Armoured company banned?

[nethoni]

What do you 40k players on this forum think about banning Armoured company armies from tournaments?
Since most tournies here in sweden (at least the ones I know of) is banning special charachters, armoured company etc. I was wondering what the opinion really is, and if it's just sweden or other countries as well.
Personally I think it's fcked up, why ban a list that nowadays is an official gw armylist that isn't very cheezie (unless you are playing entirely without tankremoval in wich case your list itself isn't blanced)...

.Oni

[angelusmortis]

Armored company isnt a standard list. 99% of all tournies do not allow non-standard lists. Also included in this are lists such as Lost and the Damned, 13th Company, Legion of the Damned, Seeding Swarms, etc. The reason is for balance. Those lists are really balanced well in a standard 40k game. They play better in Apocalypse. I mean, at 1500 pts, not many people are going to do well against 8 pie plates and AV14.

[Woz]

Im with the Ban.

[knight (M.I.A)]

I'm with the ban as well, but I have to correct angelusmortis on the 13th Company and the Lost and the Damned.
Those two are official Codex lists from the Eye of Terror Codex and since there is no newer version or any statement that those army lists are outdated they're still tournement legal. Same for the old Codex Catachan and the Cadians and the oter army list from the Codex: Eye of Terror.
But since there were never any Codices Kroot Mercanaries, Tribal Orks, or Armoured Company those are only Chapter Approved lists.

[angelusmortis]

I think it depends on the tourny though. I've seen some that allow them and some that dont. (In ref to Eye of Terror). The bottom line is though, that its always up to the tourny organizers as to what is allowed and what is not. I'm simply saying what is the norm.

[knight (M.I.A)]

Agreed.
But even if those lists are allowed, nobody uses them. Those armies are too specialised, for a good match. If they get the right conditions they're really hard opponents, but when not...

[mardaddy]

I would not agree to play against an Armored Company unless I knew it ahead of time and could tailor a list...

Since I play Daemonhunters - there is really not a lot of dedicated anti-tank stuff that we'd normally field in a general-purpose list; a DH force facing an AC across the table would HAVE to tailor it to even have a sporting chance.

Orbital Bombardment? Yea, 0-1 and extremely undependable.
Landraiders? Granted... but at their cost, not enough, and the few would be fire magnets for the whole tank line.

Everything else that has a decent chance anti-tank (in a general purpose list) would not be present in enough depth to make a difference vs. an entire AC.

[Deleted]

what about deep striking fast attack grey knights? get behind the tanks and those storm bolters will hurt any leman russ with enough shots. and then you can charge them and do damage even then.

also i would view it wrong as to know what you are fighting ahead of the battle. if that was the case and i knew if was going up against 10 leman russes. id pack 50 lascannons into my army.

if you know what your facing ahead of the time i think it takes some of the fun out of playing

[mardaddy]

spacepuppy... Deep Striking does not work for DH against AC.

First - Let's just say for grins that the AC do not just hang in the back of the Dep Zone preventing the deep strike in their rear, and that they DO move forward a bit...

So I Deep Strike and get shots on ONE TANK (and hoping for enough 6's to make it worthwhile.) No Assault until the next turn, so I have to weather however many templates are dropped on the unit - which are all clustered base to base so EVERYONE is getting pie-d!!

And if I were playing an IG force, yes, I would play a general force org against AC, not tailor it. But for DH... well, the difference is, you CAN pack melta's and lascannons, which at least have a decent enough shot at taking out a tank with a single hit (when you actually hit)... I cannot!

I would want to go almost totally GK-pure, I would not (with knowledge ahead), play a DH army w/IG allies and load up on melta's and lascannons, because that would be not right either... I don't mind losing - just want a sporting chance.

[nethoni]

ok, I guess it's the general opinion after all. Well, I on the other hand wouldn't mind at all playing against ac, because I build my armies so that they CAN counter enemy tanks. Sooner or later you are going to face them, perhaps not as much av 14 but still lots of tanks. The IG with mechanised makes a lot of armour too, what're the grey knights force you are talking about going to do then?

[mardaddy]

Like you, I try to keep a general purpose list to be able to handle SOME tanks. But it's just not enough to handle a whole army of them. Going that deep with anti-tank troop & weapon types really hamstrings the GK in their considerable HtH capability; Let's face it - that is where they tend to do best. Recall that they are probably THE most expensive army to field, points-wise.

It is not difficult to go over 1,700pts of Grey Knights with just 32 total models and no wargear (1 HQ and 2 Troops w/transports), so you are already light on the table regarding actual model count - spending points by going anti-tank heavy takes away even more points that are needed for forces that need to take table objectives.

To keep things in the right arena, when I get around to it at home before the weekend, I'll crank out an almost pure-GK anti-tank force in the Army List section (almost pure because I believe I need to field an Inquisitor and at least one Stormtrooper squad.)

[Cadian 117]

Realisticly: I think thats retarded. Come on the guard almost require huge amounts of tanks. + I have seen orks beat a tank company played by a very competent player.

Gameplay:Im with the ban.

[mardaddy]

nethoni: commissar.proboards22.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=armylist&thread=1201748954&page=1

[nethoni]

hm, they could really use indoctrined IG to actually be able to counter tha ac. Still I go with spacepuppy, to completely build an army to counter a known threat it takes away some of the fun. Isn't it more satisfying winning when at a disadvantage?
Don't really think any army commander knows exactly what he's up against and would therefore try having a little of everything.
But indeed it's a lot of tanks to smash up, if you are lucky you could do that with not too much at or unlucky you won't be albe to even with a lot

[Deleted]

Every Tourny ive played in has allowed armoured company but i have yet to see anyone bring them. Big reason why is the fact that they are so unflexable. Because there vehicles and most people like to bring mostly ordance weapons, all you need to do is get some troops right up in them and they are reduced to using all non-ordance weapons and then have to make the hard choice of killing the troops in the tank mob or kill the troops moving tords them.

I personally think armoured is cheesy, but at the same time thats mostly because i much rather shoot troops over armour.

[Deleted]

cheesey no i dont think so. the imperial guard is made of two types of regiments infantry and armoured. these are split into other types: artillery armoured personal divisions so on and so forth. i think its a great idea. however they also play at a great disadvantage they have less troops then even the pure grey knight player. (i had an 1850 pure gk army counting 39 knights)


they risk losing objectives really easy and the loss of one tank can be disasterous.