Is it just me...

[Lord Hanaur]

To be fair, most play an army at a time most of the time.  But I also have 9 armies myself and feel somewhat compelled to know them.  

 

I don't have any deathstars in my armies that i can think of so i think Deathstars are probably a little oversold as necessary.  Its one way to win for sure.  But if I was to make a list 9and maybe we should?) of all the different TYPES of forces I play, sort of categorizing them, I think I'd find NO fortifications (well i am trying a skyshield ruight now but its not thus far very impactful)  no deathstars and no super heavies.

 

I think you can win without all that.

[tombking]

An opponent with an extreme army can focus fire on the 1/4 designed to counter that area, and if successful is very likely to win.

 

As for keeping up with rules, I've given up. $50 hardbacks are way too much, especially when I have about 8 different armies to update... let alone getting opponent army rules.

This. From the Card Kingdom tourney, one battle against the necron starchild thing. Between being forced on the short board edges with a large army and then that thing can move 12" and shoot giant pie plate 38" admittely not D but not that I got a save against it out in the open. Oh look 2 squads gone (including the one that was the most threat to it) and a maybe a 3rd from the 17" flame template. I could have reserved but then that risks him jumping on and wiping out the few units on the table before everyone else comes on and oh look monster in the deployment zone that I can only snap fire against that is going just eat me up as I come on.

 

I got long table edge against the stompa so was able to move a bit and hide but still nothing that can hit it hard enough in one turn to take it down and then it has 4 mek boys so it gets those hull points right back. Then the 12 inch move and being able to fire a whole lot of things including a ranged big pie plate and big flame it can catch up and do damage to the stuff trying to run away which isn't doing any damage as it is moving and only able to fire small arms and not able to sit on an objective.

 

The other side of the coin, the games that had the big toys in their armies were over in one or two turns as big thing takes out other big thing then you just stomp the rest of the army. For example the Khorne engine killed the star child turn 1 which blew up in a big enough area to take out the rest of the necron army. Ooops. Fun for a change up of things but not on a regular basis.

 

I don't think that Escalation and Stronghold are bad things but at first glance they don't seem to integrate well with a bog standard 40K army.

[Guest]

All comers lists are in trouble. Let's say I tried to get ready for the new environment:

 

1/4 of your points to anti-air

1/4 to anti superheavies / strongholds

1/4 of your points to stop death stars

1/4 of your points for scoring troops

 

I know there is some overlap (FW lascannon Sabre defense platforms for example), but let's just look at broad strokes. An opponent with an extreme army can focus fire on the 1/4 designed to counter that area, and if successful is very likely to win. Maybe I am over-simplifying, but it seems like I can't build a good list any more to deal with all these different kinds of threats. Maybe when you try to build in so many counters for everything it gets to the point where your army has little focus and a regular 5th edition style MSU or horde list from 5th takes you out.

Loads of overlap. Higher strength AA works for AT. AT works for super-heavies and stongholds and deathstars. Many Scoring units can function for at least one of these roles too. 

 

Look at the classic SM tactical squad. Unit is scoring. Missile launcher or heavy bolter could be AA, could go with lascannon or MM and be Anti-vehicle/super heavy/building. Even the basic bolters work fine agains the lighter aircraft. Frag grenades are pretty impressive for clearing out buildings should you get close enough and the basic krak grenades are pretty impressive against most vehicles and even some MCs. A power fist or melta bomb can do pretty solid damage to some super heavies or buildings, especially in conjunction with strength increases. Special weapons are in the same boat.

 

Is the unit competitive? Usually not. It's often ditched for more "optimized" units, unless a specific special rule will make it more than its typical value. The tactical squad is a hallmark of SM all-comers lists, while the scouts or biker troops are there for the more "optimized" list creations, as are allies.

 

Presently, I've been running units of 5x camo bolter scouts with flakk ML and a combi-melta sarge. Unit is 105pts (DA) and rarely has any staying power without a transport (AP4 cover denial is pretty common). That said, the unit does pretty well and an all-comers unit. Very flexible in deployment and use options. I doubt the flakk missiles are worth it and I've certainly never gotten my points in damage to AA units, but my opponent's seem to value the flakk higher than I do, so it can be useful for using them to protect more valuable other units. Between 2x of these units, I ususally get their points back and more.

-Pax

[Lord Hanaur]

Prudence sometimes dictates target priority more than real damage dealing ability, and lets face it, its a dice game.  Any given Sunday, the Cleveland Browns COULD win and the Scout missile COULD down a bird.  So if theres extra firepower lying around, hey, why not use the scouts for first blood right?

[Aventine]

All comers lists are in trouble. Let's say I tried to get ready for the new environment:

 

1/4 of your points to anti-air

1/4 to anti superheavies / strongholds

1/4 of your points to stop death stars

1/4 of your points for scoring troops

 

Is that how anyone actually sits down to make a list? A list doesn't have to have stopping/killing power for all those units, as there are other ways of mitigation. Also, many units (most), as Pax said, fit into multiple roles.

 

For me, I don't really see the difference in the release of the Knight from, say, the plastic Carnifex kit. When the Fex came out it was the biggest plastic monster and suddenly every Nid player could (and did) have 6 of them in their army, and it was really hard to deal with for a bit, and people complained, then got used to them... and now we have Riptides and Wraithknights and Carnifexen no longer elicit very strong feeling from anyone.

 

This game is the same as it ever was; what you make of it.

[WestRider]

The more I think about it, the more I think the Knights are actually the worst step in this direction yet. This is the first time since I started playing where it's possible to field an entire Army that's completely immune to almost every basic Weapon/Troop in the Game, and doesn't give up Scoring Power to do it. Even with 3rd Ed Armoured Companies, you could work on getting around to rear armour and stuff, but this is an entire Army that's completely immune to anything below S6 (S7 in Assaults) without some kind of special Rule like Rending or Armourbane.

 

At least in 5th, I could crack transports and then open up with my basic firepower at the dudes who fell out. With Fex Spam, Bolters and Lasguns could still do something, even if it wasn't terribly effective. With Knights as an Army, most of the Models in a reasonably balanced force have no role except to cower and die.

[JamesBeadle]

I dunno. I have a guy I am playing who owns a Cestus Assault Ram and a FW Predator with a heavy conversion beamer. Both units have st10 ap1 pie plates, and I play Ork Horde armies. I have almost nothing to stop this in my Ork collection so if I find myself playing against both of these models, I will probably just get creamed. He isn't a jerk though, so I doubt after my first spanking he will continue to run both, and if he does, I will just talk it out with him or go home. 

 

It really is about just having fun folks to game with, and ususally people aren't jerks. The models Chris has are way cool. 

[tombking]

 but this is an entire Army that's completely immune to anything below S6 (S7 in Assaults) without some kind of special Rule like Rending or Armourbane.

And most of the standard things that small arms didn't hurt like Wraitlords, Carnifexes, etc usually die pretty easily to standard heavy weapons, missile/plasma/las which are just going to annoy the Knight.

[tombking]

I dunno. I have a guy I am playing who owns a Cestus Assault Ram and a FW Predator with a heavy conversion beamer. Both units have st10 ap1 pie plates, and I play Ork Horde armies.

The Escalation pie plates are the big Apocalypse pie plates not the large blast from the basic rules, you can easily fit a 20+ boy mob under them and they are all gonna die.

 

I had 3 squads pretty much become useless after one shot from the Necron starchild thing before I even got to my half of turn one as I had to be bunched up on the short table edge for deployment.

[AbusePuppy]

That's probably true, we haven't had anyone super competitive bust out a LoW. I think, as best as I can figure, the least limiting, most beneficial tournament rules go something like this:

2+ re-roll nerf ala LVO (4+ on 2nd roll)

2 Codex limit ala LVO (No Primary+Ally+Inquisition+Formation+Knight+LoW)

Allow Escalation and Stronghold Assault, but no ranged weapons with D allowed (even SM can have Knights then, and everyone else has non-D options).

No defense networks (multi forts) or void shields.

No non-Escalation FW LoW.

Allow Formations (Unique) and Inquisition, but they count to two Codex limit.

 

Why no Void Shields? Absent apocalypse, the VSG isn't particularly powerful in my experience- you're paying 100pts for three AV12 HP. 110pts gets you two Chimeras, which have 6HP, come with guns, and are protecting two troop squads in a pretty similar way to how the VSG protects units. (Plus the Chimeras can get cover saves, are mobile, and aren't automatically negated by getting within 12".)

 

I don't see the problem with the defense networks, either. Barring possibly the Void Relay Network, none of them are anything resembling competitive.

 

The fix for 2+ with rerolls is actually a lot simpler than most people tend to think, and it requires two very small bits of errata to enact: Grimoire of True Names only affects your Daemonic save (meaning it can't get any better than a 3+ on any model except Fateweaver) and Fortune affects one type of saving throw (armor, cover, invulnerable) each time it is cast. With both of those in force, there's basically no chance that Screamerstar or Seerstar are going to dominate anything.

 

 

I will also note that the so called "compeditive" lists are really just a bunch of lists designed to specifically counter each other.

 

All-comers lists aren't extinct, they just don't appear in the tournament setting much because the kind of player that plays games with the intention of a balanced and fun against all opponents, isn't welcome amongst the tournament players.

 

Two things here. One, that isn't true at all- a good competitive list usually has to be prepared to deal with lots of different kinds of threats. Unsurprisingly, most of them will focus on making sure they have answers to the most powerful expected opponents (Riptides/Broadsides, deathstars, Wave Serpents, bike marines, etc) but a list that comes only expecting to have to win against any of those is a list that will do poorly at any large tournament. You WILL end up fighting things outside the usual suspects, and if you aren't ready for that, you WILL lose.

 

Also, you seem to be using a very different definition of "all-comers list" than I usually see. A "take all comers" list is one designed to be able to handle a wide variety of enemies, with tools to deal with each of them- generally speaking, this is how tournament lists are designed. it has nothing to do with making the game "balanced and fun against all opponents," because there's no such thing as a list that makes the game fun. (That's dependent on the players themselves.) I'm also confused by why you think that a particular list would be "unwelcome against the tournament players" because, in talking to other competitive players, I have never heard of a legal list that would be unwelcome. If you aren't cheating or intentionally mangling the rules, you have the right to bring any list you choose to take.

[Guest]

The more I think about it, the more I think the Knights are actually the worst step in this direction yet. This is the first time since I started playing where it's possible to field an entire Army that's completely immune to almost every basic Weapon/Troop in the Game, and doesn't give up Scoring Power to do it. Even with 3rd Ed Armoured Companies, you could work on getting around to rear armour and stuff, but this is an entire Army that's completely immune to anything below S6 (S7 in Assaults) without some kind of special Rule like Rending or Armourbane.

 

At least in 5th, I could crack transports and then open up with my basic firepower at the dudes who fell out. With Fex Spam, Bolters and Lasguns could still do something, even if it wasn't terribly effective. With Knights as an Army, most of the Models in a reasonably balanced force have no role except to cower and die.

Yes and no.

 

I agree this particular army build is probably not a good list for a friendly game. Having toface the Same model 3-6 times is just lame. 

 

As for balance, I honestly see these knights as being particularly vulnerable to tyranids and other melee oriented forces. The invulnerable save goes away in assault and they have only I4 with no special assault grenades. For ranged weapons, It has two weapons, only one of which can even target flyers (with weak profiles) and the other one can only inflict a single wound per turn on you MCs (unless you squad them up). If building a tyranid army with lots of Melee MCs and you just sit in cover and force the charge, those knight titans will lose. You get armor against the hammer, swing first, and clobber them with lots of attacks. Knight Titans can't challenge and can't overwatch. They could chose to stay at range, but they really don't have the shooting to remain as large a threat at long range. 

 

I think these will give shooty armies fits, especially shooty armies that need to stay stationary in order to fire at full effect. The facing based invulnerable saves will be bad for IG and TAU which include less mobile shooty forces. That said, you could probably destroy one of these with a unit or two of FW with EMP grenades or IG vets with melta bombs, especially if the knight is forced to charge through terrain first.

 

 

 

The Escalation pie plates are the big Apocalypse pie plates not the large blast from the basic rules, you can easily fit a 20+ boy mob under them and they are all gonna die.

 

I had 3 squads pretty much become useless after one shot from the Necron starchild thing before I even got to my half of turn one as I had to be bunched up on the short table edge for deployment.

Escalation uses both. Small blast is still 3" and large blast, like the heavy conversion beamer pred, is still 5". Massive blast is 7" and apocalyptic blast is 10". the Apocalyptic mega-blast is that 15" one and is pretty uncommon even in apocalypse (except when super heavies are destroyed, that is the common use for it). 

-Pax

[WestRider]

There isn't a single Nid MC that I wouldn't Charge with an undamaged Knight, Cover or no. A Trygon is probably the worst-case scenario, and even one of those doesn't kill a Knight in a single round on average, while a Charging Knight does kill a Trygon in one round on average, especially if the Trygon's taken a couple of Wounds from Battle Cannon fire already.

 

A damaged Knight shouldn't be Charging a Trygon or anything with Electroshock Grubs, but if it's still got 4+ HP, pretty much anything else is a reasonable target.

 

Or they can just camp Objectives, blast away at Scoring Units, and generally grind. A pair of Crones will probably account for a Knight or two, but if the Nids are putting much in the air, they're going to end up weak on the ground.

 

Not to mention the fact that a Nid list based around Melee MCs is just fodder for most Tau, Eldar, SM, Daemon, and IG Lists, so you're getting into the Rock/Paper/Scissors aspect that's my core complaint about 6th and all the add-ons.

[tombking]

Escalation uses both. Small blast is still 3" and large blast, like the heavy conversion beamer pred, is still 5". Massive blast is 7" and apocalyptic blast is 10". the Apocalyptic mega-blast is that 15" one and is pretty uncommon even in apocalypse (except when super heavies are destroyed, that is the common use for it). 

-Pax

These were dropping the 10" one on me. It was not amusing from a player morale view. My opponents were nice and they were good games, just kinda hard to be excited about the game when oh those 2 sqauds just went poof before you even get to move and so did your only chance at actually hurting this beast. On the other hand I actually got to play and that was an important bit and 2 games were against regular armies so I wasn't the only one without a big model.

[Threejacks]

The Escalation pie plates are the big Apocalypse pie plates not the large blast from the basic rules, you can easily fit a 20+ boy mob under them and they are all gonna die.

 

I had 3 squads pretty much become useless after one shot from the Necron starchild thing before I even got to my half of turn one as I had to be bunched up on the short table edge for deployment.

  The Massive (10") and Mega Blast(15") pie plates are very risky shots to take when the target is close to or on the edge of the board...chances are they are being fired as the main primary weapon from a very expensive points wise unit and have pretty good chance of scattering off the board.

 

 I had this happen with my Aquila on tues firing at a large batch of Nids.I placed it so it was just over an inch from the board edge because that was the best I could do with his grouping and it scatter 2" and ended up just hanging off the board edge.The Aquila can fire that mega blast once per turn and costs 550+ points.

  With that in mind when playing against the massive blast stuff on the small (non apoc size) tables that are normal 40k one can indeed spread their troops in crafty ways to minimize their effect:)

 

 Of course theres always the 1 in 3 chance of a direct hit like what happened in my game on the next turn...21 nids dead....

[blackvigil]

Good discussion here... I am glad there are lots of opinions on the matter. 

I did vote with my money, and with my feet. I am working on my fantasy army, and I plan to play in the Fantasy OFCC, and not 40k. This will be the first year in quite a few that i won't be playing in the 40k, and my first ever Fantasy. (to be truthful, if they weren't scheduled opposite, I would likely play in both, just to have fun with my new guard army)

[Aventine]

These were dropping the 10" one on me. It was not amusing from a player morale view. My opponents were nice and they were good games, just kinda hard to be excited about the game when oh those 2 sqauds just went poof before you even get to move and so did your only chance at actually hurting this beast. On the other hand I actually got to play and that was an important bit and 2 games were against regular armies so I wasn't the only one without a big model.

 

Were you aware of what it did before deployment/ the game started? Did you do anything to mitigate the damage (out of LOS/squads on multi-level ruins)?

 

Why no Void Shields? Absent apocalypse, the VSG isn't particularly powerful in my experience- you're paying 100pts for three AV12 HP. 110pts gets you two Chimeras, which have 6HP, come with guns, and are protecting two troop squads in a pretty similar way to how the VSG protects units. (Plus the Chimeras can get cover saves, are mobile, and aren't automatically negated by getting within 12".)

 

I don't see the problem with the defense networks, either. Barring possibly the Void Relay Network, none of them are anything resembling competitive.

 

The fix for 2+ with rerolls is actually a lot simpler than most people tend to think, and it requires two very small bits of errata to enact: Grimoire of True Names only affects your Daemonic save (meaning it can't get any better than a 3+ on any model except Fateweaver) and Fortune affects one type of saving throw (armor, cover, invulnerable) each time it is cast. With both of those in force, there's basically no chance that Screamerstar or Seerstar are going to dominate anything.

 

I just see no Void Shields as the logical counterpart to no ranged D, which is what really makes shields at all necessary. Defense Networks was less a balance issue and more a logistical one; most tournaments have pre-placed terrain, getting one fort down is enough headache already, try 4+ of them.

I think that fix is too light. Even with the 2nd roll nerfed to 4+, Seer Council still won LVO.

[AbusePuppy]

There isn't a single Nid MC that I wouldn't Charge with an undamaged Knight, Cover or no. A Trygon is probably the worst-case scenario, and even one of those doesn't kill a Knight in a single round on average, while a Charging Knight does kill a Trygon in one round on average, especially if the Trygon's taken a couple of Wounds from Battle Cannon fire already.

 

I can't imagine how you would get anything like a fair fight, given that a Knight costs more than 100pts more than even the most tricked-out of MCs. Against a pair of Carnifexes (240-270pts, depending) should cause ~5HP of damage to it- a Harpy in combination with one of the other fighty MCs should likewise cause enough damage to bring it down, or nearly so. (Carnifexes on the charge will be exceptionally unpleasant due to large numbers of S9 HoW hits.)

 

Nids in their basic build actually fair relatively well against Knights.

 

 

I just see no Void Shields as the logical counterpart to no ranged D, which is what really makes shields at all necessary. Defense Networks was less a balance issue and more a logistical one; most tournaments have pre-placed terrain, getting one fort down is enough headache already, try 4+ of them.

I think that fix is too light. Even with the 2nd roll nerfed to 4+, Seer Council still won LVO.

 

I think the difference is that Str D has a major impact on the game, whereas Void Shields really don't. Why ban something if it's not a problem? I've seen the same argument against both defense networks and the GI.I. JOE PLAYSET/Skyshield Landing Pad, but I don't cop to it- either just let the player remove a piece of terrain to make room or make them deal with the hassle of deploying everything inside the available space.

 

I'm mystified how the Seerstar guy managed to win. Without Fortune, it's just a bunch of fast Terminators with weak attacks, and 25% of the time (even with two Farseers) he should've been missing Fortune. I just don't get how he didn't get rolled by someone at some point because of bad luck with rolling up/activating psychic powers.

 

(As far as my fix goes, keep in mind that with that version of it, a Riptide blast or some other Ignores Cover shot is just looking at punching through a 4+ (rather than a 4+ rerolled or 2+/4+), which should be doing a lot of damage.

[Guest]

That's probably true, we haven't had anyone super competitive bust out a LoW. I think, as best as I can figure, the least limiting, most beneficial tournament rules go something like this:

2+ re-roll nerf ala LVO (4+ on 2nd roll)

2 Codex limit ala LVO (No Primary+Ally+Inquisition+Formation+Knight+LoW)

Allow Escalation and Stronghold Assault, but no ranged weapons with D allowed (even SM can have Knights then, and everyone else has non-D options).

No defense networks (multi forts) or void shields.

No non-Escalation FW LoW.

Allow Formations (Unique) and Inquisition, but they count to two Codex limit.

 

I think that really limits some of the most unpleasant matchups, and allows for super heavies, which seem to be very much part of the game now, considering the all superheavy Codex coming out.

In order as above:

 

-Not sure what the 2+ re-roll nerf applies to. Penalty for BS10?

 

-You don't permit the weaker books to use allies and LoW, so they are stuck between allies OR LoWs. IG, in example, can't use a super heavy and allies, despite really needing both for a tourney list. While TAU, who don't need a super heavy, are free to take eldar allies....

 

-So, you penalize D ranged weapons, but not the units that carry them. So a Revenant is fine with those dual torrent hellstorm ap2 pinning not-poision-poisoned (3+) and 1+3d6 armor pen is fine, but a shadowsword with a single large blast D weapon is too much?

 

-Now this forth one contradicts the second one. We can use escalation, stronghold assault AND our codex? That's three books. You included LoWs in the first list, so I'm not sure where the book limit is.

 

-Banning of void shields is odd. I can see the issues with the void shield generator, just because it's one of those GW models without a model, so you might end up with issues regarding size and such. But many of the regular buildings can upgrade to have the shields, so it bans those too. It also bans 40k models that innately have void shields, like warhound titans. Also, you allow the eldar holofields, but not the void shields? Are orks allowed their power fields? I can see issues with the void shields due to poorly worded rules, but their inclusion is balance related and simply cutting them out is not in the best interest of balance.

 

-No non-escalation FW Lords of War? Is this the same as allowing Escalation approved FW lords of war? Or do you mean that FW models found in the escalation book are the only FW lords of war permitted? Are we talking about FW models or FW rules? It matters because there have been past versions of GW approved models that now only have FW rules. In example, GW contracted armorcast to make warhound titans in the past, which are not FW models, but follow FW rules. For that matter, are outdated models/scuplts legal? In example, GW at one point make a pewter thunderhawk gunship for normal 40k, a model which is considerably smaller than the current FW one, but technically a GW model.

 

-Isn't the last point redundant with the 2nd point's parenthesis section? It still contradicts point 4, but who's counting...

 

Anyway, I strongly doubt this list would solve the issues your looking to eliminate. If anything, it will create more/new issues.

 

 

If you want an actual solution, try this one:

 

-No single FOC entry may include more than 25% of the army's max points for the event. In example of FOC entries: no HQ, troop, heavy, FA, LoW, fort, allied FOC slots, INQ FOC slots. Non-slot entries are still considered entries, but are consider their own entry. Dedicated transports are considered non-slot entries, so do not count toward their transported unit's cost. Dataslates/formations are considered a single entry if models included are not also allowed to be part of the FOC for primary/ally, so it does limit them. This does affect IG platoons in a limiting manner, but I don't foresee this as a huge issue....

 

So, at 2k, can't include any fortification bigger than 500pts. Can't include any superheavy more than 500pts. Greatly limits any deathstars which don't feature lots of ICs. In terms of ranged D weapons, you still have the shadowsword, which is by far the least broken D ranged weapon unit in all of escalation, plus the shadowsword is unable to afford their BS increase without going over the 500pt mark. This method does ban most of the super heavies in both the FW and the escalation books at the 2k mark. If you want more expensive models, just raise the total points, which in turn, raises the limit on the cost of FOC entries. This does mean that revenants wouldn't be allowed until the 4k mark...

 

I will note that if allowing FW, the kustom stompa is just banned. That model is very easily broken for it's cost. To be fair, for the version of 40k apocalypse it was original designed for, it isn't broken, but the present incarnation is not reasonable for normal play. They'd be fine in apocalypse.

-Pax

[Aventine]

In order as above:

 

-Not sure what the 2+ re-roll nerf applies to. Penalty for BS10?

 

-You don't permit the weaker books to use allies and LoW, so they are stuck between allies OR LoWs. IG, in example, can't use a super heavy and allies, despite really needing both for a tourney list. While TAU, who don't need a super heavy, are free to take eldar allies....

 

-So, you penalize D ranged weapons, but not the units that carry them. So a Revenant is fine with those dual torrent hellstorm ap2 pinning not-poision-poisoned (3+) and 1+3d6 armor pen is fine, but a shadowsword with a single large blast D weapon is too much?

 

-Now this forth one contradicts the second one. We can use escalation, stronghold assault AND our codex? That's three books. You included LoWs in the first list, so I'm not sure where the book limit is.

 

-Banning of void shields is odd. I can see the issues with the void shield generator, just because it's one of those GW models without a model, so you might end up with issues regarding size and such. But many of the regular buildings can upgrade to have the shields, so it bans those too. It also bans 40k models that innately have void shields, like warhound titans. Also, you allow the eldar holofields, but not the void shields? Are orks allowed their power fields? I can see issues with the void shields due to poorly worded rules, but their inclusion is balance related and simply cutting them out is not in the best interest of balance.

 

-No non-escalation FW Lords of War? Is this the same as allowing Escalation approved FW lords of war? Or do you mean that FW models found in the escalation book are the only FW lords of war permitted? Are we talking about FW models or FW rules? It matters because there have been past versions of GW approved models that now only have FW rules. In example, GW contracted armorcast to make warhound titans in the past, which are not FW models, but follow FW rules. For that matter, are outdated models/scuplts legal? In example, GW at one point make a pewter thunderhawk gunship for normal 40k, a model which is considerably smaller than the current FW one, but technically a GW model.

 

-Isn't the last point redundant with the 2nd point's parenthesis section? It still contradicts point 4, but who's counting...

 

Anyway, I strongly doubt this list would solve the issues your looking to eliminate. If anything, it will create more/new issues.

 

Alright, well you were going back and forth between asking questions/not understanding to arguing a lot in there,  but I'll try to answer/counter in order as above:

 

-that nerf applies to units with 2+ re-rollable saves (aka 1/36 to cause a wound)

 

-Escalation is not a Codex; Lords of War would not count towards two Codex limit (sorry if its inclusion in my example threw you off, just showing how crazy it can get)

 

-Basically. At least you can get an invulnerable against the Sonic Lance, and vehicles are way better off than getting hit by D. Don't let the crappiness of the Shadowsword cloud the issue.

 

-Again, neither are a Codex.

 

-Agreed for the most part. Just threw them out with D. I think I'd be harder pressed to not allow them if a model existed for sure.

 

-Just FW rules, not worried about what models are used. This just means the only LoW allowed are those in the Escalation book.

 

-Not quite redundant, just clarifying that they count as a Codex for the 2nd rule. What "point 4' is that suppose to contradict?

 

Since you didn't know what I was talking about for the most part, how could you say what issues would be solved or created by this? Not to mention that I never actually said what I was trying to eliminate.

 

As for the rule you proposed, it is one I have heard before, and I think it has merits. It really just depends on how you want to make the cut. I really didn't want to disallow the Lord of Skulls or Necron Vault (since they are pretty fair [without shooty D]), but I also didn't want dual Pulsars ruining everyones day without rolling. Part of wanting to make sure the Vault and Lord of Skulls are allowed is in deference to the FLGS; don't want to ban some of the biggest kits/ only Lords of War they can actually sell.

[Guest]

Alright, well you were going back and forth between asking questions/not understanding to arguing a lot in there,  but I'll try to answer/counter in order as above:

 

-that nerf applies to units with 2+ re-rollable saves (aka 1/36 to cause a wound)

 

-Escalation is not a Codex; Lords of War would not count towards two Codex limit (sorry if its inclusion in my example threw you off, just showing how crazy it can get)

 

-Basically. At least you can get an invulnerable against the Sonic Lance, and vehicles are way better off than getting hit by D. Don't let the crappiness of the Shadowsword cloud the issue.

 

-Again, neither are a Codex.

 

-Agreed for the most part. Just threw them out with D. I think I'd be harder pressed to not allow them if a model existed for sure.

 

-Just FW rules, not worried about what models are used. This just means the only LoW allowed are those in the Escalation book.

 

-Not quite redundant, just clarifying that they count as a Codex for the 2nd rule. What "point 4' is that suppose to contradict?

 

Since you didn't know what I was talking about for the most part, how could you say what issues would be solved or created by this? Not to mention that I never actually said what I was trying to eliminate.

Clearly not seeing eye to eye, but perhaps we can get on the same page.

 

-A nerf to 2+ rerollable saves. I see your point there. I used BS 10 because I didn't think it was intended, but the original post would include that, so I used it for clarification. BS 10, for the relevance, is a 2+ to hit, followed by a 2+ to hit should the first miss. I will argue that the 2+ re-roll-able saves issue is defeated by options that don't allow saves. Certainly, not all units have great options here, but there are several methods to remove such a unit beyond just shooting it to death. I do miss the old days where the DH had the psy-weapons which denied invulnerable saves and the C'tan denied them in assault, but that was the yonder years with T7 tyranids and CSM lords which became daemon princes with 51+ points of daemonic gifts...

 

-Yeah, the LoWs in the parenthesis threw me off. So the idea is that players can have 2 codex, plus escalation and stronghold assault? A limitation on sources of units, rather than on units? So, in example, a daemon player couldn't include Bel'ka'lor (?spelling), plus his daemons and CSM allies? Or is the supplemental character separate? I might still be confused with this one. The INQ "codex" is still just a digital PDF....

 

-I see some of your point with the sonic lances, but the main issue with the revenant isn't the damage it deals, but the inability of most armies to damage it back.If the Revenant was just a stationary model at the same cost with the same weapons, it would not create nearly the fuss it creates. I do think the sonic lances are terribly underrated and would be a nightmare for many armies to cope with, even if not amazing against high armor vehicles and didn't deny invulnerable saves - they rape biker and tyranids armies....

 

-this would point 4, which is related to my being thrown off by LoWs in the parenthesis. Ignore this one.

 

-Hmm...also sort of agreed. If you intend to drop the void shields, should probably dis-allow eldar titan holo fields and ork power fields, as all three are built with the same ranged D weapon defense in mind. The problem here is that many actual units include these as part of their unit. Most of the eldar super heavies have holofields, most of the ork stompa variants have power fields, and most of the imperial titans have void shields. I will also note that in the previous edition, D melee weapons were called Titan killer weapons because they could only be used against other super heavies. The idea was that the weapons were far too large to function against normal size units and were not designed with normal size units in mind. If banning the ranged D weapons, you really should ban the melee ones against non-titans. D melee weapons are horribly overpowered if D weapons are otherwise banned.

 

-That makes sense, a ban on FW rules entirely. That one would be very easy to implement.

 

-This one again references my confusion within the parenthesis. Ignore this one too.

 

As a note, really seems like complete banning of escalation would be easier to implement than allowing only some. Then again, it would also be easier to ban all but a single codex. Say, only IG allowed event... Rules discussions would go smooth because everyone used the same army, so everyone had the same gains and losses when rules were argued one way or another.

 

I personally think the present situation is pretty well balanced upon itself. The main issues I see presently are all related mostly to GW not having all the new rules in the BRB and therefore unknown in advance to all players. Opponents facing a LoW always have that "surprise" game where they try to wrap their heads around how to cope with the LoW.

 

Beyond that, players using armies with less desirable escalation units are often more opposed to escalation usage. I see this one over and over again: Players with Tau, SM, sisters, tyranids and some Dark Eldar/Eldar are very much opposed to escalation, while the IG, Necron, Daemon, Chaos SM, and Ork players are usually loving it. In terms of the list armies having undesirable escalation units, it's all units without kits from GW, where you have to buy a very expensive FW model - and then the rules are either lackluster or so great that no one would enjoy facing it.

-Pax

[Torg]

Good discussion here... I am glad there are lots of opinions on the matter. 

 

I did vote with my money, and with my feet. I am working on my fantasy army, and I plan to play in the Fantasy OFCC, and not 40k. This will be the first year in quite a few that i won't be playing in the 40k, and my first ever Fantasy. (to be truthful, if they weren't scheduled opposite, I would likely play in both, just to have fun with my new guard army)

 

I really feel this discussion has clarified to me the current situation with 40k.. and why now probably isn't the best time for me to jump back into it.  

-d

[WestRider]

 

 

There isn't a single Nid MC that I wouldn't Charge with an undamaged Knight, Cover or no. A Trygon is probably the worst-case scenario, and even one of those doesn't kill a Knight in a single round on average, while a Charging Knight does kill a Trygon in one round on average, especially if the Trygon's taken a couple of Wounds from Battle Cannon fire already.

I can't imagine how you would get anything like a fair fight, given that a Knight costs more than 100pts more than even the most tricked-out of MCs. Against a pair of Carnifexes (240-270pts, depending) should cause ~5HP of damage to it- a Harpy in combination with one of the other fighty MCs should likewise cause enough damage to bring it down, or nearly so. (Carnifexes on the charge will be exceptionally unpleasant due to large numbers of S9 HoW hits.)

 

Nids in their basic build actually fair relatively well against Knights.

 

I did specify "single" MC. The whole point is that, if taking Pax's strategy and hanging back to force the Knights to Charge you in Cover, the Knight Player can arrange things so that there never is a fair fight, because the Nids have completely surrendered the initiative.

[pretre]

I really feel this discussion has clarified to me the current situation with 40k.. and why now probably isn't the best time for me to jump back into it.  

-d

Don't let the internet decide what games you play. Let your friends and gaming group decide.

[AbusePuppy]

I did specify "single" MC. The whole point is that, if taking Pax's strategy and hanging back to force the Knights to Charge you in Cover, the Knight Player can arrange things so that there never is a fair fight, because the Nids have completely surrendered the initiative.

 

Right, but I'm just saying that comparing a single MC to a Knight is silly- it's like saying "there's no way a single Guardsman can bring down Draigo!" Well duh, one of them costs a lot more than the other, so it only makes sense. If you compare more equal point values, Nids actually come out pretty okay.

 

I will agree that playing defensively is probably not a good plan, though- Nids don't really have a good defensive posture. Making good use of FMC maneuverability to snipe and selectively engage the Knights, combined with screening from small bugs, will go a long ways, and I5 on the relevant units (Harpy, Crone, Tyrant) likewise helps. Amusingly enough, a Knight would actually be better off without its weapon when fighting a Harpy/Crone- S10 will instagib them, but the Destroyer table just causes d3+1 wounds most of the time.

[tombking]

Were you aware of what it did before deployment/ the game started? Did you do anything to mitigate the damage (out of LOS/squads on multi-level ruins)?

I was aware. However it was short table edges for deployment. There were no buildings only rock/mountain terrain. I had a 60+ model marine army only half of that was in  a Rhino. As stated earlier I could have reserved but that would mean easily losing what was on the table right away, or the beast being 24" across the table turn 2 and me having to walk on and getting snap fire with anything that could hurt it and then it going oh look things to blow up. I did the best I could by halving my army around an LOS blocking mountain. But it basically zoomed up 12 inches crippled one half then zipped over and crippled the other half and then it was more or less end of effective game.

 

The ork stompa was on a different table but still no ruins just jungle and hills. I did better with cover and assault with my dreads. Still it was hard to do 12 hull points in one go as with all the meks they just come right back and as stated before if I am moving all the time to hide, keep away that pretty much negates any heavy weapons I can bring to bear on the thing and negates me being able to stay put on a objective.

 

I think there are some new toys that could help, Stormraven, Centurions, the uber heavy dread that I just don't have the models for yet.