Switch Theme:

Orks are Not OP but Ghaz is. Absurdly so.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord






 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.

I'm sure, thanks to all the whining when the rule was first previewed, that it will find it's way to Imperial and Chaos units, because of course Xenos armies can't have unique and interesting rules. No doubt those units will be far superior to Ghaz with the same rule (as even with it, he sucks).


*Envy




But yes, agreed on all points there.


Games Workshop Delenda Est.

Users on ignore- 53.

If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them. 
   
Made in ca
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion





 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.

I'm sure, thanks to all the whining when the rule was first previewed, that it will find it's way to Imperial and Chaos units, because of course Xenos armies can't have unique and interesting rules. No doubt those units will be far superior to Ghaz with the same rule (as even with it, he sucks).


I'm not jelous of the rule myself (all told character protection is proably better) but I do think we're more like then not to see this rule be refined for future units. I'd not be suprised to see GW examine the rule in use, and then pout out say... Angron with a refined version of it

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in gb
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






 Grimtuff wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.

I'm sure, thanks to all the whining when the rule was first previewed, that it will find it's way to Imperial and Chaos units, because of course Xenos armies can't have unique and interesting rules. No doubt those units will be far superior to Ghaz with the same rule (as even with it, he sucks).


*Envy

But yes, agreed on all points there.

Ah right you are! You remind me of one of my mates in our group who always tells me off for not using the word "fewer" when appropriate.
   
Made in us
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel




Douglasville, GA

Is this a better version?

PROPHET OF GORK AND MORK
This unit has a 4++ Invulnerable Save. The first time this unit takes damage from an attack, this improves to a 2++. The second time, it gains a 4+++ FnP. These improvements go away at the end of the turn.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 flandarz wrote:
Is this a better version?

PROPHET OF GORK AND MORK
This unit has a 4++ Invulnerable Save. The first time this unit takes damage from an attack, this improves to a 2++. The second time, it gains a 4+++ FnP. These improvements go away at the end of the turn.
Did you mean phase? Because if you meant phase, it's better, since you CAN hurt him down, it's just tough. But if you really meant turn, it's way worse.

But I'd rather he either be a proper monster (16+ wounds, T8, 2+/4++/maybe 5+++) or have 9 wounds, maybe with a come back from death once mechanic.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel




Douglasville, GA

Either is fine, but I was under the impression the hate for the rule wasn't about how durable it made him, but rather that it broke immersion and/or (insert reason here). If it's just "Ghaz is too hard to kill", then just say so.
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran





To be fair, the max wounds per phase is more of an easy way out when writing rules.
It’s a solid rule, yes.

Then, fact that he’s slow and over priced though it suddenly seems a lot worse.
Add in the fact he can’t hide and it becomes a handicap.
Top it off with clan lock and it’s all downhill.

Wound caps really aren’t a big deal providing a model is costed correctly and actually has a downside.
This is no new thing in terms of GW games as a whole either.
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.


Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel




Douglasville, GA

Honestly, the issues that made GW think this was a good idea wouldn't have been problems if they just switch the thr Apoc "deal damage and remove models at the end of the turn" system. Then, if you still want a rule to keep Ghaz around longer, just give him an inbuilt "half all damage done to this unit (rounded up)" mechanic.
   
Made in us
Beautiful and Deadly Keeper of Secrets





Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
WhiteDog wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.

I'm sure, thanks to all the whining when the rule was first previewed, that it will find it's way to Imperial and Chaos units, because of course Xenos armies can't have unique and interesting rules. No doubt those units will be far superior to Ghaz with the same rule (as even with it, he sucks).

Coming from one of the whiner in chief of dakkadakka, this is funny to read.

He's also not incorrect here.
You really don't have any room to speak here at all.

The rule is at least interesting, but it does show that there's been some problems with their alpha striking.
   
Made in gb
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






 vipoid wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.


Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 flandarz wrote:
Honestly, the issues that made GW think this was a good idea wouldn't have been problems if they just switch the thr Apoc "deal damage and remove models at the end of the turn" system.


I keep hearing this extolled and I've yet to see the appeal.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/03/25 20:21:09


 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 vipoid wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.


Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?
It breaks immersion, for one.

And I don't think anyone wants to see Ghaz lose that rule and otherwise be unchanged. The general suggestion I've seen mentioned is dropping him to 9 wounds, which would make him IMMENSELY more durable against the majority of armies.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in gb
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






 JNAProductions wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 vipoid wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.


Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?
It breaks immersion, for one.

And I don't think anyone wants to see Ghaz lose that rule and otherwise be unchanged. The general suggestion I've seen mentioned is dropping him to 9 wounds, which would make him IMMENSELY more durable against the majority of armies.

It breaks immersion?! Explain please. If anything should be able to shrug off attacks that should kill it, it's the biggest, baddest Ork surely? And how is that more immersion breaking than having a magical number of wounds that means this absolute unit can hide behind a Grot? It doesn't add up.


   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 vipoid wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.


Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?
It breaks immersion, for one.

And I don't think anyone wants to see Ghaz lose that rule and otherwise be unchanged. The general suggestion I've seen mentioned is dropping him to 9 wounds, which would make him IMMENSELY more durable against the majority of armies.

It breaks immersion?! Explain please. If anything should be able to shrug off attacks that should kill it, it's the biggest, baddest Ork surely? And how is that more immersion breaking than having a magical number of wounds that means this absolute unit can hide behind a Grot? It doesn't add up.


So how come he can't shrug off a grot poking him four times, but after that grot pokes him, he's immune to Volcano Cannons?

At least character protection is CONSISTENT.

Edit: To put another way, to take down a Knight, you pour everything you have into it, and it eventually dies.

To take down Ghaz, you put a couple of spare Lascannons into him and then ignore him.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/03/25 20:18:01


Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 JNAProductions wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 vipoid wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.


Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?
It breaks immersion, for one.

And I don't think anyone wants to see Ghaz lose that rule and otherwise be unchanged. The general suggestion I've seen mentioned is dropping him to 9 wounds, which would make him IMMENSELY more durable against the majority of armies.


but it would also mean you have a unit the size of a trukk who cannot be targeted separately because a grot is closer. and who dies in every duel with any decent opponent (9 wounds ain't that hard to deal). in this rendition, ghazzie lunches characters in CC, as he should, and he krumps vehicles, as he should, and he gets bogged down in chaff, as he should. unsupported, people will just feed him chaff and get on with the rest of the battle. I'd be interested in how he will do when in the midst of a couple of units of boys who can tri-point for him and screen from feeder-chaff. Though, perhaps grots will be better suited - less likely to kill the unit he wants to tri-point!

I am looking forward to using the new rules, and seeing how he does. I still have the old model, for now, so it might not quite look so cool!

12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!

I'm Selling Infinity, 40k, dystopian wars, UK based!

I also make designs for t-shirts and mugs and such on Redbubble! 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?


The issue is that Ghaz is a 12-wound T7 model with a 2+/4++ save.

Even allowing for the fact that wounds increased between editions, in 7th he would have been roughly equivalent to a Dreadknight with +1T and probably 100% more wounds. And even ordinary Dreadknights were very difficult to remove on turn 1, short of D-weapons.

Hence, the fact that a model with that level of protection still needs a special rule on top of all that strictly limiting the number of wounds he can take in a single phase, so that he isn't blown off the table on turn 1, speaks volumes about 8th edition.

My issue, therefore, is that rules like this are just papering over the cracks. It seems we're seeing a ridiculous trend of ever-increasing firepower "balanced" by putting more saves and other defences on everything. Really, the game is in dire need of dialling back both.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in gb
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






 JNAProductions wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 vipoid wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.


Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?
It breaks immersion, for one.

And I don't think anyone wants to see Ghaz lose that rule and otherwise be unchanged. The general suggestion I've seen mentioned is dropping him to 9 wounds, which would make him IMMENSELY more durable against the majority of armies.

It breaks immersion?! Explain please. If anything should be able to shrug off attacks that should kill it, it's the biggest, baddest Ork surely? And how is that more immersion breaking than having a magical number of wounds that means this absolute unit can hide behind a Grot? It doesn't add up.


So how come he can't shrug off a grot poking him four times, but after that grot pokes him, he's immune to Volcano Cannons?

At least character protection is CONSISTENT.

Edit: To put another way, to take down a Knight, you pour everything you have into it, and it eventually dies.

To take down Ghaz, you put a couple of spare Lascannons into him and then ignore him.

The character protection rule on Ghaz is more immersion breaking. Look at the size of him. He's bigger than Girlyman!

I mean if you want this super immersive game I suspect 40k isn't the one for you. A Grot can kill a Knight titan over 1000 times it's size.

Ghaz's rule represents the maximum damage he can sustain in a time period (a phase). To me it represents his armour breaking off hence why his attacks increase but strength drops.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 vipoid wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?


The issue is that Ghaz is a 12-wound T7 model with a 2+/4++ save.

Even allowing for the fact that wounds increased between editions, in 7th he would have been roughly equivalent to a Dreadknight with +1T and probably 100% more wounds. And even ordinary Dreadknights were very difficult to remove on turn 1, short of D-weapons.

Hence, the fact that a model with that level of protection still needs a special rule on top of all that strictly limiting the number of wounds he can take in a single phase, so that he isn't blown off the table on turn 1, speaks volumes about 8th edition.

My issue, therefore, is that rules like this are just papering over the cracks. It seems we're seeing a ridiculous trend of ever-increasing firepower "balanced" by putting more saves and other defences on everything. Really, the game is in dire need of dialling back both.

If you dial back both offense and defence you end up at roughly the same spot.

I distinctly remember multiple builds not too long ago on the competitive scene where it was quite literally impossible to shift the number of bodies on the table quick enough not to lose. Have we forgotten plaguebearers already?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/03/25 20:26:48


 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

The character protection rule on Ghaz is more immersion breaking. Look at the size of him. He's bigger than Girlyman!


I think the character-protection rules are a bit of a mess in general.

Many of the models were clearly given 9-wounds for very game-y reasons (models the size of Girlyman, Daemon Princes or the CCB really have no business hiding behind anything smaller than an Imperial Knight).

But even outside of the disparities in scale, there's no interactivity with the rule. Either a character is immune to shooting or all shooting can target them without penalty.

It seems like there should be something in between these two.


 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Ghaz's rule represents the maximum damage he can sustain in a time period (a phase). To me it represents his armour breaking off hence why his attacks increase but strength drops.


Minor point but if his armour is falling off, shouldn't he get faster rather than slower?

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 JNAProductions wrote:
But I'd rather he either be a proper monster (16+ wounds, T8, 2+/4++/maybe 5+++) or have 9 wounds, maybe with a come back from death once mechanic.


That's basically Mortarions statline. Who dies first thing even in casual games.

How are Mortarion or Thrakka even a threat to the imperium if five to six imperial tanks can easily kill them within the first seconds of a battle. I fail to see how this is supposed to be immersive.

7 Ork facts people always get wrong:
Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other.
A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot.
Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests.
Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why.
Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor.
Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers.
Orks do not have the power of believe. 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 Jidmah wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
But I'd rather he either be a proper monster (16+ wounds, T8, 2+/4++/maybe 5+++) or have 9 wounds, maybe with a come back from death once mechanic.


That's basically Mortarions statline. Who dies first thing even in casual games.

How are Mortarion or Thrakka even a threat to the imperium if five to six imperial tanks can easily kill them within the first seconds of a battle. I fail to see how this is supposed to be immersive.
Yeah. I'll echo Vipoid, then, by saying the game is too damn lethal.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

If you dial back both offense and defence you end up at roughly the same spot.


Not quite. Because not every army/unit has actually kept up with the jacking up of offence and defence.

What's more, if nothing else you'd at least save some time by taking out some of the extra rerolls and saves.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Androgynous Daemon Prince of Slaanesh





Norwalk, Connecticut

Is it worth it to just take Ghaz with the Tellyporta and a tidal wave of Boyz? I mean...250 bodies of Orks rushing forward, not caring about casualties and then big bad boss drops in to crump. Yay or nay?

Reality is a nice place to visit, but I'd hate to live there.

Manchu wrote:I'm a Catholic. We eat our God.


Due to work, I can usually only ship any sales or trades out on Saturday morning. Please trade/purchase with this in mind.  
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Sazzlefrats wrote:
 kastelen wrote:
Yazima wrote:
I think this thread gave me brain damage, or maybe it was the corona virus. "Ghaz OP damage" - disproved, "Ghaz OP survivability" - disproved. "I'm a competitive WoW player" - What? "40k takes no skill" - Well maybe you should learn the rules properly before you comment.

Yes this should be locked, its just a venting portal for a toxic loudmouth

Keep it open for 2 months at the very least, I need to prove OP wrong.


You don't need two months. Here lets say Ghaz vs Tau (and its battlesuit based because lolz).

1. I think we agree footslogging to the Great Unassailable Gunline is a bad strategy for Ghaz, that's 2 turns of shooting and then he gets killed in overwatch, his army gets to move really fast, so maybe thats his best use.
2. He teleports into the great unassailable gunline, way more fun. And somehow he makes that 50/50 charge. Now he gets overwatched on... and gets 4 wounds. Now he gets to fight... 6 Attacks... 4 damage each... OMG 24 wounds!! That Riptide that he charged must surely be dead? Plus we'll give Roberts84 the benefit of this being a lousy unskilled tau player.. therefore he forgot to use sheild drones to soak all the wounds, and forgot to use the Riptides ability to have a 3+ invulnerable save. That sucks right... well with a 5+ native invulnerable... big all Ghaz lands... yup 12.96 wounds. Riptide lives, but lets say with just 1 hp left. Next turn... Ghaz gets shot for 4 more, and when he charges again, he dies in overwatch, and that riptide is still alive.
3. If Ghaz fails the charge, he gets overwatched for 4, then shot for 4, then... dies in overwatch the next turn, having done exactly zero for Ghaz, zero for the army.

Now you prove the OP is wrong :-)


If you're running Farsight Battlesuits, I'd at least once try bring in a Crisis Bomb in 3-4" of Ghaz with a Homing Beacon or so, shoot him up for 4 wounds, then charge Ghaz and do 4 more Mortals with Furious Assault in the Charge Phase, and finally take him out close combat with Sworn Protectors for the final 4 wounds and be the Tau Player that get's bragging rights to having killed Ghaz in one round of close combat with your Tau.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Is it worth it to just take Ghaz with the Tellyporta and a tidal wave of Boyz? I mean...250 bodies of Orks rushing forward, not caring about casualties and then big bad boss drops in to crump. Yay or nay?
You can't afford that many Boys. It'd be 1,750 points before upgrades, and Ghaz is 285.

But, the general idea of a horde of Boys and Ghaz... I mean, I don't think it'll be bad casually, but all Ghaz really does is add a target for some anti-tank weapons. +1 attack is nice, but with 200+ Ork bodies, is weight of attacks REALLY an issue?

You'd be better off taking a Big Mek with KFF, to make them more durable.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

 Grimtuff wrote:
 Vaktathi wrote:
Tyel wrote:
But really - why don't people like the "only do X wounds a phase" thing? People often complain that stuff in modern 40k dies far too easily and this seems like a good solution. I can see the argument this should apply to all characters - arguably its a more epic form of protection than the current system of "can't touch this, can't touch this, oh no I is kill" which has provoked various dubious rules interactions in 8th. It would allow for more interesting character duels rather than *I charge, I kill unless you luck out on invuls*.
It's a really ham fisted mechanic, it essentially shuts down a level of interactivity, and just feels really forced, a poor solution to a real problem, and breaks a level of immersion when something can just start absorbing infinite levels of killing power at some point. Of greater importance, is that a mechanic like this can basically result in a truly unkillable unit if an appropriate healing mechanic is made available at some point, and GW likes to go and do things like that, sometimes without meaning to.

That said I don't think Ghaz is broken, I just really don't like that particular mechanic. I'd really have preferred Ghaz just remain a character with less than 10 wounds, this upscaling to bigger-than-primarch size is a bit odd, especially for character who's arch-nemesis is an old unaugmented human.


Thing is, it's not really a new mechanic, even for GW. Malekith in 6th ed WHFB had a similar form of protection from his armour, where he could only suffer a single wound from each hit. Archaon had a similar kind of protection, where he could only be wounded on a 3+ at best.
To me, it's not quite the same thing. Even with those abilities, they only mitigate damage, they don't limit it. You could still kill Archaon outright with a lucky cannon hit or overwhelm him with volume of attacks. With the mechanic Ghaz has, they essentially gain invulnerability once they hit their wound threshold and no amount of killing power will take them down until the next turn, doesn't matter if you have a billion lasguns or a Volcano cannon, Quantity or Quality (whereas the other mentioned abilities shift preference between the two or reduce likelyhood of critical outcomes), and if paired with any meaningful healing ability that could make them unkillable. In the case of Ghaz as is, I don't think it's a major balance issue, but its a very easy mechanic to break with some odd gameplay incentives.

I think in terms of the interactivity it becomes too game-ey as well, for the reasons I listed earlier, but that's kinda more my subjective opinion.



IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in gb
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






 vipoid wrote:

Minor point but if his armour is falling off, shouldn't he get faster rather than slower?
Yes he should. I guess them pistons keep his chonky legs moving?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 vipoid wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:

If you dial back both offense and defence you end up at roughly the same spot.


Not quite. Because not every army/unit has actually kept up with the jacking up of offence and defence.

Fair.

What's more, if nothing else you'd at least save some time by taking out some of the extra rerolls and saves.
All for this.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/03/25 21:40:43


 
   
Made in us
Flashy Flashgitz






The silly part in all this is that the metric at which "OP" is determined is that it can't be blown off the board in a turn of shooting from across the table.

Also, if any Astartes army got a similar rule nobody would bat an eye at it.

I'll show ye..... - Phillip J. Fry

Those are brave men knocking on our door! Let's go kill them! - Tyrion Lannister 
   
Made in nl
Inquisitorial Keeper of the Xenobanks






your mind

The problem that i have with 4 wnd max is that it encourages opponents to not pour fire into him and rather to spread it out which seems contrary to what Ghaz should be doing, tanking fire while the enemy is overrun.

   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




England

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I think a lot of people want to frame him into pre-conceived their box. Same thing happens with Magnus - "if you don't warptime him into combat as fast as possible then you're not maximizing him", but come to find out that isn't the only way to play him.

gak, Abaddon is great and even got a point cut and you still don't see him much, but just because you don't see him at majors doesn't mean he can't do well.

People just don't like to lean forward into melee and would rather sit on their ass with Mek Gunz.


What do you expect, you don't expect people here to think outside the box do you
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: