Any update for itc poll

[derek]

Hey so it's been like 2 weeks since frontLine posted that itc poll clarification on d weapons. It closed on that Thursday evening but I haven't seen anything since. Does anyone have the link to the updated poll? I wanna see if they've changed the d chart or nof

[Lord Hanaur]

that would be in the FAQ or whatever anyways right?

[derek]

I figured they'd actually post the poll results because they went back to clarify if they were going to actually change the d chart

[winterman]

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2015/08/14/signals-from-the-frontline-warhammer-40k-and-general-gaming-news-rumors-tactics-and-comedy-110/

 

Poll results in here.

 

Ohh and FAQ already updated:

 

Destroyer Weapons:

• 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 D3 wounds, or hull points with a penetrating hit.
• Roll of a 6: Target model takes 3 automatic wounds with no saves allowed, or 3 hull points with a penetrating hit with no saves allowed.

[derek]

Thank you I normally don't pay attention to their signals stuff so

[Guest]

 

• Roll of a 6: Target model takes 3 automatic wounds with no saves allowed, or 3 hull points with a penetrating hit with no saves allowed.

 

I hate ITC.

 

Even with the updated they still refer to a destroyer damage table roll as a "penetrating hit." Read the book.

 

Just like they keep using the the 5th/6th ed "Universal Special Rules" term which is not part of 7th.

 

ITC, the one step above GW's FAQ....

[CaptainA]

I hate ITC.

 

Even with the updated they still refer to a destroyer damage table roll as a "penetrating hit." Read the book.

 

Just like they keep using the the 5th/6th ed "Universal Special Rules" term which is not part of 7th.

 

ITC, the one step above GW's FAQ....

Then do it better.

[AbusePuppy]

Even with the updated they still refer to a destroyer damage table roll as a "penetrating hit." Read the book.

 

Just like they keep using the the 5th/6th ed "Universal Special Rules" term which is not part of 7th.

 

Hits from a Destroyer weapon on a vehicle cause a penetrating hit on a 2+. ITC is, in fact, correct in that regard.

 

USRs aren't an official term, but "special rule" is far too ambiguous of terminology because it also can refer to any other rule in the game, even those listed in the BRB aside. It's a perfectly functional colloquial usage, whether you like it or not.

[fluger]

Then do it better.

[MikhailLenin]

Without jumping too much on Pax,

But what the hell is with the hate. ITC hasn't like made you an orphan by killing your parents in a dark alley over some pearl necklace but you act like some sort of super-vigilante on it at every occasion. Most of the time your grief is stemming from your interpretation of an ITC rule or mechanic that you came up with on your own in vaccuum and parade it like its gospel when in fact you are usually incorrect and when someone points it out, you just return to your cave and await another delusion to come around...

[pretre]

Pax isn't the hero that the anti-ITC crowd needs. He is the hero that the anti-ITC crowd deserves.

[DisruptiveConduct]

MOD NOTE: can we please get back on topic of the ITC poll and not anyone's personal behavior? thank you.

[Lord Hanaur]

I dislike their FAQ.

[galahad911]

I dislike their FAQ.

 

You "dislike" Forgeworld too. I guess I can place both of those opinions in the same file...

[Skkipper]

Yep if you don't like the rulings don't play in itc events. I don't play in hanaur land because I like taking my forgeworld.

[Skkipper]

I like itc attempt to keep 40k playable. It is like when the INAT was floating around. Some people just hated it but it made sure everybody knew what game they were playing. So if I went to Chicago or Tampa or San Francisco, the game was the same.

[WestRider]

Agreed. There are a lot of specifics I disagree with them on, but I'd rather have a relatively unified rules set than be playing a different game in each of Seattle and Tacoma and Olympia and Silverdale and Bremerton and Portland.

[derek]

Moderator my question was answered in the first response. I'm not gonna attack pax as I sometimes feel the way you do the itc rulings on things annoy me alot. But I've come to accept it as its just how it rolls. I want to play more than 1 game in a day and tournaments are how I can do that but people have different rulings on things so a generalized rule book to faq gws book for tournament play is fine some things I disagree with but there's nothing I can do about it. So roll with it or don't play in tournaments and enjoy your basement 40k where you can debate the exact ruling and play your way all you want

[Guest]

Hits from a Destroyer weapon on a vehicle cause a penetrating hit on a 2+. ITC is, in fact, correct in that regard.

 

USRs aren't an official term, but "special rule" is far too ambiguous of terminology because it also can refer to any other rule in the game, even those listed in the BRB aside. It's a perfectly functional colloquial usage, whether you like it or not.

No, hits from Destroyer weapon do not cause penetrating hits at all. A hit on a vehicle with a destroyer weapon then rolls on the Destroyer Weapon Attack Table. They do not roll to penetrate. Nothing in the rules suggests they penetrate vehicles at all. They do not glance either, the model simply loses hull points as per the destroyer attack table.

 

As for special rules vs USR, the issue is that the 7th ed rules do not distinguish between the special rules found in the special rule section and any other special rules found anywhere else. This is opposed to 5th and 6th, where the USRs referenced a specific set of rules. And, USR is an official term used in both the 5th and 6th edition codex.

 

 

Then do it better.

I have tried, several times, though I don't think players are actually seeking a balanced game. I think the ones looking for balance are playing warmachine, or have found a board game they enjoy.

 

I think the ITC rules function in the respect that they allow the style game that 'ard boyz players enjoyed in 5th, to continue in the same manner as it did then. By this, I mean players that seek a tournament, detached from the setting, with highly broken unit combos, armies consistently favoring certain builds, obvious unsupport to the less played armies and lots of deathstars.

 

Think near the end of 5th edition, with that GK codex just being released. That's the game ITC promotes and clearly the incarnation of the rules ITC is trying to FAQ 7th into becoming.

[AbusePuppy]

No, hits from Destroyer weapon do not cause penetrating hits at all. A hit on a vehicle with a destroyer weapon then rolls on the Destroyer Weapon Attack Table. They do not roll to penetrate. Nothing in the rules suggests they penetrate vehicles at all. They do not glance either, the model simply loses hull points as per the destroyer attack table.

 

 

2-5 Solid Hit: The model suffers a penetrating hit that causes it to lose d3 Hull Points instead of 1.

 

Just because it doesn't make a penetration roll doesn't mean it doesn't cause a penetrating hit.

[fluger]

I think the ITC rules function in the respect that they allow the style game that 'ard boyz players enjoyed in 5th, to continue in the same manner as it did then. By this, I mean players that seek a tournament, detached from the setting, with highly broken unit combos, armies consistently favoring certain builds, obvious unsupport to the less played armies and lots of deathstars.

 

[pretre]

Just because it doesn't make a penetration roll doesn't mean it doesn't cause a penetrating hit.

Someone's gonna need some aloe vera.

[CaptainA]

 

I think the ITC rules function in the respect that they allow the style game that 'ard boyz players enjoyed in 5th, to continue in the same manner as it did then. By this, I mean players that seek a tournament, detached from the setting, with highly broken unit combos, armies consistently favoring certain builds, obvious unsupport to the less played armies and lots of deathstars.

 

Think near the end of 5th edition, with that GK codex just being released. That's the game ITC promotes and clearly the incarnation of the rules ITC is trying to FAQ 7th into becoming.

I realize I am shouting into the wind, but lets look at my ITC tournament expereince. I feel your observations are anecdotes at best Pax. Here is the breakdown of armies at three larger tournaments this summer.

 

Wargamescon

1.       Ork Bikes – Zardsnark Deathstar, bikes, grots, - Hugely converted and themed ork army on boars and dinosaurs. Savage body paint style.

2.       Goatboys 2 Knights with Thuderwolf Deathstar

3.       Stormraven formation BA from a very fluffy player just having fun.

4.       Eldar Tau – Typical Netlist – I won.

5.       Drop Pods Ultramarines

 

BAO

1.       Tau Suits, Riptides, Firebase, Tetras, Fortification. Very tricky Tau list. Painted very well with LED’s.

2.       Drop IG w/Space Marines

3.       Tyranids - 4 Flying Tyrands, 2 Harpies, 1 Crone, 30 Gargoyles, a Venomthrope, Hormaguants, and Termagaunts

4.       Highalnder Rasta themed Space Marines – Need I say more.

5.       Khorne Daemonkin – Huge mix of units with the Fist of Khorne.

 

TSHFT

1.       Flying Circus – Belakor, Fateweaver, DP’s, Horrors, Screamers. As a whole, obvious theme, sure with powerful units, but unique.

2.       CAD Dark Eldar

3.       Khorne Daemonkin Brass Scorpion, 6-7 Soul Grinders, 2 Heldrakes. Very unique and Themed.

4.       Mixed Tyranids – 3 Flyrants, 2 Toxicrenes, 2 Tervigons, Rippers, Bomb thingy. Very different tyranids build.

5.       Orks – Zardsnark Deathstar, Void Shield, Lots of mixed MSU ork units. Hugely converted and themed army. Very fun to play against.

 

Very few deathstars. Huge mix of armies. Huge mix of players. Fluffy, tournament minded, painters, guys there just to have fun, drink and play games. I would say the guys trying to break teh system with the most obvious combos are actually fairly few. Most of them are there to just try to have a winning record of 3-2.

 

Say what you will of the ITC, it has become the largest tournament format out there. Adepticon, Nova, and many other tournaments are ITC events. They have put countless hours into this and now have the largest 40k singles event in the country. It is working and more and more tournaments and events are adopting at least the ITC flag, if not the format and scoring system. You will not like everything, NO ONE WILL, so instead of bashing it every chance it comes up, come up with an alternative and put the time in to see it succeed or fail.

[fluger]

The attendance of TSHFT in 5th compared to ITC TSHFT is significant.  I was doing well in a field of mid 40s to 50.  Now it's 50-60 most times. 

 

Whatever your opinions of ITC rulings, it has succeeded in increasing tournament attendance.