[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.28112590 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

If the eldar can have an army wide "rending" special rule while shooting why can't a different army have an army wide "rending" like the eldar in close combat? In an edition where CC is all but dead, save for the deamons.
Which army would best fit the bill for such a thing?

>> No.28112657

OP here, my vote would be either for the Carcharodons or the Flesh Tearers.

>> No.28112771

Dark Eldar.

>> No.28112815

use genestealers, WS6 and rending fuck yes

>> No.28112858

Orks of course. Always krump on a 6.

Seriously though. Eldar kinda needed that rule considering how puny shuricats were. Guardians were god awful until BS4 and rend.

>> No.28112907


Eldar may have needed blade storm but they sure as hell didn't need free +1BS AND BATTLE FUCKING FOCUS.

Compare them to Corsairs, for example.

>> No.28113010

It amuses me that it took over 10 years of Eldarfags whining for those exact changes.

>hurr y we worst shootin than DE?
>hurr y we worst gun than SMurfs?

Given the timespan, it wouldn't surprise me at all if one of those whiners had managed to get into a position of power where he could influence the Codex.

>> No.28113070

mono-Slaanesh Daemons

>> No.28113377

They should have given Chainaxes rending. Would've justified taking them.

>> No.28114201


>Eldar may have needed blade storm but they sure as hell didn't need free +1BS AND BATTLE FUCKING FOCUS.

They really did when your guns are 12 inch range. They're actually a mobile army with good close range shooting now. Seriously, who gets mad at battle focus?

>> No.28115125

I thought Tyranids have (had?) that?

>> No.28115206

>Space Wolves

>> No.28117200


People whining over their own shitty codices. Honestly, with 18' at best for Dire Avengers, I don't see a problem myself.

>> No.28117418


Yeah because Eldar aren't taking 80% of the top spots of INVITATIONALS.

>> No.28117425


Is that supposed to be a problem? I suggest that you exploit the natural weaknesses of the Eldar.

>> No.28117655

Chainaxes. Would make berserkers less of an absolute joke.

>> No.28117732

It is not because of AWESOME SHURIKAN GUNS that they are.
Wave serpent spam, on top of some loose rule abuse is doing it, on top of select strong aspect warriors (DAs ain't it).
That said, DAs are good because they are not expensive, have a good ride, and are good at what they do: take out light/medium infantry.
SM tacs would be better if they excelled at taking on infantry, instead of the we do it all and fail approach.

>> No.28117770

>Is that supposed to be a problem?

Yes, it's pretty indicative of a huge problem.

The power creep is getting worse and worse.

5E GKs: 50% top 16
6E Necrons: 50% top 16
6E Tau: 75% top 16
6E Eldar: 80% top 16

Here's the source: http://app.torrentoffire.com/#/tournament/Feast-of-Blades-Invitational/2/leaderboard

This is an INVITATIONAL. That means these are all the best players who won the Open event.

And the trend now is that it's actually extremely uncommon to NOT play some type of Tau, Eldar, or Daemons in the tournament. The amount of non-Tau/Eldar/Daemons players combined is less than the amount of any of those given 3 armies.

>> No.28117807


>> No.28119362

sorta, not completely army wide. But genestealers come with rending, and pretty much all CC units bigger than gaunts can buy it (though its pointless on the MC's).

>> No.28119421

That's a pretty fucking huge problem. When any one army can hog 80% of the top slots (with the majority of the remaining 20% going to 3, maybe 4, of the remaining 14 armies in the game), you've got an unreasonable balance problem.

>> No.28119481

It wouldn't help much.

The issue for most CC troops isn't that they can't kill things in CC, its reaching CC without dying horribly. Rending won't help much if you've got like 1 guy left by the time you actually get a charge off.

That's why Daemons actually work as an Assault army. Their damage output isn't really anything special compared to other armies dedicated melee units, but Daemons can actually get there without having their nuts blown off with some degree of reliability.

>> No.28119537

1 tournaments meta isn't that representative of the whole game (especially a game thats not really meant to be a big tourny thing). Last tourny I went too couple months ago didn't have any eldar players at all.

In practice most gaming communities are much more varied in army selection.

>> No.28119570

And any communities that DO have Eldar players willing to netlist, and who are intelligent enough to play the army and not to make obvious play mistakes (which really isn't hard at all, even idiots can do it with practice), will be dominated by those Eldar players.

Same issue with Tau.

Just because a local meta doesn't have full representation doesn't mean it isn't a problem.

>> No.28119579

Yeah, around people who play for fun.
There are those people thought, for whom fun means crushing other people.
Playing with firends is superior.

>> No.28119580

Do you seriously think high-level tournament players aren't using what they feel is optimal to try to win? They aren't there to fuck around.

If a local scene is lucky enough to lack any people playing the power armies then congratu-fucking-lations to them, but not everyone has that luxury.

>> No.28119597

Ignoring the problem isn't the same as the problem not existing. Just because you can choose not to play against those people (which, for some players, means not playing at all) doesn't change the fact that the game balance is utterly nonexistent.

>> No.28119618

the local meta will effect whats optimal.
If the local meta is tank heavy then an anti-tank focused list will to relatively well in that meta.
But if you take that list into a different community whos meta is more infantry focused you'll not do so well.

>> No.28119631

oh come on stop with the hyperbole, 40k isn't perfectly balanced (what game is?).
But the balance is certainly not so bad that it actually renders any faction unplayable or an autowin.
The skill of the players is still the deciding fact in most games.

>> No.28119670

No, you'll still dominate.

If there was an easy button to beat the top lists, the top players would just use that. They switch to entirely new armies at the drop of that hat if a demonstrably better playstyle emerges, so why aren't these supposed magical countermeta lists dominating?

Its not like all sorts don't show up to these tournaments, but at the end of the day the same few lists still beat everyone and come out on top, even when people KNOW those lists are going to be in the majority and they try to build to beat them.

>> No.28119696

The skillcap isn't high enough to offset list imbalance.

The difference between a shit player and a good player is astronomical, but the difference between a good player and a great play isn't huge simply because the game isn't that complex, and it takes so little effort or intelligence to reach the threshold of "good" that list building ends up being the deciding factor more than anything else.

There is a reason that the same three or four lists make up a disproportionate portion of the wins in competitive metas, and it isn't because those lists naturally attract tactical geniuses.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.