|
Post by question on Jul 20, 2018 12:52:13 GMT -5
I was wondering about the LOW issue when I scrolled down to Chris' post. I can support the notion of 2 LOWs in what is essentially a 4K list. Some pairings will be able to toast them, others won't.
|
|
|
Post by raceygaming on Jul 20, 2018 13:31:04 GMT -5
So I am not a LOW expert by any means, so please correct me if I make a misstep.
The Cheapest Knight (full sized) is currently 375 all in with upgrades so at 1000 pts you CAN NOT bring 3 of them. If I am not mistaken I do not know of any valid detachments that will allow you to get 2 LOW legally at 1000 pts UNLESS you take 2x LOW Aux detachments which are worth 0 CP, leaving you with 250 pts if you opted for the cheapest knights, and pretty limited CP.
I can't see that being an issue. A well balanced 1000 pts should be able to deal with that style list pretty well, anti armour one knight and then kill 250 pts of infantry.
Other options, 2x 500 pts knights or super heavies. Again almost no CP and only 2 models, yes they are big but they need support which they just wont have. Again I don't see the issue here if you bring a balanced list.
1 knight with support, this is probably the scariest option. Everyone on the team bring a knight and 600 pts of support. However since we are currently allowing Magnus/Morty to show up, there is no way I'm more worried about 2 x knight with 1600 in support than Mangus/morty and 1600 pts of support. So unless every one is gonna put their Primarch's away I don't see this being a knight problem ( also by Sept there is a CHANCE we will see a Primarch Russ with the wolves)
Last option I'm seeing for LOW are 6x Mini knights, Warglave/Helverin, This list also looks pretty tough but again It would be no worse then a HQ and 6-8 FW/normal dreadnought list. the Mini Knights got the unlucky role of LOW to help compliment the knights list building more than anything.
I also pretty sure Baneblades are in the 500+ pts, most FW is 600+ these days, I'm not sure what the other big LOW units might be "cheap" and spam able at 1000.
I know we have had crusade of X and Highlander, both of which have had more restrictive list building constraints, I do not see the major issue with having more relaxed building in this one. If anything I would be more concerned about the other way around 1000 pts armies that have 150+ models. 90 pinkhorrors doing a million shots, 120 ork boys/gaunts/conscripts/cultists etc, at the low point end bodies go a lot farther than big monster units.
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Jul 20, 2018 13:46:03 GMT -5
I think another concern being that you can nab 3CP from the below list.
Valiant (big new flamer knight) Armiger Helverin (or Warglaive) Armiger Helverin (or Warglaive)
Yes, it's only 3CP to play with, but it'd be a point-click destroy kind of list if you and your team-mate both brought identical lists. You'd be facing off against two of the most arguably broken superheavies in the game currently that since they're in different "armirs" can both be the warlord with the good WL trait and some fairly sickening relics attached.
This isn't me saying "no LOW" because they do exist in the game and nearly everyone owns at least one of them nowadays. I like the idea of a limit of 2 per 4 man team.
|
|
|
Post by thesanityassassin on Jul 20, 2018 14:00:32 GMT -5
I'll preface this by saying I'm not playing in this event, so I don't have a horse in the race.
My biggest concern would be a team showing up that was something like a Morty list, a Mags list and 2 of the lists that Matt posted. Just an overload of superheavies, forcing matchups (especially in later rounds where partnerships are more fixed) that are just unwinnable for certain pairs.
At the same time, like Jordan said, 4 giant Horde lists would probably be *more* miserable to play, and no one is going to try and regulate numbers.
It also looks like we've got a pretty veteran-heavy event from the names I'm seeing, unless the out of town teams I don't recognize are all very new.
I would, at least at this point, suggest just leaving it be, with the passive understanding that showing up with 6-8 Lords of War amongst your team of 4 is likely to rub a bunch of people the wrong way...
|
|
|
Post by raceygaming on Jul 20, 2018 14:04:07 GMT -5
so that list is 24 3+ t7 wounds and 28 T 8 3+ wounds? I mean if that list is any issue what is going to happen when you run into a tank command and his 5 Russ friends? that's 60 T8 3+ wounds all of which can double tap if they stand still.
I think the Knights are a new scary looking packaging but are very comparable to other lists. At 1000 pts knight lose a lot of their support or critical mass of knights in order to carry the day.
I know in 6th Ed we had no limits on LOW, and one of my favorite games with Matt McAdoo double knights exploding all other the battle field and I think in 6th Knights were way more rough than in 8th. I mean last year we had a team bring all 4 of the great LOW demons which all got like a 200+ point boost and that team didn't blow out the tournament.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 20, 2018 15:07:10 GMT -5
lol... nope, we lost in fact (in hindsight giant expensive monsters with a 4+ save weren't such a great option...lol) So here's my two cents... keeping in mind I have a team in this tournament and primarily play CC armies which struggle with LOW's in general especially knights. My one experience vs. knights I was tabled turn 2. So I definitely have a horse in this race (to coin Matt's expression)... so all that being said: I don't think any limits are necessary, which is why I didn't put any into this tournament. The 1k is a limiting factor in a lot of ways, and yes the list Voodoo posted is brutally effective at shooting, and at a distinct advantage in the ONE KP mission. However there's a disadvantage with all objective missions (the other 5 at the tourney!) and they can't even pick up the relic (and any obsec unit would get it anyways). If a team is not prepared for dealing with primarchs or knights, then they're not prepared for (as Jordan pointed out), Russ commander + friends, Bobby G and his razorback buddies, Soul grinder spam (lol... just kidding) I mean MC spam.. etc. etc. etc. I may be completely underestimating what could appear to a truly dedicated fine tuned combo of LOW's but I'm not entirely sure it's any worse than any other lists that could be done. IF a team wants to bring a really kick your teeth in list, whether it's using LOW's or something else (custodes bikes, Ynarri, etc. etc. etc.) then there's no real way I can control that, for it's their choice what they bring. They'll of course find out that winning in no way gives them ITC points or a prize beyond a crisp high five. But some people really, really like winning. Me putting in a LOW cap is just going to mean they bring something else, which for someone with that mindset, won't be pyrovore spam. It'll be something else that's highly efficient and effective on the table, and probably equally hard to deal with as a single knight with two baby-knight buddies. ....however, like I've said, I have a horse in this race, and I'm biased due to that (whether I like to think so or not), which is why I wanted to put this out to the community at large and see what people think.
|
|
|
Post by Khalai on Jul 20, 2018 20:32:51 GMT -5
I'm on Shannon's team so take that for what its worth.
I don't think we need to mess with anything. If you limit one thing, then you just move on to the next thing that is undercosted/overperforming. I'll say this, knowing that the tournament is base rulebook missions, please, please bring 4x2 knight lists for your team. You'll go home 1-5 (2-10), and have made some people very sad. Unless I pull your team in the KP mission, I'm probably going to have to try to lose.
I agree with Jordan that the scariest lists aren't actually the knights. It's properly supported and synergized teams that include a knight or two (Or Primarch or two). Limits don't hurt that, so I say why bother?
|
|
|
Post by ohgodsnakes on Jul 23, 2018 7:24:48 GMT -5
If one player on a team has no non-flyer models left on the battlefield, are they considered "tabled" and forced to remove the rest of their models, even if the other player still has "boots on the ground"?
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 23, 2018 8:03:50 GMT -5
naw, that's pretty mean.
you big meanie.
|
|
|
Post by artonas on Jul 23, 2018 10:09:24 GMT -5
Since we are playing the kill points mission why not change it to power level. That way it’s a little closer, killing a knight is worth so many PL instead of just one.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 23, 2018 10:50:38 GMT -5
yep, definitely something to consider.
|
|
|
Post by thesanityassassin on Jul 23, 2018 11:06:34 GMT -5
Since we are playing the kill points mission why not change it to power level. That way it’s a little closer, killing a knight is worth so many PL instead of just one. Dang, this would be pretty solid. It hurt at Highlander to know my Spawn and his Tesseract Vault were both worth 1 KP. Though in the interest of fairness, my Fellblade was also worth 1KP xD
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 23, 2018 13:49:23 GMT -5
lol... shouldn't your point be that your fellblade was worth as much as his vault? (even though it's double the points!) I do like the idea of PL.
|
|
|
Post by cmcd on Jul 23, 2018 19:34:30 GMT -5
Since we are playing the kill points mission why not change it to power level. That way it’s a little closer, killing a knight is worth so many PL instead of just one. I like this. It also helps armies that have a lot of units vs armies of a few. It balances it out. Makes it fair for all.
|
|
|
Post by darkeldarguy on Jul 24, 2018 8:36:42 GMT -5
I also like the idea of PL.
I assume we are playing the suggestion for matched play tournament rules where (in this case because we are playing 1000 pt armies) that we are limited to 2 of the same data slates except troops and dedicated transports?
Also, are we playing with the beta rules?
|
|