Here's what's currently being pondered. Keep in mind these changes are not oriented entirely around "what about these new Eldar zomg!?" They are oriented around trying to minimize changes to the game, while enacting changes with a shelf life greater than 1 week (which a change to JUST Eldar would have in the era of constantly changing rules / detachment rules / etc. that we find ourselves in).
0-1 Super Heavy / Gargantuan of any kind (inclusive of iKnights)
Decurion / Guardian Warhost style Detachments, if selected, take up *all* your Detachment Limits
Stomp results of "6" hitting models that are not engaged with the Stomping model are treated as "5"
D results of "6" originating further than 12" away from the affected model(s) are treated as "5"
As an aside, I am beginning to find myself curious - Apocalypse was not a wildly successful selling item for Games Workshop. It was UNIVERSALLY stated that folks "wouldn't want to play it at a tournament or anything, but maybe for a pickup game if done right." Nevertheless, they have slowly pushed the game into being identical to original Apocalypse. When talking about toads (vs. human beings or some other more advanced animals), if you drop them into a boiling pot of water, they will freak out and depart it. If you put them in a lukewarm pot of water, then slowly turn the heat up to boiling, they will quietly perish.
It surprises me, in hearing the outcry for open battle-forged 0-restriction warhammer 40k from some quarters, how many toads are out there in our hobby.
Can we ban superheavies/gargantuans already? No one will miss them.
ReplyDeleteI hope they release a new Tau codex in time for Nova with Riptides as GCs, so you have to moth ball figures too.
DeleteWhat, like the 10 other superheavies I own? Trust me I won't qq for a second if the riptide becomes a LoW/GC.
DeleteNo one will miss them? Really? Thanks for speaking for everyone. I for one and 5 out of 6 of my group that come to nova are all for allowing 40k to be played as its rules intended. It's NOT apoc....not even close. But once again apparently the vocal minority will cry because the door gets opened up with too many options and maybe folks like you don't like the thought of having to deal with that many options. Not trying to pick a fight here but when I see you speak for a whole hobby community with a "no one will miss them" comment that really gets my ire.
DeleteFWIW we don't think any one or few people speak for everyone. We assume everyone is speaking for themselves primarily.
DeleteOk, so 90% of people won't miss them, better?
DeleteLooks to me like its a little closer to 50/50 than you think. But that was a nice smartass reply however. Well done. Excellent representation of the community.
DeletePost data proving your claim. Every one I talk to outside of 5-10% of the tournament community is over big dumb 40k.
DeleteFor my data, go look at attendance records for adepticons championships this year vs the last 4. Or feast of blades, or wargamescon. People don't like it when you take a 'roll a 6 and I win' unit. Just like they don't like 2++ rerollable or invis.
DeleteAll could be done away with, and the game would be healthier for it.
So what's so hard about compromise for you?
DeleteDifferent formats for different folks is a cool answer. It seems like at the least there are roughly 3 broad categories of players.
ReplyDeleteThose who want EVERYTHING (so they want to just play w/e the books let them do) These people really want to play apocolypse but as you pointed out with your frog metaphor...they just don't know it.
Those somewhere in the middle (this is where I think NOVA/LVO/Most major GT's currently sit) This is btw not a stab or a bad thing, its just an observation based on allowing some apocolypse esq stuff.
The last category is full of people who liked a company level game where they had some big stuff (hive tyrants, carnifexes, dreadnoughts, even riptides and wraithlords probably fall in here) This game does not have super heavy vehicles and gargantuan creatures. It has flaws...so do the other two versions listed above.
Each of those three broad strokes contains a myriad of variations contained in and between them but it might be a interesting idea to start running large events with 2-3 smaller events inside of them.
What I do know is that in my little world (which I acknowledge is just my little group of players) very few people (actually about 1 that I know of so far in the group) actually enjoy using and playing against super heavies/gargantuan creatures as a general rule in 40k.
Also justin...we should start using #BanSuperHeavies. Maybe if it trends enough on twitter GW will notice and give a damn about our tears.
ReplyDeleteor #notapocalypse40k
DeleteI don't really like the Decurion restriction. Most of the time Decurions will take up all of your points anyways, but there's still points for something like a small allied detachment or another formation like the Conclave of the Burning One.
ReplyDeleteLooking a the ITC results, they were in favor of letting it stay as a single detachment:
https://www.frontlinegaming.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Decurion-Detachments.png
They even had a big outcry as they then said that Decurion subformations are Unique without polling on that.
The decurion/warhost doesn't bother me that much either way. Though I'm sure they'd like to take a second detachment for Obsec units...Is it really unfair to allow them a second detachment? Seems more fair than lots of other legal combinations.
ReplyDeleteI am still in favor of those minor nerfs to D weapons, and I like the limit on superheavies. Nobody liked playing against iKnight primary detachments anyways. It really only restricts multiple Wraithknights, which just leaves more points for Scatterbikes...
With re: the Decurion/Warhost detachments, it is probably a good thing that they do not get ObSec. The Decurion is especially difficult to deal with as players are beginning to figure it out.
DeleteSo are daemons, centurions and iknights...
DeleteSeems like a silly ban for an army that has yet to win a major event and to top it off you're considering allowing wks? Am i the only one who sees the irony?
Deleteso we can take up to one wraithknight and if he's within 12" his gun functions normally .. before I buy 3 more d cannons , is there any chance of th being nerfed more than -1 on the d table .. or any kind of restriction for how many you can take ..
ReplyDeleteYou will be able to take either 0 or 1 Wraithknights at NOVA. There is 0 chance we are going to allow the game we play there in the main GT to be Apocalypse.
DeleteQuestion Mike,
DeleteAre you considering letting WK's into trios as well? I noticed escalation wasn't allowed this year. (curious)
Trios is run separately from the GT / Invitational, so doesn't follow the same restrictions (and I don't control the restrictions!).
DeleteThis is in general becoming a stickier and stickier situation to try and wrap heads around from an organizer perspective, though, that's for sure.
I do not envy you one bit Mike. Not only is this a wild mess for you, but just based on the comments on your blog, everyone seems extremely passionate on all sides of the fence over the issues! Hang in there, we all appreciate what you do.
DeleteI'm not a fan of limiting it to just the super detachment, but I don't like detachment limits, anyway. Seems like a cheap way to try to keep the game like 6th edition.
ReplyDeleteWhat's funny about the counter arguments to super heavies mostly boils down to 'Not in my Yard' defenses filled with hyperbole and a fear of the 'game turning into Apocalypse.' All of these ignore the simple facts that expensive super heavies are not good and they don't win tournaments. And if they're not auto-win buttons that rule the yard, what the hell is the point in banning them?
Remember one thing: all of the hated, vile tactics and tricks that can be applied to a Super Heavy can be easily applied to an Imperial Knight.
Yes, most superheavies are actually fairly balanced to overcosted, but then there are some, like the Wraithknight, that are just inexplicably cheap for what they do.
DeleteIn the past superheavies don't win tournaments because the super strong ones are banned. We'll see what happens at an event that allows multiple Wraithknights.
With the impending Knight book, it's looking like they'll drop into the Lord of War slot and so become subject to the same bans or restrictions as other superheavies, finally.
So, Matt and I played yesterday and we had him play test using the 0-1 restriction on wraithknights and all of the restrictions above. A single wraithknight wiped my entire army without me causing a single wound to anything. All due to invis... The combo is obscene, if you allow super-heavies at 0-1, then there should be no restriction on which ones you can take, just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteWe would disallow blessings on SH/GC
DeleteThat is a big plus. Some of my least fun games of 40K involved blessed SH/GC's.
DeleteDo us all a favor and disallow sh/gc's in general. They belong in apoc. We've been houseruling 40k to make it playable in a tournament setting, why should we stop now just bc eldar got a gc? Why are we pretending that gw gives us a balanced game all of a sudden?
ReplyDeleteAs a Tyranid player, the game is better with a Barbed Heirodule being an option. However, my least fun games have all involved SH/GC, and I would have no objection to them being gone so long as Imperial Knights are gone as well.
DeleteI think the best solution is to create multiple events. Light weight events with heavy limitation like highlander. medium weight events that will be most popular involving a detachment limit with no SH/GC/LOW and Heavy Weight events that are basically apoc.
hope everyone calling for no sh or gc gets their favorite unit turned into one so they can't use it either. there are people that bought three wraithknights and you can't even be satisfied with giving them one, even under restrictions?
ReplyDeleteKeep in mind there are people who bought six wave serpents who were just given the middle finger by GW. If the major beef is about models on the shelf, folks have a much bigger bone to pick with the parent company than with TOs discussing how to make the game as broadly palatable as possible.
DeleteMike, I'm in the same boat you are, the eldar army I had built is completely unusable. $500 shot down the hole, but the more I play and think about it, the game is better without SH's in the game all together. I own super heavies, just like the majority of players out there, but I'd rather mothball every SH I own then to have the game I love turn into "Can I roll more 6's than you"
DeleteThere is a huge difference between something getting nerfed and something getting banned.
DeleteFunctionally, there is no difference between a release rendering many units either no longer existent or not functionally selectable for an army build ... and a rule saying a unit is not selectable for an army build (other than who it originates from).
DeleteRendering a unit non-selectable by rules nerfs or poor rules is a real thing - just ask Pyrovores. Cool models, but I've never seen one on a table at any NOVA Open in any NOVA Open event track or format.
Said another way, I can promise you that if I banned Hormagaunts or Pyrovores or Land Speeder Storms, the complaints would be almost nonexistent (And would also not come from people playing those units). Lots of people own well-painted hormagaunts and land speeder storms, too.
DeleteIt's really not, no matter what people say, about legalization of your owned models. It's about people wanting to take the stuff they perceive to be badass in the game and that they already own. I understand that, but it's important to make sure we are clear on what the practical motivations are behind why people think their model is cool or really want to bring it. It's rare that it's actually just b/c it's cool and they want to bring it, even among the most supremely casual players.
The difference is choice. When you don't take a Land Speeder to NOVA, it's because you're electing to not use something because it's not as good as other selections in your army's rules source. When you don't take a Typhon to NOVA, it's because the organization running the event has banned it. The player isn't making the decision there, you are.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete