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.

 jy2 wrote:

You declare all your shooting at once, even though you resolve them one at a time.

Are you shure?

«The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.»

Shooting was simultaneous in 5-th, but now it is clearly not.

I'm rather glad they updated the FAQ, in fact I'd rather see them update more rules questions to stop more debates at the event. I know they're swamped with questions leading up to the event and I see it as them updating Tau more just because they're the newest set of rules so there are still lots of issues coming up with them.

 CKO wrote:

The conservative approach at its best! By the way the number 1 Tau player in the ITC painted a Tau Army for the LVO only to find out that the piranha formation is changed so he cant play that army!

I think you may be misunderstanding what "the conservative approach" is. Put simply, if there is an ambiguous rule that would benefit you (you being the Tau player, in this case) the conservative approach says "I will give myself the smallest advantage possible"

If you want to view that as a "nerf" relative to the more powerful interpretation, you can. However, what it really is, is good sportsmanship. Until such a time as the community can vote on how a ruling should go, take the moral high ground and play with the less powerful version. That's what a good sport does. And if that's not you, well sorry! The FLG crew are forcing you to either be a good sport or not come to that event. #thestruggle

Furthermore, it rubs me the wrong way when a group of guys are just trying to get a circuit of some kind together and all they get is internet rage from people who don't like how votes went. If you think one thing, but the majority of ITC players think something else, well those are just the breaks. It's not like Reece comes down from on high and changes Tau (or any other faction) because of how he wants 40k to go. Anyone can say, "but the rules say this!" Well maybe they do. But if that is broken and un-fun for people to play against (so much so that over 50% of the community wants a change) then I would say that it's better for the game as a whole that it is changed.

First these changes were specifically rushed for the lvo and there is a vote shortly after the lvo. Which is a good thing considered it gives people more time to evaluate changes after a big event.

Secondly the ITC has nothing or extremely little to do with RAW. This argument is pointless because GW can not write clear accurate rules if thier life depended on it. The ITC has more to do with RAI and for the overall quality of the game as a whole rather than RAW which is broken because GW write horribly unclear rules.

Third these changes are not amibiguous but rather real questions that were submitted. Things like Stormsurges stating you can not move clearly means you cannot move. I have have my own idea how things should work and when the vote comes up I'd vote ghostkeels can activate individually, piranha cannot enter and exit the same turn (this seems unintended) and it is still a super strong formation considering seeker missles are replenished each wave as well, Stormsurges can't move when anchored, and if a revote happens I'd say the hunter contingent can share buffs from models in the formation who only shoot at the designated coordinated fire target. People seem to forget riptides can't take the Earth cast system under the new rules.

Even tho I'm not going to LVO. More events, even the small ones are starting to use the ITC FAQ and its just all the more reason I stand by TO's using their own and not someone else. Its kind of a cop out for them to use someone else FAQ. Basically like, oh sorry that's the FAQ we are using and they just changed it. I use my own FAQ and event then my FAQ is more of just clarifications and not adjustments to the rules. You start changing the rules and then you try to please one faction just to upset another. You can't please everyone. Now I know GW/FW take their sweet time to answer questions and update their FAQ, but I've had no problems picking up the phone at an event and calling FW to get their say on something. Those guys are awesome.

Most major tournaments have thier own faq. Nova, adepticon, ATC, ETC. all use different faqs.

Thd problem resides in thd fact 40k is a large global community. You can play however you like with your friends however the best thing about ITC is the ability to play almost anywhere with the same rules. Eliminating countless arguments with people who try to argue the system and rules to thier advantage. It also limits wasting money and time building multiple army lists because everywhere you go has wildly different rules. In fact 40k is much more popular at tournaments now as a result of ITC. All those tournaments you are complaining about was less popular several years ago. It's a testament to ITC that I can look up a tournament every month that is within 1-2 hour drive from me. Also nothing binds those tournaments to using all the ITC rules tournament organizers are free to make changes as they see fit. Most don't however because most don't want to get into rules arguments with the same people I mentioned above. People who expect you to change rules to benefit thier army. For all the griping about tau everyone still expects them to do well at the lvo and expect a vote shortly after. If tau need a tweak the best way to find out is after a major tournament.

AstraVlad wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

You declare all your shooting at once, even though you resolve them one at a time.

Are you shure?

«The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.»

Shooting was simultaneous in 5-th, but now it is clearly not.

Take a look at #7 and tell me which steps does it tell you to repeat?

Thanks for the link J2Y.

@Gungo- I can appreciate what you are saying there but the problem is they are not ruling RAI. They are ruling the way they want to see it played and this leads to bias and knee jerking. Ruling it RAI requires input from the writer of the rules to understand their true intention.

Reece and crew are trying to do a good thing and I appreciate it. However with the Tau release they seem to make very quick decisions without ample play testing, rules digestion, or countermeasure play test. This seems to lead a lot of people concerned with bias.

 Fishboy wrote:


However with the Tau release they seem to make very quick decisions without ample play testing, rules digestion, or countermeasure play test. This seems to lead a lot of people concerned with bias.

So FLG is pretty much using the same method GW used to write the rules in the first place.

you dont have to specify each unit at the same exact time, but you have to specify all the weapons in the SAME unit at the same time. Thats why theres no issue of a super firing at a Ghostkeel "last" because he cant fire "last". When you declare youre shooting the Ghostkeel, i.e. before ANY dice is thrown, i declare holophotons. It doesnt say what weapon, it says before dice are thrown, meaning any dice whatsoever if the Ghostkeel is a target.

The repeating steps 3-6 is to better clarify how the "wounding out of range" thing works, since in 6th when they added that in people were adding Bigshootas in a Burna squad to make their kill range 36", which totally wasnt intended. I was quite surprised they worded it so clearly in 7th.

 CKO wrote:
Let me list the new units and formations that tau got that was to give their codex a 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

The conservative approach at its best! By the way the number 1 Tau player in the ITC painted a Tau Army for the LVO only to find out that the piranha formation is changed so he cant play that army!

lol this is humorous.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
you dont have to specify each unit at the same exact time, but you have to specify all the weapons in the SAME unit at the same time.

No, I have not. As per rulebook it is perfectly legal to shoot with one weapon (for example meltaguns) and only after that to decide whether to shoot another (combi-grav, bolters, etc.) or not.

If we have a possibility to shoot different targets it can be said that one have to declare all targets before proceeding to shooting (second step in The Shooting Sequence) but nothing requires me to assign specific weapons to said targets and even actually shooting them. As I can see the whole process of shooting multiple targets is just not covered by the rules at all.

AstraVlad wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
you dont have to specify each unit at the same exact time, but you have to specify all the weapons in the SAME unit at the same time.

No, I have not. As per rulebook it is perfectly legal to shoot with one weapon (for example meltaguns) and only after that to decide whether to shoot another (combi-grav, bolters, etc.) or not.

If we have a possibility to shoot different targets it can be said that one have to declare all targets before proceeding to shooting (second step in The Shooting Sequence) but nothing requires me to assign specific weapons to said targets and even actually shooting them. As I can see the whole process of shooting multiple targets is just not covered by the rules at all.

Step 7 in the Shooting process tells you to go back to Step 3, which is to select another weapon. If you go back to Step 2, which is to choose another target, then you are breaking the rule on Step 7.

Therefore, the proper way to play it is to declare all your targets on Step 2, then do Steps 3-7 for each target.

pg 30:
Choose a Target:
Once you have chosen the unit you want to shoot with, choose a single enemy unit for them to shoot at....

Next paragraph:
First, select a weapon that one or mode models in your unit are equipped with. The selected weapon cannot be one that the unit has shot with during this phase. All models in the unit that are equipped with the selected weapon can now shoot at the TARGET UNIT with that weapon.

Pg 172
Split Fire:
When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule shoots, one model in the unit can shoot at a different target to the rest of his unit...

Yes i know GMCs dont use splitfire but its also the best example to use here.

You still declare targets for the entire unit at once, THEN you decide what weapons to fire at said target. GMCs can target as many units they have weapons, but they are still bound to declare them before shooting. Nothing gives them permission to fire the weapons as though they were completely separate units, meaning they still adhere to the normal shooting rules for declaring a target.

 jy2 wrote:

Step 7 in the Shooting process tells you to go back to Step 3, which is to select another weapon. If you go back to Step 2, which is to choose another target, then you are breaking the rule on Step 7.

Therefore, the proper way to play it is to declare all your targets on Step 2, then do Steps 3-7 for each target.

Yes, this point of view can be valid. We still have an argument against this because it is said "Choose a Target" in singular not "Targets" in plural so by choosing to shoot "That LandRaider _and_ this pack of bikers" we violate a rule as well. But even if we are required to nominate all targets prior to shooting it still does not mean that _actual_ shooting is done simultaneously. And we still can stop shooting before we shoot on all designated targets (because nothing tells us we can not).

 Vineheart01 wrote:

Yes i know GMCs dont use splitfire

So we can stop here

a GMC is still a "unit" therefore they must follow the rules as such in shooting. The shooting phase rules doesnt say anything about Splitfire exceptions or Target Lock exceptions, but they still get declared simo. Why would a GMC be any different?

AstraVlad wrote:

 CKO wrote:
Let me list the new units and formations that tau got that was to give their codex a boast that every new codex deserves

It's so funny to read. Tau have been overpowered like hell and now they became plain and simple "I-win-button" and people still think they "deserve" to be boosted? OMG...

Bu the way, Invisibility nerf is much more severe but where are Eldar player crying about that? Are there anybody? Hey?

Because invisibility is something multiple armies have and use. It was not targeting one specific model of one specific army

A unit of marines must fire at the same target (unless splitfire stuff exists etc) and must roll weapon types together etc.

The rules for GMC Shooting lets us simply choose to select another target per weapon.



Fielding e.g. a Stormsurge (or any other GMC) we just pick a target then roll dice for any selected weapon(s) selected then continue with to the next target/weapon(s) etc. Even the 4(D) missiles can each be fired at different targets.

Some will probably not agree with this.

There are marine armies and daemon armies that abuse invis too. Thats not an Eldar thing when its in the BRB, not the Eldar book.

Also we werent desputing whether or not a super can target multiple units, its how its declared. Per the normal shooting rules, its declared at once but you roll different weapons separately. GMC/SHV is no exception other than they are not bound to a single target, but they still have to declare them before shooting anything.

Its rather annoying with the Stormsurge since it has so many weapons. At least the second shooting is considered completely separate, so i declare them after i shot everything once already.

AstraVlad wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

Step 7 in the Shooting process tells you to go back to Step 3, which is to select another weapon. If you go back to Step 2, which is to choose another target, then you are breaking the rule on Step 7.

Therefore, the proper way to play it is to declare all your targets on Step 2, then do Steps 3-7 for each target.

Yes, this point of view can be valid. We still have an argument against this because it is said "Choose a Target" in singular not "Targets" in plural so by choosing to shoot "That LandRaider _and_ this pack of bikers" we violate a rule as well. But even if we are required to nominate all targets prior to shooting it still does not mean that _actual_ shooting is done simultaneously. And we still can stop shooting before we shoot on all designated targets (because nothing tells us we can not).

Doesn't matter how many units a unit can target. The rule tells you that once you select a weapon and fire it, you cannot go back and select another target. You can only go back and select another weapon to fire. So here we have 2 scenarios:

1) You choose all your targets on Step 2 even though the rules didn't explicitly tell you to "choose all target(s)".

2) You choose a target, fire your weapon and then go back and choose another target. This is clearly illegal according to Step 7.

And no, shooting is not simultaneous in this edition. No one ever said it was. It occurs in steps. It's just that selecting a target(s) happens before any of the actual rolling to hit/wound with ALL weapons.

Jy2 is right - I stand corrected. I'm like 99 percent sure that Reece played it the other way around during a Tuesday night fight though, so I'm not sure why he did that

Shooting was simo in 6th, like i mentioned before they changed it in 7th to prevent the Bigshoota in a squad of Burnas increasing the kill range of the burnas.

It rarely means anything except for template/blast weapons, but you gotta keep it in mind if you got varied length weapons. Ive shot my plasma suits out of range because the gun drones butchered my target, which i wasnt expecting lol. Royal bummer but thats my own damn fault.

 luke1705 wrote:
Jy2 is right - I stand corrected. I'm like 99 percent sure that Reece played it the other way around during a Tuesday night fight though, so I'm not sure why he did that

So that he, or his chosen buddy for the day, could win.

Don't think he has anything objective to add to rules discussions.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Last?

Splitfire, target locks, supers, or any other rule that lets you fire at different targets is declared simultaneously. The only exception is anchored Stormsurge since he immediately fires again as a separate shooting action.
If the player targets a Ghostkeel "last" then hes cheating by not declaring everything before rolling.

I agree that is the best way to do it, but the ITC does it one weapon at a time. Watch Signals from the Frontline #400. Reece explanes that the way they do it in their Bat Reps, is how they see it and play it. Right now it isn't mentioned specifically in the FAQ, so the ITC format events I have attended have houseruled simultaneous declarations, I would hate to see that go the other way if it gets put to vote.

Even Reece reads rules wrong. Its not even obscure, theres tons of rules that follow standard rules with a slight twist where the standard rule doesnt have the exception in there.

Like Jy2 said, you choose targets at step 2 then repeat step3 through 6 for all guns. Super or not, a unit is still a unit thus follows that rule.

I imagine Reece just pulled that out of his ass instead of looking into it, since with the exception of Ghostkeels afaik it never means anything anyway. Its already known you cant target a unit inside a transport that just blew up with the same unit with any "splitfire" special rule so thats not even an enigma to consider either.

 CKO wrote:
Let me list the new units and formations that tau got that was to give their codex a 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

The conservative approach at its best! By the way the number 1 Tau player in the ITC painted a Tau Army for the LVO only to find out that the piranha formation is changed so he cant play that army!

Allow me to revise this for you:

Ghostkeel-Overpowered, Rightfully Changed

Stormsurge-Clarified

Hunter Contingent-Broken on Release, nerfed for the good of everyone

Riptide Wing-Undercosted, Not Changed

Piranha Formation-Rules Exploit, Fixed

Also, the formation is still playable in the ITC. You just don't get the most obnoxious benefit of being able to use its rules every turn.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 luke1705 wrote:
Jy2 is right - I stand corrected. I'm like 99 percent sure that Reece played it the other way around during a Tuesday night fight though, so I'm not sure why he did that

So that he, or his chosen buddy for the day, could win.

Don't think he has anything objective to add to rules discussions.

It certainly couldn't be that he is a human being and is prone to making mistakes like everyone else, especially when it comes to the overly bloated, convoluted, and poorly written 40k rules.

You're being as biased as you claim Reece is

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Even Reece reads rules wrong. Its not even obscure, theres tons of rules that follow standard rules with a slight twist where the standard rule doesnt have the exception in there.

I imagine Reece just pulled that out of his ass instead of looking into it, since with the exception of Ghostkeels afaik it never means anything anyway. Its already known you cant target a unit inside a transport that just blew up with the same unit with any "splitfire" special rule so thats not even an enigma to consider either.

I never said he was right, just that he disagreed. As I stated, I agree with you. Watch the Rules Layer segemnt, he and Frankie are not hedging. They definitively state they view sequential firing as the RAW, and play it in their Bat Reps as such. I can't help but think this is a sword of Damocles waiting to drop in a future FAQ. Hopefully it will, at least, go up for a vote.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Like Jy2 said, you choose targets at step 2 then repeat step3 through 6 for all guns. Super or not, a unit is still a unit thus follows that rule.

I agree completely.

All in all I Believe it would be a win\lose or lose\win situation for the Tau.
-Simultaneous Declaration: Great for Ghostkeels
-Sequencial Declaration: Great for Stormsurges
Which is better?

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 luke1705 wrote:
Jy2 is right - I stand corrected. I'm like 99 percent sure that Reece played it the other way around during a Tuesday night fight though, so I'm not sure why he did that

So that he, or his chosen buddy for the day, could win.

Don't think he has anything objective to add to rules discussions.

You clearly have never watched a single second of a bat rep that Reece has played in. He does the exact opposite of that, and it's really a pretty low blow to a guy's character that you have no business making. But whatever. You take your moral road, and other people can take theirs.


It's not difficult to understand how there is relevance in examining how one of the people who drafts ITC policy (and therefore, a significant portion of 40k rules as used by the tournament scene) plays a rule that could potentially have an overarching effect on pretty much every army in the game, especially if they utilize allies. A more informed statement would be "I would like to know how the biggest tournament circuit rules the SHV/GMC issue, because regardless of RAW I may go to an event that plays it that way"

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 CKO wrote:
Let me list the new units and formations that tau got that was to give their codex a 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

The conservative approach at its best! By the way the number 1 Tau player in the ITC painted a Tau Army for the LVO only to find out that the piranha formation is changed so he cant play that army!

Allow me to revise this for you:

Ghostkeel-Overpowered, Rightfully Changed

Stormsurge-Clarified

Hunter Contingent-Broken on Release, nerfed for the good of everyone

Riptide Wing-Undercosted, Not Changed

Piranha Formation-Rules Exploit, Fixed

Also, the formation is still playable in the ITC. You just don't get the most obnoxious benefit of being able to use its rules every turn.

Blatantly biased opinions not valid for clarifications in the state of California*