ITC 2015 Quarterly Update Poll

VoteVintageLabor

Take the Poll, Here!

Thank you to everyone that contributed questions, feedback, and helped to proof the poll. Thanks to everyone that votes to help shape the ITC into the tournament circuit that best represents the type of 40k we want to play!

These quarterly updates will help us to stay relevant to the ever-evolving meta of the game and desires of the players. The poll will impact ITC format and certain FAQ interpretations.

This poll will run through Thursday of next week, August 6th.

itc.logo.01.1

About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
97 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mike
Mike
6 years ago

I was really hoping mc/gc “toe in cover” would be in this one. In our group, that is the 2nd most hated rule aside from random charge range.

fluger
fluger
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

Put me down for hating that one too.

How many signatures do we have to get to get it on the ballot?

Hiveminded
Hiveminded
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

The reason you don’t get a ton of feedback on it is likely because it’s not game breaking. The “toe in cover” rule is not something that needs to be nerfed.

Keep the rules changes to those things that need to be altered to maintain game balance….just my 2 cents.

Kwodd
Kwodd
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

It would destroy Nids.

Mike
Mike
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

Eh, the MC’s may get nerfed, but venoms and mal’s would still grant shroud, and flyrants could still jink for 2+. The other MC’s could still get cover by being decently obscured. I just take issue with them being as big as vehicles and getting full blown cover by extending 1/100 of their base into area terrain. The gribblies wouldn’t be hurt by that change at all.

bugsculptor
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

Yeah, it would just be a nerf that batters the units people aren’t even taking because they’re too fragile. MCs pay a premium for high toughness and armour that is pretty much useless right now.

Most competitive nid players are running with flyrants and mawlocs, because with the amount of grav (not to mention ignores cover, auspexes etc) around you already have to be flying or able to attack from off the table to not be a dead nid.

z3n1st
z3n1st
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

‘Toe-in’ terrain needs to go by by, at least for GC, and Flying MC. I don’t see the issue with ground based MC so much, but it does seem ridiculous that a creature bigger than most tanks or one flying above the battle field is getting cover when a Rhino (or IG sentinel, Ork Kan) wouldn’t because 25%…

z3n1st
z3n1st
6 years ago
Reply to  z3n1st

Something else that needs to stop is people claiming 4+ for standing behind a ruins…you only get the 4+ for being IN ruins, this is clarified in the terrain section page 108 top left corner. “if listed as in or behind”, vs, “listed as in” clearly states when you get that cover save, and page 37 for cover indicates if its not defined (as in standing BEHIND ruins but not actually IN ruins), then its a 5+. I see this played wrong all the time and it drives me nuts.

Hiveminded
Hiveminded
6 years ago
Reply to  z3n1st

The reason you often see a 4+ save granted is because, per the terrain rules, a model behind a “barricade or wall” receives a 4+ cover save. People assume the walls of a ruin are a wall.

Jural
Jural
6 years ago
Reply to  z3n1st

I’d go for that- no toe in cover for Gargantuans or Fliers who are actively flying.

bugsculptor
6 years ago
Reply to  Jural

Flying MCs should not get toe in.

If you ban cover saves for gargantuans, you might as well ban the units. They die so fast to grav weapons without cover it isn’t even funny.

Or, make grav, deathmarks and *all weapons* that wound on non-toughness only wound gargantuans on a 6+. No point paying through the nose for toughness 8 if *everything* ignores it and you can’t hide.

Novastar
Novastar
6 years ago

Where is the vote to start the main event off with a simulated cannon sound or some other over the top noise? And when we get down to the final 8 or so we need some WWG/WCW style intro music for the armies!!!!

Socks
Socks
6 years ago

Can we do a vote to allow more superheavy vehicles in? Regular game already has s10 apoc blasts that ignore cover and D out the wazoo, maybe its time to reconsider the bans.

Socks
Socks
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

Fair enough, it does have a short range and is easy to stun. I would still like to see everything let it as it feels like some armies are getting the shaft in terms of LOW choices.

Archon-Kalafex
Archon-Kalafex
6 years ago
Reply to  Socks

Whats a Lord of War? I don’t have those… Lol :.|

Kwodd
Kwodd
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

My Harridan wants to make friends!

bugsculptor
6 years ago
Reply to  Kwodd

Mine too. I’m so bored of codex:flyrant.

Zombiedon77
Zombiedon77
6 years ago
Reply to  Socks

Agreed +1

Zombiedon77
Zombiedon77
6 years ago
Reply to  Zombiedon77

Let more in!!!

Adam (thediceabide.com)
Reply to  Zombiedon77

I say let them ALL in… but my opinions are often unpopular.

Peter
6 years ago

I agree Adam. You should come up to Know No Mercy, October 3-4 in Sacramento. I think you’ll like the format. All is let in, and mission design and scoring will attempt to keep the bonkers stuff from dominating.

D-ManA
D-ManA
6 years ago

I agree with you Adam let them all in. I went to the Iron Halo ITC tournament and what won was the Gladious Battle Company. If a lot of the LOWs that are banned were allowed in with their large blast D weapons and big blast ignores cover weapons would have been able to deal with it better. That is my two cents which like you Adam it is unpopular in the ITC crowd.

dr.insanotron
dr.insanotron
6 years ago

So for the securing style detachments I think they should just count as 2 of your detachments regardless of what’s in them

dr.insanotron
dr.insanotron
6 years ago
Reply to  dr.insanotron

Decurion style

Novastar
Novastar
6 years ago
Reply to  dr.insanotron

But only necrons have a decurion, what about the warhost and slaughter cult etc?

Novastar
Novastar
6 years ago
Reply to  Novastar

Don’t mind me, I’m just being salty at the decurion word use for every composite formation

Mike
Mike
6 years ago
Reply to  Novastar

I call them voltron formations!

Hotsauceman1
Hotsauceman1
6 years ago
Reply to  Novastar

I started using “Combi-Detachments”

ligolski
ligolski
6 years ago
Reply to  Novastar

It makes sense to most, its like warship classes. First boat of the class gives the class its name. Ford class aircraft carrier, Virginia class submarine, etc. So really its a Decurion Class detachment, giving a general description of the detachment idea.

Novastar
Novastar
6 years ago
Reply to  Novastar

@lig that’s the first time someone has described it in a way that doesn’t make me hate it for a generalized term, thank you

fluger
fluger
6 years ago

I voted.

Will Grant
Will Grant
6 years ago

Hmm if 4 plus detachments is a thing may want to look at modifying the ally table for demons and nids not to hate everyone.

I understand no Eldar with nids and wolves with demons and that there is no such thing as fair in the grim dark.

But the bad guy disavantage is currently like a Michael Bay transformers movie.

Will Grant
Will Grant
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

Right, but is it Good with Evil they cant stand?

As someone said below, something like the Lord of War list.

Orks, Necrons, Tyranids, and combined Chaos should all really get some level of alliance with one another even if it’s desperate.

Can’t have the Super Friends without the Legion of Doom:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hZ-il7Ey9I

Ct Rickey
Ct Rickey
6 years ago
Reply to  Will Grant

I would second this. It would Be a exception for like Nids with Guard or even orks to fit Fluff like Genstealer cults and the Ork tribe that seeds plants for they can have a good fight.

I am sure there is Some CtA armies people don’t have a issue with.

It would be like the Limited LoW list you have now.

Other wise 4+ sources only make for more super friends list that the Zenos can’t compete with.

Ibushi
Ibushi
6 years ago

Yeah for the decurion style detachments, I was surprised there wasnt a “counts as ALL detachments” option.

Counting each formation within them as a detachment doesn’t seem great, unless you blow open the number of detachments allowed in an army, which right now 3 seems fine.

Also changing D to D3 or 3 wounds seems good. D2 is odd.

bigpig
bigpig
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

I would have gone with a “Decurion style formations count as 2 choices” approach rather than their component pieces. Brings some extra cost but still allows options if the cap is set at 3. I get it though. Will see how it plays out.

Hotsauceman1
Hotsauceman1
6 years ago

Reece, Thank you for putting the Forgeworld Army list thing up there.
If it says yes we can use them, great.
If not, I will accuse you of mind control powers 😛

Nahh, thanks, it will be what people think is allowed and isnt. I wont be upset if they say no.

Hotsauceman1
Hotsauceman1
6 years ago
Reply to  Hotsauceman1

Also, The Armored company is a 6th edition aswell

Adam (Thediceabide.com)
Reply to  Hotsauceman1

Haha, it’s easy to miss one!

WrentheFaceless
WrentheFaceless
6 years ago

I hope War Convocation gets left alone =/

Ct Rickey
Ct Rickey
6 years ago

I really hope this is changed. It is already 3 codex to play. With a possible hundreds of free upgrades. Your no longer playing 1850 vs1850. It’s 1850 vs 2000+ easily.

Then you add 2 more codex’s that takes away the weekness of the formation for a total of 5.

That’s 5 different sources for one army. How in anyone’s mind is that fair or balanced

Sorry ranting.

iNcontroL
6 years ago
Reply to  Ct Rickey

Already have that kind of stuff going on in this game.. daemon summoning, battle company and things like decurion giving army wide advantages to the formation as well. The only difference is War Convocation hasn’t won a major tourney yet. What War Convocation list have you seen where you were like “THOSE TWO CODEXES WITH THE FORMATION BUST THE GAME!” Culexus? Drop Pods? Without either of those things the list has major holes.. now that is fine and good WH40k has countless lists with “holes” in it (all of them in fact) but again.. is the War Convocation breaking the meta? Is it dominating top tables? No and no.. so I would save your anxiety.

Pablo
Pablo
6 years ago
Reply to  iNcontroL

I agree with everything you said, except for the “War Convocation hasn’t won a major tourney yet” bit as a viable argument. I heard there was this really great 40k player named Geoff who almost went the distance with it at the BAO. I think the war convocation list needs a bit more exposure and people will start running it. It also is a hard army to build for people who can’t just be godly starcraft players and great casters with a “war convocation building budget”

As for the 1850 vs. 2000 points argument, we would see that already even without detachments and formations that give free units. We would see that in cost effective units. 140 point tacticals aren’t as valuable as 140 point blob squads are they? It’s just easy to make that cookie-cutter argument when the numbers are so clearly displayed.

Reece I love what you guys are doing, and clearly enough people go to your tournaments and use the ITC format to warrant some sort of need for these public polls. You guys are trying your best despite dealing with one of the toughest groups of people for event organizers to deal with, gamers.

Ct Rickey
Ct Rickey
6 years ago
Reply to  iNcontroL

The codex are made with Major holes in their abilities. (Except maybe Eldar) War Convocation is a good formation on its own. Even with out the free upgrades getting to have the abilities of both Skitarii, Cult Mechanicum effect each other and the IK they get is really really good and worth taking just for it self.

You almost won BAO with it at and from what I understand it was your first Tournament with them. Your a good player and you are skillful. You have every right to pourd of you showing there. I know I would be.
Your viable argument that it hasn’t won yet,,, isn’t all that viable as you went 5 and 0. and lost by a few point from being in first place.

Skitarii with drop pods have won two of the larger tournaments in the northwest with having IK or a bunch of free upgrades. We know they can be amazing when you give them the right tools.

Summoning starts off on the same footing and can be countered before it gets going. That army takes a lot of skill to play right and few people can pull it off at the top players. Also summoning comes from the same codex. Not 5 differ ones.

Battle company starts of with 6 to 10+ free OBS units that you have to kill to be able to win objectives. Recce even says it is a top tier formation/ list. Honestly if it didn’t give you 250+ points of free units is the formation worth it?

Both are great formations and top players are running them. But honestly would be running them if you didn’t get the free upgrade and the advantage it gives.

Hotsauceman1
Hotsauceman1
6 years ago

May I also say something? I think adding the Ravenwing rule, rerolling Jink saves, is too OP
Can we instead give them the ability of “Counts as having the Ravenwing rule for purposes of the detachment”

westrider
6 years ago
Reply to  Hotsauceman1

Or just amend the Detachment to allow “Units with the RavenWing Special Rule and ICs with the Dark Angels Faction and a SM Bike”.

Ct Rickey
Ct Rickey
6 years ago

Great you put the Tyranids pod question. I am praying people go with the RAW as it make them decent. And the upgrade viable.

Kwodd
Kwodd
6 years ago
Reply to  Ct Rickey

Fingers crossed.

N.I.B.
N.I.B.
6 years ago
Reply to  Ct Rickey

Yeah!
In Sweden we FAQ it to what we think is RAI – Tcyte pod guns can fire independantly and will always target the closest enemy measured from the gun, but in everything else follows the rules for MC’s (360 LOS). This will often lead to the Tcyte shooting different targets, when close to several units, but at a distance usually shoots all guns at the closes target.
Still not a great unit (too expensive) but decent, and could make its way into some lists.

Black Blow Fly
6 years ago

Really good poll this time around !

z3n1st
z3n1st
6 years ago

Great job on the poll this time!

iNcontroL
6 years ago

Voted! Can’t believe it but I am voting for a buff to D.. think it got nerfed too hard would like to see the “B” table where a 6 is still deadly but not D6+6 no nothing deadly 🙂

Interested to see the results!

Julnlecs
Julnlecs
6 years ago
Reply to  iNcontroL

I voted for the unnerf as well. D3 on 2-5 and 3 wounds on 6 is good.

Kwodd
Kwodd
6 years ago

Great poll, you guys are the best.

No-wegian77
No-wegian77
6 years ago

I can’t believe you guys nerfed the Tyrannocyte to begin with. I hope people vote for RAW.

Jural
Jural
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

RAI/RAW is a strange concept when GW forgets one of their models is a MC and not a vehicle! I’m good either way though, and for the record, voted RAW.

bigpig
bigpig
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

I agree on the RAI. Reading from the original white dwarf makes it pretty clear. That said, the Tyrannocyte needs a little bump as it is a very expensive taxi and giving that massed shooting option could give it a little bonus.

Iago
Iago
6 years ago

I don’t think that the Ravenwing HQ rule needed a pole entry since several people already got answers from GW and BL stating that it is in fact a mistake in the codex and people should play “HQ choices taking a bike get the Ravenwing special rule”.

Freeman
Freeman
6 years ago
Reply to  Iago

Who are these people?

Iago
Iago
6 years ago
Reply to  Freeman

Everyone who asked them. But to be more specific, here is the answer I got from black library:

“Hi There,

Thanks for your email, we are aware of this issue and will be addressing it as soon as possible.

For the time being (before an update is issued) we are suggesting to our customers that a “House Rule” is applied that allows any generic HQ choice such as librarian or chaplain be allowed to use in the formation and gain the Raven wing special rule. “

Nexus_Crawler
Nexus_Crawler
6 years ago
Reply to  Iago

It is best posted here since correspondence from GW is not the same as an official FAQ. Did it need to be in the survey? Maybe not. But this is a good precedent for the community to have a say if GW will not make an official statement.

bigpig
bigpig
6 years ago
Reply to  Iago

So….. an errata maybe GW? Until then, it isn’t official and hence the need for an ITC ruling. Voting is easier to defend than a bright line decision on their part so I I get it.

bugsculptor
6 years ago
Reply to  Iago

Pole entry? Quit sharing inner circle secrets.

Prindlehaven
Prindlehaven
6 years ago

Finally! Addressing KDK Bloodthirsters! I hope everyone who votes has actually read the codex…

Adam (Thediceabide.com)
Reply to  Prindlehaven

Agreed! It’s pretty much the difference between me yanking the hands off my second thirsted or not.

bigpig
bigpig
6 years ago
Reply to  Prindlehaven

and the rules for summoning/deep striking fmcs. This is a big deal and really needs to be addressed from a common sense standpoint

Ct Rickey
Ct Rickey
6 years ago

You should have a counter for we can see how many people are voting. Can’t wait to find out the total.

Jp
Jp
6 years ago

Where do we vote to ban free points??? That’s the first thing on my list, I’d even give up summoning to stop playing vs 2500 point armies in an 1850 tourney….

Hotsauceman1
Hotsauceman1
6 years ago
Reply to  Jp

+1

Trasvi
Trasvi
6 years ago
Reply to  Jp

What qualifies as ‘free points’?

Sure its easy to say War Convocation, or Battle Company, or Summoning. But Decurions formation gives a ~50% increase in durability. If you had to pay for +1FNP as upgrades to your entire force that would set any other army back a couple hundred points easily.

Where do you draw the line between free points and free abilities?

Mike
Mike
6 years ago
Reply to  Trasvi

Agreed on this. Even free preferred enemy marines and tank hunter for firebase formation is “free.” If you want to get rid of some of the big offenders, if only go along with it if you cracked down on ALL the offenders. IE no formations at all.

Jp
Jp
6 years ago
Reply to  Trasvi

I just did draw the line, it’s an easy line… Free units!!

Every army has “free abilities” and what not… It’s part of the game. But not paying for upgrades or 10 free obsec vehicles… So your free units are getting free abilities!
Just wait until free point armies start taking over… Gladius just won their first of many GT

Ct Rickey
Ct Rickey
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

Without the free units you would not see battle company’s. Giving every unit in the formation OS is big in of it self. But with out the free transports you wouldn’t see it on the board as it would have to many tax units for people.

It’s top tier as you say. But only because of the free units.

Jural
Jural
6 years ago
Reply to  Reecius

One other cool thing I haven’t heard anyone mention- but battle companies really give a gateway back to the game from people with older marine lists. You can now field your 2008 Ultramarine list and add a few pieces and it’s competive (unless you were LR heavy.)

Ct Rickey
Ct Rickey
6 years ago
Reply to  Trasvi

Necron durability is their thing has always been that way. They don’t get that and free transports. Think about it if they got free transports too.

It is true as new books come out this may all change as more armies get formation that improve their ability to kill stuff or get free stuff too. We will have to see. for now it is in many ways unfair to the older codexs

Ct Rickey
Ct Rickey
6 years ago
Reply to  Jp

Will +1 this also.

Infernoed
Infernoed
6 years ago

Hope my new army I just bought watching pod casts from front line does not get tanked that would suck. Here’s to praying

Infernoed
Infernoed
6 years ago
Reply to  Infernoed

Referring to my new war convocation

Jural
Jural
6 years ago

I would add only two notes-

1) If allies go back to RAW (and I think they should); Tyranid should have an exception. This is a minor issue with the silly formations Tyranids have, typically an ally detachment is a nerf!

2) The second to last question (about Tyrannocytes) reads wrong to me. Should yes and no be reversed? I voted based on the text, not the yes/no.

Pablo
Pablo
6 years ago

Just voted, I thought; the D nerfs were a bit too harsh and the ITC should at least bring back the ‘ignores cover on a 6’ rule. Ignores cover should be placed on expensive D slinging behemoths. I mean it kills expensive units that rely on 2+ jink saves to survive but can still be mitigated by LOS blocking terrain. Something every table should have anyways.

One issue I have is with the terrain cover issue. I don’t mind the toe in giving cover, but only for ruins. Area terrain should never give a cover save for just simply being in it.

A happy medium for the rule might just be something like “A model is considered as being in a ruin/piece of terrain if their base is in contact with the base of the terrain and if its base is also partially obscured by the terrain it is currently in.”

that way you can still have a toe in the terrain and claim the cover save, however if there is a unit standing right next to you with clear un-obscured LOS they can blast you without having to worry about you getting a cover save. It might also make the game slightly more tactical.

Jural
Jural
6 years ago
Reply to  Pablo

That’s more cinematic for sure, but it really gives a bonus to Deep Striking (WWP, or Drop Pod…) lists. Essentially it makes a terrain light board a huge advantage, or gives a ton of advantage to one side over the other.

In a world where bikes get a 4+ cover save (even up to a 3+ re-rollable), I’m OK with this abstraction for general troops. Not for MC, but it would hose Tyranids (who aren’t flyers or GC) otherwise.

Sirus the Virus
Sirus the Virus
6 years ago
Reply to  Pablo

Pablo where is Area Terrain the BRB? There isn’t any… The toe in cover thing only pertains to Crater (6+ Whoopee!) or Ruins… Remember there is no Area Terrain anymore.

Ibushi
Ibushi
6 years ago

My last question regarding the poll is when would the collated results be expected to get published?

Whatever way the polling decides, I’m a huge fan of what you guys at FLG are doing, streamlining and involving the gamers at large to come up with a concrete FAQ packet.

Keep up the good work!

Cheers
Ibushi

97
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x