Space Marine Review: Heavy Support: Thunderfire Cannon

Hi everyone, Michael here with a review of the Space Marine army’s premier artillery piece, the Thunderfire Cannon. For more reviews and analyses, check out the Tactics Corner.

Overview:

The Thunderfire Cannon is a fairly recent addition to the Space Marine arsenal. It is one of the few weapons in the Space Marine army that does not need line of sight, making it a valuable addition to the army. It has a solid damage output for its cost, but also has access to one of the best stratagems available in the codex, capable of seriously crippling selected enemy units when used right. The Thunderfire Cannon consists of a Cannon and Techmarine Gunner, costing 121 pts in total for the unit.

I would give the Thunderfire Cannon the Competitive rating. It has a good damage output, able to strike almost anywhere on the board, and correct use of its stratagem could be game winning in the right circumstances.

Wargear:

  • Thunderfire Cannon- 60″, Heavy 4D3, S5, AP -1, 1 damage. Can target models not visible to the firing model.
  • Techmarine Gunner has Bolt Pistol, Plasma Cutter (essentially an assault Plasma Pistol), a Flamer and two Servo-arms.
  • Servo-arm- Melee, S x2, AP -2, 3 damage, -1 to hit. Each servo-arm can be used to make one attack when the bearer attacks.

Abilities:

  • And They Shall Know No Fear
  • Artillery- Can only fire its ranged weapon if there is a <Chapter? Techmarine Gunner within 3″. A Techmarine Gunner can only fire a single cannon per turn. If there is no Gunner within 6″ of the Thunderfire Cannon at any point, the Cannon is removed from play.
  • Techmarine Gunner- When set up, the Gunner must be placed in coherency with the Thunderfire Cannon. After that, he is treated as a separate unit.
  • Blessing of the Omnissiah- At the end of the movement phase, a Techmarine Gunner can repair a single <Chapter> vehicle within 1″. The vehicle regains D3 lost wounds. A model can only be repaired once per turn.

Tactics:

The Thunderfire Cannon puts out some decent firepower each shooting phase. Each turn, it will fire between 4 and 12 shots (with an average of 8 shots per turn) at S5 and AP -1. Hitting on a 3+, you will be killing around 2 Marines a turn on average, or 3 Guardsmen. That doesn’t sound too great for 121 pts, but the real strength of the Thunderfire Cannon is in disrupting your opponent’s battleplan through the use of the Tremor Shells Stratagem (which will be discussed below).

The Thunderfire Cannon is quite resilient to enemy firepower as well. With T6, four wounds and a 3+ save, it will take some decent firepower to destroy it. In addition, the Blessings of the Omnissiah from the Techmarine Gunner can be used to heal a damaged Thunderfire Cannon, helping to increase its longevity on the battlefield. However, the best defence against enemy firepower is the huge range of the Thunderfire Cannon (60″) and the fact it does not need line of sight to the target. This means you can stick the Cannon behind some line of sight blocking terrain deep in your deployment zone and still be able to reach most of the table with its shooting attack. This makes the Cannon great for sticking on a backfield objective and staying in place for the whole game.

The Thunderfire Cannon works well deployed in the corner of board in your deployment zone. From there, it can still reach most of the enemy units it would want to fire at thanks to its increased range. Just remember not to leave any gap behind the cannon that enemy deep strikers could potentially land in to fire at the Cannon or assault it. It also helps to have at least one unit (or more realistically the rest of your army) in front of the Cannon to stop it from being assaulted and stopping it from firing.

Once deployed, the Cannon should be pretty static for the rest of the game. It can move and fire, but with a 3″ move, it is not going to be going anywhere fast. It is also a good idea to keep the Techmarine Gunner behind the cannon. He cannot be targeted easily thanks to the Character keyword, meaning your opponent will have to target the tougher cannon to take it out of action. As mentioned above, the Gunner can be used to heal the Cannon each turn if it is not destroyed outright.

Deploying the Cannon and Gunner next to another of your vehicles is also useful, allowing the Gunner to choose which vehicle to heal and keep them alive for longer. This works well for other long ranged firepower vehicles, such as the Whirlwind or a Lascannon Predator.

For me, the real strength of the Thunderfire Cannon and the reason you take one in your army is the Tremor Shells stratagem. This stratagem costs 1 command point and is used when you select a Thunderfire Cannon to shoot in the shooting phase. You must subtract 1 from any wound rolls, but if the Thunderfire Cannon hits the enemy unit, then in its next turn, the target unit must halve its Movement characteristic, as well as any Advance or Charge rolls. This has no effect on units with the Fly or Titanic keywords.

For me, this is a bargain for only 1 command point, and in the right situation can seriously affect the ability of an opponent’s unit to move on the battlefield, either for grabbing objectives or charging your units. Halving all the movement of a key enemy unit can be key to winning a game in 8th edition, and there are so many choice targets in a number of armies to target with the Tremor Shells. It’s just a shame you can only use it once per turn! With a key unit effectively stalled for a turn, you don’t have to devote any more firepower to that unit if you don’t want to, allowing the rest of your army to target other threats to your units. The stalled unit can then be targeted once these other threats have been weakened or destroyed.

The Stratagem can be great for fast or tough assault units, such as Genestealers, Hormagaunts, Khorne Bezerkers, Daemonettes, Harlequins, etc. What is also great is that it continues to work for enemy psychic powers or abilities, such as Da Jump, Warp Time or Hive Commander, seriously decreasing their ability to move around the board to grab objectives or assault your units. With the correct use of the Stratagem each turn and your own units’ movement, it can be possible to effectively keep a key enemy unit out of the game for several turns if you are lucky, and the ability cannot be easily countered, like a psychic power.

Another great use for the stratagem is if your opponent employs a large screening unit in their deployment zone, such as Grots or Conscripts. By using the Stratagem on such a unit, you can block the movement of other units in the army, penning the enemy army into their own deployment zone in many cases. While this may not bother a static shooting army too much, it will stop your opponent from moving to grab objectives or assert board control for bringing in their own deep strikers in future turns.

Unfortunately, the Tremor Shells Stratagem is not going to work for every unit in your opponent’s army. It does not work on units with the Fly keyword (which makes sense). This is annoying, as a lot of times it is these units that you will want to slow down and stop them from getting to your lines. It also cannot be used on units that arrive by some form of deep strike rule on the first turn they deploy. However, in subsequent turns, it is a nice way to keep these units from moving to a better position to threaten more of your army.

I think that one Thunderfire Cannon is about right for the army. One Cannon gives you range for most of the board, and is not such a big threat that your opponent will go out of the way to destroy it. Two Thunderfire Cannons on opposite sides of your deployment zone will give you full board coverage, but you can only use the Stratagem once per turn in competitive play. In this situation, the second Cannon is a bit wasted, as the damage output from the Thunderfire Cannon is decent, but not amazing.

The Techmarine Gunner has some decent firepower and combat ability. A Plasma Cutter and Flamer can provide some good firepower against a range of enemy units, with the Flamer providing some useful overwatch firepower. The two Servo-arm attacks are also useful, hitting on a 4+ at S8, -2AP and 3 damage. This can give the Techmarine Gunner some strong close combat punch if you need to. However, I would expect him to be doing much during the game other than making sure the Thunderfire Cannon is firing and occasionally repairing it. If you find him in range to shoot or get into assault, things have probably gone quite wrong.

Overall, I think the Thunderfire Cannon is a solid addition to a Space Marine army. It is not too expensive and doesn’t have the greatest damage output each turn, but it is the Tremor Shells stratagem that makes it a really good competitive choice to add to your army.

And remember, Frontline Gaming sells gaming products at a discount, every day in their webcart!

secondhandhsop

Tags:

About Michael Corr

An avid 40k player and blogger from Scotland. I started in 3rd edition and have been playing ever since. I detail my adventures in my own blog "St Andrews Wargaming", highlighting my mediocre painting skills, regular battle reports and my occasional random ramblings.

23 Responses to “Space Marine Review: Heavy Support: Thunderfire Cannon”

  1. Reecius
    Reecius February 19, 2018 8:31 am #

    The Thunderfire Cannon is IMO, an absolute must take unit for the Space Marine player. The utility it offers through the Tremor Shells stratagem. That is a game winning ability and even if it only did that would be worth it.

    • Michael Corr
      Michael Corr February 19, 2018 8:52 am #

      I agree. I’ve finally added one to my White Scars army. Been modifying the force for 8th edition based on your articles, so looking forward to seeing how it works out with all the Assault Marines and Vanguard Veterans!

      • Reecius
        Reecius February 19, 2018 9:20 am #

        You will not be disappointed. The ability to slow down enemy units in a critical turn to stop them from making an assault, getting on to an objective, etc. is absolutely game winning. It means you can ignore them for a turn and focus on dealing with other units. Seriously ridiculously powerful.

  2. Don Tomaso February 19, 2018 1:04 pm #

    A one trick costly pony that relies on free CPs. Ok, I´ll bite..
    Its very good when used with its strategem I agree but there are bad design flaws underneath the surface

    You know, it would help a lot if SM vehicle templates actually did something. as it is now it cant kill anything back points wise, is situational since armies like eldar/tau (lots of skimmers) ignore its special rule (transport objective rushing, transport melee) and it pretty much suffers from the same thing the whirlwind does, cant kill stuff to save its life.

    This is why nobody ever takes the WW and hardly ever takes the vindicator in competitive play (vidicator – on average ONE 24 inch lascannon wound on a pricey tank is just very bad and lazy game design). In other words, ridiculously bad damage output for the point cost.
    In 7th the vindi did at least scare the opponent due to the significant chance it could delete that entire costly squad with one shot etc, in 8th its beyond a joke.

    If the TFC could actually kill more then 3 guardsmen per turn people could very well start taking more then one TFC like they did pre 8th when it could actually hurt things instead of being stuck with one at the most since the only way it works is by eating command points never killing its cost back and in doing so taking more then one is a waste.

    My two spare TFCs are collecting dust on their useless-models-shelf from day one of 8th as do the 3 whirlwinds and 3 vindicators, as do the ones owned by my friends. Time to face up to and look into these things me thinks instead of pretending there is nothing to see eh?

    The decent thing to do would be to state in the TFC entry that only one TFC is allowed in the army list in matched play since the one and only thing making the TFC useful is a strategem that can only be used once a turn/phase. By making the TFC useless outside of its paired strategem due to its very poor damage-to-cost output you have basically invalidated every TFC outside the first people have in their collections.
    Invalidating peoples models was THE one thing GW promised would never take place and here we are, want to use your multiple TFCs then you are shoehorned into playing non-matched.

    The fact that some IG arty actually have working blast rules and DO kill more then 3 guardsmen per turn doesnt mitigate the fact that the SM ditto are night on useless.
    Why do people often take wyverns but never whirlwinds?

    ..eagerly awaiting the hordes of personal insults coming my way from the snowflake crowd for daring to criticize part of the 8th design balance.

    • Reecius
      Reecius February 19, 2018 1:19 pm #

      Dude, lol, you can’t insult everyone else first because you anticipate them insulting you as you are being the thing that cause the insults to fly, lol.

      That aside, the Thunderfire Cannon doesn’t have to kill a dang thing the entire game and it is still amazingly potent. I could care less if it does any damage, that is beside the point. Although that said, it does do damage to weak units that sit on objectives, which is great, but that is 100% not the point for this unit in competitive play.

      I set aside 4-5 CP just for this guy. I don’t get any “free” CP, I just play a Brigade. Being able to slow units down is just awesomely good, I cannot stress it enough.

      And yes, some units ignore the effect but I have not played a game yet where I didn’t have solid targets for them. Wave Serpent rush is not nearly as popular in the states as it is in the UK/Europe scene too, fwiw.

      But yeah, the damage output is largely irrelevant. That’s not why you take it.

      • Michael Corr
        Michael Corr February 19, 2018 2:43 pm #

        C’mon Reece! Don’t you know everything sucks in 8th edition!!!! Don’t be a moronic snowflake for trying to find any enjoyment out of the game!!!!!!!! That’s not the point of 40k!!!!!!

        • Reecius
          Reecius February 19, 2018 3:21 pm #

          Haha, you got me there, =P

      • abusepuppy February 19, 2018 3:43 pm #

        To play devil’s advocate: the damage output on it _is_ pretty low. Comparable weapons (such as the Heavy Quad Launcher) get almost twice as many shots and end up with an otherwise-similar statline, so the TFC’s ability to hurt targets is extremely low, especially in comparison to last edition when multiple-barrage weapons could lay an insane number of hits onto things.

        That said, however, most good players recognize that controlling the enemy’s movement is one of the most important parts of the game. Being able to keep the enemy off objectives, prevent charges, etc, can be absolutely critical, and while the TFC doesn’t work on all units, there are enough that it does work on (such as the screening forces mentioned in the article) it can have a lot of value. Enough to justify it in a top-tier tournament army? Possibly not, but I think that depends on the environment and the list you’re running.

        The section on the TFC in your article (http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017/11/20/5-tips-winning-space-marines/) is very illuminating- a unit that is, say, 9″ away from your lines would typically be considered a near-automatic charge. Hit it with Tremor Shells, however, and a typical infantry model would be able to move only 3″ and charge an absolute maximum of 7″- which means even a trivial repositioning of your lines will make that charge impossible. Even a unit that is 2″ away from you can be rendered almost inconsequential with the stratagem- move your own units away (putting the distance at 8″ or more) and suddenly the enemy is needing a 10 on their charge roll to get to you.

        • Reecius
          Reecius February 19, 2018 4:27 pm #

          Precisely. Half the time I hardly remember to roll the damage dice as I simply don’t care. Slowing a unit down that much takes it out of play for a turn in most instances, it can cripple your opponent’s plans.

          As you noted, when you hit a screen unit wit hit it can slow the entire army down, it is nuts.

          • Michael Corr
            Michael Corr February 20, 2018 12:51 am
            #

            Yeah, the damage output for the Cannon is practically negligible. However, as you said, that’s not why you take it.

            The ability to control your opponent’s movement is a big deal in 8th edition. With a proper screen of Scouts (fast becoming one of my new favourite units for my White Scars), you can severely hinder your opponent’s movement and deployment options.

          • Reecius
            Reecius February 20, 2018 9:43 am
            #

            Yeah, Scouts are practically necessary for competitive Marine armies.

  3. Don Tomaso February 20, 2018 10:44 pm #

    “That aside, the Thunderfire Cannon doesn’t have to kill a dang thing the entire game and it is still amazingly potent. I could care less if it does any damage, that is beside the point. Although that said, it does do damage to weak units that sit on objectives, which is great, but that is 100% not the point for this unit in competitive play.”

    Congratulations for deliberately avoiding to meet all the other logical points that I made. That was very “brave” of you.

    Two very simple questions:
    When was the last time you used two or three of your TFCs in a matched game again?
    They are so incredibly strong I mean so why stop at one? In 7th we ran with three and they killed a lot and then we were told that no models will be made so to speak, “obsolete”.

    Anyone using whirlwinds or vindies or multiples of said in strong lists? No? Funny, I thought all SM blast templates were soooo strong. lol

    Anyone else using all their TFCs collecting dust or do you all stop at only bringing one in matched play? Why?

    We see IG using mortars etc all the times, why arent there whirlies all over the place?
    Who doesnt want to kill 3 guardsmen a turn or do 0.66 wounds with one moving 24 inch lascannon on a vehicle I mean, these are after all incredibly strong and well thought of units that surely need no changes.

    How about maybe, just maybe looking past the annoyance of having pointed out non performing units and instead of trying to lamely lol-away the logic mentioned and actually *gasp* discuss these things so that maybe gw might adjust the right things to the right sides in a future CA?

    Whats the reason for not doing it? Would it spoil all the fun with laughing off the guy who points out the things that still need fixing or is it a pride thing having ones “perfect” 8th criticized? (not all of it, just the little bits that still need adjusting, the rest is as mentioned multiple times, awesome and in no need of being mentioned since good things dont need fixing)

    As for the “insult” part, I havent insulted anyone in here, merely pointed out some flawed units along with the flaw in the TFC WITH valid logic behind it that you as usual pretend not to have read hoping you will get away with it.
    The mention of the “insult” thing was simply some humor. You know, if it isnt personal insults as a replay for daring to criticize the parts that are flawed in 8th (attention Corr, far from everything “sucks”, repeat ten times, it might actually stick.) then it is the inevitable silence in not meeting the annoying pointers.

    I´m enjoying most (not all, the one sided tablings are not fun) of my games very much but that doesnt stop me from telling about and pointing out the flawed mechanic, rule or unit(s) that can be seen here and there and thus, are in need of an adjustment.

    So what will it be this time, another brave attempt at not touching what I mentioned?
    I recall still awaiting your incredible input on how very very strong GK terminators are. Funny that for some “brave” reason I am (along with half the BnC) is still waiting.

    • Michael Corr
      Michael Corr February 21, 2018 12:52 am #

      “When was the last time you used two or three of your TFCs in a matched game again?
      They are so incredibly strong I mean so why stop at one?”

      As has been said in the article and the comments above, you wouldn’t want to take more than one Thundefire Cannon in matched play. Their damage output is incredibly low, but why you take one is to access the Tremor Shells stratagem. Yes, it is a one trick pony, but it is a pretty effective trick against a number of units you may come across in competitive play. One Thunderfire Cannon is pretty strong, two or three are not, as the damage output is not enough to justify their expense. One is just enough to access the Stratagem. You could effectively take a big unit of Ork Boyz, Hormagants, Genestealers, Pox walkers, etc, out of the game for a turn for just one command point. It obviously depends on the make up of your army and how many command points you have, but that is true for every unit in the game. You can’t cover every possible situation in a review. For some Space Marine builts it will not be useful.

      If your yard stick for the effectiveness of a unit is “how much will this kill and will it be effective if I spam it?”, then no, the Thunderfire Cannon is rubbish. However, for the uses described above, I think it is effective and worthy of inclusion in the army. If the above statement is your yard stick for effectiveness, then very few units in the Space Marine codex will make the cut.

      “Anyone using whirlwinds or vindies or multiples of said in strong lists? No? Funny, I thought all SM blast templates were soooo strong. lol”

      I never even mentioned Whirlwinds or Vindicators and certainly never said SM blast templates were strong. When we get to review these units, I am sure no one will be saying that they are competitive and need to be in a tournament list.

      “Anyone else using all their TFCs collecting dust or do you all stop at only bringing one in matched play? Why?”
      For all the reasons listed in the review. You only need one in a game to do its job. With such a radical edition change, you will see units become more or less effective, as their point in the game changes with the change in rules. Do you really want to go back to 7th edition, just to be able to spam three Thunderfire Cannons? Want to go back to Riptide Wing and unkillable Deathstars?

      “We see IG using mortars etc all the times, why arent there whirlies all over the place?”

      If the Whirlwind cost the same as an IG mortar, then yes, you would see them all over the place. Again, no one mentioned Whirlwinds in the article or said they were super competitive. I can discuss any issues you have and hope to explain my point of view on why they are competitive, but if the conversation is:
      “I think the Thunderfire Cannon is competitive under the right circumstances” and the reply is “but Whirlwinds and Vindicators suck”, that is a different conversation to have in the Whirlwind and Vindicator reviews (when I get round to writing them).

      “How about maybe, just maybe looking past the annoyance of having pointed out non performing units and instead of trying to lamely lol-away the logic mentioned and actually *gasp* discuss these things so that maybe gw might adjust the right things to the right sides in a future CA?

      Whats the reason for not doing it? Would it spoil all the fun with laughing off the guy who points out the things that still need fixing or is it a pride thing having ones “perfect” 8th criticized? (not all of it, just the little bits that still need adjusting, the rest is as mentioned multiple times, awesome and in no need of being mentioned since good things don’t need fixing)”

      I’ve never said all Space Marine units are perfect. If you look through my reviews, you will see many of the units are not given the highest rating. The recent entry on Centurion Devastators was less than flattering.
      Also, no one has ever said 8th edition is perfect. I’ve played against Smite spam and have been vocal in how un-enjoyable and poor for the game I feel it is. Not every aspect of 8th edition is great, and no one has ever pretended that it is. However, in my opinion, it is a lot better than 7th edition (a version I quite enjoyed).

      You say the Thunderfire Cannon is a flawed unit. I disagree, for the points I have said in the article. It’s damage output is sub-par compared to its damage output in 8th edition, but AGAIN, that is not why you take it! You take it for the potential to control your opponent’s movement.

      “So what will it be this time, another brave attempt at not touching what I mentioned?
      I recall still awaiting your incredible input on how very very strong GK terminators are. Funny that for some “brave” reason I am (along with half the BnC) is still waiting.”

      I hope I have addressed your issues and stated my reasons behind why I recommend the unit. You may disagree, that is fine. You even said that “Its very good when used with its strategem I agree but there are bad design flaws underneath the surface”. No one is advocating taking multiple Thunderfire Cannons or that their damage output is great. The only reason you take one is for the Stratagem, which you agree with. If there are design flaws with how many wounds it can do, or the change in blast template mechanics, that is another issue. That’s not why the Thunderfire Cannon is a competitive choice. The review covers the rules of the Cannon as it is now, not how it should go back to using blast templates to be more effective.

      As for GK Terminators, I’ve never mentioned them or played against them.

      I hope that answers the issues you have. I am happy to debate the merits of different units (that’s why I write the reviews), but I’m sorry, ending your post with “..eagerly awaiting the hordes of personal insults coming my way from the snowflake crowd for daring to criticize part of the 8th design balance.” you must admit is an attempt to troll and be insulting. No one uses snowflake to describe a group of people in a non-derogatory fashion these days. Just cut out that last part and I’ll happily debate your post.

  4. Don Tomaso February 22, 2018 10:11 pm #

    Thank you for an excellent reply. I am both positively surprised as well as grateful that someone finally took their time and replied in a logical manner.
    I understand that reece didnt dare to go into the very bad and non performing unit waters after his careful cherry picking of my first post but I am kind of used to this by now. Thus my usual selection of wording since these things are rather irritating and I have zero respect for people that behave in this manner.

    My apologies if I acted in a less civil manner towards you.

    “You say the Thunderfire Cannon is a flawed unit. I disagree, for the points I have said in the article. It’s damage output is sub-par compared to its damage output in 8th edition, but AGAIN, that is not why you take it! You take it for the potential to control your opponent’s movement.”

    Flawed yes but only because the reason(s) I mentioned and explained. That is I didnt pull the reasoning out of thin air.
    Wouldnt you agree that a unit, a n y unit in a persons collection that perpetually collects dust on a shelf in 8th by default means there is a flaw to be found somewhere in the chain of rules-stats-mechanics-pointcost. This is a perfect description of the TFC.

    The point with the TFC, outside the other units mentioned such as WWs, vindies etc is not that it in plain English, sucks so much its never worth taking due to its rules and/or point costs but that its mechanics make all models in ones collection above the first one to basically be useless or shoehorned from the most popular game mode (matched) into non-matched gameplay.

    Do you see the logic? If a unit is per default so crappy (and the TFC most certainly is) that it simply does not work without its paired strategem and command points (and the TFC is very strong when used with and only with said strategem and CPs) then there is a flaw in the mechanic.
    There is no excusing away the fact that a lot of peoples TFC models simply collect dust not being usable because of the above mentioned.

    Imagine the following, I construct a 9th edition that sees a land raider or predator or dreadnought model cost 400 points each but only being able to kill 10 guardsmen per turn and thus be absolutely worthless.
    However..if a special land raider/pred/etc strategem is used the same unit (land raider, etc) all of a sudden become very strong quite easily earning their points back.
    Problem is that only one strategem of the same type can be used per phase and command points are very rare.

    The result would be an extrapolation of the current flaw, outside the first model peoples predators, landraiders and dread models would collect dust being unusable in the most popular game-mode (matched) there is because they simply put dont earn anything back point wise (whirlies, TFC) or just plain suck rules wise (vindicator).

    The other units mentioned beside the TFC were simply examples of non performing models due to overly weak, ineffective or plain wrong rules, point costs or mechanics. No wonder the participant in their flawed balancing refuse to touch this subject retorting to raisin picking or silence when faced with this topic, a shame really since only a debate can lead to these things improvements.

    “you must admit is an attempt to troll and be insulting. No one uses snowflake to describe a group of people in a non-derogatory fashion these days. Just cut out that last part and I’ll happily debate your post.”

    You are partially correct and I get what you are saying.
    Please understand though that after all the personal insults I have been met with aimed at my person in here regarding my state of mind, wishing to beat me up and even what I must be doing for a living over the times by people not seeing their own hypocricy I am least to say jaded and opted to go with this choice of, rather bad rhetoric based on my by now usual expectations regarding answers.
    Ergo: I wrote these things not to troll (this time) but as a form of sarcastic humor fully expecting the same old usual.

    My apologies if you took any offense, it really was not meant to.

    I lost track of all the times I tried to bring up the subject of adjustments for bad and flawed units so they can start being taken in matched game play in here and instantly were met by insults because I am “whining” and “ONLY” complaining despite being vindicated 100% in the recent CA.
    Where else do you take topics like significantly under performing units and flawed point mechanics in 8th in order to improve the game than to the guys partially responsible for the 8th? Then when you do you are met with ridicule or silence.
    Are you surprised that I in turn drop all respect for this pace and start trolling just for fun now and then?

    “Just cut out that last part and I’ll happily debate your post.”

    Cool. Would be awesome. At least someone would actually dare without hiding and pretending there are no problems or excusing them away with cherry picked quotes.
    I might be wrong, I might be right, it´s not important, a debate however, would be because it can lead to a better game for everyone due to well thought out CAs.

    Centurions and wargear, worth taking? not worth taking? compared to other platforms with the same wargear? Is the mechanic flawed?

    • abusepuppy February 23, 2018 4:14 am #

      >At least someone would actually dare without hiding and pretending there are no problems or excusing them away with cherry picked quotes.

      No one was hiding or pretending, you were just being so relentlessly unpleasant and insulting to argue with that no one had the slightest interest in engaging with you. That’s the thing about the internet: you can be as rude and snarky as you want, but there’s no guarantee anyone will give a shit or bother to read your posts. So when you start shouting about “snowflakes” and claiming that the whole world is out to get you for daring to suggest that 8E is imperfect, we all just tune you out because it’s clear that you’re not gonna be worth talking to. A trivial search of the site will show dozens upon dozens of articles pointing out problems with 8th and ways they might be fixed; there are no sacred cows here. But when your first resort (and preemptive tactic) is angrily insulting anyone who might disagree with you… well, you’re not worth the six seconds it takes to skim over your post.

      I and the other writers hope you’ll change that; you could probably be a very useful commentator if you wanted to be. You could even write articles yourself if you cared to and could show that you are able to put in the effort to make them good. But no one wants to read anything if your immediate response is to claim that you are under attack by some sort of grand conspiracy for telling The Truth.

      (Also, just putting quotes on the things you quote from other people isn’t a great differentiator. Carrats are a more accepted form, or using some other way of marking things out that keeps them separated from your own words.)

      • Venkarel February 23, 2018 6:46 am #

        Alright AP he/she sorta reminds me of you a few years ago. Our game needs naysayers they serve a valid point. As for the quotation thing I get that you are saying that in forums carrots are better but in the English language quotes literally, and I mean literally, are designed to point that this part of the sentence was said or the idea was created by someone else. Thus the word quote and quotation sharing the same root. Seems very petty and actual straight up incorrect by English gamer to even bring this up.

        • abusepuppy February 23, 2018 9:56 am #

          Formats and standards change over time and when needs become different. Quotation marks originated in use for handwritten documents where indentation, spacing, and other factors could be used to make block quotes stand out from the rest of the text; moreover, they existed in an age where line-by-line quotation of another text was extremely unlikely to be used.

          That’s not how things are anymore; there’s a reason that virtually all forums have a specific function for quoting other people’s posts, rather than simply using quotation marks- we communicate differently and the structure and conventions of language change to reflect that.

      • Don Tomaso March 5, 2018 7:48 pm #

        “I and the other writers hope you’ll change that; you could probably be a very useful commentator if you wanted to be. You could even write articles yourself if you cared to and could show that you are able to put in the effort to make them good. But no one wants to read anything if your immediate response is to claim that you are under attack by some sort of grand conspiracy for telling The Truth.”

        Oh there are other forums where debate and nay-sayers are met with respect and there I discuss politely without any trolling. In here over the last year..not so much.

        You DO realize it takes two to tango right? My insulting manners are not taken out of a blue sky entirely without reason.
        I can debate properly IF I want to but only if I am met with respect myself and not with cherry picked ridicule or outright silence for daring to criticize a flawed system.

    • Michael Corr
      Michael Corr February 23, 2018 4:51 am #

      I do get what you are trying to say, in a competitive environment some units or combinations are inherently going to be stronger than others, be it a virtue of lower points cost, greater damage output, etc. This has been the same for every edition of the game since the start, some units are better than others, or don’t really match the role they are supposed to have in the background. It’s always been that way and will probably continue as long as there is a game of 40k.

      It can be frustrating to not be able to take all your toys in a game. There is nothing to stop you taking them, but it is annoying if they are not competitive or struggle to do much in the game. I know that my first games of 8th edition with my Deathwatch were pretty rubbish. I took them to a few tournaments and did not have a lot of fun, getting crushed in games where I thought there was nothing wrong with my playing, I was just using a ridiculously overcosted army and struggling to compete against even semi-competitive lists.

      Saying that it can sometimes be fun. In 7th edition, I routinely used to try out sub par units and formations in friendly games just to see how they got on or if there was anything to be gained by changing my tactics. Why don’t you give some of your sub par units a go on the battlefield? Try them out and see if any benefit can be gained or you can devise some new tactics or playstyles?

      At least in 8th edition, GW seem to be making an effort to deal with some of the larger ranging player complaints. Not everything will be fixed, but they seem to be having a go at many of the major ones.

      With the reviews, I try to discuss the merits of the unit and how it can fit into your army if you want it to. I could spend paragraphs railing against why certain units suck and how I wished they could be played, but that doesn’t really help anyone. The rules are what they are, so I look for ways to use them effectively, even if they are poorer units.

      As for the trolling, it really doesn’t help your case. It can seem a bit disingenuous to be trolling a post and they say “wait, I really want a serious conversation/debate about this!” after getting called on it. In all honesty, I’ve tended to just scroll past your comments for a while in other posts. I’ve only answered this one as it was directly in one of my reviews.
      It’s not just you, any post that uses terms such as snowflakes, fanboys, soyboys, white knights, etc, is just going to get an eyeroll from me and the writer ignored pretty often. It’s why I tend to avoid forums and most other big websites focused on 40k.

      When you start a comment with “A one trick costly pony that relies on free CPs. Ok, I´ll bite..”, my immediate thought is “this person has already made up their mind and doesn’t really want to debate, it’s just going to be a trolling post insulting a bunch of things”.

      Not trying a personal attack or insult, just the way I see things after reading internet comments for a while. Lose the trolling and insults and I will happily debate the issues as I have said above. I like posting things on Frontline Gaming as I think it has a more civil readership for the most part and you can actually get some good debates and ideas from the comments. I would hate to see that disappear. (on a side note, if I am ever feeling too good about myself, I’ll check out the comments when my articles get re-posted on BoLs, that normally cures it pretty quickly!).

      • abusepuppy February 23, 2018 6:21 am #

        Bell of Lost Souls is where wargaming discussion goes to die.

        • Michael Corr
          Michael Corr February 23, 2018 6:56 am #

          My favourite is my article on the evolution of Orks in 40k. The article specifically says I am only going to talk about it from 2nd edition onwards, as that is when I first became aware of 40k. I even link to another article that discusses Orks in Rogue Trader in more detail (plus the books were too difficult to track down or way too expensive on ebay).

          A lot of the comment posts are “didn’t even mention the awesome Rogue Trader books! Obviously, the rest of the article is nonsense because of this!”.

          • Reecius
            Reecius February 23, 2018 9:44 am
            #

            Yeah, that is always the best, lol, when people comment on your articles without reading them, sometimes even the title, lol. That happened all the time over at BoLS when I was still writing for them.

  5. Don Tomaso March 5, 2018 8:56 pm #

    I have no idea how the quote function works on this forum so until someone points this out I´ll just keep using the lesser way. Instead of complaining about how not to quote here is a hint..show how and who knows, it might actually lead to a betterment 😛

    “I do get what you are trying to say, in a competitive environment some units or combinations are inherently going to be stronger than others, be it a virtue of lower points cost, greater damage output, etc. This has been the same for every edition of the game since the start, some units are better than others, or don’t really match the role they are supposed to have in the background. It’s always been that way and will probably continue as long as there is a game of 40k.”

    Yes, you are right, every edition has had its share of crap, broken rules or sometimes even outright favoritism (Heine´s old iron warriors “codex”) from the very people that are supposed to help constructing a balanced game.

    My point and this should be THE point now in 8th..is that as 8th is such a good step up from the utter trash that was the previous taudar cheese edition, why should we just accept that this is how things are supposed to be?

    Why not start talking seriously about the flawed things and have some head honcho, possibly Reece, actually give geedub some well debated pointers for their chapter approve editions?

    Actively working to better all aspects of 8th will benefit everybody, the players, hobbyists AND geedubs earnings, not to mention people like Reece that will be seen as helping to make the game better and add to geedubs profits and hopefully get more customers for his own shop.

    To achieve this a debate is needed though where all negative aspects of rules, codexes, balance, mechanics etc are brought up, discussed and dissected instead of being met with silence or ridicule. Yes yes, like AP said, I am often very abrasive BUT bear in mind, it takes two to tango. I am not like this on other forums where a debate is actually “allowed” and moderated non partially.
    If I say for example that plasma interceptors are useless due to a very ill thought out point cost (and I did) and are then met with silence or ridicule and later CA lowers their point costs significantly and these things happen over and over and I am only ridiculed for being a nagging idiot who should l2p then all respect from my side goes out the window and I find it fun to troll the people in here in return.

    8th is good, far better then 7th but there are still big issues regarding codex creep, balance, point cost insanity and outright useless units that collect dust on peoples shelves. I for one would like to help make this less so other then accept that every edition “should” normally speaking be plagued by its share of non working mechanics.

    “It can be frustrating to not be able to take all your toys in a game. There is nothing to stop you taking them, but it is annoying if they are not competitive or struggle to do much in the game. I know that my first games of 8th edition with my Deathwatch were pretty rubbish. I took them to a few tournaments and did not have a lot of fun, getting crushed in games where I thought there was nothing wrong with my playing, I was just using a ridiculously overcosted army and struggling to compete against even semi-competitive lists.”

    Yes, more or less. There is a difference between having your handful of models collect dust and having your entire codex being basically pissed on by gw.
    I am “just” annoyed that LotD and a few other units are unusable but go in and read in the gk section at bnc how fed up the gk players are over what is now basically a 7ed ork equivalent and bear in mind that said board traditionally speaking was always a yes-saying cathedral of geedub worship.

    Myself, I have deathwatch models that I am still waiting to paint because they are simply put, unplayable in matched settings. That is however just an irritant because I have other armies and my hobby goes on and I have fun using other armies/models but what about those who bought their single army, spent time on it and now are bitterly sarcastic every time they see those armies auto loose in matched or never be seen in tournaments?
    Do you think gw will attract many new customers this way among hobbyists thinking of starting by purchasing an army of deathwatch or gk and asking friends on the big boards about help collecting and building their army but being told to forget about it because said moderated board above mentioned is actually busy posting sarcastic wagers regarding how much more geedub will piss at their already trashed codex?

    “Saying that it can sometimes be fun. In 7th edition, I routinely used to try out sub par units and formations in friendly games just to see how they got on or if there was anything to be gained by changing my tactics. Why don’t you give some of your sub par units a go on the battlefield? Try them out and see if any benefit can be gained or you can devise some new tactics or playstyles?”

    Oh I did that and did that lots. Dont ever mistake me for some waac player only ever taking jetbikes and dark reeapers.
    I play matched but often “fun” matched meaning we take a little of everything rather then face the usual copypasted waac list or what have you because this is what wins.
    I mentioned already that I really like for example models like cents and have spent a lot of time converting them and I would not have bought 3 whirlwinds if I didnt like the models or the thought of using massed SM arty but here is the catch.

    Some units A R E SO bad they simply not only dont work on the table but are not even fun to try out. Speaking of cents I tried them on foot, in transports, dev loadouts, melee louadouts, I did everything but nope, they are so ill thought out and badly balanced they basically suck the fun out of the game because you are forced to play with so many points in such an uphill way that the game is at best bad for you and weird for your opponent and at worst just an early tabling.

    Same goes for vindicators. I got several because I liked the idea of trying out a slowly rolling heavy short ranged SM armour wall, not because this is effective or will win me games, but because the “feel” and narrative of it seems fun as hell.
    Imagine the “fun” when every attempt was met by zero enjoyment. Some units really need a complete re-haul but this is impossible with the correction mechanics we have so far seen and the reluctance to even acknowledge it (in here).


    At least in 8th edition, GW seem to be making an effort to deal with some of the larger ranging player complaints. Not everything will be fixed, but they seem to be having a go at many of the major ones.”

    This is awesome and should be not only encouraged but actively helped. Thus my point above, why not help geedub out by having the people they partially relied on forming 8th come with well debated suggestions for their chapter approve releases?


    With the reviews, I try to discuss the merits of the unit and how it can fit into your army if you want it to. I could spend paragraphs railing against why certain units suck and how I wished they could be played, but that doesn’t really help anyone. The rules are what they are, so I look for ways to use them effectively, even if they are poorer units.”

    Sometimes no matter how well written a review is and how awesome the hints and pointers to sound strategies are, some units are SO bad they just do not work! You can only polish a non working badly balanced and wrongly point costed turd so much.
    Bear in mind, I am not saying that you do, just stating the facts that there are units out there in this game that simply put, do not work and are thus “never” taken.

    “As for the trolling, it really doesn’t help your case.”

    Fair enough. I dont troll in a vacuum for no reason though. Way back I tried without trolling and all I got was insults so why bother.
    If you think about it, since you met and discussed my points instead of like some others have, ran away from them or cherrypick and ridicule me then I have done anything but be polite and constructive towards you, no sarcasm, bad humor or trolling needed or utilized. Nor have I even used vague jokes aimed at your expense and again, I do apologize IF you happened to take anything I said in here as an insult directed at you because if so then it was not meant as such.
    This is how I treat people I have respect for and it has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with a point or an idea or not.
    You can tell me that I am completely wrong about something I say but as long as you show me the logic behind your reasoning instead of instantly reacting by telling me that I must have an angry personal life, be unemployed, threaten to break my nose, l2p, hide when I show you my own logic and then complain that I *gasp* dare change my MO to trolling I will take your words seriously and meet them with the respect you deserve.

    We are all good at some aspect of this hobby/game and together we should help make it even better. This is kind of my idea in here, praising things that are already perfect and working is not needed, but mentioning flaws and helping eliminate them is.

    “comments when my articles get re-posted on BoLs, that normally cures it pretty quickly!).”

    Oh well, bols is well..bols.
    This is why I am so frustrated with frontline, I thought originally that this is the place to go to have some serious nay-saying debated and that flaws in 8th can be mentioned and discussed in order to be improved in CAs. Then it all went downhill after the you-are-just-whining-l2p-nothing-to-see-move-along-you-are-soooo-wrong replies came like a never ending rain even when the CA later had everything, every single thing I was saying be correct but by then it was to late and it escalated to me trolling the fanboys who themselves threw insults at me and of course the “other” guy was always single handedly at fault.
    You see, I really love to debate serious and complex things as well as be the devils advocate in debates BUT I equally love to just troll people that diss me for the fun of it.

Leave a Reply