|
|
Post by Horace on Apr 9, 2021 10:30:28 GMT
I think you have 2 options. You either obscure the point in front of the house as mentioned above, or you leave a gap between your monster and the obscuring object, reducing the odds of a hit in this manner as it then requires a bounce. You could then take this a step further if very concerned and put a troll etc between the house and the monster.
A 5" gap for example would require an initial roll of a 6,8,10 (50%) followed by a further roll of varying chances depending on the initial roll. (10 = 5/6, 8 = 4/6, 6 =3/6). My quite-possibly-shonky maths puts the overall chance of achieving this at around 33%. There is almost certainly an optimal distance to put something back which I can't be bothered to mathshammer out. If you have another model in between it would then have to successfully kill that model too. A troll is a perfect blocker in that regard.
Obviously there is a chance your monster will get shot off the board by a cannon in the early game. This is however entirely the purpose of cannons and this chance should exist - it is not broken in that regard. All you can do is sensibly minimise the risk to whatever models you bring and put down
|
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Apr 9, 2021 12:54:51 GMT
So how do people address the indirect shot. Example: I hide a monster out of LoS behind a 5” wide/deep house. My opponent aim in front of the house. On overshoot 6-8-10 it will be a perfect hit. Landing on my monsters base behind the house :/ ----------I agree that it would be worth discussing with your opponents. I've actually never seen this happen before, and I think most player assume it's not even legal. In story terms, I suppose you could just say the the cannonball bounced straight through the building. |
|
Yvain
Full Member
Posts: 112
|
Post by Yvain on Apr 26, 2021 12:55:06 GMT
This article is great. I hate how everyone just says Cannons are completely OP BS when the numbers don't lie. Everyone always remembers the time a cannon one shot their point sink large model in one shot when the chances of that happening to an unsaved model are like 15%.
Even without cannons, the shitty monsters that exist are still shitty.
|
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Apr 26, 2021 18:21:36 GMT
I think you have 2 options. You either obscure the point in front of the house as mentioned above, or you leave a gap between your monster and the obscuring object, reducing the odds of a hit in this manner as it then requires a bounce. You could then take this a step further if very concerned and put a troll etc between the house and the monster. A 5" gap for example would require an initial roll of a 6,8,10 (50%) followed by a further roll of varying chances depending on the initial roll. (10 = 5/6, 8 = 4/6, 6 =3/6). My quite-possibly-shonky maths puts the overall chance of achieving this at around 33%. There is almost certainly an optimal distance to put something back which I can't be bothered to mathshammer out. If you have another model in between it would then have to successfully kill that model too. A troll is a perfect blocker in that regard. Obviously there is a chance your monster will get shot off the board by a cannon in the early game. This is however entirely the purpose of cannons and this chance should exist - it is not broken in that regard. All you can do is sensibly minimise the risk to whatever models you bring and put down That is just not possible as if you move back the cannon player just aim at the house(wall or roof), and then overshot from that point instead. This is very legal and one point why the cannon rules are just broken. Also when moving back, very soon you monster gets visible. And second with placing the monster like this you also remove your own chance of charging as you don’t see through the building. In many cases you don’t just see one cannon, you face two. And often you place them aiming like a cross. Covering the full board. |
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Apr 26, 2021 18:58:14 GMT
This article is great. I hate how everyone just says Cannons are completely OP BS when the numbers don't lie. Everyone always remembers the time a cannon one shot their point sink large model in one shot when the chances of that happening to an unsaved model are like 15%. Even without cannons, the shitty monsters that exist are still shitty. Lol, you guys thinking 15% one shooting something with a point and click are low numbers. Those numbers are big enough for a competitive game not to be viable. I get it that it doesn’t matter when just playing for fun at the basement if you just start over when the game was over before both player gets their first turn. Nothing matters here as you just drink more booze. Not as fun if there is a year till next game though or if you have prepared and traveled a day for an event. Regarding shitty monster is just plain wrong. Wood elves: Treeman ancient, forest dragon Empire: Griffon and probably empire dragon High elves: griffon, more versions of dragons Dark elves: manticore and dragon WoC: manticore and dragon Chaos dwarfs: great Taurus and Lammasu I would guess it goes on for all the armies. Those are the armies that I have books for and in no way say they need help power wise. I have no problem winning games. I just leave the beautiful models on the shelf. All I am saying it would be fun if more models were played as all these ridden monsters are super gorgeous and the main reason they are not play are because of CANNONS. Stats wise and point wise I find them all decent or better. I still love the game, just think the cannons straight line is a bad mechanic as it is written. And cannons hitting both monster and rider is just shit. Quantum aiming cannons just plain stupid. |
|
Yvain
Full Member
Posts: 112
|
Post by Yvain on Apr 26, 2021 19:00:55 GMT
So how do people address the indirect shot. Example: I hide a monster out of LoS behind a 5” wide/deep house. My opponent aim in front of the house. On overshoot 6-8-10 it will be a perfect hit. Landing on my monsters base behind the house :/ ----------I agree that it would be worth discussing with your opponents. I've actually never seen this happen before, and I think most player assume it's not even legal. In story terms, I suppose you could just say the the cannonball bounced straight through the building. It pushes the limit of the rules. Its a gaming the system situation. According to the rules though, it also increase the chance your cannon shot auto fails to 50% instead of just the 16% misfire fail. |
|
|
|
Post by vulcan on Apr 26, 2021 22:03:45 GMT
I think you have 2 options. You either obscure the point in front of the house as mentioned above, or you leave a gap between your monster and the obscuring object, reducing the odds of a hit in this manner as it then requires a bounce. You could then take this a step further if very concerned and put a troll etc between the house and the monster. A 5" gap for example would require an initial roll of a 6,8,10 (50%) followed by a further roll of varying chances depending on the initial roll. (10 = 5/6, 8 = 4/6, 6 =3/6). My quite-possibly-shonky maths puts the overall chance of achieving this at around 33%. There is almost certainly an optimal distance to put something back which I can't be bothered to mathshammer out. If you have another model in between it would then have to successfully kill that model too. A troll is a perfect blocker in that regard. Obviously there is a chance your monster will get shot off the board by a cannon in the early game. This is however entirely the purpose of cannons and this chance should exist - it is not broken in that regard. All you can do is sensibly minimise the risk to whatever models you bring and put down That is just not possible as if you move back the cannon player just aim at the house(wall or roof), and then overshot from that point instead. This is very legal and one point why the cannon rules are just broken. Also when moving back, very soon you monster gets visible. And second with placing the monster like this you also remove your own chance of charging as you don’t see through the building. In many cases you don’t just see one cannon, you face two. And often you place them aiming like a cross. Covering the full board. Assuming you're not facing three. It becomes very hard to hide a monster under those circumstances. And sure, you're hiding the monster. What good does that do you to have a hidden monster you don't dare bring out until the game is half-over - or more? Cannons having a 15% chance EACH to one-shot a monster worth many times their points means those monsters stay on the shelf at home. Good thing? Bad thing? Up to the player, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Apr 27, 2021 5:59:57 GMT
----------I agree that it would be worth discussing with your opponents. I've actually never seen this happen before, and I think most player assume it's not even legal. In story terms, I suppose you could just say the the cannonball bounced straight through the building. It pushes the limit of the rules. Its a gaming the system situation. According to the rules though, it also increase the chance your cannon shot auto fails to 50% instead of just the 16% misfire fail. Unfortunate it is not pushing the rules :/ Its straight up is the rules. You aim at a point can be anywhere the unit can see, it lands 2”-8” further then draw a straight line. Obviously it is poorly written as most people actually think you should only aim the landing for at something you can see. And as everyone agree this is bad sports then I think we can agree the rules is poorly written too. BTW 50% is not a low number, it is insanely high. Remove the 0 and you would have a good number for that case of scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Apr 27, 2021 13:37:01 GMT
This article is great. I hate how everyone just says Cannons are completely OP BS when the numbers don't lie. Everyone always remembers the time a cannon one shot their point sink large model in one shot when the chances of that happening to an unsaved model are like 15%. Even without cannons, the shitty monsters that exist are still shitty. Lol, you guys thinking 15% one shooting something with a point and click are low numbers. Those numbers are big enough for a competitive game not to be viable. I get it that it doesn’t matter when just playing for fun at the basement if you just start over when the game was over before both player gets their first turn. Nothing matters here as you just drink more booze. Not as fun if there is a year till next game though or if you have prepared and traveled a day for an event. Regarding shitty monster is just plain wrong. Wood elves: Treeman ancient, forest dragon Empire: Griffon and probably empire dragon High elves: griffon, more versions of dragons Dark elves: manticore and dragon WoC: manticore and dragon Chaos dwarfs: great Taurus and Lammasu I would guess it goes on for all the armies. Those are the armies that I have books for and in no way say they need help power wise. I have no problem winning games. I just leave the beautiful models on the shelf. All I am saying it would be fun if more models were played as all these ridden monsters are super gorgeous and the main reason they are not play are because of CANNONS. Stats wise and point wise I find them all decent or better. I still love the game, just think the cannons straight line is a bad mechanic as it is written. And cannons hitting both monster and rider is just shit. Quantum aiming cannons just plain stupid. ----------- strutsagget , did you read the original article/post? This is a point I was trying to address. As you say, you don't use monsters, but I do!! I use ridden monsters and regular monsters all the time. I wrote the article from experience, not theory. Yes cannons are powerful, but you can play to specifically counter them. |
|
Yvain
Full Member
Posts: 112
|
Post by Yvain on Apr 27, 2021 13:40:16 GMT
It pushes the limit of the rules. Its a gaming the system situation. According to the rules though, it also increase the chance your cannon shot auto fails to 50% instead of just the 16% misfire fail. Unfortunate it is not pushing the rules :/ Its straight up is the rules. You aim at a point can be anywhere the unit can see, it lands 2”-8” further then draw a straight line. Obviously it is poorly written as most people actually think you should only aim the landing for at something you can see. And as everyone agree this is bad sports then I think we can agree the rules is poorly written too. BTW 50% is not a low number, it is insanely high. Remove the 0 and you would have a good number for that case of scenario. What I mean by pushes the limit of the rules, is that yes it is in the rules; but due to the way bounces destroy terrain and how you are supposed to only pick a point that you can see, it is likely a rules oversight. If it was intended they would have included a blurb about indirect firing your cannons.
When someone utilizes tactics like this, I honestly question if I want to actually keep gaming with them.
And yea 50% is a high number, I was point that out because if some one does use this trick at least it has a good chance to fail.
|
|
Yvain
Full Member
Posts: 112
|
Post by Yvain on Apr 27, 2021 16:35:37 GMT
Lol, you guys thinking 15% one shooting something with a point and click are low numbers. Those numbers are big enough for a competitive game not to be viable. I get it that it doesn’t matter when just playing for fun at the basement if you just start over when the game was over before both player gets their first turn. Nothing matters here as you just drink more booze. Not as fun if there is a year till next game though or if you have prepared and traveled a day for an event. Regarding shitty monster is just plain wrong. Wood elves: Treeman ancient, forest dragon Empire: Griffon and probably empire dragon High elves: griffon, more versions of dragons Dark elves: manticore and dragon WoC: manticore and dragon Chaos dwarfs: great Taurus and Lammasu I would guess it goes on for all the armies. Those are the armies that I have books for and in no way say they need help power wise. I have no problem winning games. I just leave the beautiful models on the shelf. All I am saying it would be fun if more models were played as all these ridden monsters are super gorgeous and the main reason they are not play are because of CANNONS. Stats wise and point wise I find them all decent or better. I still love the game, just think the cannons straight line is a bad mechanic as it is written. And cannons hitting both monster and rider is just shit. Quantum aiming cannons just plain stupid. ----------- strutsagget , did you read the original article/post? This is point I was trying to address. As you say, you don't use monsters, but I do!! I use ridden monsters and regular monsters all the time. I wrote the article from experience, not theory. Yes cannons are powerful, but if you can play to specifically counter them.
The shitty monster line is true. For some reason, GW thought that Toughness allow would protect monsters. It obviously does not. If you monster has no save is likely going to die long before it does anything, because you can always roll enough lasguns to kill something. None one complains about Mountain Chimeras with their sweet regen save or hydra that gain back health, everyone knows those guys can do some good work. Manticores, Griffons, anything that is relying on T5 alone will likely die unless you support it with magic.
However, if a monster gets into combat, unless vs elite infantry it will likely to earn its points back. Even a terrible monster without a save can do some serious damage especially if it is supported. Those shitty manticores only cost around 150 points. They are going to kill that amount in two turns. None GW infantry or cav is also likely to get wrecked.
Not saying its perfect, it is 8th edition after all. I do think cannons could use a bit of a nerf. I like a minus damage on bounce to make it more of a strat choice vs just the always pick 7-10 inches from the back. I also do agree about the rider mount thing, that should be a dice roll like regular shooting at riders. However, more of it is some monsters just needing a bit of a buff. They need to revisit the Toughness only guys. A regen save of 5+ should probably just be the standard.
|
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Apr 29, 2021 19:24:15 GMT
Lol, you guys thinking 15% one shooting something with a point and click are low numbers. Those numbers are big enough for a competitive game not to be viable. I get it that it doesn’t matter when just playing for fun at the basement if you just start over when the game was over before both player gets their first turn. Nothing matters here as you just drink more booze. Not as fun if there is a year till next game though or if you have prepared and traveled a day for an event. Regarding shitty monster is just plain wrong. Wood elves: Treeman ancient, forest dragon Empire: Griffon and probably empire dragon High elves: griffon, more versions of dragons Dark elves: manticore and dragon WoC: manticore and dragon Chaos dwarfs: great Taurus and Lammasu I would guess it goes on for all the armies. Those are the armies that I have books for and in no way say they need help power wise. I have no problem winning games. I just leave the beautiful models on the shelf. All I am saying it would be fun if more models were played as all these ridden monsters are super gorgeous and the main reason they are not play are because of CANNONS. Stats wise and point wise I find them all decent or better. I still love the game, just think the cannons straight line is a bad mechanic as it is written. And cannons hitting both monster and rider is just shit. Quantum aiming cannons just plain stupid. ----------- strutsagget , did you read the original article/post? This is a point I was trying to address. As you say, you don't use monsters, but I do!! I use ridden monsters and regular monsters all the time. I wrote the article from experience, not theory. Yes cannons are powerful, but you can play to specifically counter them. Yes I have and will read again a second time, it’s great. I link people here all the time. I do play monster as I mainly don’t play competitive(few tournaments these days). Also I usually can figure out odds of meeting a cannon army depending on friend I face. I also never complain if they bring their models, it’s in the book, it’s allowed and some armies must bring them to be competitive/playable by them self. And I agree you post is not about cannons are perfect, more about, how to make the best of the situation and play better. It’s the better mindset. Sorry for soaking  I do feel GW should have made some changes, and they had a lot of time to do it too but guess it’s not as bad as not getting an army book for 8ed at all. Game is still awesome |
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Apr 29, 2021 23:11:25 GMT
KevinC can you pin this post as cannons are much maligned and this is a really good tactica to get around them.
|
|
|
|
Post by KevinC on Apr 30, 2021 13:26:40 GMT
----------- strutsagget , did you read the original article/post? This is a point I was trying to address. As you say, you don't use monsters, but I do!! I use ridden monsters and regular monsters all the time. I wrote the article from experience, not theory. Yes cannons are powerful, but you can play to specifically counter them. Yes I have and will read again a second time, it’s great. I link people here all the time. I do play monster as I mainly don’t play competitive(few tournaments these days). Also I usually can figure out odds of meeting a cannon army depending on friend I face. I also never complain if they bring their models, it’s in the book, it’s allowed and some armies must bring them to be competitive/playable by them self. And I agree you post is not about cannons are perfect, more about, how to make the best of the situation and play better. It’s the better mindset. Sorry for soaking I do feel GW should have made some changes, and they had a lot of time to do it too but guess it’s not as bad as not getting an army book for 8ed at all. Game is still awesome ---------I completely understand what you mean. And I agree that a few tweaks of the cannon would balance it a bit better...like some have pointed out, I don't like that a cannonball doesn't randomize between monster and rider. I also like how they wrote the monster riding characters in the End Times. |
|
|
|
Post by Horace on May 1, 2021 8:32:10 GMT
I think you have 2 options. You either obscure the point in front of the house as mentioned above, or you leave a gap between your monster and the obscuring object, reducing the odds of a hit in this manner as it then requires a bounce. You could then take this a step further if very concerned and put a troll etc between the house and the monster. A 5" gap for example would require an initial roll of a 6,8,10 (50%) followed by a further roll of varying chances depending on the initial roll. (10 = 5/6, 8 = 4/6, 6 =3/6). My quite-possibly-shonky maths puts the overall chance of achieving this at around 33%. There is almost certainly an optimal distance to put something back which I can't be bothered to mathshammer out. If you have another model in between it would then have to successfully kill that model too. A troll is a perfect blocker in that regard. Obviously there is a chance your monster will get shot off the board by a cannon in the early game. This is however entirely the purpose of cannons and this chance should exist - it is not broken in that regard. All you can do is sensibly minimise the risk to whatever models you bring and put down That is just not possible as if you move back the cannon player just aim at the house(wall or roof), and then overshot from that point instead. This is very legal and one point why the cannon rules are just broken. Also when moving back, very soon you monster gets visible. And second with placing the monster like this you also remove your own chance of charging as you don’t see through the building. In many cases you don’t just see one cannon, you face two. And often you place them aiming like a cross. Covering the full board. I believe the rules state you aim at a point on the ground, not a roof or building. To address other points, Cannons should have a reasonable chance of killing monsters, otherwise what is there purpose? The person who brings 3 cannons.. he better hope the enemy brings something big otherwise he could have used those points FAR more effectively. If you do have a monster and the enemy has cannons, I don't think it is unreasonable to have to shield the monster for a turn or 2? Be careful with your movement otherwise, if you can't be bothered, take your chances, or take infantry where you don't have to deal with the fear. |
|
