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.

I trust the Frontline/ITC guys will make the decision thats best for the ITC scene

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I trust the Frontline/ITC guys will make the decision thats best for the ITC scene

This many years into it I would be surprised if they did anything that turned out catastrophic. While not everyone agrees 100%, and no one ever will, they do genuinely care about not ruining 40k.

I don't envy them the decision. There isn't an answer that someone won't get butthurt about.

Yes, they are the hero we need and the ones we deserve

Thank you for the support and confidence, guys, much appreciated.

And yeah, no matter what we do, some folks will be pissed at us and I will get angry emails, regardless. Sucks, but oh well. We will still have fun with our toys, damn it! lol

 Reecius wrote:
Thank you for the support and confidence, guys, much appreciated.

And yeah, no matter what we do, some folks will be pissed at us and I will get angry emails, regardless. Sucks, but oh well. We will still have fun with our toys, damn it! lol

But, but, what's the decision?

Any chance on loosing the tcyte firing ruling as well? Because it's bad.

 gigasnail wrote:
Any chance on loosing the tcyte firing ruling as well? Because it's bad.

if your trying to type d scythe it's been nerfed with str d.
The rules for it are
Roll of 2-5 d2 wounds hull
Roll of 6 2 wounds no saves

Meaning d scythes are
1-2 nothing
3-6 d2 wounds

That's a big cut down meaning 1/3 the time you are getting 0, 1/3 the time you do 1 wound/hull, and 1/3 the time you do 2 wounds/hull
And you won't be able to insta death all those toughness 2 lists you fight anymore :p

This means firedragons are actually better then wraiths at killing vehicles as they should be. I like these rules better then nova's change with short d range. Now we need to just nerf scatterlasers to str 5.

No man, Tyrannocytes.

Only 19 tickets left!

@Reecius dude. psssst. tyrannocytes. ; ;

 gigasnail wrote:
@Reecius dude. psssst. tyrannocytes. ; ;

No, it's not going to change. Not enough people complain about it to warrant any changes.

Honestly, it's not that bad. MC's can only fire 2 guns anyway. The fact that it has 5 guns that it can fire is balanced by the faq that probably at most 2 can fire at any 1 single target due to firing arcs.

Also, a 75-pt 6W MC that is also a transport and that can fire 15 S5 shots a turn is under-costed IMO. I'm just glad that we can get tranports for our army.

Agreed, Wish I could go.

it's undercosted, in the era of eldar?

really?

edit: also, we did raise the issue when Reece first added them to the FAQ. his response on the FLG comments was something along the line of 'well, that's how we think it should be played.' didn't really leave a lot of room for feedback. there was never a vote or chance to raise any points from the community (unlike the poll with the eldar and D weapons).

don't get me wrong, i really appreciate the work he does for the community and i understand it's not possible to please everyone all the time.

No, not currently with the FAQ, but the ability to fire 15 shots a turn every turn (and at the same target) makes it pretty good for its money.

And you've got to use another army besides Eldar as a yardstick. The new Eldar is just an aberration if you look to them as your standard. Compare to Eldar, almost every single unit in every single codex could use a buff. It's like trying to compare your Honda Civic to a Ferrari when you should be comparing it to other 4-cylinder cars in terms of its performance.

 jy2 wrote:
No, not currently with the FAQ, but the ability to fire 15 shots a turn every turn (and at the same target) makes it pretty good for its money.

And you've got to use another army besides Eldar as a yardstick. The new Eldar is just an aberration if you look to them as your standard. Compare to Eldar, almost every single unit in every single codex could use a buff.

15 shots at BS2 with no way to TL them or get ignores cover. 5 S5 AP5 hits, scary. the blasts are nearly as dangerous to your army as to the enemy.

the eldar are certainly an aberration (in general, but that's besides the point) but if their firepower and mobility is allowed, there's no reason to arbitrarily nerf other less effective units, not without feed back or results from the community that something is game breakingly wrong with them.

It could be worse with 5 large blasts (for horde army, that is). But the fact is, they probably won't make any changes to it if not enough people "make a stink" about it. You're more likely to see changes to the LoW status for the new knights than you are for changes to the t-cytes. The sad truth is that most Tyranid players are fine with this change. They're just happy to have a delivery transport for their MC's again (and on a non-immobile transport that can still go after objectives!). Anything else beyond that is just gravy.

no one i know of is 'fine' with it, we didn't make more of a stink because we kind of got blown off when it was first brought up. there was never a reason for the change to begin with. i don't think asking for a non-broken unit to actually do what it's designed to do is shooting the moon.

I still don't smell anything. I think you need to put a little more "stink" into it.

working on it.

 gigasnail wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
No, not currently with the FAQ, but the ability to fire 15 shots a turn every turn (and at the same target) makes it pretty good for its money.

And you've got to use another army besides Eldar as a yardstick. The new Eldar is just an aberration if you look to them as your standard. Compare to Eldar, almost every single unit in every single codex could use a buff.

15 shots at BS2 with no way to TL them or get ignores cover. 5 S5 AP5 hits, scary. the blasts are nearly as dangerous to your army as to the enemy.

the eldar are certainly an aberration (in general, but that's besides the point) but if their firepower and mobility is allowed, there's no reason to arbitrarily nerf other less effective units, not without feed back or results from the community that something is game breakingly wrong with them.

I have to agree. The Unit was nerfed for no good reason. It was not OP in anyway. the rule needs clearing I will give you that but it was hardly a issue.
I have had guys put 5 man units in the blind spots it has now with the ruling. It has huge blind spots. the 45 degree thing is fun as all get out. Completely ignoring the MC rule is crazy. Heck just splitting the unit in half and saying this half has to fire at the unit closer to it would have made more since.

Why two guns can't swivel to fire at the same unit I will never know. How can weapon pods on a land raider or a tank have more flexibility then a Living MC I will never now. 45 should be more like 120 to at lest give the MC rule some meaning.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jy2 wrote:
It could be worse with 5 large blasts (for horde army, that is). But the fact is, they probably won't make any changes to it if not enough people "make a stink" about it. You're more likely to see changes to the LoW status for the new knights than you are for changes to the t-cytes. The sad truth is that most Tyranid players are fine with this change. They're just happy to have a delivery transport for their MC's again (and on a non-immobile transport that can still go after objectives!). Anything else beyond that is just gravy.

I know no Tyranid player that is OK with that ruling, not one. Heck most of us didn't even know it was a issue till we went to a ITC event and was surprised by it. I never even seen it raised as a issue on frontline gaming website. It just appeared in the FAQ. I was what the heck. I never got a good answer on it when I asked. Even when I asked Recee at TSFT. He said some people talked about it some where, and made the ruling, and that their was no way to contest it.

I understand the need to clear up the rule as it is badly written. But to ignore the MC rule completely and then limit it shooting to a 45 angle for each gun is a slap in the face to the unit. It's shooting is not scary at all when compered to the new armies that are out there. Any two guns next to each other should be able to target the same unit really.

As for stink go to the Tyranid Hive and ask this question. Everyone there will tell you the same thing. We are all scratching our heads on this one to be sure.

I play in a regional tournament scene in the southern US (mostly Atlanta area) and no one (that I've heard) has complained that the Tyrannocyte was overpowered for being able to fire all of it's weapons at the same target. In fact, that's usually the only way that most people can actually get it to do something during the game.

Let's be real 25 Str 5 AP 5 Shots @ BS2 aren't going to do much. Orks don't win because they throw 25 shots at you, they win because they throw 3 x that amount at you!

I agree with Giga & Shadowfinder that a proper discussion for this rule should be had.

Of course, the ITC is YOUR tournament series, and you certainly are allowed to make up any rules or make any decisions in regards to how rules are interpreted at your event that you want!

Thank you for running a tournament, loving the hobby and trying to bring balance to the Force!

Not that story or fluff should really drive any logical interpretation of the rules, but when reading the description of the rule the Tyrannocyte MAY fire it's weapons at different targets, but it MUST fire all of it's weapons at the nearest target. I imagine it floating in the air rotating and if unit "X" is the closest unit to the Tyrannocyte, then all 5 guns fire at unit "X" as it spins on its axis.

Just my $0.02

Thanks again for putting all of the work into a tournament, FAQ, decisions, polls and everything else you do for the hobby.

I don't want to throw this thread any more off-track, so all I will say is this.

If you want to see a change to any of these rules, email Frontline. Get all your friends to email Frontline as well. If enough voices are raised, I can guarantee you that they will re-evaluate the rulings, if not publicly then privately with the ITC counsel.

Just FYI, ITC and Adepticon rule it the same way with regards to the Tyrannocyte (45 degree firing arcs). Nova and ETC do not have this restriction.

The ITC rules for Tyrannocytes are a stinker, and I feel sorry for you guys. It makes perhaps little difference for a single pod, but basically invalidates a pod-spam build (like mine).
The ETC has the proper interpretation of the Instinctive Fire rule:

8. Because of Instinctive Fire, a Tyrannocyte will fire all of its guns at the closest target. Measure range to and
from the MC's base to find out which model or unit will be the target of the shooting attack.

This is how it should be.

BAO 40k champs is sold out! Wow, that went fast, just about a week and the 40k champs is full at 128. Going to be a blast!

@thread

Some of the rulings in the FAQ are from before we ran polls, etc. The FAQ council is comprised of TOs from many of the big events such as the BAO, LVO (which is obviously us at FLG), Adepticon, FoB, Wargames Con, etc. Sometimes the council votes on issues that impact their events, so, it is not always handled the same way. When FLG rules on things that only impact our events, we handle it in a different manner.

That is why there can appear to be inconsistencies from one decision to another.

As for individual rulings? Yeah, people always think we got some of them "wrong," just goes with the territory. No matter which way we rule, some group will feel like it is incorrect. It is not possible to please everyone and we accept that. Again, as always, it is better to have an FAQ which you may not agree with 100% of than no FAQ at all. You have to accept the good with the bad.

I could certainly see the point of the change if there was ever a problem with the unit, but that wasn't the case. It was changed before most of us even had the model put together, much less fielded.

I'll continue to try to get people on the hive to email their feedback. The unit is borderline as it is. If you're going to castrate it's shooting output, change its point cost back to 45.

 Reecius wrote:
BAO 40k champs is sold out! Wow, that went fast, just about a week and the 40k champs is full at 128. Going to be a blast!

@thread

Some of the rulings in the FAQ are from before we ran polls, etc. The FAQ council is comprised of TOs from many of the big events such as the BAO, LVO (which is obviously us at FLG), Adepticon, FoB, Wargames Con, etc. Sometimes the council votes on issues that impact their events, so, it is not always handled the same way. When FLG rules on things that only impact our events, we handle it in a different manner.

That is why there can appear to be inconsistencies from one decision to another.

As for individual rulings? Yeah, people always think we got some of them "wrong," just goes with the territory. No matter which way we rule, some group will feel like it is incorrect. It is not possible to please everyone and we accept that. Again, as always, it is better to have an FAQ which you may not agree with 100% of than no FAQ at all. You have to accept the good with the bad.

Congrats on selling out. I hoping to get to the Next LVO.

I know you all are working hard on the tournaments you run and the ITC league. As a community we are glad we have a FAQ that's being used so widely. Was just wondering if there was a area or a email// forum for the counsel that makes the FAQ decision's. This way we can ask for faq on units or rules that come out. and fix's on units that need to be revisited list the one gsnail is suggesting.

The only problem with that is most of the guys on the council are normal fellas with families and lives. If they made themselves available the way I do, it would be overwhelming. I have the benefit of doing this professionally, and so have time to answer questions and such, whereas the other guys don't.

We try to make it as interactive as possible so folks feel like they have a say in what goes on, but if we sat down and had a debate over every ruling in the FAQ someone didn't agree with (and trust me, at least one person out there disagrees with every thing in the FAQ, haha) we'd never get anything done. There comes a point when a choice has to be made and we move on, or it would bog down in debate that would never end. I am sure you have been to YMDC, the arguments become circular and endless. We don't have time to debate everything, particularly with the break-neck pace of releases.

It sucks when folks strongly disagree with a ruling, but it is what it is. If we flip-flopped on rulings just because someone got upset, it would be chaos. We do the best we can, with the time we have to get it done.

As for new things, we try to get to them as fast as we can, but normal life can get in the way of us being able to get to brand new materials. You can email me if you are TO'ing an ITC event and need some assistance and I will get an answer to you as fast as I can (sometimes it can take me a few days if things get backed up).

So, yeah, it is an imperfect system, but it's the best solution we've come across so far. Hope to see you at the LVO! It's going to be so bad ass this year, can't wait!

Reece, I serve Alcohol, When you cut someone off, even if you are wrong and they complain, you dont go back. IF you do it means you can be bullied into changing.
I disagree with the Knight Ruling. Infact I still think keeping escalation is just weird.
But dont go back. Keep the ruling if you think that is right for now.
Dont make people think you can be bullied.

no one's bullying anyone. we're requesting (politely) the rules be played as written, because there's not an issue with them and the ruling makes the unit a bad choice to bring in a competitive environment. the FAQ was dropped on everyone with no feedback taken and before the unit was even widely fielded. when asked about the choices, we were blown off.

contrast this to the polls about IK and eldar, and how that's been handled.

i totally get you can't keep everyone happy with every ruling, and we appreciate the work Reece and his crew have done. all people are asking is that if there aren't changes that need to be made from a balance or clear rules problem, then really, should we be making changes to the rules?