Warhammer 40K Tabletop XXXII: I Got 99 Guardsmen and Morale Killed One.

[Forum Explorer]

Spoiler

Show

Imperial Fists, Battalion Detachment (+3 CPs)
(W) Captain; Combi-Plasma, Power Sword - 93 Points Storm of Fire
Lieutenant with Jump Pack; Master-Crafted Boltgun [The Primarch's Wrath] - 81 Points

Scouts (x5); Sniper Rifles - 75 Points
Scouts (x5); Sniper Rifles - 75 Points
Scouts (x5); Sniper Rifles - 75 Points
Scouts (x5); Sniper Rifles - 75 Points

Devastators (x5); x4 Heavy Bolters, Storm Bolter + Armorium Cherub - 112 Points
Hellblasters (x5); Plasma Incinerators - 165 Points

Grey Knights, Battalion Detachment (+3 CPs)
Grand Master Voldus - 190 Points Purge Soul, Vortex, Sanctuary
Brother-Captain; Falchions, Storm Bolter - 152 Points Sanctuary

Strike Squad (x5); Falchions, x1 Hammer, x4 Storm Bolters, Psilencer - 120 Points Astral Aim
Strike Squad (x5); Falchions, x1 Hammer, x4 Storm Bolters, Psilencer - 120 Points Astral Aim
Strike Squad (x5); Falchions, x4 Storm Bolters, Psilencer - 107 Points Gate
Strike Squad (x5); Falchions, x4 Storm Bolters, Psilencer - 107 Points Gate

Stormraven Gunship - 274 Points
Twin Assault Cannon, Twin Heavy Bolter, Stormstrike Missile Launchers (x2), Hurricane Bolters (x2)

Stormtalon Gunship; Twin Assault Cannon, Skyhammer Missile Launcher - 179 Points

Total: 2000 Points

He had six (seven? eight? I didn't count, and he had enough for two Battalions, but less than he would need to run three, because he told me) Infantry Squads, three Commissars, three Officers.
MTs; 3 Officers, 3 Command Squads and two Valkyries
Primaris Psykers
9 Mortars?
Codex only came out two days ago and I didn't buy it (yet). Can't give you a reasonably exact list.

Things went swimmingly for me, right from Turn 1, as I drew Kingslayer and Assassinate, and a SecObX that I was already on. Drop, drop, drop.
Straight off the bat, Voldus goes for a Purge Soul on a Commissar. "Characters can't be targeted." ...Yeah, in the Shooting phase. Voldus then throws a Vortex o' Doom at the nearest Infantry unit - because them's the rules - fortunately, Vortex hits all units within 3", which includes the Characters in, around and behind the unit. Magic dice rolls kill off the first Commissar, another Commissar, and an Officer. My Strike Knights in the middle of the board put Astral Aim on my Stormraven.

My Scouts fire their Rifles at my opponent's Warlord with the Relic that does the thing with the Command Points. As my Lieutenant has used his Jump Pack to SUA on top of my Scouts, two of my units get rr1s To Wound, and I roll just enough 6s to make it hurt, and, Imperial Fists' Snipers are really good at killing Characters, because Characters are single models and will always have Cover Saves...Unless you play Imperial Fists and have a hate-boner for Characters. That's Warlord. Kingslayer and D3 for Assassinate please, and I still haven't used a Command Point...

Bolter Drill on the Devastators.
Psybolt Ammo on the Astral Aim'd Stormraven.

My Shooting phase, my Strike Knights clean out his front rank of Infantry. My Stormraven (now named Georgius IV) can hit what it can't see. Drop those Mortars down a peg and throw some Missiles into the Valkyries for good measure. With the Commissars taken out, things look bleak as my opponent fails Morale tests and loses even more dudes.

His Turn 1, I've left him an incredibly bad board state (I have board control with four units of Scouts). He drops his Volley Gun Command Squad down in the only place he can. Surprising no-one, I use Auspex Scan on the Devastators and pop the fat baby. As Auspex Scan counts as being the Shooting phase, Storm of Fire procs as welll and his Volley Gun squad drops like a rock. With barely any Orders to fall on, and more than half his Infantry dead on Turn 1, I can tell he doesn't do nearly enough damage as he'd hoped.

My Turn 2, goes about the same as the first. I bait out his Denies and then use Astral Aim on my Stormraven, which then proceeds to strafe what it can't see - again.

My opponent concedes at the end of his Turn 2. I have 2D3+5 (?) VPs by that point. He has IIRC, 3 or 4.

"Grey Knights are broken."
Whoa. Hold up. Guard don't get to say that. The reason I won is because he net-listed like a scrub. Now, he did bring Valkyries, and that's a fun twist. But he still had the same core concept. Put a [poop]-ton of models on the board and hope your opponent didn't bring enough bullets. I designed my list to kill Characters, and I designed my list to kill hordes. If he had brought more than like,
two Leman Russes, I would have lost - and I did tell him so. The fact is, I knew what my opponent would have before he even put it on the table, because that's the kind of meta I'm in. That's why I won. Not because I have a broken list, but because my opponents are bad.

"What site did you get your list from?"
'What s-?' Holy ****. No.

Spoiler: You'll Never Guess

Show

He played Jetbikes and Wraithknights in 7th Ed., and would also complain when his opponents would bring AP3> Ignores Cover and somehow win.

Ha! Good job taking that guy down. It's always nice to see someone beat an obvious netlister.

Think I'm gonna start focusing on 40k more coming up. My AoS army is pretty much where I want it aside from a few models to finish and my Necrons aren't cutting it.

Planning on starting something new. Guard are strong for sure, but I feel like my list is really one note, honestly I'm not sure Alpha Striking armies can keep attention for very long. And yes I know that's pretty much the game right now, but I would prefer to have an army that can have board presence and play the long game more tactically. Preferably something that isn't either "all in Alpha Strike" or "castle up with Artillery".

Death Guard seem to fit that with their new Codex and Mortarion, though I'm not a huge fan of gross models (though it could be a fun conversion army). AdMech seem as though they could be really strong at that type of game, but I've not read into them too much as of yet.

What do you guys think? Is there room in the meta for playing more tactically or is it just looking at an uphill struggle to compete?

Depends on your local meta. Is it more like Cheesegear's or Voidhawks?

[Requizen]

Depends on your local meta. Is it more like Cheesegear's or Voidhawks?

Very competitive, and I'm the type that enjoys going to tournaments as well.

Hoping to get some feedback from some really strong players in my area as well. I'd rather do something new than play just my Guard list, but we'll see what's up.

[JNAProductions]

Question: Do y'all feel it's too easy to retreat from Close Combat, and, separately, that too many units ignore penalties for falling back?

[Voidhawk]

Question: Do y'all feel it's too easy to retreat from Close Combat, and, separately, that too many units ignore penalties for falling back?

Probably yes to the first, and definitely yes to the last. Saying "shooty units getting charged is bad", and then immediately taking away all penalties from every unit that matters is ridiculous.

The real issue though is that the charger gets to do exactly nothing when fallen-back from. It used to be you at least got to consolidate (or opposed initiative to sweeping-advance), but these days the unit just stands around with its pants around its ankles waiting to be shot.

[JNAProductions]

Probably yes to the first, and definitely yes to the last. Saying "shooty units getting charged is bad", and then immediately taking away all penalties from every unit that matters is ridiculous.

The real issue though is that the charger gets to do exactly nothing when fallen-back from. It used to be you at least got to consolidate (or opposed initiative to sweeping-advance), but these days the unit just stands around with its pants around its ankles waiting to be shot.

So what would your solution be?

Currently on Dakka Dakka, which brought this up here, a proposed solution is d3 mortal wounds per 5 models in the fleeing unit. I added the addendum "Up to the max attacks of the units in combat with the fleeing unit" to cap it off, but still allow brutal CC units (such as Wulfen, with 3 attacks apiece) to properly carve up people.

[lord_khaine]

And another question in the same vein i have been thinking about. Does anyone think that the differences between the different weapon types are getting eroded? It seems like more and more thinks are getting the ability to ignore those penalties.

[LeSwordfish]

Perhaps something similar to how Sweeping advance used to work - roll a D6 and add your Movement value, and you can't leave unless you win.

[JNAProductions]

Perhaps something similar to how Sweeping advance used to work - roll a D6 and add your Movement value, and you can't leave unless you win.

Eh... It does mean that a mostly whole Rhino (move 12") can lock in anything with a 7" or less move indefinitely.

[LansXero]

Eh... It does mean that a mostly whole Rhino (move 12") can lock in anything with a 7" or less move indefinitely.

Then just dont give that rule to vehicles. Or halve their movement value for the purposes of the check (like how DE weapons wound vehicles and non-vehicles differently)

[JNAProductions]

Then just dont give that rule to vehicles. Or halve their movement value for the purposes of the check (like how DE weapons wound vehicles and non-vehicles differently)

Replace Rhino with Assault Marines, then. Admittedly, easier to kill your way out of that.

[Yaktan]

Are first-turn charges not good enough for you? You want to go back to meele units eliminating any unit they touch?

I find that the new way of doing things makes shooty vs close combat armies much more interactive--instead of a binary did I kill them before they got to me, there is flow where they charge in and attack, then I get to retreat and attack back, and so forth.

[JNAProductions]

Are first-turn charges not good enough for you? You want to go back to meele units eliminating any unit they touch?

I find that the new way of doing things makes shooty vs close combat armies much more interactive--instead of a binary did I kill them before they got to me, there is flow where they charge in and attack, then I get to retreat and attack back, and so forth.

Okay, so let's say I play a melee heavy army. Say... Nurgle Daemons. I have shooting on my Plague Drones and I have a couple of Smites.

I get close with the Drones, fire off a few Death's Heads, do a few wounds, probably have them mostly saved, and charge in. I don't take any damage to Overwatch, since Plague Drones are tough, but you decide to retreat on your turn.

If it's a 5-9 man squad, you take d3 wounds. No saves.

If it's a 10-14 man squad, you take 2d3, max 4 (the number of attacks possessed by the Drones). No saves.

If you're a 15+ man squad, you're almost certainly taking 4 (3d3, max 4) and if you're a 20+ man squad, you WILL take 4 mortal wounds.

Against Tactical Marines? I get anywhere from 13-52 points from a 132 point (minimum) unit.

Against Infantry squads of Guardsmen? I get 8-16 points back.

Conscripts? In a 30 man blob? I get 12 points.

Now, Terminators and their ilk are worth more points. They are, however, good in close combat too.

It's definitely harsher than GW's current plan, but GW's current plan feths over melee armies pretty royally.

[LansXero]

That reminds me: Can you fall back as an Act of Faith? And if you do, can you shoot? (I'm guessing you can fall back, then move on your turn again, but can't shoot.)

[Forum Explorer]

So what would your solution be?

Currently on Dakka Dakka, which brought this up here, a proposed solution is d3 mortal wounds per 5 models in the fleeing unit. I added the addendum "Up to the max attacks of the units in combat with the fleeing unit" to cap it off, but still allow brutal CC units (such as Wulfen, with 3 attacks apiece) to properly carve up people.

I'd go with the models in base to base contact get to make 1 attack against the disengaging models. Or maybe they get their full attacks. But only the models in base to base.

[JNAProductions]

That reminds me: Can you fall back as an Act of Faith? And if you do, can you shoot? (I'm guessing you can fall back, then move on your turn again, but can't shoot.)

You can fall back with the Act of Faith that lets you move, I THINK.

You can't then shoot later that turn, though.

[LansXero]

I'd go with the models in base to base contact get to make 1 attack against the disengaging models. Or maybe they get their full attacks. But only the models in base to base.

Meleewatch? When you disengage, the enemy unit makes all of its attacks, but it hits on 6s? xD

[JNAProductions]

Meleewatch? When you disengage, the enemy unit makes all of its attacks, but it hits on 6s? xD

I'd also be okay with this, though I feel it deserves to be a LITTLE stronger. After all, melee can only reliably be achieved turn 2 (turn 1 is POSSIBLE, but for most units, not likely) and that's only with some of your army. A more shooty list can be at 100% effectiveness from turn 1.

[Forum Explorer]

Meleewatch? When you disengage, the enemy unit makes all of its attacks, but it hits on 6s? xD

That's actually a pretty good idea.

[Drasius]

"What site did you get your list from?"
'What s-?' Holy ****. No.

Wait a minute, wait a minute - after I read that again in another quote chain, I'm left wondering if you asked him (as I originally thought) or if he asked you (which would be freakin' rediculous, but what I'm suddenly getting the feeling was the case)?

[Blackhawk748]

You can fall back with the Act of Faith that lets you move, I THINK.

You can't then shoot later that turn, though.

You could however use your AoF to shoot anyway, cuz its awesome like that.

[LansXero]

You could however use your AoF to shoot anyway, cuz its awesome like that.

Aren't Acts of Faith at the start of the turn only? O_O. Because a single unit can only ever be affected by 1 Act of Faith each round, correct?

[Voidhawk]

Wait a minute, wait a minute - after I read that again in another quote chain, I'm left wondering if you asked him (as I originally thought) or if he asked you (which would be freakin' rediculous, but what I'm suddenly getting the feeling was the case)?

My reading:
Butthurt guy - "How could you beat my netlist!? My god, his google-fu must be stronger than mine! I must learn your secrets!"

[Blackhawk748]

Aren't Acts of Faith at the start of the turn only? O_O. Because a single unit can only ever be affected by 1 Act of Faith each round, correct?

Whoop, that is at the beginning of the turn, my bad.

[Voidhawk]

There is no quick-fix that doesn't involve rewriting most of the Assault-phase rules. 8th ed is busted. But hey, since this is all wish-listing that will never see play anyway, lets just give that a try.

First things first, we need somewhere to begin:

Spoiler: Design Principles

Show

40k Design Principles: (ie, what GW doesn't have)
0. - 40k is foremost a cinematic game. The things that these rules enable/encourage should be fun and exciting. If they aren't, change them.
0.1 - To encourage cinematic things, the cinematic stuff must be better than the non-cinematic stuff.
0.2 - Risk is exciting. But risk is also how to lose. Therefore if you want a player to take a risk, it must have a better reward than the non-risky options.
0.3 - There is a difference between Risk and Chance. No game/strategy should rest on a single die roll. No reward should give the game away.
0.4 - Some variance is fun and exciting. Too much variance may occasionally be exciting, but is never fun. Rolling a single die has lots of variance, rolling a pool has some, choosing has none.
0.5 - Making an interesting decision is also fun. A decision is only interesting if the more than one of the choices are worthwhile.

1. - Restrictions breed creativity. Nothing should be the single solution to every situation/unit.
1.2 - There must be ways to solve certain situations that are better/worse than others.
1.1 - The better something is at certain situations, the worse it must be at all other situations. No removal of interesting weaknesses.
1.2 - If a unit is generically OK at everything, it can't also be great at a single thing.
1.3 - If a unit is meant to be good at a thing, make sure other units aren't just always better than it
1.4 - "Just kill everything" should not be a route to victory. At the end of the game both players should have models on the table.

2. - The models/terrain are fixed at their current size. Everyone already owns them and wants to use them.
2.1 - 6'x4' is the maximum size of board. You can't go bigger without making it impossible to move the units in the middle.
2.2 - Any meddling in this direction just ends up as re-inventing Epic anyway.

Assault Phase Design Principles:
0. - A game between a shooty and a stabby army should not be decided purely on if the shooty one managed to kill enough stabby-dudes before they make contact.
0.1 - There must be interesting decisions for an assault army to make before charging.
0.2 - There must be interesting decisions for a shooty army to make after it gets charged.
0.3 - Or, there must be no full-shooty or full-stabby lists that work. With least a little balance in an army being best. (See Kroot for Tau, or Biovores for 'nids.)

1. - A unit's base Threat value is defined by (Ease of use) x (Power). Ranged Threat is: (Move+Weapon Range) x (Shooting Power). Assault Threat is: (Move+Charge Range) x (Assault Power).
1.1 - If guns have a higher range than most move+charge values, then dedicated assault units must have either high power, low cost, or useful effects beyond damage. Generally a mix of all three.

Right, now we have some guidelines we can start assembling a ruleset. These principles will be very important later on when we test the rules, as when something goes wrong we can look at whether a rule is not fulfilling a principle, or if a principle is in itself flawed and we need to rethink our starting presumptions. Anyone have stuff to add to this before I try and turn it into a brand new Assault phase?

[JNAProductions]

Um... You're better off designing your own game than trying to fix the mess that is 40k?

But looks good!

[Cheesegear]

What do you guys think? Is there room in the meta for playing more tactically or is it just looking at an uphill struggle to compete?

If you're playing against some of the best players in the country like I think you do...Probably not.
I don't think we're going to get a real game out of 40K until December. There aren't enough Codecies in the game, yet, and until we see how the whole picture turns out (and after Space Marines gets a rewrite to 'fix the problem' of them not winning), and then there's Chapter Approved which will - hopefully - fudge with some points costs and alter things from the Codecies.

My best advice is probably 'Wait 'til December' if you're thinking about coming back to 40K but not really sure. A competitive player like us who's already on the ropes, will totally see the fundamental brokenness of the game.

Question: Do y'all feel it's too easy to retreat from Close Combat, and, separately, that too many units ignore penalties for falling back?

I can count the number of 'ignore penalties' units on one hand. Falling Back from Melee is the only defense some armies have from it, and it gets worse when the unit that is currently beating your head in, also carries Pistols. You have to be able to Fall Back without consequences. Or, if you play a shooty army vs. World Eaters, you lose. If you're concerned about units Falling Back from you, it means that your unit isn't good enough in Melee, and you need to step up your game, or not Melee at all.

One of the older tactics used to be 'tarpit'. It was lazy, and unFun for your opponent. Here's 20+ models representing <150 Points to tie up your model/unit for the rest of the game. Tarpits are dead. They're not a thing unless you have an ability that prevents your opponent from Falling Back.

The issue currently surrounding the game is not that 'too many' units ignore the penalties for Falling Back, it's that some units don't need to Fall Back at all. Because this is an Objective-based game (except when it isn't), board position is really important. Whether you're trying to turtle up, or out maneuver your opponent, or in Cover, etc., there are certain positions on the board where you want to be (not least because it also screws up your opponent's SUA), and the ability to shoot Rapid Fire and Assault weapons while in Melee, lets you keep your board position, and have full effectiveness.

Ability to Fall Back whenever you want, is not a problem (it's almost one of the only things making Tau and certain Eldar playable). The problem is not Falling Back with no penalties.

[Yaktan]

Speaking of not falling back, here is a little list I came up with:

I'm not stuck in with you, you're stuck in with me!

Battalion (Catachan):
Company Commander x2
Infantry Squad w/ power sword x4
Scout Sentinal w/ Heavy Flamer x3
Heavy Weapons Squad w/ mortars x3
Commissar

Super-Heavy Support Detachment (Valhallan or Catachan)
Banesword w/ 2 Bolter Sponsons x3

Should come in to about 2000 points. The infantry are S4 in close combat and the baneswords can shoot just fine along with running people over in close combat.

[Cheesegear]

Speaking of not falling back, here is a little list I came up with...

Tallarn Warlord Trait; Fall Back, Order the unit to Fall Back and shoot, Charge again.
Valhallan Order; Unit can fire into Melee.
Vostroyan Order; Unit can fire while in Melee.

The +1 Strength on Catachans, is asking Guardsmen to do, what Guardsmen can't do. If you want to Melee, you can't go past Fix Bayonets!, which is way better than Catachan's +1 Strength.

[Ionbound]

So right now, is there any way to make fliers at least useful? Right now after the regiment doctrine release, and fliers' inability to actually take regiment doctrine which in turn makes Leman Russ Punishers do a better job of being punisher platforms than the Vulture, there's just no point in taking anything other than tanks and artillery as heavy support.

[Cheesegear]

So right now, is there any way to make fliers at least useful?

Lots of Fliers are useful. Hard to Hit and Supersonic are generally very good.
Sounds like you only mean Valkyries. In which case...Not if you're taking more than one. Their job is to rush SWTs or MTs or Command Squads up the board without SUA (because your opponent hates you and has board control). Since you can have two 5-mans (or 6-mans, but you lose Character 'slots') in one Valkyrie, why do you even need more than one? Valkyries are Flying Transports, and not even very good ones.