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.
2020/12/14 18:39:37
Subject: Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I'm sorry , what? Possessed bomb was a top tier strat a few months ago.... The cap on minuses to hit that came with 9th nerfed them but them getting DR and more attacks will probably make them top tier again.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 18:39:53
2020/12/14 18:42:37
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
The Baneblade rules for 5th edition can be found in the Imperial Armor series of books, the first of which came out during 3rd (2001 IIRC). The 2nd edition -> 3rd edition changeover necessitated a rewrite of the Baneblade's rules, which stayed largely the same throughout 3rd-7th.
In those editions, it was roughly 3 times as durable as a Leman Russ while having thicker armor. (3 structure points -> 9 hull points in 6th)
The main gun was was dramatically improved to keep pace with firepower escalation (regular battle cannon in 3rd, earned strength 9 AP2 in 4th, earned apocalyptic blast (10" when APOC came out, then persisted with that profile through 7th).
The number of sponsons varied (started as mandatory 1 set. Then zero or one set, with zero giving +1 armor on the side, then zero-2 sets with no benefit other than points costs to bring 0).
The points cost varied wildly (starting at 634 in 3rd, hitting 500 in 5th, then zipping back to 600ish depending on loadout in 6th and 7th).
Otherwise the rules were consistent until 8th, when it dramatically lost durability and firepower relative to the Leman Russ.
And the Imperial Armour stuff was legal to play with in a normal game of sub 2000p 40k?
Not in sub 2k in the case of the Baneblade from 3rd and 4th, but it was otherwise legal for normal 40k played above these levels (e.g. 2500, which was the standard for the GW-run 'ard boyz tournaments). As legal as anything in the game was - which is to say, your opponent had to agree/the event rules had to permit it.
In 5th you could take 3 in 1500.
You could use them at 2000 points with your opponent's consent in 3rd/4th. Also worth noting 3rd added Scorpions and Cobras for Eldar, Battle Fortresses for Orks, and Warhound Titans. It also added Gargantuan Creatures like Gargantuan Squigoths for Orks and Heirodules for Tyranids. Super Heavys aren't a new thing.
I'm sorry , what? Possessed bomb was a top tier strat a few months ago.... The cap on minuses to hit that came with 9th nerfed them but them getting DR and more attacks will probably make them top tier again.
Aren't Possessed going to 3W as well? If so, along with their terminators, Death Guard will have infantry that drops the effectiveness of 3D weapons with DR. Sounds like a buff to me.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 18:47:53
2020/12/14 18:49:10
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
The Baneblade rules for 5th edition can be found in the Imperial Armor series of books, the first of which came out during 3rd (2001 IIRC). The 2nd edition -> 3rd edition changeover necessitated a rewrite of the Baneblade's rules, which stayed largely the same throughout 3rd-7th.
In those editions, it was roughly 3 times as durable as a Leman Russ while having thicker armor. (3 structure points -> 9 hull points in 6th)
The main gun was was dramatically improved to keep pace with firepower escalation (regular battle cannon in 3rd, earned strength 9 AP2 in 4th, earned apocalyptic blast (10" when APOC came out, then persisted with that profile through 7th).
The number of sponsons varied (started as mandatory 1 set. Then zero or one set, with zero giving +1 armor on the side, then zero-2 sets with no benefit other than points costs to bring 0).
The points cost varied wildly (starting at 634 in 3rd, hitting 500 in 5th, then zipping back to 600ish depending on loadout in 6th and 7th).
Otherwise the rules were consistent until 8th, when it dramatically lost durability and firepower relative to the Leman Russ.
And the Imperial Armour stuff was legal to play with in a normal game of sub 2000p 40k?
Not in sub 2k in the case of the Baneblade from 3rd and 4th, but it was otherwise legal for normal 40k played above these levels (e.g. 2500, which was the standard for the GW-run 'ard boyz tournaments). As legal as anything in the game was - which is to say, your opponent had to agree/the event rules had to permit it.
In 5th you could take 3 in 1500.
You could use them at 2000 points with your opponent's consent in 3rd/4th. Also worth noting 3rd added Scorpions and Cobras for Eldar, Battle Fortresses for Orks, and Warhound Titans. It also added Gargantuan Creatures like Gargantuan Squigoths for Orks and Heirodules for Tyranids. Super Heavys aren't a new thing.
Fair points. However, i did play some bigger tournaments (1850p) in 5th and never saw anyone, nor heard of anyone fielding a super heavy.
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2020/12/14 18:51:26
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Aren't Possessed going to 3W as well? If so, along with their terminators, Death Guard will have infantry that drops the effectiveness of 3D weapons with DR. Sounds like a buff to me.
Huh, i legitimately thought they had only 1 wound before. Yeah, theyre going to be top tier for sure.
2020/12/14 18:52:14
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: Fair points. However, i did play some bigger tournaments (1850p) in 5th and never saw anyone, nor heard of anyone fielding a super heavy.
Sorry to hear that. I, meanwhile, played superheavies, so every event I went to had one.
They've been in 40k a while. The fact that player taboo generally kept them out isn't the same thing as them not having rules - after all, this led to most tournaments banning them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VladimirHerzog wrote: ? im pointing out that Dark reapers ARE a glasscannon unit. I thought you were saying that aspect warriors did no damage and therefore didnt qualify as glass "cannons" with your "featherduster" quip.
I'm pointing out that they still do very little damage for the points they pay, by illustrating that a "bad" unit, i.e. SM Devastators, do comparable damage.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 18:53:05
2020/12/14 18:56:04
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I'm pointing out that they still do very little damage for the points they pay, by illustrating that a "bad" unit, i.e. SM Devastators, do comparable damage.
Oh, for sure. Theyre bad but my point was to compare how ridiculous it is to say that bloat-drones and blight-haulers are glass cannons when things like dark reapers exist.
2020/12/14 18:57:22
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I'm pointing out that they still do very little damage for the points they pay, by illustrating that a "bad" unit, i.e. SM Devastators, do comparable damage.
Oh, for sure. Theyre bad but my point was to compare how ridiculous it is to say that bloat-drones and blight-haulers are glass cannons when things like dark reapers exist.
Well, right. I was riffing off that point to say that the Eldar units are even worse off because they don't do damage, either. They're glass feather dusters, while the Death Guard are complaining that their nuclear weapons are cased in steel rather than titanium.
2020/12/14 18:57:22
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: Fair points. However, i did play some bigger tournaments (1850p) in 5th and never saw anyone, nor heard of anyone fielding a super heavy.
Sorry to hear that. I, meanwhile, played superheavies, so every event I went to had one.
They've been in 40k a while. The fact that player taboo generally kept them out isn't the same thing as them not having rules - after all, this led to most tournaments banning them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VladimirHerzog wrote: ? im pointing out that Dark reapers ARE a glasscannon unit. I thought you were saying that aspect warriors did no damage and therefore didnt qualify as glass "cannons" with your "featherduster" quip.
I'm pointing out that they still do very little damage for the points they pay, by illustrating that a "bad" unit, i.e. SM Devastators, do comparable damage.
I'm sorry for every other player then, I say without having any idea how they actually played. ^^
Yeah, that's fair. I wish that player taboo came back. I loath them. However, I love Mortarion, so I'm contradicting myself. But I would much rather have a Mortarion that was more like the 30k one. So if they ban super heavies, including Mortarion and Magnus, but we got the 30k versions of the primarchs instead, I'd be a happy camper.
I'm pointing out that they still do very little damage for the points they pay, by illustrating that a "bad" unit, i.e. SM Devastators, do comparable damage.
Oh, for sure. Theyre bad but my point was to compare how ridiculous it is to say that bloat-drones and blight-haulers are glass cannons when things like dark reapers exist.
Well, right. I was riffing off that point to say that the Eldar units are even worse off because they don't do damage, either. They're glass feather dusters, while the Death Guard are complaining that their nuclear weapons are cased in steel rather than titanium.
There you go, comparing units over the army boundries again.
In that case I want to complain that the Tau only hits on 4's when other armies' infantry hits on 3's and even 2's! Or that Orks only hits on 5's! Not fair!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 18:59:45
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2020/12/14 19:28:29
Subject: Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: I do belive 2 of 10 is 20%, and 3 of 10 is 30%. My maths can be way off though.
It is, because both variants of DR increase the amount of damage required to kill a DG model beyond it's health. So the old drone requires 15 damage to kill, the new drone requires 11-12 damage from dedicated anti-tanks. However, this is distorted by the loss of the 10th wound, so the PBC is a much better example to evaluate the DR change: Old version takes 18 damage to kill, new takes 15-16, depending on the damage profile of the weapon used.
How is their durability " significantly higher against weapons that usually have low AP and wound the drone of 5s or 4s or would have killed most of the DG models anyways (4+ damage)" when they lose one wound and lose 5+ FNP?
The *loss* of durability is significantly higher.
What does low AP have to do with -1D and 5+ FNP?
Because it doesn't really matter whether a daemon engine can withstand 90 or 120 bolter shots - either way it doesn't care about getting shot by bolters.
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 actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. 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.
2020/12/14 19:29:49
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: Fair points. However, i did play some bigger tournaments (1850p) in 5th and never saw anyone, nor heard of anyone fielding a super heavy.
Sorry to hear that. I, meanwhile, played superheavies, so every event I went to had one.
They've been in 40k a while. The fact that player taboo generally kept them out isn't the same thing as them not having rules - after all, this led to most tournaments banning them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VladimirHerzog wrote: ? im pointing out that Dark reapers ARE a glasscannon unit. I thought you were saying that aspect warriors did no damage and therefore didnt qualify as glass "cannons" with your "featherduster" quip.
I'm pointing out that they still do very little damage for the points they pay, by illustrating that a "bad" unit, i.e. SM Devastators, do comparable damage.
I'm sorry for every other player then, I say without having any idea how they actually played. ^^
Yeah, that's fair. I wish that player taboo came back. I loath them. However, I love Mortarion, so I'm contradicting myself. But I would much rather have a Mortarion that was more like the 30k one. So if they ban super heavies, including Mortarion and Magnus, but we got the 30k versions of the primarchs instead, I'd be a happy camper.
So, you're complaining that you're super durable faction is now slightly less durable in certain specific cases (but more durable in others) while hoping for other durable units available to other factions to be banned? Yeah, that's fair.
2020/12/14 19:30:55
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
The Baneblade rules for 5th edition can be found in the Imperial Armor series of books, the first of which came out during 3rd (2001 IIRC). The 2nd edition -> 3rd edition changeover necessitated a rewrite of the Baneblade's rules, which stayed largely the same throughout 3rd-7th.
In those editions, it was roughly 3 times as durable as a Leman Russ while having thicker armor. (3 structure points -> 9 hull points in 6th)
The main gun was was dramatically improved to keep pace with firepower escalation (regular battle cannon in 3rd, earned strength 9 AP2 in 4th, earned apocalyptic blast (10" when APOC came out, then persisted with that profile through 7th).
The number of sponsons varied (started as mandatory 1 set. Then zero or one set, with zero giving +1 armor on the side, then zero-2 sets with no benefit other than points costs to bring 0).
The points cost varied wildly (starting at 634 in 3rd, hitting 500 in 5th, then zipping back to 600ish depending on loadout in 6th and 7th).
Otherwise the rules were consistent until 8th, when it dramatically lost durability and firepower relative to the Leman Russ.
And the Imperial Armour stuff was legal to play with in a normal game of sub 2000p 40k?
Not in sub 2k in the case of the Baneblade from 3rd and 4th, but it was otherwise legal for normal 40k played above these levels (e.g. 2500, which was the standard for the GW-run 'ard boyz tournaments). As legal as anything in the game was - which is to say, your opponent had to agree/the event rules had to permit it.
In 5th you could take 3 in 1500.
You could use them at 2000 points with your opponent's consent in 3rd/4th. Also worth noting 3rd added Scorpions and Cobras for Eldar, Battle Fortresses for Orks, and Warhound Titans. It also added Gargantuan Creatures like Gargantuan Squigoths for Orks and Heirodules for Tyranids. Super Heavys aren't a new thing.
I'm sorry , what? Possessed bomb was a top tier strat a few months ago.... The cap on minuses to hit that came with 9th nerfed them but them getting DR and more attacks will probably make them top tier again.
Aren't Possessed going to 3W as well? If so, along with their terminators, Death Guard will have infantry that drops the effectiveness of 3D weapons with DR. Sounds like a buff to me.
Don't forget that Warhound titans, Reaver titans, phantom titans. An ork great gargant, Eldar knight, Eldar tempest, banblades & Shadows word were all available in 2e via Armor/Epi-casta 3pp company licensed to make such things.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 19:31:40
2020/12/14 19:32:59
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I'm sorry for every other player then, I say without having any idea how they actually played. ^^
Yeah, that's fair. I wish that player taboo came back. I loath them. However, I love Mortarion, so I'm contradicting myself. But I would much rather have a Mortarion that was more like the 30k one. So if they ban super heavies, including Mortarion and Magnus, but we got the 30k versions of the primarchs instead, I'd be a happy camper.
So, not having any idea how they actually functioned, you decide that they must've been painful to play against? I'm glad we're having reasonable, sensible discourse here!
Why do you loathe superheavies exactly? Is it because they're emblematic of scale creep? That's hating the symptom, not the cause.
EDIT: Yeah there were many more superheavies in 2nd than I am listing; I just have personal experience with the Baneblade (R.I.P. armorcast).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 19:33:48
2020/12/14 19:38:41
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I'm sorry for every other player then, I say without having any idea how they actually played. ^^
Yeah, that's fair. I wish that player taboo came back. I loath them. However, I love Mortarion, so I'm contradicting myself. But I would much rather have a Mortarion that was more like the 30k one. So if they ban super heavies, including Mortarion and Magnus, but we got the 30k versions of the primarchs instead, I'd be a happy camper.
So, not having any idea how they actually functioned, you decide that they must've been painful to play against? I'm glad we're having reasonable, sensible discourse here!
Why do you loathe superheavies exactly? Is it because they're emblematic of scale creep? That's hating the symptom, not the cause.
EDIT:
Yeah there were many more superheavies in 2nd than I am listing; I just have personal experience with the Baneblade (R.I.P. armorcast).
Usually with superheavies hate its "That big tank you brought did a lot of damage to my small tank!!!" its OP please nerf!!. Lets disregard that my Cobra is more than a quarter of my army and that it only killed 200pts-ish of yours.
People also think 40k is all about killing (or play missions where killing is the only objective) and in these situation, titans are usually decent because of their high damage output vs low pts holding potential.
There you go, comparing units over the army boundries again.
In that case I want to complain that the Tau only hits on 4's when other armies' infantry hits on 3's and even 2's! Or that Orks only hits on 5's! Not fair!
Its a valid comparison when your main argument is that DG are now glass cannons when in reality they are still the most resilient army in the whole game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 19:40:07
2020/12/14 20:06:54
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: Fair points. However, i did play some bigger tournaments (1850p) in 5th and never saw anyone, nor heard of anyone fielding a super heavy.
Sorry to hear that. I, meanwhile, played superheavies, so every event I went to had one.
They've been in 40k a while. The fact that player taboo generally kept them out isn't the same thing as them not having rules - after all, this led to most tournaments banning them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VladimirHerzog wrote: ? im pointing out that Dark reapers ARE a glasscannon unit. I thought you were saying that aspect warriors did no damage and therefore didnt qualify as glass "cannons" with your "featherduster" quip.
I'm pointing out that they still do very little damage for the points they pay, by illustrating that a "bad" unit, i.e. SM Devastators, do comparable damage.
I'm sorry for every other player then, I say without having any idea how they actually played. ^^
Yeah, that's fair. I wish that player taboo came back. I loath them. However, I love Mortarion, so I'm contradicting myself. But I would much rather have a Mortarion that was more like the 30k one. So if they ban super heavies, including Mortarion and Magnus, but we got the 30k versions of the primarchs instead, I'd be a happy camper.
So, you're complaining that you're super durable faction is now slightly less durable in certain specific cases (but more durable in others) while hoping for other durable units available to other factions to be banned? Yeah, that's fair.
Is DG's "thing" that they are very resiliant to damage? Yes. Is it any other army's thing? No (except for Custodes)
I am complaing that models with 14+ wounds are legal in normal 2k games, yes.I would complain even if DG got a Baneblade equivalent. Even if it had the old AND the new DR.
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2020/12/14 20:09:00
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Is DG's "thing" that they are very resiliant to damage? Yes. Is it any other army's thing? No (except for Custodes)
I am complaing that models with 14+ wounds are legal in normal 2k games, yes.I would complain even if DG got a Baneblade equivalent. Even if it had the old AND the new DR.
Damn these AM and Knights players with their land raiders, repulsors, Keepers of secrets and tantalus!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 20:09:46
2020/12/14 20:09:30
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I'm sorry for every other player then, I say without having any idea how they actually played. ^^
Yeah, that's fair. I wish that player taboo came back. I loath them. However, I love Mortarion, so I'm contradicting myself. But I would much rather have a Mortarion that was more like the 30k one. So if they ban super heavies, including Mortarion and Magnus, but we got the 30k versions of the primarchs instead, I'd be a happy camper.
So, not having any idea how they actually functioned, you decide that they must've been painful to play against? I'm glad we're having reasonable, sensible discourse here!
Why do you loathe superheavies exactly? Is it because they're emblematic of scale creep? That's hating the symptom, not the cause.
EDIT:
Yeah there were many more superheavies in 2nd than I am listing; I just have personal experience with the Baneblade (R.I.P. armorcast).
Yes.
I don't feel like they a place in the game. Super-heavies is for super big games. I don't care that most of them aren't worth their points. Big models are for bog games. Huge models are for huge games.
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2020/12/14 20:10:16
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I'm sorry for every other player then, I say without having any idea how they actually played. ^^
Yeah, that's fair. I wish that player taboo came back. I loath them. However, I love Mortarion, so I'm contradicting myself. But I would much rather have a Mortarion that was more like the 30k one. So if they ban super heavies, including Mortarion and Magnus, but we got the 30k versions of the primarchs instead, I'd be a happy camper.
So, not having any idea how they actually functioned, you decide that they must've been painful to play against? I'm glad we're having reasonable, sensible discourse here!
Why do you loathe superheavies exactly? Is it because they're emblematic of scale creep? That's hating the symptom, not the cause.
EDIT:
Yeah there were many more superheavies in 2nd than I am listing; I just have personal experience with the Baneblade (R.I.P. armorcast).
Yes.
I don't feel like they a place in the game. Super-heavies is for super big games. I don't care that most of them aren't worth their points. Big models are for bog games. Huge models are for huge games.
So Guilliman would be fine because he's a small mode, right?
2020/12/14 20:11:49
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Is DG's "thing" that they are very resiliant to damage? Yes. Is it any other army's thing? No (except for Custodes)
I am complaing that models with 14+ wounds are legal in normal 2k games, yes.I would complain even if DG got a Baneblade equivalent. Even if it had the old AND the new DR.
Damn these AM and Knights players with their land raiders, repulsors, Keepers of secrets and tantalus!
You know what I mean but choose to act like you don't because you think it's funny.
That being said, I don't think vehicles should have wounds at all. Basically, I want the templates, vehicle facing, weapon arcs and armour of 5'th ed with the current base rules.
I'm sorry for every other player then, I say without having any idea how they actually played. ^^
Yeah, that's fair. I wish that player taboo came back. I loath them. However, I love Mortarion, so I'm contradicting myself. But I would much rather have a Mortarion that was more like the 30k one. So if they ban super heavies, including Mortarion and Magnus, but we got the 30k versions of the primarchs instead, I'd be a happy camper.
So, not having any idea how they actually functioned, you decide that they must've been painful to play against? I'm glad we're having reasonable, sensible discourse here!
Why do you loathe superheavies exactly? Is it because they're emblematic of scale creep? That's hating the symptom, not the cause.
EDIT:
Yeah there were many more superheavies in 2nd than I am listing; I just have personal experience with the Baneblade (R.I.P. armorcast).
Yes.
I don't feel like they a place in the game. Super-heavies is for super big games. I don't care that most of them aren't worth their points. Big models are for bog games. Huge models are for huge games.
So Guilliman would be fine because he's a small mode, right?
Correct. And if Magnus and Mortiarion had 40k versions of their 30k profiles then they would also be fine.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 20:13:04
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2020/12/14 20:15:59
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Is DG's "thing" that they are very resiliant to damage? Yes. Is it any other army's thing? No (except for Custodes)
I am complaing that models with 14+ wounds are legal in normal 2k games, yes.I would complain even if DG got a Baneblade equivalent. Even if it had the old AND the new DR.
Damn these AM and Knights players with their land raiders, repulsors, Keepers of secrets and tantalus!
You know what I mean but choose to act like you don't because you think it's funny.
That being said, I don't think vehicles should have wounds at all. Basically, I want the templates, vehicle facing, weapon arcs and armour of 5'th ed with the current base rules.
I don't know what you mean because you contradict yourself with things like this :
Big models are for bog games. Huge models are for huge games.
What is your prefered metric to judge if a model should be in the game or not? Its physical size? A random tag that assigns it to Lord of War? Its efficiency?
Because you coming out and saying that LoWs dont belong in the game makes no sense. You're lumping in tons of models that are outshined by heavy support choices.
Correct. And if Magnus and Mortiarion had 40k versions of their 30k profiles then they would also be fine.
So it is purely a "physical size" kind of deal. Guilliman boosts an army way more than Morty or Maggy do. Its also got nothing to do with their profiles since profiles don't determine size.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/12/14 20:17:39
2020/12/14 20:20:33
Subject: Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Wait you don't like Baneblades because they're big?
That's a silly reason to not let someone enjoy themselves.
"Wanna play a game of 40k?"
"Sure."
"Mind if I bring my Baneblades?"
"Yea, I do, actually."
"Alright, I'll bring the Banehammer, it's the less powerful version that no one uses."
"Still won't."
"Why?"
"your models are too big."
What?
2020/12/14 20:21:41
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Is DG's "thing" that they are very resiliant to damage? Yes. Is it any other army's thing? No (except for Custodes)
I am complaing that models with 14+ wounds are legal in normal 2k games, yes.I would complain even if DG got a Baneblade equivalent. Even if it had the old AND the new DR.
Damn these AM and Knights players with their land raiders, repulsors, Keepers of secrets and tantalus!
You know what I mean but choose to act like you don't because you think it's funny.
That being said, I don't think vehicles should have wounds at all. Basically, I want the templates, vehicle facing, weapon arcs and armour of 5'th ed with the current base rules.
I don't know what you mean because you contradict yourself with things like this :
Big models are for bog games. Huge models are for huge games.
What is your prefered metric to judge if a model should be in the game or not? Its physical size? A random tag that assigns it to Lord of War? Its efficiency?
Because you coming out and saying that LoWs dont belong in the game makes no sense. You're lumping in tons of models that are outshined by heavy support choices.
I don't contradict myself by saying "big models for big games. Huge models for huge games." (corrected my spelling)
Physical size most is usually the same as having more wounds. Yes, I know that you're gonna bring up models X, Y and Z that doesn't follow that usual standard in an attempt to undermine my point.
In what whay does my statement of Lords of War not beloning in 2k games of 40k not make sense? I know many of them are outshined by smaller stuff. So? When have I ever claimed that they are too good or OP for regular 40k? Please quote me.
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2020/12/14 20:24:41
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: In what whay does my statement of Lords of War not beloning in 2k games of 40k not make sense?
How does it make sense? What logic is behind it or underpinning it? What sense is there in it?
It certainly doesn't make sense to me on face value, so you actually have to explain yourself. The reason other people keep guessing at what you mean is because you haven't managed to state it. You might as well say "In what way does my statement of glue seventy eight sky cat synergistic War of 1812 not make sense?" I can parse the words, but not the sense.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/12/14 20:26:10
2020/12/14 20:25:21
Subject: Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
That's a silly reason to not let someone enjoy themselves.
"Wanna play a game of 40k?"
"Sure."
"Mind if I bring my Baneblades?"
"Yea, I do, actually."
"Alright, I'll bring the Banehammer, it's the less powerful version that no one uses."
"Still won't."
"Why?"
"your models are too big."
What?
And them bringing a huge model to a 2k game is a silly reason not to let ME enjoy myself.
I've played against both Knights and Banehammers and Baneblades. In some games I've ignored them, in some games I've killed them first turn. Not once has it been fun. But I can't think of more than three games without any superheavy that has been un-fun.
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2020/12/14 20:27:13
Subject: Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: And them bringing a huge model to a 2k game is a silly reason not to let ME enjoy myself. I've played against both Knights and Banehammers and Baneblades. In some games I've ignored them, in some games I've killed them first turn. Not once has it been fun. But I can't think of more than three games without any superheavy that has been un-fun.
So your personal experience has been that they are unfun, therefore they should be removed from the game for anyone else who has had fun both with and against them?
I've never encountered such selfishness in all my life.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 20:27:29
2020/12/14 20:27:23
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I don't contradict myself by saying "big models for big games. Huge models for huge games." (corrected my spelling)
Physical size most is usually the same as having more wounds. Yes, I know that you're gonna bring up models X, Y and Z that doesn't follow that usual standard in an attempt to undermine my point.
In what whay does my statement of Lords of War not beloning in 2k games of 40k not make sense? I know many of them are outshined by smaller stuff. So? When have I ever claimed that they are too good or OP for regular 40k? Please quote me.
my problem is that youre lumping in plenty of models in with the traditional LoWs.
When you include things like Armigers, Spartans and the named greater demons in your argument it makes it nonsensical.
2020/12/14 20:29:12
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: In what whay does my statement of Lords of War not beloning in 2k games of 40k not make sense?
How does it make sense? What logic is behind it or underpinning it? What sense is there in it?
It certainly doesn't make sense to me on face value, so you actually have to explain yourself. The reason other people keep guessing at what you mean is because you haven't managed to state it. You might as well say "In what way does my statement of glue seventy eight sky cat synergistic War of 1812 not make sense?"
No, that is incorrrect. That was an extremely poor analogy.
When someone slams down a super-heavy on the table it feels like they're slamming down an Apocalypse model.
They might as well field a Warlord Titan or a Warhound.Is it a Warhammer model? Yes. Does it belong in a normal game of 40k? No.
It's like they bring a model from a completely different game system.
"Oh, cool. You brought a model from Apocalypse to this game of regular 40k. Neato!"
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2020/12/14 20:33:27
Subject: Re:Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
Kall3m0n wrote: In what whay does my statement of Lords of War not beloning in 2k games of 40k not make sense?
How does it make sense? What logic is behind it or underpinning it? What sense is there in it?
It certainly doesn't make sense to me on face value, so you actually have to explain yourself. The reason other people keep guessing at what you mean is because you haven't managed to state it. You might as well say "In what way does my statement of glue seventy eight sky cat synergistic War of 1812 not make sense?"
No, that is incorrrect. That was an extremely poor analogy.
When someone slams down a super-heavy on the table it feels like they're slamming down an Apocalypse model. They might as well field a Warlord Titan or a Warhound.Is it a Warhammer model? Yes. Does it belong in a normal game of 40k? No. It's like they bring a model from a completely different game system. "Oh, cool. You brought a model from Apocalypse to this game of regular 40k. Neato!"
A good first try at the logic, but you're missing a premise. You've omitted the assumption that you hold that that model is for a different game, i.e. "not a normal game of 40k".
Now that we've identified the missing premise, can you tell me why you make that assumption? Because if you remove that premise, your argument no longer functions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/14 20:34:00
2020/12/14 20:34:10
Subject: Almost Half a Year - How's your 9th Ed Game?
I've been having fun with my Drukhari vs my friends Blood Angels. Now that he has a new Codex I'm having less fun, but in a couple of months suffering and pain will overcome those strawberry flavored smurfs again. For the Dark City.
About the LOW thing, I love seeing an army with a centerpiece model. Buildaround armies are my favourite, they feel narrative and make sense.
when 
The Bloody Sails