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.

Essentially how I read it the stormsurge locks in so it has double shots and then rides around on the tidewall like a surfboard, surround him by maybe some broadsides and some pathfinders since markers are heavy and the other team is in some serious trouble. They all reroll 1s and the terrain has its own weapon oh and you can pop your own landraiders or whatever trying to kill the surfing fishies.

Think its a little OP for like 60 points to be honest.

but on the flip side the terrain is ugly as sin

I despise all things about those fish except maybe fishing with a lascannon the terrain isn't very pretty but it makes up for it in being a MC surfboard with a mirror for your bullets.

The Stormsurge (and Riptide for that matter) looks a little big to be able to claim any kind of cover save from the Tidewall. In order to be moved with the Tidewall, the model has to be placed ON the Tidewall. Just eyeballing the pictures to far, it looks like models with up to a 32mm base could use the walls/nodes, but the large 120mm oval base of the Riptide/Stormsurge looks too large. Infantry models, Stealth suits, and maybe Crisis suits will be able to fit.

The actual chances of a shot rebounding and damaging your own models is so absurdly low... I have no idea why they even included the rule. It's certainly tugged the knee jerk reaction string in all 40K players.

A lot of how well the Tidewall performs will be based on the rest of the codex. Consider that no table with a decent amount of terrain will ever allow this line to move more than 6", and that 265 points is the current price of a Riptide or unit of Crisis suits. This fortification is 265 points of Tau that won't be shooting at you much. If anything, an Aegis Defense Line with Quad Autocannon would be a better investment of points if you really needed a fortification.

Would it not be the toe in cover argument all over again. so he has his toe on the line therefore he can move on it. this thing is going to cause issues and more house rules than anything else.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
but on the flip side the terrain is ugly as sin

I don't know if the moving tau aegis is a good way to run the SS, but ugly models have never stoped people from them being used. If they had good rules of course.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
but on the flip side the terrain is ugly as sin

I am just happy we are finally getting some Xenos terrain.

 Tamwulf wrote:
The Stormsurge (and Riptide for that matter) looks a little big to be able to claim any kind of cover save from the Tidewall. In order to be moved with the Tidewall, the model has to be placed ON the Tidewall. Just eyeballing the pictures to far, it looks like models with up to a 32mm base could use the walls/nodes, but the large 120mm oval base of the Riptide/Stormsurge looks too large. Infantry models, Stealth suits, and maybe Crisis suits will be able to fit.

The actual chances of a shot rebounding and damaging your own models is so absurdly low... I have no idea why they even included the rule. It's certainly tugged the knee jerk reaction string in all 40K players.

A lot of how well the Tidewall performs will be based on the rest of the codex. Consider that no table with a decent amount of terrain will ever allow this line to move more than 6", and that 265 points is the current price of a Riptide or unit of Crisis suits. This fortification is 265 points of Tau that won't be shooting at you much. If anything, an Aegis Defense Line with Quad Autocannon would be a better investment of points if you really needed a fortification.

You can claim cover behind the Tidewall as it's a defence line and no, MC aren't subject to the same rules as vehicles for cover, despite some being huge in comparison to vehicles.

Moving an Entrenched Stormsurge is a little trickier. You'll have to ask for the opponents permisison on that.

First the Space Pope on his rascal and now the Stormsurge on a roomba.

When will Pathfinders get their segways!?

 Frozocrone wrote:

You can claim cover behind the Tidewall as it's a defence line and no, MC aren't subject to the same rules as vehicles for cover, despite some being huge in comparison to vehicles.

Moving an Entrenched Stormsurge is a little trickier. You'll have to ask for the opponents permisison on that.

Anyone who gives permission to move an entrenched Stormsurge has not read the rules for the Tidewall.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Anyone who gives permission to move an entrenched Stormsurge has not read the rules for the Tidewall.

Well that debunks that then

I'm having trouble finding the storm surge rules. But I thought the Stormsurge anchored in the beginning of the shooting phase.
Also that it de-anchored at the beginning of the movement phase.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

You can claim cover behind the Tidewall as it's a defence line and no, MC aren't subject to the same rules as vehicles for cover, despite some being huge in comparison to vehicles.

Moving an Entrenched Stormsurge is a little trickier. You'll have to ask for the opponents permisison on that.

Anyone who gives permission to move an entrenched Stormsurge has not read the rules for the Tidewall.

You mean, the rules for the Stormsurge .

For those who don't know what is going on: the Stormsurge rules explicitly specify that the SS can't move under any circumstances once it is anchored.

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

You can claim cover behind the Tidewall as it's a defence line and no, MC aren't subject to the same rules as vehicles for cover, despite some being huge in comparison to vehicles.

Moving an Entrenched Stormsurge is a little trickier. You'll have to ask for the opponents permisison on that.

Anyone who gives permission to move an entrenched Stormsurge has not read the rules for the Tidewall.

You mean, the rules for the Stormsurge .

For those who don't know what is going on: the Stormsurge rules explicitly specify that the SS can't move under any circumstances once it is anchored.

No, I mean the rules for the Tidewall.

In order to get the free movement from the Tidewall Rampart moving, you have to be on the Tidewall Rampart. Not "in cover granted from". There is physically no way to place the Stormsurge onto the Tidewall unless you have it unattached to a base and cheese it a bit by having two Droneports or Gun Rigs next to each other(one for each foot).

 Kanluwen wrote:
There is physically no way to place the Stormsurge onto the Tidewall unless you have it unattached to a base and cheese it a bit by having two Droneports or Gun Rigs next to each other(one for each foot).

It's a StormSurge Hoverboard!

 Kanluwen wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

You can claim cover behind the Tidewall as it's a defence line and no, MC aren't subject to the same rules as vehicles for cover, despite some being huge in comparison to vehicles.

Moving an Entrenched Stormsurge is a little trickier. You'll have to ask for the opponents permisison on that.

Anyone who gives permission to move an entrenched Stormsurge has not read the rules for the Tidewall.

You mean, the rules for the Stormsurge .

For those who don't know what is going on: the Stormsurge rules explicitly specify that the SS can't move under any circumstances once it is anchored.

No, I mean the rules for the Tidewall.

In order to get the free movement from the Tidewall Rampart moving, you have to be on the Tidewall Rampart. Not "in cover granted from". There is physically no way to place the Stormsurge onto the Tidewall unless you have it unattached to a base and cheese it a bit by having two Droneports or Gun Rigs next to each other(one for each foot).

Placing the Stormsurge on a Droneport/Gunrig isn't a problem, because you can place it atop the walls if all fails. That's completely legit according to the "Wonky Model Syndrome" rule.

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

You can claim cover behind the Tidewall as it's a defence line and no, MC aren't subject to the same rules as vehicles for cover, despite some being huge in comparison to vehicles.

Moving an Entrenched Stormsurge is a little trickier. You'll have to ask for the opponents permisison on that.

Anyone who gives permission to move an entrenched Stormsurge has not read the rules for the Tidewall.

You mean, the rules for the Stormsurge .

For those who don't know what is going on: the Stormsurge rules explicitly specify that the SS can't move under any circumstances once it is anchored.

No, I mean the rules for the Tidewall.

In order to get the free movement from the Tidewall Rampart moving, you have to be on the Tidewall Rampart. Not "in cover granted from". There is physically no way to place the Stormsurge onto the Tidewall unless you have it unattached to a base and cheese it a bit by having two Droneports or Gun Rigs next to each other(one for each foot).

Placing the Stormsurge on a Droneport/Gunrig isn't a problem, because you can place it atop the walls if all fails. That's completely legit according to the "Wonky Model Syndrome" rule.

That is the most inaccurate representation of "Wobbly Model Syndrome" I have ever read.

Wobbly Model Syndrome is defined via page 20 as:

Sometimes you may find that a particular piece of terrain makes it hard to put a model exactly where you want. If you delicately balance it in place, it is very likely to fall as soon as somebody nudges the table, leaving your beautifully painted miniature damaged or even broken. In cases like this,we find it is perfectly acceptable to leave the model in a safer position, as long as both players have agreed and know its 'actual' location. If, later on, your enemy is considering shooting at the model, you will have to hold it back in the proper place so he can check line of sight.

NOTHING about that is allowing you to place a model where it would not fit.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

You can claim cover behind the Tidewall as it's a defence line and no, MC aren't subject to the same rules as vehicles for cover, despite some being huge in comparison to vehicles.

Moving an Entrenched Stormsurge is a little trickier. You'll have to ask for the opponents permisison on that.

Anyone who gives permission to move an entrenched Stormsurge has not read the rules for the Tidewall.

You mean, the rules for the Stormsurge .

For those who don't know what is going on: the Stormsurge rules explicitly specify that the SS can't move under any circumstances once it is anchored.

No, I mean the rules for the Tidewall.

In order to get the free movement from the Tidewall Rampart moving, you have to be on the Tidewall Rampart. Not "in cover granted from". There is physically no way to place the Stormsurge onto the Tidewall unless you have it unattached to a base and cheese it a bit by having two Droneports or Gun Rigs next to each other(one for each foot).

Placing the Stormsurge on a Droneport/Gunrig isn't a problem, because you can place it atop the walls if all fails. That's completely legit according to the "Wonky Model Syndrome" rule.

That is the most inaccurate representation of "Wobbly Model Syndrome" I have ever read.

Wobbly Model Syndrome is defined via page 20 as:

Sometimes you may find that a particular piece of terrain makes it hard to put a model exactly where you want. If you delicately balance it in place, it is very likely to fall as soon as somebody nudges the table, leaving your beautifully painted miniature damaged or even broken. In cases like this,we find it is perfectly acceptable to leave the model in a safer position, as long as both players have agreed and know its 'actual' location. If, later on, your enemy is considering shooting at the model, you will have to hold it back in the proper place so he can check line of sight.

NOTHING about that is allowing you to place a model where it would not fit.

The model itself would fit in there just right on a smaller base or without a base, just as you pointed out earlier. It still fits if you place it tilted against the wall (one direction or the other), but then it would be rather imbalanced because of the layout of the Droneport/Gunrig. Note that the walls are not Impassable Terrain - models can move atop of them just fine (and should, if they are able, like when resolving charge moves), and still be on the Droneport/Gunrig as the walls are part of the whole terrain.

No actually, it would not "fit right in there on a smaller base". This is you trying as hard as you can to justify something that you found out that would be absolutely broken.

If someone tried to stick the Stormsurge on this thing he would become dead to me.

 Kanluwen wrote:
No actually, it would not "fit right in there on a smaller base". This is you trying as hard as you can to justify something that you found out that would be absolutely broken.

Nice strawman there. If I tried to justify this combo, then why would I point out that it isn't working as per the rules? Also, I'm pretty sure that the Droneport/Gunrig is not smaller than the Stormsurge's oval base (it is the standard oval base, right?) - and if it is not smaller, then the Stormsurge fits, easy as that. If you put your Stormsurge on a standard monster base, then it will fit even better. But hell, you don't even have to fit the Stormsurge completely, as it is enough to be on it (and a model is on a piece of terrain even if it barely clips with its toenail)

But yeah, arguing over this is pretty darn pointless IMHO. There is no reason to fit the Stormsurge on a Droneport/Gunrig as it won't gain a cover save, it can't bypass the immobilization because of the wording of the anchoring rule, and it doesn't have to fit to use the Firebase special rule.

The Stormsurge is a 170mm oval base.

So if you want to argue that the Imperial Knight can fit on the Tidewall as well?

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Stormsurge is a 170mm oval base.

Ah! I thought that it is on the 120mm oval base. The task is obvious then: fit the Stormsurge on a 120mm oval base, then you can have it surf on a Droneport/Gunrig... for whatever strange reason you want .

The idea of the Stormsurge being deployed on the tidewall platform sounds dumb as gak and even if it would be possible I would never use that, but I guess powergamers will try it lol

Kahnawake

Can we please call the tactic of placing Models on this thing the Tidewall Surfboard Maneuver?

 Kahnawake wrote:
The idea of the Stormsurge being deployed on the tidewall platform sounds dumb as gak and even if it would be possible I would never use that, but I guess powergamers will try it lol

Kahnawake

I've seen Baneblades on Landing Pads. How does that even happen? Did it drop there from a Thunderhawk? Did they pull a Duke's of Hazzard jump? Does the platform go up and down?


40k players are weird.

I say you cannot anchor the SS on it and go surfing around. The Tidewall considers you stationary to shoot, but the model still moved if the Tidewall moved. So no, no surfing anchored SS.

Now, putting a SS on it... the straight walls cannot hold one, but the discs can. You don't need to put it INSIDE the discs. The point is, the terrain wouldn't cover 25% of a SS - probably only the Gunrig tower would, and that if you put a SS behind it.

Anyway, you don't need this to help the SS. give it a 4++ (if it'll be possible) and call it a day. No reason to keep searching for bizarre combos

I see many of the game boards in the future will be this... The ANTI-TAU-WALL board!

https://chicagoterrainfactory.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/ruined-castle-004_1200.jpg

Now try to deploy your 300pt wall!

 krazynadechukr wrote:
I see many of the game boards in the future will be this... The ANTI-TAU-WALL board!

https://chicagoterrainfactory.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/ruined-castle-004_1200.jpg

Now try to deploy your 300pt wall!

Isn't that the way the game is supposed to be played in the first place? Too many people play with very little terrain. A lot of people on the forums kept telling others to play with more terrain. Sad it's the Tidewall (or what ever it's called) will be making people play with more terrain now.

 Kanluwen wrote:
The Stormsurge is a 170mm oval base.

So if you want to argue that the Imperial Knight can fit on the Tidewall as well?

I put a Tidewall in my Tidewall.