Vs. Imperial Knights v7.0

[gigasnail]

BAO has FAQ'd stomp to not being able to hit outside of models engaged in the combat. So LVO/NOVA/BAO style and you're good.

Last time I tangled some gargs up with an IK he straight up killed 15 gargs with stomp and would have killed more, but it was a brood of 15. He did roll well though. 10-15 hits would not be an atypical result from 3 blasts.

[Squire]

Aug 22, 2014 17:20:01 GMT Jabberwocky said:

It won't be faqed as it's that way by design. The diagram even shows stomping a unit well out of normal combat engagement range (though how those models haven't piled in much closer is anybody's guess).

On a 6 it'll remove models from play, even zoeys or Tyrants. On a 2-5 it's just S6 AP4 hits so not that scary.

I think the best bet is try and get threats on 3+ facings to force it to commit somewhere rather than give it free reign to roflstomp through your midfield.

I'll just go and stand on that zoanthrope over there then rejoin the combat I'm meant to be fighting

Aug 22, 2014 23:58:55 GMT gigasnail said:

BAO has FAQ'd stomp to not being able to hit outside of models engaged in the combat. So LVO/NOVA/BAO style and you're good.

Last time I tangled some gargs up with an IK he straight up killed 15 gargs with stomp and would have killed more, but it was a brood of 15. He did roll well though. 10-15 hits would not be an atypical result from 3 blasts.

I like the idea of TO's tinkering with the rules. It would be great to see the big tournament organisers get together and try to make a standardised rule set for balanced play, or a couple of systems with one classic set for single FOC, no allies, FW, dataslates and another one with more freedom to build how you like

Stomp seems like it could be brutal but they'll get one blast as often as three. I'm getting the impression tarpitting IKs with tons of gaunts is something I'll have to experience first hand a couple of times to get a real impression of how effective/viable it's going to be

[gigasnail]

the BAO/NOVA/LVO rules is pretty much exactly that. there are small differences in the rules for the events, but they're based on a commonly agreed upon framework.

to tarpit an IK, use a medium-large brood, and have another standing by. you can force them to assault you or have their movement limited by just surrounding them but staying 1" away.

[Jabberwocky]

If you can only stomp models engaged in combat, it's makes the whole 'ker-flip' result a bit pointless. When is a vehicle going to be engaged in combat with you that you haven't already killed with your 3 strength D hits? It's also designed to send vehicle wrecks flying into other units, outside of the combat.

I can understand the change to limit the power of the thing but then it's really an issue of Comp rather than clearing up rules.

[gigasnail]

call it what you will. if it's comp, it's comp i can get behind. getting potential instant death/instant explodes results against nearby units because you stepped on a guardsman is stupid. this is something along with gravguns and the entire concept of a 2+ rerollable save that ignores whole portions of the game rules and really doesn't belong in regular 40k.

[Jabberwocky]

Perfectly understandable.

To me though, the 2+/2+ is no worse than AV being untouchable by a lot of weapons.

I guess being on the receiving end of all these things and not being able to do them ourselves gives us a bit of a negative view.

Fluff wise, I can totally see a HQ deflecting thousands of bullets as he carves through the battlefield until he finally breaks (fails fortune) and takes a lucky potshot to the back of the head or gets stomped by an MC.

I can also see a Gargantuan trying to squish those pesky little guys who keep trying to stick melta bombs onto his feet and flailing around crushing everything around.

If stomp just had scatter instead of perfect placement it would probably be fine, especially if you could then crush your own units.

[gigasnail]

fluff =/= tabletop rules

[Jabberwocky]

Without fluff though we may as well just have different colour blocks moving around the table.

[Squire]

Maybe stomp would be better if the first one goes where you want, the second rolls a scatter and lands touching the first, the third scatters and lands touching the second. Any hit can go where the knight player wants but has to be touching the previous blast template. Definitely a nerf on the current method but I think there has to be. The idea of being locked in combat but doing damage to units removed from that combat breaks a fundamental game mechanic. With scatter you could still damage other units but there's a random element and you might hit your own units if you aren't careful

[Silegy]

Aug 23, 2014 8:55:49 GMT Jabberwocky said:

Without fluff though we may as well just have different colour blocks moving around the table.

I wrote a pretty long, whiny rant, but I will just ask you - where do you see our fluff reflecting into our rules?

[Jabberwocky]

Fluff inspires almost every single rule.

Every weapon is based on fluff, every unit type, every psychic power.

They may not be very well executed (the range and effect of synapse/shadow in the Warp compared to how it is described in the fluff for example) but literally every unique rule and weapon has it's background in our fluff.

If we didn't have our fluff, we would just have bolt pistols, heavy bolters, heavy flamers, other generic, established guns etc.

It's because of fluff we have stuff like impaler cannons, acid spray, Tervigons, Catalyst, Psychic Scream, Pheromone Trails etc.

I'm not saying fluff is an excuse for badly written rules but you cannot disregard it and still expect unique and imaginative rules. The game is after all supposed to allow you to recreate a fantasy world in a fictional universe.

The rules may play out somewhat mathematically but that is a means to an end, NOT the reason to play the game.

[gigasnail]

Just model a beefed up trygon on the appropriate base if it offends your inner fluff bunny. There are tons of excellent conversions sitting around going to waste. Put them to good tabletop use.

[Silegy]

Aug 25, 2014 9:09:17 GMT Jabberwocky said:

Fluff inspires almost every single rule.

Every weapon is based on fluff, every unit type, every psychic power.

They may not be very well executed (the range and effect of synapse/shadow in the Warp compared to how it is described in the fluff for example) but literally every unique rule and weapon has it's background in our fluff.

If we didn't have our fluff, we would just have bolt pistols, heavy bolters, heavy flamers, other generic, established guns etc.

It's because of fluff we have stuff like impaler cannons, acid spray, Tervigons, Catalyst, Psychic Scream, Pheromone Trails etc.

I'm not saying fluff is an excuse for badly written rules but you cannot disregard it and still expect unique and imaginative rules. The game is after all supposed to allow you to recreate a fantasy world in a fictional universe.

The rules may play out somewhat mathematically but that is a means to an end, NOT the reason to play the game.

I most certainly do agree with you on this. But I am more interested in the detail, whereas you speak more in general. Sure, we have Deathspitters because Nids have Deathspitters while Marines have Bolters because they use Bolters.
The thing is in specific rules and specific statlines. "Hey! It spawns troops! That has to be Tervigon!" "Hey, this is some very tough Marine! Has to be Plague Marine!" "Hey, this list has a lot of Marines on bikes! Gotta be Scars!" "Huh, Raptors? I see Night Lords!" "Man, this is so fun and random! Gotta be Orks!".
These are few examples of some stuff you would call somewhat unique. And I feel like the rest of the game goes a little bit like 5 generic statlines for creatures, 5 for weapons and 5 for guns.

I am not sure if the picture I tried to set will be understood the way I meant it, but I will hope so

[Jabberwocky]

This kind of needs it's own thread but I'll post anyway for now.

Just a couple of examples of fluff reflected in rules:

Regeneration. This one is pretty obvious.

Spore Cloud - the old version - choking gas causing dangerous terrain tests and granting cover.

Acid Maw on Pyrovores - a single big chomp that bypasses armour due to the acid. Not quite a melta bomb but not limited to vehicles/MCs.

Ymgarl Factor - old and new versions both represented models mutating as they engaged enemies to best fight them.

Blinding Venom - something done quite well in this codex. Not super killy but actually blinds enemies now.



Obviously a lot of rules are going to be rehashes of similar rules but they kind of need to be to keep in line with core mechanics and to make game play smoother. Overall I'd say our codex (and probably most but I can't speak for them) has enough unique entries to represent the majority of our fluff. They aren't all done great (mostly due to points costs) but they do let you 'forge the narrative'.

What I love about nids though is that it's easy to rework and build your own fluff. For instance my Electroshock Hiveguard with AG are Electrovores - spitting balls of electrically charged energy and modelled as such, since I don't model guns in my army.

[gigasnail]

fluff not reflected in our rules: the state of our codex in general.