Super heavies or super lame?

[Sonofthelion]

Sorry to anyone that enjoys them and I don't blame you the sheer destruction they bring is vile. I've only fought The Lord of skulls . With 7th ed I'll be the first to admit I'm a bit of a noob. 3 ed was the format I played most games in and we didn't even have a god hammer kit for a silly amount of time. So obviously this game was Saturday night against a good friend of mine after we had made the mission to Worcester wargames of trinity street. The battle was hard up till the closing turns.
I understand making vehicles more powerful from older editions. 3rd ed made popping tanks so easy. 9 hull points in a 2.5k. Obviously I have my Demi company built up and mixed it with another formation and a few extra units to make the numbers up. Giving me lions blade. I may have lost but full bs overwatch is a godsend. I think making my army into a battle company expensive but free transports are ace. Thanks guys.

[manrogue]

Edited the title to be less offensive.

I personally have no issues with super heavies and find them easy to deal with all the death stars floating around, but that probably has to do with the 9 drop pods i have available in my BA army! :p

You may think a super heavy is nasty but wait till you face a teleporting invisible centstar.... lol

[jjakaalbinoboy]

Edited the title to be less offensive.

I personally have no issues with super heavies and find them easy to deal with all the death stars floating around, but that probably has to do with the 9 drop pods i have available in my BA army! :p

You may think a super heavy is nasty but wait till you face a teleporting invisible centstar.... lol

I'd second that, teleporting centstars are massive headache. I fought two at Cally, both left me with a bloody nose!

[Agent0range]

40k has become way more lethal over time I think, just look at the mechanic for Destroyer weapons. I've only been playing since the end of 5th, but did play when I was much younger during 3rd ed (so don't remember it that well), but there are a plethora of formations, armies, lists and units that just make models evaporate, and I'd say things are becoming cheaper in points in most books.

To be fair, I think a lot of super heavies are sufficiently expensive in terms of points, and most being LoW give away extra VP's so there's a risk to taking them. Some are stupidly points inefficient. Look at the poor old baneblade, or even the Lord of Skulls you mentioned. 888 points of overpriced junk that can't stomp. Part of this lethality is why I think we're seeing formations that give you free stuff. A demi company with all it's free transports gives a very lethal army target overload, and can take a beating.

[aprilmanha]

I'm not a huge fan of the Lethality really, and the fact I can complete a 1.5K game in 40 minutes to 80 minutes is a little bit boring.
(That's either a close run match where everyone blows everything off the board, or I can wiped out even faster )

I'd prefer to have to go for the 500-1000 points range to get a quick game, while the 1.5k games start to get a bit more drawn out.

If anything to save me needing to cart a huge crate of models around who spend more time getting deployed then they survive in the actual game

[Agent0range]

I'm not a huge fan of the Lethality really, and the fact I can complete a 1.5K game in 40 minutes to 80 minutes is a little bit boring.
(That's either a close run match where everyone blows everything off the board, or I can wiped out even faster )

I'd prefer to have to go for the 500-1000 points range to get a quick game, while the 1.5k games start to get a bit more drawn out.

If anything to save me needing to cart a huge crate of models around who spend more time getting deployed then they survive in the actual game

Yeah I like smaller games too, you really feel like you have to gamble more when you have less redundancy available. LOS blocking terrain helps the lethality a lot, and the main rulebook seems to encourage using boatloads of terrain. When CheZZor and I play at my place, we really fill the board up with terrain, some LOS blocking, and plenty of 4+ terrain. That helps mitigate the volume of shots quite a bit, especially if it's night fighting as well.

I can see why the OP may have had a feel bad experience against the Lord of Skulls if he was running a demi company. It has some daft AP3 gigantic flamer doesn't it? There are answers to most superheavies in 40K, and it's just a case of being prepared to face them. Strength D attacks are generally wasted on cheap multitudinous troops, so a good way of slowing super heavy walkers down is just throwing some sort of fearless/stubborn unit at them to keep them held up and killing a few cheap infantry models each turn. The Lord of Skulls is even more susceptible to that as it can't stomp its way out like a Knight, so you could conceivably hold a Lord of Skulls up for a while.

[jjakaalbinoboy]

Yeah I like smaller games too, you really feel like you have to gamble more when you have less redundancy available. LOS blocking terrain helps the lethality a lot, and the main rulebook seems to encourage using boatloads of terrain. When CheZZor and I play at my place, we really fill the board up with terrain, some LOS blocking, and plenty of 4+ terrain. That helps mitigate the volume of shots quite a bit, especially if it's night fighting as well.

I agree, LOS blocking terrain is really kind of a must these days, the tournament I went to last, all the boards had plenty of it. It's something the club needs more of to be honest.

[manrogue]

I'm massively for LoS blocking terrain, which is why i have my box my 2 big bits of it in. Wait till my new stuff i have backed on kickstarter arrive....

[wako1302]

I have no problems playing LoWs, in fact I have been known to field 5 Imperial Knights in an army and usually two when Allied with the Sisters.

I think the problem with the LoW, is if you do not have one you do not understand the weakness of a LoW, but I am not going to tell you what they are.

But most players seem to be scared by just the physical size of them.

And YES the Knights have played a manrogue drop pod list and it was touch and go for most of the game.

[Alpharius]

I have no problems playing LoWs, in fact I have been known to field 5 Imperial Knights in an army and usually two when Allied with the Sisters.

I think the problem with the LoW, is if you do not have one you do not understand the weakness of a LoW, but I am not going to tell you what they are.

But most players seem to be scared by just the physical size of them.

And YES the Knights have played a manrogue drop pod list and it was touch and go for most of the game.

Yes you do need to know the weaknesses. But, and this is a big but, LoW can take on armies by themselves if you dont super optimise for them.

Lets be honest. Johnny pick up who didnt know he was facing a single knight, let alone 5 hasnt a hope in hell.

Its why alot of people wont play your 4 knight list dave. Its not fun to have these 4 leviathans of metal turn an army to paste turn 1.

I agree you can beat them if you build for it or you happen to play drop pod melta but other than that you HAVE to counter build.

Rant over.