|
Post by nekekami on Jan 17, 2015 22:07:12 GMT -5
I'm not saying you are, but I am saying that people have.
I'm also generally of the opinion that the changes only serve to streamline the game, and unless you fall into one of the lists that do abuse, or would like to try and take advantage of said abuses, that really there's not a problem with any of the house rules that we've made.
Being as you are new, and one of the first things you've done was suggest not having our changes, based on a super-competitive mindset, why not take a step back and play how we do, instead of the other way around?
|
|
jesse
Scarab swarm
Posts: 41
|
Post by jesse on Jan 18, 2015 10:20:06 GMT -5
For sure. I've played a few games here, one of them against five knights which was the least fun I've ever had playing a game, since my anti tank comes from psychic abilities but bringing five superheavies isn't against any rules. Another was yesterday, where I got my units wrecked because I was unable to cast protective powers like endurance AND keep up any sort of offense. I still won due to spamming troops onto objectives, which is my only real way of playing to win with these limitations. I wish I didn't need to do that, since it really isn't fun, but here we are.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jan 18, 2015 10:28:36 GMT -5
case in point - without psychic powers, 5 knights rolls daemons. Literally nothing they can do.
I've tried to smash them apart - doesn't work with greater daemons.
daemonettes can't hurt it even with rending, fiends only after rolling a six on a rend can glance.
charging Khorne heralds can't even glance one.
A keeper of secrets who is extremely lucky (ie: rends only) can actually take a couple hull points off a knight in combat, but is risking being one shotted in return, and is easily killed even if they get lucky on taking a few HP off.
Bel'akor is really the only one able to reliably take one out. then the other four shoot him.
A Lord of change with the staff can possibly do it, but he's relying on 5's to even get a glance, is most of your psychic offence, has to go jump mode for a turn first to do it (so will be shot) and is just about 30 points shy of the knights' points with only a chance to kill one.
|
|
|
Post by nekekami on Jan 18, 2015 10:32:39 GMT -5
And so because it worked against you, you instead look to change how we choose to do things instead of working with it? See, the irony here is that you first mentioned all this competitiveness, and then when something got hard you jumped to try and have it changed? There's irony here, and while trying to not be the huge jerk I can be, I find myself smiling at that.
More to the point, there's few - if any - complaints against the lists you've played against. The last game I played against Shannon's (Jack Shrapnel on the forums) Necrons, my Eldar were wrecked on turn 2; That was because of my mistakes though, and not his overpowered list. Though it is a hard one.
Instead of telling people that Shannon's Necrons are ridiculous, instead I look at my own list building to see how I can change it to be better, not how I can just bull through it with more applications of one rule.
What I'm saying is that yeah, we do things differently. Yeah, maybe it doesn't favour your exact list, but in the spirit of competition, try looking at it from another direction before trying to change our views on it.
Edit: And in the case of 5 Knights, most armies are going to have a hard time, that's just a fact. But they are allowed as they're a Codex. These are all things we've talked about, and decided thus. Not saying I like it any more any anyone else, but that's how it goes, I suppose.
|
|
jesse
Scarab swarm
Posts: 41
|
Post by jesse on Jan 18, 2015 10:57:10 GMT -5
Nek I've played about a hundred games against very competitive, rogue trader era veteran players, and I'm well aware of the difference between my own mistakes (which I make a ton of) and a game not worth playing.
Going back to my examples: Most armies do not have an issue with five knights, least of all "all my troops can glance vehicles" necrons. There's a reason they don't show up in competitive tourneys, because they might roll a charge limited daemons army, but they get melted by drop pod meltas, those eldar melta guys, warrior spam, etc.
As for the game I played yesterday, I won. Telling me to get better is obviously not the correct thing to do here. I'm looking at this from a game point of view, not my own skills. Do you think its fun for either player to watch me just rush objectives last turn?
This isn't even about me, as I said I'm more than happy to sit out or play the people I have talked to that don't mind removing the cap. What I'm interested in is playing a fair game. The current world 40k scene is taking a nosedive due to GWs anti-consumer policies, why would we want to push that any further. As for the timing, I know there are several tournaments coming up and I wanted to get some opinions before then, even if I have only played here in particular a few times.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Agrippa on Jan 18, 2015 11:10:36 GMT -5
Has anyone played against Jesse letting him use a list that doesn't conform to the house rule? Seems that would be the easiest way to judge if something is overpowered.
Or at least let him post a list so that you can see if it is as fearful as people seem to think.
GW didn't impose a cap on charges, players did. So to cap some rules but to allow things like Knights roam without a cap seems kind of uneven.
|
|
jesse
Scarab swarm
Posts: 41
|
Post by jesse on Jan 18, 2015 11:26:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jan 18, 2015 11:51:06 GMT -5
...am I right to assume that's 37 warp charge per turn?
|
|
jesse
Scarab swarm
Posts: 41
|
Post by jesse on Jan 18, 2015 11:56:50 GMT -5
Thats three different lists. 12, 14 or 11 at 1500, 2000 or 1000, I sum up warp charge at the bottom of each For reference, this is a legal 49+d6 warp charge battleforged list, and if someone ever actually brought it there is no one that wouldn't be justified in telling them to leave and never return
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jan 18, 2015 12:23:26 GMT -5
which leads to community's putting forth caps because they get hit with a couple players spamming X feature of the game be it psychic powers or wave serpents or lists with 9 annihilation barges.
plus you know, the above list MAY get to turn two.
As a tourney organizer I'd just make the summoning lists play each other every round so they can have all the fun that entails.
and as far as your lists, they don't seem to be OP to me, even at the 14 warp charge version.
|
|
jesse
Scarab swarm
Posts: 41
|
Post by jesse on Jan 18, 2015 12:31:58 GMT -5
I can't even imagine how painful that would be to play through. Just that one initial game that came out the day after 7th and the guy summoned up to 4000 points and still didn't win was mind numbing, and that was only one side summoning.
|
|
|
Post by nekekami on Jan 18, 2015 12:46:56 GMT -5
See, the point I'm trying to make is the attitude at which the game is approached at, and trying to highlight that aspect of the conversation, and I'm not trying to make it about you or anyone else specifically either; Like I said in my first post here, we imposed the restrictions to stop the abuse before it was even considered after what we'd also seen when 7th dropped, and like Shannon said, the 12-charge cap came from Fantasy, in an edition where magic is so overpowered that it needed to be. Everyone who follows the game saw the streams and read the reports on what a charge-heavy army can do given the time and ability, and I don't think we are wrong to want to address that in the same way.
Then from a competitive standpoint, if rushing objectives nets you a win, who are you to complain, or your opponent for that matter? It all comes down to the game itself, and little else. If you're playing to win, then that's the endgame, isn't it?
Moving on from there, I also agree with Shannon that none of those three lists look to be overdoing much at all, which brings up two questions. The first being, are the extra couple dice in those lists really breaking it? On average, you're getting 4 extra on either, which amounts to what, two, maybe three more powers a turn? The second then, would be in spirit of keeping a rein on things, is there a higher cap we can go to? 15, 16?
Or a third, in that are we completely unfounded in our initial restrictions? Can we lift then from this point, and hope that people continue to play the game in the spirit we'd like to generate, and not have it devolve into a purely cut-throat attitude of gaming? I watch some of the other communities, and see the good and the bad that comes from both. I'm not opposed to change, but I am, and will be completely against taking the fun out of a hobby game in favour of an attitude that espouses the need to win over everything else.
|
|
jesse
Scarab swarm
Posts: 41
|
Post by jesse on Jan 18, 2015 13:16:14 GMT -5
If you're going to base it on streams and reports, you would have seen that those charge heavy daemon armies didn't win, charge heavy GK armies didn't win, charge heavy eldar armies win but for a variety of other factors that can be fixed as well. So why cap?
As for fantasy, although I don't play, from what others have told me magic is way more powerful and the cap, which was decided on by GW during balancing and played even by competitive players, makes sense. I could be wrong here but either way it's apples and oranges as the games play differently.
From a competitive standpoint, I'm justified in having an issue as I DON'T want to have to objective hump to win (playing in a tourney, not a scenario or something, means that you are playing to win rather than just accepting every challenge and smashing big units into each other because its fun).
The difference between a 14 point list in which I end up with maybe 16 after portalglyph and a summon or two if I'm feeling like I need more dice, plus the d6 is 5-10 dice, which is pretty gamechanging. Not only does it allow me to adjust my offense-psychic-objective defense balance on the fly, it lets me protect my 5+ save units that need to make it to a turn two or three charge or become dust.
I don't believe that you are unfounded in wanting to keep a handle on overall power levels getting ridiculous in the game at all. I definitely support handing lists in to the TO in advance so that crazy abusive lists can be weeded out. I just think that the restrictions could be better implemented.
Finally, a different charge cap would still prevent me from adjusting unless the cap was at 18-20 or something anyways, but at that point the type of army required to break it would be obvious and could be weeded out just by looking over their list.
|
|
|
Post by Silent one on Jan 18, 2015 14:00:57 GMT -5
After reading this for a bit it seems one if your arguments is that massive charfe armies dont win. I don't think the only/major concern us tgst they win akl tge time. I think it has to do with the game play itself and the fun level of playing against and with one of these lists.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jan 18, 2015 14:22:09 GMT -5
Or a third, in that are we completely unfounded in our initial restrictions? Can we lift then from this point, and hope that people continue to play the game in the spirit we'd like to generate, and not have it devolve into a purely cut-throat attitude of gaming? I watch some of the other communities, and see the good and the bad that comes from both. I'm not opposed to change, but I am, and will be completely against taking the fun out of a hobby game in favour of an attitude that espouses the need to win over everything else. I think we may be unfounded in our initial restrictions.... which is why I think this discussion is so important. I think that the problem may be 20 warp charge lists that are doing daemon factory, eldar shenanigans, etc. the problem may be the type of lists, rather than the charges themselves.
|
|