Beer4TheBeerGod posted:

"Just change up units" is exactly what I have a problem with. It's no different from telling someone they should change armies. If your rule system is so poorly designed that people who put money and time into creating something have to give it up then the problem isn't the people, it's the rule system. Maybe I'm just out of touch here, but it seems really unreasonable for a rule change to utterly deny a certain playing style from having any sort of agency. Not just put them at a disadvantage (which they already were), but explicitly ensure that a particular unit has no hope whatsoever of affecting one that they could have affected before the change was made. It's an artificial constraint that adversely impacts a style of play that's already at a disadvantage, provides no significant impact to the style of play that benefits from the change, and personally I don't think telling people to play something else is a reasonable solution.

panascope posted:

End this shitposting by posting your toys.

Two Beans posted:

Here's an old toy of mine, one of the few I have left from my previous time in the hobby.

Schadenboner posted:

Yeah, because you've gatekept 90% of the models in the game out of it and every faction except for one (with exception of a small Imperial Guard and Mechanicus lists and a very few Daemon units).

It's like: "I don't see why we need traffic cops, the cars at the Indy 500 seem to do fine without them!"

Pendent posted:

Two Beans posted:

Here's an old toy of mine, one of the few I have left from my previous time in the hobby.

Guy Goodbody posted:

I wonder what the armies included in the new Kill Team box will be.

zeal posted:

those dudes look rad

Guy Goodbody posted:

I wonder what the armies included in the new Kill Team box will be.

BULBASAUR posted:

he meant your battletech toys, beans

Pendent posted:

Thank you I’m pretty happy with how they’ve turned out

Artum posted:

Choice_allies.jpg

zeal posted:

what are they, flesh tearers?

ijyt posted:

ok but the rules say you can't do it so either play or don't

Stephenls posted:

I’m hoping Kill Team just steals from Shadow War Armageddon and has the box include orks and space marine scouts—but new sculpts.

A pony would be nice, also.

ijyt posted:

Please don't backpedal it's embarrassing for everyone.

Pendent posted:

You’re absolutely correct that the French managed to prove that it doesn’t matter how good your gear is if you don’t know how to use it. Conversely semi-mediocre tanks like the T-34 were incredibly effective mostly due to the way they were used.

Yeast posted:

Work in progress on a Bug commission

TheBigAristotle posted:

Does anyone have any cool tabletop Sly Marbo stories? He seems like he could be really fun

TheBigAristotle posted:

Does anyone have any cool tabletop Sly Marbo stories? He seems like he could be really fun

Von Humboldt posted:

I mostly lurk, but man, I CANNOT LET THIS STAND.

The T-34 was a very good tank for its time. During Operation Barbarossa, at the start of the German invasion of the Soviet Union, the T-34 could penetrate any German tank without trouble while bouncing shells from all but the heaviest German guns. Like, it dunked on the Germans so hard that they are on record commenting how good of a tank it was. Even after German design caught up to the T-34, constant upgrades kept the tank relevant and deadly throughout the war. It was mechanically reliable and fairly mobile, which means that it could actually be relied upon to arrive to the front and then follow up. Again, it was a [b]good/[b] tank.

Though, funnily, that sort of proves your first point - a lot of T-34s were lost in the first two years of the war because the crews were either poorly trained or operations were hamstringed by a combination of logistical, communication, and command issues.
Also, this looks really, really awesome, man. That yellow/orange just pops.

Pendent posted:

See, the funny thing is that I actually view the T-34-85 as the best tank of the war followed closely by the Sherman for much the same reason- it was easy to produce in large numbers and was generally well suited for its role. There was even a brief period early on where it and the KV-1 were basically able to run roughshod over the Nazis.

That being said, it was plagued by production quality issues, issues with the air filtration system, a godawful suspension system and an engine that was highly difficult for mechanics to access for maintenance. Later in the war it was able to challenge most German tanks effectively with the 85mm but was also extremely vulnerable to return fire by the increasingly common long 75mm, 88mm and even some 128mm guns the Germans used. By most accounts it was also a highly miserable vehicle to serve in due to cramped conditions, poor ergonomics and an exhausting steering mechanism that relied far too much on brute force. So, a mediocre tank in the sense that it was a miserable vehicle to crew or maintain.

At the end of the day this didn’t matter that much because it was just good enough to do what it needed to do and cheap enough to produce in enormous numbers.

Yes, you triggered my hidden tank obsession.

Guy Goodbody posted:

New Orks makes sense. the Ork codex drops shortly thereafter and don't Ork players complain that a lot of the current Ork models are too old?

chutche2 posted:

Fought an Admech list with open war, 2000 points. Got wrecked pretty hard but it was a fun game.

I had a crimson fists batt (Primaris infantry plus scouts and devastators led by pedro) with a cadian batt (infantry squads, scions, a russ and some heavy weapon squads) with a vindicare.

He had cawl, 2 techpriests, 2 squads of rangers with 3x arquebus, 2 squads of vanguard with 3x plasma, 2 neutron onagers, 2 dragoons, 2 armigers.

It was set piece battle, so I had to deploy my whole army then he deployed his, I would go first unless I rolled a 1, which I did, so he went first. Going first meant a lot of my most dangerous pieces died turn 1. Lost the leman russ, wiped out my aggressors, killed most of the devastators, plus wiped a guard squad. Losing the russ and aggressors right at the start ended up being a big deal.

The two armigers killed the russ with melta shots turn 1, and for the rest of the game did almost nothing. Combined I think they killed 3 hellblasters and 3 intercessors before being gunned down by hellblasters.

I did some pretty solid damage to him, wiped out the two vanguard squads, a techpriest, and the two armigers. The 6 arquebuses with Cawl rerolls just hammered me all game though, killing my Lt, apothecary, and vindicare. Primaris ancient would've made a big deal here, and mine arrived today. It was nice that crimson fists ignore shroudpsalm.

The mission was the open war one that's kill points based on PL with characters and vehicles doubled, so I did well for myself by killing the armigers but he pulled way ahead in points because of the arquebuses deleting my characters.

Was pretty sad that the first time I fielded my aggressors they all died to neutron lasers top of 1.

I ended the game with 5/12 CP left because I didn't really know how to spend it.

Strobe posted:

Counterpoint: If a change only affects army building to a significant extent at the far extremes of possible outcomes, maybe those far extremes weren't supposed to be viable in the first place? If you want to completely check out of the shooting phase, good for you. Just don't be upset when that renders some winning strategies (namely tabling your opponent) impossible.

Unless you're playing with truly magnificent amounts of ruins terrain or truly pathetic amounts of shooting (the kind you get even incidentally or by unavoidable concession to building a list with units from most Codices) this isn't even a problem. It means you can't charge a Broadside or a Ranger Squad that are holed up on the roof of a ruin and never moving from that spot for any reason that cannot be more briefly described as "the goddamn apocalypse". Big deal. If that's what decides your game, your game plan sucked or your dice weren't going to let you get there in the first place.

Pendent posted:

See, the funny thing is that I actually view the T-34-85 as the best tank of the war followed closely by the Sherman for much the same reason- it was easy to produce in large numbers and was generally well suited for its role. There was even a brief period early on where it and the KV-1 were basically able to run roughshod over the Nazis.

That being said, it was plagued by production quality issues, issues with the air filtration system, a godawful suspension system and an engine that was highly difficult for mechanics to access for maintenance. Later in the war it was able to challenge most German tanks effectively with the 85mm but was also extremely vulnerable to return fire by the increasingly common long 75mm, 88mm and even some 128mm guns the Germans used. By most accounts it was also a highly miserable vehicle to serve in due to cramped conditions, poor ergonomics and an exhausting steering mechanism that relied far too much on brute force. So, a mediocre tank in the sense that it was a miserable vehicle to crew or maintain.

At the end of the day this didn’t matter that much because it was just good enough to do what it needed to do and cheap enough to produce in enormous numbers.

Yes, you triggered my hidden tank obsession.

chutche2 posted:

I ended the game with 5/12 CP left because I didn't really know how to spend it.

S.J. posted:

Most of the range is up to date, but the few models that aren't are literally from Gorkamorka.

Maneck posted:

The scale of Ork trakks was way off, even back then. Also, the (monetary) price for Ork field artillery is eyebrow raising.

Schadenboner posted:

Personally my favorite USSR story is that there were apparently more Emchas (M4, Lend-Lease Shermans) than T-34/ in the Red Army. Might be apocryphal.

goodness posted:

Where did these miniatures come from? The website linked just has the minis without any information