Jump to content

Chapel

Members
  • Posts

    261
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Chapel

  1. This isn't just the way people from the Portland area play, it's how we play in Eugene. Monsters, Vehicles, and Bikes simply go around ruins terrain, or use them for cover and then move around them for assault etc. My Carnifex just hit them like a speed bump and go around. So it's not really like these are out of line, super uncommon special rules. Only new interesting bit I see with the ITC, is they are classifying the lower level to block LOS entirely regardless if there are windows or cracks to see through. That isn't the way we have played, although I wouldn't mind seeing it implemented. Too often armies get shot to pieces 1st turn and it's game over by turn 2. By requiring 6 pieces of custom/LOS blocking terrain, I think the organizers are attempting to introduce a level of tactical movement being required to accomplish certain objectives. It'll bottle neck certain areas for ambush, and reduce firing lanes to promote movement instead of castling up in a corner and just blasting everything.
  2. Has anyone compiled all the FAQ's into a single document or downloadable PDF by any chance? Chasing down all the pertinent FAQ's these days is a pain.
  3. Welcome to the Hive Mind.... I too am building a cult and can't wait to play some games with these awesome models! Alas, Tyranids (GSC included) have lots of grooves, nooks, and armor crannies that are not only a pain to remove mold lines from....just wait to you start painting. I'm hoping to attend OFCC next year and hope to see you and your new army there!
  4. I guess I'm not sure what the debate is on the grenades thing. The rule book says (at least mine does) that only one model may throw grenades per phase. I'm paraphrasing, but 1 model per unit per phase is the gist of it. That's how everyone I know down here in Eugene plays it as far as I know. Is this being played differently because of an ITC ruling allowing multiple grenades to be used per phase?
  5. Ahhh I shall have to check that out, thanks. I was totally looking under the psychic powers area and such. I didn't think to look under the IC's section.
  6. This came up in a game and I couldn't find anything in the rule book, so thought I'd come and see what people thought. What happens when a unit with an attached Independent Character gets hit with a power like Paroxism, and then splits into two units after? Order of Events: Enemy unit is a unit of Drones, and a Commander is attached I hit the combined unit in my psychic phase with Paroxism and they go to -2 BS/WS. In the opponents turn, he splits the squad into two units. Which unit(s) are affected by the -2 paroxism effect now? Just the drone unit? Just the Commander unit? Both units? There's no "original" unit because they were combined.
  7. Whoa, Nice! Dig the color scheme!
  8. Down in Eugene, and I run that rule in my campaigns or any tournament that I plan to run. I've heard of other people using that rule too, so it seems to be catching on and I dig that! I can't take credit for it though, I heard that somewhere else too and loved the rule.
  9. Just for the record, Glad we could steal Ninja back to the Dark Side and get him to return to Springfield. I missed gaming with him immensely and am glad he's back and corrupted into 40K again. That said Ninja, I can bring the Gargantuan Barbed Heirodule anytime you want a piece! My nids are always ready to step up and chomp some o' them tasty squids! On the other hand, my fledgling Tau army is definitely reaping the rewards from these conversations and playing against you. I'm more of a crisis suit guy, every time I play I just see Robotech cartoons from my childhood playing in my head as my suits jump around and blast tanks to scrap!
  10. Generally most tournaments I've attended have a 3 color minimum and WYSIWYG. Coming from a smaller community, it's harder to enforce the painting requirement for events, campaigns, and tournaments. But I believe and have seen that people generally have a better attitude and better time against opponents with fully painted armies. It lightens the mood and seems to soften the blow. Yes I know there are exceptions both ways, but this is generally what I've seen. That said, I'm all for the 3 color minimum and I myself even have a hard time adhering to that. I'm making an effort, putting forth the time to get there though. I was a grey plastic general for a long time and had to make a conscious effort after enjoying a couple of fully painted events to really push myself so that my opponents could have that level of respect from me. The respect that I took the time to put some loving care into painting and basing my armies. TO's have the hardest choice to decide how to handle someone who knew the rules, and chose to bend or break them anyway. It happens and sometimes it's just dang unavoidable. A model broke, or you packed the wrong one by accident. It happens. To account for these mistakes and potential problems we enforce it with the special rule: Preferred Enemy "Unpainted" and Preferred Enemy "Non-WYSIWYG". In a smaller community that doesn't have a ton of players like Portland or Seattle, it seems to work fine and help. Does a couple things.... First, I like this policy because if you did have an accident with a model, forgot one, dropped and broke it, or even just didn't get it all the way painted, you aren't severely punished by that 1 or 2 models. You are at a slight disadvantage, but not earth shattering. Second, if you were the Mega-Bozo that chose to ignore the event rules with painting and showed up with a grey army, you will be at a severe disadvantage. You likely won't have a very good showing, and it's very unlikely that you'll end up on the winning end of the stick. However, if you were just there to play and have a great time, you can still do so. The raffle might be kind, but you won't be eligible for the top or 4 prizes (Best General, Best Sports, Best Overall, Best Painted). You can still get a shot at a small gift card and have a good time though. As for the philosophy and thinking on the painting vs. affecting overall.... I'm a firm believer that "Best Overall" means just that. If you put forth an effort and tried to better your painting, you'll do just fine. I've seen plenty of armies painted up to a pretty good standard and it didn't take Golden Demon amount of time to do it. But if you put in the bare minimum, then it's just the same as being just a so-so opponent sportsmanship wise. Best Overall means you put forth the effort in painting up the best you can, tried to make sure your opponents had the most crazy awesomest time they could, and you put the beat down with bringing the pain. All too often it seems that people who won a lot of games weight the General part of the triumverate far too heavily. Like 70% and only 15% for Sportsmanship and Painting. I see them as 33% in all, so yes I can see someone who went 4-1 winning best overall over someone who went 5-0 but maybe was a turd to play against and had a bare minimum 3 colors. For some people Painting comes easy, others they can see the games playing out before the first die is already thrown and win games like crazy.....and still others are so much fun to play against, that I'd be happy playing 5 games all weekend against just them even if I lose them all. That said, Raffles are awesome, you have a shot at fortune and glory even if you haven't perfected your game. They give everyone a chance at winning something cool, even if you're just Mr. Joe Average out for a good time, meeting new peeps, and having some fun games.
  11. Genestealers being able to assault out of reserve, infiltrating, or outflanking would go a LONG way to helping them. 6 attacks would make people fear them like they should, but people would just shoot them off the board with the weak save they have currently. Bring em in off a table edge or from an infiltrated position with 4-6 attacks each.....oh yea. People dropping dueces in their shorts everytime you put some down. Warriors are easily fixed by upping their Toughness to 5. Currently they just get blitzed out by fire with such a weak save, and instant death killing them off. Even at T5, with a weak save, massed bolter fire rips them up, and at a high point cost, it's not nearly effective as they should be. It's kind of a shame that the Flying Hive Tyrant has to be the anchor and spammed to make any kind of a competitive list. If more options were viable, that would be sweet! It would also be nice to have something other than the Barbed Heirodule to be reliable for taking out armor. I think they were on the right track with the Exocrine, but shorted it with only Str 7 on it's shots. If it was Str 10 then we'd have a winner. Same goes for the Hive Guard, up those cannons to Str 10 and all of a sudden Nids have a viable force that can reliably hit armor from a short distance. Some of the other units like Trygons and such also got weeded out for more effective units. If they could attach to raveners or hormagaunts when deploying, that would be a huge bonus. You have a mini-formation or something where you bring in a Trygon, hormagaunts, and genestealers. Then the opponent HAS to deal with the immediate threat, as opposed to just a single unit at a time popping in piece meal. I guarantee you would see more units other than Flyrants.
  12. The only way to completely balance 40K, is to require all players to play with the same army list. That is 40K Chess, and honestly I think that would be a really interesting tournament. You could also expand it to just using the same codex, and allowing lists to be built to only units in that codex....which would give a bit of diversity. Backstory and fluff however, are certainly elements that drew me into the hobby, and I'd be willing to be an overwhelming majority of those playing today. While it may not have a lot to do with balance (arguable), it's certainly a factor for continued involvement in the hobby. I guess everyone has a different idea of what's fun and what a tourney should be. Some people like stomping face and winning with whatever army pieces they can put together, fluff be damned, that is the next hotness and powerful combos, and paint to the bare minimum. Others devote a ridiculous amount of time to each model, meticulously painting each detail, naming their captains, and stomping across the field of battle with a specific space marine company. And there's a lot in between, just looking for a great game with some new faces and an enjoyable game. Whatever your draw into the tournament scene, the rules may not be perfect, but it at least gives some guidelines to abide by.
  13. This isn't chess, if we were playing Chess, we'd be playing Chess. You don't see very many highly touted and advertised tournaments for chess these days. Because we want to play 40K, and 40K has a story. It's one thing to face off against marines across the table, but it's something entirely different to face off against an opponent fielding Space Marines, Eldar, Necrons, and a sprinkling of Orks thrown in for good measure.
  14. Honestly in my opinion, the detachments limitation keeps things from getting ludicrous on a story/fluff line level, and to some degree keeps the fluff cohesion together. Not that it isn't stupid already in some instances...but that is a more rare occurrence, and not the norm. But it completely breaks the mood and atmosphere to fight an army with 15 different independent characters all loaded into a party bus land raider. I faced this once in a large 8 player apocalypse game and it was not fun in the least. Fortunately I tied the whole dork lot of them up with some "Without Number" Hormagaunts which pissed off the guy to no end, because the fight was right next to my board edge, and they kept coming on and preventing them from doing anything. Seriously though, it's ridiculous enough facing some of the maximized lists out there with units from a ton of different sources (especially since I'm a Tyranid player primarily). When people start showing up with Space Marines, Orks, Necrons, Eldar, and a couple Flyrants....I'm just not interested in playing this. Might as well mix all the armies together and not have any kind of army organization whatsoever. I prefer limiting it to a few armies. At least some Chaos Marines, Renegade Guard, and Daemons makes sense on some level, as does Mechanicus, Skitarii and Knights. It's up to us as players to hold to the integrity of the games storyline, if we lose that, then what makes this game and universe special disappears.
  15. So as long as the Cult Mechanicus, Skitarii, and Knight are taken in the War Convocation, they count as 1 detachment. So if he had just combined the three sources, not taking the required models, then it would have counted as 5 detachments.... Ok that makes sense, I just wanted to make sure I understood correctly. So it's not necessarily a 3 source limit, it depends on the detachment they are bound too. Hey thanks for the clarification, appreciate it!
  16. Another on topic question for Captain A..... I noticed on the Frontline site that Geoff played an army comprised of: Cult Mechanicus Skitarii Imperial Knights Inquisition Blood Angels I was under the impression that the ITC was limiting armies to 3 detachments or formations. This would be 5 detachments right? Or is there something in the army composition regarding Imperial Armies that I didn't see?
  17. Yea so this has nothing to do with table size. But when you win best "Dark Eldar" faction at a tourney, and only 350pts of your army are Dark Eldar.... Well that's absurd.
  18. I was checking out some of the coverage of the Bay Area Open, and noticed something odd... I'd noticed it at the Guardian Cup when I played up in Portland near the end of may too. How is it (and why) that an army is classified, lets say Dark Eldar....when 1300pts worth of the army are actually Eldar? I noticed quite a few armies listed as this or that, but actually was a majority of an allied combined arms detachment from a completely different faction. Just curious, because I haven't figured out any kind of classification rule for this sort of thing.
  19. Reading through the new Space Marine codex I noticed that if an IC from say an Imperial Fists detachment, joins a unit of Ultramarines... Then the unit is considered to be neither Ultramarines, nor Imperial Fists. See pg. 189 under Chapter Tactics. It was very specific in mentioning 'unit' in this rule. So if two IC's joined one unit, then they would be considered neither faction delineation for that combined unit. Not sure how to treat it for two non-Space Marines factions joining up, but at least this gives some piece of mind for Space Marines.
  20. It's hard enough remembering rules from the current edition of the game, and codex's. Imagine how confusing it would be to have to understand or more importantly misunderstand rules from outdated codex's. In your garage, do whatever you want.... At the game store, it's polite, and more appropriate to use the most current version of the rules available for your game and army. That said, it's generally assumed, and might even be implied in the BRB somewhere that codex trumps rulebook. If a codex is released, that would imply that it would Clown older codex's as well. This game has enough rules as it is, no need to go confusing things further, but as I said....in a friendly game at home or even at the store, do what you want as long as your opponent doesn't care either way. This would also apply to the illustrious and supremely awesome follow up questions that begs to follow...."Can I make up my own Chapter of Space Marines, make up my own rules, and pick and choose rules from 6 different codex's to apply to my creative and "fluff explained" set of super rules?" No thanks, maybe in a specific situation or campaign....not for the norm.
  21. As a long time Tyranid player, I can echo the sentiment being felt by Agent P. We don't get allies (and for this I'm thankful as it keeps us unique), but it does feel that in a lot of the games I played at the Guardian Cup, and on the table in 7th edition as a whole, they start to feel very similar. Opponents are shoring up weaknesses, with mix n' match abilities from other armies to create more mega armies. Now don't get me wrong, a lot of those games are fun, but you start to face the same, or very similar rules, not armies. I feel the identity of armies is starting to disappear. It's starting to feel like Unbound. You have basically lost all identity of an army and it's specialties. Now don't get me wrong, in certain combo's it makes for a very fluffy (read this as my opinion of fluffy) combinations. Like Adeptus Mechanicus, coupled with Imperial Knights, Chaos Marines running with Daemons, Or the Adaptus Militarum being shored up with a couple units of Ultramarines, and vice versa. The resetting of the allies matrix was good in the change over, but I think it could go a bit further. Unbound is one thing, bring all the models you want from whatever faction, it's a free for all and you get all the best of the best from whatever you like. But there was something special when facing an opponent playing full Ultramarines or Blood Angels, felt unique. Very few players have identity in their armies anymore, not like the older days. Guys had tricked out Ultramarines Dice because they were full on defenders of Macragge and they had identity. Ork players had their chosen warboss and his clans, most had names, and you'd see very customize battle wagons and trucks in honor of that warboss. And you had chaos marines longing for a game against the loyalists so they could reap their souls and take out 1000's of years of pent up aggression on their former battle brothers. Games are still fun facing opponents with a lot of different armies around, but it feels like these days you are facing whatever latest rules combinations are out, instead of an army.
  22. To be fair to GW, I don't think they could possibly handle all the scenarios that the tens of thousands of players come up with to circumvent, or for lack of a better term, "Rules Lawyer" their rules. This rule is a perfect example, I see what AP is talking about and it's a very valid valid point when you break it down to the heart of the matter. However, it's extremely clear that you should be able to assault on the turn you arrive. Otherwise there is no point to having the rule in the first place. It would be like writing in the rule that Sternguard are able to fire weapons after disembarking from a drop pod, except in this case, you aren't normally allowed to assault after disembarking on the turn you arrive from reserves. Unfortunately, a lot of interpretations while valid when dissecting the language, just don't make sense considering the interaction involved.
  23. This rule doesn't have anything to do with being pinned, or being locked in combat, or falling back, or any other situation except for arriving by reserve. Unless there's another way of getting an assault claw pod into the game in some other manner (which I'm not aware of). It only states that the turn the unit disembarks, which is the players choice, then the Berzerkers may assault on that turn. It doesn't restrict them from not disembarking the turn they arrive, In fact, this rule wouldn't have any other purpose to exist except to explicitly state that the 'zerkers can assault the turn they disembark. Am I missing something?
  24. There used to be some comp systems in place at the Borderlands tournament in Salem many many years ago. The problem with any comp system, is that invariably there are broken elements that can get spammed out. All armies are not created equal, and I don't believe that there's any possible way to do so. Some armies troops are far better than other armies....just the nature of the list. However their elites or heavies may not be as powerful. There will always be a Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock element to the game and that's just the way it is. You try and bring as balanced of a list as possible, to deal with as many possible situations as you can. Furthermore, you have to be adaptable and roll with the releases. When a new book comes out there's always whining and fear of the cheese. Look at the Lictor list that won the LVO, and tell me anyone saw that coming. Bottom line is that people will always adapt and win in situations where no one expects them too. All the armies are different and will always fare better against other armies, but will struggle against some matchups. Its just how it works. I agree with the concept behind what Frontline Gaming are trying to accomplish with their polls. However, I may not agree completely with the pre-emptive attack on the Eldar, but I understand it. I know they're in a tough position trying to make the contests fun for everyone that comes, and no one wants to play a GT over two days that 4/6 matchups are super stomper Eldar armies. I'd like to see how the actual book plays out with Gargantuan Wraithkngihts, and D-weapons, and lots of jet bikes with a bazillion shots on them, and I trust that the FLG guys are playtesting the hell out of them. People will learn to counter as they always do, and the all comers list will alter slightly. Look at the invisibility and 2++ rerollable saves. Most agree those solutions work out fine, and people still take those options. Comp systems won't work....very very small tweaks will.
  25. Thanks LH, I don't use formations much, nor detachments. I'm primarily a Tyranids player and we don't get a whole lot of allies. Though from what I've seen I'm missing a lot of potential to take additional units with secondary detachments. Appreciate the heads up. Looking forward to this Tourney. I haven't been in a few years, but last time I came it was great fun. Looking to book my hotel soon, so if people are staying somewhere centralized, I'd love to know so we can grab some grub and drinks, talk about some great games and maybe meet some new friends.
×
×
  • Create New...