fluger Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 First why would you even ASK the question on Chapter Tactics. seriously. i see no reason whatsoever why this question would even be asked. All those codex's have "special stuff" already. It's less a question about actual rules and more about game balance. The Imperial Super Friends deathstar did really well at NOVA (which doesn't have ITC restrictions) and with 3 detachments possible now, its quite easy to make a deathstar that leverages DA/BA/SW/SM in some combination to get all the best USRs. The rule about losing chapter tactics for units of mixed tactics seems like an easy one to expand to non-official CTs in order to make those deathstars not possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 It's less a question about actual rules and more about game balance. The Imperial Super Friends deathstar did really well at NOVA (which doesn't have ITC restrictions) and with 3 detachments possible now, its quite easy to make a deathstar that leverages DA/BA/SW/SM in some combination to get all the best USRs. The rule about losing chapter tactics for units of mixed tactics seems like an easy one to expand to non-official CTs in order to make those deathstars not possible. Except that it wouldn't really do anything, because all the special Rules that really matter are on a Model-by-Model basis, and the bit about mixing Chapter Tactics only eliminates the ones that are handed out on a Unit-by-Unit basis. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 15, 2015 Report Share Posted October 15, 2015 It's less a question about actual rules and more about game balance. The Imperial Super Friends deathstar did really well at NOVA (which doesn't have ITC restrictions) and with 3 detachments possible now, its quite easy to make a deathstar that leverages DA/BA/SW/SM in some combination to get all the best USRs. The rule about losing chapter tactics for units of mixed tactics seems like an easy one to expand to non-official CTs in order to make those deathstars not possible. Was that the point? I thought they were trying to allow FW units with the chapter tactics rule which are also allowed in non-SM armies to attain the special rules of their chapter. My SM rapier battery, for example, has chapter tactics and can be fielded by DA, but has no means to attain DA traits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted October 15, 2015 Report Share Posted October 15, 2015 Except that it wouldn't really do anything, because all the special Rules that really matter are on a Model-by-Model basis, and the bit about mixing Chapter Tactics only eliminates the ones that are handed out on a Unit-by-Unit basis. I still don't get this understanding of the rule. I mean, not even a little bit. But, it seems to be the consensus so I'm obviously missing something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 15, 2015 Report Share Posted October 15, 2015 Still think that if the ITC truly wanted game balance, they'd change the ally chart so that every army is an ally of convenience to every other army (including other detachments of the same army). Then there would be no issues with ICs joining other detachments. No, it's not fluffy, but it would be very strong for balance in a tournament. I'd also include a modified psychic phase which made psykers generate warp charges per detachment (and dispel dice), rather than per army, with the d6 being assignable by the player at the start of each psychic phase. Again, balance, but it wouldn't fly at ITC. They just don't seem to be about balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted October 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2015 ITC isn't about making everything balanced. It is about removing the most egregious problems without making too many changes. (With a couple Reece changes added for funsies.) Changing the whole ally table is a whole level of changes that they don't need to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 17, 2015 Report Share Posted October 17, 2015 So, just throwing this out there. The FW Quad Mortar for SM: http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/fw_site/fw_pdfs/Horus_Heresy/RapierQuadMortar40k.pdf Note how it has the special rule: Chapter Tactics (or as relevant to parent Codex) How does this function with that new ITC Poll? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted October 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 17, 2015 It gets chapter tactics if the chapter has it, or if they don't, it doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white_devil Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 These questions were voted on because they were the most asked questions submitted to them via their new "ask for a ruling" thing. Also, FW is necessary for some armies to compete and should be allowed on a limited basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 I still don't get this understanding of the rule. I mean, not even a little bit. But, it seems to be the consensus so I'm obviously missing something. In the Space Marine codex, some parts of the Chapter Tactics rule apply to models- this includes things like the Hit and Run rule from White Scars, the Stealth rule from Raven Guard, the Bolter Drill rule from Imperial Fists, etc. These rules are not affected by the presence of other models in the unit; each model will have them (or not) based on its affiliation. On the other hand, a smaller number of rules refer to units with a particular Chapter Tactic. The codex clarifies that, for these purposes at least, any unit containing two or more Chapter Tactics counts for neither when determining whether they benefit from these rules. The Raven Guard rule for +1 to Night Fighting, the White Scars rule for rerolling Run distances, and the Black Templars rule for gaining Rage/CA when shot at are the only ones I'm aware of (although I suspect there's one or two more in the FW Tactics.) In short, the ITC ruling on the subject would not have changed deathstars significantly regardless of how the vote went- it would not deny Hit and Run, Skilled Rider, Feel No Pain, or any of the other relevant special rules granted by Chapter Tactics. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galahad911 Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 In the Space Marine codex, some parts of the Chapter Tactics rule apply to models- this includes things like the Hit and Run rule from White Scars, the Stealth rule from Raven Guard, the Bolter Drill rule from Imperial Fists, etc. These rules are not affected by the presence of other models in the unit; each model will have them (or not) based on its affiliation. On the other hand, a smaller number of rules refer to units with a particular Chapter Tactic. The codex clarifies that, for these purposes at least, any unit containing two or more Chapter Tactics counts for neither when determining whether they benefit from these rules. The Raven Guard rule for +1 to Night Fighting, the White Scars rule for rerolling Run distances, and the Black Templars rule for gaining Rage/CA when shot at are the only ones I'm aware of (although I suspect there's one or two more in the FW Tactics.) In short, the ITC ruling on the subject would not have changed deathstars significantly regardless of how the vote went- it would not deny Hit and Run, Skilled Rider, Feel No Pain, or any of the other relevant special rules granted by Chapter Tactics. Unless, of course, the guy writing the rule change knows about this loophole and writes the rule change in order to do what the poll question asked. In which case, if the vote had gone against the SM players I am more than willing to bet that Reece would've written it to function as the poll question asked, and not how you have it interpreted here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug_L Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 I just noticed that the ITQ rules allow all Iron Hands vehicles to get IWD. Awesome! 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.