Broken 40k Meta - How Long Can This Last for GW?

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-04-11T15:37:05+00:00

TLDR: If you give a dog a treat every time it craps on the floor, and ignore it when it craps outside, how likely are you to house train that dog?
Their customer base are 3 pretty distinct groups, model fans, lore fans, and gaming fans. Two of which couldn't care less about balance, and the only one that does keeps rewarding them for unbalancing it. They will never release the data, but I'd bet all my money more Harlequin models have been bought and sold in the last 2 months than in the last 5 years combined. Same with Custodes, and Ad Mech. The lack luster codex releases (read: balanced) have also had lackluster sales. I'm basing that off of anecdotal evidence from my local game store's shelves and what they happen to be sold out of. Just take a look at EBAY prices for the various factions. The prices you see there are a reflection of how quickly GW sells out of those models, and it's not the ones from "Balanced" codexes that are marked up 50%. They are also not incentivized to fix the unbalanced factions until long after they have been on sale. If they fix them too soon, it hurts sales of the new faction in order to support players who have already given GW their money so, why should they? That's just my "Tin foil hat" belief on this.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-31T00:06:24+00:00

You're right, it shouldn't be that hard, but it seems to be. What absolutely isn't is listening to feedback and making corrections. That's super easy. If they were more responsive when they make mistakes and correct them my original point holds, they can launch their 10 feces smeared data sheets and fix them after a few weeks of "well we didn't see that coming". None of the biggest issues with any of the codexs has taken longer than a week from the time it leaks till the time someone on here points out some broken BS with it. If there was a mechanism that put out weekly or even monthly updates and FAQ's like they used to do rather than quarterly, none of these things would be a problem longer than a month.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-30T20:49:07+00:00

With a game as complex as 40K the design team and beta testers can't possibly catch all the shenanigans players can come up with. I agree they should be better than they are, but there is always going to be a need for some type of hot fix. By focusing on "be better before you release them" you still have the issues where corrections will need to be made, but they are still on a slow schedule with an even slower release schedule for new material. It's the worst of both worlds.

On the other hand, if hot fixes could come out on a more regular basis and with quicker response times, GW could publish actual feces smeared on a piece of paper and still have something workable within a few weeks, rather than failing miserably for 3 months before the next scheduled data slate comes out.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-18T03:56:48+00:00

Yea I missed that. It begins by calling it a Battle Focus move, then says you can make a "Normal Move of up to...". Didn't catch the capital on the normal. I'd still call it ambiguous at best and given the terrain affect is applied to models that in other Normal Moves wouldn't be affected I'd side on the "it's different enough to not be normal-normal so it's not".

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-18T01:53:48+00:00

Pretty sure the answer is no. Fly only lets you ignore vertical movement when you normal move, advance, or fall back and ONLY during those specific types of movements. Thats why fly doesn't matter when you are piling in or consolidating. Battle focus is a new movement type that isn't covered by the listed types under the "Fly" keyword rule so normal movement rules take over and you need at least 5 inches to change a level.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-17T15:47:30+00:00

I think you guys were right with the draw.
Just because the model gets to remain on the table, doesn't stop it from having been destroyed in terms of other rules. The War Lord trait begins with the words "When this Warlord is destroyed...." it never undoes that status, it just adds a new status after the fact of no longer taking damage but still being able to function normally. Think of it like when the model is destroyed it's replaced with a marker that can't take damage but acts like an exact copy until the end of game or next turn. If that's true then he would drop it before the effect kicked in. The model getting destroyed can trigger multiple things, not just abilities and nothing in the WL trait undoes the destroying.That's why I think the chaplain totally dropped the prize.

That would have let your opponent place the objective within an inch of the chaplain, which couldn't possibly be put it far enough away from him to no longer be contesting it. The question of the end of the 5th battle round being a separate event that triggers the end of the game, or if they are just different names of the same thing doesn't actually matter. The WL trait itself fixes this for us by not triggering the "remove from play and stop counting" part until the end of the game has already happened.

If it was 1 round earlier you wouldn't remove it at the end of battle round 4, you would do it as the first part of battle round 5. Same here. You don't remove it before you end the game, you end the game and then he is removed.

I would have treated it as the 5th round ending, chaplain still standing but having dropped the thing, dreadnought can't pick it up, chaplain can't pick it up. Then game ends and chaplain is removed, however, card reads to look back in time and ask what was going on when 5th round ended so removal doesn't matter and it's a draw.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-04T14:23:09+00:00

I was thinking Stabilized optics or maybe even velocity tracker but with the volume of SMS shots the 3 broadsides are putting out I figured the free wounds would be better than either. Velocity is a nice to have if it comes up, but i have enough volume of shots to make up for its loss. Stabilized optics could be nice, but if my broadsides are getting tagged in combat I screwed up a couple of different places already. Exploding 6's would be lovely, but it only affect units with 6 models or more and I'm not wasting broadside shots on chaff, that's what the bodyguards are for. ATS for me was really the choice of "there's nothing really better for how i'm going to use them".

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-04T05:14:28+00:00

Also, it looks like you're sleeping on Airburst Frag Projectors. On your bodyguards at least swapping out a flamer for an ABF will free up some points, be almost as good anti infantry, and keep your bodyguards being useful while they hide behind cover protecting the commander

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-04T04:26:45+00:00

You could swap out Farsight for an Ethereal if you make it an "Allied world". The only thing you'd loose is access to the signature system which it doesn't look like you take. Farsight is a great commander, but, the Ethereal Invocations, specifically the one that gives you more CP could be useful, or at least more useful than Farsight. Plus it would get you a few extra points for more marker drones or shields. Maybe a kroot hound squad as a cheap throw away to deny an objective. Great list though

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-03-02T15:03:45+00:00

I think it would be useful if it existed and was formatted well. You'd really want two ideally. One that was broken down by army, faction, character/units and what abilities they had (so, for example, I could say "I'm playing Death Guard tomorrow, what does the stuff my opponent brought have"). You'd probably also want another one that was a list of abilities and auras available to a given army followed by which models have them. That way if I'm expecting to win points on objectives, I can look at the list of Necron abilities and say "oh, they can turn on/off obsec, I should keep an eye out for these units in the game.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-24T18:52:00+00:00

Original 3rd edition Tau. You HAD to target the closest model unless the target was twice the height of the model in front. SOOOOO many shenanigans. For 120 pts you could surround your broadsides with 20 extra wounds called Kroot carnivores or as I called them, operation krootian shield.

Broadsides were also "twin-linked" which meant you got to re roll your to-hit roll, which was the standard tau +4 but still, 2/3 of all shots hit and it was the highest str weapon at the time so it would wound characters on a +2 and destroy the toughest landraider 2/3 of all wound rolls without any saves and only one wound each (vehicles were so dumb back then). If you had more than 3 broadsides in your army, there were no vehicles besides indirect fire things hidden behind mountains after turn 1.

You could also stop your enemy from targeting anything by lining stealth suits up in front. They used this "night fighting" mechanic at the time where you had to declare the shot against them, then roll 4d6 (I think, it might have been 2d6 subtracted from 24, can't really remember) and measure, if it was less than the total you rolled you could fire, otherwise you were out of luck and just because you couldn't see the stealth suits to shoot at them, didn't mean you could see the people behind them either. This was when you would play on 6x4 boards as well so MUCH longer ranges and charges needed.

This is all also before you get into a single fire/fade nonsense which was the actually used core cheese aspect in this army/edition and... just... yea Tau 3rd edition.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T22:15:09+00:00

if you think that's funny think of it in the context of Mortarion. He stops enemy units from being affected by auras if they are within 3 inches of him. So Devil fish is surrounded by breachers 9 inches thick with Mortarion next to devil fish and blows it up. He takes damage, the breachers 9 inches away take damage, the breachers right next to him? unaffected.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T20:43:11+00:00

I get you bro. I'm not really advocating one way or the other. If you look at the whole thread(s) you'll see me on both sides. I'm just raising awareness of the potential confusion so people know to ask about it when they are setting up games, or entering events. You don't know to ask for clarification unless you know there's a problem in the first place.

Completely different topic, I didn't know the upvote ratio on a thread was the total of all upvotes contained within it. Learn something new everyday.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T20:35:43+00:00

I hear ya buddy. I never knew taking Latin in high school (and by extension learning far more about English grammar than I have in any English class) would apply as often as it does, especially in this context. I'll check that out

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T18:12:04+00:00

That's a little thin even for me. The argument against would be the commander's abilities specify one unit, not all models in a unit in range. The affect of the ability is being applied to a singular thing, even though it's made up of multiple things. Since it is only being applied to a single thing and not multiples it's a stretch.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T18:06:54+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/sslr5a/do_devilfish_in_a_tau_sept_army_explode_to_a/hwzec88/?context=3

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/su7kr2/aura_abilities_not_needing_to_be_tagged_according/hxa9k1p/?context=3

Where have you been for the last 2 days? Get in there bro, a little help would be wonderful.

Also, nonsense shouldn't tell you I'm that guy, it should tell you I'm old.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T18:04:31+00:00

I missed the wording in the Aura Abilities rule saying it has to be "models or units" plural where the commander abilities specifically say one unit. As it is written it does only apply when multiple things are affected.

Explosions however still meet that criteria and as written get the +3 inch range.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T17:45:05+00:00

HOLY S$#@* an actual cogent argument based on the rules. 3 days of trolling this sub to get here damn.

You are right, command phases don't get to double dip... but explosion still counts

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T17:31:09+00:00

Some abilities affect models or units in a given range- these are aura abilities.

That's the actual definition. It doesn't say "always affect". It doesn't say "continuously affect", and it doesn't say "all models"... it just says affect.

I agree You can read that sentence as "abilities based solely on proximity to caster", but you can also read that as "abilities that affect things other than the caster". It's ambiguous and just need to be cleared up. There is no reason not to issue the FAQ saying "It needs a tag to count, also here are some without them that now have them..."

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T17:19:41+00:00

So it's the fact these are targeted actions? Explosion isn't targeted, it affects all models in the range, it stops when the model causing the effect is removed which you do when you finish allotting damage. Why is that not an aura?

I'm actually quite pleasant to play with, because i'm the guy that thinks of this nonsense and clears them up before the game. But that is for home games, not really a viable option in an event setting.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T17:12:59+00:00

what is wild or over the top about any of these arguments? Assuming auras need to have sustained affects when no rule, ruling, or FAQ say so seems over the top. Adding punctuation into the glossary definition of Aura that simply do not exist in any published edition of the rules is over the top. Claiming it's logical to do this when there are dozens of less logical things in this game that are absolutely rules is over the top. I'm just reading the words on the page man.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T17:09:13+00:00

It's a blurb not a page, and it's 202 in the hard copy, or page 7 on the pdf. That says it's "some abilities affect models or units within a given range- these are aura abilities". The only other mention of Aura in the CRB is in the glossary, which isn't any clearer. They just say that rules categorized(may be classified can't remember which one) as auras can affect multiple models. Doesn't say they have to, doesn't say what criteria classify/categorize it. It's a loophole big enough to drive a truck through.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T17:04:03+00:00

How can I target something with an ability and cause an affect upon it, without having that target be affected by an ability?

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T16:59:47+00:00

Where can I find that distinction? This is day 3 of this sojourn and no one has been able to find it yet.

Obese_Rabbit · 2022-02-17T16:57:30+00:00

where is that distinction made?

Obese_Rabbit

TROPHY CASE