My gripe with mortal wounds

[The Unseen]

 

 

 

 

The problem does exist because some armies, or lists, cannot fit in everything needed or do not have unit/loadout availability to do all that is required to win.

I think the ‘problem’ Marshal is referring to here is unkillable/ overly-durable units that Mortal Wounds are designed to counter. The problem doesn’t exist anymore - in 8th Ed, nothing is so durable as to justify the existence of Mortal Wounds (as opposed to 7th Ed which was a very different story). These days the most durable units are dirt-cheap, single-Wound infantry (preferably with a FNP) that Mortal Wounds do nothing to counter.

Correct, that's what I meant. Even if Deathstar characters werer a problem, MWs in most circumstances would prove to be an unsuiting solution. The character and smite rule (closest enemy unit / closest visible enemy unit) make it very hard to target them with smite or for example hellfire shells.

 

Giving underperforming armies access to more mortal wounds would by a very shortsighted solution and cause heaps of new inter-army balance issues. Instead these armies should be buffed through pts and stat changes, traits and stratagems.

Personally I think general characters are even more unkillable this edition (outside the old super death star builds from last edition) purely because of the character targeting rules. As you say mortal wounds won’t help with that.

 

I think those targeting rules need changing. I’d like to see a range limit on it, like if you’re within 8 inches of a character you can target them normally.

 

Or, failing that, I would like to see it stipulate that there must be intervening models between the character you want to target and the shooting unit. It’s silly that you can’t target a character if there’s a closer model that you can’t even see! And it’s beyond silly that the unit preventing you shooting a character could even be behind the firing unit.

That rule was instituted because otherwise you could modify your own line of sight, like say with a rhino, and "snipe" characters across the table.

 

And a distance qualifier would only nerf assault units/characters yet again, which already struggle with having to pass multiple goddamn charge rolls to get a single unit plus it's buffing character into combat together.

No thanks.

 

Characters, bar a couple of exceptions, are definetely not problematic this edition.

Maybe Gman, just because he breaks so many rules, but the stuff he buffs is so underwhelming that he's a non-issue currently.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

 

 

 

The problem does exist because some armies, or lists, cannot fit in everything needed or do not have unit/loadout availability to do all that is required to win.

I think the ‘problem’ Marshal is referring to here is unkillable/ overly-durable units that Mortal Wounds are designed to counter. The problem doesn’t exist anymore - in 8th Ed, nothing is so durable as to justify the existence of Mortal Wounds (as opposed to 7th Ed which was a very different story). These days the most durable units are dirt-cheap, single-Wound infantry (preferably with a FNP) that Mortal Wounds do nothing to counter.

Correct, that's what I meant. Even if Deathstar characters werer a problem, MWs in most circumstances would prove to be an unsuiting solution. The character and smite rule (closest enemy unit / closest visible enemy unit) make it very hard to target them with smite or for example hellfire shells.

 

Giving underperforming armies access to more mortal wounds would by a very shortsighted solution and cause heaps of new inter-army balance issues. Instead these armies should be buffed through pts and stat changes, traits and stratagems.

Personally I think general characters are even more unkillable this edition (outside the old super death star builds from last edition) purely because of the character targeting rules. As you say mortal wounds won’t help with that.

 

I think those targeting rules need changing. I’d like to see a range limit on it, like if you’re within 8 inches of a character you can target them normally.

 

Or, failing that, I would like to see it stipulate that there must be intervening models between the character you want to target and the shooting unit. It’s silly that you can’t target a character if there’s a closer model that you can’t even see! And it’s beyond silly that the unit preventing you shooting a character could even be behind the firing unit.

That rule was instituted because otherwise you could modify your own line of sight, like say with a rhino, and "snipe" characters across the table.

 

And a distance qualifier would only nerf assault units/characters yet again, which already struggle with having to pass multiple goddamn charge rolls to get a single unit plus it's buffing character into combat together.

No thanks.

 

Characters, bar a couple of exceptions, are definetely not problematic this edition.

Maybe Gman, just because he breaks so many rules, but the stuff he buffs is so underwhelming that he's a non-issue currently.

You’re probably right but i still think there should be intervening models actually between the character and the shooting unit. Characters shouldn’t just be able to stroll around in complete safety simply because they’re not the closest thing to the enemy.

[Finkmilkana]

You’re probably right but i still think there should be intervening models actually between the character and the shooting unit. Characters shouldn’t just be able to stroll around in complete safety simply because they’re not the closest thing to the enemy.

While I kinda agree it would be nice, I can’t even think of a way to phrase what “intervening” means here that wouldn’t either lead to long discussions, require a lot of measuring, be exploitable or make the character rule almost useless.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

You’re probably right but i still think there should be intervening models actually between the character and the shooting unit. Characters shouldn’t just be able to stroll around in complete safety simply because they’re not the closest thing to the enemy.

While I kinda agree it would be nice, I can’t even think of a way to phrase what “intervening” means here that wouldn’t either lead to long discussions, require a lot of measuring, be exploitable or make the character rule almost useless.

Yeah, I agree it’s not an easy one. Basically I just think characters should have something to fear in the shooting phase just like everything else. Maybe if the weapons that can target characters were actually dangerous to them it would help :)

[Panzer]

 

You’re probably right but i still think there should be intervening models actually between the character and the shooting unit. Characters shouldn’t just be able to stroll around in complete safety simply because they’re not the closest thing to the enemy.

While I kinda agree it would be nice, I can’t even think of a way to phrase what “intervening” means here that wouldn’t either lead to long discussions, require a lot of measuring, be exploitable or make the character rule almost useless.

 

 

AoS actually has such wording for one of their new semi-permanent spells so it's definitely doable. ^^

[kombatwombat]

I thought about this while getting thoroughly smited at a tournament over the weekend. Mortal Wounds are essentially a shorthanded way of writing a weapon. So what would they look like written longhand as a weapon profile?

 

I’ll use smite as the example as it’s the most common:

 

Smite: Warp Charge 5. Every Psyker in the game knows this power in addition to their other powers. This power may be cast any number of times per turn, but add 1 to the warp charge value for every previous attempt unless the caster has the Brotherhood or Psykers/Sorcerors rule. If successfully cast, make an attack on the closest visible enemy unit with the following profile:

 

Smite Str 32 AP -7 Dmg D3

This weapon hits automatically. Reroll failed To Wound rolls with this weapon. This weapon does not suffer negatives To Wound. Invulnerable saves may not be taken against this weapon. Excess damage inflicted by this weapon is not lost but instead carries over to the next model. If the casting roll was over 10, increase the Damage of this weapon to D6.

 

Written out completely Mortal Wounds seem obscenely powerful. That profile reads like something I would have made up as a ten-year-old to one-up my friends and tried to claim was ‘balanced’ because it’s only D3 damage.

 

Maybe people saying MWs are too powerful and too prolific have a point.

[Beams]

I thought about this while getting thoroughly smited at a tournament over the weekend. Mortal Wounds are essentially a shorthanded way of writing a weapon. So what would they look like written longhand as a weapon profile?

 

I’ll use smite as the example as it’s the most common:

 

Smite: Warp Charge 5. Every Psyker in the game knows this power in addition to their other powers. This power may be cast any number of times per turn, but add 1 to the warp charge value for every previous attempt unless the caster has the Brotherhood or Psykers/Sorcerors rule. If successfully cast, make an attack on the closest visible enemy unit with the following profile:

 

Smite Str 32 AP -7 Dmg D3

This weapon hits automatically. Reroll failed To Wound rolls with this weapon. This weapon does not suffer negatives To Wound. Invulnerable saves may not be taken against this weapon. Excess damage inflicted by this weapon is not lost but instead carries over to the next model. If the casting roll was over 10, increase the Damage of this weapon to D6.

 

Written out completely Mortal Wounds seem obscenely powerful. That profile reads like something I would have made up as a ten-year-old to one-up my friends and tried to claim was ‘balanced’ because it’s only D3 damage.

 

Maybe people saying MWs are too powerful and too prolific have a point.

Except that's not the case, it's more akin to weapons that wound on a non toughness stat.

It's more like:

 

Smite-blaster:

This weapon hits automatically.

This weapon wounds on a roll of 5+ on 2 dice, adding a +1 to the required roll for each other fired.

Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon

This weapon can only target the nearest model.

 

Assault 1, Range 18" Str * Ap-5 d3 damage

 

 

And suddenly, it s now a weapon that I'd pass over more often than not.

[Panzer]

 

I thought about this while getting thoroughly smited at a tournament over the weekend. Mortal Wounds are essentially a shorthanded way of writing a weapon. So what would they look like written longhand as a weapon profile?

 

I’ll use smite as the example as it’s the most common:

 

Smite: Warp Charge 5. Every Psyker in the game knows this power in addition to their other powers. This power may be cast any number of times per turn, but add 1 to the warp charge value for every previous attempt unless the caster has the Brotherhood or Psykers/Sorcerors rule. If successfully cast, make an attack on the closest visible enemy unit with the following profile:

 

Smite Str 32 AP -7 Dmg D3

This weapon hits automatically. Reroll failed To Wound rolls with this weapon. This weapon does not suffer negatives To Wound. Invulnerable saves may not be taken against this weapon. Excess damage inflicted by this weapon is not lost but instead carries over to the next model. If the casting roll was over 10, increase the Damage of this weapon to D6.

 

Written out completely Mortal Wounds seem obscenely powerful. That profile reads like something I would have made up as a ten-year-old to one-up my friends and tried to claim was ‘balanced’ because it’s only D3 damage.

 

Maybe people saying MWs are too powerful and too prolific have a point.

Except that's not the case, it's more akin to weapons that wound on a non toughness stat.

It's more like:

 

Smite-blaster:

This weapon hits automatically.

This weapon wounds on a roll of 5+ on 2 dice, adding a +1 to the required roll for each other fired.

Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon

This weapon can only target the nearest model.

 

Assault 1, Range 18" Str * Ap-5 d3 damage

 

 

And suddenly, it s now a weapon that I'd pass over more often than not.

 

 

Not quite there yet. It would actually be

 

Smite-blaster:

Roll 2d6 before shooting with this weapon. On a 5+ you are allowed to shoot with it. Add +1 to the required result for each other Smite-blaster fired before this one this phase. On a roll of 11 or 12 increase the amount of shots to 1d6 instead.

This weapon hits automatically.

This weapon wounds automatically.

Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon.

This weapon can only target the nearest model even if they are engaged in melee.

You can't fire Overwatch with this weapon.

 

Assault 1d3, Range 18" Str* AP-7 (otherwise Sv2+ infantry in cover, especially in Cities of Death, would still have a save against it) D1

 

 

Anyway the point remains. Mortal wounds is just a lazy way to write stats for a very strong ranged attack. ^^

[MARK0SIAN]

 

I thought about this while getting thoroughly smited at a tournament over the weekend. Mortal Wounds are essentially a shorthanded way of writing a weapon. So what would they look like written longhand as a weapon profile?

 

I’ll use smite as the example as it’s the most common:

 

Smite: Warp Charge 5. Every Psyker in the game knows this power in addition to their other powers. This power may be cast any number of times per turn, but add 1 to the warp charge value for every previous attempt unless the caster has the Brotherhood or Psykers/Sorcerors rule. If successfully cast, make an attack on the closest visible enemy unit with the following profile:

 

Smite Str 32 AP -7 Dmg D3

This weapon hits automatically. Reroll failed To Wound rolls with this weapon. This weapon does not suffer negatives To Wound. Invulnerable saves may not be taken against this weapon. Excess damage inflicted by this weapon is not lost but instead carries over to the next model. If the casting roll was over 10, increase the Damage of this weapon to D6.

 

Written out completely Mortal Wounds seem obscenely powerful. That profile reads like something I would have made up as a ten-year-old to one-up my friends and tried to claim was ‘balanced’ because it’s only D3 damage.

 

Maybe people saying MWs are too powerful and too prolific have a point.

Except that's not the case, it's more akin to weapons that wound on a non toughness stat.

It's more like:

 

Smite-blaster:

This weapon hits automatically.

This weapon wounds on a roll of 5+ on 2 dice, adding a +1 to the required roll for each other fired.

Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon

This weapon can only target the nearest model.

 

Assault 1, Range 18" Str * Ap-5 d3 damage

 

 

And suddenly, it s now a weapon that I'd pass over more often than not.

Actually I don’t think anyone would ever pass it over because you’d also have to add the following lines to its rules:

 

This weapon doesn’t cost anything, it’s cost is factored into the model.

This weapon doesn’t prevent you taking any other weapons.

This weapon does not count towards the number of powers your model knows.

This weapon is not fired in the shooting phase.

 

No one would pass it over for the simple fact that there is literally no downside to having it, even if you don’t use it. Many of the models who have access to smite can also be great in the shooting or assault phase so it doesn’t stop you being deadly by taking it.

[Beams]

 

 

I thought about this while getting thoroughly smited at a tournament over the weekend. Mortal Wounds are essentially a shorthanded way of writing a weapon. So what would they look like written longhand as a weapon profile?

 

I’ll use smite as the example as it’s the most common:

 

Smite: Warp Charge 5. Every Psyker in the game knows this power in addition to their other powers. This power may be cast any number of times per turn, but add 1 to the warp charge value for every previous attempt unless the caster has the Brotherhood or Psykers/Sorcerors rule. If successfully cast, make an attack on the closest visible enemy unit with the following profile:

 

Smite Str 32 AP -7 Dmg D3

This weapon hits automatically. Reroll failed To Wound rolls with this weapon. This weapon does not suffer negatives To Wound. Invulnerable saves may not be taken against this weapon. Excess damage inflicted by this weapon is not lost but instead carries over to the next model. If the casting roll was over 10, increase the Damage of this weapon to D6.

 

Written out completely Mortal Wounds seem obscenely powerful. That profile reads like something I would have made up as a ten-year-old to one-up my friends and tried to claim was ‘balanced’ because it’s only D3 damage.

 

Maybe people saying MWs are too powerful and too prolific have a point.

Except that's not the case, it's more akin to weapons that wound on a non toughness stat.

It's more like:

 

Smite-blaster:

This weapon hits automatically.

This weapon wounds on a roll of 5+ on 2 dice, adding a +1 to the required roll for each other fired.

Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon

This weapon can only target the nearest model.

 

Assault 1, Range 18" Str * Ap-5 d3 damage

 

 

And suddenly, it s now a weapon that I'd pass over more often than not.

Actually I don’t think anyone would ever pass it over because you’d also have to add the following lines to its rules:

 

This weapon doesn’t cost anything, it’s cost is factored into the model.

This weapon doesn’t prevent you taking any other weapons.

This weapon does not count towards the number of powers your model knows.

This weapon is not fired in the shooting phase.

 

No one would pass it over for the simple fact that there is literally no downside to having it, even if you don’t use it. Many of the models who have access to smite can also be great in the shooting or assault phase so it doesn’t stop you being deadly by taking it.

But the cost IS factored into the model, lest we forget Malefic Lord's, Astropaths and what not going up in price.

 

Astropaths/Primaris psykers whole point is psychic, so smite or using a power that's sigle user per phase, so we're literally looking at 40pts to use a power that might deal 3 damage a turn and can't choose it's target, and each one is reduced in chance to fire.

 

For 40 pts I'd rather have a Sister of Battle with a multimelta (37) or a heavy weapons team with a lascannon (30ish?) Since then I don't have to get nice and cozy with the enemy, and can choose a target that I want to hit, and don't have to worry about having 6 Lascannons making it harder for the other ones to fire.

 

Having one or two smites in a list is fine, but there's a reason as smite spam doesn't really exist anymore. The psychic focus rule killed it.

 

 

EDIT: to clarify, though, I am not really a fan of the psychic phase. As someone who plays sisters, it's a my opponent rolls tons of dice and removes my models and once per turn I can roll a 4+ to see if one of those models grts to stay a little bit longer. I just think MW are a necessary evil, since they help prevent invulnerable deathstars from happening. In 7th, people had deathstars that statistically couldn't die. MW would have helped stop that.

[MARK0SIAN]

But the thing is this isn’t 7th edition. Those unkillable deathstars just do not exist in this edition. It’s a cure without a disease. GW have stopped FNPs stacking and they haven’t been stupid enough to give out things like rerollable 2+ invulnerable saves this time.

 

I just don’t think they’re required at all. I defy anyone to find any unit in any codex that statistically can’t die to normal methods in this edition. Even Eldar aren’t that broken.

[Beams]

But the thing is this isn’t 7th edition. Those unkillable deathstars just do not exist in this edition. It’s a cure without a disease. GW have stopped FNPs stacking and they haven’t been stupid enough to give out things like rerollable 2+ invulnerable saves this time.

 

I just don’t think they’re required at all. I defy anyone to find any unit in any codex that statistically can’t die to normal methods in this edition. Even Eldar aren’t that broken.

GMDK can get a 3++ with a +1 on the dice for an effective 2++. Save a cp for the first important hit (lascannon equivalent) that gets through, and he can tank an entire armies shooting.

 

The only reason you don't see more of him, is because he's slow and the rest of the codex lags behind.

[Panzer]

A 2++ is strong but it does require some ressources (CP for an elite army and successfully casting a psychic power) and even if you get it off it's not as gamebreaking as the deathstars of 7e. Charge him with some cultists or whatever and he can't do much anymore lol

[utilityzero]

The change to how characters work essentially killed deathstars though GW clearly doesn't understand why they needed to go since they added stacking minus 1 to hit modifiers and gave almost every sprt of character a bubble effect. Smite and MW isn't needed, GW just needs to admit they aren't cut out for writing rules and turn it over to a company who is.

[Beams]

A 2++ is strong but it does require some ressources (CP for an elite army and successfully casting a psychic power) and even if you get it off it's not as gamebreaking as the deathstars of 7e. Charge him with some cultists or whatever and he can't do much anymore lol

Right. I always see that in regards to GMDk, but I've never had that happen to mine. Generally, there's enough stormbolters on the field to keep the chaff clear, and most GK Ayers are good enough to keep the GK in a position where he's not getting charged by cultists. Also, you can always GoI him out of combat, so the worst you can do is tie him up for a phase if you somehow get close enough with chaff who survive overwatch and melee.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

But the thing is this isn’t 7th edition. Those unkillable deathstars just do not exist in this edition. It’s a cure without a disease. GW have stopped FNPs stacking and they haven’t been stupid enough to give out things like rerollable 2+ invulnerable saves this time.

 

I just don’t think they’re required at all. I defy anyone to find any unit in any codex that statistically can’t die to normal methods in this edition. Even Eldar aren’t that broken.

GMDK can get a 3++ with a +1 on the dice for an effective 2++. Save a cp for the first important hit (lascannon equivalent) that gets through, and he can tank an entire armies shooting.

 

The only reason you don't see more of him, is because he's slow and the rest of the codex lags behind.

That’s tough but it’s not in the same league as the 7th edition deathstars by a long way. Plus there’s a big difference between hard to kill and simply unkillable. Personally, I have absolutely no problem with things being hard to kill if the player has invested signifificant points/resources in him. The only problem is when they’re hard to kill without any investment.

 

Some people are happy with an edition where everything dies really quickly but I’m not one of them. I want to play elite armies with hard to kill models that I’ve payed for in points. There shouldn’t just be a cheap, easy way round all that investment. Particularly as there isn’t a cheap and effective way of dealing with hordes of cheap chaff at the other end of the scale.

[Beams]

 

 

But the thing is this isn’t 7th edition. Those unkillable deathstars just do not exist in this edition. It’s a cure without a disease. GW have stopped FNPs stacking and they haven’t been stupid enough to give out things like rerollable 2+ invulnerable saves this time.

 

I just don’t think they’re required at all. I defy anyone to find any unit in any codex that statistically can’t die to normal methods in this edition. Even Eldar aren’t that broken.

GMDK can get a 3++ with a +1 on the dice for an effective 2++. Save a cp for the first important hit (lascannon equivalent) that gets through, and he can tank an entire armies shooting.

 

The only reason you don't see more of him, is because he's slow and the rest of the codex lags behind.

That’s tough but it’s not in the same league as the 7th edition deathstars by a long way. Plus there’s a big difference between hard to kill and simply unkillable. Personally, I have absolutely no problem with things being hard to kill if the player has invested signifificant points/resources in him. The only problem is when they’re hard to kill without any investment.

 

Some people are happy with an edition where everything dies really quickly but I’m not one of them. I want to play elite armies with hard to kill models that I’ve payed for in points. There shouldn’t just be a cheap, easy way round all that investment. Particularly as there isn’t a cheap and effective way of dealing with hordes of cheap chaff at the other end of the scale.

Right, and there are pretty durable single elite models, and there are ways to deal with cheap infantry.

 

Space Marines are good against hordes if buffed properly and willing to get in cc.

 

Dominion squads especially, but any bss squads are good against hordes as well.

 

 

Guardsmen are also good against hordes.

 

In general troops are the best way to fight troops.

[Indefragable]

Apologies, but I did not read all 4 pages of this thread.

 

My thoughts:

Mortal Wounds, IMHO, are an o-k concept in and of themselves, but the execution is terrible. Simply put, they are way too easy.

 

Let's start with the main one: Smite.

I actually think Smite is not the worst idea in the world; even if unkillable 2++/2+++FNP re-rollable 2++++ resurrectable cheesbombs were a thing of 7th edition, I do like the idea of certain abilities, even relatively easy to access ones, being able to hurt anything in the game. That being said, Smite is just too damn easy as a universally accessible power. If psychic powers like Smite required you to roll To Hit like in 7th, or if they required a LD test to go off, then now we are starting to bring them back down to earth. That would inherently start to balance out 25pt Smite cheeser units in horde armies with the elite Librarian and so forth. You can bring more Smiters (Smoters?) with the former, but you get more bang for your buck with the latter.

 

Other sources of Mortal Wounds:

Certain special units should be able to do MW. The Swarmlord comes to mind: if a unit like the Swarmlord did MWs on 6's To Wound, then that would be cinematic and fluffy and really make that single unit the fearsome beast that s/he/it is supposed to be in the fluff. The keywords here are "special" and "single unit." MW done by select, appropriately limited units would be fine. There's just so many that can dole them out now (looking at you, Chaos Forgeworld Dreadnoughts).

 

Explosions:

One my personal biggest peeves in the game, I can not describe the amount of holy Black Templar-like rage this causes me. The game mechanic where Vehicles or MC's dying produce auto MW on units around them sickens me to know end. You're telling me that Thunder Hammer/Storm Shield Terminators...a unit specifically designed in both crunch and fluff to walk up to big scary things like super heavies and kill them in close combat can in fact suffer auto-wounds from doing just that? Get the :cuss out of here. I would have no problem if the rule said explosions cause Dx S500 AP-million D:eleventy billion auto wounds, but it kills me to no end how choppy units doing the jobs they were designed to do can get killed with no saves or recourse whatsoever.

[Slasher956]

I like the way of explosions doing auto hits with a strength relating to the toughness of the vehicle with an ap related to the save.... then MCs can have a round of attacks with their CC weapons when they die

 

Then change MWs done by psyhic attacks to a S v Ld attack ala mind war

 

Other MW attacks can altered as needed

[Azekai]

Smite spam isn’t good. The counterplay to smite is anti psychic and positioning. Only being able to target the closest thing in 18” is pretty easy to play around, especially when the psychic phase comes before shooting.

 

Losing a few marines or terminators to mortal wounds hurts, but those things are easily erased with plasma for a comparable point cost.

[Kastor Krieg]

Explosions:

One my personal biggest peeves in the game, I can not describe the amount of holy Black Templar-like rage this causes me. The game mechanic where Vehicles or MC's dying produce auto MW on units around them sickens me to know end. You're telling me that Thunder Hammer/Storm Shield Terminators...a unit specifically designed in both crunch and fluff to walk up to big scary things like super heavies and kill them in close combat can in fact suffer auto-wounds from doing just that? Get the out of here. I would have no problem if the rule said explosions cause Dx S500 AP-million D:eleventy billion auto wounds, but it kills me to no end how choppy units doing the jobs they were designed to do can get killed with no saves or recourse whatsoever.

You know, the terminators which are an evolution of protection suits created for regular humans to be able to safely enter ACTIVE PLASMA ENGINE CHAMBERS. You know, the thousands of Celsius, surface of the Sun plasma kind. That's why they get a save from MILITARY GRADE plasma weapons which were then overclocked to 11 for Astartes.

 

But then a gasoline / diesel engine explodes and everyone dies? :cuss that noise.

 

Also, my main pet peeve with the Mortal Wounds - aside from all the other sources, they get a whole freaking phase of ":cuss this model, that model and this other model of yours, because I said so". No, no recourse, no save, no inv, no nothing. :cuss you and your models, off the :cussing table with them! GIT!

 

That's just SO INFURIATING.

[ERJAK]

What mortal wounds? 40k has so few mortal wounds, they're frankly irrelevant. Ever since smite spam got nerfed, mortal wounds are a chaos gimmick that lets Tsons punch slightly above their weight class and little else.

 

Compare and contrast with Sigmar where most armies, even non-competitive ones, are capable of pumping out 10-20 per turn, and some armies are well known for being able to get 30+ per turn going. Hell, there was a list at the beginning of 2nd ed Sigmar that could drop 100 mortal wounds per turn anywhere on the table.

[Panzer]

Don't compare with Sigmar because there's also barely any ranged combat compared to 40k and the stats of weapons and units is completely different.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

 

But the thing is this isn’t 7th edition. Those unkillable deathstars just do not exist in this edition. It’s a cure without a disease. GW have stopped FNPs stacking and they haven’t been stupid enough to give out things like rerollable 2+ invulnerable saves this time.

 

I just don’t think they’re required at all. I defy anyone to find any unit in any codex that statistically can’t die to normal methods in this edition. Even Eldar aren’t that broken.

GMDK can get a 3++ with a +1 on the dice for an effective 2++. Save a cp for the first important hit (lascannon equivalent) that gets through, and he can tank an entire armies shooting.

 

The only reason you don't see more of him, is because he's slow and the rest of the codex lags behind.

That’s tough but it’s not in the same league as the 7th edition deathstars by a long way. Plus there’s a big difference between hard to kill and simply unkillable. Personally, I have absolutely no problem with things being hard to kill if the player has invested signifificant points/resources in him. The only problem is when they’re hard to kill without any investment.

 

Some people are happy with an edition where everything dies really quickly but I’m not one of them. I want to play elite armies with hard to kill models that I’ve payed for in points. There shouldn’t just be a cheap, easy way round all that investment. Particularly as there isn’t a cheap and effective way of dealing with hordes of cheap chaff at the other end of the scale.

Right, and there are pretty durable single elite models, and there are ways to deal with cheap infantry.

 

Space Marines are good against hordes if buffed properly and willing to get in cc.

 

Dominion squads especially, but any bss squads are good against hordes as well.

 

 

Guardsmen are also good against hordes.

 

In general troops are the best way to fight troops.

But that’s the whole point. There are ways to deal with hordes but they require you to invest in them. You have to bring a lot of stuff to deal with the hordes, I can’t bring a single model that bypasses all the strengths and points investment of a horde unit like mortal wounds do for elites.

 

Mortal wounds just bypass all the points I’ve had to spend on those tough units for very little cost. A single smite can kill a TH/SS terminator very easily, despite me paying 47 points for a 2W 2+/3++ model. However there is nothing that can remove 47 points (6 to 7 models) of ork boys by doing something as easy as rolling a 5+ on 2D6.

[Slasher956]

The same Aeldari psyker who smited your terminator has just done executionior on that unit of boyz... on a 7+* has done D3 MW then because he killed a model did another D3 MWs..... so has removed average of 4 but likely to remove 6 boyz.

 

*before modifiers so can do it on a 6+ easily and if its Eldrad then a 5+.....

 

And smite doesnt care if your a terminator or an ork it kills everyone equally.