The state of competitive 8th edition and the BAs

[CrimsonExarch]

So I'm just listening to the Long War podcast and they are all convinced that we are currently ignorant to the fact that 8th edition is just as "spam" centric in the tournament scene as any previous edition, if not more so.

 

They think that not enough play testing was actually done and to some extent I agree.

 

I've heard of ynnari lists made up of 7 Crimson hunters and x number of ravagers, marine lists made by spamming Razorbacks and gulliman for the rerolls, sisters of battle lists made up of 9 penitent engines and celestine....

 

What do you guys think? Where do we stand in this? What can we take to stand a chance against the incoming tide of spam in the competitive environment? Is there anything Blood Angel- exclusive that can make us stand out as Blood Angels and still be able to compete against this?

 

Discuss....

[Teun135]

Well I think the Long War crew is more interested in creating controversial topics that they can profit from with their paid membership... C'mon, it's Spiky Bits. The biggest click-bait generator for our hobby. This is nothing more than audible clickbait.

[CrimsonExarch]

I mean it's still a thing we are seeing in tournaments. They aren't deceiving us about these lists and they are clearly unhealthy and against the "ethos" that GW are trying to promote in 8th edition.

[Helias_Tancred]

It comes down to one important choice when you play Warhammer 40k:

 

You either choose to play with the WAAC crowd or you don't.

 

I have always chosen the latter and never had to worry about abominations and crap like that.

[Teun135]

Well the thing about those spammy lists is that they have counters. Or they can be rebalanced with upcoming tweaks to the system, which is now much easier with the new GW base system. There will always be good units, and units that are more points-efficient than others. If you want a completely balanced game, then you have to have identical forces. May as well play chess.

 

It's no more "unhealthy" than your average WAAC gamer, and they have been in this hobby as long as there has been a hobby. You learn to live with them, or you play around them. You wanna be a WAAC gamer, then you spam efficient units. It's never been different, and the solutions remain the same.

 

You can play-test this game until the cows come home, but sometimes there are limitations inherent to the medium. For complete balance, play chess. Or checkers even. Though I am sure arguments could be made about the imbalance of those games too. But if you just wanna roll dice, put cool models on the table, and have fun then you won't stress the spam lists. Changing the game to make it exactly balanced isn't going to fix anything. It'll just make it more bland and homogenized, devoid of flavor or character.

[durdle-durdle]

I mean it's still a thing we are seeing in tournaments. They aren't deceiving us about these lists and they are clearly unhealthy and against the "ethos" that GW are trying to promote in 8th edition.

Using the different force org charts to build your army however you like while rewarding more rounded forces (battalion detatchment) is a great idea, but not setting a hard limit on unit numbers overall opens the door to spamming, especially when a lot of the force orgs allow like "6 fast attacks, etc". It's a weird balancing game though, because if they put hard caps on the amount of units you can bring, it feels really restrictive, especially if it were on more staple units like bikes or something. That's why I liked formations in concept. They just made some way too restricting (angels blade) and some way too strong (eldar/necrons/tau).in theory it was a great idea, but poorly implemented.

 

On topic though, blood angels, I don't think have any specific units worth spamming. I like our units, but none are especially silly, other than what generic marines can take anyways (which they can do better than us (guilliman's parking lot))

[The Unseen]

I think one of the biggest things they could do to fix a lot of the spam is make all the blast weapons that are now completely worthless do something.

When a huge number of weapons and the vehicles carrying them are so much worse than other options, of course spam is going yo happen.

 

Best example is stuff like battle cannons, which are so bad when looked at statistically its painful, where as in previous editions, someone trying that parking lot of razorbacks+Gman would've been tabled the first time he ran up against just a regular well rounded guard list with all the blasts able to hit a bunch of tanks at the same time.

[Fallenturtle]

The biggest thing I think that they can do is enforce a limitation on either the formations or the number of X unit you have to take Especially from the same secondary key word. for example, a lot of the parking lot lists I've been seeing take full advantage of lists requiring ONE common keyword.  They take things like bare minimal guard stuff(they will always be guard to me!) then once the dedicated transports are unlocked per squad, fill them with Adeptus Astartes razorbacks, usually marked ultramarines, to benefit from Girlyman.

 

I think that you should only be allowed to run transports from the secondary army you're playing IN that detachment. If you want to run razorbacks, you have to unlock them with Adeptus Astartes.. Hell, I would go as far as to say that only Tactical squads can unlock razorbacks, but Rhinos just require adeptus astartes. This way, you can do things like i'm currently doing while building up my angels by supplementing whatever points I need with my admech army in a different detachment.

 

I highly doubt the codex's will fix the current "spam" lists in competitive play and it will be up to the people running the event to limit those types f lists, or severely detriment the people for playing those lists.

[LutherMax]

This is a player issue, not a game issue. 40k is a very free-form game, and if GW were to try to stop these kinds of lists from being possible using some kind of game mechanic it would become too restrictive for everyone.

 

There will always be players who will identify the strongest units and combinations and exploit them, but that is how they enjoy the game. There will also always be players who like variety, a well-rounded force and fluffy combinations - that's how they enjoy the game.

 

GW (quite rightly) want to provide a game that can be played either way. You just gotta find like minded folks to play against, whichever camp you're in. :)

 

 

Edit: As Fallenturtle said, if this makes tournament play difficult / unenjoyable for non min/maxing players, restrictions should be put in place by the TOs, rather than placing game-wide restrictions that affect everyone else.

Edited July 13, 2017 by LutherMax

[Remtek]

Its early to say. Feels like a lot of the playtesting and initial games have been with Eternal War missions that amplify the issues with flyer spam and static 'aurahammer' lists since it's mostly about how well you can deal and take dmg for the first 4 turns. The first 6 months of 8th ed will give GW a lot of information to tweak matched play. Hopefully they will keep staying on the ball. 

 

Personal guesstimations:

 

We will probably be seeing more line of sight blocking terrain to keep games more dynamic in tournaments.
Tournaments packs will include more progressive missions that will make static gunlines and low drop lists less efficient. (Game is still very new and many are starting off with pure eternal war.)

[Aothaine]

This is a player issue, not a game issue. 40k is a very free-form game, and if GW were to try to stop these kinds of lists from being possible using some kind of game mechanic it would become too restrictive for everyone.

 

There will always be players who will identify the strongest units and combinations and exploit them, but that is how they enjoy the game. There will also always be players who like variety, a well-rounded force and fluffy combinations - that's how they enjoy the game.

 

GW (quite rightly) want to provide a game that can be played either way. You just gotta find like minded folks to play against, whichever camp you're in.

 

 

Edit: As Fallenturtle said, if this makes tournament play difficult / unenjoyable for non min/maxing players, restrictions should be put in place by the TOs, rather than placing game-wide restrictions that affect everyone else.

 

Completely agree with LutherMax here. There are people out there that have to win no matter what and they build the lists that were dominating the tournament scene in 7th and will be doing it again in 8th. Unless you are one of the players that is like that I wouldn't worry about it too much. 

 

Be selective of the tournaments you do go to and it is the TOs job to make sure lists like 9 flyers don't show up. Putting limits on the system will only hinder the game and push away potential customers.

[Damon Nightman]

This is a player issue, not a game issue. 40k is a very free-form game, and if GW were to try to stop these kinds of lists from being possible using some kind of game mechanic it would become too restrictive for everyone.

 

There will always be players who will identify the strongest units and combinations and exploit them, but that is how they enjoy the game. There will also always be players who like variety, a well-rounded force and fluffy combinations - that's how they enjoy the game.

 

GW (quite rightly) want to provide a game that can be played either way. You just gotta find like minded folks to play against, whichever camp you're in. :)

 

 

Edit: As Fallenturtle said, if this makes tournament play difficult / unenjoyable for non min/maxing players, restrictions should be put in place by the TOs, rather than placing game-wide restrictions that affect everyone else.

Couldn't agree more! I had very little fun in 7th when I tried to play against the serious players that would spam stuff and only take the best things... not for me, but when I found other players that shared my mindset, I started having a lot more fun.

 

I overheard a space wolf player at my club complaining about how bad wulfen are and all the space wolf stuff is terrible now and that he is starting a Ynarri army so he can actually win games... I thought he was crazy, but he also probably thinks that I'm crazy for running a suboptimal army with suboptimal units. Different strokes for different folks...

 

Something I thought was really funny was when a player came up to me and my buddy talking about how he can finally make his themed, not super competitive, BA list now. He said it was SG, mephiston, Sanguinor, Dante, and nothing else but stormravens and forgeworld fliers... it was very hard for me not to laugh... to me that sounds like a very cheesy list and not at all a fluffy army that would be fun to play in casual

settings, but he thought the opposite.

 

There's lots of variation in this game and how people approach it, just gotta find the people who play at your level.

[Helias_Tancred]

This is a player issue, not a game issue. 40k is a very free-form game, and if GW were to try to stop these kinds of lists from being possible using some kind of game mechanic it would become too restrictive for everyone.

 

There will always be players who will identify the strongest units and combinations and exploit them, but that is how they enjoy the game. There will also always be players who like variety, a well-rounded force and fluffy combinations - that's how they enjoy the game.

 

GW (quite rightly) want to provide a game that can be played either way. You just gotta find like minded folks to play against, whichever camp you're in.

 

 

Edit: As Fallenturtle said, if this makes tournament play difficult / unenjoyable for non min/maxing players, restrictions should be put in place by the TOs, rather than placing game-wide restrictions that affect everyone else.

 

AMEN!!!

 

I've been saying this shortly after I got into the hobby. The most important thing about enjoying Warhammer 40k is playing with the right people first and foremost. That is as important as what army you play.

 

It's a social game. Social being the first important part of it.

[the jeske]

But you can make a spamy top tier tournament list that is fluffy. A razorback mounted demi company of marines with G-man, is the epitome of fluff. A group of scouts [be it eldar or marine] that scout targets for air strikes, is fluffy and kind of a realistic.

I think that soon people are going to see that 8th has the same problems in the non tournament game settings as it had in 7th. The fact that different units[well maybe not in case of marines] are being used then lets say 7th battle company, should at least make casual players rethink the stuff they want to build their armies out of.

[biglou666]

I also agree with the sentiment that GW shouldn't try to santion spammy lists, as they should only regularly appear in highly competetive environments anyway. Which is fair enough, because at some point, there has to be a best unit somewhere in the book, and competetive people will want to win competitions. That's that.

 

Another thing to remember is that almost any game system will go through waves of meta changes, so the best unit is only the best unit for as long as it isn't being countered. If it gets to a few more months down the line, and competetive lists are still exactly the same, then mabye we should start asking questions. But 8th is still young right now. Give it some time first. And if someone at your local store keeps bringing the same list, it should be quite easy to punish that kind of mistake :P

[Bartali]

Well I think the Long War crew is more interested in creating controversial topics that they can profit from with their paid membership... C'mon, it's Spiky Bits. The biggest click-bait generator for our hobby. This is nothing more than audible clickbait.

 

I think there's also probably a bit of bitterness that GW didn't ask them to playtest, and getting digs in at Reecius/Frontline Gaming

 

Well the thing about those spammy lists is that they have counters. Or they can be rebalanced with upcoming tweaks to the system, which is now much easier with the new GW base system. There will always be good units, and units that are more points-efficient than others. If you want a completely balanced game, then you have to have identical forces. May as well play chess.

 

It's no more "unhealthy" than your average WAAC gamer, and they have been in this hobby as long as there has been a hobby. You learn to live with them, or you play around them. You wanna be a WAAC gamer, then you spam efficient units. It's never been different, and the solutions remain the same.

 

You can play-test this game until the cows come home, but sometimes there are limitations inherent to the medium. For complete balance, play chess. Or checkers even. Though I am sure arguments could be made about the imbalance of those games too. But if you just wanna roll dice, put cool models on the table, and have fun then you won't stress the spam lists. Changing the game to make it exactly balanced isn't going to fix anything. It'll just make it more bland and homogenized, devoid of flavor or character.

 

I don't think anyone is expecting perfect balance, I would of been happy with the level of balance in 5th ed for instance. We more or less got that, but the detachments ruin it

[Xenith]

It's because spamming the same unit over a over is easy and doesn't require imagination.

 

C'mon, this is spikey butz (BoLS) we're talking about, netlist kings.

[Trevak Dal]

I mean it's still a thing we are seeing in tournaments. They aren't deceiving us about these lists and they are clearly unhealthy and against the "ethos" that GW are trying to promote in 8th edition.

And with their "living ruleset" after they have made a lot of sales, they will Eratta/FAQ it away...so build your armies around a theme with a solid core.

 

Also, tournament play rulesets are squarely in the organizers hands. If they want a no spamming rule they can do it.

[LutherMax]

There's redundancy and there's spam. 2-3 of each unit should be plenty.

[Morticon]

Much like general media - the things that stand out are the exceptions and the extreme,  not the standard for the most part.  

 

It is entirely dependent on your gaming environment, the things you will see on the battlefield.  80% of the horror lists of 7th didnt make it into the tourney circuit locally. 
People will cite bogey-man lists of worst case scenarios, and while these may see a little bit of game at some very specific tournaments, I dont believe most of us see these.

 

And the worst part is that those in the minority that DO see them are likely to speak out about it online, giving currency to its ubiquity, when in fact, no such preponderance exists. 

As for spam, i've definitely got built in redundancy, as does another very strong player locally.  WIll have to see if this sticks.  But, with the ability to rebalance points costs, GW can tweak on the fly!  

[Demoulius]

 

This is a player issue, not a game issue. 40k is a very free-form game, and if GW were to try to stop these kinds of lists from being possible using some kind of game mechanic it would become too restrictive for everyone.

 

There will always be players who will identify the strongest units and combinations and exploit them, but that is how they enjoy the game. There will also always be players who like variety, a well-rounded force and fluffy combinations - that's how they enjoy the game.

 

GW (quite rightly) want to provide a game that can be played either way. You just gotta find like minded folks to play against, whichever camp you're in.

 

 

Edit: As Fallenturtle said, if this makes tournament play difficult / unenjoyable for non min/maxing players, restrictions should be put in place by the TOs, rather than placing game-wide restrictions that affect everyone else.

Couldn't agree more! I had very little fun in 7th when I tried to play against the serious players that would spam stuff and only take the best things... not for me, but when I found other players that shared my mindset, I started having a lot more fun.

 

I overheard a space wolf player at my club complaining about how bad wulfen are and all the space wolf stuff is terrible now and that he is starting a Ynarri army so he can actually win games... I thought he was crazy, but he also probably thinks that I'm crazy for running a suboptimal army with suboptimal units. Different strokes for different folks...

 

Something I thought was really funny was when a player came up to me and my buddy talking about how he can finally make his themed, not super competitive, BA list now. He said it was SG, mephiston, Sanguinor, Dante, and nothing else but stormravens and forgeworld fliers... it was very hard for me not to laugh... to me that sounds like a very cheesy list and not at all a fluffy army that would be fun to play in casual

settings, but he thought the opposite.

 

There's lots of variation in this game and how people approach it, just gotta find the people who play at your level.

 

As for that fluffy list. Sounds like a tip of the spear assault guided by Dante himself, which hes done quite a few times actually. Having also the Sanguinor and Mephiston present is abit overkill but for example the fights on Baal were an occorance where it happened. Pretty rare still, but its a fluffy encounter that happend on more then 1 occasion (the other big example beeing Armageddon where the jump pack drop in the middle of the orks broke their backs and made them rout)

 

So while I agree that not all the battles are going to be dante with the rest of the elites, its still a thing that happens just like a full terminator army can happen from time to time. Rare, but they do happen.