Wednesday, April 22, 2015

Simple D / Stomp Change That Might Allow Wider Use and Less Bans

Kudos to the discussion on the prior post for getting the ole tinker going ...

The what if here could* (definitely not saying WOULD) lead to broader allowance of SH/Gargs, Knights, etc. This addresses big issues for negative reaction from players, such as Lynxes blasting you with D from across the board and Knights 6-stomping all over things way out of combat with them and the like.

Is your Ranged D weapon more than 12" from target? Treat any "6" as a 5.
Is your Melee D weapon or Stomp hitting a target you are not engaged with? Treat any "6" as a 5.

Ponder and Feedback.

Pros -
Maintains ability of "6" results on D and Stomp to mitigate concern regarding 2+ re-roll units without having to enact wholesale changes to Invisibility, Grimoire, Fortune, etc. (one change vs. many)

May allow for broader inclusion of peoples' "toys" in the form of Lords of War.

Prevents need to heavily modify / ban brand new units and future units with D (aside from Lords of War) if the Eldar Codex is any sign.

Cons -
It's a rules change
Some people don't want ANY D in the game at all


  1. I like it. I don't think it will change people's opinion for template range D (given their similar reactions to large template S10 AP1 Ignores Cover blasts), but it could certainly help. You could also tweak it to bring it in line with the rumored Eldar rules. If I understand it correctly, the lesser D weapons there just apply a -1 to the roll. That would give the '6 as 5' you mention above, but would also double the chance of the weapon having no effect.

  2. I like it. I would have no complaints

    I am usually opposed to making changes to the actual rules, but GW is making it increasingly harder to solve the problem areas via bans/restrictions.

    Wraithguard will still be unaffected since their weapons are 12" anyways. I would suggest changing the restriction to "half range" but that almost makes no difference to some ranged D weapons and presents problems with the D-Scythes

  3. I feel like the standard wraithcannons are fine as is, honestly. anything that could get sixed away by a squad of them would probably just as easily get fried by fire dragons, especially with the bs5 formation and unmatched agility buff letting them bypass knight shields.

  4. First in my opinion many felt the LVO had an incredibly well balanced ruleset and restrictions and as a result had a large mix of army Codexs in the top 5, 10, 20 armies. Everything from Orks and sisters to CSM, eldar, tyranids, and space marines had a chance in that tourney.

    First Lords of war are all over the place in regards to balance and cost. So regardless it needs to stay banned or use heavy handed list restrictions such as LVO.

    Second issue is range str d and assault str d are two completely different animals. It's nearly impossibly to assault first turn, it requires movement across the board, several chances at shooting phases and overwatch, random charge ranges and generally you still end up with str d that has a low int score and goes last in assault. Range str d especially in volume allow for turn 1 alpha strikes that's completely unfun and a lot more unbalancing.

    Personally I would keep LOW banned at Nova since that is what everyone wanted before.
    Secondly I would revert range str d units back to the old distortion rules used in the last codex that no elder player ever complained about and was exceptable before. It honestly isn't that much worse and simply removes the extreme anti vehicle profiles of str d. The main issue with range str d is even if you allow 12in range d, you still allow extreme alpha striking especially in the eldar warhost detschment increasing movement. Just use the old distortion rules on str d weapons literally no elder player complained about those weapons being underpowered a week ago.

    1. The thing is no one was even talking about those guns a week ago. I can just about guarantee that people asking for no lords of war were saying that with multiple D blast superheavies in mind, and certainly not thinking gw would start twisting the game this much. I'm sure Eldar players, myself included, are sore about the wraithknight being moved to LoW, as it's a fantastic model and I know it will be limited because of it. I can't imagine how bad it feels for people who had multiple wraithknights. Banning it also bans the wraith host formation, and at that point, especially if you revert Distort weapons to the old book, Eldar players would probably be better off playing the old book instead of spending $60 on the most expensive codex to date only to have half of it banned and another chunk reverted to old rules.

    2. A bit disingenuous to say that since nearly everything in the eldar book except for serpents and malefic demonlogy spam is better in the eldar book. none of the distortion units went up I price except the wrwoth knight which also got garagatuan for 50pt increase. So they are no worse then before in fact some got better such as the hemlock. Wraith guard was already a popular unit and will continue to be just as good as they were prior if you keep the old distort rules. It also solves a ton of problems by keeping them balanced and would make eldar list diversity much better since the aspects are all good now as well but not nearly as good as a a few broken units. Case in point wraith guard CS Fire dragons. A guard and wraith unit for the same point cost and the wraith unit is simply better at multiple targets and more durable.

      I don't expect the wraithknight to be banned in all its forms from ITC events, no LoWs is a NOVA rule. LVO allowed a selected list. range double d version which is probably not even the best version is likely the only one to be banned at most places.

  5. Personally I would go further and make it blanket. Treat 6s on the D, Stomp and Thunderblitz tables as 5s. Still great and effective, as D should be. But it sweeps away the auto-remove rolls that make D derpy.

    As for the Cons, remember, you've banned Ad Lance, set a detachment limit and banned unbound. You're already changing rules! This is more of a compromise though. For the second one, there is a vocal crowd that also would like to have Invisibility, Imperial Knights and all 'Death Stars' removed as well. Often what's fair isn't completely what people want.

  6. I'm quite positive range d is coming to Knights with the next models however it's still not good for the game right now. Just make str d str 10 ap2 distortion. If range d and vortex make a huge come back this game this game will become more about who goes first, whose reserves arrive first, etc. Who can get thier d atks or shots in range first etc. and then the boy defense to d str is how many voidshields do you have and how fast can you repair them because nothing else matters to d str. This is basically what the old apoc was.

  7. Mike,

    Kudos on looking at options. Playing at adepticon this year truly opened my eyes to possibilities and allowing players to bring "their toys". I understand that they used a different format, but this year was the first year that the top 16 weren't a ton of east coast players.

    Think about it......

    Now that being said. All of the big 3 have done great things for events in the past 2 years to help develop the game. NOVA has been the guinea pig right after edition drops, lvo allowed LOW in GT's, and implemented restrictions on re-rolls of saves, adepticon had unlimited detachments, etc. It's all helping the tournament scene evolve.

    What will Nova do this year again for the third year running with a tremendous controversial change before the event?

    I still stand that if you change a codex for one, then you are opening Pandora's box because now you are determining what's too powerful and must do for the other 4 akreadt mentioned. Do players really worry about so much forged world? Or does a section of the influential powers that be not want to have to worry about dealing with something they weren't expecting?

    I again applaud you Mike Brandt for taking a gander at change.


    1. Aaron I couldn't agree more with what you said. It's time to open this game up and play it as it is intended. Low In all forms should be allowed. Stop being afraid of the changes and stop listening to this small vocal minority that thinks they are the 40k game designers! Those d options are what will self balance the LOW! At least every bit as balanced as we can get. I believe some players are scared to death of playing LOW because their "unbeatable lists" such as wave serpent spam are no longer unbeatable and they actually have to build lists that have to deal with a lot more options that could "wreck" their army.

    2. While opening the game up may or may not be best, and that's a much bigger discussion, the "everybody just wants to keep playing their wave serpents" argument is both ridiculous, and coincidentally now defunct.

    3. I think a point that can be derived is that there will always be something that people complain about. Destoryer weapons are just low hanging fruit for the Win at all Costs and Casual at all Costs players.