s6nculve

Probably. lol

I've never been convinced that GW makes game decisions based off sales. If they did, new models would work a lot better, but there are plenty of examples of that not being true.

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

 I have faith that SOB will receive support some day; I just don't believe that that day will come any year soon.

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

Another question came up:

Does the following formation come in automatically turn one if their is no other drop pod in the list?  

Rules of the formation::

Wolf Guard Thunderstrike: 1 unit of 10 Wolfguard in a Drop Pod, and 1 unit of Terminators with all of the supplement special rules (Kingsguard, Sagaborn, First Among Equals). All units in the Formation must deepstrike, and, they all come in on a single roll.

 

Well the issue is that the Drop Pod comes in WITH the Terminators in this Formation. And since the Terminators cannot Deepstrike turn one, the Drop pod has to wait with them. So that is the ruling for this tournament.

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

That is official.  I apologize, i should have said so.

Okay, thanks. :)

Interesting.  I think the general concensus is that the Codex defines the Armor Value for the Quantum shielded vehicle as 13 and thus it is 13.  I think the key is that the armor has to BE something before any weapon hits it.  So before any weapon hits it, it's a 13.

 

The Lance then TREATS that 13 as a 12.

 

So the Codex is right:  it is 13 before any weapon is fired at it.

 

The Lance is right:  it treats 13 as 12.

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. :)

That's a lot of 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. :)

What specifically are you hoping to have allowed?

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?

So the Stompa and Tesseract Vault are allowed (both are in their respective codex), but Escalation superheavies such as the Baneblade are not? Just looking for some clarification here.

Yes, that is true.

you forgot the heavy destroyer in the second cult  Giotta have a unit of them also

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

Yup.  The Formations can be used outside a Decurion so you can do that.  Might be tought on points but...

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

The Decurion Detachment is one detachment, though it is composed of several formations potentially.

 

So you could create a Decurion Detachment, a second Decurion Detachment and a Combined Arms Detachment, points permitting.  Or just two Decurion Detachments.  Etc...

Or just two Destroyer Cult Formations. lol

Yeah, as I read the Codex, a Decurion is a single Detachment, regardless of how many of the little Formations you take as part of it.

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.

Detachments have been covered. Any two Detachments, or any three if at least one of them is a CAD.

 

The rest, I don't know.

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?