So now that there`s Knights in the game

[Threejacks]

 And Massive forts and Super Heavys and finally the dreaded "D":

 

 Do any of you think that this will drastically change the top end army builds very much?

 

  I know the few games ive done with my Stompa is hardly a good sample to go by but it is a 12hp Super heavy with 13 f/s av and it went down a couple times to just good ol fashion spam shooting/melee attacks.Also the D weapons I was able to use both Melee and shooting were pretty effective but no were near the "ZOMGDDD" that the net hype makes them out to be.

 

  I know that in the case of Orks a Stompa is a Viable choice for the 700-800 points it costs,,sure you can take a lot of other stuff with those points but most all of that will still have to get face time to get its points back as the game is still a shoot fest.

  As for the other more "Shooty" armys though...will it be worth it to pay for the Uber Revenant D guns or even a group of 2-3 Knights just to add some serious melee threat?...Seems to me that spending points on these items for a solid shooting army may very well dilute it down too much.

 

 Anyhow I was just curious what you long time players think will happen at the tournament level as these new big soldiers are adopted into the scene.

[Guest]

 And Massive forts and Super Heavys and finally the dreaded "D":

 

 Do any of you think that this will drastically change the top end army builds very much?

 

  I know the few games ive done with my Stompa is hardly a good sample to go by but it is a 12hp Super heavy with 13 f/s av and it went down a couple times to just good ol fashion spam shooting/melee attacks.Also the D weapons I was able to use both Melee and shooting were pretty effective but no were near the "ZOMGDDD" that the net hype makes them out to be.

 

  I know that in the case of Orks a Stompa is a Viable choice for the 700-800 points it costs,,sure you can take a lot of other stuff with those points but most all of that will still have to get face time to get its points back as the game is still a shoot fest.

  As for the other more "Shooty" armys though...will it be worth it to pay for the Uber Revenant D guns or even a group of 2-3 Knights just to add some serious melee threat?...Seems to me that spending points on these items for a solid shooting army may very well dilute it down too much.

 

 Anyhow I was just curious what you long time players think will happen at the tournament level as these new big soldiers are adopted into the scene.

Your also running a FW army list. You should verify if codex: orks results in the same issues of balance.

 

As for changes to 40k list construction, it really is just moving list creation back towards deathstar and counter-deathstar lists, just as it was in most of 5th. The difference is that the super-heavies are the deathstars, so the deathstar is a 1-model unit.

 

For more specific changes, mostly changes to imperial armies. Weapons that can't realistically pen AV15 will not be as widespread, so weapons like melta guns will be more common, while AT solutions like demolisher cannons will be less common. As superheavies are nasty to cope with, alpha strike will likely become harsher. Expect melta bombs on SM sergeants and be sure that you have a DS defense, as I suspect that turn 1 DS options will be taken more often even in non-pod/DS themed armies.

 

In regards to your stompa specifically, technically it can be destroyed by 3x melta guns. Odds are not good, but they are there enough where it might happen. That's 3 hits, 3 pens, 3 explosions and 3 bonus hull points for each shot, a total of 12 hull points in a single salvo.

 

I don't think this is realistic, but I would still deploy it bubbled 6" out in all directions with orks or grots. You can't afford to allow them to DS and damage/destroy the stompa turn 1, especially as it's so avoidable by just bubbling your forces turn 1.

 

Tournaments are going to be really nasty if they allow these. You know how magic the gathering tournaments are, it'll be like those. Lots and lots of nasty combinations centering around using the same few units or powers over and over. Certain combinations will become very common and counting them will be key. The game will focus around removing the support elements so preventing or destroying the big threat is feasible with more than just D weapons. This is more or less how 40k normally plays....

-Pax

[AbusePuppy]

Knights are as totally different animal from Escalation. Knights are worlds easier to destroy than most other superheavies and they don't put out even close to the same sort of firepower. In fact, their shooting is rather weak in most respects.

 

Escalation, on the other hand, is pretty much out of control. http://www.3plusplus.net/2014/03/escalation-tournament-report-this-is-why-we-cant-have-nice-things/ is a pretty good example of what I would expect from the game if Escalation is allowed- players with superheavies win or lose the game against each other on the first turn, spoiler armies occasionally eke out a victory, and everything else is pretty much worthless. None of the "normal" armies in the game right now stand any kind of chance against a good superheavy. A very small number of counter-strategies exist (FMCs, Drop Melta, etc) but only a limited number of factions support these strategies and even they are not even going to make a 50% win rate against C'tan, Warhounds, Revenants, and Kustom Stompas.

[Guest]

Escalation, on the other hand, is pretty much out of control. http://www.3plusplus.net/2014/03/escalation-tournament-report-this-is-why-we-cant-have-nice-things/ is a pretty good example of what I would expect from the game if Escalation is allowed- players with superheavies win or lose the game against each other on the first turn, spoiler armies occasionally eke out a victory, and everything else is pretty much worthless. None of the "normal" armies in the game right now stand any kind of chance against a good superheavy. A very small number of counter-strategies exist (FMCs, Drop Melta, etc) but only a limited number of factions support these strategies and even they are not even going to make a 50% win rate against C'tan, Warhounds, Revenants, and Kustom Stompas.

The linked list isn't an escalation list, but a FW one. The escalation supplement only allows the mentioned units. FW may allow additional ones, but those aren't issues with the escalation rules. I count 5x FW selections in the list.

 

I will note that the stock powers for the IG psyker are actually pretty awesome in escalation. Mostly the power that requires anything that wants to shoot at them to take leadership tests (even vehicles) or not be able to shoot at all. It's certainly enough to make a revenant reconsider shooting.

-Pax

[Guest]

Escalation, on the other hand, is pretty much out of control. http://www.3plusplus.net/2014/03/escalation-tournament-report-this-is-why-we-cant-have-nice-things/ is a pretty good example of what I would expect from the game if Escalation is allowed- players with superheavies win or lose the game against each other on the first turn, spoiler armies occasionally eke out a victory, and everything else is pretty much worthless. None of the "normal" armies in the game right now stand any kind of chance against a good superheavy. A very small number of counter-strategies exist (FMCs, Drop Melta, etc) but only a limited number of factions support these strategies and even they are not even going to make a 50% win rate against C'tan, Warhounds, Revenants, and Kustom Stompas.

As for your evaluations of the super heavies, I think you are overestimating them (or building underpowered lists...). I think the linked list is weak for escalation, even if the warhound itself is quite strong.

-Pax

[Threejacks]

  Great read on your tournament batrep that's what I was looking for here:)

 

 But yeah as Pax mentioned they were allowing FW and that could throw things off a bit,though I don't know much FW stuff except the Ork Dreadmob stuff,heh.

 

  I think its working out just as everyone said when they released the Uber stuff into regular game...the ranged D weapons are destroying the game at this point level.About the only ranged D weapon that is close to being balanced would be the Aquila I would think due to its immobility and it ease of destruction to other D weapons.

 

 Do you see this being fully adopted into the tourney scene when the big rules release comes in a few months?

 

 Reason I ask is next month I plan to try out the GG league as my first step into a semi competitive environment for 40k.I like to play the Stompa and plan to run my Baneblade and or Aquila in the future but those compared to the ranged D Titans are pretty small potatos and if that's what the competitive 40k scene is going to be ill probably not waste my time.Ive got a good solid collection of models with my IG and Orks to put together a solid competitive list but even with the current non-Super Heavy meta neither army is past mid tier at best and it appears that if they allow any SH in the future I would have to buy a Warhound for my IGs to stand a chance and since I don't groove on getting financing to buy a toy soldier ill pass on that.

 

 So I guess the only way forward would be allowing all the SH LoW options but house ruling them per tourney.

[AbusePuppy]

The linked list isn't an escalation list, but a FW one. The escalation supplement only allows the mentioned units. FW may allow additional ones, but those aren't issues with the escalation rules. I count 5x FW selections in the list.

 

I will note that the stock powers for the IG psyker are actually pretty awesome in escalation. Mostly the power that requires anything that wants to shoot at them to take leadership tests (even vehicles) or not be able to shoot at all. It's certainly enough to make a revenant reconsider shooting.

-Pax

 

 

Typically tournaments that allow Escalation also allow Forge World. There are some that don't, but in my experience they are pretty rare and few between.

 

I may be remembering it wrong, but I believe that power allows them to choose a different target if they fail the Ld check (rather than lose the shot, like the Shadowseer power.) That means there's very little cost to at least trying for it.

 

As for your evaluations of the super heavies, I think you are overestimating them (or building underpowered lists...). I think the linked list is weak for escalation, even if the warhound itself is quite strong.

-Pax

 

I would be intensely curious to see what kind of Escalation list you think can beat the one I posted. Of the many things I might call it, "weak" is not one of them- no other superheavy will survive its T1 shooting (on average), it goes first against lists more often than just about anything else (bar shenanigans with Vect) and it is strongly protected against other Str D weapons as well as deep strikers and has reasonable anti-flyer tech.

 

 

 But yeah as Pax mentioned they were allowing FW and that could throw things off a bit,though I don't know much FW stuff except the Ork Dreadmob stuff,heh.

 

  I think its working out just as everyone said when they released the Uber stuff into regular game...the ranged D weapons are destroying the game at this point level.About the only ranged D weapon that is close to being balanced would be the Aquila I would think due to its immobility and it ease of destruction to other D weapons.

 

 Do you see this being fully adopted into the tourney scene when the big rules release comes in a few months?

The big FW inclusion is the Warhound, which despite being in the Apoc book isn't given as an option for the Imperium. The choices given to each faction in Escalation are absolutely bizarre, to be honest; if you cut out FW, I'd say your meta essentially degenerates to a combination of Revenants and Transcendent C'tan- the Rev trumps the C'tan, but is much more vulnerable to counter-strategies (since it is more expensive and comes in a faction that doesn't get the same tools that the Imperium does.) However, both of those strategies will pretty consistently beat non-Escalation lists of most types, so the meta becomes pretty closed-off.

 

I think the Aquilla is too strong for what it is, but it's not even close to on par with the Escalation stuff available- it's rather possible for a normal list to beat an Aquilla if it plays smart (though I think the odds would still be marginally against it, depending on the army.)

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "when the big rules release comes." Are you talking about the rumors of 7th Edition? Because there's no way that is going to happen, those rumors are complete b*******. Releasing a new edition now would cost them an enormous amount of money- books ain't free, and neither is development time from their employees- and provide virtually no benefit to them. Indeed, if we take the rumors as true, it would be a positive hindrance, since no one would have any reason to buy Escalation/Stronghold/etc anymore, so those books would be dead weight also. GW may not be brilliant, but they're not absolute morons.

 

Competitive players are pretty universally rejecting Escalation wholesale. There are some attempts to fix it, but I think most of them either end up functionally not allowing superheavies (for example, the Guardian Cup caps them at 550pts and doesn't allow any ranged Str D weapons, which means most factions do not have any options at all) or altering things in a way that either doesn't matter/rebalances things so that a new superheavy is king of the hill.

 

(To elaborate on that final point- many people suggest just making Str D weapons S10 AP1 Armorbane Ignores Cover or the likes- however, this makes units like the Transcendent C'tan, which now can shrug off its one weakness, Str D guns, absurdly strong. I've seen a dozen or more different fixes, but I don't think I've seen one that I feel "works" yet.)

[Threejacks]

  Ahh ok..I thought that the new rulebook thing was written in stone,...sheese this games development has more rumors than a spoiled teen Hollywood actress!

[Guest]

1 Typically tournaments that allow Escalation also allow Forge World. There are some that don't, but in my experience they are pretty rare and few between.

 

....

 

2 I may be remembering it wrong, but I believe that power allows them to choose a different target if they fail the Ld check (rather than lose the shot, like the Shadowseer power.) That means there's very little cost to at least trying for it.

 

.....

 

3 I would be intensely curious to see what kind of Escalation list you think can beat the one I posted. Of the many things I might call it, "weak" is not one of them- no other superheavy will survive its T1 shooting (on average), it goes first against lists more often than just about anything else (bar shenanigans with Vect) and it is strongly protected against other Str D weapons as well as deep strikers and has reasonable anti-flyer tech.

 

....

 

4 The choices given to each faction in Escalation are absolutely bizarre, to be honest; if you cut out FW, I'd say your meta essentially degenerates to a combination of Revenants and Transcendent C'tan- the Rev trumps the C'tan, but is much more vulnerable to counter-strategies (since it is more expensive and comes in a faction that doesn't get the same tools that the Imperium does.) However, both of those strategies will pretty consistently beat non-Escalation lists of most types, so the meta becomes pretty closed-off.

 

....

 

5 I think the Aquilla is too strong for what it is, but it's not even close to on par with the Escalation stuff available- it's rather possible for a normal list to beat an Aquilla if it plays smart (though I think the odds would still be marginally against it, depending on the army.)

 

.....

 

6 (To elaborate on that final point- many people suggest just making Str D weapons S10 AP1 Armorbane Ignores Cover or the likes- however, this makes units like the Transcendent C'tan, which now can shrug off its one weakness, Str D guns, absurdly strong. I've seen a dozen or more different fixes, but I don't think I've seen one that I feel "works" yet.)

Lots to respond to.

 

1

I honestly think FW is inconsistent in their point costs and it results in inconsistencies in balance. The other key issue is that some units are built with very different rules in mind. In the perfect example, that Kustom Stompa you mentioned is not designed for the present version of apocalpse and is pointed for the old version. One very notable difference is that melee D weapons only used to function against other Super heaives/garguantian creatures. Another key difference was that super heavies were completely immune to psychic powers that weren't shooting attacks, so you couldn't buff or de-buff them. D weapons used to allow invulnerable saves and cause automatic ID to non-vehicle units and now function very differently.

 

I'm usually a proponent of FW, but I really don't think they are balanced with escalation very well. I suggest picking one and not using anything from the other.

 

2

Can't find my book. I'll get back to you on this one.

 

3

That wahound is strong, but the list itself is basically a turtle list. All the opponent needs is some TLOS blocking terrain and some indirect weapons (even biovores or a whirlwind) and that list would have lots of difficulty due to it's immobility. Yeah, the warhound is fast, but he moves faster than his bubble wrap, so if you advance with him, you won't be able to keep up his guards.

 

I do think that the list you have posted would lend a player to think that the LoWs are broken and that normal 40k is screwed. This is because you have a deathstar list where the entirity of the list is focusing on being the warhound, or supporting it.

 

As for actual counter lists, do you want me to tailor one? Or just build one I think is more all-comers nasty for escalation?

 

I do think you'd greatly benefit from a recon vehicle (vehicle with scout) with a searchlight, as night fighting will greatly limit the warhound and those flyers won't arrive until turn 2+.

 

4

I agreed with you with my first few reads, but they actually counter each other very well. GW did a good job picking ones that rock-paper-scissors each other very nicely. The present issue in the meta is that people don't have the TAU flyer (Tiger Shark), the Harridan, the thunderhawk, and no one seems to have any intention of buying them.

 

That harridan should be very very impressive against lots of escalation units, plus it allows tyranids an additional "flyer" slot in the FOC. It's all the normal threat of FMCs, plus S10 vector strikes and 12 S10 shots at 48" of range. It's also a transport for the gargoyles (which can be scoring with that dataslate). Do not underestimate this one. It would likely dominate the skies and crush things not-airborne.

 

The thunder hawk is easily the best LoW on paper. As a flyer it's immune to all the other D weapons in escalation. It can tow units and has an assault ramp, so you get the repair from the inside shenanigans, plus you can bring assault units. Plus it has D and ordnance weapons, which as a super heavy, can all be fired at full BS at lots of different targets. Plus you could bring scoring inside. And so forth. Most non-escalation AA options would struggle against a thunderhawk with two techmarines (with servitors) in tow. Being able to regenerate 2x HP per turn while also being airborne is nasty.

 

The tiger shark isn't comparable to the more expensive super heavies, but would still contribute pretty impressively for TAU. Very notable is that the tau flyer has access to the tau vehicle armoury, which means that it can have a 4++ against interceptor weapons, 4+ evade, and may make prescision shots. The weapons appear underwhelming, but they aren't bad. It has base BS4 with strafing run for BS5 (and pinning) against ground. This is not a deathstar unit, but in escalation, the TAU don't need one. The Riptide is already a pretty impressive escalation unit that they can take in bulk.

 

Anyway, I don't see it black and white with some escalation units being superior to all others. The flyer ones would be strong against the non-flyer ones, the flyers have issues with ground targets, and ground targets face more issues with the non-flyer ones. GW picked the right combination and if you are having trouble, you might be playing the units wrong or it might be that that particular opponent is a hard counter to your units.

 

5

Well, I think the points are right on the aquilla strongpoint and it's variant. I think the escalation units are also usually correct points. That said I agree that the aquilla isn't really comparable to a LoW. It's one of those options that's strong if you don't know what to expect. Last game against one, I podded a melta team to it's base turn 1 knocked to AV12 on all sides (main building), and forced it to snapfire (meaning it coulding fire the cannon which can't snap). ~200pts. I disabled it and advanced on his army.

 

I do see some merit in an army with both the aquilla and a different LoW. A revenant being able to only target two units with their D weapons per turn, might not be able to destroy both.

 

6

Very much agree with you on this point. D weapons are very much not the same thing as those other ones.

 

The one I've considered for balance, would be to allow cover saves from objects that "physically block TLOS to the target." No area terrain, no stealth bonuses, no shrouding bonuses, just TLOS blocking. I'd probably advocate a flat 6+ save for 25% (or more) concealment, 5+ for 50% (or more), 4+ for 75% (or more) concealment. If in doubt, use the worst save you are certain the target has. Things that modify terrain or saves (including re-rolls) don't apply to this, these saves are just to represent that the D weapon is slightly deflected by something in-between the original target and the firer, resulting in a missed shot against the intended target. You could further balance this one, by allowing the D shot that is saved to be resolved against the thing (friend, foe, or even empty terrain) that was blocking TLOS. Flyers would not count as blocking TLOS for this, as it would otherwise create a method to hit flyers with blast D weapons.

 

In example, a warhound titan with a monolith between it and it's target baneblade. It fires both turbolasers, but half the shots are saved because the monolith conceals 75% (or more) of the baneblade. Saved shots resolve a single D shot hit (same AP) against the monolith for each one that was saved (2 in our example). The blast isn't placed, the D shots are just resolved as "auto-hits." Further cover saves are not allowed. D shots blocked by terrain, like ruins, are just lost, as they don't resolve against the terrain (you could work out a system for destroying terrain too....not unreasonable with D weapons).

 

This does mean that smaller units would get more saves than bigger units. Again, this doesn't represent the terrain blocking the shot, just the D weapon "bounces" a bit off target after hitting the terrain/unit instead.

-Pax

[Threejacks]

 Perhaps a house rule making LoW choices subject to assault on the same turn the assaulting unit arrives from DS or reserve due to their huge size and fighting in such cramped quarters of a small battlefield or something,heh.

[Guest]

 Perhaps a house rule making LoW choices subject to assault on the same turn the assaulting unit arrives from DS or reserve due to their huge size and fighting in such cramped quarters of a small battlefield or something,heh.

That would be so broken....

 

Anyway, I don't think the [non-FW] LoWs are needing fixes, not really. I think not everyone is building lists with LoWs in mind and it makes them appear overpowered.

-Pax

[Threejacks]

   I gather there are some nasty DS melee combos with the melta bombs and such..I was just thinking that maybe more assault based armys may need help dealing with some D shooting Titan wiping them off the board before they can get face time.

 

 As far as I know Orks are the only faction  that can still assault out of DS using Zagstruck with Stomboys..problem is the full group is well north of 300 points and they will likely be stomped down in a turn or two.I still want to try it sometime though.

 

  I hope your right about the LoWs as I really do want to run mine more regularly even if they are the more easily dealt with ones.

[Guest]

   I gather there are some nasty DS melee combos with the melta bombs and such..I was just thinking that maybe more assault based armys may need help dealing with some D shooting Titan wiping them off the board before they can get face time.

 

 As far as I know Orks are the only faction  that can still assault out of DS using Zagstruck with Stomboys..problem is the full group is well north of 300 points and they will likely be stomped down in a turn or two.I still want to try it sometime though.

 

  I hope your right about the LoWs as I really do want to run mine more regularly even if they are the more easily dealt with ones.

Super heavies of all types can't overwatch, that's how they are balanced against assault units. You add DS assaults and they'd just melt....

 

I don't think the SH are as broken as you think they are. Issue is that the first half of 6th saw S7 become the king for AT. Autocannons and plasma taken instead of melta and lascannons. Escalation and SA change this and people are struggling to adapt. That's it.

-Pax

[AbusePuppy]

I honestly think FW is inconsistent in their point costs and it results in inconsistencies in balance. The other key issue is that some units are built with very different rules in mind. In the perfect example, that Kustom Stompa you mentioned is not designed for the present version of apocalpse and is pointed for the old version. One very notable difference is that melee D weapons only used to function against other Super heaives/garguantian creatures. Another key difference was that super heavies were completely immune to psychic powers that weren't shooting attacks, so you couldn't buff or de-buff them. D weapons used to allow invulnerable saves and cause automatic ID to non-vehicle units and now function very differently.

 

I would tend to agree with your assessment of FW, but I'm not talking about what I want for the game, just what I see. Forge World doesn't really write rules well enough to keep itself in check, especially when it comes to Apocalypse stuff- but denying that it exists doesn't change that it's there and that the people who push for the use of Escalation also tend to do so for Forge World as well.

 

 

Can't find my book. I'll get back to you on this one.

 

I double-checked it, I was actually wrong- it means giving up their shooting phase. So decent in that respect, but still extremely unreliable in its actual application.

 

 

That wahound is strong, but the list itself is basically a turtle list. All the opponent needs is some TLOS blocking terrain and some indirect weapons (even biovores or a whirlwind) and that list would have lots of difficulty due to it's immobility. Yeah, the warhound is fast, but he moves faster than his bubble wrap, so if you advance with him, you won't be able to keep up his guards.

 

Well, for one "other than the warhound" is kinda a silly thing to say about that army because it's entirely centered around the Warhound for its firepower. It's actually very, very difficult to keep out of LOS from a 9" tall model with a 12" movement speed, barring some incredibly-large pieces of terrain. And even assuming that, my Void Shield will shut down most barrage weapons, forcing them to move anti-tank units into LOS to break it and fire shots at me... which allows my Warhound et al to vaporize those units and continue with my plan as usual. (The ability to deliver scoring units via the Vendettas shouldn't be ignored, either.)

 

 

I do think that the list you have posted would lend a player to think that the LoWs are broken and that normal 40k is screwed. This is because you have a deathstar list where the entirity of the list is focusing on being the warhound, or supporting it.

 

As for actual counter lists, do you want me to tailor one? Or just build one I think is more all-comers nasty for escalation?

 

I do think you'd greatly benefit from a recon vehicle (vehicle with scout) with a searchlight, as night fighting will greatly limit the warhound and those flyers won't arrive until turn 2+.

 

Night Fight basically isn't an issue for me at all- by deploying the Warhound centrally and using its 12" move, I can shoot essentially anywhere on the table, as Str D doesn't care about Stealth/Shrouded.

 

I don't doubt you could tailor a list to beat me- heck, I practically give away such a list in my article (Be'lakor, LoC, 3 flying DPs)- but do you think you can make a list that will reasonably beat my list, a Revenant list, a Transcendent C'tan list, a flyer list, and a Drop Pod list? I would love to see what army you think can do that with any degree of consistency. 1750pts, keep in mind.

 

 

I agreed with you with my first few reads, but they actually counter each other very well. GW did a good job picking ones that rock-paper-scissors each other very nicely. The present issue in the meta is that people don't have the TAU flyer (Tiger Shark), the Harridan, the thunderhawk, and no one seems to have any intention of buying them.

 

That harridan should be very very impressive against lots of escalation units, plus it allows tyranids an additional "flyer" slot in the FOC. It's all the normal threat of FMCs, plus S10 vector strikes and 12 S10 shots at 48" of range. It's also a transport for the gargoyles (which can be scoring with that dataslate). Do not underestimate this one. It would likely dominate the skies and crush things not-airborne.

 

The Tiger Shark is a f***ing atrocity, it's one of the worst superheavies in the game. It holds the mighty power of an Ion Cannon on a five hundred point platform- but not just that, oh no! It also has Gun Drones! really, who can compete with that kind of firepower?

 

The Harridan can be grounded exactly like any other FMC. This means that what is almost guaranteed to happen against any Escalation list is it will swoop forward, make 3-5 grounding tests and fail one, then the Str D templates come down and erase it. Running it alongside the dataslate is... not really possible at 2000pts, I think- the Harridan itself is 735pts, the Skyblight Swarm is 835pts. That leaves you virtually nothing for your "actual" army, since neither of those things fulfill your FoC requirements, and it leaves you extremely light on Synapse.

 

I would gladly play my list against anything using the Harridan or Tiger Shark, no questions asked. Heck, I think my 1750 would stand a pretty strong chance against a 2K list using either of those things- they're basically a huge weight tied around the ankle of any list using them.

 

Oh, and those twelve S10 shots? BS3. So six hits, three glances/pens against AV14 (and AP3, so no bonus on the damage table.) That's barely even enough to drop my Void Shields, much less bring my units crashing down.

 

 

The thunder hawk is easily the best LoW on paper. As a flyer it's immune to all the other D weapons in escalation. It can tow units and has an assault ramp, so you get the repair from the inside shenanigans, plus you can bring assault units. Plus it has D and ordnance weapons, which as a super heavy, can all be fired at full BS at lots of different targets. Plus you could bring scoring inside. And so forth. Most non-escalation AA options would struggle against a thunderhawk with two techmarines (with servitors) in tow. Being able to regenerate 2x HP per turn while also being airborne is nasty.

 

The tiger shark isn't comparable to the more expensive super heavies, but would still contribute pretty impressively for TAU. Very notable is that the tau flyer has access to the tau vehicle armoury, which means that it can have a 4++ against interceptor weapons, 4+ evade, and may make prescision shots. The weapons appear underwhelming, but they aren't bad. It has base BS4 with strafing run for BS5 (and pinning) against ground. This is not a deathstar unit, but in escalation, the TAU don't need one. The Riptide is already a pretty impressive escalation unit that they can take in bulk.

 

Anyway, I don't see it black and white with some escalation units being superior to all others. The flyer ones would be strong against the non-flyer ones, the flyers have issues with ground targets, and ground targets face more issues with the non-flyer ones. GW picked the right combination and if you are having trouble, you might be playing the units wrong or it might be that that particular opponent is a hard counter to your units.

 

The Thunderhawk does, on paper, look good, I admit- however, it runs into a couple major problems. The first one is that the dang thing is nearly a foot and a half long- with the limitations of the flyer chassis, this means that it typically only gets to really make one pass at things before it is either flying off the table or making really awkward turns that don't allow it to shoot anything of importance. (The main cannon is on a fixed mount, remember.) It will tend to Clown other Str D guns, but the fact that it doesn't make an appearance until turn 2+ mean that the enemy titan is basically going nuts on the remaining 2/3 of your army during that time, and that can be pretty hard to endure. I wouldn't put it completely out of consideration, but I would say that it is at best a niche choice for such an environment.

 

The Tiger Shark is awful. I don't care how high of BS its crappy blast weapon is, I don't care about pinning. Remember that superheavies cannot Jink, so Evading is useless to it. Riptides in Escalation tend to die pretty instantly to the Str D guns- do you really think that a Warhound isn't going to kill 1-2 Riptides per turn with ease? Tau are actually rather weak in Escalation, generally speaking.

 

I'm not "having trouble" with Escalation; I wrecked it pretty hard. I just don't think it has even the slightest hint of balance to it, and I think you are drastically overestimating the effect that random S7 shots are going to have on anyone's actual plan in the game.

 

 

I do see some merit in an army with both the aquilla and a different LoW. A revenant being able to only target two units with their D weapons per turn, might not be able to destroy both.

 

Maybe not, but it absolutely can destroy one of them, and has a decent shot at both. And if you're bringing an Aquilla and a superheavy, you really don't have enough points to field much of anything else.

 

 

Anyway, I don't think the [non-FW] LoWs are needing fixes, not really. I think not everyone is building lists with LoWs in mind and it makes them appear overpowered.

 

The other players at the tournament I went to brought lists that were designed to deal with Lords of War. I still waded through those armies like they practically weren't even there.

 

If you remove the Forge World stuff from the equation, like I said, it all comes down to the C'tan and the Revenant. It's less broken, but still pretty broken. T9 GCs with 2+ cover are not really something that most armies can deal with, especially not when they are spewing out Str D hellstorm shots. It's a rather small model, so if we're playing with all of this LOS-blocking terrain you advocate, it's essentially going to be able to get into combat unmolested and then just sort of wade its way through the enemy forces at will, blasting and assaulting anything it wants and hiding in combat to avoid any shooting that could possibly threaten it.

[Guest]

Honestly, many of your issues seem like they stem from not enough TLOS blocking terrain and use of the warhound titan. You shouldn't have clear TLOS to the entire table in escalation games. There should always be some giant pieces of terrain blocking TLOS. The Warhound shouldn't be able to shoot everything turn 1. It should have to maneuver around the terrain to hunt it's opponent down.

 

What your doing sounds like playing 40k on an empty table and complaining that your units die too quick...yeah, they should die quick if you take away most of the strategy and just have both armies be gun lines in an empty desert.

 

 

 

1 I double-checked it, I was actually wrong- it means giving up their shooting phase. So decent in that respect, but still extremely unreliable in its actual application.

 

2 Night Fight basically isn't an issue for me at all- by deploying the Warhound centrally and using its 12" move, I can shoot essentially anywhere on the table, as Str D doesn't care about Stealth/Shrouded.

 

3 I don't doubt you could tailor a list to beat me- heck, I practically give away such a list in my article (Be'lakor, LoC, 3 flying DPs)- but do you think you can make a list that will reasonably beat my list, a Revenant list, a Transcendent C'tan list, a flyer list, and a Drop Pod list? I would love to see what army you think can do that with any degree of consistency. 1750pts, keep in mind.

 

4 The Tiger Shark is a f***ing atrocity, it's one of the worst superheavies in the game. It holds the mighty power of an Ion Cannon on a five hundred point platform- but not just that, oh no! It also has Gun Drones! really, who can compete with that kind of firepower?

 

5 The Harridan can be grounded exactly like any other FMC. This means that what is almost guaranteed to happen against any Escalation list is it will swoop forward, make 3-5 grounding tests and fail one, then the Str D templates come down and erase it. Running it alongside the dataslate is... not really possible at 2000pts, I think- the Harridan itself is 735pts, the Skyblight Swarm is 835pts. That leaves you virtually nothing for your "actual" army, since neither of those things fulfill your FoC requirements, and it leaves you extremely light on Synapse.

The Thunderhawk does, on paper, look good, I admit- however, it runs into a couple major problems. The first one is that the dang thing is nearly a foot and a half long- with the limitations of the flyer chassis, this means that it typically only gets to really make one pass at things before it is either flying off the table or making really awkward turns that don't allow it to shoot anything of importance. (The main cannon is on a fixed mount, remember.) It will tend to Clown other Str D guns, but the fact that it doesn't make an appearance until turn 2+ mean that the enemy titan is basically going nuts on the remaining 2/3 of your army during that time, and that can be pretty hard to endure. I wouldn't put it completely out of consideration, but I would say that it is at best a niche choice for such an environment.

 

5 If you remove the Forge World stuff from the equation, like I said, it all comes down to the C'tan and the Revenant. It's less broken, but still pretty broken. T9 GCs with 2+ cover are not really something that most armies can deal with, especially not when they are spewing out Str D hellstorm shots. It's a rather small model, so if we're playing with all of this LOS-blocking terrain you advocate, it's essentially going to be able to get into combat unmolested and then just sort of wade its way through the enemy forces at will, blasting and assaulting anything it wants and hiding in combat to avoid any shooting that could possibly threaten it.

 

 1

The power working is unreliable, but the test is done after the opponent decides to shoot, so it's up to them if they need to test. This makes the power more psychological against the player and that is it's strength. In the respect of you personally, would you play the odds that the warhound couldn't shoot for a turn if it meant ignoring a certain target with the D weapons for a turn? Odds are something like 91.66% chance to pass the Ld 10 test.

 

I know I'd reconsider if it meant 720pts of my army would not be able to do much for a turn...

 

2

So you don't bubble it? With that list, I'd expect you do bubble wrap your warhound to prevent DS enemies. I suppose if the plan is to put it in the center, then destroying it should be much easier than anticipated, as I don't need DS units to get to a warhound camping in the middle of the table.

 

3

I do see the issue here. A general purpose escalation list is certainly tough. Eldar could probably do it, espcially with DE allies (or DE with eldar allies). I don't know if they need the revenant, given that the lance weapons are pretty impressive against LoWs and fortifications. MSU tactics are probably best against D weapons, given that even with 4 pie plates, if you can only kill ~100pts of models per turn it does certainly limit the value a warhound can offer to the army. Haywire grenades would also be pretty impressive against the warhound and SH tanks.

 

4

I don't think the TAU needed a super heavy. They have more than ample escalation options in their current codex and shouldn't struggle against any vehicles. Worst case, they ally to obtain the AV solutions they need. As for the tiger shark, I think it might be more impressive in-game than it looks on paper. You can also swap the drones for seeker missiles (6). I do think that SH's being able to target lots of different units does make the SH flyers a bit more impressive.  

 

As for riptides, your comment about 4x D templates being able to remove 1-2 riptides per turn is funny. Yeah, 4x D templates should remove 1-2 riptides per turn. Most units should die at a rate of 1 unit per D template, while the riptides require 2x to remove them with average rolls - that's impressive. The riptides are fully able to move, shoot, move, so them being in TLOS for the D weapons is their own fault. The move-shoot-move option is very strong against escalation units that require TLOS.

 

5

Harridans don't have to zoom up. I see many FMCs do this due to limited shooting range, but the harridan doesn't face this issue. As a FMC, you could go back and forth and just shoot at long range. This should dramatically limit the number of weapons that can hit the harridan. Plus, if they waste their AA on the harridan, it means they aren't shooting any other tyranid flyers.

 

The thunderhawk can start on the table, or did you miss that in the SA book? It's a flyer with hover, so it can technically start on the table on a skyshield. Probably not a great idea, but it is an option.

 

As for the Thunderhawk size, GW has released two different thunderhawk models over the years. GW released this one a while back for normal 40k:

This sucker is pewter, but remains a legal thunderhawk for 40k models (debate-ably more legal as it's a GW one, not a FW one). I understand it to only be slightly larger than the SR....

-Pax

[PourSpelur]

They also made Space Marines with Shruiken Catapults, Terminators on 25mm bases and Ork trukks the size of skateboards...just sayin;)

[Guest]

They also made Space Marines with Shruiken Catapults, Terminators on 25mm bases and Ork trukks the size of skateboards...just sayin;)

Terms on 25mm bases are still legal for normal play. Players that put them on 40mm do so as a courtesy or for a more scenic look, but there are no official GW rules to demand or support this change from the model as it came.

-Pax

[AbusePuppy]

Honestly, many of your issues seem like they stem from not enough TLOS blocking terrain and use of the warhound titan. You shouldn't have clear TLOS to the entire table in escalation games. There should always be some giant pieces of terrain blocking TLOS. The Warhound shouldn't be able to shoot everything turn 1. It should have to maneuver around the terrain to hunt it's opponent down.

 

What your doing sounds like playing 40k on an empty table and complaining that your units die too quick...yeah, they should die quick if you take away most of the strategy and just have both armies be gun lines in an empty desert.

 

You seriously think that most tables should have enough terrain that TITANS can't see over it? Because while some of the battles in that report had some things that were pretty light on terrain, there were others that had some very large (12"x12" or bigger, more that 7" high) pieces of LOS-blocking terrain on them. That didn't stop the Warhound from getting its shots in. Moreover, the C'tan and Revenant are even better able to circumvent or take advantage of such terrain than the Warhound is. Superheavies pretty easily CAN maneuver around terrain to see past things- it's one of their advantages.

 

I generally play on tables with 25% terrain coverage and an even mix of "standard" terrain, blocking terrain, and area terrain. That's pretty much what GW recommends and it fits with what most people I've met say feels correct for play- even a tad heavier than some. We're not talking an "empty desert" here, we're talking about tables that aren't covered in 12" high impassible walls.

 

 

The power working is unreliable, but the test is done after the opponent decides to shoot, so it's up to them if they need to test. This makes the power more psychological against the player and that is it's strength. In the respect of you personally, would you play the odds that the warhound couldn't shoot for a turn if it meant ignoring a certain target with the D weapons for a turn? Odds are something like 91.66% chance to pass the Ld 10 test.

 

Generally I wouldn't, no. But generally I wouldn't need to, because most things you would attach that guy to are not a major threat to my Warhound- and if you do put him with something that is a problem, a 92% chance of success is really not very bad odds for me.

 

 

So you don't bubble it? With that list, I'd expect you do bubble wrap your warhound to prevent DS enemies. I suppose if the plan is to put it in the center, then destroying it should be much easier than anticipated, as I don't need DS units to get to a warhound camping in the middle of the table.

 

Against most armies, there's no need to bubblewrap it. Either you have Deep Striking units in your army list or you don't, and I'll know which at the beginning of the game. And I have until turn 2 to move over next to Coteaz for protection if you do- turn 1 I'm free to maneuver for shooting, unless you're running Drop Pods.

 

You seem to think that destroying a titan is a pretty trivial task just because it's not sitting next to some Guard guys. I've already put the question to you, but you haven't answered yet: can you show me a list that consistently beats my list, Eldar Revenant lists, Necron C'tan lists, Daemonic FMC lists, and SM Drop Melta lists? I want to see what this mythical beast looks like.

 

 

I do see the issue here. A general purpose escalation list is certainly tough. Eldar could probably do it, espcially with DE allies (or DE with eldar allies). I don't know if they need the revenant, given that the lance weapons are pretty impressive against LoWs and fortifications. MSU tactics are probably best against D weapons, given that even with 4 pie plates, if you can only kill ~100pts of models per turn it does certainly limit the value a warhound can offer to the army. Haywire grenades would also be pretty impressive against the warhound and SH tanks.

 

Lance weapons are okay, but not great, against a lot of the superheavies. You still needs 5s to penetrate, remember, and you need 4s to drop Void Shields. That translates into rather a lot of Lances required. (DE can bring them more easily, but DE have other problems.)

 

Haywire are actually quite good- I doubt anyone actually has the models for it, but 3x10 Scourges with 4 Haywire Blasters each is hilariously good against superheavy targets, especially if you have a Farseer around to twin-link them.

 

 

I don't think the TAU needed a super heavy. They have more than ample escalation options in their current codex and shouldn't struggle against any vehicles. Worst case, they ally to obtain the AV solutions they need. As for the tiger shark, I think it might be more impressive in-game than it looks on paper. You can also swap the drones for seeker missiles (6). I do think that SH's being able to target lots of different units does make the SH flyers a bit more impressive.  

 

As for riptides, your comment about 4x D templates being able to remove 1-2 riptides per turn is funny. Yeah, 4x D templates should remove 1-2 riptides per turn. Most units should die at a rate of 1 unit per D template, while the riptides require 2x to remove them with average rolls - that's impressive. The riptides are fully able to move, shoot, move, so them being in TLOS for the D weapons is their own fault. The move-shoot-move option is very strong against escalation units that require TLOS.

 

No, it's actually not very impressive at all because you have to shoot both pie plates at the same target (you fire each GUN independently, not each shot from a gun), so there's no real benefit at all.

 

Six. Seeker. Missiles. Five. Hundred. Points. Come on, Pax, even you can't be this obtuse.

 

 

Harridans don't have to zoom up. I see many FMCs do this due to limited shooting range, but the harridan doesn't face this issue. As a FMC, you could go back and forth and just shoot at long range. This should dramatically limit the number of weapons that can hit the harridan. Plus, if they waste their AA on the harridan, it means they aren't shooting any other tyranid flyers.

 

If your Harridan is hanging back, it's not really affecting the battle any, is it? Those half-dozen hits per turn is pretty unimpressive and sooner or later it will fail a grounding check against one of the longer-ranged weapons and then it's dying to Str D.

 

The fact that you barely even HAVE any other Tyranid flyers in your army makes the second point kinda laughable. Most armies are not gonna struggle to deal with one Tyrant, one Crone, and two Harpies at 2000pts.

 

 

 

The thunderhawk can start on the table, or did you miss that in the SA book? It's a flyer with hover, so it can technically start on the table on a skyshield. Probably not a great idea, but it is an option.

 

As for the Thunderhawk size, GW has released two different thunderhawk models over the years. GW released this one a while back for normal 40k:

This sucker is pewter, but remains a legal thunderhawk for 40k models (debate-ably more legal as it's a GW one, not a FW one). I understand it to only be slightly larger than the SR....

 

Sure, by paying an 80pt Premium. Oh, and also you're in Hover mode and can't Zoom first turn, so they can hit you will all those Str D blasts that you would otherwise be immune to. So yeah, go ahead and try that, you're opponents will greatly appreciate getting a free superheavy kill.

 

And yes, there is the old pewter Thunderhawk. How many of those have you seen in person? Not a lot, I'm betting. The overwhelming majority of players who have Thunderhawks have the resin version, so it only makes sense to base any considerations based on the model off of the vastly more prevalent one.

 

 

Terms on 25mm bases are still legal for normal play. Players that put them on 40mm do so as a courtesy or for a more scenic look, but there are no official GW rules to demand or support this change from the model as it came.

 

This is true, but keep in mind that my army of 1mm tall "Genestealers hiding in the swamp" army is also legal for play. Modeling for advantage isn't actually against the rules.

[Guest]

First, I think you misunderstand my points. I do think the warhound is very impressive. I own one, they are.

 

I don't think the rest of your list capitalises on it as much as you could. List also seems over-reliant on the warhound.

 

Anyway, here's one I posted in Knight thread, but no one seemed to read it...

 

 

Not a bug player, but here's my shot at anti-knight tyranids

 

1750pts

 

HQ Flyrant (warlord, rending claws) 205pts

HQ Flyrant (rending claws) 205pts

Troops Stealers (5) 70pts

Troops Stealers (5) 70pts

FA Hive Crone 155pts

FA Hive Crone 155pts

FA Hive Crone 155pts

 

LoW: Harridan 735pts

 

Total: 1750pts even

 

Logic is pretty straight forward. Knights can't hit air much, so, give them 6 flyers to worry about. Tryants lack range, but provide synapse and could assault if needed given that they have higher initiative than the knights). Crones have haywire weapons, which are not lacking, plus their S8 vector strikes will be valuable against the knights (also note that knight ranged weapons can't ID crones). Stealers infiltrate/outflank to a nice hidey hole.

-Pax

List isn't exactly optimized, but it might provide a challenge for your army in theory hammer, while I consider a more balanced all-comer's escalation list.

-Pax

[AbusePuppy]

I don't think the rest of your list capitalises on it as much as you could. List also seems over-reliant on the warhound.

 

Anyway, here's one I posted in Knight thread, but no one seemed to read it...

 

List isn't exactly optimized, but it might provide a challenge for your army in theory hammer, while I consider a more balanced all-comer's escalation list.

 

Well, let's go over this on a basic level: if I go first against you, you lose. My Warhound will blast the two Tyrants, my other guns will hammer your various flyers and probably do some significant damage, and that will be that. This includes my ~1/3 chance of Seizing on you in addition to simply rolling better. If it's an objective game, you have to play for the table against me- I have 6-9 scoring units with the ability to move them across the table (via Vendettas), you have two 5man squads that Flamers or other guns will make short work of. Even if you get the top of the turn, I can force 7+ Grounding checks on you each turn pretty easily, which means my Warhound should just about always have targets. Your Crones have only a finite ability to break my Void Shields (and your Tyrants none at all), so you're reliant on your Harridan there... and your Harridan isn't going to be alive for long at all.

 

Against a C'tan list, you have basically nothing- the C'tan himself can vaporize your troops without even trying and they have plenty of AA guns to drag your guys from the sky so he can launch assaults on them, and he easily beats all your guys in assault. A Revenant may not have a lot of support guns to force Grounding tests, which will put it at a major disadvantage in this case- personally I would build around Jetbikes so that is less true, but most people do not, so we can call that an advantage for you. A Drop Melta list going ahead of you should all but table you straight away as it kills your more threatening FMCs and troops and then forces you to play for the draw when it already has Warlord and First blood. (Going second will depend a lot on what its support is, but seeing Hyperios, Stalkers, Stormtalons, etc, should be expected.) A Daemonic FMC list is going to come down a lot to positioning and psychic power shenanigans, but I would call it a toss-up overall.

 

I don't really see how, barring extreme luck on your Grounding tests, that army can expect to beat most other Escalation lists, especially since you don't even have the ability to claim all of your own objectives in many games.

[Guest]

Well, let's go over this on a basic level: if I go first against you, you lose. My Warhound will blast the two Tyrants, my other guns will hammer your various flyers and probably do some significant damage, and that will be that. This includes my ~1/3 chance of Seizing on you in addition to simply rolling better. If it's an objective game, you have to play for the table against me- I have 6-9 scoring units with the ability to move them across the table (via Vendettas), you have two 5man squads that Flamers or other guns will make short work of. Even if you get the top of the turn, I can force 7+ Grounding checks on you each turn pretty easily, which means my Warhound should just about always have targets. Your Crones have only a finite ability to break my Void Shields (and your Tyrants none at all), so you're reliant on your Harridan there... and your Harridan isn't going to be alive for long at all.

 

Against a C'tan list, you have basically nothing- the C'tan himself can vaporize your troops without even trying and they have plenty of AA guns to drag your guys from the sky so he can launch assaults on them, and he easily beats all your guys in assault. A Revenant may not have a lot of support guns to force Grounding tests, which will put it at a major disadvantage in this case- personally I would build around Jetbikes so that is less true, but most people do not, so we can call that an advantage for you. A Drop Melta list going ahead of you should all but table you straight away as it kills your more threatening FMCs and troops and then forces you to play for the draw when it already has Warlord and First blood. (Going second will depend a lot on what its support is, but seeing Hyperios, Stalkers, Stormtalons, etc, should be expected.) A Daemonic FMC list is going to come down a lot to positioning and psychic power shenanigans, but I would call it a toss-up overall.

 

I don't really see how, barring extreme luck on your Grounding tests, that army can expect to beat most other Escalation lists, especially since you don't even have the ability to claim all of your own objectives in many games.

You don't have any indirect weapons, so why have I deployed with TLOS for the entire army? Harridan is likely in reserve, given it's huge size,

 

I really get the feeling, reading your posts, that you aren't playing with much tall terrain. If you buy GW ruins, those should give you an idea on how tall terrain should be for 40k....

 

This guy is about 10" tall.

About 7" tall

 

Another 10" tall

 

Another 7" tall

 

Yeah, terrain pictured has lots of open areas, but in escalation you should have at least 1 tall TLOS blocking terrain piece per table quarter....or you will find D weapons horribly unbalanced. They are not indirect weapons and that is for balance. Get a mountain or something to block TLOS.

 

For fluffy reasons, You don't fight a battle where terrain will make the battle lopsided. Yeah, surprises and such, but you shouldn't be fighting a super heavy that just snuck up on you....maybe in apocalypse.

 

At GG, we've got a FoR tower as a ruined building. It's ~14" tall and blocks TLOS well.

 

You shouldn't be able to draw TLOS to my tyrants turn 1, even with 12" move and fire.

 

Anyway, list was just to keep you thinking while I consider the list construction end. I'm still doing so.

-Pax

[Threejacks]

   Perhaps competitions that involve LoW`s should be allowing Sideboards like MTG does...

 

 This would be something that players who didn't bring a LoW would have access to.

 

 Maybe something along the lines of 30% of the army total points can be used to build a sideboard of "rapid deployment" troops that can be switched out with the main roster in order to more tailor their list for dealing with such a huge imbalance.Of course a player could just plop in their own LoW(points permiting of course) if they so choose or load up some DSing reserves that they otherwise wouldn't use.

[AscentStudios]

Totally agree. With the increasing RPS nature of the meta, sideboards (or even better, 2 army lists, which was a thing Warmachine was doing) to allow an army to cope with a meta-abusing army would really put a curb on the "play to win" grousing we hear in the tournament scene. I imagine most armies would start running a vs. infantry and a vs. armor/MC/LoW lists rather quickly, and really allow a greater strategic depth to tournaments.

[Guest]

I'm still a fan of the 25% points allowed on any one selection method. In apoc experience, the warhound and revenant are poorly suited for 3k games. They start being practical at the 4k mark. At 2k, your biggest LoW should be 500pts, tops. Likewise, single selections in the rest of the FOC shouldn't be over 500pts each. You can still add together ICs to a unit to make it more than 500pts, but no single selection beyond 500pts at the 2k mark. Dataslates are a single selection. units with a dedicated transport are two different selections.

-Pax

[WestRider]

As someone who has to take the bus, I really do not favour solutions that want me to bring along another 25-100% as many Models. I have enough trouble lugging a 2K Army around as it is.