Guest Editorial on D Weapons by Adam from the Dice Abide


Adam from the Dice Abide blog is here to talk about his opinion on the impact of D Weapons in Tournament 40K-ed The storm of arguing over Destroyer Weapons has been continuing. People hate the 2++ lists and Ovesastars that are conquering the meta, but they’re not willing to use the solution right in front of them. I’m going to talk a bit more about Destroyer weapons and why they are important to the meta of 40k.

When I talk about meta, I’m literally referring to the zeitgeist of the game. As the meta current stands right now, it’s broken. Long before we had units with 2++ re-rollable saves, we had a cyclical meta game that would ebb and flow with whatever was in fashion to play. Razorspam, begat Leafblower, begat Longfang Spam, begat GK Draigowing/Razorspam… There was always the top dog to beat and the tools to do so were always available. This cycle began to end with Daemons, capable of a 2++ re-rollable save through the use of some psychic powers, a magic item and the Daemon of Tzeentch rule. To make things worse, Eldar came along and could get it far easier through the use of one specific psychic power, and a special character allied in from Dark Eldar, The Baron. At the same time that these 2++ stars were coming along, over on the eastern fringe a different kind of star was born, the Ovesastar. This one I actually have far fewer issues with, so for now, I’m going to keep focused on the 2++ units. You see, unlike the power lists of old, there is flat out, no effective way to counter a 2++ re-rollable save. It’s not fun to go against, they reduce your fire power to a mere 2.77% of it’s previous output, and at the end of the game they have a nasty habit of breaking up into 4 different units and contesting a bunch of objectives at once. Good game.

What the game needs to be interesting is a full cycle of counters. Nothing in the game should be so good that there aren’t other effective ways to deal with it, and that’s precisely why the game is broken now. When you break the cycle, the unit at the end of that chain is going to be the winner, or in nature, the Apex Predator. I’m sure if you ask a seal, an orca is OP, and the seal probably has no fun at all playing against it. Fortunately this isn’t nature, this is a game, and that game is supposed to be fun and interesting.

So how do we introduce this cycle back into the game? Games Workshop has actually already given us the tools. The internet hates to hear it, and I’m aware that my opinion is hugely unpopular, but that doesn’t deter me because I’ve seen it in action before (who remembers the Leafblower). Because I’m a graphic designer, let me make a simple infographic…

I’ll note that this is not the all inclusive graphic of what meta is or could become, but instead an EXTREMELY simplified version, do not take it the wrong way. Now, there’s this crazy idea that some people have that Rock Paper Scissors is a bad thing, and that might be the case when you think about it on a small scale. That’s not the kind of person I am, I don’t base my opinion on what happens in a single game (this is bad data collection, you never use a single datapoint to determine a trend). If you take this approach, you could come to the conclusion that Land Raiders are over powered, because they beat up Scatter Laser toting Wave Serpents. Similarly, you could conclude that Meltaguns are over powered because they can kill a Land Raider in a single shot. That is kind of an absurd example, but you can see how detrimental small thinking can be. Instead you must think of the bigger picture. In tournaments before, you had both extreme lists, and what we call TAC lists. A TAC list is what we used to call a “balanced army” in the past, so that’s the terminology I choose to use today. A balanced list doesn’t excel at any one thing, but instead is able to provide fairly adequate threats to more than one type of opponent. If the meta looked like the graphic above, this could mean an army that is effective at dealing with both Riptides and Revenants, or Riptides and Drop Pods.

Now lets relate that graphic I posted above to nature. In nature, things try to find equilibrium, and it happens in a very logical manner. If there is not enough food, then the animal will become less abundant, if there is more food, then the animal becomes more abundant. How does this relate to wargaming? Well, if the Revenant (animal) becomes more abundant to counter the 2++ list (food), what happens next? People will take the Drop Pods (eats the Revenant), then what? Well, if the drop pod becomes more popular, then the Riptide list will become more popular, and so on… Unlike nature though, players are not assigned their role in the chain and can change at any time, after a while, people get sick of being food and try to find the alternative, which is the more balanced list I mention above.

So how long does this take? That’s a really tough question, but I suspect it wouldn’t take more than a few tournaments to jumpstart the meta engine, competitive players are always going to look for the next best thing. What wins one tournament will be popular at the next, and so will it’s direct counter.

Those are just my thoughts and theorycrafting… I’ve put a lot of time into this position and I honestly think that if people set aside their hang ups on Escalation and Destroyer Weapons in particular, we could see a fantastic future of the game. Worst case scenario, 7th edition comes out and it’s forced down your throat, like it or not, haha! 🙂


About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!

46 Responses to “Guest Editorial on D Weapons by Adam from the Dice Abide”

  1. Avatar
    Triangleface March 1, 2014 12:20 am #

    Huzzah! An excellent piece and absolutely on the money. Does this mean that GW have actually considered the bigger picture themselves? Surely not! Heresy I say!
    I can see why people don’t like the thought of just removing models with D weapons but then again, not being able to kill something due to a 2++ is just as bad. At least by allowing D weapons it will encourage more balanced, interesting lists that should lead to a more enjoyable game for everyone, which, I’m pretty sure is what we all want to see.

  2. Avatar
    Son of Dorn March 1, 2014 12:21 am #

    As more casual player, I’m all for this. However, after seeing that mini graphic, I’m curious to see what a full size meta-map would look like. The complete circle of rock, paper, scissors and the crossing lines as well. Do it Adam! Do it! 😀

  3. Avatar
    Siphen March 1, 2014 12:40 am #

    Thanks for the well-written article! It definitely gives me some new things to think about.

    I guess my main concern is the possibility of a “best” list. Due the immense freedom of our game now (allies, dataslates, codices that ignore the FOC, etc) will it be possible to bring rock, paper, AND scissors? Or perhaps a bazooka, that doesn’t give a crap about the rock or the paper or the scissors?

    I’m worried that adding in D-weapons, especially in the form of the Revenant, will just fill gaps in already powerful lists. What’s to stop a player from bringing the Revenant, and the Riptides, and the 2++ rerollables?

    • James Carmona
      kontraktkiller March 1, 2014 11:12 am #

      i love how nobody answered your question. people are so short sited and would rather throw out half baked ideas like this D weapons and titans nonsense than acutally trying to fix the problem. Saying D weapons are the best way to fix a stagnant and broken meta is like saying you’d flatten all the tires on your car because one is flat already and you want a level ride. FIX ONE PROBLEM AT A TIME PEOPLE.

      • Adam
        Adam March 1, 2014 9:06 pm #

        I thought it was more of a rhetorical question myself.

        If you think my idea is half baked, I’d love to hear a logical, well prepared argument that would give some insight into what contingencies haven’t been accounted for.

        When you say fix one problem at a time, you’re saying that Destroyer weapons don’t fix 2++ stars. How do you figure? And if we do fix one problem at a time, let’s allow Destroyer weapons, which offers a hard counter to 2++ stars, then we only have one problem, Destroyer weapons. That also gives us adequate data to properly judge how Destroyer weapons affect the meta, instead of assuming our few personal games is indecisive of what the results would be in the scale of a 200 person, 7 round tournament, which is 1400 games if you were counting.

        • Avatar
          Ignis Fatuus March 1, 2014 9:50 pm #

          It’s not that D is not strong against 2++ the problem is that it is also extremely effective at killing everything else in the game. All this does is replace the who has a stronger Death Star with who has the better Titan.

    • Avatar
      ReeciusMakeMeABaby March 1, 2014 2:35 pm #

      In a 1850 points game, you will have a hard time to bring all that stuff. Don’t forget that you still need some scoring units.

  4. Avatar
    bigpig March 1, 2014 1:34 am #

    Nothing is ever “forced down our throats” as a gaming community.

    All tournaments use mysterious objectives, mysterious terrain, and one book mission because they were forced down our throats in 6th edition, right?

    I disagree with you on the effect of greater polarization of power and more rock/paper/scissors being a good thing. We’ve discussed this before so no sense going into it over again since I don’t see you shifting on your position. I will say that it is neither a “crazy idea” or “small thinking.”

    and where do ‘nids, grey knights, orks, and a host of other armies fit into your Riptide, drop pod, superheavy formula? Greater polarization and RPS minimalizes second and third tier armies even more. It becomes impossible to truly build an all comers list when there are so many super power options on differnt sides of the spectrum. An uphill battle is one thing, but a no chance in hell blow out is another. Like you said, “this could mean an army that is effective at dealing with both Riptides and Revenants, or Riptides and Drop Pods.” And what happens when they run up against the third option they can’t beat. yay! Sign me up for that system where my chances of success in a 5 round tournament are dictated my 33% chance of not facing my hard counter.

    GW is clearly not concerned with meta balance or tournaments. I don’t fault them for that and they are welcome to do what they want. I’ve done competitive gaming for nearly three decades and have time and time again see that it is common for game systems with large rules sets to have a modified set of rules for competitive play to allow for a balanced playing field that tests the players skill rather than the randomness of draw.

    2++ is clearly broken. You do not fix it by introducing another broken element.

  5. Avatar
    Ignis Fatuus March 1, 2014 1:40 am #

    The issue becomes a TAC list that has the ranged D blast to feed off of the 2++ crowd and has the ability to eat a drop pod list by including Tau shenanagins. This (in my opinion) does not only leave Taudar/Eldau as the top dog (somebody is going to be there), but it also invalidates any kind of counter that might have been forming (super friends), and also hurts lists like Daemons who’s Death Stars already have a hard counter with grey knights and the silly kill all psycher missiles.

    In this way the ranged D not only does not solve the current problem, but creates an even larger one. I do however think that hand to face D poundings might have a place in the game… But even limited to close combat the D might be to much for us to enjoy.

  6. Avatar
    Bo Mortensen March 1, 2014 2:57 am #

    nicely written, but sorry, no.

    The cure was a great success, unfortunately the patient died! The counter to D-weapons is void-shields. In theory what I have to do is hide my seercouncil behind multible layers of voidshields (which will also protect me against all other alpha-strikes, the only weakness I can think of for the Council) Then turbo boost up and surround the enemy D-weapon and assault.

    As one of the original inventors of the DE-CW-Jetcouncil here in Denmark, I belive the way out is to disallow Allies, disallow layered saves (including fnp) and/or disallow rerolls, NOT allowing more game-breaking-mechanics!

    Btw. I’ve basically stopped playing the council w. DE-Allies as it is unfun for my opponents, but I still take the council to tournaments WITHOUT the Allies…. much more fun;o)

  7. Avatar
    RyanL March 1, 2014 4:45 am #

    I would love to see a large tournament embrace the D, in all its glory, to see what happens to the meta.

    Would the top, most competitive players take a Revenant or would they come up with a counter army?

    Would a top player risk taking the obvious Revenant-riptide (Reventide?) list? After all, if everyone took this list then there’s no advantage and suddenly you’re back to a level playing field – I don’t think that’s acceptable to the people who play to win.

    Does anyone have ideas for what would counter the Reventide lists?

  8. Avatar
    eriochrome March 1, 2014 6:25 am #

    When one leg of the meta stoll is balanced on a model that cost 325 dollars your meta will never really be balanced. You do not fix something that is broken by breaking something else. That just leaves everything in a continuous spiral out of control.

    • Adam
      Adam March 1, 2014 9:10 pm #

      Fortunately the Revenant isn’t the only source if destroyer weapons, no matter how much it may sound like that.

  9. Avatar
    the dude March 1, 2014 7:15 am #

    I am sorry I do not want to be a dick, but every time some discussion about D-weapons emerges, people are telling more about themselves than they would believe. Normally you can hardly guess anyones experience and position by online behavior, but in this case you can immediately and very accurately guess how much experience poster has, and again sorry, in this case it is not much. Poster is obviously theorycrafting without any relevant experience (please prove me wrong). Our gaming community spends some time every couple of months for some apocalypse goodness, so from first day when escalation went out, I knew it would be trouble. There are many myths on how you can “easily handle” titans and especially with revenant titan, suggested solutions are often laughable at best.

    Lets break some myths…drop pods are absolute and unreliable shit vs revenant titan. If you are going to participate in an event with skilled eldar player with revenant, then you are up for some serious dissapointment, if that was your plan how to handle it. There are several methods how to mitigate effect of drop pods. If you go first, you have small – mediocre chance (hardly a counter), if you go second – you do not have to bother unless dice will go haywire.

    1) He will have skyshield pad deployed with a titan in a corner of the table and youre fucked. You will struggle get all drop pods you can there and some will probably misshap when you will be trying to put them next to each other in the corner and getting melta-guns into six inch range will be serious issue. Even if youre lucky you will not accumulate, by far, enough firepower to statisticaly destroy it – but yeah he can fail both saves every time and then you can write battle report about how it is a viable counter…

    ..but thats not important skyshield + titan is a joke and even if it was restricted eldar player does not need it…

    2) He will have revenant deployed in the corner with bastion in front of it. This is middle finger against all drop pod armies since 6th edition and does not work just in this case. You do not take it for cover, (althought it can easily get it vs marines standing close to the bastion ), you take it because he will have very little space for pods and if he will try to get as many as possible there, he will have to drop them next to the corner of the map. Super effective – you do not even need to keep revenant on the table, you can do it even with serpents – in no way are they going to be destroyed. And if you go second, you would not even destroy turboboosted serpents – even without bastion. All the eldar player needs to do, is to not show you rear armorand give you as little space as possible – then the odds are GREATLY in his favour.

    Needless to say you do not stand your ground when cornered…you simply turboboost or jump away and then all already deployed marines are never going to participate in game. It is almost a freewin unless pod player is really lucky.

    And flyers? You are going to get by average 2 shooting phases with flyers vs Revenant titan during the game, because of how fast it is.

    I am really sorry for the rant, but holy shit, almost all suggested things about D-weapons are bullshit. If nothing else, escalation does not increase number of builds we have now, it drasticaly decreases them. Every tried to play foot list, land raiders with some elite units, or battle wagon list (or other similiar super OP lists which really needs D-weapons to be countered) which can do reasonably well if played with skill vs titans with several D-shots a turn? Yeah quite funny game, you will spend more time deploying than playing…

    • Avatar
      Pascal Roggen March 1, 2014 8:25 pm #

      going second is better vs a revenant for a drop pod list? it wastes a turn of the revenants shooting??. sure it gets an effective 4++ instead of 5++ because it will move, but 10 melta’s should see it put to rights just as well. you don’t need all your pods to land near it, just one or maybe two.
      if you get right next to it with your guys, it can’t shoot you [templates] so it has to move away[losing it’s sky shield silliness] you have a another group of melta’s arrive in a later wave and finish the job if it wasn’t done first.
      drop pods, really don’t mishap much.

      also if it’s in the back corner somewhere, you can drop regular guys behind LOS terrain forcing it to jump into a place it can actually see any targets, once again getting it in an easier place to surround with melta in the next round… also you can drop empty pods to expose less of your army.

      There’s a lot more to running a pod army, but I attempted to cover the specific arguments you posted.

      2. The bastion… even better, force the revenant out of his cushy spot[LOS blocking terrain] and melta it on later turns…. every turn the reve is not shooting at good targets is a huge waste.
      also a single pod with some melta on the other side of that bastion means it has to move away from it’s perfect position and if it wants to hit them…. has to destroy the bastion[templates darn it]

      soooo. you don’t need to drop pods in the corner of the map, you can drop empty or non threatening pods a long way away, maybe near objectives:P!, out of LOS.
      you want to reserve the titan!!, freakin amazing:) less rounds for it to be on the board, it might not turn up till turn 4 holy crap my lucky days!!:)

      Sure there are other parts of the eldar army but with a pedro list or a vulcan list[proper drop pod armies] heck even ultra’s with tiggy aint bad you can hide your comms relay [or just use tiggy] and play the funny reserves game.

      I play with a half pod half flyer list and have done for years, If the only players you’re up against just play exactly how you want them to[fall into an obvious trap] every game, I’m not surprised you think they are terrible:P

  10. Avatar
    Oran Harken March 1, 2014 7:16 am #

    To everyone saying that D isn’t the solution because it will simply create more problems I think you are missing the point.

    It will create its own set of problems but thats better than the metagame being locked in place like it is now. People will be going and trying to solve the strength d problem. As it is there is nothing else than can solve the 2++ problem and the game is stagnating because of it.

    • Adam
      Adam March 1, 2014 8:51 pm #

      You absolutely get it. 🙂

  11. jy2
    jy2 March 1, 2014 8:50 am #

    More analogies….you don’t kill a shark in a pond by pouring poison into the pond. The poison will kill everything else in there as well!

    In short, you are introducing a bigger, more unbalanced problem in trying to deal with a smaller problem. Yes, 2++ is a minor annoyance that is restricted to only a very few army builds. D-weapons are more readily available on a wider range. Pretty soon in competitive play, it’s going to be a Have’s and the Have-not’s. 2nd/3rd-tier armies need not even bother or armies without D-titans need not even bother. That does not bode well for the tournament scene. As a matter of fact, it will hurt it even more than re-rollable 2++’s ever could.

  12. Avatar
    lee March 1, 2014 9:00 am #

    or they could FAQ the ability to reroll invulnerable saves and leave out D weapons. Wow that was a hard fix

  13. Avatar
    Oran Harken March 1, 2014 9:22 am #

    I’ve only used Strength D in one game that was not apocolypse so maybe I dont have enough experience with it but it honestly was not any more powerful than 575pts worth of other anti-monsterous creature hunting units would have been. I’ve reliability done more damage with a Crimson Hunter Exarchs against the types of units I used the Aquila Strong Point on. I know its like comparing apples and organce between fortifications are static on the battlefield but I would honestly rather face down an ASP than equal points in Flyers. The only enemy Strength D I’ve felt with have been a Shadowsword twice and a Stompa once. In both of those cases it was powerful but I only lost 1 of those games just due to VP. In every case I just engaged with my Flyers and suicide fire dragon squad using star engines on their transport to get out of the Shadowswords front arc and beside it on turn 1. Maybe I just dont have a high quality of opponent so they didn’t protect their D-havers properly.

  14. Avatar
    Oran Harken March 1, 2014 9:39 am #

    I also want to add that as an Eldar player who doesn’t run Jetseer I am really tired of it myself. Call me a bad sport but I throw or drop games I know I won’t win and IMO I should not be obligated to entertain some 40kid running a netlist I know he is aping and didn’t discover on his own. My local metagame is full of net listing teenagers with unprimed armies and unfortunately thats the age we live in, bringing rerollable 2++ to a tournament is one thing, bringing it habitually to the FLGS for pick up games so you can stroke your ego with an easy win because you found the list on 4chan is ruining the community. I can’t blame GT players for popularizing these lists but we live in the information age, like it or not they will be aped and it is really dragging down my local scene.

    • Adam
      Adam March 1, 2014 9:00 pm #

      The exact same can be said about destroyers! Don’t like 2++ stars at your FLGD? Don’t play them. Don’t like a Revenants at your FLGS? Don’t play them!

      • Avatar
        Ignis Fatuus March 1, 2014 9:58 pm #

        By the same argument, don’t like Death Stars? Don’t play them.

        • Adam
          Adam March 2, 2014 8:09 am #

          If that was an option in tournaments that would be awesome.

  15. Avatar
    Sly March 1, 2014 11:20 am #

    I cannot see how D-class weapons are a solution to anything. They cause more problems than they solve, and I do not even see how they solve the Seer Council (see: Void Shields).

    Why do we need to introduce such a dangerous cure instead of just taking more Space Wolf allies? Rune Priests ARE the counter to the 2++ Psyker stars. All Imperial Codices can take SW allies. Also, about 400 pts of Coteaz + Friends can fight off 800-900 pts of Seer Council/Screamerstar, so everyone that can bring in Inquisition as Allies also has access to a SCORING unit that can fight the Deathstars.

    Who does that leave? Nids have SitW, Eldar can run their own Council, Daemons have Screamerstar and Flying Circus and can also use an Exalted artifact to mess with the Seer council (Dreamstone? I forget its name). Orks can fight against the stars with their own Nob Biker unit (do the math, it’s pretty competitive against the Seer Council, and not that bad against the Screamers). Tau can ally in Space Wolves.

    Are really going to add in D-class weapons so that Chaos has a good counter to the Seer Council? Leaving aside the situation where you can just take Be’lakor and a large unit of allied Fiends that he makes Invisible..

    Really, there is no Codex in the game that cannot handle the 2++ stars. Now, there ARE lists, and plenty of them, that cannot handle the stars. And many of these lists are shooty-oriented lists, and therefore they are what a lot of tournament players take, and therefore we get the crying about the 2++. But you do not need D-class weapons to fight the stars, and the D-class weapons are going to obliterate Obliterators… and Nobz… and the Chapter Master… and Bike armies… and Deathwing… and every other army that relies on expensive models that are individually hard to kill.

    • Avatar
      Voxal March 1, 2014 11:30 am #

      I see what you are saying sly but if people brought a list tailored against Seerstar I doubt it would be very useful if they seeded against a typical shooty list. Yes, yes I know that is always part of the risk when coming to a tournament but guess what, these Seerstars do not have that problem. They will do great almost regardless of their opponent, they don’t have that problem of being highly specific in usefulness like a list tailored to fight them is.

      Honestly I won’t be attending another tournament, GT or local until these current state of the metagame blows over. It creates the exact same gameplay situation as leafblower, the profoundly unfun “the game isn’t long enough for you to kill me based on even favourable statistics”. It’s as much fun as trying to tunnel through a concrete wall with your finger nails.

    • Adam
      Adam March 1, 2014 8:58 pm #

      I’d like to know where I can buy these fabled CSM wolf priests you speak of.

  16. James Carmona
    kontraktkiller March 1, 2014 11:30 am #

    it’d be nice if CSM could take the dread axe again……

  17. Avatar
    novaStar March 1, 2014 12:22 pm #

    you know how you get rid of broken combos? run multiple events, have a no holds bar event, have a no allies event and have a no lords of war event.

    GW herd the mass cries of the interRAGE about Lords of war and not allowing non codex things in tourneys and guess what? the next super heavy is neither a lord of war and gets its own codex lol

    • Avatar
      novaStar March 1, 2014 12:25 pm #

      90-95% of the problems would go away if allies were banned, they are in no way there to help balance an army or shore up weaknesses. they were put in the game to make more money plain and simple, every time i read an article about a broken this or that guess what it was an abusive ally that someone is crying about lol

      • Avatar
        novaStar March 1, 2014 12:27 pm #

        P.S.70% of statistics are made up lol

  18. Jason
    Raw Dogger March 1, 2014 1:38 pm #

    I certainly see the point that Adam is trying to make, but I don’t agree with any part of his argument. I have not and will never play the Riptide Spam/Seer Council deal because I have respect for my opponents, something that is severely lacking in the competitive scene at the moment. If I win a race where I have rockets attached to my shoes a la Wiley Coyote and my opponents do not did I really win the race? So people like me who play competitive yet not over powering lists now have to face the prospect of having one or two of our units removed from play without any say so because some assholes depend on these cheese dick lists to win? Using dynamite to catch the alligator in the pond sounds like a terrible deal for the turtles.

    • Adam
      Adam March 1, 2014 8:51 pm #

      But everything you said could apply to destroyer weapons too. I don’t play those lists, and have even sold off armies that were just not fun for my opponents to play. That however doesn’t prevent those armies from existing in the competitive meta of the game, so the bigger question is do we make up new rules, ban units which are for the most part totally fine, and restrict how we allow players to have fun? I don’t think that’s the answer at all.

  19. Avatar
    Nuln-Oil March 1, 2014 2:25 pm #

    This is an interesting topic, and an interesting way of thinking about things. But the problem with the D weapons, and the super-heavies, is that: 1) they are not all created equal in that some of the problem armies have the best super-heavies (I’m looking at you eldar); and 2) staying in stride with the concept of the OP, there is a new piece being put into the circle of life, but what ever precedes it is yet to be discovered (although Frankie’s DE/Eldar list appears to be in anticipation of this the super-heavies).

    I think the D weapons are going to be interesting. I think they will also make DE more common (especially when they get a new codex). DE strengths and weakness work really well against D weapons. DE has no interest in survivability, so something designed to counter survivability is out the door. DE has weaponry options that really rack up the glancing and penetrating hits, even on super-heavies.

    • Avatar
      Nuln-Oil March 1, 2014 2:28 pm #

      By survivability, points are not being expended to increase toughness, armor saves, and the like. So, D weapons are, in a way, a waste against DE.

      • Adam
        Adam March 1, 2014 8:56 pm #

        Exactly, though people seem to think that one model with a destroyer weapon = a whole army of destroyer weapons. That one D weapon will be competitively weaker to a raider, but the rest of the armies guns will still be just as good.

  20. Avatar
    daboarder March 1, 2014 2:26 pm #

    I disagree with most of your points.

    D-weapons, the ranged ones, make any unit thats not bog standard infantry with hidden heavy weapons pointless.

    Oh you took terminators thats cute I’m going to kill them as if they we’re rippers with no consideration for half the shooting mechanics in the game

    • Adam
      Adam March 1, 2014 8:54 pm #

      That’s where I disagree, it might be a powerful attack against a variety of units, but unlike the current meta of 2++ stars, destroyer weapons makes a wider variety of armies more relevant in a tournament.

  21. jy2
    jy2 March 2, 2014 8:59 am #

    Man, I gotta say….I just love the analogies in this (and Reece’s Deathstar) thread:

    “Kill a rat by putting a tiger in the room.”

    “Flatten all your tires just because 1 is flat and you want a level ride.”

    “The cure was a great success, unfortunately the patient died.”

    “You do not fix something that is broken by breaking something else.”

    “You don’t kill a shark in a pond by pouring poison into the pond. The poison will kill everything else in there as well!”

    “Using dynamite to catch the alligator in the pond sounds like a terrible deal for the turtles.”

    Man, this thread is pure gold. 😀

  22. Avatar
    mercutioh March 2, 2014 10:00 am #

    Continuing to rage against the dying of the light is not going to stop the D from Dropping. GW just tipped their hand with the knights codex. One key point to look at when looking at the meta is looking at what HASN’T been brought into line with the new edition.

    IG- GW’s answer for Massive artillery armies.

    Orks – GW’s excuse to put batshit crazy random things in books.

    Anyone want to take bets that one if not both of these armies will have access to the D in a “regular” codex?

    Also, there are so many variables in the full game that haven’t even been explored yet competitively.

    For example, Nids just came out with an army that can reasonably take 16 troops choices without blinking an eye with 14 of those choices being recyclable on a 4+

    are deathstars so good that they’re tearing through that?
    granted the troops couldn’t go through wet toilet paper, but it’s still a definitive difference maker.

    and before anyone spouts off about theory hammer. That’s all this game is. People have an idea. they test it. it works or doesn’t. discrediting an idea because it hasn’t been tested yet is simply unproductive and asinine.

    Inherently this game is fun. There are some unfun things about it, but at the end of the day. the problem is that we continue to snap up anything that is remotely unfun like they’re brownies at a head convention. Don’t like the unbalanced overpowered crap? Stop rushing out to buy the new hotness 5 seconds after the internet declares it gold.

    Competitive 40k may not be the game we want, but it is most definitely the game we deserve.

  23. Avatar
    Oadius March 2, 2014 10:11 am #

    Ah, the button designer is back. Some people think their own gastrointestinal emanations are floral and some wear handlebar mustaches. Some, albeit rare, do both.

  24. Avatar
    Bassface7 March 2, 2014 2:15 pm #

    “Now, there’s this crazy idea that some people have that Rock Paper Scissors is a bad thing”

    Is it crazy to want a game where any army i bring has a fighting chance against any army my opponent brings?

    You might notice that people don’t “play” rock paper scissors, people just use it to arbitrarily make decisions because rock paper scissiors /isn’t fun/

    I agree with Reece on this one, you don’t kill a big nasty by sending in a bigger nasty, that way lies madness. GW just need to sit down and properly re-balance the game. (i know that will never happen, but a man can dream)

    • jy2
      jy2 March 2, 2014 3:14 pm #

      Or better yet, TO’s can take it into their own hands to alter the rules into something more balanced (i.e. like the 2+/4+ replacing the 2+/2+ at the LVO). GW ain’t going to do jack. It is up to the TO’s to band together and to hash together a standard/solution that all TO’s can use.

  25. Avatar
    Threeshades March 3, 2014 3:26 am #

    Rock Paper Scissors is an okay mechanic to have in your game, if every faction has equal access to rock, paper and scissors (like how lascannons are good against vehicles but useless against mass infantry, while heavy bolters are the opposite). But if your core deployment is either of the three, the game stops working. At that point you just each write a list without the other player looking and then when youre both done, compare them, and whoever has the list that counters the other one’s wins before you play. And at that point you might as well literally just play Rock Paper Scissors.

    Also “2++ deathstars are a problem, therefore D-weapons are good” is a huge leap. HUUUUGE leap. I remember the previous incarnation of Necrons and 3.5 chaos marines had weapons that just ignored invulns and nothing more. Why directly leap to weapons that can potentially one-shot a titan (which has no place in regular 40k either in my humble opinion)?

  26. Avatar
    Ebon Hand March 3, 2014 10:12 am #

    Ha, I just realized that dine of the problems with seer stars and screamer council could be solved by the Necron Pariahs that no longer exist. :p

  27. Avatar
    HohneD March 3, 2014 11:12 am #

    A lot of the above stated deathstars and spam of certain models that make the game so un-fun started with the introduction of the 6th edition rule set.

    While I really enjoy the current rule set for it’s flexibility and amount of strategic possibilities as well as customization, I really hate it for its introduction of the Allied rules.

    The deathstars, and all the other possibilities, that the current set offers, are really only possible in this edition. While they are very fun, allowing us to play our armies in so many different ways, they also seem to make us fail to learn how to play our armies well.

    In the last edition, and edition before, I had to learn every little aspect about my Army, as well as the enemy army. What they are good at and what they are not. This determined what I would bring in a list and it challenged me to think up certain strategies on how to deal with my shortcomings of my list (ie Imperial Guard, get’s in CC and is screwed).

    Now I can simply plug these holes, don’t think all to strategically anymore, and take some Ally to compensate for my Army’s weaknesses. This is exactly the reason why you see ridiculous (fluff wise stupid) lists as the above stated Eldar build, or Necron w/ Tau allied lists etc. I mean… come on Eldar allied with Dark Eldar?!?!

    To fix the current issue, I believe the entire edition needs to be fixed, and that won’t happen for a while. Whereas it was fun for me to learn to play my army well and then strategise about dealing with a certain enemy threat like a Riptide, I am now forced to build my list in a certain way, dedicate a whole ton of stuff, just to stand the glimpse of a chance…. just not fun anymore.

Leave a Reply