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.

But that’s the thing I don’t understand (again outsider looking in) why does the ITC have the right to blatantly change codexes based on arbitrary power levels and claims of OP. Changes to the main rule book I can understand since every faction must adhere to the changes, I can understand FAQ’s to faction specific special rules and equipment when GW’s shoddy rules writing stops the game from progressing… But when you’re nerfing a specific faction over how ‘OP’ it is, you expect all other factions to get the same treatment (assuming that it’s possible for everyone to agree what ‘Over Powered’ really means in 40K and in comparison to what is considered not OP –which is impossible) but they don’t. You don’t see Eldar losing access to their Wraithknights or scatterpacks, you don’t see Marines losing their Grav guns and Battle company transports, or Necron Decurions or any faction’s decurions for that matter… And if you think they are only targeting the more ambiguous rules then why did Ork’s get a discount Stompa, regardless of its erroneous point’s cost?… OFC it’s because they are seen as one of the weaker factions…

If that’s the way you want to run your tournament’s FAQ then that’s fine, but if you are arbitrarily put rules changes up to the vote, I just have to question why this wasn’t discussed sooner and why didn’t the people who bought a ticket to this event have been given a chance to vote on these faction specific changes?

They have definitely discussed the issues with the other Tau changes on previous Signals of the Frontline podcasts. I still prefer them making the ruling than to leaving it alone and making players argue it out on the table. The entire point of having the FAQ is so those debates don't have to happen anymore.

You're making it sound like the Tau are the only faction to have negative rulings against them, but they're just getting a lot right now because they're the newest update and there were a lot of questionable rules in the book. You can blame them if you want, but it's the majority that voted and said either "I think it's supposed to be this way" or "I think this is too strong and will imbalance the game".

I think the players upset about this are generally suffering from a biased viewpoint. If you watch a questionable call in Football or Basketball, everyone from one city is going to declare "clearly that was a foul!" while everyone from the other city will be crying out "what??? that was perfectly legal!" It's hard not to let our feelings and preferences affect our perceptions.

I honestly hope some Tau players place highly here, it would do well to inspire some confidence with the faction's player base after these changes...

And no, you are right, other factions have been affected by nerfs it just seems Tau are getting targeted especially considering how long the Ghostkeel's been out only to now be nerfed.
BTW - I'm just trying to be as unbiased as possible here (being an Eldar player and all)

The only effect the ITC rulings have is to adjust the meta. If a player finds an ITC ruling to not be favorable for units they play, lame will adjust their list to maximize units that have a favored effect. And that's it, nothing more. A player that didn't pay attention to what their tournament was using as a rules format has no standing for complaint. In this case, with only one week to prepare, it is a bit dickish of them to push these changes.

SJ

 Torus wrote:
If that’s the way you want to run your tournament’s FAQ then that’s fine, but if you are arbitrarily put rules changes up to the vote, I just have to question why this wasn’t discussed sooner and why didn’t the people who bought a ticket to this event have been given a chance to vote on these faction specific changes?

If you don't like the ITC or ITC tourneys, make your own. Write your own FAQ and start running events based on the FAQ.

If you don't like the ITC rulings, send Front Line Gaming an email explaining your differences and why you believe they should change the ruling.

I can't imagine anything productive being accomplished by threads like this on Dakka.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 Torus wrote:
If that’s the way you want to run your tournament’s FAQ then that’s fine, but if you are arbitrarily put rules changes up to the vote, I just have to question why this wasn’t discussed sooner and why didn’t the people who bought a ticket to this event have been given a chance to vote on these faction specific changes?

If you don't like the ITC or ITC tourneys, make your own. Write your own FAQ and start running events based on the FAQ.

If you don't like the ITC rulings, send Front Line Gaming an email explaining your differences and why you believe they should change the ruling.

I can't imagine anything productive being accomplished by threads like this on Dakka.

Sure such thread achive probably nothing. but suggesting that simply writing a own FAQ is the solution is also kinda short sighted. The reason behind this is this: ITC is more and more used on Tournaments and in FLGS etc... so in some areas you can't get around it unless you want to play for yourself in your basement. This the ITC has much more impact on the 40k comunity than mentioned advice claims.

 _ghost_ wrote:
Sure such thread achive probably nothing.

Exactly. It just boils down to people complaining, which happens in every area. Look at the QQ on the WoW forums. Same stuff, different game.

 _ghost_ wrote:
The reason behind this is this: ITC is more and more used on Tournaments and in FLGS etc... so in some areas you can't get around it unless you want to play for yourself in your basement. This the ITC has much more impact on the 40k comunity than mentioned advice claims.

It's not that extreme, and I doubt it will ever be. I'm involved in two leagues and neither of which uses the ITC FAQ. At my local GW store, they don't use the ITC FAQ. ITC only matters for competitive players, which is the minority of players. Going back to the WoW comparison, it's like something that only applies to people running Mythic raids.

There is a valid complaint to be made if you have already booked your flights and hotel, painted your army and set up to attend a tourney. If you go to an event knowing that you are using something that is borderline exploitative -- like dropping off drones every turn would be -- you have to accept that your army might be nurfed. That has not changed in years, as GW released FAQs that would nurf an army overnight.

Anyway, thanks for the response. Good discussion, if not always productive, can be fun.

 labmouse42 wrote:
Exactly. It just boils down to people complaining, which happens in every area. Look at the QQ on the WoW forums. Same stuff, different game.
It's not that extreme, and I doubt it will ever be. I'm involved in two leagues and neither of which uses the ITC FAQ. At my local GW store, they don't use the ITC FAQ. ITC only matters for competitive players, which is the minority of players. Going back to the WoW comparison, it's like something that only applies to people running Mythic raids.

There is a valid complaint to be made if you have already booked your flights and hotel, painted your army and set up to attend a tourney. If you go to an event knowing that you are using something that is borderline exploitative -- like dropping off drones every turn would be -- you have to accept that your army might be nurfed. That has not changed in years, as GW released FAQs that would nurf an army overnight.

Anyway, thanks for the response. Good discussion, if not always productive, can be fun.

somehow i hate the way this forum works with quoting...


1. well I don't know about your area or any areas in person. but i read it several times on several forums that the ITC get more and more used. So there is a clear direction. I also doubt that it will be ever a ITC only environment. Thats not the point i want to make. Whats for sure is that there is a currently a increasing # of Events that use the ITC rules. this also includes private events. So although the ITC itself is not official it hase a increasing value to the whole community. Even for players that don't play competitive. There is not much to say if your gaming club or FLGS plays with ITC Rules. There is no infinite # of players in each area.

2. There has been a lot of anger regarding the Tau releases. A lot of discussions here and literal everywhere on the internet. many will remember this as i'd call it 'interesting' article about the coordinated firepower rule written by Reece. Then the also debatable worded vote. and so on.In adittion this happened super fast after the Dex was out so a reasonable amoutn of time to test things out was not given. all of this has been eighter biased, pseudo democratic or just not transparent enough or seemed like fear mongering. Then there is this thing that there has been a update of the FAQ very shorttime bevore a tournament. without making a big ring about it. There several things got limited. The reasoning was that these points had to be adressed before the tournament and so on. The way they handled this was neighter a nice nor a transparent way. it has a bad smell. Even if you give them the credit that the decisions have been the best for tournaments


3 so there are these two things. the increasing impact of the ITC and second the debatable way of handling things. bot of them lead to some frustration by Tau players right now. simply it feels like beeing castrated. ( FEELS i know why i talk of the FEELING) regarding their possibilities with their new toys n rules. But there is also the fear how ITC will develop in the future. Once it was intended as a FAQ to resolve unclear Rules to avoid debates on the game table. but as far as i know it it becomes more and more a Balancing tool. Unfortunatly it's not that honest and tells this right out. Sure it is a house ruling set but as i said under 1. it becomes more and more powerful as it gets used and accepted.

4. What happens right now and in this year. as new releases are published it will be interesting how the ITC evolves. will there be the same way of acting as it hapened with the Tau Codex? will there be rule nerves becaus of fear of beeing OP without testing it. ... will it be more clear why the descisions were made the way they are?

5 i'll say it again. Its just to easy to claim " if you don't want it don't play this way" Thanks to the interned and such ITC is a factor you HAVE to keep in mind. especialy if you play in the US.

 _ghost_ wrote:
So although the ITC itself is not official it hase a increasing value to the whole community.

Agreed. And for the most part, this is a good thing.

 _ghost_ wrote:
2. There has been a lot of anger regarding the Tau releases. ... it has a bad smell. Even if you give them the credit that the decisions have been the best for tournaments..... simply it feels like beeing castrated.

Feelings are important, and it's valid that some Tau players feel like they are getting the shaft.

There is evidence that FLG and Reece is not 'trying to screw Tau players'. It's simple, follow the money. FLG has strong financial incentive to make the 40k game better for the general community. Part of this is removing 'broken' combos like a rerollable 2+ save. Part of it is clarifying rules. The goal is to make the 40k community more balanced and fun for all participants. Like I said, if we follow the money it's not because FLG is being altruistic, they are doing this to generate more interest in the game and more revenue for themselves.

I've talked with Reece in dakka PMs and on the 11th company podcast. He's a down to earth, great guy who is trying to make the 40k community better. He is not some mustache twirling villain laughing at the fall of Tau.

 _ghost_ wrote:
4. What happens right now and in this year. as new releases are published it will be interesting how the ITC evolves. will there be the same way of acting as it hapened with the Tau Codex? will there be rule nerves becaus of fear of beeing OP without testing it. ... will it be more clear why the descisions were made the way they are?

Like I said earlier, this is not a new phenomena. During 6th edition, GW was releasing FAQs out like mad.

It's one of those risks you face when you build your army to take complete advantage of a ruleset. When I went to Nova in 2014 with a seer council / wave serpent list, I knew it. I bought and painted up an army that could easily have been nurfed into the ground with one FAQ. If you want to run with a cutting edge list, it's a risk you take. If you happen to have hundreds of models and can just field what you want with minimal purchases, then it's not as big of an issue.

 _ghost_ wrote:
5 i'll say it again. Its just to easy to claim " if you don't want it don't play this way" Thanks to the interned and such ITC is a factor you HAVE to keep in mind. especialy if you play in the US.

Overall, this is a good thing. It also applies to those who play in competitive environments, which is still the minority of 40k players. Casual players might see some bleedover in their tourneys, and house rules, but overall I think it will mostly effect competitive players like ourselves.

Again, great conversation. Thanks for taking the time.