How do you beat Kunnin' Rukk mixed?

[Hvy]

I was just reading some history on the Boer war and casualties amongst officers was generally- especially those leading from the front. It was common practice for the leader to wear a different and/or distinct outfit to differentiate themselves from the common soldier so that it was easier to follow them in battle. One of the changes to modern warfare was moving away from distinguishing uniforms to help keep leadership from being targeted and killed. Nothing disrupts a battle line like a like if leadership.
That said, I wish there was some way to keep my heroes from being easily targeted.
Consolation is that at least I can snipe yours back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ledha]

3 hours ago, Requizen said:

Doesn't that break immersion though? The dude standing in front is clearly going to get shot to death, despite watching Aragorn or Gandalf charge ahead in Return of the King. It's much more realistic for him to hide behind units of dudes. The idea of Look Out Sir always seemed to break realism for me in 40k. Like "oh, the Tactical marines magically saw the sniper fire coming from across the map, waited until their boss took exactly two hits, and then started jumping in front of the bullets as they were being shot". Or with blast weapons, like they all piled the leader in a protective dome of corpses and he magically was unharmed by that Battle Cannon. 

Look Out Sir really only makes sense when people are already in front of you, there really shouldn't be a situation where a leader standing heroically in front of a unit survives while they all slowly die behind him from the guns pointed at him.

But it's all just toy soldiers, anyway.

now, in 40k, the guys in the front take the bullets before the guys in the back. Since, in 40k, characters can join unit, it make them well protected against fire, except if the ennemy brought sniper, who are (in the game and irl) especially good at picking appart special character or weapon specialist

[redbeardboss]

12 hours ago, Captain Marius said:

Does this mean if you had +1 save and reroll save buffs on a 4+ save (eg Kurnoth Hunters trick) you would reroll 1s 2s and 3s THEN all dice with 3 or more would pass? Meaning those 3s you rerolled could come up as 1 or 2 and fail? So essentially youd have a 4+/3+ save? I dont think ive quite got my head around that!

no because it says "you can reroll saves" not "you have to reroll saves". so you would reroll your save dice of 1s and 2s and not your 3s. its still the same. you reroll before modifiers. it does not say you have to reroll all the dice.

[redbeardboss]

11 hours ago, Nico said:

That's not an official ruling and quite simply I don't think that this is how the game is played in tournaments. Perhaps it should be done that way. More than 90% of players (including me) were unaware of how damage rolls (you were supposed to roll a single D3 for all the Kurnoth Hunter Scythe hits and multiply that by the number of unsaved wounds - so swingy and dramatic) were meant to be done for over a year.

The purpose of the core rule is pretty clear - so that you don't miss out on rerolling 1s because of +1 to hit or -1 rend etc. (and because rerolling the 2s would be daft and fiddly). However, it arguably doesn't work (it leads to a contradiction of something being both successful and unsuccessful); when applied to concepts such as rerolling unsuccessful saves or the like. 

This is precisely the kind of absurdity/head scratching pain that the rule surely cannot reasonably be interpreted as creating.

It will be played as a simple 3+ rerollable save in practice particularly in a tournament as far as I can tell. Maybe @Forestreveries or @scrubyandwells or @Chris Tomlin have a view.

Playing Devil's Advocate, applying the reroll before the modifier would be a fairly significant nerf to Kurnoth Hunters, which might tone them down a bit, but would probably not avert the clamour for a savage points increase (please please please write a Sylvaneth list of your own before trying to repoint Kurnoth Hunters - preferably increase the costs of the bow hunters only as it is only them in Mixed Order Hurricanum lists, that are overperforming). 

Paradoxical Shield

It's even more the case for the Paradoxical Shield which is surely intended to be a trade off. You add two to the save, but must reroll successful saves. If this was interpreted literally for a 4+ save, then it would lead to the absurdity (and literally a paradox) that rolls of 2 and 3 would be unsuccessful saves, so they wouldn't be saved, but then you would add 2, so they would then be successful (which is a paradox or a contradiction as the saves are both successful and not successful). This is clever and fluffy, but how do you actually resolve this in the tournament? Meanwhile, rolls of 4, 5 and 6 would be successful saves and hence rerolls. Then on the reroll a 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 would be a save.

On reflection, maybe that was what they intended. I'm starting to doubt myself - damn you Kairos - sowing doubts in frail mortal minds! However, it would make this an exceptionally strong artefact in the game (since on the first roll you either save when you wouldn't have done normally, or you have a reroll (i.e. you've lost nothing as you get to roll again; and then on the second roll you are +2 to save, which is colossal). To be fair, there are a couple of standout artefacts out there which are no-brainers; and it's only available for the mortal heroes (who aren't mega-choppy); and the artefacts available to DoT aren't . Maybe it's a joke from Tzeentch at our expense.

Thoughts anyone?

 

 

that damn shield is where it gets confusing because you have to reroll. all other rerolls are a choice im pretty sure. usually it says you can reroll fails, 1,s ect. because its a choice if you had a mystic shield you would choose not to reroll the 3s knowing they will become 4s.

[Grimnaud]

The rerolls before modifiers makes a bit more sense when you recall that in AoS, the save is never modified, the dice are. If you have a 4+ save, then a 3 will always fail. With a +1 modifier, a 3 will still fail, though now a natural 3 would be a 4, which would be a successful save. If you can it would then be a good idea to choose not to reroll those 3's.

With the paradoxical shield, you would be forced to reroll successful saves. So with a 4+ save, and a throw of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6, you would have to preroll the 4 and the six. The 1, 2, and 3 stay the same. Lets say the rerolls are a 4 and a 5, both successful before any modifiers. Now, after rerolls, the modifiers are applied, meaning that the 2 and 3 becomes a 4 and 5 respectively, making them successful saves. The save remains the same. The dice change.

[Pannben]

Man this tread sure did go offtopic  You never talked about terrain, It´s a pain for TOs to put a lot of terrain on tables (and expensive) but It´s an easy fix and doesn´t need rulefixes. 
The biggest "problem" with this list Is the healing of the Thundertusks imo. As an old warhammerplayer I liked the 20point system because It always gave you something to play for even If you knew that you were going to lose, but you still could try to scrape up more points than you were supposed to.

[Gauche]

Terrain is only kind of a deterrent for the army and frankly making a table to counter shooting seems very exploitative. I do prefer to play with 2-4 pieces of terrain that solidly block LoS, in any game. Beyond that and the pendulum can swing too far the other way.

Since this thread I've just been making lists that beat my army and do well against the field. Pretty fun!

[WoollyMammoth]

@Carnelian @Thostos
I realized that setting up in the celestial realm still requires a 'set up step'. (Same thing for Fanatics!)
Still its a cool tactic to be patient and wait for an opening (what I should have done)

@Gauche
COOL! A local on the forum, nice.

You can't really call Stormcast fluffy, its hard to make a bad list with them. I lost because I swung my entire hammer hand into a fanatic then you blew it off the table. I had never played against Kunnin Rukk or more than one Thundertusk before. I was going in blind and I played right into your hand. I was winning on objectives, If I played it safe I probably could have won a major victory, but I just had nothing left by turn 4.

This topic was so I can learn what I did wrong and what I can do against it in the future, and I've learnt a lot. I could have simply made you move up to contest the objectives, forcing your army to spread out then striking you where you are weakest. If I say, had some ranged units appear in the back corner and all shoot at your general, it would have been a much different game. Your entire army is being held together by a 5+ save hero (no wonder you want a LOS save!).

The Gryph-hound thing is hilarious. If i had a 40pt hound I could have had him appear with the rest of my guys, then when your fanatic appeared, my Prosecutors could have killed it before it charges, then I'm free to charge normally. In a related topic, we had mentioned whether you can set up into combat (within 3") which according to the FAQ says you CAN! Unless the rule says you have to be X" from enemy models, you can set up right into combat. So that's another way to avoid fanatics...

The powergamer vs fluff gamer is an endless argument. AoS tries to find a balance between the two. Most events are ranked with painting and best game as tiebreakers and bonus points. Some people like them separate, some people like them together. If you listened to Bad Dice Daily, at the Alliance event the guy who killed the most points also won favorite player, so you can crush face and still make games fun for your opponent. The tournament was ranked on most objective points with a tiebreaker of favorite game votes. This is the trend so, if you are going to smash peoples faces in, at least have a beer ready for them after the game.

"power lists" have the advantage of the fact that most of the time you are playing someone who has no idea what it is and how to deal with it, giving you the advantage. Games take too long and are too infrequent for most people to be prepared for every list they come across. You don't have to make a "counter" list that is strong against that one list only, most good lists are well rounded and can handle lots of nasty stuff. The most powerful tool you have is a plan and tactics to deal with the scenarios you are likely to see. Without a plan you could get surprised and stuck in a bad spot. 

A lot of doom and gloom in regards to tournaments. This isn't 40k people. 5/6 of my games at LVO were awesome. All of them had nasty powerful stuff and were played well, but only one game was I up against a nasty powerlist where I got sucker punched and it was over as soon as it began. The only person to blame for that loss is me because I didn't know what I was getting into and played right into their hand. Most people agree that the experience is amazing, the painting is beautiful, most people are cool -  no one should shy away from a tournament because some people might be overly competitive. You are really missing out.

On the topic of Look out Sir! rolls - leaders don't often lead from the front. Those that did are dead and lost to history. Smart leaders send their troops in first and don't get in range to be shot. Some armies have warriors that lead the charge but those are usually brave warriors, different from the people directing the battle. If a horde of archers spots a general in range, that guy is dead - in the fluff or otherwise. I personally have never had an issue with this, heroes die whether they are shot with a cannon, sniped with arrows, or if something pops up/summoned behind them. In AoS synergy is essential and so you have to have creative ways to keep your heroes alive.

Any game with a winner and a loser is competitive. If you are at a tournament, you are going to see some nasty stuff. The only thing you can do is practice and research. Without any way to compete properly, the game does poorly (AoS launch) but when you create and support the fact that everyone wants to compete, the game can flourish. The game has to invite all kinds of people with all kinds of outlooks, and we all have to work together in the same system. I embrace overly competitive people vs having to deal with a dying system that nobody wants to play. We just have to maintain the balance so everyone can benefit.

I don't get what the big debate is over the rules, there is nothing unclear here. Rules opinions are like Stormcast - everyone's got at least one. 




 





 

[Gauche]

.

[WoollyMammoth]

@Gauche
Not at all. I'm only saying I would probably have won if I played more defensively because I was leading in objectives. I'm taking credit for playing stupid. I'm not saying I will definitely win, that's crazy. The dice gods are too fickle to ever claim that. I'll just play smarter next time.

I look forward to a rematch.

[Carnelian]

On 13/03/2017 at 10:54 PM, Gauche said:

they don't care about the rules aspect of the game by their own words. :[

Just on this point again, from the latest community post:

"This is a new game, set in the Mortal Realms during the Age of Sigmar. It has been designed specifically for competitive, organised play, to support our growing community of gamers out there. For the moment, pretty much all we have in terms of detail is the cryptic video above, but you’ll be hearing much more about this new game, and seeing some of the new miniatures, very soon…"

[Hibou]

- 3 thundertusk huskard
- Savage boss
- 40 man kunnin rukk archers
- 2 units of 20 screen goblins with fanatics
- 1 unit of screen orruks

 

Where is 3 Battle line ? 

[DynamicCalories]

2 units of Goblins and 1 unit of Orruks = 3 battleline under the Destruction Allegiance as far as I can see from the GHB

[Veterannoob]

Don't give them (juicy) targets for as long as possible, take out the boss, then go for it.

[Gauche]

Don't give them juicy targets but kill the model all the way on the back board edge? One of these things is not like the other.  I've never had someone kill my Big Boss and lose less than a full unit in exchange. Plus sometimes he has a nice wall to hide behind.

[Veterannoob]

54 minutes ago, Gauche said:

Don't give them juicy targets but kill the model all the way on the back board edge? One of these things is not like the other.  I've never had someone kill my Big Boss and lose less than a full unit in exchange. Plus sometimes he has a nice wall to hide behind.

well... The Fyreslayers can do it

[Gauche]

With the Tunnelers? Only if you go first. Which requires very, very few deployments for a Fyreslayer army considering their pretty bad Battalions.

[Veterannoob]

you  start tunneled. I've had some luck with it. Though in a team game last year my teammate killed the boss turn 1 with his chameleon skinks so that saved me some trouble  

[Galas]

10 hours ago, Auticus said:

If LOTR the movies followed AOS rules, when Aragorn and all of the heroes led the final charge to get Bilbo time to finish the ring, they'd have been gutted and killed by massed volley fire all targeting them. 

B-bilbo... Bilb... *heavy breathing* ... get me the LOTR fanboy asthma-thing please!

[Hibou]

Gobelin with fanatic ça n'y be Battle line