PDA

View Full Version : IW Army of Doom. Vote!



Maximillianus
01-03-2006, 23:31
I will take the advice that Ebolahond offered in the other thread about IW. So vote and let us see what results we get. :)

pyramid_head
01-03-2006, 23:50
people can play what they like, no list is unbeatable

TzarNikolai
01-03-2006, 23:54
in a friendly game i really wouldn't like to unpack my balanced army then find out i'm facing the 9 obliterator army of doom. that would **** me off no end.
i come to my gaming club to have fun, not face some ubercheese. if i wanted to play ubercheese i'd invent my own (and i play eldar, so i can do pretty easily...). especially where i play you'd find really quickly that no one would want to play you.

but say you're in a tourney or are trying out your army for a tourney and warn me then i don't mind.

NightHaunter86
01-03-2006, 23:57
No offense to anyone who plays an IW army of doom, but I voted no, for the simple fact that I personally would not play against it.It is not a fun game for me, I don't mind losing at all, I have only won one game in about a year of playing 40k, but I always play to have fun and this army imo is not fun to play against.

azimaith
02-03-2006, 00:01
The games about fun for both sides, tournament or not, so nope. I can guess who was the one who voted yes.

Jon_Irenicus
02-03-2006, 00:04
I went for the middle option, because a tournament *is* about winning, no matter how you put it.
It´s just the way you do it that counts, and I wouldn´t have much respect for someone so desperate to win that he´d exploit said cheezyness.

TWB
02-03-2006, 00:05
I voted for "Yes, everyone has a right to play the way he/she likes, provided that he doesn't break the rules " but I would like to qualify that by saying, don't expect to make or keep friends if you insist on using this army, you will soon have to attend tournaments just to get a game as nobody will face you by choice.

pyramid_head
02-03-2006, 00:08
The games about fun for both sides, tournament or not, so nope. I can guess who was the one who voted yes.


it was MEEEE I was the turkey all allllong

Jon_Irenicus
02-03-2006, 00:11
Just to get a better price on the Iron Warriors you´re selling, you... damn triangular shaped head sort of person! :D

pyramid_head
02-03-2006, 00:13
nah the white dwarf 6 page spread will do that good enough.

I still have a healthy respect for them and do consider the list probably the toughest to face, including ACs but it makes the victories all the sweeter

Son of Morkai
02-03-2006, 00:28
Bring it. And I'll bring some first-turn charge Kroot, a Callidus, and mass-infiltrating plasma. Huzzah.

boogle
02-03-2006, 00:29
i wouldn't care, its a game about war, not war about a game

Puffin Magician
02-03-2006, 00:56
People should expect minmaxed, fluffless, WAAC lists at Tournaments - that's where they belong [if they really do need to exist at all], but in a friendly game? It's supposed to be about fun, not handing people their asses on turn 3 after infiltrating powerweapon squads with Furious Charge or an army of tanks taken only to lay down 14 Ordnance tempates each turn. It doesn't matter to me if it's Iron Warriors, Imperial Guard, Tyranids, or anything.

I probably wouldn't refuse to play, but that doesn't make it any more acceptable at the start. Who knows, maybe a game or two against a boring list might have the "fun" army win and convince the other player to give up those kinds of lists.

Imperial Fist Commander
02-03-2006, 01:06
I voted yes, play what you like. However, don't be suprised if some people (about 55% going by the current poll results) won't be willing to play you a second time, or at all once they see your list.

Dark Muse
02-03-2006, 01:57
I voted yes, for tourney play. I never like to see people who brag about being undefeated for 100+ games. What is the point? When the DE were easy to win with in experienced hands I kept toning down and adjusting my list till I was only winning ~50% of the time. It is no fun to win or lose all the time and you don't get better, you just fall into a rut.

The point is not to slaughter your opponent but for BOTH players to have fun. If your opponents have a good time playing against the IW army of doom, great go for it. If your opponents groan when they see you come, it is an indication that you are not returning the enjoyment and sport you are getting out of playing your list.

Food for thought.

EDIT: And there are some, maybe even a lot, of players who would enjoy the challenge even in a casual game. The fact that this question is even being asked though suggests many in your area do not.

Draxalus
02-03-2006, 02:43
I'd actually prefer to face these types of cheese armies outside tourneys. Dealing with a lot of cheese helps you become a better tactician in general IMHO, especially when you yourself use a well rounded army. I rarley ever try to tool an army towards a specific type of opponent. You should master-craft one army, and learn to use it efficiently against all opponents .

Anyways For me, When I rank my opponent at a tourney, a fluffy well-rounded list is important. So a 9 obliterator army wont get much props from me. I'd prefer my IW opponents to sport 4 HS tanks, and maybe a few obliterators, but definitely not 9 of them. :cheese:

Then again, my tau army doesn't usually have a big problem with cheese IW...:D

Lord Malachi
02-03-2006, 03:17
I voted "yes" because IW are a legal army and are far from impossible to beat, especially if you know you will be facing them ahead of time. I'm not saying that you need to overpowered your army to beat them either. It really comes down to the tactics you employ and the weapon choices you make. If you bring a knife to a gunfight you can expect to lose. An IW army that is heavy on indirect fire and Obliterators (i.e. 3 Defilers and a Basilisk with 9 Obliterators, the source of all the bellyaching...) is devastating if you try to sit back and shoot. To do so is a big mistake.

Nathaniel
02-03-2006, 03:17
I voted for a yes, I've never played against an IW army let alone the IW army of doom. It seems to me that having your ass handed to you on the 3-4 turn, repeatedly would be unenjoyable but it's really up to the player if they choose to enjoy the challenge and learn from the experience.

I'd personally be happy to face any army, as long as I'd have a general idea of what it is before we start rolling up the objectives etc.

New Cult King
02-03-2006, 08:26
Tourney play - bleh, whatever. I have a dim view of tournaments, so I only play friendly games with my Iron Warriors.

In my friendly games against my only opponent, I take a Defiler, a Basilisk, a Vindicator and a Havoc squad, but no Obliterators as I really don't like their models. Of course, he plays Necrons and brings the Nightbringer and a Monolith, so both armies are pretty nasty.

If I was to go to a store to play, or play against a stranger, I would tone down the pie plates, and maybe take the Basilisk and Vindicator and a couple of Havoc squads. I see those things as totally fluffy for the IW, and not unbeatable, especially when a canny opponent Deepstrikes nasty buggers right next to the paper-thin rear armour of my Bassie...

As for the ****** that take a Daemon Prince, 9 Obliterators, and 4 Defilers (not that I've ever seen this list in real life), they deserve whatever they get. As others have said, the game is about fun for both people.

Dark Muse
02-03-2006, 11:49
I would say, barring a stream of votes changing the results, it has gotten there. A significant number of people find such a list unreasonable outside of tourny play. Over half at this stage.

Tournament play is by nature no holds barred, and that is what the IW army of doom list is about.

Sigismundjimbob
02-03-2006, 11:58
I have only won a single battle with my Orks. ive had them for about two years. every game that i have played, barring one game, has been very close. i have so much fun playing an army that is the under dog (like orks) because you are just that, the underork, i mean dog...
its all about the challenge, you cant win every battle, but ill still giv it a go. id love to face off against IW with 9 obliterators, and 4 heavy supprt choices, although i admit, the board would have to have copious amount of terrain, im not totally stupid. bring it on

squigsnok
02-03-2006, 12:20
I voted for "Yes, everyone has a right to play the way he/she likes, provided that he doesn't break the rules". I might not necessarily LIKE the guy for taking the army, coz you know he's in it for the winning, not the fun of the game.

But at the end of the day, it's all the more satisfying watching the tears well up in his eyes when he's just watched my orks rampage across his army, relentlessly power klawing anything that resembles an obliterator or an ordnance weapon. :D

philbrad2
02-03-2006, 12:27
"Yes, everyone has a right to play the way he/she likes, provided that he doesn't break the rules"

Says it all really!

If your going to single out IW I'm going to bring to light similar army configurations from other races that can prove 'uber' - All Termi SM armies, Wraithlord/Psyker heavy Eldar and armour heavy IG armies to name 3

Not all IW armies come out as this 'Army of doom' configuration (could someone post an example of this armylist please :wtf: it would make commenting on the poll easier. I have a pretty good idea of what your on about though.) If people are moaning about it as a tourney army then fine moan, as long as its legal its fieldable, probably it wouldn't figure to high on any 'sportsmanship' mark, but it can be used legally. But tourney armies have to be one of the smallest percentage armies used to play 40K, with the vast majority of games being 'friendlies' in a non-competitive setting. If you want to play tourney's go ahead but I've always found tourney army list set up to get meet certain rigid, set conditions. Not all IW players field Obliterator/ordnance rich lists - doen't say they can't though :D People who play in tournaments are out to win, they will field the best army they can within the ruleset, dammit I would!

The 'problem' is not the Iron Warriors its the way the current ruleset allow 'min/maxing' where the bare number of compulsory units are taken allowing the maxmimum number of elite/spedialist units can be fielded with the points saved. From what I can see most, if not all 40K armies allow min/maxing in their armylist. Please don't keep singling out all us poor old IW. If a list is legal within the ruleset people can use it. This isn't an IW or Eldar or IG problem its a trait that runs through all of 40K.

We can debate sportsmanship, gaming ethics etc... until the cows come home. At the end of the day the core rules allow this and until they are honed to cut out or reduce min/maxing then it will stay within the hobby. Live with it (preferably without whinging) or make a move on games dev to tighten this up. Its a loophole and like all loopholes people can and will exploit it when the need takes them.

Party on ...

:chrome:

Maximillianus
02-03-2006, 13:36
All, of this is very interesting indeed... :D But let us not jump into any conclusions yet... Keep those votes coming brothers. ;)

Grimtuff
02-03-2006, 13:41
Not all IW armies come out as this 'Army of doom' configuration (could someone post an example of this armylist please :wtf: it would make commenting on the poll easier. I have a pretty good idea of what your on about though.)

Tooled up DP
9 Oblits
2 Minimal Squads
and 4 ordnance from various sources.


As I have already stated in the other thread, although this army is acceptable it goes against my (and a lot of other gamers) gaming ideologies, not to say i wont play it, becuase if I am prepared (i.e. I get some kind of notice to concoct some uber list of my own to counter it, just to see the guy weep) I will play it.

Its the fact that I could turn up on any given club or Vets night and find myself thrown against this army. (Obviously now I have wised up to who's what at the club now, so he's avoided like a plague) But I expect to go to these nights and have a fun game, not have the seven shades kicked out of my army in 3 turns becuase "I came unprepared"

Just my 2 cents.

JasoKuuhl
02-03-2006, 14:53
I voted for yes,everyone has the right to play what they want.

I like the challenge, and btw. i don´t think the 3x3 Obliterators and 4 Ordnance Army is as unbeatable as many people think. Yes it will be a hard game, probably more challenging for you than for the oponent, but IW still can be beaten.
And i think there are many armies out there that could give IW´s a headache(Dark Eldar,all Close Combat Armies, Chaos with Demonbomb,....)
I also think especially drop pods and close combat armys can hurt
them.

I managed to score a small victory against them last tournament, using 13th company. Yes it was a very tough game, especially that tooled up demonprince "Black sword, +1 Strenght, Furious Charge, cavalry movement, which could hit at strenght 8 with initiative 6" that beardy bastard :-).

I also tried once with my guard against the hardest IW army i met yet(3x3 Oblits, and 4x8 Havocs(each having one heavy choice, 4 HB, 4MC, 4LC, 4 RL)). He got first round and destroyed all 3 Leman Russ Tanks, and probably about 30 Troopers. If you think I was shaken, then YES I WAS DAMN, i NEVER met an army that could shoot my 3 beloved Lemans in the first round.
The second match made me deploy my tanks a bit wiser(Cover) he still managed to destroy one tank but i could get the upper hand, with deepstriking squads against his obliterators. I probably could have given him a better performance the first round, but as i said i was broken, with my tanks gone.

jigplums
02-03-2006, 15:33
if armies like the iw one are so overpowered how comes there are so many?

IW Ordinance
IW infantry
Ultwe seercouncil
Aliatoc ranger
Tau 3 hammerheads 9 suits
Guard all infantry
Chaos daemonbomb-so many varieties
marine speeder death
saim hann vyperstarcannon
Nid MC lists
Nid hoard
Nid stealer swarm
Necron destroyer heavy
Necron Warrior heavy
Necron double monolith[at 1500 obviously]
Marine AC heavy +las/plas
Marine Termie heavy +las/plas
Bloodangels
etc....................................

Warboss Grimmtoof
02-03-2006, 15:38
Ize is gonna get in a good fight anewhereze me can cuz mez da orkesez an wez gonna clobber dem umies even if deyz is bin 'n spiky 'n try to lood like da tin 'eads cuz wez da orkeses and every umie knows dat orkesez is da best (even if they sez uvverwize!) But seriously I would fight it. Any army has the potential to be cheap. An eldar army can rack up on starcannons and warp spiders, an ork army can use deathskulls clan rules and load up on looted leman russes +basilisks and have lascannon squads. While Space marines can pump up whirlwinds and assult marines. Any army can be cheap, and IW can be cheap, but at roughly 200 pts for 3 oblits plus about 200 - 250 for each tank, plus troops which are about 200 pts a squad, and finally a lord (pumped up) is about 250 Your only gonna be able to squeeze in about a lord, 6 oblits, 25 troops and 2-3 tanks in a 2000 pts game. Versus my army of about 6 mega armored guys, a big mek and his mob of burnas, 100 rough boys, 30 grots, 2 units of trukk boys, Plus a dread, battlewagon and a looted leman russ? I SAY BRING IT ON!!

philbrad2
02-03-2006, 16:48
if armies like the iw one are so overpowered how comes there are so many?

<HOOOGE LIST OF ARMIES>



Thanks JIGPLUMS I see I'm not alone in my hypothesis :evilgrin:


Tooled up DP
9 Oblits
2 Minimal Squads
and 4 ordnance from various sources.


As I have already stated in the other thread, although this army is acceptable it goes against my (and a lot of other gamers) gaming ideologies, not to say i wont play it, becuase if I am prepared (i.e. I get some kind of notice to concoct some uber list of my own to counter it, just to see the guy weep) I will play it.



Cheers GRIMTUFF thought it would entail minimal troops and maximum heavy/elite slots. I've maxxed out ordnance slots before and their biggest vulnerablility is to keep them as accurate as possible they need to be as still as possible and can (and have) fallen prey to the likes of bikers with meltas/multi meltas, jump packers with melta bombs and landspeeder Tornados that can move in quick and hit hard. My personall fave IW army configuration works round two large IW squads (12 min) and Havocs find these far more flexible and psychologically damaging than tanks with big guns. Have you seen how much damage 12 to 20 rapid firing bolters can do!

As you, and I, say whereas the 'ethic's of such a list may not be in keeping with the spirit of the game it is fieldable on the tabletop. At a tournament such an army would score low on things like sportsmanship, when playing it lays down an helluva lot of firepower. But, it does have its drawbacks, mobility is a major one. Fast moving, hard hitting enemy can take out such armies with relative ease, 'minned' CSM squads are easier to kill outright or break through massed shooting/assault. So there are two 'off the top of my head' tactics.

From the comments I'm seeing a lot of people are saying 'No its not a fair army!' Which, as their opinion is valid, from the standpoint of gaming its not the be all and end all of armies. I find players who field armies with mixed, flexible forces seem to win the day not just those with the biggest gun!

Until GW tighten up on the usage of such armies then they'll be a factor of the game. As I say to everyone faced with such threats ADAPT, IMPROVISE, OVERCOME!


Good hunting ...

:chrome:

Grand Master Raziel
02-03-2006, 17:15
2: Yes, but in a competitive environment only such as tournaments, where everyone plays to win.

I'm not going to get bent out of shape at seeing an IWAOD (hmm-could be pronounced "Iwad") at a tournament. When people pay to play, with a prize of monetary value on the line (not to mention pride), they get more competitive than they might be in a more relaxed environment with less at stake.

For casual gaming, however, I expect more of an emphasis on balance and sportsmanship, which is not to say that I don't understand the drive to be hypercompetitive. I used to be like that. Min-maxed the hell out of every army list I produced. Part of it was that I was still learning how to be successful, and part of it was insecurity over my ability as a player. After a while, I found myself winning almost all my games, which made the insecurity go away, so I started making lists that I find more thematically interesting, and branching out into other armies. Now, since I'm not so insecure over my win-loss record, I don't mind losing as long as it's a decent game, but I do mind getting mugged by an unbalanced list. Every once in a while, when I do encounter someone who does mug me with such a list, I'm perfectly willing to tweak a list to crush his the next time we meet. Army lists are easy to carry around. What I really despise is when players with unbalanced lists go around and mug newbies just to score easy wins. So, in short, save the IWAODs for tournaments.

Tanith Ghost
02-03-2006, 17:34
I voted yes. 'cheese' and 'overpowered' are the excuses of loosers.
Grow up. It's a damn GAME. Not the end of the world. No-one is holding a gun to your head and making you play.

On the other hand, I go by the idea every army can loose. It just takes
more brains sometimes.

Spell_of_Destruction
02-03-2006, 18:01
I voted yes. 'cheese' and 'overpowered' are the excuses of loosers.
Grow up. It's a damn GAME.

Isn't that kind of the point they are making though? It's just a game and not a particularly finely tuned and balanced one at that. Why take winning to an extreme with beardy lists? It's not as if you're proving much by annhilating your opponent.

I love this new idea that beardiness doesn't exist, only what is and what isn't allowed by the rules (the true motto of the beardmonger). As if the rules are somehow watertight and every situation was considered when they were written!

I suppose tournaments should be no holds barred. It's just that the game isn't very conducive to tournament play. GW could tighten the rules and eliminate a lot of beardiness in the process but this would probably occur at the expense of being able to construct diverse armies.

Tanith Ghost
02-03-2006, 18:07
I love this new idea that beardiness doesn't exist, only what is and what isn't allowed by the rules (the true motto of the beardmonger). As if the rules are somehow watertight and every situation was considered when they were written!

I run an IG drop army and a codex marine army(no traits, ten man squads only, and perscribed heavy weapons). I do my level best to run armies to backround, but it gets my goat when people call for book changes on account of their own lack of skill.

All it takes it the use of one's brain and all the so-called 'chese' lists out there can be taken care of.

A nine oblit army, after all only shows the player's own lack of skill, and should speak volumes about you if you figure out how to beat it down.;)

philbrad2
02-03-2006, 19:04
A nine oblit army, after all only shows the player's own lack of skill, and should speak volumes about you if you figure out how to beat it down.;)

On the other hand running 9 Oblis could be fairly taxing, OK you've got a mega shooty weapons platform that can deep strike. But they aren't terribly mobile and could be easily overrun in assault by 'mere' Boyz/Guardsmen/Guardians. Plus sustained close range rapid fire from even basic S3 weaponry will get through in massed numbers.

I think a lot of players who field min/max armies don't think of the downside of their choices after all every Yin has its Yang. Lack of skill - perhaps, I seem to think a lack of looking from the persepective of how can opponents take down this unit?

:chrome:

Insane Psychopath
02-03-2006, 19:27
I went for

Yes, everyone has a right to play the way he/she likes, provided that he doesn't break the rules

End of the day, I don't get why people get so anger over a army. People have way of gaming & if the like one style leave them be, you are not force to play them you know. If you are going to a tournament you should exspct to face such a hard force. It kind of like painting where people want to get the best if they enter Golden Daemon... I know it not same thing, but just showing if someone like one part of the hobby they will want to be the best of that part.

My view in the whole hobby is: As long as the gamer/person alright that all at matters, as it them who make a game fun. I have a Iron Warriors army... one that all you how b*** would probley hate, yet ever oppnet said good stuff, had good game, good laught... like when my Obliterator dies to his own Plasma gun.

You should not judge the army, but as said more the gamer. Also you are not force to play them that the end of the day.

As long as it by the rules/codex eg: 1x HQ & 2x Troops... then my oppnet is free to take what ever he likes as long as it with in the rule/codex limit. I like playing my games by the rules as that why they are there.

My view on powergaming is someone who cheat all the time & is a bad losser as well as bad winner. My point of people who call a armu cheese or beardy are bad losser & to stupit top thing of tactic was made on the topic "Why´s there so much hate for the IW?". 25 page of nothing but little 3 year olds who was crying...did any of you make a tactic topic against Iron Warriors, well there was one topic but there was only 2 post on tactic. This is my point if you are going to get all p**** just because of away somene pick there army that just poor & you should just give up.

People preffer diffrent style of gaming, just because you do not agree dose not mean we have to follow "your law". So I say all them peopl that call armies cheese or beary need to get a life or laid... what ever come first & grow up. It just childish, it like if you can't beat someone up your going "ohh yeah my daddy can beat your daddy as he the strngiest person" it just pure childish & it disguest me that people act like little kids just because way someone pick a army.

IP

LostTemplar
02-03-2006, 19:28
Look, its mostly like this... Those three squads can be easeilly nulified. The problem is the ordenance. Of course, this also stems fro mthe opponent's player's skill. Afterall, if he knows how to prioritize, hen, nobody should have a chance.

The best example would be somethign alogn these lines:

Massed infantry 'nids vs that IG army. Ordenance the lil'critters, and make it so that the big ones cannot avoid incoming fire.

A fairly simple task, save for flying'tyrants. It should help you win the game, althou not a warranty for such.

Maximillianus
02-03-2006, 22:00
Well, the results seem to follow a pattern for a while now. :cool:

Deadite
02-03-2006, 22:07
Well, the results seem to follow a pattern for a while now. :cool:

And based on the votes of 127 people thus far, what conclusion have you come to? What was the question that needed answering?

Maximillianus
02-03-2006, 22:22
There was no "question" strictly speaking. But the purpose of the poll was to find out whether the ppl find the IW Army of Doom acceptable and to what extent.

For the time being:

A first conclusion would be that roughly an 87% of the voters find the IWAoD acceptable for tournament play, which certainly says something about the expectations concerning a competitive environment.

The acceptability percentage falls significantly to roughly 50% when casual play is included, since 37% find the army acceptable only in tournaments.

Finally there is a small percentage of 13% that don't even want to hear about the armylist regardless of the environment.

This in my humble opinion may indicate that the whole fuss about the IWAoD being largely unacceptable and the hatred directed against IW are at least somewhat exaggerated.

Bear in mind though that these are only the numbers speaking. If we take a closer look at the individual comments of the voters, further coclusions can be drawn. I will not comment on these for the time being though. We should collect more. ;)

Smoking Frog
03-03-2006, 02:21
Well, at the end of the day those results make sense.

I voted for "Yes, everyone has a right to play the way he/she likes, provided that he doesn't break the rules", simply because it's not difficult to beat. Most of that firepower needs to see you, and the ones that can't are highly inaccurate. Also, when you kill off the minimalised squads, you bag easy points. I'll admit, it's much more difficult, and the army has few readily exploitable weaknesses, but if you can run rings around them, outmanouvre them and exploit all of your terrain, Mr Beardibastard is going to whine and bitch and moan. And then he's gone.

For some reason, I find it easiest to beat the "i-Wad" with Dark Eldar. But that's me.

Maximillianus
03-03-2006, 11:15
It seems that a lot of people vote for the first option, since in their opinion it's not that difficult to beat the IWAoD.

Dark Muse
03-03-2006, 13:47
Oh, the IWAoD can be beat, especially if your tailor a force to it. It also seems a lot do not find it acceptable for casual games, if ever.

I would play against it if no other opponent was around. If I got first turn or it was an escalation scenario, would stand a good chance at beating it. It is a list tailored to a tourney game though, not one for casual games. Notice the qualification in some of the "its in the rules so play it" responses that go on to say "but don't expect to make any friends."

There are always gamers at any place that are less fun to play with. It is the opponent, not the army, that makes a game fun or not. The IWAoD makes that challenge more of an uphill battle though.

Kahadras
03-03-2006, 15:42
It is the opponent, not the army, that makes a game fun or not.

Yeah but the army helps. Even if your opponant is a really nice guy you have to ask the question of why he feels it nesicery to field such an army. Having said that I don't mind what people collect. Some one can build the most broken IW list in the world if they want but I won't bother playing against them so I don't really mind.

Kahadras