|
serious gaylord posted:Because scout is different to infiltrate? But the assault restriction is essentially the same, just worded differently. That was the gripe. Not being able to assault on a player's first turn and not being able to assault on the first game turn is literally the same thing. Top of the page picture:  Finished up another nine Canoptek Scarabs and one Canoptek Wraith this week. PierreTheMime fucked around with this message at 15:28 on Feb 26, 2015 |
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 02:44 |
|
|
spacegoat posted:Oh Jesus loving Christ GW. Why the distinction? The game was different in 3rd edition, very different, but the memory of gross mouth breathers attaching Wolf Guard in Terminator Armor to Wolf Scouts casts a long shadow. A Terminator tip-toes in gigantic, wheezing armor to surprise the enemy with a sneak attack.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
PierreTheMime posted:But the assault restriction is essentially the same, just worded differently. That was the gripe. Not being able to assault on a player's first turn and not being able to assault on the first game turn is literally the same thing. But its not though. The first player turn refers to whoever goes first, the first game turn refers to both players first turns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
No. It says that models first turn, so there is no distinction. It's an editing problem, for sure, but far from the most outrageous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
The fact that infiltrators cannot assault in their first turn, even when going second, makes that Harlequin heroes formation way completely pointless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:But its not though. The first player turn refers to whoever goes first, the first game turn refers to both players first turns. Neither rule uses "first player turn." Scout uses "the first game turn" whereas Infiltrate uses "a unit cannot charge in their first turn." This implies the unit's turn, whether they're going first or second is immaterial. If either rule used the other's wording it would mean exactly the same thing for the purposes of gameplay.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
Maybe it has something to do with the fact Infiltrators can't charge first turn regardless of scenario and Scouts only can't if they use their redeployment?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Maybe, who knows, let's consult the ru- edit: Nope, restriction only applies to infiltrators if they use their rules.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
You can't not use the rules, though. They Infiltrate or they Outflank.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
spacegoat posted:Maybe, who knows, let's consult the ru- The fact that the rules for all this is divided into five goddamn places is the thing that irks me the most. I spent twenty minutes this morning pouring over The Rules (tm) trying to get all the restrictions/exceptions right. In order to correctly state whether a unit can charge, you must first read: - Page 17 ("Game Turns and Player Turns") - Page 45 ("Declare Charge") - Pages 135-6 ("Reserves") - Page 167 ("Infiltrate") - Page 171 ("Scout") None of these have references to the other required passages/page numbers.  REAL MUSCLE MILK posted:You can't not use the rules, though. They Infiltrate or they Outflank. Outflank is optional, Infiltrate is not. The first passage of Infiltrate states "Units that contain at least one model with this special rule are deployed last..." Absolute statement, no option. Scout reads "...a unit containing at least one model with this special rule can choose to redeploy." It later specifies "A unit that makes a Scout redeployment cannot charge..." I just double-checked and I can't find any rule that states you can ignore any kind of Special Rule if you choose to do so. Goddamn playing 40K should be a part of the bar entrance exam. PierreTheMime fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Feb 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
Jesus people, it's not unreasonable to be expected to connect earlier concepts together. Your math books didn't re-explain addition every chapter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Yes, clearly we're the morons for not wanting to read 5 different parts of the book to understand something that could be clearly explained in one sentence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
*pushes glasses up nose* drat retards not wanting a convoluted barrier of entry into MY game. *faaaaaarrrrrrts*
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:Goddamn. This dude must have no sense of shame. Apparently it originated in Poland. They are dedicated mother fuckers to the hams. I remember some Polish GW store manager painted an entire Blood Angels chapter on his train to and from work. e: I am trying to google this guy but all I get is hits about the holocaust.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
PierreTheMime posted:Outflank is optional, Infiltrate is not. The first passage of Infiltrate states "Units that contain at least one model with this special rule are deployed last..." Absolute statement, no option. Scout reads "...a unit containing at least one model with this special rule can choose to redeploy." It later specifies "A unit that makes a Scout redeployment cannot charge..." I know. Your unit with Infiltrate either Infiltrates or it Outflanks. If it chooses not to Outflank, it Infiltrates. spacegoat posted:Yes, clearly we're the morons for not wanting to read 5 different parts of the book to understand something that could be clearly explained in one sentence. No one is a moron but two of those 'parts' are essential mechanics of the game and the other three are the sections for the rules that provide the Assault exceptions. Having the Assault exceptions listed with the rules that confer them makes sense because if you're not using them then what they do does not matter. It's not convoluted, it's inconvenient. There's no complexity involved.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
I'm just surprised that they allowed scarabs to charge the same turn they were spawned. Doesn't that make them the only unit in the game that can be generated and charge the same turn?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
The unit was on the table, you're just adding a model to it. You can't generate new units.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
MasterSlowPoke posted:The unit was on the table, you're just adding a model to it. You can't generate new units. As in, Necrons can't? Their's a psychic discipline dedicated entirely to generating new units. Tervigons...
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Yeah, the context was in regards to Necron Spyders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:Apparently it originated in Poland. They are dedicated mother fuckers to the hams. I remember some Polish GW store manager painted an entire Blood Angels chapter on his train to and from work. This is just one of those GW-isms I always find hilarious but I can't ever picture doing logistically. The idea of painting on the train is so quaint and seemingly sensible, but unless you've got roomy, empty trains that are exceptionally smooth rides I can't imagine ever managing to do anything more precise than basecoats.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
SRM posted:This is just one of those GW-isms I always find hilarious but I can't ever picture doing logistically. The idea of painting on the train is so quaint and seemingly sensible, but unless you've got roomy, empty trains that are exceptionally smooth rides I can't imagine ever managing to do anything more precise than basecoats. I don't ride trains all that often, but I would imagine the occasional shaking/bumping of the cars would drive a painter crazy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
I can't imagine attempting to ride any of the rocky, crowded, standing-room-only trains around Boston and trying to get any hobby in. Seems like a great way to spill paint on somebody or get an x-acto stuck in someone's leg.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
My local group posted a bunch of pictures from LVO (four of our guys went, 3 played in the GT). Troy took a lot of pictures of the different armies, worth a look. http://flyingmonkeyrtt.blogspot.com/2015/02/team-flying-monkeys-goes-to-lvo.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
REAL MUSCLE MILK posted:It's not convoluted, it's inconvenient. There's no complexity involved. Oh, good, thanks for clearing that up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Those of you playing Necrons: what formations are you finding the most useful? Which have been goose eggs?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:e: I am trying to google this guy but all I get is hits about the holocaust. I'm sorry, but this bit is kind of funny to me. I'm sure it was some combination of the words war and train that did it. Possibly something to do with Poland too. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:I'm sorry, but this bit is kind of funny to me. I'm sure it was some combination of the words war and train that did it. Possibly something to do with Poland too. Yeah I should have known better. Not as bad as googling hardcore Philippines on the computer when my girlfriends sister was watching when trying to find some punk shows to go to in Manila.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:Yeah I should have known better. Not as bad as googling hardcore Philippines on the computer when my girlfriends sister was watching when trying to find some punk shows to go to in Manila. Or trying to remind your Dad what Gary Oldman looks like but dropping the "r".
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
krushgroove posted:While we're posting ham images, this has been making the rounds today: It's obv that one goon's friend getting ready his 3 sicaran + sky shield LVO list: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:My local group posted a bunch of pictures from LVO (four of our guys went, 3 played in the GT). Troy took a lot of pictures of the different armies, worth a look.  This is peak 40K, right here. $120 Knight? Better put a church on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
It's probably to give it the same height as an Acheron. That's what it ran as, right? Has the flamer and the fist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
BULBASAUR posted:It's obv that one goon's friend getting ready his 3 sicaran + sky shield LVO list: Also, for the true experience, it needs more Thunderfires and IRONCLADS IN LUCIUS DROP PODS. That was a bear itself, since I asked about the list and found out, in order - They had to be Lucius Drop Pods since normal Dreds can't fit, you can assault from the Lucius turn 1, and this tactic makes you all but immune to anything! He also, about a week ago, found a reference in I think the old Apoc book about Flyers shooting at side armor and tried to present it like we were all playing Flyers wrong.  Let's hear stories of your 'hams, folks. Not the bad ones. Just the ones that don't really get the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:My local group posted a bunch of pictures from LVO (four of our guys went, 3 played in the GT). Troy took a lot of pictures of the different armies, worth a look. Steve from your group (Flying Monkey #3?) was a really nice guy by the way! All you guys that I met were really great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Ghost Hand posted:Steve from your group (Flying Monkey #3?) was a really nice guy by the way! All you guys that I met were really great. Stephen is awesome. All of the Flying Monkeys are great guys, if you're ever in the Wichita area, we throw some pretty great tournaments too. I know we're planning on going to the team tourney in Tennessee (?) and Texas Games Con as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Has anyone seen the Archon WWP tactic used in their scene? Presumably with a Wave Serpent and Fire Dragon squad, possibly with a Spiritseer? Similarly, has anyone seen that Tantalus idea I posted about earlier? How effective has it been? I'm trying to decide between 4 or 5 NOVA lists to play test, and I'd like to narrow that down to 3 before I get going.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
REAL MUSCLE MILK, three weeks from now posted:guys what one is the ion accelerator I've got 12 of these things to put together
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Phyresis posted:people used to talk about lists and strategies and poo poo now its all pics of paintjobs and hollismason list chat is the worst loving thing in the universe
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
that new bloodthirster is BLOODY HUGE lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:Goddamn. This dude must have no sense of shame. I once saw a guy playing Dwarf Fortress in a lecture I was in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 02:44 |
|
|
(Just tried posting this but my computer screwed up or something) Bought some more Shining Spears. I've used them many times, they are one of the units that really drew me in to playing Eldar, but they have almost always disappointed on the table. I have thought that using them in a full squad of 9 may be an answer though. Still not something I'd take to a tournament, but workable. So now I have 12, I figure I could always use 9 + 3, or try using multiple small, disposable units of 3. I am making a slight change to the models by using fantasy Dark Elf lances rather than the stubby laser lances the kit comes with. Looks good on the 2 test models I've done, but converting the hands to the eldar arms is going to get old pretty fast! I also picked up some of the new Harlequin Skyweavers and a Starweaver. Will convert in both cases using eldar/DE bits, to get that corsair look. I just find the idea of an Eldar raiding force, all kinds of jetbikers, vypers, and a few open top vehicles very appealing, and the Starweaver chassis fits a lot better with the Eldar look than Raiders (Venoms are alright but not quite as apt). Unfortunately that kind of light, mobile, fragile troop is not very good in-game, with a few exceptions. So I am planning to build up a sort of friendly-game Eldar force that looks awesome, to go alongside my 'all grav-tanks all the time' usual army which I'm sure is super boring to play against. I've said this many times before but I wish FW would update their loving Eldar Corsairs army list. Such a cool idea (as most FW army lists are) poorly balanced in the first place and then immediately outdated by changes in GW rules and/or more recent IA rules for some of the models.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 22:32
|
|