Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

[IthilanorStPete]

General tactics/army-building question (with the caveat that I know this may change in 9e): In 8e, do melee-focused armies usually spend any points at all on units that can sit back on objectives and provide fire support? Or do they usually go more all-in and just try and table the opponent?

[Cheesegear]

General tactics/army-building question (with the caveat that I know this may change in 9e): In 8e, do melee-focused armies usually spend any points at all on units that can sit back on objectives and provide fire support?

Generally, they have to. In 8th, Melee is just too unreliable and too prone to what your opponent 'allows' you to Charge.

Or do they usually go more all-in and just try and table the opponent?

I've said repeatedly that it's simply not possible to table a good opponent.

There are two ways to win games:
a) Score points, and
b) Prevent your opponent from scoring points.

Generally, a melee unit falls heavily under option B. A melee army, therefore, falls pretty heavily under not scoring their own points, but removing enemy models that the opponent can't score points. Since you're not really scoring your own points, because your battleplan is dictated by your opponent (and thus, melee is terrible), you're relying on the fact that your opponent, is bad. Not a good platform to start an army from.

[Forum Explorer]

General tactics/army-building question (with the caveat that I know this may change in 9e): In 8e, do melee-focused armies usually spend any points at all on units that can sit back on objectives and provide fire support? Or do they usually go more all-in and just try and table the opponent?

Like Cheesegear said, they pretty much have to. Tabling your opponent isn't even an instant win anymore, so you have to be playing the objectives in order to win. There are two ways about it:

1) Long range units that can sit back and shoot
2) Cheap troops with Obj secured who can just hold objectives without costing too many points.

It's why armies like pure Harlequins really struggle because they can't really do either. I think they might be the only army in that boat though. Pretty much every other melee army has options for long ranged stuff and/or cheap troops, even if you are going mono-codex.

[Cheesegear]

You've got a bent model.

You throw it in the hot/boiling water.
You fix it.
You throw it in the ice water.

Problem solved! Done this process a dozen times, if not more.

However, there's this one model I have, that no matter how many times I try, after a few hours, it just bends back.

[IthilanorStPete]

So this is something experienced players probably know, but I just realized.

1. Cypher and Fallen units have the Imperium faction keyword.
2. You can construct a Vanguard detachment out of just Cypher and three Fallen units.
3. This detachment can then be allied with any Imperium codex.
4. Dark Angels can fight alongside Fallen.

Does this actually work, rules-wise? Is it as much of a break from the fluff as I think it is? If so, that's hilarious.

Generally, they have to. In 8th, Melee is just too unreliable and too prone to what your opponent 'allows' you to Charge.



I've said repeatedly that it's simply not possible to table a good opponent.

There are two ways to win games:
a) Score points, and
b) Prevent your opponent from scoring points.

Generally, a melee unit falls heavily under option B. A melee army, therefore, falls pretty heavily under not scoring their own points, but removing enemy models that the opponent can't score points. Since you're not really scoring your own points, because your battleplan is dictated by your opponent (and thus, melee is terrible), you're relying on the fact that your opponent, is bad. Not a good platform to start an army from.

Like Cheesegear said, they pretty much have to. Tabling your opponent isn't even an instant win anymore, so you have to be playing the objectives in order to win. There are two ways about it:

1) Long range units that can sit back and shoot
2) Cheap troops with Obj secured who can just hold objectives without costing too many points.

It's why armies like pure Harlequins really struggle because they can't really do either. I think they might be the only army in that boat though. Pretty much every other melee army has options for long ranged stuff and/or cheap troops, even if you are going mono-codex.

Thank you both! Good stuff to know.

[Renegade Paladin]

I don't have the Chaos codex, so I'm not sure, but I seem to recall a provision saying essentially except Dark Angels detachments. I know in War of the Spider, Assassins can't be taken by a Fallen detachment, so that's another one.

[IthilanorStPete]

I don't have the Chaos codex, so I'm not sure, but I seem to recall a provision saying essentially except Dark Angels detachments. I know in War of the Spider, Assassins can't be taken by a Fallen detachment, so that's another one.

I can't find anything in the CSM codex (or the FAQ, for that matter).

[Renegade Paladin]

The answer might be in the Dark Angels codex, then. 1d4chan's page on the Fallen says they can't ally with Dark Angels because they have the Chaos keyword, so perhaps the exception lies there. My copy is stored with the loaner army at the shop so I don't have immediate access to it.

[LeSwordfish]

I can't see anywhere in the DA book that specifically excludes allying with anyone.

[hamishspence]

Chapter Approved 2019 specifically says that the "common keyword" cannot be "Imperium" or "Chaos" for a Battle-Forged army.

Battle Brothers – All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot be CHAOS, IMPERIUM, AELDARI, YNNARI or TYRANIDS, unless the Detachment in question is a Fortification Network. This has no effect on your army Faction. [CA2019 pg60]

[LeSwordfish]

Chapter Approved 2019 specifically says that the "common keyword" cannot be "Imperium" or "Chaos" for a Battle-Forged army.

That's the common keyword for a detachment, not an army, ("in each detachment" not "in all detachments"). Cypher and 3x Fallen is a full detachment. If it were the whole army, you couldn't have, say, Guard and Knights in the same army because their only shared keyword is Imperium.

[Saambell]

Chapter Approved 2019 specifically says that the "common keyword" cannot be "Imperium" or "Chaos" for a Battle-Forged army.

So wait, doesn't that mean its literally impossible to ally Guard with Space Marines? And that the only mixing of armies can be different Guard Regiments or different Chapters? As in, the worse kind of soup is the one allowed, but the allying from another codex is not allowed unless its like, Blood Angels and White Scars(as example)?

EDIT: I knew something was up as if it applied to the whole army it would be literally impossible to Ally.

[hamishspence]

That's the common keyword for a detachment, not an army, ("in each detachment" not "in all detachments"). Cypher and 3x Fallen is a full detachment. If it were the whole army, you couldn't have, say, Guard and Knights in the same army because their only shared keyword is Imperium.

Good point.

[Fable Wright]

You can, in fact, partner up Dark Angels and the Fallen. I believe there's been instances of captured Fallen being let out of prison to help the Dark Angels before?

[Wraith]

I believe there's been instances of captured Fallen being let out of prison to help the Dark Angels before?

Unless you're thinking of the Deathwatch, who specifically do NOT tell anyone that they used to be Dark Angels and instead hide their identity as Blackshields, I don't think I've ever come across this. If you can remember the source I'd love to read it, but "the Dark Angels will not tolerate the Fallen at all" is one of the very few absolutes in the game to which the writers have adhered, I think.

Unless by "help" you mean, "tied to a chair and slowly flayed alive until they tell an Interrogator where their friends are before being summarily executed", I guess that technically counts?

[Misery Esquire]

I believe specifically Cypher has been released a few times - or at least he implies/says so when Azrael lets him out during the events of the Legacy of Caliban series.

Other Fallen have less... Cypherosity available to get freed (alive).

[Cheesegear]

[Bent Resin:
1. Hot/Boiling Water.
2. Reshape.
3. Cold/Ice Water.]

However, there's this one model I have, that no matter how many times I try, after a few hours, it just bends back.

So...Nobody knows how/why this one model I have wont bend, or how to make it stay unbent?

[LeSwordfish]

So...Nobody knows how/why this one model I have wont bend, or how to make it stay unbent?

Only thing I can suggest is to have something to wedge/hold it in place for a long time after it should have solidified.

[snowblizz]

So...Nobody knows how/why this one model I have wont bend, or how to make it stay unbent?

Oh, that was a serious question...

Only thing I can suggest is to have something to wedge/hold it in place for a long time after it should have solidified.

That was my thinking too.

Instead of quickly dunking in cold water wedge it in place and let it cool off slower. Might need a longer hot soak too? Clearly you've not managed to get at the material's stress.

Might even be that the due to the particular shape it's more likely to "remember" it's original form.

[LeSwordfish]

Made a very expensive resin purchase the other day.

Spoiler

Show

Got it for about twice it's old RRP on ebay, which is not *too* bad for an OOP model, and given that it's apparently a nightmare to assemble i'm quite happy to have purchased one that's already put together. So it's fine. That's what I'll repeat to myself over the next three months of eating only baked beans.

Weighs as much as a good-sized brick, though: I might look into alternative flying base solutions since I don't entirely trust the standard GW one for this.

[gmoyes]

Well, I am very disappointed that it appears that the Psychic Awakening: Pariah book doesn't have new rules for Necrons, beside their new character. Which should be in the new codex anyways once 9th rolls over in a month or so.

*Sigh* I guess it sort of makes sense with Necrons getting a ton of new models in 9th and I heard there will be new dynasties released. But it still feels bad that I've been waiting for new rules to help customize my army only for nothing. And until the rules for the new models comes out, none of the new models really appeal to me. And looking at some of the teased rules for 9th in general, the only real thing so far to help Necrons is the standardized CP generation, if only so they can play on an even playing field as everyone else. The new blast rules hinder them more then help them and the new terrain and overwatch rules make things more difficult for shooty armies. Vehicles being able to fire while in combat remove the advantage of most Necron vehicles having fly. So unless they reveal some cool new rules for the Necron specifically, it's not looking to good so far for me.

[Cheesegear]

But it still feels bad that I've been waiting for new rules to help customize my army only for nothing.

This is what people don't get.
Yes, GW has sped production time up on their Codecies (mostly by writing them as fast as possible with a 'we'll fix it later' approach). But a few Factions, still have to be last in the cycle, and that sucks.

"It sucks that I have to wait two years for a new Codex, whilst everyone else is getting their new toys."
Back in MY day, we waited 9 years for a new Codex.
"That...Doesn't help. Saying 'it used to be worse', surprisingly, doesn't mean that it isn't still bad."

As always, Dungeons and Dragons' Unearthed Arcana shows that you can write rules in four seconds.
Play a few games? Does it work? No? Okay then.
Play a few games? Does it work? Yes? Okay. Keep using the rules until we ratify them in a book.

And looking at some of the teased rules for 9th in general, the only real thing so far to help Necrons is the standardized CP generation, if only so they can play on an even playing field as everyone else. The new blast rules hinder them more then help them and the new terrain and overwatch rules make things more difficult for shooty armies. Vehicles being able to fire while in combat remove the advantage of most Necron vehicles having fly. So unless they reveal some cool new rules for the Necron specifically, it's not looking to good so far for me.

Well, that's the problem. You're looking at the way Necrons are now, and trying to apply the new rules to an old Codex, when it's blatantly obvious that Necrons will get a new Codex that almost definitely is more aligned with the new rules.

For the rest of the Factions (except maybe Space Marines, who only got a new Codex 9 months ago), we absolutely can try and figure out how the new rules affect the current Codex, because we know everything is still in play. And if Space Marines are forced to buy their third Codex in two years, because their current Codex isn't valid (because all those new Indomitus units are coming out), people are gonna be maaad (bonus points if GW invalidates the Supplements, too [which arguably, they should]).

[LansXero]

Alaitoc is gonna go the way of the dodo with the new 'dense cover' rules. Which while strong is also gonna be finicky as hell to adjudicate.

[Avaris]

This is what people don't get.
Yes, GW has sped production time up on their Codecies (mostly by writing them as fast as possible with a 'we'll fix it later' approach). But a few Factions, still have to be last in the cycle, and that sucks.

"It sucks that I have to wait two years for a new Codex, whilst everyone else is getting their new toys."
Back in MY day, we waited 9 years for a new Codex.
"That...Doesn't help. Saying 'it used to be worse', surprisingly, doesn't mean that it isn't still bad."

As always, Dungeons and Dragons' Unearthed Arcana shows that you can write rules in four seconds.
Play a few games? Does it work? No? Okay then.
Play a few games? Does it work? Yes? Okay. Keep using the rules until we ratify them in a book.

What do you suggest as an alternative? Surely there’ll always be something last in the cycle: the goal is to reduce that cycle as much as possible.

Really sucks that Necrons (and seemingly Sisters) don’t get much in the way of new rules through Pariah.

Alaitoc is gonna go the way of the dodo with the new 'dense cover' rules. Which while strong is also gonna be finicky as hell to adjudicate.

How so? Seems quite simple to me: take a measuring stick, can you orientate it between the two models without passing over the terrain, Y/N?

[LansXero]

What do you suggest as an alternative? Surely there’ll always be something last in the cycle: the goal is to reduce that cycle as much as possible.

Really sucks that Necrons (and seemingly Sisters) don’t get much in the way of new rules through Pariah.

I honestly feel the game would be better served by condensing or axing a couple of factions, so support can be done in a reasonable time frame.

They would be better served by delaying the first release in the cycle to keep a biweekly release trickle instead of rushing it then delaying the last ones. Also, make multi-releases (kinda like PA does but with codices, not just pages of stuff).

As for the terrain, its "on or WITHIN", therefore its gonna affect things with only a sliver of base on top. "any point" is stupid, because if your base is a circle, and any fraction of that circle is "on or within", then anything that tries to hit the 'on or within edge' will have to cross points of your base also 'on or within' thus giving you dense cover even if I DS right behind you and have no part of the terrain between us.

[Avaris]

I honestly feel the game would be better served by condensing or axing a couple of factions, so support can be done in a reasonable time frame.

They would be better served by delaying the first release in the cycle to keep a biweekly release trickle instead of rushing it then delaying the last ones. Also, make multi-releases (kinda like PA does but with codices, not just pages of stuff).

I think that would run into problems of rules/release overload though? Having to handle new rules every two weeks feels excessive... Don’t disagree wity wanting as short a cycle as possible though!

As for the terrain, its "on or WITHIN", therefore its gonna affect things with only a sliver of base on top. "any point" is stupid, because if your base is a circle, and any fraction of that circle is "on or within", then anything that tries to hit the 'on or within edge' will have to cross points of your base also 'on or within' thus giving you dense cover even if I DS right behind you and have no part of the terrain between us.

So to put more simply, models partially in the terrain get the benefit of the terrain? I’m honestly ok with that, though I’d be equally ok with models needing to be wholly within. It really doesn’t seem hard to adjudicate though: is the model in terrain at all? If yes, it gets the benefit. If no, check to see if the tracing a line without passing over the terrain rule applies.

[gmoyes]

My point was that I'm annoyed more than when it finally came out, they had nothing to show for it rather than it just being last. I'm patient, I could wait. But when there is literally nothing besides the rules for a single character that I don't have interest in, while all the other factions got cool toys like custom chapter tactics and prototype weaponry. I was really looking forward for the possibilities of these for the Necrons. But nope, everything is in 9th. Who knows if my current army build is going to be viable at all. I guess seeing as I got introduced during 8th, I'm just new to standard edition change worries.

[Forum Explorer]

My point was that I'm annoyed more than when it finally came out, they had nothing to show for it rather than it just being last. I'm patient, I could wait. But when there is literally nothing besides the rules for a single character that I don't have interest in, while all the other factions got cool toys like custom chapter tactics and prototype weaponry. I was really looking forward for the possibilities of these for the Necrons. But nope, everything is in 9th. Who knows if my current army build is going to be viable at all. I guess seeing as I got introduced during 8th, I'm just new to standard edition change worries.

Honestly, this is for the best. Otherwise you might be tempted to buy Pariah, which is going to be outdated when 9th comes out anyways. Sure you can use the rules for a while, but only until the new Necron codex replaced them anyways.

[LansXero]

So to put more simply, models partially in the terrain get the benefit of the terrain? I’m honestly ok with that, though I’d be equally ok with models needing to be wholly within. It really doesn’t seem hard to adjudicate though: is the model in terrain at all? If yes, it gets the benefit. If no, check to see if the tracing a line without passing over the terrain rule applies.

The circle in the terrain has "dense cover" vs the one right behind it, which to me feels incredibly dumb.

[LeSwordfish]

I don't think it's wierd, it's the same "toe in cover" rule as most other editions have had