Jump to content

ITC Vortex Weapons?


Guest

Recommended Posts

No direct answers on the ITC site. Vortex weapons are Destroyer Weapons, yes, but are they resolved as ranged D weapons for the purposes of the ITC nerf on ranged D?

 

Vortex weapons aren't exactly common, but it's pretty annoying to resolve as ranged D for the ITC nerf, as the uncommon roll often makes them weaker weapons via the ITC nerf.

 

In example, the new DA Rift Cannon (Dark Talon) is S10, ap2, blast, blind, "rift vortex". The Shokk Attack gun runs into a similar issue.

 

The Rift Vortex rule resolves shot as a Vortex weapon if doubles are rolled on the scatter.

 


  • For ITC format events, we use the following profile for ranged Destroyer Weapons in place of that found in the book: D Weapons with the Distort Scythe special rule still subtract 1 from the table below.

    • Roll of a 1: No damage occurs.

    • Roll of a 2-5: Target model takes D2 wounds, or hull points with a penetrating hit.

    • Roll of a 6: Target model takes 2 automatic wounds with no saves allowed, or 2 hull points with a penetrating hit with no saves allowed. This attack never inflicts instant death, regardless of the target model’s toughness.

 

So, if target is toughness 5 or less, the Rift cannon will not inflict instant death if it rolls doubles for the scatter. This is because it is no longer considered S10, but is a D weapon. It instead does 1-2 wounds, maybe with saves. It does bypass FNP and does not roll to wound/pen, but it cannot get any more than 2 HP in the hit.

 

In other words, against targets with 3+ wounds that are T5 or less, the weapon is mostly weaker (depending on saves). Against vehicles, the weapon is almost entirely weaker (depending on saves again, as well as total HP), as it is unable to get explodes results (as well as unable to force the vehicle to snap, destroy weapons or immobilize).

 

Now, mind you, this all depends if a ranged Vortex weapon is a ranged D weapon. Highly unclear, as the GW rules for vortex weapons clearly don't take into account a ban on some types of D weaponry.

 

Personally, I think the Vortex Weapons are a huge grey area in the ITC format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A weapon with the Vortex trait is a D-weapon - it just remains on the table after the initial impact is resolved.

 

So shouldn't anything with the Vortex trait use the same modified table in an ITC setting? I don't see why it wouldn't/shouldn't use the same chart that other D-weapons are being subjected to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mr. Bigglesworth

I think it is a no brainer counts as range until ruled otherwise. As there is no reason to think it will be treated as a Melee d.

 

I do think ranged d should count as st 10 for purposes of instant death, that just seems silly to not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vortex weapons are all Str D ranged weapons and thus use the modified Destroyer table. There is some argument to be had about whether that also applies to the ongoing damage caused by the Vortex as it remains in place, but I think it's reasonable to assume that it continues to do so.

 

I do think ranged d should count as st 10 for purposes of instant death, that just seems silly to not.

 

Yeah, this is the big thing I don't like about ITC's Str D ruling; a S10 gun will pulp a Captain or Chapter Master (or Harpy), but a Str D gun won't. It seems really backwards and there's no obvious reason for it.

 

Heck, for that matter, a Boltgun will pulp a multiwound T2 model, but a Str D gun won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mr. Bigglesworth

Yeah a chance at two wounds makes a vindicator the better gun in terms of killing.

 

But I would be happy if the d never crossed the apocalypse line. I think gc and super heavies are fine to add but ranged d just too much, however the itc nerf is basically a big f u to d.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah allow the titans laugh at the way to deal with them if you're not playing space marines or necrons or craft world eldar. The its changes rulings for the armies benefits but couldn't do so for any other item like vortex I don't think it should suffer that bs table the itc created because d weapons are meant to just vaporize whatever they hit not just say hey I'm glad that gun that is weaker than me can kill you but lordy you still get to survive my destroyer weapon. I think the itc should have just changed the 6 result not the whole chart cause the gripe was the 6 result right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The d3 wounds was just fine what I think should have been the change was on a 6 you do 3 wounds no armour or feel no pain and invulnerable saves at a negative 1 to save cover is allowed and any failed saves cause instant deat. A 2+ invulnerable save vs a d weapon was dumb anyway so you still get some sort of save and a chance to live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The nerf to D is just silly. Sure lucky shots from d can wreck the popular Death Star builds but if you play non death star list it is just another strength 10 gun.

The problem is people built storm shield marine biker lords and cry when they get smoked on a lucky 6. The nerf on shooting D needs to go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is a no brainer counts as range until ruled otherwise. As there is no reason to think it will be treated as a Melee d.

So, for clarity, I'm not suggesting a D melee attack for a vortex weapon. Not being ranged D does not default it to melee.

 

The ITC is specifically nerfing only "ranged D weapons," with all other D attacks being a second category which uses the standard D weapon rules. The secondary effect of a vortex weapon is not clearly a ranged weapon, hence the question.

 

The D explosion created from a destroyed super heavy is not considered a ranged D weapon via the ITC. This is despite it using a blast template and scattering and functionally resolving as a D shooting attack.

 

The Vortex marker scatters after the initial shot and hits things at the start of each player turn. It is also not a shooting phase attack.

 

Seems reasonable that if the catastrophic damage D is not a ranged D attack, then the vortex should also not be a ranged D attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm perfectly calm I just don't get what the huge nerf really accomplished in reality. You still allow knights to come to the board as an exception of only 1 lord of war since their a whole codex. You allow two of the same formation to combine as a battle company per the boom but per itc rules you can't duplicate formations. I don't mean to come off as grumpy or angry I'm just saying that picking the rules you hold every army to and then changing some is just dumb. I don't think the d3 wounds was bad yes it had the chance to be 3 wounds but you got invulnerable saves and cover saves no matter what unless a 6 was rolled. I support that there needed some balance to make sure there wasn't any crazy amount of spam and I am cool with it because I for one would get sick of mass wraith units every game But d weapons shouldn't have been nerfed to oblivion just a Suttle change to the one roll that made everyone angry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The result of an exploding tank takes place directly on the vehicle that is exploding. I think it's understandable why that is not considered a 'ranged D attack'.

 

However, is the DA Talos canon a ranged weapon? If it is, then why wouldn't the results of its shots be considered 'ranged' attacks? If one of the results of its shooting is a vortex, to me that seems pretty reasonable that it would be 'ranged D', and would fall under the same category as other ranged D for the purposes of the damage chart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, is the DA Talos canon a ranged weapon? If it is, then why wouldn't the results of its shots be considered 'ranged' attacks? If one of the results of its shooting is a vortex, to me that seems pretty reasonable that it would be 'ranged D', and would fall under the same category as other ranged D for the purposes of the damage chart.

Okay, so Dark Angel DARK TALON (Talos is Dark Eldar), doesn't have a vortex weapon. It has a ranged S10 ap2 small blast, which on doubles to scatter, gains the vortex rule. It isn't, strictly speaking, a D weapon or a Vortex weapon. The other example, being the Ork Shokk Attack Gun, has a similar profile, where it sometimes has the vortex rule, but is usually not a D or Vortex weapon.

 

As for super heavy vehicle explosions, the issue is that they are resolved as a shooting attack as per the blast weapon rules. They are not shooting phase shooting attacks, but they are still resolved as shooting attacks.

 

The vortex weapons do two things. The first is a ranged attack which does roll on the D table for damage, but is also a quasi-barrage weapon. The second, and this is the important bit, is that they do further damage at the start of every turn as the "vortex" drifts around the table and damages models that stray too close. If a vehicle explosion is not a ranged D attack, then this certainly isn't either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I typo'd 'Talos' when I meant 'Talon'. I know literally nothing about DE, sorry. But -  I think you understood the question. ;)

 

The DARK TALON is a ranged weapon. As far as I know, you shoot it during the shooting phase. It has the potential of creating a Vortex - via it's RANGED attack.

 

I see no reason why it - and the Shokk Attack Gun - should not suffer right along with all the other ranged D weapon limitations that ITC decides to arbitrarily create.

 

But that's just my opinion. I think it's pretty obvious that the Dark Talon is a ranged weapon, and therefore its potential vortex (the result of a ranged weapon's attack) should fall under the same rules as other ranged weapons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I typo'd 'Talos' when I meant 'Talon'. I know literally nothing about DE, sorry. But -  I think you understood the question. ;)

 

The DARK TALON is a ranged weapon. As far as I know, you shoot it during the shooting phase. It has the potential of creating a Vortex - via it's RANGED attack.

 

I see no reason why it - and the Shokk Attack Gun - should not suffer right along with all the other ranged D weapon limitations that ITC decides to arbitrarily create.

 

But that's just my opinion. I think it's pretty obvious that the Dark Talon is a ranged weapon, and therefore its potential vortex (the result of a ranged weapon's attack) should fall under the same rules as other ranged weapons.

Sorry to nit pick again, but the weapon is actually the Rift Cannon, the Dark Talon is mounting it (I'm smiling as I type this)...

 

So, barring the fluff of the ranged D weapons vs the D explosions, why are the D vehicle explosions different? The BRB is pretty clear that as they use a blast, which makes them ranged weapons (page 158, blast rules). And they are certainly not melee weapons....

 

Personally, I see the ITC as being about favoritism towards the SM and imperial knights. I think the lack of nerf to melee D stems from not wanting to nerf imperial knights specifically. The ranged D is almost entirely not present in the SM and Imperial Knight armies (aside from a few FW models). And the ITC makes special exception for SM Formations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to nit pick again, but the weapon is actually the Rift Cannon, the Dark Talon is mounting it (I'm smiling as I type this)...

 

!!!!!!!

 

:laugh:

 

I shall hereafter refer to 'that weapon Pax is referring to' as 'that weapon Pax is referring to'.  :ph34r:

 

 

So, barring the fluff of the ranged D weapons vs the D explosions, why are the D vehicle explosions different? The BRB is pretty clear that as they use a blast, which makes them ranged weapons (page 158, blast rules). And they are certainly not melee weapons....

 

Personally, I see the ITC as being about favoritism towards the SM and imperial knights. I think the lack of nerf to melee D stems from not wanting to nerf imperial knights specifically. The ranged D is almost entirely not present in the SM and Imperial Knight armies (aside from a few FW models). And the ITC makes special exception for SM Formations.

 

My guess would be that the exploding vehicle mechanic uses the apoc blast template to simulate the catastrophic power of a super-heavy blowing up. And does it make them 'ranged weapons', or is the blast of the exploding superheavy resolved 'as a ranged weapon'? (Not rhetorical - I haven't looked at the wording and my book isn't handy). To me there's a subtle difference there: you can't 'shoot' your actual tank at someone when it explodes (though that would be freakin' cool if you could!), but the resultant explosion is resolved as a blast to represent the power of something that big going super-nova, and to guarantee the size and power of such an explosion. I think when normal (smaller) vehicles explode it's not a template but rather a d6" range (I think?). But a super-heavy using a template guarantees the size of the explosion (no potential to roll a '1' when that Super heavy goes critical!) and all the rules that go along with it.

 

As for the ITC... I haven't played in an ITC tournament, so I am just a bystander looking in. What little I know of ITC, I've read about here. I've seen a few topics that -seem- as though their rules lean toward benefiting some armies more than others, but I've no idea if the members of the ITC are purposely doing that, or if it just 'feels' that way. My hope would be that they would dish out equal limitations - if you're going to hammer ranged D weapons, hammer them all equally. If you're going to limit detachments/formations, then those limitations should apply to all forces. Their objective seems to be trying to make a more level playing field, but taking an imbalanced rule - and adding another imbalanced rule on top of it - doesn't fix anything.

 

Again, just my thoughts. I do understand what you're saying Pax, and by the wording, I could see it going either way, which is why, thankfully, an ITC tournament has a judge who can give the answer! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

!!!!!!!

 

:laugh:

 

I shall hereafter refer to 'that weapon Pax is referring to' as 'that weapon Pax is referring to'.  :ph34r:

 

 

 

My guess would be that the exploding vehicle mechanic uses the apoc blast template to simulate the catastrophic power of a super-heavy blowing up. And does it make them 'ranged weapons', or is the blast of the exploding superheavy resolved 'as a ranged weapon'? (Not rhetorical - I haven't looked at the wording and my book isn't handy). To me there's a subtle difference there: you can't 'shoot' your actual tank at someone when it explodes (though that would be freakin' cool if you could!), but the resultant explosion is resolved as a blast to represent the power of something that big going super-nova, and to guarantee the size and power of such an explosion. I think when normal (smaller) vehicles explode it's not a template but rather a d6" range (I think?). But a super-heavy using a template guarantees the size of the explosion (no potential to roll a '1' when that Super heavy goes critical!) and all the rules that go along with it.

 

As for the ITC... I haven't played in an ITC tournament, so I am just a bystander looking in. What little I know of ITC, I've read about here. I've seen a few topics that -seem- as though their rules lean toward benefiting some armies more than others, but I've no idea if the members of the ITC are purposely doing that, or if it just 'feels' that way. My hope would be that they would dish out equal limitations - if you're going to hammer ranged D weapons, hammer them all equally. If you're going to limit detachments/formations, then those limitations should apply to all forces. Their objective seems to be trying to make a more level playing field, but taking an imbalanced rule - and adding another imbalanced rule on top of it - doesn't fix anything.

 

Again, just my thoughts. I do understand what you're saying Pax, and by the wording, I could see it going either way, which is why, thankfully, an ITC tournament has a judge who can give the answer! :)

:biggrin:

 

I've barely attended ITC events. They do seem heavily skewed in favor of SM/IK armies. This sort of discrimination against the less popular armies is quite normal for 40k, so I'm not too surprised. It is a bit uncommon for a third-party to further discriminate against the non-SM/IK armies. Adepticon, in example, had a FAQ that was very well balanced amoungst the armies of 40k, with very good support for obscure questions you'd write in and they'd address.

 

As for the rules above, it's vague at best. The main issue is that the ITC ban/nerf isn't very compatible with the GW rules. The idea of a "ranged D weapon" isn't really something addressed in the GW rules. The ITC really needs to word their rules alterations more closely with the GW rules. There is not a clear definition in the ITC or GW for a "ranged D weapon."

 

ITC has yet to define the Ranged D Weapon term. They, like GW, seem keen on rules that only function by word of mouth.

 

If you look at the ITC rules, it's clear that that they believe that Destroyer weapons are a weapon type in the BRB, not a special rule that some types of weapons have (which is what the BRB says).

 

PS: https://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/40k-faq/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40K events skew toward Marines because they're the icons of the Game, and they're basically never straight-up bad, regardless of where they are in the Codex Cycle. That bias has little or nothing to do with the ITCs restrictions, and has been visible at every Tournament I've attended across 6 Editions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is people built storm shield marine biker lords and cry when they get smoked on a lucky 6. The nerf on shooting D needs to go away.

 

No, the problem is that Str D weapons are priced extremely cheaply and are amazing at killing everything in the game.

 

But hey, if I play you I'll be happy to use un-nerfed Str D against you, since you think it's so fair and balanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40K events skew toward Marines because they're the icons of the Game, and they're basically never straight-up bad, regardless of where they are in the Codex Cycle. That bias has little or nothing to do with the ITCs restrictions, and has been visible at every Tournament I've attended across 6 Editions.

I think the ITC has a bias, and, GW also has a bias. I certainly think the ITC one is much smaller, but given that it rides in addition to the existing GW one, it is a bit mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The nerf to D is just silly. Sure lucky shots from d can wreck the popular Death Star builds but if you play non death star list it is just another strength 10 gun.

The problem is people built storm shield marine biker lords and cry when they get smoked on a lucky 6. The nerf on shooting D needs to go away.

 

No, the problem is that Str D weapons are priced extremely cheaply and are amazing at killing everything in the game.

 

But hey, if I play you I'll be happy to use un-nerfed Str D against you, since you think it's so fair and balanced.

I think you are both right.

 

I think D weapons are really cheap, especially the ones in the eldar book. They are often disturbing in their ability to cleave through the strongest defenses without resistance. They are not perfect, but they are very strong.

 

I also think Death Star lists are one of the worst options to field against D weapons. In general, the D weapons excel when their opponent has all the points pooled into one spot.

 

That said, I think the biggest issue plaguing ranged D is that people haven't faced it much in 7th due to events, like the ITC, which ban them. D weapons have been present in all of 7th edition. There is a D shooting attack in the BRB's psychic power lists. They have been becoming more common with every few books. That eldar book should have been received by players that had faced a gradual increase of D weapons for the entirety of 7th.

 

I faced more D weapons in 6th than I have in 7th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mr. Bigglesworth

Pax I'm pretty confident the people that make the itc decisions play test. The wider population maybe not as much. But lack of practical experience doesn't mean strict lack of understanding. We can calculate the expected average result and determine a lot from that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ranged D weapons were banned because it's not particularly fun to just remove models wholesale without any way to defend against it. There is no amount of playing against a weapon carried by wraithguard 1 shotting my MCs that is going to make it fun. It seems the vast majority of the player base for ITC events agree with my thoughts on that. If D weapons only easily obliterated death stars or expensive units and not, quite literally, everything in the game then maybe it would be more accepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...