Jump to content

Welcome to The Bolter and Chainsword
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Rumor: Superheavy/Gargantuan Survivability


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
92 replies to this topic

#51
Dark Shepherd

Dark Shepherd

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,366 posts
The anything entering from reserves seems to be the fix for big units getting shot off the board before they can do anything, and theyve mentioned it a fair bit in the streams
  • Dracos likes this

#52
MagicHat

MagicHat

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 637 posts

It would be cool, maybe if they would make it as something like; can only loose the number of wounds to move it down one bracket per phase. So your shooting can at least make it function worse and the other player has at least 2 phases it can survive.


Mechanicus knights automatically heals 1 wound/turn, so probably not a good idea.
  • Black Blow Fly likes this

#53
MARK0SIAN

MARK0SIAN

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,895 posts
As I’ve said, I’m not a huge fan of this particular method but If I had to design it I’d actually make sure that they couldn’t lose enough wounds to be bracketed in one turn. Perhaps set the limit so they were 1 wound away from being bracketed.

I know people want to be able to impact them meaningfully in the first turn, but I actually think it’s perfectly reasonable that someone who has spent 400-500 points on a model is guaranteed at least one turn of using it in its top bracket.

gallery_86689_11936_21517.pngsml_gallery_48988_16053_22349.png


#54
BolterZorro

BolterZorro

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 814 posts

As I’ve said, I’m not a huge fan of this particular method but If I had to design it I’d actually make sure that they couldn’t lose enough wounds to be bracketed in one turn. Perhaps set the limit so they were 1 wound away from being bracketed.

I know people want to be able to impact them meaningfully in the first turn, but I actually think it’s perfectly reasonable that someone who has spent 400-500 points on a model is guaranteed at least one turn of using it in its top bracket.

Indeed. I think that the problem is mostly around T1. Once the party is engaged,in T2+, there should be enough threats on the battlefield so that the enemy has to choose carefully his first targets. For me, the problem is just T1: giving the big toy (magnus, wraithknights, stormsurge, ....) a rule/stratagem/whatever that make him almost immune or super tanky in its first appearance T1 (eventually conditioned to "if he doesn't have first to play").


  • MARK0SIAN likes this

#55
SkimaskMohawk

SkimaskMohawk

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 5,223 posts
  • Location:Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
  • Faction: Raven Guard and VIII Legion

As I’ve said, I’m not a huge fan of this particular method but If I had to design it I’d actually make sure that they couldn’t lose enough wounds to be bracketed in one turn. Perhaps set the limit so they were 1 wound away from being bracketed.

I know people want to be able to impact them meaningfully in the first turn, but I actually think it’s perfectly reasonable that someone who has spent 400-500 points on a model is guaranteed at least one turn of using it in its top bracket.


Why? Just because you pay a lot of points for a knight or other superheavy doesn't give you any special dispensation over other players. That's like saying every expensive unit should be able to fire at full effect for the first turn always. My centurion unit is almost 500 points, why don't they get guarantee max fire?
  • mel_danes, Black Blow Fly, Lanparth and 2 others like this

#56
sairence

sairence

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 734 posts

The anything entering from reserves seems to be the fix for big units getting shot off the board before they can do anything, and theyve mentioned it a fair bit in the streams


I'm not sure how viable that's going to be. Leaving Knights aside, a lot of superheavies in the current balance are already fairly points-inefficient. Looking at Baneblades, it's pretty much always better to bring the equivalent points in other units. In the current ruleset you bring non-Knight superheavies because they're cool, not because they're great.

Now 9th adds a fairly high CP cost to include them in lists and the fix to make survivabl is to spend more CP? That won't really achieve anything. So I doubt that the reserve rule is made with superheavies in mind primarily.
  • WandererTheta likes this
gallery_30308_9518_8251.png

#57
dice4thedicegod

dice4thedicegod

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 895 posts

As I’ve said, I’m not a huge fan of this particular method but If I had to design it I’d actually make sure that they couldn’t lose enough wounds to be bracketed in one turn. Perhaps set the limit so they were 1 wound away from being bracketed.

I know people want to be able to impact them meaningfully in the first turn, but I actually think it’s perfectly reasonable that someone who has spent 400-500 points on a model is guaranteed at least one turn of using it in its top bracket.

people should be able to meaningfully impact the opponents force in a turn. Whether that is killing 400-500 points of infantry, or 400-500 points of LOW.  Shouldnt put LOW on a pedestal where it is fine to massacre significant points values of non-LOW units but doing it to an LOW is somehow a problem.


  • mel_danes likes this

#58
MARK0SIAN

MARK0SIAN

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,895 posts


As I’ve said, I’m not a huge fan of this particular method but If I had to design it I’d actually make sure that they couldn’t lose enough wounds to be bracketed in one turn. Perhaps set the limit so they were 1 wound away from being bracketed.

I know people want to be able to impact them meaningfully in the first turn, but I actually think it’s perfectly reasonable that someone who has spent 400-500 points on a model is guaranteed at least one turn of using it in its top bracket.

people should be able to meaningfully impact the opponents force in a turn. Whether that is killing 400-500 points of infantry, or 400-500 points of LOW. Shouldnt put LOW on a pedestal where it is fine to massacre significant points values of non-LOW units but doing it to an LOW is somehow a problem.

Because LoWs are far more vulnerable than other units. Lots of them don’t have an invulnerable save, they’re just as easy to wound as other vehicles, they’re impossible to hide (they’re literally specifically exempted from the new terrain rules) and they’ll cost a fortune to put into reserves. Taking out 500 points of LoWs in an opponents force is much easier than taking out 500 points of normal units.
  • WandererTheta likes this

gallery_86689_11936_21517.pngsml_gallery_48988_16053_22349.png


#59
BolterZorro

BolterZorro

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 814 posts

 

 

As I’ve said, I’m not a huge fan of this particular method but If I had to design it I’d actually make sure that they couldn’t lose enough wounds to be bracketed in one turn. Perhaps set the limit so they were 1 wound away from being bracketed.

I know people want to be able to impact them meaningfully in the first turn, but I actually think it’s perfectly reasonable that someone who has spent 400-500 points on a model is guaranteed at least one turn of using it in its top bracket.

people should be able to meaningfully impact the opponents force in a turn. Whether that is killing 400-500 points of infantry, or 400-500 points of LOW. Shouldnt put LOW on a pedestal where it is fine to massacre significant points values of non-LOW units but doing it to an LOW is somehow a problem.

Because LoWs are far more vulnerable than other units. Lots of them don’t have an invulnerable save, they’re just as easy to wound as other vehicles, they’re impossible to hide (they’re literally specifically exempted from the new terrain rules) and they’ll cost a fortune to put into reserves. Taking out 500 points of LoWs in an opponents force is much easier than taking out 500 points of normal units.

 

Not only that, but at some point, even if you don't kill it, by just erasing enough wounds, it becomes far less efficient if not useless as a dead brick.


  • WandererTheta likes this

#60
kombatwombat

kombatwombat

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 534 posts
6 Custodes Terminators is about 500pts and pack 24 wounds. They have a 2+/4++ but they’re only T5 so most things wound them fairly readily. They’re also very large (6 x 50mm bases) so hiding them effectively can be a challenge. Why should they be more deserving of T1 death than LoWs?
  • Black Blow Fly and AenarIT like this

#61
MARK0SIAN

MARK0SIAN

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,895 posts

6 Custodes Terminators is about 500pts and pack 24 wounds. They have a 2+/4++ but they’re only T5 so most things wound them fairly readily. They’re also very large (6 x 50mm bases) so hiding them effectively can be a challenge. Why should they be more deserving of T1 death than LoWs?


They can also teleport for free to avoid even being on the table in turn 1. Not to mention they’re now pretty easy to hide with obscuring terrain or dense cover giving them a -1 to hit.

Also my point isn’t that other stuff should be erased easily or is deserving of a turn 1 death, certainly 500 points of custodes terminators isn’t. It’s that LoWs should have an even playing field at being able to effectively survive turn 1.

I’d happily not have this rule (if it is even true) in exchange for obscuring terrain applying to LoWs.
  • Shinespider, WandererTheta, Putrid Choir and 1 other like this

gallery_86689_11936_21517.pngsml_gallery_48988_16053_22349.png


#62
BolterZorro

BolterZorro

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 814 posts

6 Custodes Terminators is about 500pts and pack 24 wounds. They have a 2+/4++ but they’re only T5 so most things wound them fairly readily. They’re also very large (6 x 50mm bases) so hiding them effectively can be a challenge. Why should they be more deserving of T1 death than LoWs?

1. this is not 24w but 6*4w

2. hiding them is simply POSSIBLE

3. cover rules apply to them

4. they can probably do missions: normal LoW (stormsurge, wraithknight etc..) just can't

5. they benefit from way more buffs than simple LoW

etc...

I don't say they are better. I just say that many rules are against LoW for now. That's just adding up to the roof with the additional CP's. That's it.

We'll see in v9 if the gazkul rules are better than, say, morty/magnus (if so, GW should generalize the gazkull datasheet type to morty/magnus etc...). We'll see in v9 if a wraithknight is better than 3 wraith lords....(but I have some doubts about the last one ;-) )


Edited by BolterZorro, 29 June 2020 - 12:21 PM.


#63
dice4thedicegod

dice4thedicegod

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 895 posts

 

 

 

As I’ve said, I’m not a huge fan of this particular method but If I had to design it I’d actually make sure that they couldn’t lose enough wounds to be bracketed in one turn. Perhaps set the limit so they were 1 wound away from being bracketed.

I know people want to be able to impact them meaningfully in the first turn, but I actually think it’s perfectly reasonable that someone who has spent 400-500 points on a model is guaranteed at least one turn of using it in its top bracket.

people should be able to meaningfully impact the opponents force in a turn. Whether that is killing 400-500 points of infantry, or 400-500 points of LOW. Shouldnt put LOW on a pedestal where it is fine to massacre significant points values of non-LOW units but doing it to an LOW is somehow a problem.

Because LoWs are far more vulnerable than other units. Lots of them don’t have an invulnerable save, they’re just as easy to wound as other vehicles, they’re impossible to hide (they’re literally specifically exempted from the new terrain rules) and they’ll cost a fortune to put into reserves. Taking out 500 points of LoWs in an opponents force is much easier than taking out 500 points of normal units.

 

Not only that, but at some point, even if you don't kill it, by just erasing enough wounds, it becomes far less efficient if not useless as a dead brick.

 

That happens with other units too.  If a couple of ork mobs are on the table and between them take 400-500 points of casualties, then they will become “far less efficient “ too.

Due to the ever increased killing power, all armies hemorrhage units at the moment.  You can’t just exempt LOW (unless you make them so expensive that they become game warping)



#64
MARK0SIAN

MARK0SIAN

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,895 posts



As I’ve said, I’m not a huge fan of this particular method but If I had to design it I’d actually make sure that they couldn’t lose enough wounds to be bracketed in one turn. Perhaps set the limit so they were 1 wound away from being bracketed.

I know people want to be able to impact them meaningfully in the first turn, but I actually think it’s perfectly reasonable that someone who has spent 400-500 points on a model is guaranteed at least one turn of using it in its top bracket.

people should be able to meaningfully impact the opponents force in a turn. Whether that is killing 400-500 points of infantry, or 400-500 points of LOW. Shouldnt put LOW on a pedestal where it is fine to massacre significant points values of non-LOW units but doing it to an LOW is somehow a problem.
Because LoWs are far more vulnerable than other units. Lots of them don’t have an invulnerable save, they’re just as easy to wound as other vehicles, they’re impossible to hide (they’re literally specifically exempted from the new terrain rules) and they’ll cost a fortune to put into reserves. Taking out 500 points of LoWs in an opponents force is much easier than taking out 500 points of normal units.
Not only that, but at some point, even if you don't kill it, by just erasing enough wounds, it becomes far less efficient if not useless as a dead brick.
That happens with other units too. If a couple of ork mobs are on the table and between them take 400-500 points of casualties, then they will become “far less efficient “ too.
Due to the ever increased killing power, all armies hemorrhage units at the moment. You can’t just exempt LOW (unless you make them so expensive that they become game warping)

But we are not exempting as such, we are trying to even up the playing field so they’ve got an equal chance of survival, it’s just being done by a limit to the damage they can take.

Besides, I’ve already said, this is not the method I would choose or even think it’s a good method. I’d much rather pretty much anything else. If, however, it’s the only thing on the table (which it appears to be) then I’ll take it and I don’t think it’s broken, it’s just artificial and clumsy.

For me, the bottom line is LoWs already needed a survivability boost before 9th and everything we’ve seen for them only makes that worse now. This rumoured rule might help.

gallery_86689_11936_21517.pngsml_gallery_48988_16053_22349.png


#65
Dark Shepherd

Dark Shepherd

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,366 posts

The anything entering from reserves seems to be the fix for big units getting shot off the board before they can do anything, and theyve mentioned it a fair bit in the streams

I'm not sure how viable that's going to be. Leaving Knights aside, a lot of superheavies in the current balance are already fairly points-inefficient. Looking at Baneblades, it's pretty much always better to bring the equivalent points in other units. In the current ruleset you bring non-Knight superheavies because they're cool, not because they're great.

Now 9th adds a fairly high CP cost to include them in lists and the fix to make survivabl is to spend more CP? That won't really achieve anything. So I doubt that the reserve rule is made with superheavies in mind primarily.

Reserves definitely suits monsters and knights more

Baneblades et al already needed a big points drop. Especially compared to knights if they dont get an invul
  • Juggernut likes this

#66
kombatwombat

kombatwombat

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 534 posts

1. this is not 24w but 6*4w
2. hiding them is simply POSSIBLE
3. cover rules apply to them
4. they can probably do missions: normal LoW (stormsurge, wraithknight etc..) just can't
5. they benefit from way more buffs than simple LoW
etc...
I don't say they are better. I just say that many rules are against LoW for now. That's just adding up to the roof with the additional CP's. That's it.


And yet, Knights, Baneblade Chassis and Daemon Primarchs have all been competitive at various times through 8e. Custodes Terminators never have. If the 9e changes penalise those big models, they might come closer to the level of the Terminators (leaving aside the changes to multi-charges, anti tri-point strat, tanks shooting into combat and blast changes that have all negatively impacted those Terminators).

That specific case aside, it is possible to take all-LoW armies even aside from Knights. What this potential rule says is that you are not permitted to materially reduce the effectiveness of my army T1, but I can do it to you.
  • dice4thedicegod likes this

#67
WarriorFish

WarriorFish

    ++ PRÆFECT SOCIORUM ++

  • +++ADMINISTRATUM+++
  • 22,996 posts
  • Location:Blighty
  • Faction: Hunter Legion

If there is nothing more on the rumour, perhaps this discussion on the strengths and vulnerabilities of SHs can be taken to a more appropriate place? Thanks in advance.


  • mel_danes and Black Blow Fly like this

gallery_48988_15465_8206.pnggallery_30308_9518_1551.pnggallery_30308_3239_3185.pnggallery_30308_9518_17558.pnggallery_30308_3239_193.pnggallery_30308_3239_17729.png
Painting Oaths Completed:
gallery_30308_3239_28.gifgallery_30308_3239_28.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gifgallery_30308_3239_84.gifgallery_30308_3239_42.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gifgallery_30308_3239_42.gifgallery_30308_3239_28.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gifgallery_30308_3239_42.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gif
gallery_30308_3239_42.gifgallery_30308_3239_102.gifgallery_30308_3239_42.gif
In the grim predictability of online 40k, there can be only Sun Tzu quotes

SM Ironclad | IG Stormies | =][= Stormies | AM Armigers

CSM Defiler | TSons Rubrics | Daemons Daemonettes

DE Warriors | Tyranids Genestealers


#68
jaxom

jaxom

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,003 posts

EDIT: was writing this when the previous post went up. Feel free to delete or move if not entirely relevant to the discussion.
 

 

Even though I definitely agree that superheavies, especially non-knights, are in desperate need of a survivability buff I’m categorically against limiting damage per phase/turn as a mechanic. Especially when we’re talking about melee heavy units, because for shooting armies without melee viability once this unkillable unit makes contact your game is over.
 


Should a librarian dreadnought or blood angels smash captain really be able to do 40 wounds to a knight in a single fight phase? That's really not hard to do, and with the increase to CP makes it more likely to happen.

Absolutely no reason a sub 200 point model should be able to one shot a 450+ point model...

 

 

It's all about variance versus reliability and tournament players are really good at gaming the system. Previous editions had a wide variance in models being able to deal with vehicles so a guardsman with lascannon could kill a unit 200x his point cost, but it was not reliable. Dedicated anti-tank weapons (for the most part, but not all) in this edition accomplish that variance with random number of attacks and random damage. Then we've got close combat options  - like the smash captain and librarian dreadnought - which are much more reliable in damage output. Their supposed disadvantage is they have to get into close combat. This is where gaming the system comes in; the units have to be just so to overcome the disadvantages. I think the larger issue is that there's no counter-play with Knights. They can't snipe the smash captain or indirect-fire him, they can't try to dispel Wings of Sanguinius, etc. Similarly, if a Knight is one-shot off the table, there's no counter-play because the unit is gone. 

 

It is an odd one. Super Heavies have historically suffered from being the first thing shot off the table for 2 reasons: they're a big target and thus easy to shoot and charge AND they are often worth so many points that you often take out a quarter of your opponents army by killing it. This lead to the problem that super-heavies could only be decent or good if they had a arsenal of defence options open to them such as the insanity of a 3++ ALONG with the ability to use top bracket anyway.

 

I think your last point about top brackets is vital. Between that and healing, it often doesn't feel like shooting a Knight does anything until it's off the board. To be continued after next quotation.

 

Its another patch fix that is necessary now that we've abandoned the old AV system. In the old system, it was difficult to efficiently and reliably kill heavy vehicles, but much more viable to reliably silence them. The new system has increased the problem of alpha strike against big tough units. Ideally, we'd have a system where you could bracket units but not kill them immediately, but that's going to be too complicated in practice. Having alpha strikes be less viable isn't a perfect solution, but its better than nothing, especially for armies running single superheavies.

 

This is where brackets were supposed to take over. However, tournament lists obviously look to avoid the degradation of their units so we see a lot Vehicles from factions that have "double-wound for bracket" rules and/or "use top bracket" stratagems. Overall, I think dealing damage to a Vehicle needs to feel like it does something and if the only option for that is "kill it" then that's what people are going to look to do. I don't think the right design pathway to make super-heavies harder to bring down, but to increase the reliability of "they can be effected without having to completely remove the model."


Edited by jaxom, 29 June 2020 - 02:28 PM.

sml_gallery_48988_15094_5489.pngsml_gallery_48988_15094_6481.pnggallery_48988_15094_792.pnggallery_48988_15094_7590.pnggallery_48988_15094_3504.png

 

Past Event Banners

Spoiler

#69
Panzer

Panzer

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 21,076 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Faction: Order of Baal, Dal'yth Sept

At the end of the day it should be clear to everyone that such a rule would only be fighting symptoms instead of getting rid of the problem itself (the too high ranged damage output in 40k), so no it's not a perfect solution. However it would be better than nothing.


gallery_62972_10568_7658.jpgbFk9acX.pnggallery_62972_14467_40478.pnggallery_62972_14467_3819.jpggallery_62972_10568_4118.jpg


#70
Medjugorje

Medjugorje

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,830 posts
  • Location:MUNICH - GERMANY

it sounds OP - my opinion. Instead slowing down the Power creep they need such dumb rules.



#71
Dont-Be-Haten

Dont-Be-Haten

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,794 posts
  • Location:Birmingham, Alabama
  • Faction: Carmine Blades
If it was a stratagem or a once per game type thing it is definitely not OP.

gallery_62972_10568_26224.jpggallery_62972_10568_6124.jpggallery_62972_10568_31437.jpgETL_VI_Banner_Dominus_Exercitus_Blood_Angallery_62972_14467_3723.jpgxpyOWpw.jpggallery_62972_14467_9083.jpg

 


#72
Black Blow Fly

Black Blow Fly

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 15,590 posts
  • Location:Unto realms immortal...
  • Faction: TODESKOMPANIE
I just keep LOLing that click bait can get so much discussion .
  • Dracos, mel_danes and Volt like this
=][= fortis Fortuna adiuvat . =][=
my 40k FB Page:
https://m.facebook.com/Terminus6Est
Terminus Est
Blood and Honor!

#73
Volt

Volt

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,105 posts
  • Location:CA, USA
  • Faction: Anges de Vindication

Sounds awful for tactics. You shouldn't bring superheavies in the first place if they're a points sink that are easily destroyed because you lack support and screening options. Just fielding a behemoth model in the board with no cover and no support should rightly see you punished by it getting smoked as a bloody obvious target instead of soaking up firepower. Infantry is undervalued as-is in 40k and needs more of a boost, we don't need this game to just turn into apocalypse again. Don't want your Castellan getting blasted in 2 shooting phases and being left with not much in the way of points left because much of your army's budget was in that knight... then don't use that knight. It's not rocket science, some kinds of units rely on support that you're going to find in 3k games, not 2k or 1.5k games.

 

It'd be like a Wehrmacht tank commander whining that his Panther getting blown up by a couple bazooka teams lying in ambush is unfair, even though he deployed the Panther with no scout vehicles to spot the enemy, no medium armor or infantry divisions to screen fire, and instead just yolo'd the tank at the enemy which then got blown to hell because it draws attention and is vulnerable without escort.


  • Dracos, mel_danes and Schlitzaf like this

+Quod vult valde vult+


#74
Putrid Choir

Putrid Choir

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 851 posts
That makes sense for tanks and knights but what about for the human(ish) sized "character" Daemon primarchs that are 445pts+ each that are only T7 and can't hide. I feel like their models are too big and they are being punished for it. There is no way Mortarion is over 5 times taller than a plague marine without his wings in the lore. They just wanted the $150 so they made them with extra plastic. As it stands they are kind of just fire magnets.

I'm sure this is just a rumor and nothing is going to come of it, but the Daemon primarchs kinda suck for their points unless you completely cheese your list and soup. I just hope people quit buying them so GW will adjust their rules to push their sales. A Nurgling can only hope!

#75
Volt

Volt

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,105 posts
  • Location:CA, USA
  • Faction: Anges de Vindication

Could always copy something from Age of Sigmar, where Gotrek has a 3+++ but can't take any form of transportation and can't deepstrike.


  • Putrid Choir likes this

+Quod vult valde vult+





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users