Signals from the Frontline #386

signalsthumb386

Show Notes

11-4-15

Intro

  • Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Twitch, and YouTube!  Join our Forums, too! If you would like to be a guest on the show, email Reece at Contact@FrontlineGaming.org
  • We sell tabletop games and supplies at 20% off! Hit us up for your next gaming order at Orders@FrontlineGaming.org or visit our webstore at FrontlineGaming.org.

News

  • Horus Heresy Battle for Calth is coming!! This is going to be a massive release, and we are super excited for it. Frontline Gaming is FULLY stocked on these bad boys, and will be shipping them out on the 14th! Be sure to get your pre-order in to Orders@FrontlineGaming.org and save 25% off of retail on this beautiful boxed set. Sale runs through the 14th, don’t miss out!
    • Ultramarines and Word Bearers
      • Captain in Terminator Armor
      • 30 Legion Veterans in Power armor
      • 5 Legion Terminators
      • Lord in Power Armor
      • Contemptor
      • All the bits you need to play the board game!
Finally, the best part of 40K coming to the table top!

Finally, the best part of 40K coming to the table top!

  • Las Vegas Open news! We went through the wait list and gave them all the week to get first shot at the new tickets we put up for sale. Most of them sold, but we have a few extra and we added them to the web cart. If you would like to participate in the LVO 40k championships, we have more room! Jump into the webcart and get yours, today!

lvo2016-234x300

  • Dropfleet Commander reveals images of the awesome looking PHR fleet! Wow, that’s cool.

phr ship phr2

  • Crush of Iron launches their KS, and it looks pretty cool. An old school 15mm mass Fantasy battle game, similar to the old school War Master or Battle Master games of days gone by. 

crush of iron

  • Kromlech releases some very cool looking Chain Axes!

kromlech1 kromlech2

IMG_1329 IMG_1312 IMG_1313 IMG_1680

  • PuppetsWar release some very cool new models, Valhalla Champions.

pw1 pw2

  • Some fantastic new art for Heavy Gear was released!

hg1

  • Pathfinder previews some of the new beasties form their upcoming Bestiary 5, releasing this month.

pathfinder

Upcoming ITC Events

ITC

Rumors: The Rumor Section is gathered from the web and is not in any way information we receive from  any manufacturer nor is it necessarily accurate. This section of the podcast is intended for entertainment purposes only.

  • Chaos and Daemon rumors, w00t!
  • CSM
    • Scheduled for late Q1
    • Major rules changes: thank the Dark Gods!
    • New codex and minis, but a focus on replacing older kits.
  • Daemons
    • A ways off, rumored to be a Q3 release.
    • Includes any as of then unreleased Greater Daemons
    • Warp Storm table random junk toned down.
    • Environmental effects which represent the Warp, and the ability to influence these results with the various factions.
  • The Seige of Mymerea with the Eldar Corsairs to be up for Pre-Order very soon from FW!
  • Tyranid rumors?
    • New synapse rules apparently, but IB stays the same: womp, womp.
    • New “Decurion” Style formaiton with tons of the formations built into it. Hopefully they get some awesome command benefits!
    • Something about new interactions between weapon characteristics such as range and strength.
  • Next phase of the Warzone Damocles saga: the Imperium releases more of its forces to destroy Farsight!
    • Individual, plastic Assassins.
    • Sisters, Marines and AM sent to handle the Tau!
    • Supposedly the Farsight Enclave book will be updated for 7e and the new Tau Codex. Cool!
  • AoS: Archaon gets a pimpin new model! Wow, these images floating around are spectacular.

Rant Session

Tactics Corner

  • Got in another game with Raven Guard vs. Tau!

raven guard scout

Rules Lawyer

  • Update on the Tau Hunter Contingent Coordinated Firepower command benefit.
  • MKK1016 asks: Since you can’t use powers that are triggered at the beginning of the turn if you came on from reserves (pg.136 BRB) then can Cult Mechanicus units in drop pods not use Canticles?
    • They do benefit from Canticles but they do not count towards the total number of units on the table at the beginning of the turn which can impact the strength of the Canticle.
  • Torpored asks: Can KDK take Chaos FW units?
    • Not unless they are specified as being in the KDK faction or available to KDK armies.
  • Jason D asks: Do you have to swing Gorderdinker to get the bonuses?
    • No, the rule just says the bearer’s melee attacks trigger the bonus.
  • BRLH06 asks: Why do Iron Hands get Machine EMpathy for their vehicles?
    • Most specific rule in this case is Machine Empathy, which overrides the less specific rule which is Chapter Tactics.

Completed Commissions

  • Salamanders commission completed! This is our tabletop standard which is a great value to get your army on the table and ready to play.

rhinoright rhinoleft rhinofront droppods

List Review

IRON HANDS

Demi Company * (1030pts)

Captain (160pts)

Artificer Armour, Bolt Pistol, Digital Weapons (10pts), Power Fist (25pts), Storm Shield (15pts)

Command Squad (225pts), Apothecary (15pts), Company Champion (15pts), Power Sword

Razorback Twin-linked Lascannon (20pts)

Devastator Squad 2x Lascannon (40pts), 4x Space Marines (56pts)

Land Speeders (70pts) Heavy Bolter, Typhoon Missile Launcher (25pts)

Tactical Squad (190pts) Plasma Gun (15pts), Rhino (35pts)

Tactical Squad (190pts) Plasma Gun (15pts), Rhino (35pts)

Tactical Squad (85pts) Missile Launcher (Frag & Krak) (15pts)

Deredeo Pattern Dreadnought (220pts) Aiolos Missle Launcher (35pts), Twin-linked Heavy Bolter

Predators (95pts) Autocannon, Heavy Bolters (20pts)

Relic Sicaran Battle Tank (155pts) Heavy Bolters (20pts)

Tags:

About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!

27 Responses to “Signals from the Frontline #386”

  1. Tautastic November 6, 2015 2:10 pm #

    When can we expect a vote in regards with the Tau Coordinated Firepower? My gaming store is in a limbo right now and would love to eliminate all the rules debate (we mainly play ITC format and FAQ). Also, I suggest adding a fourth option:

    A: USR and +1BS all are shared.
    B: USR only shared on the main target but the +1BS is shared by everyone.
    C: USR and +1BS only shared against the main target.
    D: No USR sharing. +1BS only shared against the main target.

    Of course the markerlights only benefits the models that shoots the main target in all options.

    • Adam
      Adam (thediceabide.com) November 6, 2015 2:26 pm #

      I think it’s a mistake that they’re missing the option that simply doesn’t allow them to split fire, which would resolve the issue and be more accurate RAW. Sometimes the simplest answer is the right one, instead of having to extrapolate on what the nature of being in a single unit means, or what happens when you target something else even though you must target the same thing.

      • abusepuppy November 6, 2015 3:20 pm #

        Yeah, considering that solves the main problem (combining fire with the whole army to share benefits, then splitting out to wipe out a dozen targets) while still allowing players a solution to deathstars and fun “tricksy combo” options, I’m not sure why Reece seems so opposed to it. It’s a legitimate reading of the text, it gives most everyone what they want, and it’s relatively simple.

        • Reecius
          Reecius November 6, 2015 4:16 pm #

          I’m not opposed to it at all, I think considering the position we’re in it’s a reasonable solution, I just don’t think that is what the rules support. But at this point, who cares. We just need a resolution that appeases the more people possible, and provides a fun, fair solution to the majority.

          • Tetrisphreak November 6, 2015 4:41 pm
            #

            My contention is that the restriction to only one target only isn’t technically RAW, but rather the most likely RAI as it breaks no rules (simply prohibits optional split firing) and is supported fluff-wise as multiple tau units feeding each other information to more accurately eliminate a single target.

          • Adam
            Adam (Thediceabide.com) November 6, 2015 10:01 pm
            #

            Yeah my biggest concern with the multiple choice is getting the majority of people voting conservatively across multiple options, while a single of the more liberal interpretations wins the simple majority. Things like that happened before for Destroyer and Detachment limits, both of which were reversed with the immediate following votes.

            Regarding RAW meets RAI, I feel when you can make a reasonable interpretation of a rule, that keeps the rule from being absurd and also matches up exactly as the fluff describes, to hard to argue the playing the opposite.

          • Loopy November 9, 2015 11:29 am
            #

            Adam is right. Another option is to do two rounds of voting. Although I personally believe the rules of specific vs general allow for the split fire, if the units are allowed to share SRs, then it needs to be ruled the SRs aren’t allowed when targeting a different unit just for sanity’s sake.

  2. Tautastic November 6, 2015 4:44 pm #

    Actually, before a vote is issued, has anyone already play tested (multiple times) the Coordinated Firepower with all USR sharing against top tier armies? How did the game go? Was it a close game or a lopsided one? Since, it seems to me that the community is still debating on the interpretation of the rule and to be honest their is really only 2 “credible” interpretation.

    A. All USR shares.
    B. No USR shares.

    Anything in between is already “potentially” nerfing (depends on your position) the rule and before a vote is issued it would be nice if there was credible data (actual games played/tournament results) that all the USR rules sharing is OP?

    • Tautastic November 6, 2015 4:53 pm #

      The only two battle report I see with the new Tau was against raven guard strike force and necrons wraith star. In both games the Tau lost. Maybe even with all the USR sharing the Coordinated Firepower is not OP compared to other top tier army list?

      • Reecius
        Reecius November 6, 2015 5:24 pm #

        With the Wraiths, we were playing the toned down version, vs. RG we were playing full strength but it didn’t matter as Buffmander was out of play turn 1.

        • Tautastic November 6, 2015 5:49 pm #

          I guess the RG game showed us one way to deal with Coordinated Firepower with all USR sharing. Make the buffmander a number 1 priority. But to be fair, he was not using any SS which is arguably the best way to abuse the rule. My point is, I would much appreciate it if there were multiple games that proves that it is OP against top tier armies before already proposing compromises (assuming that the interpretation was that all USR are being shared).

          • Reecius
            Reecius November 6, 2015 8:02 pm
            #

            Fair point. We’re happy to do so. But, this one is actually more of a case of an ambiguous rule being read (emphatically) in different ways by different people.

  3. Tautastic November 6, 2015 8:39 pm #

    In the end I do believe there is only 2 “credible” RAW reading of the rule. I do not want this to turn into a rules debate so I will leave it at that. I just hope ITC makes a well informed decision in a timely manner. Would love to finalize my tourny list whatever way ITC decides to go. I do appreciate all the things you do for the community Reece. Keep up the good work!

    • Reecius
      Reecius November 7, 2015 10:43 am #

      Thanks for the feedback and we genuinely do strive to do what is fair and right. It’s tough to do though, as everyone defines those things differently on different topics.

  4. X078 November 7, 2015 12:44 am #

    I was first ambiguous and swayed by different opinions and interpretations but when rereading and testing this further it became more and more clear. The Hunter Contingent rule should not be viewed in a vacuum, same as reanimation protocol or free transports etc. In theory they all seem overpowered and people will vote against that just because, but build a Tau list tailored and maximized with these rules in mind, put it up against an equally “cheesy/competitive” Marine/Eldar/Knight list, and you will probably see that it’s not all that OP in practice. I have not myself seen any convincing Tau wins actually.

    Ponder some of the drawbacks of the CF rule:
    Overkill, you have to select and commit every participating unit in one go.
    No line of sight to enemy or not enough friendly units combining, no go.
    The amount of points to make this work army wide, with Target Lock models for sharing and enough firepower for each unit will prove a limit.

    The thing this does is give Tau its “Decurion” boost and fight against the other “decurion” -based armies on a more even level. And soon or later every codex will be “decurionized” so why ban this? why not ban Necron Reanimation, or free transports.

    The “must fire at the same target rule” is already in the BRB for the normal shooting phase so by that Target Locks should not work at all then before this CF rule. And by “toning” down and only partially allowing some parts of the CF rule like: the Buffs are only shared towards the original target and not any other, is just weird. Then you can just skip playing Buffmander in a crisis unit today because they share all the buffs and can still use them even with Target Locks against different targets.

    Anyways, just some thoughts from across the pond, cheers guys.

    • Reecius
      Reecius November 7, 2015 10:47 am #

      All good things to consider and thank you for sharing your feedback!

  5. Andrew Gonyo November 7, 2015 10:18 am #

    Just as feedback on how to handle this, and I’ll say as part of the ETC rules council we’re currently discussing/determining how to handle it as well, be careful with vote structure to avoid cries of foul afterwards.

    It should likely be a two tiered vote to avoid vote splitting, something like:

    Vote 1: There has recently been discussion on how to play the “Coordinated Firepower” rule from the new Tau Codex in conjunction with the Tau Signature Systems, notably on the “Buff Commander”. Which option do you want to see played:

    1) The Buff Commander buffs and similar unit wide effects transfer via the coordinated fire rule. See vote 1a if this option is chosen for restrictions on how they transfer.

    2) The Buff Commanders chips and similar unit wide buffs do not confer outside of his own unit. The only thing that units firing as part of this attack gain is the potential +1BS and ability to share markerlights.

    Vote 1a: Only applies is option 1 is chosen above. Please vote your preference regardless of how you voted above.:
    1) Strict Raw: The buff commander affects all contributing units, even if they use target locks to split fire as “fire as if a single unit” and the tau chips state “his unit..”

    2) Probable RAI: Only the units firing at the main target gain the buffs through coordinated firepower. As such, contributing units that make use of target locks or GC split fire rules do not gain the buffs on those shots that don’t go at the primary target

    That’s just something I threw together, but you get the idea – you avoid watering down the point of the vote (whether more stuff transfers) by making it binary in the first bit, then if people do want stuff to transfer, further clarify in the 1a vote.

    • Reecius
      Reecius November 7, 2015 10:41 am #

      Thanks for the feedback, Andrew, and yes, I agree. It must be a clear cut result. We’ve made the mistake in the past of having answers presented in such a way as to provide confused results. It must be binary, we see it that way, too. Now to write the answers and question in such a way as to accomplish that, lol.

    • Tautastic November 7, 2015 2:30 pm #

      I only have one problem with your options/vote. What is the premise of the vote? Is it the interpretation of the rule or the implementation of the rule which should never happen at the same time unless there are sufficient data already. I do believe the community first needs to come to a consensus of the interpretation of the rule. Then after sufficient data (battle reports/tournament results) another vote should be issued to change the implementation of the rule if it was too powerful/weak. I was not present when they nerfed the 2++ re-roll and invisibility but I am pretty sure there was plenty of data before they decided to change the implementation of the rule. I would advice to be very cautious with this particular situation because this rule is faction specific unlike 2++ re-roll, invisibility, and ranged D. Just my two cent.

  6. col_impact November 7, 2015 3:42 pm #

    Isn’t voting before allowing for the community to do a decent amount of testing a really bad idea here?

    The clearest RAW is the most powerful one and should be fully considered before being dismissed.

    The feedback from Tau players that have tested it and that I have conversed with is that the power level matches Decurion, Gladius, Dark Angels, Eldar, etc. and is entirely in line with the power level of these newer codexes.

    You want people to make an informed vote and not let panicked mob thinking take over.

    Otherwise it’s very predictable that an uninformed vote will result in the Tau being unjustifiably nerfed.

    After all, the number of non-Tau players greatly outnumber the number of Tau players.

    • Zero-Charisma November 7, 2015 10:04 pm #

      Sure..just have those ITC events just postpone until the community decides what’s what. That’s going to go over well…

      Look at past votes, more often then not people vote their conscience not what’s always best for their army.

      I feel for you guys at the ITC. Trying to fix GW’s CF’s (and I don’t mean cooridinated fire) seems to be a growing task.

  7. Cavalier November 8, 2015 3:54 am #

    Hey guys I just wanted to say how much I’ve been enjoying the podcast lately. Listening on my way to the FLGS to play pickup games has really been enjoyable. This episode in particular was hilarious. As always love the analysis and love the humor. Thanks guys!

  8. X078 November 8, 2015 9:22 am #

    Sharing of the USR (Buffmander etc) buffs via Coordinated Fire rule for any units that joins in is to me at least RAW clear. But the issue people seem to have is how far the sharing via Target Locks and GMC shooting can go. But I do believe the answer is in the existing rules for those two Objects. I am often a proponent of the most powerful RAW interpretation possible, and the following take on the Coordinated Fire rule looks pretty solid both RAW and RAI.

    Rules Lawyers please pick this apart.

    Coordinated Fire (CF):
    – A Unit (not a Model in a unit or Weapon on a model), declares or combines in to a CF attack.

    Shooting
    – Shooting is resolved per unit and must be completed by that unit before moving on.

    Target Lock (TL)
    – A model with a Target Lock can shoot at a DIFFERENT target to the rest of his unit.
    – Target Lock rule specifically points out that a Model not a Unit can select a DIFFERENT target.

    Gargantuan (GMC)
    – When a Gargantuan Creature makes a shooting attack, it may fire each of its weapons at a DIFFERENT target if desired.

    Example #1: Crisis units with Target Locks
    – Buffmander is part of 3+ crisis units declaring CF at a specific target.
    – A model with a Target Lock from the buffmander unit, targets a different unit, thus not firing in the CF shooting, it never leaves the unit just not part of the CF unit shooting phase.
    – The combined CF unit resolves shooting as if one unit, shares USR/buffs and firing models gets +1BS.
    – CF Unit shooting phase is resolved, coordinate fire ended, USR/buffs +1BS is not shared/given anymore.
    – The TL model can now resolve its shooting phase with it’s original USR/Buffs like Twin-Link, Ignores Cover etc, but not +1BS from CF.
    – Repeat per model with TL.

    Example #2: Gargantuan shooting as part of CF unit
    – Buffmander is part of 3+ units declaring CF at a specific target, one unit is a Storm Surge (single model).
    – Storm Surge joins in and combines to the attack choosing one weapon.
    – The combined CF unit resolves shooting as if one unit, shares USR/buffs and firing models gets +1BS.
    – CF Unit shooting phase is resolved, coordinate fire ended, USR/buffs +1BS is not shared/given anymore.
    – Storm Surge can now resolve its shooting phase per normal rules without CF for any other weapons.
    – Repeat per weapon type.

    Basically you must commit to 3+ units to get the benefit from Coordinated Fire. If you want the buffmander buffs detachment wide then commit all units that can shoot at the combined target. Since the CR rule only applies for the shooting phase of the combined units until its resolved thus units/models not firing are not included for any sharing of USR/Buffs or +1BS. Units not participating can of course start Coordinated Fire again with new USR/buffs as long as 3+ units that still can shoot combines.

  9. NotreDameGuy November 11, 2015 9:52 am #

    The absolute clear RAW interpretation is all USR are shared and Target Locks should still work with sharing USR.

    Now RAI and keeping tournaments balanced is another issue.

    While we are at it, how about we rule to increase Wraithknight by 150 points? Or remove 500+ points of free assault cannon Rhinos? Or 500+ free upgrades with skitarii?

    Just because people feel like Sharing Rules is overpowered does not automatically mean you can just remove it.

    • Reecius
      Reecius November 11, 2015 9:59 am #

      Well, the absolute clear RAW is not absolutely clear =) It may be to you, which is cool, but so far we have a lot of different, intelligent people with a lot of different, logical readings of the rule. Arguing an absolute stance with something as slippery as language is not usually a defensible position. Words can be interpreted multiple ways. I think the best thing to do here, and what we plan on doing, is simply have a vote to see how the most people read the rule. We will allow for the common interpretations of it and see what happens.

      • NotreDameGuy November 11, 2015 4:22 pm #

        The problem with that is there is a HUGE bias from every player that does not play Tau. They will ALL vote to nerf the ability just because they don’t want to play it in tournaments, not because its correct or not. I don’t feel like that method is fair.

      • NotreDameGuy November 11, 2015 4:25 pm #

        And I honestly do not see how it is not clear. They fire “as if one unit”. That means for shooting purposes, The 2+ units that are separate units are temporarily 1 unit until shooting is done. If they are one unit USR are shared….

Leave a Reply