IntenseDebate - G_M

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - Psycoteaz - Looking Back · 1 reply · +1 points

Kirby's taking the Razorbacks because he's building the list to the 1+1 theory - taking a Razorback in each unit gives you 2 decent fighting units in one FOC slot.

My first thought was, if you want the Purifiers to be scoring, why not take Castellan Crowe? At the point before you started throwing around upgrades to eat up points, you had 143pts to work with. You could have Crowe by squeezing just 7 more points out of the list. This does create an issue, though - 8 Troops choices. You could drop a couple of the melta-Warrior Squads and their transports and get back 310pts if I do my math right. With some squeezings elsewhere (dropping Purifier-toting Razorbacks down to Rhinos like Anon suggested), you could then fit in a couple of Venerable PsyRiflemen. You lose 10 infantry, but it's crappy T3 5+ infantry, and gain a couple better-armored hull and some more long-range S8 shooting.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - \"Why Can\'t You Just ... · 0 replies · +2 points

The other thing about the competitive player population is that there's at least a vocal sub-set of them who appear unwilling to tone it down at any time. This is something I honestly don't get. I can understand playing to win regardless of the setting - it's hard to throw softballs when models hit table without being obviously patronizing. However, it's fairly easy to just take it down a notch when you're writing your lists. It's not like list-writing is a skill that's going to atrophy if you don't build the leanest and meanist lists all the time. Hell, the really effective builds a codex can produce are usually identified within a few days of the thing being released. I don't think anyone's going to forget how to build their Thunderbubble, their Blood Rodeo, or whatever.

And, of course, the degree of the problem between competitve and non-competitive players get blown completely out of proportion by Internet kvetching. People posting anonymously tend not to filter the way people talking to your face would do.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - \"Why Can\'t You Just ... · 1 reply · +1 points

The flipside to this is that competitive lists impose restrictions on any player playing against them who wants to stand a reasonable chance at winning. It obliges a player who doesn't want to get stomped to select units based solely on tabletop effectiveness, cutting out aesthetic appeal and background considerations entirely - or at least making them take a distant second. I can see players having a certain amount of resentment for having to choose between only taking the "best" units and getting stomped by tournament-level lists.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - \"Why Can\'t You Just ... · 0 replies · +2 points

I like Par Larsson's "Fluff with a side of win" category.

I think AbusePuppy's point in writing this article is that competitive players get demonized in a lot of the online forums. Somehow, fluff and hobby players manage to pull off taking some kind of weird moral high ground and use it to pillory competitve players.

I think part of this is ego-salvaging. It's a lot easier to devalue another player's win by undermining its legitimacy in some way than it is to simply cop to your own mistakes. If you admit you screwed up, and/or you have a bad list, then the obligation is on you to change how you play or write your lists. If you shift the blame to your opponent, however, you free yourself to continue writing lists and playing the same old way.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - \"Why Can\'t You Just ... · 0 replies · +2 points

I once bought a batch of 20 Space Marine Scouts for $20, which was a pretty good deal, except they had some kind of wierd rubbery goop on the bases. Took me a while to figure out the guy had glued them to their bases with a hot glue gun! Joke wound up being on him, though - the stuff was easy enough to pick off. For 20 pewter Scouts for $20, I'd do as much again.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - \"Why Can\'t You Just ... · 0 replies · 0 points

There's a reason I don't, as a rule, read Black Library novels. I will admit, there are some decent ones (I thought the first Gotrex and Felix omnibus, at least, was pretty good), but there's a whole steaming pile of book-bound poo, too. The Black Library is basically in-house self-publishing for GW, and as such as all the issues that go along with any self-pubbed book. The only difference is that GW has a marketing division.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - Email in: A codex mari... · 0 replies · +1 points

If you get the Space Marine Battleforce, you'll save a fair bit of money getting a fair chunk of what you're looking for here. You'll get a Rhino, your second Tac Squad, 5 Marines that can be turned into Sternguard, your Scouts, and 5 Assault Marines you could also turn into Sternguard. You can cut the bolt pistols or plasma pistols off the Assault Marine arms and glue a bolter in its place. Looks fairly snazzy in a variety of poses, including one-handed shooting.

One downside is that you'll need to get sniper rifles for the Scouts somehow, but trading might be possible. Either that, or you might take them with pistol+ccw and use them as an outflanking unit to harass your opponent's backfield. Ditch the camo cloaks (which you won't need so much using them like this), and you'll have a few more points for some of the things Kirby suggested.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - Email in: A codex mari... · 0 replies · +2 points

A thought that might save money on the Sternguard: There's no need to buy the pewter Sternguard models. Use plastic Tac Marines and bling them up with the lion's share of the extra bitz and give them an extra-snazzy paintjob, possibly with some indicator of their being an elite unit (like BA Vets getting gold helmets, for instance).

Also, if you add heavies to the Sternies like Kirby says, you've already got the AoBR ML-toting Marine to toss in there.

One other thought: instead of fielding 2 separate Tornados and 1 Squadron of 2 Typhoons, do it the other way around. I suppose there's an argument for it either way, but I think it'd be better to potentially pop 2 transports on your first turn than to be able to affect only 1 target at a time with them.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - Threat ranges - What a... · 0 replies · +1 points

Good article. Thanks for mentioning overlapping threat radiuses (radii?). That's a concept I've been talking about for some time.

13 years ago @ 3++ is the new black - Warhammer 40,000 - Pla... · 2 replies · +1 points

Anyhow, I disagree with Kirby's premise that you can easily scale down a 2000pt list to a 1500pt list just by taking a few things out. I find this can disrupt the synergies you built into the list in the first place, and leave you lacking in areas you can't afford to. Also, it's just not very satisfying to take points out of a list. I think it's better to do the opposite - have 1500pt lists, and add stuff to them when you have the luxury of doing so. I think adding points to a smaller list works much better than taking points out of a larger list.

Finally, just to point out something in particular - the double THSS+LR Rock list Kirby said you can't do well at 1500? (cough)Deathwing(cough) ;)

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with G_M_Raziel

People I'm following

G_M_Raziel