This is complete and utter nonsense.
Sure, there are some funky things you can do, and some Codexes properly benefit from doubling their Elites (Daemons, Tau, Eldar if you play Harlies as outlined previously) but overall, these Dexes have awful Troops choices, so they're fucked.
THIS is the kind of madness you can have with double FoCs...bear in mind that while the Allies thing has a TRIPLE-whammy of restrictions, double charts have nothing whatsoever beyond meeting the minimum requirements of each.
Logan: 275
Rune Priest;
Chooser, LL, Jaws
Rune Priest;
LL, Chooser, Melta Bombs, Tempest's Wrath
5 WG;
Cyclone/Chainfist, 4w' Stormbolters - 152
5 WG;
Cyclone/Chainfist, 4w' Stormbolters - 152
5 WG;
Cyclone/Chainfist, 4w' Stormbolters - 152
5 WG;
Cyclone/Chainfist, 4w' Stormbolters - 152
5 WG;
Cyclone/Chainfist, 4w' Stormbolters - 152
5 WG;
Cyclone/Chainfist, 4w' Stormbolters - 152
4 LF;
3 ML - 90
4 LF;
3 ML - 90
4 LF;
3 ML - 90
4 LF;
3 ML - 90
4 LF;
3 ML - 90
4 LF;
3 ML - 90
That list still has 48 points to upgrade combi-weapons, or take Melta Bombs, or whatever. If you can find me a Dark Eldar army that would have a prayer against that, I'll be impressed. 30 Missiles and a pair of Lightnings a turn is scary sauce. And that isn't even the best they can do, it's just a quick illustration.
Maybe this will appeal more?
Space Marine Bike Squad;
Attack Bike, Melta Bombs, MM, 2 Meltaguns - 165
Space Marine Bike Squad;
Attack Bike, Melta Bombs, MM, 2 Meltaguns - 165
Space Marine Bike Squad;
Attack Bike, MM, Melta Bombs, 2 Meltaguns - 165
Space Marine Bike Squad;
Attack Bike, Melta Bombs, MM, 2 Meltaguns - 165
Space Marine Bike Squad;
Attack Bike, Melta Bombs, MM, 2 Meltaguns - 165
Space Marine Bike Squad;
Attack Bike, Melta Bombs, MM, 2 Meltaguns - 165
Space Marine Bike Squad;
Attack Bike, Melta Bombs, MM, 2 Meltaguns - 165
Space Marine Bike Squad;
Attack Bike, Melta Bombs, MM, 2 Meltaguns - 165
Vulkan - 190
Captain;
Bike, MB, Arti Armour, Power Sword - 170
5 Scouts;
Telion, ML, Cloaks - 147
Attack Bike;
MM - 50
Attack Bike;
MM - 50
Attack Bike;
MM - 50
1977
What to spend 23 points on? Who cares, it won't affect how it plays. Think many Mech lists can deal with that amount of twin-linked, fast moving, mobile Melta? No, they can't.
Point proved? No? This then:
Master of the Forge;
Beamer - 120
MotF - 120
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Rifleman - 125
Scouts;
ML - 85
Scouts - 85
Scouts - 85
Scouts - 85
Scouts - 85
Scouts - 85
Fancy shit? Nah, just 6 units of Scouts and 10 Riflemen.
Coteaz
Malleus Inquisitor - 25
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
1679
Points to spare. Beef up the Henchmen, take Purifier, have Venerable Psyflemen, whatever. Scary ass shit, and it proves that Imperials are no less able to benefit from the double-FoC than Xenos...so, no, it can't close the gap. If anything, it widens the gap, and makes MSU more and more important, as armies that can escape the confines of the chart through judicious use of cheap and useful Dedicated Transports can only do so more and more.
Armies don't magically become good just because they get the ability to take twice as much stuff.
This is one of the few ways in which 6th is more reliant on player ability than luck - but here's the rub: They've done it badly.
See, as much as I like to write and discuss army lists and force composition, to point out to people that some armies are terrible and some almost completely useless - in 5th edition, while list-building was an important skill and vital piece of the puzzle, it wasn't that huge a consideration.
In 6th edition, the army you have is FAR more important, as the game, intentionally I can only presume, moves more and more towards paper-scissors-stones.
With literally thousands of potential combinations now, it becomes virtually impossible to reliably cover every base. This means that more an more players will get lucky and win things with shitty unbalanced, one-trick-pony lists...not that this didn't already happen in 5th because most people who go to tournaments either aren't interested in fully optimizing their lists, or are interested, but prefer to give in to their foibles and put a personal mark on their forces beyond painting and conversion.
I don't, quite frankly, see a point in trying to make and play a balanced list in 6th. Just like in WFB 8e, there will always be something that is just too good against your one specific army, while being shit otherwise. Just give in, and play whatever the hell unbalanced crap you feel like - it's what GW wants. They want to kill tournaments and competitive play, and then no doubt relaunch the concept under their own auspices with the next edition so they can more directly make money from it. As a business plan I understand and begrudgingly respect it - it's just distasteful to be on the receiving end.
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
3 Henchmen with Psyback - 62
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
Psyfleman - 135
1679
Points to spare. Beef up the Henchmen, take Purifier, have Venerable Psyflemen, whatever. Scary ass shit, and it proves that Imperials are no less able to benefit from the double-FoC than Xenos...so, no, it can't close the gap. If anything, it widens the gap, and makes MSU more and more important, as armies that can escape the confines of the chart through judicious use of cheap and useful Dedicated Transports can only do so more and more.
Armies don't magically become good just because they get the ability to take twice as much stuff.
This is one of the few ways in which 6th is more reliant on player ability than luck - but here's the rub: They've done it badly.
See, as much as I like to write and discuss army lists and force composition, to point out to people that some armies are terrible and some almost completely useless - in 5th edition, while list-building was an important skill and vital piece of the puzzle, it wasn't that huge a consideration.
In 6th edition, the army you have is FAR more important, as the game, intentionally I can only presume, moves more and more towards paper-scissors-stones.
With literally thousands of potential combinations now, it becomes virtually impossible to reliably cover every base. This means that more an more players will get lucky and win things with shitty unbalanced, one-trick-pony lists...not that this didn't already happen in 5th because most people who go to tournaments either aren't interested in fully optimizing their lists, or are interested, but prefer to give in to their foibles and put a personal mark on their forces beyond painting and conversion.
I don't, quite frankly, see a point in trying to make and play a balanced list in 6th. Just like in WFB 8e, there will always be something that is just too good against your one specific army, while being shit otherwise. Just give in, and play whatever the hell unbalanced crap you feel like - it's what GW wants. They want to kill tournaments and competitive play, and then no doubt relaunch the concept under their own auspices with the next edition so they can more directly make money from it. As a business plan I understand and begrudgingly respect it - it's just distasteful to be on the receiving end.
10 comments:
A lot of folks are seeing double-FOCs and allies as something for Xenos to get excited about. But if Marines get those toys too, and more, then what is there to get excited about? The relative worth of Xenos is either unchanged (double-FOCs) or less than it was before (allies).
So in 6-12 months folks will realize that, just like 8th Edition Fantasy, the strong books are still strong and the weak books are still weak.
I'm not saying that the process of finding that out won't be fun for some, but we should all go into this edition with our eyes wide open. Lest we spend lots of money only to have our expectations dashed once again.
oh man, why is it the double FoC lists make me want to fall into a coma?
Ironically, I think some of the same people advocating allies and double FoC, are some of the same people who used to be against spamming. Only difference is, now it's seen as 'fun and fluffy'
The Strong books got Stronger, and the older and xenos got a little cookie.
But you should be positive about 6th! This is the salvation for the GW Hobby! This is an Elite Experience!
some of 6th looks ok, but for friendly games only.
"They want to kill tournaments and competitive play, and then no doubt relaunch the concept under their own auspices with the next edition so they can more directly make money from it. As a business plan I understand and begrudgingly respect it - it's just distasteful to be on the receiving end."
Ok good points until you get to here. If GW wanted to run the tournament scene what is stopping them from doing so? The amount of independents that do it better? If there is money to be made in that, trust me GW would have already done it. The reason they don't do tournaments anymore is because it is a giant money pit, that has a negligible affect on sales. If they kill it now and try to take it back in the next edition, what is stopping the independents from taking it over again?
The thing is, it is easier for independents to run these events because they lean quite heavily on volunteers. If GW runs something like that, they have to have paid people involved to assure it is run exactly the way they want. If independent events had to pay people from start to finish, you would see them stop running events as well.
There's nothing to say that GW couldn't make use of volunteers too. A free ticket or a few soon-to-be-released models in return for a day or two of work would bring in plenty of help.
Certainly Privateer Press and Battlefront are both able to make it work with games that don't have 40K's market share. So is Mantic.
The big thing though, is that tournaments do spur sales. I think it was $200+K for NOVA (Mike did a poll). I know that I've bought additions to my army before almost every tournament I've ever gone to, 40K or not.
On GW's end, they just need a few guys for national support to coordinate the events and wrangle up volunteers. Then, and this is the stumbling block I think, their design studio has to take the time to craft a standard tournament packet to use every year.
But GW doesn't want to do that. I imagine that they just aren't very interested in competition, don't want to spend the extra time/money to get the rules ready for it, and just don't see it as part of their core business of selling models to basement hobbyists.
I found this an interesting post (with a cookie for one of the more entertaining titles I've seen in a while), but it seems a little "sky is falling" for my likes. My reaction as line items (in no particular order):
1) Most of your statements are probably right (for the competitive gamer), but for the casual gamer, this helps out tremendously.
2) Do you think that because of this imbalance, tournies will either house-rule the elimination of double FoC/allies/both, or perhaps just set their points limits to 1999?
3) I'm not hip to all of the lingo--what's a psyback? H.Bolter razorback with Psy ammo?
4) Isn't it a good thing that you can't "reliably cover every base?" That way people don't come in with one dedicated army and smash face? The fact that people have to evolve playstyles to a more rapidly changing meta, seems like a good thing to me. It lets more units, and more codicies become viable, rather than the stagnation that we've seen in 5th.
I liked the post though, as it is thought provoking.
@Warhammer39999: The problem with "not being able to cover every base" means you can end up in situations where if you don't roll dice like they are loaded, get a few bad rolls to start with, and/or are facing an incompetent boob on the other side who doesn't know what to do, you can get beat.
It has nothing to do with your skill (unless you cheat at rolling dice), it has nothing to do with the stuff you brought to play (unless you bring loaded dice), it is all about somebody brought a stupid list that can overload your list. Because the rules are written that way.
If I may... respectfully, to those that have commented thus far...
I think what we forget sometimes, that I presume TKE 'begrudgingly respects', is simple...
Games-workshop is a model company that happens to have a game associated with their models and not a game company that has models for their game.
When we look at the rules, teasers, and such if we keep in mind that it is models first and game second things make sense (like the first part of the previous one line paragragh)... at least to some old cranky guy who lives in a corner. :P
When we think of our game in the later part of the paragraph that's when we get 'befuddled'. (For lack of a better word that won't antagonize anyone.)
I have to agree though, for now, that it doesn't seem like 'balanced' is going to help much. You go balanced and half a dozen 'one trick ponies' are gonna curb stomp you.
anyway, enough of my nonsense,
CK
Balanced lists don't lose to rocks (at least in 5th). That's a misconception that needs to die. Because balanced lists bring all the tools they need to deal with any one-trick pony rock list. Any unit in a balanced list that can't deal with a particular rock becomes cannon fodder to slow the rock down so that the 25% of your list that can kill the rock has enough time to do so.
The classic example would be Land Raider Spam vs. a light speeder army with jump troops. The AV14 Land Raiders look invincible until the speeders start zooming up to block all their access points and allow the jumpers to tear the Termies in the Raiders up one at a time. Defeating the enemy in detail instead of having to face their full strength all at once.
The only advantage unbalanced lists have is against baby seals when points are awarded for degree-of-win instead of simple win/loss. But that's simply gambling on getting favorable match-ups instead of depending on skill. Over the long haul (more than 3-4 rounds) those gambles almost never pay off. The more reliable (but less spectacular) balanced lists will have the edge when there are a lot of rounds in an event.
Hey guys,
I was talking about this on Steleks site a while ago on the chatbar. Seems like the best thing that people can do is twofold: either play 1999 games, or play 1999 games with X grace points. I prefer 1999 point games with 501 grace points. Yes, that is ardboyz size. Hell yea.
Of course I can say as a TO, that unless people demand to have the double force org chart as a store rule, the double chart would not be used where I am, because it adds such idiotic spamming to the game.
I'm dubious of three out of four of these, for one technical reason: I think it is erroneous to assume that the FoC-shifting power of HQ choices applies to other detachments beyond the one given FAQ-shifter is leading. Perhaps we will have an answer with the first BRB FAQ is released.
Granted, in the case of the Space Marines, you could take two captains (or a captain and Khan), so the bike build is possible. For the others, it wouldn't be.
Likewise, the Longfang spam list is weak to flyers. Sure, there isn't much for 'wolves to do about that (spare taking Forts.), but they'd have to pair down the 'fangs a little to do so.
Finally, how many times have you seen any of these lists actually modeled? How many people will actually run these? How many leaf blowers have you seen? How many 6 rifleman lists?
My hunch is that people will diversify more than you guys in the anti-6th camp predict, if simply due to the limits of their collections and out of boredom with total and complete spam. Likewise, rather than deleting core game rules, TOs would do much better simply to handicap lists based on factors lime spam and/or fluff.
Post a Comment