![]() ![]() This came from a wider variety of places, moving off the stratagem traincar and spreading out into the "Enhancements, Unit Bespoke Rules, Army Rules, Detachment Rules" traincars, but I wasn't defeated by excellent tactical play. ![]() The game felt more like a flowchart, just like 8th and 9th. But it was still badly damaged and took 0 shots from anti-tank weapons - this was achieved with weapons from Plasma on down purely. Rather, it resulted in people using wombo-combos to buff small arms and other non- AT weapons (heavy bolters, plasma) with additional AP and rerolls, etc.Ī worthy note is that my Baneblade did survive into Turn 2 (with 3 wounds left) after popping smoke. As I predicted when we saw the tank article, GW nerfing anti-tank weapons did not result in people taking more anti-tank (or paying more for the "real" anti-tank). The real issue here is GW failed to give terrain guidelines that allow Baneblades to maneuver - OR, perhaps a better way, would have been to adopt the 4th edition rule where Baneblades ignore terrain less than 6" ( iirc) in height when moving.Ģ) Tank durability. While this could be blamed on the player, I know him pretty well and it wasn't really deliberate (he doesn't know how wide a Baneblade is and graciously offered to move the terrain when I arrived, but I declined. My opponent set the board with ruins such that my tanks could not make meaningful forward progress. This is a hard question to answer concisely but here I go, picking the top 3 from each of my games.ġ) No terrain guidelines or allowance for large models. I will post what I posted in another thread, but here are my thoughts - I have played enough of 9th to know how this is going, and I think I gave 10th it's fair shake: GW forcing PL on us but calling it points also isn't something I'm fan of, but I can live with it. My main issue is the inbalance in terms of powerlevel between the various armies but it's not bad enough to break the game, and it will probably (hopefully) sort itself out with regular pts-updates. (Towering is a glaring issue still though.) They aren't perfect but good, a solid foundation to expand the game upon. (Unlike in 9th, most of my games so far in 10th *hasn't'* resulted in either side being tabled by turn 3.) The corerules in 10th are good, as is the decision to lower the lethality. He basically brought scissors to my paper.) They're all been more or less enjoyable, except for one against Tau where I got leaf-blown off the table in turn 1, but that came up to a combination of too little terrain (barely any LoS-blocking) and a really bad matchup listwise (I brought a bunch of heavy vehicles, he brought 9 broadsides. Played 9 games so far and I'd say "so far so good". ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |