ITC Voting Flaws

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.

**CKO**

I dont think its them, they are good people I like them but the ITC is bias towards marines.

**hotsauceman1**

As a dedicated marine player, no, no they dont. Marines get nerfed to.
You can no longer share chapter tactics despite saying it affects units, not individual models.
so, taken from things, despite RAw telling us otherwise

Independant Characters attached to the Devastators or Assault Marines in the Skyhammer Annihilation Formation may not benefit from the special rules granted from the formation. For example, they are not able to assault out of reserves, nor do they gain Relentless, etc.

The Captain in a Battle Demi-Company or Battle Company formation may not be upgraded to a Chapter Master.

Models with the Carcharodons Chapter Tactics only gain the Rage special rule when causing an enemy infantry unit to fall back from combat, not from shooting or by any other method.

When a Template weapon hits a Lucius Drop Pod with a Dreadnought embarked upon it, the D6 No Escape hits inflicted on the Dreadnought are resolved against its rear armor.

but yeah, tau get ALL the nerfs

**CKO**

Deleted because I was ask to by a fellow player!

**Frozocrone**

Thunderdome was brought to vote to say that DA, BA and SW had Chapter Tactics so that the IC from White Scars, Iron Hands etc couldn't give their bonuses to TWC.

Voted for the benefit of the SM players (ie give Thunderwolves their 2+ rerollable Jink and Invisible Hit and Run deathstar)

I'm all for nerfing things for balance, but when you rewrite things for some and not all armies, it creates a sense of injustice.

Partly why I don't use ITC. My gaming group wants to use it - I think we'll just make our own house rules using it as a base.

**CKO**

What I don't get is why the nerfs? I understand nerfing the Decurion despite its wording because that can become over powered but, the other stuff should not even be up for questioning. When did drones become feared? If someone is paying 640 points to create 3 - 10 man non scoring, non denial, bs 2, ld 7 units a turn I would wonder how is it worth it? Why did it need to be nerf is it op? Or is it unique?

By the way conservative approach that they claim to take means you make as few changes as possible keep things as they are. The way they are changing things its more of a democratic approach.

**jy2**

I'll quote here what I said in another thread with regards to the Piranha Firestream formation, one of the formations that was nerfed.

jy2 wrote:
With regards to the Piranha Firestream formation, I don't think some of the Tau players here even realize just how powerful that formation is. They say it can't score/contest/whatever and so it isn't good. Really? It is "nerfed" and rightly so. It is an extremely powerful build and I will share with you my experiences with playing against it.

I basically wrote a Tau list and my friend ran it against me. It consisted of the Firestream formation (10 piranhas in total), the Dronenet and "other" Tau stuff. We played it the "un-nerfed" way.

Game #1 vs Daemons

This was a larger game, I believe 2500. I ran Chaos knight with 2++/3++ Invuln, Fatey, D-thirster, Be'lakor, Grimoire Prince and some troops. Chaos Knight was basically useless here and just couldn't get through the infinite drone screens. D-thirster and other FMC's eventually got taken down through Tau VoF (volume-of-fire). Result: Tau Crushing Victory

Game #2 vs Daemons

This was an 1850 game with a Daemon list that I won a tournament with. It is actually a worse list than the one I used in Game #1. It was a close game, but my experience and the game ending on Turn 5 gave me a 1-pt win. Had the game went on, it would have been another crushing Tau victory. Result: Daemon Minor Victory

Game #3 vs Tyranids

I brought my 1850 tournament-winning Pentyrant (5-flyrant) list this time, but I just couldn't deal with his Piranhas, which I couldn't even target. Of course it helped that all his riptides had Skyfire, but by Turn 3, all of my flyrants were dead. I then conceded on Turn 4 with just 1 mawloc left. Result: Tau Crushing Victory

Game #4 vs Eldar

This game was played at 2250 and we didn't use ITC list-building rules. I ran an Eldar list with 5 Wraithknights! This was going to be an uphill battle for the Tau, or so we thought. By Turn 4, he had killed all 5 WK's and only lost 2 riptides (including the Y'vahra) in the process!!! Oh, and did I mention that I had Invisibility on 1 WK almost every turn? Result: Tau Crushing Victory

Analysis:

If you're thinking that for formation is not good because the drones can't score/contest, you really don't see the true power of this formation. The job of the drones is A) firepower and B) protection for the rest of the army against assault units. The amount of firepower it puts out is just staggering. With 10 piranhas, my opponent was producing 20 drones a turn. That is 40 twin-linked S5 BS3 shots a turn. And yeah, that's right....BS3 because of the Dronenet. Against my Daemons, the drones did just as much damage as his "main" offensive units (i.e. skyfiring riptides). Against my Tyranids, they shot down 2 flyrants and a couple of Mawlocs just through sheer VoF. Against Eldar, they had a hand in wounding/helping to kill almost all of the WK's. Flying or T8, it didn't matter. Sheer volume of twin-linked shooting was just devastating.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

CKO wrote:

By the way conservative approach that they claim to take means you make as few changes as possible keep things as they are. The way they are changing things its more of a democratic approach.

No, what he meant by the "conservative approach" is that when there is any ambiguity with regards to how a rule worked, the ITC guys will tend more to go with the interpretation that is less powerful, or more "conservative". There are exceptions, however, but that is usually in the case where they think the intent of the rule points to the interpretation that is more aggressive.

**CKO**

So Jy2 do you believe the piranha formation without restrictions is unbeatable?

**jy2**

CKO wrote:
So Jy2 do you believe the piranha formation without restrictions is unbeatable?

Nothing is unbeatable. Not even Invisibility.

The problem is the lack of interaction makes the formation not very fun to play against (and at the same time, very powerful). Just like unmodified D. Just like re-rollable 2+'s. Just like Invisibility. There is literally nothing you can do against it pre-nerf. Piranha's come in, drop of their drones and then leave the table before you can even do anything about it. Unlike tervigon-spam or Daemon summoning, there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop them from producing free units. At least with tervigon-spam of 5th ed., you could kill off the tervgions (or the tervigons could just stop producing by rolling doubles). And with Daemon-summoning, it is highly unreliable and will take away from the Daemon capability to cast other more offensive/defensive powers (not to mention you could kill off the summoners). But the Firestream is operating at 100% efficiency ALL THE TIME. The only thing the opponent can do is to take the hits from the drones and waste their time killing drones that have absolutely nothing to lose. You can't do anything to the source of the problem.

Play against the un-nerfed version and you will see what I mean. It is one of the most powerful mechanisms currently IMO, and that is coming from the perspective of a very competitive player.

**CKO**

Jy2 do you think its right for it to go from very powerful to uncompetitive? All the things you listed you can still play they just are not as strong now the formation is uncompetitive.

**Target**

CKO wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Independant Characters attached to the Devastators or Assault Marines in the Skyhammer Annihilation Formation may not benefit from the special rules granted from the formation. For example, they are not able to assault out of reserves, nor do they gain Relentless, etc.

I cant attach a commander to a stealth squad from the optimized stealth cadre and get +1 bs, ignore cover, and hits are resolved in the rear, that's not just you that's all IC and formations.

**axisofentropy**

Frozocrone wrote:

Partly why I don't use ITC. My gaming group wants to use it - I think we'll just make our own house rules using it as a base.

tell us more! All of you who are hating on the ITC FAQ and errata, how are you going to play instead? How will you avoid the same criticism?

If you don't like the errata, just use the Adepticon FAQ. But if you pick and choose which rules to modify, someone else in your gaming group will be upset and they'll be upset at you, not the ITC crew who apparently have thicker skin than y'all.

**Frozocrone**

axisofentropy wrote:
Frozocrone wrote:

Partly why I don't use ITC. My gaming group wants to use it - I think we'll just make our own house rules using it as a base.
tell us more! All of you who are hating on the ITC FAQ and errata, how are you going to play instead? How will you avoid the same criticism?

If you don't like the errata, just use the Adepticon FAQ. But if you pick and choose which rules to modify, someone else in your gaming group will be upset and they'll be upset at you, not the ITC crew who apparently have thicker skin than y'all.

Sarcasm is real :p

We like some of their work. Everyone in our group dislikes playing against my mates Thunderwolf Cavalry that are invisible all the time. So they want to make it BS/WS1 (while keeping them S9 RAW but we'll leave that argument)

But to fully adopt it? Its a guideline at the end of the day. Not something to be taken as law. So we'll pick the parts we agree on and make our own rules on the stuff we disagree and can come to a compromise on.

**RiTides**

The thing is, there are levels... nerfing invisibility has an across the board effect that causes people to change tactics. Making all Ghostkeels in a unit use their ability at once is just targeting a single, and seemingly not broken, unit... that's the part I dislike, it feels so arbitrary.

The general FAQ and errata is good... the individual unit targeting / nerfing is not, imo. There are a lot stronger units in the game, why pick on newly released models? I just don't get that part of the process - the reason for it or the implementation.

And before you ask, no, I don't play Tau

. But if Nids ever get new toys, I'd love for us to get to actually use them without targeting them so soon after release. If you want to nerf something, the obvious choice is an army's already powerful stuff (like Flyrants for nids). I'd rather avoid nerfing individual units altogether and stick to general rules tweaks, and only clarify rules on on individual models (i.e. FAQ). But this targeting of any decent new unit is just not fun for anybody imo... even non-Tau players.

Note, I'm talking specifically about the Ghostkeel nerf here, not the formation.

**gungo**

This topic is wrong. None of the current changes are ITC votes.
They are rules clarifications for the lvo and ITC until the next vote which is shortly after lvo.

If I'd vote for the new rules changes.
I'd say Stormsurges could move on death and glory.
I'd say ghost keels could activate individually even though it make no sense however you should be able to put blast markers on non invis models.
And piranha formation couldn't pop in and out of reserves on same turn.
The hunter contingent should be able to share rules for only models from the formation but only on the designated target.

There was many many rules clarifications beyond tau that should have a vote after lvo.

**jy2**

CKO wrote:
Jy2 do you think its right for it to go from very powerful to uncompetitive? All the things you listed you can still play they just are not as strong now the formation is uncompetitive.

Uncompetitive? Really?

One of my friends, Paul McKelvey, the #1 Tau player on the ITC, plays the Piranha Firestream and he played it that the "nerfed" way ever since the rules came out, long before the FAQ, and his list is a b*tch to play against. He hasn't lost yet with them, at least not that I know of.

Of course he runs them with the seeker missiles and he is highly skilled in the ways of the Greater Good, but still. Uncompetitive? Really? Methinks you really need to play against it, even the "nerfed" version, to see just how "uncompetitive" it is.

**Cieged**

jy2 wrote:
CKO wrote:
Jy2 do you think its right for it to go from very powerful to uncompetitive? All the things you listed you can still play they just are not as strong now the formation is uncompetitive.

Uncompetitive? Really?

One of my friends, Paul McKelvey, the #1 Tau player on the ITC, plays the Piranha Firestream and he played it that the "nerfed" way ever since the rules came out, long before the FAQ, and his list is a b*tch to play against. He hasn't lost yet with them, at least not that I know of.

Of course he runs them with the seeker missiles and he is highly skilled in the ways of the Greater Good, but still. Uncompetitive? Really? Methinks you really need to play against it, even the "nerfed" version, to see just how "uncompetitive" it is.

In CT I attended a semi-local ITC tournament of 37 people. That formation took first place.

It's small anecdotal evidence, but I'm absolutely blown away anyone thinks that it's trash.

**CKO**

jy2 wrote:
CKO wrote:
Jy2 do you think its right for it to go from very powerful to uncompetitive? All the things you listed you can still play they just are not as strong now the formation is uncompetitive.

Uncompetitive? Really?

One of my friends, Paul McKelvey, the #1 Tau player on the ITC, plays the Piranha Firestream and he played it that the "nerfed" way ever since the rules came out, long before the FAQ, and his list is a b*tch to play against. He hasn't lost yet with them, at least not that I know of.

Of course he runs them with the seeker missiles and he is highly skilled in the ways of the Greater Good, but still. Uncompetitive? Really? Methinks you really need to play against it, even the "nerfed" version, to see just how "uncompetitive" it is.

CKO wrote:

However the way it will most likely be ruled will ironically force players to play the formation the way it should be played! The true terror is not drones but seeker missiles, you should shoot your seeker missiles, next turn move closer than let your drones off than leave come back with more seeker missiles that will have more of an impact than a drone farm, especially considering the missiles an have tank-hunter.18 seeker missiles has a value of 148 points now add that with 240 your looking at 388 points out of 548 but the difference is the seeker missiles are going to be destroying units a rhino is 35 points a drop pod is 35 a bike squad with no save, now we are talking power!

I said that back in January in this very thread, believe you me I know the game, the force is strong with this one!

If your friend is the number 1 ITC Tau player whatever accomplishment that might be did he win a tournament or something, I don't know how it works? I am pretty sure he is capable of winning with any tau list he makes, its not the formation that is winning those games its Paul Mckelvey!

Do people vote with the fear of what if Frankie gets this or Paul Mckelvey gets this? (sorry about using names but they have been used as references in this thread already) Actually I know that is the case, people watch the best Tau players on Frontline gaming battle reports and become fearful. They than read articles which make them even more fearful and are told to go vote on it, which resulted in every new unit or semi-competitive formation in the Tau codex being nerfed for the LVO just validates my reason for starting this thread, the system is flawed!

With the piranha formation if you make it to where the unit cannot leave turn one, that gives the player going against them potentially 2 turns to eliminate the piranhas if they want to shoot their seeker missiles it cuts down the number of drones they can make and they have to make a choice do I use the seeker missiles this turn or cut down on the number of drones I have. Yes, you will have to deal with a lot of drones or potentially a lot of seeker missiles its called a new competitive army it happens! Forge world has 30+ guardsmen coming back on a 2+, 20+ toughness 7 wound artillery pieces in cover, or you can deal with riptide wings. With a slight change it can go from only players like Paul Mckelvey can still make it competitive to the average player can be competitive with it! That list you have to make choices to win with its not an auto win.

My main point is that ITC went from removing things like 2+ re-roll able saves and making invisibility not broken to making changes to units and formations that now the average player can not notice their power boast.

Let me list the new units and formations that tau got that was to give them their codex boast that every new codex deserves and next to it I will say if it was changed by ITC.

Tau Unit or Formation - ITC Ruling

Ghostkeel - Changed

Stormsurge - Changed

Hunter Contingent- Changed

Optimised Stealth Cadre - Changed by default

Riptide Wing - Not Changed

Piranha Formation - Changed

Drone Network - Not Changed

**Fishboy**

RiTides wrote:
The thing is, there are levels... nerfing invisibility has an across the board effect that causes people to change tactics. Making all Ghostkeels in a unit use their ability at once is just targeting a single, and seemingly not broken, unit... that's the part I dislike, it feels so arbitrary.

The general FAQ and errata is good... the individual unit targeting / nerfing is not, imo. There are a lot stronger units in the game, why pick on newly released models? I just don't get that part of the process - the reason for it or the implementation.

And before you ask, no, I don't play Tau . But if Nids ever get new toys, I'd love for us to get to actually use them without targeting them so soon after release. If you want to nerf something, the obvious choice is an army's already powerful stuff (like Flyrants for nids). I'd rather avoid nerfing individual units altogether and stick to general rules tweaks, and only clarify rules on on individual models (i.e. FAQ). But this targeting of any decent new unit is just not fun for anybody imo... even non-Tau players.

Note, I'm talking specifically about the Ghostkeel nerf here, not the formation.

Nail on the head Ritides! Have an exalt!

**RiTides**

Thanks

I've just been making a point of this one (as a non-Tau player!) as I think it illustrates the type of ruling I'm hoping the ITC will avoid going forward... i.e., let folks play with their toys unless there's a good reason to limit them (such as the Piranha formation likely being a good enough reason simply for gameplay purposes - but not the Ghostkeel).

If you feel similarly about the Ghostkeel ruling it'd be worth sending Frontline an email and hopefully getting it on the next ballot!

I just sent this to: frankie AT frontlinegaming DOT org

Hi Frankie,

It seems like a lot of people would really like the Ghostkeel ruling to be on the next ITC vote - I know it had to be ruled for the LVO, but for moving forward with ITC, it should be on the next ballot!

Relevant threads on Dakka:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/150/678686.page

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/678734.page

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/675443.page#8424541

So, please consider putting the Ghostkeel question on the next ballot - I.e., when several Ghostkeels are taken as a unit, can a single Ghostkeel activate their defensive ability at a time (to protect the whole unit) or are all activated at once (in which case, no one will be taking them as a unit and you'll have unnecessarily taken away a cool way to play Tau).

Most folks seem to be happy with your other rulings, but this one is too heavy handed and unnecessary. Hope it makes it on the next ballot!

Cheers,
Steve G / RiTides

**somerandomidiot**

Fishboy wrote:
RiTides wrote:
The thing is, there are levels... nerfing invisibility has an across the board effect that causes people to change tactics. Making all Ghostkeels in a unit use their ability at once is just targeting a single, and seemingly not broken, unit... that's the part I dislike, it feels so arbitrary.

The general FAQ and errata is good... the individual unit targeting / nerfing is not, imo. There are a lot stronger units in the game, why pick on newly released models? I just don't get that part of the process - the reason for it or the implementation.

And before you ask, no, I don't play Tau . But if Nids ever get new toys, I'd love for us to get to actually use them without targeting them so soon after release. If you want to nerf something, the obvious choice is an army's already powerful stuff (like Flyrants for nids). I'd rather avoid nerfing individual units altogether and stick to general rules tweaks, and only clarify rules on on individual models (i.e. FAQ). But this targeting of any decent new unit is just not fun for anybody imo... even non-Tau players.

Note, I'm talking specifically about the Ghostkeel nerf here, not the formation.

Nail on the head Ritides! Have an exalt!

The problem with this entire stance is that the difference between a targeted nerf and a necessary FAQ is entirely in the eye of the beholder. I was a tournament judge at a recent event, and was asked about the Ghostkeel rule, and found it not at all clear. After the event, I submitted the question to the ITC questionnaire (I'm sure I wasn't the only one) because I legitimately wasn't sure which way to rule. Anyone who is claiming the Ghostkeel ruling is a "targeted nerf" and "not at all in line with the rule" is being disingenuous, because as I read it (as an impartial third party) there were two equally valid readings.

Edit: I can't spell! :(

**RiTides**

That's a great point, somerandom, and why it should be on the next ballot!

Personally, I think it's pretty clear (compared to many of GW's other rules

). Also keep in mind that the word "unit" had to be used in the latter part of the rule because even a single Ghostkeel has their effect apply to the drones:

Naaris wrote:
Wording on the ability -
Once per battle, in the enemy Shooting phase,
a model equipped with Holophoton Countermeasures can disrupt the targeting systems used by one enemy unit that is targeting it or the unit it belongs to.

Declare that the unit will use the Holophoton Countermeasures after the enemy unit has chosen it as a target,
but before any To Hit rolls are made.

The enemy unit can only make Snap Shots in that shooting phase.

So yeah.....one model uses the ability, and as a unit, they declare they are using the HC against the attacking enemy.

I think its pretty clear that each ghostkeel gets to use their HC separately.

Obviously, in-depth discussion of the wording would be most appropriate in YMDC, and there could be a need for a bit of a clarification... but when in doubt, imo utility shouldn't be taken away from an army, and the way Frontline ruled this would mean that people would only ever field single Ghostkeels.

I'd much rather they try to err on the side of "permissive" rulings, and think the way this one went was too heavy-handed... hence, hopefully folks will email the address above and try to get it on the ballot! And even more than that, express to Frontline that they want rulings that cause the least disturbance possible... rather than rulings that err on the side of nerfing things that aren't totally clear (and let's be honest, most GW rules aren't

).

**somerandomidiot**

RiTides wrote:
That's a great point, somerandom, and why it should be on the next ballot!

Personally, I think it's pretty clear (compared to many of GW's other rules ). Also keep in mind that the word "unit" had to be used in the latter part of the rule because even a single Ghostkeel has their effect apply to the drones:

--Snip--

Obviously, in-depth discussion of the wording would be most appropriate in YMDC, and there could be a need for a bit of a clarification... but when in doubt, imo utility shouldn't be taken away from an army, and the way Frontline ruled this would mean that people would only ever field single Ghostkeels.

I'd much rather they try to err on the side of "permissive" rulings, and think the way this one went was too heavy-handed... hence, hopefully folks will email the address above and try to get it on the ballot! And even more than that, express to Frontline that they want rulings that cause the least disturbance possible... rather than rulings that err on the side of nerfing things that aren't totally clear (and let's be honest, most GW rules aren't ).

I totally agree. In fact, when I was asked to rule on it, I actually ruled exactly the same way, and allowed the guy to use his ability multiple times. I do, however, have an issue with the "the sky is falling, Reece hates Tau" attitude. Reece (and the rest of the people at Frontline Gaming) are working to produce the best tournament environment possible. These are dedicated 40k players who have pretty much given up their ability to actually play in 40k tournaments in order to grow the community. The rule was somewhat vague, and it was definitely going to come up sometime this weekend, so they got out ahead of it and provided an FAQ. I have no doubt that if there's enough requests for it, they'll provide the community a vote after the fact. For now, though, they had to give a ruling, and they gave the one they felt was correct.

**Dozer Blades**

I can see Tau winning LVO this weekend. Their new rules combined with the LVO FAQ is way strong plus now they have have a chip on the shoulder and a point to prove.

Que the Rocky theme song !

**CKO**

I want to know if there is a vote and the results is this

CKO wrote:
jy2 wrote:

Let me list the new units and formations that tau got that was to give them their codex boast that every new codex deserves and next to it I will say if it was changed by ITC.

Tau Unit or Formation - ITC Ruling

Ghostkeel - Changed

Stormsurge - Changed

Hunter Contingent- Changed

Optimised Stealth Cadre - Changed by default

Riptide Wing - Not Changed

Piranha Formation - Changed

Drone Network - Not Changed

Is the process right?

**GreaterGouda**

Cieged wrote:
jy2 wrote:
CKO wrote:
Jy2 do you think its right for it to go from very powerful to uncompetitive? All the things you listed you can still play they just are not as strong now the formation is uncompetitive.

Uncompetitive? Really?

One of my friends, Paul McKelvey, the #1 Tau player on the ITC, plays the Piranha Firestream and he played it that the "nerfed" way ever since the rules came out, long before the FAQ, and his list is a b*tch to play against. He hasn't lost yet with them, at least not that I know of.

Of course he runs them with the seeker missiles and he is highly skilled in the ways of the Greater Good, but still. Uncompetitive? Really? Methinks you really need to play against it, even the "nerfed" version, to see just how "uncompetitive" it is.

In CT I attended a semi-local ITC tournament of 37 people. That formation took first place.

It's small anecdotal evidence, but I'm absolutely blown away anyone thinks that it's trash.

I did take first place. I took the formation 2 times. 8 individual piranhas. But I didn't farm drones in my first 2 games. I used the piranhas to score objectives and deny objectives. In my final game (at the top table) I did, however, farm drones. I made 48 drones over 3 turns. The formation is good. The change the ITC FAQ implemented made the formation non competitive.

I have looked around the internet for reports, videos, anything on how the formation played out in games. I found nothing. That is why I tried it out at the tournament in CT.

I really would have liked to have had a chance to vote on this rule, or at least have been able to understand why the guys at Frontline chose the outcome they did. It all seemed really in the dark. No notice or anything.

I won't be bringing Piranhas to LVO even though I spent this past week painting them and 70 accompanying drones. I actually finished them all up this past Friday. Literally 3 hours before the FAQ was revised.

http://i.imgur.com/Q7fVnbg.jpg

Here is a picture of my drones right after I finished painting them.

**CKO**

Hey Paul, congrats on being the number one Tau player! I agree with you that the changes made makes it non competitive. Do you think by making it to where they cant leave turn one would still be competitive but at the same time not unbeatable?

Edited:

Oh my god, dude you have a legit reason to be mad!

**RiTides**

I think regardless of the rulings, hopefully the timing of the announcement can be different in the future. Even though I think I'd probably vote the other way on that formation, making that change so close to the event is obviously not ideal...

somerandomidiot wrote:
I totally agree. In fact, when I was asked to rule on it, I actually ruled exactly the same way, and allowed the guy to use his ability multiple times. I do, however, have an issue with the "the sky is falling, Reece hates Tau" attitude. Reece (and the rest of the people at Frontline Gaming) are working to produce the best tournament environment possible. These are dedicated 40k players who have pretty much given up their ability to actually play in 40k tournaments in order to grow the community. The rule was somewhat vague, and it was definitely going to come up sometime this weekend, so they got out ahead of it and provided an FAQ. I have no doubt that if there's enough requests for it, they'll provide the community a vote after the fact. For now, though, they had to give a ruling, and they gave the one they felt was correct.

Agreed here! I am sure it's both a ton of work and a rather thankless task, but it's awesome that they try to provide this for the community. I emailed them regarding the Ghostkeel ruling and hopefully it will be put on the next ballot!

I know I've said it before, but I'd also be fine with just a committee approach, in which case I'd be submitting that one for them to review. Regardless of how they do it, I really appreciate the work they put in! Hopefully this works itself out in the next revision cycle, even though it's locked in just for the LVO.

**Pythius Primus**

CKO wrote:
Hey Paul, congrats on being the number one Tau player! I agree with you that the changes made makes it non competitive. Do you think by making it to where they cant leave turn one would still be competitive but at the same time not unbeatable?

Edited:

Oh my god, dude you have a legit reason to be mad!

The person you are replying to isn't Paul.

**jy2**

Pythius Primus wrote:
CKO wrote:
Hey Paul, congrats on being the number one Tau player! I agree with you that the changes made makes it non competitive. Do you think by making it to where they cant leave turn one would still be competitive but at the same time not unbeatable?

Edited:

Oh my god, dude you have a legit reason to be mad!

The person you are replying to isn't Paul.

May be a case of mistaken identity, or he may actually be a "Paul", just not the "Paul" who is the ITC #1 Tau player.

The "Paul" lives in the West Coast. As a matter of fact, I see and play against him on a constant basis.

**iNcontroL**

Cieged wrote:
jy2 wrote:
CKO wrote:
Jy2 do you think its right for it to go from very powerful to uncompetitive? All the things you listed you can still play they just are not as strong now the formation is uncompetitive.

Uncompetitive? Really?

One of my friends, Paul McKelvey, the #1 Tau player on the ITC, plays the Piranha Firestream and he played it that the "nerfed" way ever since the rules came out, long before the FAQ, and his list is a b*tch to play against. He hasn't lost yet with them, at least not that I know of.

Of course he runs them with the seeker missiles and he is highly skilled in the ways of the Greater Good, but still. Uncompetitive? Really? Methinks you really need to play against it, even the "nerfed" version, to see just how "uncompetitive" it is.

In CT I attended a semi-local ITC tournament of 37 people. That formation took first place.

It's small anecdotal evidence, but I'm absolutely blown away anyone thinks that it's trash.

Yes Jim he has lost several times with it.. still good but no it isn't unbeaten