PDA

View Full Version : Polish problem with Steam Tank.



Reyki
10-12-2007, 12:40
In Poland when you damage a ST for 5 Wounds You have half point value.

What are You think about that?

I think, that rule is stupid.

p3990013
10-12-2007, 12:44
If your model (monster, character) loses more than half of its wounds, the opponent gets half its victory points. Is that what you mean?

If yes, isn't that normal? I mean the steam tank is treated as a monster with many wounds and 1+ armor save, why should it differ from a treeman?

Der Doctor
10-12-2007, 12:45
that is the rule in the current edition, it says half or more starting wounds

EvC
10-12-2007, 13:01
If yes, isn't that normal? I mean the steam tank is treated as a monster with many wounds and 1+ armor save, why should it differ from a treeman?

No, it's treated as a Warmachine, which means it must be completely destroyed to yield any victory points. I'm sure many will give half points for it down to 5 wounds, but strictly speaking, the rules say you get nothing even if you take off 9 wounds. Which sucks.

p3990013
10-12-2007, 13:11
Now that is a very lowly way of denying victory points to your opponents at tournaments. No wonder we see two of these on Empire army lists...

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2007, 13:39
You get half victory points for:
"Models that fight on their own and not in units"

So you get half victory points for dealing half wounds to the thing.
War machine or not, you get half VP for dealing half wounds to the steam tank mate.

And no, its not a stupid rule.

Shank
10-12-2007, 23:51
You get half victory points for:
"Models that fight on their own and not in units"

So you get half victory points for dealing half wounds to the thing.
War machine or not, you get half VP for dealing half wounds to the steam tank mate.

And no, its not a stupid rule.

Pg. 102 rulebook, "A note on Warmachines" last sentence:
"it is not possible to score half the points of a war machine, as it will always be all or nothing". The Steam Tank is a Warmachine. Seems pretty clear.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2007, 23:53
It does specifically mention "crew" of the machine.
So unless you can somehow kill the crew of a steam tank it doesnt fit the requirements of being a war machine.

Or does it have the special rule "War machine" in its description?
(legitimate question as I do not have the empire book)

As unless the steam tank is specifically stated to be a war machine (has to be proper text not itallic nonsese like this) it simply isnt a war machine and is treated like a single model that moves on its own.

Count Zero
11-12-2007, 00:20
quote from the empire book:

'except where noted otherwise, a steam tank counts as a war machine in all respects.'

there is no seperate mention of vp's in its rules so ST's are currently all or nothing for vp's.

theunwantedbeing
11-12-2007, 00:39
Well there you go then, it's a war machine so you dont get any points for it unless you destroy it.

EvC
11-12-2007, 11:56
That's what we said :p

Finnigan2004
11-12-2007, 13:23
In answer to the original question, no I do not think that it is a bad thing to award half points for a steam tank. It is probably a very reasonable response to the many people who field them not only because they are extremely good, but because they are a phenomenal means of victory point denial because they are virtually unkillable (1+ armour save, toughness 6, 10 wounds, unbreakable). The absolute dominance of 2 steamtank armies in many recent tournaments gives us some indication that they might be a little overbalanced, and I suspect that more tournaments might adopt something like this. Hopefully they will give people some notice, unlike what they apparently did with Thorek at the last UKGT.

Sherlocko
11-12-2007, 13:41
On the other hand, there are no crew to operate the war machine at the end of the battle...

JonnyTHM
11-12-2007, 14:02
Hey, just thought of a possibility and thought I'd share it.

Ever consider that maybe the victory points denial of the steam tank was put in to compensate for the fact that unlike monsters (who's VP rule everyone suggests a steam tank should follow), if you do half wounds to a steam tank, not only can it not fight as well, it can't run away as well either?

Avian
11-12-2007, 14:08
Ever consider that maybe the victory points denial of the steam tank was put in to compensate for the fact that unlike monsters (who's VP rule everyone suggests a steam tank should follow), if you do half wounds to a steam tank, not only can it not fight as well, it can't run away as well either?
No, I think if that was the case if would have been mentioned and tournament errata tends to say that it awards VPs like any other single model unit, which is in fact the only reasonable way of playing it as I see it.

DDogwood
11-12-2007, 14:57
Ever consider that maybe the victory points denial of the steam tank was put in to compensate for the fact that unlike monsters (who's VP rule everyone suggests a steam tank should follow), if you do half wounds to a steam tank, not only can it not fight as well, it can't run away as well either?

It's possible, but unlikely - as Avian says, it's likely that it would have been mentioned specifically if this was the case.

It's far more likely that the game designers simply never considered how it should work for VP purposes.

Awarding half VPs for a Steam Tank that has suffered half its wounds seems pretty fair, to be honest. It's a bit more difficult to destroy than a typical large monster, and it's far harder to destroy than any other war machine in the game. The fact that it gets less effective as it takes damage is immaterial - most Lord-level characters get a lot less effective when they suffer 5 wounds, as well.

Reyki
11-12-2007, 18:41
If You deal any damage to ST, then it gets less effective.
So half point value for deal 5 or more wounds is stupid.

Don't tell me the ST is hard to kill.
You need only 2 spear chukkas or one dwarven bolt thrower,cannon,some jezzail,dragon ogre,bretonian paladin with killing blow on large target.

Units in Empire are too expensive.
Limitation of ST are not fair.

Warboss Jhura Ironfang
11-12-2007, 21:03
You can't KB a Stank, its US is way too high.

Edit: Never mind, I didn't read last part of the post.

Cheerz,
WB Ironfang

Grimtuff
11-12-2007, 22:56
I'm still not sure how in any way this relates to Poland :confused: :eyebrows:

Count Zero
11-12-2007, 22:57
maybe the polish version of the AB is different?

DDogwood
11-12-2007, 23:09
If You deal any damage to ST, then it gets less effective.
So half point value for deal 5 or more wounds is stupid.

Most other models are dead after you deal 5 wounds (including, I believe, every other war machine). Also, the Steam Tank gets less effective, but it doesn't necessarily get easier to kill.


Units in Empire are too expensive.
Limitation of ST are not fair.

So you're saying that any competitive Empire army has to take a Steam Tank, then, because they are so valuable for their VP denial?

Honestly, as long as you and your opponent agree, then either way of doing it is fair. The only time it's not fair is if you're at a tournament and the tourney organizers don't tell players how Steam Tank VPs will be counted in advance.

Rioghan Murchadha
12-12-2007, 00:57
I'm still not sure how in any way this relates to Poland :confused: :eyebrows:


maybe the polish version of the AB is different?

Maybe it's only the Polish people who have a problem with the rule... ;)

Pokpoko
12-12-2007, 01:04
i'm sure majority of polish people haven't even heard of steamtanks.polish WHB players now...:p

Shank
12-12-2007, 04:10
It's funny, when the New Empire book came out, everyone cried "the Steam Tank got nerfed, it stinks, it is a waste of 300 points" etc etc. How opinions change.

But back to topic, the rules for warmachines and victory points are pretty clear. Not much grey area. So they are all or nothing. And that means the Steam Tank. You can't adjust the rules because you don't like them. I don't like the High Elves ASF. Can we change that one?? Please??

Finnigan2004
12-12-2007, 04:30
Sorry Shank, but they do change rules at tournaments when they choose to. The UKGT changed the rules on Thorek when it came to dominate too much. The same appears to have been done here with the steam tank. As for ASF, who knows, if they find that it's broken they might. It does not appear to be that way for the most part yet, but some people might find a way to exploit it and they could reconsider.

DDogwood
12-12-2007, 05:25
You can't adjust the rules because you don't like them.

The rules aren't written in stone by the finger of God. They can be changed for tournaments, leagues, campaigns, game clubs, and individual games.

Also, there are two conflicting rules relating to the Steam Tank. One is that it is treated as a war machine "in all respects" - this means that it counts for full VPs if the machine is destroyed or if it has no crew left at the end of the game. Since the Steam Tank has no separate crew, this suggests that the Steam Tank has to be completely destroyed to count for VPs (although, as has been pointed out, there is a counterintuitive but valid argument that the Steam Tank always gives up all its VPs, since it cannot have crew left at the end of the game).

The other rule is that "Models that fight on their own and not in units" give half VPs if they have less than half their wounds remaining at the end of the game. The Steam Tank fits this definition as well.

Since the Steam Tank is currently the only model in the game that fits both definitions, it is clearly a special case. Unless there is an official ruling, players need to decide how to calculate the VPs at the start of the game. It doesn't matter how you think it should work, you still need to sort this out with your opponent before you start playing.

If there ever is an official ruling, players, tournament organizers, or game club presidents can still change the rule as they see fit.

Shank
12-12-2007, 13:40
The rules aren't written in stone by the finger of God. They can be changed for tournaments, leagues, campaigns, game clubs, and individual games.

Also, there are two conflicting rules relating to the Steam Tank. One is that it is treated as a war machine "in all respects" - this means that it counts for full VPs if the machine is destroyed or if it has no crew left at the end of the game. Since the Steam Tank has no separate crew, this suggests that the Steam Tank has to be completely destroyed to count for VPs (although, as has been pointed out, there is a counterintuitive but valid argument that the Steam Tank always gives up all its VPs, since it cannot have crew left at the end of the game).

The other rule is that "Models that fight on their own and not in units" give half VPs if they have less than half their wounds remaining at the end of the game. The Steam Tank fits this definition as well.

Since the Steam Tank is currently the only model in the game that fits both definitions, it is clearly a special case. Unless there is an official ruling, players need to decide how to calculate the VPs at the start of the game. It doesn't matter how you think it should work, you still need to sort this out with your opponent before you start playing.

If there ever is an official ruling, players, tournament organizers, or game club presidents can still change the rule as they see fit.

You are really reaching on this one. To be honest, this is one rule that seems crystal clear. The rule "Models that fight on their own and not in units" could be just about anything. It clearly states VP's for warmachines and it clearly states in the Empire book that the Steam Tank is a Warmachine. It isn't how I "think" it should work. Any reasonable person will read the rules and realise that this is the correct way.
What they do at tournaments is up to the organizer. It doesn't change the fact that it is not possible to gain half points for a warmachine (ie Steam Tank).
It seems to me that some people will find any wording they like and try to cloud up a rule set they don't like. Face it, you think the rule is unfair, therefore it must be changed. That doesn't mean you can force your will on other players. Well, maybe in 8th edition they will fix it.

Avian
12-12-2007, 13:57
I actually look up the war machine VP rules again and I can quote:


..., a war machine is considered destroyed for the purposes of calculating victory points if either the machine has been destroyed or a crew is not in position to operate the machine at the end of the game...

A Steam Tank cannot have a crew in position to operate it at the end of the battle, so if you want to play the silly "rule as written" game, it is equally correct to say that you ALWAYS get full VPs for Steam Tanks, regardless. Even if it hasn't been touched during the game. It has, after all, no crew to operate it.

Sir_Turalyon
12-12-2007, 14:23
I'm still not sure how in any way this relates to Poland

Probably it's caused by some variant of so called "polish rules clarifications" - fan FAQ made collectively by tournament scene, intended to be used uniformly on all polish tournaments to avoid confusion. Judging by quality of produced FAQs, people who compile them have much better tournament standing then grasp of rules or of general reality. Unfortunately, some players take these clarification all too seriously, althrough it's first time I see someone rant about it on english-speaking forum :confused:.

Or maybe someone just told Reyki that such ruling applies in Poland to win an argument (sounds impressive enough and is hard to verify).

DDogwood
12-12-2007, 15:25
You are really reaching on this one. To be honest, this is one rule that seems crystal clear. The rule "Models that fight on their own and not in units" could be just about anything. It clearly states VP's for warmachines and it clearly states in the Empire book that the Steam Tank is a Warmachine.

The rules regarding warmachines are also obviously referring to warmachines with separate crew. It's not the case that one is "clearly" the intended rule, you're just picking the one that you happen to prefer.


It isn't how I "think" it should work. Any reasonable person will read the rules and realise that this is the correct way.

So you're saying that I'm an unreasonable person? I don't regularly play against an Empire player, and I don't play Empire myself, so I don't think I've got a strong bias either way. In fact, I'm specifically not saying that it should work one way or the other, I'm just saying that there are two possible interpretations and that you should clarify how it will work with your opponent before you start playing.

If you think that anyone who doesn't share your opinion is "unreasonable", then maybe you need to reexamine why you play this game.


It seems to me that some people will find any wording they like and try to cloud up a rule set they don't like. Face it, you think the rule is unfair, therefore it must be changed.

No, I don't think the rule is unfair. Please try to pay attention. I don't even think the rule should be "changed" - my whole point is that the rules are contradictory. The Steam Tank is both a warmachine and a "model that fights on its own and not in a unit". It is the only model in the game that fits in both of these categories, and contradictory rules apply. You can't just pick the one that you like, and proclaim that it is "clearly" the correct ruling, and expect everyone else to go along with you. You can refuse to play against opponents who disagree, and you can refuse to play in tournaments where the ruling is contrary to what you believe to be "clear". Remember that you are not the final arbiter of the rules for everyone else who plays the game.

If you want to argue from intent, do you honestly think that the game designers decided that the Steam Tank should count as a warmachine because of the way VPs are calculated, or because there are a number of spells, magic items, and special abilities that affect warmachines differently than other game pieces? I'll admit that it's possible, but it seems far more likely that they were thinking about things like items that give Killing Blow against multi-wound models but not warmachines.

ffarsight
12-12-2007, 15:36
WTF, now you are assuming that a steam tank as no crew?, get the f. out of here... how does it moves? by magic?? at least it has the eng. inside... soo itīs no longer a stand alone model... You all saying itīs not a warmachine, better go start playing 40k.

Want to nerf it more...you bastards... " I canīt kill it" ... "its too powerful" kind of arguments are very stupid

EvC
12-12-2007, 15:56
No-one has made those arguments, just that it's not exactly fair for a 10-wound beast of a warmachine to not give victory points when taken down to half strength. On the two occasions I've fought a Steam Tank I killed it in one game and took two wounds off it ni the other, so this ruling would have made no difference to my games, at least.

Just look at the UKGTs for an idea of how dumb this rule is, where the top tables were full of double Steam Tank armies. When you can cause 18 wounds to 600 points of models and get no victory points for your efforts, something's gone wrong...

ffarsight
12-12-2007, 16:08
yeh, the wrong thing is that the ST opponentīs are very bad players... because if you do 4 wounds to a ST tank you can do what you want with the game, since the ST player has almost no more army to play with... and of course you still get your 2000 points available.

Also itīs the only unit that gets actually "damage" in his stats when getting wounds.

I could agree that everything can get a errata after a few time of use, and when it gets one i will be in agreement with it, but get real... its perfectly stated itīs a warmachine for all respects... donīt try to say something its not.

DDogwood
12-12-2007, 16:20
WTF, now you are assuming that a steam tank as no crew?, get the f. out of here... how does it moves? by magic?? at least it has the eng. inside... soo itīs no longer a stand alone model... You all saying itīs not a warmachine, better go start playing 40k.

The example that the Steam Tank "has no crew" is simply pointing out that the Steam Tank doesn't always operate as a warmachine, even though the rules say it should. Nobody is seriously suggesting that a Steam Tank always gives up 300 VPs to your opponent, that would be stupid.


Want to nerf it more...you bastards... " I canīt kill it" ... "its too powerful" kind of arguments are very stupid


yeh, the wrong thing is that the ST opponentīs are very bad players...

First off, this thread isn't about who is "for" the Steam Tank and who is "against" it. The discussion is about what is "fair", and which of two contradictory rules should apply.

Attacking people who don't agree with your interpretation by saying that they are "very bad players" doesn't do anything to bolster your argument. Calling those who disagree with you "bastards" doesn't do anything, either.

You are right that the "I can't kill it" and "it's too powerful" arguments don't justify using one rule vs. another. By the same token, arguments like "the Steam Tank gets weaker as it takes damage" are just as useless in determining which rule should be used.

ffarsight
12-12-2007, 16:45
Ok, i shouldnīt have used those words, but i do get sentimental with it :)

About your last sentence:

There is no rules to be applied, just a rule, it is treated like a warmachine in all ather respects, except mov. Thatīs it... there is no way around...the book says it all.
But does Empire players usually win GT ??? i think not, soo what is this thing about???

i see other armys get more victorys than Empire.... or is just me?

Count Zero
12-12-2007, 17:14
i think the empire won at least 2 of the recent uk gt heats didnt they?

DhaosAndy
12-12-2007, 18:07
OT I know, but, the worst thing about the steam tank is it's simply beyond suspension of disbelief. I mean the damn things a physical impossibility and isn't magic. Bah Humbug!

utrotaren
12-12-2007, 18:15
well the steam tank do have a enginer as a crew.

Vishok
12-12-2007, 18:33
I have just started playing WHFB after many years of WH40k, and I have to say I agree that it seems unfair.

BUT

They made it that way for a reason...it's not like Empire has a lot of high toughness or strength units.

You guys are only talking about the Steam Tank, like in a vacuum. What about dragons, wyverns, chaos daemons, minotaurs, trolls, ushtabi, carnosaurs and all that other stuff?

You can't just pronounce it unfair because of it's singular attributes. It's there for a reason.

I'd say find a way to deal. Like with cannons. Or magic.

DDogwood
12-12-2007, 20:54
There is no rules to be applied, just a rule, it is treated like a warmachine in all ather respects, except mov. Thatīs it... there is no way around...the book says it all.

As I said before: the Steam Tank is both a war machine and a "model that fights on its own and not in a unit". It is the only model in the game that fits in both of these categories, and contradictory rules apply.

Why do you think that the war machine VP rule would automatically override the "model that fights on its own and not in a unit" rule? You're arguing that it's a war machine, which is explicitly stated in the unit entry, but it's also explicitly described as a model that fights on its own, and not in a unit.

The logical choice is to say "Hmm, looks like GW screwed up, and failed to clarify how this should work." Then you discuss it with your opponent, and say "I feel that such-and-such a rule should take precedence, because of reasons A, B, and C". This is much easier than getting into an argument at the end of the game about whether he gets 150 VPs or none at all, especially if that would decide the game.

ffarsight
13-12-2007, 14:11
As I said before: the Steam Tank is both a war machine and a "model that fights on its own and not in a unit". It is the only model in the game that fits in both of these categories, and contradictory rules apply.

Why do you think that the war machine VP rule would automatically override the "model that fights on its own and not in a unit" rule? You're arguing that it's a war machine, which is explicitly stated in the unit entry, but it's also explicitly described as a model that fights on its own, and not in a unit.

The logical choice is to say "Hmm, looks like GW screwed up, and failed to clarify how this should work." Then you discuss it with your opponent, and say "I feel that such-and-such a rule should take precedence, because of reasons A, B, and C". This is much easier than getting into an argument at the end of the game about whether he gets 150 VPs or none at all, especially if that would decide the game.


Well, when its stated that is a war machine in the empire rulebook, it precedes the RB because its after the 7th edition being released. Soo it is a War machine.

Finnigan2004
13-12-2007, 14:59
I think that with all of the rules argumentation, people are losing track of what the thread was asking. The original poster complained about a ruling in Polish tournaments and asked opinions. The rule is not being debated in this case, it has been ruled upon. You can argue several ways using RAW, as has been already pointed out-- including making a ridiculous argument (although possibly true) that the tank always sacrifices it's VPs. Obviously there is a problem with RAW, so a ruling was made. To restate, the original point is that a ruling was made on a controversial topic and this person disliked it. In my opinion this is o.k.-- the rules for the steam tank are a mess, but this is to be expected when a singular model has more than a full page of special rules.

DDogwood
13-12-2007, 15:20
Well, when its stated that is a war machine in the empire rulebook, it precedes the RB because its after the 7th edition being released. Soo it is a War machine.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Bloodknight
13-12-2007, 15:33
He meant "supercedes", I guess.

Dodgy Ed
13-12-2007, 17:04
I'm probably going to regret posting this but here goes;
NB this is for the UKGT only, not sure if it will have any bearing on the polish issue.



Q. As the steam tank is a war machine, do you get half points for removing over half its wounds?
A. No – you only get points for destroying the entire unit.


Warning Rampant personal opinon

Do I think this is correct?

No, No and thrice no! Why?

First up; the utter prevalence of double steam tank lists at the GT heats this year, each heat was won by one(combined with either karl Franz on dragon, Popemobile or the wizard on a pegasus who's name I can't remeber atm). Given such a swing it would seem reasonable to assume that the double steam tank list is somewhat overpowered, the fact that someone can do 18 wounds to a T6 unit and receive no victory points seems wrong some how.

Second (I give this one more credence); the designer stated flat out that the steam tank does give half points, as seen in this thread http://www.golden-throne.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=228282&sid=80643aabe30ec392248727e1e30c1784

There was a fair degree of ill feeling about it at UKGT heat 3 as well; I wouldn't be surprised if the tournament pack was changed to be more in line with Gav Thorpe's comment above, however as it stands the rules are unfortunately pretty clear cut (at least for the UKGT)

DDogwood
13-12-2007, 17:26
Second (I give this one more credence); the designer stated flat out that the steam tank does give half points, as seen in this thread http://www.golden-throne.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=228282&sid=80643aabe30ec392248727e1e30c1784


Regardless of which is the "obvious" answer, I still think it makes the most sense to talk it over with your opponent before the game.

Shank
14-12-2007, 00:41
Regardless of which is the "obvious" answer, I still think it makes the most sense to talk it over with your opponent before the game.

Yes, you can talk it over with your opponent before the game. That does seem fair. You can make sure he is fully aware that you do not get half vp's for the the steam tank. You have to destroy it to get any. I agree with you there.

PS Gav... please, that guy says a different thing everytime he is asked. Let's not forget he wrote the Dark Elf book. I can't believe that guy is still prominant at GW.

Finnigan2004
14-12-2007, 02:11
Yes, you can talk it over with your opponent before the game. That does seem fair. You can make sure he is fully aware that you do not get half vp's for the the steam tank. You have to destroy it to get any. I agree with you there.

At which point he points out that you are absolutely correct, if it's a war machine. Of course, that is only so long as you have at least one crew member in position to operate it at the end of the game, or you automatically give up three hundred victory points according to RAW. Now if it is any sort of single model that fights on it's own. Then, after you both make your intractable positions clear, you can both pack up in a huff and leave without having a game. :rolleyes:

I think that you have to remember that it's fair to have a position on something, but it very rarely works out when you state things obnoxiously in real life.

Flypaper
14-12-2007, 07:16
Second (I give this one more credence); the designer stated flat out that the steam tank does give half points, as seen in this threadHe later recanted this position - here (http://warhammer.org.uk/PhP/viewtopic.php?p=402021&sid=aa8523f9c4e9f0e5525b35463c5ad582) (scroll down about half a page).

EvC
14-12-2007, 10:46
First up; the utter prevalence of double steam tank lists at the GT heats this year, each heat was won by one(combined with either karl Franz on dragon, Popemobile or the wizard on a pegasus who's name I can't remeber atm). Given such a swing it would seem reasonable to assume that the double steam tank list is somewhat overpowered, the fact that someone can do 18 wounds to a T6 unit and receive no victory points seems wrong some how.

Only one Steam Tank in the first Heat winner's list. 5 Steam Tanks in total for the winners of all the Heats. Steam Tanks not giving half points is a huge Easter Egg that should have been errata'd for the GT (In the same way that Slann were subject to an errata saying that they can in fact do stuff from the second rank!), it's just too abusable as has been demonstrated. They need to be taken down a peg or two (They did rule things like grinding only taking place in one direction, Hand of Dust can destroy the tank, but too little too late for me!), they just make the game so dull when taken in pairs. Bizarrely Heat 3's winner lamented the fact that so many people took Steam Tanks (Of course it wasn't enoug to stop him fielding a pair of them)...

Shank
14-12-2007, 13:33
At which point he points out that you are absolutely correct, if it's a war machine. Of course, that is only so long as you have at least one crew member in position to operate it at the end of the game, or you automatically give up three hundred victory points according to RAW. Now if it is any sort of single model that fights on it's own. Then, after you both make your intractable positions clear, you can both pack up in a huff and leave without having a game. :rolleyes:

I think that you have to remember that it's fair to have a position on something, but it very rarely works out when you state things obnoxiously in real life.

The Steam tank will "Always" have at least one crewman operating the machine. You forget the tank comes with a Engineer Commander. Now, warmachine rules state, if you kill the crew or they are not in a position to operate the machine or you destroy the machine, then you get full points for the warmachine. Since the Engineer Commander cannot be hit by shooting or close combat, your only choice is to Destroy the tank. The Commander can never leave it, so he is always there to crew it.

The reason I am being obnoxious is because no matter how clearly you explain something to some people or overwhelm them with evidence, if they don't like something (this rule) they will bend words all over the place to fit their argument.

Finnigan2004
14-12-2007, 14:08
Then the two of you will get into an argument because the book does not note anywhere that the commander is a crew member-- it only notes that he has a pistol as far as I can tell with a cursory reading. It would appear that he is not a member of the crew.

Seriously, we both know that he is a crew member though. I think that you missed the point of my post though. I was not arguing which point of view was technically correct, I was talking about attitudes. The following is not directed at you specifically, but it is an attitude that I think is unfortunately prevalent in the hobby.

In my opinion, people argue far too much over RAW when powergaming is involved. Many such people are not interested in having a fun game, but rather in using the rules to get a competitive edge (read: winning). They search their lists for Easter eggs and defend to the death their right them. Then they field six lances of knights and twenty flying horses, or two steam tanks (that they feel do not give up half victory points on a technicality) and Karl Franz. All the while they complain because their opponent has a cheesy list because of ASF or having too many magic dice. Taking intractable positions over RAW really ruins the atmosphere for gaming most of the time.

In this case, as I noted above, I think that the thread has been derailed a little. The ruling in the case of the original poster is that the tank does give up half victory points. He was simply complaining about the ruling. In this case, it is quite likely that in so ruling the organizers upheld original intent of the rules. Many agree with it, and it is actually their right to do so as tournament organizers. The debate is not about whether the tank should give up half of it's victory points, it is about a ruling that has already been made.

DDogwood
14-12-2007, 15:57
In my opinion, people argue far too much over RAW when powergaming is involved. Many such people are not interested in having a fun game, but rather in using the rules to get a competitive edge (read: winning). They search their lists for Easter eggs and defend to the death their right them. Then they field six lances of knights and twenty flying horses, or two steam tanks (that they feel do not give up half victory points on a technicality) and Karl Franz. All the while they complain because their opponent has a cheesy list because of ASF or having too many magic dice. Taking intractable positions over RAW really ruins the atmosphere for gaming most of the time.

I agree 100%. We don't spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours working on our little army men so we can get into heated arguments about how many VPs a Steam Tank is worth and whether or not it has a crew member.

The objective of the game is to win, but the point of the game is to have fun. I'm not interested in playing against anyone who's so inflexible about a minor rules issue like this that he's willing to ruin his fun and my fun over it.

As far as the OP's complaint goes, if that's the ruling at local tournaments, that's the ruling. If he doesn't like it, he's not being forced to play, is he?

Rioghan Murchadha
14-12-2007, 16:32
yeh, the wrong thing is that the ST opponentīs are very bad players... because if you do 4 wounds to a ST tank you can do what you want with the game, since the ST player has almost no more army to play with... and of course you still get your 2000 points available.

What are you playing, 500 pt games? Come back and talk after you see how 'hard' to kill a Tzeentch marked Beastlord is clocking in at 330pts with gear.


Also itīs the only unit that gets actually "damage" in his stats when getting wounds.
Yes.. This is a bad thing? Most units just "die" when taking wounds. The ST remains operational and denies VP, albeit at a reduced efficiency.


I could agree that everything can get a errata after a few time of use, and when it gets one i will be in agreement with it, but get real... its perfectly stated itīs a warmachine for all respects... donīt try to say something its not.

If it's a warmachine in all respects, then the engineer gets out and ranks up in front of it to protect it if an enemy charges it, or flees abandoning the ST allowing the enemy unit to spike it. Thus making it stupidly easy to recieve full VP for the steam tank. Careful what you wish for.

Shank
14-12-2007, 23:23
What are you playing, 500 pt games? Come back and talk after you see how 'hard' to kill a Tzeentch marked Beastlord is clocking in at 330pts with gear.


Yes.. This is a bad thing? Most units just "die" when taking wounds. The ST remains operational and denies VP, albeit at a reduced efficiency.



If it's a warmachine in all respects, then the engineer gets out and ranks up in front of it to protect it if an enemy charges it, or flees abandoning the ST allowing the enemy unit to spike it. Thus making it stupidly easy to recieve full VP for the steam tank. Careful what you wish for.

"Except where noted otherwise, a Steam Tank counts as a war machine in all respects". That is straight from the Empire book. In the rules it also states that the Tank commander does not fight in close combat. So, the Tank works slightly different than other warmachines. However, it is not noted anywhere that the Steam Tank gives up half victory points.
A Dragon that suffers 4 wounds still does the same amout of attacks. And can attack in each round of combat. You cannot compare the Steam Tank to other units. It works differently. Plus it can't pursue, capture standards, a whole host of things other units can do.
So my advice is to read the Empire book before you make any crazy statements.

Shank
14-12-2007, 23:28
I agree 100%. We don't spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours working on our little army men so we can get into heated arguments about how many VPs a Steam Tank is worth and whether or not it has a crew member.

The objective of the game is to win, but the point of the game is to have fun. I'm not interested in playing against anyone who's so inflexible about a minor rules issue like this that he's willing to ruin his fun and my fun over it.

As far as the OP's complaint goes, if that's the ruling at local tournaments, that's the ruling. If he doesn't like it, he's not being forced to play, is he?

Yes, the point of the game is to have fun. I want to play by the rules. You do not. You don't agree with the rules, so you feel they should be changed. I would never complain to a High Elf player about ASF or a Dwarf player about Thorek. I feel both of those rule sets are broken. I would play the game and be a good sport. Because you don't like the rules, I should bend them so you don't pack up your things and go home?? I don't think so. I would look at how you play the game and not your opponent. Maybe the "fun" police should come after you.

Heretic Burner
14-12-2007, 23:52
As an Empire player I'm torn. Clearly its an arbitrary rule, completely outside the main rules of the game and thrust on Empire players with no feedback or even explanation given. Bad.

However, it is at least an attempt by someone to make up for GW's poor rules. Steam tanks are so effective for just that reason - while a few wounds will of course render them far less effective they are extremely difficult to destroy completely.

Yet few units in the game lose effectiveness with lost wounds, steam tank is certainly one of them. They pay a price for their difficulty to destroy and an additional VP price is a serious handicap to throw on the unit without proper testing. Steam tanks are undeniably powerful in ordinary games as they tend to generate massive VP advantages but overall I'm not too sure about this arbitrary ruling.

truthsayer
15-12-2007, 11:16
I used a matt varnish on my steam tank.. looks ok. Id never use polish though, that would ruin it.


*sorry couldnt help myself*

DDogwood
15-12-2007, 17:12
Yes, the point of the game is to have fun. I want to play by the rules. You do not. You don't agree with the rules, so you feel they should be changed.

I think you should REALLY go back and re-read what I wrote, because you obviously completely misunderstood everything I said.

I never said that I "don't agree with the rules". I just think it's ridiculous when people make bold, sweeping statements about how the rules work, without acknowledging that there is any possible room for interpretation. This goes for people who insist that the Steam Tank doesn't work like other war machines for VP purposes, too.

So, before you go around accusing people of holding opinions that you think are stupid, maybe you should make sure that you actually understand their opinions.

Rioghan Murchadha
16-12-2007, 05:30
"Except where noted otherwise, a Steam Tank counts as a war machine in all respects". That is straight from the Empire book. In the rules it also states that the Tank commander does not fight in close combat.
Ahh.. Ok, so if we want to go all RAW on this, and the commander is also not classified as crew, the ST gives up full VPs at the end of the game as noted previously, since there is no crew member in contact with it. Nowhere in the empire book does it negate that little nugget from the WM section.


So, the Tank works slightly different than other warmachines. However, it is not noted anywhere that the Steam Tank gives up half victory points.
A Dragon that suffers 4 wounds still does the same amout of attacks. And can attack in each round of combat. You cannot compare the Steam Tank to other units.
You certainly can't compare it to a dragon which typically takes up a hero slot in addition to the character that has to ride it, and comes in at a hell of a lot more points than a ST.


It works differently. Plus it can't pursue, capture standards, a whole host of things other units can do.
It doesn't have to. Just being able to dish out the damage it can, and deny a decent chunk of VPs make it brutal enough. Look at the Eldar Falcon in 40k. It's a tank that doesn't need to kill anything to make a dent in the game. The ST is a device that doesn't need to cap flags, or pursue units to be a huge PITA.

So my advice is to read the Empire book before you make any crazy statements.
My advice is to play against a list that has a couple steam tanks with an army that doesn't have access to a bunch of artillery before you jump to the defense of the thing.

EvC
16-12-2007, 13:42
Yet few units in the game lose effectiveness with lost wounds, steam tank is certainly one of them.

Really? I think you'll find almost all units in the game lose effectiveness as they take wounds. A unit of 10 Empire Inner Circle Knights that takes 9 wounds can do almost nothing, whilst at least the Steam Tank can still claim a table quarter, make enemy models flee in terror and hold up an entire unit of S4 models at little risk to itself. Same with every other unit (Except single models of course)... but that wouldn't ever be an argument to say units should only give up VPs if they're entirely destroyed.

Course that's one part of the argument, but I still think an arbitrary errata would benefit the Steam Tank. It'd certainly make the yawnfest Chariots of Sigmar a lot more interesting to face, rather than, "Oh, you're here to pick up a victory at the expense of fun?" grimness.

zak
16-12-2007, 14:45
Having no bias to either argument I feel it is fairer to discuss beforehand whether the points are given for half wounds. If you can't agree then get an independent third ruling view or simply dice for it. GW issuing errata would certainly help end this argument.

I for one agree with EVC. You can cause wounds to most units and reduce it's effectiveness. Less rank bonus, unlikely to outnumber, less attacks etc.

Gazak Blacktoof
16-12-2007, 14:45
Yet few units in the game lose effectiveness with lost wounds, steam tank is certainly one of them.

Few MODELS lose effectiveness with wounds dealt.

Almost all UNITS lose effectiveness.

My ranked unit (any type), my unit equipped with ranged weapons (any type), my unit of monsters (any type), my skirmishers (any type) loose effectiveness as they loose wounds/models.

Additionally most individual models are not as tough as a steam tank yet all of them become something of a liability once they start to loose wounds and if going by UK GT rulings will give up half VPs at a far earlier point in the game than the Steam Tank.


I think the polish rules are leaning in the right direction. I'm not particularly interested in RAW (in my opinion there is no clear RAW in this situation anyway), I say if its broken, then fix it.

EDIT: Do the steam tank rules mention that it is an individual model? This would clearly be a noted exception under the terms of "treat as a warmachine escept where noted otherwise..."

Shank
16-12-2007, 18:05
Few MODELS loose effectiveness with wounds dealt.

Almost all UNITS loose effectiveness.

My ranked unit (any type), my unit equipped with ranged weapons (any type), my unit of monsters (any type), my skirmishers (any type) loose effectiveness as they loose wounds/models.

Additionally most individual models are not as tough as a steam tank yet all of them become something of a liability once they start to loose wounds and if going by UK GT rulings will give up half VPs at a far earlier point in the game than the Steam Tank.


I think the polish rules are leaning in the right direction. I'm not particularly interested in RAW (in my opinion there is no clear RAW in this situation anyway), I say if its broken, then fix it.

EDIT: Do the steam tank rules mention that it is an individual model? This would clearly be a noted exception under the terms of "treat as a warmachine escept where noted otherwise..."

Geez you guys. Lets compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. The rule is clear, and that is it.

Gazak Blacktoof
16-12-2007, 18:37
The rule is clear, and that is it.

Says you and nobody else.

As was pointed out before this isn't about what's right or wrong but commenting on how the polish FAQ affects the game.

Repeating yourself isn't going to convince anybody.

I see no reason not to treat the model the same as other single model units and can't see a reason anybody in Poland should be up in arms about it.

DDogwood
16-12-2007, 22:19
Geez you guys. Lets compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. The rule is clear, and that is it.

Right, the rule is so clear that the lead game designer got it wrong, and said that it was a "waste of a question". It's clearly ridiculous for people to discuss house rules, tournament rules, and opinions on how it "should" work! :rolleyes:

MalusCalibur
17-12-2007, 00:12
What I think needs to be looked at here is intent. Logically, when the designers created the new rule for the Steam Tank, do you think they described it as a warmachine so that spells etc. that specifically affect warmachines would affect the tank? That seems logically sound, yes. Do you think they described it as a warmachine so that, because of its 10 wounds, its nigh impossible to claim any victory points for it? I don't think that is logical. It's possible, of course, because none of us can know what the designers intended when they created it, but I think that having the tank subject to the usual 'half VP's' rule is the most sensible and fair interpretation.
Bear in mind that all other war machines have 3 Wounds-they have a 'standardised' profile that comes with the other war machine rules [if I'm wrong about that then fair enough, because I don't know the stats for every war machine in the game]. The Steam Tank works differently, having a great deal more Wounds. Again, there is no reason that this means anything, besides a bit of logical thought.

I would strongly agree that the issue is open to debate and can see the very valid points made by both sides. The only thing that sways my opinion is the interpretation that seems most reasonable and sensible. As has been said, having a unit or model that can deny 300 VP's so easily just seems wrong. That doesn't mean for certain that it IS wrong, of course, but since the issue is debatable it's something that should be taken into account, IMO.

[Oh, for the record, I neither play Empire nor play against Empire with any regularity, so there is no vested interest in my opinion]

MalusCalibur

Grimtuff
17-12-2007, 00:19
Few MODELS loose effectiveness with wounds dealt.

Almost all UNITS loose effectiveness.

My ranked unit (any type), my unit equipped with ranged weapons (any type), my unit of monsters (any type), my skirmishers (any type) loose effectiveness as they loose wounds/models....

Loose=opposite of tight
Lose=opposite of gain or win

;)

Gazak Blacktoof
17-12-2007, 00:25
Thanks for pointing that out, now we both look like munchkins.

Dwarf Runelord 45
19-12-2007, 23:57
Hmmm.... this is pretty weird i thought you just get the full victory points when you destroy it. I've been playing the rule wrong the entire time!?!?

Shank
20-12-2007, 00:31
Hmmm.... this is pretty weird i thought you just get the full victory points when you destroy it. I've been playing the rule wrong the entire time!?!?

No, you have been playing it right. Don't let this thread confuse you. You need to destroy the tank to get any VP's.