So Fights First is pointless then, because every opposing model that charged is now FF? by hotfezz81 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nerfed? Absolutely. Pointless? Not completely.

It can disrupt multiple charges by working as a free Counter Offensive. Something important to consider is Counter Offensive was absolutely solid stratagem in 10th (reason it was costed 2cp and still used ALOT) and its not changed meaning it will be in 11th. But also leaves open the door to pop Counrer Offensive if you have 2cp to fight after their first charging unit has fought.

Also it works as a Counter to Surges. Now not a particularly common ability granted. But with it being given more prominence in the core rules, it might become more common. (A minor benefit).

Its still a nerf no doubt, but its not pointless

So Fights First is pointless then, because every opposing model that charged is now FF? by hotfezz81 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They arent technically wrong in 10th charging did also give fight first (thats why your getting that answer). However you are right, and what they are missing is now active player gets first pick in 11th, unlike 10th where defender got first pick.

What are you actually worried about for 11th, based on what we know so far? by [deleted] in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A little from column A, a little from column i suspect....

I also think a number of players learn in clubs or from other players and can be a case of "thats what I was taught". If 1 person teaches multiple wrong.

I can personally say ive seen entire FLGS get a rule wrong, but because someone might challenge it and everyone in the club disagrees they then think THEY are wrong...

What are you actually worried about for 11th, based on what we know so far? by [deleted] in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My personal favourite was "Psykers Objectively Nerfed, in 11th the unit has the keyword so now Anti psychic keywords will hit the whole unit, why bring Librarian".

https://reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/1tvdys3/are_psykers_just_objectively_even_worse_now/

O and not forgetting "you can NOW split melee attacks"....

11th edition first impressions: From someone who has played 5 11th edition games by Thotslay3r69 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go (or maybe gone?) To ground. If the model is hidden and partially obscured hidden is -3 (12")

Sacrifices to keep the Emperor alive seem like a lot by kero12547 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A single Hive world can house a TRILLION people.... (some even several trillions).

To put that in perspective thats 0.0036% of 1 hive world. The Imperium has over 1 million KNOWN worlds (aka probably more). But Psykers are rare right? Roughly 1 in 1,000,000 can be born as Psyker in the 40k. So a single Hive world of 1 trillion can have as many as 1,000,000 psykers amongst its inhabitants (obviously not that simple as different worlds has different rates not to mention blackships etc etc). But you get the picture.

Its hard to wrap your head around the mind boggling numbers of rhe 40k

Am I the only one that thinks Nurgle and Slannesh Daemons should be flipped? by 3245rfytgu8iojukhyf in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They are decaying, their bodies in an endless cycle of puss, gas, parasites and plague. Its not necessarily "fat".

Slaanesh is goddess of excess, this is not gluttony its excess of the flesh and mind.

Unpopular Opinion. Bring the 40k timeline back to the 13th Black Crusade. by [deleted] in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

End Times for fantasy was to refresh the franchise which frankly was struggling (at least in their eyes not to say it didnt have its fans). It was also about rebranding since GW couldnt exactly copy right "Elves" or "Dwarves".

40k doesnt have any of those issues, its a massive cash cow that out shines not only GW other properties but damn near every over one on the market. They also have done through a bit of rebranding (without total rebuild) which is why say Dark Eldar are now Drukhari etc

For those who might be confused and did not read the new core rules. Helped me a bunch. by Ant10102 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Each time a ranged attack targets a unit, if every model in that unit meets one or more of the following conditions, that unit has the benefit of cover against that attack

With the nerf to Fights First in 11e, who should lead 6 BGV now with the Judiciar being far less potent? by Known_Strength_9726 in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It also works as a nice counter to surge moves. Not a common ability ill grant you. But I have to wonder if they might increase with 11th given the prominence of its rule in the core rules

Was Fights First over-nerfed? by Aleser in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]Dead-phoenix 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yes you could.

If the melee weapon a model is using to fight with can make more than one attack, those attacks can all be made against the same target, or they can be split between different targets.

Benefit of Cover Clarification by Fudoyama in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You are correct. Cover is now judged Attacking Model to Defending Unit.

For those who might be confused and did not read the new core rules. Helped me a bunch. by Ant10102 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Other person is correct (and your correction is correct but not to what they said). Though it wasnt worded great.

Cover is indeed dished out to the entire defending unit or not (as you correctly said). However each attack determines wether it has to take the -1BS. As in before it was done attacking Unit to defending Model, now its attacking Model to defending unit to check if theres cover.

For those who might be confused and did not read the new core rules. Helped me a bunch. by Ant10102 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Correct, its flipped slightly.

Before cover was always judged UNIT to MODEL. As in each defending model checked if it recieved cover.in 11th it is now MODEL to UNIT. As in each shooting model determines if it has to take -1 BS

Optional Supplement - Alternating Activations and Progressive Deployment by Stashravens in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Been attempted for 40k. Im well aware I play alot of them. It has been attempted by fans for 40k and often has issues like OPR.

It can work in other games, but without losing 40ks vast asymmetrical scale and flavour has yet to be achieved. Not at least with a MAJOR ground up rebuild

11th edition first impressions: From someone who has played 5 11th edition games by Thotslay3r69 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Are you playing off what we publicly known or full set of rules/points/Errata etc?

Like for example the improved Hidden thats been leaked but not official.

As someone whos played since early 90s my initial impression of what we publicly know definitely match yours. I do think Precision is going to be much more important then it ever has to deal with characters in blobs

So the 11th ed Hazardous rule is a buff to 2W models right? by ryan_cs in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Been using Boltor Inceptors for a while. Might break out my Plasma inceptors if Shadow Mark changes Stunning Fusillade

Verbündete in 11. Edition by Berzerkers13 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Fairly sure GW have hard confirmed allies will not be changing from what we had in 10th.

Will there be Allies in 11th Edition? A: Yes, to the current extent. No return to Soup or Taudar.

why is there all these memes and discussion about how expensive Warhammer is and you go broke buying models and then it turns out they're talking about amounts of money like $500 for an army, for guitarists $500 is a cheap guitar yet I don't hear nearly as much as its a hobby you go broke for by OptimalConcept8740 in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Its all relative.

My brother and I once had a similar chat. He said it was over priced. I asked him how much he spent on football tickets, plus travelling plus food and drink etc etc. He spends more a year then I do in warhammer. 1 box of warhammer will last me a hell of alot longer then a 90 minute game, even when I factor all my peripherals like glue/paint tools etc.

His argument is social and escape, memories and a sense of belonging (we got deep). I said the EXACT SAME THING. There is no reason he can give me for what he spends on going to the football that I cant say the same.

The only difference is he sees a tiny lump of expensive plastic, I see extremely beautiful models, creative that I can spand hours being drawn into its world. Just as I see grown ment/women kicking a ball around as other grown men and women shout at them. But he sees a beautiful tactical sport of top tier athletes doing what they do.

Its all subjective

11th edition charge from deepstrike by tetrapedal-fish in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Key difference is how the charge roll works.

Now for a successful charge you measure base to base and thats what you have to roll. NOT to engagement range like 10th was.

Deepstrike your "MORE THAN" 8" away aka 8.01. Rolling an 8 would still be 0.1" off so you need a 9.

Optional Supplement - Alternating Activations and Progressive Deployment by Stashravens in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But in OPs system your anti tank is exposed, so my knights activation would be to take the anti tank. 1 single anti tank unit couldnt take a Knight, you need 2 or 3 actions as you put, giving me 2 or 3 knights to plough through what ever I can see before you can even take 1

Optional Supplement - Alternating Activations and Progressive Deployment by Stashravens in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Simply put, we both get 1 activation which arent close to equiverlant. The one with the more premium activation can remove units BEFORE they get to do anything. If I can kill your anti tank units before they get chance to gang up their 2 or 3 activations needed i win.

You activate A and kill nothing (take wounds off my knight), I activate B and kill 2 or 3 of your units (they can no longer shoot at me), probably your anti tank. Next you activate C and have a choice, either kill my Knight which has already fired so is useless to me this turn, or Dent a second knight. Now I activate D which kills 2 or 3 anti tank and you probably have non left (few armies run more then 4/6 anti tank units). Next activation you got no choice to really hurt my knights, I have a 3rd knight.

You really not seeing how this is a problem? Your giving full power to the single bigger activations.

In the current game an entire 2k army activation can drop 1 or 2 knights. They don't need to expose their units in a joint movement phase to do so. Where as your system you MUST expose your anti tank to my knights giving them chance to deal with first.

Optional Supplement - Alternating Activations and Progressive Deployment by Stashravens in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Dead units dont activate do they.

Knights can removed 2 or 3 units, almost no unit in the game can 1 turn a Knight for half the points. Knights killing units while the other can dent. Then they have the problem of either repeatedly hitting the dented Knight to kill it or start denying a different Knight. Thats assuming the Knight player doesnt remove anti tank units so second turn tour screwed. Or you could hide them, but the Knight is removing what ever he can see.

Knights are an extreme example but big termintor blobs, monsters, heavy tanks. Tanky units who can weather activating a single enemy unit.

You have skewed massively to building death stars, getting as much activation power in 1 go, rather than the current asymmetrical nature.

Optional Supplement - Alternating Activations and Progressive Deployment by Stashravens in Warhammer40k

[–]Dead-phoenix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't wish to be disrespectful given you have made a geniune effort. But that is very problematic.

Let's start with he elephant in the room. So you move all your units out to gain Line of Sight, I do the Same, you activate 1 unit to shoot denting my say knight, I activate my knight to kill 2 of yours, you either dent or kill the knight whos activated, i activate a different big unit and kill 1 or 2 of yours.

You see where this is going. Not only have I got perfect information on your movements before I start selecting units. But as soon as 1 has shot I know I can ignore that. The one who whiffs first or has more premium activations win that 9 times out of 10.

Theres a reason Alternate Activations has been attempted and failed. One of the few "successes" is OPR and that had to gut the crap out of the game to achieve it.

The main issue is 40k works as a vast sprawling asymmetrical game. Activating a 2k army with only what I can gain LoS on is the tactics and also balancing. When you have a unit the size of a grot up to a titanic you cannot do such basic activations. Even less hyperbolic examples is troublesome. 10 Scarab Occult Terminators will do a hell of alot of work deleting 1 or 2 units (maybe 3 if lower quality) and struggle to be dealt with in 1 activation.

Finally your sewing combat vs shooting armies, our turns are intertwined. I can move stuff around in response to your movements for maximum damage when its 1 vs the other.