DISQUS

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Jwolf, it is only my humble opinion, but I think you are taking a very old concept in 40k, and rewording it without r3ealizing it.

I don't know what meme you are trying to start with this 'hot and cold' terminology, but it seems like all you are asking is which armies are more forgiving than others.

The obvious answer would be the army with better defense is always the more forgiving, which turns out to be Marines and Chaos. Necrons used to be there, but they have basically been stripped of their defenses in 5th edition.

You only need to roll average with more forgiving armies, cold armies, like marines, because if you make mistakes, your toughness and armor saves can soften some of the punch.

Other armies, like Tau and Dark Eldar, require you to roll better than normal to get even results on par with marines, because if you move a unit in teh wrong spot during your movement phase, there is no saving them later on. They will get shot, and they will die.

So you ask, how can you make a less forgiving army, more forgiving? Well, for me that is defeatist attitude. I would rather answer, how do you make a more forgiving army, less forgiving? The outcome is the exact same, but your attitude in the game is vastly different, which in the end will guide your decision making abilities better.

Take Dark Eldar for example.. How did I come in first in my preliminary for the 'Ard Boyz over two marine players and a double lash plague chaos list with triple massacres? By negating my opponents more forgiving aspects of their armies.

In 5th edition, the game is all about troop choices. Troops hold objectives, and can do so even with a single model left. How can Dark Eldar capatilize on this? Do what I did... Take tons of Warriors! I took 80 Warriors on foot to negate my less forgiving armor saves, and negate my opponents melta spam. You will not eat through 80 warriors in 6 turns when they are dug in terrain, firing 24 Lance like weapons everywhere.

Speaking of Lances, the very core of making your army more forgiving is loading up on as many dark lances as possible. Dark Eldar lances are only 10 points each. Eldar's are 30, and typically lascannons are 20 - 35 in imperial armies. Since Dark Eldar units can carry two Dark Lances, and even 2 Blasters, you have 4 Lance weapons for the cost of one lascannon, and one bright lance. This gives you the ability to miss more, because you will then hit more.

So, how does an army with 41 anti tank weapons (mine) do against infantry? Disintegrators of course! 9 of them. Ravagers just decimate anything they fire on. Plague marines are just eaten for breakfast in the face of Disintegrators.

What about cover saves? Horrorfexes. For 5 points, I was pinning my marine opponent's units with, on average, a -5 leadership test. If I couldn't kill the unit due to cover saves, I just pinned them, and dealt with them later.

So how do you deal with your raiders getting blown up? By saturating the battle field with identical raiders! I ran 5 raiders, which doesn't seem like much, but bear with me here....

First my opponent has to guess wildly which raiders carry my Archon, my Dracon, my two Wych units and my Warrior unit.

Second, when firing anti tank weapons at my raiders, my ravagers were left alone to counter rape whatever they deemed necessary to rape.

Third, being the lowest priority, my 80 warriors just return massive anti meq fire every round until everything on wheels/tracks was blown up, immobilized, or missing its main weapon.

So by having a cascading army set up, whatever my opponent decided to concentrate on allowed the rest of my force to fight unmolested.

This goes back to redundancy. By having all my units basically have the same objectives in mind as each other, losing a unit will not hamper my army in the slightest as another unit can pick up the slack.

In every game, my opponents spent 5 turns dealing with my ravagers and raiders. It wasn't until the end of turn 5 when they realized i have a swarm of warriors all over the board taking objectives, getting into deployment zones, and generally winning me the games.

And in this current meta game, horde armies are going to be on top. All the meltas in the world won't help you out. And lucky for me, Dark Eldar is GW's shining example of the perfect codex. It is highly unforgiving, it is a cold army, but when balanced right by a good player, it is nigh unstoppable. I can out horde many horde builds with ease without sacrificing ANY anti tank/meq ability.

I hope you keep giving DE a try Jwolf. It took me many years until I got the nuances of the army down pat. For DE, its all about the movement phase :)

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

"First my opponent has to guess wildly which raiders carry my Archon, my Dracon, my two Wych units and my Warrior unit. "

Just a minor point...but if you're opponent had to "guess wildly" then you cheated without realising it. You HAVE to declare which transport is carrying which unit during deployment and if you loaded them into the raider after deployment, your opponent should know what carries what. It's in the basic rules and thus counters your saturation idea because a smart opponent will just pick off the Raider that they need to.

crunchyjuice · 4 months ago

yeah i thought this was a rule too but i guess it is disputed. technically it isnt really fair because you theoretically could switch units within their transports if they hadnt bailed yet. in the rule book, it says something like "for friendly games, the player should tell his opponent which units are in what transport etc"
apparently a lot of people play angry games

khanaris · 4 months ago

If you are following WYSIWYG, you should technically be putting representative models on the Raiders. Same thing with Trukks and Battlewagons. Even in a tournament setting with hidden lists, you shouldn't be forcing your opponent to guess if the vehicle is completely open-topped and WYSIWYG is in effect..

BuFFo · 4 months ago

I know I am going to sound rude here, but you are another case of a person who is misreading a rule, and then trying to pass it off like its the law.

No, reread the transport embarking rule. What you said is not true.

"... Making a note, or otherwise marking..."

I make a note on paper. I am not forced to put a model on the transport.

There is no rule in the game anywhere that forces me, in any capacity, to tell my opponent what unit is in what transport.

A lot of players play the game off of assumptions because they just aren't bothered to read the rules, and what other people are doing MUST be right, right?

I know I come off as rude, dickish and egotistical online, but I really am not. Label me a dick for not telling my opponent what is in my transport. Guess what? All my opponents here follow the rules and do the same thing. I make no bones about letting people know I am playing in the 'Ard Boyz, and if they don't know the rules as well as I do, you are already playing the match with a bunch of marks against you.

Can I have hugs please???????

- edit -

You are funny :) Just because my raiders are open topped doesn't mean you can see whats inside lol!!!

khanaris · 4 months ago

It wasn't a joke. If your opponents are not playing Orks or Dark Eldar, they don't have to tell you what is in the tank unless you are playing with open lists. Their vehicles look the same whether or not they are loaded. But if the tank actually looks like it is empty, and it isn't empty, you are not playing WYSIWYG. It isn't as straightforward as with wargear, but the idea is the same and you have far less excuse not to do it. 40k is not chess. The game is only as abstract as it needs to be. No one expects you to fit all of your models in a Trukk or Raider because the bases are too big. But that does not explain how you are somehow hiding the entire unit from view when it is riding around on the sides. You are exploiting a weak area in the rules to gain an additional advantage. That doesn't make you a dick, but it diminishes any victory you achieve.

When you embark in a vehicle, you mark that the unit is embarked. There is nothing in the rules to suggest that this marking should be opaque to your opponent.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Yes, when I embark into my raider, 1) My opponent obviously SEES what went in, so there is nothing stopping him from writing that down, and 2) as per the rules, I write on apiece of paper what is in the Raider.

I followed the rules, so whats the problem?

- edit -

Deminshes any victory I want to achieve? Hardly. This is 'Ard Boyz, and I already won a 60 dollar prize, next is a 2500 army, and after that gobs of prizes to fit on an airplane.

I don't see how following the rules diminishes my victories any :)

khanaris · 4 months ago

You are not really following the rules for WYSIWYG, though. To take this one step further, there is nothing in the rules that explicitly prevents you from modeling a bunch of Incubi on the sides of a Raider that is carrying Warriors. Or Warriors on a Raider that is carrying Wyches. Then you are even more likely to surprise and confuse your opponent.

That is more or less what you are doing. You are trying to mislead your opponent using an abstraction in the rules that doesn't make sense in terms of what the rules are supposed to represent. There is only justification for the shell game where the model itself suggests that it should be possible. And even then, your opponent should be able to look at your list in an open tournament and identify which unit is which. If they can't you are going to have to justify yourself to the tournament judge, and I have no idea how they will rule it in the upper levels.

khanaris · 4 months ago

Misleading your opponent is also a part of cheating. 40k is not war. 40k is a game. That means that there is a time and place for deception, and a time and place for sportsmanship.

Ssyrie · 4 months ago

Misleading your opponent is a part of war, deal with it. And looking at your opponents army list may tell you what type of vehicle his leader is in, but not which one. For example, if you know his Space Marine Commander is in a rhino and there are 6 rhinos on the table, how do you know which one he's in until he gets out? You don't.

Now what I do is number each transport with a different number, clearly visible on the model. I then use a token with the same number as the transport and put it face down next to the squad that is inside it. Then I place one of the passengers on top of the token to make it more obvious if I have to handle the token for any reason. So unless my opponent is completely distracted and not paying attention there is no way to "shell game" my squads from one transport to another.

Joseph · 4 months ago

My transports are all named, and listed with the units they are dedicated to. Albeit my labels are written in Greek, while the Army list uses the English translation...if you've ever taken math and studied any Greek mythology you should be able to puzzle out what name is what transport.

ACee · 4 months ago

After all this debate on what you can, should or can't tell about your transports I went out and grabbed my book to read the exact language. And I doth quote:

Some players prefer full disclosure (which is the norm in tournaments, for example)...

My understanding is that you must point out which squad and/or independant character is in which vehicle when deployed in a tournament setting unless otherwise specified by the tournament.

Ssyrie · 4 months ago

Misleading your opponent is not the same thing as cheating. Neither is deception. They are both perfectly valid strategies. Misdirection and deception are a part of any strategy game, even games like chess. It's all about making your opponent think you're doing one thing, when you are actually doing something else.

Also, Warhammer 40K is a WAR GAME. Which means that you have to be able to deal with not only the rules of the game, but the strategies of your opponent. That's why some unit abilities are secretly noted so that your opponent doesn't know where to look out for it. Do marine bike scouts have to reveal which piece of area terrain they booby-trapped with cluster mines? Not until someone steps into it. Does an inquisitor have to tell you which terrain piece the orbital bombardment is plotted for? Not till the shots come raining down. As long as there is proper documentation that ties specific units/IC's to specific transports then that's fine with me.

Personally I like surprises, even in 40K. I think it makes me a better player when I have to learn to adjust and adapt my strategies mid game to deal with any surprises my opponent throws my way.

"To mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy," is one of the first principles in war
--The Art of War by Sun Tzu

BuFFo · 4 months ago

I ahve asked multiple times here, yet no one can simply give me a page reference.

Where is the rule that tells me I need to disclose to you what is in my transports before/during deployment?

Can you do this for me please?

(A Note On Secrecy doesn't count as it is purely an optional rule)

Lerra · 4 months ago

Looking at the rulebook, I have to agree with you BuFFo. RAW, you aren't required to say what is in each transport.

There is a different standard for what is acceptable in a casual game and what is acceptable in a tournament. As long as there is not errata, a FAQ, or tournament rules against it, I don't see anything wrong with it.

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

Ooooh - prizes. Sigh.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Yes, that is the point of the 'Ard Boyz. If you don't like it, take it up with GW.

Docrailgun · 4 months ago

And there's the problem. You don't see how poor sportsmanship diminishes your victories... because you don't care. So long as you win, right?

Screw trying to help other people have fun too.

Truth Hurts · 4 months ago

M8, the problem is you come across like a dick in most of your posts, nothing wrong with your knowledge or ideas just that you are the sort of gamer that I wouoldn't cross the store to pi55 on if you were on fire

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

Spoken for truth.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

I don't post online as a dick or anything else.

It is a proven fact, proven, that humans read printed words negatively right of the bat.

I can't help that,, and hoenstly, I don't care.

Not once have I actually insulted anyone on this blog, unless in self defense.

Not once have I intentionally given false rules to fellow posters to mislead them.

When asked for tactical advice, I give it.

So frankly, I don't give a shit what anonymous children on the internet think about me. Just because 10 people are wrong 'together' doesn't make them right.

I asked multiple times for a page reference where a player is forced to disclose what they put into a transport, but all anyone can do is attack me instead of simply providing me the rule they say exists.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

That is not what the rules say.

First off, a note on secrecy is an optional rule because it clearly says "You should". This rule is purely optional in normal games.

And at the very bottom, last sentence, "The choice is yours!"

The only thing in the tournament you MUST due is show you army list, but as far as what is in the transports, that is MY CHOICE. So yes, you can read my army list all you want, but when I deploy my raiders, you aren't going to know JACK. :)

So no, it is not cheating. Its just the ability to read a rule correctly.

Have fun trying to find out what I have in my Raiders!

.... Just fyi, before my deployment, I mark down on paper (not my army list) which units are in which raiders. So I am not cheating by playing the unit shell game.

:)

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

That's why people hate tournaments. They take the "in friendly games..." stuff, and turn it into "be a dick, and don't ... "

BuFFo · 4 months ago

I don't know where you are going with this, but I am not being a dick.

A Note On Secrecy is clearly an optional rule. So why am I a dick for not showing my transports, but you 'aren't' a dick for trying to figure out what I have in them?

Also, this is 'Ard Boyz, so guess what, its all about winning, period. Better knowledge of the rules will favor the winner every time. Just because some schmoob misread a rule doesn't mean I am forced to play his 'wrong' way. If you can't deal with the WAAC side of 'Ard Boyz, then get out of the tournament.

And in my local game store, NO ONE tells their opponent what is in their transports. No one. Not one person. It is part of the strategy for armies, and it just makes sense, not only rules wise, but fluff wise as well.

Once again, I don't know what your point is, so disregard my rant here if it doesn't apply to you.

Asugradinwa · 4 months ago

I guess your local game store plays things a little different then most. As the Hard Boys tournament is "open list" tounament (you are required to provide your list prior to the game, per page 92 of the rule book).

Also on page 92:

"Always make clear to your opponent which squads are embarked in which transport vehicle"

I guess that if both players want to be secretive they can. However, unless a tournament says otherwise in their own rules, everything should be disclosed during deployment.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Yes, and I make clear what unit is embarked in a vehicle during the game just fine.

But that isn;'t what we are talking about, as there is a difference between what you quoted on page 92 and deployment.

One is embarking DURING the game, the other has nothing to do with embarking at all. Its just deployment.

And as I have said multiple times, regardless of other people's inability to read, I always show my opponent my army list during 'Ard Boyz, so I fail o see where you at getting at with this.

I love you!

- edit -

There is no rule that forces me to disclose anything during deployment. There is an optional rules called 'A Note On Secrecy" but thats as close as you are going to get.

If you can find a rule which forces me to do so, please give me a page reference?

And of course if a tourney says, in its rules, "you must disclose whats in your transports before deployment" then obviously I will.

khanaris · 4 months ago

"Full disclosure" means that you can connect everything in the army list to a model on the table, or at least to a model on the sideboard prior to deployment. If you can't, then it isn't a full disclosure tournament. That is going to be in the tournament rules, though. The rulebook is really for friendly games, and it makes it clear what you "should" tell your opponent. It is going to be up to a judge what you "must" do if you want to ignore the suggestion.

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

Oh, hey, it's not you, it's these types of tournaments in general.

I'll never play in one. Win, Win, Win. Wow.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

It beats the fake sportsmanship and comp tourneys.

Where people put on fake smiles, and chipmunk you with double zeroes just becuse they lost.

I have been chipmunked once, and that is all it took. I will never play in a sportsmanship/comp tourney ever again. I am not going to waste a few hundred bucks to travel, only to win my games and lose the tourney because the people i faced gave me zeroes across the board because they lost their games.

yeah yeah yeah, i know what you are going to say, but whatever. I could have given my opponent t gold bars, still beaten him,, and still get chipmunked scores.

I love 'Ard Boyz. You place your WAAC armies on the board, wipe your opponent off the table, and thats it, you don't get penalized for winning.

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

BuFFo 46 minutes ago: "I love 'Ard Boyz."


I bet you do...

Enjoy your game. It's not mine.

crunchyjuice · 4 months ago

ard boyz....









yep.

khanaris · 4 months ago

It only makes sense fluff-wise for armies that don't ride around in the open. Unless of course you have intentionally modeled all of your infantry to look the same, I guess.

The 'Ard Boyz rules are not a free-for-all. If you are being a "git", you may be asked to leave. That is what the rules state up front. Whether or not this qualifies is not up to you, but will depend on the judges. So it is probably a better idea to avoid these metagame tactics, and you certainly shouldn't rely on them.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

No rule in print forces me to reveal whats in my transports before / during deployment.

When my opponent attempts to stall the game by forcing me to reveal whats in my transports I will call a judge to warn the guy to stop being a git.

I agree with you completely.

khanaris · 4 months ago

You obviously don't agree with me completely. But the possibility of delay is why you should just put one or two models on the transports. That is what I do with Trukks. Then there is no stalling, and you are honoring WYSIWYG to the best of your ability rather than trying to squeeze an advantage out of the metagame.

SM · 4 months ago

But don't you find that that puts armies with open-topped vehicles at a significant disadvantage, say to chaos armies with rhinos? Sure your point certainly meets a lot that the fluff would demand, but in a tournament, if a majority of the players (a large majority considering a lot play guard and marine, all three with closed vehicles).

This is a tournament, so why should certain players be discriminated against?

WES · 4 months ago

Sorry man, but been there done that... I've played in at least three tournament games where the other player attempted to switch units around in the transports in the middle of the game.

In one case, he claimed to have them written down on a piece of paper, showed it to me, and then half way through the game pulled a completely different piece of paper out. Different size, different color. Now if someone pulls that BS, I make them place the paper (face down, still hidden) at the edge of the table between us, and if their transports are all identical, I make him "number" them with a die on top of each one.

I usually just put a model from each unit on top of my transports... and besides, my rhinos are themed to match their units... if i plunked down 5 chaos rhinos, and then gave you a list of 5 chaos units, anyone with have a brain could figure out exactly which unit belongs to which transport.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

I write what is in what Raider before the game starts on a piece of paper, and if you want me to, then sure, I will be more than happy to keep it on the table to help calm your nerves.

Nothing I hate more than cheaters who play shell games with their transported units.

40k is full of cheaters. Like any game really. Anyone who has played this game more than a year knows this. Anything I can do during our game to help alleviate some of your fears I would oblige without question.

UltramarineFan · 4 months ago

Guess what? at my local store, EVERYONE tells their opponent what is in their transports. Everyone. Every single person. It easily makes sense fluff wise as well. They have high strength binoculars in the 41st millennium and it's really not difficult to explain how they can tell what's in an open topped transport. They look. With their eyes. Even with closed transports we tell our opponents, it makes the game that bit more fun; trying to doge enemy fire on your key transports. when choosing between fun and realism I know which one I would choose.

Sathos · 4 months ago

If for example a Dracon is wearing the garb of a standard warrior to confuse the enemy you can have all the high strength binoculars you want and it wont do anything...

A "command" rhino (often damocles class) is very rare and only likely to be deployed in major conflicts...otherwise the average space marine captain and sometimes even chapter masters will simply travel around in a tactical rhino or with the terminators in a 1st company land raider...either way you wouldnt have a clue and still have to guess.

Fluff works both ways, its not one-sided and no I am not defending buffo, I am stating both current and "future" military fact, enemy commanders are not always wearing their ceremonial dress and travelling in limos.

Docrailgun · 4 months ago

The fact that NO ONE does whatever at your club doesn't make it any less or more sporting.

Sorry, didn't want to interrupt your ego trip.

LordSandwich · 4 months ago

GOD this is a sad way of approaching the tourney view.

Anonymous · 4 months ago

They're dedicated transports aren't they?

Could the opponent not justifiably ask while you deploy, "Which Raider on your list is the one you've placed here?" He isn't directly asking you what is inside, just which Raider it is. But since they're dedicated transports and you obviously aren't shuffling them on your first turn (because then he would know what units are inside)... he can figure out what is in each Raider.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

First, you need to show me where in the rules I have to declare anything about what unit I am deploying. It doesn't exist. There are NO rules, besides 'A Note...' concerning this. When you deploy a unit, say, Space Marine Tactical squad, and your opponent asks "What is that unit", you don't even have to say that its a Space Marine Tactical Squad.

During pick up and friendly games, I will gladly tell my opponent what the unit is and what the weapons do, but this is 'Ard Boyz, and this is a WAAC tournament. The only way you are going to figure out what is in my Raiders is by shooting at them and blowing them up.

Second, when I deploy a Raider, I say here is a raider with a unit inside it. They may ask me, what unit, and I hand them my army list, as per the tournament rule, and say in return, have fun figuring it out.

So yes, my opponent can ask me what unit is inside a transport, but rules wise I am not obligated to say anything. The only thing I am obligated is in the 'Ard Boyz to show my army list, that is all. And since each raider is armed the same, good luck figuring out which unit is in which Raider.

patzer · 4 months ago

Seems to me if it is open topped you should be able to see what is riding in them. I have a feeling if you get to the final round the GW Judge will request that the type of squad in a Vech will be disclosed.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Show me the rule that says open topped vehicles have to reveal whos inside at all times?

You are getting fluff mixed up with rules.

And no, no judge who knows the rules would enforce anything of the sort.

There is NO difference between a Raider and a Rhino as far as 'showing whats inside' is concerned. They are identical.

khanaris · 4 months ago

It isn't a fluff argument, though. It is WYSIWYG. You can look at a model, and tell what it is to the furthest extent that the model allows. A Rhino looks the same whether or not there are troops embarked. A Raider does not. If you run your Raiders around empty intentionally it is little different than modeling all of your Wyches as Warriors so that your opponent won't be able to tell which is which.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

OK ok ok...I seem to have sparked a bit of an arguement with that comment.

I do apologise if I made you think you were being a dick btw Buffo, I meant no implication towards that end.

Now...onto references....

Under the "A Note on Secrecy" I will admit, it states you can keep your army list a secret etc....and that is totally optional. It does also say "in the same spirit, always make clear to your opponent which squads are embarked in which transport"

While this could be interpreted as an optional "rule" in some respects I can also see how it is a rule in others....as the references to secrecy talk about the lists not deployment.....but as this is all speculation and interpretation, we'll leave that.

Now...under Dedicated Transports (and I'm sure the argument has already been said somewhere above but I skim read as I was getting the general idea of the arguments) it states that when deployed a dedicated transport can only ever have the unit it was bought for inside it. To that end, you must indicate which tank is carrying which unit. Whether you write this down and have a number on the tank/base to indicate which tank is which seems to be optional and there isn't anything about that in the dedicated transport section.

Now...this is where I believe the argument comes to a strange twist.

p94 under the Reserves rule...

"Similarly, the player must specify if any transport vehicel in reserve is carryign any of the infantry units....etc"

The "Similarly and specify part of that sentence implies that you must inform your opponent which unit is in which transport in reserve. I say this because it states above that "....the player must clearly explain the organisation of his reserves to he opponent"

This is a CLEAR statement that you HAVE to tell your opponent about what you're keeping in reserve AND how this is organised...including what is in a transport etc.

Why this doesn't move over into the same rules as deployment I can't see....

Re-reading the "note on secrecy" I can see it says to keep thing fair etc etc...but after the "always make clear to your opponent which squads are embarked in transport etc"...the next word in fact...is HOWEVER.

However is an implication that this is the optional part of the rules under "note on secrecy" and the only things after the however are to do with your force roster/army list...not the actual deployment.

My statement that you must declare what unit is in what transport during deployment stands....I can see no-where in the rules that says it is an optional choice to state what unit is in what transport. I clearly states under "A note on secrecy" that you should tell your opponent about this BEFORE it goes on to say you can keep your force roster secret...and it clearly states that you MUST tell your opponent what is being transported by what what holding units in reserve.

I'm not trying to come across as a dick...I'm trying to point out that I have actually read the rule book properly from cover to cover and am in the process of doing so again. I'm also trying to point out something to you that you may not have realised when reading the rules yourself.

By the by...Patzer is correct with regards to a GW judge enforcing that you have to say what's in what transport as the UK GT has full disclosure in it's rules. BUT...that's the UK GT.

-------------

On a side comment....if you're wanting to look at RAW with regards to EVERYTHING...Independant characters and the unit's they're joined to become seperate to that unit "when attacks are resolved"...this can be seen as the unit looses all abilities that the character confers to that WHEN attacks are resolved...and vice versa.

Meaning your whole unit looses furious charge if the character gives it to them WHEN you resolve attacks. They've got it before and after but when you resolve attacks they don't.

If you want to go RAW.....

khanaris · 4 months ago

This is getting off-topic, so I will close my argument with this:

The part about secrecy and transports IS optional. In friendly games. All rules are optional in friendly games. In a tournament, all of those optional rules take effect or not at the discretion of the tournament judges and organizers. It is NOT up to the players to decide which optional rules they will observe in a tournament setting. That is why you should never rely on this sort of tactic, and why you should clarify with the judges before it comes up in an actual game.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

Actually...if you REALLY want to go RAW it doesn't state anywhere you can only deploy what's in your force roster....by that degree I'll use 18 titans in tournament and because it doesn't say anywhere in the rules I can only deploy what's in my roster...I can do it.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

And yes, Buffo, you can have hugs.

I've nothing against you because I'm a rule basher too...I'm just trying to point out to you that there is certain things you can take too far by saying "RAW" all the time and "It's not in the rule book so I can do it"

Sathos · 4 months ago

woops too far conrad...you cannot has teh 18 t1tanz unless your FOC for that match will allow for it

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

But there's nothing in the rules that says I can only deploy what's in my FOC...

I wantz my TITANZ!!!!

Show me in the rule book where it says I'm only allowed to deploy what's in my FOC...huh? huh????

---------------

In case you're wondering...this is actually a genuine challenge for some one to point out where in the rules it states you can only deploy what is in your FOC.....just to prove how you can go too far with the "RAW" etc and that some-times a little sense goes a long way.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

AH HA!!!

My gf has pointed out to me in the big rulebook the thing that winzors the whole arguement etc etc etc

PAGE 2 of the rule book..

"The Most Important Rule"

Read on MacDuff!
-=Cackles=-

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

But I do stand by my original...longer...clarification above with appropriate pages and quotes.

patzer · 4 months ago

I guess the thing to do is ask to see if the squad in the transport is WYSIWG. and go transport to transport. After all we are being good sports and it is just a game of toy soldiers. If you aren't going to tell folks what squad is in the transport then why even show them your list, hell why even make list just bring what you have. Writing down where folks are deployed doesn't prove jack. You can still shell game and move squads as you see fit. Do I think is shady, yep, do I think it is unsportsman yep, do I think you cheat, well if it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck. Did you get over and win sure. Will that stuff fly at the finals if you make it and play? Nope. Oh and I have played and won lots of RT Ard boyz rounds and gotten plenty of GW prize support and not had to hide my army to gain the advantage.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

"I guess the thing to do is ask to see if the squad in the transport is WYSIWG. and go transport to transport."

If you are trying to circumvent the rules by doing this, then after you see each of my squads and the raiders they are in, before deployment, I move my units around, and write down on paper, as I always do, which new Raiders are holding my units.

Sorry to sound rude, but I am in no way obligated to show you what is in my transports, and your attempts to loop hole the rules doesn't fly with me.

"After all we are being good sports and it is just a game of toy soldiers."

I agree. That is why I am fully playing by the game of toy soldiers rules and not cheating you in the slightest. If you get 'angry' because you aren't being told what is in my Raiders, take that up with GW, not me, because I am doing nothing but following the written rules.

"If you aren't going to tell folks what squad is in the transport then why even show them your list, hell why even make list just bring what you have."

Because the game requires an army list to stop players from cheating, and to prove they are playing with 1500 points, instead of sneaking in an extra 200 points, which some people in my area have been caught doing quite often.

"Writing down where folks are deployed doesn't prove jack. You can still shell game and move squads as you see fit. "

You are wrong.

I write down that Wych Squad A is in the Raider with the Green Fin means just that. If you blow up my Raider with the Blue Fin, I will show you my paper that says "Wych Squad B is in the Blue Fin Raider".

So yes, it does mean squat.

"Do I think is shady, yep, do I think it is unsportsman yep, do I think you cheat, well if it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck. Did you get over and win sure. Will that stuff fly at the finals if you make it and play? Nope. Oh and I have played and won lots of RT Ard boyz rounds and gotten plenty of GW prize support and not had to hide my army to gain the advantage."

Somehow I get the feeling that you, and like most of the posters here, have been cheated before, and somehow seem to project this onto me on an anonymous blog.

Ad naseum.... I don't cheat, I disclose my army lists, and I write down what unit is in what raider, and when a raider is blown up, or the unit disembarks, I show my opponent, on my paper, what was in that Raider, to prove I don't shell game.

I hate nothing more in 40k, besides the prices, than shell game cheaters. but there is nothing more I respect than the rules, of which I follow to the best of my ability, and I hope my opponents do so as well.

SM · 4 months ago

Yeah, but by WYSIWYG, then you could only have a squad of about 4 space marines, since that is about all you're going to fit on those tiny benches. I have seen the interior of a rhino (I even have a few w/ a removable top, so you can technically see into them).

It is impractical to demand that a tournament player MUST have modeled units onto their transport, and in terms of transports, I don't feel WYSIWYG applies to them, since it is impractical to hold the carrying space of said transport to WYSIWYG standards.

QBall78 · 4 months ago

Maybe I'm wrong with this because I couldn't find WYSIWYG in the Index of my rulebook, but by looking through it I was only able to find one entrance for WYSIWYG. And this one was very specifically referring to independent Charakters.

So please tell me when I'm wrong, but it seems to me that in 5th Ed. WYSIWYG is for ICM's only.

So if you apply it to something else it's not more than just good sportsmanship (prevents people from cheating). But not more (except for ICM's of course).

khanaris · 4 months ago

But if you have a system of telling the transports apart and remembering which unit is where, that is going to be a part of full disclosure. If your opponent looks at your list and asks which transport corresponds to which model, you need to tell him. That will give away the shell game. If all the transports are absolutely identical, there is nothing to stop you from cheating (and you would routinely forget what was where by accident). This, along with WYSIWYG, is not just a Rulebook rule, so your point about references is meaningless. It is a tournament rule, so you reference it to the individual tournaments and to the judges overseeing them. It may not be cheating by the absolute letter of the main rulebook, but it is pretty close.

khanaris · 4 months ago

"It is impractical to demand that a tournament player MUST have modeled units onto their transport, and in terms of transports."

Trukks and Raiders are constructed so that it is pretty easy to simply put one or two infantry models on the transport. The original point was never that it was too hard. The player in question just wanted to squeeze an advantage out of their list. WYSIWYG is not a fluff or realism argument and never has been, so the relative size of the transport models is irrelevant. It is a gameplay mechanism that attempts to make the models as representative as possible.

UltramarineFan · 4 months ago

I'm wondering, if someone asked you "What's in that transport." would you repley with "I don't have to tell you and so I won't." ?

Lerra · 4 months ago

Whoa whoa whoa.

"When you deploy a unit, say, Space Marine Tactical squad, and your opponent asks "What is that unit", you don't even have to say that its a Space Marine Tactical Squad."

Really? I've got a ton of rogue-trader era weaponry, and most of the newer players don't know what my guns are. So at a tournament, I can just hand them my list and say nothing? That would be a huge advantage.

What about conversions? Do I have to explain what they are?

I'm new to the tournament scene so I'm trying to find that fine line. As a Dark Angels player I can use all the help I can get heh.

Flashman · 4 months ago

Bloody good write up.

sinsynn · 4 months ago

just wanna say congrats again to BuFFo! Sounds like you had a serious plan, well executed as well. Good luck next round!
@ Goatboy-
Okay, you had a rough day. It happens. My understanding is that your just starting out with Dark Eldar, and as they are a finesse army- unless you beat people over the head with 80 (80, really? Jeez) troop choices, they may take more than a handful of games to get a good feel for. C'mon, suck it up, learn from your mistakes, and move on.
Having been following BuFFo's bold posts about how deadly DE can be, played correctly with a well thought out list, I got my hands on a codex, and man, there is some evil, evil stuff in there. They are definately fragile, but in the 'cover save madness' that is 5th ed., that fragility is mitigated quite well.
So until the new DE codex nerfs some of their stuff ( I've read the codex, BuFFo, and I agree that you don't need a new one, as nerfing may occur), work out what needs working out in your list- what worked at 'ard Boyz? What didn't?- and grow from the experience. Don't let a bad 'dice gods' day convince you of some hot/cold theory. I think your better than that, honestly. Good tacticians incorperate their mistakes into learning, bad tacticians throw up their hands and say stuff like 'oh, I ran cold'.
Yes, the dice can be cruel, as can 'ard boyz, where people pull out the cheese, but c'mon, where's the cocky, unrepentant 'power list' Goatboy of old? Bring him back.
The next time you post, I wanna see "How I'm plotting my 'ard Boyz revenge!"
Get on that. Immediately.

Brent · 4 months ago

This wasn't Goatboy - it was JWolf.

I thought BuFFo wrote up a good post, in his normal, sardonic style. It's actually some small vindication for me to hear. Recently I was theory-hammering a similar list, believing Raider spam wasn't as effective in 5th. I was all talk though - BuFFo played it. Kudos.

Which isn't to say the Raider spam isn't a brutal list to face still.

But my whole point is JWolf doesn't whine, and I didn't take his post in this way either. I think he's asking an interesting question about an army building trend happening right now, and how to counter it.

I'll be honest though - I think it's the wrong question. I believe its important to put together a list that A) plays to one's strength, and B) reduces the random effect of the hateful little cubes.

It's important to reexamine our assumptions about what unit is capable of - the game changes, army lists develop, the flavor of the month is different: that kind of thing.

I'm curious - why didn't JWolf play his Guard? And does he think he would have performed better? Maybe he simply outsmarted himself picking a known, tough list to play that he didn't have as much experience with.

*shrugs*

Thanks in advance - Brent

jwolf_bols · 4 months ago

I didn't play Guard because I wanted to play something different and challenging, which Dark Eldar seem to be for me, and I expected to see a lot of Guard armies, which play to the weakness of the Dark Eldar very well.

I played Dark Eldar for the challenge, and I came up a little short. It was a great day and everyone had a good time, which is all I really care about.

Brent · 4 months ago

I get that from you; I didn't think it was an ego thing at all. I also find the result interesting, since I would have expected it to roll Mech armies.

Go figure.

You're known as a strategist, though, and I was curious if you would have changed anything, hindsight being what it is.

Take care - Brent

jwolf_bols · 4 months ago

I believe my strategy was too conservative, and I'd likely charge more aggressively towards my enemies, rather than try to accomplish anything with lances on my first turn.

Inquisitor Moloko · 4 months ago

Goatboy didn't play in 'Ard Boyz this year. The article was written by Jwolf.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

@sinsynn

Here is my list I used for the 'Ard Boyz...

Archon w/ Punisher, Shadowfield, Drugs, T.Helm, P. Grenades
4 Incubi w/ P. Grenades
Drazhar, master of cheese, er, blades
Raider w/ Dark lance and Horrorfex

Dracon
5 Warriors w/ 2x Dark Lances
Raider w/ Dark lance and Horrorfex

9 Wyches w/ WW, P. Grenades, 2x Blasters
Succubus w/ Agoniser, Poison Blades, Goblet of Spite, T. Rack
Raider w/ Dark lance and Horrorfex

9 Wyches w/ WW, P. Grenades, 2x Blasters
Succubus w/ Agoniser, Poison Blades, Archangel of Pain, T. Rack
Raider w/ Dark lance and Horrorfex

5 Warriors w/ Dark Lance and Blaster
Raider w/ Dark lance and Horrorfex

10 Warriors w/ 2x Dark Lance and 2x Blaster

10 Warriors w/ 2x Dark Lance and 2x Blaster

20 Warriors w/ 2x Dark Lance and 2x Blaster

20 Warriors w/ 2x Dark Lance and 2x Blaster

20 Warriors w/ 2x Dark Lance and 2x Blaster

Ravager w/ 3x Disintegrators and Horrorfex

Ravager w/ 3x Disintegrators and Horrorfex

Ravager w/ 3x Disintegrators and Horrorfex


I keep all my raiders armed the same so when my opponent looks at my army list, they have no clue which unit is in which Raider.

Ravagers with Horrorfexes is very effective. It is great to first pin a unit, then saturate it with 'Plasma Cannons' without fear of being shot back on next turn.

I was going to go with all Raider Squads, but I would rather have large units of warriors who can take 4 turns of Battle Cannon fire and still hold an objective.

sinsynn · 4 months ago

that's a hell of a list, my friend. Obviously it works, eh?
Man, you sure started a good argument with the 'guess which unit is in which transport' thing. You do have a gift! Lol. ;)
Here's MY question to you-
Did this ever even come up at Ard Boyz? Did any of your opponents, at any time, directly ask you "pardon me sir, but I was wondering which Raider your command squad is in? For then I MAY SHOOT AT IT WITH EVERY GUN IN MY ARMY ON TURN ONE, thereby crippling whatever strategy you may have involving that particular unit."
That's why I'm on your side in that argument. Why would someone even ASK that question? So they can 'shoot the good stuff', of course. I'm with the military on this one- don't ask, don't tell.
(on a total side note- if I was in the army, and I had to shower with other soldiers 'communally', I might have a violent issue with someone....)
Asking your opponent which unit is where is WORSE then not telling. The asker is looking to exploit that information, as it only benifits him.
You wanna know which unit is where, look at my list and work it out, or just use those 'high powered binoculars' that every one has in the 41st millenium.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

This past Saturday, if I rememebr correctly, two out of my three oppoennts asked which Raiders hold my HQs, since i have two HQ choices.

I said, here is my list, figure it out.

Only one out of the two players was smart enough to figure it out...

Turn 1 - My Dracon raider, with 2 dark lances inside it, fired Three dark lances total at a target. The smart players asked, "Why is your raider firing three dark lances?" I said, "look at my list"... He did and said, "Oh I see, that must be your Dracon HQ because its the only one on your list with 2 Dark Lances inside it.."

I winked at him and gave him a thumbs up!

Turn 2 ) The same smart player noticed that I had three raiders which did not shoot dark lances. He knew they were two wych squads and my deadly Archon HQ. Great.

He began to think hard, and realized something so obvious that I was doing.... My Wych squads raiders have dice riding on top of them indicating which Drugs they rolled for.

He instantly knew which raider had my Archon in it, and promptly blew it up.

Even though I don't have to mark my two wych raiders with dice for the drugs, I do anyway because even if I right it down, I always forget which wych squad got the drug in which raider. So, as I do not cheat in any sense of the word, I make sure I can see which drugs each wych unit has by having dice in the raiders.

Only one out of my three opponents even noticed that, but hey, its not my fault if my opponents don't see those dice.

Matthew_Rider · 4 months ago

That's retarded- according to this logic I could have extremely converted or even really old models that don't actually look like they're modern counterparts- then the opponent can't find out what they are by asking

So according to you making my army look like they have different wargear than they do is a huge advantage? If someone asks were a particular unit is on the battlefield you have to tell them

jwolf_bols · 4 months ago

You missed the point of my article. I'm not lamenting my dice rolls, just noticing that dice rolls that were poor have a lot more effect on a finesse army than on the cold bludgeons of the Guard or either Marines.

What didn't work was shooting a Chimera in a crucial location with 15 Lance weapons and not breaking it open in game 2. In game 3 it was not destroying a Drop Pod with over a dozen Lance hits. So what I learned wa find a way to get 18 lance hits instead of 12 where I need them. Not exactly rocket science.

I need no revenge for Ard Boyz - I've beaten everyone who placed in tournaments this year, and will beat them more before we're done.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Yeah, I don't know what it is about Dark Eldar, but Dark Lances never kill anything on their own. I feel your pain!

When my opponents go 'Wow, 18 Dark Lances!?!?" I go, yeah, watch them do nothing....

Lance weapons can never bust transports, but for some odd reason, they blow land raiders up just fine. Go figure!

Remember, Dark Eldar have no power fists and no melta bombs. So Dark Lances are all we have to bust vehicles... Haywire grenades are a waste of time, and the Agoniser is a joke against vehicles as well. We don't have melta weapons either. None. Blasters is as close as we get.

Ranged fire is our only way to blow vehicles up, and Lances are not the best weapons in the game to do so.

Anon156 · 4 months ago

And that's the reason I really like the Blessed Hull on my BT LRC's :-)

khanaris · 4 months ago

I guess it is important to make a distinction between below-average rolling and temporarily cursed dice. Some armies roll so few dice that it is very easy for things to deviatev down from the average and mess up your plans. Other armies by their very nature tend to generate a lot of "critical" rolls. Deathwing fall into the former category, and Orks can fall into the latter category.

Deathwing will always suffer from those times when you drop a handful of ones for the saves. Orks suffer when that Nob Biker unit with the Warboss fails a straight Leadership test and then fails the Bosspole reroll. Or when the Shokk Attack Gun blows up and clears the escorting off of an objective.

Joseph · 4 months ago

I played an 800 point Escalation game last night against an Ork player with my Dark Eldar, and it is very true about the dice needing to roll well. Lances are great en masse, especially since you need 4's to glance MOST transports (3's vs Rhinos, 2's vs Trucks) but it doesn't help when you can't hit that 3+ to hit. Then your Wyches make 4 of 4, 4+ invul saves vs a Warbosses Powerclaw and you sweep him back home to Cormorraugh as a slave, and your Dracon OD's with triple 1s before an assault, and you lose 1 warrior to 15-20 hits from Loota's thanks to a 4+ cover save...so it seems everything is a 50% chance...maybe I've just been too spoiled running a Vulkan lit with all my re-rolls...

Saark · 4 months ago

The Hydra is rather mediocre at dealing with Wave Serpents. When you are firing 4 twin-linked shots with Guard BS (3 hits) and need 5+ to glance (1 hit) and 6+ to penetrate (0 hits) the Spirit Stone equipped Wave Serpent generally is not that afraid. Also of note is that the Hydra only ignores the Skimmer Moving Flat Out and Turbo Boosted bike cover saves, not those granted by actual cover.

Stick a Fortuned Jetbike Squad in front of that Wave Serpent and suddenly it has 50% of the model covered. Jetbikers are just over 1.25" tall, and amazingly enough a Wave Serpent with Forgeworld Turret is just under 2.25" tall, mounted on the same height flying bases a jetbike squad makes a nifty screen. The Jetbikes themselves don't fear the Autocannon as you don't have volume of fire from the one tank to force a save on the Warlock, and you don't penetrate their normal armor save. The same tactic works for protecting Falcons and Fire Prisms, with the added bonus that the bikers can move into position after the bigger tank fires(Eldar jetbike assault move) giving it a clear line of fire and not providing the enemy the same claim to cover.

So, no, Hydras are not the end of the DAVU Dire Avengers. In fact they are really not all as good as they are hyped up to be.

Kurt · 4 months ago

That is why I want to try 9 Hydras in 3 heavy squadrons . The rest will be 8+ multilaser/heavy bolter/ heavy stubber Chimeras with infantry - and a lot of meltas.

Saark · 4 months ago

Lemme see here. 9x75 = 675 points to deal with an average of 360pts of transports, plus yours die per squadron to glances on the side (immobilized == wreck in squadrons) in droves to the sheer volume of Str6 fire a Jetbike army can bring to bear.

Anytime, anyplace. I'd love to scrap that list with less than 1/3rd of my forces.

Kurt · 4 months ago

" 9x75 = 675 points to deal with an average of 360pts of transports"

To deal with almost anything on the battle. thanks to their rate of fire, high strength, reroll to hit and 72" range.

"plus yours die per squadron to glances on the side (immobilized == wreck in squadrons"

Only if you have to move the squadron. But 72" range softens this limitation. You can simply select another unit to move.

So... anytime, anyplace...

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

I believe that this trend means Eldar will get Firestorms when they're re-released and they'll have similar rules to the Hydra....

Firestorm: 6 shots at Str6 twin-linked for 180pt
Hydra: 2 shots at Str 7 twin-linked for 75pt.

I'll take the Firestorm by itself over 2 Hydra's. More shots and with Holo-fields can shrug off most Hydra fire.

Course....the whole "ignores cover granted by bikes turbo-boosting" is kinda a waste of space....I only know of Scout bikers who'll suffer from this as the Autocannon is AP4. I've never seen orks take Nobs on bikes with only a 4+ save but even if they did, they get a 5+ cover from the "smoke" etc so wouldn't really be bothered.. especially if they take feel no pain too.

As for ignoring the save of flat out skimmers.....I think I only use flat out on my skimmers for getting to side armour or last turn objective contesting...it's not really a hindrance when I'm usually moving 12" and firing. The 72" range isn't that special either when the board is only giving you a maximum of 48" from side to side in most games and your opponent can close the distance with ease otherwise.

I agree with Saark here....I'll take my Jetbikes, Serpents and Fire Prisms every time against an army like that.

Especialy my Prisms with their 60" range Str 9 small blasts (or Str 10 twin linked AP1 Hydra killing beauties)....and at 160pt each with holo's and spirit stones...they're a bargain for killing hydra's.

Kurt · 4 months ago

2 Hydras - 8 tw shots, not 4.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

IG book states on p51 that Hydra Autocannon is Heavy 2....not heavy 4.

Flicking through the book to p102 I can see it says it has 2 of them...this is interesting for terms of what happens if you move it.

It basically means if you want to move to get line of sight then you're loosing 2 shots and can't use your hull mounted weapon.....whilst the Firestorm can move 12" and still fire all 6 shots.

But yes...you're right, it does have 4 shots just from 2 different weapons.

Saark · 4 months ago

To deal with anything? Sheer Hyperbole. If you are wasting your points on those, you're not taking Leman Russ Demolishers in those heavy slots. You've opene yourself up to losing the entire squadron from a lucky assault (since you only have to assault one to kill the whole squadron) and depending on special rules gimmicks that are situational at best and utterly pointless at worse.

You do know that the only Turbo Boost unit they actually hurt is Dark Eldar and Scout Bikes, right? Orks get their smokescreen, Eldar and Marines get their better armor saves.

It's a gimmick. Just like the 72" range. Name one deployment option where you are further than 24" from your enemy. Dawn of War? Sorry, 18" there. Spearhead? 24" there. Pitched Battle? Nope, again 24".

Kurt · 4 months ago

I never said this army is unbeatable. Everything can be killed with something else.

I think such an army with mech. inf and a lot of mobile AA support will be fluffy (idea comes from german panzer grenadier column in Ardennes 1944) and not pathetic in combat and fun to play.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

Never looked at the Dark Eldar jetbikes....they only have a 4+ save? Finally, something they have worse than the Eldar.

Saark · 4 months ago

Yep. Not only is the Reaver Jetbike 4+ Armor, it has poor turbo boosting capability. Since Codex trumps rulebook, they are stuck with a Turbo Boost rule that only gives them a 4+ Invulnerable save. So the Hydra eats Dark Eldar bikes for breakfast.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Um, correct me if I am wrong but...

The main rule book states a bike which turbo boosts gets a 3+ cover save.

I don't see anything in the updated Dark Eldar Reaver Jetbike Squad entry that negates this.

Saark · 4 months ago

That's because it's in the Wargear section (p.14) that describes the Reaver Jetbike and it's ability to Turbo Boost.

"makes it Jetbike Turbo Booster, its saving throw becomes invulnerable."

So 4+ becomes 4++ rather than gain a 3+ Cover save as per Turbo Boosters USR. Codex trumps BRB. Which is why Grey Knights still have "Heavy 3 Jams" Assault Cannons.

Saark · 4 months ago

Just in case you need clarification on the "Codex trumps rulebook" comment, it's right in the Universal Special Rules introduction:

"As this is just a summary. if any of the Codexes include one of these special rules and the rule is different, the one in the Codex takes precedence representing how the general special rule applies to that specific race)."

thorlock · 4 months ago

They changed that in the errata on the GW site.

1000_and_1_Sons · 4 months ago

Just want to point out something about 72" range for weapons:

The same codex that you would use in a normal game is used in apocalypse, so while a normal table makes 72" a bit much, an apocalypse table might see better use of a 72" range weapon. (as noted in WD347, when a Squiggoth's 48" weapon wasn't in range)

Bulwark · 4 months ago

I'm no expert, but I would guess that a guard player would love to see a group of expensive models on jetbikes all bunched up together like that. Something about an 8/3 5" template....

Saark · 4 months ago

And those templates do not ignore the Turbo Boost, so a re-rollable 3+ cover save deals nicely with them. Happens all the time, I've seen Forutned bike units take four dead on demolisher hits 10/1 5" unscathed.

Again, while your committing your best and most expensive units to even attempt to scare a single transport, the rest of the army plows through guardsmen as if they were not even there.

One of these days, the Guard players are going to realize that the new codex was written just to sell $50 Valkyries and $100 Forgeworld Hydras and come to understand that they have been played.

Anonymous · 4 months ago

Not all of the new extravagant Guard codex entries are useless baubles, just the ones everyone seem to be flocking to...

I'm certainly enjoying my dirt-cheap griffon batteries as they blast hordes apart and overwhelm MEQs with sheer number of wounds.

thedefenestrator · 4 months ago

I agree wholeheartedly. griffons are dirt-cheap, accurate as all hell, and can put enough S6 wounds on anything to make it crumble.

chimeras are also a pretty solid buy; 55 points for a BS3 multilaser, heavy flamer, and AV12 transport is no joke.

the psyker battle squad probably goes without saying as an extremely effective unit as well.

khanaris · 4 months ago

Some of the new templates do ignore the Turbo-boost, unfortunately. Aside from the Hellhound, you are also dealing with both the Colossus and the Eradicator. Neither of them is likely to turn up every time you fight guard, but if they are there you can't use bikes the way you normally do.

JATL · 4 months ago

You could say that any new codex (including... all the dex's...EVER!) were made to sell new shiny models........ it will happen to the Eldar again as well! so whats your point there?

Saark · 4 months ago

When the original editorial claims that this shiny new bauble is the end to the reliability and survivability of an entire army's transports, I feel compelled to comment with the cold hard truth that it is nowhere near it's hype. When the only supporters of that theory have to so damage their own competitive lists by shoveling pounds of that garbage bauble into it, I find it laughable.

Regarding the other prior posts, the Eradicator Nova Cannon ignores the Turbo Boost, but sadly does not penetrate the 3+ armor. While the Colossus will penetrate the armor, it has a minimum range that most units can be within just after deployment (18" or 24" depending on scenario), completely negating it's fire. On top of that, if firing from its own cover, it scatters widely. If it moves to get a better shot, it won't fire at all (barrage cannot fire on the move.)

And for most of those, simple formation tricks negate the impact of a large template, combined with the large bases of the bikes, and you limit your exposure significantly. Even if using them to screen the larger tanks.

Anonymous · 4 months ago

"When the original editorial claims that this shiny new bauble is the end to the reliability and survivability of an entire army's transports, I feel compelled to comment with the cold hard truth that it is nowhere near it's hype."

The end result being you following that "cold hard truth" with a statement that is as exaggerated as Jwolf's estimation of the capabilities of Hydras. IG codex got a lot of stuff that is genuinely fantastic, and then quite a few units that jump out at you on paper as even better, when the reality is that they are simply showy with no meat to them.

Saark · 4 months ago

Math != Exaggeration.

Probability of getting a glancing hit on a Wave Serpent with a Hydra:

4 TL AC Shots at BS3 = 50% Hit, 50% Re-rolls Hit = 3 Hits.
3 Hits of Str7 on AV12 (5+ Glance) = ~33% (1 in 3)
3 Hits of Str7 on AV12 (6+ Penetrate) = ~17% (1 in 6) of which 3 hits is not large enough to guarantee a Pen.

Glances have a 1 in 6 chance of immobilizing a Serpent, thus preventing it from doing its job (Transport) and a 0 in 6 chance of killing it. All other results are moot with Spirit Stones as you won't stop it from moving to deliver its cargo.

So my statement of: "Hydra = End of Wave Serpent Usefulness" is a gross exaggeration is pretty spot on.

As far as shiny stuff in the Codex worth its points? Leman Russ Squadrons. Fielding three main battle tanks while only taking a single heavy choice? Gold.

Creed. Letting those three tanks now Outflank? Platinum.

A largely sessile anti-aircraft battery with a funky rule that is pretty much ignored by the very armies you most want to use it on? Plastic Slag.

Anonymous · 4 months ago

The exaggeration I referred to was the third paragraph of your response to Bulwark. Pretty sure we've been on the same page about Hydras being pretty useless for their supposed purpose the whole time.

If the IG codex was written to sell FW Hydras, they sure as sugar could have done a better job of it.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

I don't see how he's exaggerating.

Everything seems to be about selling the most expensive stuff in the IG codex. Even the "new" tanks are going to be pricey and by making it so you can have squadrons you're just saying "buy buy buy" to people.

Everything of any decent salt that I would take from the new codex costs £30 upwards and it would cost me well over £300 just to make a 1500pt army in the fashion that would take best advantage of the codex.

In comparison to the much cheaper options available...even in the new Marine or Ork codex.

ace2666 · 4 months ago

Now do it for two hydras. That around the same cost of a DAVU wave serpent.

Saark · 4 months ago

Why not twenty? At some point if you throw your entire 1500pt list at a single unit it will fall.

Why not reverse the situation?

That DAVU Wave Serpent slows down and unloads a TL Scatter Laser barrage into the side of your squadron of Hydras (just as likely as a Hydra squadron shooting at a WS where there is no cover but Flat Out), the math is even more spectacular.

4 TL BS3 shots. 50% hit (2), 50% re-rolls hit (1) = 3 hits, one per Hydra each with a 50% chance to glance and therefore render the Hydra worthless (no shooting is the best you can get on a glance) So even if 1.5 of those hits are glances, your squadron is not doing its job at full capacity.

Even stunned, shaken and weaponless, the Serpent still does its job. Keeping its cargo safe until drop point. With Spirit Stones, it's even still mobile.

But my original point is that the statement: "The Hydra is the end of the DAVU Wave Serpent" is just wishful thinking. 1 to 1 it's not scared and more than that you have to figure in real cover into the equation. Or you have to start including other units on the opponent's side.

MakurA · 4 months ago

If you need more than average rolls, then your list is a bad list.

Am I missing something?

Lerra · 4 months ago

There is more to it than just good and bad lists. There are a lot of lists that will either massacre you or get massacred, with very little in between, because they are very unforgiving. Chaos Daemons is a lot like that - poor rolls on the reserves will destroy you. You see Chaos Daemons win tournaments fairly often, though, because when those important rolls go well, it's an extremely strong list.

The guy who won my local 'ard Boyz placed 2nd to last in the previous tournament (Chaos Daemons) with a fairly similar list.

duder · 4 months ago

How do I take a hot list and turn into a cold list? I pick an army with a 5th edition codex ;)

are you surprised IG, SM, CSM came out on top? They all have a 5th edition codex, yes CSM have one too, so do Deamons but they got gimped when they got no real anti-tank or tanks themselves.

Lerra · 4 months ago

CSM is not a 5th ed codex.

Wolfy_Molder · 4 months ago

cause you're then you're cold, you're yes then you're no, you're in then you're out, you're up then you're down, lol sorry couldn;t help it, i think is you are running a list that is too "hot" then you are in trouble from day one, but then, one that is too cold is just no fun to play against

Ej · 4 months ago

Um. Define Hot and Cold armies?

Do you mean lots of melta vs. none?

Lots of fast moving transports vs. none?

Killy vs. Fluffy?

What?

crunchyjuice · 4 months ago

~Here’s the challenge – how do you take a Hot list (one that will not, on average, win games without having good rolls) and turn it into a Cold list (one that wins with average rolling)?

geoffsnider · 4 months ago

if you want to take a list that needs better than average dice rolls to win, then you're basically a dreamer. however, if you are hell bent on running that list then you have to fall back on the strengths of the army - the things it does without having to roll dice - the things it does for free by just existing on the tabletop.

for instance, if you want to make your dark eldar list do well even though it has to run 'hot' to do well, then you have to maximize what the army can do with its fast moving vehicles and its ability to be anywhere on the table, en masse, whenever it wants. use the army's mobility to divide your opponent's force so you don't have to fight it all at once; make sure you only have to fight half of it, and when that half is gone you can turn your sights on the other half.

the problem with attempting to max out the effectiveness of a 'hot' army is that you're comparing your hot army's static 'existing' bonuses with the same potential bonuses of another army (just because you can do it doesn't mean your opponent can't), so all things are basically considered equal and you're back to just relying on your army to roll hot to win.

TheDude · 4 months ago

40k is just unbalanced and not meant for hyper-competative tournaments. Sorry guys.

justajoe · 4 months ago

I don't know if there's a single good answer. In my case, the answer is better target selection. I define that as knowing when to attack (win or no) which units.

I played DE as well, and had the same result; the game I rolled OK, I did well; the two they ran cold (typical for me....) I did poorly. But I can't blame the dice; in the third game I chose to delay occupying an objective in favor of destroying the competing unit and my opponent (Chaos Marines) quite appropriately slowed his play denying me my last movement turn leaving the objective open. Thus, target selection. Had I moved and taken the chance of losing my scoring unit, the objective would in all likelihood been contested, and the difference between being massacred and gaining a draw, everything else being equal.

For me, this is how I would change my play, my list was OK, my initial strategy, decent, but my tactical choices, poor.

Also, note that my opponent took advantage of my choices, and if slowing his turn seems ... unsportsmanlike, it's 'ArdBoyz, and I don't bear him ill. The 41st Millennium is not a fair place.

khanaris · 4 months ago

Your opponent probably should have read the 'Ard Boyz rules more carefully. Stalling deliberately is grounds for potential disqualification. It is certainly bad sportsmanship, but the 'Ard Boyz tournament does have a few rules as well.

StephenK · 4 months ago

How is this an editorial?

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Are you asking this question in the pic of the day posts? Or the GW product placement posts?

LordSandwich · 4 months ago

But this is labelled as an editorial.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/editorial

Yes, this is exactly an Editorial.

Truth Hurts · 4 months ago

like I said your a dick of the highest order and yes Jwolf i have read the posts reference Buffo but he is the most annoying (and scary clown look at the link http://www.buffo.com )
40k player I know

CatachanBrother · 4 months ago

Wow nice website, buffo the clown truely is amazing! I found some great pictures for my cubicle at work. Who needs pictures of family when I got a ripped clown juggling bowling balls.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Learn English, figure out what an Editorial is, then get back to me.

I even provided a link so you can learn what an Editorial is. I don't think you have the capacity to spell Editorial correctly in your search engine, so consider this a freebie in my fight against illiteracy among teenagers.

LordSandwich · 4 months ago

Truth be told, I wasn't arguing that the article isn't an editorial, but that StephenK was drawing attention to this because it is labelled as such. I'm not being as concise as I'd like, but there it is.

Sathos · 4 months ago

In all honesty I will admit that I have felt reason to conflict with many of Buffo's posts but he is bang on the money with this one...

–noun
1. an article in a newspaper or other periodical presenting the opinion of the publisher, editor, or editors.
2. a statement broadcast on radio or television that presents the opinion of the owner, manager, or the like, of the station or channel.
3. something regarded as resembling such an article or statement, as a lengthy, dogmatic utterance.

This article is voicing the OP's thoughts and opinions whilst asking for other's opinions to make the editorial worth "blogging" about. It may not be the most in-depth or interesting editorial but it certainly is one. He could have simply said "My Dark Eldar seem to need above average rolls to win so how do I maximise my options around that?"

but instead he added depth and interest :)

John Weyermuller · 4 months ago

You don't.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

I run an Eldar list most times these days but do still dabble in my marines every now and then.

With my Eldar, I rely purely on preventing my opponent getting the hits. I'm a jet-biker and thus you're probably know already a number of the tactics that can be used from "The Way of Saim-Hann".

Let me bring you into spec with another idea on the jet-bike army which I don't thing Fritz has realised yet. Yes, you can take objectives with jet-bikes late on in the game....but isn't that a lot of points for a turn 5 job? Wouldn't you rather get some other uses out of those jetbikes?

I've recently re-jigged my list taking into advisement a tip that a top tabler gave me at the UK GT last year. Have anti-tank in every unit but only small amounts. This idea was a strange concept to start with as I was wondering how a lot of small anti-tank would be any use....surely loading up on anti-tank in specialist units was better??...but...he's right and I'll explain.

Just as with Buffo's DE army, you end up with a lot of anti-tank on the board but only a small amount in each unit. Making it near impossible for your opponent to take out your anti-tank weapons and allowing you to cover every aspect of the battle-field with something that threatens armour.

Now...how's this work with jet-bikes and how can they be more than just fodder for turn 5 grabbing?? The answer is Warlocks....they've really come into their own in 5th ed and with the abilities they've got your can deliver quite a punch.

I take 2 squads of 6 jet-bikes with 2 cannons per unit. I then add a Warlock with a singing spear and (more recently I've dropped Embolden) Destructor.

This gives me anti-troop in a heavy flamer and the equivalent of a short range lascannon against tanks. A jet-bike can move 12" a turn with a jump move of 6" in the assault phase. Factor in the throwing range of the spear and you've got the chance to take down any tank within 24" of your squad at the start of the turn and still get back if you don't. This may seem strange but you only need to get the Warlock in range and use the other 6 bikes to get your cover save by jumping back enough behind area terrain. With the Heavy Flamer, your also threatening troops that are in cover and thus the Warlock is suddenly a nasty piece of work.

Lets not forget those jet-bikes themselves though. True, the Warlock is now a Hells Angel that floats but those bikes can pile out a ton of shots and with twin-linking or Str 6 they can actually do some damage to units. Not a lot but enough to cause a break test or finish of an already weakened unit. This coupled with their speed over the field and the ability to get where you need them fast, suddenly makes the jet-bikes a nasty HOT offensive unit.

....Oh yeah...and with T4 and a 3+ armour save...they're suddenly HOT in terms of their ability to withstand fire. Coupled with the invun save of the Warlock on 4+ and you've got the chance that even after loosing the 6 bikes, your Warlock can win you an objective all on his lonesome as well as drawing a shed load of fire from your opponent in their efforts to finish the guy off.

Dictator93 · 4 months ago

Orks have cheap transports too!

in better response to your post though I believe you are being a bit negative and sound a little "complainy" (whiny sounds cruel). There are many ways to take advantage of an rmies disadvantages or advantages (whether you are playing as or against that army).

For example, armies like Chaos Space marines have über tough units like plague marines. Tough units leads to an arrogance developed by the opposing player on how "tough" they actually are. Wipe out one unit at a time and watch as your opponent feels demoralized (ten plague marine kills in one turn is not that rough to do, if you fire your whole army at them, or just an ordnance round or two).

Another example for an army you could play. Take advantage of your disadvantage like the post two above mine by BuFFo. Your troops are weak? Take lots of them. Your opponent laughs at your expensive transports? hide them on objectives, and watch him cry as the troops in them stay alive long to keep the objective. Etc... all these things. Just use your advantages and disadvantages to play psychological games with your opponent. I reccomend playing up his units and downplaying yours through out the entire game. This will make him over secure and then, make mistakes, or be unprepared for the "organo fisting" he is about to get (Thanks to warseer for "Organo Fistors and Blargh Wargh")

-Dictator

Somofrates · 4 months ago

I'll try a couple of melta piranhas (AV11, bolter-inmune!) and lots of transports/hammerheads with crisis (plasma+flammer) jumping forth and back.

Brother Zarnicolas · 4 months ago

Knowing your army and using it to full affect will turn the list from hot to cold. The only time this doesnt work is when your facing someone who is so wraped up into pulling any small rule out that the game becomes unfun. (aka the cheeters). If you know what your forces do and deploy them right and us them with the right tactics you can have cold rolls and still pull of wins. True that these may not be great stunning all out victories but they will still be wins.

True a baddly chosen army will still lose no matter what; unless you face a baby. One thing people forget is that they spend so much time on what others do that they forget what they can do. One reason why I like theamed armies since with a theam you will normaly have a tactic with it for what the army is to do. Once you understand what your theam is then you now start to think on how to take on different styles of armies or terain/deployments. From here you can win any battle no matter if its a hot army or cold army or if its a hot or cold day for you.

sodcactus · 4 months ago

I bulk up on everything that gives me rerolls. SInce I'm mainly a Nids-player it means Feeding Tendrils, Maws, TL-Devourers etc. Usually that helps a long way. Now I only need 1) Some template weapons 2) A melta-equivalent 3) Somthing, except a Fex-claw, that can penetrate AV14 then I'll be a happy critter.

sodcactus · 4 months ago

Blast-templates are also nice, they have a higher probability of hitting something, even with the abysmal BS of the Nids. Dropping 9 blast-templates from the Deathspitter usually hits something. But it slows gameplay down....

Yiannis Adamopoulos · 4 months ago

There is only one way to make any hot list and turn it to cold and that is adaptation of play-style. The cold list relies on toughness and overall resilience, that's why icy armies are so popular.

People first of all want to have tough units because they feel bad if they loose models, they rather loose the battle and keep the models alive. They then select units that while being tough can dish out very good statistical results damage-wise, therefore they will tend to like bs4 even with less shots and re-rolls even with less attacks. Finally after the above have been fulfilled they will go for any other randomness negation like, immunity to morale or the manipulation of it, steadier movement etc.

What we have to understand here is that in essence people LOVE to play cold cause it is predictable and "safe". Right there lies the essence of you defeat those armies, it simply has to do with defeating the player. Make them feel safe while your hot army does not really allow them a single shot. It is because they have invested SO much on being tough, re-rollable and strong that a coordinated attack will make them useless, you don't need to roll well, rolling has actually almost nothing to do with it, its all about movement and the sacrifice of the temporal damage to the endgame killing positioning.

With DE for example, its a real no brainer, they have the CHEAPEST stun effects in the game. Horrorfexes for 5 and lances for 10, which means that with 30-40 points the dark ones can suppress a tank and with another 5-10, an entire infantry squad per turn! So by just keeping in cover either by boosting or via terrain/other units and maneuvering to the sides and rears you eventually get to utterly stun and entire army while being able to assault from ideal positions. As the DE pincer closes, tanks are hit where it hurts with no terrain protection and squads are engaged much easier and piecemeal.

Do you need dice for that? No, str8 vs maxAV12 and usually 10-11 WILL stun/destroy tanks and weapons. Horrorfexes will pin non fearless units, whyches will tie down anything else and oh the enemy will fire a couple of missiles at your 4+ cover raiders...
GG no RE!

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

It's not "loose" models, it's "LOSE" models.

English is dying. And the interwebs kills it a little more each day.

Brent · 4 months ago

That's your contribution?

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

And what's yours, Brent?

Uh-huh. Nothing. Nothing at all.

Thanks for playing.

Brent · 4 months ago

*sigh*

My point, as I see now I'll have to spell it out on your hand, is hobby sites have zero need for a proofreader. So you were right - want a cookie?

I'm not the playground monitor so I'll let it go here, but his homonym was less disruptive than your need to point it out.

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

And I was all, like, whatever...

Ej · 4 months ago

People like you are killing the English language. Go back to speaking Middle English if you're such a purist. Language evolves. Deal with it. Hell, you're using ellipses for God's sake. Know how many different ways there are of using them? By Chicago, Bluebook and MLA standards you're using them incorrectly.

Take your faux-grammar Nazi crap off teh int@rwebz.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

Ok...so HellenKeler didn't have to add the "English is being killed" comment....

But pointing out to some-one the correct use of language isn't bad. Sometimes people just don't know and need a prod of correction.

I used to spell unusual with 2 l's for the longest time until some one pointed it out to me...same with really...I used to use 1 l instead of 2.

Sometimes it's helpful for people to point these things out.

Snyderson · 4 months ago

If that ain't irony; American people fighting over english language and refering to it as "Nazi crap".

Honestly, how does that fit in? o.0

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

Jawol, aber ich bin nicht eine Amerikaner.

Kurt · 4 months ago

My army is very hot - 4 Heavy flamers, 6 Flamers, 4 Combiflamers, 2 Inferno pistols.

Mechanized Sisters of Battle. :)

Generally I kill enemy's transports with 3 Exorcists and then flame his infantry to death. Or just kill his uber-heavy infantry (such as tooled-out Nobz with Str8 Ap1 missiles.)

Mass 600 points of your troops to kill his 200 points - and do not worry about bad rolls.
Repeat it.

That's my principle.

LordAba · 4 months ago

There are a lot of walls of text below, when the answer is so easy:

Take lots of numbers.

It's what makes ork shooting halfway decent.

ninjajesus · 4 months ago

i found that with tyranids since idea of a lictor is great but they die so easily if u make ur genestealers take the lictors roll by making it resonate the perferred enemy by giving em feeder tendrills, scuttlers and extended carapace and charge then into combat with other units they kick ass because they get reroll so you rarely have to "roll hot" because charging 16 hormagaunts in with perferred enemy ur bound to score more wounds this also works with gaunts 2 and winged warriors so even if you roll bad u can reroll solving your problem

kingworks · 4 months ago

My DE just wish I could roll average. -_-"

Bluephoenix · 4 months ago

simple answer: high-strength, low-ap (ap3 or ap2) weapons.

this has been surprisingly effective for my guard (1/3 of my models are carrying something with at least AP3)

Bulwark · 4 months ago

The other option is to ignore the odds of hot and cold and just take a list with enough dice that the law of averages will come into play. 1 bad roll on your melta shot will let the rhino live another day, but you can roll bad 10 times in a row for that loota squad.
The more elite your army is, the more suseptible you are to rolling hot/cold.

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

what the hell is a DAVU Wave Serpent?

I wish you cool kids wouldn't use acronyms and slang to help us slow kids understand better.

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

what the hell is a DAVU Wave Serpent?

I wish you cool kids wouldn't use acronyms and slang to help us slow kids understand better.

khanaris · 4 months ago

"Dire Avenger as Vehicle Upgrade"

It is a cutesy way of noting that sticking DIre Avengers in a Wave Serpent or Falcon turns the tank itself into a scoring unit. The idea being that they may never have to get out, since that is not why they are in there. And a minimized squad is not that expensive.

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

Dude, thanks.

I had no freaking clue. There is just one Eldar player where I live, and he hates them so much he just doesn't play much.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

5 Dire Avengers - 60p
10 Storm Guardians - 80p

A fair reason to use the DA's to make the tank scoring.....but a waste of 60p in a unit that you're not going to use for anything more than making something scoring in my opinion.

We're talking a minimum of 100p for the serpent plus the other 60p. That's 160p for a scoring tank which, frankly, will probably sit and do nothing all game other than (maybe) get taken out my a missile launcher or similar.

The energy fields are cool and all.....but with armour 12 and str 8 people have a 50/50 chance of getting through and a 1 in 3 change of a penetrating hit. Add to this the 50/50 chance of immobilising the vehicle in a penetrating hit and you're making 160pt a sitting duck if you aren't going to use it as anything more than an objective holder.

For 160pt...I'd much rather take 6 to 7 Pathfinders. Least they can do some long range damage and take more punishment thanks to their 2+ cover save.

And before anyone uses the argument of the long range anti cover templates....I'll point back to the missile launchers taking down the serpent.

For 160pt in a marine army, I can easily get 4 missile launchers in a Dev squad which can out range and out shoot the serpent in every respect save for movement....and if you're using the DAVU for scoring, then it's gonna end up sat still.

Theoryhammer.....4 missiles (one with BS 5)...3 hits....1 possible glance....1 penetrating on odds. Rolling it works out far worse for the Serpent than theoryhammer gives.

Just personal opinion though. I just think there's far better things to sit and hold an objective for the points and far better things to do with your serpent than have it sit on an objective.

Havik110 · 4 months ago

heres the thing...the DE have fast easily killed assault transports...but they go for 55 points a piece...if all things stay constant, should they be dropped to 35 points or do they stay at 55 and give them all sorts of upgrades like outflank and an auto cover save (improved night shields)

BuFFo · 4 months ago

I like the Raiders at 55 points. Thats fine by me. They do carry a Dark Lance as a standard weapon. I don't know any other 'cheap' army transport that doubles as a tank killer in its own right :)

But yeah, Night Shields needs to get the boot, and give us something better.

Fritz40K · 4 months ago

Jwolf, thanks for the mention, funny thing is that GW is responsable for how I now play and it is all their fault with their ever over the top codexes...

Years ago I just blasted away when star cannons pumped out more shots and my vypers had crystal targeting matrixes, such fond memories... My fire power truly matched my arrogance to follow the quote. Then things changed over time, despite being very shooty with lots of S6 shots and mobility I was killing less and by hanging around and shooting I was getting blasted off the table. 5th Ed rolls around and my army takes a further hit with true LOS being all jetbikes and vypers and with each new codex and GW pushing more toys and higher point games I found I had to make a choice- either ramp up my army to match the shooty and loose the fluff of it- Saim-Hann needs to roll with jetbikes and vypers- even if vyper suck. Starting with the chaos codex when it was "new" is where the guys in my area and club all started to go with power builds and it continues today with the "best of space marine" lists that I face every week- How can I compete with twin linked melta vulkan spam on everything if I want to play a fluff based army? For my Eldar it is now about staying alive and making my opponent think they are winning by blowing up models I let get into harms way and let them shoot, and then I move in on turn five to contest for the win. A fortuned falcon with holo-fields, star engines, and vectored engines is hard to stop. I pretty much don't shoot anything anymore unless it is kill points, and then it is getting +1 and then zipping away. Funny thing is most cats are content to try and just shoot at me rather then chase me down. My buddy Jawaballs was in the same situation with his Blood Angels trying to deal with so much killy at the club, he moved on to positioning tactics to win over shooting. Cats expect his Blood Angels to play like "Blood Angels" and it really takes them by surprise when they discover what he is really doing.

Don't give up on your Dark Eldar, maybe just change how you play them- don't play them like everybody expects you to play 40K, blowing up models, killy, multiple same units, etc. I know DE can do my tricks better then my Eldar...

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Hey Jwolf, what was your army list?

khanaris · 4 months ago

It may not be possible for every book. The best way to minimize reliance on average rolling is to use tactics that revolve around the movement phase and to roll as many dice as possible. People tend to focus on the average when working through Mathhammer, and they forget about the standard deviation. If you play a horde army, your rolls are fairly predictable. It is hard to roll too far off the average, although 40k doesn't use enough dice to eliminate hot and cold rolling completely. But if you play Deathwing, you are inevitably going to be at the mercy of the dice in every phase of the game.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

Beautifully put :)

Asugradinwa · 4 months ago

I try to guard against a hot/cold list by doing 2 things: Spamming & generating rerolls.

My first army was Tau and now whenever I play them I load up on markerlights, kroot, and broadsides.
Markerlights to guide things & eliminate cover saves for the broadsides or crisis suits (kill my oppenent's "Hot" dice rolls & limit my "cold" ones)
Spam kroot so I'm rolling 30 dice at I5 on the charge and another 30-60 at I3

I now run a Vulkan Salamander space marine army that has a ton of multi meltas, thunderhammers, and a few flamers. Rerolling hits for the meltas is great. AP1 makes my substandard dice rolling on the damage chart better most of the time (I can't tell you the number of times I would have only immobilized a destroyed vehicle without AP1). Thunderhammer master crafting generally has me picking up at least 3-5 dice to reroll meaning more hits. Sure a lascannon has better range, but I'd need more luck on the to hit, armor penetration, and damage chart rolls with that then a multi melta.

So for an army like Dark Eldar you spam lance weapons, give wyches wych weapons (making it harder for the oppenent to "get hot") and try to buy equipment like the goblet of spite, agoniser, & combat drugs for models so you arn't hoping for good dice rolls.

Dictator93 · 4 months ago

In the local 'ard boyz I placed 3rd using a strategy like that. Basically I negated poor rolling by over hyping elements of my army.

Instead of taking mortar squads, I put mortars in all my squads that were immobile. As a result, if I missed with one mortar shell (easy to do!) I had another 4 coming down on that same spot!

Don't be discouraged Jwolf! You can do it!

Also, what was your list Jwolf! Post an update to this blog entry or create a new one.

Conrad_Dakarn · 4 months ago

I'm definitely a re-roll generator for my armies. Doom and Fortune every time with my Farseer....Twin-linked weapons at every opportunity....

Guess that's why I love playing a jet-bike army. Even my serpents and prisms are twin-linking. Though I do love to stick a Reaper Exarch on my list with one of my serpents (in case Dawn of War) and take mass advantage of crack shot with the Tempest.

Crackinjahcs · 4 months ago

Bulwark has it right. The law of averages will help to curb the hot/cold dice rolling. Just remember we all have off days. Most people mathhammer that a 4+ will hit half the time. I plan for 30% and then attack with a 3 to 1 ratio. Horde/non-elite armies can usually roll buckets of dice. Elite armies with mobility can divide and conquer/force the enemy to always be reacting while they mass at key points. Elite armies without mobility (Transports are fairly cheap in points but not in $$ for a reason...) are a bit tougher and usually work well for me with a hammer and anvil technique.

Just remember even Kharn can roll 5 1's on the charge and fail every armor save now and then... Hey that sounds just like last week :-)

Name · 4 months ago

If your army is running too hot, try substituting your low volume of high quality fire for an intense volume of S4 plus fire. My tyranid list runs three boom fexes, that's three S8 large blasts a turn with pinning. If you make them roll 12 dice on their valuable units, they will start to die.

Divergent_Reality · 4 months ago

i play necrons. they are an army that now in 5th edition needs to roll hot. with changes to combat resolution and the glancing hit tables it makes doing damage with the tin heads more difficult.

for necrons their strength lies in redundancy. multiple units for we'll be back coverage. this also helps for their firepower. two units of destroyers are more useful than one. the best bet i have found for them is to maximize the mobile firepower. the more ranged shots i can put out increases the chances of disabling vehicles and making models fail armor saves. that means destroyers, immortals and as a personal preference scarabs with disruption fields.

in my usual 1750 its nine immortals, eight destroyers and ten scarabs. plus the warriors, lord and whatnot. the warriors are there for phase out buffer and to rapid fire what gets too close.

this gives me a first turn with 43 shots of strength five or higher to start smashing things that make me die. and on the second turn the scarabs add on another 40 hand to hand attacks to pound anything hiding or nearby. i never hold scarabs in reserve, i prefer the guaranteed second turn assault/destruction versus a possible second turn arrival.

these tend to be pretty effective. large enough squads or groupings of squads to let them last. in the event og their loss, while annoying, does not break my army to tiny metallic pieces.

Denny B · 4 months ago

I rolled 100 statistical even lower and still got 1st at my local 'Ard Boyz with DE. Its called Dark Lance/Blaster Spam. I had 26 Dark Lances and Blasters and I had two massacres and 1 minor victory and about 10 of the modifiers. And I rolled horrible all day. Maybe next time, if you learn to use the DE RIGHT and dont be an idiot like so many people you'll win easily like I did.

sittingduck · 4 months ago

I hate to beat a dead horse, but here goes. Going back to the discussion of whether or not you have to disclose what squad is which transport I think it is clear that the rules require you to disclose this and are not optional. From page 92.

A Note on Secrecy
"To keep things fair, you should ALWAYS allow your opponent to read your force roster after a game. IN THE SAME SPIRIT, ALWAYS make clear to your opponent which squads are embarked in which transport vehicle. BIG PERIOD END OF SENTENCE HERE.
NEW Sentence. However, before starting to deploy their armies, it is a good idea for players to agree whether or not they can read the opponent's force roster before and during the game."

The optional part of this rule only pertains to the disclosure of rosters before and during a game. Nowhere can it be construed that disclosing your transports contents is optional. The rule is very clear and words like "always" don't allow for interpretation.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

I understand where you are coming from, but you left out the rest of the rule.

"Others prefer to leave a feel of secrecy around their lists, as bluffing can make a game really entertaining. !!!THE CHOICE IS YOURS!!!!!"

Emphasize mine.

So there you have it, the last two sentences clearly allows secrecy in the deployment and the lists if the player wishes it to be so.

This is why in the 'Ard Boyz, there is a rule made to specifically address the issue of secret army lists, as to avoid cheating, of which I am vehemently against, but there is no rule FORCING you to disclose what you are deploying at all.

So yes, you can look at my list all you want while I deploy, but I am just not going to tell you what is in my raiders because I want to "Bluff you to make the game really entertaining, since the choice is mine"

:)

sittingduck · 4 months ago

I disagree. The statement regarding the choice only refers to the disclosure of army lists before and during a game. It does not allow for the option of not disclosing your list after a game, and it doesn't allow for the option of not disclosing the contents of your transports.

Look at the sentence that you quote. Others prefer to leave a feel of secrecy around their LISTS. That in no way can be interpreted to mean that you don't have to disclose the contents of transports. It's unambiguous.

The rule as written requires you to specifically disclose what unit is in which transport regardless of when you disclose your army list.

BuFFo · 4 months ago

It is actually quite clear....

1) Showing the army list is optional.

2) Telling what unit is in what transport is done in 'the same spirit', which means it is also optional.

3) At the end of the pargraph, what I quoted, clearly states it is my choice whether I want to disclose anything at all.

4) For the 20th time, there is no rule that anyone can ind in the book which FORCES me to show you a) my list and b) what units are in what transport. It simply does not exist.

The rule as written (A Note On Secrecy) is optional. Period.

sittingduck · 4 months ago

1) Showing your army list after a game is not optional.

2) In the same spirit, ALWAYS tell your opponent what unit is in which transport. This has nothing to do with the list. The rule is simple. You must tell your opponent what unit is in which transport regardless of when the lists are exchanged. If I ask in the middle of a game " Hey, what unit is in that rhino" my opponent must tell me regardless of whether or not we have agreed to exchange list prior to or during the game.

3) The only reference to optional disclosure concerns when lists will be disclosed. Nothing else. Lists must be disclosed at the end of the game regardless of whether or not you chose to disclose them prior to or during the game. That is clearly not optional.

4) For the 20th time I just showed you the rule. It clearly exists. I quoted it in my first post.

The only optional part of secrecy is when list are disclosed. It is very clear.

khanaris · 4 months ago

After going through it again, I tend to agree. The point about showing lists does seem to be distinct from the point about transports. If you really want to play a game of bluffing, maybe it is better to keep that for friendly games where you know your opponent pretty well. But you should be able to compete in tournaments without squeezing easter eggs out of the rules.

BlackSly · 4 months ago

I'm with Duck and Khanaris. The language I see clearly state that the optional part that players have to agree about is whether lists can be read before/during games. The other parts in that rule, about disclosing lists after the game and about stating which unit is embarked in which transport, do not seem optional, not with the word "always" in the sentence.

The "others prefer" sentence clearly is modifying the "it is a good idea to agree" sentence, not the entire topic of the rule.

Therefore,
1) you must declare what is in what transport
2) you must show lists after the game
3) you MAY agree that lists have to be shown before/during the game, but in a spirit of secrecy, you MAY choose not to agree to do this.

khanaris · 4 months ago

The choice is between you and your opponent in a friendly game, which is what the rulebook was written for. In a tournament, the choice belongs to the tournament organizers and judges. You are trying to weasel around the disclosure requirements by making your transports identical. You are not doing it to "make the game really entertaining". You are doing it because you want to win and you think doing this will help.

HellenKeler · 4 months ago

AHA! So Buffo WAS being a dick! I knew it!

Cheater, cheater, pumpkin eater!

slxiii · 4 months ago

as far as the RAW argument goes, if you can put your units in transports without informing me what they are, my smart missile systems are free to shoot at their cargo. after all, i don't need line of sight, and if your unit is in range it's fair game right?
maybe i'll be able to determine what units are in which transport by their armour saves(or lack of)

BuFFo · 4 months ago

The unit is not in range because it is not on the table. Sure you don't need line of sight, but you still need to measure range to the base of the models.

There are none.

I fail to see how you are arguing "Okay, if you don't want to ride in the car with me, then I can go ahead and walk through walls!"

Okay, go ahead!

Saark · 4 months ago

If Sixii wants to press the issue, the unit actually is still "on the table" under Embarking (p.66)

"Embarking..
If the players need to measure a range involving the embarked unit (except for its shooting), this range is measured to or from the vehicle's hull."

Note that the statement isn't "shooting at it (target)" it is "its shooting (shooter)" there are other reasons why you aren't allowed to shoot at them, but "not being on the table" isn't that reason. Because of the permissive rules set, the only way to damage a unit inside a transport is described in the "Damage Effects on Passengers table."

That's twice today I've had to fix your rules. Are you hitting the same bottle of whiskey and ether you normally inflate those balloon animals with, again?

TheRealChris · 4 months ago

Surely you have to say what is in the transport? Otherwise I simply accuse you of cheating and game over. After all where is your proof? And writting it down and not showing me is no good as you could have done many scribbles on many bits of paper.

Anyway goes to show playing 40k competitively ain't as much fun as playing, for, well, fun.

zlotnik · 4 months ago

In most home games we play, we have always taken for granted that telling your opponent your list was implied in the rules.
but when further reading the rules i must agree with buffo. GW will usually use the word "must" if they are implying that you have to do something, they have in this case either deliberately or accidentally (not for us to make that decision) used the word "should"

(To keep things fair, you should ALWAYS allow your opponent to read your force roster after a game. IN THE SAME SPIRIT, ALWAYS make clear to your opponent which squads are embarked in which transport vehicl)

'should' does not imply must.

*this is just my opinion, and how my gaming group generally approaches rules*

zlotnik · 4 months ago

oh also "in the same spirit" part, i would argue that if you take my interpritation of the first sentence then this follows suite.

like to hear your thoughts on this aspect.

sittingduck · 4 months ago

I agree that should does not mean must; however in this case it is a mandate as "should" is followed by "always." So the question to ask is when "should" you tell someone what is in which transport? The answer is always.

The preceding sentence starts out with "To keep things fair." With that in mind, the sentence structure "In the same spirit" means fairness.

ACee · 4 months ago

I am posting this here because I want to address several issues on the transport mystery unit issue.

In regards to the rules it clearly says on page 92 of the rule book under the A Note On Secrecy that it is the norm in tournament play that full disclosure is used which means you indicate what squad is in what transport during deployment. I am not sure how much clearer the rule book can be.

If you want further proof of the need of disclosure it stresses it on page 94 under reserves that you have to disclose everything that is being held in reserved including if you are joining an IC to a squad, if a squad is in a transport, and which squad is coming in with which transport. It doesn't make sense that in deployment you can be vague ("Yeah that vehicle has guys in it") and when declaring reserves you have to be specific ("That Farseer is with my Seer Council and they are coming in the Wave Serpent B").

Further, if you have a bunch of transports but do not disclose which transport has which unit and merely just show your roster list to your opponent, that would give a huge advantage against an army that has all foot sloggers and you can see what infantry unit is anti-vehicle and which unit is anti-infantry where your opponent has to guess. Now if you want, you can hide what units are in your vehicles if I can put out generic infantry models and as I shoot or charge I get to actual put out there what they are. That would even the playing field.

As for the other aspect of why you have to disclose what is in your transports is the aspect of cheating. I am not calling anyone out there a specific cheater, but I am saying that hiding units in vehicles can lead to cheating. If I play against someone who cheats and someone who is being honest then how am I suppose to know the difference?

In the final analysis, someone who doesn't fully disclose what units are in which transports is trying to seek an unfair advantage in tournament settings. If I was across the table from one I would make them fully disclose what unit is in what transport and if they refused to do so I would refuse to play until a judge was called in. At best, they are trying to get an undue advantage and at worst they are cheaters.

MVB · 4 months ago

Just for the record, when Buffo said that Marines were a forgiving army in his first post just about, people probably should have turned off the negative toned dorkus.

Any army built around expensive basic troops that die to any type of weapon on a roll of a 1 or a 2 is quite the opposite of forgiving.

If you expose 30 guardsmen in cover to a bunch of pistol shots, or artillery shots, or anything that doesn't ignore cover, there's a good chance by the odds that they'll simply be there anyway ... so who really cares if they get shot at.

If you expose a marine to a couple of lasguns at ALL, he can die simply by rolling a single bad dice, and there goes a ton of your points.

The most forgiving armies are the ones where any loss of units does very little to cripple you, so that "bad dice rolling" will impact you less. Marines are the LEAST forgiving, b/c you have to struggle to not expose yourself to defensive dice rolling AT ALL, since any variance in the odds boofs you hardcore from the get-go.

Redundancy for cheap = forgiving, read: guard, orks, nids, etc. /facepalm