|
Der Waffle Mous posted:I'm coming at this solely from the viewpoint of "hey maybe charging into a fortified position should have some downsides" It does! Their cover saves make it harder to clear them out with shooting and you need to account for the vertical distance when trying to make the charge. Maybe they could've made it so units assaulting from out of a ruin into a ruin lose the always strike first from charging. But the "downside" they've added is actually "it's impossible to charge into a ruin if they set their models up well" I get it, you run a pure gunline army and don't want to interact with the fight phase. Try doing that by playing better rather than relying on wonky mechanics to make assault armies start from an even worse position. Booley fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Apr 18, 2018 |
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:31 |
|
|
Zuul the Cat posted:Or, it's just the fact that I think the decision GW made in the FAQ is a good and fair one? I play Eldar so I dont really give a poo poo one way or another from how it affects my play. But every time someone tries to pull a "you cannot assault me in any manner because even though you can climb walls, and hang on walls, you cant climb walls if it means I get attacked" I reflexively think "Nope, gently caress you"
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
Z the IVth posted:Is there anything to stop you from grabbing a lump of blu-tak and just sticking your model to the ledge or whatever it's supposed to be balancing on? This was suggested in previous rulebooks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
I'm not a fan of rules that make it physically impossible for units to do something, especially when that something is a key aspect of how certain units and armies function. Assault is already a significant challenge and imposes requirements that ranged attacks simply don't have, and this seems to be one more complication that (in my opinion) doesn't really contribute significantly towards making the game more fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
Lungboy posted:Well this thread took a wrong turn this evening. Back to Ad Mech love-in, what's the best loadout for a Dominus? Im partial to volkite/phosphor but Im playing ryza so i can take the relic that turns it into an auto cannon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
Booley posted:It does! Their cover saves make it harder to clear them out with shooting and you need to account for the vertical distance when trying to make the charge. Maybe they could've made it so units assaulting from out of a ruin into a ruin lose the always strike first from charging. But the "downside" they've added is actually "it's impossible to charge into a ruin if they set their models up well" If you can't kill enough models to clear out enough space to charge them maybe you should try playing better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:I'm not a fan of rules that make it physically impossible for units to do something, especially when that something is a key aspect of how certain units and armies function. Assault is already a significant challenge and imposes requirements that ranged attacks simply don't have, and this seems to be one more complication that (in my opinion) doesn't really contribute significantly towards making the game more fun. If it's physically impossible to do it shouldn't be done so the rules right tbh,
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
Der Waffle Mous posted:If you can't kill enough models to clear out enough space to charge them maybe you should try playing better. What you're saying here is that I should play a shooty army and not one that relies on killing things in the fight phase
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
Between this and the redeploy strategem, I think we should all look forward to the FAQ for the FAQ. Which, of course, should contain at least one contentious mistake so that they need to FAQ in turn, because then they could stylishly brand it the “FAQubed”.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
Booley posted:What you're saying here is that I should play a shooty army and not one that relies on killing things in the fight phase Yes, the first step to playing better is buying and assembling a new army.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:07
|
|
|
ijyt posted:If it's physically impossible to do it shouldn't be done so the rules right tbh, It's physically impossible because the rules say so. Ultimately everything is an abstraction anyway, so arguing that something should be a certain way because your mental image of how armored space monks should fight hooligan sentient fungus conflicts with my mental image isn't terribly effective. GW could easily rule that ruins are abstract zones and provide rules for fighting inside said zone, or they could rule that the 1" can be applied to the model and not just the base, or they could do a myriad of other things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Booley posted:What you're saying here is that I should play a shooty army and not one that relies on killing things in the fight phase I'm sorry your army has no shooting whatsoever. Did they bring Vampire Counts into 40k when I wasn't looking?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Zuul the Cat posted:It is, and you can! I run Mars and Stygies in two separate detachments. My firebase is usually Mars because of Cawl (although i'm taking him less these days), and other units I take Stygies VIII for the -1 to hit and for Clandestine Infiltration. Mars does seem very strong overall but the idea of trying to paint Cawl scares the crap out of me. Is there a Stygies colourscheme in the book? Going purely on paintjob I am leaning towards Lucius because I hate myself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Booley posted:It does! Their cover saves make it harder to clear them out with shooting and you need to account for the vertical distance when trying to make the charge. Maybe they could've made it so units assaulting from out of a ruin into a ruin lose the always strike first from charging. But the "downside" they've added is actually "it's impossible to charge into a ruin if they set their models up well" But the reverse is also true - assault armies want to run amok with no negative modifiers. We know this is true because the amount of complaining about the shooting phase and overwatch is tremendous. The new FAQ doesn't make assaulting impossible, it makes assaulting harder but only under the specific scenario of the unit you're trying to assault being in terrain and there being no available space. You can still assault, you just need to use your units together to make space so your dudes can assault. Lungboy posted:Mars does seem very strong overall but the idea of trying to paint Cawl scares the crap out of me. Is there a Stygies colourscheme in the book? Going purely on paintjob I am leaning towards Lucius because I hate myself. Cawl isn't so bad if you do it in stages. He's just a big tech-priest. Duncan has a guide on it that's pretty good, which you can watch here. The current codex doesn't have the paint schemes for other Forgeworlds, but the old ones do. Here's what they look like:   
Zuul the Cat fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Apr 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:or they could do a myriad of other things. they should make 30k the official game
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
ijyt posted:If it's physically impossible to do it shouldn't be done so the rules right tbh, It's physically impossible because it's a pringles can, not an actual guard tower. These things are abstractions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
NovemberMike posted:It's physically impossible because it's a pringles can, not an actual guard tower. These things are abstractions. ok but the rules say you can't do it so either play or don't
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
Zuul the Cat posted:Cawl isn't so bad if you do it in stages. He's just a big tech-priest. Duncan has a guide on it that's pretty good, which you can watch here. Thanks. I'll probably end up going with my own forgeworld colourscheme, although it could get awkward when trying to keep track of different <FORGEWORLD> rules.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Lungboy posted:Thanks. I'll probably end up going with my own forgeworld colourscheme, although it could get awkward when trying to keep track of different <FORGEWORLD> rules. It won’t be too bad. If you do your own you can just pick whatever one you want. There are also the lesser forgeworlds in the current codex too, like Deimos and Voss Prime.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
Cannot wait for a tournament wherein a guard player brings a Skyshield and fills it. Only removing the models sporadically from the interior to prevent assaults. This thread agrees this is right and good because things should be fortified.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Lungboy posted:Mars does seem very strong overall but the idea of trying to paint Cawl scares the crap out of me. Is there a Stygies colourscheme in the book? Going purely on paintjob I am leaning towards Lucius because I hate myself. Cawl isn't so bad. I'm new to wargaming, and mine turned out decent.  Do it in pieces and take your time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
Got to use Marbo in a massive clusterfuck 8 player teams of 2 king of the hill game tonight, was extremely fun going "surprise motherfucker!" and taking 5 wound off an overlord.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
Boon posted:Cannot wait for a tournament wherein a guard player brings a Skyshield and fills it. Only removing the models sporadically from the interior to prevent assaults. Easy counter: assault with a flying unit once there’s a hole in the center. Plus, do guardsmen ever die sporadically? Zuul the Cat fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Apr 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
Boon posted:Cannot wait for a tournament wherein a guard player brings a Skyshield and fills it. Only removing the models sporadically from the interior to prevent assaults. Ah yes we will all rue the day the unstoppable 2x skyshield lists started dominating tournaments
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:37
|
|
|
Zuul the Cat posted:But the reverse is also true - assault armies want to run amok with no negative modifiers. We know this is true because the amount of complaining about the shooting phase and overwatch is tremendous. When did I ever say I want to run amok with no negative modifiers? I just don't want it to be so easy to ignore an entire phase of the game, while still being able to contribute to the game. I'm fine with negative modifiers to assault into a ruin. I just don't want assaulting into a ruin to be a "sorry, we're full, try again later" Saying that it just means I need to bring more shooting is pretty irrelevant. A gunline army, using screens well, can get away with having no dedicated assault units. An assault army needs to have a fair bit of shooting to be functional. Previously, I could use my assault elements to kill units holding objectives, chew up screens, etc, and bring some antitank shooting to handle the things my assault units don't do as well. Now I need to bring anti-infantry shooting to clear units out of the second floor of ruins, and bring the same anti-tank shooting, so I might as well just run a pure shooting army.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:41
|
|
|
long-rear end nips Diane posted:Gonna buy the poo poo out of a kill team box if it comes out Pretty sure it will release in a box with some new terrain shown in that video. I'm super excited!
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:Ah yes we will all rue the day the unstoppable 2x skyshield lists started dominating tournaments hyperbole aside, isn't this the exactly ruling people are arguing for?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
ijyt posted:ok but the rules say you can't do it so either play or don't I'm not sure you're following everything here. Nobody's arguing about what the rules say, they're just saying that it's a little gamey and doesn't fit the idea of what's happening.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
NovemberMike posted:I'm not sure you're following everything here. Nobody's arguing about what the rules say, they're just saying that it's a little gamey and doesn't fit the idea of what's happening. A game is a bit like a game?? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:hyperbole aside, isn't this the exactly ruling people are arguing for? I'm not adverse to it, because I'm on board with "If there's no room for your dudes to complete a charge up there, then you can't complete the charge" What I don't agree with is the claim that this ruling will somehow destroy assault armies or lead to game-breaking scenarios involving skyshields. Occupying a piece of high ground to prevent being assaulted seems like a fine strategy to have in the game, and it's so terrain-dependent that I think it's fine to at least test for a while. For me it's not a question of "is this realistic," with all the silly photos and arguing over how someone could climb a wall without being shot in the face on the way up, it's really more "is this OK to have in the game?" and I think it is, both because I don't think it'll destroy assault armies (though I could be wrong there, and if I am, sure, adjust it), and because it's more practical--I'm not a fan of having models not be in the places they are physically sitting in a game with true LOS* and base-to-base measurement, or claiming that they can carefully balance on x small section of wall, etc. *which is one of the things it should have jettisoned moving to 8th e: vvvv it's not that they can't charge, just that the charge fails. If you need the narrative version of it, it's that every time the berserkers try and assault upward, they're repelled back by incoming fire and forced back into their positions. TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 00:16 on Apr 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:04
|
|
|
ijyt posted:A game is a bit like a game?? Is this actually going over your head or are you just being a warhammer player? The game is at its best when the actions you are taking feel reasonable. "My alien dudes are going to set those human soldiers on fire and burn them to death" technically describes a game action but it also fits the narrative tone of the game. A Berserker of Khorne looking at blue aliens standing on a three foot high ledge and whining at them to come down or at least give him some space on the ledge so he can fight doesn't really fit the tone of things. If you can convince me that breaking the narrative in this way lets them create a more balanced game then I'm all for it, but I'm not sure I see the game reasons for it either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
Booley posted:Aha, I am standing on a chair, thus you cannot charge me This is the world liberals want. E: Oh wait, they're both black, I thought the guy on the ground was maybe Italian or something. EE: 
Schadenboner fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Apr 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:19
|
|
|
Booley posted:Aha, I am standing on a chair, thus you cannot charge me
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/qBl4FH6.gifv
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
Everyone can  about it all day long, but at least try to look at the issue from the other side. How much fun is it to have to work your way around a hard-stop "gently caress you, no" game ruling, especially one that revolves around not doing what your army is designed to do? It's possible, yes, but try to avoid mixing 'possible' with 'fun'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:42
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:Everyone can If you dont find it fun to work around the flaws of your army, maybe its not an army you should play? I mean if someone has a Tau army and doesn't enjoy dealing with deep strike melee, maybe the answer isn't to make sure it's impossible to deep strike melee. It's not a singleplayer game man, both players need to be rewarded for doing smart stuff
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
Before the Turn 1 Deep Strike change I'd have agreed in principle and strongly disagreed in practice, where even with good screening it was possible to simply not have a deep enough deployment zone to prevent getting charged on Turn 1 with a shooty army and basically prevented from playing the game. After the Turn 1 Deep Strike change I still agree in principle, but also think it's dumb to argue about. Even on a terrain heavy board I can't imagine a game, especially in the scenarios provided at most tournaments, that not being able to charge one, maybe two units is going to significantly affect the game in ways that other intelligent use of terrain won't have the same effect on. If you really need to charge that unit in particular, shoot it some first, or pick a different target.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:48
|
|
|
Booley posted:When did I ever say I want to run amok with no negative modifiers? I just don't want it to be so easy to ignore an entire phase of the game, while still being able to contribute to the game. I'm fine with negative modifiers to assault into a ruin. I just don't want assaulting into a ruin to be a "sorry, we're full, try again later" My comment wasn’t aimed at you specifically or your army man, I was making a generalization.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
Booley posted:Saying that it just means I need to bring more shooting is pretty irrelevant. A gunline army, using screens well, can get away with having no dedicated assault units. An assault army needs to have a fair bit of shooting to be functional. Previously, I could use my assault elements to kill units holding objectives, chew up screens, etc, and bring some antitank shooting to handle the things my assault units don't do as well. Now I need to bring anti-infantry shooting to clear units out of the second floor of ruins, and bring the same anti-tank shooting, so I might as well just run a pure shooting army. I mean, even in the scenario we're discussing it's still 100% possible to deal with without shooting units, you just need FLY assault units to clear space for your land-lubbing assault units.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:31 |
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I mean, even in the scenario we're discussing it's still 100% possible to deal with without shooting units, you just need FLY assault units to clear space for your land-lubbing assault units. No. FLY assault units still need space to land in order to charge. They just don't have to measure the vertical distance, and the space they land in can be at the back side instead of the front.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 01:01
|
|