Current meta list....warning. Not for the light hearted

[Cpt. Bannockburn]

I really don't get the hostility towards tournament players. They don't hurt me, they don't hurt the games I play, and if someone wanted to play me with a list of x-hundred conscripts and commissars or a bunch of storm ravens, I'd happily try it out at least once, just to see what I can do with my more generalized lists. 

 

Not that I'd play against those lists more often, because my hobby time is limited, but how about just letting them be, instead of demonizing that they're having fun wrong?

I can imagine many reasons why tournament, or even WAAC (this is not necessarily the same thing either, btw) players like the GW range, the aesthetics of their models not the least of the reasons. It's individual, just like not everyone likes the building aspect of the hobby or the painting part.

 

Besides (and to go back on topic), I think, apart from using Azrael in a flyer list, this is a pretty fluffy RW detachment for hunting and catching the fallen ;)

[Frater Cornelius]

You don't get it. My father beat me my whole life, my mother died when I was 4 and the last thing we did is play a casual game of 40k. It is the only solid memory I have. Never forgive, never forget. Down with competitive play! Grrrrr! Or something... I am not very good at satire :D

 

To be fair, as soulless and disgusting I find those lists, I do like to play against them. It hones your skills with balanced lists and teaches you plenty about the game. Great learning experience. To me though, fluff and lists are inseparable, even in competitive play. This means I handicap myself every now and again, but still, totally worth it ;)

 

Live and let live, I say :)

 

To be fair, I think you can make a pretty alright flyer-based DA list. Take Sammael, probably in Speeder, some more (Javelin) Speeders and flyers. You have a pretty cool flying seek and destroy type RW list that isn't too far removed from the original idea.

Edited July 20, 2017 by Immersturm

[Chaplain Lucifer]

I think most (if not all) of us are demonizing Tournament players. We'rejust pointing a finger at what extremes the lists are going to.

I like playing in tournaments and it's quite fun. Still I don't push my lists to an edge because I like to keep it nice. I like my army to look like an army.

I go to a tournament to test my skills not my army.

And it seems that in "competition" they do the other way around until it's a rock paper scissors. X army againt Y has first turn? Win. Z against X? win.

I bet that if there was a vehicle called "Nuke" that costed 1500 points and killed the opponent's army on a roll of 4+, they would take it. Together with a commander for re-rolls. Gotta re-roll that 4+.

I think the notion of a sort of "pro" level event is skewed given that Codexes are not balanced between each other. A real compettion would be Everyone with the exact same army, then the best and/or luckiest would win. But at least they would be matched in theory.

But that's just my notion of competition and there's many, for every taste.

[the jeske]

 

Because GW games are the most player wargames of the planet and so a WAAC player can appoint himself as the best player of the planet and joke on fluff pmayers like us that he knows how to play and that we are just boobs

Yes its a very distorted view of what is funny in a wargame but i dont mind ETC and other "pro" tournaments

BTW that "DA" list is the ugliest one on the planet, i own just 1 DT and i will continue Using just one

 

Ok. if you have a bad list and do not go to tournaments[and if you do and complain about playing tournament lists at tournaments, then I do not know how to help], then how do you actualy get to see and play those people with tournament lists. Or do you mean those people that are casual do not want to train or win tournaments, but play against people like you ?

 

you realy think that some with a lot of tournament xp likes to waste an 2-3 hours of his time[including geting to the place where you guys play and going home] ?

[dtse]

anyway, off-topic a bit....just everyone play the game how they like, and don't judge the other side.  it's your game, you play it how you want with people who wanna play with you.  it's as simple as that. You have no right to judge or prevent people from playing the game how they want. They spent the time and money to play this game, let them play it.  

[FerociousBeast]

I really don't get the hostility towards tournament players. They don't hurt me, they don't hurt the games I play, and if someone wanted to play me with a list of x-hundred conscripts and commissars or a bunch of storm ravens, I'd happily try it out at least once, just to see what I can do with my more generalized lists. 

 

I'm not hostile towards tournament players, I just don't understand why they exist when there are better, cheaper, and yes quite popular alternatives out there.

 

If there was something that annoyed me about them, it's that the status of tournaments as the high-end of competitive play means that tactical conversations on blogs and forums like this one tend to focus on things that I'm not interested in at all, like "how many flyers can I pack into a 2000 point list," while units that I am interested in are immediately shot down as "useless drivel, won't cut it in MY meta."

 

Really, though, it's not the tournament players who are to blame (as odd as I may find them to be), it's GW, for failing to make a game that lets you play to the fluff with diverse viable options at the highest levels of competition.

[Interrogator Stobz]

+++Guys the OP has been quite clear that he does not want this thread to be about tournament vs. other play. Stay on topic or get melta'd.+++

 

Carry on.

[Berzul]

Well, in terms of meta, a friend commented to me that just as previous edition was all about that grav, this one is all about them bolters and bullet-based weaponry.

 

Storm Bolters got awesome, at Rapid Fire 2 for just 2 points.

Heavy Bolters became even cheaper than they used to be, by comparisson, in terms of other heavy weapon costs.

Our flyers pack so much bolter fire it's crazy.

Assault Cannons now fire 50% more shots.

 

With grav guns becoming worse than they used to be, flamers being harder to use (since we lost the classic tactic of dropping flamers next to the enemy), melta rules changing due to the change in armor value rules, it seems bolters have become indeed quite good, even after having no more AP value in them.

 

Thoughts?

[dtse]

Golf is expensive. But there are competitive players playing golf.

 

Hockey is expensive. And there are competitive people playing hockey

 

Both have cheaper alternatives. Like soccer. What's so hard to understand about people liking to play this game competitively?

 

Anyway. On with the show

 

 

Something has to be strong in every game. It just changes from time to time and from edition to edition.

[march10k]

I would run seven avenger strike fighters before running seven dark talons.  Main gun, at S6 and lots of shots, is viable against enemy flier spam.  Add in two lascannons and two missile launchers, and it's potent against ground targets and opposing aircraft spam.  But, yeah, with these sorts of shenanigans, it comes down to who gets first turn.  And that's why I only own one avenger...and one dark talon.

 

Anyone got thoughts about non-flyer spam options for managing flyer spam?

[dtse]

Razorback spam. Lascannon spam. Any of the other stuff can take down flyers. It's only -1 to hit. Tau commander spam could probably do it as half your army doesn't even start on the board. There's lots of options. But flyer spam is still tough

Btw that is one member of an 8 man team where there can be no duplication of faction. So you can bet the space marine member of the team was running storm ravens. Just this member was doing dark angels and that's the best flyer we have.

[sneakybamsen]

Well, in terms of meta, a friend commented to me that just as previous edition was all about that grav, this one is all about them bolters and bullet-based weaponry.

 

Storm Bolters got awesome, at Rapid Fire 2 for just 2 points.

Heavy Bolters became even cheaper than they used to be, by comparisson, in terms of other heavy weapon costs.

Our flyers pack so much bolter fire it's crazy.

Assault Cannons now fire 50% more shots.

 

With grav guns becoming worse than they used to be, flamers being harder to use (since we lost the classic tactic of dropping flamers next to the enemy), melta rules changing due to the change in armor value rules, it seems bolters have become indeed quite good, even after having no more AP value in them.

 

Thoughts?

 

Heavy bolters might be relatively cheap compared to other heavy weapons, and as much as I want heavy bolters to be the tool they should be, I cannot say they perform very well in the games I've had them. Think the heavy bolter I brought in my latest game managed to kill a single gaunt over 5 turns. In the casual tournament i went to I had an attack bike with a heavy bolter. That might have killed one or two acolytes during a game before I got tabled. I should be mowing down low toughness infantry with poor saves, but that it barely does.

 

Grav cannons are still good. Not AS good as they were, luckily, but they still do decent work. Especially against terminators and other heavy infantry that doesn't have more than t5. I have tested them as they are the painted devastator models I have, and they haven't let me down. What I like is that they are now no longer broken while having become more versatile (better vs poor armor save models than they were). I feel the price point at 28 points per grav cannon is fair. Not too cheap nor too expensive.

 

Assault cannons ruleswise now justify the weakness I've always had for them. Some people claim I am a gatlingofiliac ;)

[Interrogator Stobz]

The equivalent of 8 HBs (four twinHBs) I took to the tournament the other week pulled their weight well.

 

Hitting on 2s certainly helps heaps though.

Hitting with 20, wounding most squads on 3+ so about 14 wounds, the -1AP was often negated by cover which meant about 7 dead MEQ or a few more meatsacks and Eldar.

 

HBs need to be spammed to be worth it, finding a cheap delivery method is the key, imho Attack Bikes are too expensive for HBs.

Devastators are a possibility, Tarantulas might be even better but hit on 4+ so hmmmmm.

[dtse]

As you say. Mass heavybolter fire works. IF you can mass them up like assault cannons and IF you are at least hitting on 3s. 2s ideally. That's why HB attack bikes suck. Hitting on 4s sucks for the HB. Now, a fire raptor with two quad heavybolters will do some work....

[Interrogator Stobz]

Bring back relentless

[deffnob]

Them new FAQs. Rekt.

 

In a stunning display of "we're paying attention," GW rolled out a decent band aid to this nascent Flyer meta.

 

And 4+ to hit don't sound too bad for da boyz.

[Interrogator Stobz]

Maybe they should just work on the points of some things (flyers), their sweeping rules changes often have other less well considered effects on more balanced games.

[Frater Cornelius]

I think this solution is far better as it removes any fallout that could damage the casual scene as points would.

[oldmanlee]

Them new FAQs. Rekt.

In a stunning display of "we're paying attention," GW rolled out a decent band aid to this nascent Flyer meta.

And 4+ to hit don't sound too bad for da boyz.

It's a good thing I've jumped on the power house list that is a pure deathwing army hopefully there won't be a FAQ nerfing them any time soon

Edited July 24, 2017 by oldmanlee

[Interrogator Stobz]

I think this solution is far better as it removes any fallout that could damage the casual scene as points would.

I disagree, now the casual air-mobile can autolose. And I cannot take my Thk list, it is not broken but I autolose once you kill a couple of speeders. Now I need to take worse ground troops to survive, not the way at all.

[Cpt. Bannockburn]

But the hawk isn't a flyer. It's a Lord of War :)

[dtse]

This

[Aothaine]

 

I think this solution is far better as it removes any fallout that could damage the casual scene as points would.

I disagree, now the casual air-mobile can autolose. And I cannot take my Thk list, it is not broken but I autolose once you kill a couple of speeders. Now I need to take worse ground troops to survive, not the way at all.

 

 

Maybe....

 

Another problem with the flyer spam is that it would really have problems with a Tacical + Devastators list with Lascannons. There would be too many models and if you're playing with the correct amount of cover most of those marines are rocking a 2+ save. 

 

I think the nerf to the flyers was justified and needed. Flyers are strong and there is a place for having multiple or even entire flyer armies. But I don't think competitive play is the place for lists like that. 

[Interrogator Stobz]

But the hawk isn't a flyer. It's a Lord of War

Did I miss something? I'm at work now and cannot check...

Any help in a non link form appreciated

Edited July 24, 2017 by Interrogator Stobz

[Cpt. Bannockburn]

They made it so that units with the battlefield role 'Flyer' do not count for purposes of 'being tabled'. 

The Thunderhawk does have the keyword 'Fly', but it doesn't have the battlefield role 'Flyer'. It is, instead, a 'Lord of War', which is indeed a valid model for being on the table.