Lyraeus Posted January 8, 2019 Report Share Posted January 8, 2019 19 minutes ago, paxmiles said: So for today's week 1 Escalation League, I think I'm going to go with: ++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (T'au Empire) [31 PL, 500pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + Emergency Dispensation (1 Relic) T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + HQ + Commander in XV8 Crisis Battlesuit [7 PL, 121pts]: 3. Tenacious Survivor, Early warning override, 2x Fusion blaster, Onager gauntlet, Shield generator, Warlord Ethereal [2 PL, 45pts]: Dynamic mirror field, Honour blade + Troops + Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [2 PL, 53pts] . DS8 Tactical Support Turret w/ Missile pod: Missile pod . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle + Elites + XV8 Crisis Bodyguards [16 PL, 205pts]: 6x MV1 Gun Drone . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, Drone controller, Plasma rifle . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer ++ Total: [31 PL, 500pts] ++ Created with BattleScribe Decided to forgo the reliance on markerlights at this point level. Also going to try "melee" tau. Wow, efficient. Looks fun to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 8, 2019 Report Share Posted January 8, 2019 I'm in the GG league too, so for Wednesday, plan is this: ++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (T'au Empire) [92 PL, 1356pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + Emergency Dispensation (1 Relic) T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + HQ + Commander in XV8 Crisis Battlesuit [8 PL, 141pts]: 3. Tenacious Survivor, Early warning override, 2x Fusion blaster, 2x MV4 Shield Drone, Onager gauntlet, Shield generator, Warlord Ethereal [2 PL, 45pts]: Dynamic mirror field, Honour blade + Troops + Breacher Team [2 PL, 35pts]: 5x Fire Warrior Strike Team [2 PL, 53pts] . DS8 Tactical Support Turret w/ Missile pod: Missile pod . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [4 PL, 88pts] . DS8 Tactical Support Turret w/ Missile pod: Missile pod . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 9x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [4 PL, 88pts] . DS8 Tactical Support Turret w/ Missile pod: Missile pod . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 9x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle + Elites + XV8 Crisis Bodyguards [29 PL, 263pts]: 7x MV1 Gun Drone . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, Drone controller, Plasma rifle . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer + Fast Attack + Pathfinder Team [3 PL, 40pts] . 4x Pathfinder: 4x Markerlight . Pathfinder Shas'ui: Markerlight Pathfinder Team [3 PL, 40pts] . 4x Pathfinder: 4x Markerlight . Pathfinder Shas'ui: Markerlight Tactical Drones [4 PL, 60pts]: 6x MV1 Gun Drone + Heavy Support + XV88 Broadside Battlesuits [7 PL, 99pts] . Broadside Shas'vre: 2x Plasma rifle, Heavy rail rifle, Seeker missile, Shield generator + Flyer + AX39 Sun Shark Bomber [9 PL, 148pts]: Markerlight, Missile pod, 2x MV17 Interceptor Drone, 2x Seeker missile AX39 Sun Shark Bomber [9 PL, 148pts]: Markerlight, Missile pod, 2x MV17 Interceptor Drone, 2x Seeker missile + Dedicated Transport + TY7 Devilfish [6 PL, 108pts]: 2x MV1 Gun Drone, Burst cannon, 2x Seeker missile ++ Fortification Network (T'au Empire) [12 PL, 240pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + Fortification + Tidewall Gunrig [6 PL, 120pts]: Supremacy railgun Tidewall Gunrig [6 PL, 120pts]: Supremacy railgun ++ Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment (T'au Empire) [20 PL, 401pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + Lord of War + KV128 Stormsurge [20 PL, 401pts]: 2x Burst cannon, Cluster rocket system, Counterfire defence system, 4x Destroyer missile, Early warning override, Pulse driver cannon, Shield generator, 2x Smart missile system ++ Total: [124 PL, 1997pts] ++ Created with BattleScribe Breachers join gun drones in the Devilfish. Pathfinders embark on gunrigs. Strikes form up around Ethereal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyraeus Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 Too bad I work till 7pm so I can't do the gg league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 11 hours ago, paxmiles said: So for today's week 1 Escalation League, I think I'm going to go with: ++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (T'au Empire) [31 PL, 500pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + Emergency Dispensation (1 Relic) T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + HQ + Commander in XV8 Crisis Battlesuit [7 PL, 121pts]: 3. Tenacious Survivor, Early warning override, 2x Fusion blaster, Onager gauntlet, Shield generator, Warlord Ethereal [2 PL, 45pts]: Dynamic mirror field, Honour blade + Troops + Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [2 PL, 53pts] . DS8 Tactical Support Turret w/ Missile pod: Missile pod . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle + Elites + XV8 Crisis Bodyguards [16 PL, 205pts]: 6x MV1 Gun Drone . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, Drone controller, Plasma rifle . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer ++ Total: [31 PL, 500pts] ++ Created with BattleScribe Decided to forgo the reliance on markerlights at this point level. Also going to try "melee" tau. Tau vs Sergeant Rock's Crimson Fists. Tau victory in melee. My Tau definitely rolled above average (or seemed to). Won 6:4. Was very close game and played for the full 7 rounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 Finally got home. TAU "Melee" victory. I didn't really win in melee in a traditional sense, but melee is why I won. I held position turn 1. Crisis bodyguards landed turn 2, 9" away from Primaris Plasma Infantry - most of the opponent's firepower was that one unit. I used Strike and Fade, the Dal'yth stratagem, to move 6" in the shooting phase, which gave me a 3" charge on the primaris plasma marines. The goal was never to kill them, just to shut down their plasma shooting and it really worked. Opponent fell back, which meant no shooting for the plasma, and the crisis certainly took damage, but not nearly what the army would have if I hadn't charged them. Game boiled down to TAU Commander engaged with SM scout squad on top of a ruin, just barely in the enemy deployment zone. Opponent would have won if the Scouts were able to kill the commander, but the TAU commander won the game by slaying the scouts and surviving. Was running the Onager Gauntlet, but I'll note that it wasn't doing most of the kills. I think I killed 2 marines all game with that relic, and missed once. It was the 3 attacks per round with the regular CCW that was killing the scouts in melee. Hitting on 3s, wounding on 3s, and only 4+ scout armor in melee. And again, most of my kills were in shooting/overwatch. Opponent was crimson fists with approximately: Primaris lieutenant with magic bolter 5-man plasma primaris squad 5 man sniper scout squad with cloaks and sword 10 tactical marines (which split into combat squads) with plasma, combi-plasma+sword, and missile launcher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 Additional note, aside from using the stratagem the one time, the Dal'yth Sept trait was completely unused. Had a big ruin in my deployment zone, which I decided after deployment to occupy (wasted some shooting moving there). Suits moved every turn as they pushed the enemy. And it worked very well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 In hindsight, Firewarriors can't really fail morale checks at the 5-man level. The Ethereal doesn't really help them. I mean, even if the unit loses 4 members and has just the lone sarge standing, I'd need to roll exactly a 5 to lose any models, as 1-4 passes and 6 auto-passes due to the bonding knife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 For escalation Week 2: ++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (T'au Empire) [30 PL, 507pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + HQ + Cadre Fireblade [2 PL, 42pts]: Markerlight Commander in XV8 Crisis Battlesuit [7 PL, 121pts]: 3. Tenacious Survivor, Early warning override, 2x Fusion blaster, Onager gauntlet, Shield generator, Warlord + Troops + Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle + Fast Attack + Pathfinder Team [3 PL, 40pts] . 4x Pathfinder: 4x Markerlight . Pathfinder Shas'ui: Markerlight Pathfinder Team [3 PL, 40pts] . 4x Pathfinder: 4x Markerlight . Pathfinder Shas'ui: Markerlight + Heavy Support + TX7 Hammerhead Gunship [9 PL, 150pts]: 2x MV1 Gun Drone, Railgun ++ Fortification Network (T'au Empire) [12 PL, 240pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + Fortification + Tidewall Gunrig [6 PL, 120pts]: Supremacy railgun Tidewall Gunrig [6 PL, 120pts]: Supremacy railgun ++ Total: [42 PL, 747pts] ++ Created with BattleScribe Pathfinders Embark on the fortifications. Everything else basically explains itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 Regarding stormsurge cover bit, after contacting customer service via email last friday, they finally started working on my item last monday, and today, wednesday, they "created the label" to ship the item. Their "estimated ship date" was the 4th, It's now the 9th, and I kinda feel that they'd still not have started if I didn't contact customer service. But it's coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 2 hours ago, paxmiles said: For escalation Week 2: ++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (T'au Empire) [30 PL, 507pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + HQ + Cadre Fireblade [2 PL, 42pts]: Markerlight Commander in XV8 Crisis Battlesuit [7 PL, 121pts]: 3. Tenacious Survivor, Early warning override, 2x Fusion blaster, Onager gauntlet, Shield generator, Warlord + Troops + Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [2 PL, 38pts] . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle + Fast Attack + Pathfinder Team [3 PL, 40pts] . 4x Pathfinder: 4x Markerlight . Pathfinder Shas'ui: Markerlight Pathfinder Team [3 PL, 40pts] . 4x Pathfinder: 4x Markerlight . Pathfinder Shas'ui: Markerlight + Heavy Support + TX7 Hammerhead Gunship [9 PL, 150pts]: 2x MV1 Gun Drone, Railgun ++ Fortification Network (T'au Empire) [12 PL, 240pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + Fortification + Tidewall Gunrig [6 PL, 120pts]: Supremacy railgun Tidewall Gunrig [6 PL, 120pts]: Supremacy railgun ++ Total: [42 PL, 747pts] ++ Created with BattleScribe Pathfinders Embark on the fortifications. Everything else basically explains itself. Hmm...more I think about it, this list leans too anti-tank. I'm going to struggle against orks. I'll have to change it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ish Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 I’d drop one of the Tidewall Gunrigs and pick up a Devilfish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 37 minutes ago, Ish said: I’d drop one of the Tidewall Gunrigs and pick up a Devilfish. Devilfish and the hammerhead are the same model, so that doesn't work unless I drop the hammerhead (which If given the choice between the hammerhead and the gunrig, I'd get rid of the hammerhead). That said, Devilfish really adds nothing to this list. For ~100pts, it brings exactly the firepower of 3 drones...And units embarked aren't contributing firepower while embarked, so I lose firepower by embarking units. The Gunrig, on the other hand, allows embarked units to shoot out, so no loss of firepower. If stationary (which is my plan for the gunrig), it gains cover due to the Dal'yth Sept trait, so it has the same 3+ armor as the moving devilfish. The Gunrig itself, with marker support, has 2 shots with BS4+, which should be one hit. The hammerhead contributes 1 shot that will hit. So, provided I don't need to move, the gunrig is offensively as good as the hammerhead. And pathfinders are super fragile. Putting them in gunrig makes them effectively T7 with a 3+ save (4+ if it moves). And the markerlights (and the gunrig's railgun) are heavy weapons, so moving the gunrig is bad anyway. It also makes it hard to charge the pathfinders, as you can only charge the gunrig, which is hard to surround due to it's size, allowing the pathfinders to escape combat by disembarking. Final escalated list will not include the hammerhead, but instead will include a devilfish filled with drones. It will have both gunrigs, though. I love that model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ish Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 The Devilfish isn’t supposed to bring much, in terms of firepower, it brings mobility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelharis Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 Take the Ion Cannon instead, You have more than enough anti tank with the gunrigs. Ion cannon gives you great anti multi-wound, and it gets around one of Tau's greatest weaknesses, random shots & random damage. I would personally only take one gunrig at the 750 point mark, unless you're planning for a specific opponent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 Quote ++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (T'au Empire) [92 PL, 1356pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + Emergency Dispensation (1 Relic) T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + HQ + Commander in XV8 Crisis Battlesuit [8 PL, 141pts]: 3. Tenacious Survivor, Early warning override, 2x Fusion blaster, 2x MV4 Shield Drone, Onager gauntlet, Shield generator, Warlord Ethereal [2 PL, 45pts]: Dynamic mirror field, Honour blade + Troops + Breacher Team [2 PL, 35pts]: 5x Fire Warrior Strike Team [2 PL, 53pts] . DS8 Tactical Support Turret w/ Missile pod: Missile pod . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 4x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [4 PL, 88pts] . DS8 Tactical Support Turret w/ Missile pod: Missile pod . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 9x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle Strike Team [4 PL, 88pts] . DS8 Tactical Support Turret w/ Missile pod: Missile pod . Fire Warrior Shas'ui: Markerlight, Pulse rifle . 9x Fire Warrior w/ Pulse Rifle + Elites + XV8 Crisis Bodyguards [29 PL, 263pts]: 7x MV1 Gun Drone . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, Drone controller, Plasma rifle . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer . Crisis Bodyguard: Advanced targeting system, 2x Flamer + Fast Attack + Pathfinder Team [3 PL, 40pts] . 4x Pathfinder: 4x Markerlight . Pathfinder Shas'ui: Markerlight Pathfinder Team [3 PL, 40pts] . 4x Pathfinder: 4x Markerlight . Pathfinder Shas'ui: Markerlight Tactical Drones [4 PL, 60pts]: 6x MV1 Gun Drone + Heavy Support + XV88 Broadside Battlesuits [7 PL, 99pts] . Broadside Shas'vre: 2x Plasma rifle, Heavy rail rifle, Seeker missile, Shield generator + Flyer + AX39 Sun Shark Bomber [9 PL, 148pts]: Markerlight, Missile pod, 2x MV17 Interceptor Drone, 2x Seeker missile AX39 Sun Shark Bomber [9 PL, 148pts]: Markerlight, Missile pod, 2x MV17 Interceptor Drone, 2x Seeker missile + Dedicated Transport + TY7 Devilfish [6 PL, 108pts]: 2x MV1 Gun Drone, Burst cannon, 2x Seeker missile ++ Fortification Network (T'au Empire) [12 PL, 240pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + Fortification + Tidewall Gunrig [6 PL, 120pts]: Supremacy railgun Tidewall Gunrig [6 PL, 120pts]: Supremacy railgun ++ Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment (T'au Empire) [20 PL, 401pts] ++ + No Force Org Slot + T'au Empire Sept Choice: Dal'yth Sept + Lord of War + KV128 Stormsurge [20 PL, 401pts]: 2x Burst cannon, Cluster rocket system, Counterfire defence system, 4x Destroyer missile, Early warning override, Pulse driver cannon, Shield generator, 2x Smart missile system ++ Total: [124 PL, 1997pts] ++ Got a game in with the above. Opponent was true imperial soup. Imperial knight dominus, a regular knight, and autocannon armiger, token guardsmen with only lasguns and CP generating relic, 3 SM missile launcher devs squads fielded in non-codex astartes numbers. Marines and guard with paint schemes/models that didn't match their chapter/regiment. And an opponent who regarded this as a "soft" list. I decided in deployment on to ignore the objectives and try to see if my army could slay just one knight. We did slay one knight (the regular one, since it was closer), but it took everything. I went first, but his turn 2 I had lost all units that could have damaged his knight. According to the opponent, I lost 3:40 in VP when we called it towards the end of round 2...I have no idea how he calculated this number, but I also didn't really care about the objectives. Opponent set up table. Opponent choose really tall, line of sight blocking ruins for the center of the table, which he insisted "counted" as being 6" tall for movement up purposes, he implied this was some sort of ITC rule for ruins. I later learned that it was not ITC and was so he could benefit from LOS blocking terrain while also being able to charge units above with this knights due to a loyalist only stratagem for knights. I also was pretty blown away in the end when my opponent claimed that his dominus knight was only 600-ish points, which of course, he seemed to think was really high. My main take away from this game was that bringing that FW tau titan would have been entirely kosher against this opponent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ish Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 Yikes. Having gotten a good look at the table you guys were playing on, I think your opponent was confused about the ITC’s new rules. Those two big papercraft buildings strike me as the very definition of ITC’s Enclosed Ruins: “[A] ruin with 4 walls and a roof.” A model that lacks the Infantry or Fly keyword can’t get to upper floors of ruins, BRB p. 248. So, yes, you can park a squad of Pathfinders on the roof of an enclosed ruin and be safe from assault by a Knight Titan. Given the iconic image of Soviet infantry throwing improvised anti-tank bombs down on top of Panzers during the Battle of Stalingrad (a tactic repeated pretty much every time armor has been deployed in urban environments since) I suspect this was quite intentional by the designers. The ITC rules are just meant to clarify how terrain works for those of us that don’t use the Citadel kits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, Ish said: Yikes. Having gotten a good look at the table you guys were playing on, I think your opponent was confused about the ITC’s new rules. Those two big papercraft buildings strike me as the very definition of ITC’s Enclosed Ruins: “[A] ruin with 4 walls and a roof.” A model that lacks the Infantry or Fly keyword can’t get to upper floors of ruins, BRB p. 248. So, yes, you can park a squad of Pathfinders on the roof of an enclosed ruin and be safe from assault by a Knight Titan. Given the iconic image of Soviet infantry throwing improvised anti-tank bombs down on top of Panzers during the Battle of Stalingrad (a tactic repeated pretty much every time armor has been deployed in urban environments since) I suspect this was quite intentional by the designers. The ITC rules are just meant to clarify how terrain works for those of us that don’t use the Citadel kits. Apparently the IMPERIAL knights have a stratagem that allow them them to charge a unit specifically atop a ruin no more than 6" tall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 hour ago, paxmiles said: Got a game in with the above. Opponent was true imperial soup. Imperial knight dominus, a regular knight, and autocannon armiger, token guardsmen with only lasguns and CP generating relic, 3 SM missile launcher devs squads fielded in non-codex astartes numbers. Marines and guard with paint schemes/models that didn't match their chapter/regiment. And an opponent who regarded this as a "soft" list. I decided in deployment on to ignore the objectives and try to see if my army could slay just one knight. We did slay one knight (the regular one, since it was closer), but it took everything. I went first, but his turn 2 I had lost all units that could have damaged his knight. According to the opponent, I lost 3:40 in VP when we called it towards the end of round 2...I have no idea how he calculated this number, but I also didn't really care about the objectives. Opponent set up table. Opponent choose really tall, line of sight blocking ruins for the center of the table, which he insisted "counted" as being 6" tall for movement up purposes, he implied this was some sort of ITC rule for ruins. I later learned that it was not ITC and was so he could benefit from LOS blocking terrain while also being able to charge units above with this knights due to a loyalist only stratagem for knights. I also was pretty blown away in the end when my opponent claimed that his dominus knight was only 600-ish points, which of course, he seemed to think was really high. My main take away from this game was that bringing that FW tau titan would have been entirely kosher against this opponent. He gets 4 points in ITC for every round you forfeited. So if you ended round two, his score would be 4x4=16 points, plus whatever he scored to that point on Primary/Secondaries the first two rounds. IF IF IF he got 12 on secondaries and two on Primeries, it's possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ish Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 Quoting from 1d4chan’s summary, so this might not be 100% rulebook accurate text: Devastating Reach (1 CP): In the charge phase, pick a TITANIC Knight that has not yet charged, then pick an enemy unit entirely within ruins or a Sector Mechanicus structure (which must not have any models on the ground floor). That Knight can charge the enemy unit, and if its charge brings it within 2" horizontally and 6" vertically of the unit, the charge succeeds and the Knight can attack it in the fight phase (but not with Titanic Feet). On the one hand, this does seem like an important tool for a Knight army to have... It’d be really frustrating to have your opponent hide everything out of reach from you. On the other hand, Knights do have plenty of guns... Still, it’s only allowed to reach 6” vertically, it doesn’t treat all terrain as being 6”... So any models that are above 6” should be out of reach. I’m only eyeballing it, but those buildings both looked to be taller than 6” to me... C’est la guerre, it’s not like you were trying to sweep all before you in Guardian’s league. You got to push some soldiers around the table, roll some dice, and experiment with your new toys. That’s a fun night out in my book! (BTW, I love the shade of green you chose for the paint scheme. Those bombers are gonna look great when they’re done!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 29 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said: He gets 4 points in ITC for every round you forfeited. So if you ended round two, his score would be 4x4=16 points, plus whatever he scored to that point on Primary/Secondaries the first two rounds. IF IF IF he got 12 on secondaries and two on Primeries, it's possible. That explains that. I do think the game was very much over at that point. Continuing would have been an act of masochism. Dunno why ITC would encourage that, but I'm not really a tournament player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 29 minutes ago, Ish said: On the one hand, this does seem like an important tool for a Knight army to have... It’d be really frustrating to have your opponent hide everything out of reach from you. On the other hand, Knights do have plenty of guns... Still, it’s only allowed to reach 6” vertically, it doesn’t treat all terrain as being 6”... So any models that are above 6” should be out of reach. I’m only eyeballing it, but those buildings both looked to be taller than 6” to me... C’est la guerre, it’s not like you were trying to sweep all before you in Guardian’s league. You got to push some soldiers around the table, roll some dice, and experiment with your new toys. That’s a fun night out in my book! (BTW, I love the shade of green you chose for the paint scheme. Those bombers are gonna look great when they’re done!) Nah, I only a pair of interceptor drones on the building anyway. No loss in that manner, just was unexpected and it was especially annoying because the opponent implied that the buildings *counting as 6" for movement* was an ITC rule, and it turned out that he was altering terrain rules for his advantage. Just kinda a scumy player thing, not so much a rules problem - and the player wasn't really scumy, he was just what I think of when I think of a typical "tournament" player, which would have been fine were this an actual tournament. But for a low key league, it was scumy behaviour, I think. But I totally lost fair and square. Even if he was cheating the whole game, I think I lost before the game started. I just didn't have the tools to defeat that list. And thank you very much for that comment on the paint. I've been very much wondering if it looks good or not. Definitely isn't finished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 10 minutes ago, paxmiles said: That explains that. I do think the game was very much over at that point. Continuing would have been an act of masochism. Dunno why ITC would encourage that, but I'm not really a tournament player. Encourage it? They don't really. But you also can't penalize the guy for your unwillingnes to continue. it's just fair to assume you resisted his attempts to gain points no more, which is in fact what happens. The point is not to give up until the fat lady sings. After all, if you're losing, he's winning. Why steal his fun, right? If one believes it is "just a game" you can doff your cap and give up the points, or fight to the bitter end and make him earn it (and he'll feel as if he earned it which is always a better feeling). I would point out that since its not a tournament, it affects no one else's standing and so doffing ones cap makes more sense. In a tournament though, it makes less sense. If someone is practicing for a tournament then helping them out by continuing to play to see how many legitimate points they WOULD have gotten could also be a goal. I'm playing FOUR LVO practice games this weekend (possibly 5) and I've asked my opponents to play to the end as much as possible for that reason. It's not a tournament, but its practice for one so we kind of want to emulate that to get a better gauge. If i must be tabled so be it. Hehehe. Just food for thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ish Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 It does stress the importance of bringing some kind of anti-knight options in a list. For years and years, it was always about having the right mix to deal with the “paper, rock, scissors” of shooty, choppy, and vehicles. Then it became the “paper, rock, scissors, lizard, spock” of light infantry, heavy infantry, vehicles, and aircraft. Now it’s horde infantry, elite infantry, vehicles, aircraft, psykers, knights... Good times! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, Lord Hanaur said: Encourage it? They don't really. But you also can't penalize the guy for your unwillingnes to continue. it's just fair to assume you resisted his attempts to gain points no more which is in fact what happens. The point is not to give up until the fat lady sings. After all, if you're losing, he's winning. Why steal his fun, right? If one believes it is "just a game" you can doff your cap and give up the points, or fight to the bitter end and make him earn it (and he'll feel as if he earned it which is always a better feeling). I would point out that since its not a tournament, it affects no one else's standing and so doffing ones cap makes more sense. In a tournament though, it makes less sense. If someone is practicing for a tournament then helping them out by continuing to play to see how many legitimate points they WOULD have gotten could also be a goal. I'm playing FOUR LVO practice games this weekend (possibly 5) and I've asked my opponents to play to the end as much as possible for that reason. It's not a tournament, but its practice for one so we kind of want to emulate that to get a better gauge. If i must be tabled so be it. Hehehe. Just food for thought. I feel it penalizes me for continuing when the game is clearly a lopsided battle I have no chance of winning. Beating a dead horse should not be rewarded. As for stealing fun, I don't think kicking people while they are down is fun. A close battle is fun, a battle where the opponent has a chance is fun. If the opponent get's to a point where further gameplay isn't fun, they should stop. This is a game, not a real life. As for the GG ITC league, I've been in the GG league since well before ITC was a thing. I don't really like the ITC's influence on the hobby or on guardian games, but I like my Guardian Games and it is a good space to play. So I accept that players in the league, sometimes, see it as ITC tournament practice. It isn't all the players, but many of them are definitely there for ITC practice. And I don't know if the ITC rates sportmenship (seems unlikely), but definitely seems like making a lopsided battle "seem" even would be something that a person looking for good sportsmenship ratings would need to learn. Making the game seem sporting for both players seems very key to a sportsmenship rating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 15 minutes ago, Ish said: It does stress the importance of bringing some kind of anti-knight options in a list. For years and years, it was always about having the right mix to deal with the “paper, rock, scissors” of shooty, choppy, and vehicles. Then it became the “paper, rock, scissors, lizard, spock” of light infantry, heavy infantry, vehicles, and aircraft. Now it’s horde infantry, elite infantry, vehicles, aircraft, psykers, knights... Good times! Yeah, I'm just trying to figure out what that looks like with TAU. They've got a really strange army. Can't deny invulnerable saves for the most part. Aside from zero psykers, we have almost no mortal wound dealing weapons and zero weapons that specifically deny invulnerable saves. Have several low number of shot anti-tank weapons that deal mortal wounds on wound rolls of 6+, but aside from a single faction specific special character, we have zero options to increase the wound roll. We have a single codex lord of war that dies really quickly to anything. We have a cap of 1 functional character per detachment. And then we have really lacking GW model support...unless we buy direct. And so on and so forth. And then, on the other hand, we have ridiculously underpriced S5 volume fire. It's a really strange army. I'm very much having fun with the challenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.