that model tho.

**Eonfuzz**

Amishprn86 wrote:
Eonfuzz wrote:
Amishprn86 wrote:
Eonfuzz wrote:
Why are banlists seen as "Bad"? Other WAYYY more competitive games have them.

ie:
Street Fighter
Tekken 7
Dota 2
League of legends etc

Infact I find community moderation to be a GOOD thing, as it directly highlights end users are not happy with corporate bs

B.c people are not spending 100's of dollars on those games for 1 unit. Thats like if each character could cost up to 300$ and then they ban him after a lot of players buy him. No one would accept that.

But time IS money, as I said earlier.
If I spend 20+ hours (at least!) getting good with a character at lets say an average way of $30 an hour, that's $600+ worth of time spent learning how to play them.

People do accept that however.

Equally i can spend 20+ hours playing with that model tho.

Sure, people can also spend a LOT more time learning characters in competitive fighting games.
Honestly bans are totally acceptable, especially so if it's targeted towards Meta Chasers and not your average joe.

**orkswubwub**

Honestly I feel the problem is more with the army as a whole rather than one unit. For example repulsers are equally broken - if you consider the entire army gets the benefit of the Tau army - plus a dozen bonuses - the problem starts to take shape. Mathematically a lord discordant charging a levi dread with reroll all hits (easy in SM) on a 4+ the LD dies on average everytime. Bringing plagues you are in trouble due to thunderfire... Obviously my view on this is a chaos one but the issue is that the primary weakness of this army is melee but its bubble wrapped within 5+ for the greater goods and 4+ rerolling all hits that it really makes challenging the army in melee difficult - combine this with the charge range reduction from repulser executioners, thunderfire cannons, and devestator doctrine etc. Its difficult to deal with if you aren't harlequinn or have some banshee mask equivalent.

**tneva82**

Sterling191 wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
LOL I love how Dakka always resorts to BS personal attacks when they start to lose arguments. You guys don't even know what you are talking about anymore. We are talking about the levi and it being the most obvious busted combo and it being perfectly fine to ban the levi as a result in the short term until IH are inevitably nerfed.

No, we're talking about your blanket statement that Forge World is the root cause of all balance problems, while at the same time in a different threat you're arguing that the Iron Hands rules are the root cause of a specific set of balance problems, irrespective of Forge World involvement.

Either the Iron Hands rules are broken, a scenario in which Forge World plays no part, or Forge World rules are the underlying balance problem, in which case the Iron Hands are fine.

The hilarious part is that there's a middle ground where both factors can apply, but because of your own inability to not fundamentally freak out over everything you've locked yourself out of making that argument. But by all means, please continue to try to move the goal posts yet another time. It's highly entertaining.

And besides it's not like levi was breaking game before. Literally nothing has changed in levi except...wait for it...GW codex coming out. In particular iron hands.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

niv-mizzet wrote:
Game needs more reason to bring melee.
Melee can hop into the leviathan+characters firebase and disrupt everything while killing the characters.
People just get upset when their 100% shooty armies have a hard time with something. Ironically those same people will be the first to tell you to “bring a more balanced army” when you complain about their unchargable hover tank perched on top of a ruin.

Gee nice for those with worthwhile melee. Whatabout armies which either have no melee at all(unless you think throwing guys with WS5+ S3 AP0 D1 as melee...) or ridiculously overpriced junk in melee department.

Also melee is poor answer to say IH repulsors and if you can't surround the IH leviathan that's as good as useless thing as well with shooting being better way to deal with it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Well then the only thing left to do is pray for first turn

Overwatch is a non issue though for host raptorial warp Talons.
Because he ain't getting any overwatch.

a) warp talons are overpriced junk
b) repulsors make your charge 11". Good luck doing it
c) vs non-repulsors he can push you 12" away making you 13" charge. Oh wait that's illegal charge...

**Vaktathi**

Eonfuzz wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Eonfuzz wrote:
Why are banlists seen as "Bad"? Other WAYYY more competitive games have them.

ie:
Street Fighter
Tekken 7
Dota 2
League of legends etc

Infact I find community moderation to be a GOOD thing, as it directly highlights end users are not happy with corporate bs
To be fair, the rules exist to facilitate the sale of models, fundamentally the game is about playing with toy soldiers. When you tell people they can't play with their (expensive) toy soldiers, they tend to get irate about it.

In this case however, given the narrowness, it's probably not a huge deal (you can still run the unit, the army will just have to be built differently and won't be able to take advantage of as much stuff), but one can understand the feeling.

But money IS time, and people that spent hours learning or "maining" a character in those games doesn't get irate to the extent people do over miniatures.
And honestly, to even have a IF Bigboidred means you are meta chasing. I think meta chasers should be aware it's a risky investment and not chuck the dummy when things go slightly awry

With a videogame, you can get hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of games in during a gaming career in relatively short time spans. Most 40k players never get more than a couple dozen games in total, your average regular 40k player might get a couple dozen games a year perhaps fifty if they're really active, with your hardcore tournament crowd getting maybe 80-150? The number of people who have played a thousand games of 40k ever are the dedicated few indeed. For even relatively casual players, tournament play may form a significant proportion of their play because that may just be the best/only opportunity to get in games. Significantly fewer opportunities to actually play with those toys relative to a videogame. People don't like being told they can't use their expensive toys (which, if we're talking time=$, also had time required to build and paint and learn how to use tactically, time invested in travel for most/all play instead of playing videogames on your couch) when there's a relative lack of opportunity to use them. The cost-to-play ratio in terms of time actually spent playing 40k is dramatically higher than it is for a videogame no matter how you want to slice it.

There's also a much more direct feedback mechanism for event organizers. A bunch of people being butthurt over a videogame character being banned isn't going to sink league of legends. A couple butthurt 40k players can make their displeasure felt much more directly in a variety of ways, not the least of which is that attendance is far more critical, particularly at smaller events.

bullyboy wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
bullyboy wrote:

So you chose to play a FW army.....so? You don't play in that particular event, sorry. Your choice.
I've TO'd many FOW events, and I hear the same excuses. Why can't my Soviets play in a Normandy themed event? Really?
It's not all events, just some.
If we're talking about a narrative themed event, thats one thing, but then we're also not talking about a run of the mill event at that point.

But anyway, yes I chose to play an FW army, how and why is that different than choosing to play Space Marines generally?

Just to return to this since I've been gone most of the day..

I can answer the second part pretty easily.
When I stop by my GW store (or FLGS) on the way home, point me to the shelf where I can buy the FW army? Or even on the games-workshop online store. They are vastly different entities.

There's lots of GW stuff you can't get in a store and can only get from GW's webstore, and as for the website, try the "related sites" section at the bottom. Given that the FW people work out of the same place as the rest of corporate GW, it's hard to see how they're such vastly different entities. The primary differentiator is that FW does low production volume resin models, the main studio does higher volume plastic.

**tneva82**

bullyboy wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
bullyboy wrote:

So you chose to play a FW army.....so? You don't play in that particular event, sorry. Your choice.
I've TO'd many FOW events, and I hear the same excuses. Why can't my Soviets play in a Normandy themed event? Really?
It's not all events, just some.
If we're talking about a narrative themed event, thats one thing, but then we're also not talking about a run of the mill event at that point.

But anyway, yes I chose to play an FW army, how and why is that different than choosing to play Space Marines generally?

Just to return to this since I've been gone most of the day..

I can answer the second part pretty easily.
When I stop by my GW store (or FLGS) on the way home, point me to the shelf where I can buy the FW army? Or even on the games-workshop online store. They are vastly different entities.

And that matters how? They are both GW models. FW is part of GW. They are 100% part of same company. Easily bought. And by far less balance issues than GW main studio. Banning them is just knee jerk reaction from lazy TO's.

**Dudeface**

bullyboy wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
bullyboy wrote:

So you chose to play a FW army.....so? You don't play in that particular event, sorry. Your choice.
I've TO'd many FOW events, and I hear the same excuses. Why can't my Soviets play in a Normandy themed event? Really?
It's not all events, just some.
If we're talking about a narrative themed event, thats one thing, but then we're also not talking about a run of the mill event at that point.

But anyway, yes I chose to play an FW army, how and why is that different than choosing to play Space Marines generally?

Just to return to this since I've been gone most of the day..

I can answer the second part pretty easily.
When I stop by my GW store (or FLGS) on the way home, point me to the shelf where I can buy the FW army? Or even on the games-workshop online store. They are vastly different entities.

If you open the GW store in a mobile browser, scroll to the bottom there is a "related sites" section, inside is a link to Forgeworld. Once you are on the forgeworld site, scroll to the bottom where it lists:
"© Copyright Games Workshop Limited 2000 – 2019. GW, Games Workshop, Citadel, Forge World, Warhammer, the twin-tailed comet logo, Warhammer Forge, Warhammer 40,000, the ‘Aquila’ Double-headed eagle logo, Space Marine, 40K, 40,000, Imperial Armour, Warhammer Age of Sigmar, Stormcast Eternals, The Horus Heresy, The Horus Heresy Eye and all associated logos, illustrations, images, names, creatures, races, vehicles, locations, weapons, characters, and the distinctive likenesses thereof, are either ® or TM, and/or © Games Workshop Limited, variably registered around the world."

So again, how are they not the same, is it just because you can't stock it in a shop and people can't use the a website?

**tneva82**

And if shelf in FLGS is level of acceptance...well newsflash: Tons of products from gw main are not on shelves either. You can't build useful necron army with what is on shelves.

And speaking of necrons...yeah IH leviathan is just "dont' bother to shoot" level. 3 doomsday ark(best AT necrons have): 3.1111 wounds BEFORE FNP. Pylon(our titan killer...) 3.24 wounds before FNP. Fun fun fun.

So our choices are try to tag it into combat with wraiths(300 pts, not easy to reach and marines have plenty of mass dakka to clear wraiths) or just let it shoot all game at ease.

Ugh. Damn IH supplement.

**ccs**

bullyboy wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
bullyboy wrote:

So you chose to play a FW army.....so? You don't play in that particular event, sorry. Your choice.
I've TO'd many FOW events, and I hear the same excuses. Why can't my Soviets play in a Normandy themed event? Really?
It's not all events, just some.
If we're talking about a narrative themed event, thats one thing, but then we're also not talking about a run of the mill event at that point.

But anyway, yes I chose to play an FW army, how and why is that different than choosing to play Space Marines generally?

Just to return to this since I've been gone most of the day..

I can answer the second part pretty easily.
When I stop by my GW store (or FLGS) on the way home, point me to the shelf where I can buy the FW army? Or even on the games-workshop online store. They are vastly different entities.

Well, while on the GW site, you scroll aaaall the way down to the bottom & look in the column "Related Sites".
Oh look. Forge World is the first link under that heading. Click on it.
Or you can just type Forge World into your browser.... Afterall you're somehow bright enough to figure out how to get to the GW site & Dakka.... So you should be able to figure out how to navigate to FW.

At the local stores? It's 2019. You just have to accept that there exists things that various companies (GW or otherwise) don't sell through those channels.
And yes, I understand that might cause some resentment from the independent stores. It is after all siphoning sales away from them.

But availability wise? FW is equally available to anyone with a credit card, keyboard, & shipping address.

**tneva82**

Which is what you better have if you want whole bunch of plastic models from GW.

**Not Online!!!**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:

You can't deny the fact that the missions fundamentally change the flow of the game, as do the ITC terrain rulings.
Spoletta mentioned that in etc someone did run harlequin troupes, something not really seen in ITC.
So it has no influence and we are biased against it because we don't know it?

An anecdote without any data to analyze is pretty useless. There is usually pretty healthy LOS blocking terrain for ITC, so, non-use is a matter of Meta and not Mission. Elves have limited options on what works against vehicles so there is often little room to play around with other units.

20 points MINIMUM for a T3 model with a single melta shot, no rerolls, and no bonus unless they're at 3". I'd also imagine ITC blocking first floor actually HELPS Troupes get across the board.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ordana wrote:
Sigmatron wrote:
So when is the Eldar flyer spam gonna get banned at events? Hopefully more events don't follow this example.
Eldar flyers are less of an issue if your playing the actual game GW writes instead of ITC.

Please elaborate how they become less of a problem.

You were the one touting we were ignorant morons not intimely knowledgable about ITC, have you any proof of that?
No, then i reccomend you to work on your manners.