|
I finally got around to playing a test game yesterday, and the game ground to a screeching halt immediately. How the hell does larger cover pieces work? The rulebook talks about being "on" or "within" cover pieces, but what about something like a house? I understand barricades:  Green is in cover from red and get a +1 to their save - fine. But a house or other large object, taller than any of the models?  As we read the rulebook, that huge thing is basically ignored. If it had been a statue of the exact same dimensions though, everybody within 3" would gain cover for some weird reason. Is this really correct? We gave a +1 save to the green guys in the image. My old grog brain has a really hard time with this level of abstraction. You could make up even more insane examples, with two units on each side of huge buildings with a small alley allowing one of the red guys to see one of the green guys. Also, how do you count rapid fire range? Is it the same as shooting, as in - if one guy is with in half range of one guy from the target unit, everybody gets to rapid fire? 
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:49 |
|
|
mango sentinel posted:So I guess you want Power Swords and Thunder Hammers are the sweet spots depending on what you're doing with those units. It's dumb to focus too much on graphs like that. If somebody loads a unit DC up with thunderhammers it is absolutely going to get the poo poo shot out of it regardless of how it's deployed. At best, if you successfully charge out of deepstrike you'll trash one target before it either withdraws and your squad gets murdered by ranged fire or it dies and you still get murdered. A ten man DC squad with thunderhammers comes out at a whopping 370 points which is getting up into superheavy territory. MEQ with no option for an invuln are simply too fragile to put that many points into.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
I've been treating large pieces like that as statues.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Pendent posted:It's dumb to focus too much on graphs like that. If somebody loads a unit DC up with thunderhammers it is absolutely going to get the poo poo shot out of it regardless of how it's deployed. At best, if you successfully charge out of deepstrike you'll trash one target before it either withdraws and your squad gets murdered by ranged fire or it dies and you still get murdered. A ten man DC squad with thunderhammers comes out at a whopping 370 points which is getting up into superheavy territory. Even then, expensive single wound models with an invuln are too fragile to put that many points into. I've tried several times but I can't make my storm shield vanguard work. If I give them a hammer and shield that's 43 points per model that gets wiped out as soon as you roll a 2 on your save. Yeah they're mobile, but for 5 more points I could be fielding terminators. 10 SS + TH jump pack vanguard at 430 points could be 7 thunder hammer + stormshield terminators with some change left over, or 9 power fist + storm bolter terminators. chutche2 fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
HardCoil posted:I finally got around to playing a test game yesterday, and the game ground to a screeching halt immediately. How the hell does larger cover pieces work? The rulebook talks about being "on" or "within" cover pieces, but what about something like a house?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:Yup. I used a variant of it years ago and it was great for mopping-up damaged units. I swear, the most important casualties in the final turns of the game come from the stormbolter/combi-bolter shots from surviving Rhinos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
berzerkmonkey posted:The Core Rules clearly state that if you cannot draw a direct LOS to the model, you can't shoot at it. If that building blocks LOS, the models can't be shot at. If it is a Ruin, then you get the benefit of cover. I think his issue is that the red unit can see only one of the green but can shoot them all with out any of them receiving any cover
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
berzerkmonkey posted:The Core Rules clearly state that if you cannot draw a direct LOS to the model, you can't shoot at it. If that building blocks LOS, the models can't be shot at. If it is a Ruin, then you get the benefit of cover. Where do you see that (the stuff about direct LOS)? I can only find 3.2: In order to target an enemy unit, a model from that unit must be within the Range of the weapon being used (as listed on its profile) and be visible to the shooting model. If unsure, stoop down and get a look from behind the shooting model to see if any part of the target is visible. and 4.3: If an attack successfully wounds the target, the player commanding the target unit allocates the wound to any model in the unit (the chosen model does not have to be within range or visible to the attacking unit. Dr Hemulen fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Ruins is in the advanced rules section later in the book.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
You have to be "on a ruin" in order for it to provide cover. Here we are "next to" a house. I'm not trying to be a contrarian here, I would like to think that this may be so obvious they don't need to spell it out, but 4.3 directly state that you don't need to see the target at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
HardCoil posted:You have to be "on a ruin" in order for it to provide cover. Here we are "next to" a house. 4.3 is for wound allocation, not for attacking. 3.2: In order to target an enemy unit, a model from that unit must be within the Range of the weapon being used (as listed on its profile) and be visible to the shooting model.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:4.3 is for wound allocation, not for attacking. So he can see one model. Is that all he can kill with no overspill of wounds?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:So he can see one model. Is that all he can kill with no overspill of wounds? Wound allocation ignores line of sight, as 4.3 says. Shooting requires line of sight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
HardCoil posted:You have to be "on a ruin" in order for it to provide cover. Here we are "next to" a house. You read it all correct. It seems that the intent of the base rules was to make it very very very simple. You can tell they realized this makes a lot of terrain you might have useless so when you get the advanced rules and see things the imperial statue and barricades and such. I think it would be nice if they used 'generic impassable or obstruction terrain' instead of 'imperial statue' as an example of how to add some purpose to other terrain you might have, but it basically also says "Apply these types of rules to your terrain as agreed upon by your opponent". As someone said above, you can just count stuff at using the statue rules if it's not enterable ruins. This may be still a little obtuse (Why doesn't the ruin give cover unless you're in it?) but it at least adds some depth to terrain types without slowing things down. The first few times you play you kinda go what the gently caress is up with cover now though. I feel like they could have done a better job listing more stuff that should probably get the statue profile. Also you know, since it's not explicit, I hope you have cool opponents who agree about needing 100% LOS blocking terrain being stupid. chutche2 posted:4.3 is for wound allocation, not for attacking. Yeah but the line of sight only comes into play targeting the UNIT, not the model. You shoot at a UNIT. You can wipe out a squad of 30 if a single dick is sticking out around a corner with the base rules.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
You see one model, but can kill the entire unit if you get enough hits / wounds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:Wound allocation ignores line of sight, as 4.3 says. Shooting requires line of sight. So one guy out in the open allows the rest of his unit to be wounded without a coversave? I gotta read the rules a second time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:4.3 is for wound allocation, not for attacking. Yep, this is it. The term "LOS" isn't specifically used (I was paraphrasing because I didn't have the rulebook handy) but "and be visible to the shooting model" is pretty much self-explanatory. EDIT: I didn't catch that he was referring to a cover save. My fault.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:So one guy out in the open allows the rest of his unit to be wounded without a coversave? I gotta read the rules a second time. You can roll saves one at a time. So if one guy is out in the open and the rest are in cover, you can roll one save at a time until that guy dies and then the entire rest of the unit is in cover so they would get a cover save, but you still have to make saves for them even if they are out of LOS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
General Olloth posted:You read it all correct. It seems that the intent of the base rules was to make it very very very simple. You can tell they realized this makes a lot of terrain you might have useless so when you get the advanced rules and see things the imperial statue and barricades and such. Its not that simple though because they actually give rules for a common large terrain piece, hills, and it specially spells out that there is no way to get cover from them. The only thing they can do is block LOS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:So one guy out in the open allows the rest of his unit to be wounded without a coversave? I gotta read the rules a second time. Cover is a hard to acquire bonus now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
HardCoil posted:You have to be "on a ruin" in order for it to provide cover. Here we are "next to" a house. From the FAQ: "Change the third paragraph of rules text to read: ‘Infantry units that are on a ruin receive the benefit of cover. Other units only receive the benefit of cover if at least 50% of every model is obscured from the point of view of the shooting model.’" https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/Errata/Warhammer_40000/warhammer_40000_rulebook_ENG.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
JoshTheStampede posted:Uh, how much did they cost before? They cost 8 points now. 4. for 8 you'd have them in power armour and with boltguns.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
HardCoil posted:Also, how do you count rapid fire range? Is it the same as shooting, as in - if one guy is with in half range of one guy from the target unit, everybody gets to rapid fire? You look at line of sight and range per model in the shooting unit. When allocating wounds on the shot unit, your opponent allocates to all of the unit. That means if all models in your unit can draw line of site to one model in an enemy unit, with 5 models within half range and 5 models outside half range, you can double the shots on 5 models and potentially take out a full unit. Note that you have to be either within/touching, or within X inches of terrain to get cover saves. Opponent allocated a wound to a model 3.1" away from a statue? No cover. Opponent allocated a wound to a model 2.9" away from a statue? Cover save. Terrain is kind of hosed this edition. LordAba fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
JesusIsTehCool posted:Its not that simple though because they actually give rules for a common large terrain piece, hills, and it specially spells out that there is no way to get cover from them. The only thing they can do is block LOS. Well what I was saying wasn't that simple, I think that is part of the point. They tried to make it very simple. The extra layer I would add to that point, considering all the hills I've seen around FLGS are only taller than like 6 models in the entire game especially with scale creep, is that the hills rules are also bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
LordAba posted:You look at line of site and range per model in the shooting unit. I don't think this is true, the FAQ changed the statuary to read "‘Units within 3" of Imperial Statuary that are at least 25% obscured by it from the point of view of the shooting model receive the benefit of cover.’ If one model is within 3 inches then the unit is within 3 inches, and if 25% of the unit is obscured, then the unit gets a cover save. But they have to be 25% obscured by the statuary. If they're within 3 inches but are obscured by a different building, they don't get cover because they aren't obscured by the statuary. Compare this to non-infantry units in ruins. Every model in the unit must be obscured 50%, but that 50% doesn't have to come from the ruin itself. chutche2 fucked around with this message at 21:38 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
^^^ You are correct, cover is determined on a unit level, not an individual level. Proving that terrain rules this edition are kind of hosed. Wait, if you can't draw line of sight to models that WOULD grant the unit cover from terrain piece A because of terrain piece B does that mean the unit doesn't get cover? General Olloth posted:Well what I was saying wasn't that simple, I think that is part of the point. They tried to make it very simple. No to hills, yes to plateaus. LordAba fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
The rules for forests also changed to reflect the "get cover if 50% obscured by it" instead of needing to physically be inside it. I think they realized the books explanation was insane.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
berzerkmonkey posted:Yep, this is it. The term "LOS" isn't specifically used (I was paraphrasing because I didn't have the rulebook handy) but "and be visible to the shooting model" is pretty much self-explanatory. Im referring to both cover save and the possiblity to kill models totally obscured by terrain. Notice it says "unit" and not "model" in 3.2. That's the problem. You can target the unit if one model is visible. So the one guy poking out dooms the squad LordAba posted:You look at line of sight and range per model in the shooting unit. Yes, and then you apply the best case result. ONE guys has to see ONE enemy and then everybody gets to kill everybody. Sharks Dont Sleep posted:From the FAQ: Still doesn't help with large boxes. Some models will be 100% obscured and some 0%. As long is one is less than 50%, it's open season.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:The rules for forests also changed to reflect the "get cover if 50% obscured by it" instead of needing to physically be inside it. I think they realized the books explanation was insane. The only change to the forest rules is they they changed "point of view of shooting unit" to "shooting model". You must still be inside the forest with every model in the unit. chutche2 fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:The rules for forests also changed to reflect the "get cover if 50% obscured by it" instead of needing to physically be inside it. I think they realized the books explanation was insane. Which is silly. I'm .01" away, don't get it. I'm .01" in, I get it. It's loving infinity all over again, where if you are .01" away from a wall every other model shooting at you is a loving sniper despite shooting from a mile away through a slot between buildings that a body positive fly couldn't squeeze between.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
WhiteWolf123 posted:Are Index Sisters in bad shape? How good/bad is that army right now, and what changes would an exclusive Codex be expected to bring them? Index Sisters continue their proud tradition of doing the "mech Marine" thing better than actual Marines do, and St. Celestine continues her personal tradition of being absolutely crazily OP. However, the models are very expensive, making it hard to actually make an army, and people's weird blind spots mean the Sisters probably won't be seen that commonly, even though they're in fact very strong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:Even then, expensive single wound models with an invuln are too fragile to put that many points into. Oh, I completely agree. You can at least make some sort of case that VV (or, in the case of Blood Angels Company Vets) gain enough benefit from their mobility that they are in some cases worth taking. They aren't a good general purpose pick but probably have a niche somewhere. I don't think you can say the same thing about DC with a similar loadout. Stuff just dies too fast now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
Why would you upgrade every member of a squad? I always build in basic dudes to act as bullet catchers for the upgraded guys. Especially for melee squads. A unit is never going to make it across the board unscathed and even with 8th if you make it in with a lucky deep strike, you're going to start losing models pretty quickly. Better to lose bolt pistol/chainsword mooks than an upgraded model with a thunder hammer/storm shield. This approach is probably why I will never do a Deathwatch army.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:Why would you upgrade every member of a squad? I always build in basic dudes to act as bullet catchers for the upgraded guys. Especially for melee squads. A unit is never going to make it across the board unscathed and even with 8th if you make it in with a lucky deep strike, you're going to start losing models pretty quickly. Better to lose bolt pistol/chainsword mooks than an upgraded model with a thunder hammer/storm shield. I dunno, I feel like thunder hammers needing 4s to hit aren't going to do a lot unless you have a lot of models with them. Vanguard are 2A each, that's 1 hit per guy. If it's a 5-man squad and only 2 or 3 of them have hammers they're not actually doing much against targets you needed hammers to fight. And your 18 point pistol/chainsword mooks are going to get murked pretty quickly if they start shooting AP weaponry at you, which is the whole point of having the shields. If you've got 10 and lets say half of them have hammers and shields and the other half are chainsword mooks, you're paying 300 points for 5 thunder hammers. Death Company don't get shields but at least get 3A when charging so can leverage their hammers better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:I dunno, I feel like thunder hammers needing 4s to hit aren't going to do a lot unless you have a lot of models with them. Vanguard are 2A each, that's 1 hit per guy. If it's a 5-man squad and only 2 or 3 of them have hammers they're not actually doing much against targets you needed hammers to fight. And your 18 point pistol/chainsword mooks are going to get murked pretty quickly if they start shooting AP weaponry at you, which is the whole point of having the shields. If you've got 10 and lets say half of them have hammers and shields and the other half are chainsword mooks, you're paying 300 points for 5 thunder hammers. Death Company don't get shields but at least get 3A when charging so can leverage their hammers better. (EDIT: with 3 hammers) Average three hits, further averaging 2.5 wounds, for 7.5 damage on those wounds against anything T4 or lower. Against T7 vehicles, it's 2 wounds for 6 damage. Against T8 vehicles, it's 1.5 wounds for 4.5 damage. None of that is terrible odds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Strobe posted:(EDIT: with 3 hammers) Average three hits, further averaging 2.5 wounds, for 7.5 damage on those wounds against anything T4 or lower. Against T7 vehicles, it's 2 wounds for 6 damage. Against T8 vehicles, it's 1.5 wounds for 4.5 damage. None of that is terrible odds. There are better ways to put 6 damage on a T7 vehicle or 4.5 on a T8 one than a relatively fragile 165 point squad that has to get to melee, though. That's the cost of 4 lascannon devastators as an example.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
True, but Lascannon Devastators probably shouldn't be trying to lock a vehicle in combat, which is a clear and sometimes decisive advantage that a melee unit has. But it's almost like there's not a genuine Best Equipment to pick 100% of the time. But that can't be, this is GW! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
If you're getting Death Company in combat against something and not requiring a literal bucket of dice for your attacks you're doing something wrong. Blood Angels have way better options for killing hard targets- Sanguinary Guard, TH/SS Terminators. Company Veterans with JP are incredibly flexible and can do pretty much whatever you need. Death Company should be focusing on what they're good at and taking a pretty light loadout to do it- 10 man squad mostly armed with bolters and chainswords, throw a few power weapons in and maybe a thunder hammer. Use them as a fairly hard hitting, mobile, expendable squad that your opponent has to react to. Edit: I really want to go back to my original point about graphs with expected damage output etc not being all that useful. This is a squad of dudes who are going to die. That is literally their entire point, both in the fluff and on the tabletop. They need to be built with that expectation kept firmly in mind. Pendent fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Jul 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
What base sizes are the assassins supposed to be on? I have a bunch of old metal ones and I am not paying $37 per for new ones lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:49 |
|
|
Strobe posted:True, but Lascannon Devastators probably shouldn't be trying to lock a vehicle in combat, which is a clear and sometimes decisive advantage that a melee unit has. Sure, but 16 point assault marines can do that. I'm saying that single wound 3+ armor models just aren't viable at 40+ points, they're going to have to do a whole lot to make it worthwhile. Even with stormshields, that just means stuff like plasma won't kill them as quickly. Pendent posted:If you're getting Death Company in combat against something and not requiring a literal bucket of dice for your attacks you're doing something wrong. This is definitely my philosophy. If you're going to take guys like this, make them cheap and have them throw a bunch of dice at a trouble infantry unit and then let them die. Giving them a bunch of weapons so that they can punch out tanks should be left to assault terminators that can take a hit and keep going. In this case I generally prefer assault marines to vanguard because I can give my assault marines a pair of flamers. I'm getting less melee attacks but those flamers can do some havoc, especially since they can fall back and still shoot them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 01:07
|
|