How are you liking Reactions? What would you change?

[Cleon]

A common mechanic I've seen in other games I play is that a unit that shoots out of sequence has to give up it's next shooting phase. If reaction firing was 'borrowing forward' your next shooting would that make everyone feel better about it? or would it make it not worth doing?

[SkimaskMohawk]

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

A common mechanic I've seen in other games I play is that a unit that shoots out of sequence has to give up it's next shooting phase. If reaction firing was 'borrowing forward' your next shooting would that make everyone feel better about it? or would it make it not worth doing?

That's basically how it worked in 1st.

Interceptor prevented the weapons used from firing in their next turn. Fury of the legion let you shoot twice at the cost of shooting in the next turn (it was modelled after bladestorm, which also did the same thing). Cyberthurgy's rite of destruction let a model shoot twice at the expense of next turn's.

[TheTrans]

2 hours ago, Cleon said:

A common mechanic I've seen in other games I play is that a unit that shoots out of sequence has to give up it's next shooting phase. If reaction firing was 'borrowing forward' your next shooting would that make everyone feel better about it? or would it make it not worth doing?

Yeah no body had issues with interceptor when it was either locked to select platforms (deredeos etc), or had a real cost to it (apothecary with augury was 50 odd pts and the intercept range was 18") and it also, as you've said, stopped you shooting in your next phase. So you traded the benefit of touching up the enemy unit before it could act at the cost of firing next shooting phase.

But now Augury scanners are on 90% of PA infantry squads and only a MoS away for any infantry squad you need (they also removed the 18" limitation and added a slew of other great benefits to it), all Dreads now have the Helical Targeting Array as an option as well. So honestly, you could, if you didn't have too many vehicles, quite easily intercept with the larger part of your army and have there be absolutely zero drawbacks or hard decisions to be made. Not to mention that interceptor is given out to anything if something comes from reserve, the only 'negative' of it over the augury scanner version is it chews up your reaction. 

 

This probably comes back to Augury Scanners and Helical Arrays being absolute no brainers on shooty units. 

[kombatwombat]

Skimask raises some good points - since reactions are a no brainer with no downside attached, it’s straightforward to build a list that will just annihilate reserves without a significant cost. It’s entirely realistic to have to eat shooting from three units during your own turn even without using reserves. For a combat army, that may mean your opponent does more shooting in your turn than you do - and there’s no trade off in terms of combat reactions.

I think the borrowing forward concept is a winner. If you react, that unit can’t activate in the corresponding phase on their turn. Return fire? Give up your own shooting phase. Withdraw? That unit can’t move next turn. Hold the line? No counter charging for you.

When I proposed it earlier someone countered that it would be a bookkeeping nightmare. I don’t think so? You’re probably reacting with 2-3 units per turn. You currently have to keep track of units that rapid fired and can’t charge, units that rallied and have to snap shoot, vehicles that moved at cruising speed and only fire one weapon at full BS etc. Is it such a burden to add remembering that a unit reacted?

Edited October 6, 2022 by Slips
Removed reference to removed content

[Grotsmasha]

  

10 hours ago, Dont-Be-Haten said:

If there was a literal ignore button on these forums

Click on your username top left of page, click "Ignored Users"

=] REDACTED IMAGE [=

 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Grotsmasha

[Slips]

=][=

While I am glad that I don't have to do this too often in the AoD section since the vast majority of discussion occurs in generally a board-appropriate manner, I will reiterate that the B&Cs purpose is to respectfully and constructively discuss all things to do with Warhammer 40k and its various aspects.

Now, we're all human and that means we won't always agree and/or get along 100% with each other that doesn't mean, however, that we can throw respect for those you are communicating with out the window.

One is free to disagree with another Frater and their points/views on whatever subject it is but, resorting to personal attacks crosses the line and will not be tolerated here.

As mentioned above, use the ignore function if, for whatever reason, you absolutely cannot get past your differences so that the experience for others, and yourselves, is not ruined by frustration boiling over and regretful posts be made.

Posts have been removed, I expect those involved to politely and respectfully move on and/or ignore each other so that a repeat of this incident does not occur.

=][=

Edited October 6, 2022 by Slips

[ABrownTuft]

On 10/5/2022 at 10:38 AM, SkimaskMohawk said:

What a hilarious post.

"All the people who disagree with me shouldn't be listened to because I've played games of the new edition. Also they are, or play against, inexperienced players". 

I'll tell my BA friend whos played heresy for ~7 years that it's his inexperience that's leading to his day of revelation units getting reacted to twice on his turn. Obviously he's doing something wrong if he's getting intercepted by any of my 4 augury units with snipers and getting overwatched when he tries to charge. Should he have pinned them first? Kind of hard when I use los blocking terrain, shroud bombs and night fight to cut his ability to target my units or hit them with any barrage. Maybe just not charge them? Great, he can charge one of my two contemptors, the leviathan, or curze. Maybe he just needs to play a completely different list that relies on av 14 transports to shuttle his units up; exactly how he wanted to play his blood angels.

This is one of the things us complainers from 1st are able to do with our experience; we can limit our opponents choices with our lists and deployment, leaving them with a set of terrible options that work to our advantage. And to be clear, my list isn't fun to play as a result; I've used it 6 times since my initial outing, and the games have all been easy (even against those av14 lists). I haven't lost because of enemy reactions, but I certainly use them to win; pinning locks a unit until the end of its following turn, meaning you lose two turns from a unit when it gets pinned by reactions; the night lord advanced reaction let's me deny the key charge. 

But hey, Ive only gotten 17 games in instead of over 20. Guess I have a lot of learning to do.

@Cleon it's actually interesting that you mention hold the line. Its the only reaction that has a fail condition attached, and is broadly the incorrect option to choose on a shooting unit as it usually only strips 1 attack per model. On the balance of things overwatch will reduce more attacks than HTL, while also sometimes preventing the charge entirely with pinning. HTL is most valuable on melee units of your own, or tarpits that want to grind out a few rounds so you can counter charge.

He is doing something wrong. Why are you not pinned? Between a Herald, the Praetor taking the fear wlt, and dawnbreakers large swathes of the opposing army should be taking pinning tests at -2 just because he landed near them. 

I don't think it's fair to lay a clear lack of optimization in an all or nothing RoW at the feet of interceptor.  Especially since it's quite clear you are leaning heavily into a competitive build that's very effective at stopping DoR.

I play SW so not exactly blessed with superlative shooting units, and prodominatly a combat based army. And, I've not really experienced the pain people are describing. 

The first step was dumping all the baggage from 1.0, so out went deathstars in came msu and trading units. Single land speeders have been brilliant for me actually in drawing out overwatch or giving the opponent difficult choices. It seems like after doing some casual looks around discord and this forum that people aren't building their lists to trade at all, they also seem to just be trying to load up as many "optimal" units as possible. 

Recently my mvp has been a single vindicator. It's very good at killing recon marines and if my opponent kills it is not a significant loss. 

Smilarly people seem to be accustomed to the old philosophy of reserves; where it was a way to keep things alive. That's not necessarily true anyore, your opponent will get an opportunity to interact and I think that is generally good for the experience of a wargame. 

Now I've DDP a Levi before, but typically it's more of a way to get it up field rather than a way to remove my opponent's ability to interact with the beast. Which leads me to drop it out of los, and has seen it be quite successful.

Edited October 6, 2022 by ABrownTuft

[SkimaskMohawk]

42 minutes ago, ABrownTuft said:

He is doing something wrong. Why are you not pinned? Between a Herald, the Praetor taking the fear wlt, and dawnbreakers large swathes of the opposing army should be taking pinning tests at -2 just because he landed near them.

It's a good idea, basically the night lord move with raptors lol; Curze unfortunately (for him) gives immunity to fear to the army. Still against ld 7 he should average roughly 1 pin on the recons. Maybe incandeouses to be the leading edge of the deepstrike while the more vulnerable stuff hides behind terrain for the next turn? 

 

57 minutes ago, ABrownTuft said:

I don't think it's fair to lay a clear lack of optimization in an all or nothing RoW at the feet of interceptor.  Especially since it's quite clear you are leaning heavily into a competitive build that's very effective at stopping DoR.

Its definitely a competitive build, we're practicing for a tournament in a few months. It's not tailored to beat on him or anything, but it is meant to deal with various things; done well against non-deepstrike too. The point I was trying to make was that other than really hoping to roll the pinning, he can't do much to avoid taking two reactions on his deepstrike; and those reactions are increasing the output of a unit above and beyond what it's points nominally reflect. 

 

1 hour ago, ABrownTuft said:

The first step was dumping all the baggage from 1.0, so out went deathstars in came msu and trading units. Single land speeders have been brilliant for me actually in drawing out overwatch or giving the opponent difficult choices. It seems like after doing some casual looks around discord and this forum that people aren't building their lists to trade at all, they also seem to just be trying to load up as many "optimal" units as possible. 

Yea I agree with a lot of that; though imo a lot of optimal units are msu units that feel bad to shoot at. Javelins and proteus speeders are really good at that, contemptors too obviously.

 

1 hour ago, ABrownTuft said:

Recently my mvp has been a single vindicator. It's very good at killing recon marines and if my opponent kills it is not a significant loss.

A laser vindi? Definitely a solid choice for a heavy support slot. A normal one would need to be rather very close to get shots on recons.

 

1 hour ago, ABrownTuft said:

Now I've DDP a Levi before, but typically it's more of a way to get it up field rather than a way to remove my opponent's ability to interact with the beast. Which leads me to drop it out of los, and has seen it be quite successful.

Ya they're a little slow in comparison to the rest of stuff now, but definitely good at controlling the board around them. I haven't quite decided on having mine or a contemptor in the pod for pressure in the midfield.

[ABrownTuft]

@SkimaskMohawk I think HH 2.0 is just running I to the problem AoS ran into with their reactions. Competitive gaming falls into one of two camps. Either optimizating towards non-interaction or towards effecient trading. Obviously I've not seen your friend's list but it sounds like they haven't moved towards either pole. 

It is interesting watching the HH community go through the same growing pains as the AoS community did though. The FOC does give list a lot more structure than the AoS army building has, so I'm curious about what sorts of solutions end up coming out.

[dicebod]

Reactions kinda feel like a halfway-house between I go you go and full alternating activations. It does make me wonder if there would be less uproar if heresy went all the way to alternating reactions at some future point.

[OttoVonAwesome]

Adding drawbacks really does seem the best way to go. Makes me wanna playtest some house rules on it, Return Fire: lose next turns shooting, Overwatch: Snap shots only, Retreat count as moved at start of next turn and so on. Takes them away from being free strategems and turns them into a tactical choice. Also 1 per unit per turn I mean come on why wasn't that always a thing.

[TheNineteenth]

On 9/30/2022 at 4:44 AM, Xenith said:

Personally I think dread reactions are too strong - you can't take them down in one round, so whatever is shooting them will get pasted by return fire - my last game this was a twin gravis las contemptor. I'd like to see dreadnoughts limited to 'defensive' weapons on reaction fire also. It would take them down a notch.

Having just played a 5 round event, I must agree on this point.

I fear Anuj and his team have re-created the 6th/7th ed mess of over-powered Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures with the Dreadnaught unit type and all of the rules it ignores (for Vehicles and other-wound having things).

[Gorgoff]

12 hours ago, dicebod said:

Reactions kinda feel like a halfway-house between I go you go and full alternating activations. It does make me wonder if there would be less uproar if heresy went all the way to alternating reactions at some future point.

I would hate it with a passion. 

The problem is that some people just have problems to adjust to another edition and still play the game as if 2ed is 1ed. This thread is a good example of this. 

Reminds me of a review about X-Wing I read years ago. Someone complained about the "stupid game" for not knowing how your opponent is going to move which would lead to the ships just flying around and only sometimes randomly come into each other sights and shoot each other. 

Same thing with the "I cant do anything against my opponent use their reactions" argument. 

It is all about baiting or even forcing your opponent in doing what you want. 

Bigger games help though. If you have 5 units which you would like to return fire it is a lot harder to decide who do.

[bushman101]

55 minutes ago, Gorgoff said:

Bigger games help though. If you have 5 units which you would like to return fire it is a lot harder to decide who do.

Agreed. More units available means more decsion making. Most of my 2nd ed games have been around 2000 pts, so reactions have felt more like freebies.

 

13 hours ago, dicebod said:

Reactions kinda feel like a halfway-house between I go you go and full alternating activations. It does make me wonder if there would be less uproar if heresy went all the way to alternating reactions at some future point.

Just say it (and not derail the thread), alternating actions vs 'I go, you' doesn't make for more or less strategy. Maybe different strategy,  but not less.

[Chaeron]

5 hours ago, Gorgoff said:

Bigger games help though. If you have 5 units which you would like to return fire it is a lot harder to decide who do.

I think this is pretty important - my limited experience in a small sized game this edition basically meant it was one unit reacting against another unit directly, without having options. I’m looking forward to the potential of larger games for this reason!

[Xenith]

On 10/8/2022 at 4:30 AM, Gorgoff said:

Bigger games help though. If you have 5 units which you would like to return fire it is a lot harder to decide who do.

Absolutely agree. I've said elsewhere that RXn's are very strong, and dominated anything under 3k that I've played. I'd be in favour of the ZM reaction limits scaling with point size. one rxn per phase at 1k, maybe 1 rxn plus warlord from 1001 - 2999, then weapons free at 3000+.

 

On 10/8/2022 at 4:30 AM, Gorgoff said:

Reminds me of a review about X-Wing I read years ago. Someone complained about the "stupid game" for not knowing how your opponent is going to move which would lead to the ships just flying around and only sometimes randomly come into each other sights and shoot each other. 

that's hilarious and tragic. 

[Stitch5000]

15 minutes ago, Xenith said:

Absolutely agree. I've said elsewhere that RXn's are very strong, and dominated anything under 3k that I've played. I'd be in favour of the ZM reaction limits scaling with point size. one rxn per phase at 1k, maybe 1 rxn plus warlord from 1001 - 2999, then weapons free at 3000+.

The rulebook does state t"The ideal range for a game of the Horus Heresy – Age of Darkness is around 2,000-3,000 points, with the rules written for games between forces of 3,000 points."

There are some interesting alternative reactions in the White Dwarf Zone Mortalis rules that could easily be used in place of the Core Reactions in smaller games. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

It's funny that page 277 has that 2000-3000 range, while page 298 says 1750-3500. The latter was the original range from 1st, and was always a little off because of how impactful units can be at low points values with no counters. I thought with the broadly lower points for units, 2nd could actually have 1750 as the low end, but apparently both the rules and players tend to agree that reactions are a bit wild at that threshold. 

It's interesting that they lowered the cap; we know the FoC didn't suddenly get more unwieldy at 3500, especially with more squadrons in the game, so it must be that reactions were more trivialized at that point level and they wanted them to impact the game.

[Dont-Be-Haten]

Another couple games over the weekend. I've had more more conversations with my opponents, bringinf up thr concerns countered here. My opponents/community/meta all have about the same reactions to how reactions work versus how they are percieved once they get more than 4-5 games under their belts. Many of the on paper, think tanks fall into a void and what actually happens in game hasn't warranted what has been expressed here to the degree of swinging games as much as a Master of Signals forcing deepstrike mishaps 50% of the time. When you compare that to interceptor on unit XYZ...the mishaps fundamentally swings games completely one way by forcing deepstrikes outside of where they need to be, delaying doing anything of substance for an additional 1-2 turns. Overwatch can be neutered by having rhinos block the majority of a unit forcing less shots to be allowed to be taken and fewer wound allocation rolls to be had. 

This is not to dismiss anything anyone has already voiced, just more reinforcement that in practice and with experience things aren't as black and white as they let on and there is much more room for a grey area..

Let's also not forget that reactions swing the same way on both sides of the game where you give and take.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Quote

Overwatch can be neutered by having rhinos block the majority of a unit forcing less shots to be allowed to be taken and fewer wound allocation rolls to be had.

I like this idea with jump pack units, though it's debatable if they get to hop models during a charge. Otherwise, this tactic has the risk of undermining a combat if it wasn't going to be one sided to start with. Only a file of models will be available for LoS and wound allocation, as pointed out;, but this can mean either pulling from the leading edge of the charge, or the models maintaining unit coherency. The more coherency models die, the more strung out the charge will be, as you always have to maintain it. If you end up with a conga-line charge with only the initial charger getting in base, and then say another 3 models from pile ins, then they only need to remove those 4 models in base contact to break melee wound allocation and discard the pool. That's usually bad news for a charging unit, unless the plan was to be tied up in the opponents turn all along.

Like blocking los to hamper overwatch isnt a bad play by any means, but you do have to consider how strung out a unit can get to maintain coherency, and how dumb melee allocation can get when you have one or two models in base contact

[MegaVolt87]

Every time I hear complaints about reactions, I ask- "what are you doing to pin to setup your play to mitigate reactions or what units are you baiting reactions with to setup others?" Answer mostly crickets or blank stares. People don't want to use all the tools in the toolbox. 

[TheTrans]

54 minutes ago, MegaVolt87 said:

Every time I hear complaints about reactions, I ask- "what are you doing to pin to setup your play to mitigate reactions or what units are you baiting reactions with to setup others?" Answer mostly crickets or blank stares. People don't want to use all the tools in the toolbox. 

Please enlighten me as to how I can pin a unit to negate Interceptor? Other than pinning it in a reaction? 

[Dont-Be-Haten]

32 minutes ago, TheTrans said:

Please enlighten me as to how I can pin a unit to negate Interceptor? Other than pinning it in a reaction? 

Telepathic Fugue from librarian?

[Noserenda]

Unless you lather on the pinning its still far from reliable against typically high LD marines though, especially as it typically involves shooting the target, which is inviting the very reaction it might be looking to stop?

Except Telepathy psykers ofc, as previously mentioned i would like everyone to hinge all plans on psykers for reasons :P 

[Marshal Mittens]

Psykers, if for denying reactions alone, seem very strong in 2.0.