For more Detailed info Please go to http://connecticon40k.blogspot.com/p/connecticon-40k-gt-info.html

On Friday the 11th there will be a 2000 point Doubles tournament.

Saturday (12th) and Sunday (13th) will be a 5 game 2000 point 40k GT.

In addition there will be a megabattle running during the weekend.

GT info

2000 points with a single force organization chart.

All Armies must be WYSIWYG.

All armies must be fully painted to a 3 color minimum

Character Dataslates are allowed

All armies will be limited to a 2 Detachment Maximum (i.e. Combined arms, Allied Detachment, Formations, Inquisition, Knights etc count as a second detachment, so you may choose to field any one of these.)

We will not use Escalation. (after consideration, I orignally said no Escalation and don't want to change it this late in the game, I will consider it going forward same as FW)

We will use Stronghold Assault but only fortificaitons that have GW official models (as it gives me a size comparison for any conversions). Another note, terrain is fixed and will not be moved to fit fortifications. This may limit the placement of some larger fortifications.

No FW will be allowed in the GT.

Rounds will be 3 hours

This was a BLAST last year, and I'm hoping to make it out again. Anyone who can should check it out. The Cosplay is awesome and the area is pretty cool.

This sounds interesting.

You should check it out. Brendan runs a smooth event and the convention as a whole is pretty awesome.

Coming from the Springfield area so not a big drive....
Not much out this way...
Seeing if some of my fellow gamers might like to give it a go.

My favorite part last year was the cosplay zombies attacking my table

 Rhich wrote:
Coming from the Springfield area so not a big drive....
Not much out this way...
Seeing if some of my fellow gamers might like to give it a go.

I live it Marblehead and I may be going. My birthday is just a week after so I have a valid excuse

Me and My buddy are signed up! Trying to get more of my group to join!

For the team tournament, do you mean to say an extra elite, fast, and heavy are floating, or is the force org just a lot smaller?

The FOC is just smaller. Each player has essentially an allied detachment to work with.

Noooooooooooo!

Why is this the same day as the ATC...

Because that is when the convention is scheduled much easier to move the ATC (connecticon is 10,000+ people). I really have no control over the dates though.

Any decision on Imperial Knights yet?

Yeah they will be allowed. Having played with or against them they are good and kind of stupid, but not horribly OP. With 2 detachments using them is kind of tough

Will this be ran as a 7th ed tournament?

Yes, this will now be a 7th Edition Tournament. We have nearly 2 months before the convention so I cannot see leaving it as a 6th ed event.

As for what that will entail as far as missions, FOC, etc. Remains to be seen once I have the new book in hand I will need to make those decisions.

Based on what I have heard so far my thoughts would be

No Unbound armies-but I'm not sold on this as a necessity yet
Escalation /Stronghold Assault stuff will largely be dependent on the new rules in 7th. From the sound of it D weapons have gotten nerfed quite a bit so they might be a go.
As might FW stuff dependent on FW updating for 7th ed rules.

Given that I will likely be one of the first 7th ed GTs I have also just thought of letting everything in and see what happens, as most people will not have time to fully abuse the system.

So 2 detachment is by rulebook right? So 2 Combined arms attachments are allowed? Your parentheses confused
Will be psyked if FW allowed, my deathstorm pod needs to see some play.

Never mind, read that you were waiting on rulebook for FOC stuff Disregard

I have the book now and am playing a number of games this weekend, hope to have some finalized decisions next week. If you have specific questions feel free to post. I'll likely try to allow as much as seems reasonable unless there is giant pushback on any issues in particular.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for the 2 detachment question yes, 2 combined arms would be allowed if that is the final decision I go with.

Ok so some final decisions for 7th.

1.) 2 Detachments will be a go, so any combination of 2 detachments will be allowed. I feel this provides a pretty balanced environment as far as the game is concerned.

2.) There will be No Caps on the psycich phase, it is just not reliable enough to cap at this time.

3.) I'm sticking with No FW, at this time I don't feel like I know the rules well enough to make rulings on them.



As for other things, I am planning to pur over Escalation and Stronghold and see if I will allow them, at the moment I am leaning yes, but need to take a close look at all the entries.

I hope to have a tournament FAQ out by June 14th so about 1 month ahead of the event. If any potential attendees have questions please let me know.

As for the team event it will remain unchanged, each team member gets an allied detachment, FW will be allowed, as this is a more laid back event.

Ah well at least my FW will get some use in the team tourney Sounds awesome, can't wait! Maybe next time you could have anyone who wants to use FW submit lists by an earlier date so TOs have a chance to familiarize themselves with just the units that will be used It's so much information otherwise

That is a good idea, I also want to spend some time reading through things, and annouce it at the initial tournament release. Hope to definitely have it there in 2015.

Updated the first post with relavant tourney info.

Anyone who has questions feel free to ask.

Breng77 wrote:
For more Detailed info Please go to http://connecticon40k.blogspot.com/p/connecticon-40k-gt-info.html

On Friday the 11th there will be a 2000 point Doubles tournament.

Saturday (12th) and Sunday (13th) will be a 5 game 2000 point 40k GT.

In addition there will be a megabattle running during the weekend.

GT info

2000 points with a single force organization chart.

All Armies must be WYSIWYG.

All armies must be fully painted to a 3 color minimum

Character Dataslates are allowed

All armies will be limited to a 2 Detachment Maximum (i.e. Combined arms, Allied Detachment, Formations, Inquisition, Knights etc count as a second detachment, so you may choose to field any one of these.)

We will not use Escalation. (after consideration, I orignally said no Escalation and don't want to change it this late in the game, I will consider it going forward same as FW)

We will use Stronghold Assault but only fortificaitons that have GW official models (as it gives me a size comparison for any conversions). Another note, terrain is fixed and will not be moved to fit fortifications. This may limit the placement of some larger fortifications.

No FW will be allowed in the GT.

Rounds will be 3 hours

Any chance you would consider keeping the 2 detachment maximum, but not using 2 CAD's? I'm not looking forward to driving five hours to see a bunch of armies with six riptides, six annihilation barges, six wraithknights, etc. Or possibly just open the tournament up to unbound armies? It may be more balanced that way.

That would kind of suck for people who already made a list and started practicing >_> I always play the same combo, 7th was exciting in that you could do two full. You do have to do two troops still so somewhat limited. Just seems silly for people to knee jerk and turn 7th into 6th again.

Hitting this on my way out to massachusetts. Super excited

I wouldnt worry about the two combined arms, with progressive and alternate scoring you can out manuever them pretty easily.

Any chance you would consider keeping the 2 detachment maximum, but not using 2 CAD's? I'm not looking forward to driving five hours to see a bunch of armies with six riptides, six annihilation barges, six wraithknights, etc. Or possibly just open the tournament up to unbound armies? It may be more balanced that way.

I guess my thought concerning that was how many people are going to have time to build and paint those armies in the next month (and want to invest the money in them). I'm also not sure that any of those armies (except maybe the 6 anni-barges) is any good 6 Wraithknights is 1440 points (and like $600) So I certainly don't think you will see a bunch of armies with those builds (honestly I'd be surprised to see one.)

Now I could be wrong, maybe people will invest that kind of time and money to win Connecticon (I mean if I were LVO or NOVA or Adepticon maybe it would be different) but unless I change rules disallowing 2 CAD makes some 6th ed armies (like Farsight + Tau, or CSM + Black Legion) illegal.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Leth wrote:
Hitting this on my way out to massachusetts. Super excited

Cool always nice to have a new face. Registration has really been picking up since 7th dropped

Ah, well then never mind, you can take me off the reg. list

looking to run 2 different CAD, actually not sure I have an issue with that either thinking more about it its not much different than allies. Redacted the change as with more thought I don't see much more issue with it especially in the time given than CAD+ Ally, Being early on might as well see what the edition is like without barring things too much.

Thanks!! heading out to mass for the summer and saw your GT about the time I was planning on going, so just going to hit it on the way, complete the GT, then drive the remaining 3 hours after.

Any idea how many people you are looking to have? website didnt update numbers since I couldnt register on the site. Also how do we get the event fee to you?

you just pay me at the event. (you need to buy a convention badge from the connecticon website, but the $10 entry fee just goes to me on site.). As for how many people I think I have around 20ish at the moment but most have signed up in the last week.

What will the terrain be like? Las Vegas Open style lots of LOS blockers and stuff to take cover in or billiard-table like with maybe 5 pieces per board?

(Happy to play on either but it will dictate whether I bring an army that makes use of terrain to have a fun game or if I bring something that couldn't care less if there is terrain on the board)

 The Everliving wrote:
What will the terrain be like? Las Vegas Open style lots of LOS blockers and stuff to take cover in or billiard-table like with maybe 5 pieces per board?

(Happy to play on either but it will dictate whether I bring an army that makes use of terrain to have a fun game or if I bring something that couldn't care less if there is terrain on the board)

Alex, Im helping out Brendan with terrain from The BFS so it should be pretty much the same as what we have. 7-9 per board.

-ed

Thanks Ed.

Okay, I was planning on bringing a skyshield. With fixed terrain will it at least always be placeable or will there be situations where I have to leave it off the table?

No you should always have space to place a sky shield

So are these the set rules or are thing still in flux?

The rules are now set as per the first post. Working on an FAQ but army creation is done 2 detachments max of any kind, no FW no lords of war.

If we have specific questions should we post them here or e-mail you?

Email will likely get a bit faster response, but you can post them here. Especially rules questions as others might have the same issue.

Does Psychic Shriek require a to to hit roll?

Only real one I am concerned about at present for army comp reasons

As it is a witch fire power that is not a type specified not to need a to hit roll, it requires a roll to hit.

Will the scenarios be modified at all for 7th ed or just using the straight 6th ed scenarios?

Do objective markers have an infinite height, or do we have to factor in vertical distance?

We will use vertical distance. It'll be 6" vertically like coherancy. With ruin levels no longer being a thing, I don't think infinite height needs to be a thing any longer, as any unit can climb up terrain.

Can we still register for the tourney?

Yes there is still space, convention preregistration ends, on July 5th so that is also still open.

There seems no benefit to pre-registering for the convention though, as the price is now the same whether we register now or turn up on the day.

Or am I missing something?

You get to make sure you don't need to wait in the day of registration line which is typically slower than the pre reg line. That said if you live near by or are coming Friday evening you can pick your badge up then.

I was planning on getting a badge Friday afternoon/evening after work.

I know you are the 40k TO, but do you know if there is any WHFB at this event? Living in Webster it isn't that long a drive at all and might be interested

There is not currently an when event, as I have not found anyone to run it yet and I don't play the game much myself (nor can I to 2 tournaments effectively). There are other minis events going on.

40k mega battle and team tourney, malifux and dark age demos, an event for a game called god slayer. 2 infinity tournaments, x-wing and kromaster events. But nothing much for whfb or warmahordes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Everliving wrote:
I was planning on getting a badge Friday afternoon/evening after work.

Then it is not an issue, but you live close. But you should still sign up with me for the gt

How are you ruling re-rolls and blast weapons

Also the power field generators (digital version says one thing but the new FAQ was never updated)? And the missions, are you still using the 6th ed missions or will they be updated for 7th?

Then it is not an issue, but you live close. But you should still sign up with me for the gt

Okay, this is me pre-registering with you

Registered via the link on your Blog post.

Cool got the regestration

I'm getting info on some of the crap people are planning on bringing to this event. Back to the drawing board to figure out how to deal with 5 wraithknights and 12 jetbike units...

You can borrow my daemons. As I do not think im playing in this.

Tsilber wrote:
You can borrow my daemons. As I do not think im playing in this.

I'll totally take em if Alex won't

-jared

I'm getting info on some of the crap people are planning on bringing to this event. Back to the drawing board to figure out how to deal with 5 wraithknights and 12 jetbike units...

The reason most major tournaments are banning double CAD...

jesse wrote:

I'm getting info on some of the crap people are planning on bringing to this event. Back to the drawing board to figure out how to deal with 5 wraithknights and 12 jetbike units...

The reason most major tournaments are banning double CAD...

Because players can't handle changes in the game?

No, because players can and will find ways to break the game without being given any extra wiggle room to do so.

It's been obvious for some time that GW doesn't care so much about the rules of the game as they do the profit the game generates. It's up to the TO to balance things as much as possible.


On a different note, any chance of the FAQ or missions being updated to 7th edition this week?

That's your opinion, and it's a totally valid one. Mine is that people can't get past 6.5.

Allow me to pose this question since both of our lists have already been sent in; what are you bringing to the tournament? Not specifically, but in general.


On another side note, does anyone know if parking is included in our weekend pass or should we be prepared to pay at the garage?

Guess I missed a memo, didn't see anything about sending lists in. Anyways, my 2k no FW Double CAD is my Brodar, 2 rune priests, 2 farseers, wraithknight, jetbikes, drop pod GH with terminator guard, night spinner, reapers, long fangs, warlocks, etc. . Mainly summoning.

Sounds like a tough list. Good luck in the tournament.

Actually maybe I will play, 6 titans and a seer council seems like fun to play against, along with everyone else of coarse.

I am personally limiting myself to one main one allied since that is what most tournaments will be doing, no point in trying to get practice with a list I will never get to use.

Also that eldar army is meh at best. It would be annoying, but it has little to no offense ability.

 MyJasmineRose wrote:
Guess I missed a memo, didn't see anything about sending lists in. Anyways, my 2k no FW Double CAD is my Brodar, 2 rune priests, 2 farseers, wraithknight, jetbikes, drop pod GH with terminator guard, night spinner, reapers, long fangs, warlocks, etc. . Mainly summoning.

Lists should be submitted to Gallagher.b@connecticon.org.

Parking is not included, it is $60 for the weekend to park at the convention center, or you can park at the hilton which is where the event is for I believe $18 per day.

As for lists being über broken, no list has more than 8 troops this far, and none has more than 4 of any one unit other than troops. Though one list has 5 heavy support choices. So it is very possible with the big boys going 1 cad that people are self limiting anyway.. And 5 wraith knights is so much scarier than 4 right? Same with 12 jet bikes instead of 8. Not saying 2 cad cannot be abused, but so can self allies, or just allies.

6 titans and a seer council I'm pretty sure won't fit into a 2 detachment max tourney.

Parking is not included, it is $60 for the weekend to park at the convention center, or you can park at the hilton which is where the event is for I believe $18 per day

Thanks for the tip, you saved me some $.

Missions can be found here http://connecticon40k.blogspot.com/p/connecticon-missions-packet.html


Automatically Appended Next Post:
They will be more detailed at the event (having scoring sheets, deployment diagrams etc.) but that is the short version. FAQ will be posted up later today. For the most part it will be similar to the NOVA FAQ, but I'll note the changes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Since I cannot update my Tourney website at work I'll post some key differences in the FAQ here.

1.) Units cannot Jink unless they are directly targeted (so if 2 wave serpents are next to one another and a blast targets one and hits both only the target can jink.)- Counting other units as "targets" causes issues to me for things like invisibility.

2.) NOVA rules 25% cover counts if target is 25% in cover from any part of the model. We won't. I'm not a fan of having models get cover because my toe cannot see the model well. Cover will be determined from the majority of the model being able to see 25% or more, when in doubt check from the eyes, or ask a TO.

3.) Psykers cannot manifest more powers than their mastery level. I.e. a Level 1 psyker can only manifest one power per turn. (not sure that this is different, but just additional clarification.)

4.) Strike the allowed Fortificaitons as that is covered in the tournament info.

5.) Serpent Shield can be destroyed by Weapon destroyed results. - it is a weapon and can be twin linked by laser lock.

6.)Remove references to GK powers that no longer exist.

7.) No addition of Objective secured by using unyielding anvil.

8.) Add Warp Storm results that are not blasts hitting things that require snap firing (similar to Immotek)

New Orks are not allowed so included ruling not included.

Can you post some of the reasoning behind 1, 3, and 5?

So my reasoning is as follows.

1.) You can only Jink when you are targeted by an attack prior to hits being rolled. A skimmer that is not the declared target then has no permission to jink. Now targeting something next to it to get around jink is gamey, so I get the NOVA ruling that you can jink. However, I feel that sets a precident of secondary targeting, which leads to things like I put an invisible wave serpent next to my wave serpent. Now since it counts as being targeted (i.e. it can jink) you cannot place a blast on my non-invis serpent. Now you can rule around that by saying skimmers can jink without being the target I suppose, but it seems like less rules writing and more consistent to say, NO Jink, and if you get too close, and someone blasts you that is on you.

3.)In the BRB at the start of the section on mastery level, it states that the number of powers a psyker can cast depends on his/her mastery level. Now this does not mean it is necessarily equal to his/her mastery level. However, without more GW clarificaiton, there is no other dependent relationship that makes sense. I've seen arguments that you can cast ever power you know, but then powers cast is clearly independent of mastery level as ML is not even the go to for powers known (the book says a units entry will tell you how many powers the psyker knows, and if not use mastery level.).

5.)Ruling for consistency. The serpent shield is either a weapon and benefits from laser lock, or it isn't a weapon, and thus does not benefit from laser lock. You could say it is only a weapon when it shoots I suppose, but this seems more consistent to me.

Breng77 wrote:
So my reasoning is as follows.

1.) You can only Jink when you are targeted by an attack prior to hits being rolled. A skimmer that is not the declared target then has no permission to jink. Now targeting something next to it to get around jink is gamey, so I get the NOVA ruling that you can jink. However, I feel that sets a precident of secondary targeting, which leads to things like I put an invisible wave serpent next to my wave serpent. Now since it counts as being targeted (i.e. it can jink) you cannot place a blast on my non-invis serpent. Now you can rule around that by saying skimmers can jink without being the target I suppose, but it seems like less rules writing and more consistent to say, NO Jink, and if you get too close, and someone blasts you that is on you.

3.)In the BRB at the start of the section on mastery level, it states that the number of powers a psyker can cast depends on his/her mastery level. Now this does not mean it is necessarily equal to his/her mastery level. However, without more GW clarificaiton, there is no other dependent relationship that makes sense. I've seen arguments that you can cast ever power you know, but then powers cast is clearly independent of mastery level as ML is not even the go to for powers known (the book says a units entry will tell you how many powers the psyker knows, and if not use mastery level.).

5.)Ruling for consistency. The serpent shield is either a weapon and benefits from laser lock, or it isn't a weapon, and thus does not benefit from laser lock. You could say it is only a weapon when it shoots I suppose, but this seems more consistent to me.

FYI on #1, part of the rationale for the ruling is simply that I think too many people get hung up on the ruleset as being this clearly defined thing. In many cases, certain words or even different iterations of key words are entirely different in meaning, and you're forced to rely on basic English. It's also extremely useful to rule as reasonable in a ruleset that often doesn't even really have a clear Rules as Written (which I do think is the case here). With regard to the blast marker thing, there's a difference between clearly "targeting" something and selecting the Target of a shooting attack. The broad group of those who made the ruling on this particular one (ETC council and extras were where we got a lot of our discussion from, both on ones with agreement and disagreement) noted this difference and the import of it. It's not about selecting a legal target, but about obviously targeting something. It seemed unreasonable to a fair extreme to disallow jink in this case, and instead allow a blatant rules exploit.

NM, mis read. my bad!

SIde note: Fateweaver can still 4 witchfires... but really he should be able to fire 7 cmon...

MVBrandt wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
So my reasoning is as follows.

1.) You can only Jink when you are targeted by an attack prior to hits being rolled. A skimmer that is not the declared target then has no permission to jink. Now targeting something next to it to get around jink is gamey, so I get the NOVA ruling that you can jink. However, I feel that sets a precident of secondary targeting, which leads to things like I put an invisible wave serpent next to my wave serpent. Now since it counts as being targeted (i.e. it can jink) you cannot place a blast on my non-invis serpent. Now you can rule around that by saying skimmers can jink without being the target I suppose, but it seems like less rules writing and more consistent to say, NO Jink, and if you get too close, and someone blasts you that is on you.

3.)In the BRB at the start of the section on mastery level, it states that the number of powers a psyker can cast depends on his/her mastery level. Now this does not mean it is necessarily equal to his/her mastery level. However, without more GW clarificaiton, there is no other dependent relationship that makes sense. I've seen arguments that you can cast ever power you know, but then powers cast is clearly independent of mastery level as ML is not even the go to for powers known (the book says a units entry will tell you how many powers the psyker knows, and if not use mastery level.).

5.)Ruling for consistency. The serpent shield is either a weapon and benefits from laser lock, or it isn't a weapon, and thus does not benefit from laser lock. You could say it is only a weapon when it shoots I suppose, but this seems more consistent to me.

FYI on #1, part of the rationale for the ruling is simply that I think too many people get hung up on the ruleset as being this clearly defined thing. In many cases, certain words or even different iterations of key words are entirely different in meaning, and you're forced to rely on basic English. It's also extremely useful to rule as reasonable in a ruleset that often doesn't even really have a clear Rules as Written (which I do think is the case here). With regard to the blast marker thing, there's a difference between clearly "targeting" something and selecting the Target of a shooting attack. The broad group of those who made the ruling on this particular one (ETC council and extras were where we got a lot of our discussion from, both on ones with agreement and disagreement) noted this difference and the import of it. It's not about selecting a legal target, but about obviously targeting something. It seemed unreasonable to a fair extreme to disallow jink in this case, and instead allow a blatant rules exploit.

Like I said I can see where the ruling comes from, but then at the same time based on that ruling you would need to disallow any shooting that would target Invisible units (IMO) otherwise you end up with a double standard where in it is an exploit to game blasts against Jink, but not an exploit to game them against invisiblity. If you then take that exploit away, you allow for exploits such as wrapping multiple units with invisible units to make them untargetable by blasts and templates. Which to me is a larger exploit, and one more easily gamed than postitioning blasts to hit multiple targets. One of them can be played around by the opponent (not putting vehicles right next to one another.), the other really cannot. It also seems inconsistent to me to get jink if a blast touches you, but if it scatters you don't. I don't begrudge other events ruling differently, but I see no reason to infer that anything under that blast template is "targeted", but at the same time is not "the target of the shooting attack"

Full FAQ is now up here http://connecticon40k.blogspot.com/p/connecticon-faq.html

Is this battle points or W-L-D?

Battle points

Any plans to post some of the lists? Really curious how the field shaped up at this event.

I will likely post up the lists when I get the chance.

Best general ran

Eldar + iyanden
Spirit seer
Autarch
8x3 jet bikes
4x wraith knight
5x swooping hawks

I'm also interested in seeing the results. Any information is welcome.

Had a great time, got to meet some really cool people

 Saber wrote:
I'm also interested in seeing the results. Any information is welcome.

Here are the full results: http://app.torrentoffire.com/#/tournament/Connecticon/2/leaderboard

Breng may have some additional info on lists, etc.

Grats to Amir, seems like you guys got off lucky as he left his 10 wave serpents home.

Not sure if that would have done better than what he ran it was pretty nasty. I do have all the lists, just have not been at a pc ling enough to post them all.

Great, thanks for posting the results.

lots o' knights

Looks like 4 knights and a bunch of bikes was a Dark Eldar players wet dream.... But again Grats to Amir he is a solid player.

Probably true, but he would need to run into the one DE player for that to matter. Which he did not. DE poison spam is not that popular these days, because it has its own set of very bad match-ups. I liked my Nurgle Daemons as a match-up against his list as well, but thems the breaks in a tournament.

I was a little surprised to see no Necrons.