Jump to content

OFCC list feedback - AdMech/Knights


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

No, back to the attitude stuff. It's important. That's the key, the key I think you're missing. Not once in any post about OFCC have you mentioned a model looking cool, or being fun to play

This is the NASCAR of list feedback threads. Endless circles. What lap are we on?

Doesn't sound like you'd enjoy it. Sounds like you don't understand what OFCC offers. It's not about denying what's fun for you, it's a out denying what others can't deal with a majority of the time.

1 hour ago, Munkie said:

I never forget a face that plies me with alcohol! 

Does it help for remembering names too? I have a fair ammount of difficult retaining names and faces, never occured to me that it was a sober problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2019 at 2:25 PM, templar said:

Knight codex wasn't out last year at that time though correct?

TL;DNR: the problem isn't knights, the problem is frankenarmies. 

Long version: It was indeed out last year. The Knight codex introduced the castellan, and the mini knights. I brought a four Knight list last year, and I think we had five fun games....

The issue with knights isn't knights, it's how they are supported. A single codex Knight army is tough, but not unstoppable. But knights in an Imperial soup army.... That's another animal. 

When I plan to play my Knight army, I always consider if I want to play solo or combined arms. If I'm playing combined arms, then I leave the castellan at home in favor of either a paladin or an errant. A lone paladin and or errant is just enough to make it interesting, but not enough to overwhelm. 

In a solo codex army,  a lone castellan supported by smaller knights isn't too bad. Multiple castellan chassis knights would be overwhelming I think. 

But then again, it really depends on your opponent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate a lot of the replies here. I do want to make sure that lists I bring wouldn't cause grief in the games and realize that as the captain I can always make sure that the castellan goes against a list where it's not optimal (horde lists for instance). However, I do have other models and armies (as evident by the Daemons list I threw out). I saw one mention of Mortarion and am curious the thoughts on him in an all DG list? I love bringing big models, I feel they give a 'wow' factor to the table and just make the game feel bigger than it is. I have horribly lost Mortarion T1 and I've seen him alone run through some lists. Is he too much in the following (again, I'm working with models I have):

1998 pts, 8 cp
Super Heavy Aux:

Mortarion

Battalion: 

Necrosius the Undying

Typhus

2x20 Poxwalkers

1x9 Plague Marines (Champion Sword/Plasma Gun, 4x Bolters, 1x Flail, 1x Great Plague Cleaver, 2x Blight Launcher)

Noxious Blightbringer

Tallyman

2x Foetid Bloat-drone (2x Plaguespitters)

1x3 Myphitic Blight-haulers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lyr, try this for me. Open yourself to feedback and try and understand what people are tellling you OFCC spirit means. I can tell you that it is worth it. 

We have run this event for a long time and many who are giving you feedback are veterans of our great event. By running the tournament  this way we emphasize meeting other players and developing a camaraderie that lasts from year to year. 

We can talk more about it on Sunday if you would like. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to toss this out there, I was at OFCC in 2013; I ran Nurgle Daemon Princes, Nurgle marines on bikes and Epidemius back then, considered to be fairly strong at that time. I attained 2 favorite opponent pins (would have been 3 but one guy said he gave away his pin to another opponent because he couldn't find me, found this out after we ran into eachother leaving the event) that weekend while going 4-0-1. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2019 at 10:29 PM, Sugarlessllama said:

TL;DNR: the problem isn't knights, the problem is frankenarmies. 

Long version: It was indeed out last year. The Knight codex introduced the castellan, and the mini knights. I brought a four Knight list last year, and I think we had five fun games....

The issue with knights isn't knights, it's how they are supported. A single codex Knight army is tough, but not unstoppable. But knights in an Imperial soup army.... That's another animal. 

When I plan to play my Knight army, I always consider if I want to play solo or combined arms. If I'm playing combined arms, then I leave the castellan at home in favor of either a paladin or an errant. A lone paladin and or errant is just enough to make it interesting, but not enough to overwhelm. 

In a solo codex army,  a lone castellan supported by smaller knights isn't too bad. Multiple castellan chassis knights would be overwhelming I think. 

But then again, it really depends on your opponent. 

Soup is how those armies are designed though. 

Armies like orks or Tau are designed to be mono codex while Space Elves, Chaos, Tyranids, and Imperial are designed and balanced for people bringing soup. That's why GW hasn't banned it. It's fully intended to counter their inherent weaknesses. Such as custodes not having board presence. 

 

The castellan is a bit of an issue but it's rumored to be getting a points hike to roughly 700 but that's not set in stone so grain or two of salt. While the problem is its ability to get 3++

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lyraeus said:

Soup is how those armies are designed though. 

Armies like orks or Tau are designed to be mono codex while Space Elves, Chaos, Tyranids, and Imperial are designed and balanced for people bringing soup. That's why GW hasn't banned it. It's fully intended to counter their inherent weaknesses. Such as custodes not having board presence. 

 

The castellan is a bit of an issue but it's rumored to be getting a points hike to roughly 700 but that's not set in stone so grain or two of salt. While the problem is its ability to get 3++

I pay 600pts for 12 wraiths (36 wounds and 3++, but S6, T5, etc). and that's still not the same killing power as Castellan. Character sniping missiles, 3++ invul possible, T8, and more. Needs to be 800-900 personally (even 1k).

 

Balance is based on equal killing power ans staying power. It has a LOT that about 800-1k of any other army would take.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lyraeus said:

Soup is how those armies are designed though.

It doesn't have to be. Soup lists are created by people that choose to make soup.

That said, I like the ally option. I just wish it was more balanced against the mono-detachment army. But GW is about BUY BUY BUY, so forcing players to buy multiple codexes does seem very GW. Even your "mono-faction" orks are running an INDEX, a CODEX, and an EXPANSION book, plus chapter approved...

But 40k's new edition is on the horizon. So, meh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dark Trainer said:

I pay 600pts for 12 wraiths (36 wounds and 3++, but S6, T5, etc). and that's still not the same killing power as Castellan. Character sniping missiles, 3++ invul possible, T8, and more. Needs to be 800-900 personally (even 1k).

 

Balance is based on equal killing power ans staying power. It has a LOT that about 800-1k of any other army would take.

I never said the castellan was balanced. I can't play much of my codex because of the level of firepower the anti castellan meta brings. It just isn't efficient and I hate watching big models. 

Removing the 3++ alone helps balance the castellan from a new impossible to kill to a possible to kill T1 unit. That is important. 

Sniping Missiles are 3 CP to do, the 3++ is another 3 CP as it is. 

At 800 pts no one will take it. It's more efficient to take two crusaders at that point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paxmiles said:

It doesn't have to be. Soup lists are created by people that choose to make soup.

That said, I like the ally option. I just wish it was more balanced against the mono-detachment army. But GW is about BUY BUY BUY, so forcing players to buy multiple codexes does seem very GW. Even your "mono-faction" orks are running an INDEX, a CODEX, and an EXPANSION book, plus chapter approved...

But 40k's new edition is on the horizon. So, meh.

You are placing your desire on things. 

 

GW made the Imperium codex's with the fact that you can bring Space Wolves with Deathwatch or with Imperial Guard, or Ad Mech. They are balanced to work together far better than alone but they can be alone

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

And you are just stating the obvious. Albeit in a hostile way.

Means it's about my desire.

/sigh. I am not being hostile I am stating the facts. You are perceiving it as hostile likely because that's how you picture me. As a hostile curbstomping person who cares little for the feelings of others or some such nonsense. 

Basically you are putting your own context/spin to my statement. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

GW made the Imperium codex's with the fact that you can bring Space Wolves with Deathwatch or with Imperial Guard, or Ad Mech. They are balanced to work together far better than alone but they can be alone

You are confusing the concept of balance with efficient. Soup is more efficient.

Being more efficient doesn't equal more balanced.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

Basically you are putting your own context/spin to my statement. 

As you are with mine, but that's just the nature of conversation.

I'm glad to know you aren't trying to be hostile. Thanks for that.

Back to the subtopic of game balance. Efficiency comes in to the balance equasion(?spelling) when one army is significantly more efficient than another.

Granted some degree of inefficiency is part of army theme and is to be expected, but some units/armies/factions are regarded as having too great a difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

As you are with mine, but that's just the nature of conversation.

I'm glad to know you aren't trying to be hostile. Thanks for that.

Back to the subtopic of game balance. Efficiency comes in to the balance equasion(?spelling) when one army is significantly more efficient than another.

Grant some degree of inefficiency is part of army theme and is to be expected, but some units/armies/factions are regarded as having too great a difference.

Well look at when index's were just the only form of things. 

Imperial Guard won by a landslide due to efficiency. 

Efficiency is there so you are not bring a 150 point model just to have it get destroyed with no return on T1 or 2. Those units can work but they work to a lesser degree than other options 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont make the Castellan House Raven, bam done. No cawls wrath, no reroll 1's on everything. Now the Castellan is good not overpowered.

Also I didnt really see anything in the ad mech that was super scary either.

Play the list you want and bring it back a notch during game. "Oh I can delete that unit if I shoot everything at it, but I'll separate my shooting."

However OFCC isn't for me either even though I could make every game fun even with Castellan/Catachan horde.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...