Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This sums it up perfectly as to why their rulings are dumb. http://dave40k.blogspot.ca/2016/02/itc-vs-tau-round-2.html

My concern is that the ITC is being corrupted from within. If the ITC can no longer provide unbiased rules where will we get suggested rulings from? This just further shows the corruption within and Recce forcing these completely arbitrary and unnecessary nerfs especially with zero testing, no explanation, being hard to find on their main site (not the faq) but news of it, and the fact that every time I send them a polite letter I get a form letter response back. It's almost like they're becoming the GW of house rules and I don't like it one bit. Until we have more fairness in their internal voting system and publicly share their statistics and data I can't trust them and need to start spreading word for tournaments not to use their set of rules. At this point they need more competition or else we're going to see them become too entrenched and that would be a bad thing for competitive players. Funny how the hero becomes the Emperor like that.

Until we can get some results I say avoid em like the plague.

Tau have won no major tournaments yet and they likely won't at the rate of nerfing. And even in the ITC covered battle reports I've seen Tau lose a ton of the time for such an over powered faction that needs nerfs.

There have been a few ITC rulings I have taken issue with. Some are done not on power level but rules clarification.

For example, the ruling about Khorne Daemonkin where the bloodthirster entered play swooping...felt so stupid to me. It made a gimmick ability pointless. This was the same time that the eldar codex was given the stamp of approval.


I dont think things were done for power reasons but more so that the ITC consistently seems to rule on the conservative side whenever there is a rules question. It can be irritating, but eh, at least its consistent.

There's nothing conservative about the Ghostkeel nerf at all. The rules are crystal clear with zero ability to debate it unless you start playing word semantics and trying to change the meaning of words themselves (I see this happen a lot).

This is just incredibly biased nerfs to us for no reason taking away the main thing making ghostkeels so tanky. The funny thing is at a tournament that allowed both the "over powered" version of both the Tau combined firepower rule and the Ta'unar titan no Tau list using those made it into the top 10.

It was a FSE list that made it there. So not only did he not test anything but his is "clarifying" *cough* nerfing he is in fact blatantly showing Tau bias to such an insane degree its likely any referee doing something like this in a sport would be fired so fast.

I grow to detest the ITC more and more as a "competitive" scene. Reminds me too much of MechWarrior Online "competitive" scene where we had players cheating and developers awarding them first place. Even when caught they get a slap on the wrist. Then the MWO civil war happened anyways long story short I can see the same tactics being used by the Rece and his stooges as any corrupt video game "competitive" scene and I'v been in a a few of those.

I find Recce guilty of favoritism and bias rule writing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyjfNQ0lJn4

I'll take the ITC over stock 40k. Tau too a hit yes but over all their rule set provides a more enjoyable game.

 Gamgee wrote:
If the ITC can no longer provide unbiased rules where will we get suggested rulings from?

Wherever you want?

3rd party FAQs are only ever providing house rules for those who choose to use them. There is nothing forcing you to adopt it for your own games, and if you do choose to use it, nothing forcing you to adopt it wholesale - If there are specific rulings you disagree with, just ignore them.

 insaniak wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
If the ITC can no longer provide unbiased rules where will we get suggested rulings from?

Wherever you want?

3rd party FAQs are only ever providing house rules for those who choose to use them. There is nothing forcing you to adopt it for your own games, and if you do choose to use it, nothing forcing you to adopt it wholesale - If there are specific rulings you disagree with, just ignore them.

That is true. I should have specified. Where will we get third party faqs for tournament players. A great deal of tournaments are beginning to use the ITC and I don't think ours do yet and I'll have to see to it that we don't.

Oh thank god. Lol. Have you guys played against the 300 spawned drone list? It's not fun at all and it's extremely overpowered.

I'm glad we won't have to see such a stupid list winning any tournaments. Although I am sad to see that they ruled that dead piranhas can be "refueled" even though they are dead.

Really, games workshop should have done these things themselves so as not to force itc's hand.

For The Greater Nerf!

I thought this was a joke when I first heard about it...

I don't see the problem. I'd rather something is preemptively nerfed instead of it ruining an entire tournament

To be perfectly honest, I wish they'd have done more of this sort of thing in general. One can say many things about Reece (or anyone for that matter), but from my experience with him in person at a couple of events (though never as an opponent admittedly) and on tabletop gaming forums like this, it's hard to see him on some sort of power-tripping personal vengeance quest against Tau.

 Gamgee wrote:

That is true. I should have specified. Where will we get third party faqs for tournament players..

And the answer would be the same.

Tournaments were creating their own FAQs long before the ITC, and before that the INAT (which received much of the same sort of criticism), came along. TOs are free to use publicly-available 3rd party FAQs or not, and to cherry-pick the bits they like from them or not.

The people who create these FAQs aren't doing it as a power trip. They're doing it to have a list of known issues and suggested resolutions for them that people can choose to use or not. Nobody is forcing you to use them.

 Gamgee wrote:
This sums it up perfectly as to why their rulings are dumb. http://dave40k.blogspot.ca/2016/02/itc-vs-tau-round-2.html

My concern is that the ITC is being corrupted from within. If the ITC can no longer provide unbiased rules where will we get suggested rulings from? This just further shows the corruption within and Recce forcing these completely arbitrary and unnecessary nerfs especially with zero testing, no explanation, being hard to find on their main site (not the faq) but news of it, and the fact that every time I send them a polite letter I get a form letter response back. It's almost like they're becoming the GW of house rules and I don't like it one bit. Until we have more fairness in their internal voting system and publicly share their statistics and data I can't trust them and need to start spreading word for tournaments not to use their set of rules. At this point they need more competition or else we're going to see them become too entrenched and that would be a bad thing for competitive players. Funny how the hero becomes the Emperor like that.

Until we can get some results I say avoid em like the plague.

Tau have won no major tournaments yet and they likely won't at the rate of nerfing. And even in the ITC covered battle reports I've seen Tau lose a ton of the time for such an over powered faction that needs nerfs.

Play Sisters of Battle from now on. I GUARANTEE that no ruling by ITC or ANYONE ELSE will EVER impact your army in any way. Impossible to get nerfed if no one remembers you exist.

It's a simple clarification to a poorly written rule TFGs have been abusing. Seems to be happening a lot with the new Tau book.

The intent of the rule is obvious and good on the ITC for following the correct interpretation.

The sky is not falling.

I think stopping the never ending supply of Drones is an ok ruling. Not saying that the wording doesn't support the ability to do so, but it is a bit of a jerk move to fly in drop drones, then leave without ever having a chance of losing anything.

I do disagree with the Ghostkeel ruling though. The benefit of taking multiples is that you can use the countermeasures multiple times to keep the unit safer longer. This is part of the point cost paid for the Ghostkeel and taking a unit's ability to use the countermeasures more than once, essentially means you paid for upgrades on any model past the 1st that you aren't allowed to use.

No a biased or inflammatory title AT ALL.

Here's some baby powder for that diaper rash.

I'm a big fan of ITC, though some rulings irk me. Good thing no one's holding a boltgun to my head, eh?

If the drone thing is nerfed, does that mean that we can ignore demon summoning and tervigon spawnings?

If ITC nerfs Tau's Decurion benefits, does that mean that we can strip them from the other armies as well?

If someone wants me to play by ITC rules, and brings an invisible death star against me sure, but every time you roll a dice we'll treat it as a one. Fair, no?

 CrownAxe wrote:
I don't see the problem. I'd rather something is preemptively nerfed instead of it ruining an entire tournament

As long as it isn't YOUR army, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cindis wrote:
It's a simple clarification to a poorly written rule TFGs have been abusing. Seems to be happening a lot with the new Tau book.

The intent of the rule is obvious and good on the ITC for following the correct interpretation.

The sky is not falling.

You are 100% incorrect. It is not a "simple clarification" lmao. It is a complete opposite ruling of the rule simply because they didn't like it.

There is a reason why people enjoy playing ITC rules even in there personal meta, cause the rules are more far and will be corrected if presented with a good argument. If you do not like ITC rules then you don't have to play at those tournaments, probable better for other people who won't have to deal with an increase of WAAC players at tourneys

 Mojo1jojo wrote:
There is a reason why people enjoy playing ITC rules even in there personal meta, cause the rules are more far and will be corrected if presented with a good argument. If you do not like ITC rules then you don't have to play at those tournaments, probable better for other people who won't have to deal with an increase of WAAC players at tourneys

you DO realize the hypocrisy of what you are saying, yes?

notredameguy10 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
I don't see the problem. I'd rather something is preemptively nerfed instead of it ruining an entire tournament

As long as it isn't YOUR army, right?

Thats highly presumptuous of you to think that i only could like it because I benefit from it

You'll have to excuse them. They are a bit blind in their rage right now. Anyone not raging at the moment is considered the enemy.

I'm all for you having free speech to voice your own opinion, but calling for a boycott without suggesting a viable alternative isn't helpful and doesn't support your cause.

Suggestion:

1. Spend hundreds of hours and create a better alternative rule set.
2. Spend your own time and money promoting it and making it the defecto tournament standard.
3. Make every decision 100% perfect, every time, so that nobody is impacted and nobody has reason to complain.
4. Come back in 6 months when you've achieved all the above and tell us how easy it was.

Yeah. Thought not.

Its a pile of crap is what this is.

I am so done with it. to think I just got my local shop to ACTUALLY run a tournament and because none of them KNOW 40K well enough and I didnt want to have to run one AGAIN, I got them to use the ITC as their format to make it easy on them.

and then this. I feel like destroying the very event I just helped organize. I am that angry. I am already NOT a fan of the ITC FAQ and format but this rules authoring is absolutely absurd.

And a lot of tournaments were run before AND after the ITC came along so lets not act like the ITC is doing us a big huge FAVOR by doing this "for us". It isn't for us. It's just a necessity of their events and some people liked it.

The INAT was the same way. This is just bad.

Haters of the ITC, due to clear rules clarifications and honest voting polls. Oh well, can't please everyone.. And honestly, the group that isn't pleased isn't that great of one anyway.. I mean, look what they play

Wow you sure can play 'spot the Tau' player easy here.

 CrownAxe wrote:
I don't see the problem. I'd rather something is preemptively nerfed instead of it ruining an entire tournament

Ok then. Your entire army is banned. And you'd better not complain, because you made it perfectly clear that you'd rather see something preemptively nerfed than risk letting it ruin an entire tournament. And who knows what horrible abusive fun-ruining things your army might be capable of.

PS: don't bother trying to buy a different army, that will also be banned.

notredameguy10 wrote:
You are 100% incorrect. It is not a "simple clarification" lmao. It is a complete opposite ruling of the rule simply because they didn't like it.

This. There was nothing at all ambiguous about the rules, certain players just didn't like that GW made the rule. And because of the popular idea that Tau are overpowered they manage to get people to support their nerfs. Is it a good change to make? Arguably, but that doesn't make it a clarification.

And, honestly, I'd be much less annoyed about ITC if they admitted that this is what they are doing instead of hiding behind their laughable "we're just clarifying ambiguous rules" excuse. If you want to nerf Tau at least have the courage to openly say "we don't like this unit, so we're going to nerf it".

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Haters of the ITC, due to clear rules clarifications and honest voting polls. Oh well, can't please everyone.. And honestly, the group that isn't pleased isn't that great of one anyway.. I mean, look what they play

sorry...there was a vote on this? Umm...

Oh noez, they turned the uneven rules against you. Too bad GW can't write stuff corectly.

ITC faq's are good. Now their missions and comp are not.

 Peregrine wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
I don't see the problem. I'd rather something is preemptively nerfed instead of it ruining an entire tournament

Ok then. Your entire army is banned. And you'd better not complain, because you made it perfectly clear that you'd rather see something preemptively nerfed than risk letting it ruin an entire tournament. And who knows what horrible abusive fun-ruining things your army might be capable of.

PS: don't bother trying to buy a different army, that will also be banned.

Ok I buy and play all armies then