I realized that I haven't played my 1850 point list for over six months and I know I've learned a few things since then, so I thought I might as well take a look at it and tweak a few things so I can get a few practice games in. Especially not in my usual laid back "learning mode" manner.
Next thing on my agenda is Coastal Assault. Four rounds, 1850 points, using the INAT FAQ.
I realized that I haven't played my 1850 point list for over six months and I know I've learned a few things since then, so I thought I might as well take a look at it and tweak a few things so I can get a few practice games in. Especially not in my usual laid back "learning mode" manner.
2 Comments
For this last post, I'm going to go over both various lists and a bit more of my issues with the departures from the fluff. For review, here are the first, second and third posts.
My biggest issue remains the loss of the fear & loathing aspect of the Necrons, since in at least one specific case (Flayed Ones), adding in fear & loathing effects would have transformed them from worthless to useful. Other factors that are contradicted by the fluff have made other units less than viable for their cost. The next big disconnect comes from the idea that the higher ranking Necrons have improved bodies and more "spark" in them to function better than the lower orders. However, none of this actually shows up in the stat lines of the models. Yes, Immortals get the 3+ save (which is part of the infamous power armor as fancy carapace armor syndrome) and some later models (Lychguard, Praetorians, Lords, HQs) get S5 T5, but why the army wide I2? How is it an "improved" body with preprogrammed hyperfast reactions when super Necrons can get butchered by anything in CC before it gets a chance to fight? But, but, the Necrons are supposed to be weak in CC? Well, they still will be weak, I'm talking about a few units and pretty much the ones I'd reject in most cases. Lords, Lychguard & Praetorians would jump to I3 and Overlords (including Destroyer Lords) would go to I4. Maybe Flayed Ones & Wraiths, but for them I prefer the 3d6 Ld test or you hit on a six only. So we aren't talking about something game breaking. An alternate solution, especially reading the fluff about precision CC strikes which accounts for the low number of strikes, would be to allow a Necron to always score a swing, no matter if they died during the round. Again, this is for the higher level Necrons. Last bit of venting: Okay, so they took power weapon status away from the Staff of Light, so why is it we have to pay extra for our HQ units (OL & Lords) to get a PW and then don't get a pistol option? Destroyer Lords should have RCs also, with the option to add a Destroyer body. Speaking of Destroyer bodies, why do we have a Skimmer model that is bigger than any of the Jetbikes I've seen so far and classify it as "jump infantry", a.k.a. big fat target that moves slower now. Why, why, why?. Oh, I can go on and on nitpicking stupid stuff here. So, let's go onto the types of lists. A short break before I finish up (I think) with the Necrons (until they get FAQ'd) for a while. I have to go through my Templars and look for detailing work on top of the known detail work I need to finish before the Coastal Assault tournament at the end of January. You know, like the Terminator heads painted on the sprue, but the models are walking around with no heads....
Interesting series at Wargaming Tradecraft and some spinoff links: Beginners' Guide to Choosing An Army, Choosing a Game System, So You Want to be a (war)Gamer, Picking Your Army, Planning Your Artistic Army, Creating an Artistic Army, and another one: The List (about those who keep flipping armies). I'm still going through these on my round of reading this morning, but the first couple I skimmed over looked decent, at least for some insight, even if I disagree with them. My favorite part of 40k. The rules disputes. There are a number of internet proclaimed "unclear" rules and interpretations on both sides. In a number of these cases, pundits have pronounced on both sides of the issue. I'll go ahead and weigh in on these. Some are "iffy" to me and I'll note them as such because they read one way RAW, but they might be FAQ'd the other way by GW. I also am interpreting some one way in my games because if I'm going to play Necrons for now, I'd rather play them "gimped" for now so that I don't depend on the which way the FAQ blows.
If that ends up taking as little room as I think, then I'll go over some of the fluff stupidities, especially since even with the "refining" (or reboot), it still calls on the "fear factor" without giving any to the army. Continuing onwards through the Necrons from the back to the front of the codex. The first part is here. Again, I'm going to save some of the analysis for the last post. Well, I did Heavy Support, Fast Attack and Elites last time, so now on we go.
Well, everyone else seems to be doing it, but, seemingly as usual, I have a slightly different take on some of the units. So, I thought I would do my own version of how I score the units.
ADDED: I'm going to make some commentary on types of lists in Part Three, also including where I think GW screwed up on the fluff with units. The question got asked me about how does one apply Occam's Razor when dealing with things like rules disputes. So what is Occam's Razor? It is a way of choosing between competing theories and is often summarized as "simpler explanations are, other things being equal, generally better than more complex ones." Another way is that the explanation that fits all the known hard data, as opposed to interpretations of the data, with the fewest assumptions (interpretations) probably is the most correct one. It does not mean the explanation that can be stated the most simply is necessarily the correct one (a common error in application of the Razor), because there may be hidden assumptions that require lots of explaining to support or refute them. Also, pulling in the data sources might be more complicated than just looking in one place and going AHA!
After all, just using our eyes the fact that the sun circles the earth is perfectly valid. It takes observations, with some kind of vision enhancement (telescopes) of a number of different celestial bodies in the solar system to gather the data that refutes a geocentric view. Especially when that view is a mature and accurate theory. For trivia's sake, if you go to a planetarium and enjoy the show about the solar system, the entire setup uses a geocentric model for the same reason that geocentric theory was developed. It is the best way of dealing with bare eye observations of the solar system from the earth, especially with modern computers. Heliocentric theory simplifies the math, so it fits Occam's Razor. The worst thing is that laying out a case like this, even on a simple matter, to overcome existing beliefs, becomes a wall of text even handled relatively briefly. In RL, this took me minutes to figure out once I started studying the relevant rules sections. So, long post ahead. For those who have followed my discussions around the Net about Black Templars and Deep Strike/Drop Pod lists, you have probably noticed that I'm not a fan of Dreadnoughts. Well, actually I love them, but, they just don't work out that well most of the time on the battlefield for me. So, I've moved over to the use of Terminators in the Elite slots which causes other compromises because of the difference in points. Quite simply, Dreadnoughts with a strong CC or short range combat (MM/Ass Can) mission simply die. Put them in a Drop Pod and they get one shot and then die. Usually soaking up some firepower, but they don't last and other than the Ven Dread w/ TLLC & Tank Hunter stooging around my rear areas sniping, I haven't had any success in Dreadnought survival and except for the Ven Dread, I don't think I've gotten my points back out of one.I also dislike the Black Templar gunlines, they are just too fragile IMO for the points they cost. I'm not even getting into the stupidity of Rhino body vehicles and their side armor. If I could do it, I'd take Chimeras for my Marines. At 55 points per Chimera, yep, I'd be running some Mech Marines. Okay, back on topic, the point is that vehicles die like flies locally. Yes, they can do their missions, but a lot of vehicles just die in battles.
|