Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: FAQ updates!

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,483

    FAQ updates!

    http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/...k-fantasy.html

    Finally, immobilized skimmers lose the ability to jink. All is right with the world.
    Something something won awards in something something.

  2. #2
    Senior Member rand0mnumb3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,015
    Quote Originally Posted by ace423 View Post
    http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/...k-fantasy.html

    Finally, immobilized skimmers lose the ability to jink. All is right with the world.
    Yeah just saw that. Good change. Now I am just waiting on FMC and cover to be FAQ'd and I will be happy.

    They also REALLY nerfed Multi-Assaults by cleaning up the rules for it. It is going to be MUCH harder to multi-assault anything more then a few inches apart.


    I'm really disappointed they nerfed DE HQs though... it isn't even an FAQ for the shadowfield just a straight up nerf. RAW it is quite clear that FNP counts as if you successfully made the original save and the shadowfield doesn't break. I just don't understand GW sometimes. They just nerfed the weakest HQs in the game further for no real reason.
    Last edited by rand0mnumb3r; 02-10-2015 at 02:43 PM.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Hogleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    2,215
    They basically made green tide super duper kitable. I'm ok with that. The walker facing is awesome and necessary change. I also wish vehicles were assaulted based on facing as well.
    Quote Originally Posted by RealGenius View Post
    Your "booty > money > toy soldiers" logic is indeed irrefutable.
    http://www.centexwar.com/warroom/group.php?groupid=8

  4. #4
    Senior Member rand0mnumb3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,015
    Quote Originally Posted by Hogleg View Post
    They basically made green tide super duper kitable. I'm ok with that. The walker facing is awesome and necessary change. I also wish vehicles were assaulted based on facing as well.
    I am honestly not looking forward to explaining to people why they can't do their multi-assault now... It is one of those rules changes that won't come up much, but when it does it is completely game changing and people are going to get very upset that their plans to win are ruined due to an obscure rule clarification that most people will never see.

    I'm not sure correcting most people is worth the bad sportman vote that is sure to follow. Most people will view it as rules lawyering your way to victory and with chipmunk you for it.

    I hope vehicle remain rear armor in assault personally. It is one of the few good ways to kill super durable/cheap vheicles like Wave Serpents and Ghost Arks. It is one of the few things that make melee viable.
    Last edited by rand0mnumb3r; 02-10-2015 at 04:26 PM.

  5. #5
    Senior Member RealGenius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Not Austin
    Posts
    4,907
    You're talking about the errata on pg 46 or was there another? That seems to make it work like I thought it would.
    Last edited by RealGenius; 02-10-2015 at 06:47 PM.
    Jim
    This is why you don't go to Jim's. --Minus67
    Rook End | The Fly Lords of Terra

  6. #6
    Senior Member noodlers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    1,291
    xxx
    Last edited by noodlers; 02-10-2015 at 04:21 PM. Reason: wanted to give crp stress

  7. #7
    Senior Member Hogleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    2,215
    Yeah, it's the way most people think it works. It's gonna be largely a non-issue. The errata is only necessary now that formations have greatly increased unit size.
    Quote Originally Posted by RealGenius View Post
    Your "booty > money > toy soldiers" logic is indeed irrefutable.
    http://www.centexwar.com/warroom/group.php?groupid=8

  8. #8
    Senior Member noodlers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    1,291
    The vehicle facing faq was only for hammer of wrath

  9. #9
    Senior Member noodlers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    1,291
    Didn't units always have to maintain coherency in a multi charge

  10. #10
    Senior Member Hogleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    2,215
    Quote Originally Posted by noodlers View Post
    Didn't units always have to maintain coherency in a multi charge
    Yes. This is for pile ins, specifically intended to address the way large units move while in the pile in (e.g. green tide). The initial charge can still be set up properly.
    Quote Originally Posted by RealGenius View Post
    Your "booty > money > toy soldiers" logic is indeed irrefutable.
    http://www.centexwar.com/warroom/group.php?groupid=8

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •