SCGT Rankings and top three lists

[nuttyknatty]

1 hour ago, Pete Scholey said:

This is true. More big buildings 

I brought a whole town.?

[Donal]

2 hours ago, Pete Scholey said:

This is true. More big buildings 

@jay6 came 8th with big LoS blocking terrain.

 

[Dooflunger]

2 minutes ago, Iain said:

Where did I say incredible? This is the standard of most the painters in my local GW. Sorry if I didn't know that there was another secret hobby where you need a BA from Goldsmith's!

Where did I say you needed a BA from Goldsmith's!!??  REEEEEEEEEE!!!!

[Iain]

1 minute ago, Dooflunger said:

Where did I say you needed a BA from Goldsmith's!!??  REEEEEEEEEE!!!!

OK The RCA then, fine! Gosh.

[Dooflunger]

1 minute ago, Iain said:

OK The RCA then, fine! Gosh.

It takes years of practice and education to go beyond a single layer of glaze.. I've heard certain sects of Tibetan monks can achieve this level of mastery in under a year, but I've never seen any solid proof.

[Jamopower]

So where are the propers pics of the best painted armies? From those tiny Twitter photos there seemed to be some really nice forces, but some photos taken with actual cameras would be cool. 

 

Just noticed someone put some photos to Twitter from the displays.

[Sutek]

Alex's models are absolutely fine.  He's gone beyond the basic requirements. 

and for those complaining about TOs not arranging blocking terrain I'd point out that the players had to bring their own terrain.  I won my last game by being able to hide my Cairn Wraith behind a hill.

[Rob P]

1 hour ago, WoollyMammoth said:

Kurnoth, Kunnin Rukk and Skyfires are dominating the game right now and they need to be nerfed in some way.
A. Filling the board with terrain is a good idea in theory but to pull it off is unlikely. Even if they release a cool modular terrain set, most games will still be played without it. its too much to rely on terrain to fix shooting.
B. Since these models are so dominant they need a points increase. I think it's perfectly fine to balance the game by making the units with the biggest impact cost more. It would be extremely hard to make these units so overcosted that no one would use them. They are likely seeing some kind of increase in GH2.
C. Update their scrolls to soften them. This seems to be the way GW likes to update lately ('Secrators, Azyros, etc) but this requires new books, something that these armies are very unlikely to see. 
D. Simply impose a limit in the Generals Handbook on powerful units to prevent abuse. For example; Skyfires: Max 3 per 1000 points. 

For those who say, Sylvaneth would be a weak army without 12 Kurnoth, or that Skyfires are the only thing making DoT competitive, that's not really true, there are plenty of good things. If they stop the "arms race" where each new army needs to be stronger than the last, and take a step back to level the playing field, the game will be a lot more balanced. 
 

What about just having hard counters rather than points increase? Perhaps via grand alliance allegiance abilities at zero cost but with drawback component?

[DynamicCalories]

19 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

So where are the propers pics of the best painted armies? From those tiny Twitter photos there seemed to be some really nice forces, but some photos taken with actual cameras would be cool. 

Yeah I really wish tournaments shared more photos of armies on display!

[Stevewren]

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

A-freakin-men!

I hear the complaints that terrain doesn't matter in AoS and think "bull." Make it matter. Yes, it's hard to hide a mawcrusher, but my mounted heroes hide just fine on my tables,  thank you. 

To add on,  the other shooting issue is the assumption that shooters can always see. It has crept into the mindset so thoroughly that I've played tournament games recently where the opponent shot over a hill to a unit down-slope he could not see.  In a later game another player didn't bother to check individual models' line to a target behind a building and rolled for all his shooters.

It may be uncomfortable, but we have to have the courage to politely say "hang on,  they don't have that target available" instead of letting the LoS be assumed to be all-clear, all the time.

Well, I played @jay6 in round four. Jay had two resin ruined L shaped buildings, both about 12-15" tall with very few windows. I had three pieces that were big enough to hide a Lord of Change behind - plenty of LoS blocking terrain on that table. Of course I was running 4 lords of change so this sounds brilliant. Except Jay had 4 Hellstorm Rocket Batteries (no line of sight required) and a Hurricanum on a bale wind (which was still able to hide even on that behind the terrain we had!).

The game was my favourite game, both tactically and regarding player interaction, it went the full distance for turns and time, and Jay got the minor victory. 

So, yes, there was big terrain around. 

[tokek]

37 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

So where are the propers pics of the best painted armies? From those tiny Twitter photos there seemed to be some really nice forces, but some photos taken with actual cameras would be cool. 

 

Just noticed someone put some photos to Twitter from the displays.

Also Facebook https://www.facebook.com/SouthCoastGT/?fref=ts

[DynamicCalories]

Aha, that was fantastic, thanks!

[Dannathar]

 I have seen people mention this thread has been stolen by people not at the event. I live across the pond and could not possibly make it. But my comments are directly related to the event. I feel the terrain allowed for shooting to dominate, look at the lists they speak for themselves (some more overtly then others). From what I have read and the coverage I've seen this year and previous years. this is a top notch event run by some quality fellas. At the end of the day terrain directly effects shooters we can ask for GW to do something about shooters, but we have the answer. So we can change nothing, you will see shooting galleries and just pass the buck to GW... Or solve the "problem" ourselves, and participate with GW. If a skyfire cant move then shoot in any direction at anything all the time because its standing in and open field then it won't feel under pointed. If it can cover a lane then is forced to move to another lane to stop a hero from capping. then its a choice. As is right now with an open table they are 360 derp machines. Be part of the solution.

[WoollyMammoth]

2 hours ago, Rob P said:

What about just having hard counters rather than points increase? Perhaps via grand alliance allegiance abilities at zero cost but with drawback component?

I don't see how this is possible. Most armies now are doing their own allegiance stuff. I guess if everyone had a way to protect their army from shooting like the tempest lantern, but this would be years off in terms of books updates.

This kind of thinking is the "arms race" kind of solution. Give the next guy a bigger gun. It would be better if they just made the few biggest guns a little smaller and see how that works out.

There is no "counter" to shooting. Its like melee, except your range goes from a 2-4" bubble to a 48-60" bubble in most cases. For this reason shooting should always have much less effective hit/wound rolls and be very susceptible in melee. This is blatantly not the case in a few examples which are dictating all of competitive right now.

[Methuselah]

14 hours ago, Jamopower said:

I guess the test on the point increases for tomb kings was bit unsuccesful. It seems that no one played them. But I guess that gives also indication

More than unsuccessful - it was pointless (pardon the pun) when so many other units or formations are clearly undercosted and didn't get the same treatment.  I am bewildered as to why it should have been considered as any sort of test.

I  played a Kunnin Ruk and I am afraid to say it was the dullest game of AOS I have ever played - by a long way.  This was due to the huge numbers of dice being thrown twice in my opponents turn because the thing was shooting both in the hero phase and again in the shooting phase.  Filling the table with excessively tall terrain is not aesthetically pleasing and shouldn't be considered to be a solution for this - its a defensive solution that might be used by a player who is jaded at being blasted off the table in the current meta, or an offensive option for war machines that don't need line of sight.

My own view of shooting is that at the very least a figure shouldn't be able to shoot if in base contact with another figure and nothing should be able to shoot both in the hero phase and the combat phase.  If GW want to produce a good gaming experience I can only assume the Kunnin Ruk had not been properly tested by them prior to release. 

[WoollyMammoth]

@Methuselah
Kunnin Rukk is a very powerful army, and you only have a chance if you know exactly what to do. First off, you kill his big boss by any means necessary; they will immediately prevent him from shooting twice a turn. Then you kill his general (only possible if house rules prevent them from making their unit champion general). If you can do that the armies knees are shattered and you might win.

[Methuselah]

58 minutes ago, WoollyMammoth said:

@Methuselah
Kunnin Rukk is a very powerful army, and you only have a chance if you know exactly what to do. First off, you kill his big boss by any means necessary; they will immediately prevent him from shooting twice a turn. Then you kill his general (only possible if house rules prevent them from making their unit champion general). If you can do that the armies knees are shattered and you might win.

Pretty much agreed - but very difficult in particular for armies that can't tunnel, teleport etc if the big boss is well hidden.

[Hyperion]

2 hours ago, Auticus said:

Kunnin Rukk should be axed or heavily brought down in power.  Right now it is on par with some of the 40k abominations running amuk.

or not allow it to ally with 3 thundertusks? because if you dont have the ability to take out elites with mortal wounds, the kunnin rukk is just a bunch of dice rolling for 2 hours that will almost accomplish nothing, especially against proper kitted stormcast. 

[Kovaks]

Props to @AlexHarrison it seems like you see lists no one else does, first "all the warp spiders", now this. 

[TheWilddog]

1 hour ago, Hyperion said:

or not allow it to ally with 3 thundertusks? because if you dont have the ability to take out elites with mortal wounds, the kunnin rukk is just a bunch of dice rolling for 2 hours that will almost accomplish nothing, especially against proper kitted stormcast. 

This.  I don't hate the rukk itself.  I actually think it would be fine if they tied it to Bonesplitterz allegiance only.   That way the splitterz could have some power but then you would not have the combined Destruction filth lists. 

[jay6]

My thoughts on LoS blocking terrain are as follows:

 

1. If you're building a list where terrain helps you and the pack allows it then it is  part of your army and you should do it if it helps you. Hellstorm rocket batteries would not be deployed in an open field in a real battle.

2. If people brought 5 pieces of terrain with no LoS blocking and all shooting that could also be deemed gamey as they are stopping you hiding from their shooting.

3. I think taking 2 large L shaped ruins gained me 50pts over the weekend. Build your terrain to suit your army, play the pack.

4. I saw people with horde armies and huge pieces of area terrain so that's just as bad.

[jay6]

4 hours ago, Auticus said:

Kunnin Rukk should be axed or heavily brought down in power.  Right now it is on par with some of the 40k abominations running amuk.

Ruk is strong but if you put some scouts in front of it like shades it stops them moving too far forward in turn 1. I took Shades and 2 wizards casting -1 to hit. I was prepared for Ruk and I think most armies can be too. Cunning deciever for example.

[Jamopower]

I guess for many, it's not the overall power level as such, but the amount of dice rolled per the turn, making the game bit dull?

[wanderingrogue1]

22 hours ago, Iain said:

I think the winning list is hilarious because you can tell exactly what it does just be reading the list. I've seen all those parts separately but bringing it together does show creativity and fair play to them. Up to GW to rebalance some of those points if they're too generous.  

when you say creativity... do you mean " i (wanderingrogue) beat him at the heats with it so he then brought it" ?

 

[wanderingrogue1]

16 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Heck, Adepticon allowed borrowed armies. You don't have to paint,  or even own, your own armies in this competitive "hobby" anymore. Damn sad if you ask me. 

who bans borrowed armies??