30K List Building Considerations, or Complaining?

Support TOC on Patreon: / theoutercircle
Our bling shop - shop.spreadshi...
TOC Instagram - / theoutercircle
TOC Facebook page - / theoutercircle

[@TheOuterCircle]

So.. this episode was meant to be a "when building a list, consider..." type thing, and instead it just went pear shaped when it came to the writing of the rules. It is challenging not to bring up bad writing when nothing is done to fix it, and they just focus on FAQ'ing things nobody asked for. I just don't get it.

[@jakubgodlewski9104]

I mean it's fair. "When building a list, consider that the writers made only a like four units viable: Cataphractii Terminators, Contemptor Dreadnoughts, Heavy Support Squads, Nemesis Bolter Recon Squads. You might be lucky and have one of your Legion-specific units be somewhat playable with the right RoW." Try not to feel too bad, you are accurately describing the state of the game and those very much are serious considerations when building a list. For example, I have considered it and decided to stick to 1st Edition lmao.

[@sagacity1071]

They won't fix it. We have to do it. Which is fine because we will always make more effort than the greed workshop.

[@jakubgodlewski9104]

@@sagacity1071 It isn't fine. It's necessary.

[@DeusExMachina10001]

@@jakubgodlewski9104 Terminators are the crux of the problem IMO, especially WS5 Cataphractii variations. They're incredibly difficult to counter with anything other than Contemptors, (or the odd Leviathan but those are very slow), other WS5 Terminators, or Lascannons, and that's the primary reason why the meta is the way it is right now I think. Even WS4 ones are still meta defining. With 10-20 wounds (5-10 man squad), a 4++ and near immunity to Templates, they just mulch pretty much every other infantry unit, and require an absurd amount of Heavy ranged fire to deal with. If they've got Line with either Pride of the Legion, a Herald, or a Command Squad Banner, it's just that much worse. The saves and even the Heavy reroll against Templates could potentially stay, but them having 2 wounds just puts them in their own category. That's the primary reason Lascannons and Contemptors are everywhere I think (other than needing an answer to opposing Contemptors), and it's the reason why I take 2 units of 3 Rapier Destroyers in my "serious" NL list. Without WS5 Terminators outside of Command Squads, the NL's best option is generally to destroy the Cataphractii death star's transport as quickly as possible and just kite the unit.

[@Red2Productions]

Lack of plastic Despoilers could also be a driver as to not seeing as many. As a “new to HH when v2 came out” player, a bunch of list building for me is what can you get cheap!

[@sagacity1071]

This. I really want side arm and melee weapon kits like they have for ranged weapons.

[@williamtimonen6814]

the MK3 kit really should have been the kit for melee bodies with the basic melee weapons.

[@einrauser6103]

This is an underrated point. It is expensive to field non-tacticals unless you have access to lots of left over firstborn bits.

[@clonetf141]

Listening to this, I am happy Macca stopped playing 40k. 10th ed pisses me off on such a deep spiritual level when I look at its rules, lord knows what it would do to Macca

[@skywatcheradept]

I haven't played a single 10th ed game, but played a lot of Heresy 2.0 & Titanicus instead.

[@Wanten-the-stormtrooper]

Yeah, the oversimplification of weapons options and the obliteration of subfaction rules - and that's not even getting into GW's treatment of Heresy units and further forcing the Primaris crap down our throats by purging most of the firstborn and making the rest terrible - grind my gears to such a degree that I just can't hack it with 10th and am staying with 9th until I can find the time to start reviving 4th with the Chaos 3.5 codex.

[@mrnobodypresents1349]

Give ProHammer Classic a check, think its suppose to work with anything from 3rd to 7th. Might help.@@Wanten-the-stormtrooper

[@egnaroelprup]

This is the overall problem with the current era of gw games, theres no reason to take suboptimal lists because the games are written poorly from the outset. People blame competitive but competition is a symptom of the problems not the cause.

[@lostalone9320]

I think the issue is actually slightly different - We have gotten really good at finding optimal lists, and GW has not gotten better at adjusting to compensate. It would be better if GW were less incompetent to begin with, but to be fair it is very hard to make a game system that is genuinely well balanced at release, and still exactly as well balanced after five supplements. But GW do have a choice in how they respond to metagame shifts, and how they correct and improve on existing rules. A huge issue for GW games is that we play RAW. We kinda have to do that, because we don't always know our opponents personally and even when we do it's pretty shitty to show up for a game only to refuse to play because the other guys tournament legal army isn't to our taste. But GW don't really see themselves as custodians of a game system, even when their terrible design is causing problems. So the RAW stay not great, and we all have to follow them even when there are fan-made fixes that are very good and address the problems. Unless they get the GW stamp, they kinda don't exist except in your group of friends. If I were GW, I would seriously consider making an official "Tournament" supplement which makes small tweaks to every list every 6 months or so, and slowly pushing towards live-updated lists as being the standard for their games. They have always been scared of upsetting little Timmy who only has one army book which is 4 years old and gosh he'll just be so upset if his army isn't allowed any more. But that just means that at any given time about half of their model range is just trash tier, and at best they might get reworked in the next edition but might just be trash forever.

[@ryanhall6043]

The lack of plastic kits and budget contraints have majorally effected my lists. Things like destroyers are off the cards, unfortunately

[@WindlordRyu]

Legion Veteran Squads are actually just Recon Marines who've deadlifted their Nemesis Bolters long enough to move and shoot.

[@liammorgan1413]

While I can't attest to anything regarding ZM, with regards to regular HH2.0 games I haven't seen a lot of cases where what looks good on paper plays as well as advertised, and vice versa. Nemesis Bolters in particular come to mind for the former, be they in Recon Squads, Veteran Squads, Seeker Squads, or NL/RG Scout Squads (Prey Sight and Infravisors make them pretty lucrative options there) - paying 10pts per model racks up quickly for a weapon that needs LoS to the exact model you want to remove from the board, and that's not even a guarantee if the target is an apothecary with 4+ FNP due to sitting on an objective in a squad with the Heart of the Legion special rule. If the question is whether I want to be fielding 255pts worth of single-shot mid-strength weapons in a 10-man recon squad for that purpose alone, or if I'd rather just split it into two 5-man squads for 145pts each, I'd sooner pay extra for the latter for the utility of being able to engage more targets with Pinning if possible, and to minimize losses should one squad get lit up by the likes of a plasma mortar. Conversely, on the topic of Land Speeders and Sabre Tanks competing with one another on the basis of movement and points, I will just flat-out say that Sabres are anemic for what they bring to the table in that Fast Attack slot if it's firepower and longevity you're after (even with the stock stub autocannon as its cheapest option). You might get some single-use action with the rocket launcher upgrades, but beyond that you'll likely get more mileage out of the pintle mounts than you will with the hull-mounted gun. Comparably speaking, you could be getting lascannon javelins or dual-grav-gun speeders (plus hunter-killer missiles) for the same points cost and they'd probably last longer into a game as mobile fire support. Composition-wise, I wouldn't be snubbing units too quickly as not being worth it, even if it requires taking them in large numbers. A prime example of this are rhino-centric mechanized lists, which most people (especially those who stack all of their AT into one or two units for expediency) struggle to deal with through sheer volume of cheap metal boxes that may or may not be packing multi-meltas in addition to the trigger-happy squads inside. Likewise, for all that people will crow on about how free Intercept reactions make flyers worthless, a good chunk of them also forget to bring Skyfire weapons for that purpose when they do show up (with the added irony being that one of the most cost-effective means of AA right now is a flyer in itself). I will echo the sentiment of others however that what's cost-effective on the tabletop isn't always going to be cost-effective in monetary terms (with one other key example being the oft-cited despoilers of course), and beyond jetbikes there's nothing else in Fast Attack for Legiones Astartes that comes in plastic anymore.

[@stuartwren6811]

As a long-time HH 1.0 player, due to a mix of circumstances and a lack of enthusiasm for 2.0, I have only played one game of the new edition. I am looking to get back to playing now the hypetrain has moved on but I am finding it very hard to build any type of fun lists as well. Without actually experiencing it (maybe im listening too much to other people on the interwebs), my BA day of revelation 1.0 list looks like it'll get obliterated when they deep strike in. My White Scars chog bros list also sounds like it'll be a sh*t show too. In the novels, it was said that White Scars don't put their guys in dreadnoughts (this was retconned when book 8 came out and they sculpted a new white scars contemptor that they had to sell, so they sh*t on that too) and I refuse to either, now I'm at a major disadvantage before I start. Like you said, every list kinda looks the same, wheres all the flavour?? To run my White Scars, I think i'm going to go without a RoW, which is bullsh*t seeing as these RoWs are meant to be the flavour. Horus Heresy Vanilla 2.0.

[@TheAwesomeviking]

Ive found during about 10games, caveat being played against friends not super competatively. Drop list does better than many think, even against intercept, because of terrain. The typical reaction 10man lascannon team is OP yes, but in actual games it exposes itself for the advantage. Contemptors are powerful but 1 per 1k works well. Vehicles under AV14 however are awful, and flyers are....yeah. Having played 40k from 4th to 6th, and HH since 2017, and getting more into HH with 2.0 I find it lots of fun, with varied lists.

[@DeusExMachina10001]

HH is fun as long as you don’t have to deal with power gamers, cuz the game at the top end is just a complete mess. For instance, Death Guard have the Reaping ROW that lets them take like 70-80 lascannons just on Heavy Support, and Stone Gauntlet just shouldn’t exist.

[@lostalone9320]

Obviously HH2 has a specific problem with dreads, and that does need to be addressed separately, but a broader conceptual problem is that we have a bunch of legions and not enough ideas about how to make them unique. I play White Scars too, and holy crap do we suffer from exactly this problem. It's nice to have more movement, but the developers don't seem to have thought of what we were supposed to do when we get there. And in any case, other legions can deep strike or teleport, or they have transports, and anyway they can take bikes too.

[@TheAwesomeviking]

@@DeusExMachina10001 Yeah It`s all a fun game if you play for fun, and more narratively. I am running a reaping list next week, with a 5man lascannon team and a 8man Heavy volkite team in the troops section. WHich shows how the rite of war can be fun for list building, if you don`t go all in power gaming.

[@DeusExMachina10001]

@@TheAwesomeviking That's how u do it. Like I just watched an SN batrep where the channel owner said he just won't use Stone Gauntlet because it's too good and there's no real way to parse it down. Others, like the Reaping, can be modulated to be anywhere from fun and playable, to tabling the opponent turn 1 or 2 because your whole army consists of Lascannons and Volkite Culverins.

[@jeransangdelion]

Brutal needs to be adressed as they really fucked things up with this rule. A Thunder hammer costing the same as a chainfist or a paragon blade is a questionnable decision at best. Even worse: who considered the gravis chainfist being an "upgrade" over the regular gravis powerfist despite loosing brutal 3 ? On primarchs this rule is absurd and sets the ones with brutal a whole world above those who don't. Ferrus curbstomping the likes of Ascended Fulgrim, Lion and Sanguinius just thanks to his Brutal 3 hammer is stupid. He also has a good shot against Russ despite Russ belonging in the absurdly OP cathegory. Brutal needs some serious balancing.

[@DeusExMachina10001]

I say just give Brutal X to all the Primarchs. In the lore even Corax could scythe his way through Gal Vorbak like nothing. Sanguinius should not have to spend multiple turns trying to kill a mere Cataphractii squad. Maybe represent the physically stronger Primarchs like Mortarion or Vulcan with Brutal 3 but fewer attacks and keep WS as the primary thing that differentiates the S tier fighters like Sanguinius from guys like Lorgar.

[@Dlishfishportmelbourne]

A lot of good points here. Darcy corrected a list I made for ZM. I had a tactical support squad as my troop choice and was very surprised when I was told I cant take them as troops but there part of the troop choices :/

[@sidewinder3694]

Hey bro I wanna get a couple of your prospero shirts off your bling shop but the graphic looks so small on the website. Do you have any pics of them in real life?

[@XX-jn8co]

The point about not wanting to narrative yourself into a punching bag is a good one, I've got a fairly fluffy main army that's not built to be a specific force but is built to play right for the Legion and that I enjoy playing in fluffy ways, I'm currently tuning it up into a more focused list because the standard of list building has got more metagamey over the past year and frankly no one wants to lose constantly. I'm not going full Contemptor & lascannon HSS spam but yeah, it's not great to have to choose between narrative fun and having a shot at winning now and then.

[@LeopoldZ]

Great video! I love HH, but I wouldn't play it without some sort of house ruling. Although I don't agree with your analysis on a lot of the units mentioned. Speeders are really durable with their reroll to shroud, seekers put out a lot of hurt and can outrange a good amount of units and despoilers have worked great for me. Bikes need some help, but they aren't as bad as some seem to think. I think the biggest problem with the HH are the missions, they're pretty much exclusively kill points, which encourage big hammer units and lead to pretty static games. I like reactions, close combat units never shot their weapons in the previous edition either, since it made your charge longer.

[@TheOuterCircle]

Speeders only gain shroud if you use the reaction for them, and it’s competing against the return fire reaction…

[@LeopoldZ]

@@TheOuterCircle True. But you're not always armed properly to shoot back, especially if your opponent is clever about it. Sometimes It's also more important to survive. Shooting back is very powerful, but not always the right call :)

[@DeusExMachina10001]

WS5 Contemptors are necessary IMO because there are some legions that just don't have any good way of contesting WS5 Terminators, and they are just everywhere right now. A melee Contemptor is really the only way to do it outside of either a Command Squad or just hosing them down with lascannons. If everyone had access to decent Terminator elites that'd be one thing but some legions just got shafted on that front. Something like Knights Cenobium (especially Broken Claw ones good lord...), Suzerains, or Varagyr is going to have, say, a White Scars player scrambling for countermeasures.

[@or6397]

Yeah game needs a massive FAQ, at least.

[@bryanscott8528]

I play WE berserker assault, my troops aside from Rampagers is entirely comprised on cheap cheap despoilers (quite successfully), just a sea of bodies backed up by preds / sicarans. Though, to the point of the video, I am basically the only one i've seen in my many games which runs despoilers at all.

[@knoxminis1211]

The funny thing is that it was the cool ZM boards (the now out of production 30K Channel) and games from HH1 that heavily steered me towards HH2. I've only played 2-3 games of it so far, and I hate the deployment points part of it. Just let me play. game with my cool models! Someone should really create a better ruleset for ZM. I like Panoptica, but it is disappointing how they do not touch the core rules of the game in what they do. They made some ZM missions, but have not fixed anything about it. And I suspect that GW will probably never touch the ZM rules ever again.

[@tentativeorchgaming9305]

This reminds me of a lot of the issues with 6th and 7th edition 40K where people could take the invisible riptide or wraithknight, but thankfully in my local playgroup we're playing our armies more narratively. My last 2 games were against word bearers with a pretty balanced wide list and world eaters running 2 20-man despoiler squads with chain axes and apothecaries backed up by like 8 or so predators. I have been experimenting with a bunch of different things in salamanders, so I'm trying to run wide lists. The only things I take in every list are 1 5man unit of firedrakes and a 10 man unit of pyroclasts with a powerfist along with their respective transports. Who out there is running las cannon heavy teams and massed dreadnoughts and terminators? Does this happen in events?

[@PB-re1mm]

Great videos! Love the complative nature, and analysis of the armies. Buuuut says HH space marines is vastly more complex army comps than Old World. 2 videos later says HH Marines are basically building all the same....

[@TheOuterCircle]

You’re missing the context, I fully believe that legion builds commonly devolve into similar lists at their core, but ignoring the meta builds you have 4/5 times as many possible units in the game, as well as infinite combinations of how to use them. Fantasy, with the very strict ratios of what units fill what slots will exhaust those options far faster than Heresy. Both statements are true at once. Heresy can be samey if trying to build for efficiency, but otherwise has greater potential variety.

[@PB-re1mm]

@@TheOuterCircle Ooooh so now we're switching from realistic armies to potential. So Old World has 245 units across all the armies (most ranging from 20-30 units) just base game. Heresy has 270ish units total across all armies (most non marine armies have 17-25 units) So its arguably very close. If you include the pdf forces for old world, that's an additional 174 units. Which just buries Heresy in options.

[@TheOuterCircle]

@@PB-re1mm problem is, each faction itself is limited in the number of units, and you have far more factions, in varying availability, to spread those numbers over, and THAT is what leads to the same units popping up time and again.

[@PB-re1mm]

@@TheOuterCircle An interesting arguement to be sure but I think if you look at the "Variety" of the Legions it might surprise you. HQ for Space marines is 7. Old world average is 6.33, Troops 10 to 8.77, Elites is 9 to 7.88 and the real skew is 19 heavy options, 10 of which are duplicate tanks so realistically its 11 to 4.5. I didnt even bother adding other heresy factions cause that would've tanked the averages for marines. That's not even breaking down other redundant marine unit roles. So while yes the "19" heavy slots give you the biggest supposed variety it's laughable to see it as different. In fact on a realistic standpoint I'd argue if you took the majority of actual marine lists it would have less variation than old world. We wont see the faction spread for a bit with old world but I'd still wager it's more varied then.

[@TheOuterCircle]

@@PB-re1mm HQ for marines is 7? Well, not including characters or unique legion consuls, it's Praetor, Centurion, Master of Signals, Moritat, Mortificator, Praevian, Champion, Nullificator Primus, Librarian, Esoterist, Vigilator, Warmonger, Armistos, Primus Medicae, Forge Lord and the one that isn't a Seeker marine. That's more than 7 right there, but if we include legion ones, we add 1 for DA, EC, WS, IF, SoH, AL, WB and randomly 3 for SW, as well as additional upgrades for Praetors in Iron Hands, Iron Warriors and Thousand Sons. Also, terminator unit types and command squads to increase the options again. Where are you getting your numbers from?

[@Knekt-u7f]

Where does it say you can’t move over units with Cavalry antigrav units?

[@TheOuterCircle]

Grav sub-type.

[@Knekt-u7f]

It’s not in my book. It doesn’t say you can, but it doesn’t not say you can’t either.

[@Rabbitsarenotfood]

@@Knekt-u7f In the UK version of the books, antigrav and skimmers fall under separate sections, skimmers can "pass over friendly and enemy units but may not end their turn on top of either", antigrav makes no mention of it, so you can infer that they cannot do the same.

[@TheOuterCircle]

In the grav sub type it mentions cover. Cavalry sub type adds more rules. In both sub types you have different rules for terrain, one is unaffected penalty wise, and the other ignores it for movement. BUT nowhere does the unit type gain “may move through friendly units” which means you must go around, as in the event of no rule being written, you must refer to the default for all units, which is that no unit can move through another.

[@Knekt-u7f]

@@TheOuterCircle no ones playing it like that(bat reps on YT, events here in Scandinavia) not that they disregard the rule, but more that it feels natural and makes sence that they can, and not looked it up. I mean all art I’ve seen they clearly are flying.. Solution would be to shorten the flight stand on the base, so they slick the base and los hide(not cover)

[@LiliaArmoury]

as someone who's not yet taken the plunge on heresy namely due to it's cost i keep looking at what's going on with rules for the game and it keeps leaving me thinking "maybe next year" i nearly took the plung last year when cults and militias pdf came out but stopped because i couldn't get my head around how do i kill marines in this edition. that question has also been one i have been struggling with from a list building and army restoration stand point for 10 edition but atleast the core rules and indexes for that game are free

[@Flamethrower1942]

Any know any erm proxy stuff for DA specific units ? Plasma incinerators etc

[@ghostjager8190]

If you want prints or actual proxies?

[@Flamethrower1942]

@@ghostjager8190 Prints like the real thing or close as .

[@SerYordles]

Suppressors do in fact increase muzzle velocity and accuracy. You add length to the barrel which gives the gasses propelling the round more time to expand in turn creating a greater velocity. Some of the downsides to them are gas blowback towards the operator and added length to the weapon system.

[@TheOuterCircle]

That’s… not at all how they work. Powder is designed to be burned by the end of the muzzle, and is spread apart and dissipated inside the suppressor, which doesn’t hug the round allowing gas to bypass around it and bleed out, adding zero force to it. You do not simply add barrel length either for accuracy, that’s an old wives tale as powder burn time is matched to the barrel length, too little and unburned powder and flaming gases violently spray out with a large flash causing tumble to the round. Too little powder for the length of a given barrel causes the round to lose propulsion whilst still undergoing drag from rubbing against the bore, lowering velocity.

[@SerYordles]

@@TheOuterCircle I am not going to sit here forever and argue with you since you can yourself spend a little time researching and learn it but yes, adding length does indeed add velocity. This doesn't have endless effectiveness but firing something like a .223 round out of a 10.5" barrel vs a 20" barrel will give you a faster muzzle velocity out of the longer barrels. Rounds are not filled so precisely that they are made for a specific barrel length as most manufacturers offer a majority of the guns they make in various barrel lengths. They use unburnt gunpowder as an indicator of someone being shot at close range so clearly it is not all burnt up before the end of the barrel. Modern suppressors do give the advantage of a longer barrel chamber allowing for more gas expansion. This isn't WW2 where suppressors use rubber baffles.

[@TheOuterCircle]

@@SerYordlesoh dear, what did I say about matching the barrel length to the powder? I have 17 years of formal firearms training and production up my sleeve, what you’re saying is factually wrong, as you’re taking something like 5.56 built for a 20” barrel and being used in a cut down 10.5” barrel. I’ll tell you what, put .300 blackout in a 26” barrel and measure the muzzle velocity on exiting the bore and you’ll find it is worse than .300 blackout on a 10.5” barrel. The ratio was worked out in the 1600’s and slowly refined into mathematical formulas in the 1800’s.

[@TheOuterCircle]

@@SerYordles and in the interest of transparency, The study, “Effects of Sound Suppressors on Muzzle Velocity, Bullet Yaw, and Drag,” arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1802/1802.05748.pdf was written by four researchers based on tests they conducted at the Fusilier Complex, a private shooting range in Lafayette, Louisiana. Using rifles chambered in .300 Win Mag, the researchers shot four different factory ammunition loads; three of the loads were fired through rifles equipped with different models of suppressors, while the fourth load was shot unsuppressed. Among other variables, muzzle velocities were recorded for each load. Compared to the rifles and loads with no suppression, many of the suppressed loads showed a slight decrease in fps, from 10- to 30-fps slower." It is to be noted that very particular loads did have an increase in the same study, but they were outliers. I myself did a ton of testing with suppressors (legally) including the use of them on minimi and mag58 and they had really bizarre effects, namely with cyclic rate. Just remember, suppressors are not barrel extensions, they don't add additional twist-time nor do they have enough positive sealing to increase muzzle pressure.

[@Darkfist007]

I take despoilers because brr melee squad is fun. Also I would take scouts if I could get a good STL for scouts... >.> I ain't paying ebay prices for a box.

[@volcano3493]

1. Use of house rules are recommended for private play as well as tournament play. 2. Jetbikes & Bikes should leave the battlefield at the end of each turn like aircraft does in Legions Imperialis. They are just fast enough to quickly cover the distance of a tiny 30K/40K battlefield. While they are in play they should also be more difficult to hit like the above mentioned aircraft. Engaging them into close combat would also need special rules as a speeding bike wouldn´t stick around long enough for you to hit them X times with a model. 3. Turn dreadnoughts into vehicles. Dreadnoughts were supposed to be entombed heroes of the Legions/Chapter. So having superior stats than a tank gunner would be fine. However get rid of their forcefields or also give tanks force fields.

[@DeusExMachina10001]

Honestly just taking Sunder off of lascannons would go so far in making vehicles viable. Maybe let the rule stay on Ordinance lascannons but a Heavy Support Squad should not be essentially guaranteed to kill a Kratos in 1 round of shooting.

[@LiliaArmoury]

while from a terrain maker perspective i like the idea of playing zone mortarlis it's rules sound horrible

[@ero9841]

The plasma cannon jet are sleeper good. The best way to run plasma cannons. Kratos tanks are fantastic aswell. I haven't been able to make land speeders work. Thats a bummer Scorpion tank and snipers hard counter lascannon weapon teams.

[@Sommeill]

Surprised you did not bring up the Nemesis Recons vs Lascannon HSS vs Scorpius extravaganza.

[@calgarn059]

Is zone mortalis where the tactical support squad becomes useful?

[@TheOuterCircle]

Sadly not, I took the Mournival boosted dragons breath flamer tactical support squad, 10 torrent flamers with pinning firing down a hallway, zero kills.

[@fransaacs]

Yep. The Zone Mortalis deployment points system is poorly balanced and unnecessarily complex. As is, reading reviews and watching KZbin responses similar to yours has put me off committing to the latest version of ZM in a serious way when I believe it really should have been developed as a gateway to the whole game. Meanwhile, we've played a few casual games in the spirit of Zone Mortalis, using the free-to-download Kill Team lite rules and Intercession Squad profiles, a box of Legionary models and a set of Cursed City tiles. You're not on your own here - I feel your frustration.

[@randallmusgrave5138]

SO... Dreadnoughts.

[@biguschungus3989]

On that note, all I gotta say, is fuck iron hands

[@DemoMan465]

Assult marines can use their jump packs in zm. There are literally rules to allow that. But both players need to agree if there is a ceiling or not before. I think your problem is you are trying to do zm for a tournament, when it really isnt good for that. You really need to play it fluffy to have any kind of good time, just like normal heresy.

[@amg5787]

Honestly don’t want to play HH2.0 cause I want to play Thousand Sons, and it seems like it’d be an uphill struggle every game. I have the rules/books for HH1, but, hard to convince my 40k group to switch to that. Even though we’re playing 7th edition.

[@andreasesser4641]

Vaush is projecting so hard in these debates. Its actually funny.

[@toombs24]

I would love to see you write a FAQ & Errata, something to compete with Pano. OR your take on a full rules re-write! Also, unless I'm not seeing it, Why is there no rules for Veterans with jump packs, bikes, and grav-bikes?

[@Flamethrower1942]

Macca do you and your close gaming buddies mostly still play V1 ...it seems a better edition wasn't perfect but better than V2

[@Knekt-u7f]

This is so situational how your group or region plays AoD missions. I don’t experience any of what you describe. All events here is purely objective based, can’t win a game unless you can take and hold. Even friendly play we do objectives. Just deploying and shooting stuff for several turns is just boring, imo. 4 turns is more then enough, just makes you have to engage first turn instead of hiding for two turns in a 5-6 turns mission. I feel you probably would have a better liking to 2.0 if you had not played 1.0. I started with 2.0 so have no “this was better and suchlike “ Also ZM is crap, period.

[@TheOuterCircle]

Hang on tho, that's not the missions as given in 2.0, that's your group working around the limitations of the writing....

[@sagacity1071]

I think you being extremely disingenuous. Some players like just to kill the other player... hell world eaters are built for just fighting each turn.

[@Knekt-u7f]

@@TheOuterCircle yea, that is true actually. Point taken

[@Knekt-u7f]

@@sagacity1071 no?