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.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Blast templates were fine, and they served a very important role in making opponents think twice before bunching all their models up. Opponents who caused a fuss playing with them werent opponents worth playing against.

No, all it did was forced players to max 2" apart which slowed the game down for no reason.

Not "no reason" then. Forcing the opponent to disperse formations can deny them the advantages of cover, therefore forcing a decision between bunched up in cover and hoping the blast scatters off it, or dispersing their squads and being out of cover. Couple that with rules where indirect fire is limited to the floor of the building it hits from the overhead view and you get some interesting choices.

Having hard downsides to blobbing is good. And having auras that work more per model than unit is good, because then you're really forcing hard choices. Do I blob up for the offensive bluff or do I disperse for the defensive protection.

My point about cover is, its another mess in measurement, most horde players don't care if they are in or out of cover.

And the Blob is still the same, now you are just force to spread it out, you are still getting all the same buffs, nothing changed other than longer game times.

Instead if this xxxxHQxxxxx its this x..x..x..x..x.....HQ....x..x..x..x..x..x


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To add, it'll also make DSing worst than what it is now too.

Something to take into consideration with regards to auras is the notation of "wholly within". It's a huge difference.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Something to take into consideration with regards to auras is the notation of "wholly within". It's a huge difference.

We don't really have wholly within in 40k, AoS on the other hand, all buffs (other than special ones) are wholly within.

The stratagem says engagement distance. Not 1".

Consider that possibly engagement range is now 2, 3".

That would be 10 mortal wounds from unit of 30 hormagaunts for example.

But then if it's still 1", yeah this isn't that great.

The odds of rolling 10 "6"s on a 30 dice is VERY low.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Something to take into consideration with regards to auras is the notation of "wholly within". It's a huge difference.

We don't really have wholly within in 40k, AoS on the other hand, all buffs (other than special ones) are wholly within.

We're getting it at least, check the wording on "Circuitous Assassins":

Martel732 wrote:
The odds of rolling 10 "6"s on a 30 dice is VERY low.

1.3% to be exact.

That's pretty low .

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Blast templates were fine, and they served a very important role in making opponents think twice before bunching all their models up. Opponents who caused a fuss playing with them werent opponents worth playing against.

No, all it did was forced players to max 2" apart which slowed the game down for no reason.

Not "no reason" then. Forcing the opponent to disperse formations can deny them the advantages of cover, therefore forcing a decision between bunched up in cover and hoping the blast scatters off it, or dispersing their squads and being out of cover. Couple that with rules where indirect fire is limited to the floor of the building it hits from the overhead view and you get some interesting choices.

Having hard downsides to blobbing is good. And having auras that work more per model than unit is good, because then you're really forcing hard choices. Do I blob up for the offensive bluff or do I disperse for the defensive protection.

My point about cover is, its another mess in measurement, most horde players don't care if they are in or out of cover.

And the Blob is still the same, now you are just force to spread it out, you are still getting all the same buffs, nothing changed other than longer game times.

Instead if this xxxxHQxxxxx its this x..x..x..x..x.....HQ....x..x..x..x..x..x


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To add, it'll also make DSing worst than what it is now too.

Not if auras work by model instead of by squad, as I suggested.

I'm not sure why DSing would be harder either, as you dont currently have to be all in base contact they way that you used to.

As for hordes not caring about cover, that's generally not my experience, especially back in the days when cover meant a 4 or 5++. But it's sorta beside the point. You'd be facing hard choices with a bunch of marines facing off against Battle Cannons and Plasma Cannons too.

 Insectum7 wrote:
As for hordes not caring about cover, that's generally not my experience, especially back in the days when cover meant a 4 or 5++. But it's sorta beside the point. You'd be facing hard choices with a bunch of marines facing off against Battle Cannons and Plasma Cannons too.

Yes, but that's not what cover does anymore.

Against AP0, Cover DOUBLES MEQ survivability.
It increase GEQ survivability by a third.

 JNAProductions wrote:
1.3% to be exact.

Cool, now run those numbers when it's a group of 60/90/whatever.

Because the stratagem is for models from your army near the enemy unit, not models from a unit.

This seems to be the part that people are having a hard time grasping for whatever reason. Those little groups of 30 whatevers that people are sending in to tie up gunlines with? Even if they get shot up charging, they get an additional round of reacting before the enemy moves any of the models. You set yourself up right? It's going to increase your chances for freebie wounds that just have to effectively hit.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
1.3% to be exact.

Cool, now run those numbers when it's a group of 60/90/whatever.

Because the stratagem is for models from your army near the enemy unit, not models from a unit.

This seems to be the part that people are having a hard time grasping for whatever reason. Those little groups of 30 whatevers that people are sending in to tie up gunlines with? Even if they get shot up charging, they get an additional round of reacting before the enemy moves any of the models. You set yourself up right? It's going to increase your chances for freebie wounds that just have to effectively hit.

How the heck are you getting 60-90 models within 3" (at best) of a single enemy unit?

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
1.3% to be exact.

Cool, now run those numbers when it's a group of 60/90/whatever.

Because the stratagem is for models from your army near the enemy unit, not models from a unit.

This seems to be the part that people are having a hard time grasping for whatever reason. Those little groups of 30 whatevers that people are sending in to tie up gunlines with? Even if they get shot up charging, they get an additional round of reacting before the enemy moves any of the models. You set yourself up right? It's going to increase your chances for freebie wounds that just have to effectively hit.

How the heck are you getting 60-90 models within 3" (at best) of a single enemy unit?

"Falling back is a boogeyman akin to lasguns can kill Baneblades"
Kan chooses positions based on argument potential not logic

The enemy is a titan , and Its base takes up 1/6th of the deployment zone?

I like how that got dropped. Fall back is crazy powerful. Perhaps the most powerful rule in the game.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
1.3% to be exact.

Cool, now run those numbers when it's a group of 60/90/whatever.

Because the stratagem is for models from your army near the enemy unit, not models from a unit.

This seems to be the part that people are having a hard time grasping for whatever reason. Those little groups of 30 whatevers that people are sending in to tie up gunlines with? Even if they get shot up charging, they get an additional round of reacting before the enemy moves any of the models. You set yourself up right? It's going to increase your chances for freebie wounds that just have to effectively hit.

How the heck are you getting 60-90 models within 3" (at best) of a single enemy unit?

How are you(being the 'generalized you', not specifically you) getting entire armies shot off the board in one turn?

The answer is, of course, Theoryhammer Magic!

But for reals, one of the most commonly mentioned boogeymen is the Conscript Squad or Guard Blob Squads(Multiple 10 man squads blobbed up into a single unit via the Combined Squads Stratagem). Those unit footprints aren't small.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eldarain wrote:

"Falling back is a boogeyman akin to lasguns can kill Baneblades"
Kan chooses positions based on argument potential not logic

Whereas you seem to rely strictly upon personal attacks.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Blast templates were fine, and they served a very important role in making opponents think twice before bunching all their models up. Opponents who caused a fuss playing with them werent opponents worth playing against.

No, all it did was forced players to max 2" apart which slowed the game down for no reason.

Not "no reason" then. Forcing the opponent to disperse formations can deny them the advantages of cover, therefore forcing a decision between bunched up in cover and hoping the blast scatters off it, or dispersing their squads and being out of cover. Couple that with rules where indirect fire is limited to the floor of the building it hits from the overhead view and you get some interesting choices.

Having hard downsides to blobbing is good. And having auras that work more per model than unit is good, because then you're really forcing hard choices. Do I blob up for the offensive bluff or do I disperse for the defensive protection.

My point about cover is, its another mess in measurement, most horde players don't care if they are in or out of cover.

And the Blob is still the same, now you are just force to spread it out, you are still getting all the same buffs, nothing changed other than longer game times.

Instead if this xxxxHQxxxxx its this x..x..x..x..x.....HQ....x..x..x..x..x..x


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To add, it'll also make DSing worst than what it is now too.

Not if auras work by model instead of by squad, as I suggested.

I'm not sure why DSing would be harder either, as you dont currently have to be all in base contact they way that you used to.

As for hordes not caring about cover, that's generally not my experience, especially back in the days when cover meant a 4 or 5++. But it's sorta beside the point. You'd be facing hard choices with a bunch of marines facing off against Battle Cannons and Plasma Cannons too.

1) Aura are currently and as far as we know unchanged for 9th and are not model by model.
2) B.c less table space means less area to DS, we have already seen people get zone out from DSing units b.c of the 9" no touch space, given if you are playing smaller tables, this hurts even more so.
3) Cover right now doesn't give more hordes any benefit, 6+ armor means nothing with all the -1/-2 ap every where and currently there is no Invul for cover. This might change sure, but as far as we know for now, cover is pointless to hordes.

^That's nice, but I was talking past editions and theoretical potentials, since broad claims were laid against blasts. And I'm not sure why DSing in this case has anything to do with the blast conversation.

Point is, there's some added gameplay provided with blasts and templates that adds texture to squad decisions, and distinct potential downsides to hordes.

In fact I'm at a bit of a loss to find a downside to hordes/bunching up currently.

Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

because horde without being control turn some games in to, I get first turn speed 200models on to objectives and sit on them for 3 turns. gg. And anything that can deal with that amount of horde is at the same time, super efficient vs elite armies.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

Because GW decided that auras were a thing.

Karol wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

because horde without being control turn some games in to, I get first turn speed 200models on to objectives and sit on them for 3 turns. gg. And anything that can deal with that amount of horde is at the same time, super efficient vs elite armies.

Thats not what i mean, he is talking about just basing them near each other. There are controls in place for them, flamers, high fire weapons, soon blasts, etc... and finally points. Even in older editions players still had 200+ models even with Large blasts and Torrent flamers.

All it did was make the game move slower.

Have you seen Tervigon spam or Daemon spam of 5th? Literally started with 3x30 Gants, and 5 Tervigons, turn 1 you summoned 5x3D6 gants, turn 2 3-4 x 3D6, turn 3 2-3 x 3D6, until they are dead or stop spawning. On average players summoned 50+ turn 1, 40+ turn 2, turn 3 was the odd ball an you might only summon 20 or 30+ (against a good player you only summoned 20). Just by turn 3 you have had 200+ Termagants on the table, and you still had 700pts left over to fill.

The point, it didn't stop players in the past and only made people mad, why will it stop them now?

PS, don't get me started on the 300 Ork Greentide

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

Well it's just as awesome to me when I land a big fat template on a whole pile of bugs.

If you want positioning to be more impactful in the game, templates are one way to do it. It's a way to add more texture to unit dynamics.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

because horde without being control turn some games in to, I get first turn speed 200models on to objectives and sit on them for 3 turns. gg. And anything that can deal with that amount of horde is at the same time, super efficient vs elite armies.

Thats not what i mean, he is talking about just basing them near each other. There are controls in place for them, flamers, high fire weapons, soon blasts, etc... and finally points. Even in older editions players still had 200+ models even with Large blasts and Torrent flamers.

All it did was make the game move slower.

Have you seen Tervigon spam or Daemon spam of 5th? Literally started with 3x30 Gants, and 5 Tervigons, turn 1 you summoned 5x3D6 gants, turn 2 3-4 x 3D6, turn 3 2-3 x 3D6, until they are dead or stop spawning. On average players summoned 50+ turn 1, 40+ turn 2, turn 3 was the odd ball an you might only summon 20 or 30+ (against a good player you only summoned 20). Just by turn 3 you have had 200+ Termagants on the table, and you still had 700pts left over to fill.

The point, it didn't stop players in the past and only made people mad, why will it stop them now?

PS, don't get me started on the 300 Ork Greentide

You're blaming templates for making the game slow, but not the 300+ model armies?

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

Well it's just as awesome to me when I land a big fat template on a whole pile of bugs.

If you want positioning to be more impactful in the game, templates are one way to do it. It's a way to add more texture to unit dynamics.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

because horde without being control turn some games in to, I get first turn speed 200models on to objectives and sit on them for 3 turns. gg. And anything that can deal with that amount of horde is at the same time, super efficient vs elite armies.

Thats not what i mean, he is talking about just basing them near each other. There are controls in place for them, flamers, high fire weapons, soon blasts, etc... and finally points. Even in older editions players still had 200+ models even with Large blasts and Torrent flamers.

All it did was make the game move slower.

Have you seen Tervigon spam or Daemon spam of 5th? Literally started with 3x30 Gants, and 5 Tervigons, turn 1 you summoned 5x3D6 gants, turn 2 3-4 x 3D6, turn 3 2-3 x 3D6, until they are dead or stop spawning. On average players summoned 50+ turn 1, 40+ turn 2, turn 3 was the odd ball an you might only summon 20 or 30+ (against a good player you only summoned 20). Just by turn 3 you have had 200+ Termagants on the table, and you still had 700pts left over to fill.

The point, it didn't stop players in the past and only made people mad, why will it stop them now?

PS, don't get me started on the 300 Ork Greentide

You're blaming templates for making the game slow, but not the 300+ model armies?

Templates just means i take more time to measure thats not more impactful. Impactful would be splitting units 2 ways to less their damage like you see in AoS all the time, adding in moral negatives like snap hits, flanking rules, or defensive rules for terrain (like defensive grenades in older editions). There are many things that won't slow the game down.


So what if they play 100-300 models, 90% their turn 1 and 2 is just moving and not shooting or rolling dice. My horde armies turn 1's are way faster than my opponents turn 1. Mostly b.c i don't care about spacing 2" apart.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

Well it's just as awesome to me when I land a big fat template on a whole pile of bugs.

If you want positioning to be more impactful in the game, templates are one way to do it. It's a way to add more texture to unit dynamics.

So is terrain rules being "on or in"...which is where we seem to be going!

Where one of the big issues lies is that templates let you game the system to an extent with targeting. New setup is that you target a unit, you don't get splash damage rolling...but the new swap for 'Blast' weapons is seemingly going to alleviate that.

You're blaming templates for making the game slow, but not the 300+ model armies?

The point was likely more in regards to the whole 'constantly setting up the spacing' bit. And templates definitely were a big factor in that regard, as they were why those 300+ model armies would constantly be carefully measured out by people.

Without that, it seems to be a little bit quicker.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
As for hordes not caring about cover, that's generally not my experience, especially back in the days when cover meant a 4 or 5++. But it's sorta beside the point. You'd be facing hard choices with a bunch of marines facing off against Battle Cannons and Plasma Cannons too.

Yes, but that's not what cover does anymore.

Against AP0, Cover DOUBLES MEQ survivability.
It increase GEQ survivability by a third.

For gretchins and ork boyz it increases survivability by 1/6 and against AP-2 being in cover or not doesn't make difference at all, so yeah we greenskins don't care at all about cover for blobs, only units like flash gitz can really benefit from it or meganobz if their only duty is to keep an objective in cover in later turns.

blaktoof wrote:
The stratagem says engagement distance. Not 1".

Consider that possibly engagement range is now 2, 3".

That would be 10 mortal wounds from unit of 30 hormagaunts for example.

But then if it's still 1", yeah this isn't that great.

Eh no. It would still not double the MW output. Even if you get all in range(how on earth you suffer no casualties though? either enemy has enough models it causes casualties or it's like 1 survivor and at that point you should just 3 point the damn thing...Indeed one problem with stratagem is that if you get to use it often it shows you are bloody awful player as you should be 3 pointing anyway. Problem with fall back isn't you don't get to cause damage...Indeed even if falling back unit dies automatically on flee it would be bad for you in 90% cases as you get blown apart in return! Hell as gunline player I would gladly take rule "falling back causes unit to die" if that means 3 pointing doesn't work. I don't care about falling back unit dying. I care about not being able to shoot at that assault unit. THAT'S the issue assault army suffers from fallback. Exposing unit to shooting.) that's 30 roll fishing 6's. 1/6 of 30 is 5. Not 10.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Why does there need to be a downside to "grouping" my guys close together? Do you just personally hate Hordes touching bases or something? B.c to me visually its awesome, especially with nids.

because horde without being control turn some games in to, I get first turn speed 200models on to objectives and sit on them for 3 turns. gg. And anything that can deal with that amount of horde is at the same time, super efficient vs elite armies.

Thats not what i mean, he is talking about just basing them near each other. There are controls in place for them, flamers, high fire weapons, soon blasts, etc... and finally points. Even in older editions players still had 200+ models even with Large blasts and Torrent flamers.

All it did was make the game move slower.

Have you seen Tervigon spam or Daemon spam of 5th? Literally started with 3x30 Gants, and 5 Tervigons, turn 1 you summoned 5x3D6 gants, turn 2 3-4 x 3D6, turn 3 2-3 x 3D6, until they are dead or stop spawning. On average players summoned 50+ turn 1, 40+ turn 2, turn 3 was the odd ball an you might only summon 20 or 30+ (against a good player you only summoned 20). Just by turn 3 you have had 200+ Termagants on the table, and you still had 700pts left over to fill.

The point, it didn't stop players in the past and only made people mad, why will it stop them now?

PS, don't get me started on the 300 Ork Greentide

You're blaming templates for making the game slow, but not the 300+ model armies?

Yes, because it was the presence of templates that made those 300 model armies that much slower. Moving 300 models takes a while regardless, but doing so in such a way to maximise the 2" gap between each model takes much, much longer and the only reason to do that in editions that had blast templates was to reduce incoming damage. It's not even like it's a skill to space your models out. It's just mechanical busywork mandated by the rules, much like tri-pointing in melee.

You know as someone who does sport, I feel offended by the "mechanical busywork" not being part of a skill it.

Skill and gaining it, is exactly that something you learn and can do over and over again is based on that "mechanical busywork".
In fact doing something with out it, is considered the opposit of skill.

Horde lists typically take less time to play compared to the other lists, since a big part of the list doesn't do anything else except moving for the first turn.

I can move all my little bugs in less time than it took in 7th to resolve a wyvern squad firing.