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.

So I know of one person who uses it here on Dakkadakka and wanted to get any information I can get on peoples experience in actually using it. Theory is cool and all but I'd be quite interested I nthe facts of the matter.

I personally have it and am laboriously painting it all up (it's a lot more painting than I thought...NOT a small model!). I plan to use it just because spending that kind of money demands I at least try it.

I am attracted to the Gunrigs of course, but as a whole, I'd like to hear how people use it and also what units we might want to use in them ideally. My first bright idea is the Sniper Drone unit with an attached Cadre Fireblade. Seems like a pretty great combination for a Gunrig. Looking at the entire Tidewall Rampart as a whole, how are you using it? has it been used against you? Thoughts on it afterwards?

Just became aware thast the ITC in its not so infinite wsdom decided to not allow the Tidewall Rampart? And actually any defense network?

First Ghostkeels and now this? What the heck is going on? I'll bet my knickers 90% of the players havent even seen one on the table? What's the point of this?

If I was gonna use a gunrig i'd put Darkstrider on it to instant death T6 monsters alternatively put anything with a target lock on it so it can fire at a separate target to it's unit, or even put something with a VT on it to give it skyfire.

As for the shield line, i've played against it but since I was using a hunter contingent with a buffmander it didn't bother me much. As Tau bringing your own cover, especially cover that can move is never going to be a bad thing IMO

 Jancoran wrote:
Just became aware thast the ITC in its not so infinite wsdom decided to not allow the Tidewall Rampart? And actually any defense network?

First Ghostkeels and now this? What the heck is going on? I'll bet my knickers 90% of the players havent even seen one on the table? What's the point of this?

Have you ever actually played against a Tidewall?

I have. And it's not fun or interesting unless you're Tau or have craploads of Ignores Cover. In fact, it has the potential to become VERY irritating if you're playing against someone who likes to argue.

The Tidewall Field is also a horribly worded rule that punishes anyone who has vehicles because of the "auto glancing hit".

 Jancoran wrote:
Just became aware thast the ITC in its not so infinite wsdom decided to not allow the Tidewall Rampart? And actually any defense network?

First Ghostkeels and now this? What the heck is going on? I'll bet my knickers 90% of the players havent even seen one on the table? What's the point of this?

Defense networks have always been disallowed. Unless you like facing 6-9 Void Shields in a CAD.

Taffy17 wrote:
If I was gonna use a gunrig i'd put Darkstrider on it to instant death T6 monsters alternatively put anything with a target lock on it so it can fire at a separate target to it's unit, or even put something with a VT on it to give it skyfire.

This is also another good reason to disallow it, because of garbage like this where people claim that the special rules applying to the model manning the weapon then apply to the weapon.

They need to update Fortifications/Emplacements and they should have done it a long time ago to prevent this kind of trash.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Taffy17 wrote:
If I was gonna use a gunrig i'd put Darkstrider on it to instant death T6 monsters alternatively put anything with a target lock on it so it can fire at a separate target to it's unit, or even put something with a VT on it to give it skyfire.

This is also another good reason to disallow it, because of garbage like this where people claim that the special rules applying to the model manning the weapon then apply to the weapon.

They need to update Fortifications/Emplacements and they should have done it a long time ago to prevent this kind of trash.

um using having a model with a special rule has ALWAYS applied to a weapon it fires. This has been the case for a long time

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Just became aware thast the ITC in its not so infinite wsdom decided to not allow the Tidewall Rampart? And actually any defense network?

First Ghostkeels and now this? What the heck is going on? I'll bet my knickers 90% of the players havent even seen one on the table? What's the point of this?

Have you ever actually played against a Tidewall?

I have. And it's not fun or interesting unless you're Tau or have craploads of Ignores Cover. In fact, it has the potential to become VERY irritating if you're playing against someone who likes to argue.

The Tidewall Field is also a horribly worded rule that punishes anyone who has vehicles because of the "auto glancing hit".

Im lost on what you mean. The tidewall isnt that complicated. Basically just an Ageis with two guns and a special rule that lets it bounce shots back IF I roll a 6.

As for bringing cover with me, that IS the point (duh) and it HAS no Void shields...for 350 points. Which is insanely expensive. I can get another Stormsurge for that much and just hid in the available cover. Lol.

Not having to hope theres cover is cool. The Tidewall when i have played it had ben very limited in how far it can go. So theres that.

I am sure there are Defense Netwrosk that are broken. I am pretty darn sure this aint one of them. Not at that price.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

notredameguy10 wrote:

um using having a model with a special rule has ALWAYS applied to a weapon it fires. This has been the case for a long time

Yup. Literally always.

notredameguy10 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Taffy17 wrote:
If I was gonna use a gunrig i'd put Darkstrider on it to instant death T6 monsters alternatively put anything with a target lock on it so it can fire at a separate target to it's unit, or even put something with a VT on it to give it skyfire.

This is also another good reason to disallow it, because of garbage like this where people claim that the special rules applying to the model manning the weapon then apply to the weapon.

They need to update Fortifications/Emplacements and they should have done it a long time ago to prevent this kind of trash.

um using having a model with a special rule has ALWAYS applied to a weapon it fires. This has been the case for a long time

The specific term is "special weapons that apply to the model firing and the weapon".

Notice that nowhere does it say that it also applies to wargear that grants you special rules like Darkstrider.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Just became aware thast the ITC in its not so infinite wsdom decided to not allow the Tidewall Rampart? And actually any defense network?

First Ghostkeels and now this? What the heck is going on? I'll bet my knickers 90% of the players havent even seen one on the table? What's the point of this?

Have you ever actually played against a Tidewall?

I have. And it's not fun or interesting unless you're Tau or have craploads of Ignores Cover. In fact, it has the potential to become VERY irritating if you're playing against someone who likes to argue.

The Tidewall Field is also a horribly worded rule that punishes anyone who has vehicles because of the "auto glancing hit".

Im lost on what you mean. The tidewall isnt that complicated. Basically just an Aegis with two guns and a special rule that lets it bounce shots back IF I roll a 6.

Then maybe you should actually read the rules specifically "Tidewall Field".

Roll a dice each time a successful cover save is made for a model within 1" of a Tidewall Shieldline's energy barrier, so long as the barrier is between the attacker and the target. On a roll of 6 the attacking unit suffers 1 Randomly Allocated Wound or glancing hit, resolved at the same AP as the attacking weapon.

Three conditions have to be met:
1) 1" of a Tidewall Shieldline's energy barrier(the blue bits)
2) The barrier has to be between the attacker and the target.
3) A roll of a 6.

If you cannot see why that has the potential to become troublesome when facing someone who is very argumentative, I don't know how to help you understand the issue there.

Also: If you can't see why "auto glance" is a dumb idea, also cannot help you. A Leman Russ can strip its HPs in a single turn with a Heavy Stubber against a Tidewall.
A weapon that otherwise cannot ever harm a Leman Russ can kill it in a single turn because of the auto-glance crap.

notredameguy10 wrote:

um using having a model with a special rule has ALWAYS applied to a weapon it fires. This has been the case for a long time

Yup. Literally always.

Just because something has "literally always" done something does not mean that it should remain as such.
When Icarus Autocannons or Lascannons were the only emplaced weapon it was no big deal. That's not the case anymore and it severely needs to be revised.

Sticking with legacy crap is why Rapid Fire does 2 shots at half range instead of having a much bigger pool of shots.

The Tidewall unfairly penalizes vehicles for being vehicles. Remember, for a wound an infantry model would usually get his armor save, FNP, invuln RP etc. A vehicle just loses a HP regardless of whether or not the weapon fired is even capable of hurting it. It's that kind of stupid.

Aye, GW seems really not to understand their own rules and how punitive they are on vehicles.

The funny thing is the Tidewall Rampart is extremely uncompetitive so I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

notredameguy10 wrote:
The funny thing is the Tidewall Rampart is extremely uncompetitive so I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

Jancoran decided that this was a "big deal", despite other Defense Networks not being ITC legal.


Also, if you really can't see "what all the fuss is about" for fortifications that can cause vehicles to glance themselves to death using pintle mounts then you're willingly blinding yourself.

 Kanluwen wrote:


Also: If you can't see why "auto glance" is a dumb idea, also cannot help you. A Leman Russ can strip its HPs in a single turn with a Heavy Stubber against a Tidewall.
A weapon that otherwise cannot ever harm a Leman Russ can kill it in a single turn because of the auto-glance crap.

Just because something has "literally always" done something does not mean that it should remain as such.
When Icarus Autocannons or Lascannons were the only emplaced weapon it was no big deal. That's not the case anymore and it severely needs to be revised.

Sticking with legacy crap is why Rapid Fire does 2 shots at half range instead of having a much bigger pool of shots.

Okay so you basically want me to swallow that a Heavy stubber... that hits 1.5 times... which then i have to make a SUCCESFUL cover save (specifically) against, that then requires me to roll a 6... that could glance your tank to death.

riiiiiiiiight.

This is the kind of hyperbole driving BAD decisions. And lets carry this out. What if i DO somehow manage to cause a glance. it will eventually happen someday. i paid 350 points. So uh...yeah. I'm, okay with that DISTANT possibility.

Lol.

And then you say "it weas fine" when it was "just" the Twin linked cannons an Aegis gets... but now its basically an upgunned Aegis gun and you're now not going to follow the rules?

I dunno man.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

notredameguy10 wrote:
The funny thing is the Tidewall Rampart is extremely uncompetitive so I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

in my two games so far (soon to be three today) it has not been a superstar. The thing I liked about it other than its SUPER awesome looking, is that it can move a little which helps when objectives are "out there". You're not losing as much firepower when you use the Tidewall but then i suppose I could have gotten 350 points worth of other things to go get them.

the other thing it helped with was firepower. it gave me a couple of burly cannons to fight off the STOMPA with TWELVE Hull points that can regenerate them which has D6 shileds on TOP of those hull points which the freaking ITC allowed.

Just saying.

So it is unfathomable to me that someone is going to cry about this Tidewall.

My main interest in this thread was to learn how others are equipping or using it. I understand that it isn't probably super competitive (same cost as a StormSurge pretty much, like I said, which does a ton o damage comparatively) but i just like it. no one can really tout it as being super awesome but it is cool and it occassionally bounces some shots so i mean... Pretty cool.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:


Also: If you can't see why "auto glance" is a dumb idea, also cannot help you. A Leman Russ can strip its HPs in a single turn with a Heavy Stubber against a Tidewall.
A weapon that otherwise cannot ever harm a Leman Russ can kill it in a single turn because of the auto-glance crap.

Just because something has "literally always" done something does not mean that it should remain as such.
When Icarus Autocannons or Lascannons were the only emplaced weapon it was no big deal. That's not the case anymore and it severely needs to be revised.

Sticking with legacy crap is why Rapid Fire does 2 shots at half range instead of having a much bigger pool of shots.

Okay so you basically want me to swallow that a Heavy stubber... that hits 1.5 times... which then i have to make a SUCCESFUL cover save (specifically) against, that then requires me to roll a 6... that could glance your tank to death.

riiiiiiiiight.

well...it absolutley could.

Is it likely in any one game? No, but yes, that is absolutley possible. In fact, it'd take fewer heavy stubber shots to average that result on the Russ than you'd need Lasgun shots to kill a Necron Wraith sporting Decurion RP

A more common scenario might be something like a Leman Russ Exterminstor or Punisher could do that to itself in a couple of turns with shots that otherwise could not hurt the tank.

In the case of a punisher which actually WOULD have a shot at it (and i can buy that example as reasonable) it would average ONE glance if it fully unloaded on me. One. 6.6666 saves made = one bounce back shot succeeds.

So. I mean. Sure. I guess? This is such an incredible stretch that I just can't take it seriously.

Like i said its GOING to happen eventually that I cause a glance but I think we can say that at 350 points, you're going to be a lot more concerned with those big guns. So kill them and your worries are few. Only two wounds. i assume you can manage two wounds.

Oh look, another thread whining about ITC.

 Jancoran wrote:
In the case of a punisher which actually WOULD have a shot at it (and i can buy that example as reasonable) it would average ONE glance if it fully unloaded on me. One. 6.6666 saves made = one bounce back shot succeeds.

So. I mean. Sure. I guess? This is such an incredible stretch that I just can't take it seriously.

It means that Punisher will kill itself for you in half the span of the game without you having to do a single thing to it.

Like i said its GOING to happen eventually that I cause a glance but I think we can say that at 350 points, you're going to be a lot more concerned with those big guns. So kill them and your worries are few. Only two wounds. i assume you can manage two wounds.

not really what i was getting at, I get that its not the most wtfbrokenzomg thing out there, but the possibilities you're dismissing are not as irrelevant, rare, or impossible as you're making them out to be either.

Only if you focus on the ITC element of the conversation.

What i originally asked was about the Tidewall and how people were liking it/using it etc...

the ITC is inevitably going to come up since they decided you can't allow it. Well... how can that not come up? they even took the time to single ours out in their FAQ. Lol.

That aside, lets pretend we're in a world where people dont slavishly go by the ITC's every rule. Is there then some input I can get on the actual Tidewall itself.

Tau Haters, skip the thread. It isn't for you. Lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
In the case of a punisher which actually WOULD have a shot at it (and i can buy that example as reasonable) it would average ONE glance if it fully unloaded on me. One. 6.6666 saves made = one bounce back shot succeeds.

So. I mean. Sure. I guess? This is such an incredible stretch that I just can't take it seriously.

It means that Punisher will kill itself for you in half the span of the game without you having to do a single thing to it.

Like i said its GOING to happen eventually that I cause a glance but I think we can say that at 350 points, you're going to be a lot more concerned with those big guns. So kill them and your worries are few. Only two wounds. i assume you can manage two wounds.

not really what i was getting at, I get that its not the most wtfbrokenzomg thing out there, but the possibilities you're dismissing are not as irrelevant, rare, or impossible as you're making them out to be either.

Yes but who cares? Its 350 points. I can kill your silly tank with one SHOT with my StormSurge and be done with the argument. Same goes for my D-Cannons or my Wraithguard or my Gravcents (on a good day) or my freaking Adepta Sororitas Dominion squads and the list goes on. A single Hammerhead will do it.

its a DEFENSE network. thats what it DOES. this unlikely little tiny case where something can fire THIRTY TWO times and gets a glance in return isnt compelling.

Again, my point wasnt that its the most broken thing out there, its that you are minimizing the potential of an aspect beyond what it realistically is. If you have a squad of firewarriors that go to ground behind the thing, its entirely conceivable that you could kill some tanks in one go within a normal distribution of results. Thats possible, not average, but not so rare that it couldnt reasonably come up. To dismiss that as so remote as to be impossible or irrelevant is an incorrect assessment of the possibilities. That was my ultimate point is all.

You actually can't be defending that poorly worded rule NOW, Jancoran. You're losing even more respect of the members of the forum than you'd think.

There's no reason that Land Raider (for whatever reason it is being ran) can take glancing hits from a Heavy Bolter it fired, being reflected, because you say you paid 350 points and it SHOULD be a possibility. That's the TFG attitude.
It SHOULD just resolve at the strength of the shot and AP of the shot, but I guess that would be too much ink to really want to make note of it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You actually can't be defending that poorly worded rule NOW, Jancoran. You're losing even more respect of the members of the forum than you'd think.

There's no reason that Land Raider (for whatever reason it is being ran) can take glancing hits from a Heavy Bolter it fired, being reflected, because you say you paid 350 points and it SHOULD be a possibility. That's the TFG attitude.
It SHOULD just resolve at the strength of the shot and AP of the shot, but I guess that would be too much ink to really want to make note of it.

the wording is terrible, and has as much potential for game breaking as the Optimized Stealth Cadre. That said, just have a polite discussion with someone bringing the tidewall,and i think most people would have no problem letting the shot reflect back at the shooting vehicle at the strength and AP of the shot. but maybe to compromise for your side as well, since he's giving up guaranteed wounds, the shots go against side armor? i realize its not "logical" but neither is being able to bounce back a basilisk shot from 180" away, but in the rules. That way the 360 point item doesn't just suck butt nuggets, but neither does it just shatter high ROF vehicles.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Again, my point wasnt that its the most broken thing out there, its that you are minimizing the potential of an aspect beyond what it realistically is. If you have a squad of firewarriors that go to ground behind the thing, its entirely conceivable that you could kill some tanks in one go within a normal distribution of results. Thats possible, not average, but not so rare that it couldnt reasonably come up. To dismiss that as so remote as to be impossible or irrelevant is an incorrect assessment of the possibilities. That was my ultimate point is all.

Im not minimizing it Im putting it into sharp perspective! Its possible. that's it. And it will occassionally happen. Maybe.

And yeah, going to ground will make it a bigger deal but what then happens when i go to ground? That's correct.

So telling me what it does as a reason not to allow it is like saying "A Tactical marine fires a bolter and that one bolter could take an entire would off a Talos".

Yes. Yes it could.

Are we now going to get upset that a bolter can wound a Talos? I'm just saying. The Tactical marine is 8 times CHEAPER than a Talos yet we are going to allow it to be wounded by a Tactical Marine?

that's kind of what this sounds like to me. The answer is yes: a Leman Russ Punisher could very well take a glance. That could, yes, happen. I acknowledge it...but then i already did that.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pumaman1 wrote:

the wording is terrible, and has as much potential for game breaking as the Optimized Stealth Cadre. That said, just have a polite discussion with someone bringing the tidewall,and i think most people would have no problem letting the shot reflect back at the shooting vehicle at the strength and AP of the shot. but maybe to compromise for your side as well, since he's giving up guaranteed wounds, the shots go against side armor? i realize its not "logical" but neither is being able to bounce back a basilisk shot from 180" away, but in the rules. That way the 360 point item doesn't just suck butt nuggets, but neither does it just shatter high ROF vehicles.

Well... It already does suck butt nuggets a little bit. It is an enormous drain. It protects about the same amount of stuff really. You are kind of forced to clump up on it which should not be overlooked. It came up a lot in my games. Dude was firing 7 inch wide blasts on my head and I'm all clumped up with nowhere to go. So when you actually SEE it on the field, with models in it, you'll appreciate what I am saying.

The plus side: Aegis Line protection, 2 rockin guns (admittedly, two wound guns so not the hardest in the world to remove but you would be wise to remove them) and 4 Markerlight Drones you can kind of hide if thats even a goal (it isnt, because they cant fire until they disembark).

the biggest role it played was against the orks. Forcing them to go through my line (which i suppose is no different than an Aegis in that way) allowed me to Haywire his Stompa. fire Warriors ended up getting all the glory for the kill even though my splattered Storm Surge tried hard (and failed). So having a barrier and actually getting the jump on interlopers was cool.

Against the Flying Daemon Circus, it was a bit less useful. they jumped over it to rob me of its protections. It has perforce such a large open area that it creates behind it that any FMC is going to be able to get past that and once they do I am kind of stuck. Gub lining Tau in general isnt a great strategy and the Tidewall pretty much commits you to it so there's that.

The Tidewall doesnt exactly encourage you to play to the Tau's strong suit of mobile firepower. I dunno. I loved having it on the board but i find the hue and cry to be... unjustified so far. The guns are actually the thing about it that has the most impact but heck...Tactical Marines with Bolters can kill that. We should ban those Tactical marines eh?

Ok, against a flying circus, the tidewall loses some value, but the real value is when you move it up 6", move the riptides up with it 6", and count as not moving because they start and end within 1" of the wall, and are relentless.
or markerlight pathfinders, though if you aren't taking the drone net for that, you are doing it sub-optimal.

really the tidewall is best taken with only small parts, since it has to move in the same orientation, taking just a drone port (so you can re-reoll 1s to hit) and scooting that 4+ cover around 6" with heavy weapons, so that they shoot at full bs, and maybe pop out some drones, which are invulnerable until you do pop it out.
that way terrain doesn't stop you from moving around.
Just an idea

Cindis wrote:
Oh look, another thread whining about ITC.

Oh look, it is the exact same person that has a troll account just to troll Tau related threads


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

notredameguy10 wrote:
The funny thing is the Tidewall Rampart is extremely uncompetitive so I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

Jancoran decided that this was a "big deal", despite other Defense Networks not being ITC legal.


Also, if you really can't see "what all the fuss is about" for fortifications that can cause vehicles to glance themselves to death using pintle mounts then you're willingly blinding yourself.

Well then that is YOUR fault as a player for firing your pintle mounts at something you KNOW will potentially glance back at you. Talk about dumb tactics

The point isn't that this rule is absurdly broken. It really isn't. Some ignores cover will sort things out. It's just how stupid the rule is. For example, if a Space Marine fires a Heavy Bolter at a Fire Warrior squad he still gets his power armor save in addition to any FNP if it gets reflected back. If a Chimera fires a Heavy Bolter and gets a shot reflected back then he just loses a HP. No saves of any kind. Do you see the problem here?

The rule gets even more stupid when you consider barrage weapons. A basilisk can get a shot reflected back at it even if it's a table away behind an entire city block and a bastion with no saves allowed. A Chapter Master can get his orbital bombardment reflected back at him. That doesn't make one lick of sense. Wouldn't it reflect back into space at the ship that fired it? And why would it only cause one wound to the Chapter Master if it's a shot from a ship's cannon?

It's a stupid, broken and poorly written rule. One of the worst GW has come out with in a long time.

Aye, the mechanic is fundamentally flawed, its poor game design and its jarring nature actively impacts immersion. Even if not "broken" from a game balance perspective because of high points cost (and increasingly irrelevant measure sadly), the mechanic is extremely flawed and allows for really absurd results that really have no place in the game.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Aye, the mechanic is fundamentally flawed, its poor game design and its jarring nature actively impacts immersion. Even if not "broken" from a game balance perspective because of high points cost (and increasingly irrelevant measure sadly), the mechanic is extremely flawed and allows for really absurd results that really have no place in the game.

But...but...muh narrative!!

It is immersion breaking, though it does seem like no big deal from a gameplay standpoint.

Still, pokes a bit of a whole in the "you should be forging the narrative" doctrine that gets tossed around.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Aye, the mechanic is fundamentally flawed, its poor game design and its jarring nature actively impacts immersion. Even if not "broken" from a game balance perspective because of high points cost (and increasingly irrelevant measure sadly), the mechanic is extremely flawed and allows for really absurd results that really have no place in the game.

The best part is that GW has shown that they can write the mechanic in a way that makes sense with the Kastellan Robots.

 pumaman1 wrote:
Ok, against a flying circus, the tidewall loses some value, but the real value is when you move it up 6", move the riptides up with it 6", and count as not moving because they start and end within 1" of the wall, and are relentless.
or markerlight pathfinders, though if you aren't taking the drone net for that, you are doing it sub-optimal.

really the tidewall is best taken with only small parts, since it has to move in the same orientation, taking just a drone port (so you can re-reoll 1s to hit) and scooting that 4+ cover around 6" with heavy weapons, so that they shoot at full bs, and maybe pop out some drones, which are invulnerable until you do pop it out.
that way terrain doesn't stop you from moving around.
Just an idea

Flying Circus's actually happen.

You cannot take the Tidewall in parts. it is one big mammoth thing. It HAS to be taken that way and has to end its movement in the same formation. it isnt like the Gunrigs which can be 6" apart (although they also must end in the same formation).

So again: the Tidewalls value, thus far and as far as i have seen in actual games is that I actually wil get to strike at dreads that have to cross it, that the two guns are cool, and getting seom drones isn't bad either. Getting past it isn't tough for a lot of armies and those armies kinda got you trapped between a rock and a hard place, so what I have been pondering for the mot part is how to kind of mitigate that threat. Thus far it seems like putting my StormSurge off to the side of it helps. The StormSurge can kind of fend for itself defensively (risky but...) and it doesnt get tied up if the enemy brings fast assault (and really if you're not willing to punch Tau in the face as i have said in other threads, you're fooling yourself into a bad matchup because you cannot outshoot Tau). Thats what i did in my two games. Stompa whalloped the Surge when it got there (just too tough to kill in time) but it took the Stompa two extra turns because of it to get to my lines so it got one shot at glory before the EMP whallopped IT.

Other ideas: two Riptides instead of a Surge. The list I am playing is 1500 in preparation for a tounrament and ta 1500 that Tidewall is spendier still. So instead of a single StormSurge i could put a riptide to either side and separate/spread out the threats and make it harder for the enemy whule floating away as much as possible from whatever side they commit the most too (Again, Tidewall will only go so far but still, seems sound use of it).




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
The point isn't that this rule is absurdly broken. It really isn't. Some ignores cover will sort things out. It's just how stupid the rule is. For example, if a Space Marine fires a Heavy Bolter at a Fire Warrior squad he still gets his power armor save in addition to any FNP if it gets reflected back. If a Chimera fires a Heavy Bolter and gets a shot reflected back then he just loses a HP. No saves of any kind. Do you see the problem here?

The rule gets even more stupid when you consider barrage weapons. A basilisk can get a shot reflected back at it even if it's a table away behind an entire city block and a bastion with no saves allowed. A Chapter Master can get his orbital bombardment reflected back at him. That doesn't make one lick of sense. Wouldn't it reflect back into space at the ship that fired it? And why would it only cause one wound to the Chapter Master if it's a shot from a ship's cannon?

It's a stupid, broken and poorly written rule. One of the worst GW has come out with in a long time.

"stupid" isnt a reason. That could be said of a lot of things. We don't freaking ban a unit for being "stupid". Necrons have this SAME ability! No hue and cry about that unit!