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.

Read the title. The other thread was getting way out of hand.

Yes on the caveat that iron hands specifically leviathans are banned

I'm perfectly fine with the ban. The tournament has the right to house rule whatever they want. Don't like it don't go.

Can anyone point to a winning Iron Hands list that had a Leviathan in it? The list that won Galaxy GT was a triple Thunderfire Cannon list with no dreadnoughts, for example.

beast_gts wrote:
Can anyone point to a winning Iron Hands list that had a Leviathan in it? The list that won Galaxy GT was a triple Thunderfire Cannon list with no dreadnoughts, for example.

This is the WH40k community. We fear what is theorycrafted and lose to real lists with real balance problems later.

If they want to ban it they can, but I doubt many events will really care unless it starts winning an above average amount of tournament games. They are a shock to the meta now but that will balance out in a few months.

So when is the more than 3 Eldar flyers getting banned?

Can't vote. Your poll is missing "No Opinion".

I said Yes, because there wasn't an option for "A Tournament Organizer can so whatever the feth they want.".

 Elbows wrote:
I said Yes, because there wasn't an option for "A Tournament Organizer can so whatever the feth they want.".

Same.

I can see how an IH dread can feel oppressive in your local pick up games but are they really that bad in a competitive setting?

What's stopping eldar from charging one with a banshee mask autarch followed by a wave serpent, then piling into the rest?

 slave.entity wrote:
I can see how an IH dread can feel oppressive in your local pick up games but are they really that bad in a competitive setting?

What's stopping eldar from charging one with a banshee mask autarch followed by a wave serpent, then piling into the rest?

Knee jerk bans from local pressure after online posts of how "op" they are... even though they aren't sweeping events like Flyer spam. lol

 Sigmatron wrote:
So when is the more than 3 Eldar flyers getting banned?

Never, nothing wrong with them. Git gud?

I still consider IH repulsor executioner to be the true threat while Leviathan is a smoke-screen that players are afraid of because it's statistically impossible to win a DPS race against it. Yes leviathan is functionally immortal with absurd damage output, but the counter-play is extremely obvious: Range and close combat, so there are ways to completely shut it down.

Repulsor on the other hand has no counter-play other than a damage race that is heavily to its favor since it has extremely efficient repairing, fly, and -2 to charge it.

I think that the Leviathan might warp the meta to force every list to contain some kind of ignore overwatch element to babysit Leviathans (which many of them already contain), but in the end it will be the Repulsors laughing all the way to the top spots

A narrow ban within a specific context is fine, particularly if it's not permanent. In this instance, I'd have probably just said "levi dreads cannot benefit from X/Y/Z abilities" (same way nerfing rotate ion shields was better than just banning Castellans) for the time being instead, but that's just me.

Whether it's the most deserving thing in the world to ban is up for debate, but I'm ok with targeted, specific, and temporary bans when something looks particularly absurd.

 Vaktathi wrote:
A narrow ban within a specific context is fine, particularly if it's not permanent. In this instance, I'd have probably just said "levi dreads cannot benefit from X/Y/Z abilities" (same way nerfing rotate ion shields was better than just banning Castellans) for the time being instead, but that's just me.

Yeah, something like that would probably be a better approach.

 Continuity wrote:
I still consider IH repulsor executioner to be the true threat while Leviathan is a smoke-screen that players are afraid of because it's statistically impossible to win a DPS race against it. Yes leviathan is functionally immortal with absurd damage output, but the counter-play is extremely obvious: Range and close combat, so there are ways to completely shut it down.

Its not that simple.

In the past the question was if your list can kill a castellan knight in one turn. Now the question is, can your list kill an IH leviathan dreadnought in one turn ?

 p5freak wrote:

 Continuity wrote:
I still consider IH repulsor executioner to be the true threat while Leviathan is a smoke-screen that players are afraid of because it's statistically impossible to win a DPS race against it. Yes leviathan is functionally immortal with absurd damage output, but the counter-play is extremely obvious: Range and close combat, so there are ways to completely shut it down.

Its not that simple.

In the past the question was if your list can kill a castellan knight in one turn. Now the question is, can your list kill an IH leviathan dreadnought in one turn ?

Why do you have to? Many lists won't be forced to interact with a leviathan until turn 2/3 due to their 24'' range, and the castellan doesn't lose a turn of shooting by getting touched. Conversely, a 3++ castellan is not even remotely as durable as a Leviathan, so the answer to your question is "no, absolutely not, and you've already lost for trying"

Not trying to dismiss the power of the leviathan, but I don't think players should be approaching the levi in the same way as the castellan

Would you honestly rather wait the 6months until the next "balance pass" if it gets touched at all?

Would you rather wait those 6 months fighting nothing but lists designed to min max on the one or two broken lynchpin units?

I think the answer is pretty bloody obvious

No, I don't support bans on knee jerk panic reactions. If IH is busted, we need to demand GW to fix it, I'd not punish the players, I simply wouldn't play in the tournaments if they made it that awful I'd want to ban levis, vote with my wallet and cease buying until it's handled. This isn't a player made issue, its a GW dun messed up issue.

They should wait and let the dust settle. No one here plays in tournaments anyway so I'm not sure how its relevant.

 Kommisar wrote:
They should wait and let the dust settle. No one here plays in tournaments anyway so I'm not sure how its relevant.

Real talk right here.

I mean that is true as well, wait and see. Handle it with some class and not just hit the panic button.

People often travel and pay to play at events. If a combination of rules sees that many players have a less than fun experience due to the prevalence of these combos, the gaming scene loses. I'm not talking about outlier mean combos, I'm talking in your face, Wreck-it Ralph combos that just puts a dark cloud over a single event. We're not there yet, but initial reports I have seen on IH in BRs so far don't look positive. It's obviously not just a Leviathan issue, but I'm interested in seeing where the dust settles when this new supplement has had a real road test.

Tournament-FAQ the problem Stratagems to not apply to Leviathans. The Helbrute shoot-twice stratagem applies to the unit rather than the keyword so it won't work on Leviathans, why do you need to blanket-ban the unit when the mechanism to ban the specific combo exists in the rules?

 Continuity wrote:

Why do you have to? Many lists won't be forced to interact with a leviathan until turn 2/3 due to their 24'' range, and the castellan doesn't lose a turn of shooting by getting touched.

T2/3 ? The leviathan has 32" threat range. Thats good enough for T1.

 ChargerIIC wrote:

beast_gts wrote:
Can anyone point to a winning Iron Hands list that had a Leviathan in it? The list that won Galaxy GT was a triple Thunderfire Cannon list with no dreadnoughts, for example.

This is the WH40k community. We fear what is theorycrafted and lose to real lists with real balance problems later.

Get your facts rights, IH supplement was not allowed in most recent events and also people will need time to purchase and paint their models.
It was obvious after LGT that SM are super good, when played from good players with the models in place.

Marin wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:

beast_gts wrote:
Can anyone point to a winning Iron Hands list that had a Leviathan in it? The list that won Galaxy GT was a triple Thunderfire Cannon list with no dreadnoughts, for example.

This is the WH40k community. We fear what is theorycrafted and lose to real lists with real balance problems later.

Get your facts rights, IH supplement was not allowed in most recent events and also people will need time to purchase and paint their models.
It was obvious after LGT that SM are super good, when played from good players with the models in place.

The fact that someone won an event with just the base codex version of IronHands says they are a massive overcorrection in the usual GW style.

Rather than ban the unit which isn't a problem with other chapter's why not just ban the true issue of the Iron Hands Supliment.
Remove Leviathans and Redemptors or Ironclad dreadnaughts take their place for half the points. Also just for lols only the redemptor is targetable as the rest are sub 10W.

Really instead of banning 1 unit the Supliment needs banned if anything.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
Would you honestly rather wait the 6months until the next "balance pass" if it gets touched at all?

Would you rather wait those 6 months fighting nothing but lists designed to min max on the one or two broken lynchpin units?

I think the answer is pretty bloody obvious

It'll be fine. Wait patiently & the Imperial Fists & Salamander books will arrive & all those dreaded IH lists will morph into some other color of marines.

Ice_can wrote:

Marin wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:

beast_gts wrote:
Can anyone point to a winning Iron Hands list that had a Leviathan in it? The list that won Galaxy GT was a triple Thunderfire Cannon list with no dreadnoughts, for example.

This is the WH40k community. We fear what is theorycrafted and lose to real lists with real balance problems later.

Get your facts rights, IH supplement was not allowed in most recent events and also people will need time to purchase and paint their models.
It was obvious after LGT that SM are super good, when played from good players with the models in place.

The fact that someone won an event with just the base codex version of IronHands says they are a massive overcorrection in the usual GW style.

Rather than ban the unit which isn't a problem with other chapter's why not just ban the true issue of the Iron Hands Supliment.
Remove Leviathans and Redemptors or Ironclad dreadnaughts take their place for half the points. Also just for lols only the redemptor is targetable as the rest are sub 10W.

Really instead of banning 1 unit the Supliment needs banned if anything.

any codex after issuing tends to win games as people aren't familer with how to counter the tricks yet