Warhammer 40k

[Cielingcat]

Another question! Are either of the Chaos Land Raider or Chaos Defiler any good? They both have a lot of heavy weapons, but they cost a lot of points and it seems like a Predator with the same weapons might be cheaper.

[Draco_Argentum]

Land Raiders are largely argeed to be balls. Either they shoot their expensive guns or they transport. So straight up you're paying points for something you aren't using. Also vehicles are easy to shut down by stunning and theres always the chance that it blows up first turn.

Defilers are popular for the pie plate with indirect fire. Actually they're cried about for that. So next dex, no indirect fire option.

[the_taken]

My last battle was against a defiler. I didn't have too much problems with it. It was just a fancy basilisk. That could melee back. Deep striking assault squad with three plazpistols did it in.

[User3]

1180520220[/unixtime]]Another question! Are either of the Chaos Land Raider or Chaos Defiler any good? They both have a lot of heavy weapons, but they cost a lot of points and it seems like a Predator with the same weapons might be cheaper.

My impression was both were crap.

Land Raiders only ever get used appropriately in loyalist armies for transporting assault terminators or other hard-hitting assault units, and arguably that isn't worth it. Chaos doesn't have the Crusader variant, doesn't have assault terminators, and thus has even less reason to use one.

Defilers indirect fire is their best option... but that's a crappy option when you consider you've got Ballistics 4 vehicles and indirect fire won't even take advantage of that. Then you realize you're paying twice points-wise as much as you would for a basilisk. And finally you realize that its so frickin humongous that actually hiding the thing on a map is hard, and that it sucks at everything else you could use it for. If it was 100 points it might be playable, but as it stands its hugely overcosted and not good at much.

[Cielingcat]

So Iron Warriors for Basilisk and Vindicator is the winning strategy for the "orbital bombardment" style of play then?

[User3]

1180580903[/unixtime]]So Iron Warriors for Basilisk and Vindicator is the winning strategy for the "orbital bombardment" style of play then?

Yep. Although both Basilisk and Vindicator isn't a good option - choose one and build your list around it.

(To whit: Basilisks want to hide and be defended by more static defenses - this is probably a troop-heavy list with infiltration or deep-strike capability as your 'mobility'. Vindicators with their shorter range need an armor screen. Mechanized squads of troops in rhinos will let you cover the advance of the vindicators and restrict lines of fire to them.)

[Draco_Argentum]

IW cheese mode is 9 obliterators, 4 pie plate throwers, a daemon prince and a couple troops. Its either awesome or weak depending on the enemy.

[User3]

1180597501[/unixtime]]IW cheese mode is 9 obliterators, 4 pie plate throwers, a daemon prince and a couple troops. Its either awesome or weak depending on the enemy.

Well, I was imagining a more balanced force that doesn't just curl up and die when you play against something like the all drop pod loyalist army. I mean, yeah, that'll own Ultramarines who try to walk across the field and a lot of other n00b armies, but its going to suck hardcore against many of the good armies. (notably drop pod and mechanized eldar, and it probably won't do so well against any fast dedicated assault army)

Also, against the 300+ man guard army you just can't kill them fast enough - and that really is a problem when you have 30 models on the table, tops.

[User3]

Problem with 40K is that the designers have a lot of "trust" in their customers. In the UK they play the game honorably instead of trying to munchkin every last bit of power out of an armylist and this reflects - in fact the old White Dwarf magazines used to have articles that basically said it's "badwrongfun" to play to win instead of picking a "fluffy" army and choosing realistic troops choices. And yet they ALLOW you to pick said choices with no restrictions other than a "You really shouldn't do this, but you CAN if you want to."

And, of course, the price. GW increases their prices every six months or so, which is also why Warhammer is losing steam compared to other similar games. When I started playing, a box of space marines went for about $15 or so.. it's up to what, $35 now?

[PhoneLobster]

The "honourable" fluff excuse for GW is as lame as it is for D&D.

Because even BEING "honourable" and picking based on fluff can create a massively unballanced and crazy good army.

I mean I hear rumours of this guy who does very nicely by fielding a necron army that consists entirely of necron warriors.

But he gets punished for it in the "fluff" and even "sportsmanship" points for fielding a non fluffy cheesey army.

But what the heck about an unstoppable faceless hoard of risen again terminator rip offs ISN"T appropriate to the necron fluff?

Are a pile of vehicles and obliterators in anyway unfluffy for iron warriors?

Is an all skimmer eldar or tau army in anyway unfluffy or not suitably thematic and exciting (aside from the two looking a lot like each other, don't get me going on the stupidly redundant similarities there...)

Is an all drop pod marine army in anyway non fluffy or thematic?

With the boost given to rangers in the new eldar codex is a heavy pathfinder on the troop choices "altoic" army really that unfluffy?

As for "sportsmanship", like for that necron warrior lad, what the heck? A) What, he should come to the game deliberately setting out to lose? B) Who the heck judges these things anyway and are they retarded or what, all necron warriors? ooooh geee, I'm shaking in my boots...

[Cielingcat]

I guess I'm lucky then; I play at a local game store, rather than a GW one, and we play to have fun, which happens whether you win or lose. And since playing your best is more fun than gimping yourself, most people do their best.

[User3]

Land raiders are a tad overcosted (as was mentioned earlier). However, against certain lists they do well just because they will be hard to take down.

Defilers are ok. With indirect they come in pretty high points wise, but you sit them behind lvl 3 terrain and drop pie plates all over. They can become pretty durable too if you get them actually in terrain (and get glancing hits). I've had games where they have put holes all over the board, and I've had others where it was 6 turns of doing nothing.

And the 4 pie plate IW can really wreak some armies, but I think the better list actually uses only 2 (ind defiler and basilisk) and then has two havok squads, or even just 4 havok squads. The big problem with armor is that they can be taken out in 1 shot, and since most decent lists will have some ways of dealing with tanks and vehicles you either need lots of targets, or hidden targets. Otherwise, you're just giving away points as the anti-tank weapons will all be directed at your limited vehicles. And most anti-tank weapons aren't really cost effective against rank and file troops (except the assault cannon).

And I agree with PhoneLobster about GW's crappy way of balance (let the players decide). It's a total copout. I also find it mildly ironic that in the UK, where I've often heard the power level is less, is where the most power-gaming GT is.

[Cielingcat]

I've heard rumors that the new Chaos codex is removing the benefits you get for being a specific legion, so getting a Basilisk at this time probably isn't the best idea for me. So for now I suppose I'll stick with a Havoc squad and a Predator for anti-infantry.

[User3]

1180616650[/unixtime]]I've heard rumors that the new Chaos codex is removing the benefits you get for being a specific legion, so getting a Basilisk at this time probably isn't the best idea for me. So for now I suppose I'll stick with a Havoc squad and a Predator for anti-infantry.

That's the worst design decision ever. Ugg. Fucking GW. Not that I necessarily approve of IW cheese, but there were lots of flavorful non-broken playable armies you could field with the chaos codex rules - can't they just fix the broken shit and leave the rest of it alone?

[Neeek]

1180614239[/unixtime]]The "honourable" fluff excuse for GW is as lame as it is for D&D.

No, it's not as lame. It's more lame.

In D&D, you don't really have an opponent, and it isn't exactly a competition. Playing a weaker character in D&D can make sense, if you do it right and the DM adjusts his challenges appropriately.

In a tactical war game, you have an opponent, and the goal is to defeat said opponent. To most people, having their opponent handicap themselves in a competition is considered insulting. In my experience, the people who just want to win tend to be cheaters. Honest people want to win or lose on their own merits, and that includes their opponents doing every legal thing they can think of in order to win.

[User3]

I used to play Imperial Guard.

I stopped because of weaknesses in the game... there isn't much in the way of tactics. Due to the Imperial Guard's reliance on firepower, and total inability to fight hand to hand, and the heavy penalties imposed on firepower if you move, you have no options aside from sit on the baseline of your deployment zone and lay down a curtain of fire.

This is AMAZINGLY boring, as the game breaks down into "can I kill him before he gets to me" and my decisions have no material impact.

The game that awoke my dissatisfaction with the rules was called combat mission Barbarossa to Berlin, a WWII turn based 'WEGO' computer game.

The teams (naturally) felt very guard like, but the options for firepower and maneuver where vastly superior. Even little details like the modeling of heavy machine guns with "beaten zones" that suppressed troops made interesting.

But as a game yeah it seems like it sucks hard.

[cthulhu]

That was me.

[PhoneLobster]

I stopped because of weaknesses in the game... there isn't much in the way of tactics.

OK remember my dissatisfaction with the new swooping hawks, or more accurately trying to properly demonstrate their suckness to some chumps.

One routine went something like
Them: "holy crap look at the haywire grenades, they kill skimmers"
Me: "They're overpriced and they can't get there, skimmers outrun and outgun them".
Them :"But 40K is all about battlefield control"

I laughed, and laughed, and laughed....

But it was a sad laugh.

[cthulhu]

That is brilliantly hilarious - and alas, if only.

[RandomCasualty]

1180614239[/unixtime]]The "honourable" fluff excuse for GW is as lame as it is for D&D.

Because even BEING "honourable" and picking based on fluff can create a massively unballanced and crazy good army.

I mean I hear rumours of this guy who does very nicely by fielding a necron army that consists entirely of necron warriors.

But he gets punished for it in the "fluff" and even "sportsmanship" points for fielding a non fluffy cheesey army.

But what the heck about an unstoppable faceless hoard of risen again terminator rip offs ISN"T appropriate to the necron fluff?

I didn't know they did that for the warhammer games. That's seriously really lame.

It's a freaking wargame, you shouldn't need fluff and all that crap to back up your army. That only proves the wargame is unbalanced.

Sounds like this is nothing more than a lame way of not fixing any balance problems. Being able to win by massing one unit is just showing that that unit is broken.

[PhoneLobster]

Being able to win by massing one unit is just showing that that unit is broken.

Well, my opinion on it differs slightly.

Unlike the people who hate this guy for that list I see no real problem.

In my mind A) It is highly thematic.
B) Its a functional list that works fairly well against most opposition
C) Its still not exactly ridiculously unbeatable by most opposition
D) Yeah, OK its probably a bit boring to use, but thats his problem.

The problem is that some folks, erroniously I think, judge it to be cheesy and he loses sportsmanship and fluff points in tournaments for it. Its a weird annoying GW community perception issue, there are superior Space Marine or Chaos lists walking in with less "cheese" punishment than this guy gets (who gets it so hard that I, who have never attended a tournament, know all about it).

The other problem is that GW was really shamefully neglectful of the necron codex, the choices in there are few and far between, its a great deal of army points before any necron list even CAN be anything other than straight warriors and a lord...

[Draco_Argentum]

I like the cron background and models, but that list is atrociously boring.

As for soft scores, the problem isn't so much that it masks balance issues in lists. There are two problems.

First, most people don't know what is overpowered and also don't know the background. This means that they mark low when they shouldn't.

Second, it allows dickheads to mark low just to increase their chances of winning.

What is masking balance problems is a general perception that following the fluff = balanced and that unbalanced = unfluffy. This is wrong by inspection, anyone who can't see why is thick. Add to this all the "its not the rules fault that people abuse them" garbage from D&D and it effectively gives the devs a get out of jail free card for writing something that makes no sense.

Anyone who dosen't know what a Warhammer thread looks like can just go read a fighter thread. Its pretty much the same garbage with fighter replaced by some Warhammer thing.

[Neeek]

1180815082[/unixtime]]
It's a freaking wargame, you shouldn't need fluff and all that crap to back up your army. That only proves the wargame is unbalanced.

It's actually worse than that. Think of it this way: They have Warhammer 40K Epic, in which an entire Warhammer 40K army is like one unit.

Each unit in that is one type of guy.

So, really, this guy is actually portraying his part of his army more accurately than his competition.

[shirak]

1180614239[/unixtime]]don't get me going on the stupidly redundant similarities there...)

Do tell... AFAIK, Tau are stupid out-of-genre Borg-ripoffs. But I don't really know anything about them so... Enlighten me

[MrWaeseL]

Tau are actually the 'anime' race, designed to get fanboys from that subculture into the game.
Similarly, eldar are for the elves crowd and dark eldar are for the goth crowd.