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.

Travis from TFG Radio, and best Necron going 4-1 by the way, put together a photo montage with sound and everything from our weekend at the BAO. Check it out, it's pretty good.

http://www.captureandcontrol.com/2015/07/bay-area-open-2015-photo-montage.html

There are no Eldar nerfs in the ITC, as others noted, only the nerfs to D weapons which was a reaction to Lords of War, not Eldar. We actually made D weapons better in order to benefit Eldar. It is a common misconception that we nerfed Eldar, we did not.

And yeah, Warboss Dugg's list was nasty! Cool trick: he sticks a herald in there so that the arty become Fearless and generate blood tithe. Ouch!

Any chance of having army lists available for more than the top 10? Im curious how the necron players were trying to cope with the competition; as well as the other tyranids.

 Reecius wrote:
There are no Eldar nerfs in the ITC, as others noted, only the nerfs to D weapons which was a reaction to Lords of War, not Eldar. We actually made D weapons better in order to benefit Eldar. It is a common misconception that we nerfed Eldar, we did not.

And yeah, Warboss Dugg's list was nasty! Cool trick: he sticks a herald in there so that the arty become Fearless and generate blood tithe. Ouch!

warp spiders single jumping is a nerf, and wraithguard are not lords of war and are clearly also nerfed. Not hating cause i love how you guys are trying to balance the game, but people are not blind. Was not at the tourney ofcourse but was there alot fo wraithknights in the field? seems to me that the rules for killing gargantunam creatures and getting extra VP couple with a clear nerfing of the rulebook D weapon rules (regardless if you want to admit it or not) and couple with the ease of grav weapons in the field , im not sure why anybody would bring them.

You do realize range d was already illegal long before eldar codex was released. The itc changed the ruling so eldar can be a special snowflake and bring thier toys. That str d change was made for all factions not just eldar, which suddenly made many Forgeworld units for other factions legal in the itc as well.

The warp spider ruling wasn't a nerf but thier interpretation of the rules. There are several threads on this board about if multiple warp jumps are legal. Just because you decide your interpretation is correct doesn't make it a nerf or the intent of the games designers. But if you could get a gw dev to comment on your interpretation as correct then I am sure the itc will change the rule. I also have no intention on carrying on this argument here but feel free to do a search on this site and continue to argue your interpretation of the rule with the multiple threads on the subject. My point is thier ruling is an interpretation of the rule but it's not the only interpretation of this unclear rule and thus it's not a nerf anymore then your interpretation is considered a buff to eldar.

@Stopcallingmechief

That is not an ITC specific rules interpretation, it is pretty much tournament wide. I don't know of any events that allow unlimited flicker jumps, but hey. And as Gungo stated, that is less a nerf and more of just how we all read the rule. But, thank you for the support and honest critiques, we appreciate it.

Yes, there were a lot of Wraithknights, all of the top placing Eldar players had one. They're incredibly powerful, easily the most points efficient LoW in the game.

 Reecius wrote:
@Stopcallingmechief

That is not an ITC specific rules interpretation, it is pretty much tournament wide. I don't know of any events that allow unlimited flicker jumps, but hey. And as Gungo stated, that is less a nerf and more of just how we all read the rule. But, thank you for the support and honest critiques, we appreciate it.

Yes, there were a lot of Wraithknights, all of the top placing Eldar players had one. They're incredibly powerful, easily the most points efficient LoW in the game.

.

stopcallingmechief wrote:

 Reecius wrote:
There are no Eldar nerfs in the ITC, as others noted, only the nerfs to D weapons which was a reaction to Lords of War, not Eldar. We actually made D weapons better in order to benefit Eldar. It is a common misconception that we nerfed Eldar, we did not.

And yeah, Warboss Dugg's list was nasty! Cool trick: he sticks a herald in there so that the arty become Fearless and generate blood tithe. Ouch!

warp spiders single jumping is a nerf, and wraithguard are not lords of war and are clearly also nerfed. Not hating cause i love how you guys are trying to balance the game, but people are not blind. Was not at the tourney ofcourse but was there alot fo wraithknights in the field? seems to me that the rules for killing gargantunam creatures and getting extra VP couple with a clear nerfing of the rulebook D weapon rules (regardless if you want to admit it or not) and couple with the ease of grav weapons in the field , im not sure why anybody would bring them.

Hey Chief,

Hahaha....oh, wait....better stop calling you that.

The nerf to D wasn't targeted specifically at Eldar. It just felt that way because Eldar is the only army that can spam the D and in almost every FOC slot. No other army is able to do that. However, you can make a totally viable army without the D.

I'm just glad the attendees had the sense (but just barely) not to vote for the scatter laser nerf (1 scatter laser per 3 bikes was voted down, thank goodness). That would have been a more serious nerf to Scatdar.

 jy2 wrote:
I'm just glad the attendees had the sense (but just barely) not to vote for the scatter laser nerf (1 scatter laser per 3 bikes was voted down, thank goodness). That would have been a more serious nerf to Scatdar.

Someone brought this up to me and I think it's a good point - asking competitors at a tourney whether or not you should nerf their opponents is often going to result in a "yes" vote.

So while it didn't happen in that specific case, a lot of questions will obviously result in "yes" votes simply because it will hurt the competition and not someone's own army / list / etc.

Have you guys considered alternative ways to come to those decisions? I don't really have one, other than perhaps making a decision and putting a packet out early and having a "comment period" on it (the government does this a lot!), but it seems like the current method could result in somewhat skewed results, at least in certain cases where nerfs will affect certain armies (perhaps disliked ones) more than others.

While I agree you will have a lot of initial overreaction and some people just willing to jump on any reason to nerf a more powerful army they don't play. I think the current system works because the only options that should come to a vote have already been vetted through the committee as issues that may need addressing. It's more republic then democracy but it works. The other issue is as a whole I think most people do not vote just to screw over thier opponent but vote what they think is correct. I thought scatbikes were op and yet I still voted to keep them as they are.

I think the itc generally does a good job Limiting votes to address rule debates and a very few major balance issues. If they continue to do that then the vote system will have several layers protecting itself from over regulation. I think at some point the itc will vote to allow str d to count as str10 for insta death purposes and I have a feeling that will be allowed if brought to a vote.

Yeah, I think the vote her actually proves the opposite, that folks don't vote to screw their buddy, that they really do vote with their conscious.

@stopcallingmechief

I wasn't trying to talk down to you or anything, I hope it didn't come across that way.

Was the new Dark Angel book legal for this tourney and did any show up?

 Reecius wrote:
There are no Eldar nerfs in the ITC, as others noted, only the nerfs to D weapons which was a reaction to Lords of War, not Eldar. We actually made D weapons better in order to benefit Eldar. It is a common misconception that we nerfed Eldar, we did not.

I realize this and I as well appreciate your hard work.

I think though with the addition of Battle Company and the rest of the beefy codexes that it's soon going to be time to scrap the nerf to ranged D or at least dial it forward some to a lesser nerf. The problematic Necron LoW are now balanced and the rest aren't anything special, not compared to other things in the meta. The game is so based around just drop podding melta/etc death that LoW cause their users to lose from the error of putting too many eggs in one basket. On top of that the ITC still gives maelstrom points for damaging LoW....

At this point I don't think the 2-5 result should be nerfed at all, keep it 1-3 HPs/Ws as per the BRB. The 6 result should be maybe D3+1 wounds/HP, still no ID. As an Dark Eldar player who dabbles in Eldar, I can say that it's pretty ridiculous that my Wraithknight isn't really that much better than a single scatbike at killing a Razorback. Even if I roll a '6' with the heavy D cannon that still doesn't kill a Razorback unless I roll another 6.

WKs are great all around units that do fine, however it's important to look at D weapons from a general perspective since there wasn't a nerf just for Eldar. Should D weapons really have this much trouble getting through a single Rhino or Razorback in a meta where lists of ten free tanks are ultra common? No, I think they should have a very good chance of popping them and they just don't.

D weapons are the best weapons at destroying vehicles shot for shot.
You do realize most vehicles non super heavy in game have 3 hull points?
Just compare wraith guard w dscythe vs firedragons. Fire dragons are easily one of the best anti tank unit in game right now and a unit of d scythe wraithguard are simply better at removing vehicles from game.

No other weapon can just remove a non open top vehicle in game without some penetration rolls followed up with some lucky low ap bonuses on the damage chart. Str d can simply roll a 2-5 and strip d3 hull and remove most vehicle with ease and still roll for pen results. The only change str d needs is to count as str 10 for insta death

Honestly I'm probably not explaining this as well as others because there are loads of graphs and charts people have put out explaining how much better str d even post itc nerf. I got to find a link for you but I remember an article from someone who did a much more eloquent job of showing how good str d was with graphs and stats and even included the itc str d.

Am I the only one who's been surprised with Necron's performance in the last few major GT's?

The new codex has been getting abysmal results at the top tables, despite the notoriety of the Decurion and the buffed wraiths. I wonder what's up.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Am I the only one who's been surprised with Necron's performance in the last few major GT's?

The new codex has been getting abysmal results at the top tables, despite the notoriety of the Decurion and the buffed wraiths. I wonder what's up.

Travis, Disdainful on Dakka, from TFG Radio went 4-1 with his Necrons at BAO and if his deathstar hadn't scattered and died on a veil round 3 probably would have gone 5-0. I think the lack of Necrons performing well is due to the lack of Necron players. Of the Necrons players at the BAO I would say a majority of them were playing very underwhelming lists that had some major issues. Only Alex Gonzalez and Travis Simpson were running tooled up viable, top tier Necron lists. Of those both of them went 4-1. I played Alex Gonzalez round 5 when we were both 3-1 he trounced me hard with that list.

For me the only thing I didn't like was the Terrain with the bottom levels that were completely filled in, a small gripe honestly, and the fact I played 3 full Battle Company lists in a row

Travis, Disdainful on Dakka, from TFG Radio went 4-1 with his Necrons at BAO and if his deathstar hadn't scattered and died on a veil round 3 probably would have gone 5-0. I think the lack of Necrons performing well is due to the lack of Necron players. Of the Necrons players at the BAO I would say a majority of them were playing very underwhelming lists that had some major issues. Only Alex Gonzalez and Travis Simpson were running tooled up viable, top tier Necron lists. Of those both of them went 4-1. I played Alex Gonzalez round 5 when we were both 3-1 he trounced me hard with that list.

For me the only thing I didn't like was the Terrain with the bottom levels that were completely filled in, a small gripe honestly, and the fact I played 3 full Battle Company lists in a row

Anyone know what those necron lists were?

BlaxicanX wrote:Am I the only one who's been surprised with Necron's performance in the last few major GT's?

The new codex has been getting abysmal results at the top tables, despite the notoriety of the Decurion and the buffed wraiths. I wonder what's up.

As stated below there were 2 good necron players that I personally faced.

OverwatchCNC wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Am I the only one who's been surprised with Necron's performance in the last few major GT's?

The new codex has been getting abysmal results at the top tables, despite the notoriety of the Decurion and the buffed wraiths. I wonder what's up.

Travis, Disdainful on Dakka, from TFG Radio went 4-1 with his Necrons at BAO and if his deathstar hadn't scattered and died on a veil round 3 probably would have gone 5-0. I think the lack of Necrons performing well is due to the lack of Necron players. Of the Necrons players at the BAO I would say a majority of them were playing very underwhelming lists that had some major issues. Only Alex Gonzalez and Travis Simpson were running tooled up viable, top tier Necron lists. Of those both of them went 4-1. I played Alex Gonzalez round 5 when we were both 3-1 he trounced me hard with that list.

For me the only thing I didn't like was the Terrain with the bottom levels that were completely filled in, a small gripe honestly, and the fact I played 3 full Battle Company lists in a row

I actually played both of the necron players with the lychstar. Both of them scattered on deepstrike and both of them mishaped on turn 1. One of them got me to place it and the other had to walk on from the board edge. I would really have like to see how it would of went had they not mishaped. The third round game I believe my opponent scattered the only direction he didnt want to and he went a full 11 inchs. Was painful to watch in both games.

omerakk wrote:

Travis, Disdainful on Dakka, from TFG Radio went 4-1 with his Necrons at BAO and if his deathstar hadn't scattered and died on a veil round 3 probably would have gone 5-0. I think the lack of Necrons performing well is due to the lack of Necron players. Of the Necrons players at the BAO I would say a majority of them were playing very underwhelming lists that had some major issues. Only Alex Gonzalez and Travis Simpson were running tooled up viable, top tier Necron lists. Of those both of them went 4-1. I played Alex Gonzalez round 5 when we were both 3-1 he trounced me hard with that list.

For me the only thing I didn't like was the Terrain with the bottom levels that were completely filled in, a small gripe honestly, and the fact I played 3 full Battle Company lists in a row

Anyone know what those necron lists were?

I have copies of both list and they will be in my reports which i start late this weekend or early next week.


@ Reece is there any way I could get pictures of my score sheets from the event or have they been discarded? I would like to add maelstrom points by turn for each round.

Necrons have been doing pretty well actually. I think with the Battle company coming to prevalence and once Dark Angels get more common you will see them having a tougher time but still being one of the best codexes you can field.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Am I the only one who's been surprised with Necron's performance in the last few major GT's?

The new codex has been getting abysmal results at the top tables, despite the notoriety of the Decurion and the buffed wraiths. I wonder what's up.

Travis, Disdainful on Dakka, from TFG Radio went 4-1 with his Necrons at BAO and if his deathstar hadn't scattered and died on a veil round 3 probably would have gone 5-0. I think the lack of Necrons performing well is due to the lack of Necron players. Of the Necrons players at the BAO I would say a majority of them were playing very underwhelming lists that had some major issues. Only Alex Gonzalez and Travis Simpson were running tooled up viable, top tier Necron lists. Of those both of them went 4-1. I played Alex Gonzalez round 5 when we were both 3-1 he trounced me hard with that list.

For me the only thing I didn't like was the Terrain with the bottom levels that were completely filled in, a small gripe honestly, and the fact I played 3 full Battle Company lists in a row

Don't ya'll think bringing canoptek harvest is better than overloading on destroyers like in Alex Gonzalez's list?

Travis, Disdainful on Dakka, from TFG Radio went 4-1 with his Necrons

omerakk wrote:
Anyone know what those necron lists were?

This list was the same that Space Curves, took and did well with, to Wargames con. I got whupped by Travis the week before. From memory:

Nemesor Z
Destroyer Lord with toys, Res Orb, etc.
... these two paired with a 10 dude Lyche unit (including Veil)

3 units of 3 Heavy Destroyers
Spider
a starting scarab unit
5 or 6 Wraiths
1 jetbike unit, just 3 of them
4 or so units of units of warriors and immortals, maybe two fives and two tens. Memory fails from here

 Tomb King wrote:


I have copies of both list and they will be in my reports which i start late this weekend or early next week.

Tomb King, do you have a personal blog or will this be up in the usual places? (FLG, Bols, etc)

@Tomb King

No, we throw them away after the event. No reason to keep a stack of 1,340 score sheets, lol

@Mercury14

Battle Company is not as scary as people think it is. It's very good at winning missions, sure, but Eldar really don't need any help popping transports, you have Scat Packs, the most points efficient unit in the game. And which Necron LoW are you referring to? The entire debate about ranged D came about really in regards to the Lynx. And yes, the ITC does attribute bonus points for taking out LoW, but that has not held them back. All Knight armies did very well.

No offense at all, please don't take this that way, but if you are complaining about a WK not being good enough it is hard for me to take that seriously. Wraithknights are unbelievably good for their points, like, absurdly under-costed for what you get. EASILY, the most points efficient LoW in the game, ITC nerf to ranged D or not. Hinging your argument on the efficacy of a WK being able to destroy a Rhino is really, really not taking into account the total impact they have on the game. As an Eldar player you have so many tools in your toolbox to pop transports, it's silly. Most armies wish they had access to what you have. Again, not trying to be mean, just trying to give some perspective to this.

@Reece... I just didnt know if you recorded total points only or if you all kept the data by turn.

Casey's memory is fuzzy (but there's a con full of beers between that game and now! )

It is SpaceCurves' list. In short: Decurion; Rec Legion (replace Overlord with Zandrekh, add 8 Lychguard with Warscythes, Gauss Immortals, Nebuloscopes on the Tomb Blades); Canoptek Harvest (Max Wraiths with Coils); Destroyer Cult (minimum everything, no heavy destroyers, add Res Orb and Veil to the Lord); Allied Detachment with Orikan and 5 Tesla Immortals.

Basically it's like the speech Radjack gave to the roughnecks in Starship Troopers: Everyone re-rolls, no one dies. The lychstar has all the characters and therefore re-rolls rolls of 1 for everything. Orikan gives re-rolls of 1 to all saves, Zandrekh (as the boss of the Rec Legion) gives re-rolls of 1 to Reanimation protocols, the Destroyer Lord gives Preferred Enemy (all) so re-roll ones to hit and wound. It doesn't even care about instant death attacks, since all Reanimation Protocols bonuses apply (5+ to start, Instant Death -1 to 6+, then Decurion +1 back to 5+, and Orikan +1 back to 4+). Plus warscythes mean they house in CC and they're so resilient between all the re-rolls and the ability of Zandrekh to pick stealth ruins on t2 that you don't need to pay points for sword and board. They wreck face better *and* they're cheaper for a negligible reduction in staying power. You've got the reanimating Wraiths as your backup deathstar, basic troops that are super hard to shift and mobile firepower with the destroyers and it's just a lot to deal with.

And while I appreciate John's vote of confidence, my game with TombKing in r3 was brutal and even if I had hit the veil and not mishapped it was still a wide open game. I had played against similar lists in whole and in part in preparation for the event and knew that even all the firepower he had concentrated in his backfield bunker was unlikely to do much damage to the lychstar in the absence of very anomalous dice (having watched basically the same list shoot everything in the army at the unit for two turns straight for a net gain of 1 wound on Zandrekh and two Lychguard just the week prior), but there was a big board to fight for and he had the relic with a far more mobile army than mine. The one big hiccup to the list is that once I pop the veil, I'm basically a pedestrian for the rest of the game so quick lists can stay away. I was holding my own on Maelstrom until we rolled the turn 4 objectives and it was foregone conclusion machine after that. Great game regardless, it was a tough, tense match that I was happy to have played.

I understand that Alex took a list that subbed out the Canoptek Harvest for heavy destroyers and additional tomb blades but I don't know what else or how the points worked out.

All that aside, Mucho Macho Thanks to Reece, Frankie, and everyone who came out because it was a BLAST. I got five awesome games against great opponents that I would be stoked to play again any time, we got to smoke cigars and drink scotch, Casey yelled and bawled... kinda the perfect weekend.

 Reecius wrote:

@Mercury14

Battle Company is not as scary as people think it is. It's very good at winning missions, sure, but Eldar really don't need any help popping transports, you have Scat Packs, the most points efficient unit in the game. And which Necron LoW are you referring to? The entire debate about ranged D came about really in regards to the Lynx. And yes, the ITC does attribute bonus points for taking out LoW, but that has not held them back. All Knight armies did very well.

No offense at all, please don't take this that way, but if you are complaining about a WK not being good enough it is hard for me to take that seriously. Wraithknights are unbelievably good for their points, like, absurdly under-costed for what you get. EASILY, the most points efficient LoW in the game, ITC nerf to ranged D or not. Hinging your argument on the efficacy of a WK being able to destroy a Rhino is really, really not taking into account the total impact they have on the game. As an Eldar player you have so many tools in your toolbox to pop transports, it's silly. Most armies wish they had access to what you have. Again, not trying to be mean, just trying to give some perspective to this.

To clarify, I'm not saying that the WK or Eldar are underpowered. It's certainly very good. My comment is based on the performance of D weapons in general though. IMO they're over-nerfed in the current ITC modification and with Battle Company ten free tanks it's never been more apparent. The Lynx even stands a fairly good chance of failing to pop a single Razorback which is really sad.

Another thought... When the Eldar codex came out your show (and others) stated the belief that ranged D would be a nice foil to death stars in the meta. Have you found this to be true? I haven't played an ITC event since just before the latest Eldar codex dropped so I'm speaking mostly from FLGS tournament experience (ITC rules) and experience on various forums, but I don't think it has really at all. I think ranged D is too gimped given the current meta. Just my two pesos, thanks for listening!

Range d can use the str 10 rule back but I'm confused which deathstar is surviving range d hits? They still ignore fnp and reanimation protocol. They still do multiple wounds on single targets and they still ignore invuls on a 6. I fail to see how the rulebook range d is much more effective vs infantry. As most infantry have 1 wound or at best 2 wounds. Only a handful of non monsterous creature and special units have 3 or more wounds.

The nerf to range str d really only limits range str d from annihilating vehicles with any single hit infantry which most death stars are see very little change other then the str10 change which I agree needs to be reverted.

Single shot range d is still the best counter for high priority hard to kill single targets in game. It obviously doesnt do well. VS swarms But that's where eldar dscythe with templates do much better.

gungo wrote:
Range d can use the str 10 rule back but I'm confused which deathstar is surviving range d hits? They still ignore fnp and reanimation protocol. They still do multiple wounds on single targets and they still ignore invuls on a 6. I fail to see how the rulebook range d is much more effective vs infantry. As most infantry have 1 wound or at best 2 wounds. Only a handful of non monsterous creature and special units have 3 or more wounds.

The nerf to range str d really only limits range str d from annihilating vehicles with any single hit infantry which most death stars are see very little change other then the str10 change which I agree needs to be reverted.

Single shot range d is still the best counter for high priority hard to kill single targets in game. It obviously doesnt do well. VS swarms But that's where eldar dscythe with templates do much better.

Daemon prince doesnt have eternal warrior... it would be better to roll a 2-5 result as you could instant kill the DP... rolling a 6 would only net you 2 wounds.

 Reecius wrote:
@Stopcallingmechief

That is not an ITC specific rules interpretation, it is pretty much tournament wide. I don't know of any events that allow unlimited flicker jumps, but hey. And as Gungo stated, that is less a nerf and more of just how we all read the rule. But, thank you for the support and honest critiques, we appreciate it.

Yes, there were a lot of Wraithknights, all of the top placing Eldar players had one. They're incredibly powerful, easily the most points efficient LoW in the game.

War Spider single jump is definitely a rule change/strange interpretation/nerf and played as unlimited jumps in all events I've seen or played at out here, or in Europe.

There are several threads debating the issue in the rules forum so it's hardly a strange interpretation but the argument I've seen rests on the fact flickerjump is a warpjump and warpjump is pretty clear that it is only once a player turn.

The counter argument is that flickerjump doesn't state once a turn but then you have one unclear rule and one clear rule. I'm on the east coast and every event I've played at it is once a turn. Of course most of those events use the nova rules which also limit flickerjump to once a turn.