s6nculve

Probably. lol

Not saying it's they've been that way during their entire history, I'm only saying recently it seems to be the case.

Yeah, maybe. I hope they do, I simply guessed within the year. Lately, GW seems to be like: Senior Sales Manager- "Hey guys, those products that aren't selling well, make that [big bad swear word] sell." Employee- "Sir, do we care about balance?" Senior Sales Manager- "Not really, just make that [big bad swear word] hot. Oh, and come up with some new ideas on how we can sell models that we already produce." lol

I disagree. Prefer two Detachments. It's simple and, in my opinion, balancing. I prefer attending tournaments with this limitation. :) I agree, though I believe that GW will release 'support' for SoB within the year basically to sell more SoB models. I completely agree. I prefer armies to be individually supported. Plus, more products for GW equates to higher profits and GW is all about profits. lol

Is this the exact wording? lol

I guess we can discuss Lance versus Quantum Shielding, though not here. If you like, I am willing to start a thread in the rules discussion section? Just to be clear though, I am talking about RAW; I am not talking about RAI, balance, fluff, opinions, ect. I only post and accept quotes from a source of rules. I have recently changed my opinion based on someone's quote, from the rulebook, so maybe I am missing something else with regards to the subject. I understand some wording is open to interpretation within the rulebook, in general , so such wording will be disregarded. At least by me. If it can go either way, it's not RAW. So if we start a discussion on this subject, please only post quote and talk about your point in relation to the quote. Is that acceptible?

RAW, it does. We already have the ruling, so it doesn't really matter. I don't really want to disscuss this here. lol

So, Sequencing was pointed out to me. I totally forgot about it. My bad. Everything I had said before is true, though Sequencing says the active player chooses the order. So QS can ignore Lance, though only on the controlling player's turn (Overwatch). Extremely limited. The more you know. lol

Okay, thanks. :)

Is that an official ruling for the tournament? To clarify, Modifiers identify QS & Lance as modifiers that set values. Multiple Modifiers says they happen at the same time. Basic Versus Advance says they conflict, so QS overrules Lance. No other rules apply, specifically when talking about when they 'see' each other and timing, unless someone can quote something to the contrary. I don't really care how it's ruled. I know how it is ruled RAW. If it's ruled differently by the TO(s) for RAI or for 'balance,' I'm okay with that. I simply want to know how it will be handled for this tournament.

I have a question about how Lance and Quantum Shielding interact with each other. This is my point: Modifiers- "Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model's characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, ect.), subtracting from it (-1, -2, ect.), multiplying it (x2, x3, ect.) or even setting its value (1, 8, ect.)." Multiple Modifiers- "If a model has a combination of rules or wargear that modify a characteristic, first apply any multipliers, then apply any additions or subtractions, and finally apply any set values." Lance- "count Vehicle Armour Values that are higher than 12 as 12." Quantum Shielding- "counts all of its Front and Side Armour Values as 13." Basic Versus Advance- "a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence." Both Lance and Quantum Shielding are modifiers that set a characteristic value (Armour Value). Since they are both the same type of modifier and happen at the same time, on the same 'layer,' they are conflicting with no clear outcome. Since they are conflicting, Basic Versus Advance comes into play. Lance is basic, while Quantum Shielding is advanced. How will this interaction be handled in the tournament?

Okay, thank you for the feedback. :)

Name: Nathan T. Culver Army: Necrons Location: Bellevue, WA Available: Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays. Preferred Game Location: Heroic Knight Games, Issaquah; Mox Boarding House, Bellevue; or House. Preferred Contact Method: PM

I am asking for myself and others. I do understand that proxying is a temporary solution, if I don't have the correct model. I have no intension of proxying an entire army. I own almost every Necron model. Though there are a few a I don't own. Again, the list I provided was an answer to Lord Hanaur's question of what specific units would I possibly proxy. It was not an army list of proxies. I'm asking if Proxying is allowed, and if so, what are the guidelines. I listed similarly shaped models, as an example, to ask if 'similarly shaped models' is the guideline. As another example, I don't own any Heavy Destroyers cause I'm not willing to pay extra money for the same model, with a slightly longer weapon. I normally place a token next to my 'Heavy Destroyers,' to mark them as such; is this acceptable? I don't want to show and be told something I proxied is unacceptable, if I do even decide to proxy. :)

I'm not talking about proxing all of those models, those are examples. I simply want to know what are the proxy guidelines are, if any. :)

Well I was hoping for general guidelines. Specifically I'm talking about Necrons and Annihilation Barges being proxied as Catacomb Command Barges (or vice versa); The C'Tan Shard of the Nightbringer/Deceiver being proxied as a Transcendent C'Tan (or vice versa); Destroyers being proxied as Heavy Destroyers (or vice versa); Doom Scythes being proxied as Night Scythes (or vice versa); Overlords being proxied as Anrakyr the Traveller, Imotekh the Stormlord, Nemesor Zahdrekh, Trazyn the Infinite or Vargard Obyron (or vice versa). I may not proxy at all, though I'd like to know in case I do decide to.

What are the guidelines for proxying models, if proxies are even allowed?

Yes, that is true.

The requirement is 0-1 units of Heavy Destroyers. :)

True, though I think this might work: Destroyer Cult Destroyer Lord (Warlord; Phase Shifter, Phylacery) 3 units of 6 Destroyers 1 unit of 3 Heavy Destroyers Destroyer Cult Destroyer Lord 3 units of 6 Destroyers

Or just two Destroyer Cult Formations. lol

Alright, thank you for the info. :)

Lord Hanaur, are you saying formations act as detachments? From what WestRider was saying, I can bring a Decurion Detachment which is made up of small formations as opposed to using 'slots' like normal detachments. I'm asking for complete clarity because I don't want to show up and be told something different when I get there, though I don't mean to play twenty questions.

Thank you for the confirmation. It's a weird detachment, so I felt like I should ask. :)

Hello everyone, I'm new this forum and I just wanted confirmation on a few things. These question have probably already been answered, I didn't see answers to these questions though. Is the Necron Decurion Detachment allowed? Is there a limit to number of formation I may use? Is the Shield of Baal Exerminatus allowed?