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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/17 12:32:21
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba
|
I'd like to keep this away from being purely a complaining thread if that's possible, but the new imperial weapon retstat pass is going to create some.....odd choices, to say the least, both inside and outside the space marine list. Take some of the weapons from the codex you know well, compare them to the new shiny standard imperial weapon list items, and share how you would go about improving the weapons that are now extremely lackluster by comparison.
Genestealer Cults:
New Flamer: S4 Ap- D1, 12" range, Assault D6 autohits, 5 points.
Webber: Exact same upgrade slot. S4 Ap- D1, 16" range, Assault D3 Autohits, 5 points.
Hmmm....which shall I choose, it's so difficult! Should I pick the one that's double the firepower and has 12" range on my squad of dudes with 12" rapid fire range and fast, open-topped transports, or should I choose the one that's 16" range and half the firepower so I can shoot it when the rest of the squad is doing half damage with their guns?
Proposed Solution: The Webber's special rule in 8th was changed from wounding vs Initiative (which obviously doesn't exist now) to wounding vs either S or T, whichever is lower. The problem is, there is very very very VERY rarely a difference between those two stats, and generally when there is, it's not targets that its efficient to point a webber at anyway. As a solution instead, I would change to a new rule, Webbed.
Webbed: A unit that does not have the VEHICLE keyword that suffers one or more wounds from a weapon with this special rule subtracts 2" from their Mv stat until the end of their next movement phase. This special rule can be applied on the same unit multiple times, reducing their Mv stat to a minimum of 0".
This also adds a purpose to the Web Pistol, which has been totally pointless since the Hand Flamer went to D6 shots - identical cost, 1 shot instead of D6, and also helps them serve the neophytes' role as disruption units rather than killing units.
Grenade Launcher. Basically, an Assault gun that shoots either a Frag (D6 S3 Ap- D1) or Krak (1 shot S6 Ap-1 Dd3) grenade 24" on a BS4+ model. To highlight the problem with this one look at the Brood Brothers/Infantry Squad list, where it's the exact same slot and point value as a melta gun (Assault 1 S8 Ap-4 Dd6+2) and a flamer (Assault D6 R12" S4 Ap- D1 Autohits), the both of which do more than twice as much damage vs their proposed target. Being 24"r instead of 12" is a dubious benefit again due to the squad being 12" range rapid fire, so it pretty much just massively overpays for flexibility.
Proposed Solution: You could pretty much double the shots on this thing and be alright, if you wanted to keep it tied to the profile of the frag and krak grenade. Meltaguns, Plasmaguns, and Flamers would all still be superior to it shooting vs their preferred targets of tanks, MEQ, and GEQ, but it would be the generalist option that is a jack of all trades master of none.
Autocannon: 2 shots S7 Ap-1 D2, vs Heavy Bolter 3 shots S5 Ap-1 D2. Not a problem for Marines, who do not have Autocannons and Heavy Bolters competing for slots, but for Guard and CSM, they will now be the same points on many of the same platforms with the new heavy bolter being superior or equivalent for every value of toughness except for T6.
Proposed Solution: Make all autocannons equivalent to the new fancy primaris AP-2 version. I believe that's "Accelerator" as opposed to "Ironstorm". most of the light vehicles/monsters autocannons hunt have at least 2 shifts of armor (the only exception being Drukhari vehicles I can think of) so this would keep them relevant as a choice in the world of the new heavy bolter.
Plasma Cannon: D3 shots, S8 Ap-3 D2 overcharged. Vs new Multimelta: 2 shots, S8 Ap-4 Dd6 or d6+2 in melta range. And the plasma cannon generally costs 5 more points. And has the nastier version of gets hot where it either does a huge chunk of damage or blows away the user if it's infantry.
Proposed Solution: They might actually just have already done this one and we haven't gotten confirmation yet, but make it base damage 2, overcharging to 3. That way it stays as a solid anti-MEQ solution, but can now specialize in blasting the new super-MEQ stuff that primaris have been getting with the W3 guys left and right.
Power Pick: S: User Ap-2 Dd3 melee weapon, 10pts. It is impossibly silly that GW decided to go across the board and add a ton of "this cost only for this model, this cost for all other models" pricing into the game and DIDNT give this weapon different prices for Aberrants (Base S5 WS3+ monstrosities it literally gives a whole extra special rule to specifically) and for sergeants in Neophyte/Jackal squads (base S3 Ws4+ wimpy GEQ sarges).
Proposed Solution: If it stays the same profile as now, make it 5 points for the sarges and have it in there as a worse stats but multi-damage power weapon. If it needs improvement, why does a power axe give you +2S but this heavier pickaxe leaves you S: user?
Improvised Weapon: A bunch of really cool, kickass melee weapons in the atalan jackals kit are officially this. It is S: user, Ap- D1, 0 pts. Literally "No stats" and you can choose to, FOR FREE, instead decide to have a Cult Knife, which is S: user, Ap-, D1, grants a bonus attack (Non-Astartes Chainsword, basically). feth you for using the cooler bits in your Atalan Jackals kit, loser!
Proposed Solution: Just...just make them the same as the cult knife. What was the point of making them different? Just call all the various melee weapons in the atalan jackals kit Improvised Weapon or Brutal Assault Weapon to make them the same as the chaos cultist wargear, and give them the bonus attack. Stupid, Stupid GW. Also, why are you so insistent on giving GSC neophyte-equivalent units, who are literally just GEQ melee statlines and have no reason at all to ever want to be in melee, tons and tons of different melee weapon options some of which are super expensive? If we want Neophytes to be viewed as a potential light melee unit, and we want them to be worth 6ppm as guardsmen but with no orders, can they be A2 since we can't give them all "chainsword-equivalent" weapons like Chaos Cultists?
GSC Acolyte Melee Weapon List: In light of the power Fist/Chainfist changes, the heavy rock saw should probably be the damage D3 choice and the heavy rock cutter should be D2. That would make those two options the same value IMO, currently there's no reason to not take the rock saw. Also the drill is basically identical damage output if not slightly worse than the other two, why is it 15pts instead of 10pts? GW massively overvalues things that "could" do tons of damage, Ork players everywhere shocked pikachu face, more details at 11.
GSC Metamorph Melee Weapon List: Hooooooooooo boy are these real silly after the Power Weapon changes. the KILLER LINEUP of weaponry that Metamorphs can wield, the hyper-elite of the elite, not like those stupid Acolyte underlings who only get Chainfists that don't have a hit roll penalty get, is as follows:
Metamorph Whip: 0 pts. No stats. Give up your bonus S4 AP- D1 attack from your cult knife, get the ability to fight on a turn where you get killed before you get to attack. Proposed Solution: Pretty much OK as is, but if they really want a metamorph to be 11ppm they should probably not lose the Cult Knife bonus attack.
Metamorph Talon: 2pts. You're paying 2pts to make your bonus S4 AP- D1 attack at WS2+ instead of WS3+. As a special bonus offer, you can buy 2 of these stupid things to give up your Rending Claw's good AP for another WS2+ bonus attack. Here's how points efficient that option is:
Vs GEQ, double talon metamorph: 5 attacks, 1.85 unsaved wounds, 15pts.
Vs GEQ, two regular Acolytes: 2 attacks with knives, 4 attacks with claws. 2.2 unsaved wounds. Also double the defenses because it's two guys. Also obsec. Also gets the aforementioned awesome chainfists in the squads. 16pts.
Proposed Solution: Give them bonus attacks equal to the model's Attacks stat and remove the +1 to hit. That way you can stack up bonuses to their attacks stat through stratagems and psychic powers to make them real glass cannon chewers through light infantry.
Metamorph Claw: S+2, AP-1, D1, 3pts. fun fact, this weapon decreases your damage output vs all toughness values because you give up the Rending special rule from the normal claw and the bonus attack from the knife. And it costs points! Cool!
Proposed Solution: S+3, AP-1, D2, 3pts. The GSC roster is stretched to bursting with different glass cannon melee units, so there's basically no target that exists that we don't have multiple competing solutions for, but Autocannon statline is actually something we don't have. Still makes you less effective vs GEQ, but now at least has several useful target brackets.
Bonesword: Currently S: User, AP -2, D1, 5 points. Currently an option on Acolytes and a requirement on Primuses, and fun fact, it makes your damage output not change at all on acolytes and actively worse on the primus vs all targets.
Proposed Solution: Please just make it identical to a power sword if you're going to charge the same points for it. It's a sword, it's a special sword, we don't need special unique stats for it, it's fine.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/17 12:50:18
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/17 12:40:23
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Does the GSC Grenade Launcher have a different range to the IG one? I thought they were both 24", not 18".
|
2021-4 Plog - Here we go again... - my fifth attempt at a Dakka PLOG
My Pile of Potential - updates ongoing...
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote:This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote:You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling. - No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/17 12:50:37
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba
|
Dysartes wrote:Does the GSC Grenade Launcher have a different range to the IG one? I thought they were both 24", not 18".
Nope, for some reason it was just in my head as 18"r.
|
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/17 19:04:59
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Loyal Necron Lychguard
|
the_scotsman wrote:I'd like to keep this away from being purely a complaining thread if that's possible, but the new imperial weapon retstat pass is going to create some.....odd choices, to say the least, both inside and outside the space marine list. Take some of the weapons from the codex you know well, compare them to the new shiny standard imperial weapon list items, and share how you would go about improving the weapons that are now extremely lackluster by comparison.
I would just fix the pts. Instead, you should try to fix stat lines where they don't make sense fluff-wise, trying to justify GW's pts by "fixing" rules that were never broken is silly IMO and should only serve to highlight how silly CA20 was. Imagine doing the same thing with PL, how many shots and how much range do flamers and bolters need to be equal to lascannons? At some point you just have to give up on having different weapons on models and just play the Apocalypse game because GW has given up on internal balance and you want to use your (insert bad option) unit.
Webber: Proposed Solution: The Webber's special rule in 8th was changed from wounding vs Initiative (which obviously doesn't exist now) to wounding vs either S or T, whichever is lower. The problem is, there is very very very VERY rarely a difference between those two stats, and generally when there is, it's not targets that its efficient to point a webber at anyway. As a solution instead, I would change to a new rule, Webbed.
Webbed: A unit that does not have the VEHICLE keyword that suffers one or more wounds from a weapon with this special rule subtracts 2" from their Mv stat until the end of their next movement phase. This special rule can be applied on the same unit multiple times, reducing their Mv stat to a minimum of 0".
Proposed Wording Change: Unless the target is a VEHICLE subtract 2" from its Movement characteristic until the end of the target's next movement phase for each unsaved wound suffered. An alternative would be a bonus against Infantry and/or units with M5 or less if you're looking for an equivalent to Initiative in 9th.
Plasma Cannon: D3 shots, S8 Ap-3 D2 overcharged. Vs new Multimelta: 2 shots, S8 Ap-4 Dd6 or d6+2 in melta range. And the plasma cannon generally costs 5 more points. And has the nastier version of gets hot where it either does a huge chunk of damage or blows away the user if it's infantry.
Proposed Solution: They might actually just have already done this one and we haven't gotten confirmation yet, but make it base damage 2, overcharging to 3. That way it stays as a solid anti-MEQ solution, but can now specialize in blasting the new super-MEQ stuff that primaris have been getting with the W3 guys left and right.
Plasma cannons are blast and have 50% more range, do we know the Heavy 2 MM cost yet? Your take would be unfair if the new multimeltas cost is x2-5 or more as tends to be the case with twin-linked weapons.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/17 20:13:34
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Genestealer Cults have a whole host of issues and it really isn't related to their weapons.
|
CaptainStabby wrote:If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote:BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote:Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote:ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/18 02:24:48
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Infiltrating Broodlord
|
This is a good list scotsman, though I do have a couple nitpicks/counter opinions to offer. the_scotsman wrote: Proposed Solution: The Webber's special rule in 8th was changed from wounding vs Initiative (which obviously doesn't exist now) to wounding vs either S or T, whichever is lower. Minor correction, but in 7th when it was reintroduced the Webber's gimmick was that it was a blast weapon that used the target's strength for its AP (so shooting at a S3 target gave it AP 3, so it ignored anything less than a 2+ save). It made it good against elite T3 troops and absolutely awful against MEQ, so it never saw much play. Given that no flamer has been given blast, it might be a fairly decent addition to reflect what it once was. Admittedly, I very much like the idea of a weapon that can slow targets down. Could also take a page from Necromunda and have it force the target to save on their strength characteristic (i.e. roll below your strength, so a S3 model would need a 1 or a 2, S4 would need a 1, 2, or 3, and S6+ would only fail on a 6) to represent injury suffered from fighting against the constricting webbing and the difficulty in breaking the bond. the_scotsman wrote: This also adds a purpose to the Web Pistol, which has been totally pointless since the Hand Flamer went to D6 shots - identical cost, 1 shot instead of D6, and also helps them serve the neophytes' role as disruption units rather than killing units. To be fair, Neophytes don't get access to Hand Flamers and Acolytes don't get access to Web Pistols so there isn't a direct competition between the weapons. the_scotsman wrote: GSC Acolyte Melee Weapon List: In light of the power Fist/Chainfist changes, the heavy rock saw should probably be the damage D3 choice and the heavy rock cutter should be D2. That would make those two options the same value IMO, currently there's no reason to not take the rock saw. Also the drill is basically identical damage output if not slightly worse than the other two, why is it 15pts instead of 10pts? GW massively overvalues things that "could" do tons of damage, Ork players everywhere shocked pikachu face, more details at 11. Rock Cutters are actually fairly decent right now between the surprise cost drop they received and early 9th tending to favor its preferred targets. The D3 damage paired with their ability to get a second chance at killing the target after doing damage makes them very good at dispatching 3+ wound models. Saws are still more efficient against vehicles, but Cutters pull ahead against anything that has an odd number of wounds and monsters. For drills, I think they should probably remove the strength characteristic altogether and just have it start using its mortal wound ability if it scores a hit. Makes it far more simple than the current convoluted rules it has and gives it a more specific niche as the weapon to use against things with extremely high toughness or very good invulnerable saves. the_scotsman wrote: Metamorph Whip: 0 pts. No stats. Give up your bonus S4 AP- D1 attack from your cult knife, get the ability to fight on a turn where you get killed before you get to attack. Proposed Solution: Pretty much OK as is, but if they really want a metamorph to be 11ppm they should probably not lose the Cult Knife bonus attack. I'd probably just add the reroll failed wound rolls ability from Venomthrope Toxic Lashes (given that visually that is what the whip is inspired from) and possibly add -1 AP. It is relatively easy for GSC to get modifiers to their hit rolls, but the to-wound roll is more sparse. It also plays well with Metamorphs being the anti-infantry specialists. A lot of what they want to hunt isn't going to be packing the best saves, so forcing more wounds on the target is good. the_scotsman wrote: Metamorph Talon: 2pts. You're paying 2pts to make your bonus S4 AP- D1 attack at WS2+ instead of WS3+. As a special bonus offer, you can buy 2 of these stupid things to give up your Rending Claw's good AP for another WS2+ bonus attack. Here's how points efficient that option is: Vs GEQ, double talon metamorph: 5 attacks, 1.85 unsaved wounds, 15pts. Vs GEQ, two regular Acolytes: 2 attacks with knives, 4 attacks with claws. 2.2 unsaved wounds. Also double the defenses because it's two guys. Also obsec. Also gets the aforementioned awesome chainfists in the squads. 16pts. Proposed Solution: Give them bonus attacks equal to the model's Attacks stat and remove the +1 to hit. That way you can stack up bonuses to their attacks stat through stratagems and psychic powers to make them real glass cannon chewers through light infantry. Truthfully I think these could be fixed with point changes, as the weapon itself does what it is supposed to do (more accurate volume of attacks) but not cost effectively. I'd probably drop a single talon to 1 point and twin talons possibly to 1 point or free since they have a significant downside (also assuming Metamorphs go back to being 1 point more than Acolytes at most - no idea why they keep trying to make them 15+ points). the_scotsman wrote: Metamorph Claw: S+2, AP-1, D1, 3pts. fun fact, this weapon decreases your damage output vs all toughness values because you give up the Rending special rule from the normal claw and the bonus attack from the knife. And it costs points! Cool! I think these would be fine if they increased the AP to -2 and damage to D3 with the current strength modifier. In theory Claws are for hunting heavy infantry and bikes so added AP and damage are good. Ideally claws shouldn’t add too much strength without outside buffs though, else they might start to do too well against vehicle/monster targets which steps on Acolyte and Aberrants role and brings back bad memories of 7th edition. Also to elaborate for those who weren't around or don't remember, in 7th the metamorph weapons only granted an ability that otherwise modified the rending claws. Whips added initiative (so they were likely to swing first), Talons added Weapon Skill (more likely to hit) and claws added strength. The issue was that S6 was the golden point where they could effectively threaten just about everything and the rending rule allowed them to hurt things that otherwise wouldn't be vulnerable to S6. the_scotsman wrote: Bonesword: Currently S: User, AP -2, D1, 5 points. Currently an option on Acolytes and a requirement on Primuses, and fun fact, it makes your damage output not change at all on acolytes and actively worse on the primus vs all targets. I miss the pre-8th edition Boneswords. They used to cause instant death which made them great for keeping characters and monsters away.  Given they are basically Tyranid force swords, it would be nice if they mirrored that statline somewhat.
|
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2020/08/18 03:29:40
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/18 05:49:48
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Loyal Necron Lychguard
|
I had a game against 18 bonesword Shrikes in 8th, they caused roughly 3 damage altogether and they were attacking multi-wound models so I'm not even sure if they removed a model from the table. I would probably put them at flat 2 damage instead of d3 damage, it would be stronger in general and the monstrous boneswords are flat 3 instead of d6, not to mention it'll be less of a pain to resolve against FNP armies.
Nid melee weapons, in general, need a buff, hopefully, their new codex will deliver.
I would change rending claws to re-roll wounds and always AP-1 instead of AP-4 on wound rolls of 6. Scything talons changed to chainsword ability instead of their current ability. Boneswords and lashwhip changed to 2 damage and cost changed to 7 for both.
Monstrous claws remain their current cost but lose the bonus damage on wound rolls of 6, AP is -6 damage is 2, monstrous talons get the chainsword ability instead of their current ability, the cost is 10. Monstrous swords same stats and abilities as the new monstrous talons except with +4 S, cost is 40/55. Monstrous lashwhip gets AP-3 and +4 S and cost goes to 40/40 (20 if the model is armed with monstrous talons or monstrous claws, 10 if the model is armed with monstrous swords).
The pts cost of Necron weapons on HQ have also been thrown out of wack because GW decided that Timmy cannot into math "so we better make Lychguard 30+0 instead of 21+9 or 21+3+6". voidblades (characters) 1 pt, warscythe (characters) 5 pts, staff of light 5 pts, voidscythe 10 pts. All HQs armed with a staff of light -5 pts (so the total cost remains the same). I am not asking for perfect balance between weapon options, just throw me a bone if I decide to wield S6 AP-3 D1 instead of S7 AP-4 D2.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/19 10:04:57
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Inspiring SDF-1 Bridge Officer
|
Adding to the webber - hit unit can't Advance, Withdraw or Charge (or some penalty to such).
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/19 10:05:40
It never ends well |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2020/08/26 11:34:43
Subject: Weapons that are going to be pretty "Hmmmm.." after the imperial weapon restatting (and how to fix?)
|
 |
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba
|
Stormonu wrote:Adding to the webber - hit unit can't Advance, Withdraw or Charge (or some penalty to such).
That could be easier to track. I just think "its a freaking net gun, why do all its rules have something to do with strength of the opposing model instead of it impeding movement in some way"
It could be easier to track if it prevented Fall Back and Advance or something like that. And again, web pistol would have a point as a tie-up gun.
|
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!" |
|
 |
 |
|
|