6th Edition Balance, Fortifications, and Forgeworld

[Cadre]

Obviously, fliers are an important thing in 6th edition. That's fine and all.

However, the local tournament scene (For TN) is likely about to vote fortifications and forgeworld out of their events in 6th edition. (Although they never allowed forgeworld, GW is moving that direction, as are many other major tournaments)

I am concerned by the effect this will have on some older armies.

Tau and Eldar, for example, have literally zero anti-aircraft or fliers without the use of Fortifications or IA. It is also worth noting that these two armies lack fliers themselves in their own codexes.

It is also worth noting that the skyray deserved an update like the Hydra and it is a damned shame that their Missile Defense ship is utterly worthless against fliers, as is.

Now, even if fortifications manage to stay, these armies will struggle. A single anti-air gun is hardly adequate against, say, a Night Scythe spamming Necron list, which according to their 6th edition Amendments, are utterly ridiculous. (you can disembark from them either before or after their movement...which makes them kings of the objective grab, I think) Or perhaps a Vendetta-wing guard list?

While it is possible to use allies to get around this, those rules too are under contention for the local tournament scene and may not make it in. (though I have heard that they are more likely) I also feel that an army should be able to stand alone. It would be a damned shame to be forced to ally in Space marine fliers to make one's Tau functional.

I personally feel that despite the unfamiliarity many people have with forgeworld and the ridiculous expense of purchasing their books and models, they open up some armies that would otherwise be utterly nonviable in the current rules without some form of anti-air, be it in the form of models with sky-fire or their own fliers for self-defense.

Thoughts?

At this point I personally play DE, and at least have options. But I worry for the overall balance of the tournament scene.

[Denzark]

Taking things out of the main rule book is lame - I can see FW (currently GW still don't allow them in their own tournies) but to take out an integral part of the book is making what you play, not 40K. Why should the removal of fortifications be any more sensible than, say, enforcing no Elites in the force org?

You have 2 options:

1. Don't go cos thye are lame-oes balancing things to suit themselves or:

2. Go and spam as many fliers as possible to use as anti-air.

Or I suppose 3:

Mail them a sample of your latest stool as a protest vote.

[Wolfshade]

Mail them a sample of your latest stool as a protest vote.

I'm glad I'm not a polling officer near you

As Denzark suggests if you can't beat them, join them. Damn it GW you've won my money again and I really wanted to eat this month.

[the jeske]

Why should the removal of fortifications be any more sensible than,
Well am not saying this would be the case everywhere but . some tournaments , specialy the smaller ones , do not have access to , well lets just say everything. space is smaller , there is less terrain , fewer judges [if there ever are more then 1 at all] . because of that some tournaments[again I am not even claming what kind of number of tournaments around the world this is , no data] orgs dont want their players to bring huge Fortress etc. + there is also the problem of size. What if someone makes an uber looking tyranid aegis line , but the coversion makes it 1.5 taller then the normal one , does he suppose to carry a not coverted one for sole purpose of checking line of sight ?

What If I model my ammo/fuel depo with a huge NDK sized wall without windows at the front [and use it for me hive guard as hide point.

Or If I make an aegis line in one pice , but so long that my opponent wont be able to cross in to my deployment without flying/jump infantry or destroying terrain ?

there is also the problem of non GW shops not runing GW terrain[overcosted, people didnt buy it before 6th etc] , it creates a huge unbalance for people who can actualy order it and those that wont.

[Herzlos]

I was under the impression most tournaments had pre-set scenery and strict "no moving the scenery" rules. Following the GW rules regarding fortifications means that the fortifications are placed first, and other scenery around it, which makes it a logistical nightmare for tournament organizers. They'd either need to have a house rule placing bought scenery last (unworkable if the fortress of redemption is used), have someone run round and place scenery independently (pretty time consuming), have next to no scenery (poor game) or have a house rule outlawing scenery (easiest), or just outlawing fortresses (allowing AA placements, defence lines, etc, but no fortress of redemption or bastions).

[Renegade]

It is in the rule book stating that you can, so if the TO are not allowing terrain, it is not a 40k tourney and there is a legal claim for false advertising (in the UK and possibly other €U and maybe US/Canada/AU/NZ), unless they make it a campaign and/or claim it to be only based on 40k rules.

Threatening legal action maybe a bit OTT, but we paid for our models and the game includes everything in the BRB restricted only by Codex and FAQ/errata. The FW thing is bad enough without being told what is and is not acceptable from the official GW rules.

So I would call the organisers out for being out of order and make it clear that they were not organising a 40k game. It is probably a good thing I do not do tourneys.

[jifel]

My local scene has rules that fortifications can be used, and that any "custom" xeno or other terrain must be of the same dimensions as the imperial equivelants, so no 12" tall aegis lines for Nids.

[Sainhann]

I was under the impression most tournaments had pre-set scenery and strict "no moving the scenery" rules. Following the GW rules regarding fortifications means that the fortifications are placed first, and other scenery around it, which makes it a logistical nightmare for tournament organizers. They'd either need to have a house rule placing bought scenery last (unworkable if the fortress of redemption is used), have someone run round and place scenery independently (pretty time consuming), have next to no scenery (poor game) or have a house rule outlawing scenery (easiest), or just outlawing fortresses (allowing AA placements, defence lines, etc, but no fortress of redemption or bastions).

Well with the fact that both the Fortress of Redemption and Bastion are both very easy to destroy.

They are just AV 14 and it is not hard to come up with something to destroy either of them.

Marines have Vanguards who can get Melta Bombs and can Assault after they Deep Strike.

So I doubt that you will see very many players running with either of those.

They might be great terrain pieces but either are worth paying the points for unless you are playing a Apoc game.

Now what you could see is the Defensive Wall which at 50 points is worth paying for.

Can't be destroy since it not a building and it gives anyone near the wall (I.E. 2") a 4+ cover save.

I could see Eldar using it and putting some Pathfinders in it, getting a 2+ cover save.

But it does have it weaknesses; the save is only a Cover Save and anything that gets rid of Cover Saves will be very useful.

Also if you have Grenades you can use those instead of shooting, oh and there is no roll to hit those work out the total number of hits and then roll to wound.

Plus it is only a 4+ cover save and if you put enough fire into whatever unit is sitting behind the wall you will still kill stuff.

Unless it is Eldar Pathfinders which in their own way a good thing for you because they are 24 points for just one. So if your Eldar opponent is using them he has put a lot of points into that one unit.

[Denzark]

I'm wondering about tournament terrain emplacement. I am off to GW for their Throne of Skulls in 2 weeks and will comment on how they do it.

I have played my first game with a Bastion, and was surprised how quickly it got shot to pieces with catastrophic effects.

A melta that pens, with +2 on the chart, has a 50% chance of killing it in a one-er - ie 4+. So that is quite harsh.

[Sainhann]

Which is why you will very quickly finding that players will not be taking them.

You field it against Marines and they send in Vanguards and assault it in the first turn putting around 3-4 Melta Bombs onto it and blam it is gone.

At AV 14 and seeing what the damage is a Melta weapon will be rolling at least a 3 and more than likely a 5 or 6.

The Aegis Defense wall will be taken since you can't pop it like you can the buildings.

GW has not learned that real warfare is not like hollywood and buildings are not that easy to drop.

[the jeske]

actualy from the range melta bombs or meltas are used buildings today die just as fast. We had smuglers here burn an ex military bunker using what you call molotov coctails . but that is unimportant.

thing is with each new codex nid players are going to have to use the AA gun more and more . With each new dex all non meq armies that arent full assault will use the aegis.
and both are going to play merry hell to any deployment or special scenarios .

[Wildcard]

Hmm, just out of curiosity: If 2k points grant you another Primary and Allied detachment, does it grant a second fortification slot aswell?

[Sainhann]

actualy from the range melta bombs or meltas are used buildings today die just as fast. We had smuglers here burn an ex military bunker using what you call molotov coctails . but that is unimportant.

thing is with each new codex nid players are going to have to use the AA gun more and more . With each new dex all non meq armies that arent full assault will use the aegis.
and both are going to play merry hell to any deployment or special scenarios .

Well I do expect Imperial Guard to take it but they only get the Cover Save if you are shooting directly that them.

The biggest weakness with the Aegis Defense is that Barrage weapons will smash anything that is behind the wall.

Space Marines will being back their Whirlwinds, Eldar could field Shadow Weavers, Imperial Guard well Russ' and Artillery.

Orks will have their new bomber.

So with a player puts to much in there they should expect to get shelled.

But the buildings I would stay away from those.

[Gauthic]

Hmm, just out of curiosity: If 2k points grant you another Primary and Allied detachment, does it grant a second fortification slot aswell?

Yes BRB p110 "Bigger Games" 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence

[the jeske]

The biggest weakness with the Aegis Defense is that Barrage weapons will smash anything that is behind the wall.
So its is "bad" in mirror matches[and even that not all] and against marines that decide to run vindicators .



Space Marines will being back their Whirlwinds,
and why would they run those instead of LF[for SW] or their own flyers ?


Eldar could field Shadow Weavers
not going in to the eldar army and viable thing . thats a low AV easy to stun to death unit that takes up an hvy slot.




Orks will have their new bomber.
why would they run the bomber of the the dakka one . the bombing run can actualy kill the bomber [and its not a 1in 100 chance]


So with a player puts to much in there they should expect to get shelled.
tau , nids , GK, SW , BAs [they wont run whirls unless its for some odd local meta] .

But the most important thing is , those are still templates they still roll to scater [both moving and shoting or indirect make the scater rather large on avarge] ,so unless someone tries to play WFB in w40k the kill ration wont be enough .

[AlphaDecay]

why would they run the bomber of the the dakka one . the bombing run can actualy kill the bomber [and its not a 1in 100 chance]

Friend tried to bomb a paladin squad with Draigo. He rolled the wrecked plane result and Draigo "Look Out Sir'd" the paladin and bounced the plane off of his shield. Very cinematic, not very effective. He had two bombers out that game and after that decided the Dakka jet was much more effective. Having been on the receiving end of both types, I agree.