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.

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

gungo wrote:
Opinion? Lol whatever dude whine more.
You do realize win % by army type are tracked by the ITC space marines winning are one of the most powerful armies this isn't opinion this is facts. You do realize army lists are passed around like a bad prom date and the most op units hasn't been wg but warp spiders and ob secured scat bikes and multiple wraithknights are what these lists are made out of not opinions.

Sorry the ITC recommended taking away your broken space marine exclusive ability to assault with your Death Star turn 1, there is plenty of play reports you can look up online to show how broken this power is, but hey it's a matter of your opinion electro displacement is not one of the most broken powers in game. No point arguing if your opinion defers.

Go ahead and show me the stats of all the Top GT winners that are SM death stars besides Aaron Aelong's thunderdome.

Dude just go to the ITC website it has all the rankings for the last and current season it's not that hard...I don't need to hold your hand this is basic easily accessible stats you can use to realize your jacked up opinions are wrong.

gungo wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

gungo wrote:
Opinion? Lol whatever dude whine more.
You do realize win % by army type are tracked by the ITC space marines winning are one of the most powerful armies this isn't opinion this is facts. You do realize army lists are passed around like a bad prom date and the most op units hasn't been wg but warp spiders and ob secured scat bikes and multiple wraithknights are what these lists are made out of not opinions.

Sorry the ITC recommended taking away your broken space marine exclusive ability to assault with your Death Star turn 1, there is plenty of play reports you can look up online to show how broken this power is, but hey it's a matter of your opinion electro displacement is not one of the most broken powers in game. No point arguing if your opinion defers.

Go ahead and show me the stats of all the Top GT winners that are SM death stars besides Aaron Aelong's thunderdome.

Dude just go to the ITC website it has all the rankings for the last and current season it's not that hard...I don't need to hold your hand this is basic easily accessible stats you can use to realize your jacked up opinions are wrong.

Looks like somebody is rustle, did you get your butt kicked by too many SM deathstars armies? Maybe you should learn how to play better lol

And no crap I can see the Tourney results on the website but there are no lists. Last I know is Gladius is still the most popular SM army for ITC.

And now you've run full circle into the L2P better comeback. It's safe to say at this point whatever point you were trying to make about the competitiveness of space marines has failed epically.

I'll guess I'll just have to console myself with the fact the majority of people agree electrodisplacement is just broken in its current form and will likely be nerfed in some fashion when the ITC votes this June. Feel free to enjoy your Cheerios in that bowl of tears you've been collecting.

gungo wrote:
And now you've run full circle into the L2P better comeback. It's safe to say at this point whatever point you were trying to make about the competitiveness of space marines has failed epically.

I'll guess I'll just have to console myself with the fact the majority of people agree electrodisplacement is just broken in its current form and will likely be nerfed in some fashion when the ITC votes this June. Feel free to enjoy your Cheerios in that bowl of tears you've been collecting.

Right now no one can prove how OP electrodisplacement in competitive settings until it is tested in GTs, but too bad it won't get the chance to in ITC.

And you still haven't show me statistics of how SM deathstars with libby conclave is OP compared to the rest of the top meta... you bring zero arguments, so far almost everything that you wrote are your pathetic and rude attempt to shut someones else's opinions down. Have a seat son.

Why don't you two get a room.

Looks like somebody is rustle, did you get your butt kicked by too many SM deathstars armies? Maybe you should learn how to play better lol
.

Comments like this really do not help.

This thread/site will be far more enjoyable for all if people desist in making statements like this.

Thank you.

Something people don't seem to understand is while these powers are new, the concept of turn 1 charges is not. These two powers don't need a "ton of playtesting before changes". We all know what first turn charges do. And most would agree that it is bad for the game.

I think it is much more than just first turn charge. It's about being unable to escape with your most valuable units because the electro dstat now moves 42 inches a turn. It's really over the top.

Still though I'd rather let the community feel it in full effect until people get so fed up with it. It does seem like ITC is pushing this in an effort to protect the more casual tournament players. I wouldn't mind it being nerfed but at the same time i'd like to see if the tournament community can find a way to handle this "nob bikers circa 5th edition" or if this is really the wave serpent for today.

The top tournament players can and will find counters to it. And you are correct about the ITC nerfs being to protect the casual tournament players. Reece has said on their podcast if the midfield players stop showing up then the tournaments die.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
The top tournament players can and will find counters to it. And you are correct about the ITC nerfs being to protect the casual tournament players. Reece has said on their podcast if the midfield players stop showing up then the tournaments die.

That's not necessarily true.
They either find an easy available counter or just incorporate them into thier own list or just try to beat it head to head with thier own list.
Example warp spiders
There really is no counter to them so most eldar players just use them and most marine players just try to brute force past them. In the end warp spiders have been winning a lot of events and have have taking over most of the top standings.

I'm of the wait and see school of thought. I believe in actually testing things as is for a while before saying, "okay, this is op, ban it." Which is my entire problem with the itc as of late. Bans without testing, and blanket bans. They should run a few tournaments with the rules first before bringing something up for a ban. Sometimes things people think will destroy the game don't. Like Imperial Knights. When they first came out everyone said NO they will break the game yadda yadda yadda. Turns out IKs did no such thing, and that IKs are actually fairly well balanced.

Well the ITC puts as much thought into banning something as GW put into writing it.

Seriously you guys are just fear mongering.
What does the ITC ban? other then a select group of super heavies with things like apocalypse blast ignore cover and other similar nonesense that takes superheavies into another level.
What rules have they changed that wasn't actually what GW said is how the rules should have been played the whole time because most of you got the rules wrong in the first place!
The only ones were:
1) 2+ Rerollable nerf
2) str d roll of 6 doing 3wnds and pen result instead of 6+d6 wnds/hull.
3) invis nerf

Beyond those extreme examples everything else they voted on and passéd were actual rules debates that the community voted on the more conservative rule and in most cases GW had said they were correct in thier call or they are going to answer in a future faq. And of those the only two rules I can think of that were as contentious are the warp spider limit to one jump a turn, which I believe GW are going to claim is the correct call because they reference that flicker jump is a warp jump, and the tau detschment not sharing buffs beyond the coordinated fire target which I also think GW will state is the intention considering they made a similar ruling regarding ic buff sharing.
I also don't think the intent of electro displacement is for space marines to be the only faction in the entire game that is able to ignore first turn assaults beyond a select few formations that limit first turn assaults to specific weaksauce assault units. So far most of the ITC conservative rule votes have been the correct rule in the first place with the only clear rule changes beyond list building and mission selection being the above three rule changes I mentioned.

I am not fear mongering.

I gust went to a GT level event. Not one person rolled on that group of powers.

That's four tournament's that not one person even tried \ consider the tree useful in tournament play.

The nerf to phase form while good does not stop the combo of getting ignore cover and line of sight from happening unfortunately. Conclave can get both from different sources sadly. Or the hunters eye.

Don't see why shooting can have combo's like this but assault can't.

The whole argument that you can't defend against first turn charge doesn't work. You can't defend vs some of the shooting combo's first turn ether.

What's the difference of tabling someone turn one or two with a list with shooting or assault.

Why is shooting OK for this to happen and it's not for assault?

shadowfinder wrote:
I am not fear mongering.

I gust went to a GT level event. Not one person rolled on that group of powers.

That's four tournament's that not one person even tried \ consider the tree useful in tournament play.

The nerf to phase form while good does not stop the combo of getting ignore cover and line of sight from happening unfortunately. Conclave can get both from different sources sadly. Or the hunters eye.

Don't see why shooting can have combo's like this but assault can't.

The whole argument that you can't defend against first turn charge doesn't work. You can't defend vs some of the shooting combo's first turn ether.

What's the difference of tabling someone turn one or two with a list with shooting or assault.

Why is shooting OK for this to happen and it's not for assault?

Just because there's already one way to feth the game with a stupid formation doesn't mean we should be all up in celebration to add another another one.

Other than gw rule purists, who all frequently forget the "I want to over-ride that rule on a 4+" being the most important rule, it's apparent that ITC enthusiasts don't like that level of power, even if it comes from the datacard in black and white. ITC is a community that doesn't like a lot of the things GW does, and that's fine, because as a community they define whats okay and what isn't, for other members of their community.

Find ITC tournaments that use the GW FaQ, and you can participate in those rankings without the rules mods. Come to the Slobberknocker in OKC. It's GW FaQ there, for the most part.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

shadowfinder wrote:
I am not fear mongering.

I gust went to a GT level event. Not one person rolled on that group of powers.

That's four tournament's that not one person even tried \ consider the tree useful in tournament play.

The nerf to phase form while good does not stop the combo of getting ignore cover and line of sight from happening unfortunately. Conclave can get both from different sources sadly. Or the hunters eye.

Don't see why shooting can have combo's like this but assault can't.

The whole argument that you can't defend against first turn charge doesn't work. You can't defend vs some of the shooting combo's first turn ether.

What's the difference of tabling someone turn one or two with a list with shooting or assault.

Why is shooting OK for this to happen and it's not for assault?

Just because there's already one way to feth the game with a stupid formation doesn't mean we should be all up in celebration to add another another one.

Other than gw rule purists, who all frequently forget the "I want to over-ride that rule on a 4+" being the most important rule, it's apparent that ITC enthusiasts don't like that level of power, even if it comes from the datacard in black and white. ITC is a community that doesn't like a lot of the things GW does, and that's fine, because as a community they define whats okay and what isn't, for other members of their community.

Find ITC tournaments that use the GW FaQ, and you can participate in those rankings without the rules mods. Come to the Slobberknocker in OKC. It's GW FaQ there, for the most part.

.
The issue is the gw FAQ is not final yet and will not be for a while.

The new power is not a formation . Now the Conclave is. I think that formation needs to be addressed.

I am bringing this up for people can see different side of thought for the next vote on stuff in July for the ITC.

shadowfinder wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:

shadowfinder wrote:
I am not fear mongering.

I gust went to a GT level event. Not one person rolled on that group of powers.

That's four tournament's that not one person even tried \ consider the tree useful in tournament play.

The nerf to phase form while good does not stop the combo of getting ignore cover and line of sight from happening unfortunately. Conclave can get both from different sources sadly. Or the hunters eye.

Don't see why shooting can have combo's like this but assault can't.

The whole argument that you can't defend against first turn charge doesn't work. You can't defend vs some of the shooting combo's first turn ether.

What's the difference of tabling someone turn one or two with a list with shooting or assault.

Why is shooting OK for this to happen and it's not for assault?

Just because there's already one way to feth the game with a stupid formation doesn't mean we should be all up in celebration to add another another one.

Other than gw rule purists, who all frequently forget the "I want to over-ride that rule on a 4+" being the most important rule, it's apparent that ITC enthusiasts don't like that level of power, even if it comes from the datacard in black and white. ITC is a community that doesn't like a lot of the things GW does, and that's fine, because as a community they define whats okay and what isn't, for other members of their community.

Find ITC tournaments that use the GW FaQ, and you can participate in those rankings without the rules mods. Come to the Slobberknocker in OKC. It's GW FaQ there, for the most part.

.
The issue is the gw FAQ is not final yet and will not be for a while.

The new power is not a formation . Now the Conclave is. I think that formation needs to be addressed.

I am bringing this up for people can see different side of thought for the next vote on stuff in July for the ITC.

Correct three times.

It's weakened a little by the rules on casting up to your ML worth of powers, but still good. I was referring to the Skyhammer and other first turn assaults.

To - Fix libby conclave is pretty easy. They are locked into a unit just like a seer council.