Escalation and Stronghold are launched!

[Erich]

Should this actually become dogs and cats living together it can be solved.

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2013/12/goaboys-monday-nonsense-i-dont-want-to.html

Makes many excellent points for improvement.

Lowering the points of a tournament to 1500 (as suggested in the above article) is a great idea. Not only does it mean less nasty things it also means the games go faster. Perhaps 1650.

[andalucien]

I keep reading the Harridan description and drooling.   

Talk about ruling the skies.

The thing could easily blow up 3 stormravens in 1 turn.
- Fly over one, vector striking it at strength 10 - that's an average of 3 strength 10 hits.
- Shoot Bio - cannon at another, again an average of 3 strength 10 hits.
- Shoot 2nd bio - cannon at ANOTHER....

[MM3791]

Seeing as everything listed in Escalation and Stronghold are "Optional" in a permissive ruleset, the sky isn't falling, and this won't change most games.  It's really not that big a deal.

It's optional on the FOC, same as elites or fast being optional.

[Sir_Prometheus]

So, I HAVE read all the rules now. 

Indeed, the problem is really Destroyer weapons, nothing else. 

The "optional" building rules in stronghold, I really don't understand why they're the optional bit, they're really what the fortification rules should have been from the beginning.  This is a big case where it should have been a FAQ, but GW thinks they get to charge you money for it. (hint, I didn't pay money for it, and I don't feel even a little guilty)  I'm not sure I understand why all buildings should essentially come with assault ramps for free, now, but I also don't really have a problem with it. 

All the new buildings and add-ons seem fine, too.  (except the D weapons)  The whole complexes...things that let you take 3 bastions, multiple aegis lines and guns, those seem a little silly.  I don't mind those from a balance perspective, more just that it'd feel like I'm playing with my castle greyskull action set (tm). 

I also have no problem with superheavies (though I think they are, almost without exception, kind of silly), just the D weapons. 

In the end, I think we definitely should use the new building rules, and I'm fine with using the all the rest of it, as long as we convert D weapons to Str 10 AP1.  I would also ban all the mega-blast type stuff, limit everything to large blast or smaller.  (frisbee size damage templates are dumb)

I think it's fine to have more Str 10 in the game.  There's a lot of Space marines on bikes, Iridium commanders, demon princes, et all, taht need to fear for their lives a bit more. 

[Chase]

D weapons are fine.

They're going to be in lots of events at Battleground.

[Chase]

Why people care about Str D and not about all of the other ridiculous things in the game is beyond me.

[Grimwulfe]

They do Chase they do...  This one just happens to be extremely stupid and straight forward in banning.

[andalucien]

I care about the other ridiculous things too

[Sir_Prometheus]

D weapons are fine.

They're going to be in lots of events at Battleground.

It really bothers me to hear you say that. 

And why do you have a strong opinion on this, when you have had so little direct opinion on 40k rules, generally?

All the veteran gamers have played with D weapons before, Chase.  We really do know what we're talking about. 

[Chase]

Escalation will have less of an impact, overall, than Codex: Tau Empire.

Odds that statement is accurate, greater or less than 90%?

[Grimwulfe]

My over under is 80%

[Vermillion]

That would really depend on how its handled. If escalation doesn't require opponent permission and is allowed in 2000 or higher tournaments then my vote is escalation. Particularly since it effects all armies

[Grimwulfe]

D weapons are fine.

They're going to be in lots of events at Battleground.

It really bothers me to hear you say that. 

And why do you have a strong opinion on this, when you have had so little direct opinion on 40k rules, generally?

All the veteran gamers have played with D weapons before, Chase.  We really do know what we're talking about.

Actually Matt I tend to find the opposite.  Chase is well versed (or tries to understand) in most rules yet he tends to let Sam work them out since he is TO.  Everyone is entitled to an opinion on things including Chase.  There will always be fluffy and off the wall events and I believe this is where his statememts were directed and not necessarilty directed at "our" version of competative tourny play.

[Chase]

I have a strong opinion because I've seen these gross overreactions to D weapons every year for the past... 6 or so.  They're always wrong.  People always think they're some massive problem and will entirely warp the game, kill everything, ruin people's time, destroy the game, slash your tires, bang your girlfriend, and piss in your Cheerios.

It never happens.

The metagame needs to be shaken up.  This is a great way to do that.  Taking any superheavy is a massive risk that offers potential for massive reward.  It's likely that lists will have to change based on the fact that they might have to face a particularly nasty one.  This is all a good thing.

What we've got here is a few vocal people stating their opinion... which is probably little more than exactly that.  Only a small percentage of the community has ever played with superheavies.  VERY few have played in a normal sized game with or against one.  I'd imagine no one has played in a tournament setting where superheavies have been allowed.  Yet we've got people shouting gospel here as to why its automatically terrible. 

Why?  Because if it lives long enough to shoot it might kill a 800 point Paladin squad assuming they're ground pounding and all clustered up under a template?  What's wrong with an 800ish point unit killing another 800ish point unit?  How many things in the game can reasonably be expected to kill their points worth of stuff if they go unchecked?  Probably quite a few....  How is a superheavy or a D weapon any different from the other hard to kill, efficient, high point cost "Deathstar" units?  If someone takes a "Deathstar" unit in a world where Str D is a thing, aren't they taking the exact same risk as someone who takes a big tank or something?  Is it okay if poor metagame choices get punished in a tournament setting?  Is a superheavy a poor metagame choice in a tournament setting.....?

The Escalation book, which very few people bought and seem to know everything about (thanks!), is pretty good.  The scenarios are cool and obviously factor in the big stuff, there's a couple of rules that help level the playing field also.

I don't see what the issue is.

Mountains out of molehills.

Apparently change, ESPECIALLY when GW is involved, is always a bad thing?

[Sir_Prometheus]

It also depends upon venue.  2+ rerollables don't have much that much of an effect at BG, because very few players actually want to be "that guy", same thing with O'Vesa star.  But lots of players love their eldar and tau armies (some people say Eldar is worse than Tau, even without the seer council) so you see that a lot, and that has more effect.

But y'know, at the big GTs, seer councils and screamer stars pretty well dominate.  Even last tournament at BG I had to play someone using just fateweaver down to the 2+ rerolling (which is only about half as cheesy as a full screamerstar) and it was still pretty sucktastic and unfun. 

1st and second place for Daboys was won by seer council.  It won the invitational at NOVA.  Probably would have won the open, too, except for some match-up luck. 

2+ rerollables shouldn't be a thing.  Neither should D weapons.  I have a list of other stuff, but those two are pretty well at the top. I think characters joining riptides is a less of a problem, but if you want to ban that too, that's fine.   I feel like I'm experienced enough at this game that I'm not really talking out of my butt. 

If it influences you at all, Mike Brandt has indicated he's at least strongly considering banning 2+ rerollables in some way.  It seems very unlikely that the big tournaments will be allowing escalation.  (stronghold is a tougher call, because of the much superior building rules, without those, I'm sure no one would give it a second look).