Strategic Arms Limitation Talks?? No mega Nuclear spells

[Fear Ghoul]

I've never understood the fundamental argument against the so called Nuke spells. They are designed to counter massive blobs and deathstars, yet it is argued that they do not. Surely that means that they need to be even more powerful, not less so?

In any case it doesn't matter to me. I have only seen a Nuke spell cast once in all my games of 8th. Dwellers beneath to be precise. Killed precisely half a Clanrat unit (40 strong) and a Warlord. Hardly game ending. That is because my opponents and I don't deathstar, and neither do I. I never sink more than 350 points into a unit. Doing otherwise is just asking for trouble.

[Duke Ramulots]

@ LI, yes, you got it!! I dont know how it turned into the argument that it did, I was mearly saying that they do indeed have several oportunities to fail. The post was never meant to cause all of your collective brains to explode.

[Maoriboy007]

I've never understood the fundamental argument against the so called Nuke spells. They are designed to counter massive blobs and deathstars, yet it is argued that they do not. Surely that means that they need to be even more powerful, not less so?.

You aren't taking into account what these spells do kill. High value monsters chariots and characters as well as any non deathstar units (like your average core, who can be killed farily well by other means, tend to be just as if not more more vulnerable to these types of spells than deathstars, so using deathstars as a The constant excuse for these spells doesn't hold that much water IMO.

In any case it doesn't matter to me. I have only seen a Nuke spell cast once in all my games of 8th. Dwellers beneath to be precise. Killed precisely half a Clanrat unit (40 strong) and a Warlord. Hardly game ending..

Recently had a game where a purple sun killed most of my core and a couple of special units generating an additional magic phase for my opponant. So three infantry units rendered almost useless , plus the loss of two additional small special models killed regardless of thier wounds. All while my opponants resources are almost completely intact. That is a massive tactical advantage that hard to come back from.

That is because my opponents and I don't deathstar, and neither do I. I never sink more than 350 points into a unit. Doing otherwise is just asking for trouble.

My opponants can deathstar all they like , because thay play armies that aren't really affected by these spells I should be so lucky. Also an average character can cost 200+ points by themselves , so unless they are wandering outside units exposed , then there will always be a profitable target

@ LI, yes, you got it!! I dont know how it turned into the argument that it did, I was mearly saying that they do indeed have several oportunities to fail. The post was never meant to cause all of your collective brains to explode.

Because your example was oversimplified , cutting out several steps and consequences (of which CC has way more than uberspells) to suppourt your uberspell argument. Both examples start with the terms "to kill in [combat/magic]" but a single close combat attack will not necessarily kill a model at the end of your formula, and uberspell certainly will, where are the ward and armour save and regeneration steps? Where are the single wounds caused? it is actually your fault for putting forward a basically flawed comparison, LInquisitor puts forward a much better comparisen between actual spell, which actually reflects how bad purple sun is.

[Duke Ramulots]

I did not cut out any steps, in cc you roll to hit, roll to wound, and roll to save. Those are the three steps.

[Maoriboy007]

I did not cut out any steps, in cc you roll to hit, roll to wound, and roll to save. Those are the three steps.

I could debate wether or not chargeing or making Base to base contact is a step or whether your opponant counterattacking is a step, but whatever, if hats what you really want to focus on , fine. The issue is that you've merely condensed both approachesinto 3 over simplified steps and not particularly accurately or in a meaningful way that accurately compares the two, intentionally or not , it come off as trying to make some kind of false impression.
Even your comparison is flawed, heres how it should look:
To wound in CC: step1- roll to hit. step2- roll to wound. step 3- attempt to save
To kill with an "autokill" spell: step 1 - roll winds of magic. step 2- attempt to cast spell. step 3- roll stat test

Even then its not erally an accurate description of the two approackes, merely an oversimplified one.

Its more like comparing the concerted effort of a wave of aircraft attacking a city , fighting its defences and trying to hit a target to a stealth bomber just sailing in and dropping a nuke, comparative moral issues aside, both have the same goals but are very different approaches and have very different results.

[Fear Ghoul]

You aren't taking into account what these spells do kill. High value monsters chariots and characters as well as any non deathstar units (like your average core, who can be killed farily well by other means, tend to be just as if not more more vulnerable to these types of spells than deathstars, so using deathstars as a The constant excuse for these spells doesn't hold that much water IMO.

So what if the Nukes also kill these things. It would be bizarre if they didn't. I would hardly think it the end of the game if 5 out of 10 Knights were to die to Dwellers, or were I to lose a Giant to Purple Sun. Characters can be an issue, and that is why you should always be allowed a Look Out Sir roll. Other than that I do not see the problem. As a Vampire Counts player, I'm far more terrified of the character sniping spells than Purple Sun.

Recently had a game where a purple sun killed most of my core and a couple of special units generating an additional magic phase for my opponant. So three infantry units rendered almost useless , plus the loss of two additional small special models killed regardless of thier wounds. All while my opponants resources are almost completely intact. That is a massive tactical advantage that hard to come back from.

Apart from the fact that this doesn't sound remotely believable (how does one template go through most of your core units?), in some games you will just be unlucky. That doesn't mean that things should be nerfed such that you can never lose because of bad luck.

My opponants can deathstar all they like , because thay play armies that aren't really affected by these spells I should be so lucky. Also an average character can cost 200+ points by themselves , so unless they are wandering outside units exposed , then there will always be a profitable target

All armies are incredibly vulnerable to at least one of the main lores spells. Dwellers works great against all T3 or less armies. Purple Sun works against low I armies. The lore of metal works against high armour save armies. I really can't think of any army that doesn't lie in at least one of these categories. And the best thing is, as is so often complained about, they allow no saves. Goodbye ChosenStar.

[Athlan na Dyr]

So what if the Nukes also kill these things. It would be bizarre if they didn't. I would hardly think it the end of the game if 5 out of 10 Knights were to die to Dwellers, or were I to lose a Giant to Purple Sun. Characters can be an issue, and that is why you should always be allowed a Look Out Sir roll. Other than that I do not see the problem. As a Vampire Counts player, I'm far more terrified of the character sniping spells than Purple Sun.

Apart from the fact that this doesn't sound remotely believable (how does one template go through most of your core units?), in some games you will just be unlucky. That doesn't mean that things should be nerfed such that you can never lose because of bad luck.

All armies are incredibly vulnerable to at least one of the main lores spells. Dwellers works great against all T3 or less armies. Purple Sun works against low I armies. The lore of metal works against high armour save armies. I really can't think of any army that doesn't lie in at least one of these categories. And the best thing is, as is so often complained about, they allow no saves. Goodbye ChosenStar.

And when the Chosen-star loses its ward save with the relatively soonish Army Book (assuming the writer is sane)? What then is the rationale for ignoring what has been a save you always get for anything?
Removing the 'no saves' stipulation would make Magic Resistance worth a glance as well as making most characters more resilient to the test or die spells (rather than adding LoS!).

Personally I prefer the army book lores' final spell. They feels powerful, but not overpowered. Of course, this is merely a personal opinion.

[Fear Ghoul]

And when the Chosen-star loses its ward save with the relatively soonish Army Book (assuming the writer is sane)? What then is the rationale for ignoring what has been a save you always get for anything?
Removing the 'no saves' stipulation would make Magic Resistance worth a glance as well as making most characters more resilient to the test or die spells (rather than adding LoS!).

Personally I prefer the army book lores' final spell. They feels powerful, but not overpowered. Of course, this is merely a personal opinion.

Presumably the Chosen would get reduced in points to compensate making them a less attractive target. And even if they were hit by a nuke spell there would be a lesser loss for the opponent as a result.

Magic Resistance is useful against nearly all magic spells. Just not the big ones. Even when it always worked I always thought it inferior to a simple ward save. Additionally a 2+ LOS roll is better than a 4+ ward save against non-combat damage.

The final spell in the Vampire Counts book is Wind of Undeath. I will never cast it because it is just not worth it unless I have nothing else. Nearly every other Vampire spell is superior, and against a massive blob something like Curse of Years is obviously the better choice. Curse of Years allows ward and regen saves, but is also far cheaper and more guaranteed to work than Purple Sun, whilst also using up the enemy's magic dice if they wish to dispel in their own turn.

[Lord Inquisitor]

I was going to leave this topic alone but I feel myself being dragged in again...

So what if the Nukes also kill these things. It would be bizarre if they didn't. I would hardly think it the end of the game if 5 out of 10 Knights were to die to Dwellers, or were I to lose a Giant to Purple Sun. Characters can be an issue, and that is why you should always be allowed a Look Out Sir roll. Other than that I do not see the problem. As a Vampire Counts player, I'm far more terrified of the character sniping spells than Purple Sun.

The point is that Nukes kill knights just as easily as spearmen. But knights cost 5 times as much as the spearman, and most of that is for the armour that they wear and protects them from most attacks.

As for undead, a good purple sun can wreck your day. Last game with my VC I had baited some chaos knights with a death sorcerer with unit of 70 or so zombies, enough to hold them for a turn. One purple sun later, a good 60 zombies died, plus half a unit of ghouls to boot, and my opponent had 12 dice back for a boosted soulblight. Critically my zombie roadblock was then massacred leaving the knights to reform to face my flank. Nasty.

Apart from the fact that this doesn't sound remotely believable (how does one template go through most of your core units?)

Ha! Never seen it? I saw a 3000 point ogre army basically destroyed entirely at the Ard Boyz final by a single purple sun. Flying caster to one flank, IF, max range hit essentially the entire army. 2/3 of the army just disappeared. Typically a VC or Daemon trick as they can get cheap flying death casters and guarantee the spell (although VC have a tougher time of it now). Sure, a bit of luck is needed to get the psun to move that far but with good placement you can throw a sun through at least one unit and more is gravy.

in some games you will just be unlucky. That doesn't mean that things should be nerfed such that you can never lose because of bad luck.

That doesn't mean you should have elements in the game that with a bit of luck can obliterate an enemy army. Of course you can lose to bad luck, but something that can cripple an entire army and win a game outright needs to be pretty damn improbable. 6-dicing psun and rolling a reasonable range is not that improbable.

All armies are incredibly vulnerable to at least one of the main lores spells. Dwellers works great against all T3 or less armies. Purple Sun works against low I armies. The lore of metal works against high armour save armies. I really can't think of any army that doesn't lie in at least one of these categories. And the best thing is, as is so often complained about, they allow no saves. Goodbye ChosenStar.

Chosenstar doesn't care about any of those spells. S test? S5 (warshrine), so only fails on a 6. I test? Only fails on a 6. Even Tranmutation is on a 5+. The only spells that wrecks chosen reliably is 13th and that doesn't work on the mounted chosenstar variant. There's not much point arguing about the Chosenstar as it's not going to be in the game long, but for the record the "nuke" spells don't even slow it down. In any case I would wager quite a bit that the big spells were not designed with chosenstar in mind. (The chosenstar only became popular after 8th was released).

The argument that the uberspells even out is flawed. Firstly, you pick your lore beforehand, so it brings the game down to a big paper/rock/scissors if you have the enemy that your spell will affect. They do not even out versus the various different units, typically they will kill elites, monsters or valuable units as easily as chaff. That's the whole point! They are unbalanced and most do not affect units in a manner proportional in any way to their cost.

Magic Resistance is useful against nearly all magic spells. Just not the big ones.

That's why everyone loads up on those magic res items, right?

What are you smoking? Magic Res only works against those spells that inflict strength hits and they are very rarely used. Out of the Lore of Shadow, only Pendulum actually inflicts hits (and Pendulum is typically considered a weak spell for that reason). Magic missiles are used, no doubt, but for clearing chaff or redirector units. No one attacks main units with simple damage spells when augments and hexes change the game!

Magic res being close to useless is one of the major complaints of the magic phase in 8th.

The final spell in the Vampire Counts book is Wind of Undeath. I will never cast it because it is just not worth it unless I have nothing else.

Same is true of many of the "big" spells in the army books. I much prefer it to the overdone spells in the rulebook but it seems they may have gone too far in the other direction.

[IcedCrow]

I have to provide my own anecdotal piece in here. In the group I game with, if 5 spells are attempted to be cast, 3 of those spells are #6 death spells, 1 of those spell is a buff or hex spell, and 1 of those spells will be one that uses actual strength to hit.

That's why I advocate the house rule where MR always works against spells, even those that say you get no save.

The reason why the #6 spells are leaned on so hard is the sheer carnage that they can inflict should they go off as opposed to the other damage spells which may at most kill a small handful of models.

[Maoriboy007]

Just for the record

Apart from the fact that this doesn't sound remotely believable (how does one template go through most of your core units?

Played a game vs Maoriboy's VC on the weekend and my DP flew up the flank of his army and blasted a purple sun through his army killing 50+ ghouls and skellies, a corpse cart and bat swarm and left me with 9 power dice after the miscast..

So what if the Nukes also kill these things. It would be bizarre if they didn't.

So what would upping their power levels do to these units that are already points in your opponants pocket? Just to ,apparantly , be able to additionaly wipe out the units your opponant can normally keep relativly safe? What we are establishing is that these uberspells already do massive damage, just not nessesarily to deathstars, justifying them as "deathstar killers"doesn't really hold water.

would hardly think it the end of the game if 5 out of 10 Knights were to die to Dwellers, or were I to lose a Giant to Purple Sun...

But have a single purple sun wipe out both in one go is a bit broken. Also both of these units can receive the same type of damage from a well cast magic missile, the difference is you have to actuall roll the wounds first and the opponant can mount some kind of defence, the strength and cost of the spell is often reflected against the strength and cost of the target, this is not hte case with uberspells, which is why no-one tends to have a problem with magic missiles or direct damage spells as such.
As a comparisen one of the whole reasons fear was loathed throughout the last edition was that unless you were already immune to it , it screwed you over way to easily with very little defence, the same principle holds here.

Characters can be an issue, and that is why you should always be allowed a Look Out Sir roll. Other than that I do not see the problem...

Ward saves and multiple wounds would be better.

As a Vampire Counts player, I'm far more terrified of the character sniping spells than Purple Sun..

Vampires are fairly durable which reflects thier value to the army and the consequences when you lose him, a smart player usually starts off with a shadow nerf followed by a uberspell. At least sniper spells do hits and allow saves.

All armies are incredibly vulnerable to at least one of the main lores spells...

I disagree, there is a definite line where armies are equally vulnerable (usually strentgth for swellers but also armies are all equally vulnerable to transmutation) , then there are a few armies which fall below this line in specific areas (low initiative armies) The sole exception is probably chaos, generally elves are generally equal or less vulnerable.

Dwellers works great against all T3 or less armies. Purple Sun works against low I armies..

Dweelers is not readily available to many armies, purple sun and pit are, which makes low initiative units easy game at the moment

The lore of metal works against high armour save armies..

All of the metals spells where armour counts allow ward saves and do single wounds, which no-one has a real problem with them. Also thier points value does not seem to reflect this , a souped up burning iron costs as much as a souped up purple sun for example. I would like to see transmutation allow ward saves and cause multiple wounds but have its cost dropped a couple of points myself.

I really can't think of any army that doesn't lie in at least one of these categories.

Chaos and most Elves are moe resistant to the majority of uberspells. Elves are no more vulnerable

And the best thing is, as is so often complained about, they allow no saves. Goodbye ChosenStar.

Not allowing saves hurts much weaker units that the chosenstar, and linquisitor says it much better than I do why this is wrong. the lastest vortex spells seem to indicate that GW realise these spells are a bit overpowered, ignoring armour is more than sufficient to make these spells good.

[The Low King]

Dweelers is not readily available to many armies, purple sun and pit are, which makes low initiative units easy game at the moment

Can get Dwellers: Lizards, Empire, Woodelves, High elves, daemons
Pit: Lizards, Empire, High elves, Daemons, Dark elves
Purple Sun: Lizards, High elves, Daemons, Ogres, Tks, VCs?

What else?

[Maoriboy007]

Can get Dwellers: Lizards(Slann only), Empire, Woodelves(Lord Wizard only?), High elves, daemons Brettonion Lord Damsel?? (not really low initiative armies)
Pit: Lizards, Empire, High elves, Daemons, Dark elves Vampires , Beasts , WoC

Purple Sun: Lizards, High elves, Daemons, Ogres, Tks, VCs Beasts Dark Elves Empire WoC?

What else?

The initiative test spells seem to be way more available then yeah?

[The Low King]

The initiative test spells seem to be way more available then yeah?

Yeah. But Dwellers is still availible to a fair few armies

[Duke Ramulots]

Bret hero level casters can get dwellers as well Maoriboy, its heavens that only the lords can get.

Dwellers is also a strength test, not a toughness test... Fear ghoul

[Haravikk]

I don't think we are on the same page about steadfast. Steadfast is there to stop things like monsters and heavy cav from just blowing through blocks in one go, and it would still be doing that.

Not if heavy cavalry and monsters, with or without the aid of disruption units, would be able to start blowing through blocks in one go once more, simply by doing that from the side. It'd be 7th edition again; disruption removing Steadfast would only benefit armies with access to cheap fast cavalry or even just cheap infantry. Should my 8 deep Dwarfs really cease being Steadfast because some skavenslaves are on their flank? Or some cheap, ineffectual fast cavalry?

Taking away the general's leadership doesn't help higher leadership models that horde up and giving half points only partly helps the problem.

I didn't say it was a complete solution, but it significantly lowers the requirement to actual get a shot at some of the masses of points tied up in a deathstar unit. It's also very much an army book problem; how many actual chaos lords have 40+ Chosen under their command? Most people I play against are happy to house-rule half victory points and 75% killed victory points and it makes a big difference.

People will be forced to take more (and thus smaller) units and the whole art of the movement phase will be back in the game.

I'm not sure I'd want that. I like 8th edition's changes to allow big solid infantry formations; while I certainly would like smaller formations to be viable too (I do still use some units of around 20) being able to have big units function usefully rather than just being free victory points is a good thing. Like with anything it's the abuses that are ruining it, but mega spells are no more fun to play against than abusive hordes. But effectively getting rid of hordes altogether would not be much fun either.

[IcedCrow]

Not if heavy cavalry and monsters, with or without the aid of disruption units, would be able to start blowing through blocks in one go once more, simply by doing that from the side. It'd be 7th edition again; disruption removing Steadfast would only benefit armies with access to cheap fast cavalry or even just cheap infantry. Should my 8 deep Dwarfs really cease being Steadfast because some skavenslaves are on their flank? Or some cheap, ineffectual fast cavalry?

Yes. yes they should. If a unit is flanked and disrupted it should be disrupted, and therefore lose combat capability. It doesn't matter if it's only a horde of skaven slaves... if a unit got outpositioned and flank charged and disrupted, they should suffer the consequences. As it is now, there is little penalty for moving like a cretin and not caring about your flanks, which totally removes what this era of warfare was all about. It enforces giant blobs meeting in the middle and throwing piles of dice. That's where I have issues with the system. Then again it was written by Mat Ward... who also authored the worst of the 40k codices... so I'm not surprised at the elementary design that enforces elementary tactics and strategies.

I'd like a system that actually encourages armies of multiple units of decent sizes. In 6th and 7th we had the multitudes of tiny little douche units running around trying to outflank each other. In 8th we have the one or two mega blobs meeting in the center and throwing fist fulls of dice at each other.

I've been playing disruption canceling steadfast for two years now. It has yet to be like 7th edition. Not one time. It encourages positioning and movement. I've had people attempt to come to the game and do the "large units of cheap cavalry" and those have been hammered off the table because by themselves they aren't doing anything, especially if you deploy correctly and have your flanks watched by the appropriate troop type, instead of just throwing them forward willy nilly without care to what's coming at you.

Our competitive league is using this rule. I suggest you try it out once or twice and see for yourself instead of dismissing it entirely as going back to 7th... because it doesn't at all. The only time it would allow for a total roll of a flank is if the opposing player was silly enough to leave his flank unguarded and exposed and not target the important units that are coming for his flank to remove their ability to disrupt... all tactical blunders.

I hear so much how this would just take us back to 7th and how it would be super cavalry all over again, and I'm willing to bet not one person has legitimately tried using this system, they are just armchairing it. I base that off of actually having used the rule for a great length of time amidst players renown for breaking systems and not having experienced these game shattering cavalry rollups that people claim would happen. And they have been tried and attempted. Oh yes. Several times.

To disrupt a unit you need 10 models. 10 cavalry models, even "cheap fast cav" are not cheap, and if they are only 10 it only takes one casualty to remove disruption. That's usually easily achievable via a S3 bow. I'd also like to point out that disruption effects occur after the combat is finished, so you need only inflict enough casualties on the flanking cavalry unit to take them below 10 for their effect to be null and void. Fast cavalry vs any dedicated combat unit are going to be skull raped in combat. Again... this is not difficult. Especially with make way and characters moving into the flank to help destroy the fast cav unit.

If thety are bringing several 20 cavalry model units, that's a big investment, and again... they don't have much else on the table either. It encourages a mixed set of units working together... the kind of warfare that I'd prefer I guess to see as opposed to someone showing up with two units of 200 slaves and assorted malarkey.

That's just my opinion. Fortunately I have a group that allows this houserule to exist, otherwise I'd not be playing warhammer (or even "house ruled unpure warhammer")

Meet-me-in-the-middle-of-the-table-hammer-while-i-continually-attempt-to-throw-six-dice-at-the-#6-spell-hammer is fun for grins once in a while but becomes very one dimensional and dull after several games of it. The system can be more than what it currently is which is the shame. Again all in my opinion.

What do you gain with disruption canceling steadfast?

* - Added weight to movements which gives more tactical combinations

* - Punishes just pushing forward without care

* - Discourages blob units

* - Brings cavalry back to have some use in the game. By itself not so much but now in conjunction with decent sized foot units you have a force, and a diverse force encourages diverse play, which lends itself to not burning players out from the same tired thing over and over again

[Duke Ramulots]

A unit of 9 knights errant would be the bane of huge blocks of infantry everywhere. Being able to take three casualties before loosing disruption size they would rule an Icecrow world.

[Židrek]

A unit of 9 knights errant would be the bane of huge blocks of infantry everywhere. Being able to take three casualties before loosing disruption size they would rule an Icecrow world.

Not if you watch your positioning and protect your flanks, and if it does become to much of a problem how about making it so that "if a unit fighting in the flank of another unit is then charged the disruption effect being caused by that unit is disrupted and no longer disrupts the unit whose flank they are in".

[Lord Inquisitor]

Because steadfast is the only thing standing between 9-strong units of knights errant and complete game domination! There would be no other possible counter!

I personally think the game would have been a lot more tactical if disruption cancelled steadfast and I can well believe that people would adapt quickly to potentially dangerous flankers. It is a house rule I'd love to try especially in a competitive setting.

But that's really a subject of another thread. Many others, actually.