Overriding Melta Bomb and Grenade FAQ and Meta Changes

[Brofist]

Why is everyone so worried about killing vehicles in close combat? Most vehicles have crappy rear armour, so they can just be kicked apart by marines. Walkers are obviously going to be a problem, but you shouldn't be trying to kill them in close combat in the first place!

 

The best way to take out them and the bigger/scarier tanks is with other vehicles, or heavy weapon-toting infantry. That's what those high strength/low AP weapons are for, after all.

Exactly. I say this over and over again as I casually set down my knight titans.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Oh come on people, there are so many shooty and melee options in the Legion list that can deal with high armor vehicles, whether it's kraken or haywire or melta (not everything can or will take ceramite), chainfists from terminators and dreadnoughts, etc.

 

I like the FAQ because it make my Vorax playable, please don't take it away. :(

 

At the Weekender they stated AoD will always follow the core ruleset, so all this "designed with this and that in mind" is kind of besides the point.

Actually Alan Bligh was questioned and said this new ruling came from GW not FW. No one played it one grenade only prior to the FAQ which is a rule change not a clarification.

[Niightcloak]

it is not a change by the FAQ, the change happen from 6th to 7th edition, only thing that was clarified is that GW considers any grenade weapon to be "thrown" as ranged and melee weapon

[MorgothNL]

Loken on another forum asked Alan Bligh to clarify this. Heres what he wrote;

"That is the new rule, and they (Forge World) have no control over it. Alan said they may address this with special rules for certain units, but in the mean time, house rule it."

I'm liking this, but unfortunately, the players that don't want it, have the 'rules backing them up' now.

I've got a HH tournament coming up, and I want to bring my Raven Guard. I am actually starting to consider canceling my registration because I cannot play my Raven Guard the way I want them to play. No, I don't want to abuse 'wrong rules' but when you play RG fluffy and use the decapitation strike ROW for example (allow max 1 heavy), your Anti-Tank goes out the window quite fast without meltabombs.

Infantry based list, like many RG armies are, really suffer from this FAQ and I refuse to start taking a Super-Heavy just to make my infantry list viable again .

Also, I have a Mechanicum army, and I don't even play it where the FAQ is active, cause that's the direct opposite of the RG problem. Mechanicum need to get krak and melta in the face to be balanced IMHO.

Glad to see adepticon ruling against it!

[Jarkaira]

Well the most points wise applications against AV14 Flare Shield don't even reside in Heavy Support.

[Withershadow]

 

Oh come on people, there are so many shooty and melee options in the Legion list that can deal with high armor vehicles, whether it's kraken or haywire or melta (not everything can or will take ceramite), chainfists from terminators and dreadnoughts, etc.

 

I like the FAQ because it make my Vorax playable, please don't take it away. :(

 

At the Weekender they stated AoD will always follow the core ruleset, so all this "designed with this and that in mind" is kind of besides the point.

Actually Alan Bligh was questioned and said this new ruling came from GW not FW. No one played it one grenade only prior to the FAQ which is a rule change not a clarification.

Literally everything in your post is false.

 

Yes the ruling came from GW, but the point is FW follows GW rules.

 

There were some areas where people played it one per phase, even though most of the 40K community didn't notice a change.

 

It's not a rules change when they literally point to an unaltered statement in the rulebook. Throw and clamp weren't uniquely defined game terms, something folks are still trying to argue.

 

Let's hope 8th is less messy.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Well the most points wise applications against AV14 Flare Shield don't even reside in Heavy Support.

Ignoring, once again, mechanicum.

[MorgothNL]

 

Well the most points wise applications against AV14 Flare Shield don't even reside in Heavy Support.

Ignoring, once again, mechanicum.

 

 

Mechanicum is the biggest problem yes. They are already on the over-powered edge of the game (depending on the list obviously). Like I said, I play mechanicum too ,and I play 'fun' lists (one of everything). But even that feels OP with the faq ruling.

 

In the end, most mechanicum players and also players playing lots of AV14/knights will be against ignoring the FAQ (even though FW said that HH games are meant to be played with multiple grenades). 

 

^^ And that's the issue I tried to explain before. The FAQ doesn't balance things out. It BUFFS armies like mechanicum and NERFS infantry based armies. From what I've experiences, lists just got very monotone. Dreads/Levies in pods are all over and grav (dreads and rapiers) are now the go-to anti-tank for anybody that used melta-bombs before. Lightnings are good too yes, but they require even less 'skill' to use. Melta-bombs at least need to make it into combat first and can be countered. Lightnings come in and fire 4 kraken (unless you have interceptor but positioning can often negate that). 

 

The FAQ reduces the variety in lists and unbalances assault legions (in an edition where shooting > assault most of the time already).

 

 

 

Jarkaira, on 07 Feb 2017 - 12:50 AM, said:

^^ Pretty much everything can be countered with something else than multiple melta bombs. 25pts for whatever vehicle killing ability is a cheap excuse for not building a list that can counter various threats in my opinion.

 

I cannot disagree with this more than I do. "building a list that cannot counter melta bombs reaching CC is a cheap excuse" is a stronger argument. Facing an opponent with melta-bombs, just changes your target priority, positioning and movement. You don't really have to change your list to counter them. The FAQ actually forces people to change their list, and the fluff and identity of many lists goes out the window in doing so.

30K is about fun games, narrative games and fluff. This FAQ, forces you to play stuff you don't want to, to be competitive in any way.

 

Rules are rules, so I will play according to the FAQ, but I cannot wait for FW to fix it (yes, I think it wrong/broken in 30k and needs a fix). If my opponent want to play without the FAQ, I will be happy to do so, so we can play the lists options intended by FW's rules.

[Withershadow]

If it's a big issue for people (and it ended up being an issue for many larger events in my state for the remainder of the year/until 8th edition at least), I compromise by letting them use melta-bombs but not krak grenades.  So if I want to goof around with less-optimal stuff like Vorax they don't evaporate wading into a tactical squad.

[Jarkaira]

^^ I still don't understand how it at the same time changes lists and doesn't.

 

I mean as you say "you don't really have to change your list to counter them."

 

Then at the next sentence is "the FAQ actually forces people to change their list".

 

Whatever the case for your house ruling is the fact stays that lists are different whether you use house ruling or not.

 

In my opinion it alters meta a lot. I still do think that house ruling it takes one aspect of list building totally away and forces fast infantry centric lists and non mechanized counters for them. Without the house ruling there will be much more diversity (but also bit higher €/£/$ cost for list which I hope won't be an issue).

[MorgothNL]

^^ I still don't understand how it at the same time changes lists and doesn't.

I mean as you say "you don't really have to change your list to counter them."

Then at the next sentence is "the FAQ actually forces people to change their list".

Whatever the case for your house ruling is the fact stays that lists are different whether you use house ruling or not.

In my opinion it alters meta a lot. I still do think that house ruling it takes one aspect of list building totally away and forces fast infantry centric lists and non mechanized counters for them. Without the house ruling there will be much more diversity (but also bit higher €/£/$ cost for list which I hope won't be an issue).

Ok, my wording was maybe a bit confusing .

What I meant was, that to counter melta-bomb infantry, the opponent does not really have to change his list much, but just play it differently.

Now, when the FAQ is active, the melta-bomb user DOES have to change his list to be viable.

This is what I've experienced in my meta. All mechanicum and armies with multiple AV14 didn't change their list after the FAQ. They play the same list with or without FAQ active. But the armies that relied on melta-bombs to take out armour, did have to change their lists. Those lists do not play the same pre/post FAQ.

Don't get me wrong, not trying to start a fight here ;). Like I said, rules are rules. It's just a smack in the face to horus heresy games I think. I went to 30k cause I like fluff games, narrative games, balanced games and players that think the same. There were no armies out there that ran 3 squads of veterans with MB in a dreadclaw before the FAQ. 30k gamers didn't 'abuse' that rule. It was just a tool that most armies, used for 1 or 2 squads, for variety, fluff, rule-of-cool etc.

The rule could be abused yes, if everyone was running complete melta-bomb armies, and mechanicum and knights were getting killed left, right and center, then yes we needed this, but that wasn't happening in the 30k scene. 99% of the lists included options to counter it, without being specifically build to counter it. Interceptor, infantry bubbles, using terrain, adjusting deployment etc was enough and it never felt close to cheese or broken to me or my meta.

Of course, if those thing I say didn't happen before the FAQ, did happen in your meta, I understand your point of view. Aside from light abuse of quad launchers, I haven't seen much cheese in any of the lists on this forum or irl. (And I don't have issues with quad launchers, for they also can be countered specifically changing your list to do so).

[Jarkaira]

So can we say that we both think that meta changes when using the house rule for multiple grenades and melta bombs but disagree upon which is the better way?

 

I do remember when Escalation and knights came out and I happened to play list with a knight in a tournament used rules from sixth edition and I faced a unit from (d)eldar list that each model had haywire grenades. Wasn't fun in a competitive sense and wasn't fun to play although I managed to squeeze a victory still (hey its competitive 40k, it shouldn't be fun like narrative 30k!).

 

Seventh edition changed this ruling into one instead one per model as old sixth edition rules were never intented to be used with the units that came into play at the same time as seventh edition rolled in.

 

It was at the very start of seventh edition that we just started using the new rules and meta evolved through that.

 

Then Horus Heresy happened to get foothold here and the same rules applied into that without questioning. I have personally got used to the way seventh edition ruleset is and there must be some prejudicement against changing it through house rules.

 

I am just content to the way people do their lists here at our humble scene as it is without minmaxing and WAAC attitude and I guess that wouldn't change with a change in melta bombs and grenades but it would change list building still.

[Blindhamster]

"There were no armies out there that ran 3 squads of veterans with MB in a dreadclaw before the FAQ"

 

I actually had this happen in the first three or four games I played after finally buying a spartan, different opponent each time and all but 1 didn't even know I owned one.

 

I play blood angels in case it matters.

[Niightcloak]

seeing a lot of Vet spam too, mostly for sniper but MB are almost always standard issue, makes them very good and point efficient against everything

[MorgothNL]

seeing a lot of Vet spam too, mostly for sniper but MB are almost always standard issue, makes them very good and point efficient against everything

They certainly overdid the veteran buff. They make many legion specific units subpar. It is because they are already that good AND can take cheap melta-bombs, that melta-bombs became sort of an issue. Everyone that didn't already run vets, now also run them, and meltabombs is quite the easy add on them. Units that pay 5pts per model for melta bombs, or units that are only good in CC like assault squads, are not part of that abuse/powercreep. 

 

A lot of 30k feels out-dated and unbalanced at the moment (the legion specific red book mostly). Not to the point of broken, but to the point that only a selection of units are really viable. 

 

"There were no armies out there that ran 3 squads of veterans with MB in a dreadclaw before the FAQ"

 

I actually had this happen in the first three or four games I played after finally buying a spartan, different opponent each time and all but 1 didn't even know I owned one.

 

I play blood angels in case it matters.

That just makes me sad, and I'm glad I haven't encountered or seen that stuff myself. Not that that list is overpowered, but I can imagine it being boring to play against in any case (depending on the theme and the rest of his army obviously).

[SkimaskMohawk]

 

 

I do remember when Escalation and knights came out and I happened to play list with a knight in a tournament used rules from sixth edition and I faced a unit from (d)eldar list that each model had haywire grenades. Wasn't fun in a competitive sense and wasn't fun to play although I managed to squeeze a victory still (hey its competitive 40k, it shouldn't be fun like narrative 30k!).

 

It's almost like the introduction of apoc into standard games with no thoughts of balance and restriction in either direction helped turn 40k into a complete and utter mess.

 

@Morgoth. I have a pretty nice mechanicum army. Actually, I just counted the points real fast and its about 7000 before two my two ordinatus, so call it close to 10k. And people have a hard time with thralls, thallax and thanatars. Lists with scoria and krios and triaros myrmidons make them cry. I feel bad that even using the "fun units" makes for a pretty tough game for my opponent, one that's already weighted for me 

[Brofist]

 

seeing a lot of Vet spam too, mostly for sniper but MB are almost always standard issue, makes them very good and point efficient against everything

They certainly overdid the veteran buff. They make many legion specific units subpar. It is because they are already that good AND can take cheap melta-bombs, that melta-bombs became sort of an issue. Everyone that didn't already run vets, now also run them, and meltabombs is quite the easy add on them. Units that pay 5pts per model for melta bombs, or units that are only good in CC like assault squads, are not part of that abuse/powercreep. 

 

A lot of 30k feels out-dated and unbalanced at the moment (the legion specific red book mostly). Not to the point of broken, but to the point that only a selection of units are really viable.

 

100% agreed about veterans. They shouldn't have touched them. Instead they made them into the best infantry choice in the game. That really screwed with game balance.

 

I do disagree that only a selection of units are viable. There are lots of good options in these books, vets just invalidate many of the infantry choices since they are such outliers.

[Lord Blackwood]

Yo bulbafist when we gonna get a game in

 

I wanna field 5x veteran tac squads 3 leviathans and 5 knights

[SockMonkey]

There is a rule or two I'd like to ignore too.... If your opponent agrees to rules changes then by all means. Don't get bitchy if they don't though.

[hhhdan]

Loken on another forum asked Alan Bligh to clarify this. Heres what he wrote;

"That is the new rule, and they (Forge World) have no control over it. Alan said they may address this with special rules for certain units, but in the mean time, house rule it."

I'm liking this, but unfortunately, the players that don't want it, have the 'rules backing them up' now.

I've got a HH tournament coming up, and I want to bring my Raven Guard. I am actually starting to consider canceling my registration because I cannot play my Raven Guard the way I want them to play. No, I don't want to abuse 'wrong rules' but when you play RG fluffy and use the decapitation strike ROW for example (allow max 1 heavy), your Anti-Tank goes out the window quite fast without meltabombs.

Infantry based list, like many RG armies are, really suffer from this FAQ and I refuse to start taking a Super-Heavy just to make my infantry list viable again .

Also, I have a Mechanicum army, and I don't even play it where the FAQ is active, cause that's the direct opposite of the RG problem. Mechanicum need to get krak and melta in the face to be balanced IMHO.

Glad to see adepticon ruling against it!

There is plenty of anti-tank stuff you can take for raven guard even if you had 0 heavy support choices. Most notably - flyers, fire raptor, stormeagle, lightning, xiphon are all quite good at tank hunting and are very fluffy for Raven guard. Also land speeders and Javelins are great tank hunters too. Also for decapitation strike multiple deathstorm drop pods would absolutely destroy vehicles too...

So yeah i don't buy the whole nothing to kill vehicles with, you just went heavy on infantry killing shooting and that's fair enough, but then i wouldn't expect to kill a lot of vehicles with such a list, so relying on melta bombs as the only real answer to vehicles in a list is wrong IMO and makes list building easier, as you can not worry about that threat as much.

[SkimaskMohawk]

We're mostly talking spartan, leviathan range here.

 

Of the flyers, only the lightning is really effective against spartans. The others can almost always just mostly glance (xiphon can pen) and thats assuming side shots. Important to mention that a fire raptor is a Heavy support, so might be competing with a Leviathan, while storm eagles and xiphons will compete against javs and lightnings.

 

Javs are great for killing not spartans, but can rather fall flat against a Leviathan since most of the weapons can't explode it and such.

 

Deathstorms are...not great. They can't kill the dangerous stuff very well and most importantly compete with mor deythan and grav rapiers.

 

His list could be better, but ignoring that due to it being based on models owned, it has far more anti-tank than anti-infantry, like the vast majority of it (non of it melee), so that's a hugely unfair comment

[Slips]

What about Melta Mor Deythan? Twin-Linked Rending Melta shots should do something against even Av14...right?

[Jarkaira]

If 10 vets with machinekillers do 3.24 hullpoints then 10 Mor Deythans won't be worse.

[Brofist]

Yo bulbafist when we gonna get a game in

 

I wanna field 5x veteran tac squads 3 leviathans and 5 knights

*Casualy sets down warlord*

[Runefyre]

Yo bulbafist when we gonna get a game in

I wanna field 5x veteran tac squads 3 leviathans and 5 knights

*Casualy sets down warlord*

*casually sets down warlord-sinister pattern battle psi-titan*

"I'm NOT compensating!"