Escalation and Stronghold are launched!

[Sir_Prometheus]

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.
....

Chase, I have no idea what you could be talking about.  D weapons have never been part of the game outside of Apocalypse, so it seems be hard for people to be "wrong" about D weapons impact.....there's never been anything to be wrong about. 

[Grimwulfe]

Unless you know these same arguments were made in apoc?   

[robpro]

I've played in plenty of tournaments that allowed use of a super heavy. I ran my Pylon against a Baneblade and a Revenant Titan back in 5th in a 2500 point tournament and things were fine. There were only 6ish people in this tournament, and one guy didn't have any super heavies. He ran 2500 points of Salamanders specifically to kill them (and it was hilarious when he seized, dropped in, and exploded the Revenant Titan top of 1). Strength D worked slightly different, and so did superheavies, but overall I expect the experience to be similar with how it would be now. As long as there's not a Reaver or a Phantom on the other end of the table (in games under say 5,000 points), I don't see a problem (also note - none of those are in Escalation as approved for 40k use). The book even gives another Warlord traits table for your opponent to roll on and every trait on it gives the warlord + his/her unit a huge boost against super heavies.

I think only the thunderhawk, revenant titan, and flying gargantuans might end up being too disruptive for regular play, but guess how you find out? I'm looking forward to the next 1850 singles tournament at BG, I've got a Transcendant C'tan who'd like to shake hands with things and stuff. I agree 100% with Chase on this one, we're like e-besties now.

[andalucien]

D Weapons don't really matter for apocalypse games because nobody cares if apocalypse games are fair.    The point is to show off a bunch of models, take pictures, and watch as many of them get blown up as possible within 12 hours.  Anything that fast forwards the destruction is welcome.

Q1:  What was the reason that GW originally came out with two sets of rules, one for Apocalypse and one for "normal" games?

Q2:  Incorporating the answer to Q1 above, what is the likelihood that all rules originally intended for Apocalypse ALSO happen to be appropriate for regular games, without any changes?

We're stating our opinions, you're stating your opinion, ain't nothing wrong with that.  It's a Forum, just like the Romans used to do, before they all got trampled by War Elephants.

[andalucien]

I've played in plenty of tournaments that allowed use of a super heavy. I ran my Pylon against a Baneblade and a Revenant Titan back in 5th in a 2500 point tournament and things were fine. There were only 6ish people in this tournament, and one guy didn't have any super heavies. He ran 2500 points of Salamanders specifically to kill them (and it was hilarious when he seized, dropped in, and exploded the Revenant Titan top of 1). Strength D worked slightly different, and so did superheavies, but overall I expect the experience to be similar with how it would be now. As long as there's not a Reaver or a Phantom on the other end of the table (in games under say 5,000 points), I don't see a problem (also note - none of those are in Escalation as approved for 40k use). The book even gives another Warlord traits table for your opponent to roll on and every trait on it gives the warlord + his/her unit a huge boost against super heavies.

Dude... i think I actually witnessed that tournament.  Late night at TempleCon right?  I was hanging around waiting for the "Meat Grinder" event to start.   It was the first time I had ever seen any superheavies in person. 

[Chase]

It's my opinion that cherry picking what mechanics you want to ban and how you want to ban them isn't a good idea.

If the big GTs are planning to go that route, that's awesome for them.  We're going to run at least 1 event every year using their rules.  If it becomes generally accepted across all GTs, that's cool too.  We're going to run "primer" events for at least 4 GTs each year.

Maybe we'll also adopt them for "standard format" tournaments (1850, nothing crazy).  Who knows?

Tournaments in 2014 will go in a bit of a different direction than in the past.  You'll see a lot more events that are "not for everyone" or "have more casual appeal" or maybe "are just different."  Doubles will remain more or less the same but will almost definitely allow most things.


The game is big enough now that it can probably handle most everything, especially with allies, dataslates, and whatever allows Coteaz (or whatever his name is) to show up in just about every list.

[Chase]

D Weapons don't really matter for apocalypse games because nobody cares if apocalypse games are fair.   

I can assure you that this is not the case.

[MM3791]

Chase, any idea when BG will get in more Stronghold Assault books? I checked both stores and they already sold out.

[andalucien]

D Weapons don't really matter for apocalypse games because nobody cares if apocalypse games are fair.   

I can assure you that this is not the case.

Actually, you're right, that is definitely incorrect   I do remember the haggling preceding last year's MegaBattle.

Let me rephrase:  Nobody SHOULD care, because apoc games always have been impossible to finish anyway (we got to turn 3 in ours with probably 85% of the models still remaining on the table when we had to go home), and when you have that much chaos going on, any 10 models' sudden disappearance would just be "lost in the noise".  I do remember lots of people complaining about how all this unfair stuff happened (like the flank march and the strategy that destroyed all the orks coming on before they arrived), but in the end everyone was just like " well THAT was a megabattle" and went home happy.

I really don't think you could take the same philosophy and apply it to regular tournaments.  Or you could, but it would take away a lot of what I find enjoyable in regular games.

[robpro]

I've played in plenty of tournaments that allowed use of a super heavy. I ran my Pylon against a Baneblade and a Revenant Titan back in 5th in a 2500 point tournament and things were fine. There were only 6ish people in this tournament, and one guy didn't have any super heavies. He ran 2500 points of Salamanders specifically to kill them (and it was hilarious when he seized, dropped in, and exploded the Revenant Titan top of 1). Strength D worked slightly different, and so did superheavies, but overall I expect the experience to be similar with how it would be now. As long as there's not a Reaver or a Phantom on the other end of the table (in games under say 5,000 points), I don't see a problem (also note - none of those are in Escalation as approved for 40k use). The book even gives another Warlord traits table for your opponent to roll on and every trait on it gives the warlord + his/her unit a huge boost against super heavies.

Dude... i think I actually witnessed that tournament.  Late night at TempleCon right?  I was hanging around waiting for the "Meat Grinder" event to start.   It was the first time I had ever seen any superheavies in person.

Haha, yeah it was at TempleCon like 3 years ago. The guy with the Revenant was so rage-faced. I played against a guy with an armored company list and won, went on the face the Salamander guy and lost (only because I'd played in the doubles event during the day and we were now well past 1am, forgot to shoot a few units which ended up costing me the game), and then played the Revenant guy round 3. The scenario made us deploy our super heavies, nothing else, and had nightfight. So basically he got to kill my pylon for free since he could deploy out of range and then jump in range. I killed all his troops so he couldn't win.

[Cryptognomicon]

Just wondering. How many people here have actually played with the new rules form the new books? Of those people how many of you have played more than one game with the new rules? My guess would be zero.

I say try it before complaining about it.  I for one am excited to try both the new books.  Will they work in tournaments? I dunno. I haven't played it yet.  Will some people hate it? I'm sure they will.  Will some people like it? I believe so. There just seems to be a lot of complaining here about rules that hardly if anyone has actually played a game with yet. I don't think cherry picking what you like or dislike is the way to go because you'll never find a set of rules/books/banned things that everyone agrees on.  Just play the game and have fun. See what happens after a few games. 

[Sir_Prometheus]

Chase, you made the statement "People have complained about D weapons for 6 years, they were wrong"

What is that statement based on?

[Ian Mulligan]

It takes some outrageous douchebaggery to state on a store's forums that you pirated rules they sell. It takes an even larger amount to then say you're pleased with your actions.

[Mad Dok Rob]

Tournaments in 2014 will go in a bit of a different direction than in the past.  You'll see a lot more events that are "not for everyone" or "have more casual appeal" or maybe "are just different."  Doubles will remain more or less the same but will almost definitely allow most things.

I like this idea.  The whole playing an outdated completely uncompetetive army has really keep me away from BG 40K tournaments.  This would probably force me to come play a couple (Tanksgiving, Monster Mash and Megabattle are awesome).

[Chase]

Chase, any idea when BG will get in more Stronghold Assault books? I checked both stores and they already sold out.

Thursday.