von hammer Posted April 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 As of right this second, no. The fact that Frontline is going to amend a few of the rulings due to this codex is hilarious. Why not just say no Eldar and get it over with, lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 As of right this second, no. The fact that Frontline is going to amend a few of the rulings due to this codex is hilarious. Why not just say no Eldar and get it over with, lol Changes have been so rapid that I think the ITC should take a more circumspect view as they try to legislate things. I really don't think that their feelings on the matter of allowing or disallowing things in the broad sense is going to work. it is almost as if GW looks right at the ITC limitations and rulings and says "Well, we have some good news and some bad news for you, ITC..." Even I, one of the the staunchest single CAD supporters LONG after it was clear that they weren't the wave of the future, had to admit defeat after seeing the Grey Knights, Dark Eldar, Militarum Tempestus, Haemonculus Covens and the shift has been incredibly progressive since then. The game has changed so dramatically that the conventions of old have simply been decimated. Don't like Multiple CADS? Here comes Grey Knights. Don't like flyers, "it's just gonna' ruin the game"? Ha! that ship sailed long ago, everyone has them and you better have a plan. Don't like Formations? Militarum Tempestus and Dark eldar and Orks come roaring in. Don't like Super heavies? Imperial Knghts get a damn CODEX while the Orks get a Stompa, the Necrons an Obelisk, then there's Escalation of course ... You don't like D Weapons? Oh well. Eldar are going to have them. Live with it, cause GW made rules for it and you're GOING to see those rules played out in some army or other. In fact you can look to the USR section of the main rulebook and see which USR's (Like Crusader) and unit types (such as Destroyers becoming Jetpacks) aren't heavily used yet and bet your bottom dollar these rules will get play in the new codex's. I think as i said before, the ITC FAQ and its general tournament rules is just overreaching itself here and attempting to be something more than the game is going to allow which is to be an "over arching guideline". It is just going to have to serve as a starting point but even it has/is morphing so much so fast that it is kind of starting to look bad in its timing, as the second they "rule" on something, Eldar happens. This wont even be the last thing that offends someone or throws a rock in the cogs, it will just be the most recent. At this stage we have the Tau Empire and Space marines as well as Chaos Space Marines trundling towards completion. Don't expect anything different. Just more surprises and more desperately trying to read the minds of players and of GW at the same time, and probably failing somewhat in both regards as they have on the Eldar and on Detachment limits.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Except that overreaching ITC is clearly successful. And from a poll of folks who go to ITC events, it is what they are looking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I don't really see D weapons as a huge issue. If anything, I think they balance certain units which are otherwise without legitimate "natural enemies." That said, some units with D weapons are unbalanced. That revenant titan is still ridiculous, and not entirely for the D weapons. In regards to ITC, one of the big issues is that they ruled Invisibility to be able to be hit with blast/template weapons at BS 1. Normally, blast/template weapons can't target invisible units, so ranged D weapons, which are almost exclusively template/blast weapons, are able to target invisible units if ITC allows them in normal play. So in this respect, they've sort of created their own issue. As for a suggestion, I think it would be entirely reasonable (for a TO) to impose a 0-1 ranged D weapon restriction in list creation. This would create a ban on units which cannot be fielded with less than 1 ranged D weapon. Depending on how the eldar codex comes out, you may modify it a bit, but 0-1 ranged D seems reasonable for a setting which features a limited 40k detachment system anyway. This would be 0-1 ranged D via weapon, psychic shooting attack or other ability, but only if you had certainty of having that effect in list creation. D acquired through a random table would be exempt. In the case of eldar, might modify it as 0-1 ranged D weapon (or up to 1 model with up to 2 D shooting attacks, so they could still bring those wraith knights). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I think, and this is a guess, that anything with a d blast will end up not making it. D scythes will make it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfestedKerrigan Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I think maybe a 0-1 Units with Ranged D would be more reasonable than 0-1 Ranged D Weapons, period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I think maybe a 0-1 Units with Ranged D would be more reasonable than 0-1 Ranged D Weapons, period. Except, than this opens up a whole new issue with some of the more nasty super heavies. That was half the revenant titan issues when escalation launched, after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I think, and this is a guess, that anything with a d blast will end up not making it. D scythes will make it though. Likely, we'll get something like a compromise where no one wins... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Likely, we'll get something like Obamacare (A compromise where no one wins....).There's no appropriate way to respond to this outside RoC. Maybe find a different analogy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white_devil Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 GW has stated numerous times that they do not care for tournaments and they do not write rules for them. Their excuse for the shoddy rules are that players should just "police themselves". Because it's not like people have differing opinions on what's ok and what's not... 7th edition as written is unplayable at tournaments. It must be altered/comped in some way. Which is what the ITC is trying to do. You may not agree with what limitations they implement, but at least they poll the community and legitimately try and make it work. Heck, enough ppl were vocal about one or two things on the latest poll that they announced they would do a new one after BAO. As pretre mentioned, the overwhelming majority are satisfied with the ITC events they attend. Speaking personally, LVO is the best tournament I've attended in quite awhile. And I've been playing this game since second edition, and attending events since 3rd. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Likely, we'll get something like a compromise where no one wins...thats exactly what you DO want in this kind of situation. If someone is a winner, it's not a good compromise. ;) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 thats exactly what you DO want in this kind of situation. If someone is a winner, it's not a good compromise. ;) Huh? I was just suggesting a likely outcome for the above issue. I have no steak in actually implementing it, as I don't play in many events. I was merely attempting to predict how they'd handle it for the ITC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PourSpelur Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Lord H: I see where you're coming from but I have a question. Correct me if I'm wrong but the general tune you're humming is "The game is changing, deal with it. Learn how to counter the new stuff and be creative." Is that correct? (Personally, I agree btw) If so, why the Forge World dislike? Nothing about your stance on "New" 40k doesn't apply to the FW argument as well... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Shots fired! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PourSpelur Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Shots fired? Maybe, but they're soft shots;) 2 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.