Does anyone have an idea of how to deal with T10 Steam Tank?

5x10 unit of skaven slaves for 100 points, tar pit it there the entire game and ignore it

Screaming Bell, Doomwheel & Fell Blade are some of the options open to Skaven. Don't know about the rest of you non-vermin...

Can it be destroyed by WoC nurgle spell "cloying quagmire"?

lomax wrote:Can it be destroyed by WoC nurgle spell "cloying quagmire"?

No because spells without strength value cant target it.

50 LSG + that spell that gives them the s value of the leader ship. Nuff said.

So....300 point Steam Tank vs ~650+150ish points of T3 elves.

That's not terribly reliable, much less given a) the fickleness of magic and b) the uncertainty over whether or not armor values are affected by the "new S" of the unit (which is still wounding on 6's anyways)

If spells without strength value can't target it, what is the point of increasing its thoghness to 10? Is anyone thinks that it is a weak unit of WHFB?

They raised its Toughness to 10 considering that warmachines will be more prevalent and more accurate, in general. Presumably it was to make it more viable, but it's somewhat strange that they would do that to the Steam Tank and neglect so many other units.

Yes... especially considering how scary it was already, imho!

Is it more effective as hammer than war machine?

You can wound it on a 6 regardless now. Just throw mass numbers of shots/attacks at it.

Against armor +1?

The WoC Aethersword would be able to kill it. Maybe not easily, but it ignores armour, so yeah.
It only costs...
URK!!!

Skaven just got rank bonuses to their stubborn? Awesome nice. "I've always wanted a Skaven army."

Empire not getting any nerfs to Mortars is good news for many I guess and bad news for others, and the buffs to Steam Tanks are nice and appropriate too because it didn't gain the thunderstomp etc like every other monster and the steam point system is a weakness (it gets really weak after a few suffered wounds).

Unrelated question: Does Skaven Stubborn now boost leadership during Steadfast? The FAQ was completely unclear, saying it comes after but that it then is added to the unmodified leadership. That changes how effective they are (Ld 10 stubborn >>> Ld 7 Stubborn). I'd definitely say one of those could Tarpit a STank: 50 models meaning that even getting 15 kills a turn with max Steam Points it's at least three turns to break, on average of about eight (assuming 4 points / turn a turn, two hits per point on average) a turn changing to impossible to break and hit another unit that game.


For Empire & O&G (I cannot recall any other armies with this piece of wargear), Runefangs and the Waaagh! Cleava (respectively to Emp and Orcs) can each do good, seeing as they wound automatically with no saves. The pro is that a Savage Orc Warboss w/ the Waaagh! Cleava isn't exactly bad either (5 attacks that auto wound w/ no saves), the con is that it's naked otherwise (only T5 6+ Ward protecting it, 4+ save if mounted) and that both these options are really sucking up a lot of points / require being put in a unit as well / tie up that unit for at least one full turn.

Bretonnia might be able to killing blow it with one of their special vows. If so, that's really their best bet for dropping one: Slap two Bretonnian characters with that vow in one unit, then thrust them at the STank on the basis that with six attacks on average they should get one Killing Blow. Of course, if it's a magic weapon, this is immediately much less effective. Still pricey as well.

Does anyone have an effective idea how to destroy ST?
Or is the best to keep ST busy with cheap units?

Minsc wrote:Unrelated question: Does Skaven Stubborn now boost leadership during Steadfast? The FAQ was completely unclear, saying it comes after but that it then is added to the unmodified leadership. That changes how effective they are (Ld 10 stubborn >>> Ld 7 Stubborn). I'd definitely say one of those could Tarpit a STank: 50 models meaning that even getting 15 kills a turn with max Steam Points it's at least three turns to break, on average of about eight (assuming 4 points / turn a turn, two hits per point on average) a turn changing to impossible to break and hit another unit that game.

It's clear that the ranks are added after steadfast has already kicked in. So, Skaven get the same LD they'd always get, but when they out rank the enemy they are also stubborn. The fact it states ranks are added to the unmodified leadership to me only explains that the 'unmodified LD' is boosted in the end. I can't see any other realistic interpretation except that Skaven are stubborn LD10 in the best scenario on the battlefield, despite what Grotsnot is trying to rules lawyer over at TWF.

Skaven can tarpit the Stank but they can hurt it too. Sure they have weapons that wound it on 4+ automatically and ignore saves, and of course the WLC's/Doomwheels can always roll 10 for strength and possibly cripple it in one shot, but I rather like the idea of 50 Skaven Slaves holding it forever and forcing it to make a few saves each turn.

Therion wrote:

Minsc wrote:Unrelated question: Does Skaven Stubborn now boost leadership during Steadfast? The FAQ was completely unclear, saying it comes after but that it then is added to the unmodified leadership. That changes how effective they are (Ld 10 stubborn >>> Ld 7 Stubborn). I'd definitely say one of those could Tarpit a STank: 50 models meaning that even getting 15 kills a turn with max Steam Points it's at least three turns to break, on average of about eight (assuming 4 points / turn a turn, two hits per point on average) a turn changing to impossible to break and hit another unit that game.

It's clear that the ranks are added after steadfast has already kicked in. So, Skaven get the same LD they'd always get, but when they out rank the enemy they are also stubborn. The fact it states ranks are added to the unmodified leadership to me only explains that the 'unmodified LD' is boosted in the end. I can't see any other realistic interpretation except that Skaven are stubborn LD10 in the best scenario on the battlefield, despite what Grotsnot is trying to rules lawyer over at TWF.

Skaven can tarpit the Stank but they can hurt it too. Sure they have weapons that wound it on 4+ automatically and ignore saves, and of course the WLC's/Doomwheels can always roll 10 for strength and possibly cripple it in one shot, but I rather like the idea of 50 Skaven Slaves holding it forever and forcing it to make a few saves each turn.

Exactly the tank is what? 300 points?

Tarpit the hell out of it and watch as their 300 point unit is stuck on a stubborn block infantry for the entire game.

Point denial is a strategy. You hold up 300 points with 100ish points unit that leaves 2900 points of your guys, vs 2700 of his...

Therion, normally it wouldn't be up for debate, but it matters as it's a break from last edition's rules. Last edition, Ranks were confirmed via FAQ to be completely irrelevant to Stubborn: You had no ranks? You're just as Stubborn as three ranks! This edition, that FAQ makes it painfully unclear. "You add ranks to unmodified leadership" could mean you add it to the leadership that isn't modified, the leadership before Steadfast, the leadership is added on top the Steadfast meaning Ld 7 steadfast with up to Ld10 depending on penalties, and so on.

So is everyone playing 3000 points now? I'm seeing a lot of people analyzing units effectiveness in a 3000 point scenario.

As an empire player, the t10 change effectively helps the steam tank only against cannons and a few high-end monsters or characters. Other than that, the problems (the reasons I won't be taking one) are exactly the same:

1) it has to do its damage the turn it strikes, or it will never do any again.

2) it costs 300 points, meaning that when that 80point unit of zombies charges it and it's done for the game (or after it takes 2 wounds and is likewise done for the game) I am playing a game at 85% strength.

The stank is now useful only against armies with a low model count (elite WoC, brets, possibly daemons on occasion since daemons are not steadfast) but against anybody benefiting from the new steadfast rules, it's simply a very poor investment. nobody panic.

Now, who wants to start the thread about "how to kill the t10 anvil of doom/cauldron of blood/casket of souls?"

The simple strategy is to ignore completely the entire game, and watch it potentially damage itself when it tries to move into position.

The Steam Tank is still what it always was- a points sink for players who don't build effective lists to play as an indefeasible unit against other ineffective list builders. Seriously, with all the artillery that you are capable of fielding in the empire rare section (including the fact that they all use large templates now!!!) the stank is a bigger point sink then before.

That said, it is fun for pick-up just for fun games.

Th steam tank is a signiture piece but i disagree with the comments above that you can just tarpit it with a shovelful of low infantry.

People get this vision that the Steam Tank is so uber it runs off on its own, actually if there is any chance it will get bogged down that is when the accompanying unit gets stuck in and fees it up.

Also the steam tank is best used to deal with enemy elite, this can be sert up easy enough because most opponentswill need to close with an Empire army, if they dont shoot them til they do. Use the steam tank to charge threatening and tough units.

Its a cannon with a nasty countercharge ability, not a stand alone uber unit to unleash to be left to run amok on a flank.

They have changed this thing to a chariot.. what ramifications does this have that might help people deal with it?

Correct me if Im wrong, but I seem to recall that in the new edition, chariots' armor saves cannot be modified, which means you can run up to it with a S10 auto-hitting great weapon that causes multiple wounds, and watch it bounce off the tanks 1+ armor save, because your -7 armor value from having S10 means feth all to a chariot in 8th.

If anyone has the new book handy today, I would much appreciate it if you could tell me this is wrong and I am horribly misinformed.

What about the commander? Is he the chariot's sole crew member?

Falconlance wrote:They have changed this thing to a chariot.. what ramifications does this have that might help people deal with it?

Correct me if Im wrong, but I seem to recall that in the new edition, chariots' armor saves cannot be modified, which means you can run up to it with a S10 auto-hitting great weapon that causes multiple wounds, and watch it bounce off the tanks 1+ armor save, because your -7 armor value from having S10 means feth all to a chariot in 8th.

If anyone has the new book handy today, I would much appreciate it if you could tell me this is wrong and I am horribly misinformed.

What about the commander? Is he the chariot's sole crew member?

It doesn't say that under the chariot rules, all it can say is that a chariot has a fixed armor save, taking into account the hardiness of the chariot, the armor worn by the crew, and any barding on the mounts.

I am under the impression, the term fixed was misconstrued by rumors. As far as I can see they can also take advantage of the spell "Glittering Robe", which I am very tempted to start abusing.

Skaven Jezzails work reasonably well, with their -4 to armor saves...

Tomb swarms

Vulcan wrote:Skaven Jezzails work reasonably well, with their -4 to armor saves...

Not very logical, but Poison Wind Globes work even better

When a chariot moves through difficult terrain, it suffers dangerous terrain tests.

dangerous terrain rolls are d6 S6 hits still? i dont see that being effective against a T10 anything.

No I believe a dangerous terrain test is now more similar to 40k. You roll a die, if you get a 1 you take d6 wounds (if you are a chariot... non-chariots take 1 wound).

Here are a number of ways to beat the snot out of the Steam Tank. . .

High Elf Solutions
Did anyone notice that in the PDF, for the Steam Tank it doesn't include the rule saying it can't be affected by spells that don't have a strength value, so there is a pretty legitimate argument saying it no longer has that rule. This puts the Lore of Metal back into contention especially the signature spell, of course that also means you evil empire players can cast augments on the damn thing.

Also something funny Teclis, can kill the steam tank very easily all he needs is the +3 strength, +3 to attacks spell, and now thats 4 hits that wound on 2+, without an armor save. So he needs an average of 2 combat rounds.

Eltharion can kill it pretty easily as well, since he can cast the savage beast of Horros and Wyssan's Wild Form on himself and then attack for 7 attacks hitting on average 6 times for 2 or 3 wounds (on charge) with no armor saves. Now there is a question on whether the Savage Beast of Horros would effect Storm Wing, if t would sheesh, thats 7 more attacks at strength 9 for 2 more wounds. Of course this is slightly pricey but I would be happy to spend 490 points to kill it in 2 or combat rounds. Oh and if you miscast you might just blow it up .

Noble with the Foe Bane, and Armor of Caledor, and then cast Savage Beast of Horros on him. 2.2 wounds per combat round. . .

Warriors of Chaos Solutions
Use a Giant, thump with club should kill the thing extremely quickly. . . And you will be up by points.
With the new rules it seems that they might die faster but to be honest they were designed to kill Steam Tanks. . .

Some of the magic, could be frankly you should just be using it on other units, unless as I suspect the Steam Tank lost its immunity to magical spells without a strength value.

I am still of the opinion you need a strength value. The FAQ doesn't say anything about Steam Point generation either: It'd be just as valid to say "Well then Steam Tanks can't generate Steam Points" now as it would to say "They can't ignore magic".

Specifically to High Elves, I was looking to find ways today of dealing with the steamtank.

I think the best method I found was using a spell from the lore of beasts to increase the strength and number of attacks that a hero gets by 3 each. This increases STR to 7 and Reduces the tanks armor save to just a 5+, the tank is still str10, so you need a weapon like foebane "Any attack that hits, wounds automatically, and then you use your strength for modifying armor saves" thus the need to up your strength to 7.

One good round of combat should mess up the steam tank. Without using spells, I am at a loss...

Karon wrote:So is everyone playing 3000 points now? I'm seeing a lot of people analyzing units effectiveness in a 3000 point scenario.

I think that the standard is either going to be 2500 or 2999. Definately not 3000 as no one will want to see 6 Cannons, 6 Mortars, 4 Rocket Batteries, and 4 Hellblasters (or anything even close to that!) and there will always be TFG.

_________________________

As for the Stank, cannons causing D6 wounds now will bring it down to size pretty quick. For those elite armies that dont have artillery like HE and DE, try an Uber lord (potion of strength and +3 strength sword) on some kind of fast steed. He will crash in and then be stuck though, so idk how well that would work unless you make him <300 points

I think 3k will be the new standard.

If not 3000, then we'll be playing 2800 (more easily goes into 25% than 2500...)

Flashman wrote:

Vulcan wrote:Skaven Jezzails work reasonably well, with their -4 to armor saves...

Not very logical, but Poison Wind Globes work even better

Oh yeah, I forgot about them, wound on a 4+ with no armor save! That'll take down a steamtank but quick!

(Well, faster and cheaper than nearly anything else out there anyway!)

The STank ignores the same Magic as always, so that solution is out.

Honestly, I am going to run two for a lot of reasons, the foremost being I love the model. I know that Helstorms are probably a stronger, more versatile pick, but the psychological impact, as well as the impact on the game if they are well-supported, is worthwhile.

I don't know the stank but looking around some ideas:

-Ogres. Just their core Ironguts with greatweapons are laying down 3 6Str hits each. And while that still requires a 6 to wound, it's also -3 to armor save and they get a LOT ofa ttacks.

Thunderers. Kind of same deal. Just three of them you're averaging like what, 18 hits? They are str 4 but armor piercing. Some of those got to get through.

Gorgers have killing blow, but I think you'd want something cheap and easy and/or not Gorgery, which has other things to do.

As for heroes, Greasus has 10 str and he'd smush it with no problem other than his outrageous cost.

-Lizardmen, besides spell wackiness, can you just Skink poison them? All their attacks are poisonous so you can tarpit and try and pour (poisonous) sugar in its gas tank.

Carnisaurs need a 6 to hit with their Str. 7, but they take away an awful lot of armor and do D3 wounds with 4 attacks.

Stegadons are nearly in the same boat and you can load them up engine of the gods.

Obviously the characters, especially Kroak and the other I don't feel like looking up, could spell him down with their unique abilities pretty easy. But that's a 675 point solution to what, 350?

The best solution to the Steam Tank in the entire game is the Great Unclean One. Balesword, S8 during the first combat phase, four automatic hits, four automatic wounds, then the Steam Tank gets four 6+ saves due to the -5 armour save modifier, and those are all then multiplied to D6 wounds each. Yep, it just about explodes already in the first combat phase.

The GuO isn't too vulnerable to cannons either, considering he's charging on turn two and has ten wounds.

I have been wondering about how to beat a Steam Tank too as a regularly play empire with 1-2 Stanks so For my Tomb Kings, I'd say the best options are Blade of Settep (ignores armour), Bone giant (and if the immunity to no strength magic is true) a casket of souls.

Therion wrote:The best solution to the Steam Tank in the entire game is the Great Unclean One.

It might be the "best", but is it the most cost effective?

I stand by my Poison Wind Globadiers

Some of these "solutions" aren't particularly fool proof.

Tarpit with X cheap unit.... Did the empire player forget to bring the compulsory 3x mortars and 1-2 helstorms?

Poisoned wind globadiers... Are these invisible poisoned wind globadiers? or are they the kind that can be killed with magic and shooting before they get across the table?

Spell that increases strength of units fighting steam tank... Are you screwed if that spell gets dispelled? Does the empire player know that?

If you use an expensive unit that you'd like to do more than one thing with to kill it in combat, you may decrease its effectiveness by dropping 2-3 wounds off of it. But don't forget that you can't walk away from the table until you've finished your plate. Your big scary strength 6 unit that charged it will live, but they have to knock 10 wounds off before they are back in the game. Its not like the steam tank is a 600 point star dragon. Its the same cost as three cannons, or just 30 points more than a 10x knight unit with full command. ZOMG 300 points!


Here are some ways to stop the tank that are either difficult or impossible for empire to stop.

Cannon. Well, three cannons pretty much paperweights the tank in one turn. One of them misses, two of them hits, and one of those two wounds. D6 wounds later, its impassable terrain.

Stone thrower. Might take you two turns, or it could happen on the first turn. One in three stone throwers keep the big hit over the tank. 5+ wounds with no armor save, D3 wounds gone.

Beast lore amber spear. The empire player will have a level 4. he'll also know that you have an amber spear. But if you are also a level 4, its quite likely that he'll be unable to counter it at least once over two turns. Now you've got a cannon.

daemons of chaos - strength 10 bloodthirster, skulltaker with heroic killing blow, changeling 'borrowing' toughness 10, therion's GUO that he mentioned. The bloodthirster will be cannon-ized, skulltaker now that he is M5, in a bloodletter unit with icon of endless war has a longer charge range than the tank. Mortars might thin that unit to nearly nothing, but skulltaker will make it most likely. GUO has some very decent cannon immunity with regenerate.

skaven - Just make sure you can outshoot empire. If you did that then you could just completely ignore the tank until it tries to get close to you, then tarpit it. Do respect the steam gun however. The steam tank will kill about 15-20 rats a turn with 5 steam points. But if its coming at you, poisoned wind globes will wreck it first.


With all of this steam tank dissing, just keep in mind that the empire player isn't going to driving it around midfield trying to roll your flank with it. He'll just have it idling next to his wizard, waiting. As you get harassed by pistoliers, weakened then charged by knights, and bombed on by 7-8 warmachines, it'll still just be waiting. Whatever limps through the smoke and the fleeing pistoliers will be faced with this beast. Adjust your 'steamtank counters' accordingly.

Shep wrote:Tarpit with X cheap unit.... Did the empire player forget to bring the compulsory 3x mortars and 1-2 helstorms?

The problem here is that even just putting a single turn of this into said Tarpit is potentially saving hundreds of points in other troops from being gibbed (I mean, if someone chose to fire all that at my 250pt block of Night Goblins instead of my 450pt block of Big 'Uns I'd be ecstatic).

Shep wrote:Poisoned wind globadiers... Are these invisible poisoned wind globadiers? or are they the kind that can be killed with magic and shooting before they get across the table?

Globadiers have about a 10" move, to my understanding, and can march-fire to boot (unless I recall Skirmisher changes wrong). The bigger disadvantages for them now are that:
1) Special (thus competing with things like Jezzails)
2) Suffer long-range penalties (meaning usually -2 to hit due to movement plus range)

That's where Poison Wind Mortars come in, needing 5's instead of 4's but longer ranged to boot.

Shep wrote:Spell that increases strength of units fighting steam tank... Are you screwed if that spell gets dispelled? Does the empire player know that?

Depends a lot on the army. HElves with Teclis, you aren't dispelling diddly the turn it's cast.

Shep wrote:Cannon. Well, three cannons pretty much paperweights the tank in one turn. One of them misses, two of them hits, and one of those two wounds. D6 wounds later, its impassable terrain.

Unfortunately, very few armies have access to these (four, to my understanding, three if you discount the Hellcannon and two if you ignore Dogs of War). Heh, well, I apologize: Unfortunate for us. For those wielding one or two Steam Tanks, it's not much a loss at all.

Shep wrote:Stone thrower. Might take you two turns, or it could happen on the first turn. One in three stone throwers keep the big hit over the tank. 5+ wounds with no armor save, D3 wounds gone.

Wait, Stone Throwers are only D3 wounds now? They really cut down a Stone Thrower to make up for it no longer needing to guess. Like, hit it hard. From S4 (S8) D6 wounds no-saves, but having to guess, to no-guess... but S3 (9) with full saves and D3 wounds. Ouch.

Shep wrote:daemons of chaos - strength 10 bloodthirster, skulltaker with heroic killing blow, changeling 'borrowing' toughness 10, therion's GUO that he mentioned. The bloodthirster will be cannon-ized, skulltaker now that he is M5, in a bloodletter unit with icon of endless war has a longer charge range than the tank. Mortars might thin that unit to nearly nothing, but skulltaker will make it most likely. GUO has some very decent cannon immunity with regenerate.

Again, very army-specific.

Stone throwers are still D6 wounds, but only under the center hole.

Minsc wrote:That's where Poison Wind Mortars come in, needing 5's instead of 4's but longer ranged to boot.

notice I ducked talking about those, haha.

They are disgusting! And rumored to be coming in the starter set? Oh great.

I wish the OP had named what army he played with. That would really help narrow down a strategy for him.

I think my only real solution for a Stank in my WoC is the hellcannon.

its str10 but that's still only a wound on 4+, and it'll prolly scatter.

Infernal gateway could do the trick with the right roll, but I'm not sure i wanna focus fire the Stank and leave the rest of his army un-blooded.

Can anyone post the actual magic rule regarding the stank now?

I can only paraphrase from looking at it like twenty times.

"the metal hull affords some amount of magical protection. Therefore the steam tank can only be damaged by spells with a strength characteristic. All other spell affects are ignored."

The problem is, in the FAQ it says use the following abilities ect. and thick hull plating isnt one of them.

They fail to list its magic resistant thick hull in the special rules in the FAQ, they dont tell us to disregard the rule in the army book. This will likely just take a phone call to fix.

The thing is, "Thick Hull" isn't the rule that gives the magic immunity. It's under a section something like "Steam Tank in the Magic Phase".

For HE an interesting option is to charge the tank with a forlaiths robe mage and be stuck in combat forever. Just make sure you grab spells that can be cast in/out of combat.

Giants don't do badly ...
Yell and bawl ... he wins combat by 2
Thump with club ... Initiave test, fail takes 2D6 wounds with no armour save
Chomp ... D3 wounds no armour save (gets a wound back for every on he causes)

ouch that would suck, since the tank auto fails initiative tests!

The main issue with Giants is getting them there intact: 6 T5 wounds with no sort of save. No +1 to hit Large Targets is a small boon, but it doesn't change that even a Steam Tank on its own has good odds of gibbing the Giant before it can reach combat. Plus, it has a 1" further charge on average (Actually 1-3", having a solid 15" average as opposed to 12-14"), meaning it can then cause its impact hits (which should drop it unless it has full wounds, and likely even then).

That's why you use Giants in pairs, but then that's 400-ish points spent to counter a single unit. You're better off in that case simply buying a block of Gobbos or Gnoblars (since you can get about 60 wounds for about 200-300pts, and even with Cannon + Handgunner spam are likely to weather enough to meet the tank and hold for a round or three than reach in-tact with a Giant).

I got a list that'll beat it, I'm still relying on the beast of lore spell that adds +3str and +3attack, but this list could be ok at decimating the steam tank. Its very gimmiky, lots of magic and lots of shooting, and no tarpits, 2996pts.

Teclis
Noble on Horse w/ talisman of Loec & +3 str lance with no armor saves on charge
Level 2 Dragon Mage w/ Silver Wand and Ring of Corin (but I'm hoping that there's something that says no warmachines may shoot me)
Lance Noble on Horse, w/. Foebane & 25pts of something else
18 Archers
18 Archers
18 Archers
20 Archers
6 Dragon Princes
6 Dragon Princes
Repeater Bolt Thrower
Repeater Bolt Thrower
Repeater Bolt Thrower
Repeater Bolt Thrower
Repeater Bolt Thrower
Repeater Bolt Thrower

Tri wrote:Giants don't do badly ...
Yell and bawl ... he wins combat by 2
Thump with club ... Initiave test, fail takes 2D6 wounds with no armour save
Chomp ... D3 wounds no armour save (gets a wound back for every on he causes)

Could a giant stuff the Steam Tank down his trousers?

THAT would be a battle report...

Mattlov wrote:

Tri wrote:Giants don't do badly ...
Yell and bawl ... he wins combat by 2
Thump with club ... Initiave test, fail takes 2D6 wounds with no armour save
Chomp ... D3 wounds no armour save (gets a wound back for every on he causes)

Could a giant stuff the Steam Tank down his trousers?

THAT would be a battle report...

only if some one knows a way to change its size ^_^ ... Large targets only ever get hit by one of those 3.

ShivanAngel wrote:ouch that would suck, since the tank auto fails initiative tests!

Unfortunately because the Steam Tank has split profile the rules have changed on how it works. It has the drivers initiative of 3, so the giant only has a 50%, chance to hit it with thump with club. I also think that the new rules will also give the steam tank the WS of the driver.

Its under the split profile section, remember the steam tank is now a chariot. . .

so that means steam tanks have to roll to hit now using the drivers WS? that would be sweet....

Only problem with the Teclis is...wouldn't the steam tank just kill said S 2 T 2 W 3 Model in the first place?


Also..really, tarpit if you can, otherwise. Shoot it, alot.

I.E. Repeater Bolt throwers (Take 5 of them, spam 30 shots, it will die sooner or later), masses of Archers...etc etc.

>Poison Attacks


....but question for the day, does it count as a warmachine?

If Yes>Last spell in Lore of Life=Dead.

Sakuzhi wrote:Only problem with the Teclis is...wouldn't the steam tank just kill said S 2 T 2 W 3 Model in the first place?
....but question for the day, does it count as a warmachine?

If Yes>Last spell in Lore of Life=Dead.

The issue with killing teclis, is he will be in a unit of PG, or white lions, and got hide in the 2nd rank and still do his single attack, or stayed up front if he had the savage beast of horros.

Actually the Steam Tank now counts as a Chariot. . . and remember that its a split profile now so it gets to use the drivers WS, Strength, and Initiative.

Actually the giant gets to automatically hit "(use the lowest if the model has several different values)" (not BRB its part of the "thump with club" rule)... a dash (-) = 0 and thats the lowest ^_^

It is a chariot but the WS of the driver is irrelevant since its rules say it is hit automatically in CC

If that wasnt the case it would prob be one of the absolute best models in the game

Ironically karl franz kills the steam tank almost in 1 round

Ironically karl franz kills the steam tank almost in 1 round

NG Warboss with Ironclaws Waagh Cleava, any hits auto wound and allow no armor saves, and when fighting a steam tank you auto hit so thats 4 wounds in one round.
BOrc Warboss-245pts
Stank-300pts
After one round of combat its over

Ironclaw's Waaagh! Cleava is an Orc-Only item, to my understanding. A better bet is a Savage Orc Warboss, in that - while it's only one additional attack (5) - it can wipe the STank out in a single Game-Turn, thus you should be free by your next turn no matter what. Problem being you just spent about 20% of your Lord allotment. It just made itself up, yes, but then you have to consider the points of the unit it's parked in.

lomax wrote:Ironically karl franz kills the steam tank almost in 1 round

Best answer I've heard so far...

Ogres will smack it around with Siege Breaker as it counts as S10 and does D6 wounds to things without an I value.

Sarge wrote:Ogres will smack it around with Siege Breaker as it counts as S10 and does D6 wounds to things without an I value.

It actually has an I of three....

With the classification change it uses the I of the driver...

I'll personally just skink blowpipe it to death with poison attacks.

Not too hard.

Well, this thread pretty much lost its relevance.

Q: "how do you handle the steam tank?"

A: "Use virtually any lore of magic and just insta-kill it, or hex it to oblivion."

Shep wrote:Well, this thread pretty much lost its relevance.

Q: "how do you handle the steam tank?"

A: "Use virtually any lore of magic and just insta-kill it, or hex it to oblivion."

If you don't mind me asking, when did this become feasible? A lot of the insta-destruction spells have no strength, and as much as people try to argue it Steam Tanks are immune to them as it's not a Special Rule that conveys magical immunity.

Minsc wrote:

Shep wrote:Well, this thread pretty much lost its relevance.

Q: "how do you handle the steam tank?"

A: "Use virtually any lore of magic and just insta-kill it, or hex it to oblivion."

If you don't mind me asking, when did this become feasible? A lot of the insta-destruction spells have no strength, and as much as people try to argue it Steam Tanks are immune to them as it's not a Special Rule that conveys magical immunity.

Considering a new PDF was just released saying you ignore the part in the army book about them being immune to magic.... Thats how...

Ok so barring the issue that STanks are or are not affected by magic...

What viable options are available to VC armies to combat the seemingly indestructible contraption?

NightChild wrote:Ok so barring the issue that STanks are or are not affected by magic...

What viable options are available to VC armies to combat the seemingly indestructible contraption?

Uhhhh the thing is very destructable....

There are tons of spells out there that will hit it witha bunch of low strength attacks that dont allow armor saves, or hit it with so many its bound to fail a few...

The thing was far from indestructible before the change, now for 300 points its a joke.

Now the steam tank is affected by all magic. On the one hand, it can now be mindrazored up to s10. On the other hand, lore of metal now bends it over in a big way.

Question: Don't Warrior Priests have a buff that brings a character up to full wounds? Couldn't they now, I 'unno, restore an injured Steam Tank now?

This is FAQ MADNESS

Minsc wrote:Question: Don't Warrior Priests have a buff that brings a character up to full wounds? Couldn't they now, I 'unno, restore an injured Steam Tank now?

There are several healing abilities and buffing spells out there.

However, there are just as many spell abilities out there that have a legitimate chance to destroy the S'Tank in a single magic phase before the S'Tank player has a chance to heal it.

Heck, even the signature spell in the Lore of Metal has a chance of destroying the S'Tank in a single casting. Then there are things like the Puprle Sun and the Dwellers Below that can one-shot it.

Kirasu wrote:This is FAQ MADNESS

Wow, and I just orderer a pair of them. Now I need to promptly order some Helblaster/Helstorms, as that just made the STank a lot less useful. What the hell is wrong with GW?!

Minsc wrote:Question: Don't Warrior Priests have a buff that brings a character up to full wounds? Couldn't they now, I 'unno, restore an injured Steam Tank now?

Yes, there are many spells that could buff or heal an injured S'Tank.

Unfortunately, there are also many spells and spell combinations that have the ability to destroy the S'Tank in a single magic phase, rendering the ability to heal it ineffectual.

Saldiven wrote:

Minsc wrote:Question: Don't Warrior Priests have a buff that brings a character up to full wounds? Couldn't they now, I 'unno, restore an injured Steam Tank now?

Yes, there are many spells that could buff or heal an injured S'Tank.

Unfortunately, there are also many spells and spell combinations that have the ability to destroy the S'Tank in a single magic phase, rendering the ability to heal it ineffectual.

None of the healing spells work on the Steam Tank, they all say either character or heal back a number of models and the Steam Tank isn't a character, and is only one model.

ShivanAngel wrote:

Sarge wrote:Ogres will smack it around with Siege Breaker as it counts as S10 and does D6 wounds to things without an I value.

It actually has an I of three....

With the classification change it uses the I of the driver...

Missed that bit obviously. So much for that plan. Then I suppose ogres would attempt to magic missile it to death with Bonecruncher (2d6 S2 no armor save).

Wouldn't throwing the purple sun spell from death at it be the best?

It doesn't "target" the Steam tank and the tank would auto fail it's int. test.

Shouldn't that work?

What would be the best spell for ST? Could WoC nurgle spell "cloying quagmire" be effective? Any other oppinions...

now that they 'refreshed' the FAQ and removed the steam tanks spell immunity, then the dwellers below and purple sun of xereus both auto-kill it. I think there is also one more auto-killer, but i can't recall off-hand.

Sweeeeet. Very happy to hear that indeed!

There's also Shadow's spell. Pit of Shades.

Use the small template and only d6 scatter, yet partials hit completely.

It'll probably hit the steamtank at least 80% of the time since it's so big, maybe more often than that.

Take initiative test or die. Steamtank automatically fails with initiative -, falls in pit and explodes.

The Lore of metal final spell might remove an entire steamtank on a roll of 6.

Clearly Pit of Shades (Shadow), Purple Sun (Death), and Lore of Metal are the 3 steamtank-destroyers.

Wouldn't you test against the drivers INT like a chariot? Or am I completely wrong on that?

TheBloodGod wrote:There's also Shadow's spell. Pit of Shades.

Use the small template and only d6 scatter, yet partials hit completely.

It'll probably hit the steamtank at least 80% of the time since it's so big, maybe more often than that.

Take initiative test or die. Steamtank automatically fails with initiative -, falls in pit and explodes.

The Lore of metal final spell might remove an entire steamtank on a roll of 6.

Clearly Pit of Shades (Shadow), Purple Sun (Death), and Lore of Metal are the 3 steamtank-destroyers.

Pit of Shades is in the FAQ as not working, last I checked.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Q. Can the spell Pit of Shades from the Lore of Shadows affect the
Steam Tank? (p51)
A. No."

Yea, page 3 of the FAQ.

em_en_oh_pee wrote:

TheBloodGod wrote:There's also Shadow's spell. Pit of Shades.

Use the small template and only d6 scatter, yet partials hit completely.

It'll probably hit the steamtank at least 80% of the time since it's so big, maybe more often than that.

Take initiative test or die. Steamtank automatically fails with initiative -, falls in pit and explodes.

The Lore of metal final spell might remove an entire steamtank on a roll of 6.

Clearly Pit of Shades (Shadow), Purple Sun (Death), and Lore of Metal are the 3 steamtank-destroyers.

Pit of Shades is in the FAQ as not working, last I checked.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Q. Can the spell Pit of Shades from the Lore of Shadows affect the
Steam Tank? (p51)
A. No."

Yea, page 3 of the FAQ.

which is odd since in pink someones added

Steam Tank, Magic phase
Ignore this paragraph.

So it's not really explained why the steam tank is not effected. I assume that one of these is not correct ... since the new pinks in the errata it must be the right one.

A few points about the Steam Tank.

The Steam Tank is now a Chariot, so unlike Warmachines (which it was), it now fits under the rules for characteristic tests for any model with a combined profile. (I.E. use the highest).

I much prefer the Steam Tank now then when it was Immune to Magic, because you can finally overcome it's glaring weakness that is the steam point system. A level 4 with Life Magic keeps it's wounds down so you can more reliably generate steam.

Don't forget that it can be buffed with magic too. What about the War Alter casting Pha's Protection on it on a 5+?

I have played with it in my Empire list, and I have played without it, and at the end of the day, it is something that I feel is sorely needed in an Empire list. It is an Unbreakable, Terror Causing unit that comes with it's own cannon and can protect the flank of an army that would normally crumble to any decent combat unit.

Infreak wrote:Wouldn't you test against the drivers INT like a chariot? Or am I completely wrong on that?

yeah you take int test at the drivers initiative.

The dwellers below does not kill the steam tank. The steam tank automatically passes str tests.

Also, priest healing can't heal a steam tank, as viable targets are limited to "any character or unit champion" within 12"

However, what DOES heal the stank is the lifebloom ability from lore of life. Cast any spell within 12" from the lore of life, heal a wound off the stank.

You don't need to kill a steam tank. You need to take your cheapest unit of ranked infantry and tar pit it forever, then with your newly acquired 200-pt advantage, wipe out the rest of your hapless enemy.

Edit: Unless you have a brass orb, a purple sun of xereus, or Pit of Shades (which I believe they will fix once they realize their oversight). A blade of realities is also a fair bet, if available, since everything auto-hits. A large block of minotaurs with great weapons can also work, or anything that has had Okham's mindrazor cast on it, since any wounds that get through will automatically ignore most or all of its armor save. But mainly, trying to finish the big fella off is a bad bet. Try to tar pit it and move on.

ShivanAngel wrote:

Infreak wrote:Wouldn't you test against the drivers INT like a chariot? Or am I completely wrong on that?

yeah you take int test at the drivers initiative.

Pretty sure it still says it fails all Initiative-based tests.

One thing I hate is when people think that tarpitting the STank will leave the rest of the army vulnerable - has anyone looked at Empire lately? You are staring down massive blocks with tons of war machines still.

I still think the STanks best use is as a psychological weapon, because people put a lot of emphasis on it. That is a boon, I feel.

OK, This thread is starting to bug me, mainly due to the weird rules of the Steam Tank. Here are the parts that matter, and the parts of the FAQ that are flat wrong.

Tri, The section in your FAQ about Pit of Doom, was probably corrected by someone, the one from GW's site is wrong, as of the current rules for the Steam Tank.

Steam Tank
-Still auto-hit, since it still has that rule.
-No longer immune to magic.
-Currently can not be healed, all spells and abilities say a number of models, or specify character/champions.
-Trait Tests: Currently it auto-passes a few, and auto-fails a few as well.
-The FAQ is wrong, the Pit of Doom kills it dead. I suggest talking with your opponent about it.

Steam Tank Solutions
-Need some way to wound T10, reliably.
-Need some way to mitigate, or negate a 1+ armor save.
-Initiative Tests are Deadly, to it.
-Heroic Killing Blow! (Sadly is in maybe 2 army books?)

I'm sorry but saying that the FAQ is wrong is nonsense. The FAQ always has the last word and it unambiguously says the Stank is immune to Pit.

So what is the consensus? Is the Stank a useless piece of junk? Still scary? Decent? I have never used one and it seems I won't need to bother buying one when everyone can neutralize it without breaking a sweat.

Lord Solar Plexus wrote:I'm sorry but saying that the FAQ is wrong is nonsense. The FAQ always has the last word and it unambiguously says the Stank is immune to Pit.

So what is the consensus? Is the Stank a useless piece of junk? Still scary? Decent? I have never used one and it seems I won't need to bother buying one when everyone can neutralize it without breaking a sweat.

Well The FAQ is opinion, the Errata is Fact and the two conflict in the same document; my money is on the Errata being correct.

I don't know how you come to that conclusion. Errata, Amendments and FAQ are all binding rule changes or clarifications and carry the same weight. The errata do not even refer to the Steam Tank, so they could not possibly contradict anything. The amendments removed the immunity to certain spells and the FAQ installs a special immunity to one single spell. That is a simple exception.

There is a school of thought that says "errata" are the only Official Changes to the Rules and FAQs are merely helpful suggestions and hints on how to play certain commonly asked about situations.+

Alpharius wrote:There is a school of thought that says "errata" are the only Official Changes to the Rules and FAQs are merely helpful suggestions and hints on how to play certain commonly asked about situations.+

And my reason for this is here ...

Games Workshop website wrote:...
The Errata have the same level of 'authority' as the main rules, as they effectively modify the published material. They are 'hard' material. It is a good idea to read them and be aware of their existence, but luckily there are very few of them for each book.

The FAQs on the other hand are very much 'soft' material. They deal with more of a grey area, where often there is no right and wrong answer - in a way, they are our own 'Studio House Rules'...

Well, there you go Lord Solar Plexus - what say you... now?!?

Alpharius, no one likes gloating, unless its them




anyway, i need not worry.

throwers no longer scatter.
Brass orb is thrown as such.
Brass orb wont scatter and auto-kills Stank.
proffit?

Failing that i have a multitude of weapons / units / items that ignore saves or inflict D3/D6 wounds (or both )

I wasn't gloating - I was just wondering what the reaction will be to the "GW Official Stance on FAQs" will be, is all!

Ogres have...
Seigebreaker+bullgorger
Bone Cruncher
Ogre Conga Line Impact? (3x7) to get some strength 10 impacts, but that is scraping the hell out of the bottom of the barrel

Dwarves:
Cannons
Other war machines

... Good thing theres not any people in my area that play empire...

Tri wrote:
And my reason for this is here ...

Could you give me a link please? I cannot find this statement on the British or German webpages nor in the British or German Empire PDF's.

Alpharius wrote:Well, there you go Lord Solar Plexus - what say you... now?!?

The same as above - where's the link to that quote and how can an Errata contradict anything if it doesn't even mention it? You did not reply to that question. The Empire FAQ (the whole PDF file is called so) doesn't include that quote and the Empire errata do not mention the Steam Tank. Perhaps you are referring to an older version, as the quote also makes no mention of amendments, while the PDF's are split in three parts.

I don't see the "soft" vs "hard" distinction anywhere in Fantasy materials. It simply says Faq are answers to commonly asked questions. Therefore, they should have essentially the same weight as rules.

Killjoy00 wrote:I don't see the "soft" vs "hard" distinction anywhere in Fantasy materials. It simply says Faq are answers to commonly asked questions. Therefore, they should have essentially the same weight as rules.

I really do think this spells it out quite clearly:

Games Workshop website wrote:...
The Errata have the same level of 'authority' as the main rules, as they effectively modify the published material. They are 'hard' material. It is a good idea to read them and be aware of their existence, but luckily there are very few of them for each book.

The FAQs on the other hand are very much 'soft' material. They deal with more of a grey area, where often there is no right and wrong answer - in a way, they are our own 'Studio House Rules'...

For the record, I agree with you in that most people use GW FAQ's as official rules changes, but the fact that GW themselves went and made the distinction is what causes sticking points...

Where is that language from?

This was for the longest time the entrance text for both fantasy and 40k ... I must admit i hadn't spotted the change made to fantasy. Link 40k

The Shrine of Knowledge

ERRATA & FAQs
Welcome to the Errata & FAQs section of our website. Here you can find the latest Errata & FAQs documents for our current books in the form of downloadable pdf documents.

In this section we cover Warhammer Fantasy Battle, Warhammer 40,000 and The Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game. We aim to have one pdf for each book belonging to these systems, including the three main rulebooks and all Warhammer Armies books, Warhammer 40,000 Codexes, and The Lord of the Rings Journey Books and Sourcebooks. If a book is not covered, it is either because we are not aware of any issues with it or we haven't got to it yet.

We aim to publish a first document within the first few months of a book's release. After this initial release, we'll review and update these documents regularly, adding new questions and errata, and correcting any mistakes we might have made when answering some of the questions.

What's the difference between Errata and FAQs?
As it is rather obvious from their name, these documents include two separate elements - the Errata and the FAQs. In case you were wondering, 'Errata' is a posh (Latin!) way to say 'Errors', and 'FAQs' stands for 'Frequently Asked Questions'. It is important to understand the distinction between the two, because they are very different.

The Errata are simply a list of the corrections we plan to make on the next reprint of the book to fix the mistakes that managed to slip into the text (no matter how many times you check a book, there are always some!). These are obviously errors, for example a model that has WS3 in the book's bestiary and WS4 in the book's army list. The Errata would say something like: 'Page 96. Replace WS3 with WS4 in the profile of the so-and-so model'.

The Errata have the same level of 'authority' as the main rules, as they effectively modify the published material. They are 'hard' material. It is a good idea to read them and be aware of their existence, but luckily there are very few of them for each book.

The FAQs on the other hand are very much 'soft' material. They deal with more of a grey area, where often there is no right and wrong answer - in a way, they are our own 'Studio House Rules'. They are, of course, useful when you play a pick-up game against someone you don't know, or at tournaments (i.e. when you don't have a set of common 'house rules' with the other player). However, if you disagree with some answers and prefer to change them in your games and make your own house rules with your friends, that's fine. In fact we encourage you to shape the game around your needs and your taste. We firmly believe that wargaming is about two (or more!) people creating a gaming experience they are both going to enjoy. In other words, you might prefer to skip the FAQs altogether and instead always apply the good old 'roll a dice' rule whenever you meet a problematic situation.

- Games Development, November 2008

... Should also be noted that this identical to both 'war of the ring' and 'lord of ring' entrance though they were updated April.

Seems GW recently changed the text to include 'Amendments' ... i had hadn't spotted that but it does not contracted the original message ether. Link fantsy

The Shrine of Knowledge

Welcome to the Errata & FAQs section of our website. Here you can find the latest Errata & FAQs documents for our current books in the form of downloadable PDFs.

We aim to have one PDF for each Warhammer book, including the main rulebook and all Warhammer Armies books. If a book is not covered, it is either because we are not aware of any issues with it or we haven't got to it yet.

Although we strive to ensure that our army books are perfect, sometimes mistakes do creep in. In addition, we occasionally print new versions of our rules, that require amendments to be made in older versions of our army books. When such issues arise we feel that it is important to deal with them as promptly as we can, and we therefore produce regular updates for all of our army books.

Each update is split into three sections: Errata, Amendments, and Frequently Asked Questions. The Errata corrects any mistakes in the book, while the Amendments bring the book up to date with the latest version of the rules. The Frequently Asked Questions (or FAQ) section answers commonly asked questions about the rules. Although you can mark corrections directly in your army book, this is by no means necessary – just keep a copy of the update with your army book.

We aim to publish an update within the first few months of a book's release. After this initial release, we'll review and update these documents regularly, adding new questions and errata, and correcting any mistakes we might have made when answering some of the questions.

Thanks Tri!

So, there it is!

While most people happily accept FAQs as 'hard and fast rules', GW does not think they are.

Most play them that way, and I certainly do too, for the most part, but you WILL run in to people (He Who Shall Not Be Named) who most certainly will NOT!

Alpharius wrote:
I really do think this spells it out quite clearly:

What is that, hot air? Are you going to provide a link when you're asked a third time?

Tri wrote:This was for the longest time the entrance text for both fantasy and 40k ...

Well, it isn't any longer. FAQ's, amendments and errata all carry the same weight. There's no distinction in terms of hierarchy.

Lord Solar Plexus wrote:

Alpharius wrote:
I really do think this spells it out quite clearly:

What is that, hot air? Are you going to provide a link when you're asked a third time?

Tri wrote:This was for the longest time the entrance text for both fantasy and 40k ...

Well, it isn't any longer. FAQ's, amendments and errata all carry the same weight. There's no distinction in terms of hierarchy.

No it's just been removed from that page, all other entrances retain it; It is very likely we'll see another update to the fantasy page if only because the last paragraph "We aim to publish an update within the first few months of a book's release..." will not make sense after the next few months. Also both of the LotR games both were updated in April without any change so It is highly unlikely that GW will change their stance on the hierarchy.

But we are moving massively away from the point in hand, if you feel that this should be discussed further make a thread in 'WHFB General Discussion and Background' and PM me: I'll be more then happy to argue my point in full.

It is not in the Fantasy FAQ, therefore it doesn't apply to Fantasy.

Killjoy00 wrote:It is not in the Fantasy FAQ, therefore it doesn't apply to Fantasy.

Games workshop disagrees

all but fantasy wrote:ERRATA & FAQs
Welcome to the Errata & FAQs section of our website. Here you can find the latest Errata & FAQs documents for our current books in the form of downloadable pdf documents.

In this section we cover Warhammer Fantasy Battle, Warhammer 40,000 and The Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game ....

See this section covers Warhammer Fantasy Battles. It's on the GW website and it's how GW play it.

Look, I'm happy to play with an FAQ answer to a question that's got no answer but i will not except an FAQ that does not answer an unknown. Steam tanks have no magic immunity, it is a chariot, so you take an Initiative test against the Engineer. If they want to amend the rules then it has got to be an Errata

You quotation comes from this page:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/articleCategory.jsp?communityArticleCatId=1000018&articleCatId=1000018&catId=cat440134a§ion=

That is because you can then click in to the fantasy section. That page itself does not contain the language.

Nothing in the fantasy section mentions the language you said either.

You might as well try to apply something from the LOTR rules faq. That is ridiculous.

In fantasy, the FAQs are not soft. It is clearly a change. Pit of Shades doesn't affect the steam tank.

Each update is split into three sections: Errata, Amendments, and Frequently Asked Questions. The Errata corrects any mistakes in the book, while the Amendments bring the book up to date with the latest version of the rules. The Frequently Asked Questions (or FAQ) section answers commonly asked questions about the rules. Although you can mark corrections directly in your army book, this is by no means necessary – just keep a copy of the update with your army boo

From : http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat440002a&categoryId=500004§ion=&aId=3000006

I personally would lean toward Pit of Shades working because it is pink. Either way, until they update the Errata/FAQ again just talk with your opponent beforehand. Easiest solution in the book.

Right. Nowhere there does it say they aren't as important or "softer." It says they answer commonly asked questions. A commonly asked question is whether the steam tank is affected by the Pit of Shades. The people who made the game answered this question by saying, no.

It doesn't affect the steam tank. It can't be any more clearer.

Killjoy00 wrote:Right. Nowhere there does it say they aren't as important or "softer." It says they answer commonly asked questions. A commonly asked question is whether the steam tank is affected by the Pit of Shades. The people who made the game answered this question by saying, no.

It doesn't affect the steam tank. It can't be any more clearer.

Except it has specifically said just that. Willfull ignorance is fine though.

That FAQ question about PoS was added when steam tanks weren't affected by spells without strength characteristics.

The pink text shows the new version of the steam tank rules, which clearly removed the immunity steam tanks had to non-strength magic (Pit of Shades)

There's no longer any basis at all to argue that pit of shades doesn't affect a steam tank. It has no rule that says it is immune to pit of shades anymore. Period.

The highlighted pink section shows the specific recent change they made to steamtank magic and it definitely overrides a question that applied to a rule which no longer exists.

There is no part of the GW website that relates to WHFB that says that. There is an intro section that says these are the FAQ for fantasy, 40k etc. Then you click through to fantasy and it says these contain errata amendments and FAQs. At no point does it say they aren't as important.

But you are right, willful ignorance is fine. I hope I don't play you in fantasy and have you try to deep strike against me, since it was somewhere on GW's website, it MUST apply to fantasy.

Specific > general. In general magic doesn't apply, but specifically the pit of shades doesn't. When they remove the pit of shades question, then it will apply.

Killjoy00 wrote:There is no part of the GW website that relates to WHFB that says that. There is an intro section that says these are the FAQ for fantasy, 40k etc. Then you click through to fantasy and it says these contain errata amendments and FAQs. At no point does it say they aren't as important.

But you are right, willful ignorance is fine. I hope I don't play you in fantasy and have you try to deep strike against me, since it was somewhere on GW's website, it MUST apply to fantasy.

Specific > general. In general magic doesn't apply, but specifically the pit of shades doesn't. When they remove the pit of shades question, then it will apply.

Except that it actually does apply, because there isn't a single rule which makes a steam tank immune to pit of shades. Quote the actual rule which does. You can't, because your entire argument is based upon a rule that THEY DELETED, but you're not intelligent enough to know that.

Your argument is that the designers answering questions about the rules has no weight. Sadly, that isn't supported by what they've said.

Personal insults will not change that.

Guys - let's try to stay calm in here, OK?

And, as has already been pointed out, I'm not sure how this link here:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat440002a&categoryId=500004§ion=&aId=3000006

is construed as 'hot air' or "ambiguous' but hey, that's why we play the game, right?

Thanks Alpharius

My point is that the link you give above says

"FAQ section answers commonly asked questions about the rules."

At no point does it say the FAQ is a less reliable source or soft in any way.

It is the people who make the game explaining the the FAQ _answers_ questions about the rules. Therefore, those are the answers.

Yea, that sounds good BloodGod, but you don't ignore a rule just because a new one changes something else. It says it is not affected by Pit of Shades. Period. Until they remove it from the FAQ, it sticks for most tourneys. You want to play in a friendly game that way, go for it, but don't expect a majority of places to rule in your favor.

em_en_oh_pee wrote:Yea, that sounds good BloodGod, but you don't ignore a rule just because a new one changes something else. It says it is not affected by Pit of Shades. Period. Until they remove it from the FAQ, it sticks for most tourneys. You want to play in a friendly game that way, go for it, but don't expect a majority of places to rule in your favor.

It's not a rule. It's an answer about a rule which no longer exists.

There is no rule in the steam tank's profile which protects it from pit of shades, PERIOD.
Do what it tells you in the pink text of the errata and delete the section which states the steamtank has immunity to certain magic.
Now the steam tank no longer has any special rules at all which would effect pit of shades in any way.

I guess I'm the only one in this thread with any common sense. You're too busy arguing semantics in order to try and make empire stronger when there isn't even a rule to support it.

But I guess if you keep saying so, the designers will magically undelete the protection from magic they purposefully removed, Killjoy00. Cross your fingers and kick your shoes together.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

em_en_oh_pee wrote:Yea, that sounds good BloodGod, but you don't ignore a rule just because a new one changes something else. It says it is not affected by Pit of Shades. Period. Until they remove it from the FAQ, it sticks for most tourneys. You want to play in a friendly game that way, go for it, but don't expect a majority of places to rule in your favor.

If you want to play a friendly game that way, go for it, but don't expect a majority of places to rule in your favor when you're arguing you're immune to spells for no reason whatsoever.

It is immune to that spell because the FAQ says so.

Tri wrote:

Killjoy00 wrote:It is not in the Fantasy FAQ, therefore it doesn't apply to Fantasy.

Games workshop disagrees

No, Games Workshop does not disagree. You are making up stuff. Games Workshop makes no mention of any hierarchy. The change in the tonality of the FAQ's cannot be overheard either. Before, they would start an answer with "We suggest...". Nowadays, it says "Yes" or "No". I'm afraid that is not a suggestion or tipp anymore, that's a perfectly applicable ruling.

TheBloodGod wrote:
Willfull ignorance is fine though.
...
There's no longer any basis at all to argue that pit of shades doesn't affect a steam tank. It has no rule that says it is immune to pit of shades anymore. Period.

Here's the rule you are willfully ignoring:

"Q. Can the spell Pit of Shades from the Lore of Shadows affect the
Steam Tank? (p51)
A. No."

What part of that has been deleted, TheBloodGod?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Alpharius wrote:

And, as has already been pointed out, I'm not sure how this link here:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat440002a&categoryId=500004§ion=&aId=3000006

is construed as 'hot air'.

You and others are claiming that it says something it doesn't, namely that FAQ's are irrelevant and must be ignored.

Let's all keep the arguments civil, please.

Kilkrazy, with pictures like that, you are not giving us much incentive.

Lord Solar Plexus wrote:

Tri wrote:

Killjoy00 wrote:It is not in the Fantasy FAQ, therefore it doesn't apply to Fantasy.

Games workshop disagrees

No, Games Workshop does not disagree. You are making up stuff. Games Workshop makes no mention of any hierarchy. The change in the tonality of the FAQ's cannot be overheard either. Before, they would start an answer with "We suggest...". Nowadays, it says "Yes" or "No". I'm afraid that is not a suggestion or tipp anymore, that's a perfectly applicable ruling.

Ah but as a whole GW does not give the same weight to every thing you are free to ignore that but it's why lots of the things get FAQ. Not sure if you're a big 40k player but if you are you'll remember some of the glaring mistakes found in the Blood-Angels and Space Wolves FAQ's. In fact the BGB FAQ still has mention to this ...

Army Specific Questions
Q. How many kill points is an Imperial Guard
Command Squad worth? Is a Junior Officer and
his four Guardsmen worth 1 point or 2?
A. A Command Squad is an independent
character and his retinue, as defined on page 48
of the rulebook. The rulebook clearly states on
page 91 that a character and his retinue are worth
1 kill point each. Therefore the enemy gains 1 kill
point for killing the Junior Officer, and 1 kill
point for killing the accompanying Guardsmen.

And commanders have not been IC for nearly a year now. It's the same as stating they're still worth 2KP.

But that is not really important to this thread. You can ether play that the FAQ is Right or Wrong, for the reasons above, and get on play. This thread should be debating the way's of killing a steam tank.

I presume you believe that Slann can cast transformation of kadon as well?

Killjoy00 wrote:I presume you believe that Slann can cast transformation of kadon as well?

FAQ wrote:Q. Can a Slann Mage-Priest cast Transformation of Kadon? (p42)
A. No.

I would say no because he's not on foot he's on the palanquin. I can see why people would be confused since the palanquin isn't really mention as a rule and he's still infantry. That is one of my biggest gripes with the FAQs: Yes and no answers are fine but would it kill GW to say why?

RaW there is absolutely no reason the Slann can't do it. But the FAQ says no and that's the way the game is played. That's my point.

Killjoy00 wrote:RaW there is absolutely no reason the Slann can't do it. But the FAQ says no and that's the way the game is played. That's my point.

? Again ignoring part of what i say: Slann cannot cast it because they are not on foot. The steam tank had magic immunity when that FAQ was added and now they don't. If you can find one thing that would block the spell, there for backing up the FAQ, then I'll happily agree that pit of shades doesn't work on a steam tank.

Tri wrote:

Killjoy00 wrote:RaW there is absolutely no reason the Slann can't do it. But the FAQ says no and that's the way the game is played. That's my point.

? Again ignoring part of what i say: Slann cannot cast it because they are not on foot. The steam tank had magic immunity when that FAQ was added and now they don't. If you can find one thing that would block the spell, there for backing up the FAQ, then I'll happily agree that pit of shades doesn't work on a steam tank.

Man, you cannot infer rules stuff. You are looking for fluff reasons to back up your argument and that is not how games work. Period. The FAQ answers the question clearly! Pit of Shades does not work, until it is FAQ'd otherwise. Also, the Slann cannot transform, unless FAQ'd otherwise. Simple as that.

em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Tri wrote:

Killjoy00 wrote:RaW there is absolutely no reason the Slann can't do it. But the FAQ says no and that's the way the game is played. That's my point.

? Again ignoring part of what i say: Slann cannot cast it because they are not on foot. The steam tank had magic immunity when that FAQ was added and now they don't. If you can find one thing that would block the spell, there for backing up the FAQ, then I'll happily agree that pit of shades doesn't work on a steam tank.

Man, you cannot infer rules stuff. You are looking for fluff reasons to back up your argument and that is not how games work. Period. The FAQ answers the question clearly! Pit of Shades does not work, until it is FAQ'd otherwise. Also, the Slann cannot transform, unless FAQ'd otherwise. Simple as that.

Nope. The FAQ does not create entirely new special rules. Erratas add new rules to a book. FAQs answer questions that came up because of those rules in the book.

The only magic immunity rules of the steamtank (look in your empire book) have been completely deleted in the latest update. THOSE are the current stats of the steamtank.

You're free to ignore common sense and believe you have some magical immunity even when there is no rule in existence to give you it. Unless they add something to the errata "Add special rule - Agile: the steamtank is fast and pit of shades doesn't work on it" or something, then you've got no legs to stand on. The army book quite clearly lists the stats of a steam tank and its abilities, none of which give magic immunity. It has no statement that it reacts to magic any differently than any other chariot (which is what it counts as.)

And when there are two contradictions in an update, the ruling that makes sense is the one that should be used. There is no rule in the book where "in all vague places, use the stupidest possible ruling."

When they screwed up Cauldron of Blood's text and talked about it's crew getting +1 attack when frenzied and their poison weapons (with the crew being Witch Elves which all have Frenzy and Poisoned weapons) they screwed up and forgot to add Special Rules: Frenzy, Poisoned attacks to the top. The common sense ruling was the one the updated Errata went with. Not because of "silly fluff." There was no support for the leaving off of Frenzy/Poison being anything other than a bad editing job. Gladly, next round of typo-fixing they'll delete that FAQ paragraph because it deals with a rule that does not exist because the ERRATA specifies that the immunity is deleted.

The Steam Tank does not need a special set of rules that outline Magic immunity for it to still be immune to that spell. The FAQ says it is, so it is. You can argue that all you want, but I have yet to encounter a judge who would rule otherwise. It may not "make sense", but that isn't how rules work. We cannot infer or assume anything - they are as they are.

em_en_oh_pee wrote:The Steam Tank does not need a special set of rules that outline Magic immunity for it to still be immune to that spell. The FAQ says it is, so it is. You can argue that all you want, but I have yet to encounter a judge who would rule otherwise. It may not "make sense", but that isn't how rules work. We cannot infer or assume anything - they are as they are.

The way the rules work is it says a rule in the BRB or the Army book and that's used in the course of a game. A deleted rule is a deleted rule. You can talk about judge rulings when you have a credible source to back that up. You don't.

YOU'RE just wishful thinking that the clear pink text which explains they removed the steam tank's magic immunity never happened. It did happen so it does not matter how you feel about it. It's no longer different from any chariot with regards to magic now.

In the case of a contradiction, the most recent pink text clearly supercedes outdated text. There is no argument about it.

Yea, there is an argument. You don't ignore a line just because of some pink text. There is no precedent for that.

Here is how this works:
Player 1 casts Pit of Shades on Player 2's Steam Tank.
Player 2 says "Hey, that won't work."
Player 1 says "Really? Why not?"
Player 2 says "Oh, because the FAQ said it was immune to that specific spell!"

Not that hard. No need to get into some debates on logic and how we are meant to interpret things or what takes precedence because it is pink or not. It is pretty clear they didn't remove that single line granting it immunity to that specific spell. Does every other spell work? Afraid so, since it removed all other instances of Magic Immunity.

So, if the above scenario was Purple Sun instead of Pit, they would look to the FAQ and see no reason not to have Purpose Sun kill the Steam Tank.

Easy, right?

... Isn't this thread dead yet?

Malleus wrote:... Isn't this thread dead yet?

...almost.

All you have to do is use the Lore of Metal, poisoned weapons, because I play against Lizardmen, which are really annoying. You also could use the Lore of Heavens with Comet of Casandra, which has increasable strength, plus most of the spells don't allow armour saves. no matter what though, you can ALWAYS wound on a if using weaker horde armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShivanAngel wrote:5x10 unit of skaven slaves for 100 points, tar pit it there the entire game and ignore it

One problem, if you do that, then it still can fire all of it's guns, just not move

it can fire its cannon in combat? I knew it could fire the steam gun but the cannon too?

not only can it fire, but it causes D3 Strength 2 wounds, as said in the army book, it isn't much, but there is a possibility to kill a few extra soldiers, though it's too bad they took away the magic resistence in the FAQ. Now the lore of Metal always wounds on a 2+.....Good for you,not me.

It is generally very unwise to fire the steam tank's cannon. that should be the least of your worries, unless you're already winning so hard that your opponent is desperate. a 1/6 chance of wounding yourself for d3 wounds... ugly.