PDA

View Full Version : First game back in 40k. Cityfight blows



TheWarSmith
05-11-2006, 16:15
So I'm building up my armoured company, and they ask "does anybody have 1000 points". So I figure, what the hell, i'll play a game.

I bring my stuff to the table and it's a bunch of the new cities of death buildings. seems cool. I'm teamed up with necrons, dark eldar, and chaos, up against tau, dark angels, kroot, and space marines.

I haven't played since 3rd edition, and I'm adapting to the new rules switches. But when I find out that almost EVERYTHING has a 4+ invuln save due to cover, it gets a bit stupid.

My ordnance was pretty useless because the tau player had his broadsides on 3 different levels of the building, and apparently 40k blast templates are 2 dimensional, and have no effect on units above/below, so I could only hit one broadside a turn(LAME)

So I'm thinking to myself, "Medusa's have S10+2d6 siege shells. I'll just blow up the building itself". The person running the game then says "no damage to buildings, no strategems". So my Medusa is pretty much sitting useless(at least it looks cool?)

Then I tried to shoot at some tau with a battle cannon. It was an L shaped building and I was shooting the exposed side, at the top level(more guys up there). I shoot, and he STILL takes cover saves, despite just being on an open ledge. LAME!

Then a hammerhead flies over my cyclops and lands INSIDE a ruined building. I later found out that skimmers cannot enter ruined buildings.

The line of sight thing was pretty lame too. the buildings were on rectangular boards, and the boards counted as blocking line of sight, so there were almost NO firing lanes more than 18", if that. Then i see there's a building with a WIDE open split in the middle, producing a very clear line of sight through it, but I'm told "no, the whole terrain piece obscures".

I didn't bother asking if he was using cityfight, cities of death, or some home brewed concoction of rules, but it was REALLY stupid. WYSIWYG was thrown completely out the window.

I hope my future games are better.

primarch16
05-11-2006, 16:49
Well yeah the whole terrain feature counts as difficult terrain, it just makes the game simpler. That why we dont have forests that are TOTALLY covered in trees, because you cant move through them. Its basically getting to the brass tax of the rules:

This square area is ruins.
Even if there is an opening we can assume that the troopers lay low and dig fox holes where ever they can.

Trust me, it speeds the whole process up.

So your playing an armoured company? Dude how can you be bitching? you have an army of armour 14 steel beasts! The guys have to use there terrain otherwise you would simlply blow them too hell! Maybe you could experement with the use of more hellhounds in the future (no cover saves from flamers).

As far as line of sight goes it works both ways, if you cant shoot him then he cant shoot you.

Sounds pretty lame how you cant use the strategems though, thats a little harsh.

Gen.Steiner
05-11-2006, 16:52
Yeh, tanks in a city and you got hammered? Shock! Horror!

Next time, bring infantry support. Or at least some Hellhounds...

Dakkagor
05-11-2006, 16:59
Demolishers with siege shells are good, or just some storm troopers to actually clear the buildings.

tuebor
05-11-2006, 17:06
Sounds pretty lame how you cant use the strategems though, thats a little harsh.

I agree. I think some strategems, like siege shells, would have helped tremendously.

Lord Humongous
05-11-2006, 17:16
I'd say the problem was more the player / game setup, than with COD. Also with your army selection- Armored Company need to be specially tailored to do decently in COD, and even then don't get the advantages a normal force would.

Yup, there is a lot of 4+ cover saves. But 4+ cover saves have zero impact when you are using ap- weapons against power armor, or using flamers. An armored company could maybe stock up on scatter lasers, inferno cannons, and other appropriate guns. There's also stratagems that make shooting more effective; your enemy may get 4+ cover, but when you re-roll all misses, it helps a bit.

The Medussa should (IMO) have siege shells as standard (or an upgrade option)- but Forge World would have to put that in thier 2005 update. If you never even had the option of buying that stratgem, you were gyped. Every COD game should allow each player at least 1 stragem (for an alpha level game)- and given the LOS issues you descibe, it sounds like you had enough terrain for a Gamma level game.

I agree that multi-level buildings vs blasts and flamer templates could be handled better. Not sure how better, but better. The flamer seems to still work OK, so maybe blasts should be limited to one floor, but would ALSO ignore cover, at least when shooting at models in multi-story buildings? I can imagine the chance of the roof caving in / floor collapsing would be pretty much cancel out the benefit of cover.

The tau on the "open ledge" were in area terrain. Deal with it. It's no worse than if they were in a "forest" that had only 1 tree model.

The hammerhead going into the ruin was wrong, but it could hover OVER the ruin.

As to LOS, unless the ruin models extended to the edge of the board, you should have been able to see over open portions of the board, IMO. But that should be determined before the game. A big "slit" in the middle of a ruin might divide it into two seperate ruins (with open space between them) or it might not; you have to determine that before the game.
It sounds like he was using a poorly implemented set of COD rules, or even just calling all buildings area terrain and otherwise using normal rules (which isn't all bad, if its made clear and doesn't unfialry aid one side).
As I mentioned before, with as much terrain as you had, under CoD rules you should have been using Gamma level rules, meaning all sides would have had access to 3 strategems. That might have been annoying (enemy sewer rats?) but would also have let you wreck a few buildings.

Codsticker
05-11-2006, 17:41
Yeh, tanks in a city and you got hammered? Shock! Horror!

Next time, bring infantry support. Or at least some Hellhounds...
Indeed; the result should not have been suprising.

TheWarSmith
05-11-2006, 17:50
The Medusa COMES with siege shells standard. It's S10+2d6 large blast. Should be no need for the strategem with it.

The tau on the open ledge would have been ok, but comparing it to a forest is a bit different. Forests prevent line of sight to a certain distance in/out, which gives them a slight disadvantage. There was NO disadvantage for him being split level in this building with open facing, as he could fire out with no disadvantage and he gained cover AND further protection from blast templates.

It's armoured company, so I know it has flaws, and I'm happy that there are flaws, as it's often considered massively broken. Hellhounds woulda been good, but I was just playing with what I have(no hellhounds yet)

I think blasts should hit one level below/above, but maybe at reduced strength and ap to represent the floor being messed up or collapsing(maybe simply wound on 4+, normal armour save?)

I also think 4+ cover for all those buildings is a bit much. I remember it used to be 6+ for soft, 5+ for hard(cityfight) and 4+ for fortified(bunkers/etc.)

Perhaps it was just a lot to handle for my first game back in the system.

Oh, and I wanted to inquire on few things that changed in 3rd-->4th.

1)Didn't it used to be just fast vehicles that were glancing only if they moved over 6", not skimmers?

2)If I place a blast and hit/wound the 4 guys under the blast, can the owner of the casualties remove them from anywhere in the unit, even if it's not where the blast was? Kinda neuters blast templates?

3)Do 1s auto fail when penetrating armour? Even if it would automatically produce a result(S10 vs. armour 10)?

carl
05-11-2006, 18:10
1)Didn't it used to be just fast vehicles that were glancing only if they moved over 6", not skimmers?

It still is, but i belive Tau have a peice of wargear that can make some penetrating hits become glancing.


2)If I place a blast and hit/wound the 4 guys under the blast, can the owner of the casualties remove them from anywhere in the unit, even if it's not where the blast was? Kinda neuters blast templates?

Yes he can. It's to stop you using templates to snipe model with Heavy eapons and Characters (i think it's dumb, as being able to snipe heavy weapons would reduce their importance and make basic grunts more important, i think it's lame seeing 5 man las plas squads all the damm time).


3)Do 1s auto fail when penetrating armour? Even if it would automatically produce a result(S10 vs. armour 10)?

No.

Frankly the people you played where idiots IMHO. Your new in and they throw you into the middile of a 6 army cityfight battle.

As for the incident where you had clear LOS to those Tau. Unless the COD expansion changed somthing, you should have got to shoot them with no cover saves. My understanding of Buildings is that to qualify for the cover save from them, some part of the building must obscure LOS to the unit. If it dosen't, (even if they are within the building), then you don't get it.

marv335
05-11-2006, 18:19
actually, the tau hammerhead can enter the ruins.
if it had the sensor spines upgrade then i's possible.
they are the only race who can though.

primarch16
05-11-2006, 18:24
The 4+ coversave was part of making 40k more of a close range fire fight game, It makes flamers and other close range weapons more usefull (especially in COD)

Falkman
05-11-2006, 18:37
The Medusa COMES with siege shells standard. It's S10+2d6 large blast. Should be no need for the strategem with it. I agree with you here, but going by RAW it still has to take the siege shells stratagem to kill buildings, I would have allowed it to just count as having CoD siege shells anyway though.



The tau on the open ledge would have been ok, but comparing it to a forest is a bit different. Forests prevent line of sight to a certain distance in/out, which gives them a slight disadvantage. There was NO disadvantage for him being split level in this building with open facing, as he could fire out with no disadvantage and he gained cover AND further protection from blast templates.
Comparing it to a forest is no different at all, they are both area terrain and work in exactly the same way.
The in/out sight reduction applies to all area terrain, even city ruins.



I also think 4+ cover for all those buildings is a bit much. I remember it used to be 6+ for soft, 5+ for hard(cityfight) and 4+ for fortified(bunkers/etc.)

6+ for very light cover (brushes, high grass)
5+ for light cover (forests, barricades)
4+ for heavy cover (ruins, trenches)
3+ for very heavy covers (bunkers)

The Cities of Death rules are very funny I think, not only do city tables look very, very cool, the games also become more intense and close in cityfight.
Of course, you'll have to rework your army list, since the high amount of terrain and limited vision makes long range shooting less useful, and assault troops, close range fire and indirect fire become so much better.

Lord Humongous
05-11-2006, 18:41
Just to maybe clarify / affirm Carl's replies-
1) Yes, its fast vehicles. If a fast vehicle isn't a skimmer, it is still able to benefit from the rule. If a skimmer is not a fast vehicle, it does not benefit.

2) Yes. It also prevents Squad leaders , chaos icons, and so forth from being sniped, and allows units to maintain coherency so that they can shoot (using heavy weapons, rapid fire over 12", etc) the next turn, rather than being forced to move to regain coherency.

3) No. (10+1 is 11...)

As for the tau on the ledge- yes, CoD does change things from normal LoS / cover rules. All buildings (or, more specifically, "building ruins") are area terrain. The floors of buildings may look open, but they are presumed to have enough scattered debris to provide cover. The CoD rules are designed to maximize the impact of buildings on the game, and minimize the need for careful LOS eye-ball work. If you've ever played Necromunda, you probably already own a laser pointer and a dental mirror... but who wants to bust those out for 40K? And who has time to lavish every building level with railings, fencework, and sandbags, just to provide "wysiwyg" cover?

Falkman
05-11-2006, 18:43
Just to maybe clarify / affirm Carl's replies-
1) Yes, its fast vehicles. If a fast vehicle isn't a skimmer, it is still able to benefit from the rule. If a skimmer is not a fast vehicle, it does not benefit.

No, the glancing over 6" rule applies only to skimmers, the rule is even named "Skimmers moving fast"(or something like that) for god's sake.

Lord Humongous
05-11-2006, 18:52
No, the glancing over 6" rule applies only to skimmers, the rule is even named "Skimmers moving fast"(or something like that) for god's sake.

Ah, correct you are. I've only ever faced fast (as in, may move 24") skimmers. Wow, ANY skimmer that moves more than 6"... and NO benefit for non-skimmer fast vehicles? That kinda blows... you'd think a buggy or some such that moved 23" would be hard to get a bead on!

tuebor
05-11-2006, 18:52
You play armoured compnay? LAME.

Such insightful commentary.

Anyway, Warsmith, COD really is quite difficult for Armoured Companies, especially configured as yours is. I think if you play a couple of games of normal 40k you'll do much better. Also, if you get some of the more COD friendly AC options like Hellhounds and Stormtroopers it'll help immensely.

Falkman
05-11-2006, 18:53
I agree with you that it might seem somewhat strange, seeing as an Ork buggy moving at breakneck speed wouldn't exactly be easy to hit.
But the skimmers have the added advantage to also be able to turn on the spot, fly up and down and so on, so I guess that's enough reason to let them get some special protection.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
05-11-2006, 19:43
So I'm building up my armoured company, and they ask "does anybody have 1000 points". So I figure, what the hell, i'll play a game.

I bring my stuff to the table and it's a bunch of the new cities of death buildings. seems cool. I'm teamed up with necrons, dark eldar, and chaos, up against tau, dark angels, kroot, and space marines.

I haven't played since 3rd edition, and I'm adapting to the new rules switches. But when I find out that almost EVERYTHING has a 4+ invuln save due to cover, it gets a bit stupid.

My ordnance was pretty useless because the tau player had his broadsides on 3 different levels of the building, and apparently 40k blast templates are 2 dimensional, and have no effect on units above/below, so I could only hit one broadside a turn(LAME)

So I'm thinking to myself, "Medusa's have S10+2d6 siege shells. I'll just blow up the building itself". The person running the game then says "no damage to buildings, no strategems". So my Medusa is pretty much sitting useless(at least it looks cool?)

Then I tried to shoot at some tau with a battle cannon. It was an L shaped building and I was shooting the exposed side, at the top level(more guys up there). I shoot, and he STILL takes cover saves, despite just being on an open ledge. LAME!

Then a hammerhead flies over my cyclops and lands INSIDE a ruined building. I later found out that skimmers cannot enter ruined buildings.

The line of sight thing was pretty lame too. the buildings were on rectangular boards, and the boards counted as blocking line of sight, so there were almost NO firing lanes more than 18", if that. Then i see there's a building with a WIDE open split in the middle, producing a very clear line of sight through it, but I'm told "no, the whole terrain piece obscures".

I didn't bother asking if he was using cityfight, cities of death, or some home brewed concoction of rules, but it was REALLY stupid. WYSIWYG was thrown completely out the window.

I hope my future games are better.

Not being funny, but it sounds like your opponents, not the rules, ruined the game for you. For example, no stratagems, and no knacking buildings? Hmmm...both are actually a key part of Cities of Death. Without them, certain forces gain horrific advantages. Plus, Cities of Death require a list designed with the rules in mind. I remember my first game of it. My opponent was prepared, I wasn't. I got my **** kicked. The next game, I cottoned on a bit, and his army was left chinned, knacked and severely brayed.

Trust me (or don't) Cities of Death is a good rules set.

TheWarSmith
05-11-2006, 19:57
So building ruins are treated like forests you say? Well, that'd mean he couldn't have fired out of them in the first place. It doesn't surprise me though. I see this tau player make TONS of opportunistic mistakes(kroot charging first turn in a non kroot only list), the skimmer landing in terrain, and now this.

It was funny. I saw him playing a guard player and he tried to charge with kroot on first turn. We looked up the rule saying "infiltrators may set up MORE than 12" away if out of LOS" and the guard player just packed up and left cause he didn't wanna deal with the lame tau player. I support him.

The glancing if over 6" rule used to be for fast vehicles, not skimmers(in 3rd) right? The only skimmers that aren't fast tha CAN move over 6" are tau anyway(i think?). Personally I think they should just be harder to hit, not harder to penetrate.

So my Medusa would auto penetrate the side armour of a basilisk, right? no need to roll at all? OMG, i forgot, don't blast/ordnance get 2 shots against open topped?

Karhedron
05-11-2006, 19:59
I hope my future games are better.

To be fair, switching from 3rd to 4th edition would probably be confusing enough without adding the extra confusion of CoD into the mix. Sounds to me like you got hit by several factors.

1) Not too familiar with 4th edition yet. Not huge changes but some take getting used to.

2) Not familiar with CoD. They are a distinctly different flavour of the game. Most people I know really enjoy CoD games but you do need to know in advance that you will be playing one and possibly adapt your army accordingly. Vehicles tend to suffer in CoD due to restricted LOS and movement.

2) Unhelpful opponents. Not allowing you any stratagems is actually breaking the rules. Even Alpha level CoD games are supposed to have 1 stratagem per army which would at least have allowed you to take seige shells.

Sorry you had a bad game but give 4th edition and CoD a chance before writing them off. I suggest picking up a copy of CoD so that you can familiarise yourself with how it differs from the regular version of the game. Then you will be able to enjoy the game without getting rules shock every 5 minutes.

TheWarSmith
05-11-2006, 20:08
Anybody have a 4th ed mini book they wanna give me? hehe. I've already spent about $350 on this army, and it's not done. I'd rather not have to spend $50 on a rulebook I'm already half aware of. Still need a vulture and a couple more leman russ tanks(have 2 hellhounds on the way).

I have my friend giving me 3 sentinels, but perhaps magnetizing them so they can take heavy flamers would be good. I imagine they're pretty good in CoD?

t-tauri
05-11-2006, 20:17
Anybody have a 4th ed mini book they wanna give me? hehe. I've already spent about $350 on this army, and it's not done. I'd rather not have to spend $50 on a rulebook I'm already half aware of. Still need a vulture and a couple more leman russ tanks(have 2 hellhounds on the way).Buy Battle for Macragge and sell or trade the minis. It'll end up costing you almost nothing for the mini-rulebook. Seriously, you need the rules.

carl
05-11-2006, 20:20
Sorry, don't have the mini dex, or a spare one. I'd say magnetized weapons if you can find the magnets are a GREAT idea. H.Flamers wil rock in COD.

Also i was wrong, it's all skimmers that can get the glancing benefits.

Frankly if your just starting out again and thus don't even have the main rulebook and they pulled that kind of game on you then i can see it bein a bad time for you. My advice would be to get a copy of the rulebook, (i know it ain't cheap, allthough Ebay may have some for sale), an sit reading and re-reading it for a good solid week before you play another game. It's well worth knowing every rule in there if you can.

GodofWarTx
05-11-2006, 20:22
one of the "flaws" that you spoke of for an armored company is that in a city, the advantage goes to infantry, so i really an not very moved by some of your arguments as to why this game did not go well.

And i disagree with the "not being able to snipe heavy weapons is dumb" thought process, because if you *really* want this game to be dominated by vehicles and not by squads, have the mechanics of the game favor annihilating some armies only chance at even SLOWING things like leman russ tanks. :rolleyes:

The tau have a wargear option for their tanks to go through terrain, gaining the advantages of being obscured without the movement risks. Its *possible* this is what the Tau player had.

If an enemy unit can shoot out of a piece of terrain with X number of models, then likewise X number of models can get turned into swiss cheese by return fire.


Correct, blast templates get two hits against open topped vehicles, combined with adding +1 to any roll you make on the damage table. HOWEVER, in 4th edition, the "hole" in the middle of the template MUST be over the model to get the full strength hit, otherwise if its the rest of the template, its just half strength. This was done to eliminate players using battle cannons to aim between two or more vehicles and barely touch both with the template edges, and blow them all sky high.

Heavy Flamer equipped Sentinels would be sheer murder on armies in CoD like Orks, IG, and Nids, who benifit incredibly from using cover saves to replace their relatively bad armor saves.

carl
05-11-2006, 20:31
Off Topic a bit, i just want to clarify my point earlier:


And i disagree with the "not being able to snipe heavy weapons is dumb" thought process, because if you *really* want this game to be dominated by vehicles and not by squads, have the mechanics of the game favor annihilating some armies only chance at even SLOWING things like leman russ tanks.

Actually that is what i DON'T want. What i want the game to be dominated by is the basic grunt, (Tac marine with Bolter, GM with lasgun, GU/DA, Ork Boy), rather than his freind with the heavy weapon.

TheWarSmith
05-11-2006, 20:43
It just doesn't make any sense that template weapon casualties coudl be taken from models NOT hit by the template. You aimed at an area of the unit, and that's what happens. The fact that you hit somebody and somebody 6" away from him actually dies is a bit odd.

Some are going to tell me that somebody else can just pick up the weapon, but that's really not true for some weapons(plasma cannons)

I'll get a better grasp on the rules before I play too many more games.

Falkman
05-11-2006, 20:44
So building ruins are treated like forests you say? Well, that'd mean he couldn't have fired out of them in the first place. It doesn't surprise me though. I see this tau player make TONS of opportunistic mistakes(kroot charging first turn in a non kroot only list), the skimmer landing in terrain, and now this.
Yeah, you see 6" into/out from Area terrain, so if your models are more than 6" in the can not be shot at and neither can they shoot themselves (unless they have barrage weapons).



It just doesn't make any sense that template weapon casualties coudl be taken from models NOT hit by the template. You aimed at an area of the unit, and that's what happens. The fact that you hit somebody and somebody 6" away from him actually dies is a bit odd.
Well, the game mechanics are not very realistic concerning many things.
Just see it as if the squad is continually moving around, running for cover etc, thus models under the template might jump away from the blast, while others get caught.

DragonPup
05-11-2006, 21:00
Anybody have a 4th ed mini book they wanna give me? hehe. I've already spent about $350 on this army, and it's not done. I'd rather not have to spend $50 on a rulebook I'm already half aware of.


BWBitz has the minibook for $20 (http://www.battlewagon-bits.com/product/3979)

Lord Humongous
05-11-2006, 21:12
It just doesn't make any sense that template weapon casualties coudl be taken from models NOT hit by the template. You aimed at an area of the unit, and that's what happens. The fact that you hit somebody and somebody 6" away from him actually dies is a bit odd.

Why couldn;t you make the same claim for any other weapon? Surely a guy using a lascannon actually aims at at "an area of the unit"- IE, a specific trooper? The mechanics of using a template require you to actually point out a spot on the table, but is shooting any other weapon all that different?

On the other hand, that's all you are doing- pointing out a spot on the table. Its not like the other side actually stopped moving, and you picked out an exact kill radius center to target...

In both cases, you just "target the squad". Blast wepons hurt a squad a bit more if they are huddled together, but certainly don't give any more selective shooting than, say, a sniper rifle would.

Chem-Dog
05-11-2006, 22:48
So I'm thinking to myself, "Medusa's have S10+2d6 siege shells. I'll just blow up the building itself". The person running the game then says "no damage to buildings, no strategems". So my Medusa is pretty much sitting useless(at least it looks cool?)


The Medussa should (IMO) have siege shells as standard (or an upgrade option)- but Forge World would have to put that in thier 2005 update. If you never even had the option of buying that stratgem, you were gyped. Every COD game should allow each player at least 1 stragem (for an alpha level game)- and given the LOS issues you descibe, it sounds like you had enough terrain for a Gamma level game.

The Medusa COMES with siege shells standard. It's S10+2d6 large blast. Should be no need for the strategem with it.
[QUOTE=Falkman;1056050]I agree with you here, but going by RAW it still has to take the siege shells stratagem to kill buildings, I would have allowed it to just count as having CoD siege shells anyway though.

Look in the Cities of Death book, the rules for Siege Shells specifically state that any vehicle with a S10 Ordenance weapon AUTOMATICALLY gets the Siege Shells as they are assumed to carry special ammo for just this kind of job.
Problem is, in Cityfight you can target the Building OR the Occupying troops.

To be honest The Warsmith, it sounds like you got double gypped, firstly they sprung CoD on you and secondly it seems that winning was more important than enjoying the game.

To get your own back Invite the Tau player for a game and then set up NO terrain whatsoever on a 8x4 table after having loaded out on basilisks and then insist on setting up on the short edges :evilgrin: that should even the score out a bit.

GodofWarTx
07-11-2006, 00:10
Funny enough, but the Tau player could still win. Railguns have a "reach out and touch someone" range of 72 inches, and if he took 3 hammer heads, or 9 broadsides, or any combo thereof, things could get messy =P

cailus
07-11-2006, 00:43
Dude the people you played against sucked. And the game master sucked too as he/she did not bother applying the actual rules.

And I for one also thinks the new Cityfight rules are not much when compared to the old ones which actually changed the game mechanic.

TheWarSmith
07-11-2006, 00:47
It'd be amazing how many Manticore artillery strikes would be called in if I played a tau player. one or 2 strikes can kill a whole broadside team.

Laser destroyers also have a good "reach out and touch someone" effect, but it's a bit more of an investment than a broadside.

SwordJon
07-11-2006, 02:41
Look in the Cities of Death book, the rules for Siege Shells specifically state that any vehicle with a S10 Ordenance weapon AUTOMATICALLY gets the Siege Shells as they are assumed to carry special ammo for just this kind of job.
Problem is, in Cityfight you can target the Building OR the Occupying troops.


You mean if they take the Siege Shells stratagem right? You can't just get the benefits of a stratagem without actually selecting it.

TheWarSmith
07-11-2006, 03:27
Um, careful w/ your quote tags. I never said what you have me quoted as. That was somebody else.

Lord Kaamio
07-11-2006, 07:22
I suppose that is expected. If I understood this correctly, you started playing based on 3rd ed rules without getting to know the new ones, and ended up in CoD fight as well with 5 other players, none of which were particularly helpful.

3rd and 4th editions are a different games IMO, the mechanics changed only a little, but the way armies play changed a lot. To tell you the truth I don't even remember 3rd edition very well anymore, but being mostly infantry player (Tyranids, Orks, Dark Angels and Necrons) I like the new rules more. Cityfight is even better with lots of close ranged action. I'd guess the rules don't really hurt Armoured Company, but CoD does... pick up some games of regular 40k with single opponent (preferably one you know) to get a grasp of the main rules and then consider CoD, it being the flavor of the year. Take your time and adapt, it's the only thing you can do if you want to keep playing. You'll find regular 40k probably quite nice, once you get accustomed with it.

Ps. does the spell check button work for others? I just get "Warning: Division by zero in /includes/functions.php(4750) : eval()'d code on line 152" and I'm using Opera 9.02

ss_cherubael
07-11-2006, 07:50
@ sword jon:yes they do auto get the shells read the first line of the strat (badly worded but thats what keeps getting returned by all of the gw staff and people i play with about it)

@war smith: sounds like your game was a bit of a farce. The rules for COD are pretty damn good and i prefer to use them than an open field set up as i like the cover rules and movement and what not, also the strategems are awesome and add another dimension to the game that is cool in a city or on an open field.

As to template weapons in COD or any terrain for that matter, we have always played it that nothing under any template (flamer, small blast, large blast) gets a cover save, this was originally due GW shoddy wording, and later we kept using it as it works better. And i think i need to implement a house rule about the minis under the template are removed, not some random at the back of the squad. This is due to the fact that most are scatter weapons and so harder to snipe with and that it is possible with a GPS guided weapon to blow the crap outta one guy in the middle of the desert why couldnt you blow the crap outta the bloke with the biggest gun with an auspex or similar guided weapon? makes more sense than GW any day of the week!

Lord Kaamio
07-11-2006, 09:05
As to template weapons in COD or any terrain for that matter, we have always played it that nothing under any template (flamer, small blast, large blast) gets a cover save, this was originally due GW shoddy wording, and later we kept using it as it works better.
I assume all of you use several weapons with blast ability, and in general low ap ordnance? Because those are the ones who are getting the huge boost. Or maybe none of you plays MEQ's, since area terrain is their only hope to survive Leman Russ or equivalent, considering the large radius ap3 blast that (insta)kills anything it hits?


And i think i need to implement a house rule about the minis under the template are removed, not some random at the back of the squad. This is due to the fact that most are scatter weapons and so harder to snipe with and that it is possible with a GPS guided weapon to blow the crap outta one guy in the middle of the desert why couldnt you blow the crap outta the bloke with the biggest gun with an auspex or similar guided weapon? makes more sense than GW any day of the week!

A single man out in the desert is an easy target. Where's he going anyway? 100 meters of flat sand everywhere, you just check the heat cam and you'll hit within 10 meters most likely :P a squad moving through a ruin isn't an easy target, especially since it seems that by many parts we have surpassed 40k understanding of technology some 30 years ago... and that seems to include precision.

The fact that models not under the template (but within LOS and range) can be taken as casualty means that the models do not actually represent the exact location of the troops (you know they don't teleport around, right?) and that shrapnel that miss the fellow behind a tree, a large rock or just laying flat might hit another warrior further on. Also there' the fact that weapons can be picked up in many cases and the unit might have a member who's quite adept as a leader, but hasn't got his own squad yet or might be there to guide some rookies on their first mission.

Then there's the game balance thing, i.e. two armies sporting blast weapons don't win or lose the game on the roll for first turn. Both will likely have most of their heavy weapons still intact on the 2nd turn unlike in the previous edition where first turn could easily see 2-5 destroyed heavy weapons from infantry squads, leaving them useless on long range. IMO it's good that 40k isn't that much like wild west drawing contest where the first one to shoot wins (or misses ;))

But, as you said, it's your house rule and I have no say to it, these are just my opinions on the matter. Your game, your house rules and if you all have fun then it's correctly played ;)

ss_cherubael
07-11-2006, 09:38
Actually Kaamio the power gamer if the group sports a raven guard army, while myself and the rest play tau, guard, nids and eldar so yeah. It really doesnt make that much of a difference, that said my guard are the only ones that sport any large numbers of blast weapons such as three battle cannons and missle launchers, the rest prefer to use las cannon like weapons and plasma weapons to kill stuff. Funny tho it wasnt me that put that forward as a house rule it was the raven guard player (although he does have a whirlwind no one is afraid of it as they know what a battle cannon is like).
As for targeting people with blast weapons and the argument of "oh the other guy picked it up!" thats utter crap. If a bloke gets hit with a fething battle cannon shell his gun isnt going to work now is it? and if it does no one in their right mind is going to use it as who knows whats wrong with it? the sgt point might work although this argument would be along the lines of everyone is a hero ready to be made under the right situation... If the shell lands on the las cannon marine he dies end of story, not the bloke with the bolter standing 3ft over from him........and so i would like a rule to reflect that since GW doesnt come with added common sense i must add it for them. BTW try my version of the blast rule next time and tell me how it goes.

Lord Kaamio
07-11-2006, 13:29
Actually Kaamio the power gamer if the group sports a raven guard army, while myself and the rest play tau, guard, nids and eldar so yeah. It really doesnt make that much of a difference, that said my guard are the only ones that sport any large numbers of blast weapons such as three battle cannons and missle launchers, the rest prefer to use las cannon like weapons and plasma weapons to kill stuff. Funny tho it wasnt me that put that forward as a house rule it was the raven guard player (although he does have a whirlwind no one is afraid of it as they know what a battle cannon is like).

Hmm. Well, then I'd guess you don't use much cover, then? Normally I see a real crowd in cover, especially when talking about lightly armored troops. Raven Guard with jump packs wouldn't so he's not much penalised by it. Also, Whirlwind is to most sv 4+ armies very much what battlecannon is to Marines, 2+ to wound and no saves... except for instant death. But I suppose you get used to everything, so maybe it's not really that big of a deal.


As for targeting people with blast weapons and the argument of "oh the other guy picked it up!" thats utter crap. If a bloke gets hit with a fething battle cannon shell his gun isnt going to work now is it? and if it does no one in their right mind is going to use it as who knows whats wrong with it? the sgt point might work although this argument would be along the lines of everyone is a hero ready to be made under the right situation... If the shell lands on the las cannon marine he dies end of story, not the bloke with the bolter standing 3ft over from him........and so i would like a rule to reflect that since GW doesnt come with added common sense i must add it for them. BTW try my version of the blast rule next time and tell me how it goes.

I'd figure they both die. 3 ft won't save you from that explosion ;) but yes, I see what you mean. But I also claim that not everything under the template is shredded to bits, since if so, why would anyone *outside* the radius be unscathed? They're pretty underpowered in any case... isn't the lethal radius of a, say, mortar shell about 50-100 meters with wounding (read potential casualty) radius of even more... battlecannon should manage easily as much. Now it's about 10 meters or even less. Anyway, most weapons are underpowered and underranged in 40k anyway, I think. It's to get some cc action in, most likely...

However, I still say it's unrealistic to be able to snipe at heavy weapons or leaders any more than a normal soldier could (who probably could, easily, but currently can't). If you play so that you nominate target models and snipe with each soldier or vehicle mounted weapon, then I see why you want to make it realistic like that. However, the way I see blast weapons is that they are an abstract hit at the squad, dealing more damage based on how tightly the squad is grouped together, rather than firing at the biggest knot of the given moment which the models represent. Models of 40k represent something between abstract "they're around here" and wysiwyg location, wysiwyg used in many cases just to make it easier to play.

I don't think I'll try the rules, because while they may work in the end, that's not how I think they should work... and playing by a house rule you don't think is logical isn't very sensible.

Gen.Steiner
07-11-2006, 13:39
If the ranges in 40K were realistic, you'd almost never see CC because everything would be killed before it got close enough... usually.