Chapter Tactics is a 40k podcast which focuses on promoting better tactical play and situational awareness across all variations of the game. Today the guys cover the ATC lists, and how they compare to the ETC lists and their effect on the larger 40k Meta.
Show Notes:
- Our Sponsor the Iron Halo put out a promo video! Check it out!
- Don’t forget to check out our new sponsor! Broken Egg Games.
- Click here for a link for information on downloading best coast pairings app where you can find lists for most of the events I mention.
- Check out the last episode of Chapter Tactics here. Or, click here for a link to a full archive of all of my episodes.
- Want more tactical information about the new edition? Check out our 8th Edition article archive to help get a leg up on the competition!
- Commercial music by Music by: www.bensound.com
- Intro by: Justin Mahar
Need help with a list idea? Got a rules question? Want to talk tactics? Then email me at…
frontlinegamingpeteypab@gmail.com
Please do not send an army list in a format such as Army Builder, send them in an easy to read, typed format. Thanks!
Re: Eldar & Shining Spears ETC vs. ATC
ATC is still “cheating” like it’s early 2018 by allowing the Biel Tan / Saim Hann stratagem without a battleforged Biel Tan / Saim Hann detachment (e.g. only having Ynnari and general Eldar Stratagems).
ETC follows the Black Heart precedent by requiring battleforged sub-factions to unlock sub-faction stratagems.
Shining Spears in a Ynnari lose a lot without Biel Tan / Saim Hann stratagems.
I normally wouldn’t care about your statement, but you are calling a large group of respected members in the community “cheaters”. Even GW says people can house rule, and change whatever they want to fit their own communities.
Though I see where you are coming from. The FAQ states:
“Also note that the only requirement to have access to Stratagems is that you have a Detachment of the appropriate Faction”
which implies that you are correct.
Still no need for the pointless event bashing.
Well, you’re entire podcast was highly condescending towards ETC as somehow less innovative and more copy-cat prone than those brilliant, innovative ATC lists.
If you cannot take a cheaky “cheaters” in quotes, well, seems like you’re only good at dishing it out 🙂
Wording aside, it makes a huge difference to Shining Spears whether you interpret “faction” following the Black Heart Graphic from Warhammer Community as meaning “Biel Tan” or simply meaning “Craftworlds”.
The hair-splitters can and will argue the former, and the current wording probably is ambigious enough to allow both. But there’s a good chance it will be ruled the Black-Heart-way eventually (as well as a larger-than-zero-chance that Black Heart is just an exception, Daemons-Stratagem-style, and Ynnari using Biel Tan/Saim Hann stratagems without a battleforged detachment of that particular faction will be fine).
I disagree entirely with your assessment of our opinion on the ETC. Especially because the words you said never even came out of any of our mouths. We clearly hit a nerve with you.
The next episode we will make sure to praise the ETC format, and all of it’s participants, for 3 straight hours. Hopefully that makes you feel better.
Maybe go listen to your own assessment of the ETC as “copy cat”-meta than. 58 minutes in is one of many examples, and a minute or so earlier, one of your other guests also calls the European Meta “dated” for brining more Dark Reapers.
I get that it is mostly in fun, poking at ETC and I tried to turn the tables a bit with a bad joke, because it is in many ways the ATC/ITC running a dated meta/ruling by allowing Ynnari Spears to deepstrike in and use the Biel Tan stratagem, not the European meta who moved past that in light of recent GW rulings/info.
If anything, I clearly hit a nerve with you it seems 🙂 Perhaps because the irony doesn’t carry well in comments or perhaps because I, well, did hit a nerve there.
So you’re putting words in my mouth for something someone else on my podcast said?
I spent an hour talking with someone who actually is a prominent member of the ETC community (Tom Adriany) and he bashed more ETC decisions than I ever have in any of my episodes. We also had a lot of positive things to say about the ETC as well.
You need to chill with the “Us vs. Them” mentality. They are two different pieces of the same gamer pie. Stop just focusing on the “negative” things that are said on my podcast and also focus on the positive things too.
Then again, you’re the same guy who believes First Blood is “tactical” so i’m not expecting a rational response or reaction from you anymore.
Lol, I keep coming back to it, because you keep obsessing about my “cheaters” line.
Follow your own advice than and stop focussing on the negative and also focus on the actual content of my comment regarding Shining Spears, lol.
I think you probably need to pick up on some reading skills first. My last comment didn’t mention your cheaters line.
You mentioned the shining spears as more evidence to fortify your main point (acting negatively towards people who play differently than you). I also mentioned it earlier when I said you were right. I even quoted the line in the FAQ you were referencing. I was thorough.
You, on the other hand, have only contributed negative comments. Not much for me to go off of, eh? I have hours of podcasting that prove I also focus on positive aspects of events, as well as negative ones.
What do you have? Nothing? Ok.
You are out of your depth here man. Go back to the 5 person forum you crawled out of if you want to deal with people who aren’t going to call you out on your BS.
For a self-proclaimed professional with an alleged positive attitude, you’re surprisingly personal and hostile to any sort of variety of opinions and approaches that enrich the hobby (if you wanna drag first-blood discussions & co. up here as well).
Again, there were some (hopefully) less-than-serious insults like “copy cats” thrown at the ETC and I initiated my response with a similar comment. That didn’t imply collective guilt for everything ever said on your podcast, it simply picked up the general tone as a starting point for the latter hypothesis on different rulings giving different players different incentives.
“you’re entire podcast was highly condescending towards ETC”
Direct quote from you. That implies direct guilt.
I’ve certainly never claimed to ONLY have a positive attitude. I am human after all.
Also, lol I love it when people cry “unprofessionalism!” at other people with platforms to speak, simply because they think they think the internet is this unending void in which they can shout out whatever vitriol, and moronic thought into without consequence. I wasn’t the only one who called you out you know.
Finally, and because it breaks your entire argument’s back, in reference to the “Copycat meta” comment. I said the worst/losing teams in the ETC (the ones who aren’t the favorites) tend to be more Copycat and cookie cutter, yet the best ETC teams also include innovation and off-meta lists.
My evaluation might be wrong, but that’s simultaneous praise and criticism of a meta.
Also, I love comments that enrich the hobby. You should try a few.
Love you Pablo, but a spades a spade. You can houserules whatever you want, but if we houserule throwing a pickle at your opponent means you win the game, then them’s the ropes, but it’s still not a real rule, and would be considered cheating in all other context.
Allowing generic or Ynnari detachments to gain access to the Craftworld-specific stratagems (including the Biel-Tan and Saim Hann ones) isn’t really a “houserule,” though; that if by far the most common interpretation seen (for example, Nick Nanavati and many of the other top East Coast players use it at tournaments) and it was the de facto postion up until very recently. The Black Heart FAQ sets up a position that arguably overrules it, but I don’t think it’s an absolute and automatic position to take and to my knowledge no major tournament has taken an official position on the matter.
Neither “houserule” nor “cheat” are words I would use to describe it if it were my argument to make, but those were the words used before I entered it. =P
i am not saying it’s an absolute and automatic position to take.
I am just saying it explains why Shining Spears are more popular in the US.
Games Workshop GT hasn’t allowed it for several months now (predating Black Heart), as have some European Tournaments that aren’t reporting to the ITC such as the Baltic Cup in Germany. ETC probably won’t allow it either.
See, if you had come into this thread saying “the rulings on how these stratagems are accessed are a big part of why there is a difference,” then I think you would’ve gotten a pretty interesting discussion out of it.
But you didn’t. You IMMEDIATELY called the difference cheating, which is a pretty huge accusation to throw on someone’s doorstep even when you put cute little quotation marks around it. You can “lol” at it all you want, but calling someone a cheater is kinda a big deal, and it really shows the mindset you’re entering this conversation with. I can think of plenty of pleasant little slurs that I could’ve opened this conversation with that probably would’ve distracted you from the “actual content of my comment” pretty thoroughly.
Well, calling the ATC “cheating” in quotes as a riff to take some air out of calling the ETC “copy cats” seems pretty on par.
I responded in the tone of the podcast.
I responded this way because I responded to a (half joking, i assume, thus possibly ” “) statement/theory from the podcast that the difference in unit use was due to ETC players being less creative/inferior to ATC players.
My response sought to not only provide a rules-based alternative hypothesis/possible explanation, but also to half-jokingly, quote, lol, whatever invert the half-jokingly, quote, lol, whatever kinda big deal insult from the podcast.
What one person said on the podcast does not reflect the views of everyone on the show. It’s a roundtable discussion in which we express our own opinions.
Seriously man, did you create the ETC format? I’m sorry one person said something even remotely neutral about your system.
There are places you can visit to heal that kind of heartache.
If it helps you feel better, not once did anyone say or insinuate that ETC players are inferior to anyone. The US team are a bunch of ETC players, and we praised them. Or do you only care that the US BASED podcast didn’t give enough praise to players from your own country?
Again, I did not take the quotes in your podcast as serious insult, nor did I intend my response to be read that way.
At no point did I accuse any individual of actual rules-violations.
I called the collective of thousands of ATC/ITC players “cheaters” explicitly (!) and very specifically (!) for actually following a rule handled mostly different in the states, it appears. In truth, they obviously would be literal, no quotation mark, cheaters, if they didn’t.
It’s akin to saying American Football Players are all “cheaters” for wearing helmets, compared to Britsh Rugby players who do not. Clearly, individually, they have no control over that and would be violating the rules if they didn’t. It’s a taunt that purposefully takes a systemic difference out of context and falsly attributes responsibility to the individual.
It’s a very different statement from saying all American Football Players are cheaters, full stop, no explanation, or from accusing any number of individual American Football Players of cheating.
if you’re hell-bent on taking offense and even more offense at my trying to underscore the original meaning with more lols and smilies, there’s nothing I can do.
But it’s not a terribly uncommon way to poke fun at one group at the expense of another.
You know there is an edit function for a reason. Instead of backtracking through several comments, a simple “Oh, my original intent wasn’t to pointlessly bash a bunch of people who i’ve never met, I’ll edit it now to include a bit more humor.”
I understand that you are trying to backtrack, and why you think what you said was actually ok. Maybe try coming at this from a different angle.
Next time people “misinterpret” what you typed try correcting them or clarifying your argument instead of immediately getting defensive and slandering an entire episode to fit your own narrative.
Seriously, “you’re entire podcast was highly condescending towards ETC”? I asked you not to pointlessly bash an event and your first line is THAT garbage?
(Other people can’t edit their comments, Petey- only the original creator of the blog post.)
Thanks for the heads up!
What AP said.
Per the latest rule FAQ all you need is the appropriate detachment to use the strategem so if your Ynnari Detachment was saim hann or Biel Tan you would still get the strategem for that specific craftworld even though you lose the craftworld bonus and battle focus. The FAQ is clear that you still get to use strategems, warlord traits, and relics
How does Brad Nichols use 5 units of Cultists? Does ATC not use rule of 3?
but rule of 3 isnt applyed for troops and transports
I think the repulsors might also be there to screen. They are large, harder to charge and can fall back and shoot with fly keyword. In front of predators they can help there, something stormraven can’t do.
Regarding deathwatch, aggressors with +1 to wound stratagem and reroll wounds of 1 can sure be cool with that type of tournament.
Yeah, I get it. The CP battery really helps that army out. I just think Guard are such a versatile army, and thought maybe they would need a more dedicated guard list. But they do know a lot more about the game than I do.
I also agree 100% about the repulsors. They are large T8 bodies that can get in the way, and don’t lose out in shooting when diving into CC.
So where are you guys getting access to these lists?
You mentioned in the podcast that there are lots of places where all this info is available. That might be a good segment for the podcast sometime to be explicit about where all these places are for new or returning players like me. Is there no Eldar forum like Bolter and Chainsword? Are forums a relic of bygone days? Thanks for the show!
Pablo specifically said he was going to post them up, and then I guess didn’t? huh.
Anyways, the ATC lists:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KLheWFx6P3ufuED52YU0NGZnEuQ7OkeQ
And the ETC ones:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HMJ7rZ2y_ffBg3rESG0JxjTl8J0B9Uyl/view
Derp! Thanks AP
Sean is an excellent player, with a very strong grip on the competitive aspects of the game, and does an excellent job explaining his reasoning, probably more so even then some of the guests on the game. He’s very well spoken, honest, not afraid to voice any opinion no matter how the circlejerk of the internet feels about a unit, is excellent at reading between the lines of list building, and is an absolute blessing to the podcast.
Though I say all that to say this… at times, it often feels a bit like his voice can be a bit too dominant over the other speakers, and it sometimes it seems like Pab can barely get a word in edgewise. I don’t mean Sean’s extended explanations, which are great and part of the main reason I listen to this cast, but just more that he often starts disagreeing or making noises to start discrediting an opinion, before the sentence is even finished or explained by Pab, or other speakers. I know he is capable of racing ahead to the end of someone else’s point and analyse whether or not they are correct before they finish it, but I think it would strengthen the delivery of his own arguments if he were to wait to the point itself was finished, especially since many of the listeners are not capable of working at the same speed, or at the very least would like to hear out the point!
This isn’t meant as an insult or anything, I just wanted to provide some (hopefully) constructive criticism, because I’m a big fan of this podcast, and I love what Sean brings to it especially, and I understand it’s just his passion and incredible amounts of game knowledge that lets him get a little eager. That’s all! Keep up the great work with the podcast.
I cant read abusepuppy’s comments anymore without reading it in his voice.