Jump to content

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

Da Iron Klads vz Stoopid Umies

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1
Dribble Joy

Dribble Joy

    Moronik

  • Bad Moonz
  • 2,454 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Sarum
  • Army Name:Nuggruz's Iron Klads.

Stoopid umies an dere stoppid dakka an orderinz wot make da dakka urt more an... an.. an dere jus stoopid!

 

Rofflestomped by a Cadian gunline.

Relic of not spend CPs and steal your CPs. Cadian re-rolls. Pask. A baneblade. So many lascannons. Strategem shenanigans.  Stationary Russ plops. Three wagons and a meganob unit dead in first turn. Tabled in beginning of turn three.

 

The End.

 

Where's my booze?


  • skarnir and FlamingDeth like this

#2
Giganotosaurus

Giganotosaurus

    squig attack arm

  • Boyz
  • 481 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Late Cretaceous
  • Army Name:Grumpy's Toys

Ouch!! 



#3
killercroc

killercroc

    Flash Git

  • Boyz
  • 1,123 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Idaho

Time to switch out for Boyz! Lascannons can only kill 1 Boy a shot!

But for real, some armies have such amazing synergy it's disgusting. I picked up the Umie book and after reading though it I don't see how they can every lose! So many ways to multi-buff units and strategies they're really strong. I'm looking at a more fluffy Umie army over a powerful one but I just want something more for fun that still looks cool.



#4
Wingnutz

Wingnutz

    Ridin' Boar

  • Boyz
  • 118 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:eastbourne uk
Least the humies dont have a strat to steal booze.. Maybe in chapter approved this year..

#5
Garslag

Garslag

    Kommando

  • Boyz
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Army Name:Waaa-Garslag
Um. This is not very compassionate but this is the best battle report I've read since Battle at da Camp.
"Parry the 6!"

#6
Gitkilla

Gitkilla

    Tankbusta Boy

  • Boyz
  • 449 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:germany
  • Army Name:Death Skulls

More like an "outcry for balance" report. Codex vs Index is fairly ridicolous.

 

But it's too hard to tweak point costs more for their balance team, esp in the time of the internet right?


Metal elitist & into game/level design.


#7
Dribble Joy

Dribble Joy

    Moronik

  • Bad Moonz
  • 2,454 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Sarum
  • Army Name:Nuggruz's Iron Klads.

I can actually hold myself quite well against a lot of codex armies (though this may be in part that people aren't expecting a four wagon list) but this was something else.



#8
Valdrog

Valdrog

    Rutted Gob Busta

  • Grotz
  • 53 posts
  • Army Name:Cuban Waaaaaghhh

Wait till you fight the new Knight Codex, 120 boys, 6 KMKs, barely managed to deal 16 wounds to one, not mentioning characters cause he was just sniping them off with that stupid broken Knight ability/weapon



#9
Gitkilla

Gitkilla

    Tankbusta Boy

  • Boyz
  • 449 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:germany
  • Army Name:Death Skulls

Wait till you fight the new Knight Codex, 120 boys, 6 KMKs, barely managed to deal 16 wounds to one, not mentioning characters cause he was just sniping them off with that stupid broken Knight ability/weapon

 

I mean they have to be strong, they are loyalist and cost a lot of money. Try to counter them with the stomper next time (Kappa)


Metal elitist & into game/level design.


#10
leopard

leopard

    Flesh Eater Squig

  • Grotz
  • 87 posts
  • Army Name:Gobfinks Gitz

Managed to take a gun line down, once, in a smaller (1,200 point) game, when we had the "night fighting" mission card drawn, and even then it was close (grots brought an armoured sentinel down, all alone!) and needed an 'umie player not familiar with his own army.

 

I think when you see that sort of matchup set yourself an objective "nail that tank", "kill that character" and just play for that and enjoy yourself, accepting the actual mission is likely a loss


  • Badfang Brassaxe likes this

#11
skarnir

skarnir

    Lobotomy

  • Blood Axez
  • 752 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DA SALT MINE
  • Army Name:SKARNIRS KAMO KILLAZ

Managed to take a gun line down, once, in a smaller (1,200 point) game, when we had the "night fighting" mission card drawn, and even then it was close (grots brought an armoured sentinel down, all alone!) and needed an 'umie player not familiar with his own army.

 

I think when you see that sort of matchup set yourself an objective "nail that tank", "kill that character" and just play for that and enjoy yourself, accepting the actual mission is likely a loss

 

That's pretty much how I play 40k these days, I don't expect to win. just try to make it a Pyrrhic victory for the enemy, which in game terms means nothing but it feels like a moral victory then.


The world is a much brighter place, when you finally pull your head out of your ass.


#12
Lexington

Lexington

    Shoota Boy

  • Boyz
  • 269 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minneapolis, MN
  • Army Name:Zagdakka'z Ladz

Curious what people think it'd take to balance out gunlines vs. CC armies in 8th? I'm writing up a "Veteran's Edition" of 8th's core rules that tries to fix this to some extent, along with a lot of other issues caused by GW's fanatical adherence to simplicity and spectacle. Here's what's in already:

  • Return of Area Terrain, which blocks LoS after 3" in. No more all-TLoS. Buildings and other big terrain can't have LoS drawn all the way through them either.
  • Models may always opt to charge their movement value, up to 6", rather than roll Charge distances.
  • Infantry wishing to Fall Back from other Infantry must win a roll-off, with negative modifiers if multiple units are engaging the unit that wants to Fall Back.
  • Models can only ever benefit from a single friendly rule or ability giving them a positive modifier to hit in shooting. Similarly, models may only ever have a single negative modifier effect applied by enemy models (Ork shooting woes factored into this, of course, but stacking mods are just a huge problem generally).

In addition, Alliances are definitely back, which balances out some of the insane comparative advantages of Imperial and Chaos armies, and the particulars of how CP are generated and spent get a bit of a re-tooling (you can only spend CP generated on a specific Detachment on models of its "type"). There's other things floating around in my head, such as not allowing Infantry to both Overwatch and Fight in the same turn, but those aren't in the working document yet. Any thoughts on other things that could be added or changed?



#13
Dribble Joy

Dribble Joy

    Moronik

  • Bad Moonz
  • 2,454 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Sarum
  • Army Name:Nuggruz's Iron Klads.
  • Models may always opt to charge their movement value, up to 6", rather than roll Charge distances.

 

I actually prefer random charge distances as a game mechanic.

 

If you have no pre-measuring, then - sorry if this is a little cynical - the game is wide open to rubber-tape-measure-syndrome.

 

If you have pre-measuing, then fixed charge distances are easy to deny, especially with gunlines.

Random distances introduce risk management and baiting into the gameplay.

 

Should the movement stat be introduced to charge distance? Maybe. On one hand it's a better representation of a unit's speed. On the other the movement stat itself limits a unit's threat range and some high movement units would end up with preposterous threat ranges (imagine a battlewagon with a 12+12+D6 melee threat range as an example, let alone bikes and the like). Positioning and movement should be as much as a defence against melee as shooting.

 

Soo... yeah, I'm kinda happy with that aspect of the game right now ;).


  • Lexington likes this

#14
leopard

leopard

    Flesh Eater Squig

  • Grotz
  • 87 posts
  • Army Name:Gobfinks Gitz

Charges as D6 + Move or Move + 2d3 I could work with as being better

 

but the biggest change would have to be actual terrain rules, you need two broad types (which can be combined) - stuff that makes you harder to hurt like fortifications, brick walls etc - the save bonus I actually like, but to be honest would prefer something that dropped the strength of the attacking weapon - e.g. a wall drops S by one point, fortification by 2.

 

then you have stuff that makes you harder to hit like smoke.

 

area terrain that can provide its bonus simply if the shot passes over it (e.g. shooting over a wall between both units), without one unit having to be totally in it.

 

I would avoid terrain changing movement by more than dropping an inch from movement, maybe from advance and charging as well

 

this helps gunnies (who can dig in) and hurts them (by making them easier to approach)


  • Lexington likes this

#15
Lexington

Lexington

    Shoota Boy

  • Boyz
  • 269 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minneapolis, MN
  • Army Name:Zagdakka'z Ladz

 

I actually prefer random charge distances as a game mechanic.

 

If you have no pre-measuring, then - sorry if this is a little cynical - the game is wide open to rubber-tape-measure-syndrome.

 

If you have pre-measuing, then fixed charge distances are easy to deny, especially with gunlines.

Random distances introduce risk management and baiting into the gameplay.

 

Whoops, I wasn't really clear about the full intent, here - full random charges would still be available as normal, but models would have the option to simply "take 6" (or less, depending on their movement value) for the charge instead. Fully randomized charges, with a minimum distance of only 2" and Overwatch to boot, has been such a punch in the gut for close combat armies, one more thing keeping them from engaging in their specialty while shooting units remain a "point-and-click" option that's rarely impeded by much.

 

Charges as D6 + Move or Move + 2d3 I could work with as being better

 

but the biggest change would have to be actual terrain rules, you need two broad types (which can be combined) - stuff that makes you harder to hurt like fortifications, brick walls etc - the save bonus I actually like, but to be honest would prefer something that dropped the strength of the attacking weapon - e.g. a wall drops S by one point, fortification by 2.

 

then you have stuff that makes you harder to hit like smoke.

 

area terrain that can provide its bonus simply if the shot passes over it (e.g. shooting over a wall between both units), without one unit having to be totally in it.

 

I would avoid terrain changing movement by more than dropping an inch from movement, maybe from advance and charging as well

 

this helps gunnies (who can dig in) and hurts them (by making them easier to approach)

 

The problem with adding to movement overall is that there's such wildly different movement values in 8th. You end up with either a lower overall charge range (tho a better "average" for many troops, I suppose), or ridiculously long charges for vehicles and flying troops. The "up to 6" solution takes out a bit of randomization for CC units - and ends up just a little short of the average random charge - without taking more laborious steps to limit this to certain unit types or movement values.

 

I definitely agree on terrain rules needing a huge overhaul, tho, and I like the idea of possibly lowering the S value of weaponry in different types of blocking terrain. It's something to look into, since the armor save modifier of so many weapons really makes "cover" a joke in this edition.  The other option I'm looking at is making cover into a variable modifier depending on type, with "standard" cover being +1, but with things like walls and ruins and other solid fortifications being +2 or even +3 for some of the really tough ones. The obvious problem there is making nigh-invincible beakies, so the idea of modifying weapons strength may work better. Thanks much for the input!



#16
leopard

leopard

    Flesh Eater Squig

  • Grotz
  • 87 posts
  • Army Name:Gobfinks Gitz

Personally would love the "cover" mechanic from LotR (basically roll to hit your target, if you miss you miss, if you hit you now have to roll to "hit" against each item in the way - a "hit" means you missed it, a miss means thats what you actually hit.

 

hit a wood or whatever and who cares, hit buildings or other units and resolve against them.

 

takes a bit more time but it fits with what you would actually expect to happen.

 

I actually think bringing movement into charges makes sense - cavalry should be able to charge faster than infantry, not seeing why a bike unit wouldn't as well - perhaps with a maximum charge range imposed (18"?) beyond which you're not going



#17
Badfang Brassaxe

Badfang Brassaxe

    Skitzo

  • Boyz
  • 2,382 posts
  • Army Name:Da Perfeshunelz

It might be a bit quicker and still work in much the same way if cover either gave a toughness buff to the target (+1 for a wooden wall/woods/hedges etc, +2 for a brick wall/trench/ditch/wrecked vehicles etc and +3 for concrete walls/rocks/armoured vehicles etc) or a similar de-buff to the strength of the weapon shooting :?