boreas Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 From what I hear, the new WFB is very very nice. Actually, I'm putting all my IG on ebay this week (suprise... not) and re-starting my first GW army ever: lizardmen! Phil Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444474 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAR Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Firenze as I recall there is an updated FAQ I think for in the guard saying you can only use platoons, scout sentinels, and stock leman russes and that is only for WH players now. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444492 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brovius Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Brovius said, "And fire Mat Ward, while they are at it. Or at least keep him away from WFB armies, and 40k fluff" Hey Bro, Not to add insult to injury, but if you get a chance get on over to your local GW and take a peek at who is getting credit for writing the 8th ed WFB rules section... I'll give you one guess :) Enjoy, MayorDaley I know, i already raged when i saw that in the store copy at my LGS The fantasy rules seem kinda fair, which is surprising for something touched by Ward (I bet it was his idea to name fantasy invulnerable saves after himself) His Fantasy codex rules, on the other hand... See the Chaos Daemons army book The fluff he does for 40k is nothing but retcon in favour of 'Ultramarines are the best. All Space marines accept Marneus Calgar as their spiritual liege' Also, this is not the exact quote, but it was similar to this: "There are some chapters who do not adhere to the codex Astartes at all, such as the Space Wolves and Black Templar... Although, they are usually few in number and their presence is declining every year" Those are the two largest chapters in the entire Imperium, and do a lot more for the Imperium than the Ultramarines and their successors combined! Ward lets his fanboyism get in the way of his work, and that's why i despise him Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444534 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apostolos Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Well WH is still playable, although it's getting harder with each new codex coming out. But pure GKs? My friends will let me use them if we play 2 vs 2 (where they are still surprisingly effective). But 1 vs 1, they won't bother. We play once every 2-3 weeks and they don't want to spoil the evening playing against an army that can't compete. Phil edit: I got an answer to my email saying they where busy and would try to contact me in the next 48 hours... I'm curious to see the list you play that is sooo horrible? I play triRaider and do well. Have you tried it? Read "Way of the Water Warrior" stickied here in the forums. Take smoke too, it turns pens hits to glances per our codex. I say all this because I really would like you first, then the mates you play with to understand that pure GKs don't "suck" we just only have one list that is playable, and that is multiple land raiders. This is why I for one am longing for a new dex. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444548 Share on other sites More sharing options...
boreas Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Oh, I've played waterwarriors tri-landraider. I spent 40 minutes moving 3 models around, sniping at MCs as Nids tried running across the table (that was 2-3 months before 5th ed. nids). After 40 minutes, he had nothing that could glance/pen AV14 so I parked on objectives and won. That's the opposite side of DH and bringing that list to the table is not fun either for me or the opposite player. Mind you, all-deepstike Nids eat that list in 3 turns now with 3x2 zoathropes deepstriking besides my raiders... Phil Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444579 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apostolos Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Do you take a physic hood? Also screening with terminators & smoke make the land raiders that much more harder to take out. Terminators are big enough to provide a cover save, and smoke will make it so that they will need a six to wreck you. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444593 Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhallenFoenix Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Land Raider spam is a point denial rout, little more. Its a one trick pony list - and as such, it only works when your opponent doesn't have the capability to handle it. I've played three LR GKs. I also went to 'Ard Boyz with 7 landraider Daemonhunters. Some armies I obliterated, because they couldn't handle that volume of AV14. Other armies, like against IG or god forbid a sisters player, would take one look at my army (and in game three, did... mech sisters... :shudder:) and start jumping in glee. Hell, the only viable build of BLOODY DARK ELDAR trumps that list, to say nothing of brightlance spam in both mech and foot eldar. Yes, the psychic hood is good. Yes, it can help protect your landraider from zoanthropes. Good luck protecting them from 6 of them, let alone a flying tyrant. I'm sorry, but for arguing the viability of an army, a cheese tactic which is little fun for anyone involved, win or lose, and basically amounts to a gamble they don't have sufficient AT fire... isn't a good argument. my .02 Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444650 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apostolos Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I hear what you are saying about cheese, and I would argue that our land raiders are the hardest to kill due to our smoke rules, I don't understand though if I'm reading your post right, how the army isn't viable because of a cheese tactic, and by viable I mean able to win a game so people won't refuse to play you because your not a challenge. I've seen and played many lists that were built around a particular unit(s) that could be considered cheese. It would be nice if I could take a well balanced list and be competitive. Some codices allow this and some don't. Our happens to be one that doesn't. I was just arguing that grey knights are not so horrible that one cant win with them, and they are so bad that people shouldn't even play against them? Yeah three land raiders is rough against a balanced list but if someone is throwing down a WAAC list and asking for a "friendly" game? I bring three land raiders and ten terminators. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444767 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zode Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I played against one such "cheese" list last night: 1500 pts of Daemons with three soulgrinders. I've just gotten back into 40K from a many year hiatis and was playing a 1500pt game for the first time since 2nd edition. Let me tell you, my one Dread with TLLasC and IST's with two little melta guns were not enough. I don't want to tell you how many points of psycannons, incinerators and plasma went to waste. And this was a friendly game. Sooo, I don't think I'll ever feel bad once I get a couple Raiders to run (I don't own any so I wasn't playing any). Gone is my misconception that Daemons are only a hoard army, along with a 10-man squad of PAGKs in two turns :pinch: Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444791 Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhallenFoenix Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I hear what you are saying about cheese, and I would argue that our land raiders are the hardest to kill due to our smoke rules, I don't understand though if I'm reading your post right, how the army isn't viable because of a cheese tactic, and by viable I mean able to win a game so people won't refuse to play you because your not a challenge. I've seen and played many lists that were built around a particular unit(s) that could be considered cheese. It would be nice if I could take a well balanced list and be competitive. Some codices allow this and some don't. Our happens to be one that doesn't. I was just arguing that grey knights are not so horrible that one cant win with them, and they are so bad that people shouldn't even play against them? Yeah three land raiders is rough against a balanced list but if someone is throwing down a WAAC list and asking for a "friendly" game? I bring three land raiders and ten terminators. Yeah, you are reading me wrong. There is nothing wrong per se in a cheesy list. By refusing to play with the best list just because its cheesy, you stop playing by the rules of the game and start playing by your own, self limiting rules. The problem comes in when the cheesy list isn't actually good. It can produce free wins from an opponent who doesn't have much in the way of meltaguns or brightlances (rarer and rarer these days), but it will also fall over flat to an army that does. In building a take-all-comers tournament list, this is definitely not a desirable state of affairs. Furthermore, it runs into another problem, with quality of play. 40k is obviously a social game, so your opponent does need to be taken into consideration for non-tournament play. A list like this tends to produce uneventful, boring games - win or lose. Either you eat melta until your 750 points of your army goes up in smoke for their 100 point investment, or your land raiders dance around all game with him unable to hurt them. OBVIOUSLY, this can't be quantified - some opponents will enjoy games like this, you may enjoy them, and both of you may be prepared to except that sometimes the list works brilliantly, and sometimes it falls flat. That makes this the least important argument against the idea by far... but speaking for myself, those are not enjoyable games, and I've played my fair share of them. I hope that clarifies my position. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444795 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apostolos Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I am totally in agreement with you regarding quantifying the fun factor on such lists, way too subjective. I will point out the two biggest threats to land raiders, lances & meltas. I'll start with meltas then touch on multi-meltas. Melta guns real threat range is 6". There ways to nullify the threat by assaulting squads touting regular meltas and typically the raiders will be housing a fairly descent assault unit in the form of PAGKs. This works well if rhinos are approaching not so well if drop pods are falling. In the matter of a pod I use terminators as a screen. They will at least grant a cover save or can be positioned to push back the 6" threat range. For multi-meltas I again use the terminators to grant the cover save because typically multi-melta shots are not as numerous as regular melta shots. Then there are lancing shots the threat range is large to deal with like metlas so I handle them like mullti-meltas and use terminator screens, that and our smoke. Now don't get me wrong, not saying this totally nullifies the melta & lance issue, but it does help, to point of reasonably being able to deal with them. @PhallenFoenix, I just wanted to add that I view these preceding posts as a discussion rather than an argument, and hope you understand my tone. I also look forward to whatever you add because thus far your responses have been sound and polite. Back on topic... yeah, we need a new codex... soon... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444826 Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhallenFoenix Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Absolutely... who's arguing? Reasonable discourse is the order of the day. I don't particularly disagree with anything you said except for the terminator screen. How are you giving your landraiders cover from a terminator squad? No chance are they obscuring 50% of the vehicle... the land raider hull is GIGANTIC... I've generally had it easier trying to obscure 50% of a baneblade. Now granted, poking just a sponson out from cover can easily handle the cover issue from at least one side, but I don't see how a terminator screen helps besides making it clear that the offending melta squad has one chance to get it right, or the terminators will shoot and assault them into itty bitty tiny pieces. The same issue makes brightlances, in my experience, quite an issue, especially when combined with the move shoot move eldar shenanigans. And yes. New codeii please. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444846 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apostolos Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I've had no one contest that terminators aren't tall enough to grant the save? But when I get home I'll measure the height of the land raider & the height of a terminator to see if I've been cheating. I do ten of them if that makes any difference. But I do play with a group where one guy tried to argue a SINGLE storm boy was enough to give a battlewagon a save! That was good times to watch happen! Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444867 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justicar Valius Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Brovius said, "And fire Mat Ward, while they are at it. Or at least keep him away from WFB armies, and 40k fluff" Hey Bro, Not to add insult to injury, but if you get a chance get on over to your local GW and take a peek at who is getting credit for writing the 8th ed WFB rules section... I'll give you one guess :lol: Enjoy, MayorDaley Ah so now he's even. He RUINED WFB by wwriting the books for the 2 armies on the top and bottom of the power scale meaning a levelling system is needed, Orcs and Goblins and Daemons of chaos. These PDFs suck and the French one still has new assault cannons while we don't! Come on, for :tu: GW, put a little effort in and also keep Matt Ward away from anything I am currently using or involved in. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444892 Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboarder Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 So the new GW blog entry is up, and because it was late I was hoping that at the very least they would clarify wether this is an update or a botch..........nothing. I now have a sinking feeling that we are never ever going to hear one way or another. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444986 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heru Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I'm just wondering what took them so long to release these terrible pdfs... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2444995 Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulReaver296 Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 I'm just wondering what took them so long to release these terrible pdfs... They had a perfectly fair and balanced version, but then they remembered that they were GW. All involved were shot (sadly, Ward had nothing to do with this version for OBVIOUS reasons), and the only computer where it existed was shot, crushed, melted, and is due to be shot into the sun in a few hours Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2445049 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Fox Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 I just checked again and the WH PDF has had Induction removed in a reformating. :) It's official, we're on our own two feet. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2445567 Share on other sites More sharing options...
BulldogUK Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Don't be dis-heartened chaps. Let's just say I was speaking to one of the horses mouths not long ago and there is defo something special coming along for us GK fans. I'm saying no more as I don't want to get anyone into trouble for unnecessary lip flapping but it takes a lot to get my juices flowing and let's just say I am already polishing the existing little guys up and clearing space on the shelves for some extremely funky new additions :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2445862 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dosjetka Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Don't be dis-heartened chaps. Let's just say I was speaking to one of the horses mouths not long ago and there is defo something special coming along for us GK fans. I'm saying no more as I don't want to get anyone into trouble for unnecessary lip flapping but it takes a lot to get my juices flowing and let's just say I am already polishing the existing little guys up and clearing space on the shelves for some extremely funky new additions :lol: *starts dusting his own shelves for more models* :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2445867 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justicar Valius Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Don't be dis-heartened chaps. Let's just say I was speaking to one of the horses mouths not long ago and there is defo something special coming along for us GK fans. I'm saying no more as I don't want to get anyone into trouble for unnecessary lip flapping but it takes a lot to get my juices flowing and let's just say I am already polishing the existing little guys up and clearing space on the shelves for some extremely funky new additions :D One of the guys I most respect on this forum, you better not be wrong! I would just like to ask on what you have heard please say A, B, C but hopefully not D. A: is coming in 2010 B: is coming in first 6 months of 2011 C: is coming in second 6 months of 2011 D: Even further in the furture than D Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2445873 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 Don't be dis-heartened chaps. Let's just say I was speaking to one of the horses mouths not long ago and there is defo something special coming along for us GK fans. I'm saying no more as I don't want to get anyone into trouble for unnecessary lip flapping but it takes a lot to get my juices flowing and let's just say I am already polishing the existing little guys up and clearing space on the shelves for some extremely funky new additions :DI feel like I'm channeling certain eastern european fellows, but special how. 'Nother meaninless inefficient apoc datasheet. A 'forces of teh Imperium' city fight addendum. A whole issue of da dwarf dedicated to some persons conversion work. Bah. I think I'll just keep painting aspect warriors. Then I think I'll finish my battle wagons xor my Brettonians. The secret to having patients is to become a doctor. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2445903 Share on other sites More sharing options...
PH34RB0T Posted June 26, 2010 Share Posted June 26, 2010 Hey everyone, just another response from the ever-lovely GW Customer Service. Now, I specifically asked whether GW will continue to support the printed version of the codex like they are with 'Ard Boyz. And his response... I know not as to the future stance on this. However it may be a mute point… It's obviously nothing definite, but it still could be a hint. Which is quite an improvement over "I have heard nothing official about company plans concerning the Inquisition." Could it be that GW is actually planning to have a =][= release relatively soon? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2446036 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerian Posted June 26, 2010 Share Posted June 26, 2010 Hey everyone, just another response from the ever-lovely GW Customer Service. Now, I specifically asked whether GW will continue to support the printed version of the codex like they are with 'Ard Boyz. And his response... I know not as to the future stance on this. However it may be a mute point… It's obviously nothing definite, but it still could be a hint. Which is quite an improvement over "I have heard nothing official about company plans concerning the Inquisition." Could it be that GW is actually planning to have a =][= release relatively soon? Hmmm. A "mute" point. I wonder what point it is that cannot speak? V Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2446077 Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted June 26, 2010 Share Posted June 26, 2010 Now, I specifically asked whether GW will continue to support the printed version of the codex like they are with 'Ard Boyz. And his response... yeah but this is a normal thing for events that do not happen on one day. If a tournament has many tiers and there is no option to change lists between them , the normal thing to do is make people play with army books/codex that were legal on the first day of the tournament . the way it looks right now ,is grim . I mean BRB tells you too look at the foc in the army and there is non and if there is non then RAW you cant pick a unit[because you dont know if it is legal to do so]. But truth be told for non tournament players that doesnt matter much . What does suck more , is the fact that both of the pdf were coming with the whole "great news for imperial players" etc and then you get something like this. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/188500-i-coming-in-2010/page/54/#findComment-2446118 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.