These are chat archives for BSData/wh40k

6th
Aug 2017
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 06 2017 02:47
so… i heard there is a GK codex floating around out there
tekton
@tekton
Aug 06 2017 02:58
The video is up there, and I have most everything I could glean from that in a pull request I'm working on @flakpanda
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 06 2017 03:03
ah. thought a scan came out
tekton
@tekton
Aug 06 2017 03:05
If one did, and people are holding out on me, I'm going to be a sad :panda_face:
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 03:21
To throw my hat into the ring, I'm actually with @skonk on this one. While I have said before I think an all or nothing 35% limit (100% if you're fielding knights) could be healthy for the game, the reality is that all of the stores I've visited in my area and most of the people I've asked are using matched play as the standard "Pick up game" ruleset
so while there needs to be restrictions I think the best place to implement them is currently with TOs for specific events, as those arenas are the most likely to see positive impact from the limit scenario without as much of a negative one
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 03:25
on the flip side of that argument, a 35% limit on LoW/swap knights to other battlefield roles in a all knight army in matched play only is following the flyers don't count ruling precident.
which, arguably, was only really a problem in competitive 40k, yes?
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 03:26
and it's a precedent I'm not sure needs reinforced
because it still feels really fucking ham-handed
reactive balancing is good in theory, but only remains so when it targets and changes appropriately
ITC 7th is the poster child example of how reactive balancing without enough consideration of the underlying problem can get you into a deep hole
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 03:29
But what if GW intended Matched to be competitive, narrative non-comp? If that is the intended usage, then maybe GW needs to tighten the matched rules even more, making it less appealing to narrative players.
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 03:30
then they should specify that more clearly, but given that they allow player choice and subtly push matched for pick-up games, I doubt is the case
still, if they go for a limit, it should be 35%, not 25%
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 03:30
agreed.
35% is better
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 03:32
though if we want to be precise the real problem is that its too easy to plug the weaknesess in a 3-knight detachment with other struff
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 04:34
Ok, all the units are in the cat; they just need linked, categorized, and points confirmed. Branch Alphalas, @GenWilhelm @amis92 or anyone else really who wants to do it, go for it - i'm done for the night.
remember, categorize on links, not SSE
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 05:17
or ven @FarseerVeraenthis
lol
even*
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Aug 06 2017 05:22
Morning! That was a good discussion about limits and so on :+1:
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 09:59
@alphalas thing is, I'm not a narrative player. No one in my little group is tbh. We play Matched play because we want to play the game using a competitive rule set but none of us would rock up to a game with a filthy list unless it was pre-agreed before hand.
Back in 7th for example, none of us would turn up with some filthy psychic death star list; we just made lists using what ever we felt like using. Personally I rarely field the same list twice and the lists are always pretty nicely a mix of all sorts.
but every now and then we would agree to both make a "tournament" list to give it a go...... which we didn't do many times cos wow it made of tedious and frustrating games.
But if one of the friends wanted to try a spammy list or something thats known to be pretty nuts then I'd want the rules to allow him to do it; but as I said, in my group we would never do stuff like that unless it was given the OK first.
It's a bit of an endless argument really cos stuff like this is heavily influenced by your own local meta I suppose :)
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 10:05
I'm just not a fan of "hard coding" rules into a system to solve issues that only affect a very small number of players.
Is why I'm not a fan of how they solved the flyer issue, it now punishes people even if they run just 1.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Aug 06 2017 10:05
I mean, really the way your gaming circle plays is narrative play using points instead of power levels and the full advanced rules...
Because you agree beforehand that you'll not rape the rules to produce the most powerful list..
I do have to disagree with you about the flyer changes though, in my opinion that is fluffy...
See, even if they did introduce list building rules for matched play, you could continue to play narrative games but select your army using points instead of power level so that it is more closely balanced - there would be nothing wrong with yhat
Although I do see you point that it should be. Down to the tournament organiser, there simply isn't the same "championship" mentality as the difference between F1 and F2000
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 11:59
They could have done the flyer change but only if you had 3+ flyers, or have them not count count unless they're part of a brigade/battalion etc.
Narrative doesn't have the rule of 1
we play matched, not narrative
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 15:20
don't think I'm going to be able to get the CSM book early like I did the SM one :(
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 17:00
So I'm now the proud owner of a 3d printed thunderhawk
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 06 2017 17:18
Does anyone need anything from here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Miniswap/comments/6rzj3e/h_chaos_space_marines_tzeentch_thousand_sons_misc/ ? Kinda in a bind and need to sell some things.
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 17:33
lets see some pics of the 3d print
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 18:08
@flakpanda everything alright? that's quite a list to just dump
I'd be curious about the NOS tartaros
what's the condition/setup on the devcents?
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 06 2017 18:09
Grav missile. There are pictures in the post.
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 18:10
ah, found it
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 06 2017 18:10
Unexpected medical costs...
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 18:10
well shit
let me check a few things, need to see where I'm at for the next couple months but I may be up for the tartaros
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 18:16
After closer inspection it seems like it's actually laser cut acrylic
Which is fine with me
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 18:21
that's pretty legit
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 18:25
nice
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 18:25
Thanks, it even has the wing mounted heavy bolters
Planning to use the DA twin bolters for the hull mounted ones
Then add bits of styrene to make the hull not so "flat"
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 18:27
is that aquilla engraved?
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 18:27
Yeah, there is a bunch of etching on it actually
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 18:27
that's legit.
does whoever did this do other things?
like a stormbird?
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 18:28
I dunno, I bought it off a guy from my LGS
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 18:28
:+1:
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 18:28
I think he he's had it a while but I'll ask him where he got it
I paid 30 bucks for it lol
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 06 2017 22:56
Alright, it's finally on Git proper - AM FW is done
Someone please QA it
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:12
need to build my aggressors but i cant decide on boltstorm or flamers
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:25
Magnetize
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:33
looks like it'd be a fiddly to do it cos the weapons at attached to the backpack differently for each weapon type
-a
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:33
hmm, can you post an image? I'm pretty adept at magnetizing things
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:35
not started building them yet but....
check the 360 degree thing
so i guess its down to if it comes with the parts to build both sets of weapons without them needing to share a key part
and if the arms can be in the same position with both weapons
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:38
I just looked at the sprues
holy shit those are complicated arms lol
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:38
also the rockets on the tops are part of the bolter set
so they would have to come off when using the flamers too lol
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:38
<
<
damnit, trying to do the eyes of pain face, apparently it doesn't work
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:39
i just built the repulsor and that had more parts than any kit ive done i think
the turret alone has 7 weapons on it
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:39
yeah, that's the main reason I dislike the tank
too busy
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:40
plus a load of aerials and gizmos
ive been thinking about how to actually use the aggressors and base how i build them off that
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:41
Honestly I'm not seeing the flame gauntlets being all that useful
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:41
they are "ok" in combat, and have weak strength shooting but in large numbers
and can shoot twice if they dont move
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:41
only an 8" range, so you need a repulsor for sure
plus you're going to be moving all the time to keep stuff in range
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:42
i dunno
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:42
wasting their shoot twice thing
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:42
army is ultramarines
what id like to happen (in a perfect world) is this
they go forwards, ideally in the tank
get out so they are out of range of being charged in the following turn, but in range of being charged the turn after :) somehow hide them a bit
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 23:43
flame agressors are only really worth it in sallies and raven guard
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:43
have a turn stood still. be nice if they could reach something to shoot em
and then hopefully they get charged in the following tuirn
turn^
do a double overwatch
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Aug 06 2017 23:43
RG because you can dump them 9" from the enemy, and even if you go second that's 4d6 overwatch someone has to brave
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:43
with autohitting flamers
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:43
People aren't going to charge them with flamers
unless they are more than 8 away
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:44
if they dont then they just get flamed
in my shooting phase
thing is they just aint that tough
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:44
thing is, they've now spent 2+ turns doing nothing
they have 2x the gauntlets right?
it's confusing because everything is plural lol
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:45
they have 1 pair
it counts as 1 weapon
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:45
so each guy shoots 6 shots with the bolter ones
ok
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:46
yeh
and 6 shots from the rockets
profiles are the same
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:46
rockets are D6
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:46
the flamers lose the rockets and just get 2d6 hits
yeh
so the bolter/rocket setup is more reliable for shot count and longer range but not auto hitting
but i just dont see the unit being very useful just as a shooty unit
its not an expensive unit though
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:49
Statically the flamers are slightly better
dealing 3.49 MEW wounds vs 3.19
however they have half the range and less chance to get to double tap
MEQ even
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:50
its an odd unit
in terms of how to use em
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:50
yeah, that was on a 3 man btw
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:50
yeh
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:50
I'd run bolters honestly unless I was Sallies
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:50
im Ultras
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:50
they are more versitile
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:51
so plan was get em close
get em charged hopefully, or charge em in
pack em out and flame
back^
no penalty for pulling out cos of auto hit
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:51
people aren't going to charge them lol
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:51
if its a melee unit they dont really have a choice :)
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:51
they are going flee like rats from the flamers
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:51
if they flee its still good heh
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:51
true
I guess it also depends on how you run the rest of your army
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:52
but 3+ save, 2 wounds, no invuln... they wont live very long
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:52
nope, especially with a max of 6 guys
a LRC will burst them down pretty fast
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:52
maybe some psychic backup or one of the defensive strats
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:54
not exactly cheap either, 129 for a 3 man squad?
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:54
its not that bad for the amount of shots
3 interceptors are 180 points
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:55
definitely not
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:55
Inceptors^
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:56
I guess the question is do you need in your face melee support or mid field dakka with melee backup?
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:56
tbh, not really played the stuff enough to know yet :)
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:58
lol, then I'd glue the bodies to the base and try them both ways and see what works better
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:58
cos they're in gravis armour they count as 2 slots in the tank too
so can only take 5
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:58
yeah
tank takes 10?
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:58
yeh
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:59
buy a Thunderhawk, fill it with 15 of them lol
James
@skonk
Aug 06 2017 23:59
heh
Alex Baur
@acebaur
Aug 06 2017 23:59
I'm trying to figure out what size game I need to play to run the T-hawk lol
2500 or 3000 is what I'm thinking